body:
Jussi-Ville Heiskanen wrote:
>If there were a way to engender a perception that the mediation
>process was conjunct in some real way to the arbitration committee,
>this would not only improve the functionality of the mediation
>committee, but also *potentially* effectively _restrict_ the number
>of cases that actually flared up to a state that can only be remedied
>by arbitration. "A stitch in time, saves nine!"

Before you criticize something, it would be very helpful to read the relevant
documentation:

"... in most cases, the arbitration committee will only hear cases referred to
them by the Mediation Committee or directly from Jimmy Wales."

"The arbitrators will accept a case if four arbitrators have voted to hear it."

From:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration_policy#Requests

I for one will not vote to hear any case where I think that earlier steps in
the dispute resolution process would help. I will also not vote to hear cases I
think are frivolous.

But a majority vote by the mediation committee would add a great deal of weight
to my decision to vote to hear a case. As would a community poll.

For me at least, requests by individuals is just so much background noise.

-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on time.
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html


list: wikien-l

source: pipermail-mbox

from_name: Fred Bauder

subject: [WikiEN-l] Ed Poor

body:
We still have the problem of getting Irismeister to begin actually paying
attention to what a very large number of people are saying. Beating on some
old fart like Uncle Ed solves nothing. Keep your eye on the ball Lir...

Fred

> From: A [name omitted for privacy reasons] <wikilir at yahoo.com>
> Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 19:53:47 -0800 (PST)
> To: wikien-l at wikipedia.org
> Subject: [WikiEN-l] Ed Poor
>
> Ed said the below to Iris. Shouldn't such juvenile
> threats be grounds for immediate desysoping? Who says
> there isn't a cabal -- this post proves that there is,
> and Ed is a member.
>
> ----------------------------------------
>
> Iris, shut up and get back to work! You are wasting
> everyone's time. Either help us to write accurate
> [[NPOV]] articles, or leave.
>
> I don't give a rat's ass about whether natural health
> or iridology or zone manipulation are true or not.
> Just make your case for them, and leave it for the
> reader to decide.
>
> People have bent over backwards to accomodate you,
> mostly out of a pure concern for fairness and justice.
> You have eroded all the good will left in my body. Any
> more crap out of you, and I will "take steps". Better
> listen up good, because I'm one the oldest "old hands"
> around here and I know how to work the system. Don't
> get me riled up against you, or I will force you out!!
> (A word to the wise is sufficient.) --[[User:Ed
> Poor|Uncle Ed]] 14:14, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_review_of_ad
> min_actions&diff=2982058&oldid=2981833
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on time.
> http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l


list: wikitech-l

from_name: Erik Zachte

subject: [Wikitech-l] Contributions count on stats page

body:
I will add a count for other edits.
But not right now.

First I am upgrading EasyTimeline to support clickable maps.
Eloquence suggested he could accomodate those, which would be great.

Then I will prepare the TomeRaider script for TR 3 which will support
images.

Erik Zachte


list: wikipedia-l

from_name: Peter Jaros

subject: [Wikipedia-l] wikimage startup?

body:
On Mar 29, 2004, at 4:24 PM, Erik Moeller wrote:

> Andre-
>> It has been discussed before, I think I want to go beyond discussion,
>> and get this thing rolling. I would like to start setting up a
>> database
>> of public domain and copyleft images, using the Wikipedia technology.
>
> As noted earlier, this should be done under the name "Wikimedia
> Commons",
> and reside at commons.wikimedia.org, to allow for other content than
> just
> images, and to make it clear that that this is not just for Wikipedia,
> but
> for all Wikimedia projects.

I'd make a distinction here.  Personally, I'd like to see Wikisource
become (or
continue to be) a collection of nicely presented public domain texts.
"Wikimedia Commons" would then be a /repository/ of assorted PD/GFDL
text and
media.  The Commons would be primarily for the use of other Wikimedia
projects
(though others would undoubtedly find it useful), whereas Wikisource
would be
intended for the "public".

I think the same distinction can be made here.  It would be good to
have a wiki
of PD/GFDL images worthy *in their own right* of being sought.  It
would also
be good to include diagrams, logos, and other images which don't
warrant this
distinction at the Commons.  And, of course, overlap is no problem.

Peter

                                  -- ---<>--- --
                        A house without walls cannot fall.
           Help build the world's largest encyclopedia at Wikipedia.org
                                  -- ---<>--- --


from_name: Brian Corr

subject: [WikiEN-l] we need a new mediation committee

body:
All I can say is that you can go to
http://boards.wikimedia.org/viewtopic.php?t=60 and judge for yourselves
what took place.

Brian (Bcorr)

At 03:31:20 UTC Wed Mar 31 2004 A [name omitted for privacy reasons] wrote:
>As Anthere noted, most attempts at mediation have
>failed. This is because the mediation committee is
>rude and elitist -- it refuses to "dirty its hands" or
>make any genuine efforts to facilitate mediation.
>
>After I accumulated several wasted hours of
>petitioning the committee, they have refused to even
>attempt to leave some posts (at relevant article talk
>pages) and invite users to accept or embark upon
>mediation. In short, THEY HAVE NOT EVEN TRIED TO
>MEDIATE.
>
>I hope you all have a great deal of fun with your edit
>wars. You will only have more and more, more and more
>-- you can ban trolls all day long, there will always
>be more people to disagree with you. The mediation
>committee is not doing its job, and the next time
>someone reverts you without explanation -- you can
>thank them.
>
>I propose that everyone on the mediation committee be
>awarded the Barnstar of Banal Bureaucratic Pride.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Qualifications for referrals to arbitration

body:
Don't blame Cimon Avaro for not doing his homework on this one.

Earlier today I quoted the following from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration :

"Currently, the arbitrators accept referrals from Jimbo Wales only, which
they decide to arbitrate on based on the voting procedure described at
wikipedia:arbitration policy."

Meanwhile http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration_policy says:

"The arbitration committee accepts requests for arbitration from anyone;
however, in most cases, the arbitration committee will only hear cases
referred to them by the Mediation Committee or directly from Jimmy Wales."

There needs to be some harmonizing of these two pages, methinks.

Brian (Bcorr)

Daniel Mayer wrote:
 >Before you criticize something, it would be very helpful to read the relevant
 >documentation:


from_name: Imran Ghory

subject: [WikiEN-l] Biography entries

body:
On Tue, 30 Mar 2004, Magnus Manske wrote:

> Both email addresses I can find on these pages return "user unknown".

Doing a whois gives:

      Tentarelli, Kenneth  (23023869I)          ken at s9.com
      s9.com
      27 BOWLES RD
      NEWBURY, NH 03255-6110
      US
      (603) 763-9294 fax: 999 999 9999

Imran
--
http://bits.bris.ac.uk/imran


from_name: Daniel Mayer

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Qualifications for referrals to arbitration.

body:
Anthere wrote:
>It might be a sort of guideline, that as long as it is "person to
>person" with not much impact on community, then it is MC issue,
>and if MC fails, well, another mediator, or anyone else is welcome
>to help

I think that that would be a useful thing to keep in mind, yes.

Brian Corr wrote:
>Don't blame Cimon Avaro for not doing his homework on this one.
>
>"Currently, the arbitrators accept referrals from Jimbo Wales only,
>which  they decide to arbitrate on based on the voting procedure
>described at wikipedia:arbitration policy."
>
>"The arbitration committee accepts requests for arbitration from
>anyone;  however, in most cases, the arbitration committee will
>only hear cases  referred to them by the Mediation Committee or
>directly from Jimmy Wales."
>
>There needs to be some harmonizing of these two pages, methinks.

A basic read of the page titled "Arbitration policy" would make clear the
difference between the temporary process and the more permanent one that it
being worked on.

"Currently" should also be a huge hint. That statement is based on clearly
marked (on the policy page, which is referred to and linked) temporary and
emergency session guidelines (which have many admitted flaws).  What we have
been talking about here is what should the more permanent process be.

Things will become more clear when we have one set of guidelines.

-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on time.
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html


from_name: David Lucas Graves

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Tok Pisin domain

body:
Back on Intlwiki-L, I remember seeing a message from Jean-Luc Azra (a.k.a.
Milaiklainim) asking that a new domain be created for a Tok Pisin Wikipedia.
  Since then he has made excellent progress at a temporary location on the
Bislama wiki (bi.wikipedia.org).  Because all the sites to which I have
contributed had already had space allotted to them when I arrived, I have no
idea how much time and trouble are involved, but I think it would be great
if Milaiklainim could continue his work in the proper place, translate the
interface, etc., etc.  Other users have recently proposed setting up domains
for Berber and Ido, so perhaps the time is right to put in a request for Tok
Pisin.  It appears that tp.wikipedia.org has not yet been taken; might that
be a good choice?  Thanks to anyone who can help!

Flauto Dolce

_________________________________________________________________
Get reliable access on MSN 9 Dial-up. 3 months for the price of 1!
(Limited-time offer)
http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/dialup&pgmarket=en-us&ST=1/go/onm00200361ave/direct/01/


body:
If two disputants and their mediator request arbitration, it would be
seriously considered.

The reason person versus community cases have been taken is that those are
the cases Jimbo has referred to us. We stand ready to accept person versus
person cases too though once we get going.

Fred

> From: Anthere <anthere9 at yahoo.com>
> Reply-To: anthere9 at yahoo.com, English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2004 07:49:48 +0200
> To: wikien-l at wikipedia.org
> Subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Qualifications for referrals to arbitration.
>
>
>
> Daniel Mayer a ?crit:
>> Jussi-Ville Heiskanen wrote:
>> "The arbitrators will accept a case if four arbitrators have voted to hear
>> it."
>>
>> From:
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration_policy#Requests
>>
>> I for one will not vote to hear any case where I think that earlier steps in
>> the dispute resolution process would help. I will also not vote to hear cases
>> I
>> think are frivolous.
>>
>> But a majority vote by the mediation committee would add a great deal of
>> weight
>> to my decision to vote to hear a case. As would a community poll.
>>
>> For me at least, requests by individuals is just so much background noise.
>>
>> -- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)
>
> Do you mean that if the two disputants and the mediator are asking at
> the same time, it is just ground noise ?
>
> It is interesting, because it goes in the direction I was thinking of.
> Separation of MC and AC entirely.
>
> Because, as it is currently happening, most cases in mediation (not all,
> but most really) are "person to person" cases. And indeed, it seems that
> the commmunity itself does not give much importance to "person to
> person" conflicts. It seeems the community idea is that "person to
> person" conflict just happen, and that it is these people business to
> rule out of the issue; With help or without help of any mediator. But
> not an issue for the AC committee.
>
> On the other hand, most cases handled by arbitration are cases of
> "person to community". Ie, cases where everyone is involved, people
> screaming against the bad person, who must be banned/blocked/spanked
> whatever. In short, AC seems to accept cases that are globally hurting
> community, but not case to case issues...that indeed are just background
> noise till they do not spread to the point of hurting the whole
> community itself.
>
> DO you see what I mean ?
>
> It might be a sort of guideline, that as long as it is "person to
> person" with not much impact on community, then it is MC issue, and if
> MC fails, well, another mediator, or anyone else is welcome to help
>
> If it is "person to community", MC committee could help, but likely, it
> is a AC issue. When it comes to the point of "person to community", in
> most cases, these are issues of trolls and vandals, not regular people.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l


from_name: fabiform

subject: [WikiEN-l] Uncle Ed reads Irismeister the riot act

body:
--- David Gerard <fun at thingy.apana.org.au> wrote:
> > Well I think you did overdo it, but I can't bring
> > myself to regret you said that.  Irismeister has
> > exhausted my patience, several times over.  I'm
> tired
> > of being lectured on civility by someone who, and
> this
> > is the nicest thing I can think of to say, is
> either
> > lacking in self-awareness or has a fine sense of
> irony
> > and is mocking us all.
>
>
> Check Talk:Iridology. It's fairly well established
> that he's using Wikipedia
> as a self-promotional medium - tracing through the
> web of web pages, Wikipedia
> user pages in various languages, WHOIS data and so
> on.

