subject: [WikiEN-l] Protected Gaia Theory

body:
--- Julie Kemp <juleskemp at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Just protected Gaia Theory.  Don't care if someone
> wants to unprotect
> it.  Won't be offended.  Hope I haven't stepped out
> of line.  Just
> trying to bring things back to a sane level.  Hope
> RK and Anthere will
> respect the protection.  Hope RK will stop extending
> his personal
> attacks against anyone who questions his
> motivations.  Hope RK will stop
> misinterpreting/misrepresenting other people's
> comments in insulting
> ways.  Still don't care about what's in the article.
>  Haven't read it.
> Don't get the arguments.  All actions based purely
> on the wish to stop
> the madness.  End transmission.

There is no reason for RK to complain. That was what
he wanted from the very beginning. One page. Politics
and non scientific theories out. No problem anymore.

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com


list: wikien-l

source: pipermail-mbox

from_name: Robert

subject: [WikiEN-l] Disambiguation proposal

body:
For some reason my fellow Wikipedias keep missing the main
point: standard Wikipedia protocol for disambiguation. In
the past, this has prevented flame wars. Why is it not
being allowed here? Let's change the [[Gaia]] article to a
disambiguation page (proposal follows)

-----

'''Gaia''': This is a [[disambiguation]] page. The term
'''Gaia''' may refer to

[[Gaia (goddess]] - A Greek and Roman goddeess.

[[Gaia theory]] - A group of scientific theories about how
life on Earth may regulate the planet's biosphere to make
it more hospitable to life. This discusses scientific views
on the subject in general, including the views of Drs.
James Lovelock, Lynn Margulis, Richard Dawkins, Carl Sagan,
etc.

[[Gaia hypothesis]] - An article devoted to solely to Dr.
James Lovelock's ideas on Gaia theory.

[[Gaia theory predecessors]] - A discussion of
proto-scientific, mystical and religious views about life
on Earth that bear similarity to Gaia theory.

[[Gaians]] - A radical political and environmentalist
group.

(and other related topics can be added as well. Perhaps
Gaia theory in religion, Gaia theory in art, etc.)

----

Will this work?

Robert (RK)

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com


from_name: Julie Kemp

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Gaia Edit Wars

body:
Anthere - This isn't a question of RK getting what he wants - the
problem, as I see it, is that the entire argument has descended into
"what Anthere wants" versus "what RK wants."  That's not the basis for
good editing.

All of the information you had in the article is still there in the
history, and can be put back in.  Protections are only temporary
measures, and I added a comment at the top of the page so that readers
know the article and its contents are in dispute.  I didn't look to see
who had edited last -- it doesn't matter and is no reflection of
opinion.

I really think you both should take a break, because this is way too
personal.  If anybody wants to unlock the page, that's fine -- I may
have overstepped wiki bounds by locking it in the first place.  But
perhaps if you both leave it alone (and refrain from insults on the talk
page), some more objective Wikipedians would have a chance to read all
of the articles in question and work on the article from two points of
view (pun intended):

*Is this article consistent with other similar articles in content and
format? (if so, fine, if not, then fix it)

*Is the current format (one article, many articles, whatever it is -- I
forget) useful to a user who knows little and wants to find out more?
If so, good, if not, fix it.

This seems to me to be a case where objective eyes would do the most
good for the wikipedia AND the article.

Be peaceful.

J

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20030701/166fff31/attachment.htm


from_name: Dante Alighieri

subject: [WikiEN-l] Protected Gaia Theory

body:
I've just put up dispute notices on ALL the Gaia pages, as well as restored
the text that is under dispute (so people can make their own decisions
about it) and protected ALL the Gaia pages.

-----
Dante Alighieri
dalighieri at digitalgrapefruit.com

"The darkest places in hell are reserved for those who maintain their
neutrality in times of great moral crisis."
    -Dante Alighieri, 1265-1321


from_name: Anthere

subject: [WikiEN-l] Anthere's problem

body:
> I urge list readers to recognize that this is false.
> It is
> no mere difference of opinion. What she claims NEVER
> HAPPENED. It is that simple.

you forgot several paragraphs in your move.
could someone restore also the international link that
was lost in his process

> No one here is censoring here, or removing content
> from the
> Wikipedia.  All I have done is introduce standard
> Wikipedia
> disambiguation techniques.  However, Anthere still
> rants as
> if disambiguation is a form of censorship or
> persecution.
> (It is not.) We have tried to disabuse her of her
> notion,
> but she becoms more agitated by the day.

I invite anyone to look at what he hid in [[Gaia
theory predecessors]].
http://www.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Gaia_theory_predecessors&oldid=1100561

I might be wrong on the definition of the word
prececessors, because of the content of this article
has nothing to do with predecessors.

> Anthere now claims "Please. Now, notice; I read the
> first
> paragraph of RK new page. And the first paragraph is
> false.
> That is a good start. It states the first person who
> hold
> the idea that all organisms on a planet regulate the
> biosphere to the benefit of the whole, was Lovelock.
> This
> is just false. It will take hours to correct his
> changes. I
> am plain disgusted."
>
> Of course, what she writes is simply not true. It is
> easy
> for her to continually rake me over the coals, as
> she
> simply makes stuff up, an attacks me for beliefs I
> do not
> have, and positions I do not hold.  I have
> repeatedly
> clarified my positions, and she just ignores the
> clarifications.

You have wrotten in the introduction that Lovelock was
at the origin of the gaia idea. Then, below, is a
whole list of people who have been saying many things
on this idea.

So, be consistent. Either you admit that Lovelock
wasnot the inventor of the concept, or let's remove
*everything* that is prior to Lovelock.

There are no limits to the falsity right now anyway.

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Gaia Edit Wars

body:
--- Julie Kemp <juleskemp at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Anthere - This isn't a question of RK getting what
> I really think you both should take a break, because
> this is way too
> personal.  If anybody wants to unlock the page,
> that's fine -- I may
> have overstepped wiki bounds by locking it in the
> first place.  But
> perhaps if you both leave it alone (and refrain from
> insults on the talk
> page), some more objective Wikipedians would have a
> chance to read all
> of the articles in question and work on the article
> from two points of
> view (pun intended):
>
> *Is this article consistent with other similar
> articles in content and
> format? (if so, fine, if not, then fix it)
>
> *Is the current format (one article, many articles,
> whatever it is -- I
> forget) useful to a user who knows little and wants
> to find out more?
> If so, good, if not, fix it.

Don't worry, you did not overstep wiki bounds. You
were quite for doing it.

However, I noticed that no one really help us before
to solve the matter. For some reasons, I am quite
fearful that noone will do it now. Then, the article
will stay as it is. Bad and censored imho. In any
case, I stop *any* of my contributions right now,
until someone has helped.

(btw, I hope that you resume yourself contributing)

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com


from_name: Toby Bartels

subject: [WikiEN-l] Cleaning out the old me

body:
>HI all - Thanks, Toby for your suggestions on helping.  I'm doing a lot
>of the cleanup by myself since I can understand Erik's reluctance to do
>a SQL search and replace.  Out of curiosity, has my old name been
>replaced in article histories?  Anyway, if anyone feels like helping do
>the changes by hand, that would be great.  Otherwise, I'll keep going,
>and perhaps if someone runs into my old name, he or she could just
>change it to [[User:JHK|JHK]]?  Thanks bunches!

I'm not sure who all worked on this -- it mostly wasn't me --
but there are now no text search results for "Hofmann Kemp",
and no links to any page with "Hofmann Kemp" in its name.
(There may be scattered references to "Julie" or the like,
but these would be difficult to identify.)

Good job!

-- Toby


from_name: Big Fat Buddha

subject: [WikiEN-l] Gaia hypothesis

body:
My curiosity got the better of me today, and I decided to see what the old wikipedia was up to.

Big surprise to see that Anther is involved in yet another edit war over the Gaia articles.  It was her possessiveness of everything related to agriculture, her frequent cries of "vandalism", her fractured French-English, and her tendency to simply fork topics into hundreds of Green-oriented smaller articles that drove me to leave wikipedia back in May.

At the time nobody seemed to care about her behavior.  At least now it is getting attention focused on it where it belongs.  For what it is worth, this isn't just between Anthere and RK.  It is between her and anyone who dares to touch the agriculture articles and doesn't share her Green politics and "interesting" concept of how information should be organized.

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20030701/638288da/attachment.htm


from_name: Jimmy Wales

subject: [WikiEN-l] Disambiguation proposal

body:
Well, this sounds reasonable to me.  Anthere, can you think of
any additions/corrections?

Robert wrote:
> For some reason my fellow Wikipedias keep missing the main
> point: standard Wikipedia protocol for disambiguation. In
> the past, this has prevented flame wars. Why is it not
> being allowed here? Let's change the [[Gaia]] article to a
> disambiguation page (proposal follows)
>
> -----
>
> '''Gaia''': This is a [[disambiguation]] page. The term
> '''Gaia''' may refer to
>
> [[Gaia (goddess]] - A Greek and Roman goddeess.
>
> [[Gaia theory]] - A group of scientific theories about how
> life on Earth may regulate the planet's biosphere to make
> it more hospitable to life. This discusses scientific views
> on the subject in general, including the views of Drs.
> James Lovelock, Lynn Margulis, Richard Dawkins, Carl Sagan,
> etc.
>
> [[Gaia hypothesis]] - An article devoted to solely to Dr.
> James Lovelock's ideas on Gaia theory.
>
> [[Gaia theory predecessors]] - A discussion of
> proto-scientific, mystical and religious views about life
> on Earth that bear similarity to Gaia theory.
>
> [[Gaians]] - A radical political and environmentalist
> group.
>
> (and other related topics can be added as well. Perhaps
> Gaia theory in religion, Gaia theory in art, etc.)
>
> ----
>
> Will this work?
>
> Robert (RK)
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
> http://sbc.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l


from_name: sannse

subject: [WikiEN-l] re: An observation

body:
Martin wrote in part:

> Thirdly, I should note that my sysop powers were the result of a fairly
informal
> decision by Ed Poor, rather than the general acclamation that has greeted
recent
> sysops. As such I feel somewhat lacking in democratic accountability! :)
While I wish
> to retain my deletion and undeletion powers solely for the purpose of
merging page
> histories or moving page titles, I would like to announce here that I will
no longer
> take any other sysop-restricted actions, until further notice. I hope you
can all trust
> me to keep my word on this matter.

I would say that the only reason there were not lots of messages seconding
your sysophood was because it was unnecesarry.

So for the record:

I strongly and enthusiastically support Martin as a sysop.  I fully trust
him to use all and any of his sysop abilities for the good of Wikipedia and
the Wikipedia community.

Regards

sannse


list: textbook-l

subject: [Textbook-l] Re: Textbooks

body:
Toby Bartels wrote:
> Since "NPOV" has never meant ?encyclopaedic?,
> I don't see the need to change letters to clarify.

Yes!

> And if I understand my Wikipedia history right,
> Jimbo's concept of NPOV predated the -pedias (even Nu-).

Hmm, I'm not sure about that.

Probably the phrase originated in emails between me and Larry during
the early days of Nupedia and possibly not until the early days of
Wikipedia.  It'd be an interesting history project to try to find out.

I don't save all my emails, though.  Some I do, some I don't.

Larry preferred the term 'unbiased', and with some good reason, but I
always felt that 'NPOV' better avoided a lot of sticky epistemological
issues about Truth With A Capital T.  It's a social concept, not an
epistemological concept.

--Jimbo


subject: [Textbook-l] California Open Source Textbook Project

body:
What license are they using?

Karl Wick wrote:

> Here is a link to a group in CA that is working to make
> open content that it can license to other states with the
> goal of cutting K-12 textbook prices by 33-50%.
>
> http://www.opensourcetext.org/
>
> It sounds like they are creating content that they will
> print up in hard copies for distribution or be the basis
> for derivative hard copy works.
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
> http://sbc.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> Textbook-l mailing list
> Textbook-l at wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/textbook-l


subject: [Textbook-l] License issues

body:
I've been chatting with Larry Lessig about copyright and license
issues, and of course he's a big proponent of his own Creative Commons
licenses.

http://creativecommons.org/license/

The GNU FDL is confusing and difficult to apply in a wiki context, and
a lot of the language presumes software documentation.

The Creative Commons licenses are much simpler.

I believe that the 'Attribution-Share Alike' license or the 'Share
Alike' license is going to be the right one to use if we did choose to
go that route.

Actually, what I think we should do, from the outset, is dual-license
everything under both licenses.  That ensures that the text is
compatible with Wikipedia.

It's a bit late for Wikipedia proper to do much good with dual licensing,
but for textbooks, it might be a good idea to do it from the outset.

--Jimbo


subject: [WikiEN-l] Gaia hypothesis

body:
--- Big Fat Buddha <bigfat_buddha at yahoo.com> wrote:
> My curiosity got the better of me today, and I
> decided to see what the old wikipedia was up to.
>
> Big surprise to see that Anther is involved in yet
> another edit war over the Gaia articles.  It was her
> possessiveness of everything related to agriculture,
> her frequent cries of "vandalism", her fractured
> French-English, and her tendency to simply fork
> topics into hundreds of Green-oriented smaller
> articles that drove me to leave wikipedia back in
> May.
>
> At the time nobody seemed to care about her
> behavior.  At least now it is getting attention
> focused on it where it belongs.  For what it is
> worth, this isn't just between Anthere and RK.  It
> is between her and anyone who dares to touch the
> agriculture articles and doesn't share her Green
> politics and "interesting" concept of how
> information should be organized.

Hello Fat Budda

I am glad that you are still around, so I can
apologize for having called you a vandal. You were
not. Just a pain :-) But you probably meant good.

I have no memory we ever did anything together on
green politics articles. I don't think I did much on
the topic. I know very little of politics. So I fail
to see how I could have divided them in dozen
articles. Do you have examples to back up your claims
?

However, I remember you and I having problem on the
[[anti-french sentiment]] article. Perhaps is it also
what is currently happening in another form ?

And yes, we had strong disagreement over redirect
versus empty articles in the agri topic. Upon which
most editors agreed your redirects were not a good
idea. Thus the redirects were listed on vdf and
deleted after community agreement.

As for the gaia articles, I think that given that you
were asking precisely the same thing that RK, ie,
saying to want one article (he is very busy recreating
dozen though he pretended wanting only one at first),
I suspect that you are indeed him.

Regards

Anthere

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com


subject: [WikiEN-l] Disambiguation proposal

body:
Yes. Just to state : RK wanted to unite all articles
at first. Now, he is putting them into pieces.

I disagree with moving all the content of political
issues in the gaian article. Not everyone recognising
himself as a gaian agrees with what is said in
political stuff. And some not recognising them with
gaian agree. This is far too reductive to put
everything under the gaian article

Second, did you really read the content of what RK is
proposing in the predecessors article ? The beginning
is indeed about predecessors. The second part is
totally current. Not ancien story. What would you
define as predecessors ? In any case, predecessors
have their part in the gaia theory as it is now. They
inspired Lovelock theory. Why should they be put
elsewhere ? It is not exactly as if all theories were
divided in two, with the old version and the new
version. Check Evolution. Is there a second article
mentionning everything that is older than 50 years ?

I would agree with gaia (goddess), with the set up of
[[Gaia]] as a purely disambiguating page. Listing all
the related articles

I disagree with letting RK definition at the top of
his version Gaia article. This is not a proper
definition. It is a scientific definition, and as such
s pov

I would be more than happy to keep the Gaia Hypothesis

I currently object that the Gaia Theory to be turned
to a purely scientific article. The Theory is not only
scientific. I also fear that if we do so, soon any
view non admitted by scientific academics will be put
aside in yet another little article, as non relevant.
Again, it is not as if non proven theories had to be
cut from proven theories.

I hope I am not supposed to agree with everything just
because you said it was reasonable.

--- Jimmy Wales <jwales at bomis.com> wrote:
> Well, this sounds reasonable to me.  Anthere, can
> you think of
> any additions/corrections?
>
> Robert wrote:
> > For some reason my fellow Wikipedias keep missing
> the main
> > point: standard Wikipedia protocol for
> disambiguation. In
> > the past, this has prevented flame wars. Why is it
> not
> > being allowed here? Let's change the [[Gaia]]
> article to a
> > disambiguation page (proposal follows)
> >
> > -----
> >
> > '''Gaia''': This is a [[disambiguation]] page. The
> term
> > '''Gaia''' may refer to
> >
> > [[Gaia (goddess]] - A Greek and Roman goddeess.
> >
> > [[Gaia theory]] - A group of scientific theories
> about how
> > life on Earth may regulate the planet's biosphere
> to make
> > it more hospitable to life. This discusses
> scientific views
> > on the subject in general, including the views of
> Drs.
> > James Lovelock, Lynn Margulis, Richard Dawkins,
> Carl Sagan,
> > etc.
> >
> > [[Gaia hypothesis]] - An article devoted to solely
> to Dr.
> > James Lovelock's ideas on Gaia theory.
> >
> > [[Gaia theory predecessors]] - A discussion of
> > proto-scientific, mystical and religious views
> about life
> > on Earth that bear similarity to Gaia theory.
> >
> > [[Gaians]] - A radical political and
> environmentalist
> > group.
> >
> > (and other related topics can be added as well.
> Perhaps
> > Gaia theory in religion, Gaia theory in art, etc.)
> >
> > ----
> >
> > Will this work?
> >
> > Robert (RK)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > __________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
> > http://sbc.yahoo.com
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com


subject: [WikiEN-l] Let's follow Wikipedia rules for the Gaia articles

body:
Vicki Rosenzweig wrote in small part:

>You might do better discussing things if you addressed
>people by their actual names. The "royal we" is, in English,
>also considered appropriate for use by editors.

Is it?
I've seen it used by authors when writing /impersonally/
("We will now examine the second of Kant's major premises."),
but not when one editor is talking about another editor to the rest.

Nevertheless, I agree that Anth?re would do well
to avoid antagonising RK any more than necessary.
However tempting it may be. ^_^

-- Toby


subject: [WikiEN-l] Let's follow Wikipedia rules for the Gaia  articles

body:
Anthere wrote in part:

>Is it acceptable that most other contributors just look at that, perhaps not
>caring in the least, perhaps deeply annoyed, perhaps greatly laughing and
>privately supporting RK, perhaps feeling sorry but not knowing what to do ?

I don't think that you need to worry very much
about what RK says on the mailing list.
It seems to me that he doesn't get much support here.
Whatever other troubles you may have,
don't worry very much about that.

>But if you all tolerate that RK does whatever he plans to do, without any
>consideration to the only one working on these pages, and decide to call me a
>vandal because I just try to express my disappointement and despair of what
>should be and not be "discussion", and try to do whatever I can invent to make
>you all aware that RK behavior is perhaps wrong, then I will just blank my
>user page, and go away.

I of course do not want you to leave the English Wikipedia.

-- Toby


list: wikitech-l

from_name: Matthias Jordan

subject: [Wikitech-l] New feature and new string in LanguageXX.php

body:
Hi, folks!

I implemented the feature that allows users (and the admins) to define a
default set of namespaces for searches. Doing so, I had to add a new
string to LanguageXX.php: defaultns. The string is already defined in
Language.php and LanguageDe.php. Since my skills in other foreign
languages are not that good I'd want to encourage the maintainers of the
respective files to include that string soon.

The changes have already been committed to the CVS repository.

Bye!
Matthias


body:
Anthere wrote:

>Toby Bartels wrote:

>>You and RK aren't the only persons working on these pages;
>>it might be best if both of you stayed away for a while.

>>You know, Ed Poor could be a big help here.

>I have been staying away from these articles on purpose for a full month. The
>gaia theory (biology) really need input. I can do that. I did nothing for a
>full month to avoid pb with RK. What did it changed ? Nothing. RK is going his
>way. And that is about it.

Other people are already clamping down on the articles
and not allowing RK to get his way in everything.

-- Toby


subject: [WikiEN-l] Anthere is still engaging in mass reversions without dialogue

body:
RK wrote:

>Finally, Anthere does NOT speak English properly;

As a native English speaker,
let me note that I've never had any significant problems
with Anth?re's use of English in this debate.
I'm not sure what RK is trying to do
by repeatedly bringing up this nonsense.

>I am appalled not only at her hateful actions, but at the
>way that many Wikipedia contributors are encouraging her
>vandalism.  (And non-stop reversions are a form of
>vandalism. Stop playing word games; you know what I mean.)

Read the Wikipedia policy pages on vandalism,
so that you know what that term means in this context.

-- Toby


from_name: Christopher Mahan

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Gaia edit wars

body:
--- Anthere <anthere6 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> That is all. When I am done restoring things, I will
> be happy that we freeze the article. But I won't stop
> editing it as long as he will revert my attempt to
> save information in the process

Anthere,

D'abord, salut.

Copy and paste from the article and keep on your hard drive, in a
text file. Write to a floppy or burn to CD if you fear loss.
Come back in two months.

D'accord?

=====
Christopher Mahan
chris_mahan at yahoo.com
818.943.1850 cell
http://www.christophermahan.com/

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com


body:
Robert,

You know, the two of you have managed to make my reading of wikien-l
totally unenjoyable.

Save the article text to your hard drive (from whichever revision you
feel like) and store it there for a couple of months (say, until
September 1).

Thanks you in advance.

=====
Christopher Mahan
chris_mahan at yahoo.com
818.943.1850 cell
http://www.christophermahan.com/

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com


subject: [WikiEN-l] Anthere and reality

body:
Anthere claims "I will be clear. RK and I disagreed on two
things. He wanted one article while I wanted 2. Now there
is only one. Point for him. Me out."

This is false. No Gaia articles have been delted. Her
claims to the contrary are totally false, and I can't
understand how she thinks she can get away with fooling all
of you. Just check out the Wikipedia for yourself! All the
Gaia articles are still there.  Is Anthere's web-browser
accessing some alternate form of Wikipedia that the rest of
us don't have access to?

Anthere claims "He wanted to remove non scientific view,
politics and such from the article, when I claim it was
important they be there. Now, only science is left. point
for him. Me out."

Untrue. In fact, this is an easily exposed falsehood. All I
did was use standard Wikipedia disambiguation, to make
clear that mystical, political and religious views that she
wants to call Gaia theory are not confused with scientific
theories.

Contrary to her odd claims, all of Anthere's material is
still there. In fact, I added discussions of non-science
opics to a science-based article, and made a few links to
non-science articles, for the sole purpose of appeasing
Anthere.  Didn't work. Now she doesn't even admit that her
work is still on the Wikipedia.

It is difficult to work with someone who repeatedly makes
false claims, and who has a persecution complex.  The rest
of you, however, can see the articles for yourself, and you
can evaluate and comment on the proposed disambiguation
that was sent to this list; it was also put on the
Discussion pages.

Robert (RK)

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Gaia edit wars

body:
--- Christopher Mahan <chris_mahan at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> --- Anthere <anthere6 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > That is all. When I am done restoring things, I
> will
> > be happy that we freeze the article. But I won't
> stop
> > editing it as long as he will revert my attempt to
> > save information in the process
>
> Anthere,
>
> D'abord, salut.
>
> Copy and paste from the article and keep on your
> hard drive, in a
> text file. Write to a floppy or burn to CD if you
> fear loss.
> Come back in two months.
>
> D'accord?

D?sol?e de perturber ta qui?tude Christopher, mais ta
remarque arrive un peu tard. Il y a deja plus d un
mois, au d?but de mes pb avec RK, j avais demand? a ce
que ces pages soient prot?g?es. Personne ne l a fait.
Tu aurais pu le faire. Aujourd hui, j ai donne a pls
reprises mon accord pour que ces pages soient
prot?g?es, mais RK n etait pas d accord. Et a
continuer a les editer a son gout.

Voudrais tu que je joue a la poup?e qui dit oui oui ?
Il suffirait que RK foute la merde et agresse les
editeurs pour que l on se plie a ses moindres desirs
pour eviter de perturber les autres ? Non, ca ne
marche pas. Si RK refuse de lacher la prise, pourquoi
la lacherais je moi meme ?

C est un peu facile tout de meme ! Il suffirait de
traiter les autres comme il me traite pour que la voie
soit libre ?
Mais, si cela peut te rassurer, une fois que le pb
sera pass?, soit je m en vais pour un bon paquet de
temps, parce qu a moi non plus cela ne fait pas
plaisir de me faire traiter de cette fa?on, soit je
reduis *tr?s* drastiquement toute mes participations a
Wikipedia.

Non, je n ai pas l intention de copier gaia sur mon
disque. De toutes fa?ons, cela fait longtemps que je l
ai d?j? sauvee :-) Mais sans liens, il est difficile
de faire qlq chose de correct.

Donc, il y a qlq heures, j ai copie la version la plus
r?cente acceptable a mes yeux comme sous page de ma
page perso; et c est ici que desormais que je l
editerais. Tout le monde est le bienvenu sur cette
page. Sauf RK. Au mieux, son contenu pourra etre
ult?rieurement int?gr? ? l article. Au pire, je
recupere mes billes et je m en vais d?finitivement.

Et crois moi, cela ne m'amuse vraiment pas de passer
des heures a me faire insulter plutot qu a faire
tranquillement des articles et a discuter avec des
amis.

Okay ?

mais, merci pour ta suggestion de toutes fa?ons

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com


from_name: tarquin

body:
Anthere wrote:

>But if you all tolerate that RK does whatever he plans to do, without any consideration to the only one working on these pages, and decide to call me a vandal because I just try to express my disappointement and despair of what should be and not be "discussion", and try to do whatever I can invent to make you all aware that RK behavior is perhaps wrong, then I will just blank my user page, and go away.
>

Forgive me for coming in to this discussion rather late. I've not been
following the list much recently.

Who is RK?
I'm terrible with names.
The only thing it reminds of is the debate a few months ago on
[[circumcision]] -- there was some intransigent who kept insisting that
any planned legislation against circumcision would be an affront to some
"holy" "god-given" tradition. I ended up concluding this was the sort of
person with whom rational debate is impossible.
it's not that guy is it?

Anthere -- plese don't leave the en: pedia!!!!

-- tarquin


from_name: steve vertigo

subject: [WikiEN-l] Disambiguation proposal

body:
> Yes. Just to state : RK wanted to unite all articles
> at first. Now, he is putting them into pieces.

Forget about what RK says.  Since neither of you can
deal in reason alone.
I think that Julie's suggestion is the best one.
it's not really important to the community that these
few articles are dealt with in any immediate
timeframe, nor do these issues merit a rift between
two people, who are both practically alone in viewing
the subjects with too much unwarranted passion.  While
interest may make for strong feelings, such strong
feelings do not necessarily make for good articles.
Julie suggested that both parties take a break, and do
other things -- I would tend to agree, though two
weeks perhaps would suffice.

> I disagree with letting RK definition at the top of
> his version Gaia article. This is not a proper
> definition. It is a scientific definition,...

(yadda)

> I hope I am not supposed to agree with everything
> just
> because you said it was reasonable.

You don't have to agree with everything,but you do
have to realize, that he doesn't really matter whether
you agree or not with consensus.  The general
consensus, being a bell curve, is bound to have people
on either end of that curve, neither of which
represents the consensus.

I would appreciate it very much, as would everyone
else on the list if both of you took a breather -- it
would allow other more ignorant, unqualified, and
incapable people than yourselves.  Despite their
incapacity, these successors will no doubt be able to
get the job done better than the experts.

Respectfoolly,
Stevertigo

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com


from_name: Geoffrey Burling

subject: [WikiEN-l] Disambiguation proposal

body:
On Tue, 1 Jul 2003, Robert wrote:

> For some reason my fellow Wikipedias keep missing the main
> point: standard Wikipedia protocol for disambiguation. In
> the past, this has prevented flame wars. Why is it not
> being allowed here? Let's change the [[Gaia]] article to a
> disambiguation page (proposal follows)
>
I don't see why the current single paragraph that explains --
& links to a fuller treatment of [[Gaia Theory]] -- can't remain
in the [[Gaia]] article, as it currently exists. In the
article on [[Oedipus]], one would expect some mention of
Freud's interpretation -- which currently exists -- & I
would expect the same kind of brief discussion & link in
any significant use of myth in intellectual thought.

I've been quiet about this whole issue until now because
I haven't been able to consider any way to contribute to
the discussion in a way others haven't already done.
As others have pointed out, it seems that we have two
contributors who are increasingly talking past each other,
& refusing to find common ground.

But making the [[Gaia]] article into a redirect I feel does
not solve the problem. Frankly, I find the division of the
matter into an article about the goddess, the scientific
theory, & the mystical belief adequate. Further articles
would only add to the confusion, as would fewer.

Geoff


subject: [WikiEN-l] apologies

body:
I'm trying out new voice recognition software, and
haven't quite got to hang of it. Please space
barexcuse my punctuation errors, grammatical errors,
errors in reason, and so on...

Focusing on a new way of writing apparently have side
effects, among them, and ever so slightly butchery of
the English language.

spectacularly,
Stevertigo

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com


subject: [WikiEN-l] apologies

body:
--- steve vertigo <utilitymuffinresearch at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Focusing on a new way of writing apparently have side
> effects, among them, and ever so slightly butchery of
> the English language.

Sort of like living in Los Angeles?

hehe

=====
Christopher Mahan
chris_mahan at yahoo.com
818.943.1850 cell
http://www.christophermahan.com/

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Gaia edit wars

body:
--- Anthere <anthere6 at yahoo.com> wrote:

> D?sol?e de perturber ta qui?tude Christopher, mais ta
> remarque arrive un peu tard. Il y a deja plus d un
> mois, au d?but de mes pb avec RK, j avais demand? a ce
> que ces pages soient prot?g?es. Personne ne l a fait.
> Tu aurais pu le faire. Aujourd hui, j ai donne a pls
> reprises mon accord pour que ces pages soient
> prot?g?es, mais RK n etait pas d accord. Et a
> continuer a les editer a son gout.

Je sais, j'ai suivi le feuilleuton.

Je ne suis pas admin, donc je n'aurais pas pu le faire.

Je me fous pas mal de ce que RK pense, mais pour raisons personnelles
qui remontent a plusieur mois...

> Voudrais tu que je joue a la poup?e qui dit oui oui ?
> Il suffirait que RK foute la merde et agresse les
> editeurs pour que l on se plie a ses moindres desirs
> pour eviter de perturber les autres ? Non, ca ne
> marche pas. Si RK refuse de lacher la prise, pourquoi
> la lacherais je moi meme ?

Premierement parce que nous sommes tous editeurs et cherchons un
respect mutuel par dessus tout.
Poupee: si 18+ ;)
Lacher: la vie est si breve, pourquoi s'embobiner?

> C est un peu facile tout de meme ! Il suffirait de
> traiter les autres comme il me traite pour que la voie
> soit libre ?

Tu penses peut etre que personne ne fait attention a RK, a toi meme,
ou a n'importe qui... Ce serait erron?... Nous nour regardons tous,
scrutinement.

> Mais, si cela peut te rassurer, une fois que le pb
> sera pass?, soit je m en vais pour un bon paquet de
> temps, parce qu a moi non plus cela ne fait pas
> plaisir de me faire traiter de cette fa?on, soit je
> reduis *tr?s* drastiquement toute mes participations a
> Wikipedia.

Fais ce que tu veux, mais sache que tant que tu nest pas bann?e, tu
es la bienvenue.

> Et crois moi, cela ne m'amuse vraiment pas de passer
> des heures a me faire insulter plutot qu a faire
> tranquillement des articles et a discuter avec des
> amis.

Amis? Collegues peut etre. W n'est pas un centre social, mais un
travail approfondit.

> mais, merci pour ta suggestion de toutes fa?ons

De rien :)

=====
Christopher Mahan
chris_mahan at yahoo.com
818.943.1850 cell
http://www.christophermahan.com/

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Gaia edit wars

body:
[french]
Putain y'en a des fautes dans c'que j'ecris.
[/french]

=====
Christopher Mahan
chris_mahan at yahoo.com
818.943.1850 cell
http://www.christophermahan.com/

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com


from_name: Hans-Joachim Gurt

body:
Hi,

I want to suggest some improvements:

* Page-titles:  more details for bookmarks+browserhistory
** Language-Code (en, de ...)
** Pagetype, like "Search", "Special", "WhatLinksHere", "PageHistory"...
 ("Editing" already gets into the page-title)
  E.g. instead of "Sport - Wikipedia" and "Sport"
  it should be "Sport - Wikipedia-DE" and "Whatlinkshere: Sport"

* Tweaks on the links for Next/Prev page:
** Recent changes:  The current output is:
 Show last 50 | 100 | 250 | 500 changes in last 1 | 3 | 7 | 14 | 30 days.
 Show new changes starting from HH:MM 1 Jul 2003

 It would be nice to also have a link "Show changes older then...",
 because "100" re-displays the first 50 entries.

** Page history:
 the prev/next links look like this:
 "View (previous 50) (next 50) (20 | 50 | 100 | 250 | 500)."
 This is misleading on the last page of the list, e.g.
 "(next 50)" is not deactivated as on the first page.

* Upload-page: after a successful upload, show some
  cut&paste examples how to use the file, like:

    [[Image:YourPicture.jpg]]
  or:

    [[Bild:FlagXY.png]]
FlagXY

I think these might not be too difficult...

By(t)e,
 HaJo Gurt
--
Whatever you do will be insignificant, but it is
very important that you do it.  -- Mohandas Gandhi


subject: [WikiEN-l] Disambiguation is not censorship (Gaia related)

body:
Anthere claims:
> Yes. Just to state : RK wanted to unite all articles
> at first. Now, he is putting them into pieces.

Anthere, are there not enough disputes already? Why do you
continue to write false claims about me?  I have never
tried to unite *all* the Gaia articles, and you know this.

All I have tried to do is unite the scientific topics into
one article, and non-science topics into other articles.  I
even made multiple links from the science articles to the
non-science ones, just for you.

> I disagree with moving all the content of political
> issues in the gaian article. Not everyone recognising
> himself as a gaian agrees with what is said in
> political stuff. And some not recognising them with
> gaian agree. This is far too reductive to put
> everything under the gaian article

Fine. If you believe that there are other political groups
that deserve their own article, make an article about them.
But please stop jamming every single remotely-related topic
into the [[Gaia theory]] page.

Anthere writes:
> Second, did you really read the content of what RK is
> proposing in the predecessors article ? The beginning
> is indeed about predecessors. The second part is
> totally current. Not ancien story. What would you
> define as predecessors ? In any case, predecessors
> have their part in the gaia theory as it is now.
> They inspired Lovelock theory. Why should they be put
> elsewhere ?

Anthere, stop being disingenuous.  Perhaps you truly
believe that these mystical, political and religious
beliefs belong in a science article about atmospheric
science and biology.  But they actually don't belong there;
you keep imposing your religious and political views on the
rest of us, and you keep screaming "censorship" when we
point out that these are separate topics. That is
inappropriate behaviour.

Frankly, Lovelock himself has stated that his theory was
not based on these religious and mystical ideas that you
favour so much.  His theory developed out of a study of
atmospheric gases, and his observation that many observed
gases in our atmosphere should not exist, unless one
postulated an as-yet-unknown mechanism.  Your claims about
the history of Lovelock's Gaia theory are historically
incorrect.  Also, your claims about Buckminster Fuller, on
this topic, are similarly historically inaccurate.

Anthere writes:
> I disagree with letting RK definition at the top of
> his version Gaia article. This is not a proper
> definition. It is a scientific definition, and as such
> is pov...

> I currently object that the Gaia Theory to be turned
> to a purely scientific article. The Theory is not only
> scientific. ...

Huh?  I am simply saying that we should have one article
specifically on science; we already have two other Gaia
articles (Gaians, and Gaia theory predecessors) that
discuss how mystics, religious believers, ancients, and
radical political groups interpret Gaia theory.  We can
also have more Gaia-related articles, as you intimated!

The problems is that every time we use standard Wikipedia
disambiguation forms, you cry censorship, and pretend that
other points of view are being hidden. They are not. They
simply are being discussed in their own articles. This is
clear to everyone else.

Please, take some time to learn how disambiguation is done
on other topics. It is not censorship. Please don't cry
victim.

The only POV violation is when you keep imposing your
religious and political beliefs on us, and forcing your
religious and political beliefs into an article about
atmospheric science and biology.

Robert (RK)

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com


subject: [WikiEN-l] Please stop the trolling.

body:
Please stop the trolling. This is the English Wikipedia
list.  Stop using this list for French discussions.

RK

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com


from_name: Tim Starling

subject: [Wikitech-l] Dynamic dates

body:
>Eclecticology wrote:
>
>The ISO format is based on numerical dates.  Thus for the example it would
>be 2003-06-24.  It includes hyphens and has leading zeros for days and
>months.  To the extent that I have been applying them I would enter such a
>date as [[2003]]-[[06-24]].  The first hyphen is outside of the link, and I
>have written redirects for the numerical dates on an as required basis.

I didn't bother putting that one in because there didn't seem to be much
support for it on the voting page. I can put it in if you want. It will be
infinitesimally slower than the rest due to the need for month name->number
conversion.

>tarquin-
> > It seems a little bats that at a time when our databse is struggling,
> > we're adding more load to the system for something so trivial.
>
>This should not add substantial load if properly coded, since it's just a
>search/replace operation with a fairly specific match (only triggers on
>linked dates).

That's my thinking too, although I haven't tested it. There's no extra DB
access, which by far forms the lion's share of the time required to display
a page. CPU load is about 5-6 lightweight preg_replace calls. They all match
a limited number of characters, and start with "[[". I thought long and hard
about various possible implementations: say, a single more complex regex
plus some PHP code to distinguish between the various cases, but I decided
that would take longer. Ditto for somehow incorporating it into
replaceInternalLinks(). The only faster thing way I can think of is writing
it in C. Setting up the regular expressions from the month name array is
done once per script run (stored in static variables), so if a tight loop of
addWikiText calls is slow, it won't be my fault.

>It will help us present a consistent picture throughout all
>our pages while not giving up some editorial liberty. I therefore fully
>support the implementation of this feature, unless the code is completely
>nuts ;-)

Yes, well you'll be able to judge that for yourself soon if I stop typing
emails and start doing some real work. :)

-- Tim Starling.

_________________________________________________________________
Hot chart ringtones and polyphonics. Go to
http://ninemsn.com.au/share/redir/adTrack.asp?mode=click&clientID=174&referral=Hotmail_taglines_plain&URL=http://ninemsn.com.au/mobilemania/default.asp


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Gaia edit wars

body:
Christopher Mahan wrote:
> [french]
> Putain y'en a des fautes dans c'que j'ecris.
> [/french]

[typical monolingual american]
Huh?
[/typical monolingual american]

People should feel free, of course, to speak whatever language that
they are comfortable with.  But keep in mind that many of us don't
speak French, and that therefore we aren't able to follow this portion
of the discussion at all.

--Jimbo


list: wikipedia-l

from_name: Menchi Zh-En WP

subject:
[Wikipedia-l] Intro for readers of this list (Was: "Edit this section", TOC
 implemented)

body:
>From: Daniel Mayer

>brion vibber wrote:
> >...you had to make an anchor
> >yourself by putting in some HTML tag with
> >an 'id="anchorname"' attribute.
>
>Sounds cool. But why not just make another article?

Because that'd make some permanent one-paragraph or one-sentence stubs on
things humankind know little about. Some articles I made refers to another
parts of sections of its own or other articles.

> >...automatically _create_ anchors from headers...
>
>Heavens no! That would be ugly and non-standard and should not be a default
>setting (in the same way as the almost as ugly auto header numbering is not
>the default).

It doesn't have to be default at all, as apparent from the Korean NoSmoke
WikiForum, for example, on my page ( http://no-smok.net/nsmk/Menchi ), I
used several levels of headers, but the index can _only_ be revealled by the
markup, [[TableOfContents]].

Menchi Zh-En

_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Gaia edit wars

body:
--- Christopher Mahan <chris_mahan at yahoo.com> wrote:
> --- Anthere <anthere6 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Je sais, j'ai suivi le feuilleuton.
>
> Je ne suis pas admin, donc je n'aurais pas pu le
> faire.

oups. d?sol?e. Cela fait assez longtemps que tu es sur
Wikipedia. Si tu estimes que cela t apporte qlq chose,
tu pourrais peut etre le demander ?

/I asked him why he did not protected the pages a
month ago, when I repeatedly (but not at the right
place) asked that these were protected. He answered he
was no admin.

> Je me fous pas mal de ce que RK pense, mais pour
> raisons personnelles
> qui remontent a plusieur mois...

En d autres termes, tu fais egalement partie de la
*cohorte* que RK a malmene. Etant donne le nb de
personnes que j ai vu se faire balayer, ou ayant admis
publiquement s'?tre faite insulter, ou m'ayant indiqu?
en priv?, avoir eu des probl?mes avec lui, je finis
par me demander qui n'en a pas eu.

/I think he said he was mishandled by RK some months
ago

> > Voudrais tu que je joue a la poup?e qui dit oui
> oui ?
> > Il suffirait que RK foute la merde et agresse les
> > editeurs pour que l on se plie a ses moindres
> desirs
> > pour eviter de perturber les autres ? Non, ca ne
> > marche pas. Si RK refuse de lacher la prise,
> pourquoi
> > la lacherais je moi meme ?
>
> Premierement parce que nous sommes tous editeurs et
> cherchons un
> respect mutuel par dessus tout.

absolumment. Sauf, que j ai cesse d avoir du respect
pour lui. J ai du respect pour *tous* les autres
editeurs, meme si je les critique parfois

/I said I respected all the respectable wikipedians.
Makes a lot ! :-)

> Poupee: si 18+ ;)

aucun souci. Stade d?pass?

/I said I was physically mature

> Lacher: la vie est si breve, pourquoi s'embobiner?

/Tres vrai. Tu es un homme sage :-)))) Tombe bien, les
vacances arrivent :-)

/Off-times are planned

> > C est un peu facile tout de meme ! Il suffirait de
> > traiter les autres comme il me traite pour que la
> voie
> > soit libre ?
>
> Tu penses peut etre que personne ne fait attention a
> RK, a toi meme,
> ou a n'importe qui... Ce serait erron?... Nous nour
> regardons tous,
> scrutinement.

Non. Je sais que vous regardez. Et je pense que
certains ont un microscope et nous regardent evoluer
tous ensemble. Terrifiant

/microcosmos

> > Mais, si cela peut te rassurer, une fois que le pb
> > sera pass?, soit je m en vais pour un bon paquet
> de
> > temps, parce qu a moi non plus cela ne fait pas
> > plaisir de me faire traiter de cette fa?on, soit
> je
> > reduis *tr?s* drastiquement toute mes
> participations a
> > Wikipedia.
>
> Fais ce que tu veux, mais sache que tant que tu nest
> pas bann?e, tu
> es la bienvenue.

J ai juste besoin de vacances :-)

> > Et crois moi, cela ne m'amuse vraiment pas de
> passer
> > des heures a me faire insulter plutot qu a faire
> > tranquillement des articles et a discuter avec des
> > amis.
>
> Amis? Collegues peut etre. W n'est pas un centre
> social, mais un
> travail approfondit.

Ahah. Je precise donc. *Tous* les wikipediens sont mes
collegues. Tous. Mais, une poign?e sont devenus des
amis. Cela n'a rien a voir avec confondre wikipedia
avec un centre social. Il y a juste qlq personnes avec
qui je trouve tr?s grand plaisir a discuter, ?
?changer en priv?, sur d'autres sujets que wikipedia.
Ils ne sont que des amis virtuels, mais ils sont
important pour moi. Pas tr?s nombreux, mais peu
importe, ils existent, et j espere que cela est
reciproque :-))) oki ?

> > mais, merci pour ta suggestion de toutes fa?ons
>
> De rien :)

Cool. Bonne journ?e Christopher.

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com


from_name: Daniel Mayer

subject: [Textbook-l] linearity

body:
Magnus wrote:
>OK, practical question: How does the software
>on a given page *know* what page is next?
>It doesn't until we tell it. The best place is within
>the page/article/module, don't you think?

Links on the TOC to specific modules would have info in them (after a & or ?)
that would give placement info. So clicking on a link to the first module in
Chapter one would give
http://textbook.wikibook.org/en/organic_chemistry_level_1:module1?textbookTOCid=45369&moduleid=1&chapterid=1

And the "Next Page" link at the bottom would then be able to know where it was
in the order of things and would give:
http://textbook.wikibook.org/en/organic_chemistry_level_1:module1?textbookTOCid=45369&moduleid=2&chapterid=1

NOTE: The moduleid is now equal to "2."

Play around with this link:
http://transitorienteddevelopment.dot.ca.gov/project/stateViewProjectOverview.jsp?projectId=10&&stationId=7

Change the project and station ids and that will change which entry you are
looking at.

>The alternative would be to make an index
>page with links, and then have *every* page
>scan *every* index (well, the ones with links
>to that page) for "Am I in here", parse the index,
>and determine the next page.

I don't think that is needed; just use ids in the urls.

-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)


from_name: Vicki Rosenzweig

subject: [WikiEN-l] Please stop the trolling.

body:
At 05:55 PM 7/1/03 -0700, Robert wrote:
>Please stop the trolling. This is the English Wikipedia
>list.  Stop using this list for French discussions.

Not everything you, or I, find irritating is trolling. I agree
that on this list, specifically, English is preferable. That
doesn't make the use of French trolling.

--
Vicki Rosenzweig
vr at redbird.org
http://www.redbird.org


from_name: Luc Van Oostenryck

subject: [Wikitech-l] fr: is almost death, de: is very slow also

body:
Hi there,

Since about one hour fr: is slower and slower. Now it's almost death.
de: is very slow also, but en: seems to be more or less OK.

Is there a problem?

--
Luc Van Oostenryck aka Looxix


subject: [Textbook-l] License issues

body:
Jimbo said:
>...
>The Creative Commons licenses are
>much simpler.

I don't know about that (I just read a few) but dual licensing might be a nice
option to have (thus making our text usable in other Creative Commons works).
However everything on our server would have to be dual licensed or we would
have a situation where some parts of some modules are dual licensed and other
parts are either GNU FDL or Creative Commons. It is difficult enough already
to convince outside authors to allow us to use their work under /one/
license. Of course I could be misunderstanding how dual-licensing works.
Maybe we should talk to the Mozilla people about how they deal with their
dual-license. It would also be nice to know what RMS thinks about
dual-licensing in general and the specific Creative Common licenses that we
might use in particular.

>I believe that the 'Attribution-Share Alike'
>license or the 'Share Alike' license is going
>to be the right one to use if we did choose
>to go that route.

Attribution-Share Alike seems to be most consistent with the GNU FDL. For
"Attribution" we can have the same simple policy as we have on WIkipedia; a
url to the original.

>Actually, what I think we should do, from the
>outset, is dual-license everything under both
>licenses.  That ensures that the text is
>compatible with Wikipedia.

But dual-licensing may create a big problem with text flowing from Wikipedia
(GFDL only) to a textbook (GFDL/Creative Commons Share Alike). Wouldn't each
and every author of the Wikipedia text have to agree to have their work
licensed under the Creative Commons Share Alike license? If not then we are
going to make things rather difficult for downstream users of the our text
who would have to sort out which licenses apply to various modules and parts
of modules. Only having one license would be simpler, no?

>It's a bit late for Wikipedia proper to do
>much good with dual licensing, but for
>textbooks, it might be a good idea to do
>it from the outset.

I like the idea but I have some reservations.

Creative Commons Share Alike license:

Require attribution?
X Yes
    No

Allow commercial uses of your work?
X Yes
   No

Allow modifications of your work?
   Yes
X Yes, as long as others share alike
    No

Which results in:
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/1.0/legalcode

--- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)


subject: [WikiEN-l] my last mail for a while

body:
I have just been said I was abusing the list, because
sending two many mails and in double sometimes.

I wish to say that I sent many mails because I thought
I could answer to criticism (RK), to comments (Steve)
and to questions and request (Jimbo).

I sent double mails because I have pb with one of my
work computer configuration (the other one is the one
doing the wrong indentation someone mentionned). This
is not mine to be able to do anything, but the firm
admin. I have no right to install a new browser, nor
to reinstall the current one. Hence, either I stop
sending mail, or MB put the filter on my name as he
said he would do.

I thought that in an edit war, the ones involved in
the edit war were welcome to give their opinion once
the article was frozen, in the talk page. I was told
no to, to let others discuss the matter. Hence, I will
not comment any more. If anyone think I could help
them understanding the topic in any way, please drop
me a message. I am doubtful of how I could feel
entirely happy with the outcome if I have no voice at
all on the matter. I certainly did not want to say my
opinion would weight in any way in the final outcome,
but perhaps proper arguments would have been
receivable. But I will gladly let others than RK and I
work on the topic. I hope that before the final
decision is taken, I will be asked by Jimbo perhaps
what I think of the resulting proposal and if I have
anything else to say. I also hope I will be told when
I can come back on the topic. I still fail to see how
this could be called consensus if the ones in the edit
wars are asked to keep out of this consensus.

I also hope that RK does not go on insulting me on
this mailing list.

Thanks

Have a good day or week all.

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com


subject: [Textbook-l] Opps! (was linearity)

body:
The examples in my last post were very confusing (I used "moduleid" where I
should have used "sectionid"). Here is a corrected version:

Links on the TOC to specific modules would have info in them (after a & or ?)
that would give placement info. So clicking on a link to the first module in
Chapter one would give
http://textbook.wikibook.org/en/organic_chemistry_level_1?textbookTOCid=45369&sectionid=1&chapterid=1

The textbook name is "organic chemistry level 1" The particular table of
contents for this version of the level 1 organic chemistry textbook is
identified with the automatic number 4536 (or a unique name; it doesn't
really matter). Anybody can build a TOC with different modules and the TOC
becomes the organizing structure of that version of the textbook. The other
info (sectionid and chapterid) are retrieved from the TOC and advanced as
needed as the software keeps track of where the reader is. The actual modules
would have been previously associated with particular sections and chapters
when the TOC was made.

And the "Next Page" link at the bottom would then be able to know where it was
in the order of things and would give:
http://textbook.wikibook.org/en/organic_chemistry_level_1?textbookTOCid=45369&sectionid=2&chapterid=1

NOTE: The sectionid is now equal to "2."

-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)


from_name: Brion Vibber

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Enhanced special page links (in testing)

body:
It's been oft complained that it's difficult to link to various special
functions -- backlinks, contribs, and the like -- which might be nice. I
made a quick hack to allow tacking a parameter onto a special page in a
wikilink, like so:

[[Special:Contributions/User name]]

[[Special:Whatlinkshere/Page title]]

[[Special:Recentchangeslinked/Page title]]

etc

See some examples and try it out at on the test wiki at
http://test.wikipedia.org/

The slash (/) doesn't have to be the separator character; if people find
it offensive I'm sure we could change it to something else. :) A(nother)
colon may or may not be preferable.

An advantage that a variant on this scheme has over the experimental
interwiki prefixes Erik put in a bit ago ([[BackLinks:foo]] etc) is that
it will require no additional per-wiki maintenance, and can be used
across existing interwiki links (once set up on the live wikis), eg:
[[DeWikipedia:Spezial:Contributions/Eloquence]] would work from English
Wikipedia, or even from other unrelated wikis so long as they support
the DeWikipedia prefix.*

A disadvantage (so far) is that since history & editing don't go through
special pages, they'll need a little more work to set up on a similar
scheme.

(Technical notes please follow up to wikitech-l. Policy & usability
notes please follow up to wikipedia-l.)

*On a somewhat related note, it may be useful to set up a redirector
such that other wikis don't have to set up a billion separate interwiki
prefixes to link to Wikipedia. eg, a link to:
   [[WikiPedia:pl:Medycyna]]

would typically end up at
   http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/pl:Medycyna

That could never be an article on English wikipedia, since internal
links would take the pl: to be an interlanguage prefix, and it's
rejected as a bad title. So why not redirect? So, to reiterate our
example with this possibility we might link:
   [[WikiPedia:de:Spezial:Contributions/Eloquence]]

on any wiki supporting the WikiPedia interwiki prefix, with no need to
bug site owners to extend their prefix list for other languages. Too
many pieces? Maybe. :) But probably easier to type than

http://de.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Spezial:Contribtutions&target=Eloquence

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)


subject: [Wikitech-l] Enhanced special page links (in testing)


from_name: Magnus Manske

subject: [Textbook-l] linearity

body:
Daniel Mayer wrote:
> LDan wrote:
>
>>I'm not the programmer, but
>>should it really be a link to a
>>regular wiki page? I think it
>>would be more appropriate
>>if it linked to something like
>>[[Special:Next]] or {{NEXTPAGE}}.
>>It would also be convienient for
>>that to appear at the bottom of
>>the screen automatically, but that
>>would take some coding.
>
>
> I really, really like this idea; that way a particular module (wiki textbook
> page) could be used by several different textbooks. The software would keep
> track of the textbook (and module) the reader is reading from so that "Next
> page" always keeps the reader in the same textbook even when many of the
> modules of that textbook are shared. A possible way for the software to know
> the order of pages is to simply scan the table of contents of whatever
> textbook the reader is reading from.

OK, practical question: How does the software on a given page *know*
what page is next? It doesn't until we tell it. The best place is within
the page/article/module, don't you think?

The alternative would be to make an index page with links, and then have
*every* page scan *every* index (well, the ones with links to that page)
for "Am I in here", parse the index, and determine the next page.

Both would be possible, the first one easy to implement (just a link;-).
The second one would be based on indices (tables of contents). To stay
in the same "book", we'd have to carry the current TOC with us on every
view. Or, we show all possible links, like "Next page in Biology", "Next
page in Chemistry", etc.

Magnus


from_name: martin at myreddice.freeserve.co.uk

subject: [WikiEN-l] The royal "we"

body:
Hi folks,

I think the royal we might be appropriate in some cases. For example, when talking
to a newcomer to Wikipedia, an editor might say "Welcome! (link) We try to write
from a neutral point of view (link) here, so I've edited your recent changes to
attribution theory (link). What do you think?". Here, the editor can be pretty confident
that Wikipedia, as a whole, agrees with the neutral point of view.

On other occasions, the royal we might not be appropriate. For example, in the
sentence "We support anarcho-communism and the abolition of capitalism", the
word "we" is not appropriate, because most Wikipedians do not support anarcho-
communism, and a few may even have a soft spot for capitalism, though they'd
obviously never admit it in public.

Oh, and royalty and folks with multiple personalities get special priviledges. Which is
nice. Anyway, since RK accused me of "jew-baiting" and "adopting Neo-Nazi-like
revisionism", (grr) I'm probably not going to be able to be very impartial here. I'll
stick to writing something at [[we]].

-Martin "MyRedDice" Harper


from_name: Fred Bauder

subject: [WikiEN-l] my last mail for a while

body:
Clearly Robert has driven you mad. Take a break. As to him, let him stew in
his own juice for awhile. However, do answer Jimbo. I have not had the
patience to follow this controversy, so I have nothing to say regarding the
details. Hang in there, cat;

Fred

> From: Anthere <anthere6 at yahoo.com>
> Reply-To: wikien-l at wikipedia.org
> Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2003 23:07:15 -0700 (PDT)
> To: wikien-l at wikipedia.org
> Subject: [WikiEN-l] my last mail for a while
>
> I have just been said I was abusing the list, because
> sending two many mails and in double sometimes.
>
> I wish to say that I sent many mails because I thought
> I could answer to criticism (RK), to comments (Steve)
> and to questions and request (Jimbo).
>
> I sent double mails because I have pb with one of my
> work computer configuration (the other one is the one
> doing the wrong indentation someone mentionned). This
> is not mine to be able to do anything, but the firm
> admin. I have no right to install a new browser, nor
> to reinstall the current one. Hence, either I stop
> sending mail, or MB put the filter on my name as he
> said he would do.
>
> I thought that in an edit war, the ones involved in
> the edit war were welcome to give their opinion once
> the article was frozen, in the talk page. I was told
> no to, to let others discuss the matter. Hence, I will
> not comment any more. If anyone think I could help
> them understanding the topic in any way, please drop
> me a message. I am doubtful of how I could feel
> entirely happy with the outcome if I have no voice at
> all on the matter. I certainly did not want to say my
> opinion would weight in any way in the final outcome,
> but perhaps proper arguments would have been
> receivable. But I will gladly let others than RK and I
> work on the topic. I hope that before the final
> decision is taken, I will be asked by Jimbo perhaps
> what I think of the resulting proposal and if I have
> anything else to say. I also hope I will be told when
> I can come back on the topic. I still fail to see how
> this could be called consensus if the ones in the edit
> wars are asked to keep out of this consensus.
>
> I also hope that RK does not go on insulting me on
> this mailing list.
>
> Thanks
>
> Have a good day or week all.
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
> http://sbc.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l


from_name: Michael Becker

subject: [WikiEN-l] New proposal for a mailing list rule.

body:
In the interest of making it possible for users to read all (or even
most) e-mail's from the mailing list, and to give people equal
representation on the list (to try an keep people who don't send 50
million e-mails from being ignored) I propose we set up a limit to the
number of e-mails that can be sent per day per e-mail account.  This
will encourage to say meaningful things (instead of useless crap).
Also, I propose that everyone read the standard rules of Netiquette
(search google if you need to) and follow them.  While some people would
consider things they do on this list harmless, others (including me)
consider them rude.

I realize that my above message may sound harsh, but I am just trying to
be direct about this problem (no beating around the bush for me).

Thanks
--
Michael Becker


subject: [WikiEN-l] Anthere and RK

body:
My suggestion to you two is to ignore each other for a while.  Every
time one of you responds to the other, people loose a little respect for
you.  Also, could you please both just leave the Gaia articles be for a
while?  It's hard for anyone to figure out what is going on with both of
you constantly fighting and bickering like cats and dogs.

P.S.  If you really feel like insulting each other, and/or sending
pointless messages to the list, please don't include the rest of the
list, just mail each other directly.

Thanks
--
Michael Becker


from_name: Jimmy Wales

subject: [Textbook-l] linearity

body:
Magnus Manske wrote:
> I think one important point of the textbook project is that we can
> actually *print* it as a textbook. That doesn't mean it should not take
> advantage of the dead-easy wiki hyperlinks, just that there should be a
> way to run a script and get a PDF, RTF, or something, that actually
> handles like a book.

I agree with this.  In the distant future, perhaps online hypertext
will be the default for all textbooks.

But one of my interests is that knowledge be shared far beyond the
wealthy nations where Internet access is ubiquitous.  The UN estimates
that 1 billion people do not have access to safe drinking water.
Those same people have very limited access to the Internet, even at
their Universities.

What I want to see is easy distribution of printed text, undertaken by
competitive firms who compete based on how cheaply they can print the
books, rather than competing on the basis of proprietary content.

I want this for the encyclopedia, but it seems as important or perhaps
even moreso for the textbooks.

--Jimbo


body:
Michael Becker wrote:
> In the interest of making it possible for users to read all (or even
> most) e-mail's from the mailing list, and to give people equal
> representation on the list (to try an keep people who don't send 50
> million e-mails from being ignored) I propose we set up a limit to the
> number of e-mails that can be sent per day per e-mail account.

I'm not sure that I support this, exactly, but I would like to note
that "too much volume" is as much a barrier to participation as rules
of this type, and that I do think this is a problem.

Part of it might be an increased effort on everyone's part to only bring
things to the mailing list after they can't be resolved on /talk pages.


from_name: Karl Wick

subject: [Textbook-l] Re: California Open Source Textbook Project

body:
Jimmy:

Did you answer your own question about the California Open
Source Textbook licenses ?

Here is text I pulled from their site: "COSTP intends to
use Creative Commons licenses for selected content.
Creative Commons licenses allow creators to let the public
to copy and distribute their work, but only on certain
conditions, and while retaining their copyright."

Hope I'm not wasting your time with old news.

Karl

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com


body:
(As a side note, I sent an email to COSTP people, and hope that
they'll be in touch soon.  It looks to me -- from their website --
that they just have an idea, and that nothing has actually been _done_
yet.  I hope that they are open to help from us, and to helping us.)

Karl Wick wrote:
> Did you answer your own question about the California Open
> Source Textbook licenses ?

Yes, but I'm glad you brought it up to the list.

> Here is text I pulled from their site: "COSTP intends to
> use Creative Commons licenses for selected content.
> Creative Commons licenses allow creators to let the public
> to copy and distribute their work, but only on certain
> conditions, and while retaining their copyright."

I'm glad to see that they are using Creative Commons licenses, since
many (though not all) of those licenses meet the GNU requirement
for "freedom":
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/license-list.html

This page has not been updated to include the creative commons
licenses, so it's just my opinion, but I think, based on what Larry
Lessig has told me, that Attribution-Share Alike is the closest in
spirit to the GNU FDL, and that things licensed under Attribution
(without the 'Share Alike' proviso) can actually be relicensed under
the GNU FDL by distributors.

One of the things that I really like about their project, and one
thing that will make their job easier, is the idea of following a
particular set of content standards.  Probably if they had enough
labor available to do it, they should follow multiple state standards,
because I can think of no really good reason for them to isolate their
project to the state of California.

Except, their website talks about the potential cost savings to the
state, so perhaps the reason for their focus has something to do with
trying to get some grant money from the state of California.

--Jimbo


subject: [Textbook-l] A development outline

body:
This outline isn't necessarily suitable for all texts, but is likely a
useful way to proceed for K-12 texts that need to be designed to meet
state content standards.

1.  Develop internal integrated content standards, based on publicly
available content standards such as:

http://www.cde.ca.gov/standards/science/grade1.html (California)
http://www.firn.edu/doe/curric/prek12/pdf/sciencek.pdf (Florida)
ftp://ftp.alsde.edu/documents/54/04SciK-2.rtf (Alabama)

The attempt here would be to integrate and harmonize as many of these
as is reasonably feasible, including UK and Australian and others as
needed.

2.  Write texts that precisely mirrors the standards put forward
in item #1.

-------

One thing that this method does is eliminate _our_ need to deal with
certain complex questions regarding the proper order of instruction in
various fields.  Much of this work has been done for us, and if our
texts are to gain widespread use, we will need to meet the needs of
end users and the decision makers who control which texts are adopted.

The same thing is most likely true for college texts.  For example,
economics is normally taught in two semesters, Economics 101 and
Economics 102.  Normally one course is 'micro' and one course is
'macro'.  But in any event, to the extent that these courses are
pre-requisites for other courses later on, any valid text will need to
cover certain points outlined in the course description.

My thinking here is that just as the wikipedia _encyclopedia_ is
envisioned as a neutral reference standard, as opposed to an avenue
for original research, Wikimedia _textbooks_ should be neutral and
tend to avoid original pedagogy.

--Jimbo


subject: [Wikitech-l] CVS

body:
Timwi wrote:

>Well, the CVS server was working intermittently (stopped working again now),
>
Sourceforge unfortunately sometimes has trouble. :(

>so I've managed to create a patch for my
>bugfix. This is much shorter than the previous, but it's really just a rearrangement of the code. The only differences to
>the previous ones are that this input:
>  ''''' text ''' text ''
>which previously would have output this:
>   text  text
>now correctly outputs the expected markup:
>   text  text
>
>At least I hope so. ;-)
>
Cooool. :)

I haven't had a chance yet to look at the new version, I'll try it out
tonight hopefully...

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)


subject: [Textbook-l] a sample textbook under devel

body:
http://test.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_textbook

Here is a link to a bit of preliminary work that I have
been playing with on the test wiki. It includes hard coded
page navigation links.

BTW Brion I really like the table of contents stuff that
you seem to have done there, and like the idea of editing
one section at a time of those big pages.

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com


body:
Karl Wick wrote:

>BTW Brion I really like the table of contents stuff that
>you seem to have done there, and like the idea of editing
>one section at a time of those big pages.
>
Not me, man, that's all Erik's handiwork. :)

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)


from_name: Richard Grevers

subject: [WikiEN-l] Response to Anthere's claims

body:
On Mon, 30 Jun 2003 19:23:42 -0700 (PDT), Robert <rkscience100 at yahoo.com>
gave utterance to the following:

> Look, among English speakers, people
> who look up encyclopaedia entries on Gaia theory are
> usually looking for information on theories about how life
> on Earth may regulate the Earth itself to make it more
> hospitable for life.
>
> Most English speakers generally are not using this title to
> look for information on pre-1900s mystics (who *never* used
> the name Gaia theory), nor are they looking for info on
> radical European left-wing political acitivists (i.e. the
> Gaiains).  If someone wants to link to articles on those
> topics, fine: We already have a working convention for
> this.  We can create a disambiguation page, or use "See
> also".  This is a convention that all of us have
> successfully used in the past; why now are so many people
> dead set against it?
>
Actually, I would hazard a guess that the most widely known occurence of
"Gaia" is Isaac Asimov's portrayal of a highly-evolved, collective
consciousness planet in the Foundation series. (How closely does Asimov
follow Gaia theory?). We currently have two pages which mention both Gaia
and Asimov, and the word Gaia isn't linked in either.

I would suggest that we move [[Gaia]] to [[Gaia (Mythology)]] and remove
the material that isn't about the Greek Goddess, and make [[Gaia]] a
disambiguation page which links to all relevant articles plus a new one
about Asimov's Gaia.

--
Richard Grevers
I can't march any more the soldier said haltingly


body:
On Tue, 1 Jul 2003 08:44:02 -0700 (PDT), Anthere <anthere6 at yahoo.com> gave
utterance to the following:
>
> I don't think that this is a very helpful strategy.
> You and RK aren't the only persons working on these pages;
> it might be best if both of you stayed away for a while.
> Certainly edit wars, alone, are not useful,
> and there's a big difference between saying
> that you're unable to discuss things with your opponent
> and saying that you're no longer going to even try.
>
> You know, Ed Poor could be a big help here.
>
>
> I have been staying away from these articles on purpose for a full month.
> The gaia theory (biology) really need input. I can do that. I did nothing
> for a full month to avoid pb with RK. What did it changed ? Nothing. RK
> is going his way. And that is about it.
>
> Why should I wait and he not ? Why should I discuss alone and get empty
> replies ?
>
> Yes, please, you may call Ed to help on this. I will trust him for
> helping to reach a good decision
>
Anthere, I don't know what mail client you are using, but it seems to be
mis-configured. Your reply to Toby shows his text as though you wrote it
rather than as quoted. This happens in both the text and html components of
your multipart message. Since all your other replies in this thread have
been in text/plain, the behaviour might have been triggered by the unkown
encoding in Toby's message. Many mail clients have a setting to choose
between replying in the original content type or always in text/plain. THe
latter is usually preferable and less problematic on lists. In any case, in
a contentious discussion such as this where there is a lot of "I didn't say
that" going on, correct quote attribution and display is essential. Please
take care everyone.

--
Richard Grevers


from_name: Karl Eichwalder

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Intro for readers of this list

body:
Daniel Mayer <maveric149 at yahoo.com> writes:

> Sounds cool. But why not just make another article?

Because we write for readers.  Some subjects are more complex and it is
a real pain if you as a reader are force to download a bunch of
articles to get the idea of the subject in question.

Also people will start adding stuff to article which are "not
complete" (they will not lookup other articles first); thus duplicating
of info usually happens and in the end the article is long again.

This leads to the conclusion that fragment identifiers are a good thing.

--
                                                         |      ,__o
http://www.gnu.franken.de/ke/                            |    _-\_<,
ke at suse.de (work) / keichwa at gmx.net (home)               |   (*)/'(*)


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Intro for readers of this list (Was: "Edit this section", TOC implemented)

body:
On Tue, 1 Jul 2003 10:51:15 -0700, Daniel Mayer <maveric149 at yahoo.com> gave
utterance to the following:

> brion vibber wrote:
>> We have allowed such links since nearly a year ago, but you had to make
>> an anchor yourself by putting in some HTML tag with an 'id="anchorname"'
>> attribute.
>
> Sounds cool. But why not just make another article?
>
Because we have (whether you like them or not) articles such as
http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aviation%2C_aerospace_and_aeronautical_terms
which help reduce the number of stub articles and are much easier to follow
than the equivalent wiktionary article (just look at the disambiguation
article for [[pitch]].
In fact - links to disambign articles are a perfect use. You can make it
clear what sense of a word you are linking to.

--
Richard Grevers
I can't march any more the soldier said haltingly


from_name: Matthias Jordan

subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: Dynamic dates

body:
Hi, folks!

Erik Moeller wrote:

> our pages while not giving up some editorial liberty. I therefore fully
> support the implementation of this feature, unless the code is completely
> nuts ;-)

Actually, I looked at the code to make some changes to my private
language file and didn't understand it. I know somehow what the code
does but not how, because I didn't want to spend that much time decoding
all those regexps that make the code pretty cryptic and hard to maintain
- with the added bonus of not having /any/ documentation.

Why not rearrange the code into two segments: Segment one would parse
the linked date like present in the article into three numerical values:
day, month, year. The second segment then would only have to concat
those values (maybe with a converted month name) into the final form.
This form could be given in the usual "$1 $2 $3 $4" syntax (with e.g. $4
being the month name). That also would take some load off the server
that now has to interpret lots of regexp patterns, which isn't too cheap
because these patterns normally first get converted into some form of a
finite automaton that is eventually given the input string for
processing. (At least the code by Tatu Ylonen proceeds in this way.)

Bye!
Matthias


from_name: Dante Alighieri

subject: [WikiEN-l] Please stop the trolling.

body:
At 05:55 PM 7/1/2003, you wrote:
>Please stop the trolling. This is the English Wikipedia
>list.  Stop using this list for French discussions.
>
>RK

You recently asked Anthere to not "cry victim". Perhaps if you didn't
continually make wild and baseless accusations of vandalism and trolling...

-----
Dante Alighieri
dalighieri at digitalgrapefruit.com

"The darkest places in hell are reserved for those who maintain their
neutrality in times of great moral crisis."
    -Dante Alighieri, 1265-1321


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Please help test new features

body:
On Wed, 2 Jul 2003, Timwi wrote:
> The TOC is invalid HTML for two major reasons:
> * The top-level LI elements are not enclosed in an UL or OL
> * The child ULs are outside the parent LIs.

It's also mysteriously in a table and there are no line breaks. :)

I notice that duplicate headings (which is not unlikely to occur with
subheadings) are marked with a numbered suffix after the first one. Better
than nothing, but this is fragile for linking; if the major sections are
rearranged in order, the numbers for the minor sections will change.

> The [edit] link does not display when you're logged out, but when you
> log in it is set as a default. This is potentially confusing to users.
> Settings should not change by creating an account :-)

Indeed. If we're adding features to make it easier to edit, I'm not sure
it makes sense to hide them from new users...

Another minor suggestion I made to Erik earlier but which would apparently
be "hard" with his regexps :) would be to have the section editing
separate on horizontal rules as well as headings. This would be
particularly helpful in talk pages and the Village Pump, where common
practice is to separate subdiscussions with rules, not headings.

> > * Linking into the Special: namespace with parameters. See Brion's
> >   separate mail for details.
>
> Seems to work great! :-)

Woo-hoo!

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)


from_name: Lightning

subject: [Wikitech-l] CVS

body:
---------  Original message --------
From: Timwi <timwi at gmx.net>
To:  <wikitech-l at wikipedia.org>
Subject: Re: [Wikitech-l] CVS
Date: 07-02-03 10:28

That would be me. my webmail is stupid and didnt send it to the list, my
bad. plus i forgot to configure it to show who I am. But yes, i follow
lj-dev, and fb quite closely and Im constantly impressed by the things you
guys pull off. like memcache, which had me droooling. I just figured since
you help run (probably) one of the biggest mysql/apache clusters/websites in
the internet, with some of the biggest traffic and DB loads you would have a
couple of things to say on the subject. nice to see you here

-Lightning Will

> Somebody sent me an anonymous (no name, no from address) e-mail in
response to a mail I sent to this list. Since I don't know who the
sender is, I guess I'll have to reply through the list. Please let me
know if this is not the correct way of doing it.

I'd be very grateful if the sender of the mail showed themselves.

> are you timwi from LJ by any chance?

Yes.

> cause if you are, im thinking you might have some ideas to try to
> reduce load to our servers and optimize this whole sheebang.

Why does it take a Timwi from LJ to do database optimisations? :-)

Anyway - yeah, I was going to have some looks at it later on. I'm
waiting for my first patch to go through first though -- I wouldn't like
to spend time on it if it's not going to be used anyway.

I noticed that pages with a lot of links (like the "List of XYZ
topics"
pages) take a long time to edit. I'm imagining it updates some table for
all those links even if just one of the links was changed, or something.
Is that the case? Perhaps if someone could point me at a particular file
and line where this is happening? Thanks in advance! :)

Greetings,
Timwi

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l at wikipedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

________________________________________________
This mail was sent by UebiMiau 2.5


body:
On Wed, 2 Jul 2003, Erik Moeller wrote:
> Brion-
> > It's also mysteriously in a table and there are no line breaks. :)
>
> I think it looks nicer in a table, but that's easy to change in Skin.php.

The table doesn't do anything a styled div wouldn't do. It's not tabular,
it's a list with a caption. :)

> > I notice that duplicate headings (which is not unlikely to occur with
> > subheadings) are marked with a numbered suffix after the first one. Better
> > than nothing, but this is fragile for linking; if the major sections are
> > rearranged in order, the numbers for the minor sections will change.
>
> So what else do you suggest?

One possibility would be to append the name of the upper header(s) to the
lower header:

== Culture ==
=== Blecchistan ===
=== Miscania ===
== Language
=== Blecchistan ===

...
...
...
...

These would remain consistent if the order of Culture and Language are
changed, or if another named section with a 3-rd level Blecchistan header
is added before or between them.

> We need to find the right balance between making editing easy and making
> reading Wikipedia unobtrusive. Some work on this is being done in the Skin
> department, for example, where we will probably end up with a Skin
> preferred by editors, and one that is more friendly to non-editing users.

Suppose the edit links are small, unobtrusive, and by default are faded
(so seemingly partially transparent on the solid background) until a
mouseover darkens them up to full visibility?

Just thoughts.

> Perhaps a better long term solution is to show users the preferences
> screen when they sign in for the first time.

That's a good idea in any case.

[snip]
> By having the neat "edit this section" feature only for headings, we
> encourage people to create headings for their own editing benefit. They
> will reorganize talk pages to have them to be able to respond quicker in
> the future. We provide no such incentive if we also implement the feature
> for rules.

Hmm...

Debatable, but I'll let it slide for now. :)

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)


subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: [Wikipedia-l] Please help test new features

body:
Moved to wikitech-l as we've gone to the minutiae of implementation rather
than policy. :)

On Wed, 2 Jul 2003, Erik Moeller wrote:
> Tables are predictable and dependable. CSS often isn't. ;-) But it's
> probably safe to use it by now.

If we don't encourage users to use browsers that support CSS, they'll have
no incentive to not drive us fricking crazy with their stupid broken
browsers. :)

A nice named div will allow skins to be flexible with the TOC placement.
In a sidebar, perhaps, whatever...

> > ...
> > ...
[snip]
> But not if the hierarchy is changed, and we would still have to retain the
> numbering feature for H2 dupes. Also, these anchor names could get very
> long, especially for H4 anchors.

Yes, all these are reasons why I don't like generating anchor names from
header text. :) Whatever you do, they remain fragile. Nice explicit
anchors would be better, though of course your fiendish table of contents
needs automatic ones anyway, so oh well. :)

> > and by default are faded
> > (so seemingly partially transparent on the solid background) until a
> > mouseover darkens them up to full visibility?
>
> Hm, can you demonstrate that?

Off the cuff, something like:

[Edit]

.sectionedit {
	float: right;
	color: #ccc; /* light gray text */
	font-size: 0.8em;
}
.sectionedit a:link {
	color: #ccf; /* light blue link text */
}
.sectionedit a:hover {
	color: #00f; /* darker, brighter blue */
}

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)


body:
On Wed, 2 Jul 2003, Erik Moeller wrote:
> Richard-
> > I think it's highly confusing having the edit section link above and to the
> > right of the section it refers to. Below and to the right would be the more
> > natural position
>
> I would like to have it displayed *right-aligned* with the section
> heading, and that's how it looks in Mozilla. The HTML used is
>
>
[edit link]

>
Page title

>
> Could this be improved somehow? Perhaps this is a case where a table
> should be used?

death to tables, noooo!!!! :)

A minor problem here is that in a linear browser (text-only, speech, etc)
or a browser with no CSS / CSS disabled, the 'edit' link will appear
before the header.

A negative top margin on the float should be able to take care of that
and let the float be logically placed after the header...

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)


from_name: Timwi

subject: [Wikitech-l] CVS

body:
Is it just me, or is something majorly wrong with the CVS server today?

Timwi


from_name: Stan Shebs

body:
Erik Moeller wrote:

>The following features are currently tested on
>        http://test.wikipedia.org :
>
>* Automatic table of contents. A TOC-table is added to pages that contain
>more than three headings. This table links to the individual sections
>within the article and hopefully makes navigation easier.
>
The TOC should be just above the first section heading.  Otherwise
the lead paragraph, the one that tells you what the article is
actually about, can be pushed down so far it's completely off the
initial screen, which is bad.  As a reader, I'm only interested
in the TOC when I've read the lead and decided that this article
is the one I'm looking for; at that point my eyes will be at the
end of the lead, and a TOC at that point helps me decide between
reading the whole article or just jumping to a section of special
interest.

It would be cool if sidebar vs main flow was a preference.

Stan


in_reply_to: <BB28B360.B02C%cunctator@kband.com>; from cunctator@kband.com on Wed, Jul 02, 2003 at 04:05:52PM -0400

body:
The Cunctator wrote:
> > We need to find the right balance between making editing easy and making
> > reading Wikipedia unobtrusive. Some work on this is being done in the Skin
> > department, for example, where we will probably end up with a Skin
> > preferred by editors, and one that is more friendly to non-editing users.
>
> This would be a terrible violation of the basic Wiki-nature of Wikipedia.

I'm not sure it's as dramatic as all that.  As long as readers can
jump right in and start editing, there's no un-wiki-ness.  Possibly
the default behavior could be that you're in read mode (which looks
the way it looks now) until you edit, and then some rearrangements are
made to suit the fact that you're editing.

I'm not sure what's right exactly, but I think that thinking in terms
of 'editing skins' and 'reading skins' isn't a terrible violation of
wikiness.


subject: [Wikitech-l] CVS

body:
>>>Hm. You say you are following lj_dev, but you seem to be missing
something. First, I am not running any servers, let alone LiveJournal
ones, apart from my little development installation which I use only for
testing. Hopefully, I'll have a Wikipedia one soon too. Secondly, both
MemCacheD and FotoBilder (and S2 as well) were programmed almost
entirely by Bradfitz and Avva; I and other volunteers were not invited
to participate in the development of it.
.<<<<

whoops, i see your posts so often in lj-dev, and your name so much in
bugzilla, and since you've had a higher ranking in the bazaar than avva, i
kinda assumed you had become part of the core team, and maybe worked for LJ.
my bad.

Anyways.. do you see a possibility of memcacheD ever being useful in the
wikipedia? obviously at this point it can't really be used because we would
need a ton more memory and probably another server, but, would it be
practical for the large ammount of text per article, and large ammount of
constantly changing articles that wikipedia has? from what I assume, given
that there was enough memory available it would do wonders for the article
search, woulnt it?

________________________________________________
This mail was sent by UebiMiau 2.5


subject: [Wikitech-l] CVS

body:
Well, the CVS server was working intermittently (stopped working again now), so I've managed to create a patch for my
bugfix. This is much shorter than the previous, but it's really just a rearrangement of the code. The only differences to
the previous ones are that this input:
  ''''' text ''' text ''
which previously would have output this:
   text  text
now correctly outputs the expected markup:
   text  text

At least I hope so. ;-)

Here is the (new) patch. Please let me know if there's still anything I can ameliorate about it.

Greetings,
Timwi

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

--- OutputPage-orig.php	Wed Jul  2 13:04:02 2003
+++ OutputPage.php	Wed Jul  2 15:11:52 2003
@@ -658,7 +658,7 @@
 		$text = preg_replace( "/(^|\n)-----*/", "\\1
", $text );
 		$text = str_replace ( "
", "
", $text );

-		$text = $this->doQuotes( $text );
+		$text = $this->doQuotes( "", $text, "" );
 		$text = $this->doHeadings( $text );
 		$text = $this->doBlockLevels( $text, $linestart );

@@ -677,11 +677,30 @@
 		return $text;
 	}

-	/* private */ function doQuotes( $text )
+	/* private */ function doQuotes( $pre, $text, $mode )
 	{
-		$text = preg_replace( "/'''(.+)'''/mU", "\$1", $text );
-		$text = preg_replace( "/''(.+)''/mU", "\$1", $text );
-		return $text;
+		if ( preg_match( "/^(.*)''(.*)$/mU", $text, $m ) ) {
+			if ( substr ($m[2], 0, 1) == "'" ) {
+				$m[2] = substr ($m[2], 1);
+				return	$mode == "em"		? $m[1] == "" ? doQuotes ( "", $m[2], "both" ) :
+															doQuotes ( $m[1],
$m[2], "emstrong" ) :
+						$mode == "strong"	? "" . $m[1] . "" . doQuotes ( "", $m[2],
"" ) :
+						$mode == "emstrong" ? doQuotes ( "", $pre . "" . $m[1] . "" .
$m[2], "em" ) :
+						$mode == "strongem" ? "" . $pre . "" . $m[1] . "" .
doQuotes ( "", $m[2], "em" ) :
+						$mode == "both"		? doQuotes ( "", "" . $m[1] . "" .
$m[2], "em" ) :
+											  $m[1] . doQuotes ( "", $m[2], "strong" );
+			} else {
+				return	$mode == "em"		? "" . $m[1] . "" . doQuotes ( $m[2] ) :
+						$mode == "strong"	? $m[1] == "" ? doQuotes ( "", $m[2], "both" ) :
+															doQuotes ( $m[1],
$m[2], "strongem" ) :
+						$mode == "emstrong" ? "" . $pre . "" . $m[1] . "" .
doQuotes ( "", $m[2], "strong" ) :
+						$mode == "strongem" ? doQuotes ( "", $pre . "" . $m[1] . "" . $m[2],
"strong" ) :
+						$mode == "both"		? doQuotes ( "", "" . $m[1] . "" . $m[2],
"strong" ) :
+											  $m[1] . doQuotes ( "", $m[2], "em" );
+			}
+		} else {
+			return $pre . ($mode == "" ? "" : $mode == "em" ? "''" : $mode == "strong" ? "'''" : "'''''") .
$text;
+		}
 	}

 	/* private */ function doHeadings( $text )


from_name: Daniel Mayer

body:
Stan wrote:
>The TOC should be just above the
>first section heading.  Otherwise
>the lead paragraph, the one that
>tells you what the article is
>actually about, can be pushed
>down so far it's completely off
>the initial screen, which is bad.

I agree completely. Take a look at how ugly and
unusable this is: http://test.wikipedia.org/wiki/Be .

>As a reader, I'm only interested
>in the TOC when I've read the lead
>and decided that this article is
>the one I'm looking for; at that
>point my eyes will be at the end
>of the lead, and a TOC at that
>point helps me decide between
>reading the whole article or just
>jumping to a section of special
>interest.

Yep.

>It would be cool if sidebar vs
>main flow was a preference.

It would be really cool if the TOC were placed
entirely in the sidebar or at the very least after the
intro section (either way we would have to encourage
short headings or the result will be over-widened
pages on low res screens).

-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com