| Revision as of 18:08, 14 November 2011 view sourceThe Pink Oboe (talk | contribs)1,530 edits →Timeline: My apologies← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 18:00, 4 January 2025 view source FloridaArmy (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users177,719 edits →Albert Percy Godber | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{pp-sock|small=yes}} | |||
| {{maintained|1={{user16|Jimbo Wales}}|article=no}} | |||
| {{pp-move|small=yes}} | |||
| {{NOINDEX}} | |||
| {{ |
{{noindex}} | ||
| {{Stb}} | |||
| {{same page other wikis|commons|meta|message=Please choose the most relevant.}} | |||
| {{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}} | {{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 = 88 | |||
| | counter = 252 | |||
| |minthreadsleft = 2 | |||
| | maxarchivesize = 350K | |||
| |algo = old(1d) | |||
| | archiveheader = {{aan}} | |||
| |archive = User talk:Jimbo Wales/Archive %(counter)d | |||
| | minthreadstoarchive = 1 | |||
| | minthreadsleft = 3 | |||
| }} | }} | ||
| {{Centralized discussion}} | |||
| {{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn|target=User talk:Jimbo Wales/Archive index|mask=User talk:Jimbo Wales/Archive <#>|indexhere=no|template=User:Jimbo Wales/indextemplate}} | |||
| __TOC__ | |||
| {{archives|age=1|target=./Archive 69|dounreplied=yes|index=./Archive index|bot=MiszaBot III|archivelist=User talk:Jimbo Wales/archivelist_manual|collapsed=yes|search=yes}} | |||
| {{-}} | |||
| {| align="right" style="clear:both" | |||
| |] | |||
| |} | |||
| == Misplaced Pages languages == | |||
| Interesting piece in the Guardian today about the work of some Oxford University researchers: . ] (]) 16:11, 11 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :I have this to the editors of ]. | |||
| :—] (]) 05:11, 12 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| ::This covers only English Misplaced Pages as is stated on the map when you click on it.<ref></ref> It would be more interesting to see a map of all Misplaced Pages languages. Naturally people are more likely to contribute in their own native language. ] <sup>]</sup><sub>(])</sub> 19:46, 12 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :::The article () has maps for English, French, Arabic, Egyptian Arabic, Persian, and Swahili. | |||
| :::—] (]) 21:55, 12 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :This visualization won the prize at WikiSym this year & is truely global, though using different data from the Oxford one. It's a hard link to find by the way, they should update the WikiSym site . Hours of fun! ] (]) 13:58, 13 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| Thanks Wavelength, I hadn't thought of The Signpost. I did add it just now to ], which I found by way of The Signpost talk page. Finding anything here is like sorting through a jumble drawer. ] (]) 22:34, 13 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :] can help editors to find useful pages. Misplaced Pages Signpost is listed under "News". | |||
| :—] (]) 01:58, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :<i>]</i> is helpful, also. | |||
| :—] (]) 04:49, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| ::Thank you, but ] is NOT listed in either of those two sources. is a list of what links to it. This is yet another example of how Misplaced Pages is highly unwelcoming to those who don't know the secret pathways which continue to increase. Wikimedia says it's Misplaced Pages's problem, and Misplaced Pages says it's not a problem at all. Brilliant. ] (]) 17:42, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| == References == | |||
| {{Reflist}} | |||
| == Missing info == | |||
| HABLAN DE CRIMENES DE LEZA HUMANIDAD COMO EL PALACIO DE JUSTICIA, EL CASO DE MAPIRIPAN, LOS ASESINATOS DE TRUJILLO PERO NUNCA NOMBRAN EL ASESINATO DE LO POBRES CAMPESINOS Y EL PROFESOR GONZALO QUE MURIERON EN COMBATES POR NUESTRO GLORIOSO Y HORROSO EJERCITO NACIONAL Y DE SUS FAMILIAS QUE NADIE SE ACUERDA ENTONCES QUE ESTAMOS HACIENDO <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 15:58, 13 November 2011 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
| :Google translation: TALK ABOUT CRIMES OF HUMANITY AS LEZA COURTHOUSE, THE CASE OF Mapiripán, the assassination of Trujillo BUT NOT NAMED THE MURDER OF THE POOR FARMERS AND GONZALO TEACHER WHO DIED IN FIGHT FOR OUR GLORIOUS AND ARMY NATIONAL HORROSO AND THEIR FAMILIES NOBODY IS AGREED THAT WE ARE DOING SO. ] (]) 16:41, 13 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| ::Thanks, Looie496. Of course, I'm still not sure what it means, if anything.--] (]) 20:20, 13 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| ::: It's either ], or that some article, somewhere in the various linguistic editions of Misplaced Pages needs a ] (but the specific article might be semi'd...the Trujillo name rings a bell for some reason) (]<span style="border:1px solid black;">''' ] '''</span>]) 11:59, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| == Old edits to your user page retrieved, your very early edits, etc. == | |||
| == Where "every word doth almost tell" == | |||
| Hi Jimmy, I've moved your user page edits from their previous location at "Jimbo Wales" to {{noredirect|User:Jimbo Wales/old2}} with ], so they're no longer in the main namespace; the title "{{noredirect|User:Jimbo Wales/old}}" was ]. I then imported edits to your user page from some 2001 database dumps, most notably the one from August 2001, so we can now see ]! I hope this is all OK with you. | |||
| I was amazed that Misplaced Pages does not currently note the pun, with the Shakespeare authorship question, to compare the line from '']'', about the name "de Vere". For years, the pun has been noted elsewhere, in the line "that every word doth almost tell my name" with the name "deVere" and the word "eVery" as almost telling the name. This is just another major curious omission, where outside sources note the connection, but it is found nowhere in Misplaced Pages. The concern is not just the years when plays were published, and the potential for unfinished plays to be pen-named later, but also the possible ] in that unusual line of poetry. Add this to the long list of simple, easy topics to add to Misplaced Pages. -] (]) 17:29, 13 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :We have policy for this sort of thing Wikid77 (we have policy for eveything!)-]. Basically if you see a gap, jump in and be bold. ] (]) 17:37, 13 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| ::When it comes to the ], boldness is not the best advice for ideas that may be viewed as fringe. Bringing it up on the article's talk page is the best advice. ] (]) 17:42, 13 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :::Agreed. ] (]) 18:35, 13 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| ::::I only sort of agree. I think the area needs a large influx of uninvolved editors to help alleviate the ongoing issues of general hostility. I have no opinion at all about the particular issue that Wikid77 has raised, since I know next to nothing about it. But speaking philosophically, the idea that views that are academically fringe but popularly repeated must be systematically *excluded* from Misplaced Pages strikes me as completely wrong. Rather, we have a responsibility to educate the public that although such things are commonly repeated, they are given little (or even no) credibility by authorities. | |||
| ::::The reason I do agree, though only partly, with Looie496, is that it's really hard to recommend to anyone without a bit of a caveat or warning to go into an area like that and "be bold". It's going to be an unpleasant experience, I'm afraid, if you do - even if it is the right thing for Misplaced Pages.--] (]) 20:01, 13 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :::::There are no reasons at all to expect an unpleasant experience if an editor works responsibly and in conformity to Misplaced Pages policies and guidelines and—in the SAQ area—pays attention to the Both new editors and those who should know better encounter friction when trying to insert inappropriate material and links into other articles. In the case of ]'s above suggestion, the place for that would be in the ] article, not the ] article (which is for more generic anti-Stratfordian material), and not the ] article or the '']'' page. A good basic understanding of the ] guidelines and the ] polices, especially ] and ], would go a long way to resolving the great majority of problems engendered by that area of Misplaced Pages. ] (]) 02:58, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::I don't agree with you. The hostility I have seen in that area goes far beyond that sort of thing. Someone can come in, adhere to policy perfectly well, and get treated very badly. It's an ugly situation.--] (]) 10:45, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::A few examples would be useful. ] (]) 13:07, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::: Naming names might cause an escalation, but the main point is to be more welcoming, and more subtle in rejecting ideas. People get the message by just saying, "''I am not sure there is much support for that view,''" rather than, "''If you continue to push your pet fringe theories, it can only end badly for you''". Something to consider. -] 14:16, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::::I was asking for examples of editors coming in and adhering to policy and being treated badly. An explicit warning to an experienced editor seems prudent to me and could even avoid a future confrontation, but I gather that's not what Jim's talking about. I'm as tired as anybody else of the constant jockeying for advantage. It would be a better situation for all if editors understood and conformed to policies instead of looking for loopholes and quoting them out of context. One would have thought that would have made things clearer for all, but one would be wrong in thinking so, wouldn't one? ] (]) 14:42, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| It's a long story how I ended up doing this. So ] is celebrating a milestone of 20% of our biographical articles being about women. In the ], a ] about who was the first woman to get a biographical entry here]]. I was able to give a ] of ] on ]! I've been spending the last couple of days checking the very early edits of the first biographies created around that time, and came upon ] (or ThomasEdison as it was at first in CamelCase). In the process of consolidating the Thomas Edison page history, I moved your edit from "ThomasEdison" to "Thomas Edison"; your early edit to that page on 23 January (UTC) was previously listed as the first one but ]. | |||
| == redirect == | |||
