from_name: Gerard Meijssen

body:
George Herbert schreef:
> On 12/22/06, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> geni schreef:
>>
>>> On 12/22/06, Christophe Henner <christophe.henner at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> And how much mass vandal robots did you have before discuting and
>>>> accepting this policy (if it has been ever discussed and accepted ;))
>>>> ?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> It's in our records for the most part you are free to search through them.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> If you have a bot making mass vandalizing, if the pseudo will be latin
>>>> or non latin won't make any difference.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Evidences?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> And by the way for bot generated pseudo it exists a feature ;).
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Um no.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> The
>>>> probleme here, for my point of view, is totally different. In the five
>>>> pillars we can read "Wikipedia is free content that anyone may edit"
>>>> exept vandals of course, and your policy is going against this as you
>>>> block non latin pseudo before they began editing, even if they would
>>>> be a good editor.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> If an editor can't cope with useing a latin alphabet username (doesn't
>>> have to make sense in any lanague know to man mind) then they are
>>> unlikely to be able to contibute to wikipedia.
>>>
>> This is not the issue. Certainly with SUL there is ONE user for all
>> projects and the English language Wikipedia seems to be of a mind to
>> effectively sabotage this by insisting on practices that can be and
>> should be replaced by new practices that provide a better result. A
>> 1.000+ editor from a Korean, Serbian, Chinese, Inuktitut can be accepted
>> as a known good. Please show some good faith as this can be easily be
>> checked.
>> Thanks,
>>     GerardM
>>
>
> Users who've done 1,000+ edits on Korean, Serbian, Chinese, Inuktitut
> etc WPs are not the users we are afraid of here, Gerard.
>
> Please stop putting up this straw man that we're all against having
> the non-english users come on over and contribute equally.  I think
> that those will be almost universally supported as a good thing among
> en.WP editors.  Implying that we think otherwise is an offensive false
> claim.  That is not why we're objecting.
Hoi,
When, as the current practice seems to be, block immediately, there is
no argument that these users are the victim of this policy. The notion
that you find it unpalatable that these people are blocked is good. Your
suggestion that this is what the current policy leads to is exactly the
problem you do not face. The suggestion of making people known by a
number is dehumanising and, it does not work either because people
typically do not remember numbers.

You are objecting and you reserve the right not to do the obvious thing
and install fonts. You object and you do not intent to look at the
history of people on the WMF that will be much better available under
SUL. You object while the problem of mixed script users has already been
solved. You do not consider SUL and its obvious implication that we
/will /have one person one user. You seem to be of the opinion that the
English language Wikipedia is a law on to itself. Your assertion of
"universal support" for the 1.000+ editors of other script projects
could not contradict more starkly with what is actually done. When it is
suggested that the vigilante behaviour of admins that go too far might
have repercussions is welcomed by you with a negative because: "they are
of good faith" while the possibility of good faith of people who use
their standard user name is of no consequence.

To me it seems as if the way you treat others is as if they are the
enemy. Remember, at one time you came new to the English language
Wikipedia, would you like to be treated like this ?

PS You is not meant as only you personally, it is there for all who
cling to this bad policy.

Thanks,
    GerardM


list: wikimedia-l

source: pipermail-mbox

subject:
[Foundation-l] English Wikipedia ethnocentric policy affects
 other communities


list: foundation-l

from_name: Anthere

subject:
[Foundation-l] English Wikipedia ethnocentric policy affects
	other communities

body:
geni wrote:
> On 12/22/06, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>It is your choice not to install fonts. So this is self inflicted
>>damage. Something you punish others for.
>
>
> I could make wikipedia pretty much un-useable in IE (and partly
> firefox) your choice not to run opera.
>
>
>
>>With SUL you can check out who and what they are within WMF. They will
>>not only have but also have en.wikipedia history. So in stead of not
>>knowing who they are you will find that they have extended history in
>>other projects.
>
>
> In a small number of cases
>
>
>>So you will have gained a way of identifying your
>>vandals in stead of lost a way of identifying them.
>
>
> How do I tell a vandle from a newbie from Ja.wikipeida?

What about seeing a "sign" (newbie) near the name of a user registered
since less than 1 month ago, and with less than 100 edits all projects
accross in the last month ?

Ant


body:
geni schreef:
> On 12/22/06, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> It is your choice not to install fonts. So this is self inflicted
>> damage. Something you punish others for.
>>
>
> I could make wikipedia pretty much un-useable in IE (and partly
> firefox) your choice not to run opera.
>
When you do this you will get banned. Certainly if you have developer
rights, it will be the end of it. A steward lost his stewardship because
he threatened to do things.
>
>
>> With SUL you can check out who and what they are within WMF. They will
>> not only have but also have en.wikipedia history. So in stead of not
>> knowing who they are you will find that they have extended history in
>> other projects.
>>
>
> In a small number of cases
>
With SUL people will be asked to concentrate all the users under one
user. Effectively it will mean that the number of people is likely to grow.
>
>> So you will have gained a way of identifying your
>> vandals in stead of lost a way of identifying them.
>>
>
> How do I tell a vandle from a newbie from Ja.wikipeida?
>
>
The same way you can identify a newbie on en.wikipedia; you look at the
user contributions. NB it is vandal and not vandle.

Thanks,
    GerardM


list: wikien-l

from_name: Eugene van der Pijll

subject: [WikiEN-l] Top posting poll; was Re: MONGO and the ArbCom

body:
Earle Martin schreef:
> On 19/12/06, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >> Qm90dG9tLXBvc3RpbmcgeW91ciBtZXNzYWdlcyBhZnRlciBCYXNlNjQ=
> > > >> ZW5jb2RpbmcgdGhlbSBiZWF0cyBldmVyeXRoaW5nLg==
> > > > begin 644 -
> > > > M5&AA="=S(&YO="!V86QI9"!B87-E-C0Z('EO=2=R92!O;FQY(&%L;&]W960@
> > > > C=&\@<'5T("<])R!A="!T:&4 at 96YD(&]F('1H92!F:6QE+ at H
> > > > end
> >%49%74%27%73%20%61%20%70%61%64%64%69%6e%67%20%63%68%61%72%61%63%74%65%72%2e
> >
> > Lbh xvqf whfg gel gbb uneq fbzrgvzrf.
>
> 01001001 00100000 01101011 01101110 01101111 01110111 00100000
> 01110111 01101000 01100001 01110100 00100000 01111001 01101111
> 01110101 00100000 01101101 01100101 01100001 01101110 00101110

Zo kan 'ie wel weer hoor. Hebben jullie niets zinnigers te doen?

Eugene


from_name: Ray Saintonge

subject: [WikiEN-l] WikiEN-l Digest, Vol 41, Issue 153

body:
Sarah wrote:

>On 12/19/06, charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com
><charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Sarah wrote
>>
>>
>>>Any public library can order material that's in a regular academic
>>>library.
>>>
>>>
>>Sorry - any public library in Kerala, Kampala or even Lima can order up anything from any academic library? Do remember that this is a global project. The 'populist' idea that anybody should be able to fact-check anything rather founders on the reality that it at most refers to about 5% of the world population, selected just about entirely on wealth.
>>
>>We are really doing the opposite: making the cream of reliable-source material actually globally available whereever there is a decent internet connection.
>>
>>
>Charles, anyone in the English-speaking world should be able easily to
>fact-check our material, and this is the English-language Wikipedia,
>so that has to be our priority.
>
Two of the three places that he mentioned are in the English-speaking
world.  I have no problem with the priority cited, nor with other
wikipedias having parallel policies.

>Your argument seems to be that because
>everyone in the world can't fact-check it, no one should be able to,
>and that we should instead leave the writing and research to
>self-selected Wikipiedia "experts," many of whom are anonymous and may
>have no expertise at all, or if they do, may not be highly regarded by
>other experts in the field.
>
I don't read that interpretation into the above at all; there is
certainly no mention of experts.

>I agree wholeheartedly that we should make the cream of
>reliable-source material globally available, but I strongly disagree
>with allowing Wikipedians to insert their own opinions and
>interpretations between those sources and our readers.
>
We all disagree with generally allowing personal opinions.  The
disagreement is in what constitutes personal opinion.  I do not consider
it personal opinion to say that we have not found the information in a
specified range of sources.  Such a comment is a partial step toward
sourcing, and may be as much as can be done at the moment.  Full
sourcing may require the combined efforts of several editors with access
to a different range of sources.  If we disallow partial sourcing it
could be more difficult to ever have a collaborative result that is the
sum of these partial sourcings.

Ec


body:
Sam Korn schreef:
> On 12/22/06, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> No other WMF project has as many resources as the English language
>> Wikipedia does. No other project gets as much attention from the
>> developers. No other project does as well as a result. No other project
>> can therefore withstand the constant abuse from vandals as successfully.
>>
>
> One senses that here lies the real reason so many people are bitching
> so much about en.wikipedia -- jealousy.  Users of other wikis see all
> that the Foundation and the developers devote to the English Wikipedia
> and ask why that can't come to their efforts too.  Perhaps they see
> the intense media coverage that the English Wikipedia gets and compare
> their own coverage unfavourably.
>
>
Jealousy, hell not for me. OmegaWiki has its own momentum and is doing
quite well thank you. When you consider the amount of press projects in
other languages get, it is quite similar remember, the Dutch Wikipedia
is world famous in the Netherlands and Belgium. What I argued was that
the English language Wikipedia has the resources to withstand abuse from
vandals. For the record I do think the English Wikipedia is doing a
splendid job.
>> However, this does not mean that might is right.
>>
>
> No.  Obviously.
>
>
>> It also does not mean
>> that arguments used that are in opposition to some of its policies can
>> be ignored as is currently happening.
>>
>
> I don't see this happening.  I see a lot of English Wikipedians who
> are trying to find a way to resolve the problems that SUL could bring.
>  I don't see anyone on this list ignoring the opposition or the
> arguments, just people who are trying to get a rational discussion on
> the subject.
>
>
>> With the improvements
>> that have happened like the prevention of mixed script user names and
>> the upcoming the SUL the arguments for the practice of blocking non
>> Latin users on sight have been largely removed.
>>
>
> Nonsense.  All that has been changed is that the sledgehammer policy
> currently in use is now outdated and overblown and should be
> *modified* to take these considerations into account.  The arguments
> for the practice have not changed; the arguments against the practice
> have been strengthened, however, and that's a completely different
> kettle of fish
The arguments for the current policy have already largely gone away.
With SUL the arguments will be even less relevant. And thank you for the
acknowledgement that the current practice is outdated and overblown.

