Difference between revisions of "Talk:Citation Needed achievement"
imported>Fippe (Support) |
m |
||
(4 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
− | ''' | + | '''Do not oppose.''' It's just another ''take something with you and do something with it at the hash'' achievement, of which there are already a few. I would prefer that displaying the sign on the way to/from the hash be a requirement. --[[User:PeterRoder|PeterRoder]] ([[User talk:PeterRoder|talk]]) 14:56, 15 January 2022 (UTC) |
− | [[ | + | <s>'''Needs Work''' regarding the criteria; it's overly specific and oddly exclusive. Why does the photo ''need'' to have your hand touching the sign? Why do all participants ''need'' to travel as a group? Surely if all of them are at the point when the sign is also there, they should succeed. Also, I don't see any reason for a distinct achievement for something as specific as this, but I would not oppose the proposal purely because of this. --[[User:KerrMcF|KerrMcF]] ([[User talk:KerrMcF|talk]]) 02:07, 27 February 2024 (UTC)</s> |
+ | |||
+ | *'''Oppose''' it does not really add anything interesting or new. --[[User:Fippe|Fippe]] ([[User talk:Fippe|talk]]) 15:16, 3 April 2024 (UTC) | ||
+ | |||
+ | * '''Oppose''' for the same as above, as well as a reasoning I remember reading on another proposal somewhere. Not everything xkcd needs to be an achievement. --[[User:KerrMcF|KerrMcF]] ([[User talk:KerrMcF|talk]]) 00:39, 9 May 2024 (UTC) |
Latest revision as of 13:13, 16 May 2024
Do not oppose. It's just another take something with you and do something with it at the hash achievement, of which there are already a few. I would prefer that displaying the sign on the way to/from the hash be a requirement. --PeterRoder (talk) 14:56, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
Needs Work regarding the criteria; it's overly specific and oddly exclusive. Why does the photo need to have your hand touching the sign? Why do all participants need to travel as a group? Surely if all of them are at the point when the sign is also there, they should succeed. Also, I don't see any reason for a distinct achievement for something as specific as this, but I would not oppose the proposal purely because of this. --KerrMcF (talk) 02:07, 27 February 2024 (UTC)