{{Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/sandbox|2005-09-19|Esperanza group|New group aims to promote Wiki-Love}}
To prevent a lot of redirects, could I change this and this so that they link directly to Wikipedia:Esperanza instead of Wikipedia:Esperanza? Jfing ers 88 21:55, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
Out of curiosity, what's wrong with redirects? From what I've heard, redirects are easy and cheap; however, I'm always seeing people "bypassing redirects." Do they take up more resources than others have implied to me in the past? Or do people just not like seeing that "redirected from" in the top left hand corner? E WS23 | (Leave me a message!) 23:42, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Esperanza/Advisory Council actually exists. Why not just edit the timeline there and transclude that? It would make more sense, in my opinion. — nath a nrdotcom ( T • C • W) 23:38, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
Esperanza has grown tremendously over the last couple of months: we have over 300 members now. However, I'm getting some signals from various parts of the Wikipedia community that they see the kind of behaviour from people with a 'green e' in their name that is quite the opposite of the things Esperanza stands for (see, for instance, the charter and the philosophy of Esperanza). I think we need to start thinking about how far we tolerate this, and what we should do in such instances. Do we just leave them a note, do we remove them from the membership list and tell them they're not longer a member? I have some thoughts about this, and the other AC members do too (the Code of Conduct is an example of what we're working on in that area), but I'd really like to see some community input about this, especially about the concrete aspects of implementing such a Code of Conduct and about warning or removing members. I know the latter measure may sound a bit extreme, but the behaviour of some Esperanza members of late has been such that other people's view of Esperanza as a community is affected by it in a very negative way, which may hinder us in the goals that we're striving for. -- Joann e B 19:28, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
I know it's a minor issue, but aren't there any ways to subst the {{PAGENAME}} in {{ EA-welcome}}? F e tofs Hello! 01:13, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
test, one, two....
It seems to only work when the template is subst: in, but thats not a problem.
Ans
e
ll
22:39, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
Hey, I was wondering how involved the coaches typically are with their coachees? I'm considering possibly joining as a coach, but I may be busy a lot until summer (specifically second week of June) so I want to know if I can safely sign up now or should I wait? — Ilyan e p (Talk) 00:11, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
I believe Ilyanep is asking whether it is time-intensive or not. It depends; some admin coaches like to go over every single little thing with their coachees, give them lessons over IRC, etc.; while others like to check what the coachees know, then try to polish their rough edges by giving lessons to them. It is truly a matter of style; however, there's a few candidates that are just hopeless. Above there was a discussion about how to weed out bad candidates that was never finished, and I'd like to ask the general Esperanza membership what do they consider is appropriate. Tito xd( ?!? - help us) 03:42, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
The proposed Code of Conduct has been up for a week or two now and discussion seems to have dried up. Can we discuss here whether we think this should be implemented or not and if implemented, should it be in its current form?
Another issue that we need to think about is the implementation of this idea. Are we going to remove everyone from the membership list and ask them to re-post, hereby accepting the Code of Conduct also go to removing any inactive members... What does everyone think? -- Cel es tianpower háblame 16:12, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
Get my birthday on your calender? Please reply via ip chat as well if you can so I notice, ta 84.9.132.66 23:13, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
A lot of people have submitted themselves to be reviewed. Including some Esperanzians like me. Please don't hold back. Regards, ßlηguγΣη | Have your say!!! - review me 02:01, 21 April 2006 (UTC).
I was curious; how did you guys decide on Esperanzian as the adjective form for Esperanza? Don't you think it sounds a bit...awkward? In my opinion, Esperanzan sounds much better. Every place that I can think of that ends in -a has the adjective form ending with -an, such as states like Alaska → Alaskan & Nevada → Nevadan, and countries like Andorra → Andorran and Moldova → Moldovan. And especially seeing as Esperanza is Spanish, other Spanish-speaking countries like Guatemala → Guatemalan, Nicaragua → Nicaraguan, Venezuela → Venezuelan. Was there a reason that Esperanzian was thought to be superior? — Knowledge Seeker দ 04:50, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
I've started a subpage at User talk:Ikiroid/Help Me Improve where you can comment on me as a user. It was originally suggested by User:Fang Aili over the IRC, and she has since helped me impliment the idea. Unlike Editor Review or RFC, this is not a one-time thing. I plan on having this page until I die or some other horrible thing happens where I have to stop contributing ^_^. So please visit it and give me some advice on how to improve myself, I'll value any advice or commentary. Thanq!-- The i kiro id ( talk parler hablar paroli 说 話し parlar) 00:36, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
I've seen the word Esperanza appear on Wikipedia from time to time, but always assumed that it was some kind of Esperanto interest group... so I never bothered checking until now... and find myself pleasantly surprised (no offense to Esperanto fans!) that it's nothing of the sort. I wonder how many other people made a similar assumption about the name and still haven't looked for themselves? Perhaps there should be a userbox saying "Esperanza is not Esperanto". :) -- noosphere 03:34, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
Moved to Wikipedia Talk:Esperanza/The bot
Wikipedia:esperanza/Newsletter ( WP:ESP/N) and Wikipedia:Esperanza/Newsletter/Slimline ( WP:ESP/NS) have been created to keep track of the newsletter. Please see them and use if you feel that you would like to. -- Cel es tianpower háblame 17:34, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
All right, the queue at Admin coaching is starting to be too long, and it's time to do a little shake-up around that program. First, I want to thank EWS23 for his hard work and helping me out during these past few weeks; we've decided, based on discussions with other coaches and the perception of the program on WT:RFA, that it's time to make a few changes.
Comments? Tito xd( ?!? - help us) 06:41, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship#RfA-induced stress? might be of interest to anyone who hasn't seen it. the wub "?!" 17:14, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
Random the Scrambled 23:01, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
(I'm not complaining this time, isn't that nice?)
Just a general notice to everyone that you can have a small picture beside your name in the stats, if you'd like.
Take a look at the stats - ILovePlankton and I already have them, so this will give you an idea of what the images will look like.
If you want one, either comment here (and tell me where the image is) or e-mail me (of course, you know what to do to make that a real e-mail address instead of a munged one).
Also, if you want to be exempt from the stats for any reason, let me know here too. — nath a nrd o tcom ( T • C • W) 03:46, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
I have to say that I am getting pretty damn sick of all of you. For the last week or so, just about the only stuff that has come up on this Talk Page has been "Incivility". You guys want to talk about man's incivility to man? Go do it somewhere else.
If this is all that Esperanza has to offer, I am ready to leave. It doesn't help that the only other thing I've seen from Esperanza is a stupid election. It's sad if the only substantive discussion is an election and the only other thing is some stupid food fight over a bot and incivility on IRC.
I would propose that all of you take an immediate and permanent break from discussing "Incivility". If that doesn't work for you, consider taking a one week break from Esperanza.
While you're at it, maybe you should read the purpose of Esperanza again. I haven't seen much of that lately.
-- Richard 21:53, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
In fact, on reflection, this whole bit is so at odds with the spirit of Esperanza that I have decided to "archive" the discussion to Wikipedia talk:Esperanza/Incivility. You guys can continue your argument over there.
Just reading through that dreck is enough to turn anyone off from joining Esperanza. I've got one foot out the door as it is.
Sheesh.
-- 69.236.189.158 22:00, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
I found the apologies, now archived, to be entirely within the spirit of Esperanza. Tijuana Brass ¡Épa!- E@ 23:25, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
I think we're all just a little tightly strung with all the disagreements going on. No one should be blamed for anything - this is Esperanza! I'd say we should all just sit back with a lovely cup of Esperanza coffee and relax. -- Nataly a 01:23, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
Hi - I've been thinking about the issue of POV userboxes (e.g. identifying a political or religious view). These have been discouraged, and in a discussion, a majority voted to ban them - but it didn't reach consensus, so they are still in use.
It seems that some people value the ability to express and identify themselves through these userboxes, and perhaps this is valuable to Wikipedia's sense of community. Though arguably our sense of community shouldn't depend on knowing each others point of view on a particular issue, and if they highlight differing opinions, maybe it's a negative impact.
After thinking about this, I've written some of my thoughts at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Userboxes - See heading Boxes for political parties and other groups, currently at the bottom. Input welcome. (Best to comment on that page unless specifically Esperanza-related). Thanks. -- Singkong2005 11:20, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
I figure this would be a good place to discuss what should be done about the bot now. After nathanrdotcom left, Misza13 put up Bob_the_Barman. The question is, would the Esperanza community like to stick with the status quo or replace it with BotOfDoom (which is basically ESP_Bar_Keep without a couple features that are never used like !ip2c, although that could be added back in by adding a line to a config file). As I am somewhat biased, I will not state a preference :) Wh e re (talk) 17:51, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
I figure I might as well add more details so people are more informed. Feel free to add anything if I leave anything out. Please note that I may be biased due to the fact that I did some work on BotOfDoom (nathanrdotcom, Whopper, ILovePlankton, the eggdrop team, and several non-wiki Internet people) Here is a general overview:
In both bots, features can be easily removed if needed. Wh e re (talk) 20:06, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
If it is of any use to you, I can offer UNIX/BSD hosting to put this thing on, I am more than happy to help (and I won't even stop it slapping me!). :) Ian13/ talk 21:05, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
When I click on the chat link I get a message saying "irc is not a registered protocol". SCHZMO ✍ 12:39, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
I suggest that we change all usages of {{ guideline}} on Esperanza pages to {{ Esp-guideline}} which is something I whipped up specifically for use on Esperanza pages. Pegasus1138 Talk | Contribs | Email ---- 22:25, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
Gee... maybe I shoulda read that Code of Conduct more closely while it was still being discussed. It was right around the time that I joined Esperanza and so I wasn't paying close attention.
Anyway, I now find that I have problems with Code of Conduct item #5. I understand that it's not good to "pack the ballot box". Nonetheless, I have done this in the past and can easily imagine that I would do it again.
Here's the situation I created an article which was titled Adaptation to global warming based upon a suggestion on the Talk Page for Mitigation of global warming that the topic deserved an article unto itself. So I was bold and did it. Within minutes, it was tagged for deletion. I rallied the global warming gang to support keeping it (and also improved the article to address various concerns). The result was a unanimous vote to keep the article. Would it have gone that way if I hadn't lobbied for support? Perhaps. However, I see nothing wrong with what I did and I'd do it again in a similar situation.
I'd like to hear some thoughts about why item #5 is important. Of course, the worst thing that could happen if I violate the rule is I could get thrown out of Esperanza. So, I could either refuse to accept the Code of Conduct now or wait until such time as I feel I need to violate item #5 and then get thrown out then.
Thoughts?
-- Richard 01:45, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
I'm posting this after seeing a rash of people who have formed opinions about what transpired without checking their facts or reading the meeting log carefully.
And now, onto my personal feelings.
I've given this a lot of thought over the last view days, especially in the light of people leaving. Since I was the one who proposed the Code of Conduct in the first place, I feel the need to explain myself a bit here. A while ago, there some signals from different corners of the community that they were seeing Esperanza members having a 'green e' in their sigs while signing a personal attack. Around the same time, some other worrisome incidents occurred, involving Esperanza members harrrassing others, on IRC and WP. Both these things struck me as ironic, seeing what Esperanza is supposed to be. That's why I proposed the principle of a Code of Conduct, a sign to the community that 'this is what we stand for', and a proposal for the way we could operationalise our mission. As things have progressed, and reading Pschemp's comments above, I'm not sure if that's the way it is interpreted right now. It has never been about policing the community, never to play judge and jury and run around after Esperanzians who 'misbehave' anywhere, but to emphasise our identity as a community. And yes, there can be disagreement about the way the Code of Conduct links to the charter ('is this what we want to stand for?'), but that's exactly why it was put up for discussion weeks ago. I am sad that people left because of the recent events, and I hope that it will not be the beginning of a new trend, people leaving because they're not happy with what Esperanza is these days. I know people feel that way, I have the same feelings myself, and I'm now curious and wondering what we can do about this. All feedback is appreciated. My personal focus in the time ahead will be supporting and strengthening the programs we have that are closest to our charter, to get back to the aim of Esperanza as closely as we can. -- Joann e B 14:19, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
So, now that we're hemorrhaging members, we might want to consider doing something differently:
Comments? Am I completely insane even for suggesting this? ;-) Kirill Lok s h in 18:29, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
For general discussion (I know this was discussed in the past). Tony Sidaway has left the following message on the talk page of MiszaBot:
I, for one, am happy to receive this spam, and receiving it is a condition of membership, is it not? NoSeptember talk 19:30, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
Since this isn't any old Wikiproject, it's an association of Wikipedians devoted to creating and maintaining a sense of community within Wikipedia, if someone is a member of Esperanza, one would expect a greater degree of community involvement to be required and that would include a message on your talk page once a month about what is happening at Esperanza. If someone doesn't want that level of involvement in the Esperanza community - one message! - then why are they in Esperanza in the first place?
I simply cannot see what hardship is caused by getting a newsletter from an organisation I have signed up for, especially when I can stop getting that newsletter by leaving the organisation. If I got no talk page messages other than from Esperanza, then it wouldn't be a problem. If I was getting 500 a month, a la Jimbo, then one more wouldn't make a difference. If, like most people, I was in the middle with an average of 5 or so a week, that one message a month would still not be the end of the world - if nothing else, a wiki makes it very easy to delete if I didn't want it cluttering up my talk page.
All Esperanza asks of its members is that they receive a message once a month. Nobody is required to make any further investment in our little group in terms of time or typing. We don't even require that people read the newsletter - just that a member receives it. This is such a tiny, minor, wee thing to ask of people who have already self-selected as being community-minded and interested in supporting each other that I'm amazed that we as a group keep having to have this conversation. ➨ ≡ Я Ξ DVΞRS ≡ 20:50, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
I seriously don't understand what the big deal is with receiving one spam message per month. I also don't see what Tony Sidaway's problem is. Even 100+ messages is no big load on the servers. The message doesn't even have images in it. -- F a ng Aili 說嗎? 21:17, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
I have stated the problem in my original message, reposted above. The posting of the same large message on hundreds of user talk pages is completely unnecessary. The wiki needs one copy of the newsletter, which everybody interested can pop on his watchlist. If this works okay for the Signpost, which covers business of interest to all Wikipedians, then it should be enough for the newsletter of a social group.
Another problem, which is more cosmetic than anything else, is the sheer ugliness of the thing. This is a massive multicolumn slab of stuff that even as an experienced Wikipedian I found confusing when I wanted to add a comment on someone's user talk page.
And underlying all this, of course, is the problem with our condoning this (relatively harmless) massive spam run, even if it's just once a month. Esperanza is a relatively harmless society; what do we say when the league of Wikipedian big-endians comes along and starts spamming hundreds of talk pages?
The effect of spam in any environment is to degrade the communication medium, cluttering it with redundant and largely unwanted, largely unread, identical copies of material that only needs to exist in one place.
We have watchlists. We have email. Let's use them. -- Tony Sidaway 21:57, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
To calm everyone down. -- Cel es tianpower háblame 21:13, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
Why are we closing Espy? H ig hway Rainbow Sneakers 21:48, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
She's leaving apparently, that lasted. Thoughts? H ig hway Rainbow Sneakers 21:53, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
Esperanza (edit:) Esperanza's Admin general and Advisory council are taking a short Wikibreak. After some recent events, it's time for some rest and some time to think about ways to continue. You're still more than welcome to continue with the programs, such as the admin coaching and keeping an eye on stressed users! The IRC channel won't be closed either, so feel free to drop by. Keep an eye on this page, we'll keep you posted on the updates. Kind regards,
Joann
e
B
22:00, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
I know this going to sound like I'm some sort of libertarian nutcase but who in the hell decided that Esperanza is on "wikibreak". How is it that this brotherhood wound up electing a bunch of hoity-toity muckety-mucks that can decide to put Esperanza on wikibreak? If they want to go on wikibreak, they should say something like "the Esperanza Advisory Council" is on wikibreak.
Does Esperanza being on wikibreak mean we're not Esperanzans for a few weeks? We get to revert to type and be our normally nasty selves?
Or did they really mean to say "Now that you've elected us to the Advisory Council, we're going to abscond with the Esperanza funds to an unnamed Caribbean island which doesn't have an extradition treaty with the U.S.?
-- Richard 22:20, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
For more clarity: this does not mean that the individuals holding those positions (except for Pschemp) are going anywhere, literally or figuratively speaking (not even to a Caribbean island, Richard). -- Joann e B 23:02, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
I think this is a really good idea, and I hope everyone can appreciate it. We are all still Esperanzians, we are just getting overworked and overstressed as problems pile on. I think the Advisory Council's break will let all of Esperanza take a nice deep breath and come back refreshed and ready to be awesome like we usually are. :D -- Nataly a 00:10, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
I believe that Esperanza's Wikibreak means that no issues will be decided for a short time. Meanwhile, I propose we deliniate exactly what problems exist here at Esperanza. Let's not discuss this issues here, but instead just outline them (for the benefit of those confused about what exactly is going on here, including myself). A simple list will help clear things up for everyone. Please list the items here. -- F a ng Aili 說嗎? 22:21, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
Hello all. I apologize for being relatively silent in the past few days on this page. I have been hit just as hard as everyone by these recent leavings and combined with the coinciding sudden leaving of Wikipedia by Hermione1980, I have been experiencing more Wikistress than I ever have on this project. However, despite my silence on this page, those of you on IRC know that I am dedicated to staying with this organization through thick and thin. I feel I will stay with Esperanza as long as I believe in its goals, and I don't see that changing any time soon.
