body:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hi,

Le Saturday 06 December 2003 00:33, Anthere a ?crit :
> >
> > For the French WP, I would say like Andre. Up to now, most of the
> > problems have been solved by discussion and consensus. In the case of the
> > recently banned user, it is after that any other solution was tried that
> > a unanimous vote decided to ban him.
> >
> > Yann
>
> I waited for a while to see what french would say about this. And
> indeed, I am not surprised by your comment Yann.
>
> There is somehow an arbitration commitee. We saw it on Papotages issue.
> The arbitration commitee involved basically any user that have been
> there for a couple of weeks. Every one was allowed to speak up on
> Papotages banning issue. Being a sysop or not made *no* difference
> whatsoever.
> I suppose though, that if recent users have declared themselves against
> the banning, their opinion would have been discarded. Their opinion was
> receivable because they agreed with the general opinion.

I don't think so. Where did you find this Anthere ?

> I hardly dare to say that the banning when it was pronounced, was *not*
> unanimous as you claim it was. You are arranging the truth Yann. It was
> perhaps very widely consensual; but on the 11th of november, if you
> claim it was unanimous, you are just lying. That our opinion was said
> non acceptable is one thing, however, I would appreciate that you
> recognised minorities opinions existed.
>
> Of course, we will agree that *now* there is unanimity. But it was not
> such on the banning day.

That is obviously false. Look at the archives:
http://fr.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Wikip%E9dia:Prise_de_d%E9cision%
2C_bannir_Papotages&diff=156213&oldid=156212

> The second is about mediation. As you say, we tried. Not all of us, not
> in an organised way, but we tried; and failed.

For to be a mediation, there is necessary an agreement on the principle of
mediation. I think that Papotages never agreed on anything like this.
I am not even sure he agreed to have *sincere* discussions.

I see that you have disagreements with a lot of people, up to the point to
scare them away. :( cf. [[User:C?r?ales Killer]] below.

"D?cid?ment, Anthere s'est jur?e de m'?gratigner d?s qu'elle le peut. Je
baisse les bras et j'arr?te tout. Quelles sont tes derni?res contributions
constructives, Anthere ? A part surveiller ce que fait untel ou untel, et
balancer des r?flexions ? tout va qui finissent par d?courager, que fais-tu
de vraiment constructif ? Moi, c'est bon, j'ai compris, j'abandonne. Tu es
plus gentille et prudente avec PP qu'avec quelqu'un qui, comme moi, essaie
d'apporter une max de choses ? Wikip?dia. Si ma pr?sence te g?ne ? ce point
l?, c'est bon, j'ai compris, je me casse." C?r?ales Killer

Yann

- --
http://www.non-violence.org/ | Site collaboratif sur la non-violence
http://www.forget-me.net/ | Alternatives sur le Net
http://fr.wikipedia.org/ | Encyclop?die libre
http://www.forget-me.net/pro/ | Formations et services Linux
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/0bT3m4KYjQo0y9oRAhhvAKCEVDGHPev9DBZ72x39HiVU0WAfFACdGf5q
Wxykxt1NqJ4FSLSH/gqY5Aw=
=sx3Y
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


list: wikipedia-l

source: pipermail-mbox

from_name: Anthere

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Arbitration/mediation on en

body:
Yann Forget a ?crit:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

>>I suppose though, that if recent users have declared themselves against
>>the banning, their opinion would have been discarded. Their opinion was
>>receivable because they agreed with the general opinion.
>
>
> I don't think so. Where did you find this Anthere ?

I did not find this Yann. I wrote it was an opinion based on recent
events (I wrote "I suppose"). I did not say this was entirely abnormal
either. It is quite understandable that there is suspicion that new
commers are just trolls, and voting against the flood to make things
more complicated.
For example, some people thought Mulot a newbie, and when she wrote she
opposed Traroth as an admin, she was answered she had less than 200
edits, hence was not allowed to speak up. I guess no one would have
complained if she had said she was favorable to Traroth.

http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip%C3%A9dia%3AAdministrateurs

In reality, Mulot has been on wikipedia more than a year ago, for a
while. She often write anonymously, but given the amount of stuff she
wrote on religion, she sure won the right to give her opinion.

Ihmo.

This is a fact. So, all I say is that perhaps we should better define
for next time, who precisely, has the right to speak up for a ban
decision (lentgh of presence, number of edits, whatever).

>>Of course, we will agree that *now* there is unanimity. But it was not
>>such on the banning day.
>
>
> That is obviously false. Look at the archives:
> http://fr.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Wikip%E9dia:Prise_de_d%E9cision%
> 2C_bannir_Papotages&diff=156213&oldid=156212

That link is not working
I suggest this one
http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip%E9dia%3APrise_de_d%E9cision%2C_bannir_Papotages
Under the "against" line, there are two names written.
In claiming I am saying something false, you are being false, and you
are being very unnice to Ryo and I.
There was very very large support, but not unanimity

>>The second is about mediation. As you say, we tried. Not all of us, not
>>in an organised way, but we tried; and failed.
>
>
> For to be a mediation, there is necessary an agreement on the principle of
> mediation. I think that Papotages never agreed on anything like this.
> I am not even sure he agreed to have *sincere* discussions.
>
> I see that you have disagreements with a lot of people, up to the point to
> scare them away. :( cf. [[User:C?r?ales Killer]] below.

I see not what is the relationship with the current issue at hand.

We are talking of mediation Yann, not about my relationships with CK,
which are ok as far as I know

For a scared away contributor, CK is quite active
http://fr.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Special:Contributions&target=C%E9r%E9ales_Killer

:-)

I only asked that CK candidacy to be a sysop be delayed for a month.

But I was the first one to *ever* dare to say I disaproved of someone
named sysop. I guess it is a bit hard on the one who is disapproved, so
I understand this reaction of him.

You did not answer to the proposition about mediation Yann. What do you
think of it ? What was your experience in trying to mediate with
Papotages ? My own experience was that instead of talking of the issue
at hand (Papotages), some said I was feeding the troll, and subsequently
attacked me on my other activities, such as saying to someone I
disagreed for him to be a sysop. This has hardly any relationship.

So how do you think we can help a difficult user ?
Do we decide to get rid of a problematic user as soon as possible to
ensure the cohesion of the group, or do we try to make them join us ?


body:
J'aimerais bien que tu te concentres sur le sujet en cours Yann

Puisque tu navigues dans le domaine de la non violence, tu dois pouvoir
avoir des id?es sur ce que nous pourrions faire pour mettre en place qlq
chose de d?cent en mati?re de m?diation.
Si a chaque fois que l on parle de mediation, la r?ponse est
* "oui mais papotages est blablabla" (il n y a pas que papotages dans le
vie)
* "oui mais anthere a ?t? pas gentille avec ck" (ce qui est un tout
autre sujet)

on y arrivera jamais.

La non violence, ce n est pas cacher que des problemes existent, c est
reconnaitre leur existence, et essayer de trouver des solutions. Alors,
aide moi a essayer de trouver des solutions plutot.


body:
Btw Yann,

All I commented yesterday to CK, was npov respect Yann.

There was a very honest and friendly discussion between Al, Fvdp and I
yesterday evening on the matter.
There is no way Wikipedia is gonna recommand that people should use the
word "Aubette" rather than "Abribus".
It may be the Acad?mie Fran?aise recommandation, but it is not Wikip?dia
role to tell people which words to use.

It is not Wikipedia to tell people they should say
aubette rather than abribus
ruban adh?sif, rather than scotch either.
or b?tonnet ouat? rather than cotton tige
or about a dozen others

People do use "abribus" as a word. Not "aubette". It is not reasonable
that Wikipedia tell them to change their habits. It is not our goal. We
should not take position ourselves, but rather attribute what is written
on the pages.
As such, suggesting a change such as "the Academie fran?aise suggests
than the word aubette be prefered to abribus" is fine. But the very
directive; "do prefer aubette to abribus" is not npov. It is telling
people how to talk, with words that are not common usage.

I understand not his reaction to Fvdp, Al and I suggestion, especially
when he considers me modifying his pages to respect npov is an attack
that deserves him leaving Wikipedia.

If CK cannot tolerate such modifications, and an easygoing discussion on
his talk page on the topic, I fear there is a problem with him indeed.
If he cannot tolerate that we change his articles, there is a problem
indeed.

So, I have a suggestion to you : would you mediate between the two of us ?


list: wikitech-l

from_name: Brion Vibber

subject: [Wikitech-l] Opteronically good!

body:
Alright, it's been a few days and I've decided to go ahead and name the
machine 'geoffrin' for Marie Th?r?se Rodet Geoffrin, an 18th century
Parisian hostess important in the literary scene of the Encyclopedists,
so I could stop calling it "the new machine" all the time.

'geoffrin' has advantages over other suggested names in that no one has
to argue over whether 'de' has to be included and it can't be
interpreted by Finns as referring to a lisping drunken pedophile. ;)
Mme Geoffrin is said to have "acted as mother and mentor to her
guests", and the main database server is indeed the protecting mother
to our data!

Once DNS changes go through it should be available as
geoffrin.wikimedia.org. Jason, could you update wikipedia.org to also
include an alias in that domain? (Also, would it be possible to add
mormo.org as a backup MX record for wikipedia.org? Right now if pliny
goes down mailing list messages will only go to the backup server if
they're sent using wikiMedia.org addresses.)

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20031206/f4c5c1d5/attachment.pgp>


subject: [Wikitech-l] Wikipedia Statistics

body:
I've got the wikipedia statistics job successfully running on the new
server ("geoffrin") now. This has the distinct advantage that the job
can be run right after the backup dump instead of waiting many hours
for my little aDSL line to download everything to run it on my home
box. It takes about 2 hours 20 minutes to run, though a fair amount of
this may be from having to read the dump compressed.

Erik, would you mind if I add the stats scripts as a module in our CVS
repository, along with my scripts that run your scripts?

Latest update: http://www.wikipedia.org/wikistats/

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20031206/ee380c6f/attachment.pgp>


list: wikien-l

from_name: Matthew Woodcraft

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: contributions of User:Mr-Natural-Health

body:
Ed Poor wrote:

>Yes, NH is strident and condescending, but maybe we can teach him to
>become nice and humble. It only took Larry and Mav three or five months
>to chill me out, when I first stumbled upon this wikiwiki, and look at
>where I am today! ;-)

Er... Ed, you were active on this Wiki months before Maveric arrived. By
that time you were already back from your first self-imposed 'indefinite
leave' for persistently pushing your own point of view, weren't you?

-M-


from_name: Daniel Mayer

subject: [Wikitech-l] Wikipedia Statistics

body:
Coolness.

I do see a minor bug: The link under 'MediaWiki' is to
http://www.wikimedia.org/ while it should either be to
http://wikipedia.sourceforge.net/ or better yet http://mediawiki.org/.

