Content deleted Content added
speculation |
Undo. After publicatation, only minor copy-edits should be made. |
||
Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
===Foundation overrule community consensus on autoconfirmation trial=== |
===Foundation overrule community consensus on autoconfirmation trial=== |
||
[[File:Erik Moeller May 2008.JPG|thumb|Wikimedia Foundation Deputy Director Erik Möller, who intervened to halt the implementation of the [[Wikipedia:Autoconfirmed article creation trial|Autoconfirmed article creation trial]], which was seen as striking an unwelcome exclusionary stance.]] |
[[File:Erik Moeller May 2008.JPG|thumb|Wikimedia Foundation Deputy Director Erik Möller, who intervened to halt the implementation of the [[Wikipedia:Autoconfirmed article creation trial|Autoconfirmed article creation trial]], which was seen as striking an unwelcome exclusionary stance.]] |
||
In a heated altercation between English Wikipedia community members and MediaWiki sysadmins in the course of a [https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=30208 bugzilla] thread, a proposed [[Wikipedia:Autoconfirmed article creation trial|trial for barring non-autoconfirmed editors from creating articles]], which [[Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)/Proposal to require autoconfirmed status in order to create articles|had garnered significant local consensus]] in a widely publicised Request for Comment, was thwarted by Wikimedia Foundation staffers and developers. The trial had been motivated by the perceived ineffectiveness of prevailing article creation mechanics, whereby a large portion of articles created by new editors were swiftly deleted and their authors reprimanded. By barring new editors from creating articles and funnelling them through the [[WP:AFC|Articles for Creation]] and [[WP:WIZARD|Article Creation Wizard]] processes, it was hoped to ease pressure on [[WP:NPP|new page patrollers]], alienate fewer new contributors and ensure a higher quality of new articles. After reticence to implement the trial from sysadmin and an intemperate reaction, Wikimedia Foundation Deputy Director Erik Möller after acknowledging the stated intentions of the intiative, put the boot down firmly on the petitioners' hopes: |
|||
{{bquote| |
{{bquote|However, we believe that creating a restriction of this type is a strong a statement of exclusion, not inclusion, and that it will confuse and deter good faith editors. Instead of trying to address many different issues by means of a simple but potentially highly problematic permission change, we believe that in order to create a friendly, welcoming and understandable experience for new editors, we need to apply an iterative, multi-prong approach, including but not limited to: |
||
* simplifying the actual workflow of new article creation and reducing |
* simplifying the actual workflow of new article creation and reducing |
||
instruction creep |
instruction creep |
||
Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
for new article development |
for new article development |
||
* connecting new users with experienced mentors faster.}} |
* connecting new users with experienced mentors faster.}} |
||
Möller and the developers attempted to redirect efforts to the [[mw:ArticleCreationWorkflow|ArticleCreationWorkflow]] project at MediaWiki in the face of strong resistance from English Wikipedia community members, with the initiator of the bug report [[User:Snottywong|Snottywong]] commenting "ArticleCreationWorkflow doesn't discuss any real solutions to the problem, so I will not be contributing there". Charges of unilateralism, incivility and a patronising tone were levelled at Foundation staff as it became evident the report would not result in implementation. Volunteer developer and long-standing English Wikipedian [[User:Happy-melon|Happy-melon]] attempted to bridge the growing divide with an entreaty for perspective: |
Möller and the developers attempted to redirect efforts to the [[mw:ArticleCreationWorkflow|ArticleCreationWorkflow]] project at MediaWiki in the face of strong resistance from the English Wikipedia community members, with the initiator of the bug report [[User:Snottywong|Snottywong]] commenting "ArticleCreationWorkflow doesn't discuss any real solutions to the problem, so I will not be contributing there". Charges of unilateralism, incivility and a patronising tone were levelled at Foundation staff as it became evident the report would not result in implementation. Volunteer developer and long-standing English Wikipedian [[User:Happy-melon|Happy-melon]] attempted to bridge the growing divide with an entreaty for perspective: |
||
{{bquote|On the other hand, there *is* a separation of *cultures* here, and it's something that an awful lot of members of the wiki communities do not appreciate. The developers and (separately) the sysadmins/WMF form their own separate communities with their own goals and practices; and those goals and practices, while closely matching those of enwiki or whereverwiki, do not |
{{bquote|On the other hand, there *is* a separation of *cultures* here, and it's something that an awful lot of members of the wiki communities do not appreciate. The developers and (separately) the sysadmins/WMF form their own separate communities with their own goals and practices; and those goals and practices, while closely matching those of enwiki or whereverwiki, do not |
||
necessarily precisely align. There is nothing unrealistic, or wrong, with enwiki having goals which are very slightly different from those of the WMF as a whole, or for their requests to not be ones that the Foundation feels bests fits with their own strategies.}} |
necessarily precisely align. There is nothing unrealistic, or wrong, with enwiki having goals which are very slightly different from those of the WMF as a whole, or for their requests to not be ones that the Foundation feels bests fits with their own strategies.}} |
||
In response to the incident, English Wikipedian and developer [[User:MZMcBride|MZMcBride]] assembled at Meta a list of instances of Wikimedia systems administrators [[meta:Ignoring community consensus|rejection of configuration changes]]. |
In response to the incident, English Wikipedian and developer [[User:MZMcBride|MZMcBride]] assembled at Meta a list of instances of Wikimedia systems administrators [[meta:Ignoring community consensus|rejection of configuration changes]]. The firm insistence of the Wikimedia Foundation to pursue its own vision of sustaining and developing the Wikimedia projects in defiance if necessary of the wishes of the core community of its flagship project – and the chief source of its funding – is an indicator of how far the organsation has grown in its brief history, and is sure to raise the hackles of those who conceived of it playing a primarily supporting role to the local communities. |
||
===Academic journals consider partnering with Wikipedia=== |
===Academic journals consider partnering with Wikipedia=== |