| Revision as of 16:52, 5 April 2007 editA.Z. (talk | contribs)6,644 editsmNo edit summary← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 18:01, 26 December 2024 edit undoLegobot (talk | contribs)Bots1,667,800 edits Removed: Misplaced Pages talk:Biographies of living persons. | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| <noinclude> | |||
| {{shortcut|]}} | |||
| {{rfclistintro}} | |||
| </noinclude> | |||
| ''']''' | |||
| {{rfcquote|text= | |||
| This a request for comment on the above question and previous section. Is the Mackinac Center for Public Policy a Conservative group and should be described as such? And does the polices listed above overrule the more widely available references describing their relationships and them as Conservative vs Free-Market? ] (]) 02:35, 18 December 2024 (UTC)}} | |||
| ''']''' | |||
| {{rfcquote|text= | |||
| Should ] be amended to: | |||
| This page is to request comment on policy or guideline topics. That applies both to disputes about any current policy or guideline, and any new proposals or amendments to those. Further, policy matters are also discussed at ]. | |||
| * '''Option 1'''{{snd}}Require former administrators to request restoration of their tools at the ] (BN) if they are eligible to do so (i.e., they do not fit into any of the exceptions). | |||
| {{RFCheader|Policy, guideline, and proposal issues}} | |||
| * '''Option 2'''{{snd}}<s>Clarify</s> <ins>Maintain the status quo</ins> that former administrators who would be eligible to request restoration via BN may instead request restoration of their tools via a voluntary ] (RfA). | |||
| * '''Option 3'''{{snd}}Allow bureaucrats to SNOW-close RfAs as successful if (a) 48 hours have passed, (b) the editor has right of resysop, and (c) a SNOW close is warranted. | |||
| '''Background''': This issue arose in one ] and is currently being discussed in an ]. ] (]/]) 21:14, 15 December 2024 (UTC)}} | |||
| ''']''' | |||
| {{rfcquote|text= | |||
| There are several questions, as follows: | |||
| #Should the lead of the current guideline be replaced with lead of the rewrite? | |||
| #Should the "Common newcomer scenarios" section and the "How to avoid being a "biter" section of the current guideline be replaced with "How to avoid biting" section of the rewrite? | |||
| #Should the "Ignorantia juris may excuse" section of the current guideline be replaced with the "It is okay not to be aware of guidelines" section of the rewrite? | |||
| #Should the "What to do if you feel you have "bitten" or "have been bitten" section of the current guideline be replaced with the "I have bitten someone—what do I do?" section of the rewrite? | |||
| The proposed rewrite can be found here: ]. Please refrain from making significant changes to the rewrite while the RfC is ongoing. Also see the idea lab discussion: {{sectionlink|Misplaced Pages:Village_pump_(idea_lab)#Rewriting_WP:BITE}}. After the last RfC, | |||
| ] has done work on cleaning up the "Understanding newcomers" section. ] <i><sup style="display:inline-flex;rotate:7deg;">]</sup></i> 14:28, 11 December 2024 (UTC)}} | |||
| ''']''' | |||
| {{rfcquote|text= | |||
| The RfC is whether to retain or remove Syrian mercenaries from the belligerents section of the infobox. ] (]) 02:58, 10 December 2024 (UTC)}} | |||
| ''']''' | |||
| {{rfcquote|text= | |||
| Should the sentence in the instructions to this template "If possible, verify the text with references provided in the foreign-language article" be reworded? ] (]) 10:14, 4 December 2024 (UTC)}} | |||
| ''']''' | |||
| {{rfcquote|text= | |||
| RfC: Should the following paragraph be added to ]? | |||
| {{tqb|10. <s>Meet the following criteria for the the respective single seater series:</s> <u>A driver who has met at least one of the following criteria for single seater racing:</u> | |||
| *] There is a major dispute going on there. People are deleting things written by other users, there are war edits, people are telling other people to leave Misplaced Pages and people are starting to leave Misplaced Pages. Some people are even going away to Wikiversity. Please, comment there! It's a dispute about what is the Reference Desk and how the Misplaced Pages pillars apply to the Reference Desk. ] 16:52, 5 April 2007 (UTC) | |||
| * Completion of one full season ''or'' a race winner in a ] series. | |||
| * Completion of one full season ''or'' a race winner in ]/]. | |||
| * Podium finish in the ] (single seater). | |||
| * Champion or runner up in a ] series.}} | |||
| note: strikethrough text was replaced by underlined text after the proposal per the discussion. | |||
| *'''Privacy proposals'''. Should the proposals ], ], and ] be marked as {{tl|rejected}}? Please comment ]. 11:38, 5 April 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ] (]) 01:01, 30 November 2024 (UTC)}} | |||
| *'''Image:FBISeal.png''' According to the United States Code, Title 18, Section 709, (and this does apply; Misplaced Pages's servers ''are'' in the US state of ]) ''unauthorized use of the FBI seal, the words “Federal Bureau of Investigation,” the initials “FBI,” or any imitation “in a manner reasonably calculated to convey the impression that such ...is approved, endorsed, or authorized by the Federal Bureau of Investigation” is prohibited.'' Especially on the template ] (which you'll have to look at a past version of) this is conveyed. 00:47, 3 April 2007 (UTC) | |||
| {{RFC list footer|policy|hide_instructions={{{hide_instructions}}} }} | |||
| *''']''': Requesting commentary about ensuring that information in articles remains within the scope of the article content. --] 12:20, 2 April 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Disambiguation''': I cut down the list of Ohio townships on ] to just a link to ], thinking to make the page less cluttered and easier to use somewhat as a directory. Another editor disagreed, saying "is there a point to forcing readers to go to a second disambiguation page?" I don't know the proper policy on this. Would there please be somewhat of discussion on the ]? 13:25, 1 April 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *]. Is policy formed when consensus is reached or when the majority of the relevant articles have been moved to conform to the policy? 03:13, 31 March 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *]. A draft proposal for more extensive guidance to editors wishing to review ]. Please make any changes as you see fit, and leave any comments you have on the talk page. I propose a goal of having the draft finalized within 2 weeks from today (by April 13) and moved to the GA project by that date. Thank you all for your attention to this. --]|]|] 16:12, 30 March 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *] — debate over acceptable use of the ]. 05:11, 30 March 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Chemical compounds''': Misplaced Pages has hundreds, if not thousands, of articles on chemical compounds, generally found in the many subcategories of ]. Unfortunately, many of these are permanent stubs and low on content, such as those listed ]. ] has been created to discuss what to do with all this. Deletion is arguably a waste, but perhaps some articles can be combined into lists for greater comprehensiveness. Please join the discussion on ]. 16:25, 26 March 2007 (UTC) | |||
| * ] of ] (and perhaps others): Page was protected along with ] on the basis of "stability" which is not a recognized reason for page protection at ]; a later reason that editwarring is immiment was brought up to preserve the protection, but there is no actual evidence of editwarring; rather, there is broad consensus to restore material that was deleted without consensus before the protection - even the person who reverted that restoration immediately before the block agrees with the consensus and said they did the revert for the "stability" rationale. Others, at both ] and in a related, larger thread at ], challege the blocks as unilateral (cf. ]), without consensus and against policy and process, and that disputes about the future of WP:ATT have nothing to do with whether the policies and guidelines that were melded to create WP:ATT, and which have been restored to active status, need to be protected from editing. Probably due to concerns about corewarring, WP:RFPP have been reluctant to get involved. The issues raised also extend to the protection of ] and ]. So, broader community input is sought on whether any of these page protections should remain, and whether WP:RS in particular should be unprotected immediately. 03:29, 24 March 2007 (UTC) Update: The protection is also thwarting application of the proper merge tags to the various original policy pages, as discussed ] and at ]. 18:19, 24 March 2007 (UTC) | |||
| * {{Tl|Disputedpolicy}} on ]. Some parties to the debates relating to ] (which is being debated at ], ] and ] among probable other places) believe that the {{tl|Disputedpolicy}} tag should be placed on ] because of ] (which is what the template is for, not for disputes over what a policy happens to say about something). Proponents of WP:ATT of course reject this idea. The ] that cannot possibly reach consensus internally, and needs further community input. — 22:22, 23 March 2007 (UTC) Update: After discussion, the template was added. A party to the disputes then immediately reverted it, with a rationale that actually has nothing to do with the template in question. ] has been asked to restore it. 03:29, 24 March 2007 (UTC) Update: ] that ATT needs this template. 18:19, 24 March 2007 (UTC) | |||
| * ] of ] without {{tl|Protected}} tag. Short version: Article was protected pending outcome of a poll. Req. made at ] to tag the article with {{tl|Protected}}, which is not only normal but highly appropriate in this case because ] and as to its particulars (and {{tl|Protected}} specifically references dispute as the defensible rationale for the protection under ]). An RFPP admin responded by doing the requested tagging. A party to the disputes at WP:ATT removed the tag. RFPP admin replaced it, dispute participant removed it again, and replaced it with a POV statement of the situation that is ] by other parties to the debates. Should the {{tl|Protected}} tag be restored, and debate partcipants reminded to leave the article alone while it is protected, since the purpose of page protection is not to create an admins-only editing environment? The relevant RFPP material is ] — 22:17, 23 March 2007 (UTC) Update: The {{tl|Protected}} tag was put back on this one (for the third time). 01:37, 24 March 2007 (UTC) | |||
| * ] A proposal for the naming of stations in the UK. 19:00, 23 March 2007 (UTC) | |||
| * ] This page is a result of a merger of ] and ]. There is disagreement over the resolution of the wording of the former , and the issue of "notabilty" for non-commercial organizations. 23:37, 20 March 2007 (UTC) | |||
| * ] Should the guideline stipulate that community bans be decided by a consensus of ''uninvolved'' or ''impartial'' editors? 14:15, 16 March 2007 (UTC) | |||
| * ] A proposal to get rid of the thousands of articles describing bus routes. They're not what one expects to see in an encyclopedia, and there's already a policy against train and subway routes. 02:53, 16 March 2007 (UTC) | |||
| * ]: Proposal to redefine the present convention of not blocking persistent vandals who space out their disruptive edits in order to evade blocks by taking advantage of the requirement that "the vandal active '''now'''". 18:38, 13 March 2007 (UTC) | |||
| * ] A proposal to change fair use policy wording to more specifically allow fair use historical images (such as logos) which provide visual historical information about the subject of an article. ] 05:32, 13 March 2007 (UTC) | |||
| * ] A propsal to disallow the use of most credentials on Misplaced Pages. 23:34, 12 March 2007 (UTC) | |||
| * ] One possible solution (of many) to the question of paid editing. Inspired by the discussion on wikien-l. ] 21:00, 11 March 2007 (UTC) | |||
| * ] Proposal involving the creation of a new noticeboard. ] 20:39, 11 March 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *] Policy involving vandalism warnings on talk pages. ] 22:01, 9 March 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *Two polls: ] and ] --] 13:58, 6 March 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *] - new ideas regarding how we handle election notability and articles. --] 01:50, 3 March 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *] — brainstorming how we appeal for the anon's money - <font face="Verdana">''']''' <small>· ] · 12:13, Friday, 2 March 2007</small></font> | |||
| *] — an essay compiling all the information and arguments on the "tired out" discussion of adverts on Wikimedia - <font face="Verdana">''']''' <small>· ] · 12:13, Friday, 2 March 2007</small></font> | |||
| *] Should the RS guideline discuss histographical/ideological bias commonly found in some sources? Obvious example: Nazi sources will be anti-semitic, and Soviet pro-Marxist. Less obvious: Western historiography, particulary from the first half of the 20th century and earlier, will have a 'Western bias'. Should we note that such sources are likely to be less reliable when discussing certain issues then modern academic work done in countries respecting free speach and academic ethics? 15:29, 1 March 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *] is this proposal rejected because consensus is unlikely? 9:06, 1 March 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *, please add your thoughts on improving integration of news on Misplaced Pages, 18:41, 28 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *] A proposal to establish notability guidelines for journalists as the general notabilty guidelines can sometimes create ] in determining notability. 00:22, 25 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *]. Should guideline require new material be added to main articles before being added to summary sections? 02:58, 24 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *] is a proposal to extend restrictions on newly registered users. 01:14, 18 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| *] should be official policy. This should be self-evident. Let's talk about it. 00:24, 18 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| * ], a proposal to subsume and replace ] and ], is ready to be implemented. Please review the document and discuss any problems on the talk page. 23:09, 16 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| * ], to seek feedback from editors about adminship and its processes. - 15:16, 16 February 2007 (UTC) | |||
| <!--Add new entries at the TOP, not here.--> | |||
| ] | |||
Latest revision as of 18:01, 26 December 2024
The following discussions are requested to have community-wide attention:
Talk:Mackinac Center for Public Policy
| This a request for comment on the above question and previous section. Is the Mackinac Center for Public Policy a Conservative group and should be described as such? And does the polices listed above overrule the more widely available references describing their relationships and them as Conservative vs Free-Market? ContentEditman (talk) 02:35, 18 December 2024 (UTC) |
Misplaced Pages:Village pump (policy)
Should Misplaced Pages:Administrators#Restoration of admin tools be amended to:
Background: This issue arose in one recent RfA and is currently being discussed in an ongoing RfA. voorts (talk/contributions) 21:14, 15 December 2024 (UTC) |
Misplaced Pages talk:Please do not bite the newcomers
There are several questions, as follows:
The proposed rewrite can be found here: Misplaced Pages:Please do not bite the newcomers/rewrite. Please refrain from making significant changes to the rewrite while the RfC is ongoing. Also see the idea lab discussion: Misplaced Pages:Village pump (idea lab) § Rewriting WP:BITE. After the last RfC, User:Alalch E. has done work on cleaning up the "Understanding newcomers" section. Ca 14:28, 11 December 2024 (UTC) |
Talk:Second Nagorno-Karabakh War
| The RfC is whether to retain or remove Syrian mercenaries from the belligerents section of the infobox. Cinderella157 (talk) 02:58, 10 December 2024 (UTC) |
| Should the sentence in the instructions to this template "If possible, verify the text with references provided in the foreign-language article" be reworded? Fangz (talk) 10:14, 4 December 2024 (UTC) |
Misplaced Pages talk:Notability (sports)
RfC: Should the following paragraph be added to WP:NMOTORSPORT?
note: strikethrough text was replaced by underlined text after the proposal per the discussion. |
| Requests for comment (All) | |
|---|---|
| Articles (All) |
|
| Non-articles (All) | |
| Instructions | To add a discussion to this list:
|
| For more information, see Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment. Report problems to Misplaced Pages talk:Requests for comment. Lists are updated every hour by Legobot. | |