Talk:Wiktionary/logo/refresh/voting/tally

Remark about the formatting of this page

If you intended to limit the access to this page to users who understand the syntax of tables in Mediawiki software, your goal is achieved, I think. A simple "dot list" would have been a better choice, in my opinion.

Sorry for the mess in the history, trying to clean Contributions/76.123.237.46 alias HaRRicH was not so easy even for me. --Szyx 20:01, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

People are supposed to vote using WiktLogoVote as described on the voting page. --Yair rand 20:06, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

I saw you removed "IP votes". Ok, right, good, perfect. But I think my remark above is still pertinent. --Szyx 20:15, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

No, it is not pertinent. Vote must be done with {{SUBST:WiktLogoVote|PRÉFÉRÉ|AUTRES|LANGUE}}, no need to understand the syntax of tables in Mediawiki software... --Hercule 21:25, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

yair rand and hercule are just dumb : the point is, if you vote as described and you make a preview, the result is a mess and it is not said anywhere that you have to validate that mess : szyx is very pertinent ! -- Kernitou 08:10, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

I agree that I was not especially rapturous at seeing the preview, but I had enough good will to surmise that in the end it would result in something meaningful, as it did... Bogorm 11:34, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

An edit notice has been added at Template:Wiktionary logo vote editnotice warning voters to read the instructions. Anyone want to add translations? --Yair rand 18:02, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

lots of ip-votes

may i propose to semi-protect this page to prevent anonymous voting? very best, oscar 00:58, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

i semi-protected the page after having seen this and that, two attempts to falsify votes. the history may need some checking. i semi-protected the page for one day, but think it would be better if this becomes permanent really. oscar 01:07, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

My concern with protection is that it would be very nice to have as many users from as many wiktionarys as possible vote. Meta is a rather "obscure" project given that you usually don't come here on you own unless you have a reason. There is a good chance they have never been here and therefore would have to make either a new account or have their SUL auto createone. If they come here and can't vote because they aren't autoconfirmed yet then they are unlikely to return when they can. James (T|C) 07:58, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

To support James's concern, I must say that it is incredibly frustrating to see a message soliciting my help in picking a logo, spend time carefully looking at the various logos and the arguments for and against each, decide on my top choices, and then find myself unable to vote for them! I am active on two wiki projects, but am unlikely to make enough contributions to meta for autoconfirmation before voting ends. Pastanecklace 22:37, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

why is it locked

It said my account doesn't exist but I have an account on both wikipedia and wiktionary. So I created a new account here. But it still won't let me vote! "This page has been locked to prevent editing." Why are you advertising encouraging people to vote when the voting system is locked out?! Ralmin 01:03, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Apparently you don't have unified login. The tally should really be unprotected. --Yair rand 01:40, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

it hasn't been locked: fyi yesterday i semi-protected it for 24 hours after vandalism (see message one section up). semi-protection means only autoconfirmed users can edit/vote; to me it seemed the most sensible thing to do, especially after the vote-falsifying attempt i reverted (imagine having to sort such edits out after many more have occurred - i happened to have been there in time imo). to me it still seems the most sensible thing to do, but if you don't mind watching around the clock reverting all the ip-edits, i'll be happy to let it go, fully into your hands, as the semi-protecting has expired by now... very best, oscar 02:22, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Well thanks for the heads up about unified login, I have now followed the instructions at Special:MergeAccount and have a unified login. So how many days and how many edits am I required to have before I can vote? Ralmin 02:32, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

I think it's four days. I'm pretty sure there's no edit minimum for autoconfirmation on Meta. --Yair rand 03:05, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

As I said above, we don't want ip edits, we DO want logged in edits whether they are autoconfirmed or not, and on this wiki its frequent that the users are not autoconfirmed yet even if they have SUL. Having a couple ip's votes sitting there for a couple votes isn't a big deal we just need to make sure we take a look at it, like we should anyway. James (T|C) 10:05, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

np afaiac, it was just "your friendly sysop" on this "obscure wiki" trying to help very best, oscar 19:26, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Did I break something?

I just tried to fix the table, and suddenly I saw a lot of anonymous users editing the page. I hope this is due to something other than my edits - I'm still looking for a newbie guide to Wikipedia/Wikimedia.

If I broke something, I would appreciate it if some more experienced user could clean up what I failed to, and safely remove the garbage at the top of the page. TMaster150 18:26, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

all looks ok, don't worry :-) i restored your own contribution instead, since it was deleted by the one who came next. very best, oscar 00:57, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Bedankt, oscar ;-) I noticed the removal of my section, but I think by that time the page had been cleaned up and semi-protected, so I decided not to restore it myself. Thanks again! TMaster150 14:04, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

graag gedaan :-) oscar 05:12, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

4 chan

Someone has created a thread on 4chan about this and has been organising mass votes for 46 because of the logo's likeness to a popular shock image. Observe the mass of 46 votes from anonymous IPs... 87.244.125.155 18:50, 12 December 2009

Not enough edits, Wikimedians voting

I'm going to highlight the vote on enWN, via the standard sitenotice (rotated ⅓rd time with our upcoming competition.

As the page is semi-protected I can't apparently vote. However, my preferred choice is #50 (with qualifications) and #52 as a backstop (again some qualifications.

I like #50 because, when you combine it with the wiktionary hover gadget several sites use, then, to users/readers, it's exactly the purpose Wiktionary serves - a dictionary. Also, it has no text. This is really important for a multilingual project. Language-specific versions of logos can then be made. There is just one little tweak I'd do on this logo with a magnifying glass, make the magnifying glass lensholder puzzle-piece shaped.

For #52 I have similar reasons for liking it (lack of actual English text). However, I would make it a word highlighted near the centre of the page to be agnostic to ltr rtl languages. I would also have one other little change there. Position a very small version of the Wikipedia logo as appropriate in the layout of the stylised book. This identifies as a WP-related project, and - I think - makes it a derivative of a trade mark that the Foundation can legally register. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 15:26, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Just tell us hwo exactly you'd like to vote and I'll post the vote for you on the page. Regards --Barras ^talk 15:29, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

• Yea, the table format is opaque. First preference #50, second #52. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 22:41, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
  • Done. I added the vote for you. --Barras ^talk 14:07, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

It's locked

Hello, it is locked. Can't edit the page. Anyone?--IBen 01:05, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

I know. I am the one keeping track of everything and it is a little hard doing so without organizing it. Sorry, wish I can help. The spesh man 18:11, 3 January 2010 (UTC)