Created a page recently and don't know where it went? Look here.

Template talk:Occupy

From OccupyWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

Occupy Template Discussion

WHAT info/details to have in the Template (since no one else is bothering)

Currently the sections are

Main Section

| home | summary | location


Template body

| started | status | size | image | image_caption | ideas | description | events | latest


Extra info/details

| tel | email | facebook | twitter | youtube | tumblr | flickr | irc=Internet Relay Chat | logo | logo_banner | statusnet | ustream | livestream | nearby

TO DO

Welcome to our template!

Are you wondering why your wiki page changed? We hope it is for the better?

You can revert back to the original by ...

Or make further changes using these hints

The template itself take it away TAB...

--Brobof 09:03, 22 November 2011 (UTC)


Don't change occupations' pages without consultation, please

Whilst this is all very Hi Tech and wonderful Perhaps many occupations might be slightly intimidated on all the data you are requesting? Let the wiki grow organically? Rather than hierarchically? Just a thought Brobof 20:48, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Are you asking the various Occupations permission before rolling out your changes. I regard this as vandalism and await a response! Brobof 18:54, 21 November 2011 (UTC)


If you feel I am 'requesting data' then then you misunderstand my approach, which is to take a superset of what the different occupies are using ang include that in the template - so that occupies can be see a list of the technologies each other are using. No one is forced to fill out anything. Each page should have, as a minimum, a location, a home (i.e. any URL) and a summary (which can be as short as one word). Tab 19:05, 21 November 2011 (UTC)


Yes. But use history to see what the page looks like This is as much about presentation than anything else. Birmingham looks better NOW ;) On a point of principal: surely it is up to each individual Occupation to define how they want their page to look rather than you acting unilaterally! Some of our contributors may not be as organised as you would like them to be.

I would suggest that at the very least you contact the Occupation and let them know you are editing their page Brobof 22:44, 21 November 2011 (UTC)


Suggestion noted. I agree that presentation is important; I am currently using this template on the rather perfunctory pages, e.g. Leicester, Leeds, Newcastle etc. which are basically just a list of contact details anyway, to increase their appeal. Tab 04:48, 22 November 2011 (UTC)


Yes I know! And they arrive and see it is all being done *for* them... Disincentivization! Would it not be better if you contact THEM and ask them to contribute. Personally I just draw their attention to the facility. Eventually someone from the local Occupation will take up the challenge and benefit from the learning experience! Like me!

However this gives me an idea. Why not an Occupy UK contacts page using your template with a simply worded intro/ welcome for the non techie on how to fill in? Imagine you are a complete beginner to computing or indeed a complete technophobe.

PS I would remove telephone numbers too. Forum is too public. Twitter and Facebook have privacy filters. Perhaps expand upon the https://occupywiki.org.uk/Twitter page? Brobof 07:27, 22 November 2011 (UTC)


Have blocked you for 2 hours Think seriously about what you are doing! Case in point: Exeter before. Exeter now. Their page was perfectly adequate before you arrive and make a mess of it! It was also Maurice's Brobof 07:47, 22 November 2011 (UTC)


A passer-by's opinion

For what it's worth, the M.O. of Occupy seems to be to respect people's boundaries and work for consensus. Don't unilaterally impose structures, tell people what the benefits are and get enough of them to agree, or at least not object. I have considerable sympathy with just getting on and doing stuff, but you don't need to trample on people's toes (indiscriminately ;) to do that. I disagree with Brobof on his disincentivization point, though it may be necessary to explain that having nothing but a template is a bit woeful. I think a welcome page is a great idea, will add a note to myself to have a go at that, though don't let that stop you doing it. Thisland 08:26, 22 November 2011 (UTC)


Re disincentivization (thank heavens for cut and paste ;) ...I am quite happy for Tab to add and improve existing content! You will note that I have only rolled back the deletion of Exeter's welcome. Substituting a rather terse here we are FULL STOP.

I am concerned about people in photos tho. Permissions? Copyright? What is OK for a local facebook page may not be so for the Official Occupy UK wiki! This is -imho- a more serious endeavour! Twitter avatars should be ok Public domain etc But in the final analysis the site should be outsourced as much as possible.

Views from other contributors? Move this page to a discussion board as it is more generic than the Template issue? Waiting Is Brobof 08:43, 22 November 2011 (UTC)


Nobody here owns content

ATM there is only a minor amount of information marked as "required"; if you have a major problem with any of them, you can argue why, and change this requirement.

Nobody is forcing an occupation page to have templates. As general editors of the wiki however, we will edit any page we see fit. Nobody owns content here either. If an occupation really doesn't like using the template on "their page", they can bring up the issue, and we'll take it into account.

However Brobof that is not what you were doing - you were attempting to revert the idea of the template as a whole. There was no structural difference in what you were doing and what Tab was doing. If his changes are "hierarchical" then so were yours. But global change is not necessarily hierarchical, nor non-organic. All it is, is work on a different scale. This sort of high-level work is vital to organise efficiently.

