User talk:ToBeFree: Difference between revisions
m Archiving 1 discussion(s) to User talk:ToBeFree/A/3) (bot |
→A barnstar for you!: new WikiLove message Tag: wikilove |
||
Line 49: | Line 49: | ||
</div></div> <section end="technews-2021-W10"/> 17:50, 8 March 2021 (UTC) |
</div></div> <section end="technews-2021-W10"/> 17:50, 8 March 2021 (UTC) |
||
<!-- Message sent by User:Johan (WMF)@metawiki using the list at https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Global_message_delivery/Targets/Tech_ambassadors&oldid=21175593 --> |
<!-- Message sent by User:Johan (WMF)@metawiki using the list at https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Global_message_delivery/Targets/Tech_ambassadors&oldid=21175593 --> |
||
== A barnstar for you! == |
|||
{| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;" |
|||
|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | [[File:Kindness Barnstar Hires.png|100px]] |
|||
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 3px 3px 0 3px; height: 1.5em;" | '''The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar''' |
|||
|- |
|||
|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | Thank you for all the help, support and guidance you provided here — [[User:Amkgp|Amkgp]] [[User talk:Amkgp|<big>💬</big>]] 04:35, 10 March 2021 (UTC) |
|||
|} |
Revision as of 04:35, 10 March 2021
|
Paid editing
Re: WP:FCOI, "An editor has a financial conflict of interest when they write about a topic with which they have a close financial relationship. This includes being an owner..." That was an instance of clear-as-a-bell PAID. It says so in the section, and it deserved a block. And all the long badgering was a violation of WP:PAYTALK. Form the POV of a non-admin, it the admins are not going to help out in these situations, it makes being an editor here difficult. --- Possibly (talk) 19:15, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
- Possibly, I was trying to explain the difference between "financial COI" and "paid editing". Paid editing is one (common) form of financial COIs, but it isn't the only possible form of a financial COI. The quoted section of the COI guideline describes exactly this difference. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:23, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
- The section of the policy is called "Paid editing". In the section, various types of FCOI are described, which both require disclosure. The text about "An editor has a financial conflict of interest" is not a get-out-of-jail free card for business owners and shareholders of companies to come in here and disrupt our normal processes without disclosing that they have a financial stake. In this case the editor had voted at an AFD without disclosure of their COI/PAID status (they came clean later), and was bludgeoning every discussion they were in. They also had zero interest in contributing to Wikipedia outside of their narrow company interests; in short, they were wasting everyone's time. This is precisely the type of situation where we need a person with a block button, so we can get on with things without being disrupted by those with a financial interest int he outcome of our work.--- Possibly (talk) 19:47, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
- Possibly, you can probably safely ignore them if that's your concern. The closing administrator will not be influenced by the bludgeoning, and I don't expect continued disruption after the deletion discussion. There is currently no reason to assume that blocking the editor has any helpful preventative effect; any possible damage is already done. Interacting with the editor in the current situation only fuels an unnecessary fire. I'd be happy if you could reconsider this situation, and Special:Diff/1010867300, after a few weeks (I promise to do so too). ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:52, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
- Sorry but in this case you missed the point. You could have gently warned them or pblocked them from the AFD, which they have very much influenced. Ignoring it and saying effectively don't worry about it, when three editors have pointedly complained about it, is not helpful. I've never taken issue with an admin's point of view, but I do with this.--- Possibly (talk) 20:04, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
- Possibly, you can probably safely ignore them if that's your concern. The closing administrator will not be influenced by the bludgeoning, and I don't expect continued disruption after the deletion discussion. There is currently no reason to assume that blocking the editor has any helpful preventative effect; any possible damage is already done. Interacting with the editor in the current situation only fuels an unnecessary fire. I'd be happy if you could reconsider this situation, and Special:Diff/1010867300, after a few weeks (I promise to do so too). ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:52, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
- The section of the policy is called "Paid editing". In the section, various types of FCOI are described, which both require disclosure. The text about "An editor has a financial conflict of interest" is not a get-out-of-jail free card for business owners and shareholders of companies to come in here and disrupt our normal processes without disclosing that they have a financial stake. In this case the editor had voted at an AFD without disclosure of their COI/PAID status (they came clean later), and was bludgeoning every discussion they were in. They also had zero interest in contributing to Wikipedia outside of their narrow company interests; in short, they were wasting everyone's time. This is precisely the type of situation where we need a person with a block button, so we can get on with things without being disrupted by those with a financial interest int he outcome of our work.--- Possibly (talk) 19:47, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Recent changes
- Section translation now works on Bengali Wikipedia. It helps mobile editors translate sections of articles. It will come to more wikis later. The first focus is active wikis with a smaller number of articles. You can test it and leave feedback.
- Flagged revisions now give admins the review right. [1]
- When someone links to a Wikipedia article on Twitter this will now show a preview of the article. [2]
Problems
- Many graphs have JavaScript errors. Graph editors can check their graphs in their browser's developer console after editing. [3]
Changes later this week
- The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 9 March. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 10 March. It will be on all wikis from 11 March (calendar).
- The New Discussion tool will soon be a new discussion tools beta feature for on most Wikipedias. The goal is to make it easier to start new discussions. [4]
Future changes
- There will be a number of changes to make it easier to work with templates. Some will come to the first wikis in March. Other changes will come to the first wikis in June. This is both for those who use templates and those who create or maintain them. You can read more.
- Reference Previews will become a default feature on some wikis on 17 March. They will share a setting with Page Previews. If you prefer the Reference Tooltips or Navigation-Popups gadget you can keep using them. If so Reference Previews won't be shown. [5][6]
- New JavaScript-based functions will not work in Internet Explorer 11. This is because Internet Explorer is an old browser that doesn't work with how JavaScript is written today. Everything that works in Internet Explorer 11 today will continue working in Internet Explorer for now. You can read more.
Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
17:50, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar | |
Thank you for all the help, support and guidance you provided here — Amkgp 💬 04:35, 10 March 2021 (UTC) |