[WikiEN-l] Wikiquette "committee"

Fri Oct 3 05:25:43 UTC 2003

From: "Vancouverguy" <blairr at telus.net>

> If it is blatent JoeM-style POV that is the problem, there is really no
need
> for arbitration. However in cases like the "Japanese Pornograpy" article,
> then arbitration is nessesary since not everyone may think that the
article
> is actually POV.

I am not sure that an article/NPOV  dispute  is actually the subject of
banning.
Though I guess that one could use an arbitrator to decide what NPOV is,
but is that really very contentious? Can't most people who are here for
a while understand that? Am I giving our users too much credit?

I thought what we were talking about is the problem with behaviour of
users that is a violation of Wikiquette,
http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikiquette
and this is the basis for some kind of sanction or penalty (i.e access to
the holy grail of wikis).

> If we do decide to do this, there should be a "fast track" process that
> would be more efficient to go by when we are dealing with people like JoeM

That is what I was suggesting when I mentioned a temporary restraining
ban for really outgrageous activity. There would have to be strict
guidelines
for that and an appeal to Jimbo so that there is some due process. Perhaps
it got lost in my verbosity!

Alex756