[WikiEN-l] Oversized criticism sections and WP:UNDUE (was: Notability and ski resorts)

[Charles Matthews]

Surreptitiousness wrote:
> George Herbert wrote:
>   
>> On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 1:16 PM, Surreptitiousness
>> <surreptitious.wikipedian at googlemail.com> wrote:
>>   
>>     
>>> Hmmm.  To do that I suppose you would have to create some rules on who
>>> can run.  Maybe bar admins from running for starters, that might reduce
>>> the risk of arbcom siding with admins. I don't think the community would
>>> allow Jimmy to appoint as he sees fit anymore, but if the board mandated
>>> a couple of seats had to be reserved fro picks, that might shake things
>>> up.  That would involve the board getting down in the mud though, which
>>> they try not to do.
>>>     
>>>       
>> You can't just throw out a possible new arbcom membership requirement
>> without considering the effects.
>>   
>>     
> You can't? Is this why nothing ever changes?  People are too scared too 
> propose anything radical? 
We're not short of proposals, usually. Progress could be made with 
further functions being split off, in the way that ban appeals are now a 
subcommittee function. There is no particular reason why socking or 
civility cases shouldn't be handled in this fashion, where the evidence 
is clear-cut enough (the usual case). The kind of radical change people 
don't want to see is from something monolithic that works (despite 
grumbling) to something else equally monolithic that is a complete step 
in the dark and unknown quantity. And don't forget that proposals have 
been howled down, in living memory - at least if you take a pile-on of a 
dozen people to be an expression of public opinion.

Charles