Misplaced Pages

talk:Miscellany for deletion - 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.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Titoxd (talk | contribs) at 01:20, 29 August 2005 (NFD now active). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 01:20, 29 August 2005 by Titoxd (talk | contribs) (NFD now active)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Talk pages

This page looks like it is off to a good start. One element I do disagree with the proposed outline on are talk pages. While in my time here I can't ever remember a talk page being nominated for deletion, it seems logical that such a nomination would go here, rather than at AfD. Talk page deletions are very unusual, and like the deletion of user or policy page, should only be nominated when there is a blatant breech of policy. As with the other pages that will be listed here the article deletion policy gives little guidance on when and why talk pages should be deleted, and talk pages thus similarly require special procedures. - SimonP 02:22, August 28, 2005 (UTC)

I agree completely. -Sean Curtin 23:42, August 28, 2005 (UTC)

Just a note

We've done a little work in this area on Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Deletion sorting. See Talk pages for deletion, User pages for deletion, Misplaced Pages pages for deletion, and the umbrella list Misplaced Pages-related pages for deletion, which also includes some items from article namespace.

Note that, at this writing, none of these lists are perfectly up to date. Feel free to help out! -- Visviva 04:05, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

It's time

It's now 01:20, 29 August 2005 (UTC), so NFD is now officially active. I'm thinking about being

This page in a nutshell: Go for it.
Adult: Misplaced Pages has grammatical and orthographic mistakes! See? Were this a serious publication, I would send a letter to the director, and another to the editorial chief! Child: Wouldn't it be easier and faster to just correct them yourself?
... and the child is right to be bold.
Misplaced Pages guidelines
Behavioral
Discussions
Content
Editing
Categorization
Style
Deletion
Project content
Other
Search


We would like everyone to be bold and help make Misplaced Pages a better encyclopedia. How many times have you read something and thought—Why doesn't this page have correct spelling, proper grammar, or a better layout? Wikis like ours develop faster when everybody helps to fix problems, correct grammar, add facts, make sure wording is accurate, etc.

Fix it yourself instead of just talking about it. In the time it takes to write about the problem, you could instead improve the encyclopedia. Misplaced Pages not only lets you add and edit articles: it wants you to do it.

Do not be upset if your bold edits get reverted. Of course, others here will edit what you write. Do not take it personally! They, like all of us, just wish to make Misplaced Pages as good an encyclopedia as it can possibly be. Also, when you see a conflict in a talk page, do not be just a "mute spectator"; be bold and drop your opinion there; see the official policy on talking and editing for more! On some of the less prominent articles on Misplaced Pages that have a lower editing rate, your bold edit might not be responded to immediately. Think about it this way: if you don't find one of your edits being reverted now and then, perhaps you're not being bold enough.

Be careful

Shortcuts

Although the boldness of contributors like you is one of Misplaced Pages's greatest assets, it is important that you take care of the common good and not edit disruptively or recklessly. Of course, any changes you make that turn out badly can be reverted easily, usually painlessly, and it is important not to feel insulted if your changes are reverted or edited further. However, some significant changes can be long-lasting and harder to fix. If you're unsure of anything, just ask for advice.

Also, changes to articles on complex, controversial subjects with long histories or active sanctions, or to Featured Articles and Good Articles, should be done with extra care. In many cases, the text as you find it has come into being after long and arduous negotiations between Wikipedians of diverse backgrounds and points of view. A careless edit to such an article might stir up a latent conflict, and other users who are involved in the page may become defensive. If you would like to make a significant edit—not just a simple copyedit—to an article on a controversial subject, it is a useful idea to first read the article in its entirety and skim the comments on the talk page. On controversial articles, the safest course is to be cautious and find consensus before making changes; but there are nevertheless situations in which bold edits can safely be made, even to contentious articles. Always use your very best editorial judgment in these cases and be sure to read the talk page.

Being bold is not an excuse to, even temporarily, violate the policy on material about living persons.

Shortcuts

Often it is easier to see that something is not right rather than to know exactly what would be right. We do not require anyone to be bold; after all, commenting that something is incorrect can be the first step to getting it fixed. It is true, though, that problems are more certain to be fixed, and will probably be fixed faster, if you are bold and do it yourself.

