from_name: Sabine Cretella

subject: [Wiktionary-l] The need for XML in a wiktionary context

body:
>> What I propose at this time is to get us thinking about importing and
>> exporting in an XML format. And considering changes to enhance the
>> functionality within all wiktionaries and the functionality to the
>> outside world.
>>
>> One of the aims of wikimedia is to create open content. By having our
>> data in our proprietary format, we do not achieve what can be achieved.
>
>
> Being able to extract the data from the English Wiktionary is
> something that has always been on my mind. It is one of the
> considerations. Ease of editing is another. That's why the entries in
> Wiktionary may not look very pretty, but they are built up in a very
> logical way. It is possible, although probably not trivial, to process
> them with a script.
>
> If XML is not to be edited by hand, then how are we going to edit it?
> Is it compatible with the Wiki concept?
>
> If you want database structures, I can give you those. I have been
> designing a relational database capable of storing everything that is
> relevant for a dictionary. The problem is in the user interface.
> That's where I'm stuck. Another problem is how to keep a history of
> what was changed. Another thing is that I don't have any idea how
> performant my database would be. Building a presentable report for an
> entry involves solving relations between many, many tables.
>
> Anyway, if you're interested in having a look at it, I will gladly
> send you the OpenOffice.org drawing with the table structures.

Jo, all this is very interesting - not only to me, but to some
colleagues as well.

I am copying this message to some of them.

Many of us are translators and our difficulty normally is the structure
and not the content. So if there's a way to combine things it is mostly
needed and the more people know about this the easier we probably can
find a way on how to concentrate efforts and exclude double work.

I am sure: most of the things we need are already there, they just need
to be adapted to be able to work "cross over" for different projects.

So please, if you can: let us have a look at your structure.

Ciao and thank you!

Sabine

>


list: wikien-l

source: pipermail-mbox

from_name: Rick

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Re: Re: Re: VfD is broken

body:
I have blocked Netoholic for 24 hours.  I am sure somebody will run slavering to the Special pages in order to unblock him as soon as they see this, but I'll tell you why I have blocked him.

Netoholic, since his first few days on Wikipedia, has been nothing but disruptive.  He created a page which he called policy concerning the names of television shows, did not tell anybody that it was there, did not indicate how long the vote on his supposed policy was supposed to be, and when four people stumbled across it and voted their approvals, he took it as gospel and immediately began the mass moving of article titles without anyone knowing it was going to happen.  As soon as people began questioning why he was moving them, he said, "it's policy", and pointed to his virtually unknown page.

Now he's on a rampage to make sure that VfD is "broken".  He is unilaterally removing pages from the VfD page, is being very combative in several discussions (yet when anybody disagrees with him he calls it personal attacks and removes their postings), and is repeatedly deleting the VfD header from pages that are still under discussion.  There appears to be no end in sight.

There is no point in my creating an RfC page on him, because nothing gets accomplished on those pages, and I refuse to go through the arbitration route.  Besides, how long can we survive the four to five months it would take to get anything accomplished?

Would SOMEONE please offer to mentor this person and make him understand that his actions are unacceptable?

RickK

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!


list: wikitech-l

from_name: Ashar Voultoiz

subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: Database shema : let's start the fun

references:
<chi9tu$vv8$1@sea.gmane.org> <413CB4E5.9040101@myrealbox.com>
	<chifbj$ejm$1@sea.gmane.org>

body:
Ashar Voultoiz wrote:
<snip>
>
> Now let's have a look at a possible solution.
>
> We can code a metadata system that will allow users to specify their own
> tables. When editing an article, a form can be displayed under the text
> like:
>
>
> [Meaning ]    [   ]
> [WordType]    [   ]
> [Translation] [   ]
> [Idiom]       [   ]
> [ADD NEW]
>
> [SAVE]
>
> The [ADD NEW] button could then be used to add another field like
> "synonym".
>
> In the database it could be saved in a table like:
>
>   [Article ID | MetaTag     | MetaValue ]
>   ---------------------------------------
>   |        25 | Meaning     | something |
>   |        25 | WordType    |      noun |
>   |        25 | Translation |    <blob> |
>   |      3422 | Meaning     |   another |
>   ---------------------------------------
>
> The same shema can possibly be used for the template system. Editor will
> just have to add the template he want to use like {{city_template}} on
> saving then reediting it will show the field available in the template :
>
>  [City name]   [New York ]
>  [Population]  [9,245,542]
>  [Census year] [     2000]
>
> That can then be saved the same way:
>   [Article ID | MetaTag     | MetaValue ]
>   ---------------------------------------
>   |        39 | City Name   |  New York |
>   |        39 | Population  | 9,245,542 |
>   |        39 | Census year |      2000 |
>   ---------------------------------------
>
>
> That might be a way to rething the template system and allow an
> implementation of Gerard idea with even more capabilities (as editors
> can easily add their own fields / tables instead of waiting for
> developpers to code things).

Please note the above idea is from Erik Moeller posted on March 2004:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2004-March/009172.html

I just found the mail after I posted my email :-/

--
Ashar Voultoiz


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Arbitration

body:
Every time I have attempted to discuss it with Guanaco, he has deleted my posting off his Talk page without responding.

RickK

Anthere <anthere9 at yahoo.com> wrote:
Are you sure Rick, that the best solution to this case is arbitration
rather than mediation ?

After all, what we are dealing here with, is much more a conflict
between two different personalities, and between two different
approaches of the sysop role, than a conflict with a vandal.

Would not it be solve by discussing with Guanaco first ?

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!


body:
Where has it been publicized that this article exists, and that it requests open discussion?  And how can you say that we have to abide by it, if it's not yet policy?

RickK

Chris Wood <standsongrace at hotmail.com> wrote:
> How did something which was only first created on August 26 suddenly
become policy without a vote or an open discussion?

It's a proposed policy, and it requests open discussion.

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

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


body:
His actions on the VfD page and the pages listed there can only be considered vandalism.  Repeated deletions of VfD headers, and repeated deletions of pages listed on the VfD page is vandalism.  Non-consensus mass moving of pages is vandalism.  Repeated deletions of other people's discussions is vandalism.

RickK

Angela <beesley at gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, 6 Sep 2004 22:03:28 -0700 (PDT), Rick wrote:
> I have blocked Netoholic for 24 hours. I am sure somebody will run slavering to the Special pages in order to unblock him as soon as they see this, but I'll tell you why I have blocked him.

I'd unblocked him before you sent this. And it didn't involve running
or slavering.

> Netoholic, since his first few days on Wikipedia, has been nothing but disruptive.

I don't think that is a fair summary. Netoholic is not a troll acting
in bad faith. He believes he is improving the VfD system. In my
opinion, he's going about that the wrong way, but his edits can not be
classed as purely disruptive.

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

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Y! Messenger - Communicate in real time. Download now.


list: wiktionary-l

subject: [Fwd: [Wiktionary-l] The need for XML in a wiktionary context]

body:
A message I just received from Daniele:

************************************************************************

-------------------
XML is the new best standard to export information without a fixed format.
It allows us to import the data and show them as you want.
The problem of XML file is the type of encoding of the file.
We will know the type of encoding used in wiktionary to store data.

Other problem is the program to access XML data.
To create an all-platform-compatible program, best way is using Java.
All Windows, Mac, Linux, PocketPC, SmartPhone, PalmOS, Symbian, BeOS and
other OS have a version of Java Virtual Machine.
J2ME for embedded devices but it's a subdomain of J2SE.
-------------------

				by
							Ing. Lele

*************************************************************************

I just had a look at the Japanese and Chinese version - as much as I can understand wiktionary and wikipedia use utf-8 encoding, but not with European languages.

Is there a reason for this?

Now let's se a moment this scenario:

1) there are different wiktionaries
2) there are different free dictionaries
3) thera are different multilingual tables with spedfic content

Everywhere people work on one theme: creating Open Content in terms of translations. Work is being done two, three, four or even more times. To my opinion this is not necessary.
Working e.g. with MySQL databases xml is not a problem - and if we can concentrate on one single structure that feeds all of it - this would really be great. Efforts wouldn't be doubled anymore - instead of double or triple work we will have double or triple results.

Can you imagine any how to's - and moreover: how to organise this work?

Since many translators don't like working online I could imagine a dictionary software like the one Daniele wants to create for data input and proof reading - maybe combining things with OmegaT. Then take the encoded data and transfer it to the wiktionary.

This way we would have.
1) entries to be used in all wiktionaries (as editing should be in a multilanguage file or at least in part of it)
2) multilanguage tables of specific themes from where we easily can create bilingual tables
3) general dictionaries for the offline-user who can go to wiktionary when he desires additional information
4) what else?

For now: going back to my table :-)

Ciao, Sabine

--

Sabine Cretella
s.cretella at wordsandmore.it
www.wordsandmore.it
Meetingplace for translators
www.wesolveitnet.com


from_name: Thomas Gries

subject:
[Wikitech-l] Unifying watchlist handling (of pages and their talk
	pages)

body:
Dear developers,

in the framework of developping a reliable E-Mailnotification scheme
(see http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/EmailNotification ) I also changed
the equal handling of watching (watch list) pages and their
corresponding talk pages. This feature is nice and I like it, but the
implementation by using bit-masking to cover namespace and namespace+1
made me crazy while implementing a clean E-Mailnotification (E-Notif)
scheme.

Let me shortly explain the reasons.The E-Notif needs to store a
timestamp (when a notification was sent to user X watching page P) in
the database. But as I need to keep track which of these pages the user
X has re-visited - in order to clear the notification flag (timestamp) -
a separate entry for *each* page (page, page_talk) was necessary. The
about four changes were extremely simple.

The E-Mail notification patch will be published soon; the documentation
is constantly updated on the above mentioned page.

User_talk pages get still their very special treatment, but I am going
to propose to treat User_talk pages in the same way as other
watch-listed pages. This would make the code cleaner.

Tom aka Nyxos
Berlin


body:
Brion Vibber wrote:
> Ashar Voultoiz wrote:
>
>> Hello !
>>
>> Sometime ago there was a lot of discussion about a database shema
>> change. I am wondering if that's a dead-end horse or if we can
>> eventually start discussion again and eventually got the changes in
>> for version 1.4 ?
>
>
> The main holdup so far has been the knowledge that we'll need to convert
> the current Wikipedias, so any change needs to be constrained to reduce
> downtime.

