my tuppence in amongst the many voices :-).....
1) If we're imagining a continuum with
smaller/higher-quality/restrictive
at one end, and larger/variable-in-quality/permissive at the other .... I
am
curious to know where the other language versions situate themselves. I am
assuming that (with some exceptions) they cluster closer to the English
model than the German, but I am just guessing. Do they?
Generally, I think it's probably best to consider the english wikipedia as a
fundamentally different beast to other projects - for a variety of reasons,
not least the sheer scale of the project. That aside - I'd share the
impression that the German project has evolved stronger structure /
governance processes than many / any others, and to that degree smaller
projects are indeed clustering closer to the english wiki.
2) When it comes to the German Wikipedia and other language versions which
put an unusually high priority on quality ..... I am curious to know what
quality-supportive measures (be they technical, social/cultural, or
policy-level) those Wikipedia have in place. Philipp says a high threshold
for notability is one in the German Wikipedia. Are there others?
You may well have read this before - but it's put rather well by 'Kato' over
at Wikipedia Review;
http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=23140&view=findpo…
basically there's a sensible three stage plan to follow to help drive
quality and minimise 'BLP' harm;
1) Semi-protext all 'BLP' material
2) Allow an 'opt-out' for some subjects (eg. non public figures, or those
not covered in 'dead tree sources' for example) - note this is more
inclusive than a simple higher threshold for notability
3) 'Default to delete' in discussions about BLP material - if we can't
positively say that it improves the project, it's sensible and responsible
to remove the material in my view.
It's very heartening to see this important issue getting discussion /
attention :-)
cheers,
Peter
PM.