Looking at current practice, there are several alternatives that may occur:
I. The most persistent win
Ia. the most highly skilled at WP dispute resolution win.
II. The parties continue to compromise until all agree on a bland version
III. One side starts a page from a different aspect (I almost said different
POV)
or on a subtopic.
IIIa. If really skilled, one side constructs the articles for all possible
aspects and
subtopics ahead of time & hopes to win on all fronts
There's a new version of Ia. if one loses at dispute resolution. Let the
other side make a
page to its liking, and try to delete it. Repeat every few months until
success.
All the above are in technical conformity to the rules
On 1/16/07, Andre Engels <andreengels(a)gmail.com> wrote:
It's very nice in Wikipedia to work with consensus. But what if no
consensus
is found? How is it decided then?
--
Andre Engels, andreengels(a)gmail.com
ICQ: 6260644 -- Skype: a_engels
_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
Wikipedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
--
David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S.