Anonymous user
The Sims Wiki talk:Policy/Creation Policies: Difference between revisions
The Sims Wiki talk:Policy/Creation Policies (edit)
Revision as of 23:33, 26 November 2012
, 11 years agoRobot: Changing template: GGsig
imported>LostInRiverview |
imported>Bawt m (Robot: Changing template: GGsig) |
||
| (7 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown) | |||
Line 6:
*[[The_Sims_Wiki:Fanon_Standards#Hollow_pages|Hollow pages]] should be deleted after one day, with the admin notifying the author the day before, [[The_Sims_Wiki:Fanon_Standards#Very_Low_Quality|Very Low Quality pages]] should be deleted after one week, with the author being notified at the start of the "countdown," [[The_Sims_Wiki:Fanon_Standards#Low_Quality|Low Quality pages]] should be deleted after two weeks, with the author being notified sometime beforehand.
So, what do you think? —[[User:Random Ranaun|<font color=green>Random Ranaun</font>]] <small>([[User talk:Random Ranaun|<font color=lime>Talk to me!</font>]])</small> 04:56, April 11, 2011 (UTC)
:I do like this new policy as it cuts down on the poor quality pages and it may encourage the creators to create higher quality pages. {{
::That should do it. Many users create fanon but have other things to do, and have to come back to it. So, do we presume the fanon is in progress, or delete it if it is of a very short length? Perhaps they could add an "in progress" tempate or something? --'''[[User:Woganhemlock|<font color="silver">WoganHemlock</font>]]<sup> [[User_talk:Woganhemlock|<font color="silver">(talk)</font>]] · [[User_blog:Woganhemlock|<font color="silver">(blog)</font>]]</sup>''' 08:12, April 11, 2011 (UTC)
:::There is already a {{t|fanon-uc}} template, which is place when a fanon page is still "under construction." If the author doesn't add this template on a poor quality fanon page, I believe that we should delete it in the required amount of time. —[[User:Random Ranaun|<font color=green>Random Ranaun</font>]] <small>([[User talk:Random Ranaun|<font color=lime>Talk to me!</font>]])</small> 15:03, April 11, 2011 (UTC)
Line 22:
== Altered fanon policies ==
Our current policy prohibits anonymous users from creating fanon. This is set up so that fanon is less likely to be abandoned by its creator. However, I think that we should reconsider this policy. To that end, I have an idea.
I think that we should continue to limit anonymous user creation of fanon, but refrain from deleting anonymous user creations immediately. Instead, we should encourage anonymous fanon creators to register an account with Wikia and allow them to reclaim their fanon if they register within a set period of time (say, 72 hours or so). That way, we don't seem so hostile to new editors, we open the door for new users, and we avoid deleting potentially good fanon due to non-registration.
Line 28:
Thoughts? -- '''[[User:LostInRiverview|<font color="green">LostInRiverview</font>]]<sup> [[User_talk:LostInRiverview|<font color="navy">talk</font>]] · [[User_blog:LostInRiverview|<font color="navy">blog</font>]]</sup>''' 05:46, August 8, 2011 (UTC)
:Sounds OK to me, but as long as we don't get heaps of anon fanon, I'm fine with it. ~>'''[[User:Woganhemlock|<font color="black">ฬ</font><font color="orange">ђ</font>]] <sup>[[User_talk:Woganhemlock|<font color="silver">(Ŧlยttєгรђא</font>]] [[Special:Contributions/Woganhemlock|<font color="grey">ƒтω!)</font>]]</sup>''' 06:02, August 8, 2011 (UTC)
::It's a good idea and it would help grow our fanon namespace. {{
== Fanon Cleanup ==
Line 34:
I've noticed that there is a policy regarding the {{[[Template:Fanon-cleanup|Fanon-cleanup]]}} template as well as some text on the template stating, "''Only administrators may add and remove this tag.''"
Personally, I think we should relax whatever restrictions we have in place of users tagging fanon articles and just let non-admins do it too. After all, if the tag is added in good faith then what problems are there? If someone has a problem with someone tagging a fanon article then they can easily take it up with the user who did it or ask for a second opinion. If anyone can add a {{[[Template:Cleanup|Cleanup]]}} template to a mainspace article then I don't see what problems arise from someone doing practically the same thing to a fanon article. {{
:If it's the case that non-admins will be able to add the tag, then I think that non-admins should also be able to remove the tag. Otherwise, you have a situation where non-admins are 'locked in' by the actions of a non-admin that they're not allowed to override due to the rule. Otherwise, I'm fine with this. -- '''[[User:LostInRiverview|<font color="navy">LiR</font>]]<sup> [[User_talk:LostInRiverview|<font color="green">speak</font>]] ~ [[User_blog:LostInRiverview|<font color="green">read</font>]]</sup>''' 17:03, May 16, 2012 (UTC)
::I was meant to write that actually - it makes sense for non-admins to remove tags too. {{LabSig}} 17:13, May 16, 2012 (UTC)
:::Yes, especially when given that sometimes a mark is needed to alert someone. I did use the cleanup tag on several very poor fanon pages... without knowing the "only administrators may ADD" aspect of it. I definitely say yes to this lifting of restrictions. [[User:Mathetesalexandrou|<span style="color:#00CC33">MILK FOR THE UNYUUFEX, </span><span style="color:#00AADD">FLAT CHEST FOR THE CUTENESS THRONE, </span><span style="color:#88AAAA">SKULLS FOR THE SKULL PROBES </span>]] ([[user talk:Mathetesalexandrou]]) 18:05, May 16, 2012 (UTC)
::::Given that despite little input (considering I've also added this to the IRC topic) there is no opposition, I've gone ahead to make these changes. {{LabSig}} 11:33, May 19, 2012 (UTC)
==Proposed writeup of ''de facto'' policy on rumors==
From time to time, rumors about new expansion or stuff packs, or new games, will appear. Since the existence of these rumors and information about them is information about The Sims Series, The Sims Wiki has created an article for them.
*Within the wiki's mainspace, information about rumored expansion packs, stuff packs, or games must be placed in [[The Sims game rumors]]. This allows The Sims Wiki to mention rumors and give information about them, while making it clear that they ''are'' rumors.
*Statements made on [[The Sims game rumors]] must have a valid source.
[[User:Dharden|Dharden]] ([[User_talk:Dharden|talk]]) 13:55, October 3, 2012 (UTC)
| |||