On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 1:54 PM, Alan Liefting alieft...@ihug.co.nz wrote:
Is it just me or do others find it difficult to instigate any sort of
changes to policies, guidelines, layout, Manual of Style and related
matters regardless of how minor they are?
Could it be that WP is a reflection
On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 6:38 PM, Steven Walling
steven.wall...@gmail.com wrote:
Research on the amount of bytes added to different namespaces suggests it is
true that the project namespace is stagnant.[1] The largest period of growth
in the bytes added to the project namespace began roughly in
On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 11:35 AM, Carcharoth carcharot...@googlemail.comwrote:
Doesn't this approach assume that people all interact with Wikipedia
in the same way? Many people only participate in a vanishingly small
part of Wikipedia and you can have some areas that are deserted and
others
On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 1:54 PM, Alan Liefting alieft...@ihug.co.nz
wrote:
Is it just me or do others find it difficult to instigate any sort of
changes to policies, guidelines, layout, Manual of Style and related
matters regardless of how minor they are?
Could it be that WP is a reflection
On 19 September 2011 18:38, Steven Walling steven.wall...@gmail.com wrote:
Research on the amount of bytes added to different namespaces suggests it
is true that the project namespace is stagnant.[1] The largest period of
growth in the bytes added to the project namespace began roughly in
On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 11:48 AM, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.netwrote:
Sounds like an interesting project which might answer a few perennial
questions such as to what extent Larry Sanger shaped basic Wikipedia
policies. However, please keep in mind that this mailing list and the
On 09/19/11 12:03 PM, Ian Woollard wrote:
On 19 September 2011 18:38, Steven Wallingsteven.wall...@gmail.com wrote:
Research on the amount of bytes added to different namespaces suggests it
is true that the project namespace is stagnant.[1] The largest period of
growth in the bytes added to
On 09/19/11 12:19 PM, Steven Walling wrote:
On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 11:48 AM, Fred Bauderfredb...@fairpoint.netwrote:
Sounds like an interesting project which might answer a few perennial
questions such as to what extent Larry Sanger shaped basic Wikipedia
policies. However, please keep in
On 09/19/11 11:35 AM, Carcharoth wrote:
Doesn't this approach assume that people all interact with Wikipedia
in the same way? Many people only participate in a vanishingly small
part of Wikipedia and you can have some areas that are deserted and
others that are very active. This isn't found by
On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 12:59 PM, Ray Saintonge sainto...@telus.net wrote:
NS5 is another cryptic acronym.
Ec
Sorry if that was cryptic. NS5 = namespace five = Project talk.
Steven
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To
On 09/17/11 6:04 PM, MuZemike wrote:
I think that certainly does happen, mainly because some don't like
change. Many RfCs and proposals contain oppose reasons such as solution
in search of a problem or If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Other than
what Alan mentioned, this has also applied to
On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 11:04 AM, MuZemike muzem...@gmail.com wrote:
Other proposals get so bogged down in endless stalemate and
filibustering (like with Pending Changes), nothing ever gets done or
moves forward. That's where the consensus-based model fails miserably.
Consensus is in a
People should [stop] making negative insinuations about the majority or
claims
of
mythical idiots that oppose nearly any sensible idea. Perhaps if you
have
proposed or supported a change that has not been implemented it was just
a
poor idea.
Yes, we should assume good faith.
Fred
Yes the pedia is somewhat ossified and change in many areas is difficult to
achieve. You only have to look at the various attempts to reform RFA to see
that.
Of course there are many possible changes that fail because they only have
minority support, and while it might be frustrating for the
Is it just me or do others find it difficult to instigate any sort of
changes to policies, guidelines, layout, Manual of Style and related
matters regardless of how minor they are?
Could it be that WP is a reflection of human behaviour and has become a
talkfest where nothing changes because of
Is it just me or do others find it difficult to instigate any sort of
changes to policies, guidelines, layout, Manual of Style and related
matters regardless of how minor they are?
Could it be that WP is a reflection of human behaviour and has become a
talkfest where nothing changes because
I think that certainly does happen, mainly because some don't like
change. Many RfCs and proposals contain oppose reasons such as solution
in search of a problem or If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Other than
what Alan mentioned, this has also applied to any technical changes to
the system.
17 matches
Mail list logo
