Wikipedia talk:Esperanza

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

This page is a subpage of Esperanza.

Notice: Esperanza is currently being reformed. Please note that all programs, the Advisory Council and the Charter are affected. Further details can be found on the Esperanza talk page.
Discussion

Welcome!

Shortcut:
WT:ESP
WT:EA


Has a story about this:
New group aims to promote Wiki-Love

Welcome to the discussion page for Esperanza! General dicussions and introductions take place on this page. Feel free to add any questions or comments about the project below.

If you would like to...

...suggest a new project, see the Proposals page.
...discuss or comment on the governance of Esperanza, see the Governance talk page.
This talk page is automatically archived by Werdnabot. Any sections older than 5 days are automatically archived to Wikipedia talk:Esperanza/Archive Dec 2006. Sections without timestamps are not archived.

Table of Contents

Archives before October 1, 2006

Archives after October 1, 2006

Contents

EA Links

[edit] Re-evaluaton

I think it would be best if we look at this organization and re-evaluate ourselves. Have we improved? How can be better involved in the WikiCommunity? Have we accomplished our goals? How much longer must our reform take? (etc.) This is important now because of the new reforms Esperanza just went through.

BTW, when is the next AC meeting?--Ed ¿Cómo estás? 00:18, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Should be soon, (I'm guessing), the elections are coming up in a few weeks. WikieZach| talk 00:22, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
Hmmm...I'm not too sure about the elections or the AC meeting. Right now we haven't go a firm idea of what direction our governance is going to take, so it seems, to me at least, strange talking about elections when we're not even really sure as to what we'd be electing people to. Thε Halo Θ 14:24, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
Good idea, Ed. Perhaps we should seek some external evaluation regarding this as well-- it seems like there should be an equivalent to WP:ER for an organization so non-members can easily offer us critique. Dar-Ape 23:48, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
Good suggestion--SUIT 23:58, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
I agree with The Halo that we shouldn't be even thinking of electing anybody to anything without first better defining what, if any, form of governance Esperanza will have in the future. The bureaucracy and hierarchy of Esperanza (real or perceived) is a major criticism of the organisation, and we would be doing ourselves a disservice if we try to elect people in the midst of our efforts to clarify who we are and what we stand for. --Kyoko 00:18, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

I was just making a comment. WikieZach| talk 00:19, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Oh, I'm sorry, nothing personal was intended, I'm just saying that it would be very poor form to hold elections when we aren't even sure if there will be officials, or how many, or what their precise roles would be, and holding elections at this time would only confirm the allegations that Esperanza relies too much on having a bureaucracy. --Kyoko 00:57, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Evaluation

Personally, I think that Esperanza needs more programs to help the community in a better way. If you compare Esperanza before the overhauls with its current condition, we have lost around 1/2 of our programs! Now we're just a bunch of people trying to debate on what step to take next, with no overall effect on the wider community of Wikipedia. Our efforts to help the Esperanzian community fail to help the Wikipedian community. Remember the Esperanza is not a seperate community. It is imperative that we look outside the box, to see how our actions will affect the community, and work quickly so that we may acheive our goals much faster. --Ed ¿Cómo estás? 02:04, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I agree, we should start with some new programs--SUIT 04:39, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
Once the charter etc has been sorted out, I would like to see a programme dedicated to recognizing the great contributions of our editors, much like the Barnstar Brigade did, without seemingly diminishing the value of this recognition. Thε Halo Θ 13:45, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Teaching

One of the things that I feel has been brought up a couple of times during this overhaul has been that Esperanza can be used as not only a supportive group for our editors, but also as a teaching organization. We already do a this in some places, for example Admin Coaching and the Tutorial Drive, but I'd also like to see Esperanza go out to find and help newbies when they need help, the same way as we go and find the people who need support. We have a great many experienced editors involved in Esperanza, so it seems to make sense to take advantage of this. I'm not sure as to whether we want to put something in our charter about this, or what, but I did think that we should remember that Esperanza is here to offer hope, and helping people to become better editors comes into that. Thε Halo Θ 13:36, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Would you dare to name names on which editors are most experienced? (do so per e-mail, if you prefer) Kim Bruning 18:30, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
Most experienced is quite different to just experienced. I mean, I wouldn't know how to justify who was most experienced. Edit count, length of time here? Experienced in terms of Wikipedia or just Esperanza?
Just to pull a few names out as those who are very experienced; Angela, FloNight, Freakofnurture, Kirill Lokshin, Mailer diablo, Natalya, NoSeptember, Sam Korn, Sango123, Shell Kinney, Tangotango. These are just a few names that jumped out at me from the members list. We also had people like Cyde, Lar, and Tawker, who spring to mind as very experienced. I would say that the above are among the most experienced, but tell me if you want me to be more selective/extensive, or whatever. These are just a few who I personally think of (and I think that a list of most experienced is personal) as the most experienced wikipedians who are members of Esperanza. However, I don't think the above are necessarily the most experienced Esperanzians :P Please, give me some feedback on this list, as depending on why you asked, and what sort of experience we're talking about, it varies greatly. Thε Halo Θ 22:31, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

The usual suspects, is it? :-) Some of these people are probably immune to my charms by now though. :-P Let's see if I can find them. Kim Bruning 00:36, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

What can I say, they're the most experienced :p Angela, Freak, and Natalya are the ones from the list with the most first hand Esperanza experience, if you're looking for people to contact about this. Thε Halo Θ 00:50, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

About your proposal, Halo, I think that your idea sort of overlaps with the purposes of the Welcoming Committee. Perhaps we can propose a merger between both organizations. Even then, you have great ideas! Keep them coming!--Ed ¿Cómo estás? 04:11, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

I had once proposed a similar merger, hypothetically, with the Kindness Campaign, and was told that it had been tried but rejected, and that Esperanza came off as being arrogant because of how the merger was attempted. I would strongly suggest not attempting a merger with another group or WikiProject until we have a more clearly defined idea of what Esperanza is. --Kyoko 12:05, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
Actually, no one really participates in KC discussions. That's why we really didn't get anywhere in your proposal. On the other hand, there are many organizations here in Wikipedia whose purpose is to help the community. Why don't we propose a merger among all of these projects? IMO this would help to increase Esperanza's involvement around the community.--Ed ¿Cómo estás? 14:29, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
I did some checking, and apparently the proposed merger that made Esperanza look bad happened many months ago, dealing with the Birthday Committee. I still think that any talk of a merger should be postponed until Esperanza finishes its overhaul. --Kyoko 15:32, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't think this has anything to do with the welcoming committee.

That, and, before esperanza goes out and deals with splinters in other peoples eyes, it's going to have to deal with the log in its own eye.

During the esperanza reform discussions, I'd like to have some people around who actually understand how wikis work and how encyclopedias work, and how to deal with online organisations.