Hello,

Maybe we can set up a read only mirror for a time. For example we might
put the wiki read only, disconnect slave and make the migration on
slave. Then we install the new MediaWiki software using the slave as
master, test it and then unplug the old system.

I am sure we can plan a 3 to 4 days maintenance window (maybe it will be
even longer) as long as we explain our users the aim of it. Of course we
don't want to fail the maintenance.

> The biggest changes that we'd like to do are:
>
> * Put current and old revisions together, to avoid having to juggle data
> between cur and old all the time and to allow a consistent revision
> numbering scheme (permalinks for current revision as well as the olds)
>
> * Separate page information like the title from the individual revision
> data, so page renames of longstanding pages don't bog down the server
> touching thousands of rows
>
> * Separate the actual *text* out of the revision information table so
> that contribs, history, etc don't pull so much junk into memory.

So instead of:

cur (cur_id, cur_ns, cur_title, cur_text, cur_user, cur_comment ...)
old (old_id, old_ns, old_title, old_text, old_user, old_comment ...)

We will have:

revisions (id, ns, title, user, comment, timestamp, text_id)
texts (text_id, text)

Where:
   'revisions.text_id' points to 'texts.text_id'

   'texts' hold the various text, a sysop revert will not duplicate text
in database since we will just reuse the text_id.

   'revisions' got an id and a pointer to a text. To get the up-to-date
article text we have to get the row that have the higher timestamp for a
given id.

With the millions of revision I am not sure if 'revisions' will be fast
maybe add another table wich cache the data like:

lastest(article_id, revision_id)

Where:
   'lastest.article_id' is UNIQUE
   'lastest.revisions_id' point to 'revisions.id'

Does it sounds correct ?

> And possibly:
> * Add language-specific title sort key field
Can't it be configured per database in mysql ? Looks like we can use
collation for this purpose:
http://dev.mysql.com/doc/mysql/en/Charset-database.html

Or we can just use the COLLATE statement everywhere, but that might lead
to trouble with postgreSQL support :
http://dev.mysql.com/doc/mysql/en/Charset-collate.html

> * Add case-insensitive 'canonical title match' field
I don't understand that one :o)

> Now as you can imagine changing the cur and old tables is about the most
> traumatizing thing we could do to the servers. :)

Yet I am sure it can be done if we carefully plan, test and make backups
of everything. We will have to set a roadbook for this maintenance with
detailled informations like:

   Who, When, How long, How do we revert it ...

Then we make a fake maintenance and check our roadbook is fine. If it's
not we start again. That will be a lot of works for developpers but I
think it's better than trying to recover the database and have the site
totally down for 2 weeks.

> A 'minimal effort' change could be to move all cur revisions into old,
> then rebuild a 'page' table from the cur data and let 'old' be a
> revisions table. I believe Jamesday has been experimenting with seeing
> how slow/fast this kind of conversion might be...
>
> -- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)

Sounds good, at least we will not have to build the revision table from
scratch :o)

--
Ashar Voultoiz


references:
<chi9tu$vv8$1@sea.gmane.org>
	<413CC55F.30307@pobox.com>	<chipdj$13t$1@sea.gmane.org>
	<413CEB1A.7010806@pobox.com>

body:
Brion Vibber wrote:
> Ashar Voultoiz wrote:
>> With the millions of revision I am not sure if 'revisions' will be
>> fast maybe add another table wich cache the data like:
>>
>> lastest(article_id, revision_id)
>>
>> Where:
>>   'lastest.article_id' is UNIQUE
>>   'lastest.revisions_id' point to 'revisions.id'
>
>
> Why have a separate table? Put that in the page table (equivalent of cur
> without the revisons themselves).

But the page table will have millions of entries (as it track all
current articles and past revisions). Maybe it will slow down queries ?
Or maybe it's what indexes are for, aren't they ?

>> Can't it be configured per database in mysql ? Looks like we can use
>> collation for this purpose:
>
> That's all MySQL 4.1 stuff, which is still in beta. We can't rely on any
> of it being present.

Maybe we can wait for MySQL 4.1 to become stable and well spread ... Not
sure if we can wait several months though.

--
Ashar Voultoiz, learning new things with Brion


from_name: Anthere

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Arbitration

body:
Are you sure Rick, that the best solution to this case is arbitration
rather than mediation ?

After all, what we are dealing here with, is much more a conflict
between two different personalities, and between two different
approaches of the sysop role, than a conflict with a vandal.

Would not it be solve by discussing with Guanaco first ?

Rick a ?crit:
> I entered the request at [[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/RickK vs. Guanaco]] in order to deal with the problem of Guanaco repeatedly making unilateral unblocks of blocked users.  This problem finally came to a head when he was not only unblocking Michael, even though Jimbo had asked him not to, but he was reverting my reversions and deletions of Michael's creations under Mike Grant even though this was in contravention of the decision that Michael was on hard ban and immediate revert.  Five members of the arbitration committee accepted the arbitration.
>
> Instead, this arbitration has turned into an ad hominem attack on me personally, and has been perverted into having nothing to do with Guanaco's actions, but entirely about me.  Fred Bauder, a member of the arbitration committee, has not only manufactured evidence which is not germane to the situation, but actively participates in the creation of information attacking me which has nothing to do even with me OR Guanaco.  I have asked him to recuse himself from the arbitration because of his collusion in this manufacturing of false evidence, but he has refused.  Instead, he has posted Jimbo's letter to the mailing list announcing his decision to unban Michael.  This mailing came after the creation of my request for arbitration and after Guanaco's unilateral unblockings, and therefore is irrelevant.  He is not only allowing, but encouraging, people not associated with the arbitration to pos
>  t information which has no bearing on the arbitration, and when I attempted to delete it,
>  he
>  repeatedly re-posted it.  As I said, with the active participation of Fred Bauder, the arbitration has become a completely different situation from what was voted on.  To my thinking, this means that the members of the arbitration committee should be requested to re-vote on whether or not to hear the case, since what they voted on is not what the case has turned into.
>
> I have repeatedly said that the arbitration process does not work.  The ONE previous time in which I bothered to participate, not only was the person against whom the arbitration was asked for (Wik) allowed off without so much as a slap on the wrist, but Hephaestos and I, the people who requested the arbitration in the first place, were admonished for our "bad behavior".  I vowed never to participate in the arbitration process again, but Guanaco's outrageous behavior caused me to rethink my position.
>
> Seeing how the process has become perverted into something it was not meant to be, I will once again say that I will no longer participate in this process, and I hereby repudiate the case which has my name on it, until such as time as Fred Bauder recuses himself and either the so-called evidence page is turned into evidence about the case that the members of the committee voted to hear, or they are allowed to take a revote.
>
> For the final time, I will no longer participate in this process.  It is not only unworkable, but too easily perverted into what it was not intended to be.
>
> RickK
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now.


from_name: Jens Ropers

subject: [WikiEN-l] Al Fasoldt

body:
I've recently had an email discussion with Al Fasoldt about the entire
"can-Wikipedia-be-trusted" affair.
He is ok with me sharing his emails, so I could forward all related
emails to this list.

Do people want me to do that?

I'm just asking 'cuz we're talking several emails here and I won't
trigger this minor flood unless people are interested.

-- Jens [[User:Ropers|Ropers]]
     www.ropersonline.com


list: foundation-l

subject: [Foundation-l] status

body:
I will be away or very little available for the next few days.
Have fun ;-)

Anthere


list: wikimedia-l

subject: [Foundation-l] status


from_name: Angela

body:
On Mon, 6 Sep 2004 22:03:28 -0700 (PDT), Rick <giantsrick13 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> I have blocked Netoholic for 24 hours.  I am sure somebody will run slavering to the Special pages in order to unblock him as soon as they see this, but I'll tell you why I have blocked him.

I'd unblocked him before you sent this. And it didn't involve running
or slavering.

> Netoholic, since his first few days on Wikipedia, has been nothing but disruptive.

I don't think that is a fair summary. Netoholic is not a troll acting
in bad faith. He believes he is improving the VfD system. In my
opinion, he's going about that the wrong way, but his edits can not be
classed as purely disruptive.

Angela.


from_name: Constans, Camille (C.C.)

subject: [Wikitech-l] Database shema : let's start the fun

body:
>
>Ashar Voultoiz wrote:
>> Hello !
>>
>> Sometime ago there was a lot of discussion about a database shema
>> change. I am wondering if that's a dead-end horse or if we can
>> eventually start discussion again and eventually got the
>changes in for
>> version 1.4 ?
>
>The main holdup so far has been the knowledge that we'll need
>to convert
>the current Wikipedias, so any change needs to be constrained
>to reduce
>downtime.
>
>The biggest changes that we'd like to do are:
>
>* Put current and old revisions together, to avoid having to
>juggle data
>between cur and old all the time and to allow a consistent revision
>numbering scheme (permalinks for current revision as well as the olds)

Personnaly I dont like the idea to put old and cur together, it will be more difficult to setup a dump job :)

>* Separate page information like the title from the individual
>revision
>data, so page renames of longstanding pages don't bog down the server
>touching thousands of rows

Dont really needed if 1 row = 1 page (old+cur) ?

>* Separate the actual *text* out of the revision information table so
>that contribs, history, etc don't pull so much junk into memory.

Yes, separate it, will improve speed of special pages :)

>And possibly:
>* Add language-specific title sort key field

Is it possible ?

>* Add case-insensitive 'canonical title match' field

for desambiguation ?

>Now as you can imagine changing the cur and old tables is
>about the most
>traumatizing thing we could do to the servers. :)

Well, doing it on ariel should be fast, the main pb is space :) We dont have enough actually to create a big temporary table.

>A 'minimal effort' change could be to move all cur revisions into old,
>then rebuild a 'page' table from the cur data and let 'old' be a
>revisions table. I believe Jamesday has been experimenting with seeing
>how slow/fast this kind of conversion might be...

