Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/Single/2013-01-21

Comments

The following is an automatically-generated compilation of all talk pages for the Signpost issue dated 2013-01-21. For general Signpost discussion, see Wikipedia talk:Signpost.

Arbitration report: Doncram case continues (2,813 bytes · 💬)

← Back to 2013-01-21

Discuss this story

Ed. note: the talk page was cleared while publishing, per our usual practice. The previous comments can be read here. Thanks, Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 23:54, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

I don't think this coverage is professional or useful. Probably no coverage is what I would prefer, for any ongoing mediation or arbitration case.

Yes, the linked list is one of two hate/attack pages developed by Orlady, singularly focused upon me, that I name in the Evidence. It is not "presumably"; i specifically name that as one of the two pages. Providing link to it here extends the effect of the hate/attack page, I think.

The issue is longterm harassment and bullying, is how I feel the arbitration could better have been titled, or longterm contention perhaps being neutral. The naming of the arbitration to be about me is circular, it makes it relatively more about me than about Orlady, Nyttend, SarekOfVulcan, other named parties, and the naming is itself biasing.

I didn't comment within this article's "clearing"; I feel my comments in the last Signpost's similar clearing didn't have useful effect. Last Signpost's coverage garbled (in my opinion) coverage of naming issue, suggesting too much that I would assume the arbitration committee members would be swayed by the biased naming. The naming is an obvious general problem, easily remedied by using an acronym or a number, and the academic research on anchoring and other biases is completely clear, in addition to the obvious effect of naming attracting different participants, so IMHO generally the naming policy should be changed. Name choice should not be the privilege of the opening disputant. I did not, however, say that I prejudged this arbitration committee's decision. The Signpost coverage should not be open to editing by arbitration participants, including me. The Signpost coverage should not take a stance either way. --doncram 19:50, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Please do not treat your personal opinion as fact. James ^{(T • C)} • 9:50pm • 10:50, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Featured content: Wazzup, G? Delegates and featured topics in review (464 bytes · 💬)

← Back to 2013-01-21

Discuss this story

GamerPro's contributions around the site had been greatly missed and I'm glad to see him back in the saddle. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 03:19, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

News and notes: Requests for adminship reform moves forward (1,351 bytes · 💬)

← Back to 2013-01-21

Discuss this story

I didn't know there were 1,000,000 varieties of pasta! (Sorry, that was uncalled for. Naughty Optimist.) Seriously, does anyone know what the millionth article was?  An optimist on the run! 12:38, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

According to the Wikimedia Blog, the "two most likely candidates" are it:8mm (gruppo musicale) and it:Scautismo e guidismo in Portogallo. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 13:00, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Yup, one of the two. The respective creators, it:User:Nungalpiriggal and it:User:Lou Crazy, both have awards on their talk pages and have complimented each other, so it may not be possible to know which one was the exact 1 millionth. – Philosopher ^{Let us reason together.} 13:16, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Technology report: Data centre migration successful (3,796 bytes · 💬)

← Back to 2013-01-21

Discuss this story

On First Quarterly Review makes for interesting reading, just wanted to chime in with two points...

1. The transcript is super bare bones, so if anyone has questions please don't be shy about using the talk page. :)
2. If anyone is interested, we recently decided to make what was formerly a private team mailing list a public one. Feel free to join the Editor Engagement list if you want, though you're warned that we often talk about details of ongoing projects without a lot of background or introduction for those completely unfamiliar.

Anyway, thanks for the coverage Jarry! Steven Walling (WMF) • talk 22:30, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

• "885 servers" - Are you sure that's just in tampa and dc data centers. The blog post made it sound like that was the grand total, and there are a couple servers in the Netherlands. Bawolff (talk) 22:50, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
  • I had my own doubts, so I asked that very question on IRC yesterday. Unfortunately I didn't get an answer, so I decided to leave it as-is. - Jarry1250 ^{[Deliberation needed]} 22:59, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

The data centre migration seems to coincide with a delay I've been seeing in article cache invalidation. Prior to 22 January, edits I submitted were immediately reflected as the latest version of the article, assuming the page wasn't subject to pending change review (ah, the ever-increasing indignities of editing without logging in). In other words, after supplying an edit summary and submitting a change, the article page would automatically refresh, perhaps with a brief delay, with the changes visible. This isn't necessarily true anymore. In the past, even when the site was under a heavy load for one reason or another, a subsequent null edit would let me see the version of the article that reflected my changes; that isn't necessarily true anymore. Another change I never saw until now: it is possible for a null edit/purge to fail even when article history shows my changes. In other words, it now appears possible for the most recent WP:permalink for an article to differ from the default version of an article. Assuming I had just edited Metacarcinus these can now differ, something I haven't seen before, after years of editing:

• http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Metacarcinus&oldid=462270535
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metacarcinus

68.165.77.6 (talk) 04:23, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

• I am seeing a lot of outdated information, especially Talk pages and Revision histories, what can be done about that? 82.113.98.49 (talk) 08:35, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

  There have been problems with out of date pages being displayed to readers in Europe who are not logged in. See Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Users reporting site time issues and delay in visible update of edits for current reports and feedback. According to #wikimedia-tech logs, at least one fix has been applied unsuccessfully; WMF network operations engineer LeslieCarr has been investigating. — Richardguk (talk) 19:54, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject report: Say What? — WikiProject Linguistics (149 bytes · 💬)

← Back to 2013-01-21

Discuss this story