[Foundation-l] Is random article truly random

John Vandenberg jayvdb at gmail.com
Wed Oct 19 12:34:20 UTC 2011

On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 10:52 PM, Andrew Garrett <agarrett at wikimedia.org> wrote:
> Yes, I'm being rhetorical. Surely you understand what I'm trying to
> say and that "90%" is not intended to be interpreted literally.
> Just in case, I'll recap without using statistics for rhetorical
> purposes: My point is about quick wins. We can attack a large portion
> (that may or may not be exactly 90%) of the problem by offering
> readers the opportunity to hide a small number of categories that
> people commonly don't want to see.

This is the first _productive_ post in a while.
We know the hot button images.
We even have an FAQ page which tells readers how to hide pictures of Muhammad

How many other images on Wikipedia are widely viewed as problematic
and yet there is consensus to keep them in the article?

I think we should develop the finite list of 'real' problems, to feed
into a defined scope of said problem, and find minimalistic solutions.


John Vandenberg

More information about the foundation-l mailing list