Fundamental reform of Wikipedia, ideas wanted Options

[Peter Damian]

Wales gives you complete charge, and you have three fundamental reforms that you are allowed to implement.

What would those be? And what are the problems or abuses that each are supposed to address?

This post has been edited by Peter Damian: Sat 12th September 2009, 12:04pm

[Dr. Blofeld]

I've finished Sentimental Lady now check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sentimental_Lady, It is due to appear in a DYK now. This is what I mean about propelling people to do things. If they are serious about building a high quality encyclopedia they need to offer editors incentives to improve quality. Most people edit articles they are interested in or because of personal pleasure writing it. This is why the coverage on wikipedia is so uneven and inherently biased. If they gave editors more encouragement to develop specific articles and have their efforts given a small reward it would make things happen. While wikipedia obviously does not have the money to reward many people on this sort of level if they raised enough money elsewhere they would put money back into the project in the areas they see as most important for expansion. The thing is one mention of money on wikipedia and the community go all objective. I do believe we are all volunteers but similarly I think the key to quality lies on giving more editors a reason to write that article in the first place. That in my view is one of the biggest flaws is that editors are not compensated for being willing to spend weeks on an article to develop it to FA. Therefore given the restricted time most editors have they are oftne not willing to spend that much time on a given article. If Jimbo and co are serious about improving quality they need to be more assertive i think rather than expecting people to do it all.

PS are you serious about that £500 offer? If you are I'll think about it!!

[RMHED]

I've finished Sentimental Lady now check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sentimental_Lady, It is due to appear in a DYK now. This is what I mean about propelling people to do things. If they are serious about building a high quality encyclopedia they need to offer editors incentives to improve quality. Most people edit articles they are interested in or because of personal pleasure writing it. This is why the coverage on wikipedia is so uneven and inherently biased. If they gave editors more encouragement to develop specific articles and have their efforts given a small reward it would make things happen. While wikipedia obviously does not have the money to reward many people on this sort of level if they raised enough money elsewhere they would put money back into the project in the areas they see as most important for expansion. The thing is one mention of money on wikipedia and the community go all objective. I do believe we are all volunteers but similarly I think the key to quality lies on giving more editors a reason to write that article in the first place. That in my view is one of the biggest flaws is that editors are not compensated for being willing to spend weeks on an article to develop it to FA. Therefore given the restricted time most editors have they are oftne not willing to spend that much time on a given article. If Jimbo and co are serious about improving quality they need to be more assertive i think rather than expecting people to do it all.

PS are you serious about that £500 offer? If you are I'll think about it!!

Oh yes, as long as it is the featured article on the main page and the blurb mentions Rachel and Jimbo's relationship.