subject: [Wikipedia-l] My apologies

body:
The status quo is, in fact a compromise. It is a compromise because
the Romanian and Moldovan Wikipedias are both open.

And as Sabine said, vivi e lascia vivere -- why do you worry so much about it?

Mark

On 04/07/06, Liviu Andronic <landronimirc at gmail.com> wrote:
> No, Mark. The status quo is what you want. Not a compromise.
>
> Deleting/closing the Moldovan Wikipedia is - generally speaking - what we
> want.
>
> Moving the existing contents from mo.wikipedia.org to a certain
> mo-cyr.wikipedia.org would be a compromise. And, once again,
>  this compromise doesn't destroy anyone's work. Just as Sabine said: "Vivi e
> lascia vivere".
>
> On 7/4/06, Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Please see the messages from Sabine Cretella.
> >
> > The status quo is the compromise.
> >
> > If you care about Wikipedia, it makes sense to take care of your own
> > instead of trying to destroy what others have built, which is exactly
> > what you are doing here. There is no reason for this to continue.
> >
> > Mark
> >
> > On 03/07/06, TSO1D From Wikpedia <tso1d at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > Of course, a conflict requires at least to sides, and only leaving one
> > side standing would end the dispute. However, I don't believe that this is
> > likely to happen in this case. By the same token one could make the argument
> > that if you would disappear (as you are virtually the only active
> > contributor on mo) then viable opposition to the closure of the project
> > would cease and the admnistration would have to acquiesece. Nevertheless, at
> > this point, the unwillingness of some administrators to act on a resolution
> > reached almost by concensus (with few dissents), practically constitutes
> > endorsement of the current status quo, thus autmatically negating the
> > partiality claimed by them.
> > >
> > >   I agree with you, though, that simply closing the encyclopedia might
> > not bring about a complete end to the dispute, though you ability to reopen
> > the debate and subjequently the wiki will be greatly reduced unless you were
> > to produce a native speaker intersted in pursuing the project. For this
> > reason, I find it best if all sides could agree on one solution and
> > compromise if need be. For example would you agree to set up a
> > transliteration tool that would convert articles from RO to Cyrillic and
> > have that available at ro-cyr or mo-cyr (assuming the tool could be
> > perfected to funciton adequately)?
> > >
> > > Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >   The conflict will end if you stop making it such an issue.
> > >
> > > Without you and your friends, there simply is no conflict.
> > >
> > > Enforcement is not all that is lacking. There are many issues here.
> > >
> > > Currently, the position of those in charge seems to be to try to seal
> > > the situation off from the outside and let both sides duke it out.
> > >
> > > And who's to say the conflict would end if the Wikipedia were closed?
> > > I know that I would hold polls for it to be reopened, try to put the
> > > content elsewhere, etc.
> > >
> > > Until Bogdan and Jacky made an issue of this, it was dormant, nobody
> > > paid attention to mo.wiki except those who actually care about it.
> > >
> > > Mark
> > >
> > > On 03/07/06, TSO1D From Wikpedia wrote:
> > > > In my view this is discussion cannot be viewed as separate from the
> > past ones on the topic, but rather the continuation (and hopefully the
> > culmination) of the issue. If such a resolution has already been made, then
> > what is the purpose of continuing this discussion and wasting even more
> > time. The only thing lacking is enforcement, and why souldn't that be
> > carried out in accordance with the general conclusion of the debate, whether
> > in the past or the present.
> > > >
> > > > I understand how some users might feel frustrated with the
> > continuation of the discussion and the war of words, however by not acting
> > the conflict will not end, and I believe you are actually giving tacit
> > approval to the project in its current state. I am sorry if others spent a
> > great deal of time looking at the dispute and now may feel irritated, but
> > others also were involved in this debate, to an even higher degree, and
> > simply stating that all this work was in waste as you do not intend to act
> > in any way seems a grave neglect of your duties and even a lack of respect
> > for those who have invested their time to try to find a solution to the
> > problem and find the best way to resolve it.
> > > >
> > > > Mark Williamson wrote:
> > > > Is this relevant to the *current* discussion?
> > > >
> > > > Everybody already knew about that. It was clear that that decision was
> > made.
> > > >
> > > > However, it was never enforced, and since then, you have taken against
> > > > yourselves by turning the heat up where it was absolutely not
> > > > necessary and making everyone stop caring.
> > > >
> > > > Mark
> > > >
> > > > On 03/07/06, Jacky PB wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hello,
> > > > >
> > > > > I would like to apologize to all of you for my
> > > > > interventions here. I just missed an e-mail of anthere
> > > > > more than 6 months old.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/2006-March/043897.html
> >
> > > > >
> > > > > My only excuse is that it happened on another thread
> > > > > than the one I followed.
> > > > >
> > > > > Yours,
> > > > > :en:Dpotop, :ro:Dpotop
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > __________________________________________________
> > > > > Do You Yahoo!?
> > > > > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> > > > > http://mail.yahoo.com
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > > > > Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > > > > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Refije dirije lanm? yo paske nou posede pw?p bato.
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > > > Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > > > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> > > >
> > > > __________________________________________________
> > > > Do You Yahoo!?
> > > > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> > > > http://mail.yahoo.com
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > > > Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > > > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Refije dirije lanm? yo paske nou posede pw?p bato.
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > > Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------
> > > Do you Yahoo!?
> > >  Get on board. You're invited to try the new Yahoo! Mail Beta.
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > > Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Refije dirije lanm? yo paske nou posede pw?p bato.
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Liviu
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>

--
Refije dirije lanm? yo paske nou posede pw?p bato.


list: wikipedia-l

source: pipermail-mbox

from_name: Mark Williamson

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Where are the decision makers?

body:
Is that a threat?

Why should anyone "give a damn" now? What reason is there for people
to not just ignore it and work on the Romanian Wikipedia? Really,
there is no good reason. Any good Wikipedian should focus on fixing
articles, writing new articles, etc., instead of fussing about
something like this.

I just want to write articles, but you and your friends insist on interrupting.

Mark

On 04/07/06, Liviu Andronic <landronimirc at gmail.com> wrote:
> Everyone will start ignoring it, as soon as the Moldovan Wikipedia gets out
> of the mo.wikipedia.org domain. No one would give a damn about it.
>
> On 7/4/06, Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com > wrote:
> >
> > Would it really make everyone happy?
> >
> > No.
> >
> > There would still be people whinging endlessly that it should be
> > closed and/or deleted.
> >
> > Mark
> >
> > On 03/07/06, Liviu Andronic < landronimirc at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > I agree that simple ignoring of this project would make it disappear in
> > a
> > > one-two year time.
> > >
> > > What the you do not get is that there is one simple solution: move mo to
> >
> > > mo-cyr. And everyone gets happy.
> > >
> > > Is this so difficult?
> > >
> > > On 7/2/06, Gerard Meijssen < gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hoi,
> > > > You do not get it.
> > > >
> > > > It is an annoyance. One of the points made is that the Moldovan
> > > > wikipedia is just trolling. Consider what makes a troll thrive;
> > > > attention. The more attention that you give it, ANY attention the more
> > > > it will get entrenched. There is this saying: "I do not care what they
> > > > say about me as long as they write my name correctly", all this
> > > > attention makes the mo.wikipedia "relevant". If it is not relevant,
> > > > refrain from giving it attention and at some time it will just
> > > > evaporate. If it does not, it cannot be considered trolling and you
> > are
> > > > plain wrong.
> > > >
> > > > The best thing for you to do: shut up. Ignore this project. Everybody
> > > > will be happier and maybe you will be proven to be right.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > >     GerardM
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Liviu Andronic wrote:
> > > > > I would have to object to the position taken by people who can make
> > a
> > > > > difference.
> > > > >
> > > > > IMHO, all this Moldovan issue annoys you as much as it does me. I do
> > not
> > > > > want to dispute on this, as much as you do not want to read all this
> > > > junk.
> > > > >
> > > > > I am wondering if the Moldovan Wikipedia is such unimportant an
> > issue. I
> > > >
> > > > > agree that it is a rarely used Wikipedia. And still, for an
> > unimportant
> > > > > Wikipedia, it does create a lot of headache to the entire community.
> > If
> > > > this
> > > > > issue flames every three months on this mailing list and on all
> > possible
> > > >
> > > > > Talk pages and triggers revert-wars on related English and Moldovan
> > > > > Wikipedia articles, then I believe that there is obviously a
> > problem.
> > > > >
> > > > > Not that this entire dispute be fair or ethical - it is a dirty war
> > that
> > > > I
> > > > > personally detest -, but is it an ethically correct position for
> > those
> > > > who
> > > > > can make a difference to just ignore?
> > > > >
> > > > > Is it so unimportant that a whole Wikipedia section could create
> > > > confusion
> > > > > and desinformation? Isn't Wikipedia supposed to provide a "free
> > > > encyclopedia
> > > > > of the highest possible quality"?
> > > > >
> > > > > Personally for me, it is strange how people with the ability to take
> > and
> > > >
> > > > > implement a decision, simply choose to ignore. All possible and
> > > > impossible
> > > > > arguments were already presented here, on the mailing list, and all
> > over
> > > > > the English and Moldovan Wikipedia, and on Metawiki. What rests to
> > do is
> > > > use
> > > > > common sense to decide on this issue.
> > > > >
> > > > > It is even stranger for me the way a decision already taken by
> > stewards
> > > > and
> > > > > bureaucrats was simply ignored and not implemented.
> > > > >
> > > > > But, then, it is up to the decision-makers to decide the stance to
> > > > adopt. I
> > > > > still hope that they will choose as soon as possible to stop
> > > > deliberately
> > > > > ignoring this issue. The problem is that this issue will not cease
> > > > > re-appearing on this mailing-list. My reason for this is that an
> > entire
> > > > > country and population (this makes an approximate 3.5 million
> > persons)
> > > > are
> > > > > incorrectly represented on Wikipedia. And one of these, or me - if
> > no
> > > > one
> > > > > else does it -, will certainly re-open this discussion in a
> > two-three
> > > > months
> > > > > time.
> > > > >
> > > > > If you managed to read till this point, thank you.
> > > > >
> > > > > Liviu
> > > > >
> > > > > On 6/30/06, Brion Vibber < brion at pobox.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> Jacky PB wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >>> Where are the decision makers? Isn't there nobody
> > > > >>>
> > > > >> No one else is interested in this issue, and getting involved would
> > > > mean
> > > > >> wasting
> > > > >> a lot of time with people fighting a lot over something
> > unimportant.
> > > > The
> > > > >> safest
> > > > >> course is thus to leave a rarely-used wiki sitting there, same as
> > we do
> > > > >> with
> > > > >> dozens of other rarely-used wikis and nobody minds.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> -- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> _______________________________________________
> > > > >> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > > > >> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > > > >> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > > > Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > > > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Liviu
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > > Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Refije dirije lanm? yo paske nou posede pw?p bato.
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Liviu
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>

--
Refije dirije lanm? yo paske nou posede pw?p bato.


list: wikien-l

from_name: Erik Moeller

subject: [WikiEN-l] Viral swarming teenage vanity spam

body:
On 7/4/06, stevertigo <vertigosteve at yahoo.com> wrote:
> This is over the top just for sheer lack of substance,
> and the fact that it passed an AFD with some help from
> a apparently clueness newbie contingent, unencumbered
> by any corrective measures for fostering founding
> philosophy.

