Policy | Technical | Proposals | Idea lab | WMF | Miscellaneous |
Daily pageviews of Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
This page has archives. Sections older than 365 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
This close in AfD was interesting: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of heraldic charges. There are many, including myself, who quote WP's without knowing which are policy and which are guidelines (or essays etc.). Why not have a different naming system to differentiate between then, such as WPP: (for policy), WPG: (for guidance), and WPE (for essays)? Aszx5000 ( talk) 09:03, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
{{
WikiProject advice}}
(a subclass of essay), because they only reflect a "local consensus" of a small number of editors; meanwhile, there are various essays that have the overwhelming support of the community (
WP:BRD,
WP:ROPE, etc.), but remains essays because they are not written as guidelines but in essay style. For a system like this proposal to work, pretty much every WP:-namespace page would have to be carefully evaluated for whether it is classified correctly, and some would need to be completely rewritten to change classification categories to reflect their actual level of community consensus buy-in. I think it's just going to remain a fact of wikilife that our documentation structure is complex and not perfectly consistent, and has a learning curve. PS: Another issue is
WP:IAR and similar concerns: there are plenty of times when the literal word of a particular policy is moderated in some particular, narrow way by principles laid out in a guideline or even an essay, but people would ignore such subtleties and just retreat to "my position wins because I cited a policy and you cited only a guideline and an essay" counterproductive thinking (not to mention that one's interpretation of the policy might be completely wrong). We already have too much of a habit of just citing a shortcut as if that explains everything, and we would not want to reinforce that bad habit with a new layer of imprimatur. —
SMcCandlish
☏
¢ 😼 08:49, 27 July 2023 (UTC)According to Wikipedia:Article titles (policy), "article titles are written using the English language". Why, then, are there over 200 articles with the title written in Chinese characters? See Category:Disambiguation pages with Chinese character titles. WWGB ( talk) 07:25, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
@
Pecopteris when you wrote remove content that is illegal or discusses things that are illegal like CP
, what were you referring to? I assume it wasn't
WP:CP.
RoySmith
(talk) 19:24, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
The redirect Wikipedia:VPP has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 September 9 § Wikipedia:VPP until a consensus is reached. —Matr1x-101 (Ping me when replying) { user page (@ commons) - talk} 14:54, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Please see Wikipedia talk:Village pump (proposals)#Looking for some unofficial clerks. WhatamIdoing ( talk) 16:05, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
Policy | Technical | Proposals | Idea lab | WMF | Miscellaneous |
Daily pageviews of Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 365 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
This close in AfD was interesting: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of heraldic charges. There are many, including myself, who quote WP's without knowing which are policy and which are guidelines (or essays etc.). Why not have a different naming system to differentiate between then, such as WPP: (for policy), WPG: (for guidance), and WPE (for essays)? Aszx5000 ( talk) 09:03, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
{{
WikiProject advice}}
(a subclass of essay), because they only reflect a "local consensus" of a small number of editors; meanwhile, there are various essays that have the overwhelming support of the community (
WP:BRD,
WP:ROPE, etc.), but remains essays because they are not written as guidelines but in essay style. For a system like this proposal to work, pretty much every WP:-namespace page would have to be carefully evaluated for whether it is classified correctly, and some would need to be completely rewritten to change classification categories to reflect their actual level of community consensus buy-in. I think it's just going to remain a fact of wikilife that our documentation structure is complex and not perfectly consistent, and has a learning curve. PS: Another issue is
WP:IAR and similar concerns: there are plenty of times when the literal word of a particular policy is moderated in some particular, narrow way by principles laid out in a guideline or even an essay, but people would ignore such subtleties and just retreat to "my position wins because I cited a policy and you cited only a guideline and an essay" counterproductive thinking (not to mention that one's interpretation of the policy might be completely wrong). We already have too much of a habit of just citing a shortcut as if that explains everything, and we would not want to reinforce that bad habit with a new layer of imprimatur. —
SMcCandlish
☏
¢ 😼 08:49, 27 July 2023 (UTC)According to Wikipedia:Article titles (policy), "article titles are written using the English language". Why, then, are there over 200 articles with the title written in Chinese characters? See Category:Disambiguation pages with Chinese character titles. WWGB ( talk) 07:25, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
@
Pecopteris when you wrote remove content that is illegal or discusses things that are illegal like CP
, what were you referring to? I assume it wasn't
WP:CP.
RoySmith
(talk) 19:24, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
The redirect Wikipedia:VPP has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 September 9 § Wikipedia:VPP until a consensus is reached. —Matr1x-101 (Ping me when replying) { user page (@ commons) - talk} 14:54, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
Please see Wikipedia talk:Village pump (proposals)#Looking for some unofficial clerks. WhatamIdoing ( talk) 16:05, 24 November 2023 (UTC)