body:
--- BJ?rn Lindqvist <bjourne at gmail.com> wrote:

> > Personally, I'd like to see an example of an admin
> repeatedly
> > harrasing a regular user failing to be put before
> arbcom.
>
> I'd like to avoid bringing that up as it can only
> cause more bad
> blood. But since you opt on seeing examples, off the
> top of my hat:
> Lir and Everyking.

Really, Really REALLY bad example.  Lir got anything
and everything that he deserved.  His repeated
trolling and bad faith edits and attacks should have
gotten him banned much sooner than they did.  He was
given many, many chances and repeatedly made Wikipedia
a sour place to be.  Imagine me, defending Everyking!

RickK

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


list: wikipedia-l

source: pipermail-mbox

from_name: oualmakran youssef

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Encyclopedia Universalis

body:
Hello

Here is an interresting link :
http://www.acrimed.org/article1763.html

Encyclopedia Universalis is one of the most well-known
encyclopedia into French. On that page, we learn that
the commpany is owned at 50% by Encyclopedia
Britannica. That they have 50 employees and that they
want to fire 15 persons.

I hope you find this email usefull and not off-topic.

Youssef, aka youssefsan

_____________________________________________________________________________
D?couvrez le nouveau Yahoo! Mail : 1 Go d'espace de stockage pour vos mails, photos et vid?os !
Cr?ez votre Yahoo! Mail sur http://fr.mail.yahoo.com


list: wikien-l

from_name: SPUI

subject: [WikiEN-l] Recent goings-on

body:
Tony Sidaway wrote:
> SPUI said:
>
>>JAY JG wrote:
>>
>>>No, the rules are set up so that admins can only be sanctioned for
>>>doing  things against policy; new users often seem to think
>>>"disagreeing with  me" or "not putting up with my POV edits" is
>>>against policy.
>>
>>Unless "Wikipedia would more or less stop running without" that editor.
>>
>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/RickK#Outside_view>  Then any policy violations are OK.
>
> Looking at RickK's response to that RfC, he seems to provide a very good
> explanation of his actions and they seems to be have been well within
> policy.  In particular, I find the argument that the second incarnation of
> Falling Up (band) was significantly different from the first, somewhat
> questionable to say the least.
>
You seriously read the following and determined they were substantially
the same?

'''Falling Up''' is a christian rock band.

'''Members'''

     * Tom
     * Jessy
     * Jeremy
     * Joe
     * Josh
     * Mike

'''Discography'''

     * Crashings

'''links'''

     * [http://www.fallingupcrashings.com/ Official Website].

----

Falling Up is a Christian band consisting of Thomas Charles Cox
(guitar), Joseph A. Kisselburgh (guitar), Mike, Josh Shroy (drums),
Jessy Ribordy (vocals) and Jeremy Miller (bass guitar). They were named
after the first song they wrote, which refers to how imperfect people
are, but how sufficient the grace of God is to compensate for that
imperfection. In harmony with their name, their music is heavy on themes
about grace. They debuted in February 24, 2004 with an 11-song album
titled "Crashings." Aaron Sprinkle (who also produced Kutless and
Anberlin) produced this album, which combines rock, metal, strings and
R+B. The music is similar to Kutless', and the members of the two bands
were childhood friends in their hometown of Albany, Oregon. It was the
members of Kutless who passed Falling Up's demo album on to BEC
Recordings owner, Brandon Ebel which lead to Falling Up signing on to
BEC alongside Kutless in the summer of 2003.

Discography

     * Crashings (2004)
           o 1. Bittersweet
           o 2. Symmetry
           o 3. Broken Heart
           o 4. Escalates
           o 5. New Hope Generation
           o 6. The Gathering
           o 7. Jacksonfive
           o 8. Divinity
           o 9. Places
           o 10. Falling in Love
           o 11. Ambience
           o 12. Arafax Deep

External Links

     * [http://www.fallingupcrashings.com/ Official band site]
     * Lyrics

What the fuck are you smoking?


subject: [WikiEN-l] Recent goings-on

body:
Tony Sidaway wrote:
>
> I don't think the RFC process is especially onerous.  Just slap together a
> few diffs showing what has been done and the actions you have taken to try
> to resolve the problem and how the other party has reacted (or not
> reacted).  Get your co-complainant, who has tried and failed to resolve
> the same problem, to certify with you, along with his own evidence.  Move
> the RFC to certified status, notify the subject, and await responses.
> It's really just a formalization of third party dispute resolution.

That's the problem - the admin had to be abusive in the same way to
someone else, and you have to locate that person. Somehow I don't find
that very likely in the majority of cases.


from_name: Matt Brown

subject: [WikiEN-l] Harrasment by an admin - examples?

body:
On 6/2/05, Rick <giantsrick13 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> This from User:Unfocused, who likes to run around
> attacking VfD nominations as bad faith.

Yes, and quite possibly he's following your contributions to check up
on you, but you /did/ still revert a newbie adding factual information
in seeming good faith twice without any explanation to him other than
'stop vandalising Wikipedia!'.  You are being in that case at least,
far too hurried and quick to revert.

-Matt (User:Morven)


from_name: Rick

subject: [WikiEN-l] Recent goings-on

body:
--- SPUI <drspui at gmail.com> wrote:
> What the fuck are you smoking?

Knock off the attacks on the mailing list.  I'd like
to mention that SPUI is also a member of the GNAA.

RickK

__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail Mobile
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Check email on your mobile phone.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/learn/mail


from_name: Phil Boswell

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Speech Jimbo on the Open Holland

body:
"Gerard Meijssen" <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com>
wrote in message news:429ECC0D.9030103 at gmail.com...
> ... I would like to change the subject and direct you to
> http://asp.noterik.com/asset-view/23 where you find a video stream with
> three presentations. The latest is Jimbo's.

Where does Jimbo's bit start? There's a slightly bewildering array of what
look like snapshots: do they denote sections? Does Jimbo's bit start at
1:21:32, picture #9?
--
Phil
[[en:User:Phil Boswell]]


from_name: Gregory Maxwell

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Recent goings-on

body:
Why not make an attempt at discrediting the position rather than the
person arguing it?

On 6/2/05, Rick <giantsrick13 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> --- SPUI <drspui at gmail.com> wrote:
> > What the fuck are you smoking?
>
> Knock off the attacks on the mailing list.  I'd like
> to mention that SPUI is also a member of the GNAA.
>
> RickK
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Yahoo! Mail Mobile
> Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Check email on your mobile phone.
> http://mobile.yahoo.com/learn/mail
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: Tony Sidaway

subject: [WikiEN-l] Recent goings-on

body:
BJ?rn Lindqvist said:
>> >I even witnessed first-hand a
>> >user trying the ArbCom route and failing because he/she could not get
>> >a second user involved in the dispute to back him/her up. Which
>> >wasn't very strange because there really only was he/she and the
>> >admin involved..
>>
>> I strongly doubt that, since that's not part of the Arbitration
>> Committee procedure.  Which case are you referring to?
>
> Ok. It was a Request for Comments. But it is the route you are
> supposed to go if you have been threatened badly by an admin.

In the case of threatening or abusive behavior, a post on [[WP:AN/I]]
should be enough.  Although it seems to me that administrator abuse is
often a fallback claim by people who are behaving in a problematic manner,
I don't dismiss it out of hand and I think it would be most extraordinary
if administrators didn't occasionally act in a heavy-handed, unjust and
sometimes even vindictive manner.  We should take such things seriously.

I don't think the RFC process is especially onerous.  Just slap together a
few diffs showing what has been done and the actions you have taken to try
to resolve the problem and how the other party has reacted (or not
reacted).  Get your co-complainant, who has tried and failed to resolve
the same problem, to certify with you, along with his own evidence.  Move
the RFC to certified status, notify the subject, and await responses.
It's really just a formalization of third party dispute resolution.

Non-administrator complainants tend to be hobbled, however, by their lack
of knowledge of how Wikipedia works.  Administrators tend to know better
than other editors just how much discretion they're allowed (it's quite
extensive, and arguably has to be so).

Successful arbitration cases have been brought against administrators,
some of them resulting in loss of administrator powers.  Usually in such
cases there has been consensus amongst other administrators that a
particular admin has gone too far.


list: wikitech-l

from_name: Ed W

subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: Feature addition to the gallery

body:
> If we're using HTML/XML syntax for extension hooks (and we are), then it
> must behave consistently with the HTML/XML elements we allow. Why would
> \" be magic in some places and not others?

Idiot question, but what other examples of places "doesn't" it work? I
can't think I have run up against this issue in normal usage?  I would
probably run up against it in my gallery example though

Might it not be interesting to support this syntax more widely then?

Either way: if we agree on the quotes thing can we pop the rest of the
code in?

Ed W


subject: [WikiEN-l] Recent goings-on

body:
SPUI said:
> JAY JG wrote:
>>
>> No, the rules are set up so that admins can only be sanctioned for
>> doing  things against policy; new users often seem to think
>> "disagreeing with  me" or "not putting up with my POV edits" is
>> against policy.
>
> Unless "Wikipedia would more or less stop running without" that editor.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/RickK#Outside_view>  Then any policy violations are OK.

Looking at RickK's response to that RfC, he seems to provide a very good
explanation of his actions and they seems to be have been well within
policy.  In particular, I find the argument that the second incarnation of
Falling Up (band) was significantly different from the first, somewhat
questionable to say the least.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Recent goings-on

body:
Charles Matthews said:
> Tony Sidaway wrote
>
>> I must say I find the idea that workplace rules should extend outside
>> the workplace in this way, applying to people who don't even work
>> there, very, very puzzling.
>
> Tony - this is off-off-topic and AFAIK no one is going to have their
> views  changed by your further pursuit of the matter in this thread.

Indeed.  I've had my say.  No more on this.


from_name: Brion Vibber

subject: [Wikitech-l] Problem with install

body:
fillme at fillmewith.info wrote:
>> Are you using MySQL 4.1 or later? Check the RELEASE-NOTES section about
>> that.
>
> 4.1.11.  Again, it works find from the command line, just not from the
> MediaWiki install page.

Then you should definitely read the release notes, and confirm that you
understand what's said there about MySQL 4.1 and that you have made sure
you have configured your system appropriately.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 253 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20050602/c95a757a/attachment.pgp>


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Recent goings-on

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

> Why not make an attempt at discrediting the position
> rather than the
> person arguing it?
>
> On 6/2/05, Rick <giantsrick13 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > --- SPUI <drspui at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > What the fuck are you smoking?
> >
> > Knock off the attacks on the mailing list.  I'd
> like
> > to mention that SPUI is also a member of the GNAA.
> >
> > RickK

This article has been discussed ad nauseum, twice on
VfD, once on VfU, and again on the bogus RfC that SPUI
filed on me, which he himself rejected.  It doesn't
need further discussion here.  SPUI is only bringing
it up here, yet again (note that not a single person
supported his position, even Jondel rejected it), to
attempt to discredit me.

