User talk:Thomas Mandel/General Systems Theory: Difference between revisions
imported>Larry Sanger No edit summary |
imported>Larry Sanger |
||
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
On the issue about where this article should live ("General Systems Theory" or "general systems theory"), the question is whether it is usually referred to in its capitalized form, as in this article title, or lower case. If someone can provide some useful evidence on that question, we can make a decision about it. | On the issue about where this article should live ("General Systems Theory" or "general systems theory"), the question is whether it is usually referred to in its capitalized form, as in this article title, or lower case. If someone can provide some useful evidence on that question, we can make a decision about it. | ||
Editors: please do not be shy about editing this article. The fact that Tom Mandel has started it does not mean that it is his article, as he knows. In particular, unexplained quotations may be excised, as can incomplete and completely cryptic sentences you find. Just, please, explain why you have removed any significant amount of text; that's our policy, too. In short, I am confident that, if we all behave ourselves, we can work on this article together and make good progress on this interesting topic. There is no reason that Tom needs to feel unwelcome here--I only hope he does not confuse hard-headed editing with hostility. Similarly, there is no reason that others need to feel that they must accept in CZ work that is plainly substandard. This is a collaborative project. | Editors: please do not be shy about editing this article. The fact that Tom Mandel has started it does not mean that it is his article, as he knows. In particular, unexplained quotations may be excised, as can incomplete and completely cryptic sentences you find, as well as outline headings that have no content (see [[CZ:Article Mechanics Complete]] on this). Such incomplete or substandard material might be usefully moved to this talk page. Just, please, explain why you have removed any significant amount of text; that's our policy, too. In short, I am confident that, if we all behave ourselves, we can work on this article together and make good progress on this interesting topic. There is no reason that Tom needs to feel unwelcome here--I only hope he does not confuse hard-headed editing with hostility. Similarly, there is no reason that others need to feel that they must accept in CZ work that is plainly substandard. This is a collaborative project. | ||
I will try to be as impartial as possible. I hope to pass off referee responsibility to Gareth, or someone else, ASAP. I won't be able to continue past Tuesday. Thanks in advance. --[[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]] 20:07, 30 March 2008 (CDT) | I will try to be as impartial as possible. I hope to pass off referee responsibility to Gareth, or someone else, ASAP. I won't be able to continue past Tuesday. Thanks in advance. --[[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]] 20:07, 30 March 2008 (CDT) | ||
Revision as of 20:09, 30 March 2008
Duplicate article
Erm... Systems_theory_(general). --Robert W King 14:58, 28 March 2008 (CDT)
- This does seem to be the title of a book... J. Noel Chiappa 16:11, 28 March 2008 (CDT)
- Thomas, if this is about the book, then the caps would be appropriate, but if it is about General systems theory then we need to rename it according to CZ:Naming conventions. Considering the wide variety of uses for this title, maybe even a disambiguation page is in order. It might be a good idea to bring in some editors to help you decide. I'll let you guys work that out. --D. Matt Innis 12:15, 30 March 2008 (CDT)
Referee statement
This article is refereed. The Citizendium Executive is continuing to pilot a Dispute Resolution process. The leading proposal is a system of "referees" for disputes. Gareth Leng has been playing role of referee, but since he will be unavailable for several more days at least, I am stepping in here myself.
About the referee system. A referee will be an uninvolved member of the project who will play no significant active part in a disputed article, but will be empowered to make certain types of decisions about a disputed article that will be provisionally binding on contributors to that article. The purpose of such decisions will be to call a halt to disputes with a decision that enables article development to continue. The decisions will be on the basis, where appropriate, of Citizendium policy, and there will be an appeal mechanism if decisions are thought to be in breach of this. The referee will not make judgments on matters of expert knowledge that lie outside their expertise, but may make judgments on style, tone, balance, neutrality etc. The referee will attempt to make a swift decision that is fair and reasonable and in the best interests of the Citizendium project; swiftness means that decisions will be imperfect, but authors will be expected to abide by them rather than extend a dispute. The referee has no disciplinary powers, a flagrant breach of his or her guidance will be a matter for the Constabulary.
One editor has written me privately raising the issue of the "Systemgestalt.jpg" graphic here. Apparently there is some objection to it because it was created by Tom Mandel himself. Moreover, the editor who contacted me said that this was discussed earlier and removed. I would like to invite the people involved here (Tom and anyone who objects to the graphic) to explain their positions, and then I will make a decision. In particular, I would like to hear from Tom about why he feels the graphic is important to include (this isn't explained or contextualized in the article itself). If anyone has any objection to its inclusion, I'd like to hear why as well.
On the issue about where this article should live ("General Systems Theory" or "general systems theory"), the question is whether it is usually referred to in its capitalized form, as in this article title, or lower case. If someone can provide some useful evidence on that question, we can make a decision about it.
Editors: please do not be shy about editing this article. The fact that Tom Mandel has started it does not mean that it is his article, as he knows. In particular, unexplained quotations may be excised, as can incomplete and completely cryptic sentences you find, as well as outline headings that have no content (see CZ:Article Mechanics Complete on this). Such incomplete or substandard material might be usefully moved to this talk page. Just, please, explain why you have removed any significant amount of text; that's our policy, too. In short, I am confident that, if we all behave ourselves, we can work on this article together and make good progress on this interesting topic. There is no reason that Tom needs to feel unwelcome here--I only hope he does not confuse hard-headed editing with hostility. Similarly, there is no reason that others need to feel that they must accept in CZ work that is plainly substandard. This is a collaborative project.
I will try to be as impartial as possible. I hope to pass off referee responsibility to Gareth, or someone else, ASAP. I won't be able to continue past Tuesday. Thanks in advance. --Larry Sanger 20:07, 30 March 2008 (CDT)