 | This is an essay. It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints. |
In progress
I had a painful realization while noticing many, many article moves from "Thing (adaptations)" to "Adaptations of Thing". The acting editor pointed me to WP:Article titles. That page describes itself as a "policy", but it is actually a collection of guidelines, per discussion (in which I wasn't involved) by other long-time editors. What I noticed was this: Many Wikipedia policies do not appear to have a foundation in discussion, sound reasoning, similar example, or precedent.
Without proper sourcing, in my opinion, some policies themselves resemble WP:OR, or WP:SYNTH, or maybe even Things I made up one day. It might be time to start citing sources, wherever possible, for Wikipedia's policies. This is not an attack, just an attempt to firm up the foundations.
- Example inline citations
- Precedent for this at Encyclopedia Brittanica, XXI ed., Intro. p. 12.
- From Strunk & White, 6th ed. p. 88.
- Link to the archived discussion originally forming this policy.
Wikipedia policies and guidelines did not spring up in a vacuum, and we shouldn't pretend that they did.
- Example problem area
At WP:Article_titles#Subsidiary_articles. As far back as I go, using the WP:WikiBlame tool, I can't find discussion of it. The older versions have slightly better explanatory text, even, but still no discussion on-wiki. Might have been in a mailing list or something.
This situation makes me feel simultaneously stupid and brave, for asking, "Hey, where are the clothes for this particular emperor?"
I've been telling people for years that policies and guidelines are arrived at by discussion and consensus, or industry examples. And though I know to a certainty that some of policies and guidelines are arrived at in these ways, some ... well ... aren't.