Consumer Rights Wiki talk:Moderators' noticeboard: Difference between revisions
CrookKilla (talk | contribs) |
→Pocket Cast: Reply |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 192: | Line 192: | ||
:'''"If [[User:Louis|Louis Rossmann]] has verifiably extolled its virtues, it's on topic."''' I think that is a short simple, good rule we should have. At least I'm going to throw it out there to be considered as the only or one of perhaps multiple rules / line definitions to address this issue. If a bright line can be drawn based on the other efforts above, good, but right now, I'm seeing a lines that I anticipate would make each decision a tough call - one that would be hard for someone with folks with even a little bias one way or the other (i.e. average humans) to be able to respectfully disagree on. Probably wouldn't hurt to add "significant coverage" or something like that but maybe not necessary. '''"Significant coverage by [[User:Louis|Louis Rossmann]] verifiably extolling something's virtues indicates an article is warranted."''' | :'''"If [[User:Louis|Louis Rossmann]] has verifiably extolled its virtues, it's on topic."''' I think that is a short simple, good rule we should have. At least I'm going to throw it out there to be considered as the only or one of perhaps multiple rules / line definitions to address this issue. If a bright line can be drawn based on the other efforts above, good, but right now, I'm seeing a lines that I anticipate would make each decision a tough call - one that would be hard for someone with folks with even a little bias one way or the other (i.e. average humans) to be able to respectfully disagree on. Probably wouldn't hurt to add "significant coverage" or something like that but maybe not necessary. '''"Significant coverage by [[User:Louis|Louis Rossmann]] verifiably extolling something's virtues indicates an article is warranted."''' | ||
:Arguments in favor: | :Arguments in favor: | ||
:# Short. | :#Short. | ||
:# Bright line. | :#Bright line. | ||
:# I think we want articles on companies which Louis verifiably extolled the virtues of. Several come to mind of which he has covered in some detail. | :#I think we want articles on companies which Louis verifiably extolled the virtues of. Several come to mind of which he has covered in some detail. | ||
:# I think the bulk of us are here because we're fans of Louis and have developed a feel for and trust his judgement. | :#I think the bulk of us are here because we're fans of Louis and have developed a feel for and trust his judgement. | ||
:Where is the current "Pro-consumer articles definition" or scope policy? | :Where is the current "Pro-consumer articles definition" or scope policy? | ||
:[[Positive_practices]] exist but doesn't answer. | :[[Positive_practices]] exist but doesn't answer. | ||
:Oh, see [[Category:Pro-consumer_articles]] defines it and just got edited on the 15th. https://consumerrights.wiki/index.php?title=Category:Pro-consumer_articles&diff=prev&oldid=57894 | :Oh, see [[Category:Pro-consumer_articles]] defines it and just got edited on the 15th. https://consumerrights.wiki/index.php?title=Category:Pro-consumer_articles&diff=prev&oldid=57894 | ||
:@[[User:Mr Pollo|Mr Pollo]], are you open to my idea? I'm reading into [[GrapheneOS]], [[Mullvad]] still being around that a proposal like mine is welcome - unlike some forums, where such a suggestion would be considered 'arguing with the mods'. [[User:CrookKilla|CrookKilla]] ([[User talk:CrookKilla|talk]]) 03:26, 29 June 2026 (UTC) | :@[[User:Mr Pollo|Mr Pollo]], are you open to my idea? I'm reading into [[GrapheneOS]], [[Mullvad]] still being around that a proposal like mine is welcome - unlike some forums, where such a suggestion would be considered 'arguing with the mods'. [[User:CrookKilla|CrookKilla]] ([[User talk:CrookKilla|talk]]) 03:26, 29 June 2026 (UTC) | ||
::I do think that if we were to continue down this route, we do seriously need to consider developing a set of proper criteria, as well as a necessary quality threshold, because only leaving it up to the whims of the bossmann just makes it difficult to sustain autonomy for the wiki [[User:JamesTDG|JamesTDG]] ([[User talk:JamesTDG|talk]]) 05:01, 29 June 2026 (UTC) | |||
==Pocket Cast== | ==Pocket Cast== | ||
| Line 208: | Line 209: | ||
I was a lifetime-license user. After I pushed back and pointed out that I had a lifetime license, the ads were removed from my account. I can provide a redacted screenshot of the email/thread if useful. [[User:ServiceLevelOne|ServiceLevelOne]] ([[User talk:ServiceLevelOne|talk]]) 17:38, 28 June 2026 (UTC) | I was a lifetime-license user. After I pushed back and pointed out that I had a lifetime license, the ads were removed from my account. I can provide a redacted screenshot of the email/thread if useful. [[User:ServiceLevelOne|ServiceLevelOne]] ([[User talk:ServiceLevelOne|talk]]) 17:38, 28 June 2026 (UTC) | ||
:While it may act as supplemental information, unless we have external coverage, I would advise against writing an article on the matter. [[User:JamesTDG|JamesTDG]] ([[User talk:JamesTDG|talk]]) 05:02, 29 June 2026 (UTC) | |||