Changes

Restored my user page he had, just a few minutes before, 20:44, 1 March 2011,  [http://outreach.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Vapmachado&action=history with this quite amazing summary]: "restoring per request, it appears this user intended to out himself, removing personal address".

Restored my user page he had, just a few minutes before, 20:44, 1 March 2011,  [http://outreach.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Vapmachado&action=history with this quite amazing summary]: "restoring per request, it appears this user intended to out himself, removing personal address".

[[File:800px-Frank Schulenburg June08.jpg|thumb|300px|right|[http://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Frank_Schulenburg Frank Schulenburg], the Wikimedia Foundation's Head of Public Outreach]]

[[File:800px-Frank Schulenburg June08.JPG|thumb|300px|right|[http://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Frank_Schulenburg Frank Schulenburg], the Wikimedia Foundation's Head of Public Outreach]]

While Frank Schulenburg, the Wikimedia Foundation's Head of Public Outreach, was doing his best to stay out of the fray, it was left to Community Fellow, Lennart Guldbrandsson, a.k.a. Hannibal, to [http://outreach.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Hannibal&diff=10078&oldid=10030 try to make amends], with some standard fare and a couple of lines addressing the situation that had developed or in his own words "background and answer":

While Frank Schulenburg, the Wikimedia Foundation's Head of Public Outreach, was doing his best to stay out of the fray, it was left to Community Fellow, Lennart Guldbrandsson, a.k.a. Hannibal, to [http://outreach.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Hannibal&diff=10078&oldid=10030 try to make amends], with some standard fare and a couple of lines addressing the situation that had developed or in his own words "background and answer":

Let me rephrase it a little bit for clarity's sake: the first years Wikipedia existed, the goal was simply to have articles on every subject and people tried to get as many edits as they could. Then another phase came along, where most everybody was concerned with quality: they added more and more sources, and tried to get more scientists to contribute. Around 2009, the third phase started to grow, but it wasn't until 2011 that it has really come into full effect, and it is still not the dominant way of thinking, namely that we should focus on the users. After all, it's the users that create the content. We are right now in the process of [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Gender_gap trying to get more women to contribute to Wikipedia and its sister projects], for instance, At the same time, there are users who have been present since the beginning, and we shouldn't ignore their needs and wants either. And the compromise here is very difficult - for everybody. Not just for the newcomers who come into a culture that is well-established and complex and yes, a little rough sometimes, but for the veterans, who have seen every attempt at change Wikipedia before, and who have had good results with their present methods. Sue (and I) represent those who have looked at the developments here, and [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Gender_gap try to see how Wikipedia should (and need to) evolve in the upcoming years].

Let me rephrase it a little bit for clarity's sake: the first years Wikipedia existed, the goal was simply to have articles on every subject and people tried to get as many edits as they could. Then another phase came along, where most everybody was concerned with quality: they added more and more sources, and tried to get more scientists to contribute. Around 2009, the third phase started to grow, but it wasn't until 2011 that it has really come into full effect, and it is still not the dominant way of thinking, namely that we should focus on the users. After all, it's the users that create the content. We are right now in the process of [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Gender_gap trying to get more women to contribute to Wikipedia and its sister projects], for instance, At the same time, there are users who have been present since the beginning, and we shouldn't ignore their needs and wants either. And the compromise here is very difficult - for everybody. Not just for the newcomers who come into a culture that is well-established and complex and yes, a little rough sometimes, but for the veterans, who have seen every attempt at change Wikipedia before, and who have had good results with their present methods. Sue (and I) represent those who have looked at the developments here, and [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Gender_gap try to see how Wikipedia should (and need to) evolve in the upcoming years].

In conclusion, now that Mono has restored your user page and explained his/her reason for removing it in the first place, I trust that the situation has resolved itself, and that we all can get back to being productive both here and on other Wikimedia projects. Good luck//Hannibal (talk) 08:55, 2 March 2011 (UTC)  

In conclusion, now that Mono has restored your user page and explained his/her reason for removing it in the first place, I trust that the situation has resolved itself, and that we all can get back to being productive both here and on other Wikimedia projects. Good luck//Hannibal (talk) 08:55, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

== End of story ==

== End of story ==