Yes, stagnation is far more accurate. Thing is, it used to be a
source of pride to tell your real world associates that you're a
wikipedia admin. You'd even put it on your resume. Now, it's a bit of
an embarassing secret and you definitely would not raise it in a job
interview.
On 3/25/10, Thomas
On 13 May 2010 07:07, David Katz dkatz2...@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, stagnation is far more accurate. Thing is, it used to be a
source of pride to tell your real world associates that you're a
wikipedia admin. You'd even put it on your resume. Now, it's a bit of
an embarassing secret and you
On 05/13/2010 12:29 AM, David Gerard wrote:
On 13 May 2010 07:07, David Katzdkatz2...@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, stagnation is far more accurate. Thing is, it used to be a
source of pride to tell your real world associates that you're a
wikipedia admin. You'd even put it on your resume. Now,
On 25 March 2010 23:10, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote:
On 25 March 2010 21:55, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 5:48 PM, geni geni...@gmail.com wrote:
On 25 March 2010 21:03, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:
A couple more questions to which I don't know the
Cameron and Clegg have got to WP already? No, I must be confused, but
the new look has arrived on our pages.
My first reaction is that the watchlist arrangements are cryptic. (I was
always going to hate having to scroll to the top for the search box.)
Charles
Cameron and Clegg have got to WP already? No, I must be confused, but
the new look has arrived on our pages.
I don't really like it either. But whilst from an editor's point of
view the skin is less suitable than monobook (or even modern), I think
our readers will enjoy the new layout. The
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 1:06 PM, Charles Matthews
charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com wrote:
AGK wrote:
My first reaction is that the watchlist arrangements are cryptic. (I was
always going to hate having to scroll to the top for the search box.)
I prefer the old location for the search box,
o_0 Citation needed. I've been amazed how it's become increasingly a
talking point on my CV over the years. (I put it in other interests
at the end.) People *like* Wikipedia.
That they do. People might write it off in conversation, but secretly,
when they google that obscure term they heard
I couldn't find the deletion and block buttons, and all the scripts
various people have set me up with disappeared. So I've reverted to
the old skin; At least they made it easy to do that.
WereSpielChequers
Message: 2
Date: Thu, 13 May 2010 12:38:56 +0100
From: AGK wiki...@googlemail.com
On 05/13/2010 04:38 AM, AGK wrote:
But although it's too early for the mainstream media to have covered
the redesign, what reception the blogosphere has given it seems to be
generally negative. (Google 'wikipedia new design' and take a look at
the blog posts and comments. But take the comments
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 6:37 PM, Charles Matthews
charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com wrote:
My first reaction is that the watchlist arrangements are cryptic. (I was
always going to hate having to scroll to the top for the search box.)
I'm used to most of it, as would most of the people who have
Delete and protect are in the dropdown arrow next to the star on the
upper-right. Block is where it always was, on the toolbar on the
left, but you have to click the arrow to display the menu. The reason
none of your scripts worked is that they are all in
[[User:WereSpielChequers/monobook.js]].
It's counter-intuitive, perhaps, but I find the internet community as
a whole to be surprisingly unaccepting of change.
~A
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 09:16, William Pietri will...@scissor.com wrote:
People should probably take blog and blog comment reaction with quite a
bit of salt. I've been
The thing that's throwing me is the new logo. It's darker than the old
one was, and actually it seems closer to the original version of the
puzzle globe.
It also looks to me less sharp than the old version. Especially
odd-looking is the text underneath the Wikipedia globe. Does anybody
else
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 3:00 PM, Amory Meltzer amorymelt...@gmail.com wrote:
Delete and protect are in the dropdown arrow next to the star on the
upper-right. Block is where it always was, on the toolbar on the
left, but you have to click the arrow to display the menu. The reason
none of
On 5/13/2010 8:36 AM, Stephen Bain wrote:
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 6:37 PM, Charles Matthews
charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com wrote:
My first reaction is that the watchlist arrangements are cryptic. (I was
always going to hate having to scroll to the top for the search box.)