Yes, I was heavily involved in [[iridology]] before I
couldn't cope with him any longer.  I gathered a great
deal of evidence for the arbitration committee by
reading through every one of his edits over the course
of two days.

Tim Starling posted a link to IRC today about trolls,
and I was interested to see that the kind called "The
Abstract" fitted Irismeister to a T:
http://www.io.com/~zikzak/troll_thesis.html#3.3

"Perhaps one of the most interesting types of trolls
is what shall be referred to here as "Abstract". They
are known to produce long, stream of conscious rants
that frequently appear to devolve into utter nonsense.
Close inspection of 42 unique Abstract trolls,
however, revealed a stunning degree of complexity and
duplicitous meaning hidden within the words, calling
to mind Dadaist works by Joyce and Lucas. One
particularly lengthy rant was actually a fairly
insightful deconstruction of Hasidic numerology as
compared to Pagan cabalistic works.

"Meyers-Briggs results were 23% iStP, with another 15%
being yHBt, and all showing a sense of entitlement,
i.e., unreasonable expectations of especially
favorable treatment or automatic compliance with his
or her expectations, which is strongly indicative of a
narcissistic personality.[7] This narcissism was
further shown to tend towards an authority complex."

But trolling on wikipedia isn't enough of a reason to
ban someone, I discover, otherwise we'd have banned a
handful of our most blatant trolls a long time ago.

Fabiform.

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on time.
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html


from_name: Dan Miller

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Trolls

body:
> fabiform-
>
> > Tim Starling posted a link to IRC today about
> trolls,
> > and I was interested to see that the kind called
> "The
> > Abstract" fitted Irismeister to a T:
> > http://www.io.com/~zikzak/troll_thesis.html#3.3
>
> This thesis is itself a troll, written by "Amy
> Dhala" (a pun on "Amidala",
> a character in the Star Wars universe and frequently
> the subject of
> Slashdot trolling posts). Most if not all the data
> is completely invented.
> There are many clues throughout the paper, such as
> "Only 2 people, known
> as Rob M. and Jeff B. used poppers" in the "drug
> use" section (Rob Malda
> and Jeff Bates are the founders of Slashdot).
>
> Regards,
>
> Erik

So that post about trolling and "The Abstract" was
really just a troll who was an abstract? Whoah, man.
It's like...the whole universe might be just ONE GRAIN
OF SAND, MAN.

Whoah.

Meelar

=====
"If the Democratic policies had been pursued over the last two or three years, the kind of tax increases that both Kerry and [Sen. John] Edwards [D-N.C.] have talked about, we would not have had the kind of job growth we've had."

-- Vice President Cheney, in an MSNBC interview March 2, lending his perspective to the economy's loss of 2.2 million jobs over three years.

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on time.
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html


from_name: Anthere

body:
Daniel Mayer a ?crit:
> Jussi-Ville Heiskanen wrote:
> "The arbitrators will accept a case if four arbitrators have voted to hear it."
>
> From:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration_policy#Requests
>
> I for one will not vote to hear any case where I think that earlier steps in
> the dispute resolution process would help. I will also not vote to hear cases I
> think are frivolous.
>
> But a majority vote by the mediation committee would add a great deal of weight
> to my decision to vote to hear a case. As would a community poll.
>
> For me at least, requests by individuals is just so much background noise.
>
> -- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)

Do you mean that if the two disputants and the mediator are asking at
the same time, it is just ground noise ?

It is interesting, because it goes in the direction I was thinking of.
Separation of MC and AC entirely.

Because, as it is currently happening, most cases in mediation (not all,
but most really) are "person to person" cases. And indeed, it seems that
the commmunity itself does not give much importance to "person to
person" conflicts. It seeems the community idea is that "person to
person" conflict just happen, and that it is these people business to
rule out of the issue; With help or without help of any mediator. But
not an issue for the AC committee.

On the other hand, most cases handled by arbitration are cases of
"person to community". Ie, cases where everyone is involved, people
screaming against the bad person, who must be banned/blocked/spanked
whatever. In short, AC seems to accept cases that are globally hurting
community, but not case to case issues...that indeed are just background
noise till they do not spread to the point of hurting the whole
community itself.

DO you see what I mean ?

It might be a sort of guideline, that as long as it is "person to
person" with not much impact on community, then it is MC issue, and if
MC fails, well, another mediator, or anyone else is welcome to help

If it is "person to community", MC committee could help, but likely, it
is a AC issue. When it comes to the point of "person to community", in
most cases, these are issues of trolls and vandals, not regular people.


body:
I disagree, a short ban to get his attention might do some good. As it might
"a handful of our most blatant trolls". If he continues in the same vein,
despite being before the arbitration committee, eventually a consensus will
develop that we are well rid of him.

Fred.

> From: fabiform <fabiform_wikipedian at yahoo.com>
> Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2004 06:17:58 -0800 (PST)
> To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Uncle Ed reads Irismeister the riot act
>
> But trolling on wikipedia isn't enough of a reason to
> ban someone, I discover, otherwise we'd have banned a
> handful of our most blatant trolls a long time ago.


from_name: Neil Harris

subject: [WikiEN-l] Biography entries

body:
Imran Ghory wrote:

>On Tue, 30 Mar 2004, Magnus Manske wrote:
>
>
>
>>I have tried three different email addresses to reach the original
>>author of these entries, presumably named Eric Tentarelli. All seem to
>>be down. Any help in tracking him down would be appreciated.
>>
>>
>
>I'm not certain but I believe Eric's responsible for the current version
>of the dictionary available at s9.com.
>
>Imran
>
>

Eric Tentarelli is described as being from the MIT class of '94 on this page: http://www.geocities.com/beaverbonspiel/detailed3.html

Whois on s9.com gives Kenneth Tentarelli as a contact, together with a
phone number and E-mail address.

-- Neil


from_name: Jimmy Wales

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Why am I blocked ?

body:
Tim Starling wrote:
> Eric Demolli wrote:
> >It was the proxy blocker. But how does it work ? I use Squid cache but
> >there
> >should be no way to connect on my proxy port from the Net.
> >I've added some acl to allow only my internal network IP should I do
> >something else ?
> >How can I be unblocked ?
> >
>
> That's all you have to do, secure the proxy and get a sysop to unblock
> you. Your computer will be rescanned eventually, and if you've
> configured your proxy correctly, you won't be reblocked.

How hard would it be for us to have the ability to punch specific
holes in our proxy blocker?  It seems a shame for Eric to have to
reconfigure something because of us.  If someone were abusing his
proxy, that might be a different matter.

I know that if my home network were to get blocked for this, I'd find
it a royal pain in the ass to have to reconfigure.

--Jimbo


from_name: Brion Vibber

subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: CVS access for comments only

references:
<c48n2p$mpn$1@sea.gmane.org>
	<c4buh3$11g$1@sea.gmane.org>	<c4c0ku$6i3$1@sea.gmane.org>
	<c4e17k$lkj$1@sea.gmane.org> <c4emqa$cmd$1@sea.gmane.org>

body:
On Mar 31, 2004, at 07:05, Phil Boswell wrote:
> Except I'm working on Windows. I have Cygwin but haven't installed the
> cvs stuff.
>
> What is the least complicated route to follow? Should I install
> something like WinCVS?

Cygwin's command-line CVS works just fine. (Be careful about line
endings, though, I don't recall whether it prefers Unix-style or
DOS-style, but whatever it uses make sure your editor sticks with
them!) It may be a little cryptic, but my eyes completely glaze over
when looking at WinCVS.

Somebody (Tim?) has recommended TortoiseCVS:
http://www.tortoisecvs.org/index.shtml

>  Do I need to soup up my account at SourceForge (which ATM merely
> knows who I am and remembers a few bookmarks for me)?

To commit directly to the repository you'd need to be added to the
project, but you can check out files and makes diffs against them via
anonymous CVS.

> Once I have the correct software installed, which branch of the
> project would I want to look at? It seems that there's new changes
> going through every day, and I don't know whether I could keep up :-)

Don't do any development in the 1.2 branch! Work on 1.3, in the main
head branch. Many things are changing.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)


body:
--- Erik Moeller <erik_moeller at gmx.de> wrote:
> fabiform-
>
> > Tim Starling posted a link to IRC today about
> trolls,
> > and I was interested to see that the kind called
> "The
> > Abstract" fitted Irismeister to a T:
> > http://www.io.com/~zikzak/troll_thesis.html#3.3
>
> This thesis is itself a troll, written by "Amy
> Dhala" (a pun on "Amidala",
> a character in the Star Wars universe and frequently
> the subject of
> Slashdot trolling posts). Most if not all the data
> is completely invented.
> There are many clues throughout the paper, such as
> "Only 2 people, known
> as Rob M. and Jeff B. used poppers" in the "drug
> use" section (Rob Malda
> and Jeff Bates are the founders of Slashdot).
>
> Regards,
>
> Erik

Thanks for explaining it to me.  So I not only fall
for a troll, but I go out of my way to tell people
about it?  Bah.  I'm such an easy mark.  :)

Fabiform.

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on time.
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html


from_name: Andre Engels

subject: [Wikipedia-l] wikimage startup?

body:
"Erik Moeller" <erik_moeller at gmx.de> schrieb:
> Andre-
> > It has been discussed before, I think I want to go beyond discussion,
> > and get this thing rolling. I would like to start setting up a database
> > of public domain and copyleft images, using the Wikipedia technology.
>
> As noted earlier, this should be done under the name "Wikimedia Commons",
> and reside at commons.wikimedia.org, to allow for other content than just
> images, and to make it clear that that this is not just for Wikipedia, but
> for all Wikimedia projects.

I don't like the name 'commons', and although I do agree that we want to
be broader than just images, in practice it will be 99% images - textual
material that might be put here should I think go to wikiquote (or if it's
longer wikisource) instead, so I think what is left apart from images are
sound bites and video footing. On the other hand I fully agree with you
that it should be connected to Wikimedia rather than wikipedia.

Andre Engels


from_name: Timwi

references:
<c48n2p$mpn$1@sea.gmane.org> <c4buh3$11g$1@sea.gmane.org>
	<c4c0ku$6i3$1@sea.gmane.org>

body:
Phil Boswell wrote:
> Timwi wrote:
>
>> Phil Boswell wrote:
>>
>>> I don't consider myself up-to-speed enough in PHP to contribute
>>> actual code, but I would like to help in documenting what's there.
>>
>> If you're talking about commenting the source code, you can submit
>> patches for that here.
>
> This is the one. What is the preferred format?

Anything the 'patch' tool will accept. (The easiest way for you to
create these patches is to use the 'cvs diff -u' command-line command.)


from_name: Ray Saintonge

subject: [Wikipedia-l] concordances

body:
Given the problems with Geoffrin I have been patient in my hope that
some day our own search function will some day rise again from its ashes.

I have been having a bit of discussion with User D?ugosz
<http://wiktionary.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User:D%C5%82ugosz&action=edit>
:   at Talk:Appendix:Words From Sherlock Holmes
<http://wiktionary.org/wiki/Talk:Appendix:Words_From_Sherlock_Holmes>
 on Wiktionary.  It makes me wonder how realistic it would be to have a
properly functioning search function take a text(s) that we have in
Wikisource and create a concordance to better illustrate variations in a
a word's usage over the year for purposes of building value added into
Wiktionary.

Ec


from_name: Tim Starling

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Why am I blocked ?

body:
Eric Demolli wrote:
> It was the proxy blocker. But how does it work ? I use Squid cache but there
> should be no way to connect on my proxy port from the Net.
> I've added some acl to allow only my internal network IP should I do
> something else ?
> How can I be unblocked ?
>

That's all you have to do, secure the proxy and get a sysop to unblock
you. Your computer will be rescanned eventually, and if you've
configured your proxy correctly, you won't be reblocked.

-- Tim Starling


from_name: Pedro Fortuny

subject: [Wikipedia-l] wikimage startup?

body:
I agree with Andre. This is mostly and specifically for images, not just a
"commons", which would be misleading.

My last post went only to Andre's account, I fear, it was a message
supporting his idea.

Pedro.

* Andre Engels <engelsAG at t-online.de> [2004-03-31]:
> "Erik Moeller" <erik_moeller at gmx.de> schrieb:
> > Andre-
> > > It has been discussed before, I think I want to go beyond discussion,
> > > and get this thing rolling. I would like to start setting up a database
> > > of public domain and copyleft images, using the Wikipedia technology.
> >
> > As noted earlier, this should be done under the name "Wikimedia Commons",
> > and reside at commons.wikimedia.org, to allow for other content than just
> > images, and to make it clear that that this is not just for Wikipedia, but
> > for all Wikimedia projects.
>
> I don't like the name 'commons', and although I do agree that we want to
> be broader than just images, in practice it will be 99% images - textual
> material that might be put here should I think go to wikiquote (or if it's
> longer wikisource) instead, so I think what is left apart from images are
> sound bites and video footing. On the other hand I fully agree with you
> that it should be connected to Wikimedia rather than wikipedia.
>
> Andre Engels
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l

--
Pedro Fortuny Ayuso: http://pfortuny.sdf-eu.org
Colegio Mayor Pe?afiel, Universidad de Valladolid
C/ Estudios 6, 47005 Valladolid, Spain -->        www.cmpenafiel.org
pfortuny at sdf-eu.org                         Tfn. Nr. 34  983  298277


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Please clarify the honorary administrator status

body:
Guillaume Blanchard wrote:
> Before voting to our honorary administrators (also called steward,
> super-admin, etc.) I like someone (Tim?) clarify the role of this new
> status.

Let's call it "steward" for now.

> First, what is the goal:
> - Manage new Wikipedia where there are no administrators?
> - Become a new level over bureaucrats for all Wikipedia?
> - Something else?

Since my goal has been to disavow developer power in favour of
democracy, I'd prefer not to dictate the rules under which stewards will
operate. This should be a decision made by the community, or by Jimbo.

However as I've said on meta, my preference is that the users of each
wiki administer their own wiki, except in the case of very small wikis.
For the moment, bureaucrats cannot desysop, so stewards will have to
evaluate community consensus and decide whether to desysop. This is the
role formerly assigned to people with shell access.

> What specific feature will they have:
> - Same as bureaucrat, but Wikimedia wide?
> - More than bureaucrat (for example only HA may be able to remove admini
> status, or give bot status)?
> - Something else?

Currently they have more abilities than bureaucrats. They can grant or
revoke any level of access. Currently bureaucrats can only grant
bureaucrat or admin status.

Additional features may be implemented depending on community sentiment.
Ultimately I would like to see stewards capable of configuring the power
structure on each wiki individually, or to allow some subset of local
users to set their own power structure. For example on request from the
Korean wikipedians, a steward might delete the bureaucrat level from ko
and allow sysops to create and demote other sysops. Or, the English
Wikipedia community may request that bureaucrats be given the ability to
determine the set of operations which sysops can perform.

I expect steward rights to be maximally unrestricted, analogous to root
access on a Unix operating system. However it's possible that some users
will have virtually unrestricted rights locally. It all depends on what
people want.

-- Tim Starling


from_name: Guillaume Blanchard

body:
Thank you very much for explanations.

I fully agree your long term view and hope we will be able to reach it a
day.

But I still don't understand why the vote for "stewards" occurs before the
community decide theirs roles? If you really need temporary "stewards" to
remove developers "power" as soon as possible, so create temporary rules (we
can change it after). Personally I can't vote without knowing witch skill
will be required for "stewards".

Aoineko

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Starling" <ts4294967296 at hotmail.com>
To: <wikipedia-l at wikipedia.org>
Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2004 11:51 AM
Subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Please clarify the honorary administrator status

> Guillaume Blanchard wrote:
> > Before voting to our honorary administrators (also called steward,
> > super-admin, etc.) I like someone (Tim?) clarify the role of this new
> > status.
>
> Let's call it "steward" for now.
>
> > First, what is the goal:
> > - Manage new Wikipedia where there are no administrators?
> > - Become a new level over bureaucrats for all Wikipedia?
> > - Something else?
>
> Since my goal has been to disavow developer power in favour of
> democracy, I'd prefer not to dictate the rules under which stewards will
> operate. This should be a decision made by the community, or by Jimbo.
>
> However as I've said on meta, my preference is that the users of each
> wiki administer their own wiki, except in the case of very small wikis.
> For the moment, bureaucrats cannot desysop, so stewards will have to
> evaluate community consensus and decide whether to desysop. This is the
> role formerly assigned to people with shell access.
>
> > What specific feature will they have:
> > - Same as bureaucrat, but Wikimedia wide?
> > - More than bureaucrat (for example only HA may be able to remove admini
> > status, or give bot status)?
> > - Something else?
>
> Currently they have more abilities than bureaucrats. They can grant or
> revoke any level of access. Currently bureaucrats can only grant
> bureaucrat or admin status.
>
> Additional features may be implemented depending on community sentiment.
> Ultimately I would like to see stewards capable of configuring the power
> structure on each wiki individually, or to allow some subset of local
> users to set their own power structure. For example on request from the
> Korean wikipedians, a steward might delete the bureaucrat level from ko
> and allow sysops to create and demote other sysops. Or, the English
> Wikipedia community may request that bureaucrats be given the ability to
> determine the set of operations which sysops can perform.
>
> I expect steward rights to be maximally unrestricted, analogous to root
> access on a Unix operating system. However it's possible that some users
> will have virtually unrestricted rights locally. It all depends on what
> people want.
>
> -- Tim Starling
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Largest Wikipedias compared to number of speakers

body:
I have made a list comparing the number of Wikipedians (according
to the stats) with the number of speakers per language. German has
most according to this statistic: 22 Wikipedians per million
speakers. For number of speakers, I have used the data from
http://www.nicemice.net/amc/tmp/lang-pop.var, using data from
Wikipedia for those languages not available. For number of
Wikipedians, I used the statistics page (which counts everyone
who at one time or other edited 5 or more articles). Here is the
list. After the language code, the number of Wikipedians per
million speakers, the number of Wikipedians and the number of
speakers in millions is given.

Numbers between brackets: counting only first-language speakers
*: number of speakers from Wikipedia
@: number of speakers not available on Wikipedia; from elsewhere
=: given as several separate languages by the source, one on
   Wikipedia
!: given as one language by the source, several on Wikipedia
*s: the number on Wikipedia would, if valid, have led the language
   to be on the top-100 list. Reduced from 8 to 6 million.

de:	22.1 (27.3)	2680	  121
he:	21.5		  110	      5.1
da:	20.0		  100	      5
sv:	18.5		  167	      9
nl:	18.2		  383	    21
gd:	16.6*		      1	      0.06
cy:	15.0*		      9	      0.6
et:	12.7		    14	      1.1
fy:	12.3		      9	      0.7
en:	12.1 (17.7)	5717	  470
no:	11.6		    58	      5
fi:	  8.3		    50	      6
gl:	  7.7@		    24	      3.1
ca:	  7.6*		    38	      5
pl:	  7.4		  327	    44
fr:	  5.3 (9.2)	  666	  124
ja:	  3.7		  472	  125
sl:	  3.1		      7	      2.2
af:	  2.3		    15	      6.4
it:	  1.8 (2.9)	  119	    63
cs:	  1.8		    22	    12
hu:	  1.6		    25	    15
hr/bs/sr:  1.5!		<=33	    21
bg:	  1.3		    12	      9
nah:	  1.3*		      2	      1.5
el:	  1.0		    12	    12
lt:	  1.0		      4	      4
ro:	  0.9		    25	    26
es:	  0.7 (1.0)	  281	  362
ms:	  0.6		    11	    18
sq:	  0.6*s		      4	      6
pt:	  0.2 (0.2)	    49	  182
fa:	  0.2		      6	    27
ka:	  0.2		      1	      3.9
ru:	  0.1 (0.2)	    39	  288
zh:	  0.1=		1064	  194
ar:	  0.1=		    16	  135
tr:	  0.1		    10	    59
vi:	  0.1		      7	    67
sk:	  0.1*		      1	      5.6
als: 	  0.1@		      1	      6
id:	  0.0 (0.5)	      9	  140
sw:	  0.0 (0.4)	      2	    30
hi:	  0.0 (0.0)	      5	  418
ta:	  0.0 (0.0)	      4	    69
ml:	  0.0		      3	    34
ur:	  0.0		      1	    57

Andre Engels
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/attachments/20040331/4143406f/attachment.htm


from_name: Sanny WINANDY

subject: [WikiEN-l] asking information about Open Content

body:
Hello,

I'm studying in Brussels (ICHEC) and I'm writing my thesis about Open Content. Therefore I'm asking you if you would be so nice to answer me some questions. I'm specially interested in your opinion about Open Content and your personnal experience. It would be very kind when you could help me.

I'm looking forward to hearing from you.

Yours sincerely,

Thill Chantal

thillchantal at hotmail.com

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20040331/a5a0fa94/attachment.htm


from_name: David Gerard

body:
> Well I think you did overdo it, but I can't bring
> myself to regret you said that.  Irismeister has
> exhausted my patience, several times over.  I'm tired
> of being lectured on civility by someone who, and this
> is the nicest thing I can think of to say, is either
> lacking in self-awareness or has a fine sense of irony
> and is mocking us all.

Check Talk:Iridology. It's fairly well established that he's using Wikipedia
as a self-promotional medium - tracing through the web of web pages, Wikipedia
user pages in various languages, WHOIS data and so on.

- d.


body:
Fred wrote:
>If two disputants and their mediator request arbitration, it
>would be seriously considered.
>
>The reason person versus community cases have been taken
>is that those are the cases Jimbo has referred to us. We stand
>ready to accept person versus person cases too though once
>we get going.

So says you. Since when have you been the spokesperson for the AC?

You are free to vote to accept such cases, but I will not unless a majority of
the mediation committee votes to refer the case or if Jimbo refers it.

--mav

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on time.
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html


body:
Guillaume Blanchard wrote:
> Thank you very much for explanations.
>
> I fully agree your long term view and hope we will be able to reach it a
> day.
>
> But I still don't understand why the vote for "stewards" occurs before the
> community decide theirs roles? If you really need temporary "stewards" to
> remove developers "power" as soon as possible, so create temporary rules (we
> can change it after). Personally I can't vote without knowing witch skill
> will be required for "stewards".

That was my silly fault. I had intended to work in two phases: first
nominations and discussion, then only after the nominations were all in
and the issues sorted out, voting. I failed to make this clear on the
meta page. The proposal was advertised as a vote on the English
Wikipedia and before I realised what was going on, the page had votes
all over it. I probably should have deleted everyone's votes at that
stage and written large-type messages everywhere prohibiting voting, but
you know me.

-- Tim Starling


from_name: Erik Moeller

body:
fabiform-

> Tim Starling posted a link to IRC today about trolls,
> and I was interested to see that the kind called "The
> Abstract" fitted Irismeister to a T:
> http://www.io.com/~zikzak/troll_thesis.html#3.3

This thesis is itself a troll, written by "Amy Dhala" (a pun on "Amidala",
a character in the Star Wars universe and frequently the subject of
Slashdot trolling posts). Most if not all the data is completely invented.
There are many clues throughout the paper, such as "Only 2 people, known
as Rob M. and Jeff B. used poppers" in the "drug use" section (Rob Malda
and Jeff Bates are the founders of Slashdot).

Regards,

Erik


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Power to the People: Wikipedia Reference

body:
<http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/linux/library/l-powhist/#resources>

> As Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, will explain, Bipolar junction
> transistors (BJT) are not only doped sandwiches, but also something
> essentially contrary to CMOS. If we could only successfully apply the same
> advanced processes used in CMOS manufacture today, to bipolar chips, we would
> make a quantum leap forward to chips with absolutely undreamed-of levels of
> performance. This CMOS gates demonstration will take your understanding of
CMOS
> to the next level.


from_name: Phil Boswell

references:
<c48n2p$mpn$1@sea.gmane.org>
	<c4buh3$11g$1@sea.gmane.org>	<c4c0ku$6i3$1@sea.gmane.org>
	<c4e17k$lkj$1@sea.gmane.org>

body:
Timwi wrote:
> Phil Boswell wrote:
>> Timwi wrote:
>>> Phil Boswell wrote:
>>>> I don't consider myself up-to-speed enough in PHP to contribute
>>>> actual code, but I would like to help in documenting what's there.
>>> If you're talking about commenting the source code, you can submit
>>> patches for that here.
>> This is the one. What is the preferred format?
> Anything the 'patch' tool will accept. (The easiest way for you to
> create these patches is to use the 'cvs diff -u' command-line command.)

Except I'm working on Windows. I have Cygwin but haven't installed the
cvs stuff.

What is the least complicated route to follow? Should I install
something like WinCVS? Do I need to soup up my account at SourceForge
(which ATM merely knows who I am and remembers a few bookmarks for me)?

Once I have the correct software installed, which branch of the project
would I want to look at? It seems that there's new changes going through
every day, and I don't know whether I could keep up :-)
--
Phil


from_name: Fred Bauder

body:
Like me Mav represents no one other than himself. The obvious solution is
for the mediation committee as a whole to request mediation if the mediator
who has been working on the case requests it.

Fred

> From: Daniel Mayer <maveric149 at yahoo.com>
> Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2004 15:22:28 -0800 (PST)
> To: wikien-l at wikipedia.org
> Subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Qualifications for referrals to arbitration.
>
> Fred wrote:
>> If two disputants and their mediator request arbitration, it
>> would be seriously considered.
>>
>> The reason person versus community cases have been taken
>> is that those are the cases Jimbo has referred to us. We stand
>> ready to accept person versus person cases too though once
>> we get going.
>
> So says you. Since when have you been the spokesperson for the AC?
>
> You are free to vote to accept such cases, but I will not unless a majority of
> the mediation committee votes to refer the case or if Jimbo refers it.
>
> --mav
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on time.
> http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l


from_name: Poor, Edmund W

subject: [WikiEN-l] Lir refuses a Mediator

body:
*You jackass, Im not a sysop. You need to grow up or resign your
position. You are setting a bad example and people like you are a
detriment to the entire community. The only standards you are upholding
is your standard that its ok for you to personally attack anyone you
feel is a substandard user, simply because you are "Uncle Ed". Why don't
you save your bullshit "wikilove" hypocrisy for yourself, you aren't
fooling anyone. [[User:Lir|Lirath Q. Pynnor]]

Why are you upping the ante? That's twice in one day you've made a
personal attack: ''jerk'' and ''jackass'' -- how juvenile do you plan to
get? Asking contributors to stop calling names is not a bad example;
asking them to stop wasting others' time is not a bad example.

I'm beginning to think that behind your pattern of personal attacks is a
hidden agenda: that you don't want any standards at all. I can see no
other reason behind your belittling remarks.

You complain on the Mediation Board and on the mailing list that no one
wants to help you, but you explicitly and insultingly disdain my help.
Are you ''trying'' to get banned? --[[User:Ed Poor|Uncle Ed]] 19:06, 31
Mar 2004 (UTC)

Ed, I explicitly and insultingly disdain your help. You are a hypocrite
who harrasses users with personal attacks and threats. You are a pompous
fool. [[User:Lir|Lirath Q. Pynnor]]

:If you reject my help, it doesn't make much sense to complain that I
"refuse" to help you, now does it? I will notify the committee. --Ed

----

I am open to suggestions as to how I could have handled this matter
better.

Ed Poor, aka Uncle Ed
Mediator


subject: [WikiEN-l] File swapping

body:
Today's Federal Court of Canada ruling may be of interest to some.

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/4639920/ and other reports.

It denied a request by the recording industry to make public the names
of ISP's customers who making files available for file swapping.

It will probably be appealed, but if this keeps up it's an indication of
positive common-sense attitudes in Canadian copyright law.

Ec


from_name: Sonja Elen Kisa

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Adding a new language

body:
Some of us have been wanting to add a Wikipedia in the Toki Pona language. We
normally use the 2 letter abbreviation "tp" for this language. How can it be
added so we can translate all the preliminary pages?

Although I do not know Klingon, I believe it would be a good idea to add it as
a possible Wikipedia language. I am sure there are many enthusiasts out there
who are willing to develop it.


body:
Tim-
> Currently they have more abilities than bureaucrats. They can grant or
> revoke any level of access. Currently bureaucrats can only grant
> bureaucrat or admin status.

I think the best way to go about this is to simply have two types of
bureaucrats, local bureaucrats who can add and remove all user privileges
and have access to other high level maintenance functions, and interwiki
(super-)bureaucrats who can do this on any wiki. I think this additional
"steward" level is needlessly confusing.

> Additional features may be implemented depending on community sentiment.
> Ultimately I would like to see stewards capable of configuring the power
> structure on each wiki individually

We are entering very dangerous territory here. Your original proposal was
to decentralize power, and that is all well and good. But this idea, to
configure power structures on a local level, has a lot of room for long-
term abuse.

Let's say I am a highly influential and generally good-natured user who is
very active on, say, the Nepali Wikipedia. I'm also known and trusted on
the English Wikipedia, so I am quickly given the "keys" to this new power
structure configuration module for ne.wikipedia.org.

Now let's say I happen to believe that it's a good idea to let sysops ban
any user for repeated POV edits, given prior warnings. I'm sure there are
many otherwise quite reasonable people who would believe that this is a
good idea. Because of my influence and my level of control, it would be
very easy for me to implement this power structure on the Nepali
Wikipedia.

As the Nepali Wikipedia grows, this principle becomes quite established.
"POV users" are routinely banned arbitrarily. Because of my influence, I
have managed to become the "last instance" of appeals -- there is no
voting before banning, but I, the "steward", have obtained a position that
effectively allows me to veto or approve any ban. Because I, and nobody
else, can desysop users, I can easily enforce this principle.

At some point in 2008, some very eloquent English-speaking user of the
Nepali Wikipedia complains about this unfair power structure, appeals to
Jimbo, the mailing lists etc. However, he is quickly shouted down by
people who fear for the autonomy of "their" Wikimedia wikis. They will
defend almost any rule on the Nepali Wikipedia as being "the business of
the Nepalese" and argue that Jimbo et al. should stay out of it, because
they are afraid that if they do not do so, their own idiosyncratic
policies will come under scrutiny.

"Individual projects should have this level of autonomy!" they will say.
And: "These rules have been in place for years, there's no reason to
change them now." There is a high level of tension between the English and
the non-English spheres, so Jimbo et al. will stay out of it to keep the
peace. This will set a precedent and other complainants will be similarly
shouted down.

Now everyone in this scenario acted with good intentions. However, one
single user has effectively managed to obtain control over what is and
isn't NPOV in a certain language Wikipedia. There might be more stewards
later on, but that merely means a change from a monarchy into an
oligarchy. Their decisions may be wrong or right, that doesn't matter, as
I think we agree this is not a scenario we want to happen.

I don't like the idea of implementing power structuers on the local level.
I see no need for it and a lot of ways for things to go wrong. Yes,
there's a difference between a 20-person wiki and a 20000-person wiki. But
these differences can be accounted for by developing a multi-stage power
structure that can be generalized for all wikis, e.g.:

< 10 users    : no sysops or bureaucrats; use Meta to ask super
                -bureaucrats to set permissions accordingly
< 100 users   : at least one bureaucrat, local "Requests for adminship"
                page, sysops can ban users if there is general consensus
                to do so, bureaucrat can remove sysop status if there
                is consensus
< 1000 users  : "Requests for bureaucrat status" page, appeals process,
                arbitration committee
1000+ users   : quickpoll-style system for dealing with emergency
                situations

I find it highly improbable that the cultural differences are so great
that we can not deal with the problems - vandalism, sysop status abuse
etc. - on a general, language-independent level. If you approach this
problem from a purely rational perspective I believe you will have to
admit that this is quite clearly so.

In fact, I believe that many non-English wikipedians will embrace your
proposal not for rational reasons, but purely because they want to grab
every little bit of autonomy for "their" wiki that they can get.

On each reasonably large wiki there are at least a couple of users who are
subconsciously motivated by a real drive for power. They will rationalize
this by saying that "We don't want to be controlled by the English
Wikipedia", "We have different problems that need different solutions",
but in reality they are already planning on what to do with these new
privileges, and not all outcomes will be desirable. I have already
observed that on some wikis, individual users have worked hard to
establish a status of authority for themselves, and a tool like the one
you are describing is exactly what they need to solidify that status.

It is also an excellent tool for astroturfers, who can dedicate a lot of
time to becoming influential and powerful "stewards" on up-and-coming
Wikimedia projects.

Keep in mind that Wikimedia is just a couple of years old, but it will be
here for a long time to come. Unless we screw up in *major* ways, and
someone creates a successful fork, the *minor* mistakes we make today will
have *huge* consequences many years in the future that are very hard to
foresee now, and very hard to repair later. The different languages
effectively act as barriers, and it is very difficult to spot dangerous
developments through these barriers. I am strongly opposed to effectively
granting absolute autonomy to a small set of individuals in defining power
structures that will likely be in place for years, if not decades.

Regards,

Erik


from_name: Anthere

body:
Well...we are in the process of building the thing no  :-) ?

We have to find the best solution...or at least the least bad...

Incidently...just because I think it is relevant to your comment Fred,
168... indicated me he wont come back

An extract

...However, I have to tell you that I'm not returning. Ultimately,
it's not because of Mav or my reputation. It's mostly
just that on the whole I don't see my work (my edits
or my dialogues) leading to lasting contributions in
an even slightly efficient or reliable way. And most
often it's a source of grief instead of fun or
satisfaction. In other words, it doesn't feel like a
worthwhile way to spend my time even though it has
introduced me to nice people like you. I wish the best
for you in and outside the project...

I offer this to you for two reasons

The first is that there is *my* gratification for 6 weeks
correspondance. If I consider it in the negative side, that is a
failure. A failure because we lost a contributor, in great part because
of Lir. And no arbitration was done on this case. And Lir is free to run
wild without being bothered, and to spit on mediation just as she
wishes. And that contributor, for hot headed he was, brought good
contributions.

However, when he quit wikipedia, he was a resentfull and bitter man.
If I did not succeed to bring him back to the project, at least he
leaves with less resentment and less anger. So, I guess I did not
entirely lose my time. He leaves with many regrets, but I think he
leaves a bit in peace.

The second point is this one.
Anyone has a right to leave anytime. But it is never good that people
leave in anger. Because when they leave in anger, they can become a
threat to the project. They can either become vandals and attack the
project, or they can just ill-talk about it. Just expressing in public
all our flaws is bad.

If we do not respect those good contributors asking for mediation and
then asking for arbitration, if we refuse then this, not only do we risk
loosing good contributors, but we risk making ennemies.

In front of this, bureaucracy...pouah

And finally, I dare ask what we should do when featured articles are in
edit war for more than 3 months ?

Fred Bauder a ?crit:
> If two disputants and their mediator request arbitration, it would be
> seriously considered.
>
> The reason person versus community cases have been taken is that those are
> the cases Jimbo has referred to us. We stand ready to accept person versus
> person cases too though once we get going.
>
> Fred


subject: [Wikitech-l] MediaWiki in Linux Magazine

body:
My article about MediaWiki for the German Linux-Magazin has now been
translated into English:
http://www.linux-magazine.com/issue/42/Mediawiki.pdf

Keep in mind that the pre-final of this article was finished on Jan 22.  I
sent them a few updates but it doesn't describe the in-place installer
yet. Nevertheless the installation procedure as described should still
work.

Regards,

Erik


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Limburgian wikipedia

body:
Kasper wrote:

> It would be nice if the Limburgian Wikipedia could be instigated at
> li.wikipedia.org, or rather lim.wikipedia.org. I think lim would be much
> clearer than li.

The question is not whether it's "clearer" or not. The language codes we
use are from an ISO standard.

I can't find any mention of "Limburgian language" in the ISO language
codes table, or on Wikipedia, or in Ethnologue. This seems to suggest to
me that such a language doesn't exist...

Wikipedia thinks that "Limburg" is either a province of the Netherlands,
or a province of Belgium, or a city in Germany. Ethnologue thinks the
following languages are spoken in...
- the Netherlands:
   http://www.ethnologue.com/show_country.asp?name=Netherlands
- Belgium:
   http://www.ethnologue.com/show_country.asp?name=Belgium
- Germany:
   http://www.ethnologue.com/show_country.asp?name=Germany

None of these mention "Limburgian", or even anything beginning with "lim".

What language are you referring to?

Timwi


from_name: Kasper

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Limburgian wikipedia

body:
It would be nice if the Limburgian Wikipedia could be
instigated at li.wikipedia.org, or rather lim.wikipedia.org. I
think lim would be much clearer than li.

thanks


from_name: Caroline Ford

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Limburgian wikipedia

body:
Walter Vermeir wrote:

> Timwi wrote:
>
>
>> None of these mention "Limburgian", or even anything beginning with
>> "lim".
>>
>> What language are you referring to?
>>
>> Timwi
>
>
> I have found a good website about this;
>
> http://www.streektaal.net/
>
> select language;
> Dansk    Nederlands    Frysk    Limburgs    Nedersaksisch  English
>
> And pick "Limburgish" in the menu
>
>> Status Since 1997, the Limburgish language has been recognized as
>> regional language by the Netherlands' government, according to
>> Article 2, paragraph 1, of the "European Charter for Regional or
>> Minority Languages". Because of this, the Dutch Government is
>> obligated to encourage the use of the language, although no specific
>> rules or arrangements have been set.
>
>
>
>
> Walter Vermeir
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>
 From ISO 639:

ISO 639-2: lim
ISO 639-1: li

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limburgish

We had all this on Wikipedia ;)

Caroline


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Limburgian wikipedia

body:
"Timwi" <timwi at gmx.net> schrieb:
> Kasper wrote:
>
> > It would be nice if the Limburgian Wikipedia could be instigated at
> > li.wikipedia.org, or rather lim.wikipedia.org. I think lim would be much
> > clearer than li.
>
> The question is not whether it's "clearer" or not. The language codes we
> use are from an ISO standard.
>
> I can't find any mention of "Limburgian language" in the ISO language
> codes table, or on Wikipedia, or in Ethnologue. This seems to suggest to
> me that such a language doesn't exist...

See: http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/codechanges.html (changes to the
ISO 639 code). "Limburgish", "Limburger" or "Limburgan" has been added to
ISO 639 with code "li" in August 2002.

Andre Engels


from_name: Walter Vermeir

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Limburgian wikipedia

body:
Timwi wrote:

> None of these mention "Limburgian", or even anything beginning with
> "lim".
>
> What language are you referring to?
>
> Timwi

I have found a good website about this;

http://www.streektaal.net/

select language;
Dansk    Nederlands    Frysk    Limburgs    Nedersaksisch  English

And pick "Limburgish" in the menu

> Status Since 1997, the Limburgish language has been recognized as
> regional language by the Netherlands' government, according to
> Article 2, paragraph 1, of the "European Charter for Regional or
> Minority Languages". Because of this, the Dutch Government is
> obligated to encourage the use of the language, although no specific
> rules or arrangements have been set.

Walter Vermeir


subject: [WikiEN-l] Thumbnail killing spree

body:
Magnus Manske wrote:

> As those of you who look at the minor edits on RC no doubt have
> noticed, I've been going around for some days replacing thumbnail
> images with links to their "larger version" with the appropriate
> thumbnail code. The original thumbnail image gets obsolete in the
> process.
>
> I have now started searching for images with "thumb" in their name. I
> will delete all those thumbnails that
> * are not linked to by some page other than an "upload log", and
> * have a larger version on wikipedia
> unless someone has a counter-argument.
>
> Otherwise, feel invited to join me on this mindless task! ;-)
>
> Maybe we should have a bot for this. Or a maintenance page. Well, if
> geoffrin is to be resurrected after all...
>
> Magnus
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
So far these have been going through images for deletion. I think we
need an agreement to bypass that.

Caroline


from_name: Magnus Manske

subject: [WikiEN-l] Thumbnail killing spree

body:
As those of you who look at the minor edits on RC no doubt have noticed,
I've been going around for some days replacing thumbnail images with
links to their "larger version" with the appropriate thumbnail code. The
original thumbnail image gets obsolete in the process.

I have now started searching for images with "thumb" in their name. I
will delete all those thumbnails that
* are not linked to by some page other than an "upload log", and
* have a larger version on wikipedia
unless someone has a counter-argument.

Otherwise, feel invited to join me on this mindless task! ;-)

Maybe we should have a bot for this. Or a maintenance page. Well, if
geoffrin is to be resurrected after all...

Magnus


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Lir refuses a Mediator

body:
Poor, Edmund W a ?crit:
> Ed, I explicitly and insultingly disdain your help. You are a hypocrite
> who harrasses users with personal attacks and threats. You are a pompous
> fool. [[User:Lir|Lirath Q. Pynnor]]
>
> :If you reject my help, it doesn't make much sense to complain that I
> "refuse" to help you, now does it? I will notify the committee. --Ed

I already gave my opinion on this on the committee board.
Lir is not having a behavior acceptable for *any* mediation.


from_name: Tomasz Wegrzanowski

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Cassubian Wikipedia

body:
I just opened Wikipedia in Cassubian. I don't know any Cassubian,
but I'm willing to help with all technical issues that will happen.

Wlasnie otworzylem Kaszubska edycje Wikipedii. Nie umiem mowic
po kaszubsku, ale chetnie pomoge we wszystkich kwestiach technicznych.


subject: [Wikitech-l] Cassubian Wikipedia


from_name: Jimmy Wales

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Fascinating story mentions us

body:
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1080707285901

This story reflects favorably on us, I think.

Essentially, here's the story.  Someone noticed that the top search
result for "Jew" at Google was an anti-semitic site.  People offended
by this started a blogging campaign to counter this result with...
the Wikipedia article [[Jew]].

http://www.jewschool.com/2004_03_01_archive.php#107951205677851436

Is the weblog post that started it all.

"I'm going to suggest using Wikipedia's entry for Jew as the initial
(and official) link for this campaign, as it's the most inclusive,
non-denominational, and democratic source on the subject."


from_name: The Cunctator

body:
On 3/30/04 9:19 AM, "Poor, Edmund W" <Edmund.W.Poor at abc.com> wrote:

> I posted the following on requests for review of admin actions. -- Ed
> Poor
>
> ----
>
> Iris, shut up and get back to work! You are wasting everyone's time.
> Either help us to write accurate NPOV articles, or leave.
>
> I don't give a rat's ass about whether natural health or iridology or
> zone manipulation are true or not. Just make your case for them, and
> leave it for the reader to decide.
>
> People have bent over backwards to accomodate you, mostly out of a pure
> concern for fairness and justice. You have eroded all the good will left
> in my body. Any more crap out of you, and I will "take steps". Better
> listen up good, because I'm one the oldest "old hands" around here and I
> know how to work the system. Don't get me riled up against you, or I
> will force you out!! (A word to the wise is sufficient.) --Uncle Ed
> 14:14, 30 Mar 2004 (UTC)
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_review_of_admin_acti
> ons
>
> ----
>
> Sorry if I overdid it, but this business of AssumeGoodFaith can only be
> taken so far. I have no more patience left for his brand of nonsense.
>
The problem isn't that you overdid it--the problem is that you explicitly
abused the power entrusted in you to threaten another user.

The language you use harms not only yourself but also Wikipedia. If anyone
needs evidence that Wikipedia is run by a cabal of arbitrary, puerile
autocrats, you've supplied it.

Yes, Irismeister is extraordinarily annoying, but how many pages are we
talking about? The iridology entry actually looks very good. Yes, it took
too much work and exasperation, but hey, we're paid by the hour.

Of course, this is all easy for me to say since I avoided being involved.

Whatever the case though, no matter what Iridology's behavior, nothing could
justify your vulgar response. With power comes responsibility.


from_name: Andre Engels

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Adding a new language

body:
"Sonja Elen Kisa" <sonja at kisa.ca> schrieb:
> Some of us have been wanting to add a Wikipedia in the Toki Pona language. We
> normally use the 2 letter abbreviation "tp" for this language. How can it be
> added so we can translate all the preliminary pages?

As I understand, policy is:
* If the language has a (2-letter) ISO 639-1 code, use it
* Otherwise, if the language has a (3-letter) ISO 639-2 code, use it
* Otherwise, make up a 3-letter code ourselves

Toki Pona is not in ISO 639 (and seen from the size and importance of it, that
does not surprise me). The ISO 639-1 code 'tp' is not in use, but if we're
going to have tp.wikipedia.org, I think Tok Pinin would be a better candidate
than Toki Pona. All in all I would say that a 3-letter code would be better,
and that for me personally it's getting to the level where I doubt whether
having it would be good at all.

> Although I do not know Klingon, I believe it would be a good idea to add it as
> a possible Wikipedia language. I am sure there are many enthusiasts out there
> who are willing to develop it.

Klingon would be code tlh.

Andre Engels


from_name: Marek Najmajer

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Cassubian Wikipedia

body:
Taw wrote on Thursday, April 01, 2004 2:08 AM:
> I just opened Wikipedia in Cassubian. I don't know any Cassubian,
> but I'm willing to help with all technical issues that will happen.

Thank you very much indeed!

Marqoz


from_name: Guillaume Blanchard

body:
As I understood the Tim long term view, only the way "powers" (I prefer
"features") is dispense may be customizable. * In all case, decision must be
taken by community consensus.*
As an example, I think (it's just my point of view) that create a complex
hierarchy into a community is a real bad idea. For me, we only need 3 types
of users:
- Normal users
- Administrators "users who have access to administration tools and must
apply community decision"
- Arbitrator "users who was elected by community to resolve conflict"
That mean, in my point of view, that all administrators may have access to
all administration features (remove administrator flag as well). If we have
an easy to see log of all administrators actions (block, ban, give/remove
status, etc.) it may be easy to detect any abuse and take proportional
sanction. Sure it's just a point of view, but I don't see why this system
may have more chance to lead to dictatorship than actual English Wikipedia
system. Contrariwise, I think hierarchize the administration is something
like a defeat avowal. Instead of force administrators to respect rules, you
create new level to oversee them. The only judge we must have is the
community.
Tim explained me (as I understood) that English Wikipedia had a different
view of governance and prefer give different administration "powers"
according to the level of trust the user have. Why not. But why it must be
*the* governance type all Wikipedia must adopt? If you are afraid with this
local governance (and you are not wrong) we can make rules that local
governance system must be first approved by Jimbo or the community (for
example, by a vote on meta).

By the way, I think we must never give a specific "power" to less than 3
people.

Aoineko

----- Original Message -----
From: "Erik Moeller" <erik_moeller at gmx.de>
To: <wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org>
Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2004 4:00 AM
Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Please clarify the honorary administrator
status

> Tim-
> > Currently they have more abilities than bureaucrats. They can grant or
> > revoke any level of access. Currently bureaucrats can only grant
> > bureaucrat or admin status.
>
> I think the best way to go about this is to simply have two types of
> bureaucrats, local bureaucrats who can add and remove all user privileges
> and have access to other high level maintenance functions, and interwiki
> (super-)bureaucrats who can do this on any wiki. I think this additional
> "steward" level is needlessly confusing.
>
> > Additional features may be implemented depending on community sentiment.
> > Ultimately I would like to see stewards capable of configuring the power
> > structure on each wiki individually
>
> We are entering very dangerous territory here. Your original proposal was
> to decentralize power, and that is all well and good. But this idea, to
> configure power structures on a local level, has a lot of room for long-
> term abuse.
>
> Let's say I am a highly influential and generally good-natured user who is
> very active on, say, the Nepali Wikipedia. I'm also known and trusted on
> the English Wikipedia, so I am quickly given the "keys" to this new power
> structure configuration module for ne.wikipedia.org.
>
> Now let's say I happen to believe that it's a good idea to let sysops ban
> any user for repeated POV edits, given prior warnings. I'm sure there are
> many otherwise quite reasonable people who would believe that this is a
> good idea. Because of my influence and my level of control, it would be
> very easy for me to implement this power structure on the Nepali
> Wikipedia.
>
> As the Nepali Wikipedia grows, this principle becomes quite established.
> "POV users" are routinely banned arbitrarily. Because of my influence, I
> have managed to become the "last instance" of appeals -- there is no
> voting before banning, but I, the "steward", have obtained a position that
> effectively allows me to veto or approve any ban. Because I, and nobody
> else, can desysop users, I can easily enforce this principle.
>
> At some point in 2008, some very eloquent English-speaking user of the
> Nepali Wikipedia complains about this unfair power structure, appeals to
> Jimbo, the mailing lists etc. However, he is quickly shouted down by
> people who fear for the autonomy of "their" Wikimedia wikis. They will
> defend almost any rule on the Nepali Wikipedia as being "the business of
> the Nepalese" and argue that Jimbo et al. should stay out of it, because
> they are afraid that if they do not do so, their own idiosyncratic
> policies will come under scrutiny.
>
> "Individual projects should have this level of autonomy!" they will say.
> And: "These rules have been in place for years, there's no reason to
> change them now." There is a high level of tension between the English and
> the non-English spheres, so Jimbo et al. will stay out of it to keep the
> peace. This will set a precedent and other complainants will be similarly
> shouted down.
>
> Now everyone in this scenario acted with good intentions. However, one
> single user has effectively managed to obtain control over what is and
> isn't NPOV in a certain language Wikipedia. There might be more stewards
> later on, but that merely means a change from a monarchy into an
> oligarchy. Their decisions may be wrong or right, that doesn't matter, as
> I think we agree this is not a scenario we want to happen.
>
> I don't like the idea of implementing power structuers on the local level.
> I see no need for it and a lot of ways for things to go wrong. Yes,
> there's a difference between a 20-person wiki and a 20000-person wiki. But
> these differences can be accounted for by developing a multi-stage power
> structure that can be generalized for all wikis, e.g.:
>
> < 10 users    : no sysops or bureaucrats; use Meta to ask super
>                 -bureaucrats to set permissions accordingly
> < 100 users   : at least one bureaucrat, local "Requests for adminship"
>                 page, sysops can ban users if there is general consensus
>                 to do so, bureaucrat can remove sysop status if there
>                 is consensus
> < 1000 users  : "Requests for bureaucrat status" page, appeals process,
>                 arbitration committee
> 1000+ users   : quickpoll-style system for dealing with emergency
>                 situations
>
> I find it highly improbable that the cultural differences are so great
> that we can not deal with the problems - vandalism, sysop status abuse
> etc. - on a general, language-independent level. If you approach this
> problem from a purely rational perspective I believe you will have to
> admit that this is quite clearly so.
>
> In fact, I believe that many non-English wikipedians will embrace your
> proposal not for rational reasons, but purely because they want to grab
> every little bit of autonomy for "their" wiki that they can get.
>
> On each reasonably large wiki there are at least a couple of users who are
> subconsciously motivated by a real drive for power. They will rationalize
> this by saying that "We don't want to be controlled by the English
> Wikipedia", "We have different problems that need different solutions",
> but in reality they are already planning on what to do with these new
> privileges, and not all outcomes will be desirable. I have already
> observed that on some wikis, individual users have worked hard to
> establish a status of authority for themselves, and a tool like the one
> you are describing is exactly what they need to solidify that status.
>
> It is also an excellent tool for astroturfers, who can dedicate a lot of
> time to becoming influential and powerful "stewards" on up-and-coming
> Wikimedia projects.
>
> Keep in mind that Wikimedia is just a couple of years old, but it will be
> here for a long time to come. Unless we screw up in *major* ways, and
> someone creates a successful fork, the *minor* mistakes we make today will
> have *huge* consequences many years in the future that are very hard to
> foresee now, and very hard to repair later. The different languages
> effectively act as barriers, and it is very difficult to spot dangerous
> developments through these barriers. I am strongly opposed to effectively
> granting absolute autonomy to a small set of individuals in defining power
> structures that will likely be in place for years, if not decades.
>
> Regards,
>
> Erik
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: stats - referrer spam

body:
Peter Gervai <grin at ...> writes:
> Hi,
>
> Could yo filter out these referrer spammers from the stats?
>
> *lmltechnologies.com
> *cyberxscape.com

The dutch Wikipedia have that also;

http://nl.wikipedia.org/stats/usage_200403.html#TOPREFS

8 7478 0.09% http://www.partypeeps2000.com/asp/AccountInfo.asp

But it is now much better. There used to be much more of that type of reffers.

