[WikiEN-l] "refactoring" signatures

Thu Jun 8 16:58:19 UTC 2006

Fastfission wrote:

>On 6/5/06, Tony Sidaway <f.crdfa at gmail.com> wrote:
>  
>
>>On 6/5/06, Fastfission <fastfission at gmail.com> wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>People should be allowed and encourage to develop their personal
>>>identity on Wikipedia
>>>      
>>>
>>Why?  Wikipedia isn't a web host, a blog or a social networking site.
>>Those who are looking for such sites will find that there are plenty
>>of those around.  There is only one Wikipedia.
>>    
>>
>
>Wikipedia is a project that thrives only because people want to spend
>a ridiculous amount of their time on it. Developing a sense of
>personal identity makes people feel comfortable, feel welcome, and
>feel invested. As long as said sense of personal identity does not get
>in the way of the goal of making an encyclopedia, I see absolutely no
>reason to try and quash it. So far most of the attempts to cut out
>"social" aspects seem to have done more harm than good, in my mind.
>
>I've never seen any plausible evidence that things like userboxes
>actually get in the way of the goal of making an encyclopedia, except
>in the sense that trying to eliminate them takes months and creates
>all sorts of awful falling-outs.
>
>FF
>  
>
That is the reason why I am apathetic about userboxes (I couldn't care 
less whether they stay or go). Complex signatures complicate 
discussions, however, and as a result have a very direct effect on the 
encyclopaedia. If our editors can't communicate, or can only communicate 
inconveniently, then the encyclopaedia will inevitably suffer.

John