Meta tags:
Headings (most frequently used words):
rfc, for, wikipedia, talk, at, on, question, process, the, of, requests, comment, contents, bad, close, wikiproject, classical, music, amending, project, guidelines, infoboxes, did, do, it, right, llm, problems, about, tags, framing, threshold, undue, weight, and, possible, promotional, content, in, byzantine, empire, script, opening, editor, should, be, used, controversial, proposed, merges, miscellaneous, pages, faq, top, this, page,
Text of the page (most frequently used words):
the (452), that (173), and (151), you (119), talk (118), rfc (116), 2026 (90), utc (90), reply (89), not (78), for (69), this (66), page (65), are (65), should (57), have (56), there (55), with (53), #wikipedia (46), august (46), can (45), about (44), discussion (44), they (42), article (42), consensus (41), think (39), but (36), editors (35), wikiproject (34), dispute (33), question (33), july (33), what (32), comment (31), how (31), was (29), don (29), people (29), whatamidoing (29), one (27), would (26), tag (26), any (26), because (26), comments (26), their (26), faq (25), group (25), just (24), time (24), like (23), edit (23), essay (23), then (23), all (23), other (22), say (22), your (22), which (22), has (22), rfcs (22), pages (21), may (19), editor (19), change (19), advice (19), june (19), polygnotus (18), opinions (18), whether (18), project (18), problem (17), opinion (17), its (17), own (17), who (17), see (17), community (17), policy (16), get (16), tags (16), wikiprojects (16), from (15), someone (15), been (15), such (15), over (15), more (14), want (14), here (14), used (14), neutral (14), ago (14), sources (14), guidelines (14), something (13), user (13), view (12), text (12), non (12), when (12), isn (12), statements (12), latest (12), might (12), right (12), apple (12), agree (11), resolution (11), could (11), also (11), does (11), questions (11), content (11), why (11), will (11), however (11), out (10), actually (10), understand (10), else (10), cannot (10), new (10), without (10), doesn (10), them (10), marshall (10), specific (10), long (10), many (10), than (10), point (10), some (10), under (9), most (9), either (9), template (9), person (9), where (9), everyone (9), know (9), please (9), close (9), only (9), case (9), process (9), says (9), even (9), usually (9), members (9), use (8), create (8), dw31415 (8), based (8), need (8), better (8), good (8), another (8), old (8), asking (8), those (8), note (8), rather (8), including (8), did (8), days (8), proposed (8), changes (8), same (8), games (8), write (8), disputes (8), within (8), financial (8), requests (7), example (7), work (7), very (7), official (7), anyone (7), giraffedata (7), line (7), included (7), section (7), well (7), made (7), aren (7), top (7), current (7), yes (7), clear (7), issue (7), prior (7), main (7), remove (7), weight (7), space (7), infobox (7), infoboxes (7), 4meter4 (7), add (6), topic (6), contents (6), make (6), having (6), fact (6), being (6), explain (6), straw (6), waste (6), start (6), actual (6), presume (6), removing (6), few (6), pov (6), disputed (6), discussed (6), problems (6), others (6), started (6), help (6), personal (6), proposal (6), idea (6), end (6), fix (6), were (6), original (6), ask (6), two (6), name (6), platforms (6), assassination (6), tagging (6), itself (6), involved (6), move (6), express (6), bankruptcy (6), freespeech (6), read (6), feb (6), 2005 (6), summary (6), table (5), last (5), possible (5), shouldn (5), generally (5), never (5), appropriate (5), rules (5), allowed (5), improve (5), sense (5), arguments (5), role (5), every (5), man (5), bryan (5), henderson (5), didn (5), always (5), aware (5), almost (5), fixed (5), these (5), again (5), let (5), closed (5), sidebar (5), trying (5), part (5), opposite (5), put (5), contains (5), link (5), saying (5), month (5), stephenmacky1 (5), into (5), wouldn (5), required (5), future (5), early (5), someonedreaming (5), among (5), sentence (5), much (5), byzantine (5), way (5), reliable (5), promotional (5), policies (5), articles (5), too (5), quotations (5), needed (5), llm (5), supposed (5), classical (5), music (5), views (5), formal (5), guideline (5), thing (5), speech (5), wider (5), 2021 (5), search (4), statement (4), apply (4), using (4), missed (4), disagree (4), doing (4), sometimes (4), rule (4), userspace (4), found (4), asked (4), assume (4), answer (4), especially (4), though (4), lot (4), side (4), reason (4), hasn (4), yet (4), haven (4), brief (4), script (4), options (4), belongs (4), relevant (4), had (4), compromise (4), while (4), chose (4), multiple (4), matter (4), discussions (4), wants (4), already (4), history (4), archives (4), consider (4), closing (4), myself (4), short (4), opening (4), open (4), come (4), after (4), groups (4), language (4), ancestries (4), separate (4), option (4), languages (4), changed (4), bob (4), game (4), violate (4), first (4), undue (4), outside (4), represent (4), longer (4), resolve (4), discussing (4), nobody (4), feels (4), added (4), issues (4), list (4), claims (4), weigh (4), find (4), force (4), conflict (4), down (4), protected (4), believe (4), include (4), each (4), 2007 (4), bot (4), hide (4), available (3), random (3), maybe (3), done (3), things (3), both (3), parties (3), important (3), subpage (3), moved (3), exactly (3), least (3), tagged (3), illusion (3), thin (3), air (3), thinking (3), makes (3), stated (3), considered (3), entire (3), arguing (3), thinks (3), faith (3), position (3), wikipedian (3), try (3), everything (3), unless (3), sure (3), simply (3), existence (3), normally (3), information (3), making (3), phrasing (3), allowing (3), ownership (3), description (3), looks (3), quite (3), below (3), valid (3), now (3), knows (3), number (3), wrong (3), removed (3), must (3), true (3), follow (3), neither (3), post (3), appears (3), join (3), controversial (3), specifically (3), interested (3), file (3), account (3), templates (3), 2015 (3), banned (3), occurred (3), instead (3), defeat (3), rfcbefore (3), similar (3), next (3), billedmammal (3), 2013 (3), indigenous (3), greek (3), suggest (3), listing (3), minor (3), mostly (3), times (3), empire (3), look (3), coffeeurbanite (3), mentioning (3), give (3), whichever (3), examples (3), selected (3), prominence (3), appearance (3), threshold (3), active (3), framing (3), deal (3), although (3), maintenance (3), state (3), ideas (3), against (3), said (3), contribs (3), ____ (3), robert (3), mcclenon (3), since (3), brink (3), verge (3), secondary (3), sort (3), words (3), mevsherd (3), small (3), minority (3), gets (3), equally (3), particular (3), anything (3), place (3), whole (3), leave (3), encouraged (3), certain (3), area (3), viewpoint (3), suppress (3), viewpoints (3), editorial (3), general (3), essays (3), 2010 (3), deletion (3), free (3), result (3), individual (3), 2006 (3), tools (3), toggle (2), contact (2), disclaimers (2), privacy (2), additional (2), terms (2), attribution (2), https (2), org (2), index (2), php (2), title (2), oldid (2), grid (2), faqs (2), particularly (2), once (2), conversation (2), difficult (2), seem (2), belong (2), somewhere (2), introduce (2), persons (2), unofficial (2), probably (2), basically (2), experience (2), consenting (2), answers (2), frequently (2), happened (2), reject (2), system (2), establishing (2), posting (2), trick (2), engaging (2), debate (2), presuming (2), difference (2), between (2), practice (2), exist (2), reduce (2), possibility (2), continued (2), factual (2), errors (2), face (2), ability (2), big (2), going (2), reference (2), editing (2), yeah (2), our (2), shows (2), recent (2), edits (2), less (2), wrote (2), situation (2), giving (2), able (2), she (2), telling (2), explained (2), badly (2), wasn (2), floor (2), violating (2), support (2), incorrect (2), previous (2), flippant (2), wanted (2), editsummary (2), refers (2), back (2), went (2), agreed (2), three (2), wikipedians (2), thanks (2), minutes (2), merges (2), miscellaneous (2), figure (2), source (2), useful (2), responses (2), correctly (2), seems (2), input (2), mentioned (2), lack (2), neutrality (2), present (2), perhaps (2), requirement (2), nothing (2), ending (2), opened (2), admit (2), approach (2), rfcend (2), exceptions (2), thought (2), rose64 (2), red (2), quoted (2), basic (2), outlined (2), permission (2), legobot (2), run (2), automatically (2), age (2), votes (2), completely (2), created (2), influence (2), century (2), weren (2), whereas (2), appear (2), linguistic (2), hellenization (2), asia (2), whose (2), inhabitants (2), abandoned (2), widget (2), alice (2), called (2), popular (2), ever (2), mention (2), taking (2), above (2), receive (2), subject (2), npov (2), concerns (2), playing (2), looking (2), remain (2), resolved (2), utterly (2), permanent (2), cost (2), wide (2), underlying (2), necessary (2), detailed (2), direct (2), compared (2), couple (2), glance (2), contain (2), type (2), past (2), towards (2), satisfy (2), discuss (2), usage (2), special (2), addressed (2), really (2), request (2), significant (2), seen (2), per (2), spent (2), improving (2), helpful (2), seeing (2), bluethricecreamman (2), reform (2), take (2), actions (2), handed (2), clearly (2), primary (2), means (2), interpretation (2), ways (2), avoid (2), aquillion (2), imminent (2), claim (2), recommend (2), power (2), political (2), control (2), informal (2), together (2), trouble (2), friends (2), dislike (2), student (2), sit (2), different (2), collective (2), recommendations (2), permitted (2), wording (2), highly (2), treated (2), enforcing (2), private (2), set (2), seek (2), before (2), defined (2), interest (2), member (2), left (2), constitution (2), beland (2), internally (2), dictate (2), regardless (2), suppression (2), got (2), collectively (2), forcing (2), profess (2), willingly (2), limits (2), discouraged (2), links (2), outcome (2), circumstances (2), acceptable (2), during (2), nor (2), prohibited (2), parts (2), through (2), accept (2), organizations (2), external (2), bad (2), amending (2), 2023 (2), november (2), april (2), 2020 (2), 2018 (2), october (2), 2016 (2), january (2), 2012 (2), 2009 (2), jan (2), dec (2), oct (2), sep (2), 2004 (2), effort (2), participate (2), tasks (2), depending (2), rarely (2), day (2), officially (2), participants (2), binding (2), off (2), formatting (2), learn (2), related (2), upload (2), log (2), donate (2), menu (2), mobile, cookie, statistics, developers, code, conduct, legal, safety, contacts, site, registered, trademark, profit, organization, wikimedia, foundation, inc, creative, commons, sharealike, license, rendered, parsoid, edited, category, retrieved, wikipedia_talk, requests_for_comment, 1370537887, reachable, elsewhere, mind, spelling, yup, gimme, sec, prefer, normal, wherein, thats, extraordinary, writ, introduced, exclusively, plays, world, asks, naked, containing, supposedly, speaking, debating, men, knowing, twice, indicate, takes, energy, easy, draw, attention, believing, practicality, alternative, allows, base, slightly, commented, exists, falling, excluded, hoaxes, typos, believes, challenge, presumed, objection, skip, ingermane, hand, shades, violation, standard, claimed, dude, wasting, rehash, hash, procedural, guys, installed, unnecessary, saves, top5, convenient, keep, eye, impasse, sufficient, size, reached, expensive, rfctracker, brd, answered, responded, interesting, consistently, refuse, awkward, repeatedly, undoing, improvements, summarily, delist, approve, police, god, misinterpreted, assuming, respectively, thoughts, label, header, users, object, war, contradicts, objected, inappropriate, apologies, missing, tired, still, obvious, flippancy, understood, false, belief, solved, ones, intended, provide, extra, explanation, clue, unclear, irrelevant, revert, invited, favifake, village, pump, merge, nominations, mfd, requested, justified, honest, misunderstanding, attitude, starts, purely, practical, unlikely, course, starting, suspected, impose, collapsed, yours, spam, attack, escalates, further, report, huh, collapsing, accounts, ips, proposals, far, checked, behind, considering, years, hard, connection, ivo, andrić, clean, ani, clarity, refusing, comply, demand, ignore, resolving, davidbrownid, counts, withdrawn, poster, whenever, happens, advantages, contrast, furthermore, okay, needs, restore, boxed, restored, straight, ought, visible, replied, changing, avoided, redact, posts, tpo, central, lists, ends, manually, pointed, proceeding, withdrew, creating, proper, procedure, feel, retained, later, additions, messing, vladimir, lenin, appeal, horrocks, geoffrey, 208, anatolian, plateau, inland, begun, dominant, culture, alexander, conquests, descendants, peoples, lycians, pamphylians, sidetians, isaurians, pisidians, lycaonians, carians, lydians, phrygians, cappadocians, immigrant, celts, goths, jews, persians, fairly, hellenized, 6th, 978, 1118785157, isbn, speakers, references, nudge, bit, vague, existing, pretty, enough, _____, blank, stamp, breadandhumus, various, lydian, carian, phrygian, isaurian, pisidian, lycaonian, lycian, favor, regarding, inclusion, requires, occasionally, surprises, literally, solve, digging, noes, product, keeps, alchemy, iconic, chris, celebrities, described, addition, thank, respond, brilliantly, commercial, illustrate, locus, closer, order, sentences, play, starter, major, glanced, notion, promotionalism, exceeds, typical, single, appreciate, feedback, adding, raise, focuses, skipping, came, via, nature, solo, evidence, intractable, semi, desperate, til, happy, live, justify, high, themselves, causing, strife, modern, head, deserve, ideal, sound, easily, settle, detail, length, jfk, fas, 