On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 2:44 PM, Ron Ritzman ritz...@gmail.com wrote:
Deleting newcomers' hard work is one of our big PR problems. Even if,
after contemplation, we decide we were actually right to do so.
When someone wanders into the sausage factory and the very first thing
that happens is
On Tue, 11 Oct 2011 01:08:41 +0100, Tony Sidaway wrote:
The only important rule here is to be bold. We really ought to take more
steps to disenfranchise those who repeatedly stamp on attempts to create new
content. They know who they are, and I mean it. We should stop them hard.
So the way to
I don't think that is entirely reasonable thing to say or do, but, on
the other hand, I wished that newcomers would be aware that creating new
articles from scratch is not the only way to help contribute to the
encyclopedia. Assuming that Wikipedia is still nowhere close to being
complete,
I don't know of any good
way in which to guide newcomers towards that direction, though,
especially in a come-and-go-type environment such as this.
When I came to Wikipedia, .. years back then.. I really liked the idea of
stubs being sorted by the field of interest. I liked it and started to
Expanding existing articles has its pitfalls as well. Having a lot of
work summarily reverted is possible there as well, though less likely.
Possibly worse is developing your own writing style and technique in
isolation and having no-one there to point out your mistakes results
in either painfully
On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 4:24 AM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
Deleting newcomers' hard work is one of our big PR problems. Even if,
after contemplation, we decide we were actually right to do so.
When someone wanders into the sausage factory and the very first thing
that happens is
Boldness
In some way I am starting to believe, that we should start to
reconsider/rethink the rule/recommendation BE BOLD in English Wikipedia. It
really is one of our philosophical cornerstones and it has it's validity,
but unfortunately, if applied by/to newbies, it ends up by their
All excellent advice, and probably already written down on-wiki
somewhere. Trouble is, those biting newbies often don't read it, and
newbies often don't read it (or don't follow it). It should be
mandatory to give this sort of advice when interacting with newbies,
but many people don't take the
Coincidentally, I started here by doing that you argued against, which
is being bold.
That aside, if we start questioning be bold, then we also need to
reconsider nobody owns articles. I've always been a firm believer,
even in the beginning that Wikipedia (same could be extended to any open
The only important rule here is to be bold. We really ought to take more
steps to disenfranchise those who repeatedly stamp on attempts to create new
content. They know who they are, and I mean it. We should stop them hard.
On Oct 10, 2011 4:45 PM, MuZemike muzem...@gmail.com wrote:
2011/10/9 WereSpielChequers werespielchequ...@gmail.com:
One good place to look would be talkpages deleted per G8, especially where
the article was deleted per A7.
Better still if you could get an extract of deleted talkpage edits by
editors with less than 100 edits.
Yes, if I could read
Hey list,
do you remember any particular discussions about articles (on the talk
page, or AfD if enough newcomers found their way there) on English
Wikipedia where you could see that new editors/outsiders didn't agree
with the concept of notability, or how notability is interpreted among
(most)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yogscast springs to mind.
A million followers on Youtube, arguably one of the factors in making
Minecraft as popular as it is today, deleted time after time.
Michel Vuijlsteke
On 9 October 2011 01:11, WereSpielChequers werespielchequ...@gmail.comwrote:
One good
Here's a couple of discussions. In the very loosest sense of the term.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/The_Yogscast
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_deletion/The_Yogscast
Sorry to go on about this, but it really defies belief, sometimes, when you
go into these things. I picked Yogscast because I'd just been watching an
episode with my wife *and* I was just about 100% sure there wouldn't be an
article on Wikipedia about them.
What are you to make of an exchange
15 matches
Mail list logo
