Can you communicate in plain English?

Editors, Admins and Bureaucrats Oh my!
Post Reply
User avatar
CrowsNest
Sucks Maniac
Posts: 4459
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2018 4:50 am
Been thanked: 3 times

Can you communicate in plain English?

Post by CrowsNest » Fri Nov 09, 2018 7:29 pm

Examine the following exchange.....
Jim Griffiths photo

Hi, any chance you could explain in plain English why the photo of Jim Griffiths you deleted is not allowed on this page: Deputy Leader of the Labour Party (UK) but is allowed on his profile page? Littlemonday (talk) 13:11, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

Use one [sic] that page does not satisfy all of the non-free content criteria, particularly 8 (contextual significance) and 10c (separate rationale for each use). The bot removed it for violating the latter – there is no rationale for that article. — JJMC89 00:55, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't understand what you're saying. Please explain why it is allowed to have a photo on one article but not the other? Also, which article is there no rationale for?!? Littlemonday (talk) 09:15, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

There is no rationale for Deputy Leader of the Labour Party (UK). That is one reason (and the reason it was removed) why it is not permitted. The other is because the image does not significantly increase the reader's understanding of the Deputy Leader of the Labour Party. Non-free images of people are, generally, only permitted as identification in the article about that person. — JJMC89 01:43, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
At which point does JJMC89 start communicating in plain English? I would argue it is only by the time of the very last line, which is what he should have said at the beginning, and nothing more (except perhaps a small explanation of what "non-free" means in this context).

Unsurprisingly, after a promising start where they seemed to accept JJMC89 was being less than helpful, several Wikipedia Administrators have now descended from on high to declare JJMC89 did nothing wrong, was communicating effectively, and the person who reported him to AN/I needs to be executed. Others variously busied themselves with unhelpful comments, including their own attempts to use multiple paragraphs to explain what JJMC89's last line covers quite adequately, in plain English.

Wikipedia is so screwed. These sort of BASIC mistakes in how to effectively communicate would be avoided if Wikipedia could attract a higher grade of volunteer, and crucially, selected the best of those to be Administrators. Good luck with that.

Dead encyclopedia walking.

User avatar
Dysklyver
Sucks Critic
Posts: 383
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2018 10:14 am
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 5 times

Re: Can you communicate in plain English?

Post by Dysklyver » Fri Nov 09, 2018 8:57 pm

Maybe Wikipedians should be given help on how to write stuff people can understand. Or get professional assistance on upgrading their skills.

Btw according to the plain english campaign what JJMC89 wrote badly fails the criteria for plain english.
De facto globally banned on all Wikimedia sites. Editor of The Wiki Cabal. find me on the Wiki Treehouse Discord.

User avatar
sashi
Sucks Critic
Posts: 283
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2017 2:01 am
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 5 times

Re: Can you communicate in plain English?

Post by sashi » Thu Dec 27, 2018 10:40 pm

JJ says he's a he who has created 10,000 accounts at ACC, which I assume means they are no enemy to newbies. I'm wondering why so many accounts would need to be created. Do that many encyclopediants systematically fail CAPTCHAs / use screen-readers (and somehow manage to patiently listen to the dozen links prior to https://accounts.wmflabs.org/ on that page)?

Post Reply