On Feb 19, 2008 6:51 AM, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
On 19/02/2008, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen cimonavaro@gmail.com wrote:
I think you miss Jimbos point by a country mile. The status quo on wikipedia is to "continue to dialog about possibilities which would be satisfactory to all sides."
There is absolutely no way that is a legit description of what is going on and any attempt to hold such a conversation would need to rewrite some fairly core wikipedia policies such as NPOV.
-- geni
Err, we've been holding such a conversation for some time now (can't recall when I got involved in it, but I figure ~ 1 year ago. No doubt it'll go on for some time longer. Dialogue doesn't mean the article changes, and indeed it was stable on my "4 point" image solution for some time, with a minor hiccough when one image was deleted as a suspected copyvio - and has now been minorly rearranged for undue weight considerations (and frankly just layout, which was shit before).
NPOV can only be compremised by actual edits to the article- dialogue has no ability to affect the article unless we come to a resolution and implement some proposal. Dialogue does give people a chance to vent and cool down a little, or become familiar with our goal here, or get board and move along. And quite frankly, the current state of the Muhammad article is lousy - a little dialogue won't be the end of the world.
Cheers WilyD