subject: [Foundation-l] [Juriwiki-l] Re: Copyright complaints

body:
David Newton wrote:

>Matt Brown wrote:
>
>
>>>This is an immensely serious issue since it exposes Wikipedia,
>>>Wikisource and the Wikimedia Foundation, not to mention the
>>>contributors to the sites, to legal liability. I wanted a definitive
>>>statement over copyright and I did not get that statement.
>>>
>>>
>>Some points:
>>
>>1) We're dealing with a matter of copyright law and not a basic,
>>everyday one.  On legal questions where there isn't a huge amount of
>>precedent and case law, you can't get a definitive answer.  Thus, not
>>many people feel qualified to comment on what the legal situation is.
>>2) The Foundation, I'm sure, does not want to expose itself to
>>liability by giving legal advice to contributors.
>>
>>
>>-Matt
>>
>>
>
>I wanted a definitive statement over the copyright policy of the
>Foundation. Angela provided that statement on this mailing list a
>couple of days ago. The position is that public domain, GFDL and
>GFDL-compatible text are what is allowed. That is a clear position and
>one that, if followed, will not land the person in trouble at all.
>
That's fine.  Nobody's arguing against that, only against your distortions.

>We then come to the area of fair use. The problem I have with fair use
>on Wikisource is that Wikisource reproduces the whole of a work by
>definition. One of the tests for the likelihood of a work being fair
>use is that the reproduction is not a "significant" amount of the
>work. The whole of a work is certainly a "significant" amount of the
>work. This is not like an artistic work where a reduced resolution
>version can be used and where such reproductions have been found to be
>fair use in things like Bridgeman vs Corel. When reproducing the whole
>of a literary work that work is reproduced with full fidelity. The
>typographic setting of the work is not relevant here since the US does
>not have typographical copyright. Wikisource is also something that
>people are encouraged to make use of for commercial purposes. Again
>that's one of the major indicators for finding something as fair use
>gone.
>
I guess that you argue against fair use, because you feel it's an easier
argument to make.  The fact that no-one has been using that argument
seem irrelevant to you.

>Fair use, by design, is a legal grey area. I cannot claim to be a
>copyright lawyer and an expert on the precedent in the US. What I can
>claim to be is a layman with an above average knowledge of copyright
>law and also someone who is alarmed by the misunderstandings and
>deliberate flouting of fair use that go out on Wikimedia sites. This
>UN situation is a classic example of that.
>
Again who is using the fair use argument?  Failing to go along with your
misunderstandings does not equate to "deliberate flouting"

>The UN resolutions are copyrighted under US statute law.
>
That's highly debatable.

>Therefore in
>order to use them on Wikisource either the permission of the UN must
>be received or fair use must be relied upon. I don't know of anyone
>who has approached the UN for permission and given the terms of use on
>their website I doubt that they would be willing to license their
>resolutions under a GFDL-compatible license. That leaves fair use and,
>as I indicated in the previous paragraph two of the major indicators
>for finding that a use is fair use are not relevant for this use of
>material.
>
Then quit pretending that that is the argument that is being made.

>With respect to the Crown copyright material I know that OPSI are not
>willing to license things under a GFDL-compatible licence as they were
>asked about this by someone at Wikipedia. Since fair use does not
>exist in the UK (where the OPSI servers are located) it cannot be
>relied upon as a defence for reusing the content and the materials
>must be removed from Wikisource.
>
The UK does not have "fair use" but it has "fair dealing".  See sections
28 to 31 of the UK Act.  Nevertheless I am specifically not commenting
on the copyright status of UK statutes.

>I don't know whether the UN servers
>are in the United States, but I suspect they are. If that is the case
>then fair use does exist as a defence for use of the copyrighted
>material, I would say it is a weak defence in this case given that two
>of the indicators for finding material as fair use are not present.
>
Please stop insisting that your opponents are using a fair use argument
when they aren't.

>All in all when creating such a high visibility site as Wikipedia and
>its allied sites I would say that we are better off erring on the side
>of caution when it comes to copyright law. If that means we cannot get
>pictures for articles or use certain source texts then so be it. Only
>where there is clear precedent for something being fair use, and the
>case concerned can be cited in the guidelines for copyright, should
>fair use be relied upon.
>
It seems more that you would err on the side of paralysis than caution.
There are fewer situations where a public policy argument would apply
than a fair use one, but clearly making the law broadly available is one.

Ec


list: wikimedia-l

source: pipermail-mbox

from_name: Ray Saintonge


list: wikien-l

from_name: Tony Sidaway

subject: [WikiEN-l] Userboxes situation "not acceptable"

body:
On 2/16/06, Kirill Lokshin <kirill.lokshin at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> So where the hell are all of these new ones coming from?

Good question!  About 35 editors have more than 100 edits to userboxes
(quite a small number of people, really).

The highest edit count is by a fellow called, Morgan695 , who has 1154
edits to userboxes.  Silence has 813.  Mistress Selina Kyle, currently
blocked, has made 577 edits to userboxes (amazing since she only
started editing on December 17 and has been blocked for most of the
time since then).  There are a couple more with around 500 edits, one
or two with around 300, and after that it tails off a bit.  Most of
the 35 seem to have in the low 100s of edits to userboxes.


from_name: Sam Fentress (Asbestos)

subject: [WikiEN-l] Tracking banned user Andrew Morrow

body:
On 2/16/06, Steve Bennett <stevage at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> massive flamewar). For a troll to actually create large numbers of
> good edits, which are then reverted with a couple of clicks (presuming
> that's possible) is the total opposite: large amount of action for
> very quick and easy reaction. Who would bother?
>
> Steve
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

Becase we end up having conversations like this, which is what the troll
wants.

More specifically, it is harder to ban someone with good edits, which is
also what the troll wants.

Sam

--
Asbestos
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Asbestos


from_name: Jon

subject: [WikiEN-l] WikiEN-l Digest, Vol 31, Issue 130

body:
Steve Bennett <stevage at gmail.com> wrote:

"Copyright is copyright, plagiarism is plagiarism. Copying a single
sentence from a large work without attribution is plagiarism..."

  Jon replies:

  No it isn't.

  Jon

---------------------------------
Yahoo! Photos ? NEW, now offering a quality print service from just 8p a photo.


subject: [WikiEN-l] (no subject)

body:
On 2/16/06, britney i <britneylovexoxo at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> My ip I am afraid to post my ip on the world wide web beacuse of all the
> craszs My user name UltraBrain The issue Blocked If an adim absoultly needs
> my ip then I would provide it to them.          Your user name or IP address
> has been blocked from editing
> You were blocked by Ricky81682
> Reason given: Autoblocked because your IP address has been recently used
> by "UltraBrain". The reason given for UltraBrain's block is: "recreation of
> deleted content and vandalism". (see our blocking policy)
>   The aritcle keept on getting vandilized by just getting deleted. It
> needs protection. And I should be unblocked. It is only meant to provide
> knowledge of the subject matter. But it seems that some people are just big
> babys with power that they should not have.
>
>
>
Britney, you were strongly warned 5 times at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:UltraBrain, and told that you would
be blocked if you continued your actions. You were only blocked for 24
hours.

The article was voted for deletion at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Amazing_Racist.
If you strongly disagree with an article's deletion, the correct place to go
is [[Wikipedia:Deletion review]] -- simply replacing the article will get
you blocked again.

Sam

--
Asbestos
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Asbestos


from_name: Steve Bennett

subject: [WikiEN-l] More AfD toxicity

body:
On 2/16/06, Justin Cormack <justin at specialbusservice.com> wrote:
> Notability for software is interesting, not sure I have seen any
> guidelines (I dont contribute much as its too much like work). Does
> the program embody new techniques? Did it create a new market? Did
> it replace the market leader? Maybe those questions just reflect my
> interests but at least they give something to write a few hundred
> words on.

Eep, that's setting the bar *way* too high IMHO. Like a singer is only
notable if they had a number one hit. Maybe rough guidelines like:
- free software: more than 100,000 downloads
- low cost software: more than X sales?
- other software: articles written in major computing magazines?

> Its difficult. Sometimes there are articles that I might think could
> only be a stub and be wrong. And having a stub might make someone else
> write a real article. The stubs I have written that have been taken
> up by other people have really pleased me, although not as much as
> some of the obscure stuff I have written real articles on (like
> [[Metropolitan Drinking Fountain and Cattle Trough Association]]).

I don't think anyone has ever destubbed an stub I've made :)

Steve


body:
On 2/16/06, Steven Ericsson Zenith <steven at semeiosis.com> wrote:
> Plagiarism does have something to do with the law if it is a breach of
> copyright.  I assume that the banned editor is hostile, so being
> defensive may be prudent.

Copyright is copyright, plagiarism is plagiarism. Copying a single
sentence from a large work without attribution is plagiarism, but not
copyright violation. Reproducing a famous photo in high resolution
with attribution but not permission is copyright violation, but not
plagiarism.

Steve


from_name: Snowspinner

subject: [WikiEN-l] David Gerard is a Hairy-Chested Love God

body:
On Feb 16, 2006, at 6:22 AM, David Gerard wrote:
>
> Although mailing list threads go all over the place, note of a serious
> problem vandal is probably not the place to go randomly riffing on
> spurious concerns that would completely invalidate how Wikipedia
> actually functions; you could at least change the subject line.
>

So could you.

-Phil


from_name: MacGyverMagic/Mgm

body:
How much of those new userboxes are actually in wide use?
We don't need a separate template when you can insert the code in your
userpage and have people copy it. You only need templates when it gets used
too much.

