Wikipedia talk:Date formatting and linking poll/Archive 3: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 18:48, 3 March 2023

Latest revision as of 13:01, 20 January 2025

Line 438:

::In accordance with how things have always worked here on WP, the ''[[status quo ante]]'' prevails where a consensus is not reached for the adoption of a new proposal. There is no denying that both Ryan and Ohconfucius would be happier if there was a 6% swing for a "conclusive result", but I think the only reasonable conclusion to draw at this point is that acceptance of autoformatting has not been gained by the community, and we must accept that it is about as clear it is likely to get. If we fail to recognise this inherent limitation of [[WP:CONSENSUS|consensus]], we would be rightly accused of [[Decision making|indecision]]. Whilst accepting that [[WP:CCC|consensus can change]], the next question which should be asked is whether the community is prepared to accept a prolongation of this discussion ''ad infinitum'' until it is conclusive enough for you or I? [[User:Ohconfucius|Ohconfucius]] ([[User talk:Ohconfucius|talk]]) 02:38, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

::* I endorse what Ohconfucius has written here 100%. His logic is unassailable. <u>I ask that you, Ryan (and the other arbitrators) read it ''thoroughly''</u>.'' The old system of autformatting has been officially dead for months now. The motion to adopt a new method of autoformatting has now failed muster. Moreover, the Wikipedian community is about ready to put a pistol in its mouth on this issue. I’m quite done fighting and dwelling on this issue; it ''has'' to end. There has clearly been enough debate. I’ll accept what the arbitrators and admins decide with grace and dignity. I just ask that they <u>grow some huevos</u> here, step up to the plate, and ''do something.'' '''Lead, follow, or get out of the way.''' <span style="white-space:nowrap;">'''[[User:Greg L|Greg L]]''' ([[User_talk:Greg_L|talk]])</span> 02:50, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

::Oh, something else in Ryan's post which struck me upon further reflection after making my post above: I would pertinently remind all that this RfC vote is '''not''' on a specific DA scheme but for the <u>general principle</u>. However "far from it in the Wikipedia sense of polling/consensus" the poll result may be on the issue, to go and explore "other methods of autoformatting for the future that wouldn't require date linking" seems to me to be counter-intuitive and "''anti-consensus''", as it would presuppose the eventual adoption of DA when the community will have voted 60% <u>against</u> it ''en principe''. Of course, if you were to include the 'oppose' in the second poll, the outcome may be something interesting like this: <small> 'keep old DA' 5%, 'new DA with <nowiki>{{#formatnumber}}</nowiki>-style markup' 12%, 'new DA with no markup' 20%, no DA at all 58%, undecided 5%</small> - what will fractioning that vote change??? Anyway, as there is supposed to be a 2 week discussion based on these results, I think perhaps Ryan may be jumping the gun here a little... [[User:Ohconfucius|Ohconfucius]] ([[User talk:Ohconfucius|talk]]) 03:50, 8 April 2009 (UTC)