Naive ideas to improve en-wp

[Mojito]

Here's a list of what I'd do (in no particular order) if I were made emperor of en-wp for a day. I think the overall principles here are
1) Recognising that volunteer time is not an infinite resource that can be spent dealing with people who have a vested interest or POV to push
2) Making the place less unpleasant
3) Quality, not quantity, of articles

Anyway, here's my half-baked ideas:
*Incivility matters. WP:CIVIL is rarely enforced, unless it's a long-term pattern of really toxic behaviour or there's also other issues at play. Calling out bad behaviour often results in "both sides"-ism (eg the "perfect victim myth" / WP:BOOMERANG). Basically, the victim is expected to ignore the attacks with a Spock-like lack of emotion. It's even worse when the attacker has built up a following over the years, since "sure editor X is a bit abrasive, but they've been around a long time and do some good work" is often enough to shut down the complaint.

*Disable IP editing. Not worth all the clean-up work it causes. Many of the counter-arguments of "but what about the good stuff that IPs do?" is based on the flawed assumption that the person would not have made the edit if they had to register beforehand. One has to register an account to post on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, etc... it's not a big deal. "The encyclopedia that anyone can edit" is still true if one has to register beforehand.

*Ditch the Articles For Creation process. It's broken (evidence: the backlog) and fundamentally flawed (an author is within their rights to publish a rejected draft anyway). AfC is basically a dumping ground for a) COI editors not smart enough to get themselves Autoconfirmed instead and b) occasionally a good-faith article that gets stuck there long enough that the new editor gives up on Wikipedia (fixing this backlog would do far more for attracting quality new editors than allowing IP editing, IMHO). Just scrap the whole thing, increase the Autoconfirmed threshold (see below) and dump it all on NPP.

*Increase Autoconfirmed-user requirements Making the UPEs do more work and wait longer should reduce the flow of spam. As for legit new editors, having some more experience under their belt is useful before creating a new article. The encyclopedia is mature enough now that there's rarely a pressing need for Article X, and maybe waiving the Autoconfirmed requirements for anything on the Requested Articles list could cover that situation (or at least get the spammers doing some useful work while they get their latest account Autoconfirmed!)

*Shorter blocks with parole review. Instead of a 6 month block then you return to your bad habits until someone can be bothered filing another AN/I case, I propose a 1 month topic block, after which the editor must show that they have made useful contributions during the topic block and they now understand what behaviours they need to avoid moving forward.

*Ditch the subject notability guidelines. Letting the fanboys write their own rules results in many articles that don't belong in an encyclopedia. The old WP:NFOOTY is a prime example.

*Spend WMF donations to help do the dirty work. Reduce the burden on volunteers by employing people to help with a) the NPP backlog b) fact-check introductions of the most-viewed articles (the main thing that most readers see, due to Google search results) and c) dispute resolution. (However, this idea is even more half-baked than the others, I don't know how you'd avoid the issues of creating unblockable editors and increasing the influence of WMF overlords).

I hope you enjoyed this pointless internet rant!

[Midsize Jake]

Well, I'd hardly call it "naive" or "pointless." Maybe "Sisyphean," but it's important to make sure these ideas remain on the table, or else they'll think everything is "normalized now" and that they've gotten away with it completely. Also, it's important to use "scare quotes" as much as possible.

What always gets me is that if you really asked WP users to fully analyze these ideas and come up with arguments for or against, you'd probably find that most of them are in favor of stuff like this — and yet they'll still never do any of it, unless maybe there's some sort of crisis that forces them to.

[orangepi]

Trying to "fix" enwiki by focusing on "incivility" is the Andrew Yang approach to making Wikipedia Great Again.

In other words ... I suppose "naive" (and flawed) is an accurate description of your proposals.

[redbaron]

Other Wikipedias, such as the Spanish one, have a threshold of 50 edits instead of 10 for autoconfirmed; that could be a good start.

(And it would be even better for the Spanish Wikipedia to restrict article creation to non-autoconfirmed users like the English one does – currently, even IP users can create articles there)

[Funcrunch]

Here's a list of what I'd do (in no particular order) if I were made emperor of en-wp for a day.

Definitely agree with disabling IP editing (as I commented in another thread on that subject). Definitely disagree with WMF-paid editing of any sort (your "even more half-baked" idea). Neutral or undecided on the other suggestions.

[Mojito]

Definitely disagree with WMF-paid editing of any sort (your "even more half-baked" idea).

Oops, maybe I should have written "even less than half-baked" instead!

[Mojito]

Here's a list of what I'd do (in no particular order)

A new one for the list is
*Ability to revoke admin privileges at ANI. The community giveth, so the community should have a mechanism to taketh away. There are cases where an admin's behaviour warrants removing the tools but isn't bad enough to be banned, and a drawn-out Arbcom hearing shouldn't be required by default. (Also, the current arbs are orright, but this mechanism will make it harder when a US Republican decides that they'd like to control en-wp by seizing the arbs' accounts )

And there's a possible revision (seems that WPO posts can't be edited after a certain time?) regarding IP edits. In the end, all that's needed is a system to connect edits to a particular (anonymous) identity. Then when User:Sexycat002 appears after Sexcat001 is banned, people can say "that's the same person" and ban the new account... just like on the rest of the internet. The current two-tier system (i.e. accounts and IPs) makes a mess of this, and so many other things (and I'm surprised that it meets the attribution requirements for CC licencing). Also, it isn't ideal to be publishing people's IP addresses on the internet, even if they can easily avoid this by registering. I still think the easiest way to avoid all this is to remove IP editing, but there are probably other methods out there which are far superior to the current systems.

/more pointless internet hypothesising

[Vice Cabal Leader]

A new one for the list is
*Ability to revoke admin privileges at ANI.

Isn't this the very thing they are discussing here? link

[ArmasRebane]

With regards to "ditching the subject notability guidelines", very few of the guidelines are actually written as circumventions of the GNG; the issue is always in the interpretation and the use of "presumed" to equal "we will keep this article even if no one can demonstrate the notability." That's a project-wide issue, the individual SNGs contribute very little to it.

[Mojito]

A new one for the list is
*Ability to revoke admin privileges at ANI.

Isn't this the very thing they are discussing here? link

Yes it is. Hopefully one of those proposals is successful.

[Randy from Boise]

With regards to "ditching the subject notability guidelines", very few of the guidelines are actually written as circumventions of the GNG; the issue is always in the interpretation and the use of "presumed" to equal "we will keep this article even if no one can demonstrate the notability." That's a project-wide issue, the individual SNGs contribute very little to it.

This is exactly right.

There is nothing wrong with the SNG system — the notability system is one of the things at WP which does work very well.

We differ philosophically on the notion of "fewer articles but better." In practice what you are arguing for is "fewer articles" — quality is independent of quantity. And I want as big a database of information at WP as possible for the AI and Google searches of the world, because the effort at assuring veracity and balance provided by MOST WP editors is very helpful to the propagation of factually correct and accurate information.

Three lines of verified accurate information in a stub beats nothing.

t

[Zoll]

Don't forget needing a lot LOT more admins, I think currently there are 1000 admins, and it's safe to assume 200 of them are inactive. We need minimum 1000 active admins. Also there should be another usergroup which can block (not ban) editors with less than 500 edits or IPs, so the admins can concentrate more on the ANIs'. And here's a controversial one, no indef blocks, except due to ArbCom or WMF office actions. Indefs are handed out like air, they're everywhere, I'll bet half of all blocks are indef, and of course they say "but, but indef doesn't mean infinite", well, my naive little editor: Category:Requests for unblock (T-H-L), Block info, length, and you'll see the not so hidden truth. Also your talk page action should never be allowed to be revoked, unless you're writing gibberish, harassment and very disturbing stuff. There's the classical excuse "but, but if they ping admins, then admins will see the notification and have their time wasted", and how much time does it take for you to click on ONE notification? If you know the user's writing lies on their talk page, simply don't respond, and move on, doesn't take much time, right? Don't respond until the user stops talking to themselves, and start having constructive discussions.

[Giraffe Stapler]

And I want as big a database of information at WP as possible for the AI and Google searches of the world, because the effort at assuring veracity and balance provided by MOST WP editors is very helpful to the propagation of factually correct and accurate information.

Three lines of verified accurate information in a stub beats nothing.

This is an old post that I just saw and can't resist commenting on.

In my observation. most Wikipedia editors are incompetent at determining if something is accurate or factually correct. The majority of them can't even be trusted to accurately represent what a source says. And the ability to determine the trustworthiness of a source seems to be a rare talent.

[The Blue Newt]

In my observation. most Wikipedia editors are incompetent at determining if something is accurate or factually correct. The majority of them can't even be trusted to accurately represent what a source says. And the ability to determine the trustworthiness of a source seems to be a rare talent.

Yepper.

Compounding this is their unwillingness to actually read a cite in the first place.

[jf1970]

These ideas make sense, so they'll be strongly opposed on Wikipedia.

