Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 03:06, 28 June 2014

Jimbo welcomes your comments and updates – he has an open door policy. He holds the founder's seat on the Wikimedia Foundation's Board of Trustees. The three trustees elected as community representatives until July 2015 are SJ, Phoebe, and Raystorm. The Wikimedia Foundation Senior Community Advocate is Maggie Dennis.

This is Jimbo Wales's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

Archives: Index, Index, A, B, C, D, E, F, G, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168, 169, 170, 171, 172, 173, 174, 175, 176, 177, 178, 179, 180, 181, 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190, 191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 196, 197, 198, 199, 200, 201, 202, 203, 204, 205, 206, 207, 208, 209, 210, 211, 212, 213, 214, 215, 216, 217, 218, 219, 220, 221, 222, 223, 224, 225, 226, 227, 228, 229, 230, 231, 232, 233, 234, 235, 236, 237, 238, 239, 240, 241, 242, 243, 244, 245, 246, 247, 248, 249, 250, 251, 252Auto-archiving period: 1 day

This user talk page might be watched by friendly talk page stalkers, which means that someone other than me might reply to your query. Their input is welcome and their help with messages that I cannot reply to quickly is appreciated.

Archives

Index –index– October 28, 2001 – April 12, 2004 April 16, 2004 – August 23, 2004 August 28, 2004 – December 8, 2004 December 9, 2004 – March 23, 2005 March 23, 2005 – July 24, 2005 July 26, 2005 – September 9, 2005 September 9, 2005 – September 24, 2005 September – December 2005 January 2006 January – February 2006 February 2006 February 2006, cont. March 2006 April 2006 – late May 2006 May 24 – July 2006 July 2006 – August 2006 August 2006 Most of September 2006 Late September 2006 – Early November 2006 Most of November 2006 Late November 2006 – December 8, 2006 December 9, 2006 – Mid January 2007 From December 22, 2006 blanking Mid January 2007 – Mid February 2007 Mid February 2007– Feb 25, 2007 From March 2, 2007 blanking March 2–5, 2007 March 5–11, 2007 March 11 – April 3, 2007 April 2 – May 2, 2007 May 3 – June 7, 2007 June 9 – July 4, 2007 July 13 – August 17, 2007 August 17 – September 11, 2007 September 14 – October 7, 2007 October 28 – December 1, 2007 December 2 – December 16, 2007 December 15 – January 4, 2008 January 4 – January 30, 2008 January 30 – February 28, 2008 February 28 – March 11, 2008 March 9 – April 18, 2008 April 18 – May 30, 2008 May 30 – July 27, 2008 July 26 – October 4, 2008 October 4 – November 12, 2008 November 10 – December 10, 2008 December 5 – December 25, 2008 December 25 – January 16, 2009 January 15 – January 27, 2009 January 26 – February 10, 2009 February 8 – March 18, 2009 March 18 – May 6, 2009 May 5 – June 9, 2009 June 10 – July 11, 2009 July 12 – August 25, 2009 August 26 – October 3, 2009 October 4 – November 20, 2009 November 20 – December 21, 2009 December 22, 2009 – January 25, 2010 January 22, 2010 – February 22, 2010 February 22, 2010 – March 17, 2010 March 17, 2010 – April 9, 2010 April 11, 2010 – April 24, 2010 April 23, 2010 – May 12, 2010 May 10, 2010 – June 4, 2010 June 4, 2010 – June 26, 2010 June 26, 2010 – July 22, 2010 July 22, 2010 – August 23, 2010 August 4, 2010 – August 28, 2010 August 28, 2010 – September 14, 2010 September 13, 2010 – October 6, 2010 October 6, 2010 – November 8, 2010 November 8, 2010 – November 21, 2010 November 21, 2010 – December 6, 2010 December 6, 2010 – December 22, 2010 December 21, 2010 – January 17, 2011 January 16, 2011 – February 10, 2011 February 6, 2011 – March 19, 2011 March 16, 2011 – March 26, 2011 March 26, 2011 – April 22, 2011 April 22, 2011 – May 16, 2011 May 17, 2011 – June 9, 2011 June 10, 2011 – July 1, 2011 July 1, 2011 – July 15, 2011 July 16, 2011 – July 26, 2011 July 26, 2011 – August 15, 2011 August 14, 2011 – August 23, 2011 August 21, 2011 – August 31, 2011 August 30, 2011 – September 7, 2011 September 4, 2011 – September 25, 2011 September 26, 2011 – October 19, 2011 October 16, 2011 – November 5, 2011 November 4, 2011 – November 12, 2011 November 11, 2011 – November 24, 2011 November 24, 2011 – December 6, 2011 December 3, 2011 – December 14, 2011 December 10, 2011 – December 16, 2011 (RFC about the Stop Online Piracy Act) December 15, 2011 – December 30, 2011 December 27, 2011 – January 9, 2012 January 9, 2012 – January 18, 2012 January 17, 2012 – January 30, 2012 January 28, 2012 – February 12, 2012 February 7, 2012 – February 25, 2012 February 19, 2012 – March 4, 2012 February 27, 2012 – March 18, 2012 March 17, 2012 – April 2, 2012 March 31, 2012 – April 13, 2012 April 12, 2012 – April 18, 2012 April 18, 2012 – April 26, 2012 April 26, 2012 – May 6, 2012 May 2, 2012 – May 22, 2012 May 19, 2012 – June 9, 2012 June 4, 2012 – June 20, 2012 June 18, 2012 – June 28, 2012 June 26, 2012 – July 12, 2012 July 3, 2012 – July 22, 2012 July 19, 2012 – July 29, 2012 July 25, 2012 – August 9, 2012 August 7, 2012 – August 30, 2012 August 29, 2012 – September 13, 2012 September 13, 2012 – September 27, 2012 September 26, 2012 – October 5, 2012 September 24, 2012 – October 20, 2012 October 9, 2012 – October 31, 2012 October 29, 2012 – November 19, 2012 November 17, 2012 – December 5, 2012 December 2–15, 2012 December 15–28, 2012 December 24, 2012 – January 12, 2013 January 13–31, 2013 February 1–10, 2013 February 11–28, 2013 March 1–16, 2013 March 17–27, 2013 March 28 – April 6, 2013 April 6–19, 2013 April 19 – May 3, 2013 April 25 – May 8, 2013 May 6–19, 2013 May 18–30, 2013 May 27 – June 16, 2013 June 17–30, 2013 June 27 – July 30, 2013 July 31 – August 4, 2013 August 4–12, 2013 August 13–27, 2013 August 28 – September 4, 2013 September 5–10, 2013 September 11–22, 2013 September 24 – October 6, 2013 October 7–16, 2013 October 17–27, 2103 October 28 – November 6, 2013 November 7–19, 2013 November 20–27, 2013 November 28 – December 5, 2013 December 6–24, 2013 December 25–30, 2013 December 31, 2013 – January 14, 2014 January 15–24, 2014 January 25–29, 2014 January 30 – February 10, 2014 Archives not yet dated: 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 This manual archive index may be out of date. Future archives: 184 185 186

This page has archives. Sections older than 24 hours may be automatically archived by ClueBot III when more than 2 sections are present.

WMF plans for mathematics II

I have copied this text to the Board wiki and emailed the board (and Lila) asking them to read it. THANK YOU for this. This is a very helpful and concise statement of the issues and concerns. I will personally recommend that we allocate resources to this. It's a straightforward request with obvious benefits - not just benefits in terms of improving the experience of mathematics editors, but benefits in terms of providing a great template for community/foundation cooperation.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 11:51, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Suggestions:

• Keep LaTeX as the platform of choice
• Don't break the use of LaTeX

No-one wants Visual Editor. Of people who might (might) benefit from it, even they're hardly clamouring for it. I'm assuming (which will probably be challenged, but I see it as axiomatic) that those with most need to edit maths are also those most likely to be happy and capable of doing it in LaTeX source. In which case our most important goal above all else is to not screw that up. Anything else is so secondary as to be barely visible. Andy Dingley (talk) 12:01, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

• I would like to add that I believe most mathematicians aren't going to be willing to write mathematics in anything other than LaTeX source (or by hand). Drop LaTeX support and many people will stop editing maths articles. —Kusma (t·c) 14:14, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Well, for whatever it is worth, I don't think anyone anywhere ever suggested dropping LaTeX support. This is more about how to improve from where we are, i.e. more ambitious than just not being stupid.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 06:44, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Let me add my voice to those arguing for keeping (and improving) LaTeX support. Writing a simple formula editor may be a nice project, but using one is much more painful than writing simple, well thought-out markup, at least for people who know what they are doing. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 07:31, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Again, there is no reason to "argue for" that since there is no one arguing against it. I am unaware of anyone even remotely discussing or suggesting that we drop LaTeX support. That really is not what this conversation is about.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 09:47, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

I'm not expecting WMF to 'drop' LaTeX support. I'm far more worried that they're going to improve it so much that it no longer works. Andy Dingley (talk) 16:49, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

It is not correct to say that nobody wants visual editor. I'm in a large group of editors who tried, it, found it wanting and abandoned it. However, after attending a session led by Phoebe Ayers. I gave it another try, and now use it in some cases. The referencing functionality is better, still not as good as what I can do offline, but at least it works. I've been in correspondence with James Forrester about additional improvements to referencing, specifically autofilling references with an ISBN or doi, and that seems to be coming along nicely. Once that exists, it will be much easier to add those types of references in VE. If I can also convince digital providers to make digital identifiers ubiquitous, it will literally make referencing easy, even for beginners.--S Philbrick(Talk) 12:58, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Hello. Most of mathematicians are writing through various tools that are writing into LaTex, not by writing directly in LaTeX language. For example, Maple or SAGE are providing a latex function, allowing to copy and paste the most tedious parts. Moreover, many macros are "quite standard" like \C to provide ${\displaystyle \mathbb {C} }$. This also shouldn't be broken. Best regards. Pldx1 (talk) 22:44, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Copyediting is tedious but lasts

As I read comments from people who want to make a lasting impact on Misplaced Pages, perhaps we should remind them how the wp:GOCE copy-editing of pages (from ragged-to-refined) can produce a massive impact, which often lasts for years, is rarely reverted (unlike POV edit-wars), and typically avoids disputes (at least to skip any page where people complain). Unlike updates to hot-topic pages, where people might bicker for days or months, the copy-editing of dozens of less-popular pages can revise hundreds of details (often 100-400 per page), while perhaps only one-page-per-hundred leads to a dispute over editing.

Currently, the wp:GOCE backlog has stretched into over 16 months during the past 2 years, and we need more editors to reduce the backlog to below 1 year. In particular, the ragged pages listed from July/August 2013 need to be revised during the next 2 months, and with upcoming efforts to clear March-June 2013, we could reduce the total backlog to only 11 months. See pages in categories:
Template:Nb10• Category:Wikipedia_articles_needing_copy_edit_from_July_2013
Template:Nb10• Category:Wikipedia_articles_needing_copy_edit_from_August_2013
An effective backlog drive needs over 800 hours of editing, which could average 10 hours per month each, with 80 people participating (or ~3 hours per week). Anyway, if more people could join the wp:GOCE (Guild of Copy Editors), then we could spread the word about how copy-editing of pages, although tedious, can lead to impressive results, as ragged-to-refined pages where people will see their hard work last, unreverted, for years and years. This is one area where a few dozen people can have an extensive, lasting impact on the quality of Misplaced Pages. -Wikid77 (talk) 00:15, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

I prefer to choose one type of mistake at a time, search for a character string from the search box, read enough on each article found to ascertain whether correction is needed, and then make one or more corrections on each article. In this way, I can proceed more quickly and efficiently with one or more automatically generated edit summaries. Sometimes, I search for mistakes in non-article namespaces.

For editors who prefer to work on backlogs, I suggest WP:DUSTY (permanent link) and its list of links under "See also". Also, I suggest that other editors copyedit pages in non-article namespaces. Those pages have a more official nature, and a mistake there can mislead editors to imitating the same mistake.

—Wavelength (talk) 00:47, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

• Copyediting pages that people read: The wp:GOCE backlog tends to fix pages which many people are actively viewing, 20-2,000 times per day, where there were dozens or hundreds of punctuation or phrasing problems, and hence, the overall impact is massive. Note: fixing 50 errors viewed 100x per day, means 5,000 fewer mistakes to see each day. There is little need to "assess" the backlog pages because over 98% of those pages require extensive changes, and the resulting edits generate a ragged-to-refined transformation of pages which are read a hundred or thousands of times per week. Because all those pages are read so often, then the quality improvement for Misplaced Pages becomes massive. Some editors are continually tagging other ragged pages into the wp:GOCE backlog, and they are extremely keen at spotting pages which need numerous/hundreds of fixes but also tend to be read often. The combined efforts of the dozens of people tagging or copy-editing the backlog pages produces this miraculous transformation of thousands of interesting pages each year, from ragged-to-refined, and few people could imagine how many hundreds of typos (or cite glitches) were corrected in each page. Where pages are not specifically copy-edited end-to-end, then the numerous typos often remain in those pages for years (more near page bottom), as a night-and-day difference in quality of typesetting, tone or clarified phrasing. -Wikid77 15:00, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Many common errors in English usage are discussed by Paul Brians, Emeritus Professor of English, Washington State University.

• Common Errors in English Usage

I recommend that all Misplaced Pages editors refer frequently to his discussions of common errors in English usage.

—Wavelength (talk) 15:53, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

I still think we could create a smart Lua script module, to check for perhaps 500 commonly misspelled words, and detect unusual punctuation such as space-comma (" ,") or space-dot (" .") or dot-capital (".C"), plus pinpoint other common text problems. However, I think there might be a vicious deletion-discussion, and such valuable tools would be deleted "because they would be difficult to maintain" or some other typical bogus reason to block major improvements here. -Wikid77 (talk) 04:18, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Would that module make corrections (see Misplaced Pages:AutoWikiBrowser/Typos) that can not be made by Misplaced Pages:AutoWikiBrowser?

—Wavelength (talk) 05:38, 26 June 2014 (UTC) and 16:30, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

VisualEditor global newsletter—June 2014

Did you know?

The character formatting menu, or "Style text" menu lets you set bold, italic, and other text styles. "Clear formatting" removes all text styles and removes links to other pages.

Do you think that clear formatting should remove links? Are there changes you would like to see for this menu? Share your opinion at MediaWiki.org.

The user guide has information about how to use VisualEditor.

The VisualEditor team is mostly working to fix bugs, improve performance, reduce technical debt, and other infrastructure needs. You can find on Mediawiki.org weekly updates detailing recent work.

• They have moved the "Keyboard shortcuts" link out of the "Page options" menu, into the "Help" menu. Within dialog boxes, buttons are now more accessible (via the Tab key) from the keyboard.
• You can now see the target of the link when you click on it, without having to open the inspector.
• The team also expanded TemplateData: You can now add a parameter type  "date" for dates and times in the ISO 8601 format, and  "boolean" for values which are true or false. Also, templates that redirect to other templates (like {{citeweb}} → {{cite web}}) now get the TemplateData of their target (bug 50964). You can test TemplateData by editing mw:Template:Sandbox/doc.
• Category: and File: pages now display their contents correctly after saving an edit (bug 65349, bug 64239)
• They have also improved reference editing: You should no longer be able to add empty citations with VisualEditor (bug 64715), as with references. When you edit a reference, you can now empty it and click the "use an existing reference" button to replace it with another reference instead. 
• It is now possible to edit inline images with VisualEditor. Remember that inline images cannot display captions, so existing captions get removed. Many other bugs related to images were also fixed.
• You can now add and edit {{DISPLAYTITLE}} and __DISAMBIG__ in the "Page options" menu, rounding out the full set of page options currently planned.
• The tool to insert special characters is now wider and simpler.

Looking ahead

The VisualEditor team has posted a draft of their goals for the next fiscal year. You can read them and suggest changes on MediaWiki.org.

The team posts details about planned work on VisualEditor's roadmap. You will soon be able to drag-and-drop text as well as images. If you drag an image to a new place, it won't let you place it in the middle of a paragraph. All dialog boxes and windows will be simplified based on user testing and feedback. The VisualEditor team plans to add autofill features for citations. Your ideas about making referencing quick and easy are still wanted. Support for upright image sizes is being developed. The designers are also working on support for viewing and editing hidden HTML comments and adding rows and columns to tables.

Supporting your wiki

Please read VisualEditor/Citation tool for information on configuring the new citation template menu, labeled "⧼visualeditor-toolbar-cite-label⧽". This menu will not appear unless it has been configured on your wiki.

If you speak a language other than English, we need your help with translating the user guide. The guide is out of date or incomplete for many languages, and what's on your wiki may not be the most recent translation. Please contact me if you need help getting started with translation work on MediaWiki.org.

VisualEditor can be made available to most non-Misplaced Pages projects. If your community would like to test VisualEditor, please contact product manager James Forrester or file an enhancement request in Bugzilla.

Please share your questions, suggestions, or problems by posting a note at mw:VisualEditor/Feedback or by joining the office hours on Saturday, 19 July 2014 at 21:00 UTC (daytime for the Americas and Pacific Islands) or on Thursday, 14 August 2014 at 9:00 UTC (daytime for Europe, Middle East, Asia).

To change your subscription to this newsletter, please see the subscription pages on Meta or the English Misplaced Pages. Thank you! Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 04:59, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Persian Misplaced Pages administrators

Template:Formerly

hi jimbo. i have some issues with persians wiki admins. they are Censoring one of the politician's page : Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, former persian king of iran. i have academic sources, which published by California University Press, it says :

The shah's paranoia reaches its peak when discussing the 1979 revolution. He claims that his overthrow was brought about by a "strange amalgam" of not only the clergy, the Tudeh, and the oil companies but also the Western media and, of course, the Carter and Thatcher administrations.[ i have another sources, from abrahamian and other professors which prove the paranoia of the king. but admins says it's not enough to prove and you should give another sources. none of them won't hear my Argument. what your help to Subject them. thanks.--Mazdak5 (talk) 18:53, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

[I am revising the heading of this section from a little help please to Persian Misplaced Pages administrators, in harmony with WP:TPOC, point 12 (Section headings). Please see Microcontent: How to Write Headlines, Page Titles, and Subject Lines. The new heading facilitates recognition of the topic in links and watchlists and tables of contents. Also, I am revising the heading level, because this is a new topic, and not a subtopic of the previous topic.

—Wavelength (talk) 19:13, 25 June 2014 (UTC)]

Unfortunately as I am unable to read Farsi, I will not be very helpful in terms of detailed editing disputes. If you email me, I can try to connect you with Persian Wikipedians whom I know and trust.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 07:43, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Trapped in North Korea please help

Community-sourcing, NOT Crowdsourcing: A blog post I hope Jimmy will appreciate

Hello Jimmy and all. Due to our shared disdain for likening Misplaced Pages to crowdsourcing, I wanted to share a blog post that I just wrote for the New Media Consortium titled, "Why You'll Never Hear Me Call Misplaced Pages Crowdsourcing." I speak a lot about the nuance of crowdsourcing and its role on a wider spectrum of Open Authority. (This is a term I established through my graduate research, and it was inspired by Misplaced Pages. I'll be speaking on it at Wikimania.) This blog was written within my role as a contributing editor for the New Media Consortium, an organization that aggregates information on ed-tech in schools and museums. Enjoy! LoriLee (talk) 14:54, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

[Once in paragraph 5 and once in paragraph 6, your blog post has the word "asks" where apparently the word "tasks" was intended.

—Wavelength (talk) 15:47, 26 June 2014 (UTC) and 15:53, 26 June 2014 (UTC)]

Nope, I mean "asks." You're making "asks" of the community. Sometimes these can be tasks, sure. I do appreciate the feedback! LoriLee (talk) 16:06, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Traditional thinking will get you killed, Wavelength. Ha! Seattle (talk) 18:53, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

See http://www.createadvantage.com/glossary/traditional-thinking

and http://www.createadvantage.com/glossary/analytical-thinking.

—Wavelength (talk) 03:55, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Yes, that confirms the suspicion. Seattle (talk) 15:47, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Dispute with another editor

Hello, I am a new editor on Misplaced Pages, and I have recently been involved in an escalating dispute with another editor, Kansas Bear, over something that began with a possible edit-war over an edit I had made on the Muslim conquests article. After reverting my edit multiple times (the first time only eight minutes after I had edited the page), each time demanding alternate or better sources, which he continued to reject, he had me reported to a friend of his, a sysop who in turn removed the edit once again on his behalf. I do not at all appreciate receiving such a threat as my first message here, nor do I find it tolerable to be repeatedly accused of "falsification" of information without any basis.

What is more, for some time now, this user has frequently accused many other editors of "edit-warring" while blatantly doing so himself, leaving them very harsh, uncivil and even threatening messages, some even bordering on personal attacks, as he did with me, with threats of reporting them to administrators or having them banned altogether (see ), while further engaging in very heated and lengthy discussions on similar articles, such as Talk:Muslim conquests on the Indian subcontinent, constantly reverting or removing edits on this and numerous other related articles while seeming to disregard, for the most part, the input and arguments of other users. I no longer much care about my particular contribution being removed, but I do not wish to have the attacks he has made on me and others here ignored without consequence.

I have not yet attempted to edit the article - or most any other article - neither do I wish to escalate this disagreement more than it already has by seeking other solutions. Indeed, if he requests so, I will leave Misplaced Pages altogether if necessary, but I would at the very least have this dispute resolved as soon as possible. Torontas (talk) 22:38, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi Torontas. Jimbo almost never gets directly involved with this type of issue. Try the dispute resolution noticeboard or maybe better, the tea house (an advice board for new editors) instead. I haven't looked at the article you mention but yes, people do get fussy about sources here, and sometimes it's off-putting to new editors. 173.228.123.145 (talk) 01:22, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Quality from Deletists Point of View

there ru:Обсуждение проекта:Добротные статьи#Фил Вечеровский и притча о недополняемости ДС discussed a proposal from a deletists' leader (who has a medal from other deletists for "improving" quality of Misplaced Pages by deleting junks) that Misplaced Pages must have only full articles and all stubs must be deleted and not allowed to be created as low quality "junk"
Jimbo, what do you think about that tendency? (Idot (talk) 11:31, 27 June 2014 (UTC))

That is a matter for the Russian Misplaced Pages, not us. The English wiki does not have a bias against stubs just because they are stubs. Tarc (talk) 11:48, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Not so fast Tarc. I had the great pleasure of meeting Sue Gardner at a London meetup. Even back in early 2010 an excessive concern for quality was apparent to the Foundation across all the different languages. Sue suggested this excessive concern may have originated from English Misplaced Pages, and to an extent, from Jimbo himself.

If I remember correctly, her exact words were "Once Jimbo began siding with the deletionists on grounds of quality, this sent ripple effects out to the satellite Wikipedias across all the different languages. Projects that were once relaxed and welcoming to newcomers and new content began adopting the same over strict approach as we see on the English wikipedia" Here is Sue addressing similar themes in one of her later death spiral videos. It might have made sense to focus on quality before 2010, when the trade offs were less apparent. With hindsight, it would be most interesting to see whether Jimbo might favor a return to a less critical, more inclusive and tolerant approach? FeydHuxtable (talk) 14:10, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

I haven't watched that whole long video but at the beginning anyway she does not say that a "focus on quality" is driving newcomers away, but bots leaving templated warnings and instructions on their talk pages. Are there really people who think that quality is not something to aim for?Smeat75 (talk) 15:50, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Sadly, yes, there are. Resolute 15:53, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Well, the idea that stubs should be deleted because they are stubs is nonsense. The stub template exists because stubs have a purpose. There is a difference between non-notable stubs and notable stubs. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:29, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

The bias towards destroying stubs is maybe a side issue. It does seem to exist however even on English Misplaced Pages. Checkout this search for the word "permastub". Often deletionists give being a permastub as a reason to delete even when the subject passes GNG. FeydHuxtable (talk) 15:38, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Agree with FeydHuxtable. I've seen even many PRODs with the reason "too short". --cyclopia 15:45, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Review

If a few editors could review this FLC candidate, that would be great. Seattle (talk) 15:52, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

And if anyone wants to take a look at the Harlem Riot of 1943 that would be great too. Seattle (talk) 16:00, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

German Admin banning users with self-proclaimed "Hyper-Light-Velocity"

Administrator called Itti from the German Misplaced Pages is stating on her page that "she" "deletes and bans with hyper-lightvelocity".

https://de.wikipedia.org/Benutzerin:Itti

This obviously doesn't meet any general standard of obligation for executive care.

Furthermore there is at least one person every day that feels annoyed or even stalked.

P.S.: Any recommendation to take it to the German Wiki oder Admin board is useless, as "Itti" is deleting any complaint before anyone there is able to read it--37.230.13.58 (talk) 17:49, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

This is an issue for the German Misplaced Pages's community; you will have to follow their processes, including appealing any bans or blocks their community has set on you.--Jasper Deng (talk) 17:55, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

First off, this is not about me, personally. I've been following this user's conduct for a couple of weeks and there's a whole bunch of (unbanned) users constantly filing complaints on her talk page, which "she" then deletes within seconds (!). In addition, following German Misplaced Pages's processes is useless, as I already stated, as "Itti" is stalking anyone and any complaint, even by active users, is erased with "hyper-lightspeed". And surprise, surprise, my info on her talk page, that she was mentioned here, was erased in the same minute (!) -probably to prevent one of the over 400 users having her on the watchlist to take notice and come here.--37.230.13.58 (talk) 18:10, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Don't mind this, nonsense. -jkb- (talk) 17:56, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

User -jkb- is a personal friend of the mentioned German admin called Itti, therefore his input is not valid or to be taken seriously. But let's see whether one of the users feeling annoyed or stalked shows up here...--37.230.13.58 (talk) 18:10, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

It is also interesting that Itti bans entire ip ranges in turkey, where "opposition members risk their life to overcome internet bans". https://de.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Benutzerin_Diskussion:Itti&diff=131425250&oldid=131425075--37.230.13.58 (talk) 18:56, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Are you kidding? The User/IP you mentioned is blocked after CU . --Alraunenstern (talk) 19:30, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

First off, you are the one who reverted the information on the mentioned admin's page that he is discussed here. https://de.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Benutzerin_Diskussion:Itti&diff=131666862&oldid=131666849 And your reason is obvious: You want to prevent those users who regularly visit that abusive user's page and regularly complain about him to take notice about this. That is clear.

On a second note, whether the OP adding the original info that the mentioned admin has banned entire ip ranges in turkey, has been banned or not is irrelevant. The problem is a German Admin is jeopardizing the physical health of tens of thousand of people in turkey, where free speech is suppressed and oppositionals jeopardize their life to overcome internet bans.

If you want to say that getting one member banned on the German Misplaced Pages - where a whole lot of admins show xenophobic tendencies and which may be the reason why this user has been blocked, btw - justifies blocking entire ip ranges when the users inside this range try to fight a dictatorship and try to illuminate their country over Misplaced Pages what their government is all about, then you and this administrator and all his friends probably should either forbear of using ip range blocks to single out a user or give up on Misplaced Pages, completely, cause this is obviously not only the wrong place for xenophobic views but also for risking people's lives and chances to elucidate their fellowmen about dictatorships while trying to circumvent ending up in a Turkish prison cell.--37.230.13.58 (talk) 20:02, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

I don't discuss with someone who accuses me of xenophobic tendencies and surmises "where a whole lot of admins show xenophobic tendencies and which may be the reason why this user has been blocked". EOD --Alraunenstern (talk) 20:38, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Who said I have interest discussing with you? You revert justified complaints from friendly user's pages, so who cares about people doing things like this? Besides, I have witnessed enough examples of xenophobia on the German Misplaced Pages and will not let you turn things upside down telling the opposite. And what is sad is I highly respect the German culture and I know loads of educated and tolerant people from this country, but what I see on the German Misplaced Pages, especially when it comes to foreigners or orientals trying to make articles or edits, often makes me shiver. --37.230.13.58 (talk) 20:56, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Does the German Misplaced Pages have a version of our WP:ANI? If so it would be a better forum than this talk page to complain about the actions of a German Misplaced Pages administrator. On our ANI, a baseless complaint may have an undesired effect. Edison (talk) 20:08, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

As I said, complaints on the German's ANI are highly likely to be deleted by user's with "hyper-light velocity"...

Sure we have. But this IP is an incident by itself, that's the problem. -jkb- (talk) 20:23, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Wait a minute, aren't you the admin who likes to permanently ban foreign users, after they have made an article that contains a few mistakes, rather than try to correct these? That is an incident, by itself.--37.230.13.58 (talk) 20:56, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

If a user is travelling faster than light, there's nothing to see here. ;-) Jonathunder (talk) 20:46, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Hiho, here I am. What a funny post here. You made my day! Regards, the devil of the night. By the way, could anybody stop this IP, the postings are more than abusive. --Itti (talk) 21:21, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Done. He's evading an indef block on his account here, anyway. Choess (talk) 21:42, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

What did the edit summary mean? "This, too, is probably Ernest Shackleton's fault". Ernest Shackleton didn't travel faster than light in Antarctica. Did the sockpuppet travel faster than light? What did a heroic explorer have to do with this? I have missed the point. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:47, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Perhaps it is this thread that can travel faster than light, as no information is being conveyed. Newyorkbrad (talk) 22:01, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

@Choess, merci :-), @Robert McClenon, this IP belongs to a multiple indef blocked user on dewiki. We call him "Südpolarforscher". Here is a list of his accounts and IPs. He hates Shackleton and all time he tries to bring his POV into artikel over Shackleton an artikel arrount the exploration of the South Pole. I´m Admin and Crat on dewiki. Thank you and have a nice day. --Itti (talk) 22:02, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

If you can find him and capture him, take him to a few miles away from the South Pole, where there are no visitors, and freeze him. Then he can be eaten by Amundsen's sled dogs. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:06, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

More Yank Barry lawsuit questions

The lawsuit filed by Yank Barry was mentioned a few days ago, but I have some more questions on the general issues involved. To avoid arguing the main case, I won't address the apparent contributions of Richfife, NatGertler, Nagle here, though it appears (to a casual examination, which doesn't rule out potential editing after the fact) that most of the edits referenced in the suits seem attributed to them in the archived version. My main interest is how John Does 1 to 50 and one other named editor whose account isn't obvious could be involved.

To begin with, I looked through that list of 31 quotes listed in the lawsuit. Apart from the three authors I'm excluding, these seem to be:

• (11) I removed the Bo Derek, Yank Barry film announcement because an announcement was never made. Npl10 (archive 1)
• (13) he was in the music business and is now is involved in "the multi-level marketing field" specifically with VitaPro, Global Village, Propectin and Jeunesse. Editingisthegame (archive 2)
• (19) So yeah, it really does look like "random lawyer in Bulgaria claims to nominate Yank Barry", which isn't worth mentioning in the article. Atama (archive 1)
• (30) Misrepresenting the situation by contributing to the false impression that he was a regular part of the band is a problem per WP:BLP. The band's willingness to play a one-off show with him changes nothing. Grayfell (Talk:Yank Barry)
• (29) seems to be cut and pasted together from five different RfC comments on Talk:Yank Barry#RfC: Should Barry be characterized as a former member of The Kingsmen? by Richfife, NinjaRobotPirate, Nagle, and Collect. In the lawsuit these are joined to read as a single paragraph. There are some other apparent paraphrasing irregularities in (26) and (9/17) but at least not multiple authors.

Now some questions. I'm not a lawyer, so please understand these are pretty ignorant:

• What happens when a lawsuit contains an inaccurate transcript of a Misplaced Pages conversation? Is it possible, for example, that the firm suing over comment 29 could subpoena WMF for information about the identity of all four authors of the quote, or even of the intervening authors whose comments were omitted, or everyone who participated in the RfC? If that were the case, is there a way for Misplaced Pages to challenge the transcript to protect the identities of those authors?

