from my experience

Jump to navigation Jump to search

from my experience

This is just some suggestion I have fro my experience with a troll on wikipedia.

background:

It was because of the actions of a troll that I left and I'm sure many other editors leave for similar reasons.

I'm a professional scientist and engineer who has worked in both academia and industry and I'm more than happy to add my knowledge and experience. I also except that others can come and edit my work but I do find it extremely frustrating to spend time and effort research a subject and get good sources to have a person come along with the deliberate intention destroying things. I had a problem with one such troll. I went to arbitration which didn't solve anything as the editors involved in arbitration had very little idea of the subject and sided with the troll. I gave up with wikipedia after that but the troll went on to cause trouble on a number of other places on wikipedia and it eventually it took two years for him to get banded permanently. As a result I've decided to come back but I'm still having problems with one editor from that time.

Recommendation:

I would like a system to deal with trolls that works better. I would like to suggest that groups of pages come under the care of a team of experts who can decide on disputes and block obvious trolls from those pages.

I would suggest the editors use their real world identities and with proof of qualifications (so we don't have trolls as editors).

78.69.23.21907:30, 28 November 2009

I just read "from my experience". I do not know if this is possible or even reasonable on any wiki area but if a professional contributor is in a wiki area, and writes as a professional including correct spelling, why can not that person have a page s/he works on and has the ability to lock everyone else out then sign with their own name? This way other professionals can decide if anything should be changed. If something should be changed in their opinions they they should be allowed to contact the writer of the article via e-mail with his real name and have a mannerable discussion. If not this idea then perhaps there are other ideas along this line of thinking. I think that if someone suggests others use real names then that person (78.69.23.21907:30, 28 November 2009 ) should use their real name which that poster did not do aside from not even using an established alias. What are your concerns of using your own name unless you are doing something wrong? What is that expression that has been suggested, "Be Bold" --William Maury Morris 00:17, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

William Maury Morris00:17, 29 November 2009