FamilySearch Wiki:Policies/Proposed enhancements

= Policies and Procedures =

This page documents the ongoing development of the policies and procedures for the FamilySearch Research Wiki. The tables help visualize both the policies and procedures that are already in place and the additional development work that is needed.

Separate pages for each policy and guideline will be created and linked to from the FamilySearch Wiki Policies page and the Guiding Principles page. (See the new Three-revert rule page as an example.) Each individual policy and procedure will be open for community discussion through the respective Discussion pages. When Policies and Guidelines are accepted as standards of the Research Wiki, there will be indication of such on the page.

Personal Actions
na = not applicable

Note: Notifying Admin should be done through the individual templates/flags that are added to the user page or the article page. The templates/flags should be programed to automatically update the Administrator's noticeboard when they are added to a page. The implementation and enhancement of current templates will include the capability to update the noticeboard.

Deletion
Notes: The current deletion request template was created for content that should be immediately deleted. There are other reasons for deletion, but users are hesitant to use the deletion template because of its strong language. We need to either revise the deletion template's language or create additional templates to fill the multiple reasons to request a deletion of content.

Editing

 * Design and implement Editing best practices. See Wikipedia How to edit a page for ideas
 * Document the usage of the Summary field when editing content. Include a suggested list of abbreviations because the field is limited to 250 characters. See Wikipedia Edit summary legend and Edit summary legend/Quick reference
 * Define difference between minor edits and major edits with the corresponding best practice.
 * Why is the "minor edit" check box on all pages automatically checked. Why is this the default? This needs to be changed. The minor edit default is an option in user preferences. I don't know if the default user registration includes the minor edit feature as the default.
 * Design and implement the Arbitration Policy (see above).
 * Design and implement content disputes policies and procedures. (See Wikipedia:Dispute Resolution)
 * Design and implement a template/flag for authors to use on pages they are creating or editing over a given length of time. This flag would warn other users and editors that the page is under construction for a set number of days. Need to determine how many days to allow for a major edit.
 * Design and implement a template/flag for authors to use on a page they are currently editing. This flag would warn other users &amp; editors that the page is currently being revised.

Dispute Resolution

 * Create a Dispute Resolution page and include content that will help authors resolve their own disputes with other authors. For reference see Wikipedia:Negotiation, Wikipedia: Dispute resolution and Wikipedia:WikiProject Dispute Resolution.
 * When disputes about content are not resolved, the page should be protected or locked until disputes are resolved. Wikipedia has a padlock flag for pages that are locked and includes the description: "This page is currently protected from editing until disputes have been resolved." (See POVFORK as an example.)
 * Identify processes and procedures for authors to use when disputes between authors cannot be resolved by themselves. Consider options developed for use by Wikipedia such as:


 * Editor assistance
 * As for a third opinion (See Wikipedia:Third opinion article)
 * Ask about the subject (See Wikipedia:WikiProject talk page)
 * Ask about a policy by using the talk page of a policy related to the dispute.
 * Ask for help at a relevant noticeboard (Wikipedia has the Administrator's noticeboard and also separate noticeboards related to specific topics such as Reliable sources; Conflict of interest; and Neutrality.)
 * For civility issues Wikipedia authors are encouraged to refer to Wikipedia:Wikiquette for idea.
 * Request a comment (Wikipedia:Requests for comment)
 * Informal mediation - "The Mediation Cabal is informal, but formal mediation is also available.
 * Formal mediation through a "Mediation Committee." Wikipedia uses formal mediation "only for disputes about Article Content, not for complaints about user conduct." What happens when disputes are related to the organization and layout of content?
 * Conduct a survey to help parties gain a better understanding of the dispute. Wikipedia state that the survey itself cannot generate a consensus. (See Wikipedia:Polling)


 * Urgent situations that would require other procedures include:


 * Urgent violations of policies on Civility and Personal Attacks
 * Improper usernames
 * Edit warring and the three-revert rule
 * Requests for permanent deletion of personal information
 * Suspected sockpuppetry
 * If a user has been blocked and wants to request the block be removed
 * When user's conduct needs urgent attention from an administrator
 * Others???

Arbitration
When all steps to resolving disputes are unsuccessful, what should an author do? Wikipedia incorporates Arbitration as the last resort to dispute resolution, but only when the dispute is NOT over content of an article. The Arbitration Committee reviews the case and makes the final decision. Whereas, Mediation was an attempt to help the parties come to a consensus. Normally Arbitration is used when there are disputes about user conduct and Mediation is used for disputes about article content. Wikipedia articles that may be helpful in developing this process include:


 * Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee
 * Wikipedia:Arbitration policy
 * Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration
 * Wikipedia:Arbitration guide