Revision as of 20:23, 14 April 2006 editFeloniousMonk (talk | contribs)18,409 edits →Jimbo Wales comments on NPOV Undue weight: Please stop disturbing this page. WP:POINT← Previous edit | Revision as of 20:46, 14 April 2006 edit undoSlimVirgin (talk | contribs)172,064 edits →Page protectionNext edit → | ||
Line 52: | Line 52: | ||
:I've had no such requests, and you have no right to remove discussion from talk pages (now restored above). You also have no right to remove the original verifiable statements from Jimbo Wales. If you remove my discussion from the Talk pages again, I will report you. If you remove verifiable quotes from the article, I will also report you. --] 20:18, 14 April 2006 (UTC) | :I've had no such requests, and you have no right to remove discussion from talk pages (now restored above). You also have no right to remove the original verifiable statements from Jimbo Wales. If you remove my discussion from the Talk pages again, I will report you. If you remove verifiable quotes from the article, I will also report you. --] 20:18, 14 April 2006 (UTC) | ||
==Page protection== | |||
I've protected the page because of the reverting, because policy pages in particular need to be stable. Let me know when you're ready to start editing again. Cheers, ] <sup><font color="Purple">]</font></sup> 20:46, 14 April 2006 (UTC) |
Revision as of 20:46, 14 April 2006
When starting a new topic, please add it to the bottom of this page, and please sign your comments with four tildes: ~~~~. This will automatically place a date stamp, which will allow us to maintain this page better.
Shortcuts to sections
... don't work, so personally I'd propose to omit WP:NPOVUW entirely from the policy page. Maybe it should better be proposed for MfD or so, per Misplaced Pages:Redirect#When should we delete a redirect?, reason 2, that is: "confusing" (it creates the confusing, and incorrect, idea that the shortcut actually links to the UW section, someone not knowing that was the intention can only be more confused when reading the "NPOVUW" acronym, and when clicking arriving at the top of the NPOV page, where the "UW" is nowhere explained). And overall, i think NPOVUW to be a horrendous acronym, in the WP:WOTTA meaning. --Francis Schonken 21:32, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
- If they don't work, then delete them. I seem to remember them working in the past, but that was sometime ago. FeloniousMonk 21:38, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
- It would be nice if the software would support redirects to sections. Not for NPOVUW, but to create e.g. WP:WEIGHT. AvB ÷ talk 12:32, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
- Agree with AvB exactly. NikoSilver 20:59, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
Sanity check
Would it be ok if I were to tag chinese ctities under Category:Taiwan as the goverment of Taiwan (Republic of China) claims to rule mainland china? --Cool Cat 09:19, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
- Seems like a question you could easily answer for yourself... if not, maybe after reading Misplaced Pages:NPOV tutorial#Categorisation, and other guidance linked from there.
- If still not being able to answer that question for yourself after reading all that, maybe ask your question at wikipedia talk:categorization, or start an RfC (but I think you may assume that the outcome of such RfC would be pretty much predictable - only encouraging you to try to find a sensible answer to your question yourself - if you'd try to find it yourself, I'm convinced the eventual answer will stick better) --Francis Schonken 09:49, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
- This discussion belongs on Category_talk:Taiwan, not here. Bensaccount 15:01, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
Jimbo Wales comments on NPOV Undue weight
Per prior requests from the community, this discussion was moved to: User_talk:Iantresman#Moved_from_Talk:NPOV FeloniousMonk 20:03, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
- I've had no such requests, and you have no right to remove discussion from talk pages (now restored above). You also have no right to remove the original verifiable statements from Jimbo Wales. If you remove my discussion from the Talk pages again, I will report you. If you remove verifiable quotes from the article, I will also report you. --Iantresman 20:18, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
Page protection
I've protected the page because of the reverting, because policy pages in particular need to be stable. Let me know when you're ready to start editing again. Cheers, SlimVirgin 20:46, 14 April 2006 (UTC)