User talk:Jagulin

A belated welcome!

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Jagulin. I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page, consult Wikipedia:Questions, or place {{help me}} on your talk page and ask your question there.

Again, welcome! –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 06:34, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your inappropriate close

I have reverted your inappropriate close at AN. With barely 100 total edits, you surely don't have sufficient experience to close discussions on Wikipedia. Much less contentious discussion involving a large number of experienced editors. It would be good, if you spend more time editing articles than wandering at noticeboards looking "for discussions to close" at this time. Thanks. – Ammarpad (talk) 20:41, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ammarpad: Thank you for correcting me. Is revert the usual way to contest a closure? For the record, I would not agree that my closure was "inappropriate". Would you share any mistake I did in the summary? Do you expect any other outcome than what I set out? About "contentious discussion" I'm not sure if you mean the discussion I closed or if you refer to another discussion I engaged in. If you point it out I'd be happy to review my involvement. Thanks, JAGulin (talk) 21:11, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Primefac: I read your closure comment on AN:Going forward. Thanks! It wasn't obvious to me why you left the "Going forward" discussion open when the others were closed. It had been silent for 2 days when you moved it and the first comment afterwards was "this doesn't belong here". Did you envision it going anywhere or was it to make sure that there was a place to find a constructive ending?

At 18:07, 7 September 2019 I closed the discussion, but it was soon reverted by one of the participants. I'm not planning to raise complaints on that, but since you did analyze the thread I'd be happy to get feedback from you, to learn from my mistakes and gain experience where needed. Of course, any input is welcome but you may also silently ignore if you so like.

With hindsight, I'd say that the conclusion you gave was the same as mine. The difference is that you tried to find consensus and I based my summary more on policy. Should I have phrased this more clearly and was not feasible with current rules an inappropriate summary? The actual discussion did go into this area and I think I found objective statements supporting such closure.

I also found that it was the right time to close since it was a waste of time, further posts were unlikely to be helpful. The discussion brought hardly any arguments to why the proposal would help, nor any why it would be destructive. With my summary I found that the discussion was actually asking for respect for consensus and don't make mistakes. While the latter is hard to require of anyone, I think the former is already required of everyone. There were some posts after my close was reverted, I see them as confirming my close rather than as a proof of me being too fast (I also think they were spawned by the revert rather than by the close). Yes, there are some interesting statements, but they should go into another discussion where they can be made more constructive. This was also the reason why I left a link to a discussion I set up on the talk page. The fact that the discussion did not take off there may indicate something, not sure what.

Does AN have special rules for discussion closing or leaving open a certain duration? WP:CLOSE is not perfectly balanced for all different kinds of discussions, but I went for the general "any uninvolved editor may close". User Ammarpad didn't clarify what the problem with my close was, I suspect it was mostly because if seemed to contradict their own opinion, but the BADNAC does mention "experience editing Wikipedia generally". Is that to be interpreted as enWp only? Nevertheless, I see that as a "self-check" and the real requirement is the ability to perform a proper close. I still see nothing to I'd call an error, what do you think? Guidelines for Challenging also seems to be forgiving for a proper non-admin closure, but of course I would have revoked my close if anyone asked me to do so. Did you find the thread to be a "contentious discussion"? Seeing that it wasn't unanimous one could argue that I should have stayed away, but in that case there wouldn't be much value of closing it either. After some consideration I re-posted my analysis as a discussion comment instead, maybe I should have done that to begin with.

Sorry for the long post, I guess I wanted you to see my train of thought when closing and my interpretation of the summary so that you can easily point out any parts that were incorrectly applied. JAGulin (talk) 11:08, 18 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

My sincere apologies for not responding sooner, I hate to admit it but this has sat at the bottom of my ping list and I've only just now seen it again after clearing things out. The main thing that was "inappropriate" about your close is your tenure on Wikipedia. Discussion at the Administrators' Noticeboard, unless very likely to only end in one way, should be closed by Admins or folks who have been around a long time (by unwritten consensus, pretty much anything that makes it to AN is considered contentious). Hope that helps. Primefac (talk) 21:02, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Google Code-In 2019 is coming - please mentor some documentation tasks!

Hello,

Google Code-In, Google-organized contest in which the Wikimedia Foundation participates, starts in a few weeks. This contest is about taking high school students into the world of opensource. I'm sending you this message because you recently edited a documentation page at the English Wikipedia.

I would like to ask you to take part in Google Code-In as a mentor. That would mean to prepare at least one task (it can be documentation related, or something else - the other categories are Code, Design, Quality Assurance and Outreach) for the participants, and help the student to complete it. Please sign up at the contest page and send us your Google account address to google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org, so we can invite you in!

From my own experience, Google Code-In can be fun, you can make several new friends, attract new people to your wiki and make them part of your community.

If you have any questions, please let us know at google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org.

Thank you!

--User:Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:58, 23 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]