| Revision as of 21:08, 26 June 2006 editKickahaOta (talk | contribs)2,279 edits Added condensed version of remarks previously discussed in "Appropriate nature of 3O disputes" on talk page← Previous edit | Revision as of 10:54, 27 June 2006 edit undoOmniplex (talk | contribs)5,865 editsm restore pending request removed without a provided 3O , see talk pageNext edit → | ||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
| Sometimes editors cannot come to a compromise, and require a tiebreaker—a third opinion. | Sometimes editors cannot come to a compromise, and require a tiebreaker—a third opinion. | ||
| In the context of disagreements—related to policy or content—sometimes these disputes involve only two editors. This frequently happens on obscure pages, which not many people watch. | |||
| The third-opinion process requires good faith on all sides. If you think that either editor involved in a dispute will not listen to a third opinion with good faith, do not request a third opinion. | |||
| {{dispute-resolution}} | {{dispute-resolution}} | ||
| ⚫ | ] | ||
| ⚫ | ] | ||
| == Guidelines == | |||
| * List a controversy involving '''only two editors.''' | |||
| * Use short, neutral explanations of both sides of the argument, and provide links to appropriate talk pages or specific edits in question. | |||
| * Sign the listing with "<nowiki>~~~~~</nowiki>" (five tildes) to add the date without your name. | |||
| * '''Do not discuss on this page.''' Leave the discussion to the linked talk page. | |||
| * Provide a third opinion on another item on the list, if one exists. | |||
| Some things can only be done one way or another. Despite good will on both sides, some disagreements cannot be solved without outside help. When only two people are involved, this may lead to a deadlock. '''This page is meant to provide a streamlined process for solving disagreements involving only two editors'''. | |||
| ⚫ | Listings that do not follow |
||
| === |
=== Listing === | ||
| * Any editor may list any controversy involving only two editors. If you are not one of the participants in the disagreement, however, you are encouraged to provide a third opinion yourself. | |||
| ⚫ | * Only provide third opinions on the relevant |
||
| * This page is meant only for disagreements involving precisely two people. If more are involved, try convincing—or coming to a compromise with—the other people. If that fails, try other Misplaced Pages dispute-solving procedures. | |||
| ⚫ | * While this page is meant to provide a swift procedure, do not provide third opinions recklessly. Remember that in |
||
| * When a third opinion has been provided in a disagreement, please remove the listing from the list below (regardless of whether you listed it in the first place). If you provide a third opinion in any disagreement below, please remove the listing from the list. | |||
| * Third opinions should be perceived as neutral. Do not offer a third opinion if you've had past dealings with the article or editors involved in the dispute. Make sure to write your opinion in a civil and nonjudgmental way. | |||
| === Providing Third Opinions === | |||
| ⚫ | * Only provide third opinions on the relevant talk pages, not on this page. | ||
| ⚫ | * While this page is meant to provide a swift procedure, do not provide third opinions recklessly. Remember that in most cases listed on this page, you alone get to decide either way. Read the arguments of the disputants thoroughly. | ||
| * Consider watching pages on which you state your opinion for a week or so, to ensure your opinion is not ignored. Articles listed on this page are frequently watched by very few people. | * Consider watching pages on which you state your opinion for a week or so, to ensure your opinion is not ignored. Articles listed on this page are frequently watched by very few people. | ||
| * You are, of course, entirely free to provide a third option—that is, to disagree with both disputants. | * You are, of course, entirely free to provide a third option—that is, to disagree with both disputants. If you do this, as in all cases in which a third opinion has been provided, remove the article from the list below. | ||
| * After providing a third opinion, remove the listing from this page. | |||
| == Active disagreements == | == Active disagreements == | ||
| Add new conflicts at the bottom. Use short (one-line), neutral descriptions, and provide links to locations where more information is available. Do not sign your name, but add a date (using "<nowiki>~~~~~</nowiki>" - five tildes). Please do not discuss the disagreement on this page. If there is a backlog, please add {{Tlx|backlog}} to top of page. | |||
| ⚫ | <!-- please add new entries to the bottom of this list --> |
||
| * No third-opinion requests are currently pending. | |||
| ⚫ | <!-- new entries above |
||
| It will help if '''everyone''' who lists something here weighs in on another disagreement. | |||
| ⚫ | ] | ||
| ⚫ | ] | ||
| ⚫ | '''Listings that do not follow instructions may be removed.''' | ||
| ⚫ | <!-- please add new entries to the bottom of this list --> | ||
| *] Edit war about the (dis)advantages of categories and the use of {{Tl|POV-section}} (plus {{Tl|Controversial3}} on the ] page). 22:32, 16 March 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ⚫ | <!-- new entries above --> | ||
Revision as of 10:54, 27 June 2006
Shortcut- ]
The Third Opinion is a guide for the use of third-party mediators in a dispute. Sometimes editors cannot come to a compromise, and require a tiebreaker—a third opinion.
In the context of disagreements—related to policy or content—sometimes these disputes involve only two editors. This frequently happens on obscure pages, which not many people watch.
| Dispute resolution (Requests) |
|---|
| Tips |
| Content disputes |
| Conduct disputes |
Guidelines
Some things can only be done one way or another. Despite good will on both sides, some disagreements cannot be solved without outside help. When only two people are involved, this may lead to a deadlock. This page is meant to provide a streamlined process for solving disagreements involving only two editors.
Listing
- Any editor may list any controversy involving only two editors. If you are not one of the participants in the disagreement, however, you are encouraged to provide a third opinion yourself.
- This page is meant only for disagreements involving precisely two people. If more are involved, try convincing—or coming to a compromise with—the other people. If that fails, try other Misplaced Pages dispute-solving procedures.
- When a third opinion has been provided in a disagreement, please remove the listing from the list below (regardless of whether you listed it in the first place). If you provide a third opinion in any disagreement below, please remove the listing from the list.
Providing Third Opinions
- Only provide third opinions on the relevant talk pages, not on this page.
- While this page is meant to provide a swift procedure, do not provide third opinions recklessly. Remember that in most cases listed on this page, you alone get to decide either way. Read the arguments of the disputants thoroughly.
- Consider watching pages on which you state your opinion for a week or so, to ensure your opinion is not ignored. Articles listed on this page are frequently watched by very few people.
- You are, of course, entirely free to provide a third option—that is, to disagree with both disputants. If you do this, as in all cases in which a third opinion has been provided, remove the article from the list below.
Active disagreements
Add new conflicts at the bottom. Use short (one-line), neutral descriptions, and provide links to locations where more information is available. Do not sign your name, but add a date (using "~~~~~" - five tildes). Please do not discuss the disagreement on this page. If there is a backlog, please add {{backlog}} to top of page.
It will help if everyone who lists something here weighs in on another disagreement.
Listings that do not follow instructions may be removed.
- Misplaced Pages:Categories, lists, and series boxes Edit war about the (dis)advantages of categories and the use of {{POV-section}} (plus {{Controversial3}} on the talk page). 22:32, 16 March 2006 (UTC)