[WikiEN-l] The downside of creating perfect articles

[Steve Bennett]

On 1/29/07, Andrew Gray <shimgray at gmail.com> wrote:
> That's exactly what we have wikiprojects for! Perfect textbook example
> of a good role for them - organising coverage on a specific subject,
> getting the infrastructure (names, redirects) in place that they can
> then come back and work on content

Ah, yes, this is true to an extent. WikiProjects are definitely better
than nothing. Their two weaknesses are their self-inflicted lack of
teeth (that obsequiously inoffensive nonsense "We're just a bunch of
people who came up with some ideas that we would love you to just
ignore, thanks!") and the lack of a meta-WikiProject.

That is, WikiProjects are self-declared managers of a particular
domain. But who manages the WikiProjects? Who decides "Our coverage of
Iranian dung beetles is inadequate, let's fix that?" Also, where is it
written that all WikiProjects should obey a couple of defined
conventions? And what happens to articles that aren't covered by any
WikiProject at all?

I have a feeling that the Wikipedia 1.0 project is supposed to answer
some of these questions but I haven't heard from them much lately.
Probably because they're actually getting on and doing good work
rather than being noisy and annoying like AfD. :)

Is this true? Is W1.0 doing what I described?

Steve