Knowledge (XXG):Proposed policy on userboxes/Proposals

4645:. No new policy means nothing has been done to address the problem. Like it or not, Kelly Martin, Tony Sidaway, et al, will have many following in their footsteps and deleting userboxes, and like it or not, there will be just as many fanatical userbox proponents undeleting them. All this pro-status quo thing does is set us up for another dispute in the future. I'm also very troubled by the contention that user pages are for free speech. Knowledge (XXG) is run and operated by the Wikimedia Foundation, and is not our property. As a result, there is no right to free speech on Knowledge (XXG), and if there was, it would extend only so far as permitted by the Foundation. Your right to free speech does not trump the right to property - your rants occupying space on the Foundation's servers are the same as picketing in someone's private property. In the latter case, you could picket only as long as permitted to by the property's owner, and it's no different for the former. Don't get me wrong - I express my own strong (and even negative) political POV in a userbox on my userpage, but I don't believe the right to free speech or no censorship exists on Knowledge (XXG). 4486:- I am no great fan of userboxes, nor do I particularly despise them - call me neutral. I have none on my "user page" and possibly never will have. If JohnDoe or JoeBloggs wishes to state to the world that he eats hamburgers, drinks Pepsi, believes in aliens, is a Bhuddist that can fly, let him do so on his user page, whether in prose or by means of a Userbox. This whole debacle, however, has spiralled out of control into a power struggle about process and accountability. For those of a delicate disposition, "look away now", because I am about to start shouting for the hard of hearing. USERBOXES DO NOT REQUIRE THE CREATION OF ANY NEW POLICIES. It is more than adequately covered by existing policy as outlined by 4582:"I don't like Israel" or "I don't like Disco" categories could also be put up for Cats for Deletion just as easily as an anti-Muslim one would be. So again those are covered by existing policy for the same reasons an anti-muslim category is. And you seem to think that deletionist and inclusionist categories would lead to edit wars. I disagree. They might lead to more people being notified about AFDs, CFDs, TFD, etc... that they have an interest in on both sides, which is a good thing since more votes from both sides equals a better consensus, but it won't lead to edit wars. Even if it did, edit wars are again covered by existing policies like the 3RRR and are against those policies. 3546: 3511: 3323: 3298: 3213: 2139: 1730: 1660: 1592: 471: 413: 334: 1235:

disagree with in her version, from prohibited completely to restricted from being used for POV pushing. I hope you'll change your view and that others will consider supporting this version. While I like a lot of the other versions and the sentiments behind them, I think some of them lack the structural benefits and clarity of wording of Kelly's version and would rather see diffs proposed, as I did, instead of complete rewrites. With many competing, slightly different, rewrites we may never get to one firm proposal that has consensus. ++

2641:- only users signed above the line have signed without reading the incorporated version, and have/will be informed of changed. If their views stay the same, its coz they agree with the alteration. Everyone after that has read the incorporated version. Content from #6 was incorporated a) it holds true in theory, b) its faults were, IMO, covered by the "interested in" section regarding categories, c) because Knowledge (XXG) is about consensus, not conflict. 3600:

same thing. The pluses of cats FAR outweigh the downside. I admit they can in VERY rare circumstances be used for wrong, but then so can half of the features of this site. Point is they are used for very positive reasons most of the time. Networking users to find out about potential wikiproject help, notifying people about AFDs they might be interested in, or just finding users with similar views or interests that you might want to get to know.

4285:

Userboxes Project NOT facilitate a central standardized source of boxes for all sorts of views and affiliation within the boundaries of existing wiki policy for the wikipedia community? Of course, it's only a "nice to know" information when someone has something like "This user is a liberal" box on their page, but if there are numerous people with that same affiliation, why not offer them a standardized way of presenting themselves?

3148: 3095: 3024: 2967: 2923: 2816: 2755: 2715: 2644: 2391: 2334: 2260: 2200: 2094: 1977: 1761: 664: 980:

Knowledge (XXG). As it goes on to say, there is no explicit sanction against stating one's beliefs on a user page (and, indeed, there are several boilerplate userbox templates which can used to that end), per se, merely that it is inappropriate to produce a standardized template to that end. I think this is absolutely fair, and has the added benefit of making the number of userbox templates more manageable. –

4348:

short, this proposed policy was written to demonstrate (elaborately, some may argue) that existing policy and guidelines already suffice the needs of Wikipedians and that userbox methodology actually benefits system performance. That does not mean that all userboxes should be distributed by the Userboxes team on the Userboxes subpages. Some userboxes are best kept in the user's own namespace.

959: 954: 815:, so called (if I may be so bold) because it's a fork rather than a freshly written proposal. It is Kelly's as written, except for changes to 3 and 4, and an additional 5 to clarify speediness. I support that one, and oppose this one as written, although I think it's a great basis for discussion and thank Kelly for putting together a well written and comprehensive draft. ++ 65:

view? Should we allow templates that serve no purpose other than adding humor to user pages? Should we allow categories that divide Wikipedians into political and religious affiliations that can be used for spamming user talk pages? Should we allow categories that serve no purpose except to list users who claim to be

2841:, this is better than Proposal 1, but cats to go with the userboxes should be allowed. The cats are a useful way of informing each other of a debate in progress, and if one side uses them, their opponents can too. Saying it's wrong to use the cats that way is like saying it's bad to tell voters when Election Day is. 903:— This smacks of censorship and is a complete change in user page policy, not just affecting userboxes. To adopt this policy means far reaching changes to what's allowed on userpages, meaning no one will be able to express any point of view on their userpage or even WikiProjects. It's in direct contravention of 3738:, there is nothing wrong with this kind of categorization. These cats and userboxes should all stay. And don't talk about some of them being "useless" or "silly", they aren't part of the encyclopedia itself, being outside of the main namespace, and do nothing to harm it. If you don't like them, don't use them. 2948:: You ever hear the saying "A picture is worth a thousand words"? Some of us (well me anyway) are sometimes not so eloquent, and use many more words than are needed to experess some sentiment. User boxes help us express some of our interests in a heck of a lot less words. They help lower stress levels. 1295:

thing, but I digress). If my userbox also says "and you should be a LEGO fan too" or "and you should go buy more LEGO product", that's advocacy. Granted, its a fine line, but that's how I see the difference anyway. Advocacy is the thing to be prevented, and what I think Kelly was most concerned about.

4762:

Templates created after the policy comes into effect, which do not meet the criteria, should only be deleted after seven days grace (again tagged for 'subst' during this period). Any template that might debatably meet the criteria must be sent to TfD, where the deletion criterion would be 'utility to

3346:

The main argument against political and biased userboxes is that they allow users with similar POV's to find each other and gang up to win edit wars. This is true. Therefore, userboxes that express POV should not have categories assocaited with them, however they should remain to be allowed on user

1136:

Userboxes whose primary purpose is to endorse or object to any particular political, religious, or ideological position. Again, userboxes which indicate an editor's interest in politics, religion, or ideology, or any particular subset thereof, are permissible (and even encouraged), but such userboxes

595:

with the type of userboxes the proposer wishes to discourage in items 3 and 4. These items go on user pages and reflect the personalities and interests of the individual editors, and are a good way to find likeminded editors on Knowledge (XXG), especially for WikiProjects. Going after these items is

227:

Userboxes whose primary purpose is to express endorsement of, or objection to, a commercial product, service, or entity (such as a movie, a book series, a soft drink, or a sports team). However, userboxes which indicate a user's interest in a specific topic are not prohibited, as long as they do not

4846:

Good proposal overall. I think that any userbox templates not designed to further the encyclopedia should exist only as code (in some central location). This would solve the problem of server load and would allow users to add any userboxes they wish. This solution should make sense for users who are

4787:

I could live with this. At least it makes an effort to avoid the debacles of the (not too long ago) past. I'm again troubled by the contention that the right to free speech exists (see my response to Proposal #11). Perhaps mention that "free speech" will also be limited by the Foundation's decisions

3858:

You don't have to be a muslim to join Wikiproject Islam. Also, even if you are muslim, that doesn't guarantee you hold certain ideological views(e.g: I know Jewish athiests, who just value their culture, as well as religious Jews who keep their culture secret). I think the logic here is muslims can

3058:

and removed them because my language skills are not relevant to writing an English-language encyclopedia. I actually like your suggestion of having religious and political userboxes allowed but not explicitly encouraged, but I think the location and language boxes should be in that category as well.

1130:

1057:

Perhaps, but I see it as less of an assumption of bad faith on the part of any particular contributor, and more of a desire to avoid groupthink as a generalized phenomenon. I think it's a reasonable concession, honestly, particularly since there is nothing to prevent an editor from expressing his or

541:

Reasonable policy, as long as it is made clear that there is a grey area between these two that is neither encouraged nor prohibited (which would include all the "funny" ones). I'd also be in favour of stating that categories are only appropriate for "encouraged", and that "one-off" userboxes should

354:

I am in general agreement with the proposed policy. I would prohibit any userbox which automatically places the user in a category of Wikipedians by POV. I would allow any userbox stating a political affiliation (free from any sloganeering), so long as it is in very specific terms reporting facts of

261:

Note that nothing in this policy prohibits a user from identifying his or her ideological beliefs on his or her user page (although doing so is generally discouraged); this policy merely prohibits creating templated userboxes for that purpose. Userbox templates should not be created that facilitate

3599:

True, but is that a reason to hold them in and have your intestine explode? No. Point is, ANYTHING can be used as a way to find users to side with you in an edit war. Doesn't mean we should eliminate page histories or VFDs after they've been closed or Wikiprojects as all can be used for exactly the

1853:

The main argument against political and biased userboxes is that they allow users with similar POVs to find each other and gang up to win edit wars. Therefore, userboxes that express POV should not have categories associated with them, BUT should be allowed on user pages. Also, there will have to

1234:

the subject of this discussion, that's what the RfC is for), she produced a well written and comprehensive proposal, IMHO, even if you disagree with some of it) but I do not agree that it is just a watered down version. It changes the sense of prohibited types 3 and 4, which many (including myself)

979:

Ms. Martin's proposal in its current form. It looks like the most of the opposition stems from the fourth prohibited point. The section, as I see it, merely disallows the creation of pre-made templates for the express purpose of espousing a political or ideological belief without direct relation to

176:

The primary purpose of userboxes is to assist Wikipedians in locating other Wikipedians who have specific skills, knowledge, or interests in order to facilitate writing an encyclopedia. Therefore, preference is given to userboxes which serve this purpose. Userboxes which do not serve this purpose

130:

should not be used as part of the userbox template. They were probably some of the reasons why some admins have been deleting them or trying to get rid of them, but we all need to understand that we have to have specific cause and reason to cite an image as fair use, because we are using it for an

4546:

I'm not sure I understand your question. Are you saying you think people use cats for deletionist or anti-Islam reasons? For the first issue, deletionist reasons, I don't see that it should be a problem seeing as inclusionists can use it for the very same thing. The two cancel each other out. Also

1383:

Most (if not all) of the userboxes available on Knowledge (XXG) have their own User category to accompany it. This puts them in a similar vein to the stub category/template pairings. Therefore, userboxes should not be judged as templates, but as a separate entity, again in a similar vein to stubs.

1152:

Userboxes whose primary purpose is to express endorsement of, or objection to, a commercial product, service, or entity (such as a movie, a book series, a soft drink, or a sports team) may not have categories associated with them, and they may not be used for advocacy of the position. Further they

1012:

thing, not bad - it makes one's self more aware of that bias and try to ensure that bias doesn't get expressed. I don't see how the marking of one's own POV could be interpreted as implying that one can express that POV when editing articles. Deleting a POV-userbox doesn't solve anything towards

835:

3 and 4 sound totalarian, but can be tweaked to suit the user's needs. Ms. Martin even said herself that POV userboxes could be changed to be less POV - the Amnesty International userbox (which has been causing a great deal of uproar), for example, could be changed from "This user supports Amnesty

4724:

Templates designed for use in userspace should only be permitted where they are of benefit to creating an encyclopaedia, and are general enough that they are likely to be used by a reasonable number of editors. Userboxes existing in the template space should be those useful to declare a relevant

3758:

The cats are used for contacting users to inform them of a vote going on, and if one side does it, their opponents can too. By your reasoning, it's wrong for voters to be told when Election Day is. As for edit wars on articles, we already have the 3-revert rule and our NPOV policy. Getting rid of

1294:

fandom (unless you subscribe to the school of thought that says that people belong to things they don't agree with on a regular basis... I guess saying "I smoke Marlboro cigarettess" would fall into that category of things, I might just be addicted to them but not necessarily think they're a good

705:

and pretty much the only limitations I can see on what one can put on one's userpage are regarding "non-free" content and things that are not related to one "as a Wikipedian". If someone is involved in editing articles on politics on Knowledge (XXG), it would seem that the guidelines would allow

64:

Regardless of the outcome of the RfC, Knowledge (XXG) needs a policy regarding the use of templates for the user namespace as well as the categorization of Wikipedians. For example, should Knowledge (XXG) allow templates designed for the user namespace which blatantly support particular points of

1334:

Because Kelly's proposal would force me to take down one of my userboxes, while this one wouldn't, I'm in favour of this one. :-p Except for that little itty-bitty problem, I prefer Kelly's solution. Knowledge (XXG) is not a place for free speech, but we should allow some reasonable statement of

1299:

seems clear cut to me on this point: that we should not be organising campaigns (either off WP or on, to do POV pushing) using our user pages, we should get our own hosting space for that sort of organizing. Those stating opposition to this proposal, are you suggesting that WP should be used for

251:

Userboxes may add the page on which they are found into an appropriate category; but such categories must be categories which are appropriate and reserved for user pages. Under no circumstance should a userbox add the page into which it is included into any category which is intended to include

4347:

This proposed policy limits only userboxes distributed by the above named project sub-pages. You are free to make and have whatever userbox you want on your own namespace (User:username/templatename) within the limits of the existing wikipedia guidelines. I made sure that I pointed that out. In

4288:

If the argument is database space (highly minimal in this case), then I assure you, one user template for a religion takes less space than all those in that religion making their own user boxes on their pages. Since the templating system is a centralized feature, problems such as copyright and

3273:

I think much of the wrath being displayed on this issue is misplaced. I understand some of the complaints that brought this whole issue around, but I think we need to take a good hard look at things before we decide to effectively ban a harmless bit of wikifun. Userboxes for such purposes as

1156:

Userboxes whose primary purpose is to endorse or object to any particular political, religious, or ideological position may not have categories associated with them and may not denote nore than simple endorsement or objection, and they may not be used for advocacy of the position. They cannot

4284:

Knowledge (XXG) is a community of users that come together from all walks of life and from all points of view to create a best NPOV encyclopedia ever. For free! Are we to take away the right for ourselves to point out our own political or religious views on our own user pages? Why should the

231:

4568:

They cancel each other out? That's like saying two people in an edit war cancel each other out-- true, but they usually end up causing huge problems for each other and wikipedia in general. And replace anti-muslim, with "im against israel" or "i dont like disco" wikipedians and the point

3496:

I didn't say cats are mainly used for that. In fact, I would assume good faith. I'm merely saying that they can be used in a negative way which should be dealt with. Under your interpretation of assume good faith, it makes sense to assume its fair to by default give out email addresses

3384:

Disagree. If you lose the categories on ideology, you have to get rid of each other user category as well, as issues like gender, race, nationality and sexual orientation could be reason for dispute, too. It can't be said these categories are massively used for finding like-minded people.

