Wikipedia:Old dogs and new tricks

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an essay; it contains the advice and/or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. It is not a policy or guideline, and editors are not obliged to follow it.
Shortcut:
WP:ODNT

Contents

[edit] Introduction

Old dogs can get complacent with what they have seen and what they know. The tried and proven are wonderful comfortable things.

Old dogs enjoy watching the pups, but get annoyed if the pups get too close or too boisterous.

But, without old dogs, there will be no pups to become old dogs.

[edit] Challenges for the Wikipedian

As a Wikipedian you have been working on a set of articles on and off for a long time. Even though no one owns articles in Wikipedia, you naturally feel a normal ownership of your handiwork. Another Wikipedian wants to restructure "your" articles.

You have for a long time been organising and categorising a series of articles, even establishing a category framework. Another Wikipedian wants to add to or restructure the article organisation and Wikipedia:categorisation scheme.

An initiative which has been tried before, possibly failed, or just by previous consensus deemed not appropriate or unsuitable at the time, is raised again by another Wikipedian.

[edit] The challenges and possible responses

In general, take a deep breath, and count to ten.

Does the challenge involve a new approach to an old idea? If it might work at all, help set up an environment to try it out. Take some time to explain the history and details of previous attempts, to help ensure the same dead ends are not gone down.

Does the challenge result from an initiative to edit-evolve a set of articles to a more world view? This is part of what an encyclopedia is all about. Take some time to explain the history and details of how the current articles arose. It will make the proposed changes more seamless by allowing what was learnt before to be included, and help ensure your hard work can be properly built upon.

Does the challenge result from an initiative to reorganise and enhance a Wikipedia:categorisation scheme to get a more world view? This is part of what an encyclopedia is all about. Take some time to explain the history and details of how the current articles arose. It will help make the proposed changes more seamless by allowing what was learnt before to be included, and help ensure your hard work can be properly built upon.

Does the challenge result from an initiative to evolve Wikipedia to a more sophisticated encyclopedic environment, for example, moving Wikipedia from a network of knowledge containers, articles, to a knowledge network embedded in articles, and is a bit "out there"? If so, give the challenge a bit of rope and let it run a bit. Help to guide it rather than stifle it.

Does the challenge mean evolving Wikipedia to a more sophisticated article environment, for example, standardising structure, layout or content for newbie articles, and is a bit "out there"? If so, give the challenge a bit of rope and let it run a bit. Help to guide it rather than stifle it.

Is the challenge bold? If it is infuriating but still interesting or intriguing, then be bold and help make the challenge even bolder.

[edit] Reality checks

Can the challenge be undone if it goes any further but goes belly up? Then let it go a bit further, but keep an eye on it.

If the challenge is too good, too easy, too breathtaking, too extensive to be true, it probably is. Gently poke it and see what the response is. If the response is considered or assertive, then let the challenge run. If it seems naive, give gentle advice, and let it run a bit but keep an eye on it. If there is give and take, then also give and take.

Is the challenge boldness or is it arrogance? Gently poke it and see what the response is. If the response is considered or assertive, then let the challenge run. If it is dismissive or aggressive, then give it a good faith guiding slap, and get a few others to keep an eye on it as well. If there is give and take then also give and take.

[edit] Summary

Take a deep breath, two if necessary.

  • Be kind to newbies.
  • Wikipedia is a collaborative consensual accountable free for all.
  • If you do not want your material edited mercilessly, then do not submit it.
  • If you do not want your ideas challenged or developed by others, then do not submit them.
  • Wikipedians are told to be bold, so bold many of them will be.
  • Assume good faith.

Wikipedia will only mature and evolve if new Wikipedians are encouraged, to stick around, to become old dogs too.

Some times old dogs need to let new tricks be played out by the pups, and not all Wikipups were born yesterday.


[edit] See also