[WikiEN-l] Quality vs. consensus (was: Meanwhile, AfD grinds on)

[Poor, Edmund W]

> > You're right, it IS insane. But according to community 
> consensus, due 
> > process is all that matters. Content be damned, we're here 
> to run an 
> > internet democracy, not write an encyclopedia!
> >
> > - --
> > Alphax                      |   /"\
> 
> I'm not sure you're being sarcastic here, or whether you 
> really mean it... Anyway, Wikipedia is NOT a democracy.
> 
> --Mgm

I think the word you're looking for is "irony". Alphax was making the
ironic observation that an overwhelming number of Wikipedians are more
concerned with consensus than with quality.

Or maybe I'm making this observation and crediting it to Alphax? No
matter: it's been said many times before.

Let's not confuse means with ends. Our GOAL is to write an encyclopedia.
It shall consist of many articles which refer to each other (often by
[[links like this]]). These articles describe the world outside of
Wikipedia and rely on sources such as common knowledge, expert scholars,
and frequently just "your average joe who happens to know something".

Our method has been to allow everyone in the world to participate.

GOAL - the "end" we have in mind.
METHOD - the "means" by which we intend to achieve this end

The question I wish to address is what method or "means" will best help
us achieve our goal. Anything which has worked so far, but is now
proving an obstacle should be re-examined. 

Ed Poor, aka Uncle Ed