Jump to content

User talk:Jimbo Wales

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by WJBscribe (talk | contribs) at 12:29, 24 May 2021 (→‎Former WMF employee Harej feels like shit. Why do I not feel surprised by anything he said?: well?). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


    Re:The future of Wikipedia A free encyclopedia. --Inspiration provided by Wikipedia's 20 anniversary, an occasion worth celebrating

    I am returning this thread since it has been almost 3 months. Wikipedians would like to know if you have changed your mind. Thanks. Life is short so let us live it to the fullest! (talk) 16:18, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    No, I haven't. I view my core role here as being to defend and strengthen the community against rogue powers of any form. This role requires me to do nothing stupid, in order to maintain the moral authority to do something when it is needed. It is a good system that works well to prevent a number of things that might happen otherwise. If a problem were ever to arise that made the good of the community require me to step aside, then I would do so. But in the meantime, I'm here to be a rather boring bit of traditional strength for the community.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 17:33, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Hear hear. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:29, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    @Life is short so let us live it to the fullest!: Jimbo is the king of Wikipedia, and that's how it should be kept. StarshipSLS (Talk), (My Contributions) 17:35, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Life is short so let us live it to the fullest!, I echo North8000 from the original thread. I'd trust Jimbo as an absolute dictator over the largely self-appointed WMF. Which, mind you, tried to kick Jimbo off the board because he wasn't doing what they wanted. In a just world we could kick everyone who supported those planned bylaw changes off the board instead. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 22:32, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Fine by me as long as it isn't made hereditary ;-) Daß Wölf 23:14, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Wales acting as an independent country

    Hi Jimbo - sorry, no idea if you can deal with this. There is a photo competiton called Wiki Loves Earth. Some users from Wales, a part of the UK, have taken it on themselves to enter Wales as a country. I don't think this should be allowed. Best wishes Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:37, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    This is a WP:UKNATIONALS issue and could no doubt lead to heated discussions. It isn't absolutely wrong to describe the Home Nations as countries and they are allowed to enter sporting events separately, although when it comes to citizenship, all of the people involved have a UK passport. You can't have English, Welsh, Scottish or Northern Irish citizenship, although this may change in the future.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 18:03, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Charlesjsharp, Wales is a principality, strictly speaking, but it is generally recognised as a country, just not one with independent sovereignty. It has its own language, parliament and flag. Guy (help! - typo?) 19:08, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    There's an internet encyclopaedia that says "Wales is a country that is part of the United Kingdom." Perhaps there is some confusion between country and sovereign state. The idea that "Wales is a principality, strictly speaking" is, to quote Ruth Davidson recently, "complete bollocks". Again, that pesky encyclopaedia says that for the last ~500 years "there has been no geographical or constitutional basis for describing any of Wales as a principality". It is up to Wiki Loves Earth to define the rules about how they want to group entries. Since the English border with Wales is not disputed, I don't anticipate any disputes arising over whether a photograph is in Wales or in some other country. I know Jimbo is best palls with some powerful people, but I don't think even he has the power to demote Wales to be merely "a part of the UK". -- Colin°Talk 20:39, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm not sure how trustworthy our articles are on this fact. The relevant second paragraph of Country appears largely unsourced. Wales sources the statement to a statistics.gov.uk page describing how they treat information for the purposes of the statistics they display. Similarly, Scotland sources the statement to: statistics.gov.uk, a blog post on 10 Downing Street, (independence aside, blog posts/press releases on UK government websites are notoriously inconsistent), and ISO which ironically, reading the document, says "WLS Wales [Cymru GB-CYM] principality". Our articles don't have good sources for the statements they make. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 21:00, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    ProcrastinatingReader, the lead of an article doesn't always provide citations for facts that are well cited in the body. For example Principality of Wales#After 1542: union with England goes into more detail. Your ISO source from 2007 is out-of-date, as the wiki article notes, ISO fixed their documentation after 2011. There's more on that here and here, which should give a flavour of the reaction that follows if one wrongly defines Wales. Which leads me to ask, leaving sources aside, why you think the many many Welsh Wikipedians would permit the world's biggest encyclopaedia to define their country wrongly? Surely even an un- or weakly-sourced lead sentence in a country-of-the-world article is likely to be correct, vs some random guy on Jimbo's talk page! -- Colin°Talk 21:45, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    It's not my source, it's the source in the Scotland article. I'm just saying the sources, at least in the lead, aren't great IMO for the statement made. And although it doesn't relate to how we decide content here, Brittanica uses "consistent unit". afaics these issues were mainly discussed in 2007. But is "is Wales/Scotland/etc a country" really something one wants to debate? Even if I had sources to unambiguously claim otherwise, and I haven't really checked if they exist or not, that's not a hill I would want to die on. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 22:12, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Colin, it's not complete bollocks, just ask Llywelyn ap Gruffudd. But, you know, language, flag, Senedd, country. Admittedly I'm not Welsh. Only my Mum, sister and five neicephews are Welsh. Guy (help! - typo?) 21:53, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    If it isn't complete bollocks, is it just a left bollock? Or perhaps a right bollock? :-) Sometimes it is important to know what kind of wrong something is. Since this conversation is about Wiki Loves Earth, I assume we are all discussing Wales as it is in 2021, with the internet and digital cameras, not a millennium ago, with tapestries and swords. The Welsh Government's website at Wales.com has this as the #1 entry of their FAQS page. -- Colin°Talk 22:11, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Just to give my two cents, since the History of England and the English language are a huge interest of mine, maybe an analogy would help, especially for all us Americans who are a bit removed from all of this. Since the Welsh were the Britonnic natives of Britain, I tend to view them as being in a similar situation as the Native Americans. They were essentially driven from their homelands by invading armies, and pushed onto a land one could equate with a reservation. One can equate it the Native American reservations, which in the US (and even Alaska, although we don't have reservations in the Lower 48 sense) are treated as sovereign states, or even independent countries (to such a degree) in that they have their own laws and tribal court-systems, etc. But, ultimately, they are still a part of the US as an overall nation, and I wouldn't count them separately for a contest like this. Zaereth (talk) 18:45, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't see the point in an analogy that bears absolutely no resemblance to Wales or the Welsh. We are having this conversation inside an encyclopaedia, which presents the reader and other editors with as many actual facts about the History of Wales, etc, as they might wish to learn. There's no need for untruths passed down from one's mum or made up analogies. Wales competes independently in several sporting events, where there is no British or UK team (e.g., rugby, football), but does compete as part of the UK in others (e.g., Olympics). That is a better analogy for the photo competition: there is no one correct answer. I note that WLM has the UK competing as a whole, though there are sub-prizes for England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. There was a dispute a while back where some users in Wales wanted to compete at international level (possibly in addition to within the UK), but that was decided against. I forget the links. IIRC about 95% of the photos entered for WLM in Wales came from one guy, who was proposing this, so... For WLE, the WMUK is not organising it, I don't know why. Users in Scotland, England and Northern Ireland cannot enter, because their WM body/community hasn't got volunteers to run it. But I guess some users in Wales have volunteered to run it for Wales. That seems an entirely positive thing. If in future WMUK decide to enter the competition, it is I guess up to the organisers to decide how to split or not split things. -- Colin°Talk 07:55, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Yeah. Just, yeah. No. --Jimbo Wales (talk) 23:30, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Exclusion of African American communities, schools, films, actors, and community leaders continues on Wikipedia

    It's a frustrating struggle and there are lots of excuses for it. But surely we can make room for Ben Wallace's high school, Draft:Central High School (Lowndes County, Alabama), as he enters the NBA hall of fame. It's a school in Alabama and has Black students, but that shouldn't make it less worthy of inclusion than Larry Bird and Jerry West's high school, or yours Jimbo.

