William Pietri wrote
That's not to say it isn't the right thing to do if the model really is a failure. But I'm not there yet.
The original WP wiki model was
:Talk pages + NPOV + IP edits allowed
and was a roaring success. So much so that
:FTA (Floor the accelerator)
was added to enWP. That gets us to where we are today in the somewhat modified form
:Talk pages + dispute resolution + NPOV + NOR + RS + BLP + no IP page creation + COI + ... + TMOO (too many other acronyms)
but FTA still applies pretty much to enWP, though Jimbo was for easing off last year.
It looks like FTA has had its day. That surely is the main conclusion from this discussion. There are numerous ways to look at this change (of which locking new articles would seem to be one of the least flexible and attractive).
Charles
----------------------------------------- Email sent from www.virginmedia.com/email Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software and scanned for spam
Summary of thread: Bad ideas: 1. Disabling page creation 2. Disabling account creation 3. Making more admin-only powers
Good ideas: 1. Shutting down AFD temporarily 2. Tagging new pages as reviewed, to reduce duplication of effort
-- Jake Nelson [[en:User:Jake Nelson]]
On 4/2/07, Jake Nelson duskwave@gmail.com wrote:
Summary of thread: Bad ideas:
- Disabling page creation
- Disabling account creation
- Making more admin-only powers
Good ideas:
- Shutting down AFD temporarily
- Tagging new pages as reviewed, to reduce duplication of effort
-- Jake Nelson [[en:User:Jake Nelson]]
I wouldn't mind a one day/week new page hiatus. If a user tried to create a new page, an auto-message could explain the one day/week cleanup idea, plus "If you must write a new page, create it in your userspace today and move it tomorrow. (+brief instructions on how to create a user subpage)". One day/week of no new articles might give admins a chance to gain some ground on various continually-backlogged speedy delete cats. And people could still write new pages in their userspace. (I am assuming this is all technically feasible.)
2 more cents, Erica User:Fang Aili
On 4/2/07, charles.r.matthews@ntlworld.com charles.r.matthews@ntlworld.com wrote:
William Pietri wrote
That's not to say it isn't the right thing to do if the model really is a failure. But I'm not there yet.
The original WP wiki model was
:Talk pages + NPOV + IP edits allowed
and was a roaring success. So much so that
:FTA (Floor the accelerator)
was added to enWP. That gets us to where we are today in the somewhat modified form
:Talk pages + dispute resolution + NPOV + NOR + RS + BLP + no IP page creation + COI + ... + TMOO (too many other acronyms)
but FTA still applies pretty much to enWP, though Jimbo was for easing off last year.
It looks like FTA has had its day. That surely is the main conclusion from this discussion. There are numerous ways to look at this change (of which locking new articles would seem to be one of the least flexible and attractive).
I soundly disagree with you that's the main conclusion from this discussion.
In fact, looking at your above summary, I might think the proper conclusion to draw is that the bureaucratic overhead of contributing to Wikipedia has grown out of control.