Wikipedia talk:Dispute resolution

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Dispute resolution page.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5: 12 months

The project page associated with this talk page is an official policy on Wikipedia. Policies have wide acceptance among editors and are considered a standard for all users to follow. Please review policy editing recommendations before making any substantive change to this page. Always remember to keep cool when editing, and don't panic.

NOTE: This is not the place to post notices of disputes, questions about particular articles, or requests for assistance. Posts that are not a discussion of the project page Wikipedia:Dispute resolution will simply be ignored or collapsed. Please go back to Wikipedia:Dispute resolution and follow the instructions there.

Dispute Resolution (inactive)

This page is within the scope of WikiProject Dispute Resolution, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Dispute ResolutionWikipedia:WikiProject Dispute ResolutionTemplate:WikiProject Dispute ResolutionDispute Resolution

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5

This page has archives. Sections older than 365 days may be automatically archived by when more than 1 section is present.

Introductory paragraph

The introduction overly focuses on methods of outside help rather than first working with the other editor; any help on that would be appreciated. Efforts to reduce WP:LAUNDRY in the introduction might also be good. Altanner1991 (talk) 11:39, 11 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Discussions for discussion and administrative action review

These processes are often involved in dispute resolution and so should be on the policy page. Thoughts regarding inclusion? Altanner1991 (talk) 17:10, 11 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Altanner1991, you recently removed the link to Wikipedia:Administrative action review from Wikipedia:Dispute resolution requests, pointing to this discussion. I'm afraid I don't follow your reasoning — could you explain why you made the removal? {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 00:22, 12 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it has not been decided on how (or even whether or not) to include the review as dispute resolution, before putting it on the requests page, which is more of a summary. Altanner1991 (talk) 16:22, 12 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sea of Faith Article

Dear Editors,

I am the Vice-President of the Sea of Faith in Australia Inc, and a qualified and experienced philosophic historian (over 30 years).

I am happy for a criticism section which takes seriously the technically philosophical arguments, but the comment in the section -- "Alvin Platinga [sic] called the movement 'an amiable sort of dottiness' -- is "academic cursing", plain and simple. Would Plantinga make that comment right in the front of the face of a liberal university scholar. I believe not, as the remark is without critical foundation and is prejudicial. Please remove.

Kind regards, Neville Buch, Historian, MPHA (Qld), Ph.D. (History) UQ., Grad. Dip. Arts (Philosophy) Melb., Grad. Dip. (Education) UQ. 49.191.24.234 (talk) 03:57, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]