|This forum page has been archived. Please do not make any further edits unless they are for maintenance purposes.|
The discussion below focuses on an addendum proposal to the user conduct policy. Hearing support, the following will move to a community vote reflecting applicable feedback. Thank you for your time in reviewing the following. -kdarrow take her for a spin! 01:09, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
Pages in the "User" namespace are the property of the user they belong to. Users may edit their own as they see fit, so long as the content aligns with current conduct policies. No other users are allowed to edit user pages of another without permission.
Pages in the "User" namespace are the property of the user they belong to. Users may edit their own as they see fit, so long as the content aligns with current policies. Users are not allowed to edit the user pages of others without permission, with the exception of rights holders making routine maintenance edits.
- Description: The addition allows for routine maintenance edits of talk pages by members of staff, such as fixing links, redirects, broken templates etc. Minor note, removed the word "conduct" as content should align with all policies, not just conduct policy.
Users are not allowed to remove comments from user talk pages or blank them, other than to remove insults/harassment or by archiving it (allowed after 40 posts or 32kb of talkpage content). Administrators need easy access to a users' talk page history. When in doubt if a post can be removed, consult an administrator. If a user talk page is blanked by a user, an admin has the right to revert the blanking unless it was done to remove harassment and/or insults. User talk pages are covered by the edit war policy. They may be deleted at the request of the user they belong to.
Administrators need easy access to a users' talk page history, therefore users are not allowed to remove comments from user talk pages or to blank them, other than to remove insults/harassment. User talk pages are covered by the edit war policy. Contact an administrator with concerns regarding talk page content and/or removal. Talk pages may be archived after 20 posts or 16kb of talk page content.
- Description: The wording suggested here aims to clarify the unclear section regarding deletion requests. The second change reduces the archive threshold, which will make it easier to manage talk pages when messages are high in volume.
Since we are taking the time to update the language, one thing I would add, based off the number of times we see the "report" button abused in Discussions, is noting ahead of time that other community members using the talk page appropriately is not harassment, even if the user whose talk page is being visited would rather no one talk to them. Disagreeing with the user on their edits, opinions, or other points of discussion, are vaild uses of a talk page, even if the user in question does not want to hear it.
That the user whose talk page has been visited feels annoyed or harassed, does not mean harassment has actually occurred. Had that happen again today in discussions, where one user flag several messages as violating the rules, just because the posts were of a differing opinion.
As far as wording for that, maybe re add one of the sentences removed, and tack on just a bit extra to drive home the point.
- Harassment does not include other users appropriately using a talk page to discuss topics such as contentious edits made or opinions expressed on wiki. When in doubt if a post can be removed, consult an administrator.
It does not crop up very often, so I do not think it would have been vote worthy change to make on its own, but if we are already cleaning up the language, it’s something I would like to see clarified. Might save us a “but it was harassment to me” excuse being made in the future.
Also, the user page addendum makes special note of rights users needing to, on occasion, edit a user page as part of site maintenance. We might want to copy paste that to the talk page section as well, unless there is a reason not to. It would of course be limited to things like fixing links which changed as a result of edits made to the wiki since the message was originally left, but I didn’t see anything mentioning why this was not present on both, if there was a reason for it. The Dyre Wolf (talk) 01:52, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
I find the proposed changes to the policy to be reasonable, and will support them if coming to a vote. I am also in favor of Dyre's suggestions.
–FindabairThe benefit of the doubt is often doubtful. 14:27, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
|Policy vote forum overview|
|Guideline||User conduct guideline|
|Amendment 1||Comment policy · Vote · 18 January 2011 · 4-3|
|Amendment 2||Talk page blanking · discussion · Vote · 11 March 2012 · 16-4-1|
|Amendment 3||Signature image size · Discussion · Vote · 24 January 2013 · 8-3-0|
|Amendment 4||Multiple accounts · Discussion · Vote · 15 June 2013 · 8-2|
|Amendment 5||Article talk pages · Discussion · Vote · 15 October 2013 · 8-2-1|
|Amendment 6||Plagiarism enforcement · Vote · 27 August 2015 · 13-0-0|
|Amendment 7||Mandatory edit summaries · Vote · 8 October 2021 · 18-10-2|
|Amendment 8||Editing user and talk pages · Discussion · Vote · 8 April 2022 · 11-0-0|
|Amendment 9||Multiple accounts and block carryover · Discussion · Vote · 8 April 2022 · 11-0-0|
|Related topics||Administration policy|