Re: [WikiEN-l] A modest proposal - a recap of resolution-l
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 1:53 PM, stevertigo wrote: > On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 10:31 AM, Gwern Branwen wrote: > >> Email lists have the attention span of ferrets on crack; if we're >> looking for long-term discussions, MLs are the worst model we could >> pick, which is another strike against this proposal. > > And yet you write to one or more regularly, I usually only write about transient events which I think will interest this particular small group of hardcore/oldtimer Wikipedians; the only other forums I could think of to reach this same group is the Signpost, and that's a one-way street. > and while your name itself > may not be cited, your term "ferrets on crack" will no doubt be reused > here until the end of wiki-time. I'm skeptical; 'ferrets on crack' is an old phrase, and I think I've used it here before without anyone picking up on it. I'd suggest that we check back in a year or two to see who was right, but there's the whole memory-hole problem with MLs... Oh the ironing! >> Ironically, wikis are so far the online medium which have done best at >> long-term conversations: I routinely see talk page conversations where >> the gaps between one message and another may be a year or three. This >> is not something I've ever been able to say of email lists, IRC chat, >> IM, newsgroups, social sites, web aggregators, most every blog... > > Keep in mind that "wiki" is just a format, with all the backend > required, for editing documents online. It's fast becoming as > ubiquitous as paper someday will once have been, and thus our entire > project is sort of stuck with a name that in a few years will have the > same sense of distinction as 'paperpedia,' or 'pulpedia'. Generic - like the _Encyclopédie_? > Anyway, back to the point, wikis are great for documents - not > conversations. There are of course ideas out there now for ways to > make wiki pages more liquid and perhaps even making its individual > elements atomic and rankable - such as to be suitable for discussions. > And there are also ideas about making traditionally non-wiki concepts > like email more openly editable - waves comes to mind, along with > other CMSes that integrate wiki. 'Someday all websites will be wiki?' > - Sure, but when that happens we won't need to to call them wikis > anymore. > > -Stevertigo Yes, the best way forward is probably to improve talk pages. They've already proven that they can go the distance; so 'all' that's needed is to make them more user-friendly and longterm-watchable without compromising their longevity. Web forums and Reddit pages are a good example of this: in theory they should work just as fine as talk pages, since they need not ever close, and forum threads can be 'stickied' to make them as permanently prominent as a WP article. Yet, in practice, they don't work so well. I attribute this to a overly cluttered UI, generally poor search, and their linear presentation. I'm actually not too enthused about Google Wave for this purpose. Watching the demo, the entire thing seems optimized for short waves with minimal nesting. The history scroll thing is no good for, say, Talk:Jesus, and the comment boxes are all very small and so discourage any in-depth discussion. -- gwern ___ 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] A modest proposal - a recap of resolution-l
> Is there a suitable place on-wiki to put a summary of some of the > points in this thread? > > Carcharoth If you don't mind the recursion, I've posted some of the discussion so far to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Issues/Long-term_discussions which is part of the still-conceptual Community Facilitation project [[WP:CF]]. If a few more people join in and help frame it and where it is going, perhaps it will take off. SJ ___ 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] Where does en:wp need most help?
http://www.google.com/search?q=wikipedia+articles+with+unsourced+claims Proving evidently that our internal search is lame compared with Google :) -Original Message- From: Bod Notbod To: wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Wed, Jul 29, 2009 10:35 pm Subject: [WikiEN-l] Where does en:wp need most help? Hi again, > But I'm interested to know if the good people of this list are aware > of specific tasks/duties on en:wp that are woefully understaffed at > the moment. Things that really need doing. > > Y-E-S spells YES and you are now it. > Articles with Unsourced Claims I did what I thought was the best kind of search on en:wp relating to your reply, and it returns a lot of salient, but not specific project, pages. I found this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:UNSOURCED#Burden_of_evidence Earlier on today I found the 'RFC' pages. I'm interested in dispute resolution. I quite like the idea of getting involved in arguments as someone who, basically, doesn't know their arse from their elbow as regards the dispute that's in progress. For example, there's some big argument going on to do with the History of Transylvania... I have absolutely no interest in the history of Transylvania at all, so I try to bring the contentious parties back to the specific point of what they're arguing about, and then try to draw the discussion back to Wikipedia policies, mainly verifiability. If you can give me a link to a specific (project) page that you're thinking of with regard to unsourced claims, please do. User: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 ___ 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] Where does en:wp need most help?
Hi again, > But I'm interested to know if the good people of this list are aware > of specific tasks/duties on en:wp that are woefully understaffed at > the moment. Things that really need doing. > > Y-E-S spells YES and you are now it. > Articles with Unsourced Claims I did what I thought was the best kind of search on en:wp relating to your reply, and it returns a lot of salient, but not specific project, pages. I found this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:UNSOURCED#Burden_of_evidence Earlier on today I found the 'RFC' pages. I'm interested in dispute resolution. I quite like the idea of getting involved in arguments as someone who, basically, doesn't know their arse from their elbow as regards the dispute that's in progress. For example, there's some big argument going on to do with the History of Transylvania... I have absolutely no interest in the history of Transylvania at all, so I try to bring the contentious parties back to the specific point of what they're arguing about, and then try to draw the discussion back to Wikipedia policies, mainly verifiability. If you can give me a link to a specific (project) page that you're thinking of with regard to unsourced claims, please do. User: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] A modest proposal - a recap of resolution-l
On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 12:48 AM, Samuel Klein wrote: > On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 1:41 PM, Carcharoth > wrote: >>> >>> Ironically, wikis are so far the online medium which have done best at >>> long-term conversations: I routinely see talk page conversations where >>> the gaps between one message and another may be a year or three. This >>> is not something I've ever been able to say of email lists, IRC chat, >>> IM, newsgroups, social sites, web aggregators, most every blog... >> >> Probably to do with the stable central point - the page being >> discussed. All the other mediums you mention are transient. New >> articles hardly anyone returns to. Here, the encyclopedia pages are >> (in theory) kept up-to-date. > > When there is a namespace set aside for central points, such as > individual topics, wikis do this brilliantly. But many wiki processes > simply archive without a central point (or have a week-long discussion > which is then frozen, no more discussion to be had). > > One aspect of a community facilitation project would be to define a > namespace for issues, which might be moved and renamed over time, but > would not be 'closed' or 'archived' because someone though a > particular proposed implementation was not a good idea. If someone > thought it was an issue to consider, then it is a valid point in the > namespace, and will always be so. Someone else might come up with a > great resolution to that issue in the future; it might be effectively > merged with other similar issues; it mght be better understood as a > combination of two resolvable issues. > > Or it might just remain, with fluctuating priority, as something > intractable yet important-to-someone. > > For instance, I was looking for the latest thoughts on the topic of > 'How to create notability guidelines for a new category' (since > [[Category:Wikipedia notability guidelines]] is pretty sparse) without > success. > > And the a little while before that I wanted to see who else thought G8 > shouldn't be used to speedy delete talk pages or subpages with > valuable discussions. I had a specific example that would have > contributed to the idea that talk pages should be preserved... but > there was only a scattering of a dozen discussions across many > different talkpage archives. > > A permanent page for each of these issues, perhaps with one or more > self-selected facilitators willing to help incorporate new thoughts > and more towards a long-term resolution, would be interesting. To > start with, you could seed the issues namespace with the perennial > proposals. [[WP:PEREN]] does not do these justice; and in short order > a good facilitator could replace each of the "Reason for previous > rejection" statements with a reworded but equally accurate "Current > compromise or resolution". Is there a suitable place on-wiki to put a summary of some of the points in this thread? 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] Request for help: Strategic Planning
What he said. :) I'm changing my invite message. Your way is better. Philippe On Jul 29, 2009, at 7:59 PM, Samuel Klein wrote: > Planning for the future is determined by your input. Come discuss > future directions for the Projects, how the Foundation can facilitate > the work of the Projects, and how we should allocate time and > resources to best support our mission." ___ 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] Request for help: Strategic Planning
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 3:09 PM, Philippe Beaudette wrote: > Please, take the time to join in this exciting process. The > importance of your participation can not be overstated. This still makes it sound as though community participation is optional, and is input into some larger non-public process. How about this: "Planning for the future is determined by your input. Come discuss future directions for the Projects, how the Foundation can facilitate the work of the Projects, and how we should allocate time and resources to best support our mission." SJ ___ 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] A modest proposal - a recap of resolution-l
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 1:41 PM, Carcharoth wrote: >> >> Ironically, wikis are so far the online medium which have done best at >> long-term conversations: I routinely see talk page conversations where >> the gaps between one message and another may be a year or three. This >> is not something I've ever been able to say of email lists, IRC chat, >> IM, newsgroups, social sites, web aggregators, most every blog... > > Probably to do with the stable central point - the page being > discussed. All the other mediums you mention are transient. New > articles hardly anyone returns to. Here, the encyclopedia pages are > (in theory) kept up-to-date. When there is a namespace set aside for central points, such as individual topics, wikis do this brilliantly. But many wiki processes simply archive without a central point (or have a week-long discussion which is then frozen, no more discussion to be had). One aspect of a community facilitation project would be to define a namespace for issues, which might be moved and renamed over time, but would not be 'closed' or 'archived' because someone though a particular proposed implementation was not a good idea. If someone thought it was an issue to consider, then it is a valid point in the namespace, and will always be so. Someone else might come up with a great resolution to that issue in the future; it might be effectively merged with other similar issues; it mght be better understood as a combination of two resolvable issues. Or it might just remain, with fluctuating priority, as something intractable yet important-to-someone. For instance, I was looking for the latest thoughts on the topic of 'How to create notability guidelines for a new category' (since [[Category:Wikipedia notability guidelines]] is pretty sparse) without success. And the a little while before that I wanted to see who else thought G8 shouldn't be used to speedy delete talk pages or subpages with valuable discussions. I had a specific example that would have contributed to the idea that talk pages should be preserved... but there was only a scattering of a dozen discussions across many different talkpage archives. A permanent page for each of these issues, perhaps with one or more self-selected facilitators willing to help incorporate new thoughts and more towards a long-term resolution, would be interesting. To start with, you could seed the issues namespace with the perennial proposals. [[WP:PEREN]] does not do these justice; and in short order a good facilitator could replace each of the "Reason for previous rejection" statements with a reworded but equally accurate "Current compromise or resolution". SJ ___ 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] Rorschach wars continue
