Misplaced Pages

:Follow the principle of least astonishment: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 22:00, 30 December 2011 editImzadi1979 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, File movers, Mass message senders, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers, Template editors151,568 editsm moved Misplaced Pages:POLA to Misplaced Pages:Follow the principle of least astonishment: expanding out the title of the page... the previous title is in the style of shortcuts← Previous edit Latest revision as of 12:32, 19 May 2018 edit undoAjaxSmack (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers32,345 edits rm shortcut 
(7 intermediate revisions by 6 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{rejected}}
== Follow the principle of least astonishment ==
{{shortcut|WP:POLA}}
The ] passed a ], urging "the community to pay particular attention to curating all kinds of potentially controversial content, including determining whether it has a realistic educational use and applying the principle of least astonishment in categorization and placement."<ref group=nb>See email clarification for scope: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2011-December/071089.html</ref> The ] passed a ], urging "the community to pay particular attention to curating all kinds of potentially controversial content, including determining whether it has a realistic educational use and applying the principle of least astonishment in categorization and placement."<ref group=nb>See email clarification for scope: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2011-December/071089.html</ref>


The resolution emphasizes that controversial content includes "that of a sexual, violent or religious nature" if it "may be offensive to some viewers", for example because they find "such content is disrespectful or inappropriate for themselves, their families or their students", even though others may "find it acceptable" because of differences "in age, background and values". The resolution emphasizes that controversial content includes "that of a sexual, violent or religious nature" if it "may be offensive to some viewers", for example because they find "such content is disrespectful or inappropriate for themselves, their families or their students", even though others may "find it acceptable" because of differences "in age, background and values".

⚫ Additionally, the Foundation has committed itself to develop a ], which would take into account the reader's choices when displaying images. Following this WMF Board decision, a ] to assess the importance of various aspects of the feature to the community. The filter is still in the design stage however; for further information see ] and ].


While the resolution does not provide a definition for the ], the following pages that were part of the workflow leading to the resolution and design of the personal image filter may be helpful in that respect: ] and ]. (Note that parts of this study were superseded by ] and by the resolution itself.) While the resolution does not provide a definition for the ], the following pages that were part of the workflow leading to the resolution and design of the personal image filter may be helpful in that respect: ] and ]. (Note that parts of this study were superseded by ] and by the resolution itself.)

⚫ Additionally, the Foundation has committed itself to develop a ], which would take into account the reader's choices when displaying images. Following this WMF Board decision, a ] to assess the importance of various aspects of the feature to the community. The filter is still in the design stage however; for further information see ] and ].


==See also== ==See also==
*], talks about information being understood by the reader without struggle for writing better articles
*] *]
*] *]
Line 25: Line 25:


==Notes== ==Notes==
{{reflist|group=nb|refs= {{reflist|group=nb}}
<!-- commented out because list item not in text {{reflist|group=nb|refs=


<ref name="typical"> <ref name="typical">
Line 31: Line 32:
</ref> </ref>


}} }}-->
]

Latest revision as of 12:32, 19 May 2018

Red crossThis is a failed proposal.
Consensus for its implementation was not established within a reasonable period of time. If you want to revive discussion, please use the talk page or initiate a thread at the village pump.

The Wikimedia Foundation passed a Resolution on controversial content, urging "the community to pay particular attention to curating all kinds of potentially controversial content, including determining whether it has a realistic educational use and applying the principle of least astonishment in categorization and placement."

The resolution emphasizes that controversial content includes "that of a sexual, violent or religious nature" if it "may be offensive to some viewers", for example because they find "such content is disrespectful or inappropriate for themselves, their families or their students", even though others may "find it acceptable" because of differences "in age, background and values".

While the resolution does not provide a definition for the principle of least astonishment, the following pages that were part of the workflow leading to the resolution and design of the personal image filter may be helpful in that respect: m:Image filter referendum/FAQ/en#What is the principle of least astonishment? and m:2010 Wikimedia Study of Controversial Content: Part Two#Explanations 2. (Note that parts of this study were superseded by m:Controversial content/Board report and by the resolution itself.)

Additionally, the Foundation has committed itself to develop a personal image filter, which would take into account the reader's choices when displaying images. Following this WMF Board decision, a referendum was held to assess the importance of various aspects of the feature to the community. The filter is still in the design stage however; for further information see meta:Controversial content and meta:Image filter referendum/Next steps/en.

See also

Notes

  1. See email clarification for scope: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2011-December/071089.html
Category: