From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Internet Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet culture, an attempt to better organise information in articles related to the Internet culture. For more information, visit the project page.
Start	This article has been rated as start-class on the quality scale.
High	This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance scale.
	It is requested that a picture or pictures be included in this article to improve its quality.

This article was originally based on material from the Free On-line Dictionary of Computing, which is licensed under the GFDL.

• Talk:Netiquette/archive1

[edit] Back to basics

This page sucks and was reflecting people's views without any recourse to WP:NPOV etc. I've got back to basics and taken the RFC as the basis for the article. I was quite disappointed to see much of the opinionated editing that had been going on where people wished to forced their POV, rather than reflect the nature of Netiquette.

Also there was a considerable amount of waffle which I have removed.

And many of the references linked to dead sites.

If you now wish to add or edit anything, please provide an in-page reference. Thanks

 BRIANTIST  (talk) 08:20, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

About half of the page as it stands still could be stricken. Most of the article remains either OR-laden lists of advice or similar lists pulled from the RFC rather than coverage of third party analysis of common rules. A rewrite, or at least deletion of those huge advice lists, may still be warranted. As long as we have those lists, edits like this are bound to continue. If we replace them with statements like "ZD editorial author John Doe recommends that people do X on teh intertubes" would result in a much, much stronger article. Can move massive lists of advice elsewhere/to other wikis where OR is acceptable. MrZaius^talk 08:43, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

phew - That's better. Been wanting to do that for ages. Now we have an article rather than a never-ending list of OR. MrZaius^talk 20:49, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

In response to the recent revert, note that the Wikipedia is a place for encyclopedic, independently sourced coverage of a given topic, not summaries of RFCs. Mass deletion of independently sourced information is hardly a positive edit. Ultimate goal here should be creating a FA-level article, not rewriting the RFC and publishing a list of advice that carries with it inherent WP:NPOV issues. MrZaius^talk 11:43, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Examples

I removed the lines about Neal Patterson, since they don't seem particularly relevant to netiquette. Netiquette is usually concerned with the social conventions of good behaviour over online communication systems; civility in emails might qualify, but the Patterson story isn't so much about him being uncivil as much as his emails being leaked. I believe it was meant to be an example of how 'private' messages aren't necessarily private, but we already have Paris Hilton's PDA as a perfect example of that. Terraxos 20:52, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

The thing is that the example is unique in having such a clear and obvious monetary cost associated with it, given the dip in stock value. Additionally, it was discussed in the context of etiquette in the linked print book about email. Restored the sourced material for now, but open to discussion on clarifying the text. Also added another similar example for the DHS. MrZaius^talk 18:58, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Forwarding

Is it considered bad etiquette to forward emails without permission? 66.208.12.125 15:02, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, but who cares. Tirus (talk) 18:08, 19 December 2007 (UTC)