Wiki Police

A person who takes responsibility for understanding and enforcing what is and is not desirable on a Wiki. WikiPolice may be appointed by a central authority, or, more often, may be self-appointed. Unlike a WikiVandal or WikiButcher, a WikiPolice person feels he or she is enforcing grounded rules that reflect a society's cumulative will and improve the society's overall prosperity and well-being.

We do not have a PoliceForce here. The volunteers who take care of this site do so with no additional power beyond those of the potential abusers. -- WardCunningham

Have to disagree... no additional power beyond the potential abusers, yes. But that merely means that there are no WikiGods (well, 1, I suppose). But the officer walking down the street has no particular power advantage either. He has a gun? Well, I can get one too. He's got lots of friends he can call in for assistance? Well, so does the Mafia. There is no officially sanctioned police force, but that's not quite the same thing. -- cwillu

Apparently, Ward changed his mind and gave some volunteers additional powers - see WikiAccessRestricted.

Self-appointed police are usually termed Vigilantes. Central appointment would be via Ward. Which is it, Vigilante or Police?

If Ward appointed them, would that make them Wardens?

I think this is a false dichotomy. In Wiki, EditText empowers everyone to be police. They are not self-appointed; it is inherent in the medium. And yet they are not centrally appointed. A "police" on Wiki has a significantly different meaning than a "police" elsewhere.

In MyIshmael, there's a discussion of how tribes create ground rules for how a community is to live. The rules aren't prohibitions, such as, "Do not drink liquor until the age of 21", or "Thou shalt not jaywalk." The rules evolve for each tribe as a way to increase harmony and minimize the impact of disruption. I think the Wiki upholds this concept fairly well. Nothing is forbidden, yet the community seeks generally accepted practices that will increase harmony (or signal if you prefer) over disruption (or noise).

I "take responsibility for understanding and enforcing what is and is not desirable on a Wiki" - but I don't consider myself a member of any WikiPolice force. Case in point: somebody stranded some text on a page that was snidely named; I rolled my eyes, moved it back, and (possibly politely) suggested they pick a better name if they were going to break apart the page. I didn't feel like a cop; in fact, I felt exactly the way I do when I roll my eyes, pick up a Mad Dog 20/20 bottle off my street, and throw it in the trash. It's not exactly WikiGnome behavior, either, since I drew attention to the action. Maybe I'm a Wiki Vigilante Street-Sweeper.

Has anyone actually spotted any WikiPolice? (or WikiMasters, for that matter....) -- GeorgePaci

I don't mind saying that I am a WikiPolice if that means we get back to talking about patterns and software instead of politics and books/movies. -- IainLowe

I don't mind being called any of those things if my actions increase the signal-to-noise ratio of the pages here, regardless of topic. -- FrancisHwang

Admirable intentions, if I do say so. But handle with care. We shall see when we return to the "WikiNow" in a month or two as to whether you have been successful.

"Return to the WikiNow?" What makes you think we are not in the WikiNow, er, right now? -- francis

It sounds like most commenters here regard "police" (and by extension WikiPolice) as pejorative terms. But they're not, at least not to my ear. I think societies need police, and Wiki's (such as this one) need WikiPolice. It may sound corny, but in my experience police protect and serve. I wince when I get pulled over in real life and metaphorically in a Wiki. But I don't mind having police around and I don't think it's insulting to call someone a "policeman." -- SteveMetsker

When this discontinuity is over, in a month or two, we will see in retrospect, if all the noise, like on this page, will be history, deleted, or forgotten and abandoned as one of the "WikiTransgressions?". I hope so.

Moved from ArbitersOfValue?

Formerly known as DrivelPolice?, these high and mighty wikizens cast judgement on pages created by others, usually by wholesale deletion.

Their judgements of value are responsible for the ever more pristine state of WardsWiki.

Once upon a time, simply not signing contributions was enough for claims of AnonymousDrivel?. Thankfully, wiki has moved on from these less tolerable days. Or has it?

Not so long ago this wiki passed 20,000 pages, and some taking notice seemed to think this was magic number that should not be passed, and concerted effort was made to reduce what was in their minds "drivel". It seems some have determined that pages without edit for as long as 366 days, and whose authors may have moved on, are history that can be discarded in favor of a Contemporary Wiki. It seems history is swept aside by their decree..... and all it takes is two. But there are those of us who think history has value and can teach us about how far we have come as well it can provide insights and wisdom. It can also show what has been tried and proven either to be of value or otherwise. It can show what mistakes need not be repeated, and that the record of what was has value as well as what is. After all this Wiki was established not only to record but also to "make" history. -- AnonymousOnPurpose

And there are those who believe we should FixBrokenWindows, CleanTheKitchen, and improve the SignalToNoise ratio.

There are basically four types of contributors and using the House metaphor they are:

Builders: Those who author original content - furnish new ideas - present new designs - put the house on the land.
Remodelers: Those who fix things, correct malfunctions, remove scars and blemishes, modernize and configure to current needs.
Demolishers: Those who remove entirely that which was on the land, hauling it off to the dump, and bury it.
Restorers: Those who recognize the uniqueness and beauty of an old design and who attempt to put it back the way it was long ago.

All of these activities have a certain value to the use of the limited land space available. Some of them are additive and some are subtractive. But all of them in careful deliberation can benefit the total picture. -- AnonymousOnPurpose

Self-appointed police are usually termed Vigilantes. Central appointment would be via Ward. Which is it, Vigilante or Police?

Then again, at some level, all police are self-appointed. Near the top, the government has decided that it needs to police me. And they appointed themselves to the decision of who that will be. Now, I'm not going to start going around disrespecting officers, using the rationale that they're merely a vigilante force... but then again, who in their right mind would piss off a vigilante force after serious forethought? -- WilliamUnderwood

What allows a PoliceForce to function is primarily legitimacy, not power. That legitimacy comes from a combination of authority conferred from above and restrictions on their power. The police don't make the laws, they are not allowed to use excessive force, and they don't decide who will be punished and how. -- DagfinnReiersol

It's easy to destroy on Wiki. Then again, it's also very easy to restore and to create.

The British tradition is that the The police are the public and the public are the police. Also, by tradition, constables were not (routinely) armed. And while they have powers of arrest, other citizens do too. On a wiki does it means exercising SoftSecurity is Policing?

CategoryWiki CategoryWikiUser