| As noted in various places like ], your first surviving edit under the username "JimboWales" was to the ThomasEdison (or Thomas Edison) page. I checked the August 2001 database dump for any earlier ones, found them, and imported to the English Misplaced Pages database. Of course you made earlier edits, but it's interesting to find early contributions attached to your username (in CamelCase form or otherwise). ] (]) 15:32, 23 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| It appears to have been recreated - ] - ] (]) 12:50, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :Such nerdy presents we give. Thanks, brother. ] (]) 16:17, 23 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| The discussion for the redirect is at ] - perhaps it needs wider publicity. I am pretty certain the community is against the creation of such a redirect. ] (]) 12:53, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| : |
::No worries. My Christmas gifts are ], as I realised later. ] (]) 05:00, 24 December 2024 (UTC) | ||
| I don't endorse the language used by Pink Oboe above, but I do endorse his (?) request: please undelete this. There was an active deletion discussion in progress, the redirect does not unambiguously meet the speedy-deletion criteria, there is precedent for similar redirects (see the various redirects to ANI, for example), and your deletion circumvented the established process for dealing with such discussions. ] (]) 13:17, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| == ''The Signpost'': 24 December 2024 == | |||
| :Non of are comparable and demeaning and attacking towards users that work there and to the whole dispute resolution process. If I had the tool I would have deleted and protected it on sight and there would have been no discussion. It was basically an attack redirect without a single beneficial use apart from that.] (]) 13:30, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| ::"Cesspit"? I don't see how this particular redirect is particularly "demeaning and attacking towards users that work there", and quite honestly I think this particular part of the DR process merits the redirect. A good analogy would be the frequent reference to RfA as "poisonous" - it reflects the state/effect of the process, not necessarily the relative merits of contributors there. ] (]) 13:36, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :::ANI:Cesspit is incomparable imo. Calling ANI a cesspit is totally different to demeaning users with such comments as, go on then ya big sissy, ]. I think you are not looking at the problems usage of such a redirect would cause and the detrimental affect it would have on dispute resolution. ] (]) 13:47, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Rob, your argument was that the redirect was insulting to contributors at WQA. Which, to your mind, is more offensive: suggesting that a user is raw sewage, or suggesting that they are a maternal figure? Your argument is simply illogical. ] (]) 13:56, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :::::ANI:Cesspit simple describes what we all know that ANI can get messy sometimes and that if your get reported there you are likely in the proverbial s**t. Totally different to you ] every time you don't like something. ] (]) 14:05, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::...which similarly describes "what we all know" and is a fairly accurate depiction of WQA. Look, there's no need to rehash the whole deletion discussion here - what should happen is that the out-of-process deletion is reversed and the discussion allowed to reach whatever conclusion community consensus decides. ] (]) 14:23, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::I don't know what you are so down on the dispute resolution for - you only have . ] (]) 14:37, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::::There's a very good reason for that, which is completely irrelevant to this discussion - again, this is about the out-of-process deletion, not the deletion arguments themselves. ] (]) 14:43, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::::Its a speedy delete of an attack redirect. ] (]) 14:46, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::::::Doesn't meet G10: not unambiguous, attack is not its only purpose. ] (]) 15:07, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| Good call, Jimbo. ] <sup>]</sup> 13:18, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::::::::To belittle and demean users - its enough of an attack creation for a speedy delete. ] (]) 15:18, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| I cheerfully tossed in the first keep, more for a poke in the eye of the ridiculousness of WQA than anything, but really guys, this doesn't stance a chance in hell of being retained. Let it go. ] (]) 13:27, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :I agree with Tarc --] | ] 14:45, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| ::Agreed as well. Besides, the redirect is ambiguous. Thinking on recent discussions I've seen/been involved with, "Run to Mommy (Daddy)" could apply to any of WQA, ANI, ARBCOM or even this very talk page. I admit, I chuckled, but this redirect serves only to demean the people that, well, run to mommy. ] for ANI might be my favourite redirect, btw. ]] 16:45, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| <div lang="en" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"><div style="column-count:2;"> {{Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/2024-12-24}} </div><!--Volume 20, Issue 18--> <div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * ''']''' * ] * ] * ] (]) 00:01, 25 December 2024 (UTC) <!-- Sent via script (]) --></div></div> | |||
