Value, respect, and strive for diversity in editors

Yeah, I find it frustrating that some people can be disruptive for 10,000+ edits, when we can usually get the idea after 1000. We ARE very lenient. I'm not sure how they get away with it. Maybe...

  1. You get away with it if you do more good than harm. (e.g.: if you've edited even a few articles)
  2. You get away with it if you have enough defenders to obstruct a consensus. (e.g.: if you've made a few friends)
  3. You get away with it if you're working in good faith. (e.g.: you show you're on some kind of crusade)

Maybe all of the above? Maybe one of the above?

I'm not sure how to combat this. I do think we're too lenient in some ways, and welcome volunteers who make WP a worse place for everyone. But I also think we need to be more welcoming overall.

Randomran14:53, 5 May 2010

Yes, I have also seen many very serious cases of scaring away promising new users. That's probably one of the most important things we must become less tolerant about.

Hans Adler15:00, 5 May 2010

what process would you use to deal with the persistently disruptive editor? what process to encourage new users, and encourage editors to encourage? (i kinda hate to devolving to process, but it's the language of rules for rules lovers; clearly an ethos is not persuasive for all)

Pohick216:19, 5 May 2010

We just make recommendations, we don't do the detailed implementation part which is left to each Wikipedia.

Inter-personals issues is one reason why many editors leave the project as mentioned in the Former Contributors Survey Results.

Personally i try to limit use of templates when communicating with a new editors and verbose more in prose in user talk pages.

KrebMarkt18:07, 5 May 2010