The contact idea is good though, we should definitely do that. :)

In any case none of this warrants a block because it prevents discussion. Blocks should only be used for spammers/liars. Infinity0 12:07, 26 November 2011 (UTC)


Another reason is that the decision is not symmetrical with respect to the parties. We are giving out admin rights quite freely here. If Tab had been an admin and was using your logic Brobof ("you're editing the wiki in a way I disagree with"), he could have just as rightly blocked you for 2 hours. Infinity0 12:11, 26 November 2011 (UTC)


If you feel the 2 hour time out Tab got was harsh, I think taking admin-ship from Brobof is WAY OVER THE TOP, all because Tab would not stop defacing people's occupy page and 1-2 admins could not be bothered to look more into the problem. I HAVE looked more in the situation!, & again I agree with Brobof's decision on the 2 hour ban of Tab. Occupy Soton 17:15, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

I did look into the problem. It's a fair point about the de-admin being harsh, I'll talk over the issue with chris, but it doesn't matter in the end if he's going to go off in a strop and not come back. Repeating "defacement" doesn't convince me - please explain why you consider it to be defacement. Infinity0 19:41, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
Have you BOTHERED to contact Brobof, tried e-mailing or tweeting him? It is defacement cos its changing the look of an occupy groups page without their knowledge or asking the group first. Occupy Soton 11:35, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
A email list was set up for discussing wiki matters of this nature but Brobof made it clear on this wiki that he didn't want to use email to discuss matters related to this wiki. Some Occupy groups are using this wiki more than others and I suspect some occupation pages haven't been created or edited by anyone from that occupation. Admin rights have been given out to people to help cope with the spam -- not for people to block other people when the disagree with them -- this isn't an appropriate use of admin rights. Chris Sun Nov 27 12:20:29 GMT 2011
WHAT else could Brobof have DONE, other than block Tab? Tab was clearly carrying on adding the template to peoples occupy page and REFUSING to discuss the promlem. Occupy Soton 12:43, 27 November 2011
He could have not blocked Tab and continued to discuss the matter. Chris Sun Nov 27 14:31:37 GMT 2011


The Occupy Template

IMO it looks UGLY, compared to the page before having the Template forced on it.

You say nobody is forcing an occupy group to have the template, but simple fact YOU ARE!, by the fact Tab and or yourself Infinity0 are adding the template to people's occupy pages. Why not ASK the occupy group if they want the template, BEFORE adding it to the occupy page. Why covertly FORCE people to have the template. Occupy Soton 13:48, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

If you think it's ugly, you could suggest changes. Just because we are doing something you don't like doesn't mean it's being forced. Apply your own logic to yourself, if we are forcing you, you are also forcing us. Infinity0 19:41, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
STOP USING it till the template issue to resolved. STOP ADDING IT to peoples occupy pages, give them the CHOICE of using the template or not. Get peoples (for example other admins) opinon in WHAT info to have in the template. Occupy Soton 12:13, 27 November 2011
Yo dude chill the fuck out. I've not added it to any new pages. But your idea that pre-emptively adding the templates is somehow taking away choice is wrong. It is good to be bold, otherwise nothing gets done. Infinity0 13:47, 27 November 2011 (UTC)


If we need to ask in advance permission for everything, nothing will get done. People can always revert a change. However I can't accept someone just asserting their way of doing things is correct, then attempting to enforce this by blocking someone. Infinity0 19:41, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
Brobof was NOT asserting that his way of doing things is right, he was trying to discuss the problem with Tab, yet Tab just carried on changing peoples occupy pages, WHICH IS TOTALLY WRONG. So Brobof did (IMO) the only thing he could do, which was block/ban Tab for a few hours. So as Tab would STOP forcing the template on peoples occupy pages, without speaking to that person or group.
But Tab just makes another account, so getting round the temp block & inflames the whole situation. WHY could have Tab not waited it out, then come back & ask Brobof why he was blocked. Tab SHOULD have stopped adding the template to the occupy pages , could have put the template into the occupy groups TALK PAGE - which would give people the OPTION to use it or not OR BTTER STILL spoken to the occupy group. You're basically saying to a occupy group "You're not doing your page correctly, do it this way" Occupy Soton 12:10, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
Blocking Tab prevents him from participating in discussion. Changing occupy pages is not "totally wrong", nobody owns the content. And this quote - "I regard this as vandalism" - is not assuming good faith. This implicitly asserts that your position is the correct one. Infinity0 13:47, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
What? discussion Tab was refusing to do? Brobof as an admin was asking Tab to STOP so as they could both discuss the matter & and maybe even discuss what info to HAVE in the template. Occupy Soton 14:54, 27 November 2011


I agree that Tab should have talked the issue over with Brobof before proceeding with more edits, but this doesn't justify a block. We can always revert changes to a few pages, but blocking prevents discussion. Infinity0 13:47, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
I think it DID justify a block, since Tab was carrying on with adding the template and not disscussing it. A number of times Brobof was saying stop, should discuss this. STOP, SHOULD DISCUSS THIS. STOP, SHOULD DISCUSS THIS So in the endTab was given a 2 hour block. Occupy Soton 14:54, 27 November 2011


Having reviewed the log again I see that Brobof issued the block about 20 minutes after giving a response to Tab on this talk page. This is not a reasonable time to expect replies. Further, I wish to strongly discourage this idea that the occupation pages are somehow "owned" by the original authors, who therefore have more "right" to edit that page and need asking for permission. This sort of attitude is extremely counterproductive. This is essentially what you and Brobof are suggesting, and for me to agree with your block would be agreeing with this attitude. See ownership of articles for more information. Infinity0 00:23, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
Simple question IS, do you want to INCULDE or EXCULDE people in using this wiki? Cos by you saying you want to EXCULDE people from using the wiki, have I got that right Infinity? Occupy Soton 09:06, 28 November 2011
If people can't understand the basic principles that online collaborative projects work under, yes I do want to exclude them. Infinity0 10:01, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
So there you have it folks, the 'owner/s' do nott want people to use the site. You can't be BOTHERED contacting the occupy group. You do not care to encourge the occupy group the maintain their page. What is the point of even HAVING this wiki then? Why not just get rid of the whole wiki? Occupy Soton 10:59, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
In fact FUCK THIS, I feel that strongly about this, that I will be deleting my groups wiki page. All this shit over Brobof's 2 hour block on Tab. Ban For all I care will only go to show how dictatorial you are Occupy Soton 10:59, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
Oh no I'm such a dictator. Go start your own wiki with your stupid rule about owning pages and see how far that goes. Infinity0 19:02, 28 November 2011 (UTC)


In the case of the occupations, it makes even less sense. Nobody owns the occupations; not even the people that help to maintain their pages on this wiki. They are just delegates, they have no authority over the content. Instead of arguing nonsense about who has rights over what page, just get the fuck on with improving it. Any further points you make about "rights" and "need permission" I will just disregard. That is not how online collaborative projects operate. Infinity0 00:23, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
Who has said the someone 'owns' an occupation? NO ONE, you're just inventing rubbish out of thin air Infinity. All I am saying is to CONTACT and ASK the Occupy person who is dealing with the groups Occupy page, if they would mind if an template was added to their groups Occupy page. Also YES It is an INSULT to the person dealing with an Occupy page in changing their page in a big way WITHOUT asking And NOTHING you Infinity or anyone says will change that FACT Occupy Soton 08:33, 28 November 2011
Dude, are you fucking even reading what I'm writing? There is NO NEED to contact them about the page. If ONE PERSON does not have a good reason for editing pages, I will still revert them. We will not allow anybody to make arbitrary changes to pages and start acting like they have more right to edit them like the rest of us. Infinity0 10:01, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
It is not an insult. If you think it is an insult, you can piss off. Seriously, get the fuck out and stop editing. We don't have time for people who think they have more rights than other people here. Nobody here owns pages, nobody here has more right to a page than anyone else. See this article. If you think this, you are NOT a collaborative editor, and we don't want you editing the wiki. Infinity0 10:04, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
Thhnk you, FINALLY Infinity admits that YES they ARE forcing a template on the smaller occupy groups without consent. END OF. If anyone changed MY GROUPS page in a big way without consulting me, I would be VERY VERY pissed off Occupy Soton 10:59, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
IT IS NOT "YOUR GROUP". Fuck! How do you not understand this concept?? Stop forcing the template away from occupy groups without consent. Infinity0 19:02, 28 November 2011 (UTC)


It is better to be bold and go ahead editing rather than awaiting permission, otherwise nothing gets done. I support reasonable good-faith attempts to improve the wiki. Asking all previous authors for permission is unrealistic and in online collaborative projects, nobody does this. Infinity0 13:47, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
Yea that maybe so, but not if you have not even bothered to contact the occupy group or person dealing with the page. Occupy Soton 14:54, 27 November 2011


The entire point is that contacting each occupy group is not necessary. I have other things to do than contact every author of a page asking permission for edits. Why don't you do this, if you care so much? You are the one that thinks this is necessary, not me. Infinity0 00:03, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
YES I will be, since NO ONE is going to bother contacting the occupy groups Occupy Soton 08:33, 28 November 2011 (UTC)


We are not going to force the template on occupations, but if there is no specific complaint I will add it because I think it's the right thing to do. The template can always be changed if people thinks it looks bad, and individual occupations can override if they really have a massive problem with it, but there's a benefit to having a consistent structure.
If you improve the looks of the template, you improve it on all pages - another benefit, efficiency-wise. It's also easier for people to set up, rather than having to worry about formatting the page. Infinity0 19:55, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Wait a response

I have contcted these Occupy groups > Bradford, Edinburgh, Exeter, Glasgow, Norwich, so I ask anyone reading this to WAIT for a response. IF there has been no response in say 3 days (at a minimum though would be nicer if people could wait for a week) then ok fair dos. Occupy Soton 09:49, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

In the meantime please stop delaying progress on the wiki. Infinity0 09:57, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
Browse
Contribute
Toolbox