Wikipedia:WikiProject Policy matters

WikiProject Policy matters is a WikiProject for discussion of the relationship which is at the heart of Wikipedia, between encyclopedia (ends) and community (means). It hopes to develop proposals to improve that relationship. It aims to be a permanent forum for adapting policy to Wikipedia's evolving needs.

Mission statement

 * Wikipedia is not a bureaucracy, but it is not an anarchy either. It is a community (without which the encyclopedia that is the ultimate aim would not exist), and is founded on an implied social contract. Arbitrary exercise of power violates that contract, and is bad for the Wikipedia community, which is ultimately bad for Wikipedia. This means that on the one hand, the spirit of the rules is more important than the letter; and on the other, that due process matters. Resolving this contradiction requires both a general respect for policy, and the continual adaptation of policy in order to meet Wikipedia's evolving needs.

What Policy matters is not: a means to discuss content issues of any sort. It is about the meta issues of the process of content creation/management and the management of editor interactions. Policy issues of this type should be addressed elsewhere.

Methods

 * Survey and organise current meta-type discussions about policy-making/enforcement
 * Discuss/develop ideas (e.g. on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Policy matters, or topic-specific subpages) on what the problems are, and possible solutions; then present proposals to the wider community via appropriate channels
 * Analyse Category:Wikipedia rejected policies and Category:Wikipedia archives to see why past proposals failed, and whether helpful conclusions can be drawn
 * Develop better methods for policymaking/revision, within or beyond the WikiProject
 * Remain a permanent means for helping the encyclopedia-creating community to respond to the ever-changing challenges of governing itself

Tasks
none agreed yet

Possible ideas
See also:Category:Wikipedia proposals


 * Propose reorganising WP:AN, e.g. by topic or function
 * Propose WP:AN/User sanction review - some kind of more organised way of reviewing user sanctions, without getting distracted by other issues on WP:ANI or necessarily going through the formalities of WP:RFC or WP:RFAR. In particular for dealing more systematically with controversial blocks. Possibly protected, so that discussions are amongst admins only.
 * Suggest ways to improve/streamline procedure
 * Suggest constructive ways to modify/clarify policy
 * Such as giving policy version numbers, and requiring non-trivial changes to be discussed first, and if accepted to lead to an appropriate change in version number
 * Such as explicitly collecting precedents for guidance on interpretation of policy
 * Such as clarifying the distinction between essays, guidelines, policies and founding principles.
 * Such as reducing instruction creep and pointlessly duplicated guidelines.
 * Such as trying to maintain a harmony between the policy on the books and the facts on the ground, sometimes by codifying existing practice.
 * Ask ArbCom candidates to comment
 * Find ways to establish the same relationship between Jimbo and the community as exists on non-English Wikipedias: i.e. Jimbo leaves them to get on with it, and users don't bother him with the mundane and the trivial. The community needs his input above all on major policy issues and on the general Future of Wikipedia. Jimbo doesn't need quite all of this crap (User talk:Jimbo Wales) distracting him from the bigger/more important issues.
 * Perhaps develop an Admin Code of Good Practice and/or a User Bill of Rights (the latter might be accepted if balanced by a User Responsibilities).
 * Propose Admin policy forum - a place for admins to discuss small policy revisions/clarifications (as an intermediate between a major Proposal with its own page, and somebody deciding to amend policy of their own bat)
 * Transpose CheckUser Policy to en:Wikipedia (and possibly clarify circumstances when/how used)
 * Limited administrators
 * Use approach of Arbitration policy/Past decisions more widely (for non-Arbcom sanctions)

Participants

 * 1) Rd232 talk 00:28, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 2) Haukur 07:58, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 3) Radiant_ &gt;|&lt;  10:55, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 4) bainer (talk) 12:12, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 5) Sjakkalle  (Check!)  12:27, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 6) Kevin baas 20:08, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 7) Adrian Lamo ·  (talk)  · (mail) · 01:17, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 8) Durin 14:18, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
 * 9) John Reid 02:35, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Forums

 * WikiProject Policy matters/Adminship
 * WikiProject Policy matters/User sanction

Wikipedia surveys

 * Requests for comment/Policies | Centralized discussion
 * Admin accountability poll
 * Wikipedia talk:Administrators' noticeboard
 * Wikipedia talk:Administrators' noticeboard
 * User RFC reform