Misplaced Pages

User talk:Jimbo Wales: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 13:56, 13 February 2009 view sourceScott MacDonald (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users14,363 edits →Hello: not quite right← Previous edit Latest revision as of 07:54, 15 January 2025 view source MediaWiki message delivery (talk | contribs)Bots3,141,424 edits →The Signpost: 15 January 2025: new sectionTag: MassMessage delivery 
(1,000 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{pp-sock|small=yes}}
{{Calm talk}}
{{pp-move|small=yes}}
{{usercomment}}
{{noindex}}
{{Stb}}
</div>
{{Usercomment}}
{{#ifeq:{{PROTECTIONLEVEL:edit}}|autoconfirmed|}}
{{Notice|1={{Center|1='''Jimbo welcomes your comments and updates – he has an ].'''<br />
'''He holds the founder's seat on the ]'s .<br />The current ] occupying "community-selected" seats are ], ], ] and ].<br />The Wikimedia Foundation's Lead Manager of Trust and Safety is ].'''}}}}
{{Notice|1={{Center|1='''This page is ] and you will not be able to leave a message here unless you are a registered editor. Instead, <br> ] '''}}}}
{{Talk header|search=yes}}
{{Misplaced Pages:TPS/banner}}
{{annual readership}}
{{Press
| subject = talkpage
| author = Matthew Gault
| title = Misplaced Pages Editors Very Mad About Jimmy Wales' NFT of a Misplaced Pages Edit
| org = ]
| url = https://www.vice.com/en/article/qjbkvm/wikipedia-editors-very-mad-about-jimmy-waless-nft-of-a-wikipedia-edit
| date = 8 December 2021
| quote = The trouble began when Wales posted an announcement about the auction on his user talk page—a kind of message board where users communicate directly with each other.
}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config {{User:MiszaBot/config
| algo = old(10d)
|maxarchivesize = 250K
| archive = User talk:Jimbo Wales/Archive %(counter)d
|counter = 45
| counter = 252
|algo = old(2d)
| maxarchivesize = 350K
|archive = User talk:Jimbo Wales/Archive %(counter)d
| archiveheader = {{aan}}
| minthreadstoarchive = 1
| minthreadsleft = 3
}} }}
{{Centralized discussion}}
{{AutoArchivingNotice|small=yes|age=2|target=./Archive 45|dounreplied=yes|index=./Archive index|bot=MiszaBot III}}
__TOC__
{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn|target=User talk:Jimbo Wales/Archive index|mask=User talk:Jimbo Wales/Archive <#>|indexhere=nein|template=User:Jimbo Wales/indextemplate}}
{{-}}
{{archives|archivelist=User talk:Jimbo Wales/Archives list|small=yes}}

== Smile! ==

{{smile|]}}

== re the action of blocking Giano - and not the situation ==

Jimbo, did you - in blocking Giano for incivility - request and receive permission of the ArbCom, as required by the ] conditions relating to Giano? ] (]) 22:58, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
:That would not be necessary in this situation, but as others have noted, the point is moot now.--] (]) 23:14, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
:What? One needs ''permission'' to block editors? ] (]) 23:02, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
:] only applies to enforcement of the civility parole, not all blocks for incivility. Also, must we have drama just because Giano was involved? --] (]) 23:05, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
:The block has already been undone, what can possibly be gained by arguing about procedure? --] (]) 23:09, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
::(To Apoc2400) Blocks for incivility are ''de facto'' enforcement of the Giano civility parole, what else would it be? (To Tango) Well, basically I am hoping to find out if Jimbo is acting like "a regular sysop" or is in his "Constitutional Monarch" mode - because if I made as many pratfalls as a admin I would have been asked to hand in my flags some time ago. ] (]) 23:23, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
:::There was no error here. It was a good block. Giano really screwed up here, and of course he is unlikely to apologize for it and accept that WP:NPA is hard policy. That I decided to be generous to him is an entirely different question.--] (]) 23:26, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
::::Can we stop handwringing about the block for a while? <s>Deciding to write an article like this is rather ] at best, but if you are going to do something that monumentally dangerous/ridiculous, you should behave ''perfectly''. Giano did ''not'' handle it well, and I'm sure most of us are scratching our heads wondering how Giano's WP-persona managed to leak into mainspace. Surely it will not happen again, so </s> lets just move on. <small> Struck most of the previous comment, as it seems silly in hindsight, and I'll take my own advice.--] (]) 23:51, 8 February 2009 (UTC)</small>
::::Jimbo, would it be possible for you to inform us of exactly what the "misunderstanding" was eventually? I'm awful confused, I spent a couple hours rummaging around the site trying to find out where the false claims could've been made, and when.--] (]) 23:42, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
:::::The latest informaton that I have is at ]. As it turns out, writing a hatchet job article about a man based on an alleged "lie" he told in a newspaper, was a really bad idea. The paper made an error, as it turns out. Even if the claim were to have been true, Misplaced Pages is not a tabloid, Misplaced Pages is not a newspaper, and writing an article like that which was almost completely about this one article, is just not even remotely acceptable. In my view, Giano has crossed a very big line here.--] (]) 23:55, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
::::::Did the article say "lie"? I only saw it say "error". --] (]) 23:58, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
:::::::The article wasn't a "hatchet job". ] (]) 23:58, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
::::::::*Just a second here - why have you put "lie" in speech marks - I never used that word - I used the word "error" get your facts straight Wales - if you can. Now I'm out of here, you keep that page deleted because if people see it, they may just wonder what you are talking about. ] (]) 00:00, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
::::::::I think I'm the only one to have said that Mr Hattersley lied - which seems to have been wrong of me, a combination of an unclear reference to something he was told ages ago and some over-eager sub-editing seem much more likely. I certainly didn't see Giano saying it anywhere. ] (]) 00:06, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
:::::::::Yes, you are the one who said it. Here is a rewrite to omit the scare quotes: "As it turns out, writing a hatchet job article about a man, based on a suggestion that he lied in the newspaper, was a really bad idea." Don't let Giano distract you with my use of scare quotes there. The point is: he did a very bad thing and he is entirely unapologetic about it. I wish that he would do what you have done: apologize for the error. I consider that extremely unlikely.--] (]) 01:14, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
:::::::Another newspaper article with mistakes, like most newspaper articles... holding forth about mistakes on Misplaced Pages. ] (]) 00:01, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

:How about " based on a suggestion that he lied in the newspaper" be replaced with "based on an article under his name containing a demonstrable error"? ] (]) 01:37, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

