from_name: Alphax (Wikipedia email)

body:
John Lee wrote:
> Chris Jenkinson wrote:
>
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> I'm just curious whether we have a policy on the use of fair use
>> images on user pages, rather than a guideline, and if so, what our
>> procedure is for enforcement of that policy if it says no such images
>> permitted. Obviously discussion is the first stepping stone, but if
>> the user in question refuses to remove it, what actions should admins
>> take in order to do so? I'm thinking of page protection and blocking
>> here. I know someone has been indefinitely blocked in the past because
>> he did not license his user page under the GFDL.
>>
>> Also, is there a straightforward page which can be used to simply
>> explain our rationale for not permitting fair use images in userspace?
>> If not, might I recommend the creation of one as then it could be
>> linked to. It may be the case that part of the reason that users are
>> not removing fair use images on request is because some people are
>> being heavy-handed with them in requesting removal. A page for this
>> would be more friendly, and a message could be added something like
>> "Hi, you have fair use images on your page, Image:X.png and
>> Image:Y.jpg. These are not permitted to be used on user pages. Please
>> read [[Wikipedia:Why fair use images are not permitted on user pages]]
>> for more information on why this is the case."
>>
>> Just a thought,
>>
>> Chris
>>
> IANAL and this is just my opinion, but if the page discusses the topic
> of the image in a manner that an article would ordinarily qualify for
> fair use, I think fair use images should be permissible. For instance,
> [[User:Johnleemk/A History of Malay Special Rights Post-World War II]]
> discusses Malay privileges in Malaysia, and therefore a fair use image
> used on our relevant articles (i.e. [[Ketuanan Melayu]], [[Article 153
> of the Constitution of Malaysia]]) is probably fair use.
>

If you plan on putting that in article space some time, do it.
[[WP:NOT]] a webhost...

--
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/20060113/af25a6a7/attachment.pgp


list: wikitech-l

source: pipermail-mbox

from_name: Guillaume Blanchard

subject: [Wikitech-l] French Wikipedia community ask for a new namespace

body:
Rob Church wrote:
> For the first request, please open a new bug on
> http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org as it makes things easier to track.
>
> As to the second, while that's not implemented in the software at the
> moment, there is an active feature request at
> http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4469 for a "namespace
> banner" of some description, which would, I think, achieve the effect
> you're after.
>
>
> Rob Church
Active a namespace in a wiki now take around 2 minutes (the time to
load/write/save confiig file on the server). Do you really think we have
to open a new "bug" (?) for that?

For the second, it is just a hopped feature. If not available we will
just include manually the same template at the top of each page. No
problemo.

Aoineko / Guillaume Blanchard


list: wikien-l

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

body:
kelvSYC wrote:
>geni wrote:
>>kelvSYC wrote:
<snip>
>>> * 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}}?
>
>
> What would prevent someone, say, an admin, from rewriting this in
> userbox (albeit a large one) form...?  And if a block is appealed,  what
> would prevent someone from writing their rebuttal in userbox form?
>

The fact that they are limited to editing their talk page? :)

Seriously, I don't see why people like userboxes so much. It's a bit
like the AfD (or was it VfD?) vote counting/reason for deletion boxes...

Little boxes, little boxes, all made of ticky-tacky...

Here's my solution for all the people who have done more editing to
userboxes and their userpages than to articles: go start
http://www.userboxes.com/ and get the hell off of our encyclopedia, you
morons. [[WP:NOT]] a webhost.

--
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/20060113/4ab2067a/attachment.pgp


from_name: Jay Converse

subject: [WikiEN-l] userbox : insanity ?

body:
On 1/13/06, 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 Jay Converse
>
> > > I couldn't have put it better. [[WP:NOT]] a social
> > experiment - it's
> > > an encyclopedia. For some people, this is too much to
> > accept, but the
> > > rest of us who are here to write an encyclopedia couldn't care less.
> > >
> > >
> > To add to this, those who are here to fight vandals also
> > couldn't care less about half of the WikiLawyering that goes
> > on around here.  Sometimes I think the people involved in
> > that particular sector of the Wiki automagically assume that
> > they're the only section of the Wiki anymore.
>
> I can't say that I care much about the nuts and bolts of anyone else's
> disputes, but to be fair, when someone comes along here, gets treated
> unfairly and unjustly and finds that this applies all the way up, they
> feel
> entitled to have a complain about it.
>
> The crowning irony is that nobody cares about the complaint. The relevant
> admins and Arbcom reckon they have done their job, and besides they have
> plenty of other work to get on with, and just about everyone else assumes
> that the ArbCom have worked through the issue and the complaint is
> unjustified.
>
> The thing is that very little about Wikipedia's social government conforms
> to the standards one might expect from a real-world justice system or
> national government. We're somewhere else.
>
> I'm not saying that the system is a total shambles, just that it's patchy.
> Much like WP itself. Some bits are really really good, some are OK, others
> need work and others suck.
>
> And the complaints that make their way here aren't from vandals. We can
> recognise vandalism and act upon it swiftly.
>
> Peter (Skyring)
>
>
I may have been missing the point when I wrote that.  What I was trying to
point out is that just as some people are here to write an encyclopedia, not
to get into fights, people like myself are here to fight vandalism, and so
neither have time nor patience for knock-down drag-out content disputes.

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


from_name: geni

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

body:
On 1/13/06, Anthony DiPierro <wikilegal at inbox.org> wrote:
> On 1/12/06, Sam Korn <smoddy at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 1/12/06, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > A while back when there was only one stub catigory and it became
> > > completely overloaded someone came up with the idea of substubs.
> > > People tended to object to the template on the basis that substubs
> > > shouldn't be in wikipedia at but that was mostly a side issue. the
> > > core was correct. Single lines do not qualify as stubs. Of course when
> > > we switched over to stubs by subject the substub catigory was lost.
> > > Still all the details can still be found in the page history:
> > >
> > > http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Substub&oldid=32649995
> > >
> >
> > The way to get rid of the substub category was not to move all its
> > contents somewhere else.  The only way was by deleting them.  I see
> > your point about why they aren't stubs.
> >
> So is a substub a candidate for speedy deletion?

Not as far as policy is concerned.

--
geni


subject: [WikiEN-l] Fair use images on user pages and enforcement

body:
John Lee wrote:
> Alphax (Wikipedia email) wrote:
>
>> John Lee wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Chris Jenkinson wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Hi everyone,
>>>>
>>>> I'm just curious whether we have a policy on the use of fair use
>>>> images on user pages, rather than a guideline, and if so, what our
>>>> procedure is for enforcement of that policy if it says no such images
>>>> permitted. Obviously discussion is the first stepping stone, but if
>>>> the user in question refuses to remove it, what actions should admins
>>>> take in order to do so? I'm thinking of page protection and blocking
>>>> here. I know someone has been indefinitely blocked in the past because
>>>> he did not license his user page under the GFDL.
>>>>
>>>> Also, is there a straightforward page which can be used to simply
>>>> explain our rationale for not permitting fair use images in userspace?
>>>> If not, might I recommend the creation of one as then it could be
>>>> linked to. It may be the case that part of the reason that users are
>>>> not removing fair use images on request is because some people are
>>>> being heavy-handed with them in requesting removal. A page for this
>>>> would be more friendly, and a message could be added something like
>>>> "Hi, you have fair use images on your page, Image:X.png and
>>>> Image:Y.jpg. These are not permitted to be used on user pages. Please
>>>> read [[Wikipedia:Why fair use images are not permitted on user pages]]
>>>> for more information on why this is the case."
>>>>
>>>> Just a thought,
>>>>
>>>> Chris
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> IANAL and this is just my opinion, but if the page discusses the topic
>>> of the image in a manner that an article would ordinarily qualify for
>>> fair use, I think fair use images should be permissible. For instance,
>>> [[User:Johnleemk/A History of Malay Special Rights Post-World War II]]
>>> discusses Malay privileges in Malaysia, and therefore a fair use image
>>> used on our relevant articles (i.e. [[Ketuanan Melayu]], [[Article 153
>>> of the Constitution of Malaysia]]) is probably fair use.
>>>
>>
>> If you plan on putting that in article space some time, do it.
>> [[WP:NOT]] a webhost...
>>
>>
>>
> It's inherently POV and to a certain extent original research. Since
> WP:NOT paper, there's not much of a point to deleting it, really. When
> I'm finished with it, I think I'll link to it from my userpage as a
> presentation of my views (since I think [[User:Johnleemk]] and its
> relevant subpages might not do that a good job of explaining why I think
> what I think). As an aside, WP might not be a webhost, but if you
> interprete it strictly, we might as well delete all userpages. :-p I
> think writing a lot in userspace is okay as long as you contribute to
> the encyclopedia as well.
>

In that case, you'd better not have "Fair Use" images on it ;)

--
Alphax - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax
Contributor to Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
"We make the internet not suck" - Jimbo Wales
Public key: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax/OpenPGP
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 556 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20060113/8dd29784/attachment.pgp


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

body:
On 1/13/06, kelvSYC <kelvSYC at shaw.ca> wrote:
> >> Name one.
> > writeing our article on 133t to start with
>
> And we're going to have a 1337 Wikipedia in the near future?  Or
> people who speak 1337 natively?  Do we really need to divide users in
> their proficiency in 1337?
>

Why not?

> ... trains people in the use of templates in a not-too-good way.
> Then it degrades into general template mania.  And then we have an
> article consisting of nothing but templates...
>

I think the stub sorting people have that under control now.

> We know that, but they might not.  After all, admins have been made
> even though they have made only 100 useful edits at en.  We might
> even have an admin who have made even less, based on the people who
> nominated and confirmed their adminship

Evidence of this happening remotely recently?
--
geni


from_name: John Lee

body:
Anthony DiPierro wrote:

>>User pages would, if I read the situation
>>right, be very little different from a GeoCities website or the
>>equivilent.
>>
>>
>
>You definitely read it wrong.  Wikipedia userpages are, in general,
>very different from the average geocities website.
>
>
How so? Neither are exempt from legal requirements to justify fair use.