    Absolutely the article needs expansion. Photographs. Alumni. Extracurriculars. Demographics. It hasn't happened in the 15 or so years the subject has been excluded from mainspace and it's not going to happen while it's stuck in draftspace with so many important subjects the are being discriminated against in a continuation of a long and ugly history here and elsewhere. 21:03, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

    Translation: Half-formed stubs continue to be rejected even when the subjects are Black. Also FloridaArmy continues to insist that any criticism or rejection of his articles is due to racism. Guy (help! - typo?) 22:55, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    If we're going to editorialize in the title, let's get to the point. The backlog at WP:Articles for Creation is over 4 months. FloridaArmy is (uniquely) under restrictions to use this process. We need to do something to fix it. I'm not suggesting Jimbo should ask the WMF to pay reviewers to clear the backlog, but we are getting close. User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 23:07, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    力, fair. But also the reaosn FA has to go through AfC is that his articles are so often deletable. And he still flatly refuses to accept this. Guy (help! - typo?) 23:23, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Which article have I had deleted User:JzG? Why are you always lying about me and my work here? Ugly. FloridaArmy (talk) 23:34, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    FloridaArmy, Per [1]:
    FloridaArmy is prohibited from creating new articles in mainspace or participating or AFD. AFC is available for new articles they want to create
    Also:
    I have closed the ANI discussion having found consensus to limit you to 20 AfC submissions at a time.
    I understand that you continue to reject these restrictions, and continue, periodically, to assert that those editors who do not accept the articles you submit, are racist (see numerous prior threads here).
    This is the single biggest and most persistent WP:NOTTHEM violation I can recall. Just saying. Guy (help! - typo?) 23:42, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    @力: paying people to do AFC is untenable because (a) financial COIs are the biggest existing problem at AFC and adding more won't help; (b) incentivising quantity of reviewing over quality will just cause NPPers huge problems and make the encyclopedia substantially lower-quality; and (c) there are very few people talented enough to do AFC properly, and it doesn't matter how much money you give people—you can't create that talent overnight. AFC is a symptom of the last 10 years we have spent scaring off newcomers and massively and inordinately overworking the few brave souls who do the bulk of the unpleasant but necessary work none of us want to. First the problem will manifest itself to the volunteers, then to the readers, and then Wikipedia will be an inferior-grade Urban Dictionary forgotten to the ages and replaced by Google's UnbiasedTruthsWiki (paid for by 93 governments and 600 companies) or whoever comes along next. That is, if we aren't ready to hear some hard truths and make some drastic changes. — Bilorv (talk) 14:05, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Bilorv, in part, yes, but there's also the problem of the transition of the project from the barn-building phase to the curation phase. New articles are, proportionately, much less likely to be about some genuinely important subject, and much more likely to be either news stories or advertisements.
    Only one person gets to start the article on general relativity. Directory entries on commercial real estate properties? A rather different matter. Guy (help! - typo?) 14:18, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Someone dishonestly keeps changing the thread title I used to "Long backlog at AfC". I have restored the correct title and it better not happen again. FloridaArmy (talk) 23:32, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      FloridaArmy, that's because you keep asserting that the slowness in accepting your torrent of often-marginal drafts is due to racial bias, and if you keep doing that then I am afraid you're going to end up banned. We're trying to help you here. Guy (help! - typo?) 07:16, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Maybe it would help it we would categorize drafts, that might attract more reviewers to look at things they are interested in. Also, if the subject is notable and the problems aren't severe, I think it's better to just move a draft to article space. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 14:39, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • @Alexis Jazz: I think this would not help, simply because there are such a small cohort of reviewers that review wide subject areas that categorisation would cost more reviewer time than it saved. We just need more people giving a helping hand. It doesn't matter how efficiently you use 20 hours of cumulative reviewer time per day if they've got a job that takes 50 hours per day. — Bilorv (talk) 00:39, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
        Bilorv, there currently is a daunting 5150 submissions on the AfC queue. I could review drafts all day and not make a dent in that number. But if there were a category with Netherlands-related drafts, I could probably clear it out entirely. This creates achievable goals, which is important if you want to attract more people to work on it. I found there actually is some rudimentary categorization at Category:Draft articles so I need to take a look. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 04:15, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
        @Alexis Jazz: yes, I've reviewed at AfC for years (though only a few at a time), so not only am I aware of how daunting the queue size is, but I've seen that increase steadily from 2,000 and I'm worried that it will continue to increase at this space until we reach a breaking point. The categories you've linked to are for drafts, not articles submitted to AfC (and the majority of categorised drafts are currently not submitted). There's no categorisation system you can suggest that would be accurate and not take up more reviewer time than it saves. In the time it will take me to tag drafts as Netherlands-related, I can actually just decline half of them (and leave the promising ones to someone else). And if you make the submitters categorise it then they will not to so or get it wrong.
        I'm aware of the issue of motivation, but the biggest problem is simply what you say: someone could review drafts all day and not make a dent in that number. We have about a dozen heroes on this site (not me) who do exactly this, and otherwise AfC would have collapsed already, but as a result of this never-ending task most of them will burn out, and the problem steadily worsens. The solution is to just get more people so that no one person is responsible for reviewing all-day every-day in order for the process to not collapse tomorrow.
        Forgive me if I'm wrong but I can't see that you've ever reviewed anything at AfC, but you seem perfectly skilled enough to do so. In that case, why not just let your motivation to be to review 2 drafts a day for the rest of the month, and if you need to be held accountable to that target then make a tally on your userpage or user talk page (or hell, my user talk page if you want)? — Bilorv (talk) 11:22, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    For the avoidance of doubt

