Jump to content

User talk:Sue Gardner

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Julius1990 (talk | contribs) at 19:10, 14 October 2011 (→Open Letter to the Executive Director). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

Welcome!

Looks like you've never been welcomed! :-(

Welcome!

Hello, Sue Gardner, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! Cbrown1023 talk 15:43, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 16 May 2011

The Signpost: 23 May 2011

The Great American Wiknic

Hi there! In the past, you've expressed an interest in local meetups of Wikipedians. Well, here's your chance! On Saturday, June 25, we'll be joining Wikipedians in cities all over the country for the first annual Great American Wiknic -- the picnic that anyone can edit! We'll meet up at a park in SF -- hopefully in the sun -- all other details are still in deliberation!

If this sounds fun, please add your name to the list: Wikipedia:Meetup/San Francisco/Wiknic and add that page to your watchlist. (And of course, feel free to edit that page with your ideas, questions, etc.) I look forward to wiknicking with you! -Pete (talk) 00:32, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 30 May 2011

Dominique Strauss Kahn Sexual Assault Allegation

Hi Sue. Just a 'heads-up' to let you know that User Off2riorob is currently blanking "Feminist and Anti-sexist reaction". I've restored but can't a third time because of WP:3RR. Issue is debated end of Michelle Conti (Natasha Kiss) section on the talk page. FightingMac (talk) 00:23, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there is a thread regarding this article at the BLP noticeboard. Regarding this content about feminists and anti-sexists opinions of a rape trial as such they are completely opinionated and unworthy of inclusion in a pre judicial article about the trial and case. If you dispute the sections removal please discuss at the BLP thread, Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#Dominique_Strauss-Kahn_sexual_assault_case - currently the discussion is only about the pornographic actors claims but we can expand to include the femenists opinions as well, thanks. Off2riorob (talk) 12:01, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've opened a section about it on the talk page here. I've asked Off2riorob's opinion on three areas 1 the question of notability 2 the issue of soapboxing 3 what I call the 'Fula student' test. I maintain that 1 the issues are very notable 2 that there is no soap-boxing 3 that students are served better for knowing the case has prompted feminist and anti-sexist reaction in France. Off2riorob's blank appears to have been prompted by the citation of a primary source, a feminist petition, but Wikipedia's policy requiring discretion with primary sources centre on OR and not soap-boxing and Off2riorob would have been better advised simply to replace the citation if it bothered him. I would also like to see his response to a remark I have made about editor equality.
(added) I would be grateful if you could contribute your views. Please do not attempt a restore as that will be seen as edit-warring, however unjust that might seem. Regarding the BLPN thread that was started by me in affort to remove a BLP contentious and libelous edit to the effect that DSK had had sex with a porn actress which it's contributor refused to delete. Off2riorob supported that but then cut the feminist content as well.
BTW can you please restore my Paris Match edit. Its point was to document sexism in the French press. You can either restore my edited version or I would much prefer the original 'tits and bum' version. Up to you but I would like to see you restore please. Thank you. FightingMac (talk) 22:52, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 6 June 2011

Could use your help at WP:Novels!

Saw your recent change in interests, and I would like to invite you to participate in WP:WikiProject Novels. I find writing about novels, and other written fiction, to be the most relaxing and fun article writing to participate in! What is more fun, the articles are really straight forward to write (we even have a mos with good hints on structure, WP:MOS (novels)) and the likelihood that their will be controversy on the article is almost non-existent! I find it relaxing to dig into the context of novels, because you learn a lot and really get to understand what you read better! A recent article I worked on The Great Lover, I would definitely recommend reading (the book that is, though the article could always use another set of eyes :P ). Unfortunately, WP:Novels has only been operating at minimal capacity, doing mostly maintenance stuff for the past year or so. We could really use some more interested users to create content! (I strongly suspect that this is a product of the Gender Bias and our lack of humanities editors). We could really use some more editors working with modern literature, I hope you will join us! If you need any help feel free to ask, and happy editing! Sadads (talk) 08:31, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 13 June 2011

Editing tips

Hey Sue, after reading the Civil Harassment Restraining Order article you mentioned today, I wanted to drop you two editing tips:

  1. It's always a nice courtesy after you create an article to create the Talk page too with any relevant WikiProject templates. They're usually just {{WikiProject Subject}}.
  2. I saw you reused a couple references over. It's easier to do that if you use named references to avoid the repetition.

