Hi again,
But I'm interested to know if the good
people of this list are aware
of specific tasks/duties on en:wp that are woefully understaffed at
the moment. Things that really need doing.
Y-E-S spells YES and you are now it.
Articles with Unsourced Claims
I did what I thought was the best kind of search on en:wp relating to
your reply, and it returns a lot of salient, but not specific project,
pages.
I found this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:UNSOURCED#Burden_of_evidence
Earlier on today I found the 'RFC' pages.
I'm interested in dispute resolution. I quite like the idea of getting
involved in arguments as someone who, basically, doesn't know their
arse from their elbow as regards the dispute that's in progress.
For example, there's some big argument going on to do with the History
of Transylvania... I have absolutely no interest in the history of
Transylvania at all, so I try to bring the contentious parties back to
the specific point of what they're arguing about, and then try to
draw the discussion back to Wikipedia policies, mainly verifiability.
I think that the need described, at your request, by wjhonson has
nothing to do with dispute resolution or mediation. Tracking down
sources yourself, or even checking to see if the request has already
been filled but without removing the tag is a great way to contribute.
Many of these articles are not controversial at all. I think we already
have enough people who like getting involved in arguments.
Ec