As an organization, we have lost sight of our broader goals. Our goals are simple, wholesome, and good: to spread community, hope, and Wikilove. When you have such a broad and large-scale message that you are trying to spread, you can't allow yourself to get caught up in small negative incidents, and that is what we have done in the past few days. As the new disclaimer on the Esperanza page now stresses, (paraphrasing) we are human. Humans make mistakes. However, THIS is not the place where we focus on those mistakes. Focusing on the mistakes is already well covered by places such as AN/I, RfC, ArbCom, and (in practice) RfA. Esperanza is the place where we focus on the positives. It's the place where we look at the GOOD contributions someone has made and say, "Don't worry, your stress will pass. There is hope still in Wikipedia. Come sit with us for a cup of tea, take a little time off, share a few laughs, and get back out there and be the best Wikipedian you can be!" And yes, there is still hope. There is still hope as long as people like you and me are still here.
So what do we need to do? As I've said in the past, I don't know what we should do with the leadership positions; I'll leave that to people who are much more politically savvy than I am. However, as for restoring the spirit that is Esperanza, it ultimately comes down to you. Yes: you. Esperanza will still be place where we can have centralized activities such as Barnstar Brigade, Admin Coaching, the Coffee Lounge, and all the others. However, it is up to the individuals to uphold the ideals that are Esperanza. So go out into the wiki and do so with a bounce in your step, a tune in your heart, and a smile on your face. Give a barnstar to someone deserving. Make someone laugh in a tense situation. Be civil in the face of incivility. Calm everyone down in controversial articles, start fresh, and be productive. Assume good faith. Help newcomers. Better yet, edit with the spirit and enthusiasm and excitement that you had when you were a newcomer.
If everyone does these things and so much more, Wikipedia will be a much better place to be. Then, when you've enjoyed a day of hard work and good cheer, come back to Esperanza and share your stories and stresses and heartaches and successes. Enjoy the light, cheerful, and supportive atmosphere we are going to create here. I will be here, and I hope you will too.
E WS23 | (Leave me a message!) 16:19, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
What the heck happened around here while I wasn't paying attention? Our leadership going on wikibreak, Pschemp leaving?, etc. What? — Ilyan e p (Talk) 00:36, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
02:49, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
No, this is not about the IRC/bot discussion (although that did have some stress level raising sides to it, to propose an understatement), and it's not all related to IRC, although IRC did have an influence on this, and it wasn't all positive. There have been concerns about Esperanza for a while, about the way it is progressing and the way it's led. The events of the last few days enlarged that, and called for some more 'immediate' action, but reform or rethinking or whatever you'd like to call it, would have had to take place either way. Someone earlier asked what the AC does for Esperanza anyway, and yes, I've been asking myself that same question as well. The answer, in my opinion, should be: the AC and Admin General are there to serve the community in fulfilling its mission. That should mean that we (as AC) facilitate rather than regulate, and when comparing that perspective to reality, I guess things have gone downhill lately. It's not just the AC stuff though, it's also people's expectations when they join, it's the way Esperanza is perceived by the 'outside world' and other things that are discussed elsewhere on this page. It's time to pause, redetermine what we (as a community, not as AC or whatever) want Esperanza to be, and what kind of structure, if any, would be the best to achieve that. Somewhere on this page, someone was talking about 'revolting against the AC'. To be honest, I'd love that to happen, because that means we have a healthy, self regulating community, but I'd rather see that happen by constructive discussion than by people leaving. I respect their decisions, but I'm sorry that we've all gotten to a point where they felt that that was their best or only option. -- Joann e B 07:26, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
Hi, you'll need to write something specific, to be taken seriously. Tony 06:22, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
NOTE: I'm was reviewing the archives of Wikipedia talk:Esperanza and found this little tidbit. I'm bringing it back here so that I can add a comment 06:40, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
I'm curious. Do you think this person is notable: George Harbottle?
I have nominated the George Harbottle article for deletion on grounds that, if the claim is a hoax, then the man is not notable. Some of the time spent on Wikipedia is really worthwhile. Other times, it's just janitorial work. -- Richard 08:36, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
Irony, lol. — May. 10, '06 [07:31] < freakofnurxture | talk>
The project pages states:
There is no necessity to edit Wikipedia. It is voluntary. There are editors out there who have a keen sense of commitment but that is not the same as a "necessity" to edit article. Alan Liefting 01:54, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
Just to let people who aren't watching that page know- the next round of the userpage award has started. It would be great if Esperanza members could go hunting for some of the 'special' userpages out there and nominate them. Of course you can also nominate your own or sign up as a judge. Petros471 10:23, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
The break is a relative term. Whewn you people shall come back? -- Bhadani 15:28, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
I did not join esperanza yet. I just wanted to know where on the list do I put my name? Mabie Active/Semi-active Members? Wikipedian 17:15, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
I've just been given a very hard time about the length of my signature and have had to remove the link to anything other than my user page to keep the hounds at bay. Just thought I'd warn others that there is trouble brewing. Sophia 10:32, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
There's a difference between having really long signatures with lots of code or ones that really stands out on a page than having a rather simple one, with minor formatting and a few links. I know about the conflict between Nathan, Tony and some others, but this should, in my view, not be seen as some kind of 'us' (people with links or formatting in their sigs) and 'them' (the people commenting about them) conflict that it's portrayed as right now. As often in conflicts, things have been put rather extremely on both sides and I don't think it's a good idea to draw these kinds of conclusions from it. -- Joann e B 14:55, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
I just got welcomed -- "hi, everybody!" "hi, Dr. Nick!" -- and noticed this:
I assume since it's late May, you'll want to modify the {{ EA-welcome}} template as appropriate. :)
— WCityMik e ( talk • contribs • where to reply) 04:38, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
Look at this Esperanza logo I made and uploaded: File:EsperanzalogoIII.jpg How do you guys like it? And archive this talk page, it's 124+ kb's.-- Gangsta-Easter-Bunny 19:44, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
