No, the projects are not that different. Actually I believe the claim that they are so very different is counterproductive. Now we can't make common solutions because a few people on *some* project blocks the roll-out. For example, we could make solutions for quality improvement, but some project claim they have a superior process (actually very few have a real quality process).
Violations of neutral point of view is perhaps the most troublesome. Check out how Nazis from WWII is described in the various versions of "Wikipedia", you will be amazed.
On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 12:07 PM, Strainu strainu10@gmail.com wrote:
2017-08-08 12:20 GMT+03:00 John Erling Blad jeblad@gmail.com:
Policy should not have local variations, unless you want to create something different from Wikipedia.
Each version of Wikipedia is a different encyclopedia. There are vastly different inclusion policies and general policies between the different encyclopedias out there, what links them is that they provide information from all areas of knowledge.
This is about core content policies. Those are no original research, verifiability, and neutral point of view. The one most don't follow is neutral point of view, where projects
rewrite
world history to focus on their own local view.
Having a policy about it does not solve the issue. Having a policy one can't really change will make it even worse.{{citation needed}} :)
On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 2:20 AM, Gnangarra gnangarra@gmail.com wrote:
its the cultural differences that influence the policy, so who's
culture is
more significant than everyone elses that will dictate the policies.
On 8 August 2017 at 08:14, John Erling Blad jeblad@gmail.com wrote:
Yes there are cultural differences between wikipedias on _content_,
but
there should be no differences on _policy_ about that content. Note also that there are some differences on use of _facts_ that are
highly
troublesome, and that comes from relaxed core policies. Armenian genocide for example.
On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 3:48 PM, Gnangarra gnangarra@gmail.com
wrote:
to quote, worth a read before even considering policies being global http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/asi.23901/abstract
This article explores the relationship between linguistic culture
and
the
preferred standards of presenting information based on article representation in major Wikipedias. Using primary research
analysis
of
the
number of images, references, internal links, external links,
words,
and
characters, as well as their proportions in Good and Featured
articles
on
the eight largest Wikipedias, we discover a high diversity of
approaches
and format preferences, correlating with culture. We demonstrate
that
high-quality standards in information presentation are not
globally
shared
and that in many aspects, the language culture's influence
determines
what
is perceived to be proper, desirable, and exemplary for
encyclopedic
entries. As a result, we demonstrate that standards for
encyclopedic
knowledge are not globally agreed-upon and “objective” but local
and
very
subjective.
On 4 August 2017 at 10:18, Ziko van Dijk zvandijk@gmail.com
wrote:
The number of pillars depends on the language version... And whether some rules is called pilöar not dpes not seem to be pf
much
importance Ziko
John Erling Blad jeblad@gmail.com schrieb am Do. 3. Aug. 2017
um
14:42:
> Five pillars are moot. > > On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 2:59 PM, Gnangarra gnangarra@gmail.com
wrote:
> > > The moment you have a centralised policy you take away the
ability
to
> > discuss, makes decisions, and achieve consensus from the
community
that
> > create the projects. Importantly you create the opportunity
for
banned
> and > > blocked editors to decide what happens in a community. > > > > By having a base set of simple policies in the Incubator that
are
> > atuomatically created when a project starts up you give them
the
best
> guide > > to establishing themselves well before that project goes live,
ince a
> > project is live it has to be allowed to develop its community. > > > > We already have the 5 pillars which are the basis for the
projects,
but
> > meta is not a place that the content creating community
spends a
lot
of
> > time. > > > > On 3 August 2017 at 19:07, John Erling Blad <jeblad@gmail.com
wrote:
> > > > > Having centralized core policies would lessen the
maintenance
and
> > process, > > > not increase them. > > > > > > On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 11:17 AM, Strainu <
strainu10@gmail.com>
wrote: > > > > > > > The core policies should be the ones pushed by board
resolution,
and > > > > those should be the absolute minimum required to keep the
projects
> > > > safe from a legal POV. Period. Otherwise, people with
little
> > > > understanding of small Wikipedias will try to push stuff
from
en.wp. > > > > Just recently someone was trying to have an RFC on meta on
all
the
> > > > different processes that en.wp has and ro.wp does not
have,
with
> > > > little consideration on whether the manpower to implement,
let
alone > > > > maintain, these processes exists. No thank you to rule
pushing
> without > > > > local context. > > > > > > > > Having a community take a rule from en.wp is different,
just
as
long > > > > as some kind of discussion happens within the community
about
it.
> Even > > > > if the rule is really useless or harmful and the community
did
not
> > > > realize that in the beginning, at least it can evolve
differently
> from > > > > the English one. Have a centralized repository and trying
to
change
> > > > the rules there by consensus would be much more difficult
for
small
> > > > communities. > > > > > > > > Strainu > > > > > > > > 2017-08-02 17:05 GMT+03:00 John Erling Blad <
jeblad@gmail.com
:
> > > > > Nearly all Wikipedia projects has virtually the same
core
content
> > > > policies, > > > > > but with slightly different wording. Nearly all,
because a
lot
of
> the > > > > > smaller lacks them, and a lot has outdated or only
partial
> policies. > > It > > > > > takes a lot of time to actually make them and keep them
updated.
> > > > > > > > > > Creating and maintaining the core content policies
should
not
be
> > > > something > > > > > that small projects should invest a lot of time in, they
should
> > simply > > > be > > > > > able to point to existing policies on Meta. The central
policies
> > should > > > > be > > > > > localized if necessary. > > > > > > > > > > Checking Meta I find > > > > > - https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/The_no_original_research_
policy > > > > > - https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Neutral_point_of_view > > > > > > > > > > I can't find anything like "Verifiability". > > > > > > > > > > Would it be possible for Wikimedia Foundation to make
some
sound
> > > baseline > > > > > policies, and with the option for local projects to
refine
those?
> > > Perhaps > > > > > with assistance from editors on Wikipedia? > > > > > > > > > > Lets try to make the policies accurate, without "no
original
> > research" > > > > > diverging into verifiability of external sources. It
should
be
> about > > > > > original research in content on Wikipedia. Likewise, at
some
> projects > > > > > neutral point of view has become "do not diverge from
creators
> point > > of > > > > > view"… > > > > > > > > > > Would this be possible? It would be really nice if those
baseline
> > > > policies > > > > > pages could be copied to the individual projects like
central
user > > > pages, > > > > > so they would be "internal" to the projects. Thus the
projects
> would > > > have > > > > > more "ownership" of them. > > > > > > > > > > The same thing apply to other meta projects (Wikipedia, Wikibooks, > > > > > Wiktionary, etc). > > > > > > > > > > Jeblad > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > > > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > > wiki/Wikimedia-l > > > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/ > > mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > > > mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject= unsubscribe > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > > > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > > wiki/Wikimedia-l > > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > > > Unsubscribe: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > > > mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject= unsubscribe > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > wiki/Wikimedia-l > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/ mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=
unsubscribe>
> > > > > > > > > > > -- > > GN. > > President Wikimedia Australia > > WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra > > Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com > > _______________________________________________ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > > wiki/Wikimedia-l > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=
unsubscribe>
> > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=
unsubscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=
unsubscribe>
-- GN. President Wikimedia Australia WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=
unsubscribe>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
,
mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
-- GN. President Wikimedia Australia WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe