Wikipedia talk:Esperanza/Archive 7

Wikipedia:Esperanza is now inactive. Please do not edit the contents of this page.This page is an archive. Discussion of the essay describing Wikipedia:Esperanza should be directed to Wikipedia talk:Esperanza. To discuss any issues found in this archive, please direct any additional comments to the Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals).

Admin Coaching

Well, folks, we have started the Admin Coaching program, and we are slowly but surely helping our participants. However, we are in dire need of more volunteers. Ideally, I want to have two coaches assigned to each user, and for each coach to have only one user to coach at a time, as that gives a much more personal, one-on-one treatment to each user. However, right now, we have 4 unassigned users in need of a coach. So, I'd like to ask for those who want to volunteer to please help us now... the sky is not falling, but we don't want users to wait too much either. Titoxd^{(?!? - help us)} 01:49, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Indeed. If we ever have extra coaches, and not enough "trainees", there is a userbox (I found it yesterday and now I cannot) which is a "I want to be an admin" box. Perhaps (if we ever have enough coaches) we could selectively spam them to tell them about the program. Banes 06:41, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Hmm...sounds interesting. --HappyCamper 05:43, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

I have not been an admin for very long (almost two months now) so I'm definitely not the most experienced admin imaginable, but I really like this idea and if you think I can be of any help, let me know! --JoanneB 11:55, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

I would like to help if I can. --Celestianpower ^háblame 08:44, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Where is the project page for this, and what exactly are we "coaching"? --HappyCamper 15:05, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Have a look here: Wikipedia:Esperanza/Programs - as far as I know it doesn't have its own page yet. --JoanneB 16:38, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Just so you all know, I am still coaching, even though my talk page is skrewed up (considering partial wikibreak).Voice of All^T|@|ESP 01:56, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Great idea....

I'm involved in about as much as I can be here already (I have a stack of articles in partly finished states that are too messy to move out of my userspace into articlespace, and two that are already there but total messes, that I SHOULD be working on instead of meta stuff...) but this is one of the best ideas going. How does one show support/thanks if one can't devote the needed time to join? Is there a list of "people who think this is a neat idea and want to say thanks to the members but can't actually join" somewhere? ++Lar: t/c 16:34, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, I'm not sure if there is a list... but you did just thank us. But you can join if you want. There is nothing required of you to join. Everything is completely voluntary. You don't have to participate in any programmes or anything. Whatever you want to do. But on behalf of Esperanza, YOU'RE WELCOME!!! :-) --LV ^{(Dark Mark)} 16:49, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

I read the charter as saying that if you say you're a member, you ought to be willing to pitch in and actually do stuff. (members that do not actively participate can drag down an organization, I have found) There's a list of things to do linked here Wikipedia:Esperanza/So you've joined Esperanza.... You guys are cool, but I'm overcommitted right now so I just wanted to say you guys are cool. Which I guess I did. Maybe sometime soon I'll reconsider joining but first I have two monster articles I made a big mess of in trying to write that I need to finish. ++Lar: t/c 17:09, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

I love it!

Image:Tired Cat.jpg is a fantastic image :-) Ta bu shi da yu 08:22, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Magnus Manske Day

Just - thanks! :-) --Magnus Manske 22:09, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Gota.jpg

As far as I know, all images on Wikipedia require a source, no matter the license. Even if not, if you do not supply a source, the image is bound to be challenged (and possibly deleted) in the future -Thanks Nv8200p talk 22:18, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Cool Cat

Hello Esperanza

I have seen which you for the administration of Cool Cat no no no Pleas no,

I please you Pleas, CoolCat is an Turkish Nationalis is not Got Administrato ---Muhamed 17:55, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Uh....--Sean Black 23:15, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Muhamed is in Category:User en-2, so his message is a little hard to understand. I think he's got a couple of German words in there, too. Anyway, he's been spamming users who voted in Cool Cat's RfA, and he probably clicked on the green e in someone's signature and thought this was the user's talk page. The same thing probably happened in the "Gota.jpg" message above. --TantalumTelluride 23:32, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

New Main Page Election talks - your input is needed

A discussion has begun on how to handle an official election for replacing the Main Page. To ensure it is set up sensibly and according to consensus, your input is needed there. --Go for it! 23:09, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Good lord, forget about voting on there! WP doesn't need a new main page, it needs a new voting procedure! :) Semiconscious • talk 00:15, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

I honestly didn't come here just to post profanity, but I swear to God, after about 90 seconds trying to figure that page out, the same phrase kept repeating in my mind over and over: "What an absolute clusterfuck." Semi is right; the procedure for achieving consensus is broken at this point for all but the simplest up-or-down votes. I'm way too much of a newbie to suggest a fix though, without getting myself laughed off of Wikipedia. What's truly ironic is that there is very little difference between any of the current drafts. --Aaron 05:26, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Move to Esperanza's main page?

Anyone else think that Possible Programs should be moved onto the main Esperanza page above the Current Programs heading? So it would look like the below? KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 04:09, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

To add the reason I think it should be, if you look at the edit history it doesn't get used very much this might promote users to show their opinions on current possible programs. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 04:13, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

• Esperanza Charter
• Members list – Those who meet the membership requirements may add their name here.
• Possible Programs
• Current Programs
• Current stress alerts
• Stressbusters – Conference room for the Stressbusters.
• Calendar – Add your important dates to the calendar.
• Images – Logos, etc.
• Election Information
• Reach out

• Obviously I'd vote in Strong Support of this. I posted a proposal on that page and it was six days before I got a single response. Then it took me another six days to realize it had been replied to in the first place. --Aaron 05:14, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Agree; there are debates on there which have been there since October and seen nothing but support yet still languish in this unknown subpage. smurrayinchester^{(User), (Talk)} 16:22, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Since there has not been any opposition to the idea I'm going to take the intuitive and move it to the main page! KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 03:34, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Google group/mailing list

I'd like to sign up for the Esperanza mailing list/Google group thingy, but User:Flcelloguy seems to be on a break. Is there any other way for me to get in, or is he the only gatekeeper? Not a big deal, but I'm an impatient SOB. *bangs on the window* I know you're in there! --Aaron 17:00, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

I can. You hasve to apply and then I'll accept you ;). --Celestianpower ^háblame 17:30, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations Esperanza!

Esperanza has just achieved 200 active members. One month ago, the active list was only 125 members. Congratulations to a fast expanding organization. :-) NoSeptember ^talk 19:10, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Hear hear! And who is the lucky 200th??? Banez 19:41, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

From the edit history it looks like it's Pg2114. Very cool! For a moment I thought it might have been me, because I just became a member yesterday evening, but I'm No. 199 :) -- Natalya 19:53, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Let's help a Newbie

Hi all. Those of you with lots of experience, especially admins, please come help a newbie. Freshly-minted User:Tara Emami created the page A Math Trail at Mills College. As you can tell by looking at it, it doesn't seem a good fit with WP:NOT, and it's already gotten an AfD, which is currently in progress (though I've requested everyone put a hold on that for a day or so). In addition, there's a copyvio issue (duly reported), but the user claims permission from the author. So ... she seems to get the whole WP concept pretty well for such a complete newbie, so I was wondering if some experienced Esperanzians could possibly give her some advice. Can someone visit her talk page and advise her on how to substantiate the copyright permission claim, and (more importantly), see if we can advise her on some way to make the page Wikiworthy, if indeed that's possible at all? It seems a shame to WP:BITE a good newbie and send them away unhappy when their first big edit job gets nuked within hours. Thanks everyone... --Aaron 20:19, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Community Builders Taskforce

Some time ago, we started a WikiProject called the Community Builders Taskforce or Wikipedia:WikiProject Community. The aim is to build a Community Development Reference via Portal:Community and to help strengthen m:The Wikipedia Community. We could use some Esperanzian Involvement. Thanks in advance. - CQ 16:12, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Proposed Admendment

Does anyone have any ideas?WikieZach 01:07, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Ideas about what? --TantalumTelluride 01:26, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

There have been several thoughts about changing voting rules. I thought that we should get back into this subject now. WikieZach 03:14, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

The Advisory Committee and the Administrator General agreed that the next election will be held with the old system of approval voting we've used so far (as we haven't seen a real problem with it), as you can all see in the log of our last meeting. However, if there's going to be any changes, they need to be discussed here first. Titoxd^{(?!? - help us)} 04:33, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Request for comment ;-)

Hi, fellow Esperanzanians.

I'm currently unhappy with my user page. The layout has been perfected thanks to the splendid work of Phaedriel (though that does not mean, of course, that you're not invited to improve upon it), but I'm unhappy with its content; therefore I'd like to request ideas as to what kind of information I could or should include in my user page, and how it could be structured best.

Thanks in advance for your input on my talk page! =] —Nightstallion (?) 13:32, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Looks perfectly fine to me. Gryffindor 14:40, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Do you have any ideas of things you'd like to add - more things about yourself, more things about your contributions, or more useful Wikipedia links, etc? -- Natalya 18:20, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Well, all of that sounds fine. ;) Basically, I'd like it to have much more content, now that the layout's good. —Nightstallion (?) 19:43, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Hey, you have one of the best userpages I've seen so far, and furthermore I'd guess nobody would take the time to read more than that anyway. Can't see any reason to be unhappy with it. ;) Well, IMHO there's a bit too much blue, and the navigation bar should be centered and/or have full width. But on the whole the page is okay like that, I'd say. ^_^ --Shir Khan 20:48, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

You already seem to have quite a bit of all of them! :) Hmm... what sticks out to you as lacking, content-wise? (When we know what you're looking for, hopefully our suggestions can be semi-useful) -- Natalya 23:00, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Mh, let's try it from the other side: If you came to an unknown user's page, what kind of information would you like to see? Which structure would appear logical to you? —Nightstallion (?) 06:41, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Your user page is great, a lot of stuff on it. I usually like to see things like the person's location, age, what they do fer a living, what sort of stuff they like, what sort of pages they edit, and maybe their views on wikipolicy and stuff. Theres a lot more information on yours than most other peoples pages. Saying that, maybe you could say what you like about wikipedia, when you joined, things like that. Apart from that, its up to you really, whatever you want to share or let people know about. As for the structure, im not really fussed; whatever suits the writer i suppose. -- jeffthejiff 12:10, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Members list Updated

Thought I would let everyone know that I went through and updated the members list for the inactive users. It dropped are active members number down to only 197. :-( Also on sadder news if anyone didn't know, NicholasTurnbull has left Wikipedia. — Moe ε 05:32, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Wow, that was unexpected. --TantalumTelluride 06:17, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Changes

Whereas, that the present charter needs changes

Whereas, that Esperanza needs reform

Resolved, to make changes to the charter of Esperanza

---

To change section 1.3.2 (Advisory Council) from:

A committee of four members...

to strike out four and insert five.

Resolution offered by Wikizach

I need a break.

Humorless users. Outright vandals. I don't want to grandstand, but I am really getting tired of trying to help out around here and getting far more hassles and nasty comments as opposed to thanks. - Lucky 6.9 06:43, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

It can be a pain at times . . .

Wikipedia Policy on external dictionaries

Hi, For the last few days, I am in the process of editing my alma-matar(IIT Kharagpur)'s wikipedia entry. What I want to do is create a new wikipedia page for the Slangs used in IIT Kharagpur, which is a complete dictionary. As I have created the dictionary myself from scratch, there's no copyright issue. All I wanted to know is that does wikipedia allows such dictionaries to be put up on wikipedia, or should I just put an external link for it?

I was suggested by Runa that I should create a wikictionary entry for it and link it from the post, but I am not sure as each page of wikictionary seems to be dedicated to a particular word, not a dictionary-by-itself. Can someone help me by telling the best/advisable way to do it.

Thanks, Ambuj.saxena 07:47, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Well I think the article would be alright, it is only like some of the 'lists'. You could. call it List of IIT Kharagpur Slang.

Hope is the Thing with Feathers

Aaron Brenneman is currently running for admin. The discussion on the request for adminship page has been a fascinating mix of opinions. I've always thought of Aaron as a sometimes hotheaded but ultimately good-hearted person. More importantly, to me he represents a great example of how an editor can change and grow over time. I think his interactions with other users have matured immensely over the past year, and I believe he will continue to do so. So to some extent, I almost view this RfA as a referendum on the question of whether the nature of a man can change — and improve — or whether we are all enslaved to our histories.

