Over the past couple of months I noticed that the Impersonal "You" Policyis pretty much never violated and it seems that even new users replace the word "you" with "the player" when necessary. I'm not saying that if the policy is declared redundant we ignore it instantly but why have a policy for a situation that almost never happens. Plus if someone does make the mistake someone else just fixes it thats it no need to have a policy on it. So any thoughts or comments. Snipergod (talk) 05:35, September 3, 2012 (UTC)
Comments[]
Comment It is hardely redundant. I see impersonal yous on a regular basis by simply going through a couple of pages, especially new ones. Walkthroughs have it, some Trivia notes have it, and sometimes its in the bulk of a page. Qw3rty! (talk) 05:37, September 3, 2012 (UTC)
Oppose - No, it's not redudant. No changes need to be made. DarkMetroid567Talk 05:39, September 3, 2012 (UTC)
Comment Even though it rarely happens, as you say, it doesn't mean that the policy should be retired. You're trying to fix something that's not broken. Joseph Tan l talk l edit count l contribs l 05:43, September 3, 2012 (UTC)
Comment/Oppose - I do not see it being redundant, and it does happen on somewhat regulary and doesn't need to be retired. Argorrath おしゃべり05:50, September 3, 2012 (UTC)
Comment - Not redundant by any means. Not only is IY still seen across many articles, but the policy (or guideline, rather) prevents it from happening more. I don't see much reason to retire it. --MLGisNot4Me talk 05:59, September 3, 2012 (UTC)
Comment - How is it redundant if users still see "you"s regularly and thus change them? Sure, a lot of them are being edited out, but there are still edits (mostly good faith ones by those that forgot to read that policy) that include "you" in them. Nothing should be changed about this policy. I.W. F.T.W. (talk)12:41, September 3, 2012 (UTC)
Oppose - Just becaues it isn't violated doesn't mean it's redundant, it means it's working. Also in the future if a user does put "you" than we can revert it and link them the policy. I still see it now and again on walk-thoughs as well.
13:59, September 3, 2012 (UTC)
Strong Oppose - Per Sam. --Bats a.k.a Rarity Filly 16:21, September 3, 2012 (UTC)
Oppose - We retire policies because they work? Nope. 19:35, September 3, 2012 (UTC)
Oppose - Per Drk. Madnessfan34537 http://i.imgur.com/lL5xjBH.png 23:51, September 3, 2012 (UTC)
Oppose; It's actually violated more than you would think, it's just that we don't extensively warn users for it, because:
- It's hard to find the person who actually put the word there.
- It's not a very serious issue. http://i.imgur.com/E2uiO5T.png SmilularTalk http://i.imgur.com/KNXWYe1.png 01:41, September 4, 2012 (UTC)
Closed - Policy will remain the same.
13:46, September 4, 2012 (UTC)