John Lee
([[User:Johnleemk]])


subject: [WikiEN-l] userbox : insanity ?

body:
Rob Smith wrote:

>You can say it a thousand times, but when diligent contributors acting in
>good faith, are driven off by a political machine with an agenda of its
>own, nullifies the premise.  It not only deters the goal of writing an
>encyclopedia, it risks the issues of validity and censorship.
>
>nobs
>
>
>
Now, that has nothing at all to do with what I was saying. (And this is
giving you the benefit of the doubt that you are correct that there is a
political cabal seeking to drive away opposing viewpoints.) I was saying
Wikipedia is not a social experiment. It is a privately funded attempt
to create an encyclopedia by allowing anyone to edit it, as long as they
don't fall foul of the owners. Typically, the community/admins act as
the owners by blocking people who fall foul of them, because the owners
of Wikipedia (the Wikimedia Foundation) give them considerable autonomy
to do so and set their own customs, etc. But the fact remains that this
is a private enterprise, so if you don't like how the Wikimedia
Foundation behaves, just up and leave. It won't hurt anyone if we end up
producing a fucked up/censored encyclopedia, because private businesses
and non-profits have no social obligations beyond following the law.

John Lee
([[User:Johnleemk]])


from_name: David Monniaux

subject: [Wikitech-l] having Google help Wikimedia Commons

body:
Howdie,

As you probably know, administrators and other volunteers on commons
(and other wikis) wage a constant battle against people who upload
photos from web sites under bogus claims ("I took it myself!" etc.).

One thing that would be nice would be a tool to check whether and where
an image file is available somewhere else on the web.

I think we can get Google to help us in that matter.

Google Images, in order to build its thumbnail database, has to download
the files and compute thumbnails. They can, at the same time, compute a
hash of the file (SHA, MD5 or similar). Perhaps they already do.

If the hash is stored into the database, they can essentially answer our
problem. They already offer a SOAP programmatic interface (which does
not offer this feature); conceivably they could offer this "look for
identical files" feature, perhaps to selected partner sites.

Since they have offered us a hand in the past...

Regards,
DM


from_name: Tim Starling

subject: [Wikitech-l] PHP 5

body:
The dual opterons in the Wikimedia cluster have now been upgraded to from
PHP 4.4.0 to 5.1.1. Presumably the rest of the cluster will follow soon,
although there doesn't seem to be any problem with running a mixed cluster
aside from the administrative overhead.

-- Tim Starling


list: wikipedia-l

from_name: Manuel de Sousa

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Wikipedia in Tetum

body:
Giuseppe,
As far as I know, a Tetum Wikipedia was proposed last November and it got
half a dozen people supporting the idea. However, there were no native
speakers of the language supporting this project.

See:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Native_speaker_sup
port#Tetum_.287_support.29

For those who don't know, Tetum is one of the official languages of
Timor-Leste (or East Timor), the youngest independent nation in the world
(the other official language is Portuguese).

Seeking for supporters, I recently sent mails to several people related to
East Timor, and posted a few messages on some blogs and discussion groups. I
immediately got several positive answers from native speakers of Tetum, as
well as people with excellent command of the language (namely non-native
speakers teachers of Tetum).

However, most of these people are not yet registered in the meta-wiki. I'm
now seeing that they do register and express their support to this project
as native speakers.

So, I'm absolutely convinced this Wikipedia in Tetum is viable, and that it
can be an exceptional tool for East-Timorese to promote their national
language internally and abroad.

So, as I guess there is a consensus to create a wiki in Tetum, I'm also
interested in knowing what must be done in order to have this setup. Must I
ask a developer? How can I do this?

Thanks & regards,
Manuel de Sousa
Porto, Portugal

> -----Mensagem original-----
> De: wikipedia-l-bounces at Wikimedia.org [mailto:wikipedia-l-
> bounces at Wikimedia.org] Em nome de Giuseppe DAngelo
> Enviada: sexta-feira, 13 de Janeiro de 2006 10:11
> Para: wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> Assunto: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Wikipedia in Tetum
>
> Could someone please confirm whether a Wikipedia in Tetum has recenlty
> been set up, or whether it is about to be set up?  Thanks!
>   pippu d'angelo
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Yahoo! Messenger with Voice: chiama da PC a telefono a tariffe esclusive
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l


from_name: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason

subject: [Wikitech-l] PHP error stats

body:
On 1/12/06, Brion Vibber <brion at pobox.com> wrote:
> ?var Arnfj?r? Bjarmason wrote:
> > In particular I'm interested in this for #6 which is in some code I
> > wrote. It happens because exif_read_data() can return all sorts of
> > funky stuff (apperently it's giving some key => array values insteaed
> > of key => scalar there) and this isn't really documented, I debugged
> > most of it when the Exif feature initially went live by making a
> > custom log for it and studying the php module's source code but
> > obviously I missed something, and to reproduce it properly I'd need
> > the image name that was being parsed which I could get from the
> > request info.
>
> Yeah that'd be nice huh. :)
>
> You could do a batch check over all images, should turn them up...

Oh the joy of sheer brute force;)


from_name: Brock Batsell

subject: [WikiEN-l] weird bug

body:
On Jan 14, 2006, at 3:57 AM, Steve Bennett wrote:

> The problem is that the article is full of invisible breakable
> hyphens.
> My immediate thought is this has been copied from somewhere, so
> probably
> violates copyright.

It was copied directly from the site linked to under "Sources",
http://cyberhymnal.org/bio/s/k/skoog_al.htm
--
[[en:User:Bbatsell]]

-------------- 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/20060114/3a2f2f87/attachment.pgp


from_name: David Gerard

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

body:
uninvited at nerstrand.net (uninvited at nerstrand.net) [060112 10:00]:

> One thing that is clear is that the community can't make any
> nonincremental changes to policy itself without solid leadership, and
> there are any number of contributors with social insight who have quit
> even discussing meaningful change (as well as those who have quit the
> project entirely) because of the impossibility of accomplishing it.

Voting on everything has become a policy disaster. That in particular needs
to be strongly discouraged. "The community" as expressed through polls is
showing itself to be on crack far too often.

- d.


from_name: Peter Mackay

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

body:
> From: wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org
> [mailto:wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org] On Behalf Of Alphax
> (Wikipedia email)
>
> Here's my solution for all the people who have done more
> editing to userboxes and their userpages than to articles: go
> start http://www.userboxes.com/ and get the hell off of our
> encyclopedia, you morons. [[WP:NOT]] a webhost.

Here's my advice to the same people. Stick around, make a lot of good edits,
become useful members of the community.

Peter (Skyring)


subject: [Wikitech-l] test.wikipedia.org

body:
After a long period of absence, test.wikipedia.org has returned. Unlike the
old test.wikipedia.org, it is running essentially the same code as the rest
of the Wikimedia wikis. The difference is that it uses the copy from NFS
rather than the synced copy on the local apache hard drives, which means
that we can more easily test for errors in the Wikimedia environment before
we take the final step and do a sync. Hopefully this will reduce the number
of transient PHP errors seen on the site, which are most often due to
differences between the developer's test environment and the Wikimedia
environment.

The rather cynical protected warning on the main page is my doing, I want to
have at least one goatse-free page on the wiki so that I can test the code
in peace.

-- Tim Starling


subject: [WikiEN-l] userbox : insanity ?

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

> On Fri, Jan 13, 2006 at 06:48:40AM +1100, Peter Mackay wrote:
> > The fact is, if you do a lot of work for WP, you can be excused
> > ANYTHING, even if there's a pile of hard evidence against you.
>
> One counterexample is sufficient to disprove a blanket
> generality like that one.

Hmmm. I said "can", but you read it as "will".

--
Pete


from_name: Sam Spade

subject: [WikiEN-l] weird bug

body:
This may not be the right place, but I found an extremely weird bug
when trying to wikify

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_L._Skoog

try wikifying that article. I thought it was just me, but if it is
I've tried twice now, and both times the [['s end up in the wrong
place...

Sam Spade


from_name: Tels

body:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Moin,

On Saturday 14 January 2006 03:03, Evan Martin wrote:
> On 1/13/06, David Monniaux <David.Monniaux at ens.fr> wrote:
> > One thing that would be nice would be a tool to check whether and
> > where an image file is available somewhere else on the web.
> >
> > I think we can get Google to help us in that matter.
>
> I'll look into it.  (No promises, but the idea seems sound...)

While the bit-hash can easily defeated (just alter one bit), the idea is
interesting - a lot of images are very probably copied without any
alteration at all.

Computing a watermark or something alike that is probably to
CPU-intensive, but it would allow loose matching (e.g. someone adds his
own (C) on an image, but leaves 99% unaltered, etc).

Best wishes,

Tels

- --
 Signed on Sat Jan 14 10:54:53 2006 with key 0x93B84C15.
 Visit my photo gallery at http://bloodgate.com/photos/
 PGP key on http://bloodgate.com/tels.asc or per email.

 Marketing lesson #1: The synergy of the result driven leverage can
 *never* incentivize a paradigm shift. --  Walterk (124748) on 2004-01-16
 at /.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iQEVAwUBQ8jK53cLPEOTuEwVAQHp5wf9G/duqnyiAToRCbv58mLF4nEXplg8RkmV
7M+iPJyg6MOZU1MnzToX/p7yyyM4a/XKLWXMRE0TorggfeEOx1vvHYAMSsS81rT/
i6XLIlKUwaK+rIEhxyzIAQJfPYXcuOCAwJ6c0wUmsmSNFKY5VP9t7WFP4ftS6Edf
74TWOQotUW5CujeJRYShe8w15RlXhAuTHzzc1ENmBliuOEBbTy21DEDYoP3OgJwb
EwAzbTHlUPI0wSbDkXRd80p0/fsFReq9l8NeT0YbFin7RnYPOWTgVM+PAv0j8YEL
v/Mxq7IVXuAA9dKhXBRUQK7IMbL2b2/b2yTqym2DDT5obF8yfIDKmg==
=APAg
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


from_name: Steve Bennett

subject: [WikiEN-l] weird bug

body:
The problem is that the article is full of invisible breakable hyphens.
My immediate thought is this has been copied from somewhere, so probably
violates copyright.

This is what it looks like when you copy/paste to notepad:

Skoog's family em-i-grat-ed to Amer-i-ca in 1869. Af-ter a few years,
they moved to Chi-ca-go, Ill-i-nois, where he was a church mu-sic
di-rect-or and taught in a pa-roc-hi-al school. He used a mid-dle
ini-tial, but had no mid-dle name.

It's easy to fix - just search/replace the special hyphen character with
nothing. I'll leave it though, in case others want to see this weird
bug.

Steve

> -----Original Message-----
> From: wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org
> [mailto:wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org] On Behalf Of Sam Spade
> Sent: Saturday, 14th January 2006 10:33 AM
> To: English Wikipedia
> Subject: [WikiEN-l] weird bug
>
>
> This may not be the right place, but I found an extremely
> weird bug when trying to wikify
>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_L._Skoog

try wikifying that article. I thought it was just me, but if it is I've
tried twice now, and both times the [['s end up in the wrong place...

Sam Spade
_______________________________________________
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: Rob Smith

subject: [WikiEN-l] userbox : insanity ?

body:
Bingo.  Let me set out clearly.  I came to write articles.  I contributed
roughly 200 from April to August.  Since August maybe 20.  My production
slowed as a result of concerted harassment by an ideologically driven
clique.  Yet 90 to 95% of my contributions are intact, and will remain
intact.  And I'm proud to see other articles are much improved -- not
necessssarily by direct contribtions -- but by calling attention to
interested editors (of whatever bias) to various problems.

As to the slanders & smears perpetrated against me by this clique, as a "POV
warrior" or I engage in "personal attacks", any editor who has interacted
with myself can and will attest, it's B.S.

nobs

On 1/13/06, Jay Converse <supermo0 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 1/13/06, Peter Mackay <peter.mackay at bigpond.com> wrote:
> > some people are here to write an encyclopedia, not
> to get into fights, people like myself are here to fight vandalism, and so
> neither have time nor patience for knock-down drag-out content disputes.
>
> --
> I'm not stupid, just selectively ignorant.
> _______________________________________________
> 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] userbox : insanity ?

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

> > I couldn't have put it better. [[WP:NOT]] a social
> experiment - it's
> > an encyclopedia. For some people, this is too much to
> accept, but the
> > rest of us who are here to write an encyclopedia couldn't care less.
> >
> >
> To add to this, those who are here to fight vandals also
> couldn't care less about half of the WikiLawyering that goes
> on around here.  Sometimes I think the people involved in
> that particular sector of the Wiki automagically assume that
> they're the only section of the Wiki anymore.

I can't say that I care much about the nuts and bolts of anyone else's
disputes, but to be fair, when someone comes along here, gets treated
unfairly and unjustly and finds that this applies all the way up, they feel
entitled to have a complain about it.

The crowning irony is that nobody cares about the complaint. The relevant
admins and Arbcom reckon they have done their job, and besides they have
plenty of other work to get on with, and just about everyone else assumes
that the ArbCom have worked through the issue and the complaint is
unjustified.

The thing is that very little about Wikipedia's social government conforms
to the standards one might expect from a real-world justice system or
national government. We're somewhere else.

I'm not saying that the system is a total shambles, just that it's patchy.
Much like WP itself. Some bits are really really good, some are OK, others
need work and others suck.

And the complaints that make their way here aren't from vandals. We can
recognise vandalism and act upon it swiftly.

Peter (Skyring)


from_name: Mark Williamson

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Fairness in voting

body:
> You know what, I think everything one says is a POV.

Yes, and on Wikipedia, people try to work together to make it more
neutral. However, Pavel was not open to that.

> Why should people from other Wikis vote for the future of mo. ?  The future
> of mo. is mostly a concern of Moldovans and Romanians, since it (the
> "Moldavian" language) is their native language.

Well, it's fine if Romanians vote -- IF they are active members of
mo.wiki. As you said, "why should people from other Wikis vote"?? If
you want to include people who aren't active on mo.wiki but are on
ro.wiki, this seems unfair and I think because of that you should
extend it to all Wikimedians.

> Would you consider it OK if all the wikipedians decided to open an Wiki in
> American (yes, I do know there's no such language, but that's exactly the
> point)?  It just like the ellections in a country:  why should citizens (in
> this case speakers) of another country (in this case language) vote for the
> fate of the country (in this case, Wiki)?  It would be absurd.

Umm, that's what's been done in making such decisions so far. Somebody
proposed an American Wikipedia on Meta, and the people who voted
against it came from not only America but Australia, the Netherlands,
Germany... and since Wikipedia is an international project, I think
that's fair.

The vote to close the Serbo-Croatian Wikipedia, although started by a
Serbian, is not limited to speakers of the language or residents of
the countries or even members of those Wikipedias. It's open to all
Wikimedians, as it should be -- such a monumental decision should be
up to everybody.

> Well, what's the point of keeping mo.,  if it's just like ro. ?

Please re-read that paragraph again. It wasn't just like ro.wiki until
Pavel moved pages and replaced their contents...

> Romanians are not foreigners on the Moldovan Wikipedia!

Ro.wikipedians are. Romanians who are established mo.wikipedians, like
Ronline, are not "foreigners". But most -- Bogdan, AdiJapan, Bonaparte
-- are foreigners.

> And it's going to be this way as long as people are uninformed by such pages
> as mo.wikipedia.org! All the people should know that: There is no
> Moldovan/Moldavian/Moldoveneasca Language!

About half of the native speakers of Limba Noastra in Rep. Moldova
disagree with you. They consider they speak "limba moldoveneasca". If
it was open-and-shut, there would be no controversy about language in
R.Moldova, people would just accept the so-called "fact" you just
said. But it's not 100% clear-cut, it's not obvious one way or the
other. Different people came to different conclusions, splitting the
country ideologically, and the government considers it "limba
moldoveneasca". We can't just say on Wikipedia, "there is no Moldovan
language", because it is _not neutral_ -- millions disagree.

> I am saying this as a person who has lived all his life in Moldova, who
> speaks Romanian and Russian fluently and who knows much about the history of
> his nation's language and traditions.

...do you know of Grigore Ureche? In his Chronicles of the Moldovan
Nation (letopisetul tarii moldovei), he has a chapter titled "about
our Moldovan language" (pentru limba noastra moldoveneasca). He wrote
his Chronicles in Cyrillic. He was not under Soviet time -- on the
contrary, he was an early Moldovan patriot who wrote a lot of valuable
material about his country. And this was before Russia annexed
Bessarabia.

> And please, do not say such things as: "Most of the people who voted were
> Romanians (or sth else)", because you HAVE NOT looked in their passports and
> you DO NOT really know who they are, you just know they speak Romanian
> fluently.

No -- I've encountered these people before. People such as AdiJapan,
Bogdangiusca, Bonaparte, are all self-designated Romanians.

Mark


from_name: Wikiacc

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

body:
On 1/13/06, Alphax (Wikipedia email) <alphasigmax at gmail.com> wrote:
> Alright then, here's my solution:
>
> Disable user page creation until a user has reached a certain number of
> edits (the point where moves and the ability to edit semi-protected
> pages are enabled).
>
> My reasoning is as follows:
>
> If a user has made enough edits to articles that they are able to move
> pages and edit semi-protected pages, they have contributed enough that
> they should be able to create a userpage. Userpages should be reserved
> for those who are writing the encyclopedia; WP:NOT a webhost.

Hear, hear!

--
--~~~~
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Wikiacc


from_name: prgibbons at ou.edu

subject: [WikiEN-l] (no subject)

body:
I am sick and tired of administrators violating rules on wikipedia for their own political prefrences.  I have been blocked once again when in disagreement with other editors and administrators over the content of material in certain articles. And once again I have called for discussion of disputed material, recieved no discussion but have had my submissions or edites reverted...with no discussion. This final time TheLand, with whom I have been disputing Economics of Fascism page, blocked me for "violating the 3rr" when I actually reverted several vandalism attempts by editors placing tags on the page without discussion dispite my calls for discussion.  I want this block removed and I want administrators to stop abusing their privilages to eliminate intellecual competition they disagree with.

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

The only purpose for which power can be rightfully
exercised over any member of a civilized community,
against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His
own good, either physical or moral, is not sufficient
warrant

- John Stuart Mill

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


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Wikipedia in Tetum

body:
One problem is, will it use Tetum or Tetun? Tetum is a creole language
based on Tetun and is the national and official language of East
Timor. Tetun is a regional language of Timor.

Tetum is basically a grammatically simplified form of Tetun with some
words from other Timorese languages.

Mark

On 13/01/06, Manuel de Sousa <manuel.sousa at tvtel.pt> wrote:
> Giuseppe,
> As far as I know, a Tetum Wikipedia was proposed last November and it got
> half a dozen people supporting the idea. However, there were no native
> speakers of the language supporting this project.
>
> See:
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Native_speaker_sup
> port#Tetum_.287_support.29
>
> For those who don't know, Tetum is one of the official languages of
> Timor-Leste (or East Timor), the youngest independent nation in the world
> (the other official language is Portuguese).
>
> Seeking for supporters, I recently sent mails to several people related to
> East Timor, and posted a few messages on some blogs and discussion groups. I
> immediately got several positive answers from native speakers of Tetum, as
> well as people with excellent command of the language (namely non-native
> speakers teachers of Tetum).
>
> However, most of these people are not yet registered in the meta-wiki. I'm
> now seeing that they do register and express their support to this project
> as native speakers.
>
> So, I'm absolutely convinced this Wikipedia in Tetum is viable, and that it
> can be an exceptional tool for East-Timorese to promote their national
> language internally and abroad.
>
> So, as I guess there is a consensus to create a wiki in Tetum, I'm also
> interested in knowing what must be done in order to have this setup. Must I
> ask a developer? How can I do this?
>
> Thanks & regards,
> Manuel de Sousa
> Porto, Portugal
>
> > -----Mensagem original-----
> > De: wikipedia-l-bounces at Wikimedia.org [mailto:wikipedia-l-
> > bounces at Wikimedia.org] Em nome de Giuseppe DAngelo
> > Enviada: sexta-feira, 13 de Janeiro de 2006 10:11
> > Para: wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > Assunto: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Wikipedia in Tetum
> >
> > Could someone please confirm whether a Wikipedia in Tetum has recenlty
> > been set up, or whether it is about to be set up?  Thanks!
> >   pippu d'angelo
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > Yahoo! Messenger with Voice: chiama da PC a telefono a tariffe esclusive
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>

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


subject: [Wikitech-l] test.wikipedia.org

body:
A proposal:

How about moving test-wikipedias to test:? It seems more appropriate
and less permanent.

Mark

On 13/01/06, Tim Starling <t.starling at physics.unimelb.edu.au> wrote:
> After a long period of absence, test.wikipedia.org has returned. Unlike the
> old test.wikipedia.org, it is running essentially the same code as the rest
> of the Wikimedia wikis. The difference is that it uses the copy from NFS
> rather than the synced copy on the local apache hard drives, which means
> that we can more easily test for errors in the Wikimedia environment before
> we take the final step and do a sync. Hopefully this will reduce the number
> of transient PHP errors seen on the site, which are most often due to
> differences between the developer's test environment and the Wikimedia
> environment.
>
> The rather cynical protected warning on the main page is my doing, I want to
> have at least one goatse-free page on the wiki so that I can test the code
> in peace.
>
> -- Tim Starling
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>

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


from_name: Alphax (Wikipedia email)

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

body:
Sam Korn wrote:
> On 1/13/06, 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 Alphax
>>>(Wikipedia email)
>>>
>>>Here's my solution for all the people who have done more
>>>editing to userboxes and their userpages than to articles: go
>>>start http://www.userboxes.com/ and get the hell off of our
>>>encyclopedia, you morons. [[WP:NOT]] a webhost.
>>
>>Here's my advice to the same people. Stick around, make a lot of good edits,
>>become useful members of the community.
>
>
> The two are not mutually exclusive.  You can have a link from your WP
> page to your other page.
>

When userboxes are getting in the way of the encyclopedia, the userboxes
must go.

--
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/20060114/a2722a60/attachment.pgp


subject: [WikiEN-l] userbox : insanity ?

body:
Peter Mackay wrote:

>
>
>I can't say that I care much about the nuts and bolts of anyone else's
>disputes, but to be fair, when someone comes along here, gets treated
>unfairly and unjustly and finds that this applies all the way up, they feel
>entitled to have a complain about it.
>
>The crowning irony is that nobody cares about the complaint. The relevant
>admins and Arbcom reckon they have done their job, and besides they have
>plenty of other work to get on with, and just about everyone else assumes
>that the ArbCom have worked through the issue and the complaint is
>unjustified.
>
>The thing is that very little about Wikipedia's social government conforms
>to the standards one might expect from a real-world justice system or
>national government. We're somewhere else.
>
>I'm not saying that the system is a total shambles, just that it's patchy.
>Much like WP itself. Some bits are really really good, some are OK, others
>need work and others suck.
>
>And the complaints that make their way here aren't from vandals. We can
>recognise vandalism and act upon it swiftly.
>
>Peter (Skyring)
>
>
>
Bingo. We're not a social experiment -- we're trying to build an
encyclopedia. I don't see any encyclopedia projects running themselves
like a real justice system or national government. Wikipedia does not
exist to mete out justice to people who try to edit it. Nobody has an
innate right to edit Wikipedia or be done justice by other people who
edit it.

John Lee
([[User:Johnleemk]])


subject: [Wikitech-l] test.wikipedia.org

body:
Actually, based on content from web.archive.org, it looks as if
somebody might've started an Old Norse testwiki on the old test:. Is
that content saved anywhere, or was it just cleared? I remember I had
a few humourous pages there of my own...

Mark

On 14/01/06, Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com> wrote:
> A proposal:
>
> How about moving test-wikipedias to test:? It seems more appropriate
> and less permanent.
>
> Mark
>
> On 13/01/06, Tim Starling <t.starling at physics.unimelb.edu.au> wrote:
> > After a long period of absence, test.wikipedia.org has returned. Unlike the
> > old test.wikipedia.org, it is running essentially the same code as the rest
> > of the Wikimedia wikis. The difference is that it uses the copy from NFS
> > rather than the synced copy on the local apache hard drives, which means
> > that we can more easily test for errors in the Wikimedia environment before
> > we take the final step and do a sync. Hopefully this will reduce the number
> > of transient PHP errors seen on the site, which are most often due to
> > differences between the developer's test environment and the Wikimedia
> > environment.
> >
> > The rather cynical protected warning on the main page is my doing, I want to
> > have at least one goatse-free page on the wiki so that I can test the code
> > in peace.
> >
> > -- Tim Starling
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikitech-l mailing list
> > Wikitech-l at wikimedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
> >
>
>
> --
> "Take away their language, destroy their souls." -- Joseph Stalin
>

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


from_name: Brion Vibber

subject: [Wikitech-l] test.wikipedia.org

body:
Mark Williamson wrote:
> Actually, based on content from web.archive.org, it looks as if
> somebody might've started an Old Norse testwiki on the old test:. Is
> that content saved anywhere, or was it just cleared? I remember I had
> a few humourous pages there of my own...

Gone, dead, buried. Sorry.

-- 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/20060114/4a0e0f47/attachment.pgp>


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

body:
geni wrote:
> On 1/13/06, Anthony DiPierro <wikilegal at inbox.org> wrote:
>
>>On 1/12/06, Sam Korn <smoddy at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On 1/12/06, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>A while back when there was only one stub catigory and it became
>>>>completely overloaded someone came up with the idea of substubs.
>>>>People tended to object to the template on the basis that substubs
>>>>shouldn't be in wikipedia at but that was mostly a side issue. the
>>>>core was correct. Single lines do not qualify as stubs. Of course when
>>>>we switched over to stubs by subject the substub catigory was lost.
>>>>Still all the details can still be found in the page history:
>>>>
>>>>http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Substub&oldid=32649995
>>>>
>>>
>>>The way to get rid of the substub category was not to move all its
>>>contents somewhere else.  The only way was by deleting them.  I see
>>>your point about why they aren't stubs.
>>>
>>
>>So is a substub a candidate for speedy deletion?
>
>
> Not as far as policy is concerned.
>

CSD tends to take care of most substubs; they either don't provide
context (A1) or make no attempt to explain the subject's notability (A7).

--
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/20060114/748302c3/attachment.pgp


from_name: John Lee

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

body:
Alphax (Wikipedia email) wrote:

>Peter Mackay wrote:
>
>
>>>From: wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org
>>>[mailto:wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org] On Behalf Of Alphax
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>>When userboxes are getting in the way of the encyclopedia,
>>>the userboxes must go.
>>>
>>>
>>What about users? If there were no users, there'd be no problems. Can we
>>please accept that *every* element on the site causes problems of one sort
>>or another and there are very few things that are completely black and
>>white.
>>
>>The current userbox issue is a symptom, not a cause. Get rid of userboxes
>>and some other thing would pop up until the underlying problem is resolved.
>>Shuffling the deckchairs is no solution if the ship is sinking.
>>
>>
>>
>
>Alright then, here's my solution:
>
>Disable user page creation until a user has reached a certain number of
>edits (the point where moves and the ability to edit semi-protected
>pages are enabled).
>
>My reasoning is as follows:
>
>If a user has made enough edits to articles that they are able to move
>pages and edit semi-protected pages, they have contributed enough that
>they should be able to create a userpage. Userpages should be reserved
>for those who are writing the encyclopedia; WP:NOT a webhost.
>
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
While this does not address Peter's original argument -- that there is a
growing divide between the "old" and "new" factions of Wikipedia -- I
must say that I like it. I am concerned, however, that this might be a
bit too arbitrary -- there could very well be a valid reason to have a
userpage before achieving such a number of edits. To cite one example, a
new user was recently blocked because he had the string "WoW" in his
username, and an admin thought he was yet another incarnation of Willy
on Wheels. Once he was unblocked, he made sure his userpage explained
that he had nothing to do with Willy on Wheels and that his name
originated from the online game World of Warcraft. Without such a
clarification, he could have been blocked repeatedly.

John Lee
([[User:Johnleemk]])


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

body:
Peter Mackay wrote:
>>From: wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org
>>[mailto:wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org] On Behalf Of Alphax
>
>
>>When userboxes are getting in the way of the encyclopedia,
>>the userboxes must go.
>
>
> What about users? If there were no users, there'd be no problems. Can we
> please accept that *every* element on the site causes problems of one sort
> or another and there are very few things that are completely black and
> white.
>
> The current userbox issue is a symptom, not a cause. Get rid of userboxes
> and some other thing would pop up until the underlying problem is resolved.
> Shuffling the deckchairs is no solution if the ship is sinking.
>

Alright then, here's my solution:

Disable user page creation until a user has reached a certain number of
edits (the point where moves and the ability to edit semi-protected
pages are enabled).

