This project is being spammed to everybody's talk page on en:wiki, with no indication of who is responsible for sending out the mass messages and where they gained consensus. Please show where consensus was obtained for the mass messaging.~~~~
Also happening on Commons.
The message has a signature so I think there is indication? (Furthermore, I did not receive such a message on my talk page on en.wikipedia.org so it seems like it is not "everybody's talk page".) If mass messaging requires consensus then please feel free to link to that policy. Thanks a lot!
Mass messages should only be sent to groups of users who are likely to want their attention drawn to the message. I don't think "everybody who edited a documentation page on the English Wikipedia" is a group likely to want their attention drawn to the message. Do you? As an aside, what was considered a "documentation page"? I don't even think I edited one recently, unless it means "talk page".
No! No google no commercial stuff. No google–wiki connection. What about Wiki basics do you not understand?
Hello, please assume good faith
I know what GF is. Google (commercial silicon valley) does not.
@DePiep: You are free to express disagreement, however, getting personal is not helpful - Criticize ideas, not people. Furthermore, I'm afraid that currently nobody knows which specific "Wiki basics" you have in mind (references required), and whatever "commercial stuff" you have in mind. You will have to elaborate and be more specific, to avoid the impression of commonplace platitudes. Thanks :)
Where did I got personal?
@DePiep: In the question "What about Wiki basics do you not understand?".
Cheap reply, AKlapper. The editor is *promoting* Google payed editing (reduced wording).
@DePiep: Please take a look and read what Google Code-in is about and what not (hint: it is not about paid editing). If you have constructive feedback and could elaborate on your specific concerns, then I'd be happy to discuss.
You say, "Google does not pay"?
You fundamentally misunderstand this issue, refuse to recognize that you’re looking at it incorrectly, and insult people who try to clarify. Stop trolling, or you will be blocked from editing.
It looks like jumping from one random conclusion ("paid editing") to another random one ("pay" without editing), as it seems like you are not interested to take a look what Google Code-in is [not] about, plus my questions get repeatedly ignored, so this conversation unfortunately does not look like a good use of my time here.
I think it's worth looking at what students and the Wikimedia projects get out of our participation. Over the last two years, I've given dozens of students from around the world the basic skills to program in Lua in the context of using Scribunto modules in Wikipedia.
At the very least, a lot of students will have made their first edits to Wikipedia, and learned something about the Lua programming language.
At best, some of those students will go on to edit their local Wikipedia and other projects, spreading skills in Lua across the globe.
For me, that's a real plus, with no downsides. I don't care that I'm not getting paid to teach. I had an entire career doing that and now I'm comfortably retired. and I'm happy to donate my time to a worthwhile cause. In my humble opinion, Google Code-In is a worthwhile cause, although I'll gladly concede that not everyone will share my sensibilities.
Prerequisites and tasks of mentors?
Is having "recently edited a documentation page at the English Wikipedia" really sufficient to be qualified as a mentor? I found the mass message description of what mentorship entails unhelpfully vague. Some digging brought me to Google's responsibilities page and the list of sample tasks. Still there's a lot unclear, including the amount of work involved.
There are no older topics