User talk:Wonderactivist/archive Waldorf

Notice: This is an archive of discussion on my Talk page of a previous Waldorf Wikiproject

Waldorf Wikiproject

Thank you for suggesting this. I didn't realize that wikiprojects could be effective at this kind of dispute resolution. Won't those who don't agree to cooperate just continue as they have been? What's the process involved, and how is it different from working for consensus with editors on the article's talk page? Professor marginalia 18:36, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have responded on the Professor's talk page. To be brief, I believe that a project will move the disputes off of the Wiki page, allow us to come to some sort of consensus with the help of administrators such as Longhair below and Invitations for general Wiki comment. We CAN make this a Wiki page and not an ongoing fight. Wonderactivist 14:52, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the invitation! ;-) The Waldorf Education page has always been a little unstable, mainly because a high proportion of its editors edit only this page and none others and are therefore unfamiliar with Wikipedia:Etiquette. For reasons that are a little too long to go into here, the page also seems to attract a large amount of 'nutters'. As a long time, occasional contributer to the page, I have seen a few attempts by level headed individuals such as yourself to rally the editors into bringing some sense to the article. None have really been that successful, however, I view it as my duty to support these individuals wherever time permits. I think that the quality of the page would be greatly improved if some agnostic editors who are active in other parts of wikipedia could be drafted into service. So in other words- I admire your initiative, and I will support it by continuing to do what I have been doing all ready.--Fergie 14:33, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have responded similarly to Fergie as to the Professor. Wonderactivist 14:57, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Wonderactivist and Fergie. I, too, am interested in a fair, consise page that describes Waldorf education, not from a Waldorf brochure point of view, but from a balanced point of view. The Waldorf page is currently problematic and people on both sides of the issue have considerable investment in making their point (myself included). I would be concerned about this effort being undertaken by people unfamilar with the subject of Waldorf education. How will they know what is factual? We've run into disagreements (not here) where quotes directly from Rudolf Steiner are posted somewhere, and then the translation is questioned, or the context is questioned, even the content is questioned. It's really a challenge to put a sensible article together that doesn't offend somebody. The article, as it is today, is replete with errors and more importantly, omissions that really need to be discussed. I tried adding to the Eurythmy section today, but I'm sure it will be heavily edited by tomorrow. I'm concerned about the science section too. My kids, for example, were taught in Waldorf school that, of all the races on the planet, Europeans are the most advanced. It's hard not to sound critical of Waldorf and still present this fact - or facts like these.

So, what to do about the immediate problem? I would suggest, for the time being, that no single person should make more than two edits per day. That seems reasonable and would certainly cut down the number of edits - and calm the notion that this article requires babysitting. If there is some mechanism in Wikipedia that can do this, I think it would help. I like the idea of a discussion on the discussion page 24 hours before an edit is made. This will help too. I think people should keep their hands off of links that are not their own. And I think approval for moving large chunks of information off the article should be by some type of consensus on the discussion page. I think the ultimate goal here is a balanced view of Waldorf and a reliable, honest article that shows Waldorf's strengths and shortcomings. Thanks! --Pete K 16:46, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have responded to Pete on hs user page with ideas for the use of a "critical views" section and the vision of making this a balanced, fair Wiki article - with possibly no outside links. Wonderactivist 15:07, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The mechanisms for fair and effective editing on wikipedia are well-established. We cannot create 'special' rules for any one page. Also, edits do not need to be 'factual' in fact The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. So this is why I believe an over haul by more experienced, agnostic editors in combination with the many Waldorf-specific editors would improve the content of this article.--Fergie 09:47, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be delighted to help with this project. I have 15 years of Waldorf school experience with three kids - including one who started in pre-school and just graduated high school. My two other kids attend Waldorf school and my ex wife is currently a Waldorf teacher and Anthroposophist. I have studied Steiner for 13 years. I am a published author (you can google my name for credits). I have been a Waldorf activist and reformist for many years. I am well respected in my Waldorf community despite broaching difficult topics from time to time. My position is that whatever information goes on this page must be truthful, accurate and unbiased. Please let me know if I can be of service. Pete Karaiskos --Pete K 03:30, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Wonderactivist,

I have tried to see how to create a sublibrary to the main article on WE, to put sub sections of the article, but not found out how to do it yet. HGilbert probably knows how to do this, and he has written most of the article. I'd support any moving by him of sections to sub pages of the main page.

Thanks,

--Thebee 18:33, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have responded fully to the Bee on his user page, and wish to point out that we do not need a sub-library as of this time. I will be creating project pages - which are working pages - and then when the project is completed we will create the necessary final pages from the project pages. Wonderactivist 15:17, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I think this is a bad idea. Sune, Thebee, is attempting to make Wikipedia an extension of his own highly controversial website, WaldorfAnswers. Posting his own material here would only lead to more unwanted controversy. I'm sure Wikipedia wouldn't be interested in hosting a sub-library of PLANS articles. Let's just work to produce an unbiased article about Waldorf and provide links to the fringe sites. There's no need to reproduce sub-pages of controversial material here.--Pete K 15:05, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the invitation. It is a positive initiative which can only be fruitful. I will contribute as possible, given my own time limitations. I agree with Fergie that, rather than creating special rules here, we follow Wikipedia guidelines (newbies: that means getting to know these!!), which are well-crafted for exactly such a situation as we have here, with sensitive topics and strong points of view. Hgilbert 09:59, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Wonderactivist. Thank you for including me in the project. I don't mind being listed as such. I don't see my role as a critic as much as a reformist. My kids are still in Waldorf, so it behooves me to work to make Waldorf better. I can, however, contribute to the critique of Waldorf if that's what is needed, as well as identify and tag inaccuracies in the supportive material for verification. Does that sound about right to you? --Pete K 16:02, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Waldorf Education; this area for admin and unbiased Wikipedian comment only

Hello Wonderactivist. Good to hear from you again. I'll give the article a read over sometime later today. At present my wiki time is reduced to brief periods of time but I'm free this afternoon when I return from several pre-planned meetings I have booked. I'll do my best then to ensure an outcome is suitable to all if possible. The cleanup taskforce is open to anyone, not just administrators, and there's always Requests for comment if it appears the content dispute is going nowhere fast. Hope that helps for now. I'll be back later with more time to spend on this article shortly. -- Longhair 00:59, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I must admit, I'm somewhat with Garrie (below) here, whereas I also don't have significant understanding of the topic to do much beyond comment on the wiki-side issues. I am willing to help out when things get tough on both sides, and can help point editors to the relevant Wikipedia policies as required, but after a quick read over the the Waldorf Education article, I think I'll have to take a re-read and examine the talk page more closely to determine the issues causing the problems here. If anyone needs administrator assistance, I'm willing to lend a hand there. Drop me a note on my talk page if you need me. -- Longhair 10:04, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comment on my talk page. Unfortunately I don't have significant understanding of the topic to do much beyond comment on the wiki-side issues. I hope my contribution leads to an improvement in the article. From what is presented it certainly appears to be a significant and worthwhile topic. Garrie 21:36, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The project is now located at User: Wonderactivist/Waldorf Project Team Page Wonderactivist 02:29, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Whither Waldorf Wikiproject?

Hi Wonderactivist, I think it's great you've initated that project, and that you have people who are similarly motivated to improve articles related to Waldorf Education. I've no problem it being a subproject of Wikipedia:WikiProject_Education or Wikipedia:WikiProject_Alternative education - in any case, it doesn't need to be in your userspace. All the best with it :-). Cormaggio ^{is learning} 13:57, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The move to userspace was intended as a temporary measure as the project was initially created in article space. I moved it to the creator's userspace to keep the project alive until such time as the editors involved found a new home for it. Hope this clear's up the current situation. -- Longhair 14:02, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've moved the project to Wikipedia:WikiProject Waldorf Project which I think is a more suitable final home. I'll see what I can do about helping to clean up the content here and make things a bit more readable. Sure is a lengthy debate you chaps have going :) -- Longhair 04:03, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

An idea only. Perhaps create separate sub-pages, on each issue under discussion. This may keep things on topic, and help those who aren't interested in the entire debate focus on their areas on concern? -- Longhair 04:19, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, so now we know where the WikiProject is based, the project's participants need to figure out what the best way(s) of managing the Waldorf-related articles is/are. But, while I am actually personally very interested in Steiner and Waldorf education, I unfortunately just don't have the time to arbitrate as an "unbiased" "knowledgeable person" :-). I think that's what a wikiproject is - an attempt to discuss issues relating to a specific subject and its representation on Wikipedia. From scanning the page, it looks like you're doing a good job so far - I would say, continue in the same vein, seeking consensus as you go. There is nothing wrong with having passionate views from different perspectives - these should be able to be merged into a coherent article under the guidance of WP:NPOV. Or, if there are significant debates about a particular issue, that can always fork into its own article (though, from my experience, care needs to be taken with such articles). So, I would simply say, again, all the best with your work. And when you're all "finished" with this, you could always start adding Waldorf-related material to Wikiversity. Cheers :-) Cormaggio ^{is learning} 10:30, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think the project is a good idea to sort out views and attempt to achieve concensus on balance and NPOV. It is my suggestion that issues are resolved there than through RfCs; for example, I made that suggestion in this message to one editor. Regards--Golden Wattle ^talk 00:56, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Waldorf unprotection