428:

Disagree in part. If I'm a supporter of a particular religion, ideology, or sports team, whose business is it to demand I refrain from saying so? Provided I don't say a particular religion or group is evil, such as proclaiming Jews a plague or Islam a tool of Satan (or Islam a tool of the

3859:

think various things about their religion. You can't know for sure that people in Wikiproject Islam will hold your views, and help you delete criticism. If it is being misused then that should be dealt with seperately. However, the existence of wikiprojects doesn't suggest any bias.--

886:

discouraged by Knowledge (XXG) guidelines. It is not prohibited, however, and the proposal, if anything, does not challenge this. I ask you to review the final paragraph: it seems the issue is less user page content, and more what should and should not be presented in template form. –

2624:

Why is proposal 6 incorporated? I didn't see much support for it yet. And the way this page is organized now, many people have voted for this proposal without seeing the new incorporated text. I don't think those votes can be counted if they're not informed. As it is, I would

1444:

Well, some of the userboxes exist in the template namespace, others might exist as hard code on the user pages and some exist via transclusion. I think that all userboxes and similar forks can be sent to TFD: they can be moved later on if the scope is out of reach of TFD.

605:

There is no prohibition on indicating "interest" in a topic; users are discouraged from, and prohibited from creating userboxes, which act as advocacy on an issue. A userbox that says "This user is interested in topics about Christianity" would be perfectly acceptable.

4734:'Editing interest' would allow templates, for example, 'user interested in US politics' but not 'user democrat'; 'user Christian theology' but not 'user Christian believer'; 'user abortion debates' but not 'pro-life'; 'scientology article editor' but not pro- or anti-. 576:

Disagree with the discouragement of ideological stances. So long as the stance is issued in the positive ("I am a member of ..." or "I subscribe to the philosophy of ..." as opposed to "The ideology of ... is dangerous or evil") they harm no one and can contribute to

1653:"Free speech of a moral kind" sorry if i was a bit confusing :-). What i meant, is people should be able to use free speech, but if it is morally wrong, or something that is just unacceptable in terms of humanity's morals, it should be prohibited (for example saying 2892:

where people propose new userboxes and they are created or not based on that vote? Then, we could create a speedy delete criteria for any new userbox created that hasn't gone through this voting process. At least that would regulate it more than the current scheme

2751:

The line itself was added later, after your comment suggesting original votes couldn't be counted. The line has been put at the time when the incorporation happened, and any comments below that line cannot have been made without reading the incorporated version.

2307:. I would like to see some of Proposal 5 included in this, as "One Off" userboxes don't have the same wide scale effects as a templated userbox. For example, I had a Liberal "one off" userbox that was similar to the templated Liberal Userbox, only the link was to 370:

I agree with Bourbons3 in that it should be allowed to express an ideological or religious affiliation using userboxes. As he said, it counts as freedom of speech. Further I'd like to add that while articles should have a NPOV, user pages certainly don't have to.

1137:

should not state that the editor is a member of, supporter of, or opponent of such a position. Your user page is not a place for advocacy. (This does not apply with respect to ideological stances about Knowledge (XXG) policy, such as inclusionism or eventualism.)

247:

In addition, userboxes must not, under any circumstance, contain unlicensed image content. Knowledge (XXG)'s fair use policy prohibits the use of unlicensed media on user pages; since userboxes only appear on user pages unlicensed media may not be used in them.

4547:

consider that deletionism isn't a "negative" any more then inclusionism is. As for using cats for Anti-Islamic purposes such as an "Anti-Muslim Category", any such category would be summarily deleted by existing process as violating multiple policies including

4417:

Under this proposal userboxes would only be constrained within existing Knowledge (XXG) and Knowledge (XXG) userspace rules and policies. No additional restrictions would be placed on them as userspaces are not part of the project as a whole and not subject to

1094:. I've been saying this before I ever came over here; userboxes can express interest in a topic without advocating for one POV or another. Value-neutral categorizations are helpful to the encyclopedia: those which are or can be used for POV-pushing are not. -- 3274:

getting a large block to AfD and RfC are inappropriate. What I fail to see is how identifying ones polical association, personal views (within reason of course), or favourite beverage in userbox format instead of writing it is harmful to the wikiproject.

3020:

for greater detail as to why they should remain. Location is useful because geographic articles about places often need the knowledge of people from that area to improve, and the easiest way for this to be achieved is by grouping Wikipedians by location.

2228:. Would support this if it were not for "illegal: Any userbox using 'inappropriate' language" - a bit heavy-handed, as unless it falls into the already-covered "Any userbox containing a direct personal attack" it's use is harmless and most likely a joke. 3226:

It seems to be like there should be a slightly less restrictive policy on "one-off" userboxes. "One-off" userboxes are created by an individual user for his or her userpage. Rather than creating a unique template for the userbox, the user just uses the

3282:

If I write, in plain text, that I am member of the Catholic Church or that I am a member of the Labour Party will you delete that? If not, please explain why a userbox (without catagorical affiliation) advocating the same position would be deleted.

1811:. These are an absolute farce, and trivialise the nature of Knowledge (XXG). The Santa userbox template is fine - it's a joke and helps build a community spirit through a degree of light-heartedness. However, the Category is wholly unnecessary. 951:- Wikipedian user pages should not be censored, particularly since conveying political views through user boxes has not yet caused any problems to the running of wiki. Instead, knowing what views other users hold helps in the achievement of NPOV. 682:

Your user page is not a free speech zone, and there are policies regarding the content you can put on them that you are expected to follow. User pages are not a "free for all", as some people seem to think. Please familiarize yourself with the

232:

userboxes should not state that the editor is a member of, supporter of, or opponent of such a position. Your user page is not a place for advocacy. (This does not apply with respect to ideological stances about Knowledge (XXG) policy, such as

3241:

s it). The real issue here is the creation of userboxes in the Template space. Basically, I suggest that there be a division between policies that apply to all userboxes and and policies which only apply to the creation of userbox templates. -

3090:"Some of us (well me anyway) are sometimes not so eloquent, and use many more words than are needed to experess some sentiment. User boxes help us express some of our interests in a heck of a lot less words. They help lower stress levels" 3083:

I'd be inclined to agree with you that they don't help write an encyclopedia, but to be honest the vast majority of userboxes do not. I think that their purpose is not to aid encyclopedia-writing, but to build community spirit. I quote

509:(such as how images in signatures are currently discouraged, but not prohibited), but I don't think an outright ban of them is quite fair, considering that Wikipedians are free to state their political opinions without userboxes anyway. — 4801:

Looks pretty good, Doc, but I'm still concerned about POV-userboxes being used for organizing. Removing categories and (biased?¹) images from the userboxes, and subst'ing them, should alleviate anything with regards to that, however. --

3837:) who constantly rove around deleting any criticism of Islam or making ad hominen attacks on those who try to keep NPOV in Islam-related articles.. The thing is, if you're going to argue for deleting Userboxes and related categories in 2416:. This proposal has my full support, as I think it addresses some of the concerns of those in support of proposal 1. Even if it does not pass in its present form, this is an excellent foundation to which concencus can be built upon. 4121:

I just realized we should exempt multi-licensing templates from this policy, as well as—possibly—the base userbox template. Although if transclusion is such a server drain I don't see how keeping the base userbox template will help. —

3609:

I find it hard to believe that anyone on Knowledge (XXG) has trouble finding someone with a POV. I've never had to look for a POV, it comes right to my articles before I can count to 3. I'd be amazed if these were used for positive

2741:

No, the line HAS been added after my comment, just look at the history. I think discussion about point 6 should be concentrated at the place Bourbons3 created above, otherwise discussion on this page will become even worse a mess

4422:

restrictions. Userspace is for users free expression. Categories on userboxes should not be changed or otherwise affected as they are positive and used for networking among the users of the project, users should be trusted under

97:

within specific templates. Apparently such double tranclusions are significantly more demanding of the Wikimedia servers than regular single transclusions are, and they should almost always be avoided. (For more information, see

4063:

For the sake of server performance, all templates intended for general use in User: namespace should be subst'd immediately and the templates moved to a central page so that their code can be copied and pasted, not transcluded.

330:

template could be interpretated to be) it counts as freedom of speech. The main problem we have is the sheer number of userboxes that are being created, despite a very similar or virtually identical userbox is already in use. -

2915:

I totally agree with everything you have said - a Userbox-creation sorting process would be ideal. I honestly believe this policy would be the best way forward; unfortunately actions outside my control seemed to trivialise

38:. This page should be viewed as a place where proposed policies have been presented, but please do not continue to vote on these as we are not ready to come to a consensus about anything regarding this issue yet. Thanks. 989:

We seem to have majority support for the #3 prohibiting rule. This is a very good start, and I'd say this policy would probably gain consensus support if it were to include #3 but not #4, or at least a softening of #4.

1527:

I thought i would put up this policy before there were too many for people to read through. I thought i would use Proposed Policy #1 as a building block, as the majority of it is, in my opinion, the ultimate solution.

1794:, but the userbox system a) simplifies how users display information, b) eases the ability of users to see other users' POV without having to read text. Any information found in a userbox could be put on a userpage 3294:

My proposal doesnt delete someone displaying their religios, political or any other views so long as they are appropriate. It also doesnt delete funny or harmless userboxes. This question applies to Proposal #1 -

2888:? There needs to be some boundaries of areas of importance/relevance to the project, otherwise we'll see everyone creating userboxes on any and every micro-aspect of culture. Could there possibly be a place like 1783:

for User Pages, and therefore are free to be POV. What people put on their userpages (within reason) is free, so if they declare their support for a religion/country/sports team/brand/POV, then they can do that

2812:

Because it doesn't matter whether or not it has got everyone's support. The overwhelming majority support his proposition in its current form, and I would not have put it in if I did not agree with it myself.

1681:, which is mostly the same thing). A policy that stifles userboxes seems contrary to the intent of Knowledge (XXG), not to mention free speech generally; banning "funny" userboxes on somebody's own Talk page is 4510:, the offending image can be deleted. This whole issue, however, is about the behaviour and actions of certain individuals, not the userboxes per-se. Smokescreens can be seen through. I vote - No new Policy. -- 2897:) which basically sees people say, "Can someone make this?", and it's done. This keeps the deletionists happy by slowing down the influx of new userboxes, and also allows userboxes on all topics to be created. 860:

with Kelly's proposed policy. It amounts to censorship, and Wikipedians will still have their POVs. So I have to ask, What's the point? It seems to me to be nothing more than a little deletionist power trip.

4731:, and would certainly include templates for: languages, expertise, geographic or national focus, wiki-status (admin etc.), project membership, editing interests, wiki-tasking (RC patroller, mediator etc).... 1068:

template. I think that has an added benefit of encouraging individual thought and even contributing to the point of userboxes to begin with (that is, providing some insight into the thoughts of the user). –

194:

Userboxes which signify that the editor holds some specific status (such as administrator) within the Knowledge (XXG) community and can therefore assist others in need of the assistance of someone with that

1462:. If we include them here we will get ridiculous things like having to define what a userbox is, and more specifically what isn't one, and that would really be instruction creep of the worst kind. I think 299:

Great start. I'd like something added to say you can still add the stuff in objections 3 and 4 into your bio on your userpage, as long as it's in text not templates/userboxes. That's acceptable, isn't it?

4262:

Templates that do not follow the above guidelines and policies should either be edited to do so if applicable or deleted by an administrative member of the Userboxes project after multilateral consensus.

4258:

it is so irrelevant to the Userboxes Project that the box is best placed on a user page and not as a central template (eg. "This user is happy", "This user is a flirt") User boxes are not emoticons.

1587:

Most userboxes should not be placed in talk pages, although some can due to the fact that they were created mainly for the use of talk page placement, and dont break any of the rules of the policy.

3442:

second thought. I've been quite busy with this whole issue, user boxes and categories. But I really don't want to take this kind of stupid accusations. I'm out of this discussion, for now. Blegh.

2319:

rule about similarity to existing userboxes. If that disallow excludes "one off" userboxes and only affects templated userboxes (which makes sense), then I will change my vote to Complete Support.

1611:"Free speech of a moral kind" is an unusual phrase which I don't quite understand in this context, but I think I understand what you mean from the examples. I could live with this as a compromise. 523:

Users should be discouraged from stating their political opinions (per request of Jimbo, if nothing else), and we should not allow the creation of userboxes to facilitate a discouraged behavior.

