Wikipedia talk:Esperanza/Archive 6

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Archive
Wikipedia:Esperanza is now inactive. Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This page is an archive. Discussion of the essay describing Wikipedia:Esperanza should be directed to Wikipedia talk:Esperanza. To discuss any issues found in this archive, please direct any additional comments to the Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals).

Elections[edit]

Once again, I draw your attention to Wikipedia:Esperanza/December 2005 elections and its corresponding talk page. If you are interested in running, please make sure to sign up by December 15. Elections will start on December 16 and will run for two weeks. Comments are appreciated. Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?) 16:47, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Shouldnt this be spammed? Where is our spammer? I havnt had any spam for weeks! Banes 19:33, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
Good point! It's been a busy time of late, and I suspect our tasty spam drops down the list for our busy editors with good reason! I'll happily spam the membership spam list about this if that's okay with the appropriate people. Let me know here. :o) ➨ REDVERS 22:09, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
Our spammer is currently on a much-deserved WikiBreak, so go feel free to go ahead and spam everyone. I don't think anyone will mind. Titoxd(?!? - did you read this?) 22:21, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
Indeed, if you wish to help me notify everyone on the member's list, please let me know. The more people, the better. Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?) 23:02, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
I will act as election staff, if necessary. Ral315 (talk) 20:06, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
That will be great! I'll create a new section at Wikipedia:Esperanza/December 2005 elections. Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?) 21:56, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Speaking of the member list, since only members registered before December 12 can vote, should the membership list be locked, like it was during the last election? New members can request to be added on the talk page... Titoxd(?!? - did you read this?) 20:33, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Yep, seems reasonable. Keep a separate, "pending election completion" list of members to be added when the election is completed. --LV (Dark Mark) 21:31, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
Done. Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?) 22:54, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Shouldnt we put up a big ad for these elections on the main esperanza page? To increase voter turnout? Banes 06:52, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Perhaps someone with powers in the Signpost can write us an article? ;) Titoxd(?!? - did you read this?) 20:53, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
What about someone in charge? --LV (Dark Mark) 20:55, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
That works too. :) Titoxd(?!? - did you read this?) 20:56, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
I'll see what can be done. Flcelloguy (A note?) 21:56, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
Ral315 is cutrrently on the IRC channel and he said that he'll mention it on the "News and Notes" section but a full article isn't really necessary until the Election is over. --Celestianpower hablamé 21:59, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Esperança[edit]

Like the alternate Portuguese name? εγκυκλοπαίδεια* (talk) 16:53, 10 December 2005 (UTC) 20:45, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

First Spanish, now Portuguese? — Moe ε 23:41, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
Spanish is very useful, but not very pretty. Portuguese is extremely beautiful, extremely difficult to pronounce, but so nasalized and vocalized, I think that it sounds nicer than French. The "ç" gives it a little cultural twist. Eu falo português! εγκυκλοπαίδεια* (talk) 16:53, 10 December 2005 (UTC) 00:40, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
As a native Spanish-speaker I do take offence for your statement above. Please be more careful when you say such things in a public forum. -- Rune Welsh | ταλκ | Esperanza 00:48, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
Well I am a native speaker of English and I think that is ugly. No need to take offense, yeesh. We all have our likes and dislikes. I speak Spanish, I think it is great, I do not think it sounds pretty. εγκυκλοπαίδεια* (talk) 16:53, 10 December 2005 (UTC) 00:50, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
I detract my statement about Spanish being ugly or whatever RuneWelsh was getting angry about. I didn't mean to offend anyone, I spent a year learning the language, and I thought a mere judgement was acceptable. I am not insulting any type of people or whatever, I am just saying that the phonology of Spanish is not so pretty. English does not sound good either...I am not saying the languages or evil or whatever, I just say that it is not pretty compared to languages like Italian, or Latin or Portuguese (and to most people) French. I am sorry B.W. can you accept my apology because you won't respond to my messages (so I just you are either really upset or you are in the middle of leaving some long angry response on my talk). Lo siento, me entiendes? There, speaking it gives me some right to judge it....gee wiz ....εγκυκλοπαίδεια* (talk) 01:06, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
Just for the record, the rest of the conversation is in our talk pages. And yeah, it took me some time to reply because I'm a slowish in typing. Sorry about that ;) -- Rune Welsh | ταλκ | Esperanza 01:16, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
Thanks BW, got all your messages! ....εγκυκλοπαίδεια* (talk) 01:27, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
I also know that it would make no sense to rename this to Portuguese, as the entire program was started due to the Spanish breakoff the main Wikipedias. I only wanted the "ç" becuase I thought it looked cool, I mean, its different. I wanted the alternative to put Esperança on my page...don't know why, just do! ....εγκυκλοπαίδεια* (talk) 01:37, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Stress Alerts[edit]

