Thread:Monolith616/@comment-10473115-20170303000811/@comment-10473115-20170308002052

Lack of participants resulting stalemates or very weak consensus is indeed a problem. We have too few active users to participate in the discussions and we even emphasize it by creating a atmosphere that the staff will make decisions. Problem is that we don't have that active staff to deal with everything. Therefore, the situation doesn't really resolve because without a consensus, nothing will be changed. See: Consensus. That's what I meant when telling that more persistent will win at the end. It's done by editing more and ultimately, the opposition tires and don't resist anymore. The most persistent party don't have a big advantage on debates, at least I like to think that way. Of course there will be lots of things that we simply don't agree on and a consistency on a degree many would hope isn't just possible.

You both brought up the frustration about non-resolved discussions and there's not much I can say to that. I've felt the same way all the time I've been editing here. That's why I've always tried to increase the discussion. Although, I did consider agent naming issue resolved, somebody should just write it to the policy. Honorifics are little more difficult as we can't even decide do we have a consensus already and who should be allowed to participate.

Shabook gave a very good explanation on how to use a move tag on articles. However, I don't see anything wrong with removing it by giving an explanation on the edit summary if there's no other discussion going on at the talk page. Merge tag on New Attilan should be removed as there isn't consensus or discussion. It could be re-added later if someone wants to start a new discussion. Our move template changes category from Category:Undecided Move to Category:Move after two weeks and I think that without posts in a few days, discussion could be ended even earlier.