Whether we deal with article-based disputes is a close issue. While I see the need and advocate it, I recall great reluctance on the part of the mailing list to allow arbitration of article content. I'm also posting this to wikien-l for further comment by the mailing list.
Fred
I feel very strongly that article disputes be settled by arbitration, or some other time consuming process where the issue is well thought over and researched, rather than decided by poll. To be honest, I have a rather contentious issue that I would like to have arbitrated, assuming it is still a concern by the time the arbitrators are ready to start taking cases (and also assuming it is decided that they will handle article disputes :) JackLynch
_________________________________________________________________ Find high-speed net deals comparison-shop your local providers here. https://broadband.msn.com
On Sunday 25 January 2004 09:28 am, Ira Stoll wrote:
Whether we deal with article-based disputes is a close issue. While I see the need and advocate it, I recall great reluctance on the part of the mailing list to allow arbitration of article content. I'm also posting this to wikien-l for further comment by the mailing list.
Fred
I feel very strongly that article disputes be settled by arbitration, or some other time consuming process where the issue is well thought over and researched, rather than decided by poll. To be honest, I have a rather contentious issue that I would like to have arbitrated, assuming it is still a concern by the time the arbitrators are ready to start taking cases (and also assuming it is decided that they will handle article disputes :) JackLynch
And I feel equally strongly that our articles, particularly not our contentious articles should be written by any committee which issues a decree about what is and is not "fact", what does and does not merit inclusion in a particular article, etc.
Arbitration should be about enforcing policies and not making editorial decisions about particular articles or disputes.
Best, Sascha Noyes
Sascha Noyes wrote:
On Sunday 25 January 2004 09:28 am, Ira Stoll wrote:
I feel very strongly that article disputes be settled by arbitration, or some other time consuming process where the issue is well thought over and researched, rather than decided by poll. To be honest, I have a rather contentious issue that I would like to have arbitrated, assuming it is still a concern by the time the arbitrators are ready to start taking cases (and also assuming it is decided that they will handle article disputes :) JackLynch
And I feel equally strongly that our articles, particularly not our contentious articles should be written by any committee which issues a decree about what is and is not "fact", what does and does not merit inclusion in a particular article, etc.
I guess I'm split on this, and don't like either solution. Our current process seems to have two main ways of resolving contentious disputes: * Whoever is most persistent wins, as eventually his opponent goes away and he reverts to his preferred version without anyone noticing * Whichever position is most popular wins, as it wins the vote (even if it's grossly incorrect)
I'm not sure whether "committee decree" is better or worse than these, as none of the three options are very good.
-Mark
Perhaps the arbitration committee can look for these patterns and attempt to fashion some remedy that deal with them. Really if this is happening it needs to be part of the complaint...err "Request for arbitration".
Fred
From: Delirium delirium@rufus.d2g.com Reply-To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@Wikipedia.org Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2004 11:29:16 -0800 To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@Wikipedia.org Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Should the content of articles be subject to arbitration?
Our current process seems to have two main ways of resolving contentious disputes:
- Whoever is most persistent wins, as eventually his opponent goes away
and he reverts to his preferred version without anyone noticing
- Whichever position is most popular wins, as it wins the vote (even if
it's grossly incorrect)
Sascha Noyes wrote:
Arbitration should be about enforcing policies and not making editorial decisions about particular articles or disputes.
I agree completely. The wiki process, if respected, is sufficient to generate excellent articles. If the wiki process is being abused, then that's where arbitration comes in (as a last resort, after mediation fails).
I find it difficult to imaging a situation in which an arbitration committee is asked to settle an issue of editorial judgment. It's about behaviors at that point, not article contents. (I do agree, of course, that the two may be entertwined. But in all the cases that I have dealt with personally, the article contents weren't the actual issue -- the issue was unwillingness to work in a spirit of kindness with others.)
--Jimbo