Revision 858809443 of "User talk:Jimbo Wales" on enwiki

{{noindex}}
{{Stb}} 
{{Usercomment}}
{{#ifeq:{{PROTECTIONLEVEL:edit}}|autoconfirmed|{{pp|small=yes}}}}
{{Notice|1={{Center|1='''Jimbo welcomes your comments and updates – he has an [[open door policy (business)|open door policy]].'''<br />
'''He holds the founder's seat on the [[WP:Wikimedia Foundation|Wikimedia Foundation]]'s [[wmf:Board of Trustees#Current members|Board of Trustees]].<br />The current [[m:Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_of_Trustees#Current_members|trustees]] occupying "community-selected" seats are [[User:Doc James|Doc James]], [[User:Pundit|Pundit]] and [[User:Raystorm|Raystorm]].<br />The Wikimedia Foundation's Lead Manager of Trust and Safety is [[User:JEissfeldt (WMF)|Jan Eissfeldt]].'''}}}}
{{Notice|1={{Center|1='''Sometimes this page is semi-protected and you will not be able to leave a message here unless you are a registered editor. In that case, <br> [[User talk:Jimbo Wales/Unprotected|you can leave a message here]] '''}}}}
{{Talk header|search=yes}}
{{Wikipedia:TPS/banner}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config
| algo                = old(1d)
| archive             = User talk:Jimbo Wales/Archive %(counter)d
| counter             = 231
| maxarchivesize      = 350K
| archiveheader       = {{aan}}
| minthreadstoarchive = 1
| minthreadsleft      = 1
}}
{{Centralized discussion}}

__TOC__
{{-}}

== Storm Gordon along west Florida ==

The current small [[Tropical Storm Gordon (2018)]], already past [[Florida Keys]] is predicted to turn away, more northwest, headed toward Mississippi or Alabama coast (farther west of [[Pensacola]]). See [[NOAA]] NHC webpage: [https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/text/refresh/MIATCPAT2+shtml/022042.shtml? live advisory status].

For Wikipedia, this is another storm giving NHC [[storm surge]] predictions as height above land, recently {{cvt|1|-|2|ft}} above ground (whatever that means locally). Recall 2012 [[Super Storm Sandy]], where many residents seemed surprised how the storm surge, reported as water above average tide levels, in a [[channel bay]] became a shocking {{cvt|14|ft}} above the waterfront and overtopped entrances to flood some of the underground New York subway train tunnels. <p>At 2:00 pm EDT, the T.S. Gordon status noted:
:: ...G{{lc:ORDON STILL PRODUCING TROPICAL-STORM-FORCE WINDS AND HEAVY RAINS ACROSS SOUTH }} F{{lc:LORIDA AND THE UPPER KEYS...}}
:: ...S{{lc:TORM SURGE WARNING AND [[HURRICANE WATCH]] IN EFFECT FOR PORTIONS OF THE CENTRAL GULF COAST...}}
The expected top windspeed, leaving Florida in 2 days, was predicted around {{convert|60|kn |mph km/h|round=5 |disp=x| (~|)}}, but could change much lower/higher due to warm [[Gulf of Mexico]], with record heat in recent U.S. weather reports. As a small storm, this is unlikely unrelated to WP page "[[Eyewall replacement cycle]]" which was perhaps a major issue for 2017 [[Hurricane Maria]] at Puerto Rico. Again, see live T.S. Gordon webpage: [https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/text/refresh/MIATCPAT2+shtml/022042.shtml? live NHC advisory]. -[[User:Wikid77|Wikid77]] ([[User talk:Wikid77|talk]]) 20:18, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
:: Two days later, as [[U.S. NWS]] predicted, [[Tropical Storm Gordon]] reached {{convert|60|kn |mph km/h|round=5 |disp=x| (~|)}} and made landfall near the Alabama-Mississippi [[state line]]. -[[User:Wikid77|Wikid77]] ([[User talk:Wikid77|talk]]) 06:40, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
:I understand that Jimbo accepts, even encourages this talk page to be used for a wide variety of subjects relevant to Wikipedia. However, I think the recent penchant to use it as a place to post weather reports is a bit too much. I'm very interested in tropical storms but this is not my go to site for such discussions.--[[User:Sphilbrick|<span style="color:#000E2F;padding:0 4px;font-family: Copperplate Gothic Light">S Philbrick</span>]][[User talk:Sphilbrick|<span style=";padding:0 4px;color:# 000;font-family: Copperplate Gothic Light">(Talk)</span>]] 19:35, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
::: Haha, but the joke was funnier 6 years ago. -[[User:Wikid77|Wikid77]] ([[User talk:Wikid77|talk]]) 06:40, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
::See [[User_talk:Jimbo_Wales/Archive_119#8_million_lost_power_in_Superstorm_Sandy|this]] for past history. It's about how we report the storm surge and how some idiot person determined to stay in their home despite warnings and evacuation orders could get in trouble if they rely only on Wikipedia. <b>[[User:Ravensfire|<span style="color: darkred;">Ravensfire</span>]]</b> ([[User talk:Ravensfire|talk]]) 20:31, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
::: I think Sphilbrick is well aware how he replied on a similar weather report 6 years ago, and then the [[U.S. NWS]], [[FEMA]], and [[USACE]] changed how they explain [[storm surge]] to show water levels on area maps in 2014, adding [[Puerto Rico]] maps in [[SLOSH]] Version 2 (see: [https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/nationalsurge/ NHC report]), after predicting in 1995 how NYC subway trains could flood in minor storms ([[Superstorm Sandy]] landed as only a tropical storm in Oct 2012). So who knew discussing "weather reports" on Jimbo-talk could change the world.... -[[User:Wikid77|Wikid77]] ([[User talk:Wikid77|talk]]) 06:40, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

:[https://thumbor.forbes.com/thumbor/960x0/https%3A%2F%2Fblogs-images.forbes.com%2Fmarshallshepherd%2Ffiles%2F2018%2F09%2F084741_5day_cone_no_line_and_wind.jpg Another one on its way]. [[User:Count Iblis|Count Iblis]] ([[User talk:Count Iblis|talk]]) 18:39, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
:: Yikes, I've added subtopic below: "[[#Hurricane Florence expected along U.S. east coast]]" for a possible risk to millions of WP users. -[[User:Wikid77|Wikid77]] ([[User talk:Wikid77|talk]]) 06:36, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

=== Hurricane Florence expected along U.S. east coast ===

The [[U.S. NWS]] is predicting Atlantic [[Hurricane Florence (2018)]] to regain strength <s>tomorrow</s> Sunday, ~08:00 pm, 9 Sep 2018 (see: [https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/text/refresh/MIATCPAT1+shtml/ live NHC Florence status]), and grow even larger near [[Bermuda]], heading toward the U.S. [[Eastern Seaboard]] perhaps by Thursday, 13 Sep 2018, but the forecast could shift by Monday. That hurricane could severely impact millions of Wikipedia users, who might take photos, soon, of area landmarks before and after hurricane damage. If electric power fails before landfall, then [[mobile phones]] can be recharged in a parked automobile (with compatible travel chargers).  Also consider surge maps, below: "[[#Reading SLOSH storm-surge maps]]". -[[User:Wikid77|Wikid77]] ([[User talk:Wikid77|talk]]) 06:36, updated 17:21, 7 September 2018, updated time [[User:Wikid77|Wikid77]] ([[User talk:Wikid77|talk]]) 06:43, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
: '''{{color|#913344|Forecast Cone map}}:''' See: [https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/refresh/graphics_at1+shtml/085212.shtml?cone#contents *live* NHC forecast map], for the updated 5-day prediction path of [[Hurricane Florence (2018)]]. -[[User:Wikid77|Wikid77]] ([[User talk:Wikid77|talk]]) 12:14, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
: The path of the storm has been due west for days, but Hurricane Florence is expected to turn more WNW after Monday, 10 Sep 2018. -[[User:Wikid77|Wikid77]] ([[User talk:Wikid77|talk]]) 05:22, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

=== Reading SLOSH storm-surge maps ===

For a large, flooding U.S. hurricane, the [[U.S. NWS]], [[FEMA]] and [[USACE]], since 2014, have developed [[SLOSH]] maps to graph the expected storm-surge levels along each seashore or bay shoreline. I guess WP pages could be expanded more to explain details of SLOSH map layouts. For example, NHC has drawn a retro map for old 2008 [[Hurricane Ike]] (see: [https://www.nhc.noaa.gov/surge/HistoricalRuns/?large&parm=2008_ike#contents Ike SLOSH map]) near [[Galveston, Texas]], where surge was stronger northeast along [[Crystal Beach, TX]]. The Texas beach houses there, although elevated one storey higher on pilings (stilts), were feared to have rolled off their bases by large waves, hitting a house sideways, atop the [[storm tide]] near {{cvt|17|ft|m|adj=mid| high}}, waves even higher. -[[User:Wikid77|Wikid77]] ([[User talk:Wikid77|talk]]) 06:36, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

== Page after page of websites that look a lot like our current main page ==

https://www.webdesignmuseum.org/

I'm just saying. --[[User:Guy Macon|Guy Macon]] ([[User talk:Guy Macon|talk]]) 18:50, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
:It's great. A classic design that looks good and works. And has big brand value. No wonder it's worthy of a museum. --[[User:Stephan Schulz|Stephan Schulz]] ([[User talk:Stephan Schulz|talk]]) 20:05, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
::(Sung to the tune of Prince's ''1999'') "Our main page looks just like it did in 1999!" --[[User:Guy Macon|Guy Macon]] ([[User talk:Guy Macon|talk]]) 20:37, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
:::If it ain't broke... Note that the basic axe or spade or frying pan or alphabet has also been stable for a long time. [[You Can't Always Get What You Want]] ;-). --[[User:Stephan Schulz|Stephan Schulz]] ([[User talk:Stephan Schulz|talk]]) 00:00, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Consider the format of a printed book: it has remained remarkably stable over the last few hundred years. Were a literate person from the 16th century transported to our time, & were the person familiar with the modern forms of language, if handed a book published this year this traveler would immediately know how to access the information in this information storage container. (There are times I can find what I'm looking for in a printed book much more quickly & easily than in an electronic document.) Lexemes divided into words, sentences & paragraphs, all set apart with spaces & punctuation; the body of the work divided into sections, chapters, books & other units; the conventions of footnotes, marginal notes, head & end notes; & embedded search tools such as tables of contents & indices -- all of these conventions have existed practically unchanged for centuries. As well as oversized illustrated initial letters, inline illustrations, & rubricated text. There have been only minor modifications to all of these, & these modifications vary more between individual printings of books in a given year than between the centuries. Not that people haven't tried to "update" the format of a book; the late 19th & 20th centuries witnessed numerous instances of intelligent & creative people attempting to reinvent all or some part of the format of a book, only to fail at finding a better version.<p>I'm not saying that the layout of Wikipedia is perfect. There are parts of it I think need improving on. If anyone has specific ideas on how to improve the interface, please suggest them. However, complaining that Wikipedia looks "dated" or "too 1990-ish" is a non-starter. If you're paying more attention to the layout of Wikipedia than its content, maybe the problem is with the article you're reading, & maybe you should think about improving that article -- or any of the millions of Wikipedia stubs -- rather than complaining that interface looks "dated". -- [[User:Llywrch|llywrch]] ([[User talk:Llywrch|talk]]) 21:08, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
:I might have missed it but I don't see anything like our current mainpage on the list. (I checked 15 of their pages).  There are about 10-20% of the illustrations that look something like our current mainpage, the closest example is [https://www.webdesignmuseum.org/gallery/the-white-house-2004 The White House 2004]. The 2005 page listing all the different language versions is shown [https://www.webdesignmuseum.org/gallery/wikipedia-2005].  [[User:Smallbones|Smallbones]]<sub>([[User talk:Smallbones|<span style="color: #cc6600;">smalltalk</span>]])</sub> 22:17, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
::That's because they archived www.wikipedia.org, not en.wikipedia.org.
::My complaint isn't that our main page is dated. It's that it ignores decades of usability research that clearly shows that a busy  landing page with many images and walls of text is inferior to something simple like the Google main page. Our main page should have a simple layout with links to separate pages for today's featured article, in the news, on this day, etc. 
::Sometimes old and busy is inferior to new and streamlined.[http://community.logos.com/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer.Discussions.Components.Files/77/1614.kjv_2D00_1611_2D00_version_2D00_margin_2D00_notes_2D00_judges_2D00_19_2D00_2.jpg] --[[User:Guy Macon|Guy Macon]] ([[User talk:Guy Macon|talk]]) 03:37, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
:::Google and Wikipedia aren't the same thing. Google has one purpose when you come to its site: You want to run a web search. Wikipedia isn't Google, it's the type of site Google is searching for in the first place. I have heard many, many gripes about Wikipedia, from the common to the highly unusual, and "The main page is difficult to navigate" is one I've literally ''never'' heard once. [[User:Seraphimblade|Seraphimblade]] <small><sup>[[User talk:Seraphimblade|Talk to me]]</sup></small> 04:37, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
::::That's because "difficult to navigate" isn't the problem. New users click away from websites they have never seen before, not because of difficult navigation, but rather because of too many words, too many images, and too many unrelated sections. This happens in the fist few seconds, long before they try to navigate.
::::BTW, your claim that "Google has one purpose when you come to its site" is completely wrong. Google offeres ''more'' things that Wikipedia. They just choose not to clutter up the main page with them (because, unlike us, they paid attention when the researchers started studying what makes a person click away from a website in he first few seconds).
::::Google ''could'' put all of the following on their main page...
::::* Android Auto
::::* Android Messages
::::* Android OS
::::* Gboard
::::* Gmail
::::* Google Alerts
::::* Google Allo
::::* Google Calendar
::::* Google Cardboard
::::* Google Cast
::::* Google Chrome
::::* Google Chromebook
::::* Google Classroom
::::* Google Cloud App Engine
::::* Google Cloud AutoML
::::* Google Cloud BigQuery 
::::* Google Cloud Bigtable
::::* Google Cloud Compute Engine
::::* Google Cloud Datastore
::::* Google Cloud Functions
::::* Google Cloud Kubernetes Engine
::::* Google Cloud Machine Learning Engine
::::* Google Cloud Pub/Sub
::::* Google Cloud Storage
::::* Google Cloud Vision
::::* Google Chromecast
::::* Google Contacts
::::* Google Daydream View
::::* Google Docs
::::* Google Drive
::::* Google Duo
::::* Google Earth
::::* Google Expeditions
::::* Google Express
::::* Google Finance
::::* Google for Education
::::* Google Forms
::::* Google Fit
::::* Google Flights
::::* Google Fonts
::::* Google Genomics
::::* Google Groups
::::* Google Hangouts
::::* Google Home
::::* Google One
::::* Google Pay
::::* Google Play Books
::::* Google Play Games
::::* Google Play Movies & TV
::::* Google Play Music
::::* Google Project Fi
::::* Google Scholar
::::* Google Search
::::* Google Sheets
::::* Google Sites
::::* Google Slides
::::* Google Store
::::* Google Street View
::::* Google Tilt Brush
::::* Google Translate
::::* Google Trips
::::* Google Video Intelligence
::::* Google Voice
::::* Google Wifi
::::* Inbox by Gmail
::::* Waze
::::* Wear OS by Google
::::* YouTube
::::* YouTube Gaming
::::* YouTube Kids
::::* YouTube Music
::::* YouTube TV
:::: ...but they don't, because someone doing a web search on Pokémon is unlikely to be interested in Google Fonts. We aren't that smart. We don't quite get that someone looking up Pokémon in an encyclopedia is unlikely to be interested in what happened on this date in history. --[[User:Guy Macon|Guy Macon]] ([[User talk:Guy Macon|talk]])

:On a tangentially related note, I strongly recommend [[Mark Z. Danielewski]]'s works, especially ''[[House of Leaves]]'', as examplary of unconventional book formatting being used as both art and message. They are also very interesting literary works of their own, especially for anyone interested in postmodernism and—if Slocombe's 2005 analysis ({{DOI|10.1353/mfs.2005.0015}}) of ''House of Leaves'' is any indication—nihilism. None of it was an attempt at starting a new standard in literary formatting, but it at least demonstrates some recent experimentation therewith. Another would be [[David Foster Wallace]]'s works, especially ''[[Infinite Jest]]''. —[[User:Nøkkenbuer|Nøkkenbuer]] ([[User talk:Nøkkenbuer|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Nøkkenbuer|contribs]]) 07:24, 7 September 2018 (UTC); added final sentence at 07:26, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
{{od}}I guess I don't know what this section is all about, but I did find a timeline of Wikipedia front pages [https://www.webdesignmuseum.org/timeline/wikipedia-2001] with versions from 2001, 2003, 2005, 2008, 2012, 2016.  Everything after 2003 is just the globe with different language versions linked.  The 2001 and 2003 versions only look vaguely like the current main page.

So {{ping|Guy Macon}} what was your point? - that the current main page is good or that it is bad? I kinda like it, but think it could use a few improvements.  BTW most of the pages shown on www.webdesignmuseum.org look like garbage to me.  Surely there are better examples of webpages than the ones they show. [[User:Smallbones|Smallbones]]<sub>([[User talk:Smallbones|<span style="color: #cc6600;">smalltalk</span>]])</sub> 11:11, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

:Wrong page. '''WWW'''.wikipedia.org (which is controlled by the WMF) is fine. '''EN'''.wikipedia.org (which we control) is the one that is cluttered with too much stuff that should be on separate pages. --[[User:Guy Macon|Guy Macon]] ([[User talk:Guy Macon|talk]]) 14:03, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
:I think the Main Page has a history of being designed more for editors than visitors. And that's fine, IMHO. It's a way of showcasing content and we have a lot of that. :) [http://discovery.wmflabs.org/external/#traffic_summary Most of our traffic] comes from search engines. Meaning while ~[https://tools.wmflabs.org/pageviews/?project=en.wikipedia.org&platform=all-access&agent=user&range=latest-20&pages=Main_Page 14 million views] sounds like a lot, it's a small percentage of overall visits. Most people plop a keyword into a box and end up on a specific article (hopefully the right one!). That said, [[Wikipedia:Main_page_design|there have been attempts]] to improve the main page in fits and starts. Unfortunately like many things there seems to lack a sustained initiative to continue the difficult work on what is arguably a politically complicated and emotionally important page. 
:I sent a note to the folks running the Web Design Museum asking that they consider having a better representation of English Wikipedia's Main_Page in their archive (instead of the .org portal). Here's hoping they consider the request. [[User:Ckoerner|Ckoerner]] ([[User talk:Ckoerner|talk]]) 19:26, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
:: In other words, the layout of the front page is as relevant to Wikipedia as the title page of a reference work to the larger composition? (As a thought experiment, ask yourself when was the last time you looked at the title page of your most used reference work -- such as a dictionary, general or specialized encyclopedia. (In my case, since I bought the latest edition of the ''[[Oxford Classical Dictionary]]'' a year ago, I can only remember looking at the title page once & shortly after I bought it.) -- [[User:Llywrch|llywrch]] ([[User talk:Llywrch|talk]]) 00:47, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
:::The main page of a website is a lot more like the printing on the spine of a book than it is like the title page: everyone who accesses the book/website sees it, but you shouldn't put too much information there if you want to maximize the number of people opening the book/going deeper on the webpage. --[[User:Guy Macon|Guy Macon]] ([[User talk:Guy Macon|talk]]) 01:37, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

== Rachael Bland ==

