User talk:NuclearVII/GWW2:BENIGN

"In fact, try not to revert at all"

"You gain experience, and the wiki can simply revert..."

Yeeeaahhh... :P Anyways; At the Unoff Wiki you may revert if you see the edit unfit. When others disagree, they mayn't revert but must bring it to attention on the Talk Page (Revert Only Once or smthing). Ofcourse, this doesn't go for blatant vandalism and malicious intent. It works good enough, although that might be because we don't have a huuuuge amount of active editors. I actually wonder how that will work within a bigger base. What do you think? --- -- (s)talkpage 17:29, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeahhhhh... was my thought too, when I was writing it, but then I thought, why not? I'd agree that that is an experimental clause, and I feel that supports the whole "be bold" idea better. Still, it is a minor issue, one that I might change. On another note, that last bit should read: "revert after disscussion is made..." but I think you got the idea?

Yeah, I know about the policies on the unoff wiki (I know many things, you'd be surprised..) and I am writing this piece by piece, so it may take a while to finish. You are more than welcome to fix structure, grammar, and the whole ### not working out so well etc.. nuke7 18:32, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh, and as I recall, Wikipedia uses a 3 reverts rule, due to the larger base. And now that I think of it, I think I put that clause in to combat the talkpage drama. A reversion (Excluding those poor antagonized vandals) has a symbolic side to it as well (lolwut?), it says: "I disagree and it was better off the old way, so I am destroying your work." I feel that is a really harsh thing to say to anybody without discussion. nuke7 18:36, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

So the overall purpose of this policy is something along the lines of "Only do good things" and "Don't kick puppies"? Calor 20:25, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Actually, this one will be "try to be nice" and the MALIGN one will be "Expect no mercy if you kick a puppy". Close, though. I wan to write one universal policy and one universal guildline, so this is a starting point. nuke7 15:39, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

I'd love to have one large policy that covers most of the major policies (NPA, USER, SIGN, etc.). Calor 19:10, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

So help. :P nuke7 19:25, 12 March 2008 (UTC)