from_name: Alphax (Wikipedia email)

body:
Dan Jacobson wrote:
> I am on a costly slow and brief modem, mostly batched by wwwoffle. So
> it is hard for me to submit bugs and comments interactively.
>
> Indeed there should be a page saying how 3rd world users could
> interact best with your site, e.g., It would be nice if there was a
> email way to add comments to discussion Talk: pages.
>
> Also I would like to note that when one sees "Your account has been
> created. Don't forget to change your Wikipedia preferences.", the
> "Wikipedia preferences" should be a link!

I'm all for this option; however, edit conflicts would be difficult to
avoid on heavily edited pages. User authentication is another obvious
problem; my preferred solution can be discerned from my .sig and the
attachments to this message.

--
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/20060110/c2dd876b/attachment.pgp


list: wikitech-l

source: pipermail-mbox

from_name: Jean Lamy

subject: [Wikitech-l] Using of mediawiki engine

body:
Rob Church a ?crit :

>You'll be looking at borrowing our parser, although I suspect you'll
>want to remove several things, including the cache (since it's a
>CMS)...
>
>
you're right

>Parser.php would be the best place to start looking. There is some
>internal (development) documentation available at
>http://wikipedia.sourceforge.net/doc, but I don't know how up-to-date
>or suitable it is.
>
>
thanks, I'm going to look at this. I suppose this file will not change
too much in the future. Isn't it ?

Jean lamy

>
>Rob Church
>
>On 10/01/06, Jean Lamy <jean.lamy at revues.org> wrote:
>
>
>>Hi,
>>
>>I was wondering if it was possible to use the mediawiki engine in an
>>external project.
>>
>>My goal is to use the mediawiki engine (only the engine, not all the
>>mediawiki application) in Lodel (http://www.lodel.org, french CMS) to
>>interpret the WiKi language.
>>And if possible, allowing the use off all extension to MediaWiki.
>>
>>Is there any documentation on this ? Is is possible ?
>>
>>Sincerely
>>
>>Jean Lamy.
>>
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Wikitech-l mailing list
>>Wikitech-l at wikimedia.org
>>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>>
>>
>>
>_______________________________________________
>Wikitech-l mailing list
>Wikitech-l at wikimedia.org
>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>
>
>


list: wikien-l

from_name: Anthony DiPierro

subject: [WikiEN-l] userbox : insanity ?

body:
On 1/10/06, Chris Jenkinson <chris at starglade.org> wrote:
> Anthony DiPierro wrote:
> > What about people (like me, but I really don't care about myself) who
> > run open proxies on their home computer?  They can be permabanned?
>
> You're running an *open* proxy? Open proxies are typically used for DDOS
> attack and suchlike. It's a really unwise idea to run an open proxy. I'm
> surprised that you haven't already been blacklisted by a number of those
> DNS database things.
>
> Chris

Yes, I'm running an open proxy, specifically a proxy which anonymizes
http connections.  See http://tor.eff.org/.  It's not useful for DDOS
attacks, really, as the one I run only forwards well-formed port 80
traffic at the same rate as you send it in (and even then, tor is kind
of slow).  And the vast majority of blacklists are smart enough not to
list proxies which don't forward SMTP.  That said, I use gmail for my
email anyway, so if I am blacklisted I probably wouldn't even know it.

The fact that Wikipedia would block someone's *user account* because
they have at one point run such a proxy makes pretty much zero sense.

Anthony


from_name: geni

subject: [WikiEN-l] userbox : insanity ?

body:
On 1/10/06, Anthony DiPierro <wikilegal at inbox.org> wrote:
> Is it now a bannable offense simply to edit from an open proxy?  If
> so, I'm sure the people over at the or-talk list will be interested to
> hear this.
>
> Anthony

Yep has been for ages.

--
geni


from_name: Rob Smith

subject: [WikiEN-l] Rewrite of Verifiability policy - further comments?

body:
SlimVirgin cites the case of A.J. Ayer, one of the originators of logical
positivism, which he later called "nonsense."  An editor now wants to insert
a verifiable citation from Prof. Ellen Schrecker in nearly 300 articles
which Prof. Schrecker herself has refuted.  Shouldn't the policy say
something about intellectual dishonesty?

nobs


from_name: Ryan Lane

subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: LDAP Group authentication problem

body:
Manilal K M <libregeek at ...> writes:

>
> hello all,
>    I am beginner to this list, since i have just started hacking
> mediawiki. I am trying to apply the LDAP authentication plugin to
> mediawiki-1.5.2 in a FC-4. I'm using openldap-2.2.23-5.
>    I have read the  documentation at :
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/LDAP_Authentication and downloaded the
> plugin from :http://bugzilla.wikipedia.org/attachment.cgi?id=1042&action=view
>

<snip>

> what may have gone wrong?
> please help
> regards
> Manilal
>

Manilal,

This is probably not the right list to post to about this. Please post this
information on the discussion page at:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/LDAP_Authentication

I'll help you out there.

V/r,

Ryan Lane


from_name: Haukur Þorgeirsson

subject: [WikiEN-l] Userbox reframing?

body:
Both sides seem to be treating the userbox conflict as some sort of
law-enforcement issue. It's either something like: "We need to show those
darn n00bs that they can't get away with this!" Or something like: "We
need to show those renegade admins that they can't get away with this!"

(Caricaturing slightly, of course.)

But it seems to me like this is better treated as an *educational* issue.
We need to calmly and carefully explain how some things, if you put them
on your userpage, make you look stupid. And - much more importantly - how
they make the project look stupid.

When people new to the project come upon userpages full of neat
standardized boxes expressing all sorts of opinions they don't think:
"Aha, these users have gone out of their way to make pretty userpages."
The impression given is rather: "The Wikipedia project provides users with
a built-in mechanism to express standardized sound-bite views about a
bunch of topics."

This is not the impression I think we want to give. I'm all for people
expressing their opinions and points of view creatively on their userpages
(sure, why not, I like reading userpages and it's often helpful to know
where people are coming from). But when it looks like the Wikimedia
foundation is encouraging people to hold over-simplified views on
complicated issues like, say, EU-enlargement, then that is not such a good
thing.

Thoughts?

Haukur


from_name: John Lee

subject: [WikiEN-l] userbox : insanity ?

body:
Peter Mackay wrote:

> <snip>
>
>If people are using Wikipedia to play rather than build an encyclopaedia,
>then they should be encouraged in this primary objective, not castigated for
>extraneous activies, because for every frivolous userbox, I dare say if I
>went looking, I could find some other piece of useless guff on the user
>pages of experienced editors. Let people play, if it does no harm and they
>are participating in community activities, but also encourage them to be
>more productive.
>
>
The difference is experienced users tend to contribute to article space
as well. Many userbox fanatics make minimal or no edits to articles. (Of
course, most people with userboxes aren't fanatics; I have quite a few
userboxes myself. But there are a few rogue bunch out there who seem
more intent on userboxes than building an encyclopedia.) I agree that
this is probably a symptom of a larger problem, though - people
forgetting we're here to build an encyclopedia, not play. Playing is
fine, as long as you build the encyclopedia while you're at it.
Wikipedia is an encyclopedia first and a community second.

John Lee
([[User:Johnleemk]])


list: wikipedia-l

from_name: Milos Rancic

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Serbo-Croatian wikipedia

body:
On 1/8/06, Milos Rancic <millosh at mutualaid.org> wrote:
> #*Also, it should be noted that Pokrajac would be desysoped on Serbian
> Wikipedia for blocking users who made a joke (not Milica, but
> Elephantus, Jovan etc.) Behaviour like this is unacceptable on
> Wikipedia. And this incident started the process of closing this
> Wikipedia. --[[User:Millosh|Millosh]] 01:07, 8 January 2006 (CET)

My English is very bad... I wanted to say "If Pokrajac did it on
Serbian Wikipedia, he would be desysoped on Serbian Wikipedia". In
general, I am against his desysoping on sr: because he didn't do the
same on sr:. However, unlike my strong support to his adminship on sr:
(I blocked previous attempts for his desysoping), I would not do that
again.


from_name: Neil Harris

subject: [Wikipedia-l] AOLday is here

body:
Wikipedia's one-day Alexa traffic rank has now surpassed that of AOL;
and there seems to be no end to the growth rate.

-- Neil

http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?&range=6m&size=large&compare_sites=aol.com&y=t&url=www.wikipedia.org


subject: [WikiEN-l] Summarising policies and guidelines

body:
Steve Bennett wrote:

>>Have fun with the MOS. Generaly only refured to when when
>>people are trying to use it in order to win a debate.
>>
>>
>
>Yeah, pages which contain hundreds of distinct suggestions with no
>single underlying motivation present a problem. Perhaps we can produce a
>short mock-up of a "perfect" page with "perfect" style?
>
>Steve
>
>
But what constitutes "perfect" or even "ideal, given existing
limitations"? Many things on Wikipedia have no consensus, as a visit to
FAC can tell you. Should the "perfect" article use only free images, or
be satisfied with fair use where free images are impractical? Should the
"perfect" article use footnotes? What about Harvard referencing? Or
inline external links? And speaking of references, do we follow
[[Wikipedia:Cite sources/example style]] or [[Wikipedia:Template
messages/Sources of articles/Generic citations]]? (Yes, the styles
differ in some cases.) Should captions be compliant with
[[Wikipedia:Captions]] or with the style currently used on most articles?

In case my point isn't clear, we can't produce a mock-up of a "perfect"
page with "perfect" style. It just isn't possible when we haven't even
decided what is "perfect".

John Lee
([[User:Johnleemk]])


from_name: Andreas Hoerstemeier

subject:
[WikiEN-l] Re: Wikipedia Blocked IP address 82.148.97.67 is for the
 whole counrty!

body:
Andrew Gray wrote:
> have, in effect, only one ISP. I have a recollection this is not the
> first time we've effectively blocked most if not all of a country; was
> it Thailand that got hit before?
Similar, but nor same. Thailand has several ISPs, however many of them
seem incapable of making their proxies non-open. Thus Thai users were
blocked by the open proxies list, which normally should prevent spam and
(really) anonymous vandalism.