--mav


from_name: wiki at tictric.net

subject: [Wikitech-l] math make failure

body:
ocaml 3.0.14
TeTex 1.0.2+20011202-2
ImageMagick 5.4.4.5-1woody1
gs 6.53.3
media-wiki latest from cvs

When I do a make in ~/math I tells me the following.
What is it missing?

ocamlopt -c util.ml
ocamlc -c render_info.mli
ocamlc -c tex.mli
ocamlyacc parser.mly
ocamlc -c parser.mli
ocamlopt -c parser.ml
ocamlc -c html.mli
ocamlopt -c html.ml
ocamlc -c mathml.mli
ocamlopt -c mathml.ml
ocamlc -c texutil.mli
ocamlopt -c texutil.ml
ocamlopt -c render.ml
ocamllex lexer.mll
187 states, 3221 transitions, table size 14006 bytes
ocamlopt -c lexer.ml
ocamlopt -c texvc.ml
File "texvc.ml", line 8, characters 14-27:
Unbound value Digest.to_hex
make: *** [texvc.cmx] Fehler 2
rm parser.ml lexer.ml

--
manfred


from_name: Tomasz Wegrzanowski

subject: [Wikitech-l] math make failure

body:
On Sat, Dec 06, 2003 at 04:56:18PM +0100, wiki at tictric.net wrote:
> ocaml 3.0.14
> TeTex 1.0.2+20011202-2
> ImageMagick 5.4.4.5-1woody1
> gs 6.53.3
> media-wiki latest from cvs
>
> When I do a make in ~/math I tells me the following.
> What is it missing?
>
> ocamlopt -c util.ml
> ocamlc -c render_info.mli
> ocamlc -c tex.mli
> ocamlyacc parser.mly
> ocamlc -c parser.mli
> ocamlopt -c parser.ml
> ocamlc -c html.mli
> ocamlopt -c html.ml
> ocamlc -c mathml.mli
> ocamlopt -c mathml.ml
> ocamlc -c texutil.mli
> ocamlopt -c texutil.ml
> ocamlopt -c render.ml
> ocamllex lexer.mll
> 187 states, 3221 transitions, table size 14006 bytes
> ocamlopt -c lexer.ml
> ocamlopt -c texvc.ml
> File "texvc.ml", line 8, characters 14-27:
> Unbound value Digest.to_hex
> make: *** [texvc.cmx] Fehler 2
> rm parser.ml lexer.ml

digest.cm* are in default Ocaml package, at least in Debian.


subject: [Wikitech-l] Errors in conversion?

body:
On Dec 3, 2003, at 04:29, Brion Vibber wrote:
> On Dec 3, 2003, at 04:07, Brion Vibber wrote:
>> I'm running a quick script to take out the bad brokenlinks entries
>> (and clear linkscc). Obviously some problems in rebuildlinks
>> remain...
>
> 'remove-brokenlinks.php' in maintenance subdirectory in unstable cvs.
>
> Output (I forgot to add headers saying which database is which, but
> you can pretty much tell):
> http://download.wikipedia.org/archives/brokenlinks.out.gz
>
> Altogether 13528 bad brokenlinks items turned up. The script didn't
> check which were or weren't also in the links table...

I've gone over rebuildlinks.inc and found what I think is the problem.
It goes through each page looking for links, then for each checks all
the links it hasn't seen before to see if the pages exist. In this bit
was a bug where it discarded the namespace data on the stuff returned
from the database; this could both put incorrect l_to target IDs into
the link tables and skip legitimate links, leaving them to get stuffed
into the brokenlinks table.

I've fixed this in CVS to take the namespace into account. If people
(in particular E23) could look it over and confirm it looks correct, we
can rebuild the live tables again.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20031206/30314deb/attachment.pgp>


subject: [Wikitech-l] Errors in conversion?

body:
On Dec 6, 2003, at 18:03, Brion Vibber wrote:
> I've fixed this in CVS to take the namespace into account. If people
> (in particular E23) could look it over and confirm it looks correct,
> we can rebuild the live tables again.

I ran it on the test wiki. I can't confirm that _everything_ is
correct, but a run of remove-brokenlinks.php after running the old
rebuild script found 32 incorrect brokenlinks, while another run after
newly rebuilding the tables found none. Progress!

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20031206/d56bbf64/attachment.pgp>


from_name: Nick Reinking

subject: [Wikitech-l] Opteronically good!

body:
On Sat, Dec 06, 2003 at 01:59:25PM -0800, Brion Vibber wrote:
> Alright, it's been a few days and I've decided to go ahead and name the
> machine 'geoffrin' for Marie Th?r?se Rodet Geoffrin, an 18th century
> Parisian hostess important in the literary scene of the Encyclopedists,
> so I could stop calling it "the new machine" all the time.
>
> 'geoffrin' has advantages over other suggested names in that no one has
> to argue over whether 'de' has to be included and it can't be
> interpreted by Finns as referring to a lisping drunken pedophile. ;)
> Mme Geoffrin is said to have "acted as mother and mentor to her
> guests", and the main database server is indeed the protecting mother
> to our data!
>
> Once DNS changes go through it should be available as
> geoffrin.wikimedia.org. Jason, could you update wikipedia.org to also
> include an alias in that domain? (Also, would it be possible to add
> mormo.org as a backup MX record for wikipedia.org? Right now if pliny
> goes down mailing list messages will only go to the backup server if
> they're sent using wikiMedia.org addresses.)

Perhaps it could be possible to include a bit of data in the TXT DNS
record for the various people who have trouble remembering if the
machine is a database server or a web server?

--
Nick Reinking -- eschewing obfuscation since 1981 -- Minneapolis, MN


subject: [WikiEN-l] Changing 'Bug reports' to 'Contact us' in the sidebar

body:
There seems to be unanimous agreement to do this, but I'm really hesitant to
make a change that will affect 360,000 pages.

I already did this on meta and it took nearly a minute for the two MediaWiki
pages to update and the whole wiki seemed to crawl when I did that. Last
thing I want to do is slow down en.wikipedia for a half hour or more!

http://en2.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Contact_us

http://en2.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Bug_reports

http://en2.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:MediaWiki_namespace_text

So am I just being too paranoid or would the wiki really slow down like I
think it might?

-- mav


subject: [Wikitech-l] math make failure

body:
> On Sat, Dec 06, 2003 at 04:56:18PM +0100, wiki at tictric.net wrote:
>> ocaml 3.0.14
>> TeTex 1.0.2+20011202-2
>> ImageMagick 5.4.4.5-1woody1
>> gs 6.53.3
>> media-wiki latest from cvs
>>
>> When I do a make in ~/math I tells me the following.
>> What is it missing?
>>
>> File "texvc.ml", line 8, characters 14-27:
>> Unbound value Digest.to_hex
>> make: *** [texvc.cmx] Fehler 2
>> rm parser.ml lexer.ml
>
> digest.cm* are in default Ocaml package, at least in Debian.

ocaml: /usr/lib/ocaml/digest.cmi
ocaml: /usr/lib/ocaml/digest.cmx

are installed and available actually.
Do I need to tell it where it can be found?

--


from_name: Rick

subject: [WikiEN-l] Question

body:
Ariddia is the creation of this user on NationStates, which is a GAME.  The creations at NationStates are not to be considered as even on the same level as the crackpot "nations" that crop up from time to time on [[List of microstates]].  *I* have a country on NationStates, and if you look at any of the informatoin on that page, you can see that NOBODY on NationStates take their creations seriously.  There are THOUSANDS of fake "nations" on NationStates.  If everybody there wanted to come to Wikipedia to add their fake country to it, we would be swamped (I know, "slipper slope argument").  But Ariddia is not a real place, it is not registered at a real place, it is not intended to be a real place, it is nothing but a place created to play the game.

RickK

aridd <aridd at wanadoo.fr> wrote:
Greetings.

I have a question, and I hope this is the right place to ask it... I saw that Wikipedia has a page listing micronations and with links to other pages containing information on each of those micronations. I contributed a page with a micronation. It was deleted, and I received an IP ban:

Your user name or IP address has been blocked by RickK. The reason given is this:
repeated creaton [sic] of nonsense articles
You may contact RickK or one of the other administrators to discuss the block.
Note that you may not use the "email this user" feature unless you have a valid email address registered in your user preferences.
Your IP address is . Please include this address in any queries you make.

My entry was a serious one, and I only made one (NOT repeated entries). I understand that Wikipedia might feel my contribution was not a useful one, and I will not repeat it. Obviously, not everything can be accepted. However, I would have appreciated that explanation being given me, rather than the above offensive message.

I apologise for the invconveniance, and also if this was not the right place to send this message.

Kind regards,
Adrian

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20031206/726c4ba9/attachment.htm


subject: [Wikitech-l] New MediaWiki stable release coming soon

body:
Now that the dev branch is pretty well broken in on Wikipedia, it's my
intention to branch and release a new 'stable' version in the next day.

If there are any real show-stopper bugs remaining, please say something!

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20031207/e25000a9/attachment.pgp>


from_name: aridd

subject: [WikiEN-l] Question

body:
Greetings.

I have a question, and I hope this is the right place to ask it... I saw that Wikipedia has a page listing micronations and with links to other pages containing information on each of those micronations. I contributed a page with a micronation. It was deleted, and I received an IP ban:

Your user name or IP address has been blocked by RickK. The reason given is this:
repeated creaton [sic] of nonsense articles
You may contact RickK or one of the other administrators to discuss the block.
Note that you may not use the "email this user" feature unless you have a valid email address registered in your user preferences.
Your IP address is . Please include this address in any queries you make.

My entry was a serious one, and I only made one (NOT repeated entries). I understand that Wikipedia might feel my contribution was not a useful one, and I will not repeat it. Obviously, not everything can be accepted. However, I would have appreciated that explanation being given me, rather than the above offensive message.

I apologise for the invconveniance, and also if this was not the right place to send this message.

Kind regards,
Adrian


from_name: Angela

subject: [WikiEN-l] Question

body:
Adrian, I have unblocked your IP. Without wanting to
judge the merit of the article, I do feel it was
unfair that you were blocked from editing without
warning.

The repetition that Rick alludes to in his reason for
blocking you would seem to be related to the fact that
you twice created the Ariddia article, and three times
added this nation to the [[List of micronations]]
page, but perhaps you were unaware you were making
these changes if you were reverted so quickly.

I have undeleted the article and listed it for
deletion so it can be judged by people other than
Rick. If there is a rough consensus in five days time
that this nation is not encyclopaedic, then it will be
re-deleted, but this does at least give you the
opportunity to defend it. See
http://en2.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion.

Regards,

Angela.

________________________________________________________________________
BT Yahoo! Broadband - Save ?80 when you order online today. Hurry! Offer ends 21st December 2003. The way the internet was meant to be. http://uk.rd.yahoo.com/evt=21064/*http://btyahoo.yahoo.co.uk


from_name: Andrew Alder

subject: Search engine. Was: [Wikitech-l] Fast

body:
G'day Brion and the Group

At 04:42 PM 4/12/03 -0800, Brion Vibber wrote:

>On Dec 4, 2003, at 16:36, Andrew Alder wrote:
>>Again, agree. I've now been through this both on the list and on the
>>Pump. My comments relate to *readers*, not *contributors*.
>>
>>Contributors certainly need fully realtime tools, which means in-house. I
>>said that before.
>
>So why are we talking about this? Google isn't going to vanish from the
>web because we get the internal search back online.

We can drop it anytime you like.

I don't understand that last quip. I don't think anyone proposed anything
like that.

In summary, questions that have been raised (with any useful answers I
think are agreed) were:

* Has there been previous discussion or thought as to whether the in-house
search (hence IHS) offers any advantages over Google?
A: No.

* Are there any advantages to IHS?
A: For contributors, Yes.
A: For readers, No.

* Are there any disadvantages to IHS?
A: Yes.

*  Is it a case of one or the other?
A: Not necessarily, there may be other options that offer the advantages of
both.

It's just an attempt at some lateral thinking.

The discussion would be better on the Wiki than on the email list IMO, but
apart from myself nobody was interested in talking about it on the Village
Pump (where someone else raised it), while here we've had a discussion
which I at least find quite a clutter in the mailbox. On the Wiki I can
easily scroll up and down the discussion in a single screen, which I like,
and refactor useful content with a few clicks. It's many times more time
and trouble to do this on an email list. My personal productivity drops to
somewhere between one-third and one-tenth I estimate, depending on the
subject, which is annoying.

I guess you're finding the same problem.

I guess also that the easiest thing would be just to go back to what we had
before performance problems led to disabling the internal search. I can't
even remember what that was, so I'll have no complaints either way.

Anyway, that's what I think we've been talking about, and I think the "why"
is obvious: To get the best possible Wikipedia.

Andrew A
aka user:andrewa

****
andrewa @ alder . ws
http://www.zeta.org.au/~andrewa
Phone 9441 4476
Mobile 04 2525 4476
****

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20031207/ac7ee8ef/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.532 / Virus Database: 326 - Release Date: 27/10/03


subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: Opteronically good!

body:
Brion Vibber a ?crit:
> Alright, it's been a few days and I've decided to go ahead and name the
> machine 'geoffrin' for Marie Th?r?se Rodet Geoffrin, an 18th century
> Parisian hostess important in the literary scene of the Encyclopedists,
> so I could stop calling it "the new machine" all the time.
>
> 'geoffrin' has advantages over other suggested names in that no one has
> to argue over whether 'de' has to be included and it can't be
> interpreted by Finns as referring to a lisping drunken pedophile. ;) Mme
> Geoffrin is said to have "acted as mother and mentor to her guests", and
> the main database server is indeed the protecting mother to our data!

Did I already mention that I loved you Brion ?

Thanks a lot :-)

Anth?re


from_name: Viajero

subject: [WikiEN-l] contributions of User:Mr-Natural-Health

body:
Hi all,

I am afraid I spoke to soon. Mr Natural-Health was initially cowered by
RK's agressive edits and hostile comments. His first response was several
anonymous personal attacks against RK on the Talk pages. Then he hit upon
the idea of listing him (also anonymously) on VfA to be de-sysoped -- only
to be told that RK wasn't a sysop to begin with. Upon learning this, he
triumphantly posted this on [[Talk:Criticisms of modern medicine]] (again
anonymously, I don't know if this is accidental or intentional):

> RK had me going believing that he was an Admin.

> All this could have been avoided if YOU guys would clearly
> point who is an Admin, here. It is extremely confusing.

> Now, that I know that RK is a nobody just like moi, I will
> continue to improve Wikipedia with selective editing. Alternative
> medicine clearly has been improved with my editing.

> Yes, I will hang in here for the long haul, revising articles
> as I see fit every couple of hours, days, weeks, months, years,
> decades.--12.77.35.139 22:57, 6 Dec 2003 (UTC)

He then proceeded to get into an edit war over one of his articles,
[[Heroic medicine]]. Upon it being protected, he tried to skirt the
injunction by creating a new article, [[Age of heroic medicine]], which
the new sysop Pakaran later protected as well. In the meantime, he 's got
a few more titles going:

[[Natural therapy]]
[[Natural philosophy]]

and added his loopy New Age stuff to:

[[Biopsychosocial model]]
[[Eastern]]
[[Interventionism]]

I would like to emphasize that it isn't his ideas which are the problem --
WP needs to improves its coverage in this area -- so much as his erratic,
willful behaviour. Not only does he insist on blanking his personal Talk
page, but he deletes comments from the article Talk pages. Just now I
restored a series of deletions (of his own messages) he made to
[[Talk:Criticisms of modern medicine]].

One final comment:

On 12/05/03  at 02:51 PM, Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> said:

> Ah-ha!  The proletarian mob raises the flag of victory from the yardarm!

> That was too close for comfort.  There was a serious risk that if Ed
> had gotten to him first he might have become a useful contributor. :-(

>From this and several other comments you've made, I gather you are
sympathetic to Mr NH's point of view. Very good, but I don't see you
getting involved in editing these articles to defend them from dogmatism.
By the look of your contributions page, it appears you devote more time to
this mailing list than to the encyclopedia itself. Fine, not everyone has
the same number of hours to devote to WP. But the longer I spend on
Wikipedia, the less respect I have for people who simply chant NPOV
mantras from the sidelines and, correspondingly, the more my respect grows
for people who roll up their sleeves and get their hands dirty in the
difficult, at times deeply frustrating task of editing articles on
polemical subjects with (other) strong-willed contributors. I have been
hard at times on Ed Poor here -- I've disagreed with his methods -- but I
freely acknowledge that he puts more energy into trying to resolve
problems in contentious articles than anyone else in this list. And in the
final tally, that's what counts.

V.


from_name: Fred Bauder

subject: [WikiEN-l] rampant scientism

body:
You are absolutely correct. Not only is the scientism view POV it is
American-centered. You can get a degree in natural medicine at the
University of Hiedelburg and go into medical practice in Germany.

This has gone on long enough.

Fred

> From: Viajero <viajero at quilombo.nl>
> Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Date: Sun, 07 Dec 2003 19:19:23 +0100
> To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Subject: [WikiEN-l] rampant scientism
>
> Hi all,
>
> I am the last person who want to see Wikipedia turned into a repository
> for flaky, New Age esotericisms, but at the same time the scientism which
> has manifested itself in the past few days in response to Mr Natural
> Health's questionable contributions is also profoundly disturbing and
> likewise a very insidious form of non-neutrality.
>
> Take for example this comment by user Snoyes on the [[Alternative
> medicine]] talk page:
>
>> The thing is that once numerous randomized controlled trials and
> double-blind experiments have shown a treatment to be effective, it is  by
> definition not an alternative medicine anymore. It is therefore quite
> simply a case of the rigour of science vs. unsubstantiated claims by
> wonder-healers. -- snoyes
>
> Obviously, it has a certain logic to it, but such an attitude is *so*
> dualistic and dogmatic.
>
> Or take this edit summary from the page history of the same article by
> user Robert Merkel:
>
>> (cur) (last) . . 01:30, 7 Dec 2003 . . Robert Merkel (put a big fat
> "doctors think this stuff is bogus" sentence near the top of the article,
> where it belongs, rather than burying it at the bottom)
>
> This individual hasn't a shred of impartiality regarding the subject.
>
> I am the only one disturbed by this?
>
> Perhaps it is because I live in Northern Europe, where these issues are
> less polarized, but for me issue is anything but black and white.
> Alternative medicine is well-established here.  My health insurance pays
> for various forms of it (some but not all).  My GP is an MD with a
> conventional medical training, but anthroposophic orientation (Rudolf
> Steiner stuff).  That means he prescribes both mainstream medicines as
> well as alternative therapies as he sees fit.
>
> I realize that double-blind trials are the gold standard in Western
> science, and I don't want to argue with that; however, there vast realms
> of human knowledge which have not yet been verified by these means, and to
> dismiss such empirical knowledge out of hand is both foolish and not our
> job.  For example, I have travelled extensively in South American and one
> sees that vast amount of "alternative medicine" practiced there (I put it
> in quotes because for people there it is not "alternative").  I doubt that
> chewing coca leaves has ever been "proven" effective by Western scientific
> protocols for altitude sickness but millions of people in the Sierra
> believe it does.  I was in a small village in the Altiplano once where the
> women cultivated a small, bitter green potato for its birth control
> properties.  Again, something which I doubt has ever been "proven", but at
> the same time something one can't simply dismiss as quaint folklore.
>
> Can we get away from looking at healing as two opposing factions and see
> it rather as a broad spectrum of techniques, ranging from nuclear medicine
> to voodoo, of which some is "scientific", some is pragmatic, and all which
> have pros and cons?
>
> In any case, at the moment the [[Alternative medicine]] article is una
> gran porquer?a.
>
> V.
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l


from_name: Delirium

body:
Brian Corr wrote:

> MNH is getting pretty out of hand and many people (myself included)
> think some sort of ban is in order -- please see the section on him at
> the former Problem Users page --
> <http://en2.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Conflicts_between_users#Mr-Natural-Health>
>

Could perhaps someone familiar with the dispute try to talk reason into
him?  It's clear from my brief perusal that some of his actions lately
have been not particularly polite, but he was also involved in an
edit-war with RK, and RK is himself known for not being particularly
polite or willing to work with others, so that could well have provoked
the hostile response from MNH.

-Mark


from_name: Evan Prodromou

subject: [Wikitech-l] Server-side File Caching Using a 404 Handler

in_reply_to:
<873cc0saui.fsf@unicorn.bad-people-of-the-future.san-francisco.ca.us>
	(Evan Prodromou's message of "Thu, 04 Dec 2003 13:21:09 -0500")

body:
So, I did actually put this on meta:

    http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/404_handler_caching

It's also an RFE on SourceForge:

    http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=855854&group_id=34373&atid=411195

~ESP

--
Evan Prodromou <evan at wikitravel.org>
Wikitravel - http://www.wikitravel.org/
The free, complete, up-to-date and reliable world-wide travel guide


from_name: Sean Barrett

body:
Brian Corr wrote:
> MNH is getting pretty out of hand and many people (myself included)
> think some sort of ban is in order -- please see the section on him at
> the former Problem Users page --
> <http://en2.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Conflicts_between_users#Mr-Natural-Health>

Should the Case of Mr-Natural-Health be the first to be considered by
the Arbitration ... hey, what are we anyway?  Council?  Board?
Committee?  Directorate?  Brigade?  Commissariat?

