I've been contributing to Wikipedia since 2003, and my contributions have been tapering off over the last six months, too.
I suddenly found myself involved in several really nasty disputes at the same type, with really stubborn people who wouldn't give in to community consensus, dragging on the argument for months or escalating the dispute in personal ways, to the point where I spent most of my time defending myself instead of working on the article under dispute. My stress level went up, and I backed off to salvage my own sanity and not have a detrimental effect on my real life.
It might be interesting to graph the number of instances of each wikistress level image over time to see if there's any correlation. They're not used uniformly or anything, but a glaring change over time would indicate something.
If so, I wonder if this can be traced back to some major change in policy or Wikimedia Foundation activities. Of course everyone will cite their own personal pet peeves, but the Wikimedia Foundation's decision to prohibit all images that aren't "free enough" happened six months ago, and every time I see a busybody deleting a legal, useful image, it certainly contributes to my wikistress level.
Or maybe it's a campaign by Britannica to destroy our community from the inside out...;-)
Slashdot Mirror
No.
No no no no no.
These are bad. Very bad.
In one particular episode of South Park, Kenny was killed by the MIR space station. Does this fact belong in:- The article about that particular South Park episode
- The MIR article
By saying that trivia sections are good, you're voting for #2.I've been contributing to Wikipedia since 2003, and my contributions have been tapering off over the last six months, too.
;-)
I suddenly found myself involved in several really nasty disputes at the same type, with really stubborn people who wouldn't give in to community consensus, dragging on the argument for months or escalating the dispute in personal ways, to the point where I spent most of my time defending myself instead of working on the article under dispute. My stress level went up, and I backed off to salvage my own sanity and not have a detrimental effect on my real life.
It might be interesting to graph the number of instances of each wikistress level image over time to see if there's any correlation. They're not used uniformly or anything, but a glaring change over time would indicate something.
If so, I wonder if this can be traced back to some major change in policy or Wikimedia Foundation activities. Of course everyone will cite their own personal pet peeves, but the Wikimedia Foundation's decision to prohibit all images that aren't "free enough" happened six months ago, and every time I see a busybody deleting a legal, useful image, it certainly contributes to my wikistress level.
Or maybe it's a campaign by Britannica to destroy our community from the inside out...