User talk:Ed Poor/Neutrality and consensus

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Userfy. Since the editor has consented to its userfication, this seems a sound compromise. Xoloz (talk) 15:54, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Neutrality and consensus

Yes, it's an essay, but it adds nothing to Wikipedia and is simply OR and synth. •Jim62sch• 20:37, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Comment: In case I'm offline when you AFD or speedy this, please honor my request of userfying it instead of deleting it, even if you delete the redirect. --Uncle Ed (talk) 22:10, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Keep. There is no reason to delete this essay. Of course it is, in a sense, original research and synthesis. The writer is trying to tackle why neutrality and consensus are sometimes in conflict. I hope people explore this problem more by developing the essay. It is not a main space article. --Bduke (talk) 23:51, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Keep as there really is nothing wrong with the essay. OR and Synth policies do not apply to essays in the Wikipedia space in the same way that they do to articles in the mainspace. - Koweja (talk) 00:11, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Isn't it unavoidable for a wikispace essay to be OR and synth? –Crazytales talk/desk 03:37, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

• Keep of course essays contain original research/synthesis. No reason to delete it. Hut 8.5 16:37, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
• Userfy or Delete Ed's on RFAR probation for disruption and POV forking, and I seem to remember evidence was given in that RFAR that he previously attempted to present his personal notions in the form of essays as guideline or policy. FeloniousMonk (talk) 03:00, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per above.--Filll (talk) 05:55, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
• Keep of course an essay is OR and synthesis. Thats what we mean by "essay". I think what is said here is wholly unobjectionable, and the controversies presented in an acceptable manner. 07:45, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
• Keep per other keep recommendations. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 08:51, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
• DeleteUserfy or rename: the essay in question has very little to do with the "consensus" aspect of its title as doesn't offer anything in the way of insight into how the two aspects interact. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk 13:00, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment: Category:Wikipedia essays states "Essays in Wikipedia namespace that are mostly written by a single person, and not frequently referenced, are generally moved to the userspace of their author." This essay would appear to meet this criteria & should be userfied until such time as it receives sufficient recognition/references to merit a move back to mainspace. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk 07:34, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
• keep This is an essay; it contains the advice and/or opinions --Looktothis (talk) 01:29, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
• Userfy and Delete Userspace is available for hosting personal essays. The Wikipedia namespace should only be used for those which many Wikipedians find useful. Eluchil404 (talk) 09:17, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment: my impression is that "userfy" means "move into user space" and means that the essay would no longer exist in mainspace. As such endorsements like "Userfy and Delete" (and to a lesser extent, "Userify, do not delete") are redundant. If this impression is incorrect, then please correct it. If it is correct, could editors please clarify their endorsements (to simply "Delete", "Keep" or "Userfy") to avoid confusion. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk 05:25, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
    • I mean move to Ed's userspace and delete the resulting redirect. I am not sure if that is the same outcome as Septentrionalis would prefer or not. Eluchil404 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 15:17, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
      • I don't care about the resulting cross-namespace redirect enough to defend it from the crusade against them, so Eluchil's solution is acceptable. But I really don't want to be counted as part of a consensus to delete either. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 19:01, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
• Userify, do not delete Ed's willing to have this happen, and I doubt this essay, with the present examples, is going to be widely popular or cited. It does discuss a real problem. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 04:10, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

  ... and on that note, I have updated the essay with a better explanation of how this is a problem. --Uncle Ed (talk) 15:48, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

• Comment/question: What is the normal procedure under the "...are generally moved to the userspace of their author" policy referenced above, with respect to the redirect that such a move would normally create? Is it to leave that redirect in place, or to remove it? Barring compelling reasons to the contrary, it would seem reasonable to follow that standard procedure (if it exists) here. Also I would suggest that "Userfy and delete redirect" or "Userfy without redirect" would be a clearer endorsement than "Userfy and delete". Hrafn^Talk_Stalk 20:45, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.