Mgm

On 2/16/06, Tony Sidaway <f.crdfa at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 2/16/06, Kirill Lokshin <kirill.lokshin at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > So where the hell are all of these new ones coming from?
>
> Good question!  About 35 editors have more than 100 edits to userboxes
> (quite a small number of people, really).
>
> The highest edit count is by a fellow called, Morgan695 , who has 1154
> edits to userboxes.  Silence has 813.  Mistress Selina Kyle, currently
> blocked, has made 577 edits to userboxes (amazing since she only
> started editing on December 17 and has been blocked for most of the
> time since then).  There are a couple more with around 500 edits, one
> or two with around 300, and after that it tails off a bit.  Most of
> the 35 seem to have in the low 100s of edits to userboxes.
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: Phil Boswell

subject: [WikiEN-l] Advice needed

body:
"Guy Chapman" <guy.chapman at spamcop.net> wrote in
message news:001a01c63285$a62e01f0$030010ac at internal.sungard.corp...
> This is the latest in the on-again, off-again history of Brian Peppers on
> Wikipedia:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Brian_Peppers_%286th_nomination%29
> Peppers is a fad on YTMND and Fark, for reasons which are obvious from
> this
> link:
> http://pepperstruth.ytmnd.com/
> No, even that's not the problem, the *real* problem is that a lot of
> people
> are determined that we should have an article on him, but the sources for
> the fact that he is disabled, lives in a nursing home, poses no threat to
> the community and appears only to be on the offenders' register as a
> result
> of an inappropriate contact with a nurse/carer, is from a source which is
> less reliable than Snopes
> (http://www.snopes.com/photos/people/peppers.asp).
> Should I just forget it?  Or ar we (either me or those who want the
> article
> restored) missing some vital point of policy?

So why are those facts not the mainstay of the article?

The YTMND feature seems to quote some reasonably sources, which can surely
be checked.

So check them, use them to lock down the article to solidly-referenced
facts, and repel all boarders who want to add anything extra without proper
references. Using the photograph in some form seems to be unavoidable, since
that is one of the main reasons for which he has become known: even Snopes
displays it.

Simply attempting to have no article on a subject which has caused so much
bother is against the principle of having a free encyclopedia. People will
want to come to Wikipedia to get the straight facts (bit of a Friday moment
on a Thursday :-) and if we don't have anything they are likely to add it
themselves, in the spirit of the place.

Having "jackbooted thugs" suddenly stomping all over them for creating an
article "which everybody knows is stoopid" will not make good PR.

HTH HAND
--
Phil
[[en:User:Phil Boswell]]


body:
"Karl A. Krueger" <kkrueger at whoi.edu> wrote in message
news:20060215223318.GA4712 at whoi.edu...
> On Wed, Feb 15, 2006 at 05:29:15PM +0000, David Gerard wrote:
>> So if I revert all and remake the good edits, the good edits stay in
>> Wikipedia but aren't associated with the banned editor - so that if
>> others are also following him about, they don't accidentally revert a
>> good edit. It's a bit more work for me, but hopefully means less work
>> for others.
>
> Banned editors are disallowed from editing.  However, banned editors
> still hold copyright over their own words.  If you revert their good
> contributions and then re-post their own words under your name, you
> might be seen as illicitly taking credit for their work.

"If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly or redistributed by
others, do not submit it."

Dude, the words have been submitted under the GFDL. Provided that DG notes
in his edit summary that he is restoring a good edit by a bad editor, the
number of legs upon which a claim might stand rapidly approaches zero.

Which way round do you want it? Do you want all edits by a bad editor to be
removed, even if they contribute good information? Or do you want even their
bad edits to be left alone?

HTH HAND
--
Phil
[[en:User:Phil Boswell]]


from_name: Matt Brown

body:
On 2/16/06, Tony Sidaway <f.crdfa at gmail.com> wrote:
> Dussst was recently blocked indefinitely (I don't know why)

AFAIR, recreation of a user previously blocked who continued doing the
same activities that got him blocked previously (which I believe was
continual uploading of unfree content under misleading descriptions
and licenses).

-Matt


from_name: Philip Welch

body:
> Steve Bennett <stevage at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> "Copyright is copyright, plagiarism is plagiarism. Copying a single
> sentence from a large work without attribution is plagiarism..."
>
   Phil replies:

   No it isn't.

   Phil

--
Philip L. Welch
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Philwelch


subject:
[WikiEN-l] User:Curps Blocking an IP address when he could have
	blocked the individual User

body:
> Excuse me? I am blocked because my IP was used by a vandal???? This
> I am
> assuming is another asinine attempt by a sanctimonious Admin to stop
> vandals by blocking an entire IP vs. the individual user...

Unless someone actually bothers to register a user account, we can
only block the IP. Even if they register an account and we block the
account instead, all the vandal has to do is not log in, in which
case we're forced to block the IP. You're asking us for something we
can't do.

> I looked at
> the user ( BDOG) who supposedly vandalized something and deserved a
> block and I noticed that he didn't even have any contributions other
> than the sandbox nor was he even given a vandalism warning... Curps
> pull
> your head out... This is BS and you had better have me unblocked
> PRONTO!

> Someone Please contact an Admin to correct this situation... Curps is
> clearly being a Dick.

We don't respond well to threats and personal attacks.

> This "Admin" has repeated
> requests on his talk page to stop using autoblock and apparently he is
> quick to ban entire blocks of IPs... I will change this when I
> become an
> Admin.

Generally we don't grant adminship to people with a history of
incivility and personal attacks, but you have time to redeem  yourself.

--
Philip L. Welch
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Philwelch


from_name: David Gerard

body:
Karl Krueger wrote:
On Wed, Feb 15, 2006 at 05:29:15PM +0000, David Gerard wrote:

>> So if I revert all and remake the good edits, the good edits stay in
>> Wikipedia but aren't associated with the banned editor - so that if
>> others are also following him about, they don't accidentally revert a
>> good edit. It's a bit more work for me, but hopefully means less work
>> for others.

>Banned editors are disallowed from editing.  However, banned editors
>still hold copyright over their own words.  If you revert their good
>contributions and then re-post their own words under your name, you
>might be seen as illicitly taking credit for their work.

In the general case, it's GFDL, it's still in the history, and if what
you said was a serious concern then no-one would ever refactor or
merge an article. In the specific case, if you look you'll see the
edits are minor maintenance edits.

Although mailing list threads go all over the place, note of a serious
problem vandal is probably not the place to go randomly riffing on
spurious concerns that would completely invalidate how Wikipedia
actually functions; you could at least change the subject line.

- d.


list: wikipedia-l

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Request for Marwari language Wikipedia

body:
"Jonathan & Kendra Dailey"
<jonathan-kendra_dailey at sall.com> wrote in message
news:000401c632e1$583163a0$0201a8c0 at WinniethePooh...
> Marwari is spoken by over 13 million people in India, Pakistan, and Nepal.
> It is related to Hindi but it is a distinct language with a long (1500
> year)
> written history and has a great amount of worldwide Diaspora.
> How do we get this started?

This would be the language you mean?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marwari_language

It would appear from this and the article on Hindi that it is considered by
many to be a dialect of the latter. If this is untrue, then those articles
need to be updated :-)

Are they sufficiently close that they can share a Wikipedia? If not, maybe
the Hindi Wikipedia might be a good place to start creating some material to
demonstrate the need for a new Wikipedia.

I hope this isn't another situation like the "Serbo-Croat/etc/etc/etc"
disaster...or even the "Romanian/Moldavian" thing.
--
Phil
[[en:User:Phil Boswell]]


from_name: Delirium

subject: [WikiEN-l] Advice needed

body:
Guy Chapman wrote:

>People insist on the article, clamour for the picture, and revert edits
>which emphasise Peppers' status as a big-time loser in the lottery of life -
>possibly because I can't write these edits in a way whihc adequately coneals
>my absolute contempt for those who exploit Peppers' picture ad an object of
>derision.
>
>
I think it would be a very bad precedent to start deleting (or avoiding
creating) articles on people who are semi-famous against their wishes,
or even exclusively as the result of mean-spirited internet denizens.
The most well-known of such unfortunate victims of internet derision is
the [[en:Star Wars kid]], who even went so far as to sue the people who
leaked the now-famous but previously private video onto the internet.  I
don't think that means we ought to delete his article, though.

Mr. Peppers appears to be less well known than the Star Wars kid, of
course, but having a Snopes entry seems to rise to the level of being
semi-notable IMO.

We *do* have to be careful not to allow Wikipedia to be used as a place
to start new fads, or propagate very weak/minor ones, but I'm wary of
taking an ideological stance that we will refuse henceforth to write
articles on people who would prefer to be less known than they are.

-Mark


body:
> I am requesting that you unblock my account.... that is something you
> cannot do? I am sick of self-righteous power tripping Admins... I am
> neither threatening you are personally attacking you... see the "don't
> be a dick" article on wikipedia, or maybe you are not familiar with
> that
> one?

"self-righteous power tripping admins" isn't a personal attack?

> Finally, you say, "generally "we" don't grant..." I am assuming by
> "we" you think that "you" are the entire voting population and elected
> speaking voice of wikipedia???

I was making an observation about the community in general.

> I have neither personally attacked you
> nor do I have a "history of invincibility"... so that comment about
> redeeming myself.... well you know what you can do with it.

I said "incivility", not "invincibility". Thankfully we also provide
Wiktionary so you can look up the meanings of those words.

Quite frankly, I would unblock you, but since you lack the common
courtesy to ask nicely, I don't have to do a goddamned thing for you.
I don't know how they run things at Ellsworth Air Force Base, but at
Wikipedia, bullying and insulting people doesn't get positive results.

--
Philip L. Welch
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Philwelch


from_name: Mason Patrick E SSgt 28 MUNS/MXWKB

body:
Excuse me? I am blocked because my IP was used by a vandal???? This I am
assuming is another asinine attempt by a sanctimonious Admin to stop
vandals by blocking an entire IP vs. the individual user... I looked at
the user ( BDOG) who supposedly vandalized something and deserved a
block and I noticed that he didn't even have any contributions other
than the sandbox nor was he even given a vandalism warning... Curps pull
your head out... This is BS and you had better have me unblocked PRONTO!

Seriously... blocking an IP address when he ( Curps) could have just
blocked the user? This has got to stop... This "Admin" has repeated
requests on his talk page to stop using autoblock and apparently he is
quick to ban entire blocks of IPs... I will change this when I become an
Admin.

