![]() | 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 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | → | Archive 7 |
Dan, Ben, and I were talking on the IRC earlier about possibly making some sort of #wikipedia-cvua feed on the IRC in order for all of us to be able to communicate, chat, have "meetings", etc, etc. So... anyone have any other thoughts on the concept? Would you use this? Random rambling dying to come out? Voice them! Right here! :) Theopolisme TALK 22:49, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
Any updates? Dan653 ( talk) 15:33, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Hey everyone! With Riley, Dan, and I completely giddy over our new IRC channel, the thought came up of potentially holding some sort of weekly (or whatever) "meetings" where we could, a) discuss issues raised that week (for example the one that Kudpung added here), as well as b) long-term stuffs (like the ones located at the "Next" page). But this would of course require some scheduling - so, what times are you available? Which days work best? Cry your heart out, and then I'll try to look through it all and find some times/days that work and we can go from there. Thanks, and keep up the great "instructing"! Theopolisme TALK 22:24, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
1. We'll go by utc time.
2. When we pick a time keep in mind that most users are either in edt or bst
User:Dan653/sandbox. So we should try to be in bewteen the two time zones which have a five hour differnce. More users live closer to edt than bst so I was thinking we should base it off UTC-2 (2 hours from edt and 3 from bst). So I was thinking a chat time of UTC 18:00 and maybe a second at UTC 00:00 .
Sound good?
All we would have left to do is pick a weekday if you guys agree.
Dan653 ( talk) 22:09, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
Talked to Dan and Riley on IRC and we narrowed it down to either Mondays, Tuesdays, or Wednesdays at UTC 18:00 and UTC 00:00 (if you haven't already, you may wish to add the UTC clock Dan mentioned below). Which days work with you? Please just drop a comment below. Thanks! Theopolisme TALK 00:56, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Looks like Dan and I were being dumb. We meannnnttttttt... 18:00 20:00 UTC Monday and 00:00 UTC Tuesday (aka 4PM/EST and 8PM/EST Monday, for those with timezone issues like me xD). Does this work with you guys? Thanks for bearing with us.
Theopolisme
TALK
02:56, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Next Week, 20:00 UTC MONDAY is what I shall be planning for - can you make it? Theopolisme TALK 20:57, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Hi all - I was just looking at WT:STiki and it appeared that Vivek Rai (who is currently under the instruction of Elizium) received a comment from Electric Catfish ( linked here) implying that if you are a student in the CVUA, they will automatically grant you STiki access - is this the case? I was under the impression that an instructor must request STiki access for their student - and as Electric isn't Vivek's instructor... hmm.. Just a rather troubling point to me - or maybe just a miscommunication or misunderstanding of policy by Electric - or maybe just me misinterpreting everything... in any case, if anyone else can enlighten me that'd be great. Thanks! Theopolisme TALK 06:04, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
(
edit conflict)STiki requests are granted to CVUA trainees (even without checking their understanding of
WP:VANDAL) only due to an inherent assumption that their Instructors will keep a watch on the trainees understanding of
WP:NOTVANDAL and will not allow a misuse of the tool. (So in a way, it makes the CVUA Instructors responsible to take care of that.) From my experience I know that nothing discourages new users (or IP users) to abandon editing on Wikipedia more than the fact that someone reverted their genuine good faith edits and called it vandalism. Please make sure that the trainees are aware of this while they test their revert skills
--
DBig
Xray
07:57, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Electriccatfish2: "Elizium is a new instructor and he/she probably isn't aware of it.(STiki advantage)
This might be a valid concern and may be one needs to do something about it. Can the CVUA make a page for summarizing important points such as these (and the one about my experience above) that every new Instructor should be aware of ?--
DBig
Xray
13:43, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
DBigXray (I finally understand that username now) makes a point, should be include a note to that effect on Instructing methods and Resources? Callanecc ( talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 15:45, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Is there any purpose, because I would like to put it up for deletion Wikipedia:Counter-Vandalism_Unit/Task_Force. Dan653 ( talk) 15:28, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
I think we should move Wikipedia:Counter-Vandalism_Unit/Academy/Next to the think tank. Dan653 ( talk) 15:37, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
What does everyone feel about potentially adding a link to the CVUA under the "Resources and Assistance" section of the Wikipedia vandalism template? Just suddenly came to as I was browsing a page.. there may be a good reason not to do this though, so please let me know. Thanks! Theopolisme TALK 11:17, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
Could all instructors please go to "My preferences" --> "gadgets" --> "appearance" --> "add a clock..." so we can inteligently schedule our irc chat meetings. Thanks Dan653 ( talk) 23:33, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
Hi everyone! Just a quick remember - don't forget that our first ever "official" IRC Meeting happens today at 20:00 UTC (4pm/EDT)! Be sure not to miss it! However, if you can't attend - or you'd just rather not come - we'll put all the meeting minutes up on-wiki soon after the meeting. Hope to see you there! :) Theopolisme TALK 12:14, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
Hi folks. I was asked to make sure that people who didn't attend the IRC knew what we discussed, so here I go. I hope that instructors that were not there can join in the next one, if time was an issue, please contact a coord or myself. If you need clarification on anything, give Theo or myself a nudge and we can assist. If I've missed anything out, tell me! Discussed:
For another copy, please see WP:CVUA/IRC.
Best, -- Chip 123456 15:48, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
Hi folks. My above student has expressed that he doesn't wish to have rollback privilleges assigned to his account. Whilst I don't mind this, I'm just wondering how do I graduate this student, as usually we graduate students who have received rollback privilleges. Thanks, Danke, Merci.-- Chip 123456 11:56, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
Since we've now got quite a few pages bearing the CVUA name - from instructor pages to policy pages to talk pages etc., etc., Callanecc suggested to me a little while ago that we may want to create a special category for all CVUA related pages - thoughts? Theopolisme TALK 13:48, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
Doing... Achowat, hey! But okay, doing now.
Theopolisme
TALK
20:58, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
After discussions with Chip and per CCC I feel that we should reevaluate our position. Leave your comments below. Dan653 ( talk) 23:27, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
Being Bold, I'm going to say we should let this go (at least for now - if a viable point comes up in the future, we should of course re-evaluate). Theopolisme TALK 17:02, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
I've coincidentially 'reverted' a vandal's attempt to vandalize History of WWE from what it looks like on the page's edit history. The vandal uses an anonymous ip username. -- Jayemd ( talk) 18:34, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
I propose that we should make rules about how long potential instructors must wait before becoming instructors if they have been previously blocked. I propose the following:
Please note that I didn't include sockpuppetry blocks, which are usually indefinite. Sockpupperty isn't just operating multiple accounts, it's using them for abusive purposes. These blocks should be dealt with on a case-by-case basis by the coordinators. Electric Catfish 00:49, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
I agree with the comments above (that we should not have set times), and would also suggest that vandalism blocks should not be seen as harshly as has been suggested. Though vandalising is certainly against what we stand for at the CVUA, it is also the most easy to turn from. An editor repeatedly blocked for edit warring or incivility has probably got a bad attitude which they may never shake; an editor who was once immature and vandalised out of bored may not be a hard-core vandal, and will probably not do it again, especially if they have this kind of role. Seems like a case for WP:COMMONSENSE. ItsZippy ( talk • contributions) 14:02, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi everyone! I don't usually chime in here, but as you all know, I'm watching with enthusiasm for all the work you guys are doing, because I'm looking for potential solutions for the backlogs at NPP. I do feel that perhaps 200+ edits for your students should ideally be stated as edits to main space. Except perhaps with Wiki mark up, user space and talk page formatting don't generally demonstrate much experience with policies. I'm saying this because one of your students is claiming to have made 22 GAs with a total of only 209 article edits. Thoughts? Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 09:28, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
Agree with Dan on this one. Theopolisme TALK 11:17, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
WTT mentioned above that the academy does not have a clear goal - which I think is an important discussion we need to have... what is the goal of the CVUA? Theopolisme TALK 20:29, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
Agree with worm. Dan653 ( talk) 16:22, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
Regarding the goal see User:Callanecc/sandbox, questions, comments...? Callanecc ( talk • contribs • logs) 21:37, 13 August 2012 (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 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | → | Archive 7 |
Dan, Ben, and I were talking on the IRC earlier about possibly making some sort of #wikipedia-cvua feed on the IRC in order for all of us to be able to communicate, chat, have "meetings", etc, etc. So... anyone have any other thoughts on the concept? Would you use this? Random rambling dying to come out? Voice them! Right here! :) Theopolisme TALK 22:49, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
Any updates? Dan653 ( talk) 15:33, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Hey everyone! With Riley, Dan, and I completely giddy over our new IRC channel, the thought came up of potentially holding some sort of weekly (or whatever) "meetings" where we could, a) discuss issues raised that week (for example the one that Kudpung added here), as well as b) long-term stuffs (like the ones located at the "Next" page). But this would of course require some scheduling - so, what times are you available? Which days work best? Cry your heart out, and then I'll try to look through it all and find some times/days that work and we can go from there. Thanks, and keep up the great "instructing"! Theopolisme TALK 22:24, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