20th, assassinations, heads, compare, suspect, immediate, principles, dealt, marshal, focus, away, improvement, whoever, degrade, indicated, family, warn, reader, disapprove, badge, shame, doc, waid, genuine, written, preferable, realize, earlier, overlooks, common, eliminate, willing, moot, fixing, preceding, unsigned, adds, ___, removes, ugly, unreasonable, stub, lead, expand, blueboar, william, mckinley, talaat, pasha, arrest, ngo, dinh, diem, john, kennedy, park, chung, hee, agreeing, fights, ideally, converted, ready, prepare, flagged, moderated, noticeboard, needing, workshopped, indeffed, consecutive, fail, due, extensive, guidance, writing, repeating, prohibition, behavior, generated, plan, hopelessly, compromised, demonstrated, salvage, failing, nollm, antioch, international, movement, churches, life, impact, local, sets, latter, reads, scare, quotes, juxtaposition, slide, skeptical, privileges, accurate, mere, depends, reasonably, perform, analysis, assumed, power_mac_g4_cube, diff, 1362544310, interface, includes, mac, cube, david, fuchs, modeling, thereof, protect, standing, determine, essentially, affirm, discounted, factionalism, counter, expressing, voice, membership, conveys, degree, subpages, turn, strenuously, advise, discard, argument, collaborate, aspect, faction, push, interpretations, odds, tell, location, tracking, activities, school, lunch, room, around, assigned, seating, works, eats, lunches, insist, soon, leaving, unfortunate, alone, spend, whom, entirely, volunteers, namespace, material, omissions, superprotect, stop, disrupting, servers, attorney, expertise, profits, board, measures, forth, separation, notbluesky, bluesky, wheelwar, letters, petitions, proposing, relatively, distinct, opportunity, according, speak, individuals, unite, battleground, owns, perfect, liberty, draft, instructional, brought, therefore, systematically, precedence, immediately, reverting, unsuspecting, michaelmaggs, hidden, explicitly, advance, exclusive, enforce, call, info, box, design, wishes, themself, perfectly, entitled, typically, bother, sounds, merely, status, event, argues, fear, complaint, misunderstandings, raised, objections, step, rest, paragraph, versions, semantics, little, abuse, author, totally, enforceable, reflect, measure, defend, incursions, rename, word, fine, stand, standpoint, intent, matters, rapidly, badrfc, explaining, lol, looked, fairness, relfect, given, expressed, suppressed, forcibly, fair, spaces, forming, reflecting, ethically, choice, foster, compliant, spirit, concern, removal, emphasis, tone, meaning, etc, recognize, discourage, application, comes, altering, formulate, meant, tool, published, reflective, public, large, unlike, adivce, tied, scenario, hates, contradicting, ordinary, context, forced, directly, assert, mos, infoboxuse, composers, self, exempt, applies, except, miscellany, misuse, mean, uses, misuses, ban, mess, oppose, principle, 5p4, welcomed, additionally, sorts, address, endless, supply, noticed, points, arbcom, determined, council, guide, happening, btw, classification, defends, share, usual, prevents, clarification, posted, warrants, outright, recommended, providing, linked, concerned, perceive, endorse, serious, ethics, organized, interests, mini, form, act, provided, bounds, conflicting, tantamount, suppressing, violates, opposing, effect, unethical, internal, setting, employer, coming, union, ethical, fundamental, freedom, topics, inactive, archived, lowercase, sigmabot, iii, 2008, jun, archive, scope, collaborative, practices, visit, require, rating, scale, following, assessment, respondents, varies, amount, higher, lower, technical, unusual, five, range, zero, several, hundred, 2024, prove, hold, second, soundly, rejected, proponents, grace, plausibly, sides, inherently, effective, determining, holds, withdraw, winning, advised, week, vote, substantially, appearing, copy, plus, timestamp, simplified, adjust, shorten, loyal, opposition, swayed, minds, conclusions, grounds, halt, participating, relevance, hours, alert, apparently, running, certainly, message, bottom, owner, turned, getting, listed, notices, shortcut, welcoming, newcomers, attacks, polite, welcome, purposes, encyclopedia, projects, printable, version, download, pdf, print, export, switch, legacy, parser, shortened, url, english, supported, portal, contribute, events, navigation, jump,
Text of the page (random words):
w though because this issue could come up again at a future rfc i think the rfc page itself could say outright that rfcs can t be used to change wikiproject guidelines or opinions because wikiprojects are protected under wp freespeech policy and have a right to make their own recommended guidelines providing they don t conflict with wider policy pages outside editors who are not project members shouldn t be allowed to come in and suppress the editorial viewpoints of wikiprojects they are not involved with 4meter4 talk 17 16 19 june 2026 utc reply i suggest that you go read the free speech essay not policy that you just linked to i do not think it says what you think it says whatamidoing talk 17 22 19 june 2026 utc reply a discussion