https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=30208
--- Comment #58 from Snottywong <[email protected]> 2011-09-14 17:03:55 UTC --- (In reply to comment #46) > The trial as proposed treats a symptom of the problem (too many bad articles > created), not the actual problem (creating articles is wonky and encourages > bad > article creation). Erik's proposal and Brandons designs actually are aimed at > the CAUSE of the problem. I'm just sayin... if I were you, I would claim that > as a win. I wish that some of the WMF developers and staff would take a day off from your normal duties, and do the following to get a perspective on what's going on here: Go to Special:NewPages, and find the list of articles that were created about 10-15 days ago. Pick a day, and patrol the entire list of articles that were created in that 24-hour period (which will be missing the very worst articles which would have been weeded out by the people who patrol the front of the queue). Then, patrol the front of the queue for a few hours to get a raw look at the stream of the worst articles that are constantly getting speedy deleted. At the end of that process, you should have a much better perspective on the state of new article creation at en-wiki. If you want to go even deeper, start taking a look at articles that have been recently patrolled to get a sense for the types of articles that the average new page patroller is letting through the gate. At the end of that process, you'll realize that any efforts to make it easier and more user-friendly to create new articles will not increase the quality of new articles, it will only make it easier for people to create more shitty articles. Making the editing interface more user-friendly is not a bad thing, but it is not a solution to the problem of the vast torrent of shitty new articles that are currently getting through the gates. What is needed is the following: 1. New WP users need to be filtered into two categories: users who genuinely want to and are capable of contributing encyclopedic content, and users who want to contribute spam, copyvios, and non-notable content and then leave. 2. The latter group should not be allowed to easily create new articles without jumping through some hoops to deter them. The former group should be educated on what Wikipedia is about, how it works, and what is expected in a new article. The proposed trial provides the deterrent to the non-serious editors, AND provides a small hurdle for serious editors to get over, which if designed correctly, that time could be used to properly educate them and get them the experience they need to successfully create a great new article, thereby sparing them the stress of having their new article deleted. I just want to make sure my previous comments were not misunderstood: Improving the editing interface is a good thing; it will allow non-techie people to contribute. This is a good thing, but it does nothing to solve the problem of editors who are already savvy enough to figure out how to create a new article, but couldn't care less about WP policies, notability, copyright issues, spam policies, etc., and aren't serious about contributing encyclopedic content. And there is a steady stream of these types of people. The proposed trial is an attempt to solve one problem, and your response is to deflect us to a completely separate problem. This is the source of our frustration. -- 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
