368:
add anything to the situation. Maybe editors who are concerned by the tag should need to read the full discussion (if any) rather than walking away with just the reason provided. I have to admit I'm a little unsympathetic to the case of editors who might apply this tag but not start the implicitly-required discussion; they don't need to start it themselves, but should coordinate with another editor at that point. Adding the parameter may also confuse editors who believe that supplying a reason obviates the need for a discussion.
219:
353:: Well, if they don't initiate a talk page discussion, isn't another person allowed to remove the template? Also I just realised that it could help with that anyway, because if the reason is sufficiently descriptive, someone else who agrees with it could start the discussion rather than simply removing the template. I feel like the only way to know for sure though is to trial it by adding the parameter and seeing how it goes. What do you think? Regards,
433:
630:
524:
139:
169:
688:
599:
425:. But I like the idea of giving more information. As an alternative what about automatically creating a Talk discussion with the editor name and the comment from the publish if an NPOV is added on an article. If they give no reason, the the discussion has "no reason given. If uncertain please contact editor, or if you can't work out why remove
742:
resore unless you have that". But according to the lead of this template, "Place this template on an article when you have identified a serious issue of balance and the lack of a WP:Neutral point of view, and you wish to attract editors with different viewpoints to the article." It doesn't say I must seek consensus first to add it.
787:
I literally followed the guidance of this template, therefore i thought it was inappropriate to remove it and indicated to Beyond My Ken that they don't own the article. I tried following this template's guidance when adding the tag. Beyond My Ken in my opinion did not. Because the template guidance
741:
the article, but the user reverted again, with the rationale, "The tag should not represent a single editor's viewpoint, it should reflect that a significant percentage of the editors discussing the issue agree that there is a neutrality problem -- that isw most definitely NOT the case here. Do not
816:
add the tag, perhaps after waiting a couple of days to see how other editors feel regarding your concerns. However, if the Talk page discussion that
Johnuniq linked to already addresses the neutrality concerns that you intended to highlight, then it would seem that there's already a consensus that
808:
I have mixed feelings regarding
Johnuniq's response to you, so I'll just say that while technically you aren't required to start a discussion regarding your POV concerns either before or after adding this tag, I think the instructions make it pretty clear that adding the tag without any supporting
367:
If the editor who adds the template is required to initiate a Talk page discussion, which appears to implicitly be the case (they're not strictly required to do so, but as you note, the tag can be removed if there isn't such a discussion), then I'm not sure whether the reason parameter will really
764:
Tags should not be used to express personal dissatisfaction with an article. Instead, clear reasons for the tag need to be provided on article talk. Documentation does not cover obvious things such as the fact that of course consensus is needed for anything in an article, including a tag. The
320:
page. I think it would be useful to have the option to display a reason in this template. Of course, this wouldn't be a replacement for discussing things on the talk page, but it could at least provide a short explanation of what the problem is. Does anyone have any comment on this? Regards,
385:: You have fair points. I guess let's see if anyone else has any thoughts on this parameter as well. I do personally think it would be useful, and I proposed it because I have use for such a parameter at the moment, but I get what you mean. Thanks,
831:
I agree with your explanation, in fact it's obviously correct. No one needs to get permission to edit an article or to add a tag. However, no one needs permission to revert an edit or remove a tag. After that, discussion and consensus is required.
788:
clearly talks in a singular you that places the tag, it doesn't indicate that I must seek consensus to add it because it is actually a tag to seek consensus. Therefore, you appear to have a circular argument. Regards,
769:
does not support your position. By the way, some thought would show that accusing another editor of OWNING an article is not appropriate given that you seem to think you OWN the right to insert a tag.
399:
Absolutely! Just expressing my opinions here, and I'm happy to defer to whatever consensus may emerge, and might even rethink my own views depending on what others have to say. Thank you!
199:
657:
555:
492:
I'd be curious to hear from other editors on this, and see test cases. If your quote is the exact wording you think should appear, then I think it needs refinement as well.
662:{{Tfm/dated|page=POV|otherpage=POV check|link=Knowledge:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 November 7#Template:POV|help=off|bigbox={{#invoke:Noinclude|noinclude|text=yes}}}}
130:
514:
189:
734:
removed it with the rationale, "No support for NPOB tag on talk page". It is my understanding that is not a reason to remove it per this template's guidance.
