Wikipedia talk:How to contribute to Wikipedia guidance: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Newbyguesses (talk | contribs) m →What are the alternatives?: -wrongheaderlevel; |
Newbyguesses (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 704:
:This page [[Wikipedia:How to contribute to Wikipedia guidance]] should not be considered as historical, it is useful information currently to en:wikipedia, as advice, or a guideline, or an essay, whatever. The debate further up this page of ''prescriptive'' versus ''descriptive'' is dead rhetoric. --
:Read the document, and act as you see fit. Act. Take action, that is how wiki works. Some information is helpful, so use it, it may be descriptive (usually), but sometimes proscriptive. --
:And some information is unhelpful, ''ie'' Instruction Creep. There is very little of that in this document. I consider it a helpful document, currently, I think I said that (Having read the discussion page, but not examined the DIFFs in the revision History very much).
: :Well, the debate goes on, but what are the alternatives, really? --
:[...] Kim, I think we actually are in violent agreement that normative policies ought to be avoided. [...] -per''— Carl (CBM · talk) 13:15, 25 April 2008 (UTC) '' [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Kim_Bruning&diff=208100280&oldid=207989950]
:[...] It is all very well to argue about whether policy should, in general, be descriptive or prescriptive, and so forth. [...] -per- ''Kirill 18:04, 27 April 2008 (UTC)'' [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Kim_Bruning&diff=208568699&oldid=208318629]
:(Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Kim_Bruning")
:See also: [[WP:VPP#Using a policy page as a scratchpad to develop a proposal]]. --
:(added)--[[User:Newbyguesses|NewbyG]] ([[User_talk:Newbyguesses|talk]]) 23:54, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
| |||