from_name: Phil Sandifer

subject: [WikiEN-l] Drive-by deletion

body:
It also says nothing in the deletion policy about criteria for deletion
on VfD. It lists some deletion criteria that must be VfDed, but it
makes no claims anywhere to provide an exhaustive list of valid reasons
for deletion.

-Snowspinner

On Oct 23, 2004, at 12:11 AM, Mark Richards wrote:

> The point is that there is no policy that says that
> notability or not is a reason for deletion. I might
> just as well get a group of morons to vote to delete
> any article with the work 'green' in them. If there
> was a vote to do it, why not? Well, because it's
> stupid and damaging. The fact that you can get five or
> six people to consistently do it doesn't make it
> right. That's why there is nothing on the deletion
> criteria which says anything about notablity.
> Mark
>
> --- Rick <giantsrick13 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Where is the policy consensus which says school
>> articles are not to be deleted?  You can't point to
>> it, because it does not exist.  Therefore, each of
>> these non-notable school stubs needs to be listed
>> individually on VfD.  If you can get a consensus
>> which says that school articles are to stay, then
>> all of these schools will no longer be listed on
>> VfD.  But until there is such an article, so long as
>> people continue to make articles about non-notable
>> schools and don't indicate anything in the article
>> which indicates that they ARE notable, they will
>> continue to be listed.
>>
>> RickK
>>
>> Mark Richards <marich712000 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>> 1. Noone is questioning your right to revert (or
>> maybe
>> even delete) 'Peter is gay'.
>> 2. There are specific people consistently deleting
>> articles that have real content. For example,
>> schools.
>> They have consitently failed to gain concensus to
>> delete all school articles, and so are listing every
>> school individually, counting on the fact that noone
>> can be bothered to vote on every one. The fact that
>> each one is often a stub at this stage makes it
>> easier
>> still to delete them, and allows them to make the
>> case
>> that there is precident for deleting more schools.
>>
>> The point is that this is contentious, because not
>> only is real information about real things (not
>> 'Peter
>> is gay') is being lost, and furthermore, only admins
>> can even see what is was that was lost.
>> Mark R.
>>
>> --- Delirium wrote:
>>
>>> I've only been skimming this thread, but I think
>>> people proposing
>>> policies upon policies are missing what actually
>>> makes wikipedia work:
>>> people just do things that need to be done. When I
>>> see a crap article
>>> that says "peter is gay", I hit 'delete', I don't
>>> list it on a page and
>>> request permission to delete it. I don't think
>> most
>>> other people do
>>> either (or even read this list or the millions of
>>> policy pages).
>>>
>>> It's true people should exercise discretion, but
>> if
>>> an article that has
>>> about 8 words in it was "unfairly" deleted, it's
>> not
>>> like Wikipedia has
>>> lost an irreplaceable masterwork. There is no
>>> prohibition against
>>> creating a new article in its place (and while
>>> you're at it, if you made
>>> it better it wouldn't even be a question). If
>> there
>>> are specific people
>>> consistently deleting questionable things, you
>> could
>>> leave a message on
>>> their talk page asking them about it.
>>>
>>> Some of the arguments over "unfairly deleted" VfD
>>> articles seem to have
>>> a similar misconception that we're deleting all
>>> possible articles at
>>> that location, while we're only deleting the one
>>> that's actually there.
>>> If there's an incoherent article with no useful
>>> information at a
>>> location of a famous person or entity, it's still
>>> appropriate to delete
>>> it. Someone can later create an actual article at
>>> that location, which
>>> then wouldn't be deleted.
>>>
>>> But the main point is that Wikipedia works by
>> people
>>> doing what they
>>> think is reasonable, and talking to people who are
>>> doing things they
>>> disagree with, not by a bunch of policy
>> mumbo-jumob.
>>> I've taken to not
>>> even reading policy pages anymore, because there
>> are
>>> literally thousands
>>> of them, and most of them are incredibly long and
>>> intricate. I don't
>>> know what the hell deletion policy is anymore:
>> there
>>> must be at least 10
>>> pages on the subject, and 100 proposals to replace
>>> it with a new set of
>>> policies.
>>>
>>> -Mark
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> WikiEN-l mailing list
>>> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
>>>
>> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________
>> Do you Yahoo!?
>> Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today!
>> http://vote.yahoo.com
>> _______________________________________________
>> WikiEN-l mailing list
>> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
>> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>>
>> __________________________________________________
>> Do You Yahoo!?
>> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
>> protection around
>> http://mail.yahoo.com
>> _______________________________________________
>> WikiEN-l mailing list
>> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
>> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today!
> http://vote.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


list: wikien-l

source: pipermail-mbox

subject: [WikiEN-l] Drive-by deletion

body:
Yes. It is clear that there is no consensus to delete all schools prima
faciae. There is also very notably no consensus to keep all schools.

Which means that schools are covered on an individual basis.

Which is, oddly enough, exactly what VfD is for - considering the
deletion of an individual article.

How convenient, no?

-Snowspinner
On Oct 22, 2004, at 11:28 PM, Simon Pulsifer wrote:

> I think [[Wikipedia talk:Deletion policy/schools]] and
> [[Wikipedia:What's in, what's out]] both pretty
> clearly show that in the wider community there is no
> consensus to remove schools. - ~~~~
>
>
>
>
>
> ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW
> Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun!
> http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: Jimmy (Jimbo) Wales

subject: [WikiEN-l] At least in part because they're stubs

body:
I think Daniel's excellent explanation of his vote is a model of how
people ought to think about these things, and shows why it is
perfectly legitimate that different people will come to different
conclusions about particular cases.  There's no magic formula here, no
simple rules, but rather thoughtfulness and human judgment.  This is
how it should be.

Daniel P. B. Smith wrote:
> "A butterface is a female who has a good looking body but an ugly face."
>
> I think there are good stubs which should be kept and bad stubs which
> should be deleted and that this was a borderline stub.
>
> I would have voted "keep" on an article whose entire content "A
> butterfly is a flying insect, usually with striking colours and
> patterns on its wings. Butterlies live on pollen and nectar from
> flowers. The lifecycle of the butterfly has four stages: egg;  larvae,
> known as a caterpillar; pupae/chrysallis; adult butterfly" because I
> would have judged chances of this caterpillar of an stub growing into a
> butterfly of an article would be good.
>
> I would have voted "delete" on an article whose entire contents was
> "Butterbeer: A fictional drink of wizards, from the Harry Potter book
> series" because I would have judged the changes of this growing into a
> good full-length article to be slim.
>
> It's not _obvious_ to me at all whether the article on "butterface"
> should be kept or deleted, but I came down on the side of "delete" and
> that's how I voted. Since the stub is actually growing it may turn out
> to be the seed of a good article, in which case my vote will have been
> a misjudgement.
>
> At the moment, indeed, I'm a whore for good-quality articles and you
> can get all sorts of things past me on VfD by simply making them
> reasonably long, reasonably well-written, and reasonably
> well-researched.
>
> Stubs, even substubs that point out real omissions in coverage are
> useful and grow. (Although I am darned if I see why it isn't better to
> request an article than to create a substub). Stubs in areas that have
> a cadre of people with an interest in the topic are useful and grow.
> Not all stubs are useful or grow. Just as Wikipedia's customs,
> practices, and technical mechanism are a way to create an encyclopedia,
> not an end in itself, a stub is a way to create an article, not an
> article in itself.
>
> --
> Daniel P. B. Smith, dpbsmith at verizon.net
> "Elinor Goulding Smith's Great Big Messy Book" is now back in print!
> Sample chapter at http://world.std.com/~dpbsmith/messy.html
> Buy it at http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1403314063/
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

--
"La n??fle est un fruit." - first words of 50,000th article on fr.wikipedia.org


list: wikipedia-l

subject: [Wikipedia-l] KIingon links

body:
I would support this if it were accompanied by the deletion of the
Klingon Wikipedia.

-Snowspinner

On Oct 23, 2004, at 4:18 AM, Andre Engels wrote:

> Klingon interwiki-links have been decided not to work. I have always
> hated this so-called compromise. But now I even find that what happens
> is that they DO work, but are shown as normal internal links rather
> than interwiki links. Isn't this contrary to the intentions of this?
> Now they are even MORE visible than normal interwiki links.
>
> Furthermore, as I have said before, I find this so-called compromise
> worse than both of the things it is supposed to be a compromise
> before.
>
> All in all, could we please get to treat Klingon interwiki links the
> normal way again?
>
> Andre Engels
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>


from_name: Mark Richards

subject: [WikiEN-l] Drive-by deletion

body:
Inclusionsts are 'disruptive' because they don't want
to delete material that is factual, verifiable and
neutral? What kind of newspeak is this?

Also, there is no long standing policy or principle
about deleting 'non-notable' items - this is a new
development as a result of deletionists not being able
to gain concensus for their ideas.

Mark

--- Rebecca <misfitgirl at gmail.com> wrote:

> ...and compare this to disruptive new inclusionists,
> such as
> Netoholic, who either don't understand Wikipedia or
> its long-standing
> policies and principles, or don't care.
>
> Somehow, I think you'll find it's the deletionists
> who've generally
> been here longer, and done the hard yards of
> actually working on good
> articles, rather than spending their wiki time
> trying to turn
> Wikipedia into Wikijunkyard.
>
> -- ambi
>
>
> > I note with a combination of amusement and horror
> but no surprise at all
> > that almost if not all parties involved in that
> discussion aside from
> > Rick are relatively new contributors (moreso at
> the time of the
> > discussion). What we're seeing seems to be a
> result of the massive
> > influx of new users who either don't understand
> Wikipedia or its
> > long-standing policies and principles, or don't
> care.
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Trigger-happy New Pages patrol

body:
?? There is nothing 'hardline' about the opinion that
factual, neutral and verifiable material should be
kept.
Mark

--- Rebecca <misfitgirl at gmail.com> wrote:

> > >As far as I'm concerned, Wikipedia still needs
> stubs to grow, precisely in
> > >areas where it is currently weak.
> >
> > I agree. The idea that stubs are bad is silly. WP
> isn't, and
> > probably will never be, a finished work.
>
> Absolutely no one here appears to be suggesting that
> stubs are bad. If
> we had any deletionists at all who were as hardline
> as Anthony, Mark
> Richards or Mr. Knight, then that's probably what
> they would argue.
>
> I haven't seen the cases at hand, but knowing recent
> events, I'd guess
> that they were probably substubs. And that's where
> they don't help
> Wikipedia, because they contribute precisely nothing
> (and diminish our
> credibility, by showing us to prefer quantity over
> quality).
>
> -- ambi
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today!
http://vote.yahoo.com


subject: [WikiEN-l] Drive-by deletion

body:
This is lunacy. You are arguing that, although there
is a list of valid reasons for deletion, and
'non-notablity' has consistently NOT been added to it
because there is no concensus, this does not in any
way indicate that non-notablity is not a reason for
deletion?
If that's really what you are arguing, then I don't
think there is anything that will convince you,
because you are clearly not interested in community
concensus building.
Mark

--- Phil Sandifer <sandifer at sbcglobal.net> wrote:

> It also says nothing in the deletion policy about
> criteria for deletion
> on VfD. It lists some deletion criteria that must be
> VfDed, but it
> makes no claims anywhere to provide an exhaustive
> list of valid reasons
> for deletion.
>
> -Snowspinner
>
> On Oct 23, 2004, at 12:11 AM, Mark Richards wrote:
>
> > The point is that there is no policy that says
> that
> > notability or not is a reason for deletion. I
> might
> > just as well get a group of morons to vote to
> delete
> > any article with the work 'green' in them. If
> there
> > was a vote to do it, why not? Well, because it's
> > stupid and damaging. The fact that you can get
> five or
> > six people to consistently do it doesn't make it
> > right. That's why there is nothing on the deletion
> > criteria which says anything about notablity.
> > Mark
> >
> > --- Rick <giantsrick13 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Where is the policy consensus which says school
> >> articles are not to be deleted?  You can't point
> to
> >> it, because it does not exist.  Therefore, each
> of
> >> these non-notable school stubs needs to be listed
> >> individually on VfD.  If you can get a consensus
> >> which says that school articles are to stay, then
> >> all of these schools will no longer be listed on
> >> VfD.  But until there is such an article, so long
> as
> >> people continue to make articles about
> non-notable
> >> schools and don't indicate anything in the
> article
> >> which indicates that they ARE notable, they will
> >> continue to be listed.
> >>
> >> RickK
> >>
> >> Mark Richards <marich712000 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> 1. Noone is questioning your right to revert (or
> >> maybe
> >> even delete) 'Peter is gay'.
> >> 2. There are specific people consistently
> deleting
> >> articles that have real content. For example,
> >> schools.
> >> They have consitently failed to gain concensus to
> >> delete all school articles, and so are listing
> every
> >> school individually, counting on the fact that
> noone
> >> can be bothered to vote on every one. The fact
> that
> >> each one is often a stub at this stage makes it
> >> easier
> >> still to delete them, and allows them to make the
> >> case
> >> that there is precident for deleting more
> schools.
> >>
> >> The point is that this is contentious, because
> not
> >> only is real information about real things (not
> >> 'Peter
> >> is gay') is being lost, and furthermore, only
> admins
> >> can even see what is was that was lost.
> >> Mark R.
> >>
> >> --- Delirium wrote:
> >>
> >>> I've only been skimming this thread, but I think
> >>> people proposing
> >>> policies upon policies are missing what actually
> >>> makes wikipedia work:
> >>> people just do things that need to be done. When
> I
> >>> see a crap article
> >>> that says "peter is gay", I hit 'delete', I
> don't
> >>> list it on a page and
> >>> request permission to delete it. I don't think
> >> most
> >>> other people do
> >>> either (or even read this list or the millions
> of
> >>> policy pages).
> >>>
> >>> It's true people should exercise discretion, but
> >> if
> >>> an article that has
> >>> about 8 words in it was "unfairly" deleted, it's
> >> not
> >>> like Wikipedia has
> >>> lost an irreplaceable masterwork. There is no
> >>> prohibition against
> >>> creating a new article in its place (and while
> >>> you're at it, if you made
> >>> it better it wouldn't even be a question). If
> >> there
> >>> are specific people
> >>> consistently deleting questionable things, you
> >> could
> >>> leave a message on
> >>> their talk page asking them about it.
> >>>
> >>> Some of the arguments over "unfairly deleted"
> VfD
> >>> articles seem to have
> >>> a similar misconception that we're deleting all
> >>> possible articles at
> >>> that location, while we're only deleting the one
> >>> that's actually there.
> >>> If there's an incoherent article with no useful
> >>> information at a
> >>> location of a famous person or entity, it's
> still
> >>> appropriate to delete
> >>> it. Someone can later create an actual article
> at
> >>> that location, which
> >>> then wouldn't be deleted.
> >>>
> >>> But the main point is that Wikipedia works by
> >> people
> >>> doing what they
> >>> think is reasonable, and talking to people who
> are
> >>> doing things they
> >>> disagree with, not by a bunch of policy
> >> mumbo-jumob.
> >>> I've taken to not
> >>> even reading policy pages anymore, because there
> >> are
> >>> literally thousands
> >>> of them, and most of them are incredibly long
> and
> >>> intricate. I don't
> >>> know what the hell deletion policy is anymore:
> >> there
> >>> must be at least 10
> >>> pages on the subject, and 100 proposals to
> replace
> >>> it with a new set of
> >>> policies.
> >>>
> >>> -Mark
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> WikiEN-l mailing list
> >>> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> >>>
> >>
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________
> >> Do you Yahoo!?
> >> Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today!
> >> http://vote.yahoo.com
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> WikiEN-l mailing list
> >> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> >>
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >>
> >>
> __________________________________________________
> >> Do You Yahoo!?
> >> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> >> protection around
> >> http://mail.yahoo.com
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> WikiEN-l mailing list
> >> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> >>
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today!
> > http://vote.yahoo.com
>
=== message truncated ===

_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today!
http://vote.yahoo.com


from_name: Anthony DiPierro

body:
> Absolutely no one here appears to be suggesting that stubs are bad. If
> we had any deletionists at all who were as hardline as Anthony, Mark
> Richards or Mr. Knight, then that's probably what they would argue.

Maybe no one here, but there are certainly those who vote to delete articles
at least in part because they're stubs.   Dpbsmith is one, who said on VfD
"In borderline cases I am influenced by the quality, thoroughness, and
scholarship behind an article as well as the topic. I would probably vote to
keep a good article on this topic. But I vote to delete this one."  Geogre
is another, who says on his talk page "The "eventualist" position is of some
concern to me because of the problem of first impressions. Eventually
Wikipedians will fill in gaps, but the new users do not often get motivated
to fix bad articles." "I think that the logic of eventualism applies equally
to absences as stubs. Eventually a Wikipedian will create a good article,
just as eventually a Wikipedian will fix a stub."  "All of this is simply to
explain why I am a "deletionist." I do not delete topics. I delete articles.
I do not pass judgment often on whether a thing is worth knowing, but I
think it is very important to make sure that the materials we have are
rewarding for the users."

As for my being "hard line", VfD forces you to be hardline.  Instead of
trying to come up with a solution that everyone can agree on, you're forced
to vote, delete or don't.  I've tried supporting a number of alternatives.
I've even said that if I'm simply given access to see deleted articles I'll
never participate on VfD again.  I've offered the compromise of moving an
article to the talk page when the problem is that the article itself is not
complete.  This way someone who wants to develop a complete article has a
stub to start with, but Wikipedia intentionally distances itself from the
article by noting that it's just discussion.  I've supported a number of
compromises.  I'm not hard line in general, just on VfD, where one is forced
to be hard line.

Anthony


subject: [WikiEN-l] Drive-by deletion

body:
Right, the problem is that the reasons given for
deletion are not ones that are part of the deletion
policy. Do you support the deletion of articles with
the word 'green' in, if I could persuade enough people
to vote for it? I hope not, and for the same reason, I
oppose people deleting school that do not meet
deletion criteria. If they do meet the community
agreed criteria for deletion, then I will vote delete.
Mark

--- Phil Sandifer <sandifer at sbcglobal.net> wrote:

> Yes. It is clear that there is no consensus to
> delete all schools prima
> faciae. There is also very notably no consensus to
> keep all schools.
>
> Which means that schools are covered on an
> individual basis.
>
> Which is, oddly enough, exactly what VfD is for -
> considering the
> deletion of an individual article.
>
> How convenient, no?
>
> -Snowspinner
> On Oct 22, 2004, at 11:28 PM, Simon Pulsifer wrote:
>
> > I think [[Wikipedia talk:Deletion policy/schools]]
> and
> > [[Wikipedia:What's in, what's out]] both pretty
> > clearly show that in the wider community there is
> no
> > consensus to remove schools. - ~~~~
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW
>
> > Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more
> fun!
> > http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
> > _______________________________________________
> > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> >
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

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


subject:
[WikiEN-l] A mailing list whose content is all the material
	deleted from Wikipedia?

body:
As usual, the case is being misrepresented. No one is
talking about the content below, we are talking about
real, verifiable articles that are factual and
neutral.
The example below is a speedy deletion candidate.
Bait. . .
and switch.
Stop it.
Mark

> If you not sure you actually want content like
> "SOMETHING THAT
> PHILLIPPE GEORGE TUCK SAYS, FROM CALNE IN WILTSHIRE
> WHEN HE IS VERY
> VERY DRUNK AND I LOVE HIM LOADS" or
> "fvgkfcgyufdcyrfdrt7rsx5esasees==
> Headline text
>
==kkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkmnjknjvyhi
>
> ancstdxydtsjsxtesb'ljasgvbjo..." or ""Hocus Pocus
> (novel)" (content
> was: 'poop')," we could send you only articles that
> are deleted as an
> outcome of the VfD process. That's only 20 articles
> per day; if we
> assume an average of 5000 bytes, that's only 100K
> per day. I think the
> real amount of traffic would be less than 30K per
> day.
>

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


subject: [WikiEN-l] Drive-by deletion

body:
> I also vote "keep" more often than you vote "delete".  Have you EVER voted
"delete"?

> RickK

Do you really not know?  I have voted to delete lots of times.  Learn the
facts before you make up lies about someone.

Anthony


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Mailing list of deleted materials

body:
An idea to deal with this - for non copyright vios, we
can use a new feature only available on wikis to give
automatic access to page histories for anyone who
wants to see it - use PAGE BLANKING, instead of
deletion!
All the benefits,and none of the downsides, plus, it
doesn't make that horrible screaching noise like
fingernails being dragged down a blackboard, that only
those in tune with Wiki principles seem able to hear
;)
Mark

--- NSK <nsk2 at wikinerds.org> wrote:

> On Saturday 23 October 2004 20:00, Daniel P.B.Smith
> wrote:
> > yes, they are seriously interested in access to
> the stream of material
> > deleted from Wikipedia. NSK says "If they are
> legal and are not
> > copyright violations."
>
> Just to clarify: Only material deleted via the VfD
> process.
>
> > What's the next step? Technical help will
> certainly be needed.
>
> Until we code a solution in software, you can inform
> the authors of the
> deleted material that they can publish them at
> http://jnana.wikinerds.org
>
> The JnanaBase wiki does allow anons and is now GFDL.
>
> --
> NSK
> Admin of http://portal.wikinerds.org
> Project Manager of http://www.nerdypc.org
> Project Manager of http://www.adapedia.org
> Project Manager of http://maatworks.wikinerds.org
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


subject: [WikiEN-l] Drive-by deletion

body:
I think this just goes to show how damaging some of
the more aggressive attack dogs on Wikipedia are. I
can certainly imagine that this would have been
different if someone had spoken informally with EBR
about how appropriate or not this was, and dealt with
it in a constructive, rather than aggressive way.
Mark

--- David Carson <david at hemiware.com> wrote:

> John Lee wrote:
>
> > I didn't deny that there are extremists in the
> deletionist camp such
> > as Rick, but what's positively annoying are brats
> like Netoholic or
> > Eric B. and Rakim, especially considering their
> vocality. For example,
> > Eric B. and Rakim has made statements such as
> "There is no reason to
> > delete any of the pages there [on VFD] at all",
> "Everyone using that
> > page [VFD] to delete articles is sabotaging
> Wikipedia and should be
> > blocked" and "The only way to fix vfd would be to
> allow people to cast
> > the identical vote on range of articles listed
> there.  Then you would
> > be able to vote "keep doesn't hurt wikipedia" (or
> whatever) on each
> > and every article".
>
>
> Eric B. and Rakim's stance is easier to understand
> when you look at his
> history: his first contributions to Wikipedia were a
> series of articles
> on subroutines and datatypes from the OpenGL API.
> Nothing wrong with
> them, as I recall, but really not encyclopedic, and
> a bunch of them were
> listed for deletion (by Rick, as it happens), with
> the overwhelming
> consensus that this content should be on Wikibooks,
> not Wikipedia. To
> which E.B&R responded with a torrent of abuse,
> calling people vandals,
> telling them to stop interfering with his work, and
> accusing Rick of
> "trying to destroy Wikipedia".
>
> See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:VfD-OpenGL
> and
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:VfD-Ballerium
>
> I have no idea if E.B&R ever moved his OpenGL
> content to Wikibooks, but
> since then, he's spent more time trolling this
> mailing list whenever
> deletion-related threads came up than doing anything
> else on Wikipedia.
>
> Cheers!
> David...
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today!
http://vote.yahoo.com


subject: [WikiEN-l] Drive-by deletion

body:
> Ray Saintonge wrote:
>
> > Bullshit!  Non-notability is not a valid excuse
> for deletion.  It is not
> > up to the contributor to be put through a
> Kafkaesque process in an
> > attempt to satisfy the illusory standards of a
> stuck-up elitist.
> > They're not trying to trip up anybody.  Your
> supposition is based on
> > nothing.  The onus is on the deletionist to learn
> respect.
>
> Hear hear!

Yes, yes.
Mark

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


subject: [WikiEN-l] Drive-by deletion

body:
Notability has nothing to do with verifiability. The
schools case exemplifies this. They are easily
verifiable. The claim that they are 'not-notable'
clearly has nothing to do with verifiability.
Mark

> The reason I used the word "notability" in the first
> place is because it
> implies to me that if something is notable enough
> for inclusion, it
> should be verifiable. Jimbo himself has clarified it
> on this list
> before; to him, the reason notability is used as a
> criteria is because
> anything notable enough to go into an encyclopedia
> should be verifiable.
> I thought we'd already ironed that out. I am not
> using "notability" in
> the same way it is normally used on VFD.
>
> John Lee
> ([[User:Johnleemk]])
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today!
http://vote.yahoo.com


subject: [WikiEN-l] Drive-by deletion

body:
This is exactly the point. Your cat is not verifiable.
Your local school is.

Some people think that neither are 'notable', but that
is simply a matter of opinion, and nothing to do with
verifiability.
Mark

--- John Lee <johnleemk at gawab.com> wrote:

> Rebecca wrote:
>
> >>Bullshit!  Non-notability is not a valid excuse
> for deletion.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >According to who? What self-respecting encyclopedia
> gives me the right
> >to write an article on my deceased cat?
> >
> >
> Technically, most encyclopedias wouldn't, but
> Wikipedia is not paper.
> However, as Jimbo has clarified, notability is not
> what it means on VFD;
> something notable enough for inclusion must be
> verifiable. So likely
> your deceased cat isn't verifiable.
>
> What puzzles me the most is: If the cat had an
> article written about it
> in the local newspaper, would it be verifiable? If
> an orbituary was
> published, would it then count as verifiable? That's
> what troubles me
> most about using "verifiability" as a replacement
> for "notability".
>
> John Lee
> ([[User:Johnleemk]])
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

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


from_name: Charles Matthews

subject: [WikiEN-l] List of persons with autism spectrum disorders

body:
Nicholas Knight wrote

> Charles Matthews wrote:
>
> > (i) listings could quite possibly be defamatory (certainly hurtful), and
are
>
> Yeeeahhh... Being on the low end of the autism spectrum myself, and
> having suffered some rather nasty consequences as a result, I have to
> say I'd find being on a list of people on the autism spectrum to be
> about as hurtful as being on a list of people that don't think much of
> "fine art".
>
> What I DO find hurtful is any implication that I SHOULD feel hurt by it.

That's not the point.  And implications that anyone who tries to discuss
this objectively is somehow unsympathetic are very unhelpful.

The point is: if someone is singled out and added to such a list just on the
basis of some signs that are vaguely connected (e.g. mildly asocial compared
to the norm, physically uncoordinated, hates telephones), this could be
defamatory and have a direct effect on their work or social position.  No
one should have to defend themselves against this sort of check-box
approach.  The whole discussion revolves about the inappropriate use of
'criteria' that have been given some publicity.

>From http://trainland.tripod.com/judith.htm:

Judith Gould writes

"Autistic disorders cannot as yet be diagnosed by using any medical
or psychological tests or on the presence of any particular feature of
behaviour. The diagnosis depends upon the developmental history
and a pattern of behaviour that unfolds over time.

A number of checklists are available for the diagnosis of autism in
childhood, for example the Autism Behaviour Checklist (ABC). These
require yes/no answers to a list of questions, for example, (Krug et
al, 1980). This format cannot be used to obtain a picture of
development and behaviour over the years since infancy. The
meanings of the questions can be misunderstood by inexperienced
raters. The ranges of questions asked are too narrow to cover the
whole spectrum.  ... "

In other words this whole business of 'outing' Robert Crumb, or David Byrne
or whoever, is without a serious basis.

> > made without any support;
>
> Certainly any such list needs to have evidence to back it up, but I fail
> to see how that's any different than anything else in an encyclopedia in
> general and Wikipedia in particular.
>
> If there's a problem with a specific article, take it up on the
> article's talk page; I don't see why this should be discussed on the
> mailing list (where, incidentally, not everyone is going to see it or be
> able to join in the discussion).

I have intervened on the talk page.  There are comments there about having
the page run on a more principled basis.  That seems not in practice to be
happening: anyone who wants to know why Gary Numan is cited will refer to
neurodiversity.org, which refers back to the WP Gary Numan page, which
refers to a woman's magazine article about how his wife decided he had
Asperger's, and so on.

I raised it here because it is a problem with large-scale POV, going to WP's
reputation, and because of the very issue about defamation.  Bill Gates
probably is too busy to be concerned; but why list him without something
more definite?  (I haven't gone into this one.)

Charles


from_name: Sean Barrett

subject: [WikiEN-l] Drive-by deletion

body:
Mark Richards stated for the record:
>>Ray Saintonge wrote:
>>
>>>Bullshit!  Non-notability is not a valid excuse
>>>for deletion.  It is not
>>>up to the contributor to be put through a
>>>Kafkaesque process in an
>>>attempt to satisfy the illusory standards of a
>>>stuck-up elitist.
>>
>>>They're not trying to trip up anybody.  Your
>>>supposition is based on
>>>nothing.  The onus is on the deletionist to learn
>>>respect.
>>
>>Hear hear!
>
>
> Yes, yes.
> Mark

Right on.

--
  Sean Barrett
  sean at epoptic.com


subject: [WikiEN-l] Drive-by deletion

body:
You could make a case that it is the responsiblity of
the author (whoever that is?!) to provide references,
but notability is just a weasel word for 'I'm not
interested in it'.
Mark

--- Nicholas Knight <nknight at runawaynet.com> wrote:

> John Lee wrote:
> > Institute new policy? I'm not sure what you mean,
> really. All I was
> > trying to say was that if contributors don't make
> it clear through an
> > article they wrote how its topic is encyclopedic,
> then the onus isn't on
> > others to hunt high and low for a way to verify
> it. Mark Richards was
> > saying the onus isn't on contributors to prove
> their articles are
> > encyclopedic. I was saying that, in my opinion, it
> is.
>
> The core concept isn't what I see as flawed (in fact
> it's almost
> tautological), it's the use of it as an excuse to
> delete things.
>
> > Speaking of verifiability, I just noticed
> >
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:VfD-Ballerium
> from a recent post
> > on the list (one of Eric B. and Rakim's deleted
> articles' deletion
> > debates). Apparently Ballerium was verifiable; at
> least Eric B. and
> > Rakim provided several third-party sources. Should
> the article have been
> > kept? Rossami stated that the reason he was voting
> "delete" was: "Let
> > the product come out for release. Then let it be
> for another 6 months.
> > If the product still has publicity and traction
> after 6 months live,
> > then it /might/ make the cut as encyclopedic."
> Isn't that a definition
> > of "notability"?
> >
> > Sorry for the off-topic rambling, it just struck
> me how Ballerium
> > appeared to be a perfect case of a verifiable
> topic having its article
> > deleted.
>
> Wow, that's a perfect example of massive abuse of
> the VfD process. I see
> comments like "doesn't exist" (which it does and
> did), and statements
> about how beta software isn't worthy of an article,
> and they don't care
> how popular it is.
>
> I note with a combination of amusement and horror
> but no surprise at all
> that almost if not all parties involved in that
> discussion aside from
> Rick are relatively new contributors (moreso at the
> time of the
> discussion). What we're seeing seems to be a result
> of the massive
> influx of new users who either don't understand
> Wikipedia or its
> long-standing policies and principles, or don't
> care.
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

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


subject: [WikiEN-l] Drive-by deletion

body:
--- Rebecca <misfitgirl at gmail.com> wrote:

> > Bullshit!  Non-notability is not a valid excuse
> for deletion.
>
> According to who?

According the the community established deletion
policy.
Mark

_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today!
http://vote.yahoo.com


from_name: Andre Engels

subject: [Wikipedia-l] KIingon links

body:
Klingon interwiki-links have been decided not to work. I have always
hated this so-called compromise. But now I even find that what happens
is that they DO work, but are shown as normal internal links rather
than interwiki links. Isn't this contrary to the intentions of this?
Now they are even MORE visible than normal interwiki links.

Furthermore, as I have said before, I find this so-called compromise
worse than both of the things it is supposed to be a compromise
before.

All in all, could we please get to treat Klingon interwiki links the
normal way again?

Andre Engels


list: wikitech-l

subject: [Wikitech-l] KIingon links


subject: [WikiEN-l] Deletion and notability

body:
Removing things that don't conform to policy is
vandalism?
Newspeak?
Mark

--- Rebecca <misfitgirl at gmail.com> wrote:

> Wonderful. Another thing that'll need to be
> reverted.
>
> I take it you're keen to repeat the saga of
> Netoholic's VFD vandalism.
>
> -- ambi
>
>
> On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 21:31:37 +0100 (BST), Simon
> Pulsifer
> <se_pulsifer at yahoo.ca> wrote:
> > In a test of my suggestion I have moved six recent
> > debates that didn't conform to current policies to
> > [[Wikipedia:VfD decisions not backed by current
> > policies]].
> >
> > - SimonP
> >
> >
>
___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW
> Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun!
>  http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
> > _______________________________________________
> > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> >
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today!
http://vote.yahoo.com


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Stopping to speedy speedy deletions

body:
Yes, the problem is that the deletion log does not
show the content of the article, so people cannot give
oversight to whether or not it should have been
deleted. Page blanking is much more appropriate.
Mark

--- "csherlock at ljh.com.au" <csherlock at ljh.com.au>
wrote:

> Mark Richards wrote:
> > By 'we' I presume you mean admins, so not scrutiny
> can
> > be given by regular users since they can't see the
> > content of the deleted article.
> > Mark
> >
> > --- "csherlock at ljh.com.au" <csherlock at ljh.com.au>
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> >>OK, I'm topposting and loving it!
> >>
> >>Firstly, deleted articles are not permanently
> >>deleted. We can retrieve them. See
>  >>[[Wikipedia:Undeletion policy]]. Secondly,
> >>if an admin is making consistent deletions and
>  >>not listening to others, they can be de'sysoped
>  >>after a request from other wikipedia editors.
>  >>Just go talk to the [[Wikipedia:Arbitration
> Committee]].
>  >>See also
> [[Wikipedia:Administrators#Administrator_abuse]].
> >>Basically this suggestion is truly horrible and I
> am
> >>strongly opposed to it.
>  >>TBSDY
>
> True, when I was referring to "we" I was referring
> to admins. However, I
> have been monitoring the deletion log lately, and I
> see very few
> articles that have been removed incorrectly. Even
> the borderline ones
> that I restored and THEN placed on VfD have had
> legitimate reasons for
> deletion. See, for example, [[Clairvoyance
> (album)]]. I restored this
> and placed on VfD, and the admin explained that as
> the had no
> information on who created it it appeared to be a
> perfect candidate for
> speedy deletion. Now I disagreed, restored and
> listed on VfD, but I can
> also see why he did this.
>
> Incidently, just to let you know: everyone can see
> the [[Deletion log]].
> As I've said before, if someone sees an article on
> their they beleive
> should not have been deleted then they should place
> a message on my talk
> page. My username is Ta bu shi da yu.
>
> TBSDY
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


from_name: Rick

subject: [WikiEN-l] Drive-by deletion

body:
What they show is that there is no consensus, one way or the other.

RickK

Simon Pulsifer <se_pulsifer at yahoo.ca> wrote:
I think [[Wikipedia talk:Deletion policy/schools]] and
[[Wikipedia:What's in, what's out]] both pretty
clearly show that in the wider community there is no
consensus to remove schools. - ~~~~

___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
vote.yahoo.com - Register online to vote today!


subject: [WikiEN-l] Deleting vs. improving

body:
To whom are you addressing this?

You did this outside of consensus, and especially the removal of the VfD header even though the articles you listed had clearly had consensus to delete was a violation of consensus and Wikiquette.

I deleted the articles which had had consensus to be deleted, and they were immediately undeleted.  How is that following the will of the community?

RickK

Simon Pulsifer <se_pulsifer at yahoo.ca> wrote:
You can't get much more involved in the VfD process
than I have been for the last few months, yet I
clearly believe some change is in order. I did no
"bitching" and "complaining" before trying to fix
things, and I am now being accused of acting without
consensus while you have decided to hammer the status
quo back into place and reverted my actions. - SimonP

___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
vote.yahoo.com - Register online to vote today!


subject: [WikiEN-l] Drive-by deletion

body:
VfD has the consensus support of the community.  Articles about schools listed on VfD have, for the most part, consensus support to be deleted.  QED.

RickK

Nicholas Knight <nknight at runawaynet.com> wrote:
Rick wrote:

> Where is the policy consensus which says school articles are
> not to be deleted? You can't point to it, because it does not
> exist.

You don't need a consensus not to delete something, you need a consensus
TO delete something. VFD should be a sanity check to ensure deletions
conform to established consensus, not a forum for making up policy.
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Drive-by deletion

body:
What makes me an extremist?  Because I have the balls to stand up to the bullies who demand that VfD be gutted, and that every article ever put on the encyclopedia be kept, regardless of veracity?  Because I actually have the courage of my convictions?

Besides, I hardly vote "delete" on as many articles as some people do.  I just support the process.

RickK

John Lee <johnleemk at gawab.com> wrote:
I didn't deny that there are extremists in the deletionist camp such as
Rick,

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Drive-by deletion

body:
No, I honestly do not recall you having EVER voted delete.  If you have, then I apologize for having denied the possibility, but I will still stand by my claim that I have voted keep more often than you have voted delete.

RickK

Anthony DiPierro <anthonydipierro at hotmail.com> wrote:
> I also vote "keep" more often than you vote "delete". Have you EVER voted
"delete"?

> RickK

Do you really not know? I have voted to delete lots of times. Learn the
facts before you make up lies about someone.

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

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Drive-by deletion

body:
Boy.  The inclusionists love to make personal attacks when they can't bother to come up with valid arguments, but then they claim that *I* am the one making personal attacks.

To begin with, where is the "grammatical error" in "every person and every company ever in existence should be kept"?  Secondly, where did I lie when you below support what I said?

RickK

Anthony DiPierro <anthonydipierro at hotmail.com> wrote:
RickK lied, saying:

> This would be great if it weren't for such users as Anthony DiPierro,
> who will, out of reflex, vote to keep any and every article ever written.
> He is on record as saying that every person and every company ever
> in existence should be kept, regardless of their notability or the
notability
> of the articles written about them.

First of all, stop lying. I don't vote to keep any and every article, any
more than you vote to delete every and every article.

As for my statement "that every person and every company ever in existence
should be kept", the grammatical error in that statement points to where you
misquoted me. I believe that every person and every company ever in
existence is notable, and by that I mean the topic is worthy of note in
Wikipedia. If an article on that person is not verifiable, then I don't
think it should be kept. If an article on a company does not provide a link
to a respectable source such as a government document or a newspaper
article, then I don't think it should be kept (although if there is no
reason to believe it is fake I think we could move it to the talk page).

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish.


body:
Wow.  I am SO in support of this.  I would heartily copy every garbage edit to this site prior to deletion.  Let's implement this!  Do you want the copyright violations, too?

RickK

"Daniel P.B.Smith" <dpbsmith at verizon.net> wrote:
> From: NSK
>
> On Saturday 23 October 2004 13:36, Rebecca wrote:
>> What self-respecting encyclopedia gives me the right
>> to write an article on my deceased cat?
>
> I see no reason why the online WP couldn't have such an article.
> Obviously the
> 1.0 paper edition couldn't, but if you have disk space and you flag the
> "non-encyclopedic" articles as such, there is absolutely no problem.

There is no problem if what you are trying to do is something other
than create an encyclopedia.

There is a _big_ problem _if_ what you are trying to do is create an
encyclopedia.

Wikipedia is a project whose purpose is to create a free encyclopedia.

Encyclopedias should not contain "non-encyclopedic articles." You do
not improve an encyclopedia by putting in non-encyclopedic articles,
any more than you would improve the Superbowl by putting in a
performance of _Hamlet_.

You say we are removing valuable content from Wikipedia. Well, all of
this material is GFDL-licensed just like everythiing else, and you are
perfectly free to copy it into Wikinerds.

Furthermore, if you are serious about the value of this material, and
if _you_ have disk space, I believe the community here would be
agreeable to set up some continuing arrangement whereby every article,
prior to deletion, is emailed to you for inclusion in Wikinerds. The
total volume is really not that large; far less than an active USENET
newsgroup. if you check the deletion log,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_log , you will see that
about 500 deletions were made on 22 October. Most were _extremely
short_, less than 200 bytes each but even if we assume an average size
of 5000 bytes that's only 2.5 megabytes. (I believe the real number
would be well under 500K). And disk is cheap.

If you not sure you actually want content like "SOMETHING THAT
PHILLIPPE GEORGE TUCK SAYS, FROM CALNE IN WILTSHIRE WHEN HE IS VERY
VERY DRUNK AND I LOVE HIM LOADS" or "fvgkfcgyufdcyrfdrt7rsx5esasees==
Headline text ==kkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkmnjknjvyhi
ancstdxydtsjsxtesb'ljasgvbjo..." or ""Hocus Pocus (novel)" (content
was: 'poop')," we could send you only articles that are deleted as an
outcome of the VfD process. That's only 20 articles per day; if we
assume an average of 5000 bytes, that's only 100K per day. I think the
real amount of traffic would be less than 30K per day.

Is Wikinerds interested in such arrangement?

Perhaps we could even set up a mailing list whose content is all the
material deleted from Wikipedia. Anyone concerned about what is being
deleted could subscribe.

--
Daniel P. B. Smith, dpbsmith at verizon.net
"Elinor Goulding Smith's Great Big Messy Book" is now back in print!
Sample chapter at http://world.std.com/~dpbsmith/messy.html
Buy it at http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1403314063/

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

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Express yourself with Y! Messenger! Free. Download now.


subject:
[WikiEN-l] Re: A mailing list whose content is all the material
	deleted from Wikipedia?

body:
Why do you object to copyright violations?  Isn't this backing down from your policy of retaining anything and everything every vomited up on Wikipedia?

RickK

NSK <nsk2 at wikinerds.org> wrote:
If they are legal and are not copyright violations, you are welcome to put
VfD-deleted articles in http://jnana.wikinerds.org

JnanaBase is GFDL.

--
NSK
Admin of http://portal.wikinerds.org
Project Manager of http://www.nerdypc.org
Project Manager of http://www.adapedia.org
Project Manager of http://maatworks.wikinerds.org
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
vote.yahoo.com - Register online to vote today!


body:
Write a policy page and a note on the Deletion policy and VfD pages that all articles should be copied to wherever prior to deletion.

RickK

"Daniel P.B.Smith" <dpbsmith at verizon.net> wrote:
I have just receive emails from Anthony DiPierro and NSK saying that,
yes, they are seriously interested in access to the stream of material
deleted from Wikipedia. NSK says "If they are legal and are not
copyright violations."

Unfortunately, the _number_ of items is too large for one person to
deal with _manually_.

What's the next step? Technical help will certainly be needed.

--
Daniel P. B. Smith, dpbsmith at verizon.net
"Elinor Goulding Smith's Great Big Messy Book" is now back in print!
Sample chapter at http://world.std.com/~dpbsmith/messy.html
Buy it at http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1403314063/

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

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


body:
Why?  I thought this whole argument arose out of objections to speedy deletions.

RickK

NSK <nsk2 at wikinerds.org> wrote:
Just to clarify: Only material deleted via the VfD process.

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
vote.yahoo.com - Register online to vote today!


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Drive-by deletion

body:
RickK lied, saying:

> This would be great if it weren't for such users as Anthony DiPierro,
> who will, out of reflex, vote to keep any and every article ever written.
> He is on record as saying that every person and every company ever
> in existence should be kept, regardless of their notability or the
notability
> of the articles written about them.

First of all, stop lying.  I don't vote to keep any and every article, any
more than you vote to delete every and every article.

As for my statement "that every person and every company ever in existence
should be kept", the grammatical error in that statement points to where you
misquoted me.  I believe that every person and every company ever in
existence is notable, and by that I mean the topic is worthy of note in
Wikipedia.  If an article on that person is not verifiable, then I don't
think it should be kept.  If an article on a company does not provide a link
to a respectable source such as a government document or a newspaper
article, then I don't think it should be kept (although if there is no
reason to believe it is fake I think we could move it to the talk page).

Other people said:
> I didn't say non-notability is a valid excuse for deletion (lots of
> people seem to read things into what I write that I didn't write).

I'm sure people use the term in other ways, but the question of notability
is what VfD is all about.  Is the topic worthy of note in Wikipedia?  The
problem isn't that we delete things that are non-notable, the problem is
that "not notable" is the entire argument for deletion so much of the time,
and that begs the question.  It's also a problem that VfD is set up to
ignore most people's points of view.  Some people think that all US
Presidents are notable.  Some think that all US cities are notable.  Some
think that all US high schools are notable.  But these beliefs are ignored
most of the time because in order to express them you have to vote over and
over and over again on the exact same issue.

> That's taking inclusionism too far, probably even for anthony's tastes.
> At least anthony thinks unverifiable articles should be deleted. Unless
> the facts about the dead cat are verifiable from a secondary source, it
> really has no place in an encyclopedia. I think that's something
> practically everyone on both sides of the debate can agree on.

Yes.  I think we could have an article on [[Tom Quartz]] and [[Slippers the
cat]], but I think the number of dead cat articles we can reasonably have is
very small.  In fact, even in the case of Tom and Slippers, it would
probably be best to redirect these topics to another article, such as
[[Theodore Roosevelt]] or [[Presidential cats]], at least until they grow
too big.  I'm rarely opposed to merging a tiny article with a larger one.

> I note with a combination of amusement and horror but no surprise at all
> that almost if not all parties involved in that discussion aside from
> Rick are relatively new contributors (moreso at the time of the
> discussion). What we're seeing seems to be a result of the massive
> influx of new users who either don't understand Wikipedia or its
> long-standing policies and principles, or don't care.

That's in part because the "long standing policies and principles" of
deletionism are largely unwritten, and are determined by a small faction of
people who hang out on VfD.  Don't worry, these new contributors will either
be driven away by the deletionists or learn to love Big Brother.  Maybe some
of them will even participate in the Two Minutes of Hate we call VfD.

> Somehow, I think you'll find it's the deletionists who've generally
> been here longer, and done the hard yards of actually working on good
> articles, rather than spending their wiki time trying to turn
> Wikipedia into Wikijunkyard.

I don't think that's the case.  I just think that things like VfD, speedy
deletions, the difficult undeletion policy, and the abrasiveness of some of
the deletionists (I've been blocked for listing articles on VfU, as well as
for voting Keep on VfD) have caused the vast majority of inclusionists to
give up or become closet inclusionists (i.e. eventualists).

Anthony


from_name: Michael Snow

subject: [WikiEN-l] Can we stop the flamewar?

body:
I would like to ask everyone to just stop the inclusionism vs.
deletionism flamewar. It's inundating my mailbox (and I receive messages
from this list in digest mode!) with a bunch of circular discussions
between people who aren't listening to each other very well and aren't
showing much interest in developing consensus that *includes* the other
side's perspective. As a result, nothing productive is being
accomplished, and we have better things to do with our time, like
writing an encyclopedia.

--Michael Snow


from_name: Daniel P.B.Smith

subject:
[WikiEN-l] A mailing list whose content is all the material deleted
	from Wikipedia?

body:
> From: NSK <nsk2 at wikinerds.org>
>
> On Saturday 23 October 2004 13:36, Rebecca wrote:
>> What self-respecting encyclopedia gives me the right
>> to write an article on my deceased cat?
>
> I see no reason why the online WP couldn't have such an article.
> Obviously the
> 1.0 paper edition couldn't, but if you have disk space and you flag the
> "non-encyclopedic" articles as such, there is absolutely no problem.

There is no problem if what you are trying to do is something other
than create an encyclopedia.

There is a _big_ problem _if_ what you are trying to do is create an
encyclopedia.

Wikipedia is a project whose purpose is to create a free encyclopedia.

Encyclopedias should not contain "non-encyclopedic articles." You do
not improve an encyclopedia by putting in non-encyclopedic articles,
any more than you would improve the Superbowl by putting in a
performance of _Hamlet_.

You say we are removing valuable content from Wikipedia. Well, all of
this material is GFDL-licensed just like everythiing else, and you are
perfectly free to copy it into Wikinerds.

Furthermore, if you are serious about the value of this material, and
if _you_ have disk space, I believe the community here would be
agreeable to set up some continuing arrangement whereby every article,
prior to deletion, is emailed to you for inclusion in Wikinerds. The
total volume is really not that large; far less than an active USENET
newsgroup. if you check the deletion log,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_log , you will see that
about 500 deletions were made on 22 October. Most were _extremely
short_, less than 200 bytes each but even if we assume an average size
of 5000 bytes that's only 2.5 megabytes. (I believe the real number
would be well under 500K). And disk is cheap.

If you not sure you actually want content like "SOMETHING THAT
PHILLIPPE GEORGE TUCK SAYS, FROM CALNE IN WILTSHIRE WHEN HE IS VERY
VERY DRUNK AND I LOVE HIM LOADS" or "fvgkfcgyufdcyrfdrt7rsx5esasees==
Headline text ==kkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkmnjknjvyhi
ancstdxydtsjsxtesb'ljasgvbjo..." or ""Hocus Pocus (novel)" (content
was: 'poop')," we could send you only articles that are deleted as an
outcome of the VfD process. That's only 20 articles per day; if we
assume an average of 5000 bytes, that's only 100K per day. I think the
real amount of traffic would be less than 30K per day.

Is Wikinerds interested in such arrangement?

Perhaps we could even set up a mailing list whose content is all the
material deleted from Wikipedia. Anyone concerned about what is being
deleted could subscribe.

--
Daniel P. B. Smith, dpbsmith at verizon.net
"Elinor Goulding Smith's Great Big Messy Book" is now back in print!
Sample chapter at http://world.std.com/~dpbsmith/messy.html
Buy it at http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1403314063/


subject: [WikiEN-l] Drive-by deletion

body:
Boy, talk about newspeak.  You claim that "deletionists" (whoever they are) can't get consensus (that's how it's spelled, by the way), when, in fact, the only things that get deleted from VfD do so BECAUSE of consensus.

RickK

Mark Richards <marich712000 at yahoo.com> wrote:
Inclusionsts are 'disruptive' because they don't want
to delete material that is factual, verifiable and
neutral? What kind of newspeak is this?

Also, there is no long standing policy or principle
about deleting 'non-notable' items - this is a new
development as a result of deletionists not being able
to gain concensus for their ideas.

Mark

--- Rebecca wrote:

> ...and compare this to disruptive new inclusionists,
> such as
> Netoholic, who either don't understand Wikipedia or
> its long-standing
> policies and principles, or don't care.
>
> Somehow, I think you'll find it's the deletionists
> who've generally
> been here longer, and done the hard yards of
> actually working on good
> articles, rather than spending their wiki time
> trying to turn
> Wikipedia into Wikijunkyard.
>
> -- ambi
>
>
> > I note with a combination of amusement and horror
> but no surprise at all
> > that almost if not all parties involved in that
> discussion aside from
> > Rick are relatively new contributors (moreso at
> the time of the
> > discussion). What we're seeing seems to be a
> result of the massive
> > influx of new users who either don't understand
> Wikipedia or its
> > long-standing policies and principles, or don't
> care.
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
vote.yahoo.com - Register online to vote today!


subject: [WikiEN-l] Deletion and notability

body:
I think your characterization is as faulty as your logic.

RickK

NSK <nsk2 at wikinerds.org> wrote:
On Saturday 23 October 2004 20:39, David Gerard wrote:
> This proposal appears to show very little comprehension of how it works.

I am sure that I know how it works.

> Everyone is here to write an encyclopedia.

I think there are many people here who do not actually care about building an
encyclopedia.

--
NSK
Admin of http://portal.wikinerds.org
Project Manager of http://www.nerdypc.org
Project Manager of http://www.adapedia.org
Project Manager of http://maatworks.wikinerds.org
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
vote.yahoo.com - Register online to vote today!


subject: [WikiEN-l] Drive-by deletion

body:
Bullcrap.  Your characterizations are only in your own mind.  If somebody can't be bothered to let us know why they care about an article, why should we?  I constantly argue that all of the individual town and cities created by bot should be kept, despite repeated attempts at mass deletions.  And I constantly vote keep for all articles about towns, even one line stubs.  But where do we go on this path?  I vote delete on schools, because from high schools we go to junior high schools, to elementary schools, to pre-schools.  We have an article on every single company that has ever existed?  We have an article on every single building that has ever existed?  Do you seriously think that these are articles we should have in an encyclopedia?

RickK

Mark Richards <marich712000 at yahoo.com> wrote:
You could make a case that it is the responsiblity of
the author (whoever that is?!) to provide references,
but notability is just a weasel word for 'I'm not
interested in it'.
Mark

--- Nicholas Knight wrote:

> John Lee wrote:
> > Institute new policy? I'm not sure what you mean,
> really. All I was
> > trying to say was that if contributors don't make
> it clear through an
> > article they wrote how its topic is encyclopedic,
> then the onus isn't on
> > others to hunt high and low for a way to verify
> it. Mark Richards was
> > saying the onus isn't on contributors to prove
> their articles are
> > encyclopedic. I was saying that, in my opinion, it
> is.
>
> The core concept isn't what I see as flawed (in fact
> it's almost
> tautological), it's the use of it as an excuse to
> delete things.
>
> > Speaking of verifiability, I just noticed
> >
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:VfD-Ballerium
> from a recent post
> > on the list (one of Eric B. and Rakim's deleted
> articles' deletion
> > debates). Apparently Ballerium was verifiable; at
> least Eric B. and
> > Rakim provided several third-party sources. Should
> the article have been
> > kept? Rossami stated that the reason he was voting
> "delete" was: "Let
> > the product come out for release. Then let it be
> for another 6 months.
> > If the product still has publicity and traction
> after 6 months live,
> > then it /might/ make the cut as encyclopedic."
> Isn't that a definition
> > of "notability"?
> >
> > Sorry for the off-topic rambling, it just struck
> me how Ballerium
> > appeared to be a perfect case of a verifiable
> topic having its article
> > deleted.
>
> Wow, that's a perfect example of massive abuse of
> the VfD process. I see
> comments like "doesn't exist" (which it does and
> did), and statements
> about how beta software isn't worthy of an article,
> and they don't care
> how popular it is.
>
> I note with a combination of amusement and horror
> but no surprise at all
> that almost if not all parties involved in that
> discussion aside from
> Rick are relatively new contributors (moreso at the
> time of the
> discussion). What we're seeing seems to be a result
> of the massive
> influx of new users who either don't understand
> Wikipedia or its
> long-standing policies and principles, or don't
> care.
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
vote.yahoo.com - Register online to vote today!


subject: [WikiEN-l] Drive-by deletion

body:
Can I ask a completely straightforward question, because I don't know.  What ID do you post under on the Wikipedia?  I don't recall having encountered your edits.  This could be solely because you edit in areas that I don't have any knowledge in (math and sciences, for example).  What's your User ID?  This is not an attack, just a request for knowledge.

RickK

NSK <nsk2 at wikinerds.org> wrote:
On Saturday 23 October 2004 21:31, Rick wrote:
> VfD has the consensus support of the community. Articles about schools
> listed on VfD have, for the most part, consensus support to be deleted.

Probably because the masses enjoy destroying things. 18th century
encyclopedists didn't allow the uneducated masses to destroy the knowledge.

--
NSK
Admin of http://portal.wikinerds.org
Project Manager of http://www.nerdypc.org
Project Manager of http://www.adapedia.org
Project Manager of http://maatworks.wikinerds.org
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard.


body:
> Furthermore, if you are serious about the value of this material, and
> if _you_ have disk space, I believe the community here would be
> agreeable to set up some continuing arrangement whereby every article,
> prior to deletion, is emailed to you for inclusion in Wikinerds. The
> total volume is really not that large; far less than an active USENET
> newsgroup. if you check the deletion log,
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_log , you will see that
> about 500 deletions were made on 22 October. Most were _extremely
> short_, less than 200 bytes each but even if we assume an average size
> of 5000 bytes that's only 2.5 megabytes. (I believe the real number
> would be well under 500K). And disk is cheap.

I would be extremely interested in this.  I already include as many deleted
articles as I can at mcfly.com.  In fact, I've said a number of times that
if I'm given access to the deleted articles I promise to never participate
on VfD or VfU again.

If I could have some automated way of getting deleted articles, I could
focus less on that and focus on making these deleted articles editable,
which is what I'd like to eventually do.

Anthony


body:
Nicholas Knight wrote

> You're falling into the classic "sympathy" trap, but I'm going to drop
> it and just say that I still fail to see why this is *any* different
> from any other Wikipedia article, especially on a contentious subject.

It certainly shouldn't be.  If we take 'diagnosis' to mean diagnosis by a
clinical psychologist on the basis of an adequate history and personal
contact, and if we assume these diagnoses are subject to the usual clinical
confidentiality, and become public only if the subject self-identifies to a
large extent, it becomes a short enough list.

I see that top of the list is a case where AS is being used as a legal
defence.  That would raise other questions.

Charles


from_name: Jochen Magnus

subject: [Wikitech-l] Problem with "archive" page?

body:
Hi,

tonight at 4:00 am (MESZ) we fetched a "cur_table.sql.bz2" from
http://download.wikimedia.org/archives/de/ which contained only approx.
97'000 articles. The previous version contained 154'000 articles in the
cur-table.

Meanwhile - six hous later - the file completly disappeard from the site
(Error 404).

I rolled back our mirror (http://lexikon.rhein-zeitung.de/) to the
previous version from Oct 13. What happened with the archive? Does this
relate to "slave out of sync" problem, which is discussed above?

Sincerely

jo


body:
> I would be extremely interested in this.  I already include as many
deleted
> articles as I can at mcfly.com.

Oops, that should say mcfly.org.  See, for example,
http://www.mcfly.org/en/Sam%20moehrke


from_name: Nikola Smolenski

subject: [Wikitech-l] Go

body:
On Friday 22 October 2004 04:55, NSK wrote:
> Is the Go button really necessary?
>
> I think it is highly confusing and cluttering. I would prefer to have just
> Search. I have seen several MW newbies trying to figure out whether they
> should click Go or Search.
>
> If you think it should stay, it's label must change to something more
> intuitive. But the best thing would be to get rid of it in 1.3.8 or 1.4.

Is "I'm feeling lucky" trademarked?


from_name: Camille Constans

body:
On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 12:33:19 +0200
Jochen Magnus <jo at magnus.de> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> tonight at 4:00 am (MESZ) we fetched a "cur_table.sql.bz2" from
> http://download.wikimedia.org/archives/de/ which contained only approx.
> 97'000 articles. The previous version contained 154'000 articles in the
> cur-table.
>
> Meanwhile - six hous later - the file completly disappeard from the site
> (Error 404).
>
> I rolled back our mirror (http://lexikon.rhein-zeitung.de/) to the
> previous version from Oct 13. What happened with the archive? Does this
> relate to "slave out of sync" problem, which is discussed above?
>
> Sincerely

We had some pbs with this dump. Please check http://download2.wikimedia.org/dl2/archives/de should be fine soon


body:
> From: "Anthony DiPierro" <anthonydipierro at hotmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Re: Trigger-happy New Pages patrol
> To: "English Wikipedia" <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Message-ID: <BAY10-DAV26gjHXwKHv00002ab1 at hotmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="iso-8859-1"
>
>> Absolutely no one here appears to be suggesting that stubs are bad. If
>> we had any deletionists at all who were as hardline as Anthony, Mark
>> Richards or Mr. Knight, then that's probably what they would argue.
>
> Maybe no one here, but there are certainly those who vote to delete
> articles
> at least in part because they're stubs.   Dpbsmith is one, who said on
> VfD
> "In borderline cases I am influenced by the quality, thoroughness, and
> scholarship behind an article as well as the topic. I would probably
> vote to
> keep a good article on this topic. But I vote to delete this one."

For the record, this is a fair presentation of my position.

Also for the record, the topic of the article was "Butterface" and the
entire content as I write this is

"A butterface is a female who has a good-looking body but an ugly face.
This term was popularized on the Howard Stern Show, and comes from the
phrase 'Everything looks good but her face'. The word butterface is
considered to be pejorative."

This is an expansion of the original article, which was:

"A butterface is a female who has a good looking body but an ugly face."

I think there are good stubs which should be kept and bad stubs which
should be deleted and that this was a borderline stub.

I would have voted "keep" on an article whose entire content "A
butterfly is a flying insect, usually with striking colours and
patterns on its wings. Butterlies live on pollen and nectar from
flowers. The lifecycle of the butterfly has four stages: egg;  larvae,
known as a caterpillar; pupae/chrysallis; adult butterfly" because I
would have judged chances of this caterpillar of an stub growing into a
butterfly of an article would be good.

I would have voted "delete" on an article whose entire contents was
"Butterbeer: A fictional drink of wizards, from the Harry Potter book
series" because I would have judged the changes of this growing into a
good full-length article to be slim.

It's not _obvious_ to me at all whether the article on "butterface"
should be kept or deleted, but I came down on the side of "delete" and
that's how I voted. Since the stub is actually growing it may turn out
to be the seed of a good article, in which case my vote will have been
a misjudgement.

At the moment, indeed, I'm a whore for good-quality articles and you
can get all sorts of things past me on VfD by simply making them
reasonably long, reasonably well-written, and reasonably
well-researched.

Stubs, even substubs that point out real omissions in coverage are
useful and grow. (Although I am darned if I see why it isn't better to
request an article than to create a substub). Stubs in areas that have
a cadre of people with an interest in the topic are useful and grow.
Not all stubs are useful or grow. Just as Wikipedia's customs,
practices, and technical mechanism are a way to create an encyclopedia,
not an end in itself, a stub is a way to create an article, not an
article in itself.

--
Daniel P. B. Smith, dpbsmith at verizon.net
"Elinor Goulding Smith's Great Big Messy Book" is now back in print!
Sample chapter at http://world.std.com/~dpbsmith/messy.html
Buy it at http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1403314063/


body:
I have just receive emails from Anthony DiPierro and NSK saying that,
yes, they are seriously interested in access to the stream of material
deleted from Wikipedia. NSK says "If they are legal and are not
copyright violations."

Unfortunately, the _number_ of items is too large for one person to
deal with _manually_.

What's the next step? Technical help will certainly be needed.

--
Daniel P. B. Smith, dpbsmith at verizon.net
"Elinor Goulding Smith's Great Big Messy Book" is now back in print!
Sample chapter at http://world.std.com/~dpbsmith/messy.html
Buy it at http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1403314063/


subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: Problem with "archive" page?

body:
Thank you Camille.

Should we better use this download site in the future?

> Please check http://download2.wikimedia.org/dl2/archives/de

jo


references:
<cldc1f$s4b$1@sea.gmane.org>
	<20041023124950.21fff100.shaihulud@shaihome.net>
	<clde7m$d8$1@sea.gmane.org>

body:
On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 13:10:46 +0200
Jochen Magnus <jo at magnus.de> wrote:

> Thank you Camille.
>
> Should we better use this download site in the future?
>
> > Please check http://download2.wikimedia.org/dl2/archives/de
>

It's just temporary, time to set up the file server


from_name: Stan Shebs

subject: [WikiEN-l] Drive-by deletion

body:
I think it's more accurate to say that VfD is tolerated but not
liked. A lot of material gets deleted that I think should be kept,
but if I spent as much on VfD as some people do, I would a) not
get anything else done in my limited WP time, and b) come to hate
dealing with WP in general. I know there are a bunch of other people
who feel the same way. It's a spectacular exaggeration to say that
a 10-4 vote out of 10,000 editors represents anything like a
"consensus", particularly when so many have been driven away by
combative, nasty, and histrionic VfD campers.

Stan

Rick wrote:

>VfD has the consensus support of the community.  Articles about schools listed on VfD have, for the most part, consensus support to be deleted.  QED.
>
>RickK
>
>Nicholas Knight <nknight at runawaynet.com> wrote:
>Rick wrote:
>
>
>>Where is the policy consensus which says school articles are
>>not to be deleted? You can't point to it, because it does not
>>exist.
>>
>
>You don't need a consensus not to delete something, you need a consensus
>TO delete something. VFD should be a sanity check to ensure deletions
>conform to established consensus, not a forum for making up policy.
>_______________________________________________
>WikiEN-l mailing list
>WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
>
>---------------------------------
>Do you Yahoo!?
>Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone.
>_______________________________________________
>WikiEN-l mailing list
>WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
>


subject: [WikiEN-l] Viewing deleted pages

body:
Anthony DiPierro wrote:

>
>Personally I'm more interested in the speedy deletions, now that these are
>increasingly being used to deal with legitimate content.
>
There you have it admins, Anthony wants all your speedies.
I suggest using a script, for greater efficiency in forwarding.
It will be interesting to see him carefully preserve "oibpyoiuer"
somewhere.

Stan


subject: [WikiEN-l] Drive-by deletion

body:
Yes, yes, we know already, you're heroically and singlehandledly
saving WP from destruction.

You get to be called an extremist because of your histrionics
about VfD, which is just a tiny part of the overall WP-building
process. I only notice VfD myself when some ignorant person lists
an article because they're not knowledgeable enough to recognize
material that is important to specialists, but doesn't appear in
any video game and therefore doesn't have 100,000 Google hits.

Stan

Rick wrote:

>What makes me an extremist?  Because I have the balls to stand up to the bullies who demand that VfD be gutted, and that every article ever put on the encyclopedia be kept, regardless of veracity?  Because I actually have the courage of my convictions?
>
>Besides, I hardly vote "delete" on as many articles as some people do.  I just support the process.
>
>RickK
>
>John Lee <johnleemk at gawab.com> wrote:
>I didn't deny that there are extremists in the deletionist camp such as
>Rick,
>
>---------------------------------
>Do you Yahoo!?
>Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish.
>_______________________________________________
>WikiEN-l mailing list
>WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
>


from_name: Brion Vibber

subject: [Wikitech-l] Robot request

body:
On Oct 23, 2004, at 8:21 AM, Ken Ara wrote:
> I have been reading the "recent changes" and "new
> articles" RSS-feeds through My Yahoo. Now I've written
> a small Python program to fetch and parse these feeds,
> but it fails most of the time with a message about
> "intermittent server problem" and warning that my
> user-agent may be blocked. Since the feeds are
> available through my browser, I conclude that I have
> been blocked. (My program sends the user-agent,
> 'WikiWalker' and provides my email address).

Can you provide a dump of the sent and received HTTP headers? You might
just be getting timeouts, the servers have had some ups and downs
lately.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20041023/e72dab59/attachment.pgp>


subject: [Wikitech-l] CC partner question

body:
On Oct 23, 2004, at 11:58 AM, NSK wrote:
> <li><?php
> 			aField( $conf, "License", "a Creative Commons license...", "radio",
> "cc" );
> 			$partner = "MediaWiki";
>
> How did you got that "partner" thing with CC and how someone can apply
> for a
> similar connection?

Please see: http://creativecommons.org/technology/web-integration

"The full set of URL variables available are as follows:

partner (required):
       The name of your application or site, used for tracking
       usage at Creative Commons. Any descriptive name can be
       added here."

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20041023/41d2d702/attachment.pgp>


subject: [WikiEN-l] Viewing deleted pages

body:
>  What's the next step? Technical help will certainly be needed.

There's a proposal on the pump to "allow non-sysops to view deleted pages".
Angela opposes it.  I think a slightly better solution is to allow a certain
class of users to view the pages.  This wouldn't be too hard to implement,
just add a third category to the restrictions column.

But perhaps an even easier technical solution is to just modify
Special:Export to allow certain IP addresses to access deleted articles.
I'm sure we can come up with something that no one objects to, unless
there's an objection to me personally having access to deleted articles.

>  Just to clarify: Only material deleted via the VfD process.

Personally I'm more interested in the speedy deletions, now that these are
increasingly being used to deal with legitimate content.  Most of the VfDed
material shows up in one of the approximately weekly database dumps.  I've
got a script to parse those dumps, but they almost never contain speedy
deletions.


from_name: phil hunt

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: List of persons with autism spectrum disorders

body:
On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 11:10:13 +0100, Charles Matthews <charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
>>From http://trainland.tripod.com/judith.htm:
>
>Judith Gould writes
>
>"Autistic disorders cannot as yet be diagnosed by using any medical
>or psychological tests or on the presence of any particular feature of
>behaviour. The diagnosis depends upon the developmental history
>and a pattern of behaviour that unfolds over time.
>
>A number of checklists are available for the diagnosis of autism in
>childhood, for example the Autism Behaviour Checklist (ABC). These
>require yes/no answers to a list of questions, for example, (Krug et
>al, 1980). This format cannot be used to obtain a picture of
>development and behaviour over the years since infancy. The
>meanings of the questions can be misunderstood by inexperienced
>raters. The ranges of questions asked are too narrow to cover the
>whole spectrum.  ... "
>
>In other words this whole business of 'outing' Robert Crumb, or David Byrne
>or whoever, is without a serious basis.

If autistic spectrum disorder (ASD) is hard to diagnose, then having
a list of people with it would be attempting to do so on the basis
of inadequate information. This is original research (which is
banned on WP) and has potential problems of factual accuracy.

If some people have diagnosed themselves as having or possibly
having ASD, then there's no reason why WP shouldn't say so.

Regarding dead people where some people have postumously diagnosed
them as having a condition, I think we need to tread more carefully.
It's not uncommon for activist groups to "claim" a famous dead
person as having a specific condition, for example some have said
Einstein was dyslexic. It would be NPOV for WP to report that
such-and-such an organisation has suggested that some person may
have had a condition, but in the case of people long dead then any
diagnosis cannot be certain.

>I raised it here because it is a problem with large-scale POV, going to WP's
>reputation, and because of the very issue about defamation.  Bill Gates
>probably is too busy to be concerned; but why list him without something
>more definite?  (I haven't gone into this one.)

It would be reasonable for WP to say something like "Wired
suggested in 1999 than Bill Gates may have ASD (give URL)" (note
that's just by way of example; I'm not saying that Wired has said
any such thing).

--
"It's easier to find people online who openly support the KKK than
people who openly support the RIAA" -- comment on Wikipedia
(Email: zen19725 at zen dot co dot uk)


body:
On Wed, 20 Oct 2004 20:02:05 +0100, Charles Matthews <charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com> wrote:
>In the course of less than an hour I have come across one speedy delete
>notice, two Wiktionary move notices, and a VfD notice, all attached to new
>short mathematics pages.  All of which would properly be labelled stubs.
>
>The Wikipedians responsible don't have specialist knowledge - they seem to
>feel that remedies for stubs other than stub notices should exist (and in
>one case, thinks that if it looks like a typographjc mess, it must be
>nonsense).
>
>As far as I'm concerned, Wikipedia still needs stubs to grow, precisely in
>areas where it is currently weak.

I agree. The idea that stubs are bad is silly. WP isn't, and
probably will never be, a finished work.

--
"It's easier to find people online who openly support the KKK than
people who openly support the RIAA" -- comment on Wikipedia
(Email: zen19725 at zen dot co dot uk)


subject: [WikiEN-l] Deletion and notability

body:
Apparently not interested in discussing things, I guess.

RickK

NSK <nsk2 at wikinerds.org> wrote:
On Saturday 23 October 2004 22:19, you wrote:
> as faulty as your logic.

giantsrick13 at yahoo.com automatically ignored for personal attacks.

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
vote.yahoo.com - Register online to vote today!


subject: [WikiEN-l] Drive-by deletion

body:
And I'll support its deletion as well.

RickK

Phil Sandifer <sandifer at sbcglobal.net> wrote:
If you can get a 2/3 vote on VfD for deleting an article because it has
the word green in it, I will not only support it, I will delete the
article myself.

-Snowspinner

On Oct 23, 2004, at 12:52 PM, Mark Richards wrote:

> Right, the problem is that the reasons given for
> deletion are not ones that are part of the deletion
> policy. Do you support the deletion of articles with
> the word 'green' in, if I could persuade enough people
> to vote for it? I hope not, and for the same reason, I
> oppose people deleting school that do not meet
> deletion criteria. If they do meet the community
> agreed criteria for deletion, then I will vote delete.
> Mark
>
> --- Phil Sandifer wrote:
>
>> Yes. It is clear that there is no consensus to
>> delete all schools prima
>> faciae. There is also very notably no consensus to
>> keep all schools.
>>
>> Which means that schools are covered on an
>> individual basis.
>>
>> Which is, oddly enough, exactly what VfD is for -
>> considering the
>> deletion of an individual article.
>>
>> How convenient, no?
>>
>> -Snowspinner
>> On Oct 22, 2004, at 11:28 PM, Simon Pulsifer wrote:
>>
>>> I think [[Wikipedia talk:Deletion policy/schools]]
>> and
>>> [[Wikipedia:What's in, what's out]] both pretty
>>> clearly show that in the wider community there is
>> no
>>> consensus to remove schools. - ~~~~
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
> ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW
>>
>>> Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more
>> fun!
>>> http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> WikiEN-l mailing list
>>> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
>>>
>> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> WikiEN-l mailing list
>> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
>> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>>
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

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

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
vote.yahoo.com - Register online to vote today!


subject: [WikiEN-l] consensus?

body:
If VfD doesn't have the consensus support of the community, then you should have no problem getting support to have the process stopped.   Why don't you try?

Anything that gets deleted off VfD has the consensus support of those who vote.  If you don't vote, you have no right to complain.  Same in VfD as it is in real-life elections.

RickK

Anthony DiPierro <anthonydipierro at hotmail.com> wrote:
> VfD has the consensus support of the community.

No it doesn't.

> Articles about schools listed on VfD have, for the most part, consensus
support to be deleted. QED.

They probably don't even have a majority support to be deleted. They
certainly don't have a consensus support.

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

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
vote.yahoo.com - Register online to vote today!


subject: [WikiEN-l] Drive-by deletion

body:
If you can get a 2/3 vote on VfD for deleting an article because it has
the word green in it, I will not only support it, I will delete the
article myself.

-Snowspinner

On Oct 23, 2004, at 12:52 PM, Mark Richards wrote:

> Right, the problem is that the reasons given for
> deletion are not ones that are part of the deletion
> policy. Do you support the deletion of articles with
> the word 'green' in, if I could persuade enough people
> to vote for it? I hope not, and for the same reason, I
> oppose people deleting school that do not meet
> deletion criteria. If they do meet the community
> agreed criteria for deletion, then I will vote delete.
> Mark
>
> --- Phil Sandifer <sandifer at sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>> Yes. It is clear that there is no consensus to
>> delete all schools prima
>> faciae. There is also very notably no consensus to
>> keep all schools.
>>
>> Which means that schools are covered on an
>> individual basis.
>>
>> Which is, oddly enough, exactly what VfD is for -
>> considering the
>> deletion of an individual article.
>>
>> How convenient, no?
>>
>> -Snowspinner
>> On Oct 22, 2004, at 11:28 PM, Simon Pulsifer wrote:
>>
>>> I think [[Wikipedia talk:Deletion policy/schools]]
>> and
>>> [[Wikipedia:What's in, what's out]] both pretty
>>> clearly show that in the wider community there is
>> no
>>> consensus to remove schools. - ~~~~
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
> ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW
>>
>>> Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more
>> fun!
>>> http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> WikiEN-l mailing list
>>> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
>>>
>> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> WikiEN-l mailing list
>> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
>> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>>
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>