From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
My userspace: /Sandbox, /Notepad, /Hurricane Resources | Otherspace: Java Sandbox
Hello! Call me Soup, AySz88, or Darvian, whichever you like best. I'll answer to any of the three.
My contributions begin with my first edit to Wikipedia, on April 2, 2005, to the article 2channel. Many of my edits are related to tropical cyclones, and I have also been working on a Java edit counter, Flcelloguy's Tool. I occasionally contribute to articles involving aspects of Internet culture such as Neopets or Bananaphone. I also occasionally vandal-whack or welcome users, especially if I notice good contributions in an obscure article or from an anonymous user.
Celierra, Cel or Celi is my red fox dæmon in the His Dark Materials sense. My and my dæmon's beliefs about dæmons are somewhat complicated, but they're mostly similar to the beliefs of our friends Okibi and Rookie, who have already outlined theirs at The Daemon Page at www.daemons.envy.nu. The orange ^-^ in my signature symbolizes Cel's presence and influence in my life, including my editing here, where she helps keep us cool and composed under any stress. Celierra has her own AIM and LiveJournal accounts, and whenever wei're around, she's online, available, and willing to talk if you need a gentler ear.
My screenname, which I have been using since my first contact with the Internet in my elementary school days, was taken from my initials, my stepdad's initials, and my birthyear. The nickname "Soup", which I have now used on many websites, derives from a comment that my screenname looks like "alphabet soup", which was said by an aquaintance from Droidarena and United Devices (now grid.org). Although I now prefer to be called "Soup", it may be less convenient for some to have to remember the nickname than to type out "AySz88", so feel free to use whichever you find to be easier.
Elsewhere on the Internet, I am:
I also was:
Hm, claims to fame... I think I was the first to add the "this includes anonymous users" and "As a courtesy, unsigned posts may be marked with {{unsigned}}" phrases to the "Please sign your posts" hatnotes being copied around talk pages now, though that's not much. :p I also uploaded the first version of Image:Tropical Storm Zeta 2005.jpg which appeared on the Main Page in the Current Events section for several days, though of course I didn't make that image.
[edit] Userboxes
(under construction)
[edit] Quick links
[edit] Sandbox
/Sandbox non-<noinclude> contents. Click show to expand.
[edit] Bias-declaring Userbox brainstorm
[edit] Domain
This does not change:
- What is allowed in userspace (as text or as substituted userboxes)
- Lists of userboxes
- Clarification: Is this saying that userbox stacks are allowed (agree) or that lists of userboxes (in userspace) are allowed in Wikipedia space (also agree, but there is dispute). — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 23:09, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
- Yikes, I didn't notice this comment. >.< It means that the issue of lists of userboxes in userspace is not discussed here, because I'm not really familiar with the issues around that. --AySz88^-^ 06:21, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Various arguments for userboxes
- Expression of editing interest, languages, and other things helpful to the project
- Self-expression, jokes
- Community interaction and finding other editors with similar interests
- Community cohesiveness
- Decor
[edit] Various arguments against userboxes
Server strain (already revealed to be not an issue)- Template namespace designed only for encyclopedia material (?)
- May appear to be endorsed by Wikipedia? (??)
- Possible attacks and trolling
[edit] ...for POV userboxes
- Public knowledge of biases
- Acknowledgement and discovery of an editor's own biases
- Self-expression
- Shows editing interests (?)
[edit] ...against POV userboxes
(See Jimbo's explanation)
- Abuse of POV boxes (WhatLinksHere/categories being a vector for vote-stacking/POV pushing)
- Identification with factions, divisiveness / impression in participants or viewers that bias is encouraged
- Advocacy, encouraging biases ("...make them seem to be engaged in Wikipedia as activists for a particular POV")
- Creation of uncivil atmosphere / inflammatory boxes / poor first impressions, taking things personally, and other bad feelings
- Lack of explanations for POVs ("Bumper sticker"-ness) (?)
- POV in userspace is undesirable (?)
- POV in Template namespace is undesirable (?)
- Template namespace designed only for encyclopedia material (?)
[edit] Reasoning
- Objects in the Template namespace space are generally assumed to be used for the benefit of the encyclopedia. It is permissible to have templates which further the goals of the encyclopedia in the Template namespace, no matter which namespace the template is intended for. (Precedent: {{proposed}}, {{style}}, and many others for the Wikipedia namespace, {{userpage}}, {{Pic of the day}} in User namespace)
- Templates are somewhat more strict than userspace because, since templates are obviously meant to be included on many pages, templates are examples of what should and is desired to appear in those pages.
- If userboxes are considered unrestricted in userspace, only boxes in the Template space may be moderated.
- In user space, things which demonstrate offerings or interests in the encyclopedia project should be encouraged. (Of course, not all things in userpages must promote workings in the encyclopedia - user space is a location where things beneficial to the community, but do little to nothing for the encyclopedia, are allowed.)
- Babel, WikiProjects boxes, declarations of interests, etc. should be expressly permitted in userpages. These promote the function of Wikipedia.
- Users of userboxes should be aware that the contents of their userbox may change.
- Declarations of biases on user pages, if they have the intent to reduce systemic bias in encyclopedia matters or to draw attention towards personal bias, should be encouraged, as they encourage NPOV.
- These declarations should have the effect of promoting the goal of NPOV in Wikipedia.
- These declarations must be careful to neither be inflammatory nor solicit people to take up the same bias.
- The userboxes should not place userpages in categories (there is no obvious positive use for such categories).
- Especially, declarations of bias should be careful to not promote acting in a biased manner in encyclopedia activities. Declarations of possible bias in the Template space (should or must) also discourage, or acknowledge the discouragement of, the same bias in encyclopedia-editing and other Wikipedia activities, such that they are certain to not undermine the goal of NPOV.
- Incidentally, this also discourages using the box for vote-stacking or other bias-based abuse, as the users do not intend to form any sort of coalition or group (as is obvious from the text of the userbox).
- In the case that a userbox or other template fails these guidelines, attempts to reword the template should be conducted first in order to bring it within these guidelines, so rewordings are not enacted in the middle of a deletion debate, leading to confusion or an unnecessary debate. Nomination at TfD should occur only if nobody can think of a permissible wording. (The TfD then progresses normally.)
- In userspace, explanations of one's viewpoints beyond mere identification (and beyond the userboxes) is encouraged.
- Advocacy should be strongly discouraged, even in User space. Advocacy includes anything meant to solicit support or opposition towards an opinion or bias, or anything which may encourage identification to a "side", faction, or cabal. Inflammatory gestures may be completely prohibited.
- Advocate userboxes are also discouraged by the existence of bias-reduction userboxes.
- Users who abuse userboxes through attempts to bring bias into articles or processes should be revealed and punished.
- Userbox-users who receive any such attempts to solicit votes or bias should be assumed to act in good faith and presumed to reveal any attempts to solicit bias to the overall community. They should not be prohibited from participating in the matters to which they were exposed (since such a rule would lead to abuse to remove opposition), but should take special care to take the Neutral Point of View and avoid their bias.
[edit] Results
- Userboxes helpful to the encyclopedia are allowed in the Template namespace.
- Userboxes in the Template namespace with declarations of bias for the purpose of NPOV are allowed
- Declarations of possible bias in the Template space (should or must) also discourage, or acknowledge the discouragement of, the same bias in encyclopedia-editing and other Wikipedia activities.
- If nobody can find an acceptable way to word a bias-declaring userbox, the box may be nominated at TfD, and deleted via normal procedure (with consensus support). (How to delete the material - whether to subst or not - will not be addressed here.)
- Advocate userboxes are not allowed in the Template space and their wording should be replaced.
- Good faith is assumed of users of userboxes, who are expected to reveal any attempts of userbox abuse to the public community.
- Boxes which contains these are (still) not allowed in the Template namespace:
- Advocacy or encouragement of bias
- Promotion of a faction
[edit] Limits
- This should not override any other policy
- This should encroach as little as possible on the existing poll
[edit] Bias-countering userboxes
I wonder if objections would be satiated if we make POV userboxes an explicitly bias-countering tool by rewording them along these lines (as an example): See better examples below
- User (Sun):+ :
"This user admits to having a pro-(Sun) POV." or "This user attempts to prevent his pro-(Sun) POV from entering articles." or "This user tends towards supporting (the Sun)."
- User (Sun):0 :
"This user feels he has no bias towards (the Sun)."
- User (Sun):- :
"This user admits to having a anti-(Sun) POV." or "This user attempts to prevent his anti-(Sun) POV from entering articles." or "This user tends towards opposing (the Sun)."
If desired, one could extend this to five types by adding these two:
- User (Sun):++ :
"This user's pro-(Sun) POV discourages themselves(himself/herself) from editing articles about it." (or reword of this)
- User (Sun):-- :
"This user's anti-(Sun) POV discourages themselves(himself/herself) from editing articles about it." (or reword of this)
Of course, not all userboxes would have to have the same wording, they would just need to somehow make it clear that the box isn't advocating/advertising the POV, but is expressing a possible bias in encyclopedia-writing.
(Copied from my post at Wikipedia talk:Userboxes#POV Userbox Suggestion. --AySz88^-^ 06:28, 16 May 2006 (UTC))
- I support this principle, and think the existance of such userboxes would be of much more benefit to WP than their current forms are. However, strong proponents of userboxes could make a case that these boxes would discourabe people from using userboxes, since people are probably less likely to state "I admit a positive bias towards n" than they are "I believe that n is correct".
- Perhaps more worryingly than that, they could effectively punish honesty during VfD's and neutrality disputes. A user who honestly used the statement of bias userboxes could disable their ability to participate rationally in disputes over that issue without others discounting their opinions, while those users who were equally biased but blind to their own faults could go undetected. --tjstrf 07:21, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
-
- Well, about the first paragraph, I guess I'd have to reply that people who would rather state that instead of a reworded more-neutral/tame/encyclopedic/[insert adjective here] version should be discouraged from using userboxes, as they are probably missing the point of why some people don't like userboxes (i.e. the type of people that Jimbo refers to as the advocating kind).
- The second is a good point, and I have to admit that my own examples probably aren't very good; I'll have to work on them a bit to hopefully get something that works.
- As an update: I hope that the "German solution" (what a horrible name!) doesn't preclude the possibility of something like this working and turn people away from the possible benefits I see with userboxes, as I think it'd still be great to turn this into encouraging the separation of advocacy in RL with editing in Wikipedia, regardless of what happens to the existing POV boxes. --AySz88^-^ 03:55, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- Regardless of how the userfication debate turns out, you could probably get a more generic box put in that said something along the lines of "This user attempts to stay away from editing articles on which they have a strong POV." which would still get the general point across. I also share your concerns about The German Pacification, to say the least. (See User talk:Tjstrf#Off DRV continuation for a list of reasons why.) --tjstrf 04:35, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Some better examples
If one has any objections or improvements, feel free to edit or comment here.
- "This user feels his off-Wikipedia views __________ for/against/etc. _________ do not affect thier editing."
- "This user's bias for/against __________ should not show up in their edits."
- "This user restricts activites as a _________ off-Wikipedia."
- "This user strives to ensure their __________ biases do not influence their editing."
- "This user edits on Wikipedia avoiding the influence of their __+/-____ views on ____________."
- "This user avoids editing articles because they (feel that, are for, are against, etc.) ______________."
- "This user does not contribute to topics on _______ because they are a ___________."
[edit] Vandalism count
(Idea stolen from Titoxd)
[1]
| This is a Wikipedia user page.
This is not an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user this page belongs to may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia itself. The original page is located at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:AySz88.
|
