[WikiEN-l] Admins shouldn't shoot back

[Ray Saintonge]

Brian Salter-Duke wrote:

>On Sun, Jun 24, 2007 at 08:52:42AM -0400, The Mangoe wrote:
>  
>
>>There is another problem with using the projects as core organizing
>>points.A lot of them are organized around interest in a particular
>>controversial subject, and therefore present POV issues. I imagine
>>that most Christianity project members are Christians, and that  most
>>Anglican project members are Anglicans, and so forth. And then we get
>>to the LDS project and the LGBT project and we would end up with, um,
>>problems. (Not to mention REALLY sending Merkey of on a tear.)
>>    
>>
>I think this is overly pessamistic and does not agree with my experience.
>People who form a Project that invariably will attract people who "belong" 
>in the sense you suggest, step over backwards to ensure that their local
>guidelines fit the core policies. They are often more critical of
>articles on non-notable topics than other editors might be.  I think we
>should all accept good faith here. I much bigger problem is the way some
>editors who do not understand the topic really muck up the article. They
>can join a Project but the Project will sort them out.
>
Wikiprojects can still be susceptible to a scaled back version of a lot 
of the issues that we face elsewhere.  Deletion issues need to be guided 
by the projects to minimize the effect of those who delete things 
because thay never heard of it.  I agree that they can be more critical 
of non-notable topics, but they have more to base their criticism on.  
Two separate Wikiprojects can indeed come to different conclusions about 
rules issues, and as long as neither is trying to impose its view on the 
other I have no problem with that.  Where the projects actually 
interface it must be a matter of negotiation.

The issue of editors who don't have a clue about the topic can be a 
problem, but one which is distinct from having no clue about the 
project.  The risk here is for a project to so protect its way of doing 
things that it becomes authoritarian.  While we cannot accept every 
piece of idiocy that is added to an article, we still need to make room 
for new ideas, and, even more importantly, newcomers need to feel 
welcome and a part of the decision making process.

Ec