User talk:Jimbo Wales: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 06:43, 13 October 2011 view sourceJimbo Wales (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users, Founder14,541 edits →Google Street view imagery ← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 01:44, 19 January 2025 view source ArionStar (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users3,002 edits →Misplaced Pages:Featured picture candidates/delist/Jimmy Wales: new sectionTag: New topic
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{pp-sock\|small=yes}}
	{{NOINDEX}}
			{{pp-move\|small=yes}}
	{{usercomment}}
			{{noindex}}
	{{same page other wikis\|commons\|meta\|message=Please choose the most relevant.}}
			{{Stb}}
			{{Usercomment}}
			{{#ifeq:{{PROTECTIONLEVEL:edit}}\|autoconfirmed\|}}
			{{Notice\|1={{Center\|1='''Jimbo welcomes your comments and updates – he has an ].'''<br />
			'''He holds the founder's seat on the ]'s .<br />The current ] occupying "community-selected" seats are ], ], ] and ].<br />The Wikimedia Foundation's Lead Manager of Trust and Safety is ].'''}}}}
			{{Notice\|1={{Center\|1='''This page is ] and you will not be able to leave a message here unless you are a registered editor. Instead, <br> ] '''}}}}
	{{Talk header\|search=yes}}		{{Talk header\|search=yes}}
			{{Misplaced Pages:TPS/banner}}
			{{annual readership}}
			{{Press
			\| subject = talkpage
			\| author = Matthew Gault
			\| title = Misplaced Pages Editors Very Mad About Jimmy Wales' NFT of a Misplaced Pages Edit
			\| org = ]
			\| url = https://www.vice.com/en/article/qjbkvm/wikipedia-editors-very-mad-about-jimmy-waless-nft-of-a-wikipedia-edit
			\| date = 8 December 2021
			\| quote = The trouble began when Wales posted an announcement about the auction on his user talk page—a kind of message board where users communicate directly with each other.
			}}
	{{User:MiszaBot/config		{{User:MiszaBot/config
			\| algo = old(10d)
	\|maxarchivesize = 250K
			\| archive = User talk:Jimbo Wales/Archive %(counter)d
	\|counter = 85
			\| counter = 252
	\|minthreadsleft = 2
			\| maxarchivesize = 350K
	\|algo = old(1d)
			\| archiveheader = {{aan}}
	\|archive = User talk:Jimbo Wales/Archive %(counter)d
			\| minthreadstoarchive = 1
			\| minthreadsleft = 3
	}}		}}
			{{Centralized discussion}}
	{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn\|target=User talk:Jimbo Wales/Archive index\|mask=User talk:Jimbo Wales/Archive <#>\|indexhere=no\|template=User:Jimbo Wales/indextemplate}}
			__TOC__
	{{archives\|age=1\|target=./Archive 69\|dounreplied=yes\|index=./Archive index\|bot=MiszaBot III\|archivelist=User talk:Jimbo Wales/archivelist_manual\|collapsed=yes\|search=yes}}
			{{-}}
	{\| align="right" style="clear:both"
	\|]
	\|}

			==]==
	== Talkback ==
			]
			]
			Happy New Year Jimbo!!! I hope all is well with you and your team.

			Could you or your page watchers help me with ]? The draft has been declined and tagged up. It was then deleted years ago. I had it restored today after I came across one of his photos. I think he and his photography are fascinating for capturing aspects of New Zealand's transportation and industrial history. His work is in museum and library collections. At least one of his photographs has been used in a book. He photographed Maori sites.
	{{Talkback\|Maunus}}

			], standing beside a collection of Maori carvings, including two fire-screens, carved by her father Albert Percy Godber]]
	== ] ==
			I'm sorry I haven't been able to work the draft up enough to get it admitted to mainspace. It does make me wonder about what we do and don't include, our notability criteria, Articles for Creation (AfC) process, and collaborative ethos. Thanks so much for any help or guidance you can offer! Have a great 2025 and beyond. Thanks again. ] (]) 17:57, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
			:If Godber is not ], which is what the draft reviewers say, then Wikipedians can't fix that. ] (]) 09:37, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
			::] is he "notable" and should we have an entry on him? ] (]) 17:26, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
			:::I dunno, but ] wrote that the draft did not show significant coverage about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject at that point. ] (]) 19:37, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
			]
			::::And this a request to revisit his finding. We have a photographer from more than 100 years ago who documented areas of New Zealand's North Island. We have his work in a National Library collection. We have his work discussed as iconic for one of his Maori related photographs. We have his work revisited in a 2018 exhibition. We have descriptions of him related to his photographs, his career, and we have the photos themselves documenting the areas industries, sites, infrastructure from more than 100 years ago. If I was satisfied with the previous conclusions I would not be here. So I ask again, should we have an entry on this subject? Should we just attribute his photos where we use them to an unlinked name with no explanation or discussion of who he was? I think the answer is clear, and I wanted to hear Jimbo's opinion. I am aware of what was previously stated. Years have passed and I believe it's time to reevaluate and consider. I also think it's worth reflecting on our article creations processes more generally and how we apply our conception of "notability". ] (]) 23:33, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
			*Godber's photographs include "views of the ] including large numbers of cars traveling to ], and the ]. Another group of images relate to a holiday at the ] Homestead in ] with scenes of farm life, including ], ] sheep, and farm buildings. During their stay in the South Island Godber also took photographs of Dunedin (including the ], ], ], the ], and the Hillside Railway Workshops); ] (including the Invercargill Railway Workshops); Stewart Island, ], ], ], ] and ]. Various railway stations in Canterbury and Otago, the ], and the Rosslyn Mills. Godber was a volunteer fireman with the Petone Fire Brigade with the album including views of the building, groups of firemen, fire engines and other fire fighting equipment, and a building in Petone damaged by fire. In his work with New Zealand Railways, mainly at the Petone Railway Workshops, he took interior photographs of various buildings, including the Machine Shop and finishing benches, the engine room, lathes, boilers, and fitting shops. He also took photographs of many of the steam engines that were built and worked on at the workshops. One scene shows a group of men watching a fight. Many images show his interest in logging railways, particularly in the ], ], ] area. Scenes of logging camps, various methods of transporting logs including bullock teams, logging trains, and dams created and then tripped to send logs down by river, and timber mills. Other topics covered in Godber's photographs are scenes at Maori ] and meeting houses, with some of the people identified; Maori carving and rafter designs; beekeeping, and gold mining." ] (]) 23:52, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
			*It's hard to choose which photos to share. Historic views areas, industries, bridges, natural features, railways and bridges, crafts. to his photos on Misplaced Pages Commons. Many already illustrate our entries on various subjects. ] (]) 00:01, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
			:: If you really want to help him, get a couple stories published about him in newspapers. Notability here will follow. ] (]) 01:23, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

			== ==
	Hello, Jimmy. The subject of the ] article, whom I've met and photographed twice in person, requested that his surname not be used in his article. As it is the practice to comply with such requests for reasons like privacy, I have taken care to keep it out of the article. Another editor asked about this on ] and now Touré has asked me to remove mention of it from that talk page, which I have. Can be removed from the talk page's edit history? Thank you. ] (]) 04:06, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

			That doesn't sound good. From '']''. ] (]) 09:37, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
	:We nevertheless ought to strike a balance between a desire for privacy or secrecy and the inherent value of producing a complete reference work. This individual makes regular media appearances and hosts at least two television programs. This is someone who is a celebrity; someone who is famous, not infamous. We aren't sheltering the victim of a viral video meme; Touré has diligently sought to build his name and reputation as an essayist, critic, and television personality through more than a decade of publishing and television appearances. To be clear, we're not protecting the identity of ] (about whom I still question the merit of having ''any'' article, whether he is named or not). At first blush, insisting that we conceal the last name of Touré seems to make no more sense than deleting the last name of ]. Absent a clear issue related to personal safety or his family's privacy (one which goes above and beyond the considerations which might apply to ''any'' celebrity) we're only left with a question of the degree to which our encyclopedia should conform to a celebrity's preferred personal branding. While I can appreciate that any biography's subject will be sensitive to its contents (and I believe we as a project ought to be sensitive to a subject's concerns), I can't help but find his claims that the inclusion of his surname is 'vandalism' to be somewhat overwrought.
	:The ] took place in 2006, shortly after the BLP policy came into effect, and while the community was still sorting out what it all meant to the project. (Indeed, the discussion is on the very first page of the BLP noticeboard archives.) I would hesitate to rely on that discussion's conclusion to guide us forevermore, for two reasons above and beyond our usual awareness that ]. First, the discussion was in the early days of WP:BLP, and we lacked the body of experience with BLP that we have now.
	:Second, a major point raised in the original discussion was that issue shouldn't be decided by BLP concerns, but rather was a question about verifiability and the existence of reliable sources. At the time, no reliable sources were offered to support the use of the subject's purported surname. Glancing briefly through the recent history of the article, it certainly appears that this concern remains valid today. Before we even think of pulling the BLP trigger, we need to make sure that article content clears the basic five-pillar requirement of verifiable, reliable sourcing. It is ''there'' that the question of including the subject's surname falls down. It should go without saying that the existence of a widely-available, reliable secondary source would also obviate much of the concern regarding a real or hypothetical invasion of privacy on Misplaced Pages's part—the cat, as they say, would already be out of the bag. Absent such reliable secondary sources, the name shouldn't be included purely on the basis of non-verifiability. ](]) 15:28, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
	::I agree with the above. Someone who is purposefully famous for their work and seeks to remain as such isn't a private individual. Thus, to maintain our neutrality and our breadth of coverage, we should include his full name, regardless of his wishes. So, unless sources only refer to him with half his name all the time without mentioning his full name, we should include it all. If they do only mention half...well, that's a different scenario that needs to be discussed, but I find it unlikely. <font color="silver">]</font><font color="blue">]</font><sup>]</sup> 15:51, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

			:Being discussed at ]. ] (]) 10:08, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
	:::Is a reliable source for his full name? It does link the name to a profession on BET. ] (]) 16:48, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
			::Thanks! ] (]) 11:11, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
	::::Well, I don't think you actually have to '''use''' a reference for his name in the article, that would be a bit overkill, I think. It just needs to be shown to us editors, not the readers, that RS's use his full name. So, that's one example there, yes. <font color="silver">]</font><font color="blue">]</font><sup>]</sup> 17:04, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
			::Also discussed at ] and ]. ] (]) 19:07, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
	::::I would be reluctant to rely on a primary source document relating to an individual's tax filings; it takes us to the edge of the realm of encyclopedia-writing and brushes up against investigative journalism. As a gut-instinct matter, it feels more like a 'gotcha' or 'outing'. Ideally, I'd like to see an article ''about'' Touré (preferably in the entertainment press or some other relevant venue) which includes his surname. As a rule of thumb, I'd suggest that Misplaced Pages shouldn't be the ''first'' secondary or tertiary source to include any particular bit of biographical information. ](]) 17:31, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
	:::I think TenOfAllTrades has produced a classic, thoughtful, and elegant discussion of the issue. The rule can't be "Don't include a surname unless it is ok with the BLP subject" nor can the rule be "Always include a surname, BLP subject wishes and human dignity be damned". Thoughtful editorial judgment to balance valid competing concerns is, as almost always, the right way forward.
	:::I don't know much about this particular example. I could be swayed towards omission if: there is a physical danger to family members, there is doubt about the sourcing, there is a sense that notability happened to the person rather than being sought, etc. I could be swayed towards inclusion if: there are plenty of reliable sources, there is no obvious safety or privacy issue, the person has deliberately sought fame. It's always a lovely thing when there is a simple and easy formulaic answer, but reality is complex so there often isn't one. Thoughtful discussion can be productive.--] (]) 17:17, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

			Jimbo, could I ask you please to respond to from {{u\|Tryptofish}}?
	::::Does ] writing in the count? ] (]) 18:17, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
			:... it's not just if you've edited about Israel-Palestine. It could be if you've edited anything about climate and fossil fuels, gender, immigration, vaccines, and of course, American politics. I doubt that they have the bandwidth to actually identify and harass every editor who could possibly be seen as editing information that goes against a MAGA POV, but they will likely find some easily identified targets, whom they will use to "set an example", as a way of instilling fear in our editing community. I fully expect that, in the coming months, {{u\|Jimbo Wales}} will be hauled before a hostile and performative Congressional hearing, much in the manner of university presidents. I hope very much that he will be better prepared than ] was.
	::::Following up on my previous remarks, I note that Target Entertainment Group (which distributes Touré's television interview program ''On The Record'') refers to Touré by his full name – Touré Neblett – in their and on their web site: (Rights...Catalog...Entertainment...''On The Record''). The phrase "renowned music journalist Touré Neblett" seems to come from that press release, and was repeated verbatim by a handful of outlets. ](]) 18:50, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
			:Yeah, I know this is grim. But I believe the first step in dealing with this is to go into it with our eyes open, to know what we are dealing with, what motivates it. And, more than harming individual editors, the real objective of Heritage ''et al.'' is to instill fear in the rest of us. If we become too fearful to revert POV edits, they win. In a very real sense, we have to keep doing what we have been doing, and continue to be a reliable resource for NPOV information. --] (]) 18:54, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
	:::::FWIW, we deal with similar issues at ] on occasion, usually revolving around (alleged) real or birth names of people known by stage names (particularly pornographic actor/ess), although sometimes middle names or similar. I don't recall any other case involving a surname but I don't see any reason to treat this differently. We or at least I usually prefer to deal with it in a way similar to that suggested here. We definitely don't publish the info based on searches in primary sources like trademark documents, ancestery searches, tax filings, legal cases, etc. Instead we look for reliable secondary sources. One difference I perhaps have with the above, if the person is covered in more generalised sources I would prefer to find at least one instance of the usage there rather then solely going by specialised sources. (This somewhat reflects my experience, sometimes it may be the real name of porngraphic actor/ess was covered in reliable sources that cover the industry but I don't see the need spread the name when other more generalised sources have not.) However I can see this would go both ways, it may be generalised sources are not aware of the subject's preference in a case like this. We do of course get more complicated cases in BLP/N where the subject is no longer involved in whatever it was they were doing before, and potentially no longer really seeking publicity and all the sources are fairly old. ] (]) 17:53, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
			] (]) 05:33, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

			:Well, I fully agree that developments in terms of arguments and actions aimed at destroying trust in knowledge (and of course our specific interest, trust in Misplaced Pages) are extremely worrisome, particularly as I agree that for many who are doing it, the motive does appears to be the undermining of civic norms and democracy. I also agree with Tryptofish in a part that you didn't quote: "In a narrow sense, it's technically true that if you "out" yourself, there's no point in anyone else doing it. But once your identity is known, you become vulnerable to all of the kinds of real-life harassment that doxed people find themselves subjected to. It doesn't matter, in that regard, how they found out your identity." That's a sad balancing act that no Wikipedian should have to face.
	== Interface change ==
			:As a side note, I don't think that the reliability of the Heritage Foundation as a source is particularly related to these despicable actions. Whether they should be considered a reliable source in some matters is really unrelated to whether they hate us or not.--] (]) 14:14, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
			::Suddenly ] going to court to get user-data seems like the model of gentlemanly behavior. ] (]) 11:51, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
			:::{{tq\|That's a sad balancing act that no Wikipedian should have to face.}} Unfortunately, the scales have been inexorably slipping out from beneath the foundation's abilities or willingness to protect its volunteers for my entire wiki-career. There's no balancing force at work. The private equity community has made gadflies out of what we used to label reliable local news media; Alphabet and Meta are actively coopting precision, privacy, and the public domain, while attempting to minimize the effectiveness of good faith actors like Internet Archive. Now suddenly en.wikipedians are facing the sort of personal threats long experienced by volunteers at ru.wiki and zh.wiki. The forces now arrayed against free information don't need to be actively coordinating in order to rapidly bring us to 2+2=5 territory. Any established editor could reasonably see Western culture has been under relentless attack for a long time. Here comes the Heritage Foundation's leaks, hot off Heritage's bangup release of Project 2025, leaking articles through partisan outlets apparently intended to make it appear (in one case) the ADL's recent reliability downgrade at RSNP was anyone else's fault but the ADL's own writings and actions. The news of such activity appears to threaten the community members directly and personally. ] (]) 13:26, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

			== ] ==
	I think you should change the interface of Misplaced Pages (and your other Wiki sites) to allow non-admin users to delete their user, user talk and subpages. ]] 17:12, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
	:After thoroughly and thoughtfully considering the implications of this proposal, I have come to the conclusion that this would run the risk of allowing anyone to move an article they don't like to their to their own userspace and then delete it. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 18:09, 10 October 2011 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
	::User above is correct. ]''' <sup><small>]</small></sup>''' 19:01, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

			Hey Mr. Wales, there's a discussion on ] about what image should be used on your Misplaced Pages entry. Figured you may want to chime in with personal opinion about the recent freely-licensed images of you that are presented, as there hasn't been much engagement there at the time of my post. <span style="background: cornsilk; padding: 3px;border:.5px solid salmon;">]]</span> 21:32, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
	== wikipedia for kids? ==

			== ''The Signpost'': 15 January 2025 ==
	Is there such thing?] (]) 18:11, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

			<div lang="en" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"><div style="column-count:2;"> {{Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/2025-01-15}} </div><!--Volume 21, Issue 1--> <div class="hlist" style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;"> * ''']''' * ] * ] * ] (]) 07:54, 15 January 2025 (UTC) <!-- Sent via script (]) --></div></div>
	:See these websites.
			<!-- Message sent by User:JPxG@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Wikipedia_Signpost/Subscribe&oldid=1269316164 -->
	:*
	:*
	:*
	:*
	:*
	:—] (]) 20:11, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

			== A brownie for you! ==
	::All plastered with promotion. →<span style="font-family:Euclid Fraktur">]]].</span> 00:06, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
	: is the best I have seen out there. '''<font color="navy">]</font>''' ''(<font color="green">]</font>)'' 04:06, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

			{\| style="background-color: var(--background-color-success-subtle, #fdffe7); border: 1px solid var(--border-color-success, #fceb92); color: var(--color-base, #202122);"
	:The original question is ambiguous. Are you asking about a wiki that children can edit, or about an encyclopedia that they can consult?
			\|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" \| ]
	:—] (]) 13:40, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
			\|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" \| brownie :D ] 19:05, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
	::For one they can consult, I thought that was the point of ]? For one they can edit, all too often they end up here (here being en.wiki in general, not just Jimbo's talk page). ] (]) 13:57, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

	== META ==

	I think you ''might'' like to note how a META sysop can keep an essay in his ''own'' preferred status . Cheers -- I feel like I am swimming up the Thames. ] (]) 18:25, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
	:Haven't we played this game already? Deal with it on META, not here...] ]''' <sup><small>]</small></sup>''' 19:05, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
	::At such time as Jimbo says that he is reading his meta user page again, that might make sense. As for "getting over it" right now there is a legitimate issue about an admin/editor wearing two hats at once. Cheers. ] (]) 19:25, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
	:::This isn't something you should come crying to Jimbo for. This is something you should bring to the administration of META (I'm not sure how Meta works, so I'm not sure who you'd go to). Looking at your whopping 93 edits shows that outside of worrying about that "Dick" ESSAY; you haven't been doing much else. ]''' <sup><small>]</small></sup>''' 21:55, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
	::::I assume you did ''not'' note Jimbo's opinions clearly stated about this "essay" and the nature of the edits which were stable. I would also suggest that my 20K edits across projects does ''not'' indicate any pre-occupation with any single essay. Cheers, now can you accept that Jimbo does not read his user talk page on Meta as a rule? ] (]) 22:29, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
	:::::Jimbo's not going to come in and save the day. I'm not going to further argue with you on the topic. ]''' <sup><small>]</small></sup>''' 22:46, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
	::::::Actually, Tofutwitch11, you're mistaken. I do care about bullying in any Wikimedia venue. Coming in and making wholesale changes after a long period of stability, and reverting people without discussion, is just never ok.--] (]) 23:01, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
	:::::::Right; but my point was that instead of taking it here, to your talk page, he should have brought it to the attention of an uninvolved admin or 'crat on Meta for further discussion. ]''' <sup><small>]</small></sup>''' 00:22, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
	::::::::And you assert I made ''no'' comments on Meta? I suggest you read before writing. Cheers. ] (]) 13:08, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

	== ] ==

	] ] 22:26, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

	== Please take your comments to a proper venue ==

	Thanks! --] (]) 01:17, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
	:The talk page of the article is precisely the place to discuss POV pushing and ] issues in the article.--] (]) 05:27, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
	:::Without following the relevant policies and guidelines, it is disruptive at least. Please stop disrupting the article so. --] (]) 21:13, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

	::No disrespect, Jimbo, but it's usually better to take such concerns to a user talk page, or to an administrative page like wikiquette or ANI. In my experience, once an article talk page falls into cross-discussions of editor behavior (like POV-pushing and ownership issues), it can rapidly deteriorate to a point where meaningful discussion of article ''content'' is all but impossible. Not that anyone's going to actually respect the ideal, mind you (people who get angry at each other are sometimes going to make it personal, and editors who enter that mindset tend to see article-talk as a public forum for airing grievances - human nature...). But I really don't want to have people calling me names in article talk and justifying it with 'Jimbo said we should do it'. --] 14:54, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
	* '''''Question POV-pushing politely on article talk-page first:''''' In case some of the article's editors have a group-view POV, it would, in fact, be better to start on the article's talk-page (very politely), to allow responses from the other editors who believe that the text is not overly slanted. Otherwise, it is a heavy burden for each editor to defend charges on their separate user-talk pages, especially if the fellow editors could better explain, or refute, charges of POV-pushing. By the time an issue reaches ], then it can become a dog-fight because there are few rules of fairness at ANI, and many "drive-by" opinionators just ] into a group attack, as drive-by !voters who do not even know the original article(s) which started the claims of POV-pushing, and the history of how people were goaded into the escalated debate. Of course, I have also seen cases where the article talk-page becomes a ]ground, but perhaps at that point, then clearly direct the discussion to ] with many people (of all sides) ready to debate, not just one lone guy besieged by a pack of regulars and killed off with a ]-instant decision before 10 opposing people have stated their opinions. ANI does not have a "]" restriction to require real evidence and allow 2-weeks for supporters to come and clarify a "defence" of a person being viciously non-attacked at ANI. The use of ], to rush a verdict before other views are stated, is rampant there. -] (]) 19:53, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

	== A barnstar for you! ==

	{\| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;"
	\|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" \| ]
	\|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 3px 3px 0 3px; height: 1.5em;" \| '''The Tireless Contributor Barnstar'''
	\|-
	\|style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" \| :) ] (]) 17:48, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
	\|}		\|}

			== ] ==
	==Google Street view imagery==
	Given that google is keen to work with/help wikipedia with search results and translations on certain other wikipedias I wonder if there is a chance we could arrange something with them to take photograph shots of google street view imagery to use in articles. I mean how many articles on US places are without images and in google street view you could simply photograph a select area and upload to article. Obviously quality would't be the best but the opportunity to be able to freely photograph any part of any town would be a massive step.♦ ] 23:55, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

	:See ] and scroll down to links to pages by category.
	:—] (]) 00:14, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
	::A request is not the same as actually getting us images though is it? I could put in a request today for a photo of a village in the forests of Shan State and we'd be unlikely to get one in the next 10 years.♦ ] 00:18, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
	:::Is that Shan State photo one that you could get from google images? Is that a good example that I could show to people at Google? If not, then could you show me a few examples?--] (]) 06:43, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

	== Fate of "important" articles at FAC ==

	Hi Jimbo -- I recently spent some time doing a bit of crude statistical analysis of the FAC process, with results that I think might interest you; see ]. I should point out that this has given rise to a lively discussion at ] -- most of the comments there do not agree with my conclusions though. ] (]) 03:26, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

			You're the subject on a delist FPC. Please, give us your feedback. ] (]) 01:44, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
	:You might wish to repeat the process with ].
	:—] (]) 05:19, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 01:44, 19 January 2025

Welcome to my talk page. Please sign and date your entries by inserting ~~~~ at the end.
Start a new talk topic.

Jimbo welcomes your comments and updates – he has an open door policy.
He holds the founder's seat on the Wikimedia Foundation's Board of Trustees.
The current trustees occupying "community-selected" seats are Rosiestep, Laurentius, Victoria and Pundit.
The Wikimedia Foundation's Lead Manager of Trust and Safety is Jan Eissfeldt.

This page is semi-protected and you will not be able to leave a message here unless you are a registered editor. Instead,
you can leave a message here

This is Jimbo Wales's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Archives: Index, Index, A, B, C, D, E, F, G, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168, 169, 170, 171, 172, 173, 174, 175, 176, 177, 178, 179, 180, 181, 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190, 191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 196, 197, 198, 199, 200, 201, 202, 203, 204, 205, 206, 207, 208, 209, 210, 211, 212, 213, 214, 215, 216, 217, 218, 219, 220, 221, 222, 223, 224, 225, 226, 227, 228, 229, 230, 231, 232, 233, 234, 235, 236, 237, 238, 239, 240, 241, 242, 243, 244, 245, 246, 247, 248, 249, 250, 251, 252Auto-archiving period: 10 days

This user talk page might be watched by friendly talk page stalkers, which means that someone other than me might reply to your query. Their input is welcome and their help with messages that I cannot reply to quickly is appreciated.

This talkpage has been mentioned by a media organization:

Matthew Gault (8 December 2021). "Misplaced Pages Editors Very Mad About Jimmy Wales' NFT of a Misplaced Pages Edit". Vice Media. The trouble began when Wales posted an announcement about the auction on his user talk page—a kind of message board where users communicate directly with each other.

Centralized discussion

Village pumps: policy; tech; proposals; idea lab; WMF; misc

For a listing of ongoing discussions, see the dashboard.

Albert Percy Godber

Happy New Year Jimbo!!! I hope all is well with you and your team.

Could you or your page watchers help me with Draft:Albert Percy Godber? The draft has been declined and tagged up. It was then deleted years ago. I had it restored today after I came across one of his photos. I think he and his photography are fascinating for capturing aspects of New Zealand's transportation and industrial history. His work is in museum and library collections. At least one of his photographs has been used in a book. He photographed Maori sites.

I'm sorry I haven't been able to work the draft up enough to get it admitted to mainspace. It does make me wonder about what we do and don't include, our notability criteria, Articles for Creation (AfC) process, and collaborative ethos. Thanks so much for any help or guidance you can offer! Have a great 2025 and beyond. Thanks again. FloridaArmy (talk) 17:57, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

If Godber is not WP:NOTABLE, which is what the draft reviewers say, then Wikipedians can't fix that. Polygnotus (talk) 09:37, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

user:Polygnotus is he "notable" and should we have an entry on him? FloridaArmy (talk) 17:26, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

I dunno, but User:Sulfurboy wrote that the draft did not show significant coverage about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject at that point. Polygnotus (talk) 19:37, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

And this a request to revisit his finding. We have a photographer from more than 100 years ago who documented areas of New Zealand's North Island. We have his work in a National Library collection. We have his work discussed as iconic for one of his Maori related photographs. We have his work revisited in a 2018 exhibition. We have descriptions of him related to his photographs, his career, and we have the photos themselves documenting the areas industries, sites, infrastructure from more than 100 years ago. If I was satisfied with the previous conclusions I would not be here. So I ask again, should we have an entry on this subject? Should we just attribute his photos where we use them to an unlinked name with no explanation or discussion of who he was? I think the answer is clear, and I wanted to hear Jimbo's opinion. I am aware of what was previously stated. Years have passed and I believe it's time to reevaluate and consider. I also think it's worth reflecting on our article creations processes more generally and how we apply our conception of "notability". FloridaArmy (talk) 23:33, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Godber's photographs include "views of the Hutt Valley including large numbers of cars traveling to Trentham Racecourse, and the Hutt River. Another group of images relate to a holiday at the Mendip Hills Homestead in Canterbury, New Zealand with scenes of farm life, including haymaking, merino sheep, and farm buildings. During their stay in the South Island Godber also took photographs of Dunedin (including the Ross Reservoir, Otago Boys' High School, Seacliff Mental Hospital, the 1926 Dunedin Exhibition, and the Hillside Railway Workshops); Invercargill (including the Invercargill Railway Workshops); Stewart Island, Moeraki, Tuatapere, Waiau River, Oamaru and Port Chalmers. Various railway stations in Canterbury and Otago, the Burnside Iron Mills, and the Rosslyn Mills. Godber was a volunteer fireman with the Petone Fire Brigade with the album including views of the building, groups of firemen, fire engines and other fire fighting equipment, and a building in Petone damaged by fire. In his work with New Zealand Railways, mainly at the Petone Railway Workshops, he took interior photographs of various buildings, including the Machine Shop and finishing benches, the engine room, lathes, boilers, and fitting shops. He also took photographs of many of the steam engines that were built and worked on at the workshops. One scene shows a group of men watching a fight. Many images show his interest in logging railways, particularly in the Piha, Karekare, Anawhata area. Scenes of logging camps, various methods of transporting logs including bullock teams, logging trains, and dams created and then tripped to send logs down by river, and timber mills. Other topics covered in Godber's photographs are scenes at Maori marae and meeting houses, with some of the people identified; Maori carving and rafter designs; beekeeping, and gold mining." FloridaArmy (talk) 23:52, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
It's hard to choose which photos to share. Historic views areas, industries, bridges, natural features, railways and bridges, crafts. Here's a link to his photos on Misplaced Pages Commons. Many already illustrate our entries on various subjects. FloridaArmy (talk) 00:01, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

