![]() | This page 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. |
I have opened a final proposal on the Village pump to implement some changes to the dispute resolution process. The initial discussion for the idea can be found here, and the proposal outlining the changes that would be made if enacted are are outlined here. In summary, this proposal would create a new noticeboard, Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard, move dispute-related ANI threads that don't belong there, to DRN and for a trial, deprecated WQA and the Content noticeboard with these sorts of discussions moved to DRN. Full details on the proposal are at the relevant pages. Thank you. Steven Zhang The clock is ticking.... 08:17, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
The dispute resolution noticeboard has been undergoing a one month trial to see how it works, and has had some success. As part of the original proposal, I suggested another one-month trial after that, closing WP:WQA and WP:CNB, and redirecting posts to DRN to see if the new board can handle these posts more effectively. The proposal is located [1]. Your input would be appreciated. Thank you. Steven Zhang The clock is ticking.... 22:08, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
WQA has been dropped from the proposal, but the discussion made me think of something that I thought I'd raise here. Given the perennial criticisms of WQA as allegedly not delivering what it allegedly promises, I wonder whether the name sets expectations that are part of the problem. It really isn't about "alerts", in the sense of matters requiring urgent attention. It's more like a place to get help from uninvolved people. I wonder if something more along the lines of "Wikiquette Help Desk", or something with similar connotations, would be better. On the other hand, I realize that it's hard to change a long-used name, but I figured I'd suggest this anyway. -- Tryptofish ( talk) 21:24, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
Concur with above discussion that "Wikiquette alert" is pejorative and misleading term. I propose:
We should put the following at the top of the very page.
Wikiquette Assistance is a forum where editors who feel they are being treated incivility can request assistance from other editors in peaceably resolving a situation.
Note that as it is the top of the page is probably too long; various alerts requests in the past indicate editors don't fully read the directions before starting a new thread; trimming the instructions will increase the probability they get read.
Gerardw (
talk) 10:27, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
Just awaiting help on how to move the archive pages en masse. Wikipedia:Help_desk#Move_multiple_pages. Gerardw ( talk) 22:06, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
The concept that requests which don't meet some standard of formatting or notification can just be deleted is contrary to WP:TPG -- we don't refactor editors good faith's edits. If they fail to notify other parties, politely ask them to. If the don't provide diffs, ask them to. Volunteers here should model helpfulness and civility. Gerardw ( talk) 18:44, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
In the past I have come here a couple times with very specific complaints and diffs about outright insults and the person would reply with paragraph after paragraph of vague and inaccurate accusations about all sorts of non-Wikiquette related alleged or even rumored! behaviors, with little or no proof, except maybe a link to some long discussion that was hard to follow. And thus nothing was done, not even a polite note on the user's talk page. So I didn't bother to seek help here for my most recent problems with repeated insults related to my one block in five years which happened in January. Which encouraged ever worsening behavior by the user.
However, I did have a minor specific issue with the user I brought to WP:Dispute Resolution Noticeboard and I found that the more structured template for entering information at least provided some form. (Also there seem to be better monitors there who kept things more on topic, though perhaps that is now the case here.)
Now if only this assistance page had such a template. And both WP pages put some word limit on counter-accusations on unrelated policy issues and demand diffs for them -or even requested they make their own separate complaints on an appropriate noticeboard - in the template. It might help solve the off topic "piling on" problem. Thanks. CarolMooreDC ( talk) 15:48, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
WQA has traditionally been fairly unstructured. It should be a place where it is easy for folks to get assistance, not a overly rigid bureaucratic forum. Gerardw ( talk) 18:44, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
Principle:
So the proposed language and structure is to that end:
Ultimately, I am not completely sold on any specific language, but I am indeed concerned with finding constructive solutions to the above issues. Doing so is not bureaucratic, at least not more so than having a noticeboard is. The alternative would be to eliminate WQA altogether as useless, the issues of pile-ons is obvious.-- Cerejota ( talk) 19:39, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
An RFC related to this page has recently been started at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)#RfC:_Structure_WP:WQA_conversations. Monty 845 03:05, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
![]() | It seems obvious at this point that consensus favors asking the user to make the appropriate notification, reporting instructions already modified to reflect this. Beeblebrox ( talk) 01:27, 5 October 2011 (UTC) |
{{ rfc}} Should users who fail to notify other interested parties:
From recent activity, it still doesn't appear editors coming to WQA understand the idealistic way we would like it to function. I've always understand it to be a lets talk this out and come to an understanding place, not an ANI-lite. To that end I'm proposing an updated header
I've posted it here for review & comment:
Wikipedia:Wikiquette_assistance/HeaderSandbox
Wikipedia talk:Wikiquette_assistance/HeaderSandbox.
Gerardw (
talk) 16:53, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
Updated the header as proposed. Gerardw ( talk) 02:42, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
The instructions say: Avoid initiating a request if: You want blocks, bans, or binding disciplinary measures.
Maybe I'm just not looking in the right place, but I'm not really sure where I would go if I wanted to request a block for uncivility. WP:ANI points here for civility problems and none of the other pages seem to fit. Perhaps some information on the right page for that kind of request could be added to the instructions? Sjö ( talk) 20:35, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
As the redirect is related to this noticeboard - a note to inform users here that a redirect to this noticeboard was created Wikipedia:Run to Mommy - the redirect was nominated for deletion and the discussion is at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2011 November 13 - this ended in deletion and there is now a deletion review discussion at - Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2011 November 14 - Off2riorob ( talk) 19:43, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
A brief note -- the current volunteer instructions make no mention of putting archive tags on discussions -- in general I think it's a bad idea because it implies a "shut up" gestalt. When a discussion has run it's course, volunteers and parties can simply stop responding. Gerardw ( talk) 19:00, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
I'd like to reformat the header of this page to be a little more user-friendly, and streamline with other noticeboard headers. I tried making a change twice but was reverted, with summaries that weren't all that descriptive of the opposing rationale. I feel the current header is a rather intimidating wall of text, whereas one of the new formats is more likely to actually be used. Which does everyone like best? Equazcion (talk) 19:49, 9 Jun 2012 (UTC)
Please close alerts per Wikipedia:Wikiquette_assistance/Volunteer_instructions#Closing_entries. Note that there's no rule alerts have to be closed, sometimes they'll just get archived by the bot. Nobody Ent 02:40, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
![]() | This page 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. |
I have opened a final proposal on the Village pump to implement some changes to the dispute resolution process. The initial discussion for the idea can be found here, and the proposal outlining the changes that would be made if enacted are are outlined here. In summary, this proposal would create a new noticeboard, Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard, move dispute-related ANI threads that don't belong there, to DRN and for a trial, deprecated WQA and the Content noticeboard with these sorts of discussions moved to DRN. Full details on the proposal are at the relevant pages. Thank you. Steven Zhang The clock is ticking.... 08:17, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
The dispute resolution noticeboard has been undergoing a one month trial to see how it works, and has had some success. As part of the original proposal, I suggested another one-month trial after that, closing WP:WQA and WP:CNB, and redirecting posts to DRN to see if the new board can handle these posts more effectively. The proposal is located [1]. Your input would be appreciated. Thank you. Steven Zhang The clock is ticking.... 22:08, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
WQA has been dropped from the proposal, but the discussion made me think of something that I thought I'd raise here. Given the perennial criticisms of WQA as allegedly not delivering what it allegedly promises, I wonder whether the name sets expectations that are part of the problem. It really isn't about "alerts", in the sense of matters requiring urgent attention. It's more like a place to get help from uninvolved people. I wonder if something more along the lines of "Wikiquette Help Desk", or something with similar connotations, would be better. On the other hand, I realize that it's hard to change a long-used name, but I figured I'd suggest this anyway. -- Tryptofish ( talk) 21:24, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
Concur with above discussion that "Wikiquette alert" is pejorative and misleading term. I propose:
We should put the following at the top of the very page.
Wikiquette Assistance is a forum where editors who feel they are being treated incivility can request assistance from other editors in peaceably resolving a situation.
Note that as it is the top of the page is probably too long; various alerts requests in the past indicate editors don't fully read the directions before starting a new thread; trimming the instructions will increase the probability they get read.
