from_name: Platonides

subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: E-Mail Capabilities

body:
You're probably running that wiki on a server that doesn't allow you to send
email. It (probably) has nothing to do with your install, but with the PHP
config.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tom "TK" Kuegler"
<tk-/3iGZp7K0TcWLprN/DKmJNBPR1lH4CV8 at public.gmane.org>
Newsgroups: gmane.science.linguistics.wikipedia.technical
Sent: Saturday, February 04, 2006 4:57 PM
Subject: E-Mail Capabilities

> Hello:
>
>
>
> I have been running wikimedia for a little while.  But I have had a
> problem
> getting the email components of the system to work.  None of the email
> notifications work for users and emails are never sent from the system.
> And
> in the preferences a user gets : Error sending mail: mail() has been
> disabled for security reasons
>
>
>
> I have the settings set to "true" in the localsettings.php, but that does
> not seem to be helping. Is there something I am missing?
>
>
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> TK


list: wikitech-l

source: pipermail-mbox

subject:
[Wikitech-l] Re: Extension to allow editing only by AUTHORIZED
	USERS???

body:
You can simply disallow the edit and create account permission for anonymous
users (i think it is the all * group).
Then if anyone wants to edit needs to have and account, that can only be
created by an existing one (any registered or any sysop, it depends how you
configure it).
No extension needed.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Igor Chudov" <ichudov-Ufjfhzb+M6mQVHkhH/hvKw at public.gmane.org>
Newsgroups: gmane.science.linguistics.wikipedia.technical
Sent: Friday, February 03, 2006 7:21 PM
Subject: Extension to allow editing only by AUTHORIZED USERS???

>I run a couple of wikis. Both are used as glorified help pages for
> certain projects. One is made by one person (me), and another is
> created by several persons.
>
> In any case, beyond a limited list of people, we have no interest in
> having outsiders contribute, at the time. And spam is very time
> consuming. SpamBlackList does not work well (complains about too long
> regexp) etc.
>
> So. I would like to know if there is some extension that limits who
> can contribute, to, say, a list of sysops.
>
> thanks
>
> --


list: wikien-l

from_name: Fastfission

subject: [WikiEN-l] The Counter Vandalism Unit? Whaa?

body:
On 2/4/06, The Cunctator <cunctator at gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm sorry, but for what I would hope are obvious reasons I think we
> should discourage people from playing out their paramilitary fantasies
> at Wikipedia.

So is your objection just to the "fantasy" or to the work they do? If
it isn't the latter then just get over it. People have all sorts of
stupid fantasies and all sorts of preoccupations. If they contribute
well, I could care less if they do it while pretending to be torturers
or not. Perhaps military metaphors are in questionable taste. So what?
Don't participate if it bugs you.

FF


from_name: Chris Jenkinson

subject: [WikiEN-l] Database locking

body:
The Cunctator wrote:
> Can you explain what you mean by "database lock"? Or point me to a
> reference? I'm happy to RTFM.

Basically where an admin does something which means that everything else
gets put on hold until the "something" is completed. For example,
deleting a page with a large history (such as when Ed Poor deleted AFD).

Chris

--
Chris Jenkinson
chris at starglade.org

"Mistrust all in whom the impulse to punish is powerful."
  -- Friedrich Nietzsche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra


list: wikipedia-l

from_name: The Cunctator

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: [Wikitech-l] Password security

body:
On 2/4/06, Chris Jenkinson <chris at starglade.org> wrote:
> Walter Vermeir wrote:
> > Using no password, especially when you are sysop is highly irresponsible and
> > those users should be de-sysoped.
>
> I thought adminship was no big deal... ;)
>
I personally think they should be lined up and shot.

Defend the citadel!


body:
On 2/4/06, Fastfission <fastfission at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 2/4/06, The Cunctator <cunctator at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I'm sorry, but for what I would hope are obvious reasons I think we
> > should discourage people from playing out their paramilitary fantasies
> > at Wikipedia.
>
> So is your objection just to the "fantasy" or to the work they do? If
> it isn't the latter then just get over it. People have all sorts of
> stupid fantasies and all sorts of preoccupations. If they contribute
> well, I could care less if they do it while pretending to be torturers
> or not. Perhaps military metaphors are in questionable taste. So what?
> Don't participate if it bugs you.

I would be upset if Wikipedians pretended to be torturers.

It's not a taste issue -- it's a culture issue. I strongly believe
that inclinations to building an outsider-insider dichotomy, a culture
that worries about destruction and damage, that is paranoid about
attack and ruination, is one that is pernicious to the Wikipedia
project.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Should we be declaring war on vandals?

body:
On 2/4/06, Chris Jenkinson <chris at starglade.org> wrote:
> The Cunctator wrote:
> > [[User:Cool Cat]].
>
> One person? It seems a more productive path would be to discuss it on
> his talk page rather than discussing it behind his back on the mailing
> list - as far as I know, he's not subscribed.

He's the person who founded the "Counter Vandalism Unit", so his
attitudes are influential.

He wrote on my talk page: "Are you sure you are worthy of admin tools
(strictly judging from your incivil and rather annoying attitude here
at wikipedia and on the mailing list). I DOnt believe if you had an
RfA now it would have passed."

So it's evident he's aware of the mailing list, if not participating
in it. I've left a message on his talk page.

Judging by the comments he left me, I have trouble seeing how a
one-on-one conversation would be constructive, but I'm certainly
willing to try.


from_name: Mark Williamson

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Europanto

body:
Hi. it's unlikely that a europeanto wikipedia would be created because
its vocab is unstable and it is usually considered a joke language.

On 2/3/06, Alfredo Carpineti <alfredo.carpineti at gmail.com> wrote:
> I would like to start a Wikipedia in a language called Europanto. I
> attached the Wiki article that explain it better than I can. Looking
> foward for hearing from you.
>
> Yours faithfully
>
> Alfredo Carpineti
>
> From Wikipedia.org:
>
> Europanto is a constructed language, a linguistic jest with a
> hodge-podge vocabulary from many European languages. It was created in
> 1996 by Diego Marani, a translator for the European Council of
> Ministers in Brussels. Marani created it in response to the perceived
> dominance of the English language; it is an emulation of the effect
> that non-native speakers struggling to learn a language typically add
> words and phrases from their native language to express their meanings
> clearly.
> The single outstanding feature of Europanto is that there are no fixed
> rules -- merely a set of suggestions. This means that anybody can
> start to speak Europanto immediately, on the other hand it is the
> speaker's responsibility to draw on an assumed common vocabulary and
> grammar between himself and the audience, to make himself understood.
> Effectively, Europanto as it is used, tends to have a grammar much
> like English, with words borrowed from various languages and adapted
> to be easily understood. It is sometimes considered a parody of the
> international auxiliary language genre, particularly the "Euroclone"
> variety, namely their preceived tendency to very strongly formalize
> speech, and impose strict, but arbitrary rules on it.
> The name Europanto is a portmanteau combination of European and the
> Greek stem ????- (all), and resembles Esperanto.
> Marani wrote regular newspaper columns about the language and
> published a novel using it. As of 2005, he no longer actively promotes
> it.
> [edit]
> Sample
>
> Eine terrible menace incumbe over el Kingdom des Angleterra. Poor
> Regina Elisabeth habe spent todo seine dinero in charmingantes hats
> und pumpkinose carrosses und maintenow habe keine penny left por
> acquire de Champagne dat necessite zum celebrate Prince Charles
> anniversario op el 14 Novembro. (Diego Marani)
> (Which translates as "A terrible menace has come over the Kingdom of
> England. Poor Queen Elizabeth has spent all of her money in charming
> hats and pumpkin carriages, and now is left without a penny to buy the
> Champagne which is necessary to celebrate Prince Charles' birthday on
> November 14th.")
> [edit]
>

--
"Take away their language, destroy their souls." -- Joseph Stalin


list: foundation-l

from_name: Daniel Mayer

subject: [Foundation-l] communications committee

body:
Those are not good enough reasons to balkanize this. As I previously stated, the communications
committee needs to have input from other parts of the organization, not to mention keeping
everybody on the organizational level informed of what is going on press/PR wise. If this is done
for every committee, then that will not encourage the type of communication and cross
fertilization we need to function.

In short, balkanization is a horrible idea and will only tend to fragment the foundation by
encouraging people to over-specialize and not consider what the other parts of the organization
are doing. Let's also not confuse committee members from volunteers; each committee should have a
limited number of vetted members who would have access to the Internal list and wiki, but could
have a virtually unlimited number of volunteers who would only have access to the public lists and
wikis.

That is the type of balance we should have.

-- mav

--- Angela <beesley at gmail.com> wrote:

> Although the communications committee will primarily use meta and the
> foundation wiki for its activities, there are three areas that need to
> remain confidential:
> 1) copies of old press reports since these would be copyright
> violations if you just put them on a public wiki (linking isn't an
> option for sites that don't keep open and/or permanent archives of
> their news nor for press that only appeared in hard copy)
> 2) personal contact details on the press distribution lists
> 3) press releases that we really can't release ahead of time (like
> partnerships and other deals)
>
> Unless we want to open up the internal wiki to every committee member
> (potentially hundreds of people when you consider every sub-committee
> that will be formed), having separate wikis for the few committees
> that need it seems the only sensible solution. I had not assumed that
> anyone who became a committee member would automatically get access to
> the internal wiki. Remember that only the initial committee members
> are approved by the Board. Any future additions (and the press
> committee for one intends to expand a lot over the coming weeks) will
> presumably not be going through board votes.
>
> Angela.
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com


list: wikimedia-l

subject: [Foundation-l] communications committee


from_name: Sam Korn

subject: [WikiEN-l] Database locking

body:
On 2/4/06, Chris Jenkinson <chris at starglade.org> wrote:
> Basically where an admin does something which means that everything else
> gets put on hold until the "something" is completed. For example,
> deleting a page with a large history (such as when Ed Poor deleted AFD).

[[George W. Bush]] would do.

--
Sam


subject: [Foundation-l] communications committee

body:
--- daniwo59 at aol.com wrote:
> Given the nature of writing press releases and the need for an archive of
> previous press releases, I support the idea of a separate wiki for
> communications.

Yet press releases need to get input from various parts of an organization prior to release and
everybody on the organization level should be aware of their drafting. How is having a separate
wiki that can only be viewed and edited by communications committee members going to faciliate
that?

Archived press releases should be, well, in the open on the foundation wiki, since those documents
have already been released. It would be bizzare to do anything else. Having a public archive of
past press releases is very common.

> In general, as was pointed out, press releases should be prepared in  advance
> of any event we know is in the making (but not yet public knowledge),  and
> not in a mad rush to get it done once the story breaks.

And how are those documents going to get prepared without help from various parts of the
organization that they pertain too?

> It is even good to have a basic reserve of "dummy press releases" that can
> be filled in as necessary.

What is wrong with having that on InternalWiki?

-- mav

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com


subject: [Foundation-l] communications committee


from_name: Ray Saintonge

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: US Congress Staff Editing Wikipedia

body:
Alphax (Wikipedia email) wrote:

>Ray Saintonge wrote:
>
>
>>Anthony DiPierro wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I wouldn't go so far as to say that I'd like to see the US make fair
>>>use more restrictive - although frankly it probably wouldn't matter
>>>all that much in my daily life.
>>>
>>>But making it more clear when the answer is "No."  That'd be
>>>tremendously helpful to Wikipedia, in that it'd resolve a lot of
>>>conflict, and I really don't see how it'd hurt anything.
>>>
>>>
>>Another interesting possibility would be a use-it-or-lose-it provision.
>>If there has been no properly authorized publication of a copright work
>>in the last 10 years, any reprinting is fair use.
>>
>>
>Wasn't copyright originally intended to be blanket 25 years, regardless
>of how alive or otherwise the author was?
>
In Queen Anne's Law of 1710 it was 14 years plus 14 years renewal.

Noah Webster cinvinced congress to allow heirs to renew after 28 years,
but they forgot to include that the copyright holder could renew it
himself.   Renewals were an interesting and valuable aspect of US law,
and they imposed strict requirements on who could do the renewing, and
provided a one year window for taking action.  If you missed the window,
too bad.  One of the more positive aspects of that provision is that it
gave a second chance to an author who originally got a bad deal from his
publisher; the publisher could not exercise the renewal.

Superfically repealing the renewal procedures was to conform with
international standards.  Life + 70 is now a part of the US law, even
though that will not have meaningful effects until 2047 when work by
authors who died in 1976 will go into the public domain.  Repealing
renewals was a great benefit for holders of big archives, and publishers
who could not identify or track down who really was entitled to renew.
Now they can make big money out of nostalgia.

It is worth pointing out that a companey like Disney might not be as
affected by a use-it-or-lose-it provisions.  Over the years they have
been masterful when it comes to recycling old material.

Ec


body:
Andrew Gray wrote:

>On 04/02/06, Matt Brown <morven at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>On 2/4/06, Michael Snow <wikipedia at earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Less than that, or slightly more depending on how you look at it. It was
>>>originally 14 years from the time of publication, with a one-time right
>>>of renewal for an additional 14.
>>>
>>>
>>I always think it's a shame the renewal requirement was dropped in
>>copyright law.  It ensured that stuff that nobody cared about enough
>>anymore fell into the public domain quicker.  I guess it did make
>>things a lot more complicated, though.
>>
>>
>It did, however, mean that even stuff which people did care about
>slipped through the net, often through no fault of the copyright
>owner.
>
>You may remember, back in summer 2004, a popular flash cartoon which
>parodied "This Land Is Your Land". The copyright owners demanded it be
>pulled, on the grounds that it was first copyrighted in 1956 and
>renewed in 1984. The legal wrangling which ensued then ran across a
>copy of it from 1945 (it was first written in 1940) with a copyright
>notice on the end... meaning that the copyright actually expired in
>1973, and wasn't renewed. Ooops.
>
>(Personally, I'm happy it's in the public domain - it's what the
>author probably wanted! - but it does serve as a good example...)
>
>
Woody Guthrie!

I appreciate the renewal difficulties that arose.  The key rationale
given for its repeal was to conform with the treaty requirement that
registration is not a prerequisite to a valid copyright.  That's fine.
The US now only requires registration if you are going to take action
against an infringer.   This is why I put reprinting unmaintained
copyrights in terms of fair use rather than total loss of copyright.  A
copyright could be recoverable by a simple act of republication.  My
10-year suggestion was involved an arbitrary time period, but anything
published after that time elapsed would be fair use, but this would not
apply to any usage after a new publication had reset the time limit.

Ec


body:
geni wrote:

>On 2/4/06, Chip Berlet <c.berlet at publiceye.org> wrote:
>
>
>>use-it-or-lose-it?
>>
>>That would really mess over us authors.
>>
>>:-(
>>
>>-Cberlet
>>
>>
>Nah just publish at least one copy of the book per decade. Do your
>standard print run but hold ten copies back and that's the next 100
>years dorted out. It's the compainies with huge media archives that
>would run into problems.
>
That depends on what you mean by "publish".

Ec


body:
The Cunctator wrote:
> Should any of us declare war on vandals?
>
> Aren't most vandals people who are just being juvenile, and likely if
> shown how much fun being a productive contributor to Wikipedia is,
> would rather have their edits last, influencing others?
>
> Shouldn't we distinguish between fighting vandalism and fighting
> vandals? It's not personal -- it's business. Right?
>
> Isn't declaring war a gross violation of assuming good faith?
>
> Please tell me why "declaring war" on vandals is a good idea.

Who's been declaring war on vandals?

Chris

--
Chris Jenkinson
chris at starglade.org

"Mistrust all in whom the impulse to punish is powerful."
  -- Friedrich Nietzsche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra


body:
MacGyverMagic/Mgm wrote:
> Vandals are often trollish.
> Don't feed the trolls, just clean up after them and only block when you need
> to.

I agree; yet am confused as how this is a response to what I wrote.

Chris

--
Chris Jenkinson
chris at starglade.org

"Mistrust all in whom the impulse to punish is powerful."
  -- Friedrich Nietzsche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra


body:
On 2/4/06, The Cunctator <cunctator at gmail.com> wrote:
> It's not a taste issue -- it's a culture issue. I strongly believe
> that inclinations to building an outsider-insider dichotomy, a culture
> that worries about destruction and damage, that is paranoid about
> attack and ruination, is one that is pernicious to the Wikipedia
> project.

So in the end, that's the objection. The name bugs you. Nothing to do
with how they actually work, what they have or have not done, but the
name. And an assumption about the culture of the people who
participate in it, and generally in insider-outsider metaphors.

Don't get me wrong -- I know metaphors are important. I've read my
"Metaphor and War", my _Metaphors We Live By_, my _Women, Fire, and
Dangerous Things_, and I think they're all great, smart works. But
unless you can present some real EVIDENCE of a pernicious problem
stemming from the name of this group of editors, I find it very hard
to be persuaded that this is a serious issue.

FF


body:
MacGyverMagic/Mgm wrote:
> My email program shows it as a reply to the thread, not just your message.

I'd be really grateful if you could hit reply on the email which you are
replying to, rather than a different one. It's more helpful for those of
us with different email clients. :)

Chris

--
Chris Jenkinson
chris at starglade.org

"Mistrust all in whom the impulse to punish is powerful."
  -- Friedrich Nietzsche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra


body:
MacGyverMagic/Mgm wrote:
> I could, but if I did that I would mess up the listings in GMail which I use
> myself.
> I can't make everyone happy at the same time.
> I'll try quoting part of the messages I reply to instead, which hopefully
> makes as much people happy as possible.

Why does it mess up the listing in Gmail? If that's the case, Gmail is
broken.

Chris

--
Chris Jenkinson
chris at starglade.org

"Mistrust all in whom the impulse to punish is powerful."
  -- Friedrich Nietzsche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra


body:
> I could, but if I did that I would mess up the listings in GMail which I use
> myself.
> I can't make everyone happy at the same time.
> I'll try quoting part of the messages I reply to instead, which hopefully
> makes as much people happy as possible.

I'm just replying to this through gmail just to see for myself; please
disregard.

--
Chris Jenkinson
http://talrias.net/


body:
I'm just replying to this through gmail just to see for myself; please
disregard.

On 04/02/06, Chris Jenkinson <chris at starglade.org> wrote:
> MacGyverMagic/Mgm wrote:
> > Vandals are often trollish.
> > Don't feed the trolls, just clean up after them and only block when you need
> > to.
>
> I agree; yet am confused as how this is a response to what I wrote.
>
> Chris
>
> --
> Chris Jenkinson
> chris at starglade.org
>
> "Mistrust all in whom the impulse to punish is powerful."
>   -- Friedrich Nietzsche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

--
Chris Jenkinson
http://talrias.net/


from_name: Brion Vibber

subject:
[Foundation-l] Internal wiki(s) and confidential
	committee	communications

body:
Erik Moeller wrote:
> Hiding page content is not too hard; it gets
> a bit more complicated if we want to make sure that people cannot even
> see page _titles_ outside their given namespace access, as these are
> currently shown all over the place. Perhaps a gradual implementation
> would be sufficient.

I have strong reservations on this due to the large number of ways open to
access page content in MediaWiki. I have consistently recommended against third
parties attempting to hack MediaWiki for this; anyone who actually requires this
sort of multiple-group confidentiality levels in a single wiki could lose their
job when it fails (and it probably would fail).

In addition to page titles there are summaries, extracts, fragments, search
results, templates, old versions, watchlist entries, raw loads, diffs, logs, RSS
feeds, export, and god knows what else.

I can pretty much assume that lots of time would be spent cleaning up after
mistakes, where confidential material was placed into the wrong page / edit
summary / log entry / whatever that's hard to remove.

So while we could try, I recommend strongly against it if legal confidentiality
is actually a requirement (as I cannot guarantee we can provide it with software
diametrically opposed to it) and I recommend against it if it's not a
requirement (why bother?)

If we're going to try hiding things,
* What are we hiding, from whom?
* How much do we trust them?
* Do we trust them enough not to peek?
* If we don't trust them, why are they there?
* If we do trust them, why are we hiding information?

If the only requirement is to protect against casual reading of pages by
highly-trusted individuals in another workgroup, maybe it's good enough. But do
we need it then?

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 249 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/attachments/20060204/ad5c5980/attachment.pgp


body:
Erik Moeller wrote:
> Hiding page content is not too hard; it gets
> a bit more complicated if we want to make sure that people cannot even
> see page _titles_ outside their given namespace access, as these are
> currently shown all over the place. Perhaps a gradual implementation
> would be sufficient.

I have strong reservations on this due to the large number of ways open to
access page content in MediaWiki. I have consistently recommended against third
parties attempting to hack MediaWiki for this; anyone who actually requires this
sort of multiple-group confidentiality levels in a single wiki could lose their
job when it fails (and it probably would fail).

In addition to page titles there are summaries, extracts, fragments, search
results, templates, old versions, watchlist entries, raw loads, diffs, logs, RSS
feeds, export, and god knows what else.

I can pretty much assume that lots of time would be spent cleaning up after
mistakes, where confidential material was placed into the wrong page / edit
summary / log entry / whatever that's hard to remove.

So while we could try, I recommend strongly against it if legal confidentiality
is actually a requirement (as I cannot guarantee we can provide it with software
diametrically opposed to it) and I recommend against it if it's not a
requirement (why bother?)

If we're going to try hiding things,
* What are we hiding, from whom?
* How much do we trust them?
* Do we trust them enough not to peek?
* If we don't trust them, why are they there?
* If we do trust them, why are we hiding information?

If the only requirement is to protect against casual reading of pages by
highly-trusted individuals in another workgroup, maybe it's good enough. But do
we need it then?

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 249 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/attachments/20060204/ad5c5980/attachment-0001.pgp


body:
Erik Moeller wrote:
> Hiding page content is not too hard; it gets
> a bit more complicated if we want to make sure that people cannot even
> see page _titles_ outside their given namespace access, as these are
> currently shown all over the place. Perhaps a gradual implementation
> would be sufficient.

I have strong reservations on this due to the large number of ways open to
access page content in MediaWiki. I have consistently recommended against third
parties attempting to hack MediaWiki for this; anyone who actually requires this
sort of multiple-group confidentiality levels in a single wiki could lose their
job when it fails (and it probably would fail).

In addition to page titles there are summaries, extracts, fragments, search
results, templates, old versions, watchlist entries, raw loads, diffs, logs, RSS
feeds, export, and god knows what else.

I can pretty much assume that lots of time would be spent cleaning up after
mistakes, where confidential material was placed into the wrong page / edit
summary / log entry / whatever that's hard to remove.

So while we could try, I recommend strongly against it if legal confidentiality
is actually a requirement (as I cannot guarantee we can provide it with software
diametrically opposed to it) and I recommend against it if it's not a
requirement (why bother?)

If we're going to try hiding things,
* What are we hiding, from whom?
* How much do we trust them?
* Do we trust them enough not to peek?
* If we don't trust them, why are they there?
* If we do trust them, why are we hiding information?

If the only requirement is to protect against casual reading of pages by
highly-trusted individuals in another workgroup, maybe it's good enough. But do
we need it then?

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 249 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/attachments/20060204/ad5c5980/attachment.pgp>


body:
Erik Moeller wrote:
> Hiding page content is not too hard; it gets
> a bit more complicated if we want to make sure that people cannot even
> see page _titles_ outside their given namespace access, as these are
> currently shown all over the place. Perhaps a gradual implementation
> would be sufficient.

I have strong reservations on this due to the large number of ways open to
access page content in MediaWiki. I have consistently recommended against third
parties attempting to hack MediaWiki for this; anyone who actually requires this
sort of multiple-group confidentiality levels in a single wiki could lose their
job when it fails (and it probably would fail).

In addition to page titles there are summaries, extracts, fragments, search
results, templates, old versions, watchlist entries, raw loads, diffs, logs, RSS
feeds, export, and god knows what else.

I can pretty much assume that lots of time would be spent cleaning up after
mistakes, where confidential material was placed into the wrong page / edit
summary / log entry / whatever that's hard to remove.

So while we could try, I recommend strongly against it if legal confidentiality
is actually a requirement (as I cannot guarantee we can provide it with software
diametrically opposed to it) and I recommend against it if it's not a
requirement (why bother?)

If we're going to try hiding things,
* What are we hiding, from whom?
* How much do we trust them?
* Do we trust them enough not to peek?
* If we don't trust them, why are they there?
* If we do trust them, why are we hiding information?

If the only requirement is to protect against casual reading of pages by
highly-trusted individuals in another workgroup, maybe it's good enough. But do
we need it then?

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 249 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/attachments/20060204/ad5c5980/attachment-0001.pgp>


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Europanto

body:
Hey, Klingon may be nerdy and funky, and it may have less than 1
fully-competent native speakers (to be fair, there are at least 2
native speakers, but neither of them were raised entirely in Klingon
because their parents gave up after realising belatedly that it lacks
translations for words necessary to a rich and enjoyable childhood as
"table" and "joy"), but at least it has a (mostly) constant vocabulary
and grammar.

According to most of the more complex definitions of "language",
Europanto wouldn't qualify as one -- it does not have a relatively
fixed vocabulary. The source languages aren't even for-sure -- some
people include all European languages, others limit it to German,
English, French, and Spanish, others include various other languages
such as Italian, Dutch, Portuguese, Swedish... until they resolve that
issue of way-too-many-synonyms and the myriad linguistic uncertanties,
it's more of a pan-European Wind Up Pidgin (got that phrase from JBR,
who used the phrase "Czech-Italian wind-up pidgin" to describe
Esperanto), but probably even less developed than that -- more of a
jargon or a cant or argot.

Folks, come back when your language has a more stable vocabulary. The
answer will probably still be a resounding "no" until there are native
speakers or a huge huge following...

Sinceremente vosaltres,
Marcos Williamson

On 04/02/06, Michael Snow <wikipedia at earthlink.net> wrote:
> Neil Harris wrote:
>
> > Since it appears to be possible to generate Europanto by word-by-word
> > translation of English into European languages chosen at random on a
> > word-by-word basis, I'd imagine that it would not be too difficult to
> > generate a Europanto Wikipedia programmatically, using the English
> > Wikipedia as source material, and perhaps Wiktionary as the
> > word-for-word translation dictionary. Throw in link grammars for
> > fair-to-reasonable part-of-speech tagging...
> >
> > Und voila! Esta Vikipedio Europantoi - L'encyclop?die fria e gratuita,
> > mit 950,000 artikelen!
>
> Curiously, my brain processes that as "The fried encyclopedia". So I
> guess it's a decent enough joke. As a Wikipedia language, though, it
> ranks up there with Klingon.
>
> --Michael Snow
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>

--
"Take away their language, destroy their souls." -- Joseph Stalin


from_name: MacGyverMagic/Mgm

body:
Vandals are often trollish.
Don't feed the trolls, just clean up after them and only block when you need
to.

Mgm

On 2/4/06, Chris Jenkinson <chris at starglade.org> wrote:
>
> The Cunctator wrote:
> > Should any of us declare war on vandals?
> >
> > Aren't most vandals people who are just being juvenile, and likely if
> > shown how much fun being a productive contributor to Wikipedia is,
> > would rather have their edits last, influencing others?
> >
> > Shouldn't we distinguish between fighting vandalism and fighting
> > vandals? It's not personal -- it's business. Right?
> >
> > Isn't declaring war a gross violation of assuming good faith?
> >
> > Please tell me why "declaring war" on vandals is a good idea.
>
> Who's been declaring war on vandals?
>
> Chris
>
> --
> Chris Jenkinson
> chris at starglade.org
>
> "Mistrust all in whom the impulse to punish is powerful."
> -- Friedrich Nietzsche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


body:
The Cunctator wrote:
> [[User:Cool Cat]].

One person? It seems a more productive path would be to discuss it on
his talk page rather than discussing it behind his back on the mailing
list - as far as I know, he's not subscribed.

Chris

--
Chris Jenkinson
chris at starglade.org

"Mistrust all in whom the impulse to punish is powerful."
  -- Friedrich Nietzsche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra


from_name: Tjipke de Vries

subject: [Wikipedia-l] RIP: Prince Roy of Sealand

body:
Hi SJ,

you wrote:
> Jan. 31, three days ago, marked the passing of someone whose life and
> work have managed to touch many on this list -- Paddy Roy Bates, known
> in refined circles as Prince Roy of Sealand.

Can you tell me what your source is? I did add this information to the Paddy
Roy Bates-article on Wikipedia-NL but now I get comments that the
information is false.

Best regards,

Tjipke de Vries  [[nl:Gebruiker:Tdevries]]


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Europanto

body:
Oh, et, para l'entertainement Dvs., une traduzzione al Europante:

Hey, Klingon may be nerdy et funcky, et lo possiblement tiene menos de
1 totalmente-competent sprachadoras nativas (zum ser fair, hay at
least 2 sprechedors nativos, but neither von ellos were raised
entirement en Klingon porquoi sus parents gave arriba antes von
realising belatedly que el lacks traducciones fur worter necessaire
zum o ninho-hood rico e enjoyable comme "mesa" y "joi"), pero at menos
el has un (mostly) constant vocabulaire et grammar.

According al most de los definitions mas complessos de "langue",
Europanto no would qualifiquer como un -- nein tiene un vocabulario
relativement fijado. The lenguajes sources son even para-sure -- some
gente incluyen alle les lenguajes Europaisches, otros limit el zum
Aleman, Englisch, Franzosisch, y Spagnol, altres incluyen lenguajes
varios altres como l'Italiano, Nederlands, Portugesisch, Swedish...
until ellos resolven l'issue del way-too-many-sinonimos y el myriad
uncertanties linguistiques, es mas of a pan-Europeen Wind Up Pidgin,
pero probablement even menos sviluppatto que that -- more de eine
jargon o un cant o argot.

Gente, devolve quand votre idioma tiene un vocabulaire mas stable. El
answer will probablement still ser eine "nein" resoundingo until hay
speakadoras nativas o un following huge huge...

Sinceremente dvs.,
Marcos Williamson
>
> On 04/02/06, Michael Snow <wikipedia at earthlink.net> wrote:
> > Neil Harris wrote:
> >
> > > Since it appears to be possible to generate Europanto by word-by-word
> > > translation of English into European languages chosen at random on a
> > > word-by-word basis, I'd imagine that it would not be too difficult to
> > > generate a Europanto Wikipedia programmatically, using the English
> > > Wikipedia as source material, and perhaps Wiktionary as the
> > > word-for-word translation dictionary. Throw in link grammars for
> > > fair-to-reasonable part-of-speech tagging...
> > >
> > > Und voila! Esta Vikipedio Europantoi - L'encyclop?die fria e gratuita,
> > > mit 950,000 artikelen!
> >
> > Curiously, my brain processes that as "The fried encyclopedia". So I
> > guess it's a decent enough joke. As a Wikipedia language, though, it
> > ranks up there with Klingon.
> >
> > --Michael Snow
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> >
>
>
> --
> "Take away their language, destroy their souls." -- Joseph Stalin
>

--
"Take away their language, destroy their souls." -- Joseph Stalin


body:
My email program shows it as a reply to the thread, not just your message.

Mgm


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Insulting the islam is allowed on nl: wikipedia

body:
So, if 10 good users decided to leave en.wp because of some user
(say... Bonaparte), does it mean he should be automatically blocked?

Although they may have left due to his actions, it's not directly his
control. It's not as if he pushed a button that said "Make users X, X,
X, and X leave out of frustration and anger".

Mark

On 01/02/06, Walter van Kalken <walter at vankalken.net> wrote:
> Ermmm probably you didn't read about already one good user ..... who is
> a muslim ..... has left nl: over these remarks ..... and you say let
> this user stay on ?? Is there something wrong there? We will loose more
> users than this one who insults all who bring us. Are you on nl:
> wikipedia by any chance :|
>
> Waerth/Walter
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>

--
"Take away their language, destroy their souls." -- Joseph Stalin


from_name: daniwo59 at aol.com

subject: [Foundation-l] communications committee

body:
Given the nature of writing press releases and the need for an archive of
previous press releases, I support the idea of a separate wiki for
communications.

In general, as was pointed out, press releases should be prepared in  advance
of any event we know is in the making (but not yet public knowledge),  and
not in a mad rush to get it done once the story breaks.

It is even good to have a basic reserve of "dummy press releases" that can
be filled in as necessary.

Danny


subject: [Foundation-l] communications committee


from_name: SP

subject:
[WikiEN-l] NY gubernatorial candidate's campaign altered newspaper
	articles

body:
Politician caught doing wiki style editing of newspaper articles on
their web sites.

http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/mld/kentucky/news/breaking_news/13793129.htm

Sydney aka FloNight


body:
On 2/4/06, Chris Jenkinson <chris at starglade.org> wrote:
>
> MacGyverMagic/Mgm wrote:
> > My email program shows it as a reply to the thread, not just your
> message.
>
> I'd be really grateful if you could hit reply on the email which you are
> replying to, rather than a different one. It's more helpful for those of
> us with different email clients. :)
>
> Chris
>
> --
> Chris Jenkinson
> chris at starglade.org

I could, but if I did that I would mess up the listings in GMail which I use
myself.
I can't make everyone happy at the same time.
I'll try quoting part of the messages I reply to instead, which hopefully
makes as much people happy as possible.

Mgm


from_name: sannse

subject: [Foundation-l] communications committee

body:
Elisabeth Bauer wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Angela, Michael and I met today for discussing the details of the
> communication committee. I'm giving here a summary of this meeting, a
> second meeting will be held next weekend, open to all interested people
> who want to help with the communications committee.

Will the communication committee be responsible for customer relations
(for want of a better phrase)?  In particular, the other aspects of
OTRS, especially the info queues.

--sannse


subject: [Foundation-l] communications committee


subject: OFFLIST Re: [WikiEN-l] Re: US Congress Staff Editing Wikipedia

body:
You've probably had several people say this but ... please can you
correct your computer's clock?  Your mail is coming through as from 1997.

Thanks,

sannse


subject: STUPID Re: [WikiEN-l] Re: US Congress Staff Editing Wikipedia

body:
Sorry for that folks - don'tcyah hate it when you press that send, and
then instantly realise you mucked up.

--sannse

sannse wrote:
> You've probably had several people say this but ... please can you
> correct your computer's clock?  Your mail is coming through as from 1997.
>
> Thanks,
>
> sannse
>
>


from_name: Jimmy Wales

subject: [Foundation-l] Re: [Wikinews-l] Relaunch Chinese Wikinews poll?

body:
I would strongly support doing a new set of polls but before we do we
need to work out exactly what we are asking the community to decide, and
what the parameters of the decision will be.

The decision not to start Chinese Wikinews was, in my view, one which
the community took out of respect for the strength and openness of
Chinese Wikipedia, and the (valid) concerns of that community.  Things
have changed now, of course, and it is good to reassess.

What I'm personally looking for is broad support from both the Chinese
Wikipedia community *and* from the entire community before we start it.

Some Chinese Wikipedians may believe that the block will be lifted if we
continue the current strategy.  They would presumably argue that now is
the *worst* possible time to open Chinese Wikinews.  Others will argue
that "Well, we're blocked anyway, might as well go for it."

Anything we do should be thoughtful about what those community members need.

--Jimbo


from_name: Erik Moeller

subject: [Foundation-l] Relaunch Chinese Wikinews poll?

body:
On February 7, 2005 we had a poll on Meta to gather opinions on how to
deal with the particular problem of whether to launch a Chinese language
edition of Wikinews or not. Back then, the main reason for not launching
the project was that it might jeopardize the Chinese Wikipedia, i.e.,
put it at risk of censorship. The poll was evenly split, with half
favoring launching the project given enough support (which it has), and
the other half wanting the decision to be left to the Chinese Wikipedia
community (which, incidentally, also voted 50/50):

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikinews/China

Exactly one year later, I think it might be a good idea to relaunch this
poll, with the old votes archived, given that the situation has changed
fundamentally. According to

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blocking_of_Wikipedia_in_mainland_China

Wikipedia has been censored in mainland China since October 2005.
Furthermore, we have all seen large search engines cave in to the
Chinese government in recent months. Interestingly enough, recent
reports note that Google China is being censored in spite of filtering
search results:

http://www.forbes.com/technology/feeds/afx/2006/02/03/afx2498050.html

To me, this indicates that it may simply not be possible to create an
encyclopedia written from the neutral point of view which will be
accepted by the current Chinese government. The question then becomes
whether it is legitimate for us to continue to put a resource on hold
that might be useful to millions of Chinese speakers outside the
mainland, i.e. Chinese Wikinews.

So, are there any objections to relaunching this poll, or alternative
suggestions on how to proceed? I think the "wait and see" approach has
gone on long enough.

Best,

Erik


from_name: Anthere

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: 2 New Drafts: Wikipedia Leadership and History

body:
Joseph Reagle wrote:
> Comments on these drafts are most welcome!
>
> http://reagle.org/joseph/blog/career/phd/f05?showcomments=yes
>
>     * Wikipedia's Heritage: Vision, Pragmatics, and Happenstance -
>        moving on from my earlier consideration of print publishers in
>        Four Short Stories about the Reference Work, I consider recent
>        digital encycopedic works:
>
>      This essay explores development of globally available digital
>      reference works from their first imaginings to contemporary cases.
>      My hope in undertaking such a project is to identify technical and
>      social aspects of digital reference work production that can
>      contribute to an understanding of a prominent contemporary
>      exemplar, the Wikipedia, a free online encyclopedia. Why did it
>      take over 50 years for the vision of "[w]holly new forms of
>      encyclopedias" (Bush 1945: 8 to be realized? The answer,
>      presented in this essay, was that it required an alignment of a
>      coherent goal, technical practicality, and serendipity: vision,
>      pragmatics, and happenstance. ...
>
>
>  * Do as I do: leadership in the Wikipedia
>
>      In this paper I consider how notions of leadership operate in
>      collaborative on-line cultures. In particular, I consider the
>      seemingly paradoxical, or perhaps merely playful, juxtaposition of
>      informal tyrant-like titles (e.g., "Benevolent Dictator") in
>      otherwise seemingly egalitarian voluntary content production
>      communities such as the Wikipedia. To accomplish this, I first
>      introduce the Wikipedia as an open content community and review
>      existing literature on the role of leadership in such communities.
>      I then relate ethnographic and archival data on how leadership is
>      understood, performed, and discussed in the Wikipedia community. I
>      conclude by integrating concepts from existing literature and my
>      own findings into a theory of leadership and note other communities
>      and leaders against which this theory could be tested. ...
>

Looks interesting...
I just printed it... Looks like it will put me back in the past. I'll be
glad to put one day new perspectives on the topic I think ;-)

ant


subject: [Foundation-l] Re: Relaunch Chinese Wikinews poll?

body:
Erik Moeller wrote:
> On February 7, 2005 we had a poll on Meta to gather opinions on how to
> deal with the particular problem of whether to launch a Chinese language
> edition of Wikinews or not. Back then, the main reason for not launching
> the project was that it might jeopardize the Chinese Wikipedia, i.e.,
> put it at risk of censorship. The poll was evenly split, with half
> favoring launching the project given enough support (which it has), and
> the other half wanting the decision to be left to the Chinese Wikipedia
> community (which, incidentally, also voted 50/50):
>
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikinews/China
>
> Exactly one year later, I think it might be a good idea to relaunch this
> poll, with the old votes archived, given that the situation has changed
> fundamentally. According to
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blocking_of_Wikipedia_in_mainland_China
>
> Wikipedia has been censored in mainland China since October 2005.
> Furthermore, we have all seen large search engines cave in to the
> Chinese government in recent months. Interestingly enough, recent
> reports note that Google China is being censored in spite of filtering
> search results:
>
> http://www.forbes.com/technology/feeds/afx/2006/02/03/afx2498050.html
>
> To me, this indicates that it may simply not be possible to create an
> encyclopedia written from the neutral point of view which will be
> accepted by the current Chinese government. The question then becomes
> whether it is legitimate for us to continue to put a resource on hold
> that might be useful to millions of Chinese speakers outside the
> mainland, i.e. Chinese Wikinews.
>
> So, are there any objections to relaunching this poll, or alternative
> suggestions on how to proceed? I think the "wait and see" approach has
> gone on long enough.
>
> Best,
>
> Erik

Admittedly, the previous attitude which consisted of "not opening" the
chinese speaking wikinews to avoid China censoring our projects... makes
little sense now...

Actually, I am concerned...

We currently claim this : "Imagine a world in which every single person
is given free access to the sum of all human knowledge. That's what
we're doing."

Unfortunately, I feel it is not true. That might be what we are *trying*
to do, or what we are *aiming* to do.

But if we are frank with ourselves, we are currently putting most of our
energy "in giving free access to a lot of knowledge to people who could
mostly access this knowledge without us".

Granted, we simplify the access to knowledge to many. We collect the
info. We organise it. We put all our attention in giving non biaised
information. And this is already really great.
But we mostly give information to those who have internet access and if
they made a bit of effort, they could actually find this information all
by themselves. At least for major languages.

In short, we facilitate access to information for those who *already*
can access it.

What we do not do is:
* We do not *improve* access to those who do not have access to
information now
* And we do not make *every effort* to collect the sum of human knowledge.

The best example being precisely chinese (main land) knowledge that we
do not collect and chinese (main land) end users which we do not inform.

ant


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Fairness in voting

body:
On 30/01/06, Liviu Andronic <landronimirc at gmail.com> wrote:
> Well Node, [snip] discussion.

.

> It's not [snip] coherency?

Yes, it is.

> Now, [snip] the following.

That's not neutral as it considers your POV -- that Moldovan and
Romanian are "the same language" -- to be a Fact, which it is not, and
will never be. There is no such thing as "the same language", for any
two varieties -- it's a political discourse and not a linguistic one.

>    - *Ro.wiki keeps its Romanian content as normal*.

...

>    - *ro-cyr.wiki gets content in Cyrillic Romanian* using this alphabet
>    (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romanian_Cyrillic_alphabet ), if some
>    one deems it necessary to have such a Wikipedia. It is, by the way, the
>    alphabet that Grigore Ureche used to write his works (and not the Moldovan
>    Cyrillic alphabet), but about this later. Ro.wiki should not get
>    biscriptal because this alphabet is not representative of modern Romania and
>    you will not find Romanians able to actually use this script.
>    It was used till 1860, when Moldavia united Wallachia to create Romania

And when was it used until in Bessarabia? Bessarabia wasn't part of
Moldavia in 1860.

>    - *mo-cyr.wiki gets its content in Moldovan Cyrillic* using this
>    alphabet (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moldovan_alphabet), invented in
>    the 1930s by good old godfather Stalin, if you deem necessary to keep this
>    Wikipedia. It should probably be named more appropriatly something like
>    Moldovan/Romanian Cyrillic, but we logically cannot have two Romanian
>    Cyrillics.

Stalin didn't invent it. Stalin may have had some cursory knowledge of
linguistics, but I'm certain he didn't invent the Moldovan alphabet.

> *Please note* that all these three scripts are used for writing the one and
> same language - Romanian (and Node, you can dispute this as long as you
> wish, but you cannot pronounce yourself on this matter without having any
> knowledge in Romanian).

I know more Romanian than you and your unionist cronies claim. After
all, I can understand Pavel, can't I? And I have produced coherent or
at least mostly coherent statements in the past.

> Of course the language evolves in time and the
> Romanian used by Grigore Ureche differs quite a lot from the one used by,
> say, Mihai Eminescu, who is also Moldovan and the national most known
> Romanian poet (he is someone of a hero in Romania).

"The same language" is, again, political rather than linguistic
discourse. Moldovan and Romanian, Italian and Italian, Portuguese and
Portuguese, My English and Your English, will never be "the same
language" because there is no such concept, linguistically.

>    - *mo.wiki becomes [snip] rid of this Cyrillic script.

Not neutral.

>    What concerns Transnistria, it is the 14th, Russian 14th army that decides
>    which language is more appropriate to the local population.

That's not exactly true, but then you already knew that. Read more
about Transdniester and you will find the true situation.

Moldovan parents now have the freedom of choice in Transdniester, and
the majority have chosen Cyrillic, despite the fact that they could
send their kids to Latin schools. One could argue that they are afraid
of consequences (political, social, economic) that might come from
sending their kids to such a school, but it is their choice
nonetheless.

> Your point [snip] you?

No, it wasn't -- they were two very different places. The article
about Chisinau at the mowiki and the article at the rowiki were very
different byte-by-byte, but post-Pavel, they were identical. His
fault.

> Don't worry Node. If you have still not noticed it, I am currently trying
> from all my powers to FIX IT! By making this content be moved or deleted.

That's not "fixing it". If there are errors in an article on the
English Wikipedia, if you advocate to move it or delete it, people
will laugh in your face, even if it is full of them. You repair the
errors individually, rather than deleting the whole product.

Like the popular phrase, "the operation was a success, but the patient
is dead." You can't fix the errors in a product by simply eliminating
the product.

> Aftewards, [snip] Wikipedia.

That's because you haven't followed the events. I was there, first of
all, and beyond that, there were at least 2 other native speakers
(Elnoel and Vertaler) and possibly more.

>  As long as you wish.

GFY...

> How come 0? What about this: "*The precision of numbers about
> nationality/ethnicity and language was questioned.*"? (take this
> http://www.azi.md/news?ID=31931 and this http://www.azi.md/news?ID=31416 for
> reference). This census concerned languages as well, although I couldn't
> find statistics on this. Not yet. Although, logically, if one calls himself
> Romanian, he speaks Romanian. Russian - Russian. Ukrainian - either Russian
> or Ukrainian. Gagauz -
> Gagauz. About Moldovans - when someone tells you he is Moldovan

Well, that's a faulty assumption. If you look at any census results
from any country which include language, you will find that it is
almost never that everybody who claims a certain ethnic group is
exactly congruent with language. I think it's probable that in
Chisinau, there are Moldovans who only know Russian (or at least it is
their mother tongue), Russians who only know Moldovan, Ukrainians who
only know Gagauz, Bulgars who only know Ukrainian, Belarusans who only
know Moldovan.

Especially considering the pre-independence linguistic trends of RSSM,
it is na?ve to think that ethnicity and language align 100%, or even
90%.

> and you ask him about the language he speaks, he will mostly certain give
> you one answer: Moldovan. However, big however, he will think of the
> Moldovan dialect that he is speaking day-to-day, and not of the Romanian
> language he is writing in any day-to-day documents, at school, etc. And
> still, my point stays: these millions of people (which cannot phisically be
> more than 3.6 million; which in half makes 1.8 millions - ?a va for millions
> disagree) were not necessarily able to openly declare their ethnic (which
> comprises language) origin. Otherwise, if you dispose of other statistics,
> please tell me.

1.8 million is still "millions". Ethnic DOES NOT COMPRISE LANGUAGE.
Although the two are linked, they are far from identical. How is it
that many Tibetans don't know Tibetan, or that almost all Cornish
people speak only English?

> Well, Node. I have to give [snip] Romanian.

For the first few articles, yes. Beyond that, NO!

> Thirdly - how did you come [snip] and practice it.

You know it, you probably speak it, you just don't write it. You can
find examples of it in lots of poetry.

> Do you understand what you are saying? Where did you come up with this
> language also? For the reference, it is Romanian that was always used in
> Wallachia, and that Wallachia is used only to distinguish the historical
> region called "?ara Rom?neasc?" - Romanian Country -, and modern Romania
> that is more or less the combination of Wallachia, Transilvania and
> Moldavia. I recall you that Moldavia is united with Romania and that in
> Moldavia they strangely enough write in Romanian and have nothing against it
> and speak either Romanian or something one may with difficulty classify as a
> Moldavian dialect. And that Moldova - present time Moldova - by mistake is
> not part of Romania. Moldova historically is a Romanian province!

You're deluded if you think Moldovan writing is historically identical
to Wallachian (or "Romanian"). Moldovan developed and continues to
develop (but in a much more limited capacity) separate from
Wallachian/Romanian.

> Always imposed: beginning with 1930's - Stalin (MASSR), beginning with 1940
> - same Stalin (MSSR), beginning with 1989 - Russian 14th Army
> (Transnistria).

No... since a couple of years ago, it was a choice in Transnistria,
also, many of the key policymakers in earlier times were themselves
Moldovans.

> In Transnistria, some of the Latin schools were
> > re-opened.
>
>
> Please cite your sources. I couldn't find one word on this in Moldovan
> electronic newspapers. Better said nowhere on the net.

Hah. Everywhere says that -- they were re-opened as private schools --
 even the PMR official website!! There are one or two high schools in
Tiraspol which use the Latin alphabet today. Private schools which
supposedly charge no fee but are funded by external sources.

> Funny question. Why did you go to school? But, so that I not be personal,
> why did I go to school? Because as a kid I was told to do so. Why the
> parents give their children to school? Because they want that their children
> have a future, that they get a minimum of education - the minimum that
> Transnistria under Putin can offer. And sometimes when it comes the question
> of the kids future, you don't ask much questions regarding the language.

They could send their kids to a Latin school, home-school, send them
to a Russian school, attempt to flee to Moldova or ROmania, or any
number of other options. Instead, they chose to send their kids to a
Cyrillic school. Your parents probably didn't have a choice.

But somehow I doubt most Moldovans care, or have ever really cared,
about the alphabet they use, considering Moldova is the poorest
country in Europe today and has almost always been largely agrarian in
nature. And since when to farmers fight to the death over alphabets?

> Strange. Ro.wikipedia also agrees with Anittas absurdities: (
> http://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grigore_Ureche#Opera - don't search too much,
> last paragraph). And even stranger, Grigore Ureche also agrees with these
> absurdities: ?Rum?nii, c??i s? afl? l?cuitori la ?ara Ungureasc? ?i la
> Ardeal ?i la Maramoro?u, de la un loc suntu cu moldov?nii ?i to?i de la R?m
> s? trag." (

Still not seeing it. I still think it's more telling than anything the
title of the chapter than any of its contents.

Mark

--
"Take away their language, destroy their souls." -- Joseph Stalin


from_name: Elisabeth Bauer

subject: [Foundation-l] communications committee

body:
Hi all,

Angela, Michael and I met today for discussing the details of the
communication committee. I'm giving here a summary of this meeting, a
second meeting will be held next weekend, open to all interested people
who want to help with the communications committee.

The committee will consist of four initial members
* Angela Beesley
* Michael Snow
* Nicholas Moreau
* David Gerard
Further members are welcome.

The Schwartz PR team who is working pro bono for us and I will act as
advisors. With this email, I am resigning from my job as press officer.
I will still help with the work, but I need a bit of distance from
Wikimedia/Wikipedia at the moment.

The committee will elect a chair as soon as it has a stable membership.

Working tools:
* an internal press wiki (enotif enabled) and a mailing list will be
used to coordinate the work of the communications committee. The mailing
list and the wiki will be open to all people doing PR on an
international or project level.
* the press queues in otrs
* the press release distribution and archive software on wikimedia.de

Main tasks (for the moment):
* The committee is responsible for authorizing and coordinating the
press teams on local projects (list on [[Wikimedia:Press room]])
* The committee will tend to the list of interview contacts
([[Internal:Interview partners]])
* It will draft and distribute the press releases of the Wikimedia
foundation and provide help for local press releases

Areas of work:
>From the structure of the committees, there are quite a lot of work
areas for the communication committee:
* Press
* Promotion
* OTRS
* Translation
* Fundraising
* Internal communication

To address all these areas, probably subcommittees have to be founded,
that's a topic for the open meeting next weekend.

Relevant meta pages:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications_committee
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications_subcommittees

greetings,
elian


subject: [Foundation-l] communications committee


from_name: brion at pobox.com

subject: [Wikitech-l] MediaWiki automated test run failure 2006-02-05

body:
An automated run of parserTests.php showed the following failures:

Running test BUG 361: URL within URL, not bracketed... FAILED!
Running test External links: invalid character... FAILED!
Running test Bug 2702: Mismatched <i> and <a> tags are invalid... FAILED!
Running test A table with no data.... FAILED!
Running test A table with nothing but a caption... FAILED!
Running test Link containing "#<" and "#>" % as a hex sequences... FAILED!
Running test Magic links: PMID incorrectly converts space to underscore... FAILED!
Running test Template with thumb image (wiht link in description)... FAILED!
Running test Link to image page... FAILED!
Running test BUG 1887: A ISBN with a thumbnail... FAILED!
Running test BUG 1887: A <math> with a thumbnail... FAILED!
Running test Image caption containing another image... FAILED!
Running test BUG 561: {{/Subpage}}... FAILED!
Running test Simple category... FAILED!
Running test Section headings with TOC... FAILED!
Running test Media link with nasty text... FAILED!
Running test Image link to nonexistent file (bug 1850 - good)... FAILED!
Running test Bug 2095: link with pipe and three closing brackets... FAILED!
Running test Sanitizer: Validating the contents of the id attribute (bug 4515)... FAILED!

Passed 262 of 281 tests (93.24%) FAILED!


body:
Anthere:

> Granted, we simplify the access to knowledge to many. We collect the
> info. We organise it. We put all our attention in giving non biaised
> information. And this is already really great.
> But we mostly give information to those who have internet access and if
> they made a bit of effort, they could actually find this information all
> by themselves. At least for major languages.
>
> In short, we facilitate access to information for those who *already*
> can access it.

Very true. You will remember the "Mobile Audio Wikipedia" project that
aims to bring Wikipedia articles (in spoken form) to cell phones, for
free (with support from governments, corporations and foundations). This
would be one way to improve access for people who don't have access now,
and fairly uncontroversial. This is something which could be tackled by
the Special Projects committee, provided it is sufficiently open and agile.

A more controversial idea in the area of Internet censorship would be to
provide a package of tools that can help people to penetrate censorship.
This would also require us to more closely look into the issues of
authentication and authorization related to anonymous access. Jimmy has
posted on this issue in his blog a while ago:
http://blog.jimmywales.com/index.php/archives/2005/09/27/tor-wikipedia/

I've also published some thoughts on how to distribute anonymization
tools here:
http://intelligentdesigns.net/Freedom_Tools

Finally, Brion and Gerard have been talking about our authentication
strategies after single login, and the issue of anonymized access could
certainly be factored into this:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Brion_VIBBER/Berlin_roundup#GerardM

I think at some point we have to make the choice between continuing our
"appeasement" strategy, or openly confronting censorship. If one
community on this planet is capable of working together to penetrate
censorship in order to bring knowledge to people, it is ours. Nobody can
say that we haven't tried to work with the authorities, and nobody can
say that we oppose censorship in order to push a political agenda.

We are "knowledge aid workers", and aid workers are not always welcome.
Sometimes, you have to break the rules of the land in order to do your
job. As Wikipedia becomes as large as the largest search engines, our
actions are scruticinized just as closely. As I have said before, we do
not have to act like a for-profit corporation. We can lead the way for
others to follow.

However, I'd already be happy to make some progress on Chinese Wikinews
before taking more radical steps.

Erik


from_name: Alphax (Wikipedia email)

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: So much for books as reliable references!

body:
Ray Saintonge wrote:
> Michael Snow wrote:
>
>> Delirium wrote:
>>
>>> Stan Shebs wrote:
>>>
>>>> Actually, it's sort of interesting that this is news. While it's
>>>> common practice to have peer review for scholarly books, the "peer"
>>>> part of the term should be a hint that it's not the publisher doing
>>>> the checking! My guess is that our reverence for the printed page
>>>> is such that we just assume no one would dare to print without
>>>> being certain of its correctness.
>>>
>>>
>>> In many fields the peer-review of even scholarly books is not all
>>> that high.  In the sciences, journal articles hold much more weight
>>> than books, because there's a perception that anybody can get a book
>>> published.
>>
>>
>> I'm not so sure that the peer review of journal articles is
>> necessarily that much better. I recently dealt with a situation in
>> which the submitter of an article was able to specifically request
>> that his article not be forwarded to one of the logical candidates for
>> peer-reviewing it, because he anticipated that this person would give
>> an unfavorable review. Cherry-picking your reviews hardly counts as
>> rigorous scholarship in my book.
>>
>> The theory of peer review is nice, but even in academia the execution
>> is often shoddy and politically skewed. Practices at different
>> journals vary, of course, so the reputation of the journal needs to be
>> considered beyond just the question of whether it qualifies as
>> peer-reviewed.
>
>
> This past week the CBC has featured the story of Dr. Ranjit Chandra who
> faked results about multivitamin benefits for the elderly.  He has since
> left the country, but seems to be doing well running a non-existent
> university in Switzerland, and selling his multivitamins in India.
<snip>
>
> One quotation from the third part of the programme.
>
>> The former editor of the British Medical Journal, Richard Smith, says
>> there's a good reason for that.
>>
>>
>> "Anybody who knows about peer review knows that sometimes it will pick
>> up a fraudulent study, but it's by no means guaranteed to do so,"
>> Smith says. "And that's largely because it starts from a position of
>> trust. So if somebody says there were 200 patients, then you assume
>> there were 200 patients. You don't say, 'Well show me their records
>> and show me their photographs, I need to see them.' The whole thing is
>> based on trust."
>>
> The pharmaceutical industry in particular has a reputation for making
> its studies look good.
>
> It is never safe to say that a peer-reviewed article is ipso-facto valid.
>

I don't suppose anyone remembers the name of the guy who used the same
set of data over and over and over again to fake his results on nanotech
research...

--
Alphax - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax
Contributor to Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
"We make the internet not suck" - Jimbo Wales
Public key: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax/OpenPGP
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 556 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20060205/1b7a3779/attachment.pgp


body:
Anthony DiPierro wrote:

>On 2/3/06, Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote:
>
>
>>Anthony DiPierro wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I wouldn't go so far as to say that I'd like to see the US make fair
>>>use more restrictive - although frankly it probably wouldn't matter
>>>all that much in my daily life.
>>>
>>>But making it more clear when the answer is "No."  That'd be
>>>tremendously helpful to Wikipedia, in that it'd resolve a lot of
>>>conflict, and I really don't see how it'd hurt anything.
>>>
>>>
>>Another interesting possibility would be a use-it-or-lose-it provision.
>>If there has been no properly authorized publication of a copright work
>>in the last 10 years, any reprinting is fair use.
>>
>>
>At the very least a liberal application of adverse possession and
>prescriptive easements to copyright would be nice.  After all, if
>"intellectual property" really is "property", one should have to
>actively defend the property in order to keep it.
>
This makes fair use the intellectual counterpart to squatters' rights. ;-)

One point that I have sometimes raised is that a property rights vest in
a person  (which can include a corporation or a trust).  Unless somebody
exists to own the rights there can be no copyrights.  If a corporation
owns certain copyrights, then goes bankrupt and the copyrights (which
may have already been long forgotten) are not transferred in the
bankruptcy proceedings, there is a strong argument for saying that the
copyrights went into the public domain at the time of bankruptcy.
Similarly, if a jurisdiction specifies only that copyrights are passed
on to children and granchildren of the author, rather than according to
rules of succession, one cannot read into that that cousins or nephews
could gain those rights.

Ec


from_name: David Gerard

subject: [Foundation-l] Re: communications committee

body:
On 04/02/06, Elisabeth Bauer <elian at djini.de> wrote:

> The committee will consist of four initial members
> * Angela Beesley
> * Michael Snow
> * Nicholas Moreau
> * David Gerard
> Further members are welcome.

To be a UK press contact, I should probably be listed on the
Foundation wiki press contacts ... I've decided my mobile number is
public (though I usually let it go to message): 07990 822 568. I asked
to be added to the page a while ago ... is there some problem I'm not
aware of?

- d.


subject: [WikiEN-l] The Counter Vandalism Unit? Whaa?

body:
The Cunctator wrote:
> On 2/3/06, Guettarda <guettarda at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On 2/3/06, Sam Korn <smoddy at gmail.com> wrote:
>><snip>
>>
>>>I ask those who support the CVU: 1) how does it help Wikipedia in ways
>>>that a non-organisational structure couldn't? and 2) is the good it
>>>does really more significant than the dislike it creates among other
>>>Wikipedians?
>>>
>>
>>1. I'd hazard a guess that the CVU builds a spirit of community among people
>>who want to focus on fighting vandalism and gives recognition to an
>>essential task which really gets very little recognition
>
>
> It's the *kind* of recognition that troubles me. The Counter Vandalism
> Unit is a clear take-off of the Counter Terrorism Unit. Not the kind
> of analogy I like to see.
>

*'''Delete''', Americentric. Alternatively '''rename''' to
"Wikipedia:Home Guard"...

--
Alphax - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax
Contributor to Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
"We make the internet not suck" - Jimbo Wales
Public key: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax/OpenPGP
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 556 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20060205/88041eba/attachment.pgp


body:
Andrew Gray wrote:
> On 03/02/06, Philip Welch <wikipedia at philwelch.net> wrote:
>
>
>>>At the other end of the spectrum is that there is no such thing as
>>>vandalism, just edits that are less helpful than others.
>>>
>>>We should try to function as close to the latter end as possible.
>>>
>>>The very word "vandalism" I think is a somewhat false analogy, since
>>>there's no permanent damage in Wikipedia.
>>
>>So what do you suggest we call it when someone blanks the featured
>>article and overwrites it with "COCK COCK COCK COCK COCK FUCK ASS
>>COCK GAY LOLWTFBBQ"?
>
>
> "Uninventive"?
>

Guaranteed to generate abusive emails...

--
Alphax - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax
Contributor to Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
"We make the internet not suck" - Jimbo Wales
Public key: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax/OpenPGP
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 556 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20060205/cd370864/attachment.pgp


body:
Stan Shebs wrote:
> The Cunctator wrote:
>
>> What most of the people on this thread fail to recognize is that
>> creating anti-vandalism paramilitaries *encourages* vandalism.
>>
> That's just a ludicrous point of view - the vast majority of vandals
> I deal with neither know nor care about WP internal process. If they
> did, they would be able to introduce vandalism in much more subtle
> ways, for instance by stacking vandalistic edits behind legitimate
> changes by a sockpuppet, mixing vandalism in with a good edit, using
> plausible sounding edit summaries, etc. Instead, they tend to add
> the first thing that comes to mind, usually scatological.
>

Oh, I don't know; back when I used to visit #wikipedia-en-vandalism we'd
see some pretty creative ones. Of course, the fact that a blacklist IP
just removed 6500 bytes from the article /did/ make us suspicious of the
edit summary of "correcting a minor typo"... :)

--
Alphax - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax
Contributor to Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
"We make the internet not suck" - Jimbo Wales
Public key: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax/OpenPGP
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 556 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20060205/a9058d0d/attachment.pgp


body:
The Cunctator wrote:

>Should any of us declare war on vandals?
>
>Aren't most vandals people who are just being juvenile, and likely if
>shown how much fun being a productive contributor to Wikipedia is,
>would rather have their edits last, influencing others?
>
>Shouldn't we distinguish between fighting vandalism and fighting
>vandals? It's not personal -- it's business. Right?
>
>Isn't declaring war a gross violation of assuming good faith?
>
>Please tell me why "declaring war" on vandals is a good idea.
>
The more wars you declare, the greater your chances of losing wars.

War on terror, war on crime, war on poverty, war on drugs, war on
vandals.  Such an approach as easily encourages what it seeks to
destroy.  The Vandals were one of the enemies of the Roman Empire; can
we do as well against them.

In the Nov./Dec.2005  issue of "Adbusters" there is an interesting
quote. "Why, of course, the people don't want war ... That is
understood.  But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who
determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people
along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a
parliament or a communist dictatorship ... Voice or no voice, the people
can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders.  That is easy.  All
you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the
pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger.  It
works the same in any country."  Herman Goering had a lot to be
retrospective about when he said that in 1946.

Some might get literal about the term country, and argue that Wikipedia
is not a country.  But if we are not a country, what the hell are we
doing declaring wars.

Ec


subject:
[Foundation-l] Internal wiki(s)
	and	confidential	committee	communications

body:
Erik Moeller wrote:
> Brion-
>
> you raise excellent technical points. Of course, there are also security
> issues with the existing implementation, such as file uploads, which are
> openly accessible (don't know if they have been specially secured on
> internal).

There's been protection for uploads on private wikis for quite some time, where
configured.

> The only remaining question then is whether it is easier and more
> practical to have multiple confidential places (from which information
> will have to be aggregated), or to modify our software to allow multiple
> levels of access in a single installation. I would argue that a gradual
> implementation of the latter strategy is more promising and scalable in
> the long run. However, if you say that it cannot be done, it is pretty
> much a no-go.

Theoretically it can be done, and we might even have good reasons to think about
it and plan for it, but I would strongly caution against assuming it will be
there anytime soon.

Using separate databases for drastically different privilege levels is here now
and it's as secure as we're likely to see on our shared servers.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 249 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/attachments/20060205/6c59d429/attachment.pgp


body:
Erik Moeller wrote:
> Brion-
>
> you raise excellent technical points. Of course, there are also security
> issues with the existing implementation, such as file uploads, which are
> openly accessible (don't know if they have been specially secured on
> internal).

There's been protection for uploads on private wikis for quite some time, where
configured.

> The only remaining question then is whether it is easier and more
> practical to have multiple confidential places (from which information
> will have to be aggregated), or to modify our software to allow multiple
> levels of access in a single installation. I would argue that a gradual
> implementation of the latter strategy is more promising and scalable in
> the long run. However, if you say that it cannot be done, it is pretty
> much a no-go.

Theoretically it can be done, and we might even have good reasons to think about
it and plan for it, but I would strongly caution against assuming it will be
there anytime soon.

Using separate databases for drastically different privilege levels is here now
and it's as secure as we're likely to see on our shared servers.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 249 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/attachments/20060205/6c59d429/attachment-0001.pgp


body:
Erik Moeller wrote:
> Brion-
>
> you raise excellent technical points. Of course, there are also security
> issues with the existing implementation, such as file uploads, which are
> openly accessible (don't know if they have been specially secured on
> internal).

There's been protection for uploads on private wikis for quite some time, where
configured.

> The only remaining question then is whether it is easier and more
> practical to have multiple confidential places (from which information
> will have to be aggregated), or to modify our software to allow multiple
> levels of access in a single installation. I would argue that a gradual
> implementation of the latter strategy is more promising and scalable in
> the long run. However, if you say that it cannot be done, it is pretty
> much a no-go.

Theoretically it can be done, and we might even have good reasons to think about
it and plan for it, but I would strongly caution against assuming it will be
there anytime soon.

Using separate databases for drastically different privilege levels is here now
and it's as secure as we're likely to see on our shared servers.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 249 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/attachments/20060205/6c59d429/attachment.pgp>


body:
Erik Moeller wrote:
> Brion-
>
> you raise excellent technical points. Of course, there are also security
> issues with the existing implementation, such as file uploads, which are
> openly accessible (don't know if they have been specially secured on
> internal).

There's been protection for uploads on private wikis for quite some time, where
configured.

> The only remaining question then is whether it is easier and more
> practical to have multiple confidential places (from which information
> will have to be aggregated), or to modify our software to allow multiple
> levels of access in a single installation. I would argue that a gradual
> implementation of the latter strategy is more promising and scalable in
> the long run. However, if you say that it cannot be done, it is pretty
> much a no-go.

Theoretically it can be done, and we might even have good reasons to think about
it and plan for it, but I would strongly caution against assuming it will be
there anytime soon.

Using separate databases for drastically different privilege levels is here now
and it's as secure as we're likely to see on our shared servers.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 249 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/attachments/20060205/6c59d429/attachment-0001.pgp>


body:
The Cunctator wrote:
> On 2/3/06, Jay Converse <supermo0 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On 2/3/06, The Cunctator <cunctator at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>More (and automatic) admins, I say.
>>
>>This is the easiest, fastest, most efficient, least work-intensive method...
>>
>>of dismantling Wikipedia from the inside out.
>>
>>I'd say a good portion of our vandals are kids who have nothing better to
>>do.  This is the same kind of kid who, from experience with forums, and
>>various other free forms of online entertainment, will perform the bare
>>minimum of actual work necessary to get whatever power, MP3, level they
>>want.
>>
>>If you tell people they need to browse 6 months and get 1000 edits and they
>>will be automatically admin'd, you will see people adding content to
>>articles one word at a time, making meaningless edits to pages over and over
>>again, and doing that until they hit 1001, then sit around until 6 months
>>have passed up.  Then they'll go nuts using their admin powers in incredibly
>>new and damaging ways.
>
>
> Wow, you have not only a minimum faith in the good nature of your
> fellow man, a lot of faith in their lack of anything better to do.
>

You'd be surprised how much time some people have on their hands, and
how completely and utterly nuts some people are.

>
>>Automatic adminship is NOT the way to go.  Absolutely not.  To be honest, I
>>don't think we need to be admitting admins at the rate that we are.  Hell,
>>RfA pretty much is an automatic approval process at this point anyway, and
>>I've seen infrequent complaints that some admins getting through aren't
>>quite stable.  Just imagine what would happen if we put adminship in the
>>hands of, essentially, everyone.
>
>
> Oh, lordy! The unwashed masses! Quick, defend the citadel. Being an
> admin really ain't that amazing.
>

Isn't it? There are already quite a few admins who block users with the
minimum of warnings, using obscure block messages, don't have an email
address set, and won't respond to what other users are saying.

Now please, stop being disingenious and get back to whatever it is on
Wikipedia that you're good at.

--
Alphax - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax
Contributor to Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
"We make the internet not suck" - Jimbo Wales
Public key: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax/OpenPGP
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 556 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20060205/d3b37aee/attachment.pgp


body:
The Cunctator wrote:
> On 2/4/06, Jay Converse <supermo0 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On 2/4/06, The Cunctator <cunctator at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On 2/4/06, Jay Converse <supermo0 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On 2/4/06, The Cunctator <cunctator at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Oh, lordy! The unwashed masses! Quick, defend the citadel. Being an
>>>>>admin really ain't that amazing.
>>>>
>>>>Except for the simple fact that they can delete images, which cannot be
>>>>restored.  All it takes is one bad apple to completely destroy
>>>
>>>Wikipedia's
>>>
>>>>images, unless they're stopped in time.
>>>
>>>That's true now, isn't it?
>>>
>>>>And we all know how hard it is to remove an admin once he's there.
>>>
>>>That's because becoming an admin isn't automatic.
>>>
>>
>>You're completely avoiding both my points.  If you give everyone a gun, all
>>it takes is one person to fire a shot for the whole town to erupt in a blaze
>>of gunfire.  If you give trustworthy people, a small portion of them, guns,
>>then those people become a symbol of trust and honesty to everyone else.
>>Obviously guns are a bit of an extreme comparison...
>
>
> I'm not avoiding your points, I don't buy your logic. Yes, guns are an
> extreme comparison and, I think, a poor analogy. The thought of
> holding a funeral for the loss of a Wikipedia image is pretty
> entertaining, though.
>
> [Not to get into it, but: I'm not a huge fan of a small portion of
> "trustworthy" people wielding guns. Somehow a lot of people seem to
> get killed by guns in the US nonetheless.]
>

That is because (as I understand it) the rules for firearms ownership
are pretty much the same as what you are suggesting for adminship -
anyone who qualifies, gets teh awesome power. In fact, some states
(well, counties anyway) /require/ people to own guns.

Now, are you *sure* you still want adminship to be automagic?

>
>>Also, by using circular logic on the second point, you're ignoring the fact
>>that it seems to be generally thought that the current de-adminship process,
>>which relies on admins not coming in hundreds at a time, is already broken,
>>and you want to flood it even further.  You're saying that by adding more
>>people to be looked over, the already bogged-down system will magically fix
>>itself?
>
>
> No, I'm saying that the current system sucks, and that it should be
> replaced by an "easily given, easily taken away" philosophy.
>

In case you haven't noticed, Wikipedia is not a little website in some
random backwater of the internet like it was 3 years ago - we're now one
of the Top 20 (Alexa peak of 13) websites _in the world_. We cannot
afford to hand out administrative privileges in this manner. However, I
do think that we should make it far easier to /remove/ adminship from
those who abuse it.

--
Alphax - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax
Contributor to Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
"We make the internet not suck" - Jimbo Wales
Public key: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax/OpenPGP
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 556 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20060205/4336aa22/attachment.pgp


subject: [WikiEN-l] Here's an interesting one

body:
Tony Sidaway wrote:
> On 2/3/06, Philip Welch <wikipedia at philwelch.net> wrote:
>
>>Is it just me, or would things go a lot better if experimentation was
>>part of the policymaking process?
>
>
> It was my impression that it already was!
>
>
>>This is what Proposed Deletions is
>>doing and it seems like a far better idea than arguing ad infinitum
>>about improving our deletion processes.
>
>
> qv.
>
> However I don't see the temporary undeletion thing as a policy matter,
> rather one of persuading administrators not to delete articles while
> their deletion is being challenged, in good faith, on DRV.
>
> It's all about assuming good faith, of which alas there is not much in
> our deletion and undeletion processes.
>

Oh screw it. Let's make a new committee which will handle *all* deletion
and undeletion requests, except speedies and copyvios. Let's call it,
um, Uncyclopedia...

--
Alphax - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax
Contributor to Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
"We make the internet not suck" - Jimbo Wales
Public key: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax/OpenPGP
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 556 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20060205/8a9bdb38/attachment.pgp


subject: [WikiEN-l] Here's an interesting one

body:
geni wrote:
> On 2/3/06, John Lee <johnleemk at gawab.com> wrote:
>
>>I've been pushing Tony to put forth a real replacement for DRV for a
>>long time, and I'm glad he did. This is a solution I'd like to see
>>implemented. I think admins can be trusted with this.
>>
>
>
> The flaw is that with 800 admins to shop around with we risk haveing
> to repeat a heck of a lot of AFD votes. Neutraliseing missbehaveing
> admins is tricky.
>

The trick to neutralisation is in determining whether they are acidic or
basic. Of course "caustic" could forseeably cover both of those... :)

--
Alphax - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax
Contributor to Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
"We make the internet not suck" - Jimbo Wales
Public key: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax/OpenPGP
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 556 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20060205/b47fe254/attachment.pgp


references:
<20060131034941.0D6EB1AC592A@mail.wikimedia.org>	<43DEFFA5.5070600@earthlink.net>	<dror1d$qjv$1@sea.gmane.org>
	<43E4078A.1060409@telus.net>

body:
Ray Saintonge wrote:
> Tim Starling wrote:
>
>> We were talking about what we'd like the Congress to do, not WIPO.
>> Come to think of it, there's a
>>
>> step Congress could take towards harmonization that would be more
>> useful for us: to reduce the term
>> of copyright to the Berne Convention minimum of life + 50 years.
>>
> Interesting comment from someone whose country only recently moved up to
> life + 70. ;-)
>

I suspect that this was somehow tied into the "Free Trade" (cough)
agreement that Disney brainwashed Bush into brainwashing Howard to sign.

--
Alphax - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax
Contributor to Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
"We make the internet not suck" - Jimbo Wales
Public key: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax/OpenPGP
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 556 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20060205/c53106d5/attachment.pgp


body:
Ray Saintonge wrote:
> Anthony DiPierro wrote:
>
>> I wouldn't go so far as to say that I'd like to see the US make fair
>> use more restrictive - although frankly it probably wouldn't matter
>> all that much in my daily life.
>>
>> But making it more clear when the answer is "No."  That'd be
>> tremendously helpful to Wikipedia, in that it'd resolve a lot of
>> conflict, and I really don't see how it'd hurt anything.
>>
> Another interesting possibility would be a use-it-or-lose-it provision.
> If there has been no properly authorized publication of a copright work
> in the last 10 years, any reprinting is fair use.
>

Wasn't copyright originally intended to be blanket 25 years, regardless
of how alive or otherwise the author was?

--
Alphax - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax
Contributor to Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
"We make the internet not suck" - Jimbo Wales
Public key: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax/OpenPGP
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 556 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20060205/1ae51a2a/attachment.pgp


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: A school teacher's wiki-like classroom experiment

body:
Heinz wrote:
> David Gerard schrieb:
>
>> This is excellent:
>>
>>     http://www.nowtoronto.com/issues/2006-02-02/goods_next.php
>>
>> It may also be a good experiment to suggest to teachers in general if
>> they're trying to explain Wikipedia.
>>
>>
> very funny.
> teachers begin to explain to pupils how to use wikipedia for doing their
> homework with wikipedia. ;-)
>

There's a template that's sometimes used on the refdesk for exactly that
purpose:

{{dyoh}}

--
Alphax - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax
Contributor to Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
"We make the internet not suck" - Jimbo Wales
Public key: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax/OpenPGP
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 556 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20060205/dbc6fd40/attachment.pgp


subject:
[Wikipedia-l] Re: [WikiEN-l] Re: A school teacher's wiki-like
	classroom experiment

body:
Heinz wrote:
> David Gerard schrieb:
>
>> This is excellent:
>>
>>     http://www.nowtoronto.com/issues/2006-02-02/goods_next.php
>>
>> It may also be a good experiment to suggest to teachers in general if
>> they're trying to explain Wikipedia.
>>
>>
> very funny.
> teachers begin to explain to pupils how to use wikipedia for doing their
> homework with wikipedia. ;-)
>

There's a template that's sometimes used on the refdesk for exactly that
purpose:

{{dyoh}}

--
Alphax - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax
Contributor to Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
"We make the internet not suck" - Jimbo Wales
Public key: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax/OpenPGP
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 556 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/attachments/20060205/dbc6fd40/attachment.pgp


from_name: Ivan Krstic

subject:
[Wikitech-l] Call for Participation: Wikimania 2006,
	the annual Wikimedia Conference

body:
Dear Wikitech folk,

we are now accepting submissions for the second annual international
Wikimedia Conference -- Wikimania. The primary deadline for submitting
an abstract is April 15, 2006. The conference will be held from August
4-6, 2006 in Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA, on the Harvard Law School
campus.

Of particular interest to this list will be our Technical Infrastructure
track, dealing with issues related to MediaWiki development and
extensions, Wikimedia hardware layout, and new ideas for development,
including case studies from other wikis or similar projects.

As part of the conference, we'll also be hosting hacking days, during
which you'll be able to relax and write some good code with other wiki
hackers who share your interests. We hope to have details on hacking
days soon.

Head to

  http://wikimania.wikimedia.org/wiki/Call_for_papers

for the CFP, and then right over to

  http://cfp.wikimania.wikimedia.org/

in order to submit an abstract. We are accepting submissions for papers,
posters, presentations, workshops, and discussion groups. And if you
have ideas about speakers, tutorials, or panels, please add
them to the list here:

  http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2006/Program_ideas

Please pass this notice on to those you think would find it of interest.
We're looking forward to some excellent tech track submissions, and a
great conference overall!

--
Ivan Krstic <krstic at fas.harvard.edu> | GPG: 0x147C722D


from_name: Rob Church

subject: [Wikitech-l] How do i hide users from User List?

body:
You can't. Why do you need to hide them? I know the docs say not to,
but it *might* be safe to do so under certain circumstances...

Rob Church

On 04/02/06, Jon Savian <worknit at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello
>
> How do i go about hiding users on the User List page?  Since the
> mediawiki documentation says not to delete suers from the database, i
> figure hiding them on the webpage is the next best thing.  Even
> removing the User List page from the special pages would work too.
>
> how can i do this?
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>