-- the Epoptic Arbiter


subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: Narrowing focus

in_reply_to:
<87ptf3m6j6.fsf@unicorn.bad-people-of-the-future.san-francisco.ca.us>
	(Evan Prodromou's message of "Fri, 05 Dec 2003 14:03:09 -0500")

body:
So, I've made this a proposed feature on meta:

    http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/Field-value_pairs

I think I got it close to what came up on this list.

There's also an RFE on SourceForge:

    http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=855890&group_id=34373&atid=411195

Thanks to everyone who refined this fuzzy concept into something
implementable.

~ESP

--
Evan Prodromou <evan at wikitravel.org>
Wikitravel - http://www.wikitravel.org/
The free, complete, up-to-date and reliable world-wide travel guide


body:
OK, nobody has raised any objections so I'm going to do this in 1 hour (see
the email post time above).

--mav


from_name: Robert

subject:
[WikiEN-l] Mr-Natural-Health says he is a Nazi. What can we make of
	this?

body:
Mr-Natural-Health made the statement that he is a Nazi; he
said this to me on my User page because I am am Jewish.
This is very hateful. He is even sending private hate mail
to people he disagrees with. For instance:

====

  To: "RK"
  Subject: RK, the Arse!
  From:  "Mr-Natural-Health" <johnhgohde at yahoo.com>
  To: "RK"
  Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2003 19:24:06 +0000 (UTC)

  You are an Arse! Just thought that you might want to
know. :)

====

It is not just me; in a very short time many in the
Wikipedia community have come to the conclusion that
Mr-Natural-Health is a threat. Please see for yourself by
reading the comments on his User page; every time someone
tries to discuss things with him, he belittles and insults
them, and then attacks them.

Mr-Natural-health has repeatedly stated that he plans on
coming back to Wikipedia with other ISP under false names,
and that he will not let anyone alter his edits.  This is
explicit admission of vandalism.

In any case, the edits he makes include gross falsehoods,
distortions, fabrications, and paranoia.  I am distubred by
the way that Ec and a few others are defending this
disturbed individual and his "work". I had planned to stay
off Wiki-En for good, but in this case seeing this man
defended, instead of banned, was too much.

A few contributors to Wiki-En forum seem devoid of common
sense; it would be a shame if their lack of sense allowed
Wikipedia to be damaged by allowing wackos free reign.

Robert (RK)

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


subject: [WikiEN-l] Perceived scientism just doesn't exist

body:
First off, please stop using ad homenim attack-words like
"scientism"; this is grossly offensive to those of us who
use science to separate claims from facts.  If you want to
discuss a specific issue, please discuss the issue without
the words that show anger and fear of scientists.

Viajero writes:
> I realize that double-blind trials are the gold standard
> in Western science, and I don't want to argue with that;

Indeed; they are the gold standard in all forms of science.
Asians, Hispanics, Arabs, Jews, Blacks, and Whites all use
this method to verify claims. These peer-reviewed methods
are used in Eastern, near-Eastern and in Western countries.
In fact, there is nothing "western" about so-called
"western" medicine at all.

Sadly, the term "western" is often used as a perjorative
term by people who are advocating alternative health-care
techniques for profit, and who do not have proof that their
techniques work. "Alternative medicine" is no more
"eastern" than peer-reviewed medicine is "western".  The
only useful categories are these:

(A) There exists peer-reviewed data, duplicated by many
reseachers, that a claimed technique actually works.

(B) No such data exists, and we are expected to take
someone's word, or believe in anecdotes.

This isn't western or eastern. It is about facts versus a
charlatan taking your money.

> however, there vast realms of human knowledge which
> have not yet been verified by these means, and to
> dismiss such empirical knowledge out of hand is both
> foolish and not our job.

I totally agree; yet I have no idea why you believe such a
thing is happening here. Only among certain advocates of
alternative medicine do we find such closed minded
attitudes, with people dogmatically asserting that certain
things (i.e. western medicine) are bad and should not be
used.  In stark contrast, "western" doctors have always
been open to investigating new techniques and drugs.

Every day scientists from western countries scour nations
all across the globe to learn about traditional
fold-remedies, drugs and treatments. They constantly test
them in peer-reviewed studes to see if they actually work.
In fact, this is big business. I am totally flabbergasted
that you somehow have been led to believe the opposite.

The only problem is that some unhinged people like
Mr-Natural-Health get angry when their favored forms of
alternative quackery are proven to be fraudulent, if not
dangerous.  Then they start ranting about "western"
medicine in a nearly racist fashion.

So, sorry man, I can't agree with anything you said.

Robert (RK)

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
http://photos.yahoo.com/


from_name: Ray Saintonge

body:
Viajero wrote:

>Hi all,
>
>I am afraid I spoke to soon. Mr Natural-Health was initially cowered by
>RK's agressive edits and hostile comments. His first response was several
>anonymous personal attacks against RK on the Talk pages.
>
Certain editors have developed a reputation for aggressiveness.  This
was a factor when there was a discussion about whether RK should be a
sysop.  Veterans know this and how to avoid the hot buttons.  As a
newbie Mr. NH walked into this with his eyes closed

>Then he hit upon
>the idea of listing him (also anonymously) on VfA to be de-sysoped -- only
>to be told that RK wasn't a sysop to begin with. Upon learning this, he
>triumphantly posted this on [[Talk:Criticisms of modern medicine]] (again
>anonymously, I don't know if this is accidental or intentional):
>
>>RK had me going believing that he was an Admin.
>>
It's easy to leave that impression, without saying so.  (IIRC, RK is not
but RickK is.  Both have aggressive tendencies, and there is a
considerable overlap of their interest areas.) .  I'm inclined to
believe that the failures to sign were unintentional.  He does sign
sometimes, and there is nothing in his postings to suggest that he is
unwilling to accept credit for what he says.  Those who intentionally
refuse to sign their posts tend to be consistent about this.

>>All this could have been avoided if YOU guys would clearly
>>point who is an Admin, here. It is extremely confusing.
>>
I agree, but there's no easy way of doing this.  We have a long list of
admins, and each one tends to focus on a group of areas that interests him.

>>Now, that I know that RK is a nobody just like moi, I will
>>continue to improve Wikipedia with selective editing. Alternative
>>medicine clearly has been improved with my editing.
>>
>>Yes, I will hang in here for the long haul, revising articles
>>as I see fit every couple of hours, days, weeks, months, years,
>>decades.--12.77.35.139 22:57, 6 Dec 2003 (UTC)
>>
>
>He then proceeded to get into an edit war over one of his articles,
>[[Heroic medicine]]. Upon it being protected, he tried to skirt the
>injunction by creating a new article, [[Age of heroic medicine]], which
>the new sysop Pakaran later protected as well. In the meantime, he 's got
>a few more titles going:
>
>[[Natural therapy]]
>[[Natural philosophy]]
>
[[Talk:Heroic medicine]] shows no attempt to deal with the issues head
on, or any attempt to reach a common unterstanding.  The very first
posting to that talk page was

> User:Mr-Natural-Health  has made some changes on this article that I
> see as more than a little questionable. I'm marking the article as
> NPOV dispute until this can be resolved. -- Pakaran 07:30, 7 Dec 2003
> (UTC)

That came 3 minutes after he had put a bare "neutrality disputed" notice
on the article.  Where is Pakaran's attempt to find common ground?
 Blocking articles is no way to strive for NPOV.

>and added his loopy New Age stuff to:
>
>[[Biopsychosocial model]]
>[[Eastern]]
>[[Interventionism]]
>
The term "New Age" does not appear in any of those articles.  I've heard
it used for many years, but am still uncertain about what it means; so I
just don't use it.  Using such a characterization is prejudicial.

>I would like to emphasize that it isn't his ideas which are the problem --
>WP needs to improves its coverage in this area -- so much as his erratic,
>willful behaviour. Not only does he insist on blanking his personal Talk
>page, but he deletes comments from the article Talk pages. Just now I
>restored a series of deletions (of his own messages) he made to
>[[Talk:Criticisms of modern medicine]].
>
The bad behaviour was not as one-sided as you would suggest.

>On 12/05/03  at 02:51 PM, Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> said:
>
>>Ah-ha!  The proletarian mob raises the flag of victory from the yardarm!
>>
>>That was too close for comfort.  There was a serious risk that if Ed
>>had gotten to him first he might have become a useful contributor. :-(
>>
>
>>From this and several other comments you've made, I gather you are
>sympathetic to Mr NH's point of view. Very good, but I don't see you
>getting involved in editing these articles to defend them from dogmatism.
>
Fair enough comment.

>By the look of your contributions page, it appears you devote more time to
>this mailing list than to the encyclopedia itself. Fine, not everyone has
>the same number of hours to devote to WP.
>
True.  I don't dispute that my WP edits lately have been sparse.  I have
even complained myself about the time that the mailing lists take.  I do
manage to keep away from the Village Pump and VfD for time management as
well as other purposes.  On the other hand I spend a lot more time on
Wiktionary (and more recently on Wikisource) than on Wikipedia

>But the longer I spend on
>Wikipedia, the less respect I have for people who simply chant NPOV
>mantras from the sidelines and, correspondingly, the more my respect grows
>for people who roll up their sleeves and get their hands dirty in the
>difficult, at times deeply frustrating task of editing articles on
>polemical subjects with (other) strong-willed contributors.
>
I was unaware of this dispute until you (Please correct me if it wasn't
you) first brought it to the mailing list.  One of the purposes that is
served by bringing a subject like this to the mailing lists is that it
draws opinions from people who had not previously been a part of the
debate.  I'll read these, and sometimes simply decide that I want no
part of the subject.  At other times I will make an effort to visit the
problem articles, and make up my own mind based on what I observe.  If I
happen to disagree with the complainer rather than the complainee, I'll
say so, then go back to whatever I was doing before.  The number of such
articles that I continue to follow will be very small.

> I have been
>hard at times on Ed Poor here -- I've disagreed with his methods -- but I
>freely acknowledge that he puts more energy into trying to resolve
>problems in contentious articles than anyone else in this list. And in the
>final tally, that's what counts.
>
Agreed.  I think too that Ed is more aware of his own hot button items
than many others here.
Ec


body:
Sean Barrett wrote:

> Brian Corr wrote:
>
>> MNH is getting pretty out of hand and many people (myself included)
>> think some sort of ban is in order -- please see the section on him
>> at the former Problem Users page --
>> <http://en2.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Conflicts_between_users#Mr-Natural-Health>
>
>
> Should the Case of Mr-Natural-Health be the first to be considered by
> the Arbitration ... hey, what are we anyway?  Council?  Board?
> Committee?  Directorate?  Brigade?  Commissariat?

I believe there was a general consensus that mediation should come
before arbitration.

Ec


from_name: Brian Corr

body:
MNH is getting pretty out of hand and many people (myself included) think
some sort of ban is in order -- please see the section on him at the former
Problem Users page --
<http://en2.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Conflicts_between_users#Mr-Natural-Health>

Thanks, Brian

At Sun, 07 Dec 2003 11:58:24 +0100, Viajero wrote (in part):
>Hi all,
>
>I am afraid I spoke to soon. Mr Natural-Health was initially cowered by
>RK's agressive edits and hostile comments. His first response was several
>anonymous personal attacks against RK on the Talk pages. Then he hit upon
>the idea of listing him (also anonymously) on VfA to be de-sysoped -- only
>to be told that RK wasn't a sysop to begin with.
[snip]


from_name: Geoff Burling

subject: [WikiEN-l] Edit War over [[Edit conflicts]] (!)

body:
And I'm the one who protected the page. Immoveable object, irresistable
force, & all that.

Let's all go back to our corners, count to 10, & take a quick breather.
And I wish I had a better solution than that.

Geoff


body:
Okay, Angela pointed out that I was intervening/interfering after the
battle had come to an end. I undid my act.

I'd promise that I would use my sooper sysop powurs more carefully in
the future, but I'm never certain if I'll bother using them again.
(I'd rather contribute to articles than club people with sysop rights.)

Geoff


subject:
[Wikitech-l] Re: [Mediawiki-l] New MediaWiki stable release coming
	soon

body:
>>>>> "BV" == Brion Vibber <brion at pobox.com> writes:

    BV> Now that the dev branch is pretty well broken in on Wikipedia,
    BV> it's my intention to branch and release a new 'stable' version
    BV> in the next day.

    BV> If there are any real show-stopper bugs remaining, please say
    BV> something!

So, I'm holding off on a couple of RFEs (having to do with uploading
files) until this merge happens.

~ESP

--
Evan Prodromou <evan at wikitravel.org>
Wikitravel - http://www.wikitravel.org/
The free, complete, up-to-date and reliable world-wide travel guide


body:
Actually, if you look at the edit history of alternative medicine, RK got
involved well after MNH had started to be difficult:
<http://en2.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Alternative_medicine&action=history&limit=250&offset=0>

And MNH *started it* with RK with the edit summary, "Hello, RK. Have you
always suffered from mental illness and perceptual problems?"

Thanks, Brian

>Delerium wrote:
>
>Could perhaps someone familiar with the dispute try to talk reason into
>him?  It's clear from my brief perusal that some of his actions lately
>have been not particularly polite, but he was also involved in an
>edit-war with RK, and RK is himself known for not being particularly
>polite or willing to work with others, so that could well have provoked
>the hostile response from MNH.
>
>-Mark


from_name: Daniel Mayer

body:
Nevermind - somebody beat me to it.

--mav


from_name: John Kenney

subject: [WikiEN-l] User:Caius2ga

body:
I have, in fact, resubscribed to the mailing list in order to propose a ban
on user:Caius2ga.  I have really, really, seriously tried to work with him,
and he is simply a vandal.  He refuses to engage anyone in any kind of
discussion (with occasional exceptions where he seems halfway reasonable),
and engages in all kinds of shenanigans with talk pages and so forth.  I
suggest anybody interested take a look at the history of the Talk:Silesia
page, for instance.

Thanks

John Kenney

_________________________________________________________________
Shop online for kids? toys by age group, price range, and toy category at
MSN Shopping. No waiting for a clerk to help you! http://shopping.msn.com


subject: [WikiEN-l] rampant scientism

body:
Viajero wrote:

>Hi all,
>
>I am the last person who want to see Wikipedia turned into a repository
>for flaky, New Age esotericisms, but at the same time the scientism which
>has manifested itself in the past few days in response to Mr Natural
>Health's questionable contributions is also profoundly disturbing and
>likewise a very insidious form of non-neutrality.
>
I think we have a basis for agreement here.

>Take for example this comment by user Snoyes on the [[Alternative
>medicine]] talk page:
>
>>The thing is that once numerous randomized controlled trials and
>>
>double-blind experiments have shown a treatment to be effective, it is  by
>definition not an alternative medicine anymore. It is therefore quite
>simply a case of the rigour of science vs. unsubstantiated claims by
>wonder-healers. -- snoyes
>
>Obviously, it has a certain logic to it, but such an attitude is *so*
>dualistic and dogmatic.
>
The quote starts from a reasonable premise, but draws improper
conclusions.  The rigour of science becomes the rigidity of science, and
the fallacy of the excluded middle.  It presumes that any thing which is
"unsubstantiated", or unknown, or unidentified is ipso facto false.  An
Unidentified Flying Object may very well turn out to be an illusion, but
it is unscientific to presume that.  I prefer to accept the fact that it
is unidentified, and go on with life with a compulsive need to answer
what cannot be answered.  And "wonder-healers" is certainly a straw man.
 There are surely some alternative practitioners who make extravagant
claims or send out "penis enlarger" spam, but I would venture to say
that there are far more who (like most physicians) quietly see patients
in their treatment rooms, doing the best they can.

>Or take this edit summary from the page history of the same article by
>user Robert Merkel:
>
>>(cur) (last) . . 01:30, 7 Dec 2003 . . Robert Merkel (put a big fat
>>
>"doctors think this stuff is bogus" sentence near the top of the article,
>where it belongs, rather than burying it at the bottom)
>
>This individual hasn't a shred of impartiality regarding the subject.
>
The fallacy of authority.  If the person making the statement is
sufficiently authoritative, everybody will uncritically accept it as true.

>I am the only one disturbed by this?
>
No!

>Perhaps it is because I live in Northern Europe, where these issues are
>less polarized, but for me issue is anything but black and white.
>Alternative medicine is well-established here.  My health insurance pays
>for various forms of it (some but not all).  My GP is an MD with a
>conventional medical training, but anthroposophic orientation (Rudolf
>Steiner stuff).  That means he prescribes both mainstream medicines as
>well as alternative therapies as he sees fit.
>
Steiner certainly believed in a more wholistic approach.

>I realize that double-blind trials are the gold standard in Western
>science, and I don't want to argue with that; however, there vast realms
>of human knowledge which have not yet been verified by these means, and to
>dismiss such empirical knowledge out of hand is both foolish and not our
>job.
>
The priests of scientism have become today's grand inquisitor's.  It
takes nothing less than one of Kuhn's paradigm shifts to shake things up.

>For example, I have travelled extensively in South American and one
>sees that vast amount of "alternative medicine" practiced there (I put it
>in quotes because for people there it is not "alternative").  I doubt that
>chewing coca leaves has ever been "proven" effective by Western scientific
>protocols for altitude sickness but millions of people in the Sierra
>believe it does.  I was in a small village in the Altiplano once where the
>women cultivated a small, bitter green potato for its birth control
>properties.  Again, something which I doubt has ever been "proven", but at
>the same time something one can't simply dismiss as quaint folklore.
>
The big multinational pharmaceutical companies are aware of these
things.  For them the question is can it be patented?  If the plants
could be used just as they are found in the wild, there would be no
profit in that.

>Can we get away from looking at healing as two opposing factions and see
>it rather as a broad spectrum of techniques, ranging from nuclear medicine
>to voodoo, of which some is "scientific", some is pragmatic, and all which
>have pros and cons?
>
I've consistently supported that approach.

>In any case, at the moment the [[Alternative medicine]] article is una
>gran porquer.
>
Indeed!

Ec


from_name: Toby Bartels

body:
RK wrote in part:

>First off, please stop using ad homenim attack-words like
>"scientism"; this is grossly offensive to those of us who
>use science to separate claims from facts.  If you want to
>discuss a specific issue, please discuss the issue without
>the words that show anger and fear of scientists.

Of course, many people use the term "scientism"
that are not angry or fearful of scientists.
Even some people that *are* scientists!
Of course, this is to be expected.

>The only useful categories are these:

>(A) There exists peer-reviewed data, duplicated by many
>reseachers, that a claimed technique actually works.

>(B) No such data exists, and we are expected to take
>someone's word, or believe in anecdotes.

>This isn't western or eastern. It is about facts versus a
>charlatan taking your money.

So if data doesn't exist, then it's from a charlatan?
Or is the dichotomy in the last sentence different from the A/B dichotomy?
If the latter, then you might elaborate.

>Viajero wrote:

>>however, there vast realms of human knowledge which
>>have not yet been verified by these means, and to
>>dismiss such empirical knowledge out of hand is both
>>foolish and not our job.

>I totally agree; yet I have no idea why you believe such a
>thing is happening here.

Perhaps Viajero believes it because you say things like A/B above.
This (false) dichotomy suggests that if a practice is not yet verified,
that then we are expected to believe it without verification.

It's a darned good thing that other people noticed MNH before you did, RK,
or it might have been EoT all over again -- where the regular Wikipedians
ignore your charges because you back them up with exaggerations
and biased rhetoric.  Next time leave it to people like Viajero.

-- Toby


subject: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedia hierarchy

body:
Jimmy Wales wrote:

>Toby Bartels wrote:

>>Undeletion should never require more official validation than deletion.

>And generally less, right, since after all a person can always 'undelete'
>by just starting the article over and copying and pasting the text?

Not entirely.

For one thing, your solution destroys the edit history.
Also, only admins can even view the text that they want to copy and paste
(although that point is not relevant to current issue,
since it is only about relative numbers of administrators).

In short, undeleting by your method is not as good as undeleting by software.
That is one reason why undeleting shouldn't be unduly restricted.

-- Toby


subject: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedia hierarchy

body:
Cimon Avaro (Jussi-Ville Heiskanen) wrote:

>Toby Bartels wrote:

>>Undeletion should never require more official validation than deletion.

>The inclusion of the word "never" in your argument; and the absence of a
>stated justification for your view; suggests that your position is a
>dogmatic one. Am I mischaractericising your attitude?

Yes, you are.  I will clarify.

The word "never" indicates that I consider a matter of principle.
I don't merely mean that I don't think that this should happen ''now'' --
I mean that it should ''never'' happen.  On principle.
Of course, principles can be challenged, and I might change my mind.
Thus this is not the same as dogma.

I left out stating any justification, because I hoped (and believed)
that the principle, once mentioned, would be widely viewed as correct.
If somebody challenges the principle (or its application to this case),
then I would want to respond with justification for my position.
If I expected people to change their minds ''without'' doing so,
then that would be dogamatic.  But I don't.

I half expected you to say ?When you put it that way, I agree.? --
on grounds of principle.  And I half expected you to say
?I disagree with that principle.  What are your justifications?? --
and then I would justify it.  As it is, you began a meta-discussion
about my attitude.  That's OK, The Cunctator does the same thing. ^_^

But I'll elaborate on the principle anyway, since I'm talking.
The main principle is this:

: On a wiki, undoing an action should always be as easy as doing it.

