Nonvocal's blog, Here you go... Options

[NVS]

NVS, you appear to really enjoy, or else are very compelled, to participate in Wikipedia. For what it's worth, I suggest choosing a topic that's interesting to you and then taking an article about some aspect of that topic to Featured status.

The only real reward that may result from doing so is a feeling of satisfaction and pride for having created what would probably be one of the best, if not the best, article on that subject on the entire English Internet. But, I suspect that that feeling may be better than whatever you may be getting out of trying to participate in the project's administration. If you have already taken an article to FA with this or any of your previous WP accounts, my apologies for presuming that you haven't done so.

There is more than just the En wiki project. However, thank you for the advice.

This post has been edited by NVS: Tue 29th July 2008, 1:47am

[Cla68]

NVS, you appear to really enjoy, or else are very compelled, to participate in Wikipedia. For what it's worth, I suggest choosing a topic that's interesting to you and then taking an article about some aspect of that topic to Featured status.

The only real reward that may result from doing so is a feeling of satisfaction and pride for having created what would probably be one of the best, if not the best, article on that subject on the entire English Internet. But, I suspect that that feeling may be better than whatever you may be getting out of trying to participate in the project's administration. If you have already taken an article to FA with this or any of your previous WP accounts, my apologies for presuming that you haven't done so.

There is more than just the En wiki project. However, thank you for the advice.

I should have said any language wiki.

[NVS]

NVS, you appear to really enjoy, or else are very compelled, to participate in Wikipedia. For what it's worth, I suggest choosing a topic that's interesting to you and then taking an article about some aspect of that topic to Featured status.

The only real reward that may result from doing so is a feeling of satisfaction and pride for having created what would probably be one of the best, if not the best, article on that subject on the entire English Internet. But, I suspect that that feeling may be better than whatever you may be getting out of trying to participate in the project's administration. If you have already taken an article to FA with this or any of your previous WP accounts, my apologies for presuming that you haven't done so.

There is more than just the En wiki project. However, thank you for the advice.

I should have said any language wiki.

I think I would actually like to get more involved into fund raising and such when time permits.

[Giggy]

All that said, I find it amusing how many people take to analyzing RFA after theirs fails. RFA is broken, that is not in question by those grounded in reality, but not every failed RFA is evidence of it. A full blown analysis by a professional (volunteering his services, of course) is in progress. Gazimoff's project was initiated after RFA/DHMO 3. His RFA was clearly a turning point in the ongoing discussions about RFA. Not in that it failed, but in the shameful, pathetic behavior of some of those who participated in it and the affect it had. Individual analysis is pointless, particularly when it's your own RFA, because your opinion and perception are not neutral. If you want to participate in a genuine review, Gazimoff's page is the place to be.

I'm not sure me analysing RfA would be a good idea for anyone

Linky

Posting comments doesn't work (it says something about the DOM being messed up, and if I bypass that javascript check it says I "must be logged in")

Fixed, for now. I have to debug the php later. Its sad if I have to use a bug tracker. :| Thank you for the report.

Might I suggest you just use BlogSpot and let Google solve all your problems?

[LaraLove]

NVS, you appear to really enjoy, or else are very compelled, to participate in Wikipedia. For what it's worth, I suggest choosing a topic that's interesting to you and then taking an article about some aspect of that topic to Featured status.

The only real reward that may result from doing so is a feeling of satisfaction and pride for having created what would probably be one of the best, if not the best, article on that subject on the entire English Internet. But, I suspect that that feeling may be better than whatever you may be getting out of trying to participate in the project's administration. If you have already taken an article to FA with this or any of your previous WP accounts, my apologies for presuming that you haven't done so.

Of all my actions on Wikipedia, I can't recall one admin action that really left me with a feeling of pride of satisfaction. There is much more joy in writing and article improvement, no doubt. Aspiring for adminship is a waste. And I think I now understand the editors who oppose what they believe is an admin mill... and I think I just came to agree with them.

[NVS]

New post today.

[Kelly Martin]

New post today.

Must you use Wikipedia Review to advertise your blog?

[NVS]

New post today.

Must you use Wikipedia Review to advertise your blog?

I should have kept it within the scope of this thread, Wikipedia thru the eyes of bloggers. I'll do better next time to ensure that all blogs advertised and commented on are WMF related. So sorry if this one was...


...improper.

[thekohser]

I am shocked, offended, and aghast that someone would use this forum to self promote!

[NVS]

I am shocked, offended, and aghast that someone would use this forum to self promote!

Ms Martin.... hellooooooo. *echo* *echo* *echo* Of course, *I* only get my wrist slapped.

[NVS]

A few new interesting posts, http://www.datascreamer.com

[NVS]

A few new interesting posts, http://www.datascreamer.com

And more more new one.

[Neil]

Exactly one quarter of your posts to WR (16 of 64) have been on this one self-promotional thread, NVS.

I don't think Greg has promoted Wikipedia Review sixteen times out of his 3,351 posts, yet he's the patsy who gets castigated as a self-promoter.

Poor Greg.

