CZ:Proposals/Change to reversion policy: Difference between revisions
imported>Larry Sanger No edit summary |
imported>Larry Sanger No edit summary |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{proposal assignment| | {{proposal assignment|Const}} | ||
== Complete explanation == | == Complete explanation == | ||
Edit [[CZ:Professionalism#Reversion and deletion as unprofessional behaviors]] to emphasize that it is the lack of explanation which is the offence, not the mere act of reverting or deleting others' work. Raise the limit on removal from 50 words to about 100 words or 1kb. | Edit [[CZ:Professionalism#Reversion and deletion as unprofessional behaviors]] to emphasize that it is the lack of explanation which is the offence, not the mere act of reverting or deleting others' work. Raise the limit on removal from 50 words to about 100 words or 1kb. |
Revision as of 15:19, 13 February 2008
This proposal has been assigned to the Constabulary, and is now in the Constabulary proposals queue.
Complete explanation
Edit CZ:Professionalism#Reversion and deletion as unprofessional behaviors to emphasize that it is the lack of explanation which is the offence, not the mere act of reverting or deleting others' work. Raise the limit on removal from 50 words to about 100 words or 1kb.
Reasoning
Citizendium authors are not nearly so bold about existing articles as Wikipedia authors are; and I believe that the existing wording in the professionalism policy is partially responsible. I believe that if it were made clear that large edits, including those which wipe out significant parts of other people's work, are acceptable, provided they are discussed, that authors here will feel less inhibition about improving existing articles.
Wikipedia describes its process as "bold, revert, discuss". This leads to edit wars. Citizendium's process should be "bold, discuss." and "revert, discuss." People should not be discouraged from making large changes, unless they consistently make bad changes. Discussion should be encouraged, and required for larger changes.
Raising the word limit will make it easier for knowledgeable authors to replace low quality micro-stubs with more fleshed-out articles without having to worry about violating rules or having to present a detailed rationale when the work speaks for itself. (Of course, if the work doesn't speak for itself, it should be discussed anyway, but someone else can start that discussion.)
Implementation
- Create and discuss detailed rewording of CZ:Professionalism#Reversion and deletion as unprofessional behaviors
- Adopt revised wording (requires Editorial Council?)
- Edit CZ:Professionalism#Reversion and deletion as unprofessional behaviors to reflect new policy
Discussion
Excellent use of the system, Anthony, thanks. Personally, I think this is almost a trivial change, but it's worth discussing.
Since this concerns CZ:Professionalism, the decisionmaking group is the Constabulary. I think that they'll simply take whatever the community recommends on this. Go ahead and draft the new language, Anthony, and send it off to the constables. --Larry Sanger 14:58, 13 February 2008 (CST)
Proposals System Navigation (advanced users only) | |
|
Proposal lists (some planned pages are still blank):
|