from_name: Yann Forget

body:
Hi,

Le Thursday 23 September 2004 19:54, Brion Vibber a ?crit :
> On Sep 23, 2004, at 1:42 AM, Yann Forget wrote:
> > Le Thursday 23 September 2004 03:26, Brion Vibber a ?crit :
> >> Certainly we could give them a stripped dump in that timeframe, but I
> >> think they'd be wasting a lot of money pressing it to disc in that
> >> state. I can't support this as described.
> >
> > Is Wikipedia that bad? ;o)
> > No I don't think so. There are obviously many stubs, incomplete
> > articles and
> > so on, but still I think that it is a valuable pice of work.
> > Or so I was told. ;o)
>
> Wikipedia is a very valuable resource, but it's a *dynamic* one. If
> you're going to throw away the advantages of our process, you'd better
> have something else to fall back on.
>
> There's a *lot* of crud in general. There will be mistakes. There will
> be falsehoods. There will be 'FUCKFUCKFUCK' vandalism. And in six
> months when they go to press, the Wikipedia on the web will be much
> improved -- but every mistake in their published copy will be preserved
> indelibly and it's us, not Mandrake, who's going to get the bad press
> over it.

Really I don't think so.
We will need proper notice about what is Wikipedia, how it is built, and we
will have a link on each article with a mention "see the updated version
online". So users will be able to update articles whenever they like it.

You will say, "What the use to have a DVD if I can see the article online."
Well if you have a 56K connection, there is a big difference between updating
a few articles about current events (Irak, US elections, etc.) and getting a
whole encylopedia with a total of 4 GB. Anyway, the biography of Einstein
won't be very different in 6 months time, so it doesn't matter to upgrade it,
but the article about the next US elections will.

People buying the Mandrake Linux distribution will get Wikipedia as a bonus.
So even if you don't have an Internet connection, it's better to have a free
but not perfect 6-month-old encyclopedia than nothing. Seing than commercial
encyclopedias are usually several years late and are far to be cheap, it will
be quite good.

> -- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)

Yann

--
http://www.non-violence.org/ | Site collaboratif sur la non-violence
http://www.forget-me.net/ | Alternatives sur le Net
http://fr.wikipedia.org/ | Encyclop?die libre
http://www.forget-me.net/pro/ | Formations et services Linux


list: wikipedia-l

source: pipermail-mbox

from_name: Anthere

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: wikipedia  in China

body:
Christopher Mahan a ?crit:
>>...Wikipedia is a threat to closed
>>information, particularly that kind of closed information that
>>governments often dislike: information that undercuts assertions
>>that
>>everything is on track.
>
>
> Yes, if every other article is about failure of this and breakdown of
> that, with Falung and Commies and Free Tibet all over the place, I
> would shut it down too.
>
> I want to see articles about increased privatisation, efforts the
> government makes in building health, telecom, and transportation
> infrastructure. I want to see articles about economic growth in
> Shanghai, about schools in remote locations, about the growing
> chinese auto assembly and manufacturing capabilities.
>
> These things are happening in China. Not including them in and of
> itself is admitting western-bias, which, you are right, the Chinese
> authorities don't look kindly upon.

I totally agree with you here.

I do not mean chinese editors should not talk about the controversial
issues, but if they should also take *great care* to talk about the good
points above mentionned.

They could make it proeminent that wikipedia is not only talking about
failure but also about *success* and perhaps their governement will see
it not only as a dangerous tool, but also as a tool to show to
non-chinese all the success the chinese can be very proud of.

There is no need to censor failure then, but perhaps only to try to make
success a bit more proeminent, to gain some support.

ant


from_name: Paweł 'Ausir' Dembowski

subject: [Wikipedia-l] wikipedia  in China

body:
CM> You have to realize that there are reasons the chinese government
CM> suppresses news. Just as there are in every country.

Don't forget that Chinese Wikipedia not used only in PRC, though.

--
Ausir
mailto:fallout at lexx.eu.org
http://fallout.scifi.pl
ICQ 41090834 GG 2730728


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: wikipedia  in China

body:
I agree with this again.

I also think, in the long run, it is worth to drop a couple of topics,
or at least to try not to focus to strongly on them, rather than having
the whole project blocked.

Is that censorship ?

Well... self-censorship, perhaps.

But
* the day clitoris pictures are put on the english wikipedia without
causing an uproar (because clitoris are shoking and might get wikipedia
censored in schools)
* the day we can put ethnic statistics on the french wikipedia without
causing an uproar (because "races" do not exist and publishing stats
might get wikipedia shut down for publishing illegal information)

we can talk again about self-censorship :-)

Note that I am not saying they should not be npov within articles.

ant

Christopher Mahan a ?crit:
> --- Fred Bauder <fredbaud at ctelco.net> wrote:
>
>
>>Stan is being sarcastic, but how would that article be handled?
>
>
> Like I said, no article.
>
> We're building an encyclopedia, not an activist website.
>
> You have to realize that there are reasons the chinese government
> suppresses news. Just as there are in every country.
>
> In the US, for example, the press is not supposed to show grossly
> mutilated bodies. Also, they are not allowed to release the names of
> underage rape victims. Why is that? Because it endangers and upsets
> people.
>
> Just because we're npov does not mean that we can't work within the
> legal frameworks of various countries.
>
> I would say that if there was an article which talked about computing
> in china, and the article was well-written, balanced, showing on the
> one hand how computer enthusiasts have "pushed the envelope" and how
> the government "reins them in", I might see a blurb about the subject
> at hand.
>
> Let's not forget that the US has draconian laws regarding online
> behavior and that many people around the world can't understand why
> we put up with them. It's our way, it's not perfect, but it works ok.
> Likewise the chinese way.
>
>
>
> =====
> Chris Mahan
> 818.943.1850 cell
> chris_mahan at yahoo.com
> chris.mahan at gmail.com
> http://www.christophermahan.com/
>
>
>
> _______________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today!
> http://vote.yahoo.com


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: wikipedia  in China

body:
Stan Shebs a ?crit:
> Christopher Mahan wrote:
>
>> --- Stan Shebs <shebs at apple.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> And ditto for the Tiananmen square articles, since only a couple
>>> thousand
>>> people died, after all - hardly any at all, percentagewise!
>>>
>>
>> No, not ditto for the Tiananmen stuff. Yes it's horrible, but did you
>> know that a 1850 rebellion cause 50 million deaths in China? Where's
>> that article?
>> Look at the whole filtering of internet content in america's school
>> and libraries. It's been raging now for a while, with no end in
>> sight. But nobody gets killed. Let's keep things in perspective.
>>
> Now I have no idea what you're trying to argue. In a wiki you're
> not going to get very far trying to order people to write on
> subject A before they write on subject B, and if your purpose is
> to appease governments, for many editors that's all the excuse
> they need to write in even more depth on the subjects you're
> wanting to avoid.
>
> If persons in the PRC want to risk real-world punishment by
> reading or writing disapproved material, that's a judgement they
> have to make for themselves; there's nobody on the outside
> qualified to make that choice for them.
>
> Stan

He did not say that.
This can only be a self-decision of course.


from_name: Henry H. Tan-Tenn

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: wikipedia  in China

body:
Anthere wrote:
> I agree with this again.
>
> I also think, in the long run, it is worth to drop a couple of topics,
> or at least to try not to focus to strongly on them, rather than having
> the whole project blocked.
>
> Is that censorship ?
>
> Well... self-censorship, perhaps.

Hmm...not sure where this will lead.  Presumably user pages will also be
censored, as are certain politically sensitive user names.  And of
course, as part of the registration process, users should also digitally
pledge that they are not members of certain organizations.

> But
> * the day clitoris pictures are put on the english wikipedia without
> causing an uproar (because clitoris are shoking and might get wikipedia
> censored in schools)
> * the day we can put ethnic statistics on the french wikipedia without
> causing an uproar (because "races" do not exist and publishing stats
> might get wikipedia shut down for publishing illegal information)
>
> we can talk again about self-censorship :-)

There is a difference, though, between editors and readers "causing an
uproar" (which is arguably a mark of a healthy wiki) and a state
"causing an uproar".  As Wikipedia is a wiki, it'd be nice if state
agents actually show up and cause such an uproar (even the vandalism
kind), but that does not seem to be the case here.


from_name: Jens Ropers

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Partnership with Mandrakesoft

body:
On 23 Sep 2004, at 19:54, Brion Vibber wrote:

> Wikipedia is a very valuable resource, but it's a *dynamic* one. If
> you're going to throw away the advantages of our process, you'd better
> have something else to fall back on.
>
> There's a *lot* of crud in general. There will be mistakes. There will
> be falsehoods. There will be 'FUCKFUCKFUCK' vandalism. And in six
> months when they go to press, the Wikipedia on the web will be much
> improved -- but every mistake in their published copy will be
> preserved indelibly and it's us, not Mandrake, who's going to get the
> bad press over it.
>
> -- brion

<AOL> I strongly second that. </AOL>

-- ropers
[[en:User:Ropers]]


list: wikitech-l

from_name: Rowan Collins

subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: Test my lex/yacc parser!

references:
<cigum2$i19$1@sea.gmane.org>
	<9f02ca4c04091910144fb9fc68@mail.gmail.com>
	<cil3do$mpb$1@sea.gmane.org>
	<9f02ca4c04092005563f022703@mail.gmail.com>
	<cimtnk$o3c$1@sea.gmane.org>
	<9f02ca4c04092310162250f65a@mail.gmail.com>
	<civ3io$4ph$1@sea.gmane.org>

body:
On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 20:09:21 +0100, Timwi <timwi at gmx.net> wrote:
> > Still, doesn't this mean the parser needs to recognise
> > "#REDIRECT <linkpattern>" as a special token? And doesn't that, in
> > turn, present a problem if we want to retain MagicWord i18n?
>
> Not really. We can still recognise redirects with a regexp (or anything
> else in PHP) before passing the page to the parser.

But why make that a special case? Why say "before using the nice
eficient real parser, use a not-a-parser to check for the #REDIRECT
directive, and have it do some voodoo" Far better to just have the
parser recognise "#REDIRECT" (and any variants anyone wants) and
output a parse tree with a special redirect node.

