Wikipedia talk:What are High-Quality Arguments for Forming Consensus?: Difference between revisions

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: no consensus. (closed by non-admin page mover) Bensci54 (talk) 17:10, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:What are High-Quality Arguments for Forming Consensus? → User:Gluo88/What are High-Quality Arguments for Forming Consensus? – This might be more suitable for a userpage essay, instead of an explanation of WP:CONSENSUS, as noted above the article. -Lemonaka 18:17, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ESSAY has some limited guidance on user-fying essays, however it only mentions it happening if the essay is "problematic". I don't personally see any big issues with the essay, probably a few small corrections that need to be made. The essay doesn't appear to greatly expand on the coverage we already have on the topic, although the section on consensus versus correctness is interesting and does discuss a phenomenon I've witnessed (and unwittingly participated in) here before.

I have no problem with this remaining where it is, assuming it will get traffic and hopefully a few more editors, although most essays tend to be largely written by a single author. I would question whether we need the shortcut for it, but we won't be able to empirically answer that for a while. If this does get userfied, the author might want to indicate somewhere on this talk page that it is okay for others to edit if they wish, and that would be my only big negative to userfying - doing so may discourage edits which could improve the essay, even if it's unlikely many such edits will occur. ASUKITE 20:05, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think usually this kind of thing is done at WP:MFD, even if it's a move. Cremastra (u — c) 23:38, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If that's the case - to the potential closer, if this doesn't get any solid replies, a no-consensus close would enable this to be resubmitted there, where it will hopefully get the attention it deserves. ASUKITE 16:36, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]