On 15 November 2012 12:04, Andreas Kolbe <jayen...@gmail.com> wrote: > If you look at the CIPR draft best practice guidelines (which are not of > course Wikipedia policy at the moment, but are quite similar to Jimbo's > "bright line" rule) > > http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Draft_best_practice_guidelines_for_PR#A_Step-by-Step_Guide:_How_to_improve_articles > > you'll see that point 3 begins: "If there is no response ...", and point 4 > likewise begins, "If you get no response". The process also requires people > to look through the contributions history to find and contact editors who > worked on the article if they don't get a response on the talk page. > > That *is* cumbersome, and using a central on-wiki noticeboard would improve > customer satisfaction.
Andreas, the "customer" on Wikipedia is the reader. And forgetting that leads to a confusion of "contact Wikipedia" with "complaints service". Readers and editors play different roles in the system. We need to keep clear the distinction. (Even if the mechanism for contacting WP could do with tweaking, we still need to be clear that the reader matters.) Charles _______________________________________________ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