[Zoll]

Don't forget needing a lot LOT more admins, I think currently there are 1000 admins, and it's safe to assume 200 of them are inactive. We need minimum 1000 active admins. Also there should be another usergroup which can block (not ban) editors with less than 500 edits or IPs, so the admins can concentrate more on the ANIs'. And here's a controversial one, no indef blocks, except due to ArbCom or WMF office actions. Indefs are handed out like air, they're everywhere, I'll bet half of all blocks are indef, and of course they say "but, but indef doesn't mean infinite", well, my naive little editor: Category:Requests for unblock (T-H-L), Block info, length, and you'll see the not so hidden truth. Also your talk page action should never be allowed to be revoked, unless you're writing gibberish, harassment and very disturbing stuff. There's the classical excuse "but, but if they ping admins, then admins will see the notification and have their time wasted", and how much time does it take for you to click on ONE notification? If you know the user's writing lies on their talk page, simply don't respond, and move on, doesn't take much time, right? Don't respond until the user stops talking to themselves, and start having constructive discussions.

to be exact, according to the active users list, out of 888 Admins on the EN wiki, 513, registered an admin action in the last 30 days. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... &limit=500 and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators

[Elinruby]

Since we're asking for naive ideas, declaring all sports to be out of scope would immediately eliminate a huge amount of both drama and cruft.

And will never happen, I know.

[Vigilant]

* Institute semi-protect or pending changes for all BLPs.
* Require editors who work on BLPs to edit under their real names.
* Remove all advanced permissions from all WMF accounts and lock them. - They can work through ARBCOM.

[ScotFinnRadish]

Since we're asking for naive ideas, declaring all sports to be out of scope would immediately eliminate a huge amount of both drama and cruft.

And will never happen, I know.

Even starting with fake sports like professional wrestling would help. Add to that list children's TV shows and reality shows.

[Elinruby]

Since we're asking for naive ideas, declaring all sports to be out of scope would immediately eliminate a huge amount of both drama and cruft.

And will never happen, I know.

Even starting with fake sports like professional wrestling would help. Add to that list children's TV shows and reality shows.

Amen. I also nominate YouTube "influencers" with one video. But now I'm truly dreaming.

[The Blue Newt]

Since we're asking for naive ideas, declaring all sports to be out of scope would immediately eliminate a huge amount of both drama and cruft.

And will never happen, I know.

Even starting with fake sports like professional wrestling would help. Add to that list children's TV shows and reality shows.

Amen. I also nominate YouTube "influencers" with one video. But now I'm truly dreaming.

On the opposite end, adding some people (and businesses) in technology-outside-electronics. Most other business, come to think of it.

The “Who’s Who” side of Wiki presents a very bizarre image of how the world actually works. The. one term mayor of some New Jersey hamlet is covered religiously even though the “article” contains no more than term of office and date of death. Private enterprise that has or had a far greater impact has to meet a much tougher standard of “notability.”

[Bezdomni]

On the opposite end, adding some people (and businesses) in technology-outside-electronics. Most other business, come to think of it.

The “Who’s Who” side of Wiki presents a very bizarre image of how the world actually works. The. one term mayor of some New Jersey hamlet is covered religiously even though the “article” contains no more than term of office and date of death. Private enterprise that has or had a far greater impact has to meet a much tougher standard of “notability.”

I couldn't agree more.

Imagine: a biography of corporate persons policy for companies other than Monsanto!

(I see this "right to be forgotten" spork at the back of the drawer still hasn't been updated with the tap on the tail the CNIL gave them over two years ago... §. Go figure. )

[Beeblebrox]

At one point I thought it was more or less inevitable that WP would simply get too large and would have to be forked, with all the pop culture content moving to "Wikipedia POP" or something like that. What other encyclopedia would have seperate articles for each season of America's Got Talent or Family Guy or whatever?

That was like 2010, I was pretty sure it would have happened by now. I still think it should happen, and that everyone would be happier if it did.

[Elinruby]

What other encyclopedia would have seperate articles for each season of America's Got Talent or Family Guy or whatever

My favorite rant used to be along the lines of: "If we have articles on individual episodes of Pinky and the Brain then surely the first feature film produced in DR Congo (or whatever) is notable enough for an article."

Yes, I know. I was young and impetuous then.<g>

Then suddenly there was only one article about Pinky and the Brain, the show, so not only am I sadder and wiser in the ways of notability, I don't even have that to complain about any more, Hmph. Kids these days don't have the talent for being ridiculous that we used to.

[Hemiauchenia]

What other encyclopedia would have seperate articles for each season of America's Got Talent or Family Guy or whatever

My favorite rant used to be along the lines of: "If we have articles on individual episodes of Pinky and the Brain then surely the first feature film produced in DR Congo (or whatever) is notable enough for an article."

