I'm looking for opinions (from anyone) on revising the project page on Criticism... namely, the thinking behind when exactly Crit sections are needed, and when they are not. It really is a simple enough issue: at the moment, Wikipedia policy and guidelines, both, are too vague to resolve ANY disputes over when exactly Crit sections can exist, and when they should be scattered into articles. Both sides of Crit section disputes have to resort to arguing over who's point of view simply makes the most SENSE... (which is utterly fruitless, of course, and becomes just a battle of patience... ie, whoever gets sick of it and leaves first loses, and the other editors draw consensus, and make their changes. Ie, these disputes become "democracy-driven", because policy doesn't help)
So, I'm just trying to get some editors together who can work on some clarifications to the Criticism section... I started a discussion on the talk page for the Criticism article, but nobody has chimed in yet, in over a week. (well, one guy did) This isn't a policy article - just guidelines - but I still want to make sure there's some consensus before just tossing in these clarifications. So far, none of it is my thinking: I've read all this stuff at some point or another, and am just collecting the ideas.