User talk:Keegan (WMF)/Archive 1

Welcome!
Hello, Keegan (WMF), and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially what you did for Wikipedia:VisualEditor/Feedback. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! Tito ☸ Dutta 23:59, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Introduction to Wikipedia
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

Your Recent Comment on the Mediaviewer
Hi. I saw your recent comment on the Mediaviewer talk page, and would like to note that I found it remarkably offensive. Here is what you said:


 * "You can get rid of it for yourself. Untick the box that says "Enable Media Viewer." Petitions are not generally helpful on the English Wikipedia, since it is driven by consensus and not vote. If you have useful, fruitful comments and criticisms for Media Viewer other than that you do not like it, those would be great to hear so we can make a better product for you to use and enjoy as well."

Let's be clear about something: people who blindly invoke "consensus" are merely engaging in a form of politicking. Yes, we work by consensus, but consensus can change, and seeking to prevent people from adding their "+1" to an opinion on the grounds that the consensus has already been formed is merely an attempt to stifle debate. In the same way, your dismissive remark that you're not interested if people "do not like it", but only want "useful, fruitful comments" is not acceptable. Simply not liking something is always a reason for not having it, even if people can't enunciate exactly why they don't like it. Your position that you will only be interested in "useful, fruitful comments" entirely misses the point. Who is to judge what is "useful" and "fruitful"? I'll bet that in your head it's you, and your colleagues on the team that rolled out the Mediaviewer. The problem is that since you are the people who are responsible for this functionality, you have a natural emotional commitment to it, and for reasons of pure self-respect will find it immensely difficult to accept that people just want it gone. For you, a "useful" or "fruitful" comment is one that in some way preserves the Mediaviewer. For me, and for many other people, the most useful and fruitful outcome would be for it to vanish permanently.

The most offensive aspect of your comment, however, was the supercilious remark where you put yourself and your colleagues in the position of proprietorship and management: it "would be great to hear so we can make a better product for you to use and enjoy as well". Who the heck are you to talk about making a better product? We, the editors, registered and unregistered, are the ones who make Wikipedia a "better product". The overall tone of your comment was condescending and patronising.

Finally, it should be clear that you can count me as another editor who dislikes the Mediaviewer. However, the reason I've got involved in this particular issue is because not only do I not like it, but my partner, who is not signed up to Wikipedia and has no intention of doing so, was so irritated by the Mediaviewer that I was woken up at 3.30am in the morning yesterday just so I could listen to a stream of complaints about it. I have no objection to the Mediaviewer being added to Wikipedia's functionality, but it should be "opt in" for everyone, including anonymous users. Please correct this as soon as possible.

RomanSpa (talk) 10:28, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Hey RomanSpa, I'm sorry that I offended you so deeply. That was certainly not my intent. Spinningspark put it right, at least in the first paragraph written there, about considerations of readers as well as editors. I could have said it better, like was done there. We get 500 million unique visitors per month and yet only have 30,000 active editors. As it currently stands, Media Viewer will provide a lot more value in viewing images to readers and hopefully editors when they are not in editing mode. Again, my intent was not to be antagonistic and I'm sorry that my tone struck you this way. Thank you for taking the time to let me know, I'll strive to do better in the future. Keegan (WMF) (talk) 16:50, 6 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your reply. However, you haven't addressed the question of how a user who doesn't wish to sign up as an editor can avoid the problems of (a) enlarging maps and other images, and (b) getting details of the sources and contributors of images. As things stand, this functionality isn't available to the casual user. RomanSpa (talk) 16:55, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Ah, yes. There is a fix going next week that will allow the IPs to one-click through the image to the File page, just as logged-in users to now. A decision was made a long time ago to not have this function for IPs, and clearly we were wrong on that, so it's going to be fixed. This will allow access to the larger sizes/resolutions. Media Viewer v.3 will have a fully developed zoom and high resolution features built in; we had a hackish version of it for this release but we hated the quality of it and the developers would rather make it of better quality. As far as details about the source and contribution of the image, how would you recommend displaying this information in the Viewer? Some images are going to be un-fun to work with because the scattered/lack of metadata across file pages that we (and I mean we as in us volunteers, I'm one of those too) have to organize. There is upcoming work between the Multimedia team and the Wikidata team to start this process to make it easier on us a volunteers. Keegan (WMF) (talk) 17:09, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

MediaViewer
I think you're involved with this, so just a quick heads up: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=66606

A simple example can be seen with, which, if viewed in media viewer, will only credit Mathew Brady, leaving out my restoration work because Mathew Brady is a templated creator, and I am not. Adam Cuerden (talk) 10:48, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
 * :/ Hmm that's certainly maybe not as clear as it can be. At the moment you can pull up the fold (using the up arrhttp://git-scm.com/figures/18333fig0327-tn.pngow or clicking on the chevron) and see your credit for restoration in the file description as well as the upload credit, buuuuttttttttt how to pull up the fold isn't exactly as clear as it could be.  Accessing this information is going to be much more clear in the coming days...
 * Still, :/ . I'll see what, if anything, I can do. So many templates! Thanks for letting me know, Adam. Keegan (WMF) (talk) 14:37, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
 * No worries - and it actually does work if it's not a templated creator, so far as I can tell, so I think it's just tweaking how it handles Commons' creator templates. It's a great little add-on; I really like it for browsing Wikipedia, although I do wish it was a little easier to turn it off and on: When I'm doing a lot of image work, I sometimes want quick access to, say, what pages an image is used in, or the full-res image, but if I'm browsing Wikipedia for other things, I'd like it on. Adam Cuerden (talk) 16:02, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Cool, good to hear. I use Media Viewer for just about the same- downtime reading and browsing. Keegan (WMF) (talk) 18:52, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

mediaviewer contribution not helpful
i requested that one should be able to get the original image in the browser with two clicks like before. i find your comment not very helpful. i cannot find the comment any more *blush*, notification notified me about it, i clicked it and now its gone. but you said something in the lines "your request is not necessary, just wait until we implement zooming". currently it is 3 clicks, 30% more than before, if you are intelligent enough to see it is hidden behind "use file". --ThurnerRupert (talk) 04:08, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
 * ThurnerRupert: I'm not sure of the comment either but I do apologize if it was unhelpful. What I told you was probably based on Multimedia team planning at the time and we had no obvious solution on hand. I'm quite sorry about that, original file size is extremely important and I've always maintained so when trying to get access to it though Media Viewer. Fortunately it is back to 2 clicks.
 * You can access the original file (the https://upload.wikimedia... URL) now by clicking on the mountain icon in the bottom right of the image. Here's an example from the photo on my userpage. This will behave just as clicking on the File: page image did before by fitting to browser or expanding to full size for inspection, or right clicking to save.
 * As for the zoom, the Multimedia team still plans on developing a bona fide zoom feature for Media Viewer with proper zoom in-and-out, pan options, and other such features.
 * I hope this clears things up, let me know if you have any further questions/comments/concerns. Keegan (WMF) (talk) 04:56, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

yes, it does, thank you! and i am now wondering how i ever could not see that mountain icon. maybe this is a hint i should vote to place it on a different spot :)--ThurnerRupert (talk) 21:43, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

notification pointing into void
i remember now where i got confused with the notifications: the notification pointed pointed to here, on mediawiki. which is empty. via the history link also in the notification one can still reach what was edited. i'd love (1) that all notification are visible in "my global user account", (2) a mail contains the text, so i do not need to visit a web page and (3) if i click on the notification, it reveals something useful even the page got moved. you think this would make any sense, and if yes, if this would be something technically feasible as well? --ThurnerRupert (talk) 21:28, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Yeah, Notifications needs some help in further development. Things like global notifications are dependent on finalizing SUL, which is taking place this year (hopefully). There are other tweaks that would be nice. The day we do get global notifications I will be a very happy camper. Keegan (WMF) (talk) 23:40, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Please comment on Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals) Media Viewer RfC
You are being notified because you have participated in previous discussions on the same topic. Alsee (talk) 17:35, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Compact personal bar
Hello Keegan! I noticed that I have the list of links for my personal bar (user page, notifications, talk page, preferences etc.) instead of the nifty compact bar I enabled in Beta Preferences. I looked at the Beta Preferences and the compact personal bar was not there anymore. Know what happened to it? Harej (talk) 18:17, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
 * huh, I have no idea. Let us find out, shall we? do you have any information? Keegan (WMF) (talk) 23:34, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
 * See the 2 patches linked at . The removal was also announced in Tech/News/2015/04. Possibly elsewhere? HTH. --Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 00:27, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Regarding the translation request
I am being directed to this page and the message looks translated pretty good there. --Glacious (talk) 10:52, 2 March 2015 (UTC)