{{Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/sandbox|2005-09-19|Esperanza group|New group aims to promote Wiki-Love}}
To prevent a lot of redirects, could I change this and this so that they link directly to Wikipedia:Esperanza instead of Wikipedia:Esperanza? Jfing ers 88 21:55, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
Out of curiosity, what's wrong with redirects? From what I've heard, redirects are easy and cheap; however, I'm always seeing people "bypassing redirects." Do they take up more resources than others have implied to me in the past? Or do people just not like seeing that "redirected from" in the top left hand corner? E WS23 | (Leave me a message!) 23:42, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Esperanza/Advisory Council actually exists. Why not just edit the timeline there and transclude that? It would make more sense, in my opinion. — nath a nrdotcom ( T • C • W) 23:38, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
Esperanza has grown tremendously over the last couple of months: we have over 300 members now. However, I'm getting some signals from various parts of the Wikipedia community that they see the kind of behaviour from people with a 'green e' in their name that is quite the opposite of the things Esperanza stands for (see, for instance, the charter and the philosophy of Esperanza). I think we need to start thinking about how far we tolerate this, and what we should do in such instances. Do we just leave them a note, do we remove them from the membership list and tell them they're not longer a member? I have some thoughts about this, and the other AC members do too (the Code of Conduct is an example of what we're working on in that area), but I'd really like to see some community input about this, especially about the concrete aspects of implementing such a Code of Conduct and about warning or removing members. I know the latter measure may sound a bit extreme, but the behaviour of some Esperanza members of late has been such that other people's view of Esperanza as a community is affected by it in a very negative way, which may hinder us in the goals that we're striving for. -- Joann e B 19:28, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
I know it's a minor issue, but aren't there any ways to subst the {{PAGENAME}} in {{ EA-welcome}}? F e tofs Hello! 01:13, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
test, one, two....
It seems to only work when the template is subst: in, but thats not a problem.
Ans
e
ll
22:39, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
Hey, I was wondering how involved the coaches typically are with their coachees? I'm considering possibly joining as a coach, but I may be busy a lot until summer (specifically second week of June) so I want to know if I can safely sign up now or should I wait? — Ilyan e p (Talk) 00:11, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
I believe Ilyanep is asking whether it is time-intensive or not. It depends; some admin coaches like to go over every single little thing with their coachees, give them lessons over IRC, etc.; while others like to check what the coachees know, then try to polish their rough edges by giving lessons to them. It is truly a matter of style; however, there's a few candidates that are just hopeless. Above there was a discussion about how to weed out bad candidates that was never finished, and I'd like to ask the general Esperanza membership what do they consider is appropriate. Tito xd( ?!? - help us) 03:42, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
The proposed Code of Conduct has been up for a week or two now and discussion seems to have dried up. Can we discuss here whether we think this should be implemented or not and if implemented, should it be in its current form?
Another issue that we need to think about is the implementation of this idea. Are we going to remove everyone from the membership list and ask them to re-post, hereby accepting the Code of Conduct also go to removing any inactive members... What does everyone think? -- Cel es tianpower háblame 16:12, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
Get my birthday on your calender? Please reply via ip chat as well if you can so I notice, ta 84.9.132.66 23:13, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
A lot of people have submitted themselves to be reviewed. Including some Esperanzians like me. Please don't hold back. Regards, ßlηguγΣη | Have your say!!! - review me 02:01, 21 April 2006 (UTC).
I was curious; how did you guys decide on Esperanzian as the adjective form for Esperanza? Don't you think it sounds a bit...awkward? In my opinion, Esperanzan sounds much better. Every place that I can think of that ends in -a has the adjective form ending with -an, such as states like Alaska → Alaskan & Nevada → Nevadan, and countries like Andorra → Andorran and Moldova → Moldovan. And especially seeing as Esperanza is Spanish, other Spanish-speaking countries like Guatemala → Guatemalan, Nicaragua → Nicaraguan, Venezuela → Venezuelan. Was there a reason that Esperanzian was thought to be superior? — Knowledge Seeker দ 04:50, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
I've started a subpage at User talk:Ikiroid/Help Me Improve where you can comment on me as a user. It was originally suggested by User:Fang Aili over the IRC, and she has since helped me impliment the idea. Unlike Editor Review or RFC, this is not a one-time thing. I plan on having this page until I die or some other horrible thing happens where I have to stop contributing ^_^. So please visit it and give me some advice on how to improve myself, I'll value any advice or commentary. Thanq!-- The i kiro id ( talk parler hablar paroli 说 話し parlar) 00:36, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
I've seen the word Esperanza appear on Wikipedia from time to time, but always assumed that it was some kind of Esperanto interest group... so I never bothered checking until now... and find myself pleasantly surprised (no offense to Esperanto fans!) that it's nothing of the sort. I wonder how many other people made a similar assumption about the name and still haven't looked for themselves? Perhaps there should be a userbox saying "Esperanza is not Esperanto". :) -- noosphere 03:34, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
Moved to Wikipedia Talk:Esperanza/The bot
Wikipedia:esperanza/Newsletter ( WP:ESP/N) and Wikipedia:Esperanza/Newsletter/Slimline ( WP:ESP/NS) have been created to keep track of the newsletter. Please see them and use if you feel that you would like to. -- Cel es tianpower háblame 17:34, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
All right, the queue at Admin coaching is starting to be too long, and it's time to do a little shake-up around that program. First, I want to thank EWS23 for his hard work and helping me out during these past few weeks; we've decided, based on discussions with other coaches and the perception of the program on WT:RFA, that it's time to make a few changes.
Comments? Tito xd( ?!? - help us) 06:41, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship#RfA-induced stress? might be of interest to anyone who hasn't seen it. the wub "?!" 17:14, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
Random the Scrambled 23:01, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
(I'm not complaining this time, isn't that nice?)
Just a general notice to everyone that you can have a small picture beside your name in the stats, if you'd like.
Take a look at the stats - ILovePlankton and I already have them, so this will give you an idea of what the images will look like.
