This approach seems like eminent common sense. We can expect a substantial
portion of our users to edit in at least some area from a strongly held
point of view, whether it is the viewpoint of an Israeli settler or an
advocate of alternative medicine. The question cannot be does someone have
and try to express a point of view, but how they go about it. The problem
with User:Anticapitalist is not his point of view; it is the blanking of
pages followed by the insertion of nonsense and his notion that he can just
make up a rule for all of Wikipedia. If he would just go to [[capitalism]]
and add a negative perspective...
Fred
From: Caroline Ford
<caroline(a)secretlondon.me.uk>
Reply-To: caroline(a)secretlondon.me.uk, English Wikipedia
<wikien-l(a)Wikipedia.org>
Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2004 20:58:34 +0000
To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l(a)Wikipedia.org>
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Are things getting worse?
I think one thing we need to remember is that in real life people die
over some of the issues we are squabbling about. With this in mind, it
is hardly surprisingly that people edit-war "to the death" over some of
them.
I think some of the problems are a natural consequence of our growth.
The larger we become the more likely it is that we get a wider range of
POVs. As we become more prominant we will also attract more "netcranks"
and the like.
We still have a geographical bias, partly but not solely due to the
different levels of internet access amongst different communities and
countries. As this divide narrows we will get more contributors who
disagree with the current consensus on various articles. Most articles
on countries and political movements have not been edited by people from
the relevant country.
If we sometimes have trouble getting Wikilove between the US and UK then
it will probably get worse as net access improves in eastern Europe and
the former Soviet Union, for example.
I don't mean to be pessimistic but we need to have a strategy to deal
with this.
Caroline/Secretlondon