https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40499
Dereckson <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED See Also| |https://bugzilla.wikimedia. | |org/show_bug.cgi?id=19332 Resolution| |WONTFIX --- Comment #6 from Dereckson <[email protected]> 2012-09-27 07:41:31 UTC --- [ The previous changes ] The extension were requested after a discussion between Meno25 and Ciphers with an approval by Cyanos. But you'll note in this discussion, they all agreed. This is a consensus : the Wikimedia culture tends to prefer quiet discussions to majority votes. The discussion took place in the village pump, a correct place to discuss such matter. Furthermore, the change were requested on Bugzilla end June. It's only early Augustus the configuration occured. This 6 weeks delay would have allowed any interested people to come and shout "I've relaunched the discussion with strong objections, there isn't consensus anymore.". 2 years later, a new discussion occurs to change the configuration. This discussion didn't lead to a full restriction of the extension, but to disable editors autopromotion and to add 2 new namespaces, Portal: and Annex: This can be revisited at the following URLs: * [[ar:ويكيبيديا:الميدان/أرشيف/تقنية/06/2009]] (section 1) * Bug 19332 * [[ar:ويكيبيديا:الميدان/أرشيف/تقنية/10/2011]] (section 10) I stress on the point the 2011 discussion were documented rather a comprehensive way by Ciphers. ________________________________________________________ [ Local consensus ] The conditions to request such change is mainly an internal matter to the Arabic Wikipedia. Our responsibility is only to check this consensus exists, not to be a "chamber of appeal". It's on ar.wikipedia you have to convince other contributors you get a consensus. If you would be interested by my personal opinion, you'd discover I consider 5 people for a change, 4 against, 1 neutral isn't a consensus, because even if you don't count the neutral opinion, you have virtually the same number of people supporting than rejecting your change. I would even dare to think your change would be more arbitrarily as nobody opposes the first, but 4 people opposed yours. This is really the difference between a "discussion to reach an agreement" and a "vote". We tend to prefer the first on Wikimedia communities. And when we use numeral votes, the threshold tends to be 2/3 (some meta RfC or fr. "prises de décision"), 3/4 (the threshold of support votes to become administrator on commons., but the bureaucrat has a discretion power to judge community consensus instead) or 80% (the same for fr., not documented and unofficial, as it's the bureaucrats who check if there is or not a consensus and judge the validity of against votes). Some votes use Condorcet method to get a winner proposal among 3 to 8, instead to use raw numeric stuff. It's rather rare (but still exists) to only use 50% as threshold. On some wikis (e.g. fr.), the threshold could be discussed before the vote start. [ Now, the matter being clarified to be a Pro-Against-Neutral 5-4-1 vote, and implementation change a consensual (if alas not populated) discussion, it's safe to assume there is no consensus. ] -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug. You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Wikibugs-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l
