It's very nice in Wikipedia to work with consensus. But what if no consensus is found? How is it decided then?
Political strong-arming and lobbying of allies. =)
On 1/16/07, Andre Engels andreengels@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@gmail.com ICQ: 6260644 -- Skype: a_engels _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
On 1/16/07, Andre Engels andreengels@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?
That would depend a bit on the nature of the dispute, I guess?
In an article or other content dispute, perhaps the involved editors should do their best to make necessary concessions, possibly including a section on the article to describe the nature of the controversy at hand (this assumes all parties are acting more or less reasonably).
In terms of policy debate, en.wikipedia at least is pretty deeply fleshed out and institutionalized, as opposed to a new project where there's little existing practice or precedent -- people are usually trying to gain consensus to *change* something, in this sort of environment. If no such consensus is achieved, we usually fall back on the status quo of existing practice.
Some situations can't always be resolved that way, in which case there's no easy solution. Or if there is, I'm missing it.
-Luna
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@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@gmail.com ICQ: 6260644 -- Skype: a_engels _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org