Drama over merging templates

You can talk about anything related to Wikipedia criticism here.
Post Reply
User avatar
Bbb23sucks
Sucker
Posts: 1337
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2023 9:08 am
Location: The Astral Plane
Has thanked: 1255 times
Been thanked: 263 times

Drama over merging templates

Post by Bbb23sucks » Wed May 17, 2023 1:06 am

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... al_article

I saw this a wiki ago, but I did not look into further. Now I have noticed that there is indeed significant drama. For those who don't know: this proposal would merge the vital article talk header template with the main article header template. As a side-effect, the TfD notice appears on nearly every article talk-page.
Comment. I have recently been contributing to VA. This feels like a backward step imho. I see the VA as the "Encyclopedia Britannica" inside Wikipedia. There are a lot of marginal articles in Wikipedia (some are GA-rated and even FA-rated), and I think the VA process is important to fulfilling Wikipedia's goal of providing free access to the most important knowledge. Yes, Level 5 is problematic, and maybe just too big to handle given the smaller size of the active Wikipedia community. However, perhaps we should re-emphasize Levels 1 to 4, and just do this for Level 5? Again, I am a novice here, but I would think that the VA process should be at least as important to Wikipedia's mission as the GA/FA process? Aszx5000 (talk) 08:33, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
Lol! Even Wikipedia know their own content is mostly garbage.
"Globally banned" since September 5, 2023 for exposing harassment.

Email: wikipediasucks@disroot.org

Petition to ban Bbb23Wikipedia AlternativeDonate to help French strikers

User avatar
ericbarbour
Sucks Admin
Posts: 4547
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 1:56 am
Location: The ass-tral plane
Has thanked: 1099 times
Been thanked: 1797 times

Re: Drama over merging templates

Post by ericbarbour » Thu May 18, 2023 3:59 am

Comment. I have recently been contributing to VA. This feels like a backward step imho. I see the VA as the "Encyclopedia Britannica" inside Wikipedia. There are a lot of marginal articles in Wikipedia (some are GA-rated and even FA-rated), and I think the VA process is important to fulfilling Wikipedia's goal of providing free access to the most important knowledge. Yes, Level 5 is problematic, and maybe just too big to handle given the smaller size of the active Wikipedia community. However, perhaps we should re-emphasize Levels 1 to 4, and just do this for Level 5? Again, I am a novice here, but I would think that the VA process should be at least as important to Wikipedia's mission as the GA/FA process? Aszx5000 (talk) 08:33, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
Whoever that person is, they're gonna get banned, sooner or later.

WP:NOCRITICISM

PS, right after you posted this, some little robot boy "archived" the argument. Someone hit a raw nerve. The squabble continues here.

We've never discussed the "Vital Article" business before. The concept was started on Meta in 2004, by your lovely friend and mine David Gerard. Apparently it originated from an IRC discussion, none of this was archived, as usual. The template was invented in 2009 by Quadell, an early administrator and typical blind/stupid wikifanboy. Very few people even noticed it for the last 14 years. It looks like many other "failed projects". Wikipedians have a talent for generating projects that fail. Some nerd tried to revive it in 2022 but to little avail.

Quadell's RFA was a bit of a joke but he made it, and his RFB in 2006 failed by a close vote. He was desysopped last year under the new "inactivity" rule, meaning less than 100 edits in 5 years.

The fucko-buckos who played that stupid game to keep their powerz really screwed up, which is why the 2023 list of former admins exploded in January. It includes a good number of Wikipedia's worst people, plus some of its best: Raul654, Prodego, KillerChihuahua, Tim Vickers, Steve Smith, Laser brain (the bastard who used Wikipedia to openly promote an obscure music shop), Vicki Rosenzweig, Pierre Abbat, Ortolan88 (a VERY early admin), Camembert (same), SatyrTN, Merovingian, Cool Hand Luke, Fennec, Chairboy (who did one evil thing that made him a "prominent abusive admin" forever), InShaneee, The Wordsmith, Aaron Schultz, SirFozzie, Scott Macdonald, and a few others. Good or bad, all of them were regular noticeboard squabblers in Wikipedia's stupid "golden age", from 2005 to 2009. And also major Jimbo butt-suckers.

There's not much else to say about "Vital Articles" other than their failure to gain traction.

User avatar
ericbarbour
Sucks Admin
Posts: 4547
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 1:56 am
Location: The ass-tral plane
Has thanked: 1099 times
Been thanked: 1797 times

Re: Drama over merging templates

Post by ericbarbour » Thu May 18, 2023 4:37 am

And btw, there STILL is no proper subject index for Wikipedia. The "contents outline" was the "best" one ever assembled that I've seen, and it's been a dead project since 2019. There were a few others that all died out a long time ago.

Post Reply