Misplaced Pages

talk:Adopt-a-user: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

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 editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 20:33, 2 September 2008 editEnkyo2 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Pending changes reviewers58,409 editsm →Referral from context of WP:AN/I?← Previous edit Revision as of 18:14, 3 September 2008 edit undoEnkyo2 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Pending changes reviewers58,409 editsm →Referral from context of WP:AN/I?Next edit →
Line 283: Line 283:


==Referral from context of WP:AN/I?== ==Referral from context of WP:AN/I?==
I don't know whether or not this is urgent? I this is urgent, I am responding with appropriate urgency to a well-intentioned suggestion. I don't know whether or not this is urgent? If this is urgent, I am responding with appropriate urgency to a well-intentioned suggestion.


The following comes from ]. The following comes from ].

Revision as of 18:14, 3 September 2008

To-do list for Misplaced Pages:Adopt-a-user: edit · history · watch · refresh

To-do list is empty: remove {{To do}} tag or click on edit to add an item.


Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7


New award

Can you all please contribute at here Thank you F9T 18:46, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Watch page

Good evening,

I've created a script to track new users seeking to be adopted.

Every 20 minutes, my bot queries In category since and edit the page if needed.

So, adopters can watch this page to immediately (well... with at more 19 minutes 59 secondes lag) know there is someone to adopt.

Do you want I also maintain this page here?

If yes, what the {{User}} template do you prefer?

--Dereckson (talk) 20:04, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Some suggestions:
  • Unless your bot offers additional value, other editors may ask why the link to the category page isn't sufficient. After all, that will have the same names as the list that your bot creates. I suggest that you add, to the new subpage, that date that the adoption request was made (that is, the date that the bot copies the name from the category to the page); this would give editors a sense of who has been waiting the longest to be adopted, which is something the category page does not do.
  • It's not clear why you're asking about a User template; the short answer is that it's not clear why anyone has to change anything that they're doing right now. So any templates now in use will continue in use. No new templates should be needed (if I'm missing the point as to why a new one is needed, please specify.) -- John Broughton (♫♫) 15:22, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
Actually, the category does tell you who has been waiting longest; it's ordered by date the template was added, so the people at the top of the list have been waiting longest. --Sopoforic (talk) 06:27, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, didn't read the fine print. One reason I didn't was because there are inconsistencies - not all requests are listed under the number "2", so not all requests are in fact being chronologically listed. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 20:48, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
Look User:Dereckson/AdoptMeList, it's very useful to have the link to the Special:Contributions, so we can immediately see what kind of contribs the newcomer makes. There is no need for a new template, I ask what the ideal format to print the user.
Mdnavid (talk · contribs · count · logs · email) (since 2007-12-15 18:27:10) seems great but maybe too long? --Dereckson (talk) 17:30, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Lectures

Kim Bruning has proposed doing some lectures on various topics on IRC to help out the newer users. Adopters, you might consider giving a lecture, and you might want to let your adoptees know about them once a date is set in case they'd like to attend. Planning is happening at Misplaced Pages:Lectures (and in IRC in #wikipedia at the moment). --Sopoforic (talk) 06:07, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Redesign implemented

I've finally gotten around to implementing the redesign I proposed ages ago. The affected areas are the main page and the adoptees' area. My single goal was to simplify everything so that the potential adoptees could more easily see what they needed to do to get adopted, and I think that I've made good progress for that. Certainly the old main page was a terrible mess of userboxes and too-long instructions.

Anyone who thinks they can improve it should of course feel free, but I do ask that you try to keep down on the clutter. --Sopoforic (talk) 06:24, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Someone who really needs help

Florentino floro could really use some help, and I think adoption might be the only way he could be a constructive member of Misplaced Pages. A quick look at his talk page and his bio here on Misplaced Pages should help explain. Beeblbrox (talk) 03:13, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

I have also dropped by his talk page and suggested he ask to be adopted Beeblbrox (talk) 03:21, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Help on criteria

Hello,

I wish to adopt somebody. I exceed all the criteria on the home page of the Adopt-a-user project, except one: I was blocked for 2 days for personal attacks on 4 February this year, breaking the criteria for blocks. However, I feel that I have reformed, and I do not have any more issues (I think, but most of you would too, I suppose) with this. Can I be allowed to adopt? contribsSTYROFOAM☭1994 00:45, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Of course! We've all made mistakes in the past, goes the cliche. And I'm sure you'd make a wonderful adopter. Master of Puppets Call me MoP!☺ 22:57, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Getting adopted

I put a notice on my user page seeking adoption, but no one has responded. Do I have to actively seek out someone to adopt me, or do I just wait until I get noticed? Ecoleetage (talk) 18:09, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

I think it's better to wait passively, because other people might get annoyed. Someone is bound to come by you. STYROFOAM1994 19:24, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

i am willing to adopt Grandoldman (talk) 13:23, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm afraid you're probably not ready to adopt yet. You have less that 25 edits in mainspace and talk, and most of your other edits are to user pages and user talk pages. You should probably wait a little while to familiarise yourself with with Misplaced Pages a little more. There are a large number of processes and situations that can come up, which your adoptees might need help with, but that are rare enough that you won't necessarily encounter them right away. For this reason, we prefer that editors have at least 500 edits before adopting other users. If I may, I would recommend joining a wikiproject and working with them on some articles--that will help you to get experience both with the collaborative aspects of editing and the processes that typically come up--e.g. AFD, GA and WP:FA. Once you've got a little more experience, feel free to come back here and adopt. We'll be happy to have you, when you're ready. --Sopoforic (talk) 21:14, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
My reply wasn't to you, it was to User:Grandoldman. He removed his comment, though, which made my comment seem out of place. I've restored it. --Sopoforic (talk) 22:42, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Question

When you put a notice on your userpage to get adopted, is your name put on a list somewhere, or do you just hope someone stumbles upon your userpage?

Youre dreaming eh? (talk) 23:07, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, you're automatically placed in Category:Wikipedians seeking to be adopted in Adopt-a-user. CattleGirl 23:46, 30 March 2008 (UTC)


Adoption Question

My User Id: Crimson Red Fox, I am new to Misplaced Pages and have been adopted! Yeah! One problem, I don't know how to locate users on Misplaced Pages. I have been adoped by Steve_Crossin, please tell me how I can locate him. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Crimson Red Fox (talk • contribs) 19:52, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

You can reach his user page by typing User:Steve Crossin in the seearch box or his talk page by changing "User" to "User talk". It looks like based on his talk page that you already found him so hopefully he will be able to give you more useful tips on navigating the wiki. Good luck. Stardust8212 20:27, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Question

I would like to adopt a user but I was blocked back in january for having a multi-user account. Can I still adopt? RC-0722 /1 20:10, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi, the guidelines state that nobody should have had no blocks in the last six months, but I don't see that it should really stop you. You seem to meet all of the other criteria. Also, the guidelines suggest that if you choose to nominate a co-adopter then this would definitely not be an issue. Hope this helps. Reece (Talk) (Contributions) 17:45, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Co-adoption - legal?

Is co-adoption legal? I know there was a page a while back that User:RyRy5 was using to run his own adoption program and hire other "teachers", which got deleted. But I'm still not sure if that makes co-adoption illegal or not. - DiligentTerrier (and friends) 18:58, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure it's ok, I remember even seeing a note that you can seek a co-adopter if your adopter is busy often, or something. I'll try and find where I saw that. xenocidic (talk) 20:21, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
Here: Misplaced Pages:Adopt-a-User/Adopter's Area
“ If a user does not meet the above criteria but still adopts, then the adoptee should be informed of the situation and they should have a co-adopter. ”
I also thought I saw it somewhere else, but can't find that right now. cheers, xenocidic (talk) 20:23, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
Co-adoption should be fine, at least I don't think i've ever seen it written that it isn't legal. I can't see why there would be any problem with it. Reece (Talk) (Contributions) 17:53, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
Co-adoption is fine. In general, anything which can help adoptees is fine, whether we have anything codifying it or not. --Sopoforic (talk) 18:23, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Block in the last 6 months?

I would like to adopt User:Supeyman, but I did have a minor 12 hour block almost 4 months ago, when I was a newbie. I have completely reformed, and I now have 4,000 total edits, 3,000 in the mainspace, a featured article, 10 DYKs, and I am a rollbacker. I'm just wondering if I can go through with this. Editorofthewiki 14:29, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

I'd say go for it, especially if you are going to be a co-adopter with Bark. xenocidic (talk) 14:36, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
You'll be fine. Malinaccier (talk) 14:39, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
The following discussion is archived. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

The result was modify guideline to Adopters should not have any recent blocks or caused vandalism in the last 3 months. xenocidic (talk) 18:06, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Adoption critera regarding blocks

We've had several users over the last few months asking about this criterion:

"Adopters should not have any recent blocks (last 6 months) or caused vandalism (last 3 months)."

Typically, they've had a block two or three months ago, and want to know whether it will be okay for them to adopt. And we tell them that it should be fine. So, I propose that we change this criterion to read:

"Adopters should not have been blocked or performed vandalism in the last two months."

This should provide a cut-off date that's a little more in line with what everyone seems to feel is reasonable. What do you think? --Sopoforic (talk) 15:17, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Hrm... I'd say three months is a better cooling off period. I agree 6 is a rather long time. xenocidic (talk) 17:49, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
I'm undecided, but I think this should go to the Village Pump proposals page for further discussion. Also, has anyone taken a look at the original discussions where they decided on this guideline. - DiligentTerrier (and friends) 17:50, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
This is just an internal matter; there's no reason to take it to the village pump. As for 'the original discussions', there weren't any. These requirements seem to have been added by Randfan back in October 2006, when they included "Be a member of Esperanza", "Be a member of the Kindness Campaign (KC)", "Must have a co-adopter for every one adoptee. If you have three adoptees or more that you are helping you must have at least have two other adopters for every adoptee, one of which doesn't have more than two adoptees", and the no blocks in the last year. It's been toned down since then, but it seems not enough.
Three months should be okay as well. My concern is just that six months is unreasonably long. --Sopoforic (talk) 18:03, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
I would agree with you that 6 months is way too long. 3 months sounds about right. I can;t see any reason to go to the village pump, best to just hold a quick vote here, as it is an internal matter. Reece (Talk) (Contributions) 08:09, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Here is the link to where the founding users of this program appear to have had a few discussions: Misplaced Pages talk:Adopt-a-User/Criteria. - DiligentTerrier (and friends) 11:49, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Here are the other archived discussions: . - DiligentTerrier (and friends) 11:51, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.


The following discussion is archived. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The result was do not merge. xenocidic ( talk ¿ review ) 20:53, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Merge with help desk?

As far as I can tell, the purpose of adoption is for newbies to get help with various things. Is this not redundant with Misplaced Pages:Help desk? The help desk has the advantages of being less formal, and having a broader base of editors to help you rather than just your one adopter. Any reason to keep this around? I say we mark it as historical and refer people to the help desk instead. Friday (talk) 19:19, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

AAU is for users who want long-term one-on-one assistance. xenocidic (talk) 19:31, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
Right.. and is long term one-on-one assistance from one specific editor better in some way than being able to get questions answered quickly and easily as they come up? I don't immediately see how it would be better, and I can think of ways it's worse. If the help desk can provide the useful parts of the adoption experience in an easier and more lightweight way, it seems like a suitable replacement. The leftover parts of the adoption experience are just social networking crap which we want to discourage anyway. Friday (talk) 21:13, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
I think some users might be overwhelmed or timid at asking at a help desk but adding a tag to their userpage and a friendly individual coming around to offer guidance is easier. I'm not sure why you're so interesting in deprecating this program, it's not harming anyone. Perhaps a link to the Help desk from the AAU landing page might be of some use, but still, I don't see the 'net positive' in deep-sixing AAU. xenocidic (talk) 22:10, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
Exactly, and adopters can follow up and mentor their adoptees in a way that users at the help desk could never do. - DiligentTerrier (and friends) 22:36, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
Insofar as the 'social networking crap' makes users more comfortable and more likely to contribute, we actually want to encourage it. Obviously, we don't encourage socializing for the sake of socializing, but that's not what goes on here--the adoption program provides new users with a relationship with a more experience editor that they can go to with questions.
Some users are, I think, simply more comfortable in the more 'intimate' environment afforded by adoption. I don't see any reason we shouldn't accommodate them as well as the users who are comfortable posting questions on the help desk or whichever talk pages may be appropriate. --Sopoforic (talk) 01:26, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.


Harassment

Hey! I think what Ya Boi Krakerz wrote to my adoptee's guestbook, is considered to be a harassment. I'm not sure what to do in this situation. Can you people enlighten me? EliAS 20:46, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

I wouldn't call it harassment, per se. Tasteless, yes. If she doesn't want the comment in her guestbook, it can be deleted. xenocidic ( talk ¿ review ) 20:52, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for clearing things up. I wasn't sure about that. EliAS 15:27, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Oversight and "private" adoption programs

Wondered what the folks involved with this think about people running adoption programs independently from this. In the few times I've noticed them, it's concerned me because the "adopter" has been an obviously clueless editor. It's more a case of the blind leading the blind than anything else. Is there some amount of oversight that goes into "official" adoptions done via this page to help prevent this? Certainly, if someone is obviously clueless, we don't want them running amok leading newbies astray. How does this program prevent this, and should adoptions done outside of this program be discouraged? Friday (talk) 15:08, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

I've been observing what prompted this, and I'm really not sure how to address it. Technically, free-lance adoption programmes are not supposed to be run per the RyRy et. al MFD, but the one you're talking about is purporting to be involved with WP:AAU. If you look at my adoption subpage, I make it quite clear it's not its own adoption program, as should others. as for the oversight issue, I simply don't know. xenocidic ( talk ¿ review ) 15:18, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
I don't know which particular people you're talking about, so I'll speak generally: in the case of one user offering to help another in a way similar to what we do here, but not as part of the AAU program, this just isn't our concern. People are free to act as they choose, after all. As for people claiming to be adopters in the AAU program who don't fulfill the requirements, that is a little more of a problem. For the most part, we have to rely on people not to lie about themselves and hope that we catch people who do.
I don't know how common it is for unqualified people to claim to adopt as part of this program--I'm sure I've seen two or three instances of it over the last year and a half, but unless there are lots of people doing it who aren't caught, it's probably not too big a deal. I expect it'd be fairly trivial to throw together a program to scan over all the people in the adopters category to check whether they meet at least the edit count requirement. This would only catch people using the userbox/category, though, but there's no way for us to monitor everyone.
Regarding your final question: I don't think we should attempt to discourage people from helping one another. The value of this program is that it provides an easy way to connect new users with experienced users, and, in theory at least, ensures that the 'experienced users' really are experienced. I don't see any reason that we should wish to prevent people from 'adopting' or 'mentoring' or what-have-you on their own, though. This program is far from perfect, after all, so people should feel free to work outside it as well, just as long as it's clear that's what they're doing. --Sopoforic (talk) 18:56, 23 May 2008 (UTC)


The following discussion is archived. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The result of the discussion was: moot point - user exercised right to vanish. xenocidic (talk) 17:31, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

(unnamed adopter)

Im concerned about this user being an adopter on the following grounds. (removed name)

  1. He has 1200 edits, 1/3 without edit summeries.
  2. He has made offerings 4/5th of the users seeking adoption, has not removed thier request notice either
  3. He has not adopted anyone in the past.
  4. He has not listed himself as an adopter
  5. He has not been adopted.