> First of all, even in the current system there is no way for server
> admins to customise the magic words without modifying actual source
> code.

Well, technically, no, but Language*.php and LocalSettings.php are
more like configuration files that happen to be executable for
convenience. Editing the declaration of $wgMagicWordsEn in
Language.php is no more difficult or involved than, say, editing a
.ini file.

> Secondly, you're making it sound like recompiling the parser was
> some sort of monumental task.

Actually, I have to admit I had no idea how difficult it would be, but
I assumed it would mean having at least a compiler, if not a
compiler-compiler and a whole load of other tools. Editing PHP doesn't
need that kind of thing, and the way its designed now, you needn't
notice your editing code.

> Here's an idea. One could provide a .c or .h file where #define
> statements are used to define the magic words, and then make sure that
> if you modify it, you only need to recompile the binary (i.e. invoke
> gcc) but you don't need flex, bison, or swig. But even if you were to
> require flex, bison and swig, even then the recompilation can be
> automated by a simple script.

If it were possible to only require a c compiler, it would certainly
be a favour to other admins running MediaWiki. It's going to be
annoying enough for some of them to have to deal with a binary part as
well as PHP.

> > So maybe you're right, and the only workable solution is to have all
> > variants hard-coded in the parser. I guess this is where we come to
> > regret adopting an "extension" syntax that matches/conflicts with the
> > syntax used by "allowed bits of HTML".
>
> True. If we had something like [!math x^2 + y^2 = z^2 !], then we could
> say "everything in [! ... !] is an extension". Would make life much easier.

It's oh so tempting to say "let's change it" but a) I'd be mobbed by
everyone who voted for the current syntax (which includes myself) and
b) we'd have to go through changing exisitng uses of <math>, or make
it a special case, or something.

> I think, considering all of these problems we have discussed, it makes a
> real lot of sense to formulate a "rule" that the design of the parser
> should fulfill: The parser must know in advance how to parse everything.
> The resulting parse tree must not depend on anything other than the
> input wiki text.

Yep, I think you're probably right on that one. And as you say, the
more things that can e done inside the parser, the better, since
outside means PHP, and is likely to be less efficient.

--
Rowan Collins BSc
[IMSoP]


list: foundation-l

subject: [Foundation-l] Partnership with Mandrakesoft

body:
Le Thursday 23 September 2004 20:13, Jean-Christophe Chazalette a ?crit :
> Are we talking about a formal written contract or about an oral agreement ?
> Needless to say I strongly encourage a formal distribution deal, the
> transfer of responsibilty having quite a big potential of financial
> troubles (suing Wikimedia Foundation is not an opportunity because it is a
> Foundation and it has no significant financial background, this is not at
> all the same for MandrakeSoft ...). If needed, I'm willing to assess such a
> written contract.
>
> villy

Thanks, Villy.
I will need your help for drafting a notice.

Yann

--
http://www.non-violence.org/ | Site collaboratif sur la non-violence
http://www.forget-me.net/ | Alternatives sur le Net
http://fr.wikipedia.org/ | Encyclop?die libre
http://www.forget-me.net/pro/ | Formations et services Linux


list: wikimedia-l


from_name: Delirium

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: wikipedia  in China

body:
Anthere wrote:

> Now... I ask the question. Why would it be shocking to provide a
> """short""" article on this board issue (the closing of the board in
> China) and invite the reader to have further information by following
> external links ?

I'm not sure how to easily do this --- we'd still have to have it on
Wikipedia if we want to make the information available ourselves, and to
have it available in Chinese (having an article in English does no good
for people who don't speak English).  With the [[en:clitoris]] article,
there wasn't any talk of moving it to an external server or anything of
that sort---it was still right there on wikipedia.org for anyone to view.

-Mark


from_name: Tim Starling

subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: security warning!!!

body:
yuanml wrote:
> as [[User:formulax]] mentioned in
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/2004-September/017409.html
>
> The guy called [[User:Yaohua2000]] today upload a text file, in which
> contains passwords of some users, to threaten us. we deleted the file
> immediately. but the situation seems very dangerous for us now, one
> can steal the password of our users.
>
> The flood vandalism in Zh: serveral months ago was took by
> [[User:Yaohua2000]]. This guy seems to be very clever but very evil
> also.

There was really never any need to send out password hashes in cookies.
I made a quick patch to send out randomly generated tokens instead,
which have no relationship to the password.

Domas Mituzas wrote:
> That user discovered the bug and reported it in #mediawiki. The best
> solution would be serve downloads from a separate domain, so project
> cookies would not affect.

There are stacks of methods which allow attackers to obtain cookies, we
discover them and fix them all the time. It's best if we minimise the
consequences.

-- Tim Starling


from_name: Erik Moeller

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: wikipedia  in China

body:
Anthere-
> I totally agree with you here.

> I do not mean chinese editors should not talk about the controversial
> issues, but if they should also take *great care* to talk about the good
> points above mentionned.

I have to disagree here, but I also have to say that I consider the
Chinese government nothing but fascism with a red touch. Frankly, I don't
see Wikipedia working in such an environment, unless we can provide true
anonymity for authors and make the site censorship-resistant, i.e. it
would have to be hosted on something like Freenet. I believe Wikimedia
should definitely pursue such a strategy, but see little hope of
convincing the rest of you guys of this.

I can see your point about hypocrisy, but I have been a consistent
advocate against any type of self-censorship on any Wikipedia. "With the
first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censored, the first
thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."

Call me unrealistic, but I'd prefer it if the Chinese Wikipedia upheld its
freedom of expression, even if that means that it won't be available to
most of the Chinese citizens. Education is meaningless when it is
immediately instrumentalized and molded according to the demands of a
repressive government. It will be unavailable or turned into propaganda in
all the areas where it matters most.

If we take a stand for freedom here, then perhaps this will drive more
people to realize the true importance of freedom of speech on the
Internet. Let's not give in to those who would have people not think for
themselves, whether they're religious fundamentalists in the United States
or so-called communists in China. And somehow I have the feeling that our
work will outlive both.

Our subtitle, "The Free Encyclopedia", should never invite sarcasm and
cynicism. It should be taken literally.

Regards,

Erik


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: wikipedia  in China

body:
On 24 Sep 2004, at 03:01, Christopher Mahan wrote:

> I also think that having chinese and non-western editors on w is a
> great advantage to us, because it demonstrates our commitment to
> NPOV.
>
> I also agree that the W will outlive just about all current
> governments, and may even be instrumental in their changing for the
> better.

Please don't abbreviate the Wikipedia as "W".
Please use "WP" instead.
As of late, I tend to get to feel very, very sick whenever I read "W".

Thank you for your consideration.

-- ropers [[en:User:Ropers]]
     www.ropersonline.com


subject: [Wikipedia-l] wikipedia  in China

body:
Christopher-
> In the US, for example, the press is not supposed to show grossly
> mutilated bodies. Also, they are not allowed to release the names of
> underage rape victims. Why is that? Because it endangers and upsets
> people.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Ghraib_prisoner_abuse

Does this information endanger and upset people? Yes, it endangers the
soldiers who committed abuse and their superiors who tolerated or ordered
it, and it upsets those who strongly believe that US troops don't commit
such acts of brutality.

Should it be removed? Of course not. It is education where it matters. It
is education that can prevent suffering. Similar information, where it
applies, should be published about the Chinese government, the Chinese
troops, on the Chinese Wikipedia.

You may call that "activism", and you do have a point. If you know
anything about the history of encyclopedias, you know that they were born
out of enlightenment ideals (and not very NPOV!). People like Diderot
deliberately tried to "upset" the status quo in many ways.

We are not like the original encyclopedias in that we don't deliberately
promote specific agendas (at least we try not to). But certainly it would
make us a parody of an encyclopedia if we went out of our way to prevent
information from being distributed that could lead to social change -- it
would be the exact opposite of what the original encyclopedists wanted.

Regards,

Erik


body:
Angela-
> Mandrakesoft are aware of our editing processes. They know what they
> are getting, and that the content has not been verified. They have
> agreed to take legal responsibility for this.

Well, we obviously can't stop them from doing it. As long as we've
publicly and privately disclaimed liability, I think we're reasonably safe
from a legal position. But please do not underestimate the legal mess they
could get into. It's not just image tagging. It's quite likely that there
are at least a few hundred undetected copyvios on en: and fr:, from books,
unindexed websites, closed electronic archives, newspaper articles,
magazines, journals, and so forth, and probably even quite a few Google-
indexed pages or articles which contain small fragments thereof.

This is not because people are malicious but because many people simply
have no concept of copyright. It is a stupid idea to begin with, so it
takes quite a while for people to grasp the notion that certain sequences
of words can be owned. Even with people understanding the concept of IP in
one context (music, movies) they often have difficulties translating it
into other contexts (texts, images, recipes ..)

Therefore, this:
> It's great advertising for us, it's
> great as an early trial of distributing our content offline, and it's
> great for raising awareness of the need to tag images properly.

seems a little too enthusiastic. "Raising awareness" is not always a good
thing if it leads to lawsuits and headlines like "Wiki-fiddlers steal from
many sources". Also, we are *aware* of the need to tag images properly.
May I suggest that the board promote these two things to get the process
into motion:
1) make open list of untagged images and announce properly on community
portal and the like that all of these images which are not tagged by date
N will be hidden
2) fix stupid upload form
(They should happen at the same time.)

Regards,

Erik


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: wikipedia  in China

body:
Erik, I actually agree with a a lot of things you said.

HOWEVER, as regards this comment:

On 24 Sep 2004, at 02:35, Erik Moeller wrote:
> I have to disagree here, but I also have to say that I consider the
> Chinese government nothing but fascism with a red touch.

Well... let me get this straight:
You're accusing the Chinese government (did you mean "system of
government"?) of being "nothing but fascism with a red touch."
So you're not just saying there are a couple of very foul apples in the
basket -- you're saying there are ''NOTHING BUT'' foul apples (and a
dab of red) in there.

You're posting on a mailing list which is frequented by Chinese
nationals.
You've just told them that EVERYTHING their government has achieved was
foul, rotten and worthless.

Isn't that somewhat stark?

Also--correct me if I'm mistaken--you're German.
Assuming that you're a socially responsible person you are undoubtedly
aware of the "special place" Germany holds in the history of fascism.
You're hopefully also aware that Germany's express allies in the
Fascist Axis, the Japanese, had a certain role in something known as
the (AFAIK still not apologized-for) [[Nanjing Massacre]].
You also must be aware that a historical continuity exists between
those Chinese who fought AGAINST a WWII aggressor, Fascist Axis power
(i.e. Japan) and those who are now part of the Chinese government at
all levels.

Yet you're telling our Chinese contributors--who are of the very people
who have paid such a high price--you're telling them to their face that
THEIR government, not the Japanese/German Fascist Axis, but rather
THEIR government was  "nothing but fascism".

Excuse me, but I for one find that stark. I'm not Chinese, but if I was
Chinese I would go livid right now and demand a public apology.

-- ropers [[en:User:Ropers]]


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: wikipedia  in China

body:
Christopher-
> I think she means that if we are respectful of other
> people' sensitivities, then a greater good will come out in the end.

The censorship of content about the Chinese government's actions is not in
the interest of the many, it is in the interest of the ruling elite. Whose
"sensitivities" are really at stake here?

I was as concerned about proceeding with caution when they initially
censored us as everyone else. When a really big bully pushes you, you may
try to reason with him first. Perhaps you can bribe him, or you can hope
that he will pick on the other kids and leave you alone.

But that's what all the other kids do, and that's why the bully has his
power in the first place. And if you grant him that power, then he will
use it and still abuse you. If at that point you are worried about the
bully's "sensitivities", you are already a slave at heart.

Sometimes you have to push back.

Even if it hurts. And compared to what happened in 1989, the temporary
loss of botanic knowledge is hardly a tragedy.

The way to defeat the bullies of the world is to expose them for what they
are, and to realize that we are the many and they are the few. Then we can
fight them.

Let them censor us instead of being their fig leaf. What a great way for
them to prove the point that they're not interested even in neutral
content, only in propaganda. Then let's use our collective intelligence to
dig a way through the Great Firewall.


from_name: Ray Saintonge

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: wikipedia  in China

body:
Stirling Newberry wrote:

> Our POV's on the Chinese government aren't the issue here, it is the
> government of the PRC's POV on Wikipedia.

You have it backwards.  The PRC government has not come on line to
express its official POV.

Ec


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: wikipedia  in China

body:
Jens-
> Yet you're telling our Chinese contributors--who are of the very people
> who have paid such a high price--you're telling them to their face that
> THEIR government, not the Japanese/German Fascist Axis, but rather
> THEIR government was  "nothing but fascism".
                   ^is                      ^with a red touch

History has this ugly tendency of repeating itself, only the roles and
costumes change. If you expect political correctness from me, boy have you
got the wrong guy.

Erik


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: wikipedia  in China

body:
Erik Moeller wrote:

>When a really big bully pushes you, you may
>try to reason with him first. Perhaps you can bribe him, or you can hope
>that he will pick on the other kids and leave you alone.
>
>But that's what all the other kids do, and that's why the bully has his
>power in the first place. And if you grant him that power, then he will
>use it and still abuse you. If at that point you are worried about the
>bully's "sensitivities", you are already a slave at heart.
>
>Sometimes you have to push back.
>
In other words you need a bigger and better gang to out-bully the
bullies. :-)

Ec


from_name: Andrew Lih

subject: [Wikipedia-l] wikipedia in China

body:
We should wait a few days to find out how widespread the "block" is
first before coming up with an official response. This was discussed
in the #wikimedia IRC channel as well.

In the long run, hopefully the Internet authorities will realize that
having Wikipedia accessible in the PRC is generally a good thing. This
is basically why Google was unblocked two years ago. So instead of a
complete ban, general URL-based "blocking" by their filters would be
good enough to cut out what they find problematic. PRC Internet
blocking takes place in different tiers - DNS blocking entire site
names, URL-based blocking based on keywords, E-mail screening for
keywords, etc.

As I mentioned to Jimbo in June's London meetup, the Internet
authorities work in a way that resemble how administrators work in
Wikipedia - it is a distributed team of folks making decisions, and
one department may disagree with another and have a block lifted.

I'm not sure WP admins like being compared to the PRC authorities, however. :)

-Andrew (User:Fuzheado)

On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 12:05:05 -0600, Fred Bauder <fredbaud at ctelco.net> wrote:
> Maybe, but there may be an article, [[censorship]]. What goes in that?
>
> Fred
>
> > From: Christopher Mahan <chris_mahan at yahoo.com>
> > Reply-To: wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2004 10:46:55 -0700 (PDT)
> > To: wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] wikipedia  in China
>
>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --- Fred Bauder <fredbaud at ctelco.net> wrote:
> >
> >> All the things you suggest are good and no problem for the
> >> government. I
> >> have absolutely no problem with writing about all those good
> >> things. But the
> >> focus of the government is going to be on things like that BBS that
> >> got shut
> >> down. Should there be no article? A syncopathic article explaining
> >> why it
> >> was necessary to shut it down from the government viewpoint? Or an
> >> article
> >> from a Neutral point of view?
> >
> > No article at all.
> > It is truly insignificant, if you think about it.
> > When there are 350,000 articles in Chinese about Chinese history,
> > politics, culture and religions, then, a small blurb about efforts by
> > the central govt to curb radicalism that impacted a small number of
> > computer users (anything less than 10 million is small in china.)
> > would be called for.
> >
> > Let's not focus on the twisted twig while standing in a large forest.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > =====
> > Chris Mahan
> > 818.943.1850 cell
> > chris_mahan at yahoo.com
> > chris.mahan at gmail.com
> > http://www.christophermahan.com/
> >
> >
> >
> > __________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
> > http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>

--
Andrew Lih
andrew.lih at gmail.com


subject: [Wikipedia-l] wikipedia  in China

body:
Erik Moeller wrote:

>Christopher-
>
>
>>In the US, for example, the press is not supposed to show grossly
>>mutilated bodies. Also, they are not allowed to release the names of
>>underage rape victims. Why is that? Because it endangers and upsets
>>people.
>>
Withholding the names of underage rape victims is based on protecting
the rights of the victims.

>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Ghraib_prisoner_abuse
>
>Does this information endanger and upset people? Yes, it endangers the
>soldiers who committed abuse and their superiors who tolerated or ordered
>it, and it upsets those who strongly believe that US troops don't commit
>such acts of brutality.
>
How does it endanger them any more than they endangered themselves.
Those who don't believe that this sort of thing is happening need upsetting.

>Should it be removed? Of course not. It is education where it matters. It
>is education that can prevent suffering. Similar information, where it
>applies, should be published about the Chinese government, the Chinese
>troops, on the Chinese Wikipedia.
>
AFAIK the Chinese army is not engaging in adventures on the other side
of the globe.

>You may call that "activism", and you do have a point. If you know
>anything about the history of encyclopedias, you know that they were born
>out of enlightenment ideals (and not very NPOV!). People like Diderot
>deliberately tried to "upset" the status quo in many ways.
>
>We are not like the original encyclopedias in that we don't deliberately
>promote specific agendas (at least we try not to). But certainly it would
>make us a parody of an encyclopedia if we went out of our way to prevent
>information from being distributed that could lead to social change -- it
>would be the exact opposite of what the original encyclopedists wanted.
>
>
The original encyclopedists can oly be judged in the light of their own
times.  NPOV is radical specific agenda, and it does upset the status
quo.  That's just fine. Microsoft's and Disney's status quo of
maintaining proprietary rights on anything that isn't nailed down are
just a small part of the status que that we are confronting.

Ec


from_name: Fred Bauder

subject: [Foundation-l] BBC Go Digital

body:
I guess this is a dead end. I assumed they probably had people in Beijing,
as the New York Times does and that they had a reasonable working
relationship with the government.

Fred

> From: Jiong Sheng <sheng.jiong at gmail.com>
> Reply-To: Jiong Sheng <sheng.jiong at gmail.com>, Wikimedia Foundation Mailing
> List <foundation-l at wikimedia.org>
> Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 06:19:30 +0000
> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List <foundation-l at wikimedia.org>
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] BBC Go Digital
>
> This might not be a good idea. BBC is not deemed as "friendly" by the
> Chinese government: its Chinese website is already blocked for years
> (maybe since its existence). This could only get things worse.
>
> On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 11:01:59 -0600, Fred Bauder <fredbaud at ctelco.net> wrote:
>> You know it might be nice if someone from the Chinese Wikipedia could be
>> interviewed in light of recent difficulties. Provided they know what they
>> are getting into.
>>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


subject: [Foundation-l] BBC Go Digital


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: wikipedia  in China

body:
I think that rather than go that way, into a little bit of censorship, we
ought to go the other way and make sure they know that we welcome their side
of the story, provided it is properly attributed. For example I recently put
into external links all of their white papers on Tibet. That may not be
enough but is at least the start of a win win approach.

Fred

> From: Anthere <anthere9 at yahoo.com>
> Reply-To: wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 07:46:51 +0200
> To: wikipedia-l at wikipedia.org
> Subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: wikipedia  in China
>
> Now... I ask the question. Why would it be shocking to provide a
> """short""" article on this board issue (the closing of the board in
> China) and invite the reader to have further information by following
> external links ?
>
> Especially if these links lead to the english wikipedia for example ?
>
> There is no difference with a LINKED clitoris, since people can still
> access the information.
>
> Just as it is helping some american deal with a clitoris picture without
> fully censoring the information, it might help the chinese government
> without fully censoring the information. It might just help recognise
> local sensibilities.
>
> How different is that ?


from_name: Jiong Sheng

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: wikipedia in China

body:
> Now... I ask the question. Why would it be shocking to provide a
> """short""" article on this board issue (the closing of the board in
> China) and invite the reader to have further information by following
> external links ?

The problem is no one in a wiki can stop anyone else from editing an
article. A "short" article on any subject, especial those closely
related to the people, would soon be expanded by contributors. And I
don't like the idea of self-censorship too: for a Chinese national
living in Singapore for almost five years, I learn from my own
experiences that self-censorship sometimes can be even worse than
government-imposed censorships: people would just be too concerned if
their opinions or descriptions have "crossed the line", and often
result in more conservative writings.

I think I would accept the result where some of the "sensitive"
articles to be filtered off automatically. These articles would remain
in Chinese Wikipedia, but mainland Chinese would not be able to see
these pages (unless through proxy). It would be much better than
banning the whole site, or periodically blocking us on very "special"
dates. However this is not something that we can decide.

Chinese government is fascist? No, but I believe most Chinese would
want to see a more liberal and democratic China as soon as possible,
though not through revolutions or violence as in 1989.

User:formulax


subject: [Foundation-l] BBC Go Digital

body:
This might not be a good idea. BBC is not deemed as "friendly" by the
Chinese government: its Chinese website is already blocked for years
(maybe since its existence). This could only get things worse.

On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 11:01:59 -0600, Fred Bauder <fredbaud at ctelco.net> wrote:
> You know it might be nice if someone from the Chinese Wikipedia could be
> interviewed in light of recent difficulties. Provided they know what they
> are getting into.
>


subject: [Foundation-l] BBC Go Digital


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: wikipedia  in China

body:
Barring some major collapse Wikipedia will soon have a major international
presence on the internet. However we need to be cautious to not let our
mouth outrun our gun. Soon means 5 or 10 years.

Fred

> From: Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net>
> Reply-To: wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 04:47:42 -0700
> To: wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Re: wikipedia  in China
>
> Erik Moeller wrote:
>
>> When a really big bully pushes you, you may
>> try to reason with him first. Perhaps you can bribe him, or you can hope
>> that he will pick on the other kids and leave you alone.
>>
>> But that's what all the other kids do, and that's why the bully has his
>> power in the first place. And if you grant him that power, then he will
>> use it and still abuse you. If at that point you are worried about the
>> bully's "sensitivities", you are already a slave at heart.
>>
>> Sometimes you have to push back.
>>
> In other words you need a bigger and better gang to out-bully the
> bullies. :-)
>
> Ec
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l


from_name: Gerard Meijssen

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: wikipedia  in China

body:
Christopher Mahan wrote:

>--- Jens Ropers <ropers at ropersonline.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>>On 24 Sep 2004, at 03:01, Christopher Mahan wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>I also think that having chinese and non-western editors on w is
>>>
>>>
>>a
>>
>>
>>>great advantage to us, because it demonstrates our commitment to
>>>NPOV.
>>>
>>>I also agree that the W will outlive just about all current
>>>governments, and may even be instrumental in their changing for
>>>
>>>
>>the
>>
>>
>>>better.
>>>
>>>
>>Please don't abbreviate the Wikipedia as "W".
>>Please use "WP" instead.
>>As of late, I tend to get to feel very, very sick whenever I read
>>"W".
>>
>>Thank you for your consideration.
>>
>>
>
>Don't censor me man!!!
>
>If you feel sick when you see the double-u, then I suggest you take a
>few days off and see a specialist. It's a letter of the alphabet, for
>Pete's Sake!
>
>Why WP? It's not Wiki Pedia, it Wikipedia. One word.  Anyway. We've
>strayed in the land of OT, so I'll go home now...
>
>=====
>Chris Mahan
>818.943.1850 cell
>chris_mahan at yahoo.com
>chris.mahan at gmail.com
>http://www.christophermahan.com/
>
>
>
>__________________________________
>Do you Yahoo!?
>Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
>http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
>_______________________________________________
>Wikipedia-l mailing list
>Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>
There are those who do not just "w" but also wiktionary, etc.
Wikipedia-l is the list where many general things are discussed..So it
is sloppy but understood.
Thanks,
    GerardM


subject: [Wikipedia-l] wikipedia  in China

body:
There have been instances where Chinese troops have been undisciplined. All
it proves is that people who have been desperately poor all their lives were
tempted by wristwatches and ballpoint pens.

Fred

> From: Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net>
> Reply-To: wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 05:11:38 -0700
> To: wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] wikipedia  in China
>
> Similar information, where it
>> applies, should be published about the Chinese government, the Chinese
>> troops, on the Chinese Wikipedia.


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: wikipedia  in China

body:
Delirium a ?crit:
> Anthere wrote:
>
>> Is that censorship ?
>>
>> Well... self-censorship, perhaps.
>>
>> But
>> * the day clitoris pictures are put on the english wikipedia without
>> causing an uproar (because clitoris are shoking and might get
>> wikipedia censored in schools)
>> * the day we can put ethnic statistics on the french wikipedia without
>> causing an uproar (because "races" do not exist and publishing stats
>> might get wikipedia shut down for publishing illegal information)
>
>
> You should note that the clitoris pictures currently are, and have been
> for upwards of a year, included in the English Wikipedia.
>
> Also, nobody has seriously suggested removing them: the argument has
> been over whether to have them inline or linked.  There is no measurable
> support for actually suppressing their availability, so I don't see the
> similarity---they will be there in some shape or form regardless of
> which side in the argument prevails.
>
> -Mark

I saw with interest that they were online for the time being, which
doesnot hide the *true fact* they were rather heated discussions on this
topic several times for about 18 months as I remember it.

My memory is not so short :-)

But as you perfectly well say, a lot of the argument was whether they
should be inline OR linked. And it did appear agreeable to a *sizeable*
part of the community that the image should be censored INLINE, but
could appear as external links.

Now... I ask the question. Why would it be shocking to provide a
"""short""" article on this board issue (the closing of the board in
China) and invite the reader to have further information by following
external links ?

Especially if these links lead to the english wikipedia for example ?

There is no difference with a LINKED clitoris, since people can still
access the information.

Just as it is helping some american deal with a clitoris picture without
fully censoring the information, it might help the chinese government
without fully censoring the information. It might just help recognise
local sensibilities.

How different is that ?


from_name: Christopher Mahan

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: wikipedia  in China

body:
--- Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote:

> In other words you need a bigger and better gang to out-bully the
> bullies. :-)

But, as the CIV rulers are fond of saying: "Our words are backed by
NUCLEAR WEAPONS!!!"

On other words, nobody can out-bully the Chinese. Not Russia, not
Europe, not India, not the US. You either play with them, or they
take their toys and go home (and cut access to your domain as they
leave).

=====
Chris Mahan
818.943.1850 cell
chris_mahan at yahoo.com
chris.mahan at gmail.com
http://www.christophermahan.com/

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


from_name: Stirling Newberry

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: wikipedia  in China

references:
<9HS3ZGVxpVB@erik_moeller>	<A80061CA-0DCC-11D9-B139-0003931DCE20@ropersonline.com>
	<E746A52A-0DCE-11D9-A3CE-000A95A26E0A@xigenics.net>
	<415406A3.4090307@telus.net>

body:
On Sep 24, 2004, at 7:36 AM, Ray Saintonge wrote:

> Stirling Newberry wrote:
>
>> Our POV's on the Chinese government aren't the issue here, it is the
>> government of the PRC's POV on Wikipedia.
>
> You have it backwards.  The PRC government has not come on line to
> express its official POV.
> Ec
>

It has done so by blocking the site.


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: wikipedia  in China

body:
--- Jens Ropers <ropers at ropersonline.com> wrote:

> Recognizing the utility of communicating with others on their
> level,
> here is my official response to the above mature, considered,
> weighed
> and scrupulous judgment:

> http://tinyurl.com/3ctz9
> http://tinyurl.com/ys9zf

Jens,

I strongly advise you not to do this again. A lot of the people on
this list (myself included) are in a work environment.

=====
Chris Mahan
818.943.1850 cell
chris_mahan at yahoo.com
chris.mahan at gmail.com
http://www.christophermahan.com/

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


list: wikien-l

subject: [WikiEN-l] Occupation of Palestine - edit war

body:
--- JAY JG <jayjg at hotmail.com> wrote:

Jay, first, sign your posts to the mailing list.
A name is nice, your handle would be OK.

Second. I am watching the page in question. I have asked all parties
involved to take a time-out, which runs until tomorrow, and so far,
so good.

It seems obvious that there are people who want to explore better
ways to explain the topic this and other pages cover. I would suggest
that you try to talk to these people and ask them their opinion as to
how to do things better.

Lastly: please keep your comments short. Thanks.

=====
Chris Mahan
818.943.1850 cell
chris_mahan at yahoo.com
chris.mahan at gmail.com
http://www.christophermahan.com/

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


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: wikipedia  in China

body:
Fred Bauder wrote:

>Barring some major collapse Wikipedia will soon have a major international
>presence on the internet. However we need to be cautious to not let our
>mouth outrun our gun. Soon means 5 or 10 years.
>
>
Certainly, but dealing with the PRC is dealing with bureaucracy more
than dealing with "communism".  Bureaucrats tend not to consider what
others are doing as part of their job description.  They tend to uphold
the law based on their own narrow views of what that law means, and what
they feel will please their superiors..  This results in very
conservative decisions.  They would do Dilbert proud.

The present crisis, like the last one of the kind, will probably be
solved by our colleagues in China, who have experience in approaching
Kafka's Castle.  Those of us on the outside need to be patient, and
avoid compromising the situation that our colleagues find themselves in.

Ec


subject: [Wikipedia-l] wikipedia  in China

body:
Fred Bauder wrote:

>There have been instances where Chinese troops have been undisciplined.
>
That's a product of the military mentality.  The rank-and-file military
is not drawn from the upper socio-economic strata of a society.  Such
examples can be drawn from many countries.  The first things that
recruits are taught is to march in step.  That's a part of insuring that
they will ride like Tennyson's 600 into the Valley of Death.

>All it proves is that people who have been desperately poor all their lives were
>tempted by wristwatches and ballpoint pens.
>
Again, this is not uniquely Chinese, or a specific reflection on the
current government of China.  It's been over 20 years since I visited
India,  but at that time I would encounter Indian government employees
ogling the cheap ballpoint pens that I carried in my shirt pocket.  It
may me feel that if I ever went back to India I should do so with an
ample supply of cheap pens for use in convincing officials about the
right decisions.

Ec


subject: [Wikipedia-l] wikipedia  in China

body:
Pawe? 'Ausir' Dembowski wrote:

>>>Should it be removed? Of course not. It is education where it matters. It
>>>is education that can prevent suffering. Similar information, where it
>>>applies, should be published about the Chinese government, the Chinese
>>>troops, on the Chinese Wikipedia.
>>>
>>>
>RS> AFAIK the Chinese army is not engaging in adventures on the other side
>RS> of the globe.
>
>Ever heard of Tibet?
>
Tibet is not on the other side of the globe.  At least it has a border
with China.  That situation is not comparable to the Iraqi fuck-up.

