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

Fastfission wrote:
> That's not true. They both allow for attributed POV and analysis.
>
> "Respected scholar John Doe has said that the impact of Pepys on
> future literature is incalcuable, and at least 20 books per decade are
> published on him."
>
> ..and so forth would be perfectly in line with NPOV and NOR. What
> would not be appropriate are unattributed, "universalized" statements
> of value, but there's nothing in NPOV or NOR which says that all value
> statements whatsoever should be stripped out of articles.
>
> And if the hypothetical statement above is only half of the story, it
> is easy enough to add a line of "Though some other scholars, such as
> Jane Doe, think that he is often overrated, pointing to his lack of
> intersubjective hyperbolity in his later work" or whatever the case
> may be.
>
> We can push viewpoints, if we identify whose viewpoint it is and we
> give them and other relevant viewpoints their own representation in a
> neutral and attributed way. We just can't push *our own* viewpoints.
>

Can the Foundation create another project whose job it is to create
viewpoints that we can then cite?

Or is this the job of Wikisource and Wikibooks?

Or aren't we allowed to cite them, per the "no self-references" rule?

- --
Alphax                      |   /"\
Encrypted Email Preferred   |   \ /     ASCII Ribbon Campaign
OpenPGP key ID: 0xF874C613  |    X   Against HTML email & vCards
http://tinyurl.com/cc9up    |   / \
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQEVAwUBQ19CrbMAAH8MeUlWAQgoqQgAozeQmrEb/riTxz3zb9jwgwjFIcw+NM6+
Zs8pY+1sfVWM2jTgT/bNQdeKyAEJBG8czQrtNvqaA6u0PlYW4YYcSooqzpiTmEgh
dQ4wScurQo1Z7mdxA5/Lvv1a4u6kPF9y4TssiSmEQCwrMxcLqzmcGaHHEGMsIt+t
ZuKVgLAEkI+KgWpZ76M+nm/omA9t8mrrjQj09sQOhkloh6W0XqTHPwnGCrPG/AFq
xiwrKAGrSMsBxkZzxuFjnTWxxPWgyLz1y8PFnzv3W++Z9qP/vFzvps/1qyEU4C+t
J9Dgs3iw9qvuF2dPKYKkqKYOaBFvQ6PgbKTFzaFrtVpgOrEoLmSTGg==
=2uWE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


list: wikien-l

source: pipermail-mbox

from_name: Alphax

subject:
[WikiEN-l] Skyring edit history to date - (formerly Blocked -
	In	violation of the Wikipedia blocking policy)

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

Ilya N. wrote:
> who owns this IPs?
>

I can't look them up to confirm this, but I suspect Telstra and Optus.

- --
Alphax                      |   /"\
Encrypted Email Preferred   |   \ /     ASCII Ribbon Campaign
OpenPGP key ID: 0xF874C613  |    X   Against HTML email & vCards
http://tinyurl.com/cc9up    |   / \
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQEVAwUBQ19D0LMAAH8MeUlWAQgWywf/V4mYjFXYRv9JpYZJ8ylNYGbVQ9sSJ1wv
hWTjeEQ3l2hlEP/EX/jq1c6VidcwGBrd+65ov8O+2j7amYnoMXlftM8BlHqfhINc
Cj+UeaUxncHxgkSColj2jpHTr2w9/tOab4GJRXOOE47wSdX+1YQb9xIDri7gBDjJ
4CyJL7xIzZTpScC8aXlsNK6RKsT4YMOGgNQIVFNRP48ETfNyB5JPp2I3vl3DlK6S
9QxyMQHEKEO00d+gsJJgUJjNXRPwYb7VwQ8r1NkMKmPqaxHT8Ca2uI3jdDHDF70M
vxPc+HE62cOW/STRvLuuncXbM7LAinJQ5OyI6Is7XDTe9Gj1/VelaQ==
=OaYe
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


from_name: Koltwills at aol.com

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: For anyone who thought NPOV wasn't all that hard

body:
In a message dated 10/26/2005 6:09:58 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com writes:

I sure  as hell do believe that this list is full of messages that are poorly

edited.

Charles

I, of course, am writing from my own personal experience.  It was the
appallingly inaccurate and often racist material in articles related  to black
people that brought me to Wikipedia in the first place.   Another factor
contributing to crappy article quality is related to  the heavily skewed demographics of
project participants in terms of youth and  ethnicity.

But that's nothing new.

And no doubt, Charles -- but the editorial quality of traded  messages here
is hardly cause for concern -- and is certainly not even  a subject of
productive discussion.

dcv


list: wikipedia-l

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Static HTML dumps

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

Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> On 10/20/05, Alphax <alphasigmax at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Theoretically, all images in articles are thumbnails. Just include the
>>thumbnail versions of the images.
>
>
> I suppose its the same issue for the wikitext itself, but keep in mind
> the need to offer a copy in the preferred form for editing.
>
> I'm not a huge fan of html dumps in general. Wikitext tends to be much
> smaller (even compressed), and if you're doing to do fancy compression
> stuff you'll need to include a reader which makes me wonder why not a
> full wikitext viewer.
>

Pilaf and Lupin have done some work on implementing a wikitext viewer in
Javascript; see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Pilaf/Live_Preview and
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Tools/Navigation_popups for more
information.

- --
Alphax                      |   /"\
Encrypted Email Preferred   |   \ /     ASCII Ribbon Campaign
OpenPGP key ID: 0xF874C613  |    X   Against HTML email & vCards
http://tinyurl.com/cc9up    |   / \
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQEVAwUBQ19FpbMAAH8MeUlWAQh+hwgAjnM5m/7PNb7ETQyczi9YQ7/1ocQjUWd6
mP81hgMAMJPBjyJq279cM9YYqMk6T++b/HAfAj5FgJExD86IGD9B89/gyHoHp3ro
2mQ+pFdeEnjwRHyiZFdwAF36tb3FewyWvw+FzOtldrEen9uSDzD1wR7Z/Au1/+s9
cie40Z5LvyD1AYV4S5N679eTaxlR7LJ6VI/wNQRg/3VsY3Cb30rQj8WmvTgbC2uV
oavhSMtqloK0TjDHftgUlmg3+EBIz6V2G2DtE9tQU9tg+LXeSKMlG0ltKEYEoAIA
uBaBwWoIxXoQ3UnO4hK50M0ofWFJNWYCgxxmU37IxD6psyjYhpcRxw==
=tLnF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


from_name: Ryan Delaney

subject: Pure Wiki Deletion (was Re: [WikiEN-l] New Ideas for AfD)

body:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

geni wrote:

>General aggreement isn't going to happen any more on anything. As such
>in order to get things done we have to shift over to super majority.
>If you don't like this go and join a smaller project.

That, or we can just switch to pure wiki deletion, and work on getting
consensus for edits without the bureaucracy; you know, the Wiki way.
It baffles me that people think deletion should be treated differently
from other kinds of edits- as if this particular kind of content
dispute ought to be resolved by bureaucracy, rules, and votes, whereas
others should be discusssed and mediated.

Ryan
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFDYBJl6MKb8lYmCtcRAq4JAJ97T2ZFfTcy2SIievj073IIxBe+WQCgujdt
9QjG1s3cEvUMI59xQSqk4zA=
=HMoO
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


from_name: Christopher Maloney

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: WikiEN-l Digest, Vol 27, Issue 186

body:
Thanks for all your help and suggestions.  It is all very interesting
-- I'm still very new to Wikipedia.  That is, I've been reading it for
a while, but haven't edited much.

Tim Starling, I tried your proposed solution from the page
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Advice_to_Tor_users_in_China,
and it works, after a fashion.  However, as I noted on that talk page
(which I used as a test), it breaks my access to, for example, the
mailing list archives.  I can't access, for example,
http://mail.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2005-October/031345.html.
 I get the following error message:

  Not Found
  The requested URL /pipermail/wikien-l/2005-October/031345.html was
not found on this server.
  Additionally, a 404 Not Found error was encountered while trying to
use an ErrorDocument to handle the request.

What is the IP address 145.97.39.155, anyway?  Is that your own proxy server?


subject:
[WikiEN-l] How do I respond to the right thread,
	when I'm receiving digests?

body:
Sorry, this is probably a stupid question.  I've just joined the
mailing list, I read the welcome email and the about page, and can't
find the answer to this.

I configured myself to receive the message digests -- there's way too
much volume on this list for anything else.  I want to respond to a
particular thread, though, and can't see how to do it easily.  Is it
just a matter of copying the subject line?  Actually, I'm pretty sure
it's not, because I see several cases of duplicate subjects which are
separate threads.

Thanks


from_name: Bryan Derksen

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Webcomics/Deletion again

body:
Andrew Gray wrote:

>Today's VFD zen: the first twelve of fifteen entries on this days page
>are nominated simply as "NN, D. ~~~~" (and there's more after that). I
>swear this becomes self-parody sometimes...
>
>
Just voted blanket "keep" on all of them, and am awaiting the inevitable
accusation of WP:POINT. Nevermind that I probably spent more effort on
my votes than the nominator did....


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: How do I edit a page from inside China?

body:
Sorry this is a duplicate message.  I originally posted it with the
subject line of the digest that I received.  Now, even though it's a
separate thread, with the right subject line, maybe somebody will read
it (maybe not).

Thanks for all your help and suggestions.  It is all very interesting
-- I'm still very new to Wikipedia.  That is, I've been reading it for
a while, but haven't edited much.

Tim Starling, I tried your proposed solution from the page
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Advice_to_Tor_users_in_China,
and it works, after a fashion.  However, as I noted on that talk page
(which I used as a test), it breaks my access to, for example, the
mailing list archives.  I can't access, for example,
http://mail.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2005-October/031345.html.
 I get the following error message:

  Not Found
  The requested URL /pipermail/wikien-l/2005-October/031345.html was
not found on this server.
  Additionally, a 404 Not Found error was encountered while trying to
use an ErrorDocument to handle the request.

What is the IP address 145.97.39.155, anyway?  Is that your own proxy server?

Another page I can't access is
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l.  But note that,
for all of these, I can get them with Tor turned off -- i.e. they're
not blocked by the government.  So I can just switch back and forth,
but it's a bit annoying.


from_name: Philip Sandifer

subject: [WikiEN-l] New Ideas for AfD

body:
On Oct 26, 2005, at 7:18 PM, geni wrote:

>
> General aggreement isn't going to happen any more on anything. As such
> in order to get things done we have to shift over to super majority.
> If you don't like this go and join a smaller project.
>
>

Your opinion, while interesting, is kind of notable for utterly
contradicting what Jimbo has said repeatedly about the community, and
the fact that we are not a democracy.

-Snowspinner


from_name: Andrew Gray

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Webcomics/Deletion again

body:
On 26/10/05, Phil Boswell <phil.boswell at gmail.com> wrote:

> For example, I doubt if I could name half-a-dozen Particle Physicists. I'll
> bet you there are ten times that many who deserve an article of their own,
> but you'd be hard put to it to convince some of the hard-core AFD
> deletionists of it, because they simply vote "nn, never heard of them"
> without even giving the appearance of reading the article.

Today's VFD zen: the first twelve of fifteen entries on this days page
are nominated simply as "NN, D. ~~~~" (and there's more after that). I
swear this becomes self-parody sometimes...

I'm half-tempted to nominate a short but reasonably notable bio I
wrote this afternoon for deletion, simply to see if anyone would
concur with "nn, d" ([[Fleury Mesplet]], eighteenth century French
printer with silly name = obscure), but I fear that it might be a
little obviously Making A Point.

--
- Andrew Gray
  andrew.gray at dunelm.org.uk


from_name: Fl Celloguy

subject: [WikiEN-l] RE: WikiEN-l Digest, Vol 27, Issue 205

body:
>
>Message: 10
>Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 00:26:04 +0100
>From: Chris Jenkinson <chris at starglade.org>
>Subject: [WikiEN-l] Privacy policy and editing anonymously notice.
>To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at wikipedia.org>,	Wikipedia
>	<wikipedia-l at wikimedia.org>,	Wikimedia Foundation
>	<foundation-l at wikimedia.org>
>Message-ID: <4360108C.5070803 at starglade.org>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
>Hi all,
>
>As the Board have been rather slow with publicising the new privacy
>policy,

What new privacy policy? Is there a new one?

>I have taken the step of adding a notice to the bottom of
>[[MediaWiki:Copyrightstext]] on the English-language Wikipedia (the text
>which is displayed when you click "Edit this page"), which mentions that
>if you are editing anonymously, your IP address will be publically and
>permanently associated with the edits, and if you're editing while
>logged in, your IP address will be stored for around 2 weeks.

I don't like this message. It is an extremely stern and harshly worded
message that might scare away potential contributors. Isn't a link to the
policy enough? Most websites don't write out their entire Terms of Service
(TOS) directly on the page; there's a link to the ToS at the bottom instead.
(Sidenote: if you've ever taken the time to read the ToS for some major
websites, they're quite scary...)

>Someone has also added a link to the privacy policy on the bottom of
>every page.

I like that - nice and simple link to the policy, similar to the
aforementioned ToS links.

><snip>
>Chris

I just don't think that the notice there is appropriate. When I clicked edit
today, I went "What the...?!" A link at the bottom is enough, in my opinion.
What do all of you think?

Regards,

Flcelloguy
>From Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia.

_________________________________________________________________
On the road to retirement? Check out MSN Life Events for advice on how to
get there! http://lifeevents.msn.com/category.aspx?cid=Retirement


subject: [WikiEN-l] Oops, didn't change subject line...

body:
P.S. Next time I promise to change the subject line so it keeps the thread
alive. (Sorry!) I get digest instead of one mail at a time.

Flcelloguy
>From Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia.

_________________________________________________________________
Don?t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!
http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/


list: wikitech-l

from_name: muhammad zaid zainuddin

subject: [Wikitech-l] problem with buginese lontara (missing diacritic)

body:
Dear wikitech,

It's me. Again........... (the troublesome guy.) This problem just struck
me. There's missing a diacritic for the buginese lontara font. This vowel
use to make the characters voweless. As you guys notice that all lontara
characters end with vowel /a/. The diacritic is attached. Therefore, is
there any possibility to add this diacritic?

Secondly, I still cannot type in the characters via keyboard. Can someone
explain it to me step by step?

Thank you

Muhammad Zaid Zainuddin


body:
In a message dated 10/26/2005 8:08:59 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
jack.i.lynch at gmail.com writes:

Logic should be the basis for everyones education, and is a great  deal
of fun, as I know full well,having studied and taught it for  years. I
am currently feeding my favorite logic text to our 13yr old,  who is
devouring it's simple truths with great joy and mirth.

Eee-uuuw!

That boring teacher was you? :p

dcv


list: foundation-l

from_name: Robert Scott Horning

subject: [Foundation-l] Privacy policy and editing anonymously notice.

body:
Chris Jenkinson wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> As the Board have been rather slow with publicising the new privacy
> policy, I have taken the step of adding a notice to the bottom of
> [[MediaWiki:Copyrightstext]] on the English-language Wikipedia (the
> text which is displayed when you click "Edit this page"), which
> mentions that if you are editing anonymously, your IP address will be
> publically and permanently associated with the edits, and if you're
> editing while logged in, your IP address will be stored for around 2
> weeks.
>
> Someone has also added a link to the privacy policy on the bottom of
> every page.
>
> I urge admins on all the various projects to update their project with
> this information - make it clear that editing will mean that some
> personally-identifiable information is kept about the contributor.
>
> Chris

As a matter of policy is this reasonable?  I'm just thinking out loud
here, but might it be reasonable after a certain length of time that
anonymous edits from IP addresses could be turned into simply a user
with the name "Anonymous" instead?  It would require a minor change in
MediaWiki, but I don't think it is that difficult of a challenge
technically.

I'm raising this here to suggest that perhaps another policy could ben
enacted for anonymous users.  After a year or so it would be very
difficult to even find logs to claim that you used a particular IP
address unless it was on a permanent IP table for an organization and
somehow dated.  Besides, we are using IP addresses anyway to help
distinguish trolls from honest contributors who are trying to add
reasonable content but just want to stay anonymous.  Why not purge these
IP address records as well?  I'm talking about the social policy aspect
of doing this, not actually implementing this in MediaWiki software.

--
Robert Scott Horning


list: wikimedia-l


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Webcomics/Deletion again

body:
geni wrote:

>On 10/27/05, Bryan Derksen <bryan.derksen at shaw.ca> wrote:
>
>
>>Nevermind that I probably spent more effort on
>>my votes than the nominator did....
>>
>>
>
>Unlikely. Nomitateing involves:
>1)finding the article. This has been made easy for you
>2)typeing {{Subst:ADF}} a the top of the page
>3a) If you are me looking up the instructions on how to list something
>4)typeing in reason
>5)listing.
>
>So the person at a minium edited 3 pages. How many did you edit?
>
>
One edit for each VfD, obviously, but I don't see how the number of
edits one has to make in the course of sticking "NN, D" on a page makes
"NN, D" any more meaningful. Should my vote be disregarded because I
didn't put enough effort into provide adequate evidence that I'd
considered the case and had a valid reason for voting the way I did? If
so, I would gladly withdraw those poorly-supported votes I made since
that's exactly the thing I was complaining about in the first place. A
policy like that would remove the whole basis of my objection.

As it is there's probably one or two of those articles that I will be
going back and retracting my "keeps" for based on other peoples' more
detailed comments in response to these nominations. But those "keeps"
were IMO a reasonable default reaction to this kind of nonsense.


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

Christopher Maloney wrote:
> Sorry, this is probably a stupid question.  I've just joined the
> mailing list, I read the welcome email and the about page, and can't
> find the answer to this.
>
> I configured myself to receive the message digests -- there's way too
> much volume on this list for anything else.  I want to respond to a
> particular thread, though, and can't see how to do it easily.  Is it
> just a matter of copying the subject line?  Actually, I'm pretty sure
> it's not, because I see several cases of duplicate subjects which are
> separate threads.
>

Nope, you need to receive individual messages. If you are lucky you
could try MIME digests though...

- --
Alphax                      |   /"\
Encrypted Email Preferred   |   \ /     ASCII Ribbon Campaign
OpenPGP key ID: 0xF874C613  |    X   Against HTML email & vCards
http://tinyurl.com/cc9up    |   / \
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQEUAwUBQ19hZrMAAH8MeUlWAQjGygf2IGNu+g5cu7qOWVqWs0SpZWCQMFrL8zxn
vLYnqXJogusYwhQ8I9bynHzQb4eEDx1trvz407m72bf6+FPbWsMqzkJxvFfxrql9
OjYrowIPI0kzPZRQzFQcbYzXLS7JmAVEIPOO1iXM2YkV3QYsIv7mddEB+Ftfo22p
bTqHWPJo6stgknXiuHW0toGNv0zK18NWf+4HTm9wqcS1THmd7wj9lODMyQGJRFSt
Od7ghZrJiNlQYs8sg1IlMgEq8bTEVWA4QvKH5AcDB763gnqefu/nlP6QEVcWQh4L
oDY83irZ3R355znpUVLg3PwzbbILSEzlQJyPLmbQ0QoKxpbYETRi
=hh+D
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


subject: [WikiEN-l] New Ideas for AfD

body:
On Oct 26, 2005, at 7:31 PM, geni wrote:
>
> I try to be a realist. The current size of the project means that we
> know have people or even groups of people who will never agree on
> anything ever. The time needed to carry out the length of debate
> needed to get anything close to consensus is now so long that if we
> want a result withing a decade we have to use supermajority rather
> than consensus. No amout of jumping up and down saying wikipedia is
> not a democracy is going to change that.
>

And no amount of cataloging the difficulties of consensus-building is
going to make Wikipedia a democracy.

I'm delivering a paper tomorrow (One that I'll probably also submit
to Wikimania) on a related issue here, though, and I don't think it's
number of people that determines whether an issue can be settled or
not. I think it's that we have a very, very concrete epistemology for
article content. What I mean is that NPOV, verifiability, NOR, and
the like make it so anyone, expert or no, can evaluate an article's
quality. Consensus works because we're all working from the same page.

The epistemology for deletion debates is far from set, though. And
the epistemology for policy decisions at large are totally unset. We
have a few Foundation issues, but for the most part, there's room for
totally different interpretations of what the project is. And as long
as that's true, there's no way we're going to reliably obtain
agreement of any sort.

Which is mostly a plea for the Foundation to "lay the smack down" as
it were.

-Snowspinner


from_name: GerardM

subject:
[Foundation-l] P2P Wikipedia (was Re: Our exponentially
	increasing costs)

body:
Hoi,
When you need a forum, there is always the research network. From my
perspective learning about this technology is great even when it does not
help in this instance it will be useful for other applications..

So great stuff :)

Thanks,
GerardM

On 10/26/05, Robert Scott Horning <robert_horning at netzero.net> wrote:
>
> Anthony DiPierro wrote:
>
> >This is the reason I think a more P2P based network would be such a great
> >solution for the long-term. People wouldn't need to donate cash to cover
> >operating "costs".
> >
> >Anthony
> >
> >
> I know this belongs on the technical mailing list, but I would like to get
> more involved with at least some experimental Wikipedia data servers that
> use the P2P approach for distribution of content. Are there some forums,
> talk pages, or developer groups that are working to develop this concept?
>
> I found http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/P2P but there are certainly other
> that may be useful.
>
> The #1 problem I see with most current P2P networks is that they are
> anti-wiki and are only useful for spreading content. Editing content and
> pushing the edits back to a central repository goes beyond the current P2P
> topology and would have to be a key component to a MediaWiki P2P edition. I
> guess I'm asking for a Wikiproject type thing to get started to discuss this
> issue, but realize that there are so many forums to discuss something like
> this that trying to pick out one place to make a discussion of this nature
> can be difficult.
>
> There would still be a need to cover some basic "operating costs", but we
> could perhaps cut some of the server growth down quite a bit through
> alternative technologies, reducing bandwidth to a higher percentage of
> actual content instead of navigational queries. It would also help reduce
> effects of server overloading, and have a side benefit to transmit
> information to places like China where it would work around official
> censorship.
>
> --
> Robert Scott Horning
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>


subject: [WikiEN-l] Webcomics/Deletion again

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

Justin Cormack wrote:
>
> On 26 Oct 2005, at 09:42, Alphax wrote:
>
>> Can you find public, verifiable information about these webcomics
>> in respectable secondary sources?
>
>
> There is a problem that there is a systemic bias against (for
> example) academic and journalistic reporting on new forms of culture
> (witness the coverage of computer games in the mainstream press).

There are established magazines and other media sources which routinely
talk about computer games.

> So I would support being more lenient in these cases if necessary,
> and allowing argument supported by primary sources if done well, and
> not pushing political points but being descriptive or linking related
> threads (post apocalyptic storylines; Manga characterisation, fierce
> rabbits or whatever).
>

"Is noted outside of the community it originated" is one of the things I
tried to pin to the "notable" tag (foolish me). By that I mean: "has
received attention outside of its own fandom".

So, a website which sells widgets and is unknown outside of the widget
community should not have an article; a website which is reasonably
well-known in the widget community should be mentioned in the article on
widgets; and a website which sells widgets, well known within the widget
community, /which has been Slashdotted/, could have it's own article.

- --
Alphax                      |   /"\
Encrypted Email Preferred   |   \ /     ASCII Ribbon Campaign
OpenPGP key ID: 0xF874C613  |    X   Against HTML email & vCards
http://tinyurl.com/cc9up    |   / \
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQEVAwUBQ19lY7MAAH8MeUlWAQj8+Qf/Wx7PpxP61s1UfFz5671LXa8v3mW60XUl
IoN/jHfHlY/PX6pxuO+GUVFAC20lc2T6lTTR8Rz0YO2tx2UTdCNQ/Emc74qw5AeN
mots5g847HX5XzaidAmjvrZU7nBJcaJIQWxBecOxD23x/j1rBljCyzsrCpIot1Y8
KcMf/8O3SrxK2FwcWhPkbh5mDUgkweRRcfY2w2HsxGWZmkY3vRaLLOl68gKEqo4t
TO44arY7u2VeL+TxqlF+ntRIVk3P4/Kc5t8JrZFq/oxh33/BP8RqHF0YLVUbXK/h
DRxzY2X97f1uMseOPahIiQBq0ctj0mb2bOm1JPD4LpE2fh9wi20n0Q==
=x/mM
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


subject:
[WikiEN-l] Infinite Block
	by	AbusiveAdmin/Extortion/Harassment/Fraudulent
	use of Wikipedia Abuse Emails

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

Jeff V. Merkey wrote:
>
> Hi Fred,
>
> Unfortunately, I have obligations under the law as a litigant to enforce
> the Courts orders since the Court retained jurisdiction.  At present,
> internet stalkers from SCOX have posted the terms of a sealed document
> to this site.  The best solution is total removal of the page about me,
> or a minumum, rollback to the approved content Wales and I agreed to and
> permanent locking of the page.
<snip>

Which page exactly?

- --
Alphax                      |   /"\
Encrypted Email Preferred   |   \ /     ASCII Ribbon Campaign
OpenPGP key ID: 0xF874C613  |    X   Against HTML email & vCards
http://tinyurl.com/cc9up    |   / \
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQEVAwUBQ19nd7MAAH8MeUlWAQg+oQf/VwIbGNSiDbtauaFFfLjNlB72FqeeCFO7
+VvtvgDEvVv3MGxEILGG4o9naRCdraCbqFZq0dKeE/TwzWGxExElRvjerNtCRWOA
glZmvlcl1l4OlMcwRcUN8CX+xPIMR3YuAJDfO/xcyaRNzckCdX3wrkpqPDHFGVj8
pOAVDc1KR/buQ2yFJ20hIhOL+tCPI+uOWiNnXvIuNHzT1abyplx3VJwW5YLS5MDZ
Xo97j/hqeNIjZaebqyAv2CXnocLXuY9kcdVXSXeLP5flFZynLsTkK/EfnCIVB3iV
dLcUpPhNKHoE2veOiBBUBA+S2O4PzXt7ndHlzGDYa474XNH6fwtIcw==
=bzXF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


from_name: Michael Turley

subject: [WikiEN-l] Bridging the Chasm between Two Cultures

body:
On 10/26/05, Poor, Edmund W <Edmund.W.Poor at abc.com> wrote:

--snip--

Ok, Mr. Chasm-bridger, let's see you fix the deletion debate, once and
for all...

;-)

(Oh no!  He's gonna delete AfD again!)

--
Michael Turley
User:Unfocused


subject: [WikiEN-l] Webcomics/Deletion again

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

David Gerard wrote:
> Alphax wrote:
>
>
>> So, a website which sells widgets and is unknown outside of the
>> widget community should not have an article
>
>
> I must ask: why on earth not, if the info is third-party verifiable?
> How is one to research an area one is new to without cues to such
> things? If you're interested in an area, why *wouldn't* you be
> interested in things of interest within that area?
>

Why should we have articles on every single Pokemon if they are totally
unknown outside of the Pokemon community?

> I see no reason to deliberately reduce our possible usefulness.
>

I never said that such things wouldn't become more-well known and hence
eventually merit their own articles.

> The issue of webcomic articles mostly being pretty crappy is another
> matter, and an important one.

Right, the problem I see is that people with an "extreme interest" in X
(you might even call it obsession) think that "all X are equally
important and Wikipedia should have articles on all of them, including Y
and Z".

The problem is, the rest of the X community says "oh, Y and Z are just
another couple of X's, nothing special". By including Y and Z, we are
effectively pushing the POV that there is something different about Y
and Z with respect to all other X.

Now, should Y and Z become well-known within the X community, we can
mention them in the article about X, possibly even with their own
sections in the article on X.

Finally, should Y and Z become known /outside of/ the X community, we
can have an article on it.

I feel that an excellent example of this is the Slashdot series.

> But your proposal seems an overgeneralisation of a way to use
> deleting the whole article as a tool to solve *editorial* problems.

Well, we always have the ability to merge and redirect... I really don't
understand what you're saying here.

> The problem there being that many people think an article being
> deleted means another article on that topic can never be created,
> ever. (Some even think an article being deleted means its content
> shouldn't be allowed in new articles anywhere else on the
> encyclopedia, which I can't make sense of.)
>

That's completely wrong...

- --
Alphax                      |   /"\
Encrypted Email Preferred   |   \ /     ASCII Ribbon Campaign
OpenPGP key ID: 0xF874C613  |    X   Against HTML email & vCards
http://tinyurl.com/cc9up    |   / \
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQEVAwUBQ19s8C/ia4ZoBgmdAQg6Pgf/W+r0Kbhqzf+S0tb0gEh1xQUdPclPJV+/
OpEpAPKak6ro7Yk9oE0Y2UJjnSpe82V03xFg04BpSIceDUYOqU1bbFXEItHcS8Kr
yCuDqnBPb/5zTu2azmMiq0j2vD9cquajVsmh9KdTy7i9Xi4v1FA+vW2pkcH82lRI
cvilgLPa7tiXl/qAcKK9PDMYh6A/NPcy0XgfbR+rNJM/ieHziFq8FjgaS44tegXA
JCim++ku4BJ0tcdX1lTGCSQYmfodZqA056cPX630c1KJNpxYUTKlu4CZZ7fDUygq
mg4GUdXcadui0kAFxRtZ9GN7YKwgeWdtn/uKCMvm7kfM4CHPYnXI6g==
=C5iJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


from_name: Angela

subject: [Foundation-l] 9/11wiki content sharing

body:
On 10/26/05, Poe, Marshall <MPoe at theatlantic.com> wrote:
> As a part of my effort to enrich www.memorywiki.org, I would like to
> take some of the personal memoir content from 9/11wiki and posting it to
> the site. I think my audience would benefit from the memoirs, and that
> the memoirs would be more widely read (eventually).

How about just moving the whole wiki there rather than copying it page by page?

I see no point in keeping in what was supposed to be an archive of
content that had to be removed from the English Wikipedia in an
editable form as a unwanted pseudo-Wikimedia project. It is not well
maintained, as a check of the main page's history will show before I
resorted to protecting it. Considering the difficulty in getting any
new project approved by Wikimedia, including a lot of very worthwhile
ideas, I don't see the point in keeping one controversial,
monolingual, biased wiki that has no community.

I really think this would be an ideal opportunity to find a new home for it.

Angela.


subject: [Foundation-l] 9/11wiki content sharing


from_name: Mark Williamson

subject: Ant: Re: [Wikipedia-l] I can't believe!

body:
> > So, do you consider Belgradian to be your mother tongue? I, for one,
> > think you're blowing smoke and disrupting WP to prove a point.
>
> No, if it is possible to have "regional languages", I said that I have
> the same feelings for my regions as Zlatiborians for their.

I don't care about your feelings vs. their feelings. I will ask you
again: Do you consider Belgradian to be your mother tongue?

> There is more chance to have the person like that then person from
> Zlatibor. There are much more computers in San Francisco then in
> Zlatibor. If Wikipedia's official policy is to have "regional
> templates", I am sure that a lot of people would like to have their
> "regional language templates".

I don't advocate a policy of _having_ such templates, but rather of
_allowing_ them when people who plan to actually use them want to
create them. In your case, it seems more like you're wanting to
disrupt WP to make a point, rather than that you actually feel like
Belgradian is your mother tongue.

> > Wikipedia is about consensus, not "majority rules".
>
> You have strong principles. The same one you are using about one more
> Chinese Wikipedia as you are using for the Zlatibor language template.

What? I didn't say anything about having another Chinese WP. Yes, I
advocate for Cantonese and Wu WPs, but contrary to what you may think
these aren't "one more Chinese Wikipedia".

Now, what I assume here is that you're trying to tell me that my
belief is in a "majority rules" policy and that I should apply it
everywhere.

Quite the contrary, I still believe in consensus. However, assuming
good faith, I have not contested the 3 or so votes against a Cantonese
WP that are either unsigned or signed by an anonymous user, as well as
those by users who appear to be likely sockpuppets. I have not
insisted that every voter verify their identity.

Also, the difference between a straight-out vote and a straw poll
whose goal is to achieve consensus is that a straight-out vote doesn't
nessecarily include elaboration on the opinions of the voters, just a
simple "aye" or "nay". Nobody has insisted that all the Sinitic-wp
voters on Meta all elaborate on their positions. Many have simply
voted support or oppose with no explanation.

On the other hand, on the template-deletion page, people have
expressed more detailed opinions which, although diametrically
opposed, could probably find some sort of compromise in between.

And I should also add that Meta and individual Wikipedias are very
different sites with very different rules -- many of the articles at
Meta would be speedied if they were posted to en.wiki.

Mark


from_name: Fastfission

subject: [WikiEN-l] For anyone who thought NPOV wasn't all that hard

body:
If they are truly incommensurable sides, you *can't* bridge the gap, by
definition. However you can reflect on its incommensurability, which just
fine and not too hard.

The best way to deal with incommensurability in a neutral way, in my mind,
is to 1. state each side in their own terms, 2. state how they characterize
each other.

In reality, though, a lot of things which are labeled as incommensurable end
up not being so, in the end. There is a large literature on
incommensurability (following Thomas Kuhn) in the philosophy and history of
science; I think we have a small article on it.

FF

On 10/26/05, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Read this and work out how you would bridge this gap.
>
> http://www.csicop.org/si/2004-05/new-age.html
>
> If you have a quick formula that works, good. But how would you get
> someone to think that formula is a good idea and *want* to apply it?
>
>
> - d.
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: charles matthews

body:
Ed Poor wrote

 >Oh, well, I'm just rambling.

The capacity of the American male to self-promote never ceases to amaze me.
(Yep, happens on wiki-en too, amazingly enough.)  The 'aw, shucks, there I
go talking about myself' that follows induces a sense of awe too.

Charles


from_name: Noir Dezzir

subject: [WikiEN-l] Rigging at RfA

body:
Hi everyone,
[[User:Anonymous editor]] is contesting for Adminship. Many votes in his
support are by usernames created in the last couple of days, and their only
contribution to wikipedia has been that vote. When I pointed that out,
[[User:Anonymous editor]] deleted my comments, marking his deletions as a
"minor edit", and his close admin friend [[User:Slimvirgin]] blocked me.
This pair is known for misusing wikipedia policies and admin powers in the
past, for example, with reference to the [[Islamophobia]] article.
Kindly look into the past credentials of [[User:Anonymous editor]], and cast
your vote.
Thanks
Muwaffaq


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Webcomics/Deletion again

body:
geni wrote:

>On 10/27/05, Bryan Derksen <bryan.derksen at shaw.ca> wrote:
>
>
>>One edit for each VfD, obviously, but I don't see how the number of
>>edits one has to make in the course of sticking "NN, D" on a page makes
>>"NN, D" any more meaningful. Should my vote be disregarded because I
>>didn't put enough effort into provide adequate evidence that I'd
>>considered the case and had a valid reason for voting the way I did? If
>>so, I would gladly withdraw those poorly-supported votes I made since
>>that's exactly the thing I was complaining about in the first place. A
>>policy like that would remove the whole basis of my objection.
>>
>>
>
>No it shoulds be dissregarded because WP:POINT. I take it you conceed
>that the nominator did in fact take more effort to nominate than you
>did to vote.
>
>
Can we disregard ComCat's nominations in the same vein, then? My point
is that the number of clicks isn't relevant to the amount of effort the
nomination itself reflects. If I'd cast my votes using an elabourate
system of voice-to-speech hex editing via a telnet session, or whatever,
that doesn't make what I wrote any more or less valid.

>
>
>>As it is there's probably one or two of those articles that I will be
>>going back and retracting my "keeps" for based on other peoples' more
>>detailed comments in response to these nominations. But those "keeps"
>>were IMO a reasonable default reaction to this kind of nonsense.
>>
>>
>
>Can you prove it is nonsense? Today hasn't been the best day for
>wikipedia running times. Listing things on AFD under those conditions
>is a pain.
>
>
"NN, D" provides no information on which to make a case. And if
Wikipedia's sluggishness is irrelevant, once an edit window is open
there isn't any further communication with the webserver until "save
changes" is clicked. There's plenty of time to type up a justification
for one's vote. If there isn't time for other reasons, then why not wait
until there _is_ time? There isn't a deadline.


body:
Koltwills at aol.com wrote

> But a populist idea like Wikipedia in the  hands of anyone with
> access to a computer and an ISP is doomed from  the start as a reliable
> source of
> authoritative information.

I don't believe that for a minute.

I sure as hell do believe that this list is full of messages that are poorly
edited.

Charles


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Webcomics/Deletion again

body:
geni wrote:

>On 10/27/05, Bryan Derksen <bryan.derksen at shaw.ca> wrote:
>
>
>>Can we disregard ComCat's nominations in the same vein, then?
>>
>>
>
>No becuase they don't appear to violate WP:POINT.
>
>
A mass copy-and-paste nomination of articles for deletion without
providing any justification isn't disruptive? IMO you've got some odd
standards for disruption, considering you once warned me I might be
blocked for disruptiveness when I proposed an policy change here on the
mailing list for increasing the duration of AfDs.

>Doing anything when Wikipedia is sluggish shows you care. You know if
>you want to encorage debate on AFD how about debateing. Go through and
>comment rather than voteing. Decide that for a time peroid (say a
>month) you are not going to vote only comment. Encourage others to the
>same.
>

I've now gone through all of my ComCat-nomination votes and expanded on
them with more extensive comments. Turns out that my initial instincts
were completely correct, after due reconsideration all of my votes
stayed "keep" (with one exception where I mistook a "NN,D" _vote_ by
ComCat as a _nomination_ instead - the actual nomination was
reasonable). Plenty of fodder for debate there, and plenty of effort
spent to back up my position. Now may I complain about the lack of
justification the nominations provided?

Here they are, for the record:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Bayonne_High_School
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Summit_Middle_School
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Grove_School
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Eugene_F._Provenzo
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Mike_Brady_%28musician%29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Tim_Brady
(this is the one I misread)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/George_Alexander_%28US_Army_soldier%29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Counting_coo
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Horace_Mann_Elementary_School_%28Oak_Park%2C_Illinois%29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/High_School_tram_station
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Spooky_Kid
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/RealPlane
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Habbo_Paper


from_name: geni

subject: [WikiEN-l] New Ideas for AfD

body:
On 10/26/05, Anthony DiPierro <wikispam at inbox.org> wrote:
>  Supports what consensus? I just said, if people can't come to a general
> agreement, then there *is* no consensus. You seem to be mistaking majority
> with consensus.

General aggreement isn't going to happen any more on anything. As such
in order to get things done we have to shift over to super majority.
If you don't like this go and join a smaller project.

--
geni


from_name: Chris Jenkinson

body:
Hi all,

As the Board have been rather slow with publicising the new privacy
policy, I have taken the step of adding a notice to the bottom of
[[MediaWiki:Copyrightstext]] on the English-language Wikipedia (the text
which is displayed when you click "Edit this page"), which mentions that
if you are editing anonymously, your IP address will be publically and
permanently associated with the edits, and if you're editing while
logged in, your IP address will be stored for around 2 weeks.

Someone has also added a link to the privacy policy on the bottom of
every page.

I urge admins on all the various projects to update their project with
this information - make it clear that editing will mean that some
personally-identifiable information is kept about the contributor.

Chris


subject: [WikiEN-l] Privacy policy and editing anonymously notice.


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Privacy policy and editing anonymously notice.


subject: [WikiEN-l] New Ideas for AfD

body:
On 10/27/05, Philip Sandifer <snowspinner at gmail.com> wrote:
> Your opinion, while interesting, is kind of notable for utterly
> contradicting what Jimbo has said repeatedly about the community, and
> the fact that we are not a democracy.
>
> -Snowspinner

I try to be a realist. The current size of the project means that we
know have people or even groups of people who will never agree on
anything ever. The time needed to carry out the length of debate
needed to get anything close to consensus is now so long that if we
want a result withing a decade we have to use supermajority rather
than consensus. No amout of jumping up and down saying wikipedia is
not a democracy is going to change that.

Fortunetly when it comes to individual articles the number of people
involved is small enough that consensus is still posible in a large
number of cases.

--
geni


from_name: Alphax

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Webcomics/Deletion again

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

Phil Boswell wrote:
> "Alphax" <alphasigmax at gmail.com> wrote in
> message news:435F6564.4010207 at gmail.com...
> [snip]
>
>>"Is noted outside of the community it originated" is one of the things I
>>tried to pin to the "notable" tag (foolish me). By that I mean: "has
>>received attention outside of its own fandom".
>>So, a website which sells widgets and is unknown outside of the widget
>>community should not have an article; a website which is reasonably
>>well-known in the widget community should be mentioned in the article on
>>widgets; and a website which sells widgets, well known within the widget
>>community, /which has been Slashdotted/, could have it's own article.
>
>
> The problem here is that there are many people/things which are extremely
> interesting but---until we write about them---all but unknown **outside
> their particular subject community**.
>
> For example, I doubt if I could name half-a-dozen Particle Physicists. I'll
> bet you there are ten times that many who deserve an article of their own,
> but you'd be hard put to it to convince some of the hard-core AFD
> deletionists of it, because they simply vote "nn, never heard of them"
> without even giving the appearance of reading the article.
>

Alright, I admit it, it's a stupid idea.

> What I can't understand is that I come to an encyclopaedia wanting to find
> things I **don't** already know about, not endless regurgitation of stuff I
> already knew. So rejecting an article on the grounds that I don't already
> know the subject matter seems nonsensical to me.
>
> Am I alone?

No. It's just difficult to get one's head around all this...

- --
Alphax                      |   /"\
Encrypted Email Preferred   |   \ /     ASCII Ribbon Campaign
OpenPGP key ID: 0xF874C613  |    X   Against HTML email & vCards
http://tinyurl.com/cc9up    |   / \
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQEVAwUBQ1+hALMAAH8MeUlWAQjWbwgAjKMC/ZV1spWHygRJ5NIpYWYI93UJV0M8
rZ+u9woBmdpov1tLqzpG1NQzKki1jROHMjuus0+emXW0EQUYBAuSqwiKWFQZV893
2blULunvKrbmlAR3VlE91isfUlw7hcPKGsTBNtO0StaVGZz/a0cf5Py1eYjBH8ng
TK9B+KSvnkVCBpGaOaNZ/ZcHmHZz4i7X7dmv1erpobmYYyMwQ8AfkedW0J0mVw8r
dTjD4LsybWZEorCh3HUSTsOQ1w2VBA8263BED3sJSRRA5UAW1YrfYCeLqpFL/qNg
VcAdRMb9t3bwZOwpRVsZoejsjVzBqcSfBSpP+LAGF2OhBpAOdFDQsA==
=1orF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


body:
On 10/27/05, Ryan Delaney <ryan.delaney at gmail.com> wrote:
> That, or we can just switch to pure wiki deletion, and work on getting
> consensus for edits without the bureaucracy; you know, the Wiki way.
> It baffles me that people think deletion should be treated differently
> from other kinds of edits- as if this particular kind of content
> dispute ought to be resolved by bureaucracy, rules, and votes, whereas
> others should be discusssed and mediated.
>
> Ryan

I  do not want to get into more edit dissputes that last for months.
Delete is different from other dissputes in that the result is rather
binary (there is also the issue that if I started doing PWD on low
profile articles it would be much harder to pick up.

--
geni


from_name: Ryan Delaney

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Pure Wiki Deletion

body:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

geni wrote:

>Delete is different from other dissputes in that the result is rather
>binary (there is also the issue that if I started doing PWD on low
>profile articles it would be much harder to pick up.
>
> I do not want to get into more edit dissputes that last for months.

Well, every edit is binary. Either it stays or it doesn't. Besides, an
edit being binary doesn't offer up any connection to why it should be
decided by rules and votes rather than discussion. Also, if you think
PWD would lead to edit wars, how would you feel about an encyclopedia
that anyone could edit: There would be edit wars galore and it would
degenerate into chaos, neh? ;-)

Ryan
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFDYHA66MKb8lYmCtcRAqcLAJ9BsyfSp1ijosf8ERoKC7yYZONlggCgtPZs
Ro+as/PvUu7fdfo6OxdzBOk=
=EiUl
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


references:
<e5e6e5cc0510250747o4e021cc7qd673cb6dedfa6f3d@mail.gmail.com>
	<djm7si$v7h$1@sea.gmane.org> <435F3CA2.5070104@gmail.com>

body:
On 10/26/05, Alphax <alphasigmax at gmail.com> wrote:
> Isn't Tor back-tracable by timing attack in China due to the size of the
> network, making any "anonymity" useless?

I think he's less concerned with anonymity than he is about getting
around the Great Firewall and being able to edit Wikipedia. If he's
worried about prosecution, well, that's his own fear and he should be
aware of what is or what is not legally/technically possible. Anyway,
that's an issue for Tor and him to worry about, not us.

There are a host of reasonably simple technological solutions which
could mitigate most of this (i.e. allowing users with reasonable edit
histories to edit from tor accounts) but as Jimbo said all of that
means very little unless we sit down and hack out the code for it.

On 10/26/05, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
> Looking at http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=550 , the
> problem isn't having the code to hand - we have code patches on hand
> for lots of possible options. The problem is deciding what is actually
> a good idea socially. What's an obviously elegant solution to the
> problem? If there isn't one, what compromise would make things better
> rather than worse?

I took a look at it briefly and it seemed to be 80% of the people
saying, "This might be a good option to have in some circumstances"
and another 20% saying "I dunno, vandals might be able to still abuse
it!" Personally, I think it looks like an instance of the perfect
trumping the good.

If the code is there to do the "block certain IPs from allowing anon
edits but not from account creation" trick, why not just turn it on?
If all hell breaks loose we can turn it off again. We don't have to
get it perfect on the first try, do we? Whatever happens, the
experience would definitely inform future discussion and speculation
about these sorts of things.

FF


from_name: Jack Lynch

body:
I'd like to have something profound to say, or at least some witty
comments to make fun of you guys with, but I stick to stating the
obvious.

Liberal arts education is what is wrong w the american education
system. Europe, w its career orientated educational specialisation is
much better, in essentially every way, which I can say easily having
experienced both cultures.

Skepticism is one of the most close minded paradigms possible, by its
very definition. The ability for skeptics to think outside their box
is astonishingly poor, as is their ability to accept obvious facts
(like what sort of things can be known w any degree of certainty).

Logic should be the basis for everyones education, and is a great deal
of fun, as I know full well,having studied and taught it for years. I
am currently feeding my favorite logic text to our 13yr old, who is
devouring it's simple truths with great joy and mirth. Don't blame the
subject matter for being uninteresting, blame the teacher for boring
lessons.

Finially, and on much the same note, if you want people to be more
well rounded and capable of critical thinking, keep making sure they
find balanced, factually accurate and well referenced encyclopedia
entries when they type a word into their favorite search engine (or
wikipedia search bar).

Jack (Sam Spade)


body:
lol, probably not, I'm only an amateur teacher or tutor, not a prof.
of logic. I do my best to drive the basics of logic into everyone I
come into contact w, however, as some of you might know all too well
;)

Jack (Sam Spade)

On 10/27/05, Koltwills at aol.com <Koltwills at aol.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> In a message dated 10/26/2005 8:08:59 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
> jack.i.lynch at gmail.com writes:
>
> Logic should be the basis for everyones education, and is a great  deal
> of fun, as I know full well,having studied and taught it for  years. I
> am currently feeding my favorite logic text to our 13yr old,  who is
> devouring it's simple truths with great joy and mirth.
>
>
> Eee-uuuw!
>
> That boring teacher was you? :p
>
> dcv
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Webcomics/Deletion again

body:
On 10/27/05, Bryan Derksen <bryan.derksen at shaw.ca> wrote:
> Just voted blanket "keep" on all of them, and am awaiting the inevitable
> accusation of WP:POINT.

It isn't hard to prove

>Nevermind that I probably spent more effort on
> my votes than the nominator did....

Unlikely. Nomitateing involves:
1)finding the article. This has been made easy for you
2)typeing {{Subst:ADF}} a the top of the page
3a) If you are me looking up the instructions on how to list something
4)typeing in reason
5)listing.

So the person at a minium edited 3 pages. How many did you edit?

--
geni


from_name: Anthere

subject: [WikiEN-l] Stevertigo's RFA or whatever trigram

body:
Dear fellow wikipedians,

Yesterday, stewards received a request to unsysop
Stevertigo, after a failed reconfirmation of
sysophood, following an arbcom decision.

Jtkiefer also asked me privately by irc to carry on
the request.

I consequently unsyoped Stevertigo.

Today, Steve post on my talk page, this comment :
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Anthere#Request_for_permissions

As a reminder, stewards are not here to judge, but to
carry on the decision of the community. I have no idea
why Steve was brought in front of the arbcom (well,
right, it is a 3RR issue, but I do not know the
details, and I do not want to get in this).

Now, I think in this case, the "judges" are
* the arbcom
* the voting community

And the steward is just to carry on the decision the
"judges" made.

If there is something unclear in the final decision,
it should not be my job to go reading all the
discussions around this case, so as to figure out
myself the "correct" conclusion. I think Stevertigo is
a honest editor, and he would not try to cheat on the
decision, so if he feels the outcome has not been
fair/clear, it is probable that there is a little
something unclear somewhere.

So, what I would like you to do, is to clarify the
current situation, so that the correct decision, to
desysop or not to desysop, is taken.

I give it 48 hours without doing anything, and if
there is no clarification by then, I will revert to
the previous stable situation (ie, Steve sysop) till
an agreement is reached between yourselves.

Ant

__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
http://mail.yahoo.com


list: commons-l

from_name: Delphine Ménard

subject: [Commons-l] Should Commons host the Wikimedia Logos or not?

body:
Hi all.

The Wikimedia logos are up for deletion in Commons *yet again*. I
therefore started a page which is designed to give a once and for all
answer on this matter. The page is:

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Alter_Wikimedia_Commons_policy_to_allow_Wikimedia_logos

Please keep all comments to the talk page:

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons_talk:Alter_Wikimedia_Commons_policy_to_allow_Wikimedia_logos

Timeline for now is two weeks discussion, three weeks vote, if you
feel it should be longer, please change it. This is a decision that ,
in case of a "no we shouldn't" answer,will deeply affect all projects
and require new technical implementations. So please do pass this on
to your individual projects and translate the vote page on commons if
needed. Thank you.

Cheers,

Delphine
--
~notafish


subject: [Foundation-l] Should Commons host the Wikimedia Logos or not?


subject: [WikiEN-l] Why changing the deletion process is a bad idea

body:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

MacGyverMagic/Mgm wrote:

>
>2)Pure wiki deletion is a nice idea, but if people start blanking you
>can't see the difference between page blankers and people who are
>actually interested in a discussion about the article's validity.

People deleting an article by blanking would include an edit summary.
I'm kinda suprised that this objection keeps coming up since the
solution is so obvious.

Ryan
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFDYJCF6MKb8lYmCtcRAnB4AJ97cCND+8GJ92Kqb6U1aCBI6yeCWgCfR2/X
+/rH9l130MAsQurU5Z1u/Cw=
=59BC
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


from_name: SJ

subject:
[Wikipedia-l] Wikipedia flyers & the UN's World Summit on the
	Information Society

body:
The UN is holding the second of two gatherings for its "World Summit
on the Information Society" [WSIS] in a few weeks  ( www.itu.int/wsis/
).  Wikimedia is sending representatives to the event; they are
bringing information about the projects with them.

This information should be in as many languages as possible. You can
help by translating the Wiki cheatsheet and the Wikimedia leaflet :

         http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Translation_requests/WSIS

The WSIS event will be a good way to reach people from every corner of
the world.  There will be hundreds of leaders and public speakers
there.  These people can carry the spirit of the Wikimedia projects to
their countries and organizations.

Please translate this request and forward it to other-language mailing
lists, and project village pumps.

Sincerely,
     SJ


subject: [WikiEN-l] Deletion suggestion

body:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Worldtraveller wrote:

>So how about scrapping afd/vfd and replacing with a system whereby an
>editor may tag an article with a 'candidate for deletion' tag and provide
>a rationale. Admins can patrol the resulting category, assess each case,
>delete as necessary. If someone disagrees with the deletion, they can
>either contact the admin who deleted to ask them to review their decision,
>or if they want wider community input there's vfu (which could be renamed
>afu?)

What you're proposing is more or less "pure admin deletion" -- the
idea that admins should get to decide what articles are deleted, and
fight it out amongst themselves. I think this moves the balance of
power even further away from the general populace of editors in an
unfair way. There is nothing that says a non-admin's opinion about
what should be deleted is any less valid than that of an admin.

Beyond that, there is no practical advantage to this over pure wiki
deletion, because in PWD, admins would still have control over what
articles stay deleted because they would be the ones with the power to
protect a deleted article. I envision that this would happen rather
commonly, and would be the simple solution to the edit wars that the
doom sayers are always prophecizing would occur under PWD. If an admin
is certain that a bad article should stay deleted, he or she will
delete and protect it. There is simply no drawback to this. All the
problems that exist in PWD also exist under AFD. The only difference
is that we lose the bureaucracy, we lose the drama, and we lose the
sense of finality that AFD gives to deletion.

Ryan
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFDYJIW6MKb8lYmCtcRAkNYAJ4pVh1S3apy/o6X7ELzGnOsSojbVACgnNDI
wk3U30CkuzmWhmlRIM2c3iw=
=tkBs
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


body:
Hi Muhammad,

http://www.omniglot.com/writing/lontara.htm doesn't show a virama
character (vowelless diacritic). Additionally, books I have about
Lontara do not mention it.

Can you send some more information about it somewhere?

As for typing in Lontara, please download
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/bug/9/97/Layout02.zip.pdf
(right-click and click "save target as...")

Then rename to "layout02.zip".

Then, unzip. Click "buginese.msi". This will install the Lontara
typing. When it is done, click start -> control panel -> regional and
language options.

Click the "languages" tab. Under "text services and input languages",
click "details...".

Then click "add", select "Bulgarian" (there is no "Bugis", but
"Bulgarian" uses code BG),

Under "keyboard layout/ime" Bulgarian will be selected but click and
scroll to "bugis". Then click OK.

After that click "language bar",  then check the box next to "show the
language bar on the desktop". Click OK, and then click OK again.

Then there will be a little bar on the taskbar with a blue button
which says EN (or MS or ID, or whatever language you use by default).
Click on it, and choose "bulgarian". Then, anything you type should
show Bugis letters.

The keyboard is the same as the one of the other Bugis font you used,
except z and x are punctuation ("end of section", and symbol used to
show a repeated word).

Cheers
Mark

On 26/10/05, muhammad zaid zainuddin <zaidpjd at umich.edu> wrote:
> Dear wikitech,
>
> It's me. Again........... (the troublesome guy.) This problem just struck
> me. There's missing a diacritic for the buginese lontara font. This vowel
> use to make the characters voweless. As you guys notice that all lontara
> characters end with vowel /a/. The diacritic is attached. Therefore, is
> there any possibility to add this diacritic?
>
> Secondly, I still cannot type in the characters via keyboard. Can someone
> explain it to me step by step?
>
> Thank you
>
> Muhammad Zaid Zainuddin
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>
>

--
If you would like a gmail invite, please send me an e-mail.
Si ud. quiere que le env?e una invitaci?n para juntar gmail, env?eme un mensaje.
Si vous voulez que je vous envoie une invitation ? joindre gmail,
envoyez-moi s.v.p un message.
Se vce. gostaria que lhe envie um convite para juntar gmail, favor de
envie-me uma mensagem.
Se vuleti chi vi manu 'n invitu a uniri gmail, mandatimi n messaggiu.


body:
I very much agree, the answer is to cite sources.

Jack (Sam Spade)

On 10/27/05, Fastfission <fastfission at gmail.com> wrote:
> If they are truly incommensurable sides, you *can't* bridge the gap, by
> definition. However you can reflect on its incommensurability, which just
> fine and not too hard.
>
> The best way to deal with incommensurability in a neutral way, in my mind,
> is to 1. state each side in their own terms, 2. state how they characterize
> each other.
>
> In reality, though, a lot of things which are labeled as incommensurable end
> up not being so, in the end. There is a large literature on
> incommensurability (following Thomas Kuhn) in the philosophy and history of
> science; I think we have a small article on it.
>
> FF


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Webcomics/Deletion again

body:
On 10/27/05, Bryan Derksen <bryan.derksen at shaw.ca> wrote:
> geni wrote:
>
> >On 10/27/05, Bryan Derksen <bryan.derksen at shaw.ca> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Nevermind that I probably spent more effort on
> >>my votes than the nominator did....
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Unlikely. Nomitateing involves:
> >1)finding the article. This has been made easy for you
> >2)typeing {{Subst:ADF}} a the top of the page
> >3a) If you are me looking up the instructions on how to list something
> >4)typeing in reason
> >5)listing.
> >
> >So the person at a minium edited 3 pages. How many did you edit?
> >
> >
> One edit for each VfD, obviously, but I don't see how the number of
> edits one has to make in the course of sticking "NN, D" on a page makes
> "NN, D" any more meaningful. Should my vote be disregarded because I
> didn't put enough effort into provide adequate evidence that I'd
> considered the case and had a valid reason for voting the way I did? If
> so, I would gladly withdraw those poorly-supported votes I made since
> that's exactly the thing I was complaining about in the first place. A
> policy like that would remove the whole basis of my objection.

No it shoulds be dissregarded because WP:POINT. I take it you conceed
that the nominator did in fact take more effort to nominate than you
did to vote.

> As it is there's probably one or two of those articles that I will be
> going back and retracting my "keeps" for based on other peoples' more
> detailed comments in response to these nominations. But those "keeps"
> were IMO a reasonable default reaction to this kind of nonsense.

Can you prove it is nonsense? Today hasn't been the best day for
wikipedia running times. Listing things on AFD under those conditions
is a pain.

--
geni


from_name: Tim Starling

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Previews

body:
David Gerard wrote:
> steven l. rubenstein wrote:
>
>
>>Half the time I click on "Save Page" the next screen is a "Preview" (and my
>>edits are not yet saved).  I have been careful about this, and am
>>definitely clicking on "Save Page," not "Show Preview."  And this is
>>happening a lot.
>>Is this happening to anyone else, or is it just me?
>>Does anyone have any idea why it is happening?
>
>
>
> Been happening to me too, on meta as well as en. (I've been adding to
> [[m:Bash]].)
>
> It's a known symptom of a very busy database - rather than committing
> the change, it dumps you back to the preview screen.

News to me. If the database is too busy, you should get a timeout screen or
a "cannot contact database server" error message.

We don't know exactly why this problem happens, but it's probably caused by
loss or temporary unavailability of session data. Brion says we still got
these reports when we put sessions in NFS, so memcached can't explain the
problem in its entirety, but nonetheless I'd be inclined to think the
current increase in reports is due to load on the memcached servers. We
should probably try installing memcached on another 10 or 15 servers and see
if that fixes the problem.

A closely related problem is being spontaneously logged out if you didn't
select the "remember me" checkbox when you logged in.

-- Tim Starling


subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: Whihc php file called

body:
Amruta Lonkar wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am trying to find whihc function is called when user hits the save button on
> edit page and in whihc file the button click for save is checked.
>
> Any help appreciated.
>
> Thanks,
> --
> Amruta

Article::save(), in Article.php. Submitting the form generates a POST
request to index.php with action=save in the query string. This action is
dispatched to the Article object.

-- Tim Starling


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Pure Wiki Deletion

body:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

geni wrote:

>
>Do you really want deletion in the hands of these people? Other than a
>mild interest in which of our edit warriors would come out on top I
>can see nothing posertive about this aproach.
>
It sounds to me like you just don't believe in the idea of a Wiki in
general. I could make the exact same argument against letting anyone
edit the article; the more persistent edit warrior always wins, so
what's the point? If that's your view, we can't even have a discussion
about this. But it makes me wonder why you are involved with Wikipedia
at all. :\

Ryan
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFDYKp86MKb8lYmCtcRAuSbAJ0dLbh2Ala4aOfBc8FemOmlLNi4hQCeIFB9
SGfs6rmzSNLW7nBPuQu44xg=
=SWpt
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


from_name: Sean Barrett

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Webcomics/Deletion again

body:
> On 10/27/05, Justin Cormack <justin at specialbusservice.com> wrote:
>
> > The amount of time wasted makes this tantamount to vandalism and I think
> > blocking the user from VfD would be a suitable response.
> >
> > Justinc
>
> Maybe maybe not but there is no way under the rules to do that.
>
> --
> geni

See the Arbitration case of Anthony DiPierro.  He was a disruptive
inclusionist; there is no reason why someone couldn't be banned
from AfD for deletionist disruption.

Note that the disruption is of /Wikipedia/.  It is impossible to
disrupt /AfD/ with deletionism, no matter how lunatic -- that entire
subsystem is maliciously designed to support and encourage lunatic
deletionism.

--
 Sean Barrett     | Inritum est qua legibus
 sean at epoptic.com | prohibitum est.


body:
Christopher Maloney wrote:
> Sorry this is a duplicate message.  I originally posted it with the
> subject line of the digest that I received.  Now, even though it's a
> separate thread, with the right subject line, maybe somebody will read
> it (maybe not).
>
>
> Thanks for all your help and suggestions.  It is all very interesting
> -- I'm still very new to Wikipedia.  That is, I've been reading it for
> a while, but haven't edited much.
>
> Tim Starling, I tried your proposed solution from the page
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Advice_to_Tor_users_in_China,
> and it works, after a fashion.  However, as I noted on that talk page
> (which I used as a test), it breaks my access to, for example, the
> mailing list archives.  I can't access, for example,
> http://mail.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2005-October/031345.html.

Thanks for the report. This should be fixable with a fairly simple tweak to
the suggested configuration file, I'll update the page now.

-- Tim Starling


from_name: slimvirgin at gmail.com

subject: [WikiEN-l] Rigging at RfA

body:
On 10/26/05, Noir Dezzir <mknopfler at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi everyone,
> [[User:Anonymous editor]] is contesting for Adminship. Many votes in his
> support are by usernames created in the last couple of days, and their only
> contribution to wikipedia has been that vote. When I pointed that out,
> [[User:Anonymous editor]] deleted my comments, marking his deletions as a
> "minor edit", and his close admin friend [[User:Slimvirgin]] blocked me ...
> Thanks
> Muwaffaq

I blocked [[User:Muwaffaq]] for disruption for making bigoted remarks
on the RfC page, including "by having a double digit birth rate these
people [i.e. Muslims] have garnered all these votes to get adminship
..." http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Anonymous_editor&diff=prev&oldid=26493014

Several editors on the page expressed surprise that he was being
allowed to edit and he was warned not to make any more comments like
it, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Muwaffaq&diff=prev&oldid=26579434
but did it again, so I blocked him for 24 hours.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=block&user=&page=User%3AMuwaffaq

I'm pretty sure he's a sock puppet but I can't prove it. His
contributions include blanking [[Jesus]] and redirecting it to
[[Muhammad]]. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jesus&diff=prev&oldid=18429618

Sarah


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Webcomics/Deletion again

body:
On 10/27/05, Bryan Derksen <bryan.derksen at shaw.ca> wrote:
> Can we disregard ComCat's nominations in the same vein, then?

No becuase they don't appear to violate WP:POINT.

> My point
> is that the number of clicks isn't relevant to the amount of effort the
> nomination itself reflects. If I'd cast my votes using an elabourate
> system of voice-to-speech hex editing via a telnet session, or whatever,
> that doesn't make what I wrote any more or less valid.

However it would show that you cared rather a lot (unless you had a
less complex method of accessing the net in which case it shows you
are wierd.

> "NN, D" provides no information on which to make a case. And if
> Wikipedia's sluggishness is irrelevant, once an edit window is open
> there isn't any further communication with the webserver until "save
> changes" is clicked. There's plenty of time to type up a justification
> for one's vote. If there isn't time for other reasons, then why not wait
> until there _is_ time? There isn't a deadline.

Doing anything when Wikipedia is sluggish shows you care. You know if
you want to encorage debate on AFD how about debateing. Go through and
comment rather than voteing. Decide that for a time peroid (say a
month) you are not going to vote only comment. Encourage others to the
same.

--
geni


from_name: Folke Behrens

subject: [Wikitech-l] How to use "--output=mysql" option of mwdumper?

body:
2005/10/27, Nick Jenkins <nickpj at gmail.com>:
> ludo:/home/nickj/wikipedia# /usr/java/jre1.5.0_05/bin/java -Xmx200M
> -classpath mysql-connector-java-3.1.11/mysql-connector-java-3.1.11-bin.jar:.
> -server -jar mwdumper.jar --format=sql:1.4
> 20051020_pages_articles.xml.bz2
> --output=mysql://localhost/enwiki?user=wiki\&password=wiki
> Exception in thread "main" java.io.IOException: com.mysql.jdbc.Driver
>         at org.mediawiki.dumper.Dumper.connectMySql(Unknown Source)
>         at org.mediawiki.dumper.Dumper.openOutputFile(Unknown Source)
>         at org.mediawiki.dumper.Dumper.main(Unknown Source)

You can't use "-classpath" with "-jar". You have to add mwdumper.jar
to the classpath and directly specify the main class. Another option
is to add Class-Path to the manifest file.

java -classpath mysql.jar:mwdumper.jar org.mediawiki.dumper.Dumper ....

--fb


subject: [Foundation-l] Wikimania 2006 : please, hold on

body:
Hi dear all,

So....

I would like to remind anyone that Wikimania is an
event organised primarily by the Wikimedia Foundation.

This year, Wikimania will occur in Boston, more
precisely we will be hosted by Harward University.
However, the event is still an event organised by the
Foundation, by a core team of wikipedians, and
primarily for the community. It engages our whole
organisation... and can improve or damage our image as
well.

In the light of the past Wikimania, I think the event
needs to be organised in a rather professional way.
Experience showed the last core organisation team that
while some issues needed to be discussed and fixed
very quickly, other issues did not need to be taking
care of before one or two months before the actual
event taking place.
Experience also showed it was extremely important that
certain responsabilities be clearly given to "named"
persons, rather than being loosely taking care of by
anyone feeling an interest at some point, that
organisational tools be used rather than wikis etc...

In short, any event involving rather big amounts of
money, external communication and so, had to be
organised in a *professional* way, rather than the
(great but not all fitting) wiki way.

For this reason, we are thinking (though it is not yet
a final decision), to have officially an Event
coordinator.
Other roles to be held in the organisation are
typically
* technical support
* sponsor/grant coordinator
* logistic assistant
* press coordinator and other outside communication
* internal communication (webmastering and translation
mostly)
* programm coordinator

All this, with a certain degree of control from the
Foundation. And a strict degree of control by the
Event coordinator. And the agreement of the core team
for all issues which involve the whole team.

The Foundation is currently discussing this
organisation, and it is my belief no major move should
be done until this is all agreed, with the board and
with the current core team.

Which mean things like :
* no sponsorship deal should be start up without a
grant/sponsor coordinator
* no logistic involving Harward university should be
discussed without having set who would be the event
coordinator and logistic assistant
* no major communication should be made without the
agreement of the whole team...
* and incidently, no logo derivative should be
published and distributed without the prior agreement
of ... the logo copyright holder (the Foundation).

We have time. Wikimania will happen next summer. Let's
do things step by step, even though the whole idea is
very exciting. As Danny says, tasks must not be
replicated, efforts not be wasted, spirits must stay
cool and we MUST appear coordinated in front of
partners.

Thanks

Anthere

--------
These are all very valid points. However, before we
have a meeting, it
would seem rather sensible for the board to decide who
the organizing
committee is. In that way, tasks will not be
replicated, and efforts
will not be wasted. Do we know who the coordinators
for this event are?

Danny

-----Original Message-----
From: SJ <2.718281828 at gmail.com>
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List <foundation-l at
wikimedia.org>;
Wikimedia Translators <translators-l at wikimedia.org>
Sent: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 08:11:38 -0400
Subject: [Foundation-l] Wikimania 2006 : general
meeting & getting
involved

  Dear all,

Wikimania this past August was a joyous and wonderful
event.  It was
remarkable above all for the geographic diversity of
its attendees.

Help make the next Wikimania just as wonderful, and
even more
international and multilingual.  Please translate this
message and
pass it on to your respective mailing lists and wikis.

How to get involved :
1. Come to an IRC meeting next week.  We will be
discussing conference
dates, among other things.  Note what times you can
make it, or add to
the agenda, here:

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2006:Planning#Meetings

2. Volunteer your time, language skills, and
enthusiasm:

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2006:Planning#Volunteering

3.  Sign up for yet another mailing list
(wikimania-l).  It is
currently low-traffic and primarily English-language;
two things you
can help change.

http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l

4. Plan carpools or offer crash space for the event.
(harder to do
before the date is fixed, of course)

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2006:Venue#Attendees

Organizing Wikimania is at once demanding and
rewarding; and a chance
to learn about the inner workings of a large
conference.  Please join
us on IRC, or on the wiki, to find out more.

++SJ
_______________________________________________

__________________________________
Yahoo! FareChase: Search multiple travel sites in one click.
http://farechase.yahoo.com


from_name: Lionel Brits

subject: [Wikitech-l] How to implement wikibooks like module on mediawiki

body:
Can anybody point me in the right direction as to what software is
required to get mediawiki acting like wikibooks? I.e. how name/spaces
automatically create links between modules of a book? I've done quite a
lot of searching but I haven't found the answer. Apologies if this is
the wrong place to ask.

Cheers,

- Lionel


from_name: David Gerard

subject:
[WikiEN-l]
	Unilateral action contrary to a vote from a rouge admnin,
	David Gerard

body:
I've deleted the scabrous template [[Template:Twoversions]] as a
blatant encouragement to violate NPOV and substitute Sympathetic Point
Of View.  It was voted "keep" on TFD, which is complete rubbish
because eight people can't vote to violate NPOV on Wikipedia.
Currently protected blank.

Voting is not only Evil, it's Stupid. Think, dammit.

- d.


from_name: Fred Bauder

subject: [WikiEN-l] Rigging at RfA

body:
If what you say is true it is very serious, to the point of being
tragic. I have no interest in casting votes regarding anyone I'm not
familiar with, but I suggest you request arbitration regarding this
matter. But only if it is as serious as you say. If you are only
resentful at not being able to impose your point of view at
[[Islamophobia]] you probably should not bother. Those votes would
not have been counted anyway and it is hard to tell exactly who made
those accounts so the result may be more ambiguous than you might
desire.

Fred

On Oct 26, 2005, at 8:25 PM, Noir Dezzir wrote:

> Hi everyone,
> [[User:Anonymous editor]] is contesting for Adminship. Many votes
> in his
> support are by usernames created in the last couple of days, and
> their only
> contribution to wikipedia has been that vote. When I pointed that out,
> [[User:Anonymous editor]] deleted my comments, marking his
> deletions as a
> "minor edit", and his close admin friend [[User:Slimvirgin]]
> blocked me.
> This pair is known for misusing wikipedia policies and admin powers
> in the
> past, for example, with reference to the [[Islamophobia]] article.
> Kindly look into the past credentials of [[User:Anonymous editor]],
> and cast
> your vote.
> Thanks
> Muwaffaq
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Webcomics/Deletion again

body:
On 10/27/05, Bryan Derksen <bryan.derksen at shaw.ca> wrote:

> A mass copy-and-paste nomination of articles for deletion without
> providing any justification isn't disruptive?

However I can't show that they are doing it to make a point

>IMO you've got some odd
> standards for disruption, considering you once warned me I might be
> blocked for disruptiveness when I proposed an policy change here on the
> mailing list for increasing the duration of AfDs.

I wasn't exactly being serious. While I can come up with some say
"interesting" interpritations of the rules I don't I could really get
you under the dissruption clause for that.

> I've now gone through all of my ComCat-nomination votes and expanded on
> them with more extensive comments. Turns out that my initial instincts
> were completely correct, after due reconsideration all of my votes
> stayed "keep" (with one exception where I mistook a "NN,D" _vote_ by
> ComCat as a _nomination_ instead - the actual nomination was
> reasonable). Plenty of fodder for debate there, and plenty of effort
> spent to back up my position.

I'd bet tempted to go a stage further and not vote at all.

> Now may I complain about the lack of
> justification the nominations provided?
>

In theory RFC however it would be likely yo become messy.

> Here they are, for the record:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Bayonne_High_School
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Summit_Middle_School
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Grove_School

I see no reason to mess with the ritual that is school AFds aparenty
most of those takeing part are consenting adults.

--
geni


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Pure Wiki Deletion

body:
On 10/27/05, Ryan Delaney <ryan.delaney at gmail.com> wrote:
> Well, every edit is binary. Either it stays or it doesn't. Besides, an
> edit being binary doesn't offer up any connection to why it should be
> decided by rules and votes rather than discussion.

Nothing to stop you useing discussion. It is psoible to find a form of
wording that both sides find acceptable. This is not posible to do
with deletion. Something is either deleted or it is not deleted.

 Also, if you think
> PWD would lead to edit wars, how would you feel about an encyclopedia
> that anyone could edit: There would be edit wars galore and it would
> degenerate into chaos, neh? ;-)
>
> Ryan

You ever seen a long running edit conflic where neither side with
compramise? I have. they generaly end in one side or the other
implodeing. You know who wins such conflicts? Not the side that was
right or even the side with more people on. No it is the side which
has the greater wiki warfare skills. The ones who know how to play the
politics and their oponents emotions. The ones who have no problem
with fighting a battle for months at a time. The ones who know how to
play the intensity of the conflict so as to maxism stress on thier
oponent.

Do you really want deletion in the hands of these people? Other than a
mild interest in which of our edit warriors would come out on top I
can see nothing posertive about this aproach.

--
geni


subject:
[WikiEN-l] Unilateral action contrary to a vote from a rouge
	admnin, David Gerard

body:
On 10/27/05, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
> I've deleted the scabrous template [[Template:Twoversions]] as a
> blatant encouragement to violate NPOV and substitute Sympathetic Point
> Of View.  It was voted "keep" on TFD, which is complete rubbish
> because eight people can't vote to violate NPOV on Wikipedia.
> Currently protected blank.
>
> Voting is not only Evil, it's Stupid. Think, dammit.
>
>
> - d.

Not all dissputes are over NPOV.

--
geni


subject: [Foundation-l] Wikimania 2006 : general meeting & getting involved

body:
Dear all,

Wikimania this past August was a joyous and wonderful event.  It was
remarkable above all for the geographic diversity of its attendees.

Help make the next Wikimania just as wonderful, and even more
international and multilingual.  Please translate this message and
pass it on to your respective mailing lists and wikis.

How to get involved :
1. Come to an IRC meeting next week.  We will be discussing conference
dates, among other things.  Note what times you can make it, or add to
the agenda, here:
    http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2006:Planning#Meetings

2. Volunteer your time, language skills, and enthusiasm:
    http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2006:Planning#Volunteering

3.  Sign up for yet another mailing list (wikimania-l).  It is
currently low-traffic and primarily English-language; two things you
can help change.
    http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l

4. Plan carpools or offer crash space for the event.  (harder to do
before the date is fixed, of course)
    http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2006:Venue#Attendees

Organizing Wikimania is at once demanding and rewarding; and a chance
to learn about the inner workings of a large conference.  Please join
us on IRC, or on the wiki, to find out more.

++SJ


subject:
[WikiEN-l] Infinite Block
	byAbusiveAdmin/Extortion/Harassment/Fraudulent use of
	WikipediaAbuse Emails

body:
I googled you (at this late date) and find your story quite
interesting and a reasonable subject for a Wikipedia article. I have
no idea what is in the sealed settlement or how it relates to the
information in your article. I also have no idea what the effect of
someone publishing the settlement on the internet has. I remember
when I was in law school and we would sometimes ask what the law was
about this or that and the Professor, wise man that he was, would say
that no one knew until the court of last resort had ruled. But
finding answers in that manner is, at best, ruinous. I hope you can
negotiate a mutually agreeable settlement with Jimmy Wales and
Wikimedia Foundation. Clearly though, these issues are beyond the
competence of Wikipedia's arbitration committee.

If I were dictator, I would probably just delete the article and
protect the page as I can see this causes you pain. I would not
unblock you though as you have a track record of litigation and
something is sure to happen which will give at least color of a legal
claim. We are a rather unruly bunch so expecting that we would all
avoid doing something that might offend is unreasonable.

Fred

On Oct 26, 2005, at 4:31 PM, Jeff V. Merkey wrote:

>
> Hi Fred and All,
>
> In answer to both questions, the page is Jeffrey_Vernon_Merkey.
> The Talks pages througout the history section and the article are
> both litered with excertps from the sealed settlement agreement.
> Delete the page and rollback to the content Wales and I agreed to
> and lock it, then case closed and I can get back to editing.
> Please consider this.  It's going to take about 35 days total to
> get an order to take it down ( and I will get the order).  How
> about just accept this proposal, do what Wales and I originally
> agreed to, and lock the page back to the stipulated content, remove
> the entire history section (or hide it from the public) to remove
> the settlement language.  Then I can happily get back to editing
> and not have to worry with that page again.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jeff
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


subject: [WikiEN-l] Fwd: Wikimania 2006 : general meeting & getting involved

body:
Come to Meta to discuss next year's Wikimania.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: SJ <2.718281828 at gmail.com>
Date: Oct 27, 2005 8:11 AM
Subject: Wikimania 2006 : general meeting & getting involved
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List <foundation-l at wikimedia.org>,
Wikimedia Translators <translators-l at wikimedia.org>

Dear all,

Wikimania this past August was a joyous and wonderful event...
remarkable above all for the geographic diversity of its attendees.

Help make the next Wikimania just as wonderful, and even more
international and multilingual.  Please translate this message and
pass it on to your respective mailing lists and wikis.

How to get involved :
1. Come to an IRC meeting next week.  We will be discussing conference
dates, among other things.  Note what times you can make it, or add to
the agenda, here:
    http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2006:Planning#Meetings

2. Volunteer your time, language skills, and enthusiasm:
    http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2006:Planning#Volunteering

3.  Sign up for yet another mailing list (wikimania-l).  It is
currently low-traffic and primarily English-language; two things you
can help change.
    http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l

4. Plan carpools or offer crash space for the event.  (harder to do
before the date is fixed, of course)
    http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2006:Venue#Attendees

Organizing Wikimania is at once demanding and rewarding; and a chance
to learn about the inner workings of a large conference.  Please join
us on IRC, or on the wiki, to find out more.

++SJ

--
++SJ


subject:
[Wikipedia-l] Fwd: Wikimania 2006 : general meeting & getting
	involved


from_name: Poe, Marshall

body:
Could someone, just for the benefit of this (relative) outsider and
journalist, explain what the basic objections are to AdSense type ads on
Wikipedia? I know you'll be speaking for yourself and not the community,
and will read the explanations accordingly.

Best, MP

Marshall Poe, Ph.D.
The Atlantic Monthly
600 New Hampshire Ave. NW
Washington, DC 20037
202-266-6511
mpoe at theatlantic.com
-----Original Message-----
From: foundation-l-bounces at wikimedia.org
[mailto:foundation-l-bounces at wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Dan Grey
Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2005 7:41 AM
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Benefits of advertising (was Our
exponentiallyincreasing costs)

On 27/10/05, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
> >The relatively small number of editors who will throw a hissy-fit off

> >won't be missed - new editors arrive all the time, and many
> >eventually crawl back after a public foot-stomping session anyway.
>
>
> A full one-third of that hard core sufficiently dedicated to Wikipedia

> to spend  their own scarce cash going all the way to Wikimania 2005,
> wasn't it? Something about that doesn't sound "insignificant" to me.
> Maybe it does to you.

I think you're under-estimating the total number of editors WP has,
over-estimating who'd leave, and over-valuing their importance.

Where'd you get that figure from anyway?

Dan
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l at wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


subject:
[Foundation-l] Benefits of advertising (was Our
	exponentiallyincreasing costs)


from_name: Anthony DiPierro

subject:
[Foundation-l] Benefits of advertising (was Our exponentially
	increasing costs)

body:
> >I wonder how they'd pay for their fork...
>
>
> A fork would be a disaster for both prongs of the fork, but that
> doesn't mean it wouldn't be a certainty.

You've said that twice now, but I think it's far from obvious. A fork, with
those who don't mind ads participating on one site, and those who do mind
ads participating on another site, wouldn't necessarily be a disaster. As
long as there was cooperation between the two sides, it could actually be a
good thing. You know, survival of the fittest and everything.


subject: [WikiEN-l] RfA concern

body:
Sounds like an irc star. That would explain a fan club. I can't stand
irc, but I have no objection to folks who can constructively banter
becoming administrators. They are skilled communicators. It is a lot
harder for a sensible hard-headed person to become liked than for
someone who is well liked to become a capable administrator. It seems
reasonable to me. Creating good new articles is not one of the duties
of an administrator anyway.

Fred

On Oct 27, 2005, at 8:24 AM, Justin Cormack wrote:

> I am slightly concerned about the RfA for Acetic Acid. This is a user
> whose only attempt to create an article is [[vitaminwater]] which is
> really bad. He does however have overwhelming support (even from a
> couple of people I know) and clearly has a huge fanclub, and he hasnt
> done anything blatently wrong (apart from a perhaps unnecessary RfC).
>
> I was wondering about suggesting a mentoring program in how to
> write an
> article perhaps, which would be something I would be interested in
> creating anyway.
>
> I am sure he wont do any harm as an admin, but it all seems a bit odd.
>
> Justinc
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: Christopher Mahan

subject: [Foundation-l] Member Since. Was Rigging at RfA

body:
Is there an easy way to find how long ago a user has been a member?
Maybe a special tag that renders that automatically?

Thoughts?

--- David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:

> >[[User:Anonymous editor]] is contesting for Adminship. Many votes
> in his
> >support are by usernames created in the last couple of days, and
> their only
> >contribution to wikipedia has been that vote. When I pointed that
> out,
> >[[User:Anonymous editor]] deleted my comments, marking his
> deletions as a
> >"minor edit", and his close admin friend [[User:Slimvirgin]]
> blocked me.
> >This pair is known for misusing wikipedia policies and admin
> powers in the
> >past, for example, with reference to the [[Islamophobia]] article.
> >Kindly look into the past credentials of [[User:Anonymous
> editor]], and cast
> >your vote.
>
>
> I have to get around to doing a pile of sockchecking [*] on this
> precise matter. If you see an edit from me placing strikes through
> a
> pile of the "Oppose" votes, you'll know why.
>
> It may be necessary for bureaucrats to look very closely at these
> votes or kill the RFA and restart it or try again later, in case
> supporters have been swayed by the apparent mass of 'oppose' votes.
>
>
> - d.
>
> [*] The problem is I don't scale. We need more users with checkuser
> access; how to arrange this is a vexed question, because the Board
> has
> the willies about the privacy policy issue. It's not a matter to
> put
> to a vote, any more than root access is. I discussed this with Tim
> Starling last night and will hopefully send an email to the Board
> tonight. It needs sorting out properly and correctly, but soon. I
> have
> a couple of prospects in mind on en:.
>
> [cc'ed to foundation-l]
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

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

__________________________________
Yahoo! FareChase: Search multiple travel sites in one click.
http://farechase.yahoo.com


body:
On 10/27/05, Dan Grey <dangrey at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 27/10/05, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I think recent discussion on en: re the Answers.com <http://Answers.com>deal has
> > established that if we put ads on en: Wikipedia, a significant
> > proportion of contributors will feel sufficiently betrayed and ripped
> > off to get up and *leave*. Certainly enough to start a viable fork.
> > For no good reason of operating policy, and to the detriment of both
> > forks.
>
> I wonder how they'd pay for their fork...
>
> I've said it before and I'll say it again, if the choice is between a
> website with ads and no site at all, I'll take ads.

The thing is, when (and if) it gets to that point, there will be ads. If one
quarter the budget target is missed, and the hardware needed to run the site
well is gone, and the quality of the site starts to seriously decline (down
50% of the time or something), there are only really two possibilities:

1) Ads come, and some people leave, trying to make an ad-free fork.

2) Ads don't come, and some people leave, trying to make ad-full fork.

At the point, if it ever comes, that it becomes clear that the site can't
run solely on donations, the argument for ads will be much stronger, there
probably will be few people who would leave, and probably the majority would
be in favor of turning on the ads.

It'd be nice if we could switch before then, because there are a lot of
better things we can do with the donation money than run a website, but it
isn't absolutely necessary.