Anyway, I encourage everyone to read the RfA and, if you are so inclined, to vote for or against Aaron as you deem appropriate.

Yours in hope, Nandesuka 15:20, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

• I'm happy to annouce that Aaron Brenneman was successfully elected on a (110/30/7) vote. And he immediately proved himself to be one of the most rational admins around regarding the lunatic War on (Some) Userboxes. I'm proud to have voted for him. --Aaron 00:34, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Pokemon Name Origin

I have read your note in my discussion page, and I took a look at the link you provided and I agree with you that there shouldn't be a name origin header in the Wikipedia Pokemon entries if it's only two or less sentences. Dionyseus 22:53, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

I think this was intended for Celestianpower's talk page; this is a problem with having the green 'e' in signatures, we end up with confused users. Perhaps we should consider adding them after names, rahter than in the middle of them. Essjay ^{Talk • Contact} 23:30, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

I tried what you suggest for some time, but I only got people to address me as "Esperanza" (mostly newbies, but a couple experienced users as well). So I switched to the green letter in the middle of y signature... -- Rune Welsh | ταλκ 23:57, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Well, what I was thinking was more like: Rune Welsh | ταλκ e. Essjay ^{Talk • Contact} 00:55, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

The well-meaning, but sometimes confusing green letter thing

What might be more appropriate is to develop a splash page that isn't the lead-in to Esperanza, which says "Hi! You clicked on the green thingy. This isn't the user's user page. That green letter signifies the user belongs to Esperanza. By joining Esperanza and putting that l'il green letter in their name, User:Guy with a green letter in his name is signifying that....."

OR

We could generate a user-page template, {{Userpage Esperanza|USERNAME}} that says "Howdy! The green letter in my signature means.... (etc.) If you'd like to leave me a message, click here [User Talk:USERNAME]. For more information about Esperanza, click here."

Eh? Eh? JDoorjam Talk 23:45, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

I think it would be good to only link to the normal User page and simply have a note in the user page as to the green 'e' (or other letter) signifying Esperanza membership. The linked 'e' can be annoying even to experienced users. —Quarl ^(talk) 2006-02-10 01:53Z

I personally like User:Jdoorjam's idea. Something about me likes the green e, even when I click on it mistakenly. Brings a bit of whimsy that needs to remain central to the project. -Tim Rhymeless (Er...let's shimmy) 02:51, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

It's nice, but also confusing, hence why we get so many mistaken posts here. (Look right above this section.) Better that it be apended to the username (as in Example (talk) (e) or something) than included in the username. Also cuts down on the code needed, as you don't have to link your userpage twice, or add an extra set of font color tags. Essjay ^{Talk • Contact} 03:02, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

A middle-of-the-road way to do it is to simply make the green letter link to your user page like the rest of your name, and then on the user page you proudly and prominently beam about Esperanza, and explain the green letter that's in your user name, and link here. (And if people want a nice, neat, boilerplate statement about how "3speranza is teh r0x0r" or whatever it should say (clearly, I'm not the best candidate for message-writing...), there could be a template that briefly explains the purpose and goals of Esperanza, and links to to the main page. Cheers, JDoorjam Talk 03:11, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Actually, we have quite a few of those; I think they're at Wikipedia:Esperanza/Images. Essjay ^{Talk • Contact} 03:54, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

How about this: Since most signatures link to Wikipedia:Esperanza for length purposes, convert that page from a redirect to a transclusion of the current page with a message at the top along the lines of "This is Esperanza, a Wikipedia community project. If you meant to visit a member's user page, hit the "back" button on your browser and try again." Ral315 (talk) 15:12, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Sheer brilliance! ;-) *Essjay awards Ral315 a cookie.* Essjay ^{Talk • Contact} 21:34, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Here's another possible solution. See my signature.
--TantalumTe(Please don't click the e if you want to contact me)lluride

I don't know; it looks like your name is TantalumTePlease don't click the e if you want to contact melluride. It's rather long. How about something along these lines : smurrayinchester^{(User), (Talk), (Esperanza)} 19:00, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

I didn't really change my signature. And I advise everyone else not to implement my ridiculous suggestion. --TantalumTelluride 19:10, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

I perfer ral315's solution. It takes a lot less work to implement than anything could, especially with all the residual sigs sticking around w/ the link. — Ilyanep (Talk) 19:06, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

