Erik Moeller (erik_moeller(a)gmx.de) [050523 06:51]:
A peer review process, in my opinion, must be tied to
*discussion* first
of all, and not to voting. Voting is a valid last resort, but not a
generally good way to review an encyclopedia. It would be very bitter if
a simple software feature could be used to overthrow years of
consensus-building culture on Wikipedia.
I am somewhat concerned that the fact that these ratings will be public
will be used to influence discussion. I hope when this feature goes into
beta, we will have a clear and public policy that these ratings have no
relevance whatsoever to ongoing discussions and decision making
processes.
Mmmm. Possibly the results should not even be viewable for 1.5.
Otherwise I strongly oppose this feature being taken
live in
the first place. I have no objection to people using the ratings to
build a list of pages to work on, as long as the question whether the
pages do, in fact, need work remains a community decision.
Yes. However, articles with low ratings will be an obvious place to go for
people to fix things up.
I think it'd be horrible if "low ratings" suddenly became a VFD reason.
- d.