"Jimmy Wales" jwales@bomis.com schrieb:
Louis Kyu Won Ryu wrote:
Root causes of the "current upset" have everything to do with Wikipedia policies and customs, in particular, the absence of some sort of means for dealing with article disputes that cannot be solved within the Wiki consensus editing model.
Is there any evidence that this is the case in the current controversy? What I mean is that the article already seems much improved over the past several weeks. So in what way is it really true that the problem can't be solved within the Wiki consensus editing model?
It is not working in that the consensus editing model can make POV lines and paragraphs NPOV, can correct factual errors and so forth, but the issue with the page is that a number of people (me included) are of the opinion that large amount of texts should be either removed from the page or severely shortened, and others (in particular Ec) will never get in consensus with such a change.
Andre Engels
Andre Engels wrote:
"Jimmy Wales" jwales@bomis.com schrieb:
Louis Kyu Won Ryu wrote:
Root causes of the "current upset" have everything to do with Wikipedia policies and customs, in particular, the absence of some sort of means for dealing with article disputes that cannot be solved within the Wiki consensus editing model.
Is there any evidence that this is the case in the current controversy? What I mean is that the article already seems much improved over the past several weeks. So in what way is it really true that the problem can't be solved within the Wiki consensus editing model?
It is not working in that the consensus editing model can make POV lines and paragraphs NPOV, can correct factual errors and so forth, but the issue with the page is that a number of people (me included) are of the opinion that large amount of texts should be either removed from the page or severely shortened, and others (in particular Ec) will never get in consensus with such a change.
Huh?? I've not been involved with the article. I agree that it can be trimmed down. Much of what is said about Keating should be removed as irrelevant. You must be thinking of someone else.
Ec