User talk:William Pietri/Archive 05
| Hello fellow Wikipedia administrators open to recall category member! |
|---|
|
I am leaving you this message because recent events have given me concern. When Aaron Brenneman and I, and others, first developed this category well over a year ago, we visualized it as a simple idea. A low hassle, low bureaucracy process. We also visualized it as a process that people would come to trust, in fact as a way of increasing trust in those admins who chose to subscribe to the notion of recall. The very informal approach to who is qualified to recall, what happens during it, and the process in general were all part of that approach. But recent events have suggested that this low structure approach may not be entirely effective. More than one of the recent recalls we have seen have been marred by controversy around what was going to happen, and when. Worse, they were marred by some folk having the perception, rightly or wrongly, that the admin being recalled was trying to change the rules, avoid the process, or in other ways somehow go back on their word. This is bad. It's bad for you the admin, bad for the trust in the process, and bad for the community as a whole. I think a way to address this issue is to increase the predictability of the process in advance. I have tried to do that for myself. In my User:Lar/Accountability page, I have given pretty concrete definitions of the criteria for recall, and of the choices I can make, and of the process for the petition, and of the process for other choices I might make (the modified RfC or the RfAr). I think it would be very helpful if other admins who have voluntarily made themselves subject to recall went to similar detail. It is not necessary to adopt the exact same conditions, steps, criteria, etc. It's just helpful to have SOME. Those are mine, fashion yours as you see fit, I would not be so presumptuous as to say mine are right for you. In fact I urge you not to just adopt mine, as I do change them from time to time without notice, but instead develop your own. You are very welcome to start with mine if you so wish, though. But do something. If you have not already, I urge you to make your process more concrete, now, while there is no pressure and you can think clearly about what you want. Do it now rather than later, during a recall when folk may not react well to perceived changes in process or commitment. Further, I suggest that after you document your process, that you give a reference to it for the benefit of other admins who may want to see what others have done. List it in this table as a resource for the benefit of all. If you use someone else's by reference rather than copy, I suggest you might want to do as Cacharoth did, and give a link to a specific version. Do you have to do these things? Not at all. These are suggestions from me, and me alone, and are entirely up to you to embrace or ignore. I just think that doing this now, thinking now, documenting now, will save you trouble later, if you should for whatever reason happen to be recalled. I apologise if this message seems impersonal, but with over 130 members in the category, leaving a personal message for each of you might not have been feasible, and I feel this is important enough to violate social norms a bit. I hope that's OK. Thanks for your time and consideration, and best wishes. Larry Pieniazek NOTE: You are receiving this message because you are listed in the Wikipedia administrators open to recall category. This is a voluntary category, and you should not be in it if you do not want to be. If you did not list yourself, you may want to review the change records to determine who added you, and ask them why they added you. |
...My guinea pigs and the "A"s through "S"s having felt this message was OK to go forward with (or at least not complained bitterly to me about it :) ), today it's the turn of the "T"s through "Z"s (and beyond, apparently)! I'm hoping that more of you chaps/chapettes will point to their own criteria instead of mine :)... it's flattering but a bit scary! :) Also, you may want to check back to the table periodically, someone later than you in the alphabet may have come up with a nifty new idea. ++Lar: t/c 20:54, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
Great Lakes Film Fest edit
I've restored it for now, but I've tagged it for advertisement anyways until he can make/or someone else makes the improvements if it is possible that it can be saved. --JForget 02:56, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
Loved your analogy... edit
...here. I'll remember that, thanks! J Milburn (talk) 13:46, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks! Kind of you to say so. William Pietri (talk) 17:54, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
User talk:JzG edit
Nice work! --John (talk) 08:21, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks. With that much history, it takes a while, and there were some heart-stopping pauses. But it seems to have worked, and nothing caught on fire. That I know of, anyhow. :-) -- William Pietri (talk) 08:32, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
Kickin' Brass edit
Hi, I was the creator of the Kickin' Brass artice. The page said to contact an admin about getting a copy of the page sent as a an email. Is there any way to get it sent to dcs152@msstate.edu for reference? We're working on our own webpage and need all that info. Thanks, Dcs152 (talk) 17:45, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
- Sent! If you need further help, don't hesitate to ask. William Pietri (talk) 18:09, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Portable games edit
They're White, round, cold, and wet and this is their target! LOL! -- JediLofty User ¦ Talk
- Excellent. Hooray for snowballs! William Pietri (talk) 16:55, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi edit
You are seeing this message, because you participated in' Third Opinion' in [1] Could you please have a look at the discussion again and give your opinion as to whether this edit[2] is valid. thanks Ajjay (talk) 18:04, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
NTWW edit
I'd like to draw your attention to Wikipedia:NotTheWikipediaWeekly, a ~weekly Skypecast half-way between serious topics and casual chat. I'd love to see you join one of the forthcoming sessions. Dorftrottel (ask) 01:14, April 15, 2008
Simon Wessely edit
Hi, Are you in some way connected with the extraordinary entry for "Professor Simon Wessely"? He is a hugely controversial figure in the ME/CFS community and this is not reflected in the article. His entry is like something you would read in North Korea or China eulogising a local government official. The insurance company UNUM, for whom he works, describes him as "someone who does not shy away from controversy." This is not reflected in his entry. This entry is completely contrary to the spirit of Wikipedia. Shame on you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.211.74.1 (talk) 18:23, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
- Shame on me? Come now. I don't think I've ever edited the article, although I did comment on the talk page in 2005 or so. If you think the article should be fixed, then find reliable sources so that others can verify the information you would like to insert. Perhaps read over our guidelines for biographies of living persons. And then go to it! That's how the other 2.2 million articles got made, and his is no exception.
- Alternatively, if that seems too constraining, then there is lots more internet on which you can publish personal opinions.
- Either way, good luck! -- William Pietri (talk) 04:19, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
Herbalife discussion edit
just wanted to tell you how impressed I am after reading the discussión page of herbalife. I see you have invested a lot of patience, brains and time to keep the article NPOV back in 2006. I would have gone crazy with those distributors edits. It happened to me in the spanish wiki on other articles. I hope you keep contributing to the wiki, as you must be gifted to handle this kind of situations.Jsgbrl (talk) 03:56, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
- That's very nice of you to say so. Indeed, they had me at the end of my rope for a while, but another editor, A.B. was good enough to step in to take over. Thanks for the kind words! William Pietri (talk) 05:48, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
i'll get back to you mid next week with some suggestions as i'm working on trying to update and simplify the financial info, then keep it updated regularly. appreciate your objectivity, george —Preceding unsigned comment added by Georgefischer (talk • contribs) 19:17, 11 July 2008 (UTC)