stringtranslate.com

Usuario:SMcCandlish

Status: Busy

Nota: Los comentarios de SMcCandlish en Wikipedia son un trabajo en progreso, sujetos a la exención de responsabilidad del modo hilo .
Autoconveniencia: sandbox – sandbox2 – sandbox3 – sandbox4 – sandbox5 – sandbox6 – sandbox7 – sandbox8 – sandbox9 – sandbox10 – Usuario:SMcCandlish/Status – Todas las subpáginas de esta página – Todas las subpáginas de mi página de discusión .

Me siguen diciendo que me parezco a varias celebridades:
Casualmente, fui brevemente roadie tecnológico de Aerosmith (la banda de Tyler) en 1994; Probablemente fueron la primera banda en chatear en vivo en línea con sus fans detrás del escenario en los shows. Un colega y yo estábamos a cargo de eso.
JAJAJA

 

  En el radar:  Un boletín ocasional sobre los desafíos de Wikipedia

—  "¿Comentarios?" Los enlaces van a la propia página de discusión de OtR, no a las de las fuentes originales de las noticias.
  • "Wikipedia todavía tiene un problema de diversidad de moderadores. Su nuevo jefe quiere solucionarlo". (Cristiano Lima, The Washington Post , 15 de septiembre de 2021)
Según WashPo , WMF ha elegido a un abogado y ejecutivo de una organización sin fines de lucro sudafricano para que sea su nuevo director ejecutivo. Si bien he estado diciendo durante una década que WMF tiene que dejar de contratar gente de la industria de software y servicios en línea para dirigir una ONG y contratar gente de ONG, esta – Maryana Iskander – es bastante cautelosa y burocrática, o se sale de eso. manera en la entrevista.
  • En primer lugar, está la creencia de que el Código de Conducta Universal de WMF (redactado en supuesta consulta con todas las comunidades editoriales de WMF pero ignorando en gran medida todos sus comentarios) es la clave para diversificar el grupo editorial de Wikipedia. (Y como siempre en los principales medios de comunicación, "Wikipedia" significa en.wikipedia.org.) Toda la UCC es básicamente una reformulación de algunas políticas clave de WP (y de los Comunes y Wikcionario), además de algunas "visiones" de WMF. Es cuestionablemente razonable esperar que un documento en gran medida redundante, que fue creado para proyectos que carecen de suficiente desarrollo de políticas, y que ha tenido y seguirá teniendo poco impacto en en.Wikipedia, provoque un cambio radical en quiénes se ofrecen como voluntarios para editar aquí. Para ello es necesario un alcance en el mundo real a gran escala. Uno pensaría que el director ejecutivo de una organización sin fines de lucro ya lo entendería.
  • A continuación, Iskander hace una referencia bastante confusa al artículo 230 de la Ley de Decencia en las Comunicaciones. Este escudo de responsabilidad de contenido ha aparecido mucho en las noticias de Estados Unidos últimamente, como objetivo del Partido Republicano en su disputa con las "grandes tecnologías", especialmente los sitios de redes sociales que desbancan a escritores de extrema derecha por propaganda antidemocracia e información errónea sobre la salud pública. crisis. Iskander tiene razón en que WMF no está en una posición peligrosa en esto, pero el artículo implica fuertemente que Iskander y WMF están muy interesados ​​e involucrados. Incluso cuando se le pide, Iskander no da más detalles significativos y simplemente ofrece una evasión de que la educación es importante. Por lo tanto, necesitamos más información real sobre lo que está haciendo WMF con respecto a los esfuerzos para revisar la sección 230.
  • Continuando, Iskander dice algo alarmante: "Wikipedia ha visto un enorme aumento de tráfico en torno al covid-19, [por lo que] ha trabajado en una asociación muy productiva con la Organización Mundial de la Salud para proporcionar credibilidad adicional a ese trabajo". Eso es difícil de distinguir de una afirmación de que la OMS tiene plantas editoriales que son PROPIETARIAS de los artículos relevantes. Pero es motivo de preocupación sea cual sea la verdad. WMF no debería "asociarse" con ningún organismo externo para influir en el contenido de la enciclopedia (especialmente uno que ha recibido tantos golpes de credibilidad como la OMS).
  • Hay algo potencialmente interesante aquí, aunque los demonios podrían residir en los detalles: "muchos de los problemas de acceso básico pueden parecer técnicamente diferentes [entre Sudáfrica y EE. UU.], pero la forma en que las personas entienden qué información está disponible para ellos – cómo acceden a ella – esos problemas existen en todas partes". ¿Qué va a significar esto a nivel práctico? ¿ Se aplicará mejor MOS:ACCESS ? ¿ Se reintegrará Wikipedia en inglés simple al sitio principal como artículos alternativos? ¿La versión móvil del sitio dejará de eliminar funciones? ¿ WP:GLAM se convertirá en un esfuerzo mayor? Hay cientos de maneras (sensible o no) de que esta afirmación podría afectar la política, el financiamiento y el "producto" final (aunque uno sospecha que nada importante cambiará para mejor a menos que la cultura interna del liderazgo organizacional del WMF también cambie de manera significativa). de manera importante, como diversificando la junta directiva, hacia más académicos y personas sin fines de lucro en lugar de personas ricas de la industria tecnológica).
En resumen, tengo esperanzas de que la experiencia de Iskander en ONG lo convierta en un mejor ejecutivo. dir. en mejor forma que los dos últimos que hemos tenido, pero desde el principio dice cosas extrañas, demasiado vagas e incluso preocupantes. Y nada en la entrevista sugiere realmente algo parecido a una solución para el problema de diversidad editorial de WP, que el titular sugería que iba a ser el foco.  - SMcCandlish ☏ ¢  😼  15:48, 15 de septiembre de 2021 (UTC)
[ ¿Comentarios? ]
  • "Imponer la ortodoxia: los activistas de izquierda están utilizando viejas tácticas en un nuevo ataque al liberalismo" (redactores, The Economist , 10 de septiembre de 2021)
"Es posible detectar ecos inquietantes del estado confesional de antaño", y la extrema izquierda actual está reciclando técnicas de tiempos divertidos como la Inquisición. "He estado diciendo esto durante años, y el artículo es un buen resumen de cómo" "izquierda" e "izquierdista" no siempre se alinean con "liberal". Es una observación que muy pocos escritores convencionales han estado dispuestos a hacer, pero la verdad es que explica una gran cantidad de presión disruptiva sobre puntos de vista en Wikipedia.  El activismo de extrema derecha es a menudo más difícil de detectar y más difícil de resistir públicamente para el editor promedio que el extremismo de extrema derecha, que tendemos a reconocer y luego eliminar al verlo  . 
[ ¿Comentarios? ]
Una encuesta de Information Research muestra que la motivación de las personas para editar es a menudo "su deseo de cambiar las opiniones de la sociedad", y también que ven Wikipedia como un "sitio de red social". Esto no es ninguna novedad para nosotros, y el material no tiene una muestra estadística enorme, pero apostaría dinero real a que será reconfirmado por estudios posteriores. Esto tiene implicaciones de sesgo sistémico , neutralidad y conflicto de intereses (tampoco es noticia). En lo que realmente no pensamos mucho es en lo que esto significa para Wikipedia a largo plazo, ya que todos los que tienen una agenda se vuelven más conscientes de que pueden intentar aprovechar sigilosamente los artículos de Wikipedia para mejorar su versión de cualquier historia, especialmente después de Trump en 2016. La campaña presidencial estadounidense demostró que se pueden obtener resultados poderosos mediante la manipulación organizada de los sitios de "redes sociales" (si WP realmente lo es o no es irrelevante si el público así lo cree).  - SMcCandlish ☏ ¢  😼  23:28, 1 de junio de 2018 (UTC)
[ ¿Comentarios? ]
  • La encuesta sobre la lista de deseos de la comunidad de WMF se puede jugar con el sistema ( SMcCandlish , 19 de diciembre de 2017)
La Encuesta sobre la lista de deseos de la comunidad de 2017 ha cerrado; Los resultados están aquí y son tan decepcionantes como en años anteriores. Este proceso es fundamentalmente defectuoso por numerosas razones:
  • Sólo las diez propuestas principales recibirán recursos para ellas, sin importar cuántas sean o cuán urgentes o importantes sean.
  • Es una "contienda de popularidad" de corto plazo, de votación directa, permitida por el escrutinio, sin necesidad de fundamentos: la creación de consenso normal en Wikimedia se ve frustrada.
  • Esta configuración anima a las personas a votar por las 10 cosas que más desean y luego votar en contra de todas las demás propuestas, incluso si están de acuerdo con ellas. Las propuestas no pueden generar apoyo con el tiempo.
  • No hay "nivelación del campo de juego" entre categorías. Las propuestas importantes de interés más limitado (por ejemplo, para administradores o personal técnico) nunca se aprueban, sólo las que tienen el mínimo común denominador (y las más sondeadas).
  • Muy pocos wikimedianos siquiera saben que la encuesta existe o cuándo está abierta, lo que agrava en gran medida el sesgo causado por el escrutinio enfocado: los picos intencionales en realidad determinan el resultado.
He redactado algunas sugerencias para que funcione mejor .  - SMcCandlish ☏ ¢  > ʌ ⱷ҅ ᴥ ⱷ ʌ <  18:08, 19 de diciembre de 2017 (UTC)
[ ¿Comentarios? ]

