Sorry for the late reply. Here is the reply I sent a couple of days ago that
bounced since I wrote it from my usual email account:
Hello,
Thanks for reminding me of this thread and specifically for showing me this
suggestion, which I hadn't seen.
We are actually working on a similar idea. I
On 9 April 2011 20:21, Andrew Garrett agarr...@wikimedia.org wrote:
I don't mean to minimise the importance of keeping our established
users happy and free from harassment, but I want to caution against
the biases that we will undoubtedly have in considering our focus.
Anecdotally, we tend
You can see it in this Google spreadsheet here:
https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0Aq_nhKkb7L-OdG5uWlJLT25TZkZ3MzdSeUNqZnZqY2chl=enauthkey=CP3O_PgO
-- it's publicly viewable but not editable.
Brilliant! One point though, every item on that list has a meta solution
of better information
On Tue, 2011-04-12 at 10:36 -0700, ext Sue Gardner wrote:
We do all see the world from where we sit, and we interact with the
people we already know ... so, experienced editors will be more
exposed to the kinds of concerns shared by other experienced editors,
and those concerns will
On 12 April 2011 19:46, Quim Gil quim@nokia.com wrote:
In fact Wikimedia content is also popular among mobile users (directly
or through apps), but what about mobile contributions?
I just tried editing an article on en:wp on my shiny new BlackBerry
9300. (Which can browse Wikipedia just
I tried it about half a dozen times on my HTC desire. The user experience is
truly dreadful, and I'm not trying it again.
Op 12 apr. 2011 21:02 schreef David Gerard dger...@gmail.com het
volgende:
On 12 April 2011 19:46, Quim Gil quim@nokia.com wrote:
In fact Wikimedia content is also
I just tried editing an article on en:wp on my shiny new BlackBerry
9300. (Which can browse Wikipedia just fine.) It was ridiculously
annoying and I'm not sure I'd bother fixing typos I spotted in casual
reading.
(At least Vector worked in that version of the BlackBerry browser ...)
Does
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 3:02 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
On 12 April 2011 19:46, Quim Gil quim@nokia.com wrote:
In fact Wikimedia content is also popular among mobile users (directly
or through apps), but what about mobile contributions?
I just tried editing an article
On Tue, 2011-04-12 at 20:02 +0100, ext David Gerard wrote:
On 12 April 2011 19:46, Quim Gil quim@nokia.com wrote:
In fact Wikimedia content is also popular among mobile users (directly
or through apps), but what about mobile contributions?
I just tried editing an article on en:wp
On 12 April 2011 12:02, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
I just tried editing an article on en:wp on my shiny new BlackBerry
9300. (Which can browse Wikipedia just fine.) It was ridiculously
annoying and I'm not sure I'd bother fixing typos I spotted in casual
reading.
(At least Vector
On Sun, 2011-04-10 at 14:50 -0400, ext Pharos wrote:
On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 2:49 AM, Nikola Smolenski smole...@eunet.rs wrote:
Perhaps it would be helpful if, when creating a new account, a user could
write a short message about what would they like to do on Wikipedia (this
would become
On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 10:43 AM, Quim Gil quim@nokia.com wrote:
On Sun, 2011-04-10 at 14:50 -0400, ext Pharos wrote:
On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 2:49 AM, Nikola Smolenski smole...@eunet.rs wrote:
Perhaps it would be helpful if, when creating a new account, a user could
write a short message
Дана Sunday 10 April 2011 06:36:22 MZMcBride написа:
featured article requirements or anything like that. They might be
inundated with too many links in welcome messages (which I view as a
largely separate issue from policy creep), but I don't think the vast
majority of editors pay any mind to
Both excellent ideas.
To which I'd add - a lot of websites have live chat support, click here to
chat to a customer service agent.
A *click to get help from an experienced editor* button, along with the
reverse suggested *An experienced editor would like to talk to you, click
to accept*
I know that nobody has the guts to do it, but I wonder... I wonder
what would happen if all administrators, bureaucrats and so on where
told to take a hike. What would happen if new requirements for being
administrator and so forth included assuming real identities, and a
set of real world
On 10.04.2011 05:03, Dror Kamir wrote:
Are there people who would like to help me collect such cases like those
of Astrology, Kosovo, the Middle East etc. and/or cases that were sent
to arbitration which didn't help much and the like, and productively
analyze them in order to think of better
On 10.04.2011 05:03, Dror Kamir wrote:
Are there people who would like to help me collect such cases like
those
of Astrology, Kosovo, the Middle East etc. and/or cases that were sent
to arbitration which didn't help much and the like, and productively
analyze them in order to think of better
What is the purpose of all those questions? I've always provided that
information to this list and if anything ever come out of it, besides
being scolded by the list masters for making off-list posts, was to
gain a new following of admirers.
