from_name: Anthony DiPierro

body:
On 10/25/05, dpbsmith at verizon.net <dpbsmith at verizon.net> wrote:
>
> The Wikipedia promise is "edit this page."
>
> But I don't think the promise of zero-threshold _editing_ should
> automatically be a promise of zero-threshold article _creation._
>
> _Most_ people get their feet wet with simple edits, giving a chance to get
> acculturated before taking the leap to creating an article. People whose
> first edit is the creation of an article are, I think, showing _too_ bold
> a
> temperament.
>
> Many online communities have a provision whereby new users' messages are
> automatically moderated initially and only removed from moderation after
> they've posted a small number of acceptable messages.
>
> Suppose we had a level of privilege called, say "contributor." Anons and
> non-
> contributors could edit articles just as they do now, but only
> contributors
> could create an article _and have it appear immediately in the main
> namespace._
>
> Articles contributed by non-contributors would go to a "moderated" area.
> These article would not appear in the namespace until a contributor made
> at
> least one edit to them. That is, an article is approved by making a single
> edit to it. The reason for requiring one edit for approval would be to
> strongly encourage contributors not to mindlessly approve marginal
> articles.
>
> I'm thinking that it should be extremely easy to become a contributor. I'm
> thinking that the requirement should be a) contributors must have user
> names,
> and b) users with accounts get contributor status automatically as soon as
> their first new article is approved.

 It's not a bad idea, but the design is overly complicated, especially the
part about the moderated area. I think the moderated area would cause too
many arguments and finger pointing, as well as be difficult to implement in
code and bloat the mediawiki software. Why not just take away the ability of
new users and non-users to create new articles? Much simpler to implement,
and it'd cause a lot fewer arguments.
 Anthony


list: wikien-l

source: pipermail-mbox

from_name: Han Dao

subject: [WikiEN-l] New Ideas for AfD

body:
Define the notability standard for every topics that need such a standard
like webcomics. So if a webcomic was AfD, one have to check the webcomic
notability guideline to see if they meet.
On 10/25/05, Snowspinner <Snowspinner at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> OK, so since the "Deletion again" thread became "Let's rehash the
> same old and really kind of beside the point 'should we have an
> article on everyone' argument," let's try again.
>
> Current ideas I've seen on how to fix the Broken that is AfD
>
> 1) Shut it down for a month and see if the Wiki explodes
> 2) Allow experts to speedy keep
> 3) Continually let every discussion on the matter get derailed while
> good contributors leave the project
>
> Did I miss anything?
>
> -Phil Sandifer (Snowspinner)
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


list: foundation-l

from_name: Amgine

subject: [Foundation-l] Re: Answers.com and Wikimedia Foundation...

body:
This has been an exciting discussion from the spectator POV. But I'd
like to bring up a few wiki points:

# Only intervene if a problem exists, and then only the least amount
necessary to address the issue.

#: Funding is an existing problem. Wikipedia usability is an existing
problem. The proposed item appears, to me, to address both, while not
increasing system costs.

# Assume good faith.

#: The persons who are involved in this effort are very likely aware
of the potential issues, and are bringing this to the community in a
time and effect constrained manner - a 60 day trial period, and
they're talking to us nearly 90 days before they even start that.
Seems to me to be a good-faith effort to avoid possible community
issues, and to hear from all parts of the community, and we should
assume they have the best interests of everyone at heart.

# Avoid bad  feelings, edit wars, and disruptive behaviour. Be polite.

#: We have clear differences of opinion. Although some here feel the
issues are stark, black and white, it is also clear that others feel
it is a continuum of greys. Respect that other  people feel
differently, and strongly, about the issues. Consider if what you want
to say is specifically helpful, and avoid rhetoric which is only
attempting to support one of many valid opinions.

# Be bold.

#: Changes happen. They can be reverted if they are shown to be a
problem.

Amgine

BTW: Board, Officers, etc? Thanks for your patience.


list: wikimedia-l


from_name: Ilya N.

subject: [WikiEN-l] Arbitration Committee elections, 2005

body:
While I respect Jimbo's opinion I'm not quite sure if this way is the right
way to go.

The 'old boys' club' is one of my concerns. The other one (which is slightly
related) is that some highly-qualified candidates which could do very well
might not be on Jimbo's (and the arbCom's) radar, so how would that work?

~Ilya N.

On 10/25/05, Chris Jenkinson <chris at starglade.org> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I think it's important to get some discussion started on the way the
> arbitrators will be chosen at the end of this year, as Jimbo Wales has
> recently altered the elections page[1], saying that this year there will
> be a new system. As he hasn't decided, it's our responsibility as
> Wikipedians to help pick the best arbitrators with the best possible
> system.
>
> Currently his idea is on a appointments and confirmation procedure,
> roughly equivalent to the process that judges become United States
> Supreme Court members - i.e., Jimbo Wales picks a number of Wikipedians
> and they go through for a confirmation vote from the community. This
> obviously differs greatly from the previous system, where candidates put
> their name forward and any candidate willing to stand was added to the
> 'ballot paper' (similar to an election in most democratic countries).
>
> This idea has already come in for some criticism[2], such as Geni
> suggesting it would be easier to make accusations of an "old boy's
> club", and Michael Snow, Filiocht and jguk mentioning that they would
> prefer the community to be trusted to make the right decision.
>
> Therefore I propose that we remind ourselves of the advantages and
> disadvantages that last year's elections showed, debate the merits of
> the current line of thinking of Jimbo's idea and if possible come up
> with a new system ensures that the English language Wikipedia is
> arbitrated by the best Arbitrators who were chosen by the best possible
> system.
>
> Chris
>
> 1. http://tinyurl.com/c2ph9
> 2. http://tinyurl.com/7n88j
> _______________________________________________
> 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] How do I edit a page from inside China?

body:
There as well as Bugzilla Bug #550

~Ilya N. (User: Ilyanep)

On 10/25/05, Stefan Sittler <kiaparowits at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 10/25/05, Christopher Maloney <voldrani at gmail.com> wrote:
> > As most of you probably know, China has recently blocked (again)
> > access to Wikipedia. I've gotten around their Great Firewall by
> > installing tor, but now, I find that my edit access to pages is
> > blocked, because I appear to be coming from an open proxy.
> >
> > I don't understand why my edit access is blocked, even though I'm
> > logged in as a valid user (Klortho). I'm sure there's a good reason,
> > but I don't understand it. Anyway, is there any way around this? I
> > certainly hope so, because it seems ironic to me that Wikipedia, in
> > effect, puts up an additional barrier to Chinese people wanting to
> > express themselves (in addition to the censorship by the government,
> > that is).
>
> This *very issue* is right now being proposed as a policy, here:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Blocking_policy_proposal
>
> Ironically, you yourself may not be able to enter into the discussion
> (although maybe talk-page editing isn't blocked?), but you can at
> least see what's happening. At least some people are hoping that this
> exact situation can be remedied.
> Good luck.
>
> --smws
> (user:Kiaparowits)
>
> > _______________________________________________
> > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


subject: [WikiEN-l] "Can you trust Wikipedia?"

body:
Are any of these Articles Featured or even FAC's?

It may not exactly be fair to judge articles that aren't, because those are
always in production.

~Ilya N. (AKA User: Ilyanep)

On 10/24/05, Neil Harris <usenet at tonal.clara.co.uk> wrote:
>
> The Guardian has a story entitled "Can you trust Wikipedia?" in which
> various specialists rate Wikipedia articles in their field of knowledge:
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,,1599116,00.html
>
> At the very least, it will draw attention to the articles reviewed,
> particularly the article on [[haute couture]], which Vogue's editor
> rated at 0/10.
>
> Noted Wikipedia critic Robert McHenry rates the [[Encylopedia]] article
> at 5/10: not nearly good enough, but it's a start... it might well be
> worthwhile to try to improve Wikipedia's McHenry Index by improving the
> quality of this article, and backing up its statement with solid cites.
> Downplaying the self-reference to Wikipedia own fabulousness might be a
> useful first step.
>
> The other article ratings were:
>
> [[Steve Reich]] 7/10
> [[Basque people]] 7/10
> [[TS Eliot]] 6/10
> [[Samuel Pepys]] 6/10
> [[Bob Dylan]] 8/10
>
> A friend forwarded me a link to this; they have an interest in one of
> the fields reviewed, and commented that they were somewhat dubious about
> the factual accuracy of one of the criticisms made in the article ;-)
>
> -- Neil
>


subject: [WikiEN-l] In The News - new name needed

body:
Unless we rename it to something like "Current Events" People will continue
to abbreviate it ITN out of habit.

~Ilya N. (User:Ilyanep)

On 10/25/05, Andrew Gray <shimgray at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 24/10/05, MacGyverMagic/Mgm <macgyvermagic at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I like that idea. But how would we deal with old links? We can't just
> > deprecate a link and not replace it. If they call it ITN, it will
> > still be called ITN if it points to [[WP:NEWS]].
>
> I pretty much meant what Flcello suggests below: ask people to call it
> News (or something) rather than ITN. Not perfect - but most people say
> AfD not VfD now.
>
> --
> - Andrew Gray
> andrew.gray at dunelm.org.uk
>


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Crappy prose isn't the main "quality" problem.

body:
Agreed...and it could be argued that some of our policies prohibit such an
article from being created.

~Ilya N. (User:Ilyanep)

On 10/24/05, Daniel P. B. Smith <dpbsmith at verizon.net> wrote:
>
> The quality problem in our articles isn't "crappy prose." Sure, a
> sentence like
>
> "Implicit order means a system has hidden information which is not
> apparent based solely on direct observation."
>
> makes me wince.
>
> But improving the quality of an article is more than just rewriting
> crappy prose. Or checking facts. Or adding references. Or fixing
> typos. Or removing inaccuracies.
>
> As the -paedia root implies, a good encyclopedia article should
> teach. That means it should go beyond Gradgrind, facts, facts, facts.
> It should convey not data, not information, but knowledge. It should
> integrate and synthesize; it should be comprehensible to a wide range
> of readers, for example by having a progressive structure that gives
> the basics quickly without sacrificing detail later. It should be
> well balanced, giving suitably proportioned weight to all aspects of
> its subject. It should be analytical.
>
> It takes a _lot_ of work to do that.
>
> If you look at the Guardian criticisms, Mike Barnes complains that
> some of the writing in an article is "unhelpful." He thinks
> encyclopedia articles should be helpful.
>
> Alexandra Shulman complains that an article "inaccurate and unclear"
> and that "every value judgment it makes is wrong." She thinks
> encyclopedia articles should be not only accurate but clear, and that
> they _should present value judgements--sound ones._
>
> Mark Kurlansky complains of some factual details. No comment on the
> prose.
>
> Anthony Julius complains that an article is "purely factual and not
> in any way analytical." He thinks encyclopedia articles should be
> analytical.
>
> Claire Tomalin complains of minor accuracies, complains more about
> major _omissions_, and by the failure of the article to comment on
> the literary merit of Pepy's diary. She thinks an encyclopedia should
> provide balanced coverage of a topic. Like Shulman, she thinks it
> should present sound value judgements.
>
> Derek Barker indeed complains of prose style.
>
> Robert McHenry complains that an article shows "no understanding of
> the cultural and historical contexts involved. In other words, it is
> a school essay, sketchy and poorly balanced."
>
> Most complain of inaccuracies, but characterize them as minor.
>
> Only one complains of bad prose.
>
> The others complain of articles that fail to be helpful; clear;
> present sound value judgements; be analytical; and provide balanced
> coverage of their subject.
>
>
> --
> Daniel P. B. Smith, dpbsmith at verizon.net
> "Elinor Goulding Smith's Great Big Messy Book" is now back in print!
> Sample chapter at http://world.std.com/~dpbsmith/messy.html
> Buy it at http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1403314063/
>
>


body:
Does NPOV or NOR allow analysis at all? Not in the slightest.

While it is meant to discourage pushing a viewpoint and putting uncited
research up on Wikipedia, what would happen if someone were to analyze a
point in an article?

In some cases it would seem to be pushing a point of view (even if the
opposite POV is expressed) and sometimes would cause an edit war

In other cases it would be seen as original research (oh no! You can't say
that without citing it!)

Maybe I'm just not understanding correctly what you mean by analyzing.

On 10/25/05, Koltwills at aol.com <Koltwills at aol.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> In a message dated 10/25/2005 5:28:50 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
> ilyanep at gmail.com writes:
>
> Agreed...and it could be argued that some of our policies prohibit such an
> article from being created.
>
> ~Ilya N. (User:Ilyanep)
>
>
> *applauding Daniel Smith's analysis of the comments in the Guardian
> article"
>
> Policies such as?
>
> dcv
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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.


from_name: Chris Jenkinson

subject: [Foundation-l] Answers.com stuff

body:
Gerrit Holl wrote:
> I think the BBC is not-for-profit.
>
> Gerrit.
>

More precisely it is a subsidised organisation which funnels any profit
back into programming. The BBC is aided by the fact that anyone who
watches TV has to pay a TV licence.

Interesting fact - only a very small percentage (3.5%, or ?0.35 per
month) of the licence fee is spent on bbc.co.uk.

Chris


subject: [Foundation-l] Answers.com stuff


subject:
[WikiEN-l] Skyring edit history to date - (formerly Blocked - In
	violation of the Wikipedia blocking policy)

body:
who owns this IPs?

~Ilya N. (User:Ilyanep)

On 10/25/05, Tom Cadden <thomcadden at yahoo.ie> wrote:
>
>
> --- geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On 10/25/05, Alphax <alphasigmax at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Good lord, what happened to [[WP:FAITH]]? No
> > messages were left on the
> > > IP talk page and the conclusion that "Skyring is
> > using 213.x.x.x" seems
> > > to be based purely on style and/or content over
> > the course of 5 edits.
> > > Isn't it more likely that a completely different
> > person, in Ireland,
> > > possibly Irish, made these edits?
> > >
> > > I refer you to [[Occam's Razor]]; equally, I refer
> > you to [[Hanlon's
> > > Razor]].
> >
> > However going by the email it is pretty clear that
> > it is skyring so it
> > isn't a problem.
> >
> > --
> > geni
> >
> To give an idea of Skyring's antics since being banned
> at the start of September, among the names and IPs
> proven to be him, or strongly suspected of being him
> are
>
> 1. 144.138.154.241 <http://144.138.154.241>
> 2. 139.168.158.170 <http://139.168.158.170>
> 3. 139.168.157.152 <http://139.168.157.152>
> 4. 139.168.158.161 <http://139.168.158.161>
> 5. 139.168.159.1 <http://139.168.159.1>
> 6. 139.168.159.95 <http://139.168.159.95>
> 7. 143.238.244.146 <http://143.238.244.146>
> 8. 143.238.244.181 <http://143.238.244.181>
> 9. 143.238.244.30 <http://143.238.244.30>
> 10. 143.238.244.52 <http://143.238.244.52>
> 11. 143.238.244.73 <http://143.238.244.73>
> 12. 144.131.118.150 <http://144.131.118.150>
> 13. 144.131.119.225 <http://144.131.119.225>
> 14. 203.51.24.117 <http://203.51.24.117>
> 15. 203.51.24.233 <http://203.51.24.233>
> 16. 203.51.25.203 <http://203.51.25.203>
> 17. 203.51.25.229 <http://203.51.25.229>
> 18. 203.51.25.90 <http://203.51.25.90>
> 19. 203.51.30.105 <http://203.51.30.105>
> 20. 203.51.31.100 <http://203.51.31.100>
> 21. 203.51.31.98 <http://203.51.31.98>
> 22. 203.51.35.13 <http://203.51.35.13>
> 23. 203.51.35.78 <http://203.51.35.78>
> 24. 62.24.143.171 <http://62.24.143.171>
> 25. AULDBITCH LOVES YOU
> 26. Aroundtheworld
> 27. Blue Moon Cocktail Bar
> 28. DataCommander
> 29. DoctorGrace
> 30. DungareeDoll
> 31. IloveParis
> 32. MagicSpeller
> 33. Notanerd
> 34. Onlyapapermoon
> 35. Rainrainrain
> 36. Rasptongue
> 37. Safeground
> 38. Statue of limitations
> 39. TheOneGirl
> 40. Truetoform
> 41. WaspFactory
> 42. Called Jim
> 43. Declared with a grin
> 44. Except for the tool
> 45. FamousRay
> 46. Flatulent
> 47. For playing the fool
> 48. GuaranteedTrue
> 49. Halfinch
> 50. He's a good bloke and
> 51. HisHoliness
> 52. Lackaday-oh
> 53. Laughter's no sin!
> 54. Mandriver
> 55. Mineeyes
> 56. Not A Joke Joyce
> 57. NudgeNudge
> 58. QueenVickie
> 59. SayNoMore
> 60. Swinglow
> 61. TurningHeads
> 62. Ubuntu
> 63. UncleJo
> 64. EZ-SpelChek
> 65. What a Friend
> 66. WrongAgain
>
> Over 300 edits have been made to well over 100
> articles. Only a fraction of the IPs used are listed
> above.
>
> He has now begun setting up new names to go onto pages
> and pose as neutral observers coming on to defend
> Skyring.
>
> In addition he has blitzed various users with spam.
>
> Thom
> jtdirl
>
>
>
>
>
> ___________________________________________________________
> Yahoo! Messenger - NEW crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with
> voicemail http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
>
>


from_name: Michael Turley

body:
On 10/25/05, Ilya N. <ilyanep at gmail.com> wrote:
> While I respect Jimbo's opinion I'm not quite sure if this way is the right
> way to go.
>
> The 'old boys' club' is one of my concerns. The other one (which is slightly
> related) is that some highly-qualified candidates which could do very well
> might not be on Jimbo's (and the arbCom's) radar, so how would that work?

Volunteerism.

I'm assuming that Jimbo will make time to research whatever candidates
he finds worthy of further consideration, and that he will do so.

--
Michael Turley
User:Unfocused


from_name: geni

subject: [WikiEN-l] Blocked - In violation of the Wikipedia blocking policy

body:
On 10/25/05, Alphax <alphasigmax at gmail.com> wrote:
> Good lord, what happened to [[WP:FAITH]]? No messages were left on the
> IP talk page and the conclusion that "Skyring is using 213.x.x.x" seems
> to be based purely on style and/or content over the course of 5 edits.
> Isn't it more likely that a completely different person, in Ireland,
> possibly Irish, made these edits?
>
> I refer you to [[Occam's Razor]]; equally, I refer you to [[Hanlon's
> Razor]].

However going by the email it is pretty clear that it is skyring so it
isn't a problem.

--
geni


from_name: Delirium

subject:
[Foundation-l] Answers.com and Wikimedia Foundation to
	Form	NewPartnership

body:
GerardM wrote:

>On 10/25/05, Robert Scott Horning <robert_horning at netzero.net> wrote:
>
>
>>Delirium wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Anthony DiPierro wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>I can't for the life of me understand why people "a bunch of editors
>>>>
>>>>
>>and
>>
>>
>>>>readers" would leave over something like this. I also don't think
>>>>it'd be a
>>>>bad thing to get rid of the people who think this way.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>Well, if the Foundation really wanted to find out, they could issue an
>>>ultimatum---we're starting GoogleAds tomorrow, and anyone opposed to
>>>advertising on Wikipedia can get out (and good riddance!).
>>>
>>>Of course, they are unlikely to do so. =]
>>>
>>>-Mark
>>>
>>>
>>Attitudes like this are going to destroy the project entirely. I guess
>>you don't care about the fact that your actions are encouraging large
>>scale emmigration from Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects, and
>>forking of contents. It doesn't matter if this action with Answer.com<http://Answer.com>
>>was good or bad, an attitude like this where you can good riddance to
>>people who don't agree with you is contrary to what this community has
>>been about.
>>
>>
>
>
>As much as you are entitled to an opinion, Anthony and Mark have an equal
>right to their opinion. They do not expect people to leave in the first
>place over having ads or not. To their opinion extremely few people would
>walk away and these are in his opinion extremist that we may be better of
>without. Now by painting the other party as having an anti community
>attitude is over the top.
>
>
To be clear, I was actually responding to Anthony's message by taking
the opposite view---I'm quite anti-advertisements.  He suggested that
only a few people would leave if we put ads on, and we'd be better off
without them anyway.  I was saying that there's an easy way to find out,
but I doubt the board will do it---perhaps what I should have added
explicitly is that they won't do that because they're smart enough not
to (even if they thought it was a good idea, which they almost certainly
don't).  I do think quite a lot of good editors would leave if GoogleAds
were put on Wikipedia, and not just a few extremists that we'd be better
off without.

-Mark


from_name: Martin Richards

subject: [WikiEN-l] Been blocked, HELP!

body:
[[User:Curps]] blocked my new unused bot [[User:Bluebot]] and now I ([[User:Bluemoose]]) have been autoblocked, For some reason I can't log back in and unblock myself, when it does log in I get server erros, I can't e-mail curps because he/she doesnt have an email. Please can someone sort this out.

This is REALLY pissing me off now.

thanks

Martin


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Link formatting suggestion

body:
On 10/25/05, Timwi <timwi at gmx.net> wrote:
> I don't know why I always end up regretting having made any suggestions.

Because as a general rule we don't ever change things untill we have
completely and utterly exusested that posibilty of doing nothing

--
geni


body:
On 10/25/05, Christopher Maloney <voldrani at gmail.com> wrote:
> As most of you probably know, China has recently blocked (again)
> access to Wikipedia.  I've gotten around their Great Firewall by
> installing tor, but now, I find that my edit access to pages is
> blocked, because I appear to be coming from an open proxy.
>
> I don't understand why my edit access is blocked, even though I'm
> logged in as a valid user (Klortho).  I'm sure there's a good reason,
> but I don't understand it.  Anyway, is there any way around this?  I
> certainly hope so, because it seems ironic to me that Wikipedia, in
> effect, puts up an additional barrier to Chinese people wanting to
> express themselves (in addition to the censorship by the government,
> that is).

Because we get so much vandalism through Tor proxies that it isn't
worth unblocking them. When we block ips it prevents anyone from
useing them even if they have an account.

--
geni


subject: [WikiEN-l] Been blocked, HELP!

body:
p.s. my ip is 88.111.81.174

----- Original Message -----
From: "Martin Richards" <Martin at velocitymanager.com>
To: "English Wikipedia" <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2005 5:05 PM
Subject: [WikiEN-l] Been blocked, HELP!

> [[User:Curps]] blocked my new unused bot [[User:Bluebot]] and now I
> ([[User:Bluemoose]]) have been autoblocked, For some reason I can't log
> back in and unblock myself, when it does log in I get server erros, I
> can't e-mail curps because he/she doesnt have an email. Please can someone
> sort this out.
>
> This is REALLY pissing me off now.
>
> thanks
>
> Martin
> _______________________________________________
> 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:
[Foundation-l] Answers.com and Wikimedia Foundation to Form
	NewPartnership

body:
On 10/25/05, Delirium <delirium at hackish.org> wrote:
>
>
> To be clear, I was actually responding to Anthony's message by taking
> the opposite view---I'm quite anti-advertisements. He suggested that
> only a few people would leave if we put ads on, and we'd be better off
> without them anyway. I was saying that there's an easy way to find out,
> but I doubt the board will do it---perhaps what I should have added
> explicitly is that they won't do that because they're smart enough not
> to (even if they thought it was a good idea, which they almost certainly
> don't). I do think quite a lot of good editors would leave if GoogleAds
> were put on Wikipedia, and not just a few extremists that we'd be better
> off without.
>
> -Mark

 No, you're right. Apparently a poll was done at Wikimania and 2/3 of people
were against it and 1/3 said they'd leave. So yeah, there's one good
argument not to have ads, I guess. I just can't figure out what any of the
other ones are.
 It's also not clear what percentage of those who would leave would be
willing to stay under certain circumstances. Ads for just non-logged in
users? Opt-out ads? Opt-in ads? The choices are a lot broader than just ads
or no ads.
 Anthony


from_name: Peta Holmes

body:
>who owns this IPs?
>~Ilya N. (User:Ilyanep)

The IPs are owned by Telstra and Otpus, the two
largest telecommunications companies in Australia.
Since the ArbCom case he has gone to the effort of
using a second ISP (Optus) which uses some kind of
nasty relatively open proxy that seems to just assign
new IPs when one is blocked. I seriously doubt that
either company would do anything.

--Peta

__________________________________
Start your day with Yahoo! - Make it your home page!
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs


from_name: Jeff V. Merkey

subject:
[WikiEN-l] Infinite Block by
	AbusiveAdmin/Extortion/Harassment/Fraudulent
	use of Wikipedia Abuse Emails

body:
Hi Fred,

Unfortunately, I have obligations under the law as a litigant to enforce
the Courts orders since the Court retained jurisdiction.  At present,
internet stalkers from SCOX have posted the terms of a sealed document
to this site.  The best solution is total removal of the page about me,
or a minumum, rollback to the approved content Wales and I agreed to and
permanent locking of the page.  Anything else is going to result in
these people coming back to the site, posting the content again, and an
edit war ensuing.  I won;t stand by and be libled or used as a whipping
boy for Linux propaganda.  I will sign written agreement, provided the
page is locked with approved content or removed entirely.  As it stands
I just had Wales served with an order and I notifed Judge Kimball the
content is on this site, I have no other choice, I have an obligation to
enforce this order.  The way to remove this obligation from me relative
to this site is to remove the page or better even still, lock it to
prevent these folks from posting sealed materials in the future.  As it
stands, I would expect the Federal Court will serve a Praecipe from the
Sheriff on Wales and have it taken down in any event, whether anyone
here agrees or not.  I wanted to avoid all that, so I tried as best I
could to provide sound advice on how to sidestep this problem.  I wish
the folks on the site had listened.  As you have as an attorney, so have
I lived in a constant cloud of litigation for the past ten years.  I
really would like for that to change.

Sincerely,

Jeff V. Merkey


from_name: Snowspinner

subject: [WikiEN-l] New Ideas for AfD

body:
OK, so since the "Deletion again" thread became "Let's rehash the
same old and really kind of beside the point 'should we have an
article on everyone' argument," let's try again.

Current ideas I've seen on how to fix the Broken that is AfD

1) Shut it down for a month and see if the Wiki explodes
2) Allow experts to speedy keep
3) Continually let every discussion on the matter get derailed while
good contributors leave the project

Did I miss anything?

-Phil Sandifer (Snowspinner)


from_name: Fastfission

body:
I think this is right. Insisting people not call a page name by its
obvious acronym won't work and won't be intuitive. A new page name
will be better, and people won't continue calling something by an
acronym that no longer makes sense for long (VfD is still
comprehensible but becoming less so. And the news section is nowhere
as trafficked or used as VfD ever is/was).

So... suggestions?

*Current Events (WP:CE)
*News Desk (WP:ND)
*Current News (WP:CN --> used currently for Clueless Newbie)
*...your suggestion here?

FF

On 10/25/05, Ilya N. <ilyanep at gmail.com> wrote:
> Unless we rename it to something like "Current Events" People will continue
> to abbreviate it ITN out of habit.
>
> ~Ilya N. (User:Ilyanep)
>
> On 10/25/05, Andrew Gray <shimgray at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 24/10/05, MacGyverMagic/Mgm <macgyvermagic at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > I like that idea. But how would we deal with old links? We can't just
> > > deprecate a link and not replace it. If they call it ITN, it will
> > > still be called ITN if it points to [[WP:NEWS]].
> >
> > I pretty much meant what Flcello suggests below: ask people to call it
> > News (or something) rather than ITN. Not perfect - but most people say
> > AfD not VfD now.
> >
> > --
> > - Andrew Gray
> > andrew.gray at dunelm.org.uk
> >
> _______________________________________________
> 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: Koltwills at aol.com

body:
In a message dated 10/25/2005 5:28:50 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
ilyanep at gmail.com writes:

Agreed...and it could be argued that some of our policies  prohibit such an
article from being created.

~Ilya N.  (User:Ilyanep)

*applauding Daniel Smith's analysis of the comments in the Guardian  article"

Policies such as?

dcv


from_name: Alphax

body:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Tom Cadden wrote:
> I've raised this issue on the [[In the News]] page,
<snip>

In the News
- From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

This article is about the television series "In the News." For a list of
current events that are currently in the news, please see the article
[[Current events]].

[[WP:ITN]] redirects to {{In the news}}.

Which is the bigger issue here: a shortcut which is clearly in the
Wikipedia namespace, or a non-existant article trying to mirror
Wikinews? We actually don't have an article saying what a current event is.

- --
Alphax                      |   /"\
Encrypted Email Preferred   |   \ /     ASCII Ribbon Campaign
OpenPGP key ID: 0xF874C613  |    X   Against HTML email & vCards
http://tinyurl.com/cc9up    |   / \
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQEVAwUBQ13oFrMAAH8MeUlWAQgKLQf/QgeLGiofT/fS3TNU2YWtwx6+6jTVAUDd
Sa24hE/SUis0iFlDLbdqfF/RoKipt6n32yF145v1FMcNpDVEtWwcpljtaVKpD1NW
wSQ+nfySaJ4SWcn4TjohbMNTXUSyYl6eUDU4y/h+lDi0UtWhC5eigZJfjFMHLMmr
tO6h8B/ay/TtUrRq2DYIRIN94m+4Z7uANU5D2n77b4GMgTmlBWusTeryhfkX0l01
juO2U/hOMfWps/X1NbZEmUcId9JyIf/PzsKXL9HqK+bzWJ+hyT0A1PgKeIchZ2Pq
0QMqPklxwaV3sg+REVBbi00ABHWdqNy+dk4qn7n2BfS+jSdfWhpzfA==
=IVX0
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


subject: [WikiEN-l] no speedy criterion for blatent non fair use media

body:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Justin Cormack wrote:
<snip>
> The speedy delete criteria are too bureaucratic now, things have to
> be tagged for a week, which is pointless in this case.
>

I thought "speedy" meant "admins, provided tagging passes a sanity
check, delete this on sight"...

- --
Alphax                      |   /"\
Encrypted Email Preferred   |   \ /     ASCII Ribbon Campaign
OpenPGP key ID: 0xF874C613  |    X   Against HTML email & vCards
http://tinyurl.com/cc9up    |   / \
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQEVAwUBQ13on7MAAH8MeUlWAQj0cAf9EDS/vOJEHHknbFiDnTuF5y4ONxOCpQSV
LxfGHPpRF5pFibGu0TjS2fPDjow/UEqzWw6iwum43a0TmE05DhIOeA4aMo2EBTzV
pxtFErMIUOkZbb3xjtFtrcGN8RnLn3z45ulikvJoSFuLHMASUPgvhWvh90C2+fcJ
HErwOKkb/313fgOi6jRkmBKwiP5wB0vNa9OSMWrkm9HAc+A9mBmLk0T3g8JjlmvM
Hv0lbCjlJQH6WlfSPin2kiBM2H/aaN46qMN02c6Q+HXrmJfNHG13QmuKrGtQtb5K
24psAo8Tk7w9e959Ab16LQyBe0yNwKd8aHMb4zP9ZFr2KUEbheJ51g==
=mY9z
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


subject: [WikiEN-l] Deletion again

body:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Snowspinner wrote:
<snip>
> Here's a first stab - people with documentable credentials in an area
> that would, in the eyes of a reasonable layman, qualify them to make  a
> decision on the importance of a topic will be allowed to speedy  keep
> articles in the area of their credentials.
>

Before anyone says "not Nupedia again", I think content inclusion
guidlines are actually an area that needs a bit of credentialism.

Of course, we would still need to guard against POV pushing and original
research, but it is certainly a better idea than many of the current ones.

- --
Alphax                      |   /"\
Encrypted Email Preferred   |   \ /     ASCII Ribbon Campaign
OpenPGP key ID: 0xF874C613  |    X   Against HTML email & vCards
http://tinyurl.com/cc9up    |   / \
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQEVAwUBQ13pfbMAAH8MeUlWAQjYmAf/bcTYoiiA2542LmR45oaM+HuY+FYDNMSS
MDLC99OMxKCeSoFnixJvjE6ysG/xV/0wcKtbuC+wj8i6jLxNIOD934jj0AYtPS+n
uLCT/tVOwB6x1MuzxMw0dIVAF7Ucc57sjs91etxUl85+j1Ng6JRDACmkhSV76HPO
m99h+vfE3UxcvHuOWBuQhwN4VkeS8u2N56nRjOEDqSPgyTsFKCs2VUWHJUSPMkZJ
dVAPRscDMyCluBvQTiYQC+kavy5hKgJT62xeGd2QqMPpch0X5SGpgRKin1bObW3o
KkaE7oGwbZj9ZEHU732XF4zKeeUlyvjFdaiJr/bX6oIzP1qm/CrUBQ==
=gX+/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


subject: [WikiEN-l] Been blocked, HELP!

body:
OK, I managed to unblock Bluebot, but I am still blocked, is this because of
autoblock? in which case does this mean I can' edit for 24 hours?

----- Original Message -----
From: "Martin Richards" <Martin at velocitymanager.com>
To: "English Wikipedia" <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2005 5:05 PM
Subject: [WikiEN-l] Been blocked, HELP!

> [[User:Curps]] blocked my new unused bot [[User:Bluebot]] and now I
> ([[User:Bluemoose]]) have been autoblocked, For some reason I can't log
> back in and unblock myself, when it does log in I get server erros, I
> can't e-mail curps because he/she doesnt have an email. Please can someone
> sort this out.
>
> This is REALLY pissing me off now.
>
> thanks
>
> Martin
> _______________________________________________
> 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: Jack Lynch

subject: [WikiEN-l] Unnecessary nudity on [[Hogtie bondage]]

body:
I agree w BJ?rn, despite the western civ gaff. I like books of
reference because they allow access to the truth, rather than the
censored fluff one finds in the media. If I look up Hogtie bondage, I
expect to see a naked chick erotically hogtied. if I look up
cryptography, I expect to find info on the latest encryption

techniques. Both subjects have those who would wish to censor them;
books of reference are our strongest weapon against such types. Don't
take away what makes the wikipedia good, don't become the enemy,
deletionism is anti-wiki.

