[Wikipedia-l] How would you deal with this problem?

[Stephen Gilbert]

--- Larry Sanger <lsanger at nupedia.com> wrote:

<snip to the end...>
 
> Is there *anything* we can do, consistent with our
> policies of openness,
> to make the project more attractive to the
> best-qualified people, in the
> face of the above problem?
> 
> --Larry

I agree with KQ's suggestion. I think it's a matter of
trying to work together. As an expert, your natural
inclination is to replace an article that you don't
think very much of with your own writing. Fred's
natural reaction to this is to feel dismissed. The
problem escalates from there.

This isn't the same situation as, say, "working" on an
article with Helga Jonat. Fred (Hi Fred! Are you tuned
in to this thread?) is a good contributor to the
project, and isn't out to push a specific agenda all
through Wikipedia. On the other side of the coin,
you're obviously not intending to dismiss Fred as
unimportant, nor are you trying to insult his
intelligence.

Remember that you both have the same goal: to produce
a good article on "reality". It seems that there's a
clash of approaches here. "Reality" is an enormous
topic, and a truly good article is not going to take
shape in only a few weeks.

We're starting to see the growth of Wikipedia
straining the sense of community. Take a look at the
Wiki Life Cycle
(http://www.usemod.com/cgi-bin/mb.pl?WikiLifeCycle).
It's a remarkably accurate guide to the rise and fall
of wiki communities. We are entering stage 17:
"Decline Of Civility -- there are more strangers than
friends, and assum[ing] good faith fails as reputation
is fleeting." As more and more Wikipedians contribute,
we have to be careful; it's getting easier to get into
heated arguments, and these fights will de-stabilize a
project that bases itself on openness.

Stephen G.

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Y! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your web site
http://webhosting.yahoo.com/