User talk:THK
Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Will (E@) T 21:03, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia problems
[edit]I like the Wikipedia very much, but these are some things that in my opinion are wrong with the Wikipedia:
- The process for deleting content is political, slow, and is the single most frustrating thing. Adding things is easy. Changing things (that are not protected) is easy. Deleting things is ridiculously painful. There has got to be a better way. Bring on easy deletion and undeletion of content by users.
- Everybody wants to vote, but precious few people fix problems. Voting on something is easy. Acting to fix a problem is a lot harder. It would improve the Wikipedia if people voted less, but did more.
- Discussions: To have a discussion requires listening to the response! Too often people walk into a topic, leave their opinion, and vanish, to never come back to respond to questions / comments about what they have added. If you don't intend on responding, then don't leave the message in the first place. Wikipedia is not a soapbox.
- Consensus is great in theory, but useless in practise. Someone changing their position rarely happens. More than 3 people can't even agree on what video to rent, so how can 15 people all agree on what to do about a controversial topic? They can't, which leads to majority rules. Which would be fine, if we said "majority rules" was the decision-making process, instead of the pushing the daydream of "consensus".
- Perma-protection of articles and templates. Fine when used temporarily, but perma-protecton prevents change. It might seem a good idea at first for vandalization targets, but protection prevents even constructive change.