Inkipedia:Policy/Consensus

Inkipedia is collaborative by nature. Therefore, major changes that take place on it should be determined by users in a consensus-based voting structure. Without consensus, such changes and projects would be based on the ideas of only a few editors.

What is considered a consensus?
Consensus is reached when the majority of a group (i.e. Inkipedia's active editors) agree on an issue. In Inkipedia's case, however, consensus is not purely determined via vote count. Instead, the dispute should be analyzed in an unbiased fashion to determine which plan of action has the strongest arguments.

Some disputes may require considerably stronger consensus than others. Requests for adminship, for instance, will almost always require a much more in-depth consensus than a new infobox would. Such disputes will generally continue for longer to ensure that as many users as possible voice their opinion.

Consensus is reversible. If an editor feels that a decision no longer suits the wiki, they may begin another discussion to reverse the decision. This should only be done a reasonable amount of time after the original decision was reached, or if multiple arguments based on previously unknown information can be presented.

What happens when a consensus cannot be reached?
If it appears that the editors involved in debate cannot reach a compromise and their arguments are evaluated at approximately the same strength, the debate is declared "no quorum" and the subject of the debate fails to pass. Beginning a similar debate shortly afterwards, especially if no change in the situation has been made, is generally discouraged.

What actions require consensus?
The following actions always require consensus:
 * Adjusting the wiki's general scope
 * Making or repealing policies
 * Making significant changes or amendments to a policy
 * Obtaining adminship or bureaucratship

These actions generally require consensus, but exceptions do exist:
 * Merging or splitting articles
 * Moving or deleting articles
 * Major, visible style changes, especially in templates and MediaWiki
 * Removing large amounts of information
 * Mass editing multiple articles with significant edits, especially if the edits contradict prior information
 * Complex reorganizing of articles, especially when combined with other changes that require consensus

These actions generally do not require consensus in most cases, unless the action is directly disputed by another user:
 * Removing falsehoods, spelling and grammar corrections, manual of style corrections, etc.
 * Removing irrelevant or out-of-scope information
 * Adding in-scope information or creating new in-scope articles
 * Basic article layout and style changes