User talk:Extremind
Welcome
[edit]Hello, Extremind, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} and your question on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
- The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- Editing tutorial
- Picture tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Naming conventions
- Simplified Manual of Style
We hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 03:04, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
Universe
[edit]Please note that just because you are discussing something on a talk page does not mean that you can just insert it into an article. This is especially the case when the consensus is so clearly against you, as it is on Talk: Universe. Please do not re-add that additional phrase to the article until you can show that consensus has changed to include it. Qwyrxian (talk) 23:03, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
- Please note that I don't need any reason at all to improve an article. This is especially the case when what you call consensus is not based on any valid reasoning but acts merely as an opinionated majority. No one there put forward any effort of understanding the depth and the importance of the change that I have proposed, except Student7, who made the only constructive comment on the matter. Please also note that ignorance and shallowness does not empower your authority in any way, even if you are many. I was kind of hoping to find some open minded Wikipedians around, but it looks like I was wrong. You are just acting territorial and putting me on the stand instead of looking forward to find the best solution together. Please, you find yourself in no position to ask me anything. Extremind (talk) 09:05, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) Unfortunately, an "opinionated majority" is what defines WP:CONSENSUS and consensus is one of the 5 Pillars of Wikipedia. As such, consensus pretty much always wins. It's one of the concepts you agreed to when you signed up to this private website, so unfortunately/fortunately it's not optional. You'll find in most cases, the concept of consensus will help you more than hinder you ES&L 09:15, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you for the mention to WP:CONSENSUS. It says there clearly that In determining consensus, consider the quality of the arguments, the history of how they came about, the objections of those who disagree, and existing documentation in the project namespace. The quality of an argument is more important than whether it represents a minority or a majority view. The arguments "I just don't like it" and "I just like it" usually carry no weight whatsoever.
- Yes, and your " I like it" is outweighed by the numerous other voices citations to policy such as WP:VALID. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 10:49, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
- Yes, Evermind, you can't simply assert, "I'm right, everyone else is wrong, so I have consensus." While a majority is not strictly speaking consensus, an "everyone but one person" definitely is. You are welcome to continue discussing the matter (within reason; there's a point at which any discussion can turn into tendentiousness), but you can't edit the article to meet your version until you can clearly show that you have a consensus. If we have to default to something, we should default to 1) the version of the article prior to the changes in dispute, or 2) the version held by the majority. In this case, an overwhelming majority. If you want to pursue further, what you should probably do is seek further dispute resolution,
possibly through an Request for comment.Qwyrxian (talk) 10:53, 23 October 2013 (UTC) - Correction, I forgot we were already doing an RfC. Qwyrxian (talk) 11:22, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
- Yes, Evermind, you can't simply assert, "I'm right, everyone else is wrong, so I have consensus." While a majority is not strictly speaking consensus, an "everyone but one person" definitely is. You are welcome to continue discussing the matter (within reason; there's a point at which any discussion can turn into tendentiousness), but you can't edit the article to meet your version until you can clearly show that you have a consensus. If we have to default to something, we should default to 1) the version of the article prior to the changes in dispute, or 2) the version held by the majority. In this case, an overwhelming majority. If you want to pursue further, what you should probably do is seek further dispute resolution,
- Yes, and your " I like it" is outweighed by the numerous other voices citations to policy such as WP:VALID. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 10:49, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you for the mention to WP:CONSENSUS. It says there clearly that In determining consensus, consider the quality of the arguments, the history of how they came about, the objections of those who disagree, and existing documentation in the project namespace. The quality of an argument is more important than whether it represents a minority or a majority view. The arguments "I just don't like it" and "I just like it" usually carry no weight whatsoever.