Thomas Dalton wrote:
2010/1/10 geni <geniice(a)gmail.com>om>:
2010/1/10 Charles Matthews
<charles.r.matthews(a)ntlworld.com>om>:
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