Wikipedia:Update/1/Conduct policy changes, December 2008 to June 2009

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Most of these monthly reports were generated after the fact, in November 2009. (All the other monthly reports linked from WP:Update were generated at the end of the relevant months.) The pages diff'd are: Civility, Dispute resolution, Edit war, Editing policy, Ignore all rules, No legal threats, No personal attacks, Ownership of articles, Sock puppetry and Vandalism. Few section links are provided, and only potentially significant changes are covered.


June 2009

[Monthly report generated at the end of June 2009]


  • Wikipedia:Consensus
    • In the lead section, changed "Consensus is part of a range of policies on how editors work with others" to "Consensus is wikipedias fundamental model for decision making, and determines how editors work with others"
    • Also in the lead section, added "While on-wiki text is considered to be the canonical consensus, creative use of other means of reaching consensus is permitted and encouraged."
    • In WP:CON#Process, changed "legal and ethical restrictions" to "legal restrictions"
    • Added to WP:CON#Exceptions: [Some exceptions supersede consensus decisions on a page] "or wiki."
    • In the same section, changed [local debate on a WikiProject does not override the larger consensus] "behind a policy or guideline." to "of the community, as documented in for instance policies or guidelines."
    • Same section, changed "These represent the consensus decisions achievable among all Wikimedia projects, and affect all of them." to "These represent the consensus among all Wikimedia projects, and affect all of them. Because there's such a large community subscribing to them, they are rather hard to change."








  • Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines
    • Added to lead section: "If negotiable elements of a policy are unclear or do not conform to actual practice, then consensus should be found in order to change the policy to reflect that practice. This is an ongoing task, as policy at WP evolves."


  • Wikipedia:Sock puppetry
    • In WP:SOCK#Identification and handling of suspected sock puppets, changed [The only definitive proof that an account is a sock puppet is an actual admission.] "Anything short of such may provide mere circumstantial evidence that may be used as grounds for suspicion generally when multiple signs are present." to "Since such admissions are unusual, most determinations of sockpuppetry are based on various combinations of circumstantial evidence."



May 2009
  • Wikipedia:Dispute resolution
    • Removed: "Dispute resolution is meant to be a process for figuring out the best way to proceed. This means it is only useful if there's a well-definable end condition (although, naturally, the disputants need not know in advance what the resolution will be). ... If it becomes obvious that no established procedure is going to ping a resolution to the dispute, other means need to be used. (Creativity can be quite helpful here.) It's a good thing that outside politics and pseudoscience, this happens very rarely."



  • Wikipedia:Ownership of articles
    • Added: "Wikipedia content (including articles, categories, templates, and others) is collaboratively edited. Wikipedia contributors are editors, not authors, and no-one, however expert they think they are (and may actually be) has the right to act as if they own a particular article. All Wikipedia contributions are licenced under the GNU Free Documentation License, giving readers the rights to copy, redistribute and modify a work."
April 2009
  • Wikipedia:Dispute resolution
    • Added: "For easy and direct access to dispute resolution requests, along with concise and accurate summaries of their respective guidelines, use Wikipedia:Dispute resolution requests (WP:DRR). Note also that the "dispute resolution" sidebar (right) has direct links to filing requests for many of the dispute resolution levels, but requesting dispute resolution involves different guidelines and application processes for each level, and WP:DRR can familiarize you with each of them."
    • New section: WP:DR#Words of caution




  • Wikipedia:Vandalism
    • Added: "(however, edits/reverts over a content dispute are never vandalism, see WP:EW)."
    • Added: "The template {{uw-vandalism1}} - although being a vandalism template - is also appropriate because it's courteous enough not be perceived as offensive and it doesn't imply vandalism. This is the default template for Twinkle and Huggle."
    • Added: "Reversion or removal of unencyclopedic material, or of edits covered under Biographies of Living People. Some material - sometimes even factually correct material - does not belong on Wikipedia, and removing it is not vandalism. Check to make sure that the addition was in line with Wikipedia standards before restoring it or reporting its removal as vandalism."
    • Added: "Lack of understanding of the purpose of Wikipedia. Some users are not familiar with Wikipedia's purpose or policies and may start editing it as if it were a different medium - such as a forum or blog - in a way that appears unproductive, or borderline vandalism to experienced users. Although such edits can usually be reverted, it should not be treated as vandalism."
March 2009



February 2009


  • Wikipedia:Edit war
    • Added to the introduction: "Never edit war for the purpose of satirically illustrating a point about Wikipedia practices. Such behavior may quickly lead to a block even if you come nowhere near breaching the three-revert rule."


January 2009
  • Wikipedia:Vandalism
    • Changed: "dnsstuff.com" to "domaintools.com"
    • Added: [Wikipedia now only allows registered users active for at least four days] "and with at least 10 edits" [to move pages.]
December 2008



  • Wikipedia:Edit war
    • Removed: "Edit warring is not necessarily any single action; instead, it is any mindset that tolerates confrontational tactics to affect content disputes."
    • Added: "As "edit-warring" is a concept about which reasonable people may disagree, administrators must warn users in good standing before blocking them for edit-warring."
    • Removed: "Editors with combative mindsets should only revert when necessary. Before making multiple reverts, discuss the disputed changes on the other editor's user talk page or yours, and remember that it is easy to misunderstand intentions and overestimate others' aggression on the Internet. Believing that an adversary is "wrong", "POV pushing" or "uncooperative" never excuses edit warring."


  • Wikipedia:No personal attacks
    • Removed footnote: "The ArbCom has found that "[t]he remove personal attacks guideline (and the application thereof) is controversial. It has often been abused by malefactors, and may not have community consensus. It should, at most, be interpreted strictly and used sparingly.[1]"