FamilySearch Wiki:How Community Governs Wikipedia: Difference between revisions

giving feedback
(Editorial quality review)
(giving feedback)
Line 13: Line 13:
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Editorial_oversight_and_control Wikipedia:Editorial oversight and control] discusses:<br>
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Editorial_oversight_and_control Wikipedia:Editorial oversight and control] discusses:<br>


Wikipedia:Arbitration committee
Wikipedia:Arbitration committee  


Wikipedia:Dispute resolution
Wikipedia:Dispute resolution  


Wikipedia:Consensus
Wikipedia:Consensus  


Wikipedia:Sock puppetry
Wikipedia:Sock puppetry  


Wikipedia:Conflict of interest
Wikipedia:Conflict of interest  


Wikipedia:Vandalism
Wikipedia:Vandalism  


Wikipedia:AIV
Wikipedia:AIV  


Wikipedia:Requests for comment
Wikipedia:Requests for comment  


Wikipedia:Polling is not a substitute for discussion
Wikipedia:Polling is not a substitute for discussion  


Wikipedia:Single-purpose account
Wikipedia:Single-purpose account  


Wikipedia:Help desk


Wikipedia:Village pump


== Details&nbsp; ==
<br>


=== Editorial administration, oversight and management<ref name="WikipediaAbout">from Wikipedia:About</ref> ===
== Details&nbsp;  ==
 
=== Editorial administration, oversight and management<ref name="WikipediaAbout">from Wikipedia:About</ref> ===


The Wikipedia community is largely self-organising, so that anyone may build a reputation as a competent editor and become involved in any role he/she may choose, subject to peer approval. Individuals often will choose to become involved in specialised tasks, such as reviewing articles at others' request, watching current edits for vandalism, watching newly created articles for quality control purposes, or similar roles. Editors who find that editorial administrator responsibility would benefit their ability to help the community may ask their peers in the community for agreement to undertake such roles; a structure which enforces meritocracy and communal standards of editorship and conduct. At present, around a 75–80% approval rating after enquiry is considered the requirement for such a role, a standard which tends to ensure a high level of experience, trust, and familiarity across a broad front of projects within Wikipedia.  
The Wikipedia community is largely self-organising, so that anyone may build a reputation as a competent editor and become involved in any role he/she may choose, subject to peer approval. Individuals often will choose to become involved in specialised tasks, such as reviewing articles at others' request, watching current edits for vandalism, watching newly created articles for quality control purposes, or similar roles. Editors who find that editorial administrator responsibility would benefit their ability to help the community may ask their peers in the community for agreement to undertake such roles; a structure which enforces meritocracy and communal standards of editorship and conduct. At present, around a 75–80% approval rating after enquiry is considered the requirement for such a role, a standard which tends to ensure a high level of experience, trust, and familiarity across a broad front of projects within Wikipedia.  
Line 43: Line 47:
A variety of software-assisted systems and automated programs help several hundred editors to watch for problematic edits and editors. An arbitration committee sits at the top of all editorial and editor conduct disputes,[5] and its members are elected in three regularly-rotated tranches by an established enquiry and decision-making process in which all regular editors can equally participate.  
A variety of software-assisted systems and automated programs help several hundred editors to watch for problematic edits and editors. An arbitration committee sits at the top of all editorial and editor conduct disputes,[5] and its members are elected in three regularly-rotated tranches by an established enquiry and decision-making process in which all regular editors can equally participate.  


=== Handling disputes and abuse<ref name="WikipediaAbout" /> ===
=== Handling disputes and abuse<ref name="WikipediaAbout" /> ===


Main articles: Wikipedia:Vandalism, Wikipedia:Dispute resolution, Wikipedia:Consensus, Wikipedia:Sock puppetry, Wikipedia:Conflict of interest
Main articles: Wikipedia:Vandalism, Wikipedia:Dispute resolution, Wikipedia:Consensus, Wikipedia:Sock puppetry, Wikipedia:Conflict of interest  


Wikipedia has a rich set of methods to handle most abuses that commonly arise. These methods are well-tested and should be relied upon.
Wikipedia has a rich set of methods to handle most abuses that commonly arise. These methods are well-tested and should be relied upon.  


