The last time I tried to get some additional comments on a user category there was little to no response, so I thought some of you on the mailing list might be able to bring some additional views on this.
I noticed a user pointing to [[Wikipedia:User categories for discussion/Archive/October 2007#Wikipedians by mental and physiological condition and subcats]] the other day, and I was a bit surprised to see all of those categories did get deleted. I personally know of a few times such categories were used to help out with article collaboration, and even once during a debate about the handicapped sign being used in templates. In the past I've recommended to people that they were a good way to contact someone who wouldn't be bothered by someone asking questions related to their condition. It's been my assumption that when a user put themselves in such a category (or uses the associated userbox) they were basically listing themselves as a resource, as if to say "I have this condition, and I am inviting any editor that is interested to ask me about it, or ask me about what resources I know of that might help said articles". A lot of Wikipedians have conditions, but don't have an active interest in working on the related articles, but are still willing to help when asked.
It also reminds me of something [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Anime and manga]] has done, where it has made a magazine and book listing where users can list what books and magazines they have. So when someone knows that an anime was talked about in a book, they can find who owns the book and ask them for help, or how to cite the information.
While I agree with a great many of these deletion discussions, I think people are not being reasonable in how things can and have been used, or are not considering some of the points I've brought up.
I'm also confused as to why people seem to think that [[WP:MYSPACE]] applies to anything that they don't see as helping Wikipedia. Certainly, useless categories should be deleted, but being useless does not mean something is being (or is even practical to be) used for social networking. It also seems to set people off, in that since they are assuming these categories are being used for social networking, reasonable arguments that demonstrate wiki-related use will not be given proper consideration.
Like I said, a lot of these deletions are dead on, but we're also losing a lot of categories that were realistically usable. Should some be taken to DRV? Should a kind of "rationale" page be created to help avoid confusion? Are any of these categories realistically being used for social networking, or are we overreacting? Are babies in lurking in the bath water? Is it bath water in the first place? Green or yellow? Up or down? Paper or plastic?
-- Ned Scott
On 29/12/2007, Ned Scott ned@nedscott.com wrote:
Like I said, a lot of these deletions are dead on, but we're also losing a lot of categories that were realistically usable. Should some be taken to DRV? Should a kind of "rationale" page be created to help avoid confusion? Are any of these categories realistically being used for social networking, or are we overreacting? Are babies in lurking in the bath water? Is it bath water in the first place? Green or yellow? Up or down? Paper or plastic?
It's A Tricky One. The trouble is when the fine line between "useful for encyclopedic collaboration" and "social networking at best, POV-pushing list at worst" is way too blurry.
I'm mindful of the de:wp answer, which was to allow *only* languages and location in userboxes.
- d.
True, but I think "Wikipedians by mental and physiological condition and subcats" are categories where it's not realistic that people are using such categories for social networking or POV-pushing. In other words, commenting on the ones that are not even near the line. I also keep seeing [[WP:MYSPACE]] links in UCfDs that don't make any sense, regardless if the category should be deleted or not.
--Ned Scott
On Dec 28, 2007, at 6:13 PM, David Gerard wrote:
It's A Tricky One. The trouble is when the fine line between "useful for encyclopedic collaboration" and "social networking at best, POV-pushing list at worst" is way too blurry.
On 29/12/2007, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
It's A Tricky One. The trouble is when the fine line between "useful for encyclopedic collaboration" and "social networking at best, POV-pushing list at worst" is way too blurry.
I'm mindful of the de:wp answer, which was to allow *only* languages and location in userboxes.
At this stage I'd say there isn't the community will to do something about these things. I think the worst of them tend to die so perhaps by natural selection we'll end up with relatively benign user categories.
My solution would simply be to ask the developers to disable categories in userspace and talkspace. Where aggregation of users is either required for operational purposes (blocked socks and the like) or for skill sharing (languages, education, vocational skills), list pages in project space would do the same job in a much more reliable and trackable way (category membership has no history). But we won't get my solution so that's just a pipe dream.
No office, but that is a horrible idea. I've always favored categorization of things like WikiProjects over list pages, and it would make a lot of things needlessly more complicated. There's a reason we have categories. Besides, once we are able to do cross- category matching, such categories will be even more useful.
-- Ned Scott
On Dec 28, 2007, at 8:21 PM, Tony Sidaway wrote:
At this stage I'd say there isn't the community will to do something about these things. I think the worst of them tend to die so perhaps by natural selection we'll end up with relatively benign user categories.
