Creating essentially invisible articles in userspace already has at least
one example, and seemingly within [[category:hated people]]. I guess that
they could go straight into mainspace, suffer there, get moved into
someone's user space for protection that is like vandal proof, then once
admins take sides on which edits were bad without taking sides on which
editors are bad -- once admins know what BLP means in terms of examples
explained, then it could be moved into mainspace again, where it can still
be deleted, and where ten or twenty people who actually interacted with the
subject had their say.
sinewave, huh? Neatness counts. They've gotta end with .5 bias and half the
amplitude, or they'll click.
"Jonathan Hall" <sinewave(a)silentflame.com> wrote in message
news:5f9b6e200907220700u2b94b5b3o35d7d5246ea24882@mail.gmail.com...
OK - so I think a fair summary of this proposal
(correct me if I'm wrong)
is:
We should create a group of experienced BLP editors (or similar) to
edit a BLP that has been the subject of an edit war. The page would be
protected from editing by other (non-sysop) users. This would form an
alternative to or replacement for page protection, and would hopefully
lead to more editing than page protection.
We should also allow users to create draft articles in their userspace
that are (by default) protected from editing by other non-sysops.
I share FT2's concerns about the need to avoid
creating a BLP cabal
with the first point, and I also have concerns about the second point
- it could lead to POV forks and encourage people to hide an imperfect
article in their userspace rather than it being more visible and
publically editable, which will lead to faster improvement. It could
also lead to greater feelings of article ownership - if you grew an
article to (say) A-class in your userspace before moving it to article
space you'll probably have greater feelings of ownership than if it
was in publically editablearticlespace from the start.
On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 04:05, Jay
Litwyn<brewhaha(a)freenet.edmonton.ab.ca> wrote:
Subject-Was: Re: A new solution for the BLP dilemma
"Nothing new is under the sun", are among the most humbling of a
preacher's words. If you hav ever right-clicked on a file that you
uploaded to your website (and you probably hav one that you are not
using), then clicked on "properties", you would be greeted with this menu
of flags, all within your control:
R W P
e r e
a i r
d t m
e i
t
Owner: X X O
Group: O O O
Everyone: X O O
Those would be appropriate settings for your user page, which is the only
one that the system would let you own. Admins would be owners of all pages
in main: and user: on wikipedia. That way, if you you refused to comply
with one rule or another concerning how user space is used, then an admin
would permit everyone to also be able to write to your space, so that a
volunteer could show you his ignorance of those rules :-) I can almost see
the author of "vandalproof" hanging his head and asking why he did not
think of that.
group permission is a special feature of protected file systems. Windows
does not hav group permission in XP, TMK, and it does let you protect
shared objects from being written to. My web server is NetBSD, so it does
hav groups. Users can be added to groups, so that people who hav made
applications for being included in a group -- applications to a sysop
would let you write files in a particular project, because you were a
member of the required group.
In a series of occurances, here is how a biography might become authorized
and get a special stamp of approval from the subject of the biography.
Someone write's a biography about someone else on their user page.
They let it out among their collaborators.
Two of those collaborators want to fix it, so the starter permits everyone
to write to it.
An edit war breaks out, so the sysop (sysops always hav power to permit,
as well as power to destroy, which is not displayed) retracts all
permission, except permission to a group, then assigns three veterans to
that group and solicits their attention to an article in progress.
No blocks are issued.
No significant flaws are in the wording or the evidence.
The page is permitted for reading by all and writing by none.
Occasionally, on the talk page, someone raises {{editprotected}}.
The questions typically get an answer that could hav been found by reading
three months of history.
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
--
1001010 1001000110000111011001101100
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l