Yes, I know. I was young and impetuous then.<g>

Then suddenly there was only one article about Pinky and the Brain, the show, so not only am I sadder and wiser in the ways of notability, I don't even have that to complain about any more, Hmph. Kids these days don't have the talent for being ridiculous that we used to.

I mean, we have an article about A Pinky and the Brain Christmas (T-H-L), so that's some consolation I suppose.

[Elinruby]

I mean, we have an article about A Pinky and the Brain Christmas (T-H-L), so that's some consolation I suppose.

List of General Hospital cast members (T-H-L) and History of General Hospital (T-H-L)

Not really seeing articles about individual episodes of anything, though, now that I look. Maybe somebody made this a project. If so well done.

[rnu]

Not really seeing articles about individual episodes of anything, though, now that I look. Maybe somebody made this a project. If so well done.

There's always List of The Simpsons episodes (T-H-L).

[eppur si muove]

Not really seeing articles about individual episodes of anything, though, now that I look. Maybe somebody made this a project. If so well done.

There are articles for the first 11 episodes of Babylon 5 and for one episode from season 3. There were 5 series of 22 episodes. Seth Ilys (T-C-L) who created the two episade articles I checked stopped editing under that id in 2007.

[bagofworms]

Expand the number of SNGs to encompass all broad topic areas. Allow them to establish notability criteria and to define the kinds of sources needed to count toward SIGCOV. To have a stand-alone article, a subject must meet the SNG. But wait! The article must also:
Cite a magazine article-length independent secondary prose source directly on the subject. That means quotes/primary observations/background not involving the subject/coverage of a group of things that includes the subject but does not specifically discuss the subject itself/etc. do not count toward the length threshold. The article must also cite multiple additional pieces of SIGCOV. None of the sources contributing to notability can be "local interest".

[redbaron]

Not really seeing articles about individual episodes of anything, though, now that I look. Maybe somebody made this a project. If so well done.

There's always List of The Simpsons episodes (T-H-L).

... which links to List of The Simpsons episodes (seasons 1–20) (T-H-L) and List of The Simpsons episodes (season 21–present) (T-H-L), which link to the individual episodes. So that's almost 34* seasons' worth of individual episodes.

* There are a couple of episodes missing from season 32, and very few episodes of season 34 have articles; everything else is blue linked as far as I can see.

[Elinruby]

Not really seeing articles about individual episodes of anything, though, now that I look. Maybe somebody made this a project. If so well done.

There are articles for the first 11 episodes of Babylon 5 and for one episode from season 3. There were 5 series of 22 episodes. Seth Ilys (T-C-L) who created the two episade articles I checked stopped editing under that id in 2007.

A mission?

[Beeblebrox]

I'm fairly certain that every single episode of any Star Trek show has an article.

I don't think I have a problem with that, they are actually usually fairly well-written and referenced, although I'm sure there exceptions here and there.

The reason I am fairly certain is that I have watched most but not all of these shows and often you can't recognize guest stars because they look like aliens, so I look up the episode. I suppose I could find the same information on IMDB but WP is just more familiar.

[Elinruby]

* There are a couple of episodes missing from season 32, and very few episodes of season 34 have articles; everything else is blue linked as far as I can see.

The random article I clicked had nine references. A bit light for its length but more than i expected. This may be more of an American culture problem than an Wikipedia problem. I am genuinely torn

[Elinruby]

I've given this some thought and I guess I am ok with the Simpsons articles, as long as nobody touches Tintin. Which I already know that Piotrus (T-C-L) is planning to do; in fact he recently got me to say that I could possibly conceive of a world in which a non-notable Tintin album might exist. Maybe.

As for Star Treks, clearly not, obvs, and in fact a dab page appears to be needed for Faith of the Heart (T-H-L) (my bad, missed that the article is in fact about the same song, it just thinks a different version is the primary one. I am quietly impressed)

[rnu]

Faith of the Heart (T-H-L)

The song has been used on four occasions as the music selected for wake-up calls on space missions. The first was on 16 June 2002 for the Space Shuttle Endeavour during mission STS-111 to the International Space Station. It was again used on 2 August 2005 for mission STS-114, the first mission of the Space Shuttle programme following the Space Shuttle Columbia disaster. It was broadcast to the seven crew of the Space Shuttle Discovery, and had been chosen as a surprise for the crew by Deputy Shuttle Programme Manager Wayne Hale.[15] NASA astronaut Richard Mastracchio selected "Where My Heart Will Take Me" for broadcast on 9 August 2007 onboard Endeavour for STS-118. The final broadcast on board a Space Shuttle was on May 23, 2009 during STS-125, the final Space Shuttle servicing mission to the Hubble Space Telescope. On this occasion it was broadcast to the crew of the Space Shuttle Atlantis. It was the third science fiction themed wake-up call in a row, the previous day having been the Cantina Band composition by John Williams for Star Wars, and two days prior was Alexander Courage's Theme from Star Trek.[15]