Even if you subtract the newbies, it's fairly obvious that there is no
consensus to delete. I think the page should be kept for now, but this
is a special case of WP:MEME where the meme is still very young and
it's hard to determine how ephemeral it will be.

There's nothing wrong with doing another AfD two or three months from
now. In the case of [[Brian Peppers]], Jimmy tried an article creation
moratorium as an alternative approach. Peppers, however, is another
special case where human dignity is concerned. I see no harm in
keeping a verifiable, limited page about [[Eon8]] for the time being.
I am very wary of viral marketing crap, but this seems to be a
harmless experiment without a clear commercial motive.

If someone is looking for a nice wiki idea to launch, I suspect a
"MemeWatch" wiki that explicitly allows original research would do
rather well, and we could point many of the forum people who keep
coming up in cases like that in this direction.

Applying our existing policies seems more important to me than keeping
the encyclopedia free of "trivial" content. With 1.2 million articles,
including a page dedicated to anthropomorphized operating systems
([[List of OS-tans]]) and an entire category of lists of fictional
animals, that strikes me as a rather quixotic enterprise.

Erik


list: foundation-l

subject: [Foundation-l] Offering Wikibooks content for sale

body:
Quick comments:

1) Both http://www.lulu.com/content/346504 and the PDF attribute the
content to "Wikimedia Foundation Inc. & Contributing authors". Which
of the content is actually claimed to be copyrighted by the WMF?
Normally all content is under the GFDL; there is no transfer of
copyright to the WMF during the editing process. If content by the WMF
is used (the logos come to mind), explicit permission is necessary,
but I did not see any such content. I suspect the user simply
misunderstood how copyright on Wikimedia projects works, in which case
the WMF should be removed from the authorship credit.

2) The problem with a proliferation of unofficial links is that the
user who has control over the print on demand account also controls
the markup, and can change it any time. For this reason, an official
solution should be sought as quickly as possible. As James has noted,
the problem parallels strongly our existing CafePress shop at:

http://www.cafepress.com/wikipedia

In fact, CafePress also offers print on demand services. The shop is
controlled by the Foundation. It would seem best to me to authorize
trusted users to manage  print on demand services on behalf of the
Foundation, and to make sure that all proceeds (if any) go directly to
the organization. Perhaps the small SP subcommittee on static content

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special_projects_subcommittees/Static_content

could be expanded to deal with this problem, at least until a better
organizational model that involves the projects and languages directly
is found.

Erik


list: wikimedia-l


list: wikitech-l

from_name: Mei Wu

subject: [Wikitech-l] Microsoft Exchange Server and Mediawiki

body:
Right now, the internal Microsoft smtp server, which is included in
the IIS 5, is running. Because the Wiki is running on the same
computer as the smtp server does, I am little bit confused what the
problem might be. I configured the smtp server to allow relay with no
authentication, but it didn't work.
Are there any specific configurations I have to make to get the smtp
server to send out emails in a LAN ?

Thanks for your help.

Mei

On 7/4/06, Steve Bennett <stevage at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 7/4/06, Mei Wu <mwu.mailbox at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I am running a local Microsoft IIS 5 smtp server on the Windows XP
> > machine. In the php.ini, I have specified localhost as the smtp
> > server. When I go to the Wiki logon page, type my username and hit the
> > "Email password" button, I get the following error message:
> >
> > Error sending mail: Failed to connect to localhost:25 [SMTP: Failed to
> > connect socket: An established connection was aborted by the software
> > in your host machine. (code: -1, response: )]
> >
> > I don't know what the problem is. When I try to logon to the smtp
> > server using "telnet localhost 25", it does not work ("Connect
> > failed"). Thanks for your help.
>
> Quite simply the problem is your mail server is not behaving itself -
> nothing to do with MediaWiki. I'm a bit confused about what your mail
> server is though - is it smtp, exchange, or IIS? I thought those three
> things were quite separate, but perhaps not?
>
> Steve
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>


from_name: Jacky PB

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Certificare

body:
Salut Ronline,

Nu stiu daca ai urmarit ultima discutie referitoare la
wikipedia moldoveneasca, dar la un moment dat Mark
Williamson mi-a trimis un mesaj injurios.

Acum, vor si altii sa il vada, in cont, ca sa se
asigure ca intr-adevar el l-a trimis. Insa e vorba de
un cont Yahoo, si deci daca dau acces la el si e sters
mesajul nu mai am "dovada". :)

Am deci nevoie de un trustee, un user respectat pe
wikipedia, care sa se uite primul si sa vada mesajul
acolo. Apoi, poate sa se uite cine o vrea.

Ai putea, te rog, sa fii trustee in directia asta?
Daca da, iti trimit parola, te uiti, si eventual faci
o copie a mesajului.

Numai bine,
Jacky (Dpotop)

ps: Cel care vrea sa se uite e Liviu Andronic. Tu stii
cumva cine e?

--- "Wikipedia Romania (Ronline)"
<rowikipedia at gmail.com> wrote:

> >
> > Your Wikipedia may be larger than ours, but ours
> is higher quality.
> > Maybe we should delete the Romanian Wikipedia
> instead? As you can see,
> > it is clearly substandard -- the only Wikipedia of
> its size with less
> > bytes per article is the Swedish Wikipedia. No
> other Wikipedia is as
> > low, until you get down under 7000 articles.
> >
> > Mark
>
>
> I'm not particularly getting involved in this whole
> Moldovan argument again,
> but I think your point above is highly misleading.
> The Moldovan Wikipedia is
> not in any way of higher quality than the Romanian
> Wikipedia, because byte
> size doesn't reflect this, for two reasons:
>
> 1) Nearly all articles on the Moldovan wiki have a
> corresponding Romanian
> article of the same or greater length. This is
> because a significant number
> of them were transliterated from the Romanian
> Wikipedia.
> 2) The grammatical quality of the mo: articles is
> arguably lower. This is
> the more subtle aspect of quality, and also includes
> things like depth of
> coverage and systemic bias.
>
> So, the Romanian Wikipedia is of a higher
> functionality than the mo.wiki,
> and its quality is also higher, because it basically
> contains all of the
> info that mo. contains, plus more.
>
> In any case, the argument for closing the mo:wiki
> was that it is has poor
> quality articles and is a playground for trolling,
> not that it particularly
> has a low article or byte-size count.
>
> On 24/06/06, Jacky PB <dpotop1 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > > ... it should be closed now
> > >
> > > Amen !
> > > (I cut the oppinion of Francis Tyers out of a
> context that hides it).
> > >
> > > > If only it were possible to get a non-involved
> party to look at this
> > for
> > > > 5 minutes and decide one way or the other. It
> would save everyone a
> > hell
> > > > of a lot of time. What we need is a knee jerk
> binding judgement! (of
> > > > course this is said partly in jest, but we
> really aren't going to get
> > > > anywhere by 'discussing' this).
> > >
> > > Well, **you** of all are non-involved. And after
> following this
> > discussion for a **long** time you ended with the
> same conclusion:
> > Regardless of what the Moldovan language is or is
> not, there are no native
> > contributors, and there is one single contributor
> overall (who actually
> > cannot contribute because he is at level mo-2).
> Isn't this enough?
> > >
> > > Dpotop
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------
> > > Want to be your own boss? Learn how on  Yahoo!
> Small Business.
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > > Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > >
>
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Refije dirije lanm? yo paske nou posede pw?p bato.
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> >
>
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
>
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>

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


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Certificare

body:
Jacky, you were told to drop this, remember? Fred Bauder said he
believes you, but that it doesn't matter.

The message was obviously not meant to be sent to the list, but since
it was I shall translate.

> Salut Ronline,
>
> Nu stiu daca ai urmarit ultima discutie referitoare la
> wikipedia moldoveneasca, dar la un moment dat Mark
> Williamson mi-a trimis un mesaj injurios.

Hi Ronline,

I don't know if you've been following the most recent discussion about
the Moldovan Wikipedia, but at one point Mark Williamson sent me an
offensive message.

> Acum, vor si altii sa il vada, in cont, ca sa se
> asigure ca intr-adevar el l-a trimis. Insa e vorba de
> un cont Yahoo, si deci daca dau acces la el si e sters
> mesajul nu mai am "dovada". :)

Now, I want to make sure that others can see what he has sent. I am
using a Yahoo account, and I can give you access to it and delete all
personal messages.

> Am deci nevoie de un trustee, un user respectat pe
> wikipedia, care sa se uite primul si sa vada mesajul
> acolo. Apoi, poate sa se uite cine o vrea.

I need a trustee, a respected Wikipedian, who can see the message there.

> Ai putea, te rog, sa fii trustee in directia asta?
> Daca da, iti trimit parola, te uiti, si eventual faci
> o copie a mesajului.

Can you please be the trustee? If yes, I shall send you the password
and a copy of the message.


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Certificare

body:
This was an obvious mistake, and everybody saw it.
Sorry everybody. The "reply-to" of the list messages
can be tricky sometimes, especially when one is used
to  talking with individual users.

Also, I'm not sure that you, of all, should police
this list. It seems to me that it's you that floods
wikipedia-l since I send my final message on the
subject one day ago.

Finally, YOUR TRANSLATION OF MY MESSAGE IS INCORRECT
AND DECEPTIVE. I did not initiate a process of showing
the message to the others. I have been asked to show
it. By Liviu. That's a huge difference.
Otherwise said, you either do not know Romanian, or
purposefully mistranslated paragraph 2.

For me, this issue is over. Mo.wiki is freezed. So,
Mark, please leave me alone, I have other stuff to do.

:en:Dpotop

--- Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com> wrote:

> Jacky, you were told to drop this, remember? Fred
> Bauder said he
> believes you, but that it doesn't matter.
>
> The message was obviously not meant to be sent to
> the list, but since
> it was I shall translate.
>
> > Salut Ronline,
> >
> > Nu stiu daca ai urmarit ultima discutie
> referitoare la
> > wikipedia moldoveneasca, dar la un moment dat Mark
> > Williamson mi-a trimis un mesaj injurios.
>
> Hi Ronline,
>
> I don't know if you've been following the most
> recent discussion about
> the Moldovan Wikipedia, but at one point Mark
> Williamson sent me an
> offensive message.
>
> > Acum, vor si altii sa il vada, in cont, ca sa se
> > asigure ca intr-adevar el l-a trimis. Insa e vorba
> de
> > un cont Yahoo, si deci daca dau acces la el si e
> sters
> > mesajul nu mai am "dovada". :)
>
> Now, I want to make sure that others can see what he
> has sent. I am
> using a Yahoo account, and I can give you access to
> it and delete all
> personal messages.
>
> > Am deci nevoie de un trustee, un user respectat pe
> > wikipedia, care sa se uite primul si sa vada
> mesajul
> > acolo. Apoi, poate sa se uite cine o vrea.
>
> I need a trustee, a respected Wikipedian, who can
> see the message there.
>
> > Ai putea, te rog, sa fii trustee in directia asta?
> > Daca da, iti trimit parola, te uiti, si eventual
> faci
> > o copie a mesajului.
>
> Can you please be the trustee? If yes, I shall send
> you the password
> and a copy of the message.
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
>
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>

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


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Certificare

body:
The correct translation follows.
Sorry, but half truths are often worse than an
outright lie.

:en:Dpotop

> > > Salut Ronline,
> > >
> > > Nu stiu daca ai urmarit ultima discutie
> > referitoare la
> > > wikipedia moldoveneasca, dar la un moment dat
> Mark
> > > Williamson mi-a trimis un mesaj injurios.

Hello Ronline,

I do not know if you've been following the last
discussion on the Moldovan wikipedia, but at one point
Mark Williamson sent me an offensive message.

> > > Acum, vor si altii sa il vada, in cont, ca sa se
> > > asigure ca intr-adevar el l-a trimis. Insa e
> vorba
> > de
> > > un cont Yahoo, si deci daca dau acces la el si e
> > sters
> > > mesajul nu mai am "dovada". :)

Now, some others want to see the message in the
account, so that they can be sure he sent it. But it's
a Yahoo account, so that if I give access to it and
the message is deleted there is no more "proof". :)

> > > Am deci nevoie de un trustee, un user respectat
> pe
> > > wikipedia, care sa se uite primul si sa vada
> > mesajul
> > > acolo. Apoi, poate sa se uite cine o vrea.

Therefore, I need a trustee, a respected wikipedia
user, to look there first and see the message there.
Then, anybody can take a look.

> > > Ai putea, te rog, sa fii trustee in directia
> asta?
> > > Daca da, iti trimit parola, te uiti, si eventual
> > faci
> > > o copie a mesajului.

Can you, please, be the trustee on this matter? If
yes,
I will send you the password, you take a look, and
possibly make a copy of the message.

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


from_name: James Hare

subject: [Foundation-l] Proposal for Wikipedia in European Portuguese

body:
I'll be right back, I have to now file an audit for every piece of knowledge
in my brain to see if it's not lodged in 1959.

On 7/4/06, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hoi,
> What "we" call Chinese is no longer considered a language..
> http://www.sil.org/iso639-3/documentation.asp?id=zho
> Thanks,
>   GerardM
>
> James Hare wrote:
> > O RLY?
> >
> > I thought they were dialects of Chinese.
> >
> > On 7/4/06, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Hoi,
> >> Cantonese and Mandarin are BOTH languages according to ISO-639-3.
> >> Thanks,
> >>     GerardM
> >>
> >>
> >> James Hare wrote:
> >>
> >>> Yes, dialect forks are just a waste of space, bandwidth and time,
> unless
> >>>
> >> the
> >>
> >>> dialects vary greatly (such as Cantonese and Mandarin).
> >>>
> >>> On 7/3/06, Robert Scott Horning <robert_horning at netzero.net> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> James Hare wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> The only reason why I can see two different Portuguese wikis is
> >>>>>
> >> because
> >>
> >>>> the
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> two (majority) versions -- European Portuguese and Brazillian
> >>>>>
> >> Portuguese
> >>
> >>>> --
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> are very different. Are they?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On 7/2/06, Luiz Augusto <lugusto at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Sorry for my English. Recently, a newbie from Portuguese Wikipedia
> >>>>>>
> >> has
> >>
> >>>>>> proposed on meta a vote to create Wikipedia in european portuguese.
> >>>>>>
> >> He
> >>
> >>>>>> don't
> >>>>>> talked about it with any editor from pt:Wikipedia and that proposal
> >>>>>>
> >> has
> >>
> >>>>>> discovered by me, accidentally. I send a note in Village Pump from
> >>>>>> pt:wikipedia. More than 30 editors has voted against that proposal.
> >>>>>> Unconsoled with this, he was suspended that voting and is imposing
> >>>>>>
> >> to,
> >>
> >>>> in
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>> a
> >>>>>> new vote about it, only europeans speakers can vote on it.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Is all ok to the current rules for request a new language?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>> As a fluent portuguese speaker, I have no idea why a vote of this
> >>>>
> >> nature
> >>
> >>>> must be restricted to only those who come from a certain country or
> >>>> continent.  I am, however, opposed to this idea, as well as the
> earlier
> >>>> Brazilian Portuguese Wikipedia proposal that also failed.  To me this
> >>>> sounds like somebody trying to establish rules that would make his
> pet
> >>>> project work, when there is strong opposition to the idea.  I'll put
> >>>> more of my thoughts on the new language poll page to keep down
> >>>>
> >> bandwidth.
> >>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Robert Scott Horning
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Certificare

body:
Nobody wanted to see the message in the account. You have not been
reading. People clearly do not care. Your translation is deceptive and
incorrect. You do not know Romanian.

Mark

On 04/07/06, Jacky PB <dpotop1 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> This was an obvious mistake, and everybody saw it.
> Sorry everybody. The "reply-to" of the list messages
> can be tricky sometimes, especially when one is used
> to  talking with individual users.
>
> Also, I'm not sure that you, of all, should police
> this list. It seems to me that it's you that floods
> wikipedia-l since I send my final message on the
> subject one day ago.
>
> Finally, YOUR TRANSLATION OF MY MESSAGE IS INCORRECT
> AND DECEPTIVE. I did not initiate a process of showing
> the message to the others. I have been asked to show
> it. By Liviu. That's a huge difference.
> Otherwise said, you either do not know Romanian, or
> purposefully mistranslated paragraph 2.
>
> For me, this issue is over. Mo.wiki is freezed. So,
> Mark, please leave me alone, I have other stuff to do.
>
> :en:Dpotop
>
>
> --- Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Jacky, you were told to drop this, remember? Fred
> > Bauder said he
> > believes you, but that it doesn't matter.
> >
> > The message was obviously not meant to be sent to
> > the list, but since
> > it was I shall translate.
> >
> > > Salut Ronline,
> > >
> > > Nu stiu daca ai urmarit ultima discutie
> > referitoare la
> > > wikipedia moldoveneasca, dar la un moment dat Mark
> > > Williamson mi-a trimis un mesaj injurios.
> >
> > Hi Ronline,
> >
> > I don't know if you've been following the most
> > recent discussion about
> > the Moldovan Wikipedia, but at one point Mark
> > Williamson sent me an
> > offensive message.
> >
> > > Acum, vor si altii sa il vada, in cont, ca sa se
> > > asigure ca intr-adevar el l-a trimis. Insa e vorba
> > de
> > > un cont Yahoo, si deci daca dau acces la el si e
> > sters
> > > mesajul nu mai am "dovada". :)
> >
> > Now, I want to make sure that others can see what he
> > has sent. I am
> > using a Yahoo account, and I can give you access to
> > it and delete all
> > personal messages.
> >
> > > Am deci nevoie de un trustee, un user respectat pe
> > > wikipedia, care sa se uite primul si sa vada
> > mesajul
> > > acolo. Apoi, poate sa se uite cine o vrea.
> >
> > I need a trustee, a respected Wikipedian, who can
> > see the message there.
> >
> > > Ai putea, te rog, sa fii trustee in directia asta?
> > > Daca da, iti trimit parola, te uiti, si eventual
> > faci
> > > o copie a mesajului.
> >
> > Can you please be the trustee? If yes, I shall send
> > you the password
> > and a copy of the message.
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> >
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> >
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>

--
Refije dirije lanm? yo paske nou posede pw?p bato.


body:
It incorrectly represents Moldova? Come on!

Wikipedia uses language as a MEDIUM. If somebody wants to know about
the language, they would go to
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moldovan_language or
http://ca.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moldau or whichever language they speak
article.

They will NOT go to mo.wikipedia.

And you are clearly not in touch with reality. In schools east of the
Dniestr river, which teach Moldovan, the Cyrillic alphabet is taught.
This fact is a fact and you cannot contest it. This is the usual
script.

Now, unless you want to challenge the territorial integrity of
Moldova, it seems reasonable to accept that Moldova is, in fact, a
biscriptal nation.

As Gerard noted, mo-cyr is not acceptable because it violates conventions.

Mark

On 04/07/06, Liviu Andronic <landronimirc at gmail.com> wrote:
> This is what would reasonably happen, Mark. In my opinion, of course.
>
> Currently people "give a damn" because it represents incorreclty Moldova.
> Personally, I cannot stand when my country is represented n'*importe comment
> * on Wikipedia.
>
> We don't use this writing, Mark. Apart from exceptions, nowhere. This
> writing, for all areas of life, is a reality of the past. And do not try to
> discredit my words stating that "he is not in Moldova". I lived my whole
> life in Moldova, which makes, roughly, 20 years. I read news. I return to
> Moldova at least one time per year. I know what happens there. We don't use
> this writing. Other Moldovans that are currently in Moldova could easily
> backup this.
>
> If you want to write articles, I have nothing against it. Moving all you
> have done on mo.wikipedia.org to mo-cyr.wikipedia.org would in no way
> interrupt your work. And your work would cease disturbing people
> concerned.
>
> But enough on this. Let's see the way the current
> vote<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposals_for_closing_projects#Closure_of_Moldovan_Wikipedia>on
> meta ends.
>
> On 7/4/06, Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Is that a threat?
> >
> > Why should anyone "give a damn" now? What reason is there for people
> > to not just ignore it and work on the Romanian Wikipedia? Really,
> > there is no good reason. Any good Wikipedian should focus on fixing
> > articles, writing new articles, etc., instead of fussing about
> > something like this.
> >
> > I just want to write articles, but you and your friends insist on
> > interrupting.
> >
> > Mark
> >
> > On 04/07/06, Liviu Andronic <landronimirc at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Everyone will start ignoring it, as soon as the Moldovan Wikipedia gets
> > out
> > > of the mo.wikipedia.org domain. No one would give a damn about it.
> > >
> > > On 7/4/06, Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Would it really make everyone happy?
> > > >
> > > > No.
> > > >
> > > > There would still be people whinging endlessly that it should be
> > > > closed and/or deleted.
> > > >
> > > > Mark
> > > >
> > > > On 03/07/06, Liviu Andronic < landronimirc at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > I agree that simple ignoring of this project would make it disappear
> > in
> > > > a
> > > > > one-two year time.
> > > > >
> > > > > What the you do not get is that there is one simple solution: move
> > mo to
> > > >
> > > > > mo-cyr. And everyone gets happy.
> > > > >
> > > > > Is this so difficult?
> > > > >
> > > > > On 7/2/06, Gerard Meijssen < gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hoi,
> > > > > > You do not get it.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It is an annoyance. One of the points made is that the Moldovan
> > > > > > wikipedia is just trolling. Consider what makes a troll thrive;
> > > > > > attention. The more attention that you give it, ANY attention the
> > more
> > > > > > it will get entrenched. There is this saying: "I do not care what
> > they
> > > > > > say about me as long as they write my name correctly", all this
> > > > > > attention makes the mo.wikipedia "relevant". If it is not
> > relevant,
> > > > > > refrain from giving it attention and at some time it will just
> > > > > > evaporate. If it does not, it cannot be considered trolling and
> > you
> > > > are
> > > > > > plain wrong.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The best thing for you to do: shut up. Ignore this project.
> > Everybody
> > > > > > will be happier and maybe you will be proven to be right.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > >     GerardM
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Liviu Andronic wrote:
> > > > > > > I would have to object to the position taken by people who can
> > make
> > > > a
> > > > > > > difference.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > IMHO, all this Moldovan issue annoys you as much as it does me.
> > I do
> > > > not
> > > > > > > want to dispute on this, as much as you do not want to read all
> > this
> > > > > > junk.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I am wondering if the Moldovan Wikipedia is such unimportant an
> > > > issue. I
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > agree that it is a rarely used Wikipedia. And still, for an
> > > > unimportant
> > > > > > > Wikipedia, it does create a lot of headache to the entire
> > community.
> > > > If
> > > > > > this
> > > > > > > issue flames every three months on this mailing list and on all
> > > > possible
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Talk pages and triggers revert-wars on related English and
> > Moldovan
> > > > > > > Wikipedia articles, then I believe that there is obviously a
> > > > problem.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Not that this entire dispute be fair or ethical - it is a dirty
> > war
> > > > that
> > > > > > I
> > > > > > > personally detest -, but is it an ethically correct position for
> > > > those
> > > > > > who
> > > > > > > can make a difference to just ignore?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Is it so unimportant that a whole Wikipedia section could create
> > > > > > confusion
> > > > > > > and desinformation? Isn't Wikipedia supposed to provide a "free
> > > > > > encyclopedia
> > > > > > > of the highest possible quality"?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Personally for me, it is strange how people with the ability to
> > take
> > > > and
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > implement a decision, simply choose to ignore. All possible and
> > > > > > impossible
> > > > > > > arguments were already presented here, on the mailing list, and
> > all
> > > > over
> > > > > > > the English and Moldovan Wikipedia, and on Metawiki. What rests
> > to
> > > > do is
> > > > > > use
> > > > > > > common sense to decide on this issue.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It is even stranger for me the way a decision already taken by
> > > > stewards
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > > bureaucrats was simply ignored and not implemented.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > But, then, it is up to the decision-makers to decide the stance
> > to
> > > > > > adopt. I
> > > > > > > still hope that they will choose as soon as possible to stop
> > > > > > deliberately
> > > > > > > ignoring this issue. The problem is that this issue will not
> > cease
> > > > > > > re-appearing on this mailing-list. My reason for this is that an
> > > > entire
> > > > > > > country and population (this makes an approximate 3.5 million
> > > > persons)
> > > > > > are
> > > > > > > incorrectly represented on Wikipedia. And one of these, or me -
> > if
> > > > no
> > > > > > one
> > > > > > > else does it -, will certainly re-open this discussion in a
> > > > two-three
> > > > > > months
> > > > > > > time.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > If you managed to read till this point, thank you.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Liviu
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 6/30/06, Brion Vibber < brion at pobox.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> Jacky PB wrote:
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>> Where are the decision makers? Isn't there nobody
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >> No one else is interested in this issue, and getting involved
> > would
> > > > > > mean
> > > > > > >> wasting
> > > > > > >> a lot of time with people fighting a lot over something
> > > > unimportant.
> > > > > > The
> > > > > > >> safest
> > > > > > >> course is thus to leave a rarely-used wiki sitting there, same
> > as
> > > > we do
> > > > > > >> with
> > > > > > >> dozens of other rarely-used wikis and nobody minds.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> -- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> _______________________________________________
> > > > > > >> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > > > > > >> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > > > > > >> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > > > > > Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > > > > > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Liviu
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > > > > Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > > > > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Refije dirije lanm? yo paske nou posede pw?p bato.
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > > > Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > > > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Liviu
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > > Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Refije dirije lanm? yo paske nou posede pw?p bato.
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Liviu
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>

--
Refije dirije lanm? yo paske nou posede pw?p bato.


from_name: ScottL

body:
   From the BBC article posted way way back on this thread it appears
that the schools for ethnically Moldavian children in Transdniester
actually use the Latin script if they can, and some times they do it
when they are officially being persecuted.  At least that is what the
article said.  As far as I can tell the (non-moldavian speaking) people
in power are trying (unsuccessfully) to impose this script.  Now it
probably is likely older people in the region still use it and its
probably in public use but I am not sure you can say that its in many
schools. At least not to a point where students are learning it to the
exclusion of the Latin based script.

