Being a linguist i am often asked how many languages do i speak. I
don't like that question, because that's not exactly what Linguistics
is about.
Being a Wikipedian i am often asked how many articles did i write. I
don't like that question either, because most work on Wikipedia is
about improving
Дана Sunday 10 April 2011 06:36:22 MZMcBride написа:
> featured article requirements or anything like that. They might be
> inundated with too many links in welcome messages (which I view as a
> largely separate issue from policy creep), but I don't think the vast
> majority of editors pay any mind
I'm not convinced that the need to retype your password was the only
or even the main reason why Strategy had relatively few participants
from the community.
Using Strategy as a testbed for liquid threads was also a contributory
factor, I'm sure I wasn't the only person who had problems with that
Fred,
links here
http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2010-December/062911.html
see also this thread
http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2010-December/062860.html
--
John Vandenberg
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation
What is the purpose of all those questions? I've always provided that
information to this list and if anything ever come out of it, besides
being scolded by the list masters for making off-list posts, was to
gain a new following of admirers.
Sincerely,
Virgilio A. P. Machado
At 19:47 09-04-2
I know that nobody has the guts to do it, but I wonder... I wonder
what would happen if all administrators, bureaucrats and so on where
told to take a hike. What would happen if new requirements for being
administrator and so forth included assuming real identities, and a
set of real world qual
I can give plenty of problematic behaviors of veteran users toward new
users on the English Wikipedia. I don't know whether simplification of
rules and guidelines are the way to deal with them (although I'm all in
favor of simplification). Here are just a few of these behaviors as
examples (and
On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 21:37, Fred Bauder wrote:
> I have a feeling that thinking of "better ways to treat them" may be
> quite difficult.
I fear the Foundation is making a mistake by focusing on quantity, not
quality. The last 10 years has seen the creation of a very experienced
editor and admin
Risker wrote:
> As far as I know, since always, Casey. One must log in separately there;
> going from another WMF project, one's login doesn't follow. One of the main
> reasons for the creation of SUL was so users could go from WMF project to
> project without having to log in again; partly for e
On 9 April 2011 23:39, Risker wrote:
>
>
> On 9 April 2011 23:27, Casey Brown wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 11:20 PM, Risker wrote:
>> > This is an area where every project is going to have its own take on
>> things,
>> > and we can probably learn from each other's experience; however, wha
> Are there people who would like to help me collect such cases like those
> of Astrology, Kosovo, the Middle East etc. and/or cases that were sent
> to arbitration which didn't help much and the like, and productively
> analyze them in order to think of better ways to treat them and the
> users in
Risker wrote:
> I'm particularly interested in policy simplification; I know our project has
> far, far too many complex and even contradictory policies, guidelines, and
> miscellaneous pages that result in "alphabet soup" messages that even
> experienced users find almost impenetrable. I pity the
On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 11:20 PM, Risker wrote:
> This is an area where every project is going to have its own take on things,
> and we can probably learn from each other's experience; however, what
> information there is seems to be housed on the strategy wiki, which many
> users avoid because it'
On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 1:03 PM, Dror Kamir wrote:
> Are there people who would like to help me collect such cases like those
> of Astrology, Kosovo, the Middle East etc. and/or cases that were sent
> to arbitration which didn't help much and the like, and productively
> analyze them in order to t
Getting back on topic, the board's resolution says:
We urge the Wikimedia community to promote openness and collaboration, by:
* Treating new editors with patience, kindness, and respect; being aware
of the challenges facing new editors, and reaching out to them; and
encouraging others to do the
Are there people who would like to help me collect such cases like those
of Astrology, Kosovo, the Middle East etc. and/or cases that were sent
to arbitration which didn't help much and the like, and productively
analyze them in order to think of better ways to treat them and the
users involve?
[FYI]
-- Forwarded message --
From: Erik Moeller
Date: 2011/4/9
Subject: March 2011 Wikimedia Foundation Report
To: wikimediaannounc...@lists.wikimedia.org
As always, the wiki version with images is on Meta:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Report,_March_201
> Fred, arbitration doesn't help in such cases. The arbitrators are not in
> a position to make editorial decisions. All they can do is tell the
> parties to control themselves, reiterate the principle of NPOV and
> decide upon further sanctions, which usually just add fuel to the fire.
> That's ex
Fred, arbitration doesn't help in such cases. The arbitrators are not in
a position to make editorial decisions. All they can do is tell the
parties to control themselves, reiterate the principle of NPOV and
decide upon further sanctions, which usually just add fuel to the fire.
That's exactly
> I cannot comment on the case of Kosovo, because I have no information
> about this case (as far as Wikipedia is concerned, that is), however,
> phenomena which resemble this description are very common in articles
> about conflicts, especially the Middle East conflict. There are groups
> of edito
I cannot comment on the case of Kosovo, because I have no information
about this case (as far as Wikipedia is concerned, that is), however,
phenomena which resemble this description are very common in articles
about conflicts, especially the Middle East conflict. There are groups
of editors who
Hi everyone,
With great regret, I tell you that Herbythyme has found it necessary to
withdraw from the Ombudsman commission [1] due to extenuating personal
circumstances. We wish him all the best and thank him for his service. He
will be resuming his permissions as before.