is already happening at wikipedia talk wikiproject classical music close clarification btw you can t have a wikiproject guideline because the policy on wp guidelines does not accept the idea that there can be a guideline that belongs to a group of editors rather than to the whole community it s a wikiproject advice page this classification both defends the group s right to share their opinion within the usual limits that we would apply to an essay and prevents the group from enforcing their opinion because it s just an essay 4meter4 you may be interested in seeing wikipedia wikiproject council guide advice pages but one interpretation of the proposal is a minor change infoboxes are neither required nor prohibited for any article whether to include an infobox which infobox to include and which parts of the infobox to use is determined through discussion and consensus among the editors at each individual article infoboxes are neither required nor prohibited for any article if there is a dispute over whether to include an infobox which infobox to include or which parts of the infobox to use it should be resolved through discussion and consensus among the editors at each individual article it s not clear to me whether the main point of the rfc was to remove the rest of the paragraph but i don t see any significant difference between these two versions whatamidoing talk 17 20 19 june 2026 utc reply well advice page then the semantics matter little here the point is that outside editors don t get to change wikiproject advice pages and this was an abuse of rfc process wikiprojects have a right to author their own advice pages note that wikiproject advice pages are totally not enforceable and are basically an essay space for wikiprojects if an editor wants to change the advice page then they should join the wikiproject and get involved internally if an advice page is supposed to represent the opinions of a group that advice page better reflect the actual opinions of the editors in that group you don t get to dictate the official position of a wikiproject advice pages are supposed to be a measure of what the editors in that project think not what editors outside the project think 4meter4 talk 17 28 19 june 2026 utc reply and the op for the rfc was banned by arbcom last month over infoboxes so there s an endless supply of problems with this particular rfc you may have noticed that i made the same points myself during the rfc though the op wasn t banned at that point but there are circumstances in which an rfc would be welcomed by a wikiproject or could be helpful additionally just like some essays aren t acceptable to the community some sorts of advice pages wouldn t be acceptable and an rfc is one of the ways to address that the end result is that i think we can t actually say in the rfc page itself that rfcs can t be used to change wikiproject pages because they can be under certain circumstances one thing you could do to defend the wikiproject against future incursions is to rename wikipedia wikiproject classical music guidelines to something that doesn t use the word guidelines editors might be less interested in the contents of a page that doesn t use the same language as the wikipedia policies and guidelines whatamidoing talk 17 41 19 june 2026 utc reply i d be fine with recommendations regardless i stand by my standpoint that rfcs can t change wikiproject pages with the intent of viewpoint suppression this was a clear case of a viewpoint suppression rfc wp freespeech matters and this rfc should have been closed rapidly as a badrfc 4meter4 talk 17 47 19 june 2026 utc reply you haven t read wp freespeech yet have you it s an essay explaining why the wikipedia community can suppress your view any time we want without violating the us constitution whatamidoing talk 17 51 19 june 2026 utc reply lol got me there it s been a while since i looked at that page then let s get down to basic fairness if an advice page is supposed to relfect the viewpoints of the members of a given project but the viewpoints expressed have been suppressed and forcibly changed is that fair i don t think it is maybe you are ok with that i m not if this were a policy page or an official guideline page have at it everyone gets a say in those spaces but in this case we have editors collectively forming an editorial opinion reflecting the viewpoint of a specifically defined group i can t see how forcing that group to profess advice they didn t willingly agree to is ethically a good choice to foster a community that is compliant with the spirit of wp 5p4 4meter4 talk 18 01 19 june 2026 utc reply i believe that if you read my comments in the rfc oppose on principle because a wikiproject advice page should