A week ago, he asked for the creation of the english
version of
wikiversity, which I opposed, as wikiversity is not a recognised
wikimedia foundation project and still under discussion (in spite
of the existence of german wikiversity). Aya other option was to
move all wikiversity content to meta. I only said
1) content should be protected (ie, deleting it would be vandalism)
2) the community should be asked its opinion before changing
deletion rules
3) wikiversity is still under discussion.
There is NO way this will (should) change overnight, and any new
project (if started) will be done slowly and carefully. Threats of
deleting content are not correct.
Seems like a unilateral decision by [[User:Aya]] when I checked at
[[Wikiversity]]. It doesn't have my backing at the very least, and
it appears to have not been the backing of the majority.
Nevertheless, Wikiversity has been target to many a vandal attack
lately...
That goes for ANY changes to do on Wikibooks. They
should be done
slowly, only after reaching community consensus, and certainly not
imposed. There is no hierarchy and no one has more rights than others.
I'll add that many editors are currently very busy at Wikimania and
not able to answer requests for speedy decisions.
I have to admit that I was shocked to hear Wikiversity was protected,
since it made no sense to me. Still, WV still suffers from scoping
issues that are still not fully resolved at this time. One thing
that I still do not understand is why Wikiversity is effectively a
book in Wikibooks while the remainder of Wikibooks is effectively a
section of Wikiversity...
As for sweeping changes, Aya is admittedly more radical than most (he
had proposed to delete [[WB:VFD]] at one point), although this is
pretty standard in a community where "community consensus" usually
means "after a few months, the only person saying anything on the
subject is yourself". Thus much of Wikibooks' own policy is
typically done by "consensus of one" (merging [[Wikibooks:What
Wikibooks is not]] into [[Wikibooks:Deletion policy]]), or in which
policies are made but are virtually nonenforceable
([[Wikibooks:Naming conventions]]) without the use of a potentially
dangerous bot.
The community in Wikibooks also seems to be very polarized - there
seems to be a separate community that deals with BOTM/COTM and
another group actively discussing policy issues - lately a few in the
BOTM/COTM regulars have accused me of unilaterally changing policy
even though they have been thoroughly discussed (even predating BOTM
and COTM) but were virtually unenforceable.
Still, at least something had to be done - the decision to make Aya a
bureaucrat was a needed one (even if I disagree with someone
requesting bureaucratship - I still believe it should be a nominated
post), if only to bring more admins to the project to deal with huge
admin backlogs. The decision to overhaul policy was needed over huge
issues in Wikibooks stemming from forking of Wikipedia content and
whether biographies were instructional material.