The Sims Wiki talk:Policy

Pay sites
What is 'The Sims Wiki's' policy on pay sites? I noticed that TSR is only mentioned on Pay sites. I believe them to be the biggest pay site. In my opinion 'The Sims Wiki' should declare colors and offer a more adult article on paysites. It should explain that selling custom content for real money is not allowed since EA owns ALL rights to anything in this game. I can find the exact part of the EULA which says it and have had an inquire with EA tech support, stating that selling Sims stuff is illegal. Since selling the stuff is illegal, we should have no trouble in linking to MATY's excellent forum where you can find items from paysites for free (let's not link to the official EA created stuff though, double standards, but EA has the law on their side). We are already linking to MATY's main page. If anyone gives trouble they can't legally do anything about it since anything created for the sims is not the property of the creator, it's EA's property. EA owns anything about the game and whenever you start the game you agree that you are only playing with their permission (a permission which includes you agreeing to not selling anything).

I see two options regarding pay sites: 1. Be neutral, like now and secretly avoid linking to them. 2. Condemn pay sites and make it against the rules to link to them. In this scenario 'pay sites' includes anything from monthly subscription, to pay-per-item, to items only available to donators. All items on the site has to be free or it's a pay site.

Why don't EA just sue the pay sites? Well, it's all about politics really. If EA set their mind to it they could have lawyors and a bailiff round to them and shut 'em down faster than no one's business. BUT doing this would cause of case of the big evil corporation vs. the small good creative contributor, EA doesn't want that on their image. Pay sites are essentially motivating creative soles to be abit more creative, since they get payed in return themselves. In the long run: More custom content (from pay sites or not) = More custom content, without EA lifting a finger. Doesn't take a genius to see that that's a sweet deal for EA.

Question: If pay sites were shut down wouldn't that mean less custom content? Answer: In theory yes, but that would be exactly like if you stop illegally copied games, there'd be less copied games. Removing pay sites would only diminish the already illegal part of the game. My reasoning here is informing visitors to our site that what pay sites are doing is against the law and NOT link or mention them, which in return hopefully won't direct any of our readers there. Duskey ( talk )( blog ) 22:07, June 18, 2010 (UTC)


 * It's the duty of the wiki, or any wiki, to provide facts and information. That being said, I don't think it's fair to favor free sites over pay sites (or vice versa), even if there is a legitimate reason for doing so. In short, I'd rather see links to all the sites or links to none of the sites, but I don't think we have the right to pick and choose, since doing so would be showing support for one side or another, and would diminsish this wiki's credible claim at neutrality; when this wiki loses its neutrality, it can no longer be treated as a factual database. LostInRiverview (talk)(blog) 22:49, June 18, 2010 (UTC)
 * Further, it shouldn't be the place of this Wiki to determine what is against the law or against EA's policies; if EA wants to push the issue, they're certainly capable of it. At best I believe we should reference the issue but not claim in either direction as to its legality. Something along the lines of "The concept of Pay Sites may violate the EULA, but EA has yet to press the issue or seek legal action against so-called pay sites." Again, I encourage neutrality. LostInRiverview (talk)(blog) 22:52, June 18, 2010 (UTC)


 * Duskey, I disagree with you, and agree with LostInRiverview. This wiki should not "declare colors" or take sides in the paysite/anti-paysite dispute. Being neutral, and being seen as neutral, is good for the credibility of the site. Also, our job here, as I see it, is not to provide legal advice (I don't know about you, but IANAL) or to encourage people to visit or avoid any particular sites or type of sites. Dharden 23:45, June 18, 2010 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia describes disputes. Wikipedia does not engage in disputes. -Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. That being said the article, Pay sites, does not actually describe the controversy it merely states that there is one. --a_morris (talk) 02:36, June 19, 2010 (UTC)


 * I see, you've proven your points. I guess I'll have to subdue my loathing for pay sites while I'm on Sims Wiki. I'll probably do my best to describe the issue of sims pay sites sooner or later, should be an interesting test of character, unless someone beats me to it, I'm not reserving rights here or anything.
 * Just for the sake of discussion (I'm not gonna do any of this, I just think it's interesting discussion): Won't linking to pay sites be abit like linking to pirate sites with the sims on them? The only discernable difference I see is that EA actively enforces their copyright in regards to pirating, but not custom content. Also linking directly to torrents or torrent sites is a no-no, right? How about linking to a google search with the keywords 'sims 3 torrent'. Weird how those two examples would be treated differently. Duskey ( talk )( blog ) 03:21, June 19, 2010 (UTC)
 * The original creator should be attributed just like images. A screenshot of a google search would be more appropriate than a link. --a_morris (talk) 14:31, June 19, 2010 (UTC)


 * Original creator of what? Not sure I get what you mean. Duskey ( talk )( blog ) 21:42, June 21, 2010 (UTC)
 * Of custom content. --a_morris (talk) 14:20, June 22, 2010 (UTC)

Expanding our 5th policy
I'd like to suggest two additions to our 5th policy on blocking:
 * 5b
 * Indefinite/Permanent blocks should only by issued in the most extreme cases. See Wikipedia:Blocking policy#Indefinite blocks.


 * 5c
 * Users affected by indefinite blocks will have their user and talk page blanked (except for the block notice). All user sub-pages (including archives), templates and files not related to The Sims Wiki or in use will be deleted.

My reasoning behind this is that if a user has been permanently blocked, they obviously made a gross violation of policy and are not coming back. Beyond that there is no information to be found in the user's pages or files for anyone. They effectively do not exist on this wiki anymore and it is a waste to keep a memory of them other than their block and reason behind it. Enforcing the deletion of this also prevents users from contacting the blockee, not realizing that they cannot respond due to a permanent block. What are your thoughts? Can we reach a similar outcome by other means? What is the value of keeping old user files? Duskey ( talk ) 11:45, July 20, 2010 (UTC)


 * Additionally I'd like to suggest that indefinite blocks be edited to expire on Jan 1, 9999 for easy overview in the block list. Not a policy, just a rule of thumb. Duskey ( talk ) 13:43, July 22, 2010 (UTC)

Player stories
I would like to make a change to the second sentence of point #2 of the player stories policy.

from:

"A link should be provided, usually in an infobox." to:

"The page should be clearly marked as a player story and a link should be provided from the Sim character's or neighborhood's page, usually in an infobox." --a_morris (talk) 21:03, July 21, 2010 (UTC) Check my reply to the right :) Duskey ( talk ) 13:41, July 22, 2010 (UTC)

IRC Policy
''Immediately below is a proposed policy addition, regarding the IRC channel. This is open for community discussion and approval/denial. -- Patrick (LostInRiverview) (talk)(blog)(random page) 03:46, July 31, 2010 (UTC)''

The Sims Wiki has a dedicated IRC (Internet Relay Chat) Channel that is open to all editors on the Wiki and allows live communication between multiple editors in real-time. By using the channel (Freenode/#The_Sims), you agree to be bound by these policies, and acknowledge that violation of policies can result in being kicked or banned from the channel, with possible corresponding action on The Sims Wiki.

The following rules govern use of the IRC Channel:
 * There is no official topic of the channel; it may be used to discuss the Wiki, discuss The Sims, or simply to build community. However, discussions on the channel must remain appropriate for a general audience.
 * Harassing or attacking other channel users is not allowed.
 * Negative actions by users on the IRC Channel may be addressed by operators on the channel. Negative behavior on the IRC channel may also result in disciplinary action on the Wiki, including warnings, blocks and bans.

Administrators
Administrators from this Wiki are marked by 'voice' status and have a + in front of their name. They are able to kick or ban users who do not follow the policies set above. A kick is a temporary removal from the channel and serves as a warning. A ban can have a limited duration or be indefinite, depending on the severity of the case. The duration of a ban will correspond roughly to the existing policies on blocking users from the Wiki.

If you are an administrator on the Wiki, have registered with the freenode network and wish to obtain voice status, contact Duskey, our IRC channel contact.

