On 14 November 2012 17:44, HJ Mitchell wrote:
> More OTRS agents would certainly help
My offer to be an OTRS operator has been accepted; thank you Harry,
and Fae, who reach supported it.
--
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
___
On 16 November 2012 22:13, David Gerard wrote:
> On 16 November 2012 21:11, Joe Filceolaire wrote:
>
>> The CIPR guidelines are not aimed at those people. They are aimed at the PR
>> pro but WP noob who has been told by his boss to fix something on WP. The
>> CIPR guidelines give him something fr
On 16 November 2012 21:11, Joe Filceolaire wrote:
> The CIPR guidelines are not aimed at those people. They are aimed at the PR
> pro but WP noob who has been told by his boss to fix something on WP. The
> CIPR guidelines give him something from the CIPR that he can show his boss
> to explain why
I was involved in the CIPR guidelines and I pushed very had for the
guidelines to say PR people reading the guidelines should not edit the COI
pages. There are circumstances where a PR pro can edit a page but they need
a bit of experience editing WP first.
The CIPR guidelines are not aimed at thos
On 16 November 2012 13:11, Andreas Kolbe wrote:
> The supreme irony here is that Wikipedia set out to be open, in contrast to
> the ivory tower of academe. Yet over the space of a decade, Wikipedia has
> become so involved, and its policy so impenetrable and contradictory, that
> people are now m
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 11:39 AM, Charles Matthews <
charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> On 16 November 2012 09:54, Andreas Kolbe wrote:
>
> > Charles, I really am a bit mystified here. First of all, I would echo
> Tom's
> > point about the insider fallacy. In quality management terms, the
On 16 November 2012 09:54, Andreas Kolbe wrote:
> Charles, I really am a bit mystified here. First of all, I would echo Tom's
> point about the insider fallacy. In quality management terms, the people
> Wikipedia writes about are customers, just as readers are. That's quality
> management ABC, an
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 9:29 AM, Charles Matthews <
charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> On 16 November 2012 08:08, Thomas Morton
> wrote:
> > If they hire a lawyer it goes to legal@,which can be even slower and
> > usually ends up with a recommendation back to OTRS.
> >
> > Your reply here
On 16 November 2012 08:08, Thomas Morton wrote:
> If they hire a lawyer it goes to legal@,which can be even slower and
> usually ends up with a recommendation back to OTRS.
>
> Your reply here is what I call the insider fallacy. Because we are
> wikipedians we consider Wikipedia and the mission th
Hi stevie. Long emial, sorry.
Simplest answer; Improve the OTRS software.
That would be big step, but my recent attempt to do so didn't get anywhere.
Barring that, OTRS recruitment isn't the best solution. Agents get burnt
out and, as delicately as I can, some of us are terrible at customer
serv
If they hire a lawyer it goes to legal@,which can be even slower and
usually ends up with a recommendation back to OTRS.
Your reply here is what I call the insider fallacy. Because we are
wikipedians we consider Wikipedia and the mission the most important
thing.
An article subject justifiably do
On 15 November 2012 14:10, Thomas Morton wrote:
> We have two customers, and one "employee" role, I think. And it should go
> something like (in order of importance):
>
> Reader (Customer)
> Subject (Customer)
> Editor (Employee)
>
> Or in other words; because the PR company represents the subject
On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 2:16 PM, Stevie Benton <
stevie.ben...@wikimedia.org.uk> wrote:
> Tom , I think that's a fair comment - but we have the problem that we
> can't actually employ anyone to provide that service. An an OTRS volunteer
> yourself, do you have any suggestions on how we can bring m
Tom , I think that's a fair comment - but we have the problem that we can't
actually employ anyone to provide that service. An an OTRS volunteer
yourself, do you have any suggestions on how we can bring more people into
the fold? It doesn't seem to be something we can reasonably incentivise,
either
We have two customers, and one "employee" role, I think. And it should go
something like (in order of importance):
Reader (Customer)
Subject (Customer)
Editor (Employee)
Or in other words; because the PR company represents the subject of the
article, and we rank so highly on Google etc., they sho
On 15 November 2012 12:04, Andreas Kolbe wrote:
> If you look at the CIPR draft best practice guidelines (which are not of
> course Wikipedia policy at the moment, but are quite similar to Jimbo's
> "bright line" rule)
>
> http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Draft_best_practice_guidelines_for_PR#A_Step-
On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 7:32 PM, Doug Weller wrote:
> It isn't a terribly rewarding role and burnout is common.
> Triage won't solve the problem as there are so many complaints that aren't
> simple to deal with satisfactorily, and we already have a system in place
> for it which may creak but wor
It isn't a terribly rewarding role and burnout is common.
Triage won't solve the problem as there are so many complaints that aren't
simple to deal with satisfactorily, and we already have a system in place
for it which may creak but works better than nothing.
