What's the worst thing that could happen if we got rid of userpages altogether? Wikipedia would grind to a halt because most of the users would probably leave. Not because they're hugely attached to their userpages, but because it would be a ringing endorsement of the conduct of certain admins (deleting inflammatory userboxes without a policy for it, and then when there IS a policy for it they abuse THAT, and block people who disagree with them, etcetera) in this whole userbox mess.
Cynical
Not only would a number of users simply leave (the benefits and final ramifications of which I'm sure many people have many different opinions on), and not only would it generate bad press from the snickering Wikipedia Defeatists ("looks like Wikipedia can't allow everyone to edit it after all!" You know that'd start showing up), but the remaining people who want user pages would do what [[User:Tony Sidaway]] has done, and simply userpagify their talk pages (That Tony Sidaway... always sticking it to the man! *;-)* ), bringing us back to square one.
JDoorjam
On 2/18/06, David Alexander Russell webmaster@davidarussell.co.uk wrote:
What's the worst thing that could happen if we got rid of userpages altogether? Wikipedia would grind to a halt because most of the users would probably leave. Not because they're hugely attached to their userpages, but because it would be a ringing endorsement of the conduct of certain admins (deleting inflammatory userboxes without a policy for it, and then when there IS a policy for it they abuse THAT, and block people who disagree with them, etcetera) in this whole userbox mess.
Cynical _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Getting rid of user pages is like curing the disease by killing the patient. Completely unnecessary.
Ryan
On 2/22/06, Ben Lowe ben.lowe@gmail.com wrote:
Not only would a number of users simply leave (the benefits and final ramifications of which I'm sure many people have many different opinions on), and not only would it generate bad press from the snickering Wikipedia Defeatists ("looks like Wikipedia can't allow everyone to edit it after all!" You know that'd start showing up), but the remaining people who want user pages would do what [[User:Tony Sidaway]] has done, and simply userpagify their talk pages (That Tony Sidaway... always sticking it to the man! *;-)* ), bringing us back to square one.
JDoorjam
On 2/18/06, David Alexander Russell webmaster@davidarussell.co.uk wrote:
What's the worst thing that could happen if we got rid of userpages altogether? Wikipedia would grind to a halt because most of the users would probably leave. Not because they're hugely attached to their userpages, but because it would be a ringing endorsement of the conduct of certain
admins
(deleting inflammatory userboxes without a policy for it, and then when there IS a policy for it they abuse THAT, and block people who disagree with them, etcetera) in this whole userbox mess.
Cynical _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Deleting userpages would make editing unnecessarily hard. I'd would instantly kill all the notes I keep on my wiki projects. And all the links I keep for easy access so I don't have to search to find stuff.
Basically, I can only see downsides to doing it.
Mgm
On 2/22/06, Ryan Delaney ryan.delaney@gmail.com wrote:
Getting rid of user pages is like curing the disease by killing the patient. Completely unnecessary.
Ryan
On 2/22/06, Ben Lowe ben.lowe@gmail.com wrote:
Not only would a number of users simply leave (the benefits and final ramifications of which I'm sure many people have many different opinions on), and not only would it generate bad press from the snickering Wikipedia Defeatists ("looks like Wikipedia can't allow everyone to edit it after all!" You know that'd start showing up), but the remaining people who want user pages would do what [[User:Tony Sidaway]] has done, and simply userpagify their talk pages (That Tony Sidaway... always sticking it to the man! *;-)* ), bringing us back to square one.
JDoorjam
On 2/18/06, David Alexander Russell webmaster@davidarussell.co.uk
wrote:
What's the worst thing that could happen if we got rid of userpages altogether? Wikipedia would grind to a halt because most of the users would probably leave. Not because they're hugely attached to their
userpages,
but because it would be a ringing endorsement of the conduct of certain
admins
(deleting inflammatory userboxes without a policy for it, and then
when
there IS a policy for it they abuse THAT, and block people who
disagree
with them, etcetera) in this whole userbox mess.
Cynical _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On 2/22/06, MacGyverMagic/Mgm macgyvermagic@gmail.com wrote:
Deleting userpages would make editing unnecessarily hard. I'd would instantly kill all the notes I keep on my wiki projects. And all the links I keep for easy access so I don't have to search to find stuff.
Basically, I can only see downsides to doing it.
Mgm
Why can't your notes and links be kept in the project namespace?
Anthony
On 2/23/06, Anthony DiPierro wikilegal@inbox.org wrote:
Why can't your notes and links be kept in the project namespace?
Anthony
We'd get thousands of random personal notes in the project space randomly edited by anyone who comes by. It would be a complete mess. Besides, that would only cause people to misuse the wikipedia namespace for things they misused the userspace for before. Tightening the rules on userspaces would work just as well.
Mgm
On 2/23/06, MacGyverMagic/Mgm macgyvermagic@gmail.com wrote:
On 2/23/06, Anthony DiPierro wikilegal@inbox.org wrote:
Why can't your notes and links be kept in the project namespace?
Anthony
We'd get thousands of random personal notes in the project space randomly edited by anyone who comes by. It would be a complete mess. Besides, that would only cause people to misuse the wikipedia namespace for things they misused the userspace for before. Tightening the rules on userspaces would work just as well.
Mgm
You seem to be saying that the user namespace is not useful, but not harmful either. I agree that tightening the rules on the userspaces would have essentially the same effect as getting rid of them, though.
As for it being a complete mess, I think it'd probably be less of a mess. Instead of having similar notes being spread among hundreds of user pages, it'd be contained to just one project page.
Anthony
In any case, you didn't answer my question. You said that killing the user namespace would "instantly kill all the notes I keep on my wiki projects. And all the links I keep for easy access so I don't have to search to find stuff." But why can't your notes and links be kept in the project namespace? Surely doing that wouldn't cause thousands of random personal notes in the project space randomly edited by anyone who comes by. We're just talking about your notes. They aren't random, are they?
Anthony
On 2/23/06, MacGyverMagic/Mgm macgyvermagic@gmail.com wrote:
On 2/23/06, Anthony DiPierro wikilegal@inbox.org wrote:
Why can't your notes and links be kept in the project namespace?
Anthony
We'd get thousands of random personal notes in the project space randomly edited by anyone who comes by. It would be a complete mess. Besides, that would only cause people to misuse the wikipedia namespace for things they misused the userspace for before. Tightening the rules on userspaces would work just as well.
Mgm _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On Fri, 24 Feb 2006 10:13:19 -0500, you wrote:
In any case, you didn't answer my question. You said that killing the user namespace would "instantly kill all the notes I keep on my wiki projects. And all the links I keep for easy access so I don't have to search to find stuff." But why can't your notes and links be kept in the project namespace?
What was that saying about "a difference which makes no difference"? Guy (JzG)
The problem with keeping your notes in the project namespace is that you would still need a place to organise your notes and remind you where they are. If sandboxes were linked to articles, then you might have a dozen or so different sandboxes linked to a single article space - several of them forgotten (because you don't have a user pages to organise your sandboxes). I have a whole pile of abandoned article ideas in my user space. That doesn't mean that they will never be used, just that my attention got consumed by other (usually less productive) things. Granted, you could keep track of these things by looking through all the pages on your watchlist...but that would be far less productive (given that many people have watchlists with thousands of items.
Thing is, I'm pretty lazy, so I'd probably just set up shop in one article space and simply turn that space into my note space for all of my articles. I'd find a nice, quiet article -- maybe my home town, it'd feel like I was moving back -- and set up shop there. (Or maybe I'd use the [[Brian Peppers]] space; I hear that's not getting a lot of use….) You can't really tell me that anyone would patrol these notes pages to determine whether they're related *enough* to the article. Well, you can say it, but I'll laugh at you. What then, protocols for deletion of people's notes? NfD? "Non-notable notes; they don't relate enough to this article. Merge with [[User:Redwolf24]]'s notes."
Fine, then I'd set up shop in non-sensical article space, like "[[The blind unicyclists of Kenya (video game)]]" and get to work where no one would have any idea what is and isn't pertinent to the article. What's that you say? The article is non-notable? A probable hoax? How do you know -- the article hasn't even been written yet! Besides, short of contrib-stalking me (flattering, but a little creepy), there's no way you'd know where I was keeping my notes anyway.
Maybe I'd even throw in a userbox. Sorry, article-notesbox. "These article notes do not support the United Nations."
There are simply too many ways in which the article space would end up being abused in order to cobble together some semblance of the functionality of userspace.
Ben
On 2/24/06, Guettarda <guettarda@gmail.com > wrote:
The problem with keeping your notes in the project namespace is that you would still need a place to organise your notes and remind you where they are. If sandboxes were linked to articles, then you might have a dozen or so different sandboxes linked to a single article space - several of them forgotten (because you don't have a user pages to organise your sandboxes). I have a whole pile of abandoned article ideas in my user space. That doesn't mean that they will never be used, just that my attention got consumed by other (usually less productive) things. Granted, you could keep track of these things by looking through all the pages on your watchlist...but that would be far less productive (given that many people have watchlists with thousands of items. _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On 2/24/06, Ben Lowe ben.lowe@gmail.com wrote:
Thing is, I'm pretty lazy, so I'd probably just set up shop in one article space and simply turn that space into my note space for all of my articles. I'd find a nice, quiet article -- maybe my home town, it'd feel like I was moving back -- and set up shop there. (Or maybe I'd use the [[Brian Peppers]] space; I hear that's not getting a lot of use….) You can't really tell me that anyone would patrol these notes pages to determine whether they're related *enough* to the article. Well, you can say it, but I'll laugh at you. What then, protocols for deletion of people's notes? NfD? "Non-notable notes; they don't relate enough to this article. Merge with [[User:Redwolf24]]'s notes."
Fine, then I'd set up shop in non-sensical article space, like "[[The blind unicyclists of Kenya (video game)]]" and get to work where no one would have any idea what is and isn't pertinent to the article. What's that you say? The article is non-notable? A probable hoax? How do you know -- the article hasn't even been written yet! Besides, short of contrib-stalking me (flattering, but a little creepy), there's no way you'd know where I was keeping my notes anyway.
Maybe I'd even throw in a userbox. Sorry, article-notesbox. "These article notes do not support the United Nations."
There are simply too many ways in which the article space would end up being abused in order to cobble together some semblance of the functionality of userspace.
Ben
I guess I just don't see what the functionality of userspace is in the first place, if not to be used by the user as an expression of themselves.
I also think what's more likely to happen, if people *really* insist on keeping their notes separate from everyone elses, is you'll see things like [[Wikipedia:Bob's notes]], not notes thrown into the article space. Someone doing what you claim you would do would quickly be banned.
Anthony
On 2/24/06, Anthony DiPierro wikilegal@inbox.org wrote:
I guess I just don't see what the functionality of userspace is in the first place, if not to be used by the user as an expression of themselves.
I also think what's more likely to happen, if people *really* insist on keeping their notes separate from everyone elses, is you'll see things like [[Wikipedia:Bob's notes]], not notes thrown into the article space. Someone doing what you claim you would do would quickly be banned.
Anthony
And if we get stuff like [[Wikipedia:Anthony's notes]], [[Wikipedia:Bob's notes]] and [[Wikipedia:MacGyverMagic's notes]] it would basically result in a massive shift of userspace material to the Wikipedia space. Userspaces can be useful in creating a community feeling as well as keeping notes. It's not to express yourself, that's not what Wikipedia is about. It's to create an identity for yourself so people feel comfortable working with you and for keeing project related material.
As soon as you state you are "against the right to bear firearms in the United States", you're going to get people on the defensive, especially when you start to edit gun-related articles. The same thing goes for "pro- or anti-abortion" and loads of other subjects. It's okay to show your interest in the subject, but as soon as you show your views you are using Wikipedia as a soapbox which it's not (see WP:NOT).
Userspaces work fine. It's the abuse (divisive userboxes/advertising/personal attacks) that needs addressing. You don't need to kill an entire namespace to address some problems that crop up in there.
We don't delete articles for attracting vandalism. We shouldn't delete userpages for attracting problematic behavior from just a few of the people either.
Mgm
On 2/24/06, MacGyverMagic/Mgm macgyvermagic@gmail.com wrote:
On 2/24/06, Anthony DiPierro wikilegal@inbox.org wrote:
I guess I just don't see what the functionality of userspace is in the first place, if not to be used by the user as an expression of themselves.
I also think what's more likely to happen, if people *really* insist on keeping their notes separate from everyone elses, is you'll see things like [[Wikipedia:Bob's notes]], not notes thrown into the article space. Someone doing what you claim you would do would quickly be banned.
Anthony
And if we get stuff like [[Wikipedia:Anthony's notes]], [[Wikipedia:Bob's notes]] and [[Wikipedia:MacGyverMagic's notes]] it would basically result in a massive shift of userspace material to the Wikipedia space. Userspaces can be useful in creating a community feeling as well as keeping notes. It's not to express yourself, that's not what Wikipedia is about. It's to create an identity for yourself so people feel comfortable working with you and for keeing project related material.
As soon as you state you are "against the right to bear firearms in the United States", you're going to get people on the defensive, especially when you start to edit gun-related articles. The same thing goes for "pro- or anti-abortion" and loads of other subjects. It's okay to show your interest in the subject, but as soon as you show your views you are using Wikipedia as a soapbox which it's not (see WP:NOT).
See, this is where I think saying that you're against the "right" to bear firearms in the US *is* creating an identity for yourself. I also think it facilitates working with people on gun-related articles, if indeed you are the type of person who's capable of working with others on gun-related articles in the first place.
Oh well. Whatever. I've had my say. I don't really care enough to talk about it further.
Anthony
On Fri, 24 Feb 2006 14:34:08 -0500, you wrote:
See, this is where I think saying that you're against the "right" to bear firearms in the US *is* creating an identity for yourself. I also think it facilitates working with people on gun-related articles, if indeed you are the type of person who's capable of working with others on gun-related articles in the first place.
*fire*arms? Now I understand! I thought it was about the constitutional right to wear sleeveless vests.... Guy (JzG)
On Fri, 24 Feb 2006 19:22:47 +0100, you wrote:
And if we get stuff like [[Wikipedia:Anthony's notes]], [[Wikipedia:Bob's notes]] and [[Wikipedia:MacGyverMagic's notes]] it would basically result in a massive shift of userspace material to the Wikipedia space
Which was pretty much my point: the problem doesn't go away, it just moves somewhere else. Only somewhere it's less obviously not part of the project.... Guy (JzG)
On 2/25/06, MacGyverMagic/Mgm macgyvermagic@gmail.com wrote:
As soon as you state you are "against the right to bear firearms in the United States", you're going to get people on the defensive, especially when you start to edit gun-related articles. The same thing goes for "pro- or anti-abortion" and loads of other subjects. It's okay to show your interest in the subject, but as soon as you show your views you are using Wikipedia as a soapbox which it's not (see WP:NOT).
I don't think it's inherently wrong to show your views, the problem is how it's done.
I *could* have a userbox saying "this user hates foo," but that just angers supporters of foo, and makes me look like nothing more than a member of some foo-hating club that's here to POV push.
What would be better would be to say something like "I have an interest in foo-related subjects, as a person who is not a fan of foo. I've previously worked on some articles related to foo, such as [[bar]] and [[quux]]. If you think that my work on foo is overly negative, please leave a note on my talk page and we can discuss it!"
-- Stephen Bain stephen.bain@gmail.com
In all of this discussion of deleting userpages (which would deprive me of some thoughtful essays, such as [[User:Wetman]]'s comments on a valuable Wikipedia article), has any of the participants noticed that there are at least two contests for the "Best user page"?
If attention devoted to user pages is attention & resources taken from Wikipedia -- & therefore a Bad Thing -- then maybe someone should talk to these horrible people who are encouraging people to improve their user pages. (Even though Jimbo's own page is one of those nominated by one group as worthy of consideration.)
Or perhaps consider that this maillist has become an ivory tower, disconnected with the daily actions of Wikipedia. But I am often wrong in my conclusions.
]honestly not attempting to be sardonic[ Geoff
On 2/26/06, Geoffrey Burling llywrch@agora.rdrop.com wrote:
In all of this discussion of deleting userpages (which would deprive me of some thoughtful essays, such as [[User:Wetman]]'s comments on a valuable Wikipedia article), has any of the participants noticed that there are at least two contests for the "Best user page"?
Yes but Esperanza could rather a tricky oposition.
-- geni
On 2/24/06, Anthony DiPierro wikilegal@inbox.org wrote:
In any case, you didn't answer my question. You said that killing the user namespace would "instantly kill all the notes I keep on my wiki projects. And all the links I keep for easy access so I don't have to search to find stuff." But why can't your notes and links be kept in the project namespace? Surely doing that wouldn't cause thousands of random personal notes in the project space randomly edited by anyone who comes by. We're just talking about your notes. They aren't random, are they?
If anyone could edit the notes I am keeping they lose their value. They're structured the way they are because it's helpful to me. If anyone could edit them they soon become random because others don't necessarily see the logic behind the structure I'm using.
Mgm
On 2/24/06, MacGyverMagic/Mgm macgyvermagic@gmail.com wrote:
On 2/24/06, Anthony DiPierro wikilegal@inbox.org wrote:
In any case, you didn't answer my question. You said that killing the user namespace would "instantly kill all the notes I keep on my wiki projects. And all the links I keep for easy access so I don't have to search to find stuff." But why can't your notes and links be kept in the project namespace? Surely doing that wouldn't cause thousands of random personal notes in the project space randomly edited by anyone who comes by. We're just talking about your notes. They aren't random, are they?
If anyone could edit the notes I am keeping they lose their value.
I guess you're one of the minority of users that has a protected user page? If so, I guess you have a point, though I thought even user pages were supposed to be editable by all, in theory.
They're structured the way they are because it's helpful to me. If anyone could edit them they soon become random because others don't necessarily see the logic behind the structure I'm using.
Mgm
Most user pages are already editable by anyone. Yet somehow people manage to not step all over each other. Funny how that works.
Anthony
On 2/24/06, Anthony DiPierro wikilegal@inbox.org wrote:
On 2/24/06, MacGyverMagic/Mgm macgyvermagic@gmail.com wrote:
On 2/24/06, Anthony DiPierro wikilegal@inbox.org wrote:
In any case, you didn't answer my question. You said that killing the user namespace would "instantly kill all the notes I keep on my wiki projects. And all the links I keep for easy access so I don't have to search to find stuff." But why can't your notes and links be kept in the project namespace? Surely doing that wouldn't cause thousands of random personal notes in the project space randomly edited by anyone who comes by. We're just talking about your notes. They aren't random, are they?
If anyone could edit the notes I am keeping they lose their value.
I guess you're one of the minority of users that has a protected user page? If so, I guess you have a point, though I thought even user pages were supposed to be editable by all, in theory.
They're structured the way they are because it's helpful to me. If
anyone
could edit them they soon become random because others don't necessarily
see
the logic behind the structure I'm using.
Mgm
Most user pages are already editable by anyone. Yet somehow people manage to not step all over each other. Funny how that works.
Anthony
That's the whole idea why I like userpages - somehow people don't trip each other up. Mine is not protected, yet few feel the urge to edit it. On the few rare occasions someone did, it was to fix some typos or to inform me an idea I had listed had been written. (And they were all kind enough to inform me) The fact it's a userpage which "belongs" to someone makes people a lot more considerate when editing someone's personal notes and sandboxes.
I don't see the same thing happening in any other namespace.
I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. I don't like to go and suggest extreme ideas when less invasive things can be tried first. No doubt there's going to be people with different views.
Mgm
On 2/24/06, MacGyverMagic/Mgm macgyvermagic@gmail.com wrote:
On 2/24/06, Anthony DiPierro wikilegal@inbox.org wrote:
Most user pages are already editable by anyone. Yet somehow people manage to not step all over each other. Funny how that works.
Anthony
That's the whole idea why I like userpages - somehow people don't trip each other up. Mine is not protected, yet few feel the urge to edit it. On the few rare occasions someone did, it was to fix some typos or to inform me an idea I had listed had been written. (And they were all kind enough to inform me) The fact it's a userpage which "belongs" to someone makes people a lot more considerate when editing someone's personal notes and sandboxes.
I don't see the same thing happening in any other namespace.
I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. I don't like to go and suggest extreme ideas when less invasive things can be tried first. No doubt there's going to be people with different views.
Mgm
Sounds good to me. I wasn't even really suggesting any extreme ideas. If I were to make a suggestion it would involve more of a gradual shift away from the concept of ownership of notes. My comments started out as a question, which was only half-rhetorical. But then I got on the defensive. And to some extent I guess the question was answered. Some people keep notes on such disparate subjects that the very subjects themselves are forgotten.
Thanks for the relatively civil discussion.
Anthony
On 2/24/06, Anthony DiPierro wikilegal@inbox.org wrote:
Thanks for the relatively civil discussion.
Anthony
Thanks to you too. I much prefer civil discussions over deletion wheelwarring.
On 2/22/06, Ben Lowe ben.lowe@gmail.com wrote:
Not only would a number of users simply leave (the benefits and final ramifications of which I'm sure many people have many different opinions on), and not only would it generate bad press from the snickering Wikipedia Defeatists ("looks like Wikipedia can't allow everyone to edit it after all!" You know that'd start showing up), but the remaining people who want user pages would do what [[User:Tony Sidaway]] has done, and simply userpagify their talk pages (That Tony Sidaway... always sticking it to the man! *;-)* ), bringing us back to square one.
Um :)
My talkification of my userpage (or was it the userfication of my talk page?) came out of boredom with a completely useless talk page. All the interesting stuff is on the talk page, so why waste time maintaining both?
Needless to say I make vastly more use of userspace than most Wikipedians.
Of course this isn't about self expression at all, but about its reverse: uniformity and regimentation. They must die.
Well, most people seem to be strongly in favour of keeping their user pages for storing work in progress or their favourite links. My next question:
What is the worst possible thing that could happen if no one else could see your user page?
Apart from a couple of vague references to babel boxes, no one seems to have indicated much that would be lost without a public userpage.
Steve
On 2/23/06, Tony Sidaway f.crdfa@gmail.com wrote:
On 2/22/06, Ben Lowe ben.lowe@gmail.com wrote:
Not only would a number of users simply leave (the benefits and final ramifications of which I'm sure many people have many different opinions on), and not only would it generate bad press from the snickering Wikipedia Defeatists ("looks like Wikipedia can't allow everyone to edit it after all!" You know that'd start showing up), but the remaining people who want user pages would do what [[User:Tony Sidaway]] has done, and simply userpagify their talk pages (That Tony Sidaway... always sticking it to the man! *;-)* ), bringing us back to square one.
Um :)
My talkification of my userpage (or was it the userfication of my talk page?) came out of boredom with a completely useless talk page. All the interesting stuff is on the talk page, so why waste time maintaining both?
Needless to say I make vastly more use of userspace than most Wikipedians.
Of course this isn't about self expression at all, but about its reverse: uniformity and regimentation. They must die. _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On 2/23/06, Steve Bennett stevage@gmail.com wrote:
Well, most people seem to be strongly in favour of keeping their user pages for storing work in progress or their favourite links. My next question:
What is the worst possible thing that could happen if no one else could see your user page?
Apart from a couple of vague references to babel boxes, no one seems to have indicated much that would be lost without a public userpage.
Steve
If you start deleting userpages or making them private, a couple things will happen:
(1) it will be harder to track people using their userspace for inappropriate purposes (2) people will start moving their userboxes to their talk pages (3) you will start to suggest that we get rid of user talk pages too, suggesting people use IRC or email to communicate.
Ryan
On 2/23/06, Steve Bennett stevage@gmail.com wrote:
Well, most people seem to be strongly in favour of keeping their user pages for storing work in progress or their favourite links. My next question:
What is the worst possible thing that could happen if no one else could see your user page?
It would be impossible to use these resources if you are not logged in. it would be impossible to follow some of the To Do links on other people's pages and do some of the tasks, it would be impossible to see how people are doing (Wikistress meters, etc)...
G'day Steve,
Well, most people seem to be strongly in favour of keeping their user pages for storing work in progress or their favourite links. My next question:
What is the worst possible thing that could happen if no one else could see your user page?
Apart from a couple of vague references to babel boxes, no one seems to have indicated much that would be lost without a public userpage.
Um! Over here! Not drowning, waving!
Both Fred Bauder and Yours Truly have strongly hinted that we find it *very* useful to view others' userpages, if only to say "oh, that explains it" at times.
Cheers,
-- Mark Gallagher "What? I can't hear you, I've got a banana on my head!" - Danger Mouse
On Fri, 24 Feb 2006 02:07:42 +1100, you wrote:
Both Fred Bauder and Yours Truly have strongly hinted that we find it *very* useful to view others' userpages, if only to say "oh, that explains it" at times.
I completely agree. The problem is not with giving people the ability to tell the community a little about themselves, it's with people who misunderstand the nature of the user page. It's not like being at home where you can do what you want, it's more like the lounge of a private club, where you can engage in idle banter but are still constrained by the rules of the club and are still required to show consideration for those around you. That's how I see it anyway. Guy (JzG)
On 2/23/06, Steve Bennett stevage@gmail.com wrote:
Well, most people seem to be strongly in favour of keeping their user pages for storing work in progress or their favourite links. My next question:
What is the worst possible thing that could happen if no one else could see your user page?
Apart from a couple of vague references to babel boxes, no one seems to have indicated much that would be lost without a public userpage.
In case you missed it the first time, deleting the userpages of my accounts would eliminate the following:
* The ownership statement for OrphanBot. * The description of what OrphanBot does and does not do. * OrphanBot's current task status. * OrphanBot's current development status. * The statement that all my edits are multi-licensed into the public domain.
Also, in the past, it would have eliminated:
* My criteria for the use of fair-use images in featured articles (now mostly part of [[Wikipedia:Fair use]]).
-- Mark [[User:Carnildo]]
It's just plain overkill. People misusing or obsessing over userboxes is the problem. So it us those users and userboxes that need to be addressed. Killing all userpages is like putting everyone in jail to make sure you got the bank robbers.
Mgm
On Feb 23, 2006, at 1:41 PM, MacGyverMagic/Mgm wrote:
It's just plain overkill. People misusing or obsessing over userboxes is the problem. So it us those users and userboxes that need to be addressed. Killing all userpages is like putting everyone in jail to make sure you got the bank robbers.
It's like destroying all sentient life in the universe to contain the Flood.
It's like cutting off your nose to spite your face.
The proposal to delete userboxes is a sandwich short of a picnic.
A few cards short of a full deck.
A few bricks short of a wall.
It's like starving your kids to protect them from food poisoning.
It's like dying of thirst to protect yourself from drowning.
It's like burning down a forest to protect it from wildfires.
It's like destroying the village in order to save it.
Besides, without a publicly visible userpage, how else are people to find out who the hell we are?