¡Hola!

Soy Stanton McCandlish (aquí a menudo se hace referencia simplemente como SMcC y algunos me han apodado Mac , lo cual no me importa). Soy desarrollador web, consultor de TI, autor de no ficción, activista por las libertades civiles y ejecutivo de una organización sin fines de lucro, además de instructor aficionado de billar de bolsillo, genealogista, ex editor de noticias en línea, analista de políticas, archivero, editor independiente y también artista aficionado. , entre otras cosas. He estado entre los wikipedistas más activos y ávidos. Tengo una licenciatura en antropología y comunicación (una especialización personalizada que combina lingüística y comunicación humana más amplia, incluido periodismo, relaciones públicas y crítica de medios). Soy ciudadano estadounidense, pero he vivido en Inglaterra, Irlanda y Canadá durante períodos prolongados, y aprendí a leer y escribir en el Reino Unido (y, en consecuencia, uso una especie de inglés del Atlántico Medio ). Tengo competencia en una extraña variedad de temas, como mitología celta, gramática y uso del inglés, gatos de la Isla de Man, cultura de Nuevo México, leyes de EE. UU. en ciertos campos (libertad de expresión, privacidad y propiedad intelectual), salamandras, estándares web, usabilidad de la interfaz de usuario. , albinismo, billar, medios en línea, Art Nouveau, subculturas post-punk, Mac OS X, vestimenta Highland y varias franquicias de ficción (aunque alrededor del 95% de mi tiempo de lectura es no ficción), entre otros temas. Al ser un erudito autodidacta, mis intereses cambian con el tiempo y son intensos. Algunas de mis últimas pasiones son la historia del tartán, interfaz entre la zoología y la antropología, especialmente la historia y la naturaleza de la domesticación; y patrones cambiantes de uso del inglés.

Inicio de sesión unificado: SMcCandlish es el inicio de sesión único de este usuario para todos los proyectos públicos de Wikimedia.

Mi hora local actual es 08:15 p.m. ( recargar ).

Biografía

Contacto

  • Envíame un correo electrónico aquí
  • Mi perfil en LinkedIn

Wikitividades

Poniendo mi dinero donde está mi boca

La versión "TL;DR"

Niveles de accesoy roles

Estadísticas

Más allá de es.wikipedia

Detalle

SMcCandlish ( charla  · mensaje  · contribuciones  · contribuciones globales  · contribuciones eliminadas  · movimientos de página  · creación de usuario  · bloquear usuario  · bloquear registro  · recuento  · total  · registros  · editar resúmenes  · correo electrónico | lu  · rfas  · rfb  · arbcase  · rfc  · lta  · CUreq  · calcetines  · calcetines | derechos actuales  · registro de derechos (local)  · registro de derechos (global/meta) | derechos  · renombra  · bloques  · protecciones  · eliminaciones | movimientos  · registro de cambios pendientes  · filtro de abuso  · páginas creadas | RM  · XfD  · AfD  · UtHx  · UtE )

  • Mi registro de carga/mover de Commons (mucho más informativo para mis contribuciones de imágenes que el de en.wiki).
  • Mis contribuciones a las políticas y directrices de WP
  • Errores de MediaWiki Bugzilla que he presentado o en los que he estado involucrado

En lo que estoy trabajando ahora...