2009/7/29 Ken Arromdee : > On Wed, 29 Jul 2009, geni wrote: >> > It's too bad that the people saying that publishing the inkblots is harmful >> > are professionals instead of New York Times editors. If it was the New >> > York Times, they would have been unceremoniously deleted without even a >> > WP:OFFICE. >> Not really. In this case there are a number editors who've spent >> significant amounts of time arguing for their inclusion and are not >> likely to react to well to any attempted removal. > > If the New York Times had claimed the information is harmful, Jimbo would have > deleted the information much earlier--no editor would have gotten a *chance* > to spend a significant amount of time defending it. You don't get editors > investing a lot of time if you make the deletion a fait accompli before a lot > of time has passed. Jimbo isn't a commons admin. -- geni ___ 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] Request for help: Strategic Planning
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 6:10 PM, Brian wrote: > Apparantly there is still dome dns propagation occuring. What I see at > strategy.wikimedia.org is not what I saw when I received the first e-mail. I > saw what whjohnson saw - a portal. Now it resolves to the wiki. Ah okay. DNS *can* be a nasty bugger sometimes. :-) But still, if you guys find anything that you think *should* be on the Main Page or should be different, the "convenors" have been very attentive and open to comments and suggestions. I'm sure they'd love to hear any of your thoughts. :-) -- Casey Brown Cbrown1023 ___ 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] Rorschach wars continue
<> Please report to Re-education Camp #41 -Original Message- From: Ray Saintonge To: English Wikipedia Sent: Wed, Jul 29, 2009 3:16 pm Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Rorschach wars continue Ken Arromdee wrote: > It's too bad that the people saying that publishing the inkblots is harmful > are professionals instead of New York Times editors. If it was the New > York Times, they would have been unceremoniously deleted without even a > WP:OFFICE. > > Does this dispute put us in league with the Scientologists? Ec ___ 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] Rorschach wars continue
On Wed, 29 Jul 2009, geni wrote: > > It's too bad that the people saying that publishing the inkblots is harmful > > are professionals instead of New York Times editors. If it was the New > > York Times, they would have been unceremoniously deleted without even a > > WP:OFFICE. > Not really. In this case there are a number editors who've spent > significant amounts of time arguing for their inclusion and are not > likely to react to well to any attempted removal. If the New York Times had claimed the information is harmful, Jimbo would have deleted the information much earlier--no editor would have gotten a *chance* to spend a significant amount of time defending it. You don't get editors investing a lot of time if you make the deletion a fait accompli before a lot of time has passed. ___ 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] Request for help: Strategic Planning
wjhonson, it's really not, despite the way it's acting for you. For whatever reason, a small number of people are being forwarded to the wrong site, and the servers are confused. I'm sorry you got caught in it. That link really leads to the main page. Philippe On Jul 29, 2009, at 5:14 PM, wjhon...@aol.com wrote: > The top level page is a listing of all the other projects, Wikipedia, > Wikisource, etc. > Strategy not being one of those listed. > > > < seems to give a great deal of links (and explanations of what those > pages are). Was there something missing that you noticed?>> > > ___ 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] Rorschach wars continue
Ken Arromdee wrote: > It's too bad that the people saying that publishing the inkblots is harmful > are professionals instead of New York Times editors. If it was the New > York Times, they would have been unceremoniously deleted without even a > WP:OFFICE. > > Does this dispute put us in league with the Scientologists? Ec ___ 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] Request for help: Strategic Planning
Okay makes sense now. Now it redirects me, before it wasn't. -Original Message- From: Brian To: English Wikipedia Sent: Wed, Jul 29, 2009 3:10 pm Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Request for help: Strategic Planning On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 4:08 PM, Casey Brown wrote: > On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 5:25 PM, wrote: > > This main page of strategy.wikimedia.org is merely a icon-listing of > > all the projects. > > There is no obvious link to "drill down" into the strategy wiki itself. > > No links except to other projects. > > And the main page can't be edited. > > > > Sorry, but what do you mean by "drill down"? To me, the Main Page > seems to give a great deal of links (and explanations of what those > pages are). Was there something missing that you noticed? > > -- > Casey Brown > Cbrown1023 > > Apparantly there is still dome dns propagation occuring. What I see at strategy.wikimedia.org is not what I saw when I received the first e-mail. I saw what whjohnson saw - a portal. Now it resolves to the wiki. ___ 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] Request for help: Strategic Planning
The top level page is a listing of all the other projects, Wikipedia, Wikisource, etc. Strategy not being one of those listed. <> -Original Message- From: Casey Brown To: English Wikipedia Sent: Wed, Jul 29, 2009 3:08 pm Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Request for help: Strategic Planning On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 5:25 PM, wrote: > This main page of strategy.wikimedia.org is merely a icon-listing of > all the projects. > There is no obvious link to "drill down" into the strategy wiki itself. > No links except to other projects. > And the main page can't be edited. > Sorry, but what do you mean by "drill down"? To me, the Main Page seems to give a great deal of links (and explanations of what those pages are). Was there something missing that you noticed? -- Casey Brown Cbrown1023 ___ 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] Request for help: Strategic Planning
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 4:08 PM, Casey Brown wrote: > On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 5:25 PM, wrote: > > This main page of strategy.wikimedia.org is merely a icon-listing of > > all the projects. > > There is no obvious link to "drill down" into the strategy wiki itself. > > No links except to other projects. > > And the main page can't be edited. > > > > Sorry, but what do you mean by "drill down"? To me, the Main Page > seems to give a great deal of links (and explanations of what those > pages are). Was there something missing that you noticed? > > -- > Casey Brown > Cbrown1023 > > Apparantly there is still dome dns propagation occuring. What I see at strategy.wikimedia.org is not what I saw when I received the first e-mail. I saw what whjohnson saw - a portal. Now it resolves to the wiki. ___ 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] Request for help: Strategic Planning