SKL

Mark Williamson wrote:
> It incorrectly represents Moldova? Come on!
>
> Wikipedia uses language as a MEDIUM. If somebody wants to know about
> the language, they would go to
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moldovan_language or
> http://ca.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moldau or whichever language they speak
> article.
>
> They will NOT go to mo.wikipedia.
>
> And you are clearly not in touch with reality. In schools east of the
> Dniestr river, which teach Moldovan, the Cyrillic alphabet is taught.
> This fact is a fact and you cannot contest it. This is the usual
> script.
>
> Now, unless you want to challenge the territorial integrity of
> Moldova, it seems reasonable to accept that Moldova is, in fact, a
> biscriptal nation.
>
> As Gerard noted, mo-cyr is not acceptable because it violates conventions.
>
> Mark
>
> On 04/07/06, Liviu Andronic <landronimirc at gmail.com> wrote:
>> This is what would reasonably happen, Mark. In my opinion, of course.
>>
>> Currently people "give a damn" because it represents incorreclty Moldova.
>> Personally, I cannot stand when my country is represented n'*importe comment
>> * on Wikipedia.
>>
>> We don't use this writing, Mark. Apart from exceptions, nowhere. This
>> writing, for all areas of life, is a reality of the past. And do not try to
>> discredit my words stating that "he is not in Moldova". I lived my whole
>> life in Moldova, which makes, roughly, 20 years. I read news. I return to
>> Moldova at least one time per year. I know what happens there. We don't use
>> this writing. Other Moldovans that are currently in Moldova could easily
>> backup this.
>>
>> If you want to write articles, I have nothing against it. Moving all you
>> have done on mo.wikipedia.org to mo-cyr.wikipedia.org would in no way
>> interrupt your work. And your work would cease disturbing people
>> concerned.
>>
>> But enough on this. Let's see the way the current
>> vote<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposals_for_closing_projects#Closure_of_Moldovan_Wikipedia>on
>> meta ends.
>>
>> On 7/4/06, Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Is that a threat?
>>>
>>> Why should anyone "give a damn" now? What reason is there for people
>>> to not just ignore it and work on the Romanian Wikipedia? Really,
>>> there is no good reason. Any good Wikipedian should focus on fixing
>>> articles, writing new articles, etc., instead of fussing about
>>> something like this.
>>>
>>> I just want to write articles, but you and your friends insist on
>>> interrupting.
>>>
>>> Mark
>>>
>>> On 04/07/06, Liviu Andronic <landronimirc at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Everyone will start ignoring it, as soon as the Moldovan Wikipedia gets
>>> out
>>>> of the mo.wikipedia.org domain. No one would give a damn about it.
>>>>
>>>> On 7/4/06, Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com > wrote:
>>>>> Would it really make everyone happy?
>>>>>
>>>>> No.
>>>>>
>>>>> There would still be people whinging endlessly that it should be
>>>>> closed and/or deleted.
>>>>>
>>>>> Mark
>>>>>
>>>>> On 03/07/06, Liviu Andronic < landronimirc at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> I agree that simple ignoring of this project would make it disappear
>>> in
>>>>> a
>>>>>> one-two year time.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What the you do not get is that there is one simple solution: move
>>> mo to
>>>>>> mo-cyr. And everyone gets happy.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is this so difficult?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 7/2/06, Gerard Meijssen < gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Hoi,
>>>>>>> You do not get it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It is an annoyance. One of the points made is that the Moldovan
>>>>>>> wikipedia is just trolling. Consider what makes a troll thrive;
>>>>>>> attention. The more attention that you give it, ANY attention the
>>> more
>>>>>>> it will get entrenched. There is this saying: "I do not care what
>>> they
>>>>>>> say about me as long as they write my name correctly", all this
>>>>>>> attention makes the mo.wikipedia "relevant". If it is not
>>> relevant,
>>>>>>> refrain from giving it attention and at some time it will just
>>>>>>> evaporate. If it does not, it cannot be considered trolling and
>>> you
>>>>> are
>>>>>>> plain wrong.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The best thing for you to do: shut up. Ignore this project.
>>> Everybody
>>>>>>> will be happier and maybe you will be proven to be right.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>     GerardM
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Liviu Andronic wrote:
>>>>>>>> I would have to object to the position taken by people who can
>>> make
>>>>> a
>>>>>>>> difference.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> IMHO, all this Moldovan issue annoys you as much as it does me.
>>> I do
>>>>> not
>>>>>>>> want to dispute on this, as much as you do not want to read all
>>> this
>>>>>>> junk.
>>>>>>>> I am wondering if the Moldovan Wikipedia is such unimportant an
>>>>> issue. I
>>>>>>>> agree that it is a rarely used Wikipedia. And still, for an
>>>>> unimportant
>>>>>>>> Wikipedia, it does create a lot of headache to the entire
>>> community.
>>>>> If
>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>> issue flames every three months on this mailing list and on all
>>>>> possible
>>>>>>>> Talk pages and triggers revert-wars on related English and
>>> Moldovan
>>>>>>>> Wikipedia articles, then I believe that there is obviously a
>>>>> problem.
>>>>>>>> Not that this entire dispute be fair or ethical - it is a dirty
>>> war
>>>>> that
>>>>>>> I
>>>>>>>> personally detest -, but is it an ethically correct position for
>>>>> those
>>>>>>> who
>>>>>>>> can make a difference to just ignore?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Is it so unimportant that a whole Wikipedia section could create
>>>>>>> confusion
>>>>>>>> and desinformation? Isn't Wikipedia supposed to provide a "free
>>>>>>> encyclopedia
>>>>>>>> of the highest possible quality"?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Personally for me, it is strange how people with the ability to
>>> take
>>>>> and
>>>>>>>> implement a decision, simply choose to ignore. All possible and
>>>>>>> impossible
>>>>>>>> arguments were already presented here, on the mailing list, and
>>> all
>>>>> over
>>>>>>>> the English and Moldovan Wikipedia, and on Metawiki. What rests
>>> to
>>>>> do is
>>>>>>> use
>>>>>>>> common sense to decide on this issue.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It is even stranger for me the way a decision already taken by
>>>>> stewards
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>> bureaucrats was simply ignored and not implemented.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> But, then, it is up to the decision-makers to decide the stance
>>> to
>>>>>>> adopt. I
>>>>>>>> still hope that they will choose as soon as possible to stop
>>>>>>> deliberately
>>>>>>>> ignoring this issue. The problem is that this issue will not
>>> cease
>>>>>>>> re-appearing on this mailing-list. My reason for this is that an
>>>>> entire
>>>>>>>> country and population (this makes an approximate 3.5 million
>>>>> persons)
>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>> incorrectly represented on Wikipedia. And one of these, or me -
>>> if
>>>>> no
>>>>>>> one
>>>>>>>> else does it -, will certainly re-open this discussion in a
>>>>> two-three
>>>>>>> months
>>>>>>>> time.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If you managed to read till this point, thank you.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Liviu
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 6/30/06, Brion Vibber < brion at pobox.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Jacky PB wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Where are the decision makers? Isn't there nobody
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> No one else is interested in this issue, and getting involved
>>> would
>>>>>>> mean
>>>>>>>>> wasting
>>>>>>>>> a lot of time with people fighting a lot over something
>>>>> unimportant.
>>>>>>> The
>>>>>>>>> safest
>>>>>>>>> course is thus to leave a rarely-used wiki sitting there, same
>>> as
>>>>> we do
>>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>> dozens of other rarely-used wikis and nobody minds.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> -- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> Wikipedia-l mailing list
>>>>>>>>> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
>>>>>>>>> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Wikipedia-l mailing list
>>>>>>> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
>>>>>>> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Liviu
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Wikipedia-l mailing list
>>>>>> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
>>>>>> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Refije dirije lanm? yo paske nou posede pw?p bato.
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Wikipedia-l mailing list
>>>>> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
>>>>> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Liviu
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Wikipedia-l mailing list
>>>> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
>>>> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Refije dirije lanm? yo paske nou posede pw?p bato.
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Wikipedia-l mailing list
>>> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
>>> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Liviu
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikipedia-l mailing list
>> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
>> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>>
>
>


list: textbook-l

subject: [Textbook-l] [Foundation-l] Offering Wikibooks content for sale

body:
On 7/4/06, Jimmy Wales <jwales at wikia.com> wrote:
> However, in the short term, since this came as a complete surprise
> without any information given to the broader community, I have removed
> the link from wikibooks, and also asked lulu to pull the book
> immediately (but perhaps temporarily).

Also, from Danny:
> Furthermore, the content was developed as a result of a grant made to the
> Foundation with the stated goal of creating *free* content. After considerable
> discussions with them, we have made it clear that we intend to keep the books
> online and not take them to print.

Let's just be absolutely clear here that the content is under the
GFDL, and anyone can use it commercially or in other ways if they
follow the terms of the license. The only issues here are
a) whether it is wise for the Wikimedia Foundation to do it at this
point in time
b) that the Wikimedia Foundation name was used inappropriately
c) to what extent such uses should be documented on the Wikimedia projects.

Right?

Erik


from_name: Ulisse Savi

subject:
[Wikitech-l] ERROR 1153 (08S01) at line 4566: Got a packet bigger
	than 'max_allowed_packet' bytes

body:
I' have a new error restoring the wikimedia dump, with  mwdumper.

java -jar mwdumper.jar --format=sql:1.5 enwiki-latest-pages-articles.xml.bz2 | mysql -u wikimediaus -p wikimedia

ERROR 1153 (08S01) at line 4566: Got a packet bigger than 'max_allowed_packet' bytes

An idea ?
WHAT IS THIS ERROR ?
ERROR 1153 (08S01) at line 4566: Got a packet bigger than 'max_allowed_packet' bytes

[root at air873 ~]# java -jar mwdumper.jar --format=sql:1.5 enwiki-latest-pages-articles.xml.bz2 | mysql -u wikimediaus -p wikimedia
...........
-----------
430,000 pages (37.301/sec), 430,000 revs (37.301/sec)
431,000 pages (37.299/sec), 431,000 revs (37.299/sec)
432,000 pages (37.306/sec), 432,000 revs (37.306/sec)
433,000 pages (37.285/sec), 433,000 revs (37.285/sec)

ERROR 1153 (08S01) at line 4566: Got a packet bigger than 'max_allowed_packet' bytes

434,000 pages (37.311/sec), 434,000 revs (37.311/sec)
435,000 pages (37.344/sec), 435,000 revs (37.344/sec)
436,000 pages (37.375/sec), 436,000 revs (37.375/sec)


from_name: Jens Frank

subject:
[Wikitech-l] ERROR 1153 (08S01) at line 4566: Got a packet
	bigger than 'max_allowed_packet' bytes

body:
On Tue, Jul 04, 2006 at 06:45:17AM +0200, Ulisse Savi wrote:
> I' have a new error restoring the wikimedia dump, with  mwdumper.
>
> java -jar mwdumper.jar --format=sql:1.5 enwiki-latest-pages-articles.xml.bz2 | mysql -u wikimediaus -p wikimedia
>
> ERROR 1153 (08S01) at line 4566: Got a packet bigger than 'max_allowed_packet' bytes

http://www.google.com/search?q=Got+a+packet+bigger+than+%27max_allowed_packet%27+bytes&start=0&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official

Regards,

	jeluf


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Apropos:moldovia

body:
I fully subscribe to the analysis of Berto. And I mean
*fully*.

And given this analysis, the question you should ask
yourselves is: Are there *any* Moldovans interested in
this cyrillic script here on wikipedia?

If not, this non-partisan analysis tells us that
mo.wikipedia is just another political tool in a dirty
war.

:en:Dpotop

--- Berto <albertoserra at ukr.net> wrote:

