body:
I agree... What would be worse is if the "systemic bias" follows the
traditional fault lines, which we have been so concerned about for so
long. After all, the New Media and its bottoms-up approach was meant
to make things "different". That's why we have so much faith in it,
and would like to invest our volunteer efforts here. Maybe, it is time
we recognised this problem and began to deal with it: how do
initiatives like the Wikipedia deal with non-English, non-visible,
largely non-digitised and oral societies (which have wealth of their
own, but not in a traditionally 'recognisable' sense)? To push a topic
to Wikia just because *we* can't recognise it's worth is unfair to the
topic. We can't also enter the vicious cycle of argument believing
that because-it-isn't-there-it-isn't-prominent (how does it become
'prominent' in the first place, if it is being rejected on these
grounds)?

Yet, there must be *some* way out. Am optimistic... FN

On 08/01/07, J.L.W.S. The Special One <hildanknight at gmail.com> wrote:
> While working on articles about Singaporean movies, I've encountered a
> similar problem: difficulty finding references due to systemic bias.
>
> Some seem to have the impression that Singaporean = non-notable. I've
> seen articles on many Singaporean topics, which no Singaporean would
> contest the notability of, get nominated for deletion, under the claim
> of non-notability.
>
> That Wikipedia suffers from systemic bias is not surprising.

--
FN M: 0091 9822122436 P: +91-832-240-9490 (after 1300IST please)
http://fn.goa-india.org  http://fredericknoronha.wordpress.com


list: wikien-l

source: pipermail-mbox

from_name: David Gerard

subject: [WikiEN-l] Help!

body:
On 08/01/07, Marc Riddell <michaeldavid86 at comcast.net> wrote:

> Yes, I'm in full screen. I'm using Internet Explorer, 5.1. This just
> happened overnight! I've been working in Wikipedia for over a year now.

On a Mac, right? Do you have Firefox, Safari or Camino installed? Does
it do the same in any of those?

(It's possible a subtle CSS change on the front page has messed things
up in IE Mac 5.1.)

(cc'ing to wikitech-l. Original problem: "I closed out of Wikipedia
last evening - everything was fine. This morning, I tried to access it
and the entire page is a mess. The WP Globe and contents selections
are superimposed over the page, and I don't have access to the log-in
or other such buttons. I tried to access WP via a Google search, and
got the same thing.")

- d.


list: wikitech-l

subject: [Wikitech-l] [WikiEN-l] Help!


from_name: Steve Block

subject: [WikiEN-l] Thousands of *awful* articles on websites

body:
Ray Saintonge wrote:
> Steve Block wrote:
>
>> Steve Block wrote:
>>
>>
>>> The Cunctator wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> On 1/4/07, Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> The Cunctator wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> I would note that "Game Over" comes from American video game culture
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> It's much older than.  It appeared on pinball machines before video
>>>>> games ever existed.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Hmmm... you're going to have to edit
>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_over then...
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Oh for crying out loud, what on earth does a referee's whistle mean at
>>> the end of a footie match if not game over?  Christ, how many PE
>>> teachers around the world have called out come on in boys, game over...
>>>
>>>
>> I mean Thackery wrote in Vanity Fayre that "The Game, in her opinion,
>> was over".  That's a century before pinball culture.  Did Americans
>> invent sex too?
>>
> There are many examples like the one from Thackery.  "The game was over"
> is somewhat different because of the "was".  I looked at Google Books
> and kept getting a lot of different situations where a sentence ended
> with "game", and the next one began with "Over".  We are looking for its
> use as an interjection.  Perhaps in something like this hypothetical
> sentence: "As he lay on his deathbed he realized it would soon be game
> over."  The problem is not as easy as it seems.

Oh I got one of those.  But I think we are talking about different
things here.  I'm simply stating that it seems to me to be somewhat
original research to postulate that the concept behind the phrase "Game
over", was established by it's usage in the video games of the
seventies.  The concept, that of using the term "game over" to imply
that something was finished, has been around for a long time, which I
think the Thackeray quote shows.  You've got James Parton. Life of
Voltaire, 1881. "That game over, Madame du Ch?telet, who was on the
losing side, asked her revenge. Another game was begun."

I mean, the phrase "the game was afoot" is a long established one, which
implies the game would, at some point be over.  I don't dispute that
video games have used the term "game over", but I think it is dangerous
to associate any cultural impact solely with the video game's usage of
the phrase, and also to ignore the wider context of the phrase and
variations of it, as the article currently does, without any concrete
sourcing.  The OED doesn't currently define the term, which to me
implies the whole article is defining a new term.  Which merely
demonstrates how tricky all this sourcing is.  I'd rather see an article
which said in the 1800's the term Game over was used in such manners as
these.  Then detail it's usage in patents of the fifties, which we have,
and then detail the usage in the seventies.  I think it is a mistake to
associate all examples of it to video game influence.  I would hope we
can all accept the concept and the phrase have been around longer than
the seventies, and that whilst video game usage influenced a generation,
it was borrowed from elsewhere.  I feel presenting it as derived from
video games gives undue weight to that usage.  I've yet to find a good
source which states it was a new term created by the video game
industry, but I have yet to find a good source to state otherwise also.
  So it seems to me that without such sources, we have to be very
careful what we write. Anyway, on and off I will keep looking.

--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.16.7/619 - Release Date: 07/01/07 18:29


subject: [WikiEN-l] Help!

body:
On 08/01/07, Marc Riddell <michaeldavid86 at comcast.net> wrote:
> From: "David Gerard" <dgerard at gmail.com>

> > On a Mac, right? Do you have Firefox, Safari or Camino installed? Does
> > it do the same in any of those?

> No. I have none of these that I know of. No matter how I try to access WP,
> whether from Google or any other source, the Globe & Site Table of Contents
> stays superimposed over everything.

Hmm. Anyone else with IE Mac 5.1 seeing anything like this?

- d.


subject: [Wikitech-l] [WikiEN-l] Help!


from_name: Brion Vibber

subject: [Wikitech-l] Print stylesheet: Fixed font size hinders scaling

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

Bernd vdB wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Matthew Flaschen wrote:
>> Brion Vibber wrote:
>>> Could you please describe how one "scales prior to printing"?
> ..
>> It took me a while to figure that one out too.  I think he means users
>> might scale the text in Firefox, then print, ...
>
> Hmm, I have here Firefox 2.0.0.1 running, I go to
>   File-Print_Preview
> and on top in the middle there is a "Scale" element that can be changed from
> 100% to, say 70%.

I can find no such option in Firefox 2.0.0.1 on Mac OS X. What operating
system are you running? Remember, being specific makes it a lot easier
to find out what you mean and reproduce the problem.

> Try it with google, or 99% of this worlds famous websites, and - wow, it
> scales down.
> Try it with wikipedia and it doesn't.

Sounds like a bug in Firefox; a printing scaling feature ought to work
regardless of which method was used to set font sizes in the page's
style sheet. Have you reported it to Mozilla?

- -- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFFoszUwRnhpk1wk44RAlI2AJ4/ILmGta678mvwGS7dDOO3ggBkmACgiLkG
lk7myPB/iSOSgFnXa/Crva4=
=NhBW
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


body:
Ray Saintonge wrote:
> Steve Block wrote:
>
>> Steve Block wrote:
>>
>>
>>> The Cunctator wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> On 1/4/07, Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> The Cunctator wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> I would note that "Game Over" comes from American video game culture
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> It's much older than.  It appeared on pinball machines before video
>>>>> games ever existed.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Hmmm... you're going to have to edit
>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_over then...
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Oh for crying out loud, what on earth does a referee's whistle mean at
>>> the end of a footie match if not game over?  Christ, how many PE
>>> teachers around the world have called out come on in boys, game over...
>>>
>>>
>> I mean Thackery wrote in Vanity Fayre that "The Game, in her opinion,
>> was over".  That's a century before pinball culture.  Did Americans
>> invent sex too?
>>
> There are many examples like the one from Thackery.  "The game was over"
> is somewhat different because of the "was".  I looked at Google Books
> and kept getting a lot of different situations where a sentence ended
> with "game", and the next one began with "Over".  We are looking for its
> use as an interjection.  Perhaps in something like this hypothetical
> sentence: "As he lay on his deathbed he realized it would soon be game
> over."  The problem is not as easy as it seems.

Thackeray is probably the one to try, and probably why the OED cites him
under it's section on these uses of the term game.  I keep turning up
tantalising snippets from google of Thackeary passages, the most recent
being "Here Madam Esmond caught sight of her friend's tall frame as it
strode up and down before the windows; and, the evening being warm, or
her game over, she gave..."  Now I haven't the context to ascribe any
meaning to that snippet, since I don't have the whole work, but
Thackeray is an author who did write of women and the games they play.
Becky Sharpe springs to mind from the aforementioned Vanity Fair.  I
think there's more in this than meets the eye, and I think it serves
Wikipedia to work out how best to describe this.

--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.16.7/619 - Release Date: 07/01/07 18:29


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

Brion Vibber wrote:
> Bernd vdB wrote:
>> Hmm, I have here Firefox 2.0.0.1 running, I go to
>>   File-Print_Preview
>> and on top in the middle there is a "Scale" element that can be changed from
>> 100% to, say 70%.
>
> I can find no such option in Firefox 2.0.0.1 on Mac OS X. What operating
> system are you running? Remember, being specific makes it a lot easier
> to find out what you mean and reproduce the problem.

I did find a "scale" option in 'File'/'Page Setup', which seems to work
just fine.

50% and 200% produce very small and very large text output respectively
when print-previewing
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_Branch%2C_Pennsylvania

- -- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com / brion @ wikimedia.org)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFFos7RwRnhpk1wk44RAhdhAJ0YDhLPCGfv4HLiEXqUp7jLbQeR9wCg3ZdK
ccWiSteqCYarvK2c6kJdibI=
=k4fM
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


from_name: Kajk Dev

subject: [Wikitech-l] Hieroglyphs

body:
Hi List

I and some other users of the Hieroglyph-Plugin of the wikimedia-software were wondering if it was possible to add additional Hieroglyphs. Can someone help with this issue?

If it is possible, we for shure will be able to provide the Hieroglyphs.

Thank you Kajk
--
Der GMX SmartSurfer hilft bis zu 70% Ihrer Onlinekosten zu sparen!
Ideal f?r Modem und ISDN: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/smartsurfer


list: textbook-l

from_name: Andrew Whitworth

subject: [Textbook-l] Wikibook User Arbitration

body:
>What I've done here is turn this into a formal debate.  While prehaps we
>can change the terms "plaintiff" and "defendant", the purpose here is to
>allow everybody to air their concerns and grievences in a public manner
>that can be reviewed later on by all parties involved, and by those
>chared with oversight of this project, including other administrators,
>stewards, and ultimately the WMF board of trustees.

I want to make this perfectly clear right now, I do like the way you are
going about this process. This arbitration hearing has been set up in a
clear, well-defined way that does give everybody a shot to talk.  Barring
the use of some specific terminology, I think the process is a good general
model to use in the future.

What I don't like, (and what Johnny has been pointing out), is that Johnny
himself served as a moderator in this situation (between Darklama and
Panic). Panic asked Johnny (and myself) to come in and moderate the
discussion. Johnny's decision was that Panic was in the wrong, and his
continued bad behavior warranted a block.

What this arbitration hearing is doing, is essentially punishing (or
threatening to punish) Johnny for acting as a volunteer moderator for Panic
in the first place. Panic didn't like the outcome, but that's tough beans:
He asked for a moderator because he wanted to maintain unilateral control
over his book, but what he got was a punishment instead. We're creating a
precedent where moderation and arbitration can be appealed ad infinitum
until everybody gives up or storms off. Somewhere we need to say "A decision
has already been made on this issue, and we need to stand by our decisions".
Don't think for an instant that if you agree with Johnny and have panic
blocked, that  he won't appeal higher up the chain (WMF intervention?) to
have you de-admined as well. Maybe he won't succeed, but tell me having your
adminship on the line over this won't upset you pretty badly as well?

--Andrew Whitworth

_________________________________________________________________
Your Hotmail address already works to sign into Windows Live Messenger! Get
it now
http://clk.atdmt.com/MSN/go/msnnkwme0020000001msn/direct/01/?href=http://get.live.com/messenger/overview


from_name: Jeff Raymond

subject: [WikiEN-l] New bot up for RFA

body:
geni wrote:
> On 1/8/07, Andrew Gray <shimgray at gmail.com> wrote:
>> We know the programmer intends it to do
>> something simple and routine. We don't know if he has a secret plan
>> (he doesn't, I am sure, but someone who doesn't know of him might not
>> accept this),
>
> The problem with that line of paranoia is that it doesn't trust
> someone enough to run code you can't see but at the same time trust
> them to give you the real code.

Of course, if the code that's been released doesn't match the code that's
running, we can obviously note the problem.  Not so if the code is held
back, or only given to "trusted users," as subjective a criterion as you
can get.

-Jeff


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

Bernd vdB wrote:
> you wrote:
> ...
>> I can find no such option in Firefox 2.0.0.1 on Mac OS X. What operating
>> system are you running?
>
> Windows XP, sorry for being a bit autistic - I have no other OS with a gui
> running here and assumed Firefox would have the same features on every platform.
> But, am I completely wrong to assume that the majority of wikipedia users has
> got Windows running (which doesn't mean that there would be no good reasons to
> go elsewhere)?

I asked you what *you* were running so I could try to reproduce the
problem *you* described.

>> Sounds like a bug in Firefox; a printing scaling feature ought to work
>> regardless of which method was used to set font sizes ..
>
> No, really, Firefix works just as designed and as specified.

Well, that would be a surprise; can you show me the design
specifications for Firefox's print scaling feature? :)

In fact, a quick search through bugzilla shows that this is a known bug:

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=205001
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=153080
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=177805

So I rather suspect that this is not "as designed and as specified" at all.

> A fixed font size is _meant_ to render fixed, and:
> "Use of percentage values, or values in 'em's, leads to more robust and
> cascadable style sheets."
> ( http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/fonts.html#font-size-props )

This isn't a cascade issue; it's a bug in Mozilla's Gecko renderer as to
how it handles print scaling. Scaling, by definition, would need to
change the logical resolution of those document absolute units as well.
(And in fact the behavior is correct when printing from Firefox on Mac
OS X, so the bug appears limited to the printing subsystem on some other
platforms.)

> And, have a look at:
>   http://en.wikipedia.org/skins-1.5/monobook/main.css?41
> .. and you fill not one font-size in 'pt', only percent, ems or 'small' etc.

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. If you're trying to
convince us that the use of different units in one of our style sheets
means that there is not a bug in Firefox's printing modules on some
platforms, I don't think I'm convinced. ;)

That doesn't mean we can't change the print stylesheet to compensate,
but please don't stray off into unrelated territory.

Just because I ask you questions about a bug I can't reproduce on my
system without more information from you doesn't mean I'm out to get you.

- -- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com / brion @ wikimedia.org)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFFotiTwRnhpk1wk44RAp7eAKC3RGXCPdu+Coa3zrn6Ldi9fP6prgCg4Gcn
yCu+U8F8BvScDEwpTZ36vGY=
=FpOX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


list: wikipedia-l

from_name: Walter van Kalken

subject:
[Wikipedia-l] Entries for deletion.... issues from the Third
 World

body:
David Gerard wrote:

>On 08/01/07, J.L.W.S. The Special One <hildanknight at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>>While working on articles about Singaporean movies, I've encountered a
>>similar problem: difficulty finding references due to systemic bias.
>>Some seem to have the impression that Singaporean = non-notable. I've
>>seen articles on many Singaporean topics, which no Singaporean would
>>contest the notability of, get nominated for deletion, under the claim
>>of non-notability.
>>That Wikipedia suffers from systemic bias is not surprising.
>>
>>
>
>
>This may be worth politely noting on WT:AFD.
>
>
>
This is unfortunately not just a problem on the English wikipedia but in
the Dutch one as well. and I would think in many other big language
editions. As soon as something isn't covered by google people
unfortunately assume it isn't notable :( .

Waerth


subject: [Wikitech-l] Remote Sidebar links at MW.org

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

Mark Clements wrote:
> I don't know if this affects other wikis, but currently all the remote (full
> URL) links in the sidebar at mediawiki.org are broken.
>
> For example, the bug tracker link currently points to
> http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Bug_tracker-url, instead of
> http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/ (as specified at [[Mediawiki:Bug
> tracker-url]]).

Seems to be a regression in the message cache system where spaces are
involved; I'm working on it.

- -- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFFot5QwRnhpk1wk44RAjnKAKCGI7Y4Gb4CxhxqdT8jVWrJEj1Y1wCgm9AR
UeKoOzQkfSqhG0Yj2+IBIP8=
=JVB/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


from_name: Matthew Flaschen

body:
Brion Vibber wrote:
> Could you please describe how one "scales prior to printing"?
>
> -- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)

It took me a while to figure that one out too.  I think he means users
might scale the text in Firefox, then print, not realizing a print
stylesheet would be in effect.  Thus, their scaling would surprisingly
have no effect.

Matthew Flaschen

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 252 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20070108/644a6325/attachment.pgp>


from_name: Gurch

subject: [WikiEN-l] Help!

body:
Marc Riddell wrote:
>
>> From: "NSLE (Wikipedia)" <nsle.wikipedia at gmail.com>
>> Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
>> Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 23:39:46 +0800
>> To: "English Wikipedia" <wikien-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
>> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Help!
>>
>> And for userlogin: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Userlogin should
>> work.
>
> I just tried to log in, but the button is partially covered by the overlay &
> won't activate.
>
> Marc
>> On 08/01/07, NSLE (Wikipedia) <nsle.wikipedia at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Main_Page&action=purge
>>>
>>> Does that work?
>
> No, the Globe, etc. is still superimposed, blocking access to everything
> else.
>>> On 08/01/07, Marc Riddell <michaeldavid86 at comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> From: "NSLE (Wikipedia)" <nsle.wikipedia at gmail.com>
>>>>> Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at lists.wikimedia.org >
>>>>> Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2007 20:12:46 +0800
>>>>> To: "English Wikipedia" <wikien-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
>>>>> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Help!
>>>>>
>>>>> [[Special:Userlogin]] is the link to log-in. Try clearing your browser
>>>>> cache/purging the page.
>>>> I'm afraid this couldn't have happened to a worse person when it comes
>>>> to
>>>> computer understanding. I am completely dependent on my technical
>>>> support
>>>> guy and he is away at a conference right now. So your instructions will
>>>> need
>>>> to be simpler. I really am sorry about this, and I appreciate any help
>>>> you
>>>> can give me. This is a first with WP for me. What does clear my browser
>>>> cache/purging the page mean?
>>>>
>>>> Thank you!
>>>>
>>>> Marc

How about http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Userlogin?useskin=nostalgia

-Gurch


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

Brion Vibber wrote:
> Mark Clements wrote:
>> I don't know if this affects other wikis, but currently all the remote (full
>> URL) links in the sidebar at mediawiki.org are broken.
>
>> For example, the bug tracker link currently points to
>> http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Bug_tracker-url, instead of
>> http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/ (as specified at [[Mediawiki:Bug
>> tracker-url]]).
>
> Seems to be a regression in the message cache system where spaces are
> involved; I'm working on it.