If you want one, either comment here (and tell me where the image is) or e-mail me (of course, you know what to do to make that a real e-mail address instead of a munged one).
Also, if you want to be exempt from the stats for any reason, let me know here too. — nath a nrd o tcom ( T • C • W) 03:46, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
I have to say that I am getting pretty damn sick of all of you. For the last week or so, just about the only stuff that has come up on this Talk Page has been "Incivility". You guys want to talk about man's incivility to man? Go do it somewhere else.
If this is all that Esperanza has to offer, I am ready to leave. It doesn't help that the only other thing I've seen from Esperanza is a stupid election. It's sad if the only substantive discussion is an election and the only other thing is some stupid food fight over a bot and incivility on IRC.
I would propose that all of you take an immediate and permanent break from discussing "Incivility". If that doesn't work for you, consider taking a one week break from Esperanza.
While you're at it, maybe you should read the purpose of Esperanza again. I haven't seen much of that lately.
-- Richard 21:53, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
In fact, on reflection, this whole bit is so at odds with the spirit of Esperanza that I have decided to "archive" the discussion to Wikipedia talk:Esperanza/Incivility. You guys can continue your argument over there.
Just reading through that dreck is enough to turn anyone off from joining Esperanza. I've got one foot out the door as it is.
Sheesh.
-- 69.236.189.158 22:00, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
I found the apologies, now archived, to be entirely within the spirit of Esperanza. Tijuana Brass ¡Épa!- E@ 23:25, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
I think we're all just a little tightly strung with all the disagreements going on. No one should be blamed for anything - this is Esperanza! I'd say we should all just sit back with a lovely cup of Esperanza coffee and relax. -- Nataly a 01:23, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
Hi - I've been thinking about the issue of POV userboxes (e.g. identifying a political or religious view). These have been discouraged, and in a discussion, a majority voted to ban them - but it didn't reach consensus, so they are still in use.
It seems that some people value the ability to express and identify themselves through these userboxes, and perhaps this is valuable to Wikipedia's sense of community. Though arguably our sense of community shouldn't depend on knowing each others point of view on a particular issue, and if they highlight differing opinions, maybe it's a negative impact.
After thinking about this, I've written some of my thoughts at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Userboxes - See heading Boxes for political parties and other groups, currently at the bottom. Input welcome. (Best to comment on that page unless specifically Esperanza-related). Thanks. -- Singkong2005 11:20, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
I figure this would be a good place to discuss what should be done about the bot now. After nathanrdotcom left, Misza13 put up Bob_the_Barman. The question is, would the Esperanza community like to stick with the status quo or replace it with BotOfDoom (which is basically ESP_Bar_Keep without a couple features that are never used like !ip2c, although that could be added back in by adding a line to a config file). As I am somewhat biased, I will not state a preference :) Wh e re (talk) 17:51, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
I figure I might as well add more details so people are more informed. Feel free to add anything if I leave anything out. Please note that I may be biased due to the fact that I did some work on BotOfDoom (nathanrdotcom, Whopper, ILovePlankton, the eggdrop team, and several non-wiki Internet people) Here is a general overview:
In both bots, features can be easily removed if needed. Wh e re (talk) 20:06, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
If it is of any use to you, I can offer UNIX/BSD hosting to put this thing on, I am more than happy to help (and I won't even stop it slapping me!). :) Ian13/ talk 21:05, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
When I click on the chat link I get a message saying "irc is not a registered protocol". SCHZMO ✍ 12:39, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
I suggest that we change all usages of {{ guideline}} on Esperanza pages to {{ Esp-guideline}} which is something I whipped up specifically for use on Esperanza pages. Pegasus1138 Talk | Contribs | Email ---- 22:25, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
Gee... maybe I shoulda read that Code of Conduct more closely while it was still being discussed. It was right around the time that I joined Esperanza and so I wasn't paying close attention.
Anyway, I now find that I have problems with Code of Conduct item #5. I understand that it's not good to "pack the ballot box". Nonetheless, I have done this in the past and can easily imagine that I would do it again.
Here's the situation I created an article which was titled Adaptation to global warming based upon a suggestion on the Talk Page for Mitigation of global warming that the topic deserved an article unto itself. So I was bold and did it. Within minutes, it was tagged for deletion. I rallied the global warming gang to support keeping it (and also improved the article to address various concerns). The result was a unanimous vote to keep the article. Would it have gone that way if I hadn't lobbied for support? Perhaps. However, I see nothing wrong with what I did and I'd do it again in a similar situation.
I'd like to hear some thoughts about why item #5 is important. Of course, the worst thing that could happen if I violate the rule is I could get thrown out of Esperanza. So, I could either refuse to accept the Code of Conduct now or wait until such time as I feel I need to violate item #5 and then get thrown out then.
Thoughts?
-- Richard 01:45, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
I'm posting this after seeing a rash of people who have formed opinions about what transpired without checking their facts or reading the meeting log carefully.
And now, onto my personal feelings.
