SupportRobert Ullmann 23:23, 23 August 2007 (UTC) why the F is this a vote? this is a policy-TT page that only says it is policy because of the redirect. Why not just delete it? even RFD/O would be excessive! Robert Ullmann23:23, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Presumably, to underscore the point, that no one here appreciates being dragged through this sort of nonsense. Don't you remember the amount of BS the last time I RFDO'd one of these? --Connel MacKenzie23:28, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I wanted to ignore the banner that says "This...policy, guideline or common practices page...should not be modified without a VOTE." However, I saw a lot of other pages that include the Policy-TT template, such as Dispute resolution, Verifiability, About Latin, Quotations, and Usage notes, so I thought it unwise. But now looking at Dispute resolution it says "This policy...needs a lot of though[t] and work before it can become...accepted policy[,] but...it's a starting point." On Usage notes it says "Anyone should...feel free to build a Draft Policy in this page." Are those the sorts of things we have to bring to vote to modify? It seems a lot of these pages carry the banner erroneously. DAVilla18:48, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think you made the right call in going through the formal procedure on this one. My understanding is that a new policy has to be voted in, not simply have the banner stuck on it. --EncycloPetey18:50, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not certain that a few pages didn't just have the policy tag stuck on them, like this one for instance. Maybe we could come up with a list that were never actually voted on, that really do need to be policies, and just vote on them collectively, to get that formality out of the way? DAVilla20:23, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support DAVilla 12:00, 23 August 2007 (UTC)