subject: [WikiEN-l] Bowdlerpedia--go got it!

body:
Tony Sidaway (minorityreport at bluebottle.com) [050418 17:37]:
> Alex Regh said:

> > The problem therefore is, in my opinion, how we can find a way between
> > the need to inform (which does IMO include pictures) and a need to
> > remain accessible to as many people as possible.

> I have an idea.  Let's licence the material using the GFDL!  Then anybody
> who wants to make a bowdlerpedia can do so.

Or they can claim they do, like kids.net.au, and not actually do much work
in that direction!

- d.


list: wikien-l

source: pipermail-mbox

from_name: David Gerard

subject: [WikiEN-l] Links to porn sites

body:
Fred Bauder (fredbaud at ctelco.net) [050419 02:18]:

> I looked at one, the Mary Carey site. It is a commercial web site for sale
> of her wares, such as they are. I think she can buy advertising for that
> purpose and ought not to depend on an encyclopedia article. She is a notable
> figure, but links might be more appropriately to reports of her notable
> political activities such as running for governor of California rather than
> to her store. It's easy enough to google for it anyway.

Why remove this commercial page in particular, rather than any other
company page on Wikipedia? That is, this doesn't seem to be the criterion
commercial links are added or removed on for other articles, so this seems
a novel policy.

- d.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Links to porn sites

body:
Fred Bauder (fredbaud at ctelco.net) [050419 02:35]:
> From: David Gerard <fun at thingy.apana.org.au>

> > Why remove this commercial page in particular, rather than any other
> > company page on Wikipedia? That is, this doesn't seem to be the criterion
> > commercial links are added or removed on for other articles, so this seems
> > a novel policy.

> It is the Prurient content....

It's her *official home page*. Removing it would be ridiculous.

- d.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Links to porn sites

body:
Kevin Rector (krector at Compco.com) [050419 02:40]:

> I would think that we should be hesitant to link to any web sites (porn
> or otherwise) whose primary commodity is selling access or "memberships"
> to the website, and more liberal with links to other types of
> industries.

Possibly. But (1) it's an editorial judgement call and (2) the page is
clearly tagged [[Category:Porn stars]].

- d.


list: foundation-l

from_name: Delirium

subject: [Foundation-l] Comment on Copyright Orphans

body:
Ray Saintonge wrote:

> I agree with Anthere that we perhaps should submit something
> representing WMF, but it's hard to know what kind of official position
> we should take   In my own submission I certainly could not go so far
> as to state that I was representing the Foundation.  They were
> entirely my own opinions.  What points should we be makeing?

I was thinking about this a bit, and I'm not that sure it strongly
impacts us, especially in a way that's easy to convincingly explain.
The major thing Wikimedia is known for is Wikipedia, which really is
unlike most of what's been written in the past, whether in or out of
copyright.  Sure, we imported en masse some 1911 EB articles, but even
if all copyright disappeared entirely, the current revision of EB would
need substantial work to be turned into good Wikipedia articles.  I'm
not sure it would buy us that much over just getting some more writers.
And with images, we can either generally take images ourselves
(something that's happening increasingly often), or rely on fair use for
historically important images that are still under copyright.  There are
a few cases where asking for permission would be helpful, but in general
an orphaned work is no worse from our perspective than a work that's
non-orphaned but where a copyright holder simply refuses to grant us a
GFDL or CC license to it.  Wikisource probably suffers the most direct
impact, but again, orphaned works aren't a unique problem---copyrighted
but non-orphaned works are no better.

I get the impression that the case the copyright office is most
interested in is one that doesn't impact us at all: The case where
someone is willing to pay a copyright holder for a license to use their
work (e.g. for a film adaptation of a book), but cannot do so because
the copyright holder is unable to be located.

-Mark


list: wikimedia-l


list: wikipedia-l

from_name: Anthere

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: html emails

body:
Chad Perrin a ?crit:
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 12:45:54AM +0100, Cormac Lawler wrote:
>
>>On 4/18/05, Chad Perrin <perrin at apotheon.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Mon, Apr 18, 2005 at 09:41:58PM +0200, Anthere wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>When I say the majority, I was referring to those discussing the topic
>>>>on quarto list. Cormac, could you sent a sample of the last version of
>>>>the mail so that Chad can understand what I mean by "best to use html" ?
>>>>
>>>
>>>Is the group of people discussing it on the quarto list the sum total of
>>>people who will receive this email of which you speak?
>>>
>>
>>The email is proposed to be distributed on the newly-created
>>foundation-news-l mailing list, specifically set up for this purpose
>>(and possibly other announcements though this hasn't been fully
>>discussed). We've also thought about using it as a multilingual press
>>release.
>>
>>On multilinguality, is it any easier to display a multilingual message
>>in a plain text email? Or does this require the html solution? (This
>>is why html was proposed in the first place.)
>>
>
>
> short answer: Yes.
>
> slightly longer answer:  The language for which a given computer is set
> up is the language in which that computer is going to be most easily
> able to render text.  Thus, if you happen to be using an Arabic-language
> version of a given OS, it will display text as Arabic where that is the
> language in which the text is sent.  Unicode, after all, wasn't just
> designed for the Web.
>
> Now, granted, there are some languages that might suffer limitations in
> this area, but they'll tend to suffer the same limitations with
> displaying text in HTML as well.  After all, text is text: text in HTML
> uses the same mechanism as text outside of HTML, unless the text is
> actually rendered as a static image, which is another ball of wax
> entirely.
>
> --
> Chad Perrin
> [ CCD CopyWrite | http://ccd.apotheon.org ]

This has already been discussed in length for the main page of Wikipedia.
Displaying a certain content of text due to the language of the browser
is not a good solution. It is not a solution that we direct readers to a
*certain* type of quarto version depending on their browser settings.

Have you a solution for this ?

ant


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: html emails

body:
Mark Williamson a ?crit:
> I use Windows almost always, use M$ Office, and actually don't even
> have Linux installed on my system.
>
> I am by no measure a "Linux geek", and whatever geek I have in me is
> certainly not the type that effects my preferences on these sort of
> things, though I will admit that I tend to prefer notepad to wysiwyg
> editors for html.
>
> I don't know any programming languages save what QBasic I learned from
> my grandpa when I was 4 or 5, and HTML if that can be considered a
> programming language.
>
> Yet I still prefer plain text e-mails to HTML e-mails for most of the
> reasons that have already been stated.
>
> Anthere said that subscription is not mandatory, and that if you don't
> want an e-mail you don't want to subscribe.
>
> What about the people who DO want an e-mail, just not in HTML? Are we
> going to exclude them just because we have such high standards?

We will not exclude them. Anyone can also see the quarto out on most
project main pages and it is announced as well in mailing list.

What we are currently trying to do is to set up an additional system to
announce it.

> Does anybody even realise that HTML e-mails display very differently
> in different clients?
>
> Or that many people have turned support for HTML e-mails off because
> of 1-pixel images as described above and other malicious uses of HTML?
>
> Why not offer an option?

Are you ready to take care of the development on that topic ?

> Or even better, why not send people a plain-text e-mail with a LINK to
> an actual website with the newsletter?

Because we can not send A link. Depending on the language people talk,
they will choose amongst for example 15 different links.

> And I'm sorry, but "quarto" just sounds to me like an aborted attempt
> at a cartoon villain. When I say it it sounds like "court-o" or
> "cord-o". And really, I don't think it sounds nice. Why not just
> "quarterly report" like the rest of the world does?
>
> Mark

Because Wikipedia is not doing things like the rest of the world does.

ant


from_name: Sj

subject: [WikiEN-l] Titian, Titanic, and titillation

body:
Sometimes I think I continue to wade through the fountain of wikien-l
solely for these dpbs specials.

I must confess I am dying to know who is rummaging for what in the
background of that Titian.

SJ


from_name: Sean Barrett

subject:
[Wikipedia-l] Survey regarding email preference (was Re: html
	emails)

body:
> Oh, well, since it's more than 50% we can afford to just shoot and bury
> the remainder.  Okay.  No problem, then.

That's the position being taken on images; why would you expect it to
be different here?


subject: [Wikipedia-l] html emails

body:
Gerard Meijssen (gerard.meijssen at gmail.com) [050419 07:10]:

> Quarto is a production where much effort is spend on producing a nice
> layout, this is to present what we do as well as possible. Without HTML
> it does not make the same impact. When you want to see what it looks
> like you can find old versions in the final format. It really looks much
> better that the pre production stuff.

So make the email text and include a link to the HTML web page.

> It is nice that text has a high geek factor, HTML is for these purposes
> superior.

High geek factor? In my mail client HTML email shows as the HTML.

Perhaps you could encode the entire thing in Flash. Then it could be
animated as well and have a soundtrack. Surely that would be *far* superior
to mere HTML.

- d.


from_name: Charles Matthews

subject: [WikiEN-l] Intolerance directed towards poor English

body:
[[Japanese nationalism]] is very much in the news; anyone looking there now
will see a fairly comprehensive article, which is constantly being added to,
and would give a fair idea of why there is still an issue in East Asia.

A dozen days ago there was not much there (nothing pre-1945).  A great deal
has been added by an anon, who has introduced himself ([[User
talk:Asbestos]]), and clearly has a wide background in this area.  His
English is bad (he appears to be a Spanish-spaeker from Uruguay) and always
needs work.

My point is that I have had a devil of a job with this material, in the face
of some very blinkered attitudes from others:

*"It's machine translation".

No it isn't - too many typos for that.

*"It's incomprehensible".

No it isn't.

*"It's vandalism".

No it isn't. (That was from someone who has had an account for four days,
and who has already been given a barnstar. Please!)

*Reverts with no explanation.

This is bad behaviour, and likely to offend a good contributor.

I find this all reflects very badly on the culture of the English Wikipedia.
Few seem to have the time to puzzle out badly-expressed contributions.  To
extend the coverage to parts others find hard to reach we are going to ned,
not Heineken beer, but help from the widest possible range of editors.

Charles


from_name: Tony Sidaway

subject: [WikiEN-l] Tony

body:
Chad Perrin said:
>>
>
> Actually, while I agree that Tony's manner is sometimes unnecessarily
> abrasive,

For which I apologise.  My horror at what I regard as exceptionally poor
reasoning should not have caused me to be so cutting.
> he makes a good point: you've provided evidence of nothing
> substantive.  Your argument is based in the assumption that the entire
> self-described Christian demographic of this world would object to a
> given image, which is patently absurd.

Which is what I should have said.

The argument seems to be "the lurkers agree with me" taken to its ultimate
conclusion.


body:
> The whole Kate Winslet thread seems amazingly overwrought, because it's
>  such a _bad_ example of a potential problem. It's a bad example
> because  it combines the _maximum_ of gratuitiousness (it's not at all
> necessary  to select this particular scene to illustrate the movie)

It's not at all necessary to select any picture at all. It follows from
your reasoning above that all pictures are gratuitous.
> with the  _minimum_ of indecency. The indecency, if there is any at
> all, exists  only because we know, are told, or understand the context
> to be erotic,  not because of the actual pictorial content.