I've given this a lot of thought over the last view days, especially in the light of people leaving. Since I was the one who proposed the Code of Conduct in the first place, I feel the need to explain myself a bit here. A while ago, there some signals from different corners of the community that they were seeing Esperanza members having a 'green e' in their sigs while signing a personal attack. Around the same time, some other worrisome incidents occurred, involving Esperanza members harrrassing others, on IRC and WP. Both these things struck me as ironic, seeing what Esperanza is supposed to be. That's why I proposed the principle of a Code of Conduct, a sign to the community that 'this is what we stand for', and a proposal for the way we could operationalise our mission. As things have progressed, and reading Pschemp's comments above, I'm not sure if that's the way it is interpreted right now. It has never been about policing the community, never to play judge and jury and run around after Esperanzians who 'misbehave' anywhere, but to emphasise our identity as a community. And yes, there can be disagreement about the way the Code of Conduct links to the charter ('is this what we want to stand for?'), but that's exactly why it was put up for discussion weeks ago. I am sad that people left because of the recent events, and I hope that it will not be the beginning of a new trend, people leaving because they're not happy with what Esperanza is these days. I know people feel that way, I have the same feelings myself, and I'm now curious and wondering what we can do about this. All feedback is appreciated. My personal focus in the time ahead will be supporting and strengthening the programs we have that are closest to our charter, to get back to the aim of Esperanza as closely as we can. -- Joann e B 14:19, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
So, now that we're hemorrhaging members, we might want to consider doing something differently:
Comments? Am I completely insane even for suggesting this? ;-) Kirill Lok s h in 18:29, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
For general discussion (I know this was discussed in the past). Tony Sidaway has left the following message on the talk page of MiszaBot:
I, for one, am happy to receive this spam, and receiving it is a condition of membership, is it not? NoSeptember talk 19:30, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
Since this isn't any old Wikiproject, it's an association of Wikipedians devoted to creating and maintaining a sense of community within Wikipedia, if someone is a member of Esperanza, one would expect a greater degree of community involvement to be required and that would include a message on your talk page once a month about what is happening at Esperanza. If someone doesn't want that level of involvement in the Esperanza community - one message! - then why are they in Esperanza in the first place?
I simply cannot see what hardship is caused by getting a newsletter from an organisation I have signed up for, especially when I can stop getting that newsletter by leaving the organisation. If I got no talk page messages other than from Esperanza, then it wouldn't be a problem. If I was getting 500 a month, a la Jimbo, then one more wouldn't make a difference. If, like most people, I was in the middle with an average of 5 or so a week, that one message a month would still not be the end of the world - if nothing else, a wiki makes it very easy to delete if I didn't want it cluttering up my talk page.
All Esperanza asks of its members is that they receive a message once a month. Nobody is required to make any further investment in our little group in terms of time or typing. We don't even require that people read the newsletter - just that a member receives it. This is such a tiny, minor, wee thing to ask of people who have already self-selected as being community-minded and interested in supporting each other that I'm amazed that we as a group keep having to have this conversation. ➨ ≡ Я Ξ DVΞRS ≡ 20:50, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
I seriously don't understand what the big deal is with receiving one spam message per month. I also don't see what Tony Sidaway's problem is. Even 100+ messages is no big load on the servers. The message doesn't even have images in it. -- F a ng Aili 說嗎? 21:17, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
I have stated the problem in my original message, reposted above. The posting of the same large message on hundreds of user talk pages is completely unnecessary. The wiki needs one copy of the newsletter, which everybody interested can pop on his watchlist. If this works okay for the Signpost, which covers business of interest to all Wikipedians, then it should be enough for the newsletter of a social group.
Another problem, which is more cosmetic than anything else, is the sheer ugliness of the thing. This is a massive multicolumn slab of stuff that even as an experienced Wikipedian I found confusing when I wanted to add a comment on someone's user talk page.
And underlying all this, of course, is the problem with our condoning this (relatively harmless) massive spam run, even if it's just once a month. Esperanza is a relatively harmless society; what do we say when the league of Wikipedian big-endians comes along and starts spamming hundreds of talk pages?
The effect of spam in any environment is to degrade the communication medium, cluttering it with redundant and largely unwanted, largely unread, identical copies of material that only needs to exist in one place.
We have watchlists. We have email. Let's use them. -- Tony Sidaway 21:57, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
To calm everyone down. -- Cel es tianpower háblame 21:13, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
Why are we closing Espy? H ig hway Rainbow Sneakers 21:48, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
She's leaving apparently, that lasted. Thoughts? H ig hway Rainbow Sneakers 21:53, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
Esperanza (edit:) Esperanza's Admin general and Advisory council are taking a short Wikibreak. After some recent events, it's time for some rest and some time to think about ways to continue. You're still more than welcome to continue with the programs, such as the admin coaching and keeping an eye on stressed users! The IRC channel won't be closed either, so feel free to drop by. Keep an eye on this page, we'll keep you posted on the updates. Kind regards,
Joann
e
B
22:00, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
I know this going to sound like I'm some sort of libertarian nutcase but who in the hell decided that Esperanza is on "wikibreak". How is it that this brotherhood wound up electing a bunch of hoity-toity muckety-mucks that can decide to put Esperanza on wikibreak? If they want to go on wikibreak, they should say something like "the Esperanza Advisory Council" is on wikibreak.
Does Esperanza being on wikibreak mean we're not Esperanzans for a few weeks? We get to revert to type and be our normally nasty selves?
Or did they really mean to say "Now that you've elected us to the Advisory Council, we're going to abscond with the Esperanza funds to an unnamed Caribbean island which doesn't have an extradition treaty with the U.S.?
-- Richard 22:20, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
For more clarity: this does not mean that the individuals holding those positions (except for Pschemp) are going anywhere, literally or figuratively speaking (not even to a Caribbean island, Richard). -- Joann e B 23:02, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
I think this is a really good idea, and I hope everyone can appreciate it. We are all still Esperanzians, we are just getting overworked and overstressed as problems pile on. I think the Advisory Council's break will let all of Esperanza take a nice deep breath and come back refreshed and ready to be awesome like we usually are. :D -- Nataly a 00:10, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
I believe that Esperanza's Wikibreak means that no issues will be decided for a short time. Meanwhile, I propose we deliniate exactly what problems exist here at Esperanza. Let's not discuss this issues here, but instead just outline them (for the benefit of those confused about what exactly is going on here, including myself). A simple list will help clear things up for everyone. Please list the items here. -- F a ng Aili 說嗎? 22:21, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
Hello all. I apologize for being relatively silent in the past few days on this page. I have been hit just as hard as everyone by these recent leavings and combined with the coinciding sudden leaving of Wikipedia by Hermione1980, I have been experiencing more Wikistress than I ever have on this project. However, despite my silence on this page, those of you on IRC know that I am dedicated to staying with this organization through thick and thin. I feel I will stay with Esperanza as long as I believe in its goals, and I don't see that changing any time soon.