I like the idea too, but there's just one snag. Flicking through this page, several members have linked straight to Wikipedia:Esperanza, which could pose an issue, but I think, if mentioned in the Esperanza spam, it would only be a temporary problem, so long as everyone read it... smurrayinchester^{(User), (Talk)} 19:11, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Sending it out with the spam seems like it would take care of the large majority of the problem. Good idea. -- Natalya 19:12, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Hello everyone! I'm on the "members pending" list for Esperanza, and I just wanted to get some feedback on my new signature (how it looks, where the "E" links to, etc.). As for where the E links to, I got the idea from JDoorjam's and Ral315's comments above. Let me know what you think, and thanks in advance for your responses. EWS23 | (Leave me a message!) 17:48, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Regarding WP:ESP/PROP

I'd like to make a proposal: That from now on, all proposals posted to Wikipedia:Esperanza/Proposals be given an up-or-down decision by the Esperanza leadership within a reasonable period of time and amount of discussion ("reasonable" as defined however the leadership sees fit), instead of the current situation where unwanted proposals are simply left to languish without comment. Thoughts? --Aaron 03:26, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

(I do hope you see the irony in this idea languishing without comment. ;-) ) JDoorjam Talk 03:34, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

First, the Esperanza leadership aren't responsible for deciding what proposals are accepted, the membership is. Second, we can't force people to discuss things. If a proposal doesn't get any response within a couple of weeks, then that is a pretty good sign that the membership isn't interested. With that said, the proposals page could do with a bit more attention; it has traditionally been ignored by much of the membership. Essjay ^{Talk • Contact} 03:51, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

If the proposals page has been largely ignored by the membership, then how can we say that any proposal is interesting to the membership or not? --Aaron 03:57, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

The proposal's page is not the only medium for making decisions; we do have a mailing list and an IRC channel, as well as private emailing between users. Like anything on Wikipedia, just because there isn't a discussion in the place you looked, doesn't mean there hasn't been one elsewhere. However, I don't believe the issue here is the proposals page, but rather the feelings of being ignored that you expressed on the alert's page. It would likely be more productive to begin a discussion of what led you to feel that way, and how you think Esperanza could have better satisfied your expectations, so that we may avoid having similar experiences in the future. To focus on a single issue in order to vent frustration about a larger problem will not provide much satisfaction. Essjay ^{Talk • Contact} 21:38, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Please see my candidate statement; it's pretty much my response to this. Thanks. --Aaron 18:31, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Euhmmm

We have Membership Requirements?!?! Man i missed that! Why in gods name?! It would probably have excluded me as a member when i joined! The Minister of War ^(Peace) 10:35, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

It was included in the charter when JCarriker and Redwolf24 prepared it; I suppose the idea was to have an association of established users who are familiar with Wikipedia, and thus can be of assistance to others. Essjay ^{Talk • Contact} 21:43, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

But this is self-defeating! I've already seen one member striked off the membership list for not meeting requirements! Surely we want this to be an open society?! The Minister of War ^(Peace) 12:13, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

I would think that, as a group dedicated to unity in Wikidom, and everybody feeling like a community, Esperanza is a troll magnet. Two weeks and 150 edits... those are pretty low bars for actual users of Wikipedia, whereas someone looking to flood the group with socks and cause havoc here would have a really hard time doing so. :: shrug :: I think I'm ok with it, so long as those (low) hurdles don't ever arbitrarily increase. JDoorjam Talk 14:57, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Howabout1 is semi-back

Hi all. I visited once a few days ago and got hooked again :(? :)?. As you can see by the emoticons I'm not sure if that is good or bad. But either way I'd apreciate a little help getting readjusted to the wiki (I've also added a post to the coffe lounge, I'm not sure just where to put this. I was also noticing I have the third edit on this page. It cetainly has changed since then... Howabout1 03:39, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Kushiel's Scion

FYI, looks like someone may have altered your "vote" on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kushiel's Scion. Just thought you'd want to know. (Whoever it was deleted my "vote" outright.) Crypticfirefly 07:23, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

This comment seems to be intended for Francisco Valverde. I've left him and Crypticfirefly messages. It appears FV's signiture is damaged and only links here. Yet another case of green e clicking... smurrayinchester^{(User), (Talk)} 17:00, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Not exactly "green e" clicking, this is where the user's signature leads to. I have placed another copy of the message on his page, thanks for pointing this out. Crypticfirefly 17:21, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Signature competition?

