Forum:List of Previously rejected proposals

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Yew Grove > List of Previously rejected proposals
This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This thread was archived on 19 February 2010 by C Teng.

This is the page where we will vote on whether or not to add particular topics to our list of Previously rejected proposals. To be added to the list, a topic

  • Must have been discussed and rejected at least three times.
  • The community must have rejected the proposal overwhelmingly (approx.90%)

Wikians are not forbidden to re-raise these topics, but should note the reasons for why they failed. Such re-raised proposals must consider these objections strongly and explicitly address arguments against those objections before proposing anything similar again.

Disallow I.P.s from editing

Per discussions :One, Two, Three, Four

It is recognized that most vandalism comes from random IP addresses, however, most IP edits are not vandalism. We believe that IPs contribute a lot of great material to this wiki, and that disallowing them from editing would violate the concept of a wiki, that being a site that anyone can edit, and we would lose a lot of great contributions.

Add to list (or you can say Support) --Degenret01 08:39, October 14, 2009 (UTC)

Add to list - Because IPs often add great information, especially on new pages. Ancient talisman.png Oil4 Talk 09:15, October 14, 2009 (UTC)

Add to list - However, that is not to say that we may need to block them on certain pages, but this is unlikely. Magic-icon.pngStelercusIlluminated Book of Balance.png 09:36, October 14, 2009 (UTC)

Support - Smile Cheers, Chicken7 >talk 10:38, October 14, 2009 (UTC)

Add to list - As it goes against the wiki spirit, assuming good faith, and Wikia will never do it. - TehKittyCatTalk Wikian-Book 10:52, October 14, 2009 (UTC)

Add to list - I don't think that hard working IP editors should be let down by vandals, who take advantage of the anonymity of the IP address. Ruud (talk)(Suggest me naems) 10:57, October 14, 2009 (UTC)

Comment - Is the criteria set in concrete (so if you try to raise banning ips again without a new reason, the thread is locked) or is is just guidelines for people to consider when creating a thread?? If it is the first then I would have to oppose. Often, it is not what people are saying but how they say it that matters in Yew Grove. If someone believes that ips should not be able to edit (as an example) and without any new argument spends hours perfecting an argument on how ips should be banned, it would be possible that it could pass without any new evidence. By comparing posts to the criteria, you might prevent future discussions from occurring. Unicorn horn dust.png Evil Yanks talk 11:01, October 14, 2009 (UTC)

Comment - I believe it will just be guidelines for users. If a thread does pop up that is listed here, maybe we could just direct the user to this, if their ideas and reasons are nothing new. Cheers, Chicken7 >talk 11:17, October 14, 2009 (UTC)
Add to list - Makes sense. they are not forced to close the thread, they are just shown this thread to help them make an informed decision if they want to continue on with the thread or not. Unicorn horn dust.png Evil Yanks talk 02:31, October 15, 2009 (UTC)

Add to list - Sounds good. ~MuzTalk 11:11, October 14, 2009 (UTC)

Add to list or Support - per Degeneret. Anyone can and should be able to edit, unless of course, the pages are protected according to the Protection policy. Wink   az talk   13:45, October 14, 2009 (UTC)

Add to list - Per Az. --Quarenon  Talk 14:58, October 14, 2009 (UTC)

Support/Add to list - Found another one. Quest.png Gaz Lloyd 7:^]Events!99s 15:24, October 14, 2009 (UTC)

Add to list - Self explanatory and a good example of something that should be put on this list. New tools that are done along the lines of the semi-protect tool or perhaps other aspects to a wiki that could limit but not prohibit anonymous editing could be considered, but elimination of IP edits is pretty much cast in concrete at this point as something that won't happen. --Robert Horning 15:47, October 14, 2009 (UTC)

Add to list - please, before someone suggests it again. Andrew talk 01:49, October 15, 2009 (UTC)

Add to list - Per the pervious four discussions and the loads of policies mentioned there. Now that's a throwing weapon!Doucher4000******r4000I'll eat you! 02:44, October 15, 2009 (UTC)

Add to list - Per common sense.  Tien  20:37, October 16, 2009 (UTC)

Add to list - As much as IP's can be a pain, they contribute a lot of the content here. ~ Fire Surge icon.png Sentry Telos Talk  03:37, October 17, 2009 (UTC)

Support - In the Spirit of the Wiki. The WikiGhost, if you will. 15:59, October 18, 2009 (UTC)

Add to list - Good idea ;)

Bonziiznob Talk

23:26, October 18, 2009 (UTC)

Comment - This isn't going to not pass, so we should add it. 19:05, October 21, 2009 (UTC)

Closed - This topic has been added to Forum:Previously rejected proposals - READ THIS BEFORE YOU POST. Future topics can be raised here, or in another thread.   az talk   10:37, October 22, 2009 (UTC)

I'm archiving this, as Yew Grove discussions can be long, and it makes sense to have them in separate forum pages. White partyhat old.png C Teng talk 02:02, February 17, 2010 (UTC)