This page is an archive of a community-wide discussion. This page is no longer live. Further comments or questions on this topic should be made in a new Senate Hall page rather than here so that this page is preserved as a historic record. C4-DE Bot (talk) 19:53, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
Forums > Senate Hall archive > SH:User page policy - a more friendly Wook
Welcome to late night spring cleaning ideas! (or well, it's springtime where I am). This is an opening discussion on the Wookieepedia:User page and profile policy. A handful of proposed edits have been whipped up here, in a diff that will continue to be updated as copy-edits and suggestions get added. A summary of the changes:
- Makes the intro more friendly—less of a, "I'm hunting you down" vibe in the first paragraph.
- (Third paragraph) While Wookieepedia is not the right space for most fan works, it needn't be worded so harshly. I've made an attempt to soften the wording while still reccomending the Fanon wiki.
- Combining the subpages rules for concision.
- Removing rule relating to not listing social networking handles. We've got a handful of userboxes that do this, and people often list their Discord handles or emails on their talk pages. Don't really see why an archaic rule such as this applies in the modern-day.
- Putting "safe for work" mention in its own rule and adding that content must comply with the Fandom anti-discrimination policy. Rule below it is unaltered (but now it's own bullet point) relating to not posting pirated or illegal content.
- Adding specific mention that users making false claims (such as them being an admin when they're not) can be redacted by an administrator.
- Splitting "no user can edit another user's userpage without consent" rule from the "bots" clause, as they're two slightly different topics.
- Making "Excessive user page edits" section less harshly-worded while still having the same end-effect. Removed mention of which specific categories count—at that point, we'd essentially have to list out most other namespaces. May as well just define it as any userspace other than a userspace at that point.
Open to feedback! This is just my iteration of a friendlier user page policy that has the same end-effects and rules, while also being a bit more modernized and in touch with current policies.—spookywillowwtalk 04:46, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
Unless further disagreement arises, hoping to take this to CT in the near future (maybe next week)?— and then we can trek onward with policy cleanup!—spookywillowwtalk 16:29, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
Update: Sent to CT: Forum:CT:User page policy revamp —spookywillowwtalk 17:56, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
Discussion
- Looks great to me, certainly a much better tone. Ayrehead02 (talk) 08:39, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
- Looking good! Imperators II(Talk) 10:41, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
- Love this, as always I have things to say lol little typo "partaining" -> "pertaining" Manoof (he/him/his)
11:54, 12 March 2023 (UTC) - The category rule is broken frequently. Subpages using article drafts and maintenance categories have been present on many pages in the User namespace. Not sure how to address this though, short of actually enforcing it. Perhaps a bot could remove category links in the user namespace? Or the removal of categories/fixing errors that result in maintenance categories be added as a clause to edit others userpages? I dunno... Manoof (he/him/his) 11:54, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
- False claims I'd change redaction to removal. Manoof (he/him/his) 11:54, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
- Hiding data "permanent block from editing" is this different to just "Permanent block"? Manoof (he/him/his)
11:54, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
- Seems like a hefty of enough offense that folks might get forwarded up to Fandom for it. We can't exactly say for sure what they will do once passed on, but "permanent block from editing" seems more specific and firm than cutting it short.—spookywillowwtalk 14:09, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
- The 500:100 ratio is just 5:1 so this should be simplified. Additionally there's no mention of time period, so this should be specified if this is total edits over the lifetime of the account or a specific time period (eg last 12 months) Manoof (he/him/his) 11:54, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
- The original CT suggests the rule means total edits, which indeed should be clarified. The ratio is such to exclude users with less than 600 edits. 01miki10 Open comlink 12:03, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
- Good point with the 600 edits, though I think that should be also more explicit to prevent similar mistakes to what I did, simplifying ratios isn't uncommon after all! :) Manoof (he/him/his) 13:25, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
- Good point with the 600 edits, though I think that should be also more explicit to prevent similar mistakes to what I did, simplifying ratios isn't uncommon after all! :) Manoof (he/him/his)
- The original CT suggests the rule means total edits, which indeed should be clarified. The ratio is such to exclude users with less than 600 edits. 01miki10 Open comlink 12:03, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
- Fixed above spelling error, added that bots can remove article-specific categories (I personally feel if someone is using Category:Jedi Knights or something, they should not be able to {{Nobots}} out of it), clarified that it is calculated using the lifetime editcount of the account, while not simplifying it since it's current intention is indeed to be 500:100 per the CT.—spookywillowwtalk 14:09, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
- This looks great! Rsand 30 (talk) 17:23, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
- Good work, especially on the tone. NanoLuukeCloning Facility 14:00, 13 March 2023 (UTC)