Re: [WikiEN-l] Fwd: [Wikitech-l] Fwd: Autoconfirmed article creation trial
Possibly a really professional approach with full-time resources devoted to explaining things and producing a detailed FAQ and managing expectations to slowly build a consensus. But that jibes uncomfortably with the approach where groups of volunteers try and produce the same results. It also feels like campaigning to try and grow a consensus rather than working with what is there already. But that may be needed in cases where opinions are all over the place and people may not be fully informed about something or may polarise into different camps. All gets rather political, really. Carcharoth On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 7:35 AM, MuZemike wrote: > Does anyone think we can really get an actual "consensus" for anything > big anymore on en.wiki? > > To take from Beeblebrox on the Signpost not too long ago > (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2011-08-29/The_pending_changes_fiasco): > > "There seems inevitably to come a point in any such attempt where there > are simply too many voices, too many nonsensical objections, too much > petty bickering to get anything done. This is a growing, systemic > problem at Wikipedia, and eventually we are going to have to deal with it." > > The near-converse applies when developers "boldly" turn relatively minor > features on without "community consensus", as seen at > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_%28technical%29/Archive_90#Watchlist_emails > . That is, people complain up and down about it. It is impossible to > have everyone happy about everything. > > -MuZemike > > On 9/13/2011 11:38 AM, David Gerard wrote: >> On 13 September 2011 17:35, Gwern Branwen wrote: >> >>> And in turn, I look forward to the study of the effects of this >>> change, which will never happen despite all promises before. >> >> >> Apparently just over 50% in favour is "broad consensus". Who knew? >> >> (Almost as good as the person who told me "we achieved consensus >> against that change" and it was, literally, a straw poll with two "no" >> and one "yes".) >> >> >> - d. >> >> ___ >> WikiEN-l mailing list >> WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org >> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l > > > ___ > WikiEN-l mailing list > WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l > ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
[WikiEN-l] Short featured articles
Today's featured article is all of 6 paragraphs long. Discuss. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MissingNo. Carcharoth ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Short featured articles
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 1:15 PM, Carcharoth wrote: > Today's featured article is all of 6 paragraphs long. Discuss. > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MissingNo. Hmmm. I sometimes feel that there's certain articles that just cannot ever be made featured articles due to inbuilt limitations and I don't think I would have supported this at FAC. Do others share my (only shakily held) belief that some articles, no matter how much work is put into them, can never get to featured status? Bodnotbod ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Short featured articles
> Today's featured article is all of 6 paragraphs long. Discuss. > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MissingNo. > > Carcharoth Seems appropriate. Fred ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Short featured articles
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 3:00 PM, Fred Bauder wrote: >> Today's featured article is all of 6 paragraphs long. Discuss. >> >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MissingNo. > > Seems appropriate. Sure, the length is about right for the topic, but if you are in the habit of settling down at some point in the day to read through the featured article, you might feel a little short-changed that you'd finished reading it after a few minutes or so. I suspect readers don't realise that almost any article can be featured, and have certain expectations that aren't always met. This is a case where viewing figures don't help, as lots of people click through to the FA, but the question here is what the reaction is of those readers. But then I'm not convinced that people even use the main page the way that is assumed. I suspect the main use is as an entry point to Wikipedia, with a brief scan of what is there if the passing visitor is not in a rush, and maybe following some of the links if something looks interesting. Those who want to follow some regularly may be more likely to use RSS or some other syndication service. Carcharoth ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Short featured articles
> On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 3:00 PM, Fred Bauder > wrote: >>> Today's featured article is all of 6 paragraphs long. Discuss. >>> >>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MissingNo. >> >> Seems appropriate. > > Sure, the length is about right for the topic, but if you are in the > habit of settling down at some point in the day to read through the > featured article, you might feel a little short-changed > > Carcharoth Change is good. Fred ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Short featured articles
On 14 September 2011 14:53, Bod Notbod wrote: > Do others share my (only shakily held) belief that some articles, no > matter how much work is put into them, can never get to featured status? > Any article can legitimately be made FA, no matter how unencyclopedic, if you rewrite it, move it to a different name and change the topic. Bodnotbod > -- -Ian Woollard ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Short featured articles