be treated like a user essay and that means that other editors shouldn t mess with it but are free to write their own essays to disagree with it you would see that i agree with you on that point but just because this one rfc looks like a misuse to me doesn t mean that all uses of rfcs are misuses you are asking us to ban all rfcs because there was just one 1 problem also i don t think that this is a case of forcing that group to profess advice they didn t willingly agree to isn t the main concern removing words whatamidoing talk 19 09 19 june 2026 utc reply removal of words changes emphasis tone meaning etc that should be done by the members of the project regardless i am asking for the rfc page to recognize its limits or at least discourage its application when it comes to altering opinion pages at wikiprojects its one thing to start an rfc to formulate a wp consensus on a wider policy page or even any page in article space it s another thing to change opinion pages meant to represent the opinions of a specific group of editors it sort of like how its discouraged to edit another editor s user space in general i think the rfc tool shouldn t be used on opinion pages at all if they are published by a specific group that isn t reflective of the wikipedia public at large unlike general essays wikiproject adivce pages are opinions tied to a specific group i can t think of a scenario or example of an rfc where that has been necessary and appropriate can you if so link that rfc here 4meter4 talk 19 22 19 june 2026 utc reply it is discouraged to edit in another editor s user space but an rfc can be used to force a change to someone s user page or to a user essay just like wikipedia miscellany for deletion can be used to force the deletion of such a page why should a group of self selected editors be exempt from a process that applies to everyone and everything else and do you really want to leave the community with no option except deletion the most relevant rfc in this context is 2010 wikipedia talk wikiproject composers infoboxes rfc in which the wikiproject was forced to change their advice so that it didn t directly conflict with mos infoboxuse and assert wp ownership of their articles note that there s no requirement for the group to say anything at all about infoboxes if the group hates it they can remove the whole thing the outcome that s not available is contradicting the ordinary rules we don t ever want editors to find wikiproject example advice and read do x when the official community wide guidelines say don t do x if you would like to look for past rfcs then you might find the long list of rfcs in user billedmammal list of rfcs to be useful note that the links take you to the page where it happened but almost never to the rfc itself whatamidoing talk 20 14 19 june 2026 utc reply i fear that this complaint is based on multiple misunderstandings 1 there is no such thing as protected speech under wp freespeech policy protected speech sounds like something one might find under the us constitution whereas wp freespeech is merely a user essay the personal opinion of the editor who wrote it and has no formal status within wikipedia in any event it argues against your position 2 wikiprojects do not have members in the sense of a defined closed group of editors who have the exclusive power to set up and enforce private rules that you call info box policy wikiprojects are by design open and any editor who has an interest and wishes to consider themself to be a member is perfectly entitled to express a view whether or not they have left their name on the project page i would consider myself to be an informal member of a number of wikiprojects including that one although i typically don t bother to put my name down 3 wikiprojects are at perfect liberty to create pages of recommendations and many of them do what they are not permitted to do is to draft instructional pages that conflict with formal wikipedia policies and guidelines you may say that the wording that has now been brought into line with the wikipedia guideline was only an advice page and was therefore never in conflict however as a matter of practice certain highly active editors in this area systematically treated that wording as taking precedence over the official guidelines including immediately reverting any infobox that was added by an unsuspecting editor and enforcing a private rule set out in hidden text within articles which explicitly required editors to seek permission in advance before making certain edits michaelmaggs talk 21 18 19 june 2026 utc reply wikiprojects are not political parties there is no minority group of members to protect here you have no more right or standing to determine what the