32
edits
Changes
The Six Rotten Pillars of Wikipedia (view source)
Revision as of 17:33, 29 November 2008
, 17:33, 29 November 2008Added shortened intro from original WR thread
'''THE SIX ROTTEN PILLARS OF WIKIPEDIA'''<ref>Originally appeared in Wikipedia Review, in [http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=20830 this] thread by the anonymous contributor Cedric the cat. It has been modified somewhat to reflect the context</ref>
'''WHY WIKIPEDIA IS DOOMED: THE SIX ROTTEN PILLARS OF WIKIPEDIA'''<ref>Originally appeared in Wikipedia Review, in [http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=20830 this] thread by the anonymous contributor Cedric the cat. It has been modified somewhat to reflect the context</ref>
It is becoming clear to even the most fervent wiki-apologists that something is really wrong with the current state of Wikipedia. A number of WP users have complained that editor conflicts have definitely been on the rise since 2004, and that the last two years on WP have been particularly bad. This is cited as an ever growing distraction from “building the encyclopedia”. In fact, edit wars over particular articles and other editor conflicts do appear to be growing at an ever increasing rate. In the early days of Wikipedia:Administrators’ noticeboard/Incidents (“WP:ANI”, WP’s drama center, [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive1 founded in December, 2004]), it usually took around one week to fill an archive. Now archives are filled about every two days.
So why all the drama? There are a number of reasons, all of which have been discussed here before at Wikipedia Review, and at some length. The most basic causes I identify as
<center>'''THE SIX ROTTEN PILLARS OF WIKIPEDIA'''</center>
== INSTANT EDITING OF ARTICLES ==
== INSTANT EDITING OF ARTICLES ==