I'm
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 3:57 PM, MuZemike muzem...@gmail.com wrote:
Another gripe is that they shrunk the
search box even smaller, which really makes looking for a page
problematic. On nearly all computers and with how vector is set up to
operate, the width of the search box could easily be
Date: Thu, 13 May 2010 13:46:47 +0100
From: WereSpielChequers werespielchequ...@googlemail.com
Subject: [WikiEN-l] The new look to Wikipedia
To: wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Message-ID:
aanlktikhfjdg0ty412vbcawkudmjx7jpm30ps4tsu...@mail.gmail.com
Content-Type: text/plain;
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 5:11 PM, Phantomsteve
wikipedia.phantomst...@phantom-enterprises.co.uk wrote:
I'll try vector when I have a chance to try out the different scripts which
I have in monobook - I might just add them one at a time to vector and see
which work and which don't!
There is a
On 13 May 2010 10:14, Magnus Manske magnusman...@googlemail.com wrote:
Maybe that should be done automatically for everyone where monobook.js
exists but vector.js doesn't?
If that were done, it would be important to make sure the monobook.js was
retained (do it as a copy, rather than a move).
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 6:15 PM, Calculator Ftvb i...@futuramerlin.com wrote:
On 13 May 2010 10:14, Magnus Manske magnusman...@googlemail.com wrote:
Maybe that should be done automatically for everyone where monobook.js
exists but vector.js doesn't?
If that were done, it would be important
Noöne; I just thought it important to make sure users' monobook scripts
weren't broken.
—Ecw.technoid.dweeb
On 13 May 2010 13:19, Magnus Manske magnusman...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 6:15 PM, Calculator Ftvb i...@futuramerlin.com
wrote:
On 13 May 2010 10:14, Magnus
David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
I disagree. I've been using Vector since the beta and find it no problem.
I agree. I've been using beta as well and I think people just need to
be familiar with it. What would be usable would be a simple drop
down menu for letting the user choose between
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 7:46 PM, stevertigo stv...@gmail.com wrote:
David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
I disagree. I've been using Vector since the beta and find it no problem.
I agree. I've been using beta as well and I think people just need to
be familiar with it. What would be usable
On 13/05/2010, AGK wiki...@googlemail.com wrote:
I prefer the old location for the search box, yes. But I think that's
because I'm _used_ to it being on the left. I think the usability team
gave a rationale at one point for the new box location, and I seem to
recall it being quite a sound one.
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 8:08 PM, Ian Woollard ian.wooll...@gmail.com wrote:
On 13/05/2010, AGK wiki...@googlemail.com wrote:
I prefer the old location for the search box, yes. But I think that's
because I'm _used_ to it being on the left. I think the usability team
gave a rationale at one
On 13/05/2010, Carcharoth carcharot...@googlemail.com wrote:
I'm used to typing the term for a page I know is there and hitting
search (instead of go) because I want the results of a search
rather than being take to the page (e.g. when searching for people not
listed on a disambiguation page,
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 3:08 PM, Ian Woollard ian.wooll...@gmail.com wrote:
On 13/05/2010, AGK wiki...@googlemail.com wrote:
I prefer the old location for the search box, yes. But I think that's
because I'm _used_ to it being on the left. I think the usability team
gave a rationale at one
Carcharoth wrote:
sigh
I'm used to typing the term for a page I know is there and hitting
search (instead of go) because I want the results of a search
rather than being take to the page (e.g. when searching for people not
listed on a disambiguation page, though they should be). How do I do
On 13 May 2010 21:10, Carcharoth carcharot...@googlemail.com wrote:
I realise I (and others) will have to adapt, and this is all part of
the usability drive.
I maintain that the usability drive is almost exclusively aimed at
those just discovering editing, and at new editors. It became clear
AGK wrote:
Basically, us set-in-our-ways old-timers aren't the target audience
for the Vector skin :-).
Indeed. Going back to monobook is not quite enough, though. Best to hide
the message speaking of We've made a few improvements to Wikipedia, too.
Charles
Charles Matthews charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com wrote:
Indeed. Going back to monobook is not quite enough, though. Best to hide
the message speaking of We've made a few improvements to Wikipedia, too.
And who is we in the we've made improvements. It was not long ago
that we made the
I absolutely agree. I'd never use vector to edit, but from a purely
reading point of view (which is still 50% of how I use Wikimedia)
it's gorgeous, and very smooth, and I feel definitely highlights the
editing aspect as well.
~A
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 16:21, AGK wiki...@googlemail.com
As requested, here's the weekly Flagged Protection update.
As I mentioned last week, we are starting pre-rollout activities while
we finish up the last bits of development. Now that the successful
launch of the new enwiki UI is out of the way, we will be getting
together with Rob H. and the
34 matches
Mail list logo
