First of all, I am not talking just about BLP. This is part of the problem. I am also concerned about new editors who were treated badly (that happens more often than you think), about unreasonable decisions of admins etc. Secondly, such ombudsman should keep a certain distance from Wikipedia's "corridors", namely, s/he must not be an administrator nor bureaucrat, and while s/he should be well acquainted with Wikipedia, perhaps it would be better if s/he won't edit. Furthermore, it is crucial that this person be identified by her/his real name and be reachable in various ways, not only through an e-mail address. It is also important that this person give a public account on the problems s/he handled and measures s/he took to solve them. The very existence of such a report is the guarantee that all complaints be addressed properly, and in addition it would increase transparency and let us have a clear picture of the Wikipedian scene.
Dror K בתאריך 14/03/11 15:18, ציטוט David Gerard: > On 14 March 2011 12:53, Dror Kamir<dqa...@bezeqint.net> wrote: > >> As a first step, I think it would be useful to appoint an ombudsman to >> Wikipedia, either one to all of them or to each one. We can start with >> the English Wikipedia. This ombudsman will be identified by her/his real >> name and receive complaints from editors and from people who are >> subjects of articles. While this person can use help from other >> Wikipedians, it is important that there would be one person who would >> lead this work and be known, reachable and responsible to answer every >> complaint. The idea that anonymous admins, who act mainly upon their own >> personal judgment, can handle every problem, should be cast aside. It is >> also important that such ombudsman publish a public report about the >> complaints received in a certain period of time and how they were >> handled. It is also important that s/he would have the authority to >> intervene in the decisions of admins in certain cases, e.g. BLP. > > Something like this is how it works now - if stuff gets to the BLP > queue in OTRS, the experienced editors who deal with such things do > descend on said articles, editorial axe in hand. This mechanism has > the general support of the community, the admins and the arbcom. > > The main problem I've found is that aggrieved BLP subjects don't > understand that they can actually email i...@wikimedia.org and have > someone seriously look at the problem. > > > - d. > > _______________________________________________ > foundation-l mailing list > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
