Wikipedia talk:Political dispute

Essays Low‑impact

	This page is within the scope of WikiProject Wikipedia essays, a collaborative effort to organise and monitor the impact of Wikipedia essays. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion. For a listing of essays see the essay directory.EssaysWikipedia:WikiProject EssaysTemplate:WikiProject EssaysWikiProject Wikipedia essays pages
Low	This page has been rated as Low-impact on the project's impact scale.
	The above rating was automatically assessed using data on pageviews, watchers, and incoming links.

Untitled[edit]

What if the difference between a Wikipedia:political dispute and a Wikipedia:POV warrior is that, in a political dispute, people calm down and compromise as they are more heard, while a POV warrior simply escalates to get more of what they want? If that's so, then we need to have a way to detect how positive feedback vs negative feedback operate to encourage/discourage such conflicts.

In other words, granting less leeway to POV warriors has become customary at Wikipedia. But maybe granting more leeway to people who are actually in a political dispute, for instance, George W. Bush vs. John Kerry (talk about edit war!), actually will calm things down more.

Worth discussing. As is the whole need for a polity to start to deal with the inherent political differences on a more sophisticated level than just to say NPOV dispute. The systemic bias issue for instance is now being countered by Wikipedia:WikiProject_Countering_systemic_bias - long overdue. So dealing with political disputes AS political, might be the next step. Especially since wiki politics now intersects with politics as usual IRL, as Green Party of Canada Living Platform makes obvious, and as the October Bush vs. Kerry edit war / trollfest makes obvious.