| == Closing RFDs == | |||
| <!-- Message sent by User:JPxG@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Wikipedia_Signpost/Subscribe&oldid=1263792399 --> | |||
| == Happy New Year to Misplaced Pages's Founder! == | |||
| I am concerned that when you closed ] as a speedy deletion you violated ], unless, of course, it was an office action. I don't believe it's appropriate for admins to super-vote - even if they are voting correctly. Please consider not taking abrupt unnecessary action in the future - there is no rush, and not only did you prevent non-admins from reversing your action, you also used your gravitas as "founder." Such actions should be reserved for things that really need it. Thanks. ] (]) 13:46, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :I think that from time to time it is valuable to remind people that ] is hard policy, and that civility really does matter. Snarky comments should not be given the luxury of a serious discussion and debate as if this were a serious matter to consider. Delete, salt if necessary, move on. Users whose talk page shows an astonishing degree of incivility should be blocked permanently without batting an eye, as they are destructive to our purpose of building soman encyclopedia - I won't take that last step myself, but it would be good for the encyclopedia to re-establish the principle that insults are absolutely unacceptable.--] (]) 13:51, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :: I have added your new speedy deletion category as G13. ] (]) 13:53, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :::Thanks, but there is no new rationale needed, no new policy needed. Existing policy more than covers this sort of thing.--] (]) 14:13, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :::: Could you point out where? Thanks. ] (]) 14:17, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| {{hat|The right place for this discussion is at the talk page of ]}} | |||
| Jimbo, it appears that at least one member of the community disagrees that incivil pages can be speedily deleted. Please defend your new speedy deletion rationale at ]. Thanks. ] (]) 14:02, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :sadly ] has deleted it - I support it and we should seek consensus to replace it. ] (]) 14:02, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| ::There's no new category needed. It's an attack, it's vandalism, delete. ] <sup>]</sup> 14:05, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :(ec)I hope you mean "defend it at ]", not at "]", as that would be a call to edit war on a policy page. Furthermore, perhaps that one person disagrees that policy can be set by Jimbo alone, and that a talk page discussion is needed for this anyway, no matter if he agrees with the sentiment or not, or perhaps he feels that the new policy and the page deleted under that then not-existing policy don't match (i.e. that that redirect was not a PA), or perhaps he had another reason (like that G10 already applies if it is really a PA). Please don't ascribe motives to persons without very good reason. ] (]) 14:07, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| {{hab}} | |||
| Sorry to bother you again but... ] ] <sup>]</sup> 14:14, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :] is a blockable offense, and I think it's about time for it. When you add to his shocking violations of ] (see his talk page for example) I'm astonished it hasn't happened already.--] (]) 14:17, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :: Jimbo, creating a template page does not disrupt the encyclopedia. I'm really concerned that you are advocating for a block here. ] (]) 14:19, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :::. Just saying... ] (]) 14:38, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| ::::That is loud quacking indeed. Can someone block him - ] indefed on November 6th 2009 - ] created November 6, 2009 - with an unbelievable liking of some totally obscure articles - ] (]) 15:16, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| Happy New Year Jimbo Wales! Wish you luck in 2025! ] (]) 03:13, 1 January 2025 (UTC) | |||
| :::::This "Stalker" output apparently only outputs pages where both editors edited. There is no list of ''discordant'' pages which have been edited by exactly one editor. The output is worthless for making decisions about sock-puppets. It is shocking that Off2riorob would call for a blocking and label that crap "strong quacking indeed". It should be shocking that <s>Hipocrite (well, maybe not, considering the name)</s> Delicious Carbuncle would post such smearing output in such a passive aggressive manner. (16:46, 14 November 2011 (UTC) Updated: My apologies to Hipocrite for the confusion, which is especially bad because I know that I should double-check names. Sincerely, KW) | |||
