from_name: Alex Kwan

body:
Hello,

Mark Williamson wrote:
> What I think is this: if there are people who want to write it, and
> people who want to read it, no matter the number on either side (as
> long as it's more than 2 or 3 people total), it's rediculous to send

I think someone was talking about moving this conversation somewhere
else? I was vacationing in mainland China and didn't catch where this
was moved to? Would some kind soul please inform me? Thanks.

> varieties and in some places there is the stereotype that a Mandarin
> speaker expects everybody to speak Mandarin, and if they don't, they
> must be daft (not that everybody fits this stereotype). Accommodations
> for Cantonese, Minnan, Hakka, Wu, Minbei, Gan, etc. are rarely made,
> and when they are it's usually in minor local issues, and nowadays it
> seems it mostly happens in Hong Kong, Macao, and Taiwan.

Actually, the attitude in Hong Kong has always been that you must be
daft if you can't speak Cantonese with the perfect Hong Kong accent.
It's only after 1997 that the various public transportation, etc. have
Mandarin announcements. The "official" Hong Kong stance is two written
languages and three spoken languages. Most people ended up writing bad
English & somewhat sufficient Chinese and speaking perfect Cantonese,
somewhat okay English, and lousy Mandarin.

Since I've been going to Guangzhou a lot lately, I've noticed that there
is a big difference between the attitude about Cantonese in Guangzhou
vs. Hong Kong. And in Macao, even the Macanese speaks great Cantonese,
though they all speak Portuguese at home.

As to the written system, Hong Kong has always used traditional Chinese
and I hope that never changes. I can read simplified Chinese but I think
it's the ugliest thing ever. And it's not like it helped the literacy
rate or anything, since both Taiwan and Hong Kong have a higher literacy
rate than mainland China. But I'm little old me and I'm not stupid
enough to go against the whole Chinese government.

> As Stirling Newberry noted, there is a fairly recent phenomenon of
> material emerging in "CWY" (colloquial cantonese). Similar signs have

Depends entirely on what you think of as recent, as plenty of popular HK
fiction in the 80s are written in Cantonese. But to the older
generation, even if they are Cantonese speakers themselves, baihua is
simply how you write. It's not just prejudice against Cantonese, but
also prejudice against mass culture/pop culture.

little Alex


list: wikien-l

source: pipermail-mbox

from_name: actionforum at comcast.net

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Silverback and the 3RR

body:
> Well, If I see a 3RR violation on a page I'm editing I'll post it on WP:AN
> instead of acting on it myself.
>
> AndyL

Thanx, I will assume good faith.

BTW, Barry Goldwater also co-sponsored (along with Sen. Mark Hatfield) in 1968, the bill to end the draft.  He was a conservative of the classical liberal vein (at least at that time).  On civil rights, he probably feared that the bill might result in discriminatory quotas.  Two wrongs don't make a right.

                                     -- Silverback


list: wikitech-l

from_name: Amgine

subject: [Wikitech-l] Recent Changes bot

body:
We have registered the IRC channel #enrc.wikinews, and would like to set
up an RC bot similar to that used on #derc.wikinews and #enrc.wikipedia.
How should we go about asking for that? (Or is that Who, What, Where,
When, Why, and How?)

Amgine


from_name: csherlock at ljh.com.au

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: How to join the cabal

body:
Gentlemen.

As the leader of the Cabal, I must ask you to all shut up because you
are ruining it for the rest of us!

Ta bu shi da yu

Nicholas Knight wrote:
> John Collison wrote:
>
>>
>>> Just answer these questions:
>>>
>>> a) Do green flamingoes sing Schubert when the sky is a bright canary
>>> yellow?
>>>
>>> b) Could you lend me six, no eight, filter-tipped Chesterfields
>>> without any menthol?
>>>
>>> c) Are there bombs in Gilead?
>>>
>> I've a better question. If you get it right, you can join.
>>
>>
>> Q: Is there a cabal?
>
>
> Well, that depends on what your definition of "is" is.
>
>> ++++++++++++++
>> Answers:
>> If you answered no, you get to join the cabal.
>> ++++++++++++++
>
>
> Darn.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: abuse of administrator priviledges by AndyL

body:
Mav,

I made one called [[WP:AN]] that's been in use for some time now. I
think some admin still don't know about it...

Ta bu shi da yu

Daniel Mayer wrote:
> --- actionforum at comcast.net wrote:
>
>>2) If these were somehow, technically reverts on my part, he was the one
>>instigating them, it is abusive for him to be the one to block me in such a
>>situation, he should have to call in another administrator, rather than
>>judge an "edit war" he was a participant in.
>
>
> Speaking of which, a general requests for admin action page may be useful in
> such cases. It would work the same as (and perhaps replace) the requests for
> page protection page. Or we could have separate pages for different actions
> (page history move, quick deletions, page protections and blocks such as the
> one you mention).
>
> -- mav
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Illegally Blocked user: Tteexx

body:
Fred, the article is [[Yopu]]. It has one source, and external link to a
website that is currently giving me an error.

TBSDY

Fred Bauder wrote:
> What I note about this is that you do not tell us the name of the article or
> any details about it or what was considered objectionable about it. So your
> complaint kind of ends up in the air. It upsets but it offers no way to
> easily look at it and determine what's going on.
>
> Although one could research it by looking at your user contributions I
> suppose. But why not just tell us?
>
> Fred
>
>
>>From: Stewart Pederson <stewped at gmail.com>
>>Reply-To: Stewart Pederson <stewped at gmail.com>, English Wikipedia
>><wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
>>Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2005 23:31:55 -0900
>>To: wikien-l at wikipedia.org
>>Subject: [WikiEN-l] Illegally Blocked user: Tteexx
>>
>>Dear Wikipedia Folks,
>>
>>I have been blocked for editing my article, and continuing to add
>>information.  The article is currently a VfD candidate and the
>>democratic process has been occuring until today.  The apparent reason
>>for my block was that Neutrality assumes I am using multiple accounts?
>>Or is it that he thinks my article is a hoax?  He also mentions the
>>use of self-made images.  These images are related to the article and
>>it shouldn't matter that I created them.  The information being
>>presented is brand new research and though it may be deemed that it
>>does not deserve a place on Wikipedia, I feel its unfair to block me,
>>remove all images, and attempt to discredit me before the democratic
>>process has completed.
>>
>>Furthermore, the block policy states, "Use of blocks to gain advantage
>>in a content dispute...", and since this is the only article that I
>>have been editing, and "Neutrality" is convinced its fake, it would seem
>>that this clearly is the case.  If you don't like the research, vote to
>>delete it.  If you like it, vote to keep it.  Don't censor me from attempting
>>to bring in other sources that help the article.
>>
>>I have e-mailed Neutrality about this situation, and have yet to see a
>>reply.  I would appreciate a valid reason with proof instead of
>>assuming that all keep votes were done by me.
>>
>>Thank you,
>>
>>Stewart Pederson
>>_______________________________________________
>>WikiEN-l mailing list
>>WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
>>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l


from_name: Thomas Gries

subject:
[Wikitech-l] proposal to have new option to suppress duplicate
	mails fromn wikibugs-l

body:
I would like to suggest to the owner/developer of the wikibugs-l
mailinglist (Brion ?)

to implement a new and more general email preference option to suppress
duplicate mails to be sent, e.g. when one has a relation to a certain
bug and is also member of the wikibugs-l mailinglist. (In this case, one
currently receives two mails).


from_name: Anthere

subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: un-admin user

body:
Heli Retzek a ?crit:

> guys, didnt find out how to un-admin a user (without deleting). Any link or
> suggestion available?

Only stewards can unsysop an admin.
For such a request : http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_permissions

> tx a lot
>
> HeliR

De nada

Gal Anthere


subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: inter project links (was Patrol feature)

body:
Hmmmm,

http://bugzilla.wikipedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=708

I opened that enhancement feature (it is not a bug) in october during
the Great Dutch Crisis.
It is indeed the second most wanted feature.

Erik proposed himself to write it for release 1.4.

What is this status ? Is it written or not yet ? Was there a problem ?
Is it not well enough defined for development ?
Is there someone else willing to write it ?
When is release 1.5 planned ?

Ant

Gerard Meijssen a ?crit:

> For your information, on the nl:wikipedia there was a temporary truce
> whereby no references were made to the nl:wiktionary. This truce was
> agreed because the interproject links were promissed for release 1.4.
> The relevant bugzilla entry has one of the highest number of requests.
> As the interproject links have not been implemented, references to
> wiktionary are created again in the nl:wikipedia. The argument that the
> developpers do want they want and according to their own priorities is a
> valid one. However when things are agreed in the "user world" based on
> expectations from developpers, it is also reasonable that when these
> expecations are not met, it is not without consequences.
>
> Thanks,
>    GerardM


list: wikipedia-l

subject: AW: AW: [Wikipedia-l] Propose to set up a Cantonese Wikipedia

body:
Hello,

Sorry to reply so late, but I was in mainland China.

Andr? M?ller wrote:
> Oh... I'm sorry, than I have understood you wrong. :(
> I also seemed to have a much different impression of Cantonese.
>
> - now even smaller Andr?

Sorry, didn't mean to sound as brusque as I was. I had no intention of
making you feel bad or anything. :(

little Alex


from_name: Jens Ropers

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: alleged improper block of Tteexx

body:
On 2 Jan 2005, at 23:24, Stewart Pederson wrote:

> I'm going to work in getting
> pictures of the Yopu statue and form a separate site about the on
> going research.

Good luck. No, I don't mean this to sound derisively cynical. I'm
serious. If your "Yopu research" becomes sufficiently well-known,
oft-linked, referenced and cited (be it for reasons of factual
relevance or "Internet phenomenon"-quirkiness), then we'll be happy to
once again start having an article about it. No, that's NOT a license
to munge together some pop-up adorned freely hosted site and come back
and shout "HEY! THERE'S EVIDENCE! IT'S ON TEH INTARWEB!" But if you can
achieve clear notability AND that's objectively demonstrable, then your
Yopu stuff might indeed find its way back here again.

A word of warning though:
Achieving the requisite notability may prove harder than you expect.
And -- if I could quote the [[Gay Nigger Association of America]] as an
example -- even if you DO achieve a fair degree of notability, like it
or not, but here too many folks are definitely LESS inclined to keep
articles by or about subjects/people they find ANNOYING as opposed to
subjects/people that they are SYMPATHETIC to. This may lead to a less
than totally objective assessment of notability, which probably is less
than totally ideal. But there's little merit in raging against that
because we're only human and we all suffer from the same flaws that
just come with the human condition.