I went around Wikipedia today and scavenged out a new fresh batch of users that have went on wikibreak. I have posted them on the Alerts page. — Moe ε 02:00, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Some news...[edit]

Some updates: candidates for the elections must be registered by December 15, so if you plan to run, act now. (Just a friendly reminder!) Also, you should have received a message on your talk page in the past few days regarding Esperanza; from now on, all Esperanzians will receive these important messages regarding our organization. If you do not wish to receive any more messages, please list yourself at WP:ESP/S. Special thanks to Redvers, who has been filling in as our messenger, as Redwolf24 is taking a well-deserved wiki-break. In addition, I have created an announcement board at Wikipedia:Esperanza/to_do, which is transcluded to the main page. I urge all Esperanzians to place that page on your watchlist, in order to be aware of news and announcements. Finally, you will receive a message in the upcoming days both reminding you about the elections and announcing some exciting news. Many thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?) 01:01, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Can I join? I think what you lot are doing is brilliant. I have been an admirere of the 'pedia since I came to university in America a few years ago. Also I noticed from your page history you've had three Adminitrator Generals? Why so many and why aren't these guys active (Essjay, Redwolf, and Carriker) now? User:4micah

Of course you can join! Pretty much anyone is eligible to join. All you have to do is to go to WP:ESP/M and list yourself (the page is locked right now, though, due to the elections; list yourself on the talk page). We've had three so far because JCarriker took the reins in the beginning, transferred power to Redwolf24, who then let Essjay take power. All three were crucial members of Esperanza as we got started and helped shape this organization; their efforts are very much appreciated. Essjay, unfortunately, decided to move on and resigned earlier this month. This election will conclude with our first ever elected administrator general, who will hopefully finish his/her term of one year. THanks! Flcelloguy (A note?) 16:24, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
Just to clarify some things: I haven't left Esperanza, I just forgot place my name back in the active members column and I'm not particpating in the election because of the neutrality precedent. -JCarriker 08:01, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Cultures of the World[edit]

Would you consider contributing? Or how about voting for it as collaboration of the week for this new but important article.--Culturesoftheworld 19:36, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Essjay has left the building[edit]

Essjay just blanked his talk page and deleted his user page. 132.162.209.220 20:30, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Esperanza image[edit]

Esperanza-short.PNG has been deleted? Why? — Moe ε 21:02, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Essjay deleted all his images. I've tried to restore a temporary version. FireFox 21:07, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
Check Essjay's talk page and his deletion log. the wub "?!" 21:14, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

User:Jossifresco[edit]

What happened here? Member of Esperanza, Admin, and December 2005 election canidate gone? — Moe ε 04:07, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Nope, just changed his username. Robert 04:15, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
Thank god, when I saw the red link going to his user space, I thought I was going to freak. Thanks for updating me. — Moe ε 23:11, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Resignation[edit]

I'd like to resign from Esperanza, but there is a "View Source" link so I couldn't remove it. Please remove my name. Thanks. I'll keep the link to Esperanza in my sig, though. εγκυκλοπαίδεια* 18:30, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Done. FireFox 18:36, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
I have talked things over with JCarriker, and I would like my name to be reinserted, thanks. εγκυκλοπαίδεια* 17:56, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
Done. FireFox 18:03, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!![edit]

MERRY CHRISTMAS, Esperanza/Archive 6! For all to share--Santa on Sleigh 22:00, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Ooh, yummy. Many thanks, Santa! --User:Jenmoa 22:23, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Hey[edit]

FireFox has told me I can't join right now due to elections. However, can I just say I have a lot of interest in this project, and I plan to join ASAP. ComputerJoe 17:46, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

Glad to see you're enthusiastic! The list on the talk page will be tranferred to the list of members as soon as the election concludes. Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?) 19:07, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

Admending the Charter[edit]

I think that would be the big issue once the new 'government' of Esperanza joins in. I am in favor of a massive admendment offered by some users what describes what to do in the case of an resignation. Wikizach 17:54, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

Admending the Charter Inserting a New Section

In the event that the Admin General should resign, the member of the Advisory Committee with the most votes in any one of the previous two elections shall immediately take office. In the case of a tie, the members of the Advisory Committee shall elect one of it's members to serve as an 'Acting Admin General' until the next elections take place. In the event that any Advisory Committee member should resign, that spot shall remain open until the next series of elections, as defined by the Esperanza Charter. The member winning this seat shall hold the seat for the remainder of the prior candidate's term, or if this term has expired, for a full term as defined by the Esperanza Charter.

Thoughts on this? Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?) 19:07, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
I'll reiterate my idea that the AG should be elected by the AC from amongst themselves, whenever the post is vacant. That allows for a unified election and simplifies the process for us <uriah type="heap"> humble ordinary Esperanza members </uriah>. It also means that we need never be "headless" again pending a vote. As I've said before, a Prime Ministerial system rather than a presidential one.
As for the second part of Wikizach's proposal, I'm afraid it's a bit bureaucratic for my liking, and thus liable to confuse new members who are unlikely to have read that deeply into the Charter. A quick rewrite:
If an Advisory Committee member should resign, their seat will remain vacant until the next tranche election when a Special Election for the seat will be held at the same time. The winner will hold the seat for the remainder of the term. If a vacant seat is in the same tranche as the next election, no Special Election will be held.
It might also help to define a quorum (unless one is already defined) and to require an immediate election if the AC falls below this. That quorum could, of course, be just one person!
I'll admit something here: I love all this election business, both in RL and here (though not the RfA system, I must admit). But we mustn't let elections and bureaucracy interfere with Esperanza's main duty of being good, kind, fun and supportive to all Wikipedians. ➨ REDVERS 20:38, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
When these elections are over, I think that we should hold a vote into whether we want a Prime Minister or a President although I do echo Redvers in that we don't want to forget our mission. --Celestianpower háblame 21:31, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
I have an idea. What if someone writes one giant (easy to understand) admendment that includes the things that we preety much agree on.
  • To continue our goal
  • To change the governing system
  • To make a resignation replacement process

One thing that I might add, we need to extend the Advisory Council's terms, so that voting is less often. The more voting, politics, and campaigning, the more Wikipedia becomes more of a Congressional Blog. Let's talk about this more as the new year approches. Wikizach 23:25, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

Amending the voting process?[edit]

