Wikipedia talk:Template index/User talk namespace/Archive 16

Archive 10

←

Archive 14

Archive 15

Archive 16

Archive 17

Archive 18

→

Archive 20

Warning guidelines for hate speech

I came to thinking about this when I encountered this edit. Then, I read through the template messages, and noticed that there were not a set that specifically addressed hate speech and/or improper use of epithets. While, I guess, it could be covered by the disruptive editing, personal attack, and defamation warnings, I feel that the warning system could be improved by having templates for this behavior. Examples:

Please refrain from using racial epithets while editing Wikipedia. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted. Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continual disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you.

Please stop using Wikipedia to spread racial epithets and hate speech. If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing.

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you make personal attacks on other people. Wikipedia needs to stay neutral and must not be used to spread racist doctrines.

Any input welcome, thanks. Mungo Kitsch (talk) 02:59, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

I like the idea, but as you mention the current templates are sufficient. Perhaps you could use the additional text section to highlight the Wiki policies pertaining to hate speech. Maybe something like, "Please stop using Wikipedia to spread racial epithets and hate speech. Wikipedia is not a platform for you to issue personal attacks or spread your ideology." —Brian Halvorsen (talk) 23:07, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

I think you would run into an issue crafting templates specific enough to be practical. Just in the examples above, we have several potential kinds of violations, including vandalism, bias, giving gratuitous weight to offensive content, and personal attacks on other editors. It will be challenging to make a single template that is effective when probably only one of these violations is at issue. --Bsherr (talk) 16:23, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

Uw-nonfree wording

I'm wondering whether the wording of Template:uw-nonfree should be slightly tweaked from "We always appreciate when users upload files" to something along lines of "We always appreciate when users upload files or add them to articles". There are not really anyother uw template related to non-free content, so this one is used pretty much in all cases.

The most common problem related to non-free content use seems to be people inappropriately adding already uploaded non-free files to articles; most of the time this is done in good faith by editors simply unaware that not all files are licensed the same and that each non-free use needs to comply with WP:NFCCP. Anyway, I occasionally use this template in some of those cases, but more than a couple of times the response has been along the lines of "I didn't upload the file, so it's not my problem". Most people never really seem to read beyond the first sentence and get to the part where it says or "or added to a page may fail our non-free policy" or they simply read through it because they overly focus on the first sentence which only mentions uploading. There are no multiple level warning templates for non-free use, so I can understand trying to keep the template's wording as friendly as possible, but it might be best to tweaked that first sentence a bit to mention not only uploading, but also the adding of files. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:45, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

I think it's a good proposal. --Bsherr (talk) 16:29, 31 August 2018 (UTC)