Non-article namespaces

Main page: Misplaced Pages:Administration § Data structure and development

Although editors are encouraged to be bold in updating articles, more caution is sometimes required when editing pages in non-article namespaces. Such pages are identified by a namespace prefix. For example, this page, Misplaced Pages:Be bold, has the "Misplaced Pages:" prefix; if it were called simply Be bold (with no prefix) it would be an article.

Problems may arise for a variety of reasons in different contexts in non-article namespaces. These problems should be taken into account in deciding whether to be bold, and how bold to be.

Misplaced Pages namespace

Main page: Misplaced Pages:Policies and guidelines § Content changes Further information: Misplaced Pages:Project namespace § Content

Misplaced Pages does not "enshrine" old practices: bold changes to its policies and guidelines are sometimes the best way to adapt and improve the encyclopedia. In this case, "bold" refers to boldness of idea; such ideas are most commonly raised and discussed first to best formulate their implementation.

The admonition "be careful" is especially important in relation to policies and guidelines, where key parts may be phrased in a particular way to reflect a very hard-won compromise—which may not be obvious to those unfamiliar with the background. In these cases, it is also often better to discuss potential changes first. However, spelling and grammatical errors can and should be fixed as soon as they are noticed.

Discussing changes to other Misplaced Pages-space pages on the talk page is also a good idea. If nothing else, it will provide an explanation of the changes for later editors. Most such pages are collections of arguments placed in Misplaced Pages space for later reference, so the same arguments don't need to be made over and over again.

Template namespace

Further information: Misplaced Pages:Template namespace § Guidelines

One must be especially careful when being bold with templates: updating them can have far-reaching consequences because one change can affect lots of pages at once. Moreover, some templates are part of a wide-ranging, uniform system of templates across Misplaced Pages, e.g. infoboxes and stubs. Remember, all source code is easily broken by untested changes (but always quite fixable).

Because of these concerns, many heavily used templates are indefinitely protected from editing. Before editing templates, consider proposing any changes on the associated talk pages and announcing the proposed change on pages of appropriate WikiProjects. Templates often have associated sandbox and testcases pages; respectively these are a place for the proposed modified template, and a place where the proposal may be trialed in comparison with the existing version.

Category namespace

Creating new categories or reorganizing the category structure may come to affect many pages. Consider the guidelines on categorization and overcategorization, and if what you're doing might be considered controversial (especially if it concerns categories for living people), propose changes at Categories for discussion, also mentioning them on pages of appropriate WikiProjects.

File namespace

Main page: Misplaced Pages:File names

Be bold in adding information to the description of an existing image. However, new images should be uploaded with new names rather than overwriting old ones. Doing otherwise risks having the old image confused with the new one. Therefore, you must always be careful.

User namespace

Main page: Misplaced Pages:User pages

It is generally recommended that you do not edit another Wikipedian's user page or comments left on talk pages (other than your own, and even then do not be reckless). Fixing vandalism is nearly always welcome, even on user pages. Specific users will let you know if they find your changes inappropriate or if you have given incorrect information.

Portal namespace

Regarding changes to graphical layout? See the next section. Note that the color scheme used for portals is not necessarily arbitrary. For example, most portals related to countries use the colors of the nation's flag. It is a good idea to propose design changes on the talk page first.

Graphical layout changes

Shortcuts

Making major changes to the graphical layout of certain pages that are not articles requires caution (examples below). It is often best to test changes first (in a sandbox page in your userspace, or a subpage of the page in question), and to discuss the proposed change with other editors before making it live. When many users edit pages for layout, different plans can conflict, and the page may get worse rather than better.

This is particularly true of highly visible pages, such as those linked from the navigation boxes on the left of the screen. These often use intricate formatting to convey their information, and a lot of work has gone into making them as user-friendly as possible. Moreover, some pages form groups whose formatting is intended to be uniform. You should establish consensus before making design edits to these types of pages. Examples include the Main Page (which in any case is permanently protected), the Community Portal, the Featured content group of pages, and the group consisting of Misplaced Pages:Contents and its subpages, as well as Portal:Current events. This does not apply to articles or normal portals.

See also

and removing the header at the top of the page. --Titoxd 01:20, 29 August 2005 (UTC)