Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/Meta
In this article, we will explore the fascinating world of Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/Meta, a topic that has captured the attention of people of all ages and walks of life. With a rich and diverse history, Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/Meta has played a crucial role in the formation of our societies and cultures. From its ancient roots to its relevance today, Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/Meta has proven to be a topic worthy of study and reflection. Throughout these pages, we will examine its many facets and its impacts in various areas, thus providing a complete and enriching overview of Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/Meta.
This is a "meta" talk page, that is, a page for meta-discussions about Requests for comment, as opposed to about specific Requests for comment. Meta-discussions (both on this article talk page and on other talk pages) have in the recent past included:
- The extent to which the Wikipedia:Requests for comment article should be split into subpages, it at all.
- The content of the template for user conduct RfCs.
- The process for certifying user conduct RfCs and the details of the threshold standards for certification.
Coloring within the Lines
There has been a problem on several recent user conduct RfCs that editors have edited portions of the page that they were not supposed to edit. Sometimes the person whose conduct is the subject of the RfC will insert comments into the Summary, or the certifiers will insert comments into the Response. I have a suggestion. The template should have wording added that states that this is not permitted. I would suggest wording at the top of the Description and the Summary of the form: "The person whose conduct is the subject of this RfC MUST NOT edit this section. Editing this section by the subject may result in a temporary block by an admin and may be seen by the ArbCom as evidence of bad faith." Similarly, the top of the response should have wording of the form: "The certifiers or endorsers of this RfC MUST NOT edit this section. Editing this section by the certifiers or endorsers may result in a temporary block by an admin and may be seen by the ArbCom as evidence of bad faith." Robert McClenon 18:56, 3 September 2005 (UTC)