User talk:Jimbo Wales

(Manual archive list)

WMF plans for mathematics II

Hatted for visibility and to open the way for a discussion. Please open this and read it, and then discuss below.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 11:51, 23 June 2014 (UTC)]]
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Dear Jimbo, A few weeks ago I started a discussion here as a result of which you challenged the mathematics editor community — "What would math editors prefer today? I'm happy to help but it would be delicious if I had an NPOV summary of the current state of the art, how it compares with what we support, and some basic first step explanations of what the steps are to get from where we are to where we want to be, what help we might be able to engage from the broader math community, and what engineering costs we might expect to shoulder on our end." As a result there has been a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics#A challenge from Jimbo Wales (at which we have tried to bring in views from other languages as well). I'm posting the summary here — I look forward to hearing your comments. Deltahedron (talk) 19:41, 21 June 2014 (UTC) Summary Background About 1% of Wikipedia's 4.5 million articles are assessed as being in "Mathematics and Logic". Probably a similar number are in theoretical physics and in computer science. So in about a hundred thousand articles, the ability to render mathematics is indispensible to the reader: the ability to write and edit mathematics is indispensible to the author and editor. Currently the predominant mathematics markup system in all forms of document preparation is some flavour of LaTeX. It may be presumed that any serious mathematics content contributor will be thoroughly familiar with LaTeX. LaTeX is rendered on web pages in a variety of ways: currently Wikipedia uses two of the more popular methods, rendering formulae as PNG images and rendering dynamically using MathJax. There are deficiencies in the current implementation of each of these methods. The stability and usefulness of current mathematics rendering is reduced by the following Incremental development of reader and editor interfaces is apt to degrade the reader or editor experience without warning. Major changes in editor interfaces, such as the introduction of Wikipedia:VisualEditor and Wikipedia:Flow, may be radically incompatible with existing LaTeX markup practices. Effort to support mathematics editing and rendering comes entirely from the volunteer community. Currently one volunteer is working on mathematics rendering, and support for mathematics editing in VE consisted of one GSoC summer volunteer. WMF planning We are reliably informed that WMF has no plans for development of mathematics rendering and editing. That is, there is no plan to coordinate volunteer effort; no plan to integrate volunteer effort into existing products; no plan to ensure the sustainability of mathematics rendering and editing through major changes to the software and user interface. As a consequence of the lack of plans, there is no allocation of WMF developer effort to the maintenance, sustainability or enhancement of mathematics rendering and editing. It is assumed that volunteer developers will undertake any tasks that are necessary, even though there is no plan to coordinate those efforts. It is reasonable to say that there is considerable expertise and experience in mathematics rendering and editing in the existing editor communities. There is no explicit mechanism to capture that experience and make use of it in planning, development or review. Such efforts as have been made to do so are limited in extent and driven by the user community rather than WMF. The role of Community Advocates in linking the editor community and WMF planning and developers in this context has not been effective. Suggestions General WMF planning address the issue of development of mathematics and other complex rendering markup and editing components. WMF liaise actively and effectively with existing editor and reader communities in (1). WMF draw up roadmap for development of complex rendering and editing. WMF liaise actively and effectively with volunteer developer communities to determine required frameworks and work packages. WMF allocate funds and resources to support work packages. Specific Mathematics rendering to be based on MathJax as principal vehicle, with efficiency and resources issues resolved on a wide variety of platforms. LaTeX markup retained as principal mode of editing mathematics text with concomitant option to directly edit at the wikitext markup level. WMF establish a workflow for further development and deployment of the math extension, using the https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Math/Roadmap page to coordinate the development process. WMF designate a fixed contact person at WMF that cares about math related questions and a brief to maintain regular and frequent contact with volunteer community. Short-term Fix MathSource mode is currently disabled: see [1] which resolves this issue. Fix issues with experimental mathoid (MathML + SVG) support on the Beta Cluster.

