Category talk:Policies and guidelines

Policy policy / Guideline guideline
The Police/Guidelines template states minor edits only on Policy/Guideline project pages, and proposals for changes in policies/guidelines should be limited to the talk pages for those project pages.

Under what circumstances, then, do proposals on the discussion pages get added/embedded into the Policy/guideline policy pages themselves? After an evil straw poll? When an administrator/moderator agrees some common elements are in consensus? --Chibiabos 17:50, 13 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Usually it gets added by an administrator (and usually that is me, though it's by no means necessary) after there's been enough examples of us doing something in that way to make it clear that it's the way people are agreeing to do it. For example, as I recall the full text of the policy on personal exclusion was written and confirmed as a policy quite a while after we actually started to exclude people (although a reduced version was probably proposed for a while before that).


 * Policy is generally written to describe the current state of affairs to those who are new to the wiki, as opposed to making new rules that seek to change the way we do things. If policies change or are created, it is typically because people have been doing things contrary to the policy. People sometimes disagree with the rules, and if they argue convincingly about it on the talk page for that specific case then they may convince others and it will stick for that article (if they don't, they will probably just keep getting reverted). Over time, if enough people do the same thing in similar situations, it becomes general practice and may be written into policy. Over at Wikipedia they have to specifically say that some things are non-negotiable, such as neutrality, as otherwise they would be subject to change just like everything else.


 * To take another example - say people started making lists of web links, like List of furry LiveJournal communities, even though there was a policy that stated that they were discouraged, and it turned out that these lists were useful and nobody had a problem with their presence. The policy might therefore be changed to state that these were permitted. In that case the rule against them probably shouldn't have been made in the first place, since there weren't enough examples of lists having been created to judge whether or not they were a good idea for us. --GreenReaper(talk) 19:00, 13 September 2006 (UTC)


 * That sounds like a "break a rule to make a rule" policy, which I guess is my own personal failing for not being comfortable with. When I go someplace -- online or IRL -- I'd like to know the rules ahead of time so I can abide by them, and to know that I am protected from abuse by others by those rules as well.  I'm not fond of anarchy.  --Chibiabos 20:18, 13 September 2006 (UTC)


 * As they say, "they're more guidelines than actual rules". What can you expect on a site where (almost) any page can be edited by anybody at any time? :-)


 * Policies give wide-ranging general advice, and attempt to explain the underlying principles that are intended to be served by them. Each article is different, though, and wide latitude is given to editors to carve their own path in uncertain territory in the hope that they can come up with solutions that satisfy everyone concerned and improve the wiki - perhaps a solution that has not been previously considered or recommended. About the only rule that we really try to enforce at all strictly is neutrality, and where necessary, verifiability (which is a part of neutrality - facts are neutral, but we need to have some way to be reasonably sure that they are facts first).


 * The plus side of this is that people are less likely to think bad of you for doing something bold. If you think something is wrong, then you don't complain; instead, you fix it. If others disagree with you, they will probably change it back - or better, shift it back while incorporating the best parts of your own changes. It's unlikely that they'd hold it against you for trying . . . the first time, anyway. ;-) --GreenReaper(talk) 21:02, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Commercials/adverts
Is there a policy addressing articles that are essentially commercials or advertisements? If not, should there be? --GingerM (Leave me a message) 01:49, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Edit it until it's not a commercial or advertisement? Articles should be neutral, and while we encourage detailed descriptions, when the language crosses the line towards promotion, that's a problem. Perhaps you had an article in mind? --GreenReaper(talk) 01:58, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes - the Furry Fashion article. It seems to me to be chiefly a list of what's available for potential customers and job listings for sim staff. I'm trying to think how to change the article while keeping it article-size. Guidance from any "older and wiser heads" would be welcome :-) --GingerM (Leave me a message) 08:36, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I'd say the bits like "you can have X for Y L$" are inappropriate; we're not a storefront. We do not tend to list the prices of currently-selling goods unless they have encyclopedic value (example of an exception: Softpaw sold for significantly more than most furry magazines, a notable fact at the time). Listings of staff with their position are in line with other groups and organizations, and noting the timing of regular events also seems fine as long as they are regular. "Probably the largest" could do with a citation. --GreenReaper(talk) 19:52, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks - that helps give me a feel for the sort of thing to be on the watch for. I'll take another look at the article bearing that in mind. --GingerM (Leave me a message) 02:55, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Suggested policy or help page: user pages versus articles
I'm thinking having a policy or help page on "your page", distinguishing between user pages and articles as well as emphasising that an article about a person does not belong to that person, would be useful. The paragraph starting "Our tolerance of vanity pages is much higher." at About mentions this, and I think there are longer descriptions elsewhere, though possibly only on discussion pages. -- Sine 16:14, 23 August 2013 (EDT)