Kipala
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary |
|||
Mstari 230:
You sound like you own Wikipedia and aknowledge that there may be temporal contributions from people who are not "we". If he falls in line, he may become useful, if not, we carry on regardless. Wikipedia should be more open, so that new contributors dont need to be talked to personally. --'''[[Mtumiaji:CGN2010|CGN2010]] ([[Majadiliano ya mtumiaji:CGN2010|majadiliano]])''' 11:38, 16 Septemba 2010 (UTC)
::A) What is your proposal? "More open" for what? How would you like to handle e.g. this "wachawi"- entry? B) Up til now I thought it is a positive characteristic of this wikipedia that "we" (some of "those" active here) talk personally to new contributors whereever that is possible. "I" guess that this was the way to get some people on board who have been active or still are. What is your idea instead of talking personally? C) As you mention a delete policy - why don`t you help me with a few examples from our delete-history what you see as unfitting deletes? D) about the ownership thing - you have repeated this and seem to have a strong impression. Well, that is not my view. What shall we do about it? '''[[Mtumiaji:Kipala|Kipala]] ([[Majadiliano ya mtumiaji:Kipala#top|majadiliano]])''' 12:30, 16 Septemba 2010 (UTC)
A) More open to people's reasons to contribute. For mature user wikipedia is an encyclopedia, but there are many other ways it is seen. Thats is already the case for various other wiki-languages and (as far as i see it for sw), the average native sw contributor is seeing wikipedia more of an interactive website. If the outlook for wikipedia doesn't reflect this, it will never grow into a community. With interactive I mean to see entries more like e.g. a [http://de-de.facebook.com/pages/Handelshochschule-Leipzig/112681578742996 facebook entry]: with links, content, talk pages and so on - but also with more symbolic meanings of page-titles (thats why I proposed removing the bracket from TZ town). B) I dont mean no harm. One think that is crucial for me, is that we need to understand that "we" (the non-native speaker) are guests in sw:wp. As a guest I have to regognize the particular features of the home-owner - as of A) above. Once these basic principles are sorted out, i believe communication would be easier possible anyway - also upfront communication. But i also think that a lot of people find it intimidating. C) The delete policy is just an aspect of the above, i.e. if a commonly shared approach as of A) is in place, delete wouldnt be a problem. It looks like the two examples turned out that M. was in fact a spelling mistake and the author didnt mean to write an article on the person, and W. may have been meant as a redirect, or a page of its own. Generally, I agree: there are plenty of spam entries, that can de deleted immidiately, but in some cases (even if there are titles with spelling mistakes or punctuation mark in it) some new contributors would be very grateful if their entry survives. I correct myself: the critic of the delting-policy is just a critic for points A) and B). --'''[[Mtumiaji:CGN2010|CGN2010]] ([[Majadiliano ya mtumiaji:CGN2010|majadiliano]])''' 13:11, 16 Septemba 2010 (UTC)
| |||