Wikipedia:What are High-Quality Arguments for Forming Consensus?
 | This is an explanatory essay about the WP:CONSENSUS page. This page provides additional information about concepts in the page(s) it supplements. This page is not one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community. |
According to Wikipedia's consensus policy, Consensus refers to opinions or decisions that are generally accepted within the Wikipedia community. Logically, it follows that checking the level of support within the community is one of the necessary conditions for determining whether consensus has been reached. However, the consensus policy also states that "The quality of an argument is more important than whether it represents a minority or a majority view."
This raises a question: can we say that the formation of consensus is only related to the quality of arguments and not related to the level of support within the community? The answer is no, and this is determined by the very meaning of consensus.
Evaluating the Quality of Arguments
[edit]So, how should we understand that the weight of the quality of arguments is higher than the weight of the number of people supporting those arguments?
It can be seen that mutual influence and persuasion are key in the process of forming consensus. Therefore, the quality of arguments aimed at forming consensus is directly related to their persuasive power. Thus, these high-quality arguments are more likely to be accepted as consensus when they eventually gain majority support.
Therefore, the idea that "The quality of an argument is more important than whether it represents a minority or a majority view"
can be understood as follows: regardless of whether an argument initially represents a minority or majority opinion, a high-quality argument with greater persuasive power is more likely to be unanimously agreed upon or accepted by the majority in the process of forming consensus. In the process of forming consensus, the final method to determine whether consensus has been reached must be through understanding the level of support within the community, as this aligns with the meaning of consensus.
When fully understanding Wikipedia's consensus policy, it's important to recognize that an argument supported by only a few people cannot be considered consensus unless it gains broader support. Consensus is not the same as majority voting; an option favored by 51% of people typically does not suffice to establish consensus. However, high-quality arguments in discussions aimed at building consensus can gain support through their persuasiveness, gradually turning initial minority backing into majority support. Therefore, the final level of support an argument garners within the group serves as a key indicator of its quality.
Prioritizing Consensus Over Correctness
[edit]The definition of consensus only involves opinions or decisions that are generally accepted within the group and does not explicitly involve correctness. Consensus does not necessarily equate to or imply correctness. Even if the majority agrees on a certain viewpoint, it may still be incorrect. Sometimes, the correct viewpoint of a minority may be overlooked by the majority, but this does not affect its correctness.
This raises another question: why adopt a consensus-based decision-making process rather than one based on correctness?
Determining absolute correctness can be challenging, especially in areas with ongoing debate or where information needs interpretation. Some matters can be objectively judged as right or wrong, such as mathematical calculations and formal logical deductions. In these cases, if there is a debate, Wikipedia's consensus tends to favor the correct side. However, most discussions have more complex attributes, such as differing values, varying interpretations of terms, and conflicting viewpoints. Consensus is often the way we make these decisions.
Although consensus does not necessarily guarantee correctness, it is the cornerstone of collaboration within the Wikipedia community. Therefore, consensus should adopt the opinions of the majority, but also emphasize making appropriate compromises with important minority opinions. Consensus enables Wikipedia to operate effectively, even in the face of uncertainty or disagreement.