Cheers, Steven Walling 03:40, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 20 June 2011

Minor update to your user page

Hi. I changed your user page to reflect Danese's upcoming departure. --MZMcBride (talk) 05:30, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh thanks, MZ :-) Sue Gardner (talk) 22:31, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Civil Harassment Restraining Order

Calmer Waters 18:02, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 27 June 2011

The Signpost: 4 July 2011

Your speech at WiHED summit helped inspire this proposal

I was following your presentation on Twitter via the #wihed hashtag, and what you said about Wikipedia's coverage of the social sciences and humanities rang true for me. I've been trying hard to get some teamwork and collaboration going to help improve weak history articles (history, especially history outside of the United States and Europe are weaknesses at present) with limited success. So, in part because of your WiHED speech, I've created this proposal that–extrapolating from the Wikimedia Strategic Plan to 2015–aims to change the way collaboration works on Wikipedia: Proposal: Moving beyond moribund WikiProjects to a new platform for collaboration

It's just a start, but your thoughts are appreciated!

NickDupree (talk) 20:28, 9 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Now that's a fine idea - however, instead of focusing on 'inactivity' as the bane of wikiprojectdom, how about providing better tools for wikiproject groups to replace the clumsy project system? A more structured and simpler system would make being active easier, and would automatically provide visualization for which were active and which were not. [a continuous view there could supplement an 'active/inactive' label] – SJ + 20:39, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'd love for the Wikimedia Foundation folks to implement the better social and collaborative tools alluded to in the Wikimedia Strategic Plan to 2015, or at least give us more information on when it's expected. In my view, the sooner the better; we lose too many editors to the lack of collaborative environment/broken platform to support collaboration. I want to move forward to exciting new social and collaborative tools, ASAP.  :-) –NickDupree (talk) 21:02, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

@SJ, we have the foundations there that needn't be just swept away. Wikipedia:WikiProject United States has got reactivated earlier this year, as has its collaboration, with some good work done. Am planning the same with China's....Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:49, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No one wants to sweep away collaborations that are working, only to revive ones that died long ago! And new social and collaborative tools will enhance both healthy and struggling teams alike. :-) NickDupree (talk) 22:22, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not convinced that the availability of particular tools is a significant determining factor in whether collaborative groups succeed or fail; if that were the case, then I would expect a more even spread of activity across the existing projects, since the tools available to each are roughly identical. My experience is that the opposite is actually true: successful projects can become and remain active despite a lack of tools—and, indeed, the core community of active projects has gradually invented various tools to fulfill its own requirements, rather than having them provided a priori. The core impediment, in my view, remains social rather than technological; and this is arguably harder to fix, because doing so effectively requires recognizing the existence of certain fundamental weaknesses in Wikipedia's social model. Kirill [talk] [prof] 23:59, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The key is finding the people interested - it really only needs four or so folks really interested in a topic area to take off - hence advertising various collaborative events is critical. Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:56, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 11 July 2011

Thank you

It was a pleasure meeting with you as well. I'm encouraged by the actions of general counsel, and I'm also very happy that my top pick for liaison has not refused the nomination. Cool Hand Luke 17:07, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 18 July 2011

A lot of muck being thrown at Wikipedia

Ms. Gardner a lot of muck is thrown at Wikipedia, can you arrange for someone competent to look at it please. <link to blatant personal attack redacted>.Yogesh Khandke (talk) 11:11, 24 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's just a silly blog post over which we have no control. It gave us a laugh, and we have all ignored it and moved on - I suggest you do the same yourself rather than spamming the link to it all over the place (here, Jimbo's page, my page) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:39, 24 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ms. Gardner a lot of muck is thrown at Wikipedia, please do. Yogesh Khandke (talk) 12:59, 24 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 25 July 2011

The Signpost: 01 August 2011

Thanks!

Always a pleasure to have public technical difficulties :p. Give me a poke if you're around - I'm in the Rapaport Hall about to start a panel with James, Kat, Karen and a couple of others. Ironholds (talk) 07:03, 6 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No problem; Karen and I are perched outside the Rapaport as we speak - I assume you'll be inside, given that it's Jimmy's closing speech ;p. Give me a poke if you have time; I need to pester you about something ;p. Ironholds (talk) 13:14, 6 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 08 August 2011

May I ask you a courtesy?

