Joseph Seddon wrote:
>In terms of CentralNotice and its usage, there is a quite rightly many a
>question about whether this or any other usage of it is appropriate.
>CentralNotice is possibly the most powerful non-profit communication tool
>on the planet. So powerful that projects like Wiki Loves Monuments can
>achieve world records with it. Questions that we have, as a movement,
>never asked ourselves include how it could or should (an important
>difference) be used, what do we consider an efficient or effective usage,
>what are our readers interested in, what are our editors interested in,
>is it possible to give them a choice rather than force them to see
>everything or nothing?

I'm really struggling to understand what you're saying here. You seem to
be suggesting that the Wikimedia movement has never asked itself about
CentralNotice spam. I happen to know that you're very aware of extensive
discussions about the use of CentralNotice on this mailing list, on
Meta-Wiki, and elsewhere. You ("Seddon (WMF)") heavily edited this page in
2016: <>.
This page was created in May 2011. And even in May 2011 (over six years
ago now), the overuse and abuse of CentralNotice was not a new topic.

Given this, it's really difficult to understand what you mean when you
suggest that reasonable considerations, such as not showing a stupid
advertisement to every user, have somehow been overlooked to date. The
exact opposite is demonstrably true and you know this.


Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: and
New messages to:

Reply via email to