User talk:CodeAndGin: Difference between revisions
From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
(→Re:T:BOUND: new section) |
No edit summary |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
:''Contrariwise'', this sometimes applies to things which have ''not'' actually been written anywhere (yet). Ideally, [[Tardis:Who writes policy|all past decisions and current practice ''should'' be written into explicit policy]], but nobody's perfect. It makes sense to have a policy that says "even if the current setup isn't codified by a specific policy, you shouldn't, on a whim, try and implement a change that would have ramifications on thousands of pages without starting a discussion". So, in the above policy, '''the word "policy" doesn't just apply to those decisions that have been officially enshrined through discussion, but also refers to operating procedures that apply to multiple pages over large periods of time with the express knowledge of admins''', even if these procedures technically contradict the results of a previous forum decision. Try not to make large scale changes to the wiki without opening a discussion about these changes first. | :''Contrariwise'', this sometimes applies to things which have ''not'' actually been written anywhere (yet). Ideally, [[Tardis:Who writes policy|all past decisions and current practice ''should'' be written into explicit policy]], but nobody's perfect. It makes sense to have a policy that says "even if the current setup isn't codified by a specific policy, you shouldn't, on a whim, try and implement a change that would have ramifications on thousands of pages without starting a discussion". So, in the above policy, '''the word "policy" doesn't just apply to those decisions that have been officially enshrined through discussion, but also refers to operating procedures that apply to multiple pages over large periods of time with the express knowledge of admins''', even if these procedures technically contradict the results of a previous forum decision. Try not to make large scale changes to the wiki without opening a discussion about these changes first. | ||
Or [[Forum:Temporary forums/T:BOUND Reform]] for more. [[User:Najawin|Najawin]] [[User talk:Najawin|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 20:39, 25 April 2024 (UTC) | Or [[Forum:Temporary forums/T:BOUND Reform]] for more. [[User:Najawin|Najawin]] [[User talk:Najawin|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 20:39, 25 April 2024 (UTC) | ||
:Well, there's that. But also, in particular, there's been a somewhat consistent strain on the wiki where many articles ''don't'' actually abide by [[T:NO RW]] as it's currently written. Since this practice is well known and reasonably widespread, even though it ''technically violates policy'', we shouldn't make changes without a discussion. And this discussion has been started and is currently waiting for a resolution. (Of course, an admin can correct me here, as they're the ones that write/construct policy, but this was my intent in writing the first draft of Nu-T:BOUND.) [[User:Najawin|Najawin]] [[User talk:Najawin|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 22:26, 25 April 2024 (UTC) | |||
::If you're interested in why I phrased it that way, I was motivated by specific discussions around that time, namely, [[Forum:Temporary forums/Subpages 2.0]]. And BCM has repeatedly justified, in my mind, my decision to use that wording, based on his attempts to edit in violation of the conclusion of that thread, both pre and post fork. [[User:Najawin|Najawin]] [[User talk:Najawin|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 00:00, 26 April 2024 (UTC) | |||
== Re: IP user removing delete tags == | |||
Huh. Thank you for warning me. Do feel free to restore them whenever you notice such shenanigans. --[[User:Scrooge MacDuck|Scrooge MacDuck]] [[User talk:Scrooge MacDuck|<span title="Talk to me">☎</span>]] 16:20, 27 June 2024 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 16:20, 27 June 2024
Just to help[[edit source]]
You might want to read T:HOMEWORLD and Thread:209869 in User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Panopticon III, which serves as relevant precedent, if you haven't already, given your sandbox. Cheers. Najawin ☎ 23:12, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
- Ah, I also remembered Thread:278448 at User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Panopticon IV. Najawin ☎ 01:31, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
- Scrooge performed the merger in April 2021 when the forums were down, but merged Joan Redfern at the same time. See Nate's comment on Talk:Joan Redfern, I guess? That's all I have off hand. Najawin ☎ 01:39, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
Re:T:BOUND[[edit source]]
See paragraph 5 of T:BOUND.
- Contrariwise, this sometimes applies to things which have not actually been written anywhere (yet). Ideally, all past decisions and current practice should be written into explicit policy, but nobody's perfect. It makes sense to have a policy that says "even if the current setup isn't codified by a specific policy, you shouldn't, on a whim, try and implement a change that would have ramifications on thousands of pages without starting a discussion". So, in the above policy, the word "policy" doesn't just apply to those decisions that have been officially enshrined through discussion, but also refers to operating procedures that apply to multiple pages over large periods of time with the express knowledge of admins, even if these procedures technically contradict the results of a previous forum decision. Try not to make large scale changes to the wiki without opening a discussion about these changes first.
Or Forum:Temporary forums/T:BOUND Reform for more. Najawin ☎ 20:39, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- Well, there's that. But also, in particular, there's been a somewhat consistent strain on the wiki where many articles don't actually abide by T:NO RW as it's currently written. Since this practice is well known and reasonably widespread, even though it technically violates policy, we shouldn't make changes without a discussion. And this discussion has been started and is currently waiting for a resolution. (Of course, an admin can correct me here, as they're the ones that write/construct policy, but this was my intent in writing the first draft of Nu-T:BOUND.) Najawin ☎ 22:26, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- If you're interested in why I phrased it that way, I was motivated by specific discussions around that time, namely, Forum:Temporary forums/Subpages 2.0. And BCM has repeatedly justified, in my mind, my decision to use that wording, based on his attempts to edit in violation of the conclusion of that thread, both pre and post fork. Najawin ☎ 00:00, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Re: IP user removing delete tags[[edit source]]
Huh. Thank you for warning me. Do feel free to restore them whenever you notice such shenanigans. --Scrooge MacDuck ☎ 16:20, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