40 out of 130

Hello,

I do not know, if I will attend the next Wikimania, but this time I disliked very much the name "Wikichicks lunch", which was one of the reasons I did not attend it. I am no chick at all, I do not regard other women as chicken and had never the intention to lunch in a chicken coop. I am sorry, but that name did not sound funny to me but ridiculous. In fact on my lunch table there were some rather ribald(?) jokes on chicks, dicks and pigs. So as a courtesy I would like to have this name changed. Thanks for your attention. Catfisheye (talk) 19:40, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

p.s. Someone said that about 20% of the Wikimania attendees were female. That would be 130 women, I do not know how many of them were locals, but I just counted 40 women at the Wikichicks lunch which took place _before_ sabbath started, so I wonder where were the _90_ other women? And why they did not attend? (I just checked your contribs to Wikipedia and saw that you are not often here around, so yeah, do not why I am writing anything here, maybe it is just for the record, that somebody has given it a thought.)
Hi Catfisheye. I didn't name Wikichix (I think it is spelled with an x) and I don't have any control over what it's called. You can read more about the history of the group and its name, on this page. Thanks for your note. Sue Gardner (talk) 22:00, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, thanks for your fast reply. Well in the Conference book and the invitation e-mail it was spelled Chicks, but anyway, the stylish x IMHO does not change that much.
I have to admit that first I chatted with Jorm about this issue, he did not know whom to address, so I addressed you, but as you state you are not the right person either. So now I do not know what to do about this thing, i. e. I will just keep staying away and maybe there is one or two other women between the 90 missing who have the same reason for non-attendance. I did what I could. ;) Regards Catfisheye (talk) 23:50, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 15 August 2011

The Signpost: 22 August 2011

The Signpost: 29 August 2011

The Signpost: 05 September 2011

The Signpost: 12 September 2011

Executive Director's Barnstar

I have a nomination: Whatamidoing. She has consistently proven to be a sane and friendly voice in every discussion I have seen her partake in. She has contributed an enormous amount of time engaging with community members on behalf of myself and the New Editor Engagement group, answering questions about our various projects (such as Article Feedback) and even taking a couple bullets from a couple jerks. I have personally given her much WikiLove, but I think she deserves as much as possible.--Jorm (WMF) (talk) 00:57, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Seconded. She does amazing work all around the project. :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 01:04, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

E.D. Barnstar - DeltaQuad

Hi Sue,

I'd like to nominate User:DeltaQuad for your new barnstar. He's fantastic... and almost single-handedly handles the emails from people who are trying to get past a block (because they are in a school that's blocked, or their roommate was dumb, or whatever). Never loses his cool, and always does a good job. Philippe Beaudette, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 03:20, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

E.D. Barnstar - Abhilasha369

Hi Sue: I'd like to nominate User:Abhilasha369. She's a student in the Wikipedia India Education Program and has started and edited 2 fantastic articles Robinson Crusoe Economy & Ragnar Nurkse's Balanced Growth Theory. She's put in awesome work - as the articles testify. ...er, you might want to also tell her who you are coz she might not know. Hmundol (talk) 08:44, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


E.D. Barnstar - Nice poa

Hi, Sue! I'd like to nominate User:nice poa for the ED Barnstar. Nice is the top editor on the Portuguese encyclopedia and has been part of the community for a while. I haven't worked with her directly --she prefers to keep a lower profile--but I'm told that she's a wonderful Wikipedian (the username says it all) and deserves the ED Barnstar for her time and dedication to Wikipedia. Her Portuguese account is here: http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usu%C3%A1rio:Nice_poa Mokapantages (talk) 21:21, 19 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Fabulous Hair Dandy Award
This special barnstar is for all the hard work Sue has put into the Hairstyle article! Well done and may you always have a fabulous hairstyle! SarahStierch (talk) 23:07, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A Burberry handbag for you!

Thank you!
Thank you so much, Sue! I am really honoured to be the fourth recipient of the Executive Director's Barnstar! It's beautiful! :-)

As a matter of fact, I'm so honoured to even interact with you! I noticed you're interested in handbags... So here'a a handbag for you... a virtual one. :-) Hopefully you already have this one!!! :D Even after my part in the Wikipedia India Education Program is over, I'll surely continue editing articles on Wikipedia. The ability to use the "edit" button comes with great power. And I promise to uphold it with great responsibility! Regards Abhilasha369 (talk) 04:02, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination

Hi, I'd like to nominate User:Courcelles for the Executive Director's barnstar (although, with all due respect, I think the name implies some kind of presidential authority). Courcelles is one of our most active users here at Wikipedia, with a mere ~200k edits. He started editing in December 2009 and was given admin privileges 6 months after that. In June 2011, he made about 20k edits. Additionally, he holds various admin action records. But numbers isn't all. Courcelles is a very friendly and sympathetic contributor, and participates regularly in anti-vandalism, dispute resolution, RfA discussions and VRT tasks. Additionally, he's been entrusted with AUSC membership by the Arbitration Committee, and given CheckUser and Oversight rights by consequence. He is a fantastic contributor, and I think that deserves recognition. Warmly, Kudu ~I/O~ 20:18, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination RuWiki

Once again, thank you very much for your reward! The wiki-community is too large to mention all the deserving candidates.

But the situation related to the Incubator I know much better.

First of all, I want to note a great Incubator team - Dmitry89, Felitsata, Letzte*Spieler. In 2010 we have come up with many new solutions to help newcomers and actively developed in the incubator for many months.

Probably the most noteworthy is Dmitry89's work: has been tirelessly reviewing and continually improving his bots, which for more than a year help to maintain order and cleanliness in the Incubator.

I would also like to mention those who had a particularly significant contribution to the very first, most difficult steps when the Incubator was a cause of the great skepticism and doubt.

This is the most experienced members of our section:

  • Ilya Voyager, who has helped to make the first templates and supported the Incubator in spring 2009, when it was at the first draft stage.
  • Kv75, who wrote the first bots for the Incubator. I also want to mention his deep understanding of the situation in the project, conversations with him helped to find better decisions.
  • Yaroslav Blanter, who took the risk and had courage to place an new invitation to the authors, when it was still an unknown project. I would like to mention Yaroslav would like to mention as one of the best people in RuWiki who did a lot in general.

If we are talking about people not connected to the Incubator, Stas Kozlovsky, who does a great and difficult lobbying job trying to introduce in Russia the free license, panorama freedom etc.

I think that our yongest patroller, Maxtirdatov, who is only 9 y.o. deserves a mention.

Samal2010 (talk) 22:19, 19 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


PS. Thanks Victoria for her support with translation. Samal2010 (talk) 22:20, 19 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 19 September 2011

More awards

I've got an idea. On the occasion of the anniversary we encouraged the participants who have made a significant contribution to the development of the Incubator by awarding one of:

  • Barnstar
  • Medal
  • Badge of honor

This allowed us to award many more editors.

Sorry that some pages are in Russian, our project is very international

Samal2010 (talk) 19:19, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A nomination, if I may

Hi, Sue, I'd like to make a nomination for the Executive Director's Barnstar. And while I'm here, I'd like to say that it's really nice that the executive director, no less, can find time to acknowledge some of those people who keep the wheels turning on a day-to-day basis.

Anyway, my nominee is Dank (talk · contribs). Dan is an admin and a coordinator of the Military History Wikiproject, but he spends most of his on-wiki time reviewing and copy-editing military history articles at peer review, A-class, and FAC. No matter what the article, Dan always has something constructive to say and useful suggestions to make. In fact, he reviewed 63 articles between May and June this year—almost every article within the project's scope nominated at one of those fora, and more than twice the number reviewed by any other. And yet nominators always appreciate his comments, and he always manages to keep a cool head, even when somebody is being stubborn or awkward or downright rude—a trait I've always admired, but not one that comes naturally to me!

For his sheer dedication to the project, I think Dan is a perfect candidate for this barnstar, and I hope you'll consider him. All the best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:13, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs
Three Cups of Deceit
John Cavanagh (economist)
Andy Greenwald
Pixie cut
Anthonomus pomorum
Westwood Highlands, San Francisco
Heathfield Special School
Karlene Faith
Andrew Laties
Kickstarter
A Tragic Legacy
Google Squared
Mischa Merz
A History of Marriage
Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management
Gaming law
Ocean View, San Francisco
Cathedral Hill, San Francisco
Bangladesh Standard Time
Cleanup
Wired Records
Anza Vista, San Francisco
Andy Stirling
Merge
Westwood Park, San Francisco
Central Asia Institute
Pennies for Peace
Add Sources
ENTJ
Laurel Heights, San Francisco
Death of Osama bin Laden
Wikify
Attribution (psychology)
Mugai Nyodai
Donald Margulies
Expand
Ehrenreich
Tibet
Bernard Debré

