Ten things is a good idea - sort of

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
13 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Ten things is a good idea - sort of

stevertigo-2
Hello list,

I like the fact that people (by one means or another) agreed on using
the banner space for something other than the fund drive (there is
already a permanent link in the interaction sidebox, no?).  Then
things is an interesting usage for that valuable bulletin space.

But I don't think its the best usage. A better usage would be for
mobjobs; fix-it tasks which would effectively serve double duty as
reminders (or first time notices) of some basic process and policy,
focusing on particular problems or aspects. These can be minor items
that need lots of eyeballs to correct on a large scale. My favorite
peeves are:
* the misuse of external links in the body of articles,
* improper hatnotes (WP:HAT - hey, my protologism is official terminology! ;)
* self refs in-body/outside-of-parenthesis. 'For more information,' etc.

-stevertigo

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ten things is a good idea - sort of

David Gerard-2
On 31/08/2007, stevertigo <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I like the fact that people (by one means or another) agreed on using
> the banner space for something other than the fund drive (there is
> already a permanent link in the interaction sidebox, no?).  Then
> things is an interesting usage for that valuable bulletin space.
> But I don't think its the best usage. A better usage would be for
> mobjobs; fix-it tasks which would effectively serve double duty as
> reminders (or first time notices) of some basic process and policy,
> focusing on particular problems or aspects. These can be minor items
> that need lots of eyeballs to correct on a large scale. My favorite
> peeves are:
> * the misuse of external links in the body of articles,
> * improper hatnotes (WP:HAT - hey, my protologism is official terminology! ;)
> * self refs in-body/outside-of-parenthesis. 'For more information,' etc.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Wikipedia_ads

Mind you, there was strong opposition to it when it showed up, at the
notion that they would be generally deployed - rather than confined to
people's user pages, placed there as the user chose. People seem to
have an aversion to public service announcements in ad form, as well
as advertising itself.


- d.

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ten things is a good idea - sort of

Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
In reply to this post by stevertigo-2
On 8/31/07, stevertigo <[hidden email]> wrote:

> * improper hatnotes (WP:HAT - hey, my protologism is official terminology! ;)

It is even better/worse than that. I have seen the term "hatnotes" used outside
wikipedia.

Stephen Colbert is not that far wrong to talk about "wikiality".

Personally as the initial author of WP:BITE, I feel conflicting emotions when
biting the newbies is referred to on online fora entirely divorced
from wikimedia...



--
Jussi-Ville Heiskanen, ~ [[User:Cimon Avaro]]

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ten things is a good idea - sort of

geni
In reply to this post by stevertigo-2
On 31/08/2007, stevertigo <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Hello list,
>
> I like the fact that people (by one means or another) agreed on using
> the banner space for something other than the fund drive

They did no such thing.

> (there is
> already a permanent link in the interaction sidebox, no?).  Then
> things is an interesting usage for that valuable bulletin space.
>
> But I don't think its the best usage. A better usage would be for
> mobjobs; fix-it tasks which would effectively serve double duty as
> reminders (or first time notices) of some basic process and policy,
> focusing on particular problems or aspects. These can be minor items
> that need lots of eyeballs to correct on a large scale.

Wikipedian eyeballs putting that kind of thing in anon notice is
pointless and if you start adding rubbish to the top of the screen for
logged in users there will be resistance and rightfuly so.

--
geni

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ten things is a good idea - sort of

stevertigo-2
On 8/31/07, geni <[hidden email]> wrote:
> They did no such thing.

Ah, thank you Geni for that concise, but detailed explanation.

> Wikipedian eyeballs putting that kind of thing in anon notice is
> pointless and if you start adding rubbish to the top of the screen for
> logged in users there will be resistance and rightfuly so.

Next time, you can just boil it down to "pointless rubbish" and save your
fingers the trouble. No doubt it bothers you to have to respond to such
"pointless rubbish" at all, so why get CTS while doing it?

Thanks again so much for your opinion.

