There is a general view amongst Wikipedia admins that excessive
templating on user pages is poor practice. I frequently use an initial
(customized) welcome template for new users and do use standard user
warning templates for vandalism, though not for regulars. However
these templates are not
Surely making it only available to those users who understand markup
completely undermines one of the great unintended consequences - that it's
really useful for posting talkpage messages? New users can use those
templates in a *perfectly* meaningful way - as a way of communicating
instead of
On 30 October 2011 08:06, Oliver Keyes scire.fac...@gmail.com wrote:
Surely making it only available to those users who understand markup
completely undermines one of the great unintended consequences - that it's
really useful for posting talkpage messages? New users can use those
templates in
Not my call, but I'd totally support that.
On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 9:35 AM, geni geni...@gmail.com wrote:
On 30 October 2011 08:06, Oliver Keyes scire.fac...@gmail.com wrote:
Surely making it only available to those users who understand markup
completely undermines one of the great
On 30 October 2011 08:06, Oliver Keyes scire.fac...@gmail.com wrote:
Surely making it only available to those users who understand markup
completely undermines one of the great unintended consequences - that it's
really useful for posting talkpage messages?
I did not equate users with 10 edits
On Sat, 29 Oct 2011 17:27:30 +0200, Nickanc Wikipedia
nickanc.w...@gmail.com wrote:
IMHO, Wikilove is something so important about wikipedia's ethics and
behaviour that shall be in every wiki. IMHO.
I absolutely disagree. Wikipedia ethics and behavior encourage thanking
the contributors, but it
On 30 October 2011 10:15, Yaroslav M. Blanter pute...@mccme.ru wrote:
Along the same line of reasoning, I see
that 99% of admins use template warnings which I hate and I never used any
template warning except for copyright violation when I was still an admin.
In my opinion, getting a
You seem to be missing my point - that the WL tool serves an ulterior
function of allowing users who do not understand markup to communicate and
request help in a way they can understand. I *am* saying that most of those
with few or no edits will have problems understanding markup, which is why
So far my only experience with extension:wikilove is having a new user
prefer it to just editing my talk page, and so over the course of a
mundane conversation about sourcing I earned myself two civility
barnstars and three trophies. Hooray!
One take away from this experience of
--
Message: 8
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2011 21:40:37 +0200
From: Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Show community consensus for Wikilove
To: f...@wikimedia.org.uk, Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
On Sat, 29 Oct 2011 23:15:52 +0200, Bjoern Hoehrmann derhoe...@gmx.net
wrote:
Some editors just want to edit articles and regard the social and
meta dimensions of the project as annoying distractions, while other
editors see those as the main attractions. Some prefer You are nice.,
others
On 30 October 2011 10:22, Oliver Keyes scire.fac...@gmail.com wrote:
You seem to be missing my point - that the WL tool serves an ulterior
function of allowing users who do not understand markup to communicate and
request help in a way they can understand. I am saying that most of those
with
Hoi,
There are a few issues:
- the choice of what is going to be developed is very much a management
issue; what gets priority and why
- there are always people who object to any project because they are of
the opinion that something else should be considered to be more relevant
-
--
Message: 7
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2011 13:05:37 +0100
From: Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Show community consensus for Wikilove
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Message-ID:
On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 4:05 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
On 28 October 2011 13:48, Peter Gervai grin...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 04:05, Tim Starling tstarl...@wikimedia.org wrote:
as I did. We both spend a lot of time making sure Wikipedia is always
up and
On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 10:04 PM, Kim Bruning k...@bruning.xs4all.nl wrote:
On Sat, Oct 22, 2011 at 03:36:18PM -0700, Erik Moeller wrote:
Making it easy for editors to say, based on normal editorial judgment
and established practices in their project, Hey, reader, there's
something here you
On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 3:52 PM, Oliver Keyes scire.fac...@gmail.comwrote:
You seem to be missing my point - that the WL tool serves an ulterior
function of allowing users who do not understand markup to communicate and
request help in a way they can understand. I *am* saying that most of
We have the ability to strike back with our means
Lockout of all the IP addresses of companies, institutions, members of
Congress. All to the Blacklist of our site.
This includes all educational institutions and religious groups who
profess not an implicit model of an open knowledge society.
Hoi,
You are missing the point completely as far as I am concerned. The
community was involved in defining our strategy. Making our community more
friendly is a strategic choice defined by the strategy project and endorsed
by the board.
I doubt very much that one of our many communities has the
One problem is that the word Love is used quite differently in the
German language. Even in Great Britain.
Love as a term is used in English in a fully inflated notion of flooding.
I have no idea what lovers say to each other in the U.S. when it comes
to really love.
Maybe they just grunt at
thank you!
h
Am 29.10.2011 13:31, schrieb FT2:
Having checked the original blog
posthttp://suegardner.org/2011/09/28/on-editorial-judgment-and-empathy/,
I think it's either a rare exception of poorly chosen wording, or shows a
judgment within WMF that I can't agree with.
I remember when
What is the real situation of this law?
Is it still enter into discussion? It has been confirmed? Or is it just a
proposal?
Sorry, I don't know the goings of U.S. law, but this news is concern to me.
_
MateusNobre
MetalBrasil on Wikimedia projects
(+55) 85 88393509
On 10/30/11 4:14 AM, Yaroslav M. Blanter wrote:
One take away from this experience of yours could be that the process
of utilizing talk pages is extremely arcane and horrible from a user
experience perspective, while using WikiLove to communicate - even
though it is the wrong channel -
On 10/30/11 4:48 AM, Fae wrote:
Okay, my email and WSC's original email related to the primary
function as defined athttp://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/WikiLove.
Requests for help are probably better handled by something other than
a heart icon at the top of every user talk page. I would say that
On 30 October 2011 17:44, Brandon Harris bhar...@wikimedia.org wrote:
(One of my favorite things about talk pages is that, for most people,
*there is no talk page button*. There's a Discussion tab. So when
someone says Hey, just leave me a message on my talk page and I'll help
you
Mostly useless and mostly harmless thing becomes harmful at the moment
when people start to spend a lot of time on discussing it.
A note for future improvements: Yes, WMF should do bold actions, but
it shouldn't waste community's confidence on mostly useless
improvements.
I was saying that the WL layout posting on talkpages ;p.
On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 1:42 PM, Theo10011 de10...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 3:52 PM, Oliver Keyes scire.fac...@gmail.com
wrote:
You seem to be missing my point - that the WL tool serves an ulterior
function of
Speaking personally, the tech department develops features that benefit the
community. The difference is that they, quite rightly, see the community
as consisting of both readers and editors. They are developing
editor-specific new features, such as the Zoom interface for
Special:NewPages, as I
As for empowering users and letting them play a role - speaking
professionally now, that's exactly what tech is trying to do. I should
know, they've hired me on a short-term basis to help out :P. If you want to
get involved, my inbox is always open. Drop me an email and I'll send you
links to what
We shouldn't be taken by the spirit of wiki environment. Sometimes, at Village
Pump, through great debats and violent discussions, I feel like a lawyer,
defending my point of view. We're more a tribunal than a colaborative and
friendly ambience. Blocks are the prisons, and we're lawyers
We're not just talking about a tool, but a revolution in the way of
communicative and collaborative Wikipedia. It is a way to make Wikipedia
a
family environment, not a court or an academy of letters. We need that.
Wikipedia really needs that at all.
_
MateusNobre
I don't know about your family, but I have no enemies at mine. Didn't
understand the relation about ''family environment'' and ''friends and
enemies'': this looks like more ''factions/clans environments'' than ''family
envornment''. Actually, in some wikipedias (including pt.wiki) we have some
When I spoke ''family'' I wanted to say we need a more likable system of
communication. We need a real collaborative method, which not only fit
for
the editions, but for the treatment of users too. We're a big family
working for a common objective: a world in which every single human
being
Re OKeyes Switching authorisation and prioritisation over to the editors
completely ignores readers, and assumes that editors will act outside their
own/interests to ensure that reader-specific features do get some
traction; I'm not convinced that the community would want to ignore
readers, I'm
I'm not saying that they would *ignore* readers, just that consistently
taking outside parties into account is something every group finds
difficult. I can see the community noting, in such discussions, that
readers have a stake. I can even see them taking this stake into account
when making
Hoi,
I totally agree that Commons needs tagging and that such tagging will do
much more to help people find the illustrations they are looking for then
the current category and whatever system. WereSpielCheckers we agree on
this. Now let us concentrate on things where we can win.
When Commons has
On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 10:24 AM, Hubert hubert.la...@gmx.at wrote:
One problem is that the word Love is used quite differently in the
German language. Even in Great Britain.
Love as a term is used in English in a fully inflated notion of flooding.
I have no idea what lovers say to each
Hubert, 30/10/2011 15:24:
One problem is that the word Love is used quite differently in the
German language. Even in Great Britain.
This again means that translators have to be bold. It's true that
translation can be difficult, in fact most interwikis of
Totally disagree with you, Yaroslav.
Do you really think a traditional (you know, traditional in Wikipedia
equivalent to bureaucratic) communication and social system, friendship-free,
at wikis reduces the efficiency? Why the friendship and camaraderie in editions
and talk should reduce the
That shouldn't be the issue. The question is the effect. What would make
you more pleased, a standard message/template that you did good, or a
personal message from someone from who you know yourself that he watched
over your work? Personally, I doubt that a simple template machine could
lead
40 matches
Mail list logo
