Wikipedia talk:File mover
 | This is not the page to ask for help or make test edits.
To make test edits, please use the Sandbox. For other help, please see our main help page. |
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the File mover page. |
|
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 60 days  |
 | This project page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
When actioning a file move request
editWhen working file move requests and a file is listed for discussion, should the move not take place and wait until the discussion is done or just move the file, leave a redirect, anyway ? - FlightTime (open channel) 17:09, 3 September 2021 (UTC)
- FlightTime, if the file is likely to get deleted I typically decline any move request. Sometimes I'll even decline a request because and list the file at FfD instead of moving it. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 01:57, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
- @Alexis Jazz: Good, that's what logic told me. Thanx for your reply. - FlightTime (open channel) 02:13, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
Is this page a policy?
editIt currently has some weird Ombox at the top of the page that does not state it's a policy and isn't {{Procedural policy}}, but at the bottom of the page it's in Category:Wikipedia procedural policies. I propose that we decide in this talk page section if this is a policy or not, and then change the ombox and category to be in sync and agree with each other. The template and category should either be...
- {{Procedural policy}}, which will automatically put it in Category:Wikipedia procedural policies
- {{Information page}}, no policy category
I'm leaning towards #2. I don't think single editors are supposed to decide that something is a policy, and other user right pages such as WP:NPR are information pages, not policies.
Depending on how this goes, I will also propose the same thing on other out of sync pages such as WP:PMR, which also has the same custom Ombox and procedural policy category. –Novem Linguae (talk) 21:41, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
- I confess I don't personally see the issue here - I think it's fine for a single editor to promote these userright procedures as policy pages without objection. WP:PMR's designation came from the close and wasn't challenged then or after, although nobody aside from the closer asked for that to happen. So really, I just think the idea that procedural policies need a confirmatory, explicit vote doesn't line up with precedent and history.
- But I also don't particularly see why they need to be policies. So I don't care too much either way, but we should probably be consistent across userrights.
- Also, what is a "procedural policy" is just poorly defined IMO, verses what's a procedure with a high level of community acceptance but without the tag. This discussion might be better suited for WP:VPP. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 23:42, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
- Has {{subcat guideline|behavioral guideline}} been considered? Seems appropriate for this page. If not, having it as procedural would be fine. — BerryForPerpetuity (talk) 14:52, 1 November 2024 (UTC)
- I dug into this a bit more and found an attempt to make this a guideline that failed. Wikipedia talk:File mover/Archive 1#RfC to adopt Wikipedia:File mover as an official guideline. I also dug into WP:PMR more, which was in a similar situation, but I found an RFC close that explicitly stated that that one is promoted to policy. With those findings, I am feeling more confident about how to fix this. I've tagged WP:PMR as a policy and I've tagged FMR (this page) as an information page. –Novem Linguae (talk) 20:04, 1 November 2024 (UTC)