Believe it or not, we still don't enough active involved editors in many
areas. I think many things will work out when we have more input from a
broader base. For example about 4 people regularly edit the Tibet article,
they fight a bit, but a few dozen actual Tibetans would change the mix.
Likewise the half dozen who edit in the communist area would face a new
dynamic if a few dozen who actually lived under communism weighed in.
This is true of our administrative and policy areas too, a very thin group
in terms of numbers and diversity of viewpoint.
Fred
From: Andre Engels <andreengels(a)gmail.com>
Reply-To: Andre Engels <andreengels(a)gmail.com>om>, Wikimedia Foundation Mailing
List <foundation-l(a)wikimedia.org>
Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 18:30:01 +0200
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List <foundation-l(a)wikimedia.org>
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Re: Arbitration committe and content
On Thu, 28 Oct 2004 10:15:31 -0600, Fred Bauder <fredbaud(a)ctelco.net> wrote:
We do have a way to decide using
[[Wikipedia:Neutral point of view]]. All
significant points or view are to be included in the article. There are fine
points to be decided, such at how much proportional space viewpoints are to
be alloted but our policy is quite clear on the main point. Most POV
disputes are centered around censoring opposing viewpoints and almost all
POV warriors are in the wrong.
Still, this begs the question of what is a 'significant' point of
view. Also, as you say, there are those finer points. Do we show the
points of view as equals, or do we say "this is what most experts
think, but others say that"? Which is given first, or do we first
state the part that both agree on and only then the opinions? How much
should be written on a certain POV?
And then there are the arguments that aren't about POV at all, but
about inclusion (whether inclusing in Wikipedia as a whole or in a
particular article) or about the way Wikipedia is to look like.
Every day Wikipedia has many of those decisions. In many cases there
is just someone editing the way s/he likes it, and nobody who cares
noticing. In many other cases a short discussion gets to an agreeable
answer. But there still isn't anything to get to answer when it is
not.
Andre Engels
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l