body:
Oldak Quill wrote:

>I think it is false to say that a particular language can never be
>presented in a secular, NPOV fashion.
>

I would tend to agree with you here, but in the case of the Ute groups,
its not our language and not our place
to make such an assessement based upon their beliefs.  We should never
take a stance on the validity of any
person or groups beliefs as to whether they are right or wrong, just
accept that these are their sincere
beliefs and go from there.

>Of course, it can be the case
>that most of the speakers are unwilling to present their langauge in
>this fashion (this is not a criticism). Wikipedia will forever be
>incompatable with systematic POV, but we would certainly like
>something worked out.
>

The issue is that the culture and language of native peoples are
virtually inseparable from one another.  The culture
IS the language.  Most native peoples (us included) believe the language
contains words of power that express
and spiritual and physical as one, since in our belief systems, we make
no distincition between the sacred and the
secular -- we view both as a interwoven tapestry.   See
http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cherokee_Clans for a good
explanation of this.    These basic beliefs permeate Native American
Culture and create artificial hurdles to efforts
like this one.  I am making progress because they trust me due to the
fact I understand why they feel this way and
they know my word is written on the wind (they know I wont disrespect
their wishes).

>Are there no Cherokeeans who are willing to work
>with the existing Wikipedia model to raise the profile of their
>langauge/culture?
>
>

I am willing but the Anikutani are not willing to do so nor are the
Religious folks in Oklahoma.  One of our linguists
recentl quit the project (I could care less she wasn't helping much
anyway) because the leaders at the Stokes
Stomp Dance grounds slyly told her she would not lead the dances if she
participated in this project and
allowed our language to be made part of a machine translator.  Most of
our leaders do not share this view and
are behind the project, including the Tribal Council, Dr. Durbin
Feeling, Dr, Delso, and a lot of our educators,
however, the more radical religious elements have been raising a lot of
issues about it.  Tough, the light moves
forward ...

Jeff

>On 13/07/06, Jeff V. Merkey <jmerkey at wolfmountaingroup.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Jeff V. Merkey wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Oldak Quill wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Not at all. The best way to improve the site would be to work with
>>>>other langauge Wikipedias and within Wikimedia. Are you being active
>>>>in seeking members?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>Yes, I am, however, our culture is alien to the Wikipedia culture and
>>>there are going to be issues
>>>with the way the site operates.  So far every Cherokee who has edited on
>>>WP has gotten banned
>>>or scrutinized to the point they leave.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>(NOTE:  This comment pertains to people who were raised in the Cherokee
>>Culture and speak the language, not
>>Cherokee folks who were raised in American Culture and may have Cherokee
>>ancestry but do not know their
>>culture or the language -- there are a lot of folks in this category on
>>WP today and they seem to be fine, but their
>>contributions are nil to nothing in this area becuase they do not know
>>the culture and for all intents and purposes,
>>they are not immersed in our culture or grew up in it -- I did).
>>
>>
>>
>>> We have a concept of respecting
>>>the space of a person
>>>who is working on something.
>>>
>>>WP 's policies allow a 16 year old with a computer to come in and
>>>disrupt someone else's work and this
>>>doesn;t work for us.  Our culture is based on mutual respect, and I
>>>believe WP and Wales operate on the
>>>premise people on WP should be the same way.  This has not been the
>>>course followed.  I think WP should
>>>continue and we can do hat we need with the content -- off site where
>>>our cultural issues can coexist
>>>peacefully.
>>>
>>>You wont get many native people editing here due to the way the site is
>>>organized -- respect for others is
>>>lacking in the way articles are edited.  It's ok though, we can still
>>>both be successful if we figure out a way
>>>to create dual environments where folks can be successful.
>>>
>>>I am meeting w9ith the tribal council of the Ute, Shoshone, and Unita
>>>Nations on July 18, at 1:30 in Fort Duschene
>>>on the machine translations for their Wikipedia, so I am making
>>>excellent progress.  They also expressed a desire
>>>to host their content off Wikipedia due to their review of the issues
>>>with how the site works -- its alien to most native
>>>cultures.  The Ute's believe their language is sacred and they don't
>>>want non speakers working on it for religious
>>>reasons.  You are going to find this is a prevalent attitude among
>>>Native Peoples.  The ute's did not even allow their
>>>langauge to be written down until the mid 1970's due to their religious
>>>beliefs, so this is a big step for them.
>>>
>>>Jeff
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>On 13/07/06, Jeff V. Merkey <jmerkey at wolfmountaingroup.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Robert Scott Horning wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Jeffrey V. Merkey wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Oldak Quill wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Most Wikimedia projects don't translate "Wikipedia", "Wiktionary", and
>>>>>>>>"Wikimedia", they transliterate them. Even non-Latin alphabets do
>>>>>>>>this: Russian Wikipedia is called "?????????" which transliterates as
>>>>>>>>Ve-I-Ka-I-Pe-Ye-De-I-Ya (those are the names of the letters, at
>>>>>>>>least). Does Cherokee have some kind of formal transliteration system?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>On 12/07/06, Jeffrey V. Merkey <jmerkey at wolfmountaingroup.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>The name should be:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>???? ????
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>(digoweli gatsanula)
>>>>>>>>>"the books = pedia " " that are fast = wiki "
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>to match the actual meanings of the words "wiki" and "pedia".
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>The current name of the site, while catchy, is not accurate for the
>>>>>>>>>language, and was synthesized.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Just a suggestion...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Jeff
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Yes. it does have one for words like this, but taking potshots at the
>>>>>>>name can create something you do not intend.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Let's look at it:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Wi-gi-que-di-ya
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>wi  - (negative imperfect past tense)
>>>>>>>gi - to combine
>>>>>>>que - incomplete verb root about an animal
>>>>>>>di - plural for a non living object
>>>>>>>ya - broad area of concern (means "pertains to or covers a broad area or
>>>>>>>topic)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>While it is interesting some of the points and counter points about this
>>>>>>issue, isn't this something better left to be discussed on project pages
>>>>>>by participants and made as a local decision?  At least I would feel
>>>>>>more comfortable with people who are involved with the development of
>>>>>>the project (aka Cherokee Wikipedia content developers) instead of
>>>>>>getting European or Austrialian attitudes from people who may never even
>>>>>>add a single word to that project.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>This whole discussion strikes me as something very similar to when the
>>>>>>name Wikipedia itself was coined, along with all of the other major
>>>>>>sister projects and their names.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>There are no participants on the site.   The site has been dead for
>>>>>months.  Probably because NONE OF THEM SPEAK CHEROKEE.
>>>>>Perhaps best thing is to close the site completely and I'll just manage
>>>>>the fork off Wikipedia.
>>>>>
>>>>>Jeff
>>>>>
>>>>>Jeff
>>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>>foundation-l mailing list
>>>>>foundation-l at wikimedia.org
>>>>>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>foundation-l mailing list
>>>foundation-l at wikimedia.org
>>>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>foundation-l mailing list
>>foundation-l at wikimedia.org
>>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>


list: wikimedia-l

source: pipermail-mbox

from_name: Jeff V. Merkey

subject: [Foundation-l] Cherokee Wikipedia Name Suggestion


list: wikien-l

from_name: Fred Bauder

subject: [WikiEN-l] POV nomenclature

body:
On Jul 13, 2006, at 12:42 PM, George Herbert wrote:

> I suspect that general consensus agrees with me on this point.

I do too, but it does not trump NPOV.

Fred


list: foundation-l

from_name: Volker Haas

subject: [Foundation-l] Printed on Demand Books from Wikipedia articles

body:
Hi Robert

Robert Scott Horning wrote:

> I am curious how you plan to compile these books in a format that looks
> good on paper and not strictly as a web format.  While this can be
> automated to an extent, I do think there are some issues that come from
> trying to move content from a web format to a printed page, and not all
> of these can be completely automated.
As you have pointed out, an automatic conversion of html (or mediawiki
markup) into latex can not be automated in a way that the book is
absolutely perfect.
But right now we are pretty satisfied with the results - even though we
are still working on improvments of the conversion.
The conversion is done with a parser we developed from scratch - as
mentioned in a previous post. The mediawiki markup is translated
into an internal representation which then gets transformed to latex (to
be more precise "context") - this is the hard part. It is slightly easier to
transform the internal representation back to html since some css-style
information can be maintained.

> As I havn't been able to preview
> a book yet,
>
>
I hope you did not encounter any technical problems with the pediapress
website?

- Volker


list: wikitech-l

from_name: Sean Whitton

subject: [Wikitech-l] Rollback for trusted users

body:
I would agree that whatever happens it should be a permission that stewards
can revoke; that ability should always be there. You've got some good
arguments for an automatic level of granting, but perhaps a page where you
can hit a button to request the flag might be more appropriate, a page that
only works once and only once you've met the requirements? I don't know
about the coding of this but it would mean that any user who had lost the
flag for any reason would have to use a request page to get a b'crat to
assign it again, meaning that they could be checked out for a 3RR violation
or whatever. I am against any form of automatic upgrading once edits are
made because it makes the permission seem like an automatic right of making
those edits, and this could be socially abused. I know it could be made
clear, but I can foresee many conflicts over permissions being revoked, so
having to ask for them (in a sense) may prevent upset. Does this make any
sense?

            ?Xyrael

On 13/07/06, Rob Church <robchur at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 13/07/06, Sean Whitton <sean at silentflame.com> wrote:
> > I would disagree with the idea of restricting it to rolling back anons
> only,
> > as I think with a requirement of that many edits this wouldn't be an
> issue.
> > Your ideas of using the 3RR rule to autoremove the rollback is a good
> idea,
> > though.
> >
> > Forgive me if I have misunderstood, but I would disagree with
> automatically
> > enabling this ability and instead would suggest that users who are into
> > vandal fighting request it in a similar manner to bot requests.
>
> As I see it, we've got a few options...
>
> 1. Just give it out, to all autoconfirmed users.
> 2. Give it out to all autoconfirmed users who have passed some
> additional threshold, such as edit count; record user edit counts
> somewhere, or maintain a flag on their account which is updated when
> the desired threshold is passed.
> 3. Have bureaucrats and stewards give it out.
>
> Each option has benefits and each has disadvantages. For instance,
> suggesting #1 on wikien-l would be liable to get me shot, owing to En
> Wikipedia's lack of desire to use simple functions such as block
> against users who deserve it. Abuse it? Blocked. Simple.
>
> Reliance on either of #2 or #3 alone isn't quite optimum in my book.
> What we *could* do is combine the two. If the implementation for #2
> added users to a group with the rollback permission (granted one-off
> on their 2000th edit, to take an arbitrary figure), as opposed to
> adding them to an implicit group (effectively re-granted with every
> session), then it could be revoked for the short or long term by
> bureaucrats and stewards and ArbCom, oh my.
>
> Retaining option #3 would allow it to be given back, or given out
> prematurely.
>
> #2 as an implicit group is not too horrendous to code into MediaWiki;
> we can add a new column to the user table and add checking code to the
> edit form or Article::editUpdates() method, etc. The more complex
> proposal starts to look uglier, so I'm thinking implementation of that
> *might* be via an extension, assuming we have or could add all the
> required hooks and grappling ledges.
>
>
> Rob Church
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>


from_name: geni

subject: [Foundation-l] Quran in Sitenotice

body:
The urdu wikipedia has been changed to show a verse of the Quran in Sitenotice

http://ur.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Sitenotice

I don't belive that this kind of endorsement of a religion is
compatible with the mission of the wikimedia foundation.

--
geni


subject: [Foundation-l] Quran in Sitenotice


from_name: Oldak Quill

subject: [Foundation-l] Quran in Sitenotice

body:
Of course. Wikipedia should be entirely secular. The only way we can
be truly neutral and unbiased is to have no official position on
anything (or do this as much as is possible).

Wikimedia should never, ever endorse any religion.

On 13/07/06, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
> The urdu wikipedia has been changed to show a verse of the Quran in Sitenotice
>
>
> http://ur.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Sitenotice
>
>
> I don't belive that this kind of endorsement of a religion is
> compatible with the mission of the wikimedia foundation.
>
> --
> geni
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

--
Oldak Quill (oldakquill at gmail.com)


subject: [Foundation-l] Quran in Sitenotice


from_name: stevertigo

subject: [WikiEN-l] POV nomenclature

body:
--- jayjg <jayjg99 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Wow.  Did you come up with "2006 Israeli-attacks on Lebanon" as a
> "neutral" name?

At least I'm trying.

-Stevertigo

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


subject: [Foundation-l] Quran in Sitenotice

body:
On 7/13/06, Michael Bimmler <mbimmler at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hm, imho it depends a bit on it's meaning (I can't read it, sorry). If
> it is just about, say, the value of knowledge, it might be not even so
> bad, although I wonder why there should be such quotes in the
> Sitenotice, as it is probably intended for other messages...
> Michael

the only translation I have is
"you call people towards the righteous deeds and forget yourself doing
so, whereas you also read the words of god, don't you have any senses"

from nexus on #wikipedia

--
geni


subject: [Foundation-l] Quran in Sitenotice


from_name: Jack

body:
May I suggest that pediapress not require cookies to just look at the
site, tho I can understand requiring cookies when a customer builds up
a book.

Wikipedia for instance only creates cookies when account holders wish
to be automatically logged in - no cookies are required to just read
articles.
--
user:Jeandr?


subject: [Foundation-l] Quran in Sitenotice

body:
Such things are up to the individual project, IMHO.

On 13/07/06, Mathias Schindler <mathias.schindler at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 7/13/06, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
> > The urdu wikipedia has been changed to show a verse of the Quran in Sitenotice
> >
> >
> > http://ur.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Sitenotice
> >
> >
> > I don't belive that this kind of endorsement of a religion is
> > compatible with the mission of the wikimedia foundation.
>
> Thanks for pointing this out. Am I right to assume that
> http://ur.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D8%A2%DB%8C%DB%81_31-45_%D8%AA%DA%A9 is
> just an text extract that has not encyclopedic style and would be more
> suitable at wikisource?
>
> Mathias
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

--
Oldak Quill (oldakquill at gmail.com)


subject: [Foundation-l] Quran in Sitenotice


subject: [WikiEN-l] POV nomenclature

body:
On Jul 13, 2006, at 12:52 PM, George Herbert wrote:

> On 7/13/06, Fred Bauder <fredbaud at ctelco.net> wrote:
>
>> On Jul 13, 2006, at 12:42 PM, George Herbert wrote:
>>
>>> I suspect that general consensus agrees with me on this point.
>>>
>>
>> I do too, but it does not trump NPOV.
>>
>
> Trump implies some sort of absolutism.  I'm trying to point out that
> absolutism for any of the policies eventually leads to mutual
> contradictions with other policies.
>
> That way lies madness and flame wars...
>
> --
> -george william herbert
> george.herbert at gmail.com

It is like the United States, which, as we all know, opposes torture.
That is the policy of the United States. No matter how much torture
is done, the policy remains. So all the edit warring and voting you
want to do will not abrogate NPOV.

Fred


subject: [Foundation-l] Quran in Sitenotice

body:
Even if the verse were essentually non-religious, a quote from the
Qur'an, a religious text, is inappropriate. This verse is blatantly
religious though and should be removed as quickly as is possible.

On 13/07/06, Michael Bimmler <mbimmler at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 7/13/06, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 7/13/06, Michael Bimmler <mbimmler at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Hm, imho it depends a bit on it's meaning (I can't read it, sorry). If
> > > it is just about, say, the value of knowledge, it might be not even so
> > > bad, although I wonder why there should be such quotes in the
> > > Sitenotice, as it is probably intended for other messages...
> > > Michael
> >
> >
> > the only translation I have is
> > "you call people towards the righteous deeds and forget yourself doing
> > so, whereas you also read the words of god, don't you have any senses"
> >
> Hm. Doesn't look really appropriate for a Sitenotice. I can't see any
> reason, why this should be shown to every user...
> Michael
> > from nexus on #wikipedia
> >
> > --
> > geni
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

--
Oldak Quill (oldakquill at gmail.com)


subject: [Foundation-l] Quran in Sitenotice


subject: [WikiEN-l] POV nomenclature

body:
>> --- Fred wrote:
>>It is like the United States, which, as we all know, opposes torture.
That is the policy of the United States. No matter how much torture
is done, the policy remains. So all the edit warring and voting you
>>want to do will not abrogate NPOV.

> --- George Herbert <george.herbert at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Are you [Fred] seriously equating article names with torture???
> > Obviously we've hit a nerve here, but ... gentlemen, please, calm down.
>
>-- Stevertigo wrote:
> I had thought that was a bit odd as well.

Methinks Fred was being multidimensionally facetious, but in a way
which somehow advances human dignity. I think.

-Stevertigo

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


subject: [Foundation-l] Quran in Sitenotice

body:
My "individual project" statement was to do with whatever was written
on the page of text (rather than the MediaWiki message). But you're
right about these pillars and that page of text too should be moved.

On 13/07/06, Mathias Schindler <mathias.schindler at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 7/13/06, Oldak Quill <oldakquill at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Such things are up to the individual project, IMHO.
>
> Wikipedias central pillars are not up the individual project. These include
>
> 1. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia
> 2. Wikipedia is written in NPOV (these include religious endorsements)
> 3. Wikipedia respects copyright law
> 4. Wikilove.
>
> Mathias
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

--
Oldak Quill (oldakquill at gmail.com)


subject: [Foundation-l] Quran in Sitenotice


subject: [Foundation-l] Quran in Sitenotice

body:
I think we should ask the sysop who added it for their reasons so that
we can greater understand why it was put there, but I can't read Urdu
so I'm at a bit of a loss. Does anyone have a nice translator, or can
speak it themselves? This would seem a sensible step forward to me.

	?Xyrael

On 13/07/06, Oldak Quill <oldakquill at gmail.com> wrote:
> Even if the verse were essentually non-religious, a quote from the
> Qur'an, a religious text, is inappropriate. This verse is blatantly
> religious though and should be removed as quickly as is possible.
>
> On 13/07/06, Michael Bimmler <mbimmler at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 7/13/06, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On 7/13/06, Michael Bimmler <mbimmler at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Hm, imho it depends a bit on it's meaning (I can't read it, sorry). If
> > > > it is just about, say, the value of knowledge, it might be not even so
> > > > bad, although I wonder why there should be such quotes in the
> > > > Sitenotice, as it is probably intended for other messages...
> > > > Michael
> > >
> > >
> > > the only translation I have is
> > > "you call people towards the righteous deeds and forget yourself doing
> > > so, whereas you also read the words of god, don't you have any senses"
> > >
> > Hm. Doesn't look really appropriate for a Sitenotice. I can't see any
> > reason, why this should be shown to every user...
> > Michael
> > > from nexus on #wikipedia
> > >
> > > --
> > > geni
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > foundation-l mailing list
> > > foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> > > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
>
>
> --
> Oldak Quill (oldakquill at gmail.com)
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

--

            ?Xyrael
                    Sean Whitton ? sean at silentflame.com | xyrael.net


subject: [Foundation-l] Quran in Sitenotice


from_name: Rob Church

subject: [Wikitech-l] SVN for Language Select Javascript?

body:
On 13/07/06, Edward Z. Yang <edwardzyang at thewritingpot.com> wrote:
> Sounds great. Does that mean I'd get SVN access (even if it's just for
> that extension folder) to maintain it?

Given our current attitude, it seems you'd get Subversion access if
you offered to blow your nose in the name of MediaWiki.

We don't typically do per-folder permissions; we just trust people not
to fuck up code they don't understand or touch stuff they're not
supposed to.

However, I'd vouch for your sanity and ability to keep your sticky
fingers to yourself, and I want to see some proof of concept code for
this.

Rob Church


body:
Birgitte SB wrote:

>You may want to be sure and explain exactly what the
>GFDL entails in this case.  There is no guarantee that
>any work that is done under this license will be
>treated in a sacred manner by downstream users.
>Non-speakers would be within full rights to take the
>fork made in the Ute's language and put it up on a new
>website or even on Wikipedia where any "16 year old
>with a computer" will be able to edit it.
>
>
Which is why the translations will be intertribal only and not accessible
to the general public in the case of the Uto-Aztecan translations -- at
their
request. The Foundation will have access to it, contingent on the
concessions
the Ute's are willing to make.

There are those involved who want it accessible to everyone, but their
leaders
make the final call. They have agreed that all Ute Indians will have
access to
the site. It doesn't violate the GFDL, its their language and they are
providing me
all four dialects, which this is the firs time in their history they
have done so

Ute, Unite Ute, Uncompaghre Ute, and the the ancient Deep Ute Language. And
unknown to the general public, the Ute's, like most tribes have a
written language
using syllabaric lithographs for their language. Some examples of it can
be viewed
as pictographs in nine-mile canyon in Utah -- they have never shared it
before.

So as near as I can tell, I have made some very good progress very
quickly. The Foundation
is sensitive and respectful fo these types of projects.

>Wikipedia is alien to most cultures I imagine.  It is
>alien to capitalist culture and academic culture to
>name two.  However many people accostomed to those
>cultures learn to adapt to and even appreciate WP
>culture.
>

> I think you are focusing too much on the
>negative at WP and overlooking the positives of
>inter-culture collaboration.
>
No, I am a WP advocate, so don't misconstrue what I say. I am
just coldly and directly stating the reality. Also, There is little to
no benefit to interculture collaboration if you don't speak the language
of what's presented, so the consumers of the content will invariably be the
tribes themselves, and not the general community, so I think it's a moot
point.

>I hope your endeavor
>succeeds in any event.
>
>Birgitte SB
>
>--- "Jeff V. Merkey" <jmerkey at wolfmountaingroup.com>
>wrote:
>
>
>
>>Oldak Quill wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Not at all. The best way to improve the site would
>>>
>>>
>>be to work with
>>
>>
>>>other langauge Wikipedias and within Wikimedia. Are
>>>
>>>
>>you being active
>>
>>
>>>in seeking members?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>Yes, I am, however, our culture is alien to the
>>Wikipedia culture and
>>there are going to be issues
>>with the way the site operates.  So far every
>>Cherokee who has edited on
>>WP has gotten banned
>>or scrutinized to the point they leave.  We have a
>>concept of respecting
>>the space of a person
>>who is working on something.
>>
>>WP 's policies allow a 16 year old with a computer
>>to come in and
>>disrupt someone else's work and this
>>doesn;t work for us.  Our culture is based on mutual
>>respect, and I
>>believe WP and Wales operate on the
>>premise people on WP should be the same way.  This
>>has not been the
>>course followed.  I think WP should
>>continue and we can do hat we need with the content
>>-- off site where
>>our cultural issues can coexist
>>peacefully.
>>
>>You wont get many native people editing here due to
>>the way the site is
>>organized -- respect for others is
>>lacking in the way articles are edited.  It's ok
>>though, we can still
>>both be successful if we figure out a way
>>to create dual environments where folks can be
>>successful.
>>
>>I am meeting w9ith the tribal council of the Ute,
>>Shoshone, and Unita
>>Nations on July 18, at 1:30 in Fort Duschene
>>on the machine translations for their Wikipedia, so
>>I am making
>>excellent progress.  They also expressed a desire
>>to host their content off Wikipedia due to their
>>review of the issues
>>with how the site works -- its alien to most native
>>cultures.  The Ute's believe their language is
>>sacred and they don't
>>want non speakers working on it for religious
>>reasons.  You are going to find this is a prevalent
>>attitude among
>>Native Peoples.  The ute's did not even allow their
>>langauge to be written down until the mid 1970's due
>>to their religious
>>beliefs, so this is a big step for them.
>>
>>Jeff
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>On 13/07/06, Jeff V. Merkey
>>>
>>>
>><jmerkey at wolfmountaingroup.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Robert Scott Horning wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Jeffrey V. Merkey wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Oldak Quill wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Most Wikimedia projects don't translate
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>"Wikipedia", "Wiktionary", and
>>
>>
>>>>>>>"Wikimedia", they transliterate them. Even
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>non-Latin alphabets do
>>
>>
>>>>>>>this: Russian Wikipedia is called
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>"?'???????????????Z(" which transliterates as
>>
>>
>>>>>>>Ve-I-Ka-I-Pe-Ye-De-I-Ya (those are the names of
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>the letters, at
>>
>>
>>>>>>>least). Does Cherokee have some kind of formal
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>transliteration system?
>>
>>
>>>>>>>On 12/07/06, Jeffrey V. Merkey
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>><jmerkey at wolfmountaingroup.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>The name should be:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>??--?Z(?????Z(? ?Z(??????"?Z(?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>(digoweli gatsanula)
>>>>>>>>"the books = pedia " " that are fast = wiki "
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>to match the actual meanings of the words
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>"wiki" and "pedia".
>>
>>
>>>>>>>>The current name of the site, while catchy, is
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>not accurate for the
>>
>>
>>>>>>>>language, and was synthesized.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Just a suggestion...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Jeff
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>Yes. it does have one for words like this, but
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>taking potshots at the
>>
>>
>>>>>>name can create something you do not intend.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Let's look at it:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Wi-gi-que-di-ya
>>>>>>
>>>>>>wi  - (negative imperfect past tense)
>>>>>>gi - to combine
>>>>>>que - incomplete verb root about an animal
>>>>>>di - plural for a non living object
>>>>>>ya - broad area of concern (means "pertains to
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>or covers a broad area or
>>
>>
>>>>>>topic)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>While it is interesting some of the points and
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>counter points about this
>>
>>
>>>>>issue, isn't this something better left to be
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>discussed on project pages
>>
>>
>>>>>by participants and made as a local decision?  At
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>least I would feel
>>
>>
>>>>>more comfortable with people who are involved
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>with the development of
>>
>>
>>>>>the project (aka Cherokee Wikipedia content
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>developers) instead of
>>
>>
>>>>>getting European or Austrialian attitudes from
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>people who may never even
>>
>>
>>>>>add a single word to that project.
>>>>>
>>>>>This whole discussion strikes me as something
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>very similar to when the
>>
>>
>>>>>name Wikipedia itself was coined, along with all
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>of the other major
>>
>>
>>>>>sister projects and their names.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>There are no participants on the site.   The site
>>>>
>>>>
>>has been dead for
>>
>>
>>>>months.  Probably because NONE OF THEM SPEAK
>>>>
>>>>
>>CHEROKEE.
>>
>>
>>>>Perhaps best thing is to close the site completely
>>>>
>>>>
>>and I'll just manage
>>
>>
>>>>the fork off Wikipedia.
>>>>
>>>>Jeff
>>>>
>>>>Jeff
>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>foundation-l mailing list
>>>>foundation-l at wikimedia.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>foundation-l mailing list
>>foundation-l at wikimedia.org
>>
>>
>>
>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
>
>
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
>http://mail.yahoo.com
>_______________________________________________
>foundation-l mailing list
>foundation-l at wikimedia.org
>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
>
>


from_name: Delirium

subject: [WikiEN-l] Borderline notable bios (yes, again)

body:
Guy Chapman aka JzG wrote:

>But in the end, no.  I don't think we should have an article on
>somebody who is in the end "famous" solely because, well, a group of
>sophomoric fucktards got their rocks off laughing at his appearance.
>
>
Up for deleting [[Joseph Merrick]]?  Or is there a threshold for
"famousness" above which such humanitarian concerns cease to apply?

-Mark


from_name: jkelly at fas.harvard.edu

subject: [WikiEN-l]  Image statistics -- 374 000+ "fair use" images

references:
<5668b2t6g8nvmutcivoaaja49qs73c55rl@4ax.com>
	<44B4B3D6.3010001@gmail.com>
	<dfd0b40607130609o5d9f0fexe213fa8b0dcb905c@mail.gmail.com>

body:
  Hi,

  User:Kotepho queried the en: database as of July 4, 2006 to get numbers on
media we are hosting.  The results are at [[User:Kotepho/reports/Images by
copyright status statistics]].

  In short, we had the following:

  853 215 tagged as having a free license
  374 304 tagged with a variant of "fair use"

  As a point of comparison, Commons has

  677 813 media files as of this email's timestamp

  Roughly half of our "fair use" images are tagged with the template for
"magazine cover" or "promophoto".

                                           Jkelly


body:
Fred Bauder wrote:

>On Jul 13, 2006, at 12:20 PM, Birgitte SB wrote:
>
>
>
>>You may want to be sure and explain exactly what the
>>GFDL entails in this case.  There is no guarantee that
>>any work that is done under this license will be
>>treated in a sacred manner by downstream users.
>>Non-speakers would be within full rights to take the
>>fork made in the Ute's language and put it up on a new
>>website or even on Wikipedia where any "16 year old
>>with a computer" will be able to edit it.
>>
>>Wikipedia is alien to most cultures I imagine.  It is
>>alien to capitalist culture and academic culture to
>>name two.  However many people accostomed to those
>>cultures learn to adapt to and even appreciate WP
>>culture.  I think you are focusing too much on the
>>negative at WP and overlooking the positives of
>>inter-culture collaboration.  I hope your endeavor
>>succeeds in any event.
>>
>>Birgitte SB
>>
>>
>
>The Cherokee, particularly, have historically been willing to share
>their wisdom.
>
>Fred
>
>
>
Correct, Not true of most other tribes however ....

Jeff

>_______________________________________________
>foundation-l mailing list
>foundation-l at wikimedia.org
>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
>
>


from_name: Rob

body:
On 7/13/06, Delirium <delirium at hackish.org> wrote:

> Up for deleting [[Joseph Merrick]]?  Or is there a threshold for
> "famousness" above which such humanitarian concerns cease to apply?

Yep.  When Hollywood makes Brian Peppers: The Movie, we can restore
that article.


from_name: John Lyden

subject: [WikiEN-l] Image statistics -- 374 000+ "fair use" images

references:
<5668b2t6g8nvmutcivoaaja49qs73c55rl@4ax.com>
	<44B4B3D6.3010001@gmail.com>
	<dfd0b40607130609o5d9f0fexe213fa8b0dcb905c@mail.gmail.com>
	<1152811324.44b6813cdccd6@webmail.fas.harvard.edu>

body:
*tongue firmly in cheek*

I still fail to see what this has to do with poor [[Wayne Gretzky]].