Someone Please contact an Admin to correct this situation... Curps is
clearly being a Dick.


body:
On 2/16/06, Phil Boswell <phil.boswell at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> "Karl A. Krueger" <kkrueger at whoi.edu> wrote in message
> news:20060215223318.GA4712 at whoi.edu...
> > On Wed, Feb 15, 2006 at 05:29:15PM +0000, David Gerard wrote:
> >> So if I revert all and remake the good edits, the good edits stay in
> >> Wikipedia but aren't associated with the banned editor - so that if
> >> others are also following him about, they don't accidentally revert a
> >> good edit. It's a bit more work for me, but hopefully means less work
> >> for others.
> >
> > Banned editors are disallowed from editing.  However, banned editors
> > still hold copyright over their own words.  If you revert their good
> > contributions and then re-post their own words under your name, you
> > might be seen as illicitly taking credit for their work.
>
> "If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly or redistributed
> by
> others, do not submit it."
>
> Dude, the words have been submitted under the GFDL. Provided that DG notes
> in his edit summary that he is restoring a good edit by a bad editor, the
> number of legs upon which a claim might stand rapidly approaches zero.
>
> Which way round do you want it? Do you want all edits by a bad editor to
> be
> removed, even if they contribute good information? Or do you want even
> their
> bad edits to be left alone?
>
> HTH HAND
> --
> Phil
> [[en:User:Phil Boswell]]
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

Phil is right.


from_name: BJörn Lindqvist

body:
> > Banned editors are disallowed from editing.  However, banned editors
> > still hold copyright over their own words.  If you revert their good
> > contributions and then re-post their own words under your name, you
> > might be seen as illicitly taking credit for their work.
>
> "If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly or redistributed by
> others, do not submit it."
>
> Dude, the words have been submitted under the GFDL. Provided that DG notes
> in his edit summary that he is restoring a good edit by a bad editor, the
> number of legs upon which a claim might stand rapidly approaches zero.
>
> Which way round do you want it? Do you want all edits by a bad editor to be
> removed, even if they contribute good information? Or do you want even their
> bad edits to be left alone?

That's a false dilemma fallacy. The way round I want it and most
everyone else is: 1. good edits left alone 2. bad edits removed 3. bad
users banned. I can't understand how it would be LESS work to rollback
all Amorrow's edits and then recreate the good ones instead of only
rolling back the bad ones. But its very nice of David Gerard taking
the time to only destroy Amorrow's bad edits. Many vandals have gotten
each and every edit they made rollbacked which means that lots of good
information was lost.

--
mvh Bj?rn


body:
On 2/16/06, Alphax (Wikipedia email) <alphasigmax at gmail.com> wrote:
> This is a favourite tactic of some of the more obnoxious trolls that can
> be found at Wikipedia Review - do some vandalism with some good edits
> thrown in, then sit back and laugh as all are reverted.

That's depraved and not even troll-like behaviour. I understand the
basic motivation of a troll to be like a baby with a saucepan - small
amount of action (banging saucepan, or asking an inflammatory
question) produces a large action (noise/attention from family, or
massive flamewar). For a troll to actually create large numbers of
good edits, which are then reverted with a couple of clicks (presuming
that's possible) is the total opposite: large amount of action for
very quick and easy reaction. Who would bother?

Steve


list: foundation-l

subject:
[Foundation-l] Babylon Ltd using Wikipedia - press
	releasequestions

body:
"Erik Moeller" <erik_moeller at gmx.de> wrote in message
news:43F397AE.70604 at gmx.de...
> One thing I was worried about is that Babylon contained spyware for some
> time. However, it turns out that they already removed it in 2002 to
> appeal to a professional audience. Anyone worried that Babylon contains
> spyware should read this:
>
> http://www.babylon.com/eng/display.php?id=87&tree=7&level=3&show_id=680

Erm...

I just love the way a company whose entire reason for being is to translate
stuff fails to include an English translation: the link at the top of that
page where it says "this is also available in English" simply returns to the
German copy.

Actually, clicking around that website, I cannot in the short time available
find **any** links between the various language versions of what would
appear to be the same press releases: they don't even have the same date. It
would appear that the Wikipedia press release is only available in German.

Oops much?
--
Phil
[[en:User:Phil Boswell]]


from_name: Brion Vibber

subject: [Foundation-l] Undelete view changed

body:
I've changed how the Special:Undelete view works a little bit. The last deleted
page text is no longer displayed above the revisions list; it tended to be
rather annoying for big pages and could make things hard to deal with if the
page had hostile CSS (eg obscuring the buttons).

The revisions also now display the wiki source code by default, making it easier
to examine the code of a deleted page or copy-and-paste if necessary. Rendered
preview from there is optional.

Please copy this notification to whereever your wiki's curious sysops may be
hanging out.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 249 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/attachments/20060216/86a029a4/attachment.pgp


subject: [Foundation-l] Undelete view changed

body:
I've changed how the Special:Undelete view works a little bit. The last deleted
page text is no longer displayed above the revisions list; it tended to be
rather annoying for big pages and could make things hard to deal with if the
page had hostile CSS (eg obscuring the buttons).

The revisions also now display the wiki source code by default, making it easier
to examine the code of a deleted page or copy-and-paste if necessary. Rendered
preview from there is optional.

Please copy this notification to whereever your wiki's curious sysops may be
hanging out.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 249 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/attachments/20060216/86a029a4/attachment-0001.pgp


subject: [Foundation-l] Undelete view changed

body:
I've changed how the Special:Undelete view works a little bit. The last deleted
page text is no longer displayed above the revisions list; it tended to be
rather annoying for big pages and could make things hard to deal with if the
page had hostile CSS (eg obscuring the buttons).

The revisions also now display the wiki source code by default, making it easier
to examine the code of a deleted page or copy-and-paste if necessary. Rendered
preview from there is optional.

Please copy this notification to whereever your wiki's curious sysops may be
hanging out.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 249 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/attachments/20060216/86a029a4/attachment.pgp>


subject: [Foundation-l] Undelete view changed

body:
I've changed how the Special:Undelete view works a little bit. The last deleted
page text is no longer displayed above the revisions list; it tended to be
rather annoying for big pages and could make things hard to deal with if the
page had hostile CSS (eg obscuring the buttons).

The revisions also now display the wiki source code by default, making it easier
to examine the code of a deleted page or copy-and-paste if necessary. Rendered
preview from there is optional.

Please copy this notification to whereever your wiki's curious sysops may be
hanging out.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 249 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/attachments/20060216/86a029a4/attachment-0001.pgp>


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Undelete view changed

body:
I've changed how the Special:Undelete view works a little bit. The last deleted
page text is no longer displayed above the revisions list; it tended to be
rather annoying for big pages and could make things hard to deal with if the
page had hostile CSS (eg obscuring the buttons).

The revisions also now display the wiki source code by default, making it easier
to examine the code of a deleted page or copy-and-paste if necessary. Rendered
preview from there is optional.

Please copy this notification to whereever your wiki's curious sysops may be
hanging out.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 249 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/attachments/20060216/86a029a4/attachment.pgp


list: wikitech-l

subject: [Wikitech-l] Undelete view changed

body:
I've changed how the Special:Undelete view works a little bit. The last deleted
page text is no longer displayed above the revisions list; it tended to be
rather annoying for big pages and could make things hard to deal with if the
page had hostile CSS (eg obscuring the buttons).

The revisions also now display the wiki source code by default, making it easier
to examine the code of a deleted page or copy-and-paste if necessary. Rendered
preview from there is optional.

Please copy this notification to whereever your wiki's curious sysops may be
hanging out.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 249 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20060216/86a029a4/attachment.pgp>


from_name: Anthere

subject: [WikiEN-l] Babylon Ltd using Wikipedia - press release questions

body:
Steve Bennett wrote:
> On 2/15/06, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>I wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Dropping our name so as to imply a more active collaboration than
>>>downloading a database dump ... that seems slightly questionable
>>>behaviour. Unless, of course, there was an active collaboration with
>>>Babylon Ltd?
>
>
> So, it sounds like they will just be redisplaying our content and/or
> providing links to it. But will this help attract more people to
> edit/write articles?
>
> Steve

Ultimately, we aim at being a resource :-)

ant


subject: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedia merchandise

body:
Ben Yates wrote:
> The wikimedia foundation makes comparatively little from selling
> shirts, so I've put together a new store for them on spreadshirt
> (which has higher quality plot prints, not just digital prints -- and
> which I am not in any way affiliated with, for the record) and come up
> with a few new designs and a fashion-y logo-ish thing.  (I'm not a
> designer by trade, so I'm sure these could be improved on.)
>
> The store is at https://www.spreadshirt.com/shop.php?sid=21410 -- let
> me know what you think (though for god's sake don't buy anything from
> it yet; nobody but the hosting/shirtmaking company will get any
> money).
>
> Also, who else exactly should I contact about this?
>
> Ben Yates

Hello Ben.

We welcome any suggestions (such as new items) and new designs to
improve the income rate of the merchandise. Another shop is not
necessarily a bad idea (we could have a shop with first rate
merchandise, more expensive; and another shop with lesser quality but
lesser price as well).
I also rather like some of your suggestions.

Now, on the practical part.

Use of logo and name : Of course, if you use the logo (which is not the
case right now) or the brand name, do not forget copyright issues (I
think you know about this). So, check with us for use authorization. An
agreement should be made with regards to the right to use logo and/or
name and benefits percentages be considered. I suggest you write about
this at foundation-l at wikimedia.org so that we see who to put in touch
with you.

Another practical point. In case there is use of logo, there are visual
guidelines to follow. These were transfered on the Foundation website,
but .... which I can not find at all with the search tool (another
mystery). Well... if you use the logo, I am sure we'll find it back :-)

Another point : where does that design come from ? (the distorted W ?).
I never saw it. So, I do not see well how buyers will associate the
design to wikipedia (and so, purchase it as a wikipedia related item).

Right now, Maveric is taking care of the english shop.


body:
On 2/16/06, Sam Fentress (Asbestos) <asbestos999 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Becase we end up having conversations like this, which is what the troll
> wants.

The troll wants us to have philosophical discussions about the nature
of trolling? More power to him.

> More specifically, it is harder to ban someone with good edits, which is
> also what the troll wants.

That is more typical troll behaviour. Most successful trolls try and
skirt the borders, so they piss off half the admins, while the other
half is just convinced that they're a little misguided. Step too far
over the line and you won't have any friends to save you.

Steve


from_name: GerardM

body:
Hoi,
According to Ethnologue:
http://www.ethnologue.com/show_family.asp?subid=90928 Marwari is seen
as a cluster of languages not as a single language.

