| Revision as of 04:28, 10 September 2006 editGraham87 (talk | contribs)Account creators, Autopatrolled, Event coordinators, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, Importers291,576 editsm →Demote inactive admins: sp← Previous edit |
Revision as of 16:46, 11 September 2006 edit undoRadiant! (talk | contribs)36,918 edits +linksNext edit → |
| Line 12: |
Line 12: |
|
*'''Proposal''' because of such-and-such law, Misplaced Pages must do so-and-so (e.g. implement censorship as above, or require identification of editors, or defer certain rulings to the U.S. Supreme Court) |
|
*'''Proposal''' because of such-and-such law, Misplaced Pages must do so-and-so (e.g. implement censorship as above, or require identification of editors, or defer certain rulings to the U.S. Supreme Court) |
|
*'''Not a good idea because:''' You are not a lawyer, and neither is most of the community. Misplaced Pages employs a lawyer who will inform us if and when such measures are necessary. The community need not use its incomplete comprehension of legality to impose restrictions upon itself. |
|
*'''Not a good idea because:''' You are not a lawyer, and neither is most of the community. Misplaced Pages employs a lawyer who will inform us if and when such measures are necessary. The community need not use its incomplete comprehension of legality to impose restrictions upon itself. |
|
*'''See also:''' ]. |
|
*'''See also:''' ]. |
|
|
|
|
|
==Protecting the main page article== |
|
==Protecting the main page article== |
| Line 22: |
Line 22: |
|
*'''Proposal:''' everybody should register an account from editing; IP addresses are insufficient. |
|
*'''Proposal:''' everybody should register an account from editing; IP addresses are insufficient. |
|
*'''Not a good idea because:''' a significant part of our good edits come from IP addresses; positive experiences with initial IP edits lead users to create accounts who otherwise would not do so; recent changes disabling IP's from creating new or editing semiprotected articles are sufficient. |
|
*'''Not a good idea because:''' a significant part of our good edits come from IP addresses; positive experiences with initial IP edits lead users to create accounts who otherwise would not do so; recent changes disabling IP's from creating new or editing semiprotected articles are sufficient. |
|
*'''See also:''' ? |
|
*'''See also:''' ] |
|
|
|
|
|
==Enforce American (or British) spelling== |
|
==Enforce American (or British) spelling== |
|
*'''Proposal:''' for consistency's sake, we should pick one style of spelling (British or American, generally) and stick with it. |
|
*'''Proposal:''' for consistency's sake, we should pick one style of spelling (British or American, generally) and stick with it. |
|
*'''Not a good idea because:''' It is widely impractical and there is no agreement on which style should be chosen, which has in the past resulted in repeated, needless edit warring. |
|
*'''Not a good idea because:''' It is widely impractical and there is no agreement on which style should be chosen, which has in the past resulted in repeated, needless edit warring. |
|
*'''See also:''' ] |
|
*'''See also:''' ], ] |
|
|
|
|
|
==Numerical rules for ]== |
|
==Numerical rules for ]== |
|
*'''Proposal:''' something like "people can only nominate three articles per day", "articles cannot be nominated more than once per year", etc. |
|
*'''Proposal:''' something like "people can only nominate three articles per day", "articles cannot be nominated more than once per year", etc. |
|
*'''Not a good idea because:''' strict numerical limits fall under ]. This is a solution in search of a problem. |
|
*'''Not a good idea because:''' strict numerical limits fall under ]. This is a solution in search of a problem. |
|
|
*'''See also:''' ], ] |
|
*'''See also:''' ? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
==Demote inactive admins== |
|
==Demote inactive admins== |
|
*'''Proposal:''' inactive admins should have their admin status revoked automatically after a given time period. The reasoning behind this is generally that the accounts might be compromised. |
|
*'''Proposal:''' inactive admins should have their admin status revoked automatically after a given time period. The reasoning behind this is generally that the accounts might be compromised. |
|
*'''Not a good idea because:''' an inactive account is ''less'' likely to be compromised than an active one (and also, if a vandal had successfully breached an admin's account, he would presumably use it for something and not let it stay inactive). |
|
*'''Not a good idea because:''' an inactive account is ''less'' likely to be compromised than an active one (and also, if a vandal had successfully breached an admin's account, he would presumably use it for something and not let it stay inactive). |
|
*'''See also:''' ? |
|
*'''See also:''' ] |
|
|
|
|
|
==Hierarchical structures== |
|
|
*'''Proposal:''' there should be some kind of "partial admin" that gets certain admin powers but not all of them. |
|
|
*'''Not a good idea because:''' it's confusing; if we can't trust people to use their tools sensibly, they don't become admins period. |
|
|
*'''See also:''' ] |
|
|
|
|
|
==Automatically prompt for missing edit summary== |
|
==Automatically prompt for missing edit summary== |
This is a list of things that are frequently proposed on Misplaced Pages, and have been rejected by the community several times in the past. If you make a proposal along these lines, it is likely to be swiftly closed for the exact same reason. See Misplaced Pages:Village pump (perennial proposals) for discussion on several of these.