Sorry I hadn't replied earlier. I thought leaving you all to your own devices for a while might get things moving along. I've unprotected the Waldorf article. Let me know if any further trouble stirs. Thanks. -- Longhair\^talk 12:08, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your note to my talk page. I edited the {{todo}} template at the Waldorf project with an idea. I suggest creating subpages at your project on each particular issue under dispute. Not every editor will be involved in every dispute, or will they? This way, those involved in the thick of the discussion can work on the areas they feel need work, and administrators are easier able to sort through the bulk of information without wading through lengthy diatribe on a single talk page. I trust this helps. Your work in getting the project off the ground is admirable. I hope your hand heals quick. I've been one-armed myself many years ago, and I know how frustrating it can be when you just hunger to get back to a keyboard to get some work done. Cheers. -- Longhair\^talk 12:46, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I dare say it, but the project needs all the help it can get. Sure is a wildfire at times. Your efforts to bring calm in a storm are at times the lone voice of reason. -- Longhair\^talk 12:56, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mediation

A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Rudolf Steiner, and indicate whether you agree or refuse to mediate. If you are unfamiliar with mediation, please refer to Wikipedia:Mediation. There are only seven days for everyone to agree, so please check as soon as possible. Hgilbert 02:43, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are you aware of this request? Mediation can only go forward if all agree to it! Hgilbert 01:54, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Mediation

A Request for Mediation to which you are a party has been accepted. You can find more information on the mediation subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Rudolf Steiner.

For the Mediation Committee, Essjay (Talk)

This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to open new mediation cases. If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

This message delivered: 12:00, 15 October 2006 (UTC).

Steiner Question

The following is a copy of your question and its response that was posted on User talk:Essjay. The page is about to be archived and I wanted to make sure that you knew the answer.

Dear Essjay, I am not normally very active on Wikipedia, but had started the Waldorf project when I was so tired of seeing others fight on the page - harming Wikipedia's reputation. I was growing increasingly frustrated with the Waldorf project and was quite happy that someone requested mediation for the page. To me it seemed a logical next step as the project could not proceed until both sides wanted an end to the edit wars.
I did sign up on the mediation list as I didn't wish to block the process and my name had been added. If I am obligated to contribute in some way, please let me know, but otherwise, I am happy to turn it over to mediator hands. Best wishes, Wonderactivist 01:33, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

If you know you will be happy with any consensus that might be reached, just let the mediator know, and they will understand. Armedblowfish (talk|mail) 02:04, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Cbrown1023 04:03, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration

There is a current request for arbitration relating to the articles Waldorf education, Anthroposophy, Rudolf Steiner and Rudolf Steiner's views on race and ethnicity. Hgilbert 01:28, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Waldorf education

Hello,

An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Waldorf education. Please add any evidence you may wish the arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Waldorf education/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Waldorf education/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Thatcher131 01:32, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Waldorf education

The above entitled arbitration case has closed, and the final decision has been issued at the above link. Waldorf education, Rudolf Steiner, Anthroposophy and the extended family of related articles such as Social Threefolding are placed on article probation. Editors of these articles are expected to remove all original research and other unverifiable information, including all controversial information sourced in Anthroposophy related publications. It is anticipated that this process may result in deletion or merger of some articles due to failure of verification by third party peer reviewed sources. If it is found, upon review by the Arbitration Committee, that any of the principals in this arbitration continue to edit in an inappropriate and disruptive way editing restrictions may be imposed. Review may be at the initiative of any member of the Arbitration Committee on their own motion or upon petition by any user to them.

For the arbitration committee, Thatcher131 23:41, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reopening of arbitration

I have reopened the arbitration case concerning this article for review Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Waldorf education/Review. Fred Bauder 15:06, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Survey Invitation

Hi there, I am a research student from the National University of Singapore and I wish to invite you to do an online survey about Wikipedia. To compensate you for your time, I am offering a reward of USD$10, either to you or as a donation to the Wikimedia Foundation. For more information, please go to the research home page. Thank you. --WikiInquirer 13:54, 9 March 2007 (UTC)^{talk to me}[reply]