[[User:Ahoerstemeier]]


from_name: Jay Converse

subject: [WikiEN-l] userbox : insanity ?

body:
On 1/10/06, Anthony DiPierro <wikilegal at inbox.org> wrote:
>
> On 1/10/06, Chris Jenkinson <chris at starglade.org> wrote:
> > Anthony DiPierro wrote:
> > > What about people (like me, but I really don't care about myself) who
> > > run open proxies on their home computer?  They can be permabanned?
> >
> > You're running an *open* proxy? Open proxies are typically used for DDOS
> > attack and suchlike. It's a really unwise idea to run an open proxy. I'm
> > surprised that you haven't already been blacklisted by a number of those
> > DNS database things.
> >
> > Chris
>
> Yes, I'm running an open proxy, specifically a proxy which anonymizes
> http connections.  See http://tor.eff.org/.  It's not useful for DDOS
> attacks, really, as the one I run only forwards well-formed port 80
> traffic at the same rate as you send it in (and even then, tor is kind
> of slow).  And the vast majority of blacklists are smart enough not to
> list proxies which don't forward SMTP.  That said, I use gmail for my
> email anyway, so if I am blacklisted I probably wouldn't even know it.
>
> The fact that Wikipedia would block someone's *user account* because
> they have at one point run such a proxy makes pretty much zero sense.
>
> Anthony
>
>
I was also of the impression that the only reason an IP would be blocked
because the user used it was to prevent issues with recently-blocked users.
What's the point of recommending someone sign up for an account, and
advertising that you get benefits over an IP account, only to be told your
IP is invalid?

--
I'm not stupid, just selectively ignorant.


from_name: Brion Vibber

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Writing of "Kurdi" (Kurdish) in Interwikis

body:
Erdal Ronahi wrote:
> We would be happy with both scripts in the interlinks or with Latin, as it
> is used anywhere in the Kurdish speakin areas. But ONLY the arabic script
> makes it very hard to recognize for probably the majority of Kurds (and
> people worldwide).
>
> So could it please be changed back?

http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4530

-- 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/wikipedia-l/attachments/20060110/48fd6b09/attachment.pgp


list: foundation-l

from_name: Dariusz Siedlecki

subject: [Foundation-l] Steward elections closing

body:
I wanted to notify foundation-l that the Steward elections of 2006 are
closing tonight, UTC time. From 16 candidates only 9 are making it
through by this time:

* Jean-Christophe Chazalette (villy)
* Ausir
* Romihaitza
* Walter
* Paginazero
* Jon Harald S?by
* Suisui
* Rdsmith4
* Asc?nder

Also, Arno Lagrange failed his re-nomination and, if no one is against
this move, his steward rights will be taken away.

--
Pozdrawiam,
Dariusz "Datrio" Siedlecki


list: wikimedia-l


from_name: Magnus Manske

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Achieving validation on Wikipedia

body:
David Gerard wrote:

>Tidycat wrote:
>
>
>
>>Hi.  I've been studying the issue of article  validation on Wikipedia
>>
>>
>for almost two months now (since before the  Seigenthaler incident),
>and I've written up an in-depth analysis of it  at
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:TidyCat/Achieving_validation_on_Wikipedia
>
>
>Nice one! I've added it to [[Category:Editorial validation]].
>
>(no, I have no idea of the status of the article rating feature or extension)
>
>
Stable version: In the works by Tim Starling
Review: Try http://magnusmanske.de/wikipeerdia

Magnus


from_name: Kirill Lokshin

subject: [WikiEN-l] The top users of userboxes

body:
On 1/10/06, ?var Arnfj?r? Bjarmason <avarab at gmail.com> wrote:
> Seeing as this userbox discussion is all the rave around here I
> thought I'd do a little project based on them, so here it is, an RSS
> feed on zedler updated every 24hrs that lists the top 50 users of
> userboxes:
>
> http://tools.wikimedia.de/~avar/cgi-bin/userbox_feed

There seem to be some names repeated, since user subpages are
apparently counted as a separate occurrence.

And now, the meaningless statistic of the day: according to my utterly
unscientific perusal of [[WP:LA]], there are four admins on that list
right now ;-)

Kirill Lokshin


from_name: Peter Mackay

subject: [WikiEN-l] userbox : insanity ?

body:
> From: wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org
> [mailto:wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org] On Behalf Of Fastfission

> Taking care of these issues as *general* issues and not
> related to one specific fad is the way to extinguish whatever
> actual problems there are without being idiosyncratic and
> draconian about it.

Seems to me that userboxes are the symptom, rather than the cause, of a
certain malaise in Wikipedia.

I'd like to see moves toward encouragement and co-operation, rather than
demonisation.

If frivolous userboxes are causing a load on the server that noticably slows
down the site for everybody, then that is cause to act with speed and
authority, but short of that, any high-handed remedy is merely going to fuel
the fire.

If people are using Wikipedia to play rather than build an encyclopaedia,
then they should be encouraged in this primary objective, not castigated for
extraneous activies, because for every frivolous userbox, I dare say if I
went looking, I could find some other piece of useless guff on the user
pages of experienced editors. Let people play, if it does no harm and they
are participating in community activities, but also encourage them to be
more productive.

On BookCrossing.com, we have a couple of numbers that appear after the names
of users, and these show the level of participation in the general activity
of the site. Perhaps it might be useful to add in some numbers after
Wikipedia names, and I'd suggest number of edits in articlespace and length
of membership in days, which would show at a glance a rough idea of how
valuable a particular editor is. If that doesn't put too much load on the
servers, that is.

Peter (Skyring)


from_name: Chris Jenkinson

subject: [WikiEN-l] userbox : insanity ?

body:
Anthony DiPierro wrote:
> What about people (like me, but I really don't care about myself) who
> run open proxies on their home computer?  They can be permabanned?

You're running an *open* proxy? Open proxies are typically used for DDOS
attack and suchlike. It's a really unwise idea to run an open proxy. I'm
surprised that you haven't already been blacklisted by a number of those
DNS database things.

Chris

--
Chris Jenkinson
chris at starglade.org

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


from_name: Andrew Gray

subject: [WikiEN-l] offline users wish to add comments to pages via email

body:
On 10/01/06, Steve Bennett <stevage at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I'm all for this option; however, edit conflicts would be difficult to
> > avoid on heavily edited pages. User authentication is another obvious
> > problem; my preferred solution can be discerned from my .sig and the
> > attachments to this message.
>
> I think the suggestion is just for them to be able to send a comment
> that would be stuck on the comments page - another user would then at
> some stage integrate that into the page text. You see this happening
> already sometimes, people drop by, say they don't know how to work
> wikipedia, but ... is wrong with the following page.

Email form button? mailto:helpdesk-l, or something similar, presetting
the subject as "Comment on {{PAGENAME}}". We could then either correct
it, bin it, or leave a talk-page comment.

--
- Andrew Gray
  andrew.gray at dunelm.org.uk


subject: [WikiEN-l] userbox : insanity ?

body:
> From: wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org
> [mailto:wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org] On Behalf Of John Lee
>
> Peter Mackay wrote:
>
> > <snip>
> >
> >If people are using Wikipedia to play rather than build an
> >encyclopaedia, then they should be encouraged in this primary
> >objective, not castigated for extraneous activies, because for every
> >frivolous userbox, I dare say if I went looking, I could find some
> >other piece of useless guff on the user pages of experienced
> editors.
> >Let people play, if it does no harm and they are participating in
> >community activities, but also encourage them to be more productive.
> >
> >
> The difference is experienced users tend to contribute to
> article space as well.

So do inexperienced users.

> Many userbox fanatics make minimal or
> no edits to articles. (Of course, most people with userboxes
> aren't fanatics; I have quite a few userboxes myself. But
> there are a few rogue bunch out there who seem more intent on
> userboxes than building an encyclopedia.) I agree that this
> is probably a symptom of a larger problem, though - people
> forgetting we're here to build an encyclopedia, not play.

I think it goes deeper than that. I think that some new editors are being
made to feel that they are not part of the established WP community and
consequently they are "acting up". This is the same "old hands" vs "young
Turks" divide I see on other sites and indeed in real life. This is not to
say that all old hands are pitted against all new arrivals, but it's a noisy
minority at both ends of the spectrum who are stirring things up.

Peter (Skyring)


from_name: The Cunctator

subject:
[WikiEN-l] Effects of fixed release version on a Wikipedia? (was
	Ads on Wikipedia?)

body:
On 1/10/06, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
> The Cunctator wrote:
>
> >I think there are better revenue streams for the Wikimedia Foundation
> >to be pursuing, in particular CD/DVD dead-tree versions of
> >Wikipedia/Wikibooks, although those will corrupt the nature of the
> >project too, perhaps in worse ways, so who really knows.
>
>
> Has de: been corrupted in this sense by the DVD edition? (I'm not
> entirely clear on what you specifically mean here by "corruption,"
> though I'm very aware that a fixed version will have strong side
> effects on the dynamics of the wiki, good and bad.)

Right, that's all I'm talking about, in a mock-doomsaying way.

> As I understand it (and would welcome correction), Digitalmedia's
> genius move with this was to set out their quality needs in such a way
> that the de: Wikipedia volunteers would *want* that work to be done
> (polishing, referencing, fact-checking, etc).
>
> I really really really want en: to be good enough to pull a DVD-ROM
> edition from!

Me too! I just worry it'll be used as an excuse for ever-more layers
of needless hierarchy and bureacracy, and ever more attempts to make
articles suitable for printing to dead trees instead of part of a
dynamic web.


from_name: kelvSYC

subject: [WikiEN-l] kelvSYC's take on userboxes

body:
Anyone who has seen my userpage in the past day would probably see
that I just got into that userbox fad.  Naturally, I do have a few
opinions:

* Some userboxes are over the top in the sense that they do promote
POV.  Those should be deleted.  I mean, I don't really need to know
on any "Wikipedia-related professional" level whether someone
believes that [[American English]] is the only correct English, or
whether someone is a fan of the [[Dallas Cowboys]], or whether
someone is a [[Quebec separatist]].  Although on the other hand, I
have to admit I am guilty of including some of these userboxes (eg.
{{user ubx-5}}, {{user Catan}}, etc.)  Just because it's a template
doesn't mean it is not subject to NPOV, and some of us forget that.
* There perhaps should be a "minimum use" requirement for userboxes,
to facilitate in, say, tfd processes ("Only one user uses it?
Delete!").  But that means that everyone would have to use them...
* I really hope that a separate userbox space is _not_ made...
* Is there a way to appeal to copyright holders to allow their fair
use images in spaces other than the main space?  Conversely, is there
a mechanism for holders to declare that certain images are
permissible in spaces other than the main space?  I ask as I am aware
of the fair use thing, and while I think that it sucks (for stylistic
reasons), it is necessary and something we all have to live with.
* Some userboxes are humorous in nature ({{user ubx-5}} is an
example), and they should be deleted for the greater image of
userboxing (Did I say anything that remotely make sense?).  I don't
particularly care if someone is a native speaker of bullshit ({{User
en-B-N}}), 1337 ({{User 1337-N}}) or gibberish ({{User gb-N}}).  They
can all go to the bit bucket.
* Please, for the love of <insert religious figure here>, delete
redundant crap userboxes like {{User Earthling}}.
* Some userboxes are irrelevant to the nature of Wikipedia.  I don't
care whether someone's favorite color is yellow ({{User yellow}}) or
not.  It doesn't help me work with other Wikipedia contributors in
making better articles.  They should be deleted.
* However, userboxes may be good for building communities.  We should
keep all of them that are "good" in nature, like the Babel ones, ones
that split users by location, ones that denote RC patrol, admins, the
ones that denote expertise in academic fields, etc.  I really don't
think a userbox is necessary for tagging users who have been
victimized by such-and-such vandal.
* The userbox fad, if left unchecked, may infect other stuff too...
such as a userbox for "this IP is blocked", "this user is blocked",
"this user has requested that the page be protected from movement", etc.

Anyways, you all have your opinions, and you can all give feedback to
mine and hopefully change my mind.  After all, that's why I post, right?


from_name: geni

subject:
[WikiEN-l] Begging notices,
	external commercial distributors (was Ads on Wikipedia?)

body:
On 1/10/06, Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote:
> I was under the impression that the fundraising objectives for the
> quarter were achieved.  What becomes tacky is continuing to post these
> notices (including Jimbo's appeal letter) after the objectives have been
> reached and the pre-determined fundraising period has ended.  If someone
> miscalculated the needs, they should be adjusted next time around.
>
> Ec
>

See:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki_talk:Sitenotice

--
geni


from_name: Ashar Voultoiz

body:
Ryan Lane wrote:
> This is probably not the right list to post to about this. Please post this
> information on the discussion page at:
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/LDAP_Authentication
>
> I'll help you out there.

Ryan,

Is there anything that prevent your patch from being an extension ? :)

--
Ashar Voultoiz - WP++++
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Hashar
http://www.livejournal.com/community/wikitech/
IM: hashar at jabber.org  ICQ: 15325080


from_name: Rob Church

subject: [Wikitech-l] Using of mediawiki engine

body:
Never rely on any code in CVS remaining as it is for any length of time. ;-)

Rob Church

On 10/01/06, Jean Lamy <jean.lamy at revues.org> wrote:
>
>
> Rob Church a ?crit :
>
> >You'll be looking at borrowing our parser, although I suspect you'll
> >want to remove several things, including the cache (since it's a
> >CMS)...
> >
> >
> you're right
>
> >Parser.php would be the best place to start looking. There is some
> >internal (development) documentation available at
> >http://wikipedia.sourceforge.net/doc, but I don't know how up-to-date
> >or suitable it is.
> >
> >
> thanks, I'm going to look at this. I suppose this file will not change
> too much in the future. Isn't it ?
>
> Jean lamy
>
> >
> >Rob Church
> >
> >On 10/01/06, Jean Lamy <jean.lamy at revues.org> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Hi,
> >>
> >>I was wondering if it was possible to use the mediawiki engine in an
> >>external project.
> >>
> >>My goal is to use the mediawiki engine (only the engine, not all the
> >>mediawiki application) in Lodel (http://www.lodel.org, french CMS) to
> >>interpret the WiKi language.
> >>And if possible, allowing the use off all extension to MediaWiki.
> >>
> >>Is there any documentation on this ? Is is possible ?
> >>
> >>Sincerely
> >>
> >>Jean Lamy.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>_______________________________________________
> >>Wikitech-l mailing list
> >>Wikitech-l at wikimedia.org
> >>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >_______________________________________________
> >Wikitech-l mailing list
> >Wikitech-l at wikimedia.org
> >http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
> >
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>


from_name: John Lee

subject: [WikiEN-l] userbox : insanity ?

body:
Anthony DiPierro wrote:

>On 1/10/06, Anthony DiPierro <wikilegal at inbox.org> wrote:
>
>
>>On 1/10/06, John Lee <johnleemk at gawab.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Peter Mackay wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>><snip>
>>>>
>>>>If people are using Wikipedia to play rather than build an encyclopaedia,
>>>>then they should be encouraged in this primary objective, not castigated for
>>>>extraneous activies, because for every frivolous userbox, I dare say if I
>>>>went looking, I could find some other piece of useless guff on the user
>>>>pages of experienced editors. Let people play, if it does no harm and they
>>>>are participating in community activities, but also encourage them to be
>>>>more productive.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>The difference is experienced users tend to contribute to article space
>>>as well. Many userbox fanatics make minimal or no edits to articles. (Of
>>>course, most people with userboxes aren't fanatics; I have quite a few
>>>userboxes myself. But there are a few rogue bunch out there who seem
>>>more intent on userboxes than building an encyclopedia.)
>>>
>>>
>>Take a look at the edits of [[User:Jimbo Wales]] and [[User:Anthere]].
>> There are productive things to do other than edit articles.  (This is
>>not at all to knock their contributions, it is instead to knock the
>>notion that article count means everything).
>>
>>
>>
>Or [[User:Kelly Martin]].  I count one article edit in the last 500,
>though I might have missed a few.
>
>Deleting userboxes is as productive toward the goal of creating an
>encyclopedia as creating them.
>
>
These people have assumed duties that aid the process of building an
encyclopedia which do not (directly, at least) involve article editing.
A new user (and pretty much everyone who isn't on the Board, Medcom,
Arbcom, etc.) does not have such responsibilities. The only way they/we
can help out will almost certainly involve article editing (stub
sorting, AfD/speedy tagging, etc.). Even some niche tasks (like
preparing spoken articles or uploading images) involve some article editing.

John Lee
([[User:Johnleemk]])


body:
On 1/10/06, Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote:
> geni wrote:
>
> >On 1/10/06, Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>I was under the impression that the fundraising objectives for the
> >>quarter were achieved.  What becomes tacky is continuing to post these
> >>notices (including Jimbo's appeal letter) after the objectives have been
> >>reached and the pre-determined fundraising period has ended.  If someone
> >>miscalculated the needs, they should be adjusted next time around.
> >>
> >>Ec
> >>
> >>
> >See:
> >
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki_talk:Sitenotice
> >
> I wasn't looking for techniques for removing the banner.  I've learned
> to ignore it.  Tackiness is not just a matter of how it impresses me
> personally.
>
> Ec
>

I was suggesting that as a venue to complain.

--
geni


from_name: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason

subject: [WikiEN-l] The top users of userboxes

body:
Seeing as this userbox discussion is all the rave around here I
thought I'd do a little project based on them, so here it is, an RSS
feed on zedler updated every 24hrs that lists the top 50 users of
userboxes:

http://tools.wikimedia.de/~avar/cgi-bin/userbox_feed


from_name: Erdal Ronahi

body:
Hi,

I am one of the admins in the Kurdish Wikipedia. We have just noted, that
the name of our language in the "other languages:" colunm (interwiki) has
changed from the Roman to the Arabic script, from "kurd?" to "?????". We
were very surprised about that. What is the reason for the change?

Kurdish is written in both scripts, that's a fact, and we are trying to run
the Wikipedia with both alphabets - Roman and Arabic. We want to have all
alphabets and all dialects in one Wikipedia. Noone so far has proposed to
split the Wiki.

But as a matter of fact, 99% of the Kurdish Wikipedia is writen in the Roman
(Latin) Alphabet. In Roman script, the name of Kurdish is "kurd?". This was
also the case in all interwiki links. The portal www.wikipedia.org is so
kind to use both scripts (look under 100+).

We would be happy with both scripts in the interlinks or with Latin, as it
is used anywhere in the Kurdish speakin areas. But ONLY the arabic script
makes it very hard to recognize for probably the majority of Kurds (and
people worldwide).

So could it please be changed back?

Thanks,
Erdal


from_name: Dejan Cabrilo

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Serbo-Croatian wikipedia

body:
> On 1/8/06, Dejan Cabrilo <dcabrilo at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Not that big of a deal, but still, everybody thinks that it's OK to
> > post the Holy Bible on Wikipedia.
>
> You are lying again.

Milos, you first said that nobody tagged POV articles as such, and
that I should've. We concluded that I did. Now you are saying that I
didn't attempt to improve them, but did tag them. I did try to improve
some, but I was constantly reverted and even rolled back by some
admins (I can look into those). So, don't tell me I am not saying
truth again, please.

This is not about Serbian Wikipedia per se. I am just saying that we
should be happy that we have people of different religions and
ethnicites who can contribute to same Wikipedia, and that it's only a
positive thing.

> Serbian, Croatian and Bosnian adjectives mean a language, not a
> nation. And it seems that you have a lot of Serbian, Croatian and
> Bosnian ethnicities and cultures. For you, they are "anti-civilized",
> they are "regressive", they are... This is a clear fascism.

Please, please, please, don't call me a fascist or a nationalist of
any kind. It's kind of a personal attack, the way I feel it. I don't
feel Serbian, Croatian or Bosnian, but I don't feel Yugoslavian
either. Nationality is not important for me, but call me whatever you
like. I do claim I, myself and perhaps nobody else, speak
Serbo-Croatian, but it's not about the name of the language, it's
about the encyclopedia.

I really can't reply to your accusations right now. I hope you
understand how much it hurts me that anyone calls me fascist, but I
never called different ethinicites and cultures "anti-civilized" or
"regressive". I just said that we should all attempt at working
together. If you want to join it, good. I am sure... no, I KNOW, that
you and everybody else can perfectly well communicate to Bosnians and
Croats, and we should use that as much as we can. After all, it's
about creating an encyclopedia, not about building a community.

It doesn't matter if our edition is called Serbo-Croatian, or
Neo-Shtokavian, or "our language". It's about not being country, or
ethno-centric, but information centric.

Dejan


subject: [WikiEN-l] The top users of userboxes

body:
On 1/10/06, Kirill Lokshin <kirill.lokshin at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 1/10/06, ?var Arnfj?r? Bjarmason <avarab at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Seeing as this userbox discussion is all the rave around here I
> > thought I'd do a little project based on them, so here it is, an RSS
> > feed on zedler updated every 24hrs that lists the top 50 users of
> > userboxes:
> >
> > http://tools.wikimedia.de/~avar/cgi-bin/userbox_feed
>
> There seem to be some names repeated, since user subpages are
> apparently counted as a separate occurrence.

<description>
The top 50 user pages on the English Wikipedia ordered in descending
order by the number of userbox templates they have,  and then by the
page title.
</description>

Someone reported that already, it was easier to just make it a feature
than fixing it;)


from_name: Ilya N.

subject: [Wikipedia-l] AOLday is here

body:
finally...cause "we make the internet not suck"* and AOL screws up the
internet for the little guy :)

*Jimmy Wales

On 1/10/06, Neil Harris <usenet at tonal.clara.co.uk> wrote:
>
> Wikipedia's one-day Alexa traffic rank has now surpassed that of AOL;
> and there seems to be no end to the growth rate.
>
> -- Neil
>
>
> http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?&range=6m&size=large&compare_sites=aol.com&y=t&url=www.wikipedia.org
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>

--
~Ilya N.
http://w3stuff.com/ilya/ (My website; DarkLordFoxx Media)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Ilyanep (on Wikipedia)


subject: [WikiEN-l] userbox : insanity ?

body:
> From: wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org
> [mailto:wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org] On Behalf Of Anthony DiPierro
>
> Take a look at the edits of [[User:Jimbo Wales]] and [[User:Anthere]].
>  There are productive things to do other than edit articles.
> (This is not at all to knock their contributions, it is
> instead to knock the notion that article count means everything).

Mmm, but if new editors got stuck into the same sorts of activity as Jimbo,
my eyebrows would assume the shape of the Golden Arches.

Peter (Skyring)


subject: [WikiEN-l] userbox : insanity ?

body:
Anthony DiPierro wrote:

>On 1/10/06, John Lee <johnleemk at gawab.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Anthony DiPierro wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Or [[User:Kelly Martin]].  I count one article edit in the last 500,
>>>though I might have missed a few.
>>>
>>>Deleting userboxes is as productive toward the goal of creating an
>>>encyclopedia as creating them.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>These people have assumed duties that aid the process of building an
>>encyclopedia which do not (directly, at least) involve article editing.
>>A new user (and pretty much everyone who isn't on the Board, Medcom,
>>Arbcom, etc.) does not have such responsibilities. The only way they/we
>>can help out will almost certainly involve article editing (stub
>>sorting, AfD/speedy tagging, etc.). Even some niche tasks (like
>>preparing spoken articles or uploading images) involve some article editing.
>>
>>John Lee
>>([[User:Johnleemk]])
>>
>>
>
>So, it's bad to not make many article edits.  And the response to my
>comment that there are board members and arbcom members who don't make
>many article edits is that it's OK, because they're board members and
>arbcom members?
>
>I'm sorry, but that seems circular to me.  I think there are lots of
>ways to improve Wikipedia which don't involve any article editing, and
>most of them don't involve admin powers either.
>
><snip>
>
>Anthony
>
>
I don't consider it circular reasoning. These people have gained the
trust of the community to perform certain tasks that ordinary/new
editors may not (at least without getting in hot soup). They are
building the encyclopedia, too. I don't care if they create a billion
userboxes (provided this doesn't overload the servers), as long as they
continue helping out to build the encyclopedia. Article editing is but
one metric for measuring this enyclopedia-building quotient, but it
generally applies to all editors unless they have other duties that do
not involve article editing but do involve encyclopedia-building. And if
you can think of ways to build an encyclopedia without editing or
gaining the trust of the community, please, do share.

John Lee
([[User:Johnleemk]])


from_name: Jens Frank

subject: [Wikitech-l] Installation of ten new apaches - status

body:
Hello,

the installation of the ten new apaches currently suffers from some Fedora
Core 4 bugs.

srv80 hangs because the yum update of the diskdumptuils fails due to
incompatible changes in a patch.

The effect is described here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=170098

Srv79 is unreachable because a
  yum update kernel kernel-smp kernel-smp-devel; reboot
didn't return. No ping response any more from srv79.

Regards,

jens

--
Telefonieren Sie schon oder sparen Sie noch?
NEU: GMX Phone_Flat http://www.gmx.net/de/go/telefonie


subject: [WikiEN-l] kelvSYC's take on userboxes

body:
On 1/11/06, kelvSYC <kelvSYC at shaw.ca> wrote:
> * Is there a way to appeal to copyright holders to allow their fair
> use images in spaces other than the main space?  Conversely, is there
> a mechanism for holders to declare that certain images are
> permissible in spaces other than the main space?  I ask as I am aware
> of the fair use thing, and while I think that it sucks (for stylistic
> reasons), it is necessary and something we all have to live with.

1.Yes if they release it under GFDL or CC (or PD)
2.Yes if they release it under GFDL or CC (or PD). with premission is
not acceptable

> * Some userboxes are humorous in nature ({{user ubx-5}} is an
> example), and they should be deleted for the greater image of
> userboxing (Did I say anything that remotely make sense?).  I don't
> particularly care if someone is a native speaker of bullshit ({{User
> en-B-N}}), 1337 ({{User 1337-N}}) or gibberish ({{User gb-N}}).  They
> can all go to the bit bucket.

133t 534|<3r'5 have thier uses.

> * Please, for the love of <insert religious figure here>, delete
> redundant crap userboxes like {{User Earthling}}.
> * Some userboxes are irrelevant to the nature of Wikipedia.  I don't
> care whether someone's favorite color is yellow ({{User yellow}}) or
> not.  It doesn't help me work with other Wikipedia contributors in
> making better articles.  They should be deleted.

Doesn't really hinder you either.

> * However, userboxes may be good for building communities.  We should
> keep all of them that are "good" in nature, like the Babel ones, ones
> that split users by location, ones that denote RC patrol, admins, the
> ones that denote expertise in academic fields, etc.

List user tell you who the admins are.

> * The userbox fad, if left unchecked, may infect other stuff too...
> such as a userbox for "this IP is blocked", "this user is blocked",
> "this user has requested that the page be protected from movement", etc.
>

{{subst:test5}}?

--
geni


subject: [WikiEN-l] The top users of userboxes

body:
Kirill Lokshin wrote:

>On 1/10/06, ?var Arnfj?r? Bjarmason <avarab at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Seeing as this userbox discussion is all the rave around here I
>>thought I'd do a little project based on them, so here it is, an RSS
>>feed on zedler updated every 24hrs that lists the top 50 users of
>>userboxes:
>>
>>http://tools.wikimedia.de/~avar/cgi-bin/userbox_feed
>>
>>
>
>There seem to be some names repeated, since user subpages are
>apparently counted as a separate occurrence.
>
>And now, the meaningless statistic of the day: according to my utterly
>unscientific perusal of [[WP:LA]], there are four admins on that list
>right now ;-)
>
>Kirill Lokshin
>
>
Plus one non-admin developer who most probably won't mind if I note this
here. ;)

grm_wnr


from_name: Brian

subject:
[Wikitech-l] MediaWiki 1.5.5 (^1.5.3) w/ PHP 4.4.1 & MySQL 4.1
	blank page on load

body:
I recently moved my MediaWiki 1.5.3 database from a MySQL 4.0 server to a MySQL
4.1 server.  OLDPASSWORDS is enabled, and PHP 4.4.1 is using the newest MySQL
libraries.  I am concurrently running a Simple Machines Forum (which works
flawlessly, showing that there is no problem with password hashing on MySQL 4.1)

After transfering to MySQL 4.1, all pages are returned blank
(<html><body></body></html) after an excessively long load time.  I've tried
upgrading to 1.5.5, and even running a fresh install of 1.5.5, all to no avail.
 During the install, the 'Initialising "MediaWiki" namespace' step takes
excessively long.

I have no access to my PHP error logs, because my host (servage.net) is about as
poor as they come when it deals with customer service.

Any help on this issue would be GREATLY appreciated.


from_name: Anthony DiPierro

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: userbox : insanity ?

body:
On 1/11/06, Phil Boswell <phil.boswell at gmail.com> wrote:
> "Anthony DiPierro" <wikilegal at inbox.org> wrote
> in message
> news:71cd4dd90601101110n590dc1c4j45a6d17d6a112da8 at mail.gmail.com...
> On 1/10/06, Chris Jenkinson <chris at starglade.org>
> wrote:
> > Anthony DiPierro wrote:
> [snip]
> > > You're running an *open* proxy? Open proxies are typically used for DDOS
> > > attack and suchlike. It's a really unwise idea to run an open proxy. I'm
> > > surprised that you haven't already been blacklisted by a number of those
> > > DNS database things.
> > Yes, I'm running an open proxy, specifically a proxy which anonymizes
> > http connections.  See http://tor.eff.org/.
>
> That's not an http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_proxy, that's an
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onion_Router which is an entirely different
> beast.
>
I suppose you'll excuse my confusion which is based on the fact that
Tor exit node IP addresses are regularly blocked as open proxies :).

Thanks for the clarification,
Anthony


subject: [WikiEN-l] Userbox reframing?

body:
On 1/11/06, Tony Sidaway <f.crdfa at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 1/10/06, Haukur ?orgeirsson <haukurth at hi.is> wrote:
> > when it looks like the Wikimedia
> > foundation is encouraging people to hold over-simplified views on
> > complicated issues like, say, EU-enlargement, then that is not such a good
> > thing.
> >
> > Thoughts?
>
> Absolutely.  This is a "What Wikipedia is not" issue.  Wikipedia is in
> danger of becoming known more for bumper sticker culture full of
> simplistic political slogans than for its encyclopedie, which *used*
> to be (I recall sometime back before December) about producing an
> encyclopedia of which one of the most persistent policy points was its
> *neutral* point of view.
>
> How can we build a neutral encyclopedia while providing common
> resources to enable the wide propagation of such rabid political
> statements as "Love my Country ?Fear my Government" (with  wikilinks
> to the articles on patriotism and neo-nazism) and "This user trusts
> the EU (an over-powerful, non-democratic bureaucracy) about as far as
> they can throw it"?
>

How isn't so important if it's already happening.  Do you think
Wikipedia has stopped building a neutral encyclopedia?


from_name: Rob Smith

subject: [WikiEN-l] How to bring back people who don't want to bother?

body:
Take from a user victimized by the concerted efforts of sockpuppet trolls
given licence to run rampant throughout Wikipedia: Reputation is everything.

