User:Kingturtle/WikiPrinciples

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I think it is healthy for all editors, no matter how long they've been clicking away in these virtual halls, to review these links and ruminations concerning what it means to be a Wikipedian.

Contents

[edit] A proposed Wikicovenant

  • Make others feel welcome
  • Create and continue a friendly environment
  • Turn the other cheek (which includes walking away from potential edit wars)
  • Give praise, especially to those you don't know
  • Forgive
  • Remember, people grow
  • Remember, you're not always right - sometimes you're wrong - sometimes you're dead wrong
  • Try to figure out how to do it yourself

[edit] On seniority

  • Taken from Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians in order of arrival:
    • "We Wikipedians abhor the idea that the amount of time spent working on this website is any sort of indication of how well one can write an encyclopedia article. Indeed, we distinguish ourselves by our ability to write good articles, which is what really matters. We ought to do our best to underemphasize seniority, which can be used, often illegitimately, as a way of deciding who to accord how much respect."

[edit] On treating others and interacting

[edit] On editing

[edit] On redlinking

From Wikipedia:Manual of Style (links): "If a red link is within the context of the article, and it is a topic with the potential to eventually be a neutral, verifiable encyclopedia article, then the link should be kept as an invitation for an editor to begin the appropriate article with this title. Such links do not have an expiration date." Red links "point to "buds" from which Wikipedia will grow in the future." Why is a red link better? From Wikipedia:Red link: "Good red links help Wikipedia — they encourage new contributors in useful directions, and remind us that Wikipedia is far from finished."

[edit] On embedded external links

From Wikipedia:Manual of Style (links) "You should not add a descriptive title to an embedded HTML link within an article." Embedding external links is meant for citations and references, not for covering up red links or for creating external links. An embedded external link takes the reader away from Wikipedia, and could take that reader on a reading and link-clicking adventure that takes them away from Wikipedia for a long time. We want people to stick around, I think. A red link is an offer to a reader to make an article, to stick around, to help.

[edit] Remember, we're humans

[edit] More extreme measures

[edit] Ruminations

[edit] Parting words of advice from Larry Sanger

  • be open and warmly welcoming, not insular,
  • be focused singlemindedly on writing an encyclopedia, not on Usenet-style debate,
  • recognize and praise the best work, work that is detailed, factual, well-informed, and well-referenced,
  • work to understand what neutrality requires and why it is so essential to and good for this project,
  • treat your fellow productive, well-meaning members of Wikipedia with respect and good will,
  • attract and honor good people who know a lot and can write about it well, and
  • show the door to trolls, vandals, and wiki-anarchists, who if permitted would waste your time and create a poisonous atmosphere here.

[edit] Parting words from Lir

[edit] On Adminstrators

An often paraphrased comment about adminship is the following, said by Jimbo Wales in February 2003, referring to administrators as sysops:

I just wanted to say that becoming a sysop is *not a big deal*.

I think perhaps I'll go through semi-willy-nilly and make a bunch of people who have been around for awhile sysops. I want to dispel the aura of "authority" around the position. It's merely a technical matter that the powers given to sysops are not given out to everyone.

I don't like that there's the apparent feeling here that being granted sysop status is a really special thing.

– Jimbo Wales, wikimedia.org archive entry, gmane archive entry

KnowledgeOfSelf has a nice essay to consider on administrator practices.

[edit] Get a WikiLife

"Do you spend all your time crusading on one bureaucratic tip or another? Factboxes! Notability! Must slap "not good enough" templates on all non-featured articles!!! Do you?! Well, then you're not doing Wikipedia right. Get a life, and contribute something useful, instead of nagging the rest of us who are trying to get some actual work done." - Jengod

[edit] Reasons I like to wikify and copyedit

  • I become educated in matters I didn't know about
  • It helps me become a better writer
  • Useful redirects can be created
  • Non-existing articles that might be of use can be discovered

[edit] From SimonATL's userpage

Wikipedia allows anyone to add to the sum total of human knowledge and is also a great outlet for budding writers and editors. I am proud to be associated with Wikipedia and consider it a truly amazing human resource all humanity can be proud of.

As a child growing up on a farm in the midwest USA, I used to enjoy reading encyclopedias up in the upper reaches of a maple tree. Little could I have imagined at that time, in the mid-20th Century, that one day, I would actually contribute to a encyclopedia of revolutionary scope and import, a truly international project that all editors can be proud to be associated with.

One of the things I most like about Wikipedia is how research in one area leads to others and one never knows where the trail of information will take the reader. This is way cool, and one of the most mind-expanding aspects of Wikipedia, nes pas?

Wikipedia is an opportunity to give back something of my life experience and education in history, languages, philosophy, geo-political-military issues, miltary science, history (ancient, military, US and european) and information technology as well as language skills in English, Spanish, French (and occasionally Latin and a little Greek) with a wider audience of fellow info junkies.

[edit] Reasons I am an inclusionist

  • What is important to me might not be important to you, and vice versa. I should not judge whether your interests are valid, useful or important. That's for you to decide.
  • I learn a lot from the variety of topics covered in Wikipedia.
  • Deletionism can lead to an Imperialist mindset that supposes only sanctioned cultural interests are of worth.
  • "If someone has taken the time to do something, whether that be creating a new article or modifying an existing one, that is important. So long as the work falls within the clear guidelines as to what can be included in Wikipedia: verifiability, no original research, and neutral point of view." - Truthanado
  • "The majority of effort in Wikipedia should be to continue to add to the sum total of knowledge by adding and improving articles....It's all too easy to delete articles, less easy to accept that readers may find the content therein useful and therefore may contribute to the encyclopaedia by improving them." - Stephenb
  • See also: Association of Inclusionist Wikipedians

[edit] Message from Angr regarding Veropedia

If you've written a quality article, be sure to keep a close eye on it! There is now a for-profit website called "Veropedia" where stable versions of Wikipedia's best articles are mirrored. Because Veropedia is funded by advertising, it cannot be committed to the concept of the neutral point of view: any source of information (whether an encyclopedia, a newspaper, or a television news channel) funded through advertising is subject to censorship by its sponsors and liable to portray them in a positive light.

At Veropedia, however, articles are not directly editable. Rather, Veropedia editors come to Wikipedia to edit the articles here, and then move their preferred versions of the article back there. As a result, Wikipedia itself is in danger of losing its neutrality when Veropedians come here to make our articles more pleasing to their sponsors.

So if you've written a quality article, or even if you just have one on your watchlist, be sure to watch it closely and prevent Veropedians from interfering with Wikipedia's neutrality.

[edit] Fed up with vandals? Have patience

The following was taken from Chinese3126's user page on 3 January, 2008:

I'm a proud Wikipedian. I used to be a major vandal, don't get me started on how I got an IP ban on my house, a six month softblock at school, mainly because I wanted revenge for having Wikipedia content as the reason why I got caught for plagiarism. Now I have converted and started an account and I am a reformed vandal.

[edit] Good reading for admins

[edit] And for fun

[edit] My message to new admins

A consensus has been reached by your peers that you should be an admin. I have made it so. Please review [[Wikipedia:Administrators' reading list]] and keep up the great work. Sincerely, ~~~~

[edit] My response to "Why doesn't this article discuss..."

Find a [[Wikipedia:Reliable sources|reliable source]] that addresses the claim, and add it to this article [[Wikipedia:Citing sources|citing the source]]. ~~~~