4072:

Any templates not intended for use within User: namespace are Candidates for Speedy Deletion either upon becoming orphaned or within 1 week of this policy being enacted, whichever happens first.

4593:

Ok, you've presented a strong case. I just think you have to be aware that some people are so radical as to want to keep all categories for users, even these ones that go against policy. Ill

244:

Userboxes that fall into neither of the above categories are neither encouraged nor prohibited; editors may create such userboxes but are expected to exercise reasonable restraint in doing so.

2992:: What's so special about location and language skills? What relevance to Knowledge (XXG) does it have where I live or what languages I speak that categories for those should be encouraged? -- 375:

11:22, 2 January 2006 (UTC) PS: I'm not really fond of any restrictions besides those considered with copyright or personal attacks. So this comment is not my only objection to the proposal.

1807:. I have stated my view here several times before. At present, many userboxes are linked to ludicrous categories that are no help to anyone... the one that immediately springs to mind is 4533:

I find it hard to believe that people go out of their way to network for deletionist or anti-islam users. Could you perhaps convince me, and those who have such reservations, otherwise?--

1153:

may not reproduce the logo or trademarked identifying mark of the product. They cannot directly link to an external site but may link to the Knowledge (XXG) article on the topic, if any.

4266:

I see no reason to crack down on political, religious or interests boxes such as "This user supports Amnesty International" or "This user is a republican" or "This user enjoys watching

141:

May I note to all that the above two issues on meta templates and fair-use images are the two main current tasks at the WikiProject and we are working on removing all traces of them.

93:: And don't forget about the double transclusion caused by many userbox templates. Granted, WikiProject Userboxes has been addressing the issue, but many users transclude the basic 69:? Basically, we need to establish guidelines for the creation of new user templates and user categories. What types of templates and what types of categories should be allowed? -- 3581:

And farts CAN smell bad. Doesn't mean they always do. To base policy on assuming that they'll be used for bad things assumes bad faith about wikipedians, which is against policy.

2589:. The principle was boiled down to one sentence: Userboxes under this category should be positive - that is to say "in support of something" as opposed to "dislikes something". 2493:

This represents almost exactly my opinion on the issue. If I were to quibble I'd eliminate the distinction between "Encouraged" and "Allowed", but that's not really important.

1535:

Those that promote a user's details, although not too detailed or personal, as this will create too many userboxes (language, location, basic interests like sport or computers)

1454:

The scope of this policy discussion should only be userboxes in the template namespace, including the borderline case of a user putting a userbox in a subpage of his userspace

2665:- Actually it's changed since I voted, and I'm not fond of the additions either. Can we pull proposal 6 since it has no support below and is highly controversial and violates 3396:

Well thats a racist and sexist assumption, that all blacks have a certain ideology, or all women have a certain ideology. It is in fact good to find black people to work on

2257:. That is definitely not a direct attack, but is completely unnecessary language. Harmless bad-language is allowed - the text reads "inappropriate". That's different. 3347:

pages. Also, there will have to be some way to address the 'what links here' issue, so that people can't look up capitalist wikipedians like myself through that page.--

1458:

of making it available to others or avoiding deletion (but that's just common sense). Userboxes that have been hardcoded into a userpage are already adressed in full at

3433:. You don't have to insult me for bringing this up - especially as I'm deeply involved in battling racism and sexism. That's the entire reason I'm politically active. 52: 1290:

If I have a userbox that says "I am a LEGO fan", that's a statement about me, about my interests/beliefs/worldviews. It can presumably be taken as an endorsement of

1420:

Giving these little boxes their own *FD is going overboard, IMO. However, they could be seen as part of the User namespace and therefore handled at the low-traffic

1035:

I just finally got what the other side's arguing (about creating voting blocs); I think it's a rather depressing (possibly bad-faith) view of Wikipedians though. --

3778: 2889: 4828:, that should be acceptable to both sides. A non-POV image that can be used by both sides of the debate (like in the GWB userboxes) would be neutral, though. -- 2700:- It cannot have changed since you voted - the changes you refer to occured where the line is. Anyway, as I said above the incorporation happened because, IMO, 1467: 733: 4759:

be immediately deleted. A caution template should be placed on them, inviting users to 'subs:' into userspace. Four weeks grace should be given before deletion.

3667:

as there are legitimate reasons to solicit opinions from certain points of view. Userbox for deletion is absurd and will only institutionalize a passing fad. —

2044:

ect, since users with that certain skill can contact each other for support (should only be one catagory per. userbox series, not one for each of -1, -2, ect.).

736:

and policy, introducing a policy herself to fit her actions as a despicable attempt at post-justification, however valid a policy proposal as of such may be.

30:

commonly seen on Wikipedians' user pages; what should be allowed, encouraged, or discouraged in userboxes. It became an increasingly divided and unproductive

4766:

Userboxes that don't comply with template requirements can be copied onto some special pages, from where they may be cut and paste onto userpages as desired.

4737:

However, all POV, belief-orientated, extra-wiki affiliation, user-specific, or joke, userboxes, could all continue to exist in user pages, without hindrance.

4677:

point-of-view, and should be allowed to arrange the space as they wish (including using the use of any userboxes). This should be limited only by policy on

446:. Your user page is not a free speech zone, and a statement of your support of a religion, ideology, or sports team does not describe you as a Wikipedian. 99: 2570:

to freely shove ourselves in other people's faces without the risk of the average joe or jane taking offense or feeling nauseous when viewing user pages.

4839: 4296:

In my personal view, existing policy and guidelines concerning image copyright and user page content already suffice as what content the boxes may have.

2038:

Seems perfect (In my view this policy should encompass all userpage templates, and not just userboxes (soon we will have to question what is a userbox.)

4155:

I can't believe we need policies on what editors may and may not express on their own user pages using userboxes, but if it is to be so, then so be it.

3749:

Well I'm not opposed to the silly categories so much as the ideological categories that COULD fuel edit wars, and surely have been used in such a way.--

191:

Userboxes which identify other special skills (such as experience with proofreading, copyediting, or photoediting) of value in creating an encyclopedia.

4911:

from which Pathoschild has been workign was ammended to take that into consideration. The policy is open to amendment if there are further concerns. --

4813: 2371:. This is nitpicking, but could "templatised" be applied to the first instance of userbox in that line? That would match more with what I had in mind. 975:

Though this may come as a surprise to those who have been following the RfC-that-must-not-be-named, I'm going to have to say that I wholeheartedly and

4219:

policy (see below). (All user box templates using the "User " prefix that are NOT listed on those pages should probably be deleted for being orphans.)

3992:. Redundant with existing policy. We already have WP:CIVIL, why add another policy that says that WP:CIVIL applies to userboxes? *It already does*. — 3806: 3768:

The three revert rule exists so a given point of view cant filibuster. These cats make it easy to find ideological clones of yourself on an issue.--

3540: 1848: 1391:. Any nominations that are sent here are given seven days while debate takes places as to whether the Userbox in question should be kept or deleted. 1161: 1105: 35: 17: 1544:

Those that promote a user's position in Knowledge (XXG) (like admin) which would help others find assistance in some way in terms of Knowledge (XXG)

4820:¹By biased, I mean pro/anti images, because Whatlinkshere can still be used from that image page to tell who is posting a userbox. If the issue is 1553:

Those that promote free speech of a moral kind (including stating a user's religion, political views or ideology without causing serious offense)

103: 1172:

below the allowed and prohibited sections, which are usage notes and guidelines, are kept as written. They are not reproduced here for brevity)

3935:

Isn't that covered by Knowledge (XXG) policy? Seriously though mentioning that outright might reignited the Firefox war from earlier this week.

3946:

Of course, it is covered by Knowledge (XXG) policy, but I feel that if that is included here, there is no question or confusion about it all.

262:

editors performing acts discouraged by the Knowledge (XXG) community. Editors are reminded that user pages are intended to be about oneself

3508:

Categories are not needed. They have no great use, and are mainly used to track people of similar beliefs or ideologies in a negative way -

1505:

was a terrible mistake, and not one to be emulated. Categories that are populated solely for a template that's been deleted in process are

4076:

As for concerns about offensive userboxes, unfair use, et. al.; we *already* have policies that cover that. Let's avoid instruction creep.

4040:. As Phil Welch said, this is redundant and won't address the underlying issues. It's only setting up a time bomb for yet another dispute. 2225: 1471: 1321:

Thanks. Your interpretation makes sense, and I could live with it, but the writer of this proposal ought to make the difference explicit.

904: 1281:" mean? In other words, what is the difference between "endorsing", which is allowed under this proposal, and "advocacy", which is not? 1388: 4059:

Userboxes are an issue entirely beneath our notice. Some people raise questions about server performance, so I propose the following:

3834: 4933: 4211:

It is to be assumed that all userbox templates with Prefix "User " belong to the Userboxes Project and are thus to be listed on the "

4016:, though it is redundant with existing policy, but since you suggested it we might as well clarify that it extends to the userboxes. 793:, but rather a combination of lack of judgement and an apparent character flaw that allows such actions to be justified in her mind. 3559:

In this case the burden of proof is on you as the accuser. Especially since the view you take borders or bulls through violation of

1257:, while reworded the basis of the message is the same and IMHO is much to restrictive to the userspace per the userspace guidelines. 2894: 4825: 2704:

is covered by the "interested in" section regarding categories, b) because Knowledge (XXG) is about consensus, not conflict. The

4606:

I'm certain their are, but that's why we have Categories for Deletion. If someone creates a userbox w/a category that is against

3820: 768:. Mr. TCorp seems to be indeed very familiar with AGF (as am I)... hence his pointing out that you assumed the total opposite. -- 4548: 4245:

it promotes or advocates illegal and/or violent activities (ie "This user supports the NAZI party" or "This user is a cannibal")

388:; your user page is not a "free speech zone". Perhaps you need to familiarize yourself with what Knowledge (XXG) is and what 3054:

many times, and contributed to it, and up until yesterday I had a whole slew of Babel boxes on my user page. But then I read

2503: 1131:

amount to endorsing or opposing that topic. Your user page is not a place to endorse or advertise for any external entities.

228:

amount to endorsing or opposing that topic. Your user page is not a place to endorse or advertise for any external entities.

4191: 3699:

I was thinking in terms of writing articles about Eastern Europe and looking for avowed communists to provide their POV,. —

3545: 3510: 3322: 3297: 3254:. Most of these one-offs can be made as user subpages, which take up very little if any server space on Knowledge (XXG). -- 3212: 2138: 1729: 1659: 1591: 1475: 470: 412: 333: 4890:

This directly contravenes the Arbitration Committee's principle in the pedophile userbox wheel war that it is implicit at

3800: 3121:

To clarify: in principle I support your proposal, but I'd like to see "encouraged" points 1 & 2 moved to "allowed". --

1387:

Any userboxes that contradict what is encouraged, or contain material that is prohibited, may be subject to nomination on

3690:

Would you mind supplying an example for why someone would need to do a lookup on deletionist wikipedians, for example? --

2920:

when we were nearing some kind of consensus. It now seems that this page is largely irrelevant. Which is unfortunate.

2461:

are added to the list of approved categories. For example, I think it would be very useful to have a category linked to

1479: 3455:

im not claiming you are racist or sexist, but rather that the acceptance of such a principle would be racist/sexist. --

3174:

I think a variety of one-of userboxes should be allowed as long as they don't clutter categories and are made using the

1047: 1025: 2885: 786: 4862:

That's esentially what I'm aiming at. Move the contraverial stuff out of templates and we can all leave it at that. --

3792: 2193:- content from #6 has been incorporated in the interested of consensus and de-clogging this page. I fully agree with 2022: 2014: 1560:(becasue of potentially creating an overload in userboxes) are humorous, as long as they do not casue serious offense) 1541:

Those that promote a user's skills in terms of editing Knowledge (XXG) (copyright knowledge, high editing skills, etc)

118: 110: 81: 73: 3964:. Condition: Userboxes MUST BE included in Fair Use guidelines, as per Fair Use clause of US Copyright Law. See also 3572:

Even if he is wrong, the fact is that they CAN be used that way, which is hazardous to a development environment. --

2462: 3842: 1718:

I agree with this proposal conditionally. I would like to know more about what constitutes "moral" in this context.

1300:

advocacy? If not, why isn't this a good proposal? What specifically is wrong with it? How is it not aligned with

578: 4320: 3847: 3446:

19:25, 2 January 2006 (UTC) Okay, I'm in again. Being insulted is not a reason to withdraw from a policy debate.

2466: 2291: 2235: 1313: 1244: 1210: 1184: 909: 824: 620:

By the same token you have just stated, so are the types of userboxes you are trying to prohibit in #3 and #4. --

4555:. We do not need any overarching category policy as they should be taken case by case under existing guidelines. 1230:

I agree it's reworded, that's the idea! (whatever you may think of Kelly or her actions (which emphatically are

66: 4908: 4067:

Templates within any given user's userspace, intended for use only within that user's space, remain acceptable.

