User talk:Bensin

Nomination of Applejack (beverage) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Applejack (beverage) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Applejack (beverage) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Rainbow Dash !xmcuvg2MH 03:01, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. Voting already closed "keep" though. --Bensin (talk) 14:55, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Survey for new page patrollers

New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello Bensin! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you. If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only. If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it. Please click HERE to take part. Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback. You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of Wiki Media Foundation at 11:37, 25 October 2011 (UTC).

Office Hours

Hey Bensin! I'm just dropping you a message because you've commented on (or expressed an interest in) the Article Feedback Tool in the past. If you don't have any interest in it any more, ignore the rest of this message :).

If you do still have an interest or an opinion, good or bad, we're holding an office hours session tomorrow at 19:00 GMT/UTC in #wikimedia-office to discuss completely changing the system. In attendance will be myself, Howie Fung and Fabrice Florin. All perspectives, opinions and comments are welcome :).

I appreciate that not everyone can make it to that session - it's in work hours for most of North and South America, for example - so if you're interested in having another session at a more America-friendly time of day, leave me a message on my talkpage. I hope to see you there :). Regards, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 14:32, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the invitation! I'll try and be there. --Bensin (talk) 19:29, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for showing, dude! Loved your contributions - it's great to have you helping us out with this stuff :). I've passed all your suggestions on to Fabrice, who has some feedback. He's really enthusiastic about upvoting/downvoting comments, which was initially stuck in but was kept out of the wireframes until we knew if the community would like it or not. The idea of inviting readers to see other comments before providing some themselves is also a great one - we'll consider that in Phase 2 of the design, which will start in January-ish (it's a bit complex for the initial phase). All in all, great suggestions! Please do provide any others you have, or any comments overall, at Wikipedia talk:Article Feedback Tool/Version 5, which is where discussions will mainly be centred. Office hours logs can be found here, and we're thinking of holding another one maybe next Thursday. I'll let you know when I have more details :). Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 19:37, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

It was a good talk, dude! :-) I'm glad you like my suggestions. Thanks for the links! I'll post some comments there. I'll try and join the next Office hours too. --Bensin (talk) 00:47, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Awesome! Okay, I've now confirmed a time-and-date; we're holding it at 24:00 UTC on Thursday (the odd time is to allow East Coast editors to participate - they'd normally be at work). Thank you so, so much for your comments so far. Make no mistake, you're winning a lot of brownie points :P. Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 19:27, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Great! I'll see you there. Make no mistake, I plan to collect dem brownies if I'm ever in the office neighborhood. Make 'em half regular, half with chocolate chips. ;-) --Bensin (talk) 01:31, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

• Hah! Half chocolate it is :P. Thanks for your attendance this week, and your ideas - the full logs can be found here, as always, and we plan on scheduling the hours far more in advance in the future, so I'll let you know the schedule over the next say, two months as soon as we work it out :). Re your specific ideas:

  considering the impact on readers in a/b testing: this'll be taken into account :). The results will be analysed with reader pissed-offedness in mind.

  merging comments: "interesting idea" was the response. There's some question as to whether merging would mess with the raw feedback data, but linking comments together in some way is definitely being considered, whether it's by merging (a la OTRS) or just by saying "X comment is associated with Y comment".

• The more general topics we discussed also had responses, but I'll bring those up on the talkpage to spur discussion. Once again, thanks so much :). Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 21:39, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

  Oh, and we've started a thread here about access issues; if you have the time to drop your opinion down there, please do so :) (yes, I know, you've already given your opinion, but it's easier for the devs if they're all in the same place ;p). Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 19:31, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

• Oh - and the next Office Hours session will be held on Thursday at 19:00 UTC in #wikimedia-office. Give me a poke if you can't make it but want me to send you the logs when they're released - we'll be holding sessions timed for East Coast editors and Australasian/Asian editors next week, so if you know any interested peeps in those timezones, poke them :). Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 22:51, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Re: merging comments: "Linking" comments is what I want I suppose. I was thinking along the lines of comment #2 marked as "done" explained by "merged to comment #1" and #1 gets all comment #2's up-votes + 1. So not an OTRS-merging where the comments are actually merged into one.

I posted my comment about the access issues on the talk page. Thanks for the heads-up.

Thanks for the invite to Office hours. I look forward to it. --Bensin (talk) 01:50, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Cool; I'll forward the amended suggestion to the devs :). Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 01:55, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

• Fabrice's response: "Since we won't start design on this feature until January, it is premature to offer specific answers on his new idea, but we will certainly take it into account when the time comes. One approach would be to enable tagging of feedback posts, with a link displaying all posts for a specified tag. Another approach is to allow an editor to select a number of posts, add a note and have that group of posts be displayable via a link below the editors' note, as proposed in this very rough concept wireframe for the Talk page, where user jimbo added a note, along with selected comments (that last part would be optional). Again, this is all very preliminary, but wanted to address Bensin's sensible suggestion"
• There's another office hours session on Friday, btw - 22:00 UTC. Hope to see you there! :) Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 14:23, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for feedback and invitation. I probably won't be able to make it tonight. If I don't, I'll read the transcript.--Bensin (talk) 19:52, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Kim Lukas

Hi, I deleted your recent article because it did not provide independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts or show that it meets the notability guidelines for music. It is now wikipedia policy that biographical articles about living people must have independent verifiable references. As a matter of policy, all biographies of living people will be deleted if they do not have references. Basing it on the Italian article is not a good idea. It fails on the same grounds, since the refs are not independent, and it is written in a promotional tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic. Unfortunately, my admin rights are only on the English version. If you think you can get this article to meet the criteria, you might as well start from scratch, there's only a couple of lines. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:34, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

restored Jimfbleak - talk to me? 19:42, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation

Hello, Bensin. When you convert an existing title to be a disambiguation page, as you did with beside manner, please also help to WP:FIXDABLINKS by checking all the pages that contain links to "bedside manner" and retargeting those links to point to the correct article. Thank you. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 13:05, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Article Feedback Tool newsletter

Hey, all! A quick update on how version 5 of the Article Feedback Tool is developing. I'm sending this to both newsletter recipients and regular participants, because I appreciate we've been a bit quiet :).

So, we're just wrapping up the first round of user contributions. A big thank you to everyone who has contributed ideas (a full list of which can be found at the top of the page); thanks almost entirely to contributions by editors, the tool looks totally different to how it did two months ago when we were starting out. Big ideas that have made it in include a comment voting system, courtesy of User:Bensin, an idea for a more available way of deploying the feedback box, suggested by User:Utar, and the eventual integration of both oversight and the existing spam filtering tools into the new version, courtesy of..well, everyone, really :).

For now, the devs are building the first prototypes, and all the features specifications have been finalised. That doesn't mean you can't help out, however; we'll have a big pile of shiny prototypes to play around with quite soon. If you're interested in testing those, we'll be unveiling it all at this week's office hours session, which will be held on Friday 2 December at 19:00 UTC. If you can't make it, just sign up here. After that, we have a glorious round of testing to undertake; we'll be finding out what form works the best, what wording works the best, and pretty much everything else under the sun. As part of that, we need editors - people who know just what to look for - to review some sample reader comments, and make calls on which ones are useful, which ones are spam, so on and so forth. If that's something you'd be interested in doing, drop an email to okeyes@wikimedia.org.

Thanks to everyone for their contributions so far. We're making good headway, and moving forward pretty quickly :). Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 16:40, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Office Hours

Hey Bensin; another Article Feedback Tool office hours session! This is going to be immediately after we start trialing the software publicly, so it's a pretty important one. If any of you want to attend, it will be held in #wikimedia-office on Friday 16th December at 19:00 UTC. As always, if you can't attend, drop me a line and I'm happy to link you to the logs when we're done. Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 22:31, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

OK, thanks. I'll try to be there. --Bensin (talk) 00:59, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Awesome! It'll be great to see you :). Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 03:13, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

You too :-) --Bensin (talk) 03:34, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

• Hey; mind emailing me? I have a fun and rewarding subproject of AFT you might like to get involved in :). Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 00:17, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Just did. --Bensin (talk) 07:07, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Phantom Rancher (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to John Elliott, James Sheridan, Max Alexander, Ted Adams, Dave O'Brien and Harry Harvey

Death Rides the Range (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to John Elliott, Charles King, Max Alexander and Oliver Drake

Life Returns (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Mary McCarthy, William Black, Lois Wilson and Stanley Fields

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:21, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Done. --Bensin (talk) 10:28, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Article Feedback Tool - notes and office hours

Hey guys! Another month, another newsletter.

First off - the first bits of AFT5 are now deployed. As of early last week, the various different designs are deployed on 0.1 percent of articles, for a certain "bucket" of randomly-assigned readers. With the data flooding in from these, we were able to generate a big pool of comments for editors to categorise as "useful" or "not useful". This information will be used to work out which form is the "best" form, producing the most useful feedback and the least junk. Hopefully we'll have the data for you by the end of the week; I can't thank the editors who volunteered to hand-code enough; we wouldn't be where we are now without you.

All this useful information means we can move on to finalising the tool, and so we're holding an extra-important office hours session on Friday, 6th January at 19:00 UTC in #wikimedia-office. If you can't make it, drop me a note and I'll be happy to provide logs so you can see what went on - if you can make it, but will turn up late, bear in mind that I'll be hanging around until 23:00 UTC to deal with latecomers :).

Things we'll be discussing include:

• The design of the feedback page, which will display all the feedback gathered through whichever form comes out on top.
• An expansion of the pool of articles which have AFT5 displayed, from 0.1 percent to 0.3 (which is what we were going to do initially anyway)
• An upcoming Request for Comment that will cover (amongst other things) who can access various features in the tool, such as the "hide" button.

If you can't make it to the session, all this stuff will be displayed on the talkpage soon after, so no worries ;). Hope to see you all there! Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 04:50, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Gun Grit (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Roger Williams, David Sharpe and Allen Hall

Down the Wyoming Trail (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Charles King and Ernie Adams

Sky Bandits (1940 film) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Ted Adams and Dave O'Brien

Boarding House Blues (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to John Mason

Drum Taps (film) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Jack Young

Forgotten (1933 film) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Leon Ames

The Man Who Cheated Himself (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to William Gould

Walk the Dark Street (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Don Ross

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:08, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Done. --Bensin (talk) 11:39, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Teamwork Barnstar
	Dear Bensin, Thanks for all your help in designing the new article feedback tools, so we can provide a better user experience and engage more readers to become editors over time! Even though I am a newbie on Wikipedia, I have learned a lot from you already, and look forward to a great collaboration with you in 2012! Fabrice Florin (talk) 21:19, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! I enjoyed working with you too. --Bensin (talk) 06:48, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

White-fruited strawberry

See Pineberry. Nadiatalent (talk) 20:41, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Great! I added the image in Pineberry to the article about strawberries. Thanks for letting me know! :-) --Bensin (talk) 21:15, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for finding the problem and fixing it! Nadiatalent (talk) 14:12, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for finding the solution and telling me about it! :-) --Bensin (talk) 15:15, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Article Feedback Tool

Hey guys; apologies for the belated nature of this notification; as you can probably imagine, the whole blackout thing kinda messed with our timetables :P. Just a quick reminder that we've got an office hours session tomorrow at 19:00 in #wikimedia-office, where we'll be discussing the results of the hand-coding and previewing some new changes. Hope to see you there :). Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 21:47, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Barnstar

(barnstar returned to sender User:Philippe (WMF))		The Original Barnstar
		This barnstar is awarded to everyone who - whatever their opinion - contributed to the discussion about Wikipedia and SOPA. Thank you for being a part of the discussion. Presented by the Wikimedia Foundation.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Philippe (WMF) (talk • contribs) 20:38, 21 January 2012

I am sorry, Philippe, but I cannot accept this barnstar. I must admit that for a long time I have secretly wanted The Original Barnstar, but I always imagined receiving it for my body of work and not for expressing an opinion (however well founded) in what appears to be a Wikimedia foundation initiated and driven[1] political campaign. What other issues would the foundation be willing to take a stand on? And what if the foundation takes a stand on something where we fundamentaly disagree? Would I have to quit the project living with the regret that all my time, all my work and efforts here was donated to an organization that turned out to fundamentaly disagree with me? Up until now the safeguard preventing this was our two policies Wikipedia:NOTADVOCATE#ADVOCATE and Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. In this case I believe the foundation abused its leverage to swing Wikipedia like a sword in a most unflattering manner and then condescendingly patted its users for allowing it. I sincerely doubt the foundation would hand out barnstars had the proposal not been supported by the community.

User Kat Walsh made an interesting argument that "We depend on a legal infrastructure that makes it possible for us to operate", but the argument has serious flaws. When she is talking about "legal infrastructure" she is referring to "American legal infrastructure" and when she is talking about what "makes it possible for us [and other sites] to operate" she is referring to what "makes it possible for us [and other sites] to operate in the US". The Wikimedia projects may be based in the US, but I think we all can agree it's a global project, and as such it can, if needed, move its base to another country. That would however require the foundation staff to relocate or quit their jobs, which may be one reason it was so eager to take a stand on this issue.

That said, I am just as happy as anyone else that the legislation seems to be postponed. I will nonetheless return this barnstar to you, but I recognize it was given to me in good faith. --Bensin (talk) 16:45, 22 January 2012 (UTC)