If I was drafting a strategy for this, I'd suggest:
Get a pool of people who have nitpicky expertise in non-political subjects
Share potential edits among the group, splitting them up into tiny edits instead of big article refactors. Spread them out among members and time. Use a bug tracking system or something
Start mixing in politically sensitive corrections after a given account has been around for a month. Use the same time/person spreading strategies
Confront pushback with sources, requests for citation, and as much legalistic paperwork as possible. Be as bland as possible. Pretend you don't understand why the other person isn't reading your sources. Be repetitive and boring in the talk pages until someone snaps, then give them another round of repetitive and boring before calling for administrators.
Never touch the hot button topics that the media is currently pressing on. Focus on places where you don't have to fight an entire CIA office. If it's in the news, set a reminder to look at it in a year
Hmm what I had in mind was more like dunk_tank but for wikipedia and somehow teaching the group how to get edits through wikipedia and tactics on how to navigate it all properly. One thing that's missing is obviously that everyone here is highly experienced at reddit-style engagement so dunk_tank works for that, but there's probably very little skill in wikipedia.
In essence the aim would be to build a community of people that are good at this.
If I was drafting a strategy for this, I'd suggest:
Get a pool of people who have nitpicky expertise in non-political subjects
Share potential edits among the group, splitting them up into tiny edits instead of big article refactors. Spread them out among members and time. Use a bug tracking system or something
Start mixing in politically sensitive corrections after a given account has been around for a month. Use the same time/person spreading strategies
Confront pushback with sources, requests for citation, and as much legalistic paperwork as possible. Be as bland as possible. Pretend you don't understand why the other person isn't reading your sources. Be repetitive and boring in the talk pages until someone snaps, then give them another round of repetitive and boring before calling for administrators.
Never touch the hot button topics that the media is currently pressing on. Focus on places where you don't have to fight an entire CIA office. If it's in the news, set a reminder to look at it in a year
Hmm what I had in mind was more like dunk_tank but for wikipedia and somehow teaching the group how to get edits through wikipedia and tactics on how to navigate it all properly. One thing that's missing is obviously that everyone here is highly experienced at reddit-style engagement so dunk_tank works for that, but there's probably very little skill in wikipedia.
In essence the aim would be to build a community of people that are good at this.
Ok, wikipedia shitposters to regularly sabotage it in subtle ways. I can support this, not as praxis but as a good bit