|This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.|
Better to not leave messages for me here, because I don't always look at meta. Put them on en:User talk:Jimbo Wales
I have archived all the old material from this page except Jimbo's warning from the top. This is not a good page to use to reach him. In addition to the user page give on enwiki, User:Jimbo Wales gives an email address for him. However, most posting here seem to think that Jimbo is a manager of the WMF wikis. He is not. The wikis are managed by the respective communities, and meta is a coordinating wiki, not a way of bypassing local decision-making process. Please choose appropriate pages to ask questions or air complaints. This page isn't one. If you don't know where to raise an issue, ask a knowledgeable user. Some will help you. --Abd (talk) 19:39, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
You may have never heard of it, but there are actually addictive administrators whose favourite hobby is - YES - block, block, block out the people, all day long (and night, certainly):
- Probably just an unimportant side-note, the afforementioned (German) Administrator has blocked exactly 58 users since being reported on this site for "excessive blocking".
Another piece of evidence proving that it is not about the most truthful and objective editors but that the ones who are winning the "Wikipedia-Contest" are the ones who are the most fanatic:
Although in German, it will be perfectly clear to anyone that the editors who have seized control over this article are Russians living in Germany (and as it may seem obvious, the possibility to rather meet an Russian Immigrant than a Ukranian one is like 99/1).
As it stands, the German Wikipedia's version of the Krim Crisis (Crim Krisis;-) is that it wasn't democracy or human rights activists, but "right-wing totalitarianism" inside the new Ukranian Government that is mainly responsible for the current chaos and injustice.
Also, it wasn't Janukowitsch's constant neglect and ignorance of the people's will, but he actually was the dicator who was "the most willing to compromise" in european (or even human history)...
Big up, Wikipedia, for your truthful depiction, once again.--126.96.36.199 00:01, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
- And at the same time, the person who is responsible for this false depiction, namely Jim Wales, is posting a memorial picture of a young man who was slain just for demonstrating for Janokowitsch to be ousted...--188.8.131.52 00:05, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
Hallo ich hab ne Frage an dich
Request on the Fairness at English Wikipedia
Hello Jimbo! Users on English Wikipedia do not wish the useful information on your personal page: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Jimbo_Wales&action=history (you gave the permission to publish a useful information). Info from the Forbes was rollbacked. Please stop them. Thank you. - 184.108.40.206 08:58, 26 October 2014 (UTC).
- Hello IP! Please stop adding unwanted things to Jimbo's page.  --NeilN (talk) 20:13, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
- Your opinion and not more (Jimbo does not think so). This topic is intended for discuss. 220.127.116.11 20:29, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
- From Jimbo: "In any event, you were right to remove the anonymous ip's edit as it is essentially vandalism. I have never made any public remark saying that I respect (or don't respect) Medvedev." I hope you understand that. --NeilN (talk) 20:41, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
- See here. pablo 20:50, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
- I saw. But all this shame (lie and so on) - will be showed for a large number of people of diffrent nations. Not only by this issue. On the Facebook will be created page (and people will click Like). 5000 of friends I have. And my friends too. In addition, the new page will contain this: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Meta:General_disclaimer (and other great shame). But not Meta (Wikipedia). All almost the same. 18.104.22.168 18:39, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
Sad, but fact,that we only have 3 really active users, 1 is an administrator. We(the 2 others) feel that he is kind of a control freak. he is not a native Yiddish speaker (as it says on his user page[] but still claims he knows bettter yiddish. We would like him to have a little more sympathy with others. There is no stuart on yiddish wikipedia so this is my only place to express, thanks and all the best.--Alefbeis (talk) 15:17, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
- I agree. he is like a dictator and does not value other people's work or what They think. he is already there for a long time but I see users have had always complaints on his actions as he does whatever he wants without really talking or asking anyone. he clearly abuses his power and this has cost us a lot of users in the past as nobody can work properly with him. he acts like its his own encyclopedia. I would really appreciate if you can do something about it. thank you very much. (im sorry about my poor English) נייגעריגער (talk) 16:24, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
- I have to disagree with both of these gentlemen. If it weren't for the individual in question, the Yiddish Wikipedia would be in shambles and completely run amuck with improper grammar and spelling. Never have I seen such dedication from a user on any other language's version of Wikipedia. I am constantly in shock at the selflessness and dedication shown by the user these two men are berating. There are certainly more than three contributors to the Yiddish wikipedia, though not everyone is always active, but no one contributes more than the administrator. I will admit that the oversight can seem excessive, but over time it became obvious that the user's relentless dedication to proper Yiddish has been a great chesed to the language and has personally opened my eyes to its proper form. Instead of lashon hora and slander, our faithful administrator at the Yiddish Wikipedia should be receiving a reward of the highest calibre. --ברסלבער (talk) 05:38, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
Please urgently get this topic/resolution scheduled for a meeting, discussed and voted; and express your opinions on the noticeboard. Thanks for your work, Nemo 20:57, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
Request unblocking my ip address
Request unblocking my ip address 22.214.171.124 16:22, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
There is a discussion underway at en:User talk:Jimbo Wales#Getting better? about evaluating the progress which has been made over the last five or ten years. I would like to participate but unfortunately cannot as the page has been semi - protected at the behest of one JoeSperrazza who seems to be something of a pain in the neck , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , .
As it's a meta discussion I'm posting my comment below:
The gorilla in the room
Jimbo says the sample should be weighted to popularity. I agree. Why don't we make it simpler still and start with the article with most page views and work down? Each version should be assessed using the methods that reviewer assistants to the editorial boards of journals use to assess suitability. Then compare assessments.
The gorilla is not the weak content highlighted by Smallbones, it's the reason for it. People register for Facebook because it's personal to them. Similarly, they register for Twitter for the ability to message their friends. Wikipedia is not personal - it's altruistic. That's why the registration model doesn't work. Larry Sanger is a big supporter of registration to write an article and it's the cornerstone of Citizendum. Check "recent changes" in Citizendum and they are few and far between, and mostly by the same person.
The hook for Wikipedia is "The free encyclopedia that anyone can edit". But when people visit the site and try to write about something that interests them and they are knowledgeable about they find they can't. Or rather, they can but then have to wait about six months while the journal decides whether to publish. Get serious, folks. This is not the way to do it. Of course there need to be safeguards. Every worthwhile enterprise gets vandalised. But we have pending changes to get over that. So let people start articles within pending changes which will switch off as soon as the text is edited by an autoconfirmed editor (i.e. vetted). See discussion and explanation at en:User talk:Jimbo Wales/Archive 193#New paid editing scandal - How many more will there be until we take serious action?. This kills two birds with one stone - marking Articles for Creation historical also ends the ability of sockpuppets to dangle the prospect of immediate publication in front of people in return for money. 126.96.36.199 (talk) 10:11, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
- The edit summary under which the above post was removed is not good enough. In Guy's own words:
I stand convicted of not always filling in edit summaries. I plead guilty and throw myself on the mercy of the court.
An editor comments:
I personally feel that he is a sneaky, unknowledgeable (on wikiprocess) and a ticking time bomb waiting for someone to do the bad thing, that way he can snap at him.
More to the point, he blocked despite his claim
I am unlikely to use admin powers in a dispute in which I am personally involved.
The above - mentioned editor continued:
Do you not feel that ... represents a lack of ability on your behalf? You have (or it has) even (been) suggested that you lack the ability of wiki process. You even seemed to agree to this.
We don't know what Guy had in mind as he hasn't said, but it can't be sockpuppetry as that is irrelevant to posts on this page. Also, he has stated
I'm very reluctant to fling accusations of sockpuppetry.
I can't say I've ever called sockpuppet, though. It's a serious allegation and needs solid evidence.
So that rules that out, then.
The same editor comments:
You seem to be looking for arguments (you've even been cited on external sources such as a news blog). Seemingly you get easily frustrated, use foul language and are considered an internet antagonist.
Guy uses rhetoric to conceal the fact that his argument has no substance:
How many times are we going to let this troll post the same nonsense? I just need to know how big a pack of popcorn to buy.
- Guy 16:22, 17 August 2015.
Another technique is to simply wipe away the opposing argument:
Illustrating what the OP says above, JzG removed his/her post and Future Perfect at Sunrise blocked.
- 188.8.131.52 17:21, 17 August 2015.
If someone with an enwiki account could post my comment into the discussion it would be appreciated. 184.108.40.206 17:59, 10 September 2015 (UTC)
Did you ever attend Wikimania with your money? Talk to us!
TL;DR: Fill a short Wikimania survey, it takes 5 min.
Hi, I'm writing you because you are listed in Wikimania/Frequent attendees. As you probably know by now, Wikimania 2016 Esino Lario wants to achieve a Wikimania format which allows people to "get things done" and leave the conference fully satisfied with the result of their investment of time and other resources (see pillars 2 and 4: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2016_bids/Esino_Lario/Pillars ). For this purpose, we consider all audiences (see https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2016_bids/Esino_Lario/Program#Target ).
Participants other than scholarship recipients and reimbursed representatives are one group we heard very little from, but we think they are important because: 1) they have financial resources and help make the Wikimania budget sustainable; 2) they have motivation to share and ideas on what makes Wikimania valuable.
We set up a form mainly to collect names of some such people and talk with them later: if you provide your contact, we may write you on this topic. We may release aggregate data from the resposes; data will be handled by us and the Wikimania 2016 fiscal sponsor "Ecomuseo delle Grigne" (under EU law). Please fill the whole form, it's short!
Feel free to forward this invite to anyone.
Federico Leva and Martin Rulsch
Wikimania 2016 team, scholarships subteam
08:30, 11 September 2015 (UTC)