Knowledge (XXG) talk:Straw polls

2789:+1 for Grace Note here. Here's the thing: ad-hoc straw polls can be a great way of cutting down a number of potential and nuanced versions of a proposal, it's just a bizarre coincidence that the situations in which they are proposed are so often the places where they serve no purpose but to document the fact that there are opposite views to which, if pressed, people who actually broadly agree on something roughly in the middle, will polarise. 212: 52: 111: 83: 3516: 175: 97: 3066:

feature request, the polling was undoubtedly a factor in that so there's really no point in trying to downplay that either. Radiant! it is difficult to understand your push to limit the significance that polling has played (and plays) on the project. The fact that polling is itself a part of the dispute resolution process speaks volumes to its standing in the community.

21: 3563: 1142:. If we fill in this page with all the situations and the caveats, that's exactly what we'll end up with. If we leave out what Netscott calls "soapboxing" and what the rest of us call "warnings about when not to use polls", we end up with a POV essay. Either way we're not writing anything here that hasn't been written before. 1104:"voting is evil", but they can't be everywhere, and often the people who start the polls just ignore them. How do you "describe" common practice when there are multiple, competing practices with no commonality? Second, wouldn't it be more helpful to the users and especially newer users, to have a page that says when polls 2771:, and at least 80% of those involve a poll, which isn't directly about article content, but it's close. When you decide which language's name to use for a river or city, or whether an event in a war is an "incident" or a "massacre" or a "tragedy" or a "battle", you're deciding content. Should we be doing it differently? - 2905:

Then why would we split them off to some other page? The answer is very simple. The people promoting this are largely the same people who object to the very idea of discouraging voting, and want PNSD deprecated. So they are trying to replace a page that discourages and explains voting, by a page that

2376:

They are unhelpful because they are irrelevant in the grand scheme of this page. They're added there to belittle the other rather serious polls that have been conducted surrounding Knowledge (XXG) policies and guidelines. This is clouding the issue. Basically they're there for "red herring" purposes.

891:

On a site with a million articles, I doubt there's much that doesn't happen on an hourly basis, including vandalism, misspellings, etc. Polling certainly happens, but it often is a mess and makes things worse. Polling can help in some cases, but I think a page talking about how to do polling should

3003:

Well it is rather common knowledge that at any one time there are generally 1,000 or so active Wikipedians so when 10% or more of that number particpates in a poll that is notable. As far as the featured requests... correct me if I am wrong but the request to have different levels of blocking did go

2501:

There is a name for the type of logical fallacy engaged in by Radiant above, where one states an unproven assertion ("their obviously poor track record") as the premise for a question in an effort to avoid any discussion about whether the assertion is correct or not, but I forget what it is. I just

2022:

Well, when trying to. In the few cases where the polls were defining, the process design typically doesn't work too well. (correlation!= causation, but I have my suspicions... typically it's when people spend more time designing polls and the poll process, than they spend actually designing the darn

1513:

WP:PNSD is not a guideline, regardless of whether there is a tag on it that says it is. Part of the reason the tag is still there is that someone got one of their admin friends to threaten to block me if I removed the guideline tag again, and then someone protected the page (although I wasn't going

565:

No, you're wrong.. this isn't the page to talk about "anti-polling" this is the page to describe current practice on Knowledge (XXG). Unfortunately it appears that editors were a bit confused about this previously and I've decided to clear the air. As the page matures it will of course be logical to

370:

It goes roughly like this: (1) list options; (2) get people to !vote; (3) argue over results; (4) argue over what the questions were; (5) argue over quorum; (6) argue over the arguing. I am told that surveys like this typically don't provide very much useful data, and that the outcome is going to be

3250:

Actually you've not proved anything yourself. There's a claim you make a counter claim neither of us have any solid "proof" and there we go. I continue to edit according to the fact that polling has been utilized (and is frequently utilized) as a tool to guage consensus for many many aspects of the

2540:

Well in order for a poll to "work out" all it has to do is establish what the state of affairs are about a given issue in terms of what views folks hold on the issue. So pretty much the only way a poll wouldn't "work out" is if it was canceled or otherwise wasn't valid in some way (ie: a poll about

3218:

No I'm not, and that's just something you assumed again because I haven't said anything like that. Your assumption that most of the "heavy lifting" is done by admins is contradicted by the fact that most of the respondents to ATT aren't admins. So like I said, 100 users out of an estimate of 90000

3035:

WRT the blocking feature request, yes, it was implemented, but the poll was not a factor in deciding whether to implement it. Note that the poll started October 2005, the implementation was done in May 2006, and the poll ended September 2006. It is generally not helpful towards the devs to suggest

2397:

False. They're notable polls, which was what you called the section before you decided to focus on the polls on policy. I note that you have refused several times now to stop making personal attacks. It's very unproductive that you want to chase off everyone who doesn't share your POV by attacking

1021:

I mean , if in particular situations we have found that straw polls blow up in our faces, we write "in this situation, straw polls blow up in our faces". If a straw poll miraculously worked, we say "It miraculously worked here". If it turns out that 99% of all straw polls are abused, we write that

996:

Again, this isn't "pro-polling" or "anti-polling", this page isn't meant to address such issues. That unfortunately is where so much confusion here has stemmed from. Now we're moving away from such pro or con soapboxing on this page and heading into guideline territory. I know "voting is evil" and

472:

explanation for how Knowledge (XXG) conducts straw polls. It is incorrect to utilize this page as a soapbox for anti-polling as has been previously done. This is not the page to do that. I encourage fellow editors to help formulate this descriptive page to be in accord with what occurs everyday on

3274:

fallacy. I've proven that 100 users out of 90000 active users is not a significant group, and that implementation feature request is not based upon a poll that closed several months after the request was implemented. But indeed, nothing new here, you just keep repeating the same false assumptions

3065:

It is silly to try and downplay whether these polls were notable. What percentage of what happens on the Wiki is determined by those 900 admins? When it comes to policy and guideline forming, etc. you can be sure that those are the folks doing most if not all of the "heavy lifting". As far as the

2044:

been used, (2) in nearly all cases where polls were used, the "outcome" of the poll was later superseded (improved) by discussion (because as Kim says, issues designed by poll typically don't work too well), (3) in several cases where polls were used, they didn't actually help, and (4) in several

3156:

most of those poll respondents aren't actually admins. That's comparing apples and oranges, and therefore fallacious. Also, I dispute the assertion that the admins do most of the heavy lifting, based on the fact that many RC patrollers, WSS members, and vandal fighters aren't admins. Simply put,

1864:

You're welcome. At the same time, it might be a bad idea to label Radiant's quite helpful suggestions as "anti polling propganda". Much of what he's saying are things we learned the hard way, over large periods of time. These are known caveats to polling. You'll have to resolve those issues with

1050:

Think of this as writing an NPOV encyclopedia article about "Polling on wikipedia". We can do NPOV, some of Reliable Sources, we can't quite cover Original Research or conflict of interest, since this is about our own practices, but we can try to get as close as possible. That's the basic idea.

327:

Policy? I thought you didn't believe in voting? The relevant parts of the guideline were moved to PNSD; the problem with having a guideline called "straw polls" is that it gives people (who tend not to read the entirety of such pages) the impression that straw polls are in most cases a good and

1103:

practices in use on Knowledge (XXG), depending on which people are the most active in a particular article or group of articles (or policy or group of policies)? This appears to be the case in terms of polling. There are some people who like to run around telling people who start polls that

2665:

Oh. I thought Grace Note was supporting polling by satirizing its opponents. No? As for wikiality, it is defined as truth by agreement. It is the so-called "consensus" process that produces wikiality, not polling. Of course, polling should be used with great caution on content pages. We

2969:, none of them are) as well as 'significant numbers' of Wikipedians (since we have over a million users, 100 doesn't seem all that significant). By the way I've edited the 'policy polls' section to remove some polls that weren't actually about policy, since adding them there is misleading. 3119:

Now you're just being obtuse, you ask any Wikipedian that has been around for any length of time and you will hear the same thing regarding the "heavy lifting" commentary. As far as the poll being a factor, you don't think the developers read that poll and took what people were actually

2153:. Look your anti-polling POV is well expressed here why don't you follow Kim Bruning's suggestion above and, "let people write out a description here" as well as, " I'd like to see people working on the page itself, not sniping at each other"... which I completely agree with. 2913:

pages with disagreement on them. Rather than resolving the issue, this approach perpetuates it. So instead such issues are resolved through careful discussion on the talk page. You have suggestions for improving PNSD? Make them. That's how the wiki process works.