As an organization, we have lost sight of our broader goals. Our goals are simple, wholesome, and good: to spread community, hope, and Wikilove. When you have such a broad and large-scale message that you are trying to spread, you can't allow yourself to get caught up in small negative incidents, and that is what we have done in the past few days. As the new disclaimer on the Esperanza page now stresses, (paraphrasing) we are human. Humans make mistakes. However, THIS is not the place where we focus on those mistakes. Focusing on the mistakes is already well covered by places such as AN/I, RfC, ArbCom, and (in practice) RfA. Esperanza is the place where we focus on the positives. It's the place where we look at the GOOD contributions someone has made and say, "Don't worry, your stress will pass. There is hope still in Wikipedia. Come sit with us for a cup of tea, take a little time off, share a few laughs, and get back out there and be the best Wikipedian you can be!" And yes, there is still hope. There is still hope as long as people like you and me are still here.
So what do we need to do? As I've said in the past, I don't know what we should do with the leadership positions; I'll leave that to people who are much more politically savvy than I am. However, as for restoring the spirit that is Esperanza, it ultimately comes down to you. Yes: you. Esperanza will still be place where we can have centralized activities such as Barnstar Brigade, Admin Coaching, the Coffee Lounge, and all the others. However, it is up to the individuals to uphold the ideals that are Esperanza. So go out into the wiki and do so with a bounce in your step, a tune in your heart, and a smile on your face. Give a barnstar to someone deserving. Make someone laugh in a tense situation. Be civil in the face of incivility. Calm everyone down in controversial articles, start fresh, and be productive. Assume good faith. Help newcomers. Better yet, edit with the spirit and enthusiasm and excitement that you had when you were a newcomer.
If everyone does these things and so much more, Wikipedia will be a much better place to be. Then, when you've enjoyed a day of hard work and good cheer, come back to Esperanza and share your stories and stresses and heartaches and successes. Enjoy the light, cheerful, and supportive atmosphere we are going to create here. I will be here, and I hope you will too.
E WS23 | (Leave me a message!) 16:19, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
What the heck happened around here while I wasn't paying attention? Our leadership going on wikibreak, Pschemp leaving?, etc. What? — Ilyan e p (Talk) 00:36, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
02:49, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
No, this is not about the IRC/bot discussion (although that did have some stress level raising sides to it, to propose an understatement), and it's not all related to IRC, although IRC did have an influence on this, and it wasn't all positive. There have been concerns about Esperanza for a while, about the way it is progressing and the way it's led. The events of the last few days enlarged that, and called for some more 'immediate' action, but reform or rethinking or whatever you'd like to call it, would have had to take place either way. Someone earlier asked what the AC does for Esperanza anyway, and yes, I've been asking myself that same question as well. The answer, in my opinion, should be: the AC and Admin General are there to serve the community in fulfilling its mission. That should mean that we (as AC) facilitate rather than regulate, and when comparing that perspective to reality, I guess things have gone downhill lately. It's not just the AC stuff though, it's also people's expectations when they join, it's the way Esperanza is perceived by the 'outside world' and other things that are discussed elsewhere on this page. It's time to pause, redetermine what we (as a community, not as AC or whatever) want Esperanza to be, and what kind of structure, if any, would be the best to achieve that. Somewhere on this page, someone was talking about 'revolting against the AC'. To be honest, I'd love that to happen, because that means we have a healthy, self regulating community, but I'd rather see that happen by constructive discussion than by people leaving. I respect their decisions, but I'm sorry that we've all gotten to a point where they felt that that was their best or only option. -- Joann e B 07:26, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
Hi, you'll need to write something specific, to be taken seriously. Tony 06:22, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
NOTE: I'm was reviewing the archives of Wikipedia talk:Esperanza and found this little tidbit. I'm bringing it back here so that I can add a comment 06:40, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
I'm curious. Do you think this person is notable: George Harbottle?
I have nominated the George Harbottle article for deletion on grounds that, if the claim is a hoax, then the man is not notable. Some of the time spent on Wikipedia is really worthwhile. Other times, it's just janitorial work. -- Richard 08:36, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
Irony, lol. — May. 10, '06 [07:31] < freakofnurxture | talk>
The project pages states:
There is no necessity to edit Wikipedia. It is voluntary. There are editors out there who have a keen sense of commitment but that is not the same as a "necessity" to edit article. Alan Liefting 01:54, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
Just to let people who aren't watching that page know- the next round of the userpage award has started. It would be great if Esperanza members could go hunting for some of the 'special' userpages out there and nominate them. Of course you can also nominate your own or sign up as a judge. Petros471 10:23, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
The break is a relative term. Whewn you people shall come back? -- Bhadani 15:28, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
I did not join esperanza yet. I just wanted to know where on the list do I put my name? Mabie Active/Semi-active Members? Wikipedian 17:15, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
I've just been given a very hard time about the length of my signature and have had to remove the link to anything other than my user page to keep the hounds at bay. Just thought I'd warn others that there is trouble brewing. Sophia 10:32, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
There's a difference between having really long signatures with lots of code or ones that really stands out on a page than having a rather simple one, with minor formatting and a few links. I know about the conflict between Nathan, Tony and some others, but this should, in my view, not be seen as some kind of 'us' (people with links or formatting in their sigs) and 'them' (the people commenting about them) conflict that it's portrayed as right now. As often in conflicts, things have been put rather extremely on both sides and I don't think it's a good idea to draw these kinds of conclusions from it. -- Joann e B 14:55, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
I just got welcomed -- "hi, everybody!" "hi, Dr. Nick!" -- and noticed this:
I assume since it's late May, you'll want to modify the {{ EA-welcome}} template as appropriate. :)
— WCityMik e ( talk • contribs • where to reply) 04:38, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
Look at this Esperanza logo I made and uploaded: File:EsperanzalogoIII.jpg How do you guys like it? And archive this talk page, it's 124+ kb's.-- Gangsta-Easter-Bunny 19:44, 19 May 2006 (UTC)