User:Chris troutman/sandbox: Difference between revisions

Help

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

< User:Chris troutman

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 20:52, 15 October 2014

WP:AIV	WP:ANI	WP:NPP	WP:RPP	WP:RFR	WP:AFD	WP:XFD
CAT:CSD	WP:CSD	WP:RM	BLPWHRR	WP:DR	WP:TM	WP:TT
WP:RCU	WP:LOP	CAT:AB	WP:BS	WP:RD	WP:NFC	WP:IUP

To-do list for University of California, Riverside:

Sandbox collection

Sabino Asuna
Peter Preuss
S. Sue Johnson
Frank W. Clark, Jr.
Jack Hewitt
Willis Conway Pierce
L. D. Anderson
G. P. McKenzie
E. I. Schlinger
Paul Alkon
Jean Paiva
Carl A. Wiley
W. Mack Dugger
Irwin W Sherman
Leon Dexter Batchelor
John Henry Reed
Robert F. Gleckner

Push to B-class

Push for GA

Others

To-do list for my personal efforts:

B Review

Vladimír Remek
The Deceivers: Allied Military Deception in the Second World War
User:ErrantX/Sandbox/Advanced Headquarters 'A' Force
Consecration of the National Cemetery at Gettysburg
Timeline of women in warfare in the United States since 2000
United States Air Force Western Regional Operations Building

Article rehab

Problem solving

Talk:Hearst Castle#Why was it donated?
{{Uw-dttr4im}}
WP:RB
Sword of Haganah Award
T. Marie Chilton Chair
Noel J. Heiner affair
Seymour L. Chapin (pdf)

To-do list for my suggestions to fix the wiki:

Either mark all IP edits for review or block them entirely outside of AfC. Although there are some good edits from IPs, the vast majority of vandalism comes from IPs. The era of "anyone can edit" needs to end.
The Education Program pays to put campus ambassadors at campuses as needed. The education program as still very much an adhocracy and despite the money flowing in from donors, it's not getting spent to help academia contribute. Any given class can greatly benefit from just one or two visits by a campus ambassador. For the cost of per diem and plane tickets we could support every class out there and encourage further growth.
Community consensus against a WMF employee is sufficient to force a firing. WMF has already had its share of misconduct. If the editors don't want you, then you need to go.
Monetary awards for article improvement like GA and FA. So long as the proper checks are in place to prevent gaming the system, we could both encourage content improvement as well as reward editors for the work they did. Let's remember, it was their hard work that helped earn Wikipedia its Alexa rank, not the staff.
IAR is deleted I have yet to see this policy applied properly. Large organizations kid themselves about being flat but fail to recognize that a bureaucracy was created because members of said organization can't operate without the strictures of rules.
Long-term valuable contributors like newsletter editors, prolific editors, etc. become salaried employees. We have editors knocking themselves out to write great content. While some editors are internally motivated, rewarding editors not only recognizes their contributions it might help some break away from a day job to dedicate even more time to Wikipedia.
Articles with GA status automatically have pending changes. FA status is fully protected. If there's one comment I've been longing to make to IPs and new editors, it's that GAs and FAs don't need the help any n00b could provide. Vandalism, especially sneaky vandalism, so easily defaces the edifice our productive contributors made that we need to do almost anything to prevent it.
PC2 is implemented Sadly, while there's consensus for PC2 to exist, there's no consensus how to use it. I propose PC2 being used to prevent content warring.
WMF pays for content experts to review/approve articles If you're taking in $35million every year, why not spend some of that polishing and troubleshooting the content issues the WMF refuses to address?
WMF license is changed to legally prohibit mirrors and other re-use. WMF wil continue to lose out to WikiWand and others if re-use isn't punished. I want everyone to be able to read Wikipedia for free. I don't care about journalists cribbing Wikipedia for their trashy magazine articles. If we allow mirrors to replicate our content then we'll be forever stuck in an arms race to keep eyeballs that might donate money.
Admins have to identify to WMF. In general I'm against any anonymity online. The first step is to at least sort through the admins.
Users are blocked if found to have misrepresented themselves on wiki. Every lying 12-year old that claims to have a Master's degree is a threat to the gullible soccer-mom that is assuming good faith.