Why does eroticism imply indecency?

>
> It is at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Venus_of_Urbino.jpg
>
> Nobody seems to be complaining about it.

Well you've started them off for sure, now.  Anything else you want to add
to the prude shopping list?


body:
MacGyverMagic/Mgm wrote

> Would a simple explanation
on the talk page and a regular call to editors to clean up the user's
bad English in his contributions be enough? If it's cleaned up, no one
can complain about it.

It is hard to ring-fence the 'problem'.  New articles like [[Yen block]] and
[[yuan of Manchuria]] are being spun out all the time.

I can quite see why these cause puzzlement.  If you don't know the dialect
('poses' = 'possess' = 'have') it looks weird.  But if people used CleanUp
as intended it would be better.

Given Chinese-Japanese relations in their current state - well, I needn't go
on.

Charles


list: wikitech-l

from_name: MaPhi Werner

subject: [Wikitech-l] MediaWiki 1.4.1 released

body:
Brion,

what is the tag name in CVS for this one? The 1.3.X releases all have
been tagged, but I can't find a REL1_4_1 in the repository, unfortunately.

Thanks for your help & work,

MaPhi


from_name: MacGyverMagic/Mgm

body:
Well, the user introduced himself and seems knowledgeable, according
to someone I consider a veteran Wikipedian. Would a simple explanation
on the talk page and a regular call to editors to clean up the user's
bad English in his contributions be enough? If it's cleaned up, no one
can complain about it.

Unfortunately, a lot of people jump to conclusions. I guess the best
thing you can do is educate them using posts like this one.

-- Mgm

On 4/19/05, Charles Matthews <charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com> wrote:
> [[Japanese nationalism]] is very much in the news; anyone looking there now
> will see a fairly comprehensive article, which is constantly being added to,
> and would give a fair idea of why there is still an issue in East Asia.
>
> A dozen days ago there was not much there (nothing pre-1945).  A great deal
> has been added by an anon, who has introduced himself ([[User
> talk:Asbestos]]), and clearly has a wide background in this area.  His
> English is bad (he appears to be a Spanish-spaeker from Uruguay) and always
> needs work.
>
> My point is that I have had a devil of a job with this material, in the face
> of some very blinkered attitudes from others:
>
> *"It's machine translation".
>
> No it isn't - too many typos for that.
>
> *"It's incomprehensible".
>
> No it isn't.
>
> *"It's vandalism".
>
> No it isn't. (That was from someone who has had an account for four days,
> and who has already been given a barnstar. Please!)
>
> *Reverts with no explanation.
>
> This is bad behaviour, and likely to offend a good contributor.
>
> I find this all reflects very badly on the culture of the English Wikipedia.
> Few seem to have the time to puzzle out badly-expressed contributions.  To
> extend the coverage to parts others find hard to reach we are going to ned,
> not Heineken beer, but help from the widest possible range of editors.
>
> Charles
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: Arkady Rose

subject: [WikiEN-l] Prudishness and censorship

body:
BJ?rn Lindqvist wrote:

>>First the numbers thing. Of all the people worldwide, the vast majority would take offense at the Kate Winslet thing. This includes about a billion of Christians, hundreds of millions of Muslims and large numbers of other people who otherwise feel that it would be inappropriate. To force a liberal image policy on them effectively excludes these people from being informed by Wikipedia.
>>
>>
>
>Sorry bud, you are clueless and prejudiced. One of the most important
>rules of rhethorics is that you should not generalise about groups
>that may be present in the audience unless you are ABSOLUTELY SURE
>that you represent them. Are you absolutely sure that you speak for
>"billions of Christians, hundreds of mullions of Muslims"? Wouldn't it
>take just ONE Muslim or Christian to step forward and say "I don't
>take offense at the picture" for your argument to be completely
>torpedoed?
>
>
>
*duly steps forward and waves*
Hi. I'm Arkady and I'm a Catholic. I'm not offended by it at all.

-a

--
Imagination is just intelligence having fun.

--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.9.16 - Release Date: 18/04/2005


from_name: BJörn Lindqvist

subject: [WikiEN-l] Prudishness and censorship

body:
> First the numbers thing. Of all the people worldwide, the vast majority would take offense at the Kate Winslet thing. This includes about a billion of Christians, hundreds of millions of Muslims and large numbers of other people who otherwise feel that it would be inappropriate. To force a liberal image policy on them effectively excludes these people from being informed by Wikipedia.

Sorry bud, you are clueless and prejudiced. One of the most important
rules of rhethorics is that you should not generalise about groups
that may be present in the audience unless you are ABSOLUTELY SURE
that you represent them. Are you absolutely sure that you speak for
"billions of Christians, hundreds of mullions of Muslims"? Wouldn't it
take just ONE Muslim or Christian to step forward and say "I don't
take offense at the picture" for your argument to be completely
torpedoed?

--
mvh Bj?rn


from_name: Kevin Videll

subject: [WikiEN-l] ABC News plagiarises Wikipedia

body:
You're.... proud of being "plagirised" ?
Well... I guess if big media are using Wiki as a news source, that's
pretty cool (yea?)

On 4/19/05, Benhurmypal at aol.com <Benhurmypal at aol.com> wrote:
> Stated live on air:
>
> "Ratzinger has repeatedly stated he would like to retire to a Bavarian
> village and dedicate himself to writing books, but more recently, he told  friends
> he was ready to 'accept any charge God placed on him.'"
>
> Good job, everyone!
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: Gregory Maxwell

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Encarta goes wiki - sort of...

body:
On 4/19/05, Sj <2.718281828 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Indeed.  Some basic social-software features that let users describe
> themselves and set up networks of friends and project-collaborators,
> and let others view those connections, would actually have a *purpose*
> on a project like Wikipedia, just as the social aspects of wiki come
> to have a real purpose beyond social experimenting and
> procrastination.

Perhaps we could setup a section of the site where each user could
write about themselves, perhaps their hobbies or profession, maybe
even include a picture... In this space they could create subpages,
and hyperlinks going to other users they know or work with.. the
ability to socially network.. areas for discussing various special
interests, information about projects they are working on.... Hmmmmm..
Nah, it would never work. ;)


subject: [WikiEN-l] Prudishness and censorship

body:
Arkady Rose said:
> BJ?rn Lindqvist wrote:
>
>>To force a liberal image policy on them effectively
>>>excludes these people from being informed by Wikipedia.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Wouldn't it take just ONE
>>Muslim or Christian to step forward and say "I don't take offense at
>>the picture" for your argument to be completely
>>torpedoed?
>>
>>
>>
> *duly steps forward and waves*
> Hi. I'm Arkady and I'm a Catholic. I'm not offended by it at all.
>

I think it should also be recognised that there's another canard here: the
idea that those people who think an image isn't appropriate in a certain
article are being "excluded from being informed". Even if it were true
that everybody was forced to look at a picture they didn't want to see,
the textual content itself is GFDL and, if it's as heinously adorned with
filth as some seem to think, someone will pop along sooner or later and
provide a bowdlerized mirror service.  That's what free content means.


body:
Sj said:
> Sometimes I think I continue to wade through the fountain of wikien-l
> solely for these dpbs specials.
>
> I must confess I am dying to know who is rummaging for what in the
> background of that Titian.

I remember wondering about that when I first saw it, in my trusty ole
1950s Britannica.  It's basically a composition, so the nude and clothed
figures and their different attitudes contrast.  And, of course, titillate
in a manner that struck Mr Clemens as "a trifle too strong for any place
but a public art gallery."
Or, mutatis mutandis, a public encyclopedia.


from_name: Mark Williamson

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: html emails

body:
Anthere, I propose that those of us who can write messages bilingually
if time allows.
Anthere?????????????r?????????????????????Z?????????????????????Z?????????`??????????????????????

Mark

On 19/04/05, Anthere <anthere9 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
> Gregory Maxwell a ??crit:
> > On 4/18/05, Anthere <anthere9 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >>yo. I think most of us would prefer it to be in html... for quite a
> >>number of reason (such as links).
> >
> >
> > HTML mails would make me unsub, perhaps that wouldn't be universally bad. :)
>
> I did not understand what unsub means.
>
> > As far as links go, your MUA should see them and make them clickable
> > even without html mail, I'm sure someone here can make some
> > recommendations for your platform...
>
> I have no idea what MUA means.
>
>
> > Hmm.. Inline images might have been useful in our discussions about
> > sexual images on wikipedia, I suppose... :)
>
> I can't figure what you mean.
>
> If I may dare say... this mailing list is international. It would be
> helpful if people made an effort so as to be understandable to more people.
>
> It is a general comment, not limited to you only. Maybe I am a bit
> stupid these days.
>
> Ant
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>

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


body:
> "Ratzinger has repeatedly stated he would like to retire to a Bavarian
> village and dedicate himself to writing books, but more recently, he told  friends
> he was ready to 'accept any charge God placed on him.'"

No history, no link-back?  How dare they!


from_name: Rick

subject: [WikiEN-l] Links to porn sites

body:
--- Fred Bauder <fredbaud at ctelco.net> wrote:
> It is the Prurient content....
>
> Fred

So what?

RickK

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Plan great trips with Yahoo! Travel: Now over 17,000 guides!
http://travel.yahoo.com/p-travelguide


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: html emails

in_reply_to:
<849f98ed050419112527c33a47@mail.gmail.com> (message from Mark
	Williamson on Tue, 19 Apr 2005 11:25:44 -0700)

body:
Won't someone think of the irony?!?

