Misplaced Pages

User:Boud/sandbox/draft RfC Reduce advocacy in Find sources Module: Difference between revisions

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.
< User:Boud | sandbox Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 20:49, 15 November 2023 editBoud (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers31,348 edits RfC initial post-signature opening statement: rename section per WP:RFC← Previous edit Revision as of 22:20, 15 November 2023 edit undoBoud (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers31,348 edits RfC initial statement: per FirefangledfeathersNext edit →
Line 3: Line 3:
== RfC initial statement == == RfC initial statement ==
<nowiki>{{rfc|policy|tech}}</nowiki> <nowiki>{{rfc|policy|tech}}</nowiki>
In the ] and in the {{t|Find general sources}} template, should we diversify our recommendations for specific search engine(s) or meta-search engine(s), with the aim of mitigating the effects of ] and ] in finding sources, and for encouraging Wikipedians to protect their ]? If yes, then what changes should be made? <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> In the ] and in the {{t|Find general sources}} template: {{find sources}}, should we diversify our recommendations for specific search engine(s) or meta-search engine(s)? If yes, then what changes should be made? <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>


== Additional comments below first statement and timestamp == == Additional comments below first statement and timestamp ==

Revision as of 22:20, 15 November 2023

Please freely edit the draft RfC below. The suggested categories are policy - although not strictly policy, the question is fundamentally related to our mission, so people interested in policy are likely to be interested in this RfC; and tech - because tech knowledge and editing rights are needed changing both the Module and the Template.

RfC initial statement

{{rfc|policy|tech}} In the Find sources module and in the {{Find general sources}} template: Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL, should we diversify our recommendations for specific search engine(s) or meta-search engine(s)? If yes, then what changes should be made? ~~~~

Additional comments below first statement and timestamp

The Find sources module lists search engines that are available for use in the {{Find general sources}} template. The 7 Nov 2021 version of the template is (links omitted) Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · TWL. If you answer "Yes", then proposals for changes to the list of links available in the module and/or to the default list of links in the template could help lead to rough consensus decisions.

Changes (additions or removals) to the 21 June 2023 list of links available in the module could include removing some engines or adding notable engines from List of search engines or Comparison of web search engines. Changes (additions or removals) to the template could be made to the primary link (currently Google) or to the more specific links such as books, news, scholar (NYT vs AP is a separate RfC). Reasons for adding or removing might include utility, reduction of bias, and/or privacy, within the constraints of the Misplaced Pages mission.

Previous suggestions of changes in related discussions include: instead of specific engines link to list of search engines; instead of Google Scholar link to Internet Archive Scholar; add somewhere the source advice WP:RX; instead of Google alone link to "Google or list of search engines#General"; instead of Google News link to Searx news at Openxng.com, Searx.be and/or Priv.au.

~~~~