Grants:IdeaLab/Encourage editors to improve on content by active contribution
What is the problem you're trying to solve?
Don't rush into article deletion without attempting improvement just because you can. Think a while before you act on the possible impact.
What is your solution?
Wikipedia is kept alive by volunteer editors. New editors get bogged down by AfC rejections with a one liner note that doesn't help them to understand what they have done wrong in the first place. AFDs are quite popular tool of 'punishment' imho by the overburdened Admin taskforce entrusted with this activity. Some statistics might easily reveal the truth of my assertion. AfDs are not closed adhering to BEFORE and IAR but merely on a vote count/consensus.
- AfDs should burden the admin with cleaning of redlinks.
- The objective should be to improve the article and only if that is a total failure, resort to AfD. Admin should be held accountable for AfD nomination without making an attempt to improve an existing article.
- Teahouse and similar forums should actively help new editors instead of providing high level instructions or quoting policies. The difference is that of handling a novice vs a seasoned wiki editor.
- imho , ganging of administrators should be avoided as much possible.
- ArbCom should be managed by a different set of administrators preferably to bring the real NPOV.
- I see this issue as a burning topic if not addressed adequately and immediately. It will reduce the amount of contribution and move people away from the basic foundation of free editing. Devopam (talk) 10:00, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
Expand your idea
Would a grant from the Wikimedia Foundation help make your idea happen? You can expand this idea into a grant proposal.