Tipwiki:Policy
From the unofficial Duke TIP Wiki
rolvaror So, I guess I will start this out by asking you what you think helps and hurts this wiki. Our policies (when complete) will cover things such as what is worthy of inclusion, what point of views should/can be used, and other stuff like that. What do you think it should say?
Suggestions - Worthy of inclusion: anything TIP related, really. Duh. POV: any TIPsters or RCs. --Caro
-Not worthy of inclusion Vandalaism is rarely appreciated and in general detracts from teh quality of Tipwiki. Don't do it.
Contents |
[edit] Delete Policy
Place a {{propose delete}} template along with the template that indicates why the page should be deleted or a explanatory note on the talk page. If no one objects in 3 days by posting a note on the talk page the page can be deleted by an admin. -- Anthony 17:50, 4 August 2006 (MST)
[edit] Articles on People Policy
There recently has been an large number of articles written about specific TIPsters. While these are intresting, I am worried that their subjucts may not all be article worthy and it is more a matter of people writing blurbs about their friends for kicks. I have no problems with articles about people of significant historical value, but just because someone attended TIP does not mean that they should have an article about them. Also, it is my hope that this site retains an open to all tipsters feeling and having articles about the members of certain tip 'cliques' could threaten that. -- Anthony 16:08, 30 December 2005 (MST)
- Even if these articles are worthy of being articles, they should probably be condensed into group articles for each group. Kkimball 17:26, 26 July 2006 (MST)
[edit] General Suggestions on Policy
- Bold the title of an article as it first appears in the article, as in wikipedia standards.
- Third person POV, as expected in encyclopedia articles. First person testimony can be done as has been done in the tunnel and the roof.
-Kkimball 17:26, 26 July 2006 (MST)
[edit] What does and does not constitute an article
General suggestion for implemented guidelines...
Does:
- Signifigant Event, single or recurring
- Tradition
- Especially noteable personages
- etc
Does not:
- (In most cases) a tipster
- (In most cases) a specific RAG
- Kkimball 23:03, 27 July 2006 (MST)
The above has my support! With the addition that articles about things that took place during a specific year be in the category for that year.Anthony 08:45, 28 July 2006 (MST)
Sounds good Kkimball 11:33, 28 July 2006 (MST)
[edit] Userpages
You should not, as a general rule, edit the userpage of another user. (This will require the moving of some pages from the people category to articles). Kkimball 20:19, 17 August 2006 (MDT)
[edit] RCs as contributors
To whoever sees this page:
This past summer I was fortunate enough to experience the staff side of TIP, as an RC at Davidson. During some of my off time, I would poke around the wiki, and suddenly find myself in a conundrum.
Namely, I found several articles that I felt compelled to edit and give the staff side of the story, especially when the current article was hurtful, slanderous, and/or offensive to staff members. (Example: 10 lies they tell you at the start of TIP #3, which basically states that RCs don't care what TIPsters do. Well, as an RC, I cared what my (and all of the) TIPsters did.)
However, one of the joys of the TIPwiki is the free, unlicensed expression of TIPsters, and I am very concerned that if I edited any articles that people would claim to be "censored by the man" or something like that.
There are a few options I can think of, and I would like to know what current and former TIPsters (not on staff) think--and maybe these can be formulated into a set of guidelines for any other RCs who feel the need to be active in the wiki community:
1). I only post/edit about things that happened to me when I was a TIPster and do nothing else, aside from minor grammatical points, etc. 2). I post new articles about what happened during some of my staff years, but as much from a TIPster's point of view as possible, simply for information--but never edit another person's opinion on such matters. 3). I both post new articles and edit articles so that they will be both professional and inoffensive to staff, thus risking offending TIPsters.
Commentary on this would be greatly, greatly appreciated, and if I don't get sufficient replies on this to make up my mind I will keep on bumping this page until I do.
Memoriae 14:25, 18 August 2007 (MDT)
I say just give your side too, staff are TIPsters too... -- User:Anthony