We violate this in various ways -- page creation, for one thing,
which is what deletion undoes.  But that is handled by the software
in completely different ways, so there's a reason to violate principle.
But that's because software needs trump other principles:

: When the Right Thing is impracticable, then do the Wrong Thing for now.

-- Toby


subject: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedia hierarchy

body:
Eclecticology wrote:

>Toby Bartels wrote:

>>Undeletion should never require more official validation than deletion.

>Perhaps undeletion should be available to everybody, not just sysops.
>Deletion itself could still be limited to sysops.

Ideally, all of these features would be available to everybody.
Deletion was made an admin-only process because undeletion was impossible
(check old talk history on deletion policies).  Now it might be expanded.

Unfortunately, deletion is handled so differently by the software
(and what's most relevant here is the inexperienced user sees it)
that I doubt that people would easily treat is as just another edit.
If the software can be made to treat it as just another edit,
then there would be no reason to restrict it (hence also not undeletion).

Another problem is our reliance on ''page'' deletion
as a way of deleting ''specific revisions'' that infringe copyright.
Since this is only effective when the infringement is a page creation,
it's not a permanently workable method.  That software may change too.

-- Toby


body:
The Epopt (Sean Barrett) wrote:

>Brian Corr wrote:

>>MNH is getting pretty out of hand and many people (myself included)
>>think some sort of ban is in order -- please see the section on him at
>>the former Problem Users page --
>><http://en2.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Conflicts_between_users#Mr-Natural-Health>

>Should the Case of Mr-Natural-Health be the first to be considered by
>the Arbitration ... hey, what are we anyway?  Council?  Board?
>Committee?  Directorate?  Brigade?  Commissariat?

Not yet.  But it might be the first case for the Mediation Cabal. ^_^

-- Toby


from_name: Sascha Noyes

subject: [WikiEN-l] rampant scientism

body:
In my (user:snoyes) defense:

I have been accused of spreading rampant "scientism" on wikipedia. Thanks,
even though you surely didn't intend it to be, this is a positive thing.

One of the definitions from [[Scientism]]:

"Scientism sometimes refers to humanism and enlightenment values informed by
science. In this use of the word, scientism is "a scientific worldview that
encompasses natural explanations for all phenomena, eschews supernatural and
paranormal speculations, and embraces empiricism and reason as the twin
pillars of a philosophy of life appropriate for an Age of Science." (Source:
Michael Shermer, The Shamans of Scientism, Scientific American, 2002)"

Note that I unfortunately know too little about alternative medicine to make
any contributions to the article. Which is why I restricted my comment to the
talk page. (You will notice that I have not once edited [[Alternative
medicine]]). My comment was a semantic criticism of the term "alternative
medicine", even though it was not carefully labled as such.

It is my belief that the mere existence of the term is harmful. "Alternative".
Alternative to what? Alternative to the "main-stream", right? Is something
main-stream based on how many users it has? Or is it main-stream based on
whether or not doctors prescribe it? Or is it main-stream based on whether or
not your health insurance pays for it?

Even if you take a simple definition such as the number of users, this still
creates enormous problems: According to some predefined threshold for usage
by the general population, homeopathic medicine (for example) could be
considered main-stream in Germany (for example). But it wouldn't be
main-stream in many other countries. Is homeopathy an alternative medicine?
According to some predefined threshold for prescription by doctors,
anthroposophic orientation (for example) could be main-stream in the country
you are located in. Is anthroposophic orientation an alternative medicine?

I submit that looking at medicine according to popularity is fundamentally
flawed. Rather, the only thing that I find interresting is whether something
can be proven to be medicinal. The term "alternative medicine" should
therefore be junked.

Of course, now we get to the "scientism" part: What methods does one accept
for establishing proof that certain actions have certain effects? I quite
happily accept scientific methods, and quite happily reject quackery.

Denigrate it as "scientism" if you will, but I prefer it over fairy tales.

On Sunday 07 December 2003 13:19, Viajero wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I am the last person who want to see Wikipedia turned into a repository
> for flaky, New Age esotericisms, but at the same time the scientism which
> has manifested itself in the past few days in response to Mr Natural
> Health's questionable contributions is also profoundly disturbing and
> likewise a very insidious form of non-neutrality.
>
> Take for example this comment by user Snoyes on the [[Alternative
>
> medicine]] talk page:
> > The thing is that once numerous randomized controlled trials and
>
> double-blind experiments have shown a treatment to be effective, it is  by
> definition not an alternative medicine anymore. It is therefore quite
> simply a case of the rigour of science vs. unsubstantiated claims by
> wonder-healers. -- snoyes
>
> Obviously, it has a certain logic to it, but such an attitude is *so*
> dualistic and dogmatic.
>
> Or take this edit summary from the page history of the same article by
>
> user Robert Merkel:
> > (cur) (last) . . 01:30, 7 Dec 2003 . . Robert Merkel (put a big fat
>
> "doctors think this stuff is bogus" sentence near the top of the article,
> where it belongs, rather than burying it at the bottom)
>
> This individual hasn't a shred of impartiality regarding the subject.
>
> I am the only one disturbed by this?
>
> Perhaps it is because I live in Northern Europe, where these issues are
> less polarized, but for me issue is anything but black and white.
> Alternative medicine is well-established here.  My health insurance pays
> for various forms of it (some but not all).  My GP is an MD with a
> conventional medical training, but anthroposophic orientation (Rudolf
> Steiner stuff).  That means he prescribes both mainstream medicines as
> well as alternative therapies as he sees fit.
>
> I realize that double-blind trials are the gold standard in Western
> science, and I don't want to argue with that; however, there vast realms
> of human knowledge which have not yet been verified by these means, and to
> dismiss such empirical knowledge out of hand is both foolish and not our
> job.  For example, I have travelled extensively in South American and one
> sees that vast amount of "alternative medicine" practiced there (I put it
> in quotes because for people there it is not "alternative").  I doubt that
> chewing coca leaves has ever been "proven" effective by Western scientific
> protocols for altitude sickness but millions of people in the Sierra
> believe it does.  I was in a small village in the Altiplano once where the
> women cultivated a small, bitter green potato for its birth control
> properties.  Again, something which I doubt has ever been "proven", but at
> the same time something one can't simply dismiss as quaint folklore.
>
> Can we get away from looking at healing as two opposing factions and see
> it rather as a broad spectrum of techniques, ranging from nuclear medicine
> to voodoo, of which some is "scientific", some is pragmatic, and all which
> have pros and cons?
>
> In any case, at the moment the [[Alternative medicine]] article is una
> gran porquer?a.
>
> V.
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

--
Please encrypt all email. Public key available from
www.pantropy.net/snoyes.asc


from_name: sannse

subject: [WikiEN-l] Question

body:
Rick wrote:

> Ariddia is the creation of this user on NationStates, which is a GAME.
The creations at NationStates are not to be considered as even on the same
level as the crackpot "nations" that crop up from time to time on [[List of
microstates]].  *I* have a country on NationStates, and if you look at any
of the informatoin on that page, you can see that NOBODY on NationStates
take their creations seriously.  There are THOUSANDS of fake "nations" on
NationStates.  If everybody there wanted to come to Wikipedia to add their
fake country to it, we would be swamped (I know, "slipper slope argument").
But Ariddia is not a real place, it is not registered at a real place, it is
not intended to be a real place, it is nothing but a place created to play
the game.
>
> RickK

I think the question here is, was there any attempt to communicate with
Adrian in any way before the block?  Did anyone explain to him why his edits
to [[List of micronations]] were being reverted and why his article at
[[Ariddia]] is not suitable for the 'pedia?  I see that RickK used a comment
on one of his reversions to communicate ("rv. The entries at NationStates
are imaginary") but maybe a comment on a talk page might have been helpful?

I guess you might feel that it would be a waste of your editing time to do
this in each similar case, but it might be worth it if it helps retain a
potentially useful user (anyone who spends lots of time on the details of
inventing a country might spend lots of time on the details of an
encyclopaedia too!)

Personally I think it should be general practice to at least give a "stop
that or you will be blocked" message on a IPs talk page before most blocks
(I'm not making that a stronger statement because I recognise there are many
variable situations).

Regards

sannse


subject: [WikiEN-l] rampant scientism

body:
Hi all,

I am the last person who want to see Wikipedia turned into a repository
for flaky, New Age esotericisms, but at the same time the scientism which
has manifested itself in the past few days in response to Mr Natural
Health's questionable contributions is also profoundly disturbing and
likewise a very insidious form of non-neutrality.

Take for example this comment by user Snoyes on the [[Alternative
medicine]] talk page:

> The thing is that once numerous randomized controlled trials and
double-blind experiments have shown a treatment to be effective, it is  by
definition not an alternative medicine anymore. It is therefore quite
simply a case of the rigour of science vs. unsubstantiated claims by
wonder-healers. -- snoyes

Obviously, it has a certain logic to it, but such an attitude is *so*
dualistic and dogmatic.

Or take this edit summary from the page history of the same article by
user Robert Merkel:

> (cur) (last) . . 01:30, 7 Dec 2003 . . Robert Merkel (put a big fat
"doctors think this stuff is bogus" sentence near the top of the article,
where it belongs, rather than burying it at the bottom)

This individual hasn't a shred of impartiality regarding the subject.

I am the only one disturbed by this?

Perhaps it is because I live in Northern Europe, where these issues are
less polarized, but for me issue is anything but black and white.
Alternative medicine is well-established here.  My health insurance pays
for various forms of it (some but not all).  My GP is an MD with a
conventional medical training, but anthroposophic orientation (Rudolf
Steiner stuff).  That means he prescribes both mainstream medicines as
well as alternative therapies as he sees fit.

I realize that double-blind trials are the gold standard in Western
science, and I don't want to argue with that; however, there vast realms
of human knowledge which have not yet been verified by these means, and to
dismiss such empirical knowledge out of hand is both foolish and not our
job.  For example, I have travelled extensively in South American and one
sees that vast amount of "alternative medicine" practiced there (I put it
in quotes because for people there it is not "alternative").  I doubt that
chewing coca leaves has ever been "proven" effective by Western scientific
protocols for altitude sickness but millions of people in the Sierra
believe it does.  I was in a small village in the Altiplano once where the
women cultivated a small, bitter green potato for its birth control
properties.  Again, something which I doubt has ever been "proven", but at
the same time something one can't simply dismiss as quaint folklore.

Can we get away from looking at healing as two opposing factions and see
it rather as a broad spectrum of techniques, ranging from nuclear medicine
to voodoo, of which some is "scientific", some is pragmatic, and all which
have pros and cons?

In any case, at the moment the [[Alternative medicine]] article is una
gran porquer?a.

V.


from_name: Brion Vibber

subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: Opteronically good!

body:
On Dec 7, 2003, at 19:35, Ashar Voultoiz wrote:
> On Sat, 6 Dec 2003 20:53:23 -0600, Nick Reinking wrote:
>> Perhaps it could be possible to include a bit of data in the TXT DNS
>> record for the various people who have trouble remembering if the
>> machine is a database server or a web server?
>
> Hello,
>
> Security wise, I don't think that's a good idea :)

Really? I was going to add the root password too, just so we don't
forget it. ;)

Honestly we'd just forget to keep it up to date. We don't even remember
to keep http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Servers up to date...

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20031207/4e38e19b/attachment.pgp>


body:
It seems to me that the debate on scientism and the questions about RK's
past behavior and whether or not it's obvious who's a sysop may be
obscuring the fact that Mr-Natural-Health's *behavior* is a problem --
whether or not people agree or disagree with his views.

I understand the ongoing concerns about not biting the newbies, but I find
it disturbing that MNH has been acting this way for days, people have tried
repeatedly to reason with him, and that there still seems to ba a lot of
skepticism and questions about whether this is all the fault of other editors.

The fact that MNH wrote the following on RK's talk page makes me think that
this is not a case of a clueless newbie:
     Ha, ... Hah, Ha! -- Mr-Natural-Health, The German Nazi from New York
     I am proud of my German heritage, how about you? Do you respect your
elder's?
     I will repeat. Everyone wanted you banned many moons
ago.--Mr-Natural-Health

Thanks, Brian

At Sun, 7 Dec 2003 15:56:03 -0800 (PST), Robert wrote:
>From: Robert <rkscience100 at yahoo.com>
>Subject: [WikiEN-l] Mr-Natural-Health says he is a Nazi. What can we
>         make of this?
>To: wikien-l at Wikipedia.org
>Message-ID: <20031207235603.36524.qmail at web20303.mail.yahoo.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
>Mr-Natural-Health made the statement that he is a Nazi; he
>said this to me on my User page because I am am Jewish.
>This is very hateful. He is even sending private hate mail
>to people he disagrees with. For instance:
>
>====
>
>   To: "RK"
>   Subject: RK, the Arse!
>   From:  "Mr-Natural-Health" <johnhgohde at yahoo.com>
>   To: "RK"
>   Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2003 19:24:06 +0000 (UTC)
>
>   You are an Arse! Just thought that you might want to
>know. :)
>
>====
>
>It is not just me; in a very short time many in the
>Wikipedia community have come to the conclusion that
>Mr-Natural-Health is a threat. Please see for yourself by
>reading the comments on his User page; every time someone
>tries to discuss things with him, he belittles and insults
>them, and then attacks them.
>
>Mr-Natural-health has repeatedly stated that he plans on
>coming back to Wikipedia with other ISP under false names,
>and that he will not let anyone alter his edits.  This is
>explicit admission of vandalism.
>
>In any case, the edits he makes include gross falsehoods,
>distortions, fabrications, and paranoia.  I am distubred by
>the way that Ec and a few others are defending this
>disturbed individual and his "work". I had planned to stay
>off Wiki-En for good, but in this case seeing this man
>defended, instead of banned, was too much.
>
>A few contributors to Wiki-En forum seem devoid of common
>sense; it would be a shame if their lack of sense allowed
>Wikipedia to be damaged by allowing wackos free reign.
>
>Robert (RK)


from_name: Sheldon Rampton

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: rampant scientism

body:
Viajero wrote:

>I am the last person who want to see Wikipedia turned into a repository
>for flaky, New Age esotericisms, but at the same time the scientism which
>has manifested itself in the past few days in response to Mr Natural
>Health's questionable contributions is also profoundly disturbing and
>likewise a very insidious form of non-neutrality.
>
>Take for example this comment by user Snoyes on the [[Alternative
>medicine]] talk page:

Setting aside the question of scientism's merits, isn't the talk page
_supposed_ to be a place where POV statements are allowed?

Actually, what are the terms of allowed discourse on talk pages? I've
had a user recently on the Disinfopedia who hasn't done any damage to
actual articles, but he has made a number of nasty remarks on talk
pages, accusing other users of "paranoid ravings" and referring to me
personally as a fascist. I've been operating on the assumption that
even intemperate remarks like this should be acceptable if they are
limited to comments on talk pages. At what point do Wikipedians draw
the line on this sort of thing?
--
--------------------------------
|  Sheldon Rampton
|  Editor, PR Watch (www.prwatch.org)
|  Author of books including:
|     Friends In Deed: The Story of US-Nicaragua Sister Cities
|     Toxic Sludge Is Good For You
|     Mad Cow USA
|     Trust Us, We're Experts
|     Weapons of Mass Deception
--------------------------------


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Wikiclips (was Re: Map Symbols)

in_reply_to: Jonathan Phillips's message of "Fri, 05 Dec 2003 12:33:21 -0800"

body:
>>>>> "JP" == Jonathan Phillips <jon at protofunk.org> writes:

    JP> Maybe a novel idea would be to make separate project on
    JP> sourceforge that is svg clipart. Like svg-clipart.sf.net would
    JP> be great.

    JP> The benefits would be open source designing of symbols, maps,
    JP> etc for the SVG-compliant community.

    JP> It might also be nice to push the artwork developed via
    JP> different SVG apps to a standard, well defined place that
    JP> might promote interoperability and compliance of all,or many
    JP> :) ofthe different SVG drawing programs.

    JP> It would be totally cool to use CVS to design with and allow
    JP> ppl. from all over the world to work on designs.

    JP> Thoughts? (I hope I haven't just gotten a little too utopian)

I think you're totally utopian, which is great!

What I wonder is whether a Wiki format might not work better for
collaboration than CVS. CVS requires setting up user permissions for
lots of people, and it can be a hassle. Wikis lower the bar for
participation considerably.

The Wikimedia Foundation has a number of Wiki-related projects going
on. There's a big demand for images from Wikipedia and the other
related projects. I've started a proposal on the Meta-Wikipedia Wiki
about doing a Wikiclip clip-art Wiki site:

      http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikiclip

It'd be interesting to see how this could develop.

~ESP

--
Evan Prodromou <evan at wikitravel.org>
Wikitravel - http://www.wikitravel.org/
The free, complete, up-to-date and reliable world-wide travel guide


body:
>From the Department of Do-As-I-Say-Don't-Do-As-I-Do:

An action-packed saga in which two veteran sysops battle in hand-to-hand
conflict with Wikipedia's champion reversionista. Two more sysops come to
the rescue. MyRedThreeEditRule casts ideological baggage to the wind. An
uneasy peace is finally restored:

  http://en2.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Wikipedia:Edit_conflicts&action=history

(Also recorded for posterity on [[Wikipedia:Yet more bad jokes and other
deleted nonsense]])

;-)

V.


body:
John C. Penta wrote:
>
> Toby Bartels wrote:
>>
>>The Epopt (Sean Barrett) wrote:
>>
>>>Should the Case of Mr-Natural-Health be the first to be
>>>considered by
>>>the Arbitration ... hey, what are we anyway?  Council?  Board?
>>>Committee?  Directorate?  Brigade?  Commissariat?
>>
>>Not yet.  But it might be the first case for the Mediation Cabal. ^_^
>
> The Mediation Illuminati?

If the Mediators can get MNH to generate more illumination than heat, I
would encourage them to call themselves the Mediation Pantheon.


from_name: A

from_email: A

subject: [WikiEN-l] Request for Arbitration

body:
Wik keeps removing "Halloween" from [[October 2003]]; in my part of the world, Halloween was front page news for a week -- there was a great deal of discussion about the decline of Halloween in Europe. Please arbitrate this issue.

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20031207/e4d593d3/attachment.htm


subject: [WikiEN-l] How and When is Arbitration Invoked?

body:
> From: Sean Barrett <sean at epoptic.org>
> Organization: Boskonia
> Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Date: Sun, 07 Dec 2003 13:52:45 -0800
> To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] contributions of User:Mr-Natural-Health
>
> Brian Corr wrote:
>> MNH is getting pretty out of hand and many people (myself included)
>> think some sort of ban is in order -- please see the section on him at
>> the former Problem Users page --
>> <http://en2.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Conflicts_between_users#Mr-Natural-H
>> ealth>
>
> Should the Case of Mr-Natural-Health be the first to be considered by
> the Arbitration ... hey, what are we anyway?  Council?  Board?
> Committee?  Directorate?  Brigade?  Commissariat?
>
> -- the Epoptic Arbiter

First, is hope of mediation abandoned in this case?

Second, what is the question for arbitration?

Third, who invokes arbitration?

Fred


subject:
[WikiEN-l] Mr-Natural-Health says he is a Nazi. What can we
	make of this?

body:
> From: Robert <rkscience100 at yahoo.com>
> Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2003 15:56:03 -0800 (PST)
> To: wikien-l at Wikipedia.org
> Subject: [WikiEN-l] Mr-Natural-Health says he is a Nazi. What can we make of
> this?
>
> A few contributors to Wiki-En forum seem devoid of common
> sense; it would be a shame if their lack of sense allowed
> Wikipedia to be damaged by allowing wackos free reign.
>
> Robert (RK)

Oh but we do, and you are exhibit one.

Fred


from_name: John C. Penta

body:
----- Original Message -----
From: Toby Bartels <toby+wikipedia at math.ucr.edu>
Date: Sunday, December 7, 2003 9:30 pm
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] contributions of User:Mr-Natural-Health

> The Epopt (Sean Barrett) wrote:
>

> >Should the Case of Mr-Natural-Health be the first to be
> considered by
> >the Arbitration ... hey, what are we anyway?  Council?  Board?
> >Committee?  Directorate?  Brigade?  Commissariat?
>
> Not yet.  But it might be the first case for the Mediation Cabal. ^_^

The Mediation Illuminati?


from_name: Neil Harris

subject: [Wikipedia-l] RE: [Wikitech-l] I never metadata I didn't like

body:
Magnus Manske wrote:

> The Cunctator wrote:
>
>> I didn't say we should implement a category scheme purely by code. I can
>> think of several better methods to providing the utility of categories
>> than inserting hidden metadata tags.
>
>
> They are not hidden! Categories would, in fact, be displayed more
> promently than "ordinary" links, like language links. And hit "edit",
> then you see the matching source. If that ain't visible enough...
>
>> I should have more time in the coming weeks to make some explicit
>> suggestions--that is, mock up examples, etc.
>> I think that having a categorization project (a la dmoz for Wikipedia)
>> would be a fine idea, as long as the work, and the data, are separate
>> from the root Wikipedia.
>
>
> How about this: When you edit a page, all "meta-links" (language
> links, categories) are parsed out of the article text and displayed in
> a smalled edit box below. When you save your edit, these just get
> pasted at the end of the article. That way, they will work like
> they're separate, and still use the existing goodies (versioning etc.).
>
>> In fact, the best thing would be to work on developing ways for outside
>> projects to hook easily into the Wikipedia content without having to be
>> a Bomis-hosted project, prolly by having an XML hook.
>>
>> If we did so, I could imagine a group at the MIT Media Lab or the Cyc
>> project figuring out some bad-ass way of navigating Wikipedia content,
>> etc.
>
>
> If we (some distant day, after many file cabinets of
> consensus-finding;-) do that, then we'd run a little script and
> extract all the category links from the database into an XML file.
> That will make a great starting point for the MIT people!
>
> Magnus

Indeed. The words "semantic bootstrapping" come to mind.

