Talk: Thomas Wood Wiki Guidelines

The rules of the wiki are a subject for all users. Therefore:

• Any registered user may propose guidelines or changes to existing guidelines
  • All users may take part in the discussion of such changes; however, administrators are the only voting users
  • One administrator can veto a proposal, but a two-thirds majority of other administrators may override the veto and pass the proposal
• To avoid problems:
  • Any proposal in which the vote is hung and cannot be reconciled within a week of the original proposal will be declared a failure and not ratified (per GP 1.10)
  • Proposals in which a poll is being taken are not subject to GP 1.10 until the end of the poll. After the poll ends GP 1.10 enters effect and a second poll is not possible (per GP 1.15)
  • IP users are not entitled to propose guideline amendments nor take part in discussion of such things (GP 1.11)
  • As part of their duties, administrators are to vote on all proposals in a timely manner

This page contains an archive of previous discussions.

Guideline Proposals

17.01 Use of non-Wooden Railway images

My proposal is to have some restrictions when it comes to users uploading particular types of images. Several users upload images that are not going to be used anywhere else except for their user page, and they have no relevance to the rest of us when working with other recently uploaded images. These images have limited uses and what gets done with them shouldn't be our responsibility, and we are not to know whether the user has simply made a mistake or has chosen to remove it from their user page, thus leaving the file sitting around untouched and never used again in our database. I've gone to "clean up" after users when I'm browsing the unused files section and discovered images that have been untouched for years. I do not understand what is so special about this site compared to other places which cater specifically for those interests, particularly when there is a wiki out there purely dedicated for the users in the Wooden Railway fan social community. I believe we ought to limit what sort of things can be uploaded or scrap them all together. Jdogman (talk) 12:51, January 21, 2015 (UTC)

Oppose: In light of experience with similar restrictions on the TTTE Wikia and the restrictions they presented toward freedom of expression, I have to vote nay. --OrigamiAirEnforcer (talk) 18:39, January 21, 2015 (UTC)

Agreed: While I admit I don't have any editing experience on the TTTE wikia (I mostly just browse it), strong points have been made on the limited use of non-Wooden Railway images, and I think it might be a good idea to exercise restrictions. FDMG, 6:48 P.M. EST Approx. FlyingDuckManGenesis (talk) 23:48, February 28, 2015 (UTC)

Result: Having resulted in a hung vote without resolution for more than 10 days, the proposal failed in voting (per GP 1.10) and was not ratified.

Proposal to switch from Talk Pages to Message Walls

This wiki has had talk pages since its inception and never made the transition to Message Walls when that feature was introduced by Wikia. I think we should switch over for a number of reasons which I will outline below:

1. Message Walls are more organized and easy to use. They do not require users to sign their messages and it is easier to see who left what message as avatars show up next to usernames. You can quote replies or view the history of a thread easily, not so much with talk pages.
2. Message Walls makes it easier to see if you've been contacted and by whom. If you've been left a message on your wall, you are notified by the username, avatar, and subject title of the message. With talk pages, you are given a general notification that does not provide any context. If a reply is made on a talk page thread, you are not notified and can only find out unless you check the recent activity feed or the thread itself. With message walls, you are notified each time a new comment is made, so you can keep up easier. You would not need to create a reply thread on the other user's wall to respond either.
3. To prevent trouble, message wall threads can be closed to further replies, should a conversation devolve into nonsense. This cannot be done with talk pages.
4. Talk page messages are not lost through the switch. If we transitioned as such, we would not lose our old conversations and much of our history. Old talk page messages would be automatically archived.

If we transitioned, changed to our guidelines would have to be made to reflect this, primarily Section 2, or "Non-content pages," specifically subpoint 2, that "After every 100 "Heading 2" messages, talk pages must be archived by an acting wiki administrator." This would need to be altered or outright removed. TWRAddictYT (talk) 16:25, July 7, 2019 (UTC)

Agreed: While it took a while for me to get adjusted to message walls, I can see that they would be easier to manage and cleaner than talk pages. By now, a number of people on other wikis would have experienced only using message walls and it would be difficult for them to adjust to talk pages. I have sometimes not been sure whether it was more beneficial to response to messages on the talk page the message was left or the other person's own talk page. The only downside of messages walls is the amount of people that post on their own walls as if it is Facebook. Enough staff should be able to prevent that from happening. Jdogman (talk) 13:48, July 8, 2019 (UTC)

Support: As an effort to modernize the wiki goes, I have no problem with this going ahead. OrigamiAirEnforcer (talk) 14:34, July 8, 2019 (UTC)

Agreed: I think this is a great idea, as message walls will keep talk pages from getting too overcrowded. FDMG, 7:27 A.M. Approx. FlyingDuckManGenesis (talk) 11:27, July 14, 2019 (UTC)