Wikipedia talk:Esperanza/Archive 1

message: Wikipedia:Esperanza is now inactive. Please do not edit the contents of this page.This page is an archive. Discussion of the essay describing Wikipedia:Esperanza should be directed to Wikipedia talk:Esperanza.  To discuss any issues found in this archive, please direct any additional comments to the Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals).
Good idea J. Let me join. Redwolf24 02:18, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

message: This looks great JC! The only thing I question is the self-nomination part. For instance, I personally would never nominate myself. But if I deserved it, I would be honored if someone else did. What if it was made so the nomination could be made either way? Just a thought. maltmomma 15:33, August 15, 2005 (UTC)
:Well, what if no one ever nominates you? I feel the same way you do and so do many others, by making self noms mandatory I hope to take away some of the reluctance of nomination yourself. There's no shame is nominating your self if there is no other way. -JCarriker 18:40, August 15, 2005 (UTC)
And there's always the option of: "Hey, JCarriker, you've been doing a great job; why not nominate yourself (since I can't nominate you)?" Call it "Self-nom with prodding." -- Essjay ·   Talk 18:57, August 15, 2005 (UTC)
:Okay. I can see the self-nom with prodding. I just don't want to exclude people who wouldn't nominate themselves. I wonder if Jimbo would allow Esperanza to have their "person of the week" featured on the main page? Food for thought. maltmomma 21:54, August 15, 2005 (UTC)
Well, Angela is a founding member, and she has the ear of the Almighty. If that's something we decide we want to do, then she would be my choice to go to to Jimbo. -- Essjay ·   Talk 04:21, August 16, 2005 (UTC)
:I'm not convinced highlighting individual users is a good idea. Ther are far too many that would go unrecognised in such a scheme, which is why I preferred the barnstar approach of recognising as many users as you like. Angela. 18:55, August 16, 2005 (UTC)
:The Featured Wikipedian plan is negotiable, but if it were to be implemented I don't think it should appear on the Main Page, but in Esperanza's space. I love barnstars, but their is a a problem with its system: you can't give yourself a barnstars and you can't ask for one— so sometimes the users who need the most encouragement have no way of higlighting or finding appreciation for their contributions. I'd like to hear more about Angela's concerns; we don't want a "solution" that is worse than the problem. -JCarriker 19:26, August 19, 2005 (UTC)
::I think it would not be a good precedent if we attempt to explicitly or otherwise highlight individual users. I imagine people would question the integrity and neutrality of Esperanza should this occur. Why not try this instead? It seems clear that we wish to find a positive, creative way of recognizing users. How about this scheme? (See the "random lottery idea") just below --HappyCamper 03:27, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Self-nominations 

message: ::Let's take a step back for a moment and consider what Esperanza really is....(See another post I have added to the bottom of this page. I haven't added this yet)
::Instead of highlighting users, why not have some sort of "lottery" instead?
::# Wikipedians add their name to Esparanza, and they suggest an article that they would like to see become a featured one. Should be something of general interest so that as many participants can take part as possible.
::# Every X number of days, we randomly chose a name from the list, and all the Esparanza people can help out editing the article to improve it.
::# In this way, we satisfy a few things simultaneously: Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and the services that Esparanza offers (I think) should supplement this - we can write articles as a gesture of thanks and recognition. Just imagine a featured article labeled with a tag that says: "This article was improved after our lucky Wikipedian won our monthly Esperanza draw. You can help out by joining Esperanza and ..." ...
::This scheme is deliberately implicit and subtle in its recognition of users. What are your thoughts on this? --HappyCamper 23:34, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I like that idea a LOT. I'd like to see the sort of articles that could turn up. Tim Rhymeless  (Er...let's shimmy) 01:21, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, wouldn't it be interesting just to see? I suppose the articles would be as random as those found in Wikipedia:Sandbox/Word Association? --HappyCamper 03:28, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Random "lottery" idea 

message: Perhaps for the Esperanzians there would be a focus on using the language of negotiation rather than that of "I am always right"...  I think I might join in! --Lisa 22:09, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that is part of the idea. Esperanza is not here to take sides and say something is "right" or "wrong". What it might say, is "In this situation, you might consider doing X, Y, Z"...So, it does not make decisions per se, but provides options so the Wikipedian can choose for themselves what is best to do. Granted, X, Y, Z might not be completely free of bias since its only a short list of options, but it is as practically neutral as possible (which I think is a good thing). --HappyCamper 03:30, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't just mean being neutral though. I observe that the most bitter arguments or edit wars involve users using language that is bound to incite the other user(s). Even "civil" language is often still harsh or cynical in it's meaning and designed to make the other user feel small rather than being at all constructive in building the encyclopaedia or building community here. Even admins seem to be guilty of this sometimes. I would really like to see Esperanza elect users to leadership positions in Esperanza who are known to be good at diplomacy and good at negotiation, regardless of their edit count or knowledge; people who specifically state they want to serve Esperanza allowing as little as possible for their political/religious/ethnic biases to affect their actions on behalf of Esperanza. Even though apparently Wikipedia isn't an experiment in democracy there is no harm in trying to make Wikipedia exemplary and ground-breaking in the way online collaboration happens! Lisa 13:39, 19 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  diplomacy vs authority/correction 

message: Here is my proposal for how to presnet problems. The future wikipedia page would have a sub page for posting problems. The talk page would be for discussing Esperanza itself. The sub page would have several sections, one for problems with another user, one for problems with having a lot of work, (more on that one later), one or two more for various specific problems, and one for a problem that doesn't fit in any category. Each section would have a sub-section for people willing to help, in the overworked category, a place for people interested on helping out with that area. Members could put anything there from comforting words to a way to deal with the problem at hand. Improvements, opinions etc. to this idea are greatly appreciated. Howabout1 Talk to me! 16:21, August 20, 2005 (UTC)
:I'd like to add to this the possibility of an IRC channel; if you're overworked, or just otherwise stressed, you could sign on for an uplifting word or a stressbusting chat. -- Essjay ·   Talk 04:58, August 21, 2005 (UTC)
Ok. Except I can't get on IRC for some reason, I asked at WP:HD, but noone answered. Howabout1 Talk to me! 04:59, August 21, 2005 (UTC)
:I think you both have excellent suggestions, but I feel I should point out that Esperanza is not meant to solve conflicts between users or NPOV article issues their are already formats for these problems. I believe that creating sub-page message boards categorized by problem and IRC are definately worth doing. -JCarriker 07:57, August 27, 2005 (UTC)
::Under what circumstances should these boards be used? After all, I'm not sure if we would want everyone to edit them. Also, as they are public, it would ultimately modulate what is being said, which might not necessarily be a good thing. I think these message boards should be deleted once they have served their purpose if they are used. --HappyCamper 03:32, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  How to present problems  

message: (Moved to from Esperanza mainpage to talk by JCarriker at 20:36, August 28, 2005 (UTC))
#I think this is a bad idea. Wikipedia does not need a cabal.-gadfium 08:38, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: we're the cabal against the cabal. We're the anti-Cabal ;) I don't see how we would be a cabal, we're like a community of WP:KC members... Redwolf24 (talk) 08:54, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Anti members 

message: Just to let y'all know that I'm on an enforced break until further notice I'm begining school on August 29th, and my free time will likely be dedicated to volunteer efforts since Marshall is already overwelmed with evacuess from Hurricane Katrina.  I will coninue to work on the charter when I have time with Redwolf. -JCarriker 03:25, August 29, 2005 (UTC)
:I am having to reduce my edits too. I'll search around for a suitable preamble and post it here when I find the time. --HappyCamper 02:56, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  My own break 

message: It seems that the discussion has somewhat tapered off lately. What do you think are the next steps for Esperanza? --HappyCamper 00:35, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: *I agree, there is some wording in the front page that I am not particularly fond of, but at the moment, I haven't had the time to address this yet. For me "government" makes Esperanza sound distant and impersonal, and I don't think this would help generate cohesiveness. For me, I've left my name on the list to express an intention of help building this up. --HappyCamper 14:35, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where are we at right now? 

message: Hmmm, for the charter, you will probably need to get input from a lot of people, and it might require some collaborative editing and so.
Might I make a novel suggestion?
There's these new fangled things called wikis, which apparently are very handy for that kind of thing. You might want to take one for a spin!
(In other words, if you don't put that darn proposed charter on the wiki yesterday-like, I'm going to have to whack y'all over the head with a RolledUpNewspaper until enlightenment ensues! :-P )
Kim Bruning 00:08, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Alright, as long as nobody minds that it will be a smattering of ideas, probably 99% might be thrown out, et cetera, et cetera. At this point, nothing is set in stone, and anything can be added. I'll start when I close a few AfDs that are filled with sockpupet votes first though. --HappyCamper 14:38, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Charter 

message: Writing this "charter" has been much more difficult than I thought. The tone of Esperanza as it is written needs to change somewhat. It needs to be somewhat warmer, and I am almost dying to add smileys all over the place just to lighten the mood! :)
Of course, there is a fine line we need to distinguish here. We recognize that we are sincere in our efforts. But how not to come across as an inapproachable institution? What target Wikipedian audience are we really trying to address here? While writing this, I kept on thinking about the Wikipedians that have left and their lasting legacies...I think we should be mindful however, that it's okay for a Wikipedian to choose to leave or to reduce their activity on Wikipedia. We have no manner of understanding what goes on beyond what they write on Wikipedia. I think we are primarily interested in ensuring that Wikipedia remains a healthy place for a volunteer to contribute at all times, regardless of whether user XYZ wants to leave or not. In this sense, not only should Esperanza address individual users, but probably some general outreaching program is needed as well. However, that's probably far, far into the future, if at all.
The ideas in this page are excellent, and would be very worthwhile to build up. I think for now, a charter might be going overboard though. After some contemplation, I'm not sure what purpose it would serve other than making Esperanza even more difficult to be what it "should" be. We need more direction before something like it is drawn up.
I would like to suggest the following: It seems that we are trying to cast too large of a net, too far, to catch too many fish. Let's try to narrow the scope of this project first, make something concrete and simple that serves a good purpose, and build from there. Once we have that going, we'll be able to motivate ourselves more to set something up and expand. I think for a project like this, we will want to do things right and well the first time. Lots of baby steps sounds more reasonable than a large step. I have a hunch we can do without the formalities at the moment.
Ideally, I hope someday Esperanza could be a place where a Wikipedian-about-to-leave can come and simply speak their mind. At the moment, let's try and figure out if we want any of these?
# "Birthday Wikipedian"
# "Wikipedian of the Week"
# "Random lottery for articles" (for want of a better name) 
I'm personally not too fond of the "Wikipedian of the Week". I'm more receptive to a "Birthday Wikipedian" though. Wikipedians simply list their birthday, (or any day for that matter), and on those days, we'll deliver "presents" to their talk pages - A word of thanks, a framed featured picture, et cetera. We should limit the number of birthdays however, so that we don't overwhelm ourselves! --HappyCamper 19:50, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I wonder if we should adopt an alternative word or phrase to charter. Every time I sat down to sketch out something on paper, it just kept on degenerating into "legalese"...Perhaps "rule of thumbs for positive interations on Wikipedia", or "Esperanza's guidelines for staying cool", or "The Wikipedian's Handbook for Editing" or something of the sort... --HappyCamper 03:39, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe think of the charter in 3 parts 1. statement of purpose/mission, 2. constitution/rules and 3. method of operation. (At present the charter seems to me to have all the constitution written but little about the mission itself or the way that mission will be carried out by members. Lisa 14:16, 19 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Much more difficult 

message: I came here from a link at the Village pump (had been here before but couldn't remember what it was about) and the first thing that struck me as the page loaded was the confederate flag.  Had to do a double take.  It must suck to be black and Mississippian (I mean, even before Katrina).  Couldn't imagine that flying all over the state I lived in.  
Oh, and good job on this project.  Guettarda 22:35, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wow 

message: The consensus seems to be that the Wikipedian of the Week would feel too cabal-like, so I wonder if instead of doing that or the Birthday deal, we could focus on celebrating the anniversary of different users' first edits? Many people include this information on their user pages, or we can figure it out from looking at user contribution links. We could create a list of days of the year, and then any user could nominate him/herself or another user by adding that person to the list. When the date of a nominee's Wikipediversary (does that sound right?) comes around, Esperanzians would go to the nominee's talk page and leave a cheerful message of thanks for past contributions and encouragement to continue making edits. 
PROS: This would be a way to spread good cheer without creating any sense of cabal.
CONS: The good cheer might not be timed so that a Wikipedian receives it when they are feeling disillusioned about their role in Wikipedia; it might make sense to do something more targetted to people who express a desire for reassurance or support. 
Other thoughts, pro or con? Mamawrites 08:53, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: This just seems like so much to manage, for so few people. We should put more focus on new users, as they are a smaller, yet important group. We should stay in touch with them instead of just giving them one standard greating(five pillars, ect...). We can use the new users as are starting list. And then work from there, perhaps with the wiki of the week. Each Esperanzian would get a user to talk to/work with for a week, that way we could have 20 wikipedians per week, since there are soo many. Just a thought :).Voice of  All (Talk)|(Esperanza) 06:34, 16 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia-anniversaries? 

message: (moved this from number 7 to here to aid page comprehensibility Lisa)
Picture it this way... you're about to leave the project and boom! you're the wikipedian of the week. I'd stop right there and realize more people seem to like me than hate me and I'd stay. I think wikipedian of the week is a good idea. Also note I have mentioned to JCarriker that we should move this stuff to Wikipedia:Esperanza for its expansion. I personally will be adding Esperanza into my signature and tomorrow I'll mention this project to some of the people in User:Redwolf24/Friends (mm, spam). Redwolf24 (talk) 08:05, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Nevermind. We have to make sure we got everything right before we open the floodgates as J has said. Redwolf24 (talk) 23:22, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

text: Please don't protect the future WoW template. It would make me sad. :( I guess if it becomes a vandalism threat, but I'd wanna help, but coundn't then. Howabout1 Talk to me! 23:25, August 27, 2005 (UTC)
Well if we expect to have so many people vandalism is very possible. Perhaps we could have them unprotected until the day they come up? Redwolf24 (talk) 23:27, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm...I'm not sure whether a Wikipedian of the Week would really help out. It seems to me that the problem is much more chronic, and a Wikipedian of the Week would not address this. I've noticed that many editors have left after encountering that singular critical comment, despite the fact that they have handled themselves well on Wikipedia for long periods. --HappyCamper 00:57, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: What if, persay, instead of voting Yay or Nay, we were to just vote yay and see who gets the most yays? Actually that sounds a bit impractical but I'm saying its a thought... Redwolf24 (talk) 06:01, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Then it might degenerate into a popularity contest? --HappyCamper 03:35, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

text: I think I'm with you HappyCamper -- not sure this can help enough people at once and some people may not want to be featured on the front page anyway. Just like some people don't want barnstars for whatever reason. Besides there will be too many amazing Wikipedians to be able to feature them all as "Wikipedian of the week". But for volunteer work like this, some kind of real recognition would be good. Maybe a permanent "roll of honour"?? This sounds a bit old-fashioned but perhaps we can set our minds to think about how Wikipedians can be recognised (much in the way offline volunteers maybe awarded national or civil honours). Lisa 13:57, 19 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: part 1

message: I have another idea to make the Wikipedian of the Week more palatable...How about changing the phrasing to read something like "My Wikipedian of the Week"? This way, it removes any appearance that this "Wikipedian of the week" is an endorsement by the encyclopedia. Is this a better alternative? --HappyCamper 04:06, 16 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: This may work. I like what User:Howabout1 suggested calling it WoW (add an exclamation point to that.) Maltmomma (chat)  03:20, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  part 3: Compromise on "Wikipedian of the Week" 

message: Perhaps one of you design folks can take a look at the layout of the project page.  I like the thought  behind what's there now, but the organization could be a bit more graceful.  Perhaps something like: 
:The members of Esperanza extend their good will and hope:
:* for Louisiana and the Gulf Coast (flag)
:* for the victims of the 2005 Niger food crisis (flag)
:* for the victims of Operation Murambatsvina (flag)
:* for the victims of the Baghdad bridge stampede and the ongoing Sectarian violence in Iraq, etc.
Thoughts? -- Dave C.talk | Esperanza 07:57, 16 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Flags and page layout 

message: ...why the senseless bureaucracy? Wikipedia as a whole has been getting nastier over the past few months, and I think we've all noticed this. This project is a really timely means of dealing with this, and kudos to its founders for getting it going. But why do we need a "provisional government" to write a "charter"? Why not do it the wiki way, as with nearly everything else on Wikipedia? Ambi 10:03, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Good idea, but...

message: Is anyone here aware of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Kindness Campaign? A remarkably similar project, perhaps some collaboration? They seem to have almost the same aims as we do. Comments? Banes 18:55, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, quite a few of us are members of KC. However, KC is informal and not highly organized. It is more of a volunteer effort to do what you can individually. Esperanza, however, is formalized and highly organized in order to systematically respond, on a large scale, to the needs of the Wikipedia community. -- Essjay ·   Talk 23:48, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aware 

message: The charter has been completed, so the drafting committee is obsolete. I promised when Esperanza passed fifty members to dissolved the provisional government, so I'm keeping my word and dissolving the provisional government as of 22:19, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, now I'm confused. Do we have an assembly or not? (The charter says contrary at the moment, but the adminstrator general says we do)... Anyways, to give Esperanza a "spark", I'm willing to trade user spaces with someone, as an experiment. In other words, I'll modify the volunteer's user page (on a separate page), and that person will modify my user page. Then, we can copy and paste our new designs for the user pages around the same time- similar to Trading Spaces. Any volunteers to give this experiment a try? Afterwards, we could leave feedback for the Esperanza community. Hey, the worst thing that could happen is that I don't like the new design and revert it back after a week. No harm done. Any victims- er, volunteers- for this? :-) Flcelloguy | A  note? | Desk  23:43, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

text: You think your confused, try being pushed aside in the very organization you founded. I knew I should have never allowed Esperanza to have been moved out of my user space until the charter was ratified. I guess that's what nice gets you these days. Regardless, the goodd intent this is little more than a coup, it should be obvious to anyone that my vision is not the driving force behind Esperanza. In short of course Esperanza contradicts me, I've been deposed. -JCarriker 05:15, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I think he posted that before I took away there being an assembly in the charter. I think the first act of the assembly would be dissolving itself, oddly enough. People inside and outside of esperanza have said the assembly makes esperanza too bureaucratic, so this is a compromise, and the community as a whole will act as the assembly was meant to. Redwolf24 (talk) 05:10, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Prov. Gov. dissolved a few comments by the Admin Gen 

message: That's my hopeful date, meaning we'd have to get some nominees before then. I hope we can muster up enough people. Then, we will have the two with the most votes have their term until February 28th (Unless they choose to be in tranch b) and the two with the 3rd and 4th place votes end December 31st. The admin generals term shall end December 31st, except for that shall be the day every year. Thus, JCarriker is our admin general of 2005. The tranches for the advisory committee will be as such:
Tranch a ending dates:
*December 31st
*April 30th
*August 31st
Tranch b ending dates:
*February 28th/29th
*June 30th
*October 31st (ineffective for 2005)
Of course dates for the first committee will be odd as it IS the first commitee. Redwolf24 (talk) 05:10, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Since we are nearing the end of the year and since JCarriker is the founder of Esperanza, I personally think he should serve a full year and be re-elected for 2006. Then have elections for the Admin Gen come up next fall for 2007. Maltmomma (chat)  05:15, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Why do we need an advisory council to coordinate promoting being nice? Why do we need an Admin Gen who serves long terms? No other organisation on Wikipedia has anything like this, except for the arbitration and mediation committees, which are special cases. It's entirely possible to have a very organised project without having elections and committees and councils and drowning the enthusiasm in bureaucracy. Why not just start working on fixing things, instead of all this not-very-useful preliminary stuff? Ambi 05:36, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

text: I don't really like the idea of really long terms. It should be no longer than 6 months. And although JCarriker has been a great leader so far, if we are holding all these votes, we should at least hold a vote of confidence in him sometime later this year (say, after a month or so of service, November 13-19?). And I'm not sure that Esperanza couldn't become a special case as well. But yes, we need to get this thing rolling. --Lord Voldemort (Dark Mark) 15:11, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  October 10 2005 Elections to the Advisory Council