My reasoning is as follows:

If a user has made enough edits to articles that they are able to move
pages and edit semi-protected pages, they have contributed enough that
they should be able to create a userpage. Userpages should be reserved
for those who are writing the encyclopedia; WP:NOT a webhost.

--
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/20060114/044b76a9/attachment.pgp


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

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

> When userboxes are getting in the way of the encyclopedia,
> the userboxes must go.

What about users? If there were no users, there'd be no problems. Can we
please accept that *every* element on the site causes problems of one sort
or another and there are very few things that are completely black and
white.

The current userbox issue is a symptom, not a cause. Get rid of userboxes
and some other thing would pop up until the underlying problem is resolved.
Shuffling the deckchairs is no solution if the ship is sinking.

Peter (Skyring)


from_name: Adrian Baker

subject: [Wikitech-l] Recent changes feed window size

body:
I've been fiddling a bit with the (Atom) recent changes feed at
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Special:Recentchanges&feed=atom.
I'm interested in whether a tool like
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:CryptoDerk/CDVF could use the feed,
so that the diff for each edit could be quickly viewed inside the tool, rather
than linked to externally.

It seems though that the combination of the default window size (50)
and the apparent refresh rate of the feed in the cache (about 20
seconds) means that there are changes that will fall through the gap
once you have more than about ~2.5 changes a second (which seems to
happen fairly often now). This means right now it's not really usable
in a tool like CDVF (and perhaps not usable in general).

What are the future plans for this feed? Can it (will it) be feasibly
maintained in a useful state as the edit rate grows further? No doubt
there are several approaches that could be taken (steadily increase
window size, refresh cache more often, split feed out into namespaces,
...), but all involve placing greater load on the server.

Adrian


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

body:
> From: wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org
> [mailto:wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org] On Behalf Of Alphax
> (Wikipedia email)
> Sent: Saturday, 14 January 2006 15:27
> To: English Wikipedia
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] kelvSYC's take on userboxes
>
> Peter Mackay wrote:
> >>From: wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org
> >>[mailto:wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org] On Behalf Of Alphax
> >
> >
> >>When userboxes are getting in the way of the encyclopedia, the
> >>userboxes must go.
> >
> >
> > What about users? If there were no users, there'd be no
> problems. Can
> > we please accept that *every* element on the site causes
> problems of
> > one sort or another and there are very few things that are
> completely
> > black and white.
> >
> > The current userbox issue is a symptom, not a cause. Get rid of
> > userboxes and some other thing would pop up until the
> underlying problem is resolved.
> > Shuffling the deckchairs is no solution if the ship is sinking.
> >
>
> Alright then, here's my solution:
>
> Disable user page creation until a user has reached a certain
> number of edits (the point where moves and the ability to
> edit semi-protected pages are enabled).
>
> My reasoning is as follows:
>
> If a user has made enough edits to articles that they are
> able to move pages and edit semi-protected pages, they have
> contributed enough that they should be able to create a
> userpage. Userpages should be reserved for those who are
> writing the encyclopedia; WP:NOT a webhost.

Not arguing, but you can make any number of edits you want, just by adding a
space here, taking one away there. If you have to do a whole bunch of these
useless edits before you get to play, how does that help the project?

Besides which, customising a userpage, even if it's only to add in a few
lines, helps new editors feel at home. And they have an immediate place to
try stuff out instead of going to test it out on an article.

The idea is to encourage members to make good edits, not to make them feel
awkward. I get the feeling that a lot of the old salts here would rather we
didn't attract new editors at all.

Peter (Skyring)


list: foundation-l

from_name: oscar

subject: [Foundation-l] Poll for Wikistandards

body:
fyi, i have started a poll concerning '''wikistandards''' at
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wiki_for_standards#Poll

best regards,

oscar

ps i hope this gets through properly now, sorry for any previous
inconvenience


list: wikimedia-l

subject: [Foundation-l] Poll for Wikistandards


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

> Bingo. We're not a social experiment -- we're trying to build
> an encyclopedia. I don't see any encyclopedia projects
> running themselves like a real justice system or national
> government. Wikipedia does not exist to mete out justice to
> people who try to edit it. Nobody has an innate right to edit
> Wikipedia or be done justice by other people who edit it.

Exactly. It's the only way to think of it. It's a corrupt, unfair, partisan
shambles. Much like a frontier town council.

About all we are united in is the wish to improve the encyclopaedia and to
beat off the vandals.

Peter (Skyring)


subject: [WikiEN-l] admin violations again

body:
If blocking me for reverting vandalism (tag placement and replacement with no discussion despite requests) isnt bad enough I am also blocked from my own user discussion page.  I want this violation corrected and the violating administrators warned about their abuses.

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

The only purpose for which power can be rightfully
exercised over any member of a civilized community,
against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His
own good, either physical or moral, is not sufficient
warrant

- John Stuart Mill

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


from_name: Haukur Þorgeirsson

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

body:
> If a user has made enough edits to articles that they are able to move
> pages and edit semi-protected pages, they have contributed enough that
> they should be able to create a userpage. Userpages should be reserved
> for those who are writing the encyclopedia; WP:NOT a webhost.

I think this would have unintended negative consequences. When I register
an account at a new Wikimedia project one of the first edits I make is
usually to my userpage to let people know where I'm coming from and where
I can most easily be contacted.

In my experience we don't have a lot of newbies starting out with building
a userpage. Typically the people who build a userpage early on are
veterans from another Wikimedia project. Take this contribution log as an
example I happened to notice:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/J%C3%B3na_%C3%9E%C3%B3runn

This user is an admin at the Icelandic Wikipedia and her main interests
are probably to contribute there. She registers an account at en to add
interwiki links and make some incidental useful edits. One of the first
things she does is to build a userpage with a bunch of userboxes.

Now, some of those userboxes I think we could do without. But I don't
think it's accurate to say that contributors like this are "using
Wikipedia as a webhost".

Regards,
Haukur


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

body:
Peter Mackay wrote:
>>From: wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org
>>[mailto:wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org] On Behalf Of Alphax
>>(Wikipedia email)
>>Sent: Saturday, 14 January 2006 15:27
>>To: English Wikipedia
>>Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] kelvSYC's take on userboxes
>>
>>Peter Mackay wrote:
>>
>>>>From: wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org
>>>>[mailto:wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org] On Behalf Of Alphax
>>>
>>>
>>>>When userboxes are getting in the way of the encyclopedia, the
>>>>userboxes must go.
>>>
>>>
>>>What about users? If there were no users, there'd be no
>>
>>problems. Can
>>
>>>we please accept that *every* element on the site causes
>>
>>problems of
>>
>>>one sort or another and there are very few things that are
>>
>>completely
>>
>>>black and white.
>>>
>>>The current userbox issue is a symptom, not a cause. Get rid of
>>>userboxes and some other thing would pop up until the
>>
>>underlying problem is resolved.
>>
>>>Shuffling the deckchairs is no solution if the ship is sinking.
>>>
>>
>>Alright then, here's my solution:
>>
>>Disable user page creation until a user has reached a certain
>>number of edits (the point where moves and the ability to
>>edit semi-protected pages are enabled).
>>
>>My reasoning is as follows:
>>
>>If a user has made enough edits to articles that they are
>>able to move pages and edit semi-protected pages, they have
>>contributed enough that they should be able to create a
>>userpage. Userpages should be reserved for those who are
>>writing the encyclopedia; WP:NOT a webhost.
>
>
> Not arguing, but you can make any number of edits you want, just by adding a
> space here, taking one away there. If you have to do a whole bunch of these
> useless edits before you get to play, how does that help the project?
>

Possibly someone will *notice* these "useless edits" and talk to the
editor; most welcome messages include links to key policies, guidlines,
and the tutorial, which often helps people get started and understand
what is expected of them. If they continue making "useless edits"
someone will give them a {{test}} or worse, at which point they might
smarten up and start doing something useful.

Even if they do make 50 or 100 useful article edits before going off to
build their userpage, that's 50 or 100 edits that someone else *doesn't*
need to make.

> Besides which, customising a userpage, even if it's only to add in a few
> lines, helps new editors feel at home. And they have an immediate place to
> try stuff out instead of going to test it out on an article.
>

Hey, I'm not Jimbo; what I say doesn't become policy :)

> The idea is to encourage members to make good edits, not to make them feel
> awkward. I get the feeling that a lot of the old salts here would rather we
> didn't attract new editors at all.
>

I agree that there is a "generation gap" between Wikipedians, but does
there need to be? We can't do without new editors; the more pairs of
eyes we have checking things, the less likely we are to be wrong; what
we *do* need to do is find out what is attracting new editors and
determine if their goals fit the goals of the project, *before* a
problem arises.

Oh heck. Let's make people fill out application forms before we let them
create an account. We must be about the only website which doesn't force
people to read the terms and conditions before you register.

--
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/20060114/d0f1190e/attachment.pgp


from_name: Sharad B

subject: [WikiEN-l] Range IP blocking

body:
>From user: Snpoj
Current user IP: 63.19.227.233

I think the system in place for range IP blocking should undergo a change.
Here's why:

I just signed up with NetZero which I assume, like most dial-up ISP's, uses
dynamic IP's. After logging in and attempting to contribute to an article, I
learned that my IP had been blocked by user: Curps. It seems that his email
was unavailable otherwise I would have brought the issue directly to him
rather than to the mailing list as a whole.

The problem here is not that my IP was blocked, because if I had not logged
in and tried to edit an article, I would have been fine and understanding of
the fact that the IP had been temporarily blocked. The problem here is that
I logged in as a responsible contributor with no reports of vandalism and
was blocked. Furthermore, I would have understood the blocking if I had
registered in the IP range previously and then was blocked, but I did not
register within that IP range, nor have any of my contributions been within
that IP range.

So, the problem is that a contributing user with no record of vandalism was
arbitrarily blocked in an attempt to stop a vandal. Although I realize that
this may be a rare instance, I still think it is important because it
represents a larger issue.  Measures were employed to stop a vandal from
destroying articles, but at the same time a valid user was prevented from
creating articles. Thus, the normal operations which lead to the improvement
and existence of Wikipedia were blocked in an attempt to halt a potential
vandal.

IP range blocking will not go away because it still is a useful (although
perhaps extreme) measure to prevent vandals, but I would like to propose a
different system to prevent cases such as my own. I propose that the new
system should roughly follow these steps:

Please note that:
I define "registered" as "originally signing up the username"
I define "contribution" as "any contribution that has not been labeled as
vandalism"

1. Accept that the IP has been blocked by an admin
2. Check whether a non-banned user is logged in from this IP range
3. Check whether the user has registered from this IP range and has made any
contributions
4. If the user has registered recently from the IP range and has made no
contributions, then block
5. If the user has registered from the IP range and has made any
contributions then unblock the specific IP as long as the user is posting
from it.
6. If the user has registered from outside the IP range and has made no
contributions (or any contributions for that matter), then unblock the
specific IP as long as the user is posting from it.

Basically, this is an attempt to move away from an "IP blocking-only" system
to a more versatile hybrid "IP/user blocking" system.

On a final note, I question the measures taken by Curps:

As shown from

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Ipblocklist?action=search&limit=50&ip=63.19

Curps has blocked 63.19.128.0/17

According to

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Range_blocks

A "/17" will block 32,768 IP addresses. (And here's a quick disclaimer: I am
not very familiar with binary and range blocking so this may be incorrect.)

I understand the dedication admins take to block vandals but in all honesty
I think it's a bit extreme to block 30,000 IP's even if it's only for a
couple of days.

If any admin is reading this, I ask that you please address this issue to
the admin community on my behalf.  Again, I understand that this issue may
be rare, but I anticipate having problems like this in the future while
using an ISP such as NetZero.

Thanks for your time. Regards,
-Snpoj

_________________________________________________________________
Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee?
Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963


from_name: Sabine Cretella

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Can a Spanish speaking member please help me?

body:
I understand some Spanish, but I really have difficulties in wiriting.
As much as I understand on wicodatos.org they want to create some kind
of wikipedia in Columbian dialects. Well I cannot follow up this because
my Spanish is simply not good enough and I have already too many
different tasks around.

Is there someone within wikipedia who is interested in having a look and
maybe see if it would make sense to consider this project for a future
inclusion in Wikipedia as well as maybe helping the admin to go the
right way to create good contents?

I suppose that this project was created because there was not enough
support within the community - well: I cannot follow up everyting ... so
I am asking you if someone is interested.

Thanks!!!

Best, Sabine

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: 	Wicodatos e-mail
Date: 	Sat, 14 Jan 2006 08:38:19 -0500
From: 	DGDIC <webmaster at amigosdelbambuco.zzn.com>
To: 	SabineCretella <sabine_cretella at yahoo.it>

ya hemos hecho cientos de mejoras para una mejor portada   y  otra suerte de  servicios, asi que te  invito muy amablemente  a pegarte de  nuevo una pasadita por  nuestra   wiki  wicodatos.org

suerte

___________________________________
Yahoo! Mail: gratis 1GB per i messaggi e allegati da 10MB
http://mail.yahoo.it


from_name: Manuel de Sousa

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Wikipedia in Tetum

body:
Mark,
There is no problem with this. As I said, it will be Tetum, the national and
official language of East Timor, with a standardised orthography established
by the National Institute of Linguistics (INL) of East Timor.

The official Tetum, derives from the dialect of the capital city, Dili,
known as "Tetum-Dili" or "Tetum-Pra?a" (or "Prasa").

As you may know, in the territory of East Timor there are another 15
languages with the status of "national language". But this Wikipedia would
be in the official Tetum of East Timor.

Could anyone inform me what must be done in order to setup the Tetum
Wikipedia?

Thanks & regards,
Manuel de Sousa

> -----Mensagem original-----
> De: wikipedia-l-bounces at Wikimedia.org [mailto:wikipedia-l-
> bounces at Wikimedia.org] Em nome de Mark Williamson
> Enviada: s?bado, 14 de Janeiro de 2006 20:44
> Para: wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> Assunto: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Wikipedia in Tetum
>
> One problem is, will it use Tetum or Tetun? Tetum is a creole language
> based on Tetun and is the national and official language of East
> Timor. Tetun is a regional language of Timor.
>
> Tetum is basically a grammatically simplified form of Tetun with some
> words from other Timorese languages.
>
> Mark
>
> On 13/01/06, Manuel de Sousa <manuel.sousa at tvtel.pt> wrote:
> > Giuseppe,
> > As far as I know, a Tetum Wikipedia was proposed last November and it
> got
> > half a dozen people supporting the idea. However, there were no native
> > speakers of the language supporting this project.
> >
> > See:
> >
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Native_speaker_s
> up
> > port#Tetum_.287_support.29
> >
> > For those who don't know, Tetum is one of the official languages of
> > Timor-Leste (or East Timor), the youngest independent nation in the
> world
> > (the other official language is Portuguese).
> >
> > Seeking for supporters, I recently sent mails to several people related
> to
> > East Timor, and posted a few messages on some blogs and discussion
> groups. I
> > immediately got several positive answers from native speakers of Tetum,
> as
> > well as people with excellent command of the language (namely non-native
> > speakers teachers of Tetum).
> >
> > However, most of these people are not yet registered in the meta-wiki.
> I'm
> > now seeing that they do register and express their support to this
> project
> > as native speakers.
> >
> > So, I'm absolutely convinced this Wikipedia in Tetum is viable, and that
> it
> > can be an exceptional tool for East-Timorese to promote their national
> > language internally and abroad.
> >
> > So, as I guess there is a consensus to create a wiki in Tetum, I'm also
> > interested in knowing what must be done in order to have this setup.
> Must I
> > ask a developer? How can I do this?
> >
> > Thanks & regards,
> > Manuel de Sousa
> > Porto, Portugal
> >
> > > -----Mensagem original-----
> > > De: wikipedia-l-bounces at Wikimedia.org [mailto:wikipedia-l-
> > > bounces at Wikimedia.org] Em nome de Giuseppe DAngelo
> > > Enviada: sexta-feira, 13 de Janeiro de 2006 10:11
> > > Para: wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > > Assunto: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Wikipedia in Tetum
> > >
> > > Could someone please confirm whether a Wikipedia in Tetum has recenlty
> > > been set up, or whether it is about to be set up?  Thanks!
> > >   pippu d'angelo
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------
> > > Yahoo! Messenger with Voice: chiama da PC a telefono a tariffe
> esclusive
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > > Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> >
>
>
> --
> "Take away their language, destroy their souls." -- Joseph Stalin
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l


from_name: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason

subject: [Wikitech-l] test.wikipedia.org

body:
On 1/14/06, Brion Vibber <brion at pobox.com> wrote:
> Mark Williamson wrote:
> > Actually, based on content from web.archive.org, it looks as if
> > somebody might've started an Old Norse testwiki on the old test:. Is
> > that content saved anywhere, or was it just cleared? I remember I had
> > a few humourous pages there of my own...
>
> Gone, dead, buried. Sorry.

Tim made a backup of it before he dropped it, it's in his ~


from_name: Giuseppe DAngelo

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Wikipedia-l Digest, Vol 30, Issue 18

body:
I can confirm  what Manuel is saying here.  I know Dr Geoff Hull of the National Institute personally and he has told me a similar thing.

  Given that East Timor is the newest nation on Earth, I really hope that something can be done for them to get a wikipedia up and running in one of their main national languages.  One can't understate what such a venture would do to the self-esteem of a whole people.  It will take a while to get going, given their problems with basic infrastructure, but I am certain that it would eventually succeed.  There is also likely to be a thriving community of Tetum speakers in nearby Darwin, where they are likely to have better infrastructure - it's just a case of getting the message through to them.
  All the best!
  Pippu d'Angelo

wikipedia-l-request at Wikimedia.org ha scritto:
  Message: 7
Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2006 00:46:49 -0000
From: "Manuel de Sousa"
Subject: RE: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Wikipedia in Tetum
To:
Message-ID: <200601150046.k0F0kmoK016051 at mail.tvtel.pt>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

Mark,
There is no problem with this. As I said, it will be Tetum, the national and
official language of East Timor, with a standardised orthography established
by the National Institute of Linguistics (INL) of East Timor.

The official Tetum, derives from the dialect of the capital city, Dili,
known as "Tetum-Dili" or "Tetum-Pra?a" (or "Prasa").

As you may know, in the territory of East Timor there are another 15
languages with the status of "national language". But this Wikipedia would
be in the official Tetum of East Timor.

Could anyone inform me what must be done in order to setup the Tetum
Wikipedia?

Thanks & regards,
Manuel de Sousa

---------------------------------
Yahoo! Messenger with Voice: chiama da PC a telefono a tariffe esclusive


from_name: Ilya N.

subject: [WikiEN-l] admin violations again

body:
You can't be blocked from your own user talk as the software doesn't allow
it afaik

On 1/14/06, prgibbons at ou.edu <prgibbons at ou.edu> wrote:
>
> If blocking me for reverting vandalism (tag placement and replacement with
> no discussion despite requests) isnt bad enough I am also blocked from my
> own user discussion page.  I want this violation corrected and the violating
> administrators warned about their abuses.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> The only purpose for which power can be rightfully
> exercised over any member of a civilized community,
> against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His
> own good, either physical or moral, is not sufficient
> warrant
>
> - John Stuart Mill
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

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


subject: [WikiEN-l] admin violations again

body:
Oh, I'm sorry...didn't quite think that far.

On 1/15/06, Sam Korn <smoddy at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 1/15/06, Ilya N. <ilyanep at gmail.com> wrote:
> > You can't be blocked from your own user talk as the software doesn't
> allow
> > it afaik
>
> User talk page protection.
>
> --
> Sam
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

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


subject: [Wikitech-l] test.wikipedia.org

body:
It is? Where can we download his ~?

Mark

On 14/01/06, ?var Arnfj?r? Bjarmason <avarab at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 1/14/06, Brion Vibber <brion at pobox.com> wrote:
> > Mark Williamson wrote:
> > > Actually, based on content from web.archive.org, it looks as if
> > > somebody might've started an Old Norse testwiki on the old test:. Is
> > > that content saved anywhere, or was it just cleared? I remember I had
> > > a few humourous pages there of my own...
> >
> > Gone, dead, buried. Sorry.
>
> Tim made a backup of it before he dropped it, it's in his ~
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>
>

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


from_name: Fruggo

subject: [Foundation-l] Re: Steward elections

body:
 Anthere  schreef:
> > Next time, I suggest to put a new rule (positive discrimination I know),
> > a requirement of 50% of female stewards... a real challenge
>

That would probably mean that there would be no new stewards at all ;)

Greetz,
Fruggo


subject: [Foundation-l] Re: Steward elections


subject: [WikiEN-l] admin violations again

body:
I believe this is KDRGibby.

K

On 1/15/06, MacGyverMagic/Mgm <macgyvermagic at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 1/15/06, prgibbons at ou.edu <prgibbons at ou.edu> wrote:
> >
> > If blocking me for reverting vandalism (tag placement and replacement
> with
> > no discussion despite requests) isnt bad enough I am also blocked from
> my
> > own user discussion page.  I want this violation corrected and the
> violating
> > administrators warned about their abuses.
>
>
> Please give your username and IP address first. Without those it's
> impossible for someone to investigate this matter. We have hundreds of
> blocks a day and finding out which one is on you would be impossible
> without
> that info.
>
> Mgm
> _______________________________________________
> 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: Geoff Burling

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

body:
On Sat, 14 Jan 2006, Haukur ?orgeirsson wrote:

> > If a user has made enough edits to articles that they are able to move
> > pages and edit semi-protected pages, they have contributed enough that
> > they should be able to create a userpage. Userpages should be reserved
> > for those who are writing the encyclopedia; WP:NOT a webhost.
>
> I think this would have unintended negative consequences. When I register
> an account at a new Wikimedia project one of the first edits I make is
> usually to my userpage to let people know where I'm coming from and where
> I can most easily be contacted.
>
One useful clue, in fact, to the intents of a new user is how many edits
pass before she/he does create a userpage. If a new user makes more than
a few (say 10 or 20 edits) without creating a userpage, it raises doubts
in my mind whether that person wants to be part of a community devoted
to creaing an encyclopedia -- or has just dropped in to agitate for a
specific POV, or to cause trouble.

I suspect that I'm not the only one to understand this behavior in this
way, for a few months ago Uncle G refused to create a user page to combat
this assumption. (However, when I've asked the occasionally newbie who
doesn't have a user page to create one, I've never been refused; I'd
say that Uncle G was needlessly fighting a battle that didn't need to be
fought.)

Geoff


subject:
[Wikitech-l] bug in UPGRADE and maintenance/upgrade1_5.php
	upgrading from 1.4rc1 to 1.5.5 using php 4.4.0

body:
Tobias Bengtsson wrote:
> When I run maintenance/upgrade1_5.php to convert iso8859-1 to UTF-8 as
> told in UPGRADE I get these errors.
>
> Fatal error: Cannot instantiate non-existent class:  specialpage in
> /home/www/sites/tobbe.nu/mediawiki-1.5.5/includes/SpecialPage.php on
> line 72
> Fatal error: Cannot instantiate non-existent class:  unlistedspecialpage
> in /home/www/sites/tobbe.nu/mediawiki-1.5.5/includes/SpecialPage.php on
> line 396
>
> linenumbers could be bogus as I changed the file to get it to work.
> The issue is that you need to put the classes at the top of the file
> SpecialPage.php. I did that and the upgrade works.

I just tested on an upgrade from a fresh install of 1.4.13 to 1.5.5, running
upgrade1_5.php, with PHP 4.4.1, no custom configuration to MediaWiki.

There was no problem at all; the program ran through to the end.

> another issue is in UPGRADE, you need to tell folks to change $IP and
> not just to copy LocalSettings.php, otherwise no upgrade works..

If they change the directory, obviously they need to change the path reference.
If they don't, they don't.

-- 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/20060115/3a40ae70/attachment.pgp>


subject: [Wikitech-l] Bug

body:
Sylvain wrote:
> There is a bug with {{?bauche flore}} tag :
> http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palmier_%C3%A0_ivoire

It's not obvious on first glance what is wrong. You need to provide details when
you report problems, or we will never be able to fix them for you.

Please see:
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/bugs.html

-- 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/20060115/c5bc03e1/attachment.pgp>


from_name: Sam Korn

subject: [WikiEN-l] Autoblock

body:
On 1/13/06, Siva Balan <siva19792403 at hotmail.com> wrote:
> My IP address is 165.21.154.114 and my user name is siva1979. I feel that I
> have been autoblocked from editing Wikipedia by Wgfinley. I hope that the
> problem will be resolved as soon as possible. Thank You.

The IP belongs to singnet.com, a Singapore-based ISP. It was probably
connected to the block of Instantnood or Huaiwei.  As it is now two
days old (presumably waiting for moderator approval), I think it's
safe to assume that the block is no longer extant.

--
Sam


from_name: - Essjay -

subject: [Foundation-l] Logo use

body:
As a former "CVU Director" (a title which bears no real authority, outside
high access in the CVU IRC channel) and the creator of the original images
(they have since been reconditioned), I must object to this. There are many,
many derivatives of the Foundation logos that have been created for various
different groups (I myself am responsible for quite a few, I admit), and
very few of these have received any objection. When I created my first
derivative, the "Admin mop", I went to Angela to determine what should be
done to get it approved; she passed it on to the other board members,
received no objection, and noted the same on the image page. In the course
of gettting that image "approved", we discussed what terms applied to such
images (use onwiki only, copyright to the foundation, images in good taste,
etc). I believe that as long as the derivatives do not defame the founation,
Wikipedians should have free reign to create derivatives of the logos for
use on Wikimedia projects.

Perhaps an informal review process should be instituted, something along the
lines of a "derivative review committee" that could quickly review the
images, insure they do not pose a threat to the foundation, and "certify"
them as safe for use on projects. I myself would be willing to serve on such
a committee; images could be uploaded to commons with a {{proposed logo
derivative}} tag, listed on a Meta page, where the committee members (which
should probably include at least one of our "legal mavens") could review
them and issue a quick decision, replacing the proposed tag with an
{{approved logo derivative}} tag that would make it clear that while the
Foundation did not object to the use of the logo on WM projects, it also did
not sponsor or sanction the group using the logo (unless of course, they do,
in which case, the tag could be altered).

I would also support requiring groups (like the CVU, but also groups like
COTW and such) to have a small italicized disclaimer (something similar to
the disambig notices that show up on the top of certain pages) saying that
they are not sponsored or sanctioned by the Foundation. (In fact, I'll go
put such a notice on the CVU page as soon as I finish this email.) I don't
think "lacking Foundation sanction" has to mean "forbidden to use the
foundation logo", when plenty of other unsanctioned groups are using the
logo.

Essjay
-----
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Essjay
Wikipedia:The Free Encyclopedia
http://www.wikipedia.org/

On 1/15/06, Sam Korn <smoddy at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On the subject of the recent introduction of Wikimedia's visual
> identity guidelines [1], I came across several images (one of which I
> apparently created myself, though I don't remember doing so) which
> contravene these guidelines.  Angela has made a list of these on Meta
> [2].  Most of these don't seem to be intrinsically harmful to the
> Foundation's copyright or give the impression that the Foundation
> endorses any concept or group that it in fact does not.
>
> However, there are some images that do concern me.  There are two
> images created by Cool Cat [3] for a group named the "Counter
> Vandalism Unit" [4], a group that aims to facilitate and improve
> vandal fighting.  The images are logos for the group.  One [5]
> incorporates the WMF logo, the other [6] the Wikipedia logo.
>
> Cool Cat was given provisional permission by Anthere to use these
> images before the above guidelines were created. [7]
>
> However, the Counter Vandalism Unit does have some opposition within
> the community.  I would note that I myself am in disagreement with
> much of its structure and attitudes, particularly some comments that
> imply that the Unit is the only way in which to fight vandalism.
> However, just to avoid any undue comments, I am sending this post not
> to request removal but just _reappraisal_ of the situation, which I
> see as potentially harmful.
>
> The logos give the impression that the Unit is Foundation-sanctioned.
> This idea is encouraged by the proliferation of the Foundation logo
> attached to Unit-related matters (most notably the infamous
> userboxes).
>
> With this in mind, may I suggest that the provisional permission
> granted to Cool Cat be at least reconsidered in light of the new
> guidelines.
>
> Happy Wikipedia Day!
>
> [1]
> http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Wikimedia_visual_identity_guidelines
> [2] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Uses_of_logo_derivatives
> [3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Cool_Cat
> [4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Counter_Vandalism_Unit
> [5] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:CVU2.PNG
> [6] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:CVU2.5.PNG
> [7] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:CVU2.5.PNG
>
> --
> Sam
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>


subject: [Foundation-l] Logo use


subject: [WikiEN-l] Range IP blocking

body:
On 1/15/06, Sharad B <skrod at hotmail.com> wrote:
> >From user: Snpoj
> Current user IP: 63.19.227.233
>
> I think the system in place for range IP blocking should undergo a change.
> Here's why:
>
> I just signed up with NetZero which I assume, like most dial-up ISP's, uses
> dynamic IP's. After logging in and attempting to contribute to an article, I
> learned that my IP had been blocked by user: Curps. It seems that his email
> was unavailable otherwise I would have brought the issue directly to him
> rather than to the mailing list as a whole.
>
> The problem here is not that my IP was blocked, because if I had not logged
> in and tried to edit an article, I would have been fine and understanding of
> the fact that the IP had been temporarily blocked. The problem here is that
> I logged in as a responsible contributor with no reports of vandalism and
> was blocked. Furthermore, I would have understood the blocking if I had
> registered in the IP range previously and then was blocked, but I did not
> register within that IP range, nor have any of my contributions been within
> that IP range.
>
> So, the problem is that a contributing user with no record of vandalism was
> arbitrarily blocked in an attempt to stop a vandal. Although I realize that
> this may be a rare instance, I still think it is important because it
> represents a larger issue.  Measures were employed to stop a vandal from
> destroying articles, but at the same time a valid user was prevented from
> creating articles. Thus, the normal operations which lead to the improvement
> and existence of Wikipedia were blocked in an attempt to halt a potential
> vandal.
>
> IP range blocking will not go away because it still is a useful (although
> perhaps extreme) measure to prevent vandals, but I would like to propose a
> different system to prevent cases such as my own. I propose that the new
> system should roughly follow these steps:
>
> Please note that:
> I define "registered" as "originally signing up the username"
> I define "contribution" as "any contribution that has not been labeled as
> vandalism"
>
> 1. Accept that the IP has been blocked by an admin
> 2. Check whether a non-banned user is logged in from this IP range
> 3. Check whether the user has registered from this IP range and has made any
> contributions
> 4. If the user has registered recently from the IP range and has made no
> contributions, then block
> 5. If the user has registered from the IP range and has made any
> contributions then unblock the specific IP as long as the user is posting
> from it.
> 6. If the user has registered from outside the IP range and has made no
> contributions (or any contributions for that matter), then unblock the
> specific IP as long as the user is posting from it.
>
> Basically, this is an attempt to move away from an "IP blocking-only" system
> to a more versatile hybrid "IP/user blocking" system.
>
>
> On a final note, I question the measures taken by Curps:
>
> As shown from
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Ipblocklist?action=search&limit=50&ip=63.19
>
> Curps has blocked 63.19.128.0/17
>
>
> According to
>
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Range_blocks
>
> A "/17" will block 32,768 IP addresses. (And here's a quick disclaimer: I am
> not very familiar with binary and range blocking so this may be incorrect.)
>
> I understand the dedication admins take to block vandals but in all honesty
> I think it's a bit extreme to block 30,000 IP's even if it's only for a
> couple of days.
>
> If any admin is reading this, I ask that you please address this issue to
> the admin community on my behalf.  Again, I understand that this issue may
> be rare, but I anticipate having problems like this in the future while
> using an ISP such as NetZero.
>
> Thanks for your time. Regards,
> -Snpoj

Bugzilla bug 550, I believe.  I do agree, however, on first glance
that a /17 for two days does seem excessive.  On the other hand, when
you see the block history [1], you can understand why the long block
was made.  I believe this is the infamous "North Carolina" vandal.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=block&user=&page=User%3A63.19.128.0%2F17

--
Sam


from_name: Ryan Delaney

subject: [WikiEN-l] Attack templates

body:
All of those look like a waste of time, but not copyvios or anything, so if
everyone would kindly resist the urge to wheel war over them I would
appreciate it. We have time to talk this out.

Ryan

On 1/11/06, Tony Sidaway <f.crdfa at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> 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.
> _______________________________________________
> 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: geni

subject: [WikiEN-l] (no subject)

body:
On 1/14/06, prgibbons at ou.edu <prgibbons at ou.edu> wrote:
> I am sick and tired of administrators violating rules on wikipedia for their own political prefrences.  I have been blocked once again when in disagreement with other editors and administrators over the content of material in certain articles. And once again I have called for discussion of disputed material, recieved no discussion but have had my submissions or edites reverted...with no discussion. This final time TheLand, with whom I have been disputing Economics of Fascism page, blocked me for "violating the 3rr" when I actually reverted several vandalism attempts by editors placing tags on the page without discussion dispite my calls for discussion.  I want this block removed and I want administrators to stop abusing their privilages to eliminate intellecual competition they disagree with.

Placeing tags on a page without discusion is not vandalism as defiened
by http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Dealing_with_vandalism

--
geni


subject: [WikiEN-l] admin violations again

body:
On 1/15/06, Ilya N. <ilyanep at gmail.com> wrote:
> You can't be blocked from your own user talk as the software doesn't allow
> it afaik

User talk page protection.

--
Sam


from_name: Snowspinner

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

body:
On Jan 15, 2006, at 2:41 PM, Geoff Burling wrote:

> One useful clue, in fact, to the intents of a new user is how many
> edits
> pass before she/he does create a userpage. If a new user makes more
> than
> a few (say 10 or 20 edits) without creating a userpage, it raises
> doubts
> in my mind whether that person wants to be part of a community devoted
> to creaing an encyclopedia -- or has just dropped in to agitate for a
> specific POV, or to cause trouble.

Or perhaps they've just decided to create an account to make edits to
the encyclopedia, and are (Probably very wisely) uninterested in
getting sucked into the black hole of community. Or just doesn't know
what to put on their userpage.

Which is to say that the redlink userpage is a sign of newbieness,
but is absolutely not a problem, and shouldn't be taken as a
requirement at all.

-Phil


from_name: Neil Harris

subject: [WikiEN-l] Range IP blocking

body:
Sam Korn wrote:
> On 1/15/06, Sharad B <skrod at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> >From user: Snpoj
>> Current user IP: 63.19.227.233
>>
>> I think the system in place for range IP blocking should undergo a change.
>> Here's why:
>>
>> I just signed up with NetZero which I assume, like most dial-up ISP's, uses
>> dynamic IP's. After logging in and attempting to contribute to an article, I
>> learned that my IP had been blocked by user: Curps. It seems that his email
>> was unavailable otherwise I would have brought the issue directly to him
>> rather than to the mailing list as a whole.
>>
>> The problem here is not that my IP was blocked, because if I had not logged
>> in and tried to edit an article, I would have been fine and understanding of
>> the fact that the IP had been temporarily blocked. The problem here is that
>> I logged in as a responsible contributor with no reports of vandalism and
>> was blocked. Furthermore, I would have understood the blocking if I had
>> registered in the IP range previously and then was blocked, but I did not
>> register within that IP range, nor have any of my contributions been within
>> that IP range.
>>
>>
[snip]
>> According to
>>
>> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Range_blocks
>>
>> A "/17" will block 32,768 IP addresses. (And here's a quick disclaimer: I am
>> not very familiar with binary and range blocking so this may be incorrect.)
>>
>> I understand the dedication admins take to block vandals but in all honesty
>> I think it's a bit extreme to block 30,000 IP's even if it's only for a
>> couple of days.
>>
>> If any admin is reading this, I ask that you please address this issue to
>> the admin community on my behalf.  Again, I understand that this issue may
>> be rare, but I anticipate having problems like this in the future while
>> using an ISP such as NetZero.
>>
>> Thanks for your time. Regards,
>> -Snpoj
>>
>
> Bugzilla bug 550, I believe.  I do agree, however, on first glance
> that a /17 for two days does seem excessive.  On the other hand, when
> you see the block history [1], you can understand why the long block
> was made.  I believe this is the infamous "North Carolina" vandal.
>
> [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=block&user=&page=User%3A63.19.128.0%2F17
>
> --
> Sam
>
>

Sharad,

Did you try complaining to NetZero regarding this problem, at least part
of which may well be within their ability to control? See
http://www.juno.com/legal/accept-use.html for their AUP.

-- Neil


from_name: Sylvain

subject: [Wikitech-l] Bug

body:
Hello

There is a bug with {{?bauche flore}} tag :
http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palmier_%C3%A0_ivoire

Sylvain


from_name: SJ

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Happy Wikipedia Day!

body:
"You're precocious for a five-year old!"

Happy Wikipedia Day, everyone.  To many more...

--SJ


from_name: MacGyverMagic/Mgm

subject: [WikiEN-l] admin violations again

body:
On 1/15/06, prgibbons at ou.edu <prgibbons at ou.edu> wrote:
>
> If blocking me for reverting vandalism (tag placement and replacement with
> no discussion despite requests) isnt bad enough I am also blocked from my
> own user discussion page.  I want this violation corrected and the violating
> administrators warned about their abuses.

Please give your username and IP address first. Without those it's
impossible for someone to investigate this matter. We have hundreds of
blocks a day and finding out which one is on you would be impossible without
that info.

Mgm


from_name: Tobias Bengtsson

subject:
[Wikitech-l] bug in UPGRADE and maintenance/upgrade1_5.php
 upgrading from 1.4rc1 to 1.5.5 using php 4.4.0

body:
Hi

When I run maintenance/upgrade1_5.php to convert iso8859-1 to UTF-8 as
told in UPGRADE I get these errors.

Fatal error: Cannot instantiate non-existent class:  specialpage in
/home/www/sites/tobbe.nu/mediawiki-1.5.5/includes/SpecialPage.php on line 72
Fatal error: Cannot instantiate non-existent class:  unlistedspecialpage
in /home/www/sites/tobbe.nu/mediawiki-1.5.5/includes/SpecialPage.php on
line 396

linenumbers could be bogus as I changed the file to get it to work.
The issue is that you need to put the classes at the top of the file
SpecialPage.php. I did that and the upgrade works.

another issue is in UPGRADE, you need to tell folks to change $IP and
not just to copy LocalSettings.php, otherwise no upgrade works..

thanks for a great product.

kind regards Tobias