https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=30208
--- Comment #31 from Brandon Harris <[email protected]> 2011-08-09 07:05:30 UTC --- (In reply to comment #30) > Please provide a link showing actual hard data (i.e. non-theoretical proof > and/or experimental evidence) which specifically shows that restricting > non-autoconfirmed editors from creating new articles will create a significant > decline in new editor retention, and/or damage (and possibly kill?!) the > entire > project. I sincerely doubt you can, since to my knowledge it's never been > attempted before. Thus, why we would like to attempt it, so that we can base > our beliefs on evidence rather than gut feelings. Look at that: on the Signpost, just like I said: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2011-08-08/News_and_notes It does not take a genius IQ to extrapolate saying "no, you can't edit the encyclopedia" to new users will cause them to get disappointed and go away based on all of this. It's very, very fragile, this thing. I disagree that you can't base decisions on "gut feelings" in this case. I'm fairly certain that if I get stabbed it will hurt; I don't need someone to actually stab me to have actual data points to draw the conclusion. > > And what a lot of new page patrollers seem to miss is this: If the workload > > is > > so high, why are you so intent on eliminating the funnel of potential new > > patrollers? > > Are you familiar with the actual hard statistical data which shows that nearly > three-quarters of all articles created by non-autoconfirmed editors are > deleted, most of which are deleted immediately? See comment 8 above. Yes, I am familiar with that statistic (which is poorly understood, to my knowledge), and I don't think it supports what you think it does. I think it mostly supports that a lot of people are trigger-happy deletionists eager to ramp up their edit counts so that they can "make admin faster" more than it means that everyone in the world has Bad Faith. > > It's a weird form of self-harm going on here. > > Are you suggesting that you think hundreds of editors have secretly banded > together with the intent to harm Wikipedia by restricting non-autoconfirmed > editors from creating new articles? No, I'm suggesting that this change is myopic in scope and: a) Violates a resolution by the Board of Trustees, and b) Violates the spirit of the Five Pillars -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug. You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Wikibugs-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l
