User:Uiteoi

I am an occasional contributor to wikipedia. I seldom create new articles but will make small edits from time to time such as adding references or internal 'See Also' links.

My areas of expertise are with computers, VoIP, NAT Traversal, Network Security, AJAX, Web Services, and Linux administration. I also contribute to other articles after having done some research and finding that valuable content may be contributed or at least referenced.

This user page contains my point(s) of view and does not claim to be neutral. However I do appreciate comments over my points of view either in my talk page or where indicated bellow.

=Concerns about wikipedia=

Open Web Foundation and speedy deletions nomination violations
See talk page for Open Web Foundation and WP:ANI.

I have written a blog post regarding this issue. Please do not blank this external link as this is only my (low traffic) user page and the link is very relevant to this issue though this is very critical of the dangerous path Wikipedia is heading for --Uiteoi (talk) 02:01, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

The following is largely an edit of my blog post mentioned above.

Who are wikipedia customers?
Obviously, the readers are but without the valuable content provided by millions of generous contributors, occasional and not, there would be nothing to feed readers. As contributors are not paid and indeed provide food for wikipedia they should also be considered customers of Wikipedia.

Therefore Wikipedia, the company here, should consider how to treat its customers properly and stop policing with over-zealous legislators, alias cops, alias judges, alias administrators.

What will happen if Wikipedia fails to keep encouraging contributors?
Well this will encourage contributors to consider alternative places to contribute, and possibly go check for Knol. This could be the beginning of the end of Wikipedia.

In the end Wikipedia could be left only with a few thousand administrators, or bot-geeks, and very few real contributors. I do not believe that administrators will contribute much more than bots and more rules to further close Wikipedia to the average contributor.

Can we still consider Wikipedia 'Open'?
A few years ago Wikipedia was definitely more open, but over the years the administrators are closing it in many ways:
 * by the explosion of the number of rules, making it impossible for the average contributor that I am to not violate half a dozen rules per edit
 * using bots to automatically an inhumanly flame contributors and prevent further edits by scaring contributors out of Wikipedia
 * by not separating powers properly and creating a closed administrator club where being politically correct (read over-zealous) is encouraged
 * by excluding administrators who would like Wikipedia to stay Open

My concerns
I am very concerned that Wikipedia is heading in the wrong direction because of the actions of over-zealous users and administrators. Over time it has become more and more difficult to make edits or create new articles without being flamed by tags and threats of speedy deletions.

These abuses frustrate Wikipedia contributors and may eventually send them the wrong message that they are not welcome here.

Wikipedia needs to streamline its processes to make it more accessible to the largest number of contributors instead of requiring occasional contributors like me to be experts in wikipedia rules.

Adding more rules is just increasing the barrier to contribution.

What could Wikipedia do?
Definitely review the direction where Wikipedia is headed and find innovative ways to keep the bad guys outs while rewarding contributors and stop scaring them off. A few guidelines: 1. Administrators should always consider if an article can be improved before any sort of tagging. This requires human intelligence and excludes the use of bots to automatically tag articles, reverse changes or delete articles. 2. Bots could still be used to help administrators make a review of articles. 3. Separate powers. There are thousands of administrators of Wikipedia, split them in exclusive groups and monitor abuses proactively.

These are just a few suggestions and I am sure that some or all of these have already been considered but it is time to implement something to give some freedom back to contributors.

Long live Wikipedia!

Other Article for which I currently argue against deletion
Zeitgeist: Addendum