If anyone really wanted to write a hatchet job on Mr Hattersley, 5 minutes' googling would give them more than enough for a much longer and more detailed article than Giano's innocuous stub. ] (]) 00:17, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
:Innocuous? I recommend that you reconsider. A biography of a journalist at a high quality newspaper which has nothing other than a claim of this sort is exactly the kind of BLP violation that I am working so hard for us to rise above. If you don't agree with me that it is NOT ok to sum up a man's career with the suggestion that he did something as bad as that, then I don't even know where to begin. We have a serious moral obligation to get things right. Anyone who doesn't agree, should leave the project.--] (]) 01:17, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
:::Skomorokh has below said it more clearly than I could. ] (]) 01:36, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
::The article stated that Hattersley claimed there were falsehoods in his Misplaced Pages entry (true as far as we knew), and that another journalist had questioned whether he had one (true). That was the extent of the "hatchet job" "BLP violation". <font color="404040">]</font> 01:20, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
::: <s>When you consider that reporter's careers are heavily dependent on their perceived veracity, it's not good.</s> much like calling the fellow a liar somewhere on this talk page isn't good. --]] 01:26, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
::::: I'm going to attempt a graceful withdrawal from this discussion, since after catching up on all the backstory, the BLP issue is more about WP:UNDUE than anything specifically included in the deleted article. --]] 16:22, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
::::What's "not good"? Mr. Richmond's professional observation published in a reliable source? <font color="404040">]</font> 01:34, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

:::::It's highly questionable if the blog is a reliable source for such a contentious claim in a BLP particularly when we don't know what level of editorial control is exercised over the blog and more to the point, the primary purpose of biographies is to describe someone's life (taken from our very own article). It is unclear if Giles Hattersley's life is notable enough for a biography, but what is clear that if it is, it is entirely inappropriate for more then say ~1/20 of it to be about some article he wrote, which may or may not have contained errors (bear in mind that at the time, we didn't have the clarification from Hattersley and we hadn't even confirmed that it wasn't oversighted and we still don't have a reliable source discussing the fact the article never existed) and which barely made a splash (especially at the time, although even now there is still no relible source discussing the article unless you include the blog). Misplaced Pages biographies are not places to correct 'errors' someone made about wikipedia (or anything else) nor are they the place to 'defend wikipedia against falsehoods'. They are definitely not the place to engage in OR (e.g. using the logs to 'prove' your point). If you create a biography article for any other reason then to talk about the life of a person, you are creating it for the wrong reason. If you create an article and start to write about a potentially non-notable controversy and don't even go into a great amount of detail about the persons life, then you are doing the wrong thing. Any of these are highly inappropriate per BLP and do wikipedia and its editors a great disservice. I for one am grateful that Jimbo Wales had been proactive in protecting wikipedia from editors engaging in this conduct. If anyone feels offended by any of this, I say tough, I for one have always felt it best to be straight up with other editors when I see their conduct as bad or wrong (this is not a personal attack, I am referring solely to poor conduct) and when they don't even apologise for that behaviour, I see no reason to feel sorry for them ] (]) 09:55, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

I wish that we enforced ] as rigorously as we seek to enforce ]. In the past I have been slandered in projectspace, and there is no effective recourse. Editors who participate under their real world identities should be protected. It is a shame that people feel the need to use pseudonyms. (And if somebody uses a pseudonym, they also should be protected from personal attacks!) ] <sup>]</sup> 10:44, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Assuming G's report of what he wrote is correct (a couple of arbs have implicitly affirmed this as has Jimbo), given history of past conflict etc. this is the type of misuse of a block, for simply giving undue emphasis to a statement otherwise compliant with BLP, that would have us seriously questioning an admin's access to the tools. Then there's the above misrepresentation of the edits in question ("hatchet job" etc) and patronising and frankly clueless comments which accompanied the unblock (complete with wondering aloud about about trolling, how extraordinarily amusing). Given that Jimbo recently couldn't be bothered to use what remains of his 'executive power' to start a trial of flagged revisions (arguably significantly more useful than any number of dubious "BLP blocks") what exactly is the point of his continuing to be anything other than a figure-head?--] (]) 12:44, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
:Jimbo, this is complete and utter... well, the word I'd like to use is one I don't prefer to be on the record as having said, so I'll just stick with "bovine manure". I've checked that article. I've read the sources. The text and the sources agree. We don't block people for using a bad source without a hell of a good reason to be sure they're deliberately misrepresenting them. "Hatchet job"? Apparently "assume good faith" doesn't apply to some people's contributions anymore. If you'd blocked him for edit warring, that could maybe pass, but blocking him for harassment over this is absurd, and pretty ironic that someone who loves "no personal attacks" so much would be fine putting an accusation like that permanently in Giano's block log. I'm highly committed to getting our biographies of living persons articles correct, but that doesn't require us to alienate committed contributors without a bloody better reason than this to think they were deliberately smearing someone. ] ] 12:51, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

== Question ==

Will Mr Hattersley himself be publicly stating that at no time did he accuse either Misplaced Pages or its editors of libel? 'Cos in the article as it is on the Sunday Times website he appears to be doing exactly that. ] (]) 02:12, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

I have no idea what he will say. But I am pretty sure that relaxing about it for a couple of days will do no one any harm.--] (]) 03:44, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

:You've spoken to or emailed the chap, I just thought that a false allegation of libel & what he intended to do about it might have been part of the conversation. ] (]) 03:49, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

::Perhaps this will come as a surprise to you, but is usually inappropriate to reveal what was talked about in private conversations and it is definitely none of our business. Jimbo is handling this in appropriate way, dealing with it constructively and keeping a level head rather then getting angry and yelling at people to fix it, something which usually just makes the situation worse and which is liable to do wikipedia and its editors a great disservice and cause far more harm to us then the article by Giles Hattersley ever did. ] (]) 09:39, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

:::A private conversation would be "how's your family" or "what are you doing for Easter" or "has that nasty infection cleared up". The founder of Misplaced Pages talking to a journalist about an article about Misplaced Pages isn't a private conversation. It is Jumbo doing something on behalf of Misplaced Pages and it's a great shame that once again Jimbo has shewn that he doesn't trust, or as far as I can see, support the community. ] (])
::::You seem to be confused between "personal" and "private". The conversation isn't personal, it is private. --] (]) 17:14, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
:::::No I don't think it is. I don't think it is appropriate for Jimbo to have such conversations and refuse to tell the community whatever it is he has said, done, or been told on our behalf. As it is we get this "you can't discuss this or make your own decisions because I am dealing with it but I won't tell you what I am doing" rubbish which serves no constructive purpose whatsoever and simply alienates editors. Patronising the community, as Jimbo seems to do more and more lately, is not leadership. ] (]) 17:21, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
::::::I bet the other end of his conversation considers it private. And I think relaxing about it for a couple days is good advice...I think it'd be a good idea if you could step away from this for a bit and come back when you can be a little more even tempered. That would make this dicussion a lot more effective...] (]) 17:54, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
:::::::He's a journalist for Pete's sake - I'm sure he's familiar with the idea that when you tell someone something it may be repeated elsewhere. I am well aware thank you of the standard response to criticism of Mr Wales, that the ones doing the criticising should go away for a while. ] (]) 18:01, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
::::::::Well, I doubt even a journalist would agree that his private communications must be published whenever someone on the internet anonymously requests it. I'm sure he understands that things he says may get around (as we all do) but that's a long way off from expecting or accepting that his private communications will be published necessarily. And I’m not suggesting you go away, just that you step away from this topic until you can discuss it more even temperedly. ] (]) 18:11, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

:::::::::Nothing anonymous about me. ] (]) 18:15, 9 February 2009 (UTC)



Duncan, you're way off base here. You are arguing with someone else, not me, about your view about what I might say, although I haven't. You accuse me of not trusting the community, of refusing to tell the community something important, etc. I think it is extremely important to note that you '''simply made all that up out of thin air''' to advance your own agenda. You should be ashamed of yourself, you are behaving like a spoiled brat.

I am talking to Mr. Hattersley and (through him) his editors. Inquiries are being made. It takes them time to get back to me. He has to talk to his people, and they have to... I don't know... but there's no hurry and there's nothing new for me to tell you. Now please stop attacking me over infractions that you simply made up. Remember, this is a weekly newspaper. Everyone was off work on Monday. Tuesday he talked to them. He got back to me with an update, I responded, he responded. We're having a conversation. When there is anything useful to tell you, I will tell you. Not before. The world does not revolve around your demands for instant gratification.--] (]) 10:58, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

:I do not see any evidence in your behaviour over this article to suggest that you trust the community. You did not trust the community to improve the article - you deleted it. You did not trust the community to cope with a mild expression of exasperation from Giano - you blocked him. I am not ashamed of myself, and I do not see any reason why I should believe you of all people when you say I should. If anyone is behaving like a spoiled brat it is you. ] (]) 16:17, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
::I wouldn't trust the community either: mild expressions of exasperation from Giano tend to turn into weeks-long flamewars. --] (]) 03:07, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
:::Does Duncan want every word of every conversation JW has about Misplaced Pages with anyone typed up here verbatim? This would not show an intent to 'trust' the community, merely an intent to bore the pants off us. Seems reasonable to me to allow people with executive function to be able to exercise reasonable diplomacy and negotiation with all kinds of people without having to make every single detail of those discussions public. JW has made public that he is engaged in ongoing discussions and is hoping to let a few good nights sleep allow everyone involved to get things back into proportion. <strong><font color="green">]</font></strong>] <strong><font color="blue">(])</font></strong> 13:28, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

== FlaggedRevs Homework ==

Did you get it done? :) ] (]) 13:56, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

I did my readings, and I wrote up a proposal. Now I'm sleeping on it for a couple of nights to revisit it to make sure it seems like something that people will like.

Yesterday I had a very full day of meetings here in the Dominican Republic, and today I am going to visit a school and community center. They are showing me how IT is impacting the poorest segments of D.R. society, and I am learning a lot. :-) --] (]) 11:04, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
:That's fine - just wanted to make sure you weren't overly distracted by other things! ] (]) 11:31, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

== Question about privacy in Misplaced Pages ==

Hello, mr. Wales!

Is it acceptable do discuss user`s private life on Misplaced Pages pages and to give personal evaluations and comments on it?--] (]) 14:58, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
:Discussing other user's lives outside of the wiki in the wiki is '''foribidden''' without said person's consent, and warrants an instant block. See ]. ] ] ] 02:00, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
:: Thanks, but what say Jimbo about whis? User was said some fact of his biography, and other users react negatively to discuss details--] (]) 04:47, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
::: Jimbo has his hands full with other issues, and he (supposedly) does not override policy anyway. Your question has been answered; if you wish to interview Mr. Wales for his opinions and thoughts I suggest you contact him and present your credentials and request an appointment. Also, please do not refer to Misplaced Pages as "wiki" - there is such a thing as a wiki, and such a word, but this is only one wiki among thousands. ]<sup>]</sup> 14:26, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
:::: It`s very important for me - Jimbo`s opinion. At some Misplaced Pages has problem with discuss about privat life of one user. And Jimbo can will help me. --] (]) 16:20, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

== Per my message from a few days ago ==

Per my message from a few days ago, I have been doing my homework. What I am trying to do is craft a proposal for FlaggedRevs which is not controversial, that addresses as many competing concerns as possible, and gives us a clear track forward at the end of the trial. I had hoped to have something ready by Monday (today), and I still may, but due to having diverted a few hours of my time yesterday to dealing with the Giles Hattersley hatchet-job biography situation, I'm running somewhat behind. --] (]) 18:22, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

:Good luck with that! I suggest you go for "as uncontroversial as possible" rather than "not controversial", otherwise you will fail. There are people that have a seemingly religious objection to FlaggedRevs and will not be persuaded by any proposal. --] (]) 18:50, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
::I think "not listen to any proposal" would be a more accurate description of some of them. --] <small>]</small> 18:52, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
:::Indeed, you both give good advice. I don't expect to get unanimity, but the idea being put forward in the press, that there is some kind of deep split in the community about this, and that this is a huge controversial step for Misplaced Pages, is one that I find a bit foolish. (Particularly in the cases where they call to ask me about it, and I explain it to them, and then they go write something inflammatory and the opposite of what I have said!) I think that there is a pretty solid middle ground, there are some legitimate concerns that need to be dealt with, and that not everyone will get everything they want, but that there is a position which almost everyone will agree is better than the current situation, and which will provide us with real learnings for moving forward in a productive way. Some people will - quite legitimately - vote no, and who will vote no will depend a lot on what I end up proposing. Other people will - quite illegitimately - declare the end of the world and that I'm a tyrant, more or less no matter what happens. So, yeah, well get "as uncontroversial as possible" and leave the press to claim the world is falling. :) {{unsigned|Jimbo Wales}}

: I am sure there are many opinions to consider, but here is what I think is important to gain consensus:
# Focus on underwatched BLPs.
# Make it clear that flagged revisions will not be used on all articles. As long as that possibility is looming, many will vote against any kind of implementation.
# Put in safeguards that makes sure this will not lead to Misplaced Pages editing grinding down to a halt, or giving too much power over article content to a small wiki-elite.
:--] (]) 18:55, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
::I'd rather not rule out flagged revs on all articles at this stage, I see no reason to. If we get up and running on just BLPs and it's only taking a couple of minutes to flag new edits, then why not expand it? Let's make one decision at a time. If people object to flagged revs on all articles then they need to speak up when someone actually proposes that, if they speak up now they need to be slapped with a wet fish. --] (]) 18:58, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
:::I disagree - Misplaced Pages-en is '''huge'''. Plenty of our low profile articles have redlink and IP editors as their major or sole contributors, flag revs will probably work very poorly on the fringes of Misplaced Pages space, definitely a place where we'll need compelling data before we consider turning it on wiki-wide.--] (]) 19:03, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
::::What are you disagreeing with? I was saying it's something to consider after we have some data... --] (]) 19:06, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
:::Not everyone has the time to stay around and evaluate every new proposal. When would we have time to write articles if we did that? I prefer to know exactly what I vote for, not some kind of open-ended let's-see-where-it-leads. --] (]) 19:07, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
::::You do know what you vote for. You vote for the proposal at the top of the voting page. You would rather make a decision now, without any facts to go on, than wait until there are facts and make the decision then? Just to save a little time? --] (]) 19:09, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
:::::If I vote yes to a "let's turn on flagged revisions and see what we do with it" proposal, then I risk that it is applied to all articles sometime when I'm not looking. I'd better be safe and vote no. If I know that it will be BLPs and some other articles that need it, then I would be willing to support. Starting with a smaller trial to see how it works is fine, but I want to know where we are going before I support the first step. --] (]) 19:21, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
: Maybe, it was discussed already somewhere, but we (Russian Misplaced Pages) have some experience with finding some not-so-controversial rules for using FlaggedRevs to fight vandalism/BLP/copyright issues, etc. (Actually, we also had strong opposition to FlaggedRevs, but now everybody see that there's nothing bad in FlaggedRevs.) See ]. Russian Misplaced Pages will be happy to share its experience. ] (]) 17:42, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure the community is ready for another debate on Flaggedrevs yet, the poll just finished in late January and the survey is still not closed. Some time to let the media frenzy die down wouldn't hurt too. Various proposals and trials are discussed, as usual the ones most supported will be presented to the community for consideration in time. ] (]) 18:59, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
:Another debate? This is all part of one big debate. This debate won't stop until we reach a conclusion, so we might as well just get on with it. --] (]) 18:04, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

