[Foundation-l] Wikipedia Policy Interlingual Coordinationn - WP:NOT

[Mark Williamson]

Alright, but what about the case of a Wiki where there are perhaps 3
active users, and the administrator is imposing their will? It is the
Foundation that gave the admins the power in the first place. I do
believe that _most_ issues people want the Foundation to get involved
in are best dealt with locally, but I feel there are some that should
be dealt with at a higher level. Simply letting a megalomaniac run a
Wiki as if it were their own personal fiefdom seems unacceptable to
me.

Mark

On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 1:52 PM, Birgitte SB<birgitte_sb at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
> --- On Thu, 8/6/09, Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> From: Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com>
>> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Wikipedia Policy Interlingual Coordinationn - WP:NOT
>> To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" <foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
>> Date: Thursday, August 6, 2009, 12:38 PM
>> This problem of one or two
>> strong-willed admins enforcing their will
>> over others is not an uncommon problem at smaller Wikis. In
>> many
>> cases, uncommon or strange orthographies, nonstandard
>> dialects, or
>> strange editing rules have been enforced; people who
>> complain are
>> often ignored and referred back to the Wiki by foundation
>> people
>> because it's a "local" matter.
>>
>
> The problem of a user dissatisfied with the actions of local administrators is not uncommon on any wiki.  When people dissatisfied with local enforcement of non-foundation issues complain here they are often properly informed that it is a local matter and that the each wiki is self-governing.  Frankly the autonomy of the wikis is hardly a choice, if you honestly consider the logistics of it.
>
> Birgitte SB
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>