While it's very tempting to exclude inexperienced esperanzans from the overhaul discussions, it might be wiser to have some experienced people around to help and support the newer or less involved esperanza members, so that they can still effectively participate. Kim Bruning 16:31, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure that it was ever said that inexperienced Esperanzans should be excluded from the Overhaul discussion, at least within this section. I believe the whole issue of experienced/inexperienced users was in regard to The Halo's idea of adding a mentoring/tutoring role to Esperanza. The very nature of a wiki is that things change and are never immutable. The open spirit behind a wiki means that all users, experienced and inexperienced, should be allowed to participate, and that includes participation in the overhaul discussion.
As for the whole log/splinter/merge thing, it was never my intention that Esperanza seek to "fix" any other Wikipedia project, nor did I ever say that Esperanza was perfect. If anything, my original motivation behind my merge idea had been that Esperanza could hopefully be fixed by being absorbed within another project. Note the choice of words: this puts Esperanza as the organisation in need of help, and not the other way around. I was trying to brainstorm how to preserve the ideals of Esperanza during the MfD, if not the actual organisation, and this was one idea I had at the time. --Kyoko 18:48, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
I'm going to have to think about your words some more.
My reply for now:
I'm actually the first person to mention excluding inexperienced Esperanzans. While I started out as a fresh faced, kind and caring person when I was nominated for adminship, wikipedia has made me a cynical, evil, dark hearted person, and I was referring to a constant temptation that I've successfully managed to resist myself, so far. <innocent look>
I was trying to put forward the idea of getting people to help with Esperanza right now, so as to help all the enthusiastic, new, and not-yet-cynical folks to dot their i's and cross their t's, if nothing else.
How can you claim to be a kind of club to help with Wikipedia, if the club members don't understand Wikipedia? On the other hand, if the will is there, us wikipedians should supply the means and help out as best we can, of course! :-) Kim Bruning 20:37, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
I think it's a great idea for Esperanza to work on tutorial programs such as these, especially in showing newbies things like what tools, policies, etc. are available on Wikipedia and where to find them.
I agree with Kyoko that any talk of merging with other programs should wait until all the current discussions have been well and truly resolved. However, if we set up a "newbie portal" on topics A and B, and someone else has done a great intro to topics C and D, and those pages are still current, just like to those external ones - there's too much duplication on Wikipedia anyway. We can offer to give them a hand, and if they want to help with our side, that's cool too. There's no requirement for them to sign a contract and sell their soul to Esperanza before we can give each other a helping hand. Quack 688 22:58, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
That's -ah- nice, I'm sure. In the mean time, how about teaching Esperanzans these things as well, before they become entirely disconnected from the wikipedia community and end up on MFD again? Just a thought. :-P Kim Bruning 23:12, 10 December 2006 (UTC) As stated before, I consider this to be a matter of some urgency. I do not intend to continue to support the existence of Esperanza without some amount of compromise from Esperanza itself.
Oh, absolutely, if we can setup a tutorial page which outlines these things, that'd be great. But that page could serve two very different functions:
1) We can encourage members to read it, show them how to set a good example across Wikipedia, and how to reconnect with the Wikipedia community as individuals. (Intended comment intended from Wikipedians: "Hey, that Esperanzan's behaving very well - maybe being a member of Esperanza taught him something useful.")
2) Esperanza could publish it, and share it with the Wikipedia community at large. This would allow outside Wikipedians to use the ideas listed, and allow Esperanza itself to reconnect with the Wikipedia community as a group. (Intended comment from Wikipedians: "That Esperanzan page is pretty useful - maybe Esperanza isn't useless after all".)
Those are two totally seperate ideas. But once the tutorial page is written, the exact same page can be used to fulfill both functions. Quack 688 23:57, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
Writing an actual realistic tutorial would be a great plan, and I'll heartily support it (see this recent rant for some reasons why). It wasn't my original idea though. My first instinct was to actually attract some experienced users who could actually teach by example. :-) We could work on both! Kim Bruning 01:25, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
Hell, yeah! But whatever methods we use (mentoring, written tutorials, or "something completely different"), at the end of the day, Esperanza will be judged by two things: the behaviour of individial members across Wikipedia, and the quality of the programs which are run by Esperanza as a whole. Quack 688 01:52, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
On further reflection, I actually think a tutorial page and a mentoring program would complement each other perfectly. First, we could get as much input as possible from those mentors when writing the tutorial page. Second, instead of a mentor having to explain the principles of Wikipedia to each and every student from scratch, they could use the tutorial as a textbook, walking the student through its contents, and answering any questions along the way. The added bonus from this approach is that if something in the tutorial is vague, or something's missing, it can be updated in time for the next "class". Forget about a school textbook that gets updated once every ten years, we could have a textbook that gets updated instantly, thanks to the Wiki-process. Quack 688 03:29, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
LOL I know what you mean. My social studies textbook still talked about the Soviet union instead of Russia. Anyway, your proposal can incorporate the Tutorials into the mentoring program so that we can help users that, well, need the help. Also, I think it would be good if we have people watching every policy for changes. Usually, when a policy is changed or edited, not much users are aware of these changes because the rarely read these pages. They've known about policy so much that they don't bother to reread their pages. It would be helpful if we could have a messageboard announcing Wikipedia-wide news that can apply to all of our editors.--Ed ¿Cómo estás? 03:37, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
You mean there's nothing like that now? I just assumed it existed somewhere and I hadn't found it yet. Crap. Um... yeah, if we do have enough people willing to keep an eye on policies/guidelines and post somewhere when they're changed, that'd be ok. An alternative would be to have people look at them at the end of every month, and put together a "reader's digest" summary of everything that's changed. Third option - what about a watchlist? Is it technically possible to setup a watchlist with every policy and guideline on it (or two watchlists, one for policies, one for guidelines), sorted by last edit date, that anyone can view? An automated solution like that would be my favourite, if it's possible. Quack 688 04:28, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
Would this watchlist include pointless vandal edits, along with minor spelling and grammar changes that no one would be interested in? I don't like the 3rd option, the other 2 I would support. Your first 2 suggestions seem very similar to me, however.--Ed ¿Cómo estás? 04:36, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
Some people would want to be informed of every change as soon as it happens, others wouldn't want to keep track of that many messages, and would be happy to read a summary of it once a month, even if this results in a delay. There's no reason not to do both, and have people read what they want to read. Quack 688 05:06, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
If there's no other thoughts on "keeping track of policy/guideline changes", I'd like to get back to the tutorial textbook and mentoring programs - I don't know how many indents WIkipedia can handle, and I don't want to find out. :-p Quack 688 05:06, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Emergency Session Needed

To the Advisory Council members and all Esperanza members. It has come to my attention that the polls, surveys, and heated debates on how to run such a large organization will come in conflict with the December Elections. I ask that the council hold a special emergency meeting and postpone the election for at least one month. Thank you, WikieZach| talk 01:36, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

I think we should "suspend" Advisory Council activity, since that is one of the focuses of our debates. We're still trying to decide what to do with the Advisory Council, so why are we requesting them to have a meeting?--Ed ¿Cómo estás? 01:45, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Becuase they are the ones who can suspend an election, then we can suspend their powers. WikieZach| talk 02:01, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Actually, you don't actually need an AC meeting. You do, however, need a majority of the AC members to comment on this topic.
BTW did you notice that the timeline on WP:ESP/G doesn't match the Governance section on WP:EA?--Ed ¿Cómo estás? 02:08, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

What's wrong with it? WikieZach| talk 02:24, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

On the timeline at WP:ESP/G, Banes's bar ended abruptly before elections are scheduled to talk place. But on WP:EA, Banes's name is on the Leadership box.--Ed ¿Cómo estás? 02:43, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

IIRC there was a meeting already scheduled for sometime early this week? Kim Bruning 14:10, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

The advisory council has been discussing things on and off, and while we tried to schedule a meeting, it hasn't worked out for all/most of us to be there, so for the time being we're just discussing through email. It seems that if we've decided on keeping the current system of governance, there is no reason not to hold elections. Don't know as much the feeling on suspending them/holding them next month, but think about what will be accomplished in that next month. Does it matter when the elections are? (That's not a hypothetical question, but something that we should all think about, to decide when they should be). -- Natalya 13:43, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
I agree with Natalya. The best time to hold an election is when we know if/what system to elect people to. Whenever we decided on how Esperanza will be structured will be the time to put that structure to use. Thε Halo Θ 14:59, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User Leaving

Despite all of the heated discussion we have been going through, it is still important to watch out for all of our members. I would like to encourage all of you to leave a message for a leaving user (User:Moe Epsilon) [1].--Ed ¿Cómo estás? 02:02, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Banes, one of our Councillors, seems to have left as well. =( --Ed ¿Cómo estás? 02:50, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Same as EWS23HighwayCello, apparently. But he might me on Wikibreak.--Ed ¿Cómo estás? 03:02, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
EWS23? Am I missing something here? I don't see evidence of a departure or a wikibreak... Dar-Ape 03:27, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Sorry about that. It's HighwayCello. Check out his contribs.--Ed ¿Cómo estás? 03:48, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Admin coaching program revamp

I'd like to inform the Esperanza community that the admin coaching has been revamped. The Transhumanist and I have been making changes to the structure, but not the project concept (i.e. it is still called "admin coaching"), but the request list and volunteer lists have been separated into subpages. We hope that the project pages are now more user-friendly. Our eventual plan is to have the project more or less run itself, by having coaches contact students themselves, without going though a coordinator. This will eliminate the chances of the program stagnating while the coordinator goes on Wikibreak. However there is a very old backlog of requests that we are working through first, and should be cleared before the program can really "run itself". So, that's the plan. I realize that some of the AC members are on wikibreak, but if there's going to be a newsletter soon I can write an announcement. I know that some people think the project should be renamed; I don't agree, but a name change won't change the functionality aspects that we are now working on. Thanks, Fang Aili talk 20:14, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

*applause* for all the hard work. The next newsletter we have, that will certainly go in it. -- Natalya 13:34, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Wow, well done guys! Great job. Thε Halo Θ 15:00, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] How do I join Esperanza?

How? -- Walter Humala - Emperor of West Wikipedia|wanna Talk? 05:00, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

The guidelines are under intense overhaul, so my suggestion would be to wait a little while before asking again. Thanks for your interest, though!--CJ King 05:08, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
You just need over 150 edits, and be here at least two weeks in order to join :) [wossi] 22:18, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../e/s/p/Wikipedia_talk%7EEsperanza_f704.html"