Jimbo, I realise you probably have about eight gazillion pings, but I just wondered if you could provide any input as to us locating a free image for this person, as discussed at [[Talk:Rachael Bland#Image issues]]. [[User:Ritchie333|<b style="color:#7F007F">Ritchie333</b>]] [[User talk:Ritchie333|<sup style="color:#7F007F">(talk)</sup>]] [[Special:Contributions/Ritchie333|<sup style="color:#7F007F">(cont)</sup>]] 13:44, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
:I'm sure this will be deleted with some standard excuse by dismissive editors and admins (socking, vandal, trolling, etc.) but I'm curious why people continually come to this page looking for guidance from Jimbo when he is largely disengaged and out of touch with the community and has been for years. When's the last time he used his admin tools to block a vandal or unblock an editor who shouldn't have been? He is supposed to be a point of contact for editors (you know, the who'll go talk to Jimbo bit) to ask for review of their case but when was the last time he even responded to one? Comments to this page are deleted all the time yet Jimbo doesn't do anything. So I'm curious why people would ask him questions about things largely unrelated to Wikipedia yet have no interest when he doesn't do the things he is supposed to that does pertain to here. [[Special:Contributions/2601:5CC:101:5DEB:600E:F0BF:1344:7B8A|2601:5CC:101:5DEB:600E:F0BF:1344:7B8A]] ([[User talk:2601:5CC:101:5DEB:600E:F0BF:1344:7B8A|talk]]) 10:56, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
::As far as I can see, this request has nothing to so with admin issues, nor even really editing as such. As [[User:Ritchie333]] pointed out at [[Talk:Rachael Bland]], Jimbo was involved in the sourcing of an image for [[Jo Cox]] shortly after she died. I think it was a question of "status". But you're probably best getting a response from Ritchie himself. [[User:Martinevans123|Martinevans123]] ([[User talk:Martinevans123|talk]]) 11:13, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
:::I realise that this page is normally used as a ''de facto'' [[Speaker's Corner]] where anyone can say anything ad nauseum, rather than a place where I would actually want Jimbo's assistance directly. However, in this case I wanted Jimbo's specific help on improving an article, as I thought he would be in a good position to do so, given previous discussions. [[User:Ritchie333|<b style="color:#7F007F">Ritchie333</b>]] [[User talk:Ritchie333|<sup style="color:#7F007F">(talk)</sup>]] [[Special:Contributions/Ritchie333|<sup style="color:#7F007F">(cont)</sup>]] 14:01, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
*'''This page is Jimbo+helpers:''' We know Jimbo is mega-busy, plus has a complex family in RL, so when an issue arises, his helpers analyze background aspects to help Jimbo respond sooner. Someone asks, in [[Bosnian language|Bosnian]], "''Molim vas pomozite s mojim problemom''" and a helper translates, "''Please help me with my problem...''" and then Jimbo replies like, "''I'll be in Bosnia next week and we can discuss then...''". If users didn't analyze 999 issues here, then it would take Jimbo even more time to get  broader community feedback, so Jimbo knows how to "speed-read" and has noted he checks for archived topics when he is away for days. The hope is someone connects on a photo, and then perhaps Jimbo can respond accordingly. Fortunately in WP "there is no [[wp:Deadline]]" and that still allows Jimbo to come here, calmly, with no stress to fix something ASAP. -[[User:Wikid77|Wikid77]] ([[User talk:Wikid77|talk]]) 18:21, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
*:{{ping|Wikid77}} Jimbo {{tq|has noted he checks for archived topics when he is away for days.}} Just out of curiosity, can you show an example? (I'm not criticizing you in any way, I'm just curious) <span style="text-shadow:#069 0.2em 0.2em 0.5em; class=texhtml">[[User:SemiHypercube|<b style="color:#090"><sup>Semi</sup></b>]][[User talk:SemiHypercube|<b style="color:#099"><sub>Hypercube</sub></b>]] [[Special:Contributions/SemiHypercube|✎]]</span> 19:21, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
{{od}}
:: It could be scanning a whole recent archive, such as [[User_talk:Jimbo_Wales/Archive_230|/Archive_230]] to see the bottom topics, or noticing an overlooked thread which archived within 2 days, such as "[[User_talk:Jimbo_Wales/Archive_229#Some Colleges Cautiously Embrace Wikipedia|/Archive_229#Some Colleges Cautiously Embrace Wikipedia]]" and then noting had not read about "Embrace Wikipedia". Because Jimbo has been scanning Jimbo-talk for over 17 years, he has found ways to pinpoint various archived topics. -[[User:Wikid77|Wikid77]] ([[User talk:Wikid77|talk]]) 04:34, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

== Did Wikimedia have a chance to save Brazil's National Museum? ==

The [[National Museum of Brazil fire]] was a disgrace, and the loss cannot be undone now.  But what strikes me is that apparently the museum was receiving [http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2018/09/04/braz-s04.html less than 60% of a $132,000 annual budget].  This is, notably, much smaller than Wikimedia's budget, which implies a quid pro quo would be possible:  hire the museum employees to photograph and upload everything to Wikipedia, in exchange for enough extra "indirect costs" budget that they could have kept the building secured against disaster.

With the ever-increasing popularity of Extreme Austerity among the ten people in the world whose opinions matter, there are probably pages and pages of equally endangered museums out there waiting their turn to burn down or be looted by thugs with a small fleet of commercial trucks some night.  Probably most of them still have some policy against photography and claim copyright over their public domain materials right to the bitter end, but can WMF find a way to break the deadlock on a few and slurp up some data?  Was there a way WMF could have saved the National Museum of Brazil entirely? [[User:Wnt|Wnt]] ([[User talk:Wnt|talk]]) 21:39, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

:First, let's check the facts. There might be some confusion about folks using figures like R$520,000 (in our article) which seems to refer to Brazilian reals, and equals something like 140,000 USD.  But in any case the numbers you give are simply unbelievable. At least we better check them.  If it is the case that a major nation in the world is financing its premier institution of cultural heritage with that sum annually, how much is there that we really can do?
:Just to try to get a handle on things, we can probably:
:*take lots of photos - or better yet fund local professionals to take lots of photos, and upload those to Commons as well as the museum's video and audio archives
:*Digitize text materials and upload it.
:But that's really only scratching the surface of the value of the items in a museum.  How do you even judge "the amount of heritage" that you've saved by taking a series of good photos of, say, an Egyptian sarcophagus?  I don't know how to do that - but I'd still guess that the value saved is less than 1% of the value of the original.

:If we were satisfied with that kind of "backup material", how much could we hope to accomplish (warning - back-of-the-envelope-calculations ahead).  If we were to concentrate on the 100 poorest nations and a single museum in each country we might be able to, say, provide $100,000 to each for photo, scanning and computer equipment. Maybe an equal amount for one year of local professional's time, plus we'd need something for training and legal work - that's roughly $250,000 for one year in one museum in one country. Times 100 countries gives $25 million.  If that's spread over 10 years, I'd think the WMF could handle it (Here I go again, spending other people's money)

:But that's a very limited program, and I think you can see that photos and scans have a very limited ability to "save the world's cultural heritage."

:If you do think that this is worthwhile, why not develop real plans, check them out with other editors, especially GLAM editors, and present something to the WMF?  [[User:Smallbones|Smallbones]]<sub>([[User talk:Smallbones|<span style="color: #cc6600;">smalltalk</span>]])</sub> 00:16, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

:: Because I haven't done any GLAM stuff and am not a great organizer.  My tendency is to toss out ideas and see what happens ... [[r/K selection theory|high r, low K]]. [[User:Wnt|Wnt]] ([[User talk:Wnt|talk]]) 02:50, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

:: Donors to the Wikimedia Foundation expect their money will be used for "developing and maintaining open content, wiki-based projects." It would be wrong to divert these funds to something else, no matter what the cause. People who donate to the Foundation can contribute to other causes if they choose. And it is up to the Brazilian people to organize their own efforts to help the museum without foreign direction. [[User:The Four Deuces|TFD]] ([[User talk:The Four Deuces|talk]]) 04:16, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

::: Very true, but WMF ''is'' allowed to pay people or institutions to develop open content.  Normally they should not do so because very well-heeled museums would try to put them over a barrel and demand lots of money up front for every piece of 300-year-old art they deign to allow some Wikipedians to photograph.  But if a museum is truly at death's door, like in the Brazilian case, and hence will presumably do big things for small money, it might be worth contemplating an exception. [[User:Wnt|Wnt]] ([[User talk:Wnt|talk]]) 15:15, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
:::: One of the notable items at Wikimedia Montréal was a 3-D printed version of Palmyra's Tetrapylon [[:File:Tetrapylon-3D-Print.jpg]]

:::: While I'm fully in support of initiatives to take photographs and videos of museum items, let's think big and push for 3-D versions of all artifacts.--[[User:Sphilbrick|<span style="color:#000E2F;padding:0 4px;font-family: Copperplate Gothic Light">S Philbrick</span>]][[User talk:Sphilbrick|<span style=";padding:0 4px;color:# 000;font-family: Copperplate Gothic Light">(Talk)</span>]] 19:54, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
{{od}}{{ping|Sphilbrick}} you've been elected to do the write-up and organizing.
The article [[NEWPALMYRA]] has a good 3D pic, uploaded by [[User:Victorgrigas]], [[:File:Arch-of-triumph-3D-print.stl]].  The article also mentions something about "cheap 3D cameras". I'm skeptical.

I've gone over my back-of-the envelope calculations above and added a few things I missed: administrative costs (including the application process for museums), detailed training costs (e.g. for cheap 3D cameras), what most cultural professionals really want - a digital inventory with full meta-data of the museum's entire collection (just to know what they are looking at in all those photos) and let a few of the really big low-income countries (e.g. Ukraine, Indonesia, India) have more than one big museum funded.  

Make the total cost $100 million spread out over 20 years.  We'd need to fund raise specifically for this project, but I would think the money is there.

Jimmy, I'd think that if we had some type of leader within the WMF - somebody with a history of aiming high and achieving his or her goals, we'd have a good chance of getting this project off the ground.  Any ideas?

[[User:Smallbones|Smallbones]]<sub>([[User talk:Smallbones|<span style="color: #cc6600;">smalltalk</span>]])</sub> 21:48, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
:I agree the cost is significant, but I think a case could be made to manufacturers of 3-D printers that they could donate them for the PR value which would be considerable. The materials costs might not carry a strong a PR value if they are donated but a case could be made. This should be right up the alley of some major donors. I'm not unaware that the cost of the materials and the 3-D printers, while far from nontrivial, might be dwarfed by the administrative and logistics costs but that's where charitable donations can meet the needs.--[[User:Sphilbrick|<span style="color:#000E2F;padding:0 4px;font-family: Copperplate Gothic Light">S Philbrick</span>]][[User talk:Sphilbrick|<span style=";padding:0 4px;color:# 000;font-family: Copperplate Gothic Light">(Talk)</span>]] 22:20, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

There's an article in WaPo [https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/our-art-has-burned-for-centuries-it-will-go-up-in-smoke-again/2018/09/05/53702182-b11b-11e8-a20b-5f4f84429666_story.html?utm_term=.b50f37c52f2f&wpisrc=nl_ideas&wpmm=1 We’re all in danger of watching our history go up in flames] saying that the fire and flood problem applies everywhere, including the US.  I'm quite serious in saying that we could do a limited project (inventory, photos, videos, audio, maybe even 3D files) along these lines, but it would need to be limited (e.g. no need to print out the 3D models - let others do that if they want to.) . 

It would also need major support from Wikipedians.  Having a big volunteer base and chapters around the world is one thing, but getting people to participate is something else.  Having a big project with big aims does not have to be a negative:

{{quote|Make no little plans; they have no magic to stir men's blood and probably themselves will not be realized. Make big plans; aim high in hope and work, remembering that a noble, logical diagram once recorded will never die, but long after we are gone be a living thing, asserting itself with ever-growing insistency. Remember that our sons and our grandsons are going to do things that would stagger us.|[[Daniel Burnham]][https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Daniel_Burnham]}} 

Pinging {{ping|John Cummings|Wittylama}} just to see if they'd think there is any chance the GLAM community would get behind this.  [[User:Smallbones|Smallbones]]<sub>([[User talk:Smallbones|<span style="color: #cc6600;">smalltalk</span>]])</sub> 13:26, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

=== Rebuild collections to avoid fire or mildew ===

The world's military challenge should be to stop fires, that have destroyed millions of written records, or tropical mildew (rotting paper documents or wooden items) by better [[air conditioning]], waterproof canisters, etc. Mankind needs better fire prevention, when "The only thing that will stop a [[Santa Ana wind]] fire... is the Pacific Ocean".

Meanwhile as a partial remedy, perhaps crowd-sourcing of artifacts could be used. Numerous antiquities have been sold as "reproductions" got for cheap by digging near archaeological sites. With today's technology, people could donate their "fake" artefacts and let scientists confirm which souvenirs are real, then store them in remote vaults as "rotated collections" on display in the major museums. Of course the original site [[provenance]] would likely be lost, but a physical relic is still 100x better, than a photo, for museum analysis. Heck, some Wikipedians could upload photos of their "reproductions" to show the world what exists outside of public museums (in [[private collections]]).

In 2014, people were asked to crowd-source 50 years of memories from the immense [[1964/1965 New York World's Fair]] (built on the shoulders of giants from the 1939 Fair), and that began to recapture the sense of "[[Disneyland]] for adults times 10" with the early use of [[color TV]] cameras, computers which could weave fabric patterns from a CRT [[lightpen]], [[animatronics]], international food courts, world market shops, water sports, polite stewardesses, and the cleanest buildings since Cincinnati. Even though much of the 1965 Fair had been lost, or rusted away, there was a sense it could be simulated from the photos or films or souvenirs of others.

Of course human knowledge includes cultural artifacts and relics, beyond text or photos or videos or audio clips. Hence, a set of Wikimedia museums with donated relics, plus rotation of collections from typical museums to raise funding, could also help prevent a fire from destroying the bulk of a nation's central museum. -[[User:Wikid77|Wikid77]] ([[User talk:Wikid77|talk]]) 06:06, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

== New phrase ==

Sorry for my bad English, I am Italian. You found humoristic the phrase “Really, you can! If you would like to, please feel free to do so. I will not send the Police to your home! Make an edit – or even several! After all, that's what Wikipedia is all about!” on “You can edit this page!” section? Can Jimbo Wales found funny that phrase? --[[Special:Contributions/151.49.71.91|151.49.71.91]] ([[User talk:151.49.71.91|talk]]) 07:46, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

:Translating humor across languages can be very difficult.  I'd guess the part about "I will not send the Police to your home!" is the part he found humorous - likely because if we took it at all seriously it would be horrific. [[User:Smallbones|Smallbones]]<sub>([[User talk:Smallbones|<span style="color: #cc6600;">smalltalk</span>]])</sub> 13:36, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

== RfC (publicizing) ==

Please see [[Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#RfC:Genetics_references]] [[User:Jytdog|Jytdog]] ([[User talk:Jytdog|talk]]) 17:05, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

== Horrid ==

Have you any idea how horrid you are? Really really horrid...THAT'S HOW HORRID! Yuck. [[User:Jimmy savile marmalade|Jimmy savile marmalade]] ([[User talk:Jimmy savile marmalade|talk]]) 19:03, 9 September 2018 (UTC)