Wikipedia:Removing warnings

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

For current discussion on removing warnings, see Wikipedia:Centralized discussion/Removing warnings.

This Wikipedia page is currently inactive and is retained as a historical archive. Either the page is no longer relevant or consensus has become unclear. If you want to revive discussion regarding the subject, you should seek broader input via a forum such as the proposals page of the village pump.

Should removing warnings other users give you be disallowed?

• Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Is removing warnings from your own user talk page an act of vandalism.3F Had some initial discussion of the issue.
• M:Help:Talk page Is an official policy on talk pages but doesn't mention it.
• Wikipedia:User page Doesn't talk about this issue
• Wikipedia:Remove personal attacks
• Wikipedia:Talk pages#Etiquette and Wikipedia:Vandalism#Types of vandalism has been changing too fast to really call its coverage of this issue policy. (Often without gathering consensus, which is strongly discouraged.)
• Wikipedia:Vandalism#Types of vandalism said at one point that removing warnings is vandalism, but this has been removed and re-added several times, again without consensus.
• Wikipedia:Talk pages#Etiquette Doesn’t take a side. It says it is wrong to remove a warning but also that it's wrong to re-add a warning. (Dispute resolution would be the only solution by this guideline.)

As of now this page is just a collection of what has been on policy pages in the past. The official policy pages should not be changing so much; we should sort out what we really want to be the policy and make it a policy once we have gathered a consensus on it.

Feel free to add warning removal policy proposals to this page, but please don't delete any of the possible policies that are listed here yet.

[edit] Vandalism

Talk page vandalism

Deleting the comments of other users from article Talk pages, or deleting entire sections thereof, is generally considered vandalism. Removing personal attacks is often considered legitimate, and it is considered acceptable to archive an overly long Talk page to a separate file and then remove the text from the main Talk page. The above does not apply to the user's own Talk page, where users generally are permitted to remove and archive comments at their discretion, except in cases of warnings, which they are generally discouraged from removing.

Removing warnings

Removing warnings for vandalism from one's talk page is also considered vandalism. However, after a reasonable time has elapsed, archiving one's talk page, including the vandal warning, is acceptable. Editors may be subject to a minor block for archiving prematurely so as to hide warnings.

Alternative policy suggestion on removing warnings: Note: this proposed policy contains several "redlinks". There is probably no need to create the pages linked to while it is up for discussion, as the context here makes clear the likely eventual content of those pages if the policy is accepted. Where a warning exists on a user talk page, any logged-in user with good standing other than the owner of the talk page, who considers that the warning is clearly inappropriate or that the behavior which led to the warning has ceased, may flag the warning as being considered for removal. This is done by placing the template {{warning-for-removal}} immediately after the warning where it appears on the talk page. This will tag the warning appropriately, and also categorize the talk page under Category:Talk pages with warnings for removal, so that the decision can be more easily reviewed by others. This must be done separately for each warning to be removed. If any logged-in editor with good standing considers that the warning is still appropriate, they may remove the {{warning-for-removal}} template from the talk page. No editor may add or remove a {{warning-for-removal}} template to/from any particular warning more than once per month, except to revert removals or additions which were themselves made in violation of policy. However, multiple warnings on a given talk page are to be treated independently. Any user adding or removing the {{warning-for-removal}} template takes responsibility for the assertion that the warning is not or is still applicable (respectively). Any such assertions made in clear bad faith are a violation of policy. If at any time the inclusion of {{warning-for-removal}}, having been placed in accordance with policy, remains intact for a period of three days, the warning may be removed (together with the template) by any editor, including the owner of the talk page. This period must be continuous, except for removals of the template out of process which were subsequently reverted. Removal of warnings according to this procedure may be made without request, or upon request made anywhere. One place where removal may be requested is at Wikipedia:Warning removal requests; requests made there will after a period be deleted without archival. Removal of warnings outside of this procedure will be considered vandalism, except where sanctioned by Jimbo Wales or the arbitration committee.

[edit] Templates

• Template:Wr
• Template:Wr3
• Template:Wr4

[edit] Can I do whatever I want to my own user talk page?

From Wikipedia:Talk pages version [1]:

Most users treat their user talk pages like regular talk pages, and archive the contents periodically to a personal subpage -- either when the page gets too large, on a regular schedule, or when they take a wikivacation. Others delete comments after they have responded to them.

Actively erasing personal messages without replying (if a reply would be appropriate or polite) will probably be interpreted as hostile. In the past, this kind of behavior has been viewed as uncivil, and this can become an issue in arbitration or other formal proceedings. Redirecting your user talk page to another page (whether meant as a joke or intended to be offensive or to send a "go away" message), except in the case of redirecting from one account to another when both are yours, can also be considered a hostile act. However, reverting such removals or redirects is not proper and may result in a block for edit warring. If someone removes your comments without answering consider moving on or dispute resolution. This is especially true for vandalism warnings.

If you feel that your user talk page is getting too large and is taking a long time to load, you may archive it. You may then remove comments from your talk page, but please make sure that those comments are readily accessible on another page.

Furthermore WP:VAND states: Removing warnings, whether for vandalism or other forms of prohibited/discouraged behavior, from one's talk page is also considered vandalism. It is generally acceptable to remove misplaced vandalism tags, as long as the reasoning is solid.

Feel free to decorate your personal pages as you see fit, but keep in mind that your user talk page has the important function of allowing other editors to communicate with you. People will get upset if they cannot use it for that purpose.