Ok, fixed in r18988 and r18989.

- -- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFFouDiwRnhpk1wk44RAmWpAJsER4OMB7Hvth5S8cTUq3d6QbFa8wCeKEkg
VtNS5pXdyGrtw/s3Ridf1jE=
=ef7u
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


from_name: Simetrical

subject: [Wikitech-l] [WikiEN-l] Help!

references:
<fb7fdd9c0701080442w1e7852ebr124f00a26b5d5ca@mail.gmail.com>
	<C1C7B259.C4B%michaeldavid86@comcast.net>
	<fbad4e140701080622ka571f8auc72bddffbe6af88f@mail.gmail.com>
	<7c2a12e20701081051p6d315de5u4be40b737afe3551@mail.gmail.com>
	<fbad4e140701081316g3cae1d24mdebe3d1db97ea523@mail.gmail.com>

body:
On 1/8/07, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 08/01/07, Simetrical <Simetrical+wikitech at gmail.com> wrote:
> > This has been fixed.  Bloody CSS1 browsers.
>
> And here I am remembering way back when IE5 for Mac was regarded as
> pretty good for compliance ...

It was.  Just it complied with CSS1, which didn't allow media-specific rules.


from_name: Gerard Meijssen

subject: [Wikitech-l] MediaWiki as a Wikimedia project

body:
Jay R. Ashworth schreef:
> On Sun, Jan 07, 2007 at 11:48:05PM -0800, George Herbert wrote:
>
>> On 1/7/07, Simetrical <Simetrical+wikitech at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 1/7/07, Rob Church <robchur at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> That's just begging for a "somebody set us up the bomb" type response.
>>>>
>>> We get signal.
>>>
>> Commit now.
>>
>> For great justice.
>>
>
> And I guess it's left up to me...
>
> All your software are belong to us.
And to "us"

Thanks,
    GerardM


from_name: J.L.W.S. The Special One

subject:
[Wikipedia-l] Entries for deletion.... issues from the Third
	World

body:
While working on articles about Singaporean movies, I've encountered a
similar problem: difficulty finding references due to systemic bias.

Some seem to have the impression that Singaporean = non-notable. I've
seen articles on many Singaporean topics, which no Singaporean would
contest the notability of, get nominated for deletion, under the claim
of non-notability.

That Wikipedia suffers from systemic bias is not surprising.

On 1/8/07, Frederick Noronha <fred at bytesforall.org> wrote:
> Hi all, Thank you all for your patience. I'm not being difficult here,
> but just feel I need to explain how things work in this part of the
> globe.... not always logically!
>
> Okay, I'm as Indian as they come... my unusual name is because I'm
> from Goa, the former Portuguese colony.
>
> My wager is that en.wikipedia.org would be far, far more
> representative of India than, say hi.wikipedia.org Sad but true. And
> there are reasons for that.
>
> Have you seen the way Indians interact with themselves? If meeting
> outside the North Indian belt, there's a good chance they  (we?) would
> be taking to each other in English. There are just so much diversity
> here, that like it or not, English often serves as a link language.
>
> Added to this, many of the Wikipedia contributors would be
> college/university-educated types, often more comfortable to express
> ideas in English than, say, in an Indian language. I've made hundreds
> of edits in English
> [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Fredericknoronha]
> but am litterally struggling to get a Konkani Wikipedia going (Konkani
> is India's smallest "national" languages, with between 1.5 to 5
> million speakers, depending whose estimates one accepts).
>
> On 08/01/07, Roberto Alfonso <rpgrca at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi there,
> >
> > Personally, I prefer to prod articles with notability asserted but no way
> > to verify that. In these "cases", I also check if the Wikipedia in the
> > language related to the article (in this case, hi.wikipedia.org) has an
> > entry about this topic.
> >
> > I haven't, but maybe I should suggest creating an article in the user's
> > native language. In the same way as a Google test fails, an AFD may also
> > fail due the inability of users to check the claims.
> >
> > Oh, once I even posted a note at WikiProject India to get some feedback
> > about Mair Rajputs :-)
> >
> > Roberto / ReyBrujo
> >
> > On 1/7/07, Frederick Noronha <fred at bytesforall.org> wrote:
> > > Hi all, I'm from India, a contributor to the Wikipedia. In recent
> > > times, the 'mortality' of new Wikipedia entries seems to be higher
> > > than usual. While one can understand the need for abundant caution,
> > > it's also important to allow for a diversity of concerns and issues in
> > > this space.
> > >
> > > Should we presume that because an initiative is not very visible in
> > > cyberspace (okay, we are under-digitised societies!) that it is not
> > > prominent or noteworthy? See as one example:
> > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vikalp This is a campaign against
> > > censorship of documentary film in India, one which has the
> > > participation of about 250 documentary film-makers.
> > >
> > > There must be some way out. Your suggestions would be welcome. FN
> > > --
> > > FN M: 0091 9822122436 P: +91-832-240-9490 (after 1300IST please)
> > > http://fn.goa-india.org  http://fredericknoronha.wordpress.com
> > > http://www.goa-india.org http://feeds.goa-india.org/index.php
>
> --
> FN M: 0091 9822122436 P: +91-832-240-9490 (after 1300IST please)
> http://fn.goa-india.org  http://fredericknoronha.wordpress.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>

--
Written with passion,
J.L.W.S. The Special One


from_name: Andre Engels

body:
2007/1/8, Frederick Noronha <fred at bytesforall.org>:
>
> Maybe we should use some discernment, instead of the mechanical rule
> of 'number of links' on Google or where-ever. In journalism, it is
> always easy to make out what is a 'plug' for someone and what is a
> genuine news-item. Guess Wikipedia could depend on local teams to also
> offer some cross-checking. FN
>

That's definitely a possibility. As said before, I think that mechanically
counting the number of links on Google is no good at all. The very least one
should do, is set the limits differently depending on the subject - higher
for western subjects, computer-related subjects and pop culture, lower for
third world subjects or subjects that had their main popularity over 10
years ago.

But even better would be to check not the number but the nature of the links
found. Or something similar to your proposal: If the Google search does not
give a clear answer immediately, have a list of experts where one or a few
can be chosen who should be able to render judgement.

--
Andre Engels, andreengels at gmail.com
ICQ: 6260644  --  Skype: a_engels


from_name: Steve Bennett

subject: [Wikitech-l] Special:Listinterwikis

references:
<ens32r$ato$1@sea.gmane.org>
	<7c2a12e20701071633p44cdec5dlac415feae4cb13cf@mail.gmail.com>
	<ens75j$k6s$1@sea.gmane.org>

body:
Why exactly do we have these "interwiki" links that go to projects
with no connection to WikiMedia? Why not just use templates:

{{youtube|foo}} (which might expand to
[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v={{{1}}}|{{{1}}} at YouTube.com]

rather than

[[YouTube:foo]]

for instance.

Why is it preferable that they be in the software itself?

Steve


subject: [WikiEN-l] New bot up for RFA

body:
On 1/8/07, James Hare <messedrocker at gmail.com> wrote:
> I can imagine how that can be benefit; it'd allow for public auditing of the
> code.
>
> Problem is, if you let everyone see it, you let EVERYONE see it -- even the
> people who will take a look at it and figure out how to compromise the bot.

Yup. Historical consensus is that the advantages outweigh the
disadvantages. See [[Security through obscurity]].

Steve


from_name: Heiko Evermann

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Creation of nds wikisource

body:
I would like to know your opinion about the creation of a Low Saxon
nds.wikisource.org.

We already have a nds.wikipedia.org (two, to be more precise:
nds.wikipedia.org and nds-nl.wikipedia.org), and a wiktionary at
nds.wiktionary.org

We then asked for the creation of nds.wikisource.org at
http://wikisource.org/wiki/Wikisource:Language_domain_requests#Domain_requests_.28nds.wikisource.org.29

Several people from the nds.wikipedia.org voted in favour of this project. I
then went to http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7855 to formally
request the creation on November 9th, 2006. Then for some time nothing
happened. In December several people from the German wikisource objected. It
was only after that that somebody in bugzilla.wikimedia.org decided to care
about our request. He concluded that there was no consensus and decided not
to create this wikisource.

Some people from de.wikisource.org say that Low Saxon is only a dialect of
German and that all our texts are welcome in their wikisource. They also want
us to be included in their project due to a lack of resources.

This now is a peculiar situation:
* Low Saxon is recognized as regional language: see
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low_German
"Low German has been recognised by the Netherlands and by Germany (since 1999)
as a regional language according to the European Charter for Regional or
Minority Languages. Within the official terminology defined in the charter,
this status would not be available to a dialect of an official language (as
per article 1 (a)), and hence not to Low German in Germany if it were
considered a dialect of German. With the ratification of the charter at the
latest, Germany would appear, therefore, to have at least implicitly adopted
the stance that Low German is not a dialect of the German language."
* we have a wikipedia
* we have a wikitionary
* we have a wikibooks
* we even have a wikiquote (which we will not use due to German copyright
problems with collections of quotations)
* but we do not have a wikisource because some people from de.wiktionary.org
managed to collect a huge number of no-votes.