Walter Vermeir


from_name: Peter Gervai

subject: [Wikipedia-l] stats became iso8859 (on hu: at least)

body:
Hello,

Somehow stats isn't utf8 right now. Used to be. Should be again.

http://hu.wikipedia.org/stats/usage_200403.html

thanks,
grin


subject: [Wikipedia-l] stats - referrer spam

body:
Hi,

Could yo filter out these referrer spammers from the stats?

*lmltechnologies.com
*cyberxscape.com

en: probably have even more, I haven't checked. hu: is enough for me now. :)

thanks,
grin


from_name: steven l. rubenstein

subject: [WikiEN-l] TDC is starting to piss me off

body:
Dear colleagues,

I just found this message from TDC on my talk page
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Slrubenstein

>A question for you:
>Now, I know you Marxist types dont believe in an afterlife and the like,
>but if I were to hold a seance and channel Marx's spirit through you, do
>you think you would try and suck your own dick. TDC 04:15, 1 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Now, I've long resisted attempts to ban people but this kind of talk (and
given TDC's antagonistic comments elsewhere, I don't think it is an April
Fool's joke) kinda wants me to see him banned.  I don't know if this is
actually a bannable offense -- I've seen far worse language elsewhere, and
I know the rule is to try to educate people and encourage them to be more
civil.  Maybe I am especially unsympathetic because TDC has wasted a lot of
people's time -- the time of serious contributors like Andyleherer and
John, and others -- on the Talk: Fascism and Talk: Karl Marx pages, and I
just do not see him making any useful contribution.  Be that as it me,
since I am the one offended here I don't quite trust my own judgment.  I've
taken a publicly antagonist position to him, dismissing his comments on
these talk pages -- although I have tried to avoid vulgarity and have
always addressed the substantive historical question.  But I don't think I
can communicate effectively with him, certainly not anymore.

Would some of you try to communicate with him about this?

Thanks,

Steve

Steven L. Rubenstein
Associate Professor
Department of Sociology and Anthropology
Bentley Annex
Ohio University
Athens, Ohio 45701
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20040401/710711c6/attachment.htm
-------------- next part --------------

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.642 / Virus Database: 410 - Release Date: 3/24/2004


from_name: Denny Vrandecic

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Hondev and 'power' structure

body:
Please, be careful with some of the terms, especially the following:

don't mix power with ability.

As far as I understand - I am no native english speaker - "power" means, you
may do sth and you are free to decide to do it or not.

"Ability" means you can do sth, but it is not your decision, if you may do
it.

Hondevs (or whatever their name will be) do get abilities, but certainly not
power. Just changing this word makes the discussion look quite different.

Just my humble opinion,
Denny


from_name: Timwi

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Patent idea

body:
Hey!

We were looking for something we came up with that we could patent,
right? And we were specifically looking for something that would make
fun of the idea of patenting itself.

Here's an idea.

For those who don't yet know, a company called Ideaflood has patented
the idea of allocating sub-domains to particular users (or user
accounts) of a website. So, for example, LiveJournal is now being asked
for licensing fees because if you purchase an account at LiveJournal,
you get a sub-domain "yourusername.livejournal.com".

How about we patent the idea of using language codes as sub-domains?

Ideaflood's patent claim is pretty weak because there is "prior art"
(i.e. people have done this before the patent was filed), but I'm not
sure I have ever seen a website that uses language codes as subdomains
before Wikipedia did. They all seem to prefer something like
www.domain.tld/en/index.html or www.domain.tld/index.en.html (with "en"
being the language code) rather than en.domain.tld.

Just an idea,
Timwi


from_name: Ray Saintonge

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Patent idea

body:
Timwi wrote:

> Mathias Schindler wrote:
>
>> Hr. Daniel Mikkelsen schrieb:
>>
>>> On Thu, 1 Apr 2004, Timwi wrote:
>>
>>           ^^^^^
>> this was the part when I stopped taking the Idea seriously :)
>
>
> It wasn't actually meant as an April Fool's joke. I've had enough of
> those for today. :)

There are always riskes connected with promoting new ideas on April 1.
:-)

Ec


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Patent idea

body:
Wesley Sheldahl wrote:

> On Thursday, April 1, 2004, at 05:34  PM, Timwi wrote:
>
>> Hr. Daniel Mikkelsen wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 1 Apr 2004, Timwi wrote:
>>>
>>>> We were looking for something we came up with that we could patent,
>>>> right?
>>>
>>> Are we? I think it's an awful idea to have the Wikimedia Foundation
>>> patent
>>> something.
>>
>> Notice that patenting something doesn't mean asking for royalties.
>
> True. However, the historical stated purpose of patents is to allow an
> inventor to profit from his or her invention for a period of time
> before everyone else starts profiting from the invention, and thereby
> provide incentive for further innovation.  What other benefit would
> there be to patenting something?  There needs to be some benefit to
> justify the expense involved.

For some the bragging rights are the only benefit that they need. :-)

Ec


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: stats - referrer spam

body:
On Thu, Apr 01, 2004 at 11:45:50AM +0000, Walter Vermeir wrote:
> Peter Gervai <grin at ...> writes:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Could yo filter out these referrer spammers from the stats?
> >
> > *lmltechnologies.com
> > *cyberxscape.com
>
> The dutch Wikipedia have that also;
>
> http://nl.wikipedia.org/stats/usage_200403.html#TOPREFS
>
> 8 7478 0.09% http://www.partypeeps2000.com/asp/AccountInfo.asp
>
> But it is now much better. There used to be much more of that type of reffers.

Actually there are plenty of them, and since hu: is small, they're showing
up in the stats. I noticed several others too. It's pretty easy to filter
them in webalizer as far as I remember.

Peter


subject: [Wikitech-l] Geoffrin

body:
Geoffrin is at the colo, and the memory tests look good so far.

I'm going to be back in there tomorrow, and I think all will be fine
from here on out.

--Jimbo


from_name: Hr. Daniel Mikkelsen

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Patent idea

body:
On Thu, 1 Apr 2004, Timwi wrote:

> We were looking for something we came up with that we could patent,
> right?

Are we? I think it's an awful idea to have the Wikimedia Foundation patent
something.

--
Daniel Mikkelsen
Copyleft Software AS


from_name: Mathias Schindler

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Patent idea

body:
Hr. Daniel Mikkelsen schrieb:

> On Thu, 1 Apr 2004, Timwi wrote:
           ^^^^^

this was the part when I stopped taking the Idea seriously :)

Mathias
--
nach uns der synflood.


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Patent idea

body:
On Thu, 1 Apr 2004, Mathias Schindler wrote:

> Hr. Daniel Mikkelsen schrieb:
>
> > On Thu, 1 Apr 2004, Timwi wrote:
>            ^^^^^
>
> this was the part when I stopped taking the Idea seriously :)

:D

--
Daniel Mikkelsen
Copyleft Software AS


from_name: Wesley Sheldahl

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Patent idea

body:
On Thursday, April 1, 2004, at 05:34  PM, Timwi wrote:

> Hr. Daniel Mikkelsen wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 1 Apr 2004, Timwi wrote:
>>> We were looking for something we came up with that we could patent,
>>> right?
>> Are we? I think it's an awful idea to have the Wikimedia Foundation
>> patent
>> something.
>
> Notice that patenting something doesn't mean asking for royalties.
>

True. However, the historical stated purpose of patents is to allow an
inventor to profit from his or her invention for a period of time
before everyone else starts profiting from the invention, and thereby
provide incentive for further innovation.  What other benefit would
there be to patenting something?  There needs to be some benefit to
justify the expense involved.

--
Wes Sheldahl
wsheldahl at iglou.com


from_name: Rick

subject: [WikiEN-l] Using Googlebomb to improve Wikipedia's standing

body:
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1080707285901

RickK

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Small Business $15K Web Design Giveaway - Enter today
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20040401/94656b69/attachment.htm


from_name: Jason Richey

subject: [Wikitech-l] Yahoo! XML feed

body:
Hello all.

I'm putting the finishing touches on a script that exports the
wikipedia in a format that can be directly imported to Yahoo!'s (and
other's) search engine.  It's nothing pretty (in fact, it's my first
PHP), but I'd be grateful if 2 things would happen:

* Someone would look at it (I attached it) and say "this sucks
  because..."

* Someone would give me cvs write access, so I could add the file to
  the repository.

Eventually, this should be on a cron, updating periodically so that
the search engines which use these results stay up-to-date.  I saved a
copy of the spec here:

http://www.bomis.com/idif/spec.pdf

I didn't come up with any good way of getting keywords for a given
page.  Using the linked page titles was a suggestion.  Other ideas?

Thanks.

--
"Jason C. Richey" <jasonr at bomis.com>

-------------- next part --------------
<?php

include_once( "/apache/htdocs/en/w/LocalSettings.php" );
include_once( "Setup.php" );
include_once('Parser.php');
include_once('Title.php');
include_once('DatabaseFunctions.php');

$idifdir = ".";
$idifurl = "http://www.wikipedia.org/idif";
$wgTitle;
$maxdata = 12500000;#this is just a rough value.  If we use Unicode, then this will be nearly 25 Megabytes, right?

export();

function export(){
  global $idifdir;
  global $idifdurl;
  global $maxdata;
  $totaldata = 0;
  $filenum=1;
  $outfile = fopen("$idifdir/wikipedia_$filenum.idif","w");
  $indexfile = fopen("$idifdir/idif_index.txt","w");
  fwrite($indexfile,"$idifurl/wikipedia_$filenum.idif\n");
  fclose($indexfile);
  outputHeader($outfile);
#get a list of page titles
  $sql = "SELECT cur_title as title from cur where cur_namespace=0";
#get data for each page
  $res = wfQuery($sql, DB_READ);
  while($s = wfFetchObject($res)){
#check file sizes, print data to file
    $data = getPageData($s->title);
    if(strlen($data)+$totaldata >= $maxdata){

#finish this file's XML stuff
       fwrite($outfile,"</IDIF>\n");
#close the file
       fclose($outfile);
#increment the file number
       $filenum++;
#open a new file
       $outfile = fopen("$idifdir/wikipedia_$filenum.idif","w");
#append the new file's URL to the IDIF index
       $indexfile = fopen("$idifdir/idif_index.txt","a");
       fwrite($indexfile,"$idifurl/wikipedia_$filenum.idif\n");
       fclose($indexfile);
#put the XML main tags in the new file
       outputHeader($outfile);
       $totaldata = 0;
}

    fwrite($outfile,$data);
    $totaldata += strlen($data);
}
}

function outputHeader($outfile){
fwrite($outfile,"<?xml version=\"1.0\"?>\n");
fwrite($outfile, "<IDIF>\n");
}

function getPageData($page){
$return = "<DOC url=\"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/$page\">\n";
$return .= "<CONTENT type=text/html>\n";
print "fetching \"$page\"\n";
  global $wgTitle;
  $title = Title::NewFromText( $page );
  $wgTitle = $title;
  if( !$title ) return "";
  $t = wfStrencode( $title->getDBKey() );
  $article = new Article($title);
  $text = $article->getContent($title);
  $parser = new Parser();
  $parser_output = $parser->parse($text);
  $return .= "\n\n";
  $title_text = $title->getText();
  $return .= "<title>Wikipedia: $title_text</title>\n";
  $return .= "<meta name=\"keywords\" content=\"Wikipedia\">\n";
  $return .= "<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Wikipedia Free Encyclopedia's article on '$title_text'\">\n";
  $return .= "\n";
  $return .= $parser_output->getText();
  $return .= "\n";

  $return .= "\n</CONTENT>\n</DOC>\n";
  return $return;

}

?>


from_name: Eric Demolli

subject: [WikiEN-l] I'm blocked again !

body:
My IP address 62.212.103.37 is blocked again by the proxy blocker !
Why is my home network proxy considered as an open proxy ?
I have reinforced the rules las time and my proxy is still considered as
"open".
Should I change any parameter ?

Eric Demolli


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Why am I blocked ?

body:
Thanks Jimmy.
You know I'm blocked again. As of today I considered my proxy as secure.  I
just like to know what kind of security hole was discovered. If a proxy
blocker as been implemented I think it would be fair to say exactly why an
address is blocked.
Eric Demolli

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jimmy Wales" <jwales at bomis.com>
To: "English Wikipedia" <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2004 7:16 PM
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Re: Why am I blocked ?

> Tim Starling wrote:
> > Eric Demolli wrote:
> > >It was the proxy blocker. But how does it work ? I use Squid cache but
> > >there
> > >should be no way to connect on my proxy port from the Net.
> > >I've added some acl to allow only my internal network IP should I do
> > >something else ?
> > >How can I be unblocked ?
> > >
> >
> > That's all you have to do, secure the proxy and get a sysop to unblock
> > you. Your computer will be rescanned eventually, and if you've
> > configured your proxy correctly, you won't be reblocked.
>
> How hard would it be for us to have the ability to punch specific
> holes in our proxy blocker?  It seems a shame for Eric to have to
> reconfigure something because of us.  If someone were abusing his
> proxy, that might be a different matter.
>
> I know that if my home network were to get blocked for this, I'd find
> it a royal pain in the ass to have to reconfigure.
>
> --Jimbo
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l


from_name: Tomos at Wikipedia

subject: [Wikitech-l] proxy blocker mistakes

body:
Hello.

It seems that one of our trusted users was blocked by proxy blocker even
though his is IPs are not open proxies. IPs I was informed of by the user
were as follows:

220.146.24.126
220.146.22.87
220.146.22.10

I will unblock these addresses, but is it really effective if I do that? I
am afraid that the blocker will re-block those addresses as soon as he start
editing. Can I do anything? Or is there anything the user should do? I would
appreciate any suggestion.

Thanks for your attention,

Tomos

_________________________________________________________________
Get tax tips, tools and access to IRS forms ? all in one place at MSN Money!
http://moneycentral.msn.com/tax/home.asp


from_name: Brion Vibber

subject: [Wikitech-l] Yahoo! XML feed

body:
On Apr 1, 2004, at 18:20, Jason Richey wrote:
[snip]
 > * Someone would give me cvs write access, so I could add the file to
>   the repository.

Sure, I'll just need your sourceforge account name...

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)


subject: [Wikitech-l] Yahoo! XML feed

body:
On Apr 1, 2004, at 18:20, Jason Richey wrote:
> I'm putting the finishing touches on a script that exports the
> wikipedia in a format that can be directly imported to Yahoo!'s (and
> other's) search engine.  It's nothing pretty (in fact, it's my first
> PHP), but I'd be grateful if 2 things would happen:
>
> * Someone would look at it (I attached it) and say "this sucks
>   because..."

A couple notes...

Unless a charset is explicitly set, XML is assumed to be Unicode
(auto-detected between UTF-8, UTF-16 big-ending, and UTF-16 little
endian). The output should either be converted to UTF-8 or marked as
ISO-8859-1 like this:
<?xml version="1.0" charset="ISO-8859-1" ?>

Actually it might be better to mark it as Windows-1252 rather than
ISO-8859-1, since sometimes bad Windows-specific characters sneak in
and could make the feed invalid if included literally.

Page titles may contain ampersands and some other funky chars, and need
to be escaped in a URL; you can use urlencode() to get it URL-encoded
and htmlspecialchars() to make it safe for literal inclusion in XML.
The $title_text should also be run through htmlspecialchars().

Otherwise it looks like it ought to be more or less functional, if a
bit hard-coded in some places. (I haven't tested it yet.)

> I didn't come up with any good way of getting keywords for a given
> page.  Using the linked page titles was a suggestion.  Other ideas?

I believe the keywords Magnus recently added to the CVS code grabs
additional keywords from the set of links in the page (which you could
pull out of a join on links and cur). That's one possibility...

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)


subject: [Wikitech-l] Yahoo! XML feed

body:
Another thing; our HTML output is not yet guaranteed to be valid XML.
This could cause a problem for literal inclusion of the HTML content
into the XML output.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)


from_name: Arvind Narayanan

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Patent idea

in_reply_to:
<c4h6bq$d6c$1@sea.gmane.org>;
	from timwi@gmx.net on Thu, Apr 01, 2004 at 02:44:01PM +0100

body:
On Thu, Apr 01, 2004 at 02:44:01PM +0100, Timwi wrote:
>
> Hey!
>
> We were looking for something we came up with that we could patent,
> right? And we were specifically looking for something that would make
> fun of the idea of patenting itself.
>
> Here's an idea.
>
> For those who don't yet know, a company called Ideaflood has patented
> the idea of allocating sub-domains to particular users (or user
> accounts) of a website. So, for example, LiveJournal is now being asked
> for licensing fees because if you purchase an account at LiveJournal,
> you get a sub-domain "yourusername.livejournal.com".
>
> How about we patent the idea of using language codes as sub-domains?
>
Sounds fun to me.

Next up: the idea of using the title of an article to construct
its URL!

After all, no other encylopedia has been doing this :) (had a
quick look at britannica.com and encarta.com)

More suggestions: simulating nested comments using wiki editing.

Hell, every source file in MediaWiki can get a patent for whatever
it implements.

Arvind

> Ideaflood's patent claim is pretty weak because there is "prior art"
> (i.e. people have done this before the patent was filed), but I'm not
> sure I have ever seen a website that uses language codes as subdomains
> before Wikipedia did. They all seem to prefer something like
> www.domain.tld/en/index.html or www.domain.tld/index.en.html (with "en"
> being the language code) rather than en.domain.tld.
>
> Just an idea,
> Timwi
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l

--
Its all GNU to me


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Why am I blocked ?

body:
Eric Demolli wrote:
> Thanks Jimmy.
> You know I'm blocked again. As of today I considered my proxy as secure.  I
> just like to know what kind of security hole was discovered. If a proxy
> blocker as been implemented I think it would be fair to say exactly why an
> address is blocked.

Agreed. I think the ban-reason string should mention the port number at
which an open proxy was detected.

Timwi


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Thumbnail killing spree

body:
Caroline Ford wrote:

> [Magnus Manske wrote about replacing old image thumbnails]
>
> So far these have been going through images for deletion. I think we
> need an agreement to bypass that.

I think there is no harm in continuing to have them go through IfD.
Actually, I find that cleaning up IfD can be a lot of fun. :)

Timwi


from_name: Walter Vermeir

subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: proxy blocker mistakes

body:
Tomos at Wikipedia wrote:

> do? I would appreciate any suggestion.
>
> Thanks for your attention,
>
> Tomos

A white list function can be usefull to have. A proxy blocker override.

Walter


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Patent idea

body:
Hr. Daniel Mikkelsen wrote:

> On Thu, 1 Apr 2004, Timwi wrote:
>
>>We were looking for something we came up with that we could patent,
>>right?
>
> Are we? I think it's an awful idea to have the Wikimedia Foundation patent
> something.

Notice that patenting something doesn't mean asking for royalties.


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Patent idea

body:
Mathias Schindler wrote:

> Hr. Daniel Mikkelsen schrieb:
>
>> On Thu, 1 Apr 2004, Timwi wrote:
>           ^^^^^
>
> this was the part when I stopped taking the Idea seriously :)

It wasn't actually meant as an April Fool's joke. I've had enough of
those for today. :)

It was a well-meant response to someone's (Jimbo's? Brion's?) question
that was asked here about a month ago or so, seeking something Wikimedia
have invented that they could patent (but then still allow people to use
freely, of course) for the sole purpose of making fun of the patenting
system.

Timwi


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Fascinating story mentions us

body:
Jimmy Wales wrote:

> Essentially, here's the story.  Someone noticed that the top search
> result for "Jew" at Google was an anti-semitic site.  People offended
> by this started a blogging campaign to counter this result with...
> the Wikipedia article [[Jew]].

Aah. A [[Googlebomb]].


subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: proxy blocker mistakes

body:
Walter Vermeir wrote:

> Tomos at Wikipedia wrote:
>
>> do? I would appreciate any suggestion.
>>
>> Thanks for your attention,
>>
>> Tomos
>
> A white list function can be usefull to have. A proxy blocker override.

That would mean knowingly allowing specific open proxies (which, by
definition, anyone can then use to troll/vandalise/etc.).