S
Stonkaments
Guest
RFC: Bolding: Fixed link
[td]*:Agree, Hal333, I opened a discussion on a MOS board which should put this into effect. That there be no bolding. Referencing someone's name who is a criminal should be limited if done at all. [[User:Efficacity|Efficacity]] ([[User talk:Efficacity|talk]]) 03:53, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[/td] [td]*
o you have something based on MOS or P&G to support that as unnecessary? Or just personal opinion? [[User:Butlerblog|<span style="font-weight:bold;"><span style="color:#333366;">Butler</span><span style="font-style:italic;color:#D2B48C;">Blog</span></span>]] ([[User talk:Butlerblog|talk]]) 12:38, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[/td]
[td]*o you have something based on MOS or P&G to support that as unnecessary? Or just personal opinion? [[User:Butlerblog|<span style="font-weight:bold;"><span style="color:#333366;">Butler</span><span style="font-style:italic;color:#D2B48C;">Blog</span></span>]] ([[User talk:Butlerblog|talk]]) 12:38, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[/td]
[td]* '''Oppose'''. [[WP:BOLD]] explicitly says, βThis is not a requirementβ, so editors insisting that MOS requires bolding in this instance are plainly wrong. [[WP:BLP]] and [[WP:BLPCRIME]] ''require'' that we treat discussion of criminal suspects with a high degree of sensitivity, and presume innocence until proven guilty; bolding the accused represents a stark ''lack'' of sensitivity, and is therefore a clear violation of [[WP:BLP]].[/td]
[td]* '''Oppose'''. [[MOS:BOLD]] explicitly says, βThis is not a requirementβ, so editors insisting that MOS requires bolding in this instance are plainly wrong. [[WP:BLP]] and [[WP:BLPCRIME]] ''require'' that we treat discussion of criminal suspects with a high degree of sensitivity, and presume innocence until proven guilty; bolding the accused represents a stark ''lack'' of sensitivity, and is therefore a clear violation of [[WP:BLP]].[/td] [td]:Edit to add: perpetrator is dead, so I guess BLP doesnβt apply directly, but the spirit of treating such topics with high sensitivity should still apply. Is there any direct guidance for perpetrators who are no longer living (and therefore will presumably never end up being convicted of a crime)? [[User:Stonkaments|Stonkaments]] ([[User talk:Stonkaments|talk]]) 06:00, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[/td]
[td]:Edit to add: perpetrator is dead, so I guess BLP doesnβt apply directly, but the spirit of treating such topics with high sensitivity should still apply. Is there any direct guidance for perpetrators who are no longer living (and therefore will presumably never end up being convicted of a crime)? [[User:Stonkaments|Stonkaments]] ([[User talk:Stonkaments|talk]]) 06:00, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[/td] [td][/td]
[td][/td]
Continue reading...
| Line 147: | Line 147: |
[td]
β Previous revision
[/td][td]
[td]*:Agree, Hal333, I opened a discussion on a MOS board which should put this into effect. That there be no bolding. Referencing someone's name who is a criminal should be limited if done at all. [[User:Efficacity|Efficacity]] ([[User talk:Efficacity|talk]]) 03:53, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[/td]Revision as of 06:12, 31 August 2025
[/td][td]*:Agree, Hal333, I opened a discussion on a MOS board which should put this into effect. That there be no bolding. Referencing someone's name who is a criminal should be limited if done at all. [[User:Efficacity|Efficacity]] ([[User talk:Efficacity|talk]]) 03:53, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[/td] [td]*
o you have something based on MOS or P&G to support that as unnecessary? Or just personal opinion? [[User:Butlerblog|<span style="font-weight:bold;"><span style="color:#333366;">Butler</span><span style="font-style:italic;color:#D2B48C;">Blog</span></span>]] ([[User talk:Butlerblog|talk]]) 12:38, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[/td][td]*
o you have something based on MOS or P&G to support that as unnecessary? Or just personal opinion? [[User:Butlerblog|<span style="font-weight:bold;"><span style="color:#333366;">Butler</span><span style="font-style:italic;color:#D2B48C;">Blog</span></span>]] ([[User talk:Butlerblog|talk]]) 12:38, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[/td]
[td]* '''Oppose'''. [[WP:BOLD]] explicitly says, βThis is not a requirementβ, so editors insisting that MOS requires bolding in this instance are plainly wrong. [[WP:BLP]] and [[WP:BLPCRIME]] ''require'' that we treat discussion of criminal suspects with a high degree of sensitivity, and presume innocence until proven guilty; bolding the accused represents a stark ''lack'' of sensitivity, and is therefore a clear violation of [[WP:BLP]].[/td][td]* '''Oppose'''. [[MOS:BOLD]] explicitly says, βThis is not a requirementβ, so editors insisting that MOS requires bolding in this instance are plainly wrong. [[WP:BLP]] and [[WP:BLPCRIME]] ''require'' that we treat discussion of criminal suspects with a high degree of sensitivity, and presume innocence until proven guilty; bolding the accused represents a stark ''lack'' of sensitivity, and is therefore a clear violation of [[WP:BLP]].[/td] [td]:Edit to add: perpetrator is dead, so I guess BLP doesnβt apply directly, but the spirit of treating such topics with high sensitivity should still apply. Is there any direct guidance for perpetrators who are no longer living (and therefore will presumably never end up being convicted of a crime)? [[User:Stonkaments|Stonkaments]] ([[User talk:Stonkaments|talk]]) 06:00, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[/td]
[td]:Edit to add: perpetrator is dead, so I guess BLP doesnβt apply directly, but the spirit of treating such topics with high sensitivity should still apply. Is there any direct guidance for perpetrators who are no longer living (and therefore will presumably never end up being convicted of a crime)? [[User:Stonkaments|Stonkaments]] ([[User talk:Stonkaments|talk]]) 06:00, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[/td] [td][/td]
[td][/td]
Continue reading...