> Now... I live in Kiev, I am NOT ethnically russian,
> slavian or whatever, and
> I could not care less for anyone's national
> feelings. Actually I suppose the
> NPOV policy should simply BAN anyone even just
> mentioning them as a decision
> criteria. If politics are allowed to be a decision
> criteria, then you can
> expect a LOT of such quarrels coming up. We all have
> political opinions, and
> I cannot think of any country in in this planet that
> has never had pretty
> good reasons for them to feel offended by (at the
> very least) some of their
> neighbouring peoples, religions, cultures, scripts,
> miniskirts,
> trolleybuses, etc. Do you want to open this
> pandora's box? Go on. Only pls
> rename this list into Wikipedia-h (H is for
> hooligans), because that's what
> it's going to be.
>
> So... living here I meet a number of moldavian (not
> transdnistrian)
> residents on the net. Bear in mind, I say
> *residents* because I simply do
> not give a damn about their blood, religion, DNA,
> etc. And I believe that
> nobody should. This people speak BOTH russian and
> moldavian. Since my use of
> rumenian languages is limited (I speak IT-4, which
> is enough to read most
> RO, but definitely not enough to write even just at
> RO-1), I usually use my
> RU-3 with them. And it works perfectly. Now, RU-3
> happens to be written in
> cyrillic and so are most of their answers, too (just
> a small number of them
> using a latin transliteration). Which in turn means
> that they either use a
> russian interface or type by some sort of charmap.
>
> I read enough *weird* reports about Ukraine at the
> time of the "orange
> revolution" to know how western journalists that
> come here should be valued.
> It really depends on which side of the conflict buys
> them sex partners, wine
> etc. In the most honest cases they sincerely believe
> to what their
> translators tell them, but simply do not have any
> way for them to check
> anything of what they are told. Such western reports
> have supported all
> possible conflicting sides in regional hot spots in
> the recent past, mostly
> because of this. So I'm really asking myself whether
> the press should be
> used as a source, when contemporary politics are
> even remotely a part of the
> issue. Reality is usually much wider and more
> complex than the canonic 8.000
> symbols a redactor is giving to his journalists for
> them to describe an
> event.
>
> I  don't mean to offend BBC's reputation, actually
> they are one of my
> favourite and most reliable news sources. I simply
> wonder whether the news
> *as such* can be used to make a decision at all, no
> matter what the source.
> After some 6 years in eastern Europe I came to
> understand that most of what
> we think of it is simply absurd. It is actually
> impossible to judge a
> foreign culture unless you dont' spend *many* years
> in it.
>
> From all practical POVs, moldavians of all kinds do
> know cyrillic scripting.
> This is because of the trade they have with Ukraine
> and Russia, that are
> ONLY using cyrillic script(s). The situation will
> only get to a further
> integration into using cyrillic once Rumenia steps
> in the EU and more strict
> border checking between Rumenia and Moldavia will be
> in place. Many
> moldavian products already bear mixed latin/cyrillic
> labels for them to be
> easily exported here (wine, mainly). The most world
> wide known moldavian
> band (Zdub si zdob, I believe BTW, they are GREAT)
> made a fortune by singing
> (also) russian songs and maintains an internet site
> in both russian and
> moldavian. So it's simply absurd to claim that one
> of the two scripts (no
> matter which one) could be unknown to the locals,
> who definitely have much
> more urgent life problems than writing a wiki, but
> undoubtedly do trade and
> listen to the radio.
>
> Choosing a script or another is mainly a thing at
> official level, a thing
> dealing with politics only. In reality, people will
> simply use them both, no
> matter what the local war games end up in deciding,
> because BOTH are needed
> in practical and economical life, and even the most
> radical guys need money
> to make a living. Same applies to the (many)
> rumenian minorities in Ukraine.
> From a practical POV having a latin script is nice
> for bringing people
> closer to the undisputable source of the rumenian
> culture, that is Rumenia.
> But on the other hand there are many minorities in
> Ukraine that never really
> had a formal instruction in the latin script (and
> probably never will), but
> still speak some rumenian dialect. And the only
> script they can manage is
> ukrainian and russian cyrillic.
>
> My fivepence worth, because I got to understand that
> most people in here
> simply does not know what the issue is about. And as
> long as we deal with
> facts and information on cold NPOV basis I am happy
> to help. IMHO the sooner
> we manage to detach geopolitics from languages, and
> get to speak about
> content accessibility in instead, the better we will
> work.
>
> B??rto
>
> ----- ?????
?????????? ?????????????????? -----
> ????: "ScottL" <scott at mu.org>
> ????????: <wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org>
> ????????????????????: 4 ???????? 2006 ??. 15:07
> ????????: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Where are the decision
> makers?
>
>
>    From the BBC article posted way way back on this
> thread it appears
> that the schools for ethnically Moldavian children
> in Transdniester
> actually use the Latin script if they can, and some
> times they do it
> when they are officially being persecuted.  At least
> that is what the
> article said.  As far as I can tell the
> (non-moldavian speaking) people
> in power are trying (unsuccessfully) to impose this
> script.  Now it
> probably is likely older people in the region still
> use it and its
> probably in public use but I am not sure you can say
> that its in many
> schools. At least not to a point where students are
> learning it to the
> exclusion of the Latin based script.
>
> SKL
>
> Mark Williamson wrote:
> > It incorrectly represents Moldova? Come on!
> >
> > Wikipedia uses language as a MEDIUM. If somebody
> wants to know about
> > the language, they would go to
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moldovan_language or
> > http://ca.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moldau or whichever
> language they speak
> > article.
> >
> > They will NOT go to mo.wikipedia.
> >
> > And you are clearly not in touch with reality. In
> schools east of the
> > Dniestr river, which teach Moldovan, the Cyrillic
> alphabet is taught.
> > This fact is a fact and you cannot contest it.
> This is the usual
> > script.
> >
> > Now, unless you want to challenge the territorial
> integrity of
> > Moldova, it seems reasonable to accept that
> Moldova is, in fact, a
> > biscriptal nation.
> >
> > As Gerard noted, mo-cyr is not acceptable because
> it violates conventions.
> >
> > Mark
>
=== message truncated ===

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


from_name: Robert Scott Horning

body:
daniwo59 at aol.com wrote:

>Of all the books to come out of print-on-demand, this one is possibly the
>most problematic. I am certainly not a lawyer but, as I see it, not only is it
>using the name of the Foundation without the explicit permission of the
>Foundation (and hence, in violation of  our trademark), it is attributing  the
>content to the Foundation. This, in turn, could make us liable for any  copyvios
>in the book (text and images). Despite numerous requests from Print on  Demand
>publishers (including Lulu), the Foundation has consistently avoided such  an
>arrangement for precisely these reasons.
>
>Furthermore, the content was developed as a result of a grant made to the
>Foundation with the stated goal of creating *free* content. After considerable
>discussions with them, we have made it clear that we intend to keep the books
>online and not take them to print. This is precisely what we said we will
>*not*  do, and it is timed perfectly to coincide with negotiations to get a
>considerably larger grant from that same foundation to expand the  Wikijunior
>project.
>
I guess this is the free as in beer vs. free as in liberty argument.
 The content certainly is free in the sense that it is available to
anybody, and we certainly havn't granted any exclusive publication
rights to a particular user.  In this sense, I have no real understand
of why this is such a problem, nor why it would affect any sort of
negotiations.  If it was promised to be free as in beer and a grant
given to be able to do that, you should involve the community who is
developing the content and let us know exactly what was promised and how
we can get stuff like this published in a more productive manner.
 Besides, the GFDL prohibits restricting publication in precisely the
manner that you are complaining about here.

The only real issue is if a link will be on a project page or not, and
to offer a strong policy on how to accomplish this.  By simply
prohibiting links of this nature IMHO is the wrong way to approach this
issue, and this is something that the WMF needs to deal with and allow
at least some sort of path to accomplish the goal:  selling content in
some sort of on-line bookstore with links on project pages.  At the
moment there is no path other than what this user has accomplished.

>
>This is not commendable. It is the bad result of people acting unilaterally
>on behalf of the Foundation without fully understanding the implications of
>what  they are doing.
>
>Danny
>
>
This user is not acting unilaterally on behalf of the WMF, but is trying
to be bold and acting on good faith to acomplish a goal that has been
dismissed on this list in the past, where comments encouraging this
specific kind of behavior have been offered and no rebuttal by people
like yourself until the actions occured.

--
Robert Scott Horning


body:
On 7/4/06, stevertigo <vertigosteve at yahoo.com> wrote:
> You mentioned the Brian Peppers article, which an
> editor apparently dispatched with appropriately. I
> think the Qabal should follow this example of NPOV
> pushing.

I don't see what it has to do with NPOV and why you spell cabal with a
"q." This is not a case of WP being specifically targeted for planting
a meme; it _is_ a meme:
http://technorati.com/search/eon8

As stupid as it may be, it's notable enough to document. You need to
stop worrying and learn to love the wiki.

Erik


body:
Jeffrey V. Merkey wrote:

>I have reviewed this website and it appears to violate the Wikimedia
>Foundation's trademark rights. I don't think the content is an issue,
>but the use of the Wikimedia Foundations trademarks and trading on the
>goodwill of the Foundation seems to impinge on its rights. We are also
>publishing College Level textbooks in Cherokee from Wikipedia content,
>however, we are not selling the textbooks, we are paying for the
>printings ourselves and donating the books to the Cherokee Nation
>language immersion programs and donating them to our schools of
>information technology.
>
>Jeff
>
>
>
I am asking for some reasonable guidelines to be offered to Wikimedia
users who do things like this so compliance with trademark issues can
made in terms that can also protect the WMF.  If you are suggesting that
each Wikimedia user must have a lawyer before they do something bold
like this, it defeats the whole purpose of putting the content available
as free (GFDL) content.  Clearly this user and any similar kinds of
publishers of content like this would like to acknowledge the WMF as the
source of the information, or at least the people that helped get the
group together that wrote this content.

I'll say this again, the GFDL does not prohibit making a profit off of
content like this, and saying that the content is free as in beer is not
the point of the GFDL.  I'm sorry that this one book is pushing the
issue, but there seems to be a serious misunderstanding of what the GFDL
is really all about here.  If you can give away book because you have
found some sort of philonthropic donor to help out in paying for the
physical paper, fine.  That is a very noble thing.  But don't muddle up
the waters here and confuse the issue.  I can also make money off of
content like this, as can you, Jeff,  and everybody else.  The GFDL
mainly says that nobody has exclusive publication rights, and why it is
called copyleft.

--
Robert Scott Horning


body:
Jimmy Wales wrote:

>Robert Scott Horning wrote:
>
>
>>There is a control issue here that does need to be resolved, and that
>>would be how much control does the WMF want to have directly over this
>>kind of activity as well?  That would also involve the use of Wikimedia
>>trademarks (aka Wikijunior) and logos.
>>
>>
>
>I have no particular stance on the overall issues here, other than some
>broad general principles that I think would be widely accepted by almost
>everyone.
>
>However, in the short term, since this came as a complete surprise
>without any information given to the broader community, I have removed
>the link from wikibooks, and also asked lulu to pull the book
>immediately (but perhaps temporarily).
>
>The important message I want to give here: this is not an issue of the
>foundation versus the community, but rather about an individual versus
>both the community and the foundation.  We should have been told first,
>there should have been a discussion and some consideration given to a
>number of important factors.
>
>--Jimbo
>
>
But you were told... here and now.... that the content is available.  It
didn't take a long time to put this together, and the point of even
raising this issue at all is because there is much more content on
Wikibooks that can be made available this way.  And I for one think it
should be in one form or another.  Help me to find a legitimate way for
Wikibooks users to accomplish this task.

As I've been trying to point out, this is just the first raindrops
before the huge storm of activity is going to be coming this way, and
trying to dam up the efforts is just going to make things worse.  OK,
you don't like how the link has been put onto the web page.  Fine.
 Let's find a way that we can accomodate something like this, and I
think a reasonable solution can be found that would also protect WMF
trademarks.

BTW, I don't think you can reasonably stop publication by Lulu Press of
this content.  The only thing you can do is to force the person doing
the publication to remove any references to the Wikimedia Foundation.  I
don't want this issue blowing up in the face of the WMF, and turn into
an ordinary user with lawyer vs foundation lawyer legal fight that has
to be settled in a courtroom.  Yet this kind of stance is headed exactly
in that direction if you are not more careful.  Please help me to
diffuse this situation.

This is also nothing new.  I have raised this issue in a theoretical
basis several times on this mailing list and have made quite inquiries
to several others as well, knowing this is a delicate issue.  Indeed,
the way this user has acted is precisely what was recommened by several
others on this mailing list, other than adding the link to the project page.