I think all changes should be tested first on suda, and all queries we use should be benchmarked.

shaihulud


from_name: Matthew Larsen

subject: [WikiEN-l] New to list

body:
Good day all,

I have recently signed up to the WikiEN-l list and would like to say
hello to all members! If I post dumb or stupid replys to anything
please forgive me as I am new here.

Thank you for your time,

Regards,

--
Matthew Larsen
   > mat.larsen at gmail.com
   > 07739 785 249


from_name: Andrew Lih

subject: [WikiEN-l] Al Fasoldt

body:
Maybe a better ideas is to make a Meta or Wikipedia: page about it,
and point folks there.

-Andrew (User:Fuzheado)

On Tue, 7 Sep 2004 01:47:06 +0200, Jens Ropers <ropers at ropersonline.com> wrote:
> I've recently had an email discussion with Al Fasoldt about the entire
> "can-Wikipedia-be-trusted" affair.
> He is ok with me sharing his emails, so I could forward all related
> emails to this list.
>
> Do people want me to do that?
>
> I'm just asking 'cuz we're talking several emails here and I won't
> trigger this minor flood unless people are interested.
>
> -- Jens [[User:Ropers|Ropers]]
>      www.ropersonline.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

--
Andrew Lih
andrew.lih at gmail.com


from_name: Gerard Meijssen

body:
Jo wrote:

> Gerard Meijssen wrote:
>
>> Ray Saintonge wrote:
>>
>>> The current format is adequate.  Your proposal makes no mention of
>>> the possible sacrifices in terms of ease of editing, a key feature
>>> in all the wikis.  How will flexibility of format be maintained?
>>
>>
>>
>> XML is not to edited by hand. You are absolutely right about that.
>> However, the current format is not without its problems. At this
>> moment an English word cannot be re-used easily in other languages.
>> Things are free formatted at the moment. It would be a good thing if
>> we start thinking about creating some database structures for use
>> within wiktionary. It would rid us of these dratted templates like
>> {{en}} and {{-en-}}. They work, it is the best thing around but they
>> are ugly.
>>
>> What I propose at this time is to get us thinking about importing and
>> exporting in an XML format. And considering changes to enhance the
>> functionality within all wiktionaries and the functionality to the
>> outside world.
>>
>> One of the aims of wikimedia is to create open content. By having our
>> data in our proprietary format, we do not achieve what can be achieved.
>
>
> Being able to extract the data from the English Wiktionary is
> something that has always been on my mind. It is one of the
> considerations. Ease of editing is another. That's why the entries in
> Wiktionary may not look very pretty, but they are built up in a very
> logical way. It is possible, although probably not trivial, to process
> them with a script.
>
> If XML is not to be edited by hand, then how are we going to edit it?
> Is it compatible with the Wiki concept?
>
> If you want database structures, I can give you those. I have been
> designing a relational database capable of storing everything that is
> relevant for a dictionary. The problem is in the user interface.
> That's where I'm stuck. Another problem is how to keep a history of
> what was changed. Another thing is that I don't have any idea how
> performant my database would be. Building a presentable report for an
> entry involves solving relations between many, many tables.
>
> Anyway, if you're interested in having a look at it, I will gladly
> send you the OpenOffice.org drawing with the table structures.
>
> Polyglot
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wiktionary-l mailing list
> Wiktionary-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiktionary-l
>
>
XML will be the result of an extraction process. In the same way, XML
will/may result in entries into the Wiktionary database.

The problem with the current "structure" is that it is too fluent and is
prone to produce errors. Particularly problematic are the translations
with numbers indicating that may or may not exist indicating to what
meaning of a word they refer. It will be almost impossible to export to
XML because of this.

I am really happy that your database design is on META so that people
can comment on it.
(http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Tables_for_Wiktionary). As discussed
with Polyglot using SKYPE, I would prefer to have less tables. However,
it is really usefull to have thought out designs and as such it is
hopefull for the things that may come.

One thing that XML should be used for is to create a history that people
can subscribe to. This will export the Wiktionary content and will make
it more relevant to many translators as it is then a matter of reading
it into whatever format. When the changes are entered after 24 hours of
the last change, things like vandalism have less chance.

Some excellent touches in the db design are to include pictures and
sounds in it. Have SAMPA, but nothing beats hearing a native speaker
saying a word, a phrase. A description of a monkey sure, but a picture
paints a thousant words. One thing that can be added is somehing on
etymology.

Thanks,
    Gerard


from_name: KNOTT, T

subject: [WikiEN-l] New to list

body:
Hi Mathew and welcome to the wonderful world of this mailing list. I
might as well use this reply to announce that whilst I've been of this
list for a couple of months I'm back now. Theresa


from_name: Daniel Mayer

subject: [Foundation-l] Launch of the Wikimedia Commons

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

> I am pleased to announce that a database has now been set up for the
> Wikimedia Commons.

This is great news!

> The site is temporarily located at http://commons.wikimedia.org/ until
> the project gets its own domain.

I'm pretty sure the plan was to keep the domain name exactly like it is now
since it is a *common* resource for all Wikimedia projects (just like Meta).

> This provides a space for those interested to begin forming the
> guidelines for the site, and to discuss how the software will need to
> adapt to make the Commons as useful as possible.
>
> The previous discussions are now linked to from
> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Project_plan.
>
> Batches of files may be uploaded as compressed zip files. Some time in
> the next few days, a script will be written to decompress these zip
> files on the server side. Please make sure you use appropriate file
> names inside the archives.

Hm. Lot's of images to transfer. Could the transwiki function be tweaked in
order to do this?

-- mav

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


from_name: Zoney

subject: [WikiEN-l] New to list

body:
I'm also new to the list, I tried a couple of replies, but they didn't
seem to work.

I'm also testing Gmail, and it's threadingness - which makes it easy
to follow discussions, but I'm never sure if it's showing earlier
actual emails I've received, or formatting quoted text as such.

I'll figure it out I'm sure.

Zoney

On Tue, 7 Sep 2004 10:35:06 +0100, KNOTT, T <tknott at qcl.org.uk> wrote:
> Hi Mathew and welcome to the wonderful world of this mailing list. I
> might as well use this reply to announce that whilst I've been of this
> list for a couple of months I'm back now. Theresa
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

--
*~()____) This message will self-destruct in 5 seconds...


from_name: Charles Matthews

subject: [WikiEN-l] New to list

body:
Matthew Larsen wrote

> Good day all,

Welcome.  My chance to say that, while no longer a newbie, _I_ find that
there is a great deal of : low-class editing of replies here (which is one
way of making it hard to read the traffic); and misuse of the list to make
arguments that should be made, more coherently, in other WP places.  So if
you find it somewhat baffliing, you're not alone.  Somewhere in the noise
there _is_ information about WP trends.

Charles


from_name: Brion Vibber

subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: Automatic minor edits Pop Quiz

body:
rose.parks at att.net wrote:
>      Brion - you have yet to respond to everybodys' answers.

Congratulations, you all win a cookie!

Seriously though, while it's very tempting to try to use a technical
solution on things like this it, unfortunately, isn't a technically
tractable problem. Small textual changes can have huge significance
(including really bad vandalism) while small changes of meaning can
appear very large to the computer (for instance moving a couple
paragraphs around).

The minor edit checkbox isn't an iron-clad guarantee; it's just a "hint"
to other contributors, the machine-readable equivalent of putting
"spelling fix" or "formatting fix" or such in the edit summary. It's
unfortunate I think that many people take it _very very seriously_, and
I don't know why they do.

-- 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/20040907/379053ac/attachment.pgp>


subject: [Wiktionary-l] Language list for Wiktionary

body:
Hi, as I said before I created a language table to be used to code lists
of terms in order to easily transfer lists of translations between one
and another wiki.

I inserted English and German for now and will add Italian asap. If
Gerard doesn't have time I'll add Dutch as well (please let me know).

So all other languages are needed. I would therefore kindly ask you to
complete the list for your language/wiktionary or to ask for help on the
relative wiktionary.

For the moment I inserted more info in my wiki here:

http://wiki.wesolveitnet.com/wakka.php?wakka=HelpNeeded

There's also the download link - please absolutely let me know if you
start working on a language in order to avoid double work. I am going to
pass this message to some translator's lists as well asking for help.

Thank you and have a great day!

Sabine

--
Sabine Cretella
s.cretella at wordsandmore.it
www.wordsandmore.it
Meetingplace for translators
www.wesolveitnet.com


from_name: cookfire

body:
Gerard Meijssen schreef:

> Jo wrote:
>
>> Gerard Meijssen wrote:
>>
>>> Ray Saintonge wrote:
>>>
>>>> The current format is adequate.  Your proposal makes no mention of
>>>> the possible sacrifices in terms of ease of editing, a key feature
>>>> in all the wikis.  How will flexibility of format be maintained?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> XML is not to edited by hand. You are absolutely right about that.
>>> However, the current format is not without its problems. At this
>>> moment an English word cannot be re-used easily in other languages.
>>> Things are free formatted at the moment. It would be a good thing if
>>> we start thinking about creating some database structures for use
>>> within wiktionary. It would rid us of these dratted templates like
>>> {{en}} and {{-en-}}. They work, it is the best thing around but they
>>> are ugly.
>>>
>>> What I propose at this time is to get us thinking about importing
>>> and exporting in an XML format. And considering changes to enhance
>>> the functionality within all wiktionaries and the functionality to
>>> the outside world.
>>>
>>> One of the aims of wikimedia is to create open content. By having
>>> our data in our proprietary format, we do not achieve what can be
>>> achieved.
>>
>>
>>
>> Being able to extract the data from the English Wiktionary is
>> something that has always been on my mind. It is one of the
>> considerations. Ease of editing is another. That's why the entries in
>> Wiktionary may not look very pretty, but they are built up in a very
>> logical way. It is possible, although probably not trivial, to
>> process them with a script.
>>
>> If XML is not to be edited by hand, then how are we going to edit it?
>> Is it compatible with the Wiki concept?
>>
>> If you want database structures, I can give you those. I have been
>> designing a relational database capable of storing everything that is
>> relevant for a dictionary. The problem is in the user interface.
>> That's where I'm stuck. Another problem is how to keep a history of
>> what was changed. Another thing is that I don't have any idea how
>> performant my database would be. Building a presentable report for an
>> entry involves solving relations between many, many tables.
>>
>> Anyway, if you're interested in having a look at it, I will gladly
>> send you the OpenOffice.org drawing with the table structures.
>>
>> Polyglot
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wiktionary-l mailing list
>> Wiktionary-l at Wikipedia.org
>> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiktionary-l
>>
>>
> XML will be the result of an extraction process. In the same way, XML
> will/may result in entries into the Wiktionary database.
>
> The problem with the current "structure" is that it is too fluent and
> is prone to produce errors. Particularly problematic are the
> translations with numbers indicating that may or may not exist
> indicating to what meaning of a word they refer. It will be almost
> impossible to export to XML because of this.
>
> I am really happy that your database design is on META so that people
> can comment on it.
> (http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Tables_for_Wiktionary). As discussed
> with Polyglot using SKYPE, I would prefer to have less tables.
> However, it is really usefull to have thought out designs and as such
> it is hopefull for the things that may come.
>
> One thing that XML should be used for is to create a history that
> people can subscribe to. This will export the Wiktionary content and
> will make it more relevant to many translators as it is then a matter
> of reading it into whatever format. When the changes are entered after
> 24 hours of the last change, things like vandalism have less chance.
>
> Some excellent touches in the db design are to include pictures and
> sounds in it. Have SAMPA, but nothing beats hearing a native speaker
> saying a word, a phrase. A description of a monkey sure, but a picture
> paints a thousant words. One thing that can be added is somehing on
> etymology.

