Jump to content

Wikidata:Requests for comment/Wikidata:Vandalism

From Wikidata
< Wikidata:Requests for comment
Latest comment: 13 years ago by Legoktm
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
Consensus is that Wikidata:Vandalism should be labeled as a guideline/information page, and there is no consensus whether it should be an official "policy" page. Legoktm (talk) 20:45, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

THIS RFC IS CLOSED. Please do NOT vote nor add comments.

Should we adopt Wikidata:Vandalism as an official policy? ...Jakob Megaphone, Telescope 23:36, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

I've expanded the page, hoping to make it more "policy-like". I've taken some cues from English Wikipedia's vandalism policy (though I didn't copy anything wholesale). —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 09:47, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Support

[edit]
Latest comment: 13 years ago7 comments6 people in discussion
  1. Image Support as information pagepolicy - as Rschen says, this probably doesn't need to be written down as a policy, but would be a good page to link to in, for example, block summaries.--Jasper Deng (talk) 00:22, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
    The new updates are satisfying enough for this to be a full policy.--Jasper Deng (talk) 18:47, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
  2. Image Support as information page – Nice informative page, but no policy content -- Byrial (talk) 04:57, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
  3. Image Support as policy page following the rewrite it's a lot better. --Rschen7754 09:46, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
  4. Image Support, obviously; because I did the expansion on it, I obviously support what I just wrote. :P —Scott5114↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 09:47, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
  5. Image Support as a guideline only Vogone talk 19:27, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
  6. Image Support as a guideline, not a policy. –TCN7JM 12:15, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Oppose, something needs to be changed

[edit]
Latest comment: 13 years ago15 comments9 people in discussion

I'm not really sure this needs to be voted on, it's just statements of fact. --Rschen7754 00:00, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Striking my oppose. --Rschen7754 05:15, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Image Oppose That 's not a policy. Snipre (talk) 10:14, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Image Weak oppose I prefer the nature of a guideline, rather than a policy. And since the local wiki-culture hasn't been truly formed yet, is it far to early. -- Lavallen (block) 14:18, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
    • What? The policy is pretty standard... --Rschen7754 18:43, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
      • We do not know the nature of the vandalism yet. (I am more worried about pov. "Blanking of pages" do no not worry me at all, it is almost always done by mistake. I did it myself several times before I learned to know the interface.) We do not know the nature of our tools yet. Maybe we can protect parts of a page in the future. (Protect statements but not sitelinks as an example.) The standard-policy is no policy. There are > 700 wmf-projects, most of them have no vandalism-policy. Where I am sysop, we have none, only a poor guideline. I, for an example, never give a warning before blocking, when it obviously is vandalism. We are only two active sysops, and both of us wants to add usefull texts, not have a kindergarten for vandals, like I see on svwp. A guideline, instead of a policy, would make it easier to change the text in the future, it would give our sysops flexibility in how to act, since this is a multi-culture-project. -- Lavallen (block) 04:52, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
Retrieved from "https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Wikidata:Requests_for_comment/Wikidata:Vandalism&oldid=598955655"