Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Non-discrimination policy
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the discussion was: keep. Clear consensus not to delete. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 04:32, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
This "Wikipedia policy with legal considerations" that has been "approved by the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees to apply to all Wikimedia projects." misrepresents the page it redirects to. This is not an English Wikipedia or global Wikimedia policy any more than the foundation:Gift policy is. The foundation:Non-discrimination policy explicitly says: The Wikimedia Foundation prohibits discrimination against staff or contractors ... If you feel you are being discriminated against, please contact your manager or the Wikimedia Foundation HR team
. The relevant policy that applies to enwiki would be Wikipedia:Harassment or the global UCOC. I'd just remove the policy tag, but it's been full protected, so I presume a consensus discussion is required. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 11:32, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
- Clarification from WMF legal:
I wanted to clear up the misunderstanding related to the WMF non-discrimination policy ... the policy was passed by the Foundation board to apply to acts taken by the Foundation and Foundation employees, not individual users. Other policies may, of course, apply.
ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 11:41, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
- Keep just edit it; this is obviously not a policy of the English Wikipedia, just remove anything that says it is a local project policy and leave the cross project redirect which could be possibly useful for someone searching for this. — xaosflux Talk 14:08, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
- Disambiguate. Turn this title into a DAB page listing all the various local, global and foundation policies related to discrimination, and any help pages or noticeboards that can assist with these issues. I think that most people searching for a non-discrimination policy on the English Wikipedia are more likely to be editors looking for help with issues they've experienced here than WMF staff and contractors. 192.76.8.91 (talk) 17:44, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
- Keep and remove the tag saying it's a local policy, because it sounds like it only applies to WMF staff and therefore isn't reasonably described as a local policy. If that's not correct then the WMF can always reinstate the tag. The soft redirect is potentially useful though. Hut 8.5 07:47, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
- Keep And remove the tag. Jackattack1597 (talk) 11:35, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
- As above, seems like the issue is with the {{legal policy}} template, so if there's no better one, seems like just removing it would be simple and ideal. I don't see the harm in keeping a (soft-)redirect to the page, since we've nothing better? ~ Amory (u • t • c) 18:30, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
- Comment. Given that this is a WMF policy with legal considerations I'd like to see the WMF sign off on this before the redirect is deleted. Chess (talk) (please use
{{reply to|Chess}}on reply) 20:38, 12 July 2021 (UTC)- The entire MfD is on the basis that it isn't a WMF policy with legal considerations. They already said the same in 2015. The WMF had nothing to do with creating this page or marking it as a "legal policy", that was done all by community members, and thus community members can undo it. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 20:40, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
- We're not the people who should be judging that. Chess (talk) (please use
{{reply to|Chess}}on reply) 20:53, 12 July 2021 (UTC)- We're the ones who judged it in the first place. One cannot create a policy citing someone else's authority (without consulting them in the first place), and then say we need the consent of that person to remove the policy they never endorsed. By all means, email legal@wikimedia.org and ask them to comment, but if they're too busy, or can't be bothered to state their position again, or simply ignore the email, then the clear consensus here should not be stalled because of it. I'd feel differently if either: (a) they'd actually added the tag themselves, or said it should be added; (b) they hadn't already said this isn't meant to apply to the Wikimedia communities. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 20:59, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
- The statement isn't that the policy doesn't apply to the Wikimedia communities, but that it only applied to acts taken by the Foundation and by Foundation employees in 2015 when the policy was written in a different way. Note that the message is carefully worded not to say that it "isn't meant to apply to the Wikimedia communities". All the message actually says is that the policy wasn't applicable in the specific case of "setting up a women-only discussion in user space" and wasn't applicable to individual users that aren't Foundation staff. Not that the policy isn't applicable to the English Wikipedia. The policy has been rewritten to prohibit discrimination against "staff or contractors" in the intervening time anyways, so that message may not be applicable anymore. Chess (talk) (please use
{{reply to|Chess}}on reply) 01:56, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
- The statement isn't that the policy doesn't apply to the Wikimedia communities, but that it only applied to acts taken by the Foundation and by Foundation employees in 2015 when the policy was written in a different way. Note that the message is carefully worded not to say that it "isn't meant to apply to the Wikimedia communities". All the message actually says is that the policy wasn't applicable in the specific case of "setting up a women-only discussion in user space" and wasn't applicable to individual users that aren't Foundation staff. Not that the policy isn't applicable to the English Wikipedia. The policy has been rewritten to prohibit discrimination against "staff or contractors" in the intervening time anyways, so that message may not be applicable anymore. Chess (talk) (please use
- We're the ones who judged it in the first place. One cannot create a policy citing someone else's authority (without consulting them in the first place), and then say we need the consent of that person to remove the policy they never endorsed. By all means, email legal@wikimedia.org and ask them to comment, but if they're too busy, or can't be bothered to state their position again, or simply ignore the email, then the clear consensus here should not be stalled because of it. I'd feel differently if either: (a) they'd actually added the tag themselves, or said it should be added; (b) they hadn't already said this isn't meant to apply to the Wikimedia communities. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 20:59, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
- We're not the people who should be judging that. Chess (talk) (please use
- The entire MfD is on the basis that it isn't a WMF policy with legal considerations. They already said the same in 2015. The WMF had nothing to do with creating this page or marking it as a "legal policy", that was done all by community members, and thus community members can undo it. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 20:40, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
- Keep - Setting aside that the proper venue for redirects (including soft) is RfD, this seems fine. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 14:09, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.