User:Greg Tyler/Ownership
 | This is an essay on the ownership policy and {{Maintained}} template. It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints. |
 | Parts of this user page (those related to the non-existent Template:Maintained) need to be updated. Please help update this user page to reflect recent events or newly available information. (March 2015) |
Firstly, let me state that I don't support ownership of articles. It's against Wikipedia's ethic in that it dissuades community work. Whilst people may feel attached to articles, those who want their writing to stay intact and not be edited shouldn't be contributing to this project. No disrespect intended, but that sort of ethos is more suited to "proper" writers.
However, I'm a big fan of the {{Maintained}} template, which renders something similar to below: {{Maintained}}
It's a great idea - new contributors who have a query about the article have an editor to direct it at. I currently maintain the Robert Muchamore and CHERUB pages and would obviously be more than happy to guide people should queries come my way. Being non-controversial, rarely edited articles they generally don't; but I have no qualms with that.
The major problem I see with this, however, is that however un-ownership like it tries to be, it does appear as some sort of elitism. It seems to say "These users know the article better than you. And they're watching you. So no screwing about." As someone who supports this template, I don't agree with that message.
My proposed solution? A new template which can be put on the article's talk page where editors can register that they have an interest in the article and are actively involved in editing and maintaining it.
The "active" link would take the reader to an article/template documentation explaining that the users listed there are considered to be active in editing and maintaining and a good port of call for queries about the article. The template documentation should also explain that users putting their names on one of these lists were signing themselves up as active, contactable participants.
Another possible template appears below. Although similar to the original, this seems more friendly and less forceful.
 | The following users are actively involved with this article and aim to edit and maintain it. If you have any questions about or problems with the article, they may well be able to help! If you're active in this article, feel free to add your name below.
Greg Tyler
These editors don't "own" the page; they're just interested in helping others develop it. |  |
That said, it may appear too friendly for experienced users and waffling purely to suck up the new editors. All said and done, I prefer my first option. It's simple, to the point, non-threatening and ignorable if necessary. Whilst I'm currently not intending to present this idea to the whole community, it's a concept I could imagine being useful to Wikipedia as a whole.
If you have any comments, queries or other feedback on this essay, I'd love to hear it. The discussion page is anxiously waiting for you.