[WikiEN-l] Policy on Reversions?

[Daniel Mayer]

Erik wrote:
>...
>A code of honor works well for small projects with 
>like-minded people. Wikipedia is neither small nor 
>like-minded. That's why it needs policies which are 
>actually followed through, and not just a call for 
>WikiLove every now and then. We don't need a 
>WikiGestapo, but we need a certain amount of policy 
>enforcement and clear rules, and that's just not   
>happening. As a result, NPOV is mostly theoretical for 
>many of the controversial articles on Wikipedia.

Sadly, I think you are right. Bureaucracy expansion.... Hm. 

One possible idea:
Somebody mentioned a "3 revert" rule where anything more than 3 reverts in an 
article content dispute by any party (not to be confused with reverting 
simple vandalism), is grounds for a warning. If within a certain amount of 
time, say a month, they go pass 3 reverts on the same article again, then 
they get a final warning. Strike three in the same month and they are banned 
from editing for a week. After that they can come back on probation (3 months 
long maybe?). At that point: 1 probation violation gets an automatic 1 week 
editing ban, second one gets 2 weeks and the third gets them a HardBan for at 
least the duration of their probation period. 

Hopefully this will encourage people to work together instead of automatically 
reverting. But we also need a way to resolve disputes. 

-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)