User talk:Krator/Why article talk pages?
For various reasons, I prefer all discussion, even personal notes, on article talk pages. Not here. Why?
Many comments on my talk page are related to a peer review I have written, an assessment I have conducted, or a third opinion I have given. Some ask for a second review/assessment, some simply thank me, or some want further explanation of one of my arguments or points.
If this is the case, I prefer notes on the same talk page as the assessment, peer review, or third opinion. This:
- Keeps discussion from becoming fragmented.
- For the same reason I usually reply on my own talk page, I prefer all discussion in one place.
- Makes it easier for editors, involved and uninvolved, to read the whole scope of a discussion.
- It may be important (especially when mediation is going on) to know what has been said by whom.
- Prevents allegations of bias and nepotism.
- Especially in third opinion cases, one editor may be alienated and lose his faith in the neutrality of the (second) third opinion given, when the other editor writes notes on my talk page. Often, two editors from the same third opinion case places notes my talk page and discuss the topic - between themselves - on my talk page.
- Prevents incivility in my userspace.
- Some Wikipedia editors lose themselves in personal attacks. Even if the original note is not a personal attack or a violation of WP:CIVIL, it may attract other involved parties - with a less amicable tone - to place notes on the same page.
Please note that while I prefer discussion to be limited to article talk pages, notifications of new replies are welcome. Often I am already watching the article in question, but when unsure of this (such as with a random assessment), a notification could be useful. A sample notification can be found at User:Krator/Response.
--User:Krator (t c) 22:32, 27 April 2007 (UTC)