UDWiki:Moderation/Policy Discussion/Comment Alterations
|
Administration Services — Protection. This page has been protected against editing. See the archive of recent actions or the Protections log. |
Several times, I've seen comments higher up in a discussion thread changed after people have already responded, which can change the meaning of the original comment, change the tone and meaning of the responses to the original comment, and introduce confusion into the conversation flow.
I propose a new policy to combat this problem:
On all pages, excluding group pages, pages in the User namespace, or pages which specifically state an overriding policy, the following rules shall take effect for any comment with an initial save date at least ten minutes preceding its last edit, or with at least one reply or comment elsewhere that references it:
- Any change involving the removal of content must be indicated by enclosing the removed content in <s>strike-out</s> HTML tags, leaving the original content in place.
- Any change involving the addition of content must be indicated by enclosing the added content in <u>underline</u> HTML tags.
- Any change not covered by the above two items must not alter the original content. Instead, the original content, including the original signature and timestamp, must be enclosed in <s>strike-out</s> HTML tags, and the new content must be added below all replies to the original content.
- Any change involving the addition, removal, or alternation of content must also include the addition of a brief explanatory note enclosed in '''bold''' wiki markup, which must be added to the end of the original content, after the signature and timestamp. The note must specify the change that took place (e.g., Content added, Content removed, or Content changed), followed directly by a new signature and timestamp (~~~~), with the original signature and timestamp left in place.
- In the event of multiple changes to a single comment, additional added, changed, or removed content must be followed by the edit number in parentheses (e.g. "(2)" for a second change to the content). All other rules must be followed, including the rules governing the addition of explanatory notes and timestamps.
- Any change that merely corrects a typo or grammatical error or a misuse of formatting commands shall be exempt from the new rules, provided that the changes do not alter the meaning of the comment or any other comments.
- An intentional violation of the rules shall be considered vandalism, and treated as such.
A brief example of what a conversation following these rules might look like (obviously this is contrived, but imagine trying to read it without the change notes):
Meaningless gibberish --User:User A 01:20, 31 May 2006 (BST)
- What do you mean? It looks like meaningless gibberish to me. --User:User B 01:25, 31 May 2006 (BST) Added text for explanation --User:User B 01:30, 31 May 2006 (BST)
- What's wrong with it? --User:User A 01:27, 31 May 2006 (BST)
- I agree.
But I don't know what User:User B was talking about.--User:User C 01:28, 31 May 2006 (BST) Removed text, I was mistaken --User:User C 01:33, 31 May 2006 (BST) This whole thing is pointless. --User:User D 01:35, 31 May 2006 (BST)Reworded this --User:User D 01:40, 31 May 2006 (BST)- I disagree. --User:User A 01:36, 31 May 2006 (BST)
- Nice job! --User:User D 01:41, 31 May 2006 (BST)
- I think this needs
some(2) a lot(2) more work. Clarify the first two ideas more. --User:User B 01:43, 31 May 2006 (BST) Added clarification --User:User B 01:47, 31 May 2006 (BST) Clarified even more --User:User B 01:55, 31 May 2006 (BST)
--Bob Hammero T•W!•U! 01:52, 31 May 2006 (BST)
