Template talk:Peer reviewed/Passed
Latest comment: 13 years ago by Pi zero
{{editprotected}} {{flag}} Please change has been reviewed to has been '''{{{modifier|}}}''' reviewed, to allow for informal reviews to use the standardised template. Please also edit the Template:Peer reviewed/Failed template in the same place. Regards, — μ 00:07, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
- If we want infrastructural support for informal reviews, I would think we'd want to pointedly make them look different, by using a separate template — perhaps {{Informally reviewed}}? --Pi zero (talk) 01:20, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
- Indeed; that would be a good option to take. I'm not sure as to how one would differentiate; colour isn't particularly important when differentiating, perhaps replacing the ambox with something else? — μ 01:27, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
- This should
be brought up at the water cooler, toget broad community feedback on whether we want to institutionalize informal peer review, as well as to get more people's ideas about how to visually distinguish the templates. Meanwhile, I'm marking this request
Not done. --Pi zero (talk) 14:40, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
- This should
- Indeed; that would be a good option to take. I'm not sure as to how one would differentiate; colour isn't particularly important when differentiating, perhaps replacing the ambox with something else? — μ 01:27, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
