In the wake of the recent naming policy poll, which was sparked by the debate on [[Talk:Kiev]] as well as the poll on the New York City talk page, it cannot be denied that a firm policy needs to be adopted regarding the naming of articles about places.
The current policy at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(city_names) is neither supported by consensus nor complete enough to handle the variety of problems with these articles' names.
I have drafted a proposed policy on the naming of articles about geographical places. I expect that there are some aspects of it which will be controversial, and some aspects which will be changed, but I have tried to justify the particulars of the policy. It is formulated as a set of principles and rejected principles.
It includes a proposed policy for dealing with disputes about article names, which would work for any kind of article, not just articles about places.
The draft proposal is at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Geographical_names_naming_policy_(pro...)
I propose a 4-week discussion and revision period followed by a two week binding voting period with a 70% majority rule. There will be separate votes for each section: "Multiple names", "Ambiguous names", and "Exceptions and naming polls". There will also be a separate vote about whether the naming polls policy shall apply to all articles or just to geographical place articles if it is adopted.
Unless there is strong objection to this voting proposal, the voting period will begin at midnight UTC June 11 and end at midnight UTC June 25.
For discussions about the details of the policy, please discuss on the relevant talk page. You can voice your objections to the voting proposal either here on the list or on the wiki.
I strongly urge that we have congenial discussion and make compromises in the proposed policy so that the vote will succeed, because I believe having a firm policy on naming will go a long way towards reducing the amount of energy expended on naming debates.
- David
I refuse to participate as I've learned from past history that people will do just whatever they feel like doing, regardless of whether they win the vote or not.
HOWEVER, I strongly suggest that you indicate what the rules are up front: What is consensus, what is the minimum number of votes. Even then, it will probably be ignored, but at least you set ground rules early.
RickK
David Friedland david@nohat.net wrote: In the wake of the recent naming policy poll, which was sparked by the debate on [[Talk:Kiev]] as well as the poll on the New York City talk page, it cannot be denied that a firm policy needs to be adopted regarding the naming of articles about places.
The current policy at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(city_names) is neither supported by consensus nor complete enough to handle the variety of problems with these articles' names.
I have drafted a proposed policy on the naming of articles about geographical places. I expect that there are some aspects of it which will be controversial, and some aspects which will be changed, but I have tried to justify the particulars of the policy. It is formulated as a set of principles and rejected principles.
It includes a proposed policy for dealing with disputes about article names, which would work for any kind of article, not just articles about places.
The draft proposal is at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Geographical_names_naming_policy_(pro...)
I propose a 4-week discussion and revision period followed by a two week binding voting period with a 70% majority rule. There will be separate votes for each section: "Multiple names", "Ambiguous names", and "Exceptions and naming polls". There will also be a separate vote about whether the naming polls policy shall apply to all articles or just to geographical place articles if it is adopted.
Unless there is strong objection to this voting proposal, the voting period will begin at midnight UTC June 11 and end at midnight UTC June 25.
For discussions about the details of the policy, please discuss on the relevant talk page. You can voice your objections to the voting proposal either here on the list or on the wiki.
I strongly urge that we have congenial discussion and make compromises in the proposed policy so that the vote will succeed, because I believe having a firm policy on naming will go a long way towards reducing the amount of energy expended on naming debates.
- David
_______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs
Rick wrote:
I refuse to participate as I've learned from past history that people will do just whatever they feel like doing, regardless of whether they win the vote or not.
HOWEVER, I strongly suggest that you indicate what the rules are up front: What is consensus, what is the minimum number of votes. Even then, it will probably be ignored, but at least you set ground rules early.
RickK
I'm sorry you're not interested in participating, but I believe some attempt at making consensus-supported policy is better than no attempt. Your point about the rules is well taken, and that's what I attempted to do here. I didn't specify a mininum number of votes though. That should be fixed before the vote begins.
- David