I have only been on Wikipedia for about a week so I don't suspect that my
views are going to carry much weight. However, I have spent a good bit of
today reviewing some of these edit wars and some of the talk pages so I
think I'll put in $.02 worth. Wik, I would say, does not act out of spite,
but simply wants to contribute what he can to the wikipedia ensure that the
entries he works on are correct.
The problem is he is very stubborn, refusing to even give an inch when he
has decided he is correct about something. This does show a sign of
immaturity in him, but I would not say that is a bannable offense. He has
been in numerous edit wars with various users where both continuously revert
each others edits. Wik's attitude seems to be that he'd rather completely
remove the contributions that he disagrees with rather than adjusting them
to be more neutral (sense that seems to be the major reasoning behind his
changes). I have observed that such actions has caused other problems such
as portions of articles, that had no reason to be removed, being deleted
accidentally.
Obviously this situation should be dealt with in a timely fashion. I think
the best answer would be a stricter policy on reversions and edit wars.
There have to be consequences to dissuade users from getting into these
pointless disputes. I more immediate action to address this situation would
be to issue a warning from the site owner (Jimbo I believe) stating that Wik
must start using other methods besides reversions for a certain amount of
time to see if he can learn to be more [[diplomatic]], leastwise he would be
banned if not permanently then at least temporarily.
[[User:T-Money|T-Money]]
----- Original Message -----
From: <kosebamse(a)gmx.net>
To: <wikien-l(a)Wikipedia.org>
Sent: Friday, November 21, 2003 1:28 PM
Subject: [WikiEN-l] Wik's views
Although there is a seemingly constant debate about [[User:Wik]]'s
conduct,
people do not seem to care too much about the
consequences of tolerating
his
behavior. I would like to raise some concerns.
It is not particularly easy to analyse Wik's contributions, as he rarely
comments his edits and does a great number of minor changes. It is however
obvious that he has a tendency to get involved in reversion wars, is
generally
unwilling to discuss his views, frequently uses words
like "vandals" and
"trolls", and refuses to talk to people whom he has declared as such. I
had a long
conversation with him over a few days (see [[User
talk:Wik]], where all
the
following quotations are taken from) and would like to
report my
impressions,
because I believe that some of the more distressing
points about Wik are
not
too obvious but should be discussed.
Wik: "There is no way to reconcile POV and NPOV". When we discussed this,
he
has made it clear that he sees it as his right to
decide what "the NPOV
version" of an article is, and to engage in reversion wars to "defend" it.
Wik:
"As far as I know NPOV is the community norm, and
I am its staunchest
defender. And this inevitably (and regrettably) involves getting into edit
wars.
What
is the alternative, just leaving the POV version
there?" He refuses to
accept that reversion wars create unstable articles, while NPOV measures
create
stable articles. He refuses to enter conversation with
his adversaries and
has
stated his goal of continuing reversion wars to
victory. Wik: "Edit wars
aren't endless, at some point one side gives up." Behind this attitude is
apparently his conviction that respecting other's views is somehow "POV
relativism",
as he likes to call it. He also seems to believe that
a gradual
improvement
of an article should not be pursued once he has
unilaterally declared what
"the NPOV version" is.
Wik has a list of users he doesn't like and with whom he refuses to
discuss
anything and whom he calls "vandals and
trolls" rather frequently. He does
not accept the hard-and-fast policy of "no personal attacks" and insists
that
his use of such vocabulary is purely descriptive. Wik:
"I'm always
talking,
except with those people where it would be wasted
time. I'm using the
terms
vandals and trolls exactly where appropriate."
When some articles where he had been engaged in reversion wars were
protected, and others started discussing them, bridging their differences
and
working
on a compromise, Wik outright refused to ever
participate in this approach
but stated his freedom of reverting any result of their work. Despite
clear
evidence to the contrary, he wrote: "It is a
fundamental misconception to
think
that edit wars can be solved by protecting the page
and telling the people
to discuss." This seems to be related to his condescending view of people
who
disagree with him, as he maintains that once having
declared his opinions,
further talk would be useless, even while others were now actively
debating
points that had been the subject of his reversions
before.
Wik's attitude towards his fellow Wikipedians is often rather reckless,
and
he demonstrates disrespect of many of Wikipedia's
very foundations (NPOV,
cooperation, policies, respect for others, Wikiquette). He has often been
told
(by Jimbo Wales, Stan Shebs, and Angela to name only a
few) that his
conduct
is not acceptable but I can see no tendency of his to
change his ways.
Although one may try talking to him, my experience with him makes me
believe that
he is unwilling to accept advice. He has even declared
his will to "make
[Wikipedia] less lame or be banned in the attempt". Given that by saying
"lame" he
seems to refer to our fundamental dogmas, I see little
hope that he can be
convinced to become more collegial. I do not think that we should set a
precedent by continuing to tolerate such conduct.
Kosebamse
--
GMX Weihnachts-Special: Seychellen-Traumreise zu gewinnen!
Rentier entlaufen. Finden Sie Rudolph! Als Belohnung winken
tolle Preise.
http://www.gmx.net/de/cgi/specialmail/
+++ GMX - die erste Adresse für Mail, Message, More! +++
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l