    I think FloridaArmy's section title is wholly inappropriate, it is an implicit accusation of racism against the editors who patrol and review drafts, and it forms part of a pattern of conduct by FA in which he has routinely in the past accused others of bigotry for failing to accept the flood of articles he writes. FA is under two restrictions, one on article creation, the other on rate of draft submission, because of his tendency to produce under-sourced articles that fail to establish notability. The section title indicates that he still views his articles as beyond reproach and still cannot ascribe any motive other than racial bias to his failure to have every single article speedily accepted. That is, to my reading, distinctly unmutual.

    Drafts are perennially backlogged. No evidence is ever presented that FA's articles or subjects are being singled out. I think FA has friends here and I would appreciate it if they could persuade him to stop presenting every failed draft as some sort of racist crusade. Thank you. Guy (help! - typo?) 15:05, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    If nothing else, I didn't need to read past the title to know who it was; it was obvious even with the malformed signature. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 00:06, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    The Blade of the Northern Lights, right. And sooner or later, disruption that is consistently founded on an assumption of bad faith, will lead to more serious consequences. I don't want that. I want FA to understand that sometimes when an undersourced draft is rejected, it's because it's undersourced, rather than because Wikipedia is a giant edifice devoted to suppressing African-American topics. That's offensive to the many people who are trying to help him, but whose help he evidently considers insufficient (because he thinks he should be allowed to just create articles, as he's said many times before). It's also offensive to our community of draft reviewers. Guy (help! - typo?) 12:42, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    My recommendation

    Even if a concern is raised in an awkward way, by someone with a long history of campaigning on a subject, the concern itself should be approached seriously and not dismissed based on the messenger. It is entirely plausible - and indeed likely in many cases - that even when contributors are all individually making every appropriate effort to be not-biased, there still is a systemic bias caused by structural issues which we may - or may not - be well positioned to address.

    To FA, I recommend that you take this to heart. It's highly unlikely that accusing individual editors of racist motives is correct, and doing so will only tend to irritate them in a way that isn't really going to lead to outcomes that you desire. To others, particularly those who might feel falsely accused of racism, I recommend to set that feeling aside and look to the content - is there an issue which we can and should address around equity in terms of the listings of high schools?--Jimbo Wales (talk) 08:36, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    In terms of the specific examples given by Florida Army, I have these observations:
    • Larry Bird's high school was Springs Valley High School in French Lick, Indiana - we have an article that is, in my own view, typical of our lower quality high school articles. Other than Bird's attendance there, it appears to be a perfectly normal and not particularly noteworthy school. (I'm sure it's a fine place and no offense is meant.) Whether we should even have articles like that is a related topic.
    • Jerry's West's high school was East Bank High School in East Bank, West Virginia - we don't have an article, so I'm not quite sure why Florida Army listed it as an example for consideration.
    • My high school was Randolph School in Huntsville, Alabama. I note that there are some significant differences here which may be interesting to contemplate. First, obviously I'm not a famous basketball player. Second, this is an independent private school. It doesn't surprise me that it's listed while many others in the area are not. (I'm not saying that is right, I'm saying that it doesn't surprise me.) The school I would have attended based on where I lived, S. R. Butler High School (now closed) is also listed, and it is said that it was on the "failing schools list for the state of Alabama."
    What I take away from all this is that there are some interesting questions to be asked here about the systemic issues around entries on high schools in the US. Are private schools more likely to be listed than public schools? Are schools which appear to be listed mainly due to a notable graduate more likely to be so depending on the race of the notable graduate? What is the racial makeup of schools that we list, versus the overall population? Is that right? What improvements could we make?--Jimbo Wales (talk) 08:52, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    People often write about the schools they attended. Therefore, it is logical that schools with a demographic that does not have a big intersection with that of Wikipedia editors, may be written about less. I am unsurprised that schools in largely working-class or otherwise deprived areas are therefore under-represented. This, however, reflects an issue with Wikipedia as a whole, not one with people working at AFC or elsewhere. Insinuating that AFC are rejecting drafts because they have an antipathy to the subject matter is ludicrous as well as offensive. Black Kite (talk) 12:13, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Correct. My only point on that is that we shouldn't just push back on the offensive insinuation, but also think about potential solutions to the broader problem. I'll note that my quick look at schools in my hometown doesn't give any conclusive results. According to our entry on the city, Huntsville has 6 public high schools, plus a few private schools. Columbia is a redirect. Grissom has an entry. Huntsville High has an entry. Jemison has an entry. Lee has an entry. New Century Technology has neither. And one school that used to be well-known but is now gone, Butler, has an entry. There isn't an obvious socioeconomic pattern to those facts.
    I think it would be really interesting for someone (Florida Army, are you interested?) to take a broader look at the pattern across more cities. Do we have a systemic issue with underrepresentation of some schools? With Black Kite, I will not be surprised to learn that we do, specifically due to the reasons mentioned.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 15:13, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Madison County where Huntsville is located appears to be 72 percent white. All but one of its high schools seem to have articles. The one in Gurley doesn't. It looks like that's a small community so likely a small school. Greene County, Alabama apparently only has one high school and it doesn't have an article. I looked in order alphabetically at the Black Belt counties of Alabama and the the first one, Bullock County I think, has an article on its school I created in 2020. The second one has the oldest high school in Alabama. It also has an article. That's as far as I've gotten.FloridaArmy (talk) 06:55, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    More than half of the so-called mankind are women

    But neither User:FloridaArmy nor User:Jimbo Wales, nor other self-anointed diversity advocates have even remarked that the Central High School (Lowndes County, Alabama) article says absolutely nothing about how this college deals with gender issues. Having produced one baseball player in 110 years of existence, what a great achievement! But how many soccer players ? Pldx1 (talk) 16:41, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Please make mobile lite apps (Progressive web app) for all Wikis

    Please make Read & Edit Progressive web applications (mobile lite apps) for other wikis, especially Wiktionary, Wikivoyage and Commons which are very well suited for contributing from a smartphone.

    2) These wikis are losing huge number of potential edits due to the absence of an app. Many wikis are in direly need more contributors. For instance, the translations content in English Wiktionary is very less and will be much needed for the new Wikifunctions project.

    3) For a majority of population, a smartphone is the only device they can afford/have. So please ensure the services reach them and that they also can contribute. The old Wiktionary mobile app had 1 million+ downloads, but app development stopped.

    4) Wikimedia should have been in the forefront of having Progressive web apps. Other top websites already have it.

    5) Progressive web application developed for one wiki can be easily adopted for all other wikis as well. And can be maintained by a small team.

    6) It is an obligation of WMF to develop Mobile apps with full editing capabilities for the community.