Thanks,
    GerardM


body:
geni schreef:
> On 12/22/06, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> When you do this you will get banned. Certainly if you have developer
>> rights, it will be the end of it. A steward lost his stewardship because
>> he threatened to do things.
>>
>
> Are you suggesting it is unreasonable to expect people to use browsers
> that are W3C compliant?
>
>
It is unreasonable to suggest that you can make IE and Firefox stop
functioning. This is poring oil on the fire.
>> With SUL people will be asked to concentrate all the users under one
>> user. Effectively it will mean that the number of people is likely to grow.
>>
>
> We shall see.
>
>
>> The same way you can identify a newbie on en.wikipedia; you look at the
>> user contributions. NB it is vandal and not vandle.
>>
>
> I can't read their contributions on Ja. I can't tell if their name is
> legit such as "Lorem ipsum" or the JA equivalent of swldk23p or whilly
> on wheels and is part of a series
>
You can find out that someone has loads (1.000+) edits.


from_name: Gary Kirk

subject: [Foundation-l] Translations fundraising.wikimedia.org

body:
I only joined this list today, so I don't know context of previous
discussions, but when I read in Wikizine Anthere's appeal, I wondered
where it was people wanting to help were supposed to do so, as it
seemed to all be on wikimediafoundation.org.

On 12/22/06, Brianna Laugher <brianna.laugher at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 22/12/06, Sam Korn <smoddy at gmail.com> wrote:
> > [reorganising thread for readability]
>
> > Well, from my experience with translating to and from Latin, Greek,
> > French and German, a good dictionary will contain notes on usage that
> > should suffice here.
>
> These are all Indo-European languages. Translating across language
> families which are less likely to share common cultural assumptions
> and practices can be far more problematic I imagine.
>
> cheers,
> Brianna
> user:pfctdayelise
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

--
Gary Kirk


body:
Sorry, to add to that, I asked somebody what they thought and that
person suggested sending an email here. So I am.

On 12/22/06, Gary Kirk <gary.kirk at gmail.com> wrote:
> I only joined this list today, so I don't know context of previous
> discussions, but when I read in Wikizine Anthere's appeal, I wondered
> where it was people wanting to help were supposed to do so, as it
> seemed to all be on wikimediafoundation.org.
>
> On 12/22/06, Brianna Laugher <brianna.laugher at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 22/12/06, Sam Korn <smoddy at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > [reorganising thread for readability]
> >
> > > Well, from my experience with translating to and from Latin, Greek,
> > > French and German, a good dictionary will contain notes on usage that
> > > should suffice here.
> >
> > These are all Indo-European languages. Translating across language
> > families which are less likely to share common cultural assumptions
> > and practices can be far more problematic I imagine.
> >
> > cheers,
> > Brianna
> > user:pfctdayelise
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
>
>
> --
> Gary Kirk
>

--
Gary Kirk


body:
Sam Korn schreef:
> On 12/22/06, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> How many users are working at any one time at en.wikipedia? And you can
>> remember the vandals by name .. I am impressed .. but somehow I doubt
>> it. I think you use the history views of the contributions of that user,
>> the talk pages of that user and for that you do not even have to know
>> what the user name is.
>>
>
> OK, think about this.  I'm looking at Special:Recentchanges.  I see an
> edit by [[User:David Gerard]].  I ignore this edit.  It's David.  I
> know he's a good editor.  Now I see an edit by [[User:Fabien1309]],
> who is a fr admin who has a rarely-used en account.  I don't recognise
> him, but I see the edit, see it's a good one, and he goes on my mental
> whitelist.
>
> Now I see [[User:??????:???????]], who is an admin on th.  I look at
> the edit, and it's a good one.  But how am I to whitelist him/her?
> It's impossible, or near enough.  And the same would go for ja, zh, or
> el (I can read Greek script, but I'm in the definite minority...)
>
> Even a set of numbers is easier to memorise.
>
>
>> And for all the ????? you only have to have to install the appropriate
>> fonts .. You are talking about self inflicting damage that you roll over
>> on people that have earned respect. From the point of good faith, it is
>> hardly that.
>>
>
> So now, in order to contribute helpfully to vandal-fighting (for
> instance) in a Wikipedia in someone's own language, they have to
> install all world fonts.  Yes.  That will really encourage people to
> join up.
>
> Don't we try to aim at a low barrier for entry?
You do not lower the barrier of entry to Wikipedia by blocking people on
sight. You are talking about people who are admins so we can tell them
that they have to install fonts. Admins are people who choose to do the
admin work. At issue is that people using their standard user are
treated worse than anonymous users Really that is outrageous..

Thanks,
    GerardM


from_name: Andre Engels

body:
2006/12/22, Sam Korn <smoddy at gmail.com>:
>
> On 12/22/06, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
> > How many users are working at any one time at en.wikipedia? And you can
> > remember the vandals by name .. I am impressed .. but somehow I doubt
> > it. I think you use the history views of the contributions of that user,
> > the talk pages of that user and for that you do not even have to know
> > what the user name is.
>
> OK, think about this.  I'm looking at Special:Recentchanges.  I see an
> edit by [[User:David Gerard]].  I ignore this edit.  It's David.  I
> know he's a good editor.  Now I see an edit by [[User:Fabien1309]],
> who is a fr admin who has a rarely-used en account.  I don't recognise
> him, but I see the edit, see it's a good one, and he goes on my mental
> whitelist.
>
> Now I see [[User:??????:???????]], who is an admin on th.  I look at
> the edit, and it's a good one.  But how am I to whitelist him/her?
> It's impossible, or near enough.  And the same would go for ja, zh, or
> el (I can read Greek script, but I'm in the definite minority...)

How large is this mental whitelist of yours? If you have normal mental
capabilities it will be hard to have more than 150-200 names on it. That's
merely a bump in the total Wikipedia usage feature. The statistics of
English Wikipedia seem to be down at the moment, but according to the
Wikistats, German Wikipedia had 1000 'very active' (at least 100 edits in a
month) and 7500 'active' (at least 5 edits in a month). Remember 200 of
them, and you still will find a majority of those edits being made by
active-yet-unknown users.

> And for all the ????? you only have to have to install the appropriate
> > fonts .. You are talking about self inflicting damage that you roll over
> > on people that have earned respect. From the point of good faith, it is
> > hardly that.
>
> So now, in order to contribute helpfully to vandal-fighting (for
> instance) in a Wikipedia in someone's own language, they have to
> install all world fonts.  Yes.  That will really encourage people to
> join up.

Vandal fighting is done by checking the edits, not by trying to pronounce
the name of the editor.

--
Andre Engels, andreengels at gmail.com
ICQ: 6260644  --  Skype: a_engels


from_name: Sam Korn

body:
On 12/22/06, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Do you want to reply to this?
> >
> You cannot remember all known good editors as it is (see the reply of
> Andre Engels). It is therefore a non-issue.

No, perhaps not.  But you can remember a good proportion.  The
"whitelist" doesn't have to be permanent.  It only has to persist as
long as one session of editing.  I can remember which users need to be
looked out for and which users are making good edits at the time I'm
doing RC patrol.  That is quite comfortably manageable.

> > And users who aren't admins who want to do this kind of work?  I
> > started anti-vandalism work within a couple of months of joining
> > en.wikipedia.  I didn't become an admin for seven months.  I would
> > probably not have bothered if I'd had to search out my XP disk and
> > install fonts, when I was far less computer savvy than I am now.
> >
> If this is what it takes to do the job.. it this is what you find it
> necessary to do.. You will.

I don't understand what you mean.  If you're saying that you intend
that everyone who wants to occasionally HELP OUT the wiki by doing RC
patrol should install all these fonts for languages they don't
understand, you're living in a world completely disconnected from
reality.  We don't make huge demands of our users before we allow them
to fight vandalism.  Indeed, all they need to do is provide a user
name and a password.

What about the non-tech-savvy people?  What about those who edit from
public computers?  Do you intend to discriminate against them?

> > But to all intents and purposes, they are anonymous, in that few
> > admins will a) be able to read and b) be able to remember and
> > understand usernames __even if they install the fonts__.  That is the
> > issue that you haven't grasped.
> Andre Engels answered this better than I have.. There are so many known
> good editors that it is impossible to remember them all. There are too
> many. So as it is already not possible to do this for Latin, the issue
> is not made worse.

So, in other words, ?????? is just as good as ??????:???????.  So
people needn't bother installing fonts, because no-one can remember
people's names.

Of course, there is absolutely no difference at all between
recognising a name in Latin and Thai, for example.  It's equally easy.
 And hey, even if it isn't, we might as well not bother trying to make
things easier for people.

--
Sam


body:
On 12/22/06, Brianna Laugher <brianna.laugher at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 22/12/06, Sam Korn <smoddy at gmail.com> wrote:
> > True. But tell me that the name of the editor isn't a factor in
> > deciding whether an edit is worth checking.
>
> This, to me, seems to be the crux of the English Wikipedia policy. I
> guess I am not alone in feeling that English Wikipedia vandal fighters
> having to read a few extra edits to check whether they are good or
> not, is better than choosing to instantaneously block all non-Latin
> usernames, when considering the size of the effect on English
> Wikipedia vandal fighters compared to the thousands of
> non-Latin-alphabet-using Wikimedia editors who may wish to easily edit
> English Wikipedia once SUL is introduced.

Absolutely.  I am sure you understand en-editors' concerns as well.

Apart from anything else, there's a huge barrier being put in place
which will hinder communication between users of a wiki, and that
cannot be a good thing.

