from_name: Andres Baravalle

body:
Hi,
I would need a suggestion on how to incorporate (if it is possible)
text from several wikipedia articles into a GPL software
(phpGrabComics). I would need to incorporate a few lines (3 to 12) in
many files. Basically I would like to include in pages as
http://www.baravalle.it/phpGrabComics/index.php?comic_array%5B%5D=dilbert&view=1
a few lines from wikipedia with the description of the comic. As I
have more than 200 modules in the software, I would have liked to use
the descriptions already written in wikipedia.

I am not sure on what I should write in the code to be compliante with
the GFDL.  I suppose that it would be an "aggregation" of GFDL text in
a GPL software: I would include the text "as is".

At the end of the message there is an example of the current code; the
variable $description_short is the one that would contain GFDL text, if
there is no conflict or problem.

In the web the output at the end of the page would be (for example, in
a page importing the first lines of the Dilbert article):

The text of this page is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation
License. It uses material from the Wikipedia.

How do I write the licence in the code of the page? I have used a
comment line, but not sure if it is the right way.

Any suggestion? I would like to use text from wikipedia, to fasten the
development (I'd like to use text from 60 to 100 pages), but if it is
a problem I will write the texts by myself and just use the GPL.

Another consideration is that I would prefer release only the text
from wikipedia under the GFDL, not all the web page. Is it possible?
That is because the pages are containing small thumbails (that should
be under "fair use"), and I am not sure I can release the thumbnails
under GFDL.

Thanks in advance,
	Andres

/*

Copyright ? 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005 Andres Baravalle

This file is part of phpGrabComics.

phpGrabComics is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or
(at your option) any later version.

phpGrabComics is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the
GNU General Public License for more details.

You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
along with phpGrabComics; if not, write to the Free Software
Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple Place, Suite 330, Boston, MA  02111-1307  USA

*/

Class Dilbert extends phpGrabComics
{
	# Grab Dilbert cartoon and put it in your site

	var $address = "http://www.dilbert.com/";
	var $unix_name = "dilbert";
	var $name = "Dilbert";

	var $author = "Scott Adams";
	var $match_string =
	"/src[=][[:punct:]](\/comics\/dilbert\/archive\/images\/dilbert[[:digit:]]+\..{3})[[:punct:]]/i";
	// This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation
License. It uses material from the Wikipedia.
	var $description_short = "
Dilbert is a popular American comic strip.
Written by Scott Adams, the comic is known for its heavily satirical
humor about a micromanaged office, featuring an engineer as the title
character and his clueless boss. The strip has run in newspapers since
April 16, 1989, spawning several books, an animated television series, a
computer game, and hundreds of Dilbert-themed merchandise items.
";
        var $description_licence = "This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation
License. It uses material from the Wikipedia";
	var $description_long = "";
	var $suggested_links = Array("http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Scott_Adams");
	var $suggested_comics = Array("userfriendly","helen");
	// fill $home_page if the web site has an easy download page, used as
$address, and a "real", different home page
	var $home_page = "";
}

?>


list: wikimedia-l

source: pipermail-mbox

subject: [Foundation-l] wikipedia content in a GPL program


list: wikitech-l

from_name: RedWolf

subject: [Wikitech-l] User table dump

body:
Where can one obtain a copy of the user table? I have the latest version (18
days old as of today!) of the cur table from download.wikimedia.org and imported
into a local mysql database. I would like to map the user id column to a name so
I can generate some reports on articles in the image namespace. For example,
listing unverified images by user name.


from_name: Thomas Gries

subject: [Wikitech-l] ENotif (e-mail notification for changed pages)

body:
http://meta.wikipedia.org/Enotif

Hello all developers and mediawikipedians,

I need urgently to know, pushy as I am, whether or not you are in favour
of having User_talk: ***and*** User: pages treated in the same way:
currently, only User_talk  pages show the "You have new messages" label
and trigger an ENotif in CVS HEAD versions, if the user has opted-in.

However more and more users have asked me whether I could also supervise
  the accompanying ***User*** page, so that changes on this page are
also triggering ENotifs.

I suggest:

to modify the MediaWiki behaviour, so that both, the
User_talk:X *and* User:X pages trigger the "you have new messages" flag
and also an ENotif(if enabled). Of course, changes of User X do neither
trigger the display of the marker nor an ENotif.

Looking forward to your answers, please reply to
mailto:mail at wikinaut.de?Subject=ENotif%20also%20for%20Userpages

Wikinaut Tom


list: wikien-l

from_name: Anthere

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: My rant

body:
Christopher Mahan a ?crit:
> I'm pissed, and I want to rant. (you've been warned)

Indeeeeeed.
Bon...
Une petite framboise pour se sentir mieux... ?a va passer...
Conseil : met un lien vers ce mail ? tous ceux qui sont "coupables" de
ces redirections. ILs n'ont peut etre pas r?alis? ?

Ant


from_name: David Gerard

subject: [Wikitech-l] SVG upload?

body:
Traroth (traroth at yahoo.fr) [050125 02:48]:

> Include SVG in Wikipedia article could be a great
> feature, especially if they are editable (in
> Wikicommons for example)

If we can be sure of live data issues, which are basically knowing what
formats have an app using them that is SO INCREDIBLY STUPID as to look for
code in its data files ... that being what a malicious uploader will craft
for. A whitelist to which additions are slow, gradual and deeply researched
is probably the only safe answer.

- d.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Let us not attack sources as unreliable without reason

body:
JAY JG (jayjg at hotmail.com) [050125 02:53]:

> It is completely unacceptable, in my view, to add caveats to cited
> references as you did, stating "Attempts to verify Bard's attribution to
> the UN Mediator's report have so far failed
> (http://domino.un.org/unispal.nsf/9a798adbf322aff38525617b006d88d7/ab14d4aafc4e1bb985256204004f55fa!OpenDocument)",
> or as Bjorn did ("Attempts to verify Bard's attribution to the UN
> Mediator's report have so far failed: see Talk:Estimates of the Palestinian
> Refugee flight of 1948."), simply because you are unwilling or unable to
> expend the necessary energy to look up the primary sources.  Moreover,
> telling people to refer to Talk: pages is bad form, particulary (but not
> exclusively) because Talk: pages change all the time, and are often
> archived.

However, you didn't have the primary reference either, which would have
avoided a great many problems.

In general, questioning a reference shouldn't provoke this level of
defensiveness. It did turn out to differ in small but important ways from
the original citation.

There must be an NPOV way of dealign with secondary references like this -
of indicating one is quoting a secondary reference and naming the reference
they claim.

- d.


subject:
[WikiEN-l] Reference questioning and how to cite secondary
	references

body:
Tony Sidaway (minorityreport at bluebottle.com) [050125 03:43]:
> JAY JG said:

> >  The fact  that only a tiny number of
> > seconday sources seem to even be candidates for  this kind of treatment
> > is interesting.

> *All* secondary sources must be handled with caution.

Yes. Particularly in the increased push for more and better referencing. I
see nothing wrong with listing a secondary source, but there must be some
accepted format for listing a secondary source with the primary source it
points to.

Even though it's susceptible to abuse by the querulous, I think it's
important that the following continue to be the case:

1. any assertion in an article can be questioned with a request for a
   reference;
2. the quality of a reference can be questioned.

This should *expecially* be the case in controversial areas.

(I try to cover my arse preemptively, e.g. in
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X_Window_System#X.Org_and_XFree86 - that
second paragraph summarises history of recent bitter memory. You bet I'm
going to reference it sentence by sentence to the point where the described
sequence of event couldn't reasonably be disputed.)

Something about this needs to go on [[Wikipedia:Cite sources]], though we
should probably thrash it out here for a while first ;-)

- d.


body:
JAY JG (jayjg at hotmail.com) [050125 04:23]:
>From: "Tony Sidaway" <minorityreport at bluebottle.com>
> >JAY JG said:

> >>  The fact  that only a tiny number of
> >> seconday sources seem to even be candidates for  this kind of treatment
> >> is interesting.

> >*All* secondary sources must be handled with caution.

> Handled with caution is fine, specific ones singled out for special
> treatment is not.

Bjorn's handling of it may have been clumsy (and that username raises an
eyebrow), but  I think the essential point he was trying to make still
stands.

(Also, you both seem to be assuming less than complete good faith on the
part of the other. I really don't see that as eing the case for either of
you. I see no reason this can't be worked out in a mutually satisfactory
manner now and for the future.)

I see no reason why each of the thousands of secondary references shouldn't
have attention paid to them in principle. We have a reference checking
project, after all.

- d.


body:
JAY JG (jayjg at hotmail.com) [050125 05:19]:
From: David Gerard <fun at thingy.apana.org.au>

> >I see no reason why each of the thousands of secondary references shouldn't
> >have attention paid to them in principle. We have a reference checking
> >project, after all.

> A great idea, in principle.

As I said, it's susceptible to abuse by the querulous. But that's an editor
problem. How far is too far? At what point do we cull querulousness without
forestalling questioning of a reference seriously considered (in good
faith) to be dubious?

- d.


body:
Delirium (delirium at hackish.org) [050125 05:26]:

> I'm not too familiar with standard practice in encyclopedias, but in
> journal and conferences papers, it's considered fairly standard to cite
> the secondary source if that's where the quote or other information came
> from, even if the secondary source itself cites a primary
> source---citing the primary source is taken to be an assertion that
> you've personally gotten the information from the primary source, or at
> least verified that it's there.  If it were discussed in running text
> (as something particularly murky or controversial often would be), it
> would be with phrasing along the lines of "Smith (1997) places the
> population of Moscow during this period at 2,321, citing a census of
> 1854 consistent with various other reports."  If the census of 1854 is
> completely undisputed, then it could be simply mentioned directly, but
> the citation would still be something like "The census of 1854 placed
> the population of Moscow at 2,321 (Smith 1997)"---citing the census
> itself would be inappropriate unless you've personally looked it up.

That looks like a very good way of dealing with it to me. What's a concise
format for footnoted reference use?

(I'm asking this with a view to something to add to [[Wikipedia:Cite
sources]]. Being mindful of [[m:Instruction creep]], of course.)

- d.


list: wikipedia-l

from_name: V. Ivanov

subject: [Wikipedia-l] os.wikipedia.org -- Ossetic wikipedia request

body:
I'd like to ask for starting Ossetic Wikipedia.

Ossetic is spoken in several territories (mostly in Russia) by
half-a-million people. Wikipedia in the language could help keep the
language actual.

About me:
http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A3%D1%87%D0%B0%D1%81%D1%82%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%BA:Amikeco
http://eo.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vikipediisto:Slavik_IVANOV

Sl. Ivanov,
Russia

--
Esperu cxiam!


from_name: Jimmy (Jimbo) Wales

subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: Google preventing comment spam

body:
Robin Shannon wrote:
> >But it also means that wikipedia
> > itself probably should turn the feature off.
> >
> > (This is not a decree or anything, just one voice in the discussion.)
>
> maybe in the 5 or so really big wikipedias, but i know for example
> that en.wikibooks has a problem with one particular chinese
> wikispammer, who doesnt get reverted for at least a couple of hours,
> if not half a day sometimes. I presume there is probably similar probs
> with some of the other smaller projects.

I think that's probably right.

It's about weighing the value of giving search engines good clues
about pages that don't suck versus the value of discouraging wikispam
when it is a problem.

--Jimbo


subject: [Wikitech-l] The AOL problem

body:
Andre Engels wrote:
> Before going to far-fetched solutions, we should first agree that
> there actually is a problem. Is there any actual evidence that there
> are AOL-users vandalising us in such amounts that it becomes
> bothersome from ever-changing IP addresses?

Yes.  I would say that the primary *personal* motivation that danny in
en wikipedia had for "mentoring" Michael (a formerly notorious vandal
who has been reformed) was that danny had an ongoing problem of
finding himself blocked from editing due to people blocking Michael.

In this case, there has been a happy ending.  But in the general case,
legitimate editors who are AOL customers have an ongoing problem,
which we deal with partly by being reluctant to block AOL ip numbers
(which is not good of course for other reasons).

--Jimbo


list: foundation-l

subject:
[Foundation-l] Re: [Wikipedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation : le ver
	dans le fruit ?

body:
I have written to the original author privately to try to address his
concerns and straighten out some factual errors.

I do not mind complaints about the path we are taking towards a larger
and more institutionalized board, although of course helpful comments
that Assume Good Faith (which I think I have earned) are even
better. :-)

>>* What will the community do if Jimmy Wales makes decisions opposite
>>to the opinion of the majority,...

The irony here is that one reason I plan to evolve the institutional
structure of the Wikimedia Foundation slowly is precisely to guard
against a rogue board which does not respect the will of the community
*and* to guard against a general evolution of the community away from
the core goals of the project.  This last point deserves some comment.

This is not a democracy.  This is a charitable humanitarian project
with clearly defined goals and aspirations.  The will of the community
is absolutely important, and the will of the community is drawn around
the goals that we have set for ourselves from the beginning.
Therefore democracy can play a very important part in this, but so
must a firm commitment to _principle_.

> >To answer "Why don't you just fork?" is slapping the donators in
> >the face

And to suggest that I would answer in such a way is a slap in the face
to me, of course.

--Jimbo


from_name: Peter Danenberg

subject: [Wikitech-l] wikitex in 1.4 ?

body:
> Does the current wikitex work together with the 1.4 branch ?

     With  one  caveat,  Matthias;  'math' should be renamed
'amsmath' or similiar in wikitex.inc.php to avoid  conflict-
ing with texvc.  The tag will change accordingly.

     I'll  address  it currently and check it into CVS along
with some maintenance.

--
Peter Danenberg                                           .
wikisophia.org                                           ..:


from_name: Christopher Mahan

subject: [WikiEN-l] My rant

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

> --- Christopher Mahan <chris_mahan at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > At Mitsubishi Companies and Mitsubishi, I spent weeks figuring
> out
> > all the ramifications of the mitsubishi companies.
> >
> > Then the list of companies gets dropped from the main article,
> then
> > the mitsubishi companies article gets redirected, and now appears
> > nowhere.
> >
> > The information on the current mistubishi page is incorrect.
>
> I just merged-in your info into the lead section at [[Mitsubishi]].
> Please make
> any needed changes due to merge errors.
>
> > I want a little respect for my work.
>
> I for one respect you and your work. I'm sure I'm not alone in
> that. It just
> looks like some things were innocently overlooked.
>
> > If it's too much to ask, then, I'll have to leave and remember WP
> as
> > something which sounded good on paper but didn't work for me in
> the
> > real world.
>
> Please don't do that. You are a great contributor and we need more
> people like
> you. :)
>
> -- mav

Thanks for the vote of confidence.
The Mitsubishi articles need a lot more work, so it's going to take a
while to sort these things out. But thank you for digging.

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

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


from_name: Kevin Puetz

body:
Mathias Schindler wrote:

> Brion Vibber wrote:
>
>> I'm inclined to agree. It looks legit from a markup perspective (ie it
>> shouldn't cause HTML validators to bitch at us; rel _is_ a defined
>> attribute for <a>, and the set of values is open-ended.)
>>
>> Of course it won't prevent wikispam, but with luck it will discourage it
>> by reducing its value.
>
> Would this tag apply to all external links, even to the "yes, this is a
> good link"-links? In the long run, we wouldn't hurt not just spammers
> but even the good guys by not linking to them in a way search engines
> would consider this link to be relevant.
>
> Or is this just PageRankParanoia?
>
> Mathias

The best proposal I've seen so far is to apply it to all recently-modified
pages (with 'recent' determined per project by how fast you think the
editors will get it cleaned up - probably a day or so is reasonable). That
assumes that it will get cleaned up before the timeout expires, and
prevents it from being visible to a robot in the interim. But links that
survive for a while still become rankable. And it's fairly simple, unlike
tracking, per-link, whether or not it has been verified.

It would also penalize valid pages that just change frequently (like, say,
the front page) but I would think most such are really not good sources of
PageRank correlation anyway.


body:
Traroth wrote:
> > > >To answer "Why don't you just fork?" is slapping
> > the donators in
> > > >the face
> >
> > And to suggest that I would answer in such a way is
> > a slap in the face
> > to me, of course.
> >
> > --Jimbo
>
> So I don't. It's just an objection I heard before when
> I raised this point.

O.k., good.  :-)

The point is: there are a lot of complex and competing considerations,
including 1. The will of the community 2. The principles of the
project 3. legal factors and questions.

The possibility of a fork *is* of course one very wonderful control on
the project, but I would react very strongly to anyone whose answer to
a simple complaint is "well, why don't you just fork?"  I seek very
strongly to avoid forks for as long as we can, by trying to find ways
to accomodate everyone.

--Jimbo


list: wiktionary-l

from_name: cookfire

subject: [Wiktionary-l] Recurring vandalism on en.wiktionary.org

body:
    Recurring vandalism on en.wiktionary.org

Who can I address this to, so it can get resolved?

I believe we have one person who already created three user accounts to
come and vandalize Wiktionary with his disgusting goatse.cx image (I'm
sorry I have to bring that up again. He does other stuff as well, which
we can easily turn back, but these images are over the top). Is there a
possibility to find out from which IP-addresses this person is coming
and to block him that way? Since he creates user accounts, all we can do
is to ban him, which is utterly ineffective since he can easily create
another user account. I don't think there is a way for a moderator to
find out what the IP address is that a logged in user is coming from, or
is there? This is usually not necessary. If you do investigate it, maybe
it's a good idea to check whether he is active on other Wikimedia
projects as well.

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Wiktionary:Vandalism_in_progress
http://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=Mario_Dinis
<http://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=Mario_Dinis>
http://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=MyPecker
<http://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=MyPecker>
http://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=JanDevries
<http://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=JanDevries>
(apparently all he did as this user was deleted again)

I hope a solution for this problem can be found. Thank you Polyglot
<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Polyglot> 08:18, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)

    Thanks for looking in to it. I think

    http://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=Bullwinkle
    <http://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=Bullwinkle>

    can be added to the list of accounts this guy created. Polyglot
    <http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Polyglot> 10:31, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)

        James, somebody managed to create a user by the name of _:

        http://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=%C2%A0
        <http://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=%C2%A0>

        What can we do about this? I'm pretty sure you are not the
        person to bother about this. Is there somebody else I can
        approach, when something like this occurs? Polyglot
        <http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Polyglot> 10:16, 18 Jan
        2005 (UTC)

            We have a vandal, who seems to be intimately familiar with
            how the wiki software works:

            http://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=%C2%8F
            <http://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=%C2%8F>

            He creates user accounts we cannot block and pages we cannot
            delete:

            http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Special:Undelete/%C2%AD

            Is the English Wiktionary the only place where this lowlife
            operates? What can we do about it? Who can we contact abou
            this? Thanks for an answer. Polyglot
            <http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Polyglot> 16:22, 24 Jan
            2005 (UTC)


from_name: Gerard Meijssen

body:
Hoi,
This person has also been vandalising other websites. I know for a fact
that he vandalised wiki.mozilla.org and, this is his idea of fun. So if
you really want to hurt him involve the police and his ISP.

One trick that works is by identifiing the URL that he uses as a SPAM
page which it actually is and record it on  *meta:Spam blacklist
<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Spam_blacklist>*

Thanks,
    GerardM

cookfire wrote:

>
>    Recurring vandalism on en.wiktionary.org
>
> Who can I address this to, so it can get resolved?
>
> I believe we have one person who already created three user accounts
> to come and vandalize Wiktionary with his disgusting goatse.cx image
> (I'm sorry I have to bring that up again. He does other stuff as well,
> which we can easily turn back, but these images are over the top). Is
> there a possibility to find out from which IP-addresses this person is
> coming and to block him that way? Since he creates user accounts, all
> we can do is to ban him, which is utterly ineffective since he can
> easily create another user account. I don't think there is a way for a
> moderator to find out what the IP address is that a logged in user is
> coming from, or is there? This is usually not necessary. If you do
> investigate it, maybe it's a good idea to check whether he is active
> on other Wikimedia projects as well.
>
> http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Wiktionary:Vandalism_in_progress
> http://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=Mario_Dinis
> <http://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=Mario_Dinis>
> http://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=MyPecker
> <http://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=MyPecker>
> http://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=JanDevries
> <http://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=JanDevries>
> (apparently all he did as this user was deleted again)
>
> I hope a solution for this problem can be found. Thank you Polyglot
> <http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Polyglot> 08:18, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)
>
>    Thanks for looking in to it. I think
>
>
> http://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=Bullwinkle
>
>
> <http://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=Bullwinkle>
>
>
>    can be added to the list of accounts this guy created. Polyglot
>    <http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Polyglot> 10:31, 17 Jan 2005
> (UTC)
>
>        James, somebody managed to create a user by the name of _:
>
>
> http://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=%C2%A0
>
>
> <http://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=%C2%A0>
>
>
>        What can we do about this? I'm pretty sure you are not the
>        person to bother about this. Is there somebody else I can
>        approach, when something like this occurs? Polyglot
>        <http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Polyglot> 10:16, 18 Jan
>        2005 (UTC)
>
>            We have a vandal, who seems to be intimately familiar with
>            how the wiki software works:
>
>
> http://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=%C2%8F
>
>
> <http://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=%C2%8F>
>
>
>            He creates user accounts we cannot block and pages we cannot
>            delete:
>
>            http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Special:Undelete/%C2%AD
>
>            Is the English Wiktionary the only place where this lowlife
>            operates? What can we do about it? Who can we contact abou
>            this? Thanks for an answer. Polyglot
>            <http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Polyglot> 16:22, 24 Jan
>            2005 (UTC)
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wiktionary-l mailing list
> Wiktionary-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiktionary-l
>


body:
Gerard Meijssen wrote:

> Hoi,
> This person has also been vandalising other websites. I know for a
> fact that he vandalised wiki.mozilla.org and, this is his idea of fun.
> So if you really want to hurt him involve the police and his ISP.
>
> One trick that works is by identifiing the URL that he uses as a SPAM
> page which it actually is and record it on  *meta:Spam blacklist
> <http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Spam_blacklist>*
>
> Thanks,
>    GerardM

I kind of gave up on the spam blacklist. It sounded like a great idea.
But the urls I want to get on there apparently are not recognized as
spam. The list is not meant for undesirable (to use a big euphemism)
content. And oddly enough I was told that there are wikimedia projects
who do use content from sites like goatse.cx.

But that is another topic. For now it would be nice that it became
impossible for people to create user names and page names that cannot be
processed (banned, deleted) afterwards. And it would be interesting to
have a place where we can go with this kind of problems. I don't want to
be bothering the wrong people. Maybe this mailing list is the right
place to resolve this kind of thing?

Jo


from_name: ?scar Selfa

subject: [Wikipedia-l] add language Valencianish

body:
Escribo en espa?ol para solicitar que se a?ada un idioma que no est? en la
lista de wikipedia:

Valenci? - "Valenciano" en espa?ol.

Alguien puede pensar que no es necesario porque cree que es un dialecto,
pero he visto que s? hay otros presuntos dialectos que ni siquiera son oficiales
en sus territorios, mientras que el valenci? si que lo es en la Comunitat
Valenciana.

M?s informaci?n en:

www.gva.es (Generalitat Valenciana)
www.racv.es (Real Acad?mia de Cultura Valenciana)
www.avl.gva.es (Acad?mia Valenciana de la Llengua)

Somos ya un grupo de amigos interesados en hacer funcionar este proyecto.

Muchas gracias, Moltes gr?cies.
?scar Selfa Perona
http://usuarios.lycos.es/gueboscar
chequetraca at hotmail.com
osip at ono.com


from_name: Ben Brockert

body:
From: "Jimmy (Jimbo) Wales" <jwales at wikia.com>
>Robin Shannon wrote:
>> >But it also means that wikipedia
>> > itself probably should turn the feature off.
>> >
>> > (This is not a decree or anything, just one voice in the discussion.)
>>
>> maybe in the 5 or so really big wikipedias, but i know for example
>> that en.wikibooks has a problem with one particular chinese
>> wikispammer, who doesnt get reverted for at least a couple of hours,
>> if not half a day sometimes. I presume there is probably similar probs
>> with some of the other smaller projects.
>
>I think that's probably right.
>
>It's about weighing the value of giving search engines good clues
>about pages that don't suck versus the value of discouraging wikispam
>when it is a problem.
>
>--Jimbo

I agree. I ineptly started a page at [[m:nofollow]], for discussion off this list.

Ben


from_name: Daniel Mayer

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Wikiforum

body:
--- Guillaume Blanchard <gblanchard at arcsy.co.jp> wrote:
> As I said in introduction, the goal is to add it (at least) on French
> Wikipedia as soon as developers agreed. So please check it!
>
> Aoineko
>
> [1] http://test-wikipedia.saewyc.net/index.php/Special:Forum

Wow! Way neat. Is this also supposed to work on talk pages? If so, then the
ability to edit above the thread list is absolutely needed (for various
permanent messages and templates).

-- mav

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


from_name: notafish

body:
Please find herewith a revised translation for better understanding.

> I posted the following text:  "Wikimedia
> Foundation:  the worm in the fruit?  At the
> time of the constituent assembly of the French
> association Wikimedia France, the subject came up
> that Jimmy Wales and Wikimedia
> Foundation would refuse  the right to use
> the trademarks which it held (Wikimedia,
> Wikipedia, Wktionary, Wikibooks...) if
> the Foundation did not have a right of veto
> (the term was debated) on the decisions
> that the French foundation would make.
> At the same time, during the creation of
> Wikimedia Foundation, Jimmy Wales imposed 3
> seats out of 5, and reserved himself the seat of
> president, the 2 seats remaining being
> provided by election (what led to 4
> anglophone members out of 5).  This
> way of doing things was not to be renewed, and a
> really democratic election was to take
> place this year (it is what had been known
> as at the time).  One learns now that Jimmy
> Wales intends to continue to reserve himself the
> seat of president, with probably a right of
> veto on the decisions.  A less democratic process
> appears difficult.  The one year delay
> was thus only one means of drowning fish.
> This way of doing things should make us ask ourselves
> certain number of questions:
>*  What are these foundations used ?
> *  Don't donators have a right to say something on
> the use that is made of the money they gave?
> * Isn't it deceiving people to make
> believe that the foundation takes care of the
> interests of Wikipedia, whereas it is only
> a buttocks-organization, without any real
> capacity of decision?
>*  Isnt it deceiving to give the appearance of democracy
>when it is not at all democratic?
>*  What will the community do if
> Jimmy Wales makes decisions opposite to
> the opinion of the majority, as it could be
> the case on the subject of
> advertisement (Jimbo never decided clearly
> against)?
>To answer "Why don't you just fork?" is
> slapping the donators in the face
>Hear me well:  I do not have
> anything against Jimbo, and I would have
> been the first to vote for him in 2004,
> and this, as long as he  would
> have been ready to remain president.  That
> would have been only a formality.  Today,
> I would be more circumspect.  Of what is Jimbo
> afraid exactly?  Some answered:
> that a Board would precisely make
> decisions opposite to the will of the
> majority.  In addition to the fact that it
> is in complete contradiction with the
> concept even of democracy, the current
> system does not put to us with the shelter.
> Simply, this "privilege" is reserved to
> only one person.  Personally, I intended to
> rather strongly get involved in the activity of
> the French association, but now, I am two
> inches away from forgetting about the whole thing.
>  That would be
> already done if Wikip?dia and the other
> projects were not in GFDL, which means
> that they do not belong to the Foundation.
> Without hostility, I would like to strive to build
> a collective work, and not to a
> sort of monument to the glory of Jimmy
> Wales, whatever his merits may be.


from_name: Ray Saintonge

subject: [Wikipedia-l] culture - recipes and other stuff

body:
Matt Brown wrote:

>On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 12:40:51 -0700, Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>But the thing with a recipie is that there are infinite possibilities,
>>and different people make it different ways. As I said before, we
>>should describe what makes it what it is and how it is made, but be
>>vague enough that we include every possibility for that food. This
>>isn't a recipie.
>>
>>
>On the other hand, we can ILLUSTRATE with sample recipes, just as we
>can illustrate with sample photographs.  Sometimes vagueness is too
>vague; sometimes what is needed is a specific as an example.  So long
>as we note that variations do exist and this is just an example, we're
>fine.  Just as we illustrate, say, an article on Persian cats with a
>picture of a specific cat; we do have to point out the possible
>variations and that this is just an example, not the definition.
>
Exactly.  Very few good cooks will follow a recipe to the letter; they
know that they need to make adjustments.  Many of the possible variants
are not critical to the recipe.  Good cooks will know from experience
what needs to be adjusted to allow for one's altitude above sea level.

Ec


body:
Just making clear that I only translated for understanding purposes. I
do not agree with anything on that text. And I second Yann in his
reply.

Best,

Delphine

On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 10:21:17 +0100, notafish <notafishz at gmail.com> wrote:
> Please find herewith a revised translation for better understanding.
>
> > I posted the following text:  "Wikimedia
> > Foundation:  the worm in the fruit?  At the
> > time of the constituent assembly of the French
> > association Wikimedia France, the subject came up
> > that Jimmy Wales and Wikimedia
> > Foundation would refuse  the right to use
> > the trademarks which it held (Wikimedia,
> > Wikipedia, Wktionary, Wikibooks...) if
> > the Foundation did not have a right of veto
> > (the term was debated) on the decisions
> > that the French foundation would make.
> > At the same time, during the creation of
> > Wikimedia Foundation, Jimmy Wales imposed 3
> > seats out of 5, and reserved himself the seat of
> > president, the 2 seats remaining being
> > provided by election (what led to 4
> > anglophone members out of 5).  This
> > way of doing things was not to be renewed, and a
> > really democratic election was to take
> > place this year (it is what had been known
> > as at the time).  One learns now that Jimmy
> > Wales intends to continue to reserve himself the
> > seat of president, with probably a right of
> > veto on the decisions.  A less democratic process
> > appears difficult.  The one year delay
> > was thus only one means of drowning fish.
> > This way of doing things should make us ask ourselves
> > certain number of questions:
> >*  What are these foundations used ?
> > *  Don't donators have a right to say something on
> > the use that is made of the money they gave?
> > * Isn't it deceiving people to make
> > believe that the foundation takes care of the
> > interests of Wikipedia, whereas it is only
> > a buttocks-organization, without any real
> > capacity of decision?
> >*  Isnt it deceiving to give the appearance of democracy
> >when it is not at all democratic?
> >*  What will the community do if
> > Jimmy Wales makes decisions opposite to
> > the opinion of the majority, as it could be
> > the case on the subject of
> > advertisement (Jimbo never decided clearly
> > against)?
> >To answer "Why don't you just fork?" is
> > slapping the donators in the face
> >Hear me well:  I do not have
> > anything against Jimbo, and I would have
> > been the first to vote for him in 2004,
> > and this, as long as he  would
> > have been ready to remain president.  That
> > would have been only a formality.  Today,
> > I would be more circumspect.  Of what is Jimbo
> > afraid exactly?  Some answered:
> > that a Board would precisely make
> > decisions opposite to the will of the
> > majority.  In addition to the fact that it
> > is in complete contradiction with the
> > concept even of democracy, the current
> > system does not put to us with the shelter.
> > Simply, this "privilege" is reserved to
> > only one person.  Personally, I intended to
> > rather strongly get involved in the activity of
> > the French association, but now, I am two
> > inches away from forgetting about the whole thing.
> >  That would be
> > already done if Wikip?dia and the other
> > projects were not in GFDL, which means
> > that they do not belong to the Foundation.
> > Without hostility, I would like to strive to build
> > a collective work, and not to a
> > sort of monument to the glory of Jimmy
> > Wales, whatever his merits may be.
>


from_name: Tony Sidaway

subject: [WikiEN-l] My rant

body:
NSK said:
> 6. Every article is developed in a software-like fashion, i.e. there
> are  versions and when the mains (maintainers) approve an article it
> will be  checked by the admins. The admins then publish the article in
> a non-Test page  (i.e. the main namespace) and give to it a unique
> version number such as 1.4.

Wouldn't this put a tremendous strain on administrators?  Every single
article would have to be vetted before publication.  I think it would also
make contributors less likely to produce articles, too.  For instance if
I'm copy editing an article it's not unusual for me to encounter a redlink
and write a brief stub for that link.  This enters my watchlist and,
believe me, people do notice those stubs and add material to make them,
when I go back a few weeks later, often a very good article on the
subject.  An example of this is my very brief stub for "Portolan chart"
which I produced in the course of copy editing an article uploaded by
someone else that was later deleted as a copyright violation.  The second
and third paragraphs were added more recently by someone else.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portolan_chart

This is one thing that works very well in a Wiki.  I don't think I would
have bothered if the production process had been more complex.


subject: [Wikitech-l] wikitex in 1.4 ?

body:
     I checked some changes into the CVS, Matthias; verified
that it worked with  1.4;  and,  in  addition,  swapped  out
dvi2bitmap for dvipng.

     Look  for  a  more  extensive  update later in the week
(Python, installation).

--
Peter Danenberg                                           .
wikisophia.org                                           ..:


from_name: Rich Holton

subject: [Wikitech-l] Redirect to Category

body:
--- "paul at immediart.com" <paul.youlten at gmail.com> wrote:

> Is there a simple way to redirect to a category page?

Create a normal redirect page, but put a colon before the word
"category" in the link:

#redirect [[:category:Martians]]

This seems to work for me. Is this what you wanted?

-Rich Holton
en.wikipedia:User:Rholton

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 250MB free storage. Do more. Manage less.
http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250


from_name: Rick

subject: [WikiEN-l] My rant

body:
Yet again another attempt to make Wikipedia into something completely different.  Why do you keep doing this?  You are not going to succeed in getting the project corrupted into your version of reality.

RickK

NSK <nsk2 at wikinerds.org> wrote:
On Tuesday 25 January 2005 03:09, Christopher Mahan wrote:
> I'm pissed, and I want to rant. (you've been warned)

I understand you completely; the problem in Wikipedia is that authors start
writing without discussing, planning and organising their efforts. In my wiki
projects I will try to follow a different approach, and I believe Wikipedia
should consider a change in its attitudes. Here is my design:
1. The wiki is just a place to store articles. Discussions in the wiki are
prohibited.
2. The Talk: pages are renamed Test: pages and all the writing and
collaborative writing happens there.
3. Non-Test pages (i.e. the real articles) are protected and only admins can
edit them.
4. The authors are using a mailing list, a phpBB forum and a special
collaboration platform to discuss and decide how to write the article. An
example of a very good collaboration platform is phpCollab.
5. There are Article Maintainers who check for copyright violations and check
the references, et cetera.
6. Every article is developed in a software-like fashion, i.e. there are
versions and when the mains (maintainers) approve an article it will be
checked by the admins. The admins then publish the article in a non-Test page
(i.e. the main namespace) and give to it a unique version number such as 1.4.

You can learn more about this design at
http://nerdypc.wikinerds.org/index.php/Help:Editing_process

Some additional info about versions exists at
http://nerdypc.wikinerds.org/index.php/Help:Article_versions

--
NSK
http://portal.wikinerds.org/freehosting
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
 Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term'


body:
Thomas Gries (mail at tgries.de) [050125 11:10]:

> I suggest:
> to modify the MediaWiki behaviour, so that both, the
> User_talk:X *and* User:X pages trigger the "you have new messages" flag

With or without Enotif (which would be very nice): yes please to this being
triggered by the User page changing!

(This would also save on people feeling they have to lock their user page
against vandals ...)

- d.


from_name: NSK

subject: [WikiEN-l] My rant

body:
On Tuesday 25 January 2005 03:09, Christopher Mahan wrote:
> I'm pissed, and I want to rant. (you've been warned)

I understand you completely; the problem in Wikipedia is that authors start
writing without discussing, planning and organising their efforts. In my wiki
projects I will try to follow a different approach, and I believe Wikipedia
should consider a change in its attitudes. Here is my design:
1. The wiki is just a place to store articles. Discussions in the wiki are
prohibited.
2. The Talk: pages are renamed Test: pages and all the writing and
collaborative writing happens there.
3. Non-Test pages (i.e. the real articles) are protected and only admins can
edit them.
4. The authors are using a mailing list, a phpBB forum and a special
collaboration platform to discuss and decide how to write the article. An
example of a very good collaboration platform is phpCollab.
5. There are Article Maintainers who check for copyright violations and check
the references, et cetera.
6. Every article is developed in a software-like fashion, i.e. there are
versions and when the mains (maintainers) approve an article it will be
checked by the admins. The admins then publish the article in a non-Test page
(i.e. the main namespace) and give to it a unique version number such as 1.4.

You can learn more about this design at
http://nerdypc.wikinerds.org/index.php/Help:Editing_process

Some additional info about versions exists at
http://nerdypc.wikinerds.org/index.php/Help:Article_versions

--
NSK
http://portal.wikinerds.org/freehosting


subject: [WikiEN-l] My rant

body:
On Tuesday 25 January 2005 13:07, Tony Sidaway wrote:
> Wouldn't this put a tremendous strain on administrators?  Every single
> article would have to be vetted before publication.  I think it would also
> make contributors less likely to produce articles, too.  For instance if

It is true that my design can work only if a wiki can find lots of *committed*
*workaholic* users. Unfortunately this kind of user is very rare, so a wiki
following such a policy would expect to have less editors. This is a problem
that I have identified and I am working on it. Do you have any suggestions on
how to update my design to allow more editors to edit?

--
NSK
http://portal.wikinerds.org/freehosting


from_name: Mark Williamson

subject:
[Wikipedia-l] Individual Wikipedias for different Sinitic
	vernaculars (Cantonese debate) - update

body:
Hi all,

In this e-mail I don't want to personally introduce new arguments but
I want people to know that further debate on this topic is continuing
at http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages

Some speakers of these languages have lent their support: Steve,
Instantnood, and Felix Wan for Yue/Cantonese, and Nishishei,
Pangguanzhe, and alaya for Wu/Shanghainese (Wu also includes the
varieties of the surrounding areas including for example Suzhou).

Interestingly, on that page, no native speakers have directly
condemned the idea (only direct opposition is from Shizhao), although
Toytoy, a Cantonese speaker, has some concerns.

Mark


from_name: Matthias Pospiech

subject: [Wikitech-l] wikitex in 1.4 ?

body:
Does the current wikitex work together with the 1.4 branch ?

Our Tex User group has great interest to try out and maybe enchance the
system.

Matthias
--
---------------------------------
www.matthiaspospiech.de


from_name: Jeff Bonham

subject: [WikiEN-l] [weed_harper@bigheavyworld.com: Re: Wikipedia e-mail]

body:
----- Forwarded message from Weed Harper <weed_harper at bigheavyworld.com> -----

X-Original-To: silsor at localhost
X-Originating-Ip: [64.30.208.48]
From: Weed Harper <weed_harper at bigheavyworld.com>
To: jbonham at mail.utm.utoronto.ca
Subject: Re: Wikipedia e-mail
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.43

>Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 22:15:54 -0500
> Jeff Bonham <jbonham at mail.utm.utoronto.ca> Weed Harper <weed_harper at bigheavyworld.com> Re: Wikipedia e-mail
>On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 01:50:53AM +0000, Weed Harper wrote:
>> I am receiving a message that I am blocked at address 64.30.208.48 due to user
Herschelkrustofsky. I know of no reason why I should be blocked. Please
explain.
>
>See the discussion at:
>[[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Posting while blocked]]
>
>Regards,
>--
>Jeff Bonham
>jbonham at mail.utm.utoronto.ca
>PGP Public Key ID: BA289747
>On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 01:50:53AM +0000, Weed Harper wrote:
>> I am receiving a message that I am blocked at address 64.30.208.48 due to user
Herschelkrustofsky. I know of no reason why I should be blocked. Please
explain.
>
>See the discussion at:
>[[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Posting while blocked]]
>
>Regards,
>--
>Jeff Bonham
>jbonham at mail.utm.utoronto.ca
>PGP Public Key ID: BA289747
>On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 01:50:53AM +0000, Weed Harper wrote:
>> I am receiving a message that I am blocked at address 64.30.208.48 due to user
Herschelkrustofsky. I know of no reason why I should be blocked. Please
explain.
>
>See the discussion at:
>[[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Posting while blocked]]

1. I am not Herscelkrustofsky.
2. I am involved in an edit dispute wuth SlimVirgin, who has apparently filed a
malicious report.
3. I have never committed a blockable offense.

------------------------------------------------------------
Visit Big Heavy World at http://www.bigheavyworld.com,
Vermont's music 24/7.

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

--
Jeff Bonham
jbonham at mail.utm.utoronto.ca
PGP Public Key ID: BA289747
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20050125/ebd7f23e/attachment.pgp


from_name: David Wendt

subject: [Wikitech-l] IDEA: Tagging capabilities

body:
We should implement CVS-style tagging, where specific article revisions
are 'tagged' so that the group of revisions with that tag can be called
up instantly. This could be used for the push to 1.0 by having a tag for
the 1.0 revisions.


from_name: Traroth

body:
 --- "Jimmy (Jimbo) Wales" <jwales at wikia.com> a ?crit
:

> > >To answer "Why don't you just fork?" is slapping
> the donators in
> > >the face
>
> And to suggest that I would answer in such a way is
> a slap in the face
> to me, of course.
>
> --Jimbo

So I don't. It's just an objection I heard before when
I raised this point.

Traroth

D?couvrez le nouveau Yahoo! Mail : 250 Mo d'espace de stockage pour vos mails !
Cr?ez votre Yahoo! Mail sur http://fr.mail.yahoo.com/


subject: [Wikitech-l] Redirect to Category

body:
--- Angela <beesley at gmail.com> wrote:

> > > > Is there a simple way to redirect to a category page?
>
> > > Create a normal redirect page, but put a colon before the word
> > > "category" in the link:
>
> This won't work. It will redirect to a page which contains the
> category introduction text, but won't display any of the pages that
> are in that category.
>
> Compare
>
http://www.wikicities.com/index.php/User:Angela/Category_redirect_test
> and http://www.wikicities.com/index.php/Category:Help

[[category:bumfoozled]]

I never noticed!

This is listed at Mediazilla as bug #710.

Sorry for the bad info.

Thanks, Angela, for setting the record straight.

-Rich Holton

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


subject:
[Foundation-l] Emergency Medicine Wikibook: seeking programmers
	and doctors, nurses, paramedics

body:
--- Paris Lovett <paris at pazzah.com> wrote:
> I'm writing to let everybody know more about the proposed Emergency Medicine
> Wikibook.

Emergency Medicine Wikibook - great idea. But you don't need permission to
start such a thing, just go to http://en.wikibooks.org and get to work! :)

> I've met with board members and it seems at the present time that
> our main challenge is finding interested programmers to create templates and
> a special registration screen.

Registration system? I'm sorry but that is not the way we do things around
here. We had one project called Nupedia that had a registration system and it
was nearly a complete failure. Its only saving grace was that its looming
downfall led to the creation to Wikipedia (whose initial purpose was to breathe
life back into Nupedia - but that never happened and Wikipedia quickly became
its own thing).

> The open-source Wikibook model is a strong
> fit with the rapidly changing and incredibly broad field of Emergency
> Medicine. Traditional textbooks simply can't cover all the little things
> which walk into an Emergency Room, everything from broken toes, to heart
> attacks and strokes, to stabbings and shootings.

This is all great and wonderful, but instead of having controls on what people
do up front, why not have control on what is included in a published/static
copy? The live Wikibook would be the place where development of the Wikibook
takes place and a separate website is where approved parts of that would be
used by emergency medicine professionals.

-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free!
http://my.yahoo.com


from_name: Paris Lovett

subject:
[Foundation-l] Emergency Medicine Wikibook: seeking programmers and
	doctors, nurses, paramedics

body:
Dear Foundation List Members,

I'm writing to let everybody know more about the proposed Emergency Medicine
Wikibook. I've met with board members and it seems at the present time that
our main challenge is finding interested programmers to create templates and
a special registration screen. The open-source Wikibook model is a strong
fit with the rapidly changing and incredibly broad field of Emergency
Medicine. Traditional textbooks simply can't cover all the little things
which walk into an Emergency Room, everything from broken toes, to heart
attacks and strokes, to stabbings and shootings. Please contact me if you
want to be part of this, particularly if you're a Wiki programmer or
Emergency doc or nurse or paramedic. All the details are below. Thanks,

Paris Lovett
"You must believe in free will; there is no choice."

-- Isaac Bashevis Singer
(1904-1991)

-------------------------------

Emergency Medicine Wikibook Proposal

Paris Lovett

paris at pazzah.com

Executive Summary

1)    An open-source textbook of Emergency Medicine (EM)

2)    The specialty of EM applies to doctors working in Emergency
Departments and in Ambulance and Disaster services, known an Emergency
Physicians (EPs).

3)    EM focuses upon the first few hours of illness. The range of diseases
is extremely broad. However, EPs do not focus upon exhaustive diagnosis and
treatment. Rather they focus upon recognition and management of immediate
threats to life and body function.

4)    The EM Wikibook would share most core features of Wikimedia projects:
open-source collaborative structure, minimizing barriers to participation,
maximizing breadth of coverage and rapidly assimilating new areas of
research and interest

5)    The EM Wikibook would differ from other Wikimedia projects in a few
important ways:

a)    Authors/editors would be required to state their name and credentials
prior to contributing

b)    The structure of entries/pages in the EM Wikibook would follow a
structured template.

c)    References in the EM Wikibook, where possible, would link out to
PubMed/NLM

6)    Getting the EM Wikibook started requires some technical feature
enhancements, most importantly

a)    Registration screens for users, requiring medical credentials

b)    Creation of template

7)    The EM Wikibook poses certain unique concerns and risks

a)    The usual concerns of plagiarism, copyright infringement, vandalism,
edit wars

b)    Regarding accuracy of medical information, there are concerns about
legal liability

c)    Posting of Private Health Information (PHI) either accidentally, or
maliciously would also be a concern

Introduction

1)    Wikimedia is currently fostering the growth of a new set of
open-source information resources: online textbooks. These textbooks are
known as Wikibooks. There is no EM textbook currently in development.

How would the EM Wikibook differ from the Wikipedia and other Wikimedia
projects?

1)    Most significantly, authors would be required to state their name and
credentials. These would not be subject to verification routinely. However,
in problematic situations those sysops would be able to request verification
of identity and/or credentials and take corrective action for fraud or
vandalism.

2)    Templates would create a standardized format for discussion of
diseases, diagnosis and management. A provisional template structure is
shown below. Each subject would feature bullet summaries, table summaries,
followed by longer narrative sections, a list of current controversies, and
a large citation list. The citations/references would link out to PubMed and
other large public medical databases.

3)    Recruitment for an EM text would be aided by lines of communication
via CORDEM, EMED-L, SAEM, and special interest groups in ACEP and EMRA.

What is needed to get the EM Wikibook up and running?

1)    We need programmers! To get the EM Wikibook up and running we need to
create a registration screen and templates

2)    The registration screen is where users can type in their name and
medical credentials. This would follow a very similar pattern to eMedicine
(an online textbook of medicine), which has a registration screen with
drop-down menus covering all schools of medicine, dentistry, nursing, and
other health disciplines. These menus are non-proprietary, and the
information is public, so the menus could be ripped and modified.

3)    The templates would create standardized subheadings and places for
bullet summaries, and table summaries. Also, a majority of
references/citations could be quickly added by simply supplying a Unique
Identifier (UI). This creates an automatic link to medical references in
PubMed. For instance, the UI = 14525742 can be used in the following URL:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Ab
stract&list_uids=14525742

Special Concerns

1)    Posting of Private Health Information (PHI). It is conceivable that
physicians might accidentally or maliciously post images or text containing
identified PHI. The concerns would be for both the wellbeing of patients
whose PHI was thus distributed, and for any resultant liability. However,
there is an inherent barrier to malicious or accidental posting can always
be tracked back to the source, and in the USA the person posting the
information would be liable under federal HIPAA laws. Other countries have
similar laws covering illegal disclosure of health information. Wikimedia
would need to use its legal resources to draft appropriate terms and
conditions for contributors to protect both itself and any institution or
individuals with roles as founders or sponsors.

2)   Liability for Medical Information. Similarly, Wikimedia can create
appropriate terms and conditions to make clear to users that sponsoring
institutions and individuals "start the ball rolling" but offer no
guarantees on the content. The disclaimer would emphasize that the medical
information in the EM Wikibook cannot be guaranteed to be accurate, and is
not a replacement for consulting with a doctor.

Draft of the template structure:

Quick Summary

We need bullet points:

.         Like this

.         And this

.         And this

.         So that people can drop in and quickly grasp the essentials

And more bullet points:

.         Like this

.         And this

.         And this

.         So that people can make a series of quick points

Table Summaries

Organism

Other

Vomiting

Cramps

Pain

Tender

Diarrhea

Fever

Rotavirus

URI

+

+

Watery

Low

Norwalk

Abrupt; No URI

+

Watery

Low

Enteric Adeno

+

Watery

Low

ETEC

Abrupt

+

Watery

EHEC (0157:H7)

+

+

+

+

watery -> bloody

+/-

Shigella

+/-

+

Watery, green-

High

Salmonella

+

+

+

Watery, foul,

+

Campylobacter

headache, myalgia, malaise

+

+

+

loose

???

Yersinia

+

+

+

Profuse watery

+

Clostridium Perfringens

+

Watery

+/-

Clostridium Difficile

+

Watery, +/- bloody

+

Historical Aspects

Background

Definition

Pathophysiology / etiology

Epidemiology

Frequency

Risk factors

Morbidity and Mortality

ED Presentations

Diagnosis

Symptoms (with NPV AND PPV)

Signs (with NPV AND PPV)

Investigations (with NPV AND PPV)

Lab

Imaging

Bedside

Invasive

Other

Consultations

Differentials (and distinguishing features)

Complications

Therapy, with indications and evidence (WITH NNT OR SIMILAR)

    Prehospital

    ABCs

    Medication

    Procedures

Disposition

    Admission criteria

    Type of admission

    Discharge (criteria)

Follow-up (with timing)

Prognosis

Cost and impact of care

Patient Education Leaflet

EBM

Controversies and Consensus

Changes in practice

Pitfalls

Common questions on examinations

Citations (PubMed/NLM links)


subject: [Wikitech-l] Redirect to Category

body:
Is there a simple way to redirect to a category page?

(also I still have that annoying logo twitch which has been fixed on wikipedia)
Paul


from_name: David Monniaux

subject: [Wikitech-l] deluxe wikilinks

body:
I'd like the possibility of showing the intro paragraph of a linked
article when the mouse hovers over it.

How about something along the lines of:

http://quatramaran.ens.fr/~monniaux/wikilinks/pagea.html

Done exclusively with Javascript *without duplication of content* (read
the HTML sources).


from_name: Magnus Manske

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Liquid information?

body:
Hi,

there's an interesting toy called "Liquid information" under development
[1]. It takes the (sometimes already excessive) wiki linking a step
further by making *every* word a link (kind of).

Try the demo of the en.wikipedia home page "liquified" at [2]. Put the
mouse cursor over a non-linked word, and see a context menu pop up.

While in that demo it seems like overkill to me, maybe we could "borrow"
one or the other design element from it?

Magnus

[1] http://www.wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,66382,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_2
[2]
http://www.liquid.org/hyper3/hp3/HP3_Menu?url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2F


subject: [Wikitech-l] Redirect to Category

body:
#redirect[[:Category:Thanks]]

On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 12:15:10 -0800 (PST), Rich Holton
<rich_holton at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> --- "paul at immediart.com" <paul.youlten at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Is there a simple way to redirect to a category page?
>
> Create a normal redirect page, but put a colon before the word
> "category" in the link:
>
> #redirect [[:category:Martians]]
>
> This seems to work for me. Is this what you wanted?
>
> -Rich Holton
> en.wikipedia:User:Rholton
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Mail - 250MB free storage. Do more. Manage less.
> http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>

--
Tel: +44(0) 7814 517 807


from_name: Angela

subject: [Foundation-l] FOSDEM - chat

body:
[forwarding on behalf of oscar at wikipedia.be
cc. Wikinl-l at wikipedia.org, Wikifr-l at wikipedia.org]

dear all,

monday january 31 2005 20:00 CET, a chat session to prepare for the FOSDEM
wil be held at   irc://freenode.net/wikimedia.

all attending are invited to join for this chat session.

oscar

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/FOSDEM_2005


subject: [Foundation-l] FOSDEM - chat


subject: [Wikitech-l] Redirect to Category

body:
> > > Is there a simple way to redirect to a category page?

> > Create a normal redirect page, but put a colon before the word
> > "category" in the link:

This won't work. It will redirect to a page which contains the
category introduction text, but won't display any of the pages that
are in that category.

Compare http://www.wikicities.com/index.php/User:Angela/Category_redirect_test
and http://www.wikicities.com/index.php/Category:Help

Angela.


from_name: Guillaume Blanchard

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Wikiforum

body:
Hi all,
Thanks to Amgine, the Wikiforum extension is now testable 24/7 on his
server [1]. This extension was asked by many French users to replace (at
least partly) hand organized French Village Pump (the hell for those who
try to keep it legible!). In fact, the extension is really more "wiki"
than "forum". This is just a special page (special:forum) that maintain
a list of the latest edited pages into a new "thread" namespace.

Features:
- The X latest threads are fully included into the forum's page (20 on
the test server).
- The Y next threads are listed as links into the forum's page (30 on
the test server).
- All the threads are listed into "All pages" special page.
- Threads are created via a special page accessible from the forum's page.
- Threads pages are pure Wiki pages that can be moved, watched,
protected, categorized, etc. like all other pages.
- Mostly all the forum page rendering is done via CSS, so it can be
customized "per project" and "per user" (via personal CSS).
- Multilinguage interface: Actually English, French and Japanese, but
any other language can be added easily. Test server is set as English so
the interface is also in (bad) English.
- Only one SQL request.

I'll fix many small things, but I don't plane to code more advanced
features.
Any suggestions, proposals, opinions, criticisms are welcomed, but keep
in mind this is an extension designed to be independent to Mediawiki and
that more advance features (like get the creation date or the total
number of edits per thread) may really decrease performance.

As I said in introduction, the goal is to add it (at least) on French
Wikipedia as soon as developers agreed. So please check it!

Aoineko

[1] http://test-wikipedia.saewyc.net/index.php/Special:Forum

PS: I didn't put the last version on CVS because I'm rewriting CSS
elements in a more elegant way.


from_name: John Robinson

subject: [WikiEN-l] My rant

body:
I think you misunderstood my mailing; I think Christopher Mahan has a
legitimate gripe, which is not being addressed. Most of the "ranting"
goes on in the articles. It doesn't make for an encyclopedia.

-Hephaestos

>
>At 10:47 PM 1/24/2005 -0600, John Robinson wrote:
>>>I'm pissed, and I want to rant. (you've been warned)
>>
>>Welcome to the club. Wikipeida is no longer an encyclopedia, in my
>>view. It has devolved into simply another write-enabled website
>>where anyone with an opinion can have a rant.
>>
>>And that's sad.
>
>He didn't rant on Wikipedia, though, he ranted on a
>Wikipedia-related mailing list. While it may still be arguable
>whether it was appropriate to do so at least it doesn't affect
>Wikipedia itself in any way. User: pages come a little closer, but
>even in that case User: pages are quite well segregated from the
>encyclopedia content.


from_name: zero 0000

subject: [WikiEN-l] primary and secondary sources

body:
Following up on the recent discussion about citation and sources,
I'd like to make a few points in no particular order.

1. Some primary sources are too difficult for most editors to access.
    Examples include unpublished material in archives and old
    newspapers in foreign languages.  Other material is readily
    available - for example almost every university with a Law
    School or Political Science department will have the UN official
    records that I located recently.

2. Primary sources are not necessarily better than secondary sources.
    Many types of primary sources require experience and knowledge
    to interpret because they are written for people in the know and
    not for outsiders.  In this case a presentation and analysis of the
    material by a specialist who understands the context and knows
    about other relevant sources is to be preferred.  (Conversely,
    presentation of genuine primary material in a misleading fashion
    is taught in Propaganda 101.)

3. Many secondary sources are written by people whose purpose is
    to deceive their readers.  We Wikipedians did not invent the
    art of POV-pushing.  For every topic which provokes edit-wars
    in Wikipedia, there is an active information-war out there trying
to
    convince us of one or the other POV.

4. The combination of 2 and 3 is a catch-22.  We need the specialists
    but can we trust them?  There is no easy answer to this but some
    partial answers can be given.  One is that people who work for
    advocacy groups or governments are the least trustable.  Next
    least trustable are the "independent experts" the media like to
    consult.  The most trustable are academics; not the teachers you
    may have taken a course from, but those who publish their research
    in peer-reviewed journals and get cited by other such people.
    However, this only goes for academics writing on their own
    specialties.

5. Academic specialists have prejudices and political opinions too
    and there is no such thing as an unbiased secondary source.

6. The first rule of citation is to state the actual place you got the
    information from.  If you want to report on some document D
    you read about in book B, your first obligation is to name B.
    It is a sin to only name D unless you looked at D yourself.

7. If it is necessary to cite one of the less trustable sources (see
4),
    the source should be identified sufficiently to warn readers
    that the source may have a motivation in slanting the evidence.
    That is, say what organisation the source belongs to or what job
    they have which might influence their opinion.  However, it is
    not necessary to pass judgment on the source (say "member of
    the XYZ political party", not "member of the XYZ political party
    which some people claim to be a lot of racist scum").

8. Random web pages which make unsourced claims are not
    sources at all in my opinion and should be avoided altogether.

Zero.

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


from_name: Andres Baravalle

body:
Daniel Mayer wrote:
> --- Andres Baravalle <andres.baravalle at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I would need a suggestion on how to incorporate (if it is possible)
>> text from several wikipedia articles into a GPL software
>> (phpGrabComics). I would need to incorporate a few lines (3 to 12) in
>> many files. Basically I would like to include in pages as
>
> If all you are only going to use is the first paragraph or two, then that is
> fair use. However, and very stupidly, the FDL and the GPL are not compatible,
> making anything more than fair use unnecessarily difficult. For this reason
> (and a few others) the Debian project does not allow FDLd documentation.
>
> This, for example, prevents our developers from using FDLd MediaWiki
> documentation in MediaWiki. One way I have suggested to get around this is to
> include a separate SQL database with that documentation in it (the database
> itself, of course, would need to comply with the FDL). So far I haven't heard
> whether or not this would be legal and IANAL.

yes, I would need only the first 1-2 paragraphs.

I have sent a similar message to licensing at gnu.org and to I got exactly
the same suggestion of using an external file.

while this is feasible, it may make the structure of the program less
clear, so I think that rewording the text is my easier option.

thank you very much for your answer,
	Andres

____________

Andres Baravalle
http://www.baravalle.it

____________

Gli uomini d'azione sono poco pratici.
La stessa azione li allontana dalla loro meta.
         Paco Ignacio Taibo I


from_name: Shane Gilchrist Ó hEorpa

subject: [Wikipedia-l] sign.wikepedia.org?

body:
Everyone,

I'm new to this list so I do hope u don't mind me asking a na?ve question
here.

It is great to see that there are wikipedia's in spoken/written languages -
but being from a Northern Ireland Sign Language community myself, I wonder
if it is possible for Wikipedia to create

Sign.wikipedia.org

to imply that it is for national sign languages - the real beauty about
national sign language communities is that we tend to work together,
crossing the borders, encouraging the development in protection and support
for our national sign languages etc.

Is it possible?

Let me know,

Shane Gilchrist ? hEorpa


from_name: Anthere

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Liquid information?

body:
what about using to link projects together (for example, dictionary and
encyclopedia article ?)

ant

Magnus Manske a ?crit:
> Hi,
>
> there's an interesting toy called "Liquid information" under development
> [1]. It takes the (sometimes already excessive) wiki linking a step
> further by making *every* word a link (kind of).
>
> Try the demo of the en.wikipedia home page "liquified" at [2]. Put the
> mouse cursor over a non-linked word, and see a context menu pop up.
>
> While in that demo it seems like overkill to me, maybe we could "borrow"
> one or the other design element from it?
>
> Magnus
>
>
> [1] http://www.wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,66382,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_2
> [2]
> http://www.liquid.org/hyper3/hp3/HP3_Menu?url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2F


subject:
[Foundation-l] Re: Emergency Medicine Wikibook: seeking programmers
 and doctors, nurses, paramedics

body:
Hello,

I would like to give a precision.
Paris contacted Jimbo to talk to him about this proposal a while ago now.
We met Paris in New York, where we had the opportunity to discuss this
project around a set of beers :-)

In Paris mind, this project was not a wikibook, but rather a new
project, due to the differences he wished to be brought, both in terms
of templates, and in terms of registration.

After discussion, we agreed that this project could be part of wikibooks
rather than a new project.

We asked Paris that he send a full proposal to this mailing list, so
that everyone can grasp the implications and possibly join.

As for myself, I had not really understood what he meant by templates,
and now that I read the description, I do not think it is problematic.

A template model can be set by Paris himself (it must be defined before
starting the pages) and be used for all pages. We manage to do this for
Wikipedia for example in all country pages. Paris, see
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/France and
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikiproject_Countries to see what I mean.

However Paris has a point when he insists on "authority", since his area
is particularly technically and legally touchy.

Still, Paris, the strength of the wiki model is precisely that anyone
can edit. If only to help you set the template, or fix typos or do
categories etc...

I do think you can start the project without mandatory "creditials
request". And I think you can do it within wikibooks to start

Here is what I suggest

First, make it clear that there will be a dual population authorized to
edit these page
* the crowd, with no credentials given. This crowd might possibly be
autorized by "rules" (human rules rather than technical rules) not to
edit the medical content. You might request a sort of moral engagement
not to do so, and it is your business to enforce this. Of course, such a
rule should have to be approved by participants to this project

* some people with credentials. They would be adding the medical content
mostly. OR they would be the ones authorized to validate  it. You can
equally make a template for them to put on their pages, where they will
state all what you mentionned. You could make a special page to list all
of them, and display it proeminently on the main page of your book. You
could also make a rule so that these guys make a validation committee
and might have the right to "approve" article with a big stamp.

Aside from technical possibilities, you have a lot of power as a
*human*, through the strength of recommandations, through rules and
through enforcement. Actually, if the community editing the book agrees
with such guidelines and believe faithfully in its wiseness, it will be
more powerful than any technical fancy feature.

What you need "now" is not tech, what you need it people, many people,
some with credentials, some without, and build a community around it,
with its own local rules.

I understand the need for "stamp of approval", but it will be important
when there is "content". For now, there is no content. Build the
framework, animate the community, add the content, then, there will be
something to protect. The community will protect the content. And you
can then use your group of "credited" people to set a
validation/approval system which will please outside people.

Do you really think a "paper" encyclopedia is ONLY written by big
professors ????

No, I do not think so, there are people taking care of typo,
reorganising text to make it look better, working on displaying pictures
in a nicer way. The big professor just add quickly the content, let it
for others to organise it well, put their big names as a stamp of
approval somewhere, and then, they go to a conference.

Just do the same :-) And you'll see that will work fine.

What you need is human leader to get it started and serious work on
mission statement, guidelines and policies; That will work :-)

Anthere

Daniel Mayer a ?crit:
> --- Paris Lovett <paris at pazzah.com> wrote:
>
>>I'm writing to let everybody know more about the proposed Emergency Medicine
>>Wikibook.
>
>
> Emergency Medicine Wikibook - great idea. But you don't need permission to
> start such a thing, just go to http://en.wikibooks.org and get to work! :)
>
>
>>I've met with board members and it seems at the present time that
>>our main challenge is finding interested programmers to create templates and
>>a special registration screen.
>
>
> Registration system? I'm sorry but that is not the way we do things around
> here. We had one project called Nupedia that had a registration system and it
> was nearly a complete failure. Its only saving grace was that its looming
> downfall led to the creation to Wikipedia (whose initial purpose was to breathe
> life back into Nupedia - but that never happened and Wikipedia quickly became
> its own thing).
>
>
>>The open-source Wikibook model is a strong
>>fit with the rapidly changing and incredibly broad field of Emergency
>>Medicine. Traditional textbooks simply can't cover all the little things
>>which walk into an Emergency Room, everything from broken toes, to heart
>>attacks and strokes, to stabbings and shootings.
>
>
> This is all great and wonderful, but instead of having controls on what people
> do up front, why not have control on what is included in a published/static
> copy? The live Wikibook would be the place where development of the Wikibook
> takes place and a separate website is where approved parts of that would be
> used by emergency medicine professionals.
>
> -- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free!
> http://my.yahoo.com


from_name: Fred Bauder

body:
This is excellent, could you add this information in this vein to
Wikipedia:Cite sources?

Fred

> From: zero 0000 <nought_0000 at yahoo.com>
> Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 02:18:37 -0800 (PST)
> To: wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Subject: [WikiEN-l] primary and secondary sources
>
> Following up on the recent discussion about citation and sources,
> I'd like to make a few points in no particular order.
>
> 1. Some primary sources are too difficult for most editors to access.
> Examples include unpublished material in archives and old
> newspapers in foreign languages.  Other material is readily
> available - for example almost every university with a Law
> School or Political Science department will have the UN official
> records that I located recently.
>
> 2. Primary sources are not necessarily better than secondary sources.
> Many types of primary sources require experience and knowledge
> to interpret because they are written for people in the know and
> not for outsiders.  In this case a presentation and analysis of the
> material by a specialist who understands the context and knows
> about other relevant sources is to be preferred.  (Conversely,
> presentation of genuine primary material in a misleading fashion
> is taught in Propaganda 101.)
>
> 3. Many secondary sources are written by people whose purpose is
> to deceive their readers.  We Wikipedians did not invent the
> art of POV-pushing.  For every topic which provokes edit-wars
> in Wikipedia, there is an active information-war out there trying
> to
> convince us of one or the other POV.
>
> 4. The combination of 2 and 3 is a catch-22.  We need the specialists
> but can we trust them?  There is no easy answer to this but some
> partial answers can be given.  One is that people who work for
> advocacy groups or governments are the least trustable.  Next
> least trustable are the "independent experts" the media like to
> consult.  The most trustable are academics; not the teachers you
> may have taken a course from, but those who publish their research
> in peer-reviewed journals and get cited by other such people.
> However, this only goes for academics writing on their own
> specialties.
>
> 5. Academic specialists have prejudices and political opinions too
> and there is no such thing as an unbiased secondary source.
>
> 6. The first rule of citation is to state the actual place you got the
> information from.  If you want to report on some document D
> you read about in book B, your first obligation is to name B.
> It is a sin to only name D unless you looked at D yourself.
>
> 7. If it is necessary to cite one of the less trustable sources (see
> 4),
> the source should be identified sufficiently to warn readers
> that the source may have a motivation in slanting the evidence.
> That is, say what organisation the source belongs to or what job
> they have which might influence their opinion.  However, it is
> not necessary to pass judgment on the source (say "member of
> the XYZ political party", not "member of the XYZ political party
> which some people claim to be a lot of racist scum").
>
> 8. Random web pages which make unsourced claims are not
> sources at all in my opinion and should be avoided altogether.
>
> Zero.
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses.
> http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l


from_name: slimvirgin at gmail.com

body:
Zero, there's a discussion going on at Wikipedia talk:CIte sources
about how that page can be improved. Some editors there feel we should
not distinguish at all between types of sources, but should accept any
citation. Others feel we should distinguish, but disagree as to what
words we ought to use to describe a good source (reputable,
authoritative, credible: all are being discussed). There's a feeling
among some editors that we should discuss the difference between
primary and secondary: others feel we shouldn't get into it. My own
view is that all these issues should be thrashed out on that page,
because if the info isn't there, where else can editors expect to find
it? Any input from you would be much appreciated.

Slim

On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 02:18:37 -0800 (PST), zero 0000
<nought_0000 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Following up on the recent discussion about citation and sources,
> I'd like to make a few points in no particular order.


subject: [Wikitech-l] client-side search engine

body:
I'm proposing again my idea of a Java-based client-side search engine:

http://quatramaran.ens.fr/~monniaux/wikipedia_en/search_applet.html

(Need good JVM, NOT the old Microsoft VM.)

The index is downloaded by chunks, as needed by the client. There's some
caching.

[The index was generated 6 months ago from a database dumb. I'll remake
it once I get mysql working again.]

What do you think? If interested, I may implement full-text search.


from_name: Skriptor

subject: [Wikipedia-l] sign.wikepedia.org?

body:
> It is great to see that there are wikipedia's in spoken/written
> languages -
> but being from a Northern Ireland Sign Language community myself, I
> wonder
> if it is possible for Wikipedia to create
>
> Sign.wikipedia.org
>
> to imply that it is for national sign languages

Excuse my ignorance, but how do you write sign language? I was under
the impression that no common written form of sign language exists
(although I know of attempts to create a notification system, which is
however more like a dance notation language than a normal alphabet).

Skriptor
[[de:Benutzer:Skriptor]]


subject: [Wikitech-l] client-side search engine

body:
I actually feel I was not clear enough:
* at present, full text search for *words* is implemented
* however, full phrase/sentence search isn't.


subject: [Wikitech-l] deluxe wikilinks

body:
*David Gerard* (fun at thingy.apana.org.au) said:
 <mailto:wikitech-l%40wikimedia.org?Subject=%5BWikitech-l%5D%20deluxe%20wikilinks&In-Reply-To=41F6B935.5020302%40ens.fr>/
/> >/ How about something along the lines of:
/> >/ http://quatramaran.ens.fr/~monniaux/wikilinks/pagea.html <http://quatramaran.ens.fr/%7Emonniaux/wikilinks/pagea.html>
/> >/ Done exclusively with Javascript *without duplication of content* (read
/> >/ the HTML sources)./
> That's *nice*. How well does it work when you simulate 10-15 second
> response times, though?

Remark that the loaded sub-pages would be of the "anonymous" kind.

These, contrary to those generated for logged-in users, can be easily cached. We could
even specify that they expire only after a certain time (I suppose the leading paragraph
of an article does not change that often, in general, and that when it changes, people
can still live with seeing the old version in a pop-up). As far as I know, the main
problem, in the long run, is Apache/database load, not Squid load.


subject: [Wikitech-l] Redirect to Category

body:
[http://www.yourwikinamehere.org/wiki/index.php/Category:Thanks]

On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 17:14:38 -0800 (PST), Rich Holton
<rich_holton at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> --- Angela <beesley at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > Is there a simple way to redirect to a category page?
> >
> > > > Create a normal redirect page, but put a colon before the word
> > > > "category" in the link:
> >
> > This won't work. It will redirect to a page which contains the
> > category introduction text, but won't display any of the pages that
> > are in that category.
> >
> > Compare
> >
> http://www.wikicities.com/index.php/User:Angela/Category_redirect_test
> > and http://www.wikicities.com/index.php/Category:Help
>
> [[category:bumfoozled]]
>
> I never noticed!
>
> This is listed at Mediazilla as bug #710.
>
> Sorry for the bad info.
>
> Thanks, Angela, for setting the record straight.
>
> -Rich Holton
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>

--
Tel: +44(0) 7814 517 807


from_name: Ashar Voultoiz

subject:
[Wikitech-l] Re: phase3/includes SpecialMypage.php, NONE,
 1.1 SpecialMytalk.php,
 NONE, 1.1 SpecialMycontributions.php,   NONE, 1.1 SpecialPage.php, 1.29,
 1.30 SkinTemplate.php, 1.18, 1.19

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

Ashar Voultoiz wrote:
> Update of /cvsroot/wikipedia/phase3/includes In directory
> sc8-pr-cvs1.sourceforge.net:/tmp/cvs-serv13580/includes
>
> Modified Files: SpecialPage.php SkinTemplate.php Added Files:
> SpecialMypage.php SpecialMytalk.php SpecialMycontributions.php Log
> Message: Get ride of the username in links when user is logged in.
> Instead use special pages just like the already existent
> [[Special:Watchlist]]. That's one more step to get pages rendered for
> logged users cached.

Hello,

I forgot to add that the original idea for this patch comes from
innocence and posted by de:Duesentrieb on livejournal wikitech
  http://www.livejournal.com/community/wikitech/2943.html

cheers,

- --
Ashar Voultoiz - WP++++
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Hashar
http://www.livejournal.com/community/wikitech/
Servers in trouble ? noc (at) wikimedia (dot) org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFB92YxpmyHQ2O4INERAoMsAJ9oQw7KEKyaiBDa5/wnaKhLmicBJACfb3qA
zD5Ppycic5Q9zMPRqGLtklA=
=CVZT
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


from_name: Matt Brown

body:
I think a major fear (voiced or not) is that making the process seem
any more complicated will scare off J. Random Wiki Editor from citing
any sources at all.  I'm not sure how real this fear is.

It is definitely the case that we'd rather a bad cite than no cite.
Because at least, then, one can check the source out.  This is why
language of calling sources "acceptable" is possibly
counterproductive; it's not the CITE that's unacceptable, it's rather
that some sources are insufficiently accurate.

There's a distinction between "acceptable to mention" and "acceptable
as verification".   Even if one's source is not that solid, and thus
doesn't count as verification, it certainly should still be mentioned.
 Most articles are works in progress and thus will have gaps in
verifiability.  Mentioning one's current best source (even if a
possibly unreliable source) is still a good thing to do.

For example, I will use a random web site for a source, but I will
know that that source is only an "interim" one until I can find a
better one.

-Matt (User:Morven)


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Wikiforum

body:
Daniel Mayer wrote:

> --- Guillaume Blanchard <gblanchard at arcsy.co.jp> wrote:
>
>> As I said in introduction, the goal is to add it (at least) on French
>> Wikipedia as soon as developers agreed. So please check it!
>>
>> Aoineko
>>
>> [1] http://test-wikipedia.saewyc.net/index.php/Special:Forum
>
>
> Wow! Way neat. Is this also supposed to work on talk pages? If so,
> then the
> ability to edit above the thread list is absolutely needed (for various
> permanent messages and templates).
>
> -- mav

Hi mav,
Make the forum work with talk page (or any other namespace) is
effortless. For example, we can add the namespace number into the URL.
We can also easily add other option like maximum number of thread per
forum (less or equal setting maximum) and other stuffs, but this will
certainly break the cache system. I will add the content of
[[project_name:Forum]] page (if any) at the top of forum page. Thanks
for your good advice.

Aoineko

PS: Thread pages actually have theirs own talk page, but I will try to
remove them.


subject: [Wikitech-l] IDEA: Tagging capabilities

body:
David Gerard schrieb:

>Related to this, Magnus has some test code to do ratings. Magnus, how ready
>is that to be put into a live, busy Wikipedia?
>
>
Last time I checked, it worked. However, last time is some month ago...

Also, I doubt anyone else besides me ever worked on the code, so it is
probably full of first-version-by-single-person bugs.

OTOH, as it does not really interact with the rest of the system, other
than showing an additional "tab", worsed case shouldn't be so bad.

>I ask because, chatting with Jimbo about this, he suggested we switch on
>ratings and ... do nothing with the data. Just gather it for a month, not
>revealing it so as to minimise observer effect. Then reveal it for everyone
>to see what they think it tells them.
>
>What would it take for the article/version rating code to be switched on in
>en:? And exposed in the interface.
>
>
One will have to create a new table manually, and decide on a schema
(what properties can be tagged, how many grades per tag).

I strongly advice to test this on a demo site with the current 1.4
software, though. If only to check nothing's broken too badly.

Magnus


from_name: Daniel Mayer

subject: [Foundation-l] New project proposal: Trade Standard

body:
--- Erik Koopman <mail at erikkoopman.nl> wrote:
> Although its high aim is Trade Standard an internet platform very equal to
> Wikipedia. The only differences are: (1) focus on technical and ethical
> subjects, (2) equal layouts for all articles, including a chapter for
> "ethical, social and sustainable characteristics". And (3) the addition of
> registers to list the ethical characteristics of chemicals, products etc.

Wikipedia is not paper and WikiProjects are used to keep sets of articles in
the same format.

-- mav

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


body:
My flash on this is that it would make a great commercial project with
bigtime advertising potential. If we do this (before someone else snatches
it up we might use it to fund Wikipedia.

Fred

> From: "Erik Koopman" <mail at erikkoopman.nl>
> Reply-To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List <foundation-l at wikimedia.org>
> Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 18:45:30 +0100
> To: <foundation-l at wikimedia.org>
> Subject: [Foundation-l] New project proposal: Trade Standard
>
> Trade Standard is a project proposal for:
> (a) a public knowledge base for all information about goods, technology and
> (way of) trade to stimulate international development,
> (b) a public ethic standard and indicator to evaluate international trade
> and industry and
> (c) a public register to verify the ethic classification of goods,
> technology and trade.
>
> Although its high aim is Trade Standard an internet platform very equal to
> Wikipedia. The only differences are: (1) focus on technical and ethical
> subjects, (2) equal layouts for all articles, including a chapter for
> "ethical, social and sustainable characteristics". And (3) the addition of
> registers to list the ethical characteristics of chemicals, products etc.
>
> Trade Standard is a project with high potential that (a) stimulates
> international spread of free (technical) information, (b) connects
> technology with ethics and (c) offers a solution to upgrade today's very
> conservative, 'lowest standards'-oriented culture of international trade and
> industry.
>
> Please help me with this project, I am a designer of post-modern concepts
> not an software specialist or insider in wiki procedures.
>
> Read the whole project proposal at
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Trade_Standard
>
> Best regards,
>
> Erik Koopman
> NL
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


from_name: Tony Sidaway

subject: [Wikipedia-l] sign.wikepedia.org?

body:
Shane Gilchrist ? hEorpa said:
> Everyone,
>
> I'm new to this list so I do hope u don't mind me asking a na?ve
> question here.
>
> It is great to see that there are wikipedia's in spoken/written
> languages - but being from a Northern Ireland Sign Language community
> myself, I wonder if it is possible for Wikipedia to create
>
> Sign.wikipedia.org
>
> to imply that it is for national sign languages - the real beauty about
> national sign language communities is that we tend to work together,
> crossing the borders, encouraging the development in protection and
> support for our national sign languages etc.
>
> Is it possible?
>
> Let me know,

It sounds like an interesting idea.  Are there established computer
representations of any of the national sign languages?  Excuse my
ignorance.


from_name: Nicolas Weeger

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Wikiforum

body:
Many thanks for your great work, Aoineko!

*wonders who to bribe to have it installed fast on fr:*

Nicolas 'Ryo'


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Wikiforum

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

| I still working on an optional JS code to be able to hide thread's
| contents by default and make them appear when user click on a link/icon.

Did you try looking at the "extended recent changes" code? It does
exactly that. Maybe you can even reuse the JS!

Magnus
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFB93prCZKBJbEFcz0RAoQAAJ9dw7e3ieyIbbZBufwgZmHocTeIhgCeJlow
9ytQgg9mISldvyv7+fwnbNw=
=qsgh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


from_name: David Gerard

subject: [Wikitech-l] deluxe wikilinks

body:
David Monniaux (David.Monniaux at ens.fr) [050126 08:25]:

> I'd like the possibility of showing the intro paragraph of a linked
> article when the mouse hovers over it.
> How about something along the lines of:
> http://quatramaran.ens.fr/~monniaux/wikilinks/pagea.html
> Done exclusively with Javascript *without duplication of content* (read
> the HTML sources).

That's *nice*. How well does it work when you simulate 10-15 second
response times, though?

- d.


subject: [Wikitech-l] IDEA: Tagging capabilities

body:
David Wendt (dcrkid at optonline.net) [050126 08:27]:

> We should implement CVS-style tagging, where specific article revisions
> are 'tagged' so that the group of revisions with that tag can be called
> up instantly. This could be used for the push to 1.0 by having a tag for
> the 1.0 revisions.

Related to this, Magnus has some test code to do ratings. Magnus, how ready
is that to be put into a live, busy Wikipedia?

I ask because, chatting with Jimbo about this, he suggested we switch on
ratings and ... do nothing with the data. Just gather it for a month, not
revealing it so as to minimise observer effect. Then reveal it for everyone
to see what they think it tells them.

What would it take for the article/version rating code to be switched on in
en:? And exposed in the interface.

- d.


from_name: Frank v Waveren

subject: [Wikitech-l] Redirect to Category

body:
On Tue, Jan 25, 2005 at 05:14:38PM -0800, Rich Holton wrote:
> > This won't work. It will redirect to a page which contains the
> > category introduction text, but won't display any of the pages that
> > are in that category.
> >
> > Compare
> >
> http://www.wikicities.com/index.php/User:Angela/Category_redirect_test
> > and http://www.wikicities.com/index.php/Category:Help

Which makes it all the odder that cat:csd does work (I tried creating
c:csd a while back and found it didn't work). Probably something
hard-coded in?

--
Frank v Waveren                                      Fingerprint: BDD7 D61E
fvw@[var.cx|stack.nl] ICQ#10074100                      5D39 CF05 4BFC F57A
Public key: hkp://wwwkeys.pgp.net/468D62C8              FA00 7D51 468D 62C8

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20050126/276dd02e/attachment.pgp>


from_name: NSK

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Liquid information?

body:
On Tuesday 25 January 2005 23:36, Magnus Manske wrote:
> While in that demo it seems like overkill to me, maybe we could "borrow"
> one or the other design element from it?

This is part of my knowledge base concept :)

--
NSK
http://portal.wikinerds.org/freehosting


subject: [Wikitech-l] IDEA: Tagging capabilities

body:
On Tuesday 25 January 2005 23:31, David Wendt wrote:
> We should implement CVS-style tagging, where specific article revisions
> are 'tagged' so that the group of revisions with that tag can be called
> up instantly. This could be used for the push to 1.0 by having a tag for
> the 1.0 revisions.

I already tag versions in my wikiprojects, see
http://nerdypc.wikinerds.org/index.php/Help:Article_versions

--
NSK
http://portal.wikinerds.org/freehosting