Since anonymous users have been experimentally prevented from adding new articles, I have created [[Wikipedia:Articles for creation]]. This allows users to request that a page be created, and list initial content. I hope that this will dampen the effect of this policy change on the creation of legitimate articles. I hope that others will consider adding this to their watchlist and helping out with this task; any registered user can fulfill these requests, or state why they think a request should not be fulfilled (article already exists under different name, etc.).
-- Creidieki
M. Creidieki Crouch wrote:
Since anonymous users have been experimentally prevented from adding new articles, I have created [[Wikipedia:Articles for creation]]. This allows users to request that a page be created, and list initial content. I hope that this will dampen the effect of this policy change on the creation of legitimate articles. I hope that others will consider adding this to their watchlist and helping out with this task; any registered user can fulfill these requests, or state why they think a request should not be fulfilled (article already exists under different name, etc.).
-- Creidieki
Perhaps I'm missing something, but what is the difference between this and [[Wikipedia:Requested articles]], which is well-established and has been around for a very long time? It is even linked to from the warning anon editors see.
--bbatsell
Perhaps I'm missing something, but what is the difference between this and [[Wikipedia:Requested articles]], which is well-established and has been around for a very long time? It is even linked to from the warning anon editors see.
[[Wikipedia:Requested articles]] asks for someone else to write an article for you. It's a very good page that serves a necessary purpose. But there's an additional, separate problem now: an anonymous user has already written several sentences or paragraphs, and needs to turn this into an article. That's what [[Wikipedia:Articles for creation]] is for. IP users can post their text to this page, and a registered user will put it into an article (if appropriate), or offer other help.
If you look at how things have been going in the first day, I think we've created several useful articles or redirects, and posted a lot of advice on peoples' talk pages about why some articles may not be appropriate. I give articles the benefit of the doubt when deciding whether to create them, and I hope others do the same. I encourage you to take a look at the page, and consider it among the maintenance tasks you consider doing.
-- Creidieki
M. Creidieki Crouch wrote:
[[Wikipedia:Requested articles]] asks for someone else to write an article for you. It's a very good page that serves a necessary purpose. But there's an additional, separate problem now: an anonymous user has already written several sentences or paragraphs, and needs to turn this into an article. That's what [[Wikipedia:Articles for creation]] is for. IP users can post their text to this page, and a registered user will put it into an article (if appropriate), or offer other help.
-- Creidieki
Thanks for the clarification — I understand its purpose now.
--bbatsell
On 12/5/05, M. Creidieki Crouch creidieki@gmail.com wrote:
Since anonymous users have been experimentally prevented from adding new articles, I have created [[Wikipedia:Articles for creation]]. This allows users to request that a page be created, and list initial content. I hope that this will dampen the effect of this policy change on the creation of legitimate articles. I hope that others will consider adding this to their watchlist and helping out with this task; any registered user can fulfill these requests, or state why they think a request should not be fulfilled (article already exists under different name, etc.).
Um, in what way is this easier than, well, creating an account?
-- Sam
Sam Korn wrote:
On 12/5/05, M. Creidieki Crouch creidieki@gmail.com wrote:
Since anonymous users have been experimentally prevented from adding new articles, I have created [[Wikipedia:Articles for creation]].
Um, in what way is this easier than, well, creating an account?
Some people really object to creating an account. Anons don't get no respect in general, but sincere contributors who don't want to create an account do exist.
- d.
Sam Korn wrote:
On 12/5/05, M. Creidieki Crouch creidieki@gmail.com wrote:
Since anonymous users have been experimentally prevented from adding new articles, I have created [[Wikipedia:Articles for creation]]. This allows users to request that a page be created, and list initial content. I hope that this will dampen the effect of this policy change on the creation of legitimate articles. I hope that others will consider adding this to their watchlist and helping out with this task; any registered user can fulfill these requests, or state why they think a request should not be fulfilled (article already exists under different name, etc.).
Um, in what way is this easier than, well, creating an account?
It's not, but there are a remarkable number of longtime good editors who apparently do not want to create accounts (I've come to recognize some familiar IPs). Part of the experiment is to see what anons decide to do when a restriction is applied - for instance, if we get a surge in throwaway logins and no benefit in content quality, that might suggest the problem is with pseudonymy rather than anonymity.
Stan
Stan Shebs wrote:
Um, in what way is this easier than, well, creating an account?
It's not, but there are a remarkable number of longtime good editors who apparently do not want to create accounts (I've come to recognize some familiar IPs). Part of the experiment is to see what anons decide to do when a restriction is applied - for instance, if we get a surge in throwaway logins and no benefit in content quality, that might suggest the problem is with pseudonymy rather than anonymity.
Can't we change the rule "anon's can't create pages" to "anons with editcount<x timespan <y" can't create pages?
Gerrit.
Gerrit Holl wrote:
Stan Shebs wrote:
Um, in what way is this easier than, well, creating an account?
It's not, but there are a remarkable number of longtime good editors who apparently do not want to create accounts (I've come to recognize some familiar IPs). Part of the experiment is to see what anons decide to do when a restriction is applied - for instance, if we get a surge in throwaway logins and no benefit in content quality, that might suggest the problem is with pseudonymy rather than anonymity.
Can't we change the rule "anon's can't create pages" to "anons with editcount<x timespan <y" can't create pages?
Gerrit.
Not as simple as you may think. Often IPs are dynamic and/or shared with others. Some people on them are vandals and others are valuable contributors.
John Lee ([[User:Johnleemk]])
Gerrit Holl wrote:
Stan Shebs wrote:
Um, in what way is this easier than, well, creating an account?
It's not, but there are a remarkable number of longtime good editors who apparently do not want to create accounts (I've come to recognize some familiar IPs). Part of the experiment is to see what anons decide to do when a restriction is applied - for instance, if we get a surge in throwaway logins and no benefit in content quality, that might suggest the problem is with pseudonymy rather than anonymity.
Can't we change the rule "anon's can't create pages" to "anons with editcount<x timespan <y" can't create pages?
Gerrit.
That will automatically allow every single AOL or school proxy, since there's ton of edits from there (many oif them quite old), and many of those edits are of the class we want the least.
grm_wnr