User:Filll/AGF Challenge Plans
I am gratified that just in a couple of days, over 2 dozen people have chosen to respond to the AGF Challenge. I hope more do in the coming days.
I plan to invite editors and admins who are experienced in editing controversial articles to answer the AGF Challenge in a while, after some others have had a chance. From private discussions with these experienced editors and personal observation, I suspect that many will be quite surprised at the sensitivity and sophistication that editors who are experienced with controversial topics on Wikipedia bring to these exercises. Contrary to the caricature that many have of these experienced editors, they are far more lenient and far less harsh than what I have heard critics claim.
I hope that we can maybe develop a set of consensus Best Practice responses to these exercises, which can be used as part of training for new editors and admins. Of course, there is no "right answer" to most of these, but editors can learn a lot by reading what approaches others suggest.
At some point in the future I might describe what actually happened in each of the situations these exercises are based on.
I am preparing a 2nd and even a 3rd set of AGF Challenge exercises. Each set of AGF Challenge exercises will consist of about 8 exercises, exploring various aspects of editing controversial and contentious topics. When this first set has reached some sort of "completed" status, I will bring out a second set, and then a third set, and possibly more depending on interest.
I have been asked to explore Challenge exercises for the training of mediators. I am in contact with the mediation community and I will be considering exercises for mediators as well.
It has been suggested that AGF Challenge exercises be part of RfAs, or Arbcomm selection. They might be useful as part of training new admins, such as at Wikipedia:New admin school/Dealing with disputes.
| No current discussions. Recent RfAs, recent RfBs: (successful, unsuccessful) |