[WikiEN-l] Experiment on new pages

Tue Dec 6 08:40:41 UTC 2005

> If we diagnose what went wrong in the Seigenthaler case, this seems like
> a very opportune place to try a small change of policy.
>
> 1. First, the Seigenthaler article was created by an anon.

What does that have to do with anything? Please assume good faith. The
person who wrote the text might have gotten Seigenthaler mixed up with
another person who might actually have been suspected of being a
Soviet spy etc. A registered user could aswell have made the same
mistake. I certainly had no idea who this Seigenthaler dude was and
wouldn't have been able to spot the errors in the article. Now I know
- he's a litigous asshole looking for revenge. What was written about
him on Wikipedia is peanuts compared to how the printed press
regularily treats famous persons. He should consider himself lucky if
involvement in the Kennedy assassination is the worst be has been
accused for.

Don't get me wrong, I like experiments. Experiments are good because
you learn something even if you fail. But the arguments for initiating
this experiment is totally bullshit. That there is (and will be) false
statements in Wikipedia is a direct consequence of it being open. If
you want to remove the possibility of cry-babies like Johnny boy
coming and whining, the only thing to do is to close down the site for
editing for good.

If you want to deal with the spam and random vandalism, there are
adequate and unobtrusive technical measures you can use. For example,
let a bayesian filter tag each edit. But no. Instead all this
panicking and draconian measures that undoubtedly *WILL* make honest
contributors life harder.

--
mvh Björn