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 02:31, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

At hi:User Talk:Siddhartha Ghai#Congratulations! --Siddhartha Ghai (talk) 06:22, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination

Hello Sue, I would like to nominate User:Anna Frodesiak for the Executive Director's barnstar. Anna is a Canadian residing in Haikou, China. She has created hundreds of new articles in diverse fields. She has a great personality and her sense of humor creates a happy atmosphere here. She is a talented artist as shown by the cover picture on her user page. Anna always attempts to convert troublesome users into productive editors. She is friendly, patient and caring with new editors. She welcomes them with personalized messages. She has been recently helping a class of 170 students from Nanjing Normal University. Anna has also been working with multiple biology wikiprojects to get the capitalization guidelines for animals in place. She is an asset to Wikipedia and deserves the barnstar. Thank you for your attention. — Ganeshk (talk) 13:13, 24 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Barnstars

Hi Sue. Would you like your barnstar to be included among the official list at Wikipedia:Barnstars (maybe Wikipedia:Personal user awards would be more suitable)? -- Ϫ 15:01, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That would be great! I think you're right: personal user awards makes the most sense. Thanks (and thank you for your earlier nomination too). Sue Gardner (talk) 06:22, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 26 September 2011


An idea to help one of WP's editor gaps

gap toothed smile.
Filling the gaps

I was thinking about some of the gaps the foundation is working to fill and I wondered if anyone has considered extending Campus Ambassador type programs to "adult education," "community education," "continuing education" or other classes that people tend to take later in life? This would have the dual benefits of diversifying our editor pool and also tapping a group of people that tend to have some spare time.

Part of the reason for some contributors fading out may simply be the business of careers or raising family as they leave young adult hood. I've often been struck by the Mormon model of missionary work and how it recognizes this. There is a pool of young 19 to 24 years old missionaries, but there is also a large number of senior missionaries who volunteer as retirees. I'm not suggesting that the Foundation is a church (!) but I think we could do well to consider that young adulthood is only one of the two times in life when people tend to have more free time and fewer career obligations. Cloveapple (talk) 17:01, 1 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination: Dreamyshade

I nominate User:Dreamyshade for the ED's Barnstar. She's been consistently editing, dicussing, guiding, gnoming and adding substantive content, contributing images, and generally being constructive on Wikipedia for about ten years. Sumanah (talk) 13:15, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 3 October 2011

The Signpost: 10 October 2011

Open Letter to the Executive Director

Dear Sue,

perhaps it might be wise to consider that questioning judgment, intelligence and empathy, publicly and repeatedly, of the unpaid volunteers that generate the money you take home every month could quite possibly not be the most effective strategy known to man.

If you’re not so sure about that, perhaps you should commission a report that deals with the question if people donate money to the Wikimedia Foundation because

  • a) they trust the editorial judgment of the communities that create Wikipedia and all these other (more often than not) really useful sites or
  • b) they think the Foundation’s Executive Director (whose position wouldn’t even exist without the countless hours of volunteer work that predated its creation) is doing such a terrific job at telling those same people, publicly and repeatedly, that they lack in empathy.

I have a feeling that the results might tend a little bit towards a), even among female, not so computer-savvy or non-white donors.

Your sincerely, The Man Who Yelled At Ting -- 15:58, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

pretty much +1. You can't expect those (the critics) to find compromises with you, while there is till the insult as non-empathic in the world and i saw nowhere any taking back of those words by you or a real apology. That is the first step. And the guarantee that the filter won't be forced in any way. On this I neither trust you nor the Board ... as sad as it is that I can't trust the heads of the project i immolated so much of my free time and money upon, on which i wrote over 400 articles and seven of them as featured and five as good articles. I did 30.000 edits, not to provocate, but to offer best information to the reader. I see no respect for me and other critics. How can this be a basis for dialogue. If possible I will be at the event with you on november here in Germany. The first sentence you should say should imply a "sorry". --Julius1990 (talk) 19:10, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Sue_Gardner&oldid=455576312"