Wikipedia:Standard exception to Projectspace limitations: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 23:28, 12 March 2010

Revision as of 03:13, 13 March 2010

Line 4:

# When an article which the restricted user created or was a major contributor to is nominated for deletion at AfD, the restricted user may edit the AfD page to comment in a civil and non-disruptive manner, and shall not be blocked for such comments.

# When an article which the restricted user created or was a major contributor to is nominated for [[WP:GA|Good Article]] or [[WP:FA|Featured article]] status, the restricted user may edit the relevant project page to comment in a civil and non-disruptive manner, and shall not be blocked for such comments.

# When on any project notice board (such as [[WP:ANI]], [[WP:COIN]], [[WP:SPI]] or the like) the restricted user is mentioned by name, the restricted user may edit the relevant noticeboard thread to respond in a civil and non-disruptive manner to comments concerning his or her actions, and shall not be blocked for such comments.

Line 10:

==Rationale==

In the case of the AfD and to a lesser extant the GA/FA exceptionsexception, article creators and major contributors are particularly likely to have relevant information and views, and it will aid the decision process if those views can be heard and form part of the discussion. While it is true that such views could be expressed on article talk pages or elsewhere, participants in the discussions are much less likely to see them there, and so will have a reduced chance to take the views into account.

In the case of noticeboard discussions, it seems only fair to give users a chance to defend or explain their actions or rebut comments about them, if possible.