I have elaborated a bit on what the tables are meant for. Please feel
free to ask questions about it. I will gladly (try to) respond.

Jo


from_name: Brian Corr

subject: Netoholic blocking (was Re: [WikiEN-l] Re: Re: Re: Re: VfD is broken)

body:
I have left a message for Netoholic warning him that I will be blocking him
if he doesn't stop "refactoring" various talk pages where he is being
criticized, citing [[Wikipedia:Refactoring]] and [[Wikipedia:Remove
personal attacks]].

The message I left was here:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Netoholic#Warning_re:_refactoring>

Thanks,
Brian (Bcorr)

At 05:48 AM 9/7/2004 +0000, you wrote:
>Date: Mon, 6 Sep 2004 22:48:09 -0700 (PDT)
>From: Rick <giantsrick13 at yahoo.com>
>Subject: Re:
>To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
>Message-ID: <20040907054809.44301.qmail at web60606.mail.yahoo.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
>His actions on the VfD page and the pages listed there can only be
>considered vandalism.  Repeated deletions of VfD headers, and repeated
>deletions of pages listed on the VfD page is vandalism.  Non-consensus
>mass moving of pages is vandalism.  Repeated deletions of other people's
>discussions is vandalism.
>
>RickK
>
>Angela <beesley at gmail.com> wrote:
>On Mon, 6 Sep 2004 22:03:28 -0700 (PDT), Rick wrote:
> > I have blocked Netoholic for 24 hours. I am sure somebody will run
> slavering to the Special pages in order to unblock him as soon as they
> see this, but I'll tell you why I have blocked him.
>
>I'd unblocked him before you sent this. And it didn't involve running
>or slavering.
>
> > Netoholic, since his first few days on Wikipedia, has been nothing but
> disruptive.
>
>I don't think that is a fair summary. Netoholic is not a troll acting
>in bad faith. He believes he is improving the VfD system. In my
>opinion, he's going about that the wrong way, but his edits can not be
>classed as purely disruptive.
>
>Angela.


from_name: Phil Sandifer

subject:
Netoholic blocking (was Re: [WikiEN-l] Re: Re: Re: Re: VfD is
	broken)

body:
What portion of the blocking policy are you invoking in this warning?

-Snowspinner

On Sep 7, 2004, at 12:13 PM, Brian Corr wrote:

> I have left a message for Netoholic warning him that I will be
> blocking him if he doesn't stop "refactoring" various talk pages where
> he is being criticized, citing [[Wikipedia:Refactoring]] and
> [[Wikipedia:Remove personal attacks]].
>
> The message I left was here:
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Netoholic#Warning_re:
> _refactoring>
>
> Thanks,
> Brian (Bcorr)
>
> At 05:48 AM 9/7/2004 +0000, you wrote:
>> Date: Mon, 6 Sep 2004 22:48:09 -0700 (PDT)
>> From: Rick <giantsrick13 at yahoo.com>
>> Subject: Re:
>> To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
>> Message-ID: <20040907054809.44301.qmail at web60606.mail.yahoo.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>>
>> His actions on the VfD page and the pages listed there can only be
>> considered vandalism.  Repeated deletions of VfD headers, and
>> repeated deletions of pages listed on the VfD page is vandalism.
>> Non-consensus mass moving of pages is vandalism.  Repeated deletions
>> of other people's discussions is vandalism.
>>
>> RickK
>>
>> Angela <beesley at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, 6 Sep 2004 22:03:28 -0700 (PDT), Rick wrote:
>> > I have blocked Netoholic for 24 hours. I am sure somebody will run
>> slavering to the Special pages in order to unblock him as soon as
>> they see this, but I'll tell you why I have blocked him.
>>
>> I'd unblocked him before you sent this. And it didn't involve running
>> or slavering.
>>
>> > Netoholic, since his first few days on Wikipedia, has been nothing
>> but disruptive.
>>
>> I don't think that is a fair summary. Netoholic is not a troll acting
>> in bad faith. He believes he is improving the VfD system. In my
>> opinion, he's going about that the wrong way, but his edits can not be
>> classed as purely disruptive.
>>
>> Angela.
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


body:
David Wendt wrote:
> Also, I'd like to see the three-revert rule be coded in the software,
> instead of just being a voluntary rule.

Vandals would thank you profusely for that. The rest of us, however,
would be less thrilled.

-- 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/20040907/b55355b2/attachment.pgp>


from_name: Ray Saintonge

subject: [Wiktionary-l] Opening up the Wiktionary content

body:
Gerard Meijssen wrote:

> Anthere, Jimbo,
> At this moment, we are in the position of getting the cooperation of
> all kinds of outside people with regard to Wiktionary. This is
> documented to a large extend on META and on the wiktionary-l
> mailinglist. Because of the quality of the data that we are allowed to
> enter and because of the quality of the persons that are involved, it
> would really help if we are able to import but also export wiktionary
> data using XML structures.
>
> The benefits are:
> *We will open up to other open dictionary content for inclusion in
> wiktionary.
> *We will open up our content to other intrested parties.
> *The wiktionary content will not be only in our own "proprietary" format.
> *We will be able to import data from one wiktionary in the next. This
> will not only enhance the quality of the wiktionaries; it will also
> enhance the reputation of the wiktionaries.
> *We will prevent the duplication of effort. Much effort now goes in
> doing the same job over and over again. An example; the word
> "Nederlands" in nl:wiktionary has 68 exact translations; these words
> exist as well. Technically these words can be copied to ALL other
> wiktionaries. This is not possible at the moment. The human effort is
> huge and wasted as it can be automated.
>
> When a consensus arrives on how to do this, it will also mean that
> some programming will be required. Without your backing, I expect that
> nothing is going to happen. When we have arrived at a road map, it
> will mean that a lot of work will be needed to make the wiktionary
> data conformant for inclusion in the new scheme and have the technique
> to get this done. We cannot reasonably ask this of the wiktionary
> community and the wikitech community when this road map is not
> co-owned by the wikimedia board.
>
> Questions:
> *Acknowledge that you will consider this as being strategic to the
> development of Wiktionary.
> *Give a timeframe in which we will know that we can plan with a
> reasonable chance of getting things implemented. (basically when will
> we have an answer to the first question)

The implications of Gerald's proposal are very unclear, and he has yet
to outline them in detail.  His focus appears to be on the translation
aspects of Wiktionary, but he needs to be reminded that translations are
only the secondary objective of the Wiktionaries.  The primary objective
is to develop a detailed understanding of a language for speakers of
that language.  Etymology, pronunciation and notes to distinguish
different usages all serve that purpose.

Gerard does not make the programming that he wants very clear.  Where is
at least an example of what he would want a page to look like?

We are already free to exchange material with other sites with
compatible licensing.  The software that we use is not proprietary is it
is available for all to use without the payment of any licensing fees.
The comments about enhancing the quality and reputation of the
wiktionaries are subjective and speculative.  There is no evidence to
support this.   Before this can be seen as a strategic plan a lot more
detail should be given.

Ec


from_name: Wil Mahan

subject:
[Wikitech-l] Patch for bug 56 - section edits sometimes wrongly
	merged

body:
Hi all,

MediaWiki bug 56 describes a problem that occurs when
there is an edit conflit between two users. If user A
inserts a new section, while user B edits a section
lower on the page, no conflict is reported but user
B's section gets duplicated.

I think the problem occurs because when a user
performs a section edit,
Article::getTextOfLastEditWithSectionReplacedOrAdded()
always inserts the edited section into the most recent
revision of the page. This can produce incorrect
results if the page has been modified since the edit
form was loaded, because the numeric index of the
desired section may change. Furthermore, the two edits
may occur at very different parts of the page, so the
edit conflict merging code does not detect the
problem.

The attached patch (against CVS head) is my attempt to
fix the bug. When editing a section, the updated
section is inserted into the revision at the time
editing began, rather than always using the current
revision. This appeared to fix the problem for
a simple test case.

Any comments would be welcome. It has been suggested
that bug 275 might be related. It looks like that is a
different bug, although I'm not sure.

Regards,
Wil Mahan

_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush


body:
Rowan Collins wrote:
> As for how to migrate, I want to refloat an idea I had before, that if
> the wiki could be put into an 'audit-log' mode (where changes can be
> made, but aren't entered into the 'real' database), the main db could
> be set to read only, restructured, and then have the log of
> changes-that-happened-in-the-meantime applied to it.

While I'm leery of this because I'm afraid it's going to be fragile to
inconsistent changes (as for instance MySQL's database replication) it
may be worth pursuing.

