[WikiEN-l] An expert's perspective - Tim Bray on editing the XML article

[wjhonson at aol.com]

"Please don't contentiously edit the article" applies to all editors, 
not just experts.  So I can't see the need for this distinction you 
think should exist. I'm still not seeing what you want here clearly.

I certainly hope you wouldn't be able to get community consensus to 
treat experts as having a WP:COI  If a conflict-of-interest means 
"you're smart we don't want smart people" than we're really sunk.


-----Original Message-----
From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <abd at lomaxdesign.com>
To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
Sent: Thu, Aug 13, 2009 4:29 pm
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] An expert's perspective - Tim Bray on editing 
the XML article



At 08:41 PM 8/12/2009, you wrote:
>*That* someone is an expert in field xyz is not a WP:COI, although some
>may see it as a conflict-of-interest (in lower case).  For something to
>be a conflict of interest in-project doesn't just require that a person
>has a strong opinion on it, or a history of deep knowledge of the 
topic.

That's right. I proposed that we *treat* self-proclaimed experts as
having a COI, i.e., the same basic rules. A badge of honor, not a
shame. No more arguments about whether a situation is a real COI or
not. You claim to be an expert, please don't contentiously edit the 
article.

You claim to be an expert, fine. We will listen to your advice, we
will check the sources you provide us, we will assist you in every way.

If you don't claim to be an expert, but you have a true COI, and
don't disclose it, well, that's Not Nice.

People with a true COI usually have *some* level of expertise, they
will be familiar with the topic, the sources, the news, or the like.
So we recruit them as advisors.


>Rather it requires that they are something close and personal to *gain*
>  from editing it in some particular fashion.  And that that gain can't
>simply be academic acclaim or high-fiving from their peers.  Rather
>that would be considered the normal rational response to a great
>article.
>
>Trying to position WP:COI as a way to attack experts merely for
>participating in the writing of articles about their field would be
>suicidal to the project.

It's a way to *protect* experts, not attack them. Treating "as COI"
isn't an attack at all. Right now, "COI" is often used as a attack.

It's a reframe, but I certainly don't have time to write more about
it. Do I hear sighs of relief?


_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l