How's that?Coolest sig...we could judge...--Tan DX 08:14, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

If you have a proposal, you should post it at WP:ESP/PROP but this one I don'[t think would pass. The userpage award is still in its infancy... --Celestianpower ^háblame 08:19, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

No. There was something of an unspoken competition, in about late 2004, I want to say. This led to many annoying signatures, with weird templates, animated gifs inside signatures, and all sorts of ridiculous things that people found very distracting (and in some cases caused people's browsers to crash). It could be cool, I wouldn't mind seeing a tutorial about how to spice up one's signature, but no competitions, please. -10:01, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

I'd be happy to write something like that. Perhaps some sort of simple tutorial series on how to design a sig, user page etc wouldn't be a bad idea. smurrayinchester^{(User), (Talk)} 17:03, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

I've had a go at making a simple tutorial, at Wikipedia:Smurrayinchester's signature tutorial, but would like to know what others think. smurrayinchester^{(User), (Talk)} 10:12, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

I have seen more than one complaint on RFA about candidate signatures. It might not be a good idea for a competition. It might be fun just for example though.--Dakota ~ ° 19:38, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

You just need rules like 1) no pictures 2) a maximum number of characters (including html code) 3) no transclusion, etc. NoSeptember ^talk 00:38, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

There could be a separate contest for code brevity, or it could at least be one of the factors considered in judging. The rules, in fact, could be shaped to encourage users to build their signatures the "right" way, rather than the entire contest being an exercise in encouraging gaudy sigs. Users could be judged on whether their signature was composed elegantly, creatively, and abstemiously (which, incidentally, is a word that uses every vowel and the letter y, in alphabetical order. Your nerdy word trivia for the day). Cheers, JDoorjam Talk 01:41, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

There is a place where signature's are discussed, m:Help:Preferences. I personally didn't find it helpful but it is there :-D KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 02:57, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

There's a slightly less technical one buried at WP:SIG. smurrayinchester^{(User), (Talk)} 10:51, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Why?

Were you all aware of the massive amounts of behind-the-scenes drama that occurs over matters such as userboxes, admin actions, reverts, etc. on Wikipedia?!? And here I thought this was an encyclopedia...

What is the drive for online communities to devolve into dramatic bickering? What happened to providing resources for the betterment of the human mind? I'm sorry to see so many good editors get wrapped up in the bureaucracy, eventually driving them away from what should be an academic endeavor. If you are caught up in revert wars, ArbCom rulings, RfCs, etc. step away: your worth is not dependent upon the outcomes of such issues. Your value as an editor, contributor, and purveyor of knowledge is not contingent upon the views of an anon editor pushing a POV, or a committee's views of your actions. If you leave, if you remove yourself from this enterprise, you only further strengthen the power of the POV and the bureaucracy. It is okay to admit defeat; it is okay to ask for help; it is okay to continue editing somewhere else. That's what Esperazna is here for, no? Semiconscious • talk 01:05, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Nice work

Just a short note to say that a lot of good work is being done by people here, so thanks for your efforts. violet/riga (t) 13:43, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

I'd like to join :)

Presumeably after the elections, but I'm just putting my name forward to become a part of Esperanza. I'm becoming more involved in Wikipedia (e.g in the past few days I've welcomed hundreds of users), so please consider me :) James Kendall [talk] 14:25, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Hey.. you should put your name down on this page. — FireFox • T • 14:33, 14 February 2006

Happy Valentine's Day!

sorry dear Esperanzians, won't be able to join you on the IRC, I wish everyone a Happy Valentine's Day though! Gryffindor

AfD

Based on what I've seen from you on AfD, I think that you might have something to add to the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cart00ney. I'd appreciate you weighing in on the matter in either direction. Savidan 19:45, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Yeah... we really need to fix that green letter clickthrough issue. (I've contacted Savidan to see who he was trying to get in touch with...) JDoorjam Talk 19:57, 14 February 2006 (UTC)