It isn't magic. People have studied how and why it was successful and other projects were not.
Wikipedia 2019 isn't the same as Wikipedia 2001. We've made lots of changes that we thought at the time were radical along the way. On Fri, Jul 5, 2019 at 6:01 AM Todd Allen <[email protected]> wrote: > That "arcane lore" has resulted in the largest educational work ever > produced by humanity, and free for everyone both as in speech and as in > beer. > > So I think we need to consider carefully before radically changing it. It > has worked, and worked unimaginably well, for most of two decades. That's > not to say it can't still be improved, but the proof is in the results. If > the English Wikipedia were badly broken, it wouldn't be a fixture of modern > life. > > Todd > > On Thu, Jul 4, 2019, 11:54 PM Gerard Meijssen <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Hoi, > > Sorry but there is no reflection and all I read is an apologist telling > us > > that English Wikipedia is the best there is. It is not, not by far. What > is > > thought of as the English Wikipedia community are the old hands steeped > in > > the arcane lore that are the policies that defend the status quo and keep > > others out. Just consider, I read a thread where it was put that a Jess > > Wade would not make administrator because (all kinds of repressive > > arguments that make my skin crawl). Just consider, I have formulated as a > > problem that 6% of list items in English Wikipedia refer to false friends > > and or do not link to the right article. I have formulated a solution > that > > involves Wikidata and find that it is not even considered. Just consider, > > in an arbcom case where I have a beef I included my point of view. It was > > not accepted because it did not comply with a set format and was > threatened > > that I could be banned because (I did not get the legalese). > > > > English Wikipedia is toxic and we can lose a substantial number of people > > when the result is that we open up and allow for new, other arguments. It > > is toxic because it considers itself complete as it is and consequently > > does a substandard job in "sharing the sum of all knowledge". > > > > Keeping things as they were is not an option. > > Thanks, > > GerardM > > > > On Fri, 5 Jul 2019 at 01:27, Nathan <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Also, I believe that the > > > > near-miracle of English Wikipedia should be tended with great care, > and > > > > that the scars from this incident will be with us for a long time. > > > > > > > > Pine > > > > ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine ) > > > > <https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l> > > > > > > > > > > > > I think there's a kernel here of something really important. An > argument > > > can be made (and has been, I'm sure) that the English Wikipedia is a > > modern > > > Wonder of the World. It's a towering achievement of technology and > > > humanity. It's humanity means that, like all of our towering > > achievements, > > > it can't escape our flaws. The world is full of toxic people. Released > > from > > > the risk of being iced out of society or punched in the face, they let > > that > > > toxicity reign on the Internet and all of its spaces - including > > Wikipedia. > > > The idea that the WMF or the Wikipedia community is going to solve this > > > problem is earnest and well-meaning but foolish. > > > > > > Yet Wikipedia was brought into being despite the toxicity, and has > > survived > > > and thrived all this time alongside the struggles of human interaction. > > So > > > maybe what we really need is for the WMF to be hands off and let the > > forces > > > that created this "miracle" keep doing their work, and for the > community > > of > > > the English Wikipedia to keep struggling but with the practical > > realization > > > that success means just keeping temps below a rolling boil. > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > > > New messages to: [email protected] > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > > <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe> > > _______________________________________________ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > > New messages to: [email protected] > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe> > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l > New messages to: [email protected] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe> _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe>
