Because the sandbox talk page is frequently vandalized, and because this is a larger issue, I'm posting this here. I'd like to know whether I'm alone with this position.
Currently, the Wikipedia Sandbox features 5 links to "experimental projects": * Hangman * Chess * Go/Weiqi * Checkers * Poetry
Ever since WikiChess became popular and accepted on Wikipedia, the sandbox has turned into an incubator for new "wikigames". The problem with this is that, as long as a page is a subpage of the sandbox, it is very difficult to delete it, because it is regarded as "legitimate playground." On the other hand, once a game has found a sufficient number of players, these players are all likely to vote "keep" when the game eventually and inevitably creeps into the Wikipedia namespace, as has happened with chess.
Therefore, the sandbox has become an incubator for a potentially unlimited number of wikigames which are almost impossible to get rid of once they've become popular. While there's nothing wrong with some harmless games, I strongly feel that such games need to be limited because:
1) Eventually, these gaming activities will attract users who do nothing *but* playing games, and therefore use our donation-sponsored hardware effectively as an Internet gameserver. These users can exist outside our normal community framework, potentially causing problems when they interact with the rest of the community and the site.
2) A couple of wikigames don't make much of a difference, but once there's 10 or 20 popular ones, the constant edits to these pages will start to clutter up Special:Recentchanges.
3) The Wikipedia: namespace is meant primarily for policies; an abundance of gaming-related pages complicates browsing and searching.
4) The more visible these activities become, the more they become a reflection on our project to outsiders.
I'm not arguing that any existing wikigame activities should be suspended -- that would be an exercise in futility, as anyone trying to do so will be shouted down by the existing player community. No, my suggested solution is this: All subpages of Wikipedia:Sandbox should be deleted. There's no need to have any "experimental development" pages.
Users who want to conduct non-game experiments can use user sandboxes for this purpose. If someone wants to start a new wikigame, they should start it in the Wikipedia: namespace, where it will receive a much more intense assessment right from the start. If a game started in the proper namespace survives VfD, then it may very well be fun or useful enough to exist.
In other words, I would strongly argue in favor of shutting down the sandbox as a VfD-resistant incubator for games which distract from the purpose of building an encyclopedia. There is value to wikigames as entertainment and as an artistic effort, but there's a separate wiki dedicated to this already -- http://games.wikicities.com/ -- and I feel that our own gaming related efforts should be limited at best.
Regards,
Erik
Erik Moeller wrote:
Ever since WikiChess became popular and accepted on Wikipedia, the sandbox has turned into an incubator for new "wikigames". The problem with this is that, as long as a page is a subpage of the sandbox, it is very difficult to delete it, because it is regarded as "legitimate playground." On the other hand, once a game has found a sufficient number of players, these players are all likely to vote "keep" when the game eventually and inevitably creeps into the Wikipedia namespace, as has happened with chess.
Wow, I had no idea the sandbox was being used this way. Zap it. Automated daily deletion of subpages, perhaps?
Users can host games on their own subpages if they really want, or (better) set up a dedicated wiki, call it wikiplay or something.
Stan
On 6/30/05, Erik Moeller erik_moeller@gmx.de wrote:
In other words, I would strongly argue in favor of shutting down the sandbox as a VfD-resistant incubator for games which distract from the purpose of building an encyclopedia.
Th latest Wikigame to be created is Checkers. This started in the Wikipedia namespace and, following Danny's attempt to speedy delete it, has been undeleted and is now on VfD. However, most voters seem to be supporting the idea that this should be moved to the sandbox rather than deleted from there.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/Checkers
Angela.
Erik Moeller wrote:
In other words, I would strongly argue in favor of shutting down the sandbox as a VfD-resistant incubator for games which distract from the purpose of building an encyclopedia. There is value to wikigames as entertainment and as an artistic effort, but there's a separate wiki dedicated to this already -- http://games.wikicities.com/ -- and I feel that our own gaming related efforts should be limited at best.
I'm surprised that the Sandbox is "VfD resistant" in the first place - I would have thought anything sandbox-related would be deliberately ephemeral and of no lasting value, and hence eminently deleteable. The template on there even says that Sandbox contents are wiped every 12 hours, wouldn't this apply to Sandbox subpages too?
Bryan Derksen wrote:
Erik Moeller wrote:
In other words, I would strongly argue in favor of shutting down the sandbox as a VfD-resistant incubator for games which distract from the purpose of building an encyclopedia. There is value to wikigames as entertainment and as an artistic effort, but there's a separate wiki dedicated to this already -- http://games.wikicities.com/ -- and I feel that our own gaming related efforts should be limited at best.
I'm surprised that the Sandbox is "VfD resistant" in the first place - I would have thought anything sandbox-related would be deliberately ephemeral and of no lasting value, and hence eminently deleteable. The template on there even says that Sandbox contents are wiped every 12 hours, wouldn't this apply to Sandbox subpages too? _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
What an easy solution might be would to have a wipe every 12 hours of the sandbox main page that also deletes any subpages (except any used for offical uses regarding the sandbox).
-Jtkiefer
On 7/1/05, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
What an easy solution might be would to have a wipe every 12 hours of the sandbox main page that also deletes any subpages (except any used for offical uses regarding the sandbox).
letting a bot use admin powers is generaly dissaproved of.
-- geni
I haven't heard anyone complaining about AllyUnions Sandbot. Technically it doesn't really delete anyway. The sandbox should be aimed at temporary stuff. There should be no use in storing stuff there permanently to exploit its "vfd status"
--Mgm
Bryan Derksen wrote:
I'm surprised that the Sandbox is "VfD resistant" in the first place - I would have thought anything sandbox-related would be deliberately ephemeral and of no lasting value, and hence eminently deleteable. The template on there even says that Sandbox contents are wiped every 12 hours, wouldn't this apply to Sandbox subpages too?
Totally. That's the whole point of a "Sandbox" -- even the name suggests that a random breeze or rainstorm might blow or wash the entire thing away.
--Jimbo
This is fascinating. Some of the wikipoetry is hilarious.
But these should definitely not be subpages of the sandbox. I suppose they can be linked to from there, though I'm also not sure why that should be. I certainly find the interest in these pages fascinating, not offensive. Such pages could clearly can be part of someone's user space.
I can imagine these being subpages of WP:FUN. Better to play games with other wikipedians than with random jerks on yahoo! games... as for the killjoys who think game-playing will Destroy Wikipedia... I think any time users spend on en:wp, monitoring their personal messages and checking their watchlists while waiting for the next move, is an efficiency win for the project.
- Eventually, these gaming activities will attract users who do nothing
*but* playing games,
I know that wiki was originally intended as a "fast gaming platform", but it has come a long way in a different direction since then. When the users you imagine arrive, I want DNA samples; they will surely be cunning alien clones sent to take over the wiki.
- The Wikipedia: namespace is meant primarily for policies; an
abundance of gaming-related pages complicates browsing and searching.
It also serves as a meta-space for projects of all stripes.
- The more visible these activities become, the more they become a
reflection on our project to outsiders.
This may be a reason not to link to games in particular from the sandbox. On the other hand, letting passing visitors (who are unlikely to become contributors) see that we also have fun, may do more to attract long-term contributors than you think.
In other words, I would strongly argue in favor of shutting down the sandbox as a VfD-resistant incubator for games which distract from the purpose of building an encyclopedia. There is value to wikigames as entertainment and as an artistic effort, but there's a separate wiki
I think the purpose here is to use wikigames to give editors a break without forcing them to leave the wiki... which has positive side-effects for community maintenance.
SJ is profoundly correct, and I have voted on the VfD accordingly.
Jack (Sam Spade)
On 7/2/05, SJ 2.718281828@gmail.com wrote:
This is fascinating. Some of the wikipoetry is hilarious.
But these should definitely not be subpages of the sandbox. I suppose they can be linked to from there, though I'm also not sure why that should be. I certainly find the interest in these pages fascinating, not offensive. Such pages could clearly can be part of someone's user space.
I can imagine these being subpages of WP:FUN. Better to play games with other wikipedians than with random jerks on yahoo! games... as for the killjoys who think game-playing will Destroy Wikipedia... I think any time users spend on en:wp, monitoring their personal messages and checking their watchlists while waiting for the next move, is an efficiency win for the project.
- Eventually, these gaming activities will attract users who do nothing
*but* playing games,
I know that wiki was originally intended as a "fast gaming platform", but it has come a long way in a different direction since then. When the users you imagine arrive, I want DNA samples; they will surely be cunning alien clones sent to take over the wiki.
- The Wikipedia: namespace is meant primarily for policies; an
abundance of gaming-related pages complicates browsing and searching.
It also serves as a meta-space for projects of all stripes.
- The more visible these activities become, the more they become a
reflection on our project to outsiders.
This may be a reason not to link to games in particular from the sandbox. On the other hand, letting passing visitors (who are unlikely to become contributors) see that we also have fun, may do more to attract long-term contributors than you think.
In other words, I would strongly argue in favor of shutting down the sandbox as a VfD-resistant incubator for games which distract from the purpose of building an encyclopedia. There is value to wikigames as entertainment and as an artistic effort, but there's a separate wiki
I think the purpose here is to use wikigames to give editors a break without forcing them to leave the wiki... which has positive side-effects for community maintenance.
-- ++SJ _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On 6/30/05, Erik Moeller erik_moeller@gmx.de wrote:
Ever since WikiChess became popular and accepted on Wikipedia, the sandbox has turned into an incubator for new "wikigames". The problem with this is that, as long as a page is a subpage of the sandbox, it is very difficult to delete it, because it is regarded as "legitimate playground."
A subpage of the sandbox is now on VFD, so I guess we'll find out just how difficult it is to delete it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/Sandbox/Chess
Angela.