Nobs01

On 1/11/06, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:

> " that's part of our public image now."


from_name: Ray Saintonge

subject: [WikiEN-l] Book: Producing Open Source Software

body:
geni wrote:

>On 1/11/06, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>On 1/11/06, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>    http://www.producingoss.com/
>>>
>>>It's mostlly about how to run a *big* open project. Not so much about
>>>technical infrastructure, but about how to interact with people.
>>>
>>>Have a read. It'll give you a lot of good ideas we can apply to Wikipedia.
>>>
>>>
>>>- d.
>>>
>>>
>>1). don't expect people to read stuff that has a contents page more
>>than one screen long.
>>
>>
>ok more seriously
>
>Avoid Private Discussions- someone needs to tell the board this.
>
>
This is informative.  Those who don't have the attention span to read a
content page more than one screen long now believet that asking someone
to read a book is tantamount to engaging in a private discussion.
Beware the cabal of book readers. :-)

Ec


from_name: Phil Boswell

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Re: userbox : insanity ?

body:
"Sam Korn" <smoddy at gmail.com> wrote in message
news:cbffa3750601071337y2067195cr19ec7cb8083c6330 at mail.gmail.com...
On 1/7/06, Bryan Derksen <bryan.derksen at shaw.ca> wrote:
[snip]
> > On the other hand, if it later turns out that a template like this
> > _does_ need changing, it'll be a lot harder to fix everything if it's
> > been substed everywhere.
> I think most shorthand templates should be substituted for another
> reason as well as the technical side (although this is a risk even
> with the best-intentioned admins).  Most templates are useful because
> they are fluid -- changes can be made on one page to affect a hundred
> related articles.  That is excellent, and a good use of templates.
> However, shorthand templates aren't intended for that.  They are
> intended to give a small bit of text quickly.  The writer doesn't
> expect their text to change later.

But the provision is there: if at some time there comes a better method for
linking to templates like that, it would be possible to seek out all the
instances of {{tl}} and update them.

Alternatively, if the new solution is that mind-numbingly good, we could
simply take a 10-minute hit on the servers, as when {{if}} was peremptorily
splatted, and business can then proceed as usual.

Premature optimisation is not good, as any good programmer will tell you.
This is why loops are unrolled by compilers, which allow you to write nice
things like "for each I in list; do stuff; next I" and then optimise the
code behind the scenes.

I would assume that novice users, when presented with a choice between
something like "{{tl|some template}}" or "&#7B;&#7B;[[Template:Some
template]]&#7D;&#7D;", would much rather the former, which actually explains
what the fsck it's doing (it's a *t*emplate *l*ink, nudge, nudge), and might
even get some understanding of what this transclusion lark is all about.

If we could persuade a friendly developer to take a look at the transclusion
code, I think there must be huge potential for optimisation. Apparently
there's some cruft in there which treats each different invocation of any
given template as a *totally separate template*. So if you have {{tl|one
template}} and {{tl|another template}}, the code fetches {{tl}} TWICE, which
is fairly daft.

Heck, this is the sort of thing I might be able to take a punt at;
unfortunately my access is through an office firewall and downloading
Mediawiki onto this workstation just wouldn't be politic. With a bit of luck
I should be getting broadband at home some time soon and then I can put my
code where my mouth is.

In the meantime, I would rather that the template-deletionists could simply
take a chill pill and stop causing ForestFires all over the damn place.

</rant style = sorry !>
--
Phil
[[en:User:Phil Boswell]]


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: How to bring back people who don't want to bother?

body:
Enduring six months of personal attacks, responding to it once during an
ArbCom Hearing, and being banned for a year, while those who trashed me and
smeared me as being "banned for personal attacks" are given license to do it
again. This why the image and reputation of Wikipedia, and the image and
reputation of editors contributing in good faith is everything.

nobs

On 1/11/06, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Nobs01 wrote:
>
> >Take it from a user victimized by the concerted efforts of sockpuppet
> trolls
> >given licence to run rampant throughout Wikipedia: Reputation is
> everything.
>
>
> You were banned for personal attacks and placed on probation after
> that for disruption:
>
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Nobs01_and_others#Nobs01_banned_for_personal_attacks
>
> Oddly enough, cases like yours are not what I was talking about.
>
>
> - d.
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: Puzzlet Chung

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Edited (duplicated) source goes to Wikisource?

body:
I know it's kind of off-topic, but I'm writing because I couldn't find
Wikisource mailing list.

There is a collection of official Korean transliteration rules,
published by South Korean government over years and counting, under
public domain. I'm converting them to fit in wiki syntax, but here is
the problem: As well as the orginal source, which is sorted by
chronogical order, I want to rearrange the documents so that the
readers would find them more convenient.

This way the sources would be useful, some Wikipedians including me
would need that -- but I worry that it would make more difficult to
maintain them when more rules are annouced in the future. And I wonder
how this could be handled by the Wikisource's policy.

Have there been any similar case in English Wikisource?

Puzzlet Chung


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: userbox : insanity ?

body:
"Anthony DiPierro" <wikilegal at inbox.org> wrote
in message
news:71cd4dd90601101110n590dc1c4j45a6d17d6a112da8 at mail.gmail.com...
On 1/10/06, Chris Jenkinson <chris at starglade.org>
wrote:
> Anthony DiPierro wrote:
[snip]
> > You're running an *open* proxy? Open proxies are typically used for DDOS
> > attack and suchlike. It's a really unwise idea to run an open proxy. I'm
> > surprised that you haven't already been blacklisted by a number of those
> > DNS database things.
> Yes, I'm running an open proxy, specifically a proxy which anonymizes
> http connections.  See http://tor.eff.org/.

That's not an http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_proxy, that's an
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onion_Router which is an entirely different
beast.

> The fact that Wikipedia would block someone's *user account* because
> they have at one point run such a proxy makes pretty much zero sense.

An Onion Router, yes. An Open Proxy: nuke them until they glow and then blow
them away in the dark.

An Open Proxy is what those viruses and worms are trying to make your
machine into: see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Botnet.

HTH HAND
--
Phil
[[en:User:Phil Boswell]]


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Nobs

body:
Responding to the bait: My contributions are 99%+ of historic nature.  Any
Arbitrator (or anyone) who has read Discussion pages I've participated can
see for themselves there is an intense focus on the substance of the
article, and distinct lack of response to persistent personal attacks.  I am
a firm believer in civility particularly in controversial discussions.  Am I
guilty of a breaching experiment, and a one time error in judgement
during my first visit to Arbitration?  Yes.

nobs

On 1/11/06, Snowspinner <Snowspinner at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Splitting the subject off of the sensible discussion that's going on...
>
> "responding to it once during an arbcom hearing" is an interesting
> way to describe using your entire user page as a sustained personal
> attack. And what narrow specialist subject do you consider yourself
> an expert on again? Political hatchet jobs?
>
> -Snowspinner
>
> On Jan 11, 2006, at 11:05 AM, Rob Smith wrote:
>
> > Enduring six months of personal attacks, responding to it once
> > during an
> > ArbCom Hearing, and being banned for a year, while those who
> > trashed me and
> > smeared me as being "banned for personal attacks" are given license
> > to do it
> > again. This why the image and reputation of Wikipedia, and the
> > image and
> > reputation of editors contributing in good faith is everything.
> >
> > nobs
> >
> >
> > On 1/11/06, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Nobs01 wrote:
> >>
> >>> Take it from a user victimized by the concerted efforts of
> >>> sockpuppet
> >> trolls
> >>> given licence to run rampant throughout Wikipedia: Reputation is
> >> everything.
> >>
> >>
> >> You were banned for personal attacks and placed on probation after
> >> that for disruption:
> >>
> >>
> >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/
> >> Nobs01_and_others#Nobs01_banned_for_personal_attacks
> >>
> >> Oddly enough, cases like yours are not what I was talking about.
> >>
> >>
> >> - d.
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> WikiEN-l mailing list
> >> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> >> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> >> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: Mason Patrick E SSgt 28 MUNS/MXWKB

subject: [WikiEN-l] RE: WikiEN-l Digest, Vol 30, Issue 100

body:
I am going to have to agree with the doll people about the current state of wiki... in fact when I have made my three months and 1000 edits and I become an admin, I will be an admin for the little people... why bother with all of the political crap... if it seems like someone is abusing their power, I will do everything in my power to stop it all the while giving the little people like the doll specialists a fair shake.

-----Original Message-----
From: wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org [mailto:wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org] On Behalf Of wikien-l-request at Wikipedia.org
Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2006 9:14 AM
To: wikien-l at Wikipedia.org
Subject: WikiEN-l Digest, Vol 30, Issue 100

Send WikiEN-l mailing list submissions to
	wikien-l at Wikipedia.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
	http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
	wikien-l-request at Wikipedia.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
	wikien-l-owner at Wikipedia.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of WikiEN-l digest..."

Today's Topics:

   1. Re: How to bring back people who don't want to bother? (Rob Smith)
   2. Re: How to bring back people who don't want to bother?
      (David Gerard)
   3. Re: How to bring back people who don't want to bother?
      (David Gerard)
   4. IP Blocks (Jason Gazeley)
   5. Re: How to bring back people who don't want to bother?
      (Arkady Rose)
   6. Re: Re: How to bring back people who don't want to bother?
      (Rob Smith)
   7. static html dump script for wikipedia (Mikko Virtaperko)
   8. Re: How to bring back people who don't want to bother?
      (Snowspinner)
   9. Re: IP Blocks (David Gerard)
  10. Re: How to bring back people who don't want to bother? (geni)
  11. Re: Fwd: 6 Free Offers - Clearance - Extended until 31st
      January (David Gerard)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 08:28:59 -0700
From: Rob Smith <nobs03 at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] How to bring back people who don't want to
	bother?
To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at wikipedia.org>
Message-ID:
	<52a8cf060601110728l1529e852s5e8b09de63d807e4 at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Take from a user victimized by the concerted efforts of sockpuppet trolls
given licence to run rampant throughout Wikipedia: Reputation is everything.

Nobs01

On 1/11/06, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:

> " that's part of our public image now."

------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 15:43:45 +0000
From: David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com>
Subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: How to bring back people who don't want to
	bother?
To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at wikipedia.org>, Jimmy Wales
	<jwales at wikia.com>
Cc: Arkady Rose <arkady.rose at gmail.com>
Message-ID:
	<fbad4e140601110743j19081ae9v6d19a37bb37c4314 at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Justin Cormack wrote:

>There are other reasons to create non wikipedia wikis too.

Yes, but in this case it's essentially the same sort of thing as a
specialist area in Wikipedia - they're specifically not wanting to
bother because AFD is *officially* an ignorantocracy now.

>Encourage them to use a compatible license, and encourage them
>to use commons for media.

At least the first, certainly!

>Whats the field?

Doll collectors, as I said. Significant hobby economically, these
things go for hundreds and sometimes thousands of dollars ... see
http://www.denofangels.com/ and [[Super Dollfie]] (one of the most
popular examples).