Comments

 * What are the consequences of harassing? "Negative actions/behavior" is a bit vague. Are they referring to the actions listed in the previous point? --a_morris (talk) 15:18, July 31, 2010 (UTC)
 * A response to harassment would be a kick or ban from the channel; if the harrassment doesn't stop or extends onto the Wiki itself, it would be handled through warning, block or ban on the wiki itself. A negative action would refer to harassment, exploitation of other users, attacks against others, extreme profanity or repeated profanity. It's sort of difficult to narrow down a definite definition of what a negative action would be, so I may be missing some things here. -- Patrick (LostInRiverview) (talk)(blog)(random page) 19:47, July 31, 2010 (UTC)
 * You could make a reference to the Terms of Service. The two points need to be connected with similar terminology so there is a clear cause and effect. --a_morris (talk) 21:40, July 31, 2010 (UTC)
 * Kick = Warning (though you can't 'mark' people on IRC for a week) Ban = Block. Bans on IRC are indefinite by standard, they will have to be manually removed if they need a duration. Which TOS are you referring to a morris? Wikia's? If we should link to a TOS it should be freenode's. I'm also a tad skeptical about carrying over actions from IRC to the Wiki since they're no telling if we have the right person unless they're registered with freenode and logged in. Someone could connect claiming to be a user on the Wiki and then get himself banned from the channel and then hope we'll block the user from the Wiki. If we do include 'carrying over punishments' in the policy it should state that only if we can correctly identify the person. People who are not logged in on IRC are like IP's here on the Wiki. Duskey ( talk ) 23:40, July 31, 2010 (UTC)

5 pillars
We should probably add this somewhere: Wikipedia:Wikipedia:Five pillars and add that besides Wikia and our own policies we also try to follow Wikipedia's policies when able. Duskey ( talk ) 04:35, July 31, 2010 (UTC)
 * Adapted:


 * 1) The Sims Wiki is an encyclopedia. It incorporates elements of general and specialized encyclopedias, almanacs, and gazetteers. The Sims Wiki is not a soapbox, an advertising platform, a vanity press, an experiment in anarchy or democracy, an indiscriminate collection of information, or a web directory. It is not a dictionary, newspaper, a collection of source documents or a creative medium; that kind of content should be contributed instead to the The Sims Fanon Wiki.
 * 2) The Sims Wiki has a neutral point of view. We strive for articles that advocate no single point of view. Sometimes this requires representing multiple points of view, presenting each point of view accurately and in context, and not presenting any point of view as "the truth" or "the best view". All articles must strive for verifiable accuracy: unreferenced material may be removed, so please provide references. Editors' personal experiences, interpretations, or opinions do not belong here. That means citing verifiable, authoritative sources, especially on controversial topics and when the subject is a living person. When conflict arises over neutrality, discuss details on the talk page, and follow dispute resolution.
 * 3) The Sims Wiki is free content that anyone can edit and distribute. Respect copyright laws. Since all your contributions are freely licensed to the public, no editor owns any article; all of your contributions can and will be mercilessly edited and redistributed.
 * 4) Wikiapedians should interact in a respectful and civil manner. Respect and be polite to your fellow Wikiapedians, even when you disagree. Apply etiquette, and avoid personal attacks. Find consensus, avoid edit wars, and remember that there are articles on the English Sims Wiki to work on and discuss. Act in good faith, never disrupt The Sims Wiki to illustrate a point, and assume good faith on the part of others. Be open and welcoming.
 * 5) The Sims Wiki does not have firm rules besides the five general principles presented here. Be bold in updating articles and do not worry about making mistakes. Your efforts do not need to be perfect; prior versions are saved, so no damage is irreparable.

--a_morris (talk) 16:21, July 31, 2010 (UTC)


 * I don't know if the pillars themselves should be adopted as strict policy per se, but I think the general concepts of each should be followed and displayed somewhere... though I don't think they should be on the Policy page as putting them there indicates that they are hard-and-fast rules. Perhaps it should be added onto the Simplified Ruleset, or placed elsewhere?


 * Also, maybe some misconceptions could be cleared up by wording the 5 pillars more simply. Like:


 * 1) The Sims Wiki is an encyclopedia of facts and information. Most articles (with notable exceptions) should have relevant and factual information.
 * 2) The Sims Wiki has a neutral point-of-view; articles should not be written in a particular "slant" and all facts must be verifiable.
 * 3) The Sims Wiki is free content; appropriate copyright laws must be respected, but the articles on the wiki are the collaborations of many people and are not owned by any person or group of people.
 * 4) Wiki Users should interact positively with each other; if there is a disagreement, users should seek constructive resolutions rather than resorting to name-calling, harrassment, edit wars, or other discouraged behavior. Users should be welcoming to new users and should assume good faith.
 * 5) There are no firm rules; when editing an article, sometimes the best solution is to ignore all preconceptions and be bold. Remember that every action on The Sims Wiki can be undone if needed.


