Talk:Engineering Society Branding Policy

I'll reformat it to be more about the inception, process, and results. The encyclopedic value would be the thought process or the implementation strategy. What if in the future, we referenced it as "refer to section XYZ (link) for usage instructions," while the body of the content remained as Alvin suggested.

Other note, if admin or anyone else takes down a page, can there be a generic message, like "this page has been blocked/taken down/etc. for [reason]." That way it doesn't just disappear but flags that it doesn't meet standards?

The real issue here is that skule.ca is down and they're using Skulepedia as a replacement. Perhaps they should work on skule.ca instead of the branding project? -User:Mauricio 13 February 2012

I disagree: a page about the rebranding initiative should contain information relevant to the inception, process, and results of the project. As it stands, this page acts mainly as a usage guide for internal members (read: directors, etc.) of the Engineering Society. If you disagree, I only need to point you to the e-mail to directors which referenced the former page. The content of this page does not carry encyclopedic value, and any policy on use should be available under the Governance->Policies section of skule.ca, as well as having been included as a PDF instead of a reference to a wiki page that can be edited by anyone.--Alvin Ho 23:28, 13 February 2012 (EST)

Going to talk to Officers about this; the content itself isn't the issue so much as formatting. It should be fine for EngSoc to post some form a branding policy that they agreed on (just as it would probably be appropriate to post a policy here as a page, in a form that is appropriate for public/students to view and use. -KPS