subject:
[Wikipedia-l] disruptive IPs of Mark Williamson attacking users on
	Moldovan Wikipedia

body:
70.58.114.75 24.251.68.75

  If you don't close rapidly and respect the decision of the vote concerning the DELETION OF MOLDOVAN WIKIPEDIA this is the result: disruptive personal attacks from Mark addressed to other users.

future civilization <future_civilization at yahoo.com> wrote:
  Several IPs coming from Phoenix, Arizona (home address of Mark W.) made several edits (and also several personal attacks) on Moldovan Wikipedia thus breaking the result of the vote to delete the Moldovan Wikipedia and decision taken to freeze/or to rapidly delete this wikipedia made here.

A ban for Mark for about a month maybe will chill him out and stop him from doing disruptive edits any more. A respect for the result of the vote would be too much from him as he immediately lounched himself in personal attacks.

There is no more talking about this Moldovan Wikipedia, people decided to close and delete it. Now, its your job to do it and respect the decision.

There was a vote for a long period of time: one month. Everybody had the chance to express himself and now the result of the vote shows very clear: people want DELETION OF MOLDOVAN WIKIPEDIA. Now, put this in practice.

future civilization wrote:
Yes, indeed. Mark doesn't have any authority and/or credibility, as himself admits. He is very interested in closing/opening any wikipedia but he uses a very disruptive language towards the new users. This disruptive language shows his limited comprehension on wikipedias in various languages. In this way he discourage people who are enthusiast to close/open new wikipedias. He has no power to decide for such a decision at the very least he wants to ask for attention. Maybe this is explained by his early age in life. You can't have any authority having only 16-17 years.

His style is to demolish everything and has a strongly counter-effect, a strong negative one on what happens in Wikipedia. I checked his blocking log and shows a mean, very strong negative behaviour.

You appear to take an extremely keen interest in the closing / opening
of wikipedias, more so than the average poster on this list. I am just
worried about newcomers who are excited about creating a wikipedia
getting discouraged because someone, without the community's backing,
acted as though he had the power to approve or deny the request. This
came out extremely strongly in your last message to Manuel.

I am not saying that you should stop being interested in the creation
and destruction of wikipedias -- I am just worried about your style of
discussing them.

Silas Snider wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: RIPEMD160

Mark Williamson wrote:
>> Question:
>> What authority do you, Mark, have over the creation of a new wikipedia?
>> Are you a developer? I don't seem to ever see you contributing patches,
>
> Put simply, I don't. I have no real authority. However, I do know that
> I have some sway, because different people have varying degrees of
> respect for me in the matter of languages. There are certainly those
> who don't trust me at all or who think I don't know much of anything
> at all about languages, but I think most people believe that I know
> quite a bit about languages but at the same time have problems with
> other things about me so they take most of my opinions/advice under
> advisement.
>
> If some developer wants to create a Tetum WP immediately, I have no
> say in that. However, I'm pretty sure that the Wikimedia community as
> a whole will have much more enthusiasm for the creation of a Tetum
> Wikipedia if its test-wiki is more vibrant and is in 100% Tetum.
>
>> etc. on wikitech-l. In fact, almost all the posts that I can see of
>> yours involve some kind of discussion over orthography or languages in
>> various wikipedias, especially when discussing closing one.
>
>>From what you say here, it seems to me that you're a relative
> newcomer. Before the Moldovan controversy, there was almost never any
> discussion about closing Wikis, given that the only 2 that have been
> closed so far are Toki Pona and Klingon.
>
> I'm not sure what's wrong, though, with the fact that almost all of my
> posts are about languages -- is that a bad thing? Certainly, if you
> look at other posters, many of them tend to have areas of particular
> interest as well.

No, its not a bad thing, I was just trying to establish why I thought
you were not a developer (in case it turned out that you were).

>
>> My point is: on what grounds do you consider it your job to be the
>> arbiter of when a proposal for wikipedia creation is good enough?
>
> Who said I do consider it my job? Besides you, that is.

You appear to take an extremely keen interest in the closing / opening
of wikipedias, more so than the average poster on this list. I am just
worried about newcomers who are excited about creating a wikipedia
getting discouraged because someone, without the community's backing,
acted as though he had the power to approve or deny the request. This
came out extremely strongly in your last message to Manuel.

I am not saying that you should stop being interested in the creation
and destruction of wikipedias -- I am just worried about your style of
discussing them.

>
> Mark
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>

Sincerely,
Silas Snider
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFEESQELeGN0GHdxM0RA1bOAJ9cv+yhyURgAsRZtglt96Iqr+4gsACfQIRl
hWdkEhAIf6yWdx9WCmbi3AU=
=K/Tl
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l

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

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

---------------------------------
Yahoo! Mail
Bring photos to life! New PhotoMail  makes sharing a breeze.


list: wikipedia-l

source: pipermail-mbox

from_name: Wikipedia Romania (Ronline)

subject:
[Wikipedia-l] What variant to use for Irish,
	Scottish and Welsh localities?

body:
> I'm impressed you know so much about Irish placenames - I don't think
> that many people even in Ireland would know where "An Uaimh" is.

Thanks :) I have a personal interest in "Celtic Europe" and the ongoing
revival of Celtic languages in these areas.

On the Romanian
> Wikipedia in general, do you use local names of all places? What about
> placenames of a country that has more than one local, or even official
> language?

When there is a Romanian name, we would use the Romanian name - for example,
"London" is called "Londra" in Romanian, so we use that name. Same for
"Moscova", "Varsovia", etc. But, on the whole, the Romanian language tends
to not "naturalise" foreign names. My dilemma is that cities like
Cardiff/Caerdydd, Cork/Corcaigh, and even smaller ones, have no Romanian
equivalent. Therefore, we would use, as any Wikipedia would use, the local
variant. When there are two official variants, we would use the most
suitable one. For Basque placenames, for example, we would use the Basque
variant (though in recent times, the Basque government has legislated that
cities be named in the form SpanishName-BasqueName, so we get names like
SanSebastian-Donostia, and Vitoria-Gasteiz).

The difference with Ireland is the Irish is the first official and national
language. To me at least, using English seems a bit inappropriate, even
though I do realise that English is (unfortunately) the "main" language of
Ireland. In areas like Wales, I would also be tempted to use the native name
(i.e. Comitatul Ddinbych instead of Denbighshire, Comitatul = shire in
Romanian), since Welsh is increasingly seen as the "national language" and
is quite widely used, particularly in the north.

The Polish Wikipedia places the article on Cork at Corcaigh:
http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corcaigh

No other Wikipedia does, they all use English names.


list: wikien-l

from_name: John Lee

subject: [WikiEN-l] [WikiEn-l] Image tagging followup

body:
Steve Bennett wrote:

>Perhaps this fictitious mechanism could allow you to specify more than
>one article?
>
>Steve
>
>
That wouldn't really solve the problem, I think. Right now the problem
is most people upload fair use images to be used as illustrations in
just one or two articles, but the fair use justification here is nearly
nil. That's what we should be focusing on -- cases of people abusing a
fair use image are rare, AFAIK.

John


body:
On 3/10/06, Craig Franklin <craig at halo-17.net> wrote:
>
> Hi Ronline,
>
> I, personally, would go with the Celtic names, especially in Ireland where
> they are now mostly "official" over the English versions, and then
> redirect
> the English version of the name in. This is not the consensus on :en
>
though, I'm sad to say.

>From what I have heard (and I may be wrong), there are proposals to use the
Celtic names in the English Wikipedia as the article title. I personally
think the English names should stay, but that the Celtic names should be
used in other languages. When you said that the Celtic names are mostly
"official" over the English versions, do you mean that the Irish version is
now used in English as well? I know that there is a movement towards this in
Scotland, where the Outer Hebrides are now known officially in English as
"Na h-Eileanan Siar".

Ronline


from_name: geni

body:
On 3/10/06, Ilmari Karonen <nospam at vyznev.net> wrote:
> Now there's an idea: maybe we should just add a big notice to the upload
> page saying "Yes, we know there are lots of images you can download off
> the web.  We don't want them." and in a smaller font "(For exceptions,
> see [[Wikipedia:Fair use]] and [[Wikipedia:Free image resources]].)".
>
> --
> Ilmari Karonen

Tempting but not overkill enough. I'd like secting a fair use tag take
you to a screen with the criteria for useing that tag on it in big
letters.

--
geni


list: foundation-l

from_name: GerardM

subject: [Foundation-l] Fair use images

body:
Hoi,
Forget about en.wikipedia !!!!

It is not about en.wikipedia.

Please engage brain or read what has been said.  It is about COMMONS
and OTHER projects. So forget about the fair use policy. It does not
apply.

And when you persist in thinking en.wikipedia .. do not talk about US.
There is more in this world. There are more projects in the WMF and
this IS the foundation mailing list.

Thanks,
    GerardM

On 3/10/06, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 3/10/06, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
> [snip]
> > There are many examples where it is REASONABLE and to be expected that
> > no changes to material is made. Logos are a great example. You are
> > talking in terms of conflict. You are not talking in terms of our aim.
> > Informing people by providing content that is Free for everybody to use.
> > Content that is as Free as it is possible to have it. It is unreasonable
> > to expect that when laws make for content that can *only *be had in a ND
> > way not to make an exception because of dogma. Mind you I am talking
> > about information where the information cannot be had in any other way.
> > Information like logos.
>
> Your reasoning is not lost on others. This is, largely, why we permit
> fair use on enwiki. But we don't confuse ourselves, unfree content is
> unfree.  In the US we are fortunate that the courts have reconized the
> harm that could be caused by giving copyright holder unlimited power
> over their works. And the discussion on this ND matter has been
> directly related to enwiki.
>
> I'm still waiting for an example of a reasonable situation where we
> should accept ND content that isn't covered by our inclusion of fair
> use.
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>


list: wikimedia-l

subject: [Foundation-l] Fair use images


from_name: Mark Williamson

subject: [Wikipedia-l] deletion of Moldovan Wikipedia

body:
The edits to which Mr Civilization is referring are a number of
articles I created, for example http://mo.wikipedia.org/wiki/1997

Now, the last time I checked, creation of stub articles is hardly a
bannable offence.

Mark

On 10/03/06, future civilization <future_civilization at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Several IPs coming from Phoenix, Arizona (home address of Mark W.) made several edits (and also several personal attacks) on Moldovan Wikipedia thus breaking the result of the vote to delete the Moldovan Wikipedia and decision taken to freeze/or to rapidly delete this wikipedia made here.
>
>   A ban for Mark for about a month maybe will chill him out and stop him from doing disruptive edits any more. A respect for the result of the vote would be too much from him as he immediately lounched himself in personal attacks.
>
>   There is no more talking about this Moldovan Wikipedia, people decided to close and delete it. Now, its your job to do it and respect the decision.
>
>   There was a vote for a long period of time: one month. Everybody had the chance to express himself and now the result of the vote shows very clear: people want DELETION OF MOLDOVAN WIKIPEDIA. Now, put this in practice.
>
>
>
>
> future civilization <future_civilization at yahoo.com> wrote:
>   Yes, indeed. Mark doesn't have any authority and/or credibility, as himself admits. He is very interested in closing/opening any wikipedia but he uses a very disruptive language towards the new users. This disruptive language shows his limited comprehension on wikipedias in various languages. In this way he discourage people who are enthusiast to close/open new wikipedias. He has no power to decide for such a decision at the very least he wants to ask for attention. Maybe this is explained by his early age in life. You can't have any authority having only 16-17 years.
>
> His style is to demolish everything and has a strongly counter-effect, a strong negative one on what happens in Wikipedia. I checked his blocking log and shows a mean, very strong negative behaviour.
>
>
> You appear to take an extremely keen interest in the closing / opening
> of wikipedias, more so than the average poster on this list. I am just
> worried about newcomers who are excited about creating a wikipedia
> getting discouraged because someone, without the community's backing,
> acted as though he had the power to approve or deny the request. This
> came out extremely strongly in your last message to Manuel.
>
> I am not saying that you should stop being interested in the creation
> and destruction of wikipedias -- I am just worried about your style of
> discussing them.
>
>
>
>
> Silas Snider wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: RIPEMD160
>
> Mark Williamson wrote:
> >> Question:
> >> What authority do you, Mark, have over the creation of a new wikipedia?
> >> Are you a developer? I don't seem to ever see you contributing patches,
> >
> > Put simply, I don't. I have no real authority. However, I do know that
> > I have some sway, because different people have varying degrees of
> > respect for me in the matter of languages. There are certainly those
> > who don't trust me at all or who think I don't know much of anything
> > at all about languages, but I think most people believe that I know
> > quite a bit about languages but at the same time have problems with
> > other things about me so they take most of my opinions/advice under
> > advisement.
> >
> > If some developer wants to create a Tetum WP immediately, I have no
> > say in that. However, I'm pretty sure that the Wikimedia community as
> > a whole will have much more enthusiasm for the creation of a Tetum
> > Wikipedia if its test-wiki is more vibrant and is in 100% Tetum.
> >
> >> etc. on wikitech-l. In fact, almost all the posts that I can see of
> >> yours involve some kind of discussion over orthography or languages in
> >> various wikipedias, especially when discussing closing one.
> >
> >>From what you say here, it seems to me that you're a relative
> > newcomer. Before the Moldovan controversy, there was almost never any
> > discussion about closing Wikis, given that the only 2 that have been
> > closed so far are Toki Pona and Klingon.
> >
> > I'm not sure what's wrong, though, with the fact that almost all of my
> > posts are about languages -- is that a bad thing? Certainly, if you
> > look at other posters, many of them tend to have areas of particular
> > interest as well.
>
> No, its not a bad thing, I was just trying to establish why I thought
> you were not a developer (in case it turned out that you were).
>
> >
> >> My point is: on what grounds do you consider it your job to be the
> >> arbiter of when a proposal for wikipedia creation is good enough?
> >
> > Who said I do consider it my job? Besides you, that is.
>
> You appear to take an extremely keen interest in the closing / opening
> of wikipedias, more so than the average poster on this list. I am just
> worried about newcomers who are excited about creating a wikipedia
> getting discouraged because someone, without the community's backing,
> acted as though he had the power to approve or deny the request. This
> came out extremely strongly in your last message to Manuel.
>
> I am not saying that you should stop being interested in the creation
> and destruction of wikipedias -- I am just worried about your style of
> discussing them.
>
> >
> > Mark
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> >
>
> Sincerely,
> Silas Snider
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
> iD8DBQFEESQELeGN0GHdxM0RA1bOAJ9cv+yhyURgAsRZtglt96Iqr+4gsACfQIRl
> hWdkEhAIf6yWdx9WCmbi3AU=
> =K/Tl
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>

--
"Take away their language, destroy their souls." -- Joseph Stalin


subject:
[Wikipedia-l] disruptive IPs of Mark Williamson attacking users
	on Moldovan Wikipedia

body:
Who exactly are you? What is your agenda?

And what users are there to attack? The Romanians only come around
every once in a while to agitate for deletion. They don't care about
the WP other than that.

Mark

On 10/03/06, future civilization <future_civilization at yahoo.com> wrote:
> 70.58.114.75 24.251.68.75
>
>   If you don't close rapidly and respect the decision of the vote concerning the DELETION OF MOLDOVAN WIKIPEDIA this is the result: disruptive personal attacks from Mark addressed to other users.
>
>
> future civilization <future_civilization at yahoo.com> wrote:
>   Several IPs coming from Phoenix, Arizona (home address of Mark W.) made several edits (and also several personal attacks) on Moldovan Wikipedia thus breaking the result of the vote to delete the Moldovan Wikipedia and decision taken to freeze/or to rapidly delete this wikipedia made here.
>
> A ban for Mark for about a month maybe will chill him out and stop him from doing disruptive edits any more. A respect for the result of the vote would be too much from him as he immediately lounched himself in personal attacks.
>
> There is no more talking about this Moldovan Wikipedia, people decided to close and delete it. Now, its your job to do it and respect the decision.
>
> There was a vote for a long period of time: one month. Everybody had the chance to express himself and now the result of the vote shows very clear: people want DELETION OF MOLDOVAN WIKIPEDIA. Now, put this in practice.
>
>
>
>
> future civilization wrote:
> Yes, indeed. Mark doesn't have any authority and/or credibility, as himself admits. He is very interested in closing/opening any wikipedia but he uses a very disruptive language towards the new users. This disruptive language shows his limited comprehension on wikipedias in various languages. In this way he discourage people who are enthusiast to close/open new wikipedias. He has no power to decide for such a decision at the very least he wants to ask for attention. Maybe this is explained by his early age in life. You can't have any authority having only 16-17 years.
>
> His style is to demolish everything and has a strongly counter-effect, a strong negative one on what happens in Wikipedia. I checked his blocking log and shows a mean, very strong negative behaviour.
>
>
> You appear to take an extremely keen interest in the closing / opening
> of wikipedias, more so than the average poster on this list. I am just
> worried about newcomers who are excited about creating a wikipedia
> getting discouraged because someone, without the community's backing,
> acted as though he had the power to approve or deny the request. This
> came out extremely strongly in your last message to Manuel.
>
> I am not saying that you should stop being interested in the creation
> and destruction of wikipedias -- I am just worried about your style of
> discussing them.
>
>
>
>
> Silas Snider wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: RIPEMD160
>
> Mark Williamson wrote:
> >> Question:
> >> What authority do you, Mark, have over the creation of a new wikipedia?
> >> Are you a developer? I don't seem to ever see you contributing patches,
> >
> > Put simply, I don't. I have no real authority. However, I do know that
> > I have some sway, because different people have varying degrees of
> > respect for me in the matter of languages. There are certainly those
> > who don't trust me at all or who think I don't know much of anything
> > at all about languages, but I think most people believe that I know
> > quite a bit about languages but at the same time have problems with
> > other things about me so they take most of my opinions/advice under
> > advisement.
> >
> > If some developer wants to create a Tetum WP immediately, I have no
> > say in that. However, I'm pretty sure that the Wikimedia community as
> > a whole will have much more enthusiasm for the creation of a Tetum
> > Wikipedia if its test-wiki is more vibrant and is in 100% Tetum.
> >
> >> etc. on wikitech-l. In fact, almost all the posts that I can see of
> >> yours involve some kind of discussion over orthography or languages in
> >> various wikipedias, especially when discussing closing one.
> >
> >>From what you say here, it seems to me that you're a relative
> > newcomer. Before the Moldovan controversy, there was almost never any
> > discussion about closing Wikis, given that the only 2 that have been
> > closed so far are Toki Pona and Klingon.
> >
> > I'm not sure what's wrong, though, with the fact that almost all of my
> > posts are about languages -- is that a bad thing? Certainly, if you
> > look at other posters, many of them tend to have areas of particular
> > interest as well.
>
> No, its not a bad thing, I was just trying to establish why I thought
> you were not a developer (in case it turned out that you were).
>
> >
> >> My point is: on what grounds do you consider it your job to be the
> >> arbiter of when a proposal for wikipedia creation is good enough?
> >
> > Who said I do consider it my job? Besides you, that is.
>
> You appear to take an extremely keen interest in the closing / opening
> of wikipedias, more so than the average poster on this list. I am just
> worried about newcomers who are excited about creating a wikipedia
> getting discouraged because someone, without the community's backing,
> acted as though he had the power to approve or deny the request. This
> came out extremely strongly in your last message to Manuel.
>
> I am not saying that you should stop being interested in the creation
> and destruction of wikipedias -- I am just worried about your style of
> discussing them.
>
> >
> > Mark
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> >
>
> Sincerely,
> Silas Snider
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
> iD8DBQFEESQELeGN0GHdxM0RA1bOAJ9cv+yhyURgAsRZtglt96Iqr+4gsACfQIRl
> hWdkEhAIf6yWdx9WCmbi3AU=
> =K/Tl
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Yahoo! Mail
> Bring photos to life! New PhotoMail  makes sharing a breeze.
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>

--
"Take away their language, destroy their souls." -- Joseph Stalin


list: wikitech-l

from_name: brion at pobox.com

subject: [Wikitech-l] MediaWiki automated test run failure 2006-03-11

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

Running test BUG 361: URL within URL, not bracketed... FAILED!
Running test External links: invalid character... FAILED!
Running test Bug 2702: Mismatched <i> and <a> tags are invalid... FAILED!
Running test A table with no data.... FAILED!
Running test A table with nothing but a caption... FAILED!
Running test Link containing "#<" and "#>" % as a hex sequences... FAILED!
Running test Template with thumb image (wiht link in description)... FAILED!
Running test Link to image page... FAILED!
Running test BUG 1887: A ISBN with a thumbnail... FAILED!
Running test BUG 1887: A <math> with a thumbnail... FAILED!
Running test BUG 561: {{/Subpage}}... FAILED!
Running test Simple category... FAILED!
Running test Basic section headings... FAILED!
Running test Section headings with TOC... FAILED!
Running test Handling of sections up to level 6 and beyond... FAILED!
Running test Resolving duplicate section names... FAILED!
Running test Template with sections, __NOTOC__... FAILED!
Running test Link inside a section heading... FAILED!
Running test Media link with nasty text... FAILED!
Running test Bug 2095: link with pipe and three closing brackets... FAILED!
Running test Parser hook: static parser hook inside a comment... FAILED!
Running test Sanitizer: Validating the contents of the id attribute (bug 4515)... FAILED!

Passed 266 of 288 tests (92.36%) FAILED!


from_name: Ilmari Karonen

body:
Guettarda wrote:
>
> Of course it won't solve all of our problems, but it might make matters
> easier.  While some people don't care about copyright, in my experience a
> lot of people are just clueless.  Most of the untagged (or obviously
> mistagged) images I come across were uploaded by newbies - sometime all they
> have done it upload a pile of images and add them to aricles (full sized,
> and the top of the page...)  They generally are people who mean well - I
> guess they just figure that we are the clueless ones who "don't know that
> you can get images of X everywhere on the web" or don't know about Google
> image search or...  These people are often apologetic when you explain the
> situation to them.

Now there's an idea: maybe we should just add a big notice to the upload
page saying "Yes, we know there are lots of images you can download off
the web.  We don't want them." and in a smaller font "(For exceptions,
see [[Wikipedia:Fair use]] and [[Wikipedia:Free image resources]].)".

--
Ilmari Karonen


from_name: future civilization

body:
You see Jake, you have to speak with Mark about it. He seems not to understand and not to accept a free, democratic vote on the DELETION OF MOLDOVAN WIKIPEDIA. His tone of his messages have been utterly unacceptable. Why doesn't he respect the vote? Absolute majority of the users have voted for DELETION. This marky didn't even vote against it.

  Now,  if you all allow him to make a circle out of this fine. It's your problem to calm him and teach him a lesson of how to respect others. If you allow him to continue this disruptive edits is also fine. After all, it's up to you to stop him. He has no authority in that matter whatsoever as he admits.

  Can you see that he didn't made a single valuable edit on that wikipedia? He made only "cut and paste" from the Romanian one.

  He did more: he made several attacks on other users as well.  Nothing he said can be construed as productive in any way- it's pure attack against romanians. Mark is known as having hatred against romanians. Check his user page.

  He lost all his friends and all his credibility when he started saying lies all over. He asks for attention and he will not received any of it. Go away marky you made too many disruptive emails here from many years now. You're annoying everybody here with your hatred against romanians. You'll remain a 16-17 year old russian anti-romanian.

Jake Nelson <duskwave at gmail.com> wrote:
  Who the hell are you, Mr. "future civilization"? I've stayed out of all
these threads because the existence or nonexistence of the Moldovan
Wikipedia neither affects nor interests me, but the tone of your
messages has been utterly unacceptable. This list exists to improve
Wikipedia. Nothing you've said can be construed as productive in any
way- it's pure attack.

Calm down and be civil if you want to be taken seriously.

-- Jake Nelson
[[en:User:Jake Nelson]]

PS. Real authority is not something that comes from age. It's earned, it
comes from being worthy of being respected. To dismiss someone because
they are "only 16-17 years" old is a grave error, and says nothing
positive about your judgment.

future civilization wrote:
> 70.58.114.75 24.251.68.75
>
> If you don't close rapidly and respect the decision of the vote concerning the DELETION OF MOLDOVAN WIKIPEDIA this is the result: disruptive personal attacks from Mark addressed to other users.
>
>
> future civilization wrote:
> Several IPs coming from Phoenix, Arizona (home address of Mark W.) made several edits (and also several personal attacks) on Moldovan Wikipedia thus breaking the result of the vote to delete the Moldovan Wikipedia and decision taken to freeze/or to rapidly delete this wikipedia made here.
>
> A ban for Mark for about a month maybe will chill him out and stop him from doing disruptive edits any more. A respect for the result of the vote would be too much from him as he immediately lounched himself in personal attacks.
>
> There is no more talking about this Moldovan Wikipedia, people decided to close and delete it. Now, its your job to do it and respect the decision.
>
> There was a vote for a long period of time: one month. Everybody had the chance to express himself and now the result of the vote shows very clear: people want DELETION OF MOLDOVAN WIKIPEDIA. Now, put this in practice.
>
>
>
>
> future civilization wrote:
> Yes, indeed. Mark doesn't have any authority and/or credibility, as himself admits. He is very interested in closing/opening any wikipedia but he uses a very disruptive language towards the new users. This disruptive language shows his limited comprehension on wikipedias in various languages. In this way he discourage people who are enthusiast to close/open new wikipedias. He has no power to decide for such a decision at the very least he wants to ask for attention. Maybe this is explained by his early age in life. You can't have any authority having only 16-17 years.
>
> His style is to demolish everything and has a strongly counter-effect, a strong negative one on what happens in Wikipedia. I checked his blocking log and shows a mean, very strong negative behaviour.
>
>
> You appear to take an extremely keen interest in the closing / opening
> of wikipedias, more so than the average poster on this list. I am just
> worried about newcomers who are excited about creating a wikipedia
> getting discouraged because someone, without the community's backing,
> acted as though he had the power to approve or deny the request. This
> came out extremely strongly in your last message to Manuel.
>
> I am not saying that you should stop being interested in the creation
> and destruction of wikipedias -- I am just worried about your style of
> discussing them.
>
>
>
>
> Silas Snider wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: RIPEMD160
>
> Mark Williamson wrote:
>
>>>Question:
>>>What authority do you, Mark, have over the creation of a new wikipedia?
>>>Are you a developer? I don't seem to ever see you contributing patches,
>>
>>Put simply, I don't. I have no real authority. However, I do know that
>>I have some sway, because different people have varying degrees of
>>respect for me in the matter of languages. There are certainly those
>>who don't trust me at all or who think I don't know much of anything
>>at all about languages, but I think most people believe that I know
>>quite a bit about languages but at the same time have problems with
>>other things about me so they take most of my opinions/advice under
>>advisement.
>>
>>If some developer wants to create a Tetum WP immediately, I have no
>>say in that. However, I'm pretty sure that the Wikimedia community as
>>a whole will have much more enthusiasm for the creation of a Tetum
>>Wikipedia if its test-wiki is more vibrant and is in 100% Tetum.
>>
>>
>>>etc. on wikitech-l. In fact, almost all the posts that I can see of
>>>yours involve some kind of discussion over orthography or languages in
>>>various wikipedias, especially when discussing closing one.
>>
>>>From what you say here, it seems to me that you're a relative
>>newcomer. Before the Moldovan controversy, there was almost never any
>>discussion about closing Wikis, given that the only 2 that have been
>>closed so far are Toki Pona and Klingon.
>>
>>I'm not sure what's wrong, though, with the fact that almost all of my
>>posts are about languages -- is that a bad thing? Certainly, if you
>>look at other posters, many of them tend to have areas of particular
>>interest as well.
>
>
> No, its not a bad thing, I was just trying to establish why I thought
> you were not a developer (in case it turned out that you were).
>
>
>>>My point is: on what grounds do you consider it your job to be the
>>>arbiter of when a proposal for wikipedia creation is good enough?
>>
>>Who said I do consider it my job? Besides you, that is.
>
>
> You appear to take an extremely keen interest in the closing / opening
> of wikipedias, more so than the average poster on this list. I am just
> worried about newcomers who are excited about creating a wikipedia
> getting discouraged because someone, without the community's backing,
> acted as though he had the power to approve or deny the request. This
> came out extremely strongly in your last message to Manuel.
>
> I am not saying that you should stop being interested in the creation
> and destruction of wikipedias -- I am just worried about your style of
> discussing them.
>
>
>>Mark
>>_______________________________________________
>>Wikipedia-l mailing list
>>Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
>>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>>
>
>
> Sincerely,
> Silas Snider
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
> iD8DBQFEESQELeGN0GHdxM0RA1bOAJ9cv+yhyURgAsRZtglt96Iqr+4gsACfQIRl
> hWdkEhAIf6yWdx9WCmbi3AU=
> =K/Tl
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Yahoo! Mail
> Bring photos to life! New PhotoMail makes sharing a breeze.
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>

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

---------------------------------
Yahoo! Mail
Bring photos to life! New PhotoMail  makes sharing a breeze.


from_name: SCZenz

subject:
[WikiEN-l] Don't remove a WP:OFFICE tag put there by Danny
	under any circumstances

references:
<fbad4e140603101225r27d675f4i@mail.gmail.com>
	<ce4d55b80603101842h5da7b8e4yb7523fb77c246a26@mail.gmail.com>
	<kp2512h9urtieqo6o7s6uddfp4h1rvkvk2@4ax.com>

body:
People who have it explained once, and then get it, are just fine.
People who have had it explained once, and don't get it, that's their
problem.  It's the people who haven't ever seen it before that deserve
an explanation.

SCZenz

On 3/11/06, Guy Chapman aka JzG <guy.chapman at spamcop.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Mar 2006 18:42:18 -0800, you wrote:
>
> >May I suggest that it would be helpful if Danny started using some
> >kind of generic explanatory template for WP:OFFICE protections?  Every
> >time it's used, people are rather confused and frustrated until it's
> >explained.
>
> Alternatively they could always try thinking a little.
> Guy (JzG)
> --
> http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JzG
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


body:
quote<<Who are you?>>quote

   This is irrelevant for this talk.

  quote<<What is your agenda?>>quote

  I have no agenda but you seem to have many hidden agendas here. One of them is your anti-romanian agenda. Your political agenda is seen from miles away.

  Actually, you don't care about the wikipedia since you made just "cut and paste" edits there. All your edits are either "cut and paste", "personal attacks against romanians" or they are lacking of content. You couldn't even find a single contributor to vote against it. You don't speak romanian or "moldovan", and you're in a situation of lying everything. You may count on people's ignorance but you can't hide the truth: you're a russian anti-romanian boy.

Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com> wrote:
  Who exactly are you?
And what users are there to attack? The Romanians only come around
every once in a while to agitate for deletion. They don't care about
the WP other than that.

Mark

On 10/03/06, future civilization wrote:
> 70.58.114.75 24.251.68.75
>
> If you don't close rapidly and respect the decision of the vote concerning the DELETION OF MOLDOVAN WIKIPEDIA this is the result: disruptive personal attacks from Mark addressed to other users.
>
>
> future civilization wrote:
> Several IPs coming from Phoenix, Arizona (home address of Mark W.) made several edits (and also several personal attacks) on Moldovan Wikipedia thus breaking the result of the vote to delete the Moldovan Wikipedia and decision taken to freeze/or to rapidly delete this wikipedia made here.
>
> A ban for Mark for about a month maybe will chill him out and stop him from doing disruptive edits any more. A respect for the result of the vote would be too much from him as he immediately lounched himself in personal attacks.
>
> There is no more talking about this Moldovan Wikipedia, people decided to close and delete it. Now, its your job to do it and respect the decision.
>
> There was a vote for a long period of time: one month. Everybody had the chance to express himself and now the result of the vote shows very clear: people want DELETION OF MOLDOVAN WIKIPEDIA. Now, put this in practice.
>
>
>
>
> future civilization wrote:
> Yes, indeed. Mark doesn't have any authority and/or credibility, as himself admits. He is very interested in closing/opening any wikipedia but he uses a very disruptive language towards the new users. This disruptive language shows his limited comprehension on wikipedias in various languages. In this way he discourage people who are enthusiast to close/open new wikipedias. He has no power to decide for such a decision at the very least he wants to ask for attention. Maybe this is explained by his early age in life. You can't have any authority having only 16-17 years.
>
> His style is to demolish everything and has a strongly counter-effect, a strong negative one on what happens in Wikipedia. I checked his blocking log and shows a mean, very strong negative behaviour.
>
>
> You appear to take an extremely keen interest in the closing / opening
> of wikipedias, more so than the average poster on this list. I am just
> worried about newcomers who are excited about creating a wikipedia
> getting discouraged because someone, without the community's backing,
> acted as though he had the power to approve or deny the request. This
> came out extremely strongly in your last message to Manuel.
>
> I am not saying that you should stop being interested in the creation
> and destruction of wikipedias -- I am just worried about your style of
> discussing them.
>
>
>
>
> Silas Snider wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: RIPEMD160
>
> Mark Williamson wrote:
> >> Question:
> >> What authority do you, Mark, have over the creation of a new wikipedia?
> >> Are you a developer? I don't seem to ever see you contributing patches,
> >
> > Put simply, I don't. I have no real authority. However, I do know that
> > I have some sway, because different people have varying degrees of
> > respect for me in the matter of languages. There are certainly those
> > who don't trust me at all or who think I don't know much of anything
> > at all about languages, but I think most people believe that I know
> > quite a bit about languages but at the same time have problems with
> > other things about me so they take most of my opinions/advice under
> > advisement.
> >
> > If some developer wants to create a Tetum WP immediately, I have no
> > say in that. However, I'm pretty sure that the Wikimedia community as
> > a whole will have much more enthusiasm for the creation of a Tetum
> > Wikipedia if its test-wiki is more vibrant and is in 100% Tetum.
> >
> >> etc. on wikitech-l. In fact, almost all the posts that I can see of
> >> yours involve some kind of discussion over orthography or languages in
> >> various wikipedias, especially when discussing closing one.
> >
> >>From what you say here, it seems to me that you're a relative
> > newcomer. Before the Moldovan controversy, there was almost never any
> > discussion about closing Wikis, given that the only 2 that have been
> > closed so far are Toki Pona and Klingon.
> >
> > I'm not sure what's wrong, though, with the fact that almost all of my
> > posts are about languages -- is that a bad thing? Certainly, if you
> > look at other posters, many of them tend to have areas of particular
> > interest as well.
>
> No, its not a bad thing, I was just trying to establish why I thought
> you were not a developer (in case it turned out that you were).
>
> >
> >> My point is: on what grounds do you consider it your job to be the
> >> arbiter of when a proposal for wikipedia creation is good enough?
> >
> > Who said I do consider it my job? Besides you, that is.
>
> You appear to take an extremely keen interest in the closing / opening
> of wikipedias, more so than the average poster on this list. I am just
> worried about newcomers who are excited about creating a wikipedia
> getting discouraged because someone, without the community's backing,
> acted as though he had the power to approve or deny the request. This
> came out extremely strongly in your last message to Manuel.
>
> I am not saying that you should stop being interested in the creation
> and destruction of wikipedias -- I am just worried about your style of
> discussing them.
>
> >
> > Mark
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> >
>
> Sincerely,
> Silas Snider
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
> iD8DBQFEESQELeGN0GHdxM0RA1bOAJ9cv+yhyURgAsRZtglt96Iqr+4gsACfQIRl
> hWdkEhAIf6yWdx9WCmbi3AU=
> =K/Tl
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Yahoo! Mail
> Bring photos to life! New PhotoMail makes sharing a breeze.
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>

--
"Take away their language, destroy their souls." -- Joseph Stalin
_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l

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


body:
geni wrote:
> On 3/10/06, Ilmari Karonen <nospam at vyznev.net> wrote:
>
>>Now there's an idea: maybe we should just add a big notice to the upload
>>page saying "Yes, we know there are lots of images you can download off
>>the web.  We don't want them." and in a smaller font "(For exceptions,
>>see [[Wikipedia:Fair use]] and [[Wikipedia:Free image resources]].)".
>
> Tempting but not overkill enough. I'd like secting a fair use tag take
> you to a screen with the criteria for useing that tag on it in big
> letters.

The big bold notice is there now, let's see if it helps any.  I'm also
fully in favor of your proposal, should someone wish to implement it.

--
Ilmari Karonen


from_name: Cormac Lawler

body:
On 3/11/06, Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com> wrote:
> For purely practical considerations, I would suggest using the English
> name for a Romanian audience. Chances are, if they have happened to
> hear of these places before, they would be more familiar with the
> English name, and, in addition to that, English pronunciation is more
> intuitive when reading Romanian than that of most Celtic languages --
> imagine how horribly most Romanians would mangle Caerdydd, An Uaimh,
> or Corcaigh.
>
> Mark

To be honest, I agree - that's what I was thinking too.

Cormac

>
> On 10/03/06, Wikipedia Romania (Ronline) <rowikipedia at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm planning to work on a number of articles related to Irish, Scottish and
> > Welsh localities on the Romanian Wikipedia. I am currently in a dilemma as
> > to what name to use - the Celtic variant or the English variant. I have
> > realised that most non-English Wikipedias use the English variant - so that
> > place names such as "Cork", "Dublin", "Edinburg" and "Cardiff" are used. For
> > the exception of Dublin, perhaps, many of these place names, particularly
> > smaller towns, do not have native variants in languages such as Romanian,
> > German, French, etc.
> >
> > So, why should the English name be used in this situation? Wouldn't the
> > Celtic name be more appropriate? Celtic languages are co-official in
> > Scotland and Wales, while in Ireland, Irish is the first official and
> > national language. Due to this, I would prefer to use placenames such as
> > "Corcaigh", "*An Uaimh*" (for Navan), "*Chill Dara" *(for Kildare), etc.
> > However, this sounds quite odd and are not frequently used, even though they
> > are the first official name. What do others think? I am inclined to use them
> > so that people are actually educated that there exists an Irish language as
> > the first official language of Ireland. Too often, people in Romania say
> > "the Irish speak (just) English" and stop it at that. They're surprised, for
> > example, when I tell them about Irish names such as "Baile Atha Cliath" for
> > Dublin, etc.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Ronline
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> >
>
>
> --
> "Take away their language, destroy their souls." -- Joseph Stalin
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>


body:
Guettarda wrote:

>On 3/10/06, Stan Shebs <shebs at apple.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Mark Wagner wrote:
>>
>>
>>Here's a thought - "fair use" images need to go through a review process
>>*before* uploading, sort of like featured articles. If the "fair use image
>>candidate" gets through the process, then it can be recorded and we don't
>>have to fight about it anymore.
>>
>>
>
>
>I have reservations about this.  Fair use is a grey area legally - it's a
>permissible violation of copyright.  If we had a formal review process,
>might that not make the project more liable if we get it wrong?
>
So, uh, the situation is to pretend the problem doesn't exist?

>  In
>addition, if we make fair use more difficult, then we are likely to get
>people tagging images with free tags.  If they are tagged as fair use, a lot
>of obvious violations show up.  On the other hand, if it's mis-tagged as
>{{GFDL}}, we'd really have to go to the source.
>
>
That's absolutely correct. As much as I hate to say it, I'm beginning to
think that the only way to solve this is to thwack all clueless people
WRT fair use with a clue stick, and to just continue reviewing images as
we stumble upon them. Reviewing them at the point of entry will just
encourage people to lie on purpose instead of just unconsciously make a
mistake.

>I would rather make it a requirement that the uploader list a source or the
>name of the copyright holder.  Lots of images don't have a source clearly
>marked, and don't have information about the copyright holder.  How can we
>even hope to verify licensing if we don't know who holds the copyright (or
>at worst, where it came from)
>
>Ian
>
>
That's a very good idea. We should make a specific, mandatory field for
this. Of course, we then run the risk of people making up sources and
copyright holder names...

John


from_name: Jake Nelson

subject:
[Wikipedia-l] disruptive IPs of Mark Williamson attacking users
 on	Moldovan Wikipedia

body:
Who the hell are you, Mr. "future civilization"? I've stayed out of all
these threads because the existence or nonexistence of the Moldovan
Wikipedia neither affects nor interests me, but the tone of your
messages has been utterly unacceptable. This list exists to improve
Wikipedia. Nothing you've said can be construed as productive in any
way- it's pure attack.

Calm down and be civil if you want to be taken seriously.

-- Jake Nelson
[[en:User:Jake Nelson]]

PS. Real authority is not something that comes from age. It's earned, it
comes from being worthy of being respected. To dismiss someone because
they are "only 16-17 years" old is a grave error, and says nothing
positive about your judgment.

future civilization wrote:
> 70.58.114.75 24.251.68.75
>
>   If you don't close rapidly and respect the decision of the vote concerning the DELETION OF MOLDOVAN WIKIPEDIA this is the result: disruptive personal attacks from Mark addressed to other users.
>
>
> future civilization <future_civilization at yahoo.com> wrote:
>   Several IPs coming from Phoenix, Arizona (home address of Mark W.) made several edits (and also several personal attacks) on Moldovan Wikipedia thus breaking the result of the vote to delete the Moldovan Wikipedia and decision taken to freeze/or to rapidly delete this wikipedia made here.
>
> A ban for Mark for about a month maybe will chill him out and stop him from doing disruptive edits any more. A respect for the result of the vote would be too much from him as he immediately lounched himself in personal attacks.
>
> There is no more talking about this Moldovan Wikipedia, people decided to close and delete it. Now, its your job to do it and respect the decision.
>
> There was a vote for a long period of time: one month. Everybody had the chance to express himself and now the result of the vote shows very clear: people want DELETION OF MOLDOVAN WIKIPEDIA. Now, put this in practice.
>
>
>
>
> future civilization wrote:
> Yes, indeed. Mark doesn't have any authority and/or credibility, as himself admits. He is very interested in closing/opening any wikipedia but he uses a very disruptive language towards the new users. This disruptive language shows his limited comprehension on wikipedias in various languages. In this way he discourage people who are enthusiast to close/open new wikipedias. He has no power to decide for such a decision at the very least he wants to ask for attention. Maybe this is explained by his early age in life. You can't have any authority having only 16-17 years.
>
> His style is to demolish everything and has a strongly counter-effect, a strong negative one on what happens in Wikipedia. I checked his blocking log and shows a mean, very strong negative behaviour.
>
>
> You appear to take an extremely keen interest in the closing / opening
> of wikipedias, more so than the average poster on this list. I am just
> worried about newcomers who are excited about creating a wikipedia
> getting discouraged because someone, without the community's backing,
> acted as though he had the power to approve or deny the request. This
> came out extremely strongly in your last message to Manuel.
>
> I am not saying that you should stop being interested in the creation
> and destruction of wikipedias -- I am just worried about your style of
> discussing them.
>
>
>
>
> Silas Snider wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: RIPEMD160
>
> Mark Williamson wrote:
>
>>>Question:
>>>What authority do you, Mark, have over the creation of a new wikipedia?
>>>Are you a developer? I don't seem to ever see you contributing patches,
>>
>>Put simply, I don't. I have no real authority. However, I do know that
>>I have some sway, because different people have varying degrees of
>>respect for me in the matter of languages. There are certainly those
>>who don't trust me at all or who think I don't know much of anything
>>at all about languages, but I think most people believe that I know
>>quite a bit about languages but at the same time have problems with
>>other things about me so they take most of my opinions/advice under
>>advisement.
>>
>>If some developer wants to create a Tetum WP immediately, I have no
>>say in that. However, I'm pretty sure that the Wikimedia community as
>>a whole will have much more enthusiasm for the creation of a Tetum
>>Wikipedia if its test-wiki is more vibrant and is in 100% Tetum.
>>
>>
>>>etc. on wikitech-l. In fact, almost all the posts that I can see of
>>>yours involve some kind of discussion over orthography or languages in
>>>various wikipedias, especially when discussing closing one.
>>
>>>From what you say here, it seems to me that you're a relative
>>newcomer. Before the Moldovan controversy, there was almost never any
>>discussion about closing Wikis, given that the only 2 that have been
>>closed so far are Toki Pona and Klingon.
>>
>>I'm not sure what's wrong, though, with the fact that almost all of my
>>posts are about languages -- is that a bad thing? Certainly, if you
>>look at other posters, many of them tend to have areas of particular
>>interest as well.
>
>
> No, its not a bad thing, I was just trying to establish why I thought
> you were not a developer (in case it turned out that you were).
>
>
>>>My point is: on what grounds do you consider it your job to be the
>>>arbiter of when a proposal for wikipedia creation is good enough?
>>
>>Who said I do consider it my job? Besides you, that is.
>
>
> You appear to take an extremely keen interest in the closing / opening
> of wikipedias, more so than the average poster on this list. I am just
> worried about newcomers who are excited about creating a wikipedia
> getting discouraged because someone, without the community's backing,
> acted as though he had the power to approve or deny the request. This
> came out extremely strongly in your last message to Manuel.
>
> I am not saying that you should stop being interested in the creation
> and destruction of wikipedias -- I am just worried about your style of
> discussing them.
>
>
>>Mark
>>_______________________________________________
>>Wikipedia-l mailing list
>>Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
>>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>>
>
>
> Sincerely,
> Silas Snider
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
> iD8DBQFEESQELeGN0GHdxM0RA1bOAJ9cv+yhyURgAsRZtglt96Iqr+4gsACfQIRl
> hWdkEhAIf6yWdx9WCmbi3AU=
> =K/Tl
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Yahoo! Mail
> Bring photos to life! New PhotoMail  makes sharing a breeze.
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>


body:
No only that Marky and try not to play who's the smart around here. You breake the decision taken by Anthere here where she told you to stop editing  and respecting the result of the vote. You're not allowed to edit that wikipedia again? Do you understand this? There was a vote about it, I don't care if you didn't vote or not. Many other people voted and now its time for you to accept it.

  It's so hard for you to accept this? You must accept Anthere's decision and don't you ever edit that wikipedia again. You russian anti-romanian.

Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com> wrote:
  The edits to which Mr Civilization is referring are a number of
articles I created, for example http://mo.wikipedia.org/wiki/1997

Now, the last time I checked, creation of stub articles is hardly a
bannable offence.

Mark

On 10/03/06, future civilization wrote:
> Several IPs coming from Phoenix, Arizona (home address of Mark W.) made several edits (and also several personal attacks) on Moldovan Wikipedia thus breaking the result of the vote to delete the Moldovan Wikipedia and decision taken to freeze/or to rapidly delete this wikipedia made here.
>
> A ban for Mark for about a month maybe will chill him out and stop him from doing disruptive edits any more. A respect for the result of the vote would be too much from him as he immediately lounched himself in personal attacks.
>
> There is no more talking about this Moldovan Wikipedia, people decided to close and delete it. Now, its your job to do it and respect the decision.
>
> There was a vote for a long period of time: one month. Everybody had the chance to express himself and now the result of the vote shows very clear: people want DELETION OF MOLDOVAN WIKIPEDIA. Now, put this in practice.
>
>
>
>
> future civilization wrote:
> Yes, indeed. Mark doesn't have any authority and/or credibility, as himself admits. He is very interested in closing/opening any wikipedia but he uses a very disruptive language towards the new users. This disruptive language shows his limited comprehension on wikipedias in various languages. In this way he discourage people who are enthusiast to close/open new wikipedias. He has no power to decide for such a decision at the very least he wants to ask for attention. Maybe this is explained by his early age in life. You can't have any authority having only 16-17 years.
>
> His style is to demolish everything and has a strongly counter-effect, a strong negative one on what happens in Wikipedia. I checked his blocking log and shows a mean, very strong negative behaviour.
>
>
> You appear to take an extremely keen interest in the closing / opening
> of wikipedias, more so than the average poster on this list. I am just
> worried about newcomers who are excited about creating a wikipedia
> getting discouraged because someone, without the community's backing,
> acted as though he had the power to approve or deny the request. This
> came out extremely strongly in your last message to Manuel.
>
> I am not saying that you should stop being interested in the creation
> and destruction of wikipedias -- I am just worried about your style of
> discussing them.
>
>
>
>
> Silas Snider wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: RIPEMD160
>
> Mark Williamson wrote:
> >> Question:
> >> What authority do you, Mark, have over the creation of a new wikipedia?
> >> Are you a developer? I don't seem to ever see you contributing patches,
> >
> > Put simply, I don't. I have no real authority. However, I do know that
> > I have some sway, because different people have varying degrees of
> > respect for me in the matter of languages. There are certainly those
> > who don't trust me at all or who think I don't know much of anything
> > at all about languages, but I think most people believe that I know
> > quite a bit about languages but at the same time have problems with
> > other things about me so they take most of my opinions/advice under
> > advisement.
> >
> > If some developer wants to create a Tetum WP immediately, I have no
> > say in that. However, I'm pretty sure that the Wikimedia community as
> > a whole will have much more enthusiasm for the creation of a Tetum
> > Wikipedia if its test-wiki is more vibrant and is in 100% Tetum.
> >
> >> etc. on wikitech-l. In fact, almost all the posts that I can see of
> >> yours involve some kind of discussion over orthography or languages in
> >> various wikipedias, especially when discussing closing one.
> >
> >>From what you say here, it seems to me that you're a relative
> > newcomer. Before the Moldovan controversy, there was almost never any
> > discussion about closing Wikis, given that the only 2 that have been
> > closed so far are Toki Pona and Klingon.
> >
> > I'm not sure what's wrong, though, with the fact that almost all of my
> > posts are about languages -- is that a bad thing? Certainly, if you
> > look at other posters, many of them tend to have areas of particular
> > interest as well.
>
> No, its not a bad thing, I was just trying to establish why I thought
> you were not a developer (in case it turned out that you were).
>
> >
> >> My point is: on what grounds do you consider it your job to be the
> >> arbiter of when a proposal for wikipedia creation is good enough?
> >
> > Who said I do consider it my job? Besides you, that is.
>
> You appear to take an extremely keen interest in the closing / opening
> of wikipedias, more so than the average poster on this list. I am just
> worried about newcomers who are excited about creating a wikipedia
> getting discouraged because someone, without the community's backing,
> acted as though he had the power to approve or deny the request. This
> came out extremely strongly in your last message to Manuel.
>
> I am not saying that you should stop being interested in the creation
> and destruction of wikipedias -- I am just worried about your style of
> discussing them.
>
> >
> > Mark
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> >
>
> Sincerely,
> Silas Snider
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
> iD8DBQFEESQELeGN0GHdxM0RA1bOAJ9cv+yhyURgAsRZtglt96Iqr+4gsACfQIRl
> hWdkEhAIf6yWdx9WCmbi3AU=
> =K/Tl
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>

--
"Take away their language, destroy their souls." -- Joseph Stalin
_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l

---------------------------------
Yahoo! Mail
Bring photos to life! New PhotoMail  makes sharing a breeze.


subject:
[Wikipedia-l] delete that Moldovan Wikipedia once and for good,
	don't let yourself intimidated by a disruptive vandal like Mark
	Williamson who has anti-romanian feelings

body:
Now it's time to close and delete that problem for good. People voted there, decision is taken. People want to delete that wikipedia.

  Respect the result of the vote taken there. Once and for good.

---------------------------------
Brings words and photos together (easily) with
 PhotoMail  - it's free and works with Yahoo! Mail.


body:
Tell this to marky please, he MUST respect the decision taken by ANTHERE here to delete that Wikipedia and not to edit there. He must respect the result of the vote. He must try and refrain from making personal attacks there as he did.

  Every edit made there on the Moldovan Wikipedia is a personal attacks against romanians/moldovans and is a real proof of his anti-romanian feelings.

  Anti-Romanian (alternatively spelled antiromanism) is hostility toward or prejudice against Romanians as a religious, ethnic, or racial group, which can range from individual hatred to institutionalized, violent persecution. Is what Mark Williamson just makes there.

Francis Tyers <spectre at ivixor.net> wrote:
  Please try and refrain from making personal attacks.

Fran

On Sat, 2006-03-11 at 07:14 -0800, future civilization wrote:
> No only that Marky and try not to play who's the smart around here. You breake the decision taken by Anthere here where she told you to stop editing and respecting the result of the vote. You're not allowed to edit that wikipedia again? Do you understand this? There was a vote about it, I don't care if you didn't vote or not. Many other people voted and now its time for you to accept it.
>
> It's so hard for you to accept this? You must accept Anthere's decision and don't you ever edit that wikipedia again. You russian anti-romanian.
>
>
>
>
> Mark Williamson wrote:
> The edits to which Mr Civilization is referring are a number of
> articles I created, for example http://mo.wikipedia.org/wiki/1997
>
> Now, the last time I checked, creation of stub articles is hardly a
> bannable offence.
>
> Mark
>
> On 10/03/06, future civilization wrote:
> > Several IPs coming from Phoenix, Arizona (home address of Mark W.) made several edits (and also several personal attacks) on Moldovan Wikipedia thus breaking the result of the vote to delete the Moldovan Wikipedia and decision taken to freeze/or to rapidly delete this wikipedia made here.
> >
> > A ban for Mark for about a month maybe will chill him out and stop him from doing disruptive edits any more. A respect for the result of the vote would be too much from him as he immediately lounched himself in personal attacks.
> >
> > There is no more talking about this Moldovan Wikipedia, people decided to close and delete it. Now, its your job to do it and respect the decision.
> >
> > There was a vote for a long period of time: one month. Everybody had the chance to express himself and now the result of the vote shows very clear: people want DELETION OF MOLDOVAN WIKIPEDIA. Now, put this in practice.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > future civilization wrote:
> > Yes, indeed. Mark doesn't have any authority and/or credibility, as himself admits. He is very interested in closing/opening any wikipedia but he uses a very disruptive language towards the new users. This disruptive language shows his limited comprehension on wikipedias in various languages. In this way he discourage people who are enthusiast to close/open new wikipedias. He has no power to decide for such a decision at the very least he wants to ask for attention. Maybe this is explained by his early age in life. You can't have any authority having only 16-17 years.
> >
> > His style is to demolish everything and has a strongly counter-effect, a strong negative one on what happens in Wikipedia. I checked his blocking log and shows a mean, very strong negative behaviour.
> >
> >
> > You appear to take an extremely keen interest in the closing / opening
> > of wikipedias, more so than the average poster on this list. I am just
> > worried about newcomers who are excited about creating a wikipedia
> > getting discouraged because someone, without the community's backing,
> > acted as though he had the power to approve or deny the request. This
> > came out extremely strongly in your last message to Manuel.
> >
> > I am not saying that you should stop being interested in the creation
> > and destruction of wikipedias -- I am just worried about your style of
> > discussing them.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Silas Snider wrote:
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: RIPEMD160
> >
> > Mark Williamson wrote:
> > >> Question:
> > >> What authority do you, Mark, have over the creation of a new wikipedia?
> > >> Are you a developer? I don't seem to ever see you contributing patches,
> > >
> > > Put simply, I don't. I have no real authority. However, I do know that
> > > I have some sway, because different people have varying degrees of
> > > respect for me in the matter of languages. There are certainly those
> > > who don't trust me at all or who think I don't know much of anything
> > > at all about languages, but I think most people believe that I know
> > > quite a bit about languages but at the same time have problems with
> > > other things about me so they take most of my opinions/advice under
> > > advisement.
> > >
> > > If some developer wants to create a Tetum WP immediately, I have no
> > > say in that. However, I'm pretty sure that the Wikimedia community as
> > > a whole will have much more enthusiasm for the creation of a Tetum
> > > Wikipedia if its test-wiki is more vibrant and is in 100% Tetum.
> > >
> > >> etc. on wikitech-l. In fact, almost all the posts that I can see of
> > >> yours involve some kind of discussion over orthography or languages in
> > >> various wikipedias, especially when discussing closing one.
> > >
> > >>From what you say here, it seems to me that you're a relative
> > > newcomer. Before the Moldovan controversy, there was almost never any
> > > discussion about closing Wikis, given that the only 2 that have been
> > > closed so far are Toki Pona and Klingon.
> > >
> > > I'm not sure what's wrong, though, with the fact that almost all of my
> > > posts are about languages -- is that a bad thing? Certainly, if you
> > > look at other posters, many of them tend to have areas of particular
> > > interest as well.
> >
> > No, its not a bad thing, I was just trying to establish why I thought
> > you were not a developer (in case it turned out that you were).
> >
> > >
> > >> My point is: on what grounds do you consider it your job to be the
> > >> arbiter of when a proposal for wikipedia creation is good enough?
> > >
> > > Who said I do consider it my job? Besides you, that is.
> >
> > You appear to take an extremely keen interest in the closing / opening
> > of wikipedias, more so than the average poster on this list. I am just
> > worried about newcomers who are excited about creating a wikipedia
> > getting discouraged because someone, without the community's backing,
> > acted as though he had the power to approve or deny the request. This
> > came out extremely strongly in your last message to Manuel.
> >
> > I am not saying that you should stop being interested in the creation
> > and destruction of wikipedias -- I am just worried about your style of
> > discussing them.
> >
> > >
> > > Mark
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > > Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> > >
> >
> > Sincerely,
> > Silas Snider
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> > Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
> > Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
> >
> > iD8DBQFEESQELeGN0GHdxM0RA1bOAJ9cv+yhyURgAsRZtglt96Iqr+4gsACfQIRl
> > hWdkEhAIf6yWdx9WCmbi3AU=
> > =K/Tl
> > -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> >
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> > http://mail.yahoo.com
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> >
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> > http://mail.yahoo.com
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> >
>
>
> --
> "Take away their language, destroy their souls." -- Joseph Stalin
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Yahoo! Mail
> Bring photos to life! New PhotoMail makes sharing a breeze.
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l

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

---------------------------------
Yahoo! Mail
Bring photos to life! New PhotoMail  makes sharing a breeze.


from_name: Jonathan

subject: [WikiEN-l] Download history tool?

body:
Steve Bennett wrote:

>Awesome ;) Would it be possible to get it to include the text of each
>edit? I'm starting to learn more about greasemonkey, doesn't seem like
>that would be easy to do. But if it is...
>
>Steve
>
It is possible.

Jonathan


from_name: Guy Chapman aka JzG

body:
On Fri, 10 Mar 2006 18:42:18 -0800, you wrote:

>May I suggest that it would be helpful if Danny started using some
>kind of generic explanatory template for WP:OFFICE protections?  Every
>time it's used, people are rather confused and frustrated until it's
>explained.

Alternatively they could always try thinking a little.
Guy (JzG)
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JzG


from_name: Daniel Mayer

subject: [WikiEN-l] Don't remove a WP:OFFICE tag put there by Danny

body:
--- geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
> The people we are writeing articles about are not customers.

Every single person on the planet is a customer. We plan to serve all.

> blanking or deleting the article= writeing off the work. Not a nice
> way to treat the previous writers. Telling them what is wrong might
> work better.

We can not leave potentially wrong, libelous, and/or slanderous text up while the article is being
reviewed and checked per an Office Action. Everything is still in the history and all the good
bits will be put back once they are confirmed and cited. Not doing this opens the foundation up to
lawsuit by unnecessarily pissing off the complaining party while we clean up whatever valid issues
(if any) they have with the article.

> It is a bit difficult to tell how many references [[Jack Thompson
> (attorney)]] had since two different systems were being used but it
> was probably over 100 (absolute minium=99). how many do you want?

Without commenting on those particular references - Not all references are equal. Just because
somebody publishes a completely wrong and biased fact somewhere else does not give us an OK to
cite that information.

> > That's what WP:OFFICE is all about -- good customer service.
>
> I seem to recall the justification was something to do with legal
> worries. Are you stateing that is not the case?

Good customer service is a great way to prevent pissing people off so much that they would be
willing to sue. So the two are closely linked.

> > Ideally, it should be thought of as an action that could and should be
> > taken by any good Wikipedian in the face of a bad article.  A very firm
> > "blank and rewrite with proper cites" is a perfectly valid move for
> > articles like this.
> >
>
> /Temp exists for such purposes. Outright blanking is pretty much
> garenteeded to be reverted.

And reverting an Office Action is pretty much guaranteed to lead to at least temporary desysoping
and blocking. We also need to feel bold enough to do the right thing when we see an utter piece of
POV crap and start over by blanking and verifying each and every fact. Perhaps a better way to do
that is via HTML comments ; text would be commented out until it is verified.

-- mav

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


from_name: Bryan Derksen

body:
geni wrote:
> /Temp exists for such purposes. Outright blanking is pretty much
> garenteeded to be reverted.
>
Weird, I agreed with everything Geni just wrote. :) Requiring an article
to be rewritten from the ground up when there's nothing actually _wrong_
with it, or at least nothing that a little editing can't fix, is silly.
A lot of these articles that get complaints from their subjects have
been the subject of a great deal of editor work and I think it's far
better to be considered a "jerk" by the subject of the article than by
the editors that wrote it and the readers who read it.

Ideally neither, of course - if the subject is tossing about legal
threats and such a temporary blanking might be in order while that gets
sorted out (_not_ temporary deletion - deletion is not a good way to
"store" material out of sight for later use, as I've ranted about
previously). But it must be dealt with in a timely manner and explained
thoroughly and transparently to the people working on the article
itself. A while back I restored Harlan Ellison's article several months
after Jimbo had blanked it because there'd been no indication of any
work being done on the dispute with Ellison since that time, not even
after I asked for an update on Jimbo's talk page. I don't think it'd be
appropriate to block me for taking such action today.


from_name: Michael Snow

body:
geni wrote:

>>Without commenting on those particular references - Not all references are equal. Just >because somebody publishes a completely wrong and biased fact somewhere else does >not give us an OK to cite that information.
>>
>>
>Depends who published it. [[Killian documents]] seems to exist.
>
>
Because the publication itself turned out to be notable, but their
contents should not be cited as fact in Wikipedia. It's not pertinent to
the issue that we can't republish libel and excuse it by citing the
libel to another source.

>However WP:OFFICE actions seem desighned to maximise the number of
>people who threaten to sue us.
>
>
Most people who threaten to sue us likely are not aware of what has
happened when people contacted the Foundation about previous unrelated
problems. The threats are a function of our visibility and publicity
about things like the Seigenthaler article, and even then the vast
majority probably believe it's the news coverage that made us delete it.

Quite the contrary, office actions are designed to *minimize* the number
of people who *actually* sue us.

--Michael Snow


subject:
[WikiEN-l] Don't remove a WP:OFFICE tag put there by
 Danny	under any circumstances

body:
Jimmy Wales wrote:
> I should add that Feburary 10 -> March 8 is *entirely too long* for a
> WP:OFFICE protection.  Anyone finding something protected that long
> should be verrrrrrrrry welcome to email Danny *and* me (cc please) to
> ask what is up.  Normally that length of protection would indicate
> either a mistake or something serious.
>
> I would say that in most cases, WP:OFFICE need not result in protection
> (semi-protection is more likely), and when there is protection it should
> normally not be for more than a couple of days.
>
This resolves almost all of my concerns about this situation. As an
avowed eventualist I can withstand _anything_ for a couple of days. :)


body:
Guy Chapman aka JzG wrote:
> On Sat, 11 Mar 2006 16:25:23 +0000, you wrote:
>
>
>> blanking or deleting the article= writeing off the work. Not a nice
>> way to treat the previous writers. Telling them what is wrong might
>> work better.
>>
>
> I think you've rather missed the point.  An office action is a quick
> and temporary  fix for an immediate problem: there is a clear
> implication that the problem will be solved by the community in the
> usual way we solve problems of accuracy and balance.  After the
> pressing problem has been fixed.
>
Jimbo wrote at 8:58 AM:

> Rather, we should respond quickly and politely to their concerns,
> including in most cases, *blanking or deleting the article* and
> *starting over*, being *extremely* careful as a community to get all the
> facts right, to strike a fair and neutral tone, and to cite sources even
> more extensively than normal.
>
Deleting and starting over implies writing off the previous work. In
fact, the it'd be really complicated to do otherwise since the GFDL
requires attribution and in the case of deletion the edit history for
the previous version is gone.

He also wrote at 9:04 AM:

> I would say that in most cases, WP:OFFICE need not result in protection
> (semi-protection is more likely), and when there is protection it should
> normally not be for more than a couple of days.
There seem to be some mixed messages coming from him on this subject
since this seems to suggest that most OFFICE actions would be nowhere
near that drastic. Unless he means that the article would be deleted
permanently (to "start over") but not protected in a deleted state for long?


from_name: Jimmy Wales

body:
Daniel R. Tobias wrote:
> Not that I have any intention of doing such a thing... but I still
> have some concerns about the whole WP:OFFICE business. Sure, I
> realize the necessity for something like that; as long as Wikipedia
> and its parent foundation exist as real-world entities rather than
> just disembodied Internet phenomena, there will be people in charge
> who have bills to pay, legalities to comply with, servers to keep
> running, and so on... and, hence, concerns for which their butts are
> on the line in a manner not shared by the typical geek just editing
> Wikipedia for the fun of it.  Nevertheless, in a site which prides
> itself on openness and rule by community consensus, having actions
> take place unilaterally and secretively goes against the grain, and
> should be kept to an absolute minimum.

It is not just about legalities, but also about common human courtesy
and good customer service.  If you are thinking of this as "the
foundation against the community" then you're not thinking of it in the
way that I'm thinking of it, so let me explain further.

We, as a community, write articles.  We write articles about some people
who happen to be alive.  Sometimes those articles are temporarily biased
or contain misinformation, and sometimes that bias or misinformation can
hurt someone's feelings.  Sometimes, indeed, our articles are *not*
biased and do *not* contain misinformation, and yet they can *still*
hurt someone's feeelings (if they don't care for the neutral facts).
The latter is, in my experience, quite rare.  Quite. Rare.

Mostly, when people call us on the phone with a beef, quiet upset, they
are not complaining about a neutral presentation of the facts.  They are
upset because someone has written a one-sided hack job.   Often it is
*not* libel, but just bad writing.

What should we do in such a case?  Well, our fundamental goal *as a
community* is to write a really great encyclopedia.  Being jerks toward
people who have their feelings hurt *and* who know nothing about how we
operate, does not strike me as a very useful way to respond.

Rather, we should respond quickly and politely to their concerns,
including in most cases, *blanking or deleting the article* and
*starting over*, being *extremely* careful as a community to get all the
facts right, to strike a fair and neutral tone, and to cite sources even
more extensively than normal.

That's what WP:OFFICE is all about -- good customer service.

Ideally, it should be thought of as an action that could and should be
taken by any good Wikipedian in the face of a bad article.  A very firm
"blank and rewrite with proper cites" is a perfectly valid move for
articles like this.

> There's kind of a feel that, if an article happens to offend the
> "wrong" people (who have some kind of political, financial, or legal
> leverage to use against Wikipedia/Wikimedia?), the Wikipedia Secret
> Police can just make it disappear, and community consensus (and all
> the Wikipedia pillars) be damned.

Why is there any such feel like this?  That's absurd and inflammatory.
WP:OFFICE *specifically* says that it is to be used sparingly,
temporarily, and is not meant to override or replace community consensus.

And honestly, you should know me well enough by now.  No amount of
political, financial, or legal leverage in the entire universe would
persuade me to do the wrong thing by our mission.  We have, as a
community, principles and integrity.  This is what we are all about.

> We already know that the community is secondary to the goal of
> producing an excellent encyclopedia.  But is that, in turn, secondary
> to some secret corporate agenda held by the Foundation Office?

Again, this is really inflammatory and not helpful to a serious
discussion of the issues.  "secret corporate agenda" geez.

--
#######################################################################
#    Office: 1-727-231-0101       |  Free Culture and  Free Knowledge #
#    http://www.wikipedia.org     |     Building a free world         #
#######################################################################


body:
SCZenz wrote:
> May I suggest that it would be helpful if Danny started using some
> kind of generic explanatory template for WP:OFFICE protections?  Every
> time it's used, people are rather confused and frustrated until it's
> explained.

This is a reasonable request.  The kinds of situations vary, of course.
 In some cases, there may be a *legal* reason why not much can be said
in the short run.  In *most* cases, it's really about trying to head off
something before it turns ugly.

--Jimbo

--
#######################################################################
#    Office: 1-727-231-0101       |  Free Culture and  Free Knowledge #
#    http://www.wikipedia.org     |     Building a free world         #
#######################################################################


body:
Cormac Lawler wrote:
> Dan, I think if you actually *read* the policy
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Office_Actions you'll see that
> it's nothing like the secretive, corporate, anti-Wikipedia,
> anti-community type of thing you suggest. It says on the page that it
> is a "temporary action to allow us to be kind while we sort out the
> encyclopedic way forward". Community consensus won't tell us when
> we're in danger of being sued - that's more likely to be ascertained
> by the person who's just received the angry email/phonecall - but
> community consensus will, as always, be what actually writes the
> balanced article in the end.
>
> N'est pas?

Very well put.

--
#######################################################################
#    Office: 1-727-231-0101       |  Free Culture and  Free Knowledge #
#    http://www.wikipedia.org     |     Building a free world         #
#######################################################################


body:
Tony Sidaway wrote:
> To be fair, the tag that geni removed was placed there by me.  Danny
> had protected the article in question on February 10, inserting the
> standard "protected" notice and placing the comment "[[WP:Office]]"
> into the protection log.
>
> On 8 March, I found it protected and did the normal check in the
> history and the talk page.  Finding nothing special, and considering
> this to be a forgotten protection, I unprotected.  When informed that
> the page had been protected under [[WP:OFFICE]] I reprotected and at
> that point inserted the following tag at the head of the article:
>
> "This article was protected on 15:32, 10 February 2006 by
> [[User:Danny]] as an [[WP:OFFICE|Office Action]]"
> [[Category:Protected]]

I should add that Feburary 10 -> March 8 is *entirely too long* for a
WP:OFFICE protection.  Anyone finding something protected that long
should be verrrrrrrrry welcome to email Danny *and* me (cc please) to
ask what is up.  Normally that length of protection would indicate
either a mistake or something serious.

I would say that in most cases, WP:OFFICE need not result in protection
(semi-protection is more likely), and when there is protection it should
normally not be for more than a couple of days.

--Jimbo

--
#######################################################################
#    Office: 1-727-231-0101       |  Free Culture and  Free Knowledge #
#    http://www.wikipedia.org     |     Building a free world         #
#######################################################################


from_name: Александр Сигачёв

subject: [Wikitech-l] Using unicode in URLs

body:
2006/3/10, Brion Vibber <brion at pobox.com>:
> Unencoded URLs aren't reliable, as various browsers treat things in various
> exciting ways.

If URL is in UTF8 then IE5, IE6, Opera and Firefox works fine. And, I
think, it's useful at least for non-Wikimedia projects in cyrillic
languages.

--
Alexander Sigachov


body:
On 3/11/06, Daniel R. Tobias <dan at tobias.name> wrote:
> On 10 Mar 2006 at 20:25, "David Gerard" <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Else you may be blocked or temporarily desysopped. These tags are
> > bloody serious, the WP:OFFICE rule is only used in case of actual
> > problems, and the Foundation handles them as expeditiously as they
> > possibly can. I expect everyone will piss and moan, but removing a
> > WP:OFFICE tag is a really really dickish thing to do. So please don't.
>
> Not that I have any intention of doing such a thing... but I still
> have some concerns about the whole WP:OFFICE business. Sure, I
> realize the necessity for something like that; as long as Wikipedia
> and its parent foundation exist as real-world entities rather than
> just disembodied Internet phenomena, there will be people in charge
> who have bills to pay, legalities to comply with, servers to keep
> running, and so on... and, hence, concerns for which their butts are
> on the line in a manner not shared by the typical geek just editing
> Wikipedia for the fun of it.  Nevertheless, in a site which prides
> itself on openness and rule by community consensus, having actions
> take place unilaterally and secretively goes against the grain, and
> should be kept to an absolute minimum.
>
> There's kind of a feel that, if an article happens to offend the
> "wrong" people (who have some kind of political, financial, or legal
> leverage to use against Wikipedia/Wikimedia?), the Wikipedia Secret
> Police can just make it disappear, and community consensus (and all
> the Wikipedia pillars) be damned.
>
> We already know that the community is secondary to the goal of
> producing an excellent encyclopedia.  But is that, in turn, secondary
> to some secret corporate agenda held by the Foundation Office?
> Blanking articles into sub-stubs and protecting them doesn't seem
> conducive to producing an excellent encyclopedia, and doing this
> without explanation is not conducive to the community.
>
> --
> == Dan ==
> Dan's Mail Format Site: http://mailformat.dan.info/
> Dan's Web Tips: http://webtips.dan.info/
> Dan's Domain Site: http://domains.dan.info/

Dan, I think if you actually *read* the policy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Office_Actions you'll see that
it's nothing like the secretive, corporate, anti-Wikipedia,
anti-community type of thing you suggest. It says on the page that it
is a "temporary action to allow us to be kind while we sort out the
encyclopedic way forward". Community consensus won't tell us when
we're in danger of being sued - that's more likely to be ascertained
by the person who's just received the angry email/phonecall - but
community consensus will, as always, be what actually writes the
balanced article in the end.

N'est pas?

Cormac

>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


body:
On Sat, 11 Mar 2006 02:01:54 -0800, you wrote:

>People who have it explained once, and then get it, are just fine.
>People who have had it explained once, and don't get it, that's their
>problem.  It's the people who haven't ever seen it before that deserve
>an explanation.

Yes, I like the new template, although discussing on the talk page is
not really an option here, wait until the matter is sorted and details
available is really all we can do.
Guy (JzG)
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JzG