Marryjifang (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
|||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Bill Gates topped the business category and Oprah Winfrey and Angelina Jolie scored high marks but many Americans through the usb for camera said they have difficulty naming a responsible leader or celebrity, according to a new poll. |
|||
{{active editnotice}} <!-- See [[Wikipedia:Editnotice]] --> |
|||
Most of the 1,001 Americans questioned in the survey for the pen net camera and said the valued responsibility, but they just didn’t see enough of it in other people. |
|||
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|||
“The index shows that people want more responsibility in their lives, but they are not always certain how to achieve that goal” said Kathy McManus, of Liberty Mutual Group, a global insurance company that conducted the poll. |
|||
|archiveheader = {{atn}} |
|||
“There’s no playbook for responsibility, so increasingly we see individual working to create their own.” |
|||
|maxarchivesize = 90K |
|||
Fifteen percent of people chose Gates, the co-found of Microsoft, as their top responsibility business leader and eight percent named Winfrey and Jolie as their choice in the celebrity stakes. |
|||
|counter = 3 |
|||
But 33 percent said they couldn’t select a celebrity that embodies responsibility and 37 percent had same response when asked about a business leader. |
|||
|algo = old(9d) |
|||
More than three-quarters of the people questioned believed reality television shows have a negative impact on personal responsibility, and a similar number thought media attention on celebrity lifestyle diminished people’s sense of responsibility. |
|||
|archive = Wikipedia talk:Contact us/Archive %(counter)d |
|||
When asked to rank themselves, teachers, young Americans and married couples gave themselves the highest marks for responsibility. |
|||
}}{{Wikipedia talk:Contact us/header}} |
|||
“Americans associate personal responsibility with family obligations and the effects of one’s action on others,” the company said in a statement |
|||
<!-- LEAVE NEW ITEMS BELOW THIS LINE --> |
|||
Seventy percent of Americans said to the car with camera that they thought they had become more responsibility in the past five years, while 74 percent said they believed other people had become less responsible during the same period. |
|||
“And on average, more than 70 percent of Americans believe teenagers, young adults and parents are somewhat or much less responsible than years ago.” it added. |
|||
== Forum == |
|||
{{Moved discussion|WP:Village pump (proposals)#Forum}} |
|||
== Wikileaks == |
|||
I do seriously hope Wikipedia will take action against Wikileaks for stealing their name. They bring it into disrepute. |
|||
Malcolm <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/94.1.105.16|94.1.105.16]] ([[User talk:94.1.105.16|talk]]) 20:29, 23 October 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
: Wikipedia does not own and did not invent the word "wiki" or the concept of a [[Wiki]] – see [[WikiWikiWeb]]. [[User talk:Amalthea|<span style="font-variant:small-caps;color:#832">Amalthea</span>]] 20:44, 23 October 2010 (UTC) |
|||
== OTRS == |
|||
The OTRS pages says to come here to contact the ORTRS team, but I see no link. <!--[[Kai Point Mine]]--> ''[[User:Rich Farmbrough|Rich]] [[User talk:Rich Farmbrough|Farmbrough]]'', 14:38, 24 October 2010 (UTC).<br /> |
|||
:Are you referring to: "If you have been advised to "contact OTRS" and were sent here, please read Wikipedia:Contact us for further advice, including suggestions for which e-mail address to write to for particular problems as well as other possible ways to resolve the issue."? If so, I think the idea is that users come here and choose the appropriate topical link, which may contain specific advice and a particular VRT email address to use. --[[User:Bsherr|Bsherr]] ([[User talk:Bsherr|talk]]) 15:42, 24 October 2010 (UTC) |
|||
I have no idea if I reporting my problem at the right site....but this is concerning the early morning phone calls about Sandra Day O'Conner. This moring at 12:45 AM the first one came telling me about O'Conner, then if that wasn't enough the second call came at 1:45 AM I guess in case I fell asleep again, same message. Now, I am 80 years old, and phone calls at time of morning can never be good, as far as I am concerned, maybe it was a mistake on the recorder, i don't know, but whatever it was I certainly hope it does not happen again. thank you. Betty Arnold, 10/25/10 Carson City, NV. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/75.40.179.224|75.40.179.224]] ([[User talk:75.40.179.224|talk]]) 19:35, 25 October 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
:It's not the right place. But I'll notify our retired supreme court justice call center. Thanks. --[[User:Bsherr|Bsherr]] ([[User talk:Bsherr|talk]]) 19:40, 25 October 2010 (UTC) |
|||
== WIKI published erroneous information about Paranaque. It seems WIKI is a political website. == |
|||
Wiki should double check any article it publishin its web site. I strongly believe that there ar some unscrupulous person who wish to downgrade the reputation of WIKI. I would suggest that they double check any article befoe they publish it in their web. I am reffering to the article of Paranaque. Though it is 2010 they have published that the mayor for 2013 is Roilo Golez. Are they campaigning for Golez. Is the Website te officia website of Golez. I wander????? <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/112.206.54.73|112.206.54.73]] ([[User talk:112.206.54.73|talk]]) 01:18, 5 November 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
:It was an instance of disruptive editing. I've reverted it. A principle of Wikipedia is that anyone can edit it, so we don't have a procedure to check edits. However, as the instructions on this page direct, '''This is not the page to ask questions, to report errors, or to contact Wikipedia.''' Please be mindful of this regarding future inquiries. --[[User:Bsherr|Bsherr]] ([[User talk:Bsherr|talk]]) 16:14, 5 November 2010 (UTC) |
|||
::I'm thinking maybe we should just semi-protect the page. Obviously the notices aren't working.. -- [[User:OlEnglish|<font size="5">œ</font>]][[User talk:OlEnglish|<sup>™</sup>]] 12:49, 10 November 2010 (UTC) |
|||
:::I'm reluctant to do that should an anonymous user actually have a question about the contact us pages. Though a user talk template explaining that this isn't the place to post irrelevant comments might help. --[[User:Bsherr|Bsherr]] ([[User talk:Bsherr|talk]]) 14:34, 10 November 2010 (UTC) |
|||
::::If they can't see the big huge [[Template:Editnotices/Group/Wikipedia talk:Contact us|group notice]] when they click 'edit page' I don't think no amount of templating will help. -- [[User:OlEnglish|<font size="5">œ</font>]][[User talk:OlEnglish|<sup>™</sup>]] 18:57, 10 November 2010 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Well, it sets up a record if the user's editing is disruptive in other ways. --[[User:Bsherr|Bsherr]] ([[User talk:Bsherr|talk]]) 19:24, 10 November 2010 (UTC) |
|||
== The bureaucratic maze == |
|||
If the OTRS email addresses weren't hidden behind a bureaucratic maze of pages that lead in circles, you'd have less people posting things here. This whole mess is incredibly bitey and hostile. [[User:Gigs|Gigs]] ([[User talk:Gigs|talk]]) 20:42, 11 November 2010 (UTC) |
|||
:Yes, but if the maze didn't exist, many more people would e-mail about issues that could be resolved by providing self-help information in the maze, or which the volunteer response team cannot help. The volume of e-mail might increase too. Most of the posts to this page are blatant advertising, blatant nonsense, non-English, or complaining about article content (which the volunteer response team cannot resolve anyway). The remainder are comments that belong on another talk page. Barely any are requests that should have been e-mailed. Of course, if you have any suggestions for improving these pages, they'd be welcome. --[[User:Bsherr|Bsherr]] ([[User talk:Bsherr|talk]]) 20:52, 11 November 2010 (UTC) |
|||
::My main suggestion is that WP:OTRS should lead to a page that has a list of the queues with email addresses. I wouldn't dare put something like "Please contact [[WP:OTRS]] to confirm whatever" on a new user's page considering the current state of affairs. If I knew that page was an actual helpful page instead of some kind of smoke screen designed to confuse new users into failing to find the email addresses, then I could do that kind of thing. [[User:Gigs|Gigs]] ([[User talk:Gigs|talk]]) 21:14, 11 November 2010 (UTC) |
|||
:::I'm not sure that would be more helpful. I think the menu is relatively easy to navigate, but if it isn't, maybe we can improve that? --[[User:Bsherr|Bsherr]] ([[User talk:Bsherr|talk]]) 22:15, 11 November 2010 (UTC) |
|||
::::It's difficult when it's all full protected. The normal editing process of finding consensus can't work. From a usability standpoint, I think we need to work to eliminate potential loops that lead people around in circles. If we want to make it wizard style then we need to stick to that, and provide people a clear branching path to where they want to go. Right now it's way too easy to be lead down rabbit holes to nowhere, or worse, back to where you started. Would you consider dropping the pages to semi-protection for a while so that normal editors might take a crack at improving them? [[User:Gigs|Gigs]] ([[User talk:Gigs|talk]]) 00:57, 12 November 2010 (UTC) |
|||
:::::I'm not an admin, so I can't, but I'm not sure it's necessary; could you sandbox proposed changes? --[[User:Bsherr|Bsherr]] ([[User talk:Bsherr|talk]]) 02:36, 12 November 2010 (UTC) |
|||
::::::It's not ideal. Forming consensus about a radical sandboxed change is often much harder than forming consensus the normal way through incremental editing. Any admin willing to drop these pages to semi protection temporarily? [[User:Gigs|Gigs]] ([[User talk:Gigs|talk]]) 03:04, 12 November 2010 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::How about incremental sandboxed change? We can go in steps. There aren't many eyes on this talk page, so I don't think there will be as many cooks in the kitchen as you might expect. --[[User:Bsherr|Bsherr]] ([[User talk:Bsherr|talk]]) 03:17, 12 November 2010 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::That's what I would be afraid of, not enough eyes. We spend a lot of time coming up with something nice and new, and then when it comes time to roll it out, people have lots of little reasons to oppose it. [[User:Gigs|Gigs]] ([[User talk:Gigs|talk]]) 03:26, 12 November 2010 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::::What I mean is edit-request it in steps. That way, there's no big moment. --[[User:Bsherr|Bsherr]] ([[User talk:Bsherr|talk]]) 03:44, 12 November 2010 (UTC) |
Revision as of 06:33, 13 November 2010
Bill Gates topped the business category and Oprah Winfrey and Angelina Jolie scored high marks but many Americans through the usb for camera said they have difficulty naming a responsible leader or celebrity, according to a new poll. Most of the 1,001 Americans questioned in the survey for the pen net camera and said the valued responsibility, but they just didn’t see enough of it in other people. “The index shows that people want more responsibility in their lives, but they are not always certain how to achieve that goal” said Kathy McManus, of Liberty Mutual Group, a global insurance company that conducted the poll. “There’s no playbook for responsibility, so increasingly we see individual working to create their own.” Fifteen percent of people chose Gates, the co-found of Microsoft, as their top responsibility business leader and eight percent named Winfrey and Jolie as their choice in the celebrity stakes. But 33 percent said they couldn’t select a celebrity that embodies responsibility and 37 percent had same response when asked about a business leader. More than three-quarters of the people questioned believed reality television shows have a negative impact on personal responsibility, and a similar number thought media attention on celebrity lifestyle diminished people’s sense of responsibility. When asked to rank themselves, teachers, young Americans and married couples gave themselves the highest marks for responsibility. “Americans associate personal responsibility with family obligations and the effects of one’s action on others,” the company said in a statement Seventy percent of Americans said to the car with camera that they thought they had become more responsibility in the past five years, while 74 percent said they believed other people had become less responsible during the same period. “And on average, more than 70 percent of Americans believe teenagers, young adults and parents are somewhat or much less responsible than years ago.” it added.