subject: De factor (was: [WikiEN-l] Making Wikipedia a multi-cultural encyclopedia)

body:
Jason Williams wrote:

>Oh, and many "borrowed" phrases from non-English languages are an
>inseparable part of English vocabulary, in my opinion. If I mean
>per se, or de facto, or de jure, I should be able to say so. Don't
>steal away the richness of the language for the sake of avoiding
>making people expand their vocabulary, please!
>

plus [[de facto]] and [[de jure]] are articles AFAIK!

>
>
>
>


list: wikien-l

source: pipermail-mbox

from_name: John Knouse

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: WikiEN-l digest, Vol 1 #270 - 13 msgs

body:
I just looked at Steverapaport's version of [[Censorship in
the United States]] and, yes, it was somewhat POV, but I
also felt that it had interesting and valid information on
misdirection of attitudes, things I've observed myself.  I
think this could be preserved somewhere in an NPOV form,
though I don't think that the Censorship article is quite
the right place.  Oh, and notice that I've deleted my
"seventeen-line" signature.

--
John Knouse
jaknouse at frognet.net


from_name: Poor, Edmund W

subject: [WikiEN-l] http://www.countryguide.com

body:
The second link, actually, but I take your meaning:

And look how they describe us:

"Wikipedia is a communal multilingual project to create a complete, accurate, free encyclopedia. It now contains well over 100 thousand articles in English and is committed to working with language speakers and computing organizations to support as many languages as possible. CountryGuide highly recommends checking this project for possible special local and regional insights and content related to travel, vacation, & destination research that might not be readily available elsewhere. However, our recommendation includes the caveat that our readers understand that it is a wiki, i.e., accepts community input directly from its members, and the information - particularly crucial data - should be verified by other sources."

Ed Poor
current status: in the doghouse :-(


from_name: Lee Pilich

subject: [WikiEN-l] RE: Censorship article

body:
At 13:28 14/04/2003 -0400, you wrote:
>I guess I shouldn't have blocked the IP of that one guy who wanted the POV
>version of the censorship article. Because wikipedia.org has been
>inaccessible ever since -- maybe a DOS attack, eh?
>
>Ah, the delicious irony. If we won't let them dictate our editorial policy
>on controversial articles, they'll simply CENSOR the entire encyclopedia.
>Metaphors like the pot calling the kettle black would come to mind, but
>I'm too overwhelmed to think of any right now.
>
>Anyway, when the 'pedia comes back up, would someone please un-block
>80.14.137.218 for me?

'Tis done.

wikipedia.org is accessible to me, by the way (and to lots of others
judging from Recent Changes) - there must be a problem at your end.

lp (camembert)


list: wikipedia-l

from_name: Lee Daniel Crocker

subject: [Wikipedia-l] GFDL on printable version

body:
> (Brion Vibber <vibber at aludra.usc.edu>):
> On Mon, 14 Apr 2003, Axel Boldt wrote:
> > I think the GFDL needs to be mentioned, and it would also be nice to
> > show the stable URL
> >   http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backus-Naur_Form
> > rather than the internal one given above.
>
> Another issue is whether we should have a stable URL that goes to
> _that particular_ revision. This is something people have requested for
> purposes of citing Wikipedia articles in bibliographies, etc, where part
> of the point is that people can check your citations to see if you quoted
> or interpreted them accurately.
>
> -- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)

I think we'll want static-looking URLs for citable revisions,
so I'd suggest:

  http://www.wikipedia.org/cite/20021215024500/Backus-Naur_Form

which gets redirected to

  .../oldrev.phtml?title=Backus-Naur_Form&time=20021215024500

That shouldn't be too hard to implement.

--
Lee Daniel Crocker <lee at piclab.com> <http://www.piclab.com/lee/>
"All inventions or works of authorship original to me, herein and past,
are placed irrevocably in the public domain, and may be used or modified
for any purpose, without permission, attribution, or notification."--LDC


list: wikitech-l

subject: [Wikitech-l] New phase3 code reorganization

body:
The latest phase3 code has been significantly reorganized, and so
it has been imported into a new CVS module "phase3" instead of
"phpwiki/newcodebase".  I will also make a .zip file release for
those who don't want to play with CVS.

I think all the docs are updated; if you know of any stray docs
somewhere, please update them to reflect this change.

--
Lee Daniel Crocker <lee at piclab.com> <http://www.piclab.com/lee/>
"All inventions or works of authorship original to me, herein and past,
are placed irrevocably in the public domain, and may be used or modified
for any purpose, without permission, attribution, or notification."--LDC


from_name: Rotem Dan

subject: [WikiEN-l] Making Wikipedia a multi-cultural encyclopedia

body:
Jason Williams wrote:

>Linking is the right answer here, in my opinion. You shouldn't
>have to wade through a thorough grounding in computer science
>before reading about how LL parsers work. Instead, [[Computer
>science]] and [[Compilers]] should be prominently linked,
>along with each technical term used.
>
I agree, this is what I meant, in fact (well not "extensive paragraph",
but a "short wikified sentence" is fine). This guideline should be clear
on the wikipedia manuals and guides.

Note: Consider that in the "printed edition", an article about "LL
parsers" that doesn't relate
to [[Computer scinece]] would seem completely obscure..

>I think -
> * Everybody should be able to understand broadly what an article
>   is describing (LL Parsers are a technique used in computer
>   science to interpret text, or something. You get the idea,
>   I'm sure)
>
Yes, I agree, but this doesn't happen in all articles.

> * Everybody should be able to learn whatever they need to understand
>   any given article merely by clicking within wikipedia. Obviously
>   this is a [[platonic]] wikipedia that has the sum of all human
>   knowledge contained within it :-)
>
Yeah :-)

> * Everybody should *not necessarily* be able to understand an
>   article just by reading it
>
I agree, but good books should be referenced (Jimbo's potential
money-making machine... ;-) )

>
>Oh, and many "borrowed" phrases from non-English languages are an
>inseparable part of English vocabulary, in my opinion. If I mean
>per se, or de facto, or de jure, I should be able to say so. Don't
>steal away the richness of the language for the sake of avoiding
>making people expand their vocabulary, please!
>
>
I am not a linguist, I more-or-less agree on this (I used "lingua
franca" myself :}),
I think that authors should be selective when using these "rich" phrases
(I have no Idea what "de jure" is,
but that does not make me an idiot). It had been shown extensivly in
recent years that
intelligence is a cultural measure. I tried once to take an American
"Intelligence" test (In english),
I failed miserably,  because I was not familiar with the "rich" or
"advanced" areas of the language.

I will have a very strong difficulty reading english books written by
shakspeare, yet I can
read poetic text in hebrew. As I said, the condition is pretty good in
wikipedia (sometimes
the language would seem even over-simplified.. ). Overhall, Engilsh is a
pretty simple language,  when
compared to chinese, for example..


from_name: Daniel Ehrenberg

subject: [WikiEN-l] User blocked

body:
One misjudgement doesn't justify completely abdicating your sysop powers. I agree that it was a little harsh, but in the future, maybe people shouldn't ban someone for trolling after only one offence without consulting anyone.  All you did was misinterperate the potential for the article.  Usually, you're excelent at dealing with POV issues and such; you just made one mistake. An unrelated thought; what would happen if a user tried to ban himself?

"Poor, Edmund W" <Edmund.W.Poor at abc.com> wrote:Well, 2 out of 2 people commenting so far think I'm wrong, so effectively immediately I'm banning myself from Wikipedia (I'll still participate on this mailing list, though).

Ed Poor

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Platinum - Watch CBS' NCAA March Madness, live on your desktop!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20030414/e8e7f058/attachment.htm


from_name: daniwo59 at aol.com

subject: [WikiEN-l] Someone is using my username!

body:
Someone has been using my username on the Talk Crass page. User
205.188.209.139 has been signing nasty comments with my username, which I
consider to be highly offensive. I have never touched this page, nor even
looked at it until today. The signature appearing there, which was reverted
by Slrubenstein is [user:Danny|Weezer]]. That was NOT me!!! Can something be
done about this please. In fact, I have not even been involved at all in the
debate with Michael/Weezer, though right now I am pretty pissed about this!

Thank you

Danny
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20030414/76fcaf15/attachment.htm


subject: [WikiEN-l] Am I blocked???

body:
When I try to clarify this on the Talk page, it says that I am blocked
because I am Michael/Weezer. I am not. This is getting ridiculous. I am very
offended!

Danny
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20030414/03d8e84b/attachment.htm


from_name: sannse

subject: [WikiEN-l] http://www.countryguide.com

body:
A contributor has added links to http://www.countryguide.com/ on many pages
(see
http://www.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Special:Contributions&target=65.
41.45.22 )  I don't think the links are particularly useful, they just lead
to more links and this just seems like advertising to me.  I'm inclined to
remove them all, but am not sure enough to do so without checking first.
What is policy on links like these?

Regards,

sannse


from_name: Stevertigo

subject: [WikiEN-l] Ideapedia - after LittleDan

body:
LittleDan's original research idea is excellent (as are nearly all of his
observations) - and Brian's further idea for a separate implementation is
spot on!  Many of us have had this idea - the question is implementation.
Thinking about it a bit - the idea should be rather explicit - (under a
general heading of course) and  notarized as being the property "of the
imaginer". But it should also be open as a wiki to allow for dynamic, and
direct collaboration - at a brainstorming level!

This would be ideal for all involved - but an important point to make is
that while the categories linking to subjects could be guides to these
detailed synopses - the material itself is essentially entirely user-pages!
Just like we like to have our own cheezy crap on WP as a /after to our own
usernames - This would be entirely that - Just userpages with their
particular spews and rants and notions and LD50 test records online - Each
user should also have ban priveliges for those pages - in case someone gets
nuts or personal.  The all of those LarrySanger/pages can have a home... :)

OR: WP gets loosened up - we use the WP as both encyclopedia and research
platform - as well as a blog/links page/ file storage/Bomis babe report
clippings.. etc... Just kidding... the problem with the meta is that its
tied to the WP in terms of purpose - and its under GFDL. Intellectual
property - or potential ip should be dealt with as such - and the site that
implements that kind of thing should act in some ways like a notary
public. -Steven H. Vertigo


subject: [WikiEN-l] Varied topical treatments

body:
The discussions on categorization - LittleDan is right on about WP being
well written - not well organized. Basically people seem to think that there
might be a better way to have some organization and structure be integrated
into the automation - like some kind of better way of designing a
heirarchical tree of related subject articles - This would no doubt be
welcome is someone could actually code those additions up and work them into
the existing wikiware...

The codecs - apparently Ogg Vorbis is good for music - providing similar
compression rates as MP3 while sounding less lossy - but its not as good for
speech - as in a talk or lecture, or well known speech that might be free to
post - Small files like letter/symbol pronunciation, etc... could use Ogg
Speex - a sister to Vorbis. No doubt if WP wants to use these codecs there
should be info/recommendations on how best to implement them - and
instructions for their use.

The concern with media - although the dump file is huge - its not exactly a
cnet pop pick - and Jim would be charged by his isp for  bandwidth overage -
if the bandwidth goes beyond what he;s paying for (assuming hes got a
business broadband account - and doesnt own the backbone itself) - a recent
horror story - an author wrote a book for Adobe Golive - and decided to web
publish the 50 MB pdf - since it wasnt selling well... and wound up with
several thousand (near 10K) in overage charges by his isp. The book was
apparently right in that grey area between 'woudnt spend 25 bucks on it' -
'and will download it in a heartbeat'. Anyway - beefy-sized media - if
popular - can get out of hand fast - is the point.

- Steven Henry Vertigo


from_name: Zoe

subject: [WikiEN-l] DW reverts to form

body:
Please see [[Talk:John le Carr?]].  DW, in his latest incarnation as Black Widow, says:"I don't give two damns about your Wikipedia:Image use policy. This is a policy created by half a dozen people out of the thousands using Wikipedia. It has NO LEGAL OR BINDING STATUS. This is an open website. I am not obliged to provide you or anyone with a statement as to its copyright status, permission, or any other thing a few people decide they want. The only obligation (and this was clearly stated already in discussions with Mr. Wales re DMCA) is to tick the box required in order to upload. NO MORE NO LESS. Stop interfering with people who actually make a contribution here. What you are doing is illegal harassment and interference. If you have any questions about this matter, please take them up with the ONLY authority, Mr. Wales who pays the freight.User:Black Widow (copied to the group's Village Pump.) " If he's unwilling to follow the proper copyright procedures, he MUST be banned. Zoe

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20030414/4b6a13d0/attachment.htm


from_name: Erik Moeller

subject: [WikiEN-l] User blocked

body:
> I blocked 80.14.137.218 for re-posting the diatribe at [[Censorship in the
> United States]].

This is an inappropriate use of sysop powers. You were involved in an edit
war regarding that article. You should have asked another sysop to protect
the page, or to block that IP (which, as far I can tell, is hard to
justify, given that the user has only made one edit).

Please do not use your sysop privileges to block users who make edits you
disagree with.

Regards,

Erik


from_name: Brion Vibber

subject: [WikiEN-l] Am I blocked???

body:
On Mon, 2003-04-14 at 17:08, daniwo59 at aol.com wrote:
> When I try to clarify this on the Talk page, it says that I am blocked
> because I am Michael/Weezer. I am not. This is getting ridiculous. I
> am very offended!

Dan, could you please list the *exact* message you're given? It should
say who banned that IP address and the reason given. Since there's been
quite a spate of Michael/Weezer banning lately, the information you've
given so far isn't enough to tell which IP address you seem to have
caught your tail on.

(Some general advice for all people: when reporting a computer problem,
please specify the *complete* and *exact* error message / warning. The
people trying to fix your problem may not be able to fix it without that
information; that's why there is a message...)

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20030414/a02e9e02/attachment.pgp


from_name: Chuck Smith

subject: [Wikipedia-l] older versions --> authors/editors

body:
What would you think of changing the text "Older
Versions" to "Authors/Editors" because this page does
indeed show which authors and editors worked on the
article.  This would make it easier for people at the
Esperanto Wikipedia to see if they trust the writers.
For example, two of our most active Wikipedians have
even written Esperanto grammar books, so people would
know that what they've written is probably more
authoritative than what others have written.  Also,
many newbies to Wikipedia don't realize how they can
find the authors and editors of an article and this
would make that clearer.

...if the people at the English Wikipedia don't like
this idea, we could just change the translation of the
Esperanto interface from "Malnovaj versioj" to
"Auxtoroj/Redaktantoj".

Thanks,
Chuck

=====
Learn Esperanto! - http://www.lernu.net/
My homepage - http://www.ikso.net/~chuck
Enciklopedio - http://eo.wikipedia.org/

___________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!? -- Une adresse @yahoo.fr gratuite et en fran?ais !
Yahoo! Mail : http://fr.mail.yahoo.com


from_name: Jens Frank

subject: [WikiEN-l] http://www.countryguide.com

body:
On Mon, Apr 14, 2003 at 02:59:52PM -0500, John R. Owens wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Apr 2003, sannse wrote:
>
>
> 	I agree, when this person first started adding them, it was even
> worse, but I (along with another user or two) worked out a reasonable
> compromise that let the links stay without being as POV as they were at
> first (I think it revolved around use of a word like "excellent" to
> describe it, and one other phrase). I'd really rather not see them at all,
> but I didn't want to be too heavy-handed in refusing "contributions"
> either (especially as I wasn't a sysop then). So I wouldn't be too
> saddened by their loss.

Sysop is no higher level in terms of policies. Sysop is only the right
to use some advanced technical features in the wiki software that are
considered as too dangerous to be given to any newbie or vandal.

A newbie has to ask for someone else doing these task, e.g. on Votes
for deletion, Vandalism in progress, etc.

Best regards,

	jens frank


from_name: Kurt Jansson

subject: [Wikitech-l] wikipedia.de redirects to wikipedia.org

body:
Jason or somebody else, could you please correct the redirection from
www.wikipedia.de back to de.wikipedia.org? Thanks.

Kurt


subject: [WikiEN-l] Am I blocked???

body:
At 20:08 14/04/2003 -0400, Danny wrote:
>When I try to clarify this on the Talk page, it says that I am blocked
>because I am Michael/Weezer. I am not. This is getting ridiculous. I am
>very offended!

I have unblocked the IP address which added that comment, so hopefully
you'll be able to contribute again now. I'll keep an eye out for rogue
contributors such as the one that faked that talk page comment (something
which Michael has done on several occasions before) for the next hour or so.

lp (camembert)


from_name: cprompt

subject: [WikiEN-l] DW reverts to form

body:
Zoe wrote:

>
> If he's unwilling to follow the proper copyright procedures, he MUST
> be banned.
>
> Zoe

Agreed.

While I'm interested to hear what is illegal about the "harrassment" and
"interference" they are suffering, I agree that people who get the
Wikipedia in legal hot water should be banned until they decide to
acknowledge the site rules and any laws we're governed by.
--cprompt


from_name: Jimmy Wales

subject: [WikiEN-l] User blocked

in_reply_to: <E506B3FF6BC1254C9AC1B948C380BC280CF6B1@sm-nyny-xm05.nena.wdpr.disney.com>; from Edmund.W.Poor@abc.com on Mon, Apr 14, 2003 at 03:18:08PM -0400

body:
Poor, Edmund W wrote:
> Well, 2 out of 2 people commenting so far think I'm wrong, so
>effectively immediately I'm banning myself from Wikipedia (I'll still
>participate on this mailing list, though).

As always, Ed sets an example for us all.

For the record, I thought Ed's actions were excessive in this case,
but minor, but I also think that Ed has built up a level of trust
based on just exactly this: his willingness to self-examination, his
willingness to step away and take a break, his willingness to change
his mind and say he was wrong.

>From time to time all of us will make decisions that cross what other
people see as "the line".  One possible reaction to criticism is to
dig in our heels, concoct justifications, etc.  Another possible
reaction is to say: "Hey, o.k., I'm listening.  And I'm taking a break
here."

--Jimbo


body:
> > - "History" should be "Older versions" or "Page history" to be more
> > obvious. Most people are not familiar with the concept of article
> > histories.

It sounds like "Page history" would satisfy everyone, then?

--Jimbo


subject: [WikiEN-l] DW reverts to form

body:
As the "ONLY authority", Mr. Wales hereby declares that Black Widow is
banned from wikipedia for blatant disregard of policy and rude
behavior.  "She" can take it up with me if she chooses to do so.

--Jimbo

Zoe wrote:

> Please see [[Talk:John le Carr?]].  DW, in his latest incarnation as Black Widow, says:"I don't give two damns about your Wikipedia:Image use policy. This is a policy created by half a dozen people out of the thousands using Wikipedia. It has NO LEGAL OR BINDING STATUS. This is an open website. I am not obliged to provide you or anyone with a statement as to its copyright status, permission, or any other thing a few people decide they want. The only obligation (and this was clearly stated already in discussions with Mr. Wales re DMCA) is to tick the box required in order to upload. NO MORE NO LESS. Stop interfering with people who actually make a contribution here. What you are doing is illegal harassment and interference. If you have any questions about this matter, please take them up with the ONLY authority, Mr. Wales who pays the freight.User:Black Widow (copied to the group's Village Pump.) " If he's unwilling to follow the proper copyright procedures, he MUST be banned!
> . Zoe
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Do you Yahoo!?
> The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.


body:
> On Mon, 14 Apr 2003, [iso-8859-1] Chuck Smith wrote:
>> What would you think of changing the text "Older
>> Versions" to "Authors/Editors" because this page does
>> indeed show which authors and editors worked on the
>> article.

> I would find that utterly confusing; I would expect such a link to show
> simply a list of individual editors, and would not click on it when
> trying to see what the last three changes were. But then, I preferred the
> original label, "History".

I agree that "Authors" doesn't help much. I think a less ambiguous term
like "Version history" would be best. Consider you're in an article about
World War II which you found via Google -- now what do you expect to find
behind a "History" link?

Regards,

Erik


subject: [WikiEN-l] Am I blocked???

body:
In a message dated 4/15/2003 12:07:17 AM Eastern Standard Time,
brion at pobox.com writes:

> Dan, could you please list the *exact* message you're given? It should
> say who banned that IP address and the reason given. Since there's been
> quite a spate of Michael/Weezer banning lately, the information you've
> given so far isn't enough to tell which IP address you seem to have
> caught your tail on.
>
Hi Brion

The problem seems to have been solved for now.

Thanks

Danny
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20030415/db4b35a6/attachment.htm


subject: [WikiEN-l] countryguide

body:
I haven't reviewed the site in question, so I can't make any very
authoritative comment, but in general I'm very much opposed to this
kind of link in the encyclopedia.

There are a lot of "gray area" issues in this area that we've never
had to deal with in terms of coming up with a specific policy... it
just hasn't come up yet.  But in general, I think we should take a
_relatively_ "hardline" approach against linking to non-free
resources.

(Not _absolutely_ hardline, as it is useful and valid in many cases.)

My tiny little side-project http://www.3apes.com/ is an effort to
create a free directory with a really free license (unlike dmoz.org,
which has a partly free license) and a wiki-style community.  But I
haven't promoted it much nor worked on it much, so it's still more of
a pioneer site than an actual live project.

It might be sensible at some point in the future for Wikipedia
articles to include links taken from such a separate project, I don't
know.

--Jimbo


subject: [WikiEN-l] DW reverts to form

body:
I know what I'm saying will be said posthumously, but I don't think Black Widow is nessessarilly DW. Black Widow just misunderstood the policies page.  If you're going to ban people for one copywright offence, then you'll ban half the people on wikipedia (minus the sysops, possibly). Many people haven't even read the policy page.  For those who do, like Black Widow, it should be written that if these policies are broken,  you risk being banned.  Right now, it looks more like a suggestions page. Although most of it should be, the copywright information looks the same. I've reorganized some of the page, putting copywrights at the top, but I still think the page needs to be more authoritative.  I also protected the image policy page. The image policy page is very important (if we get sued, it'll probably be from a picture) and shouldn't be changed by someone without some kind of authority.

<zoecomnena at yahoo.com> wrote:Please see [[Talk:John le Carr?]].  DW, in his latest incarnation as Black Widow, says:"I don't give two damns about your [[Wikipedia:Image use policy]]. This is a policy created by half a dozen people out of the thousands using Wikipedia. It has NO LEGAL OR BINDING STATUS. This is an open website. I am not obliged to provide you or anyone with a statement as to its copyright status, permission, or any other thing a few people decide they want. The only obligation (and this was clearly stated already in discussions with Mr. Wales re [[DMCA]]) is to tick the box required in order to upload. NO MORE NO LESS. Stop interfering with people who actually make a contribution here. What you are doing is illegal harassment and interference. If you have any questions about this matter, please take them up with the ONLY authority, Mr. Wales who pays the freight.[[User:Black Widow]] (copied to the group's [[Village Pump]].) " If he's unwilling to follow the proper copyright procedures, he MUST be banned. Zoe

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Platinum - Watch CBS' NCAA March Madness, live on your desktop!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20030415/f1b4bcec/attachment.htm


subject: [WikiEN-l] DW reverts to form

in_reply_to: <20030415152101.26917.qmail@web41807.mail.yahoo.com>; from littledanehren@yahoo.com on Tue, Apr 15, 2003 at 08:21:01AM -0700

body:
Daniel Ehrenberg wrote:
> I know what I'm saying will be said posthumously, but I don't think
>Black Widow is nessessarilly DW.

I agree that this isn't known with certainty.  Black Widow claims to
be DW's wife.

The problem here isn't a "single copyright violation" but a pattern of
disruptive and hostile behavior.  As always, DW and Black Widow are
free to write to me to talk about reinstatement, but a drop of the
general level of hostility and quasi-legalistic threatening tone would
be the very first requirement.

Frankly, I have a difficult time grasping what motivates people to act
that way.

--Jimbo


from_name: Bob Jordan

subject: [WikiEN-l] countryguide

body:
Sannse,

In your email to other wikipedia monitors/admins, I would appreciate a note
that CountryGuide provides a full reciprocal deep-link back to the
appropriate country.  And, while I understand that you may not think they
are useful (no offense taken -I understand the issue of spamming a
directory), the general public seems to think otherwise.  CountryGuide is
being developed along the same lines as StateGuide which (surprisingly to
me, too) is receiving good reviews as a reference utility.  See:

http://www.stateguide.com/info/workhorse.htm

Respectfully,

Bob Jordan


from_name: Axel Boldt

subject: [WikiEN-l] Ideapedia - after LittleDan

body:
--- Stevertigo <stevertigo at attbi.com> wrote:

> Thinking about it a bit - the idea should be rather explicit -
> (under a general heading of course) and  notarized as being the
> property "of the imaginer".

If you publish an idea of yours, notarized or not, it becomes part of
the public domain -- unless it is patentable
and you apply for a patent within one year of publication.
Even then, the idea is your "property" only for 20 years.

Axel

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo
http://search.yahoo.com


subject: [WikiEN-l] Ideapedia - after LittleDan

body:
No offence, but those ideas sort of would end wikipedia's life as an encyclopedia.  Maybe there should be a ([something that signifies original research]) after the title of an original research article.  Or, wikipedia could start another branch, maybe called something like allpedia, that would allow anything, no rules except copywrights, no replacing a long, well written article with a short one (even if the long one is POV) and that if an article is allowed in wikipedia the way you're writing it, you should write it there, not here. The sysops' only purpose would be to prevent the breaking of those rules (all of them) and ban anyone for three offences. the only page that could be protected would be the main page.
Stevertigo <stevertigo at attbi.com> wrote:LittleDan's original research idea is excellent (as are nearly all of his observations) - and Brian's further idea for a separate implementation is spot on! Many of us have had this idea - the question is implementation. Thinking about it a bit - the idea should be rather explicit - (under a general heading of course) and notarized as being the property "of the imaginer". But it should also be open as a wiki to allow for dynamic, and direct collaboration - at a brainstorming level!

This would be ideal for all involved - but an important point to make is that while the categories linking to subjects could be guides to these detailed synopses - the material itself is essentially entirely user-pages! Just like we like to have our own cheezy crap on WP as a /after to our own
usernames - This would be entirely that - Just userpages with their particular spews and rants and notions and LD50 test records online - Each user should also have ban priveliges for those pages - in case someone gets nuts or personal. The all of those LarrySanger/pages can have a home... :)

OR: WP gets loosened up - we use the WP as both encyclopedia and research platform - as well as a blog/links page/ file storage/Bomis babe report clippings.. etc... Just kidding... the problem with the meta is that its
tied to the WP in terms of purpose - and its under GFDL. Intellectual property - or potential ip should be dealt with as such - and the site that implements that kind of thing should act in some ways like a notary public. -Steven H. Vertigo

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Platinum - Watch CBS' NCAA March Madness, live on your desktop!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20030415/bb8b0810/attachment.htm


subject: [WikiEN-l] Ideapedia - after LittleDan

body:
yes, but if it is published in an acedemic journal, you'd get perminant credit for it, whereas if you published it in the current wiki, you'd probably get no credit.

Axel Boldt <axelboldt at yahoo.com> wrote:If you publish an idea of yours, notarized or not, it becomes part of the public domain -- unless it is patentable
and you apply for a patent within one year of publication.
Even then, the idea is your "property" only for 20 years.

Axel

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Platinum - Watch CBS' NCAA March Madness, live on your desktop!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20030415/9ab63aa9/attachment.htm


from_name: Poor, Edmund W

subject: [WikiEN-l] Black Widow user account is blocked (was: DW reverts to form)

body:
Jimbo wrote:

> As the "ONLY authority", Mr. Wales hereby declares that Black Widow is
> banned from wikipedia for blatant disregard of policy and rude
> behavior.  "She" can take it up with me if she chooses to do so.
> In accordance with Jimbo's expressed wishes,

Therefore, I have blocked the Black Widow user account.

Ed Poor

-----Original Message-----
From: Jimmy Wales [mailto:jwales at bomis.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2003 6:29 AM
To: wikien-l at wikipedia.org
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] DW reverts to form

As the "ONLY authority", Mr. Wales hereby declares that Black Widow is
banned from wikipedia for blatant disregard of policy and rude
behavior.  "She" can take it up with me if she chooses to do so.

--Jimbo


subject: [WikiEN-l] Tannin is now a sysop (was: Request sysop status)

body:
Tony Wilson (Tannin) wrote:

> Hi all. May I be added to the list of sysops please? Also, I know it's
> been asked before, but could someone point me at a suitable place to
> read up on the dos and don'ts?

You now have sysop rights.

I may not be the best one to "point out" the do's and don'ts, in view of my recent actions ("excessive in this case, but minor", as Jimbo put it).

Nevertheless, you might start at [[Wikipedia:Administrators]]. Traditionally, one of a sysop's first acts is to add themselves to the list on that page.

Ed Poor
(Uncle Ed)


subject: [WikiEN-l] User blocked

body:
Thank you for comforting me in my self-created misery :-)

I'm not exactly "abdicating", as you put it.

But I do need to slow down. I thought about it overnight, and came to the conclusion that Anthere and Erik are right. And I was wrong. :-( So I'm going to tread more carefully from now on, and try to make up for my mistakes.

As to (literally) banning oneself, a user could delete their password and user_email, then they'd never be able to log in again -- kind of like locking your keys inside your house.

Ed Poor

-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel Ehrenberg [mailto:littledanehren at yahoo.com]
Sent: Monday, April 14, 2003 10:57 PM
To: wikien-l at wikipedia.org
Subject: RE: [WikiEN-l] User blocked

One misjudgement doesn't justify completely abdicating your sysop powers. I agree that it was a little harsh, but in the future, maybe people shouldn't ban someone for trolling after only one offence without consulting anyone.  All you did was misinterperate the potential for the article.  Usually, you're excelent at dealing with POV issues and such; you just made one mistake.

An unrelated thought; what would happen if a user tried to ban himself?

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20030415/daf4808b/attachment.htm


from_name: Andre Engels

body:
On Mon, 14 Apr 2003, Lee Daniel Crocker wrote:

> > (Chuck Smith <msochuck at yahoo.com>):
> > What would you think of changing the text "Older
> > Versions" to "Authors/Editors" ...
>
> I believe it used to say "Article history" which would cover
> both uses.  I don't when it changed.

It was changed by eloquence on November 12; according to his comment this
was "as discussed on wikipedia-l". He made a message on November 11, saying
he was making a number of changes, and asking for comments. From his
proposals:

> - "History" should be "Older versions" or "Page history" to be more
> obvious. Most people are not familiar with the concept of article
> histories.

Andre Engels


from_name: tarquin

body:
Erik Moeller wrote:

>>On Mon, 14 Apr 2003, [iso-8859-1] Chuck Smith wrote:
>>
>>
>>>What would you think of changing the text "Older
>>>Versions" to "Authors/Editors" because this page does
>>>indeed show which authors and editors worked on the
>>>article.
>>>
>>>
>
>I agree that "Authors" doesn't help much. I think a less ambiguous term
>like "Version history" would be best. Consider you're in an article about
>World War II which you found via Google -- now what do you expect to find
>behind a "History" link?
>
>
lol! indeed!
"page history" is probably clearest.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Downloading horrors (was: Varied topical treatments)

body:
The only horror in the PDF story is the hideous foolishness of the author. Why did he sign up for an account which charges him for exceeding his bandwidth limit? My www.edpoor.com website simply stops responding if I exceed the limit.

I'm sure Jimbo has the foresight to deal with a sudden surge of bandwidth usage -- like 100-fold or 1000-fold.

