--- Ray Saintonge <saintonge(a)telus.net> wrote:
Cheney Shill wrote:
Interesting, but policy is policy, not your
opinion or
consensus, both of which you have no NPOV reliable sources
for. Besides this discussion is with regard to articles
that are completely uncited. In other words, you're
providing a false dilemma. It's not about citing every
last fact or deleting the article. It's about getting
substantial ("significant") reliable sources cited, as is
clearly and repeatedly stated in policy and guidelines.
Oh please! Consensus guides policy, not the other way
around which would be wikilawyering.
And how do we determine what the present consensus is? You
gave no citations to reliable sources. Are you arguing
that the stated policy is not consensus? If so, where is
this consensus and why isn't it in policy? Could you point
us to where it says consensus is absolute and
non-negotiable?
Many stated policies are not the result of a wide consensus because most
people don't get involved in policies. These policies are the domain of
people who enjoy writing policy. The rest of us have useful things to
do with our time. Very few people are active in the policy pages. The
participants are the proposer and those few who happened to notice.
Ec