--
Robert Scott Horning


body:
Mathias Schindler wrote:

>Erik Moeller schrieb:
>
>>Let's just be absolutely clear here that the content is under the
>>GFDL, and anyone can use it commercially or in other ways if they
>>follow the terms of the license. The only issues here are
>>a) whether it is wise for the Wikimedia Foundation to do it at this
>>point in time
>>b) that the Wikimedia Foundation name was used inappropriately
>>c) to what extent such uses should be documented on the Wikimedia projects.
>>
>>Right?
>>
>>
>
>I am not objecting to these three points. However, I suggest also to
>point out "soft criteria" which in by no way are legal requirements but
>rather suggestions. It boils down to: "Please tell what you are doing.
>Give everyone a chance to make suggestions. Be part of a community, not
>a sole warrior."
>
>Mathias
>
>
Why do you think I brought it up at all on this list?  There are some
issue here, and micromanagement of individual project pages by the WMF
board is not what should be happening in this situation.

I'd also like to point out that but for being a bit more timid and
realizing that there would be a firestorm of controversy over this
issue, I would have done the very same thing.  Indeed I've even offered
books for sale on the talk pages during information discussions.

--
Robert Scott Horning


from_name: Jimmy Wales

body:
Austin Hair wrote:
> On 7/3/06, Jimmy Wales <jwales at wikia.com> wrote:
>> The important message I want to give here: this is not an issue of the
>> foundation versus the community, but rather about an individual versus
>> both the community and the foundation.  We should have been told first,
>> there should have been a discussion and some consideration given to a
>> number of important factors.
>
> I'm surprised that you would consider it a matter of anyone versus
> anyone.  However misguided and ill-considered this may be, there's no
> need to polarize the matter and try to set the community against a
> presumably well-intentioned person?let's assume good faith.

You are right and I am sorry I put it that way.

--
#######################################################################
#    Office: 1-727-231-0101       |  Free Culture and  Free Knowledge #
#    http://www.wikipedia.org     |     Building a free world         #
#######################################################################


body:
Kim Bruning wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 03, 2006 at 10:02:04PM -0400, daniwo59 at aol.com wrote:
>> Furthermore, the content was developed as a result of a grant made to the
>> Foundation with the stated goal of creating *free* content.
>
> Just checking: Free as in speech, not as in beer, right?

Absolutely.

Put simply: we should welcome developments such as this, this is exactly
what we intend people to do with our content, and there is absolutely
nothing wrong with people taking this content, packaging it, and selling it.

There CAN BE something very wrong with using wikibooks itself to
advertise/promote a third-party venture, and there CAN BE something very
wrong with using the community's names to promote such work, but the
exact parameters of these things is something that we have to feel our
way forward with carefully.

My feeling here is that with some minor adjustments and communication
about what is going on, this can go forward without difficulty.

--Jimbo


body:
> Let's just be absolutely clear here that the content is under the
> GFDL, and anyone can use it commercially or in other ways if they
> follow the terms of the license. The only issues here are
> a) whether it is wise for the Wikimedia Foundation to do it at this
> point in time
> b) that the Wikimedia Foundation name was used inappropriately
> c) to what extent such uses should be documented on the Wikimedia projects.

Absolutely.  And to my mind, none of these things are a big deal in this
case.  The name was used as attribution, though in some minor details
perhaps in a fashion that might indicate endorsement of the commercial
project, and the "documentation" of this seemed to be uncomfortable to
at least Robert, who is of course a very important wikibooks admin.

There is always time to slow down and think. :)

--Jimbo


from_name: Gerard Meijssen

body:
Hoi,
Cantonese and Mandarin are BOTH languages according to ISO-639-3.
Thanks,
    GerardM

James Hare wrote:
> Yes, dialect forks are just a waste of space, bandwidth and time, unless the
> dialects vary greatly (such as Cantonese and Mandarin).
>
> On 7/3/06, Robert Scott Horning <robert_horning at netzero.net> wrote:
>
>> James Hare wrote:
>>
>>
>>> The only reason why I can see two different Portuguese wikis is because
>>>
>> the
>>
>>> two (majority) versions -- European Portuguese and Brazillian Portuguese
>>>
>> --
>>
>>> are very different. Are they?
>>>
>>> On 7/2/06, Luiz Augusto <lugusto at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Sorry for my English. Recently, a newbie from Portuguese Wikipedia has
>>>> proposed on meta a vote to create Wikipedia in european portuguese. He
>>>> don't
>>>> talked about it with any editor from pt:Wikipedia and that proposal has
>>>> discovered by me, accidentally. I send a note in Village Pump from
>>>> pt:wikipedia. More than 30 editors has voted against that proposal.
>>>> Unconsoled with this, he was suspended that voting and is imposing to,
>>>>
>> in
>>
>>>> a
>>>> new vote about it, only europeans speakers can vote on it.
>>>>
>>>> Is all ok to the current rules for request a new language?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>> As a fluent portuguese speaker, I have no idea why a vote of this nature
>> must be restricted to only those who come from a certain country or
>> continent.  I am, however, opposed to this idea, as well as the earlier
>> Brazilian Portuguese Wikipedia proposal that also failed.  To me this
>> sounds like somebody trying to establish rules that would make his pet
>> project work, when there is strong opposition to the idea.  I'll put
>> more of my thoughts on the new language poll page to keep down bandwidth.
>>
>> --
>> Robert Scott Horning
>>


body:
Michael R. Irwin wrote:

>Anthony wrote:
>
>
>
>>snip
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>>This paragraph is somewhat contradictory, but it does explicitly say
>>that trademark law does not prevent giving Wikimedia credit for the
>>work by name.
>>
>>Anthony
>>_______________________________________________
>>foundation-l mailing list
>>foundation-l at wikimedia.org
>>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>If my understanding of the FDL is correct, then the publisher must at
>least provide a pointer back to the original authors and perhaps must
>list all of the authors in the published materials somewhere.
>
>What would the Wikimedia Foundation's reaction be if the material were
>published without giving any credit to the Foundation or the original
>authors?
>
>regards,
>lazyquasar
>
>
>
That becomes an issue of copyright law.   At least according to U.S.
copyright law, you need to list all of the authors who have a copyright
claim over the content.  It is for this reason why I added the "authors"
pages to the Wikijunior books, and this is now common practice for most
Wikibooks that are at a substantial level of completion.  If you want to
have your name included in the credits (which can be verified through
page edits) of the Wikibook, you are asked to add your name to the list
of authors.  Academic ethics alone would have you include these names,
although the order of the names can be debated.

As far as using the name of the book (aka Wikijunior Big Cats) that is
another story, and it is also a matter of how far does the WMF want to
go with protecting their trademarks and how can ordinary users trying to
act in good faith be able to make publications that also acknowlege that
this content was created using WMF servers.  Certainly offering a credit
on the "authors page" is not a violation of trademark law, and a minor
issue is over if the WMF has any sort of copyright claim on content
produced and edited on WMF servers.  On that point, I don't know.  It
gets into fine points of copyright law where I know similar situations
where copyright can be asserted by 3rd parties under some circumstances.

For instance, Microsoft can assert copyright over all software that is
generated by using their compilers, even if they didn't "author" that
actual computer software.  In this case it doesn't change the GFDL, but
the question does arise if there can be any sort of copyright claim by
the WMF on content produced by Wikimedia projects.  The typical response
on this mailing list is "No", but I wouldn't be so quick to jump to that
conclusion unless it was in the form of an official statement by the WMF
that they don't claim any copyright on any project materials.  In other
words, even if there could be a copyright claim, the WMF is renoucing
any potential copyright claims.  It is a two-edged sword in the sense
that copyright claim also implies liability for content, although the
WMF seems to be acting as though they are liable for Wikimedia project
content as well.

--
Robert Scott Horning


from_name: Mathias Schindler

subject:
[Foundation-l] Native Cherokee Langage XML Dumps posted for
	20060702 Wikipedia

body:
On 7/4/06, Jeffrey V. Merkey <jmerkey at wolfmountaingroup.com> wrote:
>
> The Native Cherokee Language Translation Project has posted XML dumps
> against enwiki 07-02-2006 at

Hi Jeffrey,

thanks for all your efforts here but I honestly fail to see the
connection to Wikimedia Foundation related matters. You might find more
people interested in this on a Native Cherokee mailing list. As the data
is a machine translation from enwiki, the related mailing list might
also be slightly more relevant to you posting.

As you brought up the topic anyway, I would also suggest to stop calling
the pages at http://www.wikigadugi.org/ a "Wikipedia". It might be a
wiki based encyclopedia. However, this project is currently not part of
the Wikipedia (which could be debated, nontheless).

Thanks and Greetings,
Mathias


from_name: Phil Boswell

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Harassment on wikipedia

body:
Fred Bauder wrote:
>
> On Jul 2, 2006, at 7:50 AM, Jacky PB wrote:
>> he did that and that he believes
>> it's not ok
> He did that and it is not Ok.
>
Did he quit yet? He did promise...
--
Phil
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Harassment-on-wikipedia-tf1879730.html#a5168765
Sent from the Wikipedia General forum at Nabble.com.


from_name: TSO1D From Wikpedia

subject: [Wikipedia-l] mo - let's make a point ...

body:
Some of the points you have presented are subjective, however the Moldo-Romanian linguistic identity is not a matter of debate. There is virtually not a single person who claims that formal written Moldovan differs from Romanian (as proven by the fact that Node directly transliterated articles from Ro to Mo with no "translation"). I don't really understand what research you carried out to come to your conclusion, but if you would consult any reference work (e.g. Moldovan language at en.wiki) you can find multiple sources emphasizing this point.

  The only issue truly at stake here is the usage of the cyrillic alphabet for writing Moldovan, and that issue is a bit more complex. I don't wish to go into the details of that aspect of the debate at this point as they have been thoroughly discussed, but I wouldn't want you to make your decision on an incorrect premise (that formal Moldovan and Romanian differ).

Sabine Cretella <sabine_cretella at yahoo.it> wrote:
  1) mo = ISO 639 language code for Moldovan - it refers solely to a
language and not a territory (this seems to be mixed up every now and then)
2) like Mark already said, they would continue the project anyway, also
outside the WMF (remember the contents is GFDL and may be used by
anyone) ... well one point to consider is: if you want to assure NPOV
than you need to have that project within the WMF - outside there is no
more guarantee about NPOV
3) following a research among colleagues (translators) Moldovan is
listed as a separate language when it comes to in which and from which
language is being translated - so there must be a real difference,
otherwise translators would just say "Romanian"
4) we have "native speakers" in several projects that have a lower
written language knowledge (even if these people are to be considered of
mother tongue), the reasons for this are several and different from
country to country - many of them started to write their language again
when the wikipedia was started and after some time they again gained a
much better written level of that language, contributing to cultural
diversity and helping to understand their culture - this also leads to
better understanding of other people and therefore to less conflicts.

