Judges talk:Contest

Deliberations, elections, and other "judicial" business shall take place here.--TerryH^Talk 13:37, 9 July 2007 (EDT)

Roll call

First order of business: the calling of a roll. All judges should come to this page and watch it. Please leave your signature.--TerryH^Talk 13:38, 9 July 2007 (EDT)

Present Geo.Complain! 14:57, 9 July 2007 (EDT)

Here Ĥøĵĭmåçħôńğ^talk 17:34, 9 July 2007 (EDT)

Chief judge election

Second order of business: the election of a chief judge. As the creator of these pages, I am the acting chief judge. I will accept nominations and votes.--TerryH^Talk 13:41, 9 July 2007 (EDT)

Myself :) Geo.Complain! 14:57, 9 July 2007 (EDT)

Well, you're blessed. I am going out of my mind with concern for my wife--who might die at any time of cancer--and really don't have time to do justice to the CJ position. Plus: your proposal for creating desks for all judges shows that you've thought this matter of judgeship through fairly thoroughly.

Therefore--seeing that we two are the only judges at this time and we've both shown up in chambers--I declare that you are unanimously elected. The gavel is yours. Thank you very much.--TerryH^Talk 16:26, 9 July 2007 (EDT)

If it counts at all, I will support Geo as chief judge. --Ĥøĵĭmåçħôńğ^talk 17:26, 9 July 2007 (EDT)

It has the virtue of making Geo's election unanimous.--TerryH^Talk 23:03, 9 July 2007 (EDT)

Desks

I propose the creation of desks for all Judges. Geo.Complain! 15:01, 9 July 2007 (EDT)

Rules

We only have 6.5 hours before the contest starts, and as judges, I think we are responsible for coming up with some rules, such as what constitutes a "quality" article or "quality" edit. My proposals follow:

• A "quality article" includes at least two full-length paragraph, three relevant citations, and more in-depth content than just a stub. In the case of a dispute, the inclusion/lack of an image can be used as a deciding factor.
• A "quality edit" to an existing article includes at least two extra sentences, an additional reference, and the inclusion of an important or relevant fact.

Feel free to revise as you see fit, this shouldn't be all that hard. --Ĥøĵĭmåçħôńğ^talk 17:33, 9 July 2007 (EDT)

Hoji, I like your criteria. But to this I would like to add:

1. One point of extra credit for having more than, say, six relevant citations.
2. One point of extra credit for enclosing the citations in ref tags and including the references tag to define a reference section.
3. Two points of extra credit for submitting an article well-organized into sections.
4. One point of extra credit for breaking an existing article into logical sections if it didn't already have any.
5. A new article should be eligible for all forms of credit that can attach to an article--thus, submitting a quality new page with categorization should rate eleven points--ten for the article and one for the cat tag.--TerryH^Talk 23:02, 9 July 2007 (EDT)