User talk:Locke Cole: Difference between revisions - Wikipedia

Line 6:

::Yes, I know that RFCBEFORE says "it's often faster and more effective to thoroughly discuss the matter with any other parties on the related talk page. Editors are normally expected to make a reasonable attempt at working out their disputes before seeking help from others." That seemed to work at the Gilroy Garlic festival page, where I was involved as you know, and where I favored re-adding the names as an interim thing when the early discussion was strongly in favor of inclusion. That was a pretty calm and content-focused discussion and didn't need an RfC. The opposite is true of the Saugus discussion, which has become a battleground where I have had to hat a half-dozen sidetracks into personal accusations. IMO bringing in third parties is needed, since the battle lines are so strongly drawn between current participants that consensus is unlikely. An RfC is a way to bring in third parties. And this is not a "debate over one sentence"; it is a recurring, controversial decision that is resolved different ways at different articles, making it imperative to get a broad-based discussion. -- [[User:MelanieN|MelanieN]] ([[User talk:MelanieN|talk]]) 00:07, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

:::I may have to recheck the talk page history, but IIRC, it went directly to RFC, bypassing any attempts at discussion. As regards the alleged disruption by me, I will respect [[WP:1RR]] as it is on that article. And should you or another editor elect to place the RfC notice again, I will not revert that again. All that said, I find discussing this at all offensive, as we're effectively engaging in [[WP:NOR|original research]] on the talk page: let our sources dictate what is and is not included in the article. When you introduce voting, you invariably get people pushing a point of view and using that bias to "get their way" on how a subject is presented. I prefer a less democratic approach that defers to what reliable sources say. —[[User:Locke Cole|Locke Cole]] • [[User talk:Locke Cole|t]] • [[Special:Contributions/Locke Cole|c]] 00:29, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

::::Yes, please do that, it's always best to know what you're talking about. I think you'll find that it was initially a normal discussion and that I converted it to RfC only when El C suggested that at ANI{{snd}}which I stated clearly in the editsum of the edit where I converted it, complete with a difflink to El C's suggestion for your convenience. &#8213;[[User:Mandruss|<span style="color:#775C57;">'''''Mandruss'''''</span>]]&nbsp;[[User talk:Mandruss|<span style="color:#888;">&#9742;</span>]] 00:39, 18 November 2019 (UTC)