Delirium wrote:

Timwi wrote:

...

It was actually put up at around 18:10 UTC (I was there at the time). YES, we DO need a 24-hour notice. Different users are from different time zones and use Wikipedia at different times of the day.

So? If Wikipedia is down and they did not know about it, what's the big deal?

Uhm... you ask them. People tend to make a big fuss when that happens.

Are there people who plan their schedules a day in advance and absolutely must edit Wikipedia from 1800 to 1830 UTC on a particular day, and would be irate if they could not reschedule in advance?

This has nothing to do with scheduling, but everything with communication (knowing of planned downtimes in advance) and convenience (it's frustrating if you don't know when it will be back up).

The complaints I've heard [...] are that users would like *some* warning so if they are in the middle of an edit they can save it before the server goes down [...]

This is one type of complaint, yes; I've seen others though. Mainly that if downtime is known in advance, then everyone should know in advance.

It makes the site look ugly,

You're welcome to suggest a better look at [[MediaWiki talk:Monobook.css]] :-)

and gives the impression to the public that Wikipedia is down much more than it is,

I don't think we should be trying to use psychological tricks to make an impression that suits us. Telling users the truth is more honest. If Wikipedia is down, we shouldn't be covering it up like a secret agency.

Server status messages should be minimized as much as possible [...]

Actually, I think downtimes should be minimised as much as possible. :-p

Timwi