Thread:Wakari yasui kotoba/@comment-22439-20140227050123/@comment-24598219-20140228185828

You are attempting to be kind, when it is inappropriate. Example: you are framing a house, and someone with no experience or training wishes to grab a hammer and help (with no supervision whatsoever). After the house is finished, are you sure you want to live in it?

Letting people edit text on a Wikia, when they have no talent at it whatsoever, leaves edits which often cannot even be read properly. Meanings are left all over the floor, definitions are lost, and the point of an edit becomes less than unclear; invisible. That's not kind, that's suicidal to the wiki in question.

People who cannot write, cannot because they have not done any practice. The practice should be done at home. When they are good enough, that they can read their own writing; then come back and edit a wiki. Not before. That's how I learned, after 40 years, how to form a written thought.

Since there is little peer pressure here, users feel they can edit without criticism. It is the same as the anonymous nature of sending a text message. They know, you won't come to their house and punch them in the nose for an anonymously sent insult (even though that is what SHOULD happen).

Don't give in to kindness, wiki's need peer review. Those of us that can write, need not be prevented, out of kindness's sake. It is a duty. When bad writing is peer reviewed to the extent that everything the bad writer wrote disappears, they will get the idea. They will try to improve, or; the lazy ones will go away. Either way, the desired result will be achieved. That result is good writing with a flair for invention and insight. I'm not the only one here that can write well, but our good work is maligned by the good intentions of bad writers. It makes all wikis appear haphazard and unprofessional to the extent that the wiki itself, no longer has value to the public.

Don't lose sight of the goal; which is to provide value via the information presented.