...cuando el tiempo lo permita:

Artículos incompletos

Páginas de espacio de nombres de Wikipedia

Cosas de las que he sido en gran medida responsable o en las que he estado muy involucrado

Proyectos

Artículos

Dedico la mayor parte de mi tiempo en el espacio principal a mejorar los artículos deficientes para que tengan una calidad enciclopédica, en lugar de "pulir el cromo" de artículos que ya son buenos. Ambos tipos de trabajo son necesarios, pero creo que trabajar en artículos de clase Stub, Start y C para moverlos hacia las clases B, A y Good es una mayor prioridad para el proyecto. (Hasta la fecha, tengo poco interés en la mejora de Good-to-Featured; esa es una subcultura wiki en sí misma).

Revisado

Páginas preexistentes en las que he trabajado mucho (con el tiempo o todas a la vez); La nueva lista comenzó en enero de 2018, por lo que está muy incompleta:

  • Girls Under Glass : artículo de la banda que rehice de arriba a abajo, a partir de una lista de viñetas en inglés entrecortado, hasta convertirlo en un artículo completo (con algo de ayuda de la página de Wikipedia en alemán sobre ellos). Esta limpieza y expansión [3] (aproximadamente 23.000 materiales más) lo salvó de WP:AFD .
  • La ley de Godwin : guié informalmente esta página durante bastante tiempo, antes de que otros editores se involucraran más en mantenerla enciclopédica. (Tengo un posible conflicto de intereses, ya que trabajé en la misma organización que su homónimo en la década de 1990). Más recientemente (2023) volví a limpiarlo, ya que comenzó a volverse asqueroso nuevamente.
  • Jeannette H. Lee : artículo de empresaria coreano-estadounidense. Originalmente nominé esto para su eliminación, pero después de que se mantuvo como (marginalmente) notable, trabajé significativamente el artículo para que fuera adecuadamente enciclopédico.
  • Khes : artículo dudoso sobre un tipo de tejido y prenda de vestir índicos, escrito por un hablante no nativo de inglés y con fuentes deficientes. Alguien ya lo había programado para AfD, pero logré darle una forma aceptable (una edición de calidad más que de cantidad). Todavía tenía problemas (a diciembre de 2020), pero llamé la atención sobre la página de wikiproyectos y tablones de anuncios sobre temas relacionados con India y Pakistán.
  • Lynette Horsburgh : campeona británica de deportes de taco amateur. Estaba AfDed, así que lo mejoré (la diferencia incluye algunas ediciones intermedias realizadas por otra persona) y se conservó. No es una revisión masiva, sino cualitativa.
  • Mora, Nuevo México [4]; Condado de Mora, Nuevo México [5]; Primera Batalla de Mora [6]; Second Battle of Mora [7] – eran palimpsestos de ediciones confusas, así que las rehice todas con todo lo que realmente corresponde, editado y con algunas fuentes nuevas.
  • Nithyananda : un controvertido gurú moderno de la India. Durante mucho tiempo, este artículo oscilaba entre una página de ataque que violaba WP:BLP y un anuncio promocional descarado de sus seguidores (a quienes intenté disuadir de futuras violaciones de la política de WP, tanto en la wiki como contactando a su organización). directamente). Lo revisé repetidamente y lo vigilé durante meses hasta que otros editores neutrales llamaron hacia él la atención suficiente. (Aún surgen problemas, pero ahora son mucho más manejables).
  • Tartán : totalmente revisado de arriba a abajo, utilizando prácticamente todas las fuentes confiables disponibles.

Políticas, directrices, ensayos y propuestas de Wikipedia.

Ensayos sobre el espacio de usuario
Principales propuestas exitosas

Llave:

  • controlarY= Propuesta (o su esencia) aceptada
  • ☒N= Propuesta rechazada
  • controlarY= Aceptado parcialmente o se ha llegado a otra solución
  • ☒N= Sin consenso o resolución poco clara
Propuestas en curso
Propuestas aceptadas que necesitan más trabajo

(Eso es trabajo adicional mío o de cualquiera).

Plantillas principales

  • {{ rp }} (La plantilla que nos impidió hacer cosas horribles al citar la misma fuente muchas veces en el mismo artículo. Llegó a mí en un instante después de que Usuario: Fuhghettaboutit se lamentara de cuántas líneas se crearon al citar el mismo libro durante tanto tiempo) . muchas entradas en Glosario de términos de deportes de referencia Durante muchos años, probablemente fue la plantilla de "soporte" más utilizada para nuestro sistema de citas de fuentes. Mejoras posteriores en el manejo del sistema por parte de MediaWiki<ref> , con la adición del |ref=parámetro, eventualmente. hizo que esta plantilla quedara obsoleta (consulte esta diferencia para obtener un curso intensivo sobre el uso de |ref=).
  • {{ compact TOC }} tal como lo conocemos ahora (Había muchas plantillas radicalmente diferentes de este tipo, y las fusioné todas y sus características y agregué muchas nuevas).
  • {{ glosario }} , {{ término }} , {{ defn }} (Ver también MOS:GLOSARIOS .)
  • {{ em }} , {{ strong }} , {{ var }} , {{ kbd }} , {{ samp }} , {{ dfn }} y la mayoría del resto de Categoría: Plantillas de marcado semántico
  • {{ ' " }} , { { " ' }} , {{ " ' " }} , { { - ' } } , {{ '- }} , {{ -" }} y {{ "- }} ( plantillas de interletraje entre comillas)
  • {{ hatnote inline }} (y ​​Módulo:Hatnote inline ) y su derivada {{ crossreference }} ( {{ crossref }} , {{ xref }} )
  • {{ cue sports }} cuadro de navegación
  • {{ WikiProject Cue sports }} , {{ WikiProject New Mexico }} y varios otros
  • {{ TfR }} , {{ TfR2 }} , {{ TfR aviso }}
  • {{ encabezado falso }} : creó una plantilla unificada y flexible a partir del código originalmente en esa página y en {{fakeheader}}y {{fake header}}, con nuevas funciones agregadas.
  • {{ sfnref en línea }}
  • {{ rango de páginas }} – plantilla de accesibilidad/utilidad (temporal, es decir, destinada a ser reemplazada)
  • Mucho más, simplemente disparo y lo olvido (literalmente, a menudo me sorprende mirar el historial de una plantilla y ver que la creé y no lo recuerdo).