Articles require significant coverage

in reliable sources

that are independent of the subject.

[Wikipedia] doesn’t want its pages to become mostly-static (and therefore trustworthy) repositories of settled fact, it wants them to be WP:BATTLEGROUNDS, because that is what makes it fun for the game players, and that is what encourages the duped and incorrect conventional wisdom believers to keep signing up (or making socks) and “correcting” things that are already correct.
— Wikipediocracy

^[1]

References

Military history WikiProject
Articles for review
Featured Article candidates Battle of Saipan • German atrocities committed against Soviet prisoners of war • The Motherland Calls • Yugoslav torpedo boat T6 • Robert Poore • Chagatai Khan • Boot Monument • Roswell incident • Busbridge War Memorial
Featured Article Review Candidates Byzantine Empire • Edward I of England • Northrop YF-23 • Middle Ages • Thomas C. Hindman • Isaac Brock • Pre-dreadnought battleship
A-Class Review (Criteria/FAQ) Henry Biard • Miyoshi Nagayoshi • Lockheed YF-22 • SPARS • Operation Matterhorn logistics • USS Texas (BB-35) • John S. McCain Sr.
Good Article Nominations Aérospatiale SA 330 Puma • 1864 Washington Arsenal explosion • Felek al-Din Dündar • Mohammad Shah Qajar • Battle of Ekiokpagha • Simon Stuart (general) • 170th Rifle Division (Soviet Union) • Dabney Coleman • Benin Air Force • Battle of Mosul (2016–2017) • Crusading movement • Jarrett Robertson • Tel al-Sultan attack • Charles Keating IV • Sack of Delhi (1757) • Black and Tans • Castlereagh–Canning duel • Ottoman destroyer Yarhisar • Piri Reis • Patrick J. Ryan (chaplain) • George Preece • Francis L. Sampson • HMS Regulus (1785) • Spanish Christian–Muslim War of 1172–1212 • Italian Campaign of 1796–1797 • Pandour Corps • Central Powers • Regency of Algiers • History of the Regency of Algiers • Perdiccas • Shadia Abu Ghazaleh • SMS Otter (1877) • SMS Jäger • HMS Swallow (1744) • Battle of Köse Dağ
Good Article Reassessments Battle of Plataea • Mehmed II's Albanian campaign • USS Texas (BB-35)
Peer Review Henry Clay Work • Charles the Bold • 1939 Liechtenstein putsch • Sher Shah Suri • Rwandan genocide • Battle of Sark
See the full list of open tasks
v t e

Use these

{{tps}}
{{Reply to}}
{{Section link}}
{{Diff}}
{{Dubious}}
{{OW}}
{{repeatvandal}}
{{Old IP warnings top}}
{{In recognition}}
{{NAO}}
{{reflist-talk}}
{{Icon}}
{{spa}}
{{ill}}
{{Alarm clock}}
{{Outdent}}
{{Connected contributor}}
{{efn}}
{{notelist}}
{{Userspace draft}}
{{OBOD}}
{{Maintained}}
{{Connected contributor}}
{{em}}
{{User:Piotrus/w}}
{{Ds/alert}}
{{Sister project links}}
{{translated page}}
{{Please archive}}
{{Include-USGov}}
{{Not here}}
Wikipedia:Userboxes/List of barnstar userboxes
the stalker tool
DAB

Arbitration Committee proceedings

Case requests

Currently, there are no requests for arbitration.

[edit]

Open cases

Case name	Links	Evidence due	Prop. Dec. due
Backlash to diversity and inclusion	(t) (ev / t) (ws / t) (pd / t)	10 Oct 2024	24 Oct 2024

[edit]

Recently closed cases (Past cases)

Case name	Closed
Historical elections	13 Sep 2024

Clarification and Amendment requests

Request name	Motions	Case	Posted
Amendment request: Palestine-Israel articles (AE referral)	Motion	(orig. case)	17 August 2024
Amendment request: PIA Canvassing	none	(orig. case)	30 September 2024

Arbitrator motions

No arbitrator motions are currently open.

^ wikipediocracy http://wikipediocracy.com/2013/12/16/wikipedias-problem-in-a-nutshell/. {{cite web}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Chris_troutman/sandbox&oldid=629762570"

Category:

Wikipedia pages with to-do lists

Hidden categories:

@@ Line 136: / Line 136: @@
 * Noel J. Heiner affair
 * Seymour L. Chapin ([http://web.calstatela.edu/univ/emeriti/emeritimes/92_SPr.pdf pdf])
+|list=
+|nocats=
+|nopreload=
+|small=
+|target=
+}}
+{{To do
+|collapsed=yes
+|for=my suggestions to fix the wiki
+|inner=
+# '''Either mark all IP edits for review or block them entirely outside of AfC.''' Although there are some good edits from IPs, the vast majority of vandalism comes from IPs. The era of "anyone can edit" needs to end.
+# '''The Education Program pays to put campus ambassadors at campuses as needed.''' The education program as still very much an adhocracy and despite the money flowing in from donors, it's not getting spent to help academia contribute. Any given class can greatly benefit from just one or two visits by a campus ambassador. For the cost of ''per diem'' and plane tickets we could support every class out there and encourage further growth.
+# '''Community consensus against a WMF employee is sufficient to force a firing.''' WMF has already had its share of misconduct. If the editors don't want you, then you need to go.
+# '''Monetary awards for article improvement like GA and FA.''' So long as the proper checks are in place to prevent gaming the system, we could both encourage content improvement as well as reward editors for the work they did. Let's remember, it was their hard work that helped earn Wikipedia its Alexa rank, not the staff.
+# '''IAR is deleted''' I have yet to see this policy applied properly. Large organizations kid themselves about being ''flat'' but fail to recognize that a bureaucracy was created because members of said organization can't operate without the strictures of rules.
+# '''Long-term valuable contributors like newsletter editors, prolific editors, etc. become salaried employees.''' We have editors knocking themselves out to write great content. While some editors are internally motivated, rewarding editors not only recognizes their contributions it might help some break away from a day job to dedicate even more time to Wikipedia.
+# '''Articles with GA status automatically have pending changes. FA status is fully protected.''' If there's one comment I've been longing to make to IPs and new editors, it's that GAs and FAs don't need the help any n00b could provide. Vandalism, especially sneaky vandalism, so easily defaces the edifice our productive contributors made that we need to do almost anything to prevent it.
+# '''PC2 is implemented''' Sadly, while there's consensus for PC2 to exist, there's no consensus how to use it. I propose PC2 being used to prevent content warring.
+# '''WMF pays for content experts to review/approve articles''' If you're taking in $35million every year, why not spend some of that polishing and troubleshooting the content issues the WMF refuses to address?
+# '''WMF license is changed to legally prohibit mirrors and other re-use.''' WMF wil continue to lose out to WikiWand and others if re-use isn't punished. I want everyone to be able to read Wikipedia for free. I don't care about journalists cribbing Wikipedia for their trashy magazine articles. If we allow mirrors to replicate our content then we'll be forever stuck in an arms race to keep eyeballs that might donate money.
+# '''Admins have to identify to WMF.''' In general I'm against any anonymity online. The first step is to at least sort through the admins.
+# '''Users are blocked if found to have misrepresented themselves on wiki.''' Every lying 12-year old that claims to have a Master's degree is a threat to the gullible soccer-mom that is assuming good faith.
 |list=
 |nocats=