Talk:Article feedback/status

July status

Hi. Regarding this edit (which reverted most of this one), the rationale was twofold:

• I trimmed down the list of names, because the report is already very long as it is, and may not be the proper place for an exhaustive list of acknowledgments. The activity page already lists the team members, and if there are people outside that team that should be thanked for their one-off help on the deployment, then the blog post (which doesn't have the same length constraints as the report) would have been the proper place to do that.
• It's noteworthy news that the tool was disabled for a few days during the month, just like it's noteworthy news that it was restored. Purposely omitting these facts in the report makes it look like we want to pretend it didn't happen, and select only favorable facts for the report. This usually doesn't fly very well with Wikimedians, so I'd advise against it in the future.

In any case, I don't wish to engage in an edit war, so I've left the current version in place. guillom 12:39, 2 August 2012 (UTC)