On Tue, 2002-10-01 at 00:08, Stephen Gilbert wrote:
--- The Cunctator <cunctator(a)kband.com> wrote:
How can one edit a policy page without changing
the
policy? (Barring
pages like Votes for deletion that is a combination
of
policy-non-policy).
Ok, I admit it. I'm confused. I'm trying to say that
policy should be changed first, and then the
description should be updated to reflect the change.
You seem to be saying that the description should be
changed first, and then discussed. Your argument
doesn't make sense to me (or most other people, it
seems).
A lot of it comes down to a definition of "policy". What is it? Is it
what people do? Is it what it says on the pages? Is it an admixture of
the two? Is it what the most active contributor to Wikipedia at the time
does? Etc. etc.
What I'm saying is that most changes to policy don't need to be
discussed.
If that assertion is true, then the best meta-policy is to by default
just change the policy.
Does that reduction make more sense?
There are lots of ways to edit the policy pages
without changing the policy they describe: correcting
typos and grammar, linking, re-writing for clarity.
None of those change the policy much (but they do change the
policy--it's not a black and white thing) except for "re-writing for
clarity". One man's clarity is another man's pea soup.