Bureaucrats, checkuser, Interface administrators, interwiki, Administrators (Semantic MediaWiki), Curators (Semantic MediaWiki), Editors (Semantic MediaWiki), staff, Suppressors, Administrators
83,693
edits
Category talk:Wiki people: Difference between revisions
→Norms: reply
Leucosticte (talk | contribs) (→Norms) |
Hoof Hearted (talk | contribs) (→Norms: reply) |
||
| Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
:::Ah, so it is. --[[User:MarvelZuvembie|MarvelZuvembie]] ([[User talk:MarvelZuvembie|talk]]) 23:25, 10 March 2014 (UTC) | :::Ah, so it is. --[[User:MarvelZuvembie|MarvelZuvembie]] ([[User talk:MarvelZuvembie|talk]]) 23:25, 10 March 2014 (UTC) | ||
::::Well, I added that text because based on the recent deletion of [[Research Psychologist]], it seemed to be an accurate description of the norm. But that was a short article, about one paragraph, that mentioned mostly the controversies about him; I was wondering, if we had a longer article about someone, whether it would be appropriate to have a brief mention of controversies. If we went to minimize drama, we'll avoid saying anything negative about anyone, but then we'll be potentially depriving readers of information they might want to know. [[User:Leucosticte|Leucosticte]] ([[User talk:Leucosticte|talk]]) 11:26, 11 March 2014 (UTC) | ::::Well, I added that text because based on the recent deletion of [[Research Psychologist]], it seemed to be an accurate description of the norm. But that was a short article, about one paragraph, that mentioned mostly the controversies about him; I was wondering, if we had a longer article about someone, whether it would be appropriate to have a brief mention of controversies. If we went to minimize drama, we'll avoid saying anything negative about anyone, but then we'll be potentially depriving readers of information they might want to know. [[User:Leucosticte|Leucosticte]] ([[User talk:Leucosticte|talk]]) 11:26, 11 March 2014 (UTC) | ||
Interesting discussion! Personally, I would suggest that where possible, it would be nice to highlight positives of wiki people. However, if a wiki person has done something bad - and that bad something <u>directly</u> had an effect on their wiki (or indeed another wiki), then we should include that. If a wiki person has only bad attributes, and no redeeming features, then it might be best to create a simple stub-like article and then provide a link to their bio on another wiki. | |||
I do think we would be doing a dis-service if we only included people with positive attributes, or only included positive attributes of people whom had negative or indifferent attributes which affected the wiki world. Love these kinds of constructive discussions, keep the creative thoughts flowing! :)))) [[User:Hoof Hearted|Sean, aka <small>Hoof Hearted</small>]] • <sub>[[:Category:Active administrators of this wiki|Admin]] / [[WikiIndex:Bureaucrats|'Crat]]</sub> • <small>[[User talk:Hoof Hearted|talk2HH]]</small> 19:45, 6 May 2014 (UTC) | |||