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 4:36 PM, Ian Woollard wrote: > On 14 September 2011 14:53, Bod Notbod wrote: > >> Do others share my (only shakily held) belief that some articles, no >> matter how much work is put into them, can never get to featured status? >> > Any article can legitimately be made FA, no matter how unencyclopedic, if > you rewrite it, move it to a different name and change the topic. That's not an entirely serious answer, is it? Carcharoth ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Short featured articles
In other words, upon reading this featured article, something is Missing, No? Newyorkbrad On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 8:15 AM, Carcharoth wrote: > Today's featured article is all of 6 paragraphs long. Discuss. > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MissingNo. > > Carcharoth > > ___ > WikiEN-l mailing list > WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l > ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Short featured articles
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 12:22 AM, Fred Bauder wrote: > > Change is good. Brevity wit. -- Stephen Bain stephen.b...@gmail.com ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Short featured articles
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 5:31 PM, Newyorkbrad wrote: > In other words, upon reading this featured article, something is Missing, > No? This thread is turning pun-itive. Carcharoth ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
[WikiEN-l] Journalist admits socking on Wikipedia
Johann Hari admits he did it. http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/johann-hari/johann-hari-a-personal-apology-2354679.html - d. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Journalist admits socking on Wikipedia
A pretty mature apology in the circumstances I suppose. Tom On 14 September 2011 19:18, David Gerard wrote: > Johann Hari admits he did it. > > > http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/johann-hari/johann-hari-a-personal-apology-2354679.html > > > - d. > > ___ > WikiEN-l mailing list > WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l > ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Journalist admits socking on Wikipedia
David Gerard wrote: > Johann Hari admits he did it. > > http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/johann-hari/johann-hari-a-personal-apology-2354679.html > > > - d. I don't see socking here; he admits to using only one account, and he doesn't appear to have an account in his own name. I do see admissions of COI, POV edits, and BLP vandalism, all of which could be expected from a newbie editor and have almost certainly been rectified by now. He doesn't mention any sanctions for these edits, and they are so run of the mill that I can't even identify his username from any of the histories. Storm in a teacup? ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Journalist admits socking on Wikipedia
On Sep 15, 2011 4:51 AM, "Phil Nash" wrote: > > Storm in a teacup? Yes, the meddling with his primary materials seems the far more serious issue: Is he used as a source in any articles? (I would check were I not on my phone.) ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Journalist admits socking on Wikipedia
> David Gerard wrote: >> Johann Hari admits he did it. >> >> http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/johann-hari/johann-hari-a-personal-apology-2354679.html >> >> >> - d. > > I don't see socking here; he admits to using only one account, and he > doesn't appear to have an account in his own name. > > I do see admissions of COI, POV edits, and BLP vandalism, all of which > could > be expected from a newbie editor and have almost certainly been rectified > by > now. > > He doesn't mention any sanctions for these edits, and they are so run of > the > mill that I can't even identify his username from any of the histories. > > Storm in a teacup? You just need to spend hours going through the edits and it will doubtless be obvious enough. That we never noticed him, or identified him, is not particularly surprising. I think he's pretty cool, examining his life. Fred ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Journalist admits socking on Wikipedia
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 13:12, Fred Bauder wrote: > You just need to spend hours going through the edits and it will > doubtless be obvious enough. That we never noticed him, or identified > him, is not particularly surprising. > He was noticed and identified, which is what led the Independent to look into it. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Journalist admits socking on Wikipedia
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 11:50 AM, Phil Nash wrote: > > I do see admissions of COI, POV edits, and BLP vandalism, all of which could > be expected from a newbie editor and have almost certainly been rectified by > now. > > He doesn't mention any sanctions for these edits, and they are so run of the > mill that I can't even identify his username from any of the histories. > > Storm in a teacup? The socking isn't what's the problem. And this is not a "newbie editor" mistake. He admits malice. His words: "I continued to edit my own Wikipedia entry and some other people’s too. I took out nasty passages about people I admire – like Polly Toynbee, George Monbiot, Deborah Orr and Yasmin Alibhai-Brown. I factually corrected some other entries about other people. But in a few instances,* I edited the entries of people I had clashed with in ways that were juvenile or malicious: I called one of them anti-Semitic and homophobic, and the other a drunk. I am mortified to have done this*, because it breaches the most basic ethical rule: don’t do to others what you don’t want them to do to you. I apologise to the latter group unreservedly and totally." -Andrew ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Journalist admits socking on Wikipedia
