User:Nauriya/Terms and Conditions
If you were going to ask "Why did you revert my edit" or "Why did you place a speedy deletion tag on my page" - Read this page first. It can help you faster than I can reply on your talk page...
Please use the table of content box below to navigate easily through this page. A version of this page was originally written by EuroCarGT. However many things were copied from Wikipedia help pages. That does not mean that I plagiarized this page; this is just a set of rules that I will enforce based on Wikipedia policy.
Why did you revert my edit?[edit]I reverted your edit because it may have contained the following: Vandalism[edit]"Vandalism is any addition, removal, or change of content in a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia. Examples of typical vandalism are adding irrelevant obscenities and crude humor to a page, illegitimately blanking pages, inserting obvious nonsense into a page." The official Wikipedia policy defines "vandalism" as follows:
This policy is intentionally vague to enable vandal-fighters to deal with any unconstructive edits they find. The below is typically considered vandalism:
Examples[edit]
If after reading this page, you still think that I should not have reverted your edit, feel free to leave me a note on my talk page. When writing, please remember that, as I am a human being, I am not infallible, and I do make mistakes. For best results, write a clear, concise, and civil note. If possible, include the name of the article you are concerned with. Also, please remember to sign your post with four tildes (~~~~). Swearing, cursing, and/or attacks will simply be reverted and ignored, and they could even get you blocked from editing. Addition of unsourced content[edit]Most edits should be properly cited, sourced and referenced. This goes especially if it is a biography of a living person. Editing tests[edit]All editing test should be done at your sandbox - If you are a registered user you may use this link Examples:
Spamming[edit]All external links must be in par with the external links policy and should be related to the article's subject and is on topic. Examples: See WP:ELNO and WP:ELYES for a more descriptive inforamtion
Personal attacks[edit]Comment on content, not on the contributor. Personal attacks do not help make a point; they only hurt the Wikipedia community and deter users from helping to create a good encyclopedia. Derogatory comments about other contributors may be removed by any editor. Repeated or egregious personal attacks may lead to blocks If you have an issue use the user's talk page to discuss the issue in a civil way. Examples:
Biased content[edit]Examples:
Factual errors[edit]Verifiability means that people reading and editing the encyclopedia can check that the information comes from a reliable source. It's quite simple to understand about verifiabilty, but biased content is something you can't prove. It's called an opinion. Negative unsourced content[edit]All BLP's (Biographies of Living People) should contain: It's quite simple - if your adding something negative about a person or a thing, make sure you got the facts. Examples of negative unsourced content:
Why did you place a Speedy Deletion tag/template on my page?[edit]The criteria for speedy deletion specify the only cases in which administrators have broad consensus to bypass deletion discussion, at their discretion, and immediately delete Wikipedia pages or media There are currently 42 Criterias for Speedy Deletion. (Note: I'm not sure, I was just counting). The creator of a page may not remove a speedy deletion tag however could click the Click here to contest this speedy deletion on the tag to contest, the speedy deletion. Then after a member of the community could decline the speedy deletion OR a administrator could delete the article. Other options would be a move or redirect to another page.