I think that there should be a Low Saxon wikisource, but due to about 8 no
votes of people who just want all our content to be included into their
wikisource just to make theirs bigger and more beautiful, we cannot get one.

What do You think about that?

Kind regards,

Heiko Evermann


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Why is MediaWiki so low-tech?

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

Virgil Ierubino wrote:
> But focussing on the easy stuff: inline editing on a page with nothing but
> nice, pure, transclusion-less wikitext, I don't see this as being so hard.

Well, I look forward to your patch then... ;)

- -- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFFoug1wRnhpk1wk44RAte6AKDP1HR06AlDBb8Xx9Da5Wx6mpcQaQCeKcIG
p1NqbXvZb94kDh73NN9uLvk=
=nLH8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


from_name: Edward Z. Yang

subject: [Wikitech-l] https auth on wiki logon

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

Yedidia Klein wrote:
> for security reason I want my wiki users to logon via https connection
> while all the wiki is accessible via regular http connection. [snip]

Please redirect your message to the mediawiki-l mailing list.
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l

Wikitech-l is for discussion of Wikimedia related MediaWiki issues.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFFor72qTO+fYacSNoRApgIAJ9nIxD/q1bvs0QEKxyysm2BRCAszQCcDKb0
aqI6ckrlxF5pAv7IzGsTJ4s=
=MRzI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


from_name: Marco Schuster

subject: [Wikitech-l] Special:Listinterwikis

body:
Steve Bennett schrieb:
> Why exactly do we have these "interwiki" links that go to projects
> with no connection to WikiMedia? Why not just use templates:
>
> {{youtube|foo}} (which might expand to
> [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v={{{1}}}|{{{1}}} at YouTube.com]
>
> rather than
>
> [[YouTube:foo]]
>
> for instance.
>
> Why is it preferable that they be in the software itself?
>
Templates produce server load and have to be created on every wiki where
a youtube link has to be used.
So you can use the interwiki links in every project without having to
import dozens of templates and looking after their dependencies.
But you are right, they do not always look very nice.

Regards,
Marco


subject:
[WikiEN-l] A quiet,
	peaceful email list for experienced en contributors?

body:
Hi all,
  I notice that lately this mailing list seems to be almost overrun
with a lot of noise: complaints about blocking, diatribes about
perceived wrongs, requests of various kinds. Whereas what I would
really like is a place where the most committed and experienced
Wikipedians can discuss more serious issues in a bit of depth: where
the project is going, recurring problems at a more abstract level,
general issues more distilled than "omg [[foo.com]] is so crap!" etc.

Is there such a list, or place to talk? Is there interest in creating one?

There is certainly a need for the current list, to allow such
day-to-day discussions to take place, but somewhere to escape the
noise and engage in a bit of deeper reflection would be nice.

Any ideas?

Steve


body:
Hoi,
Two things:

   1. This is the wrong mailing list to ask this.
      foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org is the correct list.
   2. The current nds.wikipedia insists on just one specific German
      oriented orthography. This resulted in the creation of two
      Wikipedias. With Wikisource, are you going to insist that material
      has to be in this same orthography? If so, you do not deserve imho
      a nds.wikisource and I would vote with the no-voters.

Thanks,
     GerardM

Heiko Evermann schreef:
> I would like to know your opinion about the creation of a Low Saxon
> nds.wikisource.org.
>
> We already have a nds.wikipedia.org (two, to be more precise:
> nds.wikipedia.org and nds-nl.wikipedia.org), and a wiktionary at
> nds.wiktionary.org
>
> We then asked for the creation of nds.wikisource.org at
> http://wikisource.org/wiki/Wikisource:Language_domain_requests#Domain_requests_.28nds.wikisource.org.29
>
> Several people from the nds.wikipedia.org voted in favour of this project. I
> then went to http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7855 to formally
> request the creation on November 9th, 2006. Then for some time nothing
> happened. In December several people from the German wikisource objected. It
> was only after that that somebody in bugzilla.wikimedia.org decided to care
> about our request. He concluded that there was no consensus and decided not
> to create this wikisource.
>
> Some people from de.wikisource.org say that Low Saxon is only a dialect of
> German and that all our texts are welcome in their wikisource. They also want
> us to be included in their project due to a lack of resources.
>
> This now is a peculiar situation:
> * Low Saxon is recognized as regional language: see
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low_German
> "Low German has been recognised by the Netherlands and by Germany (since 1999)
> as a regional language according to the European Charter for Regional or
> Minority Languages. Within the official terminology defined in the charter,
> this status would not be available to a dialect of an official language (as
> per article 1 (a)), and hence not to Low German in Germany if it were
> considered a dialect of German. With the ratification of the charter at the
> latest, Germany would appear, therefore, to have at least implicitly adopted
> the stance that Low German is not a dialect of the German language."
> * we have a wikipedia
> * we have a wikitionary
> * we have a wikibooks
> * we even have a wikiquote (which we will not use due to German copyright
> problems with collections of quotations)
> * but we do not have a wikisource because some people from de.wiktionary.org
> managed to collect a huge number of no-votes.
>
> I think that there should be a Low Saxon wikisource, but due to about 8 no
> votes of people who just want all our content to be included into their
> wikisource just to make theirs bigger and more beautiful, we cannot get one.
>
> What do You think about that?
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Heiko Evermann
>


body:
2007/1/8, Frederick Noronha <fred at bytesforall.org>:
>
> Hmmm... some interesting issues being raised below. Just for argument
> sake: what happens if an "un-notable" entry makes it to Wikipedia?
> Would it be a grave error? Notability, after all, is mostly related to
> context. Would Shakespeare have been as "noted" a writer, if he had to
> be born in, say, Upper Egypt?

That's a big hypothetical - if he had been born there, how much and what
would he have written? Having somehting un-notable may not be a grave error,
but having thousands of un-notable things clogs Wikipedia, makes
fact-checking harder and opens the doors wide to usage of Wikipedia for
advertisement.

I think the problem lies elsewhere. The trouble is: people or
> institutions being packaged to be what they are not. Or bloated claims
> about institutions or organisations or individuals.
>
> Rather than just delete entries for being un-notable, perhaps we need
> to find ways to ensure that what's written is both accurate and
> tallies with the reality. --FN
>

But what if what is written is that so-and-so once wrote an internet page
(that a few hundred people have looked at). Do you really want to just keep
that in if you found that he really has done so?

--
Andre Engels, andreengels at gmail.com
ICQ: 6260644  --  Skype: a_engels


from_name: James Hare

subject: [WikiEN-l] New bot up for RFA

body:
Security through obscurity.

I'm sure if you asked the guy he'll give you the code, but keeping the code
concealed may be a good thing because it'll stave off the bot being
compromised for some time.

On 1/8/07, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 1/8/07, Jeff Raymond <jeff.raymond at internationalhouseofbacon.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > geni wrote:
> > > On 1/8/07, Andrew Gray <shimgray at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> We know the programmer intends it to do
> > >> something simple and routine. We don't know if he has a secret plan
> > >> (he doesn't, I am sure, but someone who doesn't know of him might not
> > >> accept this),
> > >
> > > The problem with that line of paranoia is that it doesn't trust
> > > someone enough to run code you can't see but at the same time trust
> > > them to give you the real code.
> >
> > Of course, if the code that's been released doesn't match the code
> that's
> > running, we can obviously note the problem.
>
> If the bot starts doing things out of spec I don't think we will need
> the code to know that. No the paranoid arugment fails.
>
> --
> geni
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: David Gerard

subject: [WikiEN-l] Help!

body:
On 08/01/07, Simetrical <Simetrical+wikienl at gmail.com> wrote:

> First of all: please upgrade to the latest version of IE if possible.
> Many modern Web features are not supported by IE5.  I will fix this
> mistake immediately, but other website authors might not be so quick
> to respond.  Not many website authors have IE5 installed to test with.

Browser sniff and graceful degrade?

> Second of all: this is an error on my part.  I changed the format of
> the Monobook stylesheet to add better support for handhelds, but
> unfortunately the way I chose to do so was problematic for very old
> browsers.  I'll fix it now.  It might be an hour or two until this is
> fixed on-site.

- d.


list: foundation-l

from_name: teun spaans

subject: [Foundation-l] Mission/Vision Statement

body:
Thx,

Indeed, I'd like to make clear that our vision should encompass both
kinds of "free".

Advertisements are likely to tarnish the strictly neutral image of our
projects. take the example of the Microsoft articles on wikipedia.
Microsoft the company, and articles on their products.
Using the google context ad-aware system, the most logical ads would
be for exactly ... uh, these microsoft products. You cant fool me -
even if the people could easily distinguish articles and ads,
unconsciously they would be influenced.

Waerth en GerardM argued that people ignore ads. If they were right,
companies would no longer spend a dime on ads. But they are spending
billions on them.

teun

On 1/6/07, Anthony <wikilegal at inbox.org> wrote:
> On 1/5/07, Teun Spaans <teun.spaans at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Anthony,
> >
> > what, according to you, is the place to speak up?
> >
> This thread is certainly a good place.  If you think "without
> advertisements" should be added to the mission statement, suggest it.
> It would be interesting to see who, if anyone, objects.
>
> > I have considered this mailinglist as the place to speak up, anywhere else?
> >
> There's a talk page for that mission statement draft.  Not sure where
> else it's being discussed.
>
> Anthony
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>


list: wikimedia-l

subject: [Foundation-l] Mission/Vision Statement


body:
Bernd vdB wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Matthew Flaschen wrote:
>> Brion Vibber wrote:
>>> Could you please describe how one "scales prior to printing"?
> ..
>> It took me a while to figure that one out too.  I think he means users
>> might scale the text in Firefox, then print, ...
>
> Hmm, I have here Firefox 2.0.0.1 running, I go to
>   File-Print_Preview
> and on top in the middle there is a "Scale" element that can be changed from
> 100% to, say 70%.
> Try it with google, or 99% of this worlds famous websites, and - wow, it
> scales down.
> Try it with wikipedia and it doesn't.
>
> Ok?

