Re: [Wikimedia-l] Offwiki

2014-07-10 Thread
On 10/07/2014, Wil Sinclair w...@wllm.com wrote: ... So, if you're concerned about your username being phished out, then consider creating an account at http://offwiki.org/wiki/Main_Page. Maybe you'll even stick around for a few minutes to see what we've been up to. :) I have been informed

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community RfCs about MediaViewer

2014-07-10 Thread Brion Vibber
Perhaps it's time to stop calling self-selected surveys of a tiny subset of our user base community consensus. The vast majority of our user base never logs in, never edits, and never even hears about these RfC pages. Those are the people we're making an encyclopedia for. -- brion On Wed, Jul

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community RfCs about MediaViewer

2014-07-10 Thread
On 10/07/2014, Brion Vibber bvib...@wikimedia.org wrote: Perhaps it's time to stop calling self-selected surveys of a tiny subset of our user base community consensus. The vast majority of our user base never logs in, never edits, and never even hears about these RfC pages. Those are the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community RfCs about MediaViewer

2014-07-10 Thread Isarra Yos
On 10/07/14 15:53, Brion Vibber wrote: Perhaps it's time to stop calling self-selected surveys of a tiny subset of our user base community consensus. The vast majority of our user base never logs in, never edits, and never even hears about these RfC pages. Those are the people we're making an

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community RfCs about MediaViewer

2014-07-10 Thread Todd Allen
On Jul 10, 2014 10:36 AM, Isarra Yos zhoris...@gmail.com wrote: On 10/07/14 15:53, Brion Vibber wrote: Perhaps it's time to stop calling self-selected surveys of a tiny subset of our user base community consensus. The vast majority of our user base never logs in, never edits, and never

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community RfCs about MediaViewer

2014-07-10 Thread Dan Garry
This is exactly why there is an opt-out for the feature. We don't expect everyone to like everything we make. That's a reality. So take 10 seconds to go to your preferences and disable it, and you'll never see it again. Dan On Thursday, 10 July 2014, Pierre-Selim pierre-se...@huard.info wrote:

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community RfCs about MediaViewer

2014-07-10 Thread Pete Forsyth
In order to anticipate and meet the needs of readers, you have to have a theory of what those needs are, and what will meet them. The RfC process is one way of getting toward such a theory, and the kind of work done by the WMF's Multimedia Team over the last year or so is another. The pros and

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community RfCs about MediaViewer

2014-07-10 Thread Brion Vibber
On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 9:52 AM, Pierre-Selim pierre-se...@huard.info wrote: For exemple on french wikipedia we used to have a direct link to Wikimedia Commons (we technically removed the description page proxy), now we have totally lost this feature. So yes you may think it's not important,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community RfCs about MediaViewer

2014-07-10 Thread Erik Moeller
On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 9:52 AM, Pierre-Selim pierre-se...@huard.info wrote: For exemple on french wikipedia we used to have a direct link to Wikimedia Commons (we technically removed the description page proxy), now we have totally lost this feature. Actually, Media Viewer consistently

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community RfCs about MediaViewer

2014-07-10 Thread David Gerard
On 10 July 2014 17:36, Isarra Yos zhoris...@gmail.com wrote: And those who do log in, edit, and comment on RfCs generally do so with the understanding, on some level, that everything they do, that the entire encyclopedia, is for the readers, because without an audience there would be nothing.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community RfCs about MediaViewer

2014-07-10 Thread Isarra Yos
On 10/07/14 18:01, David Gerard wrote: On 10 July 2014 17:36, Isarra Yos zhoris...@gmail.com wrote: And those who do log in, edit, and comment on RfCs generally do so with the understanding, on some level, that everything they do, that the entire encyclopedia, is for the readers, because

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community RfCs about MediaViewer

2014-07-10 Thread David Gerard
On 10 July 2014 19:23, Isarra Yos zhoris...@gmail.com wrote: On 10/07/14 18:01, David Gerard wrote: OTOH, typical mind fallacy is rampant everywhere and the results of an actual decent user survey would probably surprise everyone. That was kind of my point - as much as editors do tend deal

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community RfCs about MediaViewer

2014-07-10 Thread Marc A. Pelletier
On 07/10/2014 02:41 PM, David Gerard wrote: Anecdotally, (a) I don't mind the new viewer (b) I know a lot of people who've said they love it (c) I know a few who've said they hate it. That also matches my anecdotal impression, with perhaps the added apparent correlation between (c) and has

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community RfCs about MediaViewer

2014-07-10 Thread Todd Allen
On Jul 10, 2014 12:42 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: On 10 July 2014 19:23, Isarra Yos zhoris...@gmail.com wrote: On 10/07/14 18:01, David Gerard wrote: OTOH, typical mind fallacy is rampant everywhere and the results of an actual decent user survey would probably surprise

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] 2014-15 Annual Plan of the Wikimedia Foundation

2014-07-10 Thread Asaf Bartov
On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 10:15 PM, Pine W wiki.p...@gmail.com wrote: Thank you for the update, Alex. I find it problematic that WMF would override a community grantmaking committee that WMF previously had agreed to work with, especially if the override is to approve a proposal. I understand

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community RfCs about MediaViewer

2014-07-10 Thread Gerard Meijssen
Hoi, Do appreciate that when you show others the door, you stop conversation. Using such terminology in a confrontation like this can only backfire. Truly, I love Wikidata to bits however its RfC process is as broken as most. People pontificate, do not listen and, the arguments are intentionally

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community RfCs about MediaViewer

