Redirect to:
This page is a redirect. The following categories are used to track and monitor this redirect:
|
Table of contents First discussion Jump to bottom New topic All village pumps Shortcuts WP:VPRWP:VPR WP:VP/PRWP:VP/PR The proposals section of the village...
Click to read more »(UTC) @DannyS712 and Pppery: WT:COUNCIL is a good place. I'll also suggest VPPRO. Would it be redundant to also make it an RfC? Qzekrom 💬 theythem 02:36...
Click to read more »WP:VPT or WT:TemplateStyles but if you think this should be done at WP:VPPRO, I can take it there. You really did go down a rabbit hole there though...
Click to read more »18 December 2017 (UTC) @BU Rob13: Posted at VPT and will cross-post to VPPRO shortly. --Izno (talk) 17:55, 28 December 2017 (UTC) NOTE: There are 34...
Click to read more »More practically, the obvious answer to me seem to be to let this entire VPPRO thread die, and see if there's consensus at WT:MOS to add a note to the...
Click to read more »WP:BLPPRIMARY should not exist, you're welcome propose undoing them at WP:VPPRO. The candidate has not erred in applying them. You, however, err in applying...
Click to read more »aside, I need to look in to how to soften the language, as was discussed at VPPRO [I think], that EPH uses for declines.) At this time, I do not know if I...
Click to read more »closed in favor of the 'B' option, if that is what it is closed as. See WP:VPPRO#RfC: What to do with category links to Commons?. --Izno (talk) 01:34, 23...
Click to read more »for a portal, for example P:CA → Portal:Canada. The standard WP:VPR or WP:VPPRO shortcuts are fine and P:VPP is just confusion. Johnuniq (talk) 02:54, 28...
Click to read more »for some editors some of the time. It was pretty recently savaged in WP:VPPRO when someone proposed elevating it to guideline status, and it is frequently...
Click to read more »quotation style, that's something that would be determined at WT:MOS or WP:VPPRO, and implemented at Mediawiki:Common.css. The last thing we need is a core...
Click to read more »This is the wrong place. AN is not for content-making decisions. You want VPPRO/VPPOL (pick your poison). B) Every change advertised when proposed is insane...
Click to read more »(UTC) Please don't start the RFC here. The correct place is WP:VPPOL or WP:VPPRO (or if it is possibly going to be lengthy, a subpage of any of the above)...
Click to read more »someone I should be contacting? Should I be making another thread over at WP:VPPRO? I contacted Crisco 1492 about this, who referred me here. I haven't done...
Click to read more »is required? If this is really a subject we want to get into again, WP:VPPRO is -> that way. --Izno (talk) 16:29, 8 June 2019 (UTC) Support per John...
Click to read more »their somewhat-lesser visibility. Perhaps this should be a full RFC on WP:VPPRO or WT:Protection policy given the current lack of guidance. --Izno (talk)...
Click to read more »Only in death does duty end (talk) 19:37, 28 August 2017 (UTC) Present on VPPRO. --Izno (talk) 13:13, 28 August 2017 (UTC) ...where the sock-master of the...
Click to read more »P&G changes without a 25-editor quorum" or something, you know where WP:VPPRO is. The diff pile provided above conclusively demonstrates consistent (habitual...
Click to read more »for mass-creation, where should these talks take place?" Perhaps at WP:VPPRO. Users could say something along the lines of, "Hey, over the next few months...
Click to read more »only editor willing to do so. At any rate, that is a discussion for WP:VPPRO. Johnuniq (talk) 23:44, 16 May 2021 (UTC) Well, this probably isn't the...
Click to read more »earlier this year. Opponents observe that the proposal was not made at WP:VPPRO, and was buried at the end of a multi-part RfC about "Recent years" trivia...
Click to read more »as a WP:VPPRO discussion. Izno (talk) 20:47, 7 March 2022 (UTC) I missed any notification and I don't get Tech News and I don't follow VPPRO discussions...
Click to read more »11:19, 5 September 2016 (UTC) Nevermind; I just learned in the related VPPRO discussion that VE is still barfing up incorrect nowiki stuff all over the...
Click to read more »comes to important matters that will affect many articles, WP:VPPOL (or WP:VPPRO, depending on the nature of the discussion) and WP:CENT exist for a reason...
Click to read more »citation style, but I don't know whether 'light' is really enough to get a 'VPPRO nod' for it.--Izno (talk) 23:26, 9 August 2020 (UTC) Support the proposal...
Click to read more »respective template talk pages would have been and is now warranted. "WP:VPPRO wouldn't even be the right venue for such a discussion anyway; it would...
Click to read more »as questionable "what if" essay opinion stuff), and then propose at WP:VPPRO its elevation to a content {{Guideline}} after a while. I wouldn't be concerned...
Click to read more »change to how WP has been written for about 17 years now. That belongs at WP:VPPRO, being a major proposal, not a minor P&G clarification. — SMcCandlish ☏...
Click to read more »from anyone else, or any examination by the broader community. We have WP:VPPRO for a reason. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ >ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ< 21:54, 8 October 2017 (UTC) Is...
