Template talk:Uw-paid2
Latest comment: 3 years ago by Primefac in topic RFC about above edit request
 | To discuss conflict of interest problems with specific editors and articles, please go to Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard. |
 | Users who have been paid to edit Wikipedia must disclose this fact when discussing proposed changes to WP:COI or related pages. |
 | This template was considered for deletion on 2015 October 30. The result of the discussion was "keep". |
|
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
RFC about above edit request edit
I was instructed to establish a consensus for the change, hence this RFC. Firestar464 (talk) 04:14, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
- As an RfC statement, that is useless. See WP:RFCST and WP:RFCNEUTRAL, not to mention WP:WRFC. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:34, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
- An RfC really isn't necessary here and is as Redrose pointed out not how they're usually used. I've taken the liberty to remove it. As for the actual issue at hand I believe it's sensible to remove references to previous warnings as skipping the first warning happens even though skipping the second or third usually is preferable. It also has no negative effect on people who got a previous warning. Blablubbs and Primefac are you fine with this change? If so I would consider that consensus enough and will implement it. --Trialpears (talk) 22:58, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
- Well... I don't disagree with the change but I asked for a consensus because I felt that this would require at least some discussion (see my reply above as to those concerns). An RFC is obviously not necessary, but a few more comments in the affirmative would be nice. Primefac (talk) 23:01, 8 December 2020 (UTC)