Talk:Windsor University School of Medicine

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Windsor University School of Medicine article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL

Archives: 1: 30 days

Higher education

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Higher education, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of higher education, universities, and colleges on Wikipedia. Please visit the project page to join the discussion, and see the project's article guideline for useful advice.Higher educationWikipedia:WikiProject Higher educationTemplate:WikiProject Higher educationHigher education

Medicine Low‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Caribbean: Saint Kitts & Nevis

	Caribbean portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Caribbean, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to the countries of the Caribbean on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page to become familiar with the guidelines.CaribbeanWikipedia:WikiProject CaribbeanTemplate:WikiProject CaribbeanCaribbean
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Saint Kitts and Nevis.

Archive time

Why should the archive time be 30 days? That seems ridiculously low, seeing as there is nothing here. Why not increase it to 180 days or 90 days or something? Jesanj (talk) 19:37, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure why you created this since you created an identical discussion a month ago, but I will repeat what was written in that discussion. A previous discussion resulted in an administrator suggestion that Miszabot archive at 30-45 days of inactivity...and I agree. 30 days of inactivity is a standard archiving time; I've seen Miszabot set to just 7-10 days on some high traffic pages. There's a big "archive" button at the top of the page to see old discussions; 6 months is way too long IMHO. Aqwfyj ^Talk/_Contribs 20:00, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Admins have no more weight than others in that conversation. Why do you pretend they do? Can you give me a cite that shows 30 days is standard? Talk:Death_panel is at 6 months. Is there a problem there? Jesanj (talk) 20:12, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Campaign for "santorum" neologism is at 10 days. What's your point? Aqwfyj ^Talk/_Contribs 20:17, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So were you were making things up when you said 30 days was standard? And why exactly would 6 months be too long here? Jesanj (talk) 20:26, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No, I wasn't making anything up. 31 days is the default MiszaBot time. Frankly, if no one has responded in a discussion after 7-10 days (let alone 30) it's safe to say that it's an old discussion. Aqwfyj ^Talk/_Contribs 20:49, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

31 days is fine...Most pages I watch are set between 30 and 60 days, with rare exceptions for very fast moving pages that come down as low as 10 (this page absolutely doesn't qualify). However, I am going to make another change to the archiving--I have never once seen "minthreadsleft" set to 0; usually its at 3-4; I'll compromise and set it at 2. Especially for a new user, it would be very odd to see a page with nothing on it, as they may not immediately notice the archiving box. Qwyrxian (talk) 00:44, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds fair to me. Aqwfyj ^Talk/_Contribs 01:06, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]