On May 3, 2006, at 1:57 PM, Cheney Shill wrote:
I agree completely. The simplest and quickest BIG
thing would be
to make it VERY, UNEQUIVOCALLY clear that consensus only applies to
policy and guidelines, not to article content. All to often, and
despite the warning on the consensus page regarding groups taking
over articles, admins use consensus as the deciding factor to keep
a version of an article up that goes completely against
verifiability or NPOV, violating NOR at the same time by accepting
the claims, arguments, and votes of the group.~~~~Pro-Lick
If there is any unclarity about this issue, it needs to be spelled
out in the policy pages. The understanding is that WP:NPOV is *not-
negotiable* ane cannot be bypassed by any kind of editors consensus,
that is a group cannot agree on violation NPOV by consensus.
FYI, the amended NPOV policy (as of several weeks ago) clearly states
in the article's lead that:
"NPOV is one of Wikipedia's three content-guiding policy pages. The
other two are Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:No original
research. Jointly, these policies determine the type and quality of
material that is acceptable in the main namespace. Because the three
policies are complementary, they should not be interpreted in
isolation from one other, and editors should therefore try to
familiarize themselves with all three. The three policies are also
non-negotiable and cannot be superseded by any other guidelines or by
editors' consensus."
The last paragraph unambiguously addresses this issue.
-- Jossi