== ] ==

Hi Jimbo. I've created a short bio for Giles Hattersley. It's well referenced and I think it shows how he's notable - he was shortlisted for young journalist of the year at the ] and was also the youngest ever chief interviewer at the Sunday Times. I've left the Misplaced Pages controversy out because I don't believe it's notable enough to include - we don't have any reliable sources that say exactly what happened, and I think from a BLP perspective it's wrong to include even a mention of it when it wasn't even Hattersley's fault. '''If''' there's some significant coverage of it in the news, then we can take another look, but at the minute there only seems to be one blog entry from another journalist. Would you mind if I moved it into mainspace? ''']<sup>See ] or ]</sup>''' 00:00, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
*No Ryan, that is not a good idea at all, considering the present climate and unfinished business. ] (]) 20:54, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
:The accusations and explanation seem to have been covered by the Telegraph's communities editor in his blog . I think that's a pretty legitimate source. ] (]) 18:35, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
::No, a blog is not notable in this instance. The blog also gives that writers personal impression and doesn't rely purely on facts. It most certainly shouldn't be used to source information in the article. ''']<sup>See ] or ]</sup>''' 18:57, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
:::It might be a good enough source for the facts, it certainly isn't a good enough source (on its own, anyway) to show notability. --] (]) 19:22, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

== What happened? ==

''Moved to ]''

== rights ==

Hello,

Recently there was a discussion on the nl.wiki about your administrator rights, currently you still have local admin rights but your not active on the Misplaced Pages. (But as special moderator you don't have to be confirmed every year).

The question is now if you don't mind if we remove your rights voluntary, because you will not even notice the are gone. You are also a developer so you have the admin rights on all wikimedia projects. And a desysop will also make it possible to remove your right but it should be a waste of our and maybe your time.

I hope you will respond quickly,
] (]) 17:23, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
:Thnks for your message, I was just placing the message I will not vote if it comes to a de-sysop. I complete understand how you feel about it. ] (]) 18:43, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
::Sorry for interrupting. @Abigor: even though I am in an election for our local (wiki-nl) arbitrary committee at the moment, I would like to make a few remarks here that can make me unpopular. When this whole thing started last week I did not understand what the fuzz was all about. Two gentlemen were rather busy with getting our "special" admins removed. I thought it an example of what you often see on Wikimedia projects: users taking action where there is no problem in the first place. Perhaps it gives one a sense of importance when responsible for removing the great Jimbo Wales' special rights? Certainly it was important enough for you to tell the rest of us about your heroism at our local village pump. Yesterday you were successful in removing Brion Vibber's rights. Then Jimbo posted on your TP. That has been an eye-opener for me, and I am quite sure I'm not the only one. Jimbo made an important point, although I get from your reply above that you didn't understand it. So let me at least make this clear: if you and Romaine go on with this useless and senseless campaign, be sure a vote will not go in your favour. I advise you to stop now. As ever, my best regards, ] (]) 11:54, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

== Sign book ==

Jimbo it would be good if you could sign in my sign book.'''''<span style="background:#06f;font-family:Tahoma">]]</span>''''' 17:42, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

== LETTER FROM CHINA ==

Dear Jimmy Wales,

Thanks for reading my letter, I am a user and editor of Chinese Misplaced Pages and I want to share some ideas about the development of Chinese Misplaced Pages.

The Chinese Misplaced Pages finally got the Turning Point, after the long-term banning by the PRC government, Misplaced Pages could be visited in a certain degree of free, from our experience, this free would be keep if there is no big change. The most frequently used language Misplaced Pages can be used by a number of 400,000,000 netizens partly free, but what can we see is that the Chinese Misplaced Pages is a superficial encyclopedia, Original article with high Quality is so little, most of the featured articles are the translate version of English or other Misplaced Pages. Facing the competitors such as baidu encyclopedia(baidu baike in pinyin, a product by a Chinese company) Misplaced Pages is losing its advantage gradually.

In my point of view, Misplaced Pages is a encyclopedia for all of the world for free and NPOV, it could be and should be written by people who have different view, whether you are left-wing,right-wing,communist,or even you are a nazist, you have the right to edit the area you are good at, so, why Chinese Misplaced Pages should be the translate version of English Misplaced Pages?

What I want to do is beginning a program of inventing Chinese experts to edit the Chinese Misplaced Pages, some of Chinese experts are not unlike the idea of Misplaced Pages, just because they do not know the program and our idea, so why do we tell them the idea. NPO also need marketing, if no one know us, we would be forgotten.

I think the following things could be done:

1. Begin a program officially .

2. Sending Inventing E-mails to professors in each university.


==]==
3. Set a group to help these experts getting used to the use of Misplaced Pages.
]
]
Happy New Year Jimbo!!! I hope all is well with you and your team.


Could you or your page watchers help me with ]? The draft has been declined and tagged up. It was then deleted years ago. I had it restored today after I came across one of his photos. I think he and his photography are fascinating for capturing aspects of New Zealand's transportation and industrial history. His work is in museum and library collections. At least one of his photographs has been used in a book. He photographed Maori sites.
4. Contact the administrator of BBS in some Universities to begin the topic of Misplaced Pages.


], standing beside a collection of Maori carvings, including two fire-screens, carved by her father Albert Percy Godber]]
These are just a start of the program, more and more things should be done to improve the quality of Chinese Misplaced Pages.
I'm sorry I haven't been able to work the draft up enough to get it admitted to mainspace. It does make me wonder about what we do and don't include, our notability criteria, Articles for Creation (AfC) process, and collaborative ethos. Thanks so much for any help or guidance you can offer! Have a great 2025 and beyond. Thanks again. ] (]) 17:57, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
:If Godber is not ], which is what the draft reviewers say, then Wikipedians can't fix that. ] (]) 09:37, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
::] is he "notable" and should we have an entry on him? ] (]) 17:26, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
:::I dunno, but ] wrote that the draft did not show significant coverage about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject at that point. ] (]) 19:37, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
]
::::And this a request to revisit his finding. We have a photographer from more than 100 years ago who documented areas of New Zealand's North Island. We have his work in a National Library collection. We have his work discussed as iconic for one of his Maori related photographs. We have his work revisited in a 2018 exhibition. We have descriptions of him related to his photographs, his career, and we have the photos themselves documenting the areas industries, sites, infrastructure from more than 100 years ago. If I was satisfied with the previous conclusions I would not be here. So I ask again, should we have an entry on this subject? Should we just attribute his photos where we use them to an unlinked name with no explanation or discussion of who he was? I think the answer is clear, and I wanted to hear Jimbo's opinion. I am aware of what was previously stated. Years have passed and I believe it's time to reevaluate and consider. I also think it's worth reflecting on our article creations processes more generally and how we apply our conception of "notability". ] (]) 23:33, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
*Godber's photographs include "views of the ] including large numbers of cars traveling to ], and the ]. Another group of images relate to a holiday at the ] Homestead in ] with scenes of farm life, including ], ] sheep, and farm buildings. During their stay in the South Island Godber also took photographs of Dunedin (including the ], ], ], the ], and the Hillside Railway Workshops); ] (including the Invercargill Railway Workshops); Stewart Island, ], ], ], ] and ]. Various railway stations in Canterbury and Otago, the ], and the Rosslyn Mills. Godber was a volunteer fireman with the Petone Fire Brigade with the album including views of the building, groups of firemen, fire engines and other fire fighting equipment, and a building in Petone damaged by fire. In his work with New Zealand Railways, mainly at the Petone Railway Workshops, he took interior photographs of various buildings, including the Machine Shop and finishing benches, the engine room, lathes, boilers, and fitting shops. He also took photographs of many of the steam engines that were built and worked on at the workshops. One scene shows a group of men watching a fight. Many images show his interest in logging railways, particularly in the ], ], ] area. Scenes of logging camps, various methods of transporting logs including bullock teams, logging trains, and dams created and then tripped to send logs down by river, and timber mills. Other topics covered in Godber's photographs are scenes at Maori ] and meeting houses, with some of the people identified; Maori carving and rafter designs; beekeeping, and gold mining." ] (]) 23:52, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
*It's hard to choose which photos to share. Historic views areas, industries, bridges, natural features, railways and bridges, crafts. to his photos on Misplaced Pages Commons. Many already illustrate our entries on various subjects. ] (]) 00:01, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
:: If you really want to help him, get a couple stories published about him in newspapers. Notability here will follow. ] (]) 01:23, 11 January 2025 (UTC)


== Just wanted to say ==
Best Wishes to Misplaced Pages


You have created something valuable to everyone on the Internet. I'm sure you get this a lot, but thank you. <br>It may sound weird, but Misplaced Pages has helped me through some tough times. We can never thank you enough for this sometimes infighting, sometimes peaceful, sometimes divided, but always united community You are the backbone of the <s>cabal of editors</s> <b>thriving community</b> that is Misplaced Pages.
Raintwoto
I wish I could give you a BarnMilkyWay but no one's come up with that, apparently. (]) &#124; (PS: Have a good day) 00:49, 6 January 2025 (UTC)


== ==
raintwoto@gmail.com <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 01:22, 11 February 2009 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->


For the interested. ] (]) 10:58, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
== Giles Hattersley ==


:Summary: {{tq|This document intends to show the problematic situation in Hebrew Misplaced Pages (hewiki), and provide evidence that it has been overtaken by a group of mostly religious and nationalist editors, who prevent others from achieving higher permissions while promoting their own allies.}} –] <small>(])</small> 22:38, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
Jimbo, could I ask you to review the new article at ]? This is not a restoration of an old version but a completely new article, written from scratch, without any of the elements that made the last one a problem. Page protection is still in place until March 14th to prevent any short-term mischief and to enable you to review the article in the meantime. Hopefully this will resolve any lingering issues with this article. -- ] (]) 09:09, 11 February 2009 (UTC)


== Happy new year ==
Thank you. The article looks fine.--] (]) 10:51, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
::Here (finally) , is the edit I made with attendant summary for which Jimbo Wales blocked me. It was a bad block. It was wrong and he needs to be admonished and told firmly that that is not how Admins behave.] (]) 12:52, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
:::Jesus, you blocked him for ''that''? That's not even worth a warning. That isn't incivil by anyone's standards. Actually, for Giano, it's a rather restrained response. Honestly, you're ''way'' behind the times, Jimbo. ''']''' <sup>(])</sup> 12:58, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
::::The truth is, what Giles Hattersley wrote on 8 February 2009 was not even close to be '''significant''' enought to worth being ''represented'' in that stub (]). Maybe, <sub>I said maybe</sub>, in a "trivia" section of a 15 pages long article, but not in that stub. Another fact is, from ] point of vue and mine, Jimbo seem really concerned that "his beloved Misplaced Pages got it wrong. " . So, how Jimbo's concerns made him "fire blindly" at Giano ? Quite a bit <sub>or two</sub> indeed.
::::Finaly, how's the fact that we must go on altogether as changed ? Not at all. ]. ] (]) 14:59, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
:Oh, wow. The edit in question actually improved the article by taking out who wrote the article and you blocked him for that? Seriously, Jimbo, if that had of been anyone other than Giano, would you have blocked them? It seems your comments and actions toward Giano have been getting harsher and harsher. Perhaps it's time to let others deal with him? ] (]) 15:50, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
::Please note that Tango originally the Misplaced Pages self-reference , and he and Giano talked about it on User talk:Tango. Later, MickMacNee added Giano's name and user page to the article, Conti reverted, and Tango . At best, Tango was editing to make a ]; at worst he was baiting Giano. It was in that context that Giano said "You are making us look like idiots." ] 16:29, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
:::As I've said before, Giano has a special talent for angering people above and beyond the plain text of his words, or perhaps we collectively have a special talent for being angered by Giano?--] (]) 17:00, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
::::Can you find anything in Giano's discussions with Tango that would justify Tango baiting him? 'Cause I can't. ] 18:20, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
:::::Nope, although I settle for calling it an "edit war" --] (]) 18:29, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
::::::It's not just an edit war when you change arguments in the middle and start doing the very thing you opposed before. ] 18:45, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
:::::::Would you please read my edit summaries? I think you will find them enlightening. --] (]) 18:47, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
::::Giano & Jimbo ''clashed'' in the past, I'm guessing. ] (]) 17:06, 11 February 2009 (UTC)


Good days, Jimbo. I'd like to say that Chinese Misplaced Pages is introducing ARBCOM System currently, since Arbcom on this project, and in fact all the project is originated from the idea of yours, do you have any opinion for that? Any hints, advice or suggestions? ] 15:43, 7 January 2025 (UTC)


