Lumeniki:Community Standards

From Lumeniki
Revision as of 21:23, June 30, 2010 by Lumenous (Talk | contribs) (Undo revision 4459 by Lumenos (Talk) CENSORSHIP!!!!!)

Jump to: navigation, search

This page will be used to debate this site's community standards.

This page will lumenocument the lumeneration of some simply lumenxcellent lumenunity lumentards! Human 10:00, June 29, 2010 (UTC)
MUST we name the page after TOW? (:sic:) 10:20, June 29, 2010 (UTC)
There are already "policies" here, you know. (:sic:) 10:22, June 29, 2010 (UTC)
But do those lumenpolicies really lumeflect lumeconsensus? I think we should lumenvote on that. Lumenous 13:49, June 29, 2010 (UTC)
Okay I was reading around and found this linked from a page. I moved the page here. Not perfect but getting closer, maybe? (:sic:) 10:42, June 29, 2010 (UTC)
That's all fine, except notability has absolutely nothing to do with community standards. It's like moving an article on George W. Bush to Barack Obama because the latter was a redlink. Lumenous 13:49, June 29, 2010 (UTC)
I suppose it depends which communEntities' community standards the OP was referring to. sympathy vampire 18:11, June 30, 2010 (UTC)
No, it doesn't. Lumenotability determines what gets an article on Lumeniki. Community standards determine how the wiki works. Lumenous 18:15, June 30, 2010 (UTC)

Vote enforcement

We need scripts to be able to implement this. There is only one bureaucrat and they are not technically inclined. sympathy vampire 16:53, June 30, 2010 (UTC)

That can be easily rectified. Lumenous 17:09, June 30, 2010 (UTC)
Ewwww! Will it urt? sympathy vampire 20:43, June 30, 2010 (UTC)
Only if you resist. Lumenous 20:46, June 30, 2010 (UTC)

Voting

I propose that all changes to the community standards at this site be ratified by voting and that such votes will have the absolute power to define site strategy and content.

Eeearrrum clarifications if I may, Sir

Due to the problem of sock puppetry the voters must be identified with picture ID or the votes are weighted according to lumenist clout, unless the Goblin Takeover occurs sooner. The Lumeniki1 wikiforum is a interim meritocracy until Lumeniki can be established by technocracy (goblins) or meritocracy (lumenikilu policies).

So you are saying we don't get a say so in the community standards? Pi 01:44, June 30, 2010 (UTC)
Not saying that. sympathy vampire 20:56, June 30, 2010 (UTC)
You mean you don't intend to allow the users to decide all site policies by voting for them?--Hitman 08:24, June 30, 2010 (UTC)
Not saying that. sympathy vampire 20:56, June 30, 2010 (UTC)
This is clearly unlumenocratic. I am hoping we will not need to use force and that this will be a peaceful revolumenation, but we are ready to fight for our basic lumen rights. Lumenous 17:13, June 30, 2010 (UTC)
How is this unlumenocratic? sympathy vampire 20:56, June 30, 2010 (UTC)
What will you fight with? sympathy vampire 20:56, June 30, 2010 (UTC)

For allowing all users to vote and control the wiki

  • Hell yes. Anything else would be undemocratic.--Ostrum 15:29, June 29, 2010 (UTC)
  • fully agree Lumenous 15:47, June 29, 2010 (UTC)
  • That would be lumentastic. Pi 23:35, June 29, 2010 (UTC)
  • Looks like consensus for user control.--Hitman 08:28, June 30, 2010 (UTC)

Against

What wiki?

Do you mean Lumeniki1ref (only)? sympathy vampire 21:02, June 30, 2010 (UTC)

Proposal

That article pages be used for articles and that talk pages be used for talk about those articles. When talk edits are made they should be signed.

For

  • --Hitman 08:44, June 30, 2010 (UTC)
  • Lumenos has to learn how to use wikis properly. Lumenous 13:04, June 30, 2010 (UTC)

Against

What about this page?

Shouldn't we move this to the talk page since we are commenting on it? meme contractor 21:11, June 30, 2010 (UTC)

This is not an article. Lumenous 21:15, June 30, 2010 (UTC)