Those countries also have a huge amount of supporters on Wikipedia. Most of the edits were accepted no problem, but there are some countries that tends to violate a lot of international law. On some issues people can not see eye to eye and then it is simple majority votes that decide topic matters.įor example, I used to edit articles about international law on Wikipedia. I'd say that your explanation is correct in theory, but not in practice. That's the whole problem with Wikipedia, isn't it? It's full of messy, complicated, imperfect people. Wikipedia has no firm rules, just guidelines and policies that people have and continue to argue about endlessly. In the end the definition of what constitutes consensus is defined by the community, and that includes anyone that feels like starting a discussion and challenging the status quo. When that fails and people cannot cooperate at all, it sadly has to escalate and can end in bans for the involved users. No one owns an article, no one who follows the rules has more right to edit it than anyone else. If there's a conflict, we would really like everyone involved to go calmly discuss it in the article's Talk page with the community. >Like for page edits if there's a conflict it basically escalates up the hierarchy right? (In close cases a public chat with the Bureaucrats - the people responsible for enforcing the decision of the community - sometimes takes place to clear things up, but it's unheard of for crats to go against the opinion of the community) When there's no clear consensus, generally your request will be postponed for a couple day until issues are resolved, or eventually fail. If several people raised an important issue or found some serious problem with the way you've contributed recently, that's more important than the raw numbers. Similarly, if you get 65% oppositions, chances are your request can be closed without further considerations.īut what's important to keep in mind is that commenters are expected to explain the reason for their position, it's not just a +1/-1 system. Now in practice >75% of support almost always shows strong consensus, and will result in the request being a clear-cut accept. The main idea is that because it's not a formal vote, there's isn't supposed to be a hard threshold for passing. No problem, I'm happy to explain, but this is just my own understanding so you may still want to look it up for the fine details!
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |