Some issues I'm seeing:
- There are very few pledging to help in the improvement drive, much less a "child" project.
- The majority of the Build Stub builds are... stubs and are not even properly written, much less being able to be improved on.
- Most "important" builds have either already been vetted, or already stands out in the spotlight.
- Most builds in the "build stub" section are simply terrible; the concept is unworkable and any attempts to improve them ends in utter failure.
- There are plenty of quality issues in the Great/Good/Other/Testing/Trial categories already, and those should be first on the list.
So not only do I think this is a very poor idea, there's just a lot of other things we could be doing. And really, is a build that an author already had given up on and abandoned, is already terrible, worth such attention? — Rapta (talk|contribs) 07:07, 23 July 2007 (CEST)