[WikiEN-l] Proposal for Harmony (was: Policy on Reversions?)

Wed Nov 19 16:45:12 UTC 2003

> From: "Poor, Edmund W" <Edmund.W.Poor at abc.com>
> Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 09:50:27 -0500
> To: "English Wikipedia" <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Subject: [WikiEN-l] Proposal for Harmony (was: Policy on Reversions?)
> 
> Erik made an eloquent and keen observation:
> 
> :-)  Until there is a firm policy that is strictly enforced (e.g.
> :-)  you can revert only once, if that doesn't work, you will have
> :-)  to take it to the talk page), edit wars will be a reality on
> :-)  Wikipedia, and the side that is willing to invest the most
> :-)  time in their "POV" will get it through by sheer force.
> 
> This is precisely the problem which vexes me. This is what
> makes me want to leave Wikipedia permanently, as I have been
> 'threatening' to do all this week. This is what has driven
> away countless superb contributors. Some have complained about
> this problem loudly and repeatedly before making a public
> departure, but many have just quietly vanished like Lewis
> Carroll's snark.
> 
> Thus I would like to propose the formation of a sort of club
> or SIG within Wikipedia - sort of on the lines of the old semi-
> humorous Wikipedia 'militia' - a group of contributors who will
> join to intervene in edit wars and work together to create a
> stable and neutral article, one which all parties to the edit
> war would agree is correct and good and satisfying.

How would club members find out about edit wars? (Actually there might be a
software solution for this question). How would the club decide which "wars"
to intervene in? How would the club communicate with one another?
> 
> These club members would show by example how to contribute in
> a harmonious, useful fashion. These members would bind THEMSELVES
> to the rule of "you can only revert once". They would propose
> options on the talk page BEFORE making edits to the article.
> They might even wait an hour or a day for assent from others
> before making a change.
> 
> These club members would politely remind others not to make
> abusive remarks on talk pages. They would refactor talk when
> it got too long or tangled.
> 
> I don't have to be the club president, we might not even need
> a president or a formal roster.
> 
> What does everyone think about this plan?
> 
> Ed Poor

Sounds like a spiderweb, well designed for catching flies (folks who with a
little nudging come around), but ineffective on hawks (folks who are here to
advance a POV). It also sounds very elitist and time-consuming. I'm still
interested in how to catch hawks.

Fred