| ::::::That said, a non-lazy editor might do some further digging on these pages and some analysis. It is unfortunate that editors accuse any editor of being a sock-puppet so thoughtlessly. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">].]</span></small> 15:44, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::: What smearing output are you referring to, exactly? I don't recollect posting any smearing output. ] (]) 15:54, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::::Not sure why but there is a lot of opposition to this sock claim and it is quacking so loud its untrue - its at SPI. ] (]) 15:57, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::::The administrator said that the Stalker (so-called) tool's output was utterly inadequate to warrant an SPI search. Your reading will improve if you remove cliches from your thought: You should have to give 25 USD every time you refer to "quacking" on WP. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">].]</span></small> 17:00, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::::::You are free to draw your own conclusions about the link I posted earlier, but perhaps you should look at before making up your mind completely. ] (]) 17:36, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| This all is one of the main reasons why out-of-process deletions like this one are so often a bad idea. If you had let the discussion run its course, probably none of the current problems would have happened. ] (]) 14:22, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :Agreed. Please see ]. ] (]) 17:16, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| === Timeline === | |||
| <blockquote>I think that from time to time it is valuable to remind people that ] is hard policy, and that civility really does matter. --] (]) 13:51, 14 November 2011 (UTC)</blockquote> | |||
| # An admin, Stephan Schulz, tells two users to "Shut the fuck up" at WQA. | |||
| # SandyGeorgia starts a discussion of the civility double standards at Malleus's talk page. | |||
| # The Pink Oboe posts a "Run to mommy" redirect to WQA. | |||
| # Off2riorob posts (then removes) a vulgarity directed at Pink Oboe. | |||
| # While missing two gross instances of uncivil posting-- one from a admin, both specifically directed at other editors—Jimbo goes out of process to that might offend a vague "someone" while curiously stating that "civility really does matter". | |||
| So, if "civility really does matter", why didn't you (YOU, Jimbo) do something about the two gross instances of incivility or say something to those editors while you deleted the redirect and Is there ''nothing'' that will draw attention to the civility double standard on Misplaced Pages, and how it is frequently (and falsely) claimed that content contributors get a free pass while admins get away with whatever they want? I apologize if you actually did do something to address the underlying uncivil admin post that led to all of this, but if you did, I can't find it. An admin can tell two other editors to "shut the fuck up", and no one Yep, civility really does matter. So, ANI is a cesspool, WQA is "run to mommy", and now you, Jimbo, have put yourself in a position of "run to daddy"-- like many fathers, you wandered in to a scuffle, listened to half a story, meted out some punishment, <s>and wandered off,</s> while the real "civility" abuser got off scot free. If you are serious about civility (and there was no NPA except the retracted one from Off2riorob), then DO something about it as BOLD as you did about the Redirect-- start with Stephan Schulz. ] (]) 16:10, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :I didn't punish anyone. I am serious about personal attacks, particularly coming from admins, this is the first I have heard of it. I didn't "wander off" I'm right here. No one has gotten off scot free. And if you think there was no personal attack from The Pink Oboe, you haven't been paying attention. Go read his talk page. Look at his edit history. It is a constant stream of abuse. He called me a "fucking programmer", whatever that means. It's not acceptable. And yes, if an admin behaves in that way, they should be desysopped. There should be no double standards on civility, and crying about double standards should never be a reason to let someone get away with bad behavior. Let's clean house. If people are here to work together in mutual respect to get something useful done, then great. If they are here to abuse and harass others, let's be done with them so we can have a better environment. Gentle outreach to newcomers who are behaving badly is the right thing to do. But for a user who has been around - sockpuppet or no - as long as The Pink Oboe, there's no reason to put up with it any more.--] (]) 16:16, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| ::::My apologies, that was a brain fart on my part, it of course should have been "fucking money manager". Sorry for not making myself clearer. --] (]) 18:08, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :: Correct that you haven't "wandered off", correct that I didn't know you were addressing The Pink Oboe's entire editing history in the one diff to his talk page, and for "cleaning house": money --> mouth --> Stephan Schulz. No way is this "civility" business ever going to be anything but a double standard and a joke if Malleus gets blocked for "arse" while admins can tell two editors to "shut the fuck up" and not an eyelash is batted an AN. If we're serious, let's start where the problem starts (admin abuse and double standards in enforcement of civility and personal attacks). ] (]) 16:30, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :::I have now spoken to both Stephan Schulz and Off2Riorob. Thanks for calling those things to my attention. My primary interest here is to encourage everyone to reach within ourselves for a higher standard of behavior. Responding to people like Malleus when he's misbehaving by misbehaving further does not resolve the problem. Instead, insisting that everyone behave themselves is the right way forward. I don't think there is a huge and ongoing problem with a double standard, but there are people - respected editors, respected admins too - who really should rethink this issue.