WHEREAS our TalossaWiki media contains may pages which are supposed to neutrally and factually detail many aspects of Talossa and its activity, and should not contain politician attacks nor harassment statements;
BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED, that Article "J. Wittenberg" of the Statutory Law is renamed "J. Wittenberg and TalossaWiki", and is amended by the addition of the following articles:
4. A Wiki tool, called "TalossaWiki" is made available to all Talossan Citizens, allowing these to create and enrich pages related to all aspects of our Kingdom, be it the State, the Government, the Provinces, the culture, the politics, the Law, and also pages provided biography of Talossan Citizens,
5. The update of all Wiki pages is made volunteerely by Citizens
6. The part of TalossaWiki providing informations must remain neutral and objective and shall report facts and not opinions. Inclusion of opinions should be limited to party members on their specific Polical Parties pages, or to citizens on their own personal Citizen pages
7. Any citizen or group of citizen who feels attacked or insulted by a comment on any the Wiki page can raise a case to the Court of Justice, after unsucessful attempts to solve the matter by discussion
Wouldn't it be better if we operated our Wiki the way Wikipedia does instead of potentially criminalizing edits to TW?
-Txec R
I have attempted to address this issue in the interim by proposing some changes to our manual of style: https://wiki.talossa.com/TalossaWiki_talk:Manual_of_style
Just for reference, this came up during the campaign when a party leader added a footnote with "claimed" to the values list of another party, implying that this claim was in doubt. They also added in a promo for their party to a main namespace article. Neither of these things was a huge deal, and the matter was addressed pretty quickly with a return to the status quo. It might have been an innocent mistake, really. We deliberately chose not to make a fuss and publicize the matter. But it does look like we need some way to handle this, and our guidelines should be clear and set well in advance of the next election.
I recall pleading for this kind of measure (in the Discord) over a year ago and no one seemed to think it was a problem then...glad to see there has been a change in perspective.
I support this bill and will encourage its application not be based on the popularity of the offender or the victim.
Quote from: þerxh Sant-Enogat on Today at 11:49:47 AMWHEREAS our TalossaWiki media contains may pages which are supposed to neutrally and factually detail many aspects of Talossa and its activity, and should not contain politician attacks nor harassment statements
I would recommend the last part of the whereas clause be edited to read as "should not contain
political attacks or
harassing statements"
Quote from: Breneir Tzaracomprada on Today at 12:33:10 PMQuote from: þerxh Sant-Enogat on Today at 11:49:47 AMWHEREAS our TalossaWiki media contains may pages which are supposed to neutrally and factually detail many aspects of Talossa and its activity, and should not contain politician attacks nor harassment statements
I would recommend the last part of the whereas clause be edited to read as "should not contain political attacks or harassing statements"
I did those to myself once...wasn't fun...
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote from: King Txec on Today at 12:00:53 PMWouldn't it be better if we operated our Wiki the way Wikipedia does instead of potentially criminalizing edits to TW?
Yeah, this is weaksauce.
I don't like the urge to criminalise political speech if it annoys us, and I'm very surprised to see this coming from the PA. Especially since the PA leader once deliberately vandalised a namespace wiki page to make a political point.
We need proper wiki moderation, which is a Chancery issue, and I support efforts in that regard. Troll edits should be removed and repeat offenders should get banned, but that is a moderation issue not Call The Police.
I'm not familiar with any provision transferring administration of the wiki to the Chancery. I'm fairly sure that it's a Propaganda or Technology issue, unless I missed a significant legal change.