-stevertigo

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ten things is a good idea - sort of

stevertigo-2
In reply to this post by Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
On 8/31/07, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen <[hidden email]> wrote:
> It is even better/worse than that. I have seen the term "hatnotes" used
> outside wikipedia. Stephen Colbert is not that far wrong to talk about
> "wikiality".

I was just thinking about howat one point early on I was roundly
chastised  (and rightly so) for pushing various neologia... and one
just came back and bit me in the butt. But in a nice way.

> Personally as the initial author of WP:BITE, I feel conflicting
> emotions when
> biting the newbies is referred to on online fora entirely divorced
> from wikimedia...

And not to mention on adult Wikpedias [sic], "biting" is supposed to
have friendier significance. Le langage humain - go figure.

-stevertigo

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ten things is a good idea - sort of

geni
In reply to this post by stevertigo-2
On 31/08/2007, stevertigo <[hidden email]> wrote:
> On 8/31/07, geni <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > They did no such thing.
>
> Ah, thank you Geni for that concise, but detailed explanation.

Details are tricky but note the edit summery:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki:Anonnotice&diff=153241017&oldid=150871763

> Next time, you can just boil it down to "pointless rubbish" and save your
> fingers the trouble. No doubt it bothers you to have to respond to such
> "pointless rubbish" at all, so why get CTS while doing it?
>
> Thanks again so much for your opinion.
>

Nyet. I would regard anything not of immediate significant global
importance (24 hour database lock coming up that kind of thing) placed
in sitenotice to be a problem. This does not mean it would be
pointless just a really bad idea. Placing what you suggested in anon
notice would be largely pointless since the things you list are not
really the kind of things non editors want to work on.


--
geni

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ten things is a good idea - sort of

John Reaves
In reply to this post by stevertigo-2
I don't like the idea of sticking editing specific links in the anon
notice.  The "10 things..." list is a handy page that readers might find
interesting/informative.  We need to remember that most people that use
Wikipedia are readers, not editors, so we shouldn't necessarily impose links
about something they could care less about on them.

--John Reaves

On 8/31/07, stevertigo <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Hello list,
>
> I like the fact that people (by one means or another) agreed on using
> the banner space for something other than the fund drive (there is
> already a permanent link in the interaction sidebox, no?).  Then
> things is an interesting usage for that valuable bulletin space.
>
> But I don't think its the best usage. A better usage would be for
> mobjobs; fix-it tasks which would effectively serve double duty as
> reminders (or first time notices) of some basic process and policy,
> focusing on particular problems or aspects. These can be minor items
> that need lots of eyeballs to correct on a large scale. My favorite
> peeves are:
> * the misuse of external links in the body of articles,
> * improper hatnotes (WP:HAT - hey, my protologism is official terminology!
> ;)
> * self refs in-body/outside-of-parenthesis. 'For more information,' etc.
>
> -stevertigo
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ten things is a good idea - sort of

stevertigo-2
In reply to this post by geni
On 8/31/07, geni <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Details are tricky

Thankfully you can explain them all for us in three words or less.

> But note the edit summery (sic)

"99.9% of people that use Wikipedia are readers"
Uh, yeah. And...? And 3 percent of editors also read articles.
And casual readers never become editors, do they?

> Nyet. I would regard anything not of immediate significant global
> importance (24 hour database lock coming up that kind of thing) placed
> in sitenotice to be a problem.

Then I'm sure everyone else will follow your lead. Surely the "ten
things" must have been done without consulting you, which of course
resulted in the "problem" that was the "ten things" fiasco. :-\

> This does not mean it would be pointless just a really bad idea.

OK. "Really bad idea" is... just as good as "pointless."

> Placing what you suggested in anon notice would be largely pointless since > the things you list are not
> really the kind of things non editors want to work on.

Thats right. We have to keep them separated. Wikipedia is never edited
by anons (http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/whowriteswikipedia ) nor is
there enough work for them to do, nor are they to be trusted with
editing content anyway.

Should I go on?
-stevertigo

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ten things is a good idea - sort of

geni
On 01/09/2007, stevertigo <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 8/31/07, geni <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Details are tricky
>
> Thankfully you can explain them all for us in three words or less.
>
> > But note the edit summery (sic)
>
> "99.9% of people that use Wikipedia are readers"
> Uh, yeah. And...? And 3 percent of editors also read articles.
> And casual readers never become editors, do they?
>

Wrong edit summery.

> > Nyet. I would regard anything not of immediate significant global
> > importance (24 hour database lock coming up that kind of thing) placed
> > in sitenotice to be a problem.
>
> Then I'm sure everyone else will follow your lead. Surely the "ten
> things" must have been done without consulting you, which of course
> resulted in the "problem" that was the "ten things" fiasco. :-\
>

ten things in not in sitenotice

> > This does not mean it would be pointless just a really bad idea.
>
> OK. "Really bad idea" is... just as good as "pointless."
>
> > Placing what you suggested in anon notice would be largely pointless since > the things you list are not
> > really the kind of things non editors want to work on.
>
> Thats right. We have to keep them separated. Wikipedia is never edited
> by anons (http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/whowriteswikipedia ) nor is
> there enough work for them to do, nor are they to be trusted with
> editing content anyway.
>
> Should I go on?
> -stevertigo
>

There is a difference between adding content and house keeping. While
anons can and do fix spellings stylistic issues and hatnotes are not
something I see them dealing with much.
--
geni

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ten things is a good idea - sort of

stevertigo-2
On 8/31/07, geni <[hidden email]> wrote:
> There is a difference between adding content and house keeping. While
> anons can and do fix spellings[,] stylistic issues and hatnotes are not
> something I see them dealing with much.

"...not something I see..."
You could maybe try using your imagination?

-stevertigo

> On , stevertigo <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > Thats right. We have to keep them separated. Wikipedia is never edited
> > by anons (http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/whowriteswikipedia ) nor is
> > there enough work for them to do, nor are they to be trusted with
> > editing content anyway.
> >
> > Should I go on?
> > -stevertigo

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ten things is a good idea - sort of

geni
On 01/09/2007, stevertigo <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 8/31/07, geni <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > There is a difference between adding content and house keeping. While
> > anons can and do fix spellings[,] stylistic issues and hatnotes are not
> > something I see them dealing with much.
>
> "...not something I see..."
> You could maybe try using your imagination?
>
> -stevertigo
>

Imagination? It either happens or it does not no need for imagination.
If you can provide evidence that it happens on a reasonable scale I
will take that into consideration.

--
geni

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Ten things is a good idea - sort of

Charlotte Webb
In reply to this post by John Reaves
On 8/31/07, John Reaves <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I don't like the idea of sticking editing specific links in the anon
> notice.  The "10 things..." list is a handy page that readers might find
> interesting/informative.  We need to remember that most people that use
> Wikipedia are readers, not editors, so we shouldn't necessarily impose links
> about something they could care less about on them.
>
> On 8/31/07, stevertigo <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > Hello list,
> > I like the fact that people (by one means or another) agreed on using
> > the banner space for something other than the fund drive (there is
> > already a permanent link in the interaction sidebox, no?).  Then
> > things is an interesting usage for that valuable bulletin space.
> >
> > But I don't think its the best usage. A better usage would be for
> > mobjobs; fix-it tasks which would effectively serve double duty as
> > reminders (or first time notices) of some basic process and policy,
> > focusing on particular problems or aspects. These can be minor items
> > that need lots of eyeballs to correct on a large scale. My favorite
> > peeves are:
> > * the misuse of external links in the body of articles,
> > * improper hatnotes (WP:HAT - hey, my protologism is official terminology!
> > ;)
> > * self refs in-body/outside-of-parenthesis. 'For more information,' etc.

One compromise would be to use some parser function trickery to make
the nature of the site notice text depend on the namespace of the page
being viewed. Then the ones that blatantly break the fifth wall or are
of dubious importance (or the ones Geni decides to raise hell about)
can at least be kept out of article space.

—C.W.

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l