One obvious problem is that we don't have that logging in 1.3 now:
either it would have to be hacked into both 1.4 and 1.3 in a compatible
fashion or we should nail down 1.4 sooner with the present schema, and
make the drastic changes on a 1.5.

I think it would be worth reducing the time between releases a bit;
we've tended to wander with changes that mostly work for a while, then
it takes a long time to stabilize everything. If we can concentrate on
fewer changes on a faster release cycle we might actually get more
completed.

-- 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/20040907/c0ef5292/attachment.pgp>


body:
Wil Mahan wrote:
> The attached patch (against CVS head) is my attempt to
> fix the bug.

Please attach the patch to the bugzilla report; the mailing list is set
to strip most attachments due to problems with viruses forging addresses
of list members.

-- 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/20040907/5ad85686/attachment.pgp>


body:
--- Rowan Collins <rowan.collins at gmail.com> wrote:

> Second, how come I see no attachment: is it my
> fault, yours, or the
> mailing list software's?
> Third, are you going to copy this to the said
> bugzilla report,
> attachment and all? Apologies if you're on your way
> there now, but
> there's little point in a dedicated bug database if
> we just go and
> discuss the bugs somewhere else...

Sorry, I didn't realize that the list had a problem
with attachments. I have uploaded the patch at
http://bugzilla.wikipedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=56 .
Discussing the patch there is fine with me if that is
more appropriate.

> So hang on, I'm not quite clear on this: what
> happens to the edits
> since 'the time editing began'? Or am I completely
> miunderstanding? Or

Say that user A and user B both load the edit page at
the same time, and user B is editing a section (it's
not important whether A is doing a section or regular
edit). User A submits a change that inserts (or
removes) a section above user B's section.

This changes the section index of user B's section, so
when he or she submits, the wrong section gets
replaced. The edit conflict merging code can't detect
this case.

My fix is for user B's submission to use the revision
at the time that user B loaded the edit form, rather
than the current revision (which user A has modified).

> is this just a proof-of-analysis type patch, not an
> actual
> ready-for-inclusion fix?

This patch should be ready for inclusion unless
someone sees a problem with it. In the long run it
might not be the most efficient way of doing things.
With my patch, in the case of an section edit conflict
the database is queried for the old text twice: in
EditPage::mergeChangesInto() and
Article::getTextOfLastEditWithSectionReplacedOrAdded().
But I think my patch is the most straightforward
solution for now.

-- Wil

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


body:
Wil Mahan wrote:
> --- Rowan Collins <rowan.collins at gmail.com> wrote:
>>So hang on, I'm not quite clear on this: what
>>happens to the edits
>>since 'the time editing began'? Or am I completely
>>miunderstanding? Or
[snip]
> My fix is for user B's submission to use the revision
> at the time that user B loaded the edit form, rather
> than the current revision (which user A has modified).

I think what Rowan's asking (correct me if I'm wrong) is whether the end
result properly merges intermediate edits, or if it overwrites changes
that have been made by B (or potential C, D, E, etc in between A and B).

If I understand, this patch should make a section edit on conflict act
as the equivalent of having done a full-page edit in the first place. So
if the edit conflict automatic merging is actually working correctly I
suppose it ought to be ok, but I haven't looked too closely.

-- 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/20040907/4a8bbcf6/attachment.pgp>


body:
Anthere, Jimbo,
At this moment, we are in the position of getting the cooperation of all
kinds of outside people with regard to Wiktionary. This is documented to
a large extend on META and on the wiktionary-l mailinglist. Because of
the quality of the data that we are allowed to enter and because of the
quality of the persons that are involved, it would really help if we are
able to import but also export wiktionary data using XML structures.

The benefits are:
*We will open up to other open dictionary content for inclusion in
wiktionary.
*We will open up our content to other intrested parties.
*The wiktionary content will not be only in our own "proprietary" format.
*We will be able to import data from one wiktionary in the next. This
will not only enhance the quality of the wiktionaries; it will also
enhance the reputation of the wiktionaries.
*We will prevent the duplication of effort. Much effort now goes in
doing the same job over and over again. An example; the word
"Nederlands" in nl:wiktionary has 68 exact translations; these words
exist as well. Technically these words can be copied to ALL other
wiktionaries. This is not possible at the moment. The human effort is
huge and wasted as it can be automated.

When a consensus arrives on how to do this, it will also mean that some
programming will be required. Without your backing, I expect that
nothing is going to happen. When we have arrived at a road map, it will
mean that a lot of work will be needed to make the wiktionary data
conformant for inclusion in the new scheme and have the technique to get
this done. We cannot reasonably ask this of the wiktionary community and
the wikitech community when this road map is not co-owned by the
wikimedia board.

Questions:
*Acknowledge that you will consider this as being strategic to the
development of Wiktionary.
*Give a timeframe in which we will know that we can plan with a
reasonable chance of getting things implemented. (basically when will we
have an answer to the first question)

Thanks,
    Gerard Meijssen (GerardM)


from_name: David Wendt

body:
Oh, and just to stir this up a little more (heh) I've been hearing ideas
about shrinking the old table by only storing diffs from the last full
edit, that is, for n histories, store 1 complete edit, then store the
diffs between that edit and the next n edits. You think we should try
doing something like that?

Also, I'd like to see the three-revert rule be coded in the software,
instead of just being a voluntary rule.

Constans, Camille (C.C.) wrote:

>>Ashar Voultoiz wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Hello !
>>>
>>>Sometime ago there was a lot of discussion about a database shema
>>>change. I am wondering if that's a dead-end horse or if we can
>>>eventually start discussion again and eventually got the
>>>
>>>
>>changes in for
>>
>>
>>>version 1.4 ?
>>>
>>>
>>The main holdup so far has been the knowledge that we'll need
>>to convert
>>the current Wikipedias, so any change needs to be constrained
>>to reduce
>>downtime.
>>
>>The biggest changes that we'd like to do are:
>>
>>* Put current and old revisions together, to avoid having to
>>juggle data
>>between cur and old all the time and to allow a consistent revision
>>numbering scheme (permalinks for current revision as well as the olds)
>>
>>
>
>Personnaly I dont like the idea to put old and cur together, it will be more difficult to setup a dump job :)
>
>
>
>>* Separate page information like the title from the individual
>>revision
>>data, so page renames of longstanding pages don't bog down the server
>>touching thousands of rows
>>
>>
>
>Dont really needed if 1 row = 1 page (old+cur) ?
>
>
>
>>* Separate the actual *text* out of the revision information table so
>>that contribs, history, etc don't pull so much junk into memory.
>>
>>
>
>Yes, separate it, will improve speed of special pages :)
>
>
>
>>And possibly:
>>* Add language-specific title sort key field
>>
>>
>
>Is it possible ?
>
>
>
>>* Add case-insensitive 'canonical title match' field
>>
>>
>
>for desambiguation ?
>
>
>
>
>>Now as you can imagine changing the cur and old tables is
>>about the most
>>traumatizing thing we could do to the servers. :)
>>
>>
>
>Well, doing it on ariel should be fast, the main pb is space :) We dont have enough actually to create a big temporary table.
>
>
>
>>A 'minimal effort' change could be to move all cur revisions into old,
>>then rebuild a 'page' table from the cur data and let 'old' be a
>>revisions table. I believe Jamesday has been experimenting with seeing
>>how slow/fast this kind of conversion might be...
>>
>>
>
>I think all changes should be tested first on suda, and all queries we use should be benchmarked.
>
>shaihulud
>_______________________________________________
>Wikitech-l mailing list
>Wikitech-l at wikimedia.org
>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>
>
>


from_name: Chris Wood

body:
> How did something which was only first created on August 26 suddenly
become policy without a vote or an open discussion?

It's a proposed policy, and it requests open discussion.


from_name: Rich Points

subject: [Foundation-l] Mediawiki installation trouble

body:
Howdy,
I hope this is the right list to post this inquiry, if not can someone direct me to the appropriate list.  I'm trying to install mediawiki 1.3.2 and I'm getting the following error report.  Can someone tell me what I'm doing wrong?
Thanks
Rich

a.. PHP 4.3.8: ok
a.. Warning: PHP's register_globals option is enabled. MediaWiki will work
correctly, but this setting increases your exposure to potential security
vulnerabilities in PHP-based software running on your server. You should
disable it if you are able.
a.. PHP server API is apache; ok, using pretty URLs (index.php/Page_Title)
a.. Have XML / Latin1-UTF-8 conversion support.
a.. PHP's memory_limit is 16M. If this is too low, installation may fail!
Attempting to raise limit to 20M... ok.
a.. Have zlib support; enabling output compression.
a.. Found GD graphics library built-in, image thumbnailing will be enabled
if you enable uploads.
a.. Installation directory:
a.. Script URI path: /wiki
Warning: Unknown(DefaultSettings.php): failed to open stream: No such file
or directory in /opt2/home3/rd6714/public_html/wiki/config/index.php(373) :
eval()'d code on line 8

Warning: (null)(): Failed opening 'DefaultSettings.php' for inclusion
(include_path='.::/includes:/languages') in
/opt2/home3/rd6714/public_html/wiki/config/index.php(373) : eval()'d code on
line 8

Notice: Constant already defined in ./includes/Namespace.php on line 8

Notice: Constant already defined in ./includes/Namespace.php on line 9

Notice: Constant already defined in ./includes/Namespace.php on line 12

Notice: Constant already defined in ./includes/Namespace.php on line 13

Notice: Constant already defined in ./includes/Namespace.php on line 14

Notice: Constant already defined in ./includes/Namespace.php on line 15

Notice: Constant already defined in ./includes/Namespace.php on line 16

Notice: Constant already defined in ./includes/Namespace.php on line 17

Notice: Constant already defined in ./includes/Namespace.php on line 18

Notice: Constant already defined in ./includes/Namespace.php on line 19

Notice: Constant already defined in ./includes/Namespace.php on line 20

Notice: Constant already defined in ./includes/Namespace.php on line 21

Notice: Constant already defined in ./includes/Namespace.php on line 22

Notice: Constant already defined in ./includes/Namespace.php on line 23

Notice: Constant already defined in ./includes/Namespace.php on line 24

Notice: Constant already defined in ./includes/Namespace.php on line 25

Notice: Constant already defined in ./includes/Namespace.php on line 26

Notice: Constant already defined in ./includes/Namespace.php on line 27

Notice: Constant already defined in ./includes/Namespace.php on line 28

Notice: Constant already defined in ./includes/Namespace.php on line 29

Fatal error: Cannot redeclare

--
Rich Points
Rich at RichPoints.com
http://RichPoints.com


subject:
Netoholic blocking (was Re: [WikiEN-l] Re: Re: Re: Re: VfD
	isbroken)

body:
Netholic is not an IP address, however - he's a logged in user, and he
certainly doesn't qualify as a "new" account, which is a criterion for
blocking logged in users under this policy.

