from_name: daniwo59 at aol.com

subject: [WikiEN-l] Frankfurt Wikireader

body:
Good day, everyone.

We have been offered a unique opportunity to create a new English
Wikireader, free of charge, in time for Wikimania. This is an experiment, being  done in
collaboration with a print-on-demand company that takes great interest  in
Wikipedia.

The idea is to produce a wikireader on the subject of Frankfurt (on Main,
not the Oder--sorry, couldn't resist). It should include the overview article on
 Frankfurt, as well as articles about neighborhoods (Sachsenhausen, for
instance), important sites (Goethe House, for instance), cultural attractions,
events (the Book Fair comes to mind), and other relevant topics. Each article
should be of Feature article standard.

The book will contain approximately 50 pages -- 48-56 (books are printed in
multiples of 8 pages minimum), and include GNU-FDL data and some basic
front-matter about the Wikimedia Foundation as an introduction.  They will  be 8.5 x
11 and contain b/w images.

Sounds easy, huh? Well, the thing is we have to have all the material ready
by Monday, July 25. This includes a list of articles that should be included.
Special care should be taken that the articles and images do NOT contain any
copyvios.

The German Wikipedia has considerable experience preparing Wikireaders, and
we can learn a lot from them. Please see
_http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiReader_ (http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiReader) .  If you
can speak German, and feel that there are any articles in German that are
missing in English, feel free to translate them, but please remember that time  is
of essence here. I would like to draft the services of the Quarto staff to
help with the final copyedit, but everyone is encouraged to participate.

I will be away this weekend on a personal matter but hope to check my email
frequently. My access will be limited, however, so please keep Frankfurt
Wikireader as the subject line so that I can filter them.

In order to keep to the deadline, I propose that we have the final list of
articles ready by 9:00 pm New York time today, July 20. You may want to take a
look at the German Wikiportal for Frankfurt
(_http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal_Frankfurt_Rhein-Main_
(http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal_Frankfurt_Rhein-Main) )  for some ideas.

I have opened a listing page at
_http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Danny/Frankfurt_Wikireader_
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Danny/Frankfurt_Wikireader) .  You will notice that it is very basic right now. Feel free to do with it
what  you will.

Good luck all,

Danny


list: wikien-l

source: pipermail-mbox

subject: [WikiEN-l] Frankfurt Wikireader

body:
Correction, please work off
_http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiReader/Frankfurt_ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiReader/Frankfurt) .

Thanks


list: wikitech-l

from_name: admin Yellowikis

subject: [Wikitech-l] Sharing DBs in v1.5b

body:
Has anyone tried sharing DBs on 1.5b yet?

I installed separate wikis in French, German and English and linked
them to the same DB on a test server yesterday, but it only worked for
a few minutes  - but I think cookies and/or caching caught up with me
and made it 100% German - even for new machines visiting the pages for
the first time.

Thoughts, suggestions?

Paul


list: wikipedia-l

from_name: Ashar Voultoiz

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Current state of the Wikipedia motivation survey

body:
Joachim Schroer wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> as many of you know, we have started a survey on the motivation of
> contributors to Wikipedia a week ago. So far, more than 150 participants
> from more than 10 countries completed our online survey -- thanks a lot
> to everyone!
>
> The questionnaire will be available until August 3 at:
>
>     http://www.unipark.de/uc/wikipedia/

Done! I love surveys :p

--
Ashar Voultoiz - WP++++
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Hashar
http://www.livejournal.com/community/wikitech/
IM: hashar at jabber.org  ICQ: 15325080


from_name: Dan Grey

subject:
[WikiEN-l] Someone wants the history of an article about himself
	sanitized

body:
Are we 100% sure that e-mail is genuine? Assume good faith etc aside
for a moment, and call me a cynic, but I'd have expected the editor of
the Observer to be able to type and capitalize properly.

Has anyone mailed the Observer e-mail address asking for confirmation
of the original e-mail?

Dan


subject: [Wikitech-l] Sharing DBs in v1.5b

body:
From: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Configuration_settings_index :

=========
Shared DB settings

Shared database for multiple wikis. Presently used for storing a user
table for single sign-on. The server for this database must be the
same as for the main database.

Make sure that the database user you set in $wgDBuser has read-access
to that database. It might be sufficient to grant read-access to the
user table only.

    EXPERIMENTAL!
==========

I was hoping that I might be able to apply this to the main database
as well as the user database so people can access the same data
through different language wikis.

Paul

On 7/20/05, Brion Vibber <brion at pobox.com> wrote:
> admin Yellowikis wrote:
> > Has anyone tried sharing DBs on 1.5b yet?
> >
> > I installed separate wikis in French, German and English and linked
> > them to the same DB on a test server yesterday, but it only worked for
> > a few minutes  - but I think cookies and/or caching caught up with me
> > and made it 100% German - even for new machines visiting the pages for
> > the first time.
>
> What's "sharing DBs" mean?
>
> -- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>
>
>


from_name: Brion Vibber

subject: [Wikitech-l] Sharing DBs in v1.5b

body:
admin Yellowikis wrote:
> Has anyone tried sharing DBs on 1.5b yet?
>
> I installed separate wikis in French, German and English and linked
> them to the same DB on a test server yesterday, but it only worked for
> a few minutes  - but I think cookies and/or caching caught up with me
> and made it 100% German - even for new machines visiting the pages for
> the first time.

What's "sharing DBs" mean?

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 253 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20050720/43c7adee/attachment.pgp>


from_name: Martin Trautmann

subject: [Wikitech-l] Wikidata: XHTML2 and functionality

body:
Hi all,

I'm not yet sure about the real purpose of the wikidata project.

Currently I feel a (or the?) main part is the data entry.

I welcome a reasonable and simplified approach. I guess, a
form based entry is the most obvious solution. But I'm not sure about the
appropriate Wiki syntax for the 'expert' mode where everything is open to
extended definitions. I feel the syntax should be closer to XML instead of
HTML commands, since XHTML2 becomes more and more stable. I guess that
there's not much help to implement a new syntax without upcoming standards
in mind.

However, I expect a rather different result from wikidata: I'd like to
access not only one fixed set of data, but I'd expect an overview of
multiple records, presented as a table.

I want to filter many records and limit the search to a subset.
I want to sort those records by one or multiple sort fields.

There are many more conclusions drawn from this expectation, such as
- search and replace operation on multiple records
- normalization of entries
- language conversion
- display variations (e.g. abbreviated, columns with markers
  instead of field contents, html-table or preformatted text,
  reordering of columns, subset of columns, transformation, ...)
- maybe one could even implement spreadsheet like field entry options
- custom sort orders
- search ranges (e.g. depending on field types)
- ...

But the main request here is: wikidata should be able to merge info from
multiple sources into one table overview.

I know about several projects which work this way on wikipedia. One of
them is to filter all wikipedia geo coordinates and put them into one
extracted format. I don't know about the operation after: Could I see this
extracted info in wikipedia/wikidata itself? Could I limit my view of the
full set of data (several thousand records) e.g. to a limited range (e.g.
an area within a certain range). Could I fix errors in this subset? And
would those modification be updated back to the original sources?

I guess, it COULD be done - in theory. I don't know yet whether this is
one of the goals of wikidata.

Thanks,
Martin


body:
On 20/07/05, Dan Grey <dangrey at gmail.com> wrote:
> Are we 100% sure that e-mail is genuine? Assume good faith etc aside
> for a moment, and call me a cynic, but I'd have expected the editor of
> the Observer to be able to type and capitalize properly.
>
> Has anyone mailed the Observer e-mail address asking for confirmation
> of the original e-mail?
>

I followed my own advice and mailed him - yes it is genuine (being
super-cynical I even checked the IPs in the header - they resolve to
The Guardian).

Dan


body:
It appears someone (Fred?) has deleted the offending article and put a
stub in place. Allan also asked me if the comment he left on Sam
Spade's talk page could be removed.

Dan


from_name: Ben

subject: [WikiEN-l] Worrying trends

body:
Larger attempts at voting, such as the Manual of Styles vote over the use of
styles, and the whole mess of GNAA show that there is a huge trend going
towards voting. Consensus always seems like an abstract idea to many, not
easily defineable and up to individual judgements. Voting, it seems, is more
clear cut; majority wins, and no one has to decide which side has the
advantage.

A suggestion could be that the idea of consensus be more easily defined and
propagated.

Ben/Bratshce

On 7/20/05, Michael Turley <michael.turley at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 7/20/05, Chris Jenkinson <chris at starglade.org> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I'm becoming rather worried at the lack of consensus building on
> > requests for adminship and other pages, with oppose votes basically
> > saying "oppose, don't even think about asking why, no is no", and in
> > some cases support votes being challenged and no response (however this
> > is much rarer).
> >
> > This is incredibly damaging in my opinion as Wikipedia operates on
> > consensus, and refusing to discuss not only shows a lack of regard for
> > other people's opinions but gives an arrogant, superior attitude.
> >
> > I must say that I think that everyone who does not respond to a (good
> > faith) questioning comment asking them why should have their
> > vote/opinion on the matter disregarded. If they are not willing to say
> > why they believe what they do then they should not be considered
> > contributing to the discussion. Wikipedia is rightfully not a democracy
> > where you can vote for whatever reason you like. Any position someone
> > takes must be able to be challenged.
> >
> > I would like to see any bureaucrats making a judgement on a close RfA to
> > disregard anybody's vote, either in support or oppose, who have not
> > responded to a challenge for their reasoning.
>
> I already expect some degree of vote discounting and discarding where
> people are unresponsive regarding their votes in RfA nominations.
>
> What I think is even more worrisome and damaging is the drive straight
> to the vote in matters of attempting to change or form new policies.
> See recent votes to expand CSD, template standardization, and template
> location for examples. CSD isn't the best example, as there were
> discussions, but I didn't see any proposed consensus declarations
> before a vote was set up, and that's where I see error in that
> process.
>
> It's almost as if people are deliberately avoiding attempts to form
> consensus either because they don't understand the difference between
> consensus and majority, or they think it's too difficult to reach
> their objectives by consensus, or they're just plain pessimistic about
> the whole process. So they post a vote; starting time: almost
> immediately. Heaven help the one who attempts to delay a poll in
> progress, no matter how premature, as long as it "looks official". It
> seems that scorn is cast on those who claim the result of a poll are
> anything less than binding policy.
>
> I'm not sure how we can help this, but I'd like to start with a
> request. Can we get some bureaucrats, stewards, and other senior
> members of Wikipedia to step in on these issues as they develop and
> strongly discourage votes and polls in general? Would that be a step
> in the right direction?
>
> --
> Michael Turley
> User:Unfocused
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

--
Bratsche-It means "viola!"


body:
On 20/07/05, Dan Grey <dangrey at gmail.com> wrote:
> Allan also asked me if the comment he left on Sam
> Spade's talk page could be removed.