== ==
:::::I prefer ]. Most of the editors here are too young to remember. ] <sup>]</sup> 18:36, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
::::(to Tznkai)That's a good question. Why are people (Jimbo in particular) so angered by Giano? He sometimes does things that I cringe about, but wouldn't it make more sense to just let it go? Seriously, if anyone but Giano had acted in the same way as he did, would any of this have happened? I don't think so. I'm not sure why anyone would think to put Giano's name in the article and I don't know why Tango was warring over it, but I don't think anyone would have put my name in the article if I were the one who wrote it. This whole situation happened because Giano wrote the article. And I honestly can't figure out why people are angry at him for writting it. ] (]) 18:41, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
:::::I wrote a lengthy postmoterm on the incident above where I laid out a very brief case (mostly assertions really) that the problem was less Giano and more of our collective tendancy to freak out during BLP issues. It didn't help that Giano specificly said that he created the article as a "rebuttal" which throws up a red flag no matter who the editor is. Try out these for fun: I created ] as a rebuttal. I created ] as a rebuttal. I created ] as rebuttal. I think this particular mess could've happened to anyone. Perhaps only with it involving Giano or another high profile user would've gotten this much internal press.--] (]) 19:11, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
::::::Well said. I too have written to rebut. And as for UNDUE stress in a BLP, I knowingly created ] as a massively skewed stub years ago (I wrote about the one, rather minor aspect of JR that I happened to know about), and it remains heavily skewed now, even after JR's demise. The only complaints I got about that were for my insistence on templating the thing as a stub. -- ] (]) 02:18, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
:::You don't need to guess the reasons for my edits - it's all in the edit summaries. --] (]) 18:41, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
::::This episode seems to have been started by a good faith intention to protect WP's reputation. WP's reputation is that it is an unreliable source. There is no reason for us to wish to change this reputation, as WP is proud to be an openly unreliable source attempting to become more reliable, rather than a source which claims reliability and then always fails to live up to this promise.<strong><font color="green">]</font></strong>] <strong><font color="blue">(])</font></strong> 13:36, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
:::I'm afraid whatever my intentions were, Jimbo Wales prefers to assume bad faith and slander me and then does not even have the good manners to back down on finding he was completely in the wrong. ] (]) 13:44, 13 February 2009 (UTC)


That doesn't sound good. From '']''. ] (]) 09:37, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
== Your Conference @ FUNGLODE ==


:Being discussed at ]. ] (]) 10:08, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
Hello Mr. Jimbo. I was in the speech you gave at FUNGLODE in Dominican Republic yesterday, which was very interesting. I just want to congratulate you for your work and thank you for visiting us, I hope you liked your stay here and I'd like to attend if you give another one here. Have a good day. ] (]) 11:37, 11 February 2009 (UTC) <br>P.S.: I ''almost'' ask you to let me take a picture with you at the end of the conference when you were leaving the conference room, but I felt too embarrassed to ask :S
::Thanks! ] (]) 11:11, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
:Oh, you should have! Anyway, thanks for your kind words. I plan to be back in the Dominican Republic sometime soon, so we should meet then... I had a very interesting time today visiting a community center, a high school, and a university.--] (]) 02:12, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
::Also discussed at ] and ]. ] (]) 19:07, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
::Oh, very good to know that you will be here again and that you are having a good time. I guess that if I see you again I'll have the courage to ask for the picture. Thanks. ] (]) 02:31, 12 February 2009 (UTC)


Jimbo, could I ask you please to respond to from {{u|Tryptofish}}?
== Bad statistics ==
:... it's not just if you've edited about Israel-Palestine. It could be if you've edited anything about climate and fossil fuels, gender, immigration, vaccines, and of course, American politics. I doubt that they have the bandwidth to actually identify and harass every editor who could possibly be seen as editing information that goes against a MAGA POV, but they will likely find some easily identified targets, whom they will use to "set an example", as a way of instilling fear in our editing community. I fully expect that, in the coming months, {{u|Jimbo Wales}} will be hauled before a hostile and performative Congressional hearing, much in the manner of university presidents. I hope very much that he will be better prepared than ] was.
:Yeah, I know this is grim. But I believe the first step in dealing with this is to go into it with our eyes open, to know what we are dealing with, what motivates it. And, more than harming individual editors, the real objective of Heritage ''et al.'' is to instill fear in the rest of us. If we become too fearful to revert POV edits, they win. In a very real sense, we have to keep doing what we have been doing, and continue to be a reliable resource for NPOV information. --] (]) 18:54, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
] (]) 05:33, 10 January 2025 (UTC)


:Well, I fully agree that developments in terms of arguments and actions aimed at destroying trust in knowledge (and of course our specific interest, trust in Misplaced Pages) are extremely worrisome, particularly as I agree that for many who are doing it, the motive does appears to be the undermining of civic norms and democracy. I also agree with Tryptofish in a part that you didn't quote: "In a narrow sense, it's technically true that if you "out" yourself, there's no point in anyone else doing it. But once your identity is known, you become vulnerable to all of the kinds of real-life harassment that doxed people find themselves subjected to. It doesn't matter, in that regard, how they found out your identity." That's a sad balancing act that no Wikipedian should have to face.
Hello Mr. Jimbo. I'm kiri Simeonovski, administrator on Misplaced Pages on macedonian language. The parameter Depth which is calculated to show the quality of the articles, for me and for us on mk.Wiki is not a good statistic shower about it. The formula '''(Eits/Articles)·(Non-Articles/Artciles)·(1- stub-ratio)''' is weak, because of its manipulation from the users. Expanding edits by talkpage edits or user edits has positive impact on the Depth value, so you can get higher Depth without editing encyclopedic pages. So, I want to propose to change the formula of this parameter and to install values in it, such as kilobytes merge of the articles and to eliminate the impact of the talkpage and user edits. Regards.--] (]) 16:05, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
:Does anyone actually use the Depth statistics for anything? They were an attempt at finding a numerical measure of quality, but such a measure doesn't really exist so it's useless. Just ignore it. --] (]) 18:44, 11 February 2009 (UTC) :As a side note, I don't think that the reliability of the Heritage Foundation as a source is particularly related to these despicable actions. Whether they should be considered a reliable source in some matters is really unrelated to whether they hate us or not.--] (]) 14:14, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
::Suddenly ] going to court to get user-data seems like the model of gentlemanly behavior. ] (]) 11:51, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
::I think they are used for determining which versions of Misplaced Pages are linked to from the main page. '''''<font color="#FF0000">]</font>''''' 19:08, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
:::{{tq|That's a sad balancing act that no Wikipedian should have to face.}} Unfortunately, the scales have been inexorably slipping out from beneath the foundation's abilities or willingness to protect its volunteers for my entire wiki-career. There's no balancing force at work. The private equity community has made gadflies out of what we used to label reliable local news media; Alphabet and Meta are actively coopting precision, privacy, and the public domain, while attempting to minimize the effectiveness of good faith actors like Internet Archive. Now suddenly en.wikipedians are facing the sort of personal threats long experienced by volunteers at ru.wiki and zh.wiki. The forces now arrayed against free information don't need to be actively coordinating in order to rapidly bring us to 2+2=5 territory. Any established editor could reasonably see Western culture has been under relentless attack for a long time. Here comes the Heritage Foundation's leaks, hot off Heritage's bangup release of Project 2025, leaking articles through partisan outlets apparently intended to make it appear (in one case) the ADL's recent reliability downgrade at RSNP was anyone else's fault but the ADL's own writings and actions. The news of such activity appears to threaten the community members directly and personally. ] (]) 13:26, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
:::The top ten links on www.wikipedia.org are determined by the number of visitors each Misplaced Pages gets. Everything else is ranked by number of articles. "Depth" isn't used anywhere. --] (]) 22:42, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
::::] '''''<font color="#FF0000">]</font>''''' 07:33, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
::I use those numbers personally just to judge... not 'quality'... but rather 'depth' (as the name indicates). It is a rough but usable metric to determine whether a large language wikipedia is "real" or just hundreds of thousands of stubs or bot-generated articles. I am unsure what difference removing talk page edits and user space edits from the count would make (I suspect, in general, not very much of a difference) but it would be interesting to see. It does seem to me that mainspace edits are what the statistic should be interested in though!--] (]) 02:14, 12 February 2009 (UTC)