My mistake.  You might want to lose the attitude, and just be more
clear.  Not everyone has Firefox, and Kubuntu's Firefox 2.0.0.1 doesn't
even have that feature.

Matthew Flaschen

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 252 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20070108/b9f6b525/attachment.pgp>


from_name: MacGyverMagic/Mgm

subject: [WikiEN-l] New bot up for RFA

body:
On 1/8/07, Jeff Raymond <jeff.raymond at internationalhouseofbacon.com> wrote:
>
>
> MacGyverMagic/Mgm wrote:
> > What's the point of showing everyone the code? Are we afraid the owner
> is
> > going to abuse the bot?
>
> What's the point of hiding the code?  Why does it have to be kept a
> secret?
>
> -Jeff
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
What's the point of demanding openness? The script has had a test run, it
works and it fulfills a need and on top of it all it's run by a trusted
admin. It would be unanimously supported if it was a regular admin request.
Seems overly bureaucratic to demand the code to be open source. One or more
of the antivandal tools are also closed code to prevent vandals from abusing
it and there hasn't been anyone questioning that yet.

Mgm


subject: [Wikitech-l] Adding hooks

body:
On 1/8/07, hansm Hans Musil <hansm at wikivoyage.org> wrote:
> How is your policy about adding hooks to MediaWiki. I had some suggestions.

Make them and we'll listen.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Jeez (ANI)

body:
dmehkeri at swi.com wrote:
>>>> I hadn't had time to read ANI for the last 3 days, and just went and
>>>> started catching up.
>>>>
>>>> It's not just me; everyone's pissed off and behaving badly right now.
>>>>
>>>> We should put en.wikipedia on a one-week cooldown edit freeze....
>>>>
>>>>
>>> No that is just normal WP:AN/I.
>> No, it's not.
>>
>> It's been worse, but it's pretty bad right now.
>>
>> Longtime experienced contributors / admins are going at it with each
>> other over what are fundamentally pretty trivial incidents.
>>
>
> So then put just them on an edit freeze.
>
> IP/new account only day. I wonder what would happen.
>
> Dan

Everyone would log out and continue where they left off?

-Gurch


from_name: Keitei

subject: [WikiEN-l] New bot up for RFA

body:
> On 1/8/07, Andrew Gray <shimgray at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Fundamentally, I cannot see any reason not to release it. We're not
>> talking a vandalhunter here; there are no complex algorithms that can
>> be gamed, no part of this bot that will work better if its targets
>> don't know how it works, no plausible scenario where secrecy will
>> prove advantageous to it. It has a clearly defined, explicitly
>> defined, method; releasing the code to show that method shouldn't, to
>> my understanding, be a problem to its operation. So why not? It'll
>> make people feel better about it, reduce fear and uncertainty, and
>> let
>> us all get on with creative work - which is what we're here for.

Well, en.wp isn't the only Wikipedia. If someone had the code, they
could probably fire it up on any other Wikipedia and continue to do
this until they'd hit all of them (and presumably vandalized them
all). I imagine this would be far more disastrous than not releasing
the code. And of course the vandals /could/ code this themselves, but
it's so much easier when someone hands you the code on a GFDL platter.

Or is this WP:BEANS?

--keitei


subject: [Foundation-l] Mission/Vision Statement

body:
Hoi,
You make the issue too simple. When I am to be asked if I want
advertisements, than the answer is no. When /you /are to be asked do you
want response times that are on average 50 seconds, than the answer is
likely to be no as well.

When you say that billions are spend on adverts, then you hit the
jackpot. This is indeed one place where we can find the money to
continue the upward trend that we have both in content, in bandwidth, in
people using our content/people contributing to our content, in
languages and in projects. My problem with your stance is that you
provide no credible alternative in the face of a demonstrated need for
money. The current budget ignores all the things we could do if we had
indeed more money than needed for our immediate requirements.

To demonstrate that you can think differently; in a contract for adds,
you could specify that organisations can not advertise on their own page
and on the page of their competitor. This would wipe away your Micro$oft
inspired comment.

PS When will you start taking the real issue seriously? The issue is we
need MORE money and we will need EVEN MORE money given our growth rate.

Thanks,
    GerardM

teun spaans schreef:
> Thx,
>
> Indeed, I'd like to make clear that our vision should encompass both
> kinds of "free".
>
> Advertisements are likely to tarnish the strictly neutral image of our
> projects. take the example of the Microsoft articles on wikipedia.
> Microsoft the company, and articles on their products.
> Using the google context ad-aware system, the most logical ads would
> be for exactly ... uh, these microsoft products. You cant fool me -
> even if the people could easily distinguish articles and ads,
> unconsciously they would be influenced.
>
> Waerth en GerardM argued that people ignore ads. If they were right,
> companies would no longer spend a dime on ads. But they are spending
> billions on them.
>
> teun
>
> On 1/6/07, Anthony <wikilegal at inbox.org> wrote:
>
>> On 1/5/07, Teun Spaans <teun.spaans at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Anthony,
>>>
>>> what, according to you, is the place to speak up?
>>>
>>>
>> This thread is certainly a good place.  If you think "without
>> advertisements" should be added to the mission statement, suggest it.
>> It would be interesting to see who, if anyone, objects.
>>
>>
>>> I have considered this mailinglist as the place to speak up, anywhere else?
>>>
>>>
>> There's a talk page for that mission statement draft.  Not sure where
>> else it's being discussed.
>>
>> Anthony


subject: [Foundation-l] Mission/Vision Statement


from_name: Ilmari Karonen

subject: [WikiEN-l] New bot up for RFA

body:
Jeff Raymond wrote:
> MacGyverMagic/Mgm wrote:
>> What's the point of showing everyone the code? Are we afraid the owner is
>> going to abuse the bot?
>
> What's the point of hiding the code?  Why does it have to be kept a secret?
>
> And yes, I know there's discussion at the RfA talk page, but "vandals
> might use the code" is a poor rationale for not keeping it open.  There's
> no good reason to keep it secret, but the headcount is going in the
> support column regardless, and that's a shame that it doesn't look like
> the arguments regarding openness of the code (suddenly the "we shouldn't
> accept things that are less free" folks are quiet) are going to gain any
> traction.

For things that go into the MediaWiki codebase, yes, they do need to be
not only made public but in fact licensed under the GPL.  For something
that Robert or anyone else is running on their own computer, not really.
  Of course it would be _nice_, from an ideological perspective, if all
code was public and free, but in practice I see no grounds for demanding
this.

In fact, I personally feel there's way too much bureaucracy going on
here, and perhaps even in the "ordinary" bot approval process as well.
The way I see it, it's really no-one else's business how people choose
to make their edits and other actions, whether they do it manually in a
browser, assisted by user scripts, with a fully-automated bot or by
telnetting to port 80 on en.wikipedia.org, and whether they do it from
one account or several, as long as they admit which accounts are theirs.

If they disrupt Wikipedia, they should and will be blocked and stripped
of their other privileges just as readily whether they do so with a bot
or in any other way.  And if a trusted user should ask that an alternate
account of theirs be provided with a subset of the technical abilities
they have already been trusted with, why, that should be a mere routine
technicality that any bureaucrat or steward should be able to satisfy
upon a simple request.

It seems our approval procedures have gotten to the point where we're
just creating bureaucracy for the sake of bureaucracy, and even
demanding that things be discussed and !voted upon twice just so that
people whose participation on Wikipedia is centered around a single
project page should not be, god forbid, made to follow a link to another
page in order to participate in a centralized discussion there.

(Yes, I'm aware I'm digressing a bit from your specific point.  Sorry
for the rant, I just felt the need to get it out of my system after
reading some of the comments on that Rf-not-really-A page.)

--
Ilmari Karonen


from_name: Brion Vibber

subject: [Wikitech-l] MediaWiki 1.9.0rc1 available for testing

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

I've made a snapshot release candidate from 1.9 branch; this is a chance
to get a few more possible installation/upgrade regressions tested and
fixed.

A more widely announced 'final' 1.9.0 release will come after another
day or two.

Full release notes:
http://svn.wikimedia.org/svnroot/mediawiki/tags/REL1_9_0RC1/phase3/RELEASE-NOTES

Download from:
http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=34373&package_id=93103

MD5 checksum: 55eb83d15a95db85ed002aace93a18d9
SHA-1 checksum: 1ee7d5ddc5b356288f7bdaa9b5800cb89a461216

- -- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com / brion @ wikimedia.org)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFFov17wRnhpk1wk44RAm0NAJ9cCdwCyI05uxYzub91uU19NYEu8ACfWSsB
1vXMvKj5Q3Hhb6h0gLphWWA=
=fhhJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


from_name: mwookie

subject: [WikiEN-l] Using paragraphs from wikipedia on other websites

body:
Ok, I know this has probably been addressed 100 times, but I can't make sense
of it all. I am created a directory site for my state (New Mexico). I would
like to use wiki information about each city on the site. I don't want to
include the whole articles (mirror like). But I am quoting verbatim text.