Stephen Bain wrote: > On Sep 15, 2011 4:51 AM, "Phil Nash" wrote: >> >> Storm in a teacup? > > Yes, the meddling with his primary materials seems the far more > serious issue: > > www.independent.co.uk/news/media/press/independent-columnist-apologises-for-plagiarism-2354706.html >> I wasn't aware that this was so serious a problem. In the circumstances, the sackcloth & ashes apology seems entirely appropriate. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
[WikiEN-l] Edit-warring at [[Bertie Ahern]]
Two editors are scrapping without going to the talk page to discuss it and it's beginning get out of hand, and it's annoying that I can't do anything about it. Anyone care to step in? Cheers. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Edit-warring at [[Bertie Ahern]]
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 8:31 PM, Phil Nash wrote: > Two editors are scrapping without going to the talk page to discuss it and > it's beginning get out of hand, and it's annoying that I can't do anything > about it. > > Anyone care to step in? I've issued them both with an 'edit war' warning. Bodnotbod ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Edit-warring at [[Bertie Ahern]]
Bod Notbod wrote: > On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 8:31 PM, Phil Nash > wrote: > >> Two editors are scrapping without going to the talk page to discuss >> it and it's beginning get out of hand, and it's annoying that I >> can't do anything about it. >> >> Anyone care to step in? > > I've issued them both with an 'edit war' warning. > > Bodnotbod Much obliged. Excellent service! ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Short featured articles
On 14 September 2011 15:15, Carcharoth wrote: > expectations that aren't always met. This is a case where viewing > figures don't help, as lots of people click through to the FA, but the > question here is what the reaction is of those readers. But then I'm This may be a rare case where the reader-feedback option is actually of some indicative use :-) There's currently 60-70 valid ratings on the article, averaging about 4.5 in all four categories; "complete" is the closest we have to a proxy for "of sufficient length", and it's a safe 4.4. Yesterday's fungus article, of more reasonable length, scored 3.6 on all counts with 14 ratings, so length doesn't immediately appear to be a major factor of disquiet... (This is a bit shaky to draw conclusions from, I know - it's hard to do a study on this because of the way ratings "expire" after thirty edits, so you can't easily look at what the reaction to past articles was. Is it technically possible to extract all the ratings received by an article in a specific time period? It might be very interesting to use the daily FAs, which we know get a lot of traffic and are unlikely to have drastic flaws, to study as a defined set...) -- - Andrew Gray andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] [Foundation-l] A Wikimedia project has forked
Jussi-Ville Heiskanen wrote: > On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 6:04 AM, Phil Nash > wrote: >> Sue Gardner wrote: >>> On 12 September 2011 18:15, geni wrote: On 12 September 2011 23:45, Samuel Klein wrote: > Now: what do we need to do to make Wikinews better and more > useful? What are the costs and technical or other work involved? Very little. Mostly wikinews is misstargeted. Yet another website rewriting AP reports is never going to draw crowds. Wikinews needed original research and never really had very much of it. It is also operating in an extremely crowded market where as wikipedia had the field pretty much to itself when it started. >>> >>> Jimmy said once that part of the reason Wikipedia works so well is >>> because everybody knows what an encyclopedia article is supposed to >>> look like. >> >> Practical experience on a day-to-day basis would suggest that this >> is unduly optimistic. We are failing to attract new editors who can >> be, or wish to be, educated into "what an encyclopedia article is >> supposed to look like", and are discarding those experienced editors >> who do. Even those who remain but are becoming increasingly >> disillusioned with all the nonsense that goes on will eventually >> leave, or create a fork of Wikipedia, and to be honest, if I had the >> money right now, I'd do it myself, and cast ArbCom in its present >> form into the bottomless pit. >> >> I used to care about Wikipedia, as did others, but it's becoming >> increasingly difficult to do so. >> >> > > If money is the problem, I can solve that. I recently came into an > inheritance. Thanks for your interest; it isn't the only expression of support to have reached me. A *fresh* version of Wikipedia is obviously a major step to take, and I have to consider and reconcile the various inputs I've received, and am still receiving, and formulate a proposal document that is going to address the issues, and of course, it will be open for discussion to those who are interested. My current preference is for a partnership-based model, yet one able to generate revenue and still largely remain within the original objectives of Wikipedia. Squaring the circle may not be possible in this case, and good editors will be lost. Meanwhile, only time will tell whether it works, and that depends on achieving the proper mechanism for moving forward, and sticking to it. I'm hopefully moving premises shortly, so will be unlikely to be able to fully commit my efforts for about a month; but at least that gives time for interested parties to comment, since this is not something that should be rushed into. However, my spare time, such as it is, will be devoted to this project. Regards. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
