Grants:IdeaLab/Slithering Agendas
Project idea
editWhat is the problem you're trying to solve?
editI have seen too many instances where editors park themselves on topics and forbid worthy contributions.
What is your solution?
editCreate an easy to access forum whereby particular editors can be put before a tribunal and nominated for corrective action. I am sure this already exists at a level beyond me; but, for relatively new newcomers, it can become disheartening and cause them to abandon becoming a contributing force to the community.
Project goals
editGet involved
editParticipants
editEndorsements
edit- I find that many articles are infested with non-encyclopedic viewpoints, as people are using Wiki's large podium to broadcast their agenda, rather than facts.
This is a huge issue, and is a major reason Wikipedia is considered less than reputable in many circles. Morg00 (talk) 03:04, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
Wikipedia lacks a reliable peer review process, and therefore Conflict-of-interest editing has affected Wikipedia's content for many years. Jarble (talk) 04:37, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
- I agree and have observed this on a few wiki pages. Rather than allow the wiki page to be impartial sources of information, some authors keep undo-ing enhancements / corrections repeatedly.
They should be answerable - there should at least be a forum where such actions can be questioned. Naturally, the authors should be given a fair chance to respond - perhaps they were justified.
However, at the moment, such trollers simply put off some people - in the bargain, it is the wiki article and readers who suffer . Notthebestusername (talk) 05:20, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
Freedom of Speech must be granted! It would require technical solutions to detect organized opposing. --Hans Haase (talk) 10:28, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
Expand your idea
editWould a grant from the Wikimedia Foundation help make your idea happen? You can expand this idea into a grant proposal.