Thread:Talk:Article feedback/Irrelevant/reply (36)

You're imperious attitude doesn't really work when you've repeatedly demonstrated that you can't read. I mean honestly, this is the ENGLISH MediaWiki right?

Again, to repeat, the amount of articles (noun: inanimate object that is not a person, trait of of a person or action being done by said person) that ARE affected by "silly ratings" of people using the tool inappropriately are NOT infinitesimal, and repeatedly pretending that they are does NOT make it true.

So far you are neglecting to understand what I have repeatedly stated previously. I did not recommend that Wikipedia should "shelve the tool" on ALL pages, but LOOK AT THE DASHBOARD - yes, that's an infinitesimally small number of articles, but it gives you a clear "sampling" of what is happening on ALL articles across Wikipedia. Fan/hate votes on celeb related articles makes up a HUGE number of inexplicable ratings on the dashboard, and celeb related articles make up a HUGE number of overall daily TRAFFIC on the encyclopedia. Expecting someone to cite all 3 million + pages individually in order to prove this to you before you accept the obvious statistics is ridiculous. Of the feedback I've seen here, the only thing that's "infinitesimal" is the number of people who seem to think this tool IS working. You haven't PROVEN to me that silly ratings on celeb culture articles are "infinitesimal", and that the tool is working on 99.9999999% of the encyclopedia yet either. So go ahead, cite the 2.999 MILLION articles where it's working.

I'm doing simple math here - If only half the ratings are people HONESTLY voting on the merits of the articles (which is being generous) then I'd rather not have ANY ratings, but that was NOT my suggestion. I recommended the tool not be used on the categories of pages that it's been PROVEN thousands of people are fan/hate voting on. Unfortunately for you, this includes People, Films, TV shows, etc, etc - which you know full well is a HUGE part of the encyclopedia. If you really thought it was infinitesimal then why would you have a problem with the ratings being removed on those pages? Instead you know FULL WELL that would yank the tool from HUNDREDS of THOUSANDS of pages viewed by MILLIONS of readers every day, so you can drop your debunked "infinitesimal" myth. Nobody is buying it.

The problem with your cute little cell phone analogy is that cell phones are USEFUL. This tool is NOT. It doesn't make sense to let a very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very small number of "developmentally challenged" people defending the tool (and who have never written a Wikipedia article in their entire LIFE) have undue weight on the decision to keep it.