This project page is move-protected.

Wikibooks:Reading room/General

From Wikibooks, open books for an open world
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Replacement filing cabinet.svgArchivesWikibooks Discussion Rooms
Discussions Assistance Requests Announcements
General | Proposals | Projects | Featured books General | Technical | Administrative Deletion | Undeletion | Import | Permissions Bulletin Board

Welcome to the General reading room. On this page, Wikibookians are free to talk about the Wikibooks project in general. For proposals for improving Wikibooks, see the Proposals reading room.

ontology[edit source]

What is the top level of the Wikibooks organisation system, Wikibooks Stacks/Departments or Wikibooks:Card Catalog Office? Arlo Barnes (discusscontribs) 09:44, 1 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Autoconfirmed requirements[edit source]

Hello Wikibookians, I am a bit concerned about the modest autoconfirmed requirements. Even passing 4 days with no edits can become autoconfirmed, which allows LTAs to wait 4 days after account creation and vandalise semi-protected pages. Can we consider changing requirements for autoconfirmed to 4 days and 10 edits? Xeverything11 (discusscontribs) 09:04, 7 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Support[edit source]

  • I think that would be fair and might give the LTAs a need to contribute constructively for a bit before they are able to vandalize. What about also including that the user must also make at least 3 edits every day, for 3 days, with the allowance of a single day to make fewer? Or is that to harsh? It would at least make users need to be more active, not just make ten edits on day one and wait a few days. L10nM4st3r / ROAR at me! 11:13, 7 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    So for e.g: day 1: 4 edits, day 2: 2 edits, day 3: 3 edits, day 4, 3 (okr more) edits. Day 5: autoconfirmed. That is what I picture. L10nM4st3r / ROAR at me! 11:16, 7 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • It does seem like autoconfirmation might benefit from having a very small edit requirement, such as 10 edits. I do know that reviewing is the main tool wikibooks uses to combat vandalism—maybe an admin can speak to why there is no current editing requirement for autoconfirmation? —Kittycataclysm (discusscontribs) 23:58, 7 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
+1 to LionMaster suggestion but I would prefer longer active trial period (10 days of edit - with 3 days of continuous edit)? MrAlanKoh (discusscontribs) 14:45, 17 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@MrAlanKoh: So within 10 days, three days in a row the user edits? Did I get that right? How many edits would you agree on? And what would we do about users who prefer fewer but larger edits? L10nM4st3r / ROAR at me! 22:01, 17 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Abstain[edit source]

Oppose[edit source]

  • My personal book writing habit: very few and thus very huge edits. I believe setting a minimum edit requirement will unnecessarily impede (new) book contributions. As mentioned by Kittycataclysm, reviewing is de facto the main tool to fight vandalism. ‑‑ Kai Burghardt (discusscontribs) 23:27, 10 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Do you still make about 3 edits a day or more? If so, my suggestion (above) sould work for you and others with the same "habit" (quite a good one, unless your browser likes crashing) L10nM4st3r / ROAR at me! 21:57, 17 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comments[edit source]

See this link, where the autoconfirmed LTA named Autoconfirmedtoo undid the revertion on semi-protected page Saylor.org's Comparative Politics/African Case Studies. Before the LTA became autoconfirmed, the LTA made no edits. Xeverything11 (discusscontribs) 15:03, 7 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The autoconfirm configuration (like everything else) can be viewed in the NOC. The default for all wikis is 4 days, zero edits

'wgAutoConfirmAge' => 'default' => 4 * 3600 * 24, // 4 days to pass isNewbie()

The default for edits is 0

'wgAutoConfirmCount' => 'default' => 0

If you want something different, then a phabricator ticket is required pointing to an agreement here to make the change. So, to answer the question above, it is zero today because that is the default, not because it was ever requested to be zero. MarcGarver (discusscontribs) 12:28, 11 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Reminder to provide feedback on the Movement Charter content[edit source]

Hi all,

We are in the middle of the community consultation period on the three draft sections of the Movement Charter: Preamble, Values & Principles, and Roles & Responsibilities (statement of intent). The community consultation period will last until December 18, 2022. The Movement Charter Drafting Committee (MCDC) encourages everyone who is interested in the governance of the Wikimedia movement to share their thoughts and opinions on the draft content of the Charter.

How to share your feedback?

Interested people can share their feedback via different channels provided below:

If you want to help include your community in the consultation period, you are encouraged to become a Movement Charter Ambassador. Please find out more about it here.

Thank you for your participation!

On behalf of the Movement Charter Drafting Committee Mervat (WMF) (talk) 13:00, 12 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Community Wishlist Survey 2023 opens in January[edit source]

Please help translate to your language

(There is a translatable version of this message on MetaWiki)

Hello

The Community Wishlist Survey (CWS) 2023, which lets contributors propose and vote for tools and improvements, starts next month on Monday, 23 January 2023, at 18:00 UTC and will continue annually.

We are inviting you to share your ideas for technical improvements to our tools and platforms. Long experience in editing or technical skills is not required. If you have ever used our software and thought of an idea to improve it, this is the place to come share those ideas!

The dates for the phases of the Survey will be as follows:

  • Phase 1: Submit, discuss, and revise proposals – Monday, Jan 23, 2023 to Sunday, Feb 6, 2023
  • Phase 2: WMF/Community Tech reviews and organizes proposals – Monday, Jan 30, 2023 to Friday, Feb 10, 2023
  • Phase 3: Vote on proposals – Friday, Feb 10, 2023 to Friday, Feb 24, 2023
  • Phase 4: Results posted – Tuesday, Feb 28, 2023

If you want to start writing out your ideas ahead of the Survey, you can start thinking about your proposals and draft them in the CWS sandbox.

We are grateful to all who participated last year. See you in January 2023!

Thank you! Community Tech, STei (WMF) 16:44, 15 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Resigning[edit source]

All, since renaming became centralised, the requirements for a local bureaucrat have rapidly declined and average one or two actions a year. I think it is inappropriate to have only one local bureaucrat so I am resigning from the role. I also feel increasingly detached from the community here and am, to be honest, fed up with everything being questioned. The latter is a critical issue - the point of crats is to represent the view of the community. If I don't feel fully connected to the community then I can't represent you. MarcGarver (discusscontribs) 17:44, 3 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@MarcGarver I'm sorry to hear that you've had such negative experiences, but I understand your perspective! Does this mean that going forward we should direct any issues that require a bureaucrat to m:Steward requests since we will have no bureaucrats on Wikibooks? Thank you, and I hope you have a better time in the new year! —Kittycataclysm (discusscontribs) 22:18, 3 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@MarcGarver: Sorry to hear all your negative experiences, but thank you for your service as a bureaucrat on this wiki. I wish you all the best for your future.
@Kittycataclysm: Yes, that now means all issues that require a bureaucrat will need to be requested at either m:Steward requests (specifically m:SRP). That is, unless, we get a new bureaucrat after MarcGarver resigns. --SHB2000 (discusscontribs) 22:32, 3 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Very few projects of this size have Bureaucrats now. They really don't have a job - promote one admin a year, and flag the occasional bot. I would leave it to the Stewards to do the work if I were you. MarcGarver (discusscontribs) 08:41, 4 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@MarcGarver To check: will you be updating Wikibooks:Administrators to reflect your resignation? Cheers! —Kittycataclysm (discusscontribs) 03:25, 17 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Wow, how did I miss this? @MarcGarver: I hope you at least stay for a bit. If you do feel like staying, at least become an admin. I've seen you in RC quite a bit doing admin tasks, so you should at least get/keep that. L10nM4st3r / ROAR at me! 09:59, 17 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oh wait, you're a steward. L10nM4st3r / ROAR at me! 10:03, 17 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I have admin rights here, they are separate from the 'crat rights. I have only resigned as a 'crat. I can't use my Steward rights on this project - that's part of the Steward policy. MarcGarver (discusscontribs) 10:30, 17 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Upcoming vote on the revised Enforcement Guidelines for the Universal Code of Conduct[edit source]


You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki.

Hello all,

In mid-January 2023, the Enforcement Guidelines for the Universal Code of Conduct will undergo a second community-wide ratification vote. This follows the March 2022 vote, which resulted in a majority of voters supporting the Enforcement Guidelines. During the vote, participants helped highlight important community concerns. The Board’s Community Affairs Committee requested that these areas of concern be reviewed.

The volunteer-led Revisions Committee worked hard reviewing community input and making changes. They updated areas of concern, such as training and affirmation requirements, privacy and transparency in the process, and readability and translatability of the document itself.

The revised Enforcement Guidelines can be viewed here, and a comparison of changes can be found here.

How to vote?

Beginning January 17, 2023, voting will be open. This page on Meta-wiki outlines information on how to vote using SecurePoll.

Who can vote?

The eligibility requirements for this vote are the same as for the Wikimedia Board of Trustees elections. See the voter information page for more details about voter eligibility. If you are an eligible voter, you can use your Wikimedia account to access the voting server.

What happens after the vote?

Votes will be scrutinized by an independent group of volunteers, and the results will be published on Wikimedia-l, the Movement Strategy Forum, Diff and on Meta-wiki. Voters will again be able to vote and share concerns they have about the guidelines. The Board of Trustees will look at the levels of support and concerns raised as they look at how the Enforcement Guidelines should be ratified or developed further.

On behalf of the UCoC Project Team,

~~~~ Mervat (WMF) (discusscontribs) 13:13, 10 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]