Talk:Sideways (AVP)
From MediaWiki
...Seriously? We're really going through with such a major change with little to no discussion beforehand? Escargon (talk) 19:09, 12 December 2022 (EST)
- I can't say I agree with that take. S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47 (talk) 19:37, 12 December 2022 (EST)
- For this specific proposal there is four people discussing it (including me, so I don't get why you're trying to "gotcha" me with it), which fits the definition of "little to no. Escargon (talk) 19:45, 12 December 2022 (EST)
- The proposal was up for almost three weeks; more than enough time for people to chime in if they so chose. Yours was the only voice of dissent. Riptide was well within her rights to implement the change. -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 19:50, 12 December 2022 (EST)
- It was on a user's sandbox talk page that had no indication in the title it was about Sideways! At the very least it should have been brought up on the actual Sideways page, but I think a change this big warranted being on the community portal at the very least. This should have been discussed more thoroughly and quite frankly I'm pretty mad that there wasn't even a followup discussion about this before we just decided to go full speed ahead. Escargon (talk) 19:56, 12 December 2022 (EST)
- Well, here's the thing: we really should have done this as soon as we decided on the "each continuity family's appearances of Sideways get their own page", because they're appearing in a separate family and narrative from any other Sideways. This is, frankly, the way this should have been under the current system. --Riptide (talk) 22:02, 12 December 2022 (EST)
- It was on a user's sandbox talk page that had no indication in the title it was about Sideways! At the very least it should have been brought up on the actual Sideways page, but I think a change this big warranted being on the community portal at the very least. This should have been discussed more thoroughly and quite frankly I'm pretty mad that there wasn't even a followup discussion about this before we just decided to go full speed ahead. Escargon (talk) 19:56, 12 December 2022 (EST)
- The proposal was up for almost three weeks; more than enough time for people to chime in if they so chose. Yours was the only voice of dissent. Riptide was well within her rights to implement the change. -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 19:50, 12 December 2022 (EST)
- For this specific proposal there is four people discussing it (including me, so I don't get why you're trying to "gotcha" me with it), which fits the definition of "little to no. Escargon (talk) 19:45, 12 December 2022 (EST)