Ec


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: wikipedia  in China

body:
Anthere-
> But as you perfectly well say, a lot of the argument was whether they
> should be inline OR linked. And it did appear agreeable to a *sizeable*
> part of the community that the image should be censored INLINE, but
> could appear as external links.

> Now... I ask the question. Why would it be shocking to provide a
> """short""" article on this board issue (the closing of the board in
> China) and invite the reader to have further information by following
> external links ?

> Especially if these links lead to the english wikipedia for example ?

> There is no difference with a LINKED clitoris, since people can still
> access the information.

You're absolutely correct, there is no difference. That's why I objected
so strongly to the "let's link offensive materials" argument when it came
up. Any such choice we make is inherently POV. Only if we provide image
and text metadata and let the reader decide what they want to see we are
in the realm of NPOV, but only if we view or hide everything by default.

Regards,

Erik


from_name: Eric Pöhlsen

subject: AW: [Foundation-l] Partnership with Mandrakesoft

body:
> 2) fix stupid upload form
> (They should happen at the same time.)

I do not post often in this list, but just want to mention that discussions
for a better uploadform were running for ages and nothing has happened yet
:(


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: wikipedia  in China

body:
Christopher Mahan wrote:

>--- Jens Ropers <ropers at ropersonline.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Recognizing the utility of communicating with others on their
>>level,
>>here is my official response to the above mature, considered,
>>weighed
>>and scrupulous judgment:
>>
>>
>>http://tinyurl.com/3ctz9
>>http://tinyurl.com/ys9zf
>>
>>
>Jens,
>
>I strongly advise you not to do this again. A lot of the people on
>this list (myself included) are in a work environment.
>
I think that warning people that these are sound files should be
enough.  Approaching the subject with a sense of humour is always
welcome.  I don't think that it is up to us to get into the debate about
using an employer's computers for personal uses.

We've been condemning censorship in China, and now your suggesting
another kind of censorship.

Ec


from_name: Poor, Edmund W

body:
I admit that I edited a protected article. In my defense, I did not
realize that Ambi had protected it, and I immediately unprotected it
when its 'protected state' was pointed out to me. Since then, to show
good faith, I have made NO EDITS WHATSOEVER to any article; I've
confined myself to talk pages until this is sorted out. Like Martha
Stewart, wanting to start her sentence before the appeal? You decide....

As far as hijacking a vote is concerned, well, I've never been a fan of
"votes for deletion". Every time somebody wanted to delete an article I
like, I've simply rewritten or expanded it and asked for a new vote. I
can't recall a time anyone's really objected before. Have the rules
changed while I wasn't watching? It wouldn't be the first time.

If you vote about a situation, but the situation changes, I think this
calls for a new vote.

Besides, I think people are trying to sneak in their POV any way they
can: including 'voting'. This is not good for Wikipedia. We should write
accurate and unbiased articles that shed light on all points of view
(POV).

Especially when there are organized forces trying to SNEAK THOSE POV'S
in to the real world debate on these issues.

It all hinges on what a "Palestinian" is, and this was not well-covered.
The redirect simply glossed over the fact that this stuff was not well
covered.

Anyway, this kind of matter should not be decided by a vote. The
tradition has been, that before eliminating an article (either by
deleting it, or REDIRECTING from it), that good information from it
should be merged into another article. Voting to ignore the elephant in
the living room is not a valid option.

I'll follow what ever the arbcom or Jimbo says; I agree in advance, even
not knowing what they'll say. But it this point I don't think I've done
anything wrong.

172 gave me a lot of grief for breaking the [[Augusto Pinochet]] logjam,
and I weathered that storm. I think I can handle this too. If not, well
I always did want to go down in a blaze of glory ;-)

Ed Poor


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: wikipedia  in China

body:
Stirling Newberry wrote:

>
> On Sep 24, 2004, at 7:36 AM, Ray Saintonge wrote:
>
>> Stirling Newberry wrote:
>>
>>> Our POV's on the Chinese government aren't the issue here, it is the
>>> government of the PRC's POV on Wikipedia.
>>
>> You have it backwards.  The PRC government has not come on line to
>> express its official POV.
>> Ec
>
> It has done so by blocking the site.

If I may quote the title of a Dilbert book, "When did Ignorance become a
Point of View?"

Ec


from_name: Austin Hair

subject: [Wikipedia-l] wikipedia  in China

body:
> In the US, for example, the press is not supposed to show grossly
> mutilated bodies. Also, they are not allowed to release the names of
> underage rape victims. Why is that? Because it endangers and upsets
> people.

This is a matter of journalistic standards, not a matter of law -- many
publications can and do show such photos.  Neither is there a law
prohibiting the release of underage rape victims' names, although
newspapers can't print what the authorities don't tell them (and
wouldn't if they did -- again, though, it's not a matter of being
illegal, but rather of adherence to an ethical code drilled into their
heads during journalism school).

> Let's not forget that the US has draconian laws regarding online
> behavior and that many people around the world can't understand why
> we put up with them. It's our way, it's not perfect, but it works ok.
> Likewise the chinese way.

IP law and cryptography controls are regretable, but of marginal impact.
I, however, give the rest of the world credit for having the mental
capacity to comprehend our government's reasoning.

> =====
> Chris Mahan
> 818.943.1850 cell
> chris_mahan at yahoo.com
> chris.mahan at gmail.com
> http://www.christophermahan.com/

--
Austin D. Hair <austin at austinhair.org>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Callidus
http://www.austinhair.org/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/attachments/20040924/09dee7eb/attachment.pgp


from_name: Harry Smith

body:
Ed Poor wrote "It all hinges on what a "Palestinian"
is, and this was not well-covered."

Sounds like it would be very good to get this  one
point cleared up.  Perhaps we can do it using
"American" in place of "Canadian" and "Canada" in
place of "Palestine" during the discussion and perform
a global search and replace at the end.  (actually
this is a serious suggestion. easier to talk about,
less heated discussion perhaps, even if Canada's
boundaries have changed greatly over time and its
majority population is relatively (re)newed.)

how's this for starters?

Canadian:

a person born in that geographical area OR country
known as Canada,
a citizen the country known as Canada,
an object having characteristics specific the
geographical area OR country known as Canada,
a language spoken by the majority of the population of
the geographical area OR country known as Canada.

Lance6Wins

--- "Poor, Edmund W" <Edmund.W.Poor at abc.com> wrote:

> I admit that I edited a protected article. In my
> defense, I did not
> realize that Ambi had protected it, and I
> immediately unprotected it
> when its 'protected state' was pointed out to me.
> Since then, to show
> good faith, I have made NO EDITS WHATSOEVER to any
> article; I've
> confined myself to talk pages until this is sorted
> out. Like Martha
> Stewart, wanting to start her sentence before the
> appeal? You decide....
>
> As far as hijacking a vote is concerned, well, I've
> never been a fan of
> "votes for deletion". Every time somebody wanted to
> delete an article I
> like, I've simply rewritten or expanded it and asked
> for a new vote. I
> can't recall a time anyone's really objected before.
> Have the rules
> changed while I wasn't watching? It wouldn't be the
> first time.
>
> If you vote about a situation, but the situation
> changes, I think this
> calls for a new vote.
>
> Besides, I think people are trying to sneak in their
> POV any way they
> can: including 'voting'. This is not good for
> Wikipedia. We should write
> accurate and unbiased articles that shed light on
> all points of view
> (POV).
>
> Especially when there are organized forces trying to
> SNEAK THOSE POV'S
> in to the real world debate on these issues.
>
> It all hinges on what a "Palestinian" is, and this
> was not well-covered.
> The redirect simply glossed over the fact that this
> stuff was not well
> covered.
>
> Anyway, this kind of matter should not be decided by
> a vote. The
> tradition has been, that before eliminating an
> article (either by
> deleting it, or REDIRECTING from it), that good
> information from it
> should be merged into another article. Voting to
> ignore the elephant in
> the living room is not a valid option.
>
> I'll follow what ever the arbcom or Jimbo says; I
> agree in advance, even
> not knowing what they'll say. But it this point I
> don't think I've done
> anything wrong.
>
> 172 gave me a lot of grief for breaking the
> [[Augusto Pinochet]] logjam,
> and I weathered that storm. I think I can handle
> this too. If not, well
> I always did want to go down in a blaze of glory ;-)
>
> Ed Poor
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

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


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: wikipedia in China

body:
When dealing with the "slow pace" of reform, a famous saying in China
is: "We were ruled by the Manchus for 300 years, we can wait another
ten."

-Andrew (User:Fuzheado)

On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 21:23:29 -0600, Fred Bauder <fredbaud at ctelco.net> wrote:
> Although it seems hopeless we should, without compromising our essential
> principles, do what we can to negotiate.
>
> Fred
>
> > From: Stirling Newberry <stirling.newberry at xigenics.net>
> > Reply-To: wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2004 22:10:27 -0400
> > To: wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Re: wikipedia  in China
>
>
> >
> > Might I suggest that this is not a productive way of dealing with the
> > question of keeping Wikipedia, or most of it, accessible to people
> > within the People's Republic of China. Our POV's on the Chinese
> > government aren't the issue here, it is the government of the PRC's POV
> > on Wikipedia.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>

--
Andrew Lih
andrew.lih at gmail.com


from_name: Brion Vibber

subject: [Wikitech-l] Wiki database system

body:
On Sep 24, 2004, at 8:00 AM, Magnus Manske wrote:
> Completely ignoring the progress on the according meta page, I went
> ahead and created a database feature for the wiki.

Magnus, *please* don't forget to escape strings before putting them in
HTML output or SQL commands.

Also, please remember to use $wgRequest rather than $_REQUEST and
$_POST directly; this is meant to:
a) provide some limited basic validation
b) provide for default values if the item is not set
c) perform some character conversion when necessary
d) validate and normalize UTF-8 text input
e) allow for wrapping requests in a way that can be tested or
sub-requested easily without messing with on fifty separate globals

Additionally there's no need to specify MyISAM as the table type if
there's not a fulltext index. Better to use the default (which may not
be MyISAM).

