Re: [WikiEN-l] NOR contradicts NPOV
on 1/1/09 9:52 AM, Phil Sandifer at snowspin...@gmail.com wrote: This really is how bad our policy formation has gotten - there is a sincere belief that specialist knowledge is actually harmful to Wikipedia. It's the dominant culture, Phil. And, sadly, it is the way the Project has been headed for some time now. Marc Riddell ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] NOR contradicts NPOV
on 1/1/09 9:52 AM, Phil Sandifer at snowspin...@gmail.com wrote: This really is how bad our policy formation has gotten - there is a sincere belief that specialist knowledge is actually harmful to Wikipedia. on 1/1/09 11:10 AM, Marc Riddell at michaeldavi...@comcast.net wrote: It's the dominant culture, Phil. And, sadly, it is the way the Project has been headed for some time now. Marc Riddell Soon a group of persons will design an encyclopedia project with the same free-editing capability as Wikipedia, but which will creatively and effectively combine input from the specialist and generalist alike. We'll see. Marc ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] NOR contradicts NPOV
On Jan 1, 2009, at 11:10 AM, Marc Riddell wrote: on 1/1/09 9:52 AM, Phil Sandifer at snowspin...@gmail.com wrote: This really is how bad our policy formation has gotten - there is a sincere belief that specialist knowledge is actually harmful to Wikipedia. It's the dominant culture, Phil. And, sadly, it is the way the Project has been headed for some time now. Indeed. But it is, in practice, not difficult to find the most pernicious pieces of bad policy that allow that move, and to make it so that people who are actually interested in writing a useful resource for our readers can do so. As it stands, Wikipedia is increasingly at risk of having its quality swept away by the increasingly large community, and the resultant drop in quality of the average community member that entails. This hard and fast rule against specialist knowledge - and the bizarre belief that the solution is to strengthen it - is a key place where pushing back is beneficial. -Phil ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] NOR contradicts NPOV
On Jan 1, 2009, at 11:10 AM, Marc Riddell wrote: on 1/1/09 9:52 AM, Phil Sandifer at snowspin...@gmail.com wrote: This really is how bad our policy formation has gotten - there is a sincere belief that specialist knowledge is actually harmful to Wikipedia. It's the dominant culture, Phil. And, sadly, it is the way the Project has been headed for some time now. on 1/1/09 1:28 PM, Phil Sandifer at snowspin...@gmail.com wrote: Indeed. But it is, in practice, not difficult to find the most pernicious pieces of bad policy that allow that move, and to make it so that people who are actually interested in writing a useful resource for our readers can do so. As it stands, Wikipedia is increasingly at risk of having its quality swept away by the increasingly large community, and the resultant drop in quality of the average community member that entails. This hard and fast rule against specialist knowledge - and the bizarre belief that the solution is to strengthen it - is a key place where pushing back is beneficial. Our last two posts must have waved at each other as they went by :-). Phil, I have been pushing back for the three years that I have been here. And it is worse now than when I came. And a great part of the problem is that the leadership that does exist here appears to condone the current thinking. I believe it is time for me to help build an alternative. Marc ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] NOR contradicts NPOV
2009/1/1 Marc Riddell michaeldavi...@comcast.net: Phil, I have been pushing back for the three years that I have been here. And it is worse now than when I came. And a great part of the problem is that the leadership that does exist here appears to condone the current thinking. I believe it is time for me to help build an alternative. If your pushing back was here *rather than* on the wiki, it will have been useless. Did you try on the wiki itself? - d. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Speedy deletion
2008/12/31 Charlotte Webb charlottethew...@gmail.com:
If this is truly the root of all urgency we should turn on flaggedrevs.
Try and keep up with marking new pages as patrolled for say half an hour.
In the beginning we would want Google to index only an article's last
stable version (if one exists).
After a certain grace period (to keep known-good content from
vanishing), we can begin instructing Google to stop indexing articles
which have no flagged rev and to de-index existing unflagged revs.
There is no way to do this.
Some users like to nuke every {{third-world-topic-stub}} from
geostationary orbit because it is like a video game to them. Faster
pussycat, kill, kill, and let no mayfly die of natural causes.
Not so much. Since it is generally fairly easy to argue for the
significance of many unwritten third world articles.
Perhaps some of this energy can be channeled toward other tasks.
Experience suggests not.
--
geni
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Speedy deletion
2009/1/1 David Goodman dgoodma...@gmail.com: We could as easily set up new pages to have a half-hour holding period; the problem is how to separate the need to remove the truly nasty material immediately. A delay period inevitably requires checking things twice. Already possible http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:NewPagesoffset=20090101212200 that is http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:NewPagesoffset=year,month,day,hour,minute,second But no one wants to do that. Remember tagging is secondary admins can just straight delete without tagging. -- geni ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] flagged revvvs
On 1/1/09, David Goodman dgoodma...@gmail.com wrote: As for the Go ahead, don't let me interrupt. —C.W. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
