Jump to content

User talk:Juliancolton

From Strategic Planning
Latest comment: 14 years ago by Juliancolton in topic Next steps (again)

Welcome to the Wikimedia Foundation's strategic planning process. We appreciate your interest in taking part. You can start by reading our Community guidelines. Check out the links on the Main Page and find an area that interests you. Please feel free to ask me any questions, or you may leave a message on the Village pump.

And thanks for all your hard work so far! -- Philippe 18:53, 14 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

Thanks! –Juliancolton | Talk 18:55, 14 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

Please consider speedy deletion

Please consider speedy deletion of proposal Respect Metric Developement so that i may log in and recreate this proposal under my user name.

I didn't delete it; I simply moved it to Proposal:Respect Metric Development, which is the correct namespace for such pages. Regards, –Juliancolton | Talk 19:36, 14 August 2009 (UTC)Reply


It's deleted. : ) -- Philippe 07:57, 15 August 2009 (UTC)Reply


Hi Juliancolton:

I'm making you a sysop in a few minutes, thanks for proposing your name. As you've seen, we're very light on the "delete" key here: things that are obvious vandalism and spam go immediately, of course, but things that could conceivably be in good faith are left for a while. The idea of this wiki is to encourage full participation from everyone - we're doing our best to find enough translators to get around the language barriers. The Strategic Planning:Community guidelines are the basis of all actions. If you have questions, you can usually find me lurking around, or ask User:Eekim, who is the project manager for Strategic Planning.

Best wishes, and thanks for volunteering! -- Philippe 19:57, 14 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

I'll keep that in mind. Thanks. :) –Juliancolton | Talk 20:02, 14 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

Renaming a Proposal

Thanks for the welcome! I have a question for you. I created the Proposal:Change Notability Guidelines proposal. After doing so, I realized it should probably be the Proposal:Change Wikipedia Notability Guidelines proposal, instead. Is that something you'd be able to remedy, considering that there is no "move" function here? -- Christopher C. Parker t c 21:50, 14 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hi Christopher: I was checking in on Julian's talk page and saw your request. I've done it. There is move functionality, but I think it comes in with auto-confirmed user status. :) -- Philippe 21:59, 14 August 2009 (UTC)Reply
Thanks for the help. :) –Juliancolton | Talk 22:46, 14 August 2009 (UTC)Reply


Would you mind terribly undeleting this one? It's probably nothing, and I know it's not in the right namespace, but we've gotten a couple of proposals related to wikimedia on television and I want to err on the side of inclusion. You could follow up on it tomorrow and if it's still blank, deal with it then. I just don't want to run anyone off... THANKS for all that you've been doing. It's made my day easier! -- Philippe 04:45, 15 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

Sure thing, Done. Now that I look at it again, I was probably a bit hasty in deleting it. Thanks for the note. –Juliancolton | Talk 04:46, 15 August 2009 (UTC)Reply
Thanks! The other thing I'm trying subtly to do is to encourage the pure wiki-culture of "create a little, and let someone else work on it." I'm afraid there's been a dramatic shift away from what was once an ideal for wikis. That worries me a little. I really do appreciate all you've done! -- Philippe 04:47, 15 August 2009 (UTC)Reply
Indeed. I think the new {{cleanup}} "system" will prove quite effective in that regard. I like this change, by the way, and I've tweaked the cleanup template accordingly. –Juliancolton | Talk 04:57, 15 August 2009 (UTC)Reply
I noticed the change to the template wording, and like it. This system make me much more comfortable than just deleting, but still allows us to track them and see which ones never move beyond a title. The problem could also be indicative of poor design on the "call to proposals" templates (which is possibly - and even likely - since I did them.) -- Philippe 04:58, 15 August 2009 (UTC)Reply
The calls for proposals page seems quite clear to me, but I added a bit of text which should hopefully prevent some empty pages from being created. And yes, spelling fail on my part. :) Juliancolton | Talk 05:05, 15 August 2009 (UTC)Reply
Sometimes things get lost in translation. Which is to say, sometimes I write in such a crappy way and even the translators can't understand it. -- Philippe 07:58, 15 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

thanks for the welcome

And for being in this very important process... :) --Cerejota 00:16, 16 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the thanks. :) –Juliancolton | Talk 03:27, 16 August 2009 (UTC)Reply


Hi Julian:

It's a priority of Eugene's (and therefore a priority of mine) that we continue the work you've done on aggressively making sure that proposals are categorized into some logical fashion. Then, I think that on the Call for Proposals page, we'll display them by category, rather than as a long list, in order to break them up a little. You're my resident expert on categories... I want to make sure they all display, but the ones that are categorized display only in those categories.

How do you feel about us modifying the template so that all new proposals get Category:Uncategorized Proposals by default, and then when they're categorized, that one is removed? Then we can transclude them onto the call for proposals page by cat? Am I missing something major and obvious? I'm going to include User:MZMcBride in this discussion, since he's the guru of all things wiki code. -- Philippe 03:23, 16 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

I think that's a great idea, and I'd be happy to help implement it. –Juliancolton | Talk 03:27, 16 August 2009 (UTC)Reply
Let's wait a bit for MZMcBride to weigh in, and - barring any unforseen obstacles - look toward implementation tomorrow or the next day. I'm aware it's gonna require checking every proposal for categories. :( -- Philippe 03:33, 16 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

It would be "Category:Uncategorized proposals," not "Category:Uncategorized Proposals." And you can't transclude based on category membership (i.e., you can't say "transclude all pages in Category:Foo on this page). --MZMcBride 07:36, 16 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

What do you think about something like that? depth could be "1" instead of "0". Maybe this is somewhere useful? --Goldzahn 04:11, 16 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

I'd actually prefer to have them display like they do now - titles and all - just broken into categories. -- Philippe 04:14, 16 August 2009 (UTC)Reply
I thought as a help somewhere, because most people don´t know the categories. --Goldzahn 04:49, 16 August 2009 (UTC)Reply
Ah, OK... can you give me an example of how/where it would be used? I like the idea of giving options, at least until we get a categorization gadget installed. -- Philippe 04:51, 16 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hot cat

It works, thanks to User:Mwpnl.  :-) -- Philippe 03:39, 17 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

Great! –Juliancolton | Talk 18:32, 18 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

Welcoming Users

Hi, just wanted to drop a note to let you know that User:Mwpnl configured a welcome bot for us - there shouldn't be any need to welcome users manually any more. But watch for a malfunctioning bot, just in case, and block it if it's being bad. It's User:StrategyBot. -- Philippe 19:02, 2 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Next Steps

Next steps!
It's time to answer some questions! Would you check out the list of questions that were submitted by the community and others and try to answer some? -- Philippe 01:46, 22 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

Liquid threads

Nice to see that your user talk page works in the normal way. I've been having problems at User:Fasten's talk page because (s)he uses liquid threads. It turns out that every single comment has it's own subpage and that it all seems to work by using templates and/or transclusion. Very confusing and complicated! Content and histories are split up and spread all over the place.

Another problem was caused by Fasten's total reformatting of Talk:Emerging strategic priorities/ESP 3 key questions. Notice that right before that edit it was a normal talk page, and afterwards the edit tabs stopped working properly. I was notified on my talk page that I had inadvertently added a comment in the wrong section, but now the edit tab won't allow me to edit the section. What can be done about this situation? I thought changes should make editing become easier, rather than more complicated. While it's true that improvement can only occur through change, lots of changes can be made without real improvement. -- BullRangifer 13:49, 23 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

Next steps (again)

Hi Julian,

Thanks for all of your contributions to the strategy wiki to date! The strategic planning process wouldn't be where it is today without all of your help. Your early and frequent support was invaluable, and I want you to know how much of a difference that you made. I hope you'll continue to work towards finishing the plan...

We're about to move into the third and final phase of the process, and in many ways, this will be the most challenging. I'm hoping you will continue to be an active presence in shaping the movement's five year strategic plan.

Here are some concrete suggestions as to how you can help moving forward:

  • Add your name to Strategic Planning:Hosts. This just formalizes what I think has been true all along; that you care about this process, and that you're doing what you can to help it along moving forward.
  • Help organize and improve this wiki! Starting next week (January 18, 2010), we're going to be encouraging many more people to come participate, and we want to make sure this wiki is as presentable as possible. A comprehensive list of things to do is at Strategic Planning:To-do list.
  • Invite people to participate! Encourage volunteers to discuss Task force/Recommendations.
  • Finally, we need to clearly describe what this final phase is going to look like. In particular, we could use feedback and discussion on Strategic Planning:Decision-Making.

Let me know what you think! Many, many thanks! ~Philippe 00:48, 12 January 2010 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, I'll see what I can do. Sorry I haven't been very active here lately. I think I just got sidetracked, and when I checked back it was overwhelming. :) –Juliancolton | Talk 03:22, 12 January 2010 (UTC)Reply