Ed Poor


subject: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedians as war criminals

body:
>From my Talk page: From Rick Wilson mailto:f.g.wilson at sbcglobal.net I don't know who you are, Zoe, but if you consider my calling out Wikipedia for complicity in the crimes of Bush, then yes, I am "trying to cause trouble." To the degree that inaction or outright support of these crimes are, too, prosecutable by the International Criminal Court, I support such prosecution, and find Wikipedia a vast resource of evidence.  I'm compiling evidence for the extremely non-neutral International Criminal Court, from the vast stores of Wikipedia and those of its users whose content evidences criminal complicity in the crimes of Bush, his senior leadership, and his Coalition. The cowardly among you can breathe your sighs of relief that for most of you, the eventual outreach of the Court will mean no more than public shaming (as though that were not enough for anyone with compunction and conscience). I seriously doubt that Montrealass here would go to the gallows with that smirk on his face as did a few of his compatriots-in-spirit at Nuremburg.

Rick Wilson mailto:f.g.wilson at sbcglobal.net  Zoe

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20030415/3dafcc15/attachment.htm


from_name: Lee Daniel Crocker

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Page history is good.

body:
"Page history" it is, in CVS and on English wiki.

--
Lee Daniel Crocker <lee at piclab.com> <http://www.piclab.com/lee/>
"All inventions or works of authorship original to me, herein and past,
are placed irrevocably in the public domain, and may be used or modified
for any purpose, without permission, attribution, or notification."--LDC


subject: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedians as war criminals

body:
Well, that's pretty entertaining.

--Jimbo


from_name: Sean Barrett

subject: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedians as war criminals

body:
I too would be proud to be indicted for my writings in the Wikipedia.
Please accept my application to be considered as an active
co-conspirator.  If there are any further articles I can write that will
enhance my indictment, please let me know and I will start work
immediately.  Would it help if I express my eternal and implacable
contempt for the court?  I've been told I can be quite imaginative when
expressing contempt....

Is Rick Wilson reading this list, or should I CC him?

--
Sean Barrett     | America was neither founded nor
sean at epoptic.com | freed by the well-behaved.

... known as the Epopt on Wikipedia.

-----Original Message-----
From: wikien-l-admin at wikipedia.org
[mailto:wikien-l-admin at wikipedia.org]On Behalf Of Poor, Edmund W
Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2003 11:46
To: wikien-l at wikipedia.org
Subject: RE: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedians as war criminals

I'm content to be considered a "criminal" by the ICC -- it has no
jurisdiction outside of countries which have signed its stupid treaty --
and I never travel to those dumb places anyway. So there! Nyaah, nyaah.

I stay in the civilized world, where there is Rule By Law -- not
kangaroo courts making politicized decisions in favor of ruthless
dictatorships.

Ed Poor
Chief War Criminal
World Federation of the Wrongly Accused
-----Original Message-----
From: Zoe [mailto:zoecomnena at yahoo.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2003 2:34 PM
To: WikiEN-l at wikipedia.org
Subject: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedians as war criminals

>From my Talk page:

>From Rick Wilson mailto:f.g.wilson at sbcglobal.net I don't know who you
are, Zoe, but if you consider my calling out Wikipedia for complicity in
the crimes of Bush, then yes, I am "trying to cause trouble." To the
degree that inaction or outright support of these crimes are, too,
prosecutable by the International Criminal Court, I support such
prosecution, and find Wikipedia a vast resource of evidence.

I'm compiling evidence for the extremely non-neutral International
Criminal Court, from the vast stores of Wikipedia and those of its users
whose content evidences criminal complicity in the crimes of Bush, his
senior leadership, and his Coalition. The cowardly among you can breathe
your sighs of relief that for most of you, the eventual outreach of the
Court will mean no more than public shaming (as though that were not
enough for anyone with compunction and conscience). I seriously doubt
that Montrealass here would go to the gallows with that smirk on his
face as did a few of his compatriots-in-spirit at Nuremburg.

Rick Wilson mailto:f.g.wilson at sbcglobal.net

Zoe
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: winmail.dat
Type: application/ms-tnef
Size: 3172 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20030415/d8d50290/attachment.bin


subject: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedians as war criminals

body:
An excellent idea -- until now, I've actively avoided controversial
articles, but that was before I knew I could be a war criminal!
Whoo-hoo!  See ya on the talk page.

-----Original Message-----
From: wikien-l-admin at wikipedia.org
[mailto:wikien-l-admin at wikipedia.org]On Behalf Of Poor, Edmund W
Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2003 12:22
To: wikien-l at wikipedia.org
Subject: RE: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedians as war criminals

Sean,

How about revising the [[ICC]] article? It sorely needs attention.

For the last year or so, partisans have managed to obscure nearly
everything about it.

What are those guys really up to? How much power will they have? To whom
will they be accountable? What is the limit of their jurisdiction? What
sorts of cases are the civilized countries likely to refer to them? How
will dictatorships and other opponents of freedom and human rights
thwart justice by abusing the stated principles and procedures of the
"court"?

Why do its proponents favor it? What do they think the ICC will do, that
ad hoc tribunals such as those convened by the U.S. have not been able
to do?

I guess this could be taken off-list now. Let's either correspond
privately, or better yet, on the [[talk:ICC]] page.

Ed Poor
Proponent of freedom, peace and happiness
Opponent of censorship, war and slavery
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l at wikipedia.org
http://www.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: winmail.dat
Type: application/ms-tnef
Size: 2448 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20030415/923c3551/attachment.bin


from_name: Lee Pilich

subject: [WikiEN-l] Am I blocked???

body:
At 22:20 14/04/2003 -0700, Brion wrote:
>On Mon, 2003-04-14 at 17:08, daniwo59 at aol.com wrote:
> > When I try to clarify this on the Talk page, it says that I am blocked
> > because I am Michael/Weezer. I am not. This is getting ridiculous. I
> > am very offended!
>
>Dan, could you please list the *exact* message you're given? It should
>say who banned that IP address and the reason given. Since there's been
>quite a spate of Michael/Weezer banning lately, the information you've
>given so far isn't enough to tell which IP address you seem to have
>caught your tail on.

I unblocked what looked like the IP address in question last night as soon
as I saw Danny's email. Unfortunately, between me unblocking it and writing
to the list to say I'd unblocked it, my internet connection fell over and
refused to get up for the rest of the night. The list might receive the
email I wrote at that time some day, eventually, maybe - probably best to
ignore it.

lp (camembert)


from_name: koyaanis qatsi

subject: [WikiEN-l] RE: Wikipedians as war criminals

body:
Can I still be a war criminal even if I don't support
Bush or the Iraq war?  It sounds awfully exciting, and
after I finish this film I won't have much else to do.

thanks,

kq

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo
http://search.yahoo.com


from_name: Christopher Mahan

body:
It sounds like something I should put on my resume:

Job title: War Criminal.
Experience: Aiding and abetting groups and organizations that
consistently violate wartime criminal statutes set by the
International Criminal Court.
Specific duties involve paying taxes to the US government, supporting
the troops, and actively debunking anti-war rethoric.

Employment availability: Contingent upon my incarceration status.

=====
Christopher Mahan
chris_mahan at yahoo.com
818.943.1850 cell
http://www.christophermahan.com/

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo
http://search.yahoo.com


subject: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedians as war criminals

body:
I'm content to be considered a "criminal" by the ICC -- it has no jurisdiction outside of countries which have signed its stupid treaty -- and I never travel to those dumb places anyway. So there! Nyaah, nyaah.

I stay in the civilized world, where there is Rule By Law -- not kangaroo courts making politicized decisions in favor of ruthless dictatorships.

Ed Poor
Chief War Criminal
World Federation of the Wrongly Accused

-----Original Message-----
From: Zoe [mailto:zoecomnena at yahoo.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2003 2:34 PM
To: WikiEN-l at wikipedia.org
Subject: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedians as war criminals

>From my Talk page:

>From Rick Wilson mailto:f.g.wilson at sbcglobal.net I don't know who you are, Zoe, but if you consider my calling out Wikipedia for complicity in the crimes of Bush, then yes, I am "trying to cause trouble." To the degree that inaction or outright support of these crimes are, too, prosecutable by the International Criminal Court, I support such prosecution, and find Wikipedia a vast resource of evidence.

I'm compiling evidence for the extremely non-neutral International Criminal Court, from the vast stores of Wikipedia and those of its users whose content evidences criminal complicity in the crimes of Bush, his senior leadership, and his Coalition. The cowardly among you can breathe your sighs of relief that for most of you, the eventual outreach of the Court will mean no more than public shaming (as though that were not enough for anyone with compunction and conscience). I seriously doubt that Montrealass here would go to the gallows with that smirk on his face as did a few of his compatriots-in-spirit at Nuremburg.

Rick Wilson  <mailto:f.g.wilson at sbcglobal.net> mailto:f.g.wilson at sbcglobal.net

Zoe

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20030415/e769d464/attachment.htm


in_reply_to: <20030415205046.35846.qmail@web14710.mail.yahoo.com>; from obchodnakorze@yahoo.com on Tue, Apr 15, 2003 at 01:50:46PM -0700

body:
koyaanis qatsi wrote:
> Can I still be a war criminal even if I don't support
> Bush or the Iraq war?

Only if you write NPOV articles about it, since apparently that's the
crime here.

It might be interesting (but probably dangerous and destructive so I'm
not actually in favor of doing it) to have a poll of regular
contributors on a number of political issues, just to see where we
lie.  I suspect that we're almost everywhere except the center.  :-)

--Jimbo


from_name: Leonard Tulipan

body:
Hi!

The Wikipedia SF Homepage at http://wikipedia.sourceforge.net/
is missing a link to the Download Page
(http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=34373)

Maybe this page should look more like wikipedia?

Just a wee bit off-topic, so sorry :-)

Cheers
Leo

> --__--__--
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 18:57:40 -0500
> From: Lee Daniel Crocker <lee at piclab.com>
> To: wikitech-l at wikipedia.org
> Subject: [Wikitech-l] New phase3 code reorganization
> Reply-To: wikitech-l at wikipedia.org
>
>
> The latest phase3 code has been significantly reorganized, and so
> it has been imported into a new CVS module "phase3" instead of
> "phpwiki/newcodebase".  I will also make a .zip file release for
> those who don't want to play with CVS.
>
> I think all the docs are updated; if you know of any stray docs
> somewhere, please update them to reflect this change.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedians as war criminals

body:
Sean,

How about revising the [[ICC]] article? It sorely needs attention.

For the last year or so, partisans have managed to obscure nearly everything about it.

What are those guys really up to? How much power will they have? To whom will they be accountable? What is the limit of their jurisdiction? What sorts of cases are the civilized countries likely to refer to them? How will dictatorships and other opponents of freedom and human rights thwart justice by abusing the stated principles and procedures of the "court"?

Why do its proponents favor it? What do they think the ICC will do, that ad hoc tribunals such as those convened by the U.S. have not been able to do?

I guess this could be taken off-list now. Let's either correspond privately, or better yet, on the [[talk:ICC]] page.

Ed Poor
Proponent of freedom, peace and happiness
Opponent of censorship, war and slavery


from_name: sannse

subject: [WikiEN-l] countryguide

body:
Bob Jordan wrote:

> Sannse,
>
> In your email to other wikipedia monitors/admins, I would appreciate a
note
> that CountryGuide provides a full reciprocal deep-link back to the
> appropriate country.  And, while I understand that you may not think they
> are useful (no offense taken -I understand the issue of spamming a
> directory), the general public seems to think otherwise.  CountryGuide is
> being developed along the same lines as StateGuide which (surprisingly to
> me, too) is receiving good reviews as a reference utility.  See:
>
> http://www.stateguide.com/info/workhorse.htm

Yes, I acknowledge that CountryGuide links back to Wikipedia.  I'm not sure
that that makes the links any more useful or relevant, although it's nice to
see.

This isn't something I feel very strongly about (although other users appear
to feel more so, the links have been removed).  I agree directory sites are
useful, but I'm not sure that they are useful as part of Wikipedia.  If a
link is particulary relevant to an article it should, I think, be linked to
directly - not via CountryGuide or similar.

But, as I say, I don't feel very strongly about this either way.

Regards,

sannse


from_name: Chuck Smith

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Page history is good.

body:
 --- wikipedia-l-request at wikipedia.org a ?crit?: >
Send Wikipedia-l mailing list submissions to
> 	wikipedia-l at wikipedia.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web,
> visit
>
>
http://www.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body
> 'help' to
> 	wikipedia-l-request at wikipedia.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	wikipedia-l-admin at wikipedia.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it
> is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Wikipedia-l digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. older versions --> authors/editors
> (=?iso-8859-1?q?Chuck=20Smith?=)
>    2. Re: older versions --> authors/editors (Brion
> Vibber)
>    3. Re: older versions --> authors/editors (Lee
> Daniel Crocker)
>    4. Re: GFDL on printable version (Axel Boldt)
>    5. Re: GFDL on printable version (Brion Vibber)
>    6. Re: GFDL on printable version (Lee Daniel
> Crocker)
>    7. Re: older versions --> authors/editors (Andre
> Engels)
>    8. Re: older versions --> authors/editors (Erik
> Moeller)
>    9. Re: older versions --> authors/editors
> (tarquin)
>   10. Re: older versions --> authors/editors (Jimmy
> Wales)
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 22:32:37 +0200 (CEST)
> From: =?iso-8859-1?q?Chuck=20Smith?=
> <msochuck at yahoo.com>
> To: wikipedia-l at wikipedia.org
> Subject: [Wikipedia-l] older versions -->
> authors/editors
> Reply-To: wikipedia-l at wikipedia.org
>
> What would you think of changing the text "Older
> Versions" to "Authors/Editors" because this page
> does
> indeed show which authors and editors worked on the
> article.  This would make it easier for people at
> the
> Esperanto Wikipedia to see if they trust the
> writers.
> For example, two of our most active Wikipedians have
> even written Esperanto grammar books, so people
> would
> know that what they've written is probably more
> authoritative than what others have written.  Also,
> many newbies to Wikipedia don't realize how they can
> find the authors and editors of an article and this
> would make that clearer.
>
> ...if the people at the English Wikipedia don't like
> this idea, we could just change the translation of
> the
> Esperanto interface from "Malnovaj versioj" to
> "Auxtoroj/Redaktantoj".
>
> Thanks,
> Chuck
>
> =====
> Learn Esperanto! - http://www.lernu.net/
> My homepage - http://www.ikso.net/~chuck
> Enciklopedio - http://eo.wikipedia.org/
>
>
___________________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!? -- Une adresse @yahoo.fr gratuite et
> en fran?ais !
> Yahoo! Mail : http://fr.mail.yahoo.com
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 13:39:22 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Brion Vibber <vibber at aludra.usc.edu>
> Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] older versions -->
> authors/editors
> To: wikipedia-l at wikipedia.org
> Reply-To: wikipedia-l at wikipedia.org
>
> On Mon, 14 Apr 2003, [iso-8859-1] Chuck Smith wrote:
> > What would you think of changing the text "Older
> > Versions" to "Authors/Editors" because this page
> does
> > indeed show which authors and editors worked on
> the
> > article.
>
> I would find that utterly confusing; I would expect
> such a link to show
> simply a list of individual editors, and would not
> click on it when
> trying to see what the last three changes were. But
> then, I preferred the
> original label, "History".
>
> -- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 15:39:50 -0500
> From: Lee Daniel Crocker <lee at piclab.com>
> To: wikipedia-l at wikipedia.org
> Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] older versions -->
> authors/editors
> Reply-To: wikipedia-l at wikipedia.org
>
> > (Chuck Smith <msochuck at yahoo.com>):
> > What would you think of changing the text "Older
> > Versions" to "Authors/Editors" ...
>
> I believe it used to say "Article history" which
> would cover
> both uses.  I don't when it changed.
>
> --
> Lee Daniel Crocker <lee at piclab.com>
> <http://www.piclab.com/lee/>
> "All inventions or works of authorship original to
> me, herein and past,
> are placed irrevocably in the public domain, and may
> be used or modified
> for any purpose, without permission, attribution, or
> notification."--LDC
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 16:00:19 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Axel Boldt <axelboldt at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] GFDL on printable version
> To: wikipedia-l at wikipedia.org
> Reply-To: wikipedia-l at wikipedia.org
>
> --- tarquin <tarquin at planetunreal.com> wrote:
> > should we (briefly) mention the GFDL at the foot
> of printable
> > versions?
> >
> > Currently says:
> >
> > /Retrieved from
> >
>
"http://www.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Backus-Naur_Form"
> > It was last modified 10:26 Apr 14, 2003./
>
> I think the GFDL needs to be mentioned, and it would
> also be nice to
> show the stable URL
>   http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backus-Naur_Form
> rather than the internal one given above.
>
> Axel
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms,
> and more
> http://tax.yahoo.com
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 16:03:50 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Brion Vibber <vibber at aludra.usc.edu>
> Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] GFDL on printable version
> To: wikipedia-l at wikipedia.org
> Reply-To: wikipedia-l at wikipedia.org
>
> On Mon, 14 Apr 2003, Axel Boldt wrote:
> > I think the GFDL needs to be mentioned, and it
> would also be nice to
> > show the stable URL
> >   http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backus-Naur_Form
> > rather than the internal one given above.
>
> Another issue is whether we should have a stable URL
> that goes to
> _that particular_ revision. This is something people
> have requested for
> purposes of citing Wikipedia articles in
> bibliographies, etc, where part
> of the point is that people can check your citations
> to see if you quoted
> or interpreted them accurately.
>
> -- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 18:55:31 -0500
> From: Lee Daniel Crocker <lee at piclab.com>
> To: wikipedia-l at wikipedia.org
> Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] GFDL on printable version
> Reply-To: wikipedia-l at wikipedia.org
>
> > (Brion Vibber <vibber at aludra.usc.edu>):
> > On Mon, 14 Apr 2003, Axel Boldt wrote:
> > > I think the GFDL needs to be mentioned, and it
> would also be nice to
> > > show the stable URL
> > >   http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backus-Naur_Form
> > > rather than the internal one given above.
> >
> > Another issue is whether we should have a stable
> URL that goes to
> > _that particular_ revision. This is something
> people have requested for
> > purposes of citing Wikipedia articles in
> bibliographies, etc, where part
> > of the point is that people can check your
> citations to see if you quoted
> > or interpreted them accurately.
> >
> > -- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
>
> I think we'll want static-looking URLs for citable
> revisions,
> so I'd suggest:
>
>
>
http://www.wikipedia.org/cite/20021215024500/Backus-Naur_Form
>
> which gets redirected to
>
>
>
.../oldrev.phtml?title=Backus-Naur_Form&time=20021215024500
>
> That shouldn't be too hard to implement.
>
> --
> Lee Daniel Crocker <lee at piclab.com>
> <http://www.piclab.com/lee/>
> "All inventions or works of authorship original to
> me, herein and past,
> are placed irrevocably in the public domain, and may
> be used or modified
> for any purpose, without permission, attribution, or
> notification."--LDC
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 10:26:47 +0200 (CEST)
> From: Andre Engels <engels at uni-koblenz.de>
> To: wikipedia-l at wikipedia.org
> Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] older versions -->
> authors/editors
> Reply-To: wikipedia-l at wikipedia.org
>
> On Mon, 14 Apr 2003, Lee Daniel Crocker wrote:
>
> > > (Chuck Smith <msochuck at yahoo.com>):
> > > What would you think of changing the text "Older
> > > Versions" to "Authors/Editors" ...
> >
> > I believe it used to say "Article history" which
> would cover
> > both uses.  I don't when it changed.
>
> It was changed by eloquence on November 12;
> according to his comment this
> was "as discussed on wikipedia-l". He made a message
> on November 11, saying
> he was making a number of changes, and asking for
> comments. From his
> proposals:
>
> > - "History" should be "Older versions" or "Page
> history" to be more
> > obvious. Most people are not familiar with the
> concept of article
> > histories.
>
> Andre Engels
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 8
> Date: 15 Apr 2003 03:44:00 +0200
> From: erik_moeller at gmx.de (Erik Moeller)
> To: wikipedia-l at wikipedia.org
> Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] older versions -->
> authors/editors
> Reply-To: wikipedia-l at wikipedia.org
>
> > On Mon, 14 Apr 2003, [iso-8859-1] Chuck Smith
> wrote:
> >> What would you think of changing the text "Older
> >> Versions" to "Authors/Editors" because this page
> does
> >> indeed show which authors and editors worked on
> the
> >> article.
>
> > I would find that utterly confusing; I would
> expect such a link to show
> > simply a list of individual editors, and would not
> click on it when
> > trying to see what the last three changes were.
> But then, I preferred the
> > original label, "History".
>
> I agree that "Authors" doesn't help much. I think a
> less ambiguous term
> like "Version history" would be best. Consider
> you're in an article about
> World War II which you found via Google -- now what
> do you expect to find
> behind a "History" link?
>
> Regards,
>
> Erik
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 10:51:50 +0100
> From: tarquin <tarquin at planetunreal.com>
> To: wikipedia-l at wikipedia.org
> Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] older versions -->
> authors/editors
> Reply-To: wikipedia-l at wikipedia.org
>
>
>
> Erik Moeller wrote:
>
> >>On Mon, 14 Apr 2003, [iso-8859-1] Chuck Smith
> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>What would you think of changing the text "Older
> >>>Versions" to "Authors/Editors" because this page
> does
> >>>indeed show which authors and editors worked on
> the
> >>>article.
> >>>
> >>>
> >
> >I agree that "Authors" doesn't help much. I think a
> less ambiguous term
> >like "Version history" would be best. Consider
> you're in an article about
> >World War II which you found via Google -- now what
> do you expect to find
> >behind a "History" link?
> >
> >
> lol! indeed!
> "page history" is probably clearest.
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 03:15:26 -0700
> From: Jimmy Wales <jwales at bomis.com>
> To: wikipedia-l at wikipedia.org
> Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] older versions -->
> authors/editors
> Reply-To: wikipedia-l at wikipedia.org
>
> > > - "History" should be "Older versions" or "Page
> history" to be more
> > > obvious. Most people are not familiar with the
> concept of article
> > > histories.
>
> It sounds like "Page history" would satisfy
> everyone, then?
>
> --Jimbo

Sounds good.  Then, the Esperanto translation would be
simply "Pagxa historio".