General CSD[edit]Pages consisting entirely of incoherent text or gibberish with no meaningful content or history. This excludes poor writing, partisan screeds, obscene remarks, implausible theories, vandalism and hoaxes, fictional material, coherent non-English material, and poorly translated material. This excludes the sandbox and pages in the user namespace. In short, if you can understand it, G1 does not apply. A page created to test editing or other Wikipedia functions. Subpages of the Wikipedia Sandbox created as tests are included, but not the Sandbox itself. This criterion does not apply to pages in the user namespace, nor does it apply to valid but unused or duplicate templates (although criterion T3 may apply). This includes blatant and obvious misinformation, blatant hoaxes (including images intended to misinform), and redirects created by cleanup from page-move vandalism. A sufficiently identical and unimproved copy, having any title, of a page deleted via its most recent deletion discussion. This excludes pages that are not substantially identical to the deleted version, pages to which the reason for the deletion no longer applies, and content moved to user space for explicit improvement (but not simply to circumvent Wikipedia's deletion policy). This criterion also excludes content undeleted via deletion review, or which was deleted via proposed deletion or speedy deletion (although in that case the previous speedy criterion, or other speedy criteria, may apply). Pages created by banned or blocked users in violation of their ban or block, and which have no substantial edits by others. Uncontroversial maintenance - A very light CSD, used for unnecessary disambiguation pages, page moves and etc. If requested in good faith and provided that the only substantial content to the page and to the associated talk page was added by its author. (For redirects created as a result of a pagemove, the mover must also have been the only substantive contributor to the pages prior to the move.) If the sole author blanks a page other than a userspace page or category page, this can be taken as a deletion request. Examples include talk pages with no corresponding subject page; subpages with no parent page; image pages without a corresponding image; redirects to invalid targets, such as nonexistent targets, redirect loops, and bad titles; and categories populated by deleted or retargeted templates. These "attack pages" may include libel, legal threats, material intended purely to harass or intimidate a person or biographical material about a living person that is entirely negative in tone and unsourced. Pages that are exclusively promotional, and would need to be fundamentally rewritten to become encyclopedic. Note: An article about a company or a product which describes its subject from a neutral point of view does not qualify for this criterion. "Promotion" does not necessarily mean commercial promotion: anything can be promoted, including a person, a non-commercial organisation, a point of view, etc. Text pages that contain copyrighted material with no credible assertion of public domain, fair use, or a compatible free license, where there is no non-infringing content on the page worth saving. Rejected or unsubmitted Articles for creation pages that have not been edited in over six months. Article's CSD[edit]Articles lacking sufficient context to identify the subject of the article. Example: "He is a funny man with a red car. He makes people laugh." Articles having essentially the same content as an article on another Wikimedia project. Any article (other than disambiguation pages, redirects, or soft redirects to Wikimedia sister projects) consisting only of external links, category tags and "see also" sections, a rephrasing of the title, attempts to correspond with the person or group named by its title, a question that should have been asked at the help or reference desks, chat-like comments, template tags, and/or images. Any article that consists only of a dictionary definition that has already been transwikied (e.g., to Wiktionary), a primary source that has already been transwikied (e.g., to Wikisource), or an article on any subject that has been discussed at articles for deletion with an outcome to move it to another wiki, after it has been properly moved and the author information recorded. An article about a real person, individual animal(s), organization, web content or organized event that does not indicate why its subject is important or significant, with the exception of educational institutions. An article about a musical recording that has no corresponding article about its recording artist and does not indicate why its subject is important or significant (both conditions must be met). A recently created article with no relevant page history that duplicates an existing English Wikipedia topic, and that does not expand upon, detail or improve information within any existing article(s) on the subject, and where the title is not a plausible redirect. An article which plainly indicates that the subject was invented/coined/discovered by the article's creator or someone they know personally, and does not credibly indicate why its subject is important or significant. Redirect's CSD[edit]Redirects, apart from shortcuts, from the main namespace to any other namespace except the Category:, Template:, Wikipedia:, Help: and Portal: namespaces.
File's CSD[edit]
Unused duplicates or lower-quality/resolution copies of another Wikipedia file having the same file format. Files that are corrupt, empty, or that contain superfluous and blatant non-metadata information. This also includes image description pages for Commons images, except pages containing information not relevant to any other project Media licensed as "for non-commercial use only" (including non-commercial Creative Commons licenses), "no derivative use", "for Wikipedia use only" or "used with permission" may be deleted, unless they comply with the limited standards for the use of non-free content. Files licensed under versions of the GFDL prior to 1.3, without allowing for later versions, may be deleted. Media files that lack the necessary licensing information to verify copyright status may be deleted after being identified as such for seven days if the information is not added. Images and other media that are not under a free license or in the public domain, that are not used in any article, may be deleted after being identified as such for more than seven days, or immediately if the image's only use was on a deleted article and it is very unlikely to have any use on any other valid article. Reasonable exceptions may be made for images uploaded for an upcoming article. Non-free files claiming fair use but without a use rationale may be deleted after being identified as such for seven days. Invalid fair-use claim. Images available as identical copies on the Wikimedia Commons. Obviously non-free images (or other media files) that are not claimed by the uploader to be fair use. A URL or other indication of where the image originated should be mentioned. Files uploaded that are neither image, sound, nor video files, are not used in any article, and have no foreseeable encyclopedic use. If an uploader has specified a license and has named a third party as the source/copyright holder without providing evidence that this third party has in fact agreed, the item may be deleted seven days after notification of the uploader. Category's CSD[edit]User's CSD[edit]
Template's CSD[edit]
Portal's CSD[edit]
Why did you place a Proposing Deletion tag/template on my page?[edit]Proposed deletion (PROD) is a way to suggest an article for uncontroversial deletion. It takes longer than SD (speedy deletion) (usually a week or longer). Users can voice their opinions on PRODs. Why did you place a Nominated for Deletion tag/template on my page?[edit]Articles for deletion (AfD) is where Wikipedians discuss whether an article/page should be deleted. I will use a XfD (nominated for deletion) tag to have a community discussion and opinion for a page I think should be deleted under the deletion policy. Users of the community will vote to Keep, Delete, Merge, Redirect, or Transclude once the discussion has a vast majority an admin could decide to Keep, Delete, Merge, Redirect and Transclude the article or continue the discussion until more votes come in. Occasionally, nothing is done due to lack of consensus. What did you do to my Article Feedback?[edit]Article feedback allows anyone to easily make suggestions about a page and help editors improve articles
Readers[edit]
After an Article Feedback has been submitted[edit]Once an article feedback has been submitted it will be reviewed be users called monitors (reviewers, rollbackers and administrators) it would be reviewed as Useful, Resolved, No Action Needed or Inappropriate
If an article feedback is highly inappropriate should be reported to Oversight (suppression), Oversight should be requested for feedback which contains non-public personal information, such as phone numbers, home addresses, workplaces, schools or identities of pseudonymous or anonymous individuals who have not made their identity public. What else could I have done?[edit]I am a regular user, except for two things—I can undo all your recent edits to a given page in a single mouse click, and I am able to review your edit to see if your edit is constructive.  The purpose of reviewing is to catch and filter out obvious vandalism and obviously inappropriate edits on articles under pending changes protection, a special kind of protection that permits anonymous and newly registered editors to submit edits to articles that would otherwise be semi- or fully protected under one or more of the criteria listed in the protection policy. As a general rule, I should not accept the new revision if in analyzing the diff I find any of the following:
Furthermore, I will take special consideration of the reason given for protection, and attempt to uphold it. The protection policy reserves pending changes protection to clear cut cases, so interpretation issues should be minimal. For example, if the article is protected because of repeated inappropriate edits by a sockpuppeter, and if the same type of edits are made by a newly registered or anonymous user which I suspect is the same person, I will not accept those edits.  I have extra "rollback" links next to revisions on the recent changes page, page histories, diffs, user contribution pages, and my watchlist:
My clicking one of these links restores the page to the most recent revision that is not made by the revision's author. This appears in the page history with a generic summary that looks like this: A link to the reverted user's contribution history is provided, so that it may be easily checked for further problematic edits. It does not appear if I am reverting contributions done by a user whose username has been removed, the result being:
Note the following:
Licensing and Disclaimer[edit]All Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
The license is available to read at: Creative Commons. Did I made a mistake?[edit]Everybody in life makes mistakes no matter in life or online. In case of a mistake, here are some instructions:
Conclusion[edit]After reading this page, you'll have a full understanding about why I reverted your edit, placed a deletion tag on your page, or left a vandalism notice on your talk page. We are Additional help and information[edit]
See also[edit]This page concept has been copied from many users, and I copied much of this from Faizan's page because I liked it and wanted to explain it myself on my own userspace.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