What are your views?   «l| Ψrom3th3ăn ™ |l»  08:48, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

While s/he meets the criteria, I am concerned that s/he may be overextending themself. and yes, when offering adoption, the "adoptme" template should be replaced with the "adoptoffer" to clear out the category. As far as not listing, s/he is displaying the adopting userbox - there is no rule that you must be listed in the detailed page - but it is recommended. xenocidic (talk) 15:36, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
The following discussion is archived. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The result was keep the current name. –xenocidic (talk) 13:23, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

rename the program?

I prefer simple "mentorship" as the name of the program or, if it is going to be restricted to new users, "mentorship of new users." "Adopt" implies a parent-child relationship that I do not think is apropos here. Bwrs (talk) 18:39, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

  • Seems like an awful lot of work for a slight semantic change. "Adopt" has a lot of easy modifiers... "Adopting" "Adoptee" Adopter" "Adopted" - mentorship not as much. xenocidic (talk) 18:43, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Oppose Per above Mww113 (talk) 16:02, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Oppose per xenocidic. Plus "adoption" is a well-established term here, whilst "mentorship" is more commonly used here for "problematic users" who need a close eye on their edits because of past behavioural issues. Best kept apart.
  • Oppose "Adoption" is very popular and you would have to change all the userboxes, templates, ect.Wikidude57 I am Stinky Stanley! 14:22, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.


Can an adoptee be an adopter also at the same time?

Could they? Wikidude57 Go Red Sox! 21:32, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

No - see point 4 of the adopter criteria. If someone is being adopted, it is because they think they need help from an experienced Wikipedian. I don't see why someone who actually needs such help would be in a position to help another adoptee to the same degree that a more experienced adopter could. Bencherlite 06:16, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
I was just wondering.Wikidude57 I am Stinky Stanley! 14:19, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi.

Hello all, I was adopted several months ago, and I was once asked by my adopter if I wished to graduate the program, at the time I didn't feel I was ready. I recently have decided that I personally feel ready, and I contacted my adopter, but he has been busy with school and hasn't been on lately, is there anything I can or should do? Or should I just wait it out. (Waiting it out isn't a problem for me, but if it could be resolved that would be better.) --JpGrB 08:32, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Um...you could just be bold, remove your name from the WP:ADOPT page, and update the relevant userboxes on your, and your adopter's pages. I think there's a box specifically for graduation even. If your adopter thought you were ready a while ago, presumably they still think so now. It's wikipedia, nothing's ever deleted, so if they disagree it's not that difficult to change back. WLU (talk) 13:18, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
The relevant userbox is {{AdopteeGrad|AdopterName}}. And I agree with WLU's suggested course of action. –xenocidic (talk) 13:21, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
Thank you all, that helps. And thank you for providing the box. --JpGrB 23:01, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
Little side question, now that I've "graduated", may I possibly become an adopter? If I qualify? --JpGrB 01:46, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
Of course =) –xeno (talk) 03:30, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Need to be adopt

i really need to be adopted, and no one has adopted me, seems like its not working, i have been waiting for a while, and i have contact some users directly.

--Daisy404 (talk) 03:17, 28 July 2008 (UTC)daisy404--Daisy404 (talk) 03:17, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

looking to be adopted

im looking to be adopted {{adoptme|20080728032631}}


--Daisy404 (talk) 03:26, 28 July 2008 (UTC)daisy404--Daisy404 (talk) 03:26, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

I've left a message for a user who I think might be available to adopt you. If he's unable to, I will, but at this moment, I'm off to bed. Best of luck, –xeno (talk) 03:31, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

User:Kitty53 needs new adopter

User:Ursasapien adopted User:Kitty53 in May and was trying to help her deal with a lot of issues with creating unnotable biography articles for anime voice actors, sourcing, etc. I think he'd gotten her to the point she made articles in her userspace, then had him review them before moving them to the main space to ensure they met WP:BIO. Alas, he has been away from Wiki since June due to health reasons, and Kitty has started back creating lots and lots of unnotable voice actors, and asking for help all over the place without really knowing what she's doing (including inappropriate use of the {{help}} template and asking for people to cheer her up). I'm pretty sure she is a minor, and tends to get upset when her articles are CSD, but she seems like a nice enough kid and never gets nasty about it, just mildly dramatic and emotional. Anyone want to step in and take over mentoring her so she doesn't keep having articles deleted and can learn to be a better Misplaced Pages? -- ] (] · ]) 02:26, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

It seems that someone's taken the reins and became a mentor for her already. - Zero1328 Talk? 21:41, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
Yep, meant to come update. -- ] (] · ]) 23:04, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Inactive adoptees

I'm not sure if this has been discussed before, but I've noticed that my adoptees have become inactive (three last edited in January 2008, and one a year ago). Given the long period of time, I'm assuming that they are not coming back, either because they got bored with Misplaced Pages and decided it wasn't for them, or I'm a bad adopter—I'm hoping not the latter.

I wondered if there are other cases of this or if some standard practice is in place. Frankly, I'm not sure if I should keep the adoptee boxes on my userpage for people I don't think will return to editing, but I worry they may pop back in think I've forgotten about them. Any thoughts? (Guyinblack25 21:38, 20 August 2008 (UTC))

Hi Guyinblack25, i've found that if you dont think your adoptee will come back to the project, they usually won't. It won't be anything you've done that's driven them away, some people just don't find the project is for them. Previously i have had adoptees stop adopting, and i've found that the best way to deal with it is to leave a note on the adoptees talk page, stating that you are ending the adoption, but then say that if they do come back, you will happily pick up were you left off as adopter. Then you can happily remove the boxes. Hope this helps. Reece (Talk) (Contributions) 22:20, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
Hi GIB! I actually don't display a userbox for each individual adoptee, I have a table (User talk:Xenocidic/wikiadopt/header) transcluded onto my main adoption page (User talk:Xenocidic/wikiadopt) and when they become inactive, I just "noinclude" them on the table so they don't get transcluded onto the main adoption page and make a note of their last edit date. Feel free to robbe anything you want from my pages. –xeno (talk) 22:24, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the feedback. (Guyinblack25 22:58, 20 August 2008 (UTC))

question

are u allowed to have more than one adopter, --Daisy404 (talk) 20:48, 25 August 2008 (UTC)daisy404--Daisy404 (talk) 20:48, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Referral from context of WP:AN/I?

I don't know whether or not this is urgent? If this is urgent, I am responding with appropriate urgency to a well-intentioned suggestion.

The following comes from Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:Tenmei's abusing AfD and personal attacks.

This posting was addressed to Caspian blue:

  • I think you are overreacting, because the fundamental problem with Tenmei is his inability to make himself understood, not civility issues. It is not my intention to mock you. The other blocks is less indicative than what I assumed when looking at your log, and as such is not really relevant to this discussion. Taemyr (talk) 21:49, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

This posting was addressed to me:

  • Tenmei, I urge you to seek a Mentor. The fact that most editors find your style of discussion to be difficult to understand, as well as tending to sidetrack the discussion, is going to be a problem for you and editors around you until you substantially improve your prose. Taemyr (talk) 21:55, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

I thought I'd made an on-point contribution to this thread; and Taemyr's response was the following, which suggests that it was not seen as helpful or appropriate in the context.

  • Something definitely needs to be done about Tenmei's style of discussion if he is to be a constructive participant in this project. I suggested mentorship higher up in this tread. Taemyr (talk) 21:19, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

The following is the text I posted. Taemyr's reaction was not what I would have expected -- not positive or approving, to be sure. --Tenmei (talk) 21:46, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Extended content
When two men fight over a woman it's the fight they want, not the woman
It seems to me that there's a commonly-used American expression which applies here -- an old joke that when two men fight over a woman it's the fight they want, not the woman. I think it's the fight itself which is most important to Caspian blue. At best, maybe it's an adolescent attempt to do what seems to be the right thing ... but somehow the best intentions fall a little short of the mark? I don't think anyone can sort this one out. I know I can't.
The more important problem at hand is that there are likely to be other similarly-motivated wiki-editors who make the prospects doubtful for any article which includes both Korean and Japanese themes. The future is especially uncertain for articles like Korean missions to Edo and Joseon Tongsinsa which rely for their ultimate success on a collaborative merging of Korean and Japanese scholarship.
These articles seem already to have become another one of those Sterling examples of wiki-failure. As some of us know quite well, there are some Misplaced Pages articles which have devolved into nothing but proxy battlefields in a centuries-old set of disputes between Korea and Japan, between Koreans and Japanese.
When I created the rough draft of Korean missions to Edo, I thought there was a chance that this specific subject could become a meaningful example of something else -- an illustration of something which worked out well to the advantage of everyone; but whatever progress I thought had been made was dashed when Caspian blue accused me of personal attacks and Korea-bashing. As everyone knows, this deflects attention away from working towards developing commonly-understood objectives ... and indeed, I had some reason to believe that an AfD discussion was working towards a consensus decision, but that was untimely closed merely because of the unsubstantiated allegations Caspian blue posted here.
I tried to find an example of this American saying on the Internet. The following is from a televised discussion about a political compromise in the US Senate in 2005. We don't really need to understand the politics of whatever it is these two men are analyzing -- the objective was simply to find an illustration of an apt phrase used in context.
JIM LEHRER: Take us through this, David. These are your folks -- the conservatives. How are the conservatives going to react to this? Is anybody going to have to pay a price, do you believe?
DAVID BROOKS: I don't think they'll have to pay a price. The conservative like James Dobson are apoplectic. James Dobson wakes up apoplectic. But, you know, they wanted to fight. I'm reminded of that old joke that when two men fight over a woman it's the fight they want, not the woman. They were geared up for this fight. But I think in a not-too-distant future people are going to see that this is a good win for those conservatives because ....
Two wiki-examples of wiki-failures are Liancourt Rocks and Comfort women. I recognize that the real-world disputes about these subjects are both controversial and valid; but the talk pages provide ample evidence that for many contributors, the proxy wiki-fights are more important to the combatants that the article itself.
In the example from American television offers another useful mirror in terms of a word I had to look up in the dictionary. Brooks says that "James Dobson wakes up apoplectic," meaning that he wakes up in morning highly excited, ready for a fight about what he believes in. If I've understood wiki-etiquette correctly, Brooks would be reprimanded at WP:AN/I for writing "Dobson wakes up apoplectic," but I think I can safely write that Caspian blue acts as if he were apoplectic before he clicks into a discussion about Joseon tongsinsa or Korean missions to Edo; and what seems like Caspian blue's frustrated anger is only indirectly related to whatever words are to be read on the computer screen.
For Caspian blue and other peers with whom there is common cause at articles like Liancourt Rocks and Comfort women, it appears as if it is often very difficult to maintain a distinction between what infuriates them in the real world and what is construed as inflammatory, offensive or personal attacks in the wiki-context.
When I nominated Joseon tongsinsa for deletion because it did not comply with WP:V, that was not an anti-Korean gesture.
When Caspian blue added an online Korean encyclopedia entry as a reference source for 4 in-line citations in Joseon tongsinsa, I translated the article via Bablefish. That was not an anti-Korean gesture.
The machine translation was largely unreadable, of course; but by simply highlighting the Gregorian calendar dates with a bold font, it became possible to show that there was no correlation between the alleged citations and the source. That was not an anti-Korean gesture.
I mistook the ensuing silence as an indication that the real work of merging reliably sourced information had at last begun. I was even proud of myself for having stumbled through the onerous task of machine-translated Korean to English which could be read by the other AfD discussion participants.
But NO -- that's not what happened. Instead, the modest momentum of constructive engagement was stalled, quashed, blocked. Instead, the consensus reality of wiki-dispute resolution focuses attention elsewhere. I predict this can only happen again and again ad nauseam as it has played out in other articles.
The task at hand is difficult enough, but it explicitly becomes a Sisyphean exercise unless something is done differently. In my view, Liancourt Rocks and Comfort women are doomed to failure because each are independently re-inventing the wheel over and over again.
Caspian blue has participated in both talk pages -- and I mention this only as a way of demonstrating a knowledge that both articles exist and that both illustrate talk page difficulties. In addition, I know about both these pages, and now anyone who reads these words will know as well -- but where is the wiki-mechanism which allows for a chance that participants at Talk:Korean missions to Edo can profit from the investments of time, energy, and intellectual engagement in difficult discussions on these talk pages?
Other than posting here, what can be done to avoid the endless cycle of re-inventing the wheel in Korean missions to Edo and other similarly difficult articles? --Tenmei (talk) 16:45, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Theresa Knott counsels: "You need to keep posts short. No one reads huge long posts. Try limiting yourself to a maximum of 5 sentences (normal length ones) or one short paragraph of 10 likes of text. That way people will actually read what you say." Although I want to post the following on her talk page, it is too long -- hence unhelpful, ineffective, useless.