Now considering these points (I could work out some more, but the main
point for me is definitely NPOV) for me things are obvious ... but of
course they cannot be obvious to all.

Well, I'll be away for some days from tomorrow on - and anyway I already
was too much involved in this and really don't want to get further
involved - it is not a nice thread and I like positive things best.

Best, Sabine
Chiacchiera con i tuoi amici in tempo reale!
http://it.yahoo.com/mail_it/foot/*http://it.messenger.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l

---------------------------------
How low will we go? Check out Yahoo! Messenger?s low  PC-to-Phone call rates.


from_name: Anthony

body:
On 7/4/06, Michael R. Irwin <michael_irwin at verizon.net> wrote:
> Anthony wrote:
>
> > snip
>
>
> >This paragraph is somewhat contradictory, but it does explicitly say
> >that trademark law does not prevent giving Wikimedia credit for the
> >work by name.
>
> If my understanding of the FDL is correct, then the publisher must at
> least provide a pointer back to the original authors and perhaps must
> list all of the authors in the published materials somewhere.
>
> What would the Wikimedia Foundation's reaction be if the material were
> published without giving any credit to the Foundation or the original
> authors?

Yes, this is all very unclear.  Hopefully Brad Patrick can start
tackling this in the near future, so that there can be an official
statement as to what copyright interest, if any, the Wikimedia
Foundation claims on content, and if they claim any, then how they
intend the GFDL to be applied to such content.  It would also be nice
to once and for all answer the question as to whether or not Wikimedia
claims to be the "publisher" as the term is used in the GFDL.

Of course this likely only solves a small sliver of the problem, as
every individual contributor *also* holds a copyright interest in the
content.  One can hope that a court would consider Big Cats (for
instance) to be a joint work, in which case permission only need to be
granted by a single contributor, but it's quite up in the air whether
or not that is true.

Anthony


subject: [WikiEN-l] [[Geographic_references]]

body:
On 7/4/06, Steve Bennett <stevagewp at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 7/3/06, Anthony <wikilegal at inbox.org> wrote:
> > The current database download designed for mirrors contains "Articles,
> > templates, image descriptions, and primary meta-pages."  How is a
> > meta-page designated a "primary meta-page"?  Would that be an
> > appropriate description of this page?
>
> Interesting, no idea what that means.
>
> Steve

http://download.wikimedia.org/enwiki/20060702/

There is a special packaged version of the en.wikipedia database (for
example), which contains "Articles, templates, image descriptions, and
primary meta-pages."  It omits most Wikipedia namespace pages.

If Geographic References is going to stay in the Wikipedia namespace,
it certainly needs to be included in this database dump, as that is
the dump that mirrors are encouraged to use (and Geographic References
should be included in the mirrors).

Anthony


from_name: Sean Barrett

subject: [WikiEN-l] Moldy discussions

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

How about a separate mailing list exclusively for discussion of all
things Moldovan?

- --
 Sean Barrett     | Susan: I'm just trying to be realistic!
 sean at epoptic.com | Peter: No, you're just trying to be smart.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFEqo40MAt1wyd9d+URAr9/AJ9MwSsTTyeEZE18IWtuxdNV/IzObQCfbFah
oWHxVGqk+J8M1sz9dNPDKos=
=UN6o
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


body:
  The websites I found using the Google search you proposed just support my point. The first states:  "Moldavian is in Moldova to the northeast, and Muntenian in Muntenia, or Wallachia in the southeast, other dialects in the north and west, including much of Transylvania.,  Alternate Names: Rumanian" Or the next one: " Moldovan is widely considered to be little more than the Romanian language renamed for political purposes."

  Sabine schrieb:

> Its not me who says that they differ, but having colleagues (just   search   for translations + Moldovan) that obviously make the difference ...   well   ...    I cannot contact these people now - I can only try to do it asap. Be   sure I am going probably much further when I research than you can   imagine.    Sorry, cannot follow up for the next days.    Best, Sabine

---------------------------------
Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Make PC-to-Phone Calls to the US (and 30+ countries) for 2?/min or less.


from_name: Steve Bennett

subject: [Wikitech-l] page move vandalism restrictions not working

body:
On 7/4/06, Tim Starling <t.starling at physics.unimelb.edu.au> wrote:
> I'm surprised it hasn't been said yet, but the classic wiki solution to page
> move vandalism is not to put up barriers to making contributions, but rather
> to make vandalism easier to revert. I made a "revert" link in the page move
> log a while back, but a lot of people don't know about it, and it's far from
> ideal. What we really need is a big list of checkboxes on the user
> contribution page, with a "select all" box. Click select all, click revert,
> job done. The function would be restricted in the same way as rollback. With
> the 1.5 schema, moving pages is quite a fast operation, similar to editing.

Oh, grouped rollback, lovely.

Steve


body:
I am sorry if I came across as negative, I certainly didn't mean to be. In your last message you yourself said: (just search for "translations + Moldovan") and I did that in Google and showed you what results I got. I agree that this might not be the best way collect information, but it was you who proposed it. In any case, there is no need to rush the subject, now it's time to prepare for the game. Just need to decide who to root for.

Sabine Cretella <sabine_cretella at yahoo.it> wrote:
  I said that I am going to talk to people - people that have nothing to
do with the wikipedia and all the povs that are around here.

You can find all sorts of information that proof one or the other thesis
on the internet (depending on with which search engine + which language
version and word combination in which language you search) - that is
definitely not the way to get information (I could give you some links
that proof the contrary ... well: I don't want to use any of those).

And I don't like that you try to create a negative mood around - be
positive.

It is definitely enough for today.

Best, Sabine

TSO1D From Wikpedia schrieb:
>
> The websites I found using the Google search you proposed just support my point. The first states: "Moldavian is in Moldova to the northeast, and Muntenian in Muntenia, or Wallachia in the southeast, other dialects in the north and west, including much of Transylvania., Alternate Names: Rumanian" Or the next one: " Moldovan is widely considered to be little more than the Romanian language renamed for political purposes."
>
>
>

Chiacchiera con i tuoi amici in tempo reale!
http://it.yahoo.com/mail_it/foot/*http://it.messenger.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l

---------------------------------
Sneak preview the  all-new Yahoo.com. It's not radically different. Just radically better.


body:
Hoi,
What "we" call Chinese is no longer considered a language..
http://www.sil.org/iso639-3/documentation.asp?id=zho
Thanks,
  GerardM

James Hare wrote:
> O RLY?
>
> I thought they were dialects of Chinese.
>
> On 7/4/06, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hoi,
>> Cantonese and Mandarin are BOTH languages according to ISO-639-3.
>> Thanks,
>>     GerardM
>>
>>
>> James Hare wrote:
>>
>>> Yes, dialect forks are just a waste of space, bandwidth and time, unless
>>>
>> the
>>
>>> dialects vary greatly (such as Cantonese and Mandarin).
>>>
>>> On 7/3/06, Robert Scott Horning <robert_horning at netzero.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> James Hare wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> The only reason why I can see two different Portuguese wikis is
>>>>>
>> because
>>
>>>> the
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> two (majority) versions -- European Portuguese and Brazillian
>>>>>
>> Portuguese
>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> are very different. Are they?
>>>>>
>>>>> On 7/2/06, Luiz Augusto <lugusto at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Sorry for my English. Recently, a newbie from Portuguese Wikipedia
>>>>>>
>> has
>>
>>>>>> proposed on meta a vote to create Wikipedia in european portuguese.
>>>>>>
>> He
>>
>>>>>> don't
>>>>>> talked about it with any editor from pt:Wikipedia and that proposal
>>>>>>
>> has
>>
>>>>>> discovered by me, accidentally. I send a note in Village Pump from
>>>>>> pt:wikipedia. More than 30 editors has voted against that proposal.
>>>>>> Unconsoled with this, he was suspended that voting and is imposing
>>>>>>
>> to,
>>
>>>> in
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> a
>>>>>> new vote about it, only europeans speakers can vote on it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is all ok to the current rules for request a new language?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>> As a fluent portuguese speaker, I have no idea why a vote of this
>>>>
>> nature
>>
>>>> must be restricted to only those who come from a certain country or
>>>> continent.  I am, however, opposed to this idea, as well as the earlier
>>>> Brazilian Portuguese Wikipedia proposal that also failed.  To me this
>>>> sounds like somebody trying to establish rules that would make his pet
>>>> project work, when there is strong opposition to the idea.  I'll put
>>>> more of my thoughts on the new language poll page to keep down
>>>>
>> bandwidth.
>>
>>>> --
>>>> Robert Scott Horning


body:
On 7/4/06, Mei Wu <mwu.mailbox at gmail.com> wrote:
> I am running a local Microsoft IIS 5 smtp server on the Windows XP
> machine. In the php.ini, I have specified localhost as the smtp
> server. When I go to the Wiki logon page, type my username and hit the
> "Email password" button, I get the following error message:
>
> Error sending mail: Failed to connect to localhost:25 [SMTP: Failed to
> connect socket: An established connection was aborted by the software
> in your host machine. (code: -1, response: )]
>
> I don't know what the problem is. When I try to logon to the smtp
> server using "telnet localhost 25", it does not work ("Connect
> failed"). Thanks for your help.

Quite simply the problem is your mail server is not behaving itself -
nothing to do with MediaWiki. I'm a bit confused about what your mail
server is though - is it smtp, exchange, or IIS? I thought those three
things were quite separate, but perhaps not?

Steve


body:
Erik Moeller schrieb:

> Let's just be absolutely clear here that the content is under the
> GFDL, and anyone can use it commercially or in other ways if they
> follow the terms of the license. The only issues here are
> a) whether it is wise for the Wikimedia Foundation to do it at this
> point in time
> b) that the Wikimedia Foundation name was used inappropriately
> c) to what extent such uses should be documented on the Wikimedia projects.
>
> Right?

I am not objecting to these three points. However, I suggest also to
point out "soft criteria" which in by no way are legal requirements but
rather suggestions. It boils down to: "Please tell what you are doing.
Give everyone a chance to make suggestions. Be part of a community, not
a sole warrior."

Mathias