[Wikimedia-l] Site notice on meta
Wondering if anyone here can put up a site notice on meta regarding the proposal for the Wikimedia Travel Guide. One needs to be an admin on meta. The proposal is here http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Travel_Guide The site notice goes here http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Sitenotice -- James Heilman MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian What I do in my spare time www.opentextbookofmedicine.com ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Site notice on meta
Sure James, I can add that. Just in case, you should leave a note with the exact site notice you want, here - http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Meta:Babel since it's a meta-only issue. Regards Theo On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 12:15 PM, James Heilman jmh...@gmail.com wrote: Wondering if anyone here can put up a site notice on meta regarding the proposal for the Wikimedia Travel Guide. One needs to be an admin on meta. The proposal is here http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Travel_Guide The site notice goes here http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Sitenotice -- James Heilman MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian What I do in my spare time www.opentextbookofmedicine.com ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Request for comment on global bans policy
The way I read it, Steven correct me if I am wrong, he is writing in a staff role, but not necessarily within his Engineering responsibilities. Dan Rosenthal On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 12:17 PM, Theo10011 de10...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 4:04 AM, Steven Walling swall...@wikimedia.org wrote: P.S. On a personal note, I wanted to say that though I'm writing this with my staff accout during working hours, this is not really a part of my core job description now that I've joined Engineering and Product Development. I've spent my time authoring this policy and proposing it because I think it's really important, not merely because I was assigned to do so. Steven, just a note, I'd be a bit more comfortable if you could clearly demarcate whether you are doing this in your staff role or as a volunteer. You are debating a few people who are opposing that policy using your Steven Walling (WMF) staff account. And, not everyone new on Meta might be aware of that postscript you just added here. It also doesn't help that 4 of the 12 supporters for implementing the policy in its current form are WMF staff. Regards Theo ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Request for comment on global bans
Hi Steven, Could you explain the distinctions between https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_locks, https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_blocks, and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_bans? These look to me like they have some redundancy and some areas where they diverge. A chart which compares these three side-by-side would be helpful. Also, if Global Bans are decided by an RFC on Meta, that gives me pause. I can envision sockpuppets and meatpuppets attempting to sabotage the process and giving Meta checkusers more work to do, potentially much more work, especially if WP:DUCK behaviors need to be evaluated on multiple projects in multiple languages and/or coordination is needed with checkusers from projects in other languages. I'm a bit more supportive of the process at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_locks which seems to involve Stewards making the decision to take a global action based on multiple local projects taking local actions, rather than because there was a global community RFC at Meta. I agree with AFBorchert's comment at the RFC, Meta is working great for non-controversial project coordination, requests to stewards etc. But Meta is in no way prepared to serve as a battleground for a large-scale global ban discussion which would tend to revive previous debates at other projects. Maybe I'm missing something here, but I'm thinking that global locks and global blocks would be the best two of the three options to deal with a user who is problematic enough to be unwelcome on all wikis. Thanks, Pine ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Request for comment on global bans
Short answer as I understand it: Global blocks are the technical feature and refer to the accounts, the IPs and the software capability; global bans are the policy and refer to the people who are unwelcome. On 6 July 2012 10:44, ENWP Pine deyntest...@hotmail.com wrote: Hi Steven, Could you explain the distinctions between https://meta.wikimedia.org/** wiki/Global_locks https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_locks, https://meta.wikimedia.org/**wiki/Global_blockshttps://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_blocks, and https://meta.wikimedia.org/**wiki/Global_banshttps://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_bans? These look to me like they have some redundancy and some areas where they diverge. A chart which compares these three side-by-side would be helpful. Also, if Global Bans are decided by an RFC on Meta, that gives me pause. I can envision sockpuppets and meatpuppets attempting to sabotage the process and giving Meta checkusers more work to do, potentially much more work, especially if WP:DUCK behaviors need to be evaluated on multiple projects in multiple languages and/or coordination is needed with checkusers from projects in other languages. I'm a bit more supportive of the process at https://meta.wikimedia.org/**wiki/Global_lockshttps://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_lockswhich seems to involve Stewards making the decision to take a global action based on multiple local projects taking local actions, rather than because there was a global community RFC at Meta. I agree with AFBorchert's comment at the RFC, Meta is working great for non-controversial project coordination, requests to stewards etc. But Meta is in no way prepared to serve as a battleground for a large-scale global ban discussion which would tend to revive previous debates at other projects. Maybe I'm missing something here, but I'm thinking that global locks and global blocks would be the best two of the three options to deal with a user who is problematic enough to be unwelcome on all wikis. Thanks, Pine __**_ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.**org Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-lhttps://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Request for comment on global bans policy