 * That's just my §2, though. -- Patrick (LostInRiverview) (talk)(blog)(random page) 19:47, July 31, 2010 (UTC)


 * I agree that they're not a policy, they should probably have their own The Sims Wiki:Five pillars page with the About page and Policies linking to it. I'm not sure misconceptions will be cleared up by making the text shorter, that just leaves room for more user interpretation and misunderstanding, in my opinion. I think we should keep it at a short bolded statement and then a lengthy clarifying text containing links to relevant policies and guidelines. a morris, brings up some good topics for discussion in her references. The 'not a newspaper' should be removed from our version, since we do report on The Sims news and I, persoanlly, intend to expand on that in the near future, to bring more Sims news to the Wiki. I'm not sure what is meant with 'not a source document' so I cannot comment on that, can you please clarify it for me? 'Editors' personal experiences, interpretations, or opinions do not belong here' could be reworded to '...are only allowed on designated 'player stories'-, 'Theories'- and user pages' How does that sound? I'm also not that keen on the 'Wikiapedian' expression. It is my understanding that this is not Wikipedia, nor is it a Wikia; it is a Wiki. We're hosted by Wikia, but the general term for the site is still Wiki. I'm more favorable towards the term 'Wikian'. We could also just stick to 'User' and 'Editor'. Duskey ( talk ) 00:23, August 1, 2010 (UTC)

Combined pillars
How about we combine the two versions you've proposed so far? Although I might've just made a big hash of it. Note that this is a layout and wording example, individual examples in these pillars are still subject to discussion. Duskey ( talk ) 00:23, August 1, 2010 (UTC)

The fundamental principles by which The Sims Wiki operates have been summarized by editors in the form of five 'pillars':

The Sims Wiki is an encyclopedia of facts and information. Most articles (with notable exceptions) should have relevant and factual information. The Sims Wiki incorporates elements of general and specialized encyclopedias, almanacs, and gazetteers. The Sims Wiki is not a soapbox, an advertising platform, a vanity press, an experiment in anarchy or democracy, an indiscriminate collection of information, or a web directory. It is not a dictionary, newspaper, a collection of source documents or a creative medium; that kind of content should be contributed instead to The Sims Fanon Wiki.

The Sims Wiki has a neutral point of view; articles should not be written in a biased language and all facts must be verifiable. The Sims Wiki strive for articles that advocate no single point of view. Sometimes this requires representing multiple points of view, presenting each point of view accurately and in context, and not presenting any point of view as "the truth" or "the best view". All articles must strive for verifiable accuracy: unreferenced material may be removed, so please provide references. Editors' personal experiences, interpretations, or opinions do not belong here. That means citing verifiable, authoritative sources, especially on controversial topics and when the subject is a living person. When conflict arises over neutrality, discuss details on the talk page, and follow dispute resolution.

The Sims Wiki is free content; appropriate copyright laws must be respected, but the articles on the wiki are the collaborations of many people and are released under the CC-BY-SA license. Anyone can edit and distribute information on The Sims Wiki. Since all your contributions are freely licensed to the public, no editor owns any article; all of your contributions can and will be mercilessly edited and redistributed.

Wiki users should interact positively with each other; Users should be welcoming to new users and should assume good faith. Wikiapedians should interact in a respectful and civil manner. Respect and be polite to your fellow Wikiapedians, even when you disagree. Apply etiquette, and avoid personal attacks. Find consensus, avoid edit wars, and remember that there are articles on the English Sims Wiki to work on and discuss. Act in good faith, never disrupt The Sims Wiki to illustrate a point, and assume good faith on the part of others. Be open and welcoming.

There are no firm rules; The Sims Wiki does not have firm rules besides the five general principles presented here, though a number of policies and guidelines are followed. Be bold in updating articles and do not worry about making mistakes. Your efforts do not need to be perfect; prior versions are saved, so no damage is irreparable.


 * I personally think the five main points should be short and sweet. Try to word them as best as possible to get across as much information as possible in fewer words and sentences. Also, remember that we're not Wikipedians. --Patrick (LostInRiverview) (talk)(blog)(random page) 00:28, August 1, 2010 (UTC)


 * If we go for a simple version, the suggestion Lir made sounds good to me. Duskey ( talk ) 15:35, August 2, 2010 (UTC)