Talk:YSTV People: Difference between revisions

From YSTV History Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 17: Line 17:
[[User:MichaelP-J|MichaelP-J]] 12:03, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
[[User:MichaelP-J|MichaelP-J]] 12:03, 23 February 2007 (UTC)


It's mid-may at the moment, and from the minutes folder, appears to have been that way since at least '98. [[User:Rick|Rick]] 12:47, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
It's mid-May at the moment, and from the minutes folder, appears to have been that way since at least '98. [[User:Rick|Rick]] 12:47, 23 February 2007 (UTC)


== Ordering of Dates ==
== Ordering of Dates ==

Revision as of 15:51, 23 February 2007

Page Structure

I'd be inclined not to start listing every officership throughout the past 40 years... it'd get a bit unwieldy. Rick 18:07, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

I see what you're saying, but I do think it would be a nice record. Maybe split into separate pages for each officership? Rowan

Yes, separate pages makes more sense! Rick 18:15, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Going through the minutes in the documents folder...

I'm finding a few grey areas I'm afraid - the '02 & '04 AGMs are missing, and we have a total of 5 minutes for 2001! Rick 11:43, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Wouldn't have happened in my day... This Wiki is ace! All should know of it! Vanky 13:46, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

What time of year is the AGM? I'm trying to put together the list of all the jobs I did in YSTV, but can't quite make them fit... I was Station Engineer in my first year (99-00) and became Technical Director at some point. Then after the Big Constitutional Reorganisation (a small panel of us re-wrote the constitution from fresh, creating the present team structure - I actually wrote most of the text - that was in 2001, I think) I was the first Commercial Director. Then I was Studio Manager and then Training Manager. MichaelP-J 12:03, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

It's mid-May at the moment, and from the minutes folder, appears to have been that way since at least '98. Rick 12:47, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Ordering of Dates

My preference is to have things ordered in descending chronological ordering, since we're always going to have better + more data for the recent years, and it's easier to see new things at the top... what are people's opinions? We need to have a consistent look I think... --Matthew Tole 13:45, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree mostly, but I think leaving the older sections at the top would be better in this case - after all, it's the HistoryWiki, not PresentWiki. It'll bring the gaps in information to people's attention more. Hopefully. Rick 16:03, 22 February 2007 (UTC)