Jump to content

Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2012/Feedback

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by (Username or IP removed) at 13:10, 4 December 2012 (Voting record). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

2012 Arbitration Committee Elections

Status

  • Thank you for participating in the 2012 Arbitration Committee Election. The results have been verified and published.
  • Please offer your feedback on the Election process.

Feedback by role

Voters

The link for the username for YOLO in the voting ballot that I got was dead. Please rectify it. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 12:54, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'll doublecheck, but I believe that candidate has opted not to have a userpage. MBisanz talk 14:00, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that user does not have a userpage, thus there is no way to rectify the link unless they desired to create one. MBisanz talk 14:30, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thinking that there should maybe be an interface to switch a single vote. I'm guessing that the reason why old votes are not displayed is due to anonymity (?) or something like that, but it shouldn't compromise anything if one could change one's vote for a single candidate, no? ⁓ Hello71 15:25, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Candidates

I can say as a candidate that did not care for the formatting. WTT coding trick does produce a nice result, but candidates shouldn't have to go through all that to differentiate their responses from the questions. Not a huge deal but something to consider next year. Beeblebrox (talk) 21:45, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'd agree with the other candidates, whilst formatting makes things easier and makes sense in this scenario, it would have been better to have a different layout to the questions. WormTT(talk) 08:43, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Election volunteers

  • We need Jimbo to appoint the Commissioners sooner, we need to file a Bugzilla and notify the WMF sooner, and we need to notify the bot-ops who run the logging bot sooner. Ideally, the Commissioners should be appointed no later than a month before the election starts, the WMF should be notified two business weeks in advance, and the bot ops should be flagged down a week in advance. We can overcome a Jimbo-delay by "deeming" Commissioners appointed if they are the top 3 supported people and Jimbo hasn't appointed them by the given day. MBisanz talk 02:30, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback by topic

Complexity of Template:ACE2012

A number of editors have expressed concern over the complexity of adding new guides to the guides section of Template:ACE2012. There are a couple things that we could do to make the template syntax less complex, but that would reduce the apparent randomness to guide order. For instance, the guide adding part of the template could be substantially simplified if we are willing to accept a system where the guides are always in the same order with relationship to each other, but where they rotate through the positions in that order. Example ABCD BCDA CDAB DABC, C would always come after B and before D, but would have an equal chance to appear anywhere in the order. Do we want to make that compromise to simplify the syntax required to add a guide for next year? Monty845 15:00, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

First, a programmer could introduce a variable for the divisor, which would be incremented with every new person. Most of us can change "NumberOfCandidates <- 1" "NumberOfCandidates <- 2".
More simply, the program should just count the number of candidates, each of which should just add his user name. Kiefer.Wolfowitz 01:04, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Correct me if I'm wrong, but that would be beyond the scope of what we can do with currently available wikicode wouldn't it? We could add a number of candidates variable, but it would need to be in one of the other templates, you can't define a variable within the template that needs to use it, again as far as I'm aware. I'm not sure if needing to edit two templates for each new guide is an improvement. Monty845 01:31, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well by next year we'll have Lua (/me crosses his fingers) so it should be relatively easy to do something like this then. Legoktm (talk) 02:25, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If Wikimedia's system is not a universal Turing machine, then to Hell with it! Kiefer.Wolfowitz 14:20, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Voting record

It would be nice if the software easily permitted a user to keep a record of their votes, perhaps by downloading a pdf of the radio button selections. Not a biggy but a nice to have. --Dweller (talk) 10:24, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you can always take a screenshot before you hit the "submit" button.  ;) Personally, I recorded mine in a .txt document. It would be nice to have it as a feature, but I somehow suspect (please prove me wrong?) that it'd take more time to set up than it's worth. – Philosopher Let us reason together. 19:17, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I believe the rationale behind this either has something to do with privacy or anonymity. ⁓ Hello71 15:26, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Why do you need the help of scripts if there are screenshot add-ons in the Internet? See this. --Ankit MaityTalkContribs 13:10, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]