Jack (Sam Spade)


subject: [WikiEN-l] Deletion again

body:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Ryan Delaney wrote:
> Han Dao wrote:
>
>
>>>The problem is that most webcomics that are added into the encyclopedia are
>>>usually non-notable. So editors tend to vote delete because most will be non
>>>notable.
>>>
>
> You talk about notability like it's some objective thing. Where are
> you getting this standard from?
>

I agree. Arguing about "notability" is often based on "I have(n't) heard
of this, so it must be (non-)notable."

A better argument (although all arguments about notability lead to the
same greased incline) is the Principle of Least Astonishment. That is:

* Would you be surprised to see this article in an encyclopedia?
* Would you be surprised to not see this article in an encyclopedia?

The best argument of all (not that there are any good ones) is
demonstrating how/why the article on X is any different to any other W,
where W and X are in the set Y. If Y has size 2,000,000 and X is no
different from the other 1,999,999 members of Y, then it is pointless to
have an article on X. If however X is one of a much smaller subset of Y
(eg. 20 instead of 2,000,000) or is somehow unique amongst Y (apart from
the "every snowflake is unique" definition of uniqueness), then it makes
sense to have an article on X (or at least the smaller subset).

- --
Alphax                      |   /"\
Encrypted Email Preferred   |   \ /     ASCII Ribbon Campaign
OpenPGP key ID: 0xF874C613  |    X   Against HTML email & vCards
http://tinyurl.com/cc9up    |   / \
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQEVAwUBQ13r47MAAH8MeUlWAQg/fwf+PPEqS+foWNYGK//38TqfIVxbzkSS0MNQ
2Tky/c+P/fTKa0SXJR3SiUuNzY0hCxZKdN2BxupnNSR80fR9CxNHLGsiw3OJ2qXA
TmKRlW1UXDe9I13fo1QOdIc+Ualw2o2jZM8KL9Y1mx5N0lw0MZaOH7FUCNT2fzLx
8KAv2Kq6wJkRGG79wFfIZAop6QPkfiGd2cxUtNaEtgZREgsSxizkxiWUMTIHKYRn
amUD+ofM8SO5UqWswnbYdvQ3ZcFDHuaWCXAe+x9ur3Ay0nY4HC2gf44IRW/c0V+f
dvv5CUOFQ7elmCzn75LSLeGxyppmL72+p67ofmUoJa+rxRqoX6xNJg==
=sr0I
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


list: wikitech-l

from_name: Tels

subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: Upload URL/filesystem restructuring

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

Moin ,

On Monday 24 October 2005 19:21, Ivan Krstic wrote:
> Tels wrote:
> > although I am not sure why the "/P/" needs to be visible to the user
> > (it is deterministic, after all), and it would be handy to have a
> > "latest" revision URL. Which could be just:
> > 	http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/Puppy.jpg
> > and the software behind the back figures out what the exact latest
> > revision is and under what /CapitcalLetter/ directory it falls.
>
> Please read Brion's original message again.

Duh, sorry, I was mighty confused %~/ Please ignore any noise coming from
me. :)

Best wishes,

Tels

- --
 Signed on Tue Oct 25 17:58:14 2005 with key 0x93B84C15.
 Visit my photo gallery at http://bloodgate.com/photos/
 PGP key on http://bloodgate.com/tels.asc or per email.

 "Now, _you_ behave!"

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

iQEVAwUBQ15WRHcLPEOTuEwVAQHTugf+KwCiW3D6PgtghxO8kRxWKRe3exek0jCG
IjaolHK2ylW5em3o1q+IYAJ0QQzBBSmXiYBv96zdjZsJXDvnLfB+h5hi9nPPxgr0
wThO8/rA+iOJQdCaGVFDPh/s38OWMo4nYWRdkLxJs5TOs/tY/w/qaf78dLp7zUdk
05UJRRHqVmNpUlNd12szQwFVWPa8OB0oIaSHVlwXALLjlJN/7jMPrNYB914TlGTq
mWMw9L2+hGlujGsp/8NsWagD7w7yO7tCT2UMZ9Ef5UkYc4fS202RqRgzzBT7qsJf
SAGZoq/trc2DgOn0xyVP70sctN2STqDxjkKJzIbmyQu6OpDv3pGL4w==
=oDVI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


subject: [WikiEN-l] Deletion again

body:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Anthony DiPierro wrote:
> On 10/24/05, Justin Cormack <justin at specialbusservice.com> wrote:
>
<snip>
>> Ok if you cant do that why are all webcomics notable?
>
>
> Because Wikipedia has no space requirements. We have plenty of room to
> include all webcomics. To choose to include some, but not others, would
> allow us to make a statement about what is worthwhile and what isn't. It
> would violate NPOV. Further, the only people who are going to come across
> the article are those who are specifically looking for it. Keeping the
> article in the encyclopedia provides useful information to those people, and
> doesn't hurt anyone else. If any webcomics are notable, then all webcomics
> are notable.
>

By your logic: If any people are notable, then all people are notable.

Excuse me while I write articles on Anthony DiPierro, Justin Cormack,
and the rest.

- --
Alphax                      |   /"\
Encrypted Email Preferred   |   \ /     ASCII Ribbon Campaign
OpenPGP key ID: 0xF874C613  |    X   Against HTML email & vCards
http://tinyurl.com/cc9up    |   / \
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQEVAwUBQ13sxrMAAH8MeUlWAQgSrQf/SAbr0buW08ZRBqskd9T3GaAbQR1zvVsC
Z/x2+Q7Bj235xsp7/A/0J7QIAXwGxnbOKN2MPUKsiyLWTTzLwGMJO9D6aO6mYV+W
fGgNHvG6mFf/vX8Q832Lz8meawTDpzYQudsNC8bAeOpveK8E2aK+w8KVSHBMZcIW
L75F2YKPgdaSdtGksKp8LfHcqomcN9tbHq1NsafPU7IbgScf9ATxfuSK1RlInj8h
GJsD9nEivN4oTyYKMtAFXpwYyOMPNz8KnbJmTkpe5JaJU/e1fhzp76NlXzKfdh4x
RUumKh+NgP9vNVEUfOioTrkzkOo0KggI2FyF1yyeS8r8kGfEX/nzuA==
=A3sJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


from_name: Fl Celloguy

body:
>Message: 6
>Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 17:34:33 -0400
>From: Fastfission <fastfission at gmail.com>
>Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] In The News - new name needed
>To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at wikipedia.org>
>Message-ID:
>	<98dd099a0510251434k75868cc2o8bdca051716cb814 at mail.gmail.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
>I think this is right. Insisting people not call a page name by its
>obvious acronym won't work and won't be intuitive. A new page name
>will be better, and people won't continue calling something by an
>acronym that no longer makes sense for long (VfD is still
>comprehensible but becoming less so. And the news section is nowhere
>as trafficked or used as VfD ever is/was).
>
>So... suggestions?
>
>*Current Events (WP:CE)
>*News Desk (WP:ND)
>*Current News (WP:CN --> used currently for Clueless Newbie)
>*...your suggestion here?
>
>FF
>
>On 10/25/05, Ilya N. <ilyanep at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Unless we rename it to something like "Current Events" People will
>continue
> > to abbreviate it ITN out of habit.
> >
> > ~Ilya N. (User:Ilyanep)
> >
> > On 10/25/05, Andrew Gray <shimgray at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On 24/10/05, MacGyverMagic/Mgm <macgyvermagic at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > I like that idea. But how would we deal with old links? We can't
>just
> > > > deprecate a link and not replace it. If they call it ITN, it will
> > > > still be called ITN if it points to [[WP:NEWS]].
> > >
> > > I pretty much meant what Flcello suggests below: ask people to call it
> > > News (or something) rather than ITN. Not perfect - but most people say
> > > AfD not VfD now.
> > >
> > > --
> > > - Andrew Gray
> > > andrew.gray at dunelm.org.uk

Hmm... I like Current Events better than News Desk or Current News.
[[WP:CN]] should stay for clueless newbies.

Flcelloguy
>From Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia.

_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE!
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/


from_name: Anthony DiPierro

body:
On 10/25/05, Ilya N. <ilyanep at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Does NPOV or NOR allow analysis at all? Not in the slightest.
>
> While it is meant to discourage pushing a viewpoint and putting uncited
> research up on Wikipedia, what would happen if someone were to analyze a
> point in an article?
>
> In some cases it would seem to be pushing a point of view (even if the
> opposite POV is expressed) and sometimes would cause an edit war
>
> In other cases it would be seen as original research (oh no! You can't say
> that without citing it!)
>
> Maybe I'm just not understanding correctly what you mean by analyzing.

I was thinking the same thing. Wikipedia's policies don't really allow for
analysis or presentation of value judgements. They don't allow "comment on
literary merit". And unless I'm misunderstanding what these critics want, I
agree with the policies, that we shouldn't try to do this.

There are some complaints above that we should address, but others I think
we should ignore.

Anthony


subject: [Wikitech-l] cancelling unicode for buginese

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

Moin,

On Tuesday 25 October 2005 04:14, Mark Williamson wrote:
> It seems that Mr Zainuddin has given up on using the traditional
> Lontara script due to a simple technical problem, which could probably
> be solved very easily.
>
> Anybody with the latest version of Code2000 and Firefox should be able
> to see the special characters on http://bug.wikipedia.org/wiki/

I don't see them and I don't know what Code2000 is :)

A quick google turned up this:

	http://home.att.net/~jameskass/

So, Zaid Zainuddin, you probably just need to install the proper font to
see the characters in the edit box and on the webpage/wiki itself.

One font is apparently named "Code2000" and can be found at
http://home.att.net/~jameskass/ - and you should be able to install it.

If you need any further help, please email the list. Please also include
information like what browser are you using and what operating system.
Hopefully that will get buginese up and running.

Best wishes,

Tels

PS: I didn't even know that a language buginese existed - I resist any
lame joke attempts now :)

- --
 Signed on Tue Oct 25 18:01:10 2005 with key 0x93B84C15.
 Visit my photo gallery at http://bloodgate.com/photos/
 PGP key on http://bloodgate.com/tels.asc or per email.

 I'm a Sis-sis-sis-sis-sis-sis-sis-sinnahr...

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

iQEVAwUBQ15XxHcLPEOTuEwVAQFSwwf9E3+t+e84LfJvZsIdz/BEHdKjEu3Zyl8W
0nLCdBPtw9TY/ZNbF9AQLEfR1ceJ3pja2VEd0qYLPoI90WwE9XGkrTr0yNyxOUDH
2Yna1564TDq7U6vCVcvS14GYmn0umuXfW3zVNJBy3O8MfFuW1lvJWsgriY5pIY//
fkCke5ueE1iLR7OmC38dwt8h/JwEPbSijZQqa7FZSTNgoiHvt6Cf3NwQW72E5sW2
UhCEDqVWnFe/SJnyjnpL0hb5FREkuPCcl1NANfApjyMIlet6IT/OWFiMv4gzIDb3
Kn/kR4bzI5Tf+0YIztYpvsBh5eQSZUBueBjLDcMObiqeoPT3lFq4Jw==
=RdiE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


subject: [WikiEN-l] Deletion again

body:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Anthony_DiPierro_2
>
> "Anthony is subject to a one revert limitation, prohibited from
> creating deleted content that fails to pass a vote for undeletion,
> subject to ad hoc blocks for disruption, and banned from editing the
> Wikipedia namespace."
>
> Anthony, it wasn't Snowspinner who got you blocked from the Wikipedia
> namespace for a year. It wasn't anyone else either. It was you and
> no-one else. You wuzn't robbed, you did it to yourself. This is
> unlikely to change until you understand that life is not a breaching
> experiment.

False accusations with no facts to back them up. Sounds like a repeat of the
arb ruling itself.

Not sure what you mean about it not being likely to change. I'll be allowed
to edit in the Wikipedia namespace again in a few months.

Anthony


from_name: Timwi

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Help needed for helpdesk-l

body:
> Since the helpdesk-l address was made more instantly visible, there
> has been a surge of questions to the list - of a wide range of
> queries/problems/issues. Your help would be appreciated. You can
> subscribe at http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/helpdesk-l

I'm glad to hear my help would be appreciated, but I'm unwilling to help
if there is no newsgroup (preferrably Gmane) mirroring the mailing list.
I've asked for one before and just got a "no"; I've also applied
directly at Gmane and not received a response. Under these
circumstances, I cannot offer my help.

Timwi


body:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Paul Rynne wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> When attempting to edit a page in Wikipedia, I encountered the following
> message:
>
> Your user name or IP address has been blocked
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Blocking_policy> by Jtdirl
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jtdirl>.
>
> The reason given is:
> /on the evidence almost certainly Skyring
> /
>
> *Your IP address is 213.202.191.123. Please include this address, along
> with your username, in any queries you make.
> *
>

RIPE WHOIS reveals that this IP is used by "Ireland On-Line Broadband
Customers". Unless Skyring has been travelling I don't see how such a
connection was made.

> This block is a violation of the Wikipedia blocking policy which stated
> that it should take place in the case of  "vandalism, bots, personal
> attacks". I engaged in no such activity.
>

I have checked this IP's contributions. Four of the edits removed or
altered significant material from [[Republic of Ireland]] without
explanation; The last edit altered information in [[Presbyterian Church
in Ireland]], again without explanation.

> In addition, I discovered that the pages I had edited (a grand total of
> 5 edits EVER), had all been reverted. These edits were all minor and
> were intended to either edit, correct mistakes or badly worded entries.
> For example, in the "Demographics" section of the "Republic of Ireland"
> section, the last paragraph contains some dubious comments about
> immigrants into the Republic of Ireland. I edited this because the
> comments as they: a) ignore the largest EU immigrant community in the
> Republic (the British), and instead mentions the smaller numbers of
> Poles and Latvians (It also speculates inappropriately on the reasons
> that have chosen to immigrate), and; b) mentions various African
> nationalities under "Other nationalities" while ignoring larger less
> visible (non-EU) groupings such as Americans and Canadians!
>

None of the edits used edit summaries. I cannot comment on the content
itself, except that these concerns should probably be taken to the talk
page.

> The "blocking" policy as used by user Jtdirl might more accurately be
> labelled a censorship policy as it is clearly intended to prevent
> editing of inaccurate entries. I would strongly suggest you come up with
> a better policy to police who can block people and review when and why
> they do so.
>

At no stage were any messages left on [[User talk:213.202.191.123]].
Blocking and reverting without leaving messages on the users' talk page
is clearly not acceptable behaviour. Neither is claiming "ownership" of
articles.

If you read the edit box, you will note that it says "If you don't want
your writing to be edited and redistributed by others, please don't
submit it." It used to be a lot harsher (something like "If you don't
want your writing to be mercilessly edited...") and IMO should be a lot
BIGGER as well.

- --
Alphax                      |   /"\
Encrypted Email Preferred   |   \ /     ASCII Ribbon Campaign
OpenPGP key ID: 0xF874C613  |    X   Against HTML email & vCards
http://tinyurl.com/cc9up    |   / \
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQEVAwUBQ13y0rMAAH8MeUlWAQi6MQf/QgtCPXigVYE4F6Fz1rr3T210X2/zFrwy
GGZGDnjj726HnAp/yCYYT8YBnAhrpSJEySVI0NrZ24bRUso4ex/DGEOmWe3L31r8
YEX6pgrt3UJK3F2tYMM/3o3v0FQoAIvniXl7IstYsSYi46y78kEzIi4WPoD2fKpH
QfA+zpJ/YIgTfJqOrP+FbwX9kIOBsgkIbYTbdYlBQs2drLPjVYgS7N5IMZ4svshy
lT5QZxJmU0cwYKX3SqRQotZ0P7LF3+vG/b/9IuBNWO0WBLc2okFl5X/ptvCihYoq
ymdLxUIOzNbj1x6ItalO3eGohouodJGWsJPh+VR09dOeqdnNOsOXgQ==
=FIJ1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


body:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

BJ?rn Lindqvist wrote:
> Matt R wrote:
>> BJ?rn Lindqvist wrote:
>>>You have never had a problem with from an American viewpoint
>>>potentially-offensive images? OK. I have never had a problem with
>>>potentially-offensive photos (and text!) on pages like [[female]],
>>>[[hair]], [[feet]], [[homosexual]], etc... By saying that only
>>>[[penis]] and [[clitoris]] are potentially offensive but not the other
>>>examples I mentioned, you are implying that your viewpoint is the
>>>supreme one and more important than all others.
>>
>>I don't really understand what you're getting at here, but I'd like to point
>>out that I'm British, not American.
>
>
> Sorry, that was a bone-headed slip. I think I menat to say western
> viewpoint.

Define western... what does that make you BTW?

- --
Alphax                      |   /"\
Encrypted Email Preferred   |   \ /     ASCII Ribbon Campaign
OpenPGP key ID: 0xF874C613  |    X   Against HTML email & vCards
http://tinyurl.com/cc9up    |   / \
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQEVAwUBQ13077MAAH8MeUlWAQitsQf9GkyoPLvAW/43AYSPFO8MDaoKy/rowm9E
s+vE4caCnWO1qXoM8r8kG2nO7bKPtlzfXv3O0UyeGM9Fmw+yP3MZjsC/hl1SbMA1
UJA+pQJLIts2CfStXKzRgb/dd0j3qTqwXRSErw32tYu9MYoz3uI0xkcAtPf+CZoB
MVy5+pIRHCXvLwqD2zFvMd7dezYgDq6YSWN/VJ8jIBWFMhdnn7tKmVYH2t0zbN+J
lueah/h8CI9bI3b2QEwHQ3Cs34W3jyfl69UTGCqbEYR5Gv3zTpqb3iln93IQLwXS
P3a0PBVxqadQ9vmI+sHSWpknVgjQDZ+UHIQy1lGsuJEI1NHCmbC23A==
=tRXk
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


subject:
[WikiEN-l] So, you think you're a good writer? The "Fix Crappy
	Prose" Challenge

body:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

David Gerard wrote:
> Wikiacc wrote:
>
>>On 10/24/05, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>>===The "Fix Crappy Prose" Challenge===
>>>I'd like everyone reading this who thinks they're a pretty good writer
>>>to middle-click
>
>
>>Not everyone has a three-button mouse.
>
>
>
> At this point I confess that my laptop doesn't either and I actually
> control-clicked ;-) Command-click if you're on a Mac.
>

I often use Mozilla on a Linux machine via X11 when sitting at a Mac and
control-click ;)

- --
Alphax                      |   /"\
Encrypted Email Preferred   |   \ /     ASCII Ribbon Campaign
OpenPGP key ID: 0xF874C613  |    X   Against HTML email & vCards
http://tinyurl.com/cc9up    |   / \
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQEVAwUBQ131h7MAAH8MeUlWAQhgLQf9G2ANhLeP225jfiS+oo61WAXxZCDSWy7R
vuAhL+/akhfOZ2HAMcS80sKjn9SSF8ybHsW+bWMh6XWdcvOTlTMJGK4f6b0DMD7y
h490F7n6ZwigQPPo50RC/rqiZ3f5q6AYJ1sE1tP6S17OhYJGA7+IDxt19iB+pIMp
E615ffdQMdWMFfige6xwPxgkMWPzn29O9qKa+QMDS5dLeojFqW9OEHi0mR5f3W0X
BMzMNSqHJt4C6b21MWNkWvh2t+2yuFz9AE6RONf37hxMb3BHR011k10PgxkGJGBs
mtcdH6fguScYi80vZ8UUSD6bixxceEgkGMeDczmwAwsj6lUKoDFysA==
=fS9L
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: NTL (was ANON watchlist?)

body:
> Note that the NTL problem has been solved (presumably through some
> horribly ugly special cases in the MediaWiki code) - now, NTL users
> should see their real IP, the one they see with ipconfig or ifconfig.
> Could some NTL users please test this?

It seems to work perfectly for my NTL home broadband connection.

For the NTL corporate connection we have at work, it came up with an IP
address I can't ping or traceroute, but still one that belongs to NTL
and isn't a proxy. That IP address had several earlier contributions,
going back to December 2004 (my company moved to this building in
November 2004), so blocking it would perhaps create potential for
collateral damage by excluding the whole company.

Timwi


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: NTL

body:
>>Semi-standard - it uses an X-Forwarded-From header and sometimes it
>>reverses the order of the octets (for no good reason).
>
> Nothing in MediaWiki should reverse the order of the octets, where have
> you seen that?

He was referring to the NTL proxies. Half of them reverse the order of
the octets of the IP addresses in their X-Forwarded-From header, half of
them don't.


subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: NTL


body:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

David Gerard wrote:
> Alphax wrote:
>
>
>>RIPE WHOIS reveals that this IP is used by "Ireland On-Line Broadband
>>Customers". Unless Skyring has been travelling I don't see how such a
>>connection was made.
>
>
>
> Skyring travels lots and lots and edits from around the world.
>
>

Good lord, what happened to [[WP:FAITH]]? No messages were left on the
IP talk page and the conclusion that "Skyring is using 213.x.x.x" seems
to be based purely on style and/or content over the course of 5 edits.
Isn't it more likely that a completely different person, in Ireland,
possibly Irish, made these edits?

I refer you to [[Occam's Razor]]; equally, I refer you to [[Hanlon's
Razor]].

- --
Alphax                      |   /"\
Encrypted Email Preferred   |   \ /     ASCII Ribbon Campaign
OpenPGP key ID: 0xF874C613  |    X   Against HTML email & vCards
http://tinyurl.com/cc9up    |   / \
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQEVAwUBQ133D7MAAH8MeUlWAQh0XAf/f9G9Ib3GsbqTQ3+vhQkVkSfx4hrbuRmN
nJgkc6CD/rnxzUH6u/P/jHXWVb/T4veRWLL7nM8iIWIEnBQS4lcB7LcijiznQ5Lc
VJNBJWzG1d0VNB2A6anw3p9oFERkaSnuHl83AxaQhqUQSjzcYldy/F5aUaTRJy0H
FeDB+JaGPo+7ZLhc7MS8im0hE8ZVKMYh7IPkmvvs2CNb4YF5NSiiZ7gEy+8zwFY0
6Z8xHtqPGWywBz/SpKnlETTzrgw9E/TM/HIxt/9wbU/uF4VD2sVx6vNuZR2uKqdg
7rlmZSM00rPV5/OyAlGms9dJ4AL/yjwj8va/ZRFXmu7Bl3NTRfKi1w==
=1+oa
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


from_name: GerardM

body:
On 10/25/05, Robert Scott Horning <robert_horning at netzero.net> wrote:
>
> Delirium wrote:
>
> > Anthony DiPierro wrote:
> >
> >> I can't for the life of me understand why people "a bunch of editors
> and
> >> readers" would leave over something like this. I also don't think
> >> it'd be a
> >> bad thing to get rid of the people who think this way.
> >>
> > Well, if the Foundation really wanted to find out, they could issue an
> > ultimatum---we're starting GoogleAds tomorrow, and anyone opposed to
> > advertising on Wikipedia can get out (and good riddance!).
> >
> > Of course, they are unlikely to do so. =]
> >
> > -Mark
>
> Attitudes like this are going to destroy the project entirely. I guess
> you don't care about the fact that your actions are encouraging large
> scale emmigration from Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects, and
> forking of contents. It doesn't matter if this action with Answer.com<http://Answer.com>
> was good or bad, an attitude like this where you can good riddance to
> people who don't agree with you is contrary to what this community has
> been about.

As much as you are entitled to an opinion, Anthony and Mark have an equal
right to their opinion. They do not expect people to leave in the first
place over having ads or not. To their opinion extremely few people would
walk away and these are in his opinion extremist that we may be better of
without. Now by painting the other party as having an anti community
attitude is over the top.

This whole episode and debate is unfortunately going to leave a lot of
> embittered people on all sides of the issue, primarily due to the way it
> was presented in the first place. At this point, that doesn't matter,
> and all we got now is controversy that perhaps will never go away.
> Rubbing salt in the wounds and telling people to go away is not going
> to help.

Right, so is vilifying others.

While the initial presentation may have been flawed, and the "community"
> feeling like it was ignored (with the huge numbers of e-mails on this
> list, plus a slashdot story and the rest of the public airing of this
> issue) this can either be a divisive issue or we can try to come
> together with compromise solutions to get this to work.
>
> The underlying issue for this whole exchange is that the Foundation
> needs money in order to operate. In addtion, being one of the top 50
> websites on the internet makes advertising revenue something very
> attractive, particularly given the current commercial climate with most
> internet websites. What needs to happen is some creative thoughts about
> how some sort of revenue can help pay for the basic needs of this
> project, particularly for bandwidth and server costs.

Could other organizational aspects be done? What about P2P distributed
> models for dealing with content? Other software models for organizing
> the content? More effecient software algorithms for MediaWiki?

Suggesting that other technical models may be considered is nice. It is not
something that is easily done and, it ignores the amount of work done to
make it as scalable as it is today. Moving to another architecture is also
made more problematic because we are growing as much as before and it is not
trivial to move to a different architecture. P2P is nice but how are we
going to ensure that we have the data in the first place, how do you ensure
that little used data does not disapear ? We will still need our data stored
somewhere. P2P works nice for popular content.. we have a lot of content
that is not.

As for financial resources available to the Wikimedia Foundaion, what
> else could be done. More direct fundraising? A "telethon" or similar
> media campaign? Foundation grants or other philenthropic charities that
> could donate for specific projects (like Wikijunior and the Beck
> Foundation)? A "bookstore" that would sell CD-ROMs and printed books
> based on contents of Wikimedia projects? All of these and more can be
> done.

What if a cooperation wants to donate EUR 200.000,- ?? Is this money suspect
because it is too much or are you afraid that they want something from us ??
In what way is it in principal different from money that we get through
advertising ??

In this case there are many individuals who feel that they have labored
> hard to create an interesting public resource, only to see a few
> individuals seemingly make some money off of their volunteer labors,
> particularly with the cooperation of the "leaders" of this community.
> That is what is sticking in the craw of those who don't like what is
> going on here. And a darker side is that if somebody else is making
> money, why can't I? If Answers.com <http://Answers.com> is going to get
> that benefit from
> Wikipedia readers and make a little bit of money, what is going to stop
> each and every other editor/contributor to Wikipedia to do the same
> thing with a link on the tools page that would copy what Answers.com<http://Answers.com>is
> doing? Would that need Foundation approval (getting into cronyism) or
> can any editor simply put a link in the same place at any time? Do you
> need to be an admin to make changes there? (more resentment of the
> "heirarchy" of community leaders by ordinary users.) What about other
> products/services? What is the "end result" of all this commercial
> activity with Wikipedia?

Given the GFDL license, there are all those mirrors that make money off our
content. Is this not worse ?? Is it not better to make the money ourselves
so that we can pay our own way ?? Why is it "dark" if you can make money
from our content; it is legal !! Why is it bad if a FRIENDLY organisation
like answers.com <http://answers.com> makes money and why is it acceptable
if another company does it??

The question of what the "end result" of having more money will be ?? We can
print books and give them away. We can print DVD's and give them away. We
can pay to have content and give it away. There is no end to what we could
do if we had the will and the resources.

I don't have any answers this these questions for the most part, but I
> have seen them all raised on this mailing list in many different forums.
> Rather than telling people to "get lost and never come back, we don't
> need you", it is far better the make the people having complaints to
> become part of the solution. The decision to have ads on Wikipedia or
> not is just a small part of much larger issues here, and it never does
> any good to drive people away... especially people who are genuinely
> trying to make this a bettter place in the first place. We are not
> talking about driving away vandals and trolls here, but rather people
> who have made some significant contributions to this community.

Nobody wants people and particularly editors to go away. Do not even suggest
that. And do not use it as an argument why having more money is bad. We can
use money to fulfill our aim: bringing information that is free and NPOV to
all people in all languages.

Thanks,
GerardM


from_name: Fred Bauder

subject: [WikiEN-l] New Ideas for AfD

body:
I think that if a few regular editors want to keep it should be kept.
Their opinion should veto any number of delete votes. I don't mean to
include anyone who blindly votes keep however.

Fred

On Oct 25, 2005, at 3:34 PM, Snowspinner wrote:

> OK, so since the "Deletion again" thread became "Let's rehash the
> same old and really kind of beside the point 'should we have an
> article on everyone' argument," let's try again.
>
> Current ideas I've seen on how to fix the Broken that is AfD
>
> 1) Shut it down for a month and see if the Wiki explodes
> 2) Allow experts to speedy keep
> 3) Continually let every discussion on the matter get derailed
> while good contributors leave the project
>
> Did I miss anything?
>
> -Phil Sandifer (Snowspinner)
> _______________________________________________
> 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] Arbitration Committee elections, 2005

body:
I suggest you submit names to Jimbo with a basis for why you think
they would be a good arbitrator. That is basically all we do. If we
all agree on one person (remember we often disagree) he is likely to
seriously consider the person. If a person is making a lot of trouble
already we are not likely to think they are good candidates, but
personally I am a little concerned that what makes a good arbitrator
is not all that predictable.

By the way, anyone who thinks they can contribute to arbitration is
welcome to make proposal on the /Workshop page of any arbitration
case. I know I'll be looking for talent there. Rumor has it that
there might be a small reward for any of the Wikipedia advocates
should any of their work on /Workshop be used in a decision by the
Arbitration Committee.

Fred

On Oct 25, 2005, at 6:29 PM, Jack Lynch wrote:

> I think its pretty obvious most people disagree w Jimbo's decision.
> Allowing current arbiters to be involved in selecting new arbiters
> strikes me as a particularly ill omen. Additionally, people like
> myself with almost no contact w Jimbo directly have little or no
> chance. How does having Jimbo know who you are make one a better
> arbiter?
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
> Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2005
>
> Jack (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: Brion Vibber

subject:
[Wikitech-l] Re: Importing XML database dumps - what actually
	works?

body:
Nick Jenkins wrote:
> Exception in thread "main" java.lang.OutOfMemoryError: Java heap space

Hrmmm, memory usage should remain quite small throughout. It's possible
there are bugs in the recent buffering patches, I'll check.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 253 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20051025/2f1f4ff6/attachment.pgp>


subject: [WikiEN-l] Been blocked, HELP!

body:
Please can someone point [[User:Curps]] to my talk page [[User
talk:Bluemoose]] regarding him/her accidentally blocking me, as I have no
other method of communication. thanks.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Martin Richards" <Martin at velocitymanager.com>
To: "English Wikipedia" <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2005 5:11 PM
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Been blocked, HELP!

>> [[User:Curps]] blocked my new unused bot [[User:Bluebot]] and now I
>> ([[User:Bluemoose]]) have been autoblocked, For some reason I can't log
>> back in and unblock myself, when it does log in I get server erros, I
>> can't e-mail curps because he/she doesnt have an email. Please can
>> someone sort this out.
>>
>> This is REALLY pissing me off now.
>>
>> thanks
>>
>> p.s. my ip is 88.111.81.174
>> Martin
> _______________________________________________
> 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: [Wikitech-l] MySQL 4.1/5.0 Unicode support

body:
I've checked in a small experimental feature on REL1_5 and HEAD for
explicitly specifying the utf8 charset on tables and setting the
connection so it doesn't mangle the utf8 data on the wire.

As previously discussed this is insufficient for Wikimedia since it will
fail when you try to insert data with non-BMP Unicode characters in
various places, but those running their own sites and having to use
newer MySQL might appreciate more mundate text being stored correctly.

Activating this mode on an existing site could cause interesting
problems, however; use caution engaging it.

The server communications mode is controlled by $wgDBmysql5 (true to
send 'SET NAMES utf8' on connect), and if selected on installation table
defs are pulled from maintenance/mysql5/tables.sql, adding 'DEFAULT
CHARSET=utf8' on the tables.

I've tested this briefly on 5.0.15, but I think it will work on 4.1 as well.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 253 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20051025/eb38ab7b/attachment.pgp>


from_name: Ilya N.

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Crappy prose isn't the main "quality" problem.

body:
Yes, while some value judgements are not very encyclopedic, some (non-POV
ones) make things a lot more interesting than cold hard facts. The creator
of this thread was correct in noting that an Encyclopedia's task is not to
share facts, but knowledge

~Ilya (User:Ilyanep)

On 10/25/05, Anthony DiPierro <wikispam at inbox.org> wrote:
>
> On 10/25/05, Ilya N. <ilyanep at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Does NPOV or NOR allow analysis at all? Not in the slightest.
> >
> > While it is meant to discourage pushing a viewpoint and putting uncited
> > research up on Wikipedia, what would happen if someone were to analyze a
> > point in an article?
> >
> > In some cases it would seem to be pushing a point of view (even if the
> > opposite POV is expressed) and sometimes would cause an edit war
> >
> > In other cases it would be seen as original research (oh no! You can't
> say
> > that without citing it!)
> >
> > Maybe I'm just not understanding correctly what you mean by analyzing.
>
>
> I was thinking the same thing. Wikipedia's policies don't really allow for
> analysis or presentation of value judgements. They don't allow "comment on
> literary merit". And unless I'm misunderstanding what these critics want,
> I
> agree with the policies, that we shouldn't try to do this.
>
> There are some complaints above that we should address, but others I think
> we should ignore.
>
> Anthony
>
>


body:
Those were part of my sentiments

~Ilya N. (Ilyanep)

On 10/25/05, Jack Lynch <jack.i.lynch at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I think its pretty obvious most people disagree w Jimbo's decision.
> Allowing current arbiters to be involved in selecting new arbiters
> strikes me as a particularly ill omen. Additionally, people like
> myself with almost no contact w Jimbo directly have little or no
> chance. How does having Jimbo know who you are make one a better
> arbiter?
>
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2005
>
> Jack (Sam Spade)
>


from_name: geni

subject: [WikiEN-l] Repeated blocks -- collateral damage

body:
On 10/25/05, Koltwills at aol.com <Koltwills at aol.com> wrote:

>
> How does this happen?

You are on AOL your IP changed when you went to a new page

> Is there something I or someone else can  do to
> prevent it from occurring again?

Stop useing AOL.

--
geni


from_name: Han Dao

subject:
[WikiEN-l] Skyring edit history to date - (formerly Blocked - In
	violation of the Wikipedia blocking policy)

body:
I wonder why Skyring took the trouble of annoying us. What is his agenda?
What is his motive?

On 10/25/05, Jtkiefer <jtkiefer at wordzen.net> wrote:
>
> Peta Holmes wrote:
>
> >>who owns this IPs?
> >>~Ilya N. (User:Ilyanep)
> >>
> >>
> >
> >The IPs are owned by Telstra and Otpus, the two
> >largest telecommunications companies in Australia.
> >Since the ArbCom case he has gone to the effort of
> >using a second ISP (Optus) which uses some kind of
> >nasty relatively open proxy that seems to just assign
> >new IPs when one is blocked. I seriously doubt that
> >either company would do anything.
> >
> >--Peta
> >
> >
> Skyring's bans where just recently reset right? and if yes is the
> history of this listed somewhere?
>
> -Jtkiefer
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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: Kelly Martin

body:
On 10/25/05, Jack Lynch <jack.i.lynch at gmail.com> wrote:
> I think its pretty obvious most people disagree w Jimbo's decision.
> Allowing current arbiters to be involved in selecting new arbiters
> strikes me as a particularly ill omen. Additionally, people like
> myself with almost no contact w Jimbo directly have little or no
> chance. How does having Jimbo know who you are make one a better
> arbiter?

Jimbo is remarkably easy to talk to and is pretty accessible.  If you
want to be an Arbitrator, it really does make sense for you to make
the minimal effort to make contact with Jimbo.

Anyone who doesn't realize that there are influence structures in
Wikipedia isn't paying attention.  If you want to move up in
influence, it helps to be known, and known well, to those who already
have it.  This is true whether people with influence are selected by
appointment or by election.

We have suggested choosing Arbitrators by loading Recent Changes at a
random unannounced time and appointing the first 12 names to appear
there.  While I think this would be resoundingly unsatisfactory to
most members of the community, it would eliminate most claims of bias.
:)

Kelly


subject: [WikiEN-l] How do I edit a page from inside China?

body:
IP blocks are wrong.

Jack (Sam Spade)

> > As most of you probably know, China has recently blocked (again)
> > access to Wikipedia. I've gotten around their Great Firewall by
> > installing tor, but now, I find that my edit access to pages is
> > blocked, because I appear to be coming from an open proxy.
> >
> > I don't understand why my edit access is blocked, even though I'm
> > logged in as a valid user (Klortho). I'm sure there's a good reason,
> > but I don't understand it. Anyway, is there any way around this? I
> > certainly hope so, because it seems ironic to me that Wikipedia, in
> > effect, puts up an additional barrier to Chinese people wanting to
> > express themselves (in addition to the censorship by the government,
> > that is).


subject: [WikiEN-l] Been blocked, HELP!

body:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Curps#block

Cheers,

Jack (Sam Spade)

On 10/25/05, Martin Richards <Martin at velocitymanager.com> wrote:
> Please can someone point [[User:Curps]] to my talk page [[User
> talk:Bluemoose]] regarding him/her accidentally blocking me, as I have no
> other method of communication. thanks.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Martin Richards" <Martin at velocitymanager.com>
> To: "English Wikipedia" <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2005 5:11 PM
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Been blocked, HELP!
>
> >> [[User:Curps]] blocked my new unused bot [[User:Bluebot]] and now I
> >> ([[User:Bluemoose]]) have been autoblocked, For some reason I can't log
> >> back in and unblock myself, when it does log in I get server erros, I
> >> can't e-mail curps because he/she doesnt have an email. Please can
> >> someone sort this out.
> >>
> >> This is REALLY pissing me off now.
> >>
> >> thanks
> >>
> >> p.s. my ip is 88.111.81.174
> >> Martin
> > _______________________________________________
> > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: Chris Jenkinson

body:
Hi all,

I think it's important to get some discussion started on the way the
arbitrators will be chosen at the end of this year, as Jimbo Wales has
recently altered the elections page[1], saying that this year there will
be a new system. As he hasn't decided, it's our responsibility as
Wikipedians to help pick the best arbitrators with the best possible system.

Currently his idea is on a appointments and confirmation procedure,
roughly equivalent to the process that judges become United States
Supreme Court members - i.e., Jimbo Wales picks a number of Wikipedians
and they go through for a confirmation vote from the community. This
obviously differs greatly from the previous system, where candidates put
their name forward and any candidate willing to stand was added to the
'ballot paper' (similar to an election in most democratic countries).

This idea has already come in for some criticism[2], such as Geni
suggesting it would be easier to make accusations of an "old boy's
club", and Michael Snow, Filiocht and jguk mentioning that they would
prefer the community to be trusted to make the right decision.

Therefore I propose that we remind ourselves of the advantages and
disadvantages that last year's elections showed, debate the merits of
the current line of thinking of Jimbo's idea and if possible come up
with a new system ensures that the English language Wikipedia is
arbitrated by the best Arbitrators who were chosen by the best possible
system.

Chris

	1. http://tinyurl.com/c2ph9
	2. http://tinyurl.com/7n88j


body:
Koltwills at aol.com wrote:
> Well, I suppose I have another reason to go to  Mozilla!
>
> AOL just sux.

I believe Geni means AOL the ISP, rather than AOL the browser.

Chris


from_name: Michael Snow

subject: [WikiEN-l] Proposed overhaul of elections and arbitration process

body:
Also posted on the wiki at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2005
Please direct comments there.

Several people have indicated that they dislike Jimbo's recent
intervention in the Arbitration Committee election process. Although the
alternative plan has not fully taken shape, I share some of the
concerns. For example, I don't think a situation where Jimbo appoints
the Arbitration Committee, and the election is simply to ratify these
appointments, is a good solution. However, I understand the concerns
about the community's ability to handle this on its own, based in part
on the last election. I think we need to find a reasonable compromise
position.

Meanwhile, the arbitration system itself continues to struggle. Too many
cases are going at once; the arbitrators cannot give them adequate
attention; the process moves too slowly. There are a number of other
problems, including arbitrator activity and burnout. I have a plan that
can address many of these issues. Here's my proposal.

Add a group of users called magistrates as a body below the Arbitration
Committee. The disputes that currently go into arbitration get handled
by smaller groups of magistrates and/or arbitrators, instead of going
before the full body. I would suggest that we keep the four votes to
accept a case rule, and simply make those four people the panel for that
case. The full Arbitration Committee can review specific cases when
appropriate, as a "court of appeal".

Magistrates are appointed directly by Jimbo. Since there is no fixed
number, the Arbitration Committee (or anyone else) can suggest names,
and people can volunteer directly to him.

While we get the magistrate system up and running, extend the
appointments of the arbitrators whose terms expire in December. Hold an
election in February (shortly after the next fundraising drive, which
should come in January) to fill these seats instead. The newly elected
arbitrators begin on March 1, which gives us time to observe the
magistrates in action, since I imagine a few of them would run for the
Arbitration Committee.

Arbitrators can be elected from the community at large, not just the
pool of magistrates. However, many of the best candidates will likely
have gained experience and proven their ability as magistrates beforehand.

Benefits of this system:
*The community gets to decide which of its members are on the main body,
which is in most cases the final port of call.
*New magistrates can be added at any time, without having to wait for an
election cycle.
*Magistrates are not chosen based on unsuitable criteria, such as
RfA-style "popularity contests".
*Elections to the Arbitration Committee should favor candidates who have
demonstrated ability (as well as approval from Jimbo).
*Magistrates who "lose" an election for arbitrator can still continue to
serve.
*Larger pool of people available for any given case.
*Number of magistrates can be scaled upward as community grows. (I think
we could start with around 20.)
*Decreases the workload for any individual arbitrator/magistrate.
*Reduce burnout accordingly.
*A panel can focus more attention on its specific case.
*Less overworked arbitrators/magistrates may also be able to resolve
cases more quickly.
*Since not everyone participates in a case, magistrates can voluntarily
avoid cases in which even a perception might exist that they have a
personal interest.
*In small panels, reaching any decision requires substantial agreement
(three out of four).
*Nevertheless, the Arbitration Committee can modify or reverse
problematic decisions from small panels.
*In cases before the full Arbitration Committee, members of the smaller
panel can organize and explain the often unwieldy evidence based on
their previous review.
*For all cases, the pool of magistrates not participating directly is
still available to handle housekeeping issues that are often neglected
currently.

For all these reasons and more, I hope we can move forward with this
proposal. I think this is the best way to balance Jimbo's input with the
need to develop responsible self-government by the community.

--Michael Snow


body:
On 10/25/05, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
> > We have suggested choosing Arbitrators by loading Recent Changes at a
> > random unannounced time and appointing the first 12 names to appear
> > there.  While I think this would be resoundingly unsatisfactory to
> > most members of the community, it would eliminate most claims of bias.
> > :)
> >
>
> Not true. You would get a comitte biased in favour of whatever the
> relivant time zone was. You would also be likely to end up with a far
> from ideal comitte.

Ok, fine, we load it once every two hours and take the first name that
appears (or the second if the first name has already been chosen).
That will deal with the timezone objection.

We're going to end up with a far-from-ideal committee if we have
unrestricted elections, too, because the voting blocks that have
already formed in Wikipedia will throw weight around to attempt to
manipulate the result.  Jimbo's proposal basically ensures that we're
not asked to waste our time voting down clearly inappropriate
candidates and avoids the risk of an inappropriate candidate with
substantial influence from being elected despite our best efforts.

Kelly


list: wikipedia-l

from_name: Delirium

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Static HTML dumps

body:
Brion Vibber wrote:

> Ilya N. wrote:
>
>> I like it, but I think that you should make some sort of convention for
>> redlinks. Seeing as there's no page there, it should link to a generic
>> 'nothing here' page or something of the sort.
>
>
> On a static dump such links aren't really very useful: they don't go
> anywhere, and you can't do anything once you've got there. So they're
> just silently dropped.

They aren't useful as links, but sometimes people do imbue wikilinks
with some semantic meaning, most often an implied "note that this word
is being used in a technical sense rather than colloquially".  So the
article might read a bit strangely if the link is dropped.  Of course,
whether this happens often enough to outweigh the strangeness of having
useless links in an article is another matter...

