Потребител:Петко/Създаване на правила
от Уикипедия, свободната енциклопедия
- Част от Уикипедия:Препоръки и правила
Мислите да създадете нова препоръка или правило? Или да промените същаствуващи такива? Целта на тази страница е да помогне да създадете правила (политики), които ще действително ще работят.
Съдържание |
[редактиране] Трудности за приемане на нова политика
Уикипедианците, които желаят да добавят или променят официалната политика и правила на Уикипедия, би трябвало да действат с особено внимание заради трудността на този процес. Последните нововъведени правила са следните:
- Ограничение на възможността за премахване на лични нападки - единствената приета политика в българската Уикипедия ();
- Правило за тройно връщане (ноември 2004, за всички Уикипедии)
- Създаване на арбитърски комитет и приемане на основните му правила (януари 2004 аглийска версия)
- Критерий за бързи изтривания (януари 2004, всички уикипедии)
- Създаване на критерии за Номиниране на администратори (април 2003, всички уикипедии)
Последните четири имат подкрепата на Джимбо Уеилс.
През това време, повече от 70 предложени нови политики и промени в старите бяха отхвърлени.
[редактиране] Как се предлага нова политика
Вижте също: Уикипедия:Препоръки и правила#Как са установени правилата?
- Първо, проверете съществуващата политика, за да видите дали не съществуват вече свързани правила. Проверете също и en:Category:Wikipedia policies and guidelinesв английската Уикипедия, тъй като някои са валидни, но все още не са преведени на български.
- Преведете или създайте нова страница с чернова на предложението ви. Опитайте се да включите:
- кратко резюме на предложението;
- доводи и аргументация за предложението.
- Поискайте мнения на останалите!
- Сложете бележка и препратка на Уикипедия:Разговори.
- Наслагайте препратки към страницата от всяка минала и текуща дискусия, свързана с предложението.
- Работете към консенсус.
[редактиране] Guidelines for creating policies and guidelines
The following general principles were gathered together following the implementation of several policies across the encyclopedia. As you will see from the guidelines themselves, these points are guidelines, not rules. You know best what will work in your case.
- Choose policies that have sprung up organically, not imposed from the top down. Contributors "in the trenches" can tell when recurring themes and ideas appear across several articles. Look for conventions that are introduced by one user, but are then copied and adopted by other users. These "de facto" policies often prove very workable. Indeed they are already working!
- Leave room for flexibility. Although a uniformity of style is itself a good thing, it sometimes forces contributors into a straitjacket that they won't like. For example the very flexibility of our policy on allowing all styles of English spelling rather than just the dominant one, has caused it to be a very stable, implementable policy. Although new users often ask if and what the policy is, they tend to accept it pretty quickly once they've been shown the relevant policy page. The same is not true of inflexible policies, which generate the same arguments over and over again.
- Avoid being too prescriptive. Devolve responsibility. Although it is tempting to try to cover every possible angle that might arise, it is not always possible. Doing so can lead to long complex policies, with loopholes. Very precise rules are things that badly-intentioned users sometimes love. A policy that says "Doing X n times in a day is grounds for a banning" is often unhelpful - trollish users can and will then deliberately do X (n-1) times in a day. Better to write "Doing X is considered bad. If a user continues to do X after being warned that it is inappropriate, users may decide to {report to arb. committee/implement a temp ban/protect page}. The number of "good" users overwhelms the bad - trust the users to sort things in specific cases, the policy just provides the framework. This is similar to having a judge to implement and interpret laws.
- Avoid kneejerk reactions. Suppose one user does something annoying once. It is then often common practice to add to the boilerplate at the top of the relevant policy page, prohibiting what that user did. This in the past has led to ever-lengthening boilerplates that often consider minutiae irrevelant to the broad thrust of the policy. Consider whether it was a one-off, and thus whether it is better to keep that detail on relevant talk pages.
- Flexibility again. Most articles are only monitored by a few people. Debates are generally manageable, and consensus (often unanimous) can be reached. On very popular policy pages, this is not the case. Lots of people monitor these pages. If you cast a change in "either/or" terms you will often get opinion divided down the middle. Thus, if your policy change has to come to some sort of vote (ample discussion always comes first), use a form of approval voting rather than first past the post voting. Layout all the options, and for each option allow the user to say if the proposed solution is acceptable or unacceptable. If you only have two options to list, examine whether all the middle ground possibilities have been included.
- Check existing policies. Consult Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines. Keep in mind Wikipedia:What wikipedia is not.
- Consult widely - make a special effort to engage potential critics of the new policy, engage them and get them to help find the middle ground early.
- Do not rush - you will get there faster if you give the process the time it needs. People may oppose an idea simply because they feel it has not had adequate discussion, and especially if the feel a policy is being pushed through to circumvent discussion.
[редактиране] Policy discussions
The central place to discuss policies is Village pump (policy). The central place for formal policy proposals is the Wikipedia policy thinktank. Policy issues may also be formulated and debated on talk pages, at Meta-Wikipedia, on IRC, and on our mailing lists, but keep in mind that to become official, a policy must be agreed to on Wikipedia itself. If a policy may be controversial, it should always be discussed before being claimed as official. Consider the guidelines in Wikipedia:How to create policy. Votes are sometimes useful, but should only be held based on previous discussion and with a view to achieving consensus.
[редактиране] How policies become official
In general, there are three ways in which a policy becomes official:
- It is pronounced official by Jimbo or the Wikimedia board.
- It receives a supermajority in a poll.
- The idea of making it official has been prominently advertised on the Village pump, mailing list, and on related talk pages, and after a reasonable length of time all objections have been dealt with. (Or the more common, but less prefered, method of marking something as official and waiting to see if anyone reverts you.)
Traditions that result from established practice are sometimes hard to identify. If there is no objection to the practice, it may be difficult to sustain community attention long enough for a formal process of adopting it as policy. In this situation, the best solution may be to document existing practice on an appropriate page. This then provides a location to discuss the practice and possible changes to the policy, and it also allows people to cite a source for the policy if necessary.