I have copied this text to the Board wiki and emailed the board (and Lila) asking them to read it. THANK YOU for this. This is a very helpful and concise statement of the issues and concerns. I will personally recommend that we allocate resources to this. It's a straightforward request with obvious benefits - not just benefits in terms of improving the experience of mathematics editors, but benefits in terms of providing a great template for community/foundation cooperation.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 11:51, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Suggestions:

• Keep LaTeX as the platform of choice
• Don't break the use of LaTeX

No-one wants Visual Editor. Of people who might (might) benefit from it, even they're hardly clamouring for it. I'm assuming (which will probably be challenged, but I see it as axiomatic) that those with most need to edit maths are also those most likely to be happy and capable of doing it in LaTeX source. In which case our most important goal above all else is to not screw that up. Anything else is so secondary as to be barely visible. Andy Dingley (talk) 12:01, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

• I would like to add that I believe most mathematicians aren't going to be willing to write mathematics in anything other than LaTeX source (or by hand). Drop LaTeX support and many people will stop editing maths articles. —Kusma (t·c) 14:14, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Well, for whatever it is worth, I don't think anyone anywhere ever suggested dropping LaTeX support. This is more about how to improve from where we are, i.e. more ambitious than just not being stupid.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 06:44, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Let me add my voice to those arguing for keeping (and improving) LaTeX support. Writing a simple formula editor may be a nice project, but using one is much more painful than writing simple, well thought-out markup, at least for people who know what they are doing. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 07:31, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Again, there is no reason to "argue for" that since there is no one arguing against it. I am unaware of anyone even remotely discussing or suggesting that we drop LaTeX support. That really is not what this conversation is about.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 09:47, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

It is not correct to say that nobody wants visual editor. I'm in a large group of editors who tried, it, found it wanting and abandoned it. However, after attending a session led by Phoebe Ayers. I gave it another try, and now use it in some cases. The referencing functionality is better, still not as good as what I can do offline, but at least it works. I've been in correspondence with James Forrester about additional improvements to referencing, specifically autofilling references with an ISBN or doi, and that seems to be coming along nicely. Once that exists, it will be much easier to add those types of references in VE. If I can also convince digital providers to make digital identifiers ubiquitous, it will literally make referencing easy, even for beginners.--S Philbrick(Talk) 12:58, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Hello. Most of mathematicians are writing through various tools that are writing into LaTex, not by writing directly in LaTeX language. For example, Maple or SAGE are providing a latex function, allowing to copy and paste the most tedious parts. Moreover, many macros are "quite standard" like \C to provide $\mathbb {C}$. This also shouldn't be broken. Best regards. Pldx1 (talk) 22:44, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Copyediting is tedious but lasts

As I read comments from people who want to make a lasting impact on Wikipedia, perhaps we should remind them how the wp:GOCE copy-editing of pages (from ragged-to-refined) can produce a massive impact, which often lasts for years, is rarely reverted (unlike POV edit-wars), and typically avoids disputes (at least to skip any page where people complain). Unlike updates to hot-topic pages, where people might bicker for days or months, the copy-editing of dozens of less-popular pages can revise hundreds of details (often 100-400 per page), while perhaps only one-page-per-hundred leads to a dispute over editing.

Currently, the wp:GOCE backlog has stretched into over 16 months during the past 2 years, and we need more editors to reduce the backlog to below 1 year. In particular, the ragged pages listed from July/August 2013 need to be revised during the next 2 months, and with upcoming efforts to clear March-June 2013, we could reduce the total backlog to only 11 months. See pages in categories:
Template:Nb10• Category:Wikipedia_articles_needing_copy_edit_from_July_2013
Template:Nb10• Category:Wikipedia_articles_needing_copy_edit_from_August_2013
An effective backlog drive needs over 800 hours of editing, which could average 10 hours per month each, with 80 people participating (or ~3 hours per week). Anyway, if more people could join the wp:GOCE (Guild of Copy Editors), then we could spread the word about how copy-editing of pages, although tedious, can lead to impressive results, as ragged-to-refined pages where people will see their hard work last, unreverted, for years and years. This is one area where a few dozen people can have an extensive, lasting impact on the quality of Wikipedia. -Wikid77 (talk) 00:15, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

I prefer to choose one type of mistake at a time, search for a character string from the search box, read enough on each article found to ascertain whether correction is needed, and then make one or more corrections on each article. In this way, I can proceed more quickly and efficiently with one or more automatically generated edit summaries. Sometimes, I search for mistakes in non-article namespaces.

For editors who prefer to work on backlogs, I suggest WP:DUSTY (permanent link) and its list of links under "See also". Also, I suggest that other editors copyedit pages in non-article namespaces. Those pages have a more official nature, and a mistake there can mislead editors to imitating the same mistake.

