Grants:IdeaLab/Slithering Agendas
Project idea[edit]
What is the problem you're trying to solve?[edit]
I have seen too many instances where editors park themselves on topics and forbid worthy contributions.
What is your solution?[edit]
Create 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[edit]
Get involved[edit]
Participants[edit]
Endorsements[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[edit]
Would a grant from the Wikimedia Foundation help make your idea happen? You can expand this idea into a grant proposal.