I saw below an idea concerning developing stable versions of policies. Pretty good idea, but why are we doing this?
IMO it's because there's a basic contradiction between a policy - a document that's pretty darn solid virtually by definition - and a wiki. Junk gets added to our policies over time, respect for them decreases, trouble begins.
So which polices have suffered most? Which polices do we love to hate? What needs rewriting? [[Wikipedia:Edit war]] used be to particularly painful garbage until it thankfully got rewritten (I think by Dmcdevit, PBUH).
My own selection of policy that sins by virtue of crappiness would certainly include [[Wikipedia:Civility]], for starters. I don't think this one got off to a great start, and it's only got worse. Particularly painful is all the stuff about removing incivil comments and personal attacks - why, oh why? Haven't we learnt by now that this just quadruples drama levels? We have - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_personal_attacks#Removal_of_text
Except that no one got around to fixing up [[Wikipedia:Civility]] in response to this. What policies and guidelines need fixing to reflect pain old common sense? Garbage removal? Copyediting? And how do we go about doing this? Taskforce Policy Fixers?
CM
Odi profanum vulgus et arceo. _________________________________________________________________ Telly addicts unite! http://www.searchgamesbox.com/tvtown.shtml