[Wikipedia-l] Re: Wikipedia moderators and moral authority (was Re: Repost: clear guidelines and the power to enforce)

Mon Nov 11 22:25:20 UTC 2002

On Monday 11 November 2002 09:15 am, wikipedia-l-request at wikipedia.org wrote:
> Here is a partial list of the customs or guidelines I see as already in
> place: * don't delete an entire article or insert random nonsense (no
> vandalism) * don't alter other user's comments (no forgery)
> * don't write partisan articles on controversial subjects (NPOV)
> * don't post copyrighted material, except fair use
>
> Here are the 3 enforcement mechanisms:
> * anyone can undo a change, thus reverting the vandalism, forgery or POV
> violation (soft security) * a sysop or above can ban an IP address
> * developers can ban a signed-in user (not "authorized" but "can")
> * Jimbo can ban a signed-in user
>
> Is this is fine, then let's keep it. If it could possibly be improved,
> let's improve it.
>
> Ed Poor

This seems similar to what I proposed in this post
http://www.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/2002-November/007226.html

In that post I also added that a statement be added to each edit window that 
reads;

"By saving this page you indicate that you agree to the terms and conditions 
of using this website"    

"rules and conditions" would be a link to the policy page (read more in my 
previous post - near the bottom).

Yes it is a EULA but dammit is no longer possible to review each days edit and 
get to know each new user. Believe me I have tried more than anybody else 
except Ed to orient new users. At one time not too long ago at all I greeted 
each one that had made more than 2 unoverwritten edits and I edited each of 
their first entries for style, NPOV etc and then gave them feedback. But I 
don't have time to do this when there are 40 new users every that meet those 
selection criteria every several days. I guess I will change the filter to 5 
unoverwritten edits. 

The point is that we are quickly loosing the ability to effectively do things 
like we always have done them. Now instead of "tapping somebody on the 
shoulder" as was the previous custom we must have the software point people 
to where our policies are and state that those policies are enforceable.  

-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav) 