--] (]) 16:33, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :::: Thank you for the quick response. Now, as to Malleus and ''moi''-- as long as admin abuse goes on and is frequently directed at Malleus (or any editor who has contributed as much as he has to our mainpage), I will try to cheer him on whenever he is affected. The notion that all that has been directed at him doesn't bother him is bunk, and that is why others rally whenever it inevitably happens again. That is ''not'' the same as defending any perceived misbehavior-- since it is almost always about pointing out the double standard. When admins are dealt with the same way that Malleus is dealt with, then folks will have an argument about Malleus's perceived indiscretions. ] (]) 16:39, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| ==]== | |||
| ::::Regarding Malleus, Jimbo, your comments are really unfair. If you look at his talk page now, you can see that he has immediately rushed to help high-school students with their AP Biology projects and given a lot of help to other users. You should not be spreading the scapegoating of Malleus here, particularly when he is being so helpful to new editors and acting as an exemplary Wikipedian. | |||
| Happy New Year Jimbo!!! I hope all is well with you and your team. | |||
| ::::In my experience, Malleus describes others' behavior ''roughly'' only when he is responding to rudeness or personal attacks or when anybody would be exasperated by another editor's cluelessness. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">].]</span></small> 17:12, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :::::I didn't really say much about Malleus, so I don't see how it is unfair. My point is that when he misbehaves (you concede that he does, although you justify it on his behalf), the right answer is not to misbehave back at him. I don't see how that's unfair to him.--] (]) 17:20, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| 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. | |||
| ::::::<small>I did not justify misbehavior by MF. Violations of WP:Retaliation or exasperation are human failings.</small> I object to your bringing up MF, gratuitiously and without mentioning the context, especially the frequent provocations/personal-attacks by administrators against him, in a discussion of double standards. ''Your error was alleging'' that MF is the one misbehaving and that ''others should not retaliate against him'', when a look at the record shows that the first blood drawn has usually been his. | |||
| ::::::You are quoted (like objectivists quote Ayn Rand) by the youth at RfA deform, who mimic your behavior without your careful phrasing. The RfA discussions feature frequent PAs against MF, and you can set a better example. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">].]</span></small> 17:33, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| 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) | |||
| :Let me add that I didn't tell anybody to shut up. I told two editors engaged in what can be politely phrased as "an unconstructive personal discussion" that they ''can'' shut the fuck up. Apparently this subtle distinction was not universally perceived. I'll try for less subtlety in the future. However, I'll strongly maintain that indeed civility is more than skin-deep, and is not determined by a list of ], but rather by cases of personal attacks, suggestions of bad faith (no matter how politely phrased), cases of ], intentionally missing the point, splitting hairs when either of the half hairs leads to the same result, and so on. In other words, it requires people to pay attention to semantics, not just to syntax. --] (]) 16:40, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :: Yes, well, non-admins don't have the luxury of making the same argument about semantics v syntax-- instead, they find themselves on the end of a block, and then escalating blocks as other admins use the block log as a further excuse to block. So, best advice to you is to stop rationalizing your inappropriate response and behave as expected of admins so civility enforcement will be equal. ] (]) 16:52, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :::I dislike the administrator/writer double standard, however .... Stephen Schulz's comment seemed to me at first, and still seems to me, to have been intended with humor/good-will, and should be read in the context of the thread, which was then closing. It was not Stephen's first comment to an editor, coming out of nowhere, where it would have been utterly inappropriate. Even so, its reception, even by the tolerant SandyGeorgia, reminds us to use caution with "fuck" and to use winks and smiles liberally. :) <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">].]</span></small> 17:05, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| SandyGeorgia....those that feel Malleus is at the very least "difficult" aren't delusional.] 