• Would WMF be allowed to notify authors whose identity is subpoenaed?

• If so, do they?

• If this information is handed over, are there any limits on how it can subsequently be used? For example, would law firms be able to reuse it for other clients, or trade it with other firms online?

• Do Wikipedians have any self-help mechanism to match editors with those who could serve as expert witnesses about how Misplaced Pages works? For example, to explain how Editingisthegame was asking other editors if they had consensus to move forward, rather than repeating something just to repeat it or out of malice. Who is able to serve as an expert witness for Misplaced Pages questions? Does WMF have any advice for potential experts?

• No matter how wide a net I cast, I don't understand where you get 50 John Does, unless maybe every editor of the talk page ever is a defendant. Is it normal for a lawsuit to name an excess of John Does "just in case", or do they really have 50 people in mind?

• To my untrained eye, the core of this lawsuit is the idea that every editor named is part of a "conspiracy" with joint and several liability for every other editor's actions. In the case of the people whose quotes I listed above, that seems remarkable. I mean, even if Npl10 was wrong and an announcement was made, they would be saying he should be liable for what all these other people did, not merely for the minor offense of not finding an announcement or for not plating his announcement with "so far as I could determine". Is there any precedent (Usenet, chat rooms, online forums, etc.) for considering an article Talk: page to be a conspiracy, whether or not the version of the article at the time was biased? And does WMF take seriously the general issue of whether it could be regarded as one, whether for criminal or civil purposes?

• In the recent discussion someone started talking about SLAPP laws. Of course, it would be premature for WMF to speculate on whether that could apply in this case, but can WMF provide some tools for users to understand what their rights may be under such laws? For example, do John Does 1-50 have to wait to be named and brought into court, or could they take a proactive stance? Could Misplaced Pages editors who make a case that their freedom to edit has been impacted have the chance to win any real money? The community could benefit greatly from some direction here. Wnt (talk) 18:19, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

• • The Doe 1-50 thing is almost boilerplate and something like it appears in tons of suits where the exact defendants aren't known in advance. It doesn't mean they think there are really 50 more likely co-defendants. The rest of your questions are specific enough that discussing them here on WP is probably counterproductive due to the possibility of any discussion getting recycled into the lawsuit, but at the same time basic enough that if you take a law student out drinking you can probably get some answers. IANAL etc. 173.228.123.145 (talk) 18:47, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Provided the defendants themselves don't comment, how can our blundering about be recycled into their lawsuit? We have nothing to do with them. Wnt (talk) 18:58, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

• I would like to hear an official statement from WMF on these matters: "To my untrained eye, the core of this lawsuit is the idea that every editor named is part of a "conspiracy" with joint and several liability for every other editor's actions. In the case of the people whose quotes I listed above, that seems remarkable. I mean, even if Npl10 was wrong and an announcement was made, they would be saying he should be liable for what all these other people did, not merely for the minor offense of not finding an announcement or for not plating his announcement with "so far as I could determine". Is there any precedent (Usenet, chat rooms, online forums, etc.) for considering an article Talk: page to be a conspiracy, whether or not the version of the article at the time was biased? And does WMF take seriously the general issue of whether it could be regarded as one, whether for criminal or civil purposes?" Also: a statement as to whether WMF has the backs of good faith editors attempting to render neutral POV articles of living people. Because if they don't, it's time for us as a community to do something drastic... Carrite (talk) 19:17, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
  • There is some general info here. I kind of doubt WMF is likely to comment on active litigation but I'm not them. 173.228.123.145 (talk) 20:14, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

It's not "active litigation" against them. Inquiring minds don't just want to know, they need to know — because if this whole "everyone who ever edited is part of a conspiracy to defame" line of reasoning is allowed to win in court, there is absolutely no way that anyone should ever touch a BLP. Good luck with maintaining NPOV in that event. Moreover, potential donors to WP will need to be advised that WMF's $20,000,000+ sitting in the bank doesn't actually help the volunteers in the trenches one whit when they really need it... and there will doubtlessly need be a new non-profit legal defense entity established. Carrite (talk) 22:10, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

You need to relax. This is not the right place to discuss this matter. Whoever has been sued should (themselves or via their lawyer) contact WMF and request help. Although policy may say WMF isn't liable, as a practical matter WMF ought to help innocent contributors who get swept up in a lawsuit. There is also a federal law, the Volunteer Protection Act that shields volunteers from liability for torts, with some exceptions for egregious misconduct. Jehochman 01:07, 28 June 2014 (UTC)