See the dedicated subpage for planning of this proposal.

See [1] for previous discussion.

This needs organisation, co-ordination and discussion on logistics. Who wants to lead or speahead it? —Celestianpower ^háblame 21:38, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This project should be approached with a lot of delicacy and tact. We want to help to encourage users who have left to come back, but we don't want to badger and harass them, possibly alientating them more. The more personal this can be, the more chance it has to bring editors back. -- Natalya 01:39, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

One idea which probably won't be very useful, but here goes. The majority of the people who would be approached will probably have had one or two articles or subjects which meant a lot to them, whether because they created related articles or worked on the subject for some time. Maybe we could try somehow to try to make some of these articles collaborations for improvement, and then have whomever contact them, mention that they're missed (maybe by having a hopefully unprompted "card" with the signatures of members of a project they belonged to accompanying it?) and mention that their input would be really useful to bringing the collaboration articles up to the next level of quality. Yes, it's manipulative, and actually kinda transparent, but it might work in a few cases. Another option might be to mention the proposed appreciation week, and mention that, even if they're no longer active themselves, they would be more than welcome to nominate anyone they see fit. I kinda doubt that they'd manage to get through the appreciation week without several awards themselves.Badbilltucker 19:05, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See [2] for previous discussion.

Please discuss logistics and details here. What awards do we want? Who wants to spearhead it? How often do we give them out? —Celestianpower ^háblame 21:38, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Remember, most of all, we are building an encyclopedia! It would be great to recnognize outstanding editors and contributors to the encyclopedia. -- Natalya 01:54, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Specific project- or subject- based awards for people who have contributed in a big way to their field might work best. Maybe those awards could be given out annually by the WikiProjects themselves, either alone or in collaboration. For more general awards, maybe (this is a reach) consider awarding at least one Wikihalo award at the same time as the project awards. Votes for Project-based awards might come only from members of that Project, while the Wikihalo might come from the community as a whole. Badbilltucker 19:11, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Per my messages on the main Esperanza talk page, I have two programs to help reform Esperanza. The first is this, which will focus on making Esperanza important to the encyclopedia as a whole. The idea is to get every Esperanzian working together on one article that is in poor shape, and bring it up to (hopefully) at least GA class. Here is my recommended process:

1. Article is selected by the Esperanzians.
2. Esperanzians will review the problems and come up with solutions.
3. We will then begin work on the article for the month, and improve it as much as possible.
4. As we near completion, we will conduct a peer review.
5. Depending on the result, we will then nominate for GA class.

As said before, the hope is that this will make Esperanza seem more valuable to the encyclopedia. DoomsDay349 20:03, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As I have noticed, the coffee lounge tends to attract silliness. While the coffee lounge is not serious, by any means, certain things don't need to be there. I've also noticed that a lot of users spend far too much time in the coffee lounge and not working on the encyclopedia. I understand relieving stress, but sometimes it goes too far. For this reason, the coffee lounge is often the source of resentment of Esperanza by those not involved in our programs. Thus, I propose that a group of Esperanzians, preferably a mix of those who are active in the coffee lounge and those who are not so as to avoid a biased opinion, to monitor the coffee lounge and A) Keep out overly silly comments and posts and B) Give a friendly warning to those who spend too much time in the coffee lounge. This is also part of my attempt to make Esperanza look better in the eyes of our fellows. DoomsDay349 20:03, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As the more experienced editors know, an RfA can be a very, very harsh process to go through if a user has a sincere desire to serve the community in a larger scale. Many, many users have left Wikipedia because of the very discouraging, and most of the time, questionable and unreasonable oppose views which have little regard for mitigating factors in one's contribution. It takes an immense strength of character, an unbelievable amount of maturity and a deep sense of non-attachment to carry on and motivate oneself to contribute to this great project even after many failed RfAs. I suggest that experienced and civil users form a community within Esperanza to deal with these pressing issues. Even if users who had opposed on a RfA in good faith, could still encourage, guide and motivate the affected user as well. This would indeed create a sense of bonding, community and friendship among users as well. I recommend also that users who had personaly experienced a failed RfA to join this program as their expereince on failure and how they deal with this would be an invaluable and comforting presence to all failed RfA candidates. Of course, other users could be invited to this community as well, provided they show a strong history of civility, respect and helpfulnesss in their edits and attitudes. Any comments or constructive criticisms about this would be deeply appreciated. --Siva1979^{Talk to me} 11:39, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Siva. Interesting idea, but I was wondering, how will this support thing work? Will it be more like admin coaching, where one experienced user helps you through the tough times of an RfA, or will it be more a support group thing, with lots of users leaving messages on the RfAer's talkpage? I would also like to agree with you about how RfA's are. A good oppose or neutral vote will tell the person up for adminship why you think they aren't ready, and then what they could do to improve, instead of all these 1FA type oppose votes. A support group/support mentor could really help with that sort of thing. Thε Halo ^Θ 12:13, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, a few experienced administrators are needed here, so this should be much more intensive in terms of analysis and advise on proceeding to the next step after a failed RfA. It is also recommended that the administrators or in some cases, users who had the experience of going through a failed RfA and eventually succeeding in it to leave messages on the RfAer's talk page or even in the user talk page. But dedication is required here as well and we need the support and assurance from very experienced editors that this would be a successful program. The occasional help from Bureaucrats on dealing with failures and disappointment would also prove to be useful. --Siva1979^{Talk to me} 15:31, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support - I was about to leave the project after some of the Shi... stuff that was said at it, but a few users did the kind of stuff mentioned above, and I'm still here because of their friendly comments. However, I have seen a number of users leave because nothing was said to encourage them after their failed RfA. So, again, support. Daniel.Bryant 07:12, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think this is a great idea. However, I'm not convinced that you need "experienced admins" or even "admins" to do this work although an experienced Wikipedian is a must. Of course, it would be great to have experienced admins do this but I don't think they are the only ones who can do it.

Consider my recent post in the section titled "admin" at Wikipedia:Village pump (assistance)#admin. I'm not an admin but I think I did a pretty good job of explaining to User:Qrc2006 why his RFA failed and what he needs to do to pass the next one successfully. We could get this program running quickly if we just decide to do it and get started. I would suggest that we ask for volunteers and make a requirement be that volunteers be endorsed by at least one admin (maybe two or three admins if you think that's necessary). --Richard 17:44, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

While I don't feel that Siva1979's description of opposition and the potential difficulty of contributing after a failed RfA reflect my own ideas, he definitely has a great idea and is to be commended for taking the steps to make this idea become a reality. Count me in! hoopydink^{Conas tá tú?} 21:00, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sign me up! Great idea. I try to console newer users who go for adminship simply because they don't know the requirements and are met with a rush of "oppose" votes. I'm not an admin and I haven't had an RFA of my own yet, but I remember what Nick was like during his, so I've got a pretty good idea. I'd be more than willing to just do the "comfort" side of the equation if anyone thinks I'm not qualified to give advice, although I have been giving advice and it's turned out quite well. Anyway, it's a fabulous idea on Siva's part. :) Srose (talk) 21:12, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Notes from the latest AC meeting: This program has a lot of promise, but also could cause some issues, which are best to be worked out before any decision is made. We don't want to be condescending to those who have had a failed RfA, and we don't want this to lead people to supporting RfAs just so that someone does not feel as bad. Also consider the discussion at WT:RFA#Moral_support_for_failed_RFA_candidates. If issues can be ironed out, however, this could really help a lot of people who get stressed out from RfAs! Thanks, -- Natalya 20:55, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just to shove my oar in here - I have joined up, BTW - my own POV on this subject is that, as prevention is always better than cure, it needs to be spelt out better to people what exactly being an admin entails, and more importantly, someone should design some sort of tick-box test (see User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 2a), based on typical opposes at RFAs, that prospective admins can put themselves through and better understand what chance they actually have of their RFA succeeding. This might stop RFAs like PHDrillSergeant's, when (quite frankly) it ain't gonna happen.

But what about cure? While I understand the RFA can be a very brutal process (particularly if you fail!), and indeed I've handed out some fairly brusque opposes myself from time to time, I personally feel that if you cannot cope with the stress of a failed RFA, you are fantastically unlikely to cope with the far greater stress of actually being an admin. Ergo, it's probably a good thing that you failed - I'm sure there's some tactful way of phrasing that. The best advice is probably to go away for a bit and rethink your attitude to how you handle (hopefully; not always, I know) constructive criticism. There must be a tactful way of phrasing that, as well. Cheers, Moreschi 18:12, 20 September 2006 (UTC)(As you've probably noticed, plain speaking is one of my virtues. Circumlocution is not. I'll try to make my vocab a bit more Esperanzian, if that's what everyone wants.)[reply]

We redesigned the Front Page of Esperanza, which turned out really well. Why not do a massive redesign of the Coffee Lounge, Esperanza Talk Page, Current Programs Page, etc.? More people tend to flock towards Esperanza subpages, so why don't we make it more Esperanzian? --Ed^{talk c E} 00:32, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. I think the entire project could use some sprucing up. I just updated my proposed page for the Happy Birthday program to correspond with the new style. The only thing would be if it was neccessary to make so many sub-pages (1 for each section) for each page. On the Happy Birthday page, removed the edit box (now it is just a standard one) so everything was on one page. – Heaven's Wrath   ^Talk  01:31, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't we make a universal Esperanza design template? It will already have all of the formatting needed for each EA subpage. That way, instead of having to put in the format on each and every subpage, we could just have a bot add the template to each of the subpages.--Ed^{talk c E} 02:07, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I (might) agree (if I came anywhere close to understanding you, although I probably would agree with you if I came to understand what it is I am currently not understanding). Instead of relying on the Portal's syntax, create one for Esperanza (but make the edit box optional). I do not see a reason for using bots though (I might not understand fully), I think that I would be able to reorganize it by myself. It also would allow for projects (such as Appreciation Week to edit all the pages at once during special events. – Heaven's Wrath   ^Talk  03:43, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, forget the bots, that's a bad idea. =( What I suggest is that we make a template that carries the general design for ALL ESPERANZA subpages EXCEPT for the Front Page, which has already been designed (Thank you to all who helped with that, by the way). That way, all subpages will have the same color scheme, and all of the pages will look Esperanzian. The template itself will carry the colors needed for the page. And I'm also proposing a page redesign for the current discussion at WT:EA. The reason is this: what are the first two pages visiting Wikipedians look at? The Front Page and Esperanza Talk. (Then the participants list if they want to join, maybe we'll redesign that, too).--Ed^{talk c E} 21:48, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I could whip something up if you all would like that. Æon ^{Insanity Now!}_EA! 19:57, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That would be great! Being the person who created the EA frong page, you have all of the color codes and templates needed for this!--Ed^{talk c E} 20:19, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just wanted to let everyone know that I have been working a little on this. Currently, I am designing the Programs page. You can see it my progress here. I would like to find a different icon. If any one has any suggestions, please post them. – Heaven's Wrath   ^Talk  18:45, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Was the idea to completely revamp the pages, or to have a more subtle design for all of the pages? I don't actually know what the initial intention was, or what everyone wants, I'm just throwing that out there. -- Natalya 20:38, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My main intention was to have a universal EA header that would identify all pages as Esperanzian. This header would also incorporate the EA colors into the page.--Ed ^Trick? or _Treat? 23:59, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Moved from WT:ESP

Although my first proposed program, Why Do People Leave?, flopped, I have not been discouraged, but have returned with another proposed program: One More Chance.

There have been incidents whereby an established and respected member of the Wikipedia community commits a serious error, or egregious policy violation. They may have done so under stress and pressure, and the punishments imposed on them may further aggravate their stress. In such cases, we, as members of Esperanza, could step in; reminding them that despite their mistakes, they are still valued members of the Wikipedia community, and helping them learn from their mistakes and continue contributing.

I am likely to be a beneficiary of such a program. For the uninformed, in August, due to stress caused primarily by anonymous vandals, I started vandalising Microsoft-related articles anonymously, and was eventually blocked for 1 week after being caught by CheckUser. Off the top of my head, I can recall three established users who have been involved in highly-publicized controversies and would benefit from this proposed program: Carnildo, Everyking, and of course, my arch-nemesis, Chacor.

The name of this proposed program comes from the Jack Neo movie One More Chance. Feel free to discuss and give feedback on this proposal. If you like it, you may wish to leave a Yellow Ribbon on my talk page. If you think it sucks, you can slam it (but not too hard, please).

--J.L.W.S. The Special One 14:57, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You didn't give much detail on how the program would work. Are you proposing a strict warning to good-standing editors who succumb to stress and make disruptive edits instead of blocks? I would agree to that, to a point. A good history should provide some merit for leeway, but only if the destructive activities don't go too far. Prometheus^-X303- 15:55, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, Prometheus, you misread my post. Their status as an established editor should not waive them from receiving justified punishments for policy violations.

However, as Esperanzans, we can offer support to users who have made such mistakes. We can drop them a friendly note to remind them that despite their mistakes, their contributions are still valued. We can also offer them some guidance, so that they will learn from their mistakes and continue contributing.

If our notes and guidance are successful, when an established member commits a serious error, instead of leaving, they will learn from their mistakes and continue contributing.

After I was blocked (and at several other times), I felt that the entire Wikipedia community hated me. After reading several encouraging messages, particularly one from Newyorkbrad, I realised that this was not the case, and with guidance from several other Wikipedians, I continued to contribute to Wikipedia. --J.L.W.S. The Special One 10:01, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As per several messages left on my talk page, I wish to clarify that my use of the word "arch-nemesis" was not intended to be confrontational. I was simply using my skills as a Literature student in a light-hearted manner. I hope nobody's feelings were hurt as a result. --J.L.W.S. The Special One 10:58, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just as a note, program proposals should really be added to Wikipedia:Esperanza/Proposals. -- Natalya 18:01, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, this is surely a good idea! I have always felt that no repsected user, like Jtkiefer, Karmafist, etc. have ever erred, except to let off steam and relieve pressure/stress. I feel that we are too harsh on these contributors, that we don't give them a second chance. I guess Esperanza could go a long way in helping them out. I'll add this to WP:ESP/PROP. --May the Force be with you! Shreshth91 12:51, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I guess I did. I feel that the reasons that seasoned editors and chronic vandals vandalise may be quite different. An editors history should be considered. Perhaps not in the punishment, because whatever the motivation, vandalism is always destructive and disruptive. But those in good standing who suddenly take a wicked turn should be contacted politely to find out why and offer alternative ways to solve the problem.Prometheus^-X303- 13:04, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Esperanza's purpose seems to be helping established Wikipedians when they are stressed. When established Wikipedians are stressed, they may react in different ways. Some of them, like the above-mentioned users, may vandalise or cause disruption. Since they are doing this due to stress, we, as Esperanza members, should try and help them. I'm sure they'll stop vandalising if they're no longer stressed.

However, this proposed program should not just cover cases of established users causing disruption due to stress. It should also cover cases where an established user commits a sincere mistake, and is stressed after receiving a justified punishment. The most prominent case I can think of is Everyking. I believe he made a sincere mistake, not knowing that there was personal information in the deleted page. The subsequent events, particularly his desysopping, must have caused him considerable stress. We could have stepped in and remind him that his contributions are still valued, and help him learn from his mistakes. --J.L.W.S. The Special One 10:58, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

At first, I thought this program will be like, find a user, leave a note, find a user, leave a note, on and on and on. But then I talked to Hildanknight via MSN and he explained about this program a little bit more. I think this is a good idea, although some standards of "chance" should be implemented, because we cannot give a chance to a user who have vandalised blatantly for zillion times. Also, I agree with Hildanknight, that ESP can provide a place for guidance, or mentoring, if you wish to say, for users who have been given this chance. Can I say support here? Oh well, I assume yes, support. Cheers -- Imoeng 11:15, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think that this program is a good idea. I hope I will never act in such a way that I require Esperanza counseling for my bad behaviour, but anyway... yes, support. --Kyoko 16:16, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've been out of Esperanza a long time. I was at Hildanknight's talk page today to leave him a note about using incorrect warning templates when I read about this. I must say that this is an absolutely ridiculous misjudgement on the part of Hildanknight to be personally aggressive and uncivil. Almost certainly, if such was made in a heated instance (even in a "light-hearted manner"), it is certainly NOT taken as such, and I would like an apology. – Chacor 09:09, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Matter resolved. – Chacor 09:59, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It seems like a great idea. I was repeatedly blocked and told that I was "no use to the encyclopedia".^[1] It was Netsnipe who finally got me back on track. If there were more people like that, I could have gotten back to being a productive user a lot sooner, and would have saved everyone a lot of WikiDrama. ~ Flameviper 17:56, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Shinmawa created an Articles for creation Wizard (similar to the tutorial page) to help newbies determine whether their submissions follow the rules an are therefore suitable for inclusion. Before it was implemented we had to decline over 90% of the submissions there, making it very hard to find the ones worth creating. Initial investigation shows the amount of accepted submissions has increased after implementation. Since wizards like this one are more inviting to newbies than warning messages, it's more likely to retain good editors who just need to learn the ropes and I would like to see more of these implemented about for example "determining the copyright information of images", "image formatting tutorial", "which tag to choose?" etc. Some newbies are confused by the Wikipedia layout and editing system. Wizards have more of a windows feel and require less wiki learning before they actually start editing (so they don't have to jump hurdles to learn what they need to). What do you think of the idea and more importantly, can you think of more often asked questions to apply it to? - Mgm|^(talk) 20:20, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As a 12 year old myself, I think Esperanza should have a youth program, designed for kids and teens to talk and be appreciated. Also, just like me, I think most children won't want to reveal their actual birthdate for the birthday program, so the program would include a birthday month congrats, for kids who will reveal only their birth month only. I'm sure that people can come up with plenty of more suggestions. TeckWiz^TalkContribs_{# of Edits} 01:24, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I should probably mention that there was a proposal or something about Wikipedia in general about young contributors not mentioning their exact location, out of fears of online predators. This was in reference to a young user who has now been banned from Wikipedia. Sorry to cast a pall on the discussion, but for a program like this, people shouldn't mention exactly where they are, which is what this user repeatedly did. --Kyoko 03:08, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, TeckWiz! I'm a 15-year-old male Singaporean. (Kyoko, have I gone too far?) I support the idea of an Esperanza Youth group, as my youth has made it harder for me to cope with the stress Wikipedia causes. As a side note, I have found many websites to be unfriendly to youths, and I hope Wikipedia is an exception (I have spotted ageism in RFAs). --J.L.W.S. The Special One 04:52, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If I remember correctly, the banned user I was talking about repeatedly said what her age was and what neighborhood of a certain large city she lived in. She was repeatedly told not to do that and eventually resorted to the use of sockpuppets in order to keep participating on Wikipedia. So no, you haven't gone too far.--Kyoko 13:23, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support, with serious reservations. One younger editor retired recently after being the subject of a truly tasteless pornographic essay elsewhere, by a party other than herself, in which her age, photograph, and username were revealed. There is a real risk of that sort of thing happening again, regardless of the amount of work already being undertaken to ensure otherwise. Maybe, if the age and character of one younger editor could be verified, they might be able to help start such a group, but wikipedia's policy of transparency would almost certainly produce an instance of at least abusive language about an underage editor relatively soon. Badbilltucker 16:10, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Certain child editors would be extremely reluctant to reveal their age; people would see them as "children" rather than "editors", and their parents would yell at them for "revealing personal information". Most internet associations tell children never to reveal any personal information. So although it would be a really good idea to support child editors, the difficulty of revealing the "child editor" status presents itself as a hurdle. So I support, although I point out that you should not expect a high membership because of preferred anonymity on the Internet. ~ Flameviper 18:02, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The opposition to Esperanza Youth apparently only addresses under-13s. Besides under-13s, Esperanza Youth would also cater to teens. Many established Wikipedians are teens - in Singapore, we have: Natalinasmpf (admin), Terence Ong and Tdxiang. --J.L.W.S. The Special One 06:15, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My concern (not quite opposition) is for people who are legally considered as children (generally under 18), not just under 13. --Kyoko 15:01, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What if to join you only need to be under 18. You wouldn't be required to tell your exact age, just that you're a minor. Also optional would be your birthday month, as in just (so that the birthday brigade could congradulate a kid/teen without revealing their exact b-day.). Anyone that reveals anything against Wikipedia's minor policy should be given one warning, with a second one resulting in not being allowed to participate in Esperanza Youth. TeckWiz^TalkContribs_{# of Edits} 20:22, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Accepted proposals are listed at Wikipedia:Esperanza/Programs.

Proposals which are not accepted are stored in the archives. If there is an archived proposal that you feel could be modified to work out better, you are welcome to bring it back.

• Archive 1
• Archive 2
• Archive 3