UDWiki talk:Administration/Policy Discussion/Criterion 6 Reworking
From The Urban Dead Wiki
< UDWiki talk:Administration | Policy Discussion(Redirected from UDWiki talk:Moderation/Policy Discussion/Criterion 6 Reworking)
Jump to navigationJump to search
|
Administration Services — Protection. This page has been protected against editing. See the archive of recent actions or the Protections log. |
Huzzah for common sense! I'd suggest two warnings before it's treated like vandalism, however. Also, just subst in {{PolicyVoting}} when you're ready to open voting. It does what you already have and more. –Bob Hammero Mod•B'crat•T•A 17:25, 26 July 2006 (BST)
- Give 'em two warnings. And make sure there's a handy template to subst in so that the morons aren't overly flamed. --Darth Sensitive
W! 17:28, 26 July 2006 (BST)
- If people see a deletion in the log and don't see an accompanying deletion request eyebrows will be raised. I think they should at least have to note the deletion on the speedy delete page, and cite criterion 6. In these instances the reporting mod would be able to delete it, instead of having to wait for another one to verify the decision. --GageCFT 02:35, 27 July 2006 (BST)
- Gage, there are already scheduled deletions in place. For example, I can delete any unused image that is at least a month old without going through any page. –Bob Hammero Mod•B'crat•T•A 02:42, 27 July 2006 (BST)
- Yes, but a page by definition is in use correct?--GageCFT 16:23, 27 July 2006 (BST)
- Nope redirects are deleted because they're unused.--The General T Sys U! P! F! 17:33, 27 July 2006 (BST)
- But this policy says nothing about redirects--GageCAT 20:08, 27 July 2006 (BST)
- What makes you think that people would be any more suspicious of this scheduled deletion than one for images or something like that? Those are pages as well. Wasn't that your original concern? –Bob Hammero Mod•B'crat•T•A 20:26, 27 July 2006 (BST)
- I am not saying that the mods will have to go out of their way or ask permission, I would just like them to say what they have done on the speedy deletion page, after the fact- that is no trouble at all. --GageCAT 23:44, 27 July 2006 (BST)
- I beg to differ, though. I have sometimes deleted 10 or 20 pages at a time, or more. It would be a hassle to have to list every thing that I've deleted. –Bob Hammero Mod•B'crat•T•A 00:00, 28 July 2006 (BST)
- I have never seen 20 pages deleted in a row before without first being list on M/SD. If that was the case you wouldn't have to list them again. --GageCAT 02:07, 28 July 2006 (BST)
- Doesn't mean it doesn't happen. Deletion log. –Bob Hammero Mod•B'crat•T•A 02:23, 28 July 2006 (BST)
- Fair enough--Gage 12:28, 28 July 2006 (BST)
- Doesn't mean it doesn't happen. Deletion log. –Bob Hammero Mod•B'crat•T•A 02:23, 28 July 2006 (BST)
- I have never seen 20 pages deleted in a row before without first being list on M/SD. If that was the case you wouldn't have to list them again. --GageCAT 02:07, 28 July 2006 (BST)
- I beg to differ, though. I have sometimes deleted 10 or 20 pages at a time, or more. It would be a hassle to have to list every thing that I've deleted. –Bob Hammero Mod•B'crat•T•A 00:00, 28 July 2006 (BST)
- I am not saying that the mods will have to go out of their way or ask permission, I would just like them to say what they have done on the speedy deletion page, after the fact- that is no trouble at all. --GageCAT 23:44, 27 July 2006 (BST)
- What makes you think that people would be any more suspicious of this scheduled deletion than one for images or something like that? Those are pages as well. Wasn't that your original concern? –Bob Hammero Mod•B'crat•T•A 20:26, 27 July 2006 (BST)
- But this policy says nothing about redirects--GageCAT 20:08, 27 July 2006 (BST)
- Nope redirects are deleted because they're unused.--The General T Sys U! P! F! 17:33, 27 July 2006 (BST)
- Yes, but a page by definition is in use correct?--GageCFT 16:23, 27 July 2006 (BST)
- Gage, there are already scheduled deletions in place. For example, I can delete any unused image that is at least a month old without going through any page. –Bob Hammero Mod•B'crat•T•A 02:42, 27 July 2006 (BST)
- If people see a deletion in the log and don't see an accompanying deletion request eyebrows will be raised. I think they should at least have to note the deletion on the speedy delete page, and cite criterion 6. In these instances the reporting mod would be able to delete it, instead of having to wait for another one to verify the decision. --GageCFT 02:35, 27 July 2006 (BST)
- This change makes complete sense. --The Fifth Horseman 12:35, 28 July 2006 (BST)
- Well, the Fifth Horseman has given this policy his blessing, it is now doomed.--Gage 23:10, 29 July 2006 (BST)
Okay. Does anyone want to word the template that is meant to be substed in? –Xoid S•T•FU! 06:36, 31 July 2006 (BST)
- Here's my crack, using {{Warning}}.
- Please do not recreate deleted pages on this wiki. If you continue this behaviour, you may be banned from editing the wiki.
- The code is {{subst:Warning|recreate deleted pages on}}. What do all think? --Darth Sensitive W! 07:27, 31 July 2006 (BST)
- How about "Please do not recreate unwanted pages that have been deleted previously from the wiki. If you continue this behaviour, you may be banned from editing the wiki." –Bob Hammero Mod•B'crat•T•A 08:16, 31 July 2006 (BST)
When you say exact same, you're suggesting that someone has just copied the page, without any additional/added information? (I'm asking only for clarification, but I think this is what you mean). - Bango Skank 21:42, 6 August 2006 (BST)