*Intentional vandalism can be reported and corrected by anyone.
*Intentional vandalism can be reported and corrected by anyone.  
*Unresolved disputes between editors, whether based upon behavior, editorial approach, or validity of content, can be addressed through the talk page of an article, through requesting comments from other editors or through Wikipedia's comprehensive dispute resolution process.
*Unresolved disputes between editors, whether based upon behavior, editorial approach, or validity of content, can be addressed through the talk page of an article, through requesting comments from other editors or through Wikipedia's comprehensive dispute resolution process.  
*Abuse of user accounts, such as the creation of "Internet sock puppets" or solicitation of friends and other parties to enforce a non-neutral viewpoint or inappropriate consensus within a discussion, or to disrupt other Wikipedia processes in an annoying manner, are addressed through the sock puppet policy.
*Abuse of user accounts, such as the creation of "Internet sock puppets" or solicitation of friends and other parties to enforce a non-neutral viewpoint or inappropriate consensus within a discussion, or to disrupt other Wikipedia processes in an annoying manner, are addressed through the sock puppet policy.


In addition, brand new users (until they have established themselves a bit) may at the start find that their votes are given less weight by editors in some informal polls, in order to prevent abuse of single-purpose accounts.&nbsp;
In addition, brand new users (until they have established themselves a bit) may at the start find that their votes are given less weight by editors in some informal polls, in order to prevent abuse of single-purpose accounts.&nbsp;  
 
=== Editorial quality review<ref name="WikipediaAbout" />  ===


=== Editorial quality review<ref name="WikipediaAbout" /> ===
As well as systems to catch and control substandard and vandalistic edits, Wikipedia also has a full style and content manual and a variety of positive systems for continual article review and improvement. Examples of the processes include peer review, good article assessment, and the featured article process, a rigorous review of articles that are intended to meet the highest standards and showcase Wikipedia's capability to produce high-quality work.


As well as systems to catch and control substandard and vandalistic edits, Wikipedia also has a full style and content manual and a variety of positive systems for continual article review and improvement. Examples of the processes include peer review, good article assessment, and the featured article process, a rigorous review of articles that are intended to meet the highest standards and showcase Wikipedia's capability to produce high-quality work.
In addition, specific types of article or fields often have their own specialized and comprehensive projects, assessment processes (such as biographical article assessment), and expert reviewers within specific subjects. Nominated articles are also frequently the subject of specific focus under projects such as the Neutrality Project or are covered under editorial drives by groups such as the Cleanup Taskforce.  


In addition, specific types of article or fields often have their own specialized and comprehensive projects, assessment processes (such as biographical article assessment), and expert reviewers within specific subjects. Nominated articles are also frequently the subject of specific focus under projects such as the Neutrality Project or are covered under editorial drives by groups such as the Cleanup Taskforce.
=== Giving feedback<ref name="WikipediaAbout" /> ===


There is an established escalation-and-dispute process within Wikipedia, as well as pages designed for questions, feedback, suggestions, and comments:


*Talk pages — the associated discussion page for discussion of an article or policy's contents (usually the first place to go);
*Wikipedia:Vandalism — a facility for reporting vandalism (you are encouraged to fix vandalism yourself as well as report it);
*Dispute resolution — the procedure for handling disputes that remain unresolved within an article's talk space; and
*Village pump — the Wikipedia discussion area, part of the community portal.


See also:


*Bug tracker — a facility for reporting problems with the Wikipedia Web site or the MediaWiki software that runs it;
*Village pump: proposals page — a place for making non-policy suggestions; and
*Wikipedia:Help desk — Wikipedia's general help desk, if other pages have not answered your query.<br>


<br>


<br>


<references />
<references />
4,497

edits