1. We'll go by utc time.
2. When we pick a time keep in mind that most users are either in edt or bst
User:Dan653/sandbox. So we should try to be in bewteen the two time zones which have a five hour differnce. More users live closer to edt than bst so I was thinking we should base it off UTC-2 (2 hours from edt and 3 from bst). So I was thinking a chat time of UTC 18:00 and maybe a second at UTC 00:00 .
Sound good?
All we would have left to do is pick a weekday if you guys agree.
Dan653 ( talk) 22:09, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
Talked to Dan and Riley on IRC and we narrowed it down to either Mondays, Tuesdays, or Wednesdays at UTC 18:00 and UTC 00:00 (if you haven't already, you may wish to add the UTC clock Dan mentioned below). Which days work with you? Please just drop a comment below. Thanks! Theopolisme TALK 00:56, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Looks like Dan and I were being dumb. We meannnnttttttt... 18:00 20:00 UTC Monday and 00:00 UTC Tuesday (aka 4PM/EST and 8PM/EST Monday, for those with timezone issues like me xD). Does this work with you guys? Thanks for bearing with us.
Theopolisme
TALK
02:56, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Next Week, 20:00 UTC MONDAY is what I shall be planning for - can you make it? Theopolisme TALK 20:57, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Hi all - I was just looking at WT:STiki and it appeared that Vivek Rai (who is currently under the instruction of Elizium) received a comment from Electric Catfish ( linked here) implying that if you are a student in the CVUA, they will automatically grant you STiki access - is this the case? I was under the impression that an instructor must request STiki access for their student - and as Electric isn't Vivek's instructor... hmm.. Just a rather troubling point to me - or maybe just a miscommunication or misunderstanding of policy by Electric - or maybe just me misinterpreting everything... in any case, if anyone else can enlighten me that'd be great. Thanks! Theopolisme TALK 06:04, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
(
edit conflict)STiki requests are granted to CVUA trainees (even without checking their understanding of
WP:VANDAL) only due to an inherent assumption that their Instructors will keep a watch on the trainees understanding of
WP:NOTVANDAL and will not allow a misuse of the tool. (So in a way, it makes the CVUA Instructors responsible to take care of that.) From my experience I know that nothing discourages new users (or IP users) to abandon editing on Wikipedia more than the fact that someone reverted their genuine good faith edits and called it vandalism. Please make sure that the trainees are aware of this while they test their revert skills
--
DBig
Xray
07:57, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Electriccatfish2: "Elizium is a new instructor and he/she probably isn't aware of it.(STiki advantage)
This might be a valid concern and may be one needs to do something about it. Can the CVUA make a page for summarizing important points such as these (and the one about my experience above) that every new Instructor should be aware of ?--
DBig
Xray
13:43, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
DBigXray (I finally understand that username now) makes a point, should be include a note to that effect on Instructing methods and Resources? Callanecc ( talk • contribs) talkback (etc) template appreciated. 15:45, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Is there any purpose, because I would like to put it up for deletion Wikipedia:Counter-Vandalism_Unit/Task_Force. Dan653 ( talk) 15:28, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
I think we should move Wikipedia:Counter-Vandalism_Unit/Academy/Next to the think tank. Dan653 ( talk) 15:37, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
What does everyone feel about potentially adding a link to the CVUA under the "Resources and Assistance" section of the Wikipedia vandalism template? Just suddenly came to as I was browsing a page.. there may be a good reason not to do this though, so please let me know. Thanks! Theopolisme TALK 11:17, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
Could all instructors please go to "My preferences" --> "gadgets" --> "appearance" --> "add a clock..." so we can inteligently schedule our irc chat meetings. Thanks Dan653 ( talk) 23:33, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
Hi everyone! Just a quick remember - don't forget that our first ever "official" IRC Meeting happens today at 20:00 UTC (4pm/EDT)! Be sure not to miss it! However, if you can't attend - or you'd just rather not come - we'll put all the meeting minutes up on-wiki soon after the meeting. Hope to see you there! :) Theopolisme TALK 12:14, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
Hi folks. I was asked to make sure that people who didn't attend the IRC knew what we discussed, so here I go. I hope that instructors that were not there can join in the next one, if time was an issue, please contact a coord or myself. If you need clarification on anything, give Theo or myself a nudge and we can assist. If I've missed anything out, tell me! Discussed:
For another copy, please see WP:CVUA/IRC.
