Wikipedia:Centralized discussion

[[Category:Wikipedia {{{1}}}s|Centralized discussion]]

Explanation

These discussions were initially introduced (in March 2005) to reduce the post count on Votes for deletion. The point of these discussions is to establish consensus about a recurring theme that comes up on VFD or similar pages. If a number of related articles are discussed, the same arguments tend to be used for all of them, leading to a fragmented chaotic discussion. In that case, it would be helpful to create a centralized place for discussion; the outcome of that discussion can then be used as a guideline in the future. It can be assumed that the Wikipedian consensus holds that they hold true in the majority of situations to which they apply. For instance, the guideline WP:FICT was created through this process.

This process is generally used to (attempt to) establish a standard for organizing content (rather than content itself). Suggested topics include, but are not limited to,

• Should certain types of articles be merged, or converted to a list, or not?
• What should certain classes of articles or categories be named?
• What layout is most appropriate to certain groups of templates?

This does not mean that this page must be used for any such discussions. It is merely intended as a convenient central platform (however, if you know of such a discussion some place else, please add a link here). For issues limited to a single article, please use Requests for Comment instead.

Community input

These discussions are supposed to be as public as possible. If you know of an article page or WikiProject page that would be interested in any particular discussion, please create a (two-way) link between them. Also, please transclude Template:Cent wherever it's useful.

Actionability

If a centralized debate on an issue reaches consensus on an issue, it should not be necessary to hold a localized debate on a single instance of that issue. In other words, if consensus is reached that a certain action is appropriate in certain kinds of situation, editors can simply be bold and do it. Of course they can do so anyway, but they can refer to existing standards to explain their actions.

For instance, if a naming convention is clearly established, then renaming the relevant articles is preferable over debating the issue again at Requested Moves. After all, a consensus has already been formed. If a discussion is related to categorization, it may be appropriate to use it to establish a new speedy renaming criterion.

It is reasonable to assume that any standard or guideline has exceptions. However, if a standard is found to be consensual, editors should not work against it simply because they don't like it. It is, of course, always possible to reopen a discussion and change existing guidelines.

Procedure

New discussions

• Anyone can add a discussion to the list. This is done by creating a page on Wikipedia:Centralized discussion/<<enter topic here>>, and adding it to the top of the list in Template:Cent.
• If you wish to discuss something but feel there are too many discussions already going on at the moment, list it at the bottom of this page.
• Please look at existing discussions first to get an idea of layout and how to describe the discussion.
• If you create a discussion about a group of articles, please do not list those individual articles on VfD/CfD/TfD/etc while the discussion lasts. Instead, add a link to the bottom of the discussion.
• If you see a nomination that relates to an existing discussion here, please link both the nomination and the discussion to one another. Do not remove the nomination.

Closing discussions

• Wikipedia is, almost by definition, inconsistent. It is not possible to standardise everything, and it is certainly possible that no consensus will be reached on any issue. For instance, the AD/CE eras issue.
• Discussions will be kept for as long as necessary until consensus forms or the debate dies down. After that, they will be listed at the conclusions page.
• The person closing the discussion should summarize conclusions drawn from it, and contact some other people taking a different opinion in the discussion to verify the conclusions.

Discuss or vote?

• The point is to establish a consensual guideline through discussion, not to establish a rule through voting.
• Occasionally, however, it will be necessary to hold a vote to establish firmly where consensus lies, or to find out which of several options is preferred, e.g. for a template layout.
• If there is substantial disagreement on whether a certain issue should be standardized at all, and the objections cannot be resolved through debate, it is suggested that a simple "yes/no" vote be held, with a two-thirds majority required to pass.
• If there is disagreement on what a standard, naming convention, or layout should be, then an approval vote should be held between the different options. The option with most support wins. If there are more than two options, and after the poll two of them are closely tied for first place, a runoff vote should be held between them. Anyone who voted for either option in the earlier vote can be assumed to still hold that opinion for the runoff vote, unless that editor states otherwise.
• All such votes should run for one week, and should run simultaneously if possible. If an issue is put to a vote, please move it to the appropriate column on {{Cent}}, and add it to Wikipedia:Current surveys.
• As with all discussions on Wikipedia, be civil about it, do not make personal attacks, and uphold Wikiquette.

Reopening old discussions

• It is possible for consensus to change over time. Thus, it may be useful at some point to re-open some of these discussions.
• If so, please use the page used in the earlier discussion (archiving the talk page if necessary) and add the link back to {{Cent}}.
• However, please only re-open a discussion if, after you've asked some other user's views on the matter, it seems to no longer reflect Wikipedian consensus - do not re-open a discussion simply if you personally disagree with the outcome.

Related discussions

This page is by no means the only way to form consensus, it is merely a suggested process that has proven useful in the past. The following are similar processes.

• Wikipedia:Article series boxes policy (proposed)
• Wikipedia:Naming conventions
• Wikipedia:Infobox standardisation
• Wikipedia:Template standardisation
• Wikipedia:Template locations

Future discussion

These are suggested topics for centralized discussion in the near future.

• Categorization by gender, ethnicity, sexual preference; or by hair color etc
• Censorship or disclaimer templates ("Warning: this page contains sexually implicit material")
• Appropriateness of VFD to Wikipedia proposal pages
• When to use list articles, categories or series box templates (link)