Sincerely,
Virgilio A. P. Machado
The reason to
On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 2:49 AM, Nikola Smolenski smole...@eunet.rs wrote:
Дана Sunday 10 April 2011 06:36:22 MZMcBride написа:
featured article requirements or anything like that. They might be
inundated with too many links in welcome messages (which I view as a
largely separate issue from
On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 9:36 PM, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote:
Risker wrote:
I'm particularly interested in policy simplification; I know our project has
far, far too many complex and even contradictory policies, guidelines, and
miscellaneous pages that result in alphabet soup messages
On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 13:54, phoebe ayers phoebe.w...@gmail.com wrote:
* how do I delete an article? and its counterpart: why was my
article deleted?
* how do I merge/split an article?
* hey, can I reference a blogpost in this article?
There are formatting questions that aren't so easy to
On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 1:05 PM, Sarah slimvir...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 13:54, phoebe ayers phoebe.w...@gmail.com wrote:
* how do I delete an article? and its counterpart: why was my
article deleted?
* how do I merge/split an article?
* hey, can I reference a blogpost in
On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 14:16, phoebe ayers phoebe.w...@gmail.com wrote:
I didn't list these particular examples because I thought they were
necessarily the hardest problems on the wiki; I listed them because
they're common questions and have historically been the source of a
lot of
On 10 April 2011 16:05, Sarah slimvir...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 13:54, phoebe ayers phoebe.w...@gmail.com wrote:
* how do I delete an article? and its counterpart: why was my
article deleted?
* how do I merge/split an article?
* hey, can I reference a blogpost in this
My apologies for not posting in the proper sequence. This is in
reference to John Vandenberg's post of Sun Apr 10 05:54:28 UTC 2011,
under this same subject.
The two links provided are just the tip of the iceberg. My unwelcome
posts to this list go back, as far as I can tell, to May 2009. I am
I disagree strongly. They are spelled out *as well as we can using current,
one-flat-page methods*. That isn't the same as easy, intuitive, inviting, or
comfortable, for most people. We expect a lot from newcomers. Too much.
When a user can click a button and type *I want to delete an article*
On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 14:28, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:
In fact a lot of those issues are spelled out very clearly. See
[[WP:BLOGS]] for whether you can reference a blogpost. See
[[WP:INCITE]] for a quick way to add a footnote. See
[[Category:Infobox templates]] for how to add an
Risker wrote:
The deletion process does look daunting, but actually if you just
clunk through the instructions,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:AfD#How_to_list_pages_for_deletion
it's pretty easy, and I say that as someone with a template phobia.
Keeping in mind that I too am an
FT2 wrote:
To which I'd add - a lot of websites have live chat support, click here to
chat to a customer service agent.
A *click to get help from an experienced editor* button, along with the
reverse suggested *An experienced editor would like to talk to you, click
to accept* popup/notice,
On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 2:14 AM, FT2 ft2.w...@gmail.com wrote:
A *click to get help from an experienced editor* button, along with the
reverse suggested *An experienced editor would like to talk to you, click
to accept* popup/notice, would probably work wonders in terms of support
and
Sarah wrote:
On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 16:16, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote:
The entire deletion process is broken and needs to be fixed. Werdna was
working on an extension to make nominating a page for deletion less horrible
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Werdna/dev), but I don't
On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 15:28, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:
A newbie who
manages to find [[WP:INCITE]] and follows its instructions is still just as
likely to be trouted because they didn't use the right style of references
for the article (Sorry, Wikiproject:XXX requires that only
On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 7:54 AM, Jim Redmond j...@scrubnugget.com wrote:
The *entire point* of any wiki is that it should be easy to fix most
problems quickly. If a newbie makes mistakes - and they always will,
no matter how awesome our policies and tools are - then experienced
editors should
Of course there are problems, some of them in plain English. Is
anybody on this list able to do anything about them? I'm sure there
is. That is why I have posted here so many times asking for help.
Have I received any help? None whatsoever.
It's kind of hard to believe that any assiduous
On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 16:45, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote:
Sarah wrote:
What is the problem with allowing editors to do this kind of thing
manually -- open AfDs and RfCs, and the like? Why does there always
have to be a template, just as a matter of interest?
Well, you hit the answer
2011/4/8 Dror Kamir dqa...@bezeqint.net:
Had someone
followed the administrators' decisions on the biggest projects, and
publish a monthly newsletter with copies of the most prominent decisions
about bans and sanctions, it would increase transparency and make
administrators much more careful
On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 06:46, Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com wrote:
Besides that, there should be limits on sanctions. For example, I think
that we should limit all non-spam as well as some troll-like behavior
blocks to, let's say, two years.
There's a bit of a contradiction here, Milos. If we
About the foundation openness,
I wanted to write a comment on the foundation page, but it was not open.
So I wrote my comment on SJ talk page,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Sj#Openness
Here is what I have to say about wikipedia and openness :
;
HI, I wanted to
On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 06:46, Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com wrote:
Besides that, there should be limits on sanctions. For example, I think
that we should limit all non-spam as well as some troll-like behavior
blocks to, let's say, two years.