[Elinruby]

eh, didn't notice that; I was focused on whether the article was even about the same song. But yeah. I agree, I don't need to know anyone's alarm settings on a given day just because space. Although the earworm may conceivably pose a health hazard

[greyed.out.fields]

OK, so I may be a contrarian against contrarians:
Remain in Light (T-H-L) for all its Eno and Afrobeat, is arguably not the Heads best album. That would be Speaking in Tongues (Talking Heads album) (T-H-L) where they moved all their influences to approachable pop in an undeniably art rock record.

[Elinruby]

link
+1 because Burning Down the House

[casualdejekyll]

OK, so I may be a contrarian against contrarians:
Remain in Light (T-H-L) for all its Eno and Afrobeat, is arguably not the Heads best album. That would be Speaking in Tongues (Talking Heads album) (T-H-L) where they moved all their influences to approachable pop in an undeniably art rock record.

My favorite is Fear of Music (T-H-L).

[Midsize Jake]

My favorite is Fear of Music (T-H-L).

Mine too, and it's the most on-topic Talking Heads album for Wikipediocracy purposes too, since it has the songs "Mind," "Paper," and "Memories Can't Wait" on it.

[Anroth]

Even starting with fake sports like professional wrestling would help. Add to that list children's TV shows and reality shows.

Not sure I think a serious encyclopedia should be getting rid of Sesame Street....

[ScotFinnRadish]

Even starting with fake sports like professional wrestling would help. Add to that list children's TV shows and reality shows.

Not sure I think a serious encyclopedia should be getting rid of Sesame Street....

But a serious encyclopedia could probably stand to drop the articles on every show that was on Nick Jr. and every YouTube channel that people let babysit their toddlers. It doesn't help that they're enormous disruption magnets.

[Randy from Boise]

My favorite is Fear of Music (T-H-L).

Mine too, and it's the most on-topic Talking Heads album for Wikipediocracy purposes too, since it has the songs "Mind," "Paper," and "Memories Can't Wait" on it.

I've always been partial to More Songs About Buildings and Food, myself.

Racking my head about an arcane sports topic to write about for WP so that I can avoid doing what I'm supposed to be doing today...

t

[AndyTheGrump]

Racking my head about an arcane sports topic to write about for WP so that I can avoid doing what I'm supposed to be doing today...

t

Fierljeppen (T-H-L) could do with copy-editing...

[casualdejekyll]

Even starting with fake sports like professional wrestling would help. Add to that list children's TV shows and reality shows.

Not sure I think a serious encyclopedia should be getting rid of Sesame Street....

But a serious encyclopedia could probably stand to drop the articles on every show that was on Nick Jr. and every YouTube channel that people let babysit their toddlers. It doesn't help that they're enormous disruption magnets.

I'd also point out that responding to what was effectively a statement that "most children's TV shows don't really need articles" with literally the most influential children's TV show in American history is somewhat of a questionable argument.

[Randy from Boise]

Racking my head about an arcane sports topic to write about for WP so that I can avoid doing what I'm supposed to be doing today...

t

Fierljeppen (T-H-L) could do with copy-editing...

1959 NFL season (T-H-L)

t

[Randy from Boise]

But a serious encyclopedia could probably stand to drop the articles on every show that was on Nick Jr. and every YouTube channel that people let babysit their toddlers. It doesn't help that they're enormous disruption magnets.

It's a common mistake to think of Wikipedia as a "serious encyclopedia."

Wikipedia is an information database for internet queries and a jumping off point for people wanting to learn more about a topic.

t

[Beeblebrox]

I've always been partial to More Songs About Buildings and Food, myself.

It's fairly astounding to me that that album came out in 1978.
However, Speaking in Tongues is my personal favorite.

[Elinruby]

My favorite is Fear of Music (T-H-L).

Mine too, and it's the most on-topic Talking Heads album for Wikipediocracy purposes too, since it has the songs "Mind," "Paper," and "Memories Can't Wait" on it.

"Life During Wartime"

[Giraffe Stapler]

My favorite is Fear of Music (T-H-L).

Mine too, and it's the most on-topic Talking Heads album for Wikipediocracy purposes too, since it has the songs "Mind," "Paper," and "Memories Can't Wait" on it.

"Life During Wartime"

Transmit the message to the receiver
Hope for an answer someday
I got three passports, a couple of visas
You don't even know my real name