It isn't magic. People have studied how and why it was successful and other projects were not.
Wikipedia 2019 isn't the same as Wikipedia 2001. We've made lots of changes that we thought at the time were radical along the way.
On Fri, Jul 5, 2019 at 6:01 AM Todd Allen toddmallen@gmail.com wrote:
That "arcane lore" has resulted in the largest educational work ever produced by humanity, and free for everyone both as in speech and as in beer.
So I think we need to consider carefully before radically changing it. It has worked, and worked unimaginably well, for most of two decades. That's not to say it can't still be improved, but the proof is in the results. If the English Wikipedia were badly broken, it wouldn't be a fixture of modern life.
Todd
On Thu, Jul 4, 2019, 11:54 PM Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
Hoi, Sorry but there is no reflection and all I read is an apologist telling
us
that English Wikipedia is the best there is. It is not, not by far. What
is
thought of as the English Wikipedia community are the old hands steeped
in
the arcane lore that are the policies that defend the status quo and keep others out. Just consider, I read a thread where it was put that a Jess Wade would not make administrator because (all kinds of repressive arguments that make my skin crawl). Just consider, I have formulated as a problem that 6% of list items in English Wikipedia refer to false friends and or do not link to the right article. I have formulated a solution
that
involves Wikidata and find that it is not even considered. Just consider, in an arbcom case where I have a beef I included my point of view. It was not accepted because it did not comply with a set format and was
threatened
that I could be banned because (I did not get the legalese).
English Wikipedia is toxic and we can lose a substantial number of people when the result is that we open up and allow for new, other arguments. It is toxic because it considers itself complete as it is and consequently does a substandard job in "sharing the sum of all knowledge".
Keeping things as they were is not an option. Thanks, GerardM
On Fri, 5 Jul 2019 at 01:27, Nathan nawrich@gmail.com wrote:
Also, I believe that the near-miracle of English Wikipedia should be tended with great care,
and
that the scars from this incident will be with us for a long time.
Pine ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine ) https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
I think there's a kernel here of something really important. An
argument
can be made (and has been, I'm sure) that the English Wikipedia is a
modern
Wonder of the World. It's a towering achievement of technology and humanity. It's humanity means that, like all of our towering
achievements,
it can't escape our flaws. The world is full of toxic people. Released
from
the risk of being iced out of society or punched in the face, they let
that
toxicity reign on the Internet and all of its spaces - including
Wikipedia.
The idea that the WMF or the Wikipedia community is going to solve this problem is earnest and well-meaning but foolish.
Yet Wikipedia was brought into being despite the toxicity, and has
survived
and thrived all this time alongside the struggles of human interaction.
So
maybe what we really need is for the WMF to be hands off and let the
forces
that created this "miracle" keep doing their work, and for the
community
of
the English Wikipedia to keep struggling but with the practical
realization
that success means just keeping temps below a rolling boil. _______________________________________________ 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