[WikiEN-l] CITE nazis

[stevertigo]

--- Dabljuh <dabljuh at gmx.net> wrote:

> stevertigo, I am *very* with the problem you
> are describing. I don't think WP:CITE itself
> is the cause of the problem. WP:OWN is.
> The cause of the problem is Article Squatters. 
> I suggest to completely change the meaning
> of WP:OWN.

I think this is a valid point. The rest however fails 
float test, if only because having twenty articles about the
same thing is as pointless as anything Ive ever heard.
The proplem is ownership, how does instituting *formal 
ownership* solve that problem? 

Somebody mentioned Wikinfo, which IIRC splits its articles 
according different general points of view. That's at least
workable and in extreme cases might resemble our /draft method,
but ultimately the goal is integration according to NPOV.

A lot of people can't handle that basic old NPOV rule which
is why we have citenazis in the first place. Cite, V, etc.
are part of a static model of Wikipedia which strives for 
"perfection" but fails to the dynamic communal process by 
which we built the Wikipedia to begin with.

At one point, our most sophisticated policy after NPOV was the
"leave something for people to do" guideline. Wikipedia of course 
has a bigger "ownership problem" than just the ownership of articles.

-Stevertigo



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com