Misplaced Pages:Closing discussions: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 13:46, 13 August 2008 editKbdank71 (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users126,447 edits expanded how to secton with references← Previous edit		Revision as of 09:42, 14 August 2008 edit undoDGG (talk \| contribs)316,874 edits what the policy for admins actually saysNext edit →
Line 29:		Line 29:
	The desired standard is ], not ]. Please also note that closing admins are expected and required to exercise their judgment in order to make sure that the decision complies with the spirit of all Misplaced Pages policy and with the project goal. A good admin will transparently explain how the decision was reached. <ref>]</ref>		The desired standard is ], not ]. Please also note that closing admins are expected and required to exercise their judgment in order to make sure that the decision complies with the spirit of all Misplaced Pages policy and with the project goal. A good admin will transparently explain how the decision was reached. <ref>]</ref>

			Consensus is not determined by counting heads, but neither is it determined by the administrators own views about what is the most approprate policy. The administrator is there to judge the consensus of the community , after discarding irrelevant arguments: those which flatly contradict established policy, those based on personal opinion only, those which are logically fallacious, those which show no understanding of the matter of issue. <ref>]</ref> If the discussion shows that some people think one policy is controllling , and some another, the decider is expected to close by judging which view has the predominant number of responsible wikipedians supporting it, not select himself which is the better policy.He is not expected to decide the issue, just to judge the result of the debate, and is expected to know policy sufficiently to know what arguments are to be excluded as irrelevant. If the consensus of reasonable arguments is opposite to his view, he is expected to decide according to the consensus.He is not to be a judge of the issue, but rather of the argument.
	Consensus is not determined by counting heads, but by looking at strength of argument, and underlying policy (if any). Arguments that contradict policy, are based on opinion rather than fact, or are logically fallacious, are frequently discounted. <ref>]</ref>

	===Policy===		===Policy===

Revision as of 09:42, 14 August 2008

Shortcuts

The following is a proposed Misplaced Pages policy, guideline, or process. The proposal may still be in development, under discussion, or in the process of gathering consensus for adoption.

Consensus is Misplaced Pages's fundamental model for editorial decision-making. Policies and guidelines document communal consensus rather than creating it. Consensus is typically reached as a natural and inherent product of the wiki-editing process; generally someone makes a change or addition to a page, and then everyone who reads the page has an opportunity to either leave the page as it is or change it. Editors begin discussions to resolve disagreements that cannot be easily resolved through the normal wiki-editing process. Many community discussions and decisions happen on project pages that are specifically designed for that purpose. If discussions involve several individuals the discourse can become lengthy and the results hard to determine. After a while, it is time to close the discussion so that the community can move on.

This page offers guidelines on how and when discussions should be closed. There are no policies that directly dictate how to close a discussion. The guidelines here are documentation of the customary practices that have evolved at Misplaced Pages in the years since it was started. These customs are grounded in the core principles of Misplaced Pages etiquette such as assuming good faith, creating consensus, and maintaining civility.

Which discussions need to be closed

Many informal discussions do not need closing. Often, consensus is reached in the discussion and the outcome is obvious. Disagreements in articles are often solved by further edits. For example, two or more individuals may disagree with how a section of text on an article is written and start a discussion on the talk page. An uninvolved party might come up with a creative solution that addresses the concerns raised in the discussion. If it is a good solution, nothing needs to happen. There will be nothing more that is said, and everyone moves on. When this is the case, it often helps to leave a comment that the issue was resolved and perhaps link the edit that resolved the issue. On some pages, such as Misplaced Pages:Administrators noticeboard, the {{resolved}} template is used to note that an issue has been resolved. The template is added to the beginning of the section, with notes that indicate what action was taken. This helps shorten the reading needed to scan the page.

When a discussion involves many people and the outcome is not clear, it may be necessary to formally close the discussion. This is always the case in discussions at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion, Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion and the other XFD's.

When should discussions be closed

The closer

Varieties of closing

Closing vs archiving

Closings are sometimes termed "archiving", although unlike traditional archiving, the discussion in question is not moved to a separate page, but is kept in place and enclosed in a shaded box. This can be accomplished by placing {{archivetop}} and {{archivebottom}} around a discussion. For the sake of avoiding confusion between traditional archiving and the kind of discussion archiving described above, this page will refer to the practice as "closing".

Discussions are usually closed in situations where someone, usually an administrator, decides that the discussion is irrelevant or disruptive. This practice is used quite often on pages that attract heated dispute, although there are no rules in place governing its use, and there are times when closing a discussion can create even more strife than had existed before.

How to determine the outcome

Consensus

Policy

Many closures are also based upon Misplaced Pages policy. As noted above, arguments that contradict policy are discounted.

Misplaced Pages policy, which requires that articles and information be verifiable, avoid being original research, not violate copyright, and be written from a neutral point of view is not negotiable, and cannot be superseded by any other guidelines or by editors' consensus. A closing admin must determine whether any article violates policy, and where it is very unlikely that an article on the topic can exist without breaching policy, it must be respected above individual opinions.

Precedent

Closure procedure

Example of a closed discussion

A closed discussion looks like this:

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Misplaced Pages

:Closing discussions: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages