Fastfission wrote:
As for the project itself, I don't see it adding "process"; it seems like a way to centralize certain resources and participation, which I don't think is negative in any way.
I think the CVU is a clear win for Wikipedia and holding back the masses (and I do mean *masses*) of vandalism. Curps in particular has done some amazing work with bot-based detection of vandalism, needed to counter the bot-based vandalism that is fashionable amongst the kiddies these days. You really would not believe the mountains of crap the CVU holds back.
If the name is the real issue, I don't see anything wrong with calling it "WikiProject Counter Vandalism Project", which after all is what it is.
- d.
On 2/6/06, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
Fastfission wrote:
As for the project itself, I don't see it adding "process"; it seems like a way to centralize certain resources and participation, which I don't think is negative in any way.
I think the CVU is a clear win for Wikipedia and holding back the masses (and I do mean *masses*) of vandalism. Curps in particular has done some amazing work with bot-based detection of vandalism, needed to counter the bot-based vandalism that is fashionable amongst the kiddies these days. You really would not believe the mountains of crap the CVU holds back.
If the name is the real issue, I don't see anything wrong with calling it "WikiProject Counter Vandalism Project", which after all is what it is.
This is getting somewhere--now if we can come up with a positive, rather than negative name, we'd be perfect.
Pretty much the best kinds of project names are ones that are either expressly positive (i.e. their name assumes good faith, doesn't create an us/them dichotomy), or failing that are ironicly ugly (like "bureaucrat", "benevolent dictator", or "spelling nazi" or "mediation cabal").
This is getting somewhere--now if we can come up with a positive, rather than negative name, we'd be perfect.
Pretty much the best kinds of project names are ones that are either expressly positive (i.e. their name assumes good faith, doesn't create an us/them dichotomy), or failing that are ironicly ugly (like "bureaucrat", "benevolent dictator", or "spelling nazi" or "mediation cabal").
So "campaign to slaughter all vandals" (CSAV) would be acceptable? :)
On 2/6/06, Philip Welch wikipedia@philwelch.net wrote:
This is getting somewhere--now if we can come up with a positive, rather than negative name, we'd be perfect.
Pretty much the best kinds of project names are ones that are either expressly positive (i.e. their name assumes good faith, doesn't create an us/them dichotomy), or failing that are ironicly ugly (like "bureaucrat", "benevolent dictator", or "spelling nazi" or "mediation cabal").
So "campaign to slaughter all vandals" (CSAV) would be acceptable? :)
Now you're getting the idea, but "Holy Crusade to Slaughter All Vandals (Because God Is On Our Side)" would be better.
On 2/6/06, The Cunctator cunctator@gmail.com wrote:
This is getting somewhere--now if we can come up with a positive, rather than negative name, we'd be perfect.
We could but the anti newspeak force killed of the idea of the "care bear unit".
As long as the name is within wikipedia policy the people involved in the project can call it what they like.
-- geni
On 2/6/06, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
As long as the name is within wikipedia policy the people involved in the project can call it what they like.
The difference between "can" and "should" is not insignificant.
-- Sam
On 2/6/06, Sam Korn smoddy@gmail.com wrote:
On 2/6/06, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
As long as the name is within wikipedia policy the people involved in the project can call it what they like.
The difference between "can" and "should" is not insignificant.
-- Sam
Sure but the name appears to be the one they want so I see no reason to stop them useing it. As I said no complaints to the helpdesk so they appear to be doing better than other groups.
-- geni
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
geni wrote:
On 2/6/06, Sam Korn smoddy@gmail.com wrote:
On 2/6/06, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
As long as the name is within wikipedia policy the people involved in the project can call it what they like.
The difference between "can" and "should" is not insignificant.
-- Sam
Sure but the name appears to be the one they want so I see no reason to stop them useing it. As I said no complaints to the helpdesk so they appear to be doing better than other groups.
It doesn't need to cause specific complaints to engender an atmosphere of bad faith assumption and a lack of wikilove. Not that the name necessarily /does/ do that, but...
Yours sincerely, - -- James D. Forrester Wikimedia : [[W:en:User:Jdforrester|James F.]] E-Mail : james@jdforrester.org IM (MSN) : jamesdforrester@hotmail.com
In 2/6/06, James D. Forrester james@jdforrester.org wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
geni wrote:
On 2/6/06, Sam Korn smoddy@gmail.com wrote:
On 2/6/06, geni geniice@gmail.com wrote:
As long as the name is within wikipedia policy the people involved in the project can call it what they like.
The difference between "can" and "should" is not insignificant.
-- Sam
Sure but the name appears to be the one they want so I see no reason to stop them useing it. As I said no complaints to the helpdesk so they appear to be doing better than other groups.
It doesn't need to cause specific complaints to engender an atmosphere of bad faith assumption and a lack of wikilove. Not that the name necessarily /does/ do that, but...
Considering that the name comes from a declaration of war on vandals, I'd say it's pretty difficult to argue that it does not suffer from a lack of wikilove.
In fact, there's rather a lack of evidence for that position.
On 2/6/06, The Cunctator cunctator@gmail.com wrote:
Pretty much the best kinds of project names are ones that are either expressly positive (i.e. their name assumes good faith, doesn't create an us/them dichotomy), or failing that are ironicly ugly (like "bureaucrat", "benevolent dictator", or "spelling nazi" or "mediation cabal").
Vandalism Cleaning Brigade? Grafitti Purging Workforce? Slaves for an Unvandalised Wikipedia? The Anti-vandalism Superheroes? Vandalism Posse?
I wonder if ironically ugly is good though. Isn't CVU already sort of ironically ugly? Maybe some people aren't getting the irony...
Steve
On 2/7/06, Steve Bennett stevage@gmail.com wrote:
On 2/6/06, The Cunctator cunctator@gmail.com wrote:
Pretty much the best kinds of project names are ones that are either expressly positive (i.e. their name assumes good faith, doesn't create an us/them dichotomy), or failing that are ironicly ugly (like "bureaucrat", "benevolent dictator", or "spelling nazi" or "mediation cabal").
Vandalism Cleaning Brigade? Grafitti Purging Workforce? Slaves for an Unvandalised Wikipedia? The Anti-vandalism Superheroes? Vandalism Posse?
If we're going to have the name changed, let's at least change it to something that's not hopelessly goofy. :/
Although the thought of being a WikiSuperHero is quite intriguing...
-- Jay Converse I'm not stupid, just selectively ignorant.
On Tue, 07 Feb 2006 11:04:34 +0100, Steve Bennett stevage@gmail.com wrote:
On 2/6/06, The Cunctator cunctator@gmail.com wrote:
Pretty much the best kinds of project names are ones that are either expressly positive (i.e. their name assumes good faith, doesn't create an us/them dichotomy), or failing that are ironicly ugly (like "bureaucrat", "benevolent dictator", or "spelling nazi" or "mediation cabal").
Vandalism Cleaning Brigade? Grafitti Purging Workforce? Slaves for an Unvandalised Wikipedia? The Anti-vandalism Superheroes? Vandalism Posse?
I wonder if ironically ugly is good though. Isn't CVU already sort of ironically ugly? Maybe some people aren't getting the irony...
Whatever happened to just plain old "Recent Changes/RC patrol".
On 2/7/06, Sherool jamydlan@online.no wrote:
On Tue, 07 Feb 2006 11:04:34 +0100, Steve Bennett stevage@gmail.com wrote:
On 2/6/06, The Cunctator cunctator@gmail.com wrote:
Pretty much the best kinds of project names are ones that are either expressly positive (i.e. their name assumes good faith, doesn't create an us/them dichotomy), or failing that are ironicly ugly (like "bureaucrat", "benevolent dictator", or "spelling nazi" or "mediation cabal").
Vandalism Cleaning Brigade? Grafitti Purging Workforce? Slaves for an Unvandalised Wikipedia? The Anti-vandalism Superheroes? Vandalism Posse?
I wonder if ironically ugly is good though. Isn't CVU already sort of ironically ugly? Maybe some people aren't getting the irony...
Whatever happened to just plain old "Recent Changes/RC patrol".
Not sure, but I think that the idea is that this is an offshoot designed to tackle more complicated problems, to think about long-term strategy for managing Wikipedia's growth with the regard to the good/bad edit issue. Or maybe it's just a bunch of excited RC patrollers. Not sure.
Whatever the case, I think the best idea would be to enfold the "vandalism-fighting" aspect within a broader strategy of encouraging good edits and discouraging bad ones.
G'day Sherool, [CVU]
Whatever happened to just plain old "Recent Changes/RC patrol".
No, we can't have that, it's *boring*. We've gotta have fancy userboxen and copyvio logos and people declaring "war". Otherwise, why would anyone even *bother* fighting vandalism?
-- Mark Gallagher "What? I can't hear you, I've got a banana on my head!" - Danger Mouse
On 2/7/06, Mark Gallagher m.g.gallagher@student.canberra.edu.au wrote:
G'day Sherool, [CVU]
Whatever happened to just plain old "Recent Changes/RC patrol".
No, we can't have that, it's *boring*. We've gotta have fancy userboxen and copyvio logos and people declaring "war". Otherwise, why would anyone even *bother* fighting vandalism?
-- Mark Gallagher "What? I can't hear you, I've got a banana on my head!" - Danger Mouse
The difference is that RC Patrol is more of an idea, a job. CVU is a collection of people who subscribe to that idea and perform that job.
That's the way I see it, anyway.
-- Jay Converse I'm not stupid, just selectively ignorant.
On 2/8/06, Jay Converse supermo0@gmail.com wrote:
On 2/7/06, Mark Gallagher m.g.gallagher@student.canberra.edu.au wrote:
G'day Sherool, [CVU]
Whatever happened to just plain old "Recent Changes/RC patrol".
No, we can't have that, it's *boring*. We've gotta have fancy userboxen and copyvio logos and people declaring "war". Otherwise, why would anyone even *bother* fighting vandalism?
The difference is that RC Patrol is more of an idea, a job. CVU is a collection of people who subscribe to that idea and perform that job.
That's the way I see it, anyway.
That's yet another problem with the CVU. Every Wikipedian should be considered part of the collection of people who subscribe to the idea of keeping Wikipedia clean and neat. It's detrimental to have some people say "This is my job" because then everyone else goes "Goody! Now I don't have to worry about it."
On 2/8/06, The Cunctator cunctator@gmail.com wrote:
On 2/8/06, Jay Converse supermo0@gmail.com wrote:
On 2/7/06, Mark Gallagher m.g.gallagher@student.canberra.edu.au wrote:
G'day Sherool, [CVU]
Whatever happened to just plain old "Recent Changes/RC patrol".
No, we can't have that, it's *boring*. We've gotta have fancy
userboxen
and copyvio logos and people declaring "war". Otherwise, why would anyone even *bother* fighting vandalism?
The difference is that RC Patrol is more of an idea, a job. CVU is a collection of people who subscribe to that idea and perform that job.
That's the way I see it, anyway.
That's yet another problem with the CVU. Every Wikipedian should be considered part of the collection of people who subscribe to the idea of keeping Wikipedia clean and neat. It's detrimental to have some people say "This is my job" because then everyone else goes "Goody! Now I don't have to worry about it."
This is endemic to Wikipedia because of its massive size. No one person can do every job on the site unless they stretch themselves so thin that they do all of them poorly.
Also, you appear to be part of the "Goody! I don't have to worry about it." crowd, after looking at your edits before and after what is an apparent wikibreak.
The fact of the matter is that there are a LOT of people who have seen fit to ignore the vandalism fight. Some because they're simply better at other things and find it a waste of theirs and others time to devote themselves to something they're not as good at, some because they've done it for a while and are tired of it, and others because of an apparent feeling that they've been around so long that they'll let the peons do it for them.
-- Jay Converse I'm not stupid, just selectively ignorant.
On 2/9/06, Jay Converse supermo0@gmail.com wrote:
The fact of the matter is that there are a LOT of people who have seen fit to ignore the vandalism fight. Some because they're simply better at other things and find it a waste of theirs and others time to devote themselves to something they're not as good at, some because they've done it for a while
And speaking for myself, it's like choosing not to join the brigade of people putting out fires with buckets of water until people install smoke detectors and sprinkler systems, and until the brigade is equipped with decent fire engines and hire powered hoses.
Yes, that's a bit snobby. But hopefully I'm helping the project in other ways.
Steve
On Feb 9, 2006, at 1:13 AM, Steve Bennett wrote:
On 2/9/06, Jay Converse supermo0@gmail.com wrote:
The fact of the matter is that there are a LOT of people who have seen fit to ignore the vandalism fight. Some because they're simply better at other things and find it a waste of theirs and others time to devote themselves to something they're not as good at, some because they've done it for a while
And speaking for myself, it's like choosing not to join the brigade of people putting out fires with buckets of water until people install smoke detectors and sprinkler systems, and until the brigade is equipped with decent fire engines and hire powered hoses.
Yes, that's a bit snobby. But hopefully I'm helping the project in other ways.
Have you seen http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lupin/Anti-vandal_tool ? It offers a filtered list of RC; with the ability to view the diffs all-in-one-page, and convieient revert and rollback buttons... Is that hose high powered enough for you?
Or if you're an IRC man, there are at least 4 different filters running, I think... Take your pick. ;-)
Admittedly, we haven't got sprinkler systems, AFAIK (although blocks might count, I suppose), but the rest is there...
Jesse Weinstein
On 2/9/06, Jesse W jessw@netwood.net wrote:
Have you seen http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lupin/Anti-vandal_tool ? It offers a filtered list of RC; with the ability to view the diffs all-in-one-page, and convieient revert and rollback buttons... Is that hose high powered enough for you?
Unfortunately I don't see the revert button, and rollback doesn't work if you're not an admin. Also the warn button doesn't work if the user doesn't already have a talk page. But the idea is good (I think I've played with it before actually).
I sort of like the basic format of CryptoDerk's vandalfighter tool better, but it's sort of about garden hose level now. If it automatically showed diffs, and let you warn/revert with a single click, that would be the firehose I'm looking for.
Admittedly, we haven't got sprinkler systems, AFAIK (although blocks might count, I suppose), but the rest is there...
Yeah, would it be that much of a stress on the servers to check edits against a regex and automatically quarantine them if they matched certain basic patterns?
Steve
Yeah, more users should have admin powers.
On 2/9/06, Steve Bennett stevage@gmail.com wrote:
On 2/9/06, Jesse W jessw@netwood.net wrote:
Have you seen http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lupin/Anti-vandal_tool ? It offers a filtered list of RC; with the ability to view the diffs all-in-one-page, and convieient revert and rollback buttons... Is that hose high powered enough for you?
Unfortunately I don't see the revert button, and rollback doesn't work if you're not an admin. Also the warn button doesn't work if the user doesn't already have a talk page. But the idea is good (I think I've played with it before actually).
I sort of like the basic format of CryptoDerk's vandalfighter tool better, but it's sort of about garden hose level now. If it automatically showed diffs, and let you warn/revert with a single click, that would be the firehose I'm looking for.
Admittedly, we haven't got sprinkler systems, AFAIK (although blocks might count, I suppose), but the rest is there...
Yeah, would it be that much of a stress on the servers to check edits against a regex and automatically quarantine them if they matched certain basic patterns?
Steve _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On Feb 9, 2006, at 10:55 AM, Steve Bennett wrote:
On 2/9/06, Jesse W jessw@netwood.net wrote:
Have you seen http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lupin/Anti-vandal_tool ? It offers a filtered list of RC; with the ability to view the diffs all-in-one-page, and convieient revert and rollback buttons... Is that hose high powered enough for you?
Unfortunately I don't see the revert button, and rollback doesn't work if you're not an admin.
You're quite right. I'm not sure on what side you fall on the give-anyone-rollback issue, but, either; get godmode-lite(and politely request the maker of it get it working with Lupin's tool), or sign up on Requests for Rollback...
Also the warn button doesn't work if the user doesn't already have a talk page.
That's a bug. Please drop a note on Lupin's talk page.
Admittedly, we haven't got sprinkler systems, AFAIK (although blocks might count, I suppose), but the rest is there...
Yeah, would it be that much of a stress on the servers to check edits against a regex and automatically quarantine them if they matched certain basic patterns?
No idea.
On 2/10/06, Jesse W jessw@netwood.net wrote:
You're quite right. I'm not sure on what side you fall on the give-anyone-rollback issue, but, either; get godmode-lite(and politely request the maker of it get it working with Lupin's tool), or sign up on Requests for Rollback...
It's a weird issue, surely it's not that difficult to implement rollback from within Lupin's tool.
Pity that RfR isn't actually active. I might need to become an admin.
Also the warn button doesn't work if the user doesn't already have a talk page.
That's a bug. Please drop a note on Lupin's talk page.
Ok. I must be the millionth person to notice it though.
Steve
"Steve Bennett" stevage@gmail.com wrote in message news:f1c3529e0602090113u3f1c4bd9j953c1657bffe4ec3@mail.gmail.com...
On 2/9/06, Jay Converse supermo0@gmail.com wrote:
The fact of the matter is that there are a LOT of people who have seen fit to ignore the vandalism fight. Some because they're simply better at other things and find it a waste of theirs and others time to devote themselves to something they're not as good at, some because they've done it for a while
And speaking for myself, it's like choosing not to join the brigade of people putting out fires with buckets of water until people install smoke detectors and sprinkler systems, and until the brigade is equipped with decent fire engines and hire powered hoses.
On that basis, you could view the CVU as being the Wikipedia equivalent to the Ankh-Morpork Watch[1].
Which isn't actually such a bad thing, when you consider just how similar Wikipedia can be to Ank-Morpork...
HTH HAND
On 2/8/06, Jay Converse supermo0@gmail.com wrote:
On 2/8/06, The Cunctator cunctator@gmail.com wrote:
That's yet another problem with the CVU. Every Wikipedian should be considered part of the collection of people who subscribe to the idea of keeping Wikipedia clean and neat. It's detrimental to have some people say "This is my job" because then everyone else goes "Goody! Now I don't have to worry about it."
Also, you appear to be part of the "Goody! I don't have to worry about it." crowd, after looking at your edits before and after what is an apparent wikibreak.
Wikibreak? What is that? And what edits are you talking about? You're wrong, by the way.
On 2/8/06, The Cunctator cunctator@gmail.com wrote:
On 2/8/06, Jay Converse supermo0@gmail.com wrote:
On 2/7/06, Mark Gallagher m.g.gallagher@student.canberra.edu.au wrote:
G'day Sherool, [CVU]
Whatever happened to just plain old "Recent Changes/RC patrol".
No, we can't have that, it's *boring*. We've gotta have fancy userboxen and copyvio logos and people declaring "war". Otherwise, why would anyone even *bother* fighting vandalism?
The difference is that RC Patrol is more of an idea, a job. CVU is a collection of people who subscribe to that idea and perform that job.
That's the way I see it, anyway.
That's yet another problem with the CVU. Every Wikipedian should be considered part of the collection of people who subscribe to the idea of keeping Wikipedia clean and neat. It's detrimental to have some people say "This is my job" because then everyone else goes "Goody! Now I don't have to worry about it."
Hmm there is a backlog at [[WP:CP]]. If you want to start worrying about something start there.
-- geni