Nice text about "1984" and Wikipedia`s editing wars. Translation for not speak Russian:
Dear diary, I thought that the main character of the immortal George Orwell's "1984" has a prototype in our world - the moderator Wikipedia. Judge for yourself, it is forced by using the "updated" data edit the information in the old articles. That's how it is described in the book:
"For example, messages from" The Times "of March 17, it was clear that
In his speech on the eve of Senior Brag predicted a lull in the south Indian
front and speedy offensive Eurasia North Africa. In fact,
Eurasians actually launched an offensive in South India and North Africa
no action is taken. We had to rewrite this paragraph speech
Big Brother so that he predicted the actual course of events. Or
Again, December 19, "The Times" published an official forecast production
variety of consumer products in the fourth quarter of 1983, ie
sixth quarter ninth three-year plan. In today's issue of the printed data
actual production, and it turned out that the forecast was totally wrong.
Winston was to clarify the original figures, so that they coincide with
today. On the third sheet it was a very simple error which
can be corrected in one minute. As recently as February, the Ministry of plenty
promised (to state categorically the official terms), which in 1984
, the rate of delivery of chocolate will not diminish. In fact, as it was known, and
Winston himself, at the end of the week is going to reduce the rate from 30 to
20 grams. He had to just replace old promise advance notice,
that in April, the rate may be reduced. "
Sound familiar? Well, of course, the classic war edits, even Wikipedia describes a similar process.
Under the war meant not a single action, and the general mood of confrontation participant in regard to the content of articles. War update - is the aggressive use of update mechanism in order to win the argument about the content of the article.
When conflict management administrators often have to make decisions on the qualifications of certain actions as war edits. There are several criteria that can be used to determine the involvement of a party to war edits.
The most common criterion for the presence of the war is a violation of the participant edits the rule of three setbacks. Under this rule, the excess participant absolute limit on the number of "kickbacks" that can do in one particular article within 24 hours (three "rollback") qualifies as a war edits. This limitation, however, should not be interpreted too formal, and the fact that the party has reached (but not beyond) the limit, indicates the presence of a serious breach of conduct. Rule three setbacks should not be seen as a license to carry out "kickbacks" that are not formally covered by its action: the war of edits can be stretched for a few days or even for a longer period, they may cover several pages, although the actions of the participant thus can be within the "normal" and, finally, the problem may be that the party just used to say "roll back" to any editing, calling his displeasure.
Wars edits - it behaviors, characterized by a tendency to confrontation. This behavior is contrary to the spirit of seeking consensus, based on the discussion of the situation.
Not a war of edits "kickbacks" or vandalism edits Blocked members - at the same time, no changes are vandalism committed during the conflict over the content of the article (even if they clearly violate NPOV), and other actions, if made in good faith .
Talking about war update, we mainly have in mind the style of behavior a participant, not the number of "kickbacks", which he made on various pages for a given period of time.
By the way, a surprising number: Yandex does not want to suggest the phrase "war update" in the search query, but produces results. Google suggests search.
Dear diary, I thought that the main character of the immortal George Orwell's "1984" has a prototype in our world - the moderator Wikipedia. Judge for yourself, it is forced by using the "updated" data edit the information in the old articles. That's how it is described in the book:
"For example, messages from" The Times "of March 17, it was clear that
In his speech on the eve of Senior Brag predicted a lull in the south Indian
front and speedy offensive Eurasia North Africa. In fact,
Eurasians actually launched an offensive in South India and North Africa
no action is taken. We had to rewrite this paragraph speech
Big Brother so that he predicted the actual course of events. Or
Again, December 19, "The Times" published an official forecast production
variety of consumer products in the fourth quarter of 1983, ie
sixth quarter ninth three-year plan. In today's issue of the printed data
actual production, and it turned out that the forecast was totally wrong.
Winston was to clarify the original figures, so that they coincide with
today. On the third sheet it was a very simple error which
can be corrected in one minute. As recently as February, the Ministry of plenty
promised (to state categorically the official terms), which in 1984
, the rate of delivery of chocolate will not diminish. In fact, as it was known, and
Winston himself, at the end of the week is going to reduce the rate from 30 to
20 grams. He had to just replace old promise advance notice,
that in April, the rate may be reduced. "
Sound familiar? Well, of course, the classic war edits, even Wikipedia describes a similar process.
Under the war meant not a single action, and the general mood of confrontation participant in regard to the content of articles. War update - is the aggressive use of update mechanism in order to win the argument about the content of the article.
When conflict management administrators often have to make decisions on the qualifications of certain actions as war edits. There are several criteria that can be used to determine the involvement of a party to war edits.
The most common criterion for the presence of the war is a violation of the participant edits the rule of three setbacks. Under this rule, the excess participant absolute limit on the number of "kickbacks" that can do in one particular article within 24 hours (three "rollback") qualifies as a war edits. This limitation, however, should not be interpreted too formal, and the fact that the party has reached (but not beyond) the limit, indicates the presence of a serious breach of conduct. Rule three setbacks should not be seen as a license to carry out "kickbacks" that are not formally covered by its action: the war of edits can be stretched for a few days or even for a longer period, they may cover several pages, although the actions of the participant thus can be within the "normal" and, finally, the problem may be that the party just used to say "roll back" to any editing, calling his displeasure.
Wars edits - it behaviors, characterized by a tendency to confrontation. This behavior is contrary to the spirit of seeking consensus, based on the discussion of the situation.
Not a war of edits "kickbacks" or vandalism edits Blocked members - at the same time, no changes are vandalism committed during the conflict over the content of the article (even if they clearly violate NPOV), and other actions, if made in good faith .
Talking about war update, we mainly have in mind the style of behavior a participant, not the number of "kickbacks", which he made on various pages for a given period of time.
By the way, a surprising number: Yandex does not want to suggest the phrase "war update" in the search query, but produces results. Google suggests search.