In between time, the Yopu article will remain filed on the circular
shelf; the one that starts with a "D" and ends with "USTBIN". As you
may have learned "the hard way", Wikipedia's main premise, namely that
there are more well-meaning people in the world than intentional
wrongdoers, once again can be returned with a [[quod erat
demonstrandum]]. Trolls for example may think that it's quite easy to
waste our time, but they frequently find that for every minute THEY
invest, there are about a hundred Wikipedians who feel they can spare a
minute or two in the interest of our cause and community.

-- ropers [[en:User:Ropers]]
     www.ropersonline.com


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: The Word Cabal

body:
Geoff Burling a ?crit:
> On Fri, 31 Dec 2004 slimvirgin at gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>>And a happy New Year to you too, Geoff.  :-)
>>
>
> Oh yeah, it is New Year's Eve. I had forgotten.
>
> Since I'm expecting my first born this coming year, at the age of
> 47, I can't help but expect it will be a happy new year for me --
> & my family. Well, maybe not for my oldest cat Muffy, who will once
> again find competition for attention. ;-)
>
> Geoff

Neat !
My very best to you and the mom/baby Geoff. Take care of them.

Ant


from_name: BJörn Lindqvist

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Silverback and the 3RR

body:
On Sun, 02 Jan 2005 13:11:32 -0500, AndyL <andyl2004 at sympatico.ca> wrote:
> >Comparing Silverback's edit at Jan 1, 20:30 to the one at Dec 31,
> >07:22 it seems to not have been a revert,
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Communism&diff=9017540&oldid=8975393
> >since he changed the disputed paragraph quite a bit.
>
> He hasn't changed the paragraph as much as add to it. The problematic,
> undocumented original research is still there:

Yes, the problematic, undocumented original research was still there.
But that is not what we are discussing. What we are discussing is if
Silverback's changes to the paragraph was significant enough for the
edit, that restated some previously removed text, to not be counted as
a revert.

> To the end. Given what he reinstated, unaltered, from Libertas' version I
> don't see how the edit in question can be described as anything but a
> reversion. A reversion with other changes made but a reversion nevertheless.

When constructive people are involved in a revert war. They must try
to work out a compromise. Because barring a ban, the revert war may go
on indefinitely. They achieve this compromise by gradually mutating
the disputed text until both sides are happy with the result. You
could see it as a negotiation in which both parties take turn placing
proposals and counterproposals.

Whether Silverback changed his proposal or not is not clear.
Silverback thought he changed it, you thought he didn't. I think he
did change it and that is was not a plain revert. The number of words
in the paragraph increased from 84 to 132 which is an extra 57%.

--
mvh Bj?rn


from_name: Robert Jones

subject: [Wikitech-l] Question: logged-in tag?

body:
I wonder if you could help. Is there a tag tat will display the text
contained within only if the user is logged in? If not, can anyone suggest a
way to do this.

Many thanks.


body:
Yes. The author seems to have a particular fascination with poo.

Fred Bauder wrote:
> Some interesting facts in it too. Rice in Tibet? Don't think so.
>
> Fred
>
>
>>From: "csherlock at ljh.com.au" <csherlock at ljh.com.au>
>>Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
>>Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2005 00:41:47 +1100
>>To: wikien-l at wikipedia.org
>>Subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Illegally Blocked user: Tteexx
>>
>>Fred, the article is [[Yopu]]. It has one source, and external link to a
>>website that is currently giving me an error.
>>
>>TBSDY


list: foundation-l

subject: [Foundation-l] Re: Proposal for Wiki Project

body:
Magos?nyi ?rp?d a ?crit:
> A levelez?m azt hiszi, hogy Robert Scott Horning a k?vetkez?eket ?rta:
>
>>Clay tablets could provide that sort of stability, especially if you
>>make them ceramic instead, and don't suffer from being super valuable
>>like gold for other things.  The #1 problem is that they are more prone
>>to environmental damage and you can't put the detail in so finely as you
>>could with gold (i.e. archiving large quantities of information are
>>pretty much out).
>
>
> I would think that technology of ceramics is advanced enough now that
> enironmental damage is less concern than with gold.
> I would also venture to say that creating such ceramics tables needs
> much more physical world resources than creating wikipages.
> However is seems possible that companies doing ceramics technology
> would venture to offer some unnoticeable fraction of their production
> resources for the wast marketing possibilities of being the one
> to archive Wikipedia forever.
>
> It would be useful to estimate the quantity of information needed
> to make live easier after a catastrophy. If it is low enough (I guess
> it is), we might consider to conserve this set as tables readily useable
> for print. This way it could reach a much wider population than if
> it would be written in microfilm size.

I like this idea of preserving basic information in case of a catastrophe.
Actually, someone thought about the content on the french wikipedia, but
for now, not much work have been given on it.

http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip%C3%A9dia%3ASavoirfaire


list: wikimedia-l


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Silverback and the 3RR

body:
** snip **
>After the block was in place, each
> time we even looked at a page, the block was automatically extended,
> which made it appear to other admins that we were acting in bad faith,
> trying to made edits while blocked.

An edit attempt after one has been blocked should not be considered acting in bad faith, because often that is the only way one finds out that one has been blocked.  I received no notice on my talk page for instance.  Someone may not attempt an edit for hours, so the current automation (which has been admitted to be erroneous) would add those hours to the 24 hour period.   Attempting and edit might also be a legitimate way to check if the block is over.

Unfortunately, the current system blocks the usual wiki ways to communicate on talk pages, and does not automatically unblock you, that requires an error prone and burdensome manual vigilance on the part of the administrators.  The good news is that they are aware of this and asking for a solution.

              -- Silverback


subject: [Wikitech-l] Question: logged-in tag?

body:
Thanks Biron. I made my extension, and it works apart from the fact that the
text inside isn't parsed into wiki format. I've experimented with $wgOut but
haven't been able to figure it out, can you/anyone advise?

Many thanks.

My code:

function renderLoggedIn( $input )
{
	global $wgUser;
	if ( 0 != $wgUser->getID() ) {
	$output = $input; // User is logged in.
	return $output;
		} else {
	$output = ""; // User is not logged in.
	return $output;
	}
}

> -----Original Message-----
> From: wikitech-l-bounces at wikimedia.org
> [mailto:wikitech-l-bounces at wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Brion Vibber
> Sent: 03 January 2005 02:42
> To: Wikimedia developers
> Subject: Re: [Wikitech-l] Question: logged-in tag?
>
>
> On Jan 2, 2005, at 6:29 PM, Robert Jones wrote:
> > I wonder if you could help. Is there a tag tat will display
> the text
> > contained within only if the user is logged in?
>
> No.
>
> > If not, can anyone suggest a way to do this.
>
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Write_your_own_MediaWiki_extension
>
> -- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
>


subject: [Wikitech-l] Switch of master server to Suda complete

body: Suda is now the master. Still adjusting slaves and load sharing. Likely to be slowness and erratic response at times during the day as things are tuned.


from_name: Fred Bauder

subject: [WikiEN-l] Query admin powers

body:
I would just wait for him to return from vacation. While seniority does not
exist on Wikipedia officially, in practice it does and certain editors such
as Adam Carr have a degree of favor. Other mechanisms for solving the
problem such as negotiating with him or mediating will also require his
presence.

The page protecting seems wrong but petty.

Fred

> From: Skyring <skyring at gmail.com>
> Reply-To: Skyring <skyring at gmail.com>, English Wikipedia
> <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2005 22:26:01 +1100
> To: Robin Shannon <robin.shannon at gmail.com>, English Wikipedia
> <wikien-l at wikipedia.org>
> Subject: [WikiEN-l] Query admin powers
>
> As stated on my user page, I'm not much of a one for writing new
> articles, but I like to hunt down and correct errors. And to update
> articles where new facts come to light.
>
> Over recent days Cabinet documents relating to the 1974 Whitlam
> government in Australia have been released under the 30-year rule, and
> as much of the material is relevant to and sheds new light on Gough
> Whitlam's actions at the time, I turned to the Gough Whitlam article.
>
> Amongst other things, I noted that the article itself was heavily
> biased towards a partisan point of view. One of the many areas that
> needed correcting was the mention of the Patrick Field affair, where
> the Labor Party's nominee for a casual Seante vacancy caused by a
> death in office was rejected by the Country Party Queensland State
> Premier in favour of a Labor member who was strongly critical of
> Whitlam, an event which had far-reaching consequences in Australian
> political history.
>
> As I have numerous relevant texts ready to hand, I checked a few facts
> and rewrote the paragraph, removing obviously partisan statements for
> which I could find no source, and adding factual material. I made a
> note on the discussion page explaining my actions and citing my main
> source.
>
> Soon afterwards, user AdamCarr reverted my edit to the previous
> partisan version. He responded on the discussion page with a list of
> points which I rebutted, citing exact sources and noting that many of
> his claims were incorrect. He admitted that he could not currently
> check his statements. I asked that he refrain from reverting my edits
> until he could either provide sources or give others a chance to
> comment.
>
> Shortly after this, PMelvilleAustin again reverted my changes and
> protected the article, stating on the discussion page that AdamCarr
> and I should come to an agreement. As AdamCarr himself points out he
> is on holiday overseas and unable to cite his sources. Other editors
> are presumably available to discuss and edit the article until a
> consensus is reached, but as the article is now protected, they are
> unable to participate in the normal Wiki fashion.
>
> PMelvilleAustin seems to be using his admin powers to prevent edits to
> an article in which he is personally involved, and which should be
> available for modification in the light of the recent release of
> pertinent cabinet documents.
>
> --
> Peter in Canberra
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l


list: commons-l

from_name: Josh Gerdes

subject: [Commons-l] This list as News

body:
Hello everyone!

Is there a way to subscribe to this mailing list as a newsgroup? I know
that WikiEN-l and Wikipedia-l have that feature, but I can't find any
mentions of it for this the Commons mailing list.

Thanks,
Josh Gerdes (User:JoshG)


subject: [WikiEN-l] Query admin powers

body:
Bull on and make a nasty enemy if you wish. But, if you are patient and wait
til he can look at his references, he will probably appologize, admit that
he has no special perogatives and perhaps happily collaborate with you for
years.

Fred

> From: Skyring <skyring at gmail.com>
> Reply-To: Skyring <skyring at gmail.com>, English Wikipedia
> <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 00:21:24 +1100
> To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at wikipedia.org>
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Query admin powers
>
> On Mon, 03 Jan 2005 05:43:26 -0700, Fred Bauder <fredbaud at ctelco.net> wrote:
>> I would just wait for him to return from vacation. While seniority does not
>> exist on Wikipedia officially, in practice it does and certain editors such
>> as Adam Carr have a degree of favor. Other mechanisms for solving the
>> problem such as negotiating with him or mediating will also require his
>> presence.
>
> Adam may be on holiday, but he has made several changes to the article
> and the discussion page, where he states that he "can't check his
> references" at the moment. One might ask why he feels he is able to
> revert my edits, which I have backed up by some authoritative and
> readily available texts on the matter, if he is without access to
> reference material.
>
> In any case, he is flat out wrong on several points. No appeal to
> seniority or rankism can justify a stubborn insistence on untruths.
>
> Gough Whitlam and the events of the 1975 dismissal are well enough
> known that I can be sure that there are other editors available who
> are supplied with the standard texts, such as Paul Kelly's definitive
> text "November 1975".
> --
> Peter in Canberra
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l


from_name: Magosányi Árpád

subject: [Foundation-l] Forking the Wiki

body:
A levelez?m azt hiszi, hogy Daniel Mayer a k?vetkez?eket ?rta:
> --- Sj <2.718281828 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Being separate from -- in the sense of having its own policies,
> > community discussion areas, and goals -- does not necessarily require
> > having a separate wiki.
>
> But being different types of reference works does. Wikipedia is an
> encyclopedia, Wikibooks is a collection of textbooks/manuals, Wiktionary is a
> translating dictionary and thesaurus. Each has its own unique way of presenting
> information to the reader (Wikibooks instructs, Wikipedia informs, Wikisource
> regurgitates) and each has very different concepts about what goes onto a page

I cannot see what should be the difference between words in wikipedia and
wiktionary beyond that wiktionary should have links to other words in
other languages, which can easily put into wikipedia in a
non-obstructive manner.

Think about yourself. If you are asked to instruct, you will instruct.
If you are asked for information, you will give it. If you are using a
word, you will be aware a lot of concepts attached to that word:
other ideas, events, pieces of art, quotations, forms of it in another
languages, etc.
Nevertheless you are an integral personality, and not a schizophrene,
and not a maniac.

What we now have is a schizophrene. If I ask it what a "kutya" is in
Hungarian, it tells me it is a "dog" in english. But I cannot really
figure out anything about what a "kutya" or "dog" is, is there
differences in the use of the words, and I would never arrive to
Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. I cannot even figure out what "dog" is to
an Englishman: I won't even get to the english wiktionary page
for "dog", not even mentioning the wikipedia entry.
("kutya" is the example of how a wiktionary page should look like,
this is why I cite it as an example)

> and linking (very few internal links in Wikibooks and Wikisource, for example).

Our favourite wiki have never taken an art or literature class.
If it did, it would have a lot of asociations on each Wikisource items.
Also, when I have taken high school, our math, physics and chemistry
classes have been built upon each other. If they had been Wiki pages,
there would have been a lot of references.

--
GNU GPL: csak tiszta forr?sb?l


subject: [Foundation-l] Forking the Wiki


from_name: pinco

subject: [Wikipedia-l] A minor problem

body:
Thanks, Andre:
Ciao,
Nino

Andre Engels ha scritto:

>At the moment you have to subscribe to each wiki separately, yes.
>There are plans to change that, but I do not dare to say how long it
>will take until it happens.
>
>Andre Engels
>
>On Sun, 02 Jan 2005 20:29:19 +0100, pinco <pinco at kiesperanto.org> wrote:
>
>
>
>>from time to time I edit some Swahili pages which I subscribed, but it
>>happens that I want to contribute to the Italian and Esperanto pages, too.
>>
>>I would like to know how can I use my Swahili user's data in the Italian
>>and Esperanto pages? Should I subscribe each of them?
>>
>>Thanks a lot,
>>Nino
>>
>>
>_______________________________________________
>Wikipedia-l mailing list
>Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>
>
>
>
>

--
http://www.vessella.it (italiano, esperanto, kiswahili, english)
http://www.changamano.org (Iniziative di solidarieta` per la Tanzania)
http://www.lernado.it (Articoli di quotidiani della Tanzania, Corso di lingua swahili, Corso di lingua esperanto, Vocabolario esperanto-italiano, Jifunze lugha ya Kiesperanto, Kamusi ya Kiesperanto)


from_name: David Gerard

subject: [Foundation-l] Forking the Wiki

body:
Fred Bauder (fredbaud at ctelco.net) [050103 06:51]:

> It could include victims of the Holocaust, Viet Nam War dead, Civil War
> dead, etc.
> But would enough people actually work on it?

Perhaps the many hardworking editors on the Israeli-Palestine conflict
would have their energies usefully diverted there, before we simply block
every IP in the Middle East out of frustration ...

- d.


subject: [Foundation-l] Forking the Wiki


from_name: Nicholas Knight

subject: [WikiEN-l] Query admin powers

body:
Fred Bauder wrote:
> I would just wait for him to return from vacation. While seniority does not
> exist on Wikipedia officially, in practice it does and certain editors such
> as Adam Carr have a degree of favor. Other mechanisms for solving the
> problem such as negotiating with him or mediating will also require his
> presence.

Wonderful. We get done making fun of the "cabal", and an arbitrator of
all people comes up with something like this.

Blocking work on an article because Adam finds it inconvenient to do
research is not acceptable, no matter what his informal status is.


subject:
[Wikitech-l] Re: proposal to have new option to suppress duplicate
 mails fromn wikibugs-l

body:
Zigger wrote:
 > Have you tried disabling your email at
http://bugzilla.wikipedia.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email

I have duly considered to change my personal email settings there, but I
was unsure which options could safely be disabled and which not - in
order not to miss a single (new or old) bugzilla.

The option texts are many and not fully clear, e.g. I am member to list,
but in general not a "CC"; I am reporter and assignee to some bugs -
shall I better disable the latter ones?

Again, to be very honest, I was totally unsure due to the manifold of
options, what can be disabled to achieve the wanted result (i.e. to
receive one single mail regardless of my relation to the bug).

Perhaps, someone can help me ?


subject: [WikiEN-l] Query admin powers

body:
Common sense and putting a stamp of approval on irregularities are two
different things. You are not a sucker if you follow the rules and you a
fool if you think you have some special license to break them. Nevertheless,
the slack is cut a bit from time to time.

Fred

> From: nas ral <jewishneoconipod at gmail.com>
> Reply-To: nas ral <jewishneoconipod at gmail.com>, English Wikipedia
> <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2005 16:01:24 +0000
> To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at wikipedia.org>
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Query admin powers
>
>> While seniority does not exist on Wikipedia officially, in practice it does
>> and certain >editors such as Adam Carr have a degree of favor.
>
> Right, the two wikipedias. One is official (only read and followed by
> suckers) and the other is run by favor. Quite an admission from an
> arbitrator. So your advice is to shrug your shoulders and walk away?
> Or get some "favor" so the protection can be lifted. Failing that,
> make some sockpuppets and have some fun, no-one will take action until
> the atmosphere has been thoroughly poisoned!
>
> Its who you know, not what you know! What a way to run wikipedia!
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l


subject:
[WikiEN-l] Silverback autoblock needs to be manually removed,
	it should have expired 6 minutes ago

body:
actionforum at comcast.net (actionforum at comcast.net) [050103 09:32]:

> Someone with the admin priviledge, should remove the Silverback autoblock, the 24 hours expired 7 minutes ago.

Unblocked. I'm sure you'll play nicely with the other kids now, won't you?

- d.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Query admin powers

body:
All formal organizations and their rules are subject to informal deviation
and transgressions especially by high status individuals. We have not
outlawed the laws of sociology just by creating a cool website.

Fred

> From: nas ral <jewishneoconipod at gmail.com>
> Reply-To: nas ral <jewishneoconipod at gmail.com>, English Wikipedia
> <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2005 16:29:48 +0000
> To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at wikipedia.org>
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Query admin powers
>
> Authority rests with the wikipedia community, not with admins. Funny
> how editors without favor are never cut any slack? Wikipedia is not a
> club of friends, shaking hands and letting them get away with
> transgressions. It is the two wikipedias. Real fair. As long as these
> double standards are perpetuated, with what respect can admins be
> held?
>
> I don't have to be fool to break rules, just an admin.


from_name: Gerard Meijssen

subject: [Wikitech-l] how to run as wiktionary?

body:
Ray Kiddy wrote:

>
> Ok, maybe this is just a blind spot that I have. I cannot see it.
>
> I downloaded and am running a wiki for myself. I also know, basically,
> how to read php.
>
> And I understand that the wiktionary is a kind of Wikimedia project. I
> just cannot find how to start something which looks like a wiktionary....
>
> I guess I expected that there might be a switch in one of the
> index.php, like:
>
>     $wgSiteType = "wiki"
>
> or ...
>
>     $wgSiteType = "wiktionary"
>
> The wiktionary front page looks very different than the default
> wikipedia-style front page. For example, it has  "Quick Index" of
> letters. Are those just constructed by hand, or is there a different
> stylesheet, or skin, or config script that one uses to "turn on" the
> wiktionary features?
>
> If someone can point me at info with which to get started, I would be
> glad to write a series of pages: "Running MediaWiki Configured as a
> Wikipedia" (not much would be in this one), "Running MediaWiki
> Configured as a Wikiquote", "Running MediaWiki Configured as a
> Wiktionary", and so forth and so on.
>
> thanx - ray
>
Hoi,
There are several ways of running wiktionary; there is the English way;
this is the old lady of wiktionary, then there are the projects that
share together the same templates in order to make cooperation between
the projects possible. These are among others the nl:wiktionary the
it:wiktionary. We are experimenting on the fa:wiktionary for right to
left. There are also some wiktionaries that go it alone like the
de:wiktionary and the pl:wiktionary.

Ultimately we hope to get some coding done to give us the "ultimate
wiktionary", we either need a volunteer to code it for us or we need
money to pay a programmer to pay it for us. This would provide us with a
much improved user interface and, a wiktionary that can host wiktionary
for all languages from within one database.

If you have further questions about wiktionary, there is a wiktionary-l
mailinglist dedicated to everything wiktionary.

Thanks,
    GerardM


from_name: Matthias Pospiech

subject:
[Wikitech-l] Re: Do we have the analog of MS word template in
	mediawiki?

body:
Kiss All wrote:

> I looked around in Help of meta.wikipedia and could not find the
> template I wanted.
>
> It seems to me the current "template" in mediawiki is something like
> macro definition in C programming language, not the "template" in MS
> office word.  Like template for resume, letter,etc.

Does that really make sense ?
What you are looking for is a style template like real CMS Websystems are
offering.

A wiki however is unique in its layout, therefore you will hardly find a
template for things like a resume or letter, since a wiki is build up on
articles only.

I would be interested, for what purpose you want to use a wiki when such
templates are necessary.

Matthias

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


subject: [WikiEN-l] Query admin powers

body:
No, you should not shrug your shoulders, but you should also not get into a
tizzy over predictable phenomena. If you think there "ought to be a rule",
please go and make one to the effect that rules are to uniformly applied,
and so on although that is already part of the unwritten rules under which
the Arbitration Committee proceeds. We'll enforce it best we can, but
remember the old Russian proverb: "Laws are like spiderwebs, they catch
flies, not bumblebees."

I fear I'm breaking a rule now, "Don't feed the trolls."

Fred

> From: nas ral <jewishneoconipod at gmail.com>
> Reply-To: nas ral <jewishneoconipod at gmail.com>, English Wikipedia
> <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2005 17:07:02 +0000
> To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at wikipedia.org>
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Query admin powers
>
> So we should just shrug our shoulders when we witness "informal
> deviation and transgressions especially by high status individuals"?
>
> Are you serious with this stuff? And so the humble editor is trampled
> on cuz he ainted got friends in high places? Unbelievable.
>
> Policy should be applied, and seen to be applied, fairly and evenly,
> no matter what "informal status" a person might have. I thought an
> arbitrator would agree to that!
>
> Fred wants the so-called "laws of sociology" to overrule wikipedia
> policy. Is this an offical ArbCom line?
>
>
> On Mon, 03 Jan 2005 09:47:34 -0700, Fred Bauder <fredbaud at ctelco.net> wrote:
>> All formal organizations and their rules are subject to informal deviation
>> and transgressions especially by high status individuals. We have not
>> outlawed the laws of sociology just by creating a cool website.
>>
>> Fred


from_name: Brion Vibber

subject: [Wikitech-l] Question: logged-in tag?

body:
On Jan 2, 2005, at 7:37 PM, Robert Jones wrote:
> Thanks Biron. I made my extension, and it works apart from the fact
> that the text inside isn't parsed into wiki format. I've experimented
> with $wgOut but haven't been able to figure it out, can you/anyone
> advise?

Look at OutputPage::addWikiText and try doing similar.

Note that outputting raw HTML may be dangerous on a public wiki, as
arbitrary JavaScript code may be inserted which captures users' login
tokens and sends them to an offsite harvester, or uses ActiveX plugins
or other possible security exploits to attack vulnerable browsers.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20050103/2dbb1721/attachment.pgp>


subject:
[Wikitech-l] Do we have the analog of MS word template in
	mediawiki?

body:
On Jan 2, 2005, at 8:38 PM, Kiss All wrote:
> I looked around in Help of meta.wikipedia and could not find the
> template I wanted.
>
> It seems to me the current "template" in mediawiki is something like
> macro definition in C programming language, not the "template" in MS
> office word.  Like template for resume, letter,etc.

Right.

> Do we have the analog of MS word template in mediawiki?

No.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20050103/8cecb25b/attachment.pgp>


from_name: dpbsmith at verizon.net

subject:
[WikiEN-l] Journal denies existence of Yopu article cited by
	Tteexx/Stewped

body:
> > From: Stewart Pederson <stewped at gmail.com>
> > Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Re: alleged improper block of Tteexx
> >
> > And to Fred, yes I believe the article has factual basis because I've
> > been involved in the research.  Rice is and has been in Tibet for a
> > long time.  This was a very very quirky story that has reached an
> > almost legendary status in Tibet.  I'm going to work in getting
> > pictures of the Yopu statue and form a separate site about the on
> > going research.
>
> 1. If what you say is true, then you can resolve the issue very easily
> by showing us the journal article which you claim to know of.

I have now received a reply from timothyfox at panopticonasia.com. You may
recall that the only evidence Tteexx presented in support of the existence of
the legend, and defending against charges that it appeared to be a hoax, was
this citation:

> Lewinski and Manes. "Legends of Rural Tibet." The Journal of
> Asian/Diasporic and Aboriginal Literature.
> http://www.kuixing.panopticonasia.com/fall04/yopu.html. Fall 2004

That URL returns a 404 Not Found, but User:Tteexx or "Stewped" (if he wants
to use it as his email address I think I can use it to address him) insisted
that it was a real article temporarily unavailable at the website.

I have now received a reply from the editor of the online journal, who says:

> From: timothyfox at panopticonasia.com
> Date: 2005/01/03 Mon AM 02:45:58 CST
> To: "Daniel P.B.Smith" <dpbsmith at verizon.net>
> Subject: Re: Did Fall 2004 issue contain an article on Yopu by Lewinski and
>      Manes...
>
> Dear Professor Smith,
>
> Kui Xing has not even had a first issue out yet; it would also be
> available online. Sadly, we have had thus far just one submission for
> possible publication and that is available in the "Workshop" section of
> the website.
>
> What you find at the Kui Xing website
> (http://www.kuixing.panopticonasia.com) is all there is. How terribly
> distressing if indeed somebody has used our website as a defense for a
> hoax of some sort. Hopefully this sort of thing does not happen too often!
>
> Thank you for notifying me.
>
> Sincerely,
> Timothy R. Fox
> Kui Xing: The Journal of Asian/Diasporic and Aboriginal Literature

Since the VfD discussion page asks that it not be edited further, and the
article is deleted so its talk page is unavailable, I am presenting this here
for the record. However, I would like to add it to the VfD discussion page
with a suitable explanation if the acting sysop, Ta bu shi da yu, will give
me persmission to do so.


subject: [Wikitech-l] Parser

body:
On Jan 3, 2005, at 9:26 AM, Giovanni wrote:
> I'm using MediaWiki in a site where I'm the only person that can edit
> articles.
> I would like to know how modify the code to let JavaScript to be
> inserted.

If you have something specific that you want to use in a lot of pages,
consider:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Write_your_own_MediaWiki_extension

If you have the site locked down and want to do lots of HTML bits,
consider using $wgRawHtml = true; This should never ever be used on a
publically editable site.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20050103/1fc12e3e/attachment.pgp>


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Menara article

body:
http://www.menara.ma/Infos/includes/detail.asp?article_id=9964&lmodule=Technologie

I mention it as it is not so frequent to see african
website mention wikipedia. Thanks Jankari.

Ant

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


from_name: Achim Raschka

subject: [Foundation-l] Proposal for Wikikids

body:
Dear all,

I want to start a new Wikiproject called Wikikids. After a starting phase
it should be a Wikipedia from children for children. The following proposal
I posted at http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikikids an
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposals_for_new_projects#Wikikids but
there seems to be no reaction. It would be great if we can discuss this at
the projects discussion page at Meta.

Wikikids should be a Wikipedia-version for children aged between eight an
sixteen years. After a starting phase when adults will construct the Wiki
together with children it should be a Wikipedia from children for children.
The idea is to have articles in a simple language without much scientific
words and other stuff. The themes should be specific for children?s interests.

The idea occured in the german Wikipedia a couple of months ago. There are
a lot of ideas and problems to discuss as well. But there?s no way to solve
them in a theoretical way so it will be perfect to have a start and take a
look what will grow in it.

The starting phase

As a new project Wikikids will have the same starting problems any other
project has too. It is thought, that Wikikids will be a Wikipedia in the
full control of kids between 8 and 16 years old and also the sysos of this
project will be children too. At the starting phase there will be some
adults to help constructing the Wiki and get a start in writing the
articles, but that should be as long as there are enough children to take
control. From that time on, adults will be allowed to write articles
inbetween the rules of Wikikids (first of all: simple language), but they
will be users like any others under the control of children administration.

Problems

There are some problems to be discussed, but I think, it will be possible
to handle them. For example there should be the problems of
    * what is an encyclopedia, what kind of aricles should be find in an
encyclopedia?
    * how about the copyrights of articles and pictures?
    * ...

Articles

A lot of articles should be interesting for children and should be found in
the Wikikids. Some examples may be:
    * Information about school
    * Sports
    * Animals
    * Collecting Stamps etc.
    * Computer and Computergames
    * Games like "Magic, The Gathering", "Pok?mon" ...
    * Musik and Bands
    * Television
    * Love (how about Sex fundamentals)

Internationality

Like all other Wikimedia projects this project should be an international
linkd one. For a start, there would be a german project (there are enough
people to start) an maybe an englisch one, bur it will grow like Wikipedia.
Interwiki should be able to other Wikikids and Wikipedia.

Greetings from Berlin, Germany

Achim Raschka aka Necrophorus


subject: [Foundation-l] Proposal for Wikikids


subject: [Wikitech-l] source || books

body:
Note that as this is not a technical question, you probably should
direct inquiries to foundation-l (the Wikimedia Foundation list) if
there's not a forum directly related to the projects you're asking
about.

On Jan 3, 2005, at 12:23 AM, shantanu oak wrote:
> The FAQ page (Don't remember the URL) tells that wikisource.org should
> be used for copyright expired source material and if wikipedians want
> to start writing a book, wikibooks.org is the right place. (The actual
> wording may be different, I have written it in plain english)
>
> The differentiating line between these two projects is so thin, that I
> am confused.

I don't see how these two can possibly be confused; they are enormously
different.

Are you going to write NEW, original educational material?
  -> go to wikibooks

Are you copying OLD, previously published material which is free of
copyright?
  -> go to wikisource

> Will all the languages at wikisource get their own sub-domains?

Probably not generally.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20050103/bcff9a8f/attachment.pgp>


from_name: Ray Saintonge

subject: [Foundation-l] Forking the Wiki

body:
Magos?nyi ?rp?d wrote:

>A levelez?m azt hiszi, hogy Daniel Mayer a k?vetkez?eket ?rta:
>
>
>>--- Sj <2.718281828 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Being separate from -- in the sense of having its own policies,
>>>community discussion areas, and goals -- does not necessarily require
>>>having a separate wiki.
>>>
>>>
>>But being different types of reference works does. Wikipedia is an
>>encyclopedia, Wikibooks is a collection of textbooks/manuals, Wiktionary is a
>>translating dictionary and thesaurus. Each has its own unique way of presenting
>>information to the reader (Wikibooks instructs, Wikipedia informs, Wikisource
>>regurgitates) and each has very different concepts about what goes onto a page
>>
>>
>I cannot see what should be the difference between words in wikipedia and
>wiktionary beyond that wiktionary should have links to other words in
>other languages, which can easily put into wikipedia in a
>non-obstructive manner.
>
The difference is between what the words mean and the stories
surrounding them.  For a dictionary writer it is enough guide a person
to describe and document how that word might be used in writing.  If we
approach a hot-button word like "terrorist" we would offer a definition,
and show how it would have been used by various authors, but we would
have no need to attach that label to anybody.  This allows us to look at
the word more objectively.  We don't need to get into an NPOV battle
over it.

>Think about yourself. If you are asked to instruct, you will instruct.
>If you are asked for information, you will give it. If you are using a
>word, you will be aware a lot of concepts attached to that word:
>other ideas, events, pieces of art, quotations, forms of it in another
>languages, etc.
>
Precisely so.  Words have denotations (specific dictionary meanings) and
connotations (supplementary impressions that are as much derived from
their context).  Words like "miserly" and "frugal" have very similar
denotations but their connotations are worlds apart.  When we look at
specific contexts, the word as a tool of the writer can easily be
overwhelmed.

>Nevertheless you are an integral personality, and not a schizophrene,
>and not a maniac.
>
>What we now have is a schizophrene. If I ask it what a "kutya" is in
>Hungarian, it tells me it is a "dog" in english. But I cannot really
>figure out anything about what a "kutya" or "dog" is, is there
>differences in the use of the words, and I would never arrive to
>Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. I cannot even figure out what "dog" is to
>an Englishman: I won't even get to the english wiktionary page
>for "dog", not even mentioning the wikipedia entry.
>("kutya" is the example of how a wiktionary page should look like,
>this is why I cite it as an example)
>
A lot of these things will take time to sort out.  Much depends on what
use a person has for another language.  As an English speaker who has no
particular desire to learn Hungarian I could still want to know what a
Hungarian means when he says "kutya".  The English Wiktionary entry for
"dog" does give two Hangarian words ("kutya" and "eb"), and I may wonder
what the difference is.  If I wanted to write in Hungarian I would at
least need to refer back to the Hungarian Wiktionary to learn the
difference; this would also be the case of I were translating material
from Hungarian.  Translating by just using a dictionary can give some
strange results.  A "dog" in English can also mean an "andiron", and it
could very well seem strange for a Hungarian to find a "kutya" sitting
in a fireplace holding up logs.   In any event, a person who wants to
know about the word "dog" may not be particularly interested in such
things as its biological history or about how it is used to herd sheep
in Scotland, or about children being killed by vicious breeds of dog.
These ideas are more suited to an encyclopedia.

In its basic usage "dog" can be interpreted very easily, because it is a
concrete idea.  The more abstract ideas like "terrorst" or "frugal" can
be far more problematical.  In English, perhaps more than in any other
major language, words are defined by their usage.  There is no English
Academy to dictate the use of words.  The English language may be the
richer for it since this gives it immense power to generate new words,
but at the same time it makes life more difficult for the lexicographers.

On Arthur Conan Doyle, I was disappointed that the person who began that
project on Wiktionary went away before he could take it further.  He
made some very good points to support it, notably that a more recent
writer would better reflect the current state of the language than
Shakespeare.  Looking at a prolific writer like Doyle that way is a huge
job, but it does reflect on the way the the Oxford Dictionary was
produced in the late 1800s.  Doyle died in 1930, so even more recent
writers should also be so treated, but there we would also need to look
at possible copyright problems, and that is quite another story.

>>and linking (very few internal links in Wikibooks and Wikisource, for example).
>>
>>
>
>Our favourite wiki have never taken an art or literature class.
>If it did, it would have a lot of asociations on each Wikisource items.
>Also, when I have taken high school, our math, physics and chemistry
>classes have been built upon each other. If they had been Wiki pages,
>there would have been a lot of references.
>
This is all very fine, but what it comes down to is much work.  As
valuable as these references may be it still takes someone to do the
work of creating all those links.  If each one is to be checked properly
the work will be very slow.

Ec


subject: [Foundation-l] Forking the Wiki


body:
On Jan 3, 2005, at 1:45 AM, user_Jamesday wrote:
> Suda is now the master. Still adjusting slaves and load sharing.
> Likely to be slowness and erratic response at times during the day as
> things are tuned.

Bugzilla and shop.wikipedia.org were still trying to connect to ariel,
which meant they failed as soon as they tried a write query. I've
switched them to suda.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20050103/389ab962/attachment.pgp>


subject: [Wikitech-l] how to run as wiktionary?

body:
Gerard Meijssen wrote:

> There are several ways of running wiktionary; there is the English
> way; this is the old lady of wiktionary,

Nice way of putting it. :-)

Ec


subject: [Foundation-l] Proposal for Wikikids

body:
Achim Raschka wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> I want to start a new Wikiproject called Wikikids. After a starting
> phase it should be a Wikipedia from children for children. The
> following proposal I posted at http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikikids
> an http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposals_for_new_projects#Wikikids
> but there seems to be no reaction. It would be great if we can discuss
> this at the projects discussion page at Meta.
>
> Wikikids should be a Wikipedia-version for children aged between eight
> an sixteen years. After a starting phase when adults will construct
> the Wiki together with children it should be a Wikipedia from children
> for children. The idea is to have articles in a simple language
> without much scientific words and other stuff. The themes should be
> specific for children?s interests.
>
> As a new project Wikikids will have the same starting problems any
> other project has too. It is thought, that Wikikids will be a
> Wikipedia in the full control of kids between 8 and 16 years old and
> also the sysos of this project will be children too. At the starting
> phase there will be some adults to help constructing the Wiki and get
> a start in writing the articles, but that should be as long as there
> are enough children to take control. From that time on, adults will be
> allowed to write articles inbetween the rules of Wikikids (first of
> all: simple language), but they will be users like any others under
> the control of children administration.
>
> Problems
>
> There are some problems to be discussed, but I think, it will be
> possible to handle them. For example there should be the problems of
>    * what is an encyclopedia, what kind of aricles should be find in
> an encyclopedia?
>    * how about the copyrights of articles and pictures?
>    * ...

One major problem that is not mentioned, is how do you know when someone
is between 8 and 16 years old, except when they tell you.  I am long
past 16, but what's to prevent me from saying that I qualify.  How can
this be reconciled with the right to edit anonymously, which is one of
the important features of a wiki.

Ec


subject: [Foundation-l] Proposal for Wikikids


from_name: Lars Aronsson

body:
Anthere wrote:
> I like this idea of preserving basic information in case of a
> catastrophe. Actually, someone thought about the content on the
> french wikipedia, but for now, not much work have been given on it.

Longevity, just like any human project, can only be reached by
building on previous experience.  Before you can send a rocket to the
moon, you will have to build the first rocket, then send the first
rocket into the stratosphere, then send a rocket into orbit.

For preserving digital information, there is a lot of experience out
there, especially in maintaining software source code over long time.
These projects are so many that you can talk already of a "natural
selection" among survival strategies.  The most commonly cited are
"Keep it Simple, Stupid" (KISS) and "Lots of Copies Keep Stuff Safe"
(LOCKSS). Proprietary source code that exists in only one copy can
survive only if the company survives, which requires profitable and
slowly emerging areas of business.  Open source code can survive even
if the company goes bankrupt.  But survival also requires relevancy.
Irrelevant software is not maintained, and easily forgotten during
emergencies or relocation.  If it goes away, nobody cares to ask for
it. Dependence on complicated and immature tools (programming
languages, version control systems, filesystems, database formats) can
cause the loss of source code.

Good examples of long-lived software is the GNU Emacs text editor (18
years?) and the Linux operating system kernel (12 years?).  Both are
still actively used, developed, and maintained.

The idea to engrave Wikipedia contents on physical media fails to meet
many of these criteria.  For example, nobody uses such media in
everyday life and the knowledge of how to use them is not widespread.
If a mistake is made in the engraving, such that it is impossible to
read the contents back, very few people are able to detect this
mistake.  There is no previous experience in rescueing information
from such engravings.

Paper print-out is a little better than engraving, because many people
have the knowledge of how to read from paper.  There is also plenty of
experience (several centuries) from long-term preservation of
(acid-free) paper. However, the error rates from scanning and OCR are
such that restoration might be difficult or impractical.  Paper might
be best suited for a printed Wikipedia 1.0 that serves as a printed
encyclopedia, since that printout has a use in itself, besides
preserving the contents.  Paper might be less suitable for preserving
the edit history of every article, since nobody would ever read that
other than for restoration.

During my 22 years of programming, I have shifted operating systems
and programming languages many times, but only once (in 1990) have I
shifted character sets (from ASCII to ISO 8859-1).  Soon I will shift
again to Unicode/UTF-8, which I hope to use for the rest of my life.
If I had saved them and copied them to my next computer, I could still
read the plain text files I wrote in 1982.  Actually, I still keep
some print-outs from 1984 and I should retype them before the ink
fades away. I still have saved e-mails from 1986 on my current disk.

Wikipedia's current method of distributing digital dumps of the entire
database, in combination with keeping the project current and
relevant, is the best survival strategy I can think of.  Since it has
now survived 4 years, we can hope that it will survive 10 years.  And
when that is reached, we can hope that it will survive for 10 more.

I have a website (runeberg.org) that dates back to 1992.  Actually it
was on Gopher first, but Gopher sites are not in much use today and
nobody cares to preserve them.  My site migrated to WWW in 1993-94.
The pages are kept under RCS and it is *great fun* to be able to trace
more than 10 years of RCS history online,
http://runeberg.org/rc.pl?action=history&src=admin/foreign

--
  Lars Aronsson (lars at aronsson.se)
  Project Runeberg - free Nordic literature - http://runeberg.org/


from_name: Sean Barrett

subject: [WikiEN-l] Query admin powers

body:
Skyring stated for the record:

> On Mon, 3 Jan 2005 20:59:11 +0100, Jens Ropers <ropers at ropersonline.com> wrote:
>
>>Oh, and Peter -- about your uncanny observation:
>>
>>On 3 Jan 2005, at 18:50, Skyring wrote:
>>
>>>an all-in brawl was being
>>>waged over the clitoris article, of all things! I hadn't imagined that
>>>there could be much dispute over such a thing, but there it is. As I
>>>hastily scurried away from the battlefield it seemed to me that all of
>>>the contestants were male, which perhaps says a great deal about the
>>>level of debate. Perhaps, as Murphy Brown once suggested, the
>>>participants could drop their pants, measure themselves against a
>>>plastic ruler, and sort out arguments that way.
>>>
>>>Which brings me back to rankism, I guess!
>>
>>Well, in a word, --- BRAHHAHAHAHHAHHAHA! LOL! ROTFL! (heh! pant!) ;-D
>
>
> Sometimes it helps to put things in perspective by raising a
> ridiculous point. <g>
>
>
>>-- ropers [[en:User:Ropers]]
>>    www.ropersonline.com
>>
>>PS: Err, Peter: Which ''measurement'' are we talking? "Flaccid" or
>>"fully armed"?
>
>
> Is Wickipedia no help on this score? Perhaps we can inch our way
> towards an agreement if no ruling currently stands.

If you can't stand up under pressure, you'll just have to limp away.
Or, as the Good Book says, "It is hard for thee to kick against the
pricks." [Acts 26:14]

See also [[\/1agra]] and [[C1a|1s]].

--
  Sean Barrett     | Everything is controlled by a small evil group to
  sean at epoptic.com | which, unfortunately, no one we know belongs.


subject: [Wikitech-l] source || books

body:
shantanu oak wrote:

>Hi,
>The FAQ page (Don't remember the URL) tells that wikisource.org should
>be used for copyright expired source material and if wikipedians want
>to start writing a book, wikibooks.org is the right place. (The actual
>wording may be different, I have written it in plain english)
>
>The differentiating line between these two projects is so thin, that I
>am confused.
>
The key differentiating factor is in the originality of the work.  A
work on Wikisource must have been published elsewhere before.  Respect
for copyright is important in both projects, and is not a
differentiating factor.  Wikisource will allow works whose copyright has
not expired if they have been properly licensed under GFDL.

The one area where there has not been a strong insistence on prior
publication at Wikisource has been with computer source code.  I
personally would like to see it all moved to Wikibooks, but not enough
to have a major battle over it.

>Will all the languages at wikisource get their own
>sub-domains? I asked the question but got no answer. There are a few
>languages which share the same writing style but are totally different
>in expression. For e.g. Marathi and Hindi. When someone is searching
>for Marathi source material, he certainly don't expect to see Hindi
>pages. Having a separate sub-domain will solve that problem.
>
>
Having Marathi and Hindi in the same project should be no more a problem
than having English and Turkish, or Arabic and Urdu.  A person literate
in Marathi should in most cases be easily able to recognize which
language he is looking at in the list of titles, and just not bother to
visit the Hindi pages.  Is there something embarassing about seeing
Hindi pages in the same place?  Am I missing something in the
relationship between the Marathi and Hindi communities?

The argument about a united  or separate sub-domains was quite heated.
For now, except for one language, we are continuing as a united
sub-damain, even though this issue could come up again in the future.
The united domain has had some interesting effects, notably in the
efforts that people have made and have become willing to make in finding
ways to work together.  Such a willingness is what makes a wiki stronger.

Ec

PS:  I agree with Brion that this is not a Wikitech question, and if I
am to make any further comments on this it will be on the main Wikipedia
mailing list, now that you know about it.


from_name: Zigger

body:
Thomas,

Have you tried disabling your email at
http://bugzilla.wikipedia.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email

-- Zigger

On Mon, 03 Jan 2005 00:42:40 +0100, Thomas Gries wrote:
> ...
> to implement a new and more general email preference option to suppress
> duplicate mails to be sent, e.g. when one has a relation to a certain
> bug and is also member of the wikibugs-l mailinglist. (In this case, one
> currently receives two mails).
> ...


from_name: shantanu oak

subject: [Wikitech-l] source || books

body:
Hi,
The FAQ page (Don't remember the URL) tells that wikisource.org should
be used for copyright expired source material and if wikipedians want
to start writing a book, wikibooks.org is the right place. (The actual
wording may be different, I have written it in plain english)

The differentiating line between these two projects is so thin, that I
am confused. Will all the languages at wikisource get their own
sub-domains? I asked the question but got no answer. There are a few
languages which share the same writing style but are totally different
in expression. For e.g. Marathi and Hindi. When someone is searching
for Marathi source material, he certainly don't expect to see Hindi
pages. Having a separate sub-domain will solve that problem.

Shantanu Oak
shantanuo at yahoo.com


subject:
[Wikipedia-l] Hunting for my first edit,
	is there a Wikimuseum of ancient  data?

body:
On Jan 1, 2005, at 6:06 PM, Bryan Derksen wrote:
> I have been asked on several occasions what my first edit on Wikipedia
> was, and I admit to a certain curiousity myself. The problem is that I
> really don't remember it; I believe I first came to Wikipedia back in
> the UseModWiki days and IIRC the old edit histories from that era
> weren't imported into the current database when the transition was
> made to PHP wiki due to format incompatibilities.

They were imported some months later, after I re-wrote the conversion
script a bit. However there are a couple issues:
* In the earliest weeks/months, the configuration was to delete old
revisions after some time. (The default on UseModWiki.) Some early
revisions therefore are not available from before this was changed.
* Some items between late December and early January may be missing,
but I'm unsure of this (depends which backup was used then)
* The very last revision at conversion time had its user name field
replaced with 'Conversion script' by the original conversion, and was
not re-imported by the second import.
* Some pages were deleted, so it might just be gone. ;)
* Some users' older pages don't show up on special:Contributions due to
a technical issue when new accounts were created.

> Brion recently set up a wiki with an old database dump of the english
> wikipedia but it was corrupted. We talked in berlin about trying it
> again. A wikimuseum of this sort would be great.

I plan to have it up in time for the January 15 fourth anniversary of
Wikipedia. May have it up sometime this week if I've got time.

> Is there a database with ancient deletes in them kicking around
> somewhere? This would be handy for an unrelated reason too, there're
> some old RfC pages I participated in once upon a time that have been
> similarly deleted that I wouldn't mind having copies of for future
> reference.

Probably not, unless you can find an old deletion log page with that
info.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/attachments/20050103/38c694c8/attachment.pgp


from_name: Rick

body:
You know, being obnoxious is not helping your cause any.

RickK

actionforum at comcast.net wrote:
> -------------- Original message --------------
> Unblocked. I'm sure you'll play nicely with the other kids now, won't you?
> - d.

You know, allowing injustice and abuse to stand is not good policy. We should expand the number of admins, until we get some with gumption. As Barry Goldwater once stated: "Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. And moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue."

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

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
 Meet the all-new My Yahoo! ? Try it today!


from_name: Ashar Voultoiz

subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: plugin - doc @ brion

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

Heli Retzek wrote:
| Brion, are the new plugin-features of 1.4 already documented somewhere?
|
| tx for everything, so great work you guys are doing!
|
|
| HeliR

Hello Helir,

There is some documentation in ./docs/hooks.doc wich is a text file.

- --
Ashar Voultoiz - WP++++
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Hashar
Servers in trouble ? noc (at) wikimedia (dot) org
"This signature is a virus. Copy me in yours to spread it."
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFB2VlzpmyHQ2O4INERAmD8AJ9XwGEHgitOVjSHJo3RufRFEagxfQCg0WBu
02QDrHEcbuoPlyjqZouUdkg=
=bl7/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


subject:
[Wikitech-l] Re: How to include a portion of a wiki page in another
	wiki page?

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

Kiss All wrote:
| For example, we usually have a globle reference page composed of
| individual references from REFERENCES sections of several individual
| pages.
|
| Could we write the globle reference page using something like
|
| #include page1#REFERENCES
| #include page2#REFERENCES
| #include page3#REFERENCES
| ?
|
| I checked metawiki's help. The current template may serve us somehow,
| but too indirect.
|
| It seems "INCLUDE" is not used in metawiki now. Maybe we can add it as
| a special directive for this purpose.

Hello Kiss,

You can only include complete articles, by default from the "template"
namespace.

To include:
~  [[Template:City]] use {{city}}
~  [[Foobar]] use {{:Foobar}}
~  [[Wikipedia:Help]] use {{Wikipedia:Help}}

cheers,

- --
Ashar Voultoiz - WP++++
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Hashar
Servers in trouble ? noc (at) wikimedia (dot) org
"This signature is a virus. Copy me in yours to spread it."
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFB2VrMpmyHQ2O4INERAkI/AJ4+PGpH7YhTGsX23+ODVZLgLZq6MwCg5Iqu
N/QzzKT/0zcloANQrAdjTow=
=N0rJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


from_name: James Rosenzweig

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Query admin powers

body:
I'd like to chime in on this topic: I doubt very much
that Fred was implying that certain users have a de
facto (if not de jure) status which allows them to
violate Wikipedia policy.  If Fred was, I hope he'll
explain why, but as I said, I doubt very much that he
meant this.

Instead, I think what he was pointing out is really a
very simple truth, and one that I think cannot be
fairly called "rankism" (even if it appears in some
ways to be "rankist").  Wikipedia, because of its very
nature, attracts both the good and the bad from the
Internet.  Upon a user's arrival, it is often
difficult to tell why they are here, how well-informed
they are on certain topics, what they are willing to
do in terms of finding consensus, etc.  Gradually,
water finds its own level, and it becomes obvious to
most people in the community that certain users are
unreliable, here to make trouble, etc., and that
certain other users are generally reliable, here to
contribute, etc.  "Assume good faith" is a wonderful
principle that is very important when dealing with
newcomers especially (and one we can still improve on,
I think).  It remains an important principle for
dealing with experienced editors, but with experienced
editors it can be informed by that editor's track
record.  This is not to say that _policies_ should
apply differently to experienced users, but I think
_editors_ can _choose_ to interact differently with
"old hands" and there's nothing wrong with it.

I'm not defending the protection of the page until
Adam returns -- I think it's better not to do so.  I
agree that it seems rankist.  But I don't see anything
wrong with saying that Adam has a track record (in my
opinion, and I think in the opinion of many if not
most community members) of being reliable, fairly
reasonable, and a good contributor.  Based on this, I
would be more inclined personally to give him the
benefit of the doubt, and I would advise others to do
so, simply because I know Adam's work is almost always
very good.  If he is wrong in this case, I would still
say that extending him some grace will almost surely
pay off, since having a good relationship with an
intelligent and usually accrate contributor will
almost surely help me be a better collaborator and
contributor for Wikipedia -- I can say this with
confidence based on my knowledge of Adam, which I
could not say with confidence about an unknown user
(or a new user).  It has nothing to do with elitism
and everything to do with experience.

You who are complaining about Adam's conduct may not
know him well.  You may also be seeing a side of Adam
I haven't.  Either way, I don't see that there's a
problem with a user (arbitrator or no) commenting
that, in their experience, Adam's a good fellow and a
smart one, and so even if he's wrong here it might be
a good thing to try to promote a positive and
collaborative atmosphere with him.  It may be that
Fred didn't communicate this well (or that he wasn't
trying to communicate it), but it's how I took Fred's
comment, and certainly it expresses my view of the
situation (knowing the subject matter and the dispute
not at all).  I think Fred's comments about sociology,
etc., are intended to point to the simple truth I have
tried to talk about at considerably more length (and
probably much less eloquently), which is merely that
over time a member of any group will become known in
that group, and because their conduct is well-known,
it makes sense to interact with them according to a
different set of expectations.

If I made a little joke about your writing skills, you
might never forgive me -- you don't know me.  If an
old acquaintance did, you might take the crack a
little more easily because of your history with them.
If a man or woman you loved made the comment, you
might be able to bear it very easily (or even find it
funny), knowing as you do their experiences in life,
with writing, and how their week had gone.  Maybe
that's not a perfect analogy for the situation, but I
hope it at least illustrates somewhat the principle
here, which I don't believe has much to do with "ranks
of users".  If I'm screwing up or violating policy, I
expect to get hell for it from anybody and everybody
here -- I don't want "special treatment" and I am sure
I won't get it.  But I think I will be spoken to and
interacted with a little differently than a user who
has established a career at Wikipedia of nothing but
screw-ups and violated policies, and I don't think
that's a bad thing -- it's the nature of human
interaction.

Sorry so long -- as usual my comments have probably
outlasted the attention of the mailing list.  Happy
new year to all who observe the Gregorian calendar,

James R.
en:User:Jwrosenzweig

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


from_name: Mark Williamson

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Old norse

body:
*cough*

I'm not sure the current environment is the best place for a request
regarding Old Norse. But anyhow, I have a question: will you use the
runic script, or the latin script?

Anyhow, my suggestion is that you first write a few articles off-site,
and if you can try to find people who will help build the Wikipedia.

Mark

On Sun, 2 Jan 2005 16:57:03 +0100, Vegard Aukrust <vegara at stud.ntnu.no> wrote:
> I want to start a Wikipedia page in old norse (gamalnorska), and I suggest the language code "gno".
>
> Vegard Aukrust
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>


from_name: nas ral

subject: [WikiEN-l] Query admin powers

body:
> While seniority does not exist on Wikipedia officially, in practice it does and certain >editors such as Adam Carr have a degree of favor.

Right, the two wikipedias. One is official (only read and followed by
suckers) and the other is run by favor. Quite an admission from an
arbitrator. So your advice is to shrug your shoulders and walk away?
Or get some "favor" so the protection can be lifted. Failing that,
make some sockpuppets and have some fun, no-one will take action until
the atmosphere has been thoroughly poisoned!

Its who you know, not what you know! What a way to run wikipedia!


from_name: Heli Retzek

subject: AW: [Wikitech-l] Re: un-admin user

body:
tx, but that does not help because it deals with sysop-rights in wikipedia

on my own (mediawiki) wiki a user has to be unsysoped for legal reasons, I
am the Admin and have burocrat status.

The page "Spezial:Makesysop" just allows to create, not to set or to remove
sysop-rights.

again: how to un-sysop s.o. within my user-base?

tx

HeliR

> -----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: wikitech-l-bounces at wikimedia.org
> [mailto:wikitech-l-bounces at wikimedia.org]Im Auftrag von Anthere
> Gesendet: Montag, 03. J?nner 2005 00:58
> An: wikitech-l at wikimedia.org
> Betreff: [Wikitech-l] Re: un-admin user
>
>
>
>
> Heli Retzek a ?crit:
>
> > guys, didnt find out how to un-admin a user (without deleting).
> Any link or
> > suggestion available?
>
> Only stewards can unsysop an admin.
> For such a request :
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_permissions
>
>
> > tx a lot
> >
> > HeliR
>
> De nada
>
> Gal Anthere
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>


subject: [Foundation-l] Proposal for Wikikids

body:
Achim Raschka wrote:

> Hello again
>
>> One major problem that is not mentioned, is how do you know when someone
>> is between 8 and 16 years old, except when they tell you.  I am long
>> past 16, but what's to prevent me from saying that I qualify.  How can
>> this be reconciled with the right to edit anonymously, which is one of
>> the important features of a wiki.
>>
>> Ec
>
> I really don?t see this problem. adults should work in that Wiki but
> they don?t have to get the control of it, that?s the point. There is
> no problem if some adults write articles for the project. You will
> always have the problem of Trolls and other folk, but I think it can
> be managed if enough "normal" users will control the Wiki. In my
> opinion it?s easier to handle than the NPOV-problem in Winkinews or
> the non-scientitific systematics in Wikispecies (sorry, I?m phylogenist).
>
>> Yea.
>> Plus, there's the danger of pedophiles happily (ab)using such a place
>> as a grooming ground.
>> It's bad enough that Wikipedia had to face past (or still ongoing?)
>> onslaughts by POV crusading pedophiles seeking to sneak their sexually
>> deviant views into the mainstream. Or am I too paranoid and
>> pessimistic?
>
> I think, this way to look at the project ist too paranoid, but you?re
> right if you say we need a mechanism to handle the chance of sexual
> and perverse stuff. I think, there are great differences in how to
> handle in the different languages so germans normally are very liberal
> with Sex. There has to be a discussion about the problem and there has
> to be a result to handle it, but I don?t see that it isn?t to handle.
> Maybe I?m too optimistic?

We are dealing with two different groups here.  The POV warrior, the
troll and the pornographer want their effort to be seen.  For some the
thrill is in the fight.  It's quite the opposite for the pedophile.  His
editing activity will avoid controversy. On matters of interest to
children he will want to blend in as a cool member of the community
providing just the kind of information that kids want. He wants to build
confidence so that the kids will feel at ease to meet him when he's ready.

Ec


subject: [Foundation-l] Proposal for Wikikids


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Old norse

body:
What I meant is that now isn't really a good time for language
proposals - they don't seem to be well-recieved, especially if they're
for "dead" languages.

Mark

On Tue, 4 Jan 2005 00:02:25 +0100, Vegard Aukrust <vegara at stud.ntnu.no> wrote:
> I will use the modified latin alphabeth. Old norse is not so different from
> modern icelandic and often mistaken as that, but I want to use the same
> language the one you find in Norwegian texts from the 12th, 13th and 14th
> centuries. I don't find it more strange than latin, anglo-saxon or a lot of
> other old langiages. The letters which are not used in modern English are as
> follows: ?, o, ? and ? (but not ?, ?, ? or ? as in modern scandinavian).
>
> Vegard Aukrust
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mark Williamson" <node.ue at gmail.com>
> To: <wikipedia-l at wikimedia.org>
> Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 11:53 PM
> Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Old norse
>
> > *cough*
> >
> > I'm not sure the current environment is the best place for a request
> > regarding Old Norse. But anyhow, I have a question: will you use the
> > runic script, or the latin script?
> >
> > Anyhow, my suggestion is that you first write a few articles off-site,
> > and if you can try to find people who will help build the Wikipedia.
> >
> > Mark
> >
> > On Sun, 2 Jan 2005 16:57:03 +0100, Vegard Aukrust <vegara at stud.ntnu.no>
> > wrote:
> >> I want to start a Wikipedia page in old norse (gamalnorska), and I
> >> suggest the language code "gno".
> >>
> >> Vegard Aukrust
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> >> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> >> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> >
>
>


subject: [WikiEN-l] Query admin powers

body:
Authority rests with the wikipedia community, not with admins. Funny
how editors without favor are never cut any slack? Wikipedia is not a
club of friends, shaking hands and letting them get away with
transgressions. It is the two wikipedias. Real fair. As long as these
double standards are perpetuated, with what respect can admins be
held?

I don't have to be fool to break rules, just an admin.

On Mon, 03 Jan 2005 09:21:26 -0700, Fred Bauder <fredbaud at ctelco.net> wrote:
> Common sense and putting a stamp of approval on irregularities are two
> different things. You are not a sucker if you follow the rules and you a
> fool if you think you have some special license to break them. Nevertheless,
> the slack is cut a bit from time to time.
>
> Fred
>
> > From: nas ral <jewishneoconipod at gmail.com>
> > Reply-To: nas ral <jewishneoconipod at gmail.com>, English Wikipedia
> > <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> > Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2005 16:01:24 +0000
> > To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at wikipedia.org>
> > Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Query admin powers
> >
> >> While seniority does not exist on Wikipedia officially, in practice it does
> >> and certain >editors such as Adam Carr have a degree of favor.
> >
> > Right, the two wikipedias. One is official (only read and followed by
> > suckers) and the other is run by favor. Quite an admission from an
> > arbitrator. So your advice is to shrug your shoulders and walk away?
> > Or get some "favor" so the protection can be lifted. Failing that,
> > make some sockpuppets and have some fun, no-one will take action until
> > the atmosphere has been thoroughly poisoned!
> >
> > Its who you know, not what you know! What a way to run wikipedia!
> > _______________________________________________
> > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: Petr Kadlec

subject: AW: [Wikitech-l] Re: un-admin user

body:
> on my own (mediawiki) wiki a user has to be unsysoped for legal reasons, I
> am the Admin and have burocrat status.
>
> The page "Spezial:Makesysop" just allows to create, not to set or to remove
> sysop-rights.
>
> again: how to un-sysop s.o. within my user-base?

You can do that via direct access to database, look at table 'user',
column 'user_rights'. You can do something like
UPDATE user SET user_rights="" WHERE user_name="BadUser"

HTH,
[[ cs:User:Mormegil | Petr Kadlec ]]


subject: AW: [Wikitech-l] Re: un-admin user

body:
OK, I have deleted the entry in the mysql:user_rights

looking at the source I found that there is another user-right "above"
burocrat, that is DEVELOPER.

How can I set developer-Status on my own wiki?

tx

HeliR


subject: AW: [Wikitech-l] Re: un-admin user

body:
On Mon, 3 Jan 2005 16:41:02 +0100, Heli Retzek <helmut.retzek at asak.at> wrote:
> OK, I have deleted the entry in the mysql:user_rights

Oh, I see, you use MediaWiki 1.4?

> How can I set developer-Status on my own wiki?

Just add it to the list, so that it reads e.g. "sysop,bureaucrat,developer".

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


subject: [WikiEN-l] Query admin powers

body:
So we should just shrug our shoulders when we witness "informal
deviation and transgressions especially by high status individuals"?

Are you serious with this stuff? And so the humble editor is trampled
on cuz he ainted got friends in high places? Unbelievable.

Policy should be applied, and seen to be applied, fairly and evenly,
no matter what "informal status" a person might have. I thought an
arbitrator would agree to that!

Fred wants the so-called "laws of sociology" to overrule wikipedia
policy. Is this an offical ArbCom line?

On Mon, 03 Jan 2005 09:47:34 -0700, Fred Bauder <fredbaud at ctelco.net> wrote:
> All formal organizations and their rules are subject to informal deviation
> and transgressions especially by high status individuals. We have not
> outlawed the laws of sociology just by creating a cool website.
>
> Fred
>
> > From: nas ral <jewishneoconipod at gmail.com>
> > Reply-To: nas ral <jewishneoconipod at gmail.com>, English Wikipedia
> > <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> > Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2005 16:29:48 +0000
> > To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at wikipedia.org>
> > Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Query admin powers
> >
> > Authority rests with the wikipedia community, not with admins. Funny
> > how editors without favor are never cut any slack? Wikipedia is not a
> > club of friends, shaking hands and letting them get away with
> > transgressions. It is the two wikipedias. Real fair. As long as these
> > double standards are perpetuated, with what respect can admins be
> > held?
> >
> > I don't have to be fool to break rules, just an admin.
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: Johannes Schindelin

body:
Hi,

On Mon, 3 Jan 2005, Matthias Pospiech wrote:

> Kiss All wrote:
>
> > I looked around in Help of meta.wikipedia and could not find the
> > template I wanted.
> >
> > It seems to me the current "template" in mediawiki is something like
> > macro definition in C programming language, not the "template" in MS
> > office word.  Like template for resume, letter,etc.
>
> Does that really make sense ?
> What you are looking for is a style template like real CMS Websystems are
> offering.
>
> A wiki however is unique in its layout, therefore you will hardly find a
> template for things like a resume or letter, since a wiki is build up on
> articles only.
>
> I would be interested, for what purpose you want to use a wiki when such
> templates are necessary.

Well, I find it useful to take another article as template. I look around,
and when I found something to build my article on, I just hit Alt+E to
edit, click into the text (would be nice if some javascript set the focus
to that already...), hit Ctrl+A to mark all, hit Ctrl+C to copy it, then
go to the new article, click into the text (would be nice if some ... oh
yeah, I already said that), Ctrl+V to paste it, and then go through the
text line by line to replace the contents.

Ciao,
Dscho


subject: [Foundation-l] Forking the Wiki

body:
Magos?nyi ?rp?d wrote:

>A levelez?m azt hiszi, hogy Ray Saintonge a k?vetkez?eket ?rta:
>
>
>>Magos?nyi ?rp?d wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I cannot see what should be the difference between words in wikipedia and
>>>wiktionary beyond that wiktionary should have links to other words in
>>>other languages, which can easily put into wikipedia in a
>>>non-obstructive manner.
>>>
>>he difference is between what the words mean and the stories
>>surrounding them.  For a dictionary writer it is enough guide a person
>>to describe and document how that word might be used in writing.
>>
>>
>False assumption. You won't be able to use a word properly until you
>learn exactly what it means. And there are no two words which have
>the exact same meaning in any language. What you traditionally put
>into a dictionary and into a lexicon is just specific aspects of
>the same word, same idea. (The problem is actually worse because one word
>labels more ideas, sometimes very distinct ones.)
>
They may be specific aspects, but together they approach an
understanding of a word, which is as much as we can hope for.

>Separating these different views so far away makes exploring it more
>difficult. I think that ideas should be described in the whole wikimedia
>in a way which makes easy to wander through them in the same way as we
>process ideas in our brain. We don't know much about the latter, but
>it would be fruitful if we would use the information we do have.
>
I would not go too far to presume how we process things in our brains.
It may not be as orderly as some would believe.

>I see only one potential problem by presenting all the relevant aspects
>as one entry: volume of information. But this could be handled easily
>by presenting it in a well thought-out manner.
>
>But I can make a long list of problems arising because disconnectedness.
>
The connectedness won't happen by forcing things together prematurely.

>>>Think about yourself. If you are asked to instruct, you will instruct.
>>>If you are asked for information, you will give it. If you are using a
>>>word, you will be aware a lot of concepts attached to that word:
>>>other ideas, events, pieces of art, quotations, forms of it in another
>>>languages, etc.
>>>
>>Precisely so.  Words have denotations (specific dictionary meanings) and
>>connotations (supplementary impressions that are as much derived from
>>their context).  Words like "miserly" and "frugal" have very similar
>>denotations but their connotations are worlds apart.  When we look at
>>specific contexts, the word as a tool of the writer can easily be
>>overwhelmed.
>>
>>
>>If I wanted to write in Hungarian I would at
>>least need to refer back to the Hungarian Wiktionary to learn the
>>difference; this would also be the case of I were translating material
>>from Hungarian.  Translating by just using a dictionary can give some
>>strange results.
>>
>>
>
>I think this supports my POV.
>
Perhaps,  but if you give some people more of the other language than
they need they will go away in confusion.

>>On Arthur Conan Doyle, I was disappointed that the person who began that
>>project on Wiktionary went away before he could take it further.
>>
>>
>
>I was just referring to his book "The Hound of the Baskervilles",
>because its title contains a dog. Did not know about such project
>on Wiktionary (I am a newbie here), but you made me curious.
>
Some time ago a user put in an alphabetical list of all the words used
by Doyle in his Sherlock Holmes writings.  It was an interesting idea,
but still needed a lot more work to make it really usefull.

>>>Our favourite wiki have never taken an art or literature class.
>>>If it did, it would have a lot of asociations on each Wikisource items.
>>>Also, when I have taken high school, our math, physics and chemistry
>>>classes have been built upon each other. If they had been Wiki pages,
>>>there would have been a lot of references.
>>>
>>his is all very fine, but what it comes down to is much work.  As
>>valuable as these references may be it still takes someone to do the
>>work of creating all those links.  If each one is to be checked properly
>>the work will be very slow.
>>
>>
>
>Such a work would be of great value.
>
>And now think about references between different wikies, like
>wiktionary, wikispecies and wikipedia. As the current structure
>encourages disconnectednes, such work now is not just slow;
>it is _impossible_: the number of disconnectednesses grow larger
>than the reconnections.
>
Of course! More connections would have great value.  Your observation is
also correct, but this is a wiki where anyone can add in the links.
Maintining a balance between joint and separate projects is never easy.

Ec


subject: [Foundation-l] Forking the Wiki


subject: [WikiEN-l] Query admin powers

body:
I am not a sociologist. I do think that your "predictable phenomena"
is a red herring, however. You still want people to shrug their
shoulders. The higher the status, the less the law is "real". LOL.

Wikipedia policy is the same whether I am an editor or an arbitrator.
Sorry if this upsets you. Point me to where it says "higher status
people - ignore' on the 3RR. You can't!

What has been going on in the ArbCom! Unwritten rules! Policy is
formed by wikipedia community consensus, not by admins. Or is that
just something that can be ignored by some people?  When did admins
start thinking that they have increased authority, not just increased
responsibility?

Your acceptance of rule-breaking "Hey, it is what it is" is appalling.

On Mon, 03 Jan 2005 10:17:14 -0700, Fred Bauder <fredbaud at ctelco.net> wrote:
> No, you should not shrug your shoulders, but you should also not get into a
> tizzy over predictable phenomena. If you think there "ought to be a rule",
> please go and make one to the effect that rules are to uniformly applied,
> and so on although that is already part of the unwritten rules under which
> the Arbitration Committee proceeds. We'll enforce it best we can, but
> remember the old Russian proverb: "Laws are like spiderwebs, they catch
> flies, not bumblebees."
>
> I fear I'm breaking a rule now, "Don't feed the trolls."
>
> Fred
>
> > From: nas ral <jewishneoconipod at gmail.com>
> > Reply-To: nas ral <jewishneoconipod at gmail.com>, English Wikipedia
> > <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> > Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2005 17:07:02 +0000
> > To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at wikipedia.org>
> > Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Query admin powers
> >
> > So we should just shrug our shoulders when we witness "informal
> > deviation and transgressions especially by high status individuals"?
> >
> > Are you serious with this stuff? And so the humble editor is trampled
> > on cuz he ainted got friends in high places? Unbelievable.
> >
> > Policy should be applied, and seen to be applied, fairly and evenly,
> > no matter what "informal status" a person might have. I thought an
> > arbitrator would agree to that!
> >
> > Fred wants the so-called "laws of sociology" to overrule wikipedia
> > policy. Is this an offical ArbCom line?
> >
> >
> > On Mon, 03 Jan 2005 09:47:34 -0700, Fred Bauder <fredbaud at ctelco.net> wrote:
> >> All formal organizations and their rules are subject to informal deviation
> >> and transgressions especially by high status individuals. We have not
> >> outlawed the laws of sociology just by creating a cool website.
> >>
> >> Fred
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


subject: [WikiEN-l] Query admin powers

body:
Skyring wrote:

>A couple of weeks ago I looked at one of the pages that dealt with
>recent edits and I was perplexed to see that an all-in brawl was being
>waged over the clitoris article, of all things! I hadn't imagined that
>there could be much dispute over such a thing, but there it is. As I
>hastily scurried away from the battlefield it seemed to me that all of
>the contestants were male, which perhaps says a great deal about the
>level of debate.
>
As a newbie you must find it difficult to appreciate just how long that
battle has waged. :-)

Some males reserve their biggest wars for fighting over what they don't
have.

Ec


from_name: Sam Korn

subject: [WikiEN-l] Query admin powers

references:
<c36bd2f905010309071b3529c3@mail.gmail.com>
	<BDFECC29.A253%fredbaud@ctelco.net>
	<550ccb8205010309507ab57b3f@mail.gmail.com>

body:
On Tue, 4 Jan 2005 04:50:50 +1100, Skyring <skyring at gmail.com> wrote:
> A couple of weeks ago I looked at one of the pages that dealt with
> recent edits and I was perplexed to see that an all-in brawl was being
> waged over the clitoris article, of all things! I hadn't imagined that
> there could be much dispute over such a thing, but there it is.

I believe the clitoris debate is a fundemental one about the basic
principles of wikipedia - is censorship acceptable.  Nevertheless,
getting quite so steamed up about a picture seems a little
time-wasting...


from_name: Giovanni

subject: [Wikitech-l] Parser

body:
Hi,
I'm using MediaWiki in a site where I'm the only person that can edit articles.
I would like to know how modify the code to let JavaScript to be inserted.
Thanks,

Giovanni Putignano