[WikiEN-l] Re: Proposal on VFD: enforcement of nomination policy

Sun Mar 6 11:04:48 UTC 2005

-------------- Original message -------------- 
>d. wrote:
> actionforum at comcast.net wrote: 
> 
> >>I really don't see what's so hard about actually putting a reason bearing 
> >>a relationship to policy, particularly when VFD explicitly says to do so. 
> 
> > What's hard, it that applying policy to to a factual situation is "original 
> > research". If we can't apply definitions of words, or count for ourselves, 
> > perhaps we get out of the habit of reasoning. 
>  
> Er, I can make no sense of your response in terms of the discussion. Could 
> you please clarify? Where TF does 'original research' come into VFD policy? 

I was pointing out the irony, that the "original research" prohibition is taken to extremis in the editing of articles, and yet is relied upon so heavily in the enforcement of and application of policy.

The "original research" prohibition probably has many unintended consequences.  It can, with a petty community of editors, severely limit the use of words with plain meanings, plainly applied to a situation.  If the word hasn't been applied by someone else to the situation it is considered original research.  It also, results in articles that are thought to have language that is not smoothing flowing.  For example, one often cannot point out an "irony", unless it has been pointed out elsewhere.  But one can get two facts contradictory facts into the article in close juxtoposition to each other, and leave the detection of the irony to the reader, but it doesn't quite flow as well as the explicit notation of the irony would.

Application of policy to a factual situation is no different than application Just War theory or the Geneva Convention to a factual situation.  One is required of the community and the other effectly banned, in the articles, at least.  That is why the talk pages are often as useful as the articles themselves.  It is also an advantage that signed articles in conventional encyclopedias have, the allow an authorial voice, reasoning and categorization, resulting in good summarys.   
              -- Silverback