Some issues I'm seeing:

  1. There are very few pledging to help in the improvement drive, much less a "child" project.
  2. The majority of the Build Stub builds are... stubs and are not even properly written, much less being able to be improved on.
  3. Most "important" builds have either already been vetted, or already stands out in the spotlight.
  4. Most builds in the "build stub" section are simply terrible; the concept is unworkable and any attempts to improve them ends in utter failure.
  5. 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 Rapta Icon1 (talk|contribs) 07:07, 23 July 2007 (CEST)

Community content is available under CC-BY-NC-SA 2.5 unless otherwise noted.