Unused userboxes

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
30 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Unused userboxes

Zzyzx11 at Wikipedia
Here's something that crossed my mind:

As the number of userboxes continues to increase, I am starting to see a
number of them that are currently NOT being used by ANYONE. So in a couple
weeks from now, if these same userboxes are still not being used on any
userpage, shouldn't they be put on TFD like any other unused, orphaned
template? Why or why not?

Zzyzx11 at en.wikipedia.org
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Zzyzx11
[hidden email]

_________________________________________________________________
Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!
http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/

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

Re: Unused userboxes

endomion

> As the number of userboxes continues to increase, I am starting to see a
> number of them that are currently NOT being used by ANYONE. So in a couple
> weeks from now, if these same userboxes are still not being used on any
> userpage, shouldn't they be put on TFD like any other unused, orphaned
> template? Why or why not?

Check the history and see if they were used by the creator on their user page,
but then abandoned.  Those could be candidates for speedy delete.  The ones that
were created for other people but never used on the creator's user page could be
candidates for delete on the slow track.  
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Unused userboxes

Jay Converse
In reply to this post by Zzyzx11 at Wikipedia
On 1/6/06, Zzyzx11 at Wikipedia <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Here's something that crossed my mind:
>
> As the number of userboxes continues to increase, I am starting to see a
> number of them that are currently NOT being used by ANYONE. So in a couple
> weeks from now, if these same userboxes are still not being used on any
> userpage, shouldn't they be put on TFD like any other unused, orphaned
> template? Why or why not?
>
> Zzyzx11 at en.wikipedia.org
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Zzyzx11
> [hidden email]
>
>
It's just me, but I don't see why not.  A userbox is a template is a
template is a template... and so on and so forth.  I don't see why just
because it's currently a hot button issue that we should prevent what
already is a valid reason for deletion from being used.

--
I'm not stupid, just selectively ignorant.
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Unused userboxes

Matthew Brown-5
On 1/6/06, Jay Converse <[hidden email]> wrote:
> It's just me, but I don't see why not.  A userbox is a template is a
> template is a template... and so on and so forth.  I don't see why just
> because it's currently a hot button issue that we should prevent what
> already is a valid reason for deletion from being used.

I do suspect in the current climate that will just make a dozen people
start to use it, to protect it.

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

Re: Unused userboxes

Charles Matthews
"Matt Brown" wrote

>I do suspect in the current climate that will just make a dozen people
start to use it, to protect it.

Something to that.  Attention-seeking behaviour is sometimes best treated by
ignoring it, as parents know.

Charles


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

Re: Unused userboxes

XaosFluX
In reply to this post by Zzyzx11 at Wikipedia
I would say so, excepting ones that are part of a series, e.g.
en-1,en-2,en-3,en-4 as someone wanting to join the new level may not be able
to make the template easily.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Zzyzx11 at Wikipedia" <[hidden email]>
To: <[hidden email]>
Sent: Friday, January 06, 2006 11:51 PM
Subject: [WikiEN-l] Unused userboxes


> Here's something that crossed my mind:
>
> As the number of userboxes continues to increase, I am starting to see a
> number of them that are currently NOT being used by ANYONE. So in a couple
> weeks from now, if these same userboxes are still not being used on any
> userpage, shouldn't they be put on TFD like any other unused, orphaned
> template? Why or why not?
>
> Zzyzx11 at en.wikipedia.org
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Zzyzx11
> [hidden email]
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Don't just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!
> http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l 

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

Re: Unused userboxes

Ben Emmel
In reply to this post by Zzyzx11 at Wikipedia
On 1/6/06, Zzyzx11 at Wikipedia <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Here's something that crossed my mind:
>
> As the number of userboxes continues to increase, I am starting to see a
> number of them that are currently NOT being used by ANYONE. So in a couple
> weeks from now, if these same userboxes are still not being used on any
> userpage, shouldn't they be put on TFD like any other unused, orphaned
> template? Why or why not?
>
> Zzyzx11 at en.wikipedia.org
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Zzyzx11
> [hidden email]
>

Check out [[WP:TFD]] right now. Currently,  there is a whole bunch of
userbox warriors that are going to stall and keep any userbox that comes
their way. In short, the box is going to get kept anyways. An example of
this is {{User fair use}}, which Jimbo himself deleted before being informed
of the TfD debate, which is really irrelevant, considering that we can't
disobey the US copyright law that Wikipedia is legally obligated to fllow.

Looks to me that the userbox editors are disrupting the flow and work of
Wikipedia, but I'd be interested to hear what others think. Those who have
five times as many userbox edits as mainspace edits can't be helping
Wikipedia all that much.

--
Ben Emmel
Wikipedia - User:Bratsche
[hidden email]
"A fool sees not the same tree that a wise man sees."
-- William Blake
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Unused userboxes

SCZenz
On 1/7/06, Ben Emmel <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 1/6/06, Zzyzx11 at Wikipedia <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > Here's something that crossed my mind:
> >
> > As the number of userboxes continues to increase, I am starting to see a
> > number of them that are currently NOT being used by ANYONE. So in a couple
> > weeks from now, if these same userboxes are still not being used on any
> > userpage, shouldn't they be put on TFD like any other unused, orphaned
> > template? Why or why not?
> >
> > Zzyzx11 at en.wikipedia.org
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Zzyzx11
> > [hidden email]
> >
>
> Check out [[WP:TFD]] right now. Currently,  there is a whole bunch of
> userbox warriors that are going to stall and keep any userbox that comes
> their way. In short, the box is going to get kept anyways. An example of
> this is {{User fair use}}, which Jimbo himself deleted before being informed
> of the TfD debate, which is really irrelevant, considering that we can't
> disobey the US copyright law that Wikipedia is legally obligated to fllow.
>
> Looks to me that the userbox editors are disrupting the flow and work of
> Wikipedia, but I'd be interested to hear what others think. Those who have
> five times as many userbox edits as mainspace edits can't be helping
> Wikipedia all that much.

I hope the admin who decides closes the {{User fair use}} debate
evaluates the quality of the arguments made in relation to the
encyclopedia's mission; it'll be deleted then.

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

RE: Unused userboxes

Peter Mackay
In reply to this post by Ben Emmel
> From: [hidden email]
> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Ben Emmel
 
> Check out [[WP:TFD]] right now. Currently,  there is a whole
> bunch of userbox warriors that are going to stall and keep
> any userbox that comes their way. In short, the box is going
> to get kept anyways. An example of this is {{User fair use}},
> which Jimbo himself deleted before being informed of the TfD
> debate, which is really irrelevant, considering that we can't
> disobey the US copyright law that Wikipedia is legally
> obligated to fllow.

Yeah, well that's one that's gotta go.

> Looks to me that the userbox editors are disrupting the flow
> and work of Wikipedia, but I'd be interested to hear what
> others think. Those who have five times as many userbox edits
> as mainspace edits can't be helping Wikipedia all that much.

Perhaps if they weren't being stirred up, they might be doing more work in
articlespace, hmmmm? And if they are doing *some* work in articlespace, it
doesn't really matter if they are having a party in userspace the rest of
the time. What's the aim of the game: to build an encyclopaedia or to kick
newbies?

Peter (Skyring)


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

Re: Unused userboxes

Sam Korn
On 1/7/06, Peter Mackay <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Perhaps if they weren't being stirred up, they might be doing more work in
> articlespace, hmmmm? And if they are doing *some* work in articlespace, it
> doesn't really matter if they are having a party in userspace the rest of
> the time. What's the aim of the game: to build an encyclopaedia or to kick
> newbies?

Actually, their insensitive use of templates and categories puts
unnecessary load on the servers.  That is harmful to Wikipedia.

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

RE: Unused userboxes

Peter Mackay
> From: [hidden email]
> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Sam Korn
> Sent: Sunday, 8 January 2006 09:04
> To: English Wikipedia
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Unused userboxes
>
> On 1/7/06, Peter Mackay <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > Perhaps if they weren't being stirred up, they might be doing more
> > work in articlespace, hmmmm? And if they are doing *some* work in
> > articlespace, it doesn't really matter if they are having a
> party in
> > userspace the rest of the time. What's the aim of the game:
> to build
> > an encyclopaedia or to kick newbies?
>
> Actually, their insensitive use of templates and categories
> puts unnecessary load on the servers.  That is harmful to Wikipedia.

Fine. Let's go through all admin user pages, strip out the templates and
argue from the moral high ground.

Peter (Skyring)


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

Re: Unused userboxes

Sam Korn
On 1/7/06, Peter Mackay <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Fine. Let's go through all admin user pages, strip out the templates and
> argue from the moral high ground.

All non-useful ones are removed from mine.  I urge all other admins to
do the same.

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

Re: Unused userboxes

Kirill Lokshin
On 1/7/06, Sam Korn <[hidden email]> wrote:
> On 1/7/06, Peter Mackay <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > Fine. Let's go through all admin user pages, strip out the templates and
> > argue from the moral high ground.
>
> All non-useful ones are removed from mine.  I urge all other admins to
> do the same.

Damn good idea!

I'll point out, though, that some of the most prolific users of
userboxes are admins.

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

Re: Unused userboxes

Sam Korn
On 1/7/06, Kirill Lokshin <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Damn good idea!
>
> I'll point out, though, that some of the most prolific users of
> userboxes are admins.

More's the pity.

Just to note, I have nothing against sensitive use of userboxes (i.e.
"humourous" userboxes should not be transcluded or categorised).  The
Babel templates are in fact a very useful innovation that I entirely
support.

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

Re: Unused userboxes

Fl Celloguy
In reply to this post by Zzyzx11 at Wikipedia
>On 1/7/06, Ben Emmel <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > On 1/6/06, Zzyzx11 at Wikipedia <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Here's something that crossed my mind:
> > >
> > > As the number of userboxes continues to increase, I am starting to see
>a
> > > number of them that are currently NOT being used by ANYONE. So in a
>couple
> > > weeks from now, if these same userboxes are still not being used on
>any
> > > userpage, shouldn't they be put on TFD like any other unused, orphaned
> > > template? Why or why not?
> > >
> > > Zzyzx11 at en.wikipedia.org
> > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Zzyzx11
> > > [hidden email]
> > >
> >
> > Check out [[WP:TFD]] right now. Currently,  there is a whole bunch of
> > userbox warriors that are going to stall and keep any userbox that comes
> > their way. In short, the box is going to get kept anyways. An example of
> > this is {{User fair use}}, which Jimbo himself deleted before being
>informed
> > of the TfD debate, which is really irrelevant, considering that we can't
> > disobey the US copyright law that Wikipedia is legally obligated to
>fllow.
> >
> > Looks to me that the userbox editors are disrupting the flow and work of
> > Wikipedia, but I'd be interested to hear what others think. Those who
>have
> > five times as many userbox edits as mainspace edits can't be helping
> > Wikipedia all that much.
>
>I hope the admin who decides closes the {{User fair use}} debate
>evaluates the quality of the arguments made in relation to the
>encyclopedia's mission; it'll be deleted then.
>
>SCZenz

Unused userboxes that have been around for a while (i.e. not created in the
immediate past) should definitely be deleted (aside from those that fill a
pattern, such as Babel langauges/levels where no-one speaks it yet). Are
there any arguments for keeping these userboxes? Alternatively, I would also
argue for the deletion of all userboxes only used by one person (and the
userbox has been around for some time): what's the point of having a
template and category for something only one person is going to use? We
could just tell the person to substitute it on his/her userpage instead.

Thoughts on that? Thanks!

Flcelloguy
>From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

_________________________________________________________________
Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee®
Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963

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

RE: Unused userboxes

Steve Bennett-4
Hi,
  Not to be dumb, but if people substitute rather than transclude
templates such as userboxes, how do you know whether anyone's using them
or not? They would need unique text that you could search for.

Steve

> Unused userboxes that have been around for a while (i.e. not
> created in the
> immediate past) should definitely be deleted (aside from
> those that fill a
> pattern, such as Babel langauges/levels where no-one speaks
> it yet). Are
> there any arguments for keeping these userboxes?
> Alternatively, I would also
> argue for the deletion of all userboxes only used by one
> person (and the
> userbox has been around for some time): what's the point of having a
> template and category for something only one person is going
> to use? We
> could just tell the person to substitute it on his/her
> userpage instead.


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

Re: Unused userboxes

Sam Korn
On 1/8/06, Steve Bennett <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Hi,
>   Not to be dumb, but if people substitute rather than transclude
> templates such as userboxes, how do you know whether anyone's using them
> or not? They would need unique text that you could search for.

Place a commented link in the template, so it shows up in the
template's "whatlinkshere".

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

Re: Unused userboxes

Jimmy Wales
In reply to this post by Charles Matthews
charles matthews wrote:
> "Matt Brown" wrote
>
>> I do suspect in the current climate that will just make a dozen people
>
> start to use it, to protect it.
>
> Something to that.  Attention-seeking behaviour is sometimes best
> treated by ignoring it, as parents know.

Wisdom.

Having said that, I heard today that the number of userboxes, and in
particular the number of very problematic userboxes, has exploded.  I
think this is seriously Not Good For Our Loving Little Community.

I am not doing anything about it just yet, but I am willing to concede
that my nonviolent social request that people knock it off and think
about what it means to be a Wikipedian has not gotten very far.

As far as I can determine, and I am very much aware that I am here
prejudicing the terms of debate, this is a cultural battle between
wikipedians and people who have stumbled into this cool site they heard
about on CNN where you can write whatever the hell you want and argue
with people for fun.

--Jimbo



--
#######################################################################
#    Office: 1-727-231-0101       |  Free Culture and  Free Knowledge #
#    http://www.wikipedia.org     |     Building a free world         #
#######################################################################

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

Re: Unused userboxes

Steve Bennett-4
On 2/16/06, Jimmy Wales <[hidden email]> wrote:
> As far as I can determine, and I am very much aware that I am here
> prejudicing the terms of debate, this is a cultural battle between
> wikipedians and people who have stumbled into this cool site they heard
> about on CNN where you can write whatever the hell you want and argue
> with people for fun.

...some of whom, we hope, will stick around and become Wikipedians.

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

Re: Unused userboxes

Ray Saintonge
In reply to this post by Jimmy Wales
Jimmy Wales wrote:

>charles matthews wrote:
>  
>
>>"Matt Brown" wrote
>>    
>>
>>>I do suspect in the current climate that will just make a dozen people
>>>      
>>>
>>start to use it, to protect it.
>>
>>Something to that.  Attention-seeking behaviour is sometimes best
>>treated by ignoring it, as parents know.
>>    
>>
>Wisdom.
>
>Having said that, I heard today that the number of userboxes, and in
>particular the number of very problematic userboxes, has exploded.  I
>think this is seriously Not Good For Our Loving Little Community.
>
>I am not doing anything about it just yet, but I am willing to concede
>that my nonviolent social request that people knock it off and think
>about what it means to be a Wikipedian has not gotten very far.
>
Regrettably, this kind of philosophical self-examination is not very
popular.  My experience has been that the more thought is put into an
idea, the more readily it will be ignored.  Still as much as I may be
justified in complaining that people don't pay attention to what I say,
I must confess that some of the most interesting  (if somewhat prolix)
comments put me into such a paralysis of meditation that I fail to
respond with the careful attention that these comments deserve.

These user boxes seem to be the Wiki's answer to the 10-second
soundbite.  Compact as much as possible into a tiny box to achieve a
particular effect.  If need be sacrifice accuracy for the sake of
brevity.  That kind of thinking would have gourmet cuisine epitomized by
McDonald's.

I am no fan of the Bush administration, but I find the Cheney shooting
incident instructive.  It says more about the way that such events are
processed than about any culpability that may be attached to those
directly involved.  What difference did it make if the reporting was not
through accepted channels?  There was no matter of public policy
involved, or any consequences that would plausibly affect anyone other
than those directly involved.  Whatever fault I may find with the
current US administration let it at least be over real issues, and not
over the microscopic examination of a single personal event.  Many more
meaningful incidents are discussed far less by the press than this
single accidental shooting.

The userboxes, and the media treatment of the shooting both reflect an
amazingly similar problem.  The instantaneification of information is
incompatible with its enormousness.  We want knowledge in quantities
that we can understand.  We keep hoping that just around the corner we
will find that magical piece of software that will make it all as clear
as 42.   Our addiction to virtual reality makes it difficult to
distinguish whether the person who has moved into the house next door is
Homer Simpson or Pikachu.  Perhaps being a Wikipedian is seeking to
build the tools that will help us to cope with that reality.

>As far as I can determine, and I am very much aware that I am here
>prejudicing the terms of debate, this is a cultural battle between
>wikipedians and people who have stumbled into this cool site they heard
>about on CNN where you can write whatever the hell you want and argue
>with people for fun.
>
Participating in the debate is somewhat acceptable in guiding people to
their own decision.  If people can be willingly guided into a consensus
it is always preferable to the application of "force majeure".

Reference: Paul Virilio, "The Information Bomb"

Ec

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
12