--
Sam


from_name: Stephen Bain

body:
On 12/22/06, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 12/22/06, Birgitte SB <birgitte_sb at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > I do not understand what this has to do with non-latin
> > usernames.  This threat is just as real for *all*
> > usernames.  A sockpuppet can be built up on it.WP and
> > do this same damage.  But en.WP does not block italian
> > usernames on sight.  Only non-latin usernames.  How is
> > a non-latin username a greater threat to be a sleeper
> > vandal than a latin username?  I really do not
> > understand the problem in this regard.
>
> Information is the first principle of controling vandles. If there is
> a username you can't read that is an edge you have lost.

Usernames in history pages, contributions lists, etc are all clickable
and can all take you directly to all of the pages you need to know
about to investigate vandal accounts. History pages provide links
directly to userpage, talk page and contributions list. Same with
Recentchanges. If you are a sysop, you also get a direct link to block
the user. Note that these are all necessary steps anyway, even when
one can read the username.

What functionality is impaired by not being able to read the username,
given that MediaWiki makes all these things clickable? If there is
something I haven't thought of then please help me out, I honestly
don't see the problem.

--
Stephen Bain
stephen.bain at gmail.com


body:
On 12/22/06, Brianna Laugher <brianna.laugher at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 22/12/06, Sam Korn <smoddy at gmail.com> wrote:
> > [reorganising thread for readability]
>
> > Well, from my experience with translating to and from Latin, Greek,
> > French and German, a good dictionary will contain notes on usage that
> > should suffice here.
>
> These are all Indo-European languages. Translating across language
> families which are less likely to share common cultural assumptions
> and practices can be far more problematic I imagine.

I doubt that will make a difference, as I only used the notes that
were in English to help me.  Provided that a Thai dictionary, for
instance, has similar quality notes (and this is a good but not
exceptional dictionary) I see no reason why this should be impossible.

Yes, a knowledge of the language and culture is helpful.  But it's not
completely impossible to manage without for these simple phrases.

--
Sam


body:
Sam Korn schreef:
> On 12/22/06, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Sam Korn schreef:
>>
>>> On 12/22/06, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> How many users are working at any one time at en.wikipedia? And you can
>>>> remember the vandals by name .. I am impressed .. but somehow I doubt
>>>> it. I think you use the history views of the contributions of that user,
>>>> the talk pages of that user and for that you do not even have to know
>>>> what the user name is.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> OK, think about this.  I'm looking at Special:Recentchanges.  I see an
>>> edit by [[User:David Gerard]].  I ignore this edit.  It's David.  I
>>> know he's a good editor.  Now I see an edit by [[User:Fabien1309]],
>>> who is a fr admin who has a rarely-used en account.  I don't recognise
>>> him, but I see the edit, see it's a good one, and he goes on my mental
>>> whitelist.
>>>
>>> Now I see [[User:??????:???????]], who is an admin on th.  I look at
>>> the edit, and it's a good one.  But how am I to whitelist him/her?
>>> It's impossible, or near enough.  And the same would go for ja, zh, or
>>> el (I can read Greek script, but I'm in the definite minority...)
>>>
>>> Even a set of numbers is easier to memorise.
>>>
>
> Do you want to reply to this?
>
You cannot remember all known good editors as it is (see the reply of
Andre Engels). It is therefore a non-issue.
>
>>> So now, in order to contribute helpfully to vandal-fighting (for
>>> instance) in a Wikipedia in someone's own language, they have to
>>> install all world fonts.  Yes.  That will really encourage people to
>>> join up.
>>>
>>> Don't we try to aim at a low barrier for entry?
>>>
>> You do not lower the barrier of entry to Wikipedia by blocking people on
>> sight.
>>
>
> No.  We've already managed to work out that I don't agree with that.
>
>
>> You are talking about people who are admins so we can tell them
>> that they have to install fonts.
>>
>
> And users who aren't admins who want to do this kind of work?  I
> started anti-vandalism work within a couple of months of joining
> en.wikipedia.  I didn't become an admin for seven months.  I would
> probably not have bothered if I'd had to search out my XP disk and
> install fonts, when I was far less computer savvy than I am now.
>
If this is what it takes to do the job.. it this is what you find it
necessary to do.. You will.
>
>> At issue is that people using their standard user are
>> treated worse than anonymous users Really that is outrageous..
>>
>
> But to all intents and purposes, they are anonymous, in that few
> admins will a) be able to read and b) be able to remember and
> understand usernames __even if they install the fonts__.  That is the
> issue that you haven't grasped.
Andre Engels answered this better than I have.. There are so many known
good editors that it is impossible to remember them all. There are too
many. So as it is already not possible to do this for Latin, the issue
is not made worse.

Thanks,
    GerardM


from_name: Heimermann, Asher

subject:
[Foundation-l] To all non latin wikis please start blocking
	latin wiki accounts

body:
I don't support this.

  Walter, you should go to bed!

Walter van Kalken <walter at vankalken.net> wrote:
  After Gregory's action I want to ask all wiki's who use non-latin
languages as their standard to start blocking all latin character user
accounts and demand they use accountnames in your script, especially
those of en.wikipedians actively supporting this en: policy.

Maybe this way they will understand on en: that there action is
extremely biased and very very bad as they seem to insist to keep
blocking good users like admins from other wiki's simply because people
want to use their REAL NAME.

Start with Gregory's account btw.

Waerth

>Gregory Maxwell schreef:
>
>
>>On 12/22/06, Birgitte SB wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>The en.WP Username policy has been changed.
>>>http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Username&curid=168684&diff=95920637&oldid=95900078
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>Unfortunatly, it was changed without any valid basis.
>>
>>It is not acceptable to remove longstanding policy simply because some
>>people on a mailing list decided to speculate randomly and accuse
>>enwiki of "ethnocentricism" without substantiation.
>>
>>As a result I've reverted the change and contributed some suggestions
>>to the talk page.
>>
>>I agree that the policy should be *improved* to address the real
>>concerns brought up, and to be more friendly to users who work across
>>many languages. Simply removing the section does not, however,
>>address the very real issues which caused the creation of the policy
>>in the first place.
>>
>>
>Hoi,
>Some people congratulated me with the outcome of this affair. My
>reaction was that it did not feel like a victory because I feel bruised
>by the experience. Having said this, your suggestion that there has been
>no substantiation about the grievance that was put forward is seriously
>wrong. The notion that it is up to you to revert this change continues
>to make this affair even more painful. Simply reverting this change and
>thereby denying that many of the reasons why this policy was put in
>place is seriously wrong.
>
>I have to say I am increasingly upset by this affair.
>
>Thanks,
> GerardM
>_______________________________________________
>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


body:
On 12/22/06, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> It makes it imposible to pick up bot generated or common theme names.

So we better train either the anti-spoofing software or blocking bots
like the one Curps had. If it can automatically block anything with
"ON WHEELS" in it, surely it or something like it can be expanded to
pick up swear words or recognisable patterns in other languages.

--
Stephen Bain
stephen.bain at gmail.com


body:
On 12/22/06, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
> Sam Korn schreef:
> > I don't understand what you mean.  If you're saying that you intend
> > that everyone who wants to occasionally HELP OUT the wiki by doing RC
> > patrol should install all these fonts for languages they don't
> > understand, you're living in a world completely disconnected from
> > reality.  We don't make huge demands of our users before we allow them
> > to fight vandalism.  Indeed, all they need to do is provide a user
> > name and a password.
> >
> > What about the non-tech-savvy people?  What about those who edit from
> > public computers?  Do you intend to discriminate against them?
> >
> What about them? Is it an excuse to discriminate against people who use
> their standard user name?

No, of course it isn't and if you bothered to read what I've written
you'd know I think so.  That you don't can only suggest that you can't
be bothered to read what I write, else you'd know that I DON'T SUPPORT
EN.WIKIPEDIA'S CURRENT POLICY, just that I understand its reasoning.

> I think you do not appreciate that
> discrimination is exactly what this is about. You are quite happy to
> discriminate against people who use their Single User Login. It must be
> all right because it makes things easy for you.

So you're accusing me of discrimination.  This is completely absurd
and offensive.  Again, if you bothered to read what I've written,
you'd see that I'm trying to find some way of reconciling the problems
en.wikipedia has with the implementation of SUL.

You appear to be fixated on damning en.wikipedia.  You seem unable to
comprehend why en.wikipedia has instituted these policies, because,
apparently, SUL is going to wash them all away.

Please demonstrate you are trying to understand my points.

> So if people do not install fonts they see blocks or question marks.
> This will effectively have the effect that people will eventually want
> to install fonts. That is not a bad thing.

Yes, blackmail is a wonderful way to get things done.  I applaud you.

> As to public computers, it is
> reasonable to ask the proprietors of these public computers to at least
> install the fonts that come with the operating system that they run.

I'd agree.  But it's still not fair to these users if the owners won't.

And we seem to be drifting from the issue.

> Well no, when you have ??????:??????? and ??????:?? you can notice that there
> is a difference. The find function of your browser will be quite able to
> discriminate between the two.

And when only one appears?  Because I'm obviously going to keep all
foreign names on my clipboard to paste into the find box every time,
am I not?

> Without fonts installed you will not be
> able to make this distinction this way. If making things easy is an
> excuse for discrimination then by all means.

Again, you're accusing me of discrimination, when all I'm doing is
pointing out legitimate concerns.

> But do not be surprised the
> extend that people outside of the English language Wikipedia community
> find it problematic to discuss issues where POV is an issue. At the
> Belgrade Wikipedia meeting this was exactly one of the issues raised. I
> am sure you can find the presentation where this was expressed.

Do you want to explain what relevance this has to the rest of the
thread?  It's lost on me.

> By being less then welcoming, by approaching people as suspect you kill
> the goose that lays the golden eggs.

You really haven't heard a word I've said, have you?

> Yes, there is vandalism to an
> extend that we do not have elsewhere, but at the same time the resources
> of the English language Wikipedia are equal to none.

This is interesting.  Would you care to tell me what these resources are?