    So please make it. Thank you! - Vis M (talk) 00:52, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Vis M, smartphones suck. Nice to have to consume media, not so much to create it. (except for photos/videos) For a majority of population, a smartphone is the only device they can afford/have. In Africa and rural China maybe. How much translations content are you expecting from those areas? You can buy a used Core 2 Duo laptop for $100. (less if you shop around) And that's including COVID-19 price hike (such machines used to be closer to $50) The price will be a bit higher in developing markets, but still. If you can't afford that you have bigger problems, like paying for food and rent. To provide access, there has been Wikipedia Zero in developing markets. Great source of copyvios that was. (I'm sure there was legitimate use as well) See also User talk:Jimbo Wales/Archive 245#The tragic case of User:CejeroC and WP:THEYCANTHEARYOU. These apps for the most part just need to die. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 01:55, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    That should be blamed on WMF's irresponsibility to fix issues. A lite/progressive web app actually prevents such issues as the exact web app is just put inside a wrapper to act as a mobile lite app.
    I beg to differ on the "apps should die" part, they should be well maintained but more simplistically and with full functionalities including editing, navboxes, categories, etc. I really like responsive MonoBook/Vector-new skins for mobile and I wish that they will just put it in a wrapper to make a lite app - Vis M (talk) 05:18, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Vis M, just make a shortcut to https://en.m.wikipedia.org on your homescreen? — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 06:07, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Yeah, actually lite apps does the same. Shortcut url to homescreen will make it into an app. Twitter's story. I was requesting lite apps to make wikis accessible for more people and potential editors. - Vis M (talk) 22:36, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    If I'm reading this right as an explicit dismissal of potential editors from Africa and China, I'm shocked. I don't know what makes you an authority on access to technology in the developing world, but from my own anecdotal experience I know many communities in India have (pragmatically) access to smartphones only (I don't really care what you can buy for what price on Amazon in your country), and that living in poverty is not really anything to do with whether you are reading Wikipedia (in which case, you can be editing as you read) or whether you have some amount of free time. Of course, many people in India and Africa do speak English, but there are other language editions of Wikipedia too. China is a special case because of its firewall. — Bilorv (talk) 12:48, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Bilorv, actually it's a dismissal of smartphone editors, particularly for major text contributions. Some exceptions exist, but generally smartphone editors have a hard time producing major text contributions. And the few that do just use the mobile site. Apps for editing are not the solution here. (I have no objection to apps for reading wikis) If you can't afford food or rent you should not be wasting time editing Wikipedia while starving under a bridge. If you can afford food, rent, a smartphone and internet you shouldn't have that much trouble getting a Bluetooth keyboard and using the mobile site. It doesn't matter how much you spend on app development: until smartphones get keyboards (they used to, but really tiny ones) you can't edit too comfortably on them. It's a hardware problem. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 15:31, 21 May 2021 (UTC);[reply]
    I don't know why you think it's acceptable to say sentences like, Even in Africa and China: if you can't afford food or rent you should not be wasting time editing Wikipedia while starving under a bridge. Astonishing. — Bilorv (talk) 15:46, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Bilorv Oh, that's not right. I re-wrote my reply at some point before publishing it, the first part of that sentence you quoted is some strange Frankenstein leftover of the initial version that ended up in a different context, which made it rather unacceptable. I've adjusted it. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 15:52, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Bth sides are, well, I think the most accurate word would be "over-extreming" this. In most poor countries, people are not SO poor that they are living under bridges; rather, they can afford rent, basic necessities and perhaps a luxury or 2. And most of all, nearly everyone in poor countries have smartphones. Poor countries do not mean everyone there is poor; rather, people are poor in relation to the world. In their respective countries they might be middle-class. Either way, people are not so desperate as to not be able to afford basic necessities and things like that, but they certainly don't have enough in the bank to afford fancy laptops (not to mention the electricity cost, my parents still bother me about it even in America). A mobile app would be a great help to people with smartphones wanting to maybe make a few edits to Wikipedia, help out with things they know about (perhaps things in their own nation!!!). It is generally known that apps are better suited for mobile use than mobile sites, and an app is a great idea, requiring minimal work and upkeep while extending access to millions, or even billions.RealKnockout (talk) 16:51, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    RealKnockout, an idling laptop with the screen turned on (no monster gaming laptop, low/medium screen brightness) consumes <10W. Running for 16 hours/day would cost roughly $1/month in Europe. In the US I think about half that because less tax. I assume (given the US flag on your user page) that you use America as a synonym for the US. Your parents are not concerned about $0.02/day, they just want you to get away from the computer. In a few places it could be considerably higher, but electricity should generally not be the problem. an app is a great idea, requiring minimal work and upkeep Are you a developer? An app is a ton of work and an massive burden to developers. They already have to make sure that changes in the software work well on the desktop site, the mobile site, in various browsers, on various devices with various input methods and screen sizes and resolutions. (and they already can't fully test/manage this!) Having to develop and support apps for Android, iOS, Windows 10 Mobile (on a tight budget you don't get the latest model smartphone), KaiOS and possibly others is just a pain. Improve the mobile site? Fine. Platform-specific apps? Don't waste developer time. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 18:32, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Please don't. I'd rather energy be put towards making the regular mobile editing experience great. So few of our editors or readers use the app. Apps just aren't as popular or necessary these days, when you can make a stunning mobile site. The phrase "there's an app for that" reflects the fact that there are too many apps, not too few. CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 17:22, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      The single-task-oriented user interface of mobile phones doesn't allow serious use of tabs/windows and IME this makes adding rule-abiding citations a much worse chore than on desktops/laptops. Perhaps this is the root cause behind Alexis Jazz's complaint. What I don't see is how a PWA could fix this problem. It's really just a HTML/JS webpage, and possibly one that breaks compatibility with older and/or non-ubiquitous browsers. Daß Wölf 23:12, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      Daß Wölf, you're pretty much hitting the nail on the head there. I frequently see mobile users adding unsourced facts which may or may not be true, and desktop users are left to go on what often amounts to a wild-goose chase for the source. The single-task-oriented user interface is also at least part of the reason for WP:THEYCANTHEARYOU. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 01:58, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      CaptainEek My request with this "lite app" request is that the mobile website should be developed so well according to the best modern standards that it should be possible to just put the mobile web app in a wrapper to make lite app. I am not requesting a native mobile app. Mobile apps would actually offer better quality edits than desktop to certain wikis like Commons, Wikt & Wikivoyage - Vis M (talk) 07:59, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Former WMF employee Harej feels like shit. Why do I not feel surprised by anything he said?

    I'm quoting Harej's message in full. Just read it, it's worth it. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 04:25, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    James was Chair of Wikimania 2012

    I met James at the 2018 North America conference in Columbus, and proudly display his banner on my bots' home pages. He's a sort of founding father of our Requested moves bot-assisted process.

    Surely the Friendly space policies for in-person and virtual Wikimedia community gatherings also apply to internal Wikimedia Foundation employee interactions? – wbm1058 (talk) 02:32, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Jimbo, are you able to offer assurances that this will be properly investigated (i.e. independently of WMF, as the allegation concern senior executive(s)) and appropriate disciplinary action taken against anyone found at fault? WMF needs to get its own house in order before taking it upon itself to regulate projects through UCoC etc... WJBscribe (talk) 12:28, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Your opinions regarding Sushant Singh Rajput

    Hello, Jimbo!
    Hope you're doing well. I was in talks with various admins regarding Sushant Singh Rajput's Cause of Death. You have replied on twitter to us that we can contact you regarding SSR so here we are. Please read the following threads to get the insight on what's happening. Thank you!

    The third thread is too long but is loaded with Solid Statistics and Analysis. Since the page is Extended Confirmed Protected. Many people (Thousands) are depending on me to represent them. It would be really helpful if you could share your two cents regarding this dispute. Thank you - Call me Karthik 😉🤞 (talk • contribs) 12:25, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&oldid=1024854144"