Not saying I don't think he's a problem - just pointing out once again
that we do need more options in the blocking policy, because as it
stands the rules don't leave any room for dealing with this.

-Snowspinner

On Sep 7, 2004, at 4:15 PM, Brian Corr wrote:

> The relevant policy is at
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Blocking_policy#Disruption>,
> which says in part:
>
> "Sysops may, at their judgement, block IP addresses that disrupt the
> normal functioning of Wikipedia. Such disruption is to be objectively
> defined by specific policies, and may include changing other user's
> signed comments or making deliberately misleading edits. Users should
> be warned that they are violating policy before they are blocked."
>
> And, BTW, the warning has now become a discussion. See:
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Netoholic#Warning_re:
> _refactoring>
> and
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Netoholic#refactoring> for the
> previous discussion that led up to this.
>
> Thanks,
> Brian (BCorr)
>
> Phil Sandifer wrote
> >What portion of the blocking policy are you invoking in this warning?
> >
> >-Snowspinner
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


body:
--- Brion Vibber <brion at pobox.com> wrote:
> > My fix is for user B's submission to use the
> revision
> > at the time that user B loaded the edit form,
> rather
> > than the current revision (which user A has
> modified).
>
> I think what Rowan's asking (correct me if I'm
> wrong) is whether the end
> result properly merges intermediate edits, or if it
> overwrites changes
> that have been made by B (or potential C, D, E, etc
> in between A and B).

Thanks for the clarification. With the patch all
intermediate edits should be merged. If it is not
possible to merge changes, an edit conflit will be
reported as usual, so it should not be possible for
edits to be silently overwritten.

> If I understand, this patch should make a section
> edit on conflict act
> as the equivalent of having done a full-page edit in
> the first place. So
> if the edit conflict automatic merging is actually
> working correctly I
> suppose it ought to be ok, but I haven't looked too
> closely.

Right--when doing a section edit, the equivalent of a
full-page edit is created before any merging takes
place; that's true both with and without the patch. My
patch only corrects the way the full-page text is
constructed, so merging still takes place as usual.

-- Wil

_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush


from_name: Stan Shebs

body:
Sabine Cretella wrote:

>
> E.g. what disturbes a bit is that foreign language words are "seen" in
> the wiktionary. This is confusing. German should only give German
> terminology in its lists, English the English one, Dutch the Dutch one
> etc. When I am on the English wiktionary and find "Deutsch" as a
> single page this is not logic to me - the term "Deutsch" should be
> linked to the German wiktionary instead and should not appear in the
> listing under the letter "D".

If a high-school student was using Wiktionary for German class,
it would be kind of useless to send her over to read a definition
of "Deutsch" written *in* German, eh? Not all words translate
mechanically either, consider "Ordnung" for instance; you need an
explanation in English of its subtleties, not in a language with
whose subtleties you are unfamiliar.

Stan


body:
Yeah, your probably right... Especially on heavily vandalized webpages...

Brion Vibber wrote:

> David Wendt wrote:
>
>> Also, I'd like to see the three-revert rule be coded in the software,
>> instead of just being a voluntary rule.
>
>
> Vandals would thank you profusely for that. The rest of us, however,
> would be less thrilled.
>
> -- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>Wikitech-l mailing list
>Wikitech-l at wikimedia.org
>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>
>


from_name: Robert

subject: [WikiEN-l] A future for Nupedia?

body:
>>> Having an article only gives the impression to readers
>>> that we tolerate junk.

>> Which is good.  If we give the impression to readers
>> that we tolerate only full-grown complete articles,
>> we will detract contributors who are perhaps not quite
>> as good a writer as they would like to be.

> Exactly. This is why Nupedia failed.

That may be one of the reasons why the early attempt at
Nupedia failed, but the idea behind Nupedia still lives.
Haven't many of us discussed some form of stable Wikipedia
1.0, which has some form of peer-review above the usual?
And perhaps Nupedia was a bit premature, as we were asking
volunteers to start from zero.

Wikipedia has grown immensely in the last few years. The
number of people with serious academic credentials who have
some favorable opinion of it has probably grown by an order
of magnitude as well. Now that a huge amount of open-source
material is already available here, it should be easier to
re-kindle the Nupedia project today.  The idea would be
much more attractive this time around, as (on many
subjects) people wouldn't have to start from scratch.
Contributors could take a series of Wikipedia articles (if
they wished) and use this text as a launching pad for their
own work.

Like Larry Sanger, I am still concerned about the long-term
prestige of Wikipedia. As long as many contributors don't
reference their claims, and don't rely on published
authorities (at least to some extent), then many people in
academic won't take our articles seriously. But using
Wikipedia as an open-source feeder for growing Nupedia
articles leverages everyone's efforts; the whole could be
much greater than the sum of its parts.

Nupedia might not have worked then. But one or two years
from now it might be the perfect idea.

Robert (RK)

=====
I?m astounded by people who want to "know" the universe when it?s hard enough to find your way around Chinatown. - Woody Allen

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


subject: [WikiEN-l] JFW

body:
--- wikien-l-request at Wikipedia.org wrote:

> Send WikiEN-l mailing list submissions to
> 	wikien-l at Wikipedia.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> 	http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help'
> to
> 	wikien-l-request at Wikipedia.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	wikien-l-owner at Wikipedia.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is
> more specific
> than "Re: Contents of WikiEN-l digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Re: VfD is broken (Tim Starling)
>    2. Re: Re: Re: VfD is broken (Chris Wood)
>    3. Re: Re: Re: VfD is broken (Chris Wood)
>    4. Re: Re: Re:VfD is broken (Matt Brown)
>    5. Re: Re: Re:VfD is broken (Chris Wood)
>    6. Re: VfD is broken (Chris Wood)
>    7. Re: WikiEN-l Digest, Vol 14, Issue 14 (Denni)
>    8. Re: Please stop Danny from harassing me (J.F. de
> Wolff)
>    9. Announcing Wikibookclub (daniwo59 at aol.com)
>   10. Re: Re: Re: Re: VfD is broken (Rick)
>   11. Re: Re: Re: Re: VfD is broken (Rick)
>
>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 06 Sep 2004 12:09:11 +1000
> From: Tim Starling <ts4294967296 at hotmail.com>
> Subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: VfD is broken
> To: wikien-l at wikipedia.org
> Message-ID: <chggs8$rkp$1 at sea.gmane.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
>
> Chris Wood wrote in full:
> > Deletionism is a problem because it is against current
> Wikipedia policies.
>
> [...and some other similar posts]
>
> Chris, how about rolling those 6 posts up into one in the
> future, and
> quoting the text that you're replying to. This is a
> mailing list, not IM.
>
> -- Tim Starling
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Mon, 6 Sep 2004 14:05:51 +1200
> From: "Chris Wood" <standsongrace at hotmail.com>
> Subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Re: Re: VfD is broken
> To: wikien-l at wikipedia.org
> Message-ID: <chggsa$s0g$1 at sea.gmane.org>
>
> > Stubs yes, but their notability and/or verifiability is
> another. What
> > will people think of how trustworthy our information is
> if we permit
> > rubbish such as a biased advertisement for a discussion
> forum to
> > languish on Wikipedia?
>
> But what do you mean by notability? Your humble opinion?
> Have a look at the
> proposed policy on what "notability" means at
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Importance.
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Mon, 6 Sep 2004 14:05:56 +1200
> From: "Chris Wood" <standsongrace at hotmail.com>
> Subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Re: Re: VfD is broken
> To: wikien-l at wikipedia.org
> Message-ID: <chggse$s0g$2 at sea.gmane.org>
>
> > Unfortunately, the things which CAN be quickly deleted
> are very limited.
> Right now, there is a huge number of pages written by a
> troll named [[El
> Coronado]] which are obvious fiction, but they are not
> allowed to be speedy
> deleted, because obviously false information is not an
> acceptable condition
> (by some) for speedy deletion.  Instead, we have to go
> through the
> cumbersome VfD process to get rid of them.  If obviously
> false information
> was an accpetable criterion, then we could have gotten
> rid of all of this
> user's creations already, and we wouldn't have several
> different entries on
> VfD for them.
> >
> > If there were no VfD, what would be the inclusionists'
> acceptable process
> for getting rid of this false information?
>
> I don't think any "inclusionists" have argued to get rid
> of VfD. We're just
> saying it isn't working like it was originally designed
> to. I don't have an
> alternative process, just a recommendation that people
> actually follow
> policy on which articles should be listed on VfD - this
> is
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Importance
>
> > It took a great deal of work and research by several
> people actively
> involved in the VfD process to make this into a useable
> article.  Would
> those of you objecting to VfD actually have preferred
> that it have remained
> as it was in its original state?
> > I am an active participant in [[Cleanup]].  But there
> are hundreds of
> articles listed there that never get worked on.  By
> putting a 5-day deadline
> on them on the VfD page, we get some very reasonable
> articles, which then
> get kept.  VfD is NOT just a "deletionist" playground,
> it's a serious effort
> by many people to make decent articles, or to figure out
> what to do with
> articles that aren't decent.
>
> We are saying "improve the article, don't delete it , if
> the article is
> important (Wikipedia:Importance) enough". VfD is not
> about improvement, it's
> about deletion. Cleanup is about improvement. Yes, there
> are some articles
> (less than hundreds) which are never worked on. Yet
> surely that is better
> than the hundreds which are deleted, not because they
> don't belong in
> Wikipedia, but because they aren't good enough?
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Sun, 5 Sep 2004 19:10:58 -0700
> From: Matt Brown <morven at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Re: Re:VfD is broken
> To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at wikipedia.org>
> Message-ID: <42f90dc0040905191057474d1c at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
>
> On Mon, 6 Sep 2004 13:50:43 +1200, Chris Wood
> <standsongrace at hotmail.com> wrote:
> > Deletionism is a problem because it is against current
> Wikipedia policies.
>
> Both extremes - extreme deletionism, and extreme
> inclusionism - are
> against current Wikipedia policies.
>
> -Matt (User:Morven)
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Mon, 6 Sep 2004 14:16:37 +1200
> From: "Chris Wood" <standsongrace at hotmail.com>
> Subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Re: Re:VfD is broken
> To: wikien-l at wikipedia.org
> Message-ID: <chgham$t1v$1 at sea.gmane.org>
>
> > > Deletionism is a problem because it is against
> current Wikipedia
> policies.
> >
> > Both extremes - extreme deletionism, and extreme
> inclusionism - are
> > against current Wikipedia policies.
> >
> > -Matt (User:Morven)
>
>
=== message truncated ===

