I have a few questions that I feel need answering so that we all understand the facts behind the problem:
1) Whilst I accept that Wikipedia requires a total deletion system in some cases, what are the accepted administrative reasons behind deletions?
2) Are the deletions tracked (even if not available to the public) in any way? Is there any way that it can be determined which administrator has deleted a file (eg: usernames, IP addresses)? If not, is there any reason why there shouldn't be in the future?
Thanks for your time in answering these questions. Two of the most important features of the Open Source movement are transparentness and openness, and whilst I understand that service providers can - and should - act as a benign dictatorship 'cos it's their backsides on the line, if these sorts of problems continue it could damage the reputation of Wikipedia, which is probably Bomis' biggest asset.
I hope these problems can be sorted out in an adult and businesslike manner, and that any mistakes or omissions are learnt from. [1]
Dave McKee.
[1] This may sound a little high-and-mighty, but the previous postings had the slight air of 'Look what Johnny did!' 'No I didn't!' - which doesn't help matters.
Dave McKee wrote:
- Whilst I accept that Wikipedia requires a total deletion system in
some cases, what are the accepted administrative reasons behind deletions?
Just speaking off the top of my head, I think that total deletions seldom make sense. They should be reserved primarily for pages that are just completely mistaken (typos, unlikely misspellings), or for pages that are nothing more than insults.
Another class of pages for which total deletion makes sense would be for legitimate page titles with totally nonsensical content. A total deletion is better than a page clearing, because it restores the ? link on pages that may mention this page, thus alerting us that it needs fixing.
For example, a couple of days ago I noticed that we didn't have a page on Colin Powell, while reading a page about the current effort. If there had been a blank page there, I would not have noticed it, and we wouldn't have that content now.
- Are the deletions tracked (even if not available to the public) in
any way? Is there any way that it can be determined which administrator has deleted a file (eg: usernames, IP addresses)? If not, is there any reason why there shouldn't be in the future?
I think it is obvious that pretty much nothing should be done in secret.
of Wikipedia, which is probably Bomis' biggest asset.
Well, not really. Wikipedia traffic is extraordinarily tiny compared to our other properties. Nonetheless, I do think Wikipedia is exciting and promising.
--Jimbo
Jimmy Wales wrote:
Another class of pages for which total deletion makes sense would be for legitimate page titles with totally nonsensical content. A total deletion is better than a page clearing, because it restores the ? link on pages that may mention this page, thus alerting us that it needs fixing.
For example, a couple of days ago I noticed that we didn't have a page on Colin Powell, while reading a page about the current effort. If there had been a blank page there, I would not have noticed it, and we wouldn't have that content now.
That can be solved. Software must be changed so that blank pages have a ? link.
- Are the deletions tracked (even if not available to the public) in
any way? Is there any way that it can be determined which administrator has deleted a file (eg: usernames, IP addresses)? If not, is there any reason why there shouldn't be in the future?
I think it is obvious that pretty much nothing should be done in secret.
of Wikipedia, which is probably Bomis' biggest asset.
Well, not really. Wikipedia traffic is extraordinarily tiny compared to our other properties. Nonetheless, I do think Wikipedia is exciting and promising.
I think the idea was that, in this project, the biggest asset of Bomis is the "Wikipedia reputation". Not the content, but the reputation. I would say that there are two important assets for Bomis here:
1 - wikipedia reputation 2 - wikipedia community
That's what Bomis must preserve. Others can use the same content to build a similar project, but they would not have the same reputation and the same community.
João Mário Miranda wrote:
That can be solved. Software must be changed so that blank pages have a ? link.
I see what you mean, yes. Alternatively, the delete command could be changed to leave the history. After all, that's what seems to be the most upsetting (to me, anyway) about the delete command -- all the history is obliterated, making it difficult for community oversight to function properly.
I think the idea was that, in this project, the biggest asset of Bomis is the "Wikipedia reputation". Not the content, but the reputation. I would say that there are two important assets for Bomis here:
1 - wikipedia reputation 2 - wikipedia community
That's what Bomis must preserve. Others can use the same content to build a similar project, but they would not have the same reputation and the same community.
Right! That makes perfect sense.
As always, it seems funny to me to discuss "Bomis" in the abstract, since it's just me and Tim and the gang. :-)
wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org