There's a bit of a contradiction here, Milos. If
About the foundation openness,
I wanted to write a comment on the foundation page, but it was not open.
So I wrote my comment on SJ talk page,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Sj#Openness
Here is what I have to say about wikipedia and openness :
;
HI, I wanted to
I cannot comment on the case of Kosovo, because I have no information
about this case (as far as Wikipedia is concerned, that is), however,
phenomena which resemble this description are very common in articles
about conflicts, especially the Middle East conflict. There are groups
of editors
I cannot comment on the case of Kosovo, because I have no information
about this case (as far as Wikipedia is concerned, that is), however,
phenomena which resemble this description are very common in articles
about conflicts, especially the Middle East conflict. There are groups
of editors
Fred, arbitration doesn't help in such cases. The arbitrators are not in
a position to make editorial decisions. All they can do is tell the
parties to control themselves, reiterate the principle of NPOV and
decide upon further sanctions, which usually just add fuel to the fire.
That's exactly
Fred, arbitration doesn't help in such cases. The arbitrators are not in
a position to make editorial decisions. All they can do is tell the
parties to control themselves, reiterate the principle of NPOV and
decide upon further sanctions, which usually just add fuel to the fire.
That's
Are there people who would like to help me collect such cases like those
of Astrology, Kosovo, the Middle East etc. and/or cases that were sent
to arbitration which didn't help much and the like, and productively
analyze them in order to think of better ways to treat them and the
users
Getting back on topic, the board's resolution says:
We urge the Wikimedia community to promote openness and collaboration, by:
* Treating new editors with patience, kindness, and respect; being aware
of the challenges facing new editors, and reaching out to them; and
encouraging others to do the
On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 1:03 PM, Dror Kamir dqa...@bezeqint.net wrote:
Are there people who would like to help me collect such cases like those
of Astrology, Kosovo, the Middle East etc. and/or cases that were sent
to arbitration which didn't help much and the like, and productively
analyze
On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 11:20 PM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:
This is an area where every project is going to have its own take on things,
and we can probably learn from each other's experience; however, what
information there is seems to be housed on the strategy wiki, which many
users
Risker wrote:
I'm particularly interested in policy simplification; I know our project has
far, far too many complex and even contradictory policies, guidelines, and
miscellaneous pages that result in alphabet soup messages that even
experienced users find almost impenetrable. I pity the
Are there people who would like to help me collect such cases like those
of Astrology, Kosovo, the Middle East etc. and/or cases that were sent
to arbitration which didn't help much and the like, and productively
analyze them in order to think of better ways to treat them and the
users
On 9 April 2011 23:39, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:
On 9 April 2011 23:27, Casey Brown li...@caseybrown.org wrote:
On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 11:20 PM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:
This is an area where every project is going to have its own take on
things,
and we can probably
What is the purpose of all those questions? I've always provided that
information to this list and if anything ever come out of it, besides
being scolded by the list masters for making off-list posts, was to
gain a new following of admirers.
Sincerely,
Virgilio A. P. Machado
At 19:47
Fred,
links here
http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2010-December/062911.html
see also this thread
http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2010-December/062860.html
--
John Vandenberg
___
foundation-l mailing list
Dear community,
on the IRC board meeting at April 8th 2011 the board approved
unanimously the following resolution:
We, the Wikimedia Foundation Board, believe that the continued health of
our project communities is crucial to fulfilling our mission. The
Wikimedia projects are founded in
Hello,
This resolution is a very positive step. I hope we will soon be updated
about practical steps to implement it.
Two such practical steps that are easy to implement and would make a
significant difference, in my opinion:
(1) Administrators' decisions about bans, sanctions etc. should be
invisible temporarily while I mull this over more.
Will Johnson
-Original Message-
From: Dror Kamir dqa...@bezeqint.net
To: foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Sent: Fri, Apr 8, 2011 1:16 pm
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Board Resolution: Openness
Hello,
This resolution
While I am all about openness and journalism, I had a recent incident
which made me re-think something on these lines.
I had a few years back, started creating an open visible search-indexed
index to ArbCom proceedings.
Some editors however edit using their real names, not something I would
Fred Bauder wrote:
While I am all about openness and journalism, I had a recent incident
which made me re-think something on these lines.
I had a few years back, started creating an open visible
search-indexed index to ArbCom proceedings.
Some editors however edit using their real names, not
on 4/8/11 3:35 PM, Ting Chen at tc...@wikimedia.org wrote:
Dear community,
on the IRC board meeting at April 8th 2011 the board approved
unanimously the following resolution:
We, the Wikimedia Foundation Board, believe that the continued health of
our project communities is crucial
On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 5:02 PM, Marc Riddell michaeldavi...@comcast.net wrote:
Thank you, all, for this. This resolution is great news; and a great
commitment of support for the Wikipedia Project, as well as for the
individual Community Members who are at the heart of it.
That's welcome
60 matches
Mail list logo