> --===============1487630956==
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=GB2312
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
> Content-Disposition: inline
>
> QW50aGVyZSwgSSBwcm9wb3NlIHRoYXQgdGhvc2Ugb2YgdXMgd2hvIGNhbiB3cml0ZSBtZXNzYWdl
> cyBiaWxpbmd1YWxseQppZiB0aW1lIGFsbG93cy4KQW50aGVyZaGiv8nE3KTHpKKk65VyoaLLvaS/
> pMGkztbQpM62/qX2ufrVWqTylfiksaTryMuhqaSstv6l9rn61VqkzqXhpcOlu6lgpbik8pX4pK+k
> yMzhsLikt6TepLmhowoKTWFyawoKT24gMTkvMDQvMDUsIEFudGhlcmUgPGFudGhlcmU5QHlhaG9v
> LmNvbT4gd3JvdGU6Cj4gCj4gCj4gR3JlZ29yeSBNYXh3ZWxsIGEgqKZjcml0Ogo+ID4gT24gNC8x
> OC8wNSwgQW50aGVyZSA8YW50aGVyZTlAeWFob28uY29tPiB3cm90ZToKPiA+Cj4gPj55by4gSSB0
> aGluayBtb3N0IG9mIHVzIHdvdWxkIHByZWZlciBpdCB0byBiZSBpbiBodG1sLi4uIGZvciBxdWl0
> ZSBhCj4gPj5udW1iZXIgb2YgcmVhc29uIChzdWNoIGFzIGxpbmtzKS4KPiA+Cj4gPgo+ID4gSFRN
> TCBtYWlscyB3b3VsZCBtYWtlIG1lIHVuc3ViLCBwZXJoYXBzIHRoYXQgd291bGRuJ3QgYmUgdW5p
> dmVyc2FsbHkgYmFkLiA6KQo+IAo+IEkgZGlkIG5vdCB1bmRlcnN0YW5kIHdoYXQgdW5zdWIgbWVh
> bnMuCj4gCj4gPiBBcyBmYXIgYXMgbGlua3MgZ28sIHlvdXIgTVVBIHNob3VsZCBzZWUgdGhlbSBh
> bmQgbWFrZSB0aGVtIGNsaWNrYWJsZQo+ID4gZXZlbiB3aXRob3V0IGh0bWwgbWFpbCwgSSdtIHN1
> cmUgc29tZW9uZSBoZXJlIGNhbiBtYWtlIHNvbWUKPiA+IHJlY29tbWVuZGF0aW9ucyBmb3IgeW91
> ciBwbGF0Zm9ybS4uLgo+IAo+IEkgaGF2ZSBubyBpZGVhIHdoYXQgTVVBIG1lYW5zLgo+IAo+IAo+
> ID4gSG1tLi4gSW5saW5lIGltYWdlcyBtaWdodCBoYXZlIGJlZW4gdXNlZnVsIGluIG91ciBkaXNj
> dXNzaW9ucyBhYm91dAo+ID4gc2V4dWFsIGltYWdlcyBvbiB3aWtpcGVkaWEsIEkgc3VwcG9zZS4u
> LiA6KQo+IAo+IEkgY2FuJ3QgZmlndXJlIHdoYXQgeW91IG1lYW4uCj4gCj4gSWYgSSBtYXkgZGFy
> ZSBzYXkuLi4gdGhpcyBtYWlsaW5nIGxpc3QgaXMgaW50ZXJuYXRpb25hbC4gSXQgd291bGQgYmUK
> PiBoZWxwZnVsIGlmIHBlb3BsZSBtYWRlIGFuIGVmZm9ydCBzbyBhcyB0byBiZSB1bmRlcnN0YW5k
> YWJsZSB0byBtb3JlIHBlb3BsZS4KPiAKPiBJdCBpcyBhIGdlbmVyYWwgY29tbWVudCwgbm90IGxp
> bWl0ZWQgdG8geW91IG9ubHkuIE1heWJlIEkgYW0gYSBiaXQKPiBzdHVwaWQgdGhlc2UgZGF5cy4K
> PiAKPiBBbnQKPiAKPiAKPiBfX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f
> X19fX19fXwo+IFdpa2lwZWRpYS1sIG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdAo+IFdpa2lwZWRpYS1sQFdpa2ltZWRp
> YS5vcmcKPiBodHRwOi8vbWFpbC53aWtpcGVkaWEub3JnL21haWxtYW4vbGlzdGluZm8vd2lraXBl
> ZGlhLWwKPiAKCgotLSAKU0kgSE9DIExFR0VSRSBTQ0lTIE5JTUlWTSBFUlZESVRJT05JUyBIQUJF
> UwpRVkFOVFZNIE1BVEVSSUFFIE1BVEVSSUVUVlIgTUFSTU9UQSBNT05BWCBTSSBNQVJNT1RBIE1P
> TkFYIE1BVEVSSUFNClBPU1NJVCBNQVRFUklBUkkKRVNUTkUgVk9MVk1FTiBJTiBUT0dBIEFOIFNP
> TFZNIFRJQkkgTElCRVQgTUUgVklERVJFCg==
>
> --===============1487630956==
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> Content-Disposition: inline
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>
> --===============1487630956==--
>


subject: [WikiEN-l] Links to porn sites

body:
--- Kevin Rector <krector at Compco.com> wrote:
> I would agree with Tony with a caveat. For a sports
> related link you can
> often get a lot of information. For instance if you
> go to
> www.nashvillepredators.com you can get significant
> information about the
> team (for instance you can get the box scores for
> every game the team
> has ever played). This information is all freely
> available to anyone who
> wants it. However, -most- adult oriented sites
> simply exist to take your
> money and show you porn.
>
> I would submit that there is a different level of
> "commerciality"
> involved between the average porn site and the
> average non-porn
> corporate site since the primary commodity of the
> porn site is the porn
> site itself.
>
> I would think that we should be hesitant to link to
> any web sites (porn
> or otherwise) whose primary commodity is selling
> access or "memberships"
> to the website, and more liberal with links to other
> types of
> industries.
>
> -Kevin

Of course you would.  You're offended by the image of
one blurry breast.  A porn site would certainly offend
you.  I'm surprised your head didn't explode.

But if we are going to allow articles on porn stars,
and it would be a BIG fight if such a thing were
suggested, then we should allow links to their pages
and to fan pages, just as we do to any other actor,
sports figure, or human being.

RickK

__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail Mobile
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Check email on your mobile phone.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/learn/mail


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: html emails

body:
On 4/18/05, Anthere <anthere9 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> yo. I think most of us would prefer it to be in html... for quite a
> number of reason (such as links).

HTML mails would make me unsub, perhaps that wouldn't be universally bad. :)

As far as links go, your MUA should see them and make them clickable
even without html mail, I'm sure someone here can make some
recommendations for your platform...

Hmm.. Inline images might have been useful in our discussions about
sexual images on wikipedia, I suppose... :)


from_name: Poor, Edmund W

subject:
[WikiEN-l] I'll take care of it (was: Intolerance directed towards
	poor English)

body:
> > Would a simple explanation
> on the talk page and a regular call to editors to clean up
> the user's bad English in his contributions be enough? If
> it's cleaned up, no one can complain about it.
>
> It is hard to ring-fence the 'problem'.  New articles like
> [[Yen block]] and
> [[yuan of Manchuria]] are being spun out all the time.
>
> I can quite see why these cause puzzlement.  If you don't
> know the dialect
> ('poses' = 'possess' = 'have') it looks weird.  But if people
> used CleanUp
> as intended it would be better.

I'm willing to clean up any "poor English" articles you send my way.
Just paste a link at [[user talk:Ed Poor]]. (The other day, I criticized
a Korean elder in my church for his broken English, and I need to do
penance!)

Ed Poor


subject: [WikiEN-l] Links to porn sites

body:
--- Kevin Rector <krector at Compco.com> wrote:
> Yeah, to be clear, I'm making no comment on the
> "goodness" or "badness"
> of the article it's content or anything at all to do
> with the article in
> question, but the topic of linking to "commercial"
> sites.
>
> -Kevin

Right.

RickK

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Plan great trips with Yahoo! Travel: Now over 17,000 guides!
http://travel.yahoo.com/p-travelguide


subject: [WikiEN-l] Plea for civility (was: Prudishness and censorship)

body:
BJ?rn Lindqvist told somebody:
> ... you are clueless and prejudiced. One of the most
> important rules of rhethorics is that you should not
> generalise about groups that may be present in the audience
> unless you are ABSOLUTELY SURE that you represent them.

Ahem. One of the most important rules of mailing list
discussions is that you should not insult other participants
in the discussion. Let's all avoid rhetoric like "clueless"
or "prejudiced" when describing one another; or, better, try
not to make *any* personal remarks at all.

Thank you.

Ed Poor
Former Mailing List Admin
Wikipedia Bureaucrat
(and general pain in the neck ;-)


subject: [WikiEN-l] Links to porn sites

body:
--- Kevin Rector <krector at Compco.com> wrote:
> Right, I hate McDonalds and wish they'd go bankrupt
> (not likely).
> However, the McDonalds website does provide (at
> least the US version)
> "nutrition" information as well as other
> information. The website isn't
> the company's primary commodity, that's all I'm
> saying. I'm pretty sure
> we're agreeing on this one.
>
> -Kevin

Nope, sorry, just more poorly-disguised censorship.

RickK

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


subject:
[WikiEN-l] The horror of it all (was: Suggestions for a work-safe
	encyclopedia)

body:
--- Tony Sidaway <minorityreport at bluebottle.com>
wrote:
> Poor, Edmund W said:
>
> >
> > If your friend or co-worker was on a diet (perhaps
> for medical
> > reasons), how often would you amuse yourself by
> teasing him, "Hey,
> > Billy, want some ice cream? It's chocolate, yer
> favorite!" Knock it
> > off, will ya?
>
> This seems a very strange line of argument.  Are you
> comparing Ms Winslet
> to a large dollop of ice cream?  Who is this person
> on a diet?  Should I
> perhaps stop consuming food in public, lest I entice
> someone else to
> over-eat?  How about those horror movies I was
> chatting about?  It doesn't
> bear thinking about, does it?  What kind of appetite
> would *they* incite?

And by the same reasoning, we should remove all images
of animals, so as not to tempt the people who are
trying to overcome their bestiality.  And the images
of people, so as not to tempt those who are trying to
avoid the voices in their heads which are telling them
to murder people.

RickK

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


from_name: Cormac Lawler

subject: [Wikipedia-l] html emails

body:
On 4/19/05, Alphax <alphasigmax at gmail.com> wrote:
> Chad Perrin wrote:
>
> > [snip]
> >
> >If you really want the thing to look nice and be inaccessible to many,
> >perhaps you should distribute it as a PDF attachment instead of an HTML
> >email.  The preferred reaction to finding out that some people don't
> >like HTML cluttering up their inboxes, though, might simply be to
> >provide an option for either text or HTML at subscription time.  That
> >way, people get what they want, rather than getting the entire HTML
> >layout when all they want is information.
> >
> >
> Agreed. PDF is universal, pretty, and can have links in it - which is
> why someone wanted it in HTML in the first place.
>

First of all, there seems to be misunderstanding about the content of
this html email. It is not meant to be a full replica of the quarto,
ie every page designed etc, but simply a pleasant layout of
multilingual links to those already designed pages on the foundation
wiki or meta. It would direct the person to the release message in
their language (in the mail) and from here to the actual web version.
There are also links at the side panel to these pages.

Secondly, if there is a way of multiparting this message with text and
html - great! Let's do it. (How?)

Thirdly, that one pixel image used by spammers is surely inserted into
the email by the spammers, no? I mean, we're not going to be doing
that, right?

Finally, the PDF solution would be elegant, and could be used for the
print version. One problem is that apparently we can't host that
version on meta (as it's a proprietary format) and also, we would have
to wait until the various versions are fully translated before we did
this. But more fundamentally, we'd need someone to do it.

So, any volunteers to a) help me design this html email with
multiparted text version or b) do some PDF versioning? I'm looking for
solutions - not trying to ram a html email down anyone's throat.

