Scope
editThis page is intended to give me critical feedback on my editing or behaviour on Wikipedia. By all means state a position, but please try to include practical suggestions on how I can improve in the future and avoid making mistakes, how I can do better at avoiding inflaming conflict, how my choice of words in the past has resulted in misunderstandings and how I can complain about the problematic behaviour of others without making the situation worse. This is not intended to be a discussion between multiple parties, if a complex issue needs discussion, please use the associated talk page to resolve it before putting a position here.
If you think this scope is wrong, please raise that here too.
The outcome I am hoping for, is a series of commitments from me that can be easily referenced in context. I would prefer not to rely on evidence on off-wiki sites or other Wikimedia projects, please try to limit any examples to Wikipedia, and preferably to within the last two years.
I hope that this page can be moderated by someone other than me to deal with allegations that might be seen as abusive or repetitive.
Please could you amend your statement so that it does not make claims about Commons bureaucrats as a collective, given that there has been no discussion at the commons bureaucrat noticeboard or mailing list. In particular the following claim is problematic:
- The understanding of Commons Bureaucrats is that general requests for deleted information should not be accepted as this is against their interpretation of the privacy policy. Requests for investigations and clarifications by Commons trusted users as part of any investigation would be honoured and even without the agreement of the uploader.
If that is a quote, please attribute it specifically to the author. If it is not a quote, it is probably better struck out.