WikiLoop/New name vote
Around a year ago we first released the prototype of a web-based application with a code name WikiLoop "Battlefield". We are happy to see many Wikipedians found it useful in screening and checking the potential vandalism or quality issue with incoming revisions. As of now, WikiLoop "Battlefield" supports 11 languages, and has seen contributions from 243 logged users who reviewed 63K edits across language version Wikipedias. We think it's a good time to finalize the new name.
While we continue to make functional improvements, we received feedback from multiple community members that the code-name "battlefield" has an annotation of "war-themed", and could potentially be misinterpreted to be military-related or triggering edit-war. And we agree it's a good idea to change the name. We launch a brainstorming request on en:Wikipedia_talk:WikiLoop_Battlefield#Brainstorm to replace the name "Battlefield" and received ~35 names. Thank you!
We hope that the new short list of possible names help to identify this tool's characters:
- A review tool for Wikipedia and its sister project
- It's Easy to use for everyone, both logged in and anonymous users, and
- Creates a friendly atmosphere for collaboration.
We greatly appreciate @Sadads:, @Xinbenlv:, @ElanHR:, @Nizil Shah:, @ToBeFree:, @Nick Moyes:, @FULBERT:, @CAPTAIN MEDUSA:, @L3X1:, @OxonAlex:, @Orphan Wiki:, @Alexcalamaro:, @Rhododendrites:, @SJ:, @FULBERT:, @RedRage132: for providing naming ideas.
Final list of name candidates
[edit]We carefully considered the following factors when choosing the finalist:
- We want to avoid any names featuring "war" or "military" theme, which is one of the main reasons we want to change its current name.
- While we initially think this tool is mainly to review vandalism, given that the majority edits on Wikipedia are not vandalism, but constructive contributions, we like to neutralize the tone of name so that it's for more general review than merely to find out vandalism.
- We want to avoid any names that have a strong authoritative sense or administrative enforcement, but try to feature community citizenship and helping, such as patrol, admin, ban, etc.
- We want to take into consideration the name is easy to understand when translated into other languages, so we want to avoid slangs or terms that are specific to english (the language that this discussion is taking place)
We picked 3 names for the finalist:
- WikiLoop WikiTag: Featuring the fact everyone can tag, hence "wiki"-tag (official brand WikiLoop ¡WikiTag! in languages that support "¡").
- WikiLoop DoubleCheck: Featuring people can cross check each other to collaboratively improve the quality of Wikipedia.
- WikiLoop SecOp: Featuring people can cross each other to collaboratively improve the quality of Wikipedia.
Everyone eligible can vote for a maximum of two options from the following 3 finalists.
Short list of names and vote
[edit]Click Edit on the section for the name you want to vote in favor of. Only positive votes. All logged-in users get 2 votes. Use the following markup to express your vote:
{{Vote|Vote=Support|Username=[Your username]|Timestamp=~~~~~}}
- The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
- Per the vote result as calculated here, 77 Wikipedian votes, with weights, the result is 26 voted for WikiTag, 136 voted for DoubleCheck, 2 voted for SecOp, the winner is WikiLoop DoubleCheck.
WikiLoop WikiTag
[edit]Description: Featuring the fact everyone can tag, hence "wiki"-tag (official brand ¡WikiTag! in languages that support "¡").
- Support - Xinbenlv 04:23, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Support - Can I Log In 05:15, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Support - TechLich 05:28, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Support - The creeper2007 05:48, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Support - Ganbaruby 05:49, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose - Edits get tagged and then we look at them - Wyatt Tyrone Smith Wyatt Tyrone Smith (talk) 05:58, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Support - Edi7* 06:11, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Support - Alexcalamaro 08:27, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose - A bit ambiguous - Veracious 10:34, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Support - Sj 12:32, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Support - bluerasberry 13:42, 30 June 2020 (UTC) "Tagging" is a great term for all sorts of review and all the kinds of review activities which we want to encourage after this model. Blue Rasberry (talk) 13:41, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Support - Chrispainter0624 14:35, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Too many wikis. If anything, just "WikiLoop Tag" — Rhododendrites talk \\ 15:10, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Neutral - Agree with User:Rhododendrites, but this would be my second pick either way - Whisperjanes 20:16, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Neutral - FULBERT 01:10, 1 July 2020 (UTC) I am not sure anything really gets tagged using this, that is, beyond tagged as being reverted. Perhaps that is the intention in this?
- Neutral - I'm a bit on-the-edge with this, because it's defined everywhere in the app and docs as 'marking' but I feel that would be an awkward name. - ToxiBoi~pub 02:02, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
- Support - BeamAlexander25 07:07, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
- Support - Orphan Wiki 15:24, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose - Rsrikanth05 15:34, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
- Support - MrConorAE 20:31, 10 July 2020 (UTC) I think "mark" might be better, but this is the one I support most.
WikiLoop DoubleCheck
[edit]Description: Featuring people can cross check each other's edits to collaboratively improve the quality of Wikipedia.
- Support - Quartz dragon 18:44, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
- Support - Cmdrjameson 19:40, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
- Support - jxdn 16:19, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
- Support - CommanderWaterford 19:37, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Support - Tipeditor 15:12, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Support - Xinbenlv 04:23, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Support - Rachmat04 05:04, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Support - id34 05:04, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Support - ChromeGames923 05:10, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Support - Paradoxsociety 05:12, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Support - Can I Log In 05:15, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Support - TechLich 05:28, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Support - Evolution and evolvability 05:39, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Support - Masjawad99 05:41, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Support - The creeper2007 05:48, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Support - Ganbaruby 05:49, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Support - Wyatt Tyrone Smith 05:53, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Support - Edi7* 06:10, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Support - strug 06:16, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Support - I dream of horses 06:51, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Support - Wisnu Adi Nurcahyo 07:20, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Support - Papuass 08:40, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Support - He7d3r 09:45, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Support - Klbrain 09:48, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Support - BhaskaraPattelar 09:53, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Support - Chrispainter0624 14:34, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- I was about to say "it's okay", but the longer I imagine using the name, the better it sounds to me. "DoubleCheck" is easy to remember, can be abbreviated as "DC", like "TW" for Twinkle and "HG" for Huggle, and works well in regular discussion sentences, such as "The edit has been reverted using DoubleCheck", "please be more careful when using DoubleCheck", "I recommend enabling the DoubleCheck gadget in your preferences". Support - ToBeFree 09:56, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Its better. -Nizil Shah (talk) 10:06, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Support - Can also be abbreviated as DC, a common abbreviation for direct current electricity. That is not a very friendly connotation but I think it may work nice for anti-vandalism. I also wonder why not "CrossCheck" "CC" for the name and double check for description? - Ononal 10:11, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Support - Easy to understand what it is. - Paperworkorange 11:41, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Support totally supportive of this, and it doesn't have secondary connotations that I can anticipate, Sadads (talk) 12:18, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Support - Spy-cicle 12:44, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Support - Cantons-de-l'Est 12:52, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Support - "WL DC" makes for a good, short, and simple abbreviation. It also sounds the least "militant" of the other options. - K6ka 13:12, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Support - I also like the sound of CrossCheck, per Ononal. - S.Hinakawa 13:13, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Support - AppleBsTime 13:14, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Support - Firestarforever 13:59, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Support - Thadguidry 14:09, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Support - Rhododendrites 15:15, 30 June 2020 (UTC) - best of what's here, I guess? — Rhododendrites talk \\ 15:15, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Support - Md Maruf Parvez 15:27, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Support - Prad Nelluru 15:54, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Support - HaoranFei 16:04, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Support - Daask 16:24, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Support - Zoozaz1 16:51, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Support - DarwIn 16:55, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Support - AC5230 18:50, 30 June 2020 (UTC) (2:50 PM EDT)
- Support - Whisperjanes 20:12, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Support - FULBERT 01:12, 1 July 2020 (UTC) Doublecheck is a mouthful, but I like the concept most of the 3 options.
- Support - Nice and simple name, and I think it satisfies each of the requirements this page lays out. - ToxiBoi~pub 02:02, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
- Support - Ajshul 03:29, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
- Support - Tow 03:31, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
- Support - Eatcha 06:20, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
- Support - BEANS X2 09:22, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
- Support - Of the three options, I think this both best demonstrates what the software does, and is usable for many cases, as by others (DC abbreviation and easy use in sentences.) - aaPle 10:28, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
- Support - Nick Moyes 11:03, 1 July 2020 (UTC) Not ideal, but best of the bunch.
- Support - CAPTAIN MEDUSA 11:10, 1 July 2020 (UTC) seems OK, but not "great".
- Support - Alfie -- Thanks, Alfie. enwiki 11:45, 1 July 2020 (UTC) Least worst of the bunch. Encourages collaboration rather than the weird militaristic themes of the old name.
- Support - Ed6767 13:51, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
- Support - Orphan Wiki 15:25, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
- Support - wylie39 23:52, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
- Support - Misiuji100 8:12, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
- Support - Rsrikanth05 15:33, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
- Support - Markworthen 23:14, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
- Support - Denny 01:28, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
- Support - Jchmrt 18:56, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
- Support - [[User:Omtylo]|Omtylo]]] 07:33, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
- Support - Ganesha811 17:25, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
- Support - Llightex 01:49, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
- Support - NonsensicalSystem 09:58, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
- Support - Sohom Datta (talk) 11:41, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
- Support - Kortsleting 06:21, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
WikiLoop SecOp
[edit]Description: Short for "Second Opinion", featuring that the revisions labeled provided by its user are just opinions, and are subject to open debate and judgement.
- Support - id34 05:05, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose - Doesnt sound so right. - The creeper2007 05:50, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose - Sounds military. - Wyatt Tyrone Smith 05:50, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose - 'SecondOpinion' would have been Nice, but 'SecOp'? No, sounds like a military operation. - RonnieV 07:46, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- "Second Opinion"? Doesn't sound like it, rather like "OpSec" (operations security), a "process that (...) executes selected measures that eliminate or reduce adversary exploitation of friendly critical information" Oppose - ToBeFree 09:59, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose - Per ToBeFree. - Veracious 10:32, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose - Per RonnieV. - Paperworkorange 11:43, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose - Per ToBeFree. The inverse "Security Operations" also springs to mind. - S.Hinakawa 13:11, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose - Unfortunately, "SecOp" sounds very militant to me. It's cool, but may be off-putting to good faith users accidentally reverted by someone using the tool. - K6ka 13:13, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose - It's unclear what it means - Ajshul 03:31, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose - As everyone has mentioned, it sounds too much like a military theme. - aaPle AaPle (talk) 10:37, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose - Markworthen 23:16, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose - MrConorAE 20:34, 10 July 2020 (UTC) -- As others have said, this option sounds too "military".
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
Voting rules
[edit]- Voting dates: June 26 - July 13, 2020 00:00 UTC (two weeks)
- Everyone eligible can vote for a maximum of two options from the 3 finalists
- Eligibility: Wikipedia autoconfirmed/confirmed user (from any Wikipedia language) :WD:Q4616064 are eligible, with default multiplying factor 1
- Multiplying factor: if a user has additional contributions to WikiLoop Battlefield, they votes are multiplied by the following rules:
- Logged-in Users: in WikiLoop Battlefield
- Multiplying factor = Math.floor(log10(Number of Revisions Reviewed)) [1]
- contributions are counted by June 24th, 2020 00:00 UTC
- Code contributors: each contributor's contribution will add 2 unit to the multiplying factor
- To claim coding contributions additional votes, please mention your github username in your vote, or private message me (e.g. Email Xinbenlv at gmail dot com)[2]
- Logged-in Users: in WikiLoop Battlefield
- References
- ↑ For example, if you have 1 contribution, your vote is multiplied by 2, if you have reached the 10 revision milestones, your vote is multiplied by 3, and it is multiplied by 4 at the 100 revisions milestone, etc.
- ↑ For example, if you have 1500 revision reviewed on Wikiloop Battlefield, and also happen to contributed code, your votes is multiplied by Floor(Log(1500) + 2 = 3 + 2 = 5
Connect with us
[edit]- On-wiki en:WP:WLBF
- Github: file an issue at http://github.com/google/wikiloop-battlefield/issues/new
- Discord: https://discord.gg/sAFGPV
Thank you very much for your contribution!