Thanks
Cormac


from_name: Hemali Majithia

subject: [Wikitech-l] Help - download wikipedia database

body:
Hi,

I want to download the english wikipedia database and further process the
data. The sql dump is approx 30G in compressed format. Currently I have
setup MYSQL to import small database dumps in other languages. What is the
best and quickest approach to import the english database to MySQL? My
understanding is that I will have to download all compressed files from
http://download.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/ and cat them, so I can gunzip
them in order to import them to MySQL. Can I import subsets of the
databases without downloading all the dumps? If so, where can I find these
files ?

Is there any other ultility to convert the sql dumps to html apart from
wiki2static.pl script?

I am a new user and any help or advise will be very useful.

Thanks,
-Hemali


subject: [Wikipedia-l] html emails

body:
Cormac Lawler said:
> Secondly, if there is a way of multiparting this message with text and
> html - great! Let's do it. (How?)

Not sure, but I suspect that some mailers, such as Outlook, may do this by
default.

>
> Thirdly, that one pixel image used by spammers is surely inserted into
> the email by the spammers, no? I mean, we're not going to be doing
> that, right?

Absolutely not. But it's a good reason not to interpret html emails if it
is  feasible to ignore them (for instance, they're definitely not from
your boss, a client, or your mother) or read a text alternative.  Spammers
often send html-only because if you read the text version they don't get
any feedback.


from_name: Ray Saintonge

body:
Delirium wrote:

> Ray Saintonge wrote:
>
>> I agree with Anthere that we perhaps should submit something
>> representing WMF, but it's hard to know what kind of official
>> position we should take   In my own submission I certainly could not
>> go so far as to state that I was representing the Foundation.  They
>> were entirely my own opinions.  What points should we be makeing?
>
> I was thinking about this a bit, and I'm not that sure it strongly
> impacts us, especially in a way that's easy to convincingly explain.
> The major thing Wikimedia is known for is Wikipedia, which really is
> unlike most of what's been written in the past, whether in or out of
> copyright.  Sure, we imported en masse some 1911 EB articles, but even
> if all copyright disappeared entirely, the current revision of EB
> would need substantial work to be turned into good Wikipedia
> articles.  I'm not sure it would buy us that much over just getting
> some more writers.  And with images, we can either generally take
> images ourselves (something that's happening increasingly often), or
> rely on fair use for historically important images that are still
> under copyright.  There are a few cases where asking for permission
> would be helpful, but in general an orphaned work is no worse from our
> perspective than a work that's non-orphaned but where a copyright
> holder simply refuses to grant us a GFDL or CC license to it.
> Wikisource probably suffers the most direct impact, but again,
> orphaned works aren't a unique problem---copyrighted but non-orphaned
> works are no better.
>
> I get the impression that the case the copyright office is most
> interested in is one that doesn't impact us at all: The case where
> someone is willing to pay a copyright holder for a license to use
> their work (e.g. for a film adaptation of a book), but cannot do so
> because the copyright holder is unable to be located.

We can't afford to be short-sighted in determining how this affects us,
and I don't see ease of explanation as a significant criterion.  It's
clear that the effect of these issues is most direct and immediate on
Wikisource, but this does not prevent the issue from coming up
elsewhere.  In Wikipedia we still require original writing at the same
time as we reject original research.  Fair use is barely tolerated, and
even though taking our own images is often a possibility this is, as you
acknowledge, not an available option for historical photographs.  We
could probably invoke fair use to a greater extent than has been the
case, but a more specific and objective set of criteria that could be
applied _before_ we consider fair use would make life much easier for
our editors.

I'm less worried about copyright holders who refuse to give permission,
than about ones whom we can't find at all.  With a refusal you have the
benefit of knowing where that person stands, and if the refusal is based
on wanting to keep the material away from the public eye the fair use
argument that publishing would not affect the market for the work
becomes much stronger.  With orphan works the copyright holders would
probably often be delighted to have the work published if you can ever
find them to ask.  Many descendants have no clue that their ancestor
ever wrote anything.  The uncertainty is the big problem.

We had a discussion recently about whether a person had the right to
give his work into the public domain.  I think that the argument against
doing this was unsound, but the question does come up.  A recurring
problem lies in whether a person di in fact put his work in the public
domain.  The issue has come up in regards to "The Man Who Planted
Trees", and whether a letter by the author was sufficient evidence that
he had done so.  It would be nice to have a central registry for public
licences of various sorts or for grants into the public domain.  As one
of my more adventurous ideas I would even suggest a charitable donation
deduction on one's taxes for giving a work into the public domain. 8-)
That could bring a lot of orphan works out of obscurity.

I don't think that I would impugn the same motives on the copyright
office that you do.  If anything Sonny Bono's efforts brought the
copyright pendulum to the extreme end of its swing, and far enough there
to make more people notice that it had gone too far.  The Copyright
Office is in position to receive a lot of complaints about the present
situation at a time when it can do little about it.  Many of these
complaints may be in the form of letters by constituents to their
congressman that have been referred for explanation.  I'm sure they
would appreciate having that job made easier.  Never underestimate the
power of rural little old ladies who just want to update the history of
their local community only to be thwarted by a bureaucracy that prevents
them from using the material of a neighbour who died childless thirty
years ago.  They know he's dead because they attended the funeral.

Ec


subject: [WikiEN-l] Prudishness and censorship

body:
--- jfdwolff at doctors.org.uk wrote:
> Avoiding these images, or having a Preferences key
> to prevent their display, is NOT censorship. It is
> part of achieving the goal of Wikipedia, as I have
> argued above. It is also not a violation of NPOV, as
> an image is not a POV. It is being plain sensible,
> sensitive and broad-minded.

I love how those who are trying to censor Wikipeida
are calling THEMSELVES broad-minded.

And they continue to fail to address where the line is
drawn.  The author contends that we should cater to
the millions of people worldwide who would be offended
by Ms. Winslet's blurry breast, but makes no
suggestion to remove all images of women's faces,
which would obviously offend our Muslim readers.  Or
the images of the massacre of Nanking, or the image of
the naked girl running from napalm.  Or the image of a
man with a gun to his head.  Or the image of Rachel
Corrie about to be mowed down by a bulldozer.

RickK

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Plan great trips with Yahoo! Travel: Now over 17,000 guides!
http://travel.yahoo.com/p-travelguide


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: html emails

body:
????? Cormac,

The way to do it is, copy the Unicode text, and then place it into gmail.

Gmail does after all support utf8 in outgoing messages.

(thus the Gothic text inthe first line of this e-mail)

Mark

On 19/04/05, Cormac Lawler <cormaggio at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 4/19/05, Yann Forget <yann at forget-me.net> wrote:
> > Le Tuesday 19 April 2005 20:27, Cormac Lawler a ?crit :
> > > Ok, the main point of the proposed html mail is that it is
> > > multilingual. If you can convince me that a mail I (or whoever)
> > > send(s) will display in the appropriate language for a Japanese or
> > > Czech or Spanish viewer, I am almost sold.
> >
> > No problem:
> >
> > cs: Wikimedia Quarto je ofici?ln? bulletin nadace Wikimedia.
> >
> > de: Wikimedia Quarto ist der offizielle Newsletter der Wikimedia Foundation.
> >
> > en: The Wikimedia Quarto is the official newsletter of Wikimedia Foundation.
> >
> > es: Wikimedia Quarto es el bolet?n oficial de la Fundaci?n Wikimedia.
> >
> > fr: Wikimedia Quarto est la lettre d'informations officielle de Wikimedia
> > Foundation.
> >
> > it: Wikimedia Quarto ? la newsletter ufficiale della fondazione Wikimedia.
> >
> > ja: Wikimedia Quarto ?????????????????????2??
> >
> > pl: Wikimedia Quarto to oficjalny biuletyn Fundacji Wikimedia.
> >
> > pt: Wikimedia Quarto ? o boletim oficial da Funda??o Wikimedia.
> >
> > > Cormac
> >
> > Regards,
> > Yann
> > --
> > http://www.non-violence.org/ | Site collaboratif sur la non-violence
> > http://www.forget-me.net/ | Alternatives sur le Net
> > http://fr.wikipedia.org/ | Encyclop?die libre
> > http://www.forget-me.net/pro/ | Formations et services Linux
> >
>
> Thanks very much Yann and Mark - how exactly did you do this? I had
> more or less understood Chad originally, but when i tried doing as i
> said above, it didn't work in either of my mail clients, yahoo and
> gmail. Also, I still want to know why Anthere said this was a bad
> solution - I didn't really understand either.
> Cormac
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>
>
>

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


from_name: Neil Harris

subject:
[Wikitech-l] vandalism under similar name, and the gnashing of
	teeth

body:
E23 wrote:

>Shouldn't be a problem, MediaWiki is smart enough to tell the names
>apart if you click "block" after the name in RC. Also, if in doubt,
>why not make a short block just to see how it works?
>
>/E23
>
>On 4/19/05, Anthere anthere9-at-yahoo.com wrote:
>
>
>>A request came to me from lb wikipedia.
>>
>>The "good" user is this one :
>>http://lb.wikipedia.org/wiki/User%3ACornischong
>>
>>The "bad" user is this one :
>>http://lb.wikipedia.org/wiki/User%3ACorni%C2%ADschong
>>
>>In recent changes, they both appear as Cornischong. But the vandal is in
>>reality Corni-schong
>>
>>Cornischong is an admin on this wiki, he does not dare blocking the
>>other Cornischong by fear he will be blocked as well...
>>
>>What do you suggest ?
>>
>>Anthere
>>
>>
>>
Perhaps appropriately, %C2%AD codes for U+02AD, "latin letter bidental
percussive", i.e. quite literally a special letter for the
representation of the gnashing of teeth.   Unfortunately, no glyph
appears to be attached to this letter in most fonts. Firefox (at least
on my setup) happily displays a glyph placeholder for this character,
but, judging by my reading of the page source of the fake "Cornischong"s
page, the MediaWiki software filters it out entirely before it reaches
the browser.

This is another interesting special case of the character spoofing
issue. where it appears that server-side attempts at filtering "bad"
characters are actually making the spoofing problem worse, not better.
Perhaps, for user account names, if the normalized string is not the
same as the raw string, the user name should be blocked from creation or
use, rather than being displayed in a spoofable form.

-- Neil


subject: [WikiEN-l] Links to porn sites

body:
--- Kevin Rector <krector at Compco.com> wrote:
> > --- Kevin Rector <krector at Compco.com> wrote:
> > > Yeah, to be clear, I'm making no comment on the
> > > "goodness" or "badness"
> > > of the article it's content or anything at all
> to do
> > > with the article in
> > > question, but the topic of linking to
> "commercial"
> > > sites.
> > >
> > > -Kevin
> >
> > Right.
> >
> > RickK
>
> You calling me a liar?
>
> -Kevin

C0nsidering your recent history of demanding the
removal of anything that offends you, then, if the
shoe fits ...

RickK

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Plan great trips with Yahoo! Travel: Now over 17,000 guides!
http://travel.yahoo.com/p-travelguide


from_name: Yann Forget

body:
Hi,

Le Tuesday 19 April 2005 08:46, Delirium a ?crit :
> Ray Saintonge wrote:
> > I agree with Anthere that we perhaps should submit something
> > representing WMF, but it's hard to know what kind of official position
> > we should take   In my own submission I certainly could not go so far
> > as to state that I was representing the Foundation.  They were
> > entirely my own opinions.  What points should we be makeing?

(...)
> I get the impression that the case the copyright office is most
> interested in is one that doesn't impact us at all: The case where
> someone is willing to pay a copyright holder for a license to use their
> work (e.g. for a film adaptation of a book), but cannot do so because
> the copyright holder is unable to be located.

Trying to broaden the issue, I?think that there are many cases where Wikimedia
projects would benefit from such works if they would be available. I don't
know about any specific documents which would be covered by the copyright
office, but I can name documents in other countries and languages.

Two examples from what I have encontered myself:
1. French postage stamps from the 1920s and 1930s. The owners of copyright are
the heirs of the drawers and engravers and are obviously quite difficult to
locate.
2. Translations of M.?K.?Gandhi's writings from the 1920s and the 1930s.

I believe this is quite the same for translations of many languages of this
period.

AFAIK, there is not such an office in France. I don't know about India, but
the current editor of Gandhi's writings, Navajivan Press, easily allows free
use of the original works. It can't help to find old translators of Gandhi's
works however. In India, copyright term is 60 years after the dead of the
author, so these translations may be in the public domain.

> -Mark

Regards,

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


from_name: Rob

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Fwd: Block

body:
User:147.72.93.172/147.72.93.199 has for some time
been a troublesome presence on the Pittsburgh
Tribune-Review article.  He has made some valid
points, but they are lost amid a torrent of claims of
libel, legal threats, and general rudeness.  Earlier
today he removed a large amount of material from
Talk:Pittsburgh Tribune-Review  without archiving and
replaced it with the words "Edited to allow more
space."  I reverted and asked him not to do it again
on his user talk page.  He blanked the entire page
this time. I warned him against vandalism and
reverted.  Another blank, another warning.  I blocked
at the third blanking of the talk page.

He has long claimed nearly everything someone posts to
the article or the talk page is libelous in some form
or another.  I am surprised to learn from the headers
of the email David Gerard forwarded that apparently
the anon is Carl Prine, an award winning PTR reporter.
 One would think a reporter wouldn't throw around
accusations of libel so casually.  In any case, much
of the material is standard talk page arguing, and the
material removed includes a lengthy polite attempt by
User:KeithTyler to reason with Prine, something that I
can't imagine any reasonable person objecting to.

- Gamaliel

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Plan great trips with Yahoo! Travel: Now over 17,000 guides!
http://travel.yahoo.com/p-travelguide


from_name: David Iberri

body:
On 4/19/05, Rowan Collins <rowan.collins at gmail.com> wrote:
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Alternate_parsers

The correct URL is http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Alternative_parsers

Alternate != Alternative ;-)

-- David Iberri


from_name: Anthere

subject: [Wikitech-l] vandalism under similar name

body:
A request came to me from lb wikipedia.

The "good" user is this one :
http://lb.wikipedia.org/wiki/User%3ACornischong

The "bad" user is this one :
http://lb.wikipedia.org/wiki/User%3ACorni%C2%ADschong

In recent changes, they both appear as Cornischong. But the vandal is in
reality Corni-schong

Cornischong is an admin on this wiki, he does not dare blocking the
other Cornischong by fear he will be blocked as well...

What do you suggest ?

Anthere


subject:
[WikiEN-l] I'll take care of it (was: Intolerance
	directedtowardspoor English)

body:
> >I'm willing to clean up any "poor English" articles you send my way.
>
> OK Ed - [[Manshukoku Koku KK]] is fresh in.
>
> Charles

Rough copy-edit + moved to [[Manchukuo National Airways]].

Next job, please!

Uncle Ed


body:
Shouldn't be a problem, MediaWiki is smart enough to tell the names
apart if you click "block" after the name in RC. Also, if in doubt,
why not make a short block just to see how it works?

/E23

On 4/19/05, Anthere anthere9-at-yahoo.com wrote:
> A request came to me from lb wikipedia.
>
> The "good" user is this one :
> http://lb.wikipedia.org/wiki/User%3ACornischong
>
> The "bad" user is this one :
> http://lb.wikipedia.org/wiki/User%3ACorni%C2%ADschong
>
> In recent changes, they both appear as Cornischong. But the vandal is in
> reality Corni-schong
>
> Cornischong is an admin on this wiki, he does not dare blocking the
> other Cornischong by fear he will be blocked as well...
>
> What do you suggest ?
>
> Anthere
>


from_name: Puddl Duk

subject: [WikiEN-l] Prudishness and censorship

body:
On 4/19/05, Rick <giantsrick13 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> --- jfdwolff at doctors.org.uk wrote:
> > Avoiding these images, or having a Preferences key
> > to prevent their display, is NOT censorship. It is
> > part of achieving the goal of Wikipedia, as I have
> > argued above. It is also not a violation of NPOV, as
> > an image is not a POV. It is being plain sensible,
> > sensitive and broad-minded.
>
> I love how those who are trying to censor Wikipeida
> are calling THEMSELVES broad-minded.
>
> And they continue to fail to address where the line is
> drawn.  The author contends that we should cater to
> the millions of people worldwide who would be offended
> by Ms. Winslet's blurry breast, but makes no
> suggestion to remove all images of women's faces,
> which would obviously offend our Muslim readers.  Or
> the images of the massacre of Nanking, or the image of
> the naked girl running from napalm.  Or the image of a
> man with a gun to his head.  Or the image of Rachel
> Corrie about to be mowed down by a bulldozer.
>
> RickK
>
The "line" is drawn by the community, on a case by case basis, with
discussion and votes. Do you object to this process?


from_name: Chad Perrin

subject: [Wikipedia-l] html emails

body:
On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 12:07:59PM +0100, Cormac Lawler wrote:
> On 4/19/05, Alphax <alphasigmax at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Chad Perrin wrote:
> >
> > > [snip]
> > >
> > >If you really want the thing to look nice and be inaccessible to many,
> > >perhaps you should distribute it as a PDF attachment instead of an HTML
> > >email.  The preferred reaction to finding out that some people don't
> > >like HTML cluttering up their inboxes, though, might simply be to
> > >provide an option for either text or HTML at subscription time.  That
> > >way, people get what they want, rather than getting the entire HTML
> > >layout when all they want is information.
> > >
> > >
> > Agreed. PDF is universal, pretty, and can have links in it - which is
> > why someone wanted it in HTML in the first place.
> >
>
> First of all, there seems to be misunderstanding about the content of
> this html email. It is not meant to be a full replica of the quarto,
> ie every page designed etc, but simply a pleasant layout of
> multilingual links to those already designed pages on the foundation
> wiki or meta. It would direct the person to the release message in
> their language (in the mail) and from here to the actual web version.
> There are also links at the side panel to these pages.

In that case, I really don't see how gussying up what is effectively no
more than a short blurb and a couple of links with HTML is worth
alienating some readers.

>
> Thirdly, that one pixel image used by spammers is surely inserted into
> the email by the spammers, no? I mean, we're not going to be doing
> that, right?

You miss the point.  I don't think anyone is suggesting that HTML is
avoided because they don't trust WMF's intentions.  Rather, many of us
have HTML rendering turned off even in HTML-capable email clients
specifically because of the danger of opening an email that contains
such dirty tricks as spammers use.  Thus, even many HTML clients have
been intentionally rendered incapable of rendering HTML for all
practical purposes.  Thus, the number of people unable to view an HTML
email properly grows.

I currently use Mutt (a CLI email client), but not long ago I was
getting list traffic through Thunderbird (a GUI email client).  Even so,
I was using "simplified HTML" settings that did not display images at
all.  The end result was that all that prettified HTML formatting
spammers used was gone, as were inlined images.  Although Thunderbird
did a reasonably good job of turning HTML email into what looked like
text-only email, it still rendered some HTML-formatted email into
gibberish.  Luckily, what it handled fairly well was email produced in
email clients that had HTML formatting turned on by default -- which is
all I really needed it to do, so that I could read emails from people
who just didn't know any better.

These days, HTML email with inline images and fancy formatting is almost
universally the territory of spammers, in my experience.  How many
people with the same experiences I've had do you want to exclude from
your announcements?  How many people being unable to read your
announcement email would be considered "too many"?

I do web development for money.  I'm in the midst of a fairly
substantial project right now, in fact.  One principle of design that I
always advocate when working with the client for whom I'm doing the
design is accessibility that is as universal as possible.  It's for this
reason that the html/xhtml code should be cross-browser tested, W3C
standards compliant, and free of as much client-side scripting as
possible.  It should also be renderable to a text-based browser if at
all possible.  Email is even more constrained than webpages for purposes
of accessibility, not only because of greater limitations on email
clients than on browsers, but because people are more inclined to want
nothing more than the information.  The principles of providing maximum
accessibility remain important, though.

Email is a communication medium, not interactive entertainment.  One
does not receive email "sites" where consistent navigation elements
throughout are important characteristics.  One receives a single,
hopefully informative, communique, and perhaps some attachment files.
>From where I sit, the justifications for HTML in email seem somewhat
hollow, when set against the matter of maximum accessibility, and much
of that (to bring this full circle) is because of the common desire to
avoid making oneself vulnerable to spammers.

If you turn off the functionality that makes you vulnerable to the dirty
tricks of spammers who verify your address validity by use of HTML so
they can spam you some more, you also turn off the functionality that
makes an HTML email even readable.

>
> Finally, the PDF solution would be elegant, and could be used for the
> print version. One problem is that apparently we can't host that
> version on meta (as it's a proprietary format) and also, we would have
> to wait until the various versions are fully translated before we did
> this. But more fundamentally, we'd need someone to do it.

The format was initially produced only by a proprietary application, but
has subsequently been reverse-engineered so that it can be produced by
any number of other applications, including even OpenOffice.org (a FLOSS
competitor of Microsoft Office).  Whether or not its proprietary roots
is a problem is something that will have to be decided by other heads
than mine.

--
Chad Perrin
[ CCD CopyWrite | http://ccd.apotheon.org ]


subject: [Wikitech-l] hardware order

body:
On Mon, Apr 18, 2005 at 11:02:20PM -0700, Brion Vibber wrote:
>
> Note that my own personal prejudice runs in favor of AMD; I buy Athlons
> for my home PCs and hiss and boo Intel at every opportunity. But if
> we're going to make purchasing decisions explicitly based on a
> price/performance claim I think we need something more than warm fuzzy
> feelings of fighting The Man.

Plus, y'know, Intel may be The Man in this comparison, but AMD is The
Other Man.