I'd also like to note that SPUI is now using a
sockpuppet account (use:Sockenpuppe) to make "prank"
edits.

RickK

__________________________________
Discover Yahoo!
Get on-the-go sports scores, stock quotes, news and more. Check it out!
http://discover.yahoo.com/mobile.html


from_name: JAY JG

subject: [WikiEN-l] Recent goings-on

body:
>From: SPUI <drspui at gmail.com>
>JAY JG wrote:
>>>From: BJ?rn Lindqvist <bjourne at gmail.com>
>>>Total Bullshit. That has been done many times by new users who was
>>>harassed my some overly aggressive admins. Ofcourse they never suceed
>>>because the rules are complex and setup to protect the administrators.
>>
>>
>>No, the rules are set up so that admins can only be sanctioned for doing
>>things against policy; new users often seem to think "disagreeing with me"
>>or "not putting up with my POV edits" is against policy.
>
>Unless "Wikipedia would more or less stop running without" that editor.
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/RickK#Outside_view
>Then any policy violations are OK.

Thanks for showing exactly how trivial and petty these complaints of admin
abuse really are.

Jay.


body:
--- SPUI <drspui at gmail.com> wrote:

> Rick wrote:
> >>"michaelturley at myway.com"
> <michaelturley at myway.com>
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> >>I'd say RickK's treatment of Willswikihelp is
> pretty
> >>close to harrassing a new user
> >
> > This from User:Unfocused, who likes to run around
> > attacking VfD nominations as bad faith.
>
> Ad-hominem bullshit.

Pot.  Kettle.  Black.

RickK

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


body:
--- "michaelturley at myway.com"
<michaelturley at myway.com> wrote:
> I have repeatedly asked RickK what about my comments
> was a personal attack, and how I should rephrase
> them, but RickK has completely ignored me, other
> than to say that I'm "whining" on his talk page and
> accuse me of personal attacks.  See
>
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AVotes_for_deletion%2FZetor&diff=14596876&oldid=14596488
> for the latest example.

I have already commented on this subject on
[[Wikipedia_talk:Votes_for_deletion#Removing_attacks_on_VfD_nominators.27_motives]],
and have no intention of disussing it ad nauseum.

> PS: Nice try on changing the "Reply to:" to avoid
> seeing my response on the list.  It didn't work.

I have no idea what you're talking about.  I clicked
"Reply" on Yahoo as I always do.

RickK

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


from_name: Magnus Manske

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

Ed W schrieb:
> Either way: if we agree on the quotes thing can we pop the rest of the
> code in?

My way of getting round these "fine, except for..." issues is to add Yet
Another Global Variable (tm), like

	$wgAllowBackslashQuotes = true

Put this in DefaultSettings.php, so the actual decision (in
LocalSettings.php) is the problem of the admin, not the programmer ;-)

Magnus
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFCnvAkCZKBJbEFcz0RAmJSAJ90ecWQ/D3Sm2L6DxE6j5Yegnd7QwCfdhSp
G+O4MBjhFNKhJj+sUxPX8bc=
=AKER
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


from_name: Timwi

subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: image dumps now available

body:
Alfio Puglisi wrote:
>
> GNU tar on Cygwin extracts all files correctly, except for the last
> ones [...]. pax doesn't seem to be available for Cygwin. I found with
> surprise that there's one included with windows, but it doesn't work.

Have you tried Winzip? I have always extracted [.tar].gz files with
Winzip, and it always worked fine. (It doesn't do bzip2 though,
unfortunately.)


from_name: Gerard Meijssen

body:
Phil Boswell wrote:

>"Gerard Meijssen" <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com>
>wrote in message news:429ECC0D.9030103 at gmail.com...
>
>
>>... I would like to change the subject and direct you to
>>http://asp.noterik.com/asset-view/23 where you find a video stream with
>>three presentations. The latest is Jimbo's.
>>
>>
>
>
>Where does Jimbo's bit start? There's a slightly bewildering array of what
>look like snapshots: do they denote sections? Does Jimbo's bit start at
>1:21:32, picture #9?
>
>
Hoi,
To be honest, I was there so I did not look at it. I think it would make
sense for these snapshots to indicate where to start. I was given the
URL by a friend and I wanted to share it with you all :) . I also find
that I have never looked at data in this format.. It does not work for
me. :(

Thanks,
   GerardM


from_name: kelvSYC

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Cross-project vandal

body:
I'm here to post a warning of a vandal that spans multiple projects.
Here's a synopsis of how it went down from my POV:

[[b:User:Ivyboy]] and possible sockpuppet [[User:Dittoboy]] have been
causing disruptive behavior while trying to impersonate
[[User:Bulbaboy]] on at least en.w and en.b and possibly others.  I
was alerted to this when I saw the user trying to wikify a copyvio
page (ripped from GameFAQs), then trying to delete subsequent vfd and
copyvio notices and discussion from [[b:WB:VFD]] and the pages in
question.

As I was the person who took notice, I had to let another admin do
the work.  [[User:User142]] and [[User:Frazydee]] (also an admin)
have also been involved in this situation (as well as, of course,
[[User:Bulbaboy]]).  Ivyboy and Dittoboy have since resorted to
vandalism in various parts of en.w and en.b, ostensibly in an attempt
to prevent users at their university, [[Bar Ilan University]] in
Israel, from accessing the Wikimedia projects (it's also to note that
User142 also attends the university).

Action should be taken quickly.  Since I'm a newbie-ish admin at
en.b, I'm also looking for advice on how to deal with this sort of
situation should it pop up in the future.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Recent goings-on

body:
Tony Sidaway wrote:
> SPUI said:
>
>>>first, somewhat questionable to say the least.
>>>
>>
>>You seriously read the following and determined they were substantially
>> the same?
>
> Yes, clearly the same band which failed the music notability standard.

And fail it did.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/Falling_Up_%28band%29


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Falling Up

body:
On 6/2/05, michaelturley at myway.com <michaelturley at myway.com> wrote:
> FYI: I checked it earlier; Falling Up's album rates in at about #8700 on Amazon's album
> sales list.  This is far from a garage band playing church gigs.

It would be interesting to see in what musical company such a sales
ranking gives them.

-Matt (User:Morven)


subject: [WikiEN-l] Recent goings-on

body:
Rick wrote:
> --- SPUI <drspui at gmail.com> wrote:

>>Unless "Wikipedia would more or less stop running
>>without" that editor.
>>
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/RickK#Outside_view
>
>>Then any policy violations are OK.
>
>
> I would like to note that you withdrew your RfC.  ~~~~

I withdrew it because the process was broken, and the RFC wasn't getting
anywhere.


body:
Rick wrote:
>>"michaelturley at myway.com" <michaelturley at myway.com>
>
> wrote:
>
>>I'd say RickK's treatment of Willswikihelp is pretty
>>close to harrassing a new user
>
> This from User:Unfocused, who likes to run around
> attacking VfD nominations as bad faith.

Ad-hominem bullshit.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Recent goings-on

body:
Rick wrote:
> --- SPUI <drspui at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>What the fuck are you smoking?
>
>
> Knock off the attacks on the mailing list.  I'd like
> to mention that SPUI is also a member of the GNAA.

Hahaha, more ad-hominem. And I haven't been with the GNAA for several
months. RickK on the other hand is continually abusive.


from_name: michaelturley at myway.com

body:
>> "michaelturley at myway.com" <michaelturley at myway.com>
wrote:
> I'd say RickK's treatment of Willswikihelp is pretty
>> close to harrassing a new user

>This from User:Unfocused, who likes to run around
>attacking VfD nominations as bad faith.
>
>RickK

I *have* commented my VfD votes regarding lack of cursory research before nomination.  I will continue to do so where evidence suggests that such simple checks have not been done, however, I will work on my phrasing.

I have repeatedly asked RickK what about my comments was a personal attack, and how I should rephrase them, but RickK has completely ignored me, other than to say that I'm "whining" on his talk page and accuse me of personal attacks.  See http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AVotes_for_deletion%2FZetor&diff=14596876&oldid=14596488 for the latest example.

Had RickK made ANY sincere attempt to communicate with me politely instead of making accusations, this certainly would not have escalated.  Instead, he simply ignored and/or deleted my comments, while at the same time, accused me of "personal attacks".  These accusations are not supported by WP:NPA, however, RickK's calling my attempts to communicate with him as "whining" is.

However, I expect nothing will happen with either the User:Willswikihelp account nor my issue, since so many have already agreed with the statement in a recent RfC that implied that the wheels will fall off of Wikipedia if RickK's actions aren't simply tolerated as is.  Therefore, this is the full extent of my complaint, and as far as I care to prosecute it.

Michael Turley
User:Unfocused

PS: Nice try on changing the "Reply to:" to avoid seeing my response on the list.  It didn't work.

_______________________________________________
No banners. No pop-ups. No kidding.
Make My Way  your home on the Web - http://www.myway.com


from_name: Phil Sandifer

subject: [WikiEN-l] Recent goings-on

body:
Strange - I seem to remember you identifying your contributions as
"from the GNAA" more recently than "several months" in IRC.

-Snowspinner

On Jun 2, 2005, at 3:17 PM, SPUI wrote:

> Rick wrote:
>
>> --- SPUI <drspui at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> What the fuck are you smoking?
>>>
>> Knock off the attacks on the mailing list.  I'd like
>> to mention that SPUI is also a member of the GNAA.
>>
>
> Hahaha, more ad-hominem. And I haven't been with the GNAA for
> several months. RickK on the other hand is continually abusive.
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


subject: [WikiEN-l] Recent goings-on

body:
Phil Sandifer wrote:
> Strange - I seem to remember you identifying your contributions as
> "from the GNAA" more recently than "several months" in IRC.

Yes, as an example of a GNAA member doing good. My early contributions
have not stopped being those of a GNAA member.


from_name: Rob Brewer

subject: [WikiEN-l] Popbitch / Michael Colvin

body:
This week's edition of the UK entertainment scandal e-mail Popbitch (see
[[Popbitch]]) includes a link to [[Talk:Michael Colvin]] which includes some
"bizarre conspiracy theories" relating to [[Derek Laud]], a contestant on the
current series of Big Brother. User:Smoddy deleted them as "possibly
libellous" but they have been restored. They also exist in the history of
[[Michael Colvin]] at
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Michael_Colvin&oldid=6052341

Do we really want to be carrying this stuff? If not we will have to delete it,
both from the article (using selective undelete) and the talk page, and
probably protect the pages to stop it being pasted back in again.

Opinions?

Rob ([[user:Rbrwr]])

--
Rob Brewer <rob at rbrwr.org> <http://rbrwr.org>
"This time I want cash, not forged book tokens"


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Recent goings-on

body:
Rick wrote:
> --- Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Why not make an attempt at discrediting the position
>>rather than the
>>person arguing it?
>
> This article has been discussed ad nauseum, twice on
> VfD, once on VfU, and again on the bogus RfC that SPUI
> filed on me, which he himself rejected.  It doesn't
> need further discussion here.  SPUI is only bringing
> it up here, yet again (note that not a single person
> supported his position, even Jondel rejected it), to
> attempt to discredit me.

More like an attempt to get you to stop your crap. Jondel "rejected" the
RFC because he didn't feel like putting up with it. I "rejected" the RFC
because it was clear it wasn't getting anywhere.
>
> I'd also like to note that SPUI is now using a
> sockpuppet account (use:Sockenpuppe) to make "prank"
> edits.

Hahahaha. Bad faith indeed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=Sockenpuppe


body:
Rick wrote:
> --- SPUI <drspui at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Rick wrote:
>>
>>>>"michaelturley at myway.com"
>>
>><michaelturley at myway.com>
>>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>I'd say RickK's treatment of Willswikihelp is
>>
>>pretty
>>
>>>>close to harrassing a new user
>>>
>>>This from User:Unfocused, who likes to run around
>>>attacking VfD nominations as bad faith.
>>
>>Ad-hominem bullshit.
>
> Pot. Kettle. Black.

Yeah Rick, good job of describing yourself.


body:
Rick wrote:
> --- "michaelturley at myway.com"
> <michaelturley at myway.com> wrote:
>
>>I have repeatedly asked RickK what about my comments
>>was a personal attack, and how I should rephrase
>>them, but RickK has completely ignored me, other
>>than to say that I'm "whining" on his talk page and
>>accuse me of personal attacks.  See
>>
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AVotes_for_deletion%2FZetor&diff=14596876&oldid=14596488
>
>>for the latest example.
>
> I have already commented on this subject on
> [[Wikipedia_talk:Votes_for_deletion#Removing_attacks_on_VfD_nominators.27_motives]],
> and have no intention of disussing it ad nauseum.

(translation for others who don't have the time to read that) I was
notified that what I was doing is wrong, but don't care and will continue.


body:
>> PS: Nice try on changing the "Reply to:" to avoid
> seeing my response on the list.  It didn't work.
>
>I have no idea what you're talking about.  I clicked
>"Reply" on Yahoo as I always do.
>
>RickK

Then I apologize for that.  That very well could have been (and probably was) a result of me using an unfamiliar webmail interface.   When I originally replied to MacGyverMagic/Mgm, the list was included.

I had originally subscribed to this list with no intention of ever posting to it, but since you didn't reply to any of my messages on your talk page, (except the last, which I've already mentioned) I decided to join the conversation here.

Again, I am sorry for having included that PS line on my previous email.

Now that we are corresponding, I want to know; is it your position that ANY suggestion to VfD nominators that they do cursory research before nomination is a "personal attack"?

Michael Turley
User:Unfocused

_______________________________________________
No banners. No pop-ups. No kidding.
Make My Way  your home on the Web - http://www.myway.com


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Recent goings-on

body:
Tony Sidaway wrote:
> SPUI said:
>
>>Jondel "rejected"
>>the  RFC because he didn't feel like putting up with it. I "rejected"
>>the RFC  because it was clear it wasn't getting anywhere.
>
> Well fair enough.  But it can't have been Rick's fault if the RFC didn't
> achieve the feedback you expected.  That's why it's called a Request for
> Comments--we put them out when we're stuck trying to resolve a problem by
> ourselves and we think the matter would benefit from some fresh eyes
> looking at it.
> I know some people think of it as some kind of disciplinary thing, and if
> you expected that then you would have been disappointed because it really
> isn't like that at all.

Well yeah, I got comments. Comments that proved to me that the whole
system is corrupt. I was hoping that those comments would persuade RickK
to rethink his actions, but I can be rather naive at times.

So if I did want to attempt to get RickK to stop, what would I do? File
an RFAr and hope ArbCom is impartial enough to accept?


from_name: David 'DJ' Hedley

body:
I've never suffered harassment by an admin although I have felt,
occasionally, that one or two are 'out to get you'. Some admins (which i'll
leave un-named) aren't able to see a second point of view, don't look in to
things, and act before they think. I've seen blocks logs where an admin
blocks an IP and ends up blocking 100 people, just because they didn't look
into it. Some admins don't necessarily abuse their powers, but are too quick
to use it. The issue when somebody is in their RfA, of course, is that it is
often hard to judge how that user will use their powers - many change their
ways after becoming an admin.


body:
Christopher Mahan said:
>
>
>> > We should have a zero tolerance policy on administrator
>> > abuse.
>
> I would add that admins should not email users privately since we
> want to be able to trace their activity. If the administrator is
> contacting the user via private email, it becomes a game of "he
> said", "she said".
>

I strongly disagree.  We have to communicate with blocked editors on a
daily basis.  This is unavoidable.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Falling Up

body:
FYI: I checked it earlier; Falling Up's album rates in at about #8700 on Amazon's album sales list.  This is far from a garage band playing church gigs.

Michael Turley
User:Unfocused

_______________________________________________
No banners. No pop-ups. No kidding.
Make My Way  your home on the Web - http://www.myway.com


list: foundation-l

from_name: Jakob Voss

subject: [Foundation-l] WorldCat Wiki, WikiData etc.

body:
Hi

OCLC is planing "a Wiki that complements WorldCat. People could add
reviews, cover art, comments, etc. and relate these to bibliographic
records (..). We hope the system is flexible enough so that people do
(good) things we?re not expecting. We?d like the Wiki to be available
anywhere WorldCat records are.":

http://outgoing.typepad.com/outgoing/2005/05/worldcat_wiki.html

Looks like competition - we should better cooperate with OCLC.

greetings,
Jakob


list: wikimedia-l


subject: [Wikipedia-l] WorldCat Wiki, WikiData etc.


from_name: james

body:
it would be great if a windows compatible 'unzipper' could be used for those
windows users - guess its a case of finding one


subject: [WikiEN-l] Recent goings-on

body:
SPUI said:
>> first, somewhat questionable to say the least.
>>
> You seriously read the following and determined they were substantially
>  the same?

Yes, clearly the same band which failed the music notability standard.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Falling Up

body:
>> FYI: I checked it earlier; Falling Up's album rates in at about #8700
>> on Amazon's album sales list.  This is far from a garage band playing
>> church gigs.
>>
>
>
>I'm not sure how to take that.  Number eight thousand, seven hundred?
>Really?
>

Well, it was earlier today, then I checked again and found it at around #11,700.  I don't have a clue how they calculate that or how much their hourly updates can swing the numbers, but apparently a lot.

Michael Turley
User:Unfocused

_______________________________________________
No banners. No pop-ups. No kidding.
Make My Way  your home on the Web - http://www.myway.com


subject: [WikiEN-l] Recent goings-on

body:
SPUI said:
> Tony Sidaway wrote:
>>
>> I don't think the RFC process is especially onerous.  Just slap
>> together a few diffs showing what has been done and the actions you
>> have taken to try to resolve the problem and how the other party has
>> reacted (or not reacted).  Get your co-complainant, who has tried and
>> failed to resolve the same problem, to certify with you, along with
>> his own evidence.  Move the RFC to certified status, notify the
>> subject, and await responses.  It's really just a formalization of
>> third party dispute resolution.
>
> That's the problem - the admin had to be abusive in the same way to
> someone else, and you have to locate that person. Somehow I don't find
> that very likely in the majority of cases.

No, you and someone else have to make an effort to deal with the *same*
problem.


from_name: SPUI

subject: [WikiEN-l] Recent goings-on

body:
Tony Sidaway wrote:
>
> The Everyking RFAr proved, if it needed to be, that admins are governed by
> the same standards that apply to all editors.

So now we just need to push RickK into becoming more trollish, and he
too will get sanctions.


from_name: drmike

subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: Problem with install

body:
Quoting Brion Vibber <brion at pobox.com>:

[Hide Quoted Text]
fillme at fillmewith.info wrote:

Are you using MySQL 4.1 or later? Check the RELEASE-NOTES section about
that.

4.1.11.  Again, it works find from the command line, just not from the
MediaWiki install page.

Then you should definitely read the release notes, and confirm that you
understand what's said there about MySQL 4.1 and that you have made sure
you have configured your system appropriately.

Actually we're already doing the old passwords for a different program that
didn't work well either.

It finally clicked this afternoon and installed fine. Had to refresh a couple of
times but it finally went through.  Not sure if the host did an upgrade or
something.  *shrug*  At least it works now.

Thanks again,
-drmike


subject: [WikiEN-l] Recent goings-on

body:
Tony Sidaway wrote:
> SPUI said:
>
>>Tony Sidaway wrote:
>>
>>>The Everyking RFAr proved, if it needed to be, that admins are
>>>governed by the same standards that apply to all editors.
>>
>>So now we just need to push RickK into becoming more trollish, and he
>>too will get sanctions.
>
> No.  But what kind of sanctions should he get, and for what reason?

Reason? Harassing new users. Sanctions? Not sure. Can't exactly ban him
from talking to new users.


from_name: no lssi no lssi

subject: [Wikitech-l] Solved duplicate entries on image table to update

body:
Hi!, i solve my last problem with image table.

I make this mysql script:

CREATE TABLE tmp_image (
  img_name varchar(255) binary NOT NULL default '',
  img_size int(8) unsigned NOT NULL default '0',
  img_description tinyblob NOT NULL default '',
  img_user int(5) unsigned NOT NULL default '0',
  img_user_text varchar(255) binary NOT NULL default
'',
  img_timestamp char(14) binary NOT NULL default ''
);

INSERT INTO tmp_image(img_name, img_size,
img_description, img_user, img_user_text,
img_timestamp) SELECT DISTINCT img_name, img_size,
img_description, img_user, img_user_text,
img_timestamp FROM image;

DELETE FROM image;

INSERT INTO image(img_name, img_size, img_description,
img_user, img_user_text, img_timestamp) SELECT
DISTINCT img_name, img_size, img_description,
img_user, img_user_text, img_timestamp FROM tmp_image;

DROP TABLE tmp_image;

And after, jeluf (thanks thanks thanks a lot :D) say
to me to reindex table with this script located on
maintenance/archive (hidde documented for friends...),
patch-image_name_unique.sql.

Well, now i'm on 1.4.x :D, but i have a little problem
with metanamespaces, on 1.3.11 i use on LocalSettings.
php a variable wgMetaNamespace with value
'enciclopedia'.

On lastest updates (maded with help of brion, tim,
dammit, and so so so more....if any time i get
official LAMP certification, on sign we must be all
;P)  works fine but now doesnt. Why? I cant find any
about this.

I'm waiting for your replies. :D

Greets.

______________________________________________
Renovamos el Correo Yahoo!
Nuevos servicios, m?s seguridad
http://correo.yahoo.es


from_name: Mark Williamson

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Response from vipuser.

body:
Hi all,

I have received a response from VIPUser which I reproduce in full here:

"about sc and tc

please stop clean the translation! the reason:
???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????!
if you can't understand the content, you can do the clean job after
you learn some chinese! thank you very much for your attention to the
chinese version wikimedia commons!"

What the Chinese part says is that basically asking if I understand
Wikipedia's policy towards Simplfied and Traditional Chinese, if I
want to know more I can check Chinese Wikipedia, that for temporary
purposes it's OK to use both but in the long term conversion... not
duplicate content... improve effectiveness... reduce workload... etc.

As a user of primarily Traditional Chinese, I can tell you that,
although it is manageable, the conversion software is certainly '''not
perfect''''  and that for official press releases, sites like commons,
and the like, it's best to have two separate versions.

One simple example is that the Simplified Mainpage on Commons uses
Roman numerals for dates and times; the Traditional uses Chinese
numerals. In other cases, there are special conversions which need to
take place concerning legal terms, computer terms, and all sorts of
other things which are not currently covered by the conversion
software.

If you go through zh.wikipedia, you'll quickly   find that much text
is either converted incorrectly or sometimes left entirely
unconverted.

I don't complain about it because it's still readable although it's
somewhat poor quality.

But in these cases, it's more important that people be able to read
content written in a correct manner.

Also keep in mihd that the situation is still basically a majority of
Simplified users who, from their point of view, are accommodating for
a minority to whom they can't relate - while most Simplified users
know Traditional pretty well and don't mind much reading content in it
occasionally, Simplified characters are very difficult and grating on
the eyes and mind of most people for whom Traditional is their first
script: Traditional is occasionally used on the Mainland because it is
used in historical documents, calligraphy (theoretically -
calligraphic forms are often more similar to the Simplified form),
sometimes as titles of books, and to make something seem a little
fancy. However, in Taiwan you will never see Simplified with few
exceptions. In Hong Kong, it used to be similar to Taiwan. Simplified
is becoming more common in Hong Kong and Macao, but still the
situation is not the same as the reverse on the mainland because its
use is still very rare in HK and Macao. In Singapore, although
Simplified is used officially, people actually use both (the same is
true in Malaysia).

So while a Simplified user might not mind a page written in Simplified
but with some words or phrases in Traditional, the reverse is very
annoying and visually displeasing to a Traditional user.

Mark

--
SI HOC LEGERE SCIS NIMIVM ERVDITIONIS HABES
QVANTVM MATERIAE MATERIETVR MARMOTA MONAX SI MARMOTA MONAX MATERIAM
POSSIT MATERIARI
ESTNE VOLVMEN IN TOGA AN SOLVM TIBI LIBET ME VIDERE


subject: [WikiEN-l] Popbitch / Michael Colvin

body:
On Thu, 2 Jun 2005 19:59:58 +0100 (BST), Tony Sidaway wrote

> I should add that I found the defamatory allegations not in the talk
> page
> (which had been zapped) but in the article itself, appended after
> the stub template.  I zapped the Michael Colvin article.  It will
> probably be recreated, so keep a lookout.

I have restored the safe revisions of [[Michael Colvin]] using selective
undelete; Hoshie's edit that removed the libel reverted the article to the
state it was in beforehand, and I've left that one deleted as well, so the
history credits all diffs correctly.

Rob
[[user:Rbrwr]]

--
Rob Brewer <rob at rbrwr.org> <http://rbrwr.org>
"This time I want cash, not forged book tokens"


from_name: geni

body:
On 6/2/05, David 'DJ' Hedley <spyders at btinternet.com> wrote:
> I've never suffered harassment by an admin although I have felt,
> occasionally, that one or two are 'out to get you'. Some admins (which i'll
> leave un-named) aren't able to see a second point of view, don't look in to
> things, and act before they think. I've seen blocks logs where an admin
> blocks an IP and ends up blocking 100 people, just because they didn't look
> into it. Some admins don't necessarily abuse their powers, but are too quick
> to use it. The issue when somebody is in their RfA, of course, is that it is
> often hard to judge how that user will use their powers - many change their
> ways after becoming an admin.

There is no real way of cheacking this in advance.
--
geni


from_name: Alfio Puglisi

body:
On Thu, 2 Jun 2005, Timwi wrote:

>Alfio Puglisi wrote:
>>
>> GNU tar on Cygwin extracts all files correctly, except for the last
>> ones [...]. pax doesn't seem to be available for Cygwin. I found with
>> surprise that there's one included with windows, but it doesn't work.
>
>Have you tried Winzip? I have always extracted [.tar].gz files with
>Winzip, and it always worked fine. (It doesn't do bzip2 though,
>unfortunately.)

Winzip gives an error:

"Error reading header after processing 2872 entries"

and doesn't extract any file.

Alfio


from_name: BJörn Lindqvist

subject: [WikiEN-l] Recent goings-on

body:
> >> first, somewhat questionable to say the least.
> >>
> > You seriously read the following and determined they were substantially
> >  the same?
>
> Yes, clearly the same band which failed the music notability standard.

What is the music notability standard and why does it fail one of the
most popular Christian rock bands?

--
mvh Bj?rn


from_name: Tony Sidaway

subject: [WikiEN-l] Popbitch / Michael Colvin

body:
Rob Brewer said:
>
> Do we really want to be carrying this stuff? If not we will have to
> delete it, both from the article (using selective undelete) and the
> talk page, and probably protect the pages to stop it being pasted back
> in again.

This is extremely serious abuse--the worst I have ever seen.  As it's not
really encyclopedic and in my opinion may pose a danger to Wikipedia I've
taken the liberty of deleting it.  I know this is not included in the
deletion policy but this series of patently false and extremely damaging
allegations could expose Wikipedia to a rather hefty defamation suit.


list: wiktionary-l

subject: [Wiktionary-l] (no subject)

body:
Ray Saintonge wrote:

> Jimmy Wales wrote:
>
>> rb_wiktionary at boult.mailshell.com wrote:
>>
>>
>>> From what little I have learned so far of this idea, including the
>>> complete
>>> lack of communication with the user community, the idea of
>>> introducing a new
>>> more technical Ultimate Wiktionary sounds like a disaster waiting to
>>> happen.
>>>
>>
>> Well, I think we can avert disaster now that everyone is talking.  I did
>> not personally realize that people weren't fully informed about this --
>> that's my own fault.
>>
>>
> There's no need to blame yourself on this one.  Gerard did raise his
> idea some time ago, although someone like rb didn't come onto the
> scene until later, and was bound to find this more alarming than I.
> This doesn't mean that I agree with or even understand all of Gerard's
> proposal.  It's a fact of life that new technical proposals are
> constantly being raised.  Our developers know to exercise caution
> before giving them the green light, and you should not be put in a
> position to approve things before their time.  Let's just say that
> Gerard's promotional claims have run far ahead of his technical
> developments.
>
> Ec

Ray,
There is no need to be alarmed. It is not me who is going to do the
programming. It is not even be only me who will design the files and
their relations. There are several interested parties with awareness of
this subject that want to play a part. There are professionals in the
language industry who like the idea. They are translators, they are
language technicians. Apart from that I do have some awareness of what
computers and relational databases can do. I even have some
qualifications. As to our programmers, it is our chief of research who
is the architect of Wikidata, the underlying engine of what "Ultimate
Wiktionary" will be built on.

Promotional claims, no they are verifiable claims. Understanding what
the technical concepts are and understanding what it can be used is
something that I do claim. I have done the footwork on the Dutch
wiktionary, I have implemented the ideas that make the nl.wiktionary
tick in the fa.wiktionary to see what the issues are in a right to left
language.

As to giving the green light, we are passed that point. There is a green
light. We are programming. Ultimate Wiktionary has moved from an idea to
the implementation phase. This is the time to talk about what a database
scheme should look like. This is not a time to sit back and relax.

Thanks,
    GerardM


subject: [WikiEN-l] Popbitch / Michael Colvin

body:
Tony Sidaway said:
> Rob Brewer said:
>>
>> Do we really want to be carrying this stuff? If not we will have to
>> delete it, both from the article (using selective undelete) and the
>> talk page, and probably protect the pages to stop it being pasted back
>> in again.
>
> This is extremely serious abuse--the worst I have ever seen.  As it's
> not really encyclopedic and in my opinion may pose a danger to
> Wikipedia I've taken the liberty of deleting it.  I know this is not
> included in the deletion policy but this series of patently false and
> extremely damaging allegations could expose Wikipedia to a rather hefty
> defamation suit.

I should add that I found the defamatory allegations not in the talk page
(which had been zapped) but in the article itself, appended after the stub
template.  I zapped the Michael Colvin article.  It will probably be
recreated, so keep a lookout.


from_name: Charles Matthews

subject: [WikiEN-l] Popbitch / Michael Colvin

body:
I think Wiki-en has got off very lightly, as far as legal problems and
defamation issues is concerned.  I see that Alexa now makes WP #46 of
English sites on the Web.  There will come a point when not having serious
assets is not an adequate defence against the litigious.  (I'm not saying WP
doesn't have other lines of defence, but 'not worth suing' may not last
forever as the _first_ of those.)

Charles

PS IANAL, all that ...


subject: [WikiEN-l] Recent goings-on

body:
BJ?rn Lindqvist said:
>> >> first, somewhat questionable to say the least.
>> >>
>> > You seriously read the following and determined they were
>> > substantially
>> >  the same?
>>
>> Yes, clearly the same band which failed the music notability standard.
>
> What is the music notability standard?

This beastie:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Music/Notability_and_Music_Guidelines

> and why does it fail one of the most popular Christian rock bands?

Um, we're not talking about Payable on Death and whatnot, just some guys
who put out their album over the internet and are still playing church
gigs.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Popbitch / Michael Colvin

body:
On Thu, 2 Jun 2005 21:26:28 +0100 (BST), Tony Sidaway wrote
> I tried to fix the Derek Laud article the same way but now I can't
> see the history.  Perhaps some database lag, or maybe I screwed up.
> There are some mischievous edits that aren't defamatory (using the
> word bummer, etc, just vulgar abuse) and I tried restoring those but
> the serious allegations I kept deleted and also some of the less
> defamatory but unsupported stuff

Now you're the braver man. There is a danger, in case like this, of making the
history misleading and thus putting us in violation of the GFDL. [[Michael
Colvin]] was simple; this one looks like it wasn't.

Rob
[[user:Rbrwr]]

--
Rob Brewer <rob at rbrwr.org> <http://rbrwr.org>
"This time I want cash, not forged book tokens"


from_name: David Gerard

subject: [WikiEN-l] Recent goings-on

body:
BJ?rn Lindqvist (bjourne at gmail.com) [050602 19:12]:

> their initials so that readers themselves can do their research and
> see that the situation actually is as atrocious as I have described.

I think you lost me when you talked earlier about how oppressed Lir was
by the arbitration process.

- d.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Popbitch / Michael Colvin

body:
Rob Brewer said:
>
> I have restored the safe revisions of [[Michael Colvin]] using
> selective undelete; Hoshie's edit that removed the libel reverted the
> article to the state it was in beforehand, and I've left that one
> deleted as well, so the history credits all diffs correctly.
>

Thanks.  You're a braver man than I.


from_name: Jack Lynch

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Recent goings-on

body:
Are you seriously suggesting RickK not engage in Ad Hominem arguments?

Jack (Sam Spade)

On 6/2/05, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell at gmail.com> wrote:
> Why not make an attempt at discrediting the position rather than the
> person arguing it?
>
> On 6/2/05, Rick <giantsrick13 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > --- SPUI <drspui at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > What the fuck are you smoking?
> >
> > Knock off the attacks on the mailing list.  I'd like
> > to mention that SPUI is also a member of the GNAA.
> >
> > RickK
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > __________________________________
> > Yahoo! Mail Mobile
> > Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Check email on your mobile phone.
> > http://mobile.yahoo.com/learn/mail
> > _______________________________________________
> > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


subject: [WikiEN-l] Popbitch / Michael Colvin

body:
I tried to fix the Derek Laud article the same way but now I can't see the
history.  Perhaps some database lag, or maybe I screwed up.  There are
some mischievous edits that aren't defamatory (using the word bummer, etc,
just vulgar abuse) and I tried restoring those but the serious allegations
I kept deleted and also some of the less defamatory but unsupported stuff


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Recent goings-on

body:
SPUI said:

> Jondel "rejected"
> the  RFC because he didn't feel like putting up with it. I "rejected"
> the RFC  because it was clear it wasn't getting anywhere.
>>

Well fair enough.  But it can't have been Rick's fault if the RFC didn't
achieve the feedback you expected.  That's why it's called a Request for
Comments--we put them out when we're stuck trying to resolve a problem by
ourselves and we think the matter would benefit from some fresh eyes
looking at it.
I know some people think of it as some kind of disciplinary thing, and if
you expected that then you would have been disappointed because it really
isn't like that at all.


from_name: Rick

body:
--- "michaelturley at myway.com"
<michaelturley at myway.com> wrote:
> Now that we are corresponding, I want to know; is it
> your position that ANY suggestion to VfD nominators
> that they do cursory research before nomination is a
> "personal attack"?
>
> Michael Turley
> User:Unfocused

As I have said repeatedly, all you have to do is to
indicate that your own Google search revealed notable
links.  Attacking other people's motives is not on.

RickK

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


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Recent goings-on

body:
SPUI said:
>
> Well yeah, I got comments. Comments that proved to me that the whole
> system is corrupt. I was hoping that those comments would persuade
> RickK  to rethink his actions, but I can be rather naive at times.

I'm not sure what you mean by "the system."  People just give their
opinions in a RfC, it's pretty free-format.

You and jondell got five endorsements.  RickK made a response that got got
one endorsement.  SnowSpinner made an outside view that said "Wikipedia
would more or less stop running without RickK" and unsurprisingly that got
14 endorsements (it didn't say anything about the merits of the case).
jpgordon wrote a pretty neutral suggestion that RickK back off and let
another administrator deal with the problem, and this got three
endorsements.  Mackensen said it was a storm in a teacup and got eleven
endorsements.  Firebug wrote a response mildly chiding RickK for not
acting in the way he did and for not responding to the RfC (he did
subsequently respond).  This got nine endorsements--including one from
you!  Kim Bruning wrote another broadly hagiographic outside view that got
thirteen endorsements.

This seems like a good haul to me.  I don't know what you expected, but
there does seem to be a substantial recognition there that RickK is
generally a good administrator but he makes mistakes.   I think that's
pretty fair.

You then wrote a final "outside view" claiming you had been trolled.

>
> So if I did want to attempt to get RickK to stop, what would I do? File
>  an RFAr and hope ArbCom is impartial enough to accept?

What precisely was he continuing to do that you thought he should stop
doing?  Just deleting some articles?  Probably better to take that to VFU.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Falling Up

body:
michaelturley at myway.com said:
>
>
> FYI: I checked it earlier; Falling Up's album rates in at about #8700
> on Amazon's album sales list.  This is far from a garage band playing
> church gigs.
>

I'm not sure how to take that.  Number eight thousand, seven hundred?
Really?


from_name: Andrew Venier

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Falling Up

body:
michaelturley at myway.com wrote:

>
>> FYI: I checked it earlier; Falling Up's album rates in at about #8700
>> on Amazon's album sales list.  This is far from a garage band playing
>> church gigs.
>>
>
>
>I'm not sure how to take that.  Number eight thousand, seven hundred?
>Really?
>
>
>Well, it was earlier today, then I checked again and found it at around #11,700.  I don't have a clue how they calculate that or how much their hourly updates can swing the numbers, but apparently a lot.
>
Evidently a it varies a lot -- currently appears to be #17,402
<http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B0001DMU7M/>.

I don't know that these numbers mean a lot.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Recent goings-on

body:
On 6/2/05, BJ?rn Lindqvist <bjourne at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I don't think the RFC process is especially onerous.  Just slap together a
> > few diffs showing what has been done and the actions you have taken to try
> > to resolve the problem and how the other party has reacted (or not
> > reacted).  Get your co-complainant, who has tried and failed to resolve
> > the same problem, to certify with you, along with his own evidence.  Move
>
> Easier said than done. Locating your co-complainant is the tricky
> part. You just won't find many editors on Wikipedia who's first
> experience of the community was a banning. They tend to leave pretty
> quickly.
>
> > Successful arbitration cases have been brought against administrators,
> > some of them resulting in loss of administrator powers.  Usually in such
> > cases there has been consensus amongst other administrators that a
> > particular admin has gone too far.
>
> I think I remember one case in which the ArbCom revoked administrator
> privilegies from an admin. Some admin who had a name consisting of
> tree digits and was not 172. But you are talking in pluralis meaning
> that you have seen more than one instance of this happening. It would
> very good if you could describe the events so that we can see how far
> an admin actually can go before he or she loses his or hers
> privilegies. Set a precedence, formalize the rules, so that it doesn't
> seem like admins are VIP:s with diplomatic immunity.
>
> --
> mvh Bj?rn
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

172 and Guanaco have both lost their adminship due to arbcom cases. a
full ist of admins who have lost thier adminship (for a number of
reasons) may be found at
[[Wikipedia:List_of_administrators#Former_Administrators]]

--
geni


subject: [WikiEN-l] Recent goings-on

body:
BJ?rn Lindqvist said:
>> I don't think the RFC process is especially onerous.  Just slap
>> together a few diffs showing what has been done and the actions you
>> have taken to try to resolve the problem and how the other party has
>> reacted (or not reacted).  Get your co-complainant, who has tried and
>> failed to resolve the same problem, to certify with you, along with
>> his own evidence.  Move
>
> Easier said than done. Locating your co-complainant is the tricky
> part. You just won't find many editors on Wikipedia who's first
> experience of the community was a banning. They tend to leave pretty
> quickly.
>
>> Successful arbitration cases have been brought against administrators,
>> some of them resulting in loss of administrator powers.  Usually in
>> such cases there has been consensus amongst other administrators that
>> a particular admin has gone too far.
>
> I think I remember one case in which the ArbCom revoked administrator
> privilegies from an admin. Some admin who had a name consisting of tree
> digits and was not 172. But you are talking in pluralis meaning that
> you have seen more than one instance of this happening. It would very
> good if you could describe the events so that we can see how far an
> admin actually can go before he or she loses his or hers
> privilegies.

There's a list of five cases of desysopping:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_de-adminship

> Set a precedence, formalize the rules, so that it doesn't
> seem like admins are VIP:s with diplomatic immunity.

The Everyking RFAr proved, if it needed to be, that admins are governed by
the same standards that apply to all editors.


from_name: Timwi

subject:
[Wikitech-l] Re: [Wikipedia-l] server maintenance on June 1,
	3 a.m. UTC

body:
Tels wrote:
>
> And in addition, I hope that now not only the passwords are salted, but
> actually include more measures against brute-forcing, like hashing the
> password 10000 times, or using something stronger than MD5.

That doesn't make it any more resistant against brute-forcing.

Timwi


subject: [WikiEN-l] Recent goings-on

body:
SPUI said:
> Tony Sidaway wrote:
>>
>> The Everyking RFAr proved, if it needed to be, that admins are
>> governed by the same standards that apply to all editors.
>
> So now we just need to push RickK into becoming more trollish, and he
> too will get sanctions.

No.  But what kind of sanctions should he get, and for what reason?


subject: [WikiEN-l] Recent goings-on

body:
> > What is the music notability standard?
> This beastie:
> > and why does it fail one of the most popular Christian rock bands?
>
> Um, we're not talking about Payable on Death and whatnot, just some guys
> who put out their album over the internet and are still playing church
> gigs.

I don't know what Payable on Death is. I see now that the Notability
and Music Guidelines are pretty strict. But still, these guys produce
25,000+ relevant hits on Google. Is there maybe some other Christian
band named Falling Up or maybe a Christian hymn? Not long ago, 25,000
hits was an automatic keeper.

--
mvh Bj?rn


subject: [WikiEN-l] Recent goings-on

body:
> > their initials so that readers themselves can do their research and
> > see that the situation actually is as atrocious as I have described.
>
> I think you lost me when you talked earlier about how oppressed Lir was
> by the arbitration process.

What are you talking about? I said that Lir was harassed by certain
admins, not opressed by the fine men and women in the Arbitration
Commitee.

--
mvh Bj?rn


from_name: QuotationsBook.com Webmaster/Support

subject: [Wikitech-l] people biographies pulled in via RSS

body:
Hello

I'm constructing a large literary resource, and would like to query
articles about authors automatically, and receive Wikipedia articles
back as RSS/XML documents to present in my website, with all the
relevant backlinks to wikipedia.

Does Wikipedia have customised syndication of its content?

Regards
Amit
quotationsbook.com


subject: [WikiEN-l] Recent goings-on

body:
> I don't think the RFC process is especially onerous.  Just slap together a
> few diffs showing what has been done and the actions you have taken to try
> to resolve the problem and how the other party has reacted (or not
> reacted).  Get your co-complainant, who has tried and failed to resolve
> the same problem, to certify with you, along with his own evidence.  Move

Easier said than done. Locating your co-complainant is the tricky
part. You just won't find many editors on Wikipedia who's first
experience of the community was a banning. They tend to leave pretty
quickly.

> Successful arbitration cases have been brought against administrators,
> some of them resulting in loss of administrator powers.  Usually in such
> cases there has been consensus amongst other administrators that a
> particular admin has gone too far.

I think I remember one case in which the ArbCom revoked administrator
privilegies from an admin. Some admin who had a name consisting of
tree digits and was not 172. But you are talking in pluralis meaning
that you have seen more than one instance of this happening. It would
very good if you could describe the events so that we can see how far
an admin actually can go before he or she loses his or hers
privilegies. Set a precedence, formalize the rules, so that it doesn't
seem like admins are VIP:s with diplomatic immunity.

--
mvh Bj?rn


subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: image dump

body:
Kate Turner wrote:
>
> hmm. i completely forgot that people might want to extract the images under
> non-Unix systems... :-(  the pax format is standard, but it's not widely
> used

Why do you have to use it if it's so poorly supported?


subject:
[Wikitech-l] Re: Bug 1133 EmailUser: additional option to send a
 (blind) copy to oneself

body:
Thomas Gries wrote:
> I'm interested, if an implementation of this would be appreciated by you
> all

It wouldn't be in MediaZilla and still open if it wouldn't. :-)


subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: Solved duplicate entries on image table to update

body:
no lssi no lssi wrote:
>
> I make this mysql script:

That script copies the entire table around twice. I'm curious to know
how long that took (but then again, I don't really know how large the
table is at all).

Much more efficient would be:

ALTER TABLE image ADD COLUMN tmp_id int auto_increment;
ALTER TABLE image ADD UNIQUE INDEX (tmp_id);
DELETE FROM image WHERE tmp_id IN (SELECT i2.tmp_id FROM
	image i1, image i2 WHERE i1.tmp_id<i2.tmp AND
	i1.img_name=i2.img_name);
ALTER TABLE image DROP COLUMN tmp_id;

though I haven't tried if this works on MySQL.

Timwi


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Falling Up

body:
Matt Brown said:
> On 6/2/05, michaelturley at myway.com <michaelturley at myway.com> wrote:
>> FYI: I checked it earlier; Falling Up's album rates in at about #8700
>> on Amazon's album  sales list.  This is far from a garage band playing
>> church gigs.
>
> It would be interesting to see in what musical company such a sales
> ranking gives them.

http://www.ryantown.com/gayboyfriend/


subject: [WikiEN-l] Recent goings-on

body:
BJ?rn Lindqvist said:
>
> I don't know what Payable on Death is.

Probably the most popular Christian rock group.  Their last album even
managed to get banned from Christian record stores because of some
actually rather tame cover artwork, and enter the mainstream charts at
number nine.


from_name: Brion Vibber

subject: [Wikitech-l] LDAP Authentication and Mediawiki 1.5

body:
Lane, Ryan wrote:
> Is this still being considered to be added to mediawiki 1.5? I'm almost
> positive
> all of the changes to the core code that are required for all of my planned
> functionality have been added. Almost all of the changes that were made were
> hooks, the rest were for security. If there are any required changes,
> bugfixes, or security concerns, let me know.

I'll take a look over it tonight...

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 253 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20050602/6c073f58/attachment.pgp>


subject:
Shocking behavior towards Willswikihelp (was Re: [WikiEN-l] Recent
	goings-on)

body:
SPUI said:
> Tony Sidaway wrote:
>  But what kind of sanctions should he get, and for what reason?
>
> Reason? Harassing new users. Sanctions? Not sure. Can't exactly ban him
>  from talking to new users.

You have a good point. I just looked the  Willswikihelp case.  He bit a
newcomer who wrote a little eulogy to Sonny Bono in the middle of the
South Lake Tahoe, California article.  That's very bad behavior.  What
made it even worse was that another editor backed him up.  A touch of
groupthink there, I think.

I hope RickK will apologise to this guy.  This really didn't look like
vandalism, just a newcomer making an inappropriate edit.

Then RickK jumps into Isabella Allende and reverts what looks to me like a
reasonable, if wordy, edit about her children's books.  Cantus jumps in
and does the same thing.  Very bad behavior.

SchmuckytheCat then goes and lists Chertsey.jpg, which Willswikihelp
uploaded, on IFD claiming it was "no source, uploaded by vandal" and
without going to Willswikihelp asking him to complete the licensing
information on the image.

There's a huge failure to assume good faith here, and I see absolutely no
reason for it.  The image was in effect trashed without any kind of good
faith request for licensing information.  That kind of behavior is
enormously bad for Wikipedia.

I'm shocked.


from_name: Matt Brown

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Falling Up

body:
On 6/2/05, Andrew Venier <avenier at venier.net> wrote:
> Evidently a it varies a lot -- currently appears to be #17,402
> <http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B0001DMU7M/>.
>
> I don't know that these numbers mean a lot.

I suspect that it's heavily rated by recent sales, and thus is
probably meaningless for lower-ranked items.

-Matt (User:Morven)


subject: [WikiEN-l] Redress against personal attack?

body:
On 6/3/05, Dan Grey <dangrey101 at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> I'd like to know what my options are after Ambi called me a jerk:

I think enough whining about this has gone on already.  You told the
arbcom to "stop playing Perry Mason and go write some articles".  Ambi
took exception to this and called you a jerk.  Much childishness
ensued.

I'd suggest that both you and Ambi quit this and get about doing
something more useful for the whole project.

And although the whole Wikipedia dispute resolution process is
convoluted and somewhat painful, it serves a necessary purpose and is
the least bad way of dealing with certain problems we've yet managed
to devise.  Saying "why can't we all just get along?" doesn't work
when some people are determined to NOT get along.

-Matt (User:Morven)


subject: [WikiEN-l] Popbitch / Michael Colvin

body:
Rob Brewer (rob at rbrwr.org) [050603 02:25]:

> This week's edition of the UK entertainment scandal e-mail Popbitch (see
> [[Popbitch]]) includes a link to [[Talk:Michael Colvin]] which includes some
> "bizarre conspiracy theories" relating to [[Derek Laud]], a contestant on the
> current series of Big Brother. User:Smoddy deleted them as "possibly
> libellous" but they have been restored. They also exist in the history of
> [[Michael Colvin]] at
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Michael_Colvin&oldid=6052341
> Do we really want to be carrying this stuff? If not we will have to delete it,
> both from the article (using selective undelete) and the talk page, and
> probably protect the pages to stop it being pasted back in again.
> Opinions?

It's been deleted from the talk page once (admins can see it, and IANAL but
I have been a journalist, and it sure smelt like defamation to me). This is
close to zap on sight IMO. (It's certainly original research if the
documentation backing it up isn't to hand.) May need to keep an eye on the
article and talk page for a while, yes.

- d.


subject: [WikiEN-l] tempforcomments@hotmail.com

body:
tempforcomments2 at hotmail.com wrote:

:I've been banned from the list for speaking out.
:I shudder to think what would have happened if I revealed my Wikipedia
:username or my name on this list.

Sorry, that was me - I removed the address (not banned it) thinking it was
Enviroknot trolling again - didn't realise it was Everyking. You are free
to resubscribe the address if you wish to.

- d.


from_name: Guaka

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Paid-for-articles WPs in smaller languages

body:
On Tue, 2005-05-31 at 15:37 +0200, Wouter Steenbeek wrote:
> Guaka scripsit:
> > >From my experience with both the Limburgish and the Bambara Wikipedia
> >nearly all existing institutes won't really bother as long as there's
> >not a basic amount of articles.
>
> Well, in the case of the Limburgic wikipedia: the institutions were simply
> ignorant of the project. Recently we started contacting some of them,
> receiving positive reactions and some beginning edits, even though they
> hadn't yet informed their members.

Well they were ignorant because they ignored the emails when there
wasn't yet a basic amount of articles. I've sent mails before (I must
confess I forgot where exactly) and apparently Node ue has done the
same. So the institutions were ignorant because they ignored it. Which
is reasonable, since there was nothing to see yet. Or nothing of
interest to inform their members about.

Institutions usually consist of persons. It'll depend on the person who
reads the mail on what's being done with it. If the Wikipedia is bigger
chances are higher that the person will (re)act. Same if the person
heard about Wikipedia (in general) before. Even more if the person would
know that there are Wikipedia projects in nearly 200 languages.

Guaka!


from_name: Erik Moeller

subject: [Wikitech-l] Email authentication on Wikimedia wikis

body:
Hi,

re: the new email authentication in 1.5: I assume it will be necessary
for a user to authenticate themselves on every wiki on which they have
an account to use email features on that wiki. For Wikimedia, where many
people have accounts on a dozen wikis or more, that might be a major
PITA. I would suggest disabling this until we have single login --
unless someone is willing to hack it so that a single authentication
will take effect for all wikis.

Best,

Erik


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: tempforcomments@hotmail.com

body:
:Sorry, that was me - I removed the address (not banned it) thinking it was
:Enviroknot trolling again - didn't realise it was Everyking. You are free
:to resubscribe the address if you wish to.

Everyking just told me on IRC that tempforcomments is *not* him. So it's
someone imitating him, i.e. trolling.

- d.


subject: [Foundation-l] First research meeting: June 5, 20:00 UTC

body:
The Wikimedia Research Team ..

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

.. is a new working group focused on studying Wikimedia's content and
technology, developing recommendations and specifications, and building
bridges between outside researchers, developers, the Board, and the
community.

The WRT is open for anyone to join. It is a way to channel information
and communications, nothing more.

The first meeting of the Wikimedia Research Team will take place on
Sunday, June 5, at 20:00 UTC. To figure out what this is in your
timezone, go to:

	http://worldtimeserver.com/current_time_in_UTC.aspx

The IRC meeting will take place in the channel #wikimedia-research on
irc.freenode.net, where all the Wikimedia IRC channels are. See

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

if you need help connecting.

Some organizational topics for the agenda:

* Agreeing on the structure and mission of the Team
* Building a membership roster with a list of interests for each member
* Systematically inviting individuals from all fields of research to
participate
* Distinguishing between high priority issues that affect the whole Team
and issues that should be discussed in breakaway groups
* Deciding which tools to use where (e.g. when to use Bugzilla, when to
use Meta)
* Defining the first breakaway groups

Some specific deliverables I'd personally like to start working on soon:

* Development task framework. How important is a specific task, how
suitable is it for newbie developers, how suitable for outside
development (e.g. extensions), how important is it for Wikimedia? A
general procedure for deciding when a task should move from volunteer
development into a recommendation for targeted (paid) development is
also needed.
* Research projects. I'm sure there are many students who'd like to do a
thesis on Wikimedia. We can develop a list of worthwhile topics to
study. For example: "It would be interesting to compare how, *over a
range of defined topics* (e.g. 'articles that any encyclopedia should
have'), how our content has developed over time -- in size, number of
images, links, and so on." Or: "A distributed survey among experts on
the quality of Wikipedia articles vs. articles in other encyclopedias."
* Community meetings. I want to have IRC meetings with each Wikimedia
project community (Wikipedia, Wikinews, Wikibooks, Wikisource,
Wikiquote, Wikispecies, Wiktionary, Wikicommons, Meta-Wiki) to listen to
their individual needs and discuss possible solutions with them.

But, as noted above, we have to agree in consensus which issues are high
priority and concern the group as a whole.

I would be very glad if you could make it. Please also invite others to
come, and to join the team itself at
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Research_Team

The IRC log from the meeting will be made public.

Let me know if you have any questions.

All best,

Erik M?ller
Chief Research Officer, Wikimedia Foundation


subject: [Wikitech-l] First research meeting: June 5, 20:00 UTC


from_name: Kevin Carillo

subject: [Wikitech-l] PHP script and edit size

body:
I am writing a PHP script which aim is to retrieve the size of each row of
the history of several articles.
For this, I've spent some time looking at the different PHP files in
wiki/includesto try to understand the overall architecture of mediawiki.
I am not an expert in PHP, but my skils in C/C++ and Java (long time ago
though :) helped me.
My script reads a list of articles in an input file, and write in an output
file, the total length and the realtive size of each edit (difference
between current length and previous one). I am using the function
Article::getRevisionText in order to get the full text version of old_text.
It works perfectly for a limited number of articles, but the script stops
randomly when the list is longer.
It never stops at the same place even though around the same article (but
never at the same sql row), which makes me think that there is probably an
error related to memory or buffer issues and sql queries maybe, or at least
something being full that needs to be emptied.
I've spent several days but my limited PHP skills do not allow me to fix the
bug.
I am not asking anyone to debug the PHP file, but can anyone have a quick
look at the code to tell me whether there are problems in freeing memory,
buffers, sql results or anything that would justify the behaviour of the
script?
That would be a great help for my master thesis.

Thank you.

Kevin Carillo

<?php

define( 'MEDIAWIKI', true );
require_once( './includes/Defines.php' );
require_once( './LocalSettings.php' );
require_once( 'includes/Setup.php' );

$article_title     = "";
$prev_article_size =0;
$contrib_size      =0;
$count_edit        =0;
$log_file_nb       =1;
$count_article_20  =1;
$count_article     =1;

#get database handler
$dbw =& wfGetDB( DB_MASTER );

#open log_file
$log_file = fopen("c:/www/contrib/nms0/nms0_archive_$log_file_nb.txt",'w');

# open file which contains titles of all articles
$article_title_file = fopen('c:/www/contrib/article_title_list.txt','r');

# main while loop that read the file containing titles pf articles
while (!feof($article_title_file)) {

    # prepare log_file: open new file if 20 articles have been logged in
current log_file
   if ($count_article_20 >20) {

    # close current handler
    fclose($log_file);

    # prepare name of new log_file
    $log_file_nb ++;

    # reset nb of edits of the vurrent articles
    $count_edit = 0;

    # open new log file
    $log_file =
fopen("c:/www/contrib/nms0/nms0_archive_$log_file_nb.txt",'w');

    # reset counter
    $count_article_20 =1;
  }

   # get current article title
   $article_title_temp = fgets($article_title_file, 300);

   # fgets adds a space character at the end of the article title -> remove
it
   if (strpos($article_title_temp,' ') == FALSE) {
      $article_title = substr
($article_title_temp,0,strlen($article_title_tempstrlen)-2);
   }
  else
      $article_title = $article_title_temp;

  fwrite($log_file,"\n Article: $article_title Nb: $count_article\n");
  fwrite($log_file,"------------------------------------------------\n");

    # get history of the article
    $query="select old_id, old_title, old_text, old_flags, old_timestamp
             from old where old_namespace=0 and old_title =
\"$article_title\"
          order by old_timestamp;";

    $obj = $dbw->doQuery($query);
    #$dbw->deadlockLoop();

   if ( $dbw->numRows( $obj ) ) {

     while ( $row = $dbw->fetchObject( $obj ) ) {

           $count_edit++;

            $old_id             =  $row->old_id;
            $old_title           =  $row->old_title;
            $old_timestamp = $row->old_timestamp;

            $old_text_full = Article::getRevisionText($row);

            # calculate length
            $length = strlen($old_text_full);
            # calculate contribution size
            $contrib_size=$length - $prev_article_size;
            #keep length of article in $prev_article_size
            $prev_article_size = $length;

            fwrite($log_file,"old_title: $old_title edit nb:$count_edit ");
            fwrite($log_file,"   length:$length sold_timestamp:
$old_timestamp contrib_size: $contrib_size \n");

         } # end while loop SQL results

        $dbw->freeResult( $obj );
    } # end if
  else {
    fwrite($log_file,"$sold_title : No History. \n ");
    }

  # update count of articles to track for log_file
  $count_article_20++;

  # update total nb of articles processed
  $count_article++;

 } # end while loop article titles

  # close file handlers
  fclose($log_file);
  fclose($article_title_file);

?>


from_name: Thomas Gries

subject:
[Wikitech-l] Email authentication on Wikimedia wikis + Single
	user sign-on

body:
Erik Moeller schrieb:

> re: the new email authentication in 1.5: I assume it will be necessary
> for a user to authenticate themselves on every wiki on which they have
> an account to use email features on that wiki. For Wikimedia, where
> many people have accounts on a dozen wikis or more, that might be a
> major PITA. I would suggest disabling this until we have single login
> -- unless someone is willing to hack it so that a single
> authentication will take effect for all wikis.

I only can say again: http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/SUL -- single user
login is a long-wanted,
one user database for common unique name and user accounts a must.

The Mediawiki page shows the three most important proposals.

Is Kate's namechecker http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Namecheck again
available ? Kate had programmed a neat tool, with which those accounts
with the same certain name accross all wikis could be identified. In
addition, those with the same stored e-mail address where also
indentified by same numbers... it was a really nice tool and a kind of
pre-requisite for SUL

Perhaps it would be clever to delay the work towards release 1.5 and to
concentrate on this long-wanted SUL ?
T.


body:
Lane, Ryan wrote:
> I've added my latest LDAP Authentication patch to bugzilla:
>
> http://bugzilla.wikipedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=814
>
> I will update my corresponding documentation to match the current patch
> level. This documentation is located here:
>
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/LDAP_Authentication
>
> Is this still being considered to be added to mediawiki 1.5? I'm almost
> positive all of the changes to the core code that are required for all of my planned
> functionality have been added. Almost all of the changes that were made were
> hooks, the rest were for security. If there are any required changes,
> bugfixes, or security concerns, let me know.

Cool! Doesn't look like the core changes should break anything; I've
checked those in. I haven't touched the plugin itself yet, but we could
put it in CVS with our other extensions.

One nit: there's inconsistent use of tabs versus spaces for indentation;
I went ahead and normalized the bits I checked in to tabs.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 253 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20050603/36417b5e/attachment.pgp>


from_name: Fred Bauder

body:
There are no untouchables, however, this incident will be looked at
in the context of all of Ambi's behavior, which means that it is
unlikely that we will dump all over someone who generally acts in a
responsible way. It is possible for a Wikipedia user to destroy their
reputation by repeatedly trading on it in an inappropriate way, but
it takes a series of incidents.

As to a channel of redress, begin with Ambi. As to whether further
steps are appropriate, use common sense. Are we dealing with an
important problem or an isolated incident?

Fred

On Jun 3, 2005, at 1:48 AM, Dan Grey wrote:

> I'd like to know what my options are after Ambi called
> me a jerk:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
> Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_arbitration#Everyking_3_deadlock.3F
>
> Now, before I make a fool of myself making an
> inappropiate fuss on the wiki, maybe someone could
> tell me if there are any proper channels of redress
> for this kind of thing, whether or not Ambi is
> 'untouchable' and therefore it's not worth me
> defending myself.
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Dan100
>
>
>
>
>
> ___________________________________________________________
> How much free photo storage do you get? Store your holiday
> snaps for FREE with Yahoo! Photos http://uk.photos.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


body:
No, even Ambi would agree that it is not ok to call someone a jerk.
But is it to be "Never forget; never forgive" or "Live and let live"?
Or is there a serious problem here that we all need to closely look
at? I would say the criteria for judging that question would be
whether this problem goes on an on or whether Ambi as well as you is
willing to forgive and forget.

Fred

On Jun 3, 2005, at 3:22 AM, Dan Grey wrote:

> So can I take it as being OK to call someone a jerk?
>
>
> Dan100
>
> --- Skyring <skyring at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>> On 6/3/05, Dan Grey <dangrey101 at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> I'd like to know what my options are after Ambi
>>>
>> called
>>
>>> me a jerk:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
> Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_arbitration#Everyking_3_deadlock.3F
>
>>>
>>> Now, before I make a fool of myself making an
>>> inappropiate fuss on the wiki, maybe someone could
>>> tell me if there are any proper channels of
>>>
>> redress
>>
>>> for this kind of thing, whether or not Ambi is
>>> 'untouchable' and therefore it's not worth me
>>> defending myself.
>>>
>>
>> I think you should take Ambi's advice. Making a fuss
>> over her comment
>> merely underscores the point she was making.
>>
>> --
>> Peter in Canberra
>> _______________________________________________
>> WikiEN-l mailing list
>> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
>> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
> ___________________________________________________________
> How much free photo storage do you get? Store your holiday
> snaps for FREE with Yahoo! Photos http://uk.photos.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: Kat Walsh

body:
On 6/3/05, Dan Grey <dangrey101 at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> So can I take it as being OK to call someone a jerk?

No. But you can follow the advice given to you, quite sanely, on that
very same page, and calmly take it up with Ambi herself if you're
still smarting over it.

You shouldn't have insulted her (and the rest of the committee). She
shouldn't have called you a jerk. You are equally to blame. I don't
know what sort of action you want anyone to take here; I don't believe
any official outside action is called for. All involved parties should
cool off, apologize for the intemperate words, and deal with the
issues that underlie your barbs rather than the namecalling.

-Kat
[[User:Mindspillage]]

> --- Skyring <skyring at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On 6/3/05, Dan Grey <dangrey101 at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> > > I'd like to know what my options are after Ambi
> > called
> > > me a jerk:
> > >
> > >
> >
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_arbitration#Everyking_3_deadlock.3F
> > >
> > > Now, before I make a fool of myself making an
> > > inappropiate fuss on the wiki, maybe someone could
> > > tell me if there are any proper channels of
> > redress
> > > for this kind of thing, whether or not Ambi is
> > > 'untouchable' and therefore it's not worth me
> > > defending myself.
> >
> > I think you should take Ambi's advice. Making a fuss
> > over her comment
> > merely underscores the point she was making.
> >
> > --
> > Peter in Canberra

--
"There was a point to this story, but it has temporarily
escaped the chronicler's mind."  --Douglas Adams


from_name: Skyring

subject: [WikiEN-l] Recent goings-on

body:
On 6/3/05, Josh Gordon <joshua.p.gordon at gmail.com> wrote:
> In exactly how many places do we need to have this exact same discussion?

Your question cannot be answered exactly.

But an approximate answer is that it is an irrational number.

--
Peter in Canberra


from_name: Kate Turner

subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: image dump

body:
Timwi wrote in gmane.science.linguistics.wikipedia.technical:

> Kate Turner wrote:

>> the pax format is standard, but it's not widely used

> Why do you have to use it if it's so poorly supported?

i was unable to find any documentation on the file format that GNU tar uses
(see my previous messages to the list).  Zip was suggested as an
alternative, which is probably the most widely supported archive format.
if pax turns out to be too unwieldy, it may be worth using that instead.

kate.


subject:
[Wikitech-l] Re: Email authentication on Wikimedia wikis + Single
	user sign-on

body:
Tim Starling schrieb:

>Thomas Gries wrote:
>
>
>>Perhaps it would be clever to delay the work towards release 1.5 and to
>>concentrate on this long-wanted SUL ?
>>T.
>>
>>
>
>Lots of things are long-wanted. 1.5 needs to go live ASAP for
>performance reasons. Anyway, the code for SUL was written and released
>in 1.4, the only thing missing is a conversion script and a sysadmin
>brave enough to apply it. So there's no need to tie it to the release
>cycle. The email authentication problem can be solved in some other way,
>such as marking all existing email addresses authenticated.
>
Tim:

better use the switch I had introduced ;-))

in DefaultSettings.php simply set

     $wgEmailAuthentication = false;

This means, that the database is left untouched, the feature is disabled.
Later, when SUL works, set it to true, and the addresses can be
authenticated by the users at their discretion.
(When a user needs a temporary password - because s/he forgot the
regular one - the wiki sends also to unconfirmed addresses. Only the
"higher" e-mail functions e-mail user and e-mail notification only sends
to confirmed addresses if the switch is set to "true")

Tom

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


from_name: Tony Sidaway

subject:
Shocking behavior towards Willswikihelp (was Re: [WikiEN-l]
	Recent goings-on)

body:
Rebecca said:
> On 6/3/05, Tony Sidaway <minorityreport at bluebottle.com> wrote:
>>
>> I'm shocked.
>
> Then why not practice what you preach, and go talk to RickK? It does
> seem like a mistake has been made (although it is worth noting that
> Willswikihelp did seem to have some problems with Wikiquette when I
> looked, but that didn't make him a vandal), but would it be not be more
> appropriate to talk it over and see what happens rather that
> running to the mailing list calling for blood?

I do not call for blood.  I have expressed a hope that RickK would
apologise for his shocking behavior.
I'm sorry if my shock has been transmuted into a call for sanctions in
your mind--I should perhaps have made it more clear that I only wish to
see administrators, and all other editors, treat newcomers with
understanding.


subject: [Wikitech-l] MediaWiki 1.3.13 released [SECURITY]

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

MediaWiki 1.3.13 is a security maintenance release.

Incorrect handling of page template inclusions made it possible to
inject JavaScript code into HTML attributes, which could lead to
cross-site scripting attacks on a publicly editable wiki.

Vulnerable releases and fix:
* 1.5 prerelease: fixed in 1.5alpha2
* 1.4 stable series: fixed in 1.4.5
* 1.3 legacy series: fixed in 1.3.13
* 1.2 series no longer supported; upgrade to 1.4.5 strongly recommended

The 1.3.x series is no longer maintained except for security fixes;
new users and those seeking general bug fixes should install 1.4.5.
Existing 1.3.x installations not willing or able to upgrade to the
current stable relase should update the installation to 1.3.13; only
includes/Parser.php has changed from 1.3.12.

Release notes:
http://sourceforge.net/project/shownotes.php?release_id=332230

Download:
http://prdownloads.sf.net/wikipedia/mediawiki-1.3.13.tar.gz?download

Before asking for help, try the FAQ:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki_FAQ

Low-traffic release announcements mailing list:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-announce

Wiki admin help mailing list:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l

Bug report system:
http://bugzilla.wikipedia.org/

Play "stump the developers" live on IRC:
#mediawiki on irc.freenode.net

- -- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFCoHbQwRnhpk1wk44RArfFAJ924sPPqqy14sfDPOlVVF/zq3m9AwCfaTKY
/C1EiL5nXaEou/aJNTqsdI8=
=6HE3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


from_name: cookfire

subject: [Wiktionary-l] (no subject)

body:
Ray Saintonge wrote:

> Jimmy Wales wrote:
>
>> rb_wiktionary at boult.mailshell.com wrote:
>>
>>
>>> From what little I have learned so far of this idea, including the
>>> complete
>>> lack of communication with the user community, the idea of
>>> introducing a new
>>> more technical Ultimate Wiktionary sounds like a disaster waiting to
>>> happen.
>>>
>>
>> Well, I think we can avert disaster now that everyone is talking.  I did
>> not personally realize that people weren't fully informed about this --
>> that's my own fault.
>>
>>
> There's no need to blame yourself on this one.  Gerard did raise his
> idea some time ago, although someone like rb didn't come onto the
> scene until later, and was bound to find this more alarming than I.
> This doesn't mean that I agree with or even understand all of Gerard's
> proposal.  It's a fact of life that new technical proposals are
> constantly being raised.  Our developers know to exercise caution
> before giving them the green light, and you should not be put in a
> position to approve things before their time.  Let's just say that
> Gerard's promotional claims have run far ahead of his technical
> developments.

Ray,

Did you already go and have a look at the proposals for yourself? Of
course it takes time to implement new ideas. I still think Gerard and co
deserve the benefit of the doubt on this one. There is a lot that can be
improved to the Wiktionaries in their current form and Gerard is on a
good path to improve them. The time frame he proposed was not realistic
and maybe he shouldn't have proposed a time frame. He got things moving
though and that's an accomplishment in itself. It will cause some
disruption and it will be a lot of work to convert the material we have
already. I'm sure the community will bear it, once they see the concept
is sound.
It is not yet possible to see a model of the software in action. It is
possible to give input on parts that are glaringly missing at this point
though. Take advantage of it.

Anyway, if after all it doesn't work out, the Wiktionaries in their
current form are still there. Everybody who wants to will still be able
to continue working on them and this will remain possible for quite some
time to come. Gerard believes in this project so much, that he foresees
everybody abandoning the current way of working and starting on the UW
and I believe he is right. It will take a lot of time though. That's not
a problem. Time is on our side.

Greetings,

Polyglot


subject: [Wikitech-l] MediaWiki 1.5alpha2 released [SECURITY]

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

MediaWiki 1.5 alpha 2 includes a lot of bug fixes, feature merges,
and a security update.

THIS IS AN EXPERIMENTAL RELEASE FOR TESTING ONLY. Public or
in-production servers should use the stable MediaWiki 1.4.5 release.

Incorrect handling of page template inclusions made it possible to
inject JavaScript code into HTML attributes, which could lead to
cross-site scripting attacks on a publicly editable wiki.

Vulnerable releases and fix:
* 1.5 prerelease: fixed in 1.5alpha2
* 1.4 stable series: fixed in 1.4.5
* 1.3 legacy series: fixed in 1.3.13
* 1.2 series no longer supported; upgrade to 1.4.5 strongly recommended

For a relatively full list of changes since 1.5alpha1, see the changelog
in the release notes.

Release notes:
http://sourceforge.net/project/shownotes.php?release_id=332229

Download:
http://prdownloads.sf.net/wikipedia/mediawiki-1.5alpha2.tar.gz?download

Before asking for help, try the FAQ:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki_FAQ

Low-traffic release announcements mailing list:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-announce

Wiki admin help mailing list:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l

Bug report system:
http://bugzilla.wikipedia.org/

Play "stump the developers" live on IRC:
#mediawiki on irc.freenode.net

- -- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFCoHg3wRnhpk1wk44RAgK2AKCUiTvJ7fKmlwfy1ICpShBMFYNGvACgkiGn
oBhbMAqlYR9q0v9Q+vylRsY=
=N4ka
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


from_name: Dan Grey

body:
I'd like to know what my options are after Ambi called
me a jerk:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_arbitration#Everyking_3_deadlock.3F

Now, before I make a fool of myself making an
inappropiate fuss on the wiki, maybe someone could
tell me if there are any proper channels of redress
for this kind of thing, whether or not Ambi is
'untouchable' and therefore it's not worth me
defending myself.

Thanks in advance,

Dan100

___________________________________________________________
How much free photo storage do you get? Store your holiday
snaps for FREE with Yahoo! Photos http://uk.photos.yahoo.com


from_name: Sean Barrett

subject: [Wikipedia-l] link for complaints

body:
David Monniaux stated for the record:

> I think that all Wikipedia pages should contain somewhere (say, at the
> bottom) a link to a page where people could complain about the content
> of the articles. (I'm talking here of complaints about breach of
> privacy, copyright violation, libel etc.)

Thank you for volunteering to handle all these complaints promptly and
without pay.

--
  Sean Barrett     | The capo gives part of his plan to one,
  sean at epoptic.com | part to another, the whole to none.


from_name: Rick

body:
--- Dan Grey <dangrey101 at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

> I'd like to know what my options are after Ambi
> called
> me a jerk:
>
>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_arbitration#Everyking_3_deadlock.3F

I would think your option is clear.  Stop being a
jerk.

RickK

__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail
Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the tour:
http://tour.mail.yahoo.com/mailtour.html


from_name: Mark Williamson

subject: [Wikipedia-l] link for complaints

body:
I don't think that's the issue here. Surely there are people who would
be willing to handle these complaints. I myself would spend some time
on it perhaps.

Mark

On 03/06/05, Sean Barrett <sean at epoptic.org> wrote:
> David Monniaux stated for the record:
>
> > I think that all Wikipedia pages should contain somewhere (say, at the
> > bottom) a link to a page where people could complain about the content
> > of the articles. (I'm talking here of complaints about breach of
> > privacy, copyright violation, libel etc.)
>
> Thank you for volunteering to handle all these complaints promptly and
> without pay.
>
> --
>   Sean Barrett     | The capo gives part of his plan to one,
>   sean at epoptic.com | part to another, the whole to none.
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>

--
SI HOC LEGERE SCIS NIMIVM ERVDITIONIS HABES
QVANTVM MATERIAE MATERIETVR MARMOTA MONAX SI MARMOTA MONAX MATERIAM
POSSIT MATERIARI
ESTNE VOLVMEN IN TOGA AN SOLVM TIBI LIBET ME VIDERE