My solution would simply be to ask the developers to disable categories in userspace and talkspace. Where aggregation of users is either required for operational purposes (blocked socks and the like) or for skill sharing (languages, education, vocational skills), list pages in project space would do the same job in a much more reliable and trackable way (category membership has no history). But we won't get my solution so that's just a pipe dream.
On 29/12/2007, Ned Scott ned@nedscott.com wrote:
No office, but that is a horrible idea. I've always favored categorization of things like WikiProjects over list pages, and it would make a lot of things needlessly more complicated. There's a reason we have categories. Besides, once we are able to do cross- category matching, such categories will be even more useful.
My proposal (which has no chance of being implemented) would be to disable categories only in user pages and user talk. Wikiprojects, articles, talk pages and the like would not be affected.
Categories for WikiProject participants. I also wouldn't be able to do this: http://tools.wikimedia.de/~daniel/WikiSense/CategoryIntersect.php?wikilang=e...
I used to be able to make that list with two categories, but the AIM user category was deleted under the myspace argument as well, even though it was impractical to actually use such a category for social networking (if people want to find "random" people to chat with, there's a lot easier ways, plus not a single example of it ever being used in that way). But even with one category and using a template in place of another category, it still works.
Eventually we'll have the ability to cross-search categories within MediaWiki itself.
User categories are normally not problematic, and it would be very much over-kill to remove the feature from the user namespace. The pros of being able to use categories greatly outweigh the cons.
--Ned Scott
On Dec 28, 2007, at 9:10 PM, Tony Sidaway wrote:
On 29/12/2007, Ned Scott ned@nedscott.com wrote:
No office, but that is a horrible idea. I've always favored categorization of things like WikiProjects over list pages, and it would make a lot of things needlessly more complicated. There's a reason we have categories. Besides, once we are able to do cross- category matching, such categories will be even more useful.
My proposal (which has no chance of being implemented) would be to disable categories only in user pages and user talk. Wikiprojects, articles, talk pages and the like would not be affected.
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On Friday 28 December 2007 19:05, Ned Scott wrote:
I'm also confused as to why people seem to think that [[WP:MYSPACE]] applies to anything that they don't see as helping Wikipedia. Certainly, useless categories should be deleted, but being useless does not mean something is being (or is even practical to be) used for social networking. It also seems to set people off, in that since they are assuming these categories are being used for social networking, reasonable arguments that demonstrate wiki-related use will not be given proper consideration.
Like I said, a lot of these deletions are dead on, but we're also losing a lot of categories that were realistically usable. Should some be taken to DRV? Should a kind of "rationale" page be created to help avoid confusion? Are any of these categories realistically being used for social networking, or are we overreacting? Are babies in lurking in the bath water? Is it bath water in the first place? Green or yellow? Up or down? Paper or plastic?
Why do any of them need to be deleted? What do they hurt?
I strongly suggest you (and those who agree with you) read [[Wikipedia:Why do you care?]], an essay I wrote on this subject a few weeks ago.
On 29/12/2007, Kurt Maxwell Weber kmw@armory.com wrote:
On Friday 28 December 2007 19:05, Ned Scott wrote:
I'm also confused as to why people seem to think that [[WP:MYSPACE]] applies to anything that they don't see as helping Wikipedia. Certainly, useless categories should be deleted, but being useless does not mean something is being (or is even practical to be) used for social networking. It also seems to set people off, in that since they are assuming these categories are being used for social networking, reasonable arguments that demonstrate wiki-related use will not be given proper consideration.
Like I said, a lot of these deletions are dead on, but we're also losing a lot of categories that were realistically usable. Should some be taken to DRV? Should a kind of "rationale" page be created to help avoid confusion? Are any of these categories realistically being used for social networking, or are we overreacting? Are babies in lurking in the bath water? Is it bath water in the first place? Green or yellow? Up or down? Paper or plastic?
Why do any of them need to be deleted? What do they hurt?
I strongly suggest you (and those who agree with you) read [[Wikipedia:Why do you care?]], an essay I wrote on this subject a few weeks ago.
Which is up for deletion, in rather ironic fashion...
