Category talk:Submissions not accepted
Feedback from last year
This discussion may be worth noting, particularly when it comes to the creation of the associated template. CT Cooper · talk 12:41, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
- Short answer: I'm not convinced that changing "rejected" to "not accepted" will make anyone feel easier except schoolchildren whose first language is English, and certainly not "failed"... Deryck Chan (talk) 13:49, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
- I found it difficult to believe that w:Template:Rejected was changed to please "schoolchildren whose first language is English", and the issues raised go beyond the choice of one word. And what exactly is wrong with failed? It means the opposite to success per the dictionary, and so would be a logical choice here. CT Cooper · talk 21:26, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
- It's been argued that "failed" itself needs replacing. [1] I think "rejected" was chosen to mirror "accepted" (Category:Accepted submissions). Your point is well-taken though - we'll consider "successful"/"unsuccessful" when it comes to making decisions. Deryck Chan (talk) 02:34, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, that doesn't surprise me, but the line has to be drawn somewhere. Your right that accepted and rejected mirror each other, so really it would have to be "successful"/"unsuccessful", "successful"/"failed", or "accepted"/"rejected". On the side note, whatever words are used, mentioning in the templates what the submissions went through in some way would make them more descriptive and less blunt - this could be done with something like "This is a unsuccessful submission for Wikimania 2012 following review by the programme committee." or "This submission was reviewed by the programme committee and was unsuccessful." I'm glad that my point has been well taken, but whatever happens, it was always a minor point, so unless there are still submissions listed as under review long after the conference, which was the biggest cause of grievance this year, it won't matter too much! CT Cooper · talk 15:55, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
- It's been argued that "failed" itself needs replacing. [1] I think "rejected" was chosen to mirror "accepted" (Category:Accepted submissions). Your point is well-taken though - we'll consider "successful"/"unsuccessful" when it comes to making decisions. Deryck Chan (talk) 02:34, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
- I found it difficult to believe that w:Template:Rejected was changed to please "schoolchildren whose first language is English", and the issues raised go beyond the choice of one word. And what exactly is wrong with failed? It means the opposite to success per the dictionary, and so would be a logical choice here. CT Cooper · talk 21:26, 16 December 2012 (UTC)