Click to read more »Even so, you will probably need to have a consensus reached at e.g. WP:VPPRO for a bot to create any articles. --Izno (talk) 20:00, 18 June 2019 (UTC)...
Click to read more »some major change, not just a tweak, it can also be cross-listed on WP:VPPRO. If I'm sure it's going to be of wide-spread interest, list it on WP:CENT...
Click to read more »overcome them. This is not always a good thing. I made a proposal on WP:VPPRO to address the informedness part. Not sure how it would work out, but feel...
Click to read more »Quinn (talk) 16:06, 29 July 2022 (UTC) This is also under discussion at WP:VPPRO#RfC: Should we use the longstanding external links icon or the new one?...
Click to read more »formal closure (e.g. to know what follow-up action needs to be done). See WP:VPPRO#RFC: New PDF icon for a discussion where I did that - consensus was clearly...
Click to read more »Sources" case isn't far behind. From here back to AE, back to AN, and back to VPPRO, discussion has been tried. — Ched (talk) 18:29, 3 December 2019 (UTC) I’ve...
Click to read more »which are created from a redirect page, and if it does not currently, WP:VPPRO would probably settle in the affirmative for making it do so. Alternatively...
Click to read more »September 2020 (UTC) I think there is a fair shot of removal with an RFC at VPPRO or maybe even the temppate in question. --Izno (talk) 14:14, 17 September...
Click to read more »hosting a noticeboard there, but it never went anywhere (a WP:VPPOL or WP:VPPRO RfC concluded against such a noticeboard), and it has never had anything...
Click to read more »GreenC bot at WP:Village pump (proposals). I think we would post on WP:VPPRO and then put {{WikiProject please see}} notices on WikiProject Council and...
Click to read more »task without a clear consensus that it should be done at somewhere like WP:VPPRO. Additionally, why do we need to create these categories if we've got nothing...
Click to read more »else at that page, and at previous discussions at WP:VPPOL, WP:VPTECH, WP:VPPRO, and WT:WIKIDATA, and etc., etc.). It's clear that WikiData is coming and...
Click to read more »discussed. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:59, 31 March 2018 (UTC) In this case, WP:VPPRO would probably be appropriate. --Izno (talk) 14:11, 31 March 2018 (UTC)...
Click to read more »(proposals)#RfC: Should Template:English variant notice be deprecated? (and WP:VPPRO wouldn't even be the right venue for such a discussion anyway; it would...
Click to read more »conversations between WMF and the wiki, not for making a consensus decision. WP:VPPRO/WP:VPPOL is -> over there. Izno (talk) 13:48, 6 August 2021 (UTC) Yeah....
Click to read more »time. This is regardless the wrong place to discuss it; you will want WP:VPPRO or WP:VPT. Izno (talk) 00:05, 22 March 2021 (UTC) Thanks, will submit a...
Click to read more »would recommend an RFC at a place of your choosing, perhaps WP:CLN or WP:VPPRO/WP:VPPOL. Izno (talk) 21:27, 15 February 2023 (UTC) Template:Golden Raspberry...
Click to read more »redirect at that oddly capitalised title. Typing "wp:vppro" will automatically bring me to "WP:VPPRO" even though the lowercased redirect does not exist...
Click to read more »(talk) 00:53, 13 January 2022 (UTC) Page watchers may be interested in WP:VPPRO#RfC: Block reFill tool until fixed. Izno (talk) 22:31, 21 January 2022 (UTC)...
Click to read more »change the guideline itself. He's welcome to start a proposal, here or at WP:VPPRO, to ask whether the community wants to do that. But that is not this discussion...
Click to read more »question for specifically WT:UAA and/or WP:VPPRO. Izno (talk) 20:11, 19 February 2025 (UTC) Noted, I'll use VPPro or a more specific talk page next time,...
Click to read more »to get technical editors on board that this is a good idea and then at VPPRO? to get everyone else... I think it is a good idea, as I've stated on that...
Click to read more »m:Community Wishlist. Some1 (talk) 15:31, 15 December 2024 (UTC) At the VPPro discussion this was forked from opposition has been expressed. Thryduulf...
Click to read more »begun... 18:29, 22 April 2025 (UTC) I'd either move the discussion to WP:VPPRO or put a pointer there back to here and add links to the discussion from...
Click to read more »presented. Requesting change, including abolition, should be effected at WP:VPPRO if/when there is a general feel for why there is support or opposition to...
Click to read more »(talk) 11:48, 13 May 2025 (UTC) Pinging Utfor as the original requester at VPPRO. Thryduulf (talk) 11:49, 13 May 2025 (UTC) This sounds like a useful script...
Click to read more »(UTC) This is not a technical question. You will want to ask this at WP:VPPRO or WT:MOS. Izno (talk) 03:27, 21 June 2026 (UTC) @BD2412: "space before...
Click to read more »31 December 2025 (UTC) Future requests for integration should go to WP:VPPRO, and I think you should revisit any and all of the prior requests that have...
Click to read more »away from the reasoning for why community general sanctions are hosted at VPPRO these days, and would suggest it be moved there. The mandatory notification...
Click to read more »