[WikiEN-l] How does this prove voting is evil?

[Daniel P. B. Smith]

> On 4/10/06, Steve Bennett <stevage at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>   Just came across http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Georgia . It is
>> obvious beyond words to me that [[Georgia]] should be the country,  
>> and
>> the US state should be at something like [[Georgia (US State)]].
>> However, an ongoing poll evenly ties between that, and keeping  
>> Georgia
>> is a disambiguation page.
>>
>> I find this sad. :(

It is obvious that this particular issue is going to be  
_contentious._ I don't know what proportion of Wikipedia users or  
Wikipedia editors live in the United States, but it is large enough  
to matter. Before the breakup of the Soviet Union, the existence of  
Georgia, the SSR was almost unknown. Frankly, the only thing I knew  
about it was that it was the Stalin's birthplace, and even that was  
only because of a joking reference I'd heard to some politician:  
("He's from Georgia? So was Stalin.).

Given that this issue is contentious, it's going to be hard to  
settle. Straw polls are just one of a number of techniques for trying  
to reach stability in an article. Unless it is clear that some other  
technique _would_ have produced a clear, stable consensus and that  
the straw poll is _preventing_ a consensus that would otherwise have  
gelled, it doesn't prove polls are evil.

And since, no matter what the outcome is, anyone who types in  
"Georgia" will quickly find what they are seeking, it doesn't matter  
what the outcome is. Many of these article-naming debates seem to me  
just to be arenas for people who enjoy trying to win arguments, and,  
unlike edit wars, they are relatively harmless because the results  
_do not matter_.

If Steve Bennett's argument is that polls are evil because ignorant  
idiots who voted in the poll came up cast a majority of votes for  
what is "obviously beyond words" the wrong answer, I don't buy it. A  
majority vote for George W. Bush in a national U. S. election when it  
is obvious beyond words that that is the wrong answer does not prove  
that voting is evil. How's that for U.S.-centric for you? Pffpplsfft!

Our naming policy calls for the "most common" name, not the most  
correct or most appropriate name. Arguments on geographic names are  
always difficult to resolve because "most common among _whom_" is  
somewhat undefined for Wikipedia. Unless you are going to suggest  
that polls should be weighted to reflect what the outcome would be if  
participation included proportional representation by every English- 
speaking person in the world... that is, that Wikipedia should serve  
what is ideally its potential audience rather than its real audience.

Non-rhetorical question: does the national makeup of readers differ  
in proportion from the national makeup of active editors?