On 2/1/07, Stephen Bain stephen.bain@gmail.com wrote:
On 2/1/07, Timwi timwi@gmx.net wrote:
These people feel they're completely in the right because they have a discussion to link to -- a discussion that took place on the WikiProject page. Since such a discussion cannot override a general rule such as the Naming Convention, how do I properly respond to this without causing an edit war (or move war)?
Tell them that you're pleased some Wikipedians actually managed to get together and agree on something.
Tell them that you've thought again about what they're doing, and have decided that since they're not agreeing to include original research, nor are they agreeing that it's ok for their articles to be unverifiable, nor are they agreeing that it's ok if they don't worry about NPOV, that it's really no big deal that they are agreeing about some absolutely trivial matter (even though it might be, in some people's opinions, not within the strict letter of a mere naming convention).
-- Stephen Bain stephen.bain@gmail.com
I don't agree with you Stephen. The naming convention was created to avoid overly convoluted names. The places articles are located should be easy to link to.
We don't append "(US president)" to every president either. Because it's a pointless exercise. It doesn't achieve anything other than a lot of unneccesary work.
To overwrite a basic policy like that, you need much wider discussion anyway.
Mgm