User:Rednblu/Attribution/Poll
 | Please do not vote here at this time. This poll is not yet open. |
| Contents |
|---|
Some aspects of Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS) were also merged into WP:ATT, with other material to be incorporated into the accompanying Wikipedia:Attribution/FAQ (WP:ATTFAQ). The intention is to express present policy more clearly and concisely, and to make it more manageable and easier to follow by having it on one page.
The intention of Wikipedia:Attribution was to make one governing page on the areas concerned. The result is that we have four pages covering it; many editors find this excessive. The purpose of this poll is to determine what we should do now.
More recently, on the WikiEN-L mailing list, Jimbo Wales suggested:[1]
- "A broad community discussion to shed light on the very good work done by a group of people laboring away on WP:ATT and related pages", (see: Wikipedia talk:Attribution/Community discussion), and then,
- "a poll to assess the feelings of the community as best we can, and then we can have a final certification of the results" (this poll).
References:
- Instructions
- Familiarize yourself with the debate:
- Summary of the objectives of the merger
- Jimbo's initial comments on this issue are here, and here.
- Wikipedia talk:Attribution/Community discussion.
- Vote for your preference(s) by typing # ~~~~ and a short comment if desired.
- Do not directly respond on this page to opinions of other editors; discussion should take place on the designated talk page. Comments in the voting sections of this page should be limited to votes and short statements. Responses in the 'polling' section will be refactored and moved to the Talk page.
- For further comments use the assigned "Comments" section.
- Notes
- This is a straw poll, not a strict vote. As such, any numeric results will not be definitive. This is a means of gathering opinions in an organized way.
- Wikipedia:Attribution is not intended as a change to policy, but as a more maintainable consolidation of it. Editors are not being canvassed on desired changes, and debates over long-standing principles and policy wording should be avoided.
Q1. Do you support Wikipedia:Attribution?
- Yes.
- No.
- Neutral.
Q2:If pages are merged, what should the combined text be, for right now?
- The Wikipedia:Attribution
- Some new page to be written later
- Do not merge
Q3. Which pages should be merged?
[Vote in the appropriate section, "yes" or "no".
Wikipedia:Attribution
Yes.
No.
Wikipedia:Verifiability
Yes.
No.
Wikipedia:No original research
Yes.
No.
Wikipedia:Reliable sources
Yes.
No.
The meaning of "new page" is determined by Q2; the meaning of "old page" by Q3.
- The new page should supersede the old ones.
- Old pages should remain active to supplement the new page.
- The new page should remain active as an explanatory summary.
- The new page should become inactive.
- Neutral.
Comments
- NOTE: Please limit your statement here to 500 words. All replies to points will be refactored/placed onto the poll's talk page. You may change or edit your statement. If you want to endorse someone else's, you may endorse it, but only one total entry per person, please.