(comment) |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
I'll make changes to the policies depending on the outcome of this discussion, as usual. Most of the content is copied from Wikipedia, as I generally think it's a good place to draft a policy or guideline. There are some changes to them to accommodate our wiki. |
I'll make changes to the policies depending on the outcome of this discussion, as usual. Most of the content is copied from Wikipedia, as I generally think it's a good place to draft a policy or guideline. There are some changes to them to accommodate our wiki. |
||
| − | I didn't add any numbers (like a ratio), since I don't really like the idea of that, e.g., saying that 70% in favor of a change means it passes. I think it's better to not encourage this, as it sometimes makes it seem it's a vote. I did, however, add something about leaving a discussion for at least a week (which is something I suggest, since it's what I generally do). A discussion does not have to be closed after one |
+ | I didn't add any numbers (like a ratio), since I don't really like the idea of that, e.g., saying that 70% in favor of a change means it passes. I think it's better to not encourage this, as it sometimes makes it seem it's a vote. I did, however, add something about leaving a discussion for at least a week (which is something I suggest, since it's what I generally do). A discussion does not have to be closed after one week if there's an ongoing and active discussion. {{User:D-day/Sig}} <small>20:22, May 1, 2012 (UTC)</small> |
I forgot to add that there's a statement about making changes to policies and guidelines, provided they're not controversial or anything (which is from Wikipedia). Of course, if anyone contests the change, anyone can revert it and discuss it on the talk page. I'm not sure if anyone's comfortable with this idea, or would rather have discuss this first before. Generally, it should be discussed, but it's mostly for changes that aren't "bad" for editing, e.g., adding further guidelines for layout guide if it's already been a standard already, but hasn't been added. For example, I wanted to add something about not having to read guidelines and policies before editing, but I would be technically required to discuss this on the talk page (well, not exactly true, but let's pretend I must). I think changes like that are okay. {{User:D-day/Sig}} <small>20:29, May 1, 2012 (UTC)</small> |
I forgot to add that there's a statement about making changes to policies and guidelines, provided they're not controversial or anything (which is from Wikipedia). Of course, if anyone contests the change, anyone can revert it and discuss it on the talk page. I'm not sure if anyone's comfortable with this idea, or would rather have discuss this first before. Generally, it should be discussed, but it's mostly for changes that aren't "bad" for editing, e.g., adding further guidelines for layout guide if it's already been a standard already, but hasn't been added. For example, I wanted to add something about not having to read guidelines and policies before editing, but I would be technically required to discuss this on the talk page (well, not exactly true, but let's pretend I must). I think changes like that are okay. {{User:D-day/Sig}} <small>20:29, May 1, 2012 (UTC)</small> |
||
Revision as of 16:06, 3 May 2012
I don't know if there was ever a discussion regarding how we discuss changes (votes vs. consensus), but it's always been an grandfathered policy that we try to reach consensus in order to pass certain changes (such as deletion, guidelines, etc.) I want to make this into an official one, in addition to sock puppetry (since consensus is affected by it).
- User:D-day/Sock for sock puppetry (almost like Wikipedia)
- User:D-day/Consensus for consensus
I'll make changes to the policies depending on the outcome of this discussion, as usual. Most of the content is copied from Wikipedia, as I generally think it's a good place to draft a policy or guideline. There are some changes to them to accommodate our wiki.
I didn't add any numbers (like a ratio), since I don't really like the idea of that, e.g., saying that 70% in favor of a change means it passes. I think it's better to not encourage this, as it sometimes makes it seem it's a vote. I did, however, add something about leaving a discussion for at least a week (which is something I suggest, since it's what I generally do). A discussion does not have to be closed after one week if there's an ongoing and active discussion. ··· 
d·day! 20:22, May 1, 2012 (UTC)
I forgot to add that there's a statement about making changes to policies and guidelines, provided they're not controversial or anything (which is from Wikipedia). Of course, if anyone contests the change, anyone can revert it and discuss it on the talk page. I'm not sure if anyone's comfortable with this idea, or would rather have discuss this first before. Generally, it should be discussed, but it's mostly for changes that aren't "bad" for editing, e.g., adding further guidelines for layout guide if it's already been a standard already, but hasn't been added. For example, I wanted to add something about not having to read guidelines and policies before editing, but I would be technically required to discuss this on the talk page (well, not exactly true, but let's pretend I must). I think changes like that are okay. ··· d·day! 20:29, May 1, 2012 (UTC)