It seems to not make sense to be allowed to cast one vote for everyone that is running. Doesn't that make the votes technically null and void? That would be like being able to cast a vote for the Republican presidential candidate, one for the Democrat and one for the Independent candidate. I think that it would be more fair and equitable to only be allowed to cast one vote for Admin. General and 3 votes for the assembly for each Esperanzian voting. I doubt we would have such close elections and have to have tie-breakers if our votes were restricted as such. Any thoughts? Maltmomma (chat) 18:09, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Well obviously it is too late to take into account for the current elections, but I think that it is certainly something that needs reviewing for the future elections. I don't see much of a problem with the current voting process (approval voting) except where someone votes for every single candidate. That is pointless. Of course most people are sensible enough to only vote for three or four candidates, but others (and it's their choice), but others vote for every single candidate. I agree to a certain extent to Maltmomma's comment about "being able to cast a vote for the Republican presidential candidate, one for the Democrat and one for the Independent candidate", but to a different degree it is totally different - there are, for a start, more candidates that have a chance of getting the position. In presidential or government elections there are normally only two or three main candidates that stand a chance of getting the position. A final point is that some voters decide to vote for all but one of the candidates, which may lead to the left-out candidate's wikistress to rise. However I do think that this needs to be discussed further, in time for future elections. FireFox 18:30, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
I'd like to expand on my answer just a bit more... I personally think that approval voting is the correct way to go about this, the way it is now. FireFox 19:05, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
I disagree. If the question, as it should be, is "Do I trust the candidate in the role?" then that doesn'yt apply (in a lot of cases) to a limited number of candidates. --Celestianpower háblame 18:34, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
Concur with Celestianpower. In any case, the votes do not do any harm and is better than abstaining from voting. In either case, I have a feeling that those votes are meant to demonstrate that the voter trusts and support every Esperanzian running, helping spread our mission. Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?) 18:58, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
Yes, but if, say, 4 people are running for Admin. General and everyone casts one vote for each of the candidates then no one will actually "win" the election. I don't think this should be a popularity contest in the sense that "so and so is my friend and I'll vote for him whether or not I think he/she will be able to do a good job." It should be whoever can do the very best job for Esperanza. I really appreciate the candidates that took the time out to write a statement. Again, it's akin to an election platform and everyone can see what their goals are. What if the votes were limited to a percentage of the people running. If 10 people are running, you can cast 5 votes, etc. I just think it is pointless if a vote is cast for every person running. It's like throwing your vote away. It just seems that it would be a more fair race if we were not allowed to vote for every single candidate. Maltmomma (chat) 20:00, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
But it is the voter's perogative. If they feel every candidate is qualified, they should have the right to support everybody. Think about it as at RfA. You can support everyone there if you want. In this style of voting, why would we limit people's votes? --LV (Dark Mark) 20:11, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
(Edit conflict) The point is that this is Esperanza and not a normal election. Esperanzas main goal is to increase support and a sense of community within Wikipedia. Having a clinical, 1 (or more) vote per voter system undervalues this goal, in my opinion. --Celestianpower háblame 20:13, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
I agree with Celestianpower, but it has to be remembered that while Esperanzas main goal is to increase support and a sense of community, surely the one or two candidates which get left out by voters are going to feel "lonely" or left out, as I said above? FireFox 20:14, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
If they are going to feel left out, or unloved to any major degree, they might just not have the backbone that we should probably have in an AG or AC member anyways. I know that's harsh, but you can't expect to get everyone's vote every time. It would be unworkable. --LV (Dark Mark) 20:20, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
By setting up rules would prevent this from happening and having feelings hurt. I don't think you need to be hardened to be in the position of AG or AC, in fact, quite the opposite. Maltmomma (chat) 20:31, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

(another edit conflict) LV, an RfA is different because you're not running against someone. I agree that Esperanza's main goal is to increase support and a sense of community but what about the person who votes for everyone except one person. How does that make that person feel and as Firefox said, would indeed increase their Wikistress. I just think this needs to be looked at before the next election to make it fair and equitable to all involved. I certainly don't have all the answers but I don't think that this is the best way to handle the elections. Maltmomma (chat) 20:19, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Okay back down here, to keep thread flowing. I don't think you need to be a hard nut, but we can't have someone who will get his feelings hurt and run away crying just because someone didn't vote for them being in our top spot. Or if one troll says something bad, they run complaining and whining. It is important to be able to take a little bit of abuse if you wish to have any type of power. Just my thoughts, though. --LV (Dark Mark) 20:36, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
I agree, your skin probably does need to be a bit more thick than most but I really and truly just think it's pointless to vote for every single person running... it is, to me, a waste of a vote and just puts numbers on the tally but doesn't really get the person anywhere. Surely there is a equitable solution? Maltmomma (chat) 20:39, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
Well, I was simply saying that under the current system, we cannot fault people for voting for whom they please, even if that means they vote for everyone. Now if a different method of voting were being used... --LV (Dark Mark) 20:46, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
Whatever voting system the new AG goes for in the end, we must keep in mind two important points. (1) It must not be destructive. RfA is going through a period of intense nastiness in places. We don't need that on the 'pedia at all, and certainly not here. I speak as a guilty party - I voted against Mongo and really should have said nothing or at least gone Neutral if I had to stick my oar in (and in retrospect on his excellent admin record, Supported); I voted Neutral on Halibutt and then abstained, when I should have changed to a Support. Both times I alienated people, made a point that didn't need to be made and generally came too close to WP:POINT with a single edit. (2) Voting is public, not secret; Esperanza of all places shouldn't allow for people to walk away feeling hurt or insulted. People who didn't win this time, didn't win this time because other people did win, not because anyone felt that they wouldn't have done a good job. All people who stood won our respect for volunteering. ➨ REDVERS 22:10, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
I agree with both points you made Redvers. It shouldn't be destructive and it should not be secretive. I suppose if they keep voting the way they do currently, it will be up to a few people to actually decide who will win the elections. If others continue to vote for everyone, then the few people who cast votes for who they feel should actually be in the positions slated will actually be the deciding factor in the outcome of the election. Maltmomma (chat) 00:24, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
What we need is to have a new rule (like what many of you have said before), to make it so people can only vote for 1 (admin gen.) and 3 (adv. council.) people in the elections. I would vote in favor of such a rule, and it should of been talked about before we all voted, so to see what the canidates themselves thought. Wikizach 00:47, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Just a little note with my two cents; I started the current voting system when I administered the first set of elections, and I set it up exactly the way I did because I felt it would be better than having Esperanza, the association dedicated to making Wikipedia a better and happier place, cause people to leave. Members who choose to vote for all candidates know that their votes won't affect the outcome; if they choose to do that, then why should anyone stop them? Would it be preferable for them to refuse to vote instead, to avoid choosing between good friends and candidates they feel are equally qualified? (Which is what I would do if forced.) Granted, I can't vote because I am a former Admin General, but if I could vote under the current system, I would vote for all candidates, whether my vote counted or not, as a demonstration of my faith in them. Let the voters use thier votes how they choose to, the outcome is the same: Those with the highest number of votes will win, whether that number is five because everyone boycotted the vote in order to avoid choosing between good friends, or if it is five hundred because four hundred and ninty-five members voted for every candidate. Better to avoid the hurt feelings. -- Essjay · Talk 01:14, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Agree with Essjay here. This (or a similar type of voting) is the way to avoid RFA-style nastiness. Bratschetalk | Esperanza 05:38, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Clamoring for attention?[edit]

