Misplaced Pages

This is the current revision of this page, as edited by JJMC89 (talk | contribs) at 07:04, 10 January 2025 (Adding {{pp-sock}}). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.

• Table of contents
• First discussion
• End of page
• New post

• WT:VPP

Section sizes in Misplaced Pages:Village pump (policy) Section size for Misplaced Pages:Village pump (policy) (30 sections) Section name Byte count Section total (Top) 2,113 2,113 LLM/chatbot comments in discussions 4,102 263,647 opening comments 29,172 29,172 section break 1 12,668 12,668 section break 2 17,555 17,555 section break 3 15,563 15,563 section break 4 89,296 89,296 Section break 5 76,817 76,817 Request for closure 14,504 14,504 Alternate proposal 3,970 3,970 RfC: Voluntary RfA after resignation 64,987 82,290 Discussion 17,303 17,303 Guideline against use of AI images in BLPs and medical articles? 91,252 192,397 BLPs 96,859 96,859 Expiration date? 4,286 4,286 Non-Admin XFD Close as Delete 5,691 20,349 Discussion of How Much Attention Admins Pay to What They Are Deleting 14,658 14,658 Should WP:Demonstrate good faith include mention of AI-generated comments? 45,229 45,229 Edit quality in Android application 1,980 1,980 Allowing non-admin "delete" closures at RfD 16,926 16,926 Placement of dynamic list template 1,553 1,553 Should WP:NOTDIRECTORY be more specific about phone numbers, etc.? 1,054 1,054 Does my name technically violate the promotional username policy? 767 767 Technical section headings 1,957 1,957 Modifying the first sentence of BLPSPS 318 318 Upgrade MOS:ALBUM to an official guideline 29,376 29,376 reverts all edits 2,876 2,876 Problem For Translate page 1,312 1,312 A discrimination policy 18,637 18,637 Repeated false retirement 2,033 2,033 Total 684,814 684,814

Archives (index)

Index 1, 2

This page has archives. Sections older than 365 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present.

Page size

Please see Misplaced Pages talk:Village pump (proposals)#Looking for some unofficial clerks. WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:05, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

Trying to figure out of this is the appropriate venue for a discussion

So I'm here trying to figure out where to hold s discussion that spun off from an ANI thread on how information about active tropical cyclones (Hurricanes, typhoons etc) should be handled per WP:NOTNEWS and MOS:CURRENT. Between my own comments and those from others, there have been at least four different suggestions on where to hold the discussion, with the latest suggestion being this page. This page seems to be more about changes to policy but some discussions here do seem to be about application. Where ever it is held, this discussion would involve changes to long-standing practices within a WikiProject. TornadoLGS (talk) 02:08, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Proposal to change the header

The header for this Village pump begins with these words:

The policy section of the village pump is used to discuss already proposed policies and guidelines and to discuss changes to existing policies and guidelines.

A few editors seem to think that this means editors should not discuss changes to existing policies and guidelines on the talk pages of those same policies and guidelines (the talk pages that say, at their tops, things like "This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the What Misplaced Pages is not page").

If you are interested in this, please see Misplaced Pages talk:Policies and guidelines#Venue. WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:11, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

Adding Official Sources as references

Please advise on why official sources such as Airlines and Airport websites cant be used when adding information to Misplaced Pages.

Using Indepandant sources provides incorrect information. For example using a outdated article from clare fm saying Shannon- Paris is ending in October. Which is wrong because the official Airline and airport site state its NOT.

Misplaced Pages is supposed to be reliable source providing old links like that is wrong and unrelibale. Please allow official sites be used AVGEEK7813 (talk) 09:23, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

They can? An airport's website would be a primary source, which can be used for straightforward, descriptive statements of facts like whether that airport has certain flights. – Joe (talk) 10:13, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Ok @TheBanner is convinced that only indepandant sources are allowed and not official sites. He is removing peoples updates that have been gotten from official sites and replacing them with old outdated links. AVGEEK7813 (talk) 10:23, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Well if that is the case then he's incorrect. – Joe (talk) 10:30, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Are you a moderator on Misplaced Pages? You can confirm so we can use airport websites and airline websites as sources AVGEEK7813 (talk) 10:31, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

That's not how it works I'm afraid. We don't have moderators. If you have a disagreement with The Banner (courtesy ping) about a specific source, you should discuss it with him and other editors on the article's talk page and seek a consensus based on policies like WP:V and WP:PSTS. – Joe (talk) 10:41, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Ok thanks for your clarifications anyway AVGEEK7813 (talk) 10:57, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

In fact, it was a case where an independent source was just removed. No replacement, just removal. And an unsubstantiated claim that the source used was incorrect. The Banner talk 15:31, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

If a source is removed, usually the information the source supports should also be removed. The removal constitutes a challenge to the source and the information. If someone wants to restore it, the person adding it should include a different reliable source. Or, discuss on the talk page why the removed source is reliable after all. Jc3s5h (talk) 15:43, 9 July 2024 (UTC)