== ] ==
== Hello ==


Hey Mr. Wales, there's a discussion on ] about what image should be used on your Misplaced Pages entry. Figured you may want to chime in with personal opinion about the recent freely-licensed images of you that are presented, as there hasn't been much engagement there at the time of my post. <span style="background: cornsilk; padding: 3px;border:.5px solid salmon;">]]</span> 21:32, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
Hello Jimmy,
I am a fairly new wiki member. I am wondering what you think of the state of affairs in the world. Do you think we are in the endtimes. Also, have you ever listened to raul midon?


== ''The Signpost'': 15 January 2025 ==
Thanks and God Bless ] (]) 12:47, 12 February 2009 (UTC)


<div lang="en" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"><div style="column-count:2;"> {{Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/2025-01-15}} </div><!--Volume 21, Issue 1--> <div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * ''']''' * ] * ] * ] (]) 07:54, 15 January 2025 (UTC) <!-- Sent via script (]) --></div></div>
:I don't believe in the concept of "the endtimes". I think the world has a lot of problems, but I am nevertheless optimistic. I don't think I've ever heard Raul Midon, but I just glanced at his entry in Misplaced Pages, and it sounds like something I might like. Thanks for bringing it to my attention!--] (]) 14:50, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:JPxG@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Wikipedia_Signpost/Subscribe&oldid=1269316164 -->
:Misplaced Pages thinks that assumeing the universe follows the most likely senario then you've only got about 50 billion years to wait. See ].] 17:51, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
::No Geni. Misplaced Pages follows ] which indicate that the universe may end in 50 billion years or indeed may, in fact, have ended at 4.15pm on Thursday January 29th 2009 (UTC naturally).--] 13:56, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 07:54, 15 January 2025

    Welcome to my talk page. Please sign and date your entries by inserting ~~~~ at the end.
    Start a new talk topic.
    Jimbo welcomes your comments and updates – he has an open door policy.
    He holds the founder's seat on the Wikimedia Foundation's Board of Trustees.
    The current trustees occupying "community-selected" seats are Rosiestep, Laurentius, Victoria and Pundit.
    The Wikimedia Foundation's Lead Manager of Trust and Safety is Jan Eissfeldt.
    This page is semi-protected and you will not be able to leave a message here unless you are a registered editor. Instead,
    you can leave a message here
    This is Jimbo Wales's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.
    Archives: Index, Index, A, B, C, D, E, F, G, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168, 169, 170, 171, 172, 173, 174, 175, 176, 177, 178, 179, 180, 181, 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190, 191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 196, 197, 198, 199, 200, 201, 202, 203, 204, 205, 206, 207, 208, 209, 210, 211, 212, 213, 214, 215, 216, 217, 218, 219, 220, 221, 222, 223, 224, 225, 226, 227, 228, 229, 230, 231, 232, 233, 234, 235, 236, 237, 238, 239, 240, 241, 242, 243, 244, 245, 246, 247, 248, 249, 250, 251, 252Auto-archiving period: 10 days 
    This user talk page might be watched by friendly talk page stalkers, which means that someone other than me might reply to your query. Their input is welcome and their help with messages that I cannot reply to quickly is appreciated.
    Media mentionThis talkpage has been mentioned by a media organization:

    Centralized discussion
    Village pumps
    policy
    tech
    proposals
    idea lab
    WMF
    misc
    For a listing of ongoing discussions, see the dashboard.

    Albert Percy Godber

    Albert Percy Godber at his brass finishing lathe in the Petone railway workshops. A sign before him reads: `This is my busy day'
    "Looking down over a settlement with houses set amongst trees. The arm of a lake or harbour lies beyond, with a mountainous range on the far side. Photograph taken by Albert Percy Godber. Probably taken at Queenstown, Godber having visited Lake Wakatipu and Queenstown in 1926"

    Happy New Year Jimbo!!! I hope all is well with you and your team.

    Could you or your page watchers help me with Draft:Albert Percy Godber? The draft has been declined and tagged up. It was then deleted years ago. I had it restored today after I came across one of his photos. I think he and his photography are fascinating for capturing aspects of New Zealand's transportation and industrial history. His work is in museum and library collections. At least one of his photographs has been used in a book. He photographed Maori sites.

    "Phyllis Mary Godber wearing a Maori cloak, holding a taiaha, standing beside a collection of Maori carvings, including two fire-screens, carved by her father Albert Percy Godber

    I'm sorry I haven't been able to work the draft up enough to get it admitted to mainspace. It does make me wonder about what we do and don't include, our notability criteria, Articles for Creation (AfC) process, and collaborative ethos. Thanks so much for any help or guidance you can offer! Have a great 2025 and beyond. Thanks again. FloridaArmy (talk) 17:57, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