Best, -- Chip 123456 15:48, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
Hi folks. My above student has expressed that he doesn't wish to have rollback privilleges assigned to his account. Whilst I don't mind this, I'm just wondering how do I graduate this student, as usually we graduate students who have received rollback privilleges. Thanks, Danke, Merci.-- Chip 123456 11:56, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
Since we've now got quite a few pages bearing the CVUA name - from instructor pages to policy pages to talk pages etc., etc., Callanecc suggested to me a little while ago that we may want to create a special category for all CVUA related pages - thoughts? Theopolisme TALK 13:48, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
Doing... Achowat, hey! But okay, doing now.
Theopolisme
TALK
20:58, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
After discussions with Chip and per CCC I feel that we should reevaluate our position. Leave your comments below. Dan653 ( talk) 23:27, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
Being Bold, I'm going to say we should let this go (at least for now - if a viable point comes up in the future, we should of course re-evaluate). Theopolisme TALK 17:02, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
I've coincidentially 'reverted' a vandal's attempt to vandalize History of WWE from what it looks like on the page's edit history. The vandal uses an anonymous ip username. -- Jayemd ( talk) 18:34, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
I propose that we should make rules about how long potential instructors must wait before becoming instructors if they have been previously blocked. I propose the following:
Please note that I didn't include sockpuppetry blocks, which are usually indefinite. Sockpupperty isn't just operating multiple accounts, it's using them for abusive purposes. These blocks should be dealt with on a case-by-case basis by the coordinators. Electric Catfish 00:49, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
I agree with the comments above (that we should not have set times), and would also suggest that vandalism blocks should not be seen as harshly as has been suggested. Though vandalising is certainly against what we stand for at the CVUA, it is also the most easy to turn from. An editor repeatedly blocked for edit warring or incivility has probably got a bad attitude which they may never shake; an editor who was once immature and vandalised out of bored may not be a hard-core vandal, and will probably not do it again, especially if they have this kind of role. Seems like a case for WP:COMMONSENSE. ItsZippy ( talk • contributions) 14:02, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi everyone! I don't usually chime in here, but as you all know, I'm watching with enthusiasm for all the work you guys are doing, because I'm looking for potential solutions for the backlogs at NPP. I do feel that perhaps 200+ edits for your students should ideally be stated as edits to main space. Except perhaps with Wiki mark up, user space and talk page formatting don't generally demonstrate much experience with policies. I'm saying this because one of your students is claiming to have made 22 GAs with a total of only 209 article edits. Thoughts? Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 09:28, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
Agree with Dan on this one. Theopolisme TALK 11:17, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
WTT mentioned above that the academy does not have a clear goal - which I think is an important discussion we need to have... what is the goal of the CVUA? Theopolisme TALK 20:29, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
Agree with worm. Dan653 ( talk) 16:22, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
Regarding the goal see User:Callanecc/sandbox, questions, comments...? Callanecc ( talk • contribs • logs) 21:37, 13 August 2012 (UTC)