This post has been edited by Neil: Tue 16th September 2008, 2:18pm

[NVS]

Exactly one quarter of your posts to WR (16 of 64) have been on this one self-promotional thread, NVS.

I don't think Greg has promoted Wikipedia Review sixteen times out of his 3,351 posts, yet he's the patsy who gets castigated as a self-promoter.

Poor Greg.

Let us look at it this way.

1) What money am I making from my visitors?

2) Is my blog in the most remote way commercially promotional?

3) Am I spewing *anything* other than opinion pieces about WMF and the projects?

(answer key: 1. $0.00 2. No 3. No.)

Ok... there you have it; the repeated posts are on topic for the thread. Why are you complaining?

[KStreetSlave]

You might be better off adding your blog to the aggregator. Then new posts that are interesting will be picked up in the relevant blog sections on the site (not sure how those work.)

[Giggy]

Exactly one quarter of your posts to WR (16 of 64) have been on this one self-promotional thread, NVS.

I don't think Greg has promoted Wikipedia Review sixteen times out of his 3,351 posts, yet he's the patsy who gets castigated as a self-promoter.

Poor Greg.

Let us look at it this way.

1) What money am I making from my visitors?

2) Is my blog in the most remote way commercially promotional?

3) Am I spewing *anything* other than opinion pieces about WMF and the projects?

(answer key: 1. $0.00 2. No 3. No.)

Ok... there you have it; the repeated posts are on topic for the thread. Why are you complaining?

Let us look at it this way.

1) Are you providing anything useful to people who click the links in this thread because they expect something good?

2) Is your blog in any way assisting in WR's aims of a useful criticism of WP?

3) I couldn't think of a witty question three.

(answer key: 1. No. 2. No. 3. No.)

(Ha! You can't delete my comments on WR, like you did here... twice!)

[NVS]

Exactly one quarter of your posts to WR (16 of 64) have been on this one self-promotional thread, NVS.

I don't think Greg has promoted Wikipedia Review sixteen times out of his 3,351 posts, yet he's the patsy who gets castigated as a self-promoter.

Poor Greg.

Let us look at it this way.

1) What money am I making from my visitors?

2) Is my blog in the most remote way commercially promotional?

3) Am I spewing *anything* other than opinion pieces about WMF and the projects?

(answer key: 1. $0.00 2. No 3. No.)

Ok... there you have it; the repeated posts are on topic for the thread. Why are you complaining?

Let us look at it this way.

1) Are you providing anything useful to people who click the links in this thread because they expect something good?

2) Is your blog in any way assisting in WR's aims of a useful criticism of WP?

3) I couldn't think of a witty question three.

(answer key: 1. No. 2. No. 3. No.)

(Ha! You can't delete my comments on WR, like you did here... twice!)

Aw, don't be sore you got caught up in the spam filter.

[Casliber]

NVS - flogging a dead horse about every new comment on your blog is not a good look - don't treat people like idiots. Not as seat-squirmingly embarrassing as the denial/non-denial you were Mercury, when asked directly by Giggy some time ago but close.

Cla68 has given good advice - I gave you the same advice (maybe more than once, I don't know), and I even used caps the last time (silly really, dramatic effects never works). If you ever want to be an admin, go and edit quietly for 9 months, help with appropriate BLP (not just hacking to pieces articles but constructive stuff). I dunno...umm..anyway. I won't repeat this message any more

This post has been edited by Casliber: Wed 17th September 2008, 10:46am

[LaraLove]

Aw, don't be sore you got caught up in the spam filter.

Heed your own advice.

Exactly one quarter of your posts to WR (16 of 64) have been on this one self-promotional thread, NVS.

I don't think Greg has promoted Wikipedia Review sixteen times out of his 3,351 posts, yet he's the patsy who gets castigated as a self-promoter.

Poor Greg.

[thekohser]

Exactly one quarter of your posts to WR (16 of 64) have been on this one self-promotional thread, NVS.

I don't think Greg has promoted Wikipedia Review sixteen times out of his 3,351 posts, yet he's the patsy who gets castigated as a self-promoter.

Poor Greg.

Let us look at it this way.

1) What money am I making from my visitors?

2) Is my blog in the most remote way commercially promotional?

3) Am I spewing *anything* other than opinion pieces about WMF and the projects?

(answer key: 1. $0.00 2. No 3. No.)

Ok... there you have it; the repeated posts are on topic for the thread. Why are you complaining?

Thanks, Neil. However, I would guess that I've promoted Wikipedia Review in some way in about 100 of my posts. If true, it's still less than 3%.

As for the money I'm making... I'm actually losing money each month. Server fees outstrip my ad revenues by about a 5-to-1 margin. So, you might say I'm providing a charitable service to users like Awbrey and Ockham and SirFozzie, that they might create permanent wiki pages at no cost to themselves, and even where (if they choose) they could earn ad revenue of their own or conduct business with customers.

As for commercial promotion and "spewing", I have no rebuttal. Wikipedia Review, admittedly, is pretty much a commercial sputum factory.

Greg