331
edits
WikiIndex talk:Inclusion policy: Difference between revisions
→Inclusion with warning
Leucosticte (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
|||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
I see the possibility to include every wiki by adding a warning-template to it, whenever there is a good reason to warn.[[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 16:39, 3 December 2014 (UTC) | I see the possibility to include every wiki by adding a warning-template to it, whenever there is a good reason to warn.[[User:Manorainjan|Manorainjan]] ([[User talk:Manorainjan|talk]]) 16:39, 3 December 2014 (UTC) | ||
:That's fine, but it might have the opposite of the intended effect. Kinda like how kids know which music and movies are good, by looking for the "parental advisory" and R ratings. [[User:Leucosticte|Leucosticte]] ([[User talk:Leucosticte|talk]]) 17:06, 3 December 2014 (UTC) | :That's fine, but it might have the opposite of the intended effect. Kinda like how kids know which music and movies are good, by looking for the "parental advisory" and R ratings. [[User:Leucosticte|Leucosticte]] ([[User talk:Leucosticte|talk]]) 17:06, 3 December 2014 (UTC) | ||
::This assumes an "intended effect." It may also assume unsupervised, wild children who have no sense. *Parents* use ratings, to decide what they will support and allow. Warnings that are fact-based do seem quite appropriate. This is an ordinary editorial decision, not an exclusion/inclusion decision. As well, *attributed opinions* may be expressed, and guidelines on that may be developed. --[[User:Abd|Abd]] ([[User talk:Abd|talk]]) 20:23, 3 December 2014 (UTC) | |||