Gerardw (
talk) 10:27, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
Just awaiting help on how to move the archive pages en masse. Wikipedia:Help_desk#Move_multiple_pages. Gerardw ( talk) 22:06, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
The concept that requests which don't meet some standard of formatting or notification can just be deleted is contrary to WP:TPG -- we don't refactor editors good faith's edits. If they fail to notify other parties, politely ask them to. If the don't provide diffs, ask them to. Volunteers here should model helpfulness and civility. Gerardw ( talk) 18:44, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
In the past I have come here a couple times with very specific complaints and diffs about outright insults and the person would reply with paragraph after paragraph of vague and inaccurate accusations about all sorts of non-Wikiquette related alleged or even rumored! behaviors, with little or no proof, except maybe a link to some long discussion that was hard to follow. And thus nothing was done, not even a polite note on the user's talk page. So I didn't bother to seek help here for my most recent problems with repeated insults related to my one block in five years which happened in January. Which encouraged ever worsening behavior by the user.
However, I did have a minor specific issue with the user I brought to WP:Dispute Resolution Noticeboard and I found that the more structured template for entering information at least provided some form. (Also there seem to be better monitors there who kept things more on topic, though perhaps that is now the case here.)
Now if only this assistance page had such a template. And both WP pages put some word limit on counter-accusations on unrelated policy issues and demand diffs for them -or even requested they make their own separate complaints on an appropriate noticeboard - in the template. It might help solve the off topic "piling on" problem. Thanks. CarolMooreDC ( talk) 15:48, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
WQA has traditionally been fairly unstructured. It should be a place where it is easy for folks to get assistance, not a overly rigid bureaucratic forum. Gerardw ( talk) 18:44, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
Principle:
So the proposed language and structure is to that end:
Ultimately, I am not completely sold on any specific language, but I am indeed concerned with finding constructive solutions to the above issues. Doing so is not bureaucratic, at least not more so than having a noticeboard is. The alternative would be to eliminate WQA altogether as useless, the issues of pile-ons is obvious.-- Cerejota ( talk) 19:39, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
An RFC related to this page has recently been started at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)#RfC:_Structure_WP:WQA_conversations. Monty 845 03:05, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
![]() | It seems obvious at this point that consensus favors asking the user to make the appropriate notification, reporting instructions already modified to reflect this. Beeblebrox ( talk) 01:27, 5 October 2011 (UTC) |
{{ rfc}} Should users who fail to notify other interested parties:
From recent activity, it still doesn't appear editors coming to WQA understand the idealistic way we would like it to function. I've always understand it to be a lets talk this out and come to an understanding place, not an ANI-lite. To that end I'm proposing an updated header
I've posted it here for review & comment:
Wikipedia:Wikiquette_assistance/HeaderSandbox
Wikipedia talk:Wikiquette_assistance/HeaderSandbox.
Gerardw (
talk) 16:53, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
Updated the header as proposed. Gerardw ( talk) 02:42, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
The instructions say: Avoid initiating a request if: You want blocks, bans, or binding disciplinary measures.
Maybe I'm just not looking in the right place, but I'm not really sure where I would go if I wanted to request a block for uncivility. WP:ANI points here for civility problems and none of the other pages seem to fit. Perhaps some information on the right page for that kind of request could be added to the instructions? Sjö ( talk) 20:35, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
As the redirect is related to this noticeboard - a note to inform users here that a redirect to this noticeboard was created Wikipedia:Run to Mommy - the redirect was nominated for deletion and the discussion is at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2011 November 13 - this ended in deletion and there is now a deletion review discussion at - Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2011 November 14 - Off2riorob ( talk) 19:43, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
A brief note -- the current volunteer instructions make no mention of putting archive tags on discussions -- in general I think it's a bad idea because it implies a "shut up" gestalt. When a discussion has run it's course, volunteers and parties can simply stop responding. Gerardw ( talk) 19:00, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
I'd like to reformat the header of this page to be a little more user-friendly, and streamline with other noticeboard headers. I tried making a change twice but was reverted, with summaries that weren't all that descriptive of the opposing rationale. I feel the current header is a rather intimidating wall of text, whereas one of the new formats is more likely to actually be used. Which does everyone like best? Equazcion (talk) 19:49, 9 Jun 2012 (UTC)
Please close alerts per Wikipedia:Wikiquette_assistance/Volunteer_instructions#Closing_entries. Note that there's no rule alerts have to be closed, sometimes they'll just get archived by the bot. Nobody Ent 02:40, 10 July 2012 (UTC)