On 1/20/06, Sean Barrett sean@epoptic.org wrote:
Good point. Allow me to modify my proposal accordingly: anyone whose vote shows a culpable lack of elementary research should be penalized. This would include both those who deleted Jimbo's example that began this discussion, and those who /carelessly/ vote "keep" on fraudulent material.
Note that in both cases "I did my research but that was too subtle" ought to be considered as a defense. For example, both "okay, so he's genuinely notable in Kyrgyzstan, but I don't read Kyrgyzyse and that's the only language he's been published in" and "okay, so it's a hoax, but numerous credentialed scientists were also taken in" would be considered as mitigating factors by the Review Board.
Sean Barrett
Ok now it we've got it reframed so it is not such an obvious attempt to push inclusionism lets move onto the buracratic bit. While it appears the board at least favors increasing committes and the like:
http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolutions
(looking at that you start to wounder if the foundation is running the EU as well)
The general wikipedia community tends to be less in favor. Where would these board members come from?
Anyway if you want to try and go forward with this you need to start discussing this on wikipedia as soon as posible.~~~~
-- geni