Portal talk:Russia/Things you can do

/Archive 1

See also

Please see WP:ALSO. The See also section is the appropriate location to place links to portals. I have used this exact same arrangement and format layout for many other Featured portals and their Things you can do subsections without objections, and successfully gotten those to Featured portal status. Cirt (talk) 18:38, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Hi, Cirt! I can't really say what priorities other WikiProjects have, but having "add a silly banner to the 'see also' section of every article you can lay your hands on" is definitely not on the list of priorities of this one, especially considering how undermanned we are. Granted, it is something one can do when not in the mood for anything more interesting/useful, which is why I am not going to insist on removing it altogether. I did, however, move it all the way to the bottom where it belongs. Regarding the rest of the items, I arranged them according to my perception of their importance, but that is, of course, open to discussion. Regarding featured portals, is the layout of this section actually on the list of the FPORT criteria and is the layout I've just changed the recommended one? If it is, that is so very sad... I'd appreciate a pointer to where it says that anyway. If not, I'd simply like to point out that while a starter template for this section is probably identical for any wikiproject, eventually they are all going to diverge because different projects have different goals. We have this section not because we want to keep it as an icon devoted to the portal's featured status, but because we hope that it will actually be used/edited/re-arranged by real people. Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 18:54, March 30, 2009 (UTC)

I respectfully disagree with your assertion that the portal template is "silly" - I work quite hard on maintaining many Featured portals and it is not "silly" to ask that they be linked from the See also section of articles as per WP:ALSO. Cirt (talk) 19:07, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Cirt, before I elaborate on the point above, I would like to acknowledge the fact that no one properly thanked you for bringing this portal to featured status. If it weren't for your hard work, we'd probably still be stuck with the ghastly abomination we used to call "Russia portal". For that, I thank you very much (and quite sincerely so, lest you think I am being ironic). However, that said, you obviously did not recognize the moment when your job was done. You helped this portal to stand on its own feet; now it is a good time to let it go. If we lose featured status because we miss or break something, it is going to be our problem which we will handle. If we don't handle it properly, losing the FPORT status would be something we'd very much deserve. I could understand your desire to participate in this portal's internal matters if you were interested in Russia and were willing to do project-related the maintenance stuff (with our limited participation, turning down an extra pair of helping hands would be an incredibly stupid thing to do indeed), but I just am not seeing such an interest on your part. Frankly, I simply don't understand why you are still watching this portal (again, not that I am trying to deny you that right; I simply do not understand the purpose of your actions). If you wish to help with the project, please by all means do; if all you want is to keep an eagle eye on the bits and pieces of the portal so, god forbid, someone wouldn't accidentally screw something up or try putting it to some actual use, then thanks, but no, thanks.

Returning to the issue at hand (WP:SEEALSO), I am not trying to say that adding the portal links to the "see also" section is a silly thing per se. It is, however, very silly to emphasize it in the framework of this project, at this time. With so much maintenance/expansion/red-links-killing/stub-sorting/stub-expanding/referencing/and-so-on-and-so-forth to do, telling the folks interested in helping us that adding portal links to "see also" sections is a number one priority for us is just... stupid? The way this request is worded is not that stellar either—"Add {{Portal|Russia|Nuvola Russian flag.svg}} to the See also section of Russia-related articles"—add what?! why?! where exactly?! Try putting yourself in the shoes of a person reading this item for the first time. If it were me, I'd stop reading pretty much in the middle of that very sentence. So much for soliciting help. Surely we can do better than that?—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 19:43, March 30, 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for acknowledging the work I have put into this portal. It is a one-line suggestion on a small portion of the portal and a useful one at that. I do not know why you are making such a big deal about something that is spelled out as being a wholly appropriate thing to do per WP:ALSO. Cirt (talk) 19:49, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

As I said above, I acknowledged the fact that the line is appropriate per WP:ALSO, so I am no longer insisting on removing it altogether. What does bother me is the fact that it is listed at the top of the list, thus suggesting that it is the most important thing that could be done to help the project. It most definitely is not, despite its being "appropriate". Moving it to the very bottom will satisfy me pretty well, although I'd still like to see the actual participants of the project being able to move stuff around in a way dictated by the project's needs.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 20:24, March 30, 2009 (UTC)

thus suggesting that it is the most important thing that could be done to help the project - Your interpretation is inaccurate. Again, similar models are used in near-identical fashion at many other Featured portals. It does not "imply" anything, it is simply a uniform method of organization. Cirt (talk) 20:27, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

And I am saying that is one lousy method of organization which does not work well and actually scares away potential help instead of luring it in. Consider this one to be your first complaint. I'm going to stop with this for now; hopefully someone else will comment. Best,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 20:46, March 30, 2009 (UTC)

lousy method of organization, scares away - I must strongly disagree. I highly doubt this organizational method "scares away" anyone. That is quite a silly assertion. It takes half a second to scan the list of Things you can do and find something constructive to do. Cirt (talk) 21:03, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Gotta agree with Ezhiki in this instance, in regards to moving it down in the template. Russian articles are already hopelessly underdeveloped on WP, and this makes it appear to editors that for WP:RUSSIA this is one of the priorities for the project. When it isn't. In fact, I will go thru articles and when WP:SEEALSO is fulfilled, I will remove see also sections completely, because in most instances they are not required. A more appropriate place for the portal link is within the project template, dare I say it? --Russavia ^Dialogue 08:22, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

It already is in the project template, but that is on the talk page. Like I said, it takes 2 seconds to browse the list of the things you can do. Cirt (talk) 08:45, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

(outdent) Moved to the bottom [1]. Cirt (talk) 00:23, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Thank you.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 02:26, April 8, 2009 (UTC)