2014-07-10 Thread Gergo Tisza
On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 11:41 AM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: I concur that there's a bit much reasoning from no data, and we could do with some. Anecdotally, (a) I don't mind the new viewer (b) I know a lot of people who've said they love it (c) I know a few who've said they hate

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community RfCs about MediaViewer

2014-07-10 Thread Erik Moeller
On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 10:03 PM, Pine W wiki.p...@gmail.com wrote: Will WMF deactivate MediaViewer on English Wikipedia No. Detailed explanation: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Media_Viewer/June_2014_RfCdiff=616407785oldid=616294249 Erik -- Erik Möller VP of

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community RfCs about MediaViewer

2014-07-10 Thread Juergen Fenn
2014-07-10 17:53 GMT+02:00 Brion Vibber bvib...@wikimedia.org: Perhaps it's time to stop calling self-selected surveys of a tiny subset of our user base community consensus. The vast majority of our user base never logs in, never edits, and never even hears about these RfC pages. Those are

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community RfCs about MediaViewer

2014-07-10 Thread MZMcBride
Erik Moeller wrote: On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 10:03 PM, Pine W wiki.p...@gmail.com wrote: Will WMF deactivate MediaViewer on English Wikipedia No. Erik has stepped in and employed an office action to re-enable Media Viewer on the English Wikipedia. Erik, can you please explain what emergency

[Wikimedia-l] Deprecating print-on-demand functionality

2014-07-10 Thread Erik Moeller
Since 2008, we've offered a small feature to download printed books from Wikipedia article. This is done in partnership with a company called PediaPress. They've sold about 15K books over that time period, not enough to break even, and the support/maintenance burden for the service is no longer

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community RfCs about MediaViewer

2014-07-10 Thread John Lewis
I don't see any office action at all here. All I see is an administrator acting per what a WMF staffer has said. The code added as explained on the page; disables the feature fully and does not allow any opt ins. John Lewis On Thursday, 10 July 2014, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote: Erik

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community RfCs about MediaViewer

2014-07-10 Thread Todd Allen
This was clarified as an office action under threat of desysop here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Peteforsythdiff=616427707oldid=615757838 On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 4:31 PM, John Lewis johnflewi...@gmail.com wrote: I don't see any office action at all here. All I see is

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community RfCs about MediaViewer

2014-07-10 Thread MZMcBride
John Lewis wrote: I don't see any office action at all here. All I see is an administrator acting per what a WMF staffer has said. Sorry, I have no idea what you're talking about here. I think you may not realize that Erik and Eloquence are the same person? For reference: --- Per Fabrice's

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community RfCs about MediaViewer

2014-07-10 Thread
On 10/07/2014, Todd Allen toddmal...@gmail.com wrote: This was clarified as an office action under threat of desysop here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Peteforsythdiff=616427707oldid=615757838 Wow. This has fallen apart quickly. However the WMF's no position has been

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community RfCs about MediaViewer

2014-07-10 Thread John Lewis
I am aware they are the same. John Lewis On Thursday, 10 July 2014, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote: John Lewis wrote: I don't see any office action at all here. All I see is an administrator acting per what a WMF staffer has said. Sorry, I have no idea what you're talking about here. I

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community RfCs about MediaViewer

2014-07-10 Thread David Gerard
On 10 July 2014 23:46, Fæ fae...@gmail.com wrote: However the WMF's no position has been made extremely clear to all of us unpaid volunteers. You're not on en:wp, so are not part of the us in question. - d. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community RfCs about MediaViewer

2014-07-10 Thread
On 10/07/2014, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: On 10 July 2014 23:46, Fæ fae...@gmail.com wrote: However the WMF's no position has been made extremely clear to all of us unpaid volunteers. You're not on en:wp, so are not part of the us in question. - d. Dear David, Get off my

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community RfCs about MediaViewer

2014-07-10 Thread Erik Moeller
On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 3:25 PM, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote: Erik, can you please explain what emergency necessitated immediate (and likely unprecedented) action here? Please see Fabrice Florin's explanation, as linked in my original response:

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community RfCs about MediaViewer

2014-07-10 Thread MZMcBride
Erik Moeller wrote: In this case, we will keep the feature enabled by default (it's easy to turn off, both for readers and editors), but we'll continue to improve it based on community feedback (as has already happened in the last few weeks). Thanks for the reply. :-) If your feature development

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community RfCs about MediaViewer

2014-07-10 Thread Erik Moeller
On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 4:12 PM, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote: Many new features (e.g., the improved search backend) are deployed fairly regularly without fanfare or objection. Indeed, change-aversion tends to correlate pretty strongly with impact on existing workflows [1] and

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community RfCs about MediaViewer

2014-07-10 Thread geni
On 10 July 2014 22:21, Juergen Fenn schneeschme...@googlemail.com wrote: I don't intend to bother you when you are making an encyclopædia, Brion, but if this is the stance the Wikimedia Foundation takes it's time for me to leave the project. I expect the Wikimedia Foundation to respect a

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community RfCs about MediaViewer

2014-07-10 Thread Sue Gardner
Hey guys, I use MediaViewer, I like it, and I am happy to trust the WMF product team to build stuff. I didn't know about the RFC, but even if I had I would've been unlikely to have participated, because I don't think small opt-in discussions are the best way to do product development -- certainly

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community RfCs about MediaViewer

2014-07-10 Thread Todd Allen
If you don't want to do small opt-in trials, release software in a fully production-ready and usable state. What's getting released here is barely ready for beta. It's buggy, it's full of unexpected UX issues, it's not ready to go live on one of the top 10 websites in the world. It's got to be in