--
John Lyden - rasputinaxp at gmail.com
"The only people for me are the mad ones, the ones who are mad to
live, mad to talk, mad to be saved, desirous of everything at the same
time..." -Kerouac


from_name: Lord Voldemort

references:
<5668b2t6g8nvmutcivoaaja49qs73c55rl@4ax.com>
	<44B4B3D6.3010001@gmail.com>
	<dfd0b40607130609o5d9f0fexe213fa8b0dcb905c@mail.gmail.com>
	<1152811324.44b6813cdccd6@webmail.fas.harvard.edu>
	<980278fa0607131024n5e25addfmf60ad5d9c01e02a7@mail.gmail.com>

body:
On 7/13/06, John Lyden <rasputinaxp at gmail.com> wrote:
> *tongue firmly in cheek*
>
> I still fail to see what this has to do with poor [[Wayne Gretzky]].

Stealing my line???
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AMain_Page%2FErrors&diff=63620610&oldid=63618519

How dare you?!?! ;-)  --LV


from_name: George Herbert

subject: [WikiEN-l] POV nomenclature

body:
On 7/13/06, Fred Bauder <fredbaud at ctelco.net> wrote:
> The point is only that infractions do not abrogate a principle.

I am certainly not suggesting that NPOV be abrogated.  NPOV is good.
I like NPOV.  NPOV may not be my friend, but I buy NPOV a beer when I
see it at the pub.

--
-george william herbert
george.herbert at gmail.com


body:
On 7/13/06, Lord Voldemort <lordbishopvoldemort at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 7/13/06, John Lyden <rasputinaxp at gmail.com> wrote:
> > *tongue firmly in cheek*
> >
> > I still fail to see what this has to do with poor [[Wayne Gretzky]].
>
> Stealing my line???
>
> How dare you?!?! ;-)  --LV

Oh I suspect I'll be turned into a newt for this. :P

--
John Lyden - rasputinaxp at gmail.com
"The only people for me are the mad ones, the ones who are mad to
live, mad to talk, mad to be saved, desirous of everything at the same
time..." -Kerouac


subject: [WikiEN-l] POV nomenclature

body:
--- jayjg <jayjg99 at gmail.com> wrote:
> If you're going to argue for neutrality, it would be helpful if you
> made more neutral suggestions.  The current article name, [[2006
> Israel-Lebanon-Hezbollah conflict]], is at least neutral, although it
> suffers from being unwieldy and a Wikipedia invention (i.e. original
> research).

Hey, dont hide an accusal of bias within a comment that
purports to itself be neutral.

Aside from the fact that the title you give has the glaring issue
of completely bypassing any notions of state sovereignty,
and strangely represents a serious of hostile event as a "conflict,"
I think its perfectly fine.

--- Dabljuh <dabljuh at gmx.net> wrote:
> Do you consider replacing the title of "Holocaust"
> with "Jewish-Aryan conflict" as neutral as well?

I think this might be a Godwin's Law violation.

-Stevertigo

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


subject: [WikiEN-l] POV nomenclature

body:
--- Fred Bauder <fredbaud at ctelco.net> wrote:
> I think this is unavoidable. We have no way to know what history
> books will call it.

To the contrary - we might know before they do.

-Stevertigo

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


from_name: Gregory Maxwell

body:
On 7/13/06, jkelly at fas.harvard.edu <jkelly at fas.harvard.edu> wrote:
>   User:Kotepho queried the en: database as of July 4, 2006 to get numbers on
> media we are hosting.  The results are at [[User:Kotepho/reports/Images by
> copyright status statistics]].
>
>   In short, we had the following:
>   853 215 tagged as having a free license
>   374 304 tagged with a variant of "fair use"
>   As a point of comparison, Commons has
>   677 813 media files as of this email's timestamp

Um.

I suspect he's double counting somehow.
A month ago there were only 492,308 *total* image pages on enwiki.

Ditto for his fair use numbers.. about 2x reality from my last
measurements. The commons total looks about right.

I welcome anyone interested in running stats to contact me for a
sanity check on their queries... there are a number of common pitfalls
like  counting directly from the category tables, and failing to
filter for distinct or assuming images will never have a free tag and
a fair use tag at the same time... that can cause incorrect results.


list: commons-l

subject: [Commons-l]  Use of articles (was:Radical proposal)

body:
  Hi,

Quoting Oldak Quill <oldakquill at gmail.com>:
> I concur. I only use categories, not sure why anyone uses articles.

  Articles are useful for sorting images within a category.  One can place of
all of a particular painter's paintings of trees into one gallery, for
instance, or sort portraits chronologically.  When we have hundreds of images
in one category, articles can be used to highlight the best ones.  Further, our
search feature priveleges articles.  They have some uses; we just shouldn't be
trying to make article space replace category space or vice versa.

                                    Jkelly


subject: [Foundation-l] Quran in Sitenotice

body:
Nexus has apparently signed off and he didn't leave any method of
contact on the network, and he doesn't appear to go by the name on
enwiki-p (if at all). All we have is his host:
 -!- nexus [n=nexus at guest-8.mpi-sb.mpg.de]

Any suggestions? We could try asking for other people.

On 13/07/06, Michael Bimmler <mbimmler at gmail.com> wrote:
> geni: your translator was nexus on #wikipedia. Could he act as
> translator in this matter?
> Michael
>
> On 7/13/06, Sean Whitton <sean at silentflame.com> wrote:
> > I think we should ask the sysop who added it for their reasons so that
> > we can greater understand why it was put there, but I can't read Urdu
> > so I'm at a bit of a loss. Does anyone have a nice translator, or can
> > speak it themselves? This would seem a sensible step forward to me.
> >
> >         ?Xyrael
> >
> > On 13/07/06, Oldak Quill <oldakquill at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Even if the verse were essentually non-religious, a quote from the
> > > Qur'an, a religious text, is inappropriate. This verse is blatantly
> > > religious though and should be removed as quickly as is possible.
> > >
> > > On 13/07/06, Michael Bimmler <mbimmler at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > On 7/13/06, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > On 7/13/06, Michael Bimmler <mbimmler at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > Hm, imho it depends a bit on it's meaning (I can't read it, sorry). If
> > > > > > it is just about, say, the value of knowledge, it might be not even so
> > > > > > bad, although I wonder why there should be such quotes in the
> > > > > > Sitenotice, as it is probably intended for other messages...
> > > > > > Michael
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > the only translation I have is
> > > > > "you call people towards the righteous deeds and forget yourself doing
> > > > > so, whereas you also read the words of god, don't you have any senses"
> > > > >
> > > > Hm. Doesn't look really appropriate for a Sitenotice. I can't see any
> > > > reason, why this should be shown to every user...
> > > > Michael
> > > > > from nexus on #wikipedia
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > geni
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > foundation-l mailing list
> > > > > foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> > > > > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> > > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > foundation-l mailing list
> > > > foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> > > > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Oldak Quill (oldakquill at gmail.com)
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > foundation-l mailing list
> > > foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> > > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> >             ?Xyrael
> >                     Sean Whitton ? sean at silentflame.com | xyrael.net
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

--

	?Xyrael
		Sean Whitton (Xyrael) <sean at silentflame.com> [xyrael.net]


subject: [Foundation-l] Quran in Sitenotice


subject: [Foundation-l] Quran in Sitenotice

body:
In response to this I would say that #2 is the most important pillar,
something which Jimbo used to quote on his userpage (this seems to
have gone now). I would agree with him because a projects as wide
reaching as the foundation's cannot prosper without this. We need to
keep things as open and accessible as possible and only through NPOV
can we encourage people to get involved. If I was a non-Muslim speaker
of Urdu, I can imagine being concerned that the site was heavily
orientated in that direction, which is not the idea. Referring to #1,
it's an encyclopedia and the only purpose of having different
languages is to allow others to read and edit, not to make any other
divisions.

On 13/07/06, Robert Scott Horning <robert_horning at netzero.net> wrote:
> Mathias Schindler wrote:
>
> >On 7/13/06, Oldak Quill <oldakquill at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Such things are up to the individual project, IMHO.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Wikipedias central pillars are not up the individual project. These include
> >
> >1. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia
> >2. Wikipedia is written in NPOV (these include religious endorsements)
> >3. Wikipedia respects copyright law
> >4. Wikilove.
> >
> >Mathias
> >
> >
> However, I would point out that the only thing this violates is #2
> listed above.  The Quran (Koran?) is in the public domain and certainly
> free of copyright, and Wikilove would encourage you to try and come to
> an accomodation here rather than micromanage this from the WMF board or
> stewards.
>
> In other words, let the individual project deal with this, using their
> own cultural standards for native speakers of Urdu, tempered with these
> pillars and principles you mentioned.  It doesn't need to take up
> bandwidth here unless there is a deadlock on this issue and isn't being
> dealt with.
>
> --
> Robert Scott Horning
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

--

	?Xyrael
		Sean Whitton (Xyrael) <sean at silentflame.com> [xyrael.net]


subject: [Foundation-l] Quran in Sitenotice


subject: [Foundation-l] Quran in Sitenotice

body:
On 7/13/06, Robert Scott Horning <robert_horning at netzero.net> wrote:
> However, I would point out that the only thing this violates is #2
> listed above.  The Quran (Koran?) is in the public domain and certainly
> free of copyright, and Wikilove would encourage you to try and come to
> an accomodation here rather than micromanage this from the WMF board or
> stewards.
>

There is no accomodation. If people want they can edit their own
monobooks to include quotes. Sitenotice is not acceptable

> In other words, let the individual project deal with this, using their
> own cultural standards for native speakers of Urdu, tempered with these
> pillars and principles you mentioned.  It doesn't need to take up
> bandwidth here unless there is a deadlock on this issue and isn't being
> dealt with.
>
> --
> Robert Scott Horning
>

I belive this this has already been disscused on ur.wikipedia. They
have come to thier descision. Now we are going to have to deal with
that problem.
--
geni


subject: [Foundation-l] Quran in Sitenotice


from_name: Michael Bimmler

subject: [Foundation-l] Quran in Sitenotice

body:
On 7/13/06, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
> The urdu wikipedia has been changed to show a verse of the Quran in Sitenotice
>
>
> http://ur.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Sitenotice
>
>
> I don't belive that this kind of endorsement of a religion is
> compatible with the mission of the wikimedia foundation.
>
Hm, imho it depends a bit on it's meaning (I can't read it, sorry). If
it is just about, say, the value of knowledge, it might be not even so
bad, although I wonder why there should be such quotes in the
Sitenotice, as it is probably intended for other messages...
Michael
> --
> geni
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>


subject: [Foundation-l] Quran in Sitenotice


subject: [Foundation-l] Quran in Sitenotice

body:
On 7/13/06, Sean Whitton <sean at silentflame.com> wrote:
> Nexus has apparently signed off and he didn't leave any method of
> contact on the network, and he doesn't appear to go by the name on
> enwiki-p (if at all). All we have is his host:
>  -!- nexus [n=nexus at guest-8.mpi-sb.mpg.de]
>
> Any suggestions? We could try asking for other people.
>

Resonable list at:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Whatlinkshere&target=Template:User_ur

--
geni


subject: [Foundation-l] Quran in Sitenotice


from_name: Mathias Schindler

subject: [Foundation-l] Quran in Sitenotice

body:
On 7/13/06, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
> The urdu wikipedia has been changed to show a verse of the Quran in Sitenotice
>
>
> http://ur.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Sitenotice
>
>
> I don't belive that this kind of endorsement of a religion is
> compatible with the mission of the wikimedia foundation.

Thanks for pointing this out. Am I right to assume that
http://ur.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D8%A2%DB%8C%DB%81_31-45_%D8%AA%DA%A9 is
just an text extract that has not encyclopedic style and would be more
suitable at wikisource?

Mathias


subject: [Foundation-l] Quran in Sitenotice


from_name: Angela

body:
On 7/13/06, Delirium <delirium at hackish.org> wrote:

> In both cases the primary complaint is that the articles contain (or
> have at times contained) untrue, misleading, or irrelevant information.
> The obvious way to fix that problem is to remove such information

I can't do that without being accused of violating the autobiography
policy. Subjects are not supposed to edit their own articles. I have
tried detailing the errors on the talk page, but it gets ignored.

Angela.


subject: [Foundation-l] Quran in Sitenotice

body:
Whoever said that userboxes aren't useful? ;)

On 13/07/06, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 7/13/06, Sean Whitton <sean at silentflame.com> wrote:
> > Nexus has apparently signed off and he didn't leave any method of
> > contact on the network, and he doesn't appear to go by the name on
> > enwiki-p (if at all). All we have is his host:
> >  -!- nexus [n=nexus at guest-8.mpi-sb.mpg.de]
> >
> > Any suggestions? We could try asking for other people.
> >
>
> Resonable list at:
>
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Whatlinkshere&target=Template:User_ur
>
>
> --
> geni
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

--
Oldak Quill (oldakquill at gmail.com)


subject: [Foundation-l] Quran in Sitenotice


subject: [Foundation-l] Quran in Sitenotice

body:
On 7/13/06, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 7/13/06, Michael Bimmler <mbimmler at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hm, imho it depends a bit on it's meaning (I can't read it, sorry). If
> > it is just about, say, the value of knowledge, it might be not even so
> > bad, although I wonder why there should be such quotes in the
> > Sitenotice, as it is probably intended for other messages...
> > Michael
>
>
> the only translation I have is
> "you call people towards the righteous deeds and forget yourself doing
> so, whereas you also read the words of god, don't you have any senses"
>
Hm. Doesn't look really appropriate for a Sitenotice. I can't see any
reason, why this should be shown to every user...
Michael
> from nexus on #wikipedia
>
> --
> geni
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>


subject: [Foundation-l] Quran in Sitenotice


subject: [Foundation-l] Quran in Sitenotice

body:
On 7/13/06, Oldak Quill <oldakquill at gmail.com> wrote:
> Such things are up to the individual project, IMHO.

Wikipedias central pillars are not up the individual project. These include

1. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia
2. Wikipedia is written in NPOV (these include religious endorsements)
3. Wikipedia respects copyright law
4. Wikilove.

Mathias


subject: [Foundation-l] Quran in Sitenotice


from_name: Jeff V. Merkey

body:
Birgitte SB wrote:

>
>You certainly may do your best to restrict "access" to
>the end product as you are planning.  This is what
>many libraries do regarding rare PD texts.  However if
>*one* person who is given access decides for any
>reason to make a copy public, the cat is out of the
>bag.  For example a library may have strong
>restrictions on access. They do not allow their
>material scanned or photocopied you are only allowed
>to read it within one room.  However I could type a
>transcription on a laptop over the course of several
>weeks and put it on Wikisource.  Assuming this
>material is in the public domain, the library can do
>nothing in such in event as they only own the
>particular book not the copyright.
>
>This could one day happen to the Ute's works.  Once it
>is made public in part or whole, it can be treated in
>any way allowed under the GFDL.  The foundation has no
>control over it, however respectful they wish to be.
>I am not trying to encourage action of this sort.  But
>everyone involved needs to be aware of the
>ramifications of using copyleft material.  This may
>seem an unlikely possibilty at the moment, but over
>time it more likely than not this material will become
>public.  Although it may be a hundred years till that
>happens.  I respect what you are trying to do and the
>Ute as well.  I would hate for something like this to
>happen and the Ute to feel blindsided by such a turn
>of events.
>
>

That's the Ute's issue to manage, not mine or the Foundations. I am here
to promote the pervasiveness of WP content and bring to the Native Peoples.
What thye do with it is their own affair. I expect it will become public
at some
point, but that's not my call.

>I am not trying to miscontrue your comments, please
>correct me where I have.  I believe it is too easy to
>say "the Wikipedia way is alien to the culture of X
>and they will not be able to work under it's
>policies."  Because X can be filled with many things
>which *have* adapted to WP culture.  As I said above
>WP is very contrary to capitalist and academic
>cultures.  Although there are always individuals who
>cannot adapt, I do not like to see this generalized to
>an entire culture.   However, I always found it easy
>to work within the policies here, so it I may be
>completely wrong in this.
>
>
>
Wikipedia has been around for 6 years, Native Cultures have been around
for about 12,000 years.
I expect we will still be here 1,000 years from now. Hopefully so will
WP, but I expect it will
evolve over time and little resemble what we have today in 1,000 years.
Our people (and most tribes)
have a very long term view of things, and those views are not easily
influenced by next years
internet fad. :-)

That being said, the fact that several Native Tribes is willing to
support such a projects with WP content
is a huge endorsement of the project and the site. The Foundation should
be very proud of itself.

Jeff


subject: [Foundation-l] Quran in Sitenotice

body:
Regardless. It uses a couple of undisputable proper nouns in there:
"Scripture" and "Book" which can, in the context, only refer to the
Qur'an. It also uses the religious POV "righteousness".

On 13/07/06, Fred Bauder <fredbaud at ctelco.net> wrote:
>
> On Jul 13, 2006, at 6:53 AM, Heema Khan wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I can help in this regard. Can read Urdu. The verse is from
> > Qur'an's chapter #2, Al-Baqara (The Cow), Verse #44. Translation
> > from http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/002.qmt.html, three
> > different sources it seems
> >
> >  002.044
> >  YUSUFALI: Do ye enjoin right conduct on the people, and forget
> > (To  practise it) yourselves, and yet ye study the Scripture? Will
> > ye not understand?
> >  PICKTHAL: Enjoin ye righteousness upon mankind while ye
> > yourselves  forget (to practise it)? And ye are readers of the
> > Scripture! Have ye then no sense?
> >  SHAKIR: What! do you enjoin men to be good and neglect your own
> > souls  while you read the Book; have you then no sense?
> >
> > --heema
>
> Good advice for administrators, arbitrators, and, indeed. anyone. I
> think it is a good thing.
>
> Fred
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

--
Oldak Quill (oldakquill at gmail.com)


subject: [Foundation-l] Quran in Sitenotice


body:
On 7/13/06, Guy Chapman aka JzG <guy.chapman at spamcop.net> wrote:
> How many articles do we have on people known only for their
> deformities?  The only one I can think of is Joseph Merrick.

Well, there are quite a few, actually. Many of the "tallest man" type.
[[Xi Shun]], [[Robert Pershing Wadlow]], [[Leonid Stadnik]], etc.  But
I recall seeing some for tallest woman, etc.  I know some of these are
not technically "deformities", but thought I'd mention them.  But
you're right.  Are there other sources?  Is Peppers notable enough for
us to legitimately discard his dignity by housing an article basically
making fun of him?  I'd say for now, echoing JzG, leave the guy alone.
 --LV


from_name: Sean Whitton

subject: [Foundation-l] Quran in Sitenotice

body:
Does the benefit Fred suggests outweight the possible problems, which
are huge to me. Loads of things could go wrong or be misunderstood,
and I wouldn't want people to be put off contributing to the Urdu
'pedia by this. Communication is a priority here.

On 13/07/06, Oldak Quill <oldakquill at gmail.com> wrote:
> Regardless. It uses a couple of undisputable proper nouns in there:
> "Scripture" and "Book" which can, in the context, only refer to the
> Qur'an. It also uses the religious POV "righteousness".
>
> On 13/07/06, Fred Bauder <fredbaud at ctelco.net> wrote:
> >
> > On Jul 13, 2006, at 6:53 AM, Heema Khan wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I can help in this regard. Can read Urdu. The verse is from
> > > Qur'an's chapter #2, Al-Baqara (The Cow), Verse #44. Translation
> > > from http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/002.qmt.html, three
> > > different sources it seems
> > >
> > >  002.044
> > >  YUSUFALI: Do ye enjoin right conduct on the people, and forget
> > > (To  practise it) yourselves, and yet ye study the Scripture? Will
> > > ye not understand?
> > >  PICKTHAL: Enjoin ye righteousness upon mankind while ye
> > > yourselves  forget (to practise it)? And ye are readers of the
> > > Scripture! Have ye then no sense?
> > >  SHAKIR: What! do you enjoin men to be good and neglect your own
> > > souls  while you read the Book; have you then no sense?
> > >
> > > --heema
> >
> > Good advice for administrators, arbitrators, and, indeed. anyone. I
> > think it is a good thing.
> >
> > Fred
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
>
>
> --
> Oldak Quill (oldakquill at gmail.com)
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

--

	?Xyrael
		Sean Whitton (Xyrael) <sean at silentflame.com> [xyrael.net]


subject: [Foundation-l] Quran in Sitenotice


subject: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedia:Sidestacking and pinching

body:
Oddly enough, in my browser on the [[Wikipedia:Sidestacking and
pinching]] page the "Guidance on style" box and the shortcut box are
sidestacked.

On 7/13/06, stevertigo <vertigosteve at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Shortcut WP:SAP.
> Template: {{sidestack}}
>
> 'Nuf said.
> -Stevertigo
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


body:
Guy Chapman aka JzG wrote:

>On Thu, 13 Jul 2006 13:12:41 -0400, Delirium <delirium at hackish.org>
>wrote:
>
>
>
>>Up for deleting [[Joseph Merrick]]?  Or is there a threshold for
>>"famousness" above which such humanitarian concerns cease to apply?
>>
>>
>
>How many films have been made about Brian Peppers?  How many books
>written about his life?  Is he a prominent member of London society?
>Is his skeleton likely to be kept by the medical community and studied
>long after his death?  What are the chances of his being played by
>John Hurt in the film?
>
>The parallel is absurd.
>
>
I wasn't claiming they were equivalent.  You had suggested that, for
humanitarian reasons, we shouldn't have articles on people notable
solely for deformities or ridicule.  I was asking if there's some level
of "notable" above which the notability outweighs those concerns.  It
appears from your response that there is---you believe Merrick is
sufficiently notable to outweigh any humanitarian concerns.

I'd say in principle I agree, only I make the judgment of degree
differently in this case.  I think Peppers is sufficiently notable,
based on some media coverage and familiarity within academic circles.
There are other people who are less notable than Peppers (people known
only on YTMND and some web forums and nowhere else, for example), and
those people I agree are not worth having articles about.

Therefore, I think your original claim is basically the same as mine: We
shouldn't have articles on people notable solely for deformities or
ridicule, unless they reach some threshold level of notability.  We
differ perhaps in both where we'd put the threshold, and where on the
scale we'd put the specific person in question.

-Mark


body:
On 7/13/06, stevertigo <vertigosteve at yahoo.com> wrote:
> --- Rob <gamaliel8 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Oddly enough, in my browser on the [[Wikipedia:Sidestacking and
> > pinching]] page the "Guidance on style" box and the shortcut box are
> > sidestacked.
>
> Under WP:AGF, all irony should be regarded as intended, deliberate, and thus clever.
>
> ;)
> Stevertigo

AGF doesn't equal assume competence in markup. :)

But  I saw it for what it was and laughed...


subject:
[Foundation-l] Cherokee Wikipedia Name Suggestion - VOTE PLEASE AND
 SOME ACTION PERHAPS

body:
By the way,

Since this thread originally asked for a name change of the Cherokee
Wikipedia, do we have conencus yet? I have been positing
translated articles to the site and I have noticed editors are beginning
to join the site and I am seeing more activity. I need the following
if you want me to start uploaidng hundreds of articles in Cherokee.

1. A final decision on the name change (I would like to see "Aniyvwiya
Gadugi" as the new name since this name will create
the impression the site is endowed with the spiritual energy of our
people and serve to attract Cherokee to the site, just a suggestion, BTW.
It's a cultural thing and the disclaimer ("We are not endoring the
Cherokee Belief System in making this the name for the site, we did so to
make the site more familiar and comfortable for Native Cherokee authors,
etc." -- end quote). The name for "Cherokee Books"
"Tsalagi digoweli" should be reserved for a Cherokee Wikibooks site when
the time comes.

2. Integration of the chr2syl program so people can actually USE the
site from a regular PC keyboard. Most Cherokee edit in text in any
event and we convert to syllabary with custom tools and fonts, but the
average joe Schmoe Cherokee wil only have a text based computer.

I think Fred Bauder would like to see the site come to life, and I know
Danny and Brad also have such a view. Can we move forward
please. Time for a Vote.

Thanks for the consideration.

Jeff


from_name: Sarah

subject: [WikiEN-l] Legal threats

body:
On 7/13/06, David Boothroyd <david at election.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> In my view the
> principle is clear: if a person meets notability for a biographical
> article, then the whole of their life is notable even if on its own
> it would not qualify them. For example, Bill Clinton is not a notable
> saxophone player - he would not qualify for an article based on
> having played the saxophone - but it is reasonable to mention this
> fact in his article because it is a significant part of how he was
> perceived.
>
The difference between Clinton's saxaphone playing and this situation
is that the mention of the former is not harmful to Clinton; and the
difference between a politician whose career is ruined by a scandal is
that it'll have attached itself to his name, whereas in GLF's case,
that appears not to be the case.

Wikipedia doesn't benefit from including the information about GLF,
but he will be harmed if we do. Therefore, we ought not to. Fairness
is as important as accuracy when writing about living people, if not
more so.

Sarah


from_name: geni

subject: [Foundation-l] Quran in Sitenotice

body:
On 7/13/06, Heema Khan <heema_khan at yahoo.com> wrote:
> >I belive this this has already been disscused on ur.wikipedia. They
> >have come to thier descision. Now we are going to have to deal with
> >that problem.
>
> Yes, the matter was discussed there and the discussions
> are finished on the 8th of July, so it seems that
> Sitenote is permanent for now.
>
> --heema

Unless the foundation or the stewards act.
--
geni


subject: [Foundation-l] Quran in Sitenotice


from_name: Fred Bauder

subject: [WikiEN-l] POV nomenclature

body:
On Jul 13, 2006, at 1:15 PM, George Herbert wrote:

> On 7/13/06, Fred Bauder <fredbaud at ctelco.net> wrote:
>
>> It is like the United States, which, as we all know, opposes torture.
>> That is the policy of the United States. No matter how much torture
>> is done, the policy remains. So all the edit warring and voting you
>> want to do will not abrogate NPOV.
>>
>
> Are you seriously equating article names with torture???
>
> Obviously we've hit a nerve here, but ... gentlemen, please, calm
> down.

The point is only that infractions do not abrogate a principle.

Fred


from_name: Heema Khan

body:
----- Original Message ----
From: geni <geniice at gmail.com>
To: andrew.gray at dunelm.org.uk; Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List <foundation-l at wikimedia.org>
Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2006 11:20:50 PM
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Israel article (was: Quran in Sitenotice)

>No one sane?

>It has been edited by:
>http://ur.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:%D8%AE%D8%A7%D9%88%D8%B1

>One of the buracrats on that wikipedia.

this guy argued that if you are against Qur'anic verses in the Sitenotice
 means you are against Qur'an.

>It was created by:
>http://ur.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:%D8%B3%DB%8C%D9%81_%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%84%DB%81

>The admin we have contected over the sitenotice issue.

Doesn't surprise me, because he added the Quranic verse into the Sitenotice
in the first place.

--heema

On 7/13/06, Andrew Gray <shimgray at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all.
>
> (I apologise this won't show up in threading - I've only just
> subscribed and I'm reading old mesages through the archives)
>
> Heema Khan:
>
> > On Urdu Wikipedia, article on Israel is very short:
> > http://ur.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D8%A7%D8%B3%D8%B1%D8%A7%D8%A6%DB%8C%D9%84
> > I can translate it:
> > "Israel, a palce where jews live. In addition to Pakistan there are many other
> > countries that do not recognize this place of Jews as a country.
> > Majority of the Urdu speaking public believes that there
> > is no country by the name of Israel exists. But there is
> > a country named Palestine, whose some part is captured
> > by Jews and they call it Israel. And the English speaking
> > world says that in a country called Israel some
> > Palestenians want to create a country called Palestine."
> >
> > This is the whole article. Quite extraordinary, nothing to add more.
>
> In this specific case, if my reading of the page is right, this
> article has had a grand total of 21 edits, the ten most recent of them
> in a single three-day period in June. Every single bit of the content
> has been contributed by one single registered user; all anon edits
> have been vandalism (well, one was pageblanking, that might count as
> justified!) No discussion page, of course.
>
> On the whole, while it's still a pretty terrible article, it scares me
> less once I know that it's the work of one guy and it's just that
> no-one sane has managed to look at it yet...
>


subject: [Foundation-l] Israel article (was: Quran in Sitenotice)


from_name: daniwo59 at aol.com

subject: [Commons-l] repositories of content

body:
Hello

As some of you may know, Brad and I were in DC for most of this week, where
we werre joined by Mindspillage and NullC for some fascinating meetings  with
people from the Smithsonian, the US Holocaust Memorial Museum, the Library  of
Congress, and the National Geographic Society. One of the  primary purposes
of these meetings was to identify content that we can use  for our projects,
including Wikisource. The meetings were  very informative and productive.

Given that there are certain legal issues involved, I will wait for Brad to
describe in greater depth the outcome of these meetings. I will, however,
describe two meetings that may have more immediate results for the Wikisource
and Commons communities.

Mindspillage and I had a great meeting with Lawrence (Larry) Swiader, the
Deputy CIO of the US Holocaust Memorial Museum. He has given us permission to
use any and all of the material created and licensed by that Museum  according
to the terms of our license. This includes images, video, video  transcripts,
audio, and text, including the new Holocaust encyclopedia  that they are
building on line (in seven languages), and which they plan to  be the most
comprehensive encyclopedia of its kind in the world. All they  are asking for in
return in attribution. Essentially, although this was not said  in so many words,
they are releasing all of their in-hourse material according  to the terms of
the GNU-FDL. Larry was especially excited by the prospect of our  people
participating in the translation effort. I would like to point out that  this is an
outstanding repository of material, not just about World War II and  the
Holocaust, but about other modern instances of genocide, including Armenia,
Cambodia, Rwanda, and Darfur. They have no problem whatsover with our  translating
their proprietary formats into free software formats such as .ogg  files.

At the end of our meeting, we discussed the need for a contract to  formalize
this agreement. Brad will be drafting one to send to their counsel,  and
things should be underway quickly. In the meantime, I encourage you to look
through their materials and see what is there.

The Library of Congress meeting was also quite spectacular. They also  have
enormous archives which they are willing to share, but I am noting  here that
some of their materials still fall under copyright so greater caution  must be
exercised. Over the next few weeks, we will better identify what is  there for
the taking.

During our talks, they made mention of the fact that many important
historical documents may have been scanned, but they have not yet been  transcribed.
One of the repositories mentioned was the Thomas Jefferson archives  at
Monticello. Speaking of this particular archive, they told us that the work  was so
daunting that the Jefferson people (and other groups as well) have taken  to
outsourcing the transcription work to India. I would like to suggest to the
current Wikisource team and additional volunteers that we jump at this
opportunity to help in the realtime preservation of these documents, which are  of
enormous historical importance. My other suggestion is that we contact these
organizations in an organized manner, rather than as individuals, so that we
appear organized and do not duplicate efforts.

Finally, we have now contacted some of the most important repositories of
content in the United States and we were welcomed by them. I encourage
Wikimedians in other countries, representing other languages, to make the  same
coordinated effort with their local repositories in their respective  languages.

More to come,

Danny
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/commons-l/attachments/20060713/a8eee85a/attachment.htm


subject:
[Foundation-l] Cherokee Wikipedia Name Suggestion - VOTE PLEASE
	AND SOME ACTION PERHAPS

references:
<20060713191802.95147.qmail@web36213.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<44B6A68E.8000508@wolfmountaingroup.com>
	<44B6AC0C.7090109@wolfmountaingroup.com>

body:
On Jul 13, 2006, at 2:24 PM, Jeff V. Merkey wrote:

> 1. A final decision on the name change (I would like to see "Aniyvwiya
> Gadugi" as the new name since this name will create
> the impression the site is endowed with the spiritual energy of our
> people and serve to attract Cherokee to the site, just a
> suggestion, BTW.
> It's a cultural thing and the disclaimer ("We are not endoring the
> Cherokee Belief System in making this the name for the site, we did
> so to
> make the site more familiar and comfortable for Native Cherokee
> authors,
> etc." -- end quote). The name for "Cherokee Books"
> "Tsalagi digoweli" should be reserved for a Cherokee Wikibooks site
> when
> the time comes.
>
>
> 2. Integration of the chr2syl program so people can actually USE the
> site from a regular PC keyboard. Most Cherokee edit in text in any
> event and we convert to syllabary with custom tools and fonts, but the
> average joe Schmoe Cherokee wil only have a text based computer.
>
> I think Fred Bauder would like to see the site come to life, and I
> know
> Danny and Brad also have such a view. Can we move forward
> please. Time for a Vote.
>
> Thanks for the consideration.
>
> Jeff

I'd like to try it out.

Fred


from_name: Magnus Manske

subject: [WikiEN-l] Persondata?

body:
maru dubshinki schrieb:
> On 7/12/06, Magnus Manske <magnus.manske at web.de> wrote:
>
>
>> It's a PHP script running on the toolserver:
>> http://tools.wikimedia.de/~magnus/persondata.php
>>
>> Add "category=XYZ" or "title=XYZ" to have it scan a whole category or a
>> single article, respectively.
>>
>> Currently, it ignores the "bold" marker but uses my algorithm to find
>> the first text paragraph of an article, as implemented in
>> commons_sumitup.php (same location).
>>
>> As all my tools, it is GPL. You can get the source code at the above URL.
>>
>> Magnus
>>
>
> Forgive my cluelessness, but what do you mean by "Add 'category...'"?
> There seems to be no text input box; I can't figure out how and
> whether that should be encoded into the URL; and I'm fairly but not
> very sure you don't mean download the php and add those lines, since
> variables in PHP usually start with $ don't they?
>
http://tools.wikimedia.de/~magnus/persondata.php?category=XYZ

Magnus

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 249 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20060713/b07124ed/attachment.pgp


subject: [WikiEN-l] POV nomenclature

body:
On Jul 13, 2006, at 2:02 PM, jayjg wrote:

> If you're going to argue for neutrality, it would be helpful if you
> made more neutral suggestions.  The current article name, [[2006
> Israel-Lebanon-Hezbollah conflict]], is at least neutral, although it
> suffers from being unwieldy and a Wikipedia invention (i.e. original
> research).
>
> Jay.

I think this is unavoidable. We have no way to know what history
books will call it.

Fred


from_name: Delirium

subject: [WikiEN-l] POV nomenclature

body:
stevertigo wrote:

>>Many operation names get trumped by popular usage, which is as it should
>>be. If there is not yet a clear popular usage, fall back to official
>>names. Only if there are dueling official names, with no popular
>>preference, does it make sense to invent a term. NPOV shouldn't even
>>be a consideration, save it for the article.
>>
>>
>
>Sometimes we have to make up our own names. I refer occasionally to the
> [[Iraq disarmament crisis]] - something coined by me.
>We could also do that in these cases, following established
>conventions for neologisms representing events.
>Naming is part of POV. Either we have a culture that respects NPOV or we do not.
>
>
I think this is basically right, and agree that the analogy to
POV-titled bills and so on isn't quite right either.  A bill is a
specific document, that has a name.  A military operation is also a
specific thing, with a name.  However, our articles are usually not
specifically on the military operations---they're on the conflict,
giving information from both sides, outside interventions, lead-up,
aftermath, etc.  For example, the U.S. operation in the Gulf War was
entitled Operation Desert Storm, but a lot of the contents of [[Gulf
War]] are not strictly part of Operation Desert Storm.  For example, the
Iraqi invasion of Kuwait was part of the Gulf War, but not part of
Operation Desert Storm.  So Gulf War is a better name, and in that case
also happens to be by far the most widely used name, which is nice.

More to the point, there are multiple sides to conflicts, and they may
each have their own names for the conflict.  I think we should only use
one side's name if it's become ingrained in popular usage.  For example,
[[Operation Barbarossa]] (Nazi Germany's invasion of the Soviet Union)
and the [[Al-Aqsa intifada]].  Those are relatively few, though; in this
case the Israeli operation name is rarely used by English-language media
or commentary, and in fact it was over a day before anyone source
outside Wikipedia even tried translating it from Hebrew.

-Mark


subject: [Foundation-l] Quran in Sitenotice

body:
geni: your translator was nexus on #wikipedia. Could he act as
translator in this matter?
Michael

On 7/13/06, Sean Whitton <sean at silentflame.com> wrote:
> I think we should ask the sysop who added it for their reasons so that
> we can greater understand why it was put there, but I can't read Urdu
> so I'm at a bit of a loss. Does anyone have a nice translator, or can
> speak it themselves? This would seem a sensible step forward to me.
>
>         ?Xyrael
>
> On 13/07/06, Oldak Quill <oldakquill at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Even if the verse were essentually non-religious, a quote from the
> > Qur'an, a religious text, is inappropriate. This verse is blatantly
> > religious though and should be removed as quickly as is possible.
> >
> > On 13/07/06, Michael Bimmler <mbimmler at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On 7/13/06, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > On 7/13/06, Michael Bimmler <mbimmler at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > Hm, imho it depends a bit on it's meaning (I can't read it, sorry). If
> > > > > it is just about, say, the value of knowledge, it might be not even so
> > > > > bad, although I wonder why there should be such quotes in the
> > > > > Sitenotice, as it is probably intended for other messages...
> > > > > Michael
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > the only translation I have is
> > > > "you call people towards the righteous deeds and forget yourself doing
> > > > so, whereas you also read the words of god, don't you have any senses"
> > > >
> > > Hm. Doesn't look really appropriate for a Sitenotice. I can't see any
> > > reason, why this should be shown to every user...
> > > Michael
> > > > from nexus on #wikipedia
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > geni
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > foundation-l mailing list
> > > > foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> > > > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> > > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > foundation-l mailing list
> > > foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> > > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Oldak Quill (oldakquill at gmail.com)
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
>
>
> --
>
>             ?Xyrael
>                     Sean Whitton ? sean at silentflame.com | xyrael.net
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>


subject: [Foundation-l] Quran in Sitenotice


subject: [WikiEN-l] Legal threats

body:
On 7/13/06, Delirium <delirium at hackish.org> wrote:
> How does Wikipedia not benefit from including the information?  If
> Wikipedia biographies are to be accurate articles, they should not
> selectively exclude facts deemed inconvenient.
>
We don't benefit because he's a very minor figure, arguably not
someone who should have an article in the first place, and it wasn't a
good article anyway. So for the sake of upholding some unwritten
principle of completeness (i.e. for the sake of ideology), we're
prepared to harm an individual's real life, someone who has done
nothing to any of us, to ensure that this incident will continue to
haunt him, whereas he thought he had put it behind him.

My argument is that it's neither fair nor rational to do that, and we
ought always to be both fair and rational when dealing with people who
are, in a very real sense, at Wikipedia's mercy.

Sarah


subject: [Foundation-l] Quran in Sitenotice

body:
Otherwise: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Embassy
There are 2 entries for ur: and ur: has an embassy itself at
http://ur.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D9%88%D9%8A%DA%A9%D9%8A%D9%BE%D9%8A%DA%88%D9%8A%D8%A7:%D8%B3%D9%81%D8%A7%D8%B1%D8%AA_%D8%AE%D8%A7%D9%86%DB%81
Michael

On 7/13/06, Sean Whitton <sean at silentflame.com> wrote:
> Nexus has apparently signed off and he didn't leave any method of
> contact on the network, and he doesn't appear to go by the name on
> enwiki-p (if at all). All we have is his host:
>  -!- nexus [n=nexus at guest-8.mpi-sb.mpg.de]
>
> Any suggestions? We could try asking for other people.
>
> On 13/07/06, Michael Bimmler <mbimmler at gmail.com> wrote:
> > geni: your translator was nexus on #wikipedia. Could he act as
> > translator in this matter?
> > Michael
> >
> > On 7/13/06, Sean Whitton <sean at silentflame.com> wrote:
> > > I think we should ask the sysop who added it for their reasons so that
> > > we can greater understand why it was put there, but I can't read Urdu
> > > so I'm at a bit of a loss. Does anyone have a nice translator, or can
> > > speak it themselves? This would seem a sensible step forward to me.
> > >
> > >         ?Xyrael
> > >
> > > On 13/07/06, Oldak Quill <oldakquill at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Even if the verse were essentually non-religious, a quote from the
> > > > Qur'an, a religious text, is inappropriate. This verse is blatantly
> > > > religious though and should be removed as quickly as is possible.
> > > >
> > > > On 13/07/06, Michael Bimmler <mbimmler at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > On 7/13/06, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > On 7/13/06, Michael Bimmler <mbimmler at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > Hm, imho it depends a bit on it's meaning (I can't read it, sorry). If
> > > > > > > it is just about, say, the value of knowledge, it might be not even so
> > > > > > > bad, although I wonder why there should be such quotes in the
> > > > > > > Sitenotice, as it is probably intended for other messages...
> > > > > > > Michael
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > the only translation I have is
> > > > > > "you call people towards the righteous deeds and forget yourself doing
> > > > > > so, whereas you also read the words of god, don't you have any senses"
> > > > > >
> > > > > Hm. Doesn't look really appropriate for a Sitenotice. I can't see any
> > > > > reason, why this should be shown to every user...
> > > > > Michael
> > > > > > from nexus on #wikipedia
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > geni
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > foundation-l mailing list
> > > > > > foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> > > > > > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> > > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > foundation-l mailing list
> > > > > foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> > > > > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Oldak Quill (oldakquill at gmail.com)
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > foundation-l mailing list
> > > > foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> > > > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > >             ?Xyrael
> > >                     Sean Whitton ? sean at silentflame.com | xyrael.net
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > foundation-l mailing list
> > > foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> > > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
>
>
> --
>
>         ?Xyrael
>                 Sean Whitton (Xyrael) <sean at silentflame.com> [xyrael.net]
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>


subject: [Foundation-l] Quran in Sitenotice


subject: [WikiEN-l] POV nomenclature

body:
On Jul 13, 2006, at 2:44 PM, stevertigo wrote:

> --- Fred Bauder <fredbaud at ctelco.net> wrote:
>
>> I think this is unavoidable. We have no way to know what history
>> books will call it.
>>
>
> To the contrary - we might know before they do.
>
> -Stevertigo

Obviously, clever naming on our part will settle the matter.

Fred


subject: [Foundation-l] Quran in Sitenotice

body:
On 7/13/06, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 7/13/06, Sean Whitton <sean at silentflame.com> wrote:
> > Nexus has apparently signed off and he didn't leave any method of
> > contact on the network, and he doesn't appear to go by the name on
> > enwiki-p (if at all). All we have is his host:
> >  -!- nexus [n=nexus at guest-8.mpi-sb.mpg.de]
> >
> > Any suggestions? We could try asking for other people.
> >
>
> Resonable list at:
>
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Whatlinkshere&target=Template:User_ur
>
>
imho we should rather contact the people who actually listed
themselves on the embassy page. They are (should be) able and willing
to translate inter-wikipedia, something we don't know from all the
"user-ur"-users.

> --
> geni
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>


subject: [Foundation-l] Quran in Sitenotice


subject: [Foundation-l] Quran in Sitenotice

body:
On 7/13/06, Michael Bimmler <mbimmler at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 7/13/06, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 7/13/06, Sean Whitton <sean at silentflame.com> wrote:
> > > Nexus has apparently signed off and he didn't leave any method of
> > > contact on the network, and he doesn't appear to go by the name on
> > > enwiki-p (if at all). All we have is his host:
> > >  -!- nexus [n=nexus at guest-8.mpi-sb.mpg.de]
> > >
> > > Any suggestions? We could try asking for other people.
> > >
> >
> > Resonable list at:
> >
> >
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Whatlinkshere&target=Template:User_ur
> >
> >
> imho we should rather contact the people who actually listed
> themselves on the embassy page. They are (should be) able and willing
> to translate inter-wikipedia, something we don't know from all the
> "user-ur"-users.
More precisely: If somebody has the desire to contact etc. ;-)
Michael
>
> > --
> > geni
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
>


subject: [Foundation-l] Quran in Sitenotice


subject: [Foundation-l] Quran in Sitenotice

body:
On 7/13/06, Sean Whitton <sean at silentflame.com> wrote:
> Does the benefit Fred suggests outweight the possible problems, which
> are huge to me. Loads of things could go wrong or be misunderstood,
> and I wouldn't want people to be put off contributing to the Urdu
> 'pedia by this. Communication is a priority here.
>
Right. If there was a text on a page for admins where it is written
"Even Quran says you should behave so and so", okay, I wouldn't bother
that much. But distributing it via Sitenotice, and so flagging it
"official" (remember, visitors do not know that these sitenotice is
editable by admins, they could think that it is an official statement
of e.g. WMF) is quite another thing imho


subject: [Foundation-l] Quran in Sitenotice


from_name: Guy Chapman aka JzG

body:
On Wed, 12 Jul 2006 18:25:05 -0400, Delirium <delirium at hackish.org>
wrote:

>They may have sources and proof of notability by then, since some books
>on internet fads are currently in preparation, and I know that at least
>one of them will have a section on the Brian Peppers
>phenomenon---including mention of the debate at Wikipedia---as a case
>study.  Will you still favor deleting it then?

It depends.  I was up for allowing a very short biography saying (in
strictly neutral terms) that Peppers was an apparently disabled man
with a congenital deformity who was convicted of a minor technical
offence and gained limited notoriety after a group of sophomoric
fucktards got their rocks off laughing at his appearance in mugshots
and (wrongly) screaming "child rapist!", something that would earn a
serious fine if printed in a newspaper.

But in the end, no.  I don't think we should have an article on
somebody who is in the end "famous" solely because, well, a group of
sophomoric fucktards got their rocks off laughing at his appearance.

Anybody who thinks the YTMND stuff is anything other than sick and
depraved has probably never been close to someone with a serious
disability.  And frankly I don't care how notable the YTMNDers are in
their own minds, I don't believe the bulk of the world cares, and I
don't think we should help them perpetuate the supposed meme.

Guy (JzG)
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JzG


body:
Anthony schrieb:
> On 7/13/06, Volker Haas <volker.haas at brainbot.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Robert
>>
>> Robert Scott Horning wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I am curious how you plan to compile these books in a format that looks
>>> good on paper and not strictly as a web format.  While this can be
>>> automated to an extent, I do think there are some issues that come from
>>> trying to move content from a web format to a printed page, and not all
>>> of these can be completely automated.
>>>
>> As you have pointed out, an automatic conversion of html (or mediawiki
>> markup) into latex can not be automated in a way that the book is
>> absolutely perfect.
>> But right now we are pretty satisfied with the results - even though we
>> are still working on improvments of the conversion.
>> The conversion is done with a parser we developed from scratch - as
>> mentioned in a previous post. The mediawiki markup is translated
>> into an internal representation which then gets transformed to latex (to
>> be more precise "context") - this is the hard part. It is slightly easier to
>> transform the internal representation back to html since some css-style
>> information can be maintained.
>>
>>
> As I've mentioned before, I'd love to see a Wikimedia project which
> does exactly this.  Then the latex could be edited collaboratively to
> make things more "absolutely perfect".  It's nice to see it's at least
> somewhat possible, though I'd say the quality of the previews right
> now is fairly low.
>
My wiki2xml converter is in the subversion repository. It is a set of
scripts to convert MediaWiki markup into XML, and from there into other
formats, including plain text, HTML, DocBook, and ODT
(OpenDocument/OpenOffice format). OpenOffice is also open source and can
generate PDFs natively.

I admit that wiki2xml is currently less advanced than the impressive
pediapress software, as it does not render <math> tags, does not make a
list of figures, etc. which is due to me being busy, and being too lazy
merging in patches by others ;-)

Magnus

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 249 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/attachments/20060713/e6ec7cfc/attachment.pgp


body:
Anthony schrieb:
> On 7/13/06, Volker Haas <volker.haas at brainbot.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Robert
>>
>> Robert Scott Horning wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I am curious how you plan to compile these books in a format that looks
>>> good on paper and not strictly as a web format.  While this can be
>>> automated to an extent, I do think there are some issues that come from
>>> trying to move content from a web format to a printed page, and not all
>>> of these can be completely automated.
>>>
>> As you have pointed out, an automatic conversion of html (or mediawiki
>> markup) into latex can not be automated in a way that the book is
>> absolutely perfect.
>> But right now we are pretty satisfied with the results - even though we
>> are still working on improvments of the conversion.
>> The conversion is done with a parser we developed from scratch - as
>> mentioned in a previous post. The mediawiki markup is translated
>> into an internal representation which then gets transformed to latex (to
>> be more precise "context") - this is the hard part. It is slightly easier to
>> transform the internal representation back to html since some css-style
>> information can be maintained.
>>
>>
> As I've mentioned before, I'd love to see a Wikimedia project which
> does exactly this.  Then the latex could be edited collaboratively to
> make things more "absolutely perfect".  It's nice to see it's at least
> somewhat possible, though I'd say the quality of the previews right
> now is fairly low.
>
My wiki2xml converter is in the subversion repository. It is a set of
scripts to convert MediaWiki markup into XML, and from there into other
formats, including plain text, HTML, DocBook, and ODT
(OpenDocument/OpenOffice format). OpenOffice is also open source and can
generate PDFs natively.

I admit that wiki2xml is currently less advanced than the impressive
pediapress software, as it does not render <math> tags, does not make a
list of figures, etc. which is due to me being busy, and being too lazy
merging in patches by others ;-)

Magnus

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 249 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/attachments/20060713/e6ec7cfc/attachment-0001.pgp


body:
Anthony schrieb:
> On 7/13/06, Volker Haas <volker.haas at brainbot.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Robert
>>
>> Robert Scott Horning wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I am curious how you plan to compile these books in a format that looks
>>> good on paper and not strictly as a web format.  While this can be
>>> automated to an extent, I do think there are some issues that come from
>>> trying to move content from a web format to a printed page, and not all
>>> of these can be completely automated.
>>>
>> As you have pointed out, an automatic conversion of html (or mediawiki
>> markup) into latex can not be automated in a way that the book is
>> absolutely perfect.
>> But right now we are pretty satisfied with the results - even though we
>> are still working on improvments of the conversion.
>> The conversion is done with a parser we developed from scratch - as
>> mentioned in a previous post. The mediawiki markup is translated
>> into an internal representation which then gets transformed to latex (to
>> be more precise "context") - this is the hard part. It is slightly easier to
>> transform the internal representation back to html since some css-style
>> information can be maintained.
>>
>>
> As I've mentioned before, I'd love to see a Wikimedia project which
> does exactly this.  Then the latex could be edited collaboratively to
> make things more "absolutely perfect".  It's nice to see it's at least
> somewhat possible, though I'd say the quality of the previews right
> now is fairly low.
>
My wiki2xml converter is in the subversion repository. It is a set of
scripts to convert MediaWiki markup into XML, and from there into other
formats, including plain text, HTML, DocBook, and ODT
(OpenDocument/OpenOffice format). OpenOffice is also open source and can
generate PDFs natively.

I admit that wiki2xml is currently less advanced than the impressive
pediapress software, as it does not render <math> tags, does not make a
list of figures, etc. which is due to me being busy, and being too lazy
merging in patches by others ;-)

Magnus

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 249 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/attachments/20060713/e6ec7cfc/attachment.pgp>