Editing Netizenship/Wikipedia

From Bibliotheca Anonoma

Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.

The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then publish the changes below to finish undoing the edit.

Latest revision Your text
Line 45: Line 45:
The system of deleting articles takes place on a page with a large number of sub-pages called [[wp:WP:AFD|Articles for deletion]]. Dozens of such discussions are posted every day. Discussions last for a week. Usually the creator of the article will show up and argue (more or less effectively) that it be kept. At the expiration of the seven-day period, an uninvolved administrator will decide whether the article is kept or deleted, if there is a clear consensus for either side. If there is no consensus (which is quite rare) or if no one bothers to comment (which is quite common), the discussion is relisted for another seven days (posted to the list of the new discussions for the day on which the seven-day period was to expire) until a consensus is reached. The most common reason for articles to be deleted is that they are not notable enough (the subject of enough reliable sources) for an article. Sometimes the consensus will be to merge an article into another, in which case the old article will redirect (take visitors automatically) to the article it has become part of.
The system of deleting articles takes place on a page with a large number of sub-pages called [[wp:WP:AFD|Articles for deletion]]. Dozens of such discussions are posted every day. Discussions last for a week. Usually the creator of the article will show up and argue (more or less effectively) that it be kept. At the expiration of the seven-day period, an uninvolved administrator will decide whether the article is kept or deleted, if there is a clear consensus for either side. If there is no consensus (which is quite rare) or if no one bothers to comment (which is quite common), the discussion is relisted for another seven days (posted to the list of the new discussions for the day on which the seven-day period was to expire) until a consensus is reached. The most common reason for articles to be deleted is that they are not notable enough (the subject of enough reliable sources) for an article. Sometimes the consensus will be to merge an article into another, in which case the old article will redirect (take visitors automatically) to the article it has become part of.


Even the system of crime and punishment operates mostly via consensus. Simple cases of obvious '''vandalism''' (adding nonsense to articles, blanking pages, creating self-promotional articles, and the like) are, after a rapidly escalating series of warnings to the offender, punished by an indefinite block by an administrator. More complex cases and those involving violations of civility are dealt with on the [[wp:WP:AN/I|ANI]], short for "Administrator's noticeboard/Incidents", the drama capital of the wiki and a name most Wikipedia editors know to run away from really fast. The spectators there can, by consensus, impose sanctions on articles, block users, and in extreme cases even ban them. (It should be noted that a '''block''' from Wikipedia is equivalent to a '''ban''' from many instant messaging platforms. A block is a technical means to stop people from editing, which can be imposed by any admin, while a ban is a declaration that a person is not allowed to contribute to Wikipedia, imposed either at ANI or by the Arbitration Committee. Bans are more serious and rarer than blocks.)
Even the system of crime and punishment operates mostly via consensus. Simple cases of obvious vandalism (adding nonsense to articles, blanking pages, creating self-promotional articles, and the like) are, after a rapidly escalating series of warnings to the offender, punished by an indefinite block by an administrator. More complex cases and those involving violations of civility are dealt with on the [[wp:WP:AN/I|ANI]], short for "Administrator's noticeboard/Incidents", the drama capital of the wiki and a name most Wikipedia editors know to run away from really fast. The spectators there can, by consensus, impose sanctions on articles, block users, and in extreme cases even ban them. (It should be noted that a "block" from Wikipedia is equivalent to a "ban" from many instant messaging platforms. A block is a technical means to stop people from editing while a ban is a declaration that a person is not allowed to contribute to Wikipedia, imposed either at ANI or by the Arbitration Committee. Bans are more serious and rarer than blocks.)
 
There are two classes of quality articles: '''featured articles''' and '''good articles'''. (Articles that are lists of things have one quality class: '''featured lists''', equivalent to both featured and good content articles.) They are listed and unlisted as such by consensus at [[wp:WP:FAC|Featured article candidates]]. Editors review articles and match them against the [[wp:WP:WIAFA|criteria]], with coordinators instead of administrators closing discussions and promoting or demoting articles.


==Democracy==
==Democracy==
Please note that all contributions to Bibliotheca Anonoma are considered to be released under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike (see Bibliotheca Anonoma:Copyrights for details). If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource. Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!
Cancel Editing help (opens in new window)