To avoid confusion with researchers in the future, I've made some minor
changes to the research related pages on Meta (see below). This should help
ensure that outdated documentation does not cause unnecessarily delay
and/or expense for those interested in doing Wikimedia-related research.
1: Post
On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 7:39 AM, Lane Rasberry
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I feel that this is an unethical research project and I have told the
> researcher so. We exchanged several emails and were unable to understand
> each other. I asked them to please have their university ethics board
> contact me.
On 16 July 2014 12:34, David Gerard wrote:
> I would suggest that it doesn't become not a vote merely by not
> calling it a vote. I note all the closes that count "!votes" and how
> the not-voting pattern on a given AFD is frequently brought up at DRV.
Vote-counting is increasingly prevalent in t
tutes the bulk of such
non-vote discussions.
> Message: 2
> Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2014 15:43:48 +0300
> From: "Amir E. Aharoni"
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] AFD survey
> Message-ID:
> 84...@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/
On 07/16/2014 07:44 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:
> AFAIK deletion has
> never been a vote by policy on en.wiki.
No, but it almost always devolves to a vote de facto. Interestingly
enough, that particular question (did you close discussions by counting
show of hand vs evaluating the rationales)
Good points, Lane. Such things were possibly discussed before, but it's the
first time that I see it it spelled out like this.
This approach should be advertised a bit somehow, so that the researchers
know how to do it ethically and for everybody's benefit, and so that the
experienced Wikipedians
On 16 July 2014 12:39, Lane Rasberry wrote:
...
> I asked this researcher to discontinue the survey pending a check on the
> impact of it on the Wikipedia community. I said this because I feel they
> are out of compliance with even the soft suggestions in research that are
> available, and they kn
David Gerard, 16/07/2014 13:34:
> I would suggest that it doesn't become not a vote merely by not
> calling it a vote. I note all the closes that count "!votes" and how
> the not-voting pattern on a given AFD is frequently brought up at DRV.
Sure, but calling it a vote makes it a vote. If it's exp
Hello,
I feel that this is an unethical research project and I have told the
researcher so. We exchanged several emails and were unable to understand
each other. I asked them to please have their university ethics board
contact me.
I asked the researcher about RCOM and other things. This person s
I would suggest that it doesn't become not a vote merely by not
calling it a vote. I note all the closes that count "!votes" and how
the not-voting pattern on a given AFD is frequently brought up at DRV.
On 16 July 2014 12:25, Todd Allen wrote:
> English hasn't used voting for a long time either.
English hasn't used voting for a long time either. AfD discussions are
closed based on strength of argument and compliance with policy.
On Jul 16, 2014 2:24 AM, "Tomasz Ganicz" wrote:
> In Polish Wikipedia there is no voting for deletion for around 3-4
> years. There is discussion and then final
If the people who have created this survey can fix the problems raised by
Fae, I'd be happy to share this with several language Wikipedians in India.
I'm sure that at this point nobody would want to be part of it.
On Jul 16, 2014 1:54 PM, "Tomasz Ganicz" wrote:
> In Polish Wikipedia there is no v
In Polish Wikipedia there is no voting for deletion for around 3-4
years. There is discussion and then final decission is made by one of
admins who regularly maintains the deletion process.
2014-07-16 10:20 GMT+02:00 Federico Leva (Nemo) :
> Thanks. All questions were generic and about "Wikipedia"
Thanks. All questions were generic and about "Wikipedia", so I answered
with the Italian Wikipedia in mind. Also note that it.wiki is perhaps
the only wiki which switched deletions from voting to non-voting: the
experiment was already done, you only need to measure and interpret it.
:-) See
http://
edia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Nicole Askin
>> Sent: 16 July 2014 04:00 AM
>> To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> Subject: [Wikimedia-l] AFD survey
>>
>> We are looking for Wikipedians to participate in a survey. The survey is
>> designed t
imedia.org [mailto:
> wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Nicole Askin
> Sent: 16 July 2014 04:00 AM
> To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Subject: [Wikimedia-l] AFD survey
>
> We are looking for Wikipedians to participate in a survey. The survey is
> designed to h
Link does not work.
Cheers,
Peter
-Original Message-
From: wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org
[mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Nicole Askin
Sent: 16 July 2014 04:00 AM
To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] AFD survey
We are looking
We are looking for Wikipedians to participate in a survey. The survey is
designed to help us understand group decision-making and Wikipedia’s
Articles for Deletion (AfD) process. The research is being carried out
under the terms of the University of Western Ontario - Code of Conduct; it
will not le
18 matches
Mail list logo