3796: 5006: 4985: 4966: 4950: 4919: 4898: 4883: 4868: 4855: 4796: 4776: 4653: 4637: 4614: 4601: 4586: 4573: 4559: 4537: 4525: 4478: 4467: 4458: 4431: 4406: 4394: 4382: 4354: 4335: 4323: 4161: 4138: 4116: 4104: 4048: 4032: 4020: 4008: 3984: 3972: 3950: 3939: 3922: 3913: 3900: 3863: 3853: 3772: 3763: 3753: 3742: 3716: 3694: 3683: 3657: 3614: 3604: 3594: 3585: 3576: 3567: 3554: 3532: 3519: 3501: 3491: 3480: 3459: 3450: 3437: 3416: 3389: 3379: 3360: 3351: 3331: 3315: 3306: 3287: 3258: 3246: 3221: 3191: 3161: 3132: 3108: 3070: 3037: 3003: 2980: 2955: 2936: 2906: 2869: 2845: 2829: 2807: 2798: 2780: 2768: 2746: 2728: 2690: 2673: 2657: 2633: 2616: 2597: 2576: 2558: 2545: 2526: 2507: 2485: 2446: 2432: 2420: 2404: 2383: 2363: 2347: 2323: 2297: 2273: 2241: 2213: 2183: 2172: 2156: 2147: 2119: 2107: 2073: 2053: 2025: 1990: 1747: 1738: 1722: 1713: 1701: 1668: 1648: 1628: 1619: 1600: 1516: 1493: 1449: 1439: 1414: 1378: 1347: 1325: 1316: 1285: 1272: 1261: 1247: 1225: 1213: 1187: 1086: 1073: 1052: 1030: 1003: 984: 970: 943: 927: 915: 891: 877: 865: 850: 827: 799: 772: 760: 742: 710: 696: 677: 647: 624: 615: 600: 585: 567: 553: 532: 518: 493: 479: 455: 437: 421: 401: 379: 363: 342: 309: 292: 283: 171: 148: 135: 121: 84: 31: 4752:

Speedy deletions of userbox templates should cease, except for (obvious attacks on other users and) as below:

410:

Am i allowed to propose a policy, or I have to wait for some sort of approval/disproval if this one first? -

3189: 2521: 1643: 923:, due to item #4. Userboxes should be a souce of expression as a userpage is encouraged to be such a place. 706:

them to include quite a bit of information regarding their political "likes and dislikes". Am I mistaken?

4475: 4403: 4017: 3882:

Let's cut the censorship and rulecruft, shall we? In regards to userboxes, all we need is two guidelines.

3828: 3760: 3739: 2842: 2553:. Excellent proposal. (In fact, I've already done it on my userpage - by substing: templates manually.) -- 2011: 1744: 1269: 935:

If this ever did miraculously get passed, I would ignore it, and help others do the same. Knowledge (XXG)

862: 756: 692: 611: 563: 528: 489: 451: 397: 167: 107: 70: 4891: 4252: 4234: 4230: 4212: 4205: 3845:

on that view, you're saying that all WikiProjects should be deleted too, and that would just be silly. --

2067: 2017: 1459: 267: 221: 113: 76: 27: 4964: 4915: 4866: 4774: 3639: 2444: 4936:

userbox templates. This solves any issues raised regarding needless server load and vandalism vectors.

3824: 992:

Note. these numbers refer to the criteria under "The following categories of userboxes are prohibited:"

4181: 3638:. Prohibiting categories would do nothing. Talk page spammers looking for help in an edit war can use 4998:

but no reason why this can't be put in place in addition to a restriction on the template namespace.

4520: 3838: 3814: 2803:

Why don't we just remove the addition of Prop 6 from Prop 4 since it doesn't have everyone's support?

1974:

Hopefully some people will agree with this... hopefully some people have bothered to read this far!

1788:

a userbox. The purpose of userboxes is to standardise the format with which this can be achieved.

514: 4366:. If you can't believe we need a policy about this then don't write a policy. Seems simple to me. — 3549: 3514: 3326: 3301: 3216: 3059:

They provide interesting information, but they aren't really relevant to writing Knowledge (XXG). --

2142: 1733: 1663: 1595: 873:

There is absolutely nothing wrong with a user expressing their own viewpoint on their own userpage.

542:

be kept in the userspace of the user who wants it, but that might already be instruction creepy. --

474: 416: 337: 4852: 4834: 4808: 4793: 4650: 4634: 4449: 4373: 4129: 4095: 4045: 3999: 3706: 3674: 2860: 2594: 2473:

express a POV on religion or LGBT issues and therefore could not be used to form voting blocs, but

2441: 2308: 1854:

be some way to address the 'what links here' issue, otherwise people can find similar POVs anyway.

1344: 1157:

directly link to an external site but may link to the Knowledge (XXG) article on the topic, if any.

1100: 728:

in policy #1. I must add that I see the entire notion of a Userbox Project outsider in the form of

2629:

it as I think there needs to be more discussion about wether categories should be allowed or not.

2377:

Any userbox templates that are virtually identical or very similar to an existing userbox template

4975: 4940: 4454: 4378: 4134: 4100: 4004: 3727: 3679: 3312: 3284: 3185: 2865: 2516: 2500: 2417: 1638: 1411: 1375: 505:

absolutely with the proposed policy expect P3 and P4. Perhaps userboxes of those types should be

184:

Userboxes which identify an editor's ability to read or write in one or more languages (see also

4682: 4552: 4499: 4424: 3887: 3560: 3473: 3017: 3013: 2709: 2701: 2666: 2585:. It's not really bureaucratic when you consider that those "you can do this but not that" were 1395: 811:

as there are a number of people that objected to prohibited categories 3 and 4 I have created a

220:

Userboxes which contain any content which is not suitable for placement on a user page, per the

210: 185: 4204:. The contents of these boxes are subject to Knowledge (XXG) guidelines concerning user pages ( 326:. As long as it doesn't use any inappropriate language, or act as a personal attack (which the 3646: 2554: 2252: 1513: 1488: 1434: 967: 790: 778: 752: 729: 725: 688: 607: 559: 548: 524: 485: 447: 393: 324:

people should be able to say what religion, political party or ideology they support or oppose

163: 4847:

tired of seeing the wording of a userbox change or userbox templates nominated for deletion.

2373:

Any userboxes that are virtually identical or very similar to an existing templatised userbox

2249:- The two you mention are not necessarily covered by each other. A template could just read 1893:

Those that illustrate a user's level of participation within Knowledge (XXG) (in all aspects)

1779:

Personally, I think there is a fundemental flaw in all of the above. Userboxes are intended

596:

precisely what started a particular uproar against a certain admin's heavy-handed actions. --

4995: 4961: 4912: 4863: 4771: 4611: 4583: 4556: 4487: 4428: 4332: 4267: 3969: 3936: 3910: 3601: 3582: 3564: 3529: 3477: 3255: 3231: 3178: 3156: 3103: 3032: 2975: 2931: 2902: 2853:. Unnecessarily elaborate, redundant, and authoritarian. Instruction creep at its finest. — 2824: 2804: 2763: 2723: 2670: 2652: 2613: 2573: 2429: 2399: 2342: 2268: 2208: 2153: 2102: 1985: 1769: 1719: 1655:"This user believes all disabled people are in a wheelchair becasue they deserve punishment" 1258: 1222: 1062: 1042: 1020: 999: 924: 769: 672: 637: 621: 597: 305: 94: 43: 4690: 4686: 4678: 4607: 4495: 4419: 4290: 4173:

The restrictions in this policy are applicable only to userbox templates made using prefix

3653:

As I said in the proposal, we would make the what links here not work for such templates.--

3051: 2705: 2088: 1506: 1502: 1425: 1421: 1363: 1359: 936: 748: 468:, people can say what religion or whatever organisation/group they're in if they want to - 389: 214: 4788:

with regard to Knowledge (XXG), just to make things clear. The rest looks pretty good. :D

4511: 3918:

Add somewhere that fair use photos are not allowed as user icons and you have my support.

3810: 3786: 2953: 1706:

If a policy is needed, I like this one, it seems just about liberal enough for userpages.

1698: 1336: 874: 510: 434: 4507: 4491: 4273:

The user pages are not NPOV encyclopedic content as they are to reflect wikipedians, the

3055: 2884:: I'd support this policy depending on where irrelevant user boxes lie. Like, do we keep 2230:

However it's much better than some of the more draconian measures such as in Proposal #1.

1550:

Those that promote a user's participation in a Wikimedia sister project (Wiktionary, etc)

1301: 1296: 702: 684: 443: 385: 4829: 4803: 1624:

Same goes for me - if there has to be a policy on userboxes, I think this should be it.

1095: 1008:

It seems to me that a userbox admitting that one's self is biased in some category is a

5003: 4880: 4848: 4789: 4646: 4444: 4368: 4124: 4090: 4041: 3994: 3947: 3919: 3897: 3701: 3669: 3376: 3243: 3126: 3064: 2997: 2855: 2590: 2539: 2380: 2360: 2320: 2180: 2169: 1887:

Those that illustrate language, location and basic interests (like sport or computers).

1616: 1470:) this should apply to "userspace templates", and I propose to move this discussion to 1446: 1340: 1070: 981: 940: 888: 847: 837: 582: 360: 289: 132: 126:

Also, this would be the time to make it clear that images that are claimed to be under

3147: 3094: 3023: 2966: 2922: 2815: 2754: 2714: 2643: 2390: 2333: 2259: 2199: 2093: 1976: 1760: 1160:

Userboxes that violate any of these prohibited categories may be speedily deleted and

663: 4972: 4937: 4598: 4570: 4534: 4331:

any policy which would limit the content of userboxes beyond general userspace rules.

4316: 4113: 3860: 3769: 3750: 3713: 3691: 3654: 3611: 3591: 3573: 3498: 3456: 3413: 3357: 3348: 2495: 2482: 2285:— I see what you mean. Yeah, this is definitely many times better than the draconian 2194: 1407: 1371: 1322: 1309: 1282: 1240: 1206: 1180: 820: 707: 280: 4693:. Declaring one's biases may actually be beneficial, as it inhibits hidden agendas. 266:

and are not intended as a general personal home page, or as a free speech zone (see

177:

are discouraged; while they may be created and used, restraint should be exercised.

4895: 3643: 3401: 2152:

I diagree. Users who voted for those other props may not have approved of this one.

2062: 1510: 1484: 1430: 1083: 963: 544: 4187:") and not those userboxes made using subsections (sub pages) of user pages (eg. " 2794:

at least as long as the category thing isn't really settled (see above this page)

2132:

as it incorporates the 3 of the most popular proposals based on votes. I ask that

1920:

Those that suggest preference in terms of television, computer games and software.

233: 201:

Userboxes which indicate the editor's participating in a sister Wikimedia project.

3276:

If the problem is catagorisation then get rid of the catagories, not the userbox.

3981: 3356:

Also, a userbox for deletion page would be nice as well, to help with sorting.--

3151: 3098: 3027: 2970: 2926: 2898: 2819: 2758: 2718: 2647: 2394: 2337: 2263: 2203: 2097: 1980: 1764: 1743:"Of a moral kind" needs to be clearer, but I might support this as a compromise 1036: 1014: 995: 667: 430: 301: 237: 39: 4427:. Also they do nothing to detract from the overall project as WP is not paper. 4241:

A user box is not suitable and is thus not to be listed as described above if:

2134:

any votes for proposals for #3, #4 and #6 be counted as votes for this proposal

1930:- that is to say "in support of something" as opposed to "dislikes something". 1899:

Those that show participation in a Wikimedia sister project (Wiktionary, etc.)

4956:

subst'ing isn't the only issue, there is also issue of what template space if

4464: 4391: 4349: 4156: 4029: 3782: 3488: 3447: 3443: 3434: 3386: 3085: 2949: 2795: 2774: 2743: 2687: 2630: 2312: 2113: 2047: 1707: 1657:

which is, in my books, cruel and immoral). Hope this clears things up a bit -

1625: 1463: 1082:

I do not believe we should be in the business of policing people's userpages.

958: 794: 737: 641: 376: 372: 142: 4725:

skill, speciality, editing interest, or membership of a valid wiki-grouping.

4311:

the intent but I would still rather see Proposal 1 smithed into this form. ++

2040:

However, I do have one slight issue, I feel catagories should be allowed for

1911:

Those that illustrate personal ideologies - religion, political views, ethics

1339:

but not state it in a userbox which isn't even associated with a category?).

4999: 4876: 3372: 3122: 3060: 2993: 2535: 1690: 1612: 953: 356: 4978: 4943: 3909:

change the wp:civ part to Knowledge (XXG) policies and you have my support.

3476:

in assuming cats are used primarily for harm to wikipedia rather then help.

3472:

I disagree and would further state that I think this proposal goes against

2477:

be used to find interested editors for the purpose of article improvement.

2226:

Knowledge (XXG):What Knowledge (XXG) is not#Knowledge (XXG) is not censored

905:

Knowledge (XXG):What Knowledge (XXG) is not#Knowledge (XXG) is not censored

3965: 1580:

Those that are virtually identical or very similar to any existing userbox

1547:

Those that promote a user's participation in, or support of, a Wikiproject

1221:. This is just a watered down/re-worded version of the Martin Proposal. -- 4708:. User templates should only exist in so far as they assist in that aim. 4689:, any legal considerations, and the caveat that wikipedia is not a free 4312: 2566:. It looks like a reasonable framework within which we are all given the 1878:

Examples of each would include (excuse copying large chunks from above):

1686: 1305: 1236: 1202: 1176: 816: 661:. User pages are POV. I could go on... this is far too authoritarian. 3893:

The box isn't already duplicated somewhere else with slight differences.

3590:

Perfect metaphor. The thing is, farts WILL smell bad sometimes. lol.--

1574:

Those that are immoral in any way, or cause serious (not minor) offense

4907:

Yes it does, but it was authored before that finding. A later version

2197:'s above statement, and have altered the proposition to this degree. 1955:

userboxes that are virtually identical or very similar to an existing

1428:. Always deleting template/category pairs together can be arranged. -- 1394:

Users must familiarize themselves with the userbox policy, as well as

1358:

This policy that I propose comes to light in response to not only the

836:

International" to "This user is interested in Amnesty International".

198:

Userboxes which indicate the editor's participation in an WikiProject.

3397: 2534:

with the convergence of the "encouraged" and "allowed" categories. --

2112:

Yes, but others may not consider them languages. Anyway, its sorted.

1682: 1678: 347:

See the user page policy; your user page is not a "free speech zone".

3759:

these cats or userboxes is nothing but censorship for its own sake.

1058:

her opinions via userbox, providing they simply use the blank slate

3278:

A question to those that support a proposal to ban most userboxes:

1013:

preventing the seep-through of that POV into articles, does it? --

100:

Knowledge (XXG):Transclusion costs and benefits#Double transclusion

3777:

Thing is, this happens anyway. We already have organisations like

3409: 3208:

deleting ones that are old, no longer relavent or no longer in use

2004:- apparently the fad is to state support for your own proposals... 1694: 1674: 255:

Userboxes should not be placed in articles or article talk pages.

