Wikipedia:Kepemilikan konten: Perbedaan antara revisi
Konten dihapus Konten ditambahkan
Tidak ada ringkasan suntingan |
|||
Baris 1:
{{Sedang ditulis}}
{{pedoman}}
{{shortcut|WP:MILIK}}
Baris 27:
Keterlibatan banyak penyunting, masing-masing membela kepemilikan yang lain, bisa jadi sangat kompleks. Skenario paling mudahnya biasanya terdiri dari seorang penyunting yang dominan yang dibela oleh penyunting lain, yang mendukung kepemilikan semula. Ini bisa jadi menyita pikiran bagi penyunting-penyunting baru dan kawakan sekalipun. Seperti sebelumnya, tujulah topik tersebut dan bukannya tindakan para penyuntingnya. Jika ini gagal, lanjutkan ke penyelesaian perselisihan, tetapi penting bagi Anda untuk berkomunikasi di halaman pembicaraan dan berusahan untuk menyelesaikan perselisihan sendiri {{em|sebelum}} membesarkan proses penyelesaian konflik tersebut.
== Ownership and stewardship ==
{{Shortcut|WP:OAS|WP:STEWARDSHIP|WP:SHEPHERD}}
{{redirect|WP:STEWARDSHIP|the group of users|meta:Stewards}}
Unless an editor [[#Examples of ownership behaviour|exhibits behaviour associated with ownership]], it's best to [[Wikipedia:Assume good faith|assume good faith]] on their part and regard their behavior as stewardship. Stewardship or shepherding of an article or group of related articles may be the result of a sincere personal interest in the subject matter or in a cause or organization related to it. The editor might also be an expert or otherwise very knowledgeable in the subject matter and able to provide credible insights for locating [[Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources|reliable sources]]. The editors in question are no less responsible for adhering to core policies like [[Wikipedia:Neutral point of view|neutrality of viewpoint]], [[Wikipedia:Verifiability|verifiability]] with reliable sources, and [[Wikipedia:Civility|civility]].
Wikipedia is the encyclopedia that "anyone can edit", but not all edits bring improvement. In many cases, a core group of editors will have worked to build the article up to its present state and will revert edits that they find detrimental in order, they believe, to preserve the quality of the encyclopedia. Such reversion does not indicate an "ownership" problem, if it is supported by an edit summary referring to Wikipedia policies and guidelines, previous reviews and discussions, or specific grammar or prose problems introduced by the edit.
Where disagreement persists after such a reversion, the editor proposing the change should first take the matter to the talk page, without [[Wikipedia:No personal attacks|personal comments]] or accusations of ownership. In this way, the specifics of any change can be discussed with the editors who are familiar with the article, who are likewise expected to discuss the content civilly. This is in keeping with the [[WP:BRD|BRD cycle]], which stands for '''[[Wikipedia:Be bold|bold]], [[Wikipedia:Revert|revert]], [[Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines|discuss]]'''. Though not an official [[Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines|policy or guideline]], it is a dependable method for [[Wikipedia:Dispute resolution|dispute resolution]].
=== Featured articles ===
{{shortcut|WP:FAOWN}}
While [[Wikipedia:Featured articles|Featured articles]] (identified by a bronze star in the upper-right corner [[Image:LinkFA-star.png|14px]]) are open for editing like any other, they have gone through a community review process as [[Wikipedia:Featured article candidates|Featured article candidates]], where they are checked for high-quality sources, a thorough survey of the relevant literature, and compliance with [[Wikipedia:Featured article criteria|the Featured article criteria]]. Editors are asked to take particular care when editing a Featured article; it is considerate to discuss significant changes of text or images on the talk page first. Explaining civilly why sources and policies support a particular version of a featured article does not necessarily constitute ownership. The {{tl|article history}} template on the talk page will contain a link to the Featured article candidacy and any subsequent [[Wikipedia:Featured article review|Featured article reviews]].
[[Wikipedia:Good articles|Good articles]] (identified by a green circle in the upper-right corner [[Image:symbol support vote.svg|14px]]) have gone through a lighter peer review process than Featured articles, generally by a single editor, to check basic requirements of prose, factual accuracy, and scope. All editors are welcome to make changes and improve the article, but some discussion of significant changes is recommended, and the editors participating in the review may be able to offer advice and work with you on improving the article further.
== Jangan tanda tangani sesuatu yang bukan milik Anda ==
| |||