On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 9:59 PM, stevertigo <stvrtg(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Charles Matthews
<charles.r.matthews(a)ntlworld.com> wrote:
Hmm, I thought such "criticism
sections" had been deprecated for quite a
few years now. One thing to do is to add {{criticism section}}, the
wording of which is what I recall (that criticism is better integrated
into an article). In the hugeness case the integration would make the
article look like the "attack article" it probably is.
None of WP:CRIT, WP:NOCRIT and WP:CRIS addressing the issue seem to have made it past
being an essay into a guideline.
Strange, isn't it Charles, that the deprecation of criticism
sections/articles would be the convention for "quite a few years now"
and yet no attempt at its formalization has "made it past being an
essay into a guideline" let alone policy?
Stranger still, is it not, that this same invisible notion can still
find abuse as the centerpiece of a large-enough edit war such that
resulted in the poorly-conceptualized case given (disrespectfully) the
Prez' name?
More thing on my to-do list: Get Arbcom to actually deal with
adjudicating policy and sections therein.
- Stevertigo
Arbcom's job description and writ of authority don't include
adjudicating policy.
Suggestions that they might expand to do that, generally made by
community members, have been shot down by the community writ large and
by arbcom.
--
-george william herbert
george.herbert(a)gmail.com