Categorías

Guiones de usuario

Estos son scripts de usuario internos (para uso de los editores que han iniciado sesión en su Special:Mypage/common.js ), no scripts externos como los que utilizan Tampermonkey , Greasemonkey , etc.

  • Usuario:SMcCandlish/TidyRefs : limpia <ref ...>...</ref>el formato inconsistente. Guión completamente nuevo (2024); tiene algunas expresiones regulares bastante increíbles, y habrá más cuando regrese a este proyecto.
  • Usuario:SMcCandlish/TidyCitations : limpia {{cite ... |...}}el formato inconsistente. Basado en guiones anteriores de Sam Sailor, Zyxw, Meteor sandwich yum y Waldir, el desarrollo del último cesó en 2018.
  • Usuario:SMcCandlish/MOSNUMdates.js : convierte fechas a DMY o MDY. Bifurcado de la versión original de Ohconfucius (aún en desarrollo en enero de 2024); El mío evita saturar el menú de la izquierda con opciones que casi nunca se necesitan y habilita una que se necesita con bastante frecuencia.
  • meta:Usuario:SMcCandlish/userinfo: muestra información básica del usuario debajo de los nombres de usuario en la parte superior de las páginas de usuario y de conversación de usuarios. Basado en un guión de PleaseStand, cuyo desarrollo cesó en 2019.

Cierres no administrativos

Comencé a rastrear esto en septiembre de 2017 (y luego lo olvidé hasta principios de 2020). A veces hago cierres de discusiones como no administrador ( RfC , RM , etc.) y llego hasta el límite de lo que un no administrador puede hacer, con eso creo que son resultados positivos.

Varios.

Galería de imágenes aportadas

Algunas de las imágenes que he contribuido bajo GFDL/CC (y a veces PD) se muestran como miniaturas en mi página de galería .

Lista de quehaceres

Honestamente, ya no mantengo ni miro esto; Hay mucho que hacer, simplemente hago lo que me llama la atención primero.

Wikawards

  • v
  • t
  • mi

What I'm up to in general on Wikipedia

On Wikipedia, I mostly do the following in lieu of large-scale article authorship (though I do have some major ones planned and three under my belt):

  1. Resisting poorly-thought-out attempts to change the WP:Manual of Style and other policies and guidelines
  2. Neutralizing (sometimes subtle/crafty) PoV-pushing by tagteams of editors with a conflict of interest who try to bend Wikipedia into a promotional or advocacy outlet
  3. More broadly, reverting and repairing vandalism and other intentionally anti-encyclopedic edits, especially those by religious or other zealots, slanderers, the foul-mouthed, and the discriminatory
  4. Making substantial contributions to existing articles (and sometimes creating new ones) on topics I know a lot about
  5. Shepherding the growth and health of some particular articles that need it (and, in some but not all cases, about which I care a lot)
  6. Correcting typos, grammar errors and readability problems
  7. Weeding out unverifiable, or incredible and unsourced, claims
  8. Adding missing salient information
  9. Moving articles that violate the WP article naming conventions
  10. Correcting outright factual errors
  11. Improving cross-references, categorization, etc.
  12. Improving consistency of formatting
  13. Removing redundant wikilinks
  14. Removing pointless (Wikipedia is not a dictionary!) wikilinks – everyone already knows what "eye" and "the sun" mean, in most contexts in which they appear
  15. Removing minor, childish quasi-vandalism (smart-aleck remarks in articles, etc.) – I like to document these in the Talk pages, since they often are actually funny
  16. Tagging outright vandals' talk pages with countdown-to-blocking warnings
  17. Repairing semi-vandalism edits in the form of deletions of long-standing passages without explanation, or the inexplicable addition of large chunks of questionably relevant or unsourced alleged facts, especially attacks against living article subjects, fanwanking and crackpotism.
  18. Copyediting, encyclopedizing and formalizing any juvenile, colloquial, non-neutral or poorly thought out language in articles
  19. Fixing miscellaneous "bad stuff" - vanity/marketing language, crystalballing, etc.
  20. Proposing (and sometimes performing) merges of redundant articles
  21. Adding obvious missing redirects and making sure they go to useful places
  22. Educating misinformed arguments (per logic or Wikipedia policy) on talk pages
  23. Trying to resolve circular disputes on talk pages
  24. Defending articles from AfD when the reasoning for the deletion is specious, especially "NN per nom" me-tooism.
  25. Nominating truly atrocious crap for AfD (or for SD, or just prod'ing them)
  26. Learning a lot concerning things I didn't know about, on all sorts of topics
  27. Having a good time!

Wikitivities userboxes

Topical WikiProjects userboxes

Wikipedia tools userboxes

Wikiphilosophy

On the non-"political" side, I am largely an exopedianist with little interest in the socializing aspects - I get that from other aspects of my life. I'm largely a WikiGnome but shapeshift into other forms of WP:WikiFauna at will, sometimes for long stretches. I have taken part in some quite extensive policy debates, spent a lot of time on visual improvement of articles, wallowed in sourcing troublesome articles, buried my nose in copyediting, become a template master, and obsessed over the perfection of certain articles, as well as gotten into pointless arguments, while also created barnstars. I'm really just not pigeonholeable.

Wikiphilosophy userboxes

WikiFauna userboxes

I am a chimera, frequently shapeshifting.

Critics who think I make valuable contributions but get into conflict with me frequently would probably classify me as a cross between a WikiPlatypus and a WikiPuma.



Where I am in Wikispace

  • To see contributions in all Wikimedia projects, click here or here

Potential conflicts of interest

Just as a matter of full disclosure, there are certain articles I should not heavily edit (i.e., other than to revert vandalism, provide sources, or otherwise adjust in an entirely neutral manner), because of unintentional potential for conflict of interest or non-neutral point of view. Other editors may wish to examine carefully any edits I ever make to any of the following topics:

  • Stanton McCandlish – Me; while I might conceivably pass WP:GNG and WP:BIO, I have no article, have never had one, and don't want one - that would be a bit creepy to me, and friends with articles say they just cause trouble for them (personal attacks, misinformation, etc.), and I helped one get theirs deleted to protect their privacy. McCandlish Consulting is also me (d/b/a) and also non-notable.
  • Protecting Yourself Online – I co-authored a book by this title, ISBN 9780062515124; it has no article and is surely not notable enough to have one.
  • Wilcox–McCandlish law – something amusing that a colleague (Bryce Wilcox) and I came up with in the 1990s. Someone else created an article about it here, before I even became a WP editor; it was subsequently deleted on notability grounds, and should probably stay that way, though it might make a good WP:Essay, as it applies to talk pages here.
Things I could vaguely, conceivably have a conflict of interest on, due to past connections
  • Too many clients to individually list here (and some are covered by NDAs anyway); I know better than to edit articles about them.
  • CryptoRights Foundation (CRF) – I was their volunteer CCO/Communications Director for several years, starting 2003; it bugged me somethin' fierce that it did not have an article until recently, but it seemed grossly inappropriate to even start a "just the facts" stub on it, and someone else finally did)
  • Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) – Held various job titles there, including Program Dir., Communications Dir., etc., and was editor of their EFFector newsletter, and the webmaster of eff.org, 1993–2002.
  • Blue Ribbon Online Free Speech Campaign – This was largely my brainchild, as a part of my professional life at EFF; it was an EFF project not a personal one.
  • University of New Mexico (UNM) - Alma mater, 1991–1993 and 2007–2010; former employer, 1992–1993.
  • Double Rainbow (ice cream) – Former employer, 1991.
  • Wal-Mart – Former employer, late 1980s.
  • Cannon Air Force Base, United States Air Force – Former employer, late 1980s; I was a civilian worker, not military personnel.

Things and stuff

Funniest things I've seen on Wikipedia

[emphasis added when salient]
  • Wikipedia:Not everything needs a navbox
         The content itself isn't funny, but the fact that more than 50% of the content of the page is a huge navbox is hilarious.
  • "WP:ANI is like a huge orgy. It's fun to watch, and sometimes it's fun to join in, but like any orgy, the larger it gets, the greater the chances are that someone will eventually try to stick a dick in your ass."
         — Slakr (talk), at 03:52, 19 March 2009 (UTC), User:Slakr/Admin coaching [25]
  • 11:07, 26 March 2007 83.253.36.136 (Talk) (→Performance of FAT 32 - moved spam down)
         An edit summary from Wikipedia:Village pump (policy). Needless to say, the next editor's summary read "deleted spam".
  • A diff that must be seen to be believed
         Someone upset about grammar flames that were wasting people's time and being a distraction posts a distracting time-waste in the form of a longwinded and meticulously-researched grammar flame about it (plus a second shorter one!), all in support of the grammar flaming of the starter of the grammar flame; in the process, re-opening debate to yet more grammar flaming in the pointless sub-thread being complained about (dormant for over a day), and to which the poster was not even a party to begin with. I couldn't make this stuff up!
  • 05:46, 21 February 2007 Gracenotes (Talk | contribs) (→Template:Barnstars - *stabs kittens*)
         An edit summary in response to "no, don't delete the barnstars!" panic replies to a TfD on a useless template simply relating to barnstars. I awarded Gracenotes a Barnstar Point for that one.
  • "Hotel Wikipedia"
         A song parody by various Wikimedians (to the tune of The Eagles' "Hotel California"). I hate filk, with a passion, yet I somehow loved this.
  • Possibly the worst ever of my own typos. (See edit summary used.)
         I think I was channeling Ancient Finnish or something.
  • "Karl Marx, founder of modern Marxism ...."
         in Animal Farm, as of 13 January 2010 version (we all know that ancient Marxism was of course founded by Marxus Aurelius, right?)
  • From the "unclear on the concept" department
         Rather remarkable definition of "watch your language".
  • Hairy ball theorem
         Perhaps the funniest real article name on Wikipedia. (It's a real math/physics theorem, and not intrinsically funny, though a bit amusing.)
  • Unbelievably selective evidence
         Someone concerned about overlinking in articles actually used the Professional wrestling article as alleged smoking-gun "proof" of rampant overlinking across Wikpedia, requiring (naturally) much more stringent anti-linking wording in WP:LINKING. Of course that article in particular would have overlinking, along with just about every other noob error, except when periodically cleaned up by experienced, neutral editors who don't believe in fairytales. The article is clearly indicative of nothing but the nature of that topic's fanbase (and thus its most frequent editorial pool).
  • "Presumably we're talking about Life on Mars (TV series) here? John Carter 20:56, 13 April 2007 (UTC)"
         A comment posted at WP:COUNCIL/P, on a proposal for a "WikiProject Life on Mars"; if you don't get why this is hysterically funny, just move on – it's an old-school sci-fi geek thing.
  • Very strange font activism vandalism of my sig at a talk page
         Did you know ... that there are not just regular vandals but ones with really, really weird agendas lurking in Wikipedia?
  • http://www.well.com/~mech/WP/FunnyWikipediaCaptcha.jpg
         I'm not sure Wikipedia's account-creation CAPTCHA database should include every word... >;-)

Smartest things I've seen on Wikipedia

Just a few particularly well-thought-out bits by other editors. They aren't necessarily mindblowing or anything, just insightful and well-put.

  1. "We must always do what is best for the readers, without exception. Per WP:IAR if a 'rule' prevents you from improving the encyclopaedia, ignore it ... and if you put your personal preferences above the readers then Wikipedia is not the project for you."
         — Thryduulf (talk), at 10:52, 4 June 2018 (UTC) [26] in user talk, and in that instance about deleting redirects that are actually useful to readers but which don't quite fit someone's preferred formula.
  2. "My impression is that we shouldn't allow users going against a policy to affect how it is written. People going around changing articles against policy isn't a good reason to have that policy be rewritten"
         Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 10:40, 30 October 2023 (UTC) [27]. Slightly copyedited for clarity.
  3. "Unless you can reliably and usefully tell editors how to identify a problematic case, it's generally not helpful to mention it in a policy. It ends up backfiring, as editors make up their own, mutually incompatible definitions and proclaim that their interpretation is the true one."
         WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:07, 3 December 2023 (UTC) [28]
  4. "Tony, your writing guides were what prompted me to start getting articles up to GA back in mid-2012. I've done over 100 since (still waiting to actually get a FAC passed solo, maybe next decade) ...."
         — User:Ritchie333 (talk), at 21:57, 2 January 2018 (UTC) [29]. While this is well-deserved praise for the how-to essay series in support of WP:MOS by Tony1 (which starts here), this also gets at why style on Wikipedia is not trivia or trivial.
  5. "I ... had no problem whatsoever learning wikicode when I started writing and improving encyclopedia articles in 2009. I do not want to learn new software features that are less productive and less intuitive than old software features. I welcome any upgrades that are entirely intuitive and non-disruptive to existing editors. I will oppose ill-conceived and poorly-implemented make-work projects for professional programmers. This is not an employment program for coders. It is an encyclopedia created by volunteers, who are article writers and researchers."
         — Cullen (talk), 18:40, 29 November 2015 (UTC), Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Breakfast#RFC - Remove Flow from WikiProject Breakfast? [30] (commenting on how testing WP:Flow, WMF's new forum software intended to replace talk pages, pretty much destroyed the wikiproject that agreed to test it.
  6. "I reverted to the version before the diff you cited [i.e., the addition of disputed material], but was reverted. Changes pushed through without consensus are likely to be ignored or constantly disputed, so there's actually no point in doing this."
         — SarahSV (talk) 04:51, 27 January 2016 (UTC) Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Images#RfC: Should the guideline maintain the "As a general rule" wording or something similar? [31]
  7. "Revert rules should not be construed as an entitlement or inalienable right to revert, nor do they endorse reverts as an editing technique.
         Passed 9 to 0."
         — Arbitration Committee, 22:47, 23 March 2012 (UTC) Article titles and capitalisation, Final Decision
  8. Perhaps the most cogent explanation to date of what wikiproject banners are really for (and it's not advertising projects) by WhatamIdoing, at WP:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement, 06:00, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
  9. Roughtly 95%-accurate Observations on Wikipedia behavior by Antandrus, 12 March 2016 (may have been revised since then)
  10. "A small group is more likely to develop a self-reinforcing delusion that their position is reasonable, even when a large number of people outside the group are telling them otherwise."
         — Gigs (talk · contribs), 12 June 2013, in Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2013-06-12/Op-ed, "The tragedy of Wikipedia's commons".
  11. "Nearly all our policies are driven by the need to prevent ... abuse of Wikipedia. Policies on biographies of living people are driven largely by those who would abuse Wikipedia for purposes of defamation. Policies on neutrality and verifiability have been largely driven by the need to address those who were here to push a political agenda or promote their fringe viewpoints. What Wikipedia is not is pretty much a chronicle of all the things that people have tried to use Wikipedia for that the community has decided are detrimental to a quality encyclopedia. ... This isn't censorship, it's curation."
         — Gigs (talk · contribs), 12 June 2013, in Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2013-06-12/Op-ed, "The tragedy of Wikipedia's commons".
  12. "[C]onsensus is an outcome of discussion, not a type of discussion. Editors' comments contribute to the consensus-building process."
         — David Levy (talk · contribs), 11:49, 6 March 2012 (UTC), at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured list#Renaming and re-stylizing Today's Featured List?, accessed March 11, 2012
  13. "If rules make you nervous and depressed, and not desirous of participating in the wiki, then ignore them entirely and go about your business."
         — Koyaanis Qatsi (talk · contribs), 04:00, 18 September 2001 (UTC); it is the original formulation of WP:Ignore all rules.
  14. "Any pile of bullshit decomposes naturally."
         — Wikipedia:Ignore all dramas (as of this version), on ignoring instead of responding to wiki-stupidity. Later versions had it as the far less pithy "Even the largest pile of bullshit will decompose on its own." The original formulation was "The most copiously deposited bullshit decomposes on its own." I reverted it to the concise version on 10 August 2011‎ and it seems to have stuck.
  15. "Removed older logo. One logo is sufficient. Logos are copyrighted and Wikipedia should not serve as a gallery for logos."
         — Farine (talk · contribs), 05:59, 6 May 2008 (UTC) (edit summary at Data East)
  16. "Anyone who adds material to an article, but cannot be bothered to cite any sources, is being discourteous to the other editors who later have to try to find reliable sources."
         — Dalbury (talk · contribs) 11:42, 24 January 2007 (UTC) (Wikipedia talk:Speedy deletion criterion for unsourced articles#Userfy is a good option, accessed January 31, 2007)
  17. "Of course, the point of style is to give coherence and consistency, deviations from which can detract from the publication's voice (in this case, an encyclopedic voice)."
         — Ninly (talk · contribs), 06:38, 8 May 2009 (UTC) (Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style, accessed June 2, 2009), on the real purpose and value of the Wikipedia Manual of Style.
  18. "Show the door to trolls, vandals, and wiki-anarchists, who, if permitted, would waste your time and create a poisonous atmosphere here."
         — WP co-founder Larry Sanger, on Wikipedia:Etiquette
  19. "[N]o need for bullet points – detail here is no more important than others"
         — SilkTork (talk · contribs), 10:19, 27 June 2011 (UTC) (edit summary at Wikipedia:Article size), on the problem that too many editors create bulletized lists from normal prose, as if Wikipedia were a giant PowerPoint presentation.
  20. "While the title should be recognized as a reference to the article topic by someone familiar with the topic, for the uninitiated, it is the purpose of the article lead, not the article title, to identify the topic of the article."
         — Born2cycle (talk · contribs), 17:25, 26 January 2012 (UTC), Wikipedia talk:Article titles thread "Common names"
  21. "The reason Wikipedia has policy pages at all is to store up assertions on which we agree, and which generally convince people when we make them in talk, so we don't have to write them out again and again. This is why policy pages aren't "enforced", but quoted; if people aren't convinced by what policy pages say, they should usually say something else. The major exception to this stability is when some small group, either in good faith or in an effort to become the Secret Masters of Wikipedia, mistakes its own opinions for What Everybody Thinks. This happens, and the clique often writes its own opinions up as policy and guideline pages."
         — JCScaliger (talk · contribs), sockpuppet of Pmanderson (talk · contribs), 03:57, 3 February 2012 (UTC), Wikipedia talk:Article titles thread "Request for edit, Poll". While Anderson made this point in a WP:POINTy way, sockpuppeting in a discussion he was trying to control (and arguing against me on the details of the issue) he's precisely right, and this was well articulated.
  22. "If a high-profile [Wikipedian] poll is conducted that brings in widespread participation from editors who had previously stayed away from [the] venue, and the holdouts who had been stonewalling and preventing progress merely slouch, stuff their hands in their pockets, and walk away, then that proves that they knew full well that their arguments were not sufficiently persuasive, or didn’t have sufficient numbers, or both. ... Trying to now torpedo the current consensus by stating that certain people somehow didn’t have an opportunity to participate is nothing but sour grapes .... On Wikipedia it’s called ‘wililawyering’ which is disruptive and mustn’t be rewarded."
         — Greg L (talk · contribs), 00:49, 10 February 2012 (UTC) Wikipedia talk:Article titles thread "Why no action on implementing community consensus"
  23. "Some editors seek to be totally neutral, which means they invariably catch the most flak from everyone else."
         — User:Collect (talk), at 11:38, 30 November 2010 (UTC) [32], as a salient point in the essay WP:Sex, religion and politics.
  24. "[C]onsensus does exist absent an administrator to interpret it."
         — User:Mackensen (talk), at 04:03, 28 January 2008 (UTC) [33], commenting at a deletion review, on the fact that an XfD or other consensus process does not require formal closure if its decision is clear.

Smartest Wikipedia-relevant things I've seen from off-site

For me, pronouns are always placed within context. I am female-bodied, I am a butch lesbian, a transgender lesbian—referring to me as "she/her" is appropriate, particularly in a non-trans setting in which referring to me as "he" would appear to resolve the social contradiction between my birth sex and gender expression and render my transgender expression invisible. I like the gender neutral pronoun "ze/hir" because it makes it impossible to hold on to gender/sex/sexuality assumptions about a person you're about to meet or you've just met. And in an all trans setting, referring to me as "he/him" honors my gender expression in the same way that referring to my sister drag queens as "she/her" does.

  1. ^ Tyroler, Jamie (28 July 2006). "Transmissions – Interview with Leslie Feinberg". CampCK.com. Archived from the original on November 23, 2014. Retrieved 17 November 2014.

Allegedly sensible or clever things I've come up with here

  • Wikipedia policies are what are required for the project to operate at all; guidelines are what help it operate smoothly; high-acceptance essays are what help its operators not make fools of themselves; and miscellaneous essays are part of the community mindshare that helps shape all of the above over time.
         (At WT:Don't bludgeon the process, in a "guidelines vs. essays" thread; 23:31, 30 November 2020 (UTC) [34].
         It's a nutshell version of something I've said, in various words, many times since the late 2000s.)
  • As of right this moment, Wikipedia (the encyclopedic content, excluding other material like talk pages) is calculable to be approximately 96.71 times the size of Encyclopædia Britannica.
         (The bulk of the math is from User:Tompw/bookshelf/assumptions, but at the time it only calculated how many volumes of EB would be filled by WP.)
  • "WP is a bad place to engage in labelling that isn't absolutely integral to international public perception of the subject."
         (In an essay/tutorial at WT:Categorization, 15:39, 9 June 2018 (UTC) [35]. Someone suggested[36] framing it on their wall! The idea eventually developed into the essay WP:Race and ethnicity.)
  • "[O]ur articles are palimpsests stirred together by a global assortment of geniuses, crackpots, and everyone in between, sometimes citing great stuff, sometimes poor stuff, and sometimes nothing".
         (At WT:Manual of Style, 16:49, 24 December 2017 (UTC) [37]. This was in the context of readers wanting to verify our content with claim-by-claim inline citations not "general references".
         Someone else nominated it as a mot juste and "a gem" [38].
         It was later quoted on someone's user page [39] along with one by Stephen Fry and another by Neil Gaiman. Pretty good company; I'm honored.)
  • "An attempt at disambiguation that introduces another ambiguity is a failure."
         (I say this frequently. I'm not aware of anyone quoting me on it verbatim, but I've seen a rise in the same argument made in other words, and it is having the desired effect on article titles debates at WP:Requested moves.
  • "If MoS does not already have a rule on something, then it almost certainly doesn't need one."
         (Included as a corollary at EEng's "If MOS does not need to have a rule on something, then it needs to not have a rule on that thing" essay.
  • "No line item in our Manual of Style is supported by 100% of editors, and no editor supports 100% of its line items. The same situation is true of all style guides and their scopes and audiences in the wider world. The purpose of a stylebook is to set some ground rules (often arbitrary) so that the ballgame of writing can continue instead of the players standing around on the field brawling about trivia."
         (Summary of what I've said in variant wording probably 100 times in style disputes. No one ever tries to refute it.
         This awareness is what keeps our MoS from being a nightmare of editwarring about specific rules, over-inclusion of rules we don't need, deletion of ones we do just because someone doesn't like them, and pretense that no rules are needed.)
  • "The next-to-last resort of someone who cannot muster a rational response to an opposing argument is to wave away that argument as something impossible to respond to (the last resort being ad hominem attacks)."
         (In particular, if you say "TL;DR" to refuse to respond to a cogent argument because it takes work to do so, you are at the wrong site – this one consists almost entirely of millions of pages of detailed and particular text, so if you can't parse a few paragraphs you are incompetent to work on this project.)
  • "If one grinds an axe long and hard enough, there is no axe any longer, just a useless old stick."
         (A quasi-Taoist response to cranky complaints that relate to incidents so long ago no one should care any more. Compressed version: "Grind axe too long: no axe.")
  • "Two words: tea pot. ~~~~"
         (A response to angry accusations of wrong-doing that self-evidently apply at least equally and usually much more accurately to the ranter.
         More recently, I've used it as a mantra for myself, when I feel wikistressed. It eventually led to the WP:HOTHEADS essay.)

Nifty Wikipedia tools

Kind of hard to find unless you already know about them:

Resources

  • Wikimedia Labs at Mediawiki.org, for general info.
  • The Tool Labs at WikiTech.Wikimedia.org, where anyone can create an account to develop tools.
  • This page indicates lost tools and other problems after the demise of the old ToolServer.
  • OAuth applications list

Stats tools

  • Xtools-articleinfo at WMFLabs (general page stats, by year and month, with charts, etc.)
  • editorinteract.py at WMFLabs – analyzes your interaction with one or more other users
  • Aka's Page History Stats Tool – edit-related stats on any article or other page
  • TDS's Article Contribution Counter – get stats (with some accuracy lag, usually a few weeks) on who the top editors of an article are
  • Interiot's StubSense - what stubs are being used in a category
  • Interiot's Related Changes Watchlist – makes "Special:Recentchangeslinked" pages behave like watchlists

Internal tools

  • Special:AllMessages – track down any system message/notice (e.g. copyright warnings you are tired of seeing and want to exclude in your WP:USERCSS.)
  • Advanced Search of Wikipedia

Editing tools

Coding tools

Lua programming and Scribunto modules

Cleanup tools

  • Reference citation consistency checker (use in sandbox or talk page): {{ref info|Manx cat|style=float:right}}

Visualization tools

  • vCat – a tool to generate Graphviz diagrams of Wikipedia category relationships. Examples:
    • https://tools.wmflabs.org/vcat/render?wiki=enwiki&category=Cue_sports – Show the entire parent and other "ancestor" category tree structure of Category:Cue sports (up to the maximum of 250 nodes)
    • https://tools.wmflabs.org/vcat/render?wiki=enwiki&category=Cue_sports&depth=2 – Show just the immediate parent and grandparent categories of Category:Cue sports
    • https://tools.wmflabs.org/vcat/render?wiki=enwiki&category=Cue_sports&depth=4&algorithm=fdp – Show four levels but as node clusters instead of a tree
    • https://tools.wmflabs.org/vcat/render?wiki=enwiki&category=Cue_sports&rel=subcategory - Show the immediate child subcategories of Category:Cue sports (this function does not recurse and show child sub-sub-categories, etc.)
    • https://tools.wmflabs.org/vcat/render?wiki=enwiki&category=Cue_sports&rel=subcategory&algorithm=fdp - Show the same, but as a ring graph instead of a tree
    • https://tools.wmflabs.org/vcat/render?wiki=enwiki&title=William_A._Spinks&depth=2&algorithm=fdp - Show a node-cluster ring graph of the parent and grandparent categories of the article William A. Spinks
    • There are various other options, such as: creating links in the graph to the categories shown, or to new graphs starting at those categories; specifying output image format; outputting a text Graphviz .gv file with no node limit, for local rendering; choosing a different wiki, like French Wikipedia, or Wiktionary (example), or Commons; etc.

Help and info

Editor interaction analysis

  • Editor Interaction Analyzer by Sigma, compares the edits of two to three specified editors to see which articles overlap, sorted by minimum time between edits by both users. Only works on the English Wikipedia. Speed: slow.
  • Intersect Contribs, compares the edits of two to eight editors at any WMF wiki to see which articles overlap. Speed: fast.
  • Intertwined contributions, merges the contributions of two editors at any WMF wiki into a single list. Speed: fast.

Unsorted additions

  • Help:Labeled section transclusion – comparatively new feature that most of us don't know how to use yet
  • How to ping people: "The keys are: max 20 pings per edit; and do an edit to clean before before trying a new ping, so the system sees a clean diff; and of course always new four-tilde signature. Dicklyon (talk) 03:45, 15 December 2014 (UTC)"
  • CatScan Archived 2015-10-23 at the Wayback Machine category analysis tool
    • CatScan Quick Intersection
  • TimedMediaHandler - a-v in articles
  • Find which Wiki pages link to a particular site [40]
  • List changes made recently to pages linked from a specified page [41]
  • Readability meter [42]
  • Wikichecker [43]
  • Emoticons [44]
  • Tools for analysis of local MediaWiki installations (not directly relevant for en.wikipedia)
  • Magnus's Reference Generator – auto-format several kinds of source citations

Search sites

  • https://www.refseek.com – more than a billion sources: encyclopedias, monographs, magazines, etc.
  • https://www.worldcat.org – catalogue of 20,000 libraries. Find the nearest rare book you need; get it through inter-library loan at local library
  • https://link.springer.com – over 10 million scientific books, articles, research protocols, etc.
  • https://www.bioline.org.br – library of bioscience journals published in developing countries
  • https://repec.org – 4 million publications on economics and related subjects
  • https://www.science.gov – 2200+ scientific sites; more than 200 million articles indexed
  • https://www.pdfdrive.com – the largest website for free download of books and other works in PDF format; over 225 million titles
  • https://www.base-search.net – over 100 million scientific documents, 70% of them free

Interesting layouts

It's possible to do some nice layouts with CSS – carefully – inside the "shell" that MediaWiki provides. Just of use on project and user pages, of course. We don't do stuff like this in articles.

Security


Committed identity: a6d331de87bb595541d03acf814f68f05abde44b5c3c79e078a3b79ceabf093696dcb01a3570d6eceedb21c6e8c33f4d41649bf9c05864a474974fcc4eec54be is a SHA-512 commitment to this user's real-life identity.

Bureaucracy

Systemic mega-dramas of 2020 onward

  • meta:Community Wishlist Survey 2022 – How will WMF spend its development money and time next year? This is important.
  • meta:Universal Code of Conduct/Draft review – devils in the details, and just about the longest talk page in history
  • Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Anti-harassment RfC - more detail-devils
    • WP:FRAMGATE – relates in part to this, though the above item is more closely related to the one above it
  • meta: Requests for comment/Should the Foundation call itself Wikipedia
  • wmf:Resolution:Publication of proposed Bylaws changes, 2020 – mostly just legalese tweaks, but a few are non-trivial
    • meta:Wikimedia Foundation Board noticeboard/October 2020 - Proposed Bylaws changes – diff view of the above
    • meta:Talk:Wikimedia Foundation Board noticeboard/October 2020 - Proposed Bylaws changes – feedback page for that
  • meta:Wikimedia Foundation Board noticeboard/October 2020 - Board candidate evaluation form – draft "Board candidate rubric"
    • meta: Charla: Tablón de anuncios de la Junta de la Fundación Wikimedia/Octubre de 2020: formulario de evaluación de candidatos a la junta: página de comentarios para eso
  • meta:Estrategia/Movimiento Wikimedia/2018-20/Transition/Global Conversations – ni siquiera estoy seguro de qué es esto todavía, pero usaron el sistema de banners en todo el sistema para "publicitarlo" para recibir comentarios de la comunidad.
  • meta:Estrategia/Movimiento Wikimedia/2018-20/Transición/Discusión: tampoco estoy seguro de qué es esto, pero apareció en WP:CENT

ArbCom

Parte de la burocracia más nebulosa del WMF

  • meta:Confianza y seguridad, también conocido como el sistema de habilitación de la cultura de cancelación
    • meta: Comité de Confianza y Seguridad/Revisión de Casos: al menos hay uno, aunque estoy seguro de que será tan opaco como el anterior
  • meta: Comisión del Defensor del Pueblo: esto realmente parece interesante para algo...
  • Curiosamente, ahora se requiere que los miembros de ArbCom (en el lado de en.WP, no del lado de WMF) no estén en ninguno de los organismos mencionados anteriormente, como un conflicto de intereses (después del fiasco de WP:FRAMGATE ).