1834:

So this page is currently a safe place where folks can be bold and try stuff out. I'd like to see people working on the page itself, not sniping at each other on the talk page for no reason other than to vent their frustrations. Done venting now. Time for

1242:

That and I haven't seen some of the "points to be integrated" elsewhere, at least not explicitly. Please provide links or diffs if you can point them out? (I'd love to have them to whack people over the head with, when they're being clueless again. ;-) )

2811:

So then we should stamp out polls entirely. I'm not sure I want to go that far though. Sometimes they are useful at least. A well designed poll might go along lines of "Ok, I agree with mot folks" and "I still have issues I'd like to discuss" .. hmmm...

2502:

call it a "When did you stop beating your wife" question. There also is a second rhetorical trick in there, that of putting the word "obviously" in front of an assertion to try to distract attention away from the fact that the assertion is not only

1116:

be required if my first point is correct, as the disparate practices will have to be harmonized. It seems to me that on something as basic (or in Jimbo's recent words, "constitutional") as the fundamental decision-making process on Knowledge (XXG),

3354:

Your editing strikes me as odd when you yourself tagged this page as an essay. But yes, somewhere along the line I figured out that polls are pointless and/or harmful more often than not. I'm tempted to add a quote about padawans, but never mind.

415:

Like I said, if one would describe the safest (or arguably, least unsafe) way of doing that, people would assume it was always safe, and feel justified in their burning need, and the next thing you know is we have people vote on facts again.

1918:

Please look up "accurately" and "common" in the dictionary. Anyone can find a couple dozen instances of polling on Knowledge (XXG) (aside from AFD/RFA/etc). A couple dozen instances over the course of five years is not "common".

1342:. I am going to be reviewing the history of the development of this page to try to better understand how its utilization as a guideline became derailed and then see if what caused it to become derailed can be properly addressed. 566:

include a short history of polling on Knowledge (XXG) but now's not the time... what needs to be done now is to make an illustrative guide on what to do when an editor wants to formulate a straw poll regarding a given issue.

2972:

Additionally, the section on "feature request" polls is misleading in that there are over 9000 such issues (so the two polls are not the common case but the rare exception) and that these two polls were ignored by the devs.

1405:

No, there is reason this page was a guideline (which even you yourself tagged it as such) that is not covered by "polling is not a substitute for discussion" which lets face it PNSD is just a POV fork of its original page

2541:

whether a given logically constructed statement was true or not.... obviously the statement is going to be true or not regardless of the poll). There is now an incomplete list of policy and guideline related polls in the

2315:

You haven't stopped sniping yet. In case you haven't realized it yet, you're trying to get people who don't share your POV to stop editing this page, through using demeaning language. There is a word for such behavior...

1212:

Right, you might as well add that Knowledge (XXG) is NOT a government when you say that. The simple fact to the matter is that it is not uncommon to find organizations that are not democracies but that do employ polling.

1874:

I just want things to read accurately. As I'm doing a survey of polling on the project I'm seeng how it is actually rather commonly used. I really don't appreciate when things are misrepresented. Also I think the

1955:

Perhaps polls are mostly used on really busy pages? (I'm guessing there might be 3000 of those? (there were 1000 in jan 2006, when we had ~ 1M pages) ) In that case it'd be 3% of very busy locations. (rough

2607:

Ayup. Straw Polls on article content equals wikiality. I think we covered that in points to be included. Perhaps you'd like to edit the page so that that point is in fact integrated with the main text?

1831:

Radiant, let people write out a description here. If it sucks, it sucks, and we drop it. If it works, it works, and we keep it. But please let them work on it, and let's see what they come up with first.

1272:. Polling happens on Knowledge (XXG) and editors need a guideline on how to do that. The anti-polling or pro-polling viewpoints should be left to other pages (which obviously this page will reference). 2526: 2909:

But as we clearly know from article space, a disagreement over a page is not resolved by splitting the page into two "forks". First, this results in two contradictory pages, and second, this gives us

2684:

unless you refer to RFA/xFD/FAC, please provide evidence of this assertion? All you have so far is evidence that we've had a couple dozen polls over the past five years. What you're doing is known as

2833:

the opportunities that such a poll will have some benefit? This given the absolute certitude that polling is going to continue to play a big roll in the day in, day out functioning of the project.

532:, and hiding the parts of Wikihistory that don't match with your opinion, such as Quickpolls. Needless to say that's not going to work. The best solution would probably be to redirect this page to 406:

be useful. At any rate, some people feel a burning need for polls. It would be nice to actually describe the safest (for some definition of safe) way to do them, if people must really do them. --

296: 268: 188: 2874:

Yes I see several now, you're right, but the overlap is not 100%. This means we're going to have to do an actual refactor, sooner or later (preferably sooner). *sigh*. No time, no time ^^:; --

527:

Hm, interesting... you want a neutral guideline, but at the same time you only want to cover the side of the situation that matches your POV, calling the issues you disagree with "soapboxing"

1792:

policy, for obvious reasons). And yes, this is a new essay you're writing, because you're basically ignoring the points made by the old guideline (which are incidentally also present in the

3434: 32: 2026:

Most really good processes are formed through consensus and through writing down a descriptive representation of current practice. (So, basically same as what we're trying to do here :-) )

624:

If there's consensus to turn this into a variation on VINE, that's your perogative. But I doubt you'll be able to get it accepted as a guideline if it's taking a pro-polling position. --

3615: 155: 2825:.. etc? This view is very simplistic... all a poll does is guage what the state of a consensus on a given issue is. Again, rather than deny this and continue to push for a blanket all " 969:

Radiant: That information MUST be added sooner or later, as that is the requirement for a descriptive guideline. If you can provide such information, well, that's all the better. :-) --

2510:

track record; what I believe is that, in highly controversial articles, discussion and polling have equally poor track records, so there is no justification for singling out polling.

1664:

But that is pointless as it has been superseded. If you're going to cite me you should also listen to what I'm actually saying, rather than misrepresenting me by ignoring the context.

3219:

active users is not a significant figure. Again I note that you're really not responding to anything I say, but instead simply repeat what you've said before. That's not productive.

361:

Alright. Hmm, so where do I find the guidelines to make a proper non-binding opinion poll (aka survey) now? I need them today :-). The Survey Guidelines redirect to here. :-/ --

1301:(or when not) to do things. For instance, our blocking policy doesn't only explain how to block, but also when (and when not) to block. Note, by the way, that we already have a 1099:

While I understand the position that guidelines on Knowledge (XXG) are supposed to be "descriptive", I see at least two issues with that in this case; first, What if there are

1717:

And where did I say that this page "only ever been some non-descript 'essay'"? For starters essays aren't non-descript. See, you're misrepresenting me. Again. Stop that.

494:

Hmm, I'd love to write something about people challenging each other's opinions. And we've never really covered the concept of rough consensus before. Feeling up to it? --

3086:

Proof by assertion isn't, and your opinion isn't fact. Please show any kind of evidence that "those do most of the heavy lifting" and that it was "undoubtedly a factor"?

1541:

It's kind of novel (not to mention confusing) to note that "this page's designation as policy is disputed" on a page that is not in fact designated as policy. I suspect

960:(edit conflict) I don't see description of the problems that often happen with polling. It's not really descriptive if it selectively omits part of the description. -- 2176:. If you don't want to see people sniping, stop sniping (as you did in your previous post). Also, the pro-polling POV you're pushing is very obvious, so that's another 1697:

If you're going to misrepresent this page as only ever having been some non-descript "essay" then I'm going to cite the facts particularly when they involve yourself.

997:"voting is not evil" folks are going to want to express their POVs here but that sort of editing really needs to be curtailed if this page is going to move forward. 3036:

that things will be implemented if enough people ask for it (or that things won't be implemented unless enough people ask for it), because that simply isn't true.

3543:

At the Definitions: Polling and Voting section of the page, there are the phrases "door gods" and "Pepsi". These phrases should be "particular points" and "time"

3625: 2764: 2755:

I think there are more polls over content than Radiant suggests. I've personally seen polls on BC/AD vs BCE/CE, whether to use the word "death" when defining

586:

Precisely what I said, you want to write a POV essay that covers the issue only from your angle. The most appropriate spot for POV essays is your userspace.

1611:

If you are suggesting that this should be a guideline, I suggest you read up on how guidelines are created. At the moment, you are writing a POV essay here.

118: 3152:

So you're saying that the ~900 active admins do most of the "heavy lifting", and that therefore having 100 responses to a poll is a "significant figure",

892:

be clear about the potential problems so that editors can try to avoid them, or be able to make an informed decision whether polling is even worth it. --

818:

Ah yes, the proof by assertion is next. Unless you're referring to xFD/FAC/RFA, there's no way that we conduct numerous polls on an hourly basis. If you

165: 289: 1175:, indeed... and it was a guideline before as well. When folks are going around saying "voting is evil" there's no mistaking that for what it is, 229: 503:

That sounds like a good idea... but first this should be returned to being a guideline... as you've previously said there needs to be something

2001:←Polls have been used in very notable cases on Knowledge (XXG) when forming guidelines and policies. What is the sense in trying to deny this? 1183:

about how to use that tool beneficially than keep our heads in the sand like ostriches foolishly and see editors misuse it through ignorance.

865:. Given the level of dissent on that page it is a safe bet that there will be plenty of support for a descriptive guideline (particular given 3592:", although there are very rare experiments." Did the writer mean "exceptions"? (Also, whatever the case may be, is "very rare" accurate?) -- 1138:

This page is becoming pretty pointless. We already have a page that accurately describes how and when to poll on Knowledge (XXG), and that's

3620: 1112:

to do them, even if formulating that advice requires some adjustments to, or clarification of, current practice? And it is clear that this

3593: 127: 300: 272: 2965:

I suggest we come up with a workable definition of 'notable poll' (judged by impact, most of these polls weren't notable; judged by

1480:

That's an interesting suggestion, but the result would be that the people who read this page remain unaware that "we do consensus".

3004:

through, did it not? Have you reviewed the What is troll poll? That poll was concerned about policy surrounding trollish behavior.

2040:

Nobody denies that polls have been used. However, you need to look past the surface and see that (1) in far more cases, polls have

1952:

12 / ~3 000 000 * 100% = 0.0004% ...Wait, a couple dozen? Let's try 100... 0.0033% . The man might have a bit of a point there.

1434:

is a POV page, yes, that's why PNSD was rewritten from scratch, doesn't even remotely resemble VIE, and is a neutral guideline.

2367:

Woah woah... what makes the edit unhelpful, according to you, Netscott? Radiant, why is that edit helpful, according to you? --

798:

place for editors to use as a guideline when formulating any one of numerous polls that are conducted on an hourly basis here.

2462:

Given their obviously poor track record, what makes you think we should be "continuing to have key polls" in the first place?

88: 63: 3444: 2767:

article, and at least one or two more. I'm only one person, so I imagine there have been quite a lot more. I do a lot of

1079:. At this point I don't see a need for this page to ever become policy but there is most certainly a need for a guideline. 1054:

If you think that this is a novel concept, think again: this is how all the old policy pages on wikipedia got written. :-)

857:

Well getting this page back to its former guideline recognition is probably going to be a bit like pulling teeth much like

96: 2822: 2522: 2079: 3124:

in their comments as they formulated that new functionality? Your inclination to discount the fact that people actually

2902:

already gives a screenful of such suggestions. Are these imperfect? Nobody is denying that either. But we can fix them.

2768: 1471:

I suggest we move the how-to-do-a-poll parts of PNSD to this page, and leave the explicit "we do consensus" at pnsd. --

131: 27: 905:. That's what makes a good guideline. Minderbinder, have you looked at current version and seen something that wasn't 3484:

I have deleted the {{rejected}} headnote that was posted by a a now inactive editor. The headnote was added in 2007

929:

Well, yes, your deliberate omission of the facts that don't support your point of view. Half a truth is a whole lie.

2082:

on Knowledge (XXG) there obviously needs to be a guideline page specifically addressing that. Kim Bruning is right

473:

Knowledge (XXG) so that it can thereby become a rule of thumb for folks who may be inexperienced on forming polls.

447:

well, that's what we have now too. Usually it helps to be able to point to something solid. :-/ *scratches head* --

3522: 3032:

several orders of magnitude larger. Having, say, 100 supports on an RFA is not nearly as special as it used to be.

1754:"Not really, it's more like a perennial dispute between one user who wants to change long-standing redirects to a 1264:

There is confusion here. This page is going to be for guidelines on how to conduct a poll, not whether polling is

184: 2632:. Straw polls are used daily on Knowledge (XXG). It is time to stop denying this and to properly address it with 2521:

Just for my own curiosity, what other major polls of the ATT scale have there been before that didn't work out?

1058:

Worst case this page doesn't make it to policy status, but we might still learn a lot. Care to give it a try?

239: 3597: 1233:

Different story, I think. At any rate, polling is... tricky... to get right, at least. Can we agree on that? --

2542: 2295:

Kindly just answer the question please or let us get on with the business of writing this guideline in peace.

69: 3198:

in related polls. Again, have you forgotten that folks comment, discuss and make suggestions during polling?

2593:

Don't make the grinding noise. A kitten is killed by the grinder every time you have a poll. Because they're

3388:

Well we'll get this page to guideline designation or have it properly integrated into a singular page about

1430:

False. PNSD was expanded to cover that, which is why PNSD is a guideline and there is no need fo this page.

3190:

I am talking about folks who are the ones formulating policies and guidelines much like what's happened on

2898:

The issue isn't whether we should give suggestions on how to poll; nobody is denying that either. Note how

3427: 2821:(e/c)Well by that logic Guy, what are we doing using polls so extensively on XfDs, RfA, ArbCom elections, 2492:

Can we hold that question for a while? It might sort itself out automatically, as we edit further. ^^;; --

1892: 1585: 1581:

It is not confusing, you are disputing this page being designated as a guideline. Also you've misused the

1545: 2150: 3575: 3469: 2429:

You guys are BOTH doing that. Stop fighting already, or we'll just delete *both* pages you like ^^;; --

1179:. As I explained on your talk page... polling is not evil it is just a tool. Better to educate editors 724:

I understand that's how you describe it. I just don't agree that it's describing current practice. --

2853:

Putting some effort towards mitigating the pain at the least, might be worth a couple of hours. :-) --

1760:. Very misrepresentative. This is not some non-descript "new essay". Such commentary makes it easy to 20: 1879: 1035:

I'd agree with that. Let's see how this comes along when the notes at the bottom get integrated. --

3393: 3544: 3464: 2624:

I'm half-tempted to remove this talk. This talk page is for improving this project page. The "… is

3333:), etc. I'm not sure what happened but somewhere along the line your mentality shifted. Puzzling. 2257: 2177: 2173: 1022:

99% of straw polls are abused, beware, you might be messing up too, expected opposition, etc....

123: 3548: 3399: 3356: 3336: 3276: 3254: 3220: 3201: 3158: 3135: 3087: 3069: 3037: 3007: 2974: 2915: 2836: 2732: 2697: 2689: 2639: 2548: 2463: 2399: 2380: 2350: 2317: 2298: 2261: 2228: 2181: 2156: 2115: 2093: 2046: 2004: 1920: 1901: 1847: 1797: 1767: 1718: 1700: 1665: 1647: 1612: 1594: 1552: 1481: 1435: 1413: 1371: 1345: 1306: 1275: 1216: 1186: 1143: 1082: 1000: 930: 912: 872: 823: 801: 758: 740: 705: 659: 641: 587: 569: 537: 510: 476: 417: 372: 329: 245: 2253: 2222: 2087: 2083: 858: 1204: 1036: 961: 893: 725: 625: 2899: 2889: 2685: 2045:

notable cases, polls caused a trainwreck and we would have been far better off without them.

1793: 1367: 1363: 1302: 1139: 533: 263:

A deadline for the survey should be considered so as to resolve the issue in a timely manner.

3571: 3497: 3454: 3024:

Do you have a source for that common knowledge? To my knowledge there are approx 900 active

2952: 2875: 2854: 2813: 2657: 2609: 2566: 2493: 2430: 2368: 2030: 1970: 1866: 1836: 1472: 1244: 1234: 1062: 1026: 970: 791: 495: 448: 407: 362: 318: 241: 211: 3326: 3191: 2629: 2621: 2249: 2245: 1789: 1785: 1761: 1407: 1203:

When people go around saying "wikipedia is not a democracy" is that soapboxing as well? --

866: 699: 507:

for people to look to when they are going to go about gauging some aspect of a discussion.

2598: 468:

Ok, I've decided to take it upon myself to head up getting this page back into shape as a

126:. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the 1960: 1431: 1366:. One might argue that there is also need for a policy, and indeed we already have one: 2772: 2530: 243: 3251:

project's functioning and development and you edit to counter that. Nothing new here.

2966: 3609: 3404: 3341: 3259: 3206: 3140: 3074: 3012: 2841: 2797: 2791: 2763:

in a campaign called the "Global War on Terrorism", whether to include images in the

2737: 2644: 2553: 2385: 2355: 2303: 2233: 2161: 2098: 2009: 1966:

How would one search a db dump for polls... via looking for ==Support== perhaps? ^^;;

1906: 1852: 1772: 1705: 1652: 1599: 1418: 1350: 1280: 1221: 1191: 1087: 1005: 917: 877: 806: 745: 710: 646: 574: 515: 481: 757:

Ah, we get the false dichotomy now, and the fallacy of many questions. What's next?

2506:

obvious, but is in fact disputed. Please note, I am not saying that polling has a

1018:

Note that we're just being NPOV here. And NPOV is NPOV, no matter where it's used:

2666:

shouldn't be voting on what the facts are. But it can be used for other things.

2114:

continue to have key polls, except when a poll is explicitly requested by Jimbo.

3601: 3579: 3552: 3501: 3493: 3473: 3457: 3447: 3411: 3379: 3348: 3299: 3266: 3243: 3213: 3181: 3157:

you're assuming things, and as they say, assuming makes an ass out of U and me.

3147: 3110: 3081: 3060: 3019: 2997: 2955: 2938: 2878: 2857: 2848: 2816: 2802: 2775: 2744: 2720: 2670: 2660: 2651: 2612: 2601: 2569: 2560: 2535: 2514: 2496: 2486: 2433: 2422: 2392: 2371: 2362: 2340: 2310: 2284: 2240: 2204: 2168: 2138: 2110:

Based on what I just said as well as on WP:ATT, it would make far more sense to

2105: 2069: 2033: 2016: 1973: 1943: 1913: 1869: 1859: 1839: 1820: 1779: 1741: 1712: 1688: 1659: 1635: 1606: 1575: 1518: 1504: 1475: 1458: 1425: 1394: 1357: 1329: 1287: 1247: 1237: 1228: 1207: 1198: 1166: 1125: 1094: 1065: 1039: 1029: 1012: 973: 964: 953: 924: 896: 884: 846: 813: 781: 752: 728: 717: 682: 653: 628: 610: 581: 560: 522: 498: 488: 451: 440: 410: 395: 365: 352: 321: 304: 317:

Upped to guideline, will switch to policy if no-one disagrees within 7 days. --

822:

referring to xFD/FAC/RFA, we have plenty of suggestion pages on that already.

174: 110: 82: 1362:

There is certainly need for a guideline, and that's why we have a guideline:

3271: 2753:(Why don't we all indent the same way? - colons or stars?, make a decision) 2693: 2667: 2511: 1515: 1122: 1293:

Pro- or anti-viewpoints have nothing to do with it. Any page that explains

658:

You're well aware that you are deliberatly omitting the important caveats.

2760: 2756: 3452:

I would like to see the page unprotected please. <cross fingers: -->

3463:

I unprotected the page, as discussion has died down in a few places.

638:

current Knowledge (XXG) project practices. Was that not understood?

2260:. I would be happy to discuss that if you promise to stop sniping. 2090:

should be here with the rest of the expanded detail about polling.

2895:

Now the issue isn't that polling happens; nobody is denying that.

2527:

Knowledge (XXG) talk:WikiProject Usability/Main Page/Final archive

1886: 260:

Straw polls should not have opening and closing times as votes do.

536:, which already covers everything you're trying to cover here. 122:, a collaborative effort to organise and monitor the impact of 3510: 1642:

reestablishing this page's previous designation as a guideline

246: 205: 45: 15: 2628:" mantra is getting tiring already. That is what is known as 2590:

When you put them together, there's this big grinding noise.

2347:

You're avoiding the question regarding your unhelpful edit.

173: 2888:

There is a lot of confusion about the dispute here and on

1963:

spams them across the entire main namespace, for instance.

1844:

Thank you Kim Bruning for such a sensible suggestion! :-)

901:

Of course, all that we need to bear in mind is the mantra

634:

This isn't "pro-polling" nor is it "anti-polling" this is

2565:

Sounds like you have a solid grasp on what a poll is. --

2217:

Relative to, "let people write out a description here",

3489: 3485: 3330: 3322: 3318: 3317:←(e/c)Your editing strikes me as odd when you yourself 3195: 2906:

only explains voting but does not discourage anything.

2218: 1959:

I think perhaps more polls are being held? I know that

1753: 1641: 1339: 530: 528: 1077:

no soapboxing either pro or con on the idea of polling

2829:" mantra let guidelines be formed that at least will 1514:to remove it again anyway, because of the threat). 1865:

Radiant, else the page will never be neutral. :-/ --

3616:

Low-impact WikiProject Knowledge (XXG) essays pages

2948:Hey, we totally lost the definitions!? Restored. 2729:What made you think that I wasn't including those? 2616:

Dang, missed the opportunity to do a cat reference!

288:tags on this page without content in them (see the 2636:on how to best go about employing them correctly. 1788:, though. I suggest you read that (along with our 1644:(here tagged by none other than yourself as one). 3437:was withdrawn, so please remove the {{mfd}} tag. 2656:Just ask folks to be constructive already. :-/ -- 2529:, and the 3rr polls (can't find the link now). - 1121:"prescription" is going to have to take place. 861:has been... but that's fine, a healthy debate is 371:biased towards whatever the writer wants to see. 2682:"Straw polls are used daily on Knowledge (XXG)." 2587:See this other thing. It's called a straw poll. 314:Why did this policy suddenly become an essay? 62:does not require a rating on Knowledge (XXG)'s 794:was pointing out above... there needs to be a 267:This seems a bit contradictory to me. --[[User 2765:Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy 8: 2545:of this page that you might like to review. 2398:them, and demanding they stop editing here. 464:Reworking this back to guideline designation 3400: 3337: 3255: 3202: 3136: 3070: 3008: 2837: 2733: 2640: 2549: 2381: 2351: 2299: 2229: 2157: 2094: 2005: 1902: 1848: 1768: 1701: 1648: 1595: 1414: 1346: 1276: 1217: 1187: 1083: 1001: 913: 873: 802: 741: 706: 642: 570: 511: 477: 191:on pageviews, watchers, and incoming links. 3405: 3342: 3260: 3207: 3141: 3075: 3028:, so one would expect an amount of active 3013: 2842: 2738: 2645: 2554: 2386: 2356: 2304: 2234: 2162: 2099: 2010: 1907: 1853: 1773: 1706: 1653: 1600: 1419: 1351: 1281: 1222: 1192: 1088: 1006: 918: 903:this page is descriptive, not prescriptive 878: 807: 746: 733:So you disagree that polling occurs on an 711: 647: 575: 516: 482: 275:) 15:47, 13 November 2017 (UTC):El eassar| 77: 2951:Definately needs some editing still... -- 1758:he's writing, and the rest of the 'pedia" 3626:WikiProject Knowledge (XXG) essays pages 3440:(Is it time to unprotect the page yet?) 1591:tag which is only meant for talk pages. 146:WikiProject Knowledge (XXG) essays pages 2584:See this thing here. It's called NPOV. 79: 3396:it just needs a bit of time and work. 2759:, whether an infobox should place the 2149:Uh, no. That logic is very counter to 297:2602:306:3B45:B650:DD27:8015:F031:66B2 269:2602:306:3B45:B650:DD27:8015:F031:66B2 1305:that explains how to conduct a poll. 1260:Polling guidelilne vs. polling pulpit 702:inappropriate outside of user space? 7: 3321:as a guideline and you've played an 2892:, so let's look at what it's about. 51: 49: 402:True, but some kinds of survey can 280: 68:It is of interest to the following 2078:Well as long as we're going to be 1885:should go back up instead of that 1075:... again the mantra needs to be: 140:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Essays 130:. For a listing of essays see the 119:WikiProject Knowledge (XXG) essays 14: 2597:. And evil makes kittens suffer. 1764:regarding your involvement here. 116:This page is within the scope of 3561: 3514: 3325:role behind editing surrounding 2944:Definitions section gone missing 2823:Knowledge (XXG):Attribution/Poll 2523:Knowledge (XXG):Attribution/Poll 1297:to do things needs also explain 279:≥→]] 13:31, 7 March 2007 (UTC) 210: 109: 95: 81: 50: 30:on 24 April 2007. The result of 19: 3621:NA-Class Knowledge (XXG) essays 2769:Knowledge (XXG):requested moves 2225:you were trying to illustrate? 1173:That hasn't been written before 790:No false dichotomy, just like 1: 3602:03:03, 10 February 2015 (UTC) 3502:15:56, 14 February 2011 (UTC) 2221:is not helpful. What was the 1108:(and shouldn't) be used, and 305:15:47, 13 November 2017 (UTC) 3580:04:49, 4 November 2013 (UTC) 3553:04:43, 4 November 2013 (UTC) 3132:in polls is a bit puzzling. 2080:continuing to have key polls 2023:process itself, ARGH! ;-) ). 1784:We have a guideline against 160:This page has been rated as 26:This page was nominated for 3537:to reactivate your request. 3525:has been answered. Set the 700:describing current practice 143:Template:WikiProject Essays 3642: 3420:Request removal of mfd tag 3412:13:07, 13 April 2007 (UTC) 3380:13:05, 13 April 2007 (UTC) 3349:12:49, 13 April 2007 (UTC) 3300:12:45, 13 April 2007 (UTC) 3267:12:31, 13 April 2007 (UTC) 3244:12:26, 13 April 2007 (UTC) 3214:12:16, 13 April 2007 (UTC) 3182:12:08, 13 April 2007 (UTC) 3148:11:57, 13 April 2007 (UTC) 3111:11:50, 13 April 2007 (UTC) 3082:11:46, 13 April 2007 (UTC) 3061:11:15, 13 April 2007 (UTC) 3020:10:43, 13 April 2007 (UTC) 2998:10:39, 13 April 2007 (UTC) 1551:is what is meant instead? 737:basis on Knowledge (XXG)? 452:18:44, 29 March 2007 (UTC) 441:11:59, 29 March 2007 (UTC) 411:11:51, 29 March 2007 (UTC) 396:11:29, 29 March 2007 (UTC) 366:10:57, 29 March 2007 (UTC) 353:10:50, 29 March 2007 (UTC) 322:09:23, 29 March 2007 (UTC) 2956:12:01, 6 April 2007 (UTC) 2939:07:52, 6 April 2007 (UTC) 2879:16:22, 5 April 2007 (UTC) 2858:18:02, 5 April 2007 (UTC) 2849:17:48, 5 April 2007 (UTC) 2817:17:44, 5 April 2007 (UTC) 2803:17:38, 5 April 2007 (UTC) 2776:20:38, 6 April 2007 (UTC) 2745:16:39, 5 April 2007 (UTC) 2721:08:37, 5 April 2007 (UTC) 2671:02:05, 5 April 2007 (UTC) 2661:01:57, 5 April 2007 (UTC) 2652:01:41, 5 April 2007 (UTC) 2613:00:40, 5 April 2007 (UTC) 2602:23:18, 4 April 2007 (UTC) 2570:00:44, 5 April 2007 (UTC) 2561:20:30, 4 April 2007 (UTC) 2536:19:56, 4 April 2007 (UTC) 2515:15:43, 4 April 2007 (UTC) 2497:15:37, 4 April 2007 (UTC) 2487:15:09, 4 April 2007 (UTC) 2434:16:19, 5 April 2007 (UTC) 2423:08:03, 5 April 2007 (UTC) 2393:15:41, 4 April 2007 (UTC) 2372:15:36, 4 April 2007 (UTC) 2363:15:22, 4 April 2007 (UTC) 2341:15:14, 4 April 2007 (UTC) 2311:15:10, 4 April 2007 (UTC) 2285:15:01, 4 April 2007 (UTC) 2241:14:15, 4 April 2007 (UTC) 2205:14:02, 4 April 2007 (UTC) 2169:14:01, 4 April 2007 (UTC) 2139:13:25, 4 April 2007 (UTC) 2106:13:01, 4 April 2007 (UTC) 2070:12:58, 4 April 2007 (UTC) 2034:12:54, 4 April 2007 (UTC) 2017:12:40, 4 April 2007 (UTC) 1974:12:36, 4 April 2007 (UTC) 1944:12:02, 4 April 2007 (UTC) 1914:11:47, 4 April 2007 (UTC) 1870:11:39, 4 April 2007 (UTC) 1860:11:33, 4 April 2007 (UTC) 1840:11:32, 4 April 2007 (UTC) 1821:10:56, 4 April 2007 (UTC) 1780:10:50, 4 April 2007 (UTC) 1742:10:46, 4 April 2007 (UTC) 1713:10:42, 4 April 2007 (UTC) 1689:10:40, 4 April 2007 (UTC) 1660:10:08, 4 April 2007 (UTC) 1636:09:44, 4 April 2007 (UTC) 1607:09:38, 4 April 2007 (UTC) 1576:09:36, 4 April 2007 (UTC) 1519:15:34, 4 April 2007 (UTC) 1505:11:38, 4 April 2007 (UTC) 1476:11:28, 4 April 2007 (UTC) 1459:09:30, 4 April 2007 (UTC) 1426:09:24, 4 April 2007 (UTC) 1395:09:17, 4 April 2007 (UTC) 1358:09:12, 4 April 2007 (UTC) 1330:08:54, 4 April 2007 (UTC) 1288:08:49, 4 April 2007 (UTC) 1248:17:39, 3 April 2007 (UTC) 1238:17:38, 3 April 2007 (UTC) 1229:16:26, 3 April 2007 (UTC) 1208:16:22, 3 April 2007 (UTC) 1199:16:15, 3 April 2007 (UTC) 1167:16:11, 3 April 2007 (UTC) 1126:17:00, 3 April 2007 (UTC) 1095:16:07, 3 April 2007 (UTC) 1066:16:04, 3 April 2007 (UTC) 1040:15:54, 3 April 2007 (UTC) 1030:15:51, 3 April 2007 (UTC) 1013:15:57, 3 April 2007 (UTC) 974:15:56, 3 April 2007 (UTC) 965:15:54, 3 April 2007 (UTC) 954:15:52, 3 April 2007 (UTC) 925:15:48, 3 April 2007 (UTC) 897:15:28, 3 April 2007 (UTC) 885:15:08, 3 April 2007 (UTC) 847:14:50, 3 April 2007 (UTC) 814:14:46, 3 April 2007 (UTC) 782:14:43, 3 April 2007 (UTC) 753:14:38, 3 April 2007 (UTC) 729:14:36, 3 April 2007 (UTC) 718:14:33, 3 April 2007 (UTC) 683:14:43, 3 April 2007 (UTC) 654:14:35, 3 April 2007 (UTC) 629:14:31, 3 April 2007 (UTC) 611:13:59, 3 April 2007 (UTC) 582:13:56, 3 April 2007 (UTC) 561:13:51, 3 April 2007 (UTC) 523:13:17, 3 April 2007 (UTC) 499:13:12, 3 April 2007 (UTC) 489:12:47, 3 April 2007 (UTC) 255:Opening and closing times 181: 159: 104: 76: 1898:tag created by Radiant! 1640:No, I am working toward 3474:14:08, 2 May 2007 (UTC) 3458:12:11, 2 May 2007 (UTC) 3448:17:54, 1 May 2007 (UTC) 3394:Knowledge (XXG):Polling 3507:Vandalism edit request 3275:like a broken record. 185:automatically assessed 178: 166:project's impact scale 124:Knowledge (XXG) essays 2084:this smallish section 1338:Obviously there is a 698:Sorry, since when is 183:The above rating was 177: 1408:meta:Polling is evil 1340:need for a guideline 867:recent developments 310:what happened here? 2690:proof by assertion 179: 64:content assessment 3541: 3540: 3472: 2801: 2692:, and putting up 2688:, not to mention 2620:Funny enough per 2617: 2219:this type of edit 1432:m:polling is evil 252: 251: 204: 203: 200: 199: 196: 195: 192: 44: 43: 3633: 3588:Rare experiments 3569: 3565: 3564: 3532: 3528: 3518: 3517: 3511: 3480:Opinion headnote 3468: 3432: 3426: 3407: 3402: 3376: 3374: 3372: 3370: 3368: 3344: 3339: 3319:tagged this page 3296: 3294: 3292: 3290: 3288: 3262: 3257: 3240: 3238: 3236: 3234: 3232: 3209: 3204: 3178: 3176: 3174: 3172: 3170: 3143: 3138: 3107: 3105: 3103: 3101: 3099: 3077: 3072: 3057: 3055: 3053: 3051: 3049: 3015: 3010: 2994: 2992: 2990: 2988: 2986: 2935: 2933: 2931: 2929: 2927: 2884:The actual issue 2844: 2839: 2795: 2740: 2735: 2717: 2715: 2713: 2711: 2709: 2647: 2642: 2615: 2556: 2551: 2543:see also section 2533: 2483: 2481: 2479: 2477: 2475: 2419: 2417: 2415: 2413: 2411: 2388: 2383: 2358: 2353: 2337: 2335: 2333: 2331: 2329: 2306: 2301: 2281: 2279: 2277: 2275: 2273: 2236: 2231: 2201: 2199: 2197: 2195: 2193: 2164: 2159: 2135: 2133: 2131: 2129: 2127: 2101: 2096: 2066: 2064: 2062: 2060: 2058: 2012: 2007: 1940: 1938: 1936: 1934: 1932: 1909: 1904: 1897: 1891: 1884: 1878: 1855: 1850: 1817: 1815: 1813: 1811: 1809: 1775: 1770: 1738: 1736: 1734: 1732: 1730: 1708: 1703: 1685: 1683: 1681: 1679: 1677: 1655: 1650: 1632: 1630: 1628: 1626: 1624: 1602: 1597: 1590: 1584: 1572: 1570: 1568: 1566: 1564: 1550: 1544: 1501: 1499: 1497: 1495: 1493: 1455: 1453: 1451: 1449: 1447: 1421: 1416: 1391: 1389: 1387: 1385: 1383: 1353: 1348: 1326: 1324: 1322: 1320: 1318: 1283: 1278: 1224: 1219: 1194: 1189: 1163: 1161: 1159: 1157: 1155: 1090: 1085: 1046:NPOV/ invitation 1008: 1003: 950: 948: 946: 944: 942: 920: 915: 880: 875: 843: 841: 839: 837: 835: 809: 804: 792:User:Kim Bruning 778: 776: 774: 772: 770: 748: 743: 713: 708: 679: 677: 675: 673: 671: 649: 644: 607: 605: 603: 601: 599: 577: 572: 557: 555: 553: 551: 549: 518: 513: 484: 479: 437: 435: 433: 431: 429: 392: 390: 388: 386: 384: 349: 347: 345: 343: 341: 295: 294: 293: 287: 247: 214: 206: 182: 148: 147: 144: 141: 138: 113: 106: 105: 100: 99: 98: 93: 85: 78: 55: 54: 53: 46: 23: 16: 3641: 3640: 3636: 3635: 3634: 3632: 3631: 3630: 3606: 3605: 3590: 3562: 3560: 3530: 3526: 3515: 3509: 3482: 3430: 3424: 3422: 3366: 3364: 3362: 3360: 3358: 3286: 3284: 3282: 3280: 3278: 3230: 3228: 3226: 3224: 3222: 3168: 3166: 3164: 3162: 3160: 3097: 3095: 3093: 3091: 3089: 3047: 3045: 3043: 3041: 3039: 2984: 2982: 2980: 2978: 2976: 2963: 2946: 2925: 2923: 2921: 2919: 2917: 2886: 2872: 2827:polling is evil 2707: 2705: 2703: 2701: 2699: 2582: 2531: 2473: 2471: 2469: 2467: 2465: 2460: 2409: 2407: 2405: 2403: 2401: 2327: 2325: 2323: 2321: 2319: 2271: 2269: 2267: 2265: 2263: 2191: 2189: 2187: 2185: 2183: 2125: 2123: 2121: 2119: 2117: 2056: 2054: 2052: 2050: 2048: 1961:requested moves 1930: 1928: 1926: 1924: 1922: 1895: 1889: 1882: 1876: 1807: 1805: 1803: 1801: 1799: 1728: 1726: 1724: 1722: 1720: 1675: 1673: 1671: 1669: 1667: 1622: 1620: 1618: 1616: 1614: 1588: 1582: 1562: 1560: 1558: 1556: 1554: 1548: 1542: 1539: 1491: 1489: 1487: 1485: 1483: 1445: 1443: 1441: 1439: 1437: 1381: 1379: 1377: 1375: 1373: 1316: 1314: 1312: 1310: 1308: 1262: 1153: 1151: 1149: 1147: 1145: 1136: 1048: 940: 938: 936: 934: 932: 833: 831: 829: 827: 825: 768: 766: 764: 762: 760: 669: 667: 665: 663: 661: 597: 595: 593: 591: 589: 547: 545: 543: 541: 539: 466: 427: 425: 423: 421: 419: 382: 380: 378: 376: 374: 339: 337: 335: 333: 331: 312: 285: 283: 281: 257: 248: 242: 219: 145: 142: 139: 136: 135: 132:essay directory 94: 91: 38:withdrawn, keep 12: 11: 5: 3639: 3637: 3629: 3628: 3623: 3618: 3608: 3607: 3594:82.136.210.153 3589: 3586: 3585: 3584: 3583: 3582: 3539: 3538: 3519: 3508: 3505: 3481: 3478: 3477: 3476: 3421: 3418: 3417: 3416: 3415: 3414: 3383: 3382: 3315: 3314: 3313: 3312: 3311: 3310: 3309: 3308: 3307: 3306: 3305: 3304: 3303: 3302: 3247: 3246: 3187: 3186: 3185: 3184: 3114: 3113: 3033: 2962: 2959: 2945: 2942: 2885: 2882: 2871: 2868: 2867: 2866: 2865: 2864: 2863: 2862: 2861: 2860: 2806: 2805: 2786: 2785: 2784: 2783: 2782: 2781: 2780: 2779: 2748: 2747: 2724: 2723: 2678: 2677: 2676: 2675: 2674: 2673: 2581: 2578: 2577: 2576: 2575: 2574: 2573: 2572: 2519: 2518: 2517: 2459: 2456: 2455: 2454: 2453: 2452: 2451: 2450: 2449: 2448: 2447: 2446: 2445: 2444: 2443: 2442: 2441: 2440: 2439: 2438: 2437: 2436: 2426: 2425: 2344: 2343: 2290: 2289: 2288: 2287: 2210: 2209: 2208: 2207: 2144: 2143: 2142: 2141: 2073: 2072: 2037: 2036: 2027: 2024: 1999: 1998: 1997: 1996: 1995: 1994: 1993: 1992: 1991: 1990: 1989: 1988: 1987: 1986: 1985: 1984: 1983: 1982: 1981: 1980: 1979: 1978: 1977: 1976: 1967: 1964: 1957: 1953: 1947: 1946: 1832: 1826: 1825: 1824: 1823: 1747: 1746: 1745: 1744: 1692: 1691: 1538: 1535: 1534: 1533: 1532: 1531: 1530: 1529: 1528: 1527: 1526: 1525: 1524: 1523: 1522: 1521: 1508: 1507: 1464: 1463: 1462: 1461: 1400: 1399: 1398: 1397: 1333: 1332: 1261: 1258: 1257: 1256: 1255: 1254: 1253: 1252: 1251: 1250: 1240: 1135: 1132: 1131: 1130: 1129: 1128: 1057: 1047: 1044: 1043: 1042: 1016: 1015: 993: 992: 991: 990: 989: 988: 987: 986: 985: 984: 983: 982: 981: 980: 979: 978: 977: 976: 967: 957: 956: 888: 887: 852: 851: 850: 849: 785: 784: 721: 720: 690: 688: 687: 686: 685: 622: 621: 620: 619: 618: 617: 616: 615: 614: 613: 465: 462: 461: 460: 459: 458: 457: 456: 455: 454: 444: 443: 399: 398: 356: 355: 311: 308: 265: 264: 261: 256: 253: 250: 249: 244: 240: 238: 235: 234: 225: 224: 221: 220: 215: 209: 202: 201: 198: 197: 194: 193: 180: 170: 169: 158: 152: 151: 149: 114: 102: 101: 86: 74: 73: 67: 56: 42: 41: 33:the discussion 24: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 3638: 3627: 3624: 3622: 3619: 3617: 3614: 3613: 3611: 3604: 3603: 3599: 3595: 3587: 3581: 3577: 3573: 3568: 3559: 3558: 3557: 3556: 3555: 3554: 3550: 3546: 3536: 3533:parameter to 3524: 3520: 3513: 3512: 3506: 3504: 3503: 3499: 3495: 3491: 3487: 3479: 3475: 3471: 3466: 3462: 3461: 3460: 3459: 3456: 3450: 3449: 3446: 3441: 3438: 3436: 3429: 3428:editprotected 3419: 3413: 3410: 3408: 3403: 3395: 3391: 3387: 3386: 3385: 3384: 3381: 3378: 3377: 3353: 3352: 3351: 3350: 3347: 3345: 3340: 3332: 3329:(even in its 3328: 3324: 3320: 3301: 3298: 3297: 3273: 3270: 3269: 3268: 3265: 3263: 3258: 3249: 3248: 3245: 3242: 3241: 3217: 3216: 3215: 3212: 3210: 3205: 3197: 3193: 3189: 3188: 3183: 3180: 3179: 3155: 3151: 3150: 3149: 3146: 3144: 3139: 3131: 3127: 3123: 3118: 3117: 3116: 3115: 3112: 3109: 3108: 3085: 3084: 3083: 3080: 3078: 3073: 3064: 3063: 3062: 3059: 3058: 3034: 3031: 3027: 3023: 3022: 3021: 3018: 3016: 3011: 3002: 3001: 3000: 2999: 2996: 2995: 2970: 2968: 2961:Notable polls 2960: 2958: 2957: 2954: 2949: 2943: 2941: 2940: 2937: 2936: 2912: 2907: 2903: 2901: 2896: 2893: 2891: 2883: 2881: 2880: 2877: 2869: 2859: 2856: 2852: 2851: 2850: 2847: 2845: 2840: 2832: 2828: 2824: 2820: 2819: 2818: 2815: 2810: 2809: 2808: 2807: 2804: 2799: 2794: 2793: 2788: 2787: 2778: 2777: 2774: 2770: 2766: 2762: 2758: 2752: 2751: 2750: 2749: 2746: 2743: 2741: 2736: 2728: 2727: 2726: 2725: 2722: 2719: 2718: 2695: 2691: 2687: 2683: 2680: 2679: 2672: 2669: 2664: 2663: 2662: 2659: 2655: 2654: 2653: 2650: 2648: 2643: 2635: 2631: 2627: 2623: 2619: 2618: 2614: 2611: 2606: 2605: 2604: 2603: 2600: 2596: 2591: 2588: 2585: 2579: 2571: 2568: 2564: 2563: 2562: 2559: 2557: 2552: 2544: 2539: 2538: 2537: 2534: 2528: 2524: 2520: 2516: 2513: 2509: 2505: 2500: 2499: 2498: 2495: 2491: 2490: 2489: 2488: 2485: 2484: 2457: 2435: 2432: 2428: 2427: 2424: 2421: 2420: 2396: 2395: 2394: 2391: 2389: 2384: 2375: 2374: 2373: 2370: 2366: 2365: 2364: 2361: 2359: 2354: 2346: 2345: 2342: 2339: 2338: 2314: 2313: 2312: 2309: 2307: 2302: 2294: 2293: 2292: 2291: 2286: 2283: 2282: 2259: 2255: 2251: 2247: 2244: 2243: 2242: 2239: 2237: 2232: 2224: 2220: 2216: 2215: 2214: 2213: 2212: 2211: 2206: 2203: 2202: 2179: 2175: 2172: 2171: 2170: 2167: 2165: 2160: 2152: 2148: 2147: 2146: 2145: 2140: 2137: 2136: 2113: 2109: 2108: 2107: 2104: 2102: 2097: 2089: 2085: 2081: 2077: 2076: 2075: 2074: 2071: 2068: 2067: 2043: 2039: 2038: 2035: 2032: 2028: 2025: 2021: 2020: 2019: 2018: 2015: 2013: 2008: 1975: 1972: 1968: 1965: 1962: 1958: 1954: 1951: 1950: 1949: 1948: 1945: 1942: 1941: 1917: 1916: 1915: 1912: 1910: 1905: 1894: 1893:controversial 1888: 1881: 1873: 1872: 1871: 1868: 1863: 1862: 1861: 1858: 1856: 1851: 1843: 1842: 1841: 1838: 1833: 1830: 1829: 1828: 1827: 1822: 1819: 1818: 1795: 1794:new guideline 1791: 1787: 1783: 1782: 1781: 1778: 1776: 1771: 1763: 1759: 1757: 1751: 1750: 1749: 1748: 1743: 1740: 1739: 1716: 1715: 1714: 1711: 1709: 1704: 1696: 1695: 1694: 1693: 1690: 1687: 1686: 1663: 1662: 1661: 1658: 1656: 1651: 1643: 1639: 1638: 1637: 1634: 1633: 1610: 1609: 1608: 1605: 1603: 1598: 1587: 1586:controversial 1580: 1579: 1578: 1577: 1574: 1573: 1547: 1546:controversial 1537:Confusing tag 1536: 1520: 1517: 1512: 1511: 1510: 1509: 1506: 1503: 1502: 1479: 1478: 1477: 1474: 1470: 1469: 1468: 1467: 1466: 1465: 1460: 1457: 1456: 1433: 1429: 1428: 1427: 1424: 1422: 1417: 1409: 1404: 1403: 1402: 1401: 1396: 1393: 1392: 1369: 1365: 1361: 1360: 1359: 1356: 1354: 1349: 1341: 1337: 1336: 1335: 1334: 1331: 1328: 1327: 1304: 1300: 1296: 1292: 1291: 1290: 1289: 1286: 1284: 1279: 1271: 1267: 1259: 1249: 1246: 1241: 1239: 1236: 1232: 1231: 1230: 1227: 1225: 1220: 1211: 1210: 1209: 1206: 1202: 1201: 1200: 1197: 1195: 1190: 1182: 1181:descriptively 1178: 1174: 1171: 1170: 1169: 1168: 1165: 1164: 1141: 1133: 1127: 1124: 1120: 1115: 1111: 1107: 1102: 1098: 1097: 1096: 1093: 1091: 1086: 1078: 1074: 1070: 1069: 1068: 1067: 1064: 1059: 1055: 1052: 1045: 1041: 1038: 1034: 1033: 1032: 1031: 1028: 1023: 1019: 1014: 1011: 1009: 1004: 995: 994: 975: 972: 968: 966: 963: 959: 958: 955: 952: 951: 928: 927: 926: 923: 921: 916: 909:in the text? 908: 904: 900: 899: 898: 895: 890: 889: 886: 883: 881: 876: 868: 864: 860: 856: 855: 854: 853: 848: 845: 844: 821: 817: 816: 815: 812: 810: 805: 797: 793: 789: 788: 787: 786: 783: 780: 779: 756: 755: 754: 751: 749: 744: 736: 732: 731: 730: 727: 723: 722: 719: 716: 714: 709: 701: 697: 696: 695: 694: 693: 692: 691: 684: 681: 680: 657: 656: 655: 652: 650: 645: 637: 633: 632: 631: 630: 627: 612: 609: 608: 585: 584: 583: 580: 578: 573: 564: 563: 562: 559: 558: 535: 531: 529: 526: 525: 524: 521: 519: 514: 506: 502: 501: 500: 497: 493: 492: 491: 490: 487: 485: 480: 471: 463: 453: 450: 446: 445: 442: 439: 438: 414: 413: 412: 409: 405: 401: 400: 397: 394: 393: 369: 368: 367: 364: 360: 359: 358: 357: 354: 351: 350: 328:useful idea. 326: 325: 324: 323: 320: 315: 309: 307: 306: 302: 298: 291: 278: 274: 270: 262: 259: 258: 254: 237: 236: 233: 231: 227: 226: 223: 222: 218: 213: 208: 207: 190: 186: 176: 172: 171: 167: 163: 157: 154: 153: 150: 133: 129: 125: 121: 120: 115: 112: 108: 107: 103: 90: 87: 84: 80: 75: 71: 65: 61: 57: 48: 47: 39: 35: 34: 29: 25: 22: 18: 17: 3591: 3566: 3542: 3534: 3523:edit request 3488:and removed 3483: 3451: 3442: 3439: 3423: 3397: 3389: 3357: 3334: 3316: 3277: 3252: 3221: 3199: 3159: 3153: 3133: 3129: 3125: 3121: 3088: 3067: 3038: 3029: 3025: 3005: 2975: 2971: 2964: 2950: 2947: 2916: 2910: 2908: 2904: 2897: 2894: 2887: 2873: 2870:Redundencies 2834: 2830: 2826: 2790: 2754: 2730: 2698: 2681: 2637: 2633: 2625: 2594: 2592: 2589: 2586: 2583: 2546: 2507: 2503: 2464: 2461: 2400: 2378: 2348: 2318: 2296: 2262: 2226: 2182: 2154: 2151:WP:JIMBOSAID 2116: 2111: 2091: 2047: 2041: 2002: 2000: 1921: 1899: 1845: 1798: 1765: 1755: 1719: 1698: 1666: 1645: 1613: 1592: 1553: 1540: 1482: 1436: 1411: 1372: 1343: 1307: 1298: 1294: 1273: 1269: 1265: 1263: 1214: 1205:Minderbinder 1184: 1180: 1176: 1172: 1144: 1137: 1118: 1113: 1109: 1105: 1100: 1080: 1076: 1072: 1060: 1056: 1053: 1049: 1037:Minderbinder 1024: 1020: 1017: 998: 962:Minderbinder 931: 910: 906: 902: 894:Minderbinder 870: 862: 824: 819: 799: 795: 759: 738: 734: 726:Minderbinder 703: 689: 660: 639: 635: 626:Minderbinder 623: 588: 567: 538: 508: 504: 474: 469: 467: 418: 403: 373: 330: 316: 313: 286:<ref: --> 282:Cite error: 276: 266: 232:: 2003-2006 228: 216: 161: 117: 70:WikiProjects 60:project page 59: 37: 31: 3572:ThomasO1989 3455:Kim Bruning 3331:first edits 3154:even though 2953:Kim Bruning 2876:Kim Bruning 2855:Kim Bruning 2814:Kim Bruning 2658:Kim Bruning 2610:Kim Bruning 2567:Kim Bruning 2494:Kim Bruning 2431:Kim Bruning 2369:Kim Bruning 2031:Kim Bruning 1971:Kim Bruning 1880:disputedtag 1867:Kim Bruning 1837:Kim Bruning 1790:WP:CIVility 1752:Let's see: 1473:Kim Bruning 1245:Kim Bruning 1235:Kim Bruning 1073:descriptive 1063:Kim Bruning 1027:Kim Bruning 971:Kim Bruning 907:descriptive 496:Kim Bruning 470:descriptive 449:Kim Bruning 408:Kim Bruning 363:Kim Bruning 319:Kim Bruning 3610:Categories 3527:|answered= 3196:particpate 2686:soapboxing 2634:guidelines 2630:soapboxing 2599:Grace Note 1956:estimate). 1835:working.-- 1177:soapboxing 636:describing 284:There are 230:/Archive 1 162:Low-impact 128:discussion 92:Low‑impact 3272:Tu quoque 3194:and then 2773:GTBacchus 2694:straw men 2258:WP:KETTLE 2178:WP:KETTLE 2174:WP:KETTLE 1756:new essay 1303:guideline 1134:Pointless 1071:Yes, and 290:help page 3545:Prodirus 3465:CMummert 3443:Cheers, 3406:Netscott 3343:Netscott 3323:integral 3261:Netscott 3208:Netscott 3142:Netscott 3076:Netscott 3014:Netscott 2843:Netscott 2761:Iraq War 2757:Abortion 2739:Netscott 2646:Netscott 2555:Netscott 2458:Question 2387:Netscott 2357:Netscott 2305:Netscott 2254:WP:FAITH 2235:Netscott 2163:Netscott 2100:Netscott 2088:WP:!VOTE 2011:Netscott 1908:Netscott 1854:Netscott 1774:Netscott 1707:Netscott 1654:Netscott 1601:Netscott 1420:Netscott 1352:Netscott 1282:Netscott 1223:Netscott 1193:Netscott 1101:multiple 1089:Netscott 1007:Netscott 919:Netscott 879:Netscott 859:WP:!VOTE 808:Netscott 747:Netscott 712:Netscott 648:Netscott 576:Netscott 517:Netscott 483:Netscott 404:possibly 277:Eleassar 217:Archives 28:deletion 3392:called 3390:polling 3130:comment 3126:discuss 2900:WP:PNSD 2890:WP:PNSD 2831:enhance 2580:Just no 1368:WP:DEMO 1364:WP:PNSD 1140:WP:PNSD 534:WP:PNSD 164:on the 3494:Tenmei 3327:WP:100 3192:WP:ATT 3122:saying 3026:admins 2622:WP:TPG 2250:WP:CIV 2246:WP:NPA 1786:WP:ABF 1762:WP:ABF 1106:should 735:hourly 187:using 137:Essays 89:Essays 66:scale. 3531:|ans= 3521:This 3359:: --> 3279:: --> 3223:: --> 3161:: --> 3090:: --> 3040:: --> 3030:users 2977:: --> 2918:: --> 2798:Help! 2700:: --> 2532:Denny 2466:: --> 2402:: --> 2320:: --> 2264:: --> 2223:POINT 2184:: --> 2118:: --> 2049:: --> 1923:: --> 1887:adhoc 1800:: --> 1721:: --> 1668:: --> 1615:: --> 1555:: --> 1484:: --> 1438:: --> 1374:: --> 1309:: --> 1146:: --> 933:: --> 826:: --> 796:solid 761:: --> 662:: --> 590:: --> 540:: --> 505:solid 420:: --> 375:: --> 332:: --> 58:This 3598:talk 3576:talk 3570:. -- 3567:Done 3549:talk 3498:talk 3492:. -- 3490:here 3486:here 3470:talk 3433:The 3375:< 3295:< 3239:< 3177:< 3128:and 3106:< 3056:< 2993:< 2967:WP:N 2934:< 2716:< 2668:6SJ7 2626:evil 2595:evil 2512:6SJ7 2508:good 2482:< 2418:< 2336:< 2280:< 2200:< 2134:< 2065:< 1939:< 1816:< 1737:< 1684:< 1631:< 1571:< 1516:6SJ7 1500:< 1454:< 1390:< 1325:< 1299:when 1266:evil 1162:< 1123:6SJ7 1119:some 1114:will 949:< 863:good 842:< 777:< 678:< 606:< 556:< 436:< 391:< 348:< 301:talk 273:talk 189:data 36:was 3529:or 3445:CWC 3435:MfD 2911:two 2792:Guy 2504:not 2180:. 2112:not 2086:of 2042:not 1796:). 1295:how 1270:not 1268:or 1110:how 869:). 820:are 156:Low 3612:: 3600:) 3578:) 3551:) 3535:no 3500:) 3467:· 3453:-- 3431:}} 3425:{{ 2812:-- 2696:. 2608:-- 2525:, 2256:, 2252:, 2248:, 2029:-- 1969:-- 1896:}} 1890:{{ 1883:}} 1877:{{ 1589:}} 1583:{{ 1549:}} 1543:{{ 1410:. 1370:. 1243:-- 1061:-- 1025:-- 303:) 292:). 3596:( 3574:( 3547:( 3496:( 3409:) 3401:→ 3398:( 3373:t 3371:n 3369:a 3367:i 3365:d 3363:a 3361:R 3346:) 3338:→ 3335:( 3293:t 3291:n 3289:a 3287:i 3285:d 3283:a 3281:R 3264:) 3256:→ 3253:( 3237:t 3235:n 3233:a 3231:i 3229:d 3227:a 3225:R 3211:) 3203:→ 3200:( 3175:t 3173:n 3171:a 3169:i 3167:d 3165:a 3163:R 3145:) 3137:→ 3134:( 3104:t 3102:n 3100:a 3098:i 3096:d 3094:a 3092:R 3079:) 3071:→ 3068:( 3054:t 3052:n 3050:a 3048:i 3046:d 3044:a 3042:R 3017:) 3009:→ 3006:( 2991:t 2989:n 2987:a 2985:i 2983:d 2981:a 2979:R 2932:t 2930:n 2928:a 2926:i 2924:d 2922:a 2920:R 2846:) 2838:→ 2835:( 2800:) 2796:( 2742:) 2734:→ 2731:( 2714:t 2712:n 2710:a 2708:i 2706:d 2704:a 2702:R 2649:) 2641:→ 2638:( 2558:) 2550:→ 2547:( 2480:t 2478:n 2476:a 2474:i 2472:d 2470:a 2468:R 2416:t 2414:n 2412:a 2410:i 2408:d 2406:a 2404:R 2390:) 2382:→ 2379:( 2360:) 2352:→ 2349:( 2334:t 2332:n 2330:a 2328:i 2326:d 2324:a 2322:R 2308:) 2300:→ 2297:( 2278:t 2276:n 2274:a 2272:i 2270:d 2268:a 2266:R 2238:) 2230:→ 2227:( 2198:t 2196:n 2194:a 2192:i 2190:d 2188:a 2186:R 2166:) 2158:→ 2155:( 2132:t 2130:n 2128:a 2126:i 2124:d 2122:a 2120:R 2103:) 2095:→ 2092:( 2063:t 2061:n 2059:a 2057:i 2055:d 2053:a 2051:R 2014:) 2006:→ 2003:( 1937:t 1935:n 1933:a 1931:i 1929:d 1927:a 1925:R 1911:) 1903:→ 1900:( 1857:) 1849:→ 1846:( 1814:t 1812:n 1810:a 1808:i 1806:d 1804:a 1802:R 1777:) 1769:→ 1766:( 1735:t 1733:n 1731:a 1729:i 1727:d 1725:a 1723:R 1710:) 1702:→ 1699:( 1682:t 1680:n 1678:a 1676:i 1674:d 1672:a 1670:R 1657:) 1649:→ 1646:( 1629:t 1627:n 1625:a 1623:i 1621:d 1619:a 1617:R 1604:) 1596:→ 1593:( 1569:t 1567:n 1565:a 1563:i 1561:d 1559:a 1557:R 1498:t 1496:n 1494:a 1492:i 1490:d 1488:a 1486:R 1452:t 1450:n 1448:a 1446:i 1444:d 1442:a 1440:R 1423:) 1415:→ 1412:( 1388:t 1386:n 1384:a 1382:i 1380:d 1378:a 1376:R 1355:) 1347:→ 1344:( 1323:t 1321:n 1319:a 1317:i 1315:d 1313:a 1311:R 1285:) 1277:→ 1274:( 1226:) 1218:→ 1215:( 1196:) 1188:→ 1185:( 1160:t 1158:n 1156:a 1154:i 1152:d 1150:a 1148:R 1092:) 1084:→ 1081:( 1010:) 1002:→ 999:( 947:t 945:n 943:a 941:i 939:d 937:a 935:R 922:) 914:→ 911:( 882:) 874:→ 871:( 840:t 838:n 836:a 834:i 832:d 830:a 828:R 811:) 803:→ 800:( 775:t 773:n 771:a 769:i 767:d 765:a 763:R 750:) 742:→ 739:( 715:) 707:→ 704:( 676:t 674:n 672:a 670:i 668:d 666:a 664:R 651:) 643:→ 640:( 604:t 602:n 600:a 598:i 596:d 594:a 592:R 579:) 571:→ 568:( 554:t 552:n 550:a 548:i 546:d 544:a 542:R 520:) 512:→ 509:( 486:) 478:→ 475:( 434:t 432:n 430:a 428:i 426:d 424:a 422:R 389:t 387:n 385:a 383:i 381:d 379:a 377:R 346:t 344:n 342:a 340:i 338:d 336:a 334:R 299:( 271:( 168:. 134:. 72:: 40:.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Knowledge (XXG)

talk:Straw polls - Knowledge (XXG)

Index