[WikiEN-l] The Counter Vandalism Unit? Whaa?

geni geniice at gmail.com
Fri Feb 3 20:58:04 UTC 2006

On 2/3/06, Sam Korn <smoddy at gmail.com> wrote:
> I think you misunderstand the opposition to the "CVU".  I very much
> doubt anyone is questioning the importance of fighting vandalism!  I
> think the opposition comes from three main aspects:
> 1) The name implies (though the page itself explicitly denies) that
> the Unit is The Way vandalism is fought.  I know this is explicitly
> denied, but it is implied, and many people won't read all the way
> down.  My solution: use [[Wikipedia:RC Patrol]] to co-ordinate RC
> patrol.

Problem is they are not doing RC patrol in the clasical sense (remeber
RC patrol was not originaly pure anti vandalism.)

> 2) The images imply (though the page denies) that the Unit is
> sanctioned by the Foundation.  The images actually are in violation of
> the WMF's visual identity guidelines IMO.  Solution: remove the
> images.

The images do not imply that except to the tiny percentage of people
who have some idea about the reltionship between wikipedia the
foundation and the logo.

> 3) There exists a category for members.  This again implies that only
> those members are "qualified" RC patrollers.  Whilst *I* understand
> that that is not intended, that is nonetheless a point that comes
> across.

Oh dear. It would then appear that people are going to think we have
only 126 people "qualified" to counter systemic bias.

> Note that I do not say these things out of dislike for those
> affliliated to the CVU.  I admire the work they do.  I just have
> misgivings about the manner in which they organise themselves.  Too
> often I have seen people replying to criticism of the way the
> organisation is run with "but look at all the work we do reverting
> vandalism".  But that misunderstands the reason for the opposition.
> I ask those who support the CVU: 1) how does it help Wikipedia in ways
> that a non-organisational structure couldn't?

Try thinking about people a second. People who are prepared to sit
there day after day fighting off vandalism are a little different from
others. Oh a lot of people go through a vandle fighting stage but they
burn out on that. That means we need a constant stream of new
recruites and ways to try and get the old hands stay on. CVU helps
with both. We know from "internet wars" that there are a fair number
of combat orentated internet users. CVU takes that and channels it
into something useful.

>and 2) is the good it
> does really more significant than the dislike it creates among other
> Wikipedians?

On the basis that the average wikipedian is unlikely to have many
dealings with it I'm going for yes.


More information about the WikiEN-l mailing list