Tastywheat

Books for Liberty

Go to page here.

Proposal for Parliamentary Rules System

Having recently exposed to parliamentary procedure (i.e. Robert's Rules of Order) I'm under the impression it could actually help facilitate discussions on Wikipedia pages. For simple edits of pages I don't feel it is necessary, but for major changes (e.g. deletions, disambiguation, merging) I feel it could be helpful. Currently there is no official project/proposal page so I will place my proposal here. If and when I finish I'll make an official project page, otherwise consider these as notes. Comments are welcome (in discussion page).

Motions

Parliamentary procedure is based on a series of motions. These can introduce new proposals, change the wording of proposals, ask for extensions/limits on discussion or call the proposal to a vote (ending discussion). Using motions can clearly define the effects of proposals as well as ways to change the proposal (instead of voting down a proposal then introducing one slightly different).

Points

Parliamentary points do not indicate an action needs to be taken. Points can be made in request of clarification/elaboration, help on proper procedure (e.g. How do I call to end the debate?), or personal problems (e.g. I won't have access to a computer during the vote.). These points should be addressed first (assuming you know the answer or have a solution to the problem). In this internet setting, debate can continue without addressing the point, but motions should be withheld until the point is addressed.

Voting

In parliamentary procedure most motions, in order to carry/pass, require a majority (more than half). Sometimes a super-majority is required though (2/3 vote) and this distinction should be duly noted. Motions requiring a super-majority are such because they take away the rights of the participants (e.g. ending debate before equal time is given for and against). In this internet setting it will be easy to separate votes and count them.

Example of Process

Motion for Deletion

I propose that the article Poet be deleted. - Tastywheat (talk - contribs) 20:43, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

I second the proposal. - AnyOtherUser 20:44, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

FOR	AGAINST
This isn't a real article. It only lists a bunch of poets. If people want to find poets they should be looking under the category for Poet. - Tastywheat (talk - contribs) 21:15, 8 April 2008 (UTC) I agree. There's no content here and it's useless to have an article about a general group of people. Where are the Typist and Truck Driver articles? - AnyOtherUser	You should leave this article alone. It doesn't just list them, it groups poets by language and provides links to other poetry pages. Most people wouldn't use category pages to find poets anyway. - 111.111.111.111

Amendment(s)

Merge Then Delete (passed)

I think the proposal should include merging this article's contents with the appropriate list of poets. - AnyOtherUser

Agreed. - Tastywheat (talk - contribs)

FOR
This information shouldn't be completely deleted, but the page itself is unnecessary.
I didn't know about the list of poet pages. With them in mind this page is redundant.

Vote to change the proposal to be "Merge the article's contents with the appropriate list of poets then delete the article"

IN FAVOR	OPPOSED
Tastywheat (talk - contribs) AnyOtherUser RegisteredUsersOnly	HatesTheIdea

Proposal passed