Thomas Dalton wrote:
2010/1/10 geni geniice@gmail.com:
2010/1/10 Charles Matthews charles.r.matthews@ntlworld.com:
geni wrote:
Well so far everything you have described would risk getting you blocked from wikipedia.
Probably the most important thing to do is to contact http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:School_and_university_projects first.
I don't want to pull rank on this (much), but I have been through ArbCom discussions of "role accounts". There was some merit in what I was suggesting, namely single account with email to someone responsible. If you want, I can run some wording for the User page past ArbCom members, and see if any suggested "protocols" are sensible. I would have thought admins would have better things to do than close down such an account for technical infractions - bad behaviour would be another matter.
Arbcom don't make policy.
Precisely. The last time the community discussed role accounts the consensus was against them. Until such time as a different community consensus is established, that is the policy and ArbCom are obliged to enforce it.
Shrug. Admins are never "obliged" to enforce policy if it gives a stupid result. ArbCom are "obliged" to make some sense out of what the policy pages say, bearing in mind the good of the mission. Asking for 1500 admins to come up with a consensus position is fairly futile. Asking an Arbitrator is consulting an informed person. I know what I'd think of an admin who blocked a school project on this technicality. i'll concede that what is recommended should be well thought through, but my feeling is that this could lead to second-best advice being given.
If anyone would like to point to pages on enWP that actually say the practical things teachers in a secondary school should know about this issue, rather than waffling on about how everyone one will benefit if American college students edit Wikipedia (which in my limited experience they do with a role account), be my guest.
Charles
Charles