[Foundation-l] Re: Rethinking Meta (was- Wikiquote now has subdomains) - Wikimedia-l

19 Jul 2004

Erik Moeller wrote:
...
  Anthere-

 The reason of wikimediafoundation site is to
present a unified front to
outside. It should be clean, with no dispute, and it should be
consistent with the Foundation frame of mind. It should also contain a
whole bunch of data, which should not be modified too easily by anyone
(like financial issues).  

 This can be done using rights management and page approval. Having a  
 combined wiki helps in collaborating as a community on matters such as  
 press releases and general news. 

Right management do not exist, but I think they could be very useful here.

...
  Now, I remember
very well your CPOV proposition, which aimed at strongly
limiting access to meta, by requesting that people identify themselves
by real names to have the right for their edits to be claimed
trustworthy, when the edits of non real people were labelled "untrusted
or non representative of a so-called community point of view" by default.  

 Wow. This is a gross misrepresentation of what I said. I am frankly  
 flabbergasted. See:
 http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Community_point_of_view

 In the *discussion* I suggested that *personal essays which deviate from  
 the CPOV* (such as our favorite troll pages) should be signed, and that  
 unsigned pages could be refactored or removed. This was a compromise  
 proposal towards you to not have to completely exclude such pages. Next  
 time you "remember something very well", you may want to look it up first.

Tatata, we already fought enough on this Erik.

You wrote to me :

But if you want to write a paper or essay on a subject related to 
Wikipedia, and do not want it to be edited into CPOV form, then you 
should have the courage and conviction to stand for it with your real 
name. Alternatively, put it on your user page. -Eloquence 13:28, 29 Apr 
2004 (UTC)

Given the number of editors who accept to edit under their real name, 
and given the risks associated with using our real name on the net, 
***requesting*** from people to sign their comments and participation 
with their real name in order to have those allowed in the main space is 
just something bad.

We are allowed to write fabulous article under ip, why would not we be 
allowed to write what we think of Wikipedia under the same procedure ?

I say, if we request from editors on meta to sign their participation 
with their real name, then we'll cause dramatic drop down in collaboration.

...
  This CPOV
proposition will have to happen over my dead body :-)  

 Fortunately, Wikimedia is democratically governed.

 Regards,

 Erik 
Oh, yes, thank god, it is democratically governed :-)

------

Btw, how are the new projects building going on ?

ant