pulled this from an answer to someone. I'm not sure it's really appropriate for something, and some of it seems wrong somehow ... but I don't want to toss it yet.
- I'm not interested in editing any page without good reason
- I'm not interested in editing a subpage
- I'm not interested in discussing things to the death on the talk page
- I'm not interested in avoiding all conflicts at all costs, some things are worth fighting for. :-)
- I'm not interested in avoiding all possible conflict at cost to the encyclopedia.
- I'm not interested in slowing down editing for the sake of slowing down editing.
- I'm not interested in making wikipedia boring or stressful.
- I'm not interested in promoting bureaucracy or hierarchy
- I'm not interested in prescribing what people must do. I'm not going to tell them "this is what you should do"
- I'm interested in editing pages for good reasons.
- I'm interesting in continuing to explain wikipedia best practices in the project namespace
- I'm interested in explaining these concepts to newcomers
- I'm interested in exploring innovative ways to obtain consensus in contentious situations.
- I'm interested in preventing and/or defusing unnecessary conflict
- I'm interested in ensuring that the project namespace reflects wikipedia best practice at all times,.
- I'm interested in ensuring that pages remain editable.
- In the case of the project namespace, pages need to be editable to ensure that updates to best practices can be made at the moment they are discovered, not months later, when incidents and lessons learned have long been forgotten.
- I am very interested in ensuring that people who want to edit *can* edit as freely and as rapidly as possible, with as little friction as possible. Volunteer time is a valuable resource.
- I am interested in making sure that wikipedia is fun, if it isn't fun, why would anyone volunteer?
- I am interested in promoting adhocracy and clan culture
- I'm interested in *describing* how people do things. I want to tell people '"this is what works"
class test: def __init__(): print "does this work?" def some_more(): print "<3<3<3<3<3"
components of a "consensus statement"Edit
A consensus statement must ideally be made immediately at the moment you make an action, and explain why you took that action.
A consensus statement ideally has 4 components. These can be explicit, or they can be woven into the style of your reply (might be nice to make it nearly invisible). Sometimes not all are needed, though people should be able to ask you about any of these elements if you skipped them. Make sure you know the answers to all these components before you hit "submit" The components are:
- A personal reason why you are in support of the action you are taking
- What would theoretically need to be said or done to make you reverse that position
- A reason why you think others (will) support you (ie, why is this likely to gain consensus)
- What likely would need to be said or done to reverse the position of the community.
If you don't give the person you're reverting a reason that can be potentially disputed or agreed with ... [then you are not discussing] --Father Goose 
3 word IAREdit
You can strip out a lot of words and go from 12 to 3:
Improve the encyclopedia.
Who am I?Edit
5 stages of innovationEdit
the five stages of innovation
1. People deny that the innovation is required. 2. People deny that the innovation is effective. 3. People deny that the innovation is important. 4. People deny that the innovation will justify the effort required to adopt it. 5. People accept and adopt the innovation, enjoy its benefits, attribute it to people other than the innovator, and deny the existence of stages 1 to 4.
source says: ©AC 2005. Inspired by Alexander von Humboldt's 'Three Stages Of Scientific Discovery', as referenced by Bill Bryson in his book, 'A Short History Of Nearly Everything'.
In wikipedia you link like this. Why like that?
Which words are important to link.