User talk:Ne0Freedom
Welcome to Meta![edit]
Hello, Ne0Freedom. 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). Happy editing!
-- 19:39, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
Wikidata interwiki to Wikidata transition[edit]
Hi!
You signed up on Wikidata/Volunteers to help with the Interwiki to Wikidata transition. I wanted to get back to you about that. Have you already tried the demo? We are getting closer to an initial roll-out on the first Wikipedia and it'd be great if you could give it a try. Please do let me know about any problems you encounter. Thanks for your help :)
Cheers
Lydia
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 22:02, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
What is the basis of your opposition to Earned Public Reputation?[edit]
I'm trying to understand the basis of your expressed opposition to the idea of EPR over at the Discussion tab of https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants_talk:IdeaLab/Multidimensional_EPR_(Earned_Public_Reputation). I think you are saying that it is hard to determine if an article is controversial only based upon rapid changes? In that case, I wonder how you would recognize a controversial article?
However, in the context of EPR the significant thing is that some particular person is prone to making such changes, is eager to take sides on such debatable issues. I'm actually unsure which dimension or dimensions would be best to represent that kind of person. Perhaps "excitable" where the negative side of that dimension is "calm"? Or perhaps "impartial" with a negative side of "biased" or "judgemental"? Another option would be a dimension about the likelihood of jumping to conclusions?
While your opposition may be well justified, I'm more interested in seeking ways to make the idea of EPR more clear so that it can be applied in useful ways. Shanen (talk) 22:55, 6 August 2018 (UTC)