User talk:Psephomancy: Difference between revisions
→OR/notability criteria
(About Citoid) |
|||
Line 138:
What should the threshold be, and what should its logic be? It seems difficult to find a balance that admits interesting methods while not opening for the possibility that the wiki will get too cluttered. [[User:Kristomun|Kristomun]] ([[User talk:Kristomun|talk]]) 22:04, 14 March 2020 (UTC)
: Personally, I think a lot of the current articles are pretty much in the sweet spot. Maybe something like "[[Smith winner]]" doesn't make much sense (or at least, is better off as a subsection to [[Smith set]] rather than its own article), but for the most part, a lot of these articles really do deserve their own space. For example, Condorcet//FPTP is notable because it's one of the simplest Condorcet methods possible, Smith//Score because several ideas can be thought of for mixing the cardinal and pairwise information together in finding the winner, etc. It may help if you can point to some articles that you find to be particularly bad in this respect, then I might be able to give some more ideas. [[User:BetterVotingAdvocacy|BetterVotingAdvocacy]] ([[User talk:BetterVotingAdvocacy|talk]]) 23:12, 14 March 2020 (UTC)
| |||