If you really want to help him, get a couple stories published about him in newspapers. Notability here will follow. Carrite (talk) 01:23, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Scoop: Heritage Foundation plans to ‘identify and target’ Misplaced Pages editors

That doesn't sound good. From The Forward. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:37, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Being discussed at Misplaced Pages:Village pump (miscellaneous)#Heritage Foundation intending to "identify and target" editors. CMD (talk) 10:08, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Thanks! Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:11, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Also discussed at Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Palestine-Israel_articles_5/Evidence#Edit_request and Misplaced Pages:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Heritage_Foundation_planning_to_dox_Wikipedia_editors. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:07, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Jimbo, could I ask you please to respond to these concerns from Tryptofish?

... it's not just if you've edited about Israel-Palestine. It could be if you've edited anything about climate and fossil fuels, gender, immigration, vaccines, and of course, American politics. I doubt that they have the bandwidth to actually identify and harass every editor who could possibly be seen as editing information that goes against a MAGA POV, but they will likely find some easily identified targets, whom they will use to "set an example", as a way of instilling fear in our editing community. I fully expect that, in the coming months, Jimbo Wales will be hauled before a hostile and performative Congressional hearing, much in the manner of university presidents. I hope very much that he will be better prepared than Claudine Gay was.

Yeah, I know this is grim. But I believe the first step in dealing with this is to go into it with our eyes open, to know what we are dealing with, what motivates it. And, more than harming individual editors, the real objective of Heritage et al. is to instill fear in the rest of us. If we become too fearful to revert POV edits, they win. In a very real sense, we have to keep doing what we have been doing, and continue to be a reliable resource for NPOV information. --Tryptofish (talk) 18:54, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

Sita Bose (talk) 05:33, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

Well, I fully agree that developments in terms of arguments and actions aimed at destroying trust in knowledge (and of course our specific interest, trust in Misplaced Pages) are extremely worrisome, particularly as I agree that for many who are doing it, the motive does appears to be the undermining of civic norms and democracy. I also agree with Tryptofish in a part that you didn't quote: "In a narrow sense, it's technically true that if you "out" yourself, there's no point in anyone else doing it. But once your identity is known, you become vulnerable to all of the kinds of real-life harassment that doxed people find themselves subjected to. It doesn't matter, in that regard, how they found out your identity." That's a sad balancing act that no Wikipedian should have to face.

As a side note, I don't think that the reliability of the Heritage Foundation as a source is particularly related to these despicable actions. Whether they should be considered a reliable source in some matters is really unrelated to whether they hate us or not.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 14:14, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

Suddenly ANI going to court to get user-data seems like the model of gentlemanly behavior. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:51, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

That's a sad balancing act that no Wikipedian should have to face. Unfortunately, the scales have been inexorably slipping out from beneath the foundation's abilities or willingness to protect its volunteers for my entire wiki-career. There's no balancing force at work. The private equity community has made gadflies out of what we used to label reliable local news media; Alphabet and Meta are actively coopting precision, privacy, and the public domain, while attempting to minimize the effectiveness of good faith actors like Internet Archive. Now suddenly en.wikipedians are facing the sort of personal threats long experienced by volunteers at ru.wiki and zh.wiki. The forces now arrayed against free information don't need to be actively coordinating in order to rapidly bring us to 2+2=5 territory. Any established editor could reasonably see Western culture has been under relentless attack for a long time. Here comes the Heritage Foundation's leaks, hot off Heritage's bangup release of Project 2025, leaking articles through partisan outlets apparently intended to make it appear (in one case) the ADL's recent reliability downgrade at RSNP was anyone else's fault but the ADL's own writings and actions. The news of such activity appears to threaten the community members directly and personally. BusterD (talk) 13:26, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Talk:Jimmy_Wales#Newer_2024_image?

Hey Mr. Wales, there's a discussion on Talk:Jimmy_Wales#Newer_2024_image? about what image should be used on your Misplaced Pages entry. Figured you may want to chime in with personal opinion about the recent freely-licensed images of you that are presented, as there hasn't been much engagement there at the time of my post. Barnt Toust 21:32, 14 January 2025 (UTC)