Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> I'm not sure what the solution to this and the main article's problem is, though, other than vigilance.

People with a mission to tell The Truth have a lot more patience and determination than a bunch of regular wikipedia editors.

Burn out happens a lot, and part of the reason is the constant bickering around every single edit to an article for years. Some edits are inconsequential, but poke the wikipedians making or defending those edits as biased and you're helping your biases stay. Goad and provoke those wikipedians and you get to disrupt ANI pages as well. (Luckily, most WP editors realise the hot button topics and tread carefully; leaving us with megabytes of meta discussion over -, --, --- etc.)

I guess WP could employ a small core of people to edit the articles, using a carefully crafted selection of sources; and to deal with propagandists. They'd be trained to use troll-defeating tactics and conflict resolution.



> People with a mission to tell The Truth have a lot more patience and determination

The Truth™ is usually biased. I'm not sure if that's what you wanted to express with your comment, but it's exactly those people who want to get out the(ir) truth who have the most patience and determination.


That's exactly what I'm saying, yes.


> I guess WP could employ a small core of people to edit the articles, using a carefully crafted selection of sources;

I hope it is apparent that that approach wouldn't work and is antithetical to the fundamental principles of Wikipedia.


The current way certainly isn't working, and has left some areas of Wikipedia devoid of editors willing to put in the effort required to keep editing in the face of determined trolling.


Sure, but it isn't clear or even very suggestive that the proposal above would help.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: