| Revision as of 15:53, 13 February 2022 editButwhatdoiknow (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users8,828 edits Undid revision 1071583311 by Wikiuser100 (talk) Accept user:Wikiuser100's invitation to restore text that was in place before their chainge.Tags: Undo Reverted← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 17:44, 18 December 2024 edit undoMwwv (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers2,066 edits Reverted 1 pending edit by 87.52.108.5 to revision 1261063471 by Kenneth Kho: test editsTag: Manual revert | ||
| (169 intermediate revisions by 96 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{ |
{{Redirect|WP:CREEP|creep in articles|WP:ACREEP|creep of templates|WP:TCREEP}} | ||
| {{pp-pc|small=yes}} | |||
| ⚫ | {{Supplement|pages=]|WP:CREEP|WP:KUDZU}} | ||
| ⚫ | {{nutshell|When editing guidance, keep in mind the risk that increasingly detailed instructions will result in bloated pages that new editors find intimidating and experienced editors ignore.}} | ||
| ⚫ | Avoid ''']''' to keep Misplaced Pages ] pages easy to understand. The longer, more detailed, and more complicated you make the instructions, the less likely anyone is to read or follow whatever you write. | ||
| ⚫ | {{Supplement|pages=]| |
||
| ⚫ | {{nutshell|When editing guidance, keep in mind the risk |
||
| ⚫ | Avoid ''']''' to keep Misplaced Pages ] pages easy to understand. The longer, more detailed, and more complicated you make the instructions, the less likely anyone is to read or follow whatever you write. | ||
| == Problem == | == Problem == | ||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
| == Prevention == | == Prevention == | ||
| ''' Principles'''. Keep policies and guidelines ]. It is usually better for a policy or guideline to be too lax than too strict. Detailed policies can lead to ], impairing the ] process. If you just think that you have good advice for Wikipedians, consider adding it to an ]. | |||
| #There is a real problem that needs solving, not just a ]. | |||
| #The proposal, if implemented, is likely to make a real, positive difference. | |||
| #All implied requirements have a clear consensus. | |||
| '''Editing'''. Do not make substantive additions to a policy or guideline unless the addition solves a real and significant problem, not just a ]. Before publishing your edit, review the text for potential unintended consequences and re-write as appropriate. | |||
| All instruction should be as clear as possible. Ensure that additions are placed in a logical context, and do not obscure the meaning of the surrounding text. | |||
| It is usually better for a policy or guideline to be too lax than too strict. Content not clearly prohibited by any policy is still subject to ]. ] on article talk pages can be undermined by an over-strict policy, as an editor who wants to follow it literally can ] that the issue is already decided. | |||
| If you just think that you have good advice for Wikipedians, consider adding it to an ]. | |||
| The {{tl|Simple help page}} ] can be added to pages designed to provide simple instructions for newcomers. | |||
| ==Fixing== | ==Fixing== | ||
| {{further|Misplaced Pages:Policies and guidelines#Conflicts between advice pages}} | {{further|Misplaced Pages:Policies and guidelines#Conflicts between advice pages}} | ||
| ] | ] | ||
| Since things often "creep in" without scrutiny, even longstanding instructions should be subject to review.<ref>Calcification in rule-making drives away new editors. {{cite web | url=http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2013/01/03/wikipedia-rules-new-editors/1801229/ | title=Study: Misplaced Pages is driving away newcomers | work=] | date=January 3, 2013 | accessdate=June 17, 2021 | last=Vergano|first=Dan}}</ref> The amount of time an instruction has been present does not strengthen consensus behind it, though one should be wary whenever removing a longstanding part of policy. | Since things often "creep in" without scrutiny, even longstanding instructions should be subject to review.<ref>Calcification in rule-making drives away new editors. {{cite web | url=http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2013/01/03/wikipedia-rules-new-editors/1801229/ | title=Study: Misplaced Pages is driving away newcomers | work=] | date=January 3, 2013 | accessdate=June 17, 2021 | last=Vergano|first=Dan}}</ref> The amount of time an instruction has been present does not strengthen consensus behind it, though one should be wary whenever removing a longstanding part of a policy. | ||
| ⚫ | If you feel that a change is needed, either make your case on the talk page or ] make your changes, giving your rationale in the edit summary. If you meet with disagreement, ] the matter further. Those who oppose complete removal may still be willing to consider changes. | ||
| If an instruction does not make sense or does not seem to describe community consensus, check the page history to see when it was added and how it may have changed over time. Then check the talk page and talk archive, to see whether there was any related discussion. | |||
| == Not every instruction is creep == | |||
| ⚫ | |||
| {{Anchor|Misuse}} | |||
| ⚫ | == Linking to this page == | ||
| {{shortcut|WP:NOTCREEP}} | {{shortcut|WP:NOTCREEP}} | ||
| Additional instruction can be helpful when it succinctly states community consensus regarding a significant point, but it is harmful when the point is trivial, redundant, or unclear. | |||
| ⚫ | == Linking to this page == | ||
| If someone cited this page to explain their view, they mean that they think the rule is at least unnecessary and unimportant, if not downright harmful by creating a lot of burdensome ] or a rule that ] because it prevents editors from writing good articles. It's rare that what Misplaced Pages really needs is yet another rule. | If someone cited this page to explain their view, they mean that they think the rule is at least unnecessary and unimportant, if not downright harmful by creating a lot of burdensome ] or a rule that ] because it prevents editors from writing good articles. It's rare that what Misplaced Pages really needs is yet another rule. | ||
| If you cite this page to support your opposition to "creepy" rules, remember that some editors |
If you cite this page to support your opposition to "creepy" rules, remember that some editors are dealing with a problem that seems significant to them, and they believe that writing down a rule somewhere will somehow solve their problem, even though 99.9% of editors would never even read the rule they're proposing, much less follow it. So don't say "Oppose per CREEP"; instead, say "Oppose the creation of this unnecessary and complicated rule for a very uncommon situation that could just as easily be solved by editors using their best judgment to apply the relevant existing rules as explained at WP:CRYPTIC" – or whatever the facts of the case at hand are. | ||
| ==See also== | ==See also== | ||
| {{div col}} | {{div col}} | ||
| '''Essays against instruction creep''' | |||
| '''Policies, essays, and guidelines''' | |||
| *] | *] | ||
| ⚫ | *] | ||
| *] | |||
| *] | *] | ||
| *] (WP:MOSBLOAT) | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] (humor) | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | *] | ||
| *] | |||
| ⚫ | *] | ||
| '''Essays {{em|encouraging}} redundancy''' | '''Essays {{em|encouraging}} redundancy''' | ||
| *] | *] | ||
| *] | *] | ||
| '''Articles''' | |||
| '''Misplaced Pages articles''' | |||
| *{{Section link|Criticism of Misplaced Pages#Excessive rule-making}} | |||
| *] | *] | ||
| *] | *] | ||
| *] | |||
| *] | *] | ||
| *] | *] | ||
| *] | *] | ||
| '''Templates''' | '''Templates''' | ||
| *] (edit notice) | *] (edit notice) | ||
Latest revision as of 17:44, 18 December 2024
"WP:CREEP" redirects here. For creep in articles, see WP:ACREEP. For creep of templates, see WP:TCREEP.
 | This is an explanatory essay about the procedural policy regarding policies and guidelines. This page provides additional information about concepts in the page(s) it supplements. This page is not one of Misplaced Pages's policies or guidelines as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community. | Shortcuts |
 | This page in a nutshell: When editing guidance, keep in mind the risk that increasingly detailed instructions will result in bloated pages that new editors find intimidating and experienced editors ignore. |
Avoid instruction creep to keep Misplaced Pages policy and guideline pages easy to understand. The longer, more detailed, and more complicated you make the instructions, the less likely anyone is to read or follow whatever you write.
Problem
Nobody reads the directions from beginning to end. And increasing numbers of directions result, over time, in decreasing chances that any particular rule will be read at all, much less understood and followed. Spread out over many pages, excessive direction causes guidance to become less coherent and increasingly drift from actual community consensus. Further, having too many rules may drive away editors. To avoid these outcomes, keep Misplaced Pages space pages broad in scope, not covering every minute aspect of their subject matter.
Prevention
Principles. Keep policies and guidelines to the point. It is usually better for a policy or guideline to be too lax than too strict. Detailed policies can lead to wikilawyering, impairing the consensus-building process. If you just think that you have good advice for Wikipedians, consider adding it to an essay.
Editing. Do not make substantive additions to a policy or guideline unless the addition solves a real and significant problem, not just a hypothetical issue. Before publishing your edit, review the text for potential unintended consequences and re-write as appropriate.
Fixing
Further information: Misplaced Pages:Policies and guidelines § Conflicts between advice pages
Since things often "creep in" without scrutiny, even longstanding instructions should be subject to review. The amount of time an instruction has been present does not strengthen consensus behind it, though one should be wary whenever removing a longstanding part of a policy.
If you feel that a change is needed, either make your case on the talk page or boldly make your changes, giving your rationale in the edit summary. If you meet with disagreement, discuss the matter further. Those who oppose complete removal may still be willing to consider changes.
Not every instruction is creep
Shortcut
Additional instruction can be helpful when it succinctly states community consensus regarding a significant point, but it is harmful when the point is trivial, redundant, or unclear.
Linking to this page
If someone cited this page to explain their view, they mean that they think the rule is at least unnecessary and unimportant, if not downright harmful by creating a lot of burdensome bureaucracy or a rule that will be ignored because it prevents editors from writing good articles. It's rare that what Misplaced Pages really needs is yet another rule.
If you cite this page to support your opposition to "creepy" rules, remember that some editors are dealing with a problem that seems significant to them, and they believe that writing down a rule somewhere will somehow solve their problem, even though 99.9% of editors would never even read the rule they're proposing, much less follow it. So don't say "Oppose per CREEP"; instead, say "Oppose the creation of this unnecessary and complicated rule for a very uncommon situation that could just as easily be solved by editors using their best judgment to apply the relevant existing rules as explained at WP:CRYPTIC" – or whatever the facts of the case at hand are.
See also
Essays against instruction creep
- Misplaced Pages:Asshole John rule
- Misplaced Pages:Policy writing is hard
- Address problems without creating new specialized rules
- Misplaced Pages:Avoid writing redundant essays
- Misplaced Pages:If MOS doesn't need a rule on something, then it needs to not have a rule on that thing (WP:MOSBLOAT)
- Misplaced Pages:The rules are principles
Essays encouraging redundancy
Misplaced Pages articles
- Criticism of Misplaced Pages § Excessive rule-making
- Feature creep
- Instruction creep
- Parkinson's law
- Red tape
- Scope creep
Templates
- Template:Simple help page (edit notice)
References
- Calcification in rule-making drives away new editors. Vergano, Dan (January 3, 2013). "Study: Misplaced Pages is driving away newcomers". USA Today. Retrieved June 17, 2021.