Sorry, Andre, you'll see it twice. I forgot to include the address of
the list ...
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Aphaia <aphaia@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 09:25:47 +0900
Subject: For improvement of JA situation (Re: [Foundation-l] And blocked again)
To: Andre Engels <andreengels@gmail.com>
On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 15:46:56 +0100, Andre Engels <andreengels@gmail.com> wrote:
> Aphaia:
> > But I have to point out Japanese Wikipedia lack administrative issues
> > in general. ...[omitted by the author herself] A dormant project
> > like Japanese Wikipedia can't react to things if they are so of urgent
> > and importance.
>
> I think you made a bad choice of words there. I would not want to call
> such a succesful project as the Japanese wp (according to the
> statistics having over 100 major contributors and 4000 edits a day)
> 'dormant' in any way.
Thank you for your comment, you let me notice my another wrong wording:
I would have liked to say in the first sentence of your quotation,
"Ja Wikipedia lacks 'an interest in' administrative issues..."
I admit it is very active project, but I doubt its activities have consciousness
enough appropriate to keep such a huge project and community.
I fear if it is an unsustainable growth. The balance of increase of content
and maintenance there might be kept nowadays. So I don't think I have to change
the word dormant: a sleeping person could move very actively in a
dream but we don't
think him awake.
As for size, according to a daily and monthly survey of a Wikipedian
(User:Mintlef, http://wikipedia.g.hatena.ne.jp/mintleaf/),
JA WP has 100 major registered contributors and probably a same number
of or larger
number of anonymous contributors; It is another sign of lack of intentionally
avoiding involvement and engagement in my opinion. And this enormous anonymity
make JA issues harder, probably. So here the first question is what we can do
motivate those anonyms to register themselves to the project. /##To
make a better and
comfortable project, perhaps - without personal attacks but feeling of
love and approval...
but how? I attempted some of expressions of approval and some people
found them nice,
but right now they are alike of petals in the ocean.)
> Still, I do understand that there is a problem
> here, and I hope you can solve it. It might be a kind of
> self-fulfilling prophecy too
I appreciate your understanding. But not only understanding, if
possible, would I
like you to give us a help and assistance? I expect it wouldn't be
helpful not only JA
but also other projects potentially.
Before diving into the topic, I would like you to remark a fact I am
not there a sysadmin.
I thought JA WP needed more helper and requested sysopship twice. My
requests were
rejected with 65-72% approvals [JA WP holds 75% criteria for
promotion]. In my view
some of JA users are afraid I am a sort of authoritarians, with an
iron rod, and/or suspect
I don't shere with them the view what Wikipedia should be. Perhaps at
the latter point
they might be correct, because I can't assume what kind of view they
have (some of you
remember the ascii art I showed). As for the former point, I would
like not to comment here; it is more suitable to talk in other places,
not here on foundation-l. But please remind
my opinion belongs only to me as an individual and perhaps it is not a
typical view of JA Wikipedians.
In my view the core issue of JA WP issues are evasive attitude of
users both registered
and anonymous. It causes lack of interest on administration and
maintenance, avoidance of involvement and engagement, suppression of
good interaction
on responsibility.
And Japanese project is in fact younger than other projects and less
experienced,
or precisely, experiences what no other project has known.
Its increasing rate can be compared only to a few other projects and a
half of edits have
been done anonymously. With language barriers the experiences on the
other projects
and wisdom are hardly available there on JA WP. I dare say, JA WP will
be someday
unsustainable, unless we began right now to make appropriate actions.
I assume, one of reasons some of JA people tend to use external forums
instead of Village Pump or talk page: fond of anonymity and avoidance of
responsibility under a stably using registered name. One day I opposed
a sysop say
she would post her question not to VP but to a certain forum there I
was harassed, but
she replied the latter would give her quicker responses. And I admit
the fact might be so,
but such de facto approval could cause a potential fork and make VP
and the community
deserted. In my opinion we have not rely on anonymous talk to make our
decision, though
those people who are for anonymity might have a different opinion. If
such additional forum
should be discussed to improve the situation, we could later be back
to this point.)
In my view now regretfully JA WP lacks appropriate governance in
proportion to its size.
It is one of most active project among us. But perhaps one of most assistance
needed ones, I presume. I take this lack of interest and engagement
very serious.
It is not only a potential hazard on JA WP, but could be on other where people
are evasive in general. I heard on some small Wikipedias good editors
avoid being
nominated as sysop candidate, since they thought they couldn't - here we notice
not only lack of involvement but lack of self-esteem. In my opinion
the JA WP issues
are potentially shared by such other projects and we should seek their
resolutions.
So , as Andre pointed out, the task of administrators are there visibly harder
than on other projects I have ever involved since 2004 in my view.
And there among
the administrators again the lack of involvement arises. Recently an
user requested
for adminship but he said clearly he has no intent to use his
privileges positively.
I objected his promotion because in my view though he is a good editor
but not an
active contributors and showed clearly not to be an active
administrators. But an admin,
who is active contributors but seldom use his privileges in my view,
supported him
with words "it is not a problem, because we have already admins who don't use
their privileges).
In my view on JA WP such a strange idea has spread for a while - it has become
not merely functions to serve as a janitor but a title for eminent
users. Personally
I don't like this idea. In my view administrator are alike as janitors
or gardeners fighting with
vandals and trolls and keeping the project as clean as possible. It is
not a sort of honors,
though it is natural for us to feel honored to be supported and
trusted by a number of
trusted people. So here too, I think, JA needs to be improved to have
more admins;
if users have a wrong image, it could be a hazard for them to be appointed.
And last, the issues of malice and gossips come. I asked once some good editors
to let me recommend them to admins but was denied. They feared to be featured,
particularly on the forum I mentioned on the above. After my own
harassment, I can't
say they were too evasive. It is very a horrible experience, indeed.
And here would you
let me express my applications for those who support me: they made me succeed in
gather my strength in spirit again. But I have been fortunate. I have
friends out of JA WP
and could pour my worries in front of them. But most of Ja users are
active only on Ja
and would have no support out of their "community". People could
rumored it was a pity
but wouldn't cast the consolation to the person embarrassed directly.
Or, it was my own
case, they came to the embarrassed person and said "I am very sorry. I
hope you are back.
But I can't support you in public. I don't like to be offended as like
as you. But you are
a strong person, I know. You can bear it. and I like you." It is not a
hostility indeed but
I don't think I would like to be a part of such a group. So now it
seems to me very
reasonable many past active users left that project within three months.
So we have here to have another improvement, I guess, but at the same time,
I feel it is not my own task: the JA community wouldn't be able to notice
what is wrong in this situation, and deny to change the situation, in
the worst case.
If I recall correctly, Erik Moeller suggested the Foundation or the
Board would intervene,
I think it might be a possible reaction from us.
At least now the interested thread use the name of Wikipedia (it is
already a trademark),
though the Foundation legally has no right to close it, but can demand
it not to use
the name of Wikipedia or not to behave there is any sort of relation
between that external community and our project. And for the community
the Foundation has a right to intervene:
for example, not to refer to any other external communication ways as
if it is under the
control of the Foundation nor the project, not accepted as an official
part of the project,
nor recommended as an active part of the projects: As for the forum I
mentioned, in case
they can't improve themselves, it would be helpful at least for the
community the Board demands to the community not to refer nor
recommend it in the project documents, like the guidebook for newbies
(now they did). But on this point I think I am too involved and
will appreciate opinions of the third parties who aren't regulars
there and give a look
on the forum concerned. Both other JA users' feedbacks and ones of
other projects' participants will be appliciated.
--
Aphaea@*.wikipedia.org
email: Aphaia @ gmail (dot) com
--
Aphaea@*.wikipedia.org
email: Aphaia @ gmail (dot) com
the list ...
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Aphaia <aphaia@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 09:25:47 +0900
Subject: For improvement of JA situation (Re: [Foundation-l] And blocked again)
To: Andre Engels <andreengels@gmail.com>
On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 15:46:56 +0100, Andre Engels <andreengels@gmail.com> wrote:
> Aphaia:
> > But I have to point out Japanese Wikipedia lack administrative issues
> > in general. ...[omitted by the author herself] A dormant project
> > like Japanese Wikipedia can't react to things if they are so of urgent
> > and importance.
>
> I think you made a bad choice of words there. I would not want to call
> such a succesful project as the Japanese wp (according to the
> statistics having over 100 major contributors and 4000 edits a day)
> 'dormant' in any way.
Thank you for your comment, you let me notice my another wrong wording:
I would have liked to say in the first sentence of your quotation,
"Ja Wikipedia lacks 'an interest in' administrative issues..."
I admit it is very active project, but I doubt its activities have consciousness
enough appropriate to keep such a huge project and community.
I fear if it is an unsustainable growth. The balance of increase of content
and maintenance there might be kept nowadays. So I don't think I have to change
the word dormant: a sleeping person could move very actively in a
dream but we don't
think him awake.
As for size, according to a daily and monthly survey of a Wikipedian
(User:Mintlef, http://wikipedia.g.hatena.ne.jp/mintleaf/),
JA WP has 100 major registered contributors and probably a same number
of or larger
number of anonymous contributors; It is another sign of lack of intentionally
avoiding involvement and engagement in my opinion. And this enormous anonymity
make JA issues harder, probably. So here the first question is what we can do
motivate those anonyms to register themselves to the project. /##To
make a better and
comfortable project, perhaps - without personal attacks but feeling of
love and approval...
but how? I attempted some of expressions of approval and some people
found them nice,
but right now they are alike of petals in the ocean.)
> Still, I do understand that there is a problem
> here, and I hope you can solve it. It might be a kind of
> self-fulfilling prophecy too
I appreciate your understanding. But not only understanding, if
possible, would I
like you to give us a help and assistance? I expect it wouldn't be
helpful not only JA
but also other projects potentially.
Before diving into the topic, I would like you to remark a fact I am
not there a sysadmin.
I thought JA WP needed more helper and requested sysopship twice. My
requests were
rejected with 65-72% approvals [JA WP holds 75% criteria for
promotion]. In my view
some of JA users are afraid I am a sort of authoritarians, with an
iron rod, and/or suspect
I don't shere with them the view what Wikipedia should be. Perhaps at
the latter point
they might be correct, because I can't assume what kind of view they
have (some of you
remember the ascii art I showed). As for the former point, I would
like not to comment here; it is more suitable to talk in other places,
not here on foundation-l. But please remind
my opinion belongs only to me as an individual and perhaps it is not a
typical view of JA Wikipedians.
In my view the core issue of JA WP issues are evasive attitude of
users both registered
and anonymous. It causes lack of interest on administration and
maintenance, avoidance of involvement and engagement, suppression of
good interaction
on responsibility.
And Japanese project is in fact younger than other projects and less
experienced,
or precisely, experiences what no other project has known.
Its increasing rate can be compared only to a few other projects and a
half of edits have
been done anonymously. With language barriers the experiences on the
other projects
and wisdom are hardly available there on JA WP. I dare say, JA WP will
be someday
unsustainable, unless we began right now to make appropriate actions.
I assume, one of reasons some of JA people tend to use external forums
instead of Village Pump or talk page: fond of anonymity and avoidance of
responsibility under a stably using registered name. One day I opposed
a sysop say
she would post her question not to VP but to a certain forum there I
was harassed, but
she replied the latter would give her quicker responses. And I admit
the fact might be so,
but such de facto approval could cause a potential fork and make VP
and the community
deserted. In my opinion we have not rely on anonymous talk to make our
decision, though
those people who are for anonymity might have a different opinion. If
such additional forum
should be discussed to improve the situation, we could later be back
to this point.)
In my view now regretfully JA WP lacks appropriate governance in
proportion to its size.
It is one of most active project among us. But perhaps one of most assistance
needed ones, I presume. I take this lack of interest and engagement
very serious.
It is not only a potential hazard on JA WP, but could be on other where people
are evasive in general. I heard on some small Wikipedias good editors
avoid being
nominated as sysop candidate, since they thought they couldn't - here we notice
not only lack of involvement but lack of self-esteem. In my opinion
the JA WP issues
are potentially shared by such other projects and we should seek their
resolutions.
So , as Andre pointed out, the task of administrators are there visibly harder
than on other projects I have ever involved since 2004 in my view.
And there among
the administrators again the lack of involvement arises. Recently an
user requested
for adminship but he said clearly he has no intent to use his
privileges positively.
I objected his promotion because in my view though he is a good editor
but not an
active contributors and showed clearly not to be an active
administrators. But an admin,
who is active contributors but seldom use his privileges in my view,
supported him
with words "it is not a problem, because we have already admins who don't use
their privileges).
In my view on JA WP such a strange idea has spread for a while - it has become
not merely functions to serve as a janitor but a title for eminent
users. Personally
I don't like this idea. In my view administrator are alike as janitors
or gardeners fighting with
vandals and trolls and keeping the project as clean as possible. It is
not a sort of honors,
though it is natural for us to feel honored to be supported and
trusted by a number of
trusted people. So here too, I think, JA needs to be improved to have
more admins;
if users have a wrong image, it could be a hazard for them to be appointed.
And last, the issues of malice and gossips come. I asked once some good editors
to let me recommend them to admins but was denied. They feared to be featured,
particularly on the forum I mentioned on the above. After my own
harassment, I can't
say they were too evasive. It is very a horrible experience, indeed.
And here would you
let me express my applications for those who support me: they made me succeed in
gather my strength in spirit again. But I have been fortunate. I have
friends out of JA WP
and could pour my worries in front of them. But most of Ja users are
active only on Ja
and would have no support out of their "community". People could
rumored it was a pity
but wouldn't cast the consolation to the person embarrassed directly.
Or, it was my own
case, they came to the embarrassed person and said "I am very sorry. I
hope you are back.
But I can't support you in public. I don't like to be offended as like
as you. But you are
a strong person, I know. You can bear it. and I like you." It is not a
hostility indeed but
I don't think I would like to be a part of such a group. So now it
seems to me very
reasonable many past active users left that project within three months.
So we have here to have another improvement, I guess, but at the same time,
I feel it is not my own task: the JA community wouldn't be able to notice
what is wrong in this situation, and deny to change the situation, in
the worst case.
If I recall correctly, Erik Moeller suggested the Foundation or the
Board would intervene,
I think it might be a possible reaction from us.
At least now the interested thread use the name of Wikipedia (it is
already a trademark),
though the Foundation legally has no right to close it, but can demand
it not to use
the name of Wikipedia or not to behave there is any sort of relation
between that external community and our project. And for the community
the Foundation has a right to intervene:
for example, not to refer to any other external communication ways as
if it is under the
control of the Foundation nor the project, not accepted as an official
part of the project,
nor recommended as an active part of the projects: As for the forum I
mentioned, in case
they can't improve themselves, it would be helpful at least for the
community the Board demands to the community not to refer nor
recommend it in the project documents, like the guidebook for newbies
(now they did). But on this point I think I am too involved and
will appreciate opinions of the third parties who aren't regulars
there and give a look
on the forum concerned. Both other JA users' feedbacks and ones of
other projects' participants will be appliciated.
--
Aphaea@*.wikipedia.org
email: Aphaia @ gmail (dot) com
--
Aphaea@*.wikipedia.org
email: Aphaia @ gmail (dot) com