About: The Sims Wiki talk:5 pillars/archive   Sponge Permalink

An Entity of Type : owl:Thing, within Data Space : 134.155.108.49:8890 associated with source dataset(s)

--a_morris (talk) 16:21, July 31, 2010 (UTC) I don't know if the pillars themselves should be adopted as strict policy per se, but I think the general concepts of each should be followed and displayed somewhere... though I don't think they should be on the Policy page as putting them there indicates that they are hard-and-fast rules. Perhaps it should be added onto the Simplified Ruleset, or placed elsewhere? Also, maybe some misconceptions could be cleared up by wording the 5 pillars more simply. Like: 1. * The Sims Wiki is an encyclopedia of facts and information. Most articles (with notable exceptions) should have relevant and factual information. 2. * The Sims Wiki has a neutral point-of-view; articles should not be written in a particular "slant" and all facts must be ve

AttributesValues
rdfs:label
  • The Sims Wiki talk:5 pillars/archive
rdfs:comment
  • --a_morris (talk) 16:21, July 31, 2010 (UTC) I don't know if the pillars themselves should be adopted as strict policy per se, but I think the general concepts of each should be followed and displayed somewhere... though I don't think they should be on the Policy page as putting them there indicates that they are hard-and-fast rules. Perhaps it should be added onto the Simplified Ruleset, or placed elsewhere? Also, maybe some misconceptions could be cleared up by wording the 5 pillars more simply. Like: 1. * The Sims Wiki is an encyclopedia of facts and information. Most articles (with notable exceptions) should have relevant and factual information. 2. * The Sims Wiki has a neutral point-of-view; articles should not be written in a particular "slant" and all facts must be ve
dbkwik:sims/proper...iPageUsesTemplate
abstract
  • --a_morris (talk) 16:21, July 31, 2010 (UTC) I don't know if the pillars themselves should be adopted as strict policy per se, but I think the general concepts of each should be followed and displayed somewhere... though I don't think they should be on the Policy page as putting them there indicates that they are hard-and-fast rules. Perhaps it should be added onto the Simplified Ruleset, or placed elsewhere? Also, maybe some misconceptions could be cleared up by wording the 5 pillars more simply. Like: 1. * The Sims Wiki is an encyclopedia of facts and information. Most articles (with notable exceptions) should have relevant and factual information. 2. * The Sims Wiki has a neutral point-of-view; articles should not be written in a particular "slant" and all facts must be verifiable. 3. * The Sims Wiki is free content; appropriate copyright laws must be respected, but the articles on the wiki are the collaborations of many people and are not owned by any person or group of people. 4. * Wiki Users should interact positively with each other; if there is a disagreement, users should seek constructive resolutions rather than resorting to name-calling, harrassment, edit wars, or other discouraged behavior. Users should be welcoming to new users and should assume good faith. 5. * There are no firm rules; when editing an article, sometimes the best solution is to ignore all preconceptions and be bold. Remember that every action on The Sims Wiki can be undone if needed. That's just my ยง2, though. -- Patrick (LostInRiverview) (talk)(blog)(random page) 19:47, July 31, 2010 (UTC) I agree that they're not a policy, they should probably have their own The Sims Wiki:Five pillars page with the About page and Policies linking to it. I'm not sure misconceptions will be cleared up by making the text shorter, that just leaves room for more user interpretation and misunderstanding, in my opinion. I think we should keep it at a short bolded statement and then a lengthy clarifying text containing links to relevant policies and guidelines. a morris, brings up some good topics for discussion in her references. The 'not a newspaper' should be removed from our version, since we do report on The Sims news and I, persoanlly, intend to expand on that in the near future, to bring more Sims news to the Wiki. I'm not sure what is meant with 'not a source document' so I cannot comment on that, can you please clarify it for me? 'Editors' personal experiences, interpretations, or opinions do not belong here' could be reworded to '...are only allowed on designated 'player stories'-, 'Theories'- and user pages' How does that sound? I'm also not that keen on the 'Wikiapedian' expression. It is my understanding that this is not Wikipedia, nor is it a Wikia; it is a Wiki. We're hosted by Wikia, but the general term for the site is still Wiki. I'm more favorable towards the term 'Wikian'. We could also just stick to 'User' and 'Editor'. Duskey(talk) 00:23, August 1, 2010 (UTC)
Alternative Linked Data Views: ODE     Raw Data in: CXML | CSV | RDF ( N-Triples N3/Turtle JSON XML ) | OData ( Atom JSON ) | Microdata ( JSON HTML) | JSON-LD    About   
This material is Open Knowledge   W3C Semantic Web Technology [RDF Data] Valid XHTML + RDFa
OpenLink Virtuoso version 07.20.3217, on Linux (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu), Standard Edition
Data on this page belongs to its respective rights holders.
Virtuoso Faceted Browser Copyright © 2009-2012 OpenLink Software