WikiEN-l July 2003

wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org

77 participants
155 discussions

Another academic speaks
by Julie Kemp 01 Jul '03

01 Jul '03

I'm not sure Steve's representation of academics who work on the 'pedia is fair or accurate. Contributions by what he called "deadwood" are correctible - which is what lots of us do. What makes academics leave is when it becomes clear that popular opinion often outweighs merit, and that many people see a (false, IMO, but supported by many) dichotomy between high standards and open content. Cheers

1 0

Thanks to all
by Julie Kemp 01 Jul '03

01 Jul '03

Thanks to everybody who jumped on board and made manual changes from my old user name to my abbreviated one (which is still not going to be used - If I come back, it will be in a totally new incarnation). I jumped on last night to do some housecleaning, and Hephaestos and KQ were already there, doing an impressive job. That was wikilove in its highest form, IMO - way beyond the call of duty. Oh - and if you think you see me in another incarnation, it would not be unwelcome to have my sysop rights transferred. ;-) Julie

1 0

Anthere's admission she will be engaging in edit wars
by Robert 01 Jul '03

01 Jul '03

Anthere, I am sad to see Anthere's unilateral declariation of an edit war. I further saddened to see her unilateral demand that we MUST refer to her favored mystical and political views as "gaia theory", despite the fact that English speakers DO NOT use her odd and unusual terminology. She has now made clear that we English speakers can go fuck ourselves, because she doesn't give a damn about truth or about standard useage. Her public declaration is tantamount to admitting vandalism. You have now seen this for yourselves. Since no here has commented, am I correct in assuming that you now believe that her unilateral declarations of edit wars is appropriate behaviour? No one here has objected! I am saddened by the lack of honesty and professionalism I am seeing on this list. Robert (RK) ===== "I prefer a wicked person who knows he is wicked, to a righteous person who knows he is righteous". The Seer of Lublin [Jacob Isaac Ha-Hozeh Mi-Lublin, 1745-1815] __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! http://sbc.yahoo.com

2 1

an observation
by steve vertigo 01 Jul '03

01 Jul '03

I had email problems, so this wasnt posted earlier -= like around 9am PST -- but .here it is anyway Danny wrote >"Wikipedia is a project with a stated objective--creating an encyclopedia. Its objective is not to create an ideal >democratic >society a la Martin's perception of one. Nor is it a dumping ground, where anyone can put any crap they want in the name of free speech. It is a place that works best by consensus and compromise--not by making abrupt decisions that this must be the policy, come hell or high water. That is why I was opposed to making a final decision on the date format and spelling policies. "" >""The end result of all this is that some of the serious long term contributors have left--Zoe, for one, was one of the most ?>prolific Wikipedians and a real defender of the project against vandalism. While Martin is certainly prolific on the Recent Changes, a quick look at his past 500 changes show that his work is over 90 percent focused on users' Talk pages, and most of the rest on contentious pages, where it is bound to flame the fires of dispute."" How does having a democratic and responsive way of dealing with issues conflict with making an encyclopedia? -- Do not, Danny, fall victim to the typical assumptions and presumptions of academics. That said, your views on the usefulness of formalization seem to be inline with mine -- in terms of the nonsense details. In terms of process, however, and conducting administrative affairs, it seems the time is ripe to formalize under sunlight the way things get voted on, etc. >""What I would like to see are some solid contributions--an article culled out of a Talk page does not count---before >wasting our time with the Vandal Liberation Front. Instead I wonder when he was made a sysop whether it was to police it >over the rest of us or to further the goal of creating an encyclopedia."" You are 'free to wonder, Danny, but not aloud.' Hehe. Well... rather, if you make comments like the above, the rest of us might be inclined to point out that they are not in character for someone of your caliber, and that they need not be addressed if they are made as a slant, rather than as a formal complaint. In any case, your worthy history entitles you to some excusing. As for Zoe (sob!) and others leaving, I might point out that they by and large left under some stress. The stress comes from the conflict that their personal or institutionalized standards are not the absolute measure here, rather it is consensus that is. If a disagreement is met, it must be dealt with in ways (like co-operation and respect) that some academics seem to avoid learning. Aside from the fact that academics need to find non-academic hobbies, anyone who lets themselves get too stressed on the WP will soon enough have to face a monster of their own making, namely that same-said stress. This stress comes via various factors: Severed attachment to areas of concern, a negated sense of accomplishment when something is changed, personality issues, and so on. That academics eventually would call for higher standards, to "cut out the deadwood," and "weed out the weaklings," reflects only the fact that these professionals failed to understand what was Wikipedias founding spirit in the first place. Such people, despite their vast areas of rote knowledge, tend to have some fundamental inefficiencies that may make them in the end, extinct. Its kind of like the proverbial health-food junkie who dies if he eats bad food. Compared to the beefy, eat-anything robustness of a typically-poor diet, that health nut is an accident waiting to happen. (In some situations). The WP wont be obsolete, because it will be what it is. If Jim decided, say, to rename the WP, "Nupedia" -- saying "this henceforth a peer-reviewed thing," -- it will make no difference. It will still be the stagnant and dying Nupedia, regardless of how many articles it got via Wikipedic means. Zoe, ironically, seemed to be non-academic enough to qualify as being among the robust, but then she took it upon herself to be the top-cop, the Ken Starr chasing Clinton, and of course, like Starr, some of the methods, words and tactics Zoe chose tended to make some skeptical of her intent. And besides, how do we know she's just not hanging out at the beach more often? The WP is nice for stay at home dads and IT dungeon keepers, but for others the appeal of a topical argument stands short against the realization that life in front of a screen is a bad habit at best. So in short, I take issue with you, Danny, when you confuse the issues you presented, with the altogether different phenomenon of the changing guard. Get well soon, all -Steve __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! http://sbc.yahoo.com

4 3

re: An observation
by martin＠myreddice.freeserve.co.uk 01 Jul '03

01 Jul '03

Hi folks. Firstly, I would like to thank Danny. Despite your annoyance at my actions, and your concern for the wellbeing of Wikipedia, you were polite and calm in your criticism. Criticism is often a bitter pill to swallow, but you were a perfect gentleman, and I genuinely appreciate that. Secondly, I have been informed that some may feel that I am accusing Jimbo Wales, or Wikipedians generally, of hypocricy, regarding my comments on whether these lists are "unmoderated". I did not mean to imply any such thing, and, for the record I do not think that any of you are hypocritical. I *did* have a point behind my post, but it is not important, so I am happy to completely retract it. I apologise for the offence my careless choice of words has caused. Thirdly, I should note that my sysop powers were the result of a fairly informal decision by Ed Poor, rather than the general acclamation that has greeted recent sysops. As such I feel somewhat lacking in democratic accountability! :) While I wish to retain my deletion and undeletion powers solely for the purpose of merging page histories or moving page titles, I would like to announce here that I will no longer take any other sysop-restricted actions, until further notice. I hope you can all trust me to keep my word on this matter. Finally, I'm currently discussing this matter privately with Danny and other interested parties. If you have any feedback, positive or negative (especially negative feedback that is as polite and well-reasoned as Danny's), then I would be deleted to hear from any of you. In particular, I would like to hear from Jtdirl, who I have much respect for, despite our diametrically opposed views. My email adress is wikipedia(a)myreddice.co.uk. -Martin "MyRedDice" Harper

2 1

Jump to page:

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

WikiEN-l July 2003