—Wavelength (talk) 00:47, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

• Copyediting pages that people read: The wp:GOCE backlog tends to fix pages which many people are actively viewing, 20-2,000 times per day, where there were dozens or hundreds of punctuation or phrasing problems, and hence, the overall impact is massive. Note: fixing 50 errors viewed 100x per day, means 5,000 fewer mistakes to see each day. There is little need to "assess" the backlog pages because over 98% of those pages require extensive changes, and the resulting edits generate a ragged-to-refined transformation of pages which are read a hundred or thousands of times per week. Because all those pages are read so often, then the quality improvement for Wikipedia becomes massive. Some editors are continually tagging other ragged pages into the wp:GOCE backlog, and they are extremely keen at spotting pages which need numerous/hundreds of fixes but also tend to be read often. The combined efforts of the dozens of people tagging or copy-editing the backlog pages produces this miraculous transformation of thousands of interesting pages each year, from ragged-to-refined, and few people could imagine how many hundreds of typos (or cite glitches) were corrected in each page. Where pages are not specifically copy-edited end-to-end, then the numerous typos often remain in those pages for years (more near page bottom), as a night-and-day difference in quality of typesetting, tone or clarified phrasing. -Wikid77 15:00, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Many common errors in English usage are discussed by Paul Brians, Emeritus Professor of English, Washington State University.

• Common Errors in English Usage

I recommend that all Wikipedia editors refer frequently to his discussions of common errors in English usage.

—Wavelength (talk) 15:53, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

I still think we could create a smart Lua script module, to check for perhaps 500 commonly misspelled words, and detect unusual punctuation such as space-comma (" ,") or space-dot (" .") or dot-capital (".C"), plus pinpoint other common text problems. However, I think there might be a vicious deletion-discussion, and such valuable tools would be deleted "because they would be difficult to maintain" or some other typical bogus reason to block major improvements here. -Wikid77 (talk) 04:18, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Would that module make corrections that can not be made by Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/Typos?

—Wavelength (talk) 05:38, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

VisualEditor global newsletter—June 2014

Did you know?

The character formatting menu, or "Style text" menu lets you set bold, italic, and other text styles. "Clear formatting" removes all text styles and removes links to other pages.

Do you think that clear formatting should remove links? Are there changes you would like to see for this menu? Share your opinion at MediaWiki.org.

The user guide has information about how to use VisualEditor.

The VisualEditor team is mostly working to fix bugs, improve performance, reduce technical debt, and other infrastructure needs. You can find on Mediawiki.org weekly updates detailing recent work.

• They have moved the "Keyboard shortcuts" link out of the "Page options" menu, into the "Help" menu. Within dialog boxes, buttons are now more accessible (via the Tab key) from the keyboard.
• You can now see the target of the link when you click on it, without having to open the inspector.
• The team also expanded TemplateData: You can now add a parameter type  "date" for dates and times in the ISO 8601 format, and  "boolean" for values which are true or false. Also, templates that redirect to other templates (like {{citeweb}} → {{cite web}}) now get the TemplateData of their target (bug 50964). You can test TemplateData by editing mw:Template:Sandbox/doc.
• Category: and File: pages now display their contents correctly after saving an edit (bug 65349, bug 64239)
• They have also improved reference editing: You should no longer be able to add empty citations with VisualEditor (bug 64715), as with references. When you edit a reference, you can now empty it and click the "use an existing reference" button to replace it with another reference instead. 
• It is now possible to edit inline images with VisualEditor. Remember that inline images cannot display captions, so existing captions get removed. Many other bugs related to images were also fixed.
• You can now add and edit {{DISPLAYTITLE}} and __DISAMBIG__ in the "Page options" menu, rounding out the full set of page options currently planned.
• The tool to insert special characters is now wider and simpler.

Looking ahead

The VisualEditor team has posted a draft of their goals for the next fiscal year. You can read them and suggest changes on MediaWiki.org.

The team posts details about planned work on VisualEditor's roadmap. You will soon be able to drag-and-drop text as well as images. If you drag an image to a new place, it won't let you place it in the middle of a paragraph. All dialog boxes and windows will be simplified based on user testing and feedback. The VisualEditor team plans to add autofill features for citations. Your ideas about making referencing quick and easy are still wanted. Support for upright image sizes is being developed. The designers are also working on support for viewing and editing hidden HTML comments and adding rows and columns to tables.

Supporting your wiki

Please read VisualEditor/Citation tool for information on configuring the new citation template menu, labeled "⧼visualeditor-toolbar-cite-label⧽". This menu will not appear unless it has been configured on your wiki.

If you speak a language other than English, we need your help with translating the user guide. The guide is out of date or incomplete for many languages, and what's on your wiki may not be the most recent translation. Please contact me if you need help getting started with translation work on MediaWiki.org.

VisualEditor can be made available to most non-Wikipedia projects. If your community would like to test VisualEditor, please contact product manager James Forrester or file an enhancement request in Bugzilla.

Please share your questions, suggestions, or problems by posting a note at mw:VisualEditor/Feedback or by joining the office hours on Saturday, 19 July 2014 at 21:00 UTC (daytime for the Americas and Pacific Islands) or on Thursday, 14 August 2014 at 9:00 UTC (daytime for Europe, Middle East, Asia).

To change your subscription to this newsletter, please see the subscription pages on Meta or the English Wikipedia. Thank you! Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 04:59, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Persian Wikipedia administrators

hi jimbo. i have some issues with persians wiki admins. they are Censoring one of the politician's page : Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, former persian king of iran. i have academic sources, which published by California University Press, it says :

The shah's paranoia reaches its peak when discussing the 1979 revolution. He claims that his overthrow was brought about by a "strange amalgam" of not only the clergy, the Tudeh, and the oil companies but also the Western media and, of course, the Carter and Thatcher administrations.[ i have another sources, from abrahamian and other professors which prove the paranoia of the king. but admins says it's not enough to prove and you should give another sources. none of them won't hear my Argument. what your help to Subject them. thanks.--Mazdak5 (talk) 18:53, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

[I am revising the heading of this section from a little help please to Persian Wikipedia administrators, in harmony with WP:TPOC, point 12 (Section headings). Please see Microcontent: How to Write Headlines, Page Titles, and Subject Lines. The new heading facilitates recognition of the topic in links and watchlists and tables of contents. Also, I am revising the heading level, because this is a new topic, and not a subtopic of the previous topic.

—Wavelength (talk) 19:13, 25 June 2014 (UTC)]

Unfortunately as I am unable to read Farsi, I will not be very helpful in terms of detailed editing disputes. If you email me, I can try to connect you with Persian Wikipedians whom I know and trust.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 07:43, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Trapped in North Korea please help

Mr Wales, my name is Abigael Handlykken. I am 25 years of age and in December I read an article in Teknisk Ukeblad in which you talked about USB sticks with Wikipedia being smuggled into North Korea. As an opponent of the despicable regime and a firm believer in the notion that knowledge will set you free, I travelled to Pyongyang as a tourist. In my luggage I had some USB sticks containing the Korean Wikipedia, but I was stopped at Pyongyang airport and arrested. I have not been given consular access as Norway does not have embassy here. I am in the office of the kommandant of the prison he has been called away for a disturbance and I have feigned epileptic seizure to have guard leave me for some minutes. Please help me Mr Wales, you're my only hope! Please help. Abigael 175.45.176.130 (talk) 04:49, 26 June 2014 (UTC) Also, do not smuggle into North Korea, you may end up like me, not knowing what will happen. Help!

The IP address geolocates to the DPRK, but I have no way to verify the accuracy of anything else said here. I hope that more knowledgeable editors will comment. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:57, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

How far away is Australia from the DPRK??? Carrite (talk) 05:10, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Hmm...perhaps the reference desk will be able to better help her /sarcasm

Nothing to worry about - Traceroute shows connections from Sprint (cellular) to China to North Korea, which is similar to and reminds me of when when The Pirate Bay pulled a prank by routing/spoofing traffic through North Korea for April Fools. Definitely not impossible to do. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 05:15, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

...but this did provide a good laugh. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 05:19, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Thank you, Carrite and SuperHamster. I am smart enough to know what I don't know, and to ask those who do. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:23, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

@SuperHamster While to some people you might appear to have an idea what you are talking about, using the Pirate Bay technique would be like using a nuclear bomb to squash a roach. The intention of that hack was to provide a false apparent address to incoming connections by intentionally 'breaking' part of the internet, not to merely connect to a website from an address on the other side of the planet. All that traceroute 'proved' is that the host path to 175.45.176.130 is in fact legitimately routed through the DPRKs upstream ISP in China, which is in fact the exact opposite of how it was 'proven' that the Pirate Bay wasn't being hosted in North Korea. Full of yourself? 175.106.33.60 (talk) 11:23, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Dang, I s'pose so :( But thank you! ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 13:50, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Even if this is honest I doubt there is much we could do beyond referring the situation to diplomatic officials. My hunch is that this is a hoax, although I will make sure that WMF's CA team hears about this post in case they know more than we do. --Pine^✉ 07:07, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Clearly a troll, similar in tone to a recent Spanish language item on this page which geolocated to Australia. Feigning an epileptic seizure to clear a room of a prison commandant so that a lengthy SOS message can be sent from his computer — posted to Jimmy Wales' talk page?!?! Yeah, right. Quack quack. Carrite (talk) 07:14, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Thank you, Tim. I didn't notice the earlier Spanish language item here. I must have been helping at the Teahouse, or working on an article, or dealing with a real world paying customer off-Wikipedia. Or sleeping. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:36, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

It's clearly trolling. I remember a bizarre thread on Wikipediocracy which (deliberately?) misrepresented me as advocating for young people to smuggle USB sticks into North Korea. It's a riff on that meme.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 07:41, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Now I know, Jimbo. Sorry if I devoted more attention than it deserved. 07:59, 26 June 2014 (UTC)Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it

Well, the geolocation was interesting, if for no other reason than to ponder how much of someone's life was wasted spoofing an ip number.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 09:13, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

TIL...@Jimbo Wales: reads Wikipediocracy. Who would have thought. 146.255.183.217 (talk) 08:43, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Huh? What happens is that WO people post here with an attention-seeking heading, and they explain what the current attack-of-the-day is. Johnuniq (talk) 12:42, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

I seriously don't think the Chosen officials would overlook your mobile apparatus which could result in horrible punishment. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 08:09, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Best laugh I've had in a while. North Korea, great prank IMO :-P ♥ Solarra ♥ ^{♪ 話 ♪} ߷ _{♀ 投稿 ♀} 08:58, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

From all accounts, it is not possible to get mobile devices to connect to the internet (that we all know) in Pyongyang, but it is possible in areas closer to the Chinese border where people use Chinese simcards which means they would have Chinese IPs. This IP seems to be part of a wider range of North Korean IPs, and there is no reason to think that the IP is spoofed. What is hard to believe though is that Jimmy seems to think North Korean kids use Wikipedia for their homework, in a state that controls every aspect of life, and which has severe punishments for veering from the official doctrine. Anyway, that IP is no more spoofed than the IP I am using right now. Bye. 116.87.124.123 (talk) 09:39, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Perhaps it would be better if you asked me what I think rather than making things up out of thin air.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 14:50, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Mr Wales, in defence of my esteemed colleague above, if one wants to know what you truly think, you go to the media and read your interviews. In this article in Ingeniøren, you clearly stated:

»Nordkorea er et ekstremt eksempel. Her smugler folk Wikipedias koreanske udgave ind på USB-nøgler, da de ikke har internetadgang. Det er meget tys tys. Ofte er det teenagere, der skal bruges det til at lave deres lektier.«

Teknisk Ukeblad, which the unlucky girl now stuck in North Korea said she reads, also published the story, and they clearly stated

Nord-Korea er et ekstremt eksempel. Her smugler folk Wikipedias koreanske utgave inn via USB-nøkler, da de ikke har internett-tilgang. Det er meget hysj-hysj. Ofte er det tenåringer som bruker det som hjelp til å gjøre lekser, sier Wikipedia-grunnleggeren til det danske tidsskriftet Ingeniøren.

.

no:Lekser, being, of course, homework. So, did you, or did you not, say that teenagers in North Korea often use Wikipedia to do their homework. Or are these reputable publications just the latest in a long line of media to have distorted your words? I'll go with the reliable source, particularly as you seem to think poor Abigael is spoofing her "IP number". Enjoy this video from my home city. 91.202.242.213 (talk) 15:25, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

IP spoofing was not only not involved, but it would be technically impossible to do that way, since you would be tricking the webserver into serving pages to someone else's machine. I'm not spoofing an IP, either, and I'm sure the hell not in...(checks) Kabul. Props to you, 116.87.124.123, though. 175.106.33.60 (talk) 11:23, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Community-sourcing, NOT Crowdsourcing: A blog post I hope Jimmy will appreciate

Hello Jimmy and all. Due to our shared disdain for likening Wikipedia to crowdsourcing, I wanted to share a blog post that I just wrote for the New Media Consortium titled, "Why You'll Never Hear Me Call Wikipedia Crowdsourcing." I speak a lot about the nuance of crowdsourcing and its role on a wider spectrum of Open Authority. (This is a term I established through my graduate research, and it was inspired by Wikipedia. I'll be speaking on it at Wikimania.) This blog was written within my role as a contributing editor for the New Media Consortium, an organization that aggregates information on ed-tech in schools and museums. Enjoy! LoriLee (talk) 14:54, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

[Once in paragraph 5 and once in paragraph 6, your blog post has the word "asks" where apparently the word "tasks" should be.

—Wavelength (talk) 15:47, 26 June 2014 (UTC)]