Perhaps this is just me clamoring for attention, but wouldn't it be appropriate to have a listing of former Admins General and AC members somewhere, to recognize and remember those who have served? -- Essjay · Talk 14:25, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Yes, good idea. FireFox 14:28, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
Yes, I was planning to do that as soon as the election concludes. Flcelloguy (A note?) 14:48, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
It's done. What do people think? --Celestianpower háblame 16:22, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Esperanza Calender[edit]

It's all well and good that we have a calendar to put all important dates and events on, and it's also all well and good that the day names are displayed at the top of each month on the calender. This obviously is going to cause some problems when a new year arises, as of course the date-numbers are not going to match the day-names any longer. With only two days left until 2006, this needs to be fixed either by:

  • Shifting the day names back one (and therefore making the calender slightly less traditional) - i.e. instead of the calendar going Sunday Monday ... Saturday, it'll start Monday Tuesday ... Sunday and so on each year.
  • Or by shifting all the numbers along one, which is the less-messy option, but would take longer.

We need to decide which of those paths to take... that is, if someone has already created a 2006 calender that I'm not aware of. FireFox 15:04, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Shifting the numbers along would appear the better option. --Alf melmac 16:18, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
Remember this means shifting everyones dates with it. FireFox 16:20, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
If no one has started to work on it; I'll take care of the minor work that has to be done to the calender; I enjoy doing it. :-) — Moe ε 18:21, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
Finished. I fixed the holidays dates; Thanksgiving, Hanukkah, and others. Did I make any mistakes? — Moe ε 19:50, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Micronation[edit]

Hi, a few of us have founded a micronation (basically an imaginary country), called Tirben. It's open to all Wikipedians, and the general idea of fostering community by building an imaginary country fits in nicely with the principles of Esperanza. You're all invited to participate! See tirben.starglade.org. Talrias (t | e | c) 01:14, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

A message[edit]

(cross-posted to the Esperanza mailing list. If you haven't joined yet, please email myself or Celestianpower. Thanks!)

Fellow Esperanzians,

Well, here we are - the conclusion of another year and another election. Looking back upon this year, we've had a great and momentous journey here at Esperanza. From our beginnings, we've come together and emerged as an organization dedicated to promoting Wiki-love within Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia. We've had our charter approved, and we've had two successful elections. We've had several leaders, all of whom have dedicated time and effort into helping this organization grow. We've gone through turbulent times, but have emerged stronger as a group. Our membership has grown steadily ever since our beginnings, and bright times lay ahead of us.

On that note, I'm pleased to announce the results of our recently-concluded election. Our incumbent administrator general, Essjay, who has just recently returned from a lengthy-wikibreak, has certified the results of this election, and I too, as a member of your advisory council, also declare this election to be fair and officially complete. That being said, let me thank everyone who helped with the election, distributing messages, updating the vote tally, checking for discrepancies, and doing a whole lot more. The "lovely election staff", as coined last time, was a huge help and must be thanked for their effort. In addition, a huge thanks to everyone who voted, showing that you cared about Esperanza. Without the voters, this election would not have been possible. Finally, last but not least, a *HUGE* thank you to all of the candidates. Every one of you showed dedication and ambition by choosing to run. Remember, it's not important who wins or loses, and I - and all of us here at Esperanza - have faith in all of you to serve.

So, without further ado, the winners:

Administrator General - Celestianpower, who will serve until the end of the new year Members of the advisory council - Titoxd, FireFox, and Karmafist. The three will be joining myself on the advisory council. Titoxd and FireFox will serve until the end of April, and Karmafist will serve with myself until the end of February. Congratulations to all the winners! I look forward to working with all of you to advance Esperanza.

Finally, one last thank you - thank you to all who have lead Esperanza in the past. Essjay, JCarriker, Redwolf24, Bratsche, Acetic Acid, and RN - in no particular order- have served as our leaders this past year and have done a tremendous job. Their efforts must be applauded; I salute each and every one of them for their dedication, and now I turn to salute those who will lead us in the future. Remember - the future is bright here at Esperanza, and I look forward to joining the winners of this election in guiding it down the long and winding path and across hurdles that will indubitably face not only Esperanza but Wikipedia.

Esperanzially,
Flcelloguy (A note?) 16:03, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Esperanza welcome[edit]

Taken straight from Bratsche's fantastic work, I bring you the Esperanza welcome, for everyone who signs up. I will be doing this as much as I can but if I miss someone, please add this to their user talk page:

{{EA-welcome}}

Which produces:

Welcome to Esperanza![edit]

Esperanza-short.PNG

Welcome, Esperanza/Archive 6, to Esperanza, the Wikipedia member association! As you might know, all the Esperanzians share one important goal: the success of this encyclopedia. Within that, we then attempt to strengthen the community bonds, and be the "approachable" side of the project. All of our ideals are held in the Charter, the governing document of the association.

Now that you are a member you should read the guide to what to do now or you may be interested in some of our programs. A quite important program is the StressUnit, which seeks to support editors who have encountered any stress from their Wikipedia events, and are seeking to leave the project. So far, Esperanza can be credited with the support and retention of several users. Redwolf24 runs the spam to keep members up to date. Also, we have a calendar of special events, member birthdays, and other holidays that you can add to and follow.

In addition to these projects, several more missions of Esperanza are in development, and are currently being created at Esperanza/Possibles.

I encourage you to take an active voice in the running of Esperanza. We have a small government system, headed by our Administrator general, Celestianpower, and guided by the Advisory Committee comprised of FireFox, Flcelloguy. Titoxd, and Karmafist. The next set of elections will be February 28, and I would be glad to see you vote, or even consider running for a position.

If you have any other questions, concerns, comments, or general ideas, Esperanzian or otherwise, know that you can always contact Celestianpower by email or talk page or the Esperanza talk page. Alternatively, you could communicate with fellow users via our IRC channel, #wikipedia-esperanza (which is also good for a fun chat or two :). I thank you for joining Esperanza, and look forward to working with you in making Wikipedia a better place to work!

Thank you. --Celestianpower háblame 18:45, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

150 Active Esperanzians[edit]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't there something way back when Esperanza was first starting about a review of the charter and "governmental" process when we hit 150 members? Well, we've reached that milestone. Shall we do a self-inspection, or is that just me remembering something else?? Thanks, Bratschetalk | Esperanza 05:40, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

