[Wikipedia-l] Re: Stable versions policy

Fri Dec 30 02:50:31 UTC 2005

Bryan Derksen wrote:
<snip>
> 
> I really think the best solution is just better education for passers-by
> of how Wikipedia works - more obvious disclaimers, "this is a work in
> progress" banners, etc. Ideally, stuff that would entice them to
> contribute themselves when they see problems.
> 

I agree. Looking at the traffic on helpdesk-l (and ignoring the
spam/misguided "can I enrol in your university"/"where can I buy XYZ"
stuff), the types of enquiries have been shifting from "your site has
been hacked!" to "this article has been vandalised but I don't know what
to do" (and sadly, "If you don't take down my copyrighted material I
WILL SUE YOU IN A COURT OF LAW IN TRENTON, NEW JERSEY").

A number of solutions come to mind:

1. Change the bit of [[Mediawiki:]] text to say "the free encyclopedia
that anyone can edit" (as someone did a few weeks ago)

2. Have stable versions displaying by default

3. I'm out of ideas.

The "stable versions" point brings me to something else: people have
been complaining "The article has been vandalised but it looks OK on the
edit page". Is anon caching making us look worse than we really are?

-- 
Alphax - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax
Contributor to Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
"We make the internet not suck" - Jimbo Wales
Public key: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax/OpenPGP
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 556 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/attachments/20051230/17247d4b/attachment.pgp 