Wikipedia:Lectures/log
*: Now talking on #wikipedia-en-lectures
*: kornbluth.freenode.net sets mode +n #wikipedia-en-lectures
*: kornbluth.freenode.net sets mode +s #wikipedia-en-lectures
*: #wikipedia-en-lectures :[freenode-info] help freenode weed out clonebots, please register your IRC nick and auto-identify: http://freenode.net/faq.shtml#nicksetup
*: Notify: sanna is online (kornbluth.freenode.net).
*: Notify: siebrand is online (kornbluth.freenode.net).
*: White_Cat (i=EVA@wikimedia/White-Cat) has joined #wikipedia-en-lectures
kim_: yes, it is quiet here :-P
*: kim_ has changed the topic to: lecture here at 15:00 UTC (17:00 CEST)
White_Cat: its 15:47
White_Cat: my local time
kim_: that's an odd local time, where are you?
White_Cat: +2
White_Cat: not that ODD
White_Cat: its actualy even
kim_: +2?
kim_: eh?
kim_: you're at +2+1?
kim_: currently CEST = UTC+0200
kim_: and CEST=15:05
*: kim_ wonders where White_Cat lives
White_Cat: Day Light Savings
kim_: yes but where do you live?
*: snowolf (n=snowolf@wikimedia/Snowolf) has joined #wikipedia-en-lectures
kim_: Helo!
kim_: quiet here!
kim_: 1 hour to go
snowolf:
snowolf: at's the channel about?
*: theoB (n=jazz@bruning.xs4all.nl) has joined #wikipedia-en-lectures
kim_: Heya theo, heya snowolf
theoB: hi kim
kim_: I think today I'll explain 5 pillars
kim_: and history of that
kim_: just as a boring topic to get started
kim_: and then as people ask questions I'll switch to answering exciting questions ;-)
kim_: for folks just joining
*: kim_ nudges theoB
kim_: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Five_Pillars
kim_: if that doesn't incite riots quite yet...
kim_: ... we could always discuss this blog post :
kim_: http://nonnotablenatterings.blogspot.com/2008/04/more-on-anonymity.html
White_Cat: mmm
kim_: mmm?
kim_: well.. looks like things weren't popular at all..
kim_: saves me some time
kim_: gets me to report that lectures no worky :-P
kim_: of course, everyone might start trickling in any moment
kim_: anyone here want to help me alert people that lectures are starting?
*: Lucifer_Cat (n=chatzill@unaffiliated/workingcat/x-518352) has joined #wikipedia-en-lectures
White_Cat: kim_ well
*: SynergeticMag (n=chatzill@70-9-170-79.area4.spcsdns.net) has joined #wikipedia-en-lectures
*: Pilotguy_aw (n=ThetaXi@wikinews/pilotguy) has joined #wikipedia-en-lectures
White_Cat: the idea of a lecture over IRC is a bit flawed
*: Lucifer_Cat puts in a request to ban canines and relatives from the room.
White_Cat: a video would be better :P
White_Cat: CANVASSED!
Lucifer_Cat: well hes away
Lucifer_Cat: anyways, kim_ go on
Pilotguy_aw: lol
*: Pilotguy_aw is now known as Pilotguy
*: GofG (n=godogame@cpe-069-134-155-140.nc.res.rr.com) has joined #wikipedia-en-lectures
*: ST47 (i=st47@wikipedia/ST47) has joined #wikipedia-en-lectures
Pilotguy: Meh, I think an IRC lecture works
*: Maximr (n=chatzill@unaffiliated/maximr2) has joined #wikipedia-en-lectures
Pilotguy: GofG- Ask kim_
*: Maximr (n=chatzill@unaffiliated/maximr2) has left #wikipedia-en-lectures
kim_: Hello!
kim_: Ok
ST47: Hello!
kim_: I'm just going down the list of people who signed on previously
kim_: and just leaving them a message that lecture starts now
kim_: I'm going to start out dronging about the 5 pillars and how they started
kim_: and I hope to get interesting questions
kim_: which we'll then spend the hour answering
*: kibble (n=kibble@wikimedia/Cbrown1023) has joined #wikipedia-en-lectures
kibble: _O
kim_: start in ~ 5 minutes max :-)
kim_: hello kibble!
*: kibble wonders what this is
kibble: eya
kim_: Going to do a talk about how to influence the cabal ;-)
kibble: un
kim_: That's what I thought
kim_: let's see
GofG: Which particular cabal?
kim_: The wikipedia cabal
kim_: the big one ;-)
kim_: that doesn't actually exist, of course (tinc)
kim_: Still need to notify 11 people
kim_: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Lectures
kim_: urk
kim_: under:
kim_: ""I think I already know this stuff, but I'd love to sit in anyway"
kim_: So for the new folks
kim_: starting in a minute or ... two ... (could someone help notify the last 11 people?)
kim_: I'd like to start talking about the 5 pillars
kim_: and how they started
kim_: hmm, I'll add a link so folks have something to look at
kim_: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikirules_proposal
kim_: ^- this was the initial proposal that eventually lead to the 5 pillars
kim_: read that through for a minute :-)
kim_: This will be fairly interactive, I hope
kim_: Wikirules proposal is several influentual wikipedians asking if folks could set a simpler ruleset for wikipedia
kim_: I "subverted" the proposal, using some wiki-knowlege... so that might be a good place to start discussing how to do world domination
kim_: see if you can identify who each of the people on that page was or is :-)
kim_: I'll go notify the last 11 people in the mean time
kim_: Can I get some help? (show of hands? :-) )
*: SynergeticMag shows his hand
*: Lucifer_Cat raises but had zoned out
*: SynergeticMag was about to notify Kim_Bruning
kim_: SynergeticMag, :-P
Lucifer_Cat: lol i suppose thats kim_
Lucifer_Cat: kim bruning reminds me of kimpossible
kim_: yeah this is going to be a bit messy the first time we do this
kim_: still need to get people sorted and stuff ;-)
SynergeticMag: Luna-San is on irc right now but away, I've notified him here instead
Lucifer_Cat: so i quanticle
Lucifer_Cat: so is*
kim_: Lucifer_Cat, Erik Moeller thought the same, then I showed him some kim possible episodes
kim_: Lucifer_Cat, but you can cal me beep me when you wanna reach me anyway ;-)
kim_: call too
*: Lucifer_Cat has no idea who Erik Moeller is
White_Cat: ?
White_Cat: Kim possible?
SynergeticMag: tv show...
Lucifer_Cat: also, i've never watched kim possible, just seen some ads. so if theres any reference in there, i wont get it
White_Cat: kim_ that makes you non-notable cruft!
*: White_Cat deletes
White_Cat: :P
*: Lucifer_Cat has a question...
Lucifer_Cat: well nevermind.
White_Cat: kim_ so
White_Cat: you'll be lecturing in wikimania?
*: GofG is now known as GofG_Cat
GofG_Cat: Can I be a cat too?
kim_: Lucifer_Cat, go on?
kim_: we have a lot of hep cats here
Lucifer_Cat: GofG_Cat: sure you can
kim_: almost done notifying ;-)
Lucifer_Cat: kim_: nothing.
kim_: Ok, all notified
*: GofG_Cat is now known as GofG
Lucifer_Cat: GofG: :(
GofG: Sorry
GofG: I was talking in wikipedia-en
GofG: and realised that I look silly as a cat.
kim_: Ok
kim_: all notifying that was possible has been done
kim_: Gonna start out all boring like
kim_: so how many people here already know the 5 pillars?
GofG: That's a rather bold statement to make, kim_
SynergeticMag: Has anyone notified the other wikipedia irc channels?
GofG: >.< I'll shut up
SynergeticMag: I know about them
GofG: I'm aware of them, kim_
kim_: GofG, ROTFL ;-)
Lucifer_Cat: I read them a bit
kim_: Okay
*: SteveCrossin (n=chatzill@c211-28-55-181.frank1.vic.optusnet.com.au) has joined #wikipedia-en-lectures
SteveCrossin: hey guys sorry im late
*: GofG hugs SteveCrossin
SteveCrossin: internet broke about 30mins ago
kim_: heya!
kim_: :-)
kim_: LOL
kim_: Poor you!
kim_: it's ok
kim_: we were still busy notifying people
kim_: not everyone has their clocks set to UTC
SteveCrossin: my PC crashes today
SteveCrossin: had to reformat
kim_: SynergeticMag, feel free to notify other channels
SteveCrossin: i need a user blocked for 24 hours
*: Received a CTCP PING 1041842898906 from SynergeticMag
SteveCrossin: incivility with warnings
SteveCrossin: im the mediator
kim_: ok, so 5 pillars are that wikipedia is an encyclopedia, it has a neutral point of view, wikipeida is free content, there's a code of conduct (etiquette) , and it doesn't have firm rules
SteveCrossin: and theyve been notified of it
kim_: that's the current 5 pillars
kim_: SteveCrossin, wrong channel for that!
