Difference between revisions of Red:Be bold
m (Text replacement - "BV:" to "Red:") |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
==Being bold== | ==Being bold== | ||
If there's an edit you want to make that you think improves the article, | If there's an edit you want to make that you think improves the article, '''make the edit'''. Believe that your point of view and the way you think the article should be is just as valid as the people who wrote the article originally. | ||
Discussing edits before making them is a waste of editorial time, because most edits go undisputed. | |||
Discussing edits before making them is a waste of editorial time, because | |||
===When you should discuss=== | ===When you should discuss=== | ||
If someone reverts the edit | If someone reverts the edit then you can go on to discuss the edit made. Send the editor a message on their talk page or in the [[Discord server]]. Don't have edit wars where you repeatedly undo each other's edits forever. | ||
You can also discuss changes to an article if sweeping changes are being made and you ''actively anticipate'' the changes are controversial and will likely be challenged. This is a high threshold, in most cases you should just make the edit. | You can also discuss changes to an article if sweeping changes are being made and you ''actively anticipate'' the changes are controversial and will likely be challenged. This is a high threshold, in most cases you should just make the edit. | ||
==Be bold everywhere, as much as possible== | ==Be bold everywhere, as much as possible== | ||
If there's a [[Red:vandalism|vandal]] clearly disrupting stuff and you're an admin, be bold and [[Red:blocking policy|block them]]. If you want to suggest a new wiki feature, be bold and suggest it. | If there's a [[Red:vandalism|vandal]] clearly disrupting stuff and you're an admin, be bold and [[Red:blocking policy|block them]]. If you want to suggest a new wiki feature, be bold and suggest it. | ||
==A few thoughts from Wikipedia== | ==A few thoughts from Wikipedia== | ||
===Go for it=== | ===Go for it=== | ||
{{quote|'''Be bold''' can be explained in three words: "Go for it."| | {{quote|'''Be bold''' can be explained in three words: "Go for it."|Wikipedia}} | ||
Editors should forget about bureaucracy when editing this place. Throw bureaucracy and overthinking things in the trash where they belong. If there's an edit that '''you''' think improves the content of the article, | Editors should forget about bureaucracy when editing this place. Throw bureaucracy and overthinking things in the trash where they belong. If there's an edit that '''you''' think improves the content of the article, do it. | ||
===Fix it yourself instead of just talking about it=== | ===Fix it yourself instead of just talking about it=== | ||
{{quote|'''Fix it yourself instead of just talking about it.''' If you notice an unambiguous error or problem that any reasonable person would recommend fixing, the best course of action may be to be bold and fix it yourself rather than bringing it to someone's attention in the form of a comment or complaint. In the time it takes to write about the problem, you could instead improve the encyclopedia.| | {{quote|'''Fix it yourself instead of just talking about it.''' If you notice an unambiguous error or problem that any reasonable person would recommend fixing, the best course of action may be to be bold and fix it yourself rather than bringing it to someone's attention in the form of a comment or complaint. In the time it takes to write about the problem, you could instead improve the encyclopedia.|Wikipedia}} | ||
In the time it takes for you to tell someone else that 'oh yeah, this thing can be changed', '''you probably could have changed it by now'''. Be confident in your abilities and do it yourself, it takes less time than telling someone else to do it, and it makes you a team player! | In the time it takes for you to tell someone else that 'oh yeah, this thing can be changed', '''you probably could have changed it by now'''. Be confident in your abilities and do it yourself, it takes less time than telling someone else to do it, and it makes you a team player! | ||
===Don't be upset if your bold edits get reverted=== | ===Don't be upset if your bold edits get reverted=== | ||
{{quote|'''Don't be upset if your bold edits get reverted.'''| | {{quote|'''Don't be upset if your bold edits get reverted.'''|Wikipedia}} | ||
A typical feature of '''bold edits''' is a lack of confidence that other people will think the edit is any good. In cases like these, quite beneficial edits can go completely undone, and the wiki has not improved because ''you thought someone else might not like it''. If you think the article will be better with the edit you have in mind, what makes you think other people would disagree? | A typical feature of '''bold edits''' is a lack of confidence that other people will think the edit is any good. In cases like these, quite beneficial edits can go completely undone, and the wiki has not improved because ''you thought someone else might not like it''. If you think the article will be better with the edit you have in mind, what makes you think other people would disagree? | ||
==See also== | ==See also== | ||
[[User:NottNott/Essays/A case against bureaucracy]] | [[User:NottNott/Essays/A case against bureaucracy]] | ||
{{Editing navbox}} | {{Editing navbox}} | ||
Revision as of 09:07, 5 June 2023
 | The idea for this guideline came from a similar one on Wikipedia. Click here to see the original. |
 | This page documents an Reduced Vision Wiki guideline. It is a generally accepted standard that editors should attempt to follow, though it is best treated with common sense, and occasional exceptions may apply. Any substantive edit to this page should reflect consensus. When in doubt, discuss first on the talk page.
|
 | This page in a nutshell: Editors should make the edits they think will improve the wiki. |
Being bold
If there's an edit you want to make that you think improves the article, make the edit. Believe that your point of view and the way you think the article should be is just as valid as the people who wrote the article originally.
Discussing edits before making them is a waste of editorial time, because most edits go undisputed.
When you should discuss
If someone reverts the edit then you can go on to discuss the edit made. Send the editor a message on their talk page or in the Discord server. Don't have edit wars where you repeatedly undo each other's edits forever.
You can also discuss changes to an article if sweeping changes are being made and you actively anticipate the changes are controversial and will likely be challenged. This is a high threshold, in most cases you should just make the edit.
Be bold everywhere, as much as possible
If there's a vandal clearly disrupting stuff and you're an admin, be bold and block them. If you want to suggest a new wiki feature, be bold and suggest it.
A few thoughts from Wikipedia
Go for it
Be bold can be explained in three words: "Go for it."
— Wikipedia
Editors should forget about bureaucracy when editing this place. Throw bureaucracy and overthinking things in the trash where they belong. If there's an edit that you think improves the content of the article, do it.
Fix it yourself instead of just talking about it
Fix it yourself instead of just talking about it. If you notice an unambiguous error or problem that any reasonable person would recommend fixing, the best course of action may be to be bold and fix it yourself rather than bringing it to someone's attention in the form of a comment or complaint. In the time it takes to write about the problem, you could instead improve the encyclopedia.
— Wikipedia
In the time it takes for you to tell someone else that 'oh yeah, this thing can be changed', you probably could have changed it by now. Be confident in your abilities and do it yourself, it takes less time than telling someone else to do it, and it makes you a team player!
Don't be upset if your bold edits get reverted
Don't be upset if your bold edits get reverted.
— Wikipedia
A typical feature of bold edits is a lack of confidence that other people will think the edit is any good. In cases like these, quite beneficial edits can go completely undone, and the wiki has not improved because you thought someone else might not like it. If you think the article will be better with the edit you have in mind, what makes you think other people would disagree?