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20040924/873428dc/attachment.pgp>


from_name: JAY JG

body:
>From: "Poor, Edmund W" <Edmund.W.Poor at abc.com>
>Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
>To: <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
>Subject: [WikiEN-l] Occupation of Palestine - edit war
>Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2004 08:56:29 -0700
>Return-Path: wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org
>
>An edit war is brewing over [[Occupation of Palestine]] and [[Israeli
>occupation of Palestine]]. I am heavily involved in editing those pages,
>and I am an admin. I am determined not to 'break the rules'. I have no
>intention of using sysop rights to 'get my way' here.
>
>Jayjg and Gadykozma want these pages to REDIRECT to some other article
>-- [[Israeli-Palestinian conflict]], I guess. However, a vfd vote went
>heavily against them. Less than 30% voted for redirect, even before I
>started editing.

I must object to this characterization of the conflict.  Gadykozma wants to
re-direct, I want to delete.  And the VfD vote did not "go heavily against
[us]"; rather, 30% voted for redirection (usually with protect), and 40%
voted for simple deletion.  As Cecropia pointed out on the relevant Talk:
page:

"I did not make the decision in this case, but I affirm that the admin that
redirected made the right decision. VfD decisions are not made on the basis
of strict numerical voting. Furthermore, you cannot determine consensus by
simple percentages for a single choice when you have multiple possibilities.
It is almost impossible to get a 2/3 vote when you have at three or more
choices.

Admins are given leeway to determine consensus and it can be a thankless
job. Yet consensus has been demonstrated. There were 31 votes to remove this
as a stand-alone article; there were 13 votes to keep it; that is 70%+
support for content removal. I'm well aware that there is an intentional
bias toward non-deletion on Wikipedia; however, for the article's supporters
there is the point that accurate content can be merged into the target
article.

For the admin to have taken the middle course of leaving the article name as
a redirect is consistent with maintaining the spirit of consensus, since
there is significant support for this..."

I might also point out that while the page was under VfD and being heavily
debated and voted on, Ed Poor decided to arbitrarily re-name the article,
write a new article under the original name, and link the two, which defied
any consensus on either side.  He also continued to edit the article when it
was protected.

As a final note, I would like to add that I have never edited the article in
question, nor have I protected or un-protected it.  The only thing I have
ever done to the article is make the original listing on VfD.

>Moreover, the fact that I have added considerable new material means
>that there should be a new vote. No such vote has been made.

That's one way to describe it; I would describe it as hijacking the article
in order to overturn a vote which had gone a way Ed didn't like.  If one can
massively re-write any article under VfD and then claim that all previous
votes are void, it makes a mockery of the VfD process.

_________________________________________________________________
Powerful Parental Controls Let your child discover the best the Internet has
to offer.
http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines
  Start enjoying all the benefits of MSN? Premium right now and get the
first two months FREE*.


from_name: Anthere

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: wikipedia in China

body:
Jiong Sheng a ?crit:
>>Now... I ask the question. Why would it be shocking to provide a
>>"""short""" article on this board issue (the closing of the board in
>>China) and invite the reader to have further information by following
>>external links ?
>
>
> The problem is no one in a wiki can stop anyone else from editing an
> article. A "short" article on any subject, especial those closely
> related to the people, would soon be expanded by contributors. And I
> don't like the idea of self-censorship too: for a Chinese national
> living in Singapore for almost five years, I learn from my own
> experiences that self-censorship sometimes can be even worse than
> government-imposed censorships: people would just be too concerned if
> their opinions or descriptions have "crossed the line", and often
> result in more conservative writings.
>
> I think I would accept the result where some of the "sensitive"
> articles to be filtered off automatically. These articles would remain
> in Chinese Wikipedia, but mainland Chinese would not be able to see
> these pages (unless through proxy). It would be much better than
> banning the whole site, or periodically blocking us on very "special"
> dates. However this is not something that we can decide.
>
> Chinese government is fascist? No, but I believe most Chinese would
> want to see a more liberal and democratic China as soon as possible,
> though not through revolutions or violence as in 1989.
>
> User:formulax

I understand all that very much formulax. There is no easy way. But I
believe more in attempts to "turn the governement opinion" in a way to
have more friendly feelings toward wikipedia, than in forcing attempts
such as
* sending a press release to shame it
* calling for a lawyer (a solution suggested last june) to attack it

There is no good path imho in use of force and shame.

Obviously, trying to apply things like
* focusing on articles showing the greatness of the country
* being careful on topics likely to raise censorship
are no easy things to do. People have to agree collectively to do so,
and people have to not censor themselves more than necessarily.

It is difficult.

I might add something though. When the encyclopedists Diderot and co
wrote the Encyclop?die, they had to be agreeable to the King. For many
articles, there was no upfront criticism, the criticism of our monarchy
was quite subtile, seen in the cross links, in the references provided.

Similarly, famous writers, such as Moli?re or Voltaire succeeded to play
  or publish ferocious criticisms of a governement system which "was"
applying censorship. They succeeded to do it by using various paths,
most not using direct confrontation.

I guess using such methods avoided them to be plain put in jail and have
their head severed, and allowed their genious writing to cross the
centuries and have impact. That was worth it.


from_name: Mark Richards

subject: [WikiEN-l] Deletion for its own sake

body:
 > On 24 Sep 2004, at 18:30, JAY JG wrote:
>
> > If one can massively re-write any article under
> VfD and then claim
> > that all previous votes are void, it makes a
> mockery of the VfD
> > process.

The only way that this makes sense is if the aim is
deletion for its own sake, rather than improvement of
content.
Mark

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


from_name: Jimmy (Jimbo) Wales

subject:
[WikiEN-l] [mrjung@MIT.EDU: DMCA Notification of Infringement
	Letter]

body:
----- Forwarded message from Michael Jung <mrjung at MIT.EDU> -----

From: Michael Jung <mrjung at MIT.EDU>
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 16:47:06 -0400
To: jwales at bomis.com
Subject: DMCA Notification of Infringement Letter

September 24, 2004

Jimmy Wales, President
Wikimedia Foundation
3911 Harrisburg St. NE
St. Petersburg, FL 33703

Dear Mr. Wales,

I am writing to you to avail Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) of
its rights under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). This letter
is a Notice of Infringement as authorized in ? 512(c) of the U.S. Copyright
Law. I wish to report an instance of what I feel in good faith is an
instance of copyright infringement. The infringing material appears on the
Service for which you are the designated agent.

You are registered with the U.S. Copyright Office as the Designated Service
Provider Agent to receive notifications of alleged Copyright infringement
with respect to users of the Service for which you are the Designated Agent.

1. The material which I contend belongs to MIT, and appears illegally on
the Service is the following: A photograph of Grigori Perelman.

2. The material appears at the website address:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Perelman.jpg>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Perelman.jpg.

3. My contact information is as follows:

Michael R. Jung
Associate Counsel for Intellectual Property
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Five Cambridge Center, NE25-230
Cambridge, MA 02142
617.253.1606
mrjung at mit.edu

4. I have a good faith belief that the use of the material that appears on
the service is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or by
operation of law.

5. The information in this notice is accurate, and I am authorize to act on
behalf of the copyright owner.

I declare under the perjury laws of the United States of America that this
notification is true and correct.

Formalities aside, I would be happy to discuss this issue with you and the
need to have this photograph removed from your site as quickly as possible,
my number is above.

By typing my name below I affirm this as my digital signature:

/s/ Michael R Jung

Michael R. Jung
Associate Counsel for Intellectual Property
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Five Cambridge Center, NE 25-230
Cambridge, MA  02142-1493

Phone: (617)253-1606
Fax: (617)253-1850
mrjung at mit.edu

This message and any attached documents contain information which may be
confidential, subject to privilege or exempt from disclosure under
applicable law. These materials are intended only for the use of the
intended recipient. Delivery of this message to any person other than the
intended recipient shall not compromise or waive such confidentiality,
privilege or exemption from disclosure as to this communication.

----- End forwarded message -----

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


body:
By the way, I think I have finally figured out how I could have possibly
missed the fact that the page was protected when I edited it (note that
I concede that I *did* edit a protected page).

Look at this version:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Occupation_of_Palestine&oldid
=6099350

It's just a REDIRECT. There's no {{protected}} notice on it. To be fair
to the others, I don't think we ever had a convention that a "protected
redirect" should have a notice on it. I guess they thought I was
following the action more closely.

I didn't think the matter was closed, and I also thought (and still
think) that making significant changes to a page under vfd automatically
necessitates a new vote.

If there is a policy page that says no one can edit a page which others
want deleted, I must have missed it.

If people think a page should not be edited, because they want to vote
on its disposition -- well, I'm not sure that's a good idea, but I don't
think I would have dared to edit a protected page with a {{protected
notice}} on it. I'm not usually that bold. I would at least have
unprotected it first and said so on the talk page...

Ed Poor
Somewhere in the Hamptons
(with Martha Stewart, under house arrest)


from_name: Thomas Whaples

subject: [Wikipedia-l] wikipedia  in China

body:
Ray Saintonge wrote:

> Tibet is not on the other side of the globe.  At least it has a border
> with China.  That situation is not comparable to the Iraqi fuck-up.

Careful. Your POV is showing.


subject: [Foundation-l] BBC Go Digital

body:
I agree - I don't think talking about the inaccessibility of WP in any
significant way is prudent either. If they want to talk about users
outside US and Europe, that's one thing. But it's still to early to
tell what's going on with the access/block issue.

-Andrew

On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 06:19:30 +0000, Jiong Sheng <sheng.jiong at gmail.com> wrote:
> This might not be a good idea. BBC is not deemed as "friendly" by the
> Chinese government: its Chinese website is already blocked for years
> (maybe since its existence). This could only get things worse.
>
>
>
> On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 11:01:59 -0600, Fred Bauder <fredbaud at ctelco.net> wrote:
> > You know it might be nice if someone from the Chinese Wikipedia could be
> > interviewed in light of recent difficulties. Provided they know what they
> > are getting into.
> >
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

--
Andrew Lih
andrew.lih at gmail.com


subject: [Foundation-l] BBC Go Digital


from_name: Pawe³ 'Ausir' Dembowski

subject: [Wikipedia-l] wikipedia  in China

body:
>>Should it be removed? Of course not. It is education where it matters. It
>>is education that can prevent suffering. Similar information, where it
>>applies, should be published about the Chinese government, the Chinese
>>troops, on the Chinese Wikipedia.
>>
RS> AFAIK the Chinese army is not engaging in adventures on the other side
RS> of the globe.

Ever heard of Tibet?

--
Ausir
mailto:fallout at lexx.eu.org
http://fallout.scifi.pl
ICQ 41090834 GG 2730728


subject: [Wikipedia-l] wikipedia in China

body:
> For the US, the analog to Tibet would be the overthrow of the monarchy
> and annexation of Hawaii, or the slaughtering of Native Americans and
> forcing them to live on undesirable land.

Both circumstances which took place over a century ago and are now
universally deplored among our citizens and leaders alike.  Modern times
demand modern ideals, not arrogant attempts at dynasty.

> When trying to make this more prominent in the [[Hawaii]] article,
> folks, including myself, were met immediately with abusive responses
> from fellow users - "ignorant," "intellectually dishonest,"
> "childish," "blow your own horn."

As I recall, the overthrow of the monarchy was not state-sponsored, but
rather a sort of personal coup undertaken unilaterally by our diplomats
and condemned at the time by President Cleveland.  I also seem to recall
that the monarchy was restored, with annexation occuring after only
after it collapsed on itself years later and everyone expected the
United States to pick up the pieces (it was, after all, "our mess").
Perhaps the Philippines would be a better analogy.

Murdering Indians is bad.  You'll hear no excuses from me on the matter.
That said, neither I nor any of my ancestors have ever knowingly killed
an aboriginal native of the American continent, so don't kick my ass
about it.

> -Andrew (User:Fuzheado)

--
Austin D. Hair <austin at austinhair.org>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Callidus
http://www.austinhair.org/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/attachments/20040924/32fa6fa5/attachment.pgp


from_name: Henry H. Tan-Tenn

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: wikipedia in China

body:
Andrew Lih wrote:
> When dealing with the "slow pace" of reform, a famous saying in China
> is: "We were ruled by the Manchus for 300 years, we can wait another
> ten."

As the saying invites the question of who "we" represents, there's
reason to suspect _it_ itself may require reforming.  It'd be ironic but
not surprising if a descendent of the defeated Manchu rulers were to
utter it.

 From our very own (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manchu_language):

"Very few native Manchu speakers remain; in what used to be Manchuria
virtually no one speaks the language with the entire area having been
completely sinicized."

Although "sinicize" need not be interpreted as "forced to be sinocized"
(language shift being a complex phenomenon), it remains the case that
today there isn't a Manchu Wikipedia (ISO 639-2: mnc).

"In fact, the modern custodians of the language are actually the Sibe
who live near the Ili valley in Xinjiang and were moved there by
Qianlong Emperor in 1764. Modern Sibe is very close to Manchu, although
there are a few slight differences in writing and pronunciation;
however, the Sibe consider themselves to be separate from the Manchus."

Given that saying and the attitude behind it, it is understandable why a
Sibe may not want to be identified as a Manchu.


from_name: Delirium

subject: [Wikipedia-l] wikipedia  in China

body:
Ray Saintonge wrote:

> Tibet is not on the other side of the globe.  At least it has a border
> with China.  That situation is not comparable to the Iraqi fuck-up.

Indeed, there is no reasonable way to compare the abhorrent Chinese
atrocities in Tibet, which have included mass forced migrations and
attacks on religious shrines, to the comparatively mild US atrocities in
Iraq.

-Mark


from_name: Sj

body:
Yes, this has certainly been discussed for a long time...
Most recently, Sansculotte produced a nicely detailed set of pages
based on an older mockup of Erik's for a new upload form.  The
important text for those pages
has been translated already; but that's the easy part compared to
actually implementing it.

http://www.ru-info.de/upload_neu.htm
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Translation_requests/New_upload_form

--Sj

On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 10:17:22 +0630, Eric P?hlsen <eric at eric-poehlsen.de> wrote:
> > 2) fix stupid upload form
> > (They should happen at the same time.)
>
> I do not post often in this list, but just want to mention that discussions
> for a better uploadform were running for ages and nothing has happened yet
> :(


from_name: Ray Saintonge

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Starting a new wiki

body:
Yann Forget wrote:

>See http://r2d2.homeunix.org/mahadev_desai/day-to-day/ (600 to 850 KB of plain
>English text each)
>cf. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahadev_Desai
>
>I created the base but there is a lot of work, especially because each volume
>has an index, which would be nice to have it working.
>cf. http://wikisource.org/wiki/Day_to_Day_with_Gandhi
>
>
This raises an interesting issue.  How to handle indexes.  Typically
these make references to specific page numbers in paper books, but we
usually ignore the original pagination when we upload a book.  Maybe an
index could have the page numbers stripped out and link to some kind of
search function.  As Spock would say, "Fascinating!"

Ec


body:
On Sep 24, 2004, at 4:25 PM, Angela wrote:
>> 2) fix stupid upload form
>
> I strongly agree. Even the one currently on the test wiki at
> http://test.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Upload is better than the
> current one. Is there any reason the one at
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Uploadform1.png can not be used?

It's just a mock-up. To the best of my knowledge no such form has been
coded.

> If it's nowhere near completion, perhaps the developer committee could
> consider putting a bounty on it?

As far as I know this is part of Erik's Commons proposal that's
remained simply a proposal, with no code written. Erik, where are you
on this?

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/attachments/20040924/9ba0127f/attachment.pgp


body:
On Sep 24, 2004, at 4:25 PM, Angela wrote:
>> 2) fix stupid upload form
>
> I strongly agree. Even the one currently on the test wiki at
> http://test.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Upload is better than the
> current one. Is there any reason the one at
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Uploadform1.png can not be used?

It's just a mock-up. To the best of my knowledge no such form has been
coded.

> If it's nowhere near completion, perhaps the developer committee could
> consider putting a bounty on it?

As far as I know this is part of Erik's Commons proposal that's
remained simply a proposal, with no code written. Erik, where are you
on this?

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/attachments/20040924/9ba0127f/attachment-0001.pgp


body:
On Sep 24, 2004, at 4:25 PM, Angela wrote:
>> 2) fix stupid upload form
>
> I strongly agree. Even the one currently on the test wiki at
> http://test.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Upload is better than the
> current one. Is there any reason the one at
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Uploadform1.png can not be used?

It's just a mock-up. To the best of my knowledge no such form has been
coded.

> If it's nowhere near completion, perhaps the developer committee could
> consider putting a bounty on it?

As far as I know this is part of Erik's Commons proposal that's
remained simply a proposal, with no code written. Erik, where are you
on this?

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/attachments/20040924/9ba0127f/attachment.pgp>


body:
On Sep 24, 2004, at 4:25 PM, Angela wrote:
>> 2) fix stupid upload form
>
> I strongly agree. Even the one currently on the test wiki at
> http://test.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Upload is better than the
> current one. Is there any reason the one at
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Uploadform1.png can not be used?

It's just a mock-up. To the best of my knowledge no such form has been
coded.

> If it's nowhere near completion, perhaps the developer committee could
> consider putting a bounty on it?

As far as I know this is part of Erik's Commons proposal that's
remained simply a proposal, with no code written. Erik, where are you
on this?

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/attachments/20040924/9ba0127f/attachment-0001.pgp>


from_name: Magnus Manske

subject: [Wikitech-l] Wiki database system

body:
Completely ignoring the progress on the according meta page, I went
ahead and created a database feature for the wiki.

It is in CVS HEAD. You'll have to run the two CREATE queries (in
SpecialData.php, as a comment) and set $wgUseData = true ; in your
LocalSettings.php

A new "Data" namespace contains the display/edit form for entering the
data sets. NOTE: This is mono-language only at the moment, but I don't
see a problem in either putting many language versions into it, or use
data namespaces from several databases.

Example [[Data:Movie]] :

{| cellpadding=5
!Field!!width='50%'|Value!!Notes
|-
|Title||((!title/line))||
|-
|Year||((year/number))||
|-
|Tagline||((tagline/line))||
|-
|Plot summary||((plot/multiline))||
|-
|Actors||((actors/multiline))||
|-
|Runtime||((runtime/number))||min
|-
|Country||((country/line))||
|-
|Color||((color/dropdown/Technicolor/B&W))||
|}

This display similar to the mock-up I found on meta. Keys are defined
like ((this)), parameters for the edit screen are separated by a "/".
Note the multiple options for the ((color)) key, and the ((!title)) key,
where the "!" defines the primary key.Multiple versions (history) are
made on entries with the same primary key. Currently, only one primary
key is allowed, but it would be no real problem to change that.

The actual data entry/display is done via Special:Data. At the moment,
it can already add data using the above form, preview it, and store it
with multiple revisions (like wiki). I have started minimal work on
listing entries, but will probably continue later today.

Now begin stomping me for just hacking this without informing anyone
first ;-)

Magnus


from_name: Fred Bauder

subject: [Wikipedia-l] wikipedia in China

body:
Indeed they are. In the November 13, 1950 issue of Life magazine, pages
130-136, 138, 141, in the article "This Was the Perilous Trek to Tragedy" by
Frank Bessac, the story is told of a criminal sentence handed down in Tibet
in 1950 which called for amputation of the perpetrator's "noses and ears"
which was reduced to a public flogging of 200 lashes which sentence was
carried out in Lhasa. The cover of Life pictures the flogging.

Fred

> Meanwhile, the atrocities in Tibet are well documented.


from_name: Jens Ropers

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: wikipedia  in China

body:
On 24 Sep 2004, at 04:40, Erik Moeller wrote:

> Jens-
>> Yet you're telling our Chinese contributors--who are of the very
>> people
>> who have paid such a high price--you're telling them to their face
>> that
>> THEIR government, not the Japanese/German Fascist Axis, but rather
>> THEIR government was  "nothing but fascism".
>                    ^is                      ^with a red touch
>
> History has this ugly tendency of repeating itself, only the roles and
> costumes change. If you expect political correctness from me, boy have
> you
> got the wrong guy.
>
> Erik

Recognizing the utility of communicating with others on their level,
here is my official response to the above mature, considered, weighed
and scrupulous judgment:
http://tinyurl.com/3ctz9
http://tinyurl.com/ys9zf

-- ropers [[en:User:Ropers]]
     www.ropersonline.com


body:
>From: Christopher Mahan <chris_mahan at yahoo.com>
>Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
>To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
>Subject: RE: [WikiEN-l] Occupation of Palestine - edit war
>Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 09:47:48 -0700 (PDT)
>--- JAY JG <jayjg at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>Jay, first, sign your posts to the mailing list.
>A name is nice, your handle would be OK.

My handle is Jayjg.  You can call me Jay.

>Second. I am watching the page in question. I have asked all parties
>involved to take a time-out, which runs until tomorrow, and so far,
>so good.
>
>It seems obvious that there are people who want to explore better
>ways to explain the topic this and other pages cover. I would suggest
>that you try to talk to these people and ask them their opinion as to
>how to do things better.

In fact, I am doing so, but that doesn't have anything to do with what I saw
as an inaccurate and unfair characterization on *this* mailing list; that
can only be dealt with *here*.

>
>Lastly: please keep your comments short. Thanks.
>

Short enough?

Jay.

_________________________________________________________________
MSN? Calendar keeps you organized and takes the effort out of scheduling
get-togethers.
http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines
  Start enjoying all the benefits of MSN? Premium right now and get the
first two months FREE*.


body:
>From: Jens Ropers <ropers at ropersonline.com>
>Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
>To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
>Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Occupation of Palestine - edit war
>Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 19:27:32 +0200

><em><b>
>Because of the above, I think it's a Very Bad Thing to VfD-list and
>protect an article at the same time. The two processes are bound to
>conflict. Pick your poison but don't drink from both cups at the same
>time.

Right.  That's why I simply VfD-listed the article, and didn't protect it,
or re-direct it, or edit it any other action.

Jay.

_________________________________________________________________
Don't just Search. Find! http://search.sympatico.msn.ca/default.aspx The new
MSN Search! Check it out!


subject: [WikiEN-l] Deletion for its own sake

body:
>From: Mark Richards <marich712000 at yahoo.com>
>Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
>To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
>Subject: [WikiEN-l] Deletion for its own sake
>Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 13:55:49 -0700 (PDT)
>  > On 24 Sep 2004, at 18:30, JAY JG wrote:
> >
> > > If one can massively re-write any article under
> > VfD and then claim
> > > that all previous votes are void, it makes a
> > mockery of the VfD
> > > process.
>
>The only way that this makes sense is if the aim is
>deletion for its own sake, rather than improvement of
>content.
>Mark

The VfD article in question was a POV fork of another article; after
unsuccessfully substituting his own text several times for the content of
the original article, the author "solved" the problem by creating a new
article with the POV information he preferred.  It's not the first time I've
seen this kind of "if you don't agree with me I'm going to take my toys and
play elsewhere" kind of behaviour on Wikipedia, and in my view this kind of
article should indeed be simply deleted/re-directed back to the original,
and any valid content put into the original article using the usual process.

The other issue with the VfD article was that the title itself was
inherently POV.

Jay.

_________________________________________________________________
MSN? Calendar keeps you organized and takes the effort out of scheduling
get-togethers.
http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines
  Start enjoying all the benefits of MSN? Premium right now and get the
first two months FREE*.


subject: [Wikipedia-l] wikipedia  in China

body:
Jens Ropers wrote:

> Like the mild napalm-bombing of civilians?

Apparently you are either an idiot or read indymedia for your news, as
Napalm has not been used in a war for decades.

Meanwhile, the atrocities in Tibet are well documented.

In any case, the point is that the en: wikipedia should have documented
US atrocities, like [[Abu Ghraib]], and the zh: Wikipedia should have
documented Chinese atrocities.  Advocating removing either of them is
unacceptable.

-Mark


from_name: Gerard Meijssen

subject: [Wikitech-l] Wiki database system

body:
Magnus Manske wrote:

> Completely ignoring the progress on the according meta page, I went
> ahead and created a database feature for the wiki.
>
> It is in CVS HEAD. You'll have to run the two CREATE queries (in
> SpecialData.php, as a comment) and set $wgUseData = true ; in your
> LocalSettings.php
>
> A new "Data" namespace contains the display/edit form for entering the
> data sets. NOTE: This is mono-language only at the moment, but I don't
> see a problem in either putting many language versions into it, or use
> data namespaces from several databases.
>
> Example [[Data:Movie]] :
>
> {| cellpadding=5
> !Field!!width='50%'|Value!!Notes
> |-
> |Title||((!title/line))||
> |-
> |Year||((year/number))||
> |-
> |Tagline||((tagline/line))||
> |-
> |Plot summary||((plot/multiline))||
> |-
> |Actors||((actors/multiline))||
> |-
> |Runtime||((runtime/number))||min
> |-
> |Country||((country/line))||
> |-
> |Color||((color/dropdown/Technicolor/B&W))||
> |}
>
> This display similar to the mock-up I found on meta. Keys are defined
> like ((this)), parameters for the edit screen are separated by a "/".
> Note the multiple options for the ((color)) key, and the ((!title))
> key, where the "!" defines the primary key.Multiple versions (history)
> are made on entries with the same primary key. Currently, only one
> primary key is allowed, but it would be no real problem to change that.
>
> The actual data entry/display is done via Special:Data. At the moment,
> it can already add data using the above form, preview it, and store it
> with multiple revisions (like wiki). I have started minimal work on
> listing entries, but will probably continue later today.
>
> Now begin stomping me for just hacking this without informing anyone
> first ;-)
>
> Magnus
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Magnus,

Would it be possible to create the GEMET glossary database using this
tool ? How hard would it then be to create a XML import for the GEMET
data ??

We have the SQL statements for GEMET, we have the XML data and we have
consent to use them all. It would be an excerice to explain how, with
more additions, Wiktionary in a database format would look like.

Stomping, isn't that a way of dancing ?? This is SOO timely as far as I
am concerned :)

Thanks,
  GerardM


subject: [Wikipedia-l] wikipedia  in China

body:
Craig Franklin wrote:

>I don't know about you guys, but I think it's intolerable that the
>dictatorial Chinese government shuold be able to say what sort of articles
>we have on Wikipedia.  I, personally, would rather the resource be banned
>within the PRC, than comply with their demands for self-censorship.
>
My understanding is that they blocked the site.  They have said
absolutely nothing about demands, not even perfectly acceptable ones.

>Plus, if we do soften our approach on there, and adopt a more
>pro-"communist" attitude, I think we do a disservice to the Chinese-speaking
>community.  The very nature of the repressive Chinese government means that
>they won't be satisfied with NPOV as it stands - they'll want a POV that
>makes them look good, just like in Chinese newspapers, television, and
>radio.  Such a tone is incompatible with the foundations that Wikipedia
>stands for.
>
>
This is speculative polemic.

Ec


subject: [Wikitech-l] Millionth article on Sep 14

body:
Erik Zachte wrote:

>I got a rough estimate of when the millionth article was added:
>
>If the 109 cur/old dumps from Sep 20 would tell the whole story it would
>have been at Sep 14 at about 21:55 hrs (server time).
>
>Of course articles were deleted between Sep 14 and Sep 20 so the result
>would have been different with dumps from an earlier date.
>In fact it would bring the time forward.
>
>At the other hand some articles may not have matched the criterium of 'no
>redirect' and 'at least one internal link' on Sep 14, while they did at Sep
>20.
>
>I collected all articles in the 'cur' database that fulfilled the criteria
>at the time of the dump, then found the time they were added either in 'cur'
>or 'old'.
>
>Duplicate articles were ignored (they happen sometimes after clicking 'save'
>twice within seconds), also articles that exist only in old were not counted
>(a few hundred, they may partially be explained by different dump times for
>cur and old, with deletions coming in between, but probably mostly are just
>aborted transactions).
>
>As said I processed the 109 languages that are currently in the weekly stats
>job, so I might have missed a few entries in very recent startup languages
>that are still looking forward to their first milesone of 10 articles :)
>
>Given all the above, I think it is not useful to point to one specific
>article as the millionth, as too much noise is available.
>
>
Of course it's impossible.  And when the brass from McDonald's descends
on a small town outlet to suddenly confer upon some unsuspecting
customer the award for haing bought the umpteen billionth hamburger, do
you really think that they made a precise calculation?  It's all about
publicity.  You look at whoever wrote the first new article after 21:55
on Sept. 14; send him a T-shirt and mousepad with the logo, and make a
big fuss about it.

Ec


from_name: Daniel Kinzler

subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: Upload limitations

body:
Hello Brion

> Subject: [Wikitech-l] Upload limitations
> From: Brion Vibber <brion at pobox.com>
> To: Wikimedia developers <wikitech-l at wikimedia.org>

...

> For the moment uploads are limited to the default extension whitelist:
> 'png', 'gif', 'jpg', 'jpeg', 'ogg'. Other types of files can't be
> uploaded to the wikis until we expand it again, but files already
> uploaded remain accessible.

Please add SVG to the list of default-formats, so people can continue to
provide SVG-source for drawings. Thank you.

BTW: is there a chance that the extension for rendering SVG to PNG on
demand will be available anytime soon?

Regards,
Daniel


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: wikipedia  in China

body:
On 24 Sep 2004, at 17:47, Christopher Mahan wrote:
> --- Jens Ropers <ropers at ropersonline.com> wrote:
>> Recognizing the utility of communicating with others on their
>> level,
>> here is my official response to the above mature, considered,
>> weighed
>> and scrupulous judgment:
>> http://tinyurl.com/3ctz9
>> http://tinyurl.com/ys9zf
>
> Jens,
> I strongly advise you not to do this again. A lot of the people on
> this list (myself included) are in a work environment.

Oops.
Sorry.

_My apologies to everyone._

Silly me, I didn't consider such "side-effects".
To anyone who ''hasn't'' clicked on the above URLs: They are Monty
Python audio clips and it may indeed be unsuitable to blast them across
your office at full volume, etc.

-- ropers [[en:User:Ropers]]
     www.ropersonline.com