    If Godber is not WP:NOTABLE, which is what the draft reviewers say, then Wikipedians can't fix that. Polygnotus (talk) 09:37, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
    user:Polygnotus is he "notable" and should we have an entry on him? FloridaArmy (talk) 17:26, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
    I dunno, but User:Sulfurboy wrote that the draft did not show significant coverage about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject at that point. Polygnotus (talk) 19:37, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
    "Godber family outside their house 'Railway Whare' at 23 Bay Street, Petone, circa 1906. From left to right: Albert Percy Godber, Mary Ann Godber, Laura Godber, Phyllis and William. Photograph taken by Albert Percy Godber"
    And this a request to revisit his finding. We have a photographer from more than 100 years ago who documented areas of New Zealand's North Island. We have his work in a National Library collection. We have his work discussed as iconic for one of his Maori related photographs. We have his work revisited in a 2018 exhibition. We have descriptions of him related to his photographs, his career, and we have the photos themselves documenting the areas industries, sites, infrastructure from more than 100 years ago. If I was satisfied with the previous conclusions I would not be here. So I ask again, should we have an entry on this subject? Should we just attribute his photos where we use them to an unlinked name with no explanation or discussion of who he was? I think the answer is clear, and I wanted to hear Jimbo's opinion. I am aware of what was previously stated. Years have passed and I believe it's time to reevaluate and consider. I also think it's worth reflecting on our article creations processes more generally and how we apply our conception of "notability". FloridaArmy (talk) 23:33, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
    • Godber's photographs include "views of the Hutt Valley including large numbers of cars traveling to Trentham Racecourse, and the Hutt River. Another group of images relate to a holiday at the Mendip Hills Homestead in Canterbury, New Zealand with scenes of farm life, including haymaking, merino sheep, and farm buildings. During their stay in the South Island Godber also took photographs of Dunedin (including the Ross Reservoir, Otago Boys' High School, Seacliff Mental Hospital, the 1926 Dunedin Exhibition, and the Hillside Railway Workshops); Invercargill (including the Invercargill Railway Workshops); Stewart Island, Moeraki, Tuatapere, Waiau River, Oamaru and Port Chalmers. Various railway stations in Canterbury and Otago, the Burnside Iron Mills, and the Rosslyn Mills. Godber was a volunteer fireman with the Petone Fire Brigade with the album including views of the building, groups of firemen, fire engines and other fire fighting equipment, and a building in Petone damaged by fire. In his work with New Zealand Railways, mainly at the Petone Railway Workshops, he took interior photographs of various buildings, including the Machine Shop and finishing benches, the engine room, lathes, boilers, and fitting shops. He also took photographs of many of the steam engines that were built and worked on at the workshops. One scene shows a group of men watching a fight. Many images show his interest in logging railways, particularly in the Piha, Karekare, Anawhata area. Scenes of logging camps, various methods of transporting logs including bullock teams, logging trains, and dams created and then tripped to send logs down by river, and timber mills. Other topics covered in Godber's photographs are scenes at Maori marae and meeting houses, with some of the people identified; Maori carving and rafter designs; beekeeping, and gold mining." FloridaArmy (talk) 23:52, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
    • It's hard to choose which photos to share. Historic views areas, industries, bridges, natural features, railways and bridges, crafts. Here's a link to his photos on Misplaced Pages Commons. Many already illustrate our entries on various subjects. FloridaArmy (talk) 00:01, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
    If you really want to help him, get a couple stories published about him in newspapers. Notability here will follow. Carrite (talk) 01:23, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

    Just wanted to say

    You have created something valuable to everyone on the Internet. I'm sure you get this a lot, but thank you.
    It may sound weird, but Misplaced Pages has helped me through some tough times. We can never thank you enough for this sometimes infighting, sometimes peaceful, sometimes divided, but always united community You are the backbone of the cabal of editors thriving community that is Misplaced Pages. I wish I could give you a BarnMilkyWay but no one's come up with that, apparently. (3OpenEyes's talk page. Say hi!) | (PS: Have a good day) 00:49, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

    Requests for comment/Severe Problems in hewiki

    For the interested. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:58, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

    Summary: This document intends to show the problematic situation in Hebrew Misplaced Pages (hewiki), and provide evidence that it has been overtaken by a group of mostly religious and nationalist editors, who prevent others from achieving higher permissions while promoting their own allies. –Novem Linguae (talk) 22:38, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

    Happy new year

    Good days, Jimbo. I'd like to say that Chinese Misplaced Pages is introducing ARBCOM System currently, since Arbcom on this project, and in fact all the project is originated from the idea of yours, do you have any opinion for that? Any hints, advice or suggestions? -Lemonaka 15:43, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

    Scoop: Heritage Foundation plans to ‘identify and target’ Misplaced Pages editors

    That doesn't sound good. From The Forward. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:37, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

    Being discussed at Misplaced Pages:Village pump (miscellaneous)#Heritage Foundation intending to "identify and target" editors. CMD (talk) 10:08, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
    Thanks! Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:11, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
    Also discussed at Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel_articles_5/Evidence#Edit_request and Misplaced Pages:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Heritage_Foundation_planning_to_dox_Wikipedia_editors. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:07, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

    Jimbo, could I ask you please to respond to these concerns from Tryptofish?

    ... it's not just if you've edited about Israel-Palestine. It could be if you've edited anything about climate and fossil fuels, gender, immigration, vaccines, and of course, American politics. I doubt that they have the bandwidth to actually identify and harass every editor who could possibly be seen as editing information that goes against a MAGA POV, but they will likely find some easily identified targets, whom they will use to "set an example", as a way of instilling fear in our editing community. I fully expect that, in the coming months, Jimbo Wales will be hauled before a hostile and performative Congressional hearing, much in the manner of university presidents. I hope very much that he will be better prepared than Claudine Gay was.
    Yeah, I know this is grim. But I believe the first step in dealing with this is to go into it with our eyes open, to know what we are dealing with, what motivates it. And, more than harming individual editors, the real objective of Heritage et al. is to instill fear in the rest of us. If we become too fearful to revert POV edits, they win. In a very real sense, we have to keep doing what we have been doing, and continue to be a reliable resource for NPOV information. --Tryptofish (talk) 18:54, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

    Sita Bose (talk) 05:33, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

    Well, I fully agree that developments in terms of arguments and actions aimed at destroying trust in knowledge (and of course our specific interest, trust in Misplaced Pages) are extremely worrisome, particularly as I agree that for many who are doing it, the motive does appears to be the undermining of civic norms and democracy. I also agree with Tryptofish in a part that you didn't quote: "In a narrow sense, it's technically true that if you "out" yourself, there's no point in anyone else doing it. But once your identity is known, you become vulnerable to all of the kinds of real-life harassment that doxed people find themselves subjected to. It doesn't matter, in that regard, how they found out your identity." That's a sad balancing act that no Wikipedian should have to face.
    As a side note, I don't think that the reliability of the Heritage Foundation as a source is particularly related to these despicable actions. Whether they should be considered a reliable source in some matters is really unrelated to whether they hate us or not.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 14:14, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
    Suddenly ANI going to court to get user-data seems like the model of gentlemanly behavior. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:51, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
    That's a sad balancing act that no Wikipedian should have to face. Unfortunately, the scales have been inexorably slipping out from beneath the foundation's abilities or willingness to protect its volunteers for my entire wiki-career. There's no balancing force at work. The private equity community has made gadflies out of what we used to label reliable local news media; Alphabet and Meta are actively coopting precision, privacy, and the public domain, while attempting to minimize the effectiveness of good faith actors like Internet Archive. Now suddenly en.wikipedians are facing the sort of personal threats long experienced by volunteers at ru.wiki and zh.wiki. The forces now arrayed against free information don't need to be actively coordinating in order to rapidly bring us to 2+2=5 territory. Any established editor could reasonably see Western culture has been under relentless attack for a long time. Here comes the Heritage Foundation's leaks, hot off Heritage's bangup release of Project 2025, leaking articles through partisan outlets apparently intended to make it appear (in one case) the ADL's recent reliability downgrade at RSNP was anyone else's fault but the ADL's own writings and actions. The news of such activity appears to threaten the community members directly and personally. BusterD (talk) 13:26, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

    Talk:Jimmy_Wales#Newer_2024_image?

    Hey Mr. Wales, there's a discussion on Talk:Jimmy_Wales#Newer_2024_image? about what image should be used on your Misplaced Pages entry. Figured you may want to chime in with personal opinion about the recent freely-licensed images of you that are presented, as there hasn't been much engagement there at the time of my post. BarntToust 21:32, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

    The Signpost: 15 January 2025

    * Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:54, 15 January 2025 (UTC) Category: