Team Fortress Wiki talk:Draft/Draft space

Draft space

The idea was suggested to me by an Administrator that I won't throw under the bus.

I think the proposal is to treat the space under Team Fortress Wiki:Draft/ as draft space.

I have some experience with Wikipedia draftification.

We would need some policy. I don't favor the 6 month auto-delete, and the attendant backdoor deletion through draftificaiton.

I really wanted to visualise this (BOLDLY without explicit permission). Delete it if you need to, after discussion is started, please. My understanding is the intention to make the Draft area open to collaboration (more so than user space)?

M I K A D O 282 ⊙⊙⊙⊙⊙⊙ ⊙⊙ ⊙⊙ (Contact Mikado282 (SM)) | (contribs) (Help Wanted!) 03:03, 7 June 2023 (UTC) 03:21, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

Hi, I fail to see the purpose of having a draft space in the main namespace, staff and non-staff users already uses sandboxes in order to build articles, policies, or for leisure. Usually if a new policy/article gets proposed, it is encouraged for it to be built in a sandbox first, then after being reviewed, the article in question gets moved to the main namespace.

Perhaps I'm not looking it at a right angle, and I can be enlighten.

Yossef • Talk 05:59, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

If I understand the proposal correctly, since we are unlikely to get a Draft: space, this was a way to set up a substitute.

None of what you say about the idea of policy building (and such) in single-user space is unture, yet, long experience with the sandbox approach is that it in fact inhibits open collaboration, open invatitions making no matter.

The proposer's intention is that the Draft subfolder "sandbox" would have none of the collaboration constriants of a user sandbox, especially with the updated expressed injunctions against just anyone editing anyone else's sandbox without a by-your-leave.

Much of what you say about user sandbox, WP now says about Draft: -- but in practice, the drafts are still mostly single users, AFAIK, and the most common experience is "I think your work should be deleted, but I'll draftify it now so it can be auto-deleted in 6 months."

M I K A D O 282 ⊙⊙⊙⊙⊙⊙ ⊙⊙ ⊙⊙ (Contact Mikado282 (SM)) | (contribs) (Help Wanted!) 02:49, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

If not for general use, it would still be helpful to allow this soft namespace to be used for important wiki-wide changes, such as policy changes (User:Mikado282/Community_topics_notability_guidelines) or suggestions (User:GrampaSwood/UserpagePolicy), as they're directly related to the wiki itself and may not be suitable to be placed under an editor's personal sandbox (also, editors often wipe their sandbox after use, so the talk page is useless as reference). — Tark 03:09, 9 June 2023 (UTC)

+1 for Tark's idea of the usage of this space.
GrampaSwood (talk) 11:37, 9 June 2023 (UTC)

  I like that approach too. Yossef • Talk 13:11, 9 June 2023 (UTC)

No secret that I have supported this for sometime. It was never my intention that the community notabilty project sandbox be me only, even before I could no longer do it.

M I K A D O 282 ⊙⊙⊙⊙⊙⊙ ⊙⊙ ⊙⊙ (Contact Mikado282 (SM)) | (contribs) (Help Wanted!) 02:37, 10 June 2023 (UTC)