[WikiEN-l] So you think you can be a Wikipedia article

[stevertigo]

> On 24/07/06, Stan Shebs <shebs at apple.com> wrote:
> > That's a nice fantasy, but nobody works for no reward at all. For
> > instance, we reward random editors by letting their contributions
> > appear on a top-20 website; editors who continually have all their
> > edits reverted eventually get the hint and go away. If every policy
> > I propose gets shot down or subverted, how long do you think I'm
> > going to keep doing it?

The point of leadership isnt the personal reward associated with authority, 
its the ability to navigate though obstacles and handle disputes. 
WP doesnt need a captain or an EIC, but it could benefit from having 
a kind of editorial council.

--- Oldak Quill <oldakquill at gmail.com> wrote:

> My point was that we don't want leaders who are leaders only because
> they enjoy the perks. Our current system ensures that our transient,
> changing leadership are those who want to do something for the
> project, or believe the project should have some feature or device.
> Institutionalised leadership tends lose sight of the project and be
> lazy.

I tend to agree, but again its besides the point. The association of 
sysops with janitors has left sysops untrusted with actual decision power, 
to resolve certain disputes. They wind up put in a place where their hands
are tied by the influx. Council members could be given authority to:

1) settle particularly clear POV and disputes flatly, 
   including article deletion and material inclusion disputes.
2) make a judgement on particular a POV issue and apply it.
3) make direct article edits or else give specific article 
   instructions which to follow.
4) with other members, they can build a record of how particular 
   disputes are dealt with. 

Of course this body should be reasonalby large, perhaps 30 members, 
have all some serious skillz, and of course a dedication to and 
experience with NPOV. The body needs to be large enough to have some 
influence, have standards and review for membership, and yet it should
be small enough to require consensus among the council, and thus avoid 
the direct that sysops get into.

They should use their authority sparingly, in particular to override 
any collusion of newbie "consensus" which has been shown to be disruptive 
element as WP has grown larger.

So an edit by a councilor* is supposed to get peoples attention, 
as it corrects something which needs correcting. When compared 
to the Arbcom, whos domain is largely ex-post fact punitivity, 
this body should deal with the material application of NPOV, 
and defer civility issues to the Arbcom.

-SV

* as opposed to a "counselor"


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