Believe it or not, we still don't enough active involved editors in many areas. I think many things will work out when we have more input from a broader base. For example about 4 people regularly edit the Tibet article, they fight a bit, but a few dozen actual Tibetans would change the mix. Likewise the half dozen who edit in the communist area would face a new dynamic if a few dozen who actually lived under communism weighed in.
This is true of our administrative and policy areas too, a very thin group in terms of numbers and diversity of viewpoint.
Fred
From: Andre Engels andreengels@gmail.com Reply-To: Andre Engels andreengels@gmail.com, Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@wikimedia.org Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 18:30:01 +0200 To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Re: Arbitration committe and content
On Thu, 28 Oct 2004 10:15:31 -0600, Fred Bauder fredbaud@ctelco.net wrote:
We do have a way to decide using [[Wikipedia:Neutral point of view]]. All significant points or view are to be included in the article. There are fine points to be decided, such at how much proportional space viewpoints are to be alloted but our policy is quite clear on the main point. Most POV disputes are centered around censoring opposing viewpoints and almost all POV warriors are in the wrong.
Still, this begs the question of what is a 'significant' point of view. Also, as you say, there are those finer points. Do we show the points of view as equals, or do we say "this is what most experts think, but others say that"? Which is given first, or do we first state the part that both agree on and only then the opinions? How much should be written on a certain POV?
And then there are the arguments that aren't about POV at all, but about inclusion (whether inclusing in Wikipedia as a whole or in a particular article) or about the way Wikipedia is to look like.
Every day Wikipedia has many of those decisions. In many cases there is just someone editing the way s/he likes it, and nobody who cares noticing. In many other cases a short discussion gets to an agreeable answer. But there still isn't anything to get to answer when it is not.
Andre Engels _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l