-Mark


from_name: Jtkiefer

subject:
[Foundation-l] Re: Our exponentially increasing costs (was Re:
	Re: Answers.com and Wikimedia Foundation to Form New Partnership)

body:
Tim Starling wrote:

>Brion Vibber wrote:
>
>
>>Daniel Mayer wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>--- Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Anthony makes a good point.  Hardware does break down over time, and has
>>>>to be replaced.  Even more likely is that it will become obsolete before
>>>>it breaks down.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>When that becomes a significant issue, then the model will need to be
>>>updated.
>>>I've been told that, so far, pretty much all the hardware we've ever
>>>bought is
>>>still in use.
>>>
>>>
>>I should point out that it hasn't been that long; we started the Florida
>>cluster in early 2004 following the Great Double Server Crash of
>>Christmas 2003.
>>
>>The oldest machine we have in service is Larousse, an 866-MHz Pentium
>>III which does some specialized and backup services, and used to be our
>>secondary web server in the old California location.
>>
>>Everything else is less than two years old, with the oldest generation
>>being 2.6GHz Pentium IVs. Not quite obsolete yet!
>>
>>A number of machines have had to go out for repair or replacement over
>>time (usually faulty memory, sometimes failed disks), but most are still
>>chugging away.
>>
>>-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
>>
>>
I thought it was generally agreed upon though that rising costs on
hardware could be compensated for, since users are more than willing to
donate for hardware costs.  Correct me if I'm wrong but couldn't
wikimedia just adjust their donation goals to cover that and thus cover
the cost of new hardware/repairs/upgrades, etc...?

-Jtkiefer


body:
Fred Bauder wrote:

> I suggest you submit names to Jimbo with a basis for why you think
> they would be a good arbitrator. That is basically all we do. If we
> all agree on one person (remember we often disagree) he is likely to
> seriously consider the person. If a person is making a lot of trouble
> already we are not likely to think they are good candidates, but
> personally I am a little concerned that what makes a good arbitrator
> is not all that predictable.
>
> By the way, anyone who thinks they can contribute to arbitration is
> welcome to make proposal on the /Workshop page of any arbitration
> case. I know I'll be looking for talent there. Rumor has it that
> there might be a small reward for any of the Wikipedia advocates
> should any of their work on /Workshop be used in a decision by the
> Arbitration Committee.
>
> Fred
>
> On Oct 25, 2005, at 6:29 PM, Jack Lynch wrote:
>
>> I think its pretty obvious most people disagree w Jimbo's decision.
>> Allowing current arbiters to be involved in selecting new arbiters
>> strikes me as a particularly ill omen. Additionally, people like
>> myself with almost no contact w Jimbo directly have little or no
>> chance. How does having Jimbo know who you are make one a better
>> arbiter?
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
>> Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2005
>>
>> Jack (Sam Spade)
>
I don't think people should expect a reward for helping out other than
knowing that they've helped out and possibly earned the thanks of the
arbcom, that being said rewards are always welcome :).

-Jtkiefer


subject:
[WikiEN-l] Skyring edit history to date - (formerly Blocked -
	In	violation of the Wikipedia blocking policy)

body:
Peta Holmes wrote:

>>who owns this IPs?
>>~Ilya N. (User:Ilyanep)
>>
>>
>
>The IPs are owned by Telstra and Otpus, the two
>largest telecommunications companies in Australia.
>Since the ArbCom case he has gone to the effort of
>using a second ISP (Optus) which uses some kind of
>nasty relatively open proxy that seems to just assign
>new IPs when one is blocked. I seriously doubt that
>either company would do anything.
>
>--Peta
>
>
Skyring's bans where just recently reset right? and if yes is the
history of this listed somewhere?

-Jtkiefer


body:
> Moore's Law isn't what it used to be. Processor speeds have virtually been
> standing still for the past two years. In October 2003, Intel's fastest
> 32-bit processor was 3.2 GHz. Today, two years on, it is 3.8 GHz, an
> increase of 19%. That's a far cry from the doubling predicted by Moore's
> law.
>
> Don't think that Moore's law is inevitable, and that some new discovery on
> the horizon will see processor speeds resume the trend as if nothing
> happened. It shouldn't be suprising that performance increases are
> becoming
> more difficult, as the technology approaches physical limits. I wouldn't
> be
> suprised if the speeds of our present processors remined quite acceptable
> for several years to come.
>
> -- Tim Starling

I think this whole discussion of moore's law is misplaced. Moore's law (even
as [ab]used colloquially) doesn't imply that current processors are going to
become less acceptable in the future. A machine which can handle X hits per
second today should still be able to handle X hits per second 3 years from
today. For hardware to "become obsolete before it breaks down" would require
quite a tremendous advance in technology (or a really shitty system
scalability).

I guess in a colo facility where you pay for every cubic inch of space
that's somewhat less true, though. If you can replace two older servers with
a single one that's faster, you save on hosting costs, and in theory that
could make up for the cost of the hardware over the expected lifetime of it.
My intuition is that new technologies aren't coming out that fast, but to
measure whether they were would require looking at the cost spread out over
the full useful lifetime of the server.

Of course this all presumes that processor speed is a limiting factor in the
first place. I have no idea if that's true or not.

All that being said, Daniel's model seems to factor most of this in. In
fact, it might very well factor all of it in. I have a tough time sorting
through all the various documents on the wiki to really understand what's
going on :).


from_name: Gregory Maxwell

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Static HTML dumps

references:
<dir0g4$47q$1@sea.gmane.org> <dj63t4$cio$1@sea.gmane.org>
	<dj7c0v$ucf$1@sea.gmane.org> <43575D4A.7090302@wikia.com>
	<43576C9A.1090008@gmail.com>

body:
On 10/20/05, Alphax <alphasigmax at gmail.com> wrote:
> Theoretically, all images in articles are thumbnails. Just include the
> thumbnail versions of the images.

I suppose its the same issue for the wikitext itself, but keep in mind
the need to offer a copy in the preferred form for editing.

I'm not a huge fan of html dumps in general. Wikitext tends to be much
smaller (even compressed), and if you're doing to do fancy compression
stuff you'll need to include a reader which makes me wonder why not a
full wikitext viewer.


body:
On 10/25/05, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
> Prove it. I haven't seen any of these voteing blocks.

Then you're not watching.  The existence of voting blocks is quite
evident in RfA.

> You've seen the list of candidates so far. Which inappropriate ones do
> you think have a chance? Remeber due to the voteing system we use you
> can vote for every good candidate. In fact the voteing system tends
> towards selecting the least least popular candidates makeing unsitible
> candiates unlikely to win.

I've repeatedly stated that I will not take a public stance on any
candidate.  I am talking privately with people who I think would be
good candidates, and I will be sharing my thoughts on appropriate
candidates with Jimbo at the appropriate time.  Once Jimbo has
announced the candidates, I may or may not endorse specific
candidates, although I rather doubt it.

Kelly


from_name: Mark Williamson

subject: Ant: Re: [Wikipedia-l] I can't believe!

body:
On 25/10/05, Milos Rancic <millosh at mutualaid.org> wrote:
> As I said, if this user template pass, I don't see any reason why
> other "regional language" template should not pass.

I have no problem with that.

> When someone says that (s)he is speaking Bronxian, Philadelphian,
> San-Franciscian or even "The Language of 10th New York Avenue" and
> make a template about that, (s)he would be completely right. Of
> course, I would be the first who would list all of my native "regional
> languages" because I have the same feelings toward my regions as the
> person from Zlatibor toward Zlatibor. As well as I know a lot of
> people who have the same feelings toward the parts of Belgrade.

So, do you consider Belgradian to be your mother tongue? I, for one,
think you're blowing smoke and disrupting WP to prove a point.

How many people do you think honestly consider Bronxian or
Philadelphian or San-Franciscan to be their mother tongue? Probably
only a handful. And what are the chances that these people are
Wikipedians?

> And language user templates would become a nonsense.
>
> And I think that this conversation is nonsense, too. If you want to
> defend such principle even language user templates would become a
> nonsense, go on. But, I see that there are enough of reasonable people
> on the poll.

Wikipedia is about consensus, not "majority rules".

Mark

> On 10/24/05, Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Uhh... is there such a category? And if there were, would it matter if
> > that were a part of it? And why couldn't they classify it if it were
> > userified?
> >
> > Mark
> >
> > On 24/10/05, Milos Rancic <millosh at mutualaid.org> wrote:
> > > But, they can't classify category "User zb" in some super-category of
> > > South Slavic speaking people.
> > >
> > > On 10/24/05, Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > People can still add the category [[Category:User zb]] to their page.
> > > >
> > > > Mark
> > > >
> > > > On 24/10/05, Milos Rancic <millosh at mutualaid.org> wrote:
> > > > > On 10/24/05, Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > I don't think it matters -- even if there is no template, people can
> > > > > > make it look like a language template anyhow.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So if they can make something that looks like a rabbit and acts like a
> > > > > > rabbit, why not just give them a rabbit?
> > > > >
> > > > > Because of categorization.
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > > > > Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > > > > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > If you would like a gmail invite, please send me an e-mail.
> > > > Si ud. quiere que le env?e una invitaci?n para juntar gmail, env?eme un mensaje.
> > > > Si vous voulez que je vous envoie une invitation ? joindre gmail,
> > > > envoyez-moi s.v.p un message.
> > > > Se vce. gostaria que lhe envie um convite para juntar gmail, favor de
> > > > envie-me uma mensagem.
> > > > Se vuleti chi vi manu 'n invitu a uniri gmail, mandatimi n messaggiu.
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > 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
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > If you would like a gmail invite, please send me an e-mail.
> > Si ud. quiere que le env?e una invitaci?n para juntar gmail, env?eme un mensaje.
> > Si vous voulez que je vous envoie une invitation ? joindre gmail,
> > envoyez-moi s.v.p un message.
> > Se vce. gostaria que lhe envie um convite para juntar gmail, favor de
> > envie-me uma mensagem.
> > Se vuleti chi vi manu 'n invitu a uniri gmail, mandatimi n messaggiu.
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>

--
If you would like a gmail invite, please send me an e-mail.
Si ud. quiere que le env?e una invitaci?n para juntar gmail, env?eme un mensaje.
Si vous voulez que je vous envoie une invitation ? joindre gmail,
envoyez-moi s.v.p un message.
Se vce. gostaria que lhe envie um convite para juntar gmail, favor de
envie-me uma mensagem.
Se vuleti chi vi manu 'n invitu a uniri gmail, mandatimi n messaggiu.


from_name: Justin Cormack

subject: [WikiEN-l] Deletion again

body:
On 25 Oct 2005, at 16:35, Michael Turley wrote:
>> By your logic: If any people are notable, then all people are
>> notable.
>>
>> Excuse me while I write articles on Anthony DiPierro, Justin Cormack,
>> and the rest.
>>
>
> If you can find third party, verifiable information on them, I look
> forward to reading your articles.

Well I know exactly what third party verifiable information about me
is out
there (well I hope I do). It would produce an amazingly incoherent
article:
odd spells alternating long and short in Universities, directorship of a
Russian restaurant, couple of rather dull drivers in the Linux
kernel, old
Usenet postings about food, edits to wikipedia, strangely inconsistent
official addresses, detailed positionings in space and time based on my
photos in Commons, place and time of birth, fact that closest
relative with
an article on wikipedia is my uncle, several pictures under free
licenses.

Actually that list looks alarmingly like some of the articles we do have
on wikipedia, random collections of facts without a narrative and
organizing
thread to make them into really good articles.

Justinc