Zoney (zoney.ie(a)gmail.com) [041117 22:57]:
I have seen some articles degrade. In my opinion, some
aspects of
[[European Union]] have degraded through the wiki process during my
[....]
There are failings in the wiki system, and it does us
no harm to
recognise them, rather than cry foul at our detractors. I feel there
are many ways that content can be kept more organised / reviewed, and
there's ample prospects of getting past any problems we have. But they
shouldn't be ignored.
Certainly. I've seen the process myself.
What I'm saying is that a quality improvement process should fit with the
culture, so as not to kill the golden goose. It's not that I have a dislike
of review boards per se, but that I think they'd be way too jarring and
fundamentally repudiate the wiki process.
Some sort of review process that leverages the wiki process - let the wiki
do the work.
There are plenty of things we can do before adding something so clearly
anti-wiki as a review board.
e.g. more work and tweaks on the experimental review software (at
test.wikipedia.org); the proposed syntax for references, so as to make
checkable referencing down to the sentence level *really easy*, so that an
expectation of referencing can be more easily brought into the culture of
Wikipedia. That sort of thing.
- d.