On 7/30/06, Steve Bennett <stevagewp(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 7/30/06, Erik Moeller <eloquence(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
> The reviews would be sent to a to-be-created mailing list, e.g.
> reviews-l(a)wikipedia.org. Besides the form information, the messages
> would include an exact revision ID of the article that was being
> reviewed.
I don't think an email list is the right place for
reviews to go. They
should end up more tightly integrated in the wiki process.
It could be an option:
( ) Append my review to the wiki "discussion page", where Wikipedia
users may respond to it
( ) Send my review by e-mail to a select group of volunteers, who will
look at it and who may respond by e-mail
I for one would prefer to use only e-mail to begin with. Reviewers may
not be comfortable with their personal information being published on
the web, and the point is exactly to take away some of the complexity
of the wiki process and to build a simpler, safer social environment
where they will not have to deal with immature teenagers shouting at
them. Friendly volunteers can instead take care of the incoming
reviews, carefully build a social relationship with the reviewer, and
try to bring them into the wiki proper if it makes sense. People from
.edu domains can be treated with respect, and get the feeling that
they have a special status that elevates them above the unwashed
masses -- when in reality they have no special rights to the content
whatsoever.
Many of the people who we should solicit input from are very familiar
with e-mail. They are not familiar with "talk pages" and "wiki", and
in fact intimidated by it. We should encourage use of the "right way
of doing things", but I think we should also offer an "alternative way
of doing things."
Erik