Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2012-03-12/Discussion report
Nothing changes as long discussions continue
- RfC on the Article Rescue Squadron and canvassing.
- An RfC on the Arbitration Committee and how to deal with well-behaved sockpuppets.
- RfC on the conflict of interest guideline, as requested by the Arbitration Committee.
- RfC on adding a more prominent link to Special:MyContributions for IP editors
- RfC about allowing watchlisting of user contributions
- Binding community discussion on the Abortion article titles, as requested by the Arbitration Committee.
- RfC on the proposed cessation of selective delete (other than history merge fixes) and resulting changes to deletion policies, including the removal of a Revision Deletion criterion.
Editor's note: As I've been away most of the week, we will present a different take on the discussion report this edition. Below is an analysis of the dispute resolution and discussion system that we have, looking at the advantages and the disadvantages.
Where the discussions are
| Conduct |
| Content |
| General |
The process today
The English Wikipedia is in some ways becoming better at dealing with issues, with the creation of more and more specialized dispute resolution forums and centralized discussion areas. Areas where topics are being discussed include the village pump, centralized discussion, and the community portal; a watchlist notice is also being used to draw editors' notice. Without a doubt, there are plenty of ways to get the attention of editors who may be interested in discussion.
On the other hand, with the proliferation of these specialized forums and areas, it becomes increasingly difficult for editors to find discussions that may be relevant to them, and to ensure their opinion is heard, because of the large number of pages that need to be checked.
It also seems that it's taking longer for disputes to be resolved and discussions to be closed. Perhaps, because of the double-sided process that we have, the discussions drag out because there are so many options to consider.
In brief
- A proposal on restricting administrator's powers was started by Malleus Fatuorum on March 10.
- A "problem hotline" was created to iron out any issues with the new MediaWiki software (version 1.19) by BarkingFish on March 1.
- A poll to determine why there is a lack of non-date-specific submissions for "Today's featured article" was started by Raul654.
- A request for comments in the problem area of Indo-Afghani relations is seeking the wider-community to provide their opinions.
- Today's featured article/February 7, 2012 (Cartman gets an anal probe) causes 17,000 words of discussion with no discernible outcome.
Discuss this story
Would it be possible to tone down those colours a bit? They're pretty jarring at the moment... Jenks24 (talk) 11:45, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]