239:. Substantial changes should first be proposed and discussed here on this page. If the proposal is uncontroversial or has been discussed and is supported by
812:
As such, if you have legitimate concerns about the POV on that article, I would encourage you to start a discussion at the article's Talk page and
620:
590:
766:
487:
74:
408:
394:
377:
362:
345:
614:
336:
I wonder whether having the option of using a reason parameter would discourage editors from initiating a Talk page discussion...
280:
501:
330:
247:}} to notify an administrator or template editor to make the requested edit. Usually, any contributor may edit the template's
80:
711:
584:
138:
39:
679:
466:
296:
244:
275:
442:
20:
801:
778:
723:
826:
706:
236:
69:
841:
230:
126:
122:
118:
114:
110:
106:
102:
98:
60:
758:
93:
675:
509:
175:
579:
390:
358:
326:
809:
discussion at the Talk page may result in other editors removing it, similarly without discussion.
636:
530:
446:
317:
267:
717:
313:
277:
261:
457:
168:
8:
798:
755:
567:
386:
354:
322:
240:
50:
837:
774:
731:
483:
65:
822:
727:
702:
497:
404:
373:
341:
46:
278:
609:
249:
790:
747:
149:
833:
784:
770:
738:
671:
479:
254:
178:. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:
818:
695:
551:
493:
422:
400:
382:
369:
350:
337:
224:
24:
606:
154:
153:
283:
767:
Talk:Conspiracy theory#Lead is not neutral and article maybe is not
665:
285:
151:
558:), but it was protected, so it could not be tagged. Please add:
566:
to the top of the page to complete the nomination. Thank you. –
624:
155:
518:
282:
276:
265:. Functionality of the template can be checked using
15:
660:has ended; please remove the TfD tag (that is,
554:has been listed at Templates for discussion (
737:I reverted indicating Beyond My Ken doesn't
421:I agree that some users are unlikely to use
456:. Please do not remove this message until
467:Learn how and when to remove this message
452:Relevant discussion may be found on the
259:Any contributor may edit the template's
515:Edit request to complete TfD nomination
237:heavily used or highly visible template
730:because I believe it is not neutral.
426:
213:
163:
562:{{subst:tfm|help=off|1=POV check}}
23:for discussing improvements to the
13:
312:parameter to this template in its
14:
855:
817:the neutrality is not an issue.
686:
628:
597:
522:
431:
217:
174:This template was nominated for
167:
137:
40:Click here to start a new topic.
621:Edit request to remove TfD tag
1:
712:07:43, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
680:04:52, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
502:19:29, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
488:06:00, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
37:Put new text under old text.
745:Advice is welcome. Regards,
615:23:01, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
591:22:55, 7 November 2021 (UTC)
7:
651:to reactivate your request.
639:has been answered. Set the
545:to reactivate your request.
533:has been answered. Set the
458:conditions to do so are met
45:New to Knowledge? Welcome!
10:
860:
842:23:26, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
827:14:20, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
802:23:17, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
779:07:36, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
759:06:13, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
409:06:09, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
395:05:25, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
378:20:50, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
363:08:29, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
346:16:45, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
331:13:48, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
75:Be welcoming to newcomers
726:template on the article
316:, and tested it on the
245:edit template-protected
198:, 23 October 2020, see
453:
253:to add usage notes or
70:avoid personal attacks
664:at the top). Thanks,
131:Auto-archiving period
243:, editors may use {{
445:of this article is
732:User:Beyond My Ken
188:, 1 May 2021, see
81:dispute resolution
42:
728:Conspiracy theory
718:Placement dispute
710:
655:
654:
549:
548:
510:TfD edit requests
477:
476:
469:
292:
291:
212:
211:
208:
207:
162:
161:
61:Assume good faith
38:
851:
797:
795:
754:
752:
700:
698:
694:
690:
689:
668:
663:
646:
642:
632:
631:
625:
605:
601:
600:
587:
582:
563:
540:
536:
526:
525:
519:
472:
465:
461:
435:
434:
427:
311:
300:
286:
235:because it is a
221:
220:
214:
180:
179:
171:
164:
156:
142:
141:
132:
16:
859:
858:
854:
853:
852:
850:
849:
848:
791:
789:
748:
746:
720:
696:
687:
685:
666:
661:
644:
640:
629:
623:
612:
611:it has begun...