=====
I?m astounded by people who want to "know" the universe when it?s hard enough to find your way around Chinatown. - Woody Allen

_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/goldrush


body:
The relevant policy is at
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Blocking_policy#Disruption>, which
says in part:

"Sysops may, at their judgement, block IP addresses that disrupt the normal
functioning of Wikipedia. Such disruption is to be objectively defined by
specific policies, and may include changing other user's signed comments or
making deliberately misleading edits. Users should be warned that they are
violating policy before they are blocked."

And, BTW, the warning has now become a discussion. See:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Netoholic#Warning_re:_refactoring>
and
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Netoholic#refactoring> for the
previous discussion that led up to this.

Thanks,
Brian (BCorr)

Phil Sandifer wrote
 >What portion of the blocking policy are you invoking in this warning?
 >
 >-Snowspinner


from_name: rose.parks at att.net

body:
Hi,

     The quoted rules are Brion's revision of Chris Wood's original. Brion changed exactly 4 words; he made every "major" into "minor," and vice-versa. Then, according to Chris' rules this version is a "minor" edit of Chris' original - despite the fact that it say the exact opposite of Chris' rules.
     Brion - you have yet to respond to everybodys' answers.

                    As Ever,

                       Ruth Ifcher
--

-------------- Original message from "Chris Wood" : --------------

> >Chris Wood wrote:
> >> Rules for marking minor edits could go something like this:
> >> 1) All edits by anonymous users are minor (same rule as now)
> >> 2) A change of 5 words or less, not next to each other or in the same
> >> sentence, is major.
> >> 3) Any number of formatting changes (italics, tables, header levels etc)
> is
> >> major.
> >> 4) Everything else is minor.
> >
> >Pop quiz: what's wrong with the above text?
> >
> >-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
>
> LOL, *is embarrassed*
>
> As Timwi said, perhaps "minor" should be renamed to "trivial" in any case,
> in which case maybe this could work?
>
> Or perhaps just a "min-diff" thing as Erik suggested.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


from_name: Rick

subject: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedia blocking policy

body:
I'm through.  I won't be blocking a single vandal again.  Danny and Guanaco have allowed this nonsense to run rampant, and I get no support in the issue.  They want to mentor any and all vandals, let them.

RickK

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


subject: [WikiEN-l] JFW's and fundamentalist censorship

body:
JFW writes:
> The Maimonides issue has spun completely out of control,
> like many other pages where RK decides to take over.

No one has taken over any article. The real problem, as I
encourage you to see for yourself, is that JFW has refused
to offer any ideas, yet becomes angry when POVs other than
his exist. I have repeatedly extended my hand in
friendship, and encourged him to offer points-of-view from
within his own community. We have communicated in a most
friendly fashion in private e-mail and on a number of Talk
pages. I always welcome his point of view.  I would love
for these articles to include many points of view. But what
can I do?  JFW refuses to include any POVs he claims exist
from within his own community, and it hurts him that
not-ultra-Orthodox POVs views exist.

All JFW has been able to do so far is to protest the very
existence of ideas that differ from his own.  That is not
Wikipedia NPOV policy.

I understand that an ultra-Orthodox Jew, JFW has only
rarely been exposed to critical-historical research of his
own faith. Still, it is a bit startling to see him dismiss
the writing of his fellow Orthodox Jew so blithely. Nothing
I added was original research; rather, I merely referred to
the views of mainstream scholars of the topic - many of
whom themselves are Orthodox Jews. Unfortunately, JFW has a
very select list of who he consideres authentic Orthodox
Jewish scholars and rabbis, and he is pained by the
citation of people not on his very short list.

To give an example of JFW's misunderstandings, the last
time I mentioned Orthodox Jewish points of view on the
topic of Artscroll books, he posted a panicky attack
accusing me of damaging Jewish unity.  What JFW fails to
understand is that Wikipedia is not a fundamentalist Jewish
religious publisher.  The goal of Wikipedia is NOT to
foster JFW's idea of "Jewish unity", Joe's idea of
"Christian Unity", or Sally's idea of "Islamic Unity".  Our
goal is academic honesty and integrity.

A long time ago we found that many of our Christian
fundamentalists, Jewish fundamentalist and Muslim
fundamentalists became angry when they were confronted with
historical-critical studies of their faiths. So?  They
learn to allow these other points of view to exist, or they
revert all the material which pains them, and then they
eventually get reprimanded. JFW should choose wisely.

JFw writes:
> He deposits a lot of research, most of which is only
> of marginal relevance to the issue,

Wow, that is dishonest. We were discussing a very specific
issue, and JFW and Jayjg repearedly asked me to provide
quotes and references. I complied; In response, JFW is now
attacking me for politely presenting the very quotes he
explicitly asked me for. I find it mean and disingenous for
someone to ask me to provide citations, yet then to
complain when I comply.  That's outrageous behaviour.

JFW writes:
> and causes long and heated debates on talk pages
> whether these insertions are justified.

Yes, this occurs on every one of our pages about religion,
Jewish, Christian and Muslim. If you cannot handle this,
then this forum is not for you. I have seen a few Chrisitan
fundamentalists here become very angry when confronted with
sources that do not match thier religious dogma; the same
is true for Jewish fundamentalists such as you and Ezra
Wax. You both get angry when you see a historical-critical
POV.

This has all happened before. For example, see Ezra Wax's
old battles with Danny.  Ezra viewed Danny's contributions
as wrong, heretical and biased. In Ezra's view, unless the
article was acceptable to ultra-Orthodox Jews, it was not
"NPOV".  Unfortunately Ezra was wrong. As Danny pointed out
to him, NPOV does not mean that everyone will agree with
the article. It merely means that we say that "According to
group A, the following is true, while according to group B,
such-and-such is true".  Your problem is that you don't
want the article to mention points of view that you
consider heretical, and that's not cool.

JFW writes:
> Often, vital POVs are not represented, because
> RK favours particular sources for his research
> and (?conveniently) forgets to mention that these
> POVs exist.

I am pained to see such deliberate falsehoods. Folks,
please check the talk pages for the articles in question.
You will see that I have repeatedly asked JFW to bring
forth other POVs, if he believes that they exist.  JFW
refuses to do so - and that is his fault, for which he can
blame no one else. Instead of bringing forth other POVs, he
tries to censor those that he finds heretical or
inconvient. He especially seems angry at the views of
Orthodox Jews who are not ultra-Orthodox.

JFw writes:
> I do not argue with Robert over pages that don't
> have my interest, but we recently had a major flurry
> over [[Artscroll]], a Jewish publisher of religious
> texts. Robert wanted to insert allegations expressed
> on mailing lists concerning the historicity and
factuality
> of the content of many of these books. While some of
> these allegations came from respectable sources, some
> others were simple paranoid mumblings by mailinglist
contributors.

This is shockingly dishonest. The issue, ironically, was
about the phenomenon of ultra-Orthodox Jews censoring facts
that they found inconvenient.

We are talking about an ultra-Orthodox Jewish publisher
faking photos in Soviet-style revisionism, censoring facts
about the life of religious scholars, etc.  The faked
photss and censored texts are well-established facts. The
phenomenon is openly discussed in the academic Jewish
community, and a significant amount of criticism towards
this censorship exists in the modern Orthodox community.

The fact that JFW is at odds with his own fellow Orthodox
Jews over censorship and historical distortion is a private
matter; the fact that he misrepresents this subject in
order to effectively censor an article is richly ironic.

> I'm seriously wondering where this is heading.

This is an ad homenim attack, attributing sinister
intentions to me, solely because I am openly discussing
subjects that you wish to keep hidden. For shame.

We here on Wikipedia do not allow Christian, Jewish or
Muslim fundamentalists to restrict the topic or contents of
our articles, in order to meet their comfort levels.  As I
have always done, I continue to invite you to provide
quotes and references to back up any points-of-view that
you would like to include within any of our articles. Just
stop attacking other people for having the right to do the
same.

Robert (RK)

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


from_name: Angela

body:
I am pleased to announce that a database has now been set up for the
Wikimedia Commons.

The site is temporarily located at http://commons.wikimedia.org/ until
the project gets its own domain.

This provides a space for those interested to begin forming the
guidelines for the site, and to discuss how the software will need to
adapt to make the Commons as useful as possible.

The previous discussions are now linked to from
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Project_plan.

Batches of files may be uploaded as compressed zip files. Some time in
the next few days, a script will be written to decompress these zip
files on the server side. Please make sure you use appropriate file
names inside the archives.

Thanks to Tim Starling for creating the database, and to all those who
have contributed to the discussion so far.

Angela.


body:
Sabine Cretella wrote:

> Referring to the posts of Ray and Gerard: my problem was and still is
> (but much less now) how to make e.g. multilingual ressources of my
> project on sourceforge.net available to wiktionary. At the moment we
> are talking about how to be able to pass translations of words easily
> from one wiktionary to the other as this part is the easiest of all.
> But if you had a look at the tables Polyglot uploaded to the meta site
> you would have seen that these tables include punctuation, synonyms,
> opposites, definitions, part of speech and much, much more (to me it
> was quite overwhelming as we translators think in glossaries and not
> all those particular definitions for a term).

I looked at his pdf file and found it pretty.  My browser would not open
the other one; I don't know what software is needed for that.

The first thing that we need to address is the purpose and philosophy of
a dictionary.  To me, a dictionary is primarily descriptive, and not
prescriptive.  The multi-volume Oxford English Dictionary is a model to
be followed.  An ideal Wiktionary article will include a series of
definitions that trace the history of the word over the centuries.  The
etymology is important for understanding these uses.  I tend to view
translations as a form of synonym which happens to be in another
language.  They are guide lines which the wise translator will consider
but will not consider binding.  I would not depend on BabelFish to give
me a good Italian translation of Shakespeare or a good English
translation of Dante.

> So now we have quite a good method to copy and paste quite easily
> translations into the different wiktionaries, but does it make sense
> that a work needs to be repetead for every language again and again?
> Do we really have that much time to spend? Up to some weeks it was not
> even possible to think about a copy and paste method and thanks Gerard
> it is there - so its one huge step ahead, but it is still far away
> from being "time friendly".  Users (contributing users) should talk
> about concentrating efforts in order to have better results in less
> time. Now we are using the wiktionary just like the huge dictionary
> editors used to do years ago when every single word with all the
> relevant information was written on single sheets. The techinques are
> there to avoid double or in case of language translatios multiple work
> (how many wiktionaries are there? 20? 30? I did not check this out) so
> instead of one person needing one hour for a certain work this menas
> 30 hours of work to do the same job for 30 witkonaries. I agree,
> wiktionary is open content, but contributing people are working - and
> 30 hours are almost a week of work ... how much does this cost?
> where's the break even point for hours invested for programming and
> hours invested to let's say only 5000 terms? We are talking about
> computers and software of the second millennium not about the good old
> Zuse.

A volunteer project does not usually need to think in terms of financial
break even points.  Nobody is getting paid. :-)   Better results depend
on what you mean by that term.

> Please don't become upset now: but we should try to make things with a
> certain criteria from the beginning on - it is much harder to do it
> afterwards when there's a lot of data inserted and the need is
> definitely there. To my experience wiktionary is going to be used by
> at least 90% of the people like a dictionary - to search a word in a
> certain language.

We "have" been working on criteria from the beginning!  You're right
that most people will use Wiktionary to look up a word.  That's what
it's for.

> E.g. what disturbes a bit is that foreign language words are "seen" in
> the wiktionary. This is confusing. German should only give German
> terminology in its lists, English the English one, Dutch the Dutch one
> etc. When I am on the English wiktionary and find "Deutsch" as a
> single page this is not logic to me - the term "Deutsch" should be
> linked to the German wiktionary instead and should not appear in the
> listing under the letter "D".

This was intentional.  English speakers will gain an insight into the
words of other languages.

> All of what you ask for is needed, but there are already plenty of
> glossaries that could be uploaded and I am sure, if we have the
> techniques many companies would agree to pass their glossaries with
> definitions to OpenContent.

So what?  We're not looking for mere glossaries.

> The next thing is: I now can pass e.g. the colours list to Wiktonary,
> but I cannot retrieve an animals list with all its translations - so
> it's a one-way direction - to work with many other projects both
> directions are needed. So many of us who now concentrate on their own
> projects probably would say: I pass all my data to wiktionary as I get
> something back. Many of these listings, definitions etc. are from
> people in the language industry - and people of the language industry
> most of all search for the right term.

I have not followed the issue of colours or animals, so I can't comment
fully, though it would seem that for the latter the best thing would be
to relate the vernacular names to the Latin binomials.  The fact that a
term comes from the "language industry" should not make the proposals of
others less valid.  Contributions from either source are open to
discussion and modification.

> So: in any case I support the XML and database way - it will take some
> time to develop it, but once it is there wiktionary has all the
> characteristics needed to become the main reference tool for people
> working with languages and people being interested in languages. The
> more people can use it the more will contribute. Gerard, Polyglot and
> whoever is convinced about this way: please don't stop going. You are
> on the right way.

We will be more able to discuss the proposal when we see what it looks like.

> Now who's going to kill me ;-) ??

Huh! :-*  No problem.  Va bene.

Ec


from_name: Kiss All

body:
I don't know the reason, but have you changed the permission of config
directory?
I installed 1.3.2 on both Red Hat 9.0 and Gentoo . The only
time-consuming thing for me was to set up LAMP combination properly,
not MediaWiki.

I wrote the install guide for RH9 and refined the one for Gentoo. You
may have a look at them if you like

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Running_MediaWiki_on_Gentoo_Linux
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Running_MediaWiki_on_Red_Hat_Linux

On Tue, 7 Sep 2004 23:39:48 +0100, Rowan Collins
<rowan.collins at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Sep 2004 16:14:53 -0600, Rich Points <rich at richpoints.com> wrote:
> > Howdy,
> > I hope this is the right list to post this inquiry, if not can someone direct me to the appropriate list.
>
> You want the "mediawiki-l" list - mediawiki-l at wikimedia.org |
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l
>
> Good luck.
>
> --
> Rowan Collins BSc
> [IMSoP]
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

--
Be good....


from_name: Fred Bauder

subject: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedia blocking policy

body:
Rickk,

Do you recognize that this is a problem?

Fred

> From: daniwo59 at aol.com
> Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2004 20:24:46 EDT
> To: wikien-l at Wikipedia.org
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedia blocking policy
>
> Actually, Rick, everytime you block these chunks of vandals, I end up being
> blocked as well. Face it, the blocks are doing more harm than good. Frankly, I
> am fed up being blocked literally every day. I also want to participate in
> Wikipedia, and your attitude is not helping.
>
> Danny
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l


from_name: Guanaco

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Arbitration

body:
Rick wrote:

>Every time I have attempted to discuss it with Guanaco, he has deleted my posting off his Talk page without responding.
>
>RickK
>
>Anthere <anthere9 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>Are you sure Rick, that the best solution to this case is arbitration
>rather than mediation ?
>
>After all, what we are dealing here with, is much more a conflict
>between two different personalities, and between two different
>approaches of the sysop role, than a conflict with a vandal.
>
>Would not it be solve by discussing with Guanaco first ?
>
>
The "attempts" he posted were completely unhelpful and were not real
attempts at serious disruption.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Guanaco&diff=5493896&oldid=5493886
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Guanaco&diff=5494122&oldid=5494051

I would be willing to deal with this through mediation, but arbitration
has lately become a "second resort" through which every significant
dispute is eventually handled.

--Guanaco


from_name: Matthew Trump

references:
<chi9tu$vv8$1@sea.gmane.org> <413CC55F.30307@pobox.com>
	<413E33A2.9090205@ewsoftware.de>

body:
Possible simple solution?

keep the cur table with only the following fields
cur_id
cur_title
cur_namespace
cur_is_redirect
cur_touched
cur_random

and moreover add a new column called cur_old_id

The values that would be found for
cur_text,cur_minor_edit,cur_comment,cur_timestamp,cur_user,cur_user_name
are inserted into and given a new auto_incremented old_id as usual.

The cur table is updated only with the current "old_id" into the
cur_old_id column, and cur_is_redirect is updated as well.

cur revisions are queried through a join like this

"SELECT C.cur_id,C.cur_is_redirect,O.* from cur as C,old as O where
C.cur_title=? and C.cur_namespace=? and C.cur_old_id=O.old_id"

The disadvantage is of course that the cur queries now query on the
old table which is 1-2 orders of magnitude larger, but the join is
done on the primary key index, which is an integer.

Article history queries would of course no longer select from cur and
old but only old. The latest revision would already have a revision
id (old_id) assigned to it which would appear in the link.

Eckhart W?rner said:
> Hi,
>
> Brion Vibber schrieb:
>> The biggest changes that we'd like to do are:
> [...]
>
> Why not create a row for meta data, like the links to other
> languages,
> categories, __NOTOC__.
> It would cause some overhead in the database, but perhaps it makes
> the
> parsing faster, as the meta data part could be parsed very
> efficiently.
> The metadata part could also be ignored for searches. Perhaps you
> could
> also see in the RC what actually has changed - the meta data or the
> text.
>
> Just an idea.
>
> Eckhart
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Arbitration

body:
Guanaco wrote:

> Rick wrote:
>
>> Every time I have attempted to discuss it with Guanaco, he has
>> deleted my posting off his Talk page without responding.
>>
>> RickK
>>
>> Anthere <anthere9 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Are you sure Rick, that the best solution to this case is arbitration
>> rather than mediation ?
>>
>> After all, what we are dealing here with, is much more a conflict
>> between two different personalities, and between two different
>> approaches of the sysop role, than a conflict with a vandal.
>>
>> Would not it be solve by discussing with Guanaco first ?
>>
>>
> The "attempts" he posted were completely unhelpful and were not real
> attempts at serious disruption.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Guanaco&diff=5493896&oldid=5493886
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Guanaco&diff=5494122&oldid=5494051
>
>
> I would be willing to deal with this through mediation, but
> arbitration has lately become a "second resort" through which every
> significant dispute is eventually handled.
>
> --Guanaco
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
Oops, I meant /discussion/, not /disruption/.

--Guanaco


from_name: John Lee

subject: [WikiEN-l] [[Wikipedia:Deletion of user subpages]] now up for vote

body:
The proposed policy at [[Wikipedia:Deletion of user subpages]] is now up
for voting on [[Wikipedia talk:Deletion of user subpages]]. The policy
has been apparently ignored despite being publicised on the pump, so
[[User:Andrewa]] began the voting after two weeks of almost non-existent
discussion. Voting ends on 23:59 UTC September 19 2004.

John Lee
[[User:Johnleemk]]


from_name: daniwo59 at aol.com

subject: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedia blocking policy

body:
Actually, Rick, everytime you block these chunks of vandals, I end up being
blocked as well. Face it, the blocks are doing more harm than good. Frankly, I
am fed up being blocked literally every day. I also want to participate in
Wikipedia, and your attitude is not helping.

Danny