Hello,
I propose a new VfD system which uses Scientific
Management principles as described by Taylor, the
creator of Scientific Management:
(don't take it too seriously!)
The rules of the new system are:
1. When a Wikipedian proposes to delete a page and the
community says "NO" (as defined in Article 7), he or
she will be charged with an amount of X Wikis from his
WikiBank account. (PUNISHMENT)
2. When a Wikipedian proposes to delete a page and the
community says "YES" (as defined in Article 7), he or
she will earn an amount of X Wikis, added to his or
her WikiBank account. (REWARD)
3. When a Wikipedian proposes to delete a page and the
community is "UNDECIDED" or "NEUTRAL" (as defined in
Article 7), no change will occur to his or her
WikiBank account.
4. Only users with at least X Wikis on their WikiBank
account will be able to vote for deletion. However,
there will be an allowed overdraft of Y Wikis on all
WikiBank accounts. The user will be required to pay
the overdraft in a period of Z months by creating new
articles or fixing existing ones or providing another
service to the community.
5. Usual voters' WikiBank accounts will not be
affected. The punishment or reward will affect only
the Wikipedian who proposed a page to be deleted.
6. (intentionally left blank without any rational
reason). :)
7. Definition of the Community's Will: When a P
percentage of the voters say "YES", the Community Will
is considered to be "YES". When a P percentage of the
voters say "NO", the Community Will is considered to
be "NO". When there are no votes at all, the Community
Will is considered to be "NEUTRAL". In any other case
the Community Will is "UNDECIDED".
8. The real value of the variables X, Y, Z and P will
be defined by Jimbo, unless he nominates another
person or group to define these values. The definition
will be added to this rule-list as Article 9. :)
9. (Intentionally left blank for future use.)
10. A vote is:
10a. Positive if the Wikipedian wrote "DELETE!".
10b. Negative if the Wikipedian wrote "KEEP!".
10c. In all other cases it is a comment, not a vote,
even if the Wikipedian meant a positive or negative
vote by using other words.
10d. The "!" and the capital letters are included in
the definition of a vote. i.e. "delete!", "delete" and
"DELETE!" are considered different. :)
note: currently a P percentage of 2/3 is discussed on
the page
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_policy
The main idea of the proposed system is to PUNISH
wikipedians who vote to delete a useful page and
REWARD wikipedians who help keeping Wikipedia clean
and usable by voting to delete unnecessary or harmful
pages. People will think twice before voting to delete
a page which may seen as useful by others, but at the
same time they will have a (wiki-monetary) incentive
to vote the deletion of pages which surely will not
yield negative votes, thus keeping Wikipedia clean,
usable and safe for its readers.
Background information:
For the definition of a "Wiki":
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikimoney
For the definition a "WikiBank Account":
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiMoney_accounts
For what VfD is:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion
The goal of VFD is to prevent trolls and vandals from
destroying Wikipedia and keep it clean, usable and
safe for its readers. Our readers are our masters and
we must serve them at the best of our ability. We
should never allow vandals to put gargabe, false
information (which, especially in cases about Health
or Law, may be dangerous), potentially offensive
material etc.
VFD should exist but not overused. Currently it is
overused, since most of the pages listed in VfD could
have been listed in Cleanup or Pages Needing
Attention.
My (serious) recommendation is that anyone who likes
to use VFD should read and have a deep understanding
of Ahimsa and WikiLove.
See:
http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/WikipediAhimsa
and:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WikiLove
VFD is often destructive and contrary to Ahimsa.
Ahimsa is non-violence. However, Cleanup and Pages
Needing Attention are in harmony with the Ahimsa
principles. It is better first to use Cleanup and
Pages Needing Attention before using VFD.
VFD forces people to write either only good articles
or no articles at all. It uses the power of Fear to
control people's inclusion of stubs (small articles)
and gargage in Wikipedia. Using fear is psychological
violence, so it is against Ahimsa. In the end, VFD may
be useful (keeping Wikipedia clean), but VFD's means
are based on Violence. Of course I accept that it is
impossible or very difficult not to use Violence,
provided the current state of society and human
spirit.
It is sure that if we had unlimited time, we would
delete all Wikipedia articles in the end, because
everyone will find some soft or hard objection to any
of the existing articles. (this is an interesting
"infinite time experiment", isn't it?). Even the best
and most NPOV article may be seen as offensive by some
people. And it is known that in the human society, a
lot of mad persons found great support among the
people. If you can't think of any example, just open a
History textbook or browse Wikipedia for historical
figures and you will find many crazy trolls who were
able to influence the society in order to materialize
their craziness.
Thank you,
With Best Wishes for Peace Profound,
--Optim
--- Jimmy Wales <jwales(a)bomis.com> wrote:
Rick wrote:
Fine. I give up. I will no longer list anything
to be deleted, and
I will stop deleting any garbage that any vandals
want to add to
Wikipedia.
I don't think being huffy about it is very helpful.
Better, I think,
to work for a new system that doesn't make such
egregious errors.
"Palestinian views of the peace process" is quite
clearly an important
topic -- one of the most important topics in one of
the most important
issues of our times. And yet, rather than find a
way to work for a
neutral presentation of that issue, VfD resulted in
deletion. That's
broken. The material there may have been flawed in
some ways (though
I find it to be pretty decent, as a first draft at
least), but it was
hardly "vandalism".
On the other hand, deleting "any garbage that any
vandals want to add
to wikipedia" is valuable.
Tying the two together is a mistake, I think. When
I say that the
current VfD process is broken, I am not thereby
endorsing the notion
that we can't justifiably delete vandalism or
nonsense.
--Jimbo
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the "Signing Bonus" Sweepstakes
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/signingbonus