On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 10:58 AM, Ed Erhart eerhart@wikimedia.org wrote:
This sums it up pretty well, for those on the list without the benefit of context. Sigh. :-)
Michael, Andrew, and I also discussed setting up a page where Wikipedians of all languages could come and propose social posts for us that link to articles they've written. I figured that we could adopt the DYK/TIL format for that.
As in indicated in the previous email, we set up such a page back in 2013 and ran it for a while, see e.g. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Social_media/Calendar/2014/01 Back then we drafted and reviewed in parallel on that Meta page and on this mailing list, which involved a significant amount of overhead. Also, because few people besides Matthew and myself were checking their Meta watchlist often enough, this mailing list proved to be a much more reliable venue for people to post SM ideas for review and get a timely response. That's why the Meta page became inactive, in contrast to this mailing list. Having said that, it might be worth another try, assuming you have a critical mass of SM team members who are living the wiki lifestyle to a sufficient degree in order to ensure that submissions there get noticed and reviewed like they do here ;)
--Ed
On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 12:33 PM, James Alexander jalexander@wikimedia.org wrote:
Heh, fair point there was a lot of context missing there ;)
For the record I'm all in favor, and I was doing a cheap joke for the entertainment of those who knew the history :)
The worst problems are usually something that we will have on our radar, these articles are not hard to quickly review, and the community IS actually very good at reviewing these. When there are DYKs we're not interested in sharing there is no issue skipping them, there are 24 a day :) it's not like we're going to run out.
James Alexander Community Advocacy Wikimedia Foundation (415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur
On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 10:28 AM, Joe Sutherland jsutherland@wikimedia.org wrote:
Okay, fair point. In fairness I think something like that's unlikely to happen in the future :P
(For context for those unaware, he's talking about this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gibraltarpedia ... think this may have been pre-Katherine :) )
On 6 August 2015 at 18:26, James Alexander jalexander@wikimedia.org wrote:
On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 10:16 AM, Joe Sutherland jsutherland@wikimedia.org wrote:
It's gotten a lot better in fairness. Checking the article isn't awful before we publish it on social is also pretty trivial, thankfully.
Joe
Yes.... Yes it has....
BUT DYK that Gibraltar was ceded to Britain "in perpetuity" under the Treaty of Utrecht in 1713?
/Ducks/
James Alexander Community Advocacy Wikimedia Foundation (415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
-- Joe Sutherland Communications Intern [remote] m: +44 (0) 7722 916 433 | t: @jrbsu | w: JSutherland
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
-- Ed Erhart Editorial Intern Wikimedia Foundation
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media