| Revision as of 15:27, 16 November 2014 editNcmvocalist (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers27,127 edits No, please respect Misplaced Pages process and allow the discussion to be concluded properly. if/when this needs to be done, it can be deal with by the non-participant who closes the discussion ideally.← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 04:08, 25 July 2022 edit undoDwaipayanc (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, File movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers30,440 editsm Reverted edits by 5.245.241.17 (talk) to last version by Ed6767Tag: Rollback | ||
| (13 intermediate revisions by 9 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{short description|historical document}} | |||
| __FORCETOC__ | |||
| {{selfref|WP:RFC/U redirects here. You may be looking for ] (formerly WP:RFCU) or for ] (])}} | {{selfref|WP:RFC/U redirects here. You may be looking for ] (formerly WP:RFCU) or for ] (])}} | ||
| {{historical|type=woundup|comment=<br>'''The RFC/U process has been discontinued as a result of ].'''<br>'''Other ] processes should be used for conduct issues.|brief=yes}} | |||
| {{underdiscussion|talkpage=Misplaced Pages:Village pump (proposals)|talk=Do Away with RFC/U}} | |||
| {{info|Prior to ] at the ] that was closed in December 2014, ] on user conduct (RfC/Us) were used to discuss the problematic behaviour of specific Misplaced Pages editors, as part of the ]. RfC/Us were an informal, non-binding process. According to the discussion's closing statement, many editors found the RfC/U process ineffectual. As a result, it was closed down on 7 December 2014. | |||
| {| class="messagebox" | |||
| |- | |||
| | | |||
| | ] | |||
| | | |||
| ;This page is part of the ] (RfC/U) process, an early step in the Misplaced Pages ].<br /> | |||
| WP:RFC/U is an informal non-binding process enabling users to discuss problems with specific editors who may have violated ]. This venue lists all open/active RfC/Us. <br /> | |||
| | {{shortcut|WP:RFCC|WP:RFC/USER|WP:RFC/ADMIN|WP:RFC/BOT}} | |||
| ⚫ | |||
| ⚫ | Old RfC/Us can be found in ]. | ||
| <center> | |||
| ⚫ | }} | ||
| {| class="wikitable" style="Font-size:90%;text-align:center" | |||
| |- | |||
| | colspan="8" | '''Are you in the right place?<br />Click in the corresponding box if you want to see:''' | |||
| |- | |||
| | style="padding-left:10px;padding-right:10px" | '''] | |||
| | style="padding-left:10px;padding-right:10px" | ''']''' | |||
| | style="padding-left:10px;padding-right:10px" | ''']''' | |||
| | style="padding-left:10px;padding-right:10px" | ''']''' | |||
| | style="padding-left:10px;padding-right:10px" | ''']''' | |||
| |} | |||
| </center> | |||
| ==How to proceed== | |||
| ] Are you in the right place? Thinking about creating or certifying an RfC/U? See ]. | |||
| ] Thinking about generally participating in an RfC/U? Or responding to an RfC/U where you are the subject? See ]. | |||
| ] Looking for more informal feedback on yourself? Try ] instead of RfC/U. | |||
| ==Instructions for this page== | |||
| All participants in a user conduct RfC are expected to comply with the rules and guidelines, stated ], and below. | |||
| * Once an RfC is created, it should be ] in the "Candidates pages" section, until the minimum requirements (listed below) have been met. | |||
| * Once the requirements are met, the RfC should be moved from the "Candidate pages" section to the "Certified pages" section of ]. | |||
| * If the minimum requirements are not met, see closing and archiving (listed further below). | |||
| ===Minimum requirements=== | |||
| Before requesting community comment, at least two editors must have contacted the user on their talk page, or the talk pages involved in the dispute, and tried but failed to resolve the problem. '''Any RfC not accompanied by evidence showing that two users tried and failed to resolve the same dispute may be deleted after 48 hours as "uncertified".''' The evidence, preferably in the form of ], should not simply show the dispute itself, but should show attempts to find a resolution or compromise. The users certifying the dispute must be the same users who were involved in the attempt to resolve it. | |||
| ===Closing and archiving=== | |||
| RfC/Us should be closed in line with the ''']'''. Certified disputes which have been closed in this way may be removed from this page and archived. | |||
| If the above criteria have been met, remove the link from the list (]) and add it to the archives at ''']'''. If the dispute is handled in mediation or arbitration, please make a note of where the dispute resolution process continued. | |||
| RfCs which do not meet minimum requirements should be delisted from the "Candidate pages" section - they are not archived as they are considered "uncertified". | |||
| '''{{subst:]|'''''outcome of RfC'''''}}''' may be used for the closing of the RfC. | |||
| == General user conduct == | |||
| {{RFCUlist}} | |||
| Discussions about user conduct should be listed in this section unless the complaint is specifically about the use of admin privileges (see section below) or the choice of username (see ]). | |||
| See ] for the steps on ]. | |||
| ⚫ | |||
| == Use of administrator privileges == | |||
| This section is only for discussions specifically related to the use of sysop rights by ]. This includes the actions of protecting or unprotecting pages, deleting or undeleting pages, blocking or unblocking users, and ]. If the dispute is over an admin's actions as an editor, it should be listed under the '''General user conduct''' section above. | |||
| See ] for the steps on ]. | |||
| Once you have created the RfC/U, list the dispute by editing ]. A note may also be placed at ]. | |||
| == Use of bot privileges == | |||
| This section is only for discussions specifically related to the operation of a ]. This includes the actions of unauthorized bots, bots without flags, and inter-wiki bots. It does not include the use of scripts or semi-automated tools on a user's account. If the dispute is over a bot owner's actions as an editor, it should be listed under the '''General user conduct''' section above. | |||
| See ] for the steps on ]. | |||
| Once you have created the RfC/U, list the dispute by editing ]. A note may also be placed at ]. | |||
| ==See also== | |||
| *] | |||
| ] | |||
Latest revision as of 04:08, 25 July 2022
historical document WP:RFC/U redirects here. You may be looking for Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations (formerly WP:RFCU) or for Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/User names (WP:RFC/NAME) | This page has been closed down by community consensus, and is retained only for historical reference. If you wish to restart discussion on the status of this page, seek community input at a forum such as the village pump. The RFC/U process has been discontinued as a result of this discussion. Other dispute resolution processes should be used for conduct issues. |
 | Prior to a discussion at the Village Pump that was closed in December 2014, requests for comment on user conduct (RfC/Us) were used to discuss the problematic behaviour of specific Misplaced Pages editors, as part of the dispute resolution process. RfC/Us were an informal, non-binding process. According to the discussion's closing statement, many editors found the RfC/U process ineffectual. As a result, it was closed down on 7 December 2014. Old RfC/Us can be found in Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/User conduct/Archive. |