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

[Mark Williamson]

My point is that this situation has arisen many times in the past and
the response is very frequently a simple "We can't help you, it's a
local issue". Of course it should be dealt with at a local level but I
think that the foundation should be a little less hands-off than it
has often been when it comes to smaller communities where people have
been allowed to wield tremendous influence just because they got to a
wiki first.

Mark

On 8/7/09, Birgitte SB <birgitte_sb at yahoo.com> wrote:
> I don't know that it is useful to make a general policy for exceptions.  I
> think it is better just to watch out for such problems to pop up and try to
> direct attention to them when they are noticed.
>
> I think it is a better use of time and energy to wait and react to the sorts
> of extreme situation you suggest, rather than to seek to proactively verify
> that no wikis are in danger of developing such situations.  Not that I would
> stop anyone form volunteering to take such task on.  It is just that it is
> very tricky.  It probably would be more effective to wait till the locals
> complain and ask for help than to try and step in and accuse admins, who
> likely have put the most time and edits into the wiki, of mismanagement.
> Oftentimes locals that even have disagreements with the admins will be
> inclined to oppose your interference on the principal of solidarity, the
> devil you know, etc.  It is very touchy situation that leans towards
> misunderstandings even when everyone speaks the same language.
>
> Birgitte SB
>
> --- On Fri, 8/7/09, 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: Friday, August 7, 2009, 3:41 PM
>> I'm talking about more general
>> policy, not ja.wp in particular.
>>
>> On 8/7/09, Birgitte SB <birgitte_sb at yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>> > There are always extreme situations that merit
>> exceptional treatment.
>> > ja.WP, however, has a great deal more than 3 active
>> users.
>> >
>> > Birgitte SB
>> >
>> > --- 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, 7:45 PM
>> >> 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
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> foundation-l mailing list
>> >> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>> >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > foundation-l mailing list
>> > foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>> >
>>
>>
>> --
>> skype: node.ue
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> foundation-l mailing list
>> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>


-- 
skype: node.ue