17:33, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| : And yet another discussion of the double standard goes off-topic to Malleus, who had nothing to do with the entire incident (other than me posting about it to his talk). Beating this dead horse is boring: simple point is, what would happen if Malleus told two editors to "shut the fuck up" and why can an admin do it and then argue "semantics"? I'm equally dismayed at Jimbo's characterization of Malleus ("people like Malleus"), but that's enough for today from me. If the point hasn't been made clearly, it's hopeless. ] (]) 17:38, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| ::There is no reason to have hope. ] is not a ] but is a ]. <small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">].]</span></small> 17:42, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| ::Sandy...yes, double standards.] 18:05, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :::Speaking for myself, I'm rather fond of the f word. So fond, I utter it only amongst close friends, or if not in anger or whatever, perhaps to those who can see my face and/or hear the spin of how I say it. In my travels throughout the world, I've said to folks who didn't learn how to speak English with other kids on the playgrounds, don't even think about trying to say it, you'll get it wrong and sooner or later piss someone off, or turn them off. Likewise me saying it to the latter and more or less never online (alas). Anyway, if there's any topic where Jimmy and I seem to think alike, it's this one. Be cool, try to be what he calls "professional." It takes one far, in ways both seen and unseen. It's worthwhile. Only my 2 pence. Oh and as to hope, my take on that is straightforward. Without some kind of meaningful faith, yep, give up all hope. ] (]) 17:47, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :I would point out this is the English language Misplaced Pages. Some words which are considered highly offensive in the US are commonly used in the UK and other English-speaking countries and are considered casual slang rather than serious insults. Let's be aware of cultural differences, and that we are separated by a common language. iow, stop using words once you know others interpret them differently than you do, and stop assuming everyone using a word means it in the worst possible way. AGF and do unto others as you would have them do unto you. ] (]) 17:58, 14 November 2011 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 18:00, 4 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 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. |
 | This talkpage has been mentioned by a media organization:
|
Centralized discussion
- AI-generated images depicting living people
- Blocks for promotional activity outside of mainspace
- Voluntary RfAs after resignation
- Proposed rewrite of WP:BITE
- LLM/chatbot comments in discussions
Old edits to your user page retrieved, your very early edits, etc.
Hi Jimmy, I've moved your user page edits from their previous location at "Jimbo Wales" to User:Jimbo Wales/old2 with a little assistance, so they're no longer in the main namespace; the title "User:Jimbo Wales/old" was already taken. I then imported edits to your user page from some 2001 database dumps, most notably the one from August 2001, so we can now see the first version of your user page on 19 January 2001 (UTC)! I hope this is all OK with you.
It's a long story how I ended up doing this. So WikiProject Women in Red is celebrating a milestone of 20% of our biographical articles being about women. In the draft press release about this event, a question was raised about who was the first woman to get a biographical entry here]]. I was able to give a definitive answer of Rosa Parks on 21 January 2001 (UTC)! I've been spending the last couple of days checking the very early edits of the first biographies created around that time, and came upon Thomas Edison (or ThomasEdison as it was at first in CamelCase). In the process of consolidating the Thomas Edison page history, I moved your edit from "ThomasEdison" to "Thomas Edison"; your early edit to that page on 23 January (UTC) was previously listed as the first one but not any more.
As noted in various places like this discussion, your first surviving edit under the username "JimboWales" was to the ThomasEdison (or Thomas Edison) page. I checked the August 2001 database dump for any earlier ones, found them, and imported all of them to the English Misplaced Pages database. Of course you made earlier edits, but it's interesting to find early contributions attached to your username (in CamelCase form or otherwise). Graham87 (talk) 15:32, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Such nerdy presents we give. Thanks, brother. BusterD (talk) 16:17, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- No worries. My Christmas gifts are so predictable, as I realised later. Graham87 (talk) 05:00, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
The Signpost: 24 December 2024
- From the archives: Where to draw the line in reporting?
- Recent research: "Misplaced Pages editors are quite prosocial", but those motivated by "social image" may put quantity over quality
- Gallery: A feast of holidays and carols
- Traffic report: Was a long and dark December
Happy New Year to Misplaced Pages's Founder!
Happy New Year Jimbo Wales! Wish you luck in 2025! Gooners Fan in North London (talk) 03:13, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
Albert Percy Godber
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.
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)
Category: