There'sNoTime, are you still not sure what needs to be done here? If not,
Kudpung, could you explain a bit more. This is not a part of the project I am as familiar with, so I'm not of much use beyond coordinating getting tasks done.
TonyBallioni (
talk)
17:03, 1 September 2017 (UTC)reply
I don't think my pie charts are needed, but its a good start. I'll look over it more later today or tomorrow and see if there are any tweaks that could be made.
TonyBallioni (
talk)
15:32, 18 August 2017 (UTC)reply
Mass-message senders
Admins or mass message senders who are involved in ACTRIAL such as @
Kudpung,
TonyBallioni, and
There'sNoTime: can feel free to execute an MM or something similar. Although technically an
involved close, I think consensus is clear that a message on each admin's talk page is unnecessary and participants in the survey are of the mind that notifications on noticeboards such as COIN, SPI, NPP and AFC would be the way to go. DrStrausstalk20:29, 24 August 2017 (UTC)reply
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Admin mass-message
NPP mass-message
We need to decide whether to send these out as separate messages or in the standard newsletters.
Survey
Please add a numbered point under the heading you agree with.
Separate messages
Support: the newsletters have already been designed as standalone messages per
TonyBallioni's
WP:ACTRIAL#Newsletters. Furthermore, ACTRIAL is such a big change that a separate message is warranted in my opinion in order to fully gain the attention of those with the technical capabilities who will be affected by this (admins and reviewers). I'm not familiar with the standard newsletter schedule but if we wait until the periodical mass message we might not give adequate warning for less active members to prepare. I would also suggest that the mass message sender who is appointed should send the messages at the fortnight-remaining mark to give ample time for both this discussion and user preparation. DrStrausstalk15:24, 17 August 2017 (UTC)reply
I don't really care either way, but I also see the advantage of not double posting standalone messages on many people's talk pages.
Kudpung made some points at WT:ACTRIAL at how makinh too big a deal could also cause issues. I also see your point above: the messages would be ready to go with a few tweaks if we decide to do it seperate.
TonyBallioni (
talk)
23:44, 17 August 2017 (UTC)reply
Wikipedia seems to have recently gone mass-message crazy. Nobody on the maintenance side (admins, patrollers, reviewers) is going to be affected at all by the change. They will probably notice a change (if they even bother to notice these things) in the general profile of new articles, but that's all. Truly busy admins may notice that there are fewer CSD to delete.
I believe this should be done with a minimum of fuss, otherwise we'll be causing a mass panic and using valuable editing time by answering countless silly questions in response to the mailing. As far as workload goes, that would kind of defeat the object of the exercise. This is a policy change that could be sufficiently reported in Signpost if someone would like to draft an article here for us to check. (Signpost? What Signpost? - yet another sign of declining interest in running Wikipedia?)
A mass message to the short task force list at
WP:NPPAFCmight be appropriate, because they are concerned with on-going improvement to the concerned systems and also helping out at COIN and SPI on the renewed huge spate of sock farms and paid editing/extortion.
Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (
talk)
01:36, 18 August 2017 (UTC)reply
I feel that a mass-message to the NPP-AFC group and something like the top 100(??) NPReviewers will be optimum.I don't find much (or any) justification in mass-messaging sysops about the change.Also, teahouse-hosts and people who contribute actively at the help-desk ought to know about the change.
Godric on Leave (
talk)
04:58, 18 August 2017 (UTC)reply
Section in periodicals
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
DrStrauss, I sent it to the NPR list as part of the regular update. Most active admins get that. If we send it out to the admin newsletter again with an exact date in the regular communication it would be fine, but I don't want any overkill.
TonyBallioni (
talk)
20:42, 24 August 2017 (UTC)reply
This page is based on the site configuration. The list of rights cannot be edited on wiki. The description of a right can be by changing (or creating) pages in the MediaWiki namespace. —
JJMC89 (
T·C)
17:33, 29 August 2017 (UTC)reply
It needs to be done, but gets done by the config update. The only thing we would do on wiki is if we wanted to change the localization name of one of the groups (which I don't see above) - for example we changed "patroller" to "new page reviewer" before. —
xaosfluxTalk21:10, 5 September 2017 (UTC)reply
There'sNoTime, are you still not sure what needs to be done here? If not,
Kudpung, could you explain a bit more. This is not a part of the project I am as familiar with, so I'm not of much use beyond coordinating getting tasks done.
TonyBallioni (
talk)
17:03, 1 September 2017 (UTC)reply
I don't think my pie charts are needed, but its a good start. I'll look over it more later today or tomorrow and see if there are any tweaks that could be made.
TonyBallioni (
talk)
15:32, 18 August 2017 (UTC)reply
Mass-message senders
Admins or mass message senders who are involved in ACTRIAL such as @
Kudpung,
TonyBallioni, and
There'sNoTime: can feel free to execute an MM or something similar. Although technically an
involved close, I think consensus is clear that a message on each admin's talk page is unnecessary and participants in the survey are of the mind that notifications on noticeboards such as COIN, SPI, NPP and AFC would be the way to go. DrStrausstalk20:29, 24 August 2017 (UTC)reply
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Admin mass-message
NPP mass-message
We need to decide whether to send these out as separate messages or in the standard newsletters.
Survey
Please add a numbered point under the heading you agree with.
Separate messages
Support: the newsletters have already been designed as standalone messages per
TonyBallioni's
WP:ACTRIAL#Newsletters. Furthermore, ACTRIAL is such a big change that a separate message is warranted in my opinion in order to fully gain the attention of those with the technical capabilities who will be affected by this (admins and reviewers). I'm not familiar with the standard newsletter schedule but if we wait until the periodical mass message we might not give adequate warning for less active members to prepare. I would also suggest that the mass message sender who is appointed should send the messages at the fortnight-remaining mark to give ample time for both this discussion and user preparation. DrStrausstalk15:24, 17 August 2017 (UTC)reply
I don't really care either way, but I also see the advantage of not double posting standalone messages on many people's talk pages.
Kudpung made some points at WT:ACTRIAL at how makinh too big a deal could also cause issues. I also see your point above: the messages would be ready to go with a few tweaks if we decide to do it seperate.
TonyBallioni (
talk)
23:44, 17 August 2017 (UTC)reply
Wikipedia seems to have recently gone mass-message crazy. Nobody on the maintenance side (admins, patrollers, reviewers) is going to be affected at all by the change. They will probably notice a change (if they even bother to notice these things) in the general profile of new articles, but that's all. Truly busy admins may notice that there are fewer CSD to delete.
I believe this should be done with a minimum of fuss, otherwise we'll be causing a mass panic and using valuable editing time by answering countless silly questions in response to the mailing. As far as workload goes, that would kind of defeat the object of the exercise. This is a policy change that could be sufficiently reported in Signpost if someone would like to draft an article here for us to check. (Signpost? What Signpost? - yet another sign of declining interest in running Wikipedia?)
A mass message to the short task force list at
WP:NPPAFCmight be appropriate, because they are concerned with on-going improvement to the concerned systems and also helping out at COIN and SPI on the renewed huge spate of sock farms and paid editing/extortion.
Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (
talk)
01:36, 18 August 2017 (UTC)reply
I feel that a mass-message to the NPP-AFC group and something like the top 100(??) NPReviewers will be optimum.I don't find much (or any) justification in mass-messaging sysops about the change.Also, teahouse-hosts and people who contribute actively at the help-desk ought to know about the change.
Godric on Leave (
talk)
04:58, 18 August 2017 (UTC)reply
Section in periodicals
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
DrStrauss, I sent it to the NPR list as part of the regular update. Most active admins get that. If we send it out to the admin newsletter again with an exact date in the regular communication it would be fine, but I don't want any overkill.
TonyBallioni (
talk)
20:42, 24 August 2017 (UTC)reply
This page is based on the site configuration. The list of rights cannot be edited on wiki. The description of a right can be by changing (or creating) pages in the MediaWiki namespace. —
JJMC89 (
T·C)
17:33, 29 August 2017 (UTC)reply
It needs to be done, but gets done by the config update. The only thing we would do on wiki is if we wanted to change the localization name of one of the groups (which I don't see above) - for example we changed "patroller" to "new page reviewer" before. —
xaosfluxTalk21:10, 5 September 2017 (UTC)reply