| Revision as of 21:34, 14 January 2010 editTbsdy lives (talk | contribs)7,977 edits typo← Previous edit | Revision as of 23:46, 14 January 2010 edit undoRMHED (talk | contribs)15,716 editsmNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
| ] | ] | ||
| Generally, discussion happens and either the contributor concedes or goes away grumpy. However, a select few contributors feel that as ] is the ] that it would be best to appeal to him directly. The theory behind this is that their appeals will be heard and Jimbo will latch onto the argument in full agreement with the petitioner. Thereafter, Jimbo will logically smite the wicked editor who dared raise concerns about their behaviour/fundamentally change existing policy/delete the offending item from Misplaced Pages. | Generally, discussion happens and either the contributor concedes or goes away grumpy. However, a select few contributors feel that as ] is the claimed ] that it would be best to appeal to him directly. The theory behind this is that their appeals will be heard and Jimbo will latch onto the argument in full agreement with the petitioner. Thereafter, Jimbo will logically smite the wicked editor who dared raise concerns about their behaviour/fundamentally change existing policy/delete the offending item from Misplaced Pages. | ||
| The unfortunate news here is that it almost never works. Jimmy's talk page is monitored (at the time of writing) by people. This is made up of a large cabal who routinely either point out that the decisions made are correct, that Jimmy shouldn't be bothered with worthless tripe, or that Jimbo normally doesn't enter into these sort of discussions. Furthermore, when Jimbo does respond he rarely take sides, unless it is a completely egregious and unescapably important issue that must be responded to. Which in almost all instances is not the case with appeals to his talk page. And if it is, he'll normally get the ] to do it for him. | The unfortunate news here is that it almost never works. Jimmy's talk page is monitored (at the time of writing) by people. This is made up of a large cabal who routinely either point out that the decisions made are correct, that Jimmy shouldn't be bothered with worthless tripe, or that Jimbo normally doesn't enter into these sort of discussions. Furthermore, when Jimbo does respond he rarely take sides, unless it is a completely egregious and unescapably important issue that must be responded to. Which in almost all instances is not the case with appeals to his talk page. And if it is, he'll normally get the ] to do it for him. | ||
Revision as of 23:46, 14 January 2010
Essay on editing Misplaced Pages | This is an essay. It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Misplaced Pages contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of Misplaced Pages's policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints. | Shortcuts |
 | This page in a nutshell: "Appeal to Jimbo" is the one after the last resort. If you're doing that, you've already lost. |
A number of contributors are unhappy with the way that various matters have been dealt with on Misplaced Pages. Some are unhappy about administrator decisions, others are upset that there are offensive images on articles, while yet others feel that links to their pet website should not be removed from the project. These are just some of the things that an editor can get upset about.
Generally, discussion happens and either the contributor concedes or goes away grumpy. However, a select few contributors feel that as Jimbo Wales is the claimed founder of Misplaced Pages that it would be best to appeal to him directly. The theory behind this is that their appeals will be heard and Jimbo will latch onto the argument in full agreement with the petitioner. Thereafter, Jimbo will logically smite the wicked editor who dared raise concerns about their behaviour/fundamentally change existing policy/delete the offending item from Misplaced Pages.
The unfortunate news here is that it almost never works. Jimmy's talk page is monitored (at the time of writing) by 1988 people. This is made up of a large cabal who routinely either point out that the decisions made are correct, that Jimmy shouldn't be bothered with worthless tripe, or that Jimbo normally doesn't enter into these sort of discussions. Furthermore, when Jimbo does respond he rarely take sides, unless it is a completely egregious and unescapably important issue that must be responded to. Which in almost all instances is not the case with appeals to his talk page. And if it is, he'll normally get the Wikimedia Foundation to do it for him.
This means that if the editor has to appeal to Jimbo's talk page, they will almost certainly not persuade anyone of the merits of their case. Indeed, argumentum ad Jimbo may actually harm it in the eyes of other editors, because the person appears to be making an end run around consensus. As appealing to Jimbo tends to be the end of the discussion some have likened such a course of action to Godwin's Law.
So the best advice to editors who feel that appealing to Jimmy Wales can get around discussing issues with the wider community is to think again. It may not get them what they desire. They have been warned!
See also
- Misplaced Pages:Role of Jimmy Wales
- Misplaced Pages:Argumentum ad Jimbonem
- Misplaced Pages:What Would Jimbo Do?
- Misplaced Pages:No, you can't have a pony
- The Wrong Version