The Wikipedia Review: A forum for discussion and criticism of Wikipedia
Wikipedia Review Op-Ed Pages

Welcome, Guest! ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> YellowMonkey gone?, Cryptic deletion logs for the win
weburiedoursecretsinthegarden
post Tue 31st March 2009, 7:42pm
Post #1


Neophyte


Group: Contributors
Posts: 11
Joined: Sun 15th Mar 2009, 5:54pm
Member No.: 10,809



Ack.

This was probably covered somewhere else on WR but I don't see a post in this forum, so...

Well, I for one don't get the deletion log entry, but then, I'm an idiot, so.

All the best, Blnguy- I mean, YellowMonkey.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
One
post Tue 31st March 2009, 7:58pm
Post #2


Postmaster General
********

Group: Contributors
Posts: 2,553
Joined: Tue 25th Dec 2007, 10:49am
Member No.: 4,284

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



He deleted the userpage with the description [[Boxer (Animal Farm))]].

This alludes to some comments he made on a recent arbitration case. You might disagree with the editor, but I thought his observations were generally correct. Social users seem more likely to be "vested contributor" superusers than prolific article-writers. Insofar that Wikipedia is supposed to be an encyclopedic project, that seems backwards.

He was a prolific editor. I hope he comes back.

[Reposted this from the necro'd thread, which had an inappropriate title, that the admins were uninterested in fixing.]
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Shalom
post Tue 31st March 2009, 9:20pm
Post #3


Über Member
*****

Group: Regulars
Posts: 879
Joined: Tue 1st Apr 2008, 4:00pm
Member No.: 5,566



From One's diff, Blnguyen says: "But then again, unfortunately many article writers are hapless and politically naive and think that people actually like them."

I've experienced that myself. I've written more than 300 articles on Wikipedia: still today, more than six months after my main account stopped writing articles, I have authored more than one out of every thousand articles on Wikipedia. Aside from the few Did You Know appearances, I have received no recognition for my work. I did not expect recognition per se, but I did expect that people who would castigate me would consider my article work in mitigation. Therefore, I support Blnguyen's advice for anyone who wants to listen. Write articles, but don't expect a thank you as a substitute for not being paid money. You won't be paid in thank you either.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Milton Roe
post Tue 31st March 2009, 10:05pm
Post #4


Known alias of J. Random Troll
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,209
Joined: Thu 28th Feb 2008, 1:03am
Member No.: 5,156

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Shalom @ Tue 31st March 2009, 2:20pm) *

From One's diff, Blnguyen says: "But then again, unfortunately many article writers are hapless and politically naive and think that people actually like them."

But you may find that people like what you write. For example a number of articles on WP I've contributed heavily to are #1 google page-ranked when you search on the term.

Now, am I under the impression that this is due solely or even mostly to the amazing quaility of my writing? No.

But, on the other hand, just because a WP article exists on a subject, even a detailed one, does not ensure that it will be the #1 Google hit. It actually has to be a "pretty good and pretty readable" summary article, too. So those of us who enjoy that sort of thing, do it for that reason. If Google gives us an artificial boost, so what? We write to be read. Screw the barnstars. They mean nothing and we all know it.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Cla68
post Tue 31st March 2009, 11:16pm
Post #5


Postmaster
*******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,763
Joined: Fri 18th Apr 2008, 5:53pm
Member No.: 5,761

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Tue 31st March 2009, 10:05pm) *

QUOTE(Shalom @ Tue 31st March 2009, 2:20pm) *

From One's diff, Blnguyen says: "But then again, unfortunately many article writers are hapless and politically naive and think that people actually like them."

But you may find that people like what you write. For example a number of articles on WP I've contributed heavily to are #1 google page-ranked when you search on the term.

Now, am I under the impression that this is due solely or even mostly to the amazing quaility of my writing? No.

But, on the other hand, just because a WP article exists on a subject, even a detailed one, does not ensure that it will be the #1 Google hit. It actually has to be a "pretty good and pretty readable" summary article, too. So those of us who enjoy that sort of thing, do it for that reason. If Google gives us an artificial boost, so what? We write to be read. Screw the barnstars. They mean nothing and we all know it.


That's it exactly. Using the stats meter shows how much "your" article is being read. If the article is taking several thousand hits each month, but doesn't get messed with too much, such as changes to the wording, in my opinion that means that you did a good job with your writing. Also, if the article's talk page doesn't contain many questions or comments about the article's content, that means that the majority of the article's readers are satisfied with what they see and can't find any major issues. In short, silence often means that you did a good job. That's who you're writing for, right? The general public, not other Wikipedians?

Still, like I said in the other thread, it's understandable that some writers might be dismayed at the lack of respect that article writers receive from the Wiki game-players. I can think of several names of former arbitrators and other influential admins right off the top of my head who really didn't even try to hide their indifference or ambivalence towards article writers. I think this may be what is bothering, at least in part, YellowMonkey.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
EricBarbour
post Wed 1st April 2009, 6:03am
Post #6


blah
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 5,919
Joined: Mon 25th Feb 2008, 2:31am
Member No.: 5,066

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Tue 31st March 2009, 10:05pm) *

But, on the other hand, just because a WP article exists on a subject, even a detailed one, does not ensure that it will be the #1 Google hit. It actually has to be a "pretty good and pretty readable" summary article, too. So those of us who enjoy that sort of thing, do it for that reason. If Google gives us an artificial boost, so what? We write to be read. Screw the barnstars. They mean nothing and we all know it.

You shouldn't even write for immediate gratification like web hits. Because of the widespread copying of WP article text, what you write has a good chance of lasting for decades as a reference--even if it's flawed, and Wikipedia (or the fate thereof) be damned.

Someday (maybe long after we're all dead), someone could find your articles useful. Especially if they deal with an obscure subject.

(Of course, if you're smart, you'll post copies of it on Encyc or elsewhere....)

This post has been edited by EricBarbour: Wed 1st April 2009, 6:04am
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Cla68
post Wed 1st April 2009, 6:07am
Post #7


Postmaster
*******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,763
Joined: Fri 18th Apr 2008, 5:53pm
Member No.: 5,761

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Wed 1st April 2009, 6:03am) *
(Of course, if you're smart, you'll post copies of it on Encyc or elsewhere....)


Seriously, what other websites should good Wikipedia articles be copied to?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Alison
post Wed 1st April 2009, 6:22am
Post #8


Skinny Cow!
********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 2,514
Joined: Tue 26th Jun 2007, 8:08pm
From: Kalifornia
Member No.: 1,806



QUOTE(Cla68 @ Tue 31st March 2009, 11:07pm) *

QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Wed 1st April 2009, 6:03am) *
(Of course, if you're smart, you'll post copies of it on Encyc or elsewhere....)


Seriously, what other websites should good Wikipedia articles be copied to?

What about Wikipedia Review? Jon Awbrey and others have uploaded their best articles there already. Also, I like the way Greg has laid out the wiki, what with the directory system, dynamic creation of lists, etc.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Proabivouac
post Wed 1st April 2009, 6:36am
Post #9


Bane of all wikiland
*******

Group: Contributors
Posts: 2,246
Joined: Thu 23rd Aug 2007, 8:25am
Member No.: 2,647

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Cla68 @ Tue 31st March 2009, 11:16pm) *

Still, like I said in the other thread, it's understandable that some writers might be dismayed at the lack of respect that article writers receive from the Wiki game-players. I can think of several names of former arbitrators and other influential admins right off the top of my head who really didn't even try to hide their indifference or ambivalence towards article writers. I think this may be what is bothering, at least in part, YellowMonkey.

An excllent example of this attitude and the mistaken assumptions which underpin it (to the extent that it is thought out at all) is provided by Jayron32, high school chemistry teacher and fellow member of LaraLove's "bathrobe cabal," endorsing Peter Damian's ban on Wikipedia's administrators' noticeboard:
QUOTE(Jayron32)

"On the balance, and over a long period of time, any topic worth writing about well and notable enough to include in Wikipedia will eventually be written about by someone else. At Wikipedia, we value our contributors, but nothing anyone does is indespensable. If you are going to create content and be disruptive; well someone else will come along some day and create the content anyways and not be disruptive. I will take my chances with the good person who has no intent of making a point or who has no alterior motive beyond merely adding good content over guys like this. Endorse the block."
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=250089161

This may be so in where a generic curriculum is to be offered, and enough pay to ensure that there is at least someone willing to take your job, but in real academia, as in the arts, the notion that talented scholars are interchangeable is wildly wrong. Very often, there are only a few, or even just one, expert in any given subject, were it not for whose existence and employment, the work would simply never have been done. Even if it is the case that a given Wikipedia article of the same title would be created anyhow, to assume that it doesn't matter who winds up writing it indicates either a depraved indifference to all content below the title, or an remarkably unrealistic faith in Wikipedia's content policies to ensure consistency, at whatever quality, regardless of who is entrusted with applying them.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
LaraLove
post Wed 1st April 2009, 2:40pm
Post #10


Wikipedia BLP advocate
******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,741
Joined: Mon 28th Jan 2008, 7:53pm
Member No.: 4,627



QUOTE(Proabivouac @ Wed 1st April 2009, 2:36am) *

An excllent example of this attitude and the mistaken assumptions which underpin it (to the extent that it is thought out at all) is provided by Jayron32, high school chemistry teacher and fellow member of LaraLove's "bathrobe cabal," [...]
And again, you screw up the biographical information. Good job, super sleuth.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Proabivouac
post Wed 1st April 2009, 10:14pm
Post #11


Bane of all wikiland
*******

Group: Contributors
Posts: 2,246
Joined: Thu 23rd Aug 2007, 8:25am
Member No.: 2,647

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(LaraLove @ Wed 1st April 2009, 2:40pm) *

QUOTE(Proabivouac @ Wed 1st April 2009, 2:36am) *

An excllent example of this attitude and the mistaken assumptions which underpin it (to the extent that it is thought out at all) is provided by Jayron32, high school chemistry teacher and fellow member of LaraLove's "bathrobe cabal," [...]
And again, you screw up the biographical information. Good job, super sleuth.

Are you saying that he's not a high school chemistry teacher, or that he's not a fellow member of the "bathrobe cabal?"
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Cla68
post Thu 2nd April 2009, 7:50am
Post #12


Postmaster
*******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,763
Joined: Fri 18th Apr 2008, 5:53pm
Member No.: 5,761

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Alison @ Wed 1st April 2009, 6:22am) *

QUOTE(Cla68 @ Tue 31st March 2009, 11:07pm) *

QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Wed 1st April 2009, 6:03am) *
(Of course, if you're smart, you'll post copies of it on Encyc or elsewhere....)


Seriously, what other websites should good Wikipedia articles be copied to?

What about Wikipedia Review? Jon Awbrey and others have uploaded their best articles there already. Also, I like the way Greg has laid out the wiki, what with the directory system, dynamic creation of lists, etc.


That's a good idea.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Son of a Yeti
post Thu 2nd April 2009, 4:16pm
Post #13


High altitude member
****

Group: Regulars
Posts: 415
Joined: Sun 26th Oct 2008, 3:30pm
From: A hiding place in the Himalaya
Member No.: 8,704




Do we have two threads about him right now?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

-   Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 26th 5 17, 7:06pm