Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:Early closure to avoid unnecessary confrontation

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by BostonMA (talk | contribs) at 14:45, 31 March 2006 (Feedback?). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Feedback?

I'm hoping to see as much feedback on this policy as possible. Please also add AfDs to the final section if you believe there is / was a clear example of the need for this policy. Nice one, Deizio 14:51, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose; sorry. Well-intentioned response to a real problem; but the wrong kind. No way to tell which horse won the race until the finish line is crossed. John Reid 08:28, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No need to apologize. It is because of this exact concern that a) I have gone to such lengths to point out how important a very clear outcome is, and b) I hope to build up a list of AfDs where this rule could be applied, which will show just how certain we are talking about. I agree with the "mathematical" basis of your comment, but (to pluck numbers out of the air) an AfD with 2 days to run and 20 experienced editors voting "delete" with one angered newbie shouting "keep" is not a race in the first place. Deizio 12:50, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. The purpose of polling, rather than simply voting, is to obtain a good selection of arguments pro and con, not merely to establish which side has a majority. It is the right of every editor to use their arguments to attempt to forge a new consensus. Early closure on the basis of an initial lopsided tally, turns a poll and a discussion into a vote. --BostonMA 14:45, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]