4755:

Existing templates, which do not meet the above criteria, should

4704:, and the server-straining ability to transcluse, should only be 2479:(As this issue has now been addressed, changing vote to Support.) 3405: 1291: 279:

The purpose of userboxes is subjective, dependent on the user.--

1406:

Everyone is free to expand on this proposal as they see fit. --

131:

article, not for just some damn decoration on a silly userbox.

1538:

Those that promote a user's important skills (java, html, etc)

429:

international Jewish conspiracy, to offend both), or that the

4742:

When templates are permitted, categories can also be created.

4202:

on their own pages or as templates residing on user sub pages

3202:

Yes, perhaps a "One-off" category could be created, although

1896:

Those that show participation in, or support of, WikiProjects

1335:

opinion (why can I state on my userpage that I am opposed to

789:. I see neither good or bad faith intended in the actions of 4894:

that userpages should not bring the project into disrepute.

4717:

All userboxes should be permitted as free expression (well,

1914:

Those that are considered humourous but not overtly trivial.

558:

I felt that was obvious, but I suppose it should be stated.

4671:

Users should be permitted free expression on their userpage

1917:

Those that illustrate support of sports teams, nations etc.

842:

But alas, after reading Proposed Policy #4, I am forced to

3712:

Well can you see how it could be abused in the same way?--

2682:

Exactly! This line Deano uses as an explanation was added

4233:

page are subject to Knowledge (XXG) copyright policy and

1890:

Those that illustrate important skills (java, html, etc.)

26:

This page began as a discussion on a proposed policy for

4673:

without censorship or other hindrance. They may declare

1813:

Userboxes should only be linked to categories based on:-

1119:

as written except strike prohibited categories 3 and 4:

53:

m:Interproject Babel template standardization (proposal)

4293:) can be addressed much quicker and are easier to fix. 2029: 188:), for the purpose of obtaining translation assistance. 4490:. If any particular Userbox violates existing policy ( 3206:, perhaps by keeping track of the userboxes' use, and 3016:, and were the founding basis of all userboxes. Read 2773:

Im not sure the later #6 comments are even approiate.

205:

The following categories of userboxes are prohibited:

180:

The following categories of userboxes are encouraged:

4729:

This provision should be interpreted fairly liberally

4237:

guidelines as they are centralized user page content.

3539:

Do you have proof that it doesnt occur reguarly? See

1633:

What David said. Not sure whether you'd consider the

1472:

Knowledge (XXG):Proposed policy on userpage templates

1362:, but also the recent influx of Userbox templates on 288:

I like that. It's fair, clear and keeps us focussed.

3320:

No problem, just thought i would point it out :-) -

777:

