1,756
edits
WikiIndex talk:Prohibited content: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
Leucosticte (talk | contribs) (→Controversial sites: re) |
Leucosticte (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 53: | Line 53: | ||
::::I see. Yes, it's a live wiki. And what I see leads me to conclude that Leucosticte is using BoyWiki as he uses all wikis. Leucosticte is not an admin there. He is not even a major user, but his content is the edgiest I've seen there. He's pushing that wiki toward confrontation. Boywiki is for "boylovers," which is not a sexual category, the wiki is explicit. By the way, as far as sexual content is concerned, Wikipedia is far more "adult." | ::::I see. Yes, it's a live wiki. And what I see leads me to conclude that Leucosticte is using BoyWiki as he uses all wikis. Leucosticte is not an admin there. He is not even a major user, but his content is the edgiest I've seen there. He's pushing that wiki toward confrontation. Boywiki is for "boylovers," which is not a sexual category, the wiki is explicit. By the way, as far as sexual content is concerned, Wikipedia is far more "adult." | ||
::::BoyWiki does not meet the criteria for prohibited content. One may possibly, by searching, find content there that is problematic, but that is true of many wikis. The wiki does not "solely to provide content that is potentially dangerous and harmful," the present wording, which I will also change. --[[User:Abd|Abd]] ([[User talk:Abd|talk]]) 01:27, 6 January 2015 (UTC) | ::::BoyWiki does not meet the criteria for prohibited content. One may possibly, by searching, find content there that is problematic, but that is true of many wikis. The wiki does not "solely to provide content that is potentially dangerous and harmful," the present wording, which I will also change. --[[User:Abd|Abd]] ([[User talk:Abd|talk]]) 01:27, 6 January 2015 (UTC) | ||
:::::Would anyone care to place a friendly wager on | :::::Would anyone care to place a friendly wager on whether the BoyWiki page will be restored? [[User:Leucosticte|Leucosticte]] ([[User talk:Leucosticte|talk]]) 04:51, 6 January 2015 (UTC) | ||
::::::Naw, I don't take candy from babies. People who believe they are right make wagers, it's supposed to prove something. What it proves is testosterone and bull-headness. Which, of course, has nothing to do with being right or wrong, it's ME, right or wrong. And does restoring [[Boywiki]] have anything to do with the topic here? Boywiki may be a test of the policy, and wikis are not bound by policy; the goal is to harmonize practice and policy, for efficiency, and that can take years. Policy cannot require any administrator to do anything, another basic wiki principle. So if the deletion is contrary to policy, but no administrator is willing to restore, it is not restored. --[[User:Abd|Abd]] ([[User talk:Abd|talk]]) 14:41, 6 January 2015 (UTC) | ::::::Naw, I don't take candy from babies. People who believe they are right make wagers, it's supposed to prove something. What it proves is testosterone and bull-headness. Which, of course, has nothing to do with being right or wrong, it's ME, right or wrong. And does restoring [[Boywiki]] have anything to do with the topic here? Boywiki may be a test of the policy, and wikis are not bound by policy; the goal is to harmonize practice and policy, for efficiency, and that can take years. Policy cannot require any administrator to do anything, another basic wiki principle. So if the deletion is contrary to policy, but no administrator is willing to restore, it is not restored. --[[User:Abd|Abd]] ([[User talk:Abd|talk]]) 14:41, 6 January 2015 (UTC) | ||