Questions:
1) If I include several paragraphs from the text in my website, does my
entire site need to be licensed under the GFDL or just that page, or just
the "text" versus the layout, links, etc.?

2) What is an appropriate link,citation? I have heard or ready that I must
link the history page of the document.

3) Any question that I should be asking, but don't know to ask :)

Well, anyhow. I have read all the reusing content stuff on wikiepedia and I
understand 70% of it, but want to get some more input

An example or what I am thinking of doing is at:
http://newmexicodirect.net/other-nm-cities/artesia/ The majority of the
quoted text is near the bottom of the page.

Also, if you have links to other discussions on the subject, I would love to
see more. Thanks in advance.

--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Using-paragraphs-from-wikipedia-on-other-websites-tf2943552.html#a8231036
Sent from the English Wikipedia mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Help!

body:
Marc Riddell wrote:
>
>> How about http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Userlogin?useskin=nostalgia
>
> Yes! Using the link you gave I was able to do a successful log in. But the
> damned overlay is still there, and I don't have access to the top row of
> buttons such as my Watch List, etc.

Okay, then try:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Preferences?useskin=nostalgia

and select the Nostalgia skin for permanent use there.  You might also
want to try some of the other skins, such as Classic and Cologne Blue.

Of course, the problem with the default Monobook skin should be fixed as
soon as possible, but this should at least let you keep using Wikipedia
while we try to figure out what's causing the breakage.

--
Ilmari Karonen


from_name: NSLE (Wikipedia)

body:
Who's ready to start the new non-stupid WikiEN-l thread, part 5 (I think!),
then? :P

--NSLE/Chacor

On 08/01/07, Luna <lunasantin at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 1/8/07, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > The best thing to do for wikien-l is to start more good threads.
>
>
>
> I'd agree, I think; if another list becomes "the place to talk," it seems
> to
> me that all the complaints would just move over there. And *plus* we'd
> start
> getting the fun accusations of caballery (mitigated if the archives are
> public, but still present and plausible).
>
> But anyway, if we want to see more good threads, there's an easy way to
> get
> a few, indeed. ;)
>
> -Luna
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: Andrew Gray

subject: [WikiEN-l] New bot up for RFA

body:
On 08/01/07, bbatsell <wikipedia at theskeptik.com> wrote:

> These steps are so tedious and error-prone that we have screwed up
> numerous times already, and that has been exploited.  I'm not sure
> how many more times we can allow pictures of cleft penii or vaginal
> sores ON OUR FRONT PAGE without losing tremendous amounts of
> credibility.

With regards to yesterday's ranting, this is a perfectly appropriate
example of what automation of administrative tasks should be used
for... but I would see no reason the code can't be released. There's
no complex checks involved a vandal can game if they know the details,
simply generating a list of all transclusions from a single page and
then setting protection for each. Unless the bot does something I'm
not understanding, releasing the code gives no loss of security and
allows the community to feel a lot more comfortable permitting it.

As an aside, every minute a vandalised image is covering the main
page, we serve it up to around two thousand people (give or take 50%
based on time of day, etc). Something to bear in mind.

--
- Andrew Gray
  andrew.gray at dunelm.org.uk


from_name: Jay R. Ashworth

body:
On Tue, Jan 09, 2007 at 12:20:22AM +0100, Gerard Meijssen wrote:
> The notion that the MediaWiki software is almost entirely developed for
> one organisation is seriously wrong. OmegaWiki, formerly WiktionaryZ has
> realised a lot of functionality already and this is just one other
> project. There are many more projects that have developed on MediaWiki
> and much of this development, like OmegaWiki, is as Free as the WMF
> developed functionality is.

Well, let's be clear here: do we measure in site installations?

Or terabytes a month of traffic?  :-)

Cheers,
-- jra
--
Jay R. Ashworth                                                jra at baylink.com
Designer                          Baylink                             RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates        The Things I Think                        '87 e24
St Petersburg FL USA      http://baylink.pitas.com             +1 727 647 1274


body:
On Tue, Jan 09, 2007 at 12:21:40AM +0100, Bernd vdB wrote:
> No, really, Firefix works just as designed and as specified.
> A fixed font size is _meant_ to render fixed, and:
> "Use of percentage values, or values in 'em's, leads to more robust and
> cascadable style sheets."
> ( http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/fonts.html#font-size-props )

Let me throw an oar in the water here:

"Scaling" should, IMHO, in fact override any fixed size element,
affecting all of them equally.  If I 'Ctrl-+' your webpage in Firefox
because it's too small to read on my 1400x1050 laptop panel, and any
thing at all doesn't resize... it's broken.

Cheers,
-- jra
--
Jay R. Ashworth                                                jra at baylink.com
Designer                          Baylink                             RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates        The Things I Think                        '87 e24
St Petersburg FL USA      http://baylink.pitas.com             +1 727 647 1274


body:
On Mon, Jan 08, 2007 at 03:49:39PM -0800, Brion Vibber wrote:
> Just because I ask you questions about a bug I can't reproduce on my
> system without more information from you doesn't mean I'm out to get you.

Quote.  Of.  The.  Year.

Cheers,
-- jr 'Scary Devil Monastery' a
--
Jay R. Ashworth                                                jra at baylink.com
Designer                          Baylink                             RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates        The Things I Think                        '87 e24
St Petersburg FL USA      http://baylink.pitas.com             +1 727 647 1274


subject: [Wikitech-l] Mobile device testing

body:
On Mon, Jan 08, 2007 at 10:10:12PM +0100, Marco Schuster wrote:
> Brion Vibber schrieb:
> > Simetrical's been doing some work on the handheld stylesheet lately,
> > which brings me to the subject of testing MediaWiki in actual
> > mobile/handheld browsers.
> >
> > I stuck a few notes up the other day on the subject of testing with
> > emulators:
> >
> > http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Mobile_browser_testing
> >
> > Volunteers for testing on actual devices and donations of devices are
> > also welcome.
> >
> I tested on a HP620LX (yeah, it's outdated - CE 2.0 and some ancient
> version of IE); Wikipedia can be used there even with normal stylesheet.

Allow me to suggest that anecdotal field reports be places on the talk
page of that page?  (Actually, somewhere on WP that everyone's already
got an account would be a lighter-weight solution, if not as clean...)

Cheers,
-- jra
--
Jay R. Ashworth                                                jra at baylink.com
Designer                          Baylink                             RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates        The Things I Think                        '87 e24
St Petersburg FL USA      http://baylink.pitas.com             +1 727 647 1274


from_name: Anthony

subject: [Foundation-l] Fundraising and site notice

body:
On 1/7/07, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
> Oldak Quill schreef:
> > On 07/01/07, Florence Devouard <anthere at anthere.org> wrote:
> >
> >> Hello everyone.
> >>
> >> Just for a head up (or down)
> >>
> >> First, I wanted to announce to all that there will be no more matching
> >> donors in that fundraiser.
> >> This is due to a variety of reasons, including, but not limited to, the
> >> reaction of some members in the community.
> >>
> >
> > Regardless of whether I agreed with the Virgin notice or not, this is
> > an excellent move on behalf of the Foundation. It demonstrates the
> > Foundation's responsiveness to Wikimedians and that there is no
> > bureaucratic disconnect (which is always a worry when a project like
> > ours begins to organise into formalised institutions and structures).
> >
> > Thanks Florence and the rest of the team. You're doing an excellent job.
> >
> >
> Hoi,
> I am afraid you did not read the whole of Florence her e-mail, or you
> only read what you want to read.. "Fourth, we'll go on with limited
> funds. Limited means we'll go delaying certain issues. That's life !"
>
> This means that things that are deemed necessary will not happen or will
> not happen in the near future for lack of funds.

Ant didn't say anything about the issues which were delayed being
*necessary*.  Framing it that way seems unfair.

> There have been no
> serious proposals on how the WMF can make the money that it requires.
> And where you see responsiveness, I fail to see how our aim is indeed
> best served when you consider our growth and our lack of current funding.
>
You seem to be taking as a given that the Virgin Unite sponsorship had
an overall positive effect on the amount of funds raised.  It seems to
me that isn't necessarily the case.  There certainly has been a
dropoff of raised funds recently, though at least some of this is
likely simply due to it being a new tax year for most US donors.

Anthony


subject: [WikiEN-l] Help!

body:
[[Special:Userlogin]] is the link to log-in. Try clearing your browser
cache/purging the page.

On 08/01/07, Marc Riddell <michaeldavid86 at comcast.net> wrote:
>
> I don't know where else to turn for input on this. I closed out of
> Wikipedia
> last evening - everything was fine. This morning, I tried to access it and
> the entire page is a mess. The WP Globe and contents selections are
> superimposed over the page, and I don't have access to the log-in or other
> such buttons. I tried to access WP via a Google search, and got the same
> thing.
>
> Is anyone else experiencing this? How can I fix it?
>
> Help!
>
> Marc Riddell
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


subject: [WikiEN-l] New bot up for RFA

body:
On 08/01/07, MacGyverMagic/Mgm <macgyvermagic at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 1/8/07, Andrew Gray <shimgray at gmail.com> wrote:
> > There's
> > no complex checks involved a vandal can game if they know the details,
> > simply generating a list of all transclusions from a single page and
> > then setting protection for each. Unless the bot does something I'm
> > not understanding, releasing the code gives no loss of security and
> > allows the community to feel a lot more comfortable permitting it.
>
> That's why I don't understand some people are uncomfortable with it.
> It does something simple and it's not dangerous what exactly do they feel is
> so scary that the code needs to be released?

Because we don't *know* that. We know the programmer intends it to do
something simple and routine. We don't know if he has a secret plan
(he doesn't, I am sure, but someone who doesn't know of him might not
accept this), or if he's made some silly mistake whereby it'll
actually miss every transcluded template containing a "7", or if it'll
stop checking at the sixth level of transclusion because he thinks
there won't be any more, or whatever.

It's not a matter of trust; it's a matter of confidence. Because a bot
doesn't have that simple and obvious "common sense oversight" option,
we want to know *exactly* what it will do, not what the designer
intends it to do. And the only way to do that is to see what the code
is.

Fundamentally, I cannot see any reason not to release it. We're not
talking a vandalhunter here; there are no complex algorithms that can
be gamed, no part of this bot that will work better if its targets
don't know how it works, no plausible scenario where secrecy will
prove advantageous to it. It has a clearly defined, explicitly
defined, method; releasing the code to show that method shouldn't, to
my understanding, be a problem to its operation. So why not? It'll
make people feel better about it, reduce fear and uncertainty, and let
us all get on with creative work - which is what we're here for.

--
- Andrew Gray
  andrew.gray at dunelm.org.uk


subject: [WikiEN-l] New bot up for RFA

body:
On 1/8/07, Ilmari Karonen <nospam at vyznev.net> wrote:
> Jeff Raymond wrote:
> > MacGyverMagic/Mgm wrote:
> >> What's the point of showing everyone the code? Are we afraid the owner is
> >> going to abuse the bot?
> >
> > What's the point of hiding the code?  Why does it have to be kept a secret?
> >
> > And yes, I know there's discussion at the RfA talk page, but "vandals
> > might use the code" is a poor rationale for not keeping it open.  There's
> > no good reason to keep it secret, but the headcount is going in the
> > support column regardless, and that's a shame that it doesn't look like
> > the arguments regarding openness of the code (suddenly the "we shouldn't
> > accept things that are less free" folks are quiet) are going to gain any
> > traction.
>
> For things that go into the MediaWiki codebase, yes, they do need to be
> not only made public but in fact licensed under the GPL.  For something
> that Robert or anyone else is running on their own computer, not really.
>   Of course it would be _nice_, from an ideological perspective, if all
> code was public and free, but in practice I see no grounds for demanding
> this.
>
> In fact, I personally feel there's way too much bureaucracy going on
> here, and perhaps even in the "ordinary" bot approval process as well.
> The way I see it, it's really no-one else's business how people choose
> to make their edits and other actions, whether they do it manually in a
> browser, assisted by user scripts, with a fully-automated bot or by
> telnetting to port 80 on en.wikipedia.org, and whether they do it from
> one account or several, as long as they admit which accounts are theirs.
>
> If they disrupt Wikipedia, they should and will be blocked and stripped
> of their other privileges just as readily whether they do so with a bot
> or in any other way.  And if a trusted user should ask that an alternate
> account of theirs be provided with a subset of the technical abilities
> they have already been trusted with, why, that should be a mere routine
> technicality that any bureaucrat or steward should be able to satisfy
> upon a simple request.
>
> It seems our approval procedures have gotten to the point where we're
> just creating bureaucracy for the sake of bureaucracy, and even
> demanding that things be discussed and !voted upon twice just so that
> people whose participation on Wikipedia is centered around a single
> project page should not be, god forbid, made to follow a link to another
> page in order to participate in a centralized discussion there.
>
> (Yes, I'm aware I'm digressing a bit from your specific point.  Sorry
> for the rant, I just felt the need to get it out of my system after
> reading some of the comments on that Rf-not-really-A page.)
>
> --
> Ilmari Karonen
>

All I can say to that is here here! I completly agree with everything
said in that email. I trust to owner, so there is no reason for me not
to trust them on this.

--
-Royalguard11


from_name: Luna

subject: [WikiEN-l] New bot up for RFA

body:
On 1/8/07, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> If the bot starts doing things out of spec I don't think we will need
> the code to know that. No the paranoid arugment fails.
>

My thought exactly -- the bot is intended for one very narrow task, and if
it does anything malicious or outside of that, it seems easy enough to spot.
I can respect the opinions of those wanting open source code, it seems like
an important discussion to have, but I'm not sure that freely open source is
needed; "half-open" might be preferred, if anything. There's a longshot
difference between giving the code to 20 or even 200 people, and giving it
to the entire internet.

But all else aside, RfAs like this are tricky, because it mixes all sorts of
concerns and issues. In addition to the usual pressures of RfA, we have a
large number of people trying to write out the beginnings of an adminbotting
policy on the fly; such a policy doesn't make too much sense, before we have
any adminbots, but getting an adminbot through will be difficult until
there's some consensus as to the exact requirements, guidelines, and such
involved.

Security concerns, trust concerns, accountability concerns, those who don't
want adminbots at all, those who don't want this particular adminbot, all
sorts of opinions. Very complex discussion.

Tally was 146/28/9, last I checked, but it's got a lot longer to go before
the discussion closes. The more community input, the better, I think.

-Luna


from_name: Frederick Noronha

body:
Maybe we should use some discernment, instead of the mechanical rule
of 'number of links' on Google or where-ever. In journalism, it is
always easy to make out what is a 'plug' for someone and what is a
genuine news-item. Guess Wikipedia could depend on local teams to also
offer some cross-checking. FN

On 08/01/07, Andre Engels <andreengels at gmail.com> wrote:
> 2007/1/8, Walter van Kalken <walter at vankalken.net>:
>
> > This is unfortunately not just a problem on the English wikipedia but in
> > the Dutch one as well. and I would think in many other big language
> > editions. As soon as something isn't covered by google people
> > unfortunately assume it isn't notable :( .
> >
>
> Then  again, where's the alternative? I can remember you making a big case
> of this on the Dutch Wikipedia once. Tracking things down, in all
> probability you had been reverting the removal of vandalism on the basis of
> it.
>
> --
> Andre Engels, andreengels at gmail.com
> ICQ: 6260644  --  Skype: a_engels

--
FN M: 0091 9822122436 P: +91-832-240-9490 (after 1300IST please)
http://fn.goa-india.org  http://fredericknoronha.wordpress.com
http://www.goa-india.org http://feeds.goa-india.org/index.php


from_name: Thomas Dalton

subject: [WikiEN-l] Jeez (ANI)

body:
> Everyone would log out and continue where they left off?

But with no admin tools, so the site would implode under the weight of
all the vandalism.


subject: [WikiEN-l] New bot up for RFA

body:
On 1/8/07, Andrew Gray <shimgray at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> There's
> no complex checks involved a vandal can game if they know the details,
> simply generating a list of all transclusions from a single page and
> then setting protection for each. Unless the bot does something I'm
> not understanding, releasing the code gives no loss of security and
> allows the community to feel a lot more comfortable permitting it.

That's why I don't understand some people are uncomfortable with it.
It does something simple and it's not dangerous what exactly do they feel is
so scary that the code needs to be released?


from_name: Gordon Joly

subject:
[WikiEN-l] [Wikimediauk-l] SCHEDULING FIX please read Re:
 London Wikimeet with added Jimbo: Wednesday 10 Jan, Montagu Pyke, WC2H 0BP

body:
At 05:03 -0500 8/1/07, Jimmy Wales wrote:
>So my brain was broken when I said "Wednesday" because what I meant was
>"the last night of my stay in London" which is Tuesday.  I am speaking
>at the London School of Economics Tuesday evening, so a pub near there
>would be grand.
>
>I botched this, I am sorry.

It happens...

Gordo


subject:
[WikiEN-l] SCHEDULING FIX please read Re: London Wikimeet with
 added Jimbo: TUESDAY NINTH Jan, Montagu Pyke, WC2H 0BP

body:
At 10:53 +0000 8/1/07, David Gerard wrote:
>On 08/01/07, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>  AIEEEE!
>>  OK, fixing page ... rebuilding life ... please hold ...
>
>
>By the way, the LSE is approximately here (red arrow):
>
>   http://streetmap.co.uk/newmap.srf?x=530778&y=181130&z=0
>
>The Montagu Pyke is approximately here (red arrow):
>
>   http://streetmap.co.uk/newmap.srf?x=529855&y=181107&z=2
>
>Note that that second map includes both your source and destination,
>so would be suitable for printing and looking at confused should you
>be in London without a native guide.
>
>- d.

And The Shakespeare's Head is two minutes walk from the LSE...

Gordo


from_name: David Goodman

body:
Yes, there is a very definite tendency for deletion of anything about
a non UK/US person or institution, or an academic, or a classical
musician, or someone or something not recent enough to have material
on Google. The reason given is always "notability not asserted" and
people are actually marking for deletion anything which does not
literally countain the word "notability" in the first paragraph. This
is worst in speedy, because there are only a few hours at most to
review tthe listed items, and there's an ongoing discussion on the
talk page of WP:CSD.

Ways to deal with it are well known, but I'm outlining it for clarity.
More people must to make the very considerable effort of reviewing at
least some of the deletions.  For speedys, they're at
[[Category:Candidates_for_speedy_deletion]]. Twice a day is not too
often.  Then there's  [[Category:Proposed deletion]] every few days is
enough, and similarly at AfD. You'll see me there-- I'm DGG.

AfD is the easy part, because if an article gets to AfD, there are
enough people watching to speak up, and enough time to improve the
article.

I'm not hopeful on structural change, because no structural change can
stand up to people wantonly ignoring the meaning of the rules.  But WP
is after all a cooperatively edited project, and individual people
joining in can make a difference.  To return to the original posting,
if a number of other people familiar with Indian material support
worthy articles, it will work.

For individual articles, the way to do it is to put in a clearly
sufficient number of citations. from printed works. (accompanied by
English translations if necessary). I've found that specific citations
from peer-reviewed journals do help, if they are at all pertinent. So
do Ph.d. theses and even Masters theses.

The other specific tactic some like-minded people are using is to
write the article on their user page, and invite comment individually
from people likely to be active in AfD.
Format does matter.

-- David Goodman

On 1/8/07, Steve <subsume at gmail.com> wrote:
> My are these slopes slippery this time of year. And me without my sled.
>
> -S
>
> On 1/8/07, Andre Engels <andreengels at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > That's a big hypothetical - if he had been born there, how much and what
> > would he have written? Having somehting un-notable may not be a grave
> > error,
> > but having thousands of un-notable things clogs Wikipedia, makes
> > fact-checking harder and opens the doors wide to usage of Wikipedia for
> > advertisement.
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>

--
David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S.


subject: [Wikitech-l] [WikiEN-l] Help!

references:
<fb7fdd9c0701080442w1e7852ebr124f00a26b5d5ca@mail.gmail.com>
	<C1C7B259.C4B%michaeldavid86@comcast.net>
	<fbad4e140701080622ka571f8auc72bddffbe6af88f@mail.gmail.com>
	<7c2a12e20701081051p6d315de5u4be40b737afe3551@mail.gmail.com>

body:
On 08/01/07, Simetrical <Simetrical+wikitech at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 1/8/07, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 08/01/07, Marc Riddell <michaeldavid86 at comcast.net> wrote:

> > > Yes, I'm in full screen. I'm using Internet Explorer, 5.1. This just
> > > happened overnight! I've been working in Wikipedia for over a year now.

> > (It's possible a subtle CSS change on the front page has messed things
> > up in IE Mac 5.1.)
> > (cc'ing to wikitech-l. Original problem: "I closed out of Wikipedia
> > last evening - everything was fine. This morning, I tried to access it
> > and the entire page is a mess. The WP Globe and contents selections
> > are superimposed over the page, and I don't have access to the log-in
> > or other such buttons. I tried to access WP via a Google search, and
> > got the same thing.")

> This has been fixed.  Bloody CSS1 browsers.

And here I am remembering way back when IE5 for Mac was regarded as
pretty good for compliance ...

(mind you, there was trying to get the CSS to work for the Mozilla 1.0
start page in time for release day. Certain browsers were eventually
just sent to the lo-fi version ...)

- d.


from_name: percy tiglao

subject: [Textbook-l] Wikibook User Arbitration

body:
On 1/8/07, Andrew Whitworth <wknight8111 at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >What I've done here is turn this into a formal debate.  While prehaps we
> >can change the terms "plaintiff" and "defendant", the purpose here is to
> >allow everybody to air their concerns and grievences in a public manner
> >that can be reviewed later on by all parties involved, and by those
> >chared with oversight of this project, including other administrators,
> >stewards, and ultimately the WMF board of trustees.
>
> I want to make this perfectly clear right now, I do like the way you are
> going about this process. This arbitration hearing has been set up in a
> clear, well-defined way that does give everybody a shot to talk.  Barring
> the use of some specific terminology, I think the process is a good general
> model to use in the future.
>
> What I don't like, (and what Johnny has been pointing out), is that Johnny
> himself served as a moderator in this situation (between Darklama and
> Panic). Panic asked Johnny (and myself) to come in and moderate the
> discussion. Johnny's decision was that Panic was in the wrong, and his
> continued bad behavior warranted a block.
>
> What this arbitration hearing is doing, is essentially punishing (or
> threatening to punish) Johnny for acting as a volunteer moderator for Panic
> in the first place. Panic didn't like the outcome, but that's tough beans:
> He asked for a moderator because he wanted to maintain unilateral control
> over his book, but what he got was a punishment instead. We're creating a
> precedent where moderation and arbitration can be appealed ad infinitum
> until everybody gives up or storms off. Somewhere we need to say "A decision
> has already been made on this issue, and we need to stand by our decisions".
> Don't think for an instant that if you agree with Johnny and have panic
> blocked, that  he won't appeal higher up the chain (WMF intervention?) to
> have you de-admined as well. Maybe he won't succeed, but tell me having your
> adminship on the line over this won't upset you pretty badly as well?

Well, comming in from an entirely ignorant point of view (or nearly
ignorant), I would have to say all that this has demonstrated is that
somewhere down the road, and probably soon, we must come up with a
specific policy about this kind of thing. Something where the entire
community can have complete closure, a "final word" of sorts.

The challenge of course is that one or two turns probably ain't gonna
do it. So there needs to be a set amount of appeals (even if this set
number of appeals is 0, it needs to be set so that everyone is happy,
at least so the rules are set down). As said before, I still feel that
"community consensus" must be sacrificed if any kind of closure is to
be felt.

--Dragontamer


from_name: Guy Chapman aka JzG

subject: [WikiEN-l] New bot up for RFA

body:
On Mon, 8 Jan 2007 14:12:39 -0600 (CST), "Jeff Raymond"
<jeff.raymond at internationalhouseofbacon.com> wrote:

>For me, it's exactly this kind of dismissive attitude about it.  "Trust
>us, it does what it says.  Why do you need to know?"

Don't you trust them then?  Why *do* you need to know?  Seriously.

Guy (JzG)
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JzG


from_name: geni

subject: [WikiEN-l] New bot up for RFA

body:
On 1/8/07, Andrew Gray <shimgray at gmail.com> wrote:
> We know the programmer intends it to do
> something simple and routine. We don't know if he has a secret plan
> (he doesn't, I am sure, but someone who doesn't know of him might not
> accept this),

The problem with that line of paranoia is that it doesn't trust
someone enough to run code you can't see but at the same time trust
them to give you the real code.

--
geni


from_name: zetawoof

subject: [Wikitech-l] Discovered a remote loader

body:
http://www.medbib.com/ appears to be doing some remote loading.
(Checked by pointing it at a page of mine that I'd just created for
the purpose.)

Dispose of as you wish.


body:
Hmmm... some interesting issues being raised below. Just for argument
sake: what happens if an "un-notable" entry makes it to Wikipedia?
Would it be a grave error? Notability, after all, is mostly related to
context. Would Shakespeare have been as "noted" a writer, if he had to
be born in, say, Upper Egypt?

I think the problem lies elsewhere. The trouble is: people or
institutions being packaged to be what they are not. Or bloated claims
about institutions or organisations or individuals.

Rather than just delete entries for being un-notable, perhaps we need
to find ways to ensure that what's written is both accurate and
tallies with the reality. --FN

On 08/01/07, Steve <subsume at gmail.com> wrote:
> Maybe this is a rookie opinion, but I think that the AFD process tends to
> attract people who are focused on keeping wikipedia "uncluttered" and
> "relevant". They're always going to "err on the side of delete" and that's
> that. You can present anything to the people at AFD, but its a systemic
> habit. Those aren't just going to undo because of one person's polite
> suggestion.
>
> While I happen to think deletionists could be restrained greatly without
> loss to Wikipedia (since the articles they're deleting are hardly well
> connected and widely viewed), I'm just one opinion. Over the years I've
> noticed a kind of institutional insecurity grow in Wikipedia, over fears our
> pedia is being perceived as full of unverified internet rabble.
>
> -S
--
FN M: 0091 9822122436 P: +91-832-240-9490 (after 1300IST please)
http://fn.goa-india.org  http://fredericknoronha.wordpress.com
http://www.goa-india.org http://feeds.goa-india.org/index.php


subject:
[WikiEN-l] [Wikimediauk-l] SCHEDULING FIX please read Re:
 London Wikimeet with added Jimbo: TUESDAY NINTH Jan, Montagu Pyke, WC2H 0BP

body:
Pub details and reviews here: http://tinyurl.com/tahxs

Gordo

--
loopzilla at loopzilla.org
http://www.loopzilla.org/


from_name: Plyd

subject: [Wikitech-l] Mobile device testing

body:
Hello,

I can test it with IE for Windows Mobile 5 on my smartphone.
I also run Opera on it, so I can test it in real life.

But there seems to be many different situations (key or stylus use),
css or not, width, height of screens, default fonts, speed for slow
networks, I think we would need many users.

I also tried to write a css stylesheet for small-width screens,
inspired from Monobook.
It is pleasant on my mobile phone, but it is still the very beginning.

My stub is here :
http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utilisateur:Plyd/myskin.css
I'll take screenshots soon.

Where could we see Simetrical's one?

Plyd

On 1/8/07, Brion Vibber <brion at pobox.com> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Simetrical's been doing some work on the handheld stylesheet lately,
> which brings me to the subject of testing MediaWiki in actual
> mobile/handheld browsers.
>
> I stuck a few notes up the other day on the subject of testing with
> emulators:
>
> http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Mobile_browser_testing
>
>
> To summarize real quick:
>
> * Opera Mini can be tested in any desktop web browser via a Java applet
> that Opera provides
>
> * IE Mobile / Pocket IE can in theory be tested in an emulator that
> Microsoft provides (for Windows PCs), but I haven't gotten networking to
> work so haven't been able to reach a wiki with it
>
>
> If someone can get the