Talk:Drupal/Archives/2009/December

White House in lead?
In my judgement, the White House's adoption of Drupal is extremely notable and deserving of prominent placement in the article. However, another editor removed it from the top and put it as a minor notation at the bottom. It seems to be a fairly subjective question, so I ask the editors for consensus-- is Drupal's use by the White House web site significant enough for inclusion in the summary description at the head of the article? Yes, no? And why? --Replysixty (talk) 06:07, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I think it's definitely worth including in the article, but I don't know if that fact really is so fundamental to understanding Drupal that it merits inclusion in the lead. At the least, the proseline style in which it was included was not appropriate. I've made a more measured edit that might strike the right balance. Take a look and let me know what you think. — Bdb484 (talk) 08:23, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Seems slightly tacked-on there, but probably better... --Replysixty (talk) 08:53, 11 December 2009 (UTC)