I glad to agree with Ned on this. Those categories that are used for improper purposes can be deleted. There are always a few dozen people here trying to conduct their friendships on wiki, and it does interfere with the tone of the project--but they are not the majority. I myself would never dream of using these, medical, political ,or otherwise, but that other people do is their lookout unless they actualyl cause harm by it. We need a greater tolerance and acceptance of diversity
another example of well-intended steps being carried too far, instead of to a reasonable compromise.
David DGG
On 12/28/07, James Farrar james.farrar@gmail.com wrote:
On 29/12/2007, Kurt Maxwell Weber kmw@armory.com wrote:
On Friday 28 December 2007 19:05, Ned Scott wrote:
I'm also confused as to why people seem to think that [[WP:MYSPACE]] applies to anything that they don't see as helping Wikipedia. Certainly, useless categories should be deleted, but being useless does not mean something is being (or is even practical to be) used for social networking. It also seems to set people off, in that since they are assuming these categories are being used for social networking, reasonable arguments that demonstrate wiki-related use will not be given proper consideration.
Like I said, a lot of these deletions are dead on, but we're also losing a lot of categories that were realistically usable. Should some be taken to DRV? Should a kind of "rationale" page be created to help avoid confusion? Are any of these categories realistically being used for social networking, or are we overreacting? Are babies in lurking in the bath water? Is it bath water in the first place? Green or yellow? Up or down? Paper or plastic?
Why do any of them need to be deleted? What do they hurt?
I strongly suggest you (and those who agree with you) read [[Wikipedia:Why do you care?]], an essay I wrote on this subject a few weeks ago.
Which is up for deletion, in rather ironic fashion...
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
I feel, as I said on one deltion debate. that we are being taken over by puritans who want us to have no fun while we slave away making an encyclopedia. I am reminded of "1066 and all that":-
Monarchist Cavaliers - romantic and wrong. Puritan roundheads - repulsive but right.
Back to the grindstone.
Brian.
On Sat, Dec 29, 2007 at 02:51:37AM -0500, David Goodman wrote:
I glad to agree with Ned on this. Those categories that are used for improper purposes can be deleted. There are always a few dozen people here trying to conduct their friendships on wiki, and it does interfere with the tone of the project--but they are not the majority. I myself would never dream of using these, medical, political ,or otherwise, but that other people do is their lookout unless they actualyl cause harm by it. We need a greater tolerance and acceptance of diversity
another example of well-intended steps being carried too far, instead of to a reasonable compromise.
David DGG
On 12/28/07, James Farrar james.farrar@gmail.com wrote:
On 29/12/2007, Kurt Maxwell Weber kmw@armory.com wrote:
On Friday 28 December 2007 19:05, Ned Scott wrote:
I'm also confused as to why people seem to think that [[WP:MYSPACE]] applies to anything that they don't see as helping Wikipedia. Certainly, useless categories should be deleted, but being useless does not mean something is being (or is even practical to be) used for social networking. It also seems to set people off, in that since they are assuming these categories are being used for social networking, reasonable arguments that demonstrate wiki-related use will not be given proper consideration.
Like I said, a lot of these deletions are dead on, but we're also losing a lot of categories that were realistically usable. Should some be taken to DRV? Should a kind of "rationale" page be created to help avoid confusion? Are any of these categories realistically being used for social networking, or are we overreacting? Are babies in lurking in the bath water? Is it bath water in the first place? Green or yellow? Up or down? Paper or plastic?
Why do any of them need to be deleted? What do they hurt?
I strongly suggest you (and those who agree with you) read [[Wikipedia:Why do you care?]], an essay I wrote on this subject a few weeks ago.
Which is up for deletion, in rather ironic fashion...
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
-- David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
How does it interfere with the tone of the project?
On Dec 29, 2007 2:51 AM, David Goodman dgoodmanny@gmail.com wrote:
There are always a few dozen people here trying to conduct their friendships on wiki, and it does interfere with the tone of the project--but they are not the majority.
I do not want to embarrass anyone by quoting examples here, but if you cant think of them yourself, email me. what will harm the cause of individual expression on WP the most is an insistence on over-doing it; what will help the most is a wider representation of ordinary wikipedians at UCfD and MfD.
On 12/29/07, Ben Yates ben.louis.yates@gmail.com wrote:
How does it interfere with the tone of the project?
On Dec 29, 2007 2:51 AM, David Goodman dgoodmanny@gmail.com wrote:
There are always a few dozen people here trying to conduct their friendships on wiki, and it does interfere with the tone of the project--but they are not the majority.
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l