Difference between revisions of "ZineWiki talk:Content guidelines"
(New page: This proposed policy was written collaboratively by Dan and I, based on existing practices, prior discussions by ZineWiki administrators, general wiki practices, and our o...) |
Dan10things (talk | contribs) |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
This proposed policy was written collaboratively by [[Dan_Halligan|Dan]] and I, based on existing practices, prior discussions by ZineWiki administrators, general wiki practices, and our opinion of what we thought was appropriate. Please give us your opinions, make suggested changes/additions, and help us develop these guidelines. To respond to these proposed guidelines, please leave a message on this talk page. It's helpful if you begin your response with a statement like '''Support guideline status''', '''Oppose policy status''', or '''Comment'''. Be sure to sign your response (by typing four tildes, <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>), which will be replaced with your username and time stamp). Please explain your thoughts, ask questions, and raise concerns. All views are welcome. [[User:Jerianne|Jerianne]] 00:00, 1 April 2009 (UTC) | This proposed policy was written collaboratively by [[Dan_Halligan|Dan]] and I, based on existing practices, prior discussions by ZineWiki administrators, general wiki practices, and our opinion of what we thought was appropriate. Please give us your opinions, make suggested changes/additions, and help us develop these guidelines. To respond to these proposed guidelines, please leave a message on this talk page. It's helpful if you begin your response with a statement like '''Support guideline status''', '''Oppose policy status''', or '''Comment'''. Be sure to sign your response (by typing four tildes, <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>), which will be replaced with your username and time stamp). Please explain your thoughts, ask questions, and raise concerns. All views are welcome. [[User:Jerianne|Jerianne]] 00:00, 1 April 2009 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | '''Comment''' Not to be a downer, but there are probably quite a few entries from before the site was hacked that need to be re-edited or deleted because people chose to use their entry as a promotion tool of some sort. Some more obvious than others. Should there be a system of checks and balances from the admin side to make sure that it doesn't get out of control, like it did occasionally before the site was hacked? Part of the reason why some people are reluctant about the Zinewiki is because it can easily be used as a promotion tool, and not so many people use the neutral tone. [[User: Sarah]] 7:01pm, 1 April 2009 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | :I hope we can have an impact on that, by our development of policies and guidelines. Maybe having those in place will help the admins address any inappropriate/promotion heavy articles as they are posted. And I'm hoping that as more users return to the site, we can address some of the older entries that need to be cleaned up or outright deleted. [[User:Jerianne|Jerianne]] 00:55, 3 April 2009 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | :: I absolutely agree Sarah. We didn't have very clear guidelines for people starting a zine article, or rules/guidelines to fall back on when it read more like a promo letter than an encyclopedia article. Jerianne and I are committed to getting pretty clear guidelines, and yes that will mean going back entry by entry and editing them. I'm willing to do a bunch of that this Summer, but hope everyone will jump in and do it where they see it. [[User:Dan10things|dan10things]] 18:25, 4 April 2009 (UTC) | ||
Latest revision as of 18:25, 4 April 2009
This proposed policy was written collaboratively by Dan and I, based on existing practices, prior discussions by ZineWiki administrators, general wiki practices, and our opinion of what we thought was appropriate. Please give us your opinions, make suggested changes/additions, and help us develop these guidelines. To respond to these proposed guidelines, please leave a message on this talk page. It's helpful if you begin your response with a statement like Support guideline status, Oppose policy status, or Comment. Be sure to sign your response (by typing four tildes, ~~~~), which will be replaced with your username and time stamp). Please explain your thoughts, ask questions, and raise concerns. All views are welcome. Jerianne 00:00, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
Comment Not to be a downer, but there are probably quite a few entries from before the site was hacked that need to be re-edited or deleted because people chose to use their entry as a promotion tool of some sort. Some more obvious than others. Should there be a system of checks and balances from the admin side to make sure that it doesn't get out of control, like it did occasionally before the site was hacked? Part of the reason why some people are reluctant about the Zinewiki is because it can easily be used as a promotion tool, and not so many people use the neutral tone. User: Sarah 7:01pm, 1 April 2009 (EDT)
- I hope we can have an impact on that, by our development of policies and guidelines. Maybe having those in place will help the admins address any inappropriate/promotion heavy articles as they are posted. And I'm hoping that as more users return to the site, we can address some of the older entries that need to be cleaned up or outright deleted. Jerianne 00:55, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
- I absolutely agree Sarah. We didn't have very clear guidelines for people starting a zine article, or rules/guidelines to fall back on when it read more like a promo letter than an encyclopedia article. Jerianne and I are committed to getting pretty clear guidelines, and yes that will mean going back entry by entry and editing them. I'm willing to do a bunch of that this Summer, but hope everyone will jump in and do it where they see it. dan10things 18:25, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