This leaves one pos
> About the foundation openness,
> I wanted to write a comment on the foundation page, but it was not open.
> So I wrote my comment on SJ talk page,
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Sj#Openness
>
> Here is what I have to say about wikipedia and openness :
> ;
>
> HI, I w
> On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 06:46, Milos Rancic wrote:
>> Besides that, there should be limits on sanctions. For example, I think
>> that we should limit all non-spam as well as some troll-like behavior
>> blocks to, let's say, two years.
>
> There's a bit of a contradiction here, Milos. If we want t
About the foundation openness,
I wanted to write a comment on the foundation page, but it was not open.
So I wrote my comment on SJ talk page,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Sj#Openness
Here is what I have to say about wikipedia and openness :
;
HI, I wanted to comment
On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 06:46, Milos Rancic wrote:
> Besides that, there should be limits on sanctions. For example, I think
> that we should limit all non-spam as well as some troll-like behavior
> blocks to, let's say, two years.
There's a bit of a contradiction here, Milos. If we want to attrac
We may be fifth by Comscore data, but as Comscore discards data from
Public computers such as Internet Cafes that 365 million unique
visitors per month significantly understates our reach. It may
overstate our rank if there are sites that are disproportionately
popular amongst surfers who use Inter
On 04/08/2011 10:16 PM, Dror Kamir wrote:
> This resolution is a very positive step. I hope we will soon be updated
> about practical steps to implement it.
>
> Two such practical steps that are easy to implement and would make a
> significant difference, in my opinion:
>
> (1) Administrators'
Thanks for the update! Anyway, I am currently in the process of importing the
900+ pages from the Wikimedia Incubator there. :)
Regards,Hydrizhttp://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Hydriz
> Date: Sat, 9 Apr 2011 10:02:52 +0200
> From: mill...@gmail.com
> To: foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>
On 04/09/2011 11:37 AM, Ray Saintonge wrote:
> On 04/09/11 1:54 AM, Svip wrote:
>> On 9 April 2011 10:45, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:
>>> Milos Rancic, 09/04/2011 10:14
[1] http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/wikipedia.org
>>> We've been using comScore data for years, now:
>>> http://meta.wikimedia
On 04/09/11 1:54 AM, Svip wrote:
> On 9 April 2011 10:45, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:
>> Milos Rancic, 09/04/2011 10:14
>>> [1] http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/wikipedia.org
>> We've been using comScore data for years, now:
>> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Stu/comScore_data_on_Wikimedia
>> Ale
Thanks for this input, it seems like the right direction, but it is not
enough. Administrators' decisions should be followed much more closely
in order to prevent misuse of administrative power. It is crucial that
people who are not too involved themselves in the projects would do it.
Collectin
On 9 April 2011 10:45, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:
> Milos Rancic, 09/04/2011 10:14:
>
>> [1] http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/wikipedia.org
>
> We've been using comScore data for years, now:
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Stu/comScore_data_on_Wikimedia
> Alexa is not a reliable source.
Whil
Milos Rancic, 09/04/2011 10:14:
> [1] http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/wikipedia.org
We've been using comScore data for years, now:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Stu/comScore_data_on_Wikimedia
Alexa is not a reliable source.
Nemo
___
foundation-l m
On 04/09/2011 10:18 AM, Svip wrote:
> On 9 April 2011 10:14, Milos Rancic wrote:
>
>> May someone update manual in which it is written that Wikipedia is the
>> fifth site by traffic? For the most of 2010 and whole 2011 it has varied
>> between 6th and 8th place [1].
>>
>> Repeating that it's on t
On 9 April 2011 10:14, Milos Rancic wrote:
> May someone update manual in which it is written that Wikipedia is the
> fifth site by traffic? For the most of 2010 and whole 2011 it has varied
> between 6th and 8th place [1].
>
> Repeating that it's on the 5th place says about us one or both of the
May someone update manual in which it is written that Wikipedia is the
fifth site by traffic? For the most of 2010 and whole 2011 it has varied
between 6th and 8th place [1].
Repeating that it's on the 5th place says about us one or both of the
next two things:
* We are out of reality.
* We are u
I am glad to announce that we've got new project: Wikinews in Greek [1].
It is 31st language edition of Wikinews. (Database hasn't been imported
yet.)
[1] http://el.wikinews.org/
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe
2011/4/8 Dror Kamir :
> Had someone
> followed the administrators' decisions on the biggest projects, and
> publish a monthly newsletter with copies of the most prominent decisions
> about bans and sanctions, it would increase transparency and make
> administrators much more careful about checking
39 matches
Mail list logo