classical music wikiproject is about than any other random user what you are essentially asking is for us to affirm that a small group of people wp owns the project and that nobody else is allowed to weigh in or that their views should be discounted that sort of factionalism is utterly counter to how we work if you want to write a personal essay expressing your personal views do it in userspace if you write something in project space everyone gets to weigh in equally and no one has more voice there than anyone else the idea that there is a formal group of members of the project who get to control it is completely incorrect membership is informal and conveys no particular degree of control or influence over the project or its subpages again it feels like you are trying to turn wikiprojects into political parties do not do this i would strenuously advise you to discard that entire line of argument and anything based on it since it feels like a wp battleground approach to wikiprojects a wikiproject is a place for everyone to collaborate on improving some aspect of wikipedia not a place to create your own faction or to push for policy interpretations at odds with the community as a whole aquillion talk 04 49 21 july 2026 utc reply wikipedia a wikiproject is a group of people a group however is not everyone and what you re proposing is that a relatively distinct group of people should have no opportunity to express their group s views according to you they must speak only as individuals or not at all they cannot unite together to express their collective views they must remain separate i don t think this is a good idea there are quite a lot of pages in the project namespace that i don t think everyone should weigh in equally on for example i think that most of the wikipedia open letters and petitions contain errors and material omissions but do you think i should weigh in equally to point out that the first use of superprotect was actually used to stop a wp wheelwar that was disrupting the servers that there isn t an attorney with expertise in us non profits that would actually recommend the board reform measures that there cannot be an official statement from editors and so forth or do you think i should let those groups have their say and if i want i can have my say we ve long encouraged separation of views e g wp bluesky and wp notbluesky whatamidoing talk 05 19 21 july 2026 utc reply oh and in case it isn t clear if you tell people that they can t work together under the name of wikiproject they ll move to another location where we ll have more trouble tracking their activities anyone who s seen a school lunch room around age 12 without assigned seating knows how this works if a group of friends normally eats their lunches at table 1 and you insist that a dislike student be allowed to sit at table 1 too the original group of friends will soon find a different table to sit at leaving the unfortunate student all alone again you cannot force wp volunteers to spend time with editors whom they dislike or disagree with and if you try they may well leave the page or wikipedia entirely whatamidoing talk 05 25 21 july 2026 utc reply did i do it right edit latest comment 1 month ago 7 comments 5 people in discussion this doesn t look right talk power mac g4 cube rfc bankruptcy claims and david fuchs role modeling or lack thereof mevsherd talk 17 51 4 july 2026 utc reply hi mevsherd thanks for asking i see a couple small issues i d recommend this and the apple article claim apple was on the brink or verge of bankruptcy many sources express such opinions apple s own financial statements say the opposite should claims of imminent bankruptcy be removed the article includes the claim that apple was on the brink or verge of bankruptcy should claims of imminent bankruptcy be removed the question should be neutral move many sources express such opinions apple s own financial statements say the opposite to your comment dw31415 talk 12 31 5 july 2026 utc reply i fixed the main problem when i added the template the interface added some tags that i think weren t supposed to be there https en wikipedia org w index php title talk power_mac_g4_cube diff next oldid 1362544310 mevsherd talk 16 13 5 july 2026 utc reply i see no tags red rose64 talk 19 20 5 july 2026 utc reply i don t think that many sources express such opinions apple s own financial statements say the opposite an even handed description of what two sets of sources say is non neutral whatamidoing talk 00 43 9 july 2026 utc reply i don t think it s even handed at all note how it says article claims that apple is on the brink or verge of bankruptcy the latter reads like scare quotes to me and that the sources saying it are j...
|
