Lumeniki:Community Standards

From Lumeniki
Jump to: navigation, search

An announcement is made.


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)
You don't have to use these silly words anymore. Just make wiki your way. founder/parasite 12:28, July 1, 2010 (UTC)
But since we are on the topic; what you are saying is sorta true of wp:notability, but lumenotablity determines also the content and organization of mainspace and talk pages, in a lumenikilu. ~ Lumenos 07:28, July 17, 2010 (UTC)
At WP the content of articles is supposed to be determined by wp:verifiability however wp:verify and wp:notable are both judged according to whether something is published by reliable third-party publishers (not self published) (however the policy for the creation of articles seems much more enforced than the content of articles at WP). ~ Lumenos 07:28, July 17, 2010 (UTC)

Voting[edit]

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.

For allowing all users to vote and control the wiki[edit]

  • 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[edit]

The usages of articles and talk pages[edit]

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[edit]

  • --Hitman 08:44, June 30, 2010 (UTC)
  • Lumenos has to learn how to use wikis properly. Lumenous 13:04, June 30, 2010 (UTC)
  • Oh for sure. Pi 00:37, July 1, 2010 (UTC)

Against[edit]

Void[edit]

The current wording is unclear. Are articles not "used for articles" if they have signed comments on them?

Old vote is void because editors may not have realized this ambiguity. Must make new vote now: (If rouge lumenati wish to continue with this outdated vote communEntity suggests a rewrite of proposal and re-vote. Otherwise please clean up your mess and move it to talkpage or something.) --

No, it is not void. Your dictatorial attempts to crush democracy are not going to succeed. Lumenous 09:56, July 1, 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for clarifying. Let me know how I can aid your democracy. founder/parasite 13:08, July 1, 2010 (UTC)
RationalWikian's may find Trent's newly emerging "democratic" or "representative" proposal more interesting: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/RationalWiki:Saloon_bar#RationalWiki_foundation.2C_last_chance_for_feedback . ~ Lumenos 05:34, July 16, 2010 (UTC)
No we do in fact mean stop using the article pages for signed comments and conversations. Pi 03:27, July 1, 2010 (UTC)
I've placed alternative poll/vote on the talk page along with related questions/polls.
Poll: Who voted and meant to express that?
  • I did not vote for it but I would have voted for it and do not find it at all unclear.--Ostrum 12:25, July 1, 2010 (UTC)

Implementation[edit]

I think I deleted some talk edits. You can restore if they are not indeed talking. ~ Lumenos (talk) 18:11, April 28, 2011 (EDT)

Editing others' user pages[edit]

moved to Lumeniki:Tendencies of editors, administrators, and owners