I think the issue was server based. It's been hiccuping some today and forwarding us to the wikimediafoundation.org site... I bet he got caught in one of those. Philippe On Jul 29, 2009, at 5:08 PM, Casey Brown wrote: > On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 5:25 PM, wrote: >> This main page of strategy.wikimedia.org is merely a icon-listing of >> all the projects. >> There is no obvious link to "drill down" into the strategy wiki >> itself. >> No links except to other projects. >> And the main page can't be edited. >> > > Sorry, but what do you mean by "drill down"? To me, the Main Page > seems to give a great deal of links (and explanations of what those > pages are). Was there something missing that you noticed? > > -- > Casey Brown > Cbrown1023 > > ___ > 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] Request for help: Strategic Planning
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 5:25 PM, wrote: > This main page of strategy.wikimedia.org is merely a icon-listing of > all the projects. > There is no obvious link to "drill down" into the strategy wiki itself. > No links except to other projects. > And the main page can't be edited. > Sorry, but what do you mean by "drill down"? To me, the Main Page seems to give a great deal of links (and explanations of what those pages are). Was there something missing that you noticed? -- Casey Brown Cbrown1023 ___ 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] Request for help: Strategic Planning
It does, for me... On Jul 29, 2009, at 4:44 PM, wjhon...@aol.com wrote: > Yes http://strategy.wikimedia.org should point with an obvious link to > > http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page > > > Will > > > > > -Original Message- > From: Brian > To: English Wikipedia > Sent: Wed, Jul 29, 2009 2:27 pm > Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Request for help: Strategic Planning > > > > > > > > > > > http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page > > On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 3:25 PM, wrote: > >> This main page of strategy.wikimedia.org is merely a icon-listing of >> all the projects. >> There is no obvious link to "drill down" into the strategy wiki > itself. >> No links except to other projects. >> And the main page can't be edited. >> >> >> >> -Original Message- >> From: Philippe Beaudette >> To: English Wikipedia >> Sent: Wed, Jul 29, 2009 12:09 pm >> Subject: [WikiEN-l] Request for help: Strategic Planning >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> The Wikimedia Foundation has begun a year long phase of strategic >> planning. During this time of planning, members of the community >> have >> the opportunity to propose ideas, ask questions, and help to chart >> the >> future of the Foundation. In order to create as centralized an area >> as possible for these discussions, the strategy wiki >> (http://strategy.wikimedia.org >> >> ) has been launched. This wiki will provide an overview of the >> strategic planning process and ways to get involved, including just a >> few questions that everyone can answer. All ideas are welcome, and >> '''everyone''' is invited to participate. >> >> Please take a few moments to check out the strategy wiki. It is >> being >> translated into as many languages as possible now; feel free to leave >> your messages in your native language and we will have them >> translated (but, in case of any doubt, let us know what language it >> is, if not english!). >> >> All proposals (see >> http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Call_for_Proposals) >> for the Wikimedia Foundation may be left in any language as well. >> >> Please, take the time to join in this exciting process. The >> importance of your participation can not be overstated. >> >> [http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Philippe --Philippe] >> >> (please cross-post widely and forgive those who do) >> ___ >> 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 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] Rorschach wars continue
2009/7/29 Ken Arromdee : > It's too bad that the people saying that publishing the inkblots is harmful > are professionals instead of New York Times editors. If it was the New > York Times, they would have been unceremoniously deleted without even a > WP:OFFICE. Not really. In this case there are a number editors who've spent significant amounts of time arguing for their inclusion and are not likely to react to well to any attempted removal. -- geni ___ 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] Rorschach wars continue
It's too bad that the people saying that publishing the inkblots is harmful are professionals instead of New York Times editors. If it was the New York Times, they would have been unceremoniously deleted without even a WP:OFFICE. ___ 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] Request for help: Strategic Planning
Yes http://strategy.wikimedia.org should point with an obvious link to http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page Will -Original Message- From: Brian To: English Wikipedia Sent: Wed, Jul 29, 2009 2:27 pm Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Request for help: Strategic Planning http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 3:25 PM, wrote: > This main page of strategy.wikimedia.org is merely a icon-listing of > all the projects. > There is no obvious link to "drill down" into the strategy wiki itself. > No links except to other projects. > And the main page can't be edited. > > > > -Original Message- > From: Philippe Beaudette > To: English Wikipedia > Sent: Wed, Jul 29, 2009 12:09 pm > Subject: [WikiEN-l] Request for help: Strategic Planning > > > > > > > > > > > > > The Wikimedia Foundation has begun a year long phase of strategic > planning. During this time of planning, members of the community have > the opportunity to propose ideas, ask questions, and help to chart the > future of the Foundation. In order to create as centralized an area > as possible for these discussions, the strategy wiki > (http://strategy.wikimedia.org > > ) has been launched. This wiki will provide an overview of the > strategic planning process and ways to get involved, including just a > few questions that everyone can answer. All ideas are welcome, and > '''everyone''' is invited to participate. > > Please take a few moments to check out the strategy wiki. It is being > translated into as many languages as possible now; feel free to leave > your messages in your native language and we will have them > translated (but, in case of any doubt, let us know what language it > is, if not english!). > > All proposals (see > http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Call_for_Proposals) > for the Wikimedia Foundation may be left in any language as well. > > Please, take the time to join in this exciting process. The > importance of your participation can not be overstated. > > [http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Philippe --Philippe] > > (please cross-post widely and forgive those who do) > ___ > 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 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] Request for help: Strategic Planning
http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 3:25 PM, wrote: > This main page of strategy.wikimedia.org is merely a icon-listing of > all the projects. > There is no obvious link to "drill down" into the strategy wiki itself. > No links except to other projects. > And the main page can't be edited. > > > > -Original Message- > From: Philippe Beaudette > To: English Wikipedia > Sent: Wed, Jul 29, 2009 12:09 pm > Subject: [WikiEN-l] Request for help: Strategic Planning > > > > > > > > > > > > > The Wikimedia Foundation has begun a year long phase of strategic > planning. During this time of planning, members of the community have > the opportunity to propose ideas, ask questions, and help to chart the > future of the Foundation. In order to create as centralized an area > as possible for these discussions, the strategy wiki > (http://strategy.wikimedia.org > > ) has been launched. This wiki will provide an overview of the > strategic planning process and ways to get involved, including just a > few questions that everyone can answer. All ideas are welcome, and > '''everyone''' is invited to participate. > > Please take a few moments to check out the strategy wiki. It is being > translated into as many languages as possible now; feel free to leave > your messages in your native language and we will have them > translated (but, in case of any doubt, let us know what language it > is, if not english!). > > All proposals (see > http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Call_for_Proposals) > for the Wikimedia Foundation may be left in any language as well. > > Please, take the time to join in this exciting process. The > importance of your participation can not be overstated. > > [http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Philippe --Philippe] > > (please cross-post widely and forgive those who do) > ___ > 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
Re: [WikiEN-l] Request for help: Strategic Planning
This main page of strategy.wikimedia.org is merely a icon-listing of all the projects. There is no obvious link to "drill down" into the strategy wiki itself. No links except to other projects. And the main page can't be edited. -Original Message- From: Philippe Beaudette To: English Wikipedia Sent: Wed, Jul 29, 2009 12:09 pm Subject: [WikiEN-l] Request for help: Strategic Planning The Wikimedia Foundation has begun a year long phase of strategic planning. During this time of planning, members of the community have the opportunity to propose ideas, ask questions, and help to chart the future of the Foundation. In order to create as centralized an area as possible for these discussions, the strategy wiki (http://strategy.wikimedia.org ) has been launched. This wiki will provide an overview of the strategic planning process and ways to get involved, including just a few questions that everyone can answer. All ideas are welcome, and '''everyone''' is invited to participate. Please take a few moments to check out the strategy wiki. It is being translated into as many languages as possible now; feel free to leave your messages in your native language and we will have them translated (but, in case of any doubt, let us know what language it is, if not english!). All proposals (see http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Call_for_Proposals) for the Wikimedia Foundation may be left in any language as well. Please, take the time to join in this exciting process. The importance of your participation can not be overstated. [http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Philippe --Philippe] (please cross-post widely and forgive those who do) ___ 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] A modest proposal - a recap of resolution-l
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 6:53 AM, stevertigo wrote: > On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 3:23 PM, Luna wrote: > > > It's almost as if the vast bulk of discussion takes place on the wiki, or > > something. > > So, anyway, no. High level dispute resolution deliberations don't seem > to happen on the wiki, and this has brought about a general lack of > responsiveness, and has also negated open discussion itself to a > certain degree. My points are easier to refute when you change them, yes. I didn't say "arbcom", I said "vast bulk". Arbcom is involved in only a tiny fraction of disputes, and then only after prior resolution mechanisms have failed. Unless you're suggesting this mailing list would replace arbcom, I can't say that I'm sure what you're getting at, there. > > That, specifically, is something I find missing from your proposal: an > > earnest explanation of what this gives us that on-wiki discussion cannot. > > Personally, I think it sounds likely to fragment discussion and encourage > > forum shopping, aside from giving people the feeling they've been run > around > > -- even if you personally have a firm idea of the list's remit, other > people > > will not. > > An open mailing list for dispute resolution will bring about greater > openness and wikilove. How? What will it add that the wiki and current mailing lists cannot? You've argued that we should centralize discussion, and then you propose fragmenting it with a new list. I'm not sure if I can follow that. Wouldn't it be reasonable to start discussion here, and fork in the event that discussion overwhelms other list traffic? > > > Your increasingly incessant personal attacks and use of the royal "we" -- > > what else could you be referring to? -- are a but off-putting, as well. > > I appreciate the fact that someone perceived as making personal > attacks will be chastised by you and others, but the fact of the > matter is that I have never made any personal attacks against Cary or > anyone else in this matter. A couple sarcastic or pointy responses to > similarly sarcastic or rude commentary do not qualify. Your > "incessant" term is a gross mischaracterization. Interesting that you deny making any personal attacks, and yet you immediately leap to defend specific comments, as if you knew exactly which ones I might be referring to. Hm! Anyway, you seem to have knocked that off lately. Thanks. -Luna ___ 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] Request for help: Strategic Planning
The Wikimedia Foundation has begun a year long phase of strategic planning. During this time of planning, members of the community have the opportunity to propose ideas, ask questions, and help to chart the future of the Foundation. In order to create as centralized an area as possible for these discussions, the strategy wiki (http://strategy.wikimedia.org ) has been launched. This wiki will provide an overview of the strategic planning process and ways to get involved, including just a few questions that everyone can answer. All ideas are welcome, and '''everyone''' is invited to participate. Please take a few moments to check out the strategy wiki. It is being translated into as many languages as possible now; feel free to leave your messages in your native language and we will have them translated (but, in case of any doubt, let us know what language it is, if not english!). All proposals (see http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Call_for_Proposals) for the Wikimedia Foundation may be left in any language as well. Please, take the time to join in this exciting process. The importance of your participation can not be overstated. [http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Philippe --Philippe] (please cross-post widely and forgive those who do) ___ 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] Where does en:wp need most help?
<> Y-E-S spells YES and you are now it. Articles with Unsourced Claims There are entries that are over a year old We really shouldn't have any entries even over a month old in a perfect world. Will **Hot Deals at Dell on Popular Laptops perfect for Back to School (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1223106546x1201717234/aol?redir=http:%2F%2Faltfarm.mediaplex.com%2Fad%2Fck%2F12309%2D81939%2D1629%2D8) ___ 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] Where does en:wp need most help?
Hi, As I mentioned in passing previously, I'm intending to spend a lot more time working on Wikipedia. I can find lots of ways to spend that time at the community portal. But I have so far been spending most of it patrolling Recent Changes using Huggle. But I'm interested to know if the good people of this list are aware of specific tasks/duties on en:wp that are woefully understaffed at the moment. Things that really need doing. It would be good if you could try and list three ideas as I may either be unwilling or unsuited for any recommendations. And, of course, this request for suggestions does not constitute a commitment :o) I'm not an administrator and have no plans to become one. But if there is a shortage of admins dealing with any particular important task still suggest it, but mark it "admin" so I know. If there's something that appeals to me, but I would need to be an admin to do it, I will consider going for a promotion. User: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] A modest proposal - a recap of resolution-l
<> What a comic! I mean seriously. The good old days, weren't that good. Will **Hot Deals at Dell on Popular Laptops perfect for Back to School (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1223106546x1201717234/aol?redir=http:%2F%2Faltfarm.mediaplex.com%2Fad%2Fck%2F12309%2D81939%2D1629%2D8) ___ 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] A modest proposal - a recap of resolution-l - Enough already
<> On the contrary, the guy standing on the corner with the sign that reads "Bush is an idiot" doesn't affect me at all. No one is forcing anyone to read anything. The title of this thread is clear, anyone who doesn't want to read more of it, can simply delete-upon-sight. Will Johnson **Hot Deals at Dell on Popular Laptops perfect for Back to School (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1223106546x1201717234/aol?redir=http:%2F%2Faltfarm.mediaplex.com%2Fad%2Fck%2F12309%2D81939%2D1629%2D8) ___ 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] A modest proposal - a recap of resolution-l
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 11:03 AM, stevertigo wrote: > Yes, > its not ideal to separate discussions or to move on-wiki matters to > the mailing list... but what is ideal, and what works for wikien-l and > others could at least work for us. I should repeat though that the resolution-l list will not split discussions nor move local discussions to the mailing list that should be on wiki. Those are reasonable boundaries that Thomas outlined. And "what is ideal" should be a question. (?) -Stevertigo ___ 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] A modest proposal - a recap of resolution-l
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 9:54 AM, Samuel Klein wrote: > Well, there is something in the original proposal that makes sense to me -- > devoting specific attention to long-term facilitation of discussion and > resolution of difficult issues. There is something about wiki-time (to > borrow a term) that discourages measured discussion over time - if you miss > the flashpoint discussion that sets a precedent, people may have moved on > and you'll have to restart the original interest again. Hm. Yeah, to summarise your concept and mine in the most plain and non-controversial terms possible - I'm looking at it simply as a way of looking at DR on en.wiki in a new dimension. Yes, the technology is forty years old.. but it still apparently suffices for about a hundred other projects and project aspects. Yes, its not ideal to separate discussions or to move on-wiki matters to the mailing list... but what is ideal, and what works for wikien-l and others could at least work for us. > I think the list-vs-wiki distinction is a red herring -- I'd like to see > list-to-wiki synchronization so that we never have to have that discussion > again -- so to keep things simple, let's imagine what this would look like > on-wiki. I actually just filed a bug to start use markup conversion on [[wiki link]]s in wikien posts. Should work at least on the web archives, and perhaps anyone who gets the HTML version. Still sort of like the google waves idea - though it does look a bit overkill for us here. > Sam had a good idea in this direction : [[Wikipedia:Community Facilitation]] > . It's about something more specific than dispute resolution in general, > but may be a useful part of what you have in mind, steve. And the idea > would be both to discuss [potentially long-term] facilitation, help people > get better at it, and practice it in the context of specific issues. I like it already, and I haven't even looked at it yet. -Stevertigo ___ 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] A modest proposal - a recap of resolution-l
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 10:31 AM, Gwern Branwen wrote: > Email lists have the attention span of ferrets on crack; if we're > looking for long-term discussions, MLs are the worst model we could > pick, which is another strike against this proposal. And yet you write to one or more regularly, and while your name itself may not be cited, your term "ferrets on crack" will no doubt be reused here until the end of wiki-time. > Ironically, wikis are so far the online medium which have done best at > long-term conversations: I routinely see talk page conversations where > the gaps between one message and another may be a year or three. This > is not something I've ever been able to say of email lists, IRC chat, > IM, newsgroups, social sites, web aggregators, most every blog... Keep in mind that "wiki" is just a format, with all the backend required, for editing documents online. It's fast becoming as ubiquitous as paper someday will once have been, and thus our entire project is sort of stuck with a name that in a few years will have the same sense of distinction as 'paperpedia,' or 'pulpedia'. Anyway, back to the point, wikis are great for documents - not conversations. There are of course ideas out there now for ways to make wiki pages more liquid and perhaps even making its individual elements atomic and rankable - such as to be suitable for discussions. And there are also ideas about making traditionally non-wiki concepts like email more openly editable - waves comes to mind, along with other CMSes that integrate wiki. 'Someday all websites will be wiki?' - Sure, but when that happens we won't need to to call them wikis anymore. -Stevertigo ___ 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] A modest proposal - a recap of resolution-l
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 6:41 PM, Carcharoth wrote: > New articles hardly anyone returns to. Here, the encyclopedia pages are > (in theory) kept up-to-date. That should have said "news articles". 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] A modest proposal - a recap of resolution-l
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 6:31 PM, Gwern Branwen wrote: > On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 12:54 PM, Samuel Klein wrote: >> Well, there is something in the original proposal that makes sense to me -- >> devoting specific attention to long-term facilitation of discussion and >> resolution of difficult issues. There is something about wiki-time (to >> borrow a term) that discourages measured discussion over time - if you miss >> the flashpoint discussion that sets a precedent, people may have moved on >> and you'll have to restart the original interest again. >> > > Email lists have the attention span of ferrets on crack; if we're > looking for long-term discussions, MLs are the worst model we could > pick, which is another strike against this proposal. > > Ironically, wikis are so far the online medium which have done best at > long-term conversations: I routinely see talk page conversations where > the gaps between one message and another may be a year or three. This > is not something I've ever been able to say of email lists, IRC chat, > IM, newsgroups, social sites, web aggregators, most every blog... Probably to do with the stable central point - the page being discussed. All the other mediums you mention are transient. New articles hardly anyone returns to. Here, the encyclopedia pages are (in theory) kept up-to-date. On newsgroups I have seen years-old messages being revived, but there is often a strong social pressure to not do that, and instead start a new post. And there is no stable object for discussions to revolve around. 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] A modest proposal - a recap of resolution-l
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 12:54 PM, Samuel Klein wrote: > Well, there is something in the original proposal that makes sense to me -- > devoting specific attention to long-term facilitation of discussion and > resolution of difficult issues. There is something about wiki-time (to > borrow a term) that discourages measured discussion over time - if you miss > the flashpoint discussion that sets a precedent, people may have moved on > and you'll have to restart the original interest again. > Email lists have the attention span of ferrets on crack; if we're looking for long-term discussions, MLs are the worst model we could pick, which is another strike against this proposal. Ironically, wikis are so far the online medium which have done best at long-term conversations: I routinely see talk page conversations where the gaps between one message and another may be a year or three. This is not something I've ever been able to say of email lists, IRC chat, IM, newsgroups, social sites, web aggregators, most every blog... -- gwern ___ 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] A modest proposal - a recap of resolution-l
Well, there is something in the original proposal that makes sense to me -- devoting specific attention to long-term facilitation of discussion and resolution of difficult issues. There is something about wiki-time (to borrow a term) that discourages measured discussion over time - if you miss the flashpoint discussion that sets a precedent, people may have moved on and you'll have to restart the original interest again. I think the list-vs-wiki distinction is a red herring -- I'd like to see list-to-wiki synchronization so that we never have to have that discussion again -- so to keep things simple, let's imagine what this would look like on-wiki. Sam had a good idea in this direction : [[Wikipedia:Community Facilitation]] . It's about something more specific than dispute resolution in general, but may be a useful part of what you have in mind, steve. And the idea would be both to discuss [potentially long-term] facilitation, help people get better at it, and practice it in the context of specific issues. Sj On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 4:01 AM, stevertigo wrote: > I'm proposing that we start a resolution-l mailing list. > > Yes, I know we talked about it a month ago, to the tune of about 100 > posts, and it seemed that it wasn't going anywhere. But that was just > appearances. The reality is that the support was substantial, the > opposition was sub-articulate, and whatever substantive criticism > there was was largely based in some assumed misconceptions about its > scope (Thomas). > > The real truth is that we have been waiting for Cary to fulfill one of > his many duties and create the list. That having failed, we have been > waiting on Cary to tell us why he has not. That also having failed, we > instead have just been waiting a month for Cary to say anything at > all. And he recently did, though there was little substance in it, > other than a threat to close the bug request. Which in fact, he just > did close as WONTFIX: > https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=19414 . I'm sure he > thinks he's doing the right thing. Still, despite our recent > differences, we should welcome Cary's actual participation in our > discussion. Thank you Cary, we understand that you were just too busy > to give this proper consideration. > > Anyway, we were talking about an open list for discussing dispute > resolution. Its scope will be broad, and its purpose will be to be > helpful. It will discuss particular disputes in general, conceptual, > and editorial terms, and facilitate immediate on-wiki dispute > resolution processes. It will also discuss dispute resolution concepts > in general, wherever that goes. > > -Stevertigo > Architect of WP:CIVIL, > creator of Arbcom, > Inventor of those WP:Shortcuts > > ___ > 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] A modest proposal - a recap of resolution-l
stevertigo wrote: > On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 11:46 PM, Charles > Matthews wrote: > >> Oh, have it your own way, then. It just looked, superficially, as if you >> were dead set on alienating large numbers of people, spamming lists, >> creating personal frictions and all that. >> > > I understand that I have a created a special niche for myself here. I > also understand exactly what most concerns and troubles the > bureaucratic mindset. But note that none of this "spamming" would have > been necessary back in Jimbo's day - when anything came up he did his > best to give straight and insightful answers to almost anyone. > Hmm, it might save time if you sent an email to Jimbo, so you could get his straight and insightful "no" to the idea of resolution-l. Or even his very direct and trenchany "yes". > >> The thing is, if you are going to call up the "old days" precedents, >> then it will not do to invoke a partial and sepia-tinted version. There >> are several things we (I'm also an old-school Wikipedian) worked out >> then, including the idea that "Wikipedia is not a battleground". There >> are certainly people who continue to act as if it is. >> > > Excellent points, sir. But how would opening up and centralizing one > small aspect of dispute resolution - dedicated discussion of DR itself > - decrease the peace in any way? > Given your announced intentions for it, I think it is reasonable to assume that it is ground of your own choosing for a battle with the Sith Lords of Arbitration. > >> It is all very well to get worked up about glasnost' issues - we saw a lot >> of that in >> the last election. >> > > I know nothing of the last election - I only get involved in these > things when I think that things have become too obviously warped for > anyone else to deal with. If you could give us a little of your own > project historian overview of what you are talking about - just for > the record - that would be rather interesting too. > So it turns out you don't vote for or against arbs? You are in the majority, since turnout hardly reaches 20%. But it rather undercuts your premise. The 2008 election (and you'll forgive me if I keep this at a general level) was rather Obamamatic, in that many people were voting for the general principle of change rather than specifics of how Arbitration could be improved, procedurally or at the level of what type of person should be an arb. The Gorbachev reference is therefore to try to get away from the idea that US politics is the only valid type of comparison. It is also slyly implying that you can end up with Putin, a KGB man, whatever the sloganising. I happen to think that requests for things to be more "open" can be queried: there is plenty of private mail that should remain private because it is either (a) about private life details that have no bearing on the encyclopedia, but come up because voluntary work tends to drag private matters into the workplace, or (b) horse-trading and straw polls which are part of the proper work of a committee. In fact Arbitration cases generate acres of material showing how decisions are made; and in most cases (not all) what appears on the wiki is at least a fair record of how a decision was reached. > >> A rolling manifesto of abusing anyone connected with >> Arbitration is not actually any kind of solution to anything. >> > > The fact remains that dispute resolution functions need to be more > open. If Arbcom and perhaps even Foundation (hm) actually functioned > fully in accord with their own stated principles or values, then there > would be no issue with concepts like transparency. That's it: sentence 1 says this is about glasnsost'. And sentence 2 appears just to be false, IMX. Charles ___ 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] A modest proposal - a recap of resolution-l - Enough already
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 7:00 AM, Risker wrote: > Not to engage anyone further in this topic, I would appreciate it if the > moderators consider this has gone on quite long enough, and some > moderation is needed here. People are commenting, and I am responding. What is your problem? > I know several people have already switched to "nomail" for this list. Is that really true? I know Cary sort of chimed in here and then said, 'I'm not going to bother reading anyone's responses.' I responded anyway. -Stevertigo ___ 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] A modest proposal - a recap of resolution-l
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 11:46 PM, Charles Matthews wrote: > Oh, have it your own way, then. It just looked, superficially, as if you > were dead set on alienating large numbers of people, spamming lists, > creating personal frictions and all that. I understand that I have a created a special niche for myself here. I also understand exactly what most concerns and troubles the bureaucratic mindset. But note that none of this "spamming" would have been necessary back in Jimbo's day - when anything came up he did his best to give straight and insightful answers to almost anyone. > The thing is, if you are going to call up the "old days" precedents, > then it will not do to invoke a partial and sepia-tinted version. There > are several things we (I'm also an old-school Wikipedian) worked out > then, including the idea that "Wikipedia is not a battleground". There > are certainly people who continue to act as if it is. Excellent points, sir. But how would opening up and centralizing one small aspect of dispute resolution - dedicated discussion of DR itself - decrease the peace in any way? > It is all very well to get worked up about glasnost' issues - we saw a lot > of that in > the last election. I know nothing of the last election - I only get involved in these things when I think that things have become too obviously warped for anyone else to deal with. If you could give us a little of your own project historian overview of what you are talking about - just for the record - that would be rather interesting too. > A rolling manifesto of abusing anyone connected with > Arbitration is not actually any kind of solution to anything. The fact remains that dispute resolution functions need to be more open. If Arbcom and perhaps even Foundation (hm) actually functioned fully in accord with their own stated principles or values, then there would be no issue with concepts like transparency. Because there is an issue, and because I long ago rejected the concept of being a mere functionary, I am raising the point now - such that the matter gets dealt with. Matters eventually do get dealt with. After that, I will go back to whatever the hell it is I do around here. > What you seekt to do might very well be achieved by some forum > unconnected to Wikipedia in any official sense. I consulted with Uncyclopedia, but they just laughed. Was that the kind of disconnected and disjointed forum you were referring to? -Stevertigo ___ 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] A modest proposal - a recap of resolution-l - Enough already
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 3:00 PM, Risker wrote: > Not to engage anyone further in this topic, I would appreciate it if the > moderators consider whether this has gone on quite long enough, and some > moderation is needed here. > > I know several people have already switched to "nomail" for this list. I muted it long ago, but not everyone's a Gmail victim user. > > Risker > ___ > WikiEN-l mailing list > WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l > -- Jonathan Hall ___ 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] A modest proposal - a recap of resolution-l - Enough already
Not to engage anyone further in this topic, I would appreciate it if the moderators consider whether this has gone on quite long enough, and some moderation is needed here. I know several people have already switched to "nomail" for this list. Risker ___ 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] A modest proposal - a recap of resolution-l
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 3:23 PM, Luna wrote: > It's almost as if the vast bulk of discussion takes place on the wiki, or > something. So, anyway, no. High level dispute resolution deliberations don't seem to happen on the wiki, and this has brought about a general lack of responsiveness, and has also negated open discussion itself to a certain degree. Keep in mind that people get their motivation from different places - and in my case my recent Arbitration case left me with a certain reminder of something that I had not dealt with before - that Arbcom's deliberations are private, it does not like treating people like people, and it thinks of itself as a kind of monolith of decision. So, the idea I had a few years ago about a 'formal process for resolving disputes' has been a resounding success, but it has also become quite bureaucratic, overworked, and insular. > That, specifically, is something I find missing from your proposal: an > earnest explanation of what this gives us that on-wiki discussion cannot. > Personally, I think it sounds likely to fragment discussion and encourage > forum shopping, aside from giving people the feeling they've been run around > -- even if you personally have a firm idea of the list's remit, other people > will not. An open mailing list for dispute resolution will bring about greater openness and wikilove. It's true though that I long ago argued that wikien-l was not the place for discussing on-wiki disputes, and its gratifying to see how people have over time incorporated that idea. But its my notion that we can and should discuss dispute resolutions in a more open and centralized way, and I think a dedicated mailing list would work in that respect. > Your increasingly incessant personal attacks and use of the royal "we" -- > what else could you be referring to? -- are a but off-putting, as well. I appreciate the fact that someone perceived as making personal attacks will be chastised by you and others, but the fact of the matter is that I have never made any personal attacks against Cary or anyone else in this matter. A couple sarcastic or pointy responses to similarly sarcastic or rude commentary do not qualify. Your "incessant" term is a gross mischaracterization. -Stevertigo ___ 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] Rorschach wars continue
Gwern Branwen wrote: > Trudi Finger, a spokeswoman for Hogrefe & Huber Publishing, the > German company that bought an early publisher of Hermann Rorschach’s > book, said in an e-mail message last week: “We are assessing legal > steps against Wikimedia,” referring to the foundation that runs the > Wikipedia sites. I would always take a statement like that as face-saving. She likely didn't have a clue about the legal aspects of the matter. Everybody should be allowed the time to consult with counsel, even if all that counsel will say is to confirm our view. Taking a position either way without counsel could be viewed as irresponsible. Ec ___ 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] Alternative to watchlistr
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 8:29 AM, Carcharoth wrote: > On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 11:04 PM, Magnus > Manske wrote: >> Trying to overcome my aversion towards Java, I've written a little app >> that can aggregate watchlists for a user across WikiMedia projects. >> >> 'nuff said: >> http://magnusmanske.de/MetaWatchlist/ > > Cool. Is this being publicised elsewhere as well? Not yet. Any ideas? [Feel free to spam other places in my name ;-] Magnus ___ 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] Alternative to watchlistr
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 11:04 PM, Magnus Manske wrote: > Trying to overcome my aversion towards Java, I've written a little app > that can aggregate watchlists for a user across WikiMedia projects. > > 'nuff said: > http://magnusmanske.de/MetaWatchlist/ Cool. Is this being publicised elsewhere as well? 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
