Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2015-05-27/Discussion report
A relic from the past that needs to be updated
IRC
To many,
In the discussion, some suggest adding JavaScript that makes users use an IRC-nick identical to their Wikipedia username. This has received both positive and negative feedback from users. One of the main opponents of this suggestion is Technical 13, who stated,
I very much think that adding JavaScript code to compromise editors [sic] privacy and security is a big deal, especially when the code is as badly flawed as it is from a technical standpoint.
Another reason for opposition is that the code will not work for users whose usernames include nonstandard (non-ASCII) characters (characters other than a-z, 0-9, etc.).
The system currently in use assigns a default "WPhelp"-nick, but does not inform users that their IP will be visible to other members in the chat room. Therefore, the proposal also includes that a disclaimer as well as a
Wikipedia already uses JavaScript, what additional security flaws and issues would this script introduce? The disclaimer warns about linking usernames to IPs, not IPs to IPs. Adding a disclaimer inside the IRC channel is like not letting someone read a contract until after they sign, it's too late at that point.
Editor's note: After writing this report, but before publication, the RfC in question was closed by Guerillero with clear consensus for the disclaimer, but with no consensus for the auto-population of irc nicknames.
Misleading readers with funny DYK hooks
After multiple cleverly piped, misleading DYK-hooks appeared on the main page, the user Fgf10 had finally had enough and started a discussion on Did You Know's talk page. Some editors were direct in their counterarguments:
Just because you're unable to appreciate [them] doesn't mean the rest of us, and our readers, must live in your dull world of droning, lifeless facts.
— EEng
After the discussion ostensibly got out of hand, @Ritchie333: closed the section with the comment:
Enough, already. Wikipedia is no place for humour. Everything is very serious here and we are all terrifically important.[citation needed]
Despite this comedic closing remark by the user, the underlying question remains.
In brief
- Military dates: Another discussion and request for comments regarding "What does MDY dates. This has now been branched off into two subsections.
- Discussions and RfCs that just go on and on and on and…: The WikiProject Film's talkpage has been dominated by a way overdrawn and too long discussion regarding if non notable awards should be removed from film articles. Seems like a simple short discussion could be held and consensus can be reached? Think again. With the thread having been created in mid-April, this discussion has now reached three arbitrary breaks.
- It
doesn'tdoes matter if you're blue or yellow: It has been discussed whether Alabama on the map of same-sex marriage in the United States should be blue (legal) or yellow (stayed indefinitely pending appeal). - Protection level 3: An IP editor suggested a third protection level allowing IPs to create articles here. Only three users participated.
- Removal of the rollback link: A user technical village pump that the "rollback" link be removed, since there is no confirmation page. Although a CSS extension is available, there is discussion as to whether the Twinklerollback options are preferable.
- Merge magic in the making?: During the week, the discussion regarding whether or not the disambiguation page Magician should be merged with the disambiguation page The Magicians began. Thus far, no consensus has been achieved.
- Hillary, Hillary, Hillary: The same day as WikiProject Hillary Rodham Clinton was created. This caused one user to claim that it was merely propaganda and that the WikiProject should be deleted. Currently, the MfD has a clear consensus to keep the WikiProject. In 2008, WikiProject Barack Obamawas created, so specific WikiProjects for presidential candidates seem to have become more common.
Discuss this story
Glad to see the Discussion report back! It's a hard article to compile, so praise is rightfully due. -- llywrch (talk) 17:21, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]