You can argue that Wikipedia can live without them. And of course it
can. But having a (deserved IMO) reputation for stupidity making
people from specialist fields not even want to bother with Wikipedia
is surely NOT a good thing for us. At all.

- d.

------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 15:48:28 +0000
From: David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com>
Subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: How to bring back people who don't want to
	bother?
To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at wikipedia.org>
Message-ID:
	<fbad4e140601110748wae3f3d5gc72d1e6ef6b42aed at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Nobs01 wrote:

>Take from a user victimized by the concerted efforts of sockpuppet trolls
>given licence to run rampant throughout Wikipedia: Reputation is everything.

You were banned for personal attacks and placed on probation after
that for disruption:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Nobs01_and_others#Nobs01_banned_for_personal_attacks

Oddly enough, cases like yours are not what I was talking about.

- d.

------------------------------

Message: 4
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 15:01:36 +0000
From: "Jason Gazeley" <burwellian at hotmail.co.uk>
Subject: [WikiEN-l] IP Blocks
To: wikien-l at Wikipedia.org
Message-ID: <BAY15-F33E3235B548DB109BDCB183240 at phx.gbl>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed

Is there any way to block IP's yet allow logged in users to edit from that
IP? My college's IP got blocked this morning due to Vandalism. I was just
about to revert some other vandalism at lunch when I got the blocked notice.

Checking the IP's edit history, a couple of the vandalism edits have still
not been reverted. The pages on "Proponent" and "United States Department
for Transportation" are still vandalised but being blocked I can not revert.

Thanks

Burwellian

_________________________________________________________________
Are you using the latest version of MSN Messenger? Download MSN Messenger
7.5 today! http://messenger.msn.co.uk

------------------------------

Message: 5
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 16:02:01 +0000
From: Arkady Rose <arkady.rose at gmail.com>
Subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: How to bring back people who don't want to
	bother?
To: David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com>
Cc: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at wikipedia.org>
Message-ID: <43C52BF9.5020500 at gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

David Gerard wrote:

>>Whats the field?
>>
>>
>
>
>Doll collectors, as I said. Significant hobby economically, these
>things go for hundreds and sometimes thousands of dollars ... see
>http://www.denofangels.com/ and [[Super Dollfie]] (one of the most
>popular examples).
>
>
Specifically, Asian Ball-Jointed Dolls, as opposed to porcelain or any
other types of dolls. They have only been around about 10 years, but
already they have gained so rapidly in popularity that a recent example
of a limited-edition doll sold on eBay for $5100.

The sort of information likely to be put into an ABJD wiki is going to
be histories of the companies producing the dolls, details of all the
different resin types and head molds produced, details of the most
widely-acclaimed face-up artists (people who paint the faces) and
customisers, and sections with how-tos on customisation and modding etc.
- not the sort of thing for Wikipedia, perhaps. But the fact remains
that basically the doll community has seen how specialists in other
fields have been treated by the rabid AfD morons who assume that because
*they've* not heard of something it must be not noteable and promptly
delete, and quite frankly they fail to see why they should even bother
touching the doll-related articles in WP when instead they can just
create their own wiki, free of the current poisonous WP politics and
petty instruction-creep that at present seems, quite frankly, endemic
throughout WP at present and incidentally is the main reason I've pretty
much gone on indefinite hiatus from both editing and from wikien-l
personally.

-a

------------------------------

Message: 6
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 09:05:29 -0700
From: Rob Smith <nobs03 at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Re: How to bring back people who don't want to
	bother?
To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at wikipedia.org>
Message-ID: <52a8cf060601110805if617c13m54f468bb40b81e at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Enduring six months of personal attacks, responding to it once during an
ArbCom Hearing, and being banned for a year, while those who trashed me and
smeared me as being "banned for personal attacks" are given license to do it
again. This why the image and reputation of Wikipedia, and the image and
reputation of editors contributing in good faith is everything.

nobs

On 1/11/06, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Nobs01 wrote:
>
> >Take it from a user victimized by the concerted efforts of sockpuppet
> trolls
> >given licence to run rampant throughout Wikipedia: Reputation is
> everything.
>
>
> You were banned for personal attacks and placed on probation after
> that for disruption:
>
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Nobs01_and_others#Nobs01_banned_for_personal_attacks
>
> Oddly enough, cases like yours are not what I was talking about.
>
>
> - d.
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

------------------------------

Message: 7
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 10:39:55 +0200
From: Mikko Virtaperko <mikko at virtaperko.fi>
Subject: [WikiEN-l] static html dump script for wikipedia
To: wikien-l at wikipedia.org
Message-ID: <43C4C45B.9010301 at virtaperko.fi>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed

Hi, I wrote PHP script to dump Wikipedia:

http://mvp.jesusterror.com/wiki.html

It will create static html from defined number of Wikipedia pages. NOTE:
You must have Wikipedia installed locally to do this.

If anyone is interested I'm happy to answer any questions or improve the
program.

Mikko Virtaperko
mikko ?t virtaperko fi

------------------------------

Message: 8
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 11:08:18 -0500
From: Snowspinner <Snowspinner at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] How to bring back people who don't want to
	bother?
To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
Message-ID: <722597B2-06F0-49CC-A46F-1535AD80F1CA at gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed

I think a very good first step would be to find a specialist wiki or
two that are GFDL (Whether forks like Comixpedia or not) and copy
them in. It shows humility, improves our project, and directly
addresses the issue.

I'd say Memory Alpha, but they're CC. Comixpedia would be too
controversial right now, this doll
wiki is too new. Any other ideas?

-Phil

On Jan 11, 2006, at 9:57 AM, David Gerard wrote:

> There's a specialist topic that's about to create its own wiki. In
> discussion on a board, one person said "Why not just use Wikipedia?
> What you're describing is identical." Another responded with: "No,
> some 15 year old moron will mark it for deletion just because they
> know nothing about it."
>
> So that's part of our public image now. Well done alienating webcomics
> authors, i.e. creators of memes and popular culture on the net.
>
> Not to mention the way the webcomics AC case ended: AFD trolls now
> have the all-clear to work actively to alienate actual experts,
> because the self-professed ignorant are now *officially* to be
> considered equal to those who have an actual bloody clue.
>
> I was amazed knowledge of it had spread so far. Jimbo, you heard about
> this example at the recent UK Wikimedia meet (the doll collectors) -
> this was actually an independent example from the same field.
>
> Experts from fields that actually haven't been alienated literally
> don't think it's worth bothering to try writing in Wikipedia any more.
> Is there anything we can do to rehabilitate Wikipedia's image in the
> outside world?
>
> (yes, geni, I know you're happy to be rid of annoying specialist
> experts)
>
>
> - d.
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

------------------------------

Message: 9
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 16:09:56 +0000
From: David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] IP Blocks
To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at wikipedia.org>,
	burwellian at hotmail.co.uk
Message-ID:
	<fbad4e140601110809x39769ee5i12fda2c9d36f2e7b at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Jason Gazeley wrote:

>Is there any way to block IP's yet allow logged in users to edit from that
>IP? My college's IP got blocked this morning due to Vandalism. I was just
>about to revert some other vandalism at lunch when I got the blocked notice.

MediaWiki bug 550:

    http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=550

At present it's got a few suggested patches, it's working out what's
the best one to implement in terms of its social effects.

(cc to wikitech-l - what's the current developers' view on a good
solution to 550? Are we anywhere near having one implemented?)

As for the block itself, that's obviously collateral damage, and if
you can tell us the IP it should be promptly unblocked. What was the
text of the block message?

- d.

------------------------------

Message: 10
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 16:10:06 +0000
From: geni <geniice at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] How to bring back people who don't want to
	bother?
To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at wikipedia.org>
Message-ID:
	<f80608430601110810s375fd077k3421b7cb72a88c91 at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On 1/11/06, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
> There's a specialist topic that's about to create its own wiki. In
> discussion on a board, one person said "Why not just use Wikipedia?
> What you're describing is identical." Another responded with: "No,
> some 15 year old moron will mark it for deletion just because they
> know nothing about it."
>

Unlikely. The problem is the people who do know a little about it.
People don't tend to delete the maths stuff because they don't
understand it at all. People do understand webcomics a little with the
result that they feel they know enough to list them on afd.

> So that's part of our public image now. Well done alienating webcomics
> authors, i.e. creators of memes and popular culture on the net.
>

Evidence that there is in fact a link here? Generaly if you look at
the spred of info about wikipedia across weforums webcomic are not
mentioned.

> Not to mention the way the webcomics AC case ended: AFD trolls now
> have the all-clear to work actively to alienate actual experts,
> because the self-professed ignorant are now *officially* to be
> considered equal to those who have an actual bloody clue.
>
> I was amazed knowledge of it had spread so far. Jimbo, you heard about
> this example at the recent UK Wikimedia meet (the doll collectors) -
> this was actually an independent example from the same field.
>

Why? Pretty much any forum on the web you go to has at least one
thread on wikipedia these days. We can't hide stuff any more.

> Experts from fields that actually haven't been alienated literally
> don't think it's worth bothering to try writing in Wikipedia any more.
> Is there anything we can do to rehabilitate Wikipedia's image in the
> outside world?

Without changeing it's fundimental structure? Not really. If you are
going to write about areas of popular culture there are going to be
other people around and they are sometimes going to dissagree with
you.

> (yes, geni, I know you're happy to be rid of annoying specialist experts)

No I'd accept them also decideing not be anoying.

--
geni

------------------------------

Message: 11
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 16:14:02 +0000
From: David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com>
Subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Fwd: 6 Free Offers - Clearance - Extended
	until 31st	January
To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at wikipedia.org>, Jimmy Wales
	<jwales at wikia.com>
Cc: Arkady Rose <arkady.rose at gmail.com>
Message-ID:
	<fbad4e140601110814v7aa76150p7e7a06dc791513dd at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

I asked Arkady if there was a public link to the discussion. She said:

> You have to be a member of DoA to read most of the threads, so no - it's
> not publically viewable. However from a quick glance through the
> discussion as it stands, the overwhelming consensus is "fuck WP" - only
> more polite than that. They don't want to get involved with the
> insidious bureaucracy and delete-happy morons, and frankly I don't blame
> them. They want to share their enjoyment of dolls, not get caught up in
> stupid edit-wars with Cat Piss Men.
> And you can quote me on that, too.

Note, by the way, that this field has NOT yet been through the AFD
grinder that schools and webcomics have been through - rather, they're
another group who have seen the rubbish going on there and decided
"bugger that."

Who will be next? Who will be next that we don't hear about until well
after the event?

Tell me that's not AFD culture being directly damaging to Wikipedia,
now and for the future.

The AC has resoundingly failed to deal with the issue. (And I
apologise myself for being marked away at the time.) It needs dealing
with. Who can or will do something about it that will stick?

- d.

------------------------------

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

End of WikiEN-l Digest, Vol 30, Issue 100
*****************************************


from_name: Bryan Derksen

body:
Arkady Rose wrote:

>The sort of information likely to be put into an ABJD wiki is going to
>be histories of the companies producing the dolls, details of all the
>different resin types and head molds produced, details of the most
>widely-acclaimed face-up artists (people who paint the faces) and
>customisers, and sections with how-tos on customisation and modding etc.
>- not the sort of thing for Wikipedia, perhaps.
>
Actually, although admittedly not knowing anything in particular about
the subject and having no particular interest in it, it seems to me that
all of the above with the exception of the how-tos _do_ belong on
Wikipedia. We've got plenty of articles about other companies and
artists that are just as "trivial" or "niche".

>But the fact remains
>that basically the doll community has seen how specialists in other
>fields have been treated by the rabid AfD morons who assume that because
>*they've* not heard of something it must be not noteable and promptly
>delete, and quite frankly they fail to see why they should even bother
>touching the doll-related articles in WP when instead they can just
>create their own wiki, free of the current poisonous WP politics and
>petty instruction-creep that at present seems, quite frankly, endemic
>throughout WP at present and incidentally is the main reason I've pretty
>much gone on indefinite hiatus from both editing and from wikien-l
>personally.
>
>
Hear hear (except for the hiatus part :). It's not a bad thing that
diverse and specialized wikis exist in the world, of course, but we
shouldn't be actively encouraging Wikipedia participants to split off
from the project.


from_name: Matt Brown

subject:
[WikiEN-l] Re: Fwd: 6 Free Offers - Clearance - Extended until
	31st January

body:
If I were a newer or less eloquent contributor, I'd certainly worry
that MY pet topics might get deleted, that's for certain.

I don't think that worthy articles get deleted very often at all, but
the issue is as much that occasionally, there's a big ugly fight over
something that really should not have been up for deletion at all, or
should have been speedy kept.  It's not helped that the Wikipedia
community has a circle-round-the-wagons mentality when faced with an
angry newcomer who doesn't know how things work.  We tend to
reflexively want to do things against those who come here and tell us
what to do.

There are quite a few reasons why those interested in an obscure topic
would be BETTER off at Wikipedia, though:

1. Anti-vandalism assistance.  Vandals can utterly destroy a small
wiki with automated tools.  Natural responses to such vandalism -
including making it hard to edit - effectively kill off the project
because no "new blood" gets in.
2. Writing assistance.  Even if I don't know anything about your
topic, I can help you with grammar, presentation, etc.  Wikipedia is
big enough that such help will come along.
3. No hosting worries.  If you start your own wiki, you have to host
it, you have to be sure you can pay for it, and you have to be sure
it'll stay up.  If you put your stuff on Wikipedia, it's pretty
certain to remain available.
4. Prominence and advertising.  You're much more likely to find new
contributors if you attach your project to a top 20 website.

There have to be a few more, too.  Anyone think of any?  We might want
to have a Wikipedia: page about why NOT forking is best.

-Matt


from_name: Tony Sidaway

subject: [WikiEN-l] Attack templates

body:
Following general discussion last week, I've pressed on in trying to
develop a strategy for dealing with the worst excesses of userboxes.
Focusing solely on attack templates--whose sole purpose is to
disparage their subject--I performed some test speedies yesterday.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Tony_Sidaway/Attack_speedies%2C_2006-01-10

There is considerable support for most of these deletions, but
significant resistance, and I'm not presently clear how firm that
resistance is.  Some of the templates have been restored, usually in a
somewhat toned down form.

The discussions are taking place mainly on:

Wikipedia:Deletion review:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:DRV#More_attack_templates

Wikipedia talk: Criteria for speedy deletion

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion#Attack_templates

Policy discussion is perhaps a little premature, but there does seem
to be substantial consensus that some templates at least should be
speedily deleted as attacks, perhaps by extension of an existing
criterion for speedy deletion that is currently applied largely to
articles.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Userbox reframing?

body:
On 1/10/06, Haukur ?orgeirsson <haukurth at hi.is> wrote:
> when it looks like the Wikimedia
> foundation is encouraging people to hold over-simplified views on
> complicated issues like, say, EU-enlargement, then that is not such a good
> thing.
>
> Thoughts?

Absolutely.  This is a "What Wikipedia is not" issue.  Wikipedia is in
danger of becoming known more for bumper sticker culture full of
simplistic political slogans than for its encyclopedie, which *used*
to be (I recall sometime back before December) about producing an
encyclopedia of which one of the most persistent policy points was its
*neutral* point of view.

How can we build a neutral encyclopedia while providing common
resources to enable the wide propagation of such rabid political
statements as "Love my Country ?Fear my Government" (with  wikilinks
to the articles on patriotism and neo-nazism) and "This user trusts
the EU (an over-powerful, non-democratic bureaucracy) about as far as
they can throw it"?


from_name: Kirill Lokshin

body:
On 1/11/06, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
> There's a specialist topic that's about to create its own wiki. In
> discussion on a board, one person said "Why not just use Wikipedia?
> What you're describing is identical." Another responded with: "No,
> some 15 year old moron will mark it for deletion just because they
> know nothing about it."
>
> So that's part of our public image now. Well done alienating webcomics
> authors, i.e. creators of memes and popular culture on the net.
>
> Not to mention the way the webcomics AC case ended: AFD trolls now
> have the all-clear to work actively to alienate actual experts,
> because the self-professed ignorant are now *officially* to be
> considered equal to those who have an actual bloody clue.
>
> I was amazed knowledge of it had spread so far. Jimbo, you heard about
> this example at the recent UK Wikimedia meet (the doll collectors) -
> this was actually an independent example from the same field.
>
> Experts from fields that actually haven't been alienated literally
> don't think it's worth bothering to try writing in Wikipedia any more.
> Is there anything we can do to rehabilitate Wikipedia's image in the
> outside world?
>
> (yes, geni, I know you're happy to be rid of annoying specialist experts)

This is really a process question more than an image question; all the
PR in the world won't help us if the fifteen-year-olds are still
deleting articles.

On that note, why not give more authority to WikiProjects?  We'd need
some sort of community sanity-checking process to limit it to
"legitimate" projects; but certainly some of the larger and more
organized ones (particularly those that deal with areas where
"notability" isn't a very contentious issue) could handle their own
deletion/guidelines/etc. with minimal supervision.  We already have
this for stubs, but is there some reason it wouldn't work for at least
some subject areas?

Kirill Lokshin


from_name: Mikko Virtaperko

subject: [WikiEN-l] static html dump script for wikipedia

body:
Hi, I wrote PHP script to dump Wikipedia:

http://mvp.jesusterror.com/wiki.html

It will create static html from defined number of Wikipedia pages. NOTE:
You must have Wikipedia installed locally to do this.

If anyone is interested I'm happy to answer any questions or improve the
program.

Mikko Virtaperko
mikko ?t virtaperko fi


from_name: Fred Bauder

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Nobs

body:
If it were a one time error in judgement we would have made a very
different ruling. You converted the talk page of [[Chip Berlet]] into
a sustained personal attack based on guilt by association. You then,
during the arbitration converted your user page into the same sort of
sustained personal attack based on guilt by association. Then, and
now, you continue to maintain you did absolutely nothing wrong. Which
means, to me, that we can expect to see more of the same thing the
first chance you get.

Fred

On Jan 11, 2006, at 9:27 AM, Rob Smith wrote:

> Responding to the bait: My contributions are 99%+ of historic
> nature.  Any
> Arbitrator (or anyone) who has read Discussion pages I've
> participated can
> see for themselves there is an intense focus on the substance of the
> article, and distinct lack of response to persistent personal
> attacks.  I am
> a firm believer in civility particularly in controversial
> discussions.  Am I
> guilty of a breaching experiment, and a one time error in judgement
> during my first visit to Arbitration?  Yes.
>
> nobs


from_name: Snowspinner

body:
I think a very good first step would be to find a specialist wiki or
two that are GFDL (Whether forks like Comixpedia or not) and copy
them in. It shows humility, improves our project, and directly
addresses the issue.

I'd say Memory Alpha, but they're CC. Comixpedia would be too
controversial right now, this doll
wiki is too new. Any other ideas?

-Phil

On Jan 11, 2006, at 9:57 AM, David Gerard wrote:

> There's a specialist topic that's about to create its own wiki. In
> discussion on a board, one person said "Why not just use Wikipedia?
> What you're describing is identical." Another responded with: "No,
> some 15 year old moron will mark it for deletion just because they
> know nothing about it."
>
> So that's part of our public image now. Well done alienating webcomics
> authors, i.e. creators of memes and popular culture on the net.
>
> Not to mention the way the webcomics AC case ended: AFD trolls now
> have the all-clear to work actively to alienate actual experts,
> because the self-professed ignorant are now *officially* to be
> considered equal to those who have an actual bloody clue.
>
> I was amazed knowledge of it had spread so far. Jimbo, you heard about
> this example at the recent UK Wikimedia meet (the doll collectors) -
> this was actually an independent example from the same field.
>
> Experts from fields that actually haven't been alienated literally
> don't think it's worth bothering to try writing in Wikipedia any more.
> Is there anything we can do to rehabilitate Wikipedia's image in the
> outside world?
>
> (yes, geni, I know you're happy to be rid of annoying specialist
> experts)
>
>
> - d.
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Nobs

body:
Splitting the subject off of the sensible discussion that's going on...

"responding to it once during an arbcom hearing" is an interesting
way to describe using your entire user page as a sustained personal
attack. And what narrow specialist subject do you consider yourself
an expert on again? Political hatchet jobs?

-Snowspinner

On Jan 11, 2006, at 11:05 AM, Rob Smith wrote:

> Enduring six months of personal attacks, responding to it once
> during an
> ArbCom Hearing, and being banned for a year, while those who
> trashed me and
> smeared me as being "banned for personal attacks" are given license
> to do it
> again. This why the image and reputation of Wikipedia, and the
> image and
> reputation of editors contributing in good faith is everything.
>
> nobs
>
>
> On 1/11/06, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Nobs01 wrote:
>>
>>> Take it from a user victimized by the concerted efforts of
>>> sockpuppet
>> trolls
>>> given licence to run rampant throughout Wikipedia: Reputation is
>> everything.
>>
>>
>> You were banned for personal attacks and placed on probation after
>> that for disruption:
>>
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/
>> Nobs01_and_others#Nobs01_banned_for_personal_attacks
>>
>> Oddly enough, cases like yours are not what I was talking about.
>>
>>
>> - d.
>> _______________________________________________
>> WikiEN-l mailing list
>> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
>> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Nobs

body:
As noted, I plead guilty to certain things (like cutting & pasting a section
from the Chip Berlet talk page onto my user page).  I don't see the point in
revisiting everybody's sins in the whole affair, Chip Berlet and ArbCom
included.  Please note I refer to ArbCom "errors", not "unfairness."  I
believe very much in Wikipedia's stated goals, and have a fundemental moral
problem with circumventing the rules with sockpuppets, despite the fact that
those who do so are rewarded.  I will clear my name within the given
processes, even if there really are no policies, rules, or processes to
follow.  And given the struggle for Wikipedia to become a valid source,
let's hope censorship and intollerance are not added to the concerns.

nobs

On 1/11/06, Fred Bauder <fredbaud at ctelco.net> wrote:
>
> If it were a one time error in judgement we would have made a very
> different ruling. You converted the talk page of [[Chip Berlet]] into
> a sustained personal attack based on guilt by association. You then,
> during the arbitration converted your user page into the same sort of
> sustained personal attack based on guilt by association. Then, and
> now, you continue to maintain you did absolutely nothing wrong. Which
> means, to me, that we can expect to see more of the same thing the
> first chance you get.
>
> Fred
>
> On Jan 11, 2006, at 9:27 AM, Rob Smith wrote:
>
> > Responding to the bait: My contributions are 99%+ of historic
> > nature.  Any
> > Arbitrator (or anyone) who has read Discussion pages I've
> > participated can
> > see for themselves there is an intense focus on the substance of the
> > article, and distinct lack of response to persistent personal
> > attacks.  I am
> > a firm believer in civility particularly in controversial
> > discussions.  Am I
> > guilty of a breaching experiment, and a one time error in judgement
> > during my first visit to Arbitration?  Yes.
> >
> > nobs
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: Brion Vibber

subject: [Wikitech-l] Changes to redirect handling

body:
Some of Magnus's recent work inspired me to dig into Article.php and rework how
redirects are handled.

My current in-progress code is attached on this bug:
http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1103

Formerly, the following of redirects was handled inside Article's
getContent/fetchContent functions, and which would get called inside the view()
action handler. This is problematic for several reasons:

* When loading text for other purposes, you could trip a global redirect by
accident. Ugly parameters got hacked in to try to work around that.

* Redirecting from one type of page to another required all kinds of extra hacks
or just plain didn't work; regular articles, image pages, and category pages are
handled by different variants of the Article class while Special pages do
something else entirely.

* It's daaaaaamn ugly; lots of checks of globals and URL parameters in the
middle of text-loading code, and the global title might change while you're
halfway through a function.

In the new code, the setup code in Wiki.php creates an Article object, asks if
it's a redirect, and if so follows it to get another Article object. It feels
like a cleaner interface to me, and minimizes the amount of weird global changes
appearing as side effects of low-level content-loading methods.

With some further work, it should even be possible to handle redirects to
Special pages properly; currently those are done with a URL redirect (or not at
all, if interwiki redirects are disabled). Instead, we could load up the special
page and shove the 'redirected from' link+subheading at it like we do for
regular pages.

Since this changes some of the guts of the wiki, I haven't committed it quite
yet but plan to soon. Please test, and let me know about anything that breaks or
post a fix to the patch. (Remember, CVS HEAD is our production code and code
should always be carefully tested before committing there.)

-- 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/wikitech-l/attachments/20060111/631b2b00/attachment.pgp>


body:
On Jan 11, 2006, at 11:21 AM, geni wrote:
>
> Problem is that most people avoid GFDL.

True. This may be a problem whose best solution is going to come when
we finally get a revised and CC-compatible GFDL out of Stallman.

So... GFDL 2.0 or HURD first. Any guesses?

-Phil


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Nobs

body:
Fine; I'll discuss my behavior if asked.  It would therefore be only fair to
discuss others behavior likewise.  That would lead done the path of me
trashing the ArbCom process which (a) would be out of character (b)
self-defeating.  Reexamining the whole case would discover numerous problems
related to process, etc.  And as I told Cberlet probably 50,000 times, I'm
not gonna get into a game trashing & innuendo, despite being baited 50,000
times.

It is distinctly odd however, that I am probably the first user banned for
personal attacks who provided footnotes & citations for his personal
attacks.

nobs

On 1/11/06, Rob <gamaliel8 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Interesting that you're interested in revisiting this issue up until
> people
> start discussing your behavior in particular.
>
> On 1/11/06, Rob Smith <nobs03 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > As noted, I plead guilty to certain things (like cutting & pasting a
> > section
> > from the Chip Berlet talk page onto my user page).  I don't see the
> point
> > in
> > revisiting everybody's sins in the whole affair, Chip Berlet and ArbCom
> > included.
> >
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: Far

subject: [Wikitech-l] Please purge the data to help Chinese wikipedians.

body:
Jan:
 Thanks a lot for your answer.I have another maybe a little foolish question.  How can I get into the webserver-commandline?I' ve  tried to look for the help in meta pages but can't find it.

                                     ffaarr

>Hello ffaarr,

>the category-links are included in the articles? But the articles are not
>assigned to the categorys?

>try to execute "maintenance/refreshlinks.php" on webserver-commandline.

>Regards,
>Jan


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Userbox reframing?

body:
On 1/11/06, Haukur ?orgeirsson <haukurth at hi.is> wrote:
> I don't mind people ranting a bit against this and that on their userpages
> but - if I may speak metaphorically - using the Wikipedia printing press
> to mass-produce standardized stickers with glib political catchphrases
> doesn't give people the right idea about this project.
>
Along those lines, the Village Voice recently published an article on
their idea about the project:
http://www.villagevoice.com/arts/0602,aviv,71632,12.html

Appropriately or not, it seems to see the project as rather more
whimsical than Wales likes to see it - and it doesn't even mention
userboxes.


from_name: Filip Maljkovic

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Serbo-Croatian wikipedia

body:
>
>
>After all, it's about creating an encyclopedia, not about building a community.
>

One can't work without the other in the case of Wikipedia.

That much.
Cheers
Filip


subject: [Wikitech-l] PHP error stats

body:
Log extracts from Jan 11 04:04:30 through Jan 11 20:07:52; excluding zwinger and
larousse where various batch operations and things run.

1116 total errors logged:

Fatal errors:
996 'Allowed memory size of 52428800 bytes exhausted'
 17 'Maximum execution time of 180 seconds exceeded' [1]
  2 'Call to a member function on a non-object' [2]
  1 'Call to undefined function:  memsess_key()' [3]

Warnings:
 34 'gzinflate(): buffer error' [4]
 20 'rename(<path>,<path>): Not a directory' [5]
 16 'preg_match() expects parameter 2 to be string, array given' [6]
 12 'Cannot modify header information' [7]
 10 various mysql_* connection errors
  5 'unlink(<path>): Is a directory' [8]
  1 'unlink(<path>): No such file or directory'
  1 'filemtime(): Stat failed for <path> (errno=2 - No such file or directory)'
  1 'mkdir(<path>): File exists'

[1] Almost all are in the diff code; one in Parser::replaceInternalLinks.
[2] Title.php on line 1749
[3] User.php on line 1661
[4] Revision.php on line 456; could indicate damaged compressed entries in text
storage
[5] Image.php on line 978 (renderThumb)
[6] Exif.php on line 476
[7] in StreamFile.php various places, output from warnings in Image.php
[8] Image.php on line 981 (renderThumb)

-- 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/wikitech-l/attachments/20060111/efcf5c48/attachment.pgp>


body:
On 1/11/06, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I'm looking for ideas on this *specific* problem: specialists who see
> how AFD has treated other specialists (very badly indeed) and decide
> they can really do without even risking that degree of uncaring and
> self-righteous stupidity. This is one, there will be more. I submit
> that this is a really bad thing.

But that's what AFD is designed for!  Its entire setup is optimized to
allow otherwise uninvolved users to vote on as many articles as
possible, as quickly as possible.

One option is to kill AFD entirely; the other is to raise the barrier
of entry to deletion discussions.

Kirill Lokshin


from_name: Brock Batsell

subject: [WikiEN-l] IP Blocks

body:
Looking at the headers from that e-mail, it appears to be:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Log/block?page=User:212.219.116.67

On Jan 11, 2006, at 10:09 AM, David Gerard wrote:

> Jason Gazeley wrote:
>
>> Is there any way to block IP's yet allow logged in users to edit
>> from that
>> IP? My college's IP got blocked this morning due to Vandalism. I
>> was just
>> about to revert some other vandalism at lunch when I got the
>> blocked notice.
>
>
> MediaWiki bug 550:
>
>     http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=550
>
> At present it's got a few suggested patches, it's working out what's
> the best one to implement in terms of its social effects.
>
> (cc to wikitech-l - what's the current developers' view on a good
> solution to 550? Are we anywhere near having one implemented?)
>
> As for the block itself, that's obviously collateral damage, and if
> you can tell us the IP it should be promptly unblocked. What was the
> text of the block message?
>
>
> - d.
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20060111/6e068618/attachment.pgp


body:
Never was it more well spoken after my ArbCom ruling:

"Laws which prescribe what everyone must believe, and forbid men to say or
write anything against this or that opinion, are often passed to gratify, or
rather to appease the anger of those who cannot abide independent minds."
Spinoza

Nobs01

On 1/11/06, Peter Mackay <peter.mackay at bigpond.com> wrote:
>
> > From: wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org
> > [mailto:wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org] On Behalf Of Rob Smith
>
> > Enduring six months of personal attacks, responding to it
> > once during an ArbCom Hearing, and being banned for a year,
> > while those who trashed me and smeared me as being "banned
> > for personal attacks" are given license to do it again.
>
> You get that sort of thing here. I think the thing to do is to not kick
> against the pricks, because eventually you just spend all your time trying
> to get officialdom to notice the outrages of which they are all too well
> aware. Just get your head down, avoid the hassle, and keep on making the
> good edits that bring you joy. As I do.
>
> Pete, doping his best
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: David Gerard

body:
    http://www.producingoss.com/

It's mostlly about how to run a *big* open project. Not so much about
technical infrastructure, but about how to interact with people.

Have a read. It'll give you a lot of good ideas we can apply to Wikipedia.

- d.