On 9/12/06, Kirill Lokshin kirill.lokshin@gmail.com wrote:
On 9/12/06, Carl Peterson carlopeterson@gmail.com wrote:
What would be ideal is if we could establish a content-area (i.e., WikiProject) peer review as a prerequisite for the purposes of content
(esp.
for technical articles)
Not too difficult to set up, in theory. WikiProject-run peer reviews (in the Wikipedia "get advice for an article" sense, not the academic sense) are becoming more common (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:WikiProject_peer_reviews); and more FAC-like evaluation (rather than suggestion) methods are also being attempted (e.g.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/Assessme... ).
... then have it go to a "Brilliant Prose Committee" of qualified persons (e.g., people with actual degrees or a lot of
experience)
to evaluate the writing style, the readibility, the grammar, etc.
Presumably the nominator would still have the primary responsibility of fixing the article to meet the criticism of the committee, rather than actually having the committee be rewriting the thing?
But this hasn't a snowball's chance in hell of getting wide support, obviously, if only because of the ensuing bloodbath over who would be on the committee. ;-)
-- Kirill Lokshin _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
In my mind, the process for the committee would be similar to the RFA, except that no new sysop privileges would be granted per se and the criteria would be a history of edits of high literary quality, preferably with major contributions of that nature to an existing featured article. While I would prefer doing it on the basis of real-life credentials, i.e., education and work experience, I realize that it would not be a very Wikipedian way of settling things (on the order of WP:OR) and that an English professor does not necessarily make a good Wikipedia writer.
And yes, primary responsibility would still rest with the person making the nomination.
Carl