4,497
edits
FamilySearch Wiki talk:Consensus: Difference between revisions
fixed link
mNo edit summary |
(fixed link) |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
In order for an item to migrate from a Manual of Style discussion to a Manual of Style guideline, it needs to have reached consensus with the community. But what is consensus? Wikipedians say it is not unanimity. But what is it? A 60-40 vote? a 70-30 vote? 80-20? What kind of majority does an issue need to show in order to have reached consensus? Possibly, as Jbparker said, we don't have to worry so much about getting a huge majority on an issue because what we're making with the Manual of Style isn't policies, but guidelines. They're like strong recommendations. If someone doesn't want to follow them, they aren't compelled to do so. So community, '''what is consensus?''' [[User:Ritcheymt|Ritcheymt]] 21:23, 26 May 2009 (UTC) | In order for an item to migrate from a Manual of Style discussion to a Manual of Style guideline, it needs to have reached consensus with the community. But what is consensus? Wikipedians say it is not unanimity. But what is it? A 60-40 vote? a 70-30 vote? 80-20? What kind of majority does an issue need to show in order to have reached consensus? Possibly, as Jbparker said, we don't have to worry so much about getting a huge majority on an issue because what we're making with the Manual of Style isn't policies, but guidelines. They're like strong recommendations. If someone doesn't want to follow them, they aren't compelled to do so. So community, '''what is consensus?''' [[User:Ritcheymt|Ritcheymt]] 21:23, 26 May 2009 (UTC) | ||
:I saw "proposed consensus" used in some documentation on Wikipedia. Perhaps there is a proposed consensus written up and a period of time to allow for approval.. I think the opinion box that was added to the [[FamilySearch Wiki talk:Use |History/Local History discussion]] was a good way to get to a consensus.[[User:Franjensen|Franjensen]] 21:58, 26 May 2009 (UTC) | :I saw "proposed consensus" used in some documentation on Wikipedia. Perhaps there is a proposed consensus written up and a period of time to allow for approval.. I think the opinion box that was added to the [[FamilySearch Wiki talk:Use "History" Heading Rather than "Local Histories" in Place Pages|History/Local History discussion]] was a good way to get to a consensus.[[User:Franjensen|Franjensen]] 21:58, 26 May 2009 (UTC) | ||
:I agree with Fran on the use of the "opinion box" and the use of the terminology "proposed consensus." It seems to me that the person to write up the latter should be the person who sees a need in having consensus on a subject. Then all the contributors and users can weigh in on that subject. [[User:Jbparker|Jbparker]] 16:55, 8 June 2009 (UTC) | :I agree with Fran on the use of the "opinion box" and the use of the terminology "proposed consensus." It seems to me that the person to write up the latter should be the person who sees a need in having consensus on a subject. Then all the contributors and users can weigh in on that subject. [[User:Jbparker|Jbparker]] 16:55, 8 June 2009 (UTC) | ||