Which has been done...

I'll shut up now.

Dan


from_name: Skyring

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Plagiarism Policy, was A Missing Policy

body:
On 7/20/05, Fred Bauder <fredbaud at ctelco.net> wrote:
> It's very simple. Wikipedia policy requires you to cite your sources,
> see [[Wikipedia:Cite sources]].

In far too many cases, the source is the editor.

I think the discussion here boils down to two concepts, which overlap
to some degree.

Avoiding a charge of plagiarism by citing a source, especially where
that source was used for major or fundamental portions of the article.

Providing useful sources for further reference.

--
Peter in Canberra


subject: [Wikitech-l] Sharing DBs in v1.5b

body:
admin Yellowikis wrote:
> From: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Configuration_settings_index :
>
> =========
> Shared DB settings
>
> Shared database for multiple wikis. Presently used for storing a user
> table for single sign-on. The server for this database must be the
> same as for the main database.
>
> Make sure that the database user you set in $wgDBuser has read-access
> to that database. It might be sufficient to grant read-access to the
> user table only.
>
>     EXPERIMENTAL!
> ==========
>
> I was hoping that I might be able to apply this to the main database
> as well as the user database so people can access the same data
> through different language wikis.

No, but you can select your user interface language in preferences.

If you just point several differently-configured installations at one
complete database you're likely to have trouble with data being written
into the database incorrectly (log entries, caches of rendered items,
the entire set of localized UI strings, etc).

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 253 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20050720/5b08700d/attachment.pgp>


from_name: shizhao

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Zhuang Wikipedia is not in Zhuang

body:
Za wp user Jienji VANG is a ADSL customers from france.

[[zh:user:shizhao]]


subject: [Wikitech-l] Sharing DBs in v1.5b

body:
Well it was a beautiful dream for a few minutes...

I'll have to think a bit more about what to do.

Thanks Brion.

On 7/20/05, Brion Vibber <brion at pobox.com> wrote:
> admin Yellowikis wrote:
> > From: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Configuration_settings_index :
> >
> > =========
> > Shared DB settings
> >
> > Shared database for multiple wikis. Presently used for storing a user
> > table for single sign-on. The server for this database must be the
> > same as for the main database.
> >
> > Make sure that the database user you set in $wgDBuser has read-access
> > to that database. It might be sufficient to grant read-access to the
> > user table only.
> >
> >     EXPERIMENTAL!
> > ==========
> >
> > I was hoping that I might be able to apply this to the main database
> > as well as the user database so people can access the same data
> > through different language wikis.
>
> No, but you can select your user interface language in preferences.
>
> If you just point several differently-configured installations at one
> complete database you're likely to have trouble with data being written
> into the database incorrectly (log entries, caches of rendered items,
> the entire set of localized UI strings, etc).
>
> -- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>
>
>


from_name: Michael Turley

subject: [WikiEN-l] Worrying trends

body:
On 7/20/05, Chris Jenkinson <chris at starglade.org> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm becoming rather worried at the lack of consensus building on
> requests for adminship and other pages, with oppose votes basically
> saying "oppose, don't even think about asking why, no is no", and in
> some cases support votes being challenged and no response (however this
> is much rarer).
>
> This is incredibly damaging in my opinion as Wikipedia operates on
> consensus, and refusing to discuss not only shows a lack of regard for
> other people's opinions but gives an arrogant, superior attitude.
>
> I must say that I think that everyone who does not respond to a (good
> faith) questioning comment asking them why should have their
> vote/opinion on the matter disregarded. If they are not willing to say
> why they believe what they do then they should not be considered
> contributing to the discussion. Wikipedia is rightfully not a democracy
> where you can vote for whatever reason you like. Any position someone
> takes must be able to be challenged.
>
> I would like to see any bureaucrats making a judgement on a close RfA to
> disregard anybody's vote, either in support or oppose, who have not
> responded to a challenge for their reasoning.

I already expect some degree of vote discounting and discarding where
people are unresponsive regarding their votes in RfA nominations.

What I think is even more worrisome and damaging is the drive straight
to the vote in matters of attempting to change or form new policies.
See recent votes to expand CSD, template standardization, and template
location for examples.  CSD isn't the best example, as there were
discussions, but I didn't see any proposed consensus declarations
before a vote was set up, and that's where I see error in that
process.

It's almost as if people are deliberately avoiding attempts to form
consensus either because they don't understand the difference between
consensus and majority, or they think it's too difficult to reach
their objectives by consensus, or they're just plain pessimistic about
the whole process.  So they post a vote; starting time: almost
immediately.  Heaven help the one who attempts to delay a poll in
progress, no matter how premature, as long as it "looks official".  It
seems that scorn is cast on those who claim the result of a poll are
anything less than binding policy.

I'm not sure how we can help this, but I'd like to start with a
request.  Can we get some bureaucrats, stewards, and other senior
members of Wikipedia to step in on these issues as they develop and
strongly discourage votes and polls in general?   Would that be a step
in the right direction?

--
Michael Turley
User:Unfocused


body:
Mark Williamson <node.ue at ...> writes:

>
> Hi Ros,
>
> For examples of "real" Zhuang, please see:
>
> http://www.unhchr.ch/udhr/lang/ccx.htm
> http://rauz.net/list.asp?id=2205
> http://rauz.net/list.asp?id=1064
> http://rauz.net/list.asp?id=2204
> http://rauz.net/list.asp?id=2227
> http://hongdou.gxnews.com.cn/hongdou/forumcenter/forumview.asp?
td=2003&topic_id=198372&pagenum=2
> (see the last reply on the page)
> http://www.kam-
tai.org/languages/zhuang/materials/thestoryofhuasan/lan_09_15.htm
> http://www.chinahistoryforum.com/index.php?showtopic=3971 (lyrics of
> the song are in zhuang)
> http://chinese.pku.edu.cn/yuyanxlwx/71.TXT (the parts in latin letters
> are in zhuang)
> http://www.geocities.co.jp/NatureLand/3973/zhuangyu_ch09.htm
> http://tl.bs165.net/bbs/topic.asp?topic_id=7985 (lyrics of song Cib Bi
> are in Zhuang, the rest of the page is in chinese)
>
> So, as you can see, it looks a bit strange, for example the word for
> "you" is "mwngz", the word for "to" is "daengz"... some people would
> think it's just gibberish, but it's not.
>
> Mark

The zhwp user Flsxx life is in Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region. He understand
some Zhuang language. He say, that I did not see on Latin letter of alphabet
the mark adjust of, seeing add behind in the single phrase only"-" of, and
have a lot of syllables end with the j and z. Zhuang can according to English
or the Chinese language Pinyin of read that the method reads out, Guangxian
can hear understand generally. But writing here I majorities did not see, and
have of can't be like Zhuang language pronounces so. The Zhuang language of"
Guangxi" is "Gvangjsih" or "Gvangsis-", but the article appeared
the "Quaangc?" inside, I understood not too. Can see renminbi, have the Zhuang
up.

[[zh:user:shizhao]]


list: foundation-l

from_name: Robert Scott Horning

subject: [Foundation-l] Fonts

body:
Brion Vibber wrote:

> Zachary Harden wrote:
>
>> Dear Gerard,
>>
>> That sounds like a good idea, but I do have a question: what do you mean
>> by making fonts "free"?
>
>
> Fonts are under copyright unless you know otherwise.
>
> If we're to provide downloadable fonts to readers, they'll need to be
> freely licensed for distribution and use. (Note that many fonts you
> might download off random web sites may be restricted -- 'shareware' or
> non-commercial use or otherwise.)
>
> There are many free font projects out there, though I don't know how
> good the coverage for some languages is.
>
> -- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)

There is a real issue right now with Han (Chinese/Japanese/Korean/etc.)
fonts that support the full Unicode range...even code points to 64,000.
 Microsoft allowed its Unicode font to be downloaded for free---for a
time, but it is now down, and illegal to copy. You can now only get it
when you purchase a Chinese language expansion pack. (if you dig on the
web, there are a few "illegal archives of it, but nothing official.)
 There are several others that are available, but almost all of them are
commercial with substantial licensing fees.  One of the best current
fonts is at:

http://home.att.net/~jameskass/

He only asks for a $5 registration fee, and it is a very good font that
includes many code points for several languages including braille and
signing language fonts (as defined in the Unicode standard), but
unfortunately it is not GFDL compatable in terms of common distribution,
and Mr. Kass is retaining copyright on the font.  I don't know of any
other similar font or free download font that even approaches what this
font can accomplish.  IMHO this is something that needs to be started as
some sort of free content project, but I would have no idea where to
even begin.  I thought I saw a GNU project that was working toward this
end some time ago, but I can't seem to find the page.

--
Robert Scott Horning


list: wikimedia-l

subject: [Foundation-l] Fonts


subject: [WikiEN-l] A Missing Policy

body:
On 7/20/05, Geoff Burling <llywrch at agora.rdrop.com> wrote:
>
> In short, if you have to steal material for Wikipedia, don't steal like a
> plagiarist; steal like T.S. Eliot. And if you can't steal it, quote it
> & provide a source so we know who the words belong to.

As a poet (example below) I can appreciate this stealing of material.
Robert Heinlein used to say much the same thing except he always added
something about filing off the serial numbers.

My problem with this is that if we steal something and alter it enough
to be unrecognisable, then how does this square with "No Original
Research".

Now that poem. I stole this from an anecdote by a columnist in an
Australian newspaper about being in a lift with Lionel Murphy.

Your task: to write the funniest poem you can, in any style, on the
subject of mistaken identity.

Sunday Morning Coming Down and Letting Go
=========================================

After service this morning we lingered, we three,
The reverend Golightly, my dear wife and me.
The sun streamed in as we talked at the door;
The stained glass tinting the old wooden floor.
I relaxed for a moment, and then with a sigh
My breakfast beans blew quietly by.

I thought I'd escaped, and I would have had if
It hadn't been *quite* so much of a whiff.
My wife stopped her chatter, sniffed and said "Pooh!"
Then gazed at me sternly. "Was that awful smell you?"
She gave me a Look and my heart gave a lurch,
What, admit before God that I'd farted in church?

"Me, dear? Of course not!" I said without thinking.
Holding my ground as they both stood there blinking.
A moment of hush and the reverend mused
"Oh it must have been me, then. Please do excuse!"

Pete, all his own work


from_name: Gerard Meijssen

body:
Martin Trautmann wrote:

>Hi all,
>
>I'm not yet sure about the real purpose of the wikidata project.
>
>Currently I feel a (or the?) main part is the data entry.
>
>I welcome a reasonable and simplified approach. I guess, a
>form based entry is the most obvious solution. But I'm not sure about the
>appropriate Wiki syntax for the 'expert' mode where everything is open to
>extended definitions. I feel the syntax should be closer to XML instead of
>HTML commands, since XHTML2 becomes more and more stable. I guess that
>there's not much help to implement a new syntax without upcoming standards
>in mind.
>
>
With Wikidata, you are talking about relational data. It means that the
data is presented in a fixed format for Wikidata data. There will be
restraints to what can be entered where. Entering data using SQL will be
possible for those who have database access. Typically batch data will
be entered using XML. For Ultimate Wiktionary, we are considering TBX.
The import and export of batch data is seperate from the base functionality.

>
>However, I expect a rather different result from wikidata: I'd like to
>access not only one fixed set of data, but I'd expect an overview of
>multiple records, presented as a table.
>
>I want to filter many records and limit the search to a subset.
>I want to sort those records by one or multiple sort fields.
>
>There are many more conclusions drawn from this expectation, such as
>- search and replace operation on multiple records
>- normalization of entries
>- language conversion
>- display variations (e.g. abbreviated, columns with markers
>  instead of field contents, html-table or preformatted text,
>  reordering of columns, subset of columns, transformation, ...)
>- maybe one could even implement spreadsheet like field entry options
>- custom sort orders
>- search ranges (e.g. depending on field types)
>- ...
>
>
>
As it is a relational database, the inclusion of a translation for
"Dutch" in a language will imply that the User Interface of that
language will use that translation in stead of "Dutch". Normalisation of
entries is implicit in a relational database. Language conversion is
possible if the datadesign allows for it. Several projects have been
described on Meta that make use of this eg
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Using_Ultimate_Wiktionary_for_Commons
Ultimate Wiktionary does this explicitly (see the ERD)

It would be nice to have all the things you describe as spreadsheet like
functionality, custom sort orders etc. We are however talking about a
server side application. These kind of functionality require huge
amounts of processing power and disk IO, I do not think this will prove
to be practical. We will have some fixed functionality and we should be
happy when we achieve that.

>But the main request here is: wikidata should be able to merge info from
>multiple sources into one table overview.
>
>
As Wikidata will be relational, it will not be one table overview.
Merging data in one repository however is very much the goal.

>
>I know about several projects which work this way on wikipedia. One of
>them is to filter all wikipedia geo coordinates and put them into one
>extracted format. I don't know about the operation after: Could I see this
>extracted info in wikipedia/wikidata itself? Could I limit my view of the
>full set of data (several thousand records) e.g. to a limited range (e.g.
>an area within a certain range). Could I fix errors in this subset? And
>would those modification be updated back to the original sources?
>
>
When geodata becomes a Wikidata project; the data will be available in a
database, this database should be lanuguage neutral so that the data
should be useable in all our projects. This will be its first
application; sharing data and making data available to all projects.
Providing other types of access to the database is a next step. Given
the problems that we have with keeping our search engine always on line,
I think that would have priority over all kinds of nifty search
functionality on Wikidata data.

Fixing data in Wikidata projects, adding, modifying and removing is very
much the object of the excercise. As this is database information it
should be reflected instantly.

>I guess, it COULD be done - in theory. I don't know yet whether this is
>one of the goals of wikidata.
>
>Thanks,
>Martin
>
>


subject: [WikiEN-l] hello

body:
On 7/20/05, Christopher Larberg <christopherlarberg at gmail.com> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 7/19/05, Skyring <skyring at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Well, I don't know that it is a scam. A quick look through Google Web
> > and Groups on keywords and names and there's nothing jumping out at
> > me. If it is a scam it's a remarkably subtle one. The only thing that
> > looks odd to me is the mis-spelling of "Geraldine".
> >
> > Usually we're given a lot more information up front, such as the
> > amount of money - a fairly hefty amount is the rule - and a "come-on"
> > as to how we can help get a part of it for free. Perhaps Jeannette
> > only wants to know the names of banks in England so she can write to
> > them on behalf of her late uncle.
> >
> > Having said that, it sounds a bit odd, and heaven knows why she picked
> > this list to query.
>
> What, aren't random strangers on the Internet the first people /you/
> turn to when you have pressing legal and financial questions? ;)

Well, of course. But Wikipedia isn't exactly random strangers. We
purport to have a mine of information. If you go to answers.com, as
well you might when seeking an answer, and ask a question about bank
deposits, you are given a link to Wikipedia.

So it's plausible, as Mythbusters would say.

--
Pete, wondering if this ties in with all that "Bank of Wikipedia" stuff


from_name: Geoff Burling

body:
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005, Skyring wrote:

> On 7/20/05, Ben <bratsche1 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > This is just the way to prevent some more instruction creep: reinforce and
> > enforce existing policies.
>
> Yup. NOR and CITE cover the plagiarism issue.
>
Well, I beg to differ. As I pointed out in another email, adding
plagiarised content to Wikipedia can be understood as taking written
material someone owns & releases it under the GFDL or Creative Commons
without first consulting the author or owner.

Now plagiarism is a very specific situation that is related to CITE,
but I do not feel is identical to it. CITE refers to the facts or
assertions in an article; plagiarism refers to the language. And if
one editor reuses text in a Wikipedia article that is similar enough
to its unattributed source that a Google search can reasonably identify
it, then the question of a copyright infringement ensues.

And although the usual defence against a copyright infringement is to
invoke "fair use", because no one recognizes plagiarism as fair use
it therefore should be treated as a copyright violation -- unless the
editor responsible properly adds cites/references either at the time
of the edit -- or in a reasonably short period afterwards.

In short, plagiarism should be treated as a copyright violation, &
should be explicitly covered in our policies under copyright. Does
this seem reasonable to everyone?

***NOTE***: I will interpret silence as consent, & if no one objects,
submit this as a proposed Wikipedia Policy.

Geoff


subject: [Foundation-l] Commons copyright violotion and OTRS

body:
Gerard Meijssen wrote:

> Hoi,
> On OTRS I received a complaint that some photo's were taken from a
> website. As the photo's were located on Commons, I informed the
> gentleman to go to the Commons administrators. In this case they were
> world war II photo's of machine guns. I told the gentleman that even
> if the photos were taken from his website, it would not matter when
> the photos are already in the pubic domain.
>
> The question, as it is not possible for a Dutch admin to remove photos
> from Commons and as it has no impact to remove the pictures from an
> article, is it correct to refer this gentleman to the Commons admins
> or is there / should there be a procedure for these issues.

On Commons, if you think there is a copyright tag you can throw on
images you think are in dispute, which is the {{Copyvio}} tag, and any
user can add that onto the image.  You don't need to be an admin.
 Please make sure you put in a reason on the image page when you think
there is a problem, or try and contact the user who uploaded the content
(to be kind to a potential new user who thought uploading random stuff
from web pages was appropriate).  The tag will get flagged to a category
which the admins on Commons check very regularly, and will delete if it
is against Commons policy.

--
Robert Scott Horning


body:
On 2005-07-20 12:26, Gerard Meijssen wrote:
> Entering data using SQL will be
> possible for those who have database access.

Ah, thanks, I did not know yet that this could be done from outside
wihtout downloading the full database to do it locally.

> As it is a relational database, the inclusion of a translation for
> "Dutch" in a language will imply that the User Interface of that
> language will use that translation in stead of "Dutch".

translation can be twofold: some data is native in one language which
would required real translation mechanisms.

However, lots of data is in any kind of numerics or normalized form. Thus
it's mainly a definition of native column headers or field type formats
(e.g. date conversion from mm.dd.yyyy to yyyy-mm-dd).

> Several projects have been
> described on Meta that make use of this eg
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Using_Ultimate_Wiktionary_for_Commons
> Ultimate Wiktionary does this explicitly (see the ERD)

I never looked at those Wiktionary details. Thanks - I'll check later on.
Maybe I should check for inclusions of my *ictionaries, such as
Phictionary: Photographic terms http://home.arcor.de/objektive/Phictionary.html
Bictionary: Bicycle terms http://www.fa-technik.adfc.de/Ratgeber/Bictionary/index.html

A dictionary is one of those examples where you want search and table
options, although the sort requirement is less important.

> It would be nice to have all the things you describe as spreadsheet like
> functionality, custom sort orders etc. We are however talking about a
> server side application. These kind of functionality require huge
> amounts of processing power and disk IO, I do not think this will prove
> to be practical.

I agree that search, sort etc. are server side - and those are huge task.
However, google and other search engines show that you may list many found
hits on one pages. It's just not in a table view yet.

I don't know about spreadsheet like operation. I guess there could be
different client side editors (any kind based on some Java* ?) that could
permit spreadsheet like operations, while the SQL interface might be the
easiest choice. I guess it's more the question of providing or
recommending the proper SQL tools and setup for this kind of work.

> Merging data in one repository however is very much the goal.

Glad to hear.

I didn't understand this kind of info from
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikidata

Thanks,
Martin


body:
On 20/07/05, Daniel Mayer <maveric149 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> I completely agree. The article should be deleted and a stub of verified info
> left in its place.
>
> -- mav

...which, as I've said, has been done.

Dan


from_name: Magnus Manske

body:
Speaking of wikidata, is anyone actually working on software? If so, who
and where? I'd like to have a look, after I wrote that mockup some time
ago and then declared it unfeasible...

Magnus
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 253 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20050720/75506b0a/attachment.pgp>


body:
Magnus Manske wrote:

>Speaking of wikidata, is anyone actually working on software? If so, who
>and where? I'd like to have a look, after I wrote that mockup some time
>ago and then declared it unfeasible...
>
>Magnus
>
>
Hoi,
I am suprised that you are not aware that Erik Moeller is working on it.
Erik has promissed to deliver the first bits of software in the near
future. Erik did publish some documentation on Meta including some
descriptions of how it is to work.
Thanks,
    GerardM


from_name: JAY JG

subject: [WikiEN-l] Worrying trends

body:
>From: Chris Jenkinson <chris at starglade.org>
>
>I must say that I think that everyone who does not respond to a (good
>faith) questioning comment asking them why should have their
>vote/opinion on the matter disregarded. If they are not willing to say
>why they believe what they do then they should not be considered
>contributing to the discussion. Wikipedia is rightfully not a democracy
>where you can vote for whatever reason you like. Any position someone
>takes must be able to be challenged.

Well, speaking personally, I've probably voted in support of 3 dozen RFAs,
and only voted against 3 applications, each time listing my reasons.  In
each case I was challenged, sometimes in a most rude way, for more detail.
When I provided it, giving links to examples of policy violations etc.,  I
was attacked again.  Those who did not give reasons  for rejecting the
applications were not subject to these violations of [[Wikipedia:Civility]]
policy.  It would be most tempting, in the future, to simply vote "No" and
refuse to give a reason, in order to avoid this kind of unpleasant
treatment.

Jay.


from_name: Haukur Þorgeirsson

subject: [WikiEN-l] Fwd: Wikipedia is fun, but credibility varies a lot

body:
> First, the English Wikipedia had about 640,000
> articles at the time your article was published.
> Not 444,000. Second, Jimmy Wales started Wikipedia
> under the ownership of Bomis in 2001 - The Wikimedia
> Foundation was not formed until June of 2003.
>
> If your article had been published on Wikinews,
> then these errors would have been very quickly
> corrected before being marked for publication.

Touch?!

Haukur


body:
Gerard Meijssen wrote:

>> On Commons, if you think there is a copyright tag you can throw on
>> images you think are in dispute, which is the {{Copyvio}} tag, and
>> any user can add that onto the image.  You don't need to be an admin.
>> Please make sure you put in a reason on the image page when you think
>> there is a problem, or try and contact the user who uploaded the
>> content (to be kind to a potential new user who thought uploading
>> random stuff from web pages was appropriate).  The tag will get
>> flagged to a category which the admins on Commons check very
>> regularly, and will delete if it is against Commons policy.
>>
> Hoi,
> In this case Commons states that it is public domain. There is this
> user who has just another WW II website and is the opinion that we
> copied his website. I am not completely aware of how these things are
> done on Commons and, I do not agree with some of the procedures that I
> do know. The thing is with OTRS, I am not just some user. By notifying
> me of this issue the gentleman may think he is talking to the WMF
> itself while in fact it has nothing to do with the nl.wikipedia. So
> the issue is also a bit bigger than just this and that is why I ask
> for some guidance.

What needs to be done here is to research exactly who may be correct.
 Many WWII photographs are likely to still be under copyright (the
life+75 rule has not gone into effect yet, or the 100 year rule...
depending on what copyright laws you are using, and was published after
1924 when prior copyright had entered into public domain) and my gut
feeling is that it is likely to be a copyright violation.  When I throw
stuff onto Commons, I make extra sure that I cite exactly where I got
the image and what the terms and conditions of that image were.  Too
often an assumption was that it was on a government website, therefore
it is 100% legal to put on Commons.  That is rarely the case.  Images
without a specific URL to where the image was uploaded from (making it
easier to check PD status) or a specifc statement from the user claiming
to have scanned in a photograph in their possession (or have taken it
with their own equipment) I find highly suspicious.  Images that simply
have {{PD}} and no other comments I find especially suspicious.  They
may be public domain images, but there is no basis to confirm this fact.

One way to also check on this is to do a Google image search.  This
would at least try to see if similar photos are on other websites and if
the person who is complaining is making a stink about copyright on
something they don't own (such as some people I've seen claim copyright
on Wikipedia content and then ask for Wikipedia to remove it).  I
wouldn't spend too much time trying to track down an image in this
manner, however.

--
Robert Scott Horning


from_name: Fred Bauder

body:
I don't think you have this right. Both CITE and plagiarism refers to
facts or assertions. If the language is identical or nearly so there
may also be a copyright violation. To use facts from any source
without citing the source is plagiarism. Since Wikipedia requires
that all information used be drawn from a reputable source any
information included in Wikipedia for which no source is cited either
technically violates the requirement that it be from a reputable
source or that its source be cited. Of course, citing the source for
common information makes no sense and is an exception.

Fred

On Jul 20, 2005, at 1:38 PM, Geoff Burling wrote:

> Well, I beg to differ. As I pointed out in another email, adding
> plagiarised content to Wikipedia can be understood as taking written
> material someone owns & releases it under the GFDL or Creative Commons
> without first consulting the author or owner.
>
> Now plagiarism is a very specific situation that is related to CITE,
> but I do not feel is identical to it. CITE refers to the facts or
> assertions in an article; plagiarism refers to the language. And if
> one editor reuses text in a Wikipedia article that is similar enough
> to its unattributed source that a Google search can reasonably
> identify
> it, then the question of a copyright infringement ensues.
>
> And although the usual defence against a copyright infringement is to
> invoke "fair use", because no one recognizes plagiarism as fair use
> it therefore should be treated as a copyright violation -- unless the
> editor responsible properly adds cites/references either at the time
> of the edit -- or in a reasonably short period afterwards.
>
> In short, plagiarism should be treated as a copyright violation, &
> should be explicitly covered in our policies under copyright. Does
> this seem reasonable to everyone?
>
> ***NOTE***: I will interpret silence as consent, & if no one objects,
> submit this as a proposed Wikipedia Policy.
>
> Geoff


from_name: Mark Williamson

subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: Case sensitivity on Afrikaans Wiktionary

body:
Hi Gerard,

Signed languages are completely independent systems, and are separate
languages from spoken languages, different in grammar, syntax, and the
like. Unfortunately, there is no universally-agreed-upon method for
transcribing signed languages.

There are a few possibilities here.

1) Choose a particular transcription system. Top of the list would be
Stokoe, and Sutton Sign Writing; HamNoSys is also possible but is
mostly used by linguists while the other two are used more widely by
people who use it as their everyday language.

2) Use multimedia. We can upload videos of people signing a particular
word. Note that some signed languages also have conjugations and
inflections. However, this will leave a problem of headwords -- how do
you look up a word in a signed language? Which leads to the third
option,

3) Introduce our own notation system. This is impractical and unlikely
to work well. I suggest that instead, we adopt HamNoSys for lookup
purposes, although it is not represented by Unicode, we can try an
ASCII implementation.

Regarding "dialects" of Chinese and Arabic, that is very simple. Treat
them as separate languages. While certainly most often people write in
"Standard Arabic" or "Standard Chinese", it is also possible to write
in the local vernacular. This tends to be done more with Arabic, but
is possible with either. With Chinese, you only see it very often with
Cantonese, other varieties are occasionally but you are more likely to
find a Bible translation in them than a newspaper.

I hope very much that you will not restrict languages to those which
appear on the ISO 639-3 list. It has many shortcomings and is very,
very, very disappointing -- it would not allow for separate entries
for Yavapai, Hualapai, and Havasupai (it has only one code for them
all), even though they are very much different languages, and it by no
means includes all the languages of the world. It also separates
between Moroccan, Tunisian, and Algerian Arabic, when they're really
nearly identical.

Mark

On 20/07/05, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
> Timwi wrote:
>
> > Gerard Meijssen wrote:
> >
> >> I would welcome your comments about the ERD that I posted here
> >> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:ERD.jpg
> >
> >
> > Looks interesting, but is extremely bare. It would do well with a bit
> > of documentation. For much of it, the purpose isn't entirely clear.
> > I'm particularly confused as to why "Language", "Word" and "Meaning"
> > are each duplicated.
>
> Hoi,
> There is some documentation here:
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Ultimate_Wiktionary_data_design and
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Ultimate_Wiktionary_decisions_on_its_usage
> here.
> The duplication reflects that there is at least one table that has two
> relations to the same table. Language refers to itself for dialects,
> Word refers through Conju/Decli (conjucation or declinations) to a
> headword and derived words, Meaning is related through "Relations" this
> is to allow for thesaurus like structures.
>
> One reason why it is not as much documented as I would like is, because
> I am still working on the structure. At this moment I am thinking hard
> on how to include signed languages and the spoken dialects of the
> Chinese and Arabic written language.
>
> Thanks,
>     GerardM
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>

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


from_name: Chris Jenkinson

subject: [WikiEN-l] Worrying trends

body:
Hi all,

I'm becoming rather worried at the lack of consensus building on
requests for adminship and other pages, with oppose votes basically
saying "oppose, don't even think about asking why, no is no", and in
some cases support votes being challenged and no response (however this
is much rarer).

This is incredibly damaging in my opinion as Wikipedia operates on
consensus, and refusing to discuss not only shows a lack of regard for
other people's opinions but gives an arrogant, superior attitude.

I must say that I think that everyone who does not respond to a (good
faith) questioning comment asking them why should have their
vote/opinion on the matter disregarded. If they are not willing to say
why they believe what they do then they should not be considered
contributing to the discussion. Wikipedia is rightfully not a democracy
where you can vote for whatever reason you like. Any position someone
takes must be able to be challenged.

I would like to see any bureaucrats making a judgement on a close RfA to
disregard anybody's vote, either in support or oppose, who have not
responded to a challenge for their reasoning.

Chris

--
Chris Jenkinson
chris at starglade.org


from_name: Patrick Erwin

subject: [WikiEN-l] Press Inquiry

body:
Hello, my name is Patrick Erwin. I'm a freelance
reporter based in Madison, Wisconsin. Our local daily
paper the Wisconsin State Journal (www.madison.com)
has commissioned me to write a piece on Wikipedia.

I'm also a Wikipedian, too (see user: NickBurns).

I have experience with the site and don't need many of
the whens, wheres, and hows filled in, but was hoping
to talk to an official spokesperson to ask a few minor
questions. As we all know, it's good to name sources
and it's great to quote the source directly - no
weasel speak!

Please let me know who best to direct this inquiry to.

I look forward to your reply.

Patrick Erwin
pce53703 at yahoo.com
608.294.9695

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


from_name: David 'DJ' Hedley

subject: [WikiEN-l] Worrying trends

body:
A reasoning should be mandatory for an oppose vote. See Boothy443, a while
back, who put "ADMINS ARE EVIL" on talk pages and voted oppose on every RfA
until FCYTravis'. Support votes are in agreement of the nomination, so that
is their reasoning. Neutral votes and oppose votes, however, are not and
should need to explain why they aren't. Bureaucrats should also make their
judgement on such reasoning.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris Jenkinson" <chris at starglade.org>
To: "English Wikipedia" <wikien-l at wikipedia.org>
Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2005 4:09 PM
Subject: [WikiEN-l] Worrying trends

> Hi all,
>
> I'm becoming rather worried at the lack of consensus building on
> requests for adminship and other pages, with oppose votes basically
> saying "oppose, don't even think about asking why, no is no", and in
> some cases support votes being challenged and no response (however this
> is much rarer).
>
> This is incredibly damaging in my opinion as Wikipedia operates on
> consensus, and refusing to discuss not only shows a lack of regard for
> other people's opinions but gives an arrogant, superior attitude.
>
> I must say that I think that everyone who does not respond to a (good
> faith) questioning comment asking them why should have their
> vote/opinion on the matter disregarded. If they are not willing to say
> why they believe what they do then they should not be considered
> contributing to the discussion. Wikipedia is rightfully not a democracy
> where you can vote for whatever reason you like. Any position someone
> takes must be able to be challenged.
>
> I would like to see any bureaucrats making a judgement on a close RfA to
> disregard anybody's vote, either in support or oppose, who have not
> responded to a challenge for their reasoning.
>
> Chris
>
> --
> Chris Jenkinson
> chris at starglade.org
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


subject: [Foundation-l] Fonts

body:
Hoi,
I am doing some research for Ultimate Wiktionary. As Ultimate Wiktionary
intends to have all words in all languages, a consequence will be that
all those words that are in rare fonts will not be viewable. This is to
some extend already an issue. It is quite normal when we have an article
in wikipedia about a foreign place to include the way it is written in
that country. This is problematic for places like Ethiopia, Georgia or
Thailand to name just a few with interesting fonts.

On previous wikimeets I attended we did discuss the need for a
collection of fonts that would include as many fonts as we can get for
our public. It would help a lot if we could have one resource that is
free for use and that does include all the needed fonts. If it requires
a reasonable amount of money to buy a missing font to make it Free, I
think it is worthy of consideration. I am also sure that when we
acknowledge the people who make fonts available for this purpose we will
be able to get many resources for free.

The issue of fonts came again to my attention because I do not have
braille of signing language fonts and I really would like to be able to
include the words and their representation in script in the Ultimate
Wiktionary as well. Technically speaking, it is not necessary for me to
have these fonts but I do consider it wrong to have content that the
average user will not be able to display. Therefore my request to
consider having fonts as a resource that we want to support for our users.

Thanks,
  GerardM


subject: [Foundation-l] Fonts


from_name: Delirium

body:
Robert Scott Horning wrote:

> What needs to be done here is to research exactly who may be correct.
> Many WWII photographs are likely to still be under copyright (the
> life+75 rule has not gone into effect yet, or the 100 year rule...
> depending on what copyright laws you are using, and was published
> after 1924 when prior copyright had entered into public domain) and my
> gut feeling is that it is likely to be a copyright violation.

A significant portion of WW2-era photographs were taken by U.S.
government personnel during the course of their official duties, and are
therefore in the public domain.

In any case, someone running a WW2 website doesn't have much of a claim
against us, unless *they* took the pictures, or otherwise own the
copyrights to them.

-Mark


from_name: steve v

body:
The article did'nt have any real substance to respond
to anyway, so why bother? I know, I know--care
requires correctionality. Hmph.

-SC

--- Daniel Mayer <maveric149 at yahoo.com> wrote:

> Below is an email I sent to the author of an article
> that was semi-critical of
> Wikipedia. I think it illustrates the way many in
> academia don't get it and how
> many of those are polluting the critical thinking
> skills of students.

http://www.democratandchronicle.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050717/BUSINESS0105/507170321/1001/BUSINESS

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


from_name: Daniel Mayer

body:
--- steve v <vertigosteve at yahoo.com> wrote:
> The article did'nt have any real substance to respond
> to anyway, so why bother? I know, I know--care
> requires correctionality. Hmph.

Irony. The article was critical of Wikipedia for not being vetted by experts
and thus not reliable. Yet it was written by a person with a PdD who made very
obvious factual errors that have yet to be corrected.

I have yet to get a response from her, but I don't expect one either.

-- mav

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


body:
Speaking of obvious errors, here is a typo: PdP -> PhD

--- Daniel Mayer <maveric149 at yahoo.com> wrote:

> --- steve v <vertigosteve at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > The article did'nt have any real substance to respond
> > to anyway, so why bother? I know, I know--care
> > requires correctionality. Hmph.
>
> Irony. The article was critical of Wikipedia for not being vetted by experts
> and thus not reliable. Yet it was written by a person with a PdD who made
> very
> obvious factual errors that have yet to be corrected.
>
> I have yet to get a response from her, but I don't expect one either.
>
> -- mav
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

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


subject: [WikiEN-l] Worrying trends

body:
Wikipedia's Achilles heel was inevitably going to be
its size, and the unwieldiness of managing or guiding
large group trends. If you think about any society in
general, its continuity is dependent on the
establishement of ritual behaviours. Wikipedia's core
principles are for the most part exactly what should
be, but Ive been concerned that we lack rituals for
indoctrinating people into a sense of our community
goals and nature.

Indoctrination? Yea--if people feel like a mere
number,(relative to others I suppose), then only those
with the a healthy and egotistical presumptuousness
will tend to be assertive, and gain for their online
persona. The purpose of encyclopediasm and community
are not entirely in sync --community requires
personality, which can be obstructive to the goal of
being NPOV and detached.

So, (more smoke out of... (MSOOMA)) if conceptual
continuity is based upon outdated modalities of
community, then that may (conceptually) validate the
worries that of the community growing thinner as it
grows larger. Certainly its worrisome to think that
good articles today can be turned into porridge by a
slew of new, dissassociated editors, but that's
perhaps where "Wikifaith" comes in, I suppose.

The general idea, back in the day, was that as
problems grow, the community must restructure to
answer them. Disputes gotten too big for JW and the
mailing lists?--empower a committee to deal with this,
and another to deal with that. The point is that these
committees are more than just bantha fodder--they
represent community structure, which is just as
important as software structure, or NPO structure. If
were not responsive in terms of community structure...
<i>aw, look at me, I'm ramblin' again.  Wal, uh hope
you folks enjoyed yourselves. Catch ya further on down
the trail.</i>

SV

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

> >From: Chris Jenkinson <chris at starglade.org>
> >
> >I must say that I think that everyone who does not
> respond to a (good
> >faith) questioning comment asking them why should
> have their
> >vote/opinion on the matter disregarded. If they are
> not willing to say
> >why they believe what they do then they should not
> be considered
> >contributing to the discussion. Wikipedia is
> rightfully not a democracy
> >where you can vote for whatever reason you like.
> Any position someone
> >takes must be able to be challenged.
>
> Well, speaking personally, I've probably voted in
> support of 3 dozen RFAs,
> and only voted against 3 applications, each time
> listing my reasons.  In
> each case I was challenged, sometimes in a most rude
> way, for more detail.
> When I provided it, giving links to examples of
> policy violations etc.,  I
> was attacked again.  Those who did not give reasons
> for rejecting the
> applications were not subject to these violations of
> [[Wikipedia:Civility]]
> policy.  It would be most tempting, in the future,
> to simply vote "No" and
> refuse to give a reason, in order to avoid this kind
> of unpleasant
> treatment.
>
> Jay.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

____________________________________________________
Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs


from_name: Zachary Harden

subject: [Foundation-l] Fonts

body:
Dear Gerard,

That sounds like a good idea, but I do have a question: what do you mean by
making fonts "free"?

Regards,

Zachary Harden, en:User:Zscout370

>From: Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com>
>Reply-To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List <foundation-l at wikimedia.org>
>To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List <foundation-l at wikimedia.org>
>Subject: [Foundation-l] Fonts
>Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2005 16:57:00 +0200
>
>Hoi,
>I am doing some research for Ultimate Wiktionary. As Ultimate Wiktionary
>intends to have all words in all languages, a consequence will be that all
>those words that are in rare fonts will not be viewable. This is to some
>extend already an issue. It is quite normal when we have an article in
>wikipedia about a foreign place to include the way it is written in that
>country. This is problematic for places like Ethiopia, Georgia or Thailand
>to name just a few with interesting fonts.
>
>On previous wikimeets I attended we did discuss the need for a collection
>of fonts that would include as many fonts as we can get for our public. It
>would help a lot if we could have one resource that is free for use and
>that does include all the needed fonts. If it requires a reasonable amount
>of money to buy a missing font to make it Free, I think it is worthy of
>consideration. I am also sure that when we acknowledge the people who make
>fonts available for this purpose we will be able to get many resources for
>free.
>
>The issue of fonts came again to my attention because I do not have braille
>of signing language fonts and I really would like to be able to include the
>words and their representation in script in the Ultimate Wiktionary as
>well. Technically speaking, it is not necessary for me to have these fonts
>but I do consider it wrong to have content that the average user will not
>be able to display. Therefore my request to consider having fonts as a
>resource that we want to support for our users.


subject: [Foundation-l] Fonts


from_name: Gerold Kathan

subject: [Wikitech-l] migration towards snipsnap

body:
hi there,
one short question => is there a way to export / migrate content from mediawiki which can be used for importing into another wiki (e.g. snipsnap)

th?nx and greets from vienna,
gerold.


body:
Plus, she wrote it at about a high school level.
Yeesh.

SV

--- Daniel Mayer <maveric149 at yahoo.com> wrote:

> --- steve v <vertigosteve at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > The article did'nt have any real substance to
> respond
> > to anyway, so why bother? I know, I know--care
> > requires correctionality. Hmph.
>
> Irony. The article was critical of Wikipedia for not
> being vetted by experts
> and thus not reliable. Yet it was written by a
> person with a PdD who made very
> obvious factual errors that have yet to be
> corrected.
>
> I have yet to get a response from her, but I don't
> expect one either.
>
> -- mav
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

____________________________________________________
Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs


subject: [WikiEN-l] Worrying trends

body:
Dear All,

Boothy443, from when I last checked the RfA pages, has still opposed many
RfA's. At the one related to user Greg Robson, Greg asked Boothy to give a
reasoning why, but another user said Boothy does not have to and that Boothy
does what they do all of the time. The exchange can be seen at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RfA#GregRobson.

Regards,

Zachary Harden

>From: "David 'DJ' Hedley" <spyders at btinternet.com>
>Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
>To: "English Wikipedia" <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
>Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Worrying trends
>Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2005 16:50:34 +0100
>
>A reasoning should be mandatory for an oppose vote. See Boothy443, a while
>back, who put "ADMINS ARE EVIL" on talk pages and voted oppose on every RfA
>until FCYTravis'. Support votes are in agreement of the nomination, so that
>is their reasoning. Neutral votes and oppose votes, however, are not and
>should need to explain why they aren't. Bureaucrats should also make their
>judgement on such reasoning.
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Chris Jenkinson" <chris at starglade.org>
>To: "English Wikipedia" <wikien-l at wikipedia.org>
>Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2005 4:09 PM
>Subject: [WikiEN-l] Worrying trends
>
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I'm becoming rather worried at the lack of consensus building on
> > requests for adminship and other pages, with oppose votes basically
> > saying "oppose, don't even think about asking why, no is no", and in
> > some cases support votes being challenged and no response (however this
> > is much rarer).
> >
> > This is incredibly damaging in my opinion as Wikipedia operates on
> > consensus, and refusing to discuss not only shows a lack of regard for
> > other people's opinions but gives an arrogant, superior attitude.
> >
> > I must say that I think that everyone who does not respond to a (good
> > faith) questioning comment asking them why should have their
> > vote/opinion on the matter disregarded. If they are not willing to say
> > why they believe what they do then they should not be considered
> > contributing to the discussion. Wikipedia is rightfully not a democracy
> > where you can vote for whatever reason you like. Any position someone
> > takes must be able to be challenged.
> >
> > I would like to see any bureaucrats making a judgement on a close RfA to
> > disregard anybody's vote, either in support or oppose, who have not
> > responded to a challenge for their reasoning.
> >
> > Chris
> >
> > --
> > Chris Jenkinson
> > chris at starglade.org
> > _______________________________________________
> > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >
>
>_______________________________________________
>WikiEN-l mailing list
>WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l


from_name: Brion Vibber

subject: [Wikitech-l] namespace in new dump scheme

body:
David Campeau wrote:
> How does one go to know what namespace is an article in the new dump scheme.
> xml looks something like this:
[snip]
> are we supposed to load the *ns0 file to know what article are in ns0? what
> about the other namespace?

The list of namespaces is right there in the dump:

<mediawiki xmlns="http://www.mediawiki.org/xml/export-0.3/"
xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.mediawiki.org/xml/export-0.3/
http://www.mediawiki.org/xml/export-0.3.xsd" version="0.3" xml:lang="aa">
<siteinfo>
   <sitename>Wikipedia</sitename>
   <base>http://aa.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page</base>
   <generator>MediaWiki 1.5beta3</generator>
   <case>first-letter</case>
   <namespaces>
     <namespace key="-2">Media</namespace>
     <namespace key="-1">Special</namespace>
     <namespace key="0" />
     <namespace key="1">Talk</namespace>
     <namespace key="2">User</namespace>
     <namespace key="3">User talk</namespace>
     <namespace key="4">Wikipedia</namespace>
     <namespace key="5">Wikipedia talk</namespace>
     <namespace key="6">Image</namespace>
     <namespace key="7">Image talk</namespace>
     <namespace key="8">MediaWiki</namespace>
     <namespace key="9">MediaWiki talk</namespace>
     <namespace key="10">Template</namespace>
     <namespace key="11">Template talk</namespace>
     <namespace key="12">Help</namespace>
     <namespace key="13">Help talk</namespace>
     <namespace key="14">Category</namespace>
     <namespace key="15">Category talk</namespace>
   </namespaces>
</siteinfo>
<page>
   <title>MediaWiki:1movedto2</title>
   <id>1</id>
...

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 253 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20050720/5177c9fd/attachment.pgp>


subject: [Wikitech-l] migration towards snipsnap

body:
Gerold Kathan wrote:
> hi there, one short question => is there a way to export / migrate
> content from mediawiki which can be used for importing into another
> wiki (e.g. snipsnap)

In 1.5, you can use dumpBackup.php to do a full XML-format dump of all
pages, with or without history.

In 1.4 or earlier, you can fairly simply read current page text out of
the 'cur' table, old revisions in the 'old' table (may be compressed).
You can also use Special:Export to grab individual or multiple named
pages in XML dump format, with or without full history.

See http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Export for some info on the XML
dump format; it's a pretty straightforward text+metadata wrapper.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 253 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20050720/604e83c4/attachment.pgp>


from_name: Dori

subject: [Foundation-l] Fonts

body:
On 7/20/05, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
<snip>
> On previous wikimeets I attended we did discuss the need for a
> collection of fonts that would include as many fonts as we can get for
> our public. It would help a lot if we could have one resource that is
> free for use and that does include all the needed fonts. If it requires
> a reasonable amount of money to buy a missing font to make it Free, I
> think it is worthy of consideration. I am also sure that when we
> acknowledge the people who make fonts available for this purpose we will
> be able to get many resources for free.

Good fonts require tons of time from professional artists. I don't
think the foundation could buy them for all languages we support
unless we somehow come across a few million dollars. We'd probably
have better luck convincing Microsoft to open source theirs.

Dori


subject: [Foundation-l] Fonts


from_name: Michael Snow

subject: [Foundation-l] Re: Commons copyright violation and OTRS

body:
Delirium wrote:

> Robert Scott Horning wrote:
>
>> What needs to be done here is to research exactly who may be correct.
>> Many WWII photographs are likely to still be under copyright (the
>> life+75 rule has not gone into effect yet, or the 100 year rule...
>> depending on what copyright laws you are using, and was published
>> after 1924 when prior copyright had entered into public domain) and
>> my gut feeling is that it is likely to be a copyright violation.
>
> A significant portion of WW2-era photographs were taken by U.S.
> government personnel during the course of their official duties, and
> are therefore in the public domain.

Perhaps so, but without some indication of how we know that Photograph X
was taken by US government personnel, we don't know that the photograph
is in the public domain. In which case, given my understanding of what
the Commons' policies were supposed to be, it's not eligible for
inclusion there. We need to *know* that it's public domain because we
have facts to support this, not because we're engaging in wishful
guesswork. Otherwise, it reminds me of those people who mistakenly
believe that every picture on a federal government website is public domain.

--Michael Snow


from_name: Anthere

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Fwd: Wikipedia is fun, but credibility varies a lot

body:
Haukur ?orgeirsson a ?crit:
>>First, the English Wikipedia had about 640,000
>>articles at the time your article was published.
>>Not 444,000. Second, Jimmy Wales started Wikipedia
>>under the ownership of Bomis in 2001 - The Wikimedia
>>Foundation was not formed until June of 2003.
>>
>>If your article had been published on Wikinews,
>>then these errors would have been very quickly
>>corrected before being marked for publication.
>
>
> Touch?!
>
> Haukur

Nod. I loved this part :-)

Ant


from_name: Oskar Sigvardsson

body:
Out of curiosity, did you get a response?

--gkhan

On 7/20/05, Daniel Mayer <maveric149 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Below is an email I sent to the author of an article that was semi-critical of
> Wikipedia. I think it illustrates the way many in academia don't get it and how
> many of those are polluting the critical thinking skills of students.
>
> --- Daniel Mayer <maveric149 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2005 06:45:27 -0700 (PDT)
> > From: Daniel Mayer <maveric149 at yahoo.com>
> > Subject: Wikipedia is fun, but credibility varies a lot
> > To: Susan.Barnes at rit.edu
> > CC: maveric149 at yahoo.com
> >
> > Just a note about this article
> >
> http://www.democratandchronicle.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050717/BUSINESS0105/507170321/1001/BUSINESS
> >
> >
> > First, the English Wikipedia had about 640,000 articles at the time your
> > article was published. Not 444,000. Second, Jimmy Wales started Wikipedia
> > under the ownership of Bomis in 2001 - The Wikimedia Foundation was not
> > formed until June of 2003.
> >
> > If your article had been published on Wikinews, then these errors would have
> > been very quickly corrected before being marked for publication.
> >
> > This just goes to show that *all* forms of media have reliability issues.
> > This also shows that media published on paper with a PhD as an author is also
> > prone to obvious errors. Giving students the impression that they can trust
> > that by focusing on the unreliability of web resources like Wikipedia is a
> > great disservice to them. All media needs to be scrutinized by students.
> >
> > It is true that we sometimes discount what an expert says ; the reason is
> > that we value getting it right vs blindly accepting what an expert says
> > without checking.
> >
> > Daniel Mayer,
> > A Wikipedian
> >
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> > http://mail.yahoo.com
> >
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


subject: [Foundation-l] Fonts

body:
Zachary Harden wrote:
> Dear Gerard,
>
> That sounds like a good idea, but I do have a question: what do you mean
> by making fonts "free"?

Fonts are under copyright unless you know otherwise.

If we're to provide downloadable fonts to readers, they'll need to be
freely licensed for distribution and use. (Note that many fonts you
might download off random web sites may be restricted -- 'shareware' or
non-commercial use or otherwise.)

There are many free font projects out there, though I don't know how
good the coverage for some languages is.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 253 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/attachments/20050720/da20e9cd/attachment.pgp


subject: [Foundation-l] Fonts

body:
Zachary Harden wrote:
> Dear Gerard,
>
> That sounds like a good idea, but I do have a question: what do you mean
> by making fonts "free"?

Fonts are under copyright unless you know otherwise.

If we're to provide downloadable fonts to readers, they'll need to be
freely licensed for distribution and use. (Note that many fonts you
might download off random web sites may be restricted -- 'shareware' or
non-commercial use or otherwise.)

There are many free font projects out there, though I don't know how
good the coverage for some languages is.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 253 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/attachments/20050720/da20e9cd/attachment-0001.pgp


subject: [Foundation-l] Fonts

body:
Zachary Harden wrote:
> Dear Gerard,
>
> That sounds like a good idea, but I do have a question: what do you mean
> by making fonts "free"?

Fonts are under copyright unless you know otherwise.

If we're to provide downloadable fonts to readers, they'll need to be
freely licensed for distribution and use. (Note that many fonts you
might download off random web sites may be restricted -- 'shareware' or
non-commercial use or otherwise.)

There are many free font projects out there, though I don't know how
good the coverage for some languages is.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 253 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/attachments/20050720/da20e9cd/attachment.pgp>


subject: [Foundation-l] Fonts

body:
Zachary Harden wrote:
> Dear Gerard,
>
> That sounds like a good idea, but I do have a question: what do you mean
> by making fonts "free"?

Fonts are under copyright unless you know otherwise.

If we're to provide downloadable fonts to readers, they'll need to be
freely licensed for distribution and use. (Note that many fonts you
might download off random web sites may be restricted -- 'shareware' or
non-commercial use or otherwise.)

There are many free font projects out there, though I don't know how
good the coverage for some languages is.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 253 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/attachments/20050720/da20e9cd/attachment-0001.pgp>


from_name: Gerard Meijssen

subject: [Foundation-l] Fonts

body:
Zachary Harden wrote:

> Dear Gerard,
>
> That sounds like a good idea, but I do have a question: what do you
> mean by making fonts "free"?
>
> Regards,
>
> Zachary Harden, en:User:Zscout370

Hoi,
There are many Fonts out there already, some are Free some are shareware
and some are proprietary. With Freeing a font I mean, making them open
source or free software. The intention is that all our users will be
allowed to use it from a license point of view.

Thanks,
    GerardM

>
>> From: Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com>
>> Reply-To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List <foundation-l at wikimedia.org>
>> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List <foundation-l at wikimedia.org>
>> Subject: [Foundation-l] Fonts
>> Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2005 16:57:00 +0200
>>
>> Hoi,
>> I am doing some research for Ultimate Wiktionary. As Ultimate
>> Wiktionary intends to have all words in all languages, a consequence
>> will be that all those words that are in rare fonts will not be
>> viewable. This is to some extend already an issue. It is quite normal
>> when we have an article in wikipedia about a foreign place to include
>> the way it is written in that country. This is problematic for places
>> like Ethiopia, Georgia or Thailand to name just a few with
>> interesting fonts.
>>
>> On previous wikimeets I attended we did discuss the need for a
>> collection of fonts that would include as many fonts as we can get
>> for our public. It would help a lot if we could have one resource
>> that is free for use and that does include all the needed fonts. If
>> it requires a reasonable amount of money to buy a missing font to
>> make it Free, I think it is worthy of consideration. I am also sure
>> that when we acknowledge the people who make fonts available for this
>> purpose we will be able to get many resources for free.
>>
>> The issue of fonts came again to my attention because I do not have
>> braille of signing language fonts and I really would like to be able
>> to include the words and their representation in script in the
>> Ultimate Wiktionary as well. Technically speaking, it is not
>> necessary for me to have these fonts but I do consider it wrong to
>> have content that the average user will not be able to display.
>> Therefore my request to consider having fonts as a resource that we
>> want to support for our users.
>


subject: [Foundation-l] Fonts


body:
Hoi,
On OTRS I received a complaint that some photo's were taken from a
website. As the photo's were located on Commons, I informed the
gentleman to go to the Commons administrators. In this case they were
world war II photo's of machine guns. I told the gentleman that even if
the photos were taken from his website, it would not matter when the
photos are already in the pubic domain.

The question, as it is not possible for a Dutch admin to remove photos
from Commons and as it has no impact to remove the pictures from an
article, is it correct to refer this gentleman to the Commons admins or
is there / should there be a procedure for these issues.

Thanks,
    GerardM


body:
For the Sinophones among us, I will include the original Chinese for
whatever interest it may serve. (Flsxx's message was translated by a
separate user)

???????????V???????????^???????????????????Z???V???^?????????C?P???????????Z???????????????????????????????Z???J?R?????????????^?????Z???v?????????]?????^?????????????????{?????????????l?????????????????^??????????????-??????????????????????j??z?Y???????????????????????Z?????h?Z???????x???x?????????c?????????????????V???????????????????????@?e?????????s?????]?????^???????????????????????????^???????Z?????l?????????????????V?????????Z??Gvangjsih????Gvangsi-?????????????s???@???????????l???e?????F??Quaangc???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????H????????

Mark

On 20/07/05, shizhao <shizhao at gmail.com> wrote:
> Flsxx say:
>
> I am not a native Zhuang speaker, but I live in Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous
> Region of China, home of the majority of Zhuang people where Zhuang scripts
> can be seen in lots of places, including official signs and governmental
> documents, so I know some Zhuang words. I have never seen those scripts found
> on za.wikipedia with accent marks. A lot of Zhuang words/syllables actually
> end with "j" or "z", for example, Gvangjsih but not Quaangc??. I can understand
> many Zhuang words by reading them in the fashion of Pinyin or English, but
> most words on za.wikipedia are not apprehensible to me, indeed they look and
> sound very foreign. So I personally feel that, za.wikipedia is not currently
> written in correct Zhuang.
>
> [[zh:user:shizhao]]
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>

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


from_name: Timwi

body:
Gerard Meijssen wrote:

> I would welcome your comments about the ERD that I posted here
> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:ERD.jpg

Looks interesting, but is extremely bare. It would do well with a bit of
documentation. For much of it, the purpose isn't entirely clear. I'm
particularly confused as to why "Language", "Word" and "Meaning" are
each duplicated.


from_name: Robert Scott Horning

body:
Michael Snow wrote:

> Delirium wrote:
>
>> Robert Scott Horning wrote:
>>
>>> What needs to be done here is to research exactly who may be
>>> correct. Many WWII photographs are likely to still be under
>>> copyright (the life+75 rule has not gone into effect yet, or the 100
>>> year rule... depending on what copyright laws you are using, and was
>>> published after 1924 when prior copyright had entered into public
>>> domain) and my gut feeling is that it is likely to be a copyright
>>> violation.
>>
>>
>> A significant portion of WW2-era photographs were taken by U.S.
>> government personnel during the course of their official duties, and
>> are therefore in the public domain.
>
>
> Perhaps so, but without some indication of how we know that Photograph
> X was taken by US government personnel, we don't know that the
> photograph is in the public domain. In which case, given my
> understanding of what the Commons' policies were supposed to be, it's
> not eligible for inclusion there. We need to *know* that it's public
> domain because we have facts to support this, not because we're
> engaging in wishful guesswork. Otherwise, it reminds me of those
> people who mistakenly believe that every picture on a federal
> government website is public domain.

A significant portion of WWII-era photographs were also taken by UPI and
AP photographers (including the "famous" Iwo Jima photo of the U.S.
Marines raising the U.S. flag).... and these are completely covered by
copyright, as are photos for magazines like Time and Newsweek and LIFE
(which sent several photographers into the front lines).  Given a photo
of a WWII battle scene, it is unlikely to trace its copyright status
unless you know the exact archive it came from.  Many commonly seen
WWII-era photos are from the Corbis archives, again where many people
feel they can copy to their heart's content (including images of Nazi
Germany) but are still covered under copyright.  This makes them
ineligible for inclusion in Wikicommons, and depending on usage illegal
to use on Wikipedia as well (fair-use doesn't go that far).

--
Robert Scott Horning


body:
Robert Scott Horning wrote:

> Gerard Meijssen wrote:
>
>> Hoi,
>> On OTRS I received a complaint that some photo's were taken from a
>> website. As the photo's were located on Commons, I informed the
>> gentleman to go to the Commons administrators. In this case they were
>> world war II photo's of machine guns. I told the gentleman that even
>> if the photos were taken from his website, it would not matter when
>> the photos are already in the pubic domain.
>>
>> The question, as it is not possible for a Dutch admin to remove
>> photos from Commons and as it has no impact to remove the pictures
>> from an article, is it correct to refer this gentleman to the Commons
>> admins or is there / should there be a procedure for these issues.
>
>
>
> On Commons, if you think there is a copyright tag you can throw on
> images you think are in dispute, which is the {{Copyvio}} tag, and any
> user can add that onto the image.  You don't need to be an admin.
> Please make sure you put in a reason on the image page when you think
> there is a problem, or try and contact the user who uploaded the
> content (to be kind to a potential new user who thought uploading
> random stuff from web pages was appropriate).  The tag will get
> flagged to a category which the admins on Commons check very
> regularly, and will delete if it is against Commons policy.
>
Hoi,
In this case Commons states that it is public domain. There is this user
who has just another WW II website and is the opinion that we copied his
website. I am not completely aware of how these things are done on
Commons and, I do not agree with some of the procedures that I do know.
The thing is with OTRS, I am not just some user. By notifying me of this
issue the gentleman may think he is talking to the WMF itself while in
fact it has nothing to do with the nl.wikipedia. So the issue is also a
bit bigger than just this and that is why I ask for some guidance.

Thanks,
    GerardM


from_name: daniwo59 at aol.com

subject: [WikiEN-l] Frankfurt WikiReader

body:
This is another call for help at our Frankfurt WikiReader project. Please
take a look and help out.

Danny


from_name: Dan Grey

body:
>From the article:

>I should note that hittable is not in the Wiktionary either

>From Wikitionary:

http://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=hittable&action=history

Good work, Uncle G :-)

Dan


body:
Timwi wrote:

> Gerard Meijssen wrote:
>
>> I would welcome your comments about the ERD that I posted here
>> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:ERD.jpg
>
>
> Looks interesting, but is extremely bare. It would do well with a bit
> of documentation. For much of it, the purpose isn't entirely clear.
> I'm particularly confused as to why "Language", "Word" and "Meaning"
> are each duplicated.

Hoi,
There is some documentation here:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Ultimate_Wiktionary_data_design and
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Ultimate_Wiktionary_decisions_on_its_usage
here.
The duplication reflects that there is at least one table that has two
relations to the same table. Language refers to itself for dialects,
Word refers through Conju/Decli (conjucation or declinations) to a
headword and derived words, Meaning is related through "Relations" this
is to allow for thesaurus like structures.

One reason why it is not as much documented as I would like is, because
I am still working on the structure. At this moment I am thinking hard
on how to include signed languages and the spoken dialects of the
Chinese and Arabic written language.

Thanks,
    GerardM


body:
Mark Williamson wrote:

>Hi Gerard,
>
>Signed languages are completely independent systems, and are separate
>languages from spoken languages, different in grammar, syntax, and the
>like. Unfortunately, there is no universally-agreed-upon method for
>transcribing signed languages.
>
>There are a few possibilities here.
>
>1) Choose a particular transcription system. Top of the list would be
>Stokoe, and Sutton Sign Writing; HamNoSys is also possible but is
>mostly used by linguists while the other two are used more widely by
>people who use it as their everyday language.
>
>
It being the Ultimate Wiktionary, I would prefer not make a choise and
have them all.

>2) Use multimedia. We can upload videos of people signing a particular
>word. Note that some signed languages also have conjugations and
>inflections. However, this will leave a problem of headwords -- how do
>you look up a word in a signed language? Which leads to the third
>option,
>
>
When you look at the ERD it is explicitly indicated by the
Conju/Decli-Word table what the Headword is. This is done for any
language and it means that it is by practice and not design that in most
languages the infinitive will be the Headword. Consequently, when one
word is found the other will be also shown in a format that may need
some screen design per type of conjugation or declination.

>3) Introduce our own notation system. This is impractical and unlikely
>to work well. I suggest that instead, we adopt HamNoSys for lookup
>purposes, although it is not represented by Unicode, we can try an
>ASCII implementation.
>
>
Introducing our own notation system is not an option. To a very large
extend I want deaf people involved and they can sort it out. The only
involvement I may have is see if it is possible to implement it within
the confines of UW.

>Regarding "dialects" of Chinese and Arabic, that is very simple. Treat
>them as separate languages. While certainly most often people write in
>"Standard Arabic" or "Standard Chinese", it is also possible to write
>in the local vernacular. This tends to be done more with Arabic, but
>is possible with either. With Chinese, you only see it very often with
>Cantonese, other varieties are occasionally but you are more likely to
>find a Bible translation in them than a newspaper.
>
>
One way I am thinking is that there are often transcriptions of these
dialects / languages. I am happy to have these as well as long as I can
quote an authority who did the transcribing. Bible translations are one
of the most important resources for rare languages, we will have at some
stage a lot of Bible texts that we will analyse for its content. It may
help us create large translation memories and translation glossaries.

>I hope very much that you will not restrict languages to those which
>appear on the ISO 639-3 list. It has many shortcomings and is very,
>very, very disappointing -- it would not allow for separate entries
>for Yavapai, Hualapai, and Havasupai (it has only one code for them
>all), even though they are very much different languages, and it by no
>means includes all the languages of the world. It also separates
>between Moroccan, Tunisian, and Algerian Arabic, when they're really
>nearly identical.
>
>
>
With the design of the UW I have no technical restriction on what
languages and dialects I add. I would insert Valkenburgs (a Limburgian
dialect) as readily as any other language. If there is an intrest and if
it is no original research (ie not a newly created language) I am happy
to have it. When people can destinguish Maroccan from Tunesian etc I am
happy to include them if only to have the different pronunciation .. The
only thing I need is to explicitly have an agreed code for the
languages/dialects that the WMF agrees on. This code will be very much
internal but it needs to exist and be agreed upon. I also am thinking of
a project that should have us hear many dialects from the translation of
one A4 written text. The thing is to find an interesting text, a short
story preferably and have it spoken and recorded by the dialects /
languages that we are going to include.

Thanks Mark,
    Gerard

>Mark
>
>On 20/07/05, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Timwi wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Gerard Meijssen wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>I would welcome your comments about the ERD that I posted here
>>>>http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:ERD.jpg
>>>>
>>>>
>>>Looks interesting, but is extremely bare. It would do well with a bit
>>>of documentation. For much of it, the purpose isn't entirely clear.
>>>I'm particularly confused as to why "Language", "Word" and "Meaning"
>>>are each duplicated.
>>>
>>>
>>Hoi,
>>There is some documentation here:
>>http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Ultimate_Wiktionary_data_design and
>>http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Ultimate_Wiktionary_decisions_on_its_usage
>>here.
>>The duplication reflects that there is at least one table that has two
>>relations to the same table. Language refers to itself for dialects,
>>Word refers through Conju/Decli (conjucation or declinations) to a
>>headword and derived words, Meaning is related through "Relations" this
>>is to allow for thesaurus like structures.
>>
>>One reason why it is not as much documented as I would like is, because
>>I am still working on the structure. At this moment I am thinking hard
>>on how to include signed languages and the spoken dialects of the
>>Chinese and Arabic written language.
>>
>>Thanks,
>>    GerardM
>>


from_name: shizhao

body:
Flsxx say:

I am not a native Zhuang speaker, but I live in Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous
Region of China, home of the majority of Zhuang people where Zhuang scripts
can be seen in lots of places, including official signs and governmental
documents, so I know some Zhuang words. I have never seen those scripts found
on za.wikipedia with accent marks. A lot of Zhuang words/syllables actually
end with "j" or "z", for example, Gvangjsih but not Quaangc?. I can understand
many Zhuang words by reading them in the fashion of Pinyin or English, but
most words on za.wikipedia are not apprehensible to me, indeed they look and
sound very foreign. So I personally feel that, za.wikipedia is not currently
written in correct Zhuang.

[[zh:user:shizhao]]


subject: [Foundation-l] Editorials

body:
Hi all,

Recently, I have decided that it was time I adopt a
new project. A small one :-)

So, I started participating to wikinews in french.

It is quite a challenge I must say, because there are
a handful of very nice participants... but most of
them are not participants to wikipedia, so quite
newbies on some issues. On the other hand, plenty of
motivation and ideas which is good :-)

Still, today, I have something disturbing me a little
bit. A new main page was set up this morning; Looking
at it, I realised the html was probably not standard
(some wrong columns size or locations) and saw that
some areas were just empty (for example, it did not
mention other projects or other languages).

So it appeared to me to be a working stage, and it did
not seem a good idea to make changes live; So I
reverted the page to yesterday version and moved the
new version to a temp page :
http://fr.wikinews.org/wiki/Discuter:Accueil/temp

I then was told this version had been approved and the
vote ended yesterday. So, it should be the main page
in any cases.

Then, to list the problems of the html, I looked more
precisely at it. And I discovered 3 new sections.

One is the "Analysis section". There is one example of
it, the link being a user sub page. So, first, it
means it is very likely a non editable page (since it
is a user sub page). Second, there is a mention below,
stating "the section can be ambiguous in terms of
NPOV, as it is only partially submitted to it"

Two other sections are "Editorial" and "carte blanche"
(I am not sure I really see the difference). These
sections are empty for now, and a note indicates
"These two sections do not respect NPOV and have not
been adopted by the community".

I then commented in saying that these sections should
probably not be here in any cases, since NOT adopted
by the community. I was answered they actually were
adopted, so the little text should be modified, but
they should be on the main page.

I looked for a discussion, and found this
http://fr.wikinews.org/wiki/Wikinews%3ASalle_caf%C3%A9#PDV_.21.21

So, to me, a site with
1) articles submitted to NPOV,
2) personal analyses only partially submitted to NPOV
and not editable, and
3) editorials not submitted to NPVO
has a name, Indymedia.
Not wikinews :-)

And I do not agree. I think all wikimedia projects
should adhere to NPOV. Strictly. As much as we can.

But I then thought I had no idea what other wikinews
have been doing on this issue and that possibly some
of them have adopted editorials (which will quite
naturally report a pov).
Is this the case ?
If so, how did you organise yourself to explain
readers the difference between the neutral parts of
the site and the non neutral parts ?
And do you try to maintain an overall neutrality
within editorials ?
Or do you limit the topics concerned by editorials ?

Thanks in advance for your comments.

anthere

____________________________________________________
Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs


subject: [Foundation-l] Editorials