I'm very well familiar with the AGF policy. Perhaps

4229:All user boxes that are listed on sub pages of the 2331:- that was implied, but I've clarified it anyway. 2083:- Yeah I agree, but I presumed that was covered by 1474:as he suggests - other possible locations could be 747:Please familiarize yourself with Knowledge (XXG)'s 442:Please familiarize yourself with Knowledge (XXG)'s 51:For proposals concerning only Babel templates see: 3779:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Islam:The Muslim Guild 2890:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals 2612:. As long as the category restriction is in place. 1792:There is no obligation for anyone to use userboxes 1673:Concur. Most of that is pretty obvious (except to 1277:Question of Clarification: What does the phrase " 724:with "prohibiting" types 3 & 4 as proposed by 4215:" sub pages. These templates are subject to this 3429:be a reason for dispute, not that it necessarily 258:Userboxes should avoid the use of metatemplates. 4251:it violates any wikipedia policy on user pages ( 1366:. It is also highly dependant on the outcome of 4875:I would support this as a reasonable solution. 3204:the number of these userboxes should be limited 1942:Any userbox containing a direct personal attack 1776:As a prelude to the policy, I'll state my POV. 4028:The more userboxes and categories the better. 2087:... after all that is how they are grouped on 2315:. This userbox would have violated the fifth 1727:See bullet point 4 of this comment section - 734:questionable history in following due process 34:, and so a new page for discussion has begun 8: 3127: 3065: 2998: 2540: 1279:may not be used for advocacy of the position 1162:Knowledge (XXG):Criteria for speedy deletion 18:Knowledge (XXG):Proposed policy on userboxes 2457:- support only if categories based on user 1939:Any userbox that may cause serious offense, 484:How many times are you going to post this? 4248:it violates any wikipedia copyright policy 1164:should be modified to reflect this policy. 321:I think that this proposal is fine, except 104:Knowledge (XXG):Avoid using meta-templates 4971:True. This was intended as a compromise. 636:- surely this should be more liberal per 4299:If I missed something, do point it out. 4112:, theyre .0000001% of the server load.-- 2168:. Took the words right out of my mouth. 1945:Any userbox using inappropriate language 1924:Userboxes under this category should be 1809:Wikipedians who (don't) believe in Santa 1577:Those that break any law (i.e copyright) 162:The following is my recommended policy. 4208:) and Knowledge (XXG) copyright policy. 1583:Those that have no use, or are orphaned 1367: 4200:Users may create their own user boxes 1509:, so there's nothing to consolidate. — 1389:Knowledge (XXG):Userboxes for deletion 4698:Knowledge (XXG) is an encyclopaedia, 4197:") made for individual user page use. 1948:Any illegal userboxes (i.e copyright) 1571:Those that use inappropriate language 1476:Knowledge (XXG):User page (templates) 209:Userboxes which contain offensive or 7: 3543:for voting and such on this topic - 2895:Knowledge (XXG) talk:Userboxes/Ideas 1843:, thought those again are dubious. 1480:Knowledge (XXG):User page/Templates 2251:"This user w*nks over his beloved 1637:userbox immoral; hope you don't. — 1568:Those that act as personal attacks 1466:has it right when he says (on the 433:suck (but they do...), butt out! 24: 4706:used to further the encyclopaedia 3541:Proposal on categories in general 3092:. As I said - I totally agree. 1424:instead of the already very busy 787:Knowledge (XXG) Deletion policies 3544: 3509: 3321: 3296: 3211: 3146: 3093: 3022: 2965: 2921: 2814: 2753: 2713: 2642: 2389: 2332: 2258: 2198: 2137: 2092: 1975: 1867:, whereby the vast majority are 1835:in a subject (N.B. this is NPOV) 1759: 1728: 1658: 1590: 957: 952: 662: 593:Strongly and Vehemently Disagree 469: 411: 332: 4629:In other words, no new policy. 3966:Negativland's essay on Fair Use 3366:Comments, questions, and voting 2463:Template:User religion interest 2136:because of the incorporation - 1193:Comments, questions, and voting 2179:Read revision, still support. 1970:Comments, questions and voting 1: 4920:18:06, 21 February 2006 (UTC) 4899:17:41, 21 February 2006 (UTC) 4824:about "free speech", and not 4390:Seems liberal enough for me. 4303:Comments, Support, Opposition 4192:User:TCorp/isupportporkeating 4080:Comments, support, opposition 3843:Category:Wikipedians by stuff 1962:Any useless/orphaned userbox. 1754:Proposed Policy #4 (Liberal!) 328:This user hates George W Bush 5007:14:28, 14 January 2006 (UTC) 4986:19:09, 14 January 2006 (UTC) 4967:11:23, 14 January 2006 (UTC) 4951:23:05, 13 January 2006 (UTC) 4884:14:29, 14 January 2006 (UTC) 4869:11:21, 14 January 2006 (UTC) 4856:23:17, 13 January 2006 (UTC) 4840:20:21, 13 January 2006 (UTC) 4814:20:21, 13 January 2006 (UTC) 4797:14:41, 13 January 2006 (UTC) 4777:12:49, 13 January 2006 (UTC) 4654:14:37, 13 January 2006 (UTC) 4049:14:30, 13 January 2006 (UTC) 3731:05:49, 3 January 2006 (UTC) 2598:14:24, 13 January 2006 (UTC) 2577:10:57, 13 January 2006 (UTC) 2515:, looks good enough to me. — 1398:before making a nomination. 1348:14:20, 13 January 2006 (UTC) 1106:17:42, 10 January 2006 (UTC) 213:content, or which amount to 4638:15:46, 5 January 2006 (UTC) 4615:21:15, 4 January 2006 (UTC) 4610:, etc... it can be deleted. 4602:21:10, 4 January 2006 (UTC) 4587:20:36, 4 January 2006 (UTC) 4574:19:45, 4 January 2006 (UTC) 4560:19:29, 4 January 2006 (UTC) 4538:16:11, 4 January 2006 (UTC) 4526:13:56, 4 January 2006 (UTC) 4479:14:21, 3 January 2006 (UTC) 4468:12:11, 3 January 2006 (UTC) 4459:05:28, 3 January 2006 (UTC) 4432:05:22, 3 January 2006 (UTC) 4407:14:18, 3 January 2006 (UTC) 4395:12:11, 3 January 2006 (UTC) 4383:05:29, 3 January 2006 (UTC) 4355:16:59, 3 January 2006 (UTC) 4336:05:19, 3 January 2006 (UTC) 4324:02:28, 3 January 2006 (UTC) 4162:00:46, 3 January 2006 (UTC) 4139:23:30, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 4117:23:09, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 4105:23:03, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 4033:00:26, 3 January 2006 (UTC) 4021:23:20, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 4009:23:06, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 3985:22:10, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 3973:21:10, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 3951:22:10, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 3940:20:54, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 3923:20:31, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 3914:20:27, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 3901:20:24, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 3864:15:56, 3 January 2006 (UTC) 3854:15:31, 3 January 2006 (UTC) 3773:15:10, 3 January 2006 (UTC) 3764:14:10, 3 January 2006 (UTC) 3754:23:21, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 3743:23:17, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 3717:10:51, 3 January 2006 (UTC) 3695:23:21, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 3684:23:08, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 3658:23:19, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 3615:21:44, 3 January 2006 (UTC) 3605:18:17, 3 January 2006 (UTC) 3595:15:08, 3 January 2006 (UTC) 3586:07:43, 3 January 2006 (UTC) 3577:22:36, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 3568:20:33, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 3555:20:29, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 3533:20:21, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 3528:Do you have proof of that? 3520:20:15, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 3502:22:34, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 3492:20:09, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 3481:20:01, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 3460:22:31, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 3451:20:09, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 3438:19:22, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 3417:19:14, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 3390:19:07, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 3380:17:33, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 3361:17:30, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 3352:17:11, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 3332:15:14, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 3316:15:13, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 3307:15:08, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 3288:15:05, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 3259:19:26, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 3247:15:33, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 3222:17:32, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 3192:12:38, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 3162:15:57, 4 January 2006 (UTC) 3133:15:48, 4 January 2006 (UTC) 3109:15:24, 4 January 2006 (UTC) 3071:15:07, 4 January 2006 (UTC) 3038:14:53, 4 January 2006 (UTC) 3004:14:12, 4 January 2006 (UTC) 2981:21:36, 3 January 2006 (UTC) 2956:05:11, 3 January 2006 (UTC) 2937:21:36, 3 January 2006 (UTC) 2907:23:04, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 2870:23:12, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 2846:23:09, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 2830:21:09, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 2808:21:02, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 2799:20:56, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 2781:20:56, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 2769:20:58, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 2747:20:54, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 2729:20:40, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 2712:does it? Same principle. 2691:20:28, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 2674:20:17, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 2658:20:15, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 2634:20:10, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 2617:21:58, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 2559:21:32, 4 January 2006 (UTC) 2546:19:33, 4 January 2006 (UTC) 2527:07:16, 4 January 2006 (UTC) 2508:05:54, 4 January 2006 (UTC) 2486:19:17, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 2467:Template:User LGBT interest 2447:22:40, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 2433:21:07, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 2421:20:36, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 2405:20:48, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 2384:20:24, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 2364:20:20, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 2348:20:05, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 2324:19:53, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 2298:19:59, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 2274:19:44, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 2242:19:27, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 2214:19:35, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 2184:20:23, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 2173:18:41, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 2157:19:39, 4 January 2006 (UTC) 2148:19:43, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 2120:20:01, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 2108:16:58, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 2074:18:45, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 2054:16:50, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 2026:17:02, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 1991:15:44, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 1748:22:58, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 1739:20:17, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 1723:19:59, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 1714:14:07, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 1702:13:25, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 1669:12:58, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 1649:12:49, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 1629:12:41, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 1620:12:34, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 1601:14:22, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 1517:04:39, 3 January 2006 (UTC) 1494:21:16, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 1450:20:27, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 1440:13:55, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 1415:12:05, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 1379:12:05, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 1326:15:04, 3 January 2006 (UTC) 1317:01:40, 3 January 2006 (UTC) 1286:00:52, 3 January 2006 (UTC) 1273:22:54, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 1262:20:25, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 1248:20:23, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 1226:19:22, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 1219:Fully and strongly disagree 1214:18:13, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 1188:18:04, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 1087:13:46, 3 January 2006 (UTC) 1074:05:31, 3 January 2006 (UTC) 1053:04:55, 3 January 2006 (UTC) 1031:04:43, 3 January 2006 (UTC) 1004:02:50, 3 January 2006 (UTC) 985:02:30, 3 January 2006 (UTC) 971:02:00, 3 January 2006 (UTC) 944:20:21, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 928:19:56, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 916:19:30, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 892:02:35, 3 January 2006 (UTC) 878:18:57, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 866:18:40, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 851:18:43, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 828:18:10, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 800:17:56, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 773:17:45, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 761:17:28, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 743:17:24, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 711:00:53, 3 January 2006 (UTC) 697:17:25, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 678:17:01, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 648:16:51, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 625:17:45, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 616:17:25, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 601:16:21, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 586:15:15, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 568:17:25, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 554:13:50, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 533:17:25, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 519:13:31, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 494:17:25, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 480:13:21, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 456:17:25, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 438:13:08, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 422:13:04, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 402:17:25, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 380:11:29, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 364:10:53, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 343:19:45, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 310:09:59, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 293:09:30, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 284:17:05, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 172:08:23, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 149:11:58, 2 January 2006 (UTC) 136:04:56, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 122:04:16, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 85:03:53, 1 January 2006 (UTC) 5023: 4502:), then it can be deleted 1092:Strongest possible support 939:a soapbox for censorship. 