[WikiEN-l] To: Jimmy Wales - Admin-driven death of Wikipedia

[charles matthews]

 "Resid Gulerdem" wrote

> Some people feel
> marginalized and faced to bias actions from some
> admins. Isn't this important enough to address? The
> answer to the question is strongly related to the
> strategic call of being inclusive or exclusive.

There has never been a shortage of criticism of certain admin actions.  A 
high proportion of this has always been mud-slinging by those rightly the 
target of admin sanctions.

The issue of 'bias' is better phrased another way.  Do admins apply admin 
powers in attempts to control article content, in a way that is negative 
from the point of view of compliance with fundamental policies on content? 
It turns out that it is much harder to make a good case of this kind, than 
to make general accusations on 'bias'.  (I was accused myself like this last 
week.)  Admin action is there to defend the project, and you have to look at 
the effects in particular with respect to NPOV.

It is of course not ruled out that admins make mistakes (it happens often). 
Usually, though, our admins understand the policies much better than their 
accusers, and are not the ones trying to game the system, or apply 
'wikilawyer' tactics against the spirit of policy.

Charles