71:
35:
133:
The same result would have occurred if User C had become involved in the dispute without ever knowing that the dispute was listed at the 3O project page or before the dispute was listed there. The fact that User C was or was not biased or was or was not neutral would have no effect: the dispute would
141:
opinions, not fourth opinions, and is intended for the situation where two editors who are debating a point in full good faith just get "stuck" and can't come to a decision. Once a third editor has entered the dispute, the dispute is no longer stuck. (Indeed, even if a "genuine" Third
Opinion is
117:
User D, who frequently issues Third
Opinions, sees the dispute on the Third Opinion project page, thinks about issuing an opinion under the Third Opinion Project, and looks at article X and its talk page to get the background on the
114:
With no intention to issue a Third
Opinion, and without removing the dispute from the WP:3O page, User C goes to article X and expresses his or her opinion about the subject of the dispute.
121:
User D sees User C's comments and, without issuing a Third
Opinion, removes the dispute from the Third Opinion dispute list because more than two editors are involved in the dispute.
101:
states that Third
Opinions are available under the project only if there are exactly two editors involved in the dispute. Consider the following scenario:
50:
It contains the advice or opinions of one or more
Knowledge (XXG) contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of
51:
111:
User C happens to look at the Third
Opinion project page, sees the dispute about X, and thinks that the dispute is interesting.
142:
given, it cannot "unstick" them by itself; the dispute will still not be settled until they come to consensus.)
21:
105:
User A and User B are having a dispute at article X. They are the only two editors involved in the dispute.
55:
154:
17:
43:
128:
User C's opinion was a third opinion but was not a Third
Opinion but was a Third Opinion.
98:
108:
A or B lists their dispute at the Third
Opinion Project to get a neutral third opinion.
148:
58:. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints.
70:
76:
Although this page contains elements of what some warped minds might
137:
The reason is, basically, simple: the Third
Opinion Project offers
65:
29:
97:
The Third Opinion Paradox arises from the fact that
134:still be removed for having more than two editors.
87:, overall it is intended by the author to be
8:
52:Knowledge (XXG)'s policies or guidelines
7:
56:thoroughly vetted by the community
28:
69:
33:
1:
85:<nose–in–the–air–sniff>
171:
99:the Third Opinion Project
54:, as it has not been
18:User:TransporterMan
125:Thus the paradox:
95:
94:
86:
64:
63:
162:
84:
73:
66:
37:
36:
30:
170:
169:
165:
164:
163:
161:
160:
159:
145:
144:
60:
59:
48:
34:
26:
25:
24:
12:
11:
5:
168:
166:
158:
157:
147:
146:
123:
122:
119:
115:
112:
109:
106:
93:
92:
74:
62:
61:
49:
40:
38:
27:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
167:
156:
153:
152:
150:
143:
140:
135:
131:
130:
129:
120:
116:
113:
110:
107:
104:
103:
102:
100:
90:
83:
79:
75:
72:
68:
67:
57:
53:
47:
45:
39:
32:
31:
23:
19:
138:
136:
132:
127:
126:
124:
96:
89:dead serious
88:
81:
77:
41:
155:User essays
42:This is an
149:Category
118:dispute.
78:consider
20: |
80:to be
139:third
82:humor
44:essay
16:<
22:WP3O
151::
91:.
46:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