4909:User:Doc glasgow/workshop 4455:Katefan's ridiculous poll 4379:Katefan's ridiculous poll 4253:Knowledge (XXG):User_page 4235:Knowledge (XXG):User_page 4231:Knowledge (XXG):Userboxes 4213:Knowledge (XXG):Userboxes 4206:Knowledge (XXG):User_page 4135:Katefan's ridiculous poll 4101:Katefan's ridiculous poll 4005:Katefan's ridiculous poll 3728:Katefan's ridiculous poll 3680:Katefan's ridiculous poll 3012:Languages are covered by 2866:Katefan's ridiculous poll 1460:Knowledge (XXG):User page 933:Strongest Possible Oppose 4504:by following due process 2964:I couldn't agree more. 2686:my comment. Very weird. 1168:(note, all the notes in 4932:A bot should be run to 3404:and muslims to work on 3265:Comment/question about 3088:from just above here:- 2708:policy doesn't violate 355:membership of a group. 4549:WP:No personal attacks 3886:The box doesn't break 3311:My humble apologies. 1689:). (Have I gone a bit 1685:, to me (N to mention 1564:Unapproved userboxes: 858:Very Strongly Disagree 390:Knowledge (XXG) is not 4531:I have reservations.. 3890:towards another user. 3640:Special:Whatlinkshere 3487:My thoughts exactly. 3425:offensive. I said it 2130:the ultimate proposal 1865:templatised userboxes 659:solely for user pages 186:Knowledge (XXG):Babel 4442:I'm cool with it. — 4281:, the encyclopedia. 4177:(templates such as " 3849:Mistress Selina Kyle 3839:Category:Wikipedians 2293:Mistress Selina Kyle 2237:Mistress Selina Kyle 2046:Update covers this. 1531:Approved userboxes: 911:Mistress Selina Kyle 703:user page guidelines 685:user page guidelines 581:of vested interest. 268:the user page policy 4892:wikipedia:user page 4702:main template space 4473:Very Strong Support 4151:Proposed policy #10 3962:Conditional Support 3797:BrandonYusufToropov 3252:Conditional support 2309:American Liberalism 2304:Conditional Support 2128:In theory, this is 2028:(moved as per this 1871:, and very few are 1558:to a certain extent 1112:Proposed Policy #1a 701:Kelly: I read the 4277:and not wikipedia 3342:Proposed Policy #6 3170:Proposed Policy #5 2306: 1849:Proposed Policy #6 1847:Incorporated from 1523:Proposed Policy #3 1368:Proposed policy #1 1354:Proposed policy #2 1142:and replace with: 900:Very Strong Oppose 158:Proposed policy #1 91:Additional Comment 4917: 4506:. If it violates 4457: 4381: 4289:meta-templating ( 4137: 4103: 4007: 3730: 3682: 3421:What you said is 3160: 3107: 3036: 2979: 2935: 2868: 2828: 2767: 2727: 2656: 2506: 2403: 2346: 2302: 2272: 2253:Manchester United 2212: 2106: 1989: 1857: 1852: 1773: 1396:disruption policy 1170:Proposed Policy 1 1117:Proposed Policy 1 871:Strongly Disagree 791:User:Kelly Martin 785:herself with the 779:User:Kelly Martin 749:assume good faith 730:User:Kelly Martin 726:User:Kelly Martin 722:Strongly Disagree 676: 634:Strongly disagree 5014: 4983: 4948: 4916: 4679:personal attacks 4523: 4518: 4453: 4377: 4352: 4196: 4190: 4186: 4180: 4159: 4133: 4099: 4003: 3850: 3781:with users like 3726: 3678: 3548: 3513: 3325: 3300: 3236: 3230: 3215: 3183: 3177: 3154: 3150: 3129: 3101: 3097: 3067: 3030: 3026: 3000: 2973: 2969: 2929: 2925: 2918:all propositions 2864: 2822: 2818: 2761: 2757: 2721: 2717: 2650: 2646: 2542: 2519: 2499: 2397: 2393: 2388:Done and done. 2357:Complete Support 2340: 2336: 2294: 2266: 2262: 2238: 2223: 2206: 2202: 2141: 2100: 2096: 2070: 2065: 2020: 1983: 1979: 1855: 1846: 1767: 1763: 1732: 1662: 1641: 1594: 1491: 1487: 1456:with the purpose 1437: 1433: 1067: 1061: 1050: 1045: 1040: 1028: 1023: 1018: 977:strongly support 961: 956: 912: 902: 797: 740: 670: 666: 657:- userboxes are 551: 547: 473: 444:user page policy 415: 386:user page policy 336: 222:user page policy 215:personal attacks 116: 95:userbox template 79: 5022: 5021: 5017: 5016: 5015: 5013: 5012: 5011: 4980: 4945: 4930: 4837: 4811: 4784: 4662: 4521: 4512: 4476:Yeltensic42.618 4439: 4415: 4404:Yeltensic42.618 4350: 4305: 4226: 4194: 4188: 4184: 4178: 4170: 4157: 4153: 4082: 4057: 4018:Yeltensic42.618 3880: 3848: 3761:Yeltensic42.618 3740:Yeltensic42.618 3636:Strongly oppose 3368: 3344: 3271: 3234: 3228: 3199: 3181: 3175: 3172: 2878: 2843:Yeltensic42.618 2779: 2610:Strongly Oppose 2606: 2517: 2292: 2236: 2219: 2118: 2068: 2063: 2052: 2018: 1998: 1972: 1756: 1745:Yeltensic42.618 1712: 1639: 1608: 1525: 1489: 1483: 1435: 1429: 1404: 1356: 1337:Ketuanan Melayu 1270:Yeltensic42.618 1255:Strongly Oppose 1195: 1114: 1103: 1065: 1059: 1048: 1043: 1038: 1026: 1021: 1016: 949:Strongly oppose 921:Strongly oppose 910: 898: 882:To be fair, it 863:Yeltensic42.618 795: 738: 655:Strong disagree 646: 549: 543: 466:agree with Trek 276: 264:as a Wikipedian 160: 147: 114: 77: 62: 57: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 5020: 5018: 5010: 5009: 4991: 4990: 4989: 4988: 4929: 4926: 4925: 4924: 4923: 4922: 4902: 4901: 4887: 4886: 4872: 4871: 4859: 4858: 4843: 4842: 4833: 4817: 4816: 4807: 4799: 4783: 4780: 4768: 4767: 4764: 4760: 4753: 4747:Implementation 4744: 4743: 4740: 4739: 4738: 4735: 4732: 4722: 4712:Userbox Policy 4661: 4658: 4657: 4656: 4640: 4635:Brighterorange 4626: 4625: 4624: 4623: 4622: 4621: 4620: 4619: 4618: 4617: 4590: 4589: 4577: 4576: 4563: 4562: 4541: 4540: 4528: 4484:Strong Support 4481: 4470: 4461: 4438: 4435: 4414: 4411: 4410: 4409: 4402:works for me. 4397: 4385: 4360: 4359: 4358: 4357: 4339: 4338: 4326: 4304: 4301: 4260: 4259: 4256: 4249: 4246: 4239: 4238: 4225: 4222: 4221: 4220: 4209: 4198: 4169: 4166: 4165: 4152: 4149: 4148: 4147: 4145: 4143: 4141: 4119: 4107: 4081: 4078: 4074: 4073: 4070: 4069: 4068: 4056: 4053: 4052: 4051: 4035: 4023: 4011: 3987: 3975: 3958: 3957: 3956: 3955: 3954: 3953: 3943: 3942: 3928: 3927: 3926: 3925: 3895: 3894: 3891: 3879: 3876: 3875: 3874: 3873: 3872: 3871: 3870: 3869: 3868: 3867: 3866: 3746: 3745: 3724: 3723: 3722: 3721: 3720: 3719: 3687: 3686: 3661: 3660: 3650: 3649: 3632: 3631: 3630: 3629: 3628: 3627: 3626: 3625: 3624: 3623: 3622: 3621: 3620: 3619: 3618: 3617: 3536: 3535: 3523: 3522: 3505: 3504: 3494: 3484: 3483: 3469: 3468: 3467: 3466: 3465: 3464: 3463: 3462: 3393: 3392: 3382: 3367: 3364: 3343: 3340: 3339: 3338: 3337: 3336: 3335: 3334: 3291: 3290: 3270: 3263: 3262: 3261: 3249: 3224: 3198: 3195: 3171: 3168: 3167: 3166: 3165: 3164: 3140: 3139: 3138: 3137: 3136: 3135: 3114: 3113: 3112: 3111: 3078: 3077: 3076: 3075: 3074: 3073: 3043: 3042: 3041: 3040: 3007: 3006: 2986: 2985: 2984: 2983: 2959: 2958: 2942: 2941: 2940: 2939: 2910: 2909: 2877: 2874: 2873: 2872: 2848: 2836: 2835: 2834: 2833: 2832: 2789: 2788: 2787: 2786: 2785: 2784: 2783: 2777: 2771: 2736: 2735: 2734: 2733: 2732: 2731: 2680: 2679: 2678: 2677: 2676: 2605: 2602: 2601: 2600: 2580: 2561: 2548: 2529: 2510: 2491:Strong Support 2488: 2449: 2435: 2423: 2411: 2410: 2409: 2408: 2407: 2354: 2353: 2352: 2351: 2350: 2280: 2279: 2278: 2277: 2276: 2216: 2188: 2187: 2186: 2163: 2162: 2161: 2160: 2159: 2126: 2125: 2124: 2123: 2122: 2116: 2056: 2050: 2036:Strong Support 2033: 2008:Strong Support 2005: 1997: 1994: 1971: 1968: 1966: 1964: 1963: 1960: 1949: 1946: 1943: 1940: 1922: 1921: 1918: 1915: 1912: 1909: 1908: 1907: 1906: 1905: 1904: 1897: 1894: 1891: 1888: 1863:should be for 1861:Userbox Policy 1837: 1836: 1828: 1825: 1822: 1819: 1755: 1752: 1751: 1750: 1741: 1725: 1716: 1710: 1704: 1671: 1651: 1631: 1622: 1607: 1604: 1585: 1584: 1581: 1578: 1575: 1572: 1569: 1562: 1561: 1554: 1551: 1548: 1545: 1542: 1539: 1536: 1524: 1521: 1520: 1519: 1500: 1499: 1498: 1497: 1496: 1403: 1400: 1355: 1352: 1351: 1350: 1332: 1331: 1330: 1329: 1328: 1275: 1264: 1252: 1251: 1250: 1216: 1194: 1191: 1175:Proposed by ++ 1166: 1165: 1158: 1154: 1150: 1147: 1140: 1139: 1133: 1127: 1124: 1113: 1110: 1109: 1108: 1099: 1089: 1080: 1079: 1078: 1077: 1076: 1006: 987: 973: 946: 930: 918: 896: 895: 894: 868: 855: 854: 853: 830: 806: 805: 804: 803: 802: 775: 718: 717: 716: 715: 714: 713: 651: 650: 644: 631: 630: 629: 628: 627: 589: 588: 573: 572: 571: 570: 538: 537: 536: 535: 499: 498: 497: 496: 461: 460: 459: 458: 425: 424: 407: 406: 405: 404: 367: 366: 351: 350: 349: 348: 313: 312: 296: 295: 286: 275: 272: 242: 241: 229: 225: 218: 203: 202: 199: 196: 192: 189: 159: 156: 154: 152: 151: 145: 89: 61: 58: 56: 48: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 5019: 5008: 5005: 5001: 4997: 4993: 4992: 4987: 4984: 4977: 4974: 4970: 4969: 4968: 4965: 4963: 4959: 4955: 4954: 4953: 4952: 4949: 4942: 4939: 4935: 4927: 4921: 4918: 4914: 4910: 4906: 4905: 4904: 4903: 4900: 4897: 4893: 4889: 4888: 4885: 4882: 4878: 4874: 4873: 4870: 4867: 4865: 4861: 4860: 4857: 4854: 4850: 4845: 4844: 4841: 4838: 4836: 4831: 4827: 4823: 4819: 4818: 4815: 4812: 4810: 4805: 4800: 4798: 4795: 4791: 4786: 4785: 4781: 4779: 4778: 4775: 4773: 4765: 4763:the project'. 4761: 4758: 4754: 4751: 4750: 4749: 4748: 4741: 4736: 4733: 4730: 4727: 4726: 4723: 4720: 4716: 4715: 4714: 4713: 4709: 4707: 4703: 4699: 4694: 4692: 4688: 4684: 4680: 4676: 4672: 4667: 4666: 4659: 4655: 4652: 4648: 4644: 4643:Strong oppose 4641: 4639: 4636: 4632: 4628: 4627: 4616: 4613: 4609: 4605: 4604: 4603: 4600: 4596: 4592: 4591: 4588: 4585: 4581: 4580: 4579: 4578: 4575: 4572: 4567: 4566: 4565: 4564: 4561: 4558: 4554: 4550: 4545: 4544: 4543: 4542: 4539: 4536: 4532: 4529: 4527: 4524: 4519: 4516: 4509: 4505: 4501: 4497: 4493: 4489: 4485: 4482: 4480: 4477: 4474: 4471: 4469: 4466: 4462: 4460: 4456: 4452: 4451: 4447: 4446: 4441: 4440: 4436: 4434: 4433: 4430: 4426: 4421: 4412: 4408: 4405: 4401: 4398: 4396: 4393: 4389: 4386: 4384: 4380: 4376: 4375: 4371: 4370: 4365: 4362: 4361: 4356: 4353: 4346: 4343: 4342: 4341: 4340: 4337: 4334: 4330: 4327: 4325: 4322: 4318: 4314: 4310: 4307: 4306: 4302: 4300: 4297: 4294: 4292: 4286: 4282: 4280: 4276: 4271: 4269: 4264: 4257: 4254: 4250: 4247: 4244: 4243: 4242: 4236: 4232: 4228: 4227: 4223: 4218: 4214: 4210: 4207: 4203: 4199: 4193: 4183: 4176: 4172: 4171: 4167: 4164: 4163: 4160: 4150: 4146: 4144: 4142: 4140: 4136: 4132: 4131: 4127: 4126: 4120: 4118: 4115: 4111: 4108: 4106: 4102: 4098: 4097: 4093: 4092: 4087: 4084: 4083: 4079: 4077: 4071: 4066: 4065: 4062: 4061: 4060: 4054: 4050: 4047: 4043: 4039: 4038:Strong oppose 4036: 4034: 4031: 4027: 4024: 4022: 4019: 4015: 4012: 4010: 4006: 4002: 4001: 3997: 3996: 3991: 3988: 3986: 3983: 3979: 3976: 3974: 3971: 3967: 3963: 3960: 3959: 3952: 3949: 3945: 3944: 3941: 3938: 3934: 3933: 3932: 3931: 3930: 3929: 3924: 3921: 3917: 3916: 3915: 3912: 3908: 3905: 3904: 3903: 3902: 3899: 3892: 3889: 3885: 3884: 3883: 3877: 3865: 3862: 3857: 3856: 3855: 3852: 3851: 3844: 3840: 3836: 3833: 3830: 3826: 3822: 3819: 3816: 3812: 3808: 3805: 3802: 3798: 3794: 3791: 3788: 3784: 3780: 3776: 3775: 3774: 3771: 3767: 3766: 3765: 3762: 3757: 3756: 3755: 3752: 3748: 3747: 3744: 3741: 3737: 3734: 3733: 3732: 3729: 3718: 3715: 3711: 3710: 3709: 3708: 3704: 3703: 3698: 3697: 3696: 3693: 3689: 3688: 3685: 3681: 3677: 3676: 3672: 3671: 3666: 3663: 3662: 3659: 3656: 3652: 3651: 3648: 3645: 3641: 3637: 3634: 3633: 3616: 3613: 3610:networking.