Extended content
Theresa Knott --
I wonder if you could become a kind of "fulcrum" in ways neither of us can imagine yet?
As you know, Guy describes WP:ANI#User:Tenmei's abusing AfD and personal attacks as a "festival of Stupid" and Future Perfect at Sunrise characterizes it as mere "bickering." In that context, you represent a plausible fulcrum from which to leverage an ultimately constructive outcome:
Please re-visit just the second clause from a sentence which knowingly mis-states my AfD position: Caspian blue's summary of the complaint at hand:
  • Tenmei ... also claims that the nominated article should be completely deleted even after it is getting cited with a reliable source by me.
For the moment, set aside the fact that each of the following explained that the only way to invite assistance from the Article Rescue Squadron was by nominating an otherwise unsourced article for deletion:
Just focusing on that second clause, Caspian blue slyly managed to avoid scrutiny of the Korean language source which was cited. All that was needed was changing the venue from the fully-engaged AfD discussion thread to this one where the issues could be re-framed in more superficial terms. The AfD was summarily closed by Seicer because of Caspian blue's unsupported allegations that the discussion had degenerated into personal abuse. Future Perfect at Sunrise has now merged the articles. In my view, it was only possible to get as far as we had done because there were a sufficient number of others participating in the AfD discussion.
It plainly took more time to struggle with figuring out how to engage a process to resolve the WP:V problems with the rescue process than it took to locate and post a single Korean language encyclopedia entry. It took longer to translate the source than Caspian blue has invested in making a substantive contribution to article content. What was this really all about? I don't know, but I do know that this specific on-line text does not support any of the specific sentences for which it was cited.
QED: From this experience, Caspian blue will have learned that this is an effective gambit. There's no arguing with its success; and as a special bonus, the exercise furthers an unfathomable anti-Japanese vendetta. This was a victory in a one-sided fight was gained with relatively little effort except for a bit of argumentative prose. The disputing itself has value because of a modest adrenalin-boost fuels a practice-session which improves Caspian blue English fluency.
Who can deny that Caspian blue achieved a defined set of goals? I would have wanted to add some part of the above to the thread which is soon to be archived; but I can't see how to explain myself more succinctly than this. Why is this outcome a good one?
Perhaps you may become a fulcrum at some point in a future in which Caspian blue's over-reaching comes to your attention in a dispute involving someone else? --Tenmei (talk) 20:23, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
Categories: