Archive:Dispute Watch

What is "dispute watch"?

If an article is under "dispute watch," special rules apply. Generally speaking, on the article's talk page, arguments and contentious claims must be addressed to specific propositions that concern the wording of the article. All other manner of explanations, questions, and praise can continue on as normal.

This is an experimental new initiative--not yet formally adopted--initially proposed here. If this proposal works well, the Constabulary will adopt it and implement it on all Citizendium articles subject to "edit warring."

Why dispute watch?

We're committed to professionalism, but we're not perfect. Especially when it comes to articles on controversial issues, many people plug a little too strongly for their own views. Discussions tend to divert from the relevant, narrow, and tractable to the irrelevant, broad, and irresolvable.

Our dispute watch framework gives contributors motivation to work together constructively and focus on the article, not on underlying disputes.

Dispute watch rules and procedures

If a page is under dispute watch, you can argue--but only about the text of the article, and only about specific propositions to change (or retain) the text.

• All argumentation goes under special headings. If you have a beef, it goes under headings + propositions as described below.

• Start with a neutral section heading. All disputation must be placed under a neutral section heading (i.e., using == on either side of the heading phrase, flush left).

• State a clear proposition suing the {{prop}} template. Next, immediately below the section heading, state a clear proposition. This must concern the wording of the text, or it will be deemed off-topic and will be subject to deletion. It should be hard to mistake your meaning.

For example, if you type:

{{prop|A sentence reading, "But not everyone agrees with this," should be added to the end of the second paragraph.}}

This produces:

Proposition: A sentence reading, "But not everyone agrees with this," should be added to the end of the second paragraph.

This article is on dispute watch. This requires that all argumentation directly concern clearly-stated propositions about article wording.

• All argumentation must directly concern a proposition so formulated. Any discussion of matters that do not directly explain, support, or undermine the proposition in question is considered off-topic. Note: this means that all argumentation on the talk page must concern specific propositions about the wording of the text.

• If the proposition concerns a topic controversial in itself, it is off-topic to argue in favor of one side of the controversy. This is just a consequence of the foregoing rule, but it is worth spelling out:

These rules apply only to talk page remarks that involve, or turn on, some contentious claim or argument. Explanations of edits, questions, and praise--if not argumentative--do not require this treatment.

(1) always to state a clear topic of discussion, (2) the topic should concern the wording of the article, and (3) only argue about that topic--never the topic itself.

The role of the Constabulary

How to put an article under dispute watch

Articles under dispute watch

• A complete list: Category:Dispute Watch
• Recent changes: Dispute Watch related changes