-- 3608: 3607: 3606: 3603: 3598: 3597: 3596: 3593: 3589: 3588: 3587: 3584: 3580: 3579: 3578: 3575: 3571: 3570: 3569: 3566: 3562: 3558: 3557: 3556: 3553: 3552: 3547: 3542: 3538: 3537: 3534: 3531: 3527: 3526: 3525: 3524: 3521: 3518: 3517: 3512: 3507: 3506: 3503: 3500: 3495: 3493: 3490: 3486: 3485: 3482: 3479: 3475: 3471: 3470: 3461: 3458: 3454: 3453: 3452: 3449: 3445: 3441: 3440: 3439: 3436: 3432: 3428: 3424: 3420: 3419: 3418: 3415: 3411: 3407: 3403: 3399: 3395: 3394: 3391: 3388: 3383: 3381: 3378: 3374: 3370: 3369: 3365: 3363: 3362: 3359: 3354: 3353: 3350: 3341: 3333: 3330: 3329: 3324: 3319: 3318: 3317: 3314: 3313:Movementarian 3310: 3309: 3308: 3305: 3304: 3299: 3293: 3292: 3289: 3286: 3285:Movementarian 3281: 3280: 3279: 3277: 3268: 3264: 3260: 3257: 3253: 3250: 3248: 3245: 3240: 3237:template (or 3233: 3225: 3223: 3220: 3219: 3214: 3209: 3205: 3201: 3200: 3196: 3194: 3193: 3190: 3187: 3180: 3169: 3163: 3158: 3153: 3149: 3144: 3143: 3142: 3141: 3134: 3130: 3124: 3120: 3119: 3118: 3117: 3116: 3115: 3110: 3105: 3100: 3096: 3091: 3087: 3082: 3081: 3080: 3079: 3072: 3068: 3062: 3057: 3053: 3049: 3048: 3047: 3046: 3045: 3044: 3039: 3034: 3029: 3025: 3019: 3015: 3011: 3010: 3009: 3008: 3005: 3001: 2995: 2991: 2988: 2987: 2982: 2977: 2972: 2968: 2963: 2962: 2961: 2960: 2957: 2954: 2951: 2947: 2944: 2943: 2938: 2933: 2928: 2924: 2919: 2914: 2913: 2912: 2911: 2908: 2905: 2904: 2900: 2896: 2891: 2887: 2883: 2880: 2879: 2875: 2871: 2867: 2863: 2862: 2858: 2857: 2852: 2849: 2847: 2844: 2840: 2837: 2831: 2826: 2821: 2817: 2811: 2810: 2809: 2806: 2802: 2801: 2800: 2797: 2793: 2792:Strong OPPOSE 2790: 2782: 2776: 2772: 2770: 2765: 2760: 2756: 2750: 2749: 2748: 2745: 2740: 2739: 2738: 2737: 2730: 2725: 2720: 2716: 2711: 2707: 2703: 2699: 2696: 2695: 2694: 2693: 2692: 2689: 2685: 2681: 2675: 2672: 2668: 2664: 2661: 2660: 2659: 2654: 2649: 2645: 2640: 2637: 2636: 2635: 2632: 2628: 2623: 2620: 2619: 2618: 2615: 2611: 2608: 2607: 2603: 2599: 2596: 2592: 2588: 2584: 2581: 2579: 2578: 2575: 2569: 2565: 2562: 2560: 2556: 2552: 2549: 2547: 2543: 2537: 2533: 2530: 2528: 2525: 2524: 2520: 2518:Nightstallion 2514: 2511: 2509: 2505: 2502: 2498: 2497: 2492: 2489: 2487: 2484: 2480: 2476: 2472: 2468: 2464: 2460: 2456: 2454: 2450: 2448: 2445: 2443: 2439: 2436: 2434: 2431: 2427: 2424: 2422: 2419: 2418:Movementarian 2415: 2412: 2406: 2401: 2396: 2392: 2387: 2386: 2385: 2382: 2378: 2374: 2370: 2367: 2366: 2365: 2362: 2358: 2355: 2349: 2344: 2339: 2335: 2330: 2327: 2326: 2325: 2322: 2318: 2314: 2310: 2305: 2301: 2300: 2299: 2296: 2295: 2288: 2284: 2281: 2275: 2270: 2265: 2261: 2256: 2254: 2248: 2245: 2244: 2243: 2240: 2239: 2232: 2231: 2227: 2222: 2217: 2215: 2210: 2205: 2201: 2196: 2192: 2189: 2185: 2182: 2178: 2177: 2176: 2175: 2174: 2171: 2167: 2164: 2158: 2155: 2151: 2150: 2149: 2146: 2145: 2140: 2135: 2131: 2127: 2121: 2115: 2111: 2110: 2109: 2104: 2099: 2095: 2090: 2086: 2082: 2079: 2078: 2077: 2076: 2075: 2072: 2071: 2066: 2060: 2057: 2055: 2049: 2045: 2043: 2037: 2034: 2031: 2027: 2024: 2021: 2016: 2013: 2009: 2006: 2003: 2000: 1999: 1995: 1993: 1992: 1987: 1982: 1978: 1969: 1967: 1961: 1958: 1954: 1950: 1947: 1944: 1941: 1938: 1937: 1936: 1935: 1931: 1929: 1928: 1919: 1916: 1913: 1910: 1903: 1902: 1901: 1900: 1898: 1895: 1892: 1889: 1886: 1885: 1884: 1883: 1879: 1876: 1874: 1870: 1866: 1862: 1858: 1850: 1844: 1842: 1839:and possibly 1834: 1833: 1829: 1826: 1823: 1820: 1817: 1816: 1815: 1814: 1810: 1806: 1801: 1799: 1798: 1793: 1789: 1787: 1782: 1777: 1774: 1771: 1766: 1762: 1753: 1749: 1746: 1742: 1740: 1737: 1736: 1731: 1726: 1724: 1721: 1717: 1715: 1709: 1705: 1703: 1700: 1696: 1692: 1688: 1684: 1680: 1676: 1672: 1670: 1667: 1666: 1661: 1656: 1652: 1650: 1647: 1646: 1642: 1640:Nightstallion 1636: 1632: 1630: 1627: 1623: 1621: 1618: 1614: 1610: 1609: 1605: 1603: 1602: 1599: 1598: 1593: 1588: 1582: 1579: 1576: 1573: 1570: 1567: 1566: 1565: 1559: 1555: 1552: 1549: 1546: 1543: 1540: 1537: 1534: 1533: 1532: 1529: 1522: 1518: 1515: 1512: 1508: 1504: 1501: 1495: 1492: 1486: 1481: 1477: 1473: 1469: 1465: 1461: 1457: 1453: 1452: 1451: 1448: 1443: 1442: 1441: 1438: 1432: 1427: 1423: 1419: 1418: 1417: 1416: 1413: 1409: 1401: 1399: 1397: 1392: 1390: 1385: 1381: 1380: 1377: 1373: 1369: 1365: 1361: 1353: 1349: 1346: 1342: 1338: 1333: 1327: 1324: 1320: 1319: 1318: 1315: 1311: 1307: 1303: 1298: 1293: 1289: 1288: 1287: 1284: 1280: 1276: 1274: 1271: 1268: 1265: 1263: 1260: 1256: 1253: 1249: 1246: 1242: 1238: 1233: 1229: 1228: 1227: 1224: 1220: 1217: 1215: 1212: 1208: 1204: 1200: 1197: 1196: 1192: 1190: 1189: 1186: 1182: 1178: 1173: 1171: 1163: 1159: 1155: 1151: 1148: 1145: 1144: 1143: 1138: 1134: 1132: 1128: 1125: 1122: 1121: 1120: 1118: 1111: 1107: 1104: 1102: 1097: 1093: 1090: 1088: 1085: 1081: 1075: 1072: 1064: 1056: 1055: 1054: 1051: 1046: 1041: 1034: 1033: 1032: 1029: 1024: 1019: 1011: 1007: 1005: 1002: 1001: 997: 993: 988: 986: 983: 978: 974: 972: 969: 966: 965: 960: 955: 950: 947: 945: 942: 938: 934: 931: 929: 926: 922: 919: 917: 914: 913: 906: 901: 897: 893: 890: 885: 881: 880: 879: 876: 872: 869: 867: 864: 859: 856: 852: 849: 845: 841: 840: 839: 834: 831: 829: 826: 822: 818: 814: 810: 807: 801: 798: 792: 788: 784: 780: 776: 774: 771: 767: 764: 763: 762: 758: 754: 750: 746: 745: 744: 741: 735: 731: 727: 723: 720: 719: 712: 709: 704: 700: 699: 698: 694: 690: 686: 681: 680: 679: 674: 669: 665: 660: 656: 653: 652: 649: 643: 640:'s comments. 639: 635: 632: 626: 623: 619: 618: 617: 613: 609: 604: 603: 602: 599: 594: 591: 590: 587: 584: 580: 575: 574: 569: 565: 561: 557: 556: 555: 552: 546: 540: 539: 534: 530: 526: 522: 521: 520: 516: 512: 508: 504: 501: 500: 495: 491: 487: 483: 482: 481: 478: 477: 472: 467: 463: 462: 457: 453: 449: 445: 441: 440: 439: 436: 432: 427: 426: 423: 420: 419: 414: 409: 408: 403: 399: 395: 391: 387: 383: 382: 381: 378: 374: 369: 368: 365: 362: 358: 353: 352: 346: 345: 344: 341: 340: 335: 329: 325: 322: 318: 315: 314: 311: 308: 307: 303: 298: 297: 294: 291: 287: 285: 282: 278: 277: 273: 271: 269: 265: 259: 256: 253: 249: 245: 239: 235: 230: 226: 223: 219: 216: 212: 208: 207: 206: 200: 197: 193: 190: 187: 183: 182: 181: 178: 174: 173: 169: 165: 157: 155: 150: 144: 140: 139: 138: 137: 134: 129: 124: 123: 120: 117: 112: 109: 105: 101: 96: 92: 87: 86: 83: 80: 75: 72: 68: 59: 55: 54: 49: 47: 46: 45: 41: 37: 33: 29: 19: 4957: 4931: 4928:Proposal #13 4832: 4821: 4806: 4769: 4756: 4746: 4745: 4728: 4718: 4711: 4710: 4705: 4701: 4697: 4695: 4674: 4670: 4668: 4664: 4663: 4660:Proposal #12 4642: 4630: 4594: 4530: 4514: 4503: 4483: 4472: 4448: 4443: 4416: 4413:Proposal #11 4399: 4387: 4372: 4367: 4363: 4344: 4328: 4308: 4298: 4295: 4287: 4283: 4278: 4274: 4272: 4265: 4261: 4240: 4216: 4201: 4174: 4154: 4128: 4123: 4109: 4094: 4089: 4085: 4075: 4058: 4037: 4025: 4013: 3998: 3993: 3989: 3977: 3970:CJ Marsicano 3961: 3906: 3896: 3881: 3846: 3831: 3825:Irishpunktom 3817: 3803: 3789: 3735: 3725: 3705: 3700: 3673: 3668: 3664: 3635: 3550: 3515: 3430: 3426: 3422: 3402:afrocentrism 3355: 3345: 3327: 3302: 3275: 3272: 3267:the policies 3266: 3256:CJ Marsicano 3251: 3238: 3217: 3207: 3203: 3184:template. - 3173: 3089: 3050:I have read 2989: 2945: 2917: 2901: 2886:any of these 2881: 2859: 2854: 2850: 2838: 2791: 2697: 2683: 2662: 2638: 2626: 2621: 2609: 2586: 2582: 2571: 2567: 2563: 2555:Blu Aardvark 2550: 2531: 2522: 2512: 2494: 2490: 2478: 2474: 2470: 2458: 2452: 2451: 2437: 2425: 2413: 2376: 2375:should read 2372: 2368: 2356: 2328: 2316: 2303: 2290: 2286: 2282: 2250: 2246: 2234: 2229: 2220: 2218: 2190: 2165: 2143: 2133: 2129: 2084: 2080: 2061: 2058: 2041: 2039: 2035: 2007: 2001: 1973: 1965: 1956: 1952: 1933: 1932: 1926: 1925: 1923: 1881: 1880: 1877: 1872: 1868: 1864: 1860: 1859: 1845: 1840: 1838: 1831: 1830: 1827:WikiProjects 1812: 1808: 1804: 1802: 1796: 1795: 1791: 1790: 1785: 1780: 1778: 1775: 1757: 1734: 1664: 1654: 1644: 1634: 1596: 1589: 1586: 1563: 1557: 1556:Those that, 1530: 1526: 1455: 1405: 1393: 1386: 1382: 1357: 1278: 1266: 1254: 1231: 1223:CJ Marsicano 1218: 1198: 1174: 1169: 1167: 1141: 1135: 1129: 1116: 1115: 1098: 1091: 1009: 998: 991: 976: 962: 948: 932: 920: 908: 899: 883: 870: 857: 843: 832: 812: 808: 782: 770:CJ Marsicano 765: 753:Kelly Martin 721: 689:Kelly Martin 658: 654: 638:CJ Marsicano 633: 622:CJ Marsicano 608:Kelly Martin 598:CJ Marsicano 592: 560:Kelly Martin 525:Kelly Martin 506: 502: 486:Kelly Martin 475: 465: 448:Kelly Martin 417: 394:Kelly Martin 338: 327: 323: 320: 316: 304: 263: 260: 257: 254: 250: 246: 243: 234:inclusionism 204: 179: 175: 164:Kelly Martin 161: 153: 127: 125: 90: 88: 63: 50: 42: 25: 4996:Doc glasgow 4994:Agree with 4665:Principles: 4612:Gateman1997 4584:Gateman1997 4557:Gateman1997 4488:Gateman1997 4429:Gateman1997 4333:Gateman1997 4224:Suitability 4217:suitability 4055:Proposal #9 3937:Gateman1997 3911:Gateman1997 3878:Proposal #7 3602:Gateman1997 3583:Gateman1997 3565:Gateman1997 3551:«ßØÛ®ßÖÑ§3» 3530:Gateman1997 3516:«ßØÛ®ßÖÑ§3» 3478:Gateman1997 3328:«ßØÛ®ßÖÑ§3» 3303:«ßØÛ®ßÖÑ§3» 3269:proposal #1 3218:«ßØÛ®ßÖÑ§3» 3145:And done. 2805:Gateman1997 2671:Gateman1997 2614:Gateman1997 2574:Big Adamsky 2568:opportunity 2469:, which do 2453:Conditional 2430:Cjmarsicano 2311:instead of 2287:Proposal #1 2154:Gateman1997 2144:«ßØÛ®ßÖÑ§3» 2085:"Languages" 2042:programming 1957:templatised 1953:templatised 1735:«ßØÛ®ßÖÑ§3» 1720:Gateman1997 1665:«ßØÛ®ßÖÑ§3» 1597:«ßØÛ®ßÖÑ§3» 1259:Gateman1997 925:Gateman1997 813:proposal 1a 783:familiarize 507:discouraged 476:«ßØÛ®ßÖÑ§3» 431:Roughriders 418:«ßØÛ®ßÖÑ§3» 339:«ßØÛ®ßÖÑ§3» 238:eventualism 4826:organizing 4597:for now.-- 4569:remains.-- 3811:Farhansher 3371:Bullseye. 3086:User:AlMac 2950:User:AlMac 2504:(contribs) 2317:Disallowed 2313:Liberalism 1934:Disallowed 1873:disallowed 1805:Categories 1699:Trekphiler 1635:I like sex 1507:speediable 1464:User:Ian13 875:Niffweed17 579:disclosure 511:BorgHunter 435:Trekphiler 290:Rob Church 252:articles. 32:straw poll 4849:Carbonite 4790:Johnleemk 4687:copyright 4647:Johnleemk 4042:Johnleemk 3980:. As is. 3898:karmafist 3244:Jokermage 2778:ID:540053 2591:Johnleemk 2459:interests 2381:Jokermage 2361:Jokermage 2321:Jokermage 2181:Morgan695 2170:Morgan695 2117:ID:540053 2051:ID:540053 1832:Interests 1711:ID:540053 1691:overboard 1683:Orwellian 1468:talk page 1341:Johnleemk 1071:Seancdaug 982:Seancdaug 941:karmafist 889:Seancdaug 848:Morgan695 838:Morgan695 732:, with a 645:ID:540053 583:Jokermage 146:ID:540053 28:userboxes 4830:nae'blis 4804:nae'blis 4782:Comments 4691:web-host 4683:civility 4599:Urthogie 4571:Urthogie 4553:WP:CIVIL 4535:Urthogie 4500:WP:CIVIL 4437:Comments 4425:WP:FAITH 4114:Urthogie 3888:WP:CIVIL 3861:Urthogie 3835:contribs 3821:contribs 3807:contribs 3793:contribs 3770:Urthogie 3751:Urthogie 3714:Urthogie 3692:Urthogie 3655:Urthogie 3612:Urthogie 3592:Urthogie 3574:Urthogie 3561:WP:FAITH 3499:Urthogie 3474:WP:FAITH 3457:Urthogie 3414:Urthogie 3412:, etc.-- 3358:Urthogie 3349:Urthogie 3197:Comments 3018:WP:BABEL 3014:WP:BABEL 2876:Comments 2710:WP:FAITH 2702:WP:FAITH 2667:WP:FAITH 2587:examples 2551:Support' 2483:AdelaMae 2426:SUPPORT. 2195:AdelaMae 2012:Tantalum 1927:positive 1824:Language 1818:Location 1687:anathema 1606:Comments 1408:JB Adder 1402:Comments 1372:JB Adder 1323:Lawyer2b 1283:Lawyer2b 1096:nae'blis 844:disagree 751:policy. 708:Lawyer2b 384:See the 281:Urthogie 274:Comments 128:fair use 108:Tantalum 71:Tantalum 60:Proposal 4896:Raul654 4631:support 4595:support 4463:me too 4400:Support 4388:Support 4345:Comment 4309:Support 4279:content 4275:editors 4182:User AI 4086:Support 4026:Support 4014:Support 3978:Support 3907:Comment 3232:userbox 3179:userbox 2990:Comment 2946:Comment 2882:Comment 2698:Comment 2663:Comment 2639:Comment 2622:Comment 2583:Support 2564:Support 2532:Support 2513:Support 2455:support 2442:Jaranda 2438:Support 2414:Support 2369:Comment 2329:Comment 2283:Support 2247:Comment 2221:Comment 2191:Comment 2166:Support 2081:Comment 2059:Support 2023:lluride 2002:Support 1996:Support 1959:userbox 1882:Allowed 1869:allowed 1856:--end-- 1821:Schools 1803:As for 1786:without 1679:vandals 1511:Cryptic 1485:grm_wnr 1431:grm_wnr 1199:Support 1084:Kaldari 1063:userbox 964:Ronline 833:Comment 809:Comment 781:should 766:Comment 545:grm_wnr 211:incivil 195:status. 119:lluride 82:lluride 4976:adiant 4941:adiant 4835:(talk) 4822:really 4809:(talk) 4719:almost 4696:B. As 4608:WP:CIV 4513:Cactus 4496:WP:NPA 4420:WP:POV 4364:Oppose 4329:Oppose 4291:WP:AMT 4168:Bounds 4110:Oppose 3990:Oppose 3982:Ifnord 3823:) and 3736:Oppose 3665:Oppose 3497:too!-- 3398:nigger 3052:WP:BBL 2851:Oppose 2839:Oppose 2706:WP:CAT 2627:oppose 2604:Oppose 2501:(talk) 2359:then. 2089:WP:UBX 2064:Sceptr 1841:Sports 1797:anyway 1781:solely 1677:& 1675:idiots 1514:(talk) 1503:WP:SFD 1426:WP:TFD 1422:WP:MFD 1364:WP:TFD 1267:Oppose 1101:(talk) 1037:AySz88 1015:AySz88 937:is not 317:Oppose 5000:David 4982:|< 4981:: --> 4947:|< 4946:: --> 4934:subst 4877:David 4721:all). 4508:WP:FU 4492:WP:UP 4465:Larix 4450:Welch 4392:Larix 4374:Welch 4351:TCorp 4175:User 4158:TCorp 4130:Welch 4096:Welch 4030:Larix 4000:Welch 3783:Yuber 3707:Welch 3675:Welch 3489:Larix 3448:Larix 3444:Larix 3435:Larix 3410:egypt 3387:Larix 3373:David 3239:subst 3152:Deano 3099:Deano 3056:WP:UP 3028:Deano 2971:Deano 2927:Deano 2899:Harro 2861:Welch 2820:Deano 2796:Larix 2759:Deano 2744:Larix 2719:Deano 2688:Larix 2684:after 2648:Deano 2631:Larix 2475:could 2395:Deano 2338:Deano 2264:Deano 2204:Deano 2098:Deano 1981:Deano 1851:below 1765:Deano 1695:links 1693:with 1626:Larix 1613:David 1302:WP:UP 1297:WP:UP 996:Harro 796:TCorp 739:TCorp 668:Deano 503:Agree 377:Larix 373:Larix 357:David 302:Harro 106:.) -- 67:furry 40:Harro 16:< 5004:Talk 4960:. -- 4881:Talk 4853:Talk 4794:Talk 4700:The 4651:Talk 4551:and 4445:Phil 4369:Phil 4268:Lost 4125:Phil 4091:Phil 4046:Talk 3995:Phil 3968:. -- 3948:Zach 3920:Zach 3829:talk 3815:talk 3801:talk 3787:talk 3702:Phil 3670:Phil 3644:Guan 3423:very 3408:and 3406:arab 3377:Talk 3210:. - 3157:Talk 3123:Angr 3104:Talk 3061:Angr 3033:Talk 2994:Angr 2976:Talk 2932:Talk 2856:Phil 2825:Talk 2764:Talk 2724:Talk 2653:Talk 2595:Talk 2536:Angr 2465:and 2400:Talk 2343:Talk 2269:Talk 2209:Talk 2103:Talk 2030:diff 2010:. -- 1986:Talk 1951:Any 1770:Talk 1697:?) 1617:Talk 1482:. -- 1447:Zach 1412:Talk 1376:Talk 1345:Talk 1304:? ++ 1292:LEGO 1010:good 907:. -- 757:talk 693:talk 673:Talk 612:talk 564:talk 529:talk 515:talk 490:talk 452:talk 398:talk 361:Talk 168:talk 133:Zach 102:and 36:here 4962:Doc 4958:for 4913:Doc 4864:Doc 4772:Doc 4757:not 4675:any 4669:A. 4517:man 4498:or 4313:Lar 4270:". 3809:), 3795:), 3647:aco 3642:. — 3427:can 3400:or 3186:Mgm 3128:tɔk 3066:tɔk 2999:tɔk 2775:Ian 2557:| 2541:tɔk 2523:(?) 2496:TCC 2471:not 2114:Ian 2091:. 2048:Ian 1875:. 1758:by 1708:Ian 1645:(?) 1490:Esc 1478:or 1436:Esc 1360:RfC 1306:Lar 1237:Lar 1232:NOT 1203:Lar 1177:Lar 817:Lar 642:Ian 550:Esc 270:). 236:or 143:Ian 5002:| 4879:| 4851:| 4792:| 4770:-- 4685:, 4681:, 4649:| 4633:. 4494:, 4315:: 4195:}} 4189:{{ 4185:}} 4179:{{ 4088:— 4044:| 3431:is 3375:| 3235:}} 3229:{{ 3182:}} 3176:{{ 3131:) 3069:) 3002:) 2593:| 2572:// 2544:) 2481:- 2440:-- 2428:-- 2379:- 2289:-- 2233:-- 2224:— 1800:. 1615:| 1410:| 1374:| 1370:-- 1343:| 1308:: 1239:: 1205:: 1201:++ 1179:: 1066:}} 1060:{{ 994:. 884:is 846:. 819:: 759:) 695:) 687:. 614:) 566:) 531:) 517:) 492:) 464:I 454:) 400:) 392:. 359:| 240:.) 170:) 4979:_ 4973:R 4944:_ 4938:R 4522:✍ 4515:. 4321:c 4319:/ 4317:t 4255:) 3841:/ 3832:· 3827:( 3818:· 3813:( 3804:· 3799:( 3790:· 3785:( 3563:. 3188:| 3159:) 3155:( 3125:( 3106:) 3102:( 3063:( 3035:) 3031:( 2996:( 2978:) 2974:( 2952:| 2934:) 2930:( 2903:5 2893:( 2827:) 2823:( 2766:) 2762:( 2726:) 2722:( 2669:? 2655:) 2651:( 2538:( 2402:) 2398:( 2345:) 2341:( 2271:) 2267:( 2255:" 2211:) 2207:( 2105:) 2101:( 2069:e 2032:) 2019:e 2015:T 1988:) 1984:( 1772:) 1768:( 1314:c 1312:/ 1310:t 1245:c 1243:/ 1241:t 1211:c 1209:/ 1207:t 1185:c 1183:/ 1181:t 1149:- 1146:- 1126:- 1123:- 1049:^ 1044:- 1039:^ 1027:^ 1022:- 1017:^ 1000:5 968:✉ 825:c 823:/ 821:t 755:( 691:( 675:) 671:( 610:( 562:( 527:( 513:( 488:( 450:( 396:( 319:. 306:5 224:. 217:. 166:( 115:e 111:T 78:e 74:T 44:5

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Knowledge (XXG)

:Proposed policy on userboxes/Proposals - Knowledge (XXG)

Index