Certainly development is driven by en.wikipedia's needs to some
extent, but these needs are often replicated in other wikis before too
long.

Now, this post has been less than entirely civil, and I apologise.
But I now understand why David, having had a similar conversation with
you, felt you were saying "fuck you" to him.  You dismiss others'
concerns without a shred of logic and don't listen to them at all.
This is rude and inconsiderate.

--
Sam


from_name: David Gerard

body:
On 22/12/06, Sam Korn <smoddy at gmail.com> wrote:

> So now, in order to contribute helpfully to vandal-fighting (for
> instance) in a Wikipedia in someone's own language, they have to
> install all world fonts.  Yes.  That will really encourage people to
> join up.

Better than that - they have to be comfortable with reading all
scripts used anywhere in Wikimedia, according to Gerard's plan.

Wikipedia: The encyclopedia any linguist who's installed every script
available can edit!

> Don't we try to aim at a low barrier for entry?

I predict no-one advocating all admins learn and become comfortable
with all scripts will answer this question.

- d.


subject: [WikiEN-l] The boundaries of OR (contd) (Ray Saintonge)

body:
On 22/12/06, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 12/22/06, Guy Chapman aka JzG <guy.chapman at spamcop.net> wrote:

> > Another issue: a particular promoter of a particular POV cites a book
> > in support of his argument.  It is not a widely-circulated book.
> > Others are unable to find the book, or, having found the book, unable
> > to find the specific text supposedly quoted.  At some point we have to
> > apply the "yeah, right" rule and remove it.

> If the british libiary does not have a copy I'm going to want to hear
> a pretty good explantion.

Because deposit libraries don't actually expend a lot of effort
tracking down small publishers who don't send them a copy, beyond
perhaps a letter if they find out they exist (perhaps years after the
fact). Because deposit libraries don't have money either.

- d.


subject: [WikiEN-l] "Assume good faith" is no longer policy.

body:
On 22/12/06, Earle Martin <wikipedia at downlode.org> wrote:
> On 19/12/06, Abigail Brady <morwen at evilmagic.org> wrote:

> > For historical interest, you may which to see the initial version of
> > AGF that I wrote.  It wasn't some "let's all hug and be happy" type
> > thing, it was some practical notes about how assuming good faith is a
> > good debating tactic because you can give your opponent Enough Rope
> > (tm).

> See also http://www.usemod.com/cgi-bin/mb.pl?AssumeGoodFaith

500 error! Anyone got a copy?

- d.


body:
I think what should be taken from all this is that translation
requests should be made and publicised *well* before the whatever
we're translating about happens - for stuff we know about obviously -
like the Fundraiser. 'The Fundraiser starts tomorrow' is not much
notice, is it?

On 12/22/06, habj <sweetadelaide at gmail.com> wrote:
> 2006/12/22, Sam Korn <smoddy at gmail.com>:
>
> > I doubt that will make a difference, as I only used the notes that
> > were in English to help me.  Provided that a Thai dictionary, for
> > instance, has similar quality notes (and this is a good but not
> > exceptional dictionary) I see no reason why this should be impossible.
> >
> > Yes, a knowledge of the language and culture is helpful.  But it's not
> > completely impossible to manage without for these simple phrases.
>
> IMHO we are splitting hairs. Of course there exists lists of words
> that are simple enough that they can be translated with only a
> dictionary! (and some context, or you can not use the explanation and
> notes in your dictionary). The question is how common these cases are,
> and I'd say that partly depends on how afraid you are of silly
> mistakes. One might realise that when put in context, the simple word
> has the wrong grammatical form... since the language one translates
> from does not distinguish between these two etc. etc. ad nauseam.
>
> I've translated MediaWiki messages "blindly". It often worked OK, some
> had to be tweaked when we discovered where they were used. That was no
> big deal. In PR material, such as this fundraising stuff, silly
> mistakes look much worse. I think this discussion still somehow hovers
> around the topic of C.O.R.E. and to me it is clear that a translation
> with just a dictionary would be less satisfactory, so that correct
> English in most cases is a better alternative.
>
> /habj
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

--
Gary Kirk


from_name: geni

body:
On 12/22/06, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
> Because deposit libraries don't actually expend a lot of effort
> tracking down small publishers who don't send them a copy, beyond
> perhaps a letter if they find out they exist (perhaps years after the
> fact). Because deposit libraries don't have money either.
>
>
> - d.

At one point I ran across some refences on scams involveing vanity
publishers. One of the things even these "publishers" did was send a
copy to the british libiary (the scams were UK based) since they could
claim it as marketing and I supose to a degree made them appear more
legit. With the exception of print on demarnd people I can't see a
reason why legit publishers should be much different.

--
geni


from_name: Milos Rancic

subject: [Foundation-l] 4th assembly of Wikimedia Serbia

body:
Maybe some of you would be interested in this event...

After two assemblies at December 2005 which was in real life, our
other assemblies are on our wiki (http://rs.vikimedija.org/).

The process is different then in real life gatherings, so we made a
different time line of assemblies. Our present time line is made
because of different dynamics of talking face to face and over wiki.
This time line for sure is not the best, but it is for sure better
then to introduce time line from real life assemblies. And, of course,
if someone has good ideas related to our "network assemblies", we are
open for suggestions.

Our assembly has three phases and each of them has duration of one
week: (1) proposals for assembly agenda (for this assembly: 18th-24th
December); (2) discussion about proposals (25th-31st December); and
(3) voting (1st-7th January).

I have to mention that our Executive board has power just to do
something which Assembly is not able to do because of time. Because of
that on this assembly I put the proposal to have permanent assemblies
divided quarterly (just to have the beginning and the end of assembly)
and our 5th (winter) assembly will be kept between January 15th and
March 15th 2007.

If the proposal related to permanent assemblies passes (I don't see
any reason why not to pass), anyone who want to propose to assembly
something would be able to do so and, in general, one week would be
needed for discussion and voting.


body:
On 22/12/06, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 12/22/06, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:

> > Because deposit libraries don't actually expend a lot of effort
> > tracking down small publishers who don't send them a copy, beyond
> > perhaps a letter if they find out they exist (perhaps years after the
> > fact). Because deposit libraries don't have money either.

> At one point I ran across some refences on scams involveing vanity
> publishers. One of the things even these "publishers" did was send a
> copy to the british libiary (the scams were UK based) since they could
> claim it as marketing and I supose to a degree made them appear more
> legit. With the exception of print on demarnd people I can't see a
> reason why legit publishers should be much different.

I'm speaking from my own experience in Australia. An individual in
Australia can apply for an ISBN from the National Library of
Australia, which is per the name a deposit library, so they generally
would remember to send a copy in. But "publishing" for deposit library
purposes was defined as "distributing three or more copies of
something" - which means a lot of stuff that should be deposited won't
be. So the deposit libraries would write a letter asking nicely when
they found out. And welcome contributions of specialist collections,
e.g. I donated my Australian indie rock fanzine collection to the West
Australian state library when I left Australia, and they were most
pleased.

In the general case, you're right, *almost* everything will be in a
national deposit library; but stuff can and will be missed, and not
necessarily from a lack of significance.

- d.


from_name: George Herbert

body:
On 12/22/06, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
> Gregory Maxwell schreef:
> > On 12/22/06, Birgitte SB <birgitte_sb at yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >> The en.WP Username policy has been changed.
> >> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Username&curid=168684&diff=95920637&oldid=95900078
> >>
> >
> > Unfortunatly, it was changed without any valid basis.
> >
> > It is not acceptable to remove longstanding policy simply because some
> > people on a mailing list decided to speculate randomly and accuse
> > enwiki of "ethnocentricism" without substantiation.
> >
> > As a result I've reverted the change and contributed some suggestions
> > to the talk page.
> >
> > I agree that the policy should be *improved* to address the real
> > concerns brought up, and to be more friendly to users who work across
> > many languages.  Simply removing the section does not, however,
> > address the very real issues which caused the creation of the policy
> > in the first place.
> Hoi,
> Some people congratulated me with the outcome of this affair. My
> reaction was that it did not feel like a victory because I feel bruised
> by the experience. Having said this, your suggestion that there has been
> no substantiation about the grievance that was put forward is seriously
> wrong.

There is no substantiation that the en.WP policy is due to ethnocentrism.

Please don't generalize from "We find that your claim of ethnocentrism
is unfounded" to "We find that your entire claim that this policy is
bad is unfounded".

> The notion that it is up to you to revert this change continues
> to make this affair even more painful. Simply reverting this change and
> thereby denying that many of the reasons why this policy was put in
> place is seriously wrong.

The only person entitled to make a unilateral policy change is Jimbo.

The policy IS policy - it's been there, agreed to, been standard, been
used to do a lot of vandal-fighting.  The policy has become
controversial due to the SUL and cross-wiki and charges that it's
insensitive to other language speakers.  But it is not resolved and
consensus agreed to that it's wrong and needs to get changed right
now.

Consensus doesn't mean "We brought up this issue, it started an
argument, we changed it while people still disagree and there's no
clear majority."  It means "Talk about it until people actually agree
on something, and THEN change it.".

> I have to say I am increasingly upset by this affair.

As am I.  What is wrong with talking it out before any changes are
made, rather than insisting on acting unilaterally without regard to
others' concerns?

The insistence that this has to be done, by fiat, RIGHT NOW, is
grossly offensive.  There is no emergency rush here.  There is nothing
at all wrong with talking about it and figuring out what the
least-painful overall solution is before anything gets changed.

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


subject: [Foundation-l] Automatic username transliteration for SUL

body:
On 22/12/06, Christophe Millet <kipmaster at gmail.com> wrote:

> Copy and paste doesn't work on Internet Explorer, or on
> these browsers where all you see is "?" or an empty box.
> It works with firefox, where what you see is a box, and in it
> is the Unicode number of the character (or some other number),
> so that different unknown characters do look different to me.

My example was trying to write:

http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/UnNews:Supreme_Court_declares_global_warming_unconstitutional

The Unicode gibberish the hurricane was named after is one
contributor's username. Bits of it worked and bits of it didn't ...
very annoying.

Copying and pasting from the displayed page to a text edit box on
Ubuntu Linux works (because Ubuntu's Unicode support and font support
is very good); copying and pasting from the displayed page to a text
edit box on Windows XP doesn't work reliably.

In Firefox, copying and pasting the characters rendered "????"
*sometimes* works.

But then, we're being told that with SUL, Windows XP will be
considered a deprecated platform unless the user knows how to install
fonts by hand. So that's all right then.

- d.


from_name: jayjg

subject: [WikiEN-l] The boundaries of OR (contd)

body:
On 12/22/06, charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com
<charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com> wrote:
> jayjg wrote
>
> <snip>
>
> >let's not beat our readers over the head with our agenda.
>
> Something I can agree with. 'Understatement adds credibility.' Should appear somewhere meta-ish. Does it?

"Less is more". Robert Browning.

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Robert_Browning


body:
Sam Korn schreef:
> On 12/22/06, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> Do you want to reply to this?
>>>
>>>
>> You cannot remember all known good editors as it is (see the reply of
>> Andre Engels). It is therefore a non-issue.
>>
>
> No, perhaps not.  But you can remember a good proportion.  The
> "whitelist" doesn't have to be permanent.  It only has to persist as
> long as one session of editing.  I can remember which users need to be
> looked out for and which users are making good edits at the time I'm
> doing RC patrol.  That is quite comfortably manageable.
>
>
>>> And users who aren't admins who want to do this kind of work?  I
>>> started anti-vandalism work within a couple of months of joining
>>> en.wikipedia.  I didn't become an admin for seven months.  I would
>>> probably not have bothered if I'd had to search out my XP disk and
>>> install fonts, when I was far less computer savvy than I am now.
>>>
>>>
>> If this is what it takes to do the job.. it this is what you find it
>> necessary to do.. You will.
>>
>
> I don't understand what you mean.  If you're saying that you intend
> that everyone who wants to occasionally HELP OUT the wiki by doing RC
> patrol should install all these fonts for languages they don't
> understand, you're living in a world completely disconnected from
> reality.  We don't make huge demands of our users before we allow them
> to fight vandalism.  Indeed, all they need to do is provide a user
> name and a password.
>
> What about the non-tech-savvy people?  What about those who edit from
> public computers?  Do you intend to discriminate against them?
>
What about them? Is it an excuse to discriminate against people who use
their standard user name? I think you do not appreciate that
discrimination is exactly what this is about. You are quite happy to
discriminate against people who use their Single User Login. It must be
all right because it makes things easy for you.

So if people do not install fonts they see blocks or question marks.
This will effectively have the effect that people will eventually want
to install fonts. That is not a bad thing. As to public computers, it is
reasonable to ask the proprietors of these public computers to at least
install the fonts that come with the operating system that they run.
>
>>> But to all intents and purposes, they are anonymous, in that few
>>> admins will a) be able to read and b) be able to remember and
>>> understand usernames __even if they install the fonts__.  That is the
>>> issue that you haven't grasped.
>>>
>> Andre Engels answered this better than I have.. There are so many known
>> good editors that it is impossible to remember them all. There are too
>> many. So as it is already not possible to do this for Latin, the issue
>> is not made worse.
>>
>
> So, in other words, ?????? is just as good as ??????:???????.  So
> people needn't bother installing fonts, because no-one can remember
> people's names.
>
> Of course, there is absolutely no difference at all between
> recognising a name in Latin and Thai, for example.  It's equally easy.
>  And hey, even if it isn't, we might as well not bother trying to make
> things easier for people.
Well no, when you have ??????:??????? and ??????:?? you can notice that there
is a difference. The find function of your browser will be quite able to
discriminate between the two. Without fonts installed you will not be
able to make this distinction this way. If making things easy is an
excuse for discrimination then by all means. But do not be surprised the
extend that people outside of the English language Wikipedia community
find it problematic to discuss issues where POV is an issue. At the
Belgrade Wikipedia meeting this was exactly one of the issues raised. I
am sure you can find the presentation where this was expressed.

By being less then welcoming, by approaching people as suspect you kill
the goose that lays the golden eggs. Yes, there is vandalism to an
extend that we do not have elsewhere, but at the same time the resources
of the English language Wikipedia are equal to none.
Thanks,
    GerardM


from_name: Jeff V. Merkey

subject:
[Foundation-l] To all non latin wikis please start
 blocking	latin wiki accounts

body:
Anthere,

Can you moderate this thread? The title of the thread is disruptive and
counter-productive
of its own right. I proposed a technical solution to Brion that will
eliminate this issue
with namespaces in MediaWiki. It certainly warrants further discussion
on the technical
merits of the best approach.

I don't see how this particular thread is helpful in reviewing the
various approaches on
their technical merits.

Just my 2 cent.

Jeff

Bryan Tong Minh wrote:

>* Don't disrupt Wikipedia to prove a point
>
>Let me myself add something: You're hate for anglosaxon related
>subjects is disconcerning. Your prejudgment prevents any constructive
>discussion.  You have just proven yourself to be immature and moreover
>a hypocrite. Please notice that your comments are in no way helpful,
>and prevents any further discussion.
>
>Bryan
>
>On 12/22/06, Walter van Kalken <walter at vankalken.net> wrote:
>
>
>>After Gregory's action I want to ask all wiki's who use non-latin
>>languages as their standard to start blocking all latin character user
>>accounts and demand they use accountnames in your script, especially
>>those of en.wikipedians actively supporting this en: policy.
>>
>>Maybe this way they will understand on en: that there action is
>>extremely biased and very very bad as they seem to insist to keep
>>blocking good users like admins from other wiki's simply because people
>>want to use their REAL NAME.
>>
>>Start with Gregory's account btw.
>>
>>Waerth
>>
>>
>>
>>>Gregory Maxwell schreef:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>On 12/22/06, Birgitte SB <birgitte_sb at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>The en.WP Username policy has been changed.
>>>>>http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Username&curid=168684&diff=95920637&oldid=95900078
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>Unfortunatly, it was changed without any valid basis.
>>>>
>>>>It is not acceptable to remove longstanding policy simply because some
>>>>people on a mailing list decided to speculate randomly and accuse
>>>>enwiki of "ethnocentricism" without substantiation.
>>>>
>>>>As a result I've reverted the change and contributed some suggestions
>>>>to the talk page.
>>>>
>>>>I agree that the policy should be *improved* to address the real
>>>>concerns brought up, and to be more friendly to users who work across
>>>>many languages.  Simply removing the section does not, however,
>>>>address the very real issues which caused the creation of the policy
>>>>in the first place.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>Hoi,
>>>Some people congratulated me with the outcome of this affair. My
>>>reaction was that it did not feel like a victory because I feel bruised
>>>by the experience. Having said this, your suggestion that there has been
>>>no substantiation about the grievance that was put forward is seriously
>>>wrong. The notion that it is up to you to revert this change continues
>>>to make this affair even more painful. Simply reverting this change and
>>>thereby denying that many of the reasons why this policy was put in
>>>place is seriously wrong.
>>>
>>>I have to say I am increasingly upset by this affair.
>>>
>>>Thanks,
>>>    GerardM
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>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
>
>
>


body:
I also see on the page (forget the URL currently, but it's the one
DavidStrauss/Fundraising redirects to) there is an archive section.
What could be useful for the next time is for boilerplate-style copy
to be taken from this, which could be easily adapted. Just an idea.

On 12/22/06, David Strauss <david at fourkitchens.com> wrote:
> The system FundCORE replaced was English-only, so I saw no harm in
> implementing it with English first and adding translations shortly
> after. Now in the case of the other side of the fundraising effort (site
> notices and fundraising submission pages), I agree that more
> organization ahead of time would have smoothed things along.
>
> Gary Kirk wrote:
> > I think what should be taken from all this is that translation
> > requests should be made and publicised *well* before the whatever
> > we're translating about happens - for stuff we know about obviously -
> > like the Fundraiser. 'The Fundraiser starts tomorrow' is not much
> > notice, is it?
> >
> > On 12/22/06, habj <sweetadelaide at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> 2006/12/22, Sam Korn <smoddy at gmail.com>:
> >>
> >>> I doubt that will make a difference, as I only used the notes that
> >>> were in English to help me.  Provided that a Thai dictionary, for
> >>> instance, has similar quality notes (and this is a good but not
> >>> exceptional dictionary) I see no reason why this should be impossible.
> >>>
> >>> Yes, a knowledge of the language and culture is helpful.  But it's not
> >>> completely impossible to manage without for these simple phrases.
> >> IMHO we are splitting hairs. Of course there exists lists of words
> >> that are simple enough that they can be translated with only a
> >> dictionary! (and some context, or you can not use the explanation and
> >> notes in your dictionary). The question is how common these cases are,
> >> and I'd say that partly depends on how afraid you are of silly
> >> mistakes. One might realise that when put in context, the simple word
> >> has the wrong grammatical form... since the language one translates
> >> from does not distinguish between these two etc. etc. ad nauseam.
> >>
> >> I've translated MediaWiki messages "blindly". It often worked OK, some
> >> had to be tweaked when we discovered where they were used. That was no
> >> big deal. In PR material, such as this fundraising stuff, silly
> >> mistakes look much worse. I think this discussion still somehow hovers
> >> around the topic of C.O.R.E. and to me it is clear that a translation
> >> with just a dictionary would be less satisfactory, so that correct
> >> English in most cases is a better alternative.
> >>
> >> /habj
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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
>

--
Gary Kirk


from_name: Ilmari Karonen

subject: [WikiEN-l] The boundaries of OR (contd)

body:
jayjg wrote:
> On 12/21/06, Daniel P. B. Smith <wikipedia2006 at dpbsmith.com> wrote:
>>
>>You can't prove a negative, but you can certainly say "his book is
>>not in the Cornell University Library" or whatever, and cite a link
>>to the search or a description of how to do the search. This doesn't
>>seem very different to me from a citation.
>
> No, you absolutely cannot do that, for reasons eloquently stated
> elsewhere. The claim that it is not in the Cornell University Library
> is a novel conclusion based on your own original research;

I would disagree, and say that it is a claim made by the library
catalogue, and thus properly sourced to them.  The claim may be one made
by omission, but, insofar as the catalogue claims to be comprehensive,
it is nonetheless an unambiguous claim.

If the catalogue does not claim to be comprehensive, or if there is
doubt about its accuracy, it may be better to phrase the statement
explicitly as "his book is not listed in the Cornell University Library
catalogue."

None of the problems previously mentioned with legal databases apply to
library catalogues, which I would rather compare to other common
catalogue works such as phone books and dictionaries.  In fact, ten or
twenty years ago, one could even have pointed to the filing cabinets
full of index cards and said "here's your printed source".  :-)

Or would you also consider the statement "IttyBittySoft was not listed
in the Fortune 500 list for 2006" to be OR?

--
Ilmari Karonen


body:
On 12/22/06, Birgitte SB <birgitte_sb at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> --- Sam Korn <smoddy at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > [Many posts]
>
> You want people to acknowlede that en.WP is having
> problems.  I don't see anyone disputing that the en.WP
> policy makes thing eaisier for vandal-fighters.  I do
> see that not everyone agrees that not being able to
> remember a username is a significant problem.  Other
> significant problems that existed when the en.WP began
> this policy have been since   Personally, I do not see
> why it such a hardship for the vandal-fighters to
> simply check edits instead of mentally whitelisting
> non-latin editors.  Yes it will be a little more time
> consuming,

You destroyed your own argument here. Remeber on en wikipedia small
things tend to multiply into bog things.

--
geni


from_name: Gregory Maxwell

subject: [Foundation-l] when uploading pictures to commons ....

body:
On 12/22/06, Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote:

> Sounds like blaming the victim.  Those who have less sophisticated
> systems are often also the ones who have less sophisticated knowledge
> about such things.

Ignoring firefox bugs with SVGs for a moment (which really aren't
related to image size so much)... is there *actually* an issue with
low end systems *crashing* when they view large images?

In order to test these complaints, I opened a 6000x7000 jpeg image on
an old win95 box with 64 megs of ram without crashing.. although it
was slow.


from_name: habj

body:
2006/12/22, Sam Korn <smoddy at gmail.com>:

> I doubt that will make a difference, as I only used the notes that
> were in English to help me.  Provided that a Thai dictionary, for
> instance, has similar quality notes (and this is a good but not
> exceptional dictionary) I see no reason why this should be impossible.
>
> Yes, a knowledge of the language and culture is helpful.  But it's not
> completely impossible to manage without for these simple phrases.

IMHO we are splitting hairs. Of course there exists lists of words
that are simple enough that they can be translated with only a
dictionary! (and some context, or you can not use the explanation and
notes in your dictionary). The question is how common these cases are,
and I'd say that partly depends on how afraid you are of silly
mistakes. One might realise that when put in context, the simple word
has the wrong grammatical form... since the language one translates
from does not distinguish between these two etc. etc. ad nauseam.

I've translated MediaWiki messages "blindly". It often worked OK, some
had to be tweaked when we discovered where they were used. That was no
big deal. In PR material, such as this fundraising stuff, silly
mistakes look much worse. I think this discussion still somehow hovers
around the topic of C.O.R.E. and to me it is clear that a translation
with just a dictionary would be less satisfactory, so that correct
English in most cases is a better alternative.

/habj


body:
On 12/22/06, Birgitte SB <birgitte_sb at yahoo.com> wrote:
> The en.WP Username policy has been changed.
>http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Username&curid=168684&diff=95920637&oldid=95900078

Unfortunatly, it was changed without any valid basis.

It is not acceptable to remove longstanding policy simply because some
people on a mailing list decided to speculate randomly and accuse
enwiki of "ethnocentricism" without substantiation.

As a result I've reverted the change and contributed some suggestions
to the talk page.

I agree that the policy should be *improved* to address the real
concerns brought up, and to be more friendly to users who work across
many languages.  Simply removing the section does not, however,
address the very real issues which caused the creation of the policy
in the first place.


subject:
[Foundation-l] Throwing some data onto the flamefest fire (was:
	English Wikipedia ethnocentric policy affects other communities)

body:
On 12/22/06, Gianluigi Gamba <gigamb at tin.it> wrote:
> It's an invitation to prefer Latin script in order to make the search
> easier, not a strict prohibition.
> Usernames written entirely with non-Latin script are not blocked
> automatically.

Although it might be hard to tell from the accusations in this thread:
They are not blocked automatically on enwiki either.


body:
OK, substitue 'should' for 'it might be better if' if you wish. I am
not saying this as a random outsider, I would like to be involved with
at least making a start translating, so maybe I should join the
Translation subcommitee, if that is an option?

On 12/22/06, Aphaia <aphaia at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> As a Translation subcommittee chair speaking however on an individual
> basis, I would like to point out that we are volunteer teams and you
> have no reason to say what we "should" do and so on. I understand
> there are some heay needs and expectations, and I myself expect to see
> some translated sooner or later and always I am very happy to get a
> new, well proofread translations, but again I daresay there is no
> translation we *should* do.
>
> If you think something should be translated until a certain time, I
> recommend you to propose the translation budget which will allows to
> get contract basis translations. I strongly states in this
> circumstance there is nothing we *should* do - all our current
> translators are unpaid volunteers who must care for their real life
> concerns.
>
> Thank you for your understanding,
>
> On 12/22/06, Gary Kirk <gary.kirk at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I think what should be taken from all this is that translation
> > requests should be made and publicised *well* before the whatever
> > we're translating about happens - for stuff we know about obviously -
> > like the Fundraiser. 'The Fundraiser starts tomorrow' is not much
> > notice, is it?
> >
> > On 12/22/06, habj <sweetadelaide at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > 2006/12/22, Sam Korn <smoddy at gmail.com>:
> > >
> > > > I doubt that will make a difference, as I only used the notes that
> > > > were in English to help me.  Provided that a Thai dictionary, for
> > > > instance, has similar quality notes (and this is a good but not
> > > > exceptional dictionary) I see no reason why this should be impossible.
> > > >
> > > > Yes, a knowledge of the language and culture is helpful.  But it's not
> > > > completely impossible to manage without for these simple phrases.
> > >
> > > IMHO we are splitting hairs. Of course there exists lists of words
> > > that are simple enough that they can be translated with only a
> > > dictionary! (and some context, or you can not use the explanation and
> > > notes in your dictionary). The question is how common these cases are,
> > > and I'd say that partly depends on how afraid you are of silly
> > > mistakes. One might realise that when put in context, the simple word
> > > has the wrong grammatical form... since the language one translates
> > > from does not distinguish between these two etc. etc. ad nauseam.
> > >
> > > I've translated MediaWiki messages "blindly". It often worked OK, some
> > > had to be tweaked when we discovered where they were used. That was no
> > > big deal. In PR material, such as this fundraising stuff, silly
> > > mistakes look much worse. I think this discussion still somehow hovers
> > > around the topic of C.O.R.E. and to me it is clear that a translation
> > > with just a dictionary would be less satisfactory, so that correct
> > > English in most cases is a better alternative.
> > >
> > > /habj
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > foundation-l mailing list
> > > foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> > > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Gary Kirk
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
>
>
> --
> KIZU Naoko
>   Wikiquote: http://wikiquote.org
>   * Nessuna poesia prima di noi *
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

--
Gary Kirk


from_name: Birgitte SB

body:
--- Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 12/22/06, Luiz Augusto <lugusto at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Gianluigi is right to assert the issue for the
> Italian Wikipedia: this isn't
> > a auto-block, first the users talks). But sorry
> Gregory, English Wikipedia
> > really make auto-blocks until no first talk.
>
> There are over 400,000 usernames on enwiki with
> non-ascii characters
> in them. Only 3,394 usernames with non-ascii
> characters have been
> blocked on enwiki.
>

Can you generate a list of non-blocked non-latin
usernames that are active editors?  That would show
more clearly what current practice is.  The
non-blocked names you count above could have never
made an edit to draw attention to themselves or else
they may have been inactive since before this policy
of blocking latin usernames started.  To find
non-latin usernames that have been blocked by this
policy you can look through

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:Temporary_Wikipedian_userpages&from=Z

Birgitte SB

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


from_name: Gerard Meijssen

body:
Hoi,
When you excuse what should not be excused, you position yourself where
you do not want to be. In this threat Anthere made an interesting
suggestion; she suggested to provide some metrics to mark people as to
being known good. This was instantly rejected.  It was suggested that
people were given a number. This is imho dehumanising and I am dead
against it. It was suggested that people can install fonts to improve
their effectiveness, you call it black mail which is really "helpful".

In a previous post I have stated that with "you" I address people who
think that the arguments used to defend this policy are valid. If you
do, and you have stated that you do not, imho you do indeed discriminate.

When only one user appears in Thai, you will have to check him out in a
same way as when a user appears in Latin script. That seems obvious to
me. With the suggestion of Anthere, you might even know that the person
is a known good on the th.wikipedia.org by looking at some graphic
indicators... and consequently believe that as he does no evil there, he
will do no evil on en.wikipedia.org. This still allows you to check him
out like you will also check out every now and again what other known
goods do.

I did mention the presentation at the Belgrade conference because it
expressed publicly by a bureaucrat of another Wikipedia project how
difficult/near impossible it is to get traction in the English language
Wikipedia. Wikipedia has its prominence because of its value system. By
presenting barriers to the entry and by not being responsive to POV
issues raised Wikipedia and what it stands for is undermined. But read
the presentation .. I could read it, it is in English :)

Again about discrimination, it was you who used this word first. In some
ways it is not helpful to use a word like this because it does prevent
people from looking at the arguments. You accuse me of not reading what
you say. David Gerard provided me with silly questions. I am not so sure
that you have been reading the arguments that I have been using all
along. This whole thing has been presented as an attack against the
"evil" en.wikipedia while it is only but not less so an attack against
an evil en.wikipedia policy.