On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 2:17 AM, Theo10011 de10...@gmail.com wrote: It also doesn't help that 4 of the 12 supporters for implementing the policy in its current form are WMF staff. Theo, Could you please expand on this a bit? I'm not sure that I understand. Is it your proposition that WMF staff shouldn't weigh in on this? Or are you surprised at the number? or what? Thanks, pb ___ Philippe Beaudette Director, Community Advocacy Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 415-839-6885, x 6643 phili...@wikimedia.org phili...@wikimedia.org ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Request for comment on global bans policy
On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 4:43 PM, Philippe Beaudette phili...@wikimedia.orgwrote: Theo, Could you please expand on this a bit? I'm not sure that I understand. Is it your proposition that WMF staff shouldn't weigh in on this? Or are you surprised at the number? or what? Hi Philippe No, that is not my proposition. I am not surprised at the numbers either, though everyone on staff is voting in the same way without partaking in the discussion before. This might be incidental or you might agree with the policy, but it currently makes up for a third of the supports. If you were to follow my earlier reasoning, my concern stemmed more from demarcation of roles there, something that I have brought up to you earlier as well. If Dan's understanding is correct, Steven proposed this policy as part of his staff role through his official work account, then he supported from his regular editing account and then you, and some of the WMF staff members are voting in line with the proposed policy from the volunteer account. My point was it was all getting a bit confusing since he mentioned this in his postscript. Regards Theo ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Request for comment on global bans policy
On Jul 6, 2012 2:38 AM, Dan Rosenthal swatjes...@gmail.com wrote: The way I read it, Steven correct me if I am wrong, he is writing in a staff role, but not necessarily within his Engineering responsibilities. Dan Rosenthal Dan is correct. Apologies for any confusion. Steven On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 12:17 PM, Theo10011 de10...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 4:04 AM, Steven Walling swall...@wikimedia.org wrote: P.S. On a personal note, I wanted to say that though I'm writing this with my staff accout during working hours, this is not really a part of my core job description now that I've joined Engineering and Product Development. I've spent my time authoring this policy and proposing it because I think it's really important, not merely because I was assigned to do so. Steven, just a note, I'd be a bit more comfortable if you could clearly demarcate whether you are doing this in your staff role or as a volunteer. You are debating a few people who are opposing that policy using your Steven Walling (WMF) staff account. And, not everyone new on Meta might be aware of that postscript you just added here. It also doesn't help that 4 of the 12 supporters for implementing the policy in its current form are WMF staff. Regards Theo ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Request for comment on global bans
On Jul 6, 2012 2:48 AM, Deryck Chan deryckc...@wikimedia.hk wrote: Short answer as I understand it: Global blocks are the technical feature and refer to the accounts, the IPs and the software capability; global bans are the policy and refer to the people who are unwelcome. Deryck has got it right here. The situation is made more complex by the fact there currently is no technical mechanism for a global block. In lieu of that, Stewards etc. have been resorting to locking people out of their accounts using SUL, which is known as a global lock. A global lock is the usual way of enforcing a ban, according to the current state of the policy. Steven On 6 July 2012 10:44, ENWP Pine deyntest...@hotmail.com wrote: Hi Steven, Could you explain the distinctions between https://meta.wikimedia.org/** wiki/Global_locks https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_locks, https://meta.wikimedia.org/**wiki/Global_blocks https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_blocks, and https://meta.wikimedia.org/**wiki/Global_bans https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_bans? These look to me like they have some redundancy and some areas where they diverge. A chart which compares these three side-by-side would be helpful. Also, if Global Bans are decided by an RFC on Meta, that gives me pause. I can envision sockpuppets and meatpuppets attempting to sabotage the process and giving Meta checkusers more work to do, potentially much more work, especially if WP:DUCK behaviors need to be evaluated on multiple projects in multiple languages and/or coordination is needed with checkusers from projects in other languages. I'm a bit more supportive of the process at https://meta.wikimedia.org/**wiki/Global_locks https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_lockswhich seems to involve Stewards making the decision to take a global action based on multiple local projects taking local actions, rather than because there was a global community RFC at Meta. I agree with AFBorchert's comment at the RFC, Meta is working great for non-controversial project coordination, requests to stewards etc. But Meta is in no way prepared to serve as a battleground for a large-scale global ban discussion which would tend to revive previous debates at other projects. Maybe I'm missing something here, but I'm thinking that global locks and global blocks would be the best two of the three options to deal with a user who is problematic enough to be unwelcome on all wikis. Thanks, Pine __**_ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.**org Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] IRC office hours with the editor engagement experiments team
On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 3:47 PM, Steven Walling swall...@wikimedia.orgwrote: Hi all, The second IRC office hours with the Foundation's editor engagement experiments team will be on Saturday July 7th at 18:00 UTC. We've just completed our first feature experiment on English Wikipedia, and others are set for deployment in the next couple weeks, so there's lots to discuss! As usual, docs about office hours are on Meta.[1] There is also material documenting our experimental work there,[2] and on English Wikipedia at WP:E3. Talk to you then, -- Steven Walling https://wikimediafoundation.org/ 1. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/IRC_office_hours 2. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Editor_engagement_experiments Just a reminder that this is happening tomorrow morning. We have the results from our first experiment to talk about, and a new one to be deployed post-Wikimania. Talk to you tomorrow, -- Steven Walling https://wikimediafoundation.org/ ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
