This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
Would be great if this article explained how you go about getting or applying for or requesting a "Wikipedian in Residence." Someone searching on the topic will find this article first; it's great historical info, but nothing about how to get one! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.230.232.119 ( talk) 13:44, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
Cancer Research UK is soon to have one. [1] JFW | T@lk 12:26, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
I've removed the OR tag added by User:Fuzheado, as it seems to me that every sentence outside the lede is cited. Have I missed something? Is there a problem with something in the lede (in which case an inline tag may be better)? Or are the sources being challenged (in which case a source-specific tag would be better)? (I declare an interest, as I am one of the WiR described.) Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:10, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
outreach:Talk:Wikipedian in Residence#History points towards a 2006 blog post by User:Llywrch. I'm not sure how to work it in (and my eyelids are drooping), but it probably warrants a mention in the article.
(Also, that Outreach page could use some more watchlisters/assistance. I just saw this blog post, and it appears our Outreach list doesn't include most of those.)
Cheers! – Quiddity ( talk) 08:53, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
I think the "history" section should note the role of the Wikimedia Strategic Planning process, but it will be a little tricky as it's probably never been covered in an independent reliable source. But this discussion is worth a read: strategy:Proposal talk:GLAMwiki - Pete ( talk) 06:45, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
MOSCAPS, Chicago Manual of Style, the Oxford New Hart's Rules, and many other authorities say to minimise caps. If you want vanity capitalisation here, could you please take it up at WT:MOSCAPS or the central WT:MOS page. Before we know it, we'll be calling each other "Advisor" and "Consultant"; we decided not to go along that route long ago. Tony (talk) 08:19, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
G'day,
I'd write this directly on the article, but it's pretty clear that I have a large CoI since I created the concept, so I'll leave comments here for people to integrate as they see fit...
Thanks. No doubt I'll come back again with other points in the future :-) Witty lama 03:04, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
{{ Request edit/request}} I'd be grateful if someone could add the ARKive residency, please. Sources: [3], [4], [5] (the later is a WikimediaUK page, but uses the term "in-residence role"). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:21, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
With this position, there's now a few non-GLAD entities, universities, that have a sponsored WiR position. Also, might there be some expansion of the article and links to talk about issues such as Conflicts of Interest, Paid Advocacy, and what sort of entities can (or cannot) have a WiR? -- Petercorless ( talk) 18:56, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
Added a bit about compensation and linked to the section for CoI where it talks about WiRs as a benign activity. -- Petercorless ( talk) 19:59, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Nations and Wikipedia is a new meta page to accumulate and help organize ways nations/governments and Wikipedia interact and for the Wikipedia community to establish relevant policies and guidelines. Wikipedians in residence can be one such interaction. I thought you might be interested in this page. Please share your thoughts on it on its talk page.
-- Fixuture ( talk) 13:55, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
This phrase appears in the diagram at the top of the article, but its meaning is unclear. Please discuss here. Thanks! zazpot ( talk) 14:19, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
To editor Gamaliel: What's the problem with Andrew Orlowski's piece. You claim it's not reliable and it's clickbait; only one of those is an issue on Wikipedia. What has WP:RSN said? Chris Troutman ( talk) 17:11, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
"one editor at RSN". That criticism is one of three sentences. It's unfair to claim it dominates the section. I have a hard time understanding how a single sentence of 43 words out of the entire article is UNDUE. Now that you've tagged the section for not being neutral, what are you going to do about it? Find more rah-rah material to praise the program for balance? Your editing seems to evince your personal beliefs. I write based upon sources. Chris Troutman ( talk) 18:04, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
"unreliable tabloid source". You have neither evidence nor consensus. I say you're editing based upon your beliefs because clearly it's not based on sources. You've introduced a situation for which you have no answer, save finding sources to praise WiR so the NPOV tag can be removed without your objection. You also imagine that I'm a partisan; you have intimated above that I am a biased editor, also without evidence. I'm not desperate to distract; you're the admin just making stuff up. Chris Troutman ( talk) 00:12, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
I've requested comment here and here. Chris Troutman ( talk) 06:42, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
Would be great if this article explained how you go about getting or applying for or requesting a "Wikipedian in Residence." Someone searching on the topic will find this article first; it's great historical info, but nothing about how to get one! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.230.232.119 ( talk) 13:44, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
Cancer Research UK is soon to have one. [1] JFW | T@lk 12:26, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
I've removed the OR tag added by User:Fuzheado, as it seems to me that every sentence outside the lede is cited. Have I missed something? Is there a problem with something in the lede (in which case an inline tag may be better)? Or are the sources being challenged (in which case a source-specific tag would be better)? (I declare an interest, as I am one of the WiR described.) Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:10, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
outreach:Talk:Wikipedian in Residence#History points towards a 2006 blog post by User:Llywrch. I'm not sure how to work it in (and my eyelids are drooping), but it probably warrants a mention in the article.
(Also, that Outreach page could use some more watchlisters/assistance. I just saw this blog post, and it appears our Outreach list doesn't include most of those.)
Cheers! – Quiddity ( talk) 08:53, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
I think the "history" section should note the role of the Wikimedia Strategic Planning process, but it will be a little tricky as it's probably never been covered in an independent reliable source. But this discussion is worth a read: strategy:Proposal talk:GLAMwiki - Pete ( talk) 06:45, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
MOSCAPS, Chicago Manual of Style, the Oxford New Hart's Rules, and many other authorities say to minimise caps. If you want vanity capitalisation here, could you please take it up at WT:MOSCAPS or the central WT:MOS page. Before we know it, we'll be calling each other "Advisor" and "Consultant"; we decided not to go along that route long ago. Tony (talk) 08:19, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
G'day,
I'd write this directly on the article, but it's pretty clear that I have a large CoI since I created the concept, so I'll leave comments here for people to integrate as they see fit...
Thanks. No doubt I'll come back again with other points in the future :-) Witty lama 03:04, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
{{ Request edit/request}} I'd be grateful if someone could add the ARKive residency, please. Sources: [3], [4], [5] (the later is a WikimediaUK page, but uses the term "in-residence role"). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:21, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
With this position, there's now a few non-GLAD entities, universities, that have a sponsored WiR position. Also, might there be some expansion of the article and links to talk about issues such as Conflicts of Interest, Paid Advocacy, and what sort of entities can (or cannot) have a WiR? -- Petercorless ( talk) 18:56, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
Added a bit about compensation and linked to the section for CoI where it talks about WiRs as a benign activity. -- Petercorless ( talk) 19:59, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Nations and Wikipedia is a new meta page to accumulate and help organize ways nations/governments and Wikipedia interact and for the Wikipedia community to establish relevant policies and guidelines. Wikipedians in residence can be one such interaction. I thought you might be interested in this page. Please share your thoughts on it on its talk page.
-- Fixuture ( talk) 13:55, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
This phrase appears in the diagram at the top of the article, but its meaning is unclear. Please discuss here. Thanks! zazpot ( talk) 14:19, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
To editor Gamaliel: What's the problem with Andrew Orlowski's piece. You claim it's not reliable and it's clickbait; only one of those is an issue on Wikipedia. What has WP:RSN said? Chris Troutman ( talk) 17:11, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
"one editor at RSN". That criticism is one of three sentences. It's unfair to claim it dominates the section. I have a hard time understanding how a single sentence of 43 words out of the entire article is UNDUE. Now that you've tagged the section for not being neutral, what are you going to do about it? Find more rah-rah material to praise the program for balance? Your editing seems to evince your personal beliefs. I write based upon sources. Chris Troutman ( talk) 18:04, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
"unreliable tabloid source". You have neither evidence nor consensus. I say you're editing based upon your beliefs because clearly it's not based on sources. You've introduced a situation for which you have no answer, save finding sources to praise WiR so the NPOV tag can be removed without your objection. You also imagine that I'm a partisan; you have intimated above that I am a biased editor, also without evidence. I'm not desperate to distract; you're the admin just making stuff up. Chris Troutman ( talk) 00:12, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
I've requested comment here and here. Chris Troutman ( talk) 06:42, 31 July 2017 (UTC)