User:Sonia/Adopt/policies
< User:Sonia | Adopt
Overview of the five pillars and the main policies (deletion etc)
[edit]- This is probably the most boring part of your adoption, so I suggest you take your time and do this leisurely. To start with, we'll take the five pillars of Wikipedia one by one. First up on the list is what Wikipedia is not. ≈ Chamal talk ¤ 11:36, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
Simply put, this policy explains how to keep Wikipedia what it is – an encyclopedia. This means observing some limits not only on the content, but ourselves as well. Read the policy page and answer the questions below, but you'll have to think a bit too. Since you do have a bit of experience, I guess these are not the same questions an average adoptee would get. If you have any doubts or need to get something clarified, please ask.
- A user posts a comment at the talk page of an article about something (regarding the article's subject; not off topic) that he thinks should be added to the article, and why it should be added. He is also providing a list of news articles to back up his claims. What do you think is wrong here?
- Um... that he's not doing it himself??
- Nothing is wrong here. You could be bold and add it to the article, or you could discuss first on the talk page (especially if you feel it could be controversial). But you seem to have felt that anyway.
- Um... that he's not doing it himself??
- Somebody is using a Wikipedia page for advertising of an organization. The organization is non-notable and the page is written in a clearly promotional tone. However, it's in userspace rather than mainspace (article space). Is this a violation of WP:NOT?
- Yes, it is. Regardless what space it's in, it's still hosted by Wikipedia and thus inappropriate.
- Yep
- Yes, it is. Regardless what space it's in, it's still hosted by Wikipedia and thus inappropriate.
- A detailed recipe makes up a large part of an article about a food item. Why is this not allowed?
- Because Wikipedia provides info about the food, not how to make it. It's not a place for instructions like that.
- Right. WP:NOTGUIDE
- Because Wikipedia provides info about the food, not how to make it. It's not a place for instructions like that.
- A user creates an article named "Brazilian squad for the 2014 FIFA world cup". The event is of course notable, the dates and venues are already decided etc. But does this still violate WP:NOT (WP:NOTCRYSTAL, to be more specific)?
- ...yes? I think the 2014 world cup article itself doesn't, but guessing at the squad does.
- Yes, there's still four years to go before the event so making a squad article now is obviously mere speculation. There's no way anybody (not even the team management) can know who'll be playing in 2014.
- ...yes? I think the 2014 world cup article itself doesn't, but guessing at the squad does.
- You see something in an article that you think is inappropriately worded. You propose a change to it, with your reasons, on the talk page. Then I come along and tell you that this is the "consensus version", and point you to a discussion that has taken place several months ago. Can you start a new discussion to decide on a different wording?
- Yep. Wikipedia ain't set in stone, consensus can change over time.
- Correct again.
- Yep. Wikipedia ain't set in stone, consensus can change over time.
Your answers are pretty much spot on. Well done. ≈ Chamal talk ¤ 01:31, 11 January 2010 (UTC)