Bureaucrats, content-moderator, emailconfirmed, Administrators (Semantic MediaWiki), Curators (Semantic MediaWiki), Administrators, threadmoderator
85,404
edits
Tardis:Forum policy: Difference between revisions
From Tardis Wiki, the free Doctor Who reference
adding material mostly from Thread:223085 -- best practices with quotations/replies in threads
No edit summary |
(adding material mostly from Thread:223085 -- best practices with quotations/replies in threads) Tag: sourceedit |
||
| Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
*your post or thread violates [[T:POINT|our rule against disrupting the wiki]] by making the same point in several different places — particularly one that has been defeated by the community | *your post or thread violates [[T:POINT|our rule against disrupting the wiki]] by making the same point in several different places — particularly one that has been defeated by the community | ||
*your post or thread [[Tardis:No personal attacks|attacks another user]] or offends other, reasonably-applicable policies | *your post or thread [[Tardis:No personal attacks|attacks another user]] or offends other, reasonably-applicable policies | ||
== Things to avoid == | |||
Aside from violating [[T:DISCUSS]] and [[T:ATTACKS]], please avoid doing the following things in the so-called wall forums: | |||
* '''Over-quoting.''' As [[Thread:223085]] explains in greater detail, posts with wholly original content are far more effective than ones that contain a lot of quotes. If you must quote, quote only as much as is necessary for readers to understand what you're talking about. | |||
* '''Nested quoting.''' In general, nested quotes — where you quote someone who might have quoted someone else, who might be quoting yet a third person — are probably unnecessary. They definitely are a massive waste of space, which makes the thread look forbiddingly long to the new reader. Again, if you genuinely feel you need to nest quotes, truncate the quotes substantially. And try to keep them to only one person quoting another. | |||
* '''Replies that tell us nothing about why you feel the way you do.''' Replies like "Agreed," "No," "Yes," or even longer sentences that amount to little more than a statement of being for or against something are usually deeply unhelpful. Unless an admin asks for a simple show of hands on a purely arbitrary matter, it's important to tell us ''why'' you feel the way you do. If you don't, your opinion will likely be discounted in the final closure of the thread. | |||
* '''Argue with the ref.''' Complaining about the way a forum thread was closed or otherwise handled by an admin may be a violation of [[T:ATTACKS]], [[T:POINT]] or [[T:BOUND]], depending on the language you employ — and it doesn't matter where that injudicious complaint is found. Please try to remember that admin often put hours, days or sometimes months figuring out the fairest way to end a discussion. Also remember that everyone, including every single admin, has at one time or another failed to prevail in a forum discussion. Once a decision has been reached, your best course of action is to accept it and move on. | |||
== Penalties for violations == | |||
Repeated violations of these rules can lead to your prohibition from the Forum and/or Discussion areas, to a general block from editing at �Tardis, or to both. | |||