--
Chad Perrin
[ CCD CopyWrite | http://ccd.apotheon.org ]


from_name: Brion Vibber

subject:
[Wikitech-l] Can I use MySQL and PHP without HTTP server to read
	info from wikipedia database?

body:
mm wrote:
> I am want to process data from wikipedia database.
> Now I have some small MySQL databases for helping me to understand how
> can I use them.
> I am thinking about using CPP program to access data or/and PHP.
> Running Linux since January and still not starting to work with PHP I am
> looking for some advice.

In the maintenance/ subdirectory there are a number of command-line
scripts which work within the MediaWiki framework; you may use these as
samples if you wish.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 253 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20050419/722631c7/attachment.pgp>


from_name: Benhurmypal at aol.com

body:
Stated live on air:

"Ratzinger has repeatedly stated he would like to retire to a Bavarian
village and dedicate himself to writing books, but more recently, he told  friends
he was ready to 'accept any charge God placed on him.'"

Good job, everyone!


subject: [Foundation-l] Bambara Wikipedia Launch Competition

body:
Hi,

I don't think that this initiative was advertised.
I?find it interesting.

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Bambara_Wikipedia_Launch_Competition
http://bm.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Concours_de_lancement

Regards,

Yann

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


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Fwd: Block

body:
On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 10:41:18PM +1000, David Gerard wrote:
> Lars Aronsson (lars at aronsson.se) [050419 21:33]:
> > Rob (Gamaliel) wrote:
>
> > > [...] has made some valid points, but they are lost amid a
> > > torrent of claims of libel, legal threats, and general rudeness.
> > > Earlier today he removed a large amount of material from [...]
>
> > I've seen this kind of intriguingly rude behaviour on several
> > wikis, but not at all in another project of mine, where e-mail is
> > the primary form of communication.  Maybe the offender thinks he
> > is talking to a machine, just like he would kick a soda vending
> > machine or hit a television set that loses sync.  Could we make
> > wikis look more like a community of real people?  How?
>
>
> I suspect this is the sort of person who thinks it's all ones and zeroes
> and if it's on the Internet it doesn't count as interaction with real
> people.
>

I'm not convinced such people would even realize there were real people
on the other side of a face-to-face discussion -- at least, not any
really meaningful manner.

--
Chad Perrin
[ CCD CopyWrite | http://ccd.apotheon.org ]


from_name: Lars Aronsson

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Fwd: Block

body:
Rob (Gamaliel) wrote:

> [...] has made some valid points, but they are lost amid a
> torrent of claims of libel, legal threats, and general rudeness.
> Earlier today he removed a large amount of material from [...]

I've seen this kind of intriguingly rude behaviour on several
wikis, but not at all in another project of mine, where e-mail is
the primary form of communication.  Maybe the offender thinks he
is talking to a machine, just like he would kick a soda vending
machine or hit a television set that loses sync.  Could we make
wikis look more like a community of real people?  How?

--
  Lars Aronsson (lars at aronsson.se)
  Aronsson Datateknik - http://aronsson.se


subject: [Wikipedia-l] html emails

body:
On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 03:09:11AM +0930, Alphax wrote:
> Chad Perrin wrote:
>
> >[snip]
> >
> >I currently use Mutt (a CLI email client), but not long ago I was
> >getting list traffic through Thunderbird (a GUI email client).  Even so,
> >I was using "simplified HTML" settings that did not display images at
> >all.  The end result was that all that prettified HTML formatting
> >spammers used was gone, as were inlined images.  Although Thunderbird
> >did a reasonably good job of turning HTML email into what looked like
> >text-only email, it still rendered some HTML-formatted email into
> >gibberish.  Luckily, what it handled fairly well was email produced in
> >email clients that had HTML formatting turned on by default -- which is
> >all I really needed it to do, so that I could read emails from people
> >who just didn't know any better.
> >
> >[snip]
> >
> Spam filters are fairly good these days. Thunderbird disables all images
> in HTML by default, unless you click "display" or add the sender to your
> address book, and HTML is disabled in spam by default.

. . . and I always check the directory to which I redirect spam to
ensure that nothing in there is something I should actually be
receiving.

In what version of Thunderbird do these default settings occur?

--
Chad Perrin
[ CCD CopyWrite | http://ccd.apotheon.org ]


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: html emails

body:
On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 07:50:03PM +0200, Anthere wrote:
>
>
> Gregory Maxwell a ?crit:
> >On 4/18/05, Anthere <anthere9 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >>yo. I think most of us would prefer it to be in html... for quite a
> >>number of reason (such as links).
> >
> >
> >HTML mails would make me unsub, perhaps that wouldn't be universally bad.
> >:)
>
> I did not understand what unsub means.

"un" and "subscribe" -- the opposite of subscribing

>
> >As far as links go, your MUA should see them and make them clickable
> >even without html mail, I'm sure someone here can make some
> >recommendations for your platform...
>
> I have no idea what MUA means.

Mail User Agent, roughly equivalent to "mail client" or "email client":
Outlook Express, Thunderbird, Sylpheed, Eudora, Pegasus, Evolution,
Mutt, Pine, Elm, et cetera, all have MUA functionality.

>
> >Hmm.. Inline images might have been useful in our discussions about
> >sexual images on wikipedia, I suppose... :)
>
> I can't figure what you mean.
>
> If I may dare say... this mailing list is international. It would be
> helpful if people made an effort so as to be understandable to more people.

A snide response to that might be to compare your request to that of
others regarding a preference for text emails over HTML emails.

>
> It is a general comment, not limited to you only. Maybe I am a bit
> stupid these days.

Nothing of the sort.  Sometimes, we need to be reminded of where we're
not making our modes of communication generally accessible, whether by
poorly chosen presentation technologies or by heavy use of jargon and
abbreviations.

--
Chad Perrin
[ CCD CopyWrite | http://ccd.apotheon.org ]


from_name: Tim Starling

body:
Chad Perrin wrote:
> Text email is universal.  HTML email alienates a great many people.  If
> I wanted to see HTML, I'd use a browser or an HTML editor.

Check out this survey, done in 2003:
http://www.wilsonweb.com/wmt8/email_format_preferences.htm

87% of the non-technical survey group reported being able to read HTML
email, and 93% of the business group. HTML was reported to be preferred
over plain text by both groups.

-- Tim Starling


from_name: Daniel Mayer

subject: [WikiEN-l] Links to porn sites

body:
--- Tony Sidaway <minorityreport at bluebottle.com> wrote:
> Kevin Rector said:
> >
> > Yes, I do believe that if a non-nude can illustrate an article as well
> > as a nude can then the non-nude should be used.
>
> Why in this case, though?  The whole point was that she posed nude wearing
> the Heart of the Ocean for Jack, and the treasure hunters looking for the
> diamond found the picture.  That is the McGuffin that holds the whole
> story together.

A still of of the drawing, not of the actual nude actress, would be more
appropriate then.

-- mav

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Plan great trips with Yahoo! Travel: Now over 17,000 guides!
http://travel.yahoo.com/p-travelguide


from_name: Kevin Rector

subject: [WikiEN-l] Links to porn sites

body:
> Of course you would.  You're offended by the image of
> one blurry breast.  A porn site would certainly offend
> you.  I'm surprised your head didn't explode.

Rick, please quote me exactly where I said I was offended by that
picture. I can guarantee you that I've NEVER said that I was offended by
the Kate Winslet picture. So stop putting words in my mouth, it makes
you look foolish.

Furthermore, for all you know I absolutely love porn and porn websites.
I don't, but the fact remains that you don't know anything about me. So
you really should not talk about me at all. The urge to call you all
sorts of names is very strong... but... I... will... resist....

You seem to be so blinded by your zeal for whatever the heck it is that
you're standing up for that you missed my point entirely. It's not even
about porn. It's about what the sites we link to provide.

Here's a non-porn example:

Let's say there's www.billybobsfishingworld.com. Now, let's further say
that www.billybobsfishingworld.com exists to sell fishing information to
people who like to fish. However, the only way to get that information
is to put in a credit card because www.billybobsfishingworld.com is a
pay site whose primary commodity is itself.

My position (and again, so that you can cool your jets -- it has nothing
to do with porn) is that we should be very hesitant to link to pay sites
in articles where the purpose of the site is to be a pay site. So in
this example in the article for the world renowned fisherman [[Billy
Bob]] we would not link to his "official site" since it's just a way for
Billy Bob to make more money and is not a way for our readers to find
out more about the actual topic of the article, namely Billy Bob. We
need not drive traffic for Billy Bob; he can buy that himself.

Of course it goes without saying that if there is substantial
information freely provided about Billy Bob at
www.billybobsfishingworld.com then that is a different story and then we
should link away.

And yes, I do recognize that this would probably have to be implemented
on a case by case basis.

-Kevin


subject: [WikiEN-l] Links to porn sites

body:
> --- Kevin Rector <krector at Compco.com> wrote:
> > Yeah, to be clear, I'm making no comment on the
> > "goodness" or "badness"
> > of the article it's content or anything at all to do
> > with the article in
> > question, but the topic of linking to "commercial"
> > sites.
> >
> > -Kevin
>
> Right.
>
> RickK

You calling me a liar?

-Kevin


subject:
[Wikipedia-l] Re: Survey regarding email preference (was Re: html
	emails)

body:
Chad Perrin wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 01:58:52PM +1000, Tim Starling wrote:
>
>>Chad Perrin wrote:
>>
>>>Text email is universal.  HTML email alienates a great many people.  If
>>>I wanted to see HTML, I'd use a browser or an HTML editor.
>>
>>Check out this survey, done in 2003:
>>http://www.wilsonweb.com/wmt8/email_format_preferences.htm
>>
>>87% of the non-technical survey group reported being able to read HTML
>>email, and 93% of the business group. HTML was reported to be preferred
>>over plain text by both groups.
>>
>
>
> Oh, well, since it's more than 50% we can afford to just shoot and bury
> the remainder.  Okay.  No problem, then.

Excuse me, I never advocated one course of action over another. That was
my first post to this thread. I have no strong opinion either way, so
instead of adding to the bluster and speculation, I thought I'd
contribute some relevant information, in the hopes that the opinions
subsequently formed might be better educated. For the sake of civil
discussion, please keep your temper in check.

-- Tim Starling


from_name: Stan Shebs

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Fwd: Block

body:
Rob wrote:

>
>He has long claimed nearly everything someone posts to
>the article or the talk page is libelous in some form
>or another.  I am surprised to learn from the headers
>of the email David Gerard forwarded that apparently
>the anon is Carl Prine, an award winning PTR reporter.
> One would think a reporter wouldn't throw around
>accusations of libel so casually.
>
Since you have the real name, it might be worthwhile simply to
call him on the phone and ask why he's doing this - or, to be
really evil, call his editor on the phone. To be truly diabolic
though, call the editor of a *competing* paper, heh-heh-heh.

WP isn't an 800-pound gorilla yet, but it's at least 300
pounds, and we shouldn't be letting self-important
reporters push us around.

Stan


from_name: Gregory Maxwell

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: html emails

body:
On 4/19/05, Anthere <anthere9 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Gregory Maxwell a ?crit:
> > HTML mails would make me unsub, perhaps that wouldn't be universally bad. :)
> I did not understand what unsub means.

Unsubscribe. I would turn off my list membership. I do not wish to
received HTML mail, .. Most html mail is spam, and most html mail is
dropped by my aggressive spamfilters. If this list went HTML, I wold
miss many messages, so I might as well unsubscribe.

I would probably not be alone.

> > As far as links go, your MUA should see them and make them clickable
> > even without html mail, I'm sure someone here can make some
> > recommendations for your platform...
> I have no idea what MUA means.

http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/MUA

> > Hmm.. Inline images might have been useful in our discussions about
> > sexual images on wikipedia, I suppose... :)
>
> I can't figure what you mean.

HTML allows you to put pictures inside emails, not just links.  It can
be abused to show you images that you don't like.   I would have found
it amusing to abuse that feature when we were discussing blocking
images, although I would not have actually done it.  Other people
might, and it is a reason you should not want html mail.

> If I may dare say... this mailing list is international. It would be
> helpful if people made an effort so as to be understandable to more people.
>
> It is a general comment, not limited to you only. Maybe I am a bit
> stupid these days.

I find this amusing:  I used "MUA" in an effort to be clear since I
knew the acronym was the same in all languages.

HTML email can exclude people in much the same way that using obscure
English words can confuse non-native readers, except it is far easier
and less harmful to avoid HTML than it is to avoid English that is
difficult for nonnative readers of english.


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: html emails

body:
On 4/19/05, Cormac Lawler <cormaggio at gmail.com> wrote:
> Ok, the main point of the proposed html mail is that it is
> multilingual. If you can convince me that a mail I (or whoever)

This is entirely inaccurate.

UTF-8 encoding works through almost every mail system out there
without special attachments.  On Linux (the only platform I can speak
with authority about), the common mail clients (with the exception of
gnus inside emacs) will correctly decode utf-8.

Since the list is primarily in english, and a great many languages can
be mostly expressed with plain ascii,  the existence of a wealth of
software that supports UTF8 should be sufficient.

By pushing HTML email you would make it very difficult to use my
choice of mail client so that someone who wishes to write ?????? has
the ability to use a greater number of the less featured mail clients.
I do not think this is the correct optimization.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Links to porn sites

body:
So you are calling me a liar. Ok, just wanted to make sure. I find that
interesting considering you have no proof that my statement was made in
bad faith or was a lie (for the record, it wasn't a lie I actually meant
what I said). You're not exhibiting very good behavior for a Wikipedia
Administrator.

By the way, I really wish you'd quit talking about "what offends me"
because you have no idea of what offends me. So far, about the only
thing in relation to Wikipedia that I've found to be overly offensive is
your behavior on this mailing list towards people you don't like or
agree with.

Finally, could you point out (just once) where I've "demanded" the
removal of anything in Wikipedia? I've worked to bring disagreeing
parties together on a topic. When there was a controversial picture I
found a different picture (I did not crop the original) that satisfied
virtually everyone (except you - you've made that clear). I've worked to
create consensus and it has been emotionally very taxing because of
people like you. You have contributed nothing but grief to the entire
process. Perhaps it's because you're more interested in promoting an
ideology than making good informative NPOV encyclopedia articles.

Yes, I do believe that if a non-nude can illustrate an article as well
as a nude can then the non-nude should be used. I believe that this
creates less controversy which ultimately helps the project. That has
been my motivation -- not the removal of "anything that offends me". So,
your characterization of my behavior and motivations throughout the
whole ordeal is just plain wrong and downright uncivil.

-Kevin

> -----Original Message-----
> From: wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org [mailto:wikien-l-
> bounces at Wikipedia.org] On Behalf Of Rick
> Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2005 2:49 PM
> To: English Wikipedia
> Subject: RE: [WikiEN-l] Links to porn sites
>
>
> --- Kevin Rector <krector at Compco.com> wrote:
> > > --- Kevin Rector <krector at Compco.com> wrote:
> > > > Yeah, to be clear, I'm making no comment on the
> > > > "goodness" or "badness"
> > > > of the article it's content or anything at all
> > to do
> > > > with the article in
> > > > question, but the topic of linking to
> > "commercial"
> > > > sites.
> > > >
> > > > -Kevin
> > >
> > > Right.
> > >
> > > RickK
> >
> > You calling me a liar?
> >
> > -Kevin
>
> C0nsidering your recent history of demanding the
> removal of anything that offends you, then, if the
> shoe fits ...
>
> RickK
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Plan great trips with Yahoo! Travel: Now over 17,000 guides!
> http://travel.yahoo.com/p-travelguide
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Sanger/Wales wars continued

body:
Pete/Pcb21 wrote:
> Larry Sanger has again written at length about the history of Wikipedia
> in two articles posted on Slashdot.
[snip]
> - including a follow-up by Sanger, giving his take on the "was he or
> wasn't he the co-founder" debate, in particular

I don't think any reasonable person would object to calling Larry a
"co-founder of Wikipedia". To call one troll on a blog comment a
"debate" is to blow things extraordinarily out of proportion.

Larry hasn't been involved in the project in some three years (3/4 of
its lifetime), and most Wikipedians today have had little or no
interaction with Larry. As a result, he's seen now as an outsider, and
his criticisms are easily (mis)interpreted as attacks against a
community he's not part of.

I've only skimmed these posts, but they seem to boil down to historical
trivia ("we had 24 articles not 12!") and saying we should do things
that are already on the roadmap (eg, a more formally-vetted release in
addition to the rough-and-tumble development Wikipedia).

It'd be nice if people could avoid making a mountain out of a molehill
over this. Larry's not our enemy.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 253 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/attachments/20050419/7c740b6d/attachment.pgp


subject: [WikiEN-l] Oh no, not again...

body:
Old picture = complaining/controversy/unhappy people/low image
quality/some value to the article

New picture = less complaining/less controversy/fewer unhappy
people/higher image quality/equal value to the article as the old one

At least that's how I see it. If you disagree that's fine.

I just went and checked (it's not on my watch list); there hasn't been a
comment on the talk page for Titanic for two days. That means that all
the people who were expending energy there have now hopefully moved on
to more productive pursuits (except for those of us who keep rehashing
it on the mailing list -- which was something I promised myself I
wouldn't do - oh well).

I'm not really interested in getting back into this, I only answered
because you asked.

-Kevin

> -----Original Message-----
> From: wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org [mailto:wikien-l-
> bounces at Wikipedia.org] On Behalf Of Tony Sidaway
> Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2005 3:41 PM
> To: wikien-l at Wikipedia.org
> Subject: RE: [WikiEN-l] Links to porn sites
>
> Kevin Rector said:
> >
> > Yes, I do believe that if a non-nude can illustrate an article as
well
> > as a nude can then the non-nude should be used.
>
> Why in this case, though?  The whole point was that she posed nude
wearing
> the Heart of the Ocean for Jack, and the treasure hunters looking for
the
> diamond found the picture.  That is the McGuffin that holds the whole
> story together.  You get that contrast, the many contrasts in that
movie.
> Great opulence above decks, poverty below.  A naked young girl full of
the
> promise of life, an ancient old woman at the end of it.  Also it's a
very
> pretty picture.
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l


from_name: Poor, Edmund W

subject:
[WikiEN-l] Intolerance directed towards Chinese immigrants to
	America

body:
While I'm doing my penance, why not read an excellent historical article
my church's monthly magazine put out, on "Chinese in America".

The Chinese railroad workers showed an admirable industriousness and
self-discipline, while receiving significantly less pay than "filthy"
whites.

"China was the first nation to have a written language and before the
early dynasty of Han, they used a knife to mark the writing on freshly
slashed, moist sections of bamboo. As the bamboo dried, the records
became permanent. When paper was developed, records were kept in books."
[http://www.worldandi.com/subscribers/americanwavesdetail.asp?num=12325]


from_name: Tony Sidaway

subject: [Wikipedia-l] html emails

body:
Alphax said:
> Cormac Lawler wrote:
>
>> [snip]
>>
>>Finally, the PDF solution would be elegant, and could be used for the
>>print version. One problem is that apparently we can't host that
>>version on meta (as it's a proprietary format) and also, we would have
>>to wait until the various versions are fully translated before we did
>>this. But more fundamentally, we'd need someone to do it.
>>
>>
> PDF is proprietary? But Free PDF readers and writers exist.

PDF is an open format.  Anybody can implement a writer or reader because
the document standard is published. It is only proprietary in the sense
that the Java language is proprietary.  I believe there are some html-pdf
document translators available.  It isn't difficult.


from_name: Alphax

body:
Chad Perrin wrote:

>On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 12:54:52AM -0400, Chad Perrin wrote:
>
>
>>My temper is in check, though my sense of humore may be obscure and
>>perhaps tasteless at times.
>>
>>
>>
>
>My sense of spelling might suffer some issues tonight, too.  Humore?
>
>
I understood you completely.

>Oh, well, since it's more than 50% we can afford to just shoot and bury
>the remainder.  Okay.  No problem, then.
>
>
A certain company has been using that same argument with their "version"
of HTML for years. I laughed, because I knew you were being tongue-in-cheek.

(Hope this wraps OK)

--
Alphax
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax
There are two kinds of people: those who say to God, 'Thy will be done,' and those to whom God says, 'All right, then, have it your way.' - C. S. Lewis


from_name: Petr Kadlec

subject:
[Wikitech-l] new handling on en wikipedia for image: pages of
	commons images

body:
On 4/18/05, John Fader <jfader at gmail.com> wrote:
> Until very recently (today?) viewing such an image page showed the
> "this page does not exist" stuff, but did contain a link to the
> corresponding image page on commons.  Now the text "This file is a
> shared upload and may be used by other projects." appears, and there's
> no link to the commons page.

I don't think so. E.g. at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:W_A_Mozart_at_34c.jpg, I see "This
is a file from the Wikimedia Commons. Please see its description page
there" (with proper hyperlinks).

The message is stored at [[MediaWiki:Sharedupload]], where admins can
modify it, but no one has modified it since 21:15, 14 Mar 2005. You
might have experienced a problem with overloaded servers, which
sometimes causes the interface languages to go from LanguageXx.php
instead of MediaWiki: namespace.

-- [[cs:User:Mormegil | Petr Kadlec]]


subject: [Wikipedia-l] html emails

body:
Chad Perrin wrote:

> [snip]
>
>If you really want the thing to look nice and be inaccessible to many,
>perhaps you should distribute it as a PDF attachment instead of an HTML
>email.  The preferred reaction to finding out that some people don't
>like HTML cluttering up their inboxes, though, might simply be to
>provide an option for either text or HTML at subscription time.  That
>way, people get what they want, rather than getting the entire HTML
>layout when all they want is information.
>
>
Agreed. PDF is universal, pretty, and can have links in it - which is
why someone wanted it in HTML in the first place.

--
Alphax
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax
There are two kinds of people: those who say to God, 'Thy will be done,' and those to whom God says, 'All right, then, have it your way.' - C. S. Lewis


subject: [Wikipedia-l] html emails

body:
Alphax said:
>>
>>
> So Adobe "owns" PDF in the same sense that Sun "owns" Java.

Yes.  That is, only in the sense that Adobe has a registered trademark on
the name "PDF" and exercises control over the standard.  They don't own or
control third-party PDF readers or writers.

>
> I've been meaning to get into the TeX thing for a while now... can DVIs
>  be HTMLified? Can TeX have links in it?
>

You can htmlize a DVI, but then it will be HTML, which is not a
presentation format, so you have no real control over what it will look
like.


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: html emails

body:
Gregory Maxwell said:
>
> As far as links go, your MUA should see them and make them clickable
> even without html mail,

Most online mailers that I have used seem to do this.  You don't need a
HTML email, it works in plaintext.


from_name: Phil Sandifer

body:
Perhaps people began questioning it when they notice that he only uses
the honorific to get press for his criticisms of a project that he does
not contribute to, and in fact seems to have only contributed to when
it was financially useful to him to do so.

-Snowspinner

On Apr 19, 2005, at 5:14 PM, Pete/Pcb21 wrote:

>
> Larry Sanger has again written at length about the history of
> Wikipedia in two articles posted on Slashdot.
>
> Part I :
> http://features.slashdot.org/features/05/04/18/164213.shtml?tid=95
>
> Part II :
> http://features.slashdot.org/features/05/04/19/1746205.shtml?
> tid=95&tid=149&tid=9
>
> Some blogworld commentary is at
> http://www.corante.com/many/archives/2005/04/18/
> sanger_on_wikipedia.php
>
> - including a follow-up by Sanger, giving his take on the "was he or
> wasn't he the co-founder" debate, in particular
>
> "I was virtually always referred to as a co-founder until last year.
> What has changed?
>
> Wikipedia was my idea (in the very robust sense explained in my
> memoir), its main founding principles were in large part mine and
> enforced by me, and I did more than anyone to organize it. It simply
> would not have existed if I had started it, indeed while being
> employed by Jimmy. It was on that basis that I was for several years
> credibly and repeatedly called "co-founder" of the project.
>
> The fact that I was Jimmy's employee, which I freely admit, does not
> mean I was not also a co-founder of the project.
>
> Until last year, again, this was my honorific, and until this year,
> nobody has bothered questioning it. I wonder why."
>
> Pete
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>


from_name: Sj

subject: [Foundation-l] Re: Bambara Wikipedia Launch Competition

body:
I'm glad you brought this up on-list.  Kaspar Souren is the person
planning this project; and involved with geekcorps in mali.  There
will be some kind of official launch tomorrow, and he is planning to
do a global-voices interview on IRC in #globalvoices tomorrow
afternoon EST...

Hopefully he will be presenting about this and how to gather support
for similar initiatives at Wikimania.   And, Anthere, hopefully
someone from bisharat.net will come as well!

SJ

On 4/19/05, Anthere <anthere9 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> if you know about Bambara Yann, could you answer or comment the mail I
> forwarded to the french ml about 2 days ago about Bambara characters ?
>
> Thanks
>
> Ant
>
> Yann Forget a ?crit:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I don't think that this initiative was advertised.
> > I find it interesting.
> >
> > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Bambara_Wikipedia_Launch_Competition
> > http://bm.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Concours_de_lancement
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Yann
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

--
+sj+
 _ _ :-------.-.--------.--.--------.-.--------.--.--------[...]


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: html emails

body:
On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 09:17:24PM +0200, Anthere wrote:
>
> Chad Perrin a ?crit:
> > On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 07:50:03PM +0200, Anthere wrote:
>
> Thanks for the explanation...
>
> >>If I may dare say... this mailing list is international. It would be
> >>helpful if people made an effort so as to be understandable to more
> people.
> >
> >
> > A snide response to that might be to compare your request to that of
> > others regarding a preference for text emails over HTML emails.
>
> And a comment could be that people are not forced to register to that
> list, and could very well get informed by other means than this list,
> hence little loss if they decide not to subscribe.

The same applies to you, as well.  If you don't like dealing with emails
that are difficult to understand, you don't have to read them.  I will,
however, endeavor to be clearer.

>
> However, if I want to understand you, I have no other choice than
> reading your very long and very circonvoluted mails. And I believe that
> this is the first time I mention your mails are problematic to me. And I
> tried to say it politely Chad. I am not word playing here unfortunately.

Thanks for pointing out where I've been less than perfectly clear.  I'll
try to fix that in the future.

--
Chad Perrin
[ CCD CopyWrite | http://ccd.apotheon.org ]


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: html emails

body:
On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 03:21:23PM -0400, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> On 4/19/05, Anthere <anthere9 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > If I may dare say... this mailing list is international. It would be
> > helpful if people made an effort so as to be understandable to more people.
> >
> > It is a general comment, not limited to you only. Maybe I am a bit
> > stupid these days.
>
> I find this amusing:  I used "MUA" in an effort to be clear since I
> knew the acronym was the same in all languages.

In this case, it looks like it was a matter of being unfamiliar with
technical jargon rather than an internationalization issue.

--
Chad Perrin
[ CCD CopyWrite | http://ccd.apotheon.org ]


from_name: mm

subject:
[Wikitech-l] Can I use MySQL and PHP without HTTP server to read
 info from wikipedia database?

body:
I am want to process data from wikipedia database.
Now I have some small MySQL databases for helping me to understand how
can I use them.
I am thinking about using CPP program to access data or/and PHP.
Running Linux since January and still not starting to work with PHP I am
looking for
some advice.
Thanks,
Mircea


from_name: David Monniaux

subject: [Wikipedia-l] html emails

body:
>
> I've been meaning to get into the TeX thing for a while now... can
> DVIs be HTMLified? Can TeX have links in it?

1) Use a TeX to HTML tool such as HeVeA or latex2html or whatever.
2) Yes. Some DVI viewers recognize hyperlinks. However, I do not
recommend using DVI, because of external figures.


body:
Hasn't Jimbo indicated a preference for not calling Larry a co-founder?

-Snowspinner

On Apr 19, 2005, at 5:40 PM, Brion Vibber wrote:

> Pete/Pcb21 wrote:
>> Larry Sanger has again written at length about the history of
>> Wikipedia
>> in two articles posted on Slashdot.
> [snip]
>> - including a follow-up by Sanger, giving his take on the "was he or
>> wasn't he the co-founder" debate, in particular
>
> I don't think any reasonable person would object to calling Larry a
> "co-founder of Wikipedia". To call one troll on a blog comment a
> "debate" is to blow things extraordinarily out of proportion.
>
> Larry hasn't been involved in the project in some three years (3/4 of
> its lifetime), and most Wikipedians today have had little or no
> interaction with Larry. As a result, he's seen now as an outsider, and
> his criticisms are easily (mis)interpreted as attacks against a
> community he's not part of.
>
> I've only skimmed these posts, but they seem to boil down to historical
> trivia ("we had 24 articles not 12!") and saying we should do things
> that are already on the roadmap (eg, a more formally-vetted release in
> addition to the rough-and-tumble development Wikipedia).
>
> It'd be nice if people could avoid making a mountain out of a molehill
> over this. Larry's not our enemy.
>
> -- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l


from_name: Chad Perrin

subject: [WikiEN-l] Links to porn sites

body:
On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 08:45:03PM +0100, Tony Sidaway wrote:
> Kevin Rector said:
> >
> > My position (and again, so that you can cool your jets -- it has
> > nothing to do with porn) is that we should be very hesitant to link to
> > pay sites in articles where the purpose of the site is to be a pay
> > site.
>
> I agree with this.  In practise so-called "pay sites" tend to have a lot
> of freebies--especially porn-based sites.  This may sometimes make them
> worth linking to.

Of course, the very existence of a pay-site might be informative to the
reader, in that it says something about the person who runs the site.

--
Chad Perrin
[ CCD CopyWrite | http://ccd.apotheon.org ]


subject: [WikiEN-l] Links to porn sites

body:
On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 10:59:10PM +0100, Tony Sidaway wrote:
> Daniel Mayer said:
> > --- Tony Sidaway <minorityreport at bluebottle.com> wrote:
> >> Kevin Rector said:
> >> >
> >> > Yes, I do believe that if a non-nude can illustrate an article as
> >> > well as a nude can then the non-nude should be used.
> >>
> >> Why in this case, though?  The whole point was that she posed nude
> >> wearing the Heart of the Ocean for Jack, and the treasure hunters
> >> looking for the diamond found the picture.  That is the McGuffin that
> >> holds the whole story together.
> >
> > A still of of the drawing, not of the actual nude actress, would be
> > more appropriate then.
>
> This is an article about a movie, not a drawing (Mr Cameron, who drew it,
> is a far better director and cinematographer than he is a draftsman).

Frankly, I'm of the opinion that a still of action in the film is more
illustrative than illustration itself.  The major point to ponder here,
for me, is whether the plot point involving the nude posing and the
rediscovery of the illustration is something that is relevant to the
article itself.  I tend to lean in the direction of considering that
relevant, but I could probably be dissuaded.

--
Chad Perrin
[ CCD CopyWrite | http://ccd.apotheon.org ]


subject: [WikiEN-l] Prudishness and censorship

body:
On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 01:08:12PM -0700, Puddl Duk wrote:
> On 4/19/05, Rick <giantsrick13 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > --- jfdwolff at doctors.org.uk wrote:
> > > Avoiding these images, or having a Preferences key
> > > to prevent their display, is NOT censorship. It is
> > > part of achieving the goal of Wikipedia, as I have
> > > argued above. It is also not a violation of NPOV, as
> > > an image is not a POV. It is being plain sensible,
> > > sensitive and broad-minded.
> >
> > I love how those who are trying to censor Wikipeida
> > are calling THEMSELVES broad-minded.
> >
> > And they continue to fail to address where the line is
> > drawn.  The author contends that we should cater to
> > the millions of people worldwide who would be offended
> > by Ms. Winslet's blurry breast, but makes no
> > suggestion to remove all images of women's faces,
> > which would obviously offend our Muslim readers.  Or
> > the images of the massacre of Nanking, or the image of
> > the naked girl running from napalm.  Or the image of a
> > man with a gun to his head.  Or the image of Rachel
> > Corrie about to be mowed down by a bulldozer.
> >
> > RickK
> >
> The "line" is drawn by the community, on a case by case basis, with
> discussion and votes. Do you object to this process?

In an effort to head off RickK's perhaps more abrasive style . . .
Perhaps his comments here are meant to express his position as a part of
that community, and your pointed query is not strictly conducive to that
process.  While I could be wrong (and even if I'm not, I'm sure you'll
tell me that I am), it reads to me as though you are implying that his
argument is a de facto objection to that process.

--
Chad Perrin
[ CCD CopyWrite | http://ccd.apotheon.org ]