|This essay contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. Essays may represent widespread norms or minority viewpoints. Consider these views with discretion. Essays are not Wikipedia policies or guidelines.|
Debates on some issues in Wikipedia will always degenerate into the following familiar pattern:
- Oh yes it is!
- Oh no it isn't!
This is easiest to resolve when only one or two editors support one of the positions - he's behind you! - but in some cases is the result of two groups holdiong different and mutually irreconcilable views. The best way of fixing this appears to be:
- Discretionary sanctions for any articles involved
- Topic bans for single-purpose and advocacy-only accounts
- Getting down to specifics of what needs to change and why
In the end, though, if one party continues to promote a specific piece of disputed text long after consensus has emerged we may have no option but to block them. This is not because the cabal has ganged up on them, but because they are being a dick.