User talk:Headbomb
Add topicPlease leave messages on the English wikipedia rather than on this page.
en:User talk:Headbomb
Template Wizard script available for testing
[edit]Hello. I'm contacting you because you voted for the Infobox Wizard in the 2017 Community Wishlist Survey.
The Infobox Wizard has gotten an upgrade - it's now a Template Wizard which works for infoboxes and all other templates. The feature is being developed as an extension (which will allow for localization) but there is a prototype user script which works well.
The Wishlist Team would love it if you could take a few minutes to try the Template Wizard prototype script out and give us feedback on whether it lives up to your expectations. This feedback will help build the script into an extension. To get started, add the following to your Special:MyPage/common.js -
mw.loader.load( 'https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Samwilson/TemplateWizard.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript' );The Template Wizard will show up as a puzzle-piece icon in the 2010 WikiEditor. You can click on the icon to insert a template. Your thoughts are needed on whether it makes sense for the wizard to be available for all users by default or if there should be a preference for it. If it's a preference, what should the default be? Please leave your feedback here. Thank you! -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 22:41, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
Commond deletion bot requirements
[edit]I'm contacting you because you supported the Commons Deletion Bot proposal in the 2017 Community Wishlist. The Wishlist team has finalized the draft specifications for how the bot will work, and are seeking review in confirming or discussing the plans for the bot. If you have some time, please take a look and leave a comment. Thanks, happy editing to you. - Keegan (WMF) (talk) 19:05, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
The Community Wishlist Survey
[edit]Hi,
You get this message because you’ve previously participated in the Community Wishlist Survey. I just wanted to let you know that this year’s survey is now open for proposals. You can suggest technical changes until 11 November: Community Wishlist Survey 2019.
You can vote from November 16 to November 30. To keep the number of messages at a reasonable level, I won’t send out a separate reminder to you about that. /Johan (WMF) 11:24, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
WikiProjects
[edit]Hi Headbomb
Are you sill involved with making tools for wikiprojects? Sorry, I am not permitted to post on enwiki. Ottawahitech (talk) 03:49, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
- More or less. Not really sure I understand the question. Headbomb (talk) 07:10, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
- There is discussion on Simple Wikipedia about wikiprojects. Many oldtimers think wikiprojects are not a good fit for Simple. It would greatly help to have you dispel some of the myths. Am I making sense? Ottawahitech (talk) 15:29, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
- WikiProjects are generally good, and I would recommend them to any large Wikipedia with a significant userbase. If you don't have the userbase, there isn't much point in dividing the work by topic, and I don't keep up with Simple Wiki enough to know what's the state of things over there. The general advice I'd give is if you want WikiProjects, make sure you're making WikiProjects that make sense for the scope of Simple wiki. Maybe you have enough folks interested in science in general, but not enough folks interested in physics specifically. The first will succeed, but the second will be ignored. Headbomb (talk) 20:30, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
- Hi Headbomb, not sure why you believe wikiprojects depend on large participation. I was checking out https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_COVID-19#Article_alerts and I see the project was set up less than a week ago and only 94 editors have been involved to date. Is there something I am missing? Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (talk) 20:47, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
- Well, I was personally against setting up WP COVID as being too ephemeral, but what is a "large" participation is a very relative thing. If you have 30 people interested in WikiProjects in general that's not a lot. If you have 30 people interested in a single WikiProject, that's pretty respectable. Headbomb (talk) 20:57, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks for the quick resonse. I personally think we need more people involved in diferent aspects of COVID-19. It is a huge worldwide problem and even commercial sites, such as facebook, are changing things in response. But lets agree to disagree.
- Well, I was personally against setting up WP COVID as being too ephemeral, but what is a "large" participation is a very relative thing. If you have 30 people interested in WikiProjects in general that's not a lot. If you have 30 people interested in a single WikiProject, that's pretty respectable. Headbomb (talk) 20:57, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
- Hi Headbomb, not sure why you believe wikiprojects depend on large participation. I was checking out https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_COVID-19#Article_alerts and I see the project was set up less than a week ago and only 94 editors have been involved to date. Is there something I am missing? Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (talk) 20:47, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
- WikiProjects are generally good, and I would recommend them to any large Wikipedia with a significant userbase. If you don't have the userbase, there isn't much point in dividing the work by topic, and I don't keep up with Simple Wiki enough to know what's the state of things over there. The general advice I'd give is if you want WikiProjects, make sure you're making WikiProjects that make sense for the scope of Simple wiki. Maybe you have enough folks interested in science in general, but not enough folks interested in physics specifically. The first will succeed, but the second will be ignored. Headbomb (talk) 20:30, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
- There is discussion on Simple Wikipedia about wikiprojects. Many oldtimers think wikiprojects are not a good fit for Simple. It would greatly help to have you dispel some of the myths. Am I making sense? Ottawahitech (talk) 15:29, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
- The reason I came here is that I know you were very instrumental in setting up tools for wikiprojects on enwiki, and I personally believe those tools are fabulous (note to self: watch using Trump language on wmf sites). It seems to me that if a few , knowledgeable eidtors could set up a project so quickly, it really does not take a lot of manpower to keep it being useful once it has been set up. Am I wrong? Ottawahitech (talk) 21:13, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
Community Wishlist Survey 2019 - Section Name in Diff
[edit]Hello!
The Community Tech team (WMF) has officially started the project for Section Name in Diff, the #9 wish from the 2019 Community Wishlist Survey!
You previously voted for this wish, so we are now contacting you. We invite you to visit the project page, where you can read a project analysis and share your feedback.
We hope to see you on the project talk page, and thank you in advance!
-- IFried (WMF), 14:13, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
article alerts
[edit]There a lot of information in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_COVID-19/Article_alerts for english-wikipdians interested in working on COVID-19 articles. But what about other language wikipedias and other wmf sister-projects, such wikicommons, wikinews etc. Any thoughts on how wikimedians can take advantage of the same tools? Thanks in advance, 18:53, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
The 2021 Community Wishlist Survey is now open! This survey is the process where communities decide what the Community Tech team should work on over the next year. We encourage everyone to submit proposals until the deadline on 30 November, or comment on other proposals to help make them better. The communities will vote on the proposals between 8 December and 21 December.
The Community Tech team is focused on tools for experienced Wikimedia editors. You can write proposals in any language, and we will translate them for you. Thank you, and we look forward to seeing your proposals!
18:26, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
We invite all registered users to vote on the 2021 Community Wishlist Survey. You can vote from now until 21 December for as many different wishes as you want.
In the Survey, wishes for new and improved tools for experienced editors are collected. After the voting, we will do our best to grant your wishes. We will start with the most popular ones.
We, the Community Tech, are one of the Wikimedia Foundation teams. We create and improve editing and wiki moderation tools. What we work on is decided based on results of the Community Wishlist Survey. Once a year, you can submit wishes. After two weeks, you can vote on the ones that you're most interested in. Next, we choose wishes from the survey to work on. Some of the wishes may be granted by volunteer developers or other teams.
We are waiting for your votes. Thank you!
16:08, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
Sources you can maybe add to unreliable.js
[edit]Hi, @Headbomb. I'm sending this here because I'm proxy blocked on enwiki and I'm not confortable making my ip public. I have made a list of websites you could add to w:User:Headbomb/unreliable.js.
Feel free to strike ones that you have added and maybe add a comment.
| stuff at add | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FROM DISCUSSIONS:[edit]OTHER:[edit]
Edit: also, check out https://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/dont-get-fooled-by-these-fake-news-sites/17/ for more stuff you should propable add. |
163.116.130.27 15:12, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
- Also:
- Dailyhive.com (lower quality and less reputable, although you should use your own judgement for that)
- Habr.com (tech blog)
- Sptrkr.com (sponsored garbage)
- Whtrkr.com (also sponsored)
- thestar.com/sponsored_sections (obvious)
- lamag.com/sponsored
- ctvnews.ca/sponsored-content
- nationalpost.com/sponsored
- amny.com/sponsored
- seattletimes.com/sponsored
- And the sites listed here: https://gizmodo.com/the-9-worst-fake-news-sites-1681729157 163.116.130.27 13:40, 30 November 2022 (UTC)