SteveCrossin: sorry
kim_: SteveCrossin, 's ok :-)
kim_: SteveCrossin, ask on #wikipedia-en :-)
kim_: Ok...
kim_: Starting lecture officially now
kim_: So hello everyone, welcome to this first irc lecture :-)
GofG: Howdy Kim!
*: GofG hugs kim_
kim_: we're starting about half an hour late, due to having to notify people who didn't have their clocks set to UTC, we might expect some more people to trickle in as time progresses
*: kim_ gets hugged (only on irc folks! ;-) )
kim_: so I'm the person doing most of the talking today... but to spare my poor wrists, I hope to get people talking with each other as well at some point
kim_: I'm going to start out somewhat boringly with the 5 pillars
kim_: and then I hope to get questions and we can take interesting side routes
kim_: especially drifting off towards consensus and some cool work kevin murray has been doing, or some old work by nullc (Greg Maxwell)
kim_: Okay, so in january of 2005, people started seeing that wikipedias rules were getting way too complex, and they wanted to set up a commission to discuss how wikipedia policy could be improved
kim_: Now several months later, they were still in the process of setting up that commission
kim_: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikirules_proposal
kim_: But then someone http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Wikirules_proposal&diff=12123669&oldid=11992320
kim_:
kim_: namely to use the wiki
kim_: and when the wiki was applied to the same process...
kim_: we basically got several pages of work WP:SR (simplified ruleset) , WP:TRI (policy trifecta) and WP:5P (5 pillars)
kim_: does everyone know how to look up those pages?
*: kim_ triplechecks
SteveCrossin: yeah
SteveCrossin: u taught me about trifecta :)
SynergeticMag: yup
kim_: I know of one person who might not... basically you go to en.wikipedia.org and type what's inside the square brackets in the search box (so type WP:TRI in the search box to get a page about the trifecta, it's a useful shortcut)
kim_: (also, some folks reading the log might find that handy)
kim_: so after 5 minutes of furious typing... here's a question to the channel to solve...
kim_: what's the difference between WP:TRI and WP:5P , which 2 rules hav been added?
*: Seddon (n=chatzill@unaffiliated/seddon69) has joined #wikipedia-en-lectures
Seddon: any apologies for my late arrival
Seddon: have been up a mountain all day
*: SynergeticMag will provide the links the links http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:TRI, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:5_pillars, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sr
kim_: heya seddon, we're just comparing WP:TRI with WP:5P ...
kim_: SynergeticMag, thank you! :-)
kim_: but on the current wikipedia, we really see 2 trifectas emerging
GofG: well
kim_: one is the wiki-trifecta
kim_: the other the encyclopedia one ...
kim_: GofG, go on?
GofG: No, nevermind
kim_: *sigh*
kim_: Oh well
kim_: Anyone so far?
SynergeticMag: of course IAR is one
kim_: SynergeticMag, IAR is the 5th rule of the 5 pillars :-)
kim_: so that's common between the two. yup :-)
SynergeticMag: oh you're looking for the difference's?
kim_: heh, and on the 5 pillars, WP:Etiquette replaces "Don't be a dick"
kim_: hmm, I wonder why they did that? :-P
GofG: Well, "Wikipedia is an Encyclopedia" implies a lot more in it than "Wikipedia should have an NPOV"
SteveCrossin: i think WP:DICK is the universal behavioural guideline
kim_: GofG, *nodnod*
kim_: SteveCrossin,
SteveCrossin: like I told you once, if you follow WP:DICK
SteveCrossin: you cant go wrong
kim_: Of course, these days people say "please be civil" instead
GofG: The former implying things like verifiability, proper style, and NPOV
kim_: which is the same difference
GofG: the latter implying simply NPOV
kim_: GofG, right
kim_: so the 5 pillars are more all-inclusive
GofG: Except that
*: kim_ listnes
GofG: NPOV is in the 2nd pillar
*: kim_ listens too
Seddon: ht if what you considered being a dick to be normal in your society and something which is perhaps expected
GofG: It's more like
Seddon: eople have different interpretations of what a "dick" is
kim_: GofG, so NPOV gets stressed some more?
GofG: They split up TRI's NPOV rule into 5P's Encyclopedia rule and 5P's NPOV rule
kim_: GofG, right
GofG: I would say that Encyclopedia gets stressed more, since they took it out of NPOV and made it its own section
GofG: But I could very easiliy be wrong
kim_: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Five_pillars&oldid=13207659
kim_: GofG, you could have a point
kim_: here's the original 5 pillars written by neutrality
kim_: if you want a look at the history of these pages, you can look at WT:SR , which has discussion about simplified rulesets, and eventually people proposing the trifecta
kim_: neutrality figured that the trifecta was a tad too simple
kim_: So ... do you folks think that these 5 rules really do cover all wikipedia activity?
GofG: I personally don't
kim_: GofG, what's missing?
GofG: All the.... beurocratic stuff
GofG: I dunno, it's hard to explain
GofG: There's a ton of politics going on
kim_:
Seddon: he nitty gritty perhaps?
kim_: Indeed
GofG: brb soup
kim_: GofG, so I'd like to cover some of the underlying politics perhaps :-)
kim_: soup! ;-)
kim_: Seddon, I guess so
*: SteveCrossin will be right back
SteveCrossin: i have a conflict to handle :/
SynergeticMag: which ones kim_:
GofG: Back
kim_: If you look at WP:SR , the original plan was to list only those things that you would need to obtain adminship ... in 2005
GofG: Ended up going for cereal >.<
kim_: wb
GofG: kim_: How so?
kim_: GofG, how so on which statement?
GofG: As in, "this is the model for a good editor"?
kim_: SteveCrossin, keep your window open and keep logging :-)
kim_: GofG, exactly :-)
SteveCrossin: will do
kim_: which is what wikipedia documentation is supposed to be about, right?
SteveCrossin: they were blocked
*: SteveCrossin sighs
kim_: SteveCrossin, awww
SteveCrossin: it had to happen
kim_: SteveCrossin, you wanted them to be blocked though, right?
GofG: Wasn't/isn't adminship acceptance extremely varied based on who happens to be voting at the time, though?
SteveCrossin: yes, extreme incivility
kim_: GofG, well, everyone is supposed to have a clue about what actually makes a good admin , right?
SynergeticMag: Can we keep the conversation on the topic if at all possible. I was getting interested in the discussion. :)
kim_: SynergeticMag, underlying politics? :-)
SynergeticMag: yes
kim_: alright, everyone else want to continue on that line? :-)
SynergeticMag: this sounds massive
Seddon: ell tbh i think RfA is the place where alot of politics can be found in a condensed manner
kim_: Seddon, indeed
kim_: I'll cover some basic theory, and then we can discuss... sound like a plan?
Seddon: k cool :)
kim_: naturally, I want to start out talking about consensus ;-)
kim_: so first question, what is consensus...?
kim_: Several folks might have some ideas themselves
GofG: Hmm
kim_: so what definitions do people have? (in 1 or 2 lines?)
SynergeticMag: consensus is something that is rarely seen and hardly ever achieved, yet referenced constantly
GofG: A state where everyone is content with the current state of the article, or if you're looking for a more general definition, a state where all involved parties are simply content with the state of things?
SynergeticMag: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Consensus
SynergeticMag: GofG: as i said :)
SynergeticMag: true consensus can never be achieved on wikipedia, since it cannot exist outside of it
kim_: SynergeticMag, well, we wrote a piece on that
kim_: at WP:SILENCE
SynergeticMag: i've seen it
kim_: (silence and consensus)
kim_: basically it says that you can never really know you have consensus on anything
kim_: you can only figure that maybe you didn't when someone objects
kim_: now we can actually tie that to RFA quite nicely...
kim_: so on requests for adminship (WP:RFA for people who want to find it quickly)
GofG: Really now?
GofG: Wow, lag, sec
kim_: people often challenge people's opinions don't they?
GofG: Yes
SynergeticMag: what seems to exist is the illusion of consensus, more like consensus until (fill in the blank/reason)
GofG: I remember on LV's RFA, people were annoyed that his name violated copyright laws
kim_: so do *support* opinions get challenged most , or do *oppose* opinions get challenged most? ;-)
kim_: SynergeticMag, *nod*
kim_: GofG, Oh wow
kim_: GofG, that might not have been a typical RFA
GofG: Hehe, it was fun to watch
SteveCrossin: ok
GofG: He had like 10,000 edits and knew exactly what he was doing
kim_: has everyone noticed this tendency to challenge opposes more than supports?
kim_: GofG, wow. Did he pass? :-P
GofG: Yeah, barely
GofG: But his name is "Lord Voldemort"
SynergeticMag: kim_: i've seen both, but usually it tends to go with the flow of an RfA, the trend i.e. herd mentality
kim_: incredible
GofG: come on rofl
SteveCrossin: whoa
kim_: He Who Must Not Be Named? ;-)
kim_: goodness, I'd oppose... obvious power-hunger there :-P
kim_: (just kidding ;-) )
kim_: SynergeticMag, you've seen people question supports as well?
SynergeticMag: of course
kim_: That's interesting to hear
SynergeticMag: i think it should be
kim_: SynergeticMag, typically when the majority is already opposed?
SynergeticMag: nope
kim_: Ok, very interesting
kim_: so do you all think it's appropriate to question a person's opinion?
SynergeticMag: there have been few and minor occasions when a supporter will not have a well thought out support
SynergeticMag: kim_: sure, why not?
SynergeticMag: if it lacks, it lacks, shouldn't matter if its a support or oppose
kim_:
kim_: well, we've been seeing some people say that you should leave a person to their opinions :-)
GofG: kim_: There is an excellent example currently on RFA
SynergeticMag: i do often ignore alot of pile on supports, but i'm speaking more about bad support rationale
kim_: but since we're working in a consensus system, discussing with opposers (and the occaisional support) is genrally a good idea
GofG: Lawrence Cohen's RFA, every single opposition has an entire conversation about it
GofG: while none of the supports have any comments on them whatsoever
SynergeticMag: i saw that
kim_: since there's an 80/20 bias, an oppose can be worth several supports, if you can negotiate with them and convince them to support you :-)
SynergeticMag: thats the actual trick there kim
SynergeticMag: "negotiate" can be seen as argumentitive
SynergeticMag: (sp?)
kim_: this is irc, spelling is secondary ;-)
SynergeticMag: lol
kim_: and if you're seen as too argumentative, that can lose you support, yup
GofG: So where's the balance?
SynergeticMag: the balance for consensus?
kim_: well, ideally, people wouldn't see it as being argumentative at all
SteveCrossin: ok im back
SteveCrossin: :/
kim_: but not everyone understands consensus systems, so there you have it ;-)
SteveCrossin:
kim_: by talking on irc, and later perhaps irl, one of my hopes is that the balance will shift towards more discussion
kim_: welcome back SteveCrossin , been working hard?
SynergeticMag: i agree, not everyone who participates in RfA (or even AfD's) always understands how things work
SteveCrossin: yeah i feel :/
SynergeticMag: and can obfuscate the entire process in a matter of seconds
kim_: SteveCrossin, I know how you feel. First block ever?
kim_: SynergeticMag, that quick? :-)
SteveCrossin: regarding to mediation, yea
SteveCrossin: other blocks, no
SteveCrossin: ive had lots blocked
kim_: SynergeticMag, maybe you'd like to list some examples later when we post the log
SteveCrossin: but never a mediation block
kim_: SteveCrossin, I see.
SteveCrossin: :/
kim_: SteveCrossin, doing good man. Chat with you about it later :-)
SynergeticMag: sure, if i have time, i unfortunately have to go to work soon
SteveCrossin: okay
*: SteveCrossin listens to the wise scholar, kim_ ;)
kim_: SynergeticMag, well, perhaps we should stop in 20 minutes or so?
kim_: SteveCrossin, ahuh ;-)
kim_: me and wise, that'll be the day
SteveCrossin: lol
SteveCrossin: um
SteveCrossin: "since there's an 80/20 bias, an oppose can be worth several supports, if you can negotiate with them and convince them to support you"
kim_: SteveCrossin, yes?
SteveCrossin: sort of like ArbCom?
kim_: how's that?
SteveCrossin: where one oppose subtracts a support
*: SteveCrossin is just thinking out loud
Seddon: this might sound a little farhetched) ok you could think about the battle for consensus as a kind of gorrilla warfare
Seddon: arfetched*
SteveCrossin: gorilla?
SteveCrossin: lol
Seddon: er :P
Seddon: nyway
SynergeticMag: actually, i don't have any example i can think of about confused consensus decisions regarding an RfA, what I actually meant was that inside of the consensus process, there tends to be opposes due to common misunderstandings
SynergeticMag: should have been more clear
SynergeticMag: apologies :)
GofG: guerilla, perhaps?
Seddon: hats even better
kim_: well
Seddon: mean sometimes it is often only one or two people fighting a corner
Seddon: nd they may have very serious points
kim_: Seddon, and later?
*: kim_ listens
*: SteveCrossin lets Seddon speak
SynergeticMag: but seldom our their points abuse of tools, or policy concerns
SynergeticMag: just minor nit picking
SynergeticMag: POV opposes
Seddon: his isnt just related to RfA its a wider problem
SynergeticMag: WP:IDONTLIKEIT
SynergeticMag: well it sparked from it Seddon
SynergeticMag: a spark gives birth to flames :)
SteveCrossin: WP:PAULINE
SteveCrossin: XD
Seddon: ery true
SteveCrossin: Pauline Hanson
kim_: right
SteveCrossin: sorry :P
kim_: how to deal with fighting like that might be an interesting topic for a later lecture
Seddon: greed :P
kim_: we might ask one of the current or old mediation cabal coordinators (or the medcom coordinator) to speak on that :-)
Seddon: ll let you get back on topic :p
kim_: I'll just go do some more 101 on policy
kim_: and show ye olde consensus chart
kim_: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Consensus_new_and_old.svg
kim_: this one differs somewhat from consensus process used IRL
kim_: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Consensus-flowchart.png
kim_: which looks more like this
kim_: the reason for this is that wikipedia is online, and a wiki
kim_: ;-)
SteveCrossin: heh
SteveCrossin: concerns raised -->block
SteveCrossin: thats what happened today :/
GofG: Why would that make a difference?
kim_: awww
kim_: GofG, That's a good question, and one which I don't have a full answer to yet :-)
kim_: something I'm still learning about myself
SteveCrossin: its gonna be harder now, but anyway, that can be discussed later :)
SteveCrossin: kim learning? :o
*: SteveCrossin thought kim_ already knew everything
kim_: the main reason i can figure is that we already have a structure in which we can hold our discussions
Lucifer_Cat: if he doesnt soon, we'll make sure hes kim_burning
kim_: SteveCrossin, no one knows everything ;-)
kim_: not anymore anyway
Lucifer_Cat: kim_: gandalf does.
Lucifer_Cat: ok did.
SteveCrossin: LOL
kim_: I used to have a friend who boasted she knew all wikipedia policy by heart
SteveCrossin: and..
kim_: but that was 2 years ago or so, and she's now no longer boasting ;-)
Lucifer_Cat: heh, didnt have anything better to do?
kim_: LOL, she was on medcab, and later on arbcom :-)
kim_: hence
Lucifer_Cat: medical cabinet?
SteveCrossin: LOL
kim_: Lucifer_Cat, mediation cabal , sorry WP:MEDCAB
kim_: and arbcom is arbitration committee WP:ARBCOM
Lucifer_Cat: im sure its not cabal
kim_: I use the famous abbreviations too often :-P
*: SynergeticMag says he should have tossed a link out
kim_: Lucifer_Cat, not sekrit enough? ;-)
SteveCrossin: TINC!!
kim_: SynergeticMag, goforit! ;-)
kim_: anyway
kim_: on a wiki we try to write everything in DocumentMode first ... hang on, that's a trickier link
Lucifer_Cat: We cannot confirm or deny our existence.
SynergeticMag: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:DISPUTE
Lucifer_Cat: lol
SynergeticMag: i decided to toss out the whole process
SynergeticMag: (the link to it mind you)
kim_: http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?DocumentMode
kim_: and also http://www.usemod.com/cgi-bin/mb.pl?DocumentMode
kim_: Ok, so main wiki pages are in documentmode
*: Pilotguy is now known as Pilotguy_aw
kim_: while talk opages are threadmode
kim_: http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?ThreadMode
kim_: documentmode is basically a wikipedia article, or a policy page
kim_: while threadmode is what our discussion pages look like
kim_: on some wikis, there are no separate talk pages
kim_: and you're supposed to refactor thread mode into document mode
*: Pilotguy_aw is now known as Pilotguy
Seddon: s an off point i considered renaming MedCab, to MadCab
Seddon: ut thats a different matter
kim_: http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?WhatIsRefactoring
kim_: Seddon, :P
kim_: so our consensus process is based on trying to work on documentmode first, and then falling back to threadmode if it fails
kim_: if you see the flowchart, you'll see two cycles
*: Sniperz11 (n=a@155.69.177.146) has joined #wikipedia-en-lectures
kim_: and indeed, the right hand one stays in documentmode (constant edits to the page)
kim_: while the left hand cycle refers to what happens when people start reverting
kim_: Hi Sniperz11
kim_: we just were talking about http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Consensus_new_and_old.svg
kim_: alright
kim_: so we've covered some basics today...
kim_: was any of this new or enlightening?
*: kim_ hopes so :-)
kim_: else I'll have to make the next lecture much harder somehow :-P
Sniperz11: hello
kim_: Now there's one thing I'd briefly like to discuss :-)
Sniperz11: thanks for informing me
Seddon: think that its something that go on kim_
kim_: Seddon, fair enough :-)
kim_: Sniperz11, we're finishing for today, though we'll be there again same time next week
kim_: Sniperz11, and we'll have a log put up later today as well
Sniperz11: thanks
kim_: Okay, so you know that you're supposed to make edits that will gain consensus
kim_: else you might get accused of vandalism or whatnot?
kim_: I think everyone already knew that much
kim_: has anyone ever tried to predict what consensus would be ahead of time, and then made edits based on that *prediction* ? :-)
kim_: show of hands? :-)
GofG: I haven't >.<
*: SteveCrossin raises hand
Sniperz11: I tried...
kim_: Sniperz11, what happened? :-)
kim_: SteveCrossin, Cool :-)
Sniperz11: I tried a few times to edit based on what I thought would be the consensus
SteveCrossin: in mediations
kim_: Sniperz11, what happened when you did that?
Sniperz11: but usually, it would be rv'ed till consensus was set
Sniperz11: i dont remember
kim_: SteveCrossin, it does seem to come up there a lot, doesn't it?
SteveCrossin: yea
Sniperz11: must have been about 4-5 months ago
kim_: Sniperz11, Interesting. There is a group on wikipedia that does work that way too.
SteveCrossin: but
SteveCrossin: generally
kim_: Sniperz11, I don't typically agree with them ... ;-)
Sniperz11: hehe
*: kim_ might invite someone to give a lecture about that particular method too
SteveCrossin: global consensus outweghs local concensus, right?
Sniperz11: I gave up on that method after that.
kim_: SteveCrossin, in general, yes
Sniperz11: Now, i'm a strictly consensus guy
SteveCrossin: yeah in general
kim_: Sniperz11, that's too bad, it actually works fairly well.
Sniperz11: no non-consensual edits
kim_: Sniperz11, I see. that's actually not too good
kim_: Sniperz11, if you edit based on predicted consensus, or based on your preference, that's how you reach consensus quickest
Sniperz11: yes...
kim_: so how can you find predicted consensus?
Sniperz11: I'm sure waiting for consensus isn't the best idea for active pages, rite?
Sniperz11: I usually edit pages where we have a small clique of active editors... about 5-10
kim_: well, I guess that's where some of the discussion at "what ignore all rules means" (at WP:WIARM ) is about
kim_: Sniperz11, we just discussed that you can wait forever for consensus to come along. :-) You have to make consensus yourself
Sniperz11: hehe... yes. like I said, in pages i usually edit, there are a few active editors, so the discussion is quite fast
kim_: basically, try to discover what people have already been thinking about the topic. Check policy pages, talk pages, discussions on user talk pages, and maybe meatball and wardwiki
kim_: Sniperz11, and most pages work that way
kim_: Sniperz11, there are only a couple of very busy ages. Maybe 4000 out of 2000 000 around now
Sniperz11: yes
kim_: we need to do some new statistics :-)
kim_: when we last looked it was 1000 out of 1M (so I'm doubling my estimate to be on the safe side)
Sniperz11: hmm...
kim_: so final questions for the day... was today useful to you? And what should be discussed at the next lectures?
Seddon: R
kim_: the mediators would like to hear more about DR ;-)
kim_: right
kim_: other folks?
Sniperz11: could we have a bit of discussion about images and the related issues
*: kim_ wonders if I've bored half the folks here to death
kim_: Images? Interesting
kim_: Oh yes, all the different laws and licenses
kim_: it's probably not obvious to new people. :-)
Sniperz11: not just the copyrights, but something about cleaning up images
Sniperz11: croping
Sniperz11: etc
kim_: you mean image tutorials?
*: SteveCrossin writes FURs for 24 images :P
Sniperz11: sort of
SteveCrossin: so theyre not deleted
kim_: That's maybe a bit outside the scope of these particular talks
kim_: well they're outside the scope I thought of
Sniperz11: ok... no problem.
kim_: if you can find others also interested in that kind of stuff, we could discuss :-)
kim_: Sniperz11, well, I'm open to the idea :-)
Sniperz11: I was just thinkin aloud.
kim_: I haven't done gimp or photoshop tutorials in ages :-)
kim_: GofG, kibble , Lucifer_Cat , Pilotguy , SteveCrossin , ST47 , snowolf , SynergeticMag , theoB , White_Cat ? Any comments?
SteveCrossin: uh
SteveCrossin: on what :P
White_Cat: ?
*: Lucifer_Cat suddenly jolts up... um yes.. err... 42~
*: SteveCrossin is writing FURs
*: kibble hasn't been paying attention
White_Cat: 42
kibble: orry :-(
kim_: hehehe
kim_: I put y'all to sleep?
White_Cat: not really
Lucifer_Cat: kim_: its the name of the chan
Pilotguy: hmm good work today ;)
SynergeticMag: i'm not good on image conversations :)
kim_: kibble, what kind of exciting lecture can we have next time, that's sure to stir up controversy on en.wikipedia? ;-)
SteveCrossin: 42
SteveCrossin: Lucifer_Cat: LOL
Sniperz11: CABAL!!!!
Sniperz11: ;-P
kim_: Lucifer_Cat,
kibble: im_: why jimmy is unfit for godkink
*: kibble hides
kibble: -P
White_Cat: kim_ I am easy to distract
kibble: ing...*
kim_: Sniperz11, we can do some more discussion about how and why the cabal operates
kim_: and what the cabal is
*: Pilotguy (n=ThetaXi@wikinews/pilotguy) has left #wikipedia-en-lectures ("Time makes no sense")
Lucifer_Cat: thanks kim_ for bringing back the memories of college
kim_: kibble, oooooohhhhh, that sounds scary ;-)
kibble: -D
kim_: Lucifer_Cat, you're welcome, I hope I was a lot less boring than the professors ;-)
GofG: Thanks, kim_, for possibly giving me an insight into what college is like
Lucifer_Cat: kim_: i wish i could say that.
kim_: I think we did the best we could for an initial talk :-)
Lucifer_Cat: but you lost me at trifectas
kim_: Lucifer_Cat, Ouch! you should have yelled man :-)
Lucifer_Cat: kidding
kim_: Lucifer_Cat, the idea is to speak up if I've lost you, so we can keep you in the loop and adjust the program
kim_: will you all be coming back next week?
kim_: GofG, college is much more boring, often, except MIT or so :-P
Lucifer_Cat: heh, im always online, just ping me, i'll come over if im within earshot
Sniperz11: I'll try... I've got exams coming up
Lucifer_Cat: kim_: MIT can be very very boring too
Sniperz11: I'll stay on freenode the whole day for that day
kim_: heh
kim_: just be online at 15:00 UTC :-)
kim_: what's that in EST?
kim_: around 11 am I think?
GofG: Yeah
Sniperz11: UTC = GMT right??
kim_: UTC is the new name for GMT since the start of the century or so, yup
kim_: you can also check the current time in UTC by looking at the recent changes page
kim_: wikipedia time is UTC ;-)
Sniperz11: oh ok. thanks. thats 11 pm for me then
kim_: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:RecentChanges
kim_: 11 pm?
kim_: you're somewhere east-ish?
Sniperz11: Singapore
kim_: if that's late for you we can shift the time back slightly
Sniperz11: nah...
kim_: I've been told Singapore is a nice place, la? :-)
Sniperz11: I'm usually awake nights
Sniperz11: its nice for tourists
*: kim_ wants to visit a friend there soon . :-)
kim_: Sniperz11, are you any good at singlish? ;-)
Sniperz11: U've got a friend in me (which is the song i'm listening to now, coincidentally)
Sniperz11: i'm ok
kim_: LOL
kim_: cool :-)
Sniperz11: I can understand it a bit...
Sniperz11: mostly Hokkien (dialect of Chinese)
*: ST47 has quit ("leaving")
kim_: I see
Sniperz11: and since i'm an expat, I dont usually speak it
kim_: Sniperz11, where are you expat from?
*: kim_ is curious
Sniperz11: imagine an Indian guy trying to talk Singlish...
kim_: LOL
Sniperz11: I tried a few times,
kim_: I've heard of paki girls doing it, so why not indian guys? :-)
Sniperz11: the people around me couldn't stop laughing
kim_: ROTFL
kim_: isn't that the point? ;-)
Sniperz11: I guess so.
Sniperz11: :-D
kim_: depends on your accent a bit though, I suppose
Sniperz11: yes...
kim_: alright
Sniperz11: I roll my Rs a lot... and my O sounds like Wo...
Sniperz11: so you can imagine
kim_: I think I can!
kim_: alright
kim_: let's wrap it up
kim_: everyone back here same time same place next time around?
Sniperz11: sure
kim_: Cool
*: kim_ pokes the rest
kim_: I think it's much more fun to edit-war over WP:IAR than doing lectures
kim_: I'll have to think of something crazy to draw more attention next time :-P
kim_: Have a nice lunch, evening, or afternoon all!
kim_: )
kim_: logs will be posted later today