-- Neil


from_name: Magnus Manske

body:
The Cunctator wrote:
> I didn't say we should implement a category scheme purely by code. I can
> think of several better methods to providing the utility of categories
> than inserting hidden metadata tags.

They are not hidden! Categories would, in fact, be displayed more
promently than "ordinary" links, like language links. And hit "edit",
then you see the matching source. If that ain't visible enough...

> I should have more time in the coming weeks to make some explicit
> suggestions--that is, mock up examples, etc.
>
> I think that having a categorization project (a la dmoz for Wikipedia)
> would be a fine idea, as long as the work, and the data, are separate
> from the root Wikipedia.

How about this: When you edit a page, all "meta-links" (language links,
categories) are parsed out of the article text and displayed in a
smalled edit box below. When you save your edit, these just get pasted
at the end of the article. That way, they will work like they're
separate, and still use the existing goodies (versioning etc.).

> In fact, the best thing would be to work on developing ways for outside
> projects to hook easily into the Wikipedia content without having to be
> a Bomis-hosted project, prolly by having an XML hook.
>
> If we did so, I could imagine a group at the MIT Media Lab or the Cyc
> project figuring out some bad-ass way of navigating Wikipedia content,
> etc.

If we (some distant day, after many file cabinets of
consensus-finding;-) do that, then we'd run a little script and extract
all the category links from the database into an XML file. That will
make a great starting point for the MIT people!

Magnus


from_name: Viajero

body:
On 12/07/03  at 01:46 PM, Delirium <delirium at rufus.d2g.com> said:

> Could perhaps someone familiar with the dispute try to talk reason into
> him?  It's clear from my brief perusal that some of his actions lately

Muriel has been very persistent in trying to get him to chill out, but he
takes no heed of her excellent advice.

V.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Request for Arbitration

body:
A [name omitted for privacy reasons] wrote:

> Wik keeps removing "Halloween" from [[October 2003]]; in my part of
> the world, Halloween was front page news for a week -- there was a
> great deal of discussion about the decline of Halloween in Europe.
> Please arbitrate this issue.
>
Isn't this just a little too trivial to call for arbitration?

Ec


subject:
[WikiEN-l] Mr-Natural-Health says he is a Nazi. What can we make
	of	this?

body:
Robert wrote:

>Mr-Natural-Health made the statement that he is a Nazi; he
>said this to me on my User page because I am am Jewish.
>This is very hateful. He is even sending private hate mail
>to people he disagrees with. For instance:
>====
>To: "RK"
>  Subject: RK, the Arse!
>  From:  "Mr-Natural-Health" <johnhgohde at yahoo.com>
>  To: "RK"
>  Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2003 19:24:06 +0000 (UTC)
>
>  You are an Arse! Just thought that you might want to
>know. :)
>====
>It is not just me; in a very short time many in the
>Wikipedia community have come to the conclusion that
>Mr-Natural-Health is a threat. Please see for yourself by
>reading the comments on his User page; every time someone
>tries to discuss things with him, he belittles and insults
>them, and then attacks them.
>
These kinds of statements are clearly a breach of etiquette, and have no
relationship to the medical issues that form the substantive part of the
debate.  At the same time I can understand that he is in a situation
where he feels beset by a pack of dogs, and that can be an irrational
driving force to his words.  The reaction to his writing has been
combattive from the beginning, with no attempt whatsoever to find a
common ground.  Several of his opponents start from the closed-minded
presumption that he is absolutely wrong.

>Mr-Natural-health has repeatedly stated that he plans on
>coming back to Wikipedia with other ISP under false names,
>and that he will not let anyone alter his edits.  This is
>explicit admission of vandalism.
>
The fact is that he has not been banned.  Exploring that avenue is pure
speculation, even if he does make that threat.

>In any case, the edits he makes include gross falsehoods,
>distortions, fabrications, and paranoia.  I am distubred by
>the way that Ec and a few others are defending this
>disturbed individual and his "work". I had planned to stay
>off Wiki-En for good, but in this case seeing this man
>defended, instead of banned, was too much.
>
I make no apologies for defending his work.  Just because a handful of
us are defending a minority position should not be cause for being
disturbed.  You have elsewhere objected to what you called ad hominem
arguments, and you are right to complain when MrNH calls your sanity
into question, or calls himself a Nazi as a means of attacking your
Jewishness by innuendo.  But what are "gross falsehoods, distortions,
fabrications, and paranoia" but ad hominem arguments.  Setting up
peer-reviewed double-blind experiments as the only standard for
accepting medical practices is far too rigid an outlook on medicine.
 Other things do work, though imperfectly documented.Giving credence to
alternative medicine should not be seen as supporting quackery.
 Outright fraud does exist, but the defrauders are a ninority that get
an overblown share of the publicity.  Most alternative practitioners
like most mainstream doctors ply their trade with complete honesty and
are consistent with their own beliefs

>A few contributors to Wiki-En forum seem devoid of common
>sense; it would be a shame if their lack of sense allowed
>Wikipedia to be damaged by allowing wackos free reign.
>
Isn't "wacko" also an ad hominem term?

Ec


subject: [Wikitech-l] MediaWiki 1.1.0 release

body:
After a couple weeks of breaking it in on Wikipedia, the MediaWiki
1.1.0 release is now available. Various bug fixes, wiki-friendly table
markup, and localization improvements top user-visible changes over the
previous stable snapshots.

Release notes:
http://sourceforge.net/project/shownotes.php?release_id=202383

Download:
http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/wikipedia/mediawiki-1.1.0.tar.gz?
download

The previous stable branch snapshots may be thought of as 1.0.x. Or,
you know, not. Main development will continue in the trunk; the 1.1
branch is now for bug fixes only.

In CVS, the new release is in the REL1_1 branch, tag REL1_1_0.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20031208/0640404b/attachment.pgp>


from_name: aridd

subject: [WikiEN-l] Question

body:
Incorrect. It started off that way, but has evolved as more. It exists independantly from NS. It has its own web pages, outside NationStates. I do see your point not all micronations can be listed, and that Ariddia is far from a major one. I'm withdrawing request for it to be listed - though I do appreciate your replies. In future, perhaps Rick could bother to be a little more curteous, and to check up on what he's talking about. Just a friendly suggestion. All in all, keep up the good work in Wikipedia! Thank you for your time, and sorry for the bother.

Regards,
Adrian

Message du 07/12/03 08:38
De : Rick
A : aridd at wanadoo.fr, English Wikipedia
Copie ? :
Objet : Re: [WikiEN-l] Question

Ariddia is the creation of this user on NationStates, which is a GAME.  The creations at NationStates are not to be considered as even on the same level as the crackpot "nations" that crop up from time to time on [[List of microstates]].  *I* have a country on NationStates, and if you look at any of the informatoin on that page, you can see that NOBODY on NationStates take their creations seriously.  There are THOUSANDS of fake "nations" on NationStates.  If everybody there wanted to come to Wikipedia to add their fake country to it, we would be swamped (I know, "slipper slope argument").  But Ariddia is not a real place, it is not registered at a real place, it is not intended to be a real place, it is nothing but a place created to play the game.

RickK

aridd wrote:
Greetings.

I have a question, and I hope this is the right place to ask it... I saw that Wikipedia has a page listing micronations and with links to other pages containing information on each of those micronations. I contributed a page with a micronation. It was deleted, and I received an IP ban:

Your user name or IP address has been blocked by RickK. The reason given is this:
repeated creaton [sic] of nonsense articles
You may contact RickK or one of the other administrators to discuss the block.
Note that you may not use the "email this user" feature unless you have a valid email address registered in your user preferences.
Your IP address is . Please include this address in any queries you make.

My entry was a serious one, and I only made one (NOT repeated entries). I understand that Wikipedia might feel my contribution was not a useful one, and I will not repeat it. Obviously, not everything can be accepted. However, I would have appreciated that explanation being given me, rather than the above offensive message.

I apologise for the invconveniance, and also if this was not the right place to send this message.

Kind regards,
Adrian

Do you Yahoo!?
Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
[ (pas de nom de fichier) (0.1 Ko) ]
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20031208/05703a14/attachment.htm


subject: [WikiEN-l] Question

body:
Sorry, I didn't see this before replying... Thank you, yes, such a warning would definitely have been helpful. I would have appreciated being told what was consisered an appropriate / valuable addition. (Contrary to what Rick seems to believe, I have put work and effort into this micronation, and am continuing to do so). Here's hoping your suggestion will be acted upon... Again, thanks all for your time and comments.

Regards,
Adrian

Message du 07/12/03 20:11
De : sannse
A : English Wikipedia
Copie ? :
Objet : Re: [WikiEN-l] Question
Rick wrote: > Ariddia is the creation of this user on NationStates, which is a GAME. The creations at NationStates are not to be considered as even on the same level as the crackpot "nations" that crop up from time to time on [[List of microstates]]. *I* have a country on NationStates, and if you look at any of the informatoin on that page, you can see that NOBODY on NationStates take their creations seriously. There are THOUSANDS of fake "nations" on NationStates. If everybody there wanted to come to Wikipedia to add their fake country to it, we would be swamped (I know, "slipper slope argument"). But Ariddia is not a real place, it is not registered at a real place, it is not intended to be a real place, it is nothing but a place created to play the game. > > RickK I think the question here is, was there any attempt to communicate with Adrian in any way before the block? Did anyone explain to him why his edits to [[List of micronations]] were being reverted and why his article at [[Ariddia]] is not suitable for the 'pedia? I see that RickK used a comment on one of his reversions to communicate ("rv. The entries at NationStates are imaginary") but maybe a comment on a talk page might have been helpful? I guess you might feel that it would be a waste of your editing time to do this in each similar case, but it might be worth it if it helps retain a potentially useful user (anyone who spends lots of time on the details of inventing a country might spend lots of time on the details of an encyclopaedia too!) Personally I think it should be general practice to at least give a "stop that or you will be blocked" message on a IPs talk page before most blocks (I'm not making that a stronger statement because I recognise there are many variable situations). Regards sannse _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20031208/16caec93/attachment.htm