 |
This is an archive of Wowpedia talk:Policies.
|
Stoppit and Cleanemup to the rescue!
What an ugly page! :) I'd do something about it, but it's locked ... perhaps someone could see to sorting it out a bit? Bit more professional like? -- Kirkburn 17:41, 1 June 2006 (EDT)
- I already pleaded with Fandyllic to unlock it for a bit but he never got back to me on it :-( --Mikk 05:06, 7 June 2006 (EDT)
- (I blame schmidt though. He ninjaed my thread in fandyllic's talk page.)
- What did I do on Fandyllic's talk page? I don't see at all what you might be referring to. Schmidt 23:59, 19 June 2006 (EDT)
- Haha. Well, I asked fandyllic to unlock Policies, but then you jumped in and asked why the pages were locked to begin with, and then it degenerated to a discussion on why I was only poking Fandyllic about unlocking, and not you :-) Never mind, the page is updated, I'm happy =) --Mikk 05:39, 20 June 2006 (EDT)
- Oh, I see now that Fandyllic has placed "clean up WoWWiki:Policies" in his work log. Never mind me. :-) --Mikk 06:49, 7 June 2006 (EDT)
Relevance?
Is there a 'relevance' policy? Cause... Sideshow Bob. Who ain't a Major Character. Luci 11:26, 29 June 2006 (EDT)
- Not one yet, and we probably don't really need one. That is clearly out of the scope of this wiki. If you think something is out of scope, you can tag it {{speedydelete}}. If one of us admins think for some reason it belongs, we won't delete it right off. At that point, we'll decide that it is indeed in scope, or we will set up a vote for deletion, so that others can decide. As well, if someone else came along to it, they would also make a similar judgement, where if they think it should be voted on (that is, in most cases, if they think it should stick around) they will start a vote as well. A guideline might be in order, but I don't think it's that big of a deal right now. I don't think we have many more articles like that. Schmidt 13:25, 29 June 2006 (EDT)
- Ok, thanks, just trying to get a general sense of what to do when something is clearly wacko. Much obliged. Luci 13:31, 29 June 2006 (EDT)
- Actually, the proposed additions to the Do Not Post policy (Wowpedia talk:DNP policy) which will go into effect in a few days unless votes change, does specifically mention off-topic content. But we're really only codifying it to tell people to do what most (but not all, and certainly not newcomers) already know to do: tag it for speedy deletion. --Mikk 15:40, 29 June 2006 (EDT)
- I dunno. I'm learning fast. Hopefully not too fast. If I'm doing anything wild 'n' crazy, please tell me. Anyway, does tagging something like that for speedy deletion mean that an admin will add to vandals list when he/she deletes? Luci 16:16, 29 June 2006 (EDT)
- Not unless it's a really stupid article :) Speedydelete is just the all-purpose 'this needs to go' mark. -- Kirkburn 19:46, 29 June 2006 (EDT)
- Yeah. We do give it at least a little bit of thought. If you find anyone that does something really, really stupid or malicious (see user:WoWWilly and his "contributions" and his aliases), add them to the wowwiki:known vandals list. If you take a look at the list, you might see what "contributions" they've made. Now, just to warn, if you add someone just for malice, you will take repercussions, but we haven't had anyone do that yet. You probably won't be the first. You seem pretty level-headed. If you were to just tag something for speedy delete (which we also check to see if it's worth deleting and so on), then as far as I'm concerned, I may or may not block the person who created it unless I feel it's warranted. Even then I might add him to the vandals list and let another admin deal with him according to his judgement. If you have any relevant (or otherwise) questions, you can always leave a message on my talk page or user:Fandyllic's, or anyone else for that matter, but Fandyllic and I are the daily-maintenance admins. Schmidt 00:30, 30 June 2006 (EDT)
Suggestion
We need a list of correct spellings. Not sure if this is the correct place to suggest it, but it sounds like a policy to me :) I'm suggesting having a list of commonly misspelt stuff so that one can refer to the list when making changes. More specifically, I am referring to draenei, blood elves, high elves, and suchlike. -- Kirkburn 18:14, 14 August 2006 (EDT)
- We do have WoWWiki:List_of_common_misspellings. As for capitalizations of race names, there was a discussion several months ago that didn't end in a consensus one way or the other, though in retrospect, some standard would be nice to achieve consistency, even if Blizzard itself is rather inconsistent.--Aeleas 19:03, 14 August 2006 (EDT)
Quick reference
I've created a page of shortcut policy links, which I find quite useful on Wikipedia, at WoWWiki:Policies quick reference. If an admin sees fit, this page would be the logical place from which to link to it.--Aeleas 18:37, 7 September 2006 (EDT)
- I integrated the shortcuts into WoWWiki:Policies and made yours a redirect. (Hope that works for you, too. Just seemed better to not have separate pages to maintain). --Mikk (T) 18:52, 7 September 2006 (EDT)
Looks good.--Aeleas 19:00, 7 September 2006 (EDT)
Question of Reference to WoW version
Is there any policy about when to use references to the version of WoW? I have the feeling that every single fact about WoW in WoWWiki has a specific version where it was introduced. Should this information generally be noted, or shouldn't it? It is an especially valid question now that 2.0 has been released, and even more so when TBC is released. My general feeling is that all facts that are valid for the current released version on WoW should not need it. --LarsPensjo 09:26, 15 December 2006 (EST)
I don't even know where to start
Is there possibly a page that has all of the policies written on one page? I am having a might bit of trouble looking at the page of policies and deciding which one would tell me what I can say in a comment or not, what I should do if I see something misspelled that needs correcting, (I do this all the time anyways, might as well put it to use), and what the general rules are so that I know I won't just go willy nilly breaking ever rule known to WoWWiki. x.x Or for that matter, if an admin can direct me in the general direction of these pages, (or simplify the navigation in words for me), I would be greatly appreciative. Elsewise, I'm lost ... so very, very lost. I'm also praying that the signature works. --Emmune to your Magic 14:00, 11 May 2007 (EDT)
- General guilde line, if its a major change, discussion first. If if simple corrections, just edit them right away. We are several people who moniters the recent changed articles, so if you make an error it will be fixed by them if you didn't already fix it your self
- If you break a rule or some policy, dont worry, the worst that can happen is something like a link on your talkpage noting you broke X rule (except for harrasing/vandalising ;)). D ♠ T ♣ C ♦ 15:06, 11 May 2007 (EDT)
- Soo.. What if I break a rule and then I correct my error and never do it again, am I allowed to take such a message off of my talk page or does it have to stay there forever, making me seem like a (just insert any word you want here that is unflattering)? --Emmune to your Magic 15:18, 11 May 2007 (EDT)
- *shy embarrassment*, sorry. Thanks for the help, I truly appreciate it! --Emmune to your Magic 15:30, 11 May 2007 (EDT)
- Erm, umm... you're free to purge stuff from your talk page as you see fit. Including warnings from admins. And I for one wouldn't care if you did as long as you actually acted upon it. Oh, by the way, if you only ever read one guideline, WoWWiki:How_to_edit_a_page is the one you want to check out. :-) --Mikk (T) 05:31, 12 May 2007 (EDT)
Why the Y?
Votes completed according to this policy are considered enforceable on WoWWiki.Y I think the last Y is a typo.--SWM2448 20:04, 21 August 2007 (UTC)