User talk:Bluerasberry

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Afrikaans | العربية | azərbaycanca | Boarisch | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | বাংলা | བོད་ཡིག | bosanski | català | کوردی | čeština | Cymraeg | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | ދިވެހިބަސް | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | eesti | فارسی | suomi | français | Nordfriisk | Frysk | galego | Alemannisch | ગુજરાતી | עברית | हिन्दी | Fiji Hindi | hrvatski | magyar | Հայերեն | interlingua | Bahasa Indonesia | Ido | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | ភាសាខ្មែរ | 한국어 | Limburgs | lietuvių | Baso Minangkabau | македонски | മലയാളം | молдовеняскэ | Bahasa Melayu | مازِرونی | नेपाली | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk bokmål | occitan | Kapampangan | polski | português | Runa Simi | română | русский | slovenčina | slovenščina | Soomaaliga | shqip | српски / srpski | svenska | ślůnski | தமிழ் | ไทย | Türkmençe | Tagalog | Türkçe | татарча/tatarça | tzm  | українська | اردو | Tiếng Việt | 吴语 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/-

Welcome to Meta![edit]

Hello Bluerasberry, and welcome to the Wikimedia Meta-Wiki! This website is for coordinating and discussing all Wikimedia projects. You may find it useful to read our policy page. If you are interested in doing translations, visit Meta:Babylon. You can also leave a note on Meta:Babel or Wikimedia Forum (please read the instructions at the top of the page before posting there). If you would like, feel free to ask me questions on my talk page. Happy editing! Ottava Rima (talk) 14:34, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Your oppose vote[edit]

Hi Bluerasberry. I have to say, I found your oppose vote in my steward candidacy a bit offensive. I don't know what you were reading, but nowhere in my statement or questions have I ever implied that I was not mature enough for the position. We obviously don't know each other personally, nor do I recall knowing you in any professional capacity for which you could judge me. I do hope you'd change that particular part of your oppose vote to something a little more tasteful. Regards, SWATJester Son of the Defender 15:08, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

I cannot stop you from being offended if you choose to feel that way but I assure you that I did not intend for you to become offended. I think that you stated a lack of maturity when you said this - "Oh, and as a helpful bonus, my new job will be paying for me to go to language school for a year, so I'll have some multi-lingual capability as well." The situation is that you think being multilingual is a good trait for the position, but you are not by your standard sufficiently multilingual, so you state that you are taking classes to become more multilingual.
I am glad that you are continuing your education but the fact that you are taking education is not a distinguishing characteristic of a steward and not a trait on which your readiness for candidacy can be decided. Furthermore the fact that you are presenting this information indicates that you think that multilingual capacity is some skill which stewards ought to have, yet you do not have it, so you are saying that you have made arrangements to get it. In that case, why not just take the class for a year then apply for stewardship next year? I supported a different English-only candidate, so I voted not because of your skill but instead because of your stated self-perception. Be proud of the skills you have right now and do not advertise what person you think you will become.
Since you are offended I feel sad because it was not my intent to hurt anyone. I feel that I acted well in reading your statement and visiting your user page and even I was the one of only a few people who wrote more than a few words explaining my vote to you. If I am misunderstanding you in some way and you can guess my misconception then please talk more with me, but I think that I have done sufficient work to justify my vote at this time and would like to leave it as oppose. Blue Rasberry (talk) 02:27, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
And again, I think it is inappropriate for you to speculate on whether I'm proud of myself, or whether I'm trying to become someone else by going to mandatory language training for my job, or that somehow that reduces my maturity level. These are all personal judgments you have made about me as a person, not me as an editor, and you have no basis for making them. That is why I found your post, and your followup above, to be offensive. As for the vote change, it is irrelevant now as the election is over, however please understand that I'm following up in the hopes that you will realize that your tone and choice of words are offensive to people, so that you don't unintentionally offend someone else down the line. Regards, SWATJester Son of the Defender 17:34, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for writing to me. I understand that you are upset and I am sorry that you disagree with my rationale for voting as I did, but if you do not like that rationale then I think that another one would be that I do not think that you would make a good steward because you are too easily offended. I tried to be thoughtful and am doing my best to be a good Wikipedian. The situation that I am facing now is that I spent time for your sake participating in an election and beyond not appreciating my effort you are taking offense at my work. Since both of us have good intentions I think the problem must be some miscommunication between us but with you taking offense and escalating the tension of the situation I do not anticipate a happy end to this discussion, nor would I expect you to be able to be a steward without taking offense at constructive criticism from other people. When stewards disagree with someone I feel that they ought to try to understand the other person's point of view, because even if I am a fool then it would be better for you to try to teach me another way than just make me feel guilty for having a opinion with an invalid basis. I do not know what to think now, but I very sincerely apologize for hurting your feelings. Still I do not want to change my vote at this time. Blue Rasberry (talk) 02:05, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I think we are in essence not disagreeing here but are failing to communicate effectively to each other. No offense is taken anymore, now that your reasoning is better explained. My apologies if I made you feel guilty, I did not intend to do that, or to intensify a situation here. Regards, SWATJester Son of the Defender 06:17, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Election[edit]

Hi, and thanks for your comments in the election. Was there something specific you had in mind that was missing from my userpage? Regards, Jafeluv 10:55, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations on your election to stewardship!
I had the same complaint about the user pages of many other stewards. Your page is not bad but I feel that your user page should show that you are an open person.
Here is your page as it exists now. It is sufficient, but because you are steward some curious people will be coming to your page just to see how stewards present themselves. I think that you should take steps to be more welcoming.
Is it common that all stewards use all steward functions, or more likely that some stewards more frequently do some things and leave other business to other stewards? If you expect to more frequently do one thing, then perhaps you could state that as an area of interest. What about other administrative or bureaucratic functions? I think most people tend to only use some of them, and if you are a good person to contact for some particular function then best to state it.
Is there any particular article or Wikipedia project on which you have worked and about which you feel especially proud? I think many users who visit your page might be interested in seeing what kind of work their elected steward thinks is the best work. Perhaps you could have a description of some particular jazz article, or just show some personality by saying that you promote education about jazz in Finnish Wikipedia.
I do not really care what you say, but just say something more so that people visiting your page will know more about your interest in Wikipedia and what you do here. Thanks for your attention. Blue Rasberry (talk) 03:17, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the response. I'll definitely keep your comments in mind. Jafeluv 10:26, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

WMF Fellowships[edit]

Hi, I saw you active on those pages, and wanted to let you know I just added this proposal, in case you want to read it too! Have a nice day, --Elitre 17:41, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

I just saw your message on Talk:Wikimedia Fellowships/Project Ideas/Using your languages across the Wikipedias, and replied. Please comment further if anything occurs to you. I'll watch more closely now that I know I have a reader! Andrew Dalby 14:06, 20 January 2012 (UTC)


criteria[edit]

hi, thank you for your vote and I appreciate and respect the fact that you actually have criteria to evaluate the candidates against. Since you said you make the criterion of edit count sort of conditional, let me just explain my view: I strongly believe that correcting commas and rollbacks on recent changes watch should not be systematically promoted as better Wikipedic work than longer, narrative input (be it either in the article creation, or discussion, but meritocratic). Of course I respect the fact that my opinion is in minority, and that many users will thrive in minor edits, easily inflating their edit count into over 100k. I even definitely believe that rollbacking and comma corrections are important. Yet, my post here is over 600 characters. I don't think it is 600 times less effort to write it than 600 comma corrections, that's all :) Pundit 01:30, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Of course there are ways to cheat my criteria. I also vote for sysops on English Wikipedia, and I participate in discussions about how to decide who should be elected and who should not. I feel like everyone has criteria for making decisions, even people who do not write their criteria. It is hard for me to say what would make me sure that I would vote for someone, but I am almost positive that anyone who had fewer than 500 edits on a given wikiproject could not consider themselves highly experienced in that project. Thanks for writing, and good luck in the election. Blue Rasberry (talk) 03:03, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
Of course everybody has criteria, but people who do not make them explicit can unconsciously change them from voting to voting. It is good to have them formulated. Also, I agree that 500 edits on a project is probably a good general estimate of understanding more or less what's going on, especially for beginners. If I were to argue my case (even if only to persuade you to a neutral vote), I'd say that I do have such experience on 2 projects. I also have very high understanding of rules (declaration only on face value, but I did study them thoroughly and as a result have 2 publications on Wikipedia in the pipeline). My work on the ombudsmen commission, which does not count in any edit counters for obvious reasons, has lead me to discussing policy, rules, and CU/ComArb behavior practices on more than 10 different projects, afair. While there are many stewards well versed in cross-wiki antivandalism, my experience and knowledge seems to be quite complementary to theirs. Again, I take liberty to discuss it with you only because you clearly stated that you are open-minded about your criteria application, and allow arguments. In any case, I am grateful for your reply and serious, non-lemming approach. Pundit 16:26, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
How can I get any information about your participating on the ombudsman commission? You provided no links for me to see your personal involvement. Are discussions on this project closed? If so, can you provide an endorsement from any other ombudsman who can verify that you are in good standing?
Why do you not have 500 edits on at least 3 projects? Being a steward is partly about having some authority on multiple wikiprojects. If you have interest in multiple projects, then why have you not explored them? Do you think you will in the future?
I would be happy to support you, but if I were in your place, I am not sure that I would feel comfortable being a steward. I am fairly active on en.Wikipedia and I even do a lot of public outreach by hosting Wikipedia meetings, teaching Wikipedia at seminars, and in other ways. It is not obvious to me that you are more experienced on Wikipedia than I am, and I know that I do not have skills to be a steward, so I just wonder how you can be ready. If I saw a reason - and I am not looking for much - then I would support you. Blue Rasberry (talk) 16:50, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
hrhgh... Proceedings of the ombudsman commission are private, and this is the reason why they are not published (and non-linkable). But you raise a good point - there are no clear outside measures of ombudsman good work. I will tell fellow commission members of your concern and ask them for either endorsement or clear statement that I don't do well enough :)
I am not particularly active besides 2 projects and this is definitely a flaw. I do intend to make a better use of my camera and intensify my work on commons. In general, I stick to Wikipedia (online encyclopedia) and there are only 2 languages I speak fluently enough to seriously contribute. My main experience with other projects is through usurpations and OC.
I am reasonably active in the real Wikiworld, too ;) doing my share of the outreach to the academic community. I have no way of measuring your skills, but it may well be that you just are modest. My perception of stewardship is that of added value: I don't think everybody should satisfy the same criteria, since adding the 31st steward with the same experience does not significantly add value to this group. On the other hand, adding somebody with slightly different experience, may. cheers Pundit 17:22, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
Of course I want more diversity also. Your two languages are more than enough, and I would be happy if you contributed just a little to a second Polish-language wikiproject to learn what it is and how it works. If you make a commitment to participate in any other wikiproject (English or Polish Wikibooks, Wikisource, Wikitionary, Wikinews, anything) over the course of the next three months for at least 10 hours total, and get a recommendation from another omsbudsman, then I would support you. Is that reasonable? Blue Rasberry (talk) 17:33, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
Hi, yes, that's more than reasonable, and I believe I can use the experience indeed. I've also already written to OC, requesting support or opposition (so as to make the feedback transparent). Pundit 17:38, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
  • My fellow ombudsmen made a point that it would be quite inappropriate for OC members to vote in the elections. I understand these concerns. They did point out, however, that my good standing in the OC should not raise any doubts, since my term was renewed for another year. In particular, they stated:
Sir48:

for my part I will avoid to give any public "judgement" of any member of the commission. Similarly, I don't vote for stewards and checkusers during my time here.

You have answered as best you can in the circumatance where our proceedings are confidential. It could be added, perhaps, that it looks like you have had your service on the commision extended for one year as the rest of us.

I wish you the best of luck in the election.

Thogo:

same for me. Although I have voted in the last election, I decided this time not to vote or to comment on the candidates. But as Philippe had no problem with any of us continuing for another year I think it can be safely assumed that you served well in the committee which I fully agree to. :) Good luck for your election!

  • Of course, you may consider this as insufficient. Yet, I also believe that it in general is the proper code of conduct not to engage in voting in case of OC members, since a day could come when OC had a case of a steward, who had been elected by the votes of OC members. Pundit 15:27, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Request for more info about ombudsman commission appointees[edit]

I would like to ask more of you. Can you arrange some changes to the ombudsman page to give more information? I would like to see something more like this there, but I do not have information to complete such a table. I think the dates also should link to a public statement or discussion about the user's appointment. How would you feel about arranging to make this information accessible?
Ombudsman appointments
name appointment reconfirmation wiki
Sir48  ?  ? Dutch Wikipedia userpage
Pundit 2010 2011 Polish Wikipedia userpage
I would have done this myself, but the ombudsman page seems to be tied up with templates and anyway I do not know how to find any stating verifying the appointments. Please share your thoughts on this. Blue Rasberry (talk) 17:32, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
I think the info will be processed some time in February, by Philippe. You are right that it should be clearer. Thank you for your support! Pundit 17:45, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

[edit]

Hi Bluerasberry. I deleted File talk:WALRUS logo notext.svg and moved the content to Commons as the image is stored on Commons and not here. Trijnsteltalk 19:07, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for doing that. My mistake. Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:16, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Wikivoyage[edit]

Hi. Sorry for the late reply concerning the Wikivoyage discussion. We just started the process. I will let you know, when and where more information will be available. -- DerFussi (talk) 18:48, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:15, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Would love to meet you in Dhaka[edit]

Hi Bluerasberry, I will definitely meet you when you will be here in Dhaka. I think other Wikimedians from Dhaka (especially the members of Wikimedia Bangladesh) would also love to meet you. I'm just making a correction here: recently I have been appointed as a member of Funds Dissemination Committee of Wikimedia Foundation; but I am not judging the WLM:) Both news came on the Signpost. See you in Dhaka. - Ali Haidar Khan (Tonmoy) (talk) 18:55, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Wikimedia Travel Guide: Naming poll open[edit]

Hi there,

You are receiving this message because you edited the initial naming straw poll for the Wikimedia Travel Guide.

The proposed naming poll is now open and you can vote for as many of the proposed names as you wish, if you are eligible. Please see Travel Guide/Naming Process for full details on voting eligibility and how the final name will be selected. Voting will last for 14 days, and will terminate on 16 October at 06:59:59 UTC.

Thanks, Thehelpfulone 23:08, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Thematic orgs[edit]

I hope you don't feel like I'm targeting you personally. I'm uncomfortable with these thematic organization proposals in general, and I happened to pick on the two that I thought had the most objectionable proposals to approach. I later saw that you were involved in both. Anyway, it's nothing personal. Gigs (talk) 18:21, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

I do not feel that way. We are in touch by email now. I hope to talk with you soon. Blue Rasberry (talk) 13:06, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

WM:MED withdrawal[edit]

Did you withdraw your nomination to the board because of the possible perception of COI? I hope this doesn't mean you'll reduce your involvement in WM:MED. Your input has been crucial, and will continue to be.

There is a lot I'm very unsure about in the realm of COI. Can you tell me the thinking behind your decision to withdraw? --Anthonyhcole (talk) 12:43, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

It is only because of the perception of conflict of interest. I am happy to talk to you or anyone else about this. I may not be as involved in Wiki Medicine for now but I will continue to participate in WikiProject Medicine. Blue Rasberry (talk) 13:17, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
I'm sorry to hear that. WhatamIdoing mentioned the advisory board. I hope you'll consider that. --Anthonyhcole (talk) 13:32, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Wikimedia Travel Guide: Naming poll open[edit]

Hi there,

You are receiving this message because you voiced your opinion at the Request for Comment on the Wikimedia Travel Guide.

The proposed naming poll opened a few days ago and you can vote for as many of the proposed names as you wish, if you are eligible. Please see Travel Guide/Naming Process for full details on voting eligibility and how the final name will be selected. Voting will last for 14 days, and will terminate on 16 October at 06:59:59 UTC.

Thanks, Thehelpfulone 21:49, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

I proposed a name and voted. Thanks. Blue Rasberry (talk) 13:05, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

WM US Federation[edit]

I ask that you withdraw from the discussion of the bylaws abit. No one's vote is going to be discounted because of the reason for the vote or almost any other reason. This is not a kangaroo court, we are seeing if the proposal is backed by the community. --Guerillero 23:22, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

I am sure you do not understand my position. Email me anytime if you want to talk on phone or video. Blue Rasberry (talk) 00:39, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Move[edit]

I fixed the page title of WikiProject Med, but still waiting for a local Meta admin to delete Wiki Project Med/left-over redirect. You might want to move Template:WikiProject Med/Reports/Timeline. πr2 (t • c) 21:26, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for moving it, and thanks for pointing out the template. I moved it also Blue Rasberry (talk) 21:54, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
Maybe also the stuff in Category:Wiki Med (and the category name), Special:PrefixIndex/Wiki Med. πr2 (t • c) 20:50, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Happy Bengali New Year to you too[edit]

Hi, I'm so glad to hear from you. Hope you got back to US safely. It was very nice meeting you in Dhaka & I would love to meet, greet & treat you in Dhaka again and again:) And full marks to your memory, seems you didn't forget our discussion;) You will be happy to know that we have started organizing programs in collaboration with different universities & we successfully did one last week. Thank you for all your good wishes. --Ali Haidar Khan (Tonmoy) (talk) 19:47, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

The Stethoscope: A Wiki Project Med Foundation Review (Issue 1)[edit]

Wiki Project Med Foundation

Wiki Project Med Foundation (WPMEDF) was formally incorporated in New York as a 501(c)(3) nonprofit. Our mission is bold like Wikipedia's: Imagine a world in which every single person is given free access to the sum of all medical knowledge." That's what we're doing.

In this newsletter:

Wiki Project Med Logo.png
  • Designing our logos and name: How and why we made them
  • Creating Our Board: Who's involved and what they're doing
  • Adding 70+ Interested members: Participants from all over the globe
  • Furthering ongoing projects: Expanding exciting in many directions at once
  • Proposing Wikimania presentations: Sign up for the talks that interest you
  • Taking on on social media: Up and running with outreach (plus business cards!)
  • Charting pathways for how you can help right now: a great list easy and important areas to contribute


Read the Full Newsletter


We aim to run The Stethoscope at least once per quarter and no more than once per month. We only send to people who already signed on as WikiProject Med or Wiki Project Medicine Foundation interested members/participants. If you do not want to receive the newsletter, please add your name here.

It's been a pleasure so far, and we have so much more to do. Wishing you happy Spring up North and pleasant Autumn down South.

--Jake and the rest of the Wiki Project Med Foundation Team, Ocaasi (talk) 20:00, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Nice to talk to you[edit]

Do you have the Wikidata contacts?

Thanks, Mcnabber091 (talk) 20:17, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

No, not really. I have a friend who is promoting Wikidata and she may be able to direct you to other people if you have questions. See en:User:Aude. My personal interest is in d:Wikidata:Medicine task force. Even this I am not engaging as well as I would like. Unfortunately the best advice that I can give to you is to go to d:Wikidata:Community portal and look at what other people are doing, and to meet people there. Wikidata is a very new project and it neither has good documentation nor much community. A lot of people have hope for it and Aude would be able to tell you something about the time frames for rolling out features. Next Monday on IRC there are Wikidata staff office hours. It would be great if you could attend that. See details at IRC office hours. I am around - if you get stuck and can find no appropriate contact then please message me and I will make introductions, but first take a look yourself. Update me regularly, even if nothing is happening. Thanks. Blue Rasberry (talk) 13:56, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
I'm on the IRC chat right now. So far no luck on contacts. I'm thinking about submitting the property list here: http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Property_proposal/Place . What else about the list needs improvement? Mcnabber091 (talk) 19:02, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Wikimedia LGBT / User Group[edit]

Please see this discussion regarding User Group status. Thank you! --Another Believer (talk) 15:42, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

IdeaLab/Colours of Bangladesh[edit]

Hi, thanks for your comment on the project proposal talk page(Grants_talk:IdeaLab/Colours_of_Bangladesh). i replied to all your comments, please check that and help me to fine the inconsistencies of the project.--Nasir Khan Saikat (talk) 08:14, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

I made some big changes to the Grants/IdeaLab proposal[edit]

I provided an explanation for the structure and added more material to the proposal. Mcnabber091 (talk) 05:26, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Maps[edit]

You got your answers: Grants_talk:IEG/Wikimaps_Atlas. Yug (talk) 21:30, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

Thank you![edit]

IEG barnstar 1.png Individual Engagement Grant Barnstar
Lane, thanks for the thoughtful participation in IEG proposal discussions so far - I love it when I get to an idea, draft, or proposal and find you've already asked a million great questions! Siko (WMF) (talk) 05:40, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Upcoming IdeaLab Events: IEG Proposal Clinics[edit]

Idea Lab
Idea Lab

Hello, Bluerasberry! We've added Events to IdeaLab, and you're invited :)

Upcoming events focus on turning ideas into Individual Engagement Grant proposals before the March 31 deadline. Need help or have questions about IEG? Join us at a Hangout:

  • Thursday, 13 March 2014, 1600 UTC
  • Wednesday, 19 March 2014, 1700 UTC
  • Saturday, 29 March 2014, 1700 UTC

Hope to see you there!

This message was delivered automatically to IEG and IdeaLab participants. To unsubscribe from any future IEG reminders, remove your name from this list

IEG for Open Access Reader[edit]

Hullo! I know this is close to the wire but the Open Access Reader grant application is being submitted tonight - just flagging up in case Ed hadn't and you had time to look at it again this evening? Thank you! Leela0808 (talk) 19:10, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Leela0808 I left a short comment on the talk page encouraging the coordinators to proceed. If I criticized it was only to provide an alternative perspective, and not because I had any hesitation to supporting it as it was proposed. If you ever want to chat about then I remain standing by to give feedback on request. Thanks. Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:22, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
Hey yes - that's great! I think its a really userful overall point and I would hope if the grant is supported it could scope out some of the side issues, perhaps even having to review and report on the problems they present needing to become their own project. Thankyou! The community feedback process will start soon so if you could check in around that and exploring/asking questions with interested commentators that would be great. Ditto if you know users who would want to have input, feel free to share :D Leela0808 (talk) 15:22, 1 April 2014 (UTC)