Wikipedia talk:Committee of Wikipedians
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
First comment - I'm not sure of the whole context for creating this committee, but I am sympathetic to the idea of having a well-known and open forum for at least centralizing the tracking of policy discussions and changes. I myself (a top 25 contributor for 2004) cannot keep up with it either, even though I hang out on IRC and have email digests. It's just too disparate.
However, I think one of the reasons why it hasn't happened much on Wikipedia proper is that it is a horrible way to have conversations -- no threading, edit conflicts galore, hard to track changes. I'm afraid while there may be folks who agree with the premise of your Committee, we lack a proper implementation method. We really do need a decent threaded discussion board of some type, but then I shudder to think we're splitting it four ways -- email list, wikipedia, irc and a bboard. 147.8.235.63 04:31, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- I understand this technical aspect. But it cannot be used as excuse to preclude the majority of contributors. The emphasis should not be on the smoothness, ease, quickness but on the consensus, wide feedbacks. If you want to change policies, make important decision, you are the one who must make effort to gather feedbacks and cannot expect everyone else makes effor for you. Taku 19:21, Mar 3, 2004 (UTC)
Please be careful about demanding that Jimbo do this or that. While I cannot speak for him, he has limited time, and a quick e-mail about some specific point is actually quite efficient for him. If it is important enough and affects enough people, then others can publicize it via all of the above mechanisms; that is the reason I do not endorse the Committee concept specifically. There are plenty of channels for communication. 169.207.88.78 07:17, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- Good point. I think I negelected that Jimbo probably has a reason to distance himself from wikipedia somehow. Maybe he fear to act like a tyrannt given he has a power. I have removed that part. -- Taku 19:21, Mar 3, 2004 (UTC)
The committee appears to lack focus and be essentially inactive. Propose redirect to the Wikipedians page. --Michael Snow 22:15, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)
-
- Well, I'll leave the note here for a little while to see if he wants to express an opinion, then I'll redirect. --Michael Snow 22:30, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)
True, it is not quite active at all. But I think it is just because there are not much to do, but not because this kind of orgianization is not needed. I started this because sometimes I felt many decisions are made without hearing voices from ordinary wikipedias. If this is inactive then it means there isn't much this sort of problem. It is good but I still don't think we need to close this. -- Taku 01:46, Jul 17, 2004 (UTC) Of course, maybe a part of reasons should be I have been rather away from wikipedia lately. -- Taku 01:48, Jul 17, 2004 (UTC)
- Note to anyone reading the above post. John Aaron Edward is not even a member of the arbitration committee let alone it's "Bureaucratic Administrative Coordinator" (The AC doesn't have such a position). He has no authority or powers whatsoever. Theresa Knott (ask the rotten) 08:37, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- In light of the above, and since this seems mainly to be a "WikiProject: informing people of important issues", I've tagged it as an inactive WikiProject. Radiant_>|< 11:07, August 11, 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Project directory
Hello. The WikiProject Council has recently updated the Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory. This new directory includes a variety of categories and subcategories which will, with luck, potentially draw new members to the projects who are interested in those specific subjects. Please review the directory and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope that all the changes to the directory can be finished by the first of next month. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. B2T2 13:32, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