Recruitment isn't easy because it isn'
On 14 November 2012 17:52, Charles Matthews wrote:
> On 14 November 2012 17:44, HJ Mitchell wrote:
>
> > We get all sorts of general enquires, feedback, and other things that
> > probably should go elsehwhere. It adds up to thousands of tickets a week.
> > Try finding the urgent BLP complaints a
On 14 November 2012 17:44, HJ Mitchell wrote:
> We get all sorts of general enquires, feedback, and other things that
> probably should go elsehwhere. It adds up to thousands of tickets a week.
> Try finding the urgent BLP complaints amongst that lot, bearing in mind that
> OTRS agents are volunt
day, 14 November 2012, 15:48
Subject: Re: [Wikimediauk-l] PR industry blames 'cumbersome' Wikipedia (Andreas
Kolbe)
Oh, that's much better - but the process still needs an overhaul :-(
Richard Symonds
Wikimedia UK
0207 065 0992
Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee regi
On 14 November 2012 14:43, Thomas Morton wrote:
> David; I think Charles and Andreas have gotten beyond the original issue and
> are talking about the real problems that exist.
>
> "cumbersome" doesn't strike me as a hugely unfair way of putting it...
Well-judged spin, in other words.
Charles
_
Oh, that's much better - but the process still needs an overhaul :-(
Richard Symonds
Wikimedia UK
0207 065 0992
Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and
Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered
Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56
Richard: a slight correction, the processes for obtaining OTRS access have
changed - I think in 2009/2010.
Instead of the full 'identification' to the WMF (where you send in a copy of
your ID to prove you're >18), OTRS access only requires you to send an email
with your full real name and age
David; I think Charles and Andreas have gotten beyond the original issue
and are talking about the real problems that exist.
"cumbersome" doesn't strike me as a hugely unfair way of putting it...
@Richard; I've always been disappointed in WMF support of OTRS, it being a
key point of contact. I bu
For what it's worth, my opinion (as some who has had access to a fair few
OTRS queues for a fair number of years) is that we need more OTRS
volunteers. Lots more. At the moment, Wikimedia UK has about a dozen
semi-active volunteers for its queue, and we have reasonable response times
(48 hours ish)
On 14 November 2012 13:06, Charles Matthews
wrote:
> Let's get back down to earth. "Cumbersome" in the title of the thread
> implies we are dealing with people who are not the type to read
> instructions patiently, and follow them. These people may be "normal"
> by many standards.
And specifica
On 14 November 2012 12:58, Andreas Kolbe wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Charles Matthews
> wrote:
>> The actual solutions are (1) to grow the community (and I mean
>> growing it with responsible, well-trained editors). I personally have
>> put time and effort into this in the past,
On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Charles Matthews <
charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> On 14 November 2012 12:42, Andreas Kolbe wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 11:55 AM, Charles Matthews
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On 14 November 2012 00:00, Andreas Kolbe wrote:
> >>
> >> > And there is. Ol
On 14 November 2012 12:42, Andreas Kolbe wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 11:55 AM, Charles Matthews
> wrote:
>>
>> On 14 November 2012 00:00, Andreas Kolbe wrote:
>>
>> > And there is. Oliver's revamp of the Contact Us pages has made a huge
>> > difference, because previously, PR professionals
On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 11:40 AM, WereSpielChequers <
werespielchequ...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear Andreas, We need to remember that this is a volunteer driven process,
> and the commodity in short supply is volunteer time not PR professionals
> time. Encouraging PR people to forum shop by raising t
On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 11:55 AM, Charles Matthews <
charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> On 14 November 2012 00:00, Andreas Kolbe wrote:
>
> > And there is. Oliver's revamp of the Contact Us pages has made a huge
> > difference, because previously, PR professionals would pass three
> > invi
On 14 November 2012 00:00, Andreas Kolbe wrote:
> And there is. Oliver's revamp of the Contact Us pages has made a huge
> difference, because previously, PR professionals would pass three
> invitations to fix the article themselves before they would come to the OTRS
> e-mail address.
>
> But ther
Dear Andreas, We need to remember that this is a volunteer driven process,
and the commodity in short supply is volunteer time not PR professionals
time. Encouraging PR people to forum shop by raising the same thing in
multiple venues is disrespectful of the community, it also risks damaging
things
On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 11:24 PM, Paul Wilkinson wrote:
> Dear Andreas
> Francis Ingham is DG of the PRCA. Its fee-paying members include RLM
> Finsbury (among other WPP companies), so, ultimately, it contributes to his
> salary. Possible COI?
>
> Paul
>
Come on, you are a CIPR fellow, and CIPR
Dear Andreas
Francis Ingham is DG of the PRCA. Its fee-paying members include RLM
Finsbury (among other WPP companies), so, ultimately, it contributes to his
salary. Possible COI?
Paul
___
Wikimedia UK mailing list
wikimediau...@wikimedia.org
http://mail
36 matches
Mail list logo