I do not mind that much of the development is driven by big brother
en.wikipedia. It has produced one of the best environments for web
content. The support for other languages in MediaWiki is second to none
(and yes it can be improved upon). Wikipedia is extremely valuable to me
and I will defend what I perceive as its core values. We agree that the
current policy is wrong. What is needed is an acceptable alternative.
 From my perspective what Anthere proposed is the best I have seen so far.

Thanks,
    Gerard

PS At OmegaWiki you CAN have your user name in any script. You only get
edit rights when you provide Babel information.

Sam Korn schreef:
> On 12/22/06, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Sam Korn schreef:
>>
>>> I don't understand what you mean.  If you're saying that you intend
>>> that everyone who wants to occasionally HELP OUT the wiki by doing RC
>>> patrol should install all these fonts for languages they don't
>>> understand, you're living in a world completely disconnected from
>>> reality.  We don't make huge demands of our users before we allow them
>>> to fight vandalism.  Indeed, all they need to do is provide a user
>>> name and a password.
>>>
>>> What about the non-tech-savvy people?  What about those who edit from
>>> public computers?  Do you intend to discriminate against them?
>>>
>>>
>> What about them? Is it an excuse to discriminate against people who use
>> their standard user name?
>>
>
> No, of course it isn't and if you bothered to read what I've written
> you'd know I think so.  That you don't can only suggest that you can't
> be bothered to read what I write, else you'd know that I DON'T SUPPORT
> EN.WIKIPEDIA'S CURRENT POLICY, just that I understand its reasoning.
>
>
>> I think you do not appreciate that
>> discrimination is exactly what this is about. You are quite happy to
>> discriminate against people who use their Single User Login. It must be
>> all right because it makes things easy for you.
>>
>
> So you're accusing me of discrimination.  This is completely absurd
> and offensive.  Again, if you bothered to read what I've written,
> you'd see that I'm trying to find some way of reconciling the problems
> en.wikipedia has with the implementation of SUL.
>
> You appear to be fixated on damning en.wikipedia.  You seem unable to
> comprehend why en.wikipedia has instituted these policies, because,
> apparently, SUL is going to wash them all away.
>
> Please demonstrate you are trying to understand my points.
>
>
>> So if people do not install fonts they see blocks or question marks.
>> This will effectively have the effect that people will eventually want
>> to install fonts. That is not a bad thing.
>>
>
> Yes, blackmail is a wonderful way to get things done.  I applaud you.
>
>
>> As to public computers, it is
>> reasonable to ask the proprietors of these public computers to at least
>> install the fonts that come with the operating system that they run.
>>
>
> I'd agree.  But it's still not fair to these users if the owners won't.
>
> And we seem to be drifting from the issue.
>
>
>> Well no, when you have ??????:??????? and ??????:?? you can notice that there
>> is a difference. The find function of your browser will be quite able to
>> discriminate between the two.
>>
>
> And when only one appears?  Because I'm obviously going to keep all
> foreign names on my clipboard to paste into the find box every time,
> am I not?
>
>
>> Without fonts installed you will not be
>> able to make this distinction this way. If making things easy is an
>> excuse for discrimination then by all means.
>>
>
> Again, you're accusing me of discrimination, when all I'm doing is
> pointing out legitimate concerns.
>
>
>> But do not be surprised the
>> extend that people outside of the English language Wikipedia community
>> find it problematic to discuss issues where POV is an issue. At the
>> Belgrade Wikipedia meeting this was exactly one of the issues raised. I
>> am sure you can find the presentation where this was expressed.
>>
>
> Do you want to explain what relevance this has to the rest of the
> thread?  It's lost on me.
>
>
>> By being less then welcoming, by approaching people as suspect you kill
>> the goose that lays the golden eggs.
>>
>
> You really haven't heard a word I've said, have you?
>
>
>> Yes, there is vandalism to an
>> extend that we do not have elsewhere, but at the same time the resources
>> of the English language Wikipedia are equal to none.
>>
>
> This is interesting.  Would you care to tell me what these resources are?
>
> Certainly development is driven by en.wikipedia's needs to some
> extent, but these needs are often replicated in other wikis before too
> long.
>
> Now, this post has been less than entirely civil, and I apologise.
> But I now understand why David, having had a similar conversation with
> you, felt you were saying "fuck you" to him.  You dismiss others'
> concerns without a shred of logic and don't listen to them at all.
> This is rude and inconsiderate.
>
>


body:
--- George Herbert <george.herbert at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 12/22/06, Gerard Meijssen
> <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Gregory Maxwell schreef:
> > > On 12/22/06, Birgitte SB <birgitte_sb at yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> > >
> > >> The en.WP Username policy has been changed.
> > >>
>
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Username&curid=168684&diff=95920637&oldid=95900078
> > >>
> > >
> > > Unfortunatly, it was changed without any valid
> basis.
> > >
> > > It is not acceptable to remove longstanding
> policy simply because some
> > > people on a mailing list decided to speculate
> randomly and accuse
> > > enwiki of "ethnocentricism" without
> substantiation.
> > >
> > > As a result I've reverted the change and
> contributed some suggestions
> > > to the talk page.
> > >
> > > I agree that the policy should be *improved* to
> address the real
> > > concerns brought up, and to be more friendly to
> users who work across
> > > many languages.  Simply removing the section
> does not, however,
> > > address the very real issues which caused the
> creation of the policy
> > > in the first place.
> > Hoi,
> > Some people congratulated me with the outcome of
> this affair. My
> > reaction was that it did not feel like a victory
> because I feel bruised
> > by the experience. Having said this, your
> suggestion that there has been
> > no substantiation about the grievance that was put
> forward is seriously
> > wrong.
>
> There is no substantiation that the en.WP policy is
> due to ethnocentrism.
>
> Please don't generalize from "We find that your
> claim of ethnocentrism
> is unfounded" to "We find that your entire claim
> that this policy is
> bad is unfounded".
>
> > The notion that it is up to you to revert this
> change continues
> > to make this affair even more painful. Simply
> reverting this change and
> > thereby denying that many of the reasons why this
> policy was put in
> > place is seriously wrong.
>
> The only person entitled to make a unilateral policy
> change is Jimbo.
>
> The policy IS policy - it's been there, agreed to,
> been standard, been
> used to do a lot of vandal-fighting.  The policy has
> become
> controversial due to the SUL and cross-wiki and
> charges that it's
> insensitive to other language speakers.  But it is
> not resolved and
> consensus agreed to that it's wrong and needs to get
> changed right
> now.
>
> Consensus doesn't mean "We brought up this issue, it
> started an
> argument, we changed it while people still disagree
> and there's no
> clear majority."  It means "Talk about it until
> people actually agree
> on something, and THEN change it.".
>
> > I have to say I am increasingly upset by this
> affair.
>
> As am I.  What is wrong with talking it out before
> any changes are
> made, rather than insisting on acting unilaterally
> without regard to
> others' concerns?
>
> The insistence that this has to be done, by fiat,
> RIGHT NOW, is
> grossly offensive.  There is no emergency rush here.
>  There is nothing
> at all wrong with talking about it and figuring out
> what the
> least-painful overall solution is before anything
> gets changed.
>
>
> --
> -george william herbert
> george.herbert at gmail.com
>

Where are you picking up that this is being done
anyone is insisting on being done right now from this
list.  I think everyone on this list would be content
is en.WP said "We don't know exactly how we will fix
this but by the time SUL goes live we pledge that
accounts established from other wikis will no longer
be forced to change names."

I also cannot how you can think this is being done by
fiat.  The policy was changed by an en.WP admin who I
have *never* seen active outside of en.WP.  I do not
see him participating on this list or discussing the
issue with people outside of en.WP.  I could be wrong
if he uses another name here but I am not aware of him
having anything to do with people here outside of
en.WP.  Also the issue has been raised on the talk
page as far back as October, I do not see how you can
claim there is a lack of disscussion.  If you believe
the change was done inappropriately without consensus,
take that up with Radiant.  But do not accuse us here
of making this change by fiat without talking about
it!  That is out of line.

Birgitte SB

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


body:
I found some stuff on meta to read about it. Thanks.

On 12/22/06, Aphaia <aphaia at gmail.com> wrote:
> Thank you for your interest. On the other hand I don't know you at all
> - it unlikely happened, if you are working on this sphere. And we
> really need 1) who knows what translation is and 2) who are
> trustworthy. From this thread I failed to have such feeling (1, but
> thank you for your interest, anyway. .
>
> On 12/23/06, Gary Kirk <gary.kirk at gmail.com> wrote:
> > OK, substitue 'should' for 'it might be better if' if you wish. I am
> > not saying this as a random outsider, I would like to be involved with
> > at least making a start translating, so maybe I should join the
> > Translation subcommitee, if that is an option?
> >
> > On 12/22/06, Aphaia <aphaia at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > As a Translation subcommittee chair speaking however on an individual
> > > basis, I would like to point out that we are volunteer teams and you
> > > have no reason to say what we "should" do and so on. I understand
> > > there are some heay needs and expectations, and I myself expect to see
> > > some translated sooner or later and always I am very happy to get a
> > > new, well proofread translations, but again I daresay there is no
> > > translation we *should* do.
> > >
> > > If you think something should be translated until a certain time, I
> > > recommend you to propose the translation budget which will allows to
> > > get contract basis translations. I strongly states in this
> > > circumstance there is nothing we *should* do - all our current
> > > translators are unpaid volunteers who must care for their real life
> > > concerns.
> > >
> > > Thank you for your understanding,
> > >
> > > On 12/22/06, Gary Kirk <gary.kirk at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > I think what should be taken from all this is that translation
> > > > requests should be made and publicised *well* before the whatever
> > > > we're translating about happens - for stuff we know about obviously -
> > > > like the Fundraiser. 'The Fundraiser starts tomorrow' is not much
> > > > notice, is it?
> > > >
> > > > On 12/22/06, habj <sweetadelaide at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > 2006/12/22, Sam Korn <smoddy at gmail.com>:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I doubt that will make a difference, as I only used the notes that
> > > > > > were in English to help me.  Provided that a Thai dictionary, for
> > > > > > instance, has similar quality notes (and this is a good but not
> > > > > > exceptional dictionary) I see no reason why this should be
> impossible.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Yes, a knowledge of the language and culture is helpful.  But it's
> not
> > > > > > completely impossible to manage without for these simple phrases.
> > > > >
> > > > > IMHO we are splitting hairs. Of course there exists lists of words
> > > > > that are simple enough that they can be translated with only a
> > > > > dictionary! (and some context, or you can not use the explanation
> and
> > > > > notes in your dictionary). The question is how common these cases
> are,
> > > > > and I'd say that partly depends on how afraid you are of silly
> > > > > mistakes. One might realise that when put in context, the simple
> word
> > > > > has the wrong grammatical form... since the language one translates
> > > > > from does not distinguish between these two etc. etc. ad nauseam.
> > > > >
> > > > > I've translated MediaWiki messages "blindly". It often worked OK,
> some
> > > > > had to be tweaked when we discovered where they were used. That was
> no
> > > > > big deal. In PR material, such as this fundraising stuff, silly
> > > > > mistakes look much worse. I think this discussion still somehow
> hovers
> > > > > around the topic of C.O.R.E. and to me it is clear that a
> translation
> > > > > with just a dictionary would be less satisfactory, so that correct
> > > > > English in most cases is a better alternative.
> > > > >
> > > > > /habj
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > foundation-l mailing list
> > > > > foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> > > > > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Gary Kirk
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > foundation-l mailing list
> > > > foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> > > > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > KIZU Naoko
> > >   Wikiquote: http://wikiquote.org
> > >   * Nessuna poesia prima di noi *
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > foundation-l mailing list
> > > foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> > > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Gary Kirk
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
>
>
> --
> KIZU Naoko
>   Wikiquote: http://wikiquote.org
>   * Nessuna poesia prima di noi *
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

--
Gary Kirk


body:
On 12/22/06, Luiz Augusto <lugusto at gmail.com> wrote:
> Gianluigi is right to assert the issue for the Italian Wikipedia: this isn't
> a auto-block, first the users talks). But sorry Gregory, English Wikipedia
> really make auto-blocks until no first talk.

There are over 400,000 usernames on enwiki with non-ascii characters
in them. Only 3,394 usernames with non-ascii characters have been
blocked on enwiki.

Enwiki is big enough to find single examples to support virtually any claim.

Furthermore, you first example is only furthering the argument that
enwiki's policy is not ethnocentric.

Can you tell me what "language" that symbol would be a reasonable name in?

To save you the time in researching, I'll just tell you: Thats the
symbol used in logic for negation... it's not a sane name in any
language.

On enwiki the permission to use non-latin characters for names will
result in far more native English speakers using 'cute' characters for
their names and presenting an unreasonable burden on the community
then it will result in speakers of other languages being able to use
their preferred name. This is the case simply because of the relative
numbers of users from each class who edit the English
Wikipedia[http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Edits_by_project_and_country_of_origin].

An ideal solution would avoid causing trouble for speakers of
non-native languages when they edit outside their home language
projects while simultaneously avoiding an unnecessary proliferation of
locally inconvenient names.

I don't know that there is a simple solution to this problem, but I
think we need to stop over-exaggerating the issue and attributing
enwiki's action to biases or malice if we are to make any progress.


subject:
[WikiEN-l] Throwing some data onto the flamefest fire (was:
 English Wikipedia ethnocentric policy affects other communities)

body:
Gregory Maxwell wrote:
>
> It would be useful if someone would go through and fix the places
> where a loose RTL character is making everything backwards (don't
> remove the RTL mark, just insert a matching LTR mark).  I have no idea
> how people edit mixed directional text with any ease, and I can't seem
> to find help on any of our metapages.

Sticking

   FORM#editform TEXTAREA#wpTextbox1 { unicode-bidi: bidi-override; }

in your user monobook.css file can help.

--
Ilmari Karonen


from_name: James Hare

body:
While I don't think blocking accounts because of not using the character set
that wiki's language is written in is a good idea, I agree that when a
person signs up for a wiki with foreign characters, it's hard to welcome
them into a community when you can't make sense of their name.

On 12/22/06, Walter van Kalken <walter at vankalken.net> wrote:
>
> After Gregory's action I want to ask all wiki's who use non-latin
> languages as their standard to start blocking all latin character user
> accounts and demand they use accountnames in your script, especially
> those of en.wikipedians actively supporting this en: policy.
>
> Maybe this way they will understand on en: that there action is
> extremely biased and very very bad as they seem to insist to keep
> blocking good users like admins from other wiki's simply because people
> want to use their REAL NAME.
>
> Start with Gregory's account btw.
>
> Waerth
>
> >Gregory Maxwell schreef:
> >
> >
> >>On 12/22/06, Birgitte SB <birgitte_sb at yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>The en.WP Username policy has been changed.
> >>>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Username&curid=168684&diff=95920637&oldid=95900078
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>Unfortunatly, it was changed without any valid basis.
> >>
> >>It is not acceptable to remove longstanding policy simply because some
> >>people on a mailing list decided to speculate randomly and accuse
> >>enwiki of "ethnocentricism" without substantiation.
> >>
> >>As a result I've reverted the change and contributed some suggestions
> >>to the talk page.
> >>
> >>I agree that the policy should be *improved* to address the real
> >>concerns brought up, and to be more friendly to users who work across
> >>many languages.  Simply removing the section does not, however,
> >>address the very real issues which caused the creation of the policy
> >>in the first place.
> >>
> >>
> >Hoi,
> >Some people congratulated me with the outcome of this affair. My
> >reaction was that it did not feel like a victory because I feel bruised
> >by the experience. Having said this, your suggestion that there has been
> >no substantiation about the grievance that was put forward is seriously
> >wrong. The notion that it is up to you to revert this change continues
> >to make this affair even more painful. Simply reverting this change and
> >thereby denying that many of the reasons why this policy was put in
> >place is seriously wrong.
> >
> >I have to say I am increasingly upset by this affair.
> >
> >Thanks,
> >     GerardM
> >_______________________________________________
> >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
>


body:
--- Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 12/22/06, Walter van Kalken
> <walter at vankalken.net> wrote:
> [snip]
> > Maybe this way they will understand on en: that
> there action is
> > extremely biased and very very bad as they seem to
> insist to keep
> > blocking good users like admins from other wiki's
> simply because people
> > want to use their REAL NAME.
>
> Ah, perhaps you could help us and point out all the
> real names which
> enwiki has blocked.
> The complete list of blocked names with non-ascii
> characters is
> available at
>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Gmaxwell/nonalphausers/blocked
>
> I am strongly opposed to blocking people who are
> using their real
> name, and I've argued this in multiple places on the
> wiki.. But as far
> as I can tell such block are not a frequent
> occurrence compared to the
> number of blocks of 'cute' or vandal names.
>
> Instead of blocking users which names which are
> difficult for people
> people who speak other languages, I think we should
> accommodate them
> and improve our software to help us deal with them.
> ... but that we
> should still block names which are difficult to
> recognize and
> difficult to type for all people... and continue to
> discourage locally
> difficult names until the software has been
> improved.
> ____________________________

Here are 10 people who were blocked that I can tell
from there contributions are likely using a native
font and not just being cute.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/%D7%93%D7%A0%D7%99%D7%90%D7%9C_%D7%91%D7%9B%D7%9E%D7%98

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/%D8%A1%D9%84%DB%8C

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/%D7%A8%D7%A0%D7%93%D7%95%D7%9D

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/%D0%A1%D0%B2%D0%B5%D1%82%D0%BE%D0%BD%D0%BE%D1%81%D0%B5%D1%86

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/%C4%8Cerven%C3%BD_kohoutek

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/%D9%88%D9%82%D8%A7%D8%B5

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/%E3%81%93%E3%81%84%E3%81%A4%E3%81%85

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/%E3%81%A8%E3%82%93%E3%81%A1%E3%82%83%E3%82%93

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/%E3%81%B5%E3%81%86%E3%81%91

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/%E3%82%8F%E3%81%8C%E3%81%BE%E3%81%BE%E5%B0%8F%E7%9A%87%E5%B8%9D

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/%E3%82%A6%E3%83%83%E3%81%A7%E3%82%84%E3%82%93%E3%81%99%E9%AB%98%E6%A9%8B

Here are 10 people blocked on sight before they were
able to make a contribution.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/%CE%93%CF%81%CF%8D%CE%BB%CE%BB%CE%BF%CF%82

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/%D7%9E%D7%A9%D7%94_%D7%9B%D7%94%D7%9F

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/%D8%AC%DA%AF%D9%88%D8%A7%D8%B1

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/%D8%AD%D8%B4%D9%84%D8%A7%D8%B4%D8%AD%D8%B9%D9%82

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/%D8%B3%D8%A7%D8%B1%D9%87

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/%D8%B3%D9%8A%D9%81_%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A5%D8%B3%D9%84%D8%A7%D9%85

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/%D8%B9%D8%A8%D8%A7%D8%B3

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/%D9%87%D9%85%D8%B3_%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D8%B4%D8%A7%D8%B9%D8%B1

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/%E0%B0%B5%E0%B0%B8%E0%B1%81

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/%E1%93%82%E1%93%AA%E1%93%9A%E1%93%B1%E1%91%A6%E1%91%8E%E1%90%B9

I hope this will stop people from claiming that
accusations of blocks are unsubstantiated.  Obvouisly
the blocks have been going on for some time.  Both
blocks of editors who have a history of good edits and
shoot on-sight blocks.  If anyone still believes that
claims of blocks of non-latin editors are largely
false, please tell me exactly what you need to see to
consider my claims substantiated.  I will concede that
the blocks are not a regular en.WP process if you can
show me 20 non-latin usernames that have not been
blocked and have 3 edits between Sept and Nov.  If
there are such non-latin editors active this means it
is just a few en.WP admins making these blocks and not
the status quo of en.WP.

Birgitte SB
Birgitte SB

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