No, it isnt just you. I remember also. Banes 07:29, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
And we will do something. Over the election period, there were talks about reforming the leadership of Esperanza, so expect changes and referenda soon. Titoxd(?!? - help us) 08:08, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
Esperanza cabal! Look, everybody- Titoxd and his Advisory Council cronies are trying to rule Wikipedia with an iron fist! :)--Sean|Black 08:12, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
Shhhh! Else they will know "The Plan" of the popular masses to overthrow them! :) Do you think these changes are going to be, big? Or is that a stupid un-answerable question? Banes 08:19, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
OH NOES! *Runs to IRC and leaves a message to the cabal* Titoxd(?!? - help us) 08:22, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
Back to the serious part of the question. We're still discussing how big they might be (changes in election procedures, changes in methods to elect the leadership, etc.) You might even see a return of the Esperanzian Assembly, if needs warrant. But what we want to do most, above all the possible changes in our structure, is to make Esperanza more effective. Titoxd(?!? - help us) 08:25, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
Interesting. Don't forget to drop a line on the Esperanza mailing list if you want off wiki feedback (or whatever).--Sean|Black 08:38, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
Or spam list. We don't want to be left in the dark here, now do we, happy cabal?? Bratschetalk | Esperanza 04:11, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
To be honest, I prefer on-Wiki discussion to any other form (e.g. IRC, WikiEN-l, Esperanza-l), but that's just my opinion. And of course we'll keep you posted! We don't want the angry mob to drive us out of here, do we? ;) Titoxd(?!? - help us) 07:20, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Constitution Amending[edit]

USAhoorray!.jpg

Before we can amend or change anything, someone must provide the actual wording that needs to be amended. Once there, if we don't reach a consensus soon, then we will hold a refferendum (maybe as a third question in the Feburary Adv. Comm. elecions)

Wikizach 21:48, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

How do I join?[edit]

How do I join Esperanza? A while back, when I was just curious about what Esperanza was, there was a membership list on the main page, but I never got around to joining, and now, when I want to join, I can't find the list. smurrayinchester(User), (Talk) 17:30, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Esperanza/Members -- Essjay · Talk 17:47, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
Thank you! smurrayinchester(User), (Talk) 17:53, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Missing Wikipedians[edit]

There has been some discussion at Wikipedia talk:Missing Wikipedians regarding the length of time a user must be gone before being added to the list and whether a user can add himself to the list as his last edit. Some suggestions have been discussed, but no concensus has been reached, as evidenced by occasional edit wars and questions posed on the talk page. Meanwhile, there has also been discussion at Wikipedia talk:Esperanza/Alerts about how long alerts should remain on that list and whether they should be archived. Do you see where I'm going with this?... Well, in theory, although not necessarily in practice, the period of time before being taken off the alerts list is supposed to be about a month. And the period of time before being added to the missing list is supposed to be about a month. So here's my proposal: Why doesn't Esperanza "annex" the Missing Wikipedians page and maintain it within a set of established guidelines as an archive of Leaving-Wikipedia alerts that don't succeed? (Hopefully, this will generate more collaborative discussion and less incivility than my last proposal.) --TantalumTelluride 04:32, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

I think that's an excellent idea. It needs to have more input, and so on, but it would be very good, additionally, for the Missing Wikipedians page to be tended by a group like Esperanza instead of under the greater Wikipedia. -Tim Rhymeless (Er...let's shimmy) 07:58, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
I agree - it could be used to help us to focus our analysis of the reasons for leaving. What sort of layout do you think this list should take? Should the users have to be on the alerts page for a month before going on the WM list? --Celestianpower háblame 13:48, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
Good idea. I agree, one month on alerts and then onto the missing page would work. Banes 14:49, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Should we move the Missing Wikipedians page to Wikipedia:Esperanza/Missing Wikipedians or will it suffice to link between the two pages and explain their complementary relationship? --TantalumTelluride 16:29, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

I think we should move but create plenty of redirects. --Celestianpower háblame 17:19, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
If you do move it, there'll be piles of double redirects to fix, since a lot of missing Wikipedian user pages point to it. —Kirill Lokshin 17:26, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
Good point. Tantalum: You happy to fix these? --Celestianpower háblame 18:52, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
There are currently only three redirects, so I'll take care of them. --TantalumTelluride 20:32, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
I must have been looking at the wrong page; there's a lot more than three redirects. Anyway, I'll still fix them. --TantalumTelluride 20:49, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

I just boldly moved the page and fixed the resulting double redirects. On the whatlinkshere page, there appears to be another double redirect at Wikipedia talk:Desysopsing inactive admins, but it is in fact not a double redirect. I'm not sure what's going on there, so I didn't change it. --TantalumTelluride 21:06, 9 January 2006 (UTC)