This is sarcasm, right? Right?

On Fri, 5 Jul 2019, 12:16 Todd Allen, <toddmal...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Well, inclusionism generally is toxic. It lets a huge volume of garbage
> pile up. Deletionism just takes out the trash. We did it with damn Pokemon,
> and we'll eventually do it with junk football "biographies", with
> "football" in the sense of American and otherwise. We'll sooner or later
> get it done with "populated places" and the like too.
>
> NN athletes and populated places belong on a list, not as a permastub
> "article".
>
> As for A7, it applies only to mainspace. It is the responsibility of any
> editor creating an article directly in mainspace to cite appropriate
> sources and demonstrate notability on the first edit. If one is not yet
> ready to do that, write a draft. A7 does not apply to drafts. But for an
> article in the main encyclopedia, the expectation should absolutely be to
> show sourcing immediately.
>
> Todd
>
> On Thu, Jul 4, 2019, 7:39 AM WereSpielChequers <
> werespielchequ...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Agreeing/asserting that the English Language Wikipedia has a toxic
> editing
> > environment is easy. Defining the problem and suggesting solutions has
> > historically been rather more difficult. Just watch the latest threads at
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Civility for examples.
> >
> > On the English Wikipedia this is clearer than on some projects because we
> > have annual Arbcom elections, and a candidate can always criticise the
> > sitting arbs by saying "of the cases accepted and rejected over the last
> > year or two, ignoring those where we know there was private information,
> > these are the cases where I would have differed from the existing arbs. I
> > would have voted to accept cases xxxxxxxxxxxx,xxxxxxxx and xxxxxxxx and
> > these are the ones where i would have supported a stricter sanction zzzz,
> > zzzzz"
> >
> > Alternatively you can make suggestions as to how you would change the
> > community to make it a less toxic environment, in the past I have argued
> > for, among other things:
> >
> >
> >    1. A different way of handling edit warring that doesn't go so quickly
> >    to blocks.
> >    2. A pause in the speedy deletion process for goodfaith article
> >    creations so G3 and G10 would still be deleted as quickly as admins
> find
> >    them but A7s could stick around for at least 24 hours
> >    3. Software changes to resolve more edit conflicts without losing
> edits.
> >
> >
> > None of these have been rejected because people actually want a toxic
> > environment. But people have different definitions of toxicity, for
> example
> > some people think that everyone who loses an edit due to an edit conflict
> > understands that this is an IT problem, and are unaware of incidents
> where
> > people have assumed that this is conflict with the person whose edit one
> > the conflict. Others just don't see deletionism as toxic, some
> deletionists
> > even consider inclusionism toxic and get upset at editors who decline
> > deletion tags that are almost but not quite correct.
> >
> > My suspicion is that the intersection of "everything you submit may be
> > ruthlessly edited" a large community where you frequently encounter
> people
> > you haven't dealt with before, cultural nuances between different
> versions
> > of English and a large proportion of people who are not editing in their
> > native language makes the English Wikipedia less congenial than some
> other
> > Wikis. For example, someone who comes from a straight talking culture
> might
> > think me as euphemistic and possibly sarcastic, even when I think I'm
> being
> > nuanced and diplomatic.
> >
> > Specifically in the case of the Fram ban, the WMF should have
> communicated
> > before their first 12 month block the specific behaviours that the WMF
> > would no longer tolerate on EN Wikipedia. At least part of their problem
> > was that their first 12 month ban was for undisclosed reasons. Some
> > Wikipedians didn't want the WMF setting new behavioural rules on
> Wikipedia.
> > But other Wikipedians might have agreed with  the WMF if only we knew
> what
> > the new rules were. It is a bit like enforcing speed limits, I might
> > support lowering the speed limits where I live, but I wouldn't support
> > empowering a traffic cop to issue traffic fines for an undisclosed reason
> > where I and other motorists were having to speculate whether there was
> now
> > an invisible but enforced stop sign at junction x, or an invisible but
> > enforced parking restriction on street y. It is deeply ironic that in
> > trying to combat toxic behaviour the WMF itself behaved in a  toxic way.
> >
> > Jonathan
> >
> >
> > > > Hoi,
> > > > I am astounded that you write as if the WMF is at fault in this.
> What I
> > > > find is that in stead of pointing to the WMF, it is first and
> foremost
> > > the
> > > > community of the English Wikipedia who accepted the unacceptable and
> > > > finally has to deal with consequences. True to form, no reflection on
> > > en.wp
> > > > practices and the blame is conveniently put elsewhere.
> > > > Thanks,
> > > >      GerardM
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Reply via email to