3 ms·

>> Bad experiences for new and established contributors mean less motivated contributors. > This has nothing to do with the financials of the foundation and is

by rsync 10y ago

>> Bad experiences for new and established contributors mean less motivated contributors. > This has nothing to do with the financials of the foundation and is completely a community issue. I do not contribute financially to wikipedia, despite being very interested in doing so, because of this issue. I am sick and tired of seeing large amounts of properly formatted, well formed articles, written in good faith, deleted by the little hitlers protecting their precious wikipedia turf. This "community issue" costs wikipedia several thousand of my dollars per year. I wonder how many other people decline to support them financially due to these "community issues" ?

SomeStupidPoint 10y ago
I don't normally post "me too" on HN, but I feel I should here. I don't contribute to Wikipedia anymore, because the editorial policies don't agree with my views on how an internet encyclopedia should be run.
cooper12 10y ago
You do know that each Wikipedia is community-run right? You'd rather the foundation take away the autonomy of each wiki and force it's own standards? That goes completely against what the project was started for and would quickly alienate the userbase. If you don't believe me, just look at the backlash behind the media viewer (search for "superprotect"), visual editor, and flagged revisions. You cannot dictate rules to a community-established project, each wiki has its own culture and precedents. Sure the foundation could go all dictator, but that would be the fastest way to cause a fork and destroy the goodwill of volunteers. You don't like the community, either whine like you are doing now, or go in there and contribute. You're being no different that someone complaining that their local beach is full of trash while doing nothing to help out, or—if your username has any relevance—someone who wants a feature/bug-fix in an open-source project but won't make any pull requests.

by rsync 10y ago

SomeStupidPoint 10y ago

I don't normally post "me too" on HN, but I feel I should here. I don't contribute to Wikipedia anymore, because the editorial policies don't agree with my views on how an internet encyclopedia should be run.

cooper12 10y ago

You do know that each Wikipedia is community-run right? You'd rather the foundation take away the autonomy of each wiki and force it's own standards? That goes completely against what the project was started for and would quickly alienate the userbase. If you don't believe me, just look at the backlash behind the media viewer (search for "superprotect"), visual editor, and flagged revisions. You cannot dictate rules to a community-established project, each wiki has its own culture and precedents. Sure the foundation could go all dictator, but that would be the fastest way to cause a fork and destroy the goodwill of volunteers. You don't like the community, either whine like you are doing now, or go in there and contribute. You're being no different that someone complaining that their local beach is full of trash while doing nothing to help out, or—if your username has any relevance—someone who wants a feature/bug-fix in an open-source project but won't make any pull requests.