Actually, DW is really getting to annoy me, and not just on account of this. He's been ''gutting'' articles he doesn't like, often leaving snide comments about the persons who wrote the original version on the talk pages. Yes, some of them needed changes, but his arrogant dismissive tone about other people's work is rude, snide and outrageous. I came across some pages where three or four people people obviously had put in a long of work and had a long debate, only to find their work 'dumped' with some snide remark about it all being rubbish, with personal insults thrown in, suggesting that if that was the best they could do, they shouldn't be on Wiki. Yes, in a lot of cases things needed changing or re-writing or tidying up, but his whole approach, tone and attitude is well beyonds the bounds of acceptable behaviour.
As to his claim here, I disagree. We are not drawing up a list of filing cards here. I'm quite happy with Zoe's work. To call it a 'totally and completely lousy presentation' is not merely wrong but typical of the way he treats anyone who gets in his way, or writes something he doesn't like, in a way he doesn't like. To claim boldly that ''there is not one person on Wikipedia with any marketing expertise'' is monumental arrogance, as well as factually wrong. Maybe instead of calling himself DW he should have used TEHL (The Ego Has landed) when he joined Wiki.
OK, now that I have had my gripe for the day, I'm off to do some articles on Wiki, and if DW so much as touches anything I'm working on and leaves a snide remark, I'll set Two16 loose on him.
No. Maybe that's too cruel, though I'm not sure to whom; Two16 or DW!
JT.
From: Zoe zoecomnena@yahoo.com Reply-To: wikien-l@wikipedia.org To: WikiEN-l@wikipedia.org Subject: [WikiEN-l] A few choice words from DW Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 18:39:32 -0800 (PST)
DW put this on my Talk page. Any comments? - Zoe
Dear ZOE: I'm sure your intentions, along with the others, was quite sincere in coming up with a formula for the opening line of an article on someone. However, it is a totally and completely lousy presentation that is hard on the eyes and far too much for researchers to be asked to absdorb. In plain words, it turns people off and therefore Wikipedia's credibity. Please get over the obsession with Google, the heading doesn't gain users, only QUALITY does. I am putting an enormous amount of work into hundreds of articles that, based on this hoffific heading presentation is rendering them useless. For people with or without a brain larger than a flea, this is what they need when using an Encyclopedia for a biography or other such items: NAME: year dates, occupation. John Smith (1920-1990), Medical Scientist SPACE Born John William George Peabody Smith on July 5, 1920, he was etc. Make paragraphs short (See HarperCollins/Random House or amy other publisher about readability, interest span in the 21st Century etc. LAST LINE (always): John Smith died on December 1, 1990 and was interred in ????. If they were a great whatever, you might add one one to occupation. Then, in a new PARAGRAPH, the full date of birth. AND, I've never met anyone who said they were born in Tupelo, United States. So, do as I do and get the Province/Departement etc. for foreign countries. Too, nobody says they were born in Boston, New England, United States. So, a Region in France should be specified after the Departement or leave the region out. I don't want to see any more of my hard work changed. There is not one person on Wikipedia with any marketing expertise. Buy a few marketing books, use a little marketing common sense, and see how Wikipedia can succeed rather than articles on "getting new users." Build it right, accurate, and sufficiently detailed and interesting and they will come. ALSO, if idiots want to insert stubs or are too lazy to do research, LABEL the artice: ''Work in Progress". That way, a new user/viewer understands and doesn't click away thinking what a half-assed informa! tion site Wikipedia is. Because, when they do, they don'y come back (except to play and add the same useless bits of crap) and they don't tell others....DW
Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now
_________________________________________________________________ Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
Whatever the value of DW's suggestion for tabular formats for biographical entries, DW (Arthur's little sister?) did not respond to my invitation to discuss it on [[Wikipedia_talk:Manual of Style]]. He had suggested it on some random biographical talk page. With all due respect for Zoe, her talk page is not the place to rewrite the Manual of Style either.
I think, by the way, that the idea is a poor one, and spending a lot of time altering biographical entries to remove significant biographical information from the first paragraph is a poor use of time and energy. But I am willing to discuss it, and I imagine others would be to, in the right place.
Tom Parmenter
Tom Parmenter wrote:
Whatever the value of DW's suggestion for tabular formats for biographical entries, DW (Arthur's little sister?) did not respond to my invitation to discuss it on [[Wikipedia_talk:Manual of Style]]. He had suggested it on some random biographical talk page. With all due respect for Zoe, her talk page is not the place to rewrite the Manual of Style either.
I think, by the way, that the idea is a poor one, and spending a lot of time altering biographical entries to remove significant biographical information from the first paragraph is a poor use of time and energy. But I am willing to discuss it, and I imagine others would be to, in the right place.
Not the first time DW has been rude to people.
However, he may have a point about the opening of bio articles. I tend to prefer the "minor sentence" format, something like
NAME (dates), occupation(s)
but "occupation(s)" could feasibly be more than 1 word, eg "best known for his love poems to camels".
I put a message on his Talk page that he should discuss it here or at the Village Pump. I also reverted the reversions he made to the biographical pages he has created recently. Zoe Tom Parmenter tompar@world.std.com wrote: Whatever the value of DW's suggestion for tabular formats for biographical entries, DW (Arthur's little sister?) did not respond to my invitation to discuss it on [[Wikipedia_talk:Manual of Style]]. He had suggested it on some random biographical talk page. With all due respect for Zoe, her talk page is not the place to rewrite the Manual of Style either.
I think, by the way, that the idea is a poor one, and spending a lot of time altering biographical entries to remove significant biographical information from the first paragraph is a poor use of time and energy. But I am willing to discuss it, and I imagine others would be to, in the right place.
Tom Parmenter
_______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@wikipedia.org http://www.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
--------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now
Why not discuss it at [[Talk:Manual of Style]]? That's where it will go once anything happens. Tom P.
|From: Zoe zoecomnena@yahoo.com |Sender: wikien-l-admin@wikipedia.org |Reply-To: wikien-l@wikipedia.org |Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2003 12:13:29 -0800 (PST) | |--0-361745473-1043439209=:34726 |Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii | | |I put a message on his Talk page that he should discuss it here or at the Village Pump. I also reverted the reversions he made to the biographical pages he has created recently. |Zoe | Tom Parmenter tompar@world.std.com wrote: |Whatever the value of DW's suggestion for tabular formats for |biographical entries, DW (Arthur's little sister?) did not respond to |my invitation to discuss it on [[Wikipedia_talk:Manual of Style]]. He |had suggested it on some random biographical talk page. With all due |respect for Zoe, her talk page is not the place to rewrite the Manual |of Style either. | |I think, by the way, that the idea is a poor one, and spending a lot |of time altering biographical entries to remove significant |biographical information from the first paragraph is a poor use of |time and energy. But I am willing to discuss it, and I imagine others |would be to, in the right place. | |Tom Parmenter | |_______________________________________________ |WikiEN-l mailing list |WikiEN-l@wikipedia.org |http://www.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l |