Sometimes these things are not simple.. :(

Thanks,
   Gerard

On 2/16/06, Phil Boswell <phil.boswell at gmail.com> wrote:
> "Jonathan & Kendra Dailey"
> <jonathan-kendra_dailey at sall.com> wrote in message
> news:000401c632e1$583163a0$0201a8c0 at WinniethePooh...
> > Marwari is spoken by over 13 million people in India, Pakistan, and Nepal.
> > It is related to Hindi but it is a distinct language with a long (1500
> > year)
> > written history and has a great amount of worldwide Diaspora.
> > How do we get this started?
>
> This would be the language you mean?
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marwari_language
>
> It would appear from this and the article on Hindi that it is considered by
> many to be a dialect of the latter. If this is untrue, then those articles
> need to be updated :-)
>
> Are they sufficiently close that they can share a Wikipedia? If not, maybe
> the Hindi Wikipedia might be a good place to start creating some material to
> demonstrate the need for a new Wikipedia.
>
> I hope this isn't another situation like the "Serbo-Croat/etc/etc/etc"
> disaster...or even the "Romanian/Moldavian" thing.
> --
> Phil
> [[en:User:Phil Boswell]]
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>


from_name: Guy Chapman

body:
From: "Steve Bennett" <stevage at gmail.com>
To: "English Wikipedia" <wikien-l at wikipedia.org>
Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2006 11:48 AM

> That's depraved and not even troll-like behaviour. I understand the
> basic motivation of a troll to be like a baby with a saucepan - small
> amount of action (banging saucepan, or asking an inflammatory
> question) produces a large action (noise/attention from family, or
> massive flamewar). For a troll to actually create large numbers of
> good edits, which are then reverted with a couple of clicks (presuming
> that's possible) is the total opposite: large amount of action for
> very quick and easy reaction. Who would bother?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Paulo_Fontaine

Guy


references:
<fbad4e140602150458t3c46ab72o@mail.gmail.com>
	<43F397AE.70604@gmx.de> <dt1sse$gqe$1@sea.gmane.org>

body:
Hoi,
I do not know if it is a press release, it seems to be much more of a
marketing thingie.. There has been a similar e-mail going around in
the Dutch language to Babylon customers..

It is a sad thing that there has been no communication over this while
it has been well known by a fairly large group outside of the
"organisation". This cat has been out of the bag for quite some time
now. I think that this is something for our Miss Communication.. :)

Thanks,
   GerardM

On 2/16/06, Phil Boswell <phil.boswell at gmail.com> wrote:
> "Erik Moeller" <erik_moeller at gmx.de> wrote in message
> news:43F397AE.70604 at gmx.de...
> > One thing I was worried about is that Babylon contained spyware for some
> > time. However, it turns out that they already removed it in 2002 to
> > appeal to a professional audience. Anyone worried that Babylon contains
> > spyware should read this:
> >
> > http://www.babylon.com/eng/display.php?id=87&tree=7&level=3&show_id=680
>
> Erm...
>
> I just love the way a company whose entire reason for being is to translate
> stuff fails to include an English translation: the link at the top of that
> page where it says "this is also available in English" simply returns to the
> German copy.
>
> Actually, clicking around that website, I cannot in the short time available
> find **any** links between the various language versions of what would
> appear to be the same press releases: they don't even have the same date. It
> would appear that the Wikipedia press release is only available in German.
>
> Oops much?
> --
> Phil
> [[en:User:Phil Boswell]]
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>


subject: [WikiEN-l] Admins' love lives are off-topic for wikien-l

body:
Snowspinner wrote:
On Feb 16, 2006, at 6:22 AM, David Gerard wrote:

>> Although mailing list threads go all over the place, note of a serious
>> problem vandal is probably not the place to go randomly riffing on
>> spurious concerns that would completely invalidate how Wikipedia
>> actually functions; you could at least change the subject line.

>So could you.

*cough* This is what I get for making a pissy email post. My apologies
to Karl and the list.

(I am NOT hairy chested. How dare you.)

[and no, I don't have references: headers again. I'll have to see what
I can do other than turn the firehose of this list upon my gmail
account.]

- d.


body:
A real email client that sends the content as an attachment, you mean?

Guy


from_name: Erik Moeller

subject: [Wikitech-l] Use namespaces to separate diffent formats

body:
Yes, associating namespaces with particular functionality makes sense -
we're already doing this anyway, though right now these associations are
hardcoded (e.g. Image: namespace looks up data from the IMAGE table,
resizes and renders images, shows metadata). If the namespace manager
will be part of 1.6 as planned, we can start thinking about other
functionality to tie into it.

Erik


from_name: Ray Saintonge

subject: [WikiEN-l] Proposal: Task forces

body:
Chris Jenkinson wrote:

>After a task force as a group were happy with their suggested
>modification of a policy, they would require consent from the community
>to implement it. This would probably be done via a simple straw poll,
>and due to the task force already having a mandate from the community to
>develop changes, would be typically lower than the usual "consensus"
>pass mark (e.g. a simple majority would be sufficient to implement the
>change).
>
So much of this tries to put old whine in new bottles.  It is based on
the premise that policies should provide unchangeable black and white
alternatives.  Or that a majority vote creates a policy that will be
binding on everybody, and remain fairly inflexible.  It sets up
situations where there are winners and losers, and minimizes the
opportunities for those losers to seek alternative solutions.

>This would be useful for Wikipedia because of the increasing size of the
>community. Due to its size, people are excluded from topics they may be
>interested in discussing and debating but may not know are under
>discussion purely due to the amount of things which are under
>discussion. Unfortunately this means it is likely that good ideas are
>excluded. Forming a body tasked specifically with reform of an area,
>which actively solicits feedback from the community gives people a
>single place to discuss topics they are interested in. In a large group,
>decision making becomes difficult.
>
This is all superficially true.  At least the problems that you describe
are very real.  What we really need is new and imaginative ways to
approach decision making, not just grafting tired old techniques onto
the problems.  Whatever the solution it must be very wiki.  This implies
a very high level of uncertainty that goes well beyond the comfort zone
of many people.

>The general idea of this was inspired in part by select committees in
>legislative bodies. In the House of Commons, select committees are
>groups of MPs, from all political parties, each one dedicated to a
>different government department. Their role is to hold the government to
>account, solicit feedback from the general public, and to report to
>Parliament. While of course a direct comparison between Wikipedia and a
>legislative body is naturally flawed, the concept of a small body of
>people, interested and dedicated to a specific field, to help improve
>the system to improve its functioning is a good one and works well in
>practice.
>
Commons commttees may very well do what you say... to a point, but when
they reach a conclusion contrary to the cabinet's desires party
discipline must prevail.

>Things to consider
>
>* How would task forces be created?
>
Somebody starts a talk page

>* How would members of a task force be appointed?
>
Let anyone participate at any time.

>* Is a single "policy committee" a better idea than having multiple task
>forces?
>
Whatever ... It makes no difference.

>* How do we ensure that a task force is representative of opinion across
>Wikipedia/has community support?
>
That's impossible.

>* How do we ensure that time spent dealing with policy does not affect
>contributors' time spent on encyclopaedic articles?
>
>
:-D  Extend the length of the day beyond 24 hours.

Ec


subject: [WikiEN-l] What's the deal with the search feature?

body:
Hi all,
 I've seen various vague comments about the search database not being
updated in a while, but what's the story? It's not too good that if
you type in the exact name of an article in the search page, Wikipedia
may fail to find it (as just happened to me with my lovely example
DMExpress).

Would it also not be possible to make the behaviour of the search page
the same as the go/search box on the left of the main interface?

If I had a third wish, how about making the namespace checkboxes
display the first time you're taken to the search page, rather than
the second? To search for an object in the user or user talk
namespaces, you have to search for an article which doesn't exist
first.

Steve


body:
>> A real email client that sends the content as an attachment, you mean?
> My email was fully compliant to RFCs 2440 and 3156. I can't help it if
> you can't handle MIME messages.

I can.  But it was still a text file as a MIME attachment.  I use six or
seven different mail clients for various jobs, I don't think any of them do
that.

Guy


from_name: Drini

subject: [WikiEN-l] (no subject)

body:
and not to mention that
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Veloso&diff=prev&oldid=39849581
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nigger&diff=prev&oldid=39827640
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nigger&diff=prev&oldid=39827395
are blatant vandalism

Sam Fentress (Asbestos) wrote:
> On 2/16/06, britney i <britneylovexoxo at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> My ip I am afraid to post my ip on the world wide web beacuse of all the
>> craszs My user name UltraBrain The issue Blocked If an adim absoultly needs
>> my ip then I would provide it to them.          Your user name or IP address
>> has been blocked from editing
>> You were blocked by Ricky81682
>> Reason given: Autoblocked because your IP address has been recently used
>> by "UltraBrain". The reason given for UltraBrain's block is: "recreation of
>> deleted content and vandalism". (see our blocking policy)
>>   The aritcle keept on getting vandilized by just getting deleted. It
>> needs protection. And I should be unblocked. It is only meant to provide
>> knowledge of the subject matter. But it seems that some people are just big
>> babys with power that they should not have.
>>
>>
>>
>>
> Britney, you were strongly warned 5 times at
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:UltraBrain, and told that you would
> be blocked if you continued your actions. You were only blocked for 24
> hours.
>
> The article was voted for deletion at
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Amazing_Racist.
> If you strongly disagree with an article's deletion, the correct place to go
> is [[Wikipedia:Deletion review]] -- simply replacing the article will get
> you blocked again.
>
> Sam
>
> --
> Asbestos
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Asbestos
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
>


from_name: Steve Bennett

body:
On 2/16/06, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
> [and no, I don't have references: headers again. I'll have to see what
> I can do other than turn the firehose of this list upon my gmail
> account.]

Yep, I use gmail to read these lists, even when at home with my real
email client with filters (tm). It works extremely well.

Steve


body:
"GerardM" <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote in
message news:41a006820602160459n6962298i94ce18a378b56fb3 at mail.gmail.com...
> On 2/16/06, Phil Boswell
> <phil.boswell at gmail.com> wrote:
>> "Jonathan & Kendra Dailey"
>> <jonathan-kendra_dailey at sall.com> wrote in message
>> news:000401c632e1$583163a0$0201a8c0 at WinniethePooh...
>> > Marwari is spoken by over 13 million people in India, Pakistan, and
>> > Nepal.
>> > It is related to Hindi but it is a distinct language with a long (1500
>> > year)
>> > written history and has a great amount of worldwide Diaspora.
>> > How do we get this started?
>> This would be the language you mean?
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marwari_language
>> It would appear from this and the article on Hindi that it is considered
>> by
>> many to be a dialect of the latter. If this is untrue, then those
>> articles
>> need to be updated :-)
> According to Ethnologue:
> http://www.ethnologue.com/show_family.asp?subid=90928 Marwari is seen
> as a cluster of languages not as a single language.
> Sometimes these things are not simple.. :(

Maybe the reference is to the language:
http://www.ethnologue.com/show_language.asp?code=rwr
rather than the family: they have the same name.

feh!
--
Phil
[[en:User:Phil Boswell]]


body:
Is there an article on the history of flamewars about email format
yet? If not, why not? It probably dates back to the day after email
was invented.

Steve

On 2/16/06, Alphax (Wikipedia email) <alphasigmax at gmail.com> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA256
>
> Guy Chapman wrote:
> > A real email client that sends the content as an attachment, you mean?
> >
>
> My email was fully compliant to RFCs 2440 and 3156. I can't help it if
> you can't handle MIME messages.
>
> - --
> Alphax - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax
> Contributor to Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
> "We make the internet not suck" - Jimbo Wales
> Public key: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax/OpenPGP
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.3rc1: (MingW32)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
> iQEVAwUBQ/SMYxij9/u0qE3WAQh3zwf/bZ8Sd558xh8RBQgt3vC1hnnFtnLLCMMh
> VREFSE5cWnDcfefoiwnUwsluYWNSMrASJ4JmW6lj6cl5XQIzzoJrG6SqUUJnUK2/
> 5aNAee6NF643G2L0pqMpPEn9tvxh4XUwS0Nl1wFZq7jcebOzbM09Dj7T5Q5RSbwq
> P2AoBiVXB3Du3dblizJvQV8JXYDNWSiPmRkiIFNQ/KjTeanhw8HdaEPJEQ1utYQ8
> uQrsFHofniN9dbzee173Xan0KgMZWC8s7vswoncm7m1vutGwW6kYAXRV/w7RyQuq
> fN+v9VrScykXHUti1HnbrIjn9l2UAwDDSGdfaecJIOeTqBT/cNG9eQ==
> =s/el
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


body:
On 2/16/06, Alphax (Wikipedia email) <alphasigmax at gmail.com> wrote:
> You should see what's in my other sig:
>
>    /"\
>    \ /     ASCII Ribbon Campaign
>     X   Against HTML email & vCards
>    / \

Too bad it's not the "Because it breaks the logical order / Why is top
posting bad?" one. I've always wanted to reply:

Why is bottom posting bad?
(scroll down for answer)

Steve


subject: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedia merchandise

body:
Angela wrote:
>>Another practical point. In case there is use of logo, there are visual
>>guidelines to follow.
>
>
> They're at http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Wikimedia_visual_identity_guidelines
>
> Angela.

They were transfered more than a month ago...

Is not that odd that the search system does not find them ???

ant


subject: [WikiEN-l] Unused userboxes

body:
Jimmy Wales wrote:

>charles matthews wrote:
>
>
>>"Matt Brown" wrote
>>
>>
>>>I do suspect in the current climate that will just make a dozen people
>>>
>>>
>>start to use it, to protect it.
>>
>>Something to that.  Attention-seeking behaviour is sometimes best
>>treated by ignoring it, as parents know.
>>
>>
>Wisdom.
>
>Having said that, I heard today that the number of userboxes, and in
>particular the number of very problematic userboxes, has exploded.  I
>think this is seriously Not Good For Our Loving Little Community.
>
>I am not doing anything about it just yet, but I am willing to concede
>that my nonviolent social request that people knock it off and think
>about what it means to be a Wikipedian has not gotten very far.
>
Regrettably, this kind of philosophical self-examination is not very
popular.  My experience has been that the more thought is put into an
idea, the more readily it will be ignored.  Still as much as I may be
justified in complaining that people don't pay attention to what I say,
I must confess that some of the most interesting  (if somewhat prolix)
comments put me into such a paralysis of meditation that I fail to
respond with the careful attention that these comments deserve.

These user boxes seem to be the Wiki's answer to the 10-second
soundbite.  Compact as much as possible into a tiny box to achieve a
particular effect.  If need be sacrifice accuracy for the sake of
brevity.  That kind of thinking would have gourmet cuisine epitomized by
McDonald's.

I am no fan of the Bush administration, but I find the Cheney shooting
incident instructive.  It says more about the way that such events are
processed than about any culpability that may be attached to those
directly involved.  What difference did it make if the reporting was not
through accepted channels?  There was no matter of public policy
involved, or any consequences that would plausibly affect anyone other
than those directly involved.  Whatever fault I may find with the
current US administration let it at least be over real issues, and not
over the microscopic examination of a single personal event.  Many more
meaningful incidents are discussed far less by the press than this
single accidental shooting.

The userboxes, and the media treatment of the shooting both reflect an
amazingly similar problem.  The instantaneification of information is
incompatible with its enormousness.  We want knowledge in quantities
that we can understand.  We keep hoping that just around the corner we
will find that magical piece of software that will make it all as clear
as 42.   Our addiction to virtual reality makes it difficult to
distinguish whether the person who has moved into the house next door is
Homer Simpson or Pikachu.  Perhaps being a Wikipedian is seeking to
build the tools that will help us to cope with that reality.

>As far as I can determine, and I am very much aware that I am here
>prejudicing the terms of debate, this is a cultural battle between
>wikipedians and people who have stumbled into this cool site they heard
>about on CNN where you can write whatever the hell you want and argue
>with people for fun.
>
Participating in the debate is somewhat acceptable in guiding people to
their own decision.  If people can be willingly guided into a consensus
it is always preferable to the application of "force majeure".

Reference: Paul Virilio, "The Information Bomb"

Ec


subject: [WikiEN-l] Unused userboxes

body:
On 2/16/06, Jimmy Wales <jwales at wikia.com> wrote:
> As far as I can determine, and I am very much aware that I am here
> prejudicing the terms of debate, this is a cultural battle between
> wikipedians and people who have stumbled into this cool site they heard
> about on CNN where you can write whatever the hell you want and argue
> with people for fun.

...some of whom, we hope, will stick around and become Wikipedians.

Steve


from_name: Ben Yates

subject: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedia merchandise

body:
On the subject of the logo: I threw it together myself, in a vector
program.  I know it's important for wikipedia/media to have a
tightly-bound visual identity, but I couldn't see myself wearing any
of the curernt logos (and wikipedia's, at least, is much too detailed
to be plot printed).

(On money etc.: I'd much rather have my designs adopted as official
wikipedia merchandise than get any money from selling them -- it'll
look bloody amazing on a resume`.  But that may be a tall order.)

Also, the visual guidelines seem to be just for wikimedia, not
wikpedia in particular.

Anyway, thanks.  I'll contact the foundation mailing list and Maveric.

On 2/16/06, Anthere <Anthere9 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Ben Yates wrote:
> > The wikimedia foundation makes comparatively little from selling
> > shirts, so I've put together a new store for them on spreadshirt
> > (which has higher quality plot prints, not just digital prints -- and
> > which I am not in any way affiliated with, for the record) and come up
> > with a few new designs and a fashion-y logo-ish thing.  (I'm not a
> > designer by trade, so I'm sure these could be improved on.)
> >
> > The store is at https://www.spreadshirt.com/shop.php?sid=21410 -- let
> > me know what you think (though for god's sake don't buy anything from
> > it yet; nobody but the hosting/shirtmaking company will get any
> > money).
> >
> > Also, who else exactly should I contact about this?
> >
> > Ben Yates
>
> Hello Ben.
>
> We welcome any suggestions (such as new items) and new designs to
> improve the income rate of the merchandise. Another shop is not
> necessarily a bad idea (we could have a shop with first rate
> merchandise, more expensive; and another shop with lesser quality but
> lesser price as well).
> I also rather like some of your suggestions.
>
> Now, on the practical part.
>
> Use of logo and name : Of course, if you use the logo (which is not the
> case right now) or the brand name, do not forget copyright issues (I
> think you know about this). So, check with us for use authorization. An
> agreement should be made with regards to the right to use logo and/or
> name and benefits percentages be considered. I suggest you write about
> this at foundation-l at wikimedia.org so that we see who to put in touch
> with you.
>
> Another practical point. In case there is use of logo, there are visual
> guidelines to follow. These were transfered on the Foundation website,
> but .... which I can not find at all with the search tool (another
> mystery). Well... if you use the logo, I am sure we'll find it back :-)
>
> Another point : where does that design come from ? (the distorted W ?).
> I never saw it. So, I do not see well how buyers will associate the
> design to wikipedia (and so, purchase it as a wikipedia related item).
>
> Right now, Maveric is taking care of the english shop.
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

--
Ben Yates
Wikipedia blog - http://wikip.blogspot.com


from_name: Ryan Delaney

body:
On 2/16/06, Mason Patrick E SSgt 28 MUNS/MXWKB <
Patrick.Mason at ellsworth.af.mil> wrote:
>
> I will change this when I become an
> Admin.

Hahahah. Can stuff from the mailing list be put on BJAODN?

Ryan


subject: [WikiEN-l] Advice needed

body:
On 2/16/06, Delirium <delirium at hackish.org> wrote:
> The most well-known of such unfortunate victims of internet derision is
> the [[en:Star Wars kid]], who even went so far as to sue the people who
> leaked the now-famous but previously private video onto the internet.  I
> don't think that means we ought to delete his article, though.

He didn't like the iMac, eh?

> We *do* have to be careful not to allow Wikipedia to be used as a place
> to start new fads, or propagate very weak/minor ones, but I'm wary of
> taking an ideological stance that we will refuse henceforth to write
> articles on people who would prefer to be less known than they are.

Hmm. We're agreed to not publishing certain salacious details of
famous people on [[WP:LIVING]]. Perhaps we should avoid publishing
anything personal about "famous despite themselves" people - so the
Peppers article could be simply about the internet phenomenon, with
almost nothing (if anything) on the poor chap himself. Unless of
course he actually does anything notable, like sue someone.

Steve


subject: [Foundation-l] Wikipedia merchandise

body:
Hi -- I've made a new store for wikipedia, and come up with a few new
shirt designs.  I posted this on WikiEN-L  and was told to bring it
here, so I'll copy that message:

- - - - -

The wikimedia foundation makes comparatively little from selling
shirts, so I've put together a new store for them on Spreadshirt
(which has higher quality plot prints, not just digital prints -- and
which I am not in any way affiliated with, for the record) and come up
with a few new designs and a fashion-y logo-ish thing.  (I'm not a
designer by trade, so I'm sure these could be improved on.)

The store is at https://www.spreadshirt.com/shop.php?sid=21410 -- let
me know what you think (though for god's sake don't buy anything from
it yet; nobody but the hosting/shirtmaking company will get any
money).

- - - - -

I didn't use any of the current logos, mostly because I couldn't see
myself wearing them; instead, threw together a new vector design (in
any case, wikipedia's logo is too detailed to be plot printed).  I was
wondering where to go from here -- who to contact, whether the new
store should be Official or if I should run it on my own, and give
wikimedia some or all of the profits (and how to go about that).

I do also have some ideas for bumper stickers and such (spreadshirt
only does shirts); I was told Maveric runs the english-language
wikipedia cafepress store, but wasn't able to find a user of that
name.

Cheers
--
Ben Yates
Wikipedia blog - http://wikip.blogspot.com


subject: [Foundation-l] Wikipedia merchandise


from_name: Tony Sidaway

body:
On 2/16/06, Jeffrey M. Smith <wikipedian at jeffsmith.us> wrote:
>
> If it is possible to distinguish between userbox edits and userbox template
> creation when querying the database, that might go a long way in figuring out
> where these 2500 new userboxes have come from and what they're used for.

Yes, there are thirteen editors who have each created more than fifty userboxes:

Addaone, AzaToth, Bourbons3, Commander Keane, CyberSkull, Dussst,
?(c)g?(c)sippe Cormier, Mistress Selina Kyle, Morgan695,
Nightstallion, Silence             , Soman, Think Fast

Dussst was recently blocked indefinitely (I don't know why), and
Mistress Selina Kyle was also blocked for a long period recently for
continued disruption.

By far the most prolific producer of userboxes is morgan695, who has
produced 212.  Next are Bourbon3 and Cyberskull, each with 108.
Nobody else has yet produced more than 100.


subject: [Foundation-l] Wikipedia merchandise

body:
On 2/16/06, Ben Yates <bluephonic at gmail.com> wrote:

> I do also have some ideas for bumper stickers and such (spreadshirt
> only does shirts); I was told Maveric runs the english-language
> wikipedia cafepress store, but wasn't able to find a user of that
> name.

Sorry; scratch that part.  I found the email address for the cafepress store.

--
Ben Yates
Wikipedia blog - http://wikip.blogspot.com


subject: [Foundation-l] Wikipedia merchandise


from_name: Phil Boswell

subject: [Wikitech-l] New parameters for WhatLinksHere, please

body:
I would like to be able to specify whether redirected links and
inclusion-type links are included on the list.

How difficult would it be to add the capability to WhatLinksHere?

e.g. if I wanted only direct links, I would add ...&redirect=no

If I wanted only template inclusions, I would add ...&inclusion=yes

OTOH if I wanted everything *but* template inclusions, I would add
...&inclusion=no

HTH HAND
--
Phil
[[en:User:Phil Boswell]]


from_name: db

subject: [Foundation-l] Fundraising and Anonnotice

body:
Look at the data:
http://fundraising.wikimedia.org/ongoing/index.php/2006-02/

Conclusions:

1. This notice is not an effective means at raising
funds.
2. Having this notice up outside of the fund drives
may have a serious negative impact on the fund drives.
The next time it says, "Wikimedia needs your help" the
new instinctive reaction is, "Oh, they're always
asking for money".
3. If the individuals who maintain this notice insist
on having it up all the time, then, again, just look
at this data:
http://fundraising.wikimedia.org/ongoing/index.php/2006-01/

The conclusion here is that Jimmy's personal appeal is
FAR FAR more effective at raising funds.

Therefore: if enough people are insisting on keeping
this notice up, AT LEAST change the link back to
Jimmy's personal appeal until we find something else
that is even more effective. Not doing so is only
going to have a negative impact on long term
fundraising for Wikimedia.

The personal appeal is well written, sincere, and
effective. The general fundraising page leaves a lot
to be desired. Also, we should set it up so that
people can sign up for ongoing monthly donations, e.g.
$10 taken out of my PayPal account or credit card each
month.

Also, the notice itself, stating, "Pleas read founder
Jimmy Wales personal appeal" is far more attractive to
the majority of nonregistered wikipedia users.

There is a comment on
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki:Anonnotice&action=history
by mav stating "(de-link month-old appeal as promised
and replace with 'Your [continued donations] keep
Wikipedia free!')"

I don't know where or to whom this was promised, and I
can assure you that the majority of nonregistered
users don't either.

-d

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


from_name: Philip Welch

subject: [WikiEN-l] Proposal: Task forces

body:
This "task force" idea is stupid. No one should be "appointed" or
"elected" or "put in charge" of developing policy. Trying to develop
policy is the prerogative of each and every Wikipedian, as is the
process of building consensus and implementing the policy.

--
Philip L. Welch
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Philwelch


body:
On 2/16/06, Tony Sidaway <f.crdfa at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 2/16/06, Jeffrey M. Smith <wikipedian at jeffsmith.us> wrote:
> >
> > If it is possible to distinguish between userbox edits and userbox template
> > creation when querying the database, that might go a long way in figuring out
> > where these 2500 new userboxes have come from and what they're used for.
>
> Yes, there are thirteen editors who have each created more than fifty userboxes:
>
> Addaone, AzaToth, Bourbons3, Commander Keane, CyberSkull, Dussst,
> ?(c)g?(c)sippe Cormier, Mistress Selina Kyle, Morgan695,
> Nightstallion, Silence             , Soman, Think Fast
>
> Dussst was recently blocked indefinitely (I don't know why),

Apparently he was blocked as a reincarnation of Bourbons3, who was
blocked as a persistent copyright infringer who used false upload
summaries such as "self edited photoshop" to describe material he
obviously did not own.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Proposal: Task forces

body:
Huh oh... task forces... that sounds militaristic, therefore it MUST be
a bad idea.
:P

Chris Jenkinson wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Here is an overview of some brainstorming I and a few others have done
> on the concept of task forces for improving policy (a task force being a
> temporary organisation formed to work on a single defined task or
> activity). Task forces would be broadly responsible for an area of
> policy (for example, deletion, adminship, etc.), and would be tasked
> with coming up with improvements to an existing policy and creation of
> new policies. Please take "policy" to include both guidelines and policies.
>


body:
Terri Schiavo and related articles, and pestering certain users who he's
been stalking, basically.

On 2/16/06, Tony Sidaway <f.crdfa at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 2/15/06, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
> > This fellow was banned as User:Amorrow for vicious personal attacks
> > and threats against other users, and again as User:Pinktulip. His
> > personal attacks have escalated to stalking and threats sent to other
> > editors' employers. Fairly obviously, he's *remarkably* unwelcome on
> > anything to do with Wikipedia.
> >
> > I'm trying to build up a pattern for a strong complaint, and I'm also
> > rolling back every edit from him I see (making the edit again by hand
> > if it's a good one). If you see any edits fitting the pattern, please
> > email me or leave a note on my talk page.
> >
>
> David, is there some kind of "Wanted" poster for this guy? What is his
> modus operandi on the wiki, what are his core interests and so on?
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: Chris Jenkinson

subject: [WikiEN-l] [Fwd: [Foundation-l] Undelete view changed]

body:
Straight from the horse's mouth. Not that Mr. Vibber is a horse.

Chris

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [Foundation-l] Undelete view changed
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 13:01:39 -0800
From: Brion Vibber <brion at pobox.com>
Reply-To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List <foundation-l at wikimedia.org>
To: Wikimedia developers <wikitech-l at wikimedia.org>,
wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org,	Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
<foundation-l at wikimedia.org>

I've changed how the Special:Undelete view works a little bit. The last
deleted
page text is no longer displayed above the revisions list; it tended to be
rather annoying for big pages and could make things hard to deal with if the
page had hostile CSS (eg obscuring the buttons).

The revisions also now display the wiki source code by default, making
it easier
to examine the code of a deleted page or copy-and-paste if necessary.
Rendered
preview from there is optional.

Please copy this notification to whereever your wiki's curious sysops may be
hanging out.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)

--
Chris Jenkinson
chris at starglade.org

"Mistrust all in whom the impulse to punish is powerful."
  -- Friedrich Nietzsche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 258 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20060216/15a4ac9d/attachment.pgp
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: file:///C|/DOCUME~1/CHRIS/LOCALS~1/TEMP/nsmail-1.txt
Url: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20060216/15a4ac9d/attachment.txt


from_name: Daniel Mayer

body:
--- db <djbaniel at yahoo.com> wrote:
> 1. This notice is not an effective means at raising
> funds.

Donations have always dropped way off after fund drives end. The big difference this time was that
Jimmy's appeal cushioned that drop a bit for a few weeks after the end of this drive. Even so, the
current daily average is still well over twice that of the last whole month without any
fundraising drive, November 2005 ($438 vs $1190). The notice is simply a reminder that we need and
accept donations; not much more than the plain [Donations] link in the sidebar but slightly more
noticeable. In fact, simply thanking people for their continued donations may cause less donor
fatigue than even the current message.

> The conclusion here is that Jimmy's personal appeal is
> FAR FAR more effective at raising funds.

See the anonnotice talk page. There was an edit war over having Jimmy's name on every page on the
English Wikipedia since that was showing up on Google search results. It did make 'Jimmy Wales'
more popular than 'Jesus Christ' for a while, according to GoogleFight. :)

> Therefore: if enough people are insisting on keeping
> this notice up, AT LEAST change the link back to
> Jimmy's personal appeal until we find something else
> that is even more effective. Not doing so is only
> going to have a negative impact on long term
> fundraising for Wikimedia.

I'm not opposed to that. But at the same time we have to consider donor fatigue and the fact that
Jimmy's appeal is just about the best kind of weapon we have during an actual fundraiser. Using
the same weapon all the time may tire potential donors. Thus the simple statement that donations
keep Wikipedia running. Simple stuff like that will tend to prime the well instead of running it
dry, IMO.

> The personal appeal is well written, sincere, and
> effective. The general fundraising page leaves a lot
> to be desired. Also, we should set it up so that
> people can sign up for ongoing monthly donations, e.g.
> $10 taken out of my PayPal account or credit card each
> month.

Yeah, the general fundraising page needs a lot of help. It has been a long while since it was last
overhauled and doing that is on my ToDo list. Please visit the copy on meta to help improve it.

> There is a comment on
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki:Anonnotice&action=history
> by mav stating "(de-link month-old appeal as promised
> and replace with 'Your [continued donations] keep
> Wikipedia free!')"
>
> I don't know where or to whom this was promised, and I
> can assure you that the majority of nonregistered
> users don't either.

The edit comment right before that one.

-- mav

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


subject: [Foundation-l] Wikipedia merchandise

body:
--- Ben Yates <bluephonic at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi -- I've made a new store for wikipedia, and come up with a few new
> shirt designs.  I posted this on WikiEN-L  and was told to bring it
> here, so I'll copy that message:

Great designs! I like the swoosh-like W. However, the base prices are a bit eye-popping; I thought
the base prices of CafePress were high.

> The store is at https://www.spreadshirt.com/shop.php?sid=21410 -- let
> me know what you think (though for god's sake don't buy anything from
> it yet; nobody but the hosting/shirtmaking company will get any
> money).
>
> I didn't use any of the current logos, mostly because I couldn't see
> myself wearing them; instead, threw together a new vector design (in
> any case, wikipedia's logo is too detailed to be plot printed).  I was
> wondering where to go from here -- who to contact, whether the new
> store should be Official or if I should run it on my own, and give
> wikimedia some or all of the profits (and how to go about that).

I'd rather simply create a new section of the CafePress store that had your and similar designs.
We will need to work out the copyright and trademark issues though. Right now we have a policy
that all CafePress designs need to have their copyright owned by the foundation. And, of course,
the Foundation already has a trademark on the term 'Wikipedia.'

> I do also have some ideas for bumper stickers and such (spreadshirt
> only does shirts); I was told Maveric runs the english-language
> wikipedia cafepress store, but wasn't able to find a user of that
> name.

Maveric149 - What, you never heard of me? I need to edit more often. :) Please add more ideas
here:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fundraising_ideas/Cafe_Press

-- mav

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


subject: [Foundation-l] Wikipedia merchandise


body:
--- Daniel Mayer <maveric149 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> --- db <djbaniel at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > 1. This notice is not an effective means at raising
> > funds.

I see what the problem is. Looks like the PayPal script has not been working for the last several
days so it *looks* like donations have dropped to zero. They haven't (I just checked the PayPal
account). But they are a bit down per the month's average ; likely due to the absence of the
donation tracking feedback.

I just asked Brion to fix this.

-- mav

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


from_name: Alphax (Wikipedia email)

body:
BJ?rn Lindqvist wrote:
>>>Banned editors are disallowed from editing.  However, banned editors
>>>still hold copyright over their own words.  If you revert their good
>>>contributions and then re-post their own words under your name, you
>>>might be seen as illicitly taking credit for their work.
>>
>>"If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly or redistributed by
>>others, do not submit it."
>>
>>Dude, the words have been submitted under the GFDL. Provided that DG notes
>>in his edit summary that he is restoring a good edit by a bad editor, the
>>number of legs upon which a claim might stand rapidly approaches zero.
>>
>>Which way round do you want it? Do you want all edits by a bad editor to be
>>removed, even if they contribute good information? Or do you want even their
>>bad edits to be left alone?
>
>
> That's a false dilemma fallacy. The way round I want it and most
> everyone else is: 1. good edits left alone 2. bad edits removed 3. bad
> users banned. I can't understand how it would be LESS work to rollback
> all Amorrow's edits and then recreate the good ones instead of only
> rolling back the bad ones. But its very nice of David Gerard taking
> the time to only destroy Amorrow's bad edits. Many vandals have gotten
> each and every edit they made rollbacked which means that lots of good
> information was lost.
>

This is a favourite tactic of some of the more obnoxious trolls that can
be found at Wikipedia Review - do some vandalism with some good edits
thrown in, then sit back and laugh as all are reverted.

--
Alphax - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax
Contributor to Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
"We make the internet not suck" - Jimbo Wales
Public key: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax/OpenPGP

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 550 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20060216/c190cc73/attachment.pgp


body:
On 2/16/06, Sam Korn <smoddy at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 2/16/06, Ryan Delaney <ryan.delaney at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hahahah. Can stuff from the mailing list be put on BJAODN?
>
> I don't know how serious you are being here, so I'll answer with a
> straight face.

I speak with my tounge in cheek, but I thank you for your answer anyway. ;-)

Ryan


subject: [WikiEN-l] Proposal: Task forces

body:
Hi all,

Here is an overview of some brainstorming I and a few others have done
on the concept of task forces for improving policy (a task force being a
temporary organisation formed to work on a single defined task or
activity). Task forces would be broadly responsible for an area of
policy (for example, deletion, adminship, etc.), and would be tasked
with coming up with improvements to an existing policy and creation of
new policies. Please take "policy" to include both guidelines and policies.

General idea

Members of a task force would be appointed in some way (for example via
elections), and would discuss amongst themselves the problems with the
existing policy, how to improve it so it better serves building the
encyclopaedia, and the removal of policies which do not help the
development of Wikipedia. The various task forces would work the
community to get feedback on all aspects of their work, including
problems with existing policies, discussion of what works and what
doesn't, and comments on their suggested proposals.

After a task force as a group were happy with their suggested
modification of a policy, they would require consent from the community
to implement it. This would probably be done via a simple straw poll,
and due to the task force already having a mandate from the community to
develop changes, would be typically lower than the usual "consensus"
pass mark (e.g. a simple majority would be sufficient to implement the
change).

I would suggest a task force for each area of Wikipedia policy, such as
moving pages, each administrative tool (deletion, blocking, protection,
rollback), manual of style, adminship, bureaucratship, recent changes,
copyright, stubs, etc. Obviously, some task forces would have larger
roles than others - some task forces, such as one for bureaucrat-related
policy, simply may not be necessary due to the low numbers.

Use to Wikipedia

This would be useful for Wikipedia because of the increasing size of the
community. Due to its size, people are excluded from topics they may be
interested in discussing and debating but may not know are under
discussion purely due to the amount of things which are under
discussion. Unfortunately this means it is likely that good ideas are
excluded. Forming a body tasked specifically with reform of an area,
which actively solicits feedback from the community gives people a
single place to discuss topics they are interested in. In a large group,
decision making becomes difficult.

Inspiration

The general idea of this was inspired in part by select committees in
legislative bodies. In the House of Commons, select committees are
groups of MPs, from all political parties, each one dedicated to a
different government department. Their role is to hold the government to
account, solicit feedback from the general public, and to report to
Parliament. While of course a direct comparison between Wikipedia and a
legislative body is naturally flawed, the concept of a small body of
people, interested and dedicated to a specific field, to help improve
the system to improve its functioning is a good one and works well in
practice.

Things to consider

* How would task forces be created?
* How would members of a task force be appointed?
* Is a single "policy committee" a better idea than having multiple task
forces?
* How do we ensure that a task force is representative of opinion across
Wikipedia/has community support?
* How do we ensure that time spent dealing with policy does not affect
contributors' time spent on encyclopaedic articles?

Thoughts welcomed! I've also put this on Wikipedia, at:
  --> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Talrias/Task_forces_proposal

Chris

--
Chris Jenkinson
chris at starglade.org

"Mistrust all in whom the impulse to punish is powerful."
  -- Friedrich Nietzsche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra


subject: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedia merchandise

body:
I did just take a look at it -- I think the best entries are the ones
getting voted for, for what it's worth.

On 2/16/06, Alphax (Wikipedia email) <alphasigmax at gmail.com> wrote:

> Slightly off-topic, but are you involved in the New Wikisource Logo
> discussion (http://wikisource.org/wiki/Wikisource:New_Wikisource_logo)?
>
> --
> Alphax - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax
> Contributor to Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
> "We make the internet not suck" - Jimbo Wales
> Public key: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax/OpenPGP
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
>
>
>

--
Ben Yates
Wikipedia blog - http://wikip.blogspot.com


from_name: Sam Korn

body:
On 2/16/06, Ryan Delaney <ryan.delaney at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hahahah. Can stuff from the mailing list be put on BJAODN?

I don't know how serious you are being here, so I'll answer with a
straight face.

No, you can't, in general.  Mailing list posts are not automatically
released under GDFL, as pages on the Wiki are, so the works are not
appropriately licensed.

There might, of course, be a fair use claim, as always.

--
Sam


from_name: brion at pobox.com

subject: [Wikitech-l] MediaWiki automated test run failure 2006-02-17

body:
An automated run of parserTests.php showed the following failures:

Running test BUG 361: URL within URL, not bracketed... FAILED!
Running test External links: invalid character... FAILED!
Running test Bug 2702: Mismatched <i> and <a> tags are invalid... FAILED!
Running test A table with no data.... FAILED!
Running test A table with nothing but a caption... FAILED!
Running test Link containing "#<" and "#>" % as a hex sequences... FAILED!
Running test Magic links: PMID incorrectly converts space to underscore... FAILED!
Running test Template with thumb image (wiht link in description)... FAILED!
Running test Link to image page... FAILED!
Running test BUG 1887: A ISBN with a thumbnail... FAILED!
Running test BUG 1887: A <math> with a thumbnail... FAILED!
Running test BUG 561: {{/Subpage}}... FAILED!
Running test Simple category... FAILED!
Running test Section headings with TOC... FAILED!
Running test Media link with nasty text... FAILED!
Running test Bug 2095: link with pipe and three closing brackets... FAILED!
Running test Sanitizer: Validating the contents of the id attribute (bug 4515)... FAILED!

Passed 264 of 281 tests (93.95%) FAILED!


subject: [Foundation-l] Wikipedia merchandise

body:
The prices are a bit high, but plot prints look reeeeeally good.
Maybe we could transfer the designs to Cafepress, but keep them on
spreadshirt as well, with a notice next to the cafepress entries that
higher quality versions are available.  (I'll head over to that meta
link and stop clogging up the mailing list now.)

On 2/17/06, Daniel Mayer <maveric149 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> --- Ben Yates <bluephonic at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi -- I've made a new store for wikipedia, and come up with a few new
> > shirt designs.  I posted this on WikiEN-L  and was told to bring it
> > here, so I'll copy that message:
>
> Great designs! I like the swoosh-like W. However, the base prices are a bit eye-popping; I thought
> the base prices of CafePress were high.
>
> > The store is at https://www.spreadshirt.com/shop.php?sid=21410 -- let
> > me know what you think (though for god's sake don't buy anything from
> > it yet; nobody but the hosting/shirtmaking company will get any
> > money).
> >
> > I didn't use any of the current logos, mostly because I couldn't see
> > myself wearing them; instead, threw together a new vector design (in
> > any case, wikipedia's logo is too detailed to be plot printed).  I was
> > wondering where to go from here -- who to contact, whether the new
> > store should be Official or if I should run it on my own, and give
> > wikimedia some or all of the profits (and how to go about that).
>
> I'd rather simply create a new section of the CafePress store that had your and similar designs.
> We will need to work out the copyright and trademark issues though. Right now we have a policy
> that all CafePress designs need to have their copyright owned by the foundation. And, of course,
> the Foundation already has a trademark on the term 'Wikipedia.'
>
> > I do also have some ideas for bumper stickers and such (spreadshirt
> > only does shirts); I was told Maveric runs the english-language
> > wikipedia cafepress store, but wasn't able to find a user of that
> > name.
>
> Maveric149 - What, you never heard of me? I need to edit more often. :) Please add more ideas
> here:
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fundraising_ideas/Cafe_Press
>
> -- mav
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

--
Ben Yates
Wikipedia blog - http://wikip.blogspot.com


subject: [Foundation-l] Wikipedia merchandise


body:
On 2/15/06, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
> This fellow was banned as User:Amorrow for vicious personal attacks
> and threats against other users, and again as User:Pinktulip. His
> personal attacks have escalated to stalking and threats sent to other
> editors' employers. Fairly obviously, he's *remarkably* unwelcome on
> anything to do with Wikipedia.
>
> I'm trying to build up a pattern for a strong complaint, and I'm also
> rolling back every edit from him I see (making the edit again by hand
> if it's a good one). If you see any edits fitting the pattern, please
> email me or leave a note on my talk page.
>

David, is there some kind of "Wanted" poster for this guy? What is his
modus operandi on the wiki, what are his core interests and so on?


body:
David Gerard wrote:
> Snowspinner wrote:
> On Feb 16, 2006, at 6:22 AM, David Gerard wrote:
>
>
>>>Although mailing list threads go all over the place, note of a serious
>>>problem vandal is probably not the place to go randomly riffing on
>>>spurious concerns that would completely invalidate how Wikipedia
>>>actually functions; you could at least change the subject line.
>
>
>>So could you.
>
>
>
> *cough* This is what I get for making a pissy email post. My apologies
> to Karl and the list.
>
> (I am NOT hairy chested. How dare you.)
>
> [and no, I don't have references: headers again. I'll have to see what
> I can do other than turn the firehose of this list upon my gmail
> account.]
>

Get a /real/ email client like Thunderbird.

--
Alphax - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax
Contributor to Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
"We make the internet not suck" - Jimbo Wales
Public key: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax/OpenPGP
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 550 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20060217/2d5165e2/attachment.pgp


body:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Guy Chapman wrote:
> A real email client that sends the content as an attachment, you mean?
>

My email was fully compliant to RFCs 2440 and 3156. I can't help it if
you can't handle MIME messages.

- --
Alphax - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax
Contributor to Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
"We make the internet not suck" - Jimbo Wales
Public key: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax/OpenPGP
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3rc1: (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQEVAwUBQ/SMYxij9/u0qE3WAQh3zwf/bZ8Sd558xh8RBQgt3vC1hnnFtnLLCMMh
VREFSE5cWnDcfefoiwnUwsluYWNSMrASJ4JmW6lj6cl5XQIzzoJrG6SqUUJnUK2/
5aNAee6NF643G2L0pqMpPEn9tvxh4XUwS0Nl1wFZq7jcebOzbM09Dj7T5Q5RSbwq
P2AoBiVXB3Du3dblizJvQV8JXYDNWSiPmRkiIFNQ/KjTeanhw8HdaEPJEQ1utYQ8
uQrsFHofniN9dbzee173Xan0KgMZWC8s7vswoncm7m1vutGwW6kYAXRV/w7RyQuq
fN+v9VrScykXHUti1HnbrIjn9l2UAwDDSGdfaecJIOeTqBT/cNG9eQ==
=s/el
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


body:
Steve Bennett wrote:
> Is there an article on the history of flamewars about email format
> yet? If not, why not? It probably dates back to the day after email
> was invented.
>
>

You should see what's in my other sig:

   /"\
   \ /     ASCII Ribbon Campaign
    X   Against HTML email & vCards
   / \

--
Alphax - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax
Contributor to Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
"We make the internet not suck" - Jimbo Wales
Public key: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax/OpenPGP
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 550 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20060217/0b4446d1/attachment.pgp


from_name: Angela

subject: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedia merchandise

body:
> Another practical point. In case there is use of logo, there are visual
> guidelines to follow.

They're at http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Wikimedia_visual_identity_guidelines

Angela.


from_name: geni

subject: [WikiEN-l] Advice needed

body:
On 2/16/06, Steve Bennett <stevage at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hmm. We're agreed to not publishing certain salacious details of
> famous people on [[WP:LIVING]]. Perhaps we should avoid publishing
> anything personal about "famous despite themselves" people - so the
> Peppers article could be simply about the internet phenomenon, with
> almost nothing (if anything) on the poor chap himself. Unless of
> course he actually does anything notable, like sue someone.
>
> Steve

We don't really know anything about brain peppers himself beyond what
is in the database.

--
geni


body:
On 2/17/06, Katefan0 <katefan0wiki at gmail.com> wrote:
> Terri Schiavo and related articles, and pestering certain users who he's
> been stalking, basically.
>

Originaly Linda Lovelace as well

Rather obsesive can come in from multiple IPs (although I suspect he
is still from earthlink). Has a very noticble writeing style that
tends to deal heavily in conflict methaphores and simli. A classic
example can be found here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Linda_Lovelace#Lovelace_as_warfare

As far as I can tell he is more likely to stalk those he views as
female. In fact his whole attidude to those he thinks are female is
rather worrying.
--
geni


from_name: Jack Stephens

subject: [WikiEN-l] An emotive plea for unblocking

body:
Users of Wikipedia,
I write in earnest emotional trauma. I am a self-diagnosed wikiaddict, both
in editing and reading, I have been a prolific wikipedia user and editor for
quite a while now, I am not sure exactly how long, but I feel suitably
attached to wikipedia to feel sincerely aggrieved, due to my recent
blocking. My username is Jdcooper, and my IP address 128.243.220.42. When
attempting to revert some vandalism today I was informed that User:Golbez
has blocked me with the highly descriptive reasoning: "vandal". As someone
who has never so much as THOUGHT of vandalising an article in my life, and
as someone who gets highly troubled by wikivandalism, I was, I feel
legitimately, sent into a devastating panic by such allegations. My only
explanation is that, as I am editing from a university network (University
of Nottingham, Great Britain, if anyone cares) with over 5,000 users,
vandalism from one of said users may have been disproportionately punished.
Whatever the case, I can assure everyone, particularly Golbez, that I am the
furthest from a vandal you could ever hope to meet. I am a
non-confrontational user who generally busies himself with correcting
spelling mistakes, reverting vandalism, merging duplicates and sorting
stubs. I have e-mailed Golbez about the misunderstanding (as I am sure this
is) but I am unfamiliar with this kind of process (that of unblocking), as,
not being a vandal, this has never happened to me before. I urge someone who
can help me to do so, as I am anxious to get back to editing, my life is all
but meaningless without it.
Yours hopefully,
Jdcooper


subject: [WikiEN-l] Unused userboxes

body:
On 2/16/06, Jimmy Wales <jwales at wikia.com> wrote:
> Having said that, I heard today that the number of userboxes, and in
> particular the number of very problematic userboxes, has exploded.  I
> think this is seriously Not Good For Our Loving Little Community.
>

"Our Loving Little Community" has been a thing of the past probably at
least as long as I've been an admin. We have 800 admins. Certainly not
little and to be honest there are many on there I don't know at all.

> I am not doing anything about it just yet, but I am willing to concede
> that my nonviolent social request that people knock it off and think
> about what it means to be a Wikipedian has not gotten very far.

When and where did you make that request?

>
> As far as I can determine, and I am very much aware that I am here
> prejudicing the terms of debate, this is a cultural battle between
> wikipedians and people who have stumbled into this cool site they heard
> about on CNN where you can write whatever the hell you want and argue
> with people for fun.

Nothing is that simple. People who belive " you can write whatever the
hell you want and argue with people for fun" have always existed. Some
learn some give up and some have to be removed. They have always
existed they always will exist. Not really a problem. At least not a
new one.

Trying to profile the sides is pointless since the pure userbax
contiversy cuts across pretty much all the traditional conflict lines.

There is a conflict going on between the older generation and newer
generation on wikipedia but that always happens. The latest generation
is influenced by a different eniviroment to the older ones. They
respond by behaveing slightly differently to the older generations.
This always happens this always will happens. There is some friction
sure but you just have to live with that for the most part it will
sort itself out.

You notice the conflict this time because more than in the past it
effects your role within wikipedia. Simply put when it comes to day to
day running you don't have one any more. The current generation
doesn't know you. They have no reason to. Thus there is not going to
be as much automatic deference.

--
geni