598:
596:
585:
580:
561:
538:
534:
523:
517:
512:
473:
462:
451:
436:
432:
309:
303:
298:
288:
287:
281:
218:
158:
157:
152:
129:
87:
86:
56:
12:
11:
5:
857:
847:
846:
845:
844:
810:
806:
805:
804:
765:discussion at
719:
716:
715:
714:
658:The discussion
653:
652:
633:
622:
619:
618:
617:
610:
547:
546:
527:
516:
513:
511:
508:
507:
506:
505:
504:
475:
474:
439:
437:
430:
419:
418:
417:
416:
415:
414:
413:
412:
411:
387:DesertPipeline
355:DesertPipeline
323:DesertPipeline
302:
295:
290:
289:
284:
279:
274:
273:
222:
210:
209:
206:
205:
204:
203:
193:
172:
160:
159:
150:
148:
147:
144:
143:
89:
88:
85:
84:
77:
72:
63:
57:
55:
54:
43:
34:
33:
30:
29:
28:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
856:
843:
839:
835:
830:
829:
828:
824:
820:
815:
811:
807:
803:
800:
796:
794:
786:
782:
781:
780:
776:
772:
768:
763:
762:
761:
760:
757:
753:
751:
743:
740:
735:
733:
729:
725:
724:I placed this
713:
708:
704:
699:
693:
684:
683:
682:
681:
677:
673:
669:
659:
650:
647:parameter to
638:
634:
627:
626:
616:
613:
608:
604:
595:
594:
593:
592:
588:
583:
577:
576:
573:
570:
564:
559:
557:
553:
544:
541:parameter to
532:
528:
521:
520:
503:
499:
495:
491:
490:
489:
485:
481:
471:
468:
459:
455:
449:
448:
444:
438:
429:
428:
424:
420:
410:
406:
402:
398:
397:
396:
392:
388:
384:
381:
380:
379:
375:
371:
366:
365:
364:
360:
356:
352:
349:
348:
347:
343:
339:
335:
334:
333:
332:
328:
324:
319:
315:
308:I've added a
306:
294:
272:
270:
269:
264:
263:
256:
252:
251:
250:documentation
246:
242:
238:
234:
232:
226:
223:
216:
215:
201:
197:
194:
191:
187:
184:
183:
182:
181:
177:
173:
170:
166:
165:
146:
145:
140:
136:
128:
124:
120:
116:
112:
108:
104:
100:
97:
95:
91:
90:
82:
78:
76:
73:
71:
67:
64:
62:
59:
58:
52:
48:
47:Learn to edit
44:
41:
36:
35:
32:
31:
26:
22:
18:
17:
813:
792:
749:
744:
736:
721:
691:
656:
648:
637:edit request
602:
574:
571:
568:
565:
560:
552:Template:POV
550:
542:
531:edit request
463:
441:
383:User:Doniago
351:User:Doniago
307:
304:
293:
266:
260:
258:
248:
233:from editing
229:permanently
228:
225:Template:POV
195:
186:Do not merge
185:
134:
92:
19:This is the
480:Wakelamp db
641:|answered=
607:* Pppery *
556:nomination
535:|answered=
443:neutrality
268:test cases
255:categories
200:discussion
190:discussion
793:Thinker78
750:Thinker78
454:talk page
318:testcases
301:parameter
297:Adding a
241:consensus
231:protected
83:if needed
66:Be polite
27:template.
21:talk page
834:Johnuniq
785:Johnuniq
771:Johnuniq
676:contribs
447:disputed
176:deletion
135:365Â days
94:Archives
51:get help
819:DonIago
697:firefly
569:Laundry
494:DonIago
423:DonIago
401:DonIago
370:DonIago
338:DonIago
314:sandbox
262:sandbox
799:(talk)
756:(talk)
739:WP:OWN
310:reason
299:reason
645:|ans=
635:This
572:Pizza
539:|ans=
529:This
79:Seek
838:talk
823:talk
814:then
775:talk
722:Hi.
692:Done
678:) @
672:talk
603:Done
498:talk
484:talk
440:The
405:talk
391:talk
374:talk
359:talk
342:talk
327:talk
305:Hi,
196:Keep
68:and
667:Tol
643:or
537:or
227:is
25:POV
840:)
825:)
777:)
705:·
701:(
674:|
649:no
589:)
586:c̄
575:03
543:no
500:)
486:)
407:)
393:)
376:)
361:)
344:)
329:)
271:.
257:.
133::
125:,
121:,
117:,
113:,
109:,
105:,
101:,
49:;
836:(
821:(
783:@
773:(
709:)
707:c
703:t
670:(
581:d
578:(
496:(
482:(
478:"
470:)
464:(
460:.
450:.
403:(
389:(
372:(
357:(
340:(
325:(
202:.
192:.
127:8
123:7
119:6
115:5
111:4
107:3
103:2
99:1
96::
53:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
