Wikipedia:Attempting to overturn recent consensus
 | This is an essay. It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints. |
In some instances, a specific proposal is repeatedly made with the same result occurring each time the proposal is made. For example, articles may be nominated for deletion, renaming, or merging, or a policy may be proposed to be altered in a specific way.
Where the same proposal is made repeatedly, and the same proposal is made again only a short time after the close of the previous proposal, administrators closing the discussion may be requested to impose a moratorium on future efforts to repeat the failed proposal for a period of time. A moratorium may also be imposed by a discussion achieving the clear consensus of the community.
In user conduct appeals, a moratorium on further appeals is not uncommon. They may also be established by discretionary sanctions which are fully under Arbcom's authority.
However, moratoriums should be used with caution, and only within strict limits. Moratoriums run counter to the general practice on Wikipedia that any editor may initiate a discussion on any topic related to the operations of the encyclopedia at any time. Generally, a moratorium should be short, because consensus can change over time. A moratorium may always be lifted if there is consensus in a discussion proposing to do so.