Dear colleagues,
Examples like these remind us how important a sense of humor is for successfully remaining and being productive in the grand work of Wikipedia. By the time I got through the series of comments LauraHale asks us to consider, I was again reminded of why I like Wikipedians and why I am outraged by Wikipedians. Gallows humor can set in, but hope is sparked too.
Stick with it Laura, you are making headway. There is decent (if exasperating) engagement going on, not bad.
Meanwhile, does anybody have an amusing joke to keep the rest of us amicably disposed to the "world brain' project? How about an anecdote?
I have a little one:
Somehow I'd surfed my way into a situation (seemed all male) where an admin (a) had taken to task, threatened, and ultimately exaggerated the sins of a (supposed) Canadian teenager(t) who'd created a segment on a page donning himself the First Lord or Baron of somewhere - something like that. The (a) was not very civil and after I visited the 'lord' page, I believed (a) had taken the facts and got ahead of himself. It was clear to me an exuberant new Wikipedia contributor (t) got deeply into being a lord, and was especially fond of envisioning and detailing lordly regalia, sabre weaponry, and medals to enhance his lordliness.
I decided to weigh in and defend (t) suggesting admins needed to take this (obvious youth) with a grain of salt, gently guide the newcomer, helping create an environment where he distinguishes online gaming characters from what really exists, facts vs. fantasy, if you will. Well, I posted to that effect, because I worried the 'lord' (t) would disappear from Wikipedia forever (and it was obvious he showed 'promise'). Other admins got in on it, agreed with me, and the last I knew, they'd taken (a) 'out behind the woodshed.' I thought that reaction harsh too. I likely posted some kindly comments on Virtues. My ideas were defended, not attacked. I surfed off somewhere else... I hope (t) stayed on board, corrected, and survived his first lordly battles...
KSRolph