Grants:IdeaLab/more robust controversy handling
What is the problem you're trying to solve?Edit
Women having less testosterone, tend to be less aggressive and would likely lose in an edit war, leading to less women participation.
Thus we need a robust controversial handling strategy that will ensure fair representation. to all parties involve.
What is your solution?Edit
Good idea, taking a step back, I think the direction should be to formulate a more robust way to handling controversy. e.g. for controversial subject, instead of allowing outright deletion, allow individual users to perhaps sponsor a controversy page. Which is to be reflected as a non-canon version of the page in question, to be linked from the page in question.
The non-canon page is under the protection / ownership of the user, who is responsible for updating the content of the page including merging in changes from the main page.. This will prevent materials from being wrongfully deleted.
Non-canon pages will be allowed to be voted back as canon from users who have made prior contributions to the main page.
Each user might also flag other users as “fire-starter” on a page, this flagged users will be unable to edit the page, only being able to “sponsor” edits on the page. To prevent abuse, “fire-starter” flags will have a expiry of 2 weeks.
- Advisor Erm. I am the one who propose this idea.. so I can advise? Haaaa Haaaa (talk) 09:56, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
Expand your ideaEdit
Do you want to submit your idea for funding from the Wikimedia Foundation?