[WikiEN-l] Original research: our secret pleasure?

[Chris Howie]

William Pietri wrote:
> Another option is to say that the rules are what we look to when we 
> disagree over whether or not the article is good, or at least adequate. 
> If there is no disagreement, then the article stands. Otherwise, we can 
> start going through the rules, which can be looked at as a catalog of 
> thinking about problems we've had a lot.

And if there is disagreement, the source and argument must be considered.  If
the argument is "policy X says we can't use this" then it should be dismissed
as wikilawyering.  If a rational argument is presented explaining why it
damages the encyclopedia, then it should of course be given consideration.

(Of course this is shaky ground.  Policies exist to improve the encyclopedia,
so disregarding one should be done after lots of consideration.  But really,
that's just repeating [[WP:IAR]], isn't it...)

-- 
Chris Howie
http://www.chrishowie.com
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Crazycomputers

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GCS/IT d-(--) s:- a-->? C++(+++)$> UL++++ P++++$ L+++>++++ E---
W++ N o++ K? w--$ O M- V- PS--(---) PE++ Y+ PGP++ t+ 5? X-
R(+)>- tv-(--) b- DI+> D++ G>+++ e>++ h(--)>--- !r>+++ y->+++
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20070527/341bfec4/attachment.pgp