On May 3, 2006, at 1:57 PM, Cheney Shill wrote:
I agree completely. The simplest and quickest BIG thing would be to make it VERY, UNEQUIVOCALLY clear that consensus only applies to policy and guidelines, not to article content. All to often, and despite the warning on the consensus page regarding groups taking over articles, admins use consensus as the deciding factor to keep a version of an article up that goes completely against verifiability or NPOV, violating NOR at the same time by accepting the claims, arguments, and votes of the group.~~~~Pro-Lick
If there is any unclarity about this issue, it needs to be spelled out in the policy pages. The understanding is that WP:NPOV is *not- negotiable* ane cannot be bypassed by any kind of editors consensus, that is a group cannot agree on violation NPOV by consensus.
FYI, the amended NPOV policy (as of several weeks ago) clearly states in the article's lead that:
"NPOV is one of Wikipedia's three content-guiding policy pages. The other two are Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:No original research. Jointly, these policies determine the type and quality of material that is acceptable in the main namespace. Because the three policies are complementary, they should not be interpreted in isolation from one other, and editors should therefore try to familiarize themselves with all three. The three policies are also non-negotiable and cannot be superseded by any other guidelines or by editors' consensus."
The last paragraph unambiguously addresses this issue.
-- Jossi