Thanks,
Chuck

=====
Learn Esperanto! - http://www.lernu.net/
My homepage - http://www.ikso.net/~chuck
Enciklopedio - http://eo.wikipedia.org/

___________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!? -- Une adresse @yahoo.fr gratuite et en fran?ais !
Yahoo! Mail : http://fr.mail.yahoo.com


from_name: Tony Wilson

subject: [WikiEN-l] Request sysop status

body:
Hi all. May I be added to the list of sysops please? Also, I know it's
been asked before, but could someone point me at a suitable place to
read up on the dos and don'ts?

Thanks,

Tony Wilson
(Tannin)
list at redhill.net.au


from_name: John R. Owens

body:
On Wed, 16 Apr 2003, james duffy wrote:

> Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 03:02:19 +0100
> From: james duffy <jtdirl at hotmail.com>
> Subject: [WikiEN-l] new threat by DW as OLGA BITYERKOKOFF
>
> The following was left on my talk page by a new user called OLGA
> BITYERKOKOFF, who probably is the DW/Black Widow, going by their tone and
> edit pattern, but could also be the latest member of the Adam family.
>
> -------
> NOTICE: The following comment and labeling is inappropriate and libelous.
> Any further comment of this nature by you directed at me and stated herein
> or elsewhere will result in my proceeding immediately with all legal
> remedies available to me in accordance with the laws of the United States.
> AND DO GOVERN YOURSELF ACCORDINGLY. [[User:Olga Bityerkokoff]]
>
> (cur) (last) . . 00:52 Apr 16, 2003 . . Jtdirl (Vandal Alert)
> * According to Tannin, a new user Olga Bityerkokoff is a banned ex-user. It
> might be Michael but probably is Adam. *sigh*
> -------

As I noted on the [[Wikipedia:Annoying users]] page, Olga's very first act
of editing was to restore a comment of Wei Chin Ho's that had been removed
from [[Wikipedia:Administration FAQ]] (which I was actually kind of glad
for, since I'd been looking for such a page). So I think the link is
pretty conclusive, if you follow what Wei Chin Ho had been up to. I'm sure
s/he'd say it's all purely circumstantial, though.

Oh well, back to governing myself accordingly now. I'm still breathlessly
awaiting a response to my Russian question regarding her heritage she's
"very proud of despite people like (me)". ;)

--
John R. Owens http://www.ghiapet.homeip.net/
It's easy to find something worth dying for.  Do you have anything worth
living for?
				--Lorien


subject: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedians as war criminals

body:
Poor, Edmund W wrote:

> I'm content to be considered a "criminal" by the ICC -- it has no
> jurisdiction outside of countries which have signed its stupid treaty
> -- and I never travel to those dumb places anyway. So there! Nyaah, nyaah.
>
> I stay in the civilized world, where there is Rule By Law -- not
> kangaroo courts making politicized decisions in favor of ruthless
> dictatorships.

Shades of not invented here?
 From what I read & hear, the general perception in Europe is that it's
the US who's at fault for refusing to sign up to (yet another)
international effort.
Ed, please keep your politics off-list, especially at a time when the US
is only too happy to impose its will by force without the backing of the
UN. At least the ICC has that.


from_name: Ray Saintonge

subject: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedians as war criminals

body:
tarquin wrote:

> Poor, Edmund W wrote:
>
>> I'm content to be considered a "criminal" by the ICC -- it has no
>> jurisdiction outside of countries which have signed its stupid treaty
>> -- and I never travel to those dumb places anyway. So there! Nyaah,
>> nyaah.
>>
>> I stay in the civilized world, where there is Rule By Law -- not
>> kangaroo courts making politicized decisions in favor of ruthless
>> dictatorships.
>
>
>
> Shades of not invented here?
> From what I read & hear, the general perception in Europe is that it's
> the US who's at fault for refusing to sign up to (yet another)
> international effort.
> Ed, please keep your politics off-list, especially at a time when the
> US is only too happy to impose its will by force without the backing
> of the UN. At least the ICC has that.

I found Rick Wilson's remarks incoherent, and still can't be sure of
whether he is for or against the court... His claim that Wikipedia is
somehow complicit in Bush's war crimes makes no sense at all, whether
you're for or against the ICC.

Ed's uninformed vituperation is a gross distortion of fact.  He tends to
ignore the fact that it is the democratic countries that have been most
supportive of the Court, and a challenging array of rogue states, who
consider themselves above the law, have opposed it.  It does have
jurisdiction against citizens of non-participating states, but I would
hardly expect those countries to comply with extradition orders.  The ad
hoc courts set up by the United States are nothing more than lynch mobs
with a veneer of procedure.  The extraterritorial applications of a
country's laws is as much resented by people world-wide now as it was
when the tea was thrown into Boston Harbor.

Ed's approach to this subject has all the appearance of a troll.

Eclecticology


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Brion Vibber and I at MIT next week

body:
Hey everybody,

Just wanted to send a message out that Brion Vibber
and I will be at MIT next week (April 19-26) and
thought maybe some Wikipedians would be interesting in
meeting up.  If you're interested, please email me
personally at msochuck at yahoo.com.

We're planning to have an open house day where Brion
and I will probably talk a bit (in English) about
Wikipedia (maybe 10 minutes), mostly about our work on
the Esperanto version, but it might be of interest to
some of you.  This will be on Tuesday, April 22 at
2:00pm - 3:50pm in room 4-231
(http://whereis.mit.edu/bin/map?locate=bldg_4).  This
is connected with the Esperanto at Interreto seminar at
MIT (http://www.ikso.net/mit), where we'll work on
various Esperanto Internet projects.  The working
language of the seminar is Esperanto as we have
participants coming from 7 different countries.

Thanks,
Chuck

=====
Learn Esperanto! - http://www.lernu.net/
My homepage - http://www.ikso.net/~chuck
Enciklopedio - http://eo.wikipedia.org/

___________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!? -- Une adresse @yahoo.fr gratuite et en fran?ais !
Yahoo! Mail : http://fr.mail.yahoo.com


from_name: james duffy

subject: [WikiEN-l] new threat by DW as OLGA BITYERKOKOFF

body:
The following was left on my talk page by a new user called OLGA
BITYERKOKOFF, who probably is the DW/Black Widow, going by their tone and
edit pattern, but could also be the latest member of the Adam family.

-------
NOTICE: The following comment and labeling is inappropriate and libelous.
Any further comment of this nature by you directed at me and stated herein
or elsewhere will result in my proceeding immediately with all legal
remedies available to me in accordance with the laws of the United States.
AND DO GOVERN YOURSELF ACCORDINGLY. [[User:Olga Bityerkokoff]]

(cur) (last) . . 00:52 Apr 16, 2003 . . Jtdirl (Vandal Alert)
* According to Tannin, a new user Olga Bityerkokoff is a banned ex-user. It
might be Michael but probably is Adam. *sigh*
-------

JT

_________________________________________________________________
STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail


subject: [WikiEN-l] new threats by DW as OLGA BITYERKOKOFF

body:
Since Olga made the below threat to me, she posted the following on
Montrealais's talk page.

Your snide comments are a personal attack on my character and will not be
tolerated on this website. Any further references to me by you in a
derogatory manner will be met with a legal action in Quebec Superior Court,
Montreal, Canada where I am represented by Mendelsohn, Rosentzveig, Shacter,
attorneys at law, at 1000 Sherbrooke St. W., 26th Floor, Montreal. That is
one block from your university. [[Olga Bityerkokoff]]

>From: "james duffy" <jtdirl at hotmail.com>
>Reply-To: wikien-l at wikipedia.org
>To: wikien-l at wikipedia.org
>Subject: [WikiEN-l] new threat by DW as OLGA BITYERKOKOFF
>Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 03:02:19 +0100
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>X-Originating-IP: [213.202.164.252]
>X-Originating-Email: [jtdirl at hotmail.com]
>Received: from www.wikipedia.org ([130.94.122.197]) by
>mc2-f10.law16.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Tue, 15
>Apr 2003 19:03:41 -0700
>Received: from www.wikipedia.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])by
>www.wikipedia.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3G1wIJ18266;Wed, 16 Apr
>2003 01:58:18 GMT
>Received: from hotmail.com (bay1-f95.bay1.hotmail.com [65.54.245.95])by
>www.wikipedia.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3G1vRJ18188for
><wikien-l at wikipedia.org>; Wed, 16 Apr 2003 01:57:28 GMT
>Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC;
>Tue, 15 Apr 2003 19:02:19 -0700
>Received: from 213.202.164.252 by by1fd.bay1.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP;Wed,
>16 Apr 2003 02:02:19 GMT
>X-Message-Info: UZmYcfFpTCewzfqvyl1d15R59mlxBfYY
>Message-ID: <BAY1-F95HltO7WUHbSs00025d34 at hotmail.com>
>X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Apr 2003 02:02:19.0958 (UTC)
>FILETIME=[367FB560:01C303BC]
>Sender: wikien-l-admin at wikipedia.org
>Errors-To: wikien-l-admin at wikipedia.org
>X-BeenThere: wikien-l at wikipedia.org
>X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13
>Precedence: bulk
>List-Help: <mailto:wikien-l-request at wikipedia.org?subject=help>
>List-Post: <mailto:wikien-l at wikipedia.org>
>List-Subscribe:
><http://www.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l>,<mailto:wikien-l-request at wikipedia.org?subject=subscribe>
>List-Id: Discussion list for English-language Wikipedia
><wikien-l.wikipedia.org>
>List-Unsubscribe:
><http://www.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l>,<mailto:wikien-l-request at wikipedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>List-Archive: <http://www.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/>
>Return-Path: wikien-l-admin at wikipedia.org
>
>
>
>
>The following was left on my talk page by a new user called OLGA
>BITYERKOKOFF, who probably is the DW/Black Widow, going by their tone and
>edit pattern, but could also be the latest member of the Adam family.
>
>-------
>NOTICE: The following comment and labeling is inappropriate and libelous.
>Any further comment of this nature by you directed at me and stated herein
>or elsewhere will result in my proceeding immediately with all legal
>remedies available to me in accordance with the laws of the United States.
>AND DO GOVERN YOURSELF ACCORDINGLY. [[User:Olga Bityerkokoff]]
>
>(cur) (last) . . 00:52 Apr 16, 2003 . . Jtdirl (Vandal Alert)
>* According to Tannin, a new user Olga Bityerkokoff is a banned ex-user. It
>might be Michael but probably is Adam. *sigh*
>-------
>
>JT
>
>
>
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
>http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
>
>_______________________________________________
>WikiEN-l mailing list
>WikiEN-l at wikipedia.org
>http://www.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

_________________________________________________________________


from_name: Jimmy Wales

subject: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedians as war criminals

in_reply_to: <3E9C8B79.9040100@planetunreal.com>; from tarquin@planetunreal.com on Tue, Apr 15, 2003 at 11:45:13PM +0100

body:
Uh, it's probably best if we _all_ don't discuss politics on the list.

tarquin wrote:

> Poor, Edmund W wrote:
>
> > I'm content to be considered a "criminal" by the ICC -- it has no
> > jurisdiction outside of countries which have signed its stupid treaty
> > -- and I never travel to those dumb places anyway. So there! Nyaah, nyaah.
> >
> > I stay in the civilized world, where there is Rule By Law -- not
> > kangaroo courts making politicized decisions in favor of ruthless
> > dictatorships.
>
>
> Shades of not invented here?
>  From what I read & hear, the general perception in Europe is that it's
> the US who's at fault for refusing to sign up to (yet another)
> international effort.
> Ed, please keep your politics off-list, especially at a time when the US
> is only too happy to impose its will by force without the backing of the
> UN. At least the ICC has that.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at wikipedia.org
> http://www.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l


subject: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedians as war criminals

in_reply_to: <3E9D1D65.8020006@telus.net>; from saintonge@telus.net on Wed, Apr 16, 2003 at 02:07:49AM -0700

body:
We shouldn't discuss the politics of the ICC in the polite company
of wikipedia, but I'd say this is perfectly valid:

Ray Saintonge wrote:
> I found Rick Wilson's remarks incoherent, and still can't be sure of
> whether he is for or against the court... His claim that Wikipedia is
> somehow complicit in Bush's war crimes makes no sense at all, whether
> you're for or against the ICC.

The charge of "incoherence" is valid.  That claim that we're war
criminals is just goofball.  It might help to know that Rick calls
himself a "former Maoist organizer," whatever that may mean.

> Ed's approach to this subject has all the appearance of a troll.

I don't agree.  I agree in substance with Ed's views on the ICC, but
*really* we shouldn't discuss politics on the list.  It's outside the
scope of our mission, and very dangerous for WikiLove.

--Jimbo


body:
In a case like this, speculation on the real identity 'Olga
Bityerkokoff' is amusing but unnecessary.  The name itself is
vandalism and sufficient cause for banning.

Eric Demolli wrote:

> I'm pretty sure that DW is Olga he try to accuse me of Copyright violation
> on the article Citro?n 2 CV. I invite everyone to make his own opinion.
>
> Ericd
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at wikipedia.org
> http://www.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l


in_reply_to: <BAY1-F417pD5kKCw5zQ000093a5@hotmail.com>; from jtdirl@hotmail.com on Wed, Apr 16, 2003 at 03:30:16AM +0100

body:
I would just love to see the look on a judge's face when presented
with a case from 'Olga Bityerkokoff'.

james duffy wrote:

> Since Olga made the below threat to me, she posted the following on
> Montrealais's talk page.
>
> Your snide comments are a personal attack on my character and will not be
> tolerated on this website. Any further references to me by you in a
> derogatory manner will be met with a legal action in Quebec Superior Court,
> Montreal, Canada where I am represented by Mendelsohn, Rosentzveig, Shacter,
> attorneys at law, at 1000 Sherbrooke St. W., 26th Floor, Montreal. That is
> one block from your university. [[Olga Bityerkokoff]]
>
>
> >From: "james duffy" <jtdirl at hotmail.com>
> >Reply-To: wikien-l at wikipedia.org
> >To: wikien-l at wikipedia.org
> >Subject: [WikiEN-l] new threat by DW as OLGA BITYERKOKOFF
> >Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 03:02:19 +0100
> >MIME-Version: 1.0
> >X-Originating-IP: [213.202.164.252]
> >X-Originating-Email: [jtdirl at hotmail.com]
> >Received: from www.wikipedia.org ([130.94.122.197]) by
> >mc2-f10.law16.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Tue, 15
> >Apr 2003 19:03:41 -0700
> >Received: from www.wikipedia.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])by
> >www.wikipedia.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3G1wIJ18266;Wed, 16 Apr
> >2003 01:58:18 GMT
> >Received: from hotmail.com (bay1-f95.bay1.hotmail.com [65.54.245.95])by
> >www.wikipedia.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3G1vRJ18188for
> ><wikien-l at wikipedia.org>; Wed, 16 Apr 2003 01:57:28 GMT
> >Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC;
> >Tue, 15 Apr 2003 19:02:19 -0700
> >Received: from 213.202.164.252 by by1fd.bay1.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP;Wed,
> >16 Apr 2003 02:02:19 GMT
> >X-Message-Info: UZmYcfFpTCewzfqvyl1d15R59mlxBfYY
> >Message-ID: <BAY1-F95HltO7WUHbSs00025d34 at hotmail.com>
> >X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Apr 2003 02:02:19.0958 (UTC)
> >FILETIME=[367FB560:01C303BC]
> >Sender: wikien-l-admin at wikipedia.org
> >Errors-To: wikien-l-admin at wikipedia.org
> >X-BeenThere: wikien-l at wikipedia.org
> >X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.13
> >Precedence: bulk
> >List-Help: <mailto:wikien-l-request at wikipedia.org?subject=help>
> >List-Post: <mailto:wikien-l at wikipedia.org>
> >List-Subscribe:
> ><http://www.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l>,<mailto:wikien-l-request at wikipedia.org?subject=subscribe>
> >List-Id: Discussion list for English-language Wikipedia
> ><wikien-l.wikipedia.org>
> >List-Unsubscribe:
> ><http://www.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l>,<mailto:wikien-l-request at wikipedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> >List-Archive: <http://www.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/>
> >Return-Path: wikien-l-admin at wikipedia.org
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >The following was left on my talk page by a new user called OLGA
> >BITYERKOKOFF, who probably is the DW/Black Widow, going by their tone and
> >edit pattern, but could also be the latest member of the Adam family.
> >
> >-------
> >NOTICE: The following comment and labeling is inappropriate and libelous.
> >Any further comment of this nature by you directed at me and stated herein
> >or elsewhere will result in my proceeding immediately with all legal
> >remedies available to me in accordance with the laws of the United States.
> >AND DO GOVERN YOURSELF ACCORDINGLY. [[User:Olga Bityerkokoff]]
> >
> >(cur) (last) . . 00:52 Apr 16, 2003 . . Jtdirl (Vandal Alert)
> >* According to Tannin, a new user Olga Bityerkokoff is a banned ex-user. It
> >might be Michael but probably is Adam. *sigh*
> >-------
> >
> >JT
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >_________________________________________________________________
> >STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
> >http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >WikiEN-l mailing list
> >WikiEN-l at wikipedia.org
> >http://www.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
> _________________________________________________________________
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at wikipedia.org
> http://www.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: RE: Wikipedians as war criminals

body:
Jimbo writes:
> It might be interesting (but probably dangerous and
> destructive so I'm not actually in favor of doing
> it) to have a poll of regular contributors on a
> number of political issues, just to see where we
> lie.  I suspect that we're almost everywhere except
> the center.  :-)

That would be interesting, but dangerous to the
community?  Now that you mention it, I could see work
on the 'pedia descending into a big bickerfest.  I'll
take that as a gentle reproach for bringing my POV
into it.  :-)

kq

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo
http://search.yahoo.com


from_name: Anthere

subject: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedians as war criminals

body:
--- Zoe <zoecomnena at yahoo.com> wrote:
> From my Talk page: From Rick Wilson
> mailto:f.g.wilson at sbcglobal.net I don't know who you
> are, Zoe, but if you consider my calling out
> Wikipedia for complicity in the crimes of Bush, then
> yes, I am "trying to cause trouble."...

LOL

But...why did he choose your talk page and not one of
the war article Zoe ???

Anthere

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo
http://search.yahoo.com


from_name: Poor, Edmund W

subject: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedians as war criminals

body:
I'm tempted to say that I'll keep mine off, if you'll keep yours off -- but that would be wrong. It would lead to that "downward spiral" which Martin Luther King spoke against so eloquently.

I'd be better off incorporating your ideas about Europe's perception of America and about American "happiness" to impose its will, into the [[ICC]] article :-)

Obediently,

Ed Poor

-----Original Message-----
From: tarquin [mailto:tarquin at planetunreal.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2003 6:45 PM
To: wikien-l at wikipedia.org
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedians as war criminals

Poor, Edmund W wrote:

> I'm content to be considered a "criminal" by the ICC -- it has no
> jurisdiction outside of countries which have signed its stupid treaty
> -- and I never travel to those dumb places anyway. So there! Nyaah, nyaah.
>
> I stay in the civilized world, where there is Rule By Law -- not
> kangaroo courts making politicized decisions in favor of ruthless
> dictatorships.

Shades of not invented here?
 From what I read & hear, the general perception in Europe is that it's
the US who's at fault for refusing to sign up to (yet another)
international effort.
Ed, please keep your politics off-list, especially at a time when the US
is only too happy to impose its will by force without the backing of the
UN. At least the ICC has that.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedians as war criminals

body:
Ray,

I'm not *ignoring* the fact that nearly all the 100-odd signatories to the Rome Treaty are either democratic or at least somewhat free. If that fact isn't in the Wikipedia, though, I wish you would put it in -- with an appropriate footnote. (I seem to recall reading it online somewhere yesterday, on a pro-ICC website.)

Nor is my vituperation "uninformed", as you put it. America has put forth detailed reasons as to why it objects to the ICC. I think all those reasons should be put into the [[ICC]] article, balanced with the corresponding reasons of why ICC supporters favor the court. The article has begun to do that, but my impression is that the article is slanted in favor of the ICC, and that the pro-ICC rebuttal to America's anti-ICC objections are presented as definitive. I would prefer for the article to be neutral.

As in,

America fears that the ICC will do X, Y and Z.
Supporters of the ICC call these things unlikely or impossible.

(Or something like that.)

What you said about the "appearance of a troll" has, itself, the appearance of a personal attack. But I don't mind. It reminds me about [[Sam Gamgee]]'s amusing poem from The Lord of the Rings. (Although I confess I am a bit worried about going outside my cave during daylight: I might turn into stone :-)

Your personal attacks won't change my attitude toward you. I respect your contributions, even when we disagree -- as we obviously do on this issue. The challenge is, how can we work together to make an article which is both informative and neutral?

-----Original Message-----
From: Ray Saintonge [mailto:saintonge at telus.net]
Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2003 5:08 AM
To: wikien-l at wikipedia.org
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedians as war criminals

tarquin wrote:

I found Rick Wilson's remarks incoherent, and still can't be sure of
whether he is for or against the court... His claim that Wikipedia is
somehow complicit in Bush's war crimes makes no sense at all, whether
you're for or against the ICC.

Ed's uninformed vituperation is a gross distortion of fact.  He tends to
ignore the fact that it is the democratic countries that have been most
supportive of the Court, and a challenging array of rogue states, who
consider themselves above the law, have opposed it.  It does have
jurisdiction against citizens of non-participating states, but I would
hardly expect those countries to comply with extradition orders.  The ad
hoc courts set up by the United States are nothing more than lynch mobs
with a veneer of procedure.  The extraterritorial applications of a
country's laws is as much resented by people world-wide now as it was
when the tea was thrown into Boston Harbor.

Ed's approach to this subject has all the appearance of a troll.

Eclecticology

____


body:
What's really difficult is this:

* to describe one's most cherished, most deeply held beliefs

but NOT

* to insist that others agree with (or even respect) those beliefs

How many of us can simply say what we believe, and be content to let it go at that? I'm not even sure I myself am capable of that -- and I'm a fairly easy-going, tolerant kind of guy.

Many of us, certainly including me, sublimate this desire to see our beliefs reflected in print, by incorporating them into Wikipedia articles. We are allowed to do this, of course, provided that they are expressed *neutrally* -- that is, not asserted as FACTUAL but presented as the POV of someone outside the Wikipedia community. (I think Larry and I disagreed over whether it's ethical to do this, I might add.)

Most of what I put into the Wikipedia touches on controversial subjects, although I have been known to enter the odd indisputable fact now and then. Why, just yesterday I wrote about Graffiti (Palm) -- 'cuz it's on my ViewSonic PDA.

I try very hard to present POVs which I disbelieve just as clearly as those I believe. My goal is always that no one ought to be able to discern MY point of view from my edits alone. If I succeed more than half the time, I think I'm doing fairly well.

And some of my prose has lasted untouched for months at a time (in one case, well over a year) -- even though it touches on issues which typically arouse the greatest antipathy when DEBATED. But the consensus of Wiki writers on some of these examples is, de facto, that I expressed it best.

To my great distress, I don't always do so well. Hardly a day goes by when someone has to revert one of my edits, because MY point of view slipped in, rendering an article non-neutral. I appreciate all those fixes, even if I don't always say so ^_^

Ed Poor

-----Original Message-----
From: koyaanis qatsi [mailto:obchodnakorze at yahoo.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2003 9:02 AM
To: wikien-l at wikipedia.org
Subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: RE: Wikipedians as war criminals

Jimbo writes:
> It might be interesting (but probably dangerous and
> destructive so I'm not actually in favor of doing
> it) to have a poll of regular contributors on a
> number of political issues, just to see where we
> lie.  I suspect that we're almost everywhere except
> the center.  :-)

That would be interesting, but dangerous to the
community?  Now that you mention it, I could see work
on the 'pedia descending into a big bickerfest.  I'll
take that as a gentle reproach for bringing my POV
into it.  :-)

kq

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo
http://search.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l at wikipedia.org
http://www.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l


from_name: Brion Vibber

subject: [Wikitech-l] DB dumps

body:
On Wed, 16 Apr 2003, Thomas Corell wrote:
> I din't find it on the donload page, so I ask here:
>
> Are you dumping using the -e option of mysqldump?

Yes (via --opt).

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)


from_name: Axel Boldt

subject: [Wikitech-l] List of sites added

body:
--- Erik Moeller <erik_moeller at gmx.de> wrote:
> I've added a list of sites using the Wikipedia software to our page
> at
>
>         http://wikipedia.sourceforge.net
>
> Let me know if I missed one.

Should we mention the Enciclopedia Libre?

Axel

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo
http://search.yahoo.com


subject: [Wikitech-l] List of sites added

body:
On Wed, 16 Apr 2003, Axel Boldt wrote:
> --- Erik Moeller <erik_moeller at gmx.de> wrote:
> > I've added a list of sites using the Wikipedia software to our page
> > at
> >         http://wikipedia.sourceforge.net
> > Let me know if I missed one.
>
> Should we mention the Enciclopedia Libre?

I've added it. I'm having trouble connecting to their site, though, they
may be down at the moment.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)


from_name: Richard Grevers

body:
On Tue, 15 Apr 2003 11:07:16 -0400, Poor, Edmund W <Edmund.W.Poor at abc.com>
wrote:

> The only horror in the PDF story is the hideous foolishness of the
> author. Why did he sign up for an account which charges him for exceeding
> his bandwidth limit? My www.edpoor.com website simply stops responding if
> I exceed the limit.
>
> I'm sure Jimbo has the foresight to deal with a sudden surge of bandwidth
> usage -- like 100-fold or 1000-fold.
>
*Richard looks around for a NZ broadband provider who doesn't have a
transfer cap plus overage charges*: Nope - they all work that way - we have
no choice, largely because all our data either has to go via satellite (not
cheap) or via submarine cable across the Pacific Ocean or Tasman Sea (also
not cheap).
So you can rest assured that I will not be downloading a dump.
--
Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/


subject: [Wikitech-l] DB dumps

body:
On Wed, 16 Apr 2003, Thomas Corell wrote:
> Brion Vibber wrote:
> > On Wed, 16 Apr 2003, Thomas Corell wrote:
> >>Are you dumping using the -e option of mysqldump?
> > Yes (via --opt).
>
> *sigh* after some hours with my favourite editor I thought so. I never
> expected that editors have so much problmes with a linelenght of about 1
> million chars :(

Clearly these text editors were not designed for the modern database
professional. :D

> Just for some tests with my postgresql, can you send me a mysqldump (from
> german wikipedia, if possible) without that option?

Sure, here's a cur dump which ought to be in more traditional syntax*:
http://de.wikipedia.org/tarballs/20030416_cur_table.sql.bz2

* Using options: --add-drop-table --add-locks --all --quick
instead of --opt.

If you want an old dump too, just shout.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)


from_name: Stan Shebs

subject: [WikiEN-l] JoanB is DW

body:
Eric Demolli wrote:

>See Village pump.
>
Shoot, I was totally taken in and wrote a nice intro thing on its
talk page; but the accumulating stuff on Village pump and Image use
policy now looks like a direct continuation of the line of argument
from Black Widow.

You know folks, if people had to register with their real names,
this whole identity guessing game would go away.  I've been messing
with Wikipedia for only 10 weeks, so am still a newbie, but between
the identity games with troublesome users and the cleanup of daily
vandalism by anonymous users, it looks to me like it costs more time
to deal with all that than is saved by getting the few anonymous
contributions.

Do people still believe that anonymous contribution is critical
to success, or is it just an attitude left over from the startup
days?

Stan


from_name: Sean Barrett

subject: [WikiEN-l] JoanB is DW

body:
How would you know that whatever I filled in was my "real" name?

--
 Vyacheslav Molotov
 vyacheslavmolotov at yahoo.com

-----Original Message-----
From: wikien-l-admin at wikipedia.org
[mailto:wikien-l-admin at wikipedia.org]On Behalf Of Stan Shebs
Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2003 10:54
To: wikien-l at wikipedia.org
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] JoanB is DW

Eric Demolli wrote:

>See Village pump.
>
Shoot, I was totally taken in and wrote a nice intro thing on its
talk page; but the accumulating stuff on Village pump and Image use
policy now looks like a direct continuation of the line of argument
from Black Widow.

You know folks, if people had to register with their real names,
this whole identity guessing game would go away.  I've been messing
with Wikipedia for only 10 weeks, so am still a newbie, but between
the identity games with troublesome users and the cleanup of daily
vandalism by anonymous users, it looks to me like it costs more time
to deal with all that than is saved by getting the few anonymous
contributions.

Do people still believe that anonymous contribution is critical
to success, or is it just an attitude left over from the startup
days?

Stan

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l at wikipedia.org
http://www.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l


subject: [WikiEN-l] JoanB is DW

body:
On Wed, 16 Apr 2003, Stan Shebs wrote:
> You know folks, if people had to register with their real names,
> this whole identity guessing game would go away.

I'm a big fan of UseRealNames myself, but there are two separate problems
here:

1) People on the net being more rude and uncivil than they'd be in
face-to-face conversion with someone of known identity

2) People creating multiple identities just to cause trouble.

Using real names is alleged to help with 1) by making a firmer connection
to meatspace and its social rules, but it doesn't do much about issue 2),
which is about people who have explicitly made the decision to violate
social expectations and deceive the people they're interacting with.

Short of requiring credit cards or physical verification of an
identification card, we can't verify that people are who they say they
are. It will remain trivial to create new accounts under new names that
_look_ like real names. ("Susan Mason", etc)

Requiring e-mail verification would not help either, as it's trivial to
create throwaway free e-mail accounts.

>  I've been messing with Wikipedia for only 10 weeks, so am still a
> newbie, but between the identity games with troublesome users and the
> cleanup of daily vandalism by anonymous users, it looks to me like it
> costs more time to deal with all that than is saved by getting the few
> anonymous contributions.

How many of our regulars would never have gotten into Wikipedia then?

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

> Do people still believe that anonymous contribution is critical
> to success, or is it just an attitude left over from the startup
> days?

Yes. A low barrier to entry is one of the essential defining
characteristics of Wikipedia which sets it apart from other projects.

See also at the bottom of
http://www.usemod.com/cgi-bin/mb.pl?LoginsAreEvil :

  "Nonetheless, the trade off is between security and accessibility. But
  bear in mind that in an attack passive readers that do not have logins
  will also be barred or slowed from fixing the vandalism. It is in those
  dire situations that your hidden friends really show."

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)


from_name: tarquin

subject: [WikiEN-l] Some more What Wikipedia is not

body:
In light of DW's recent "this is an open site" blah blah, here's a
suggestion for the "What Wikipedia is not" page.

(not that it probably won't do anything to shut DW up...)

Wikipedia's goal is to produce an open content encyclopedia. This does
NOT mean you can write anything here.
It DOES mean that you can copy Wikipedia content and publish it
somewhere else, with any alterations you wish (under the GFDL of course).


from_name: Eric Demolli

body:
I'm pretty sure that DW is Olga he try to accuse me of Copyright violation
on the article Citro?n 2 CV. I invite everyone to make his own opinion.

Ericd


from_name: Thomas Corell

subject: [Wikitech-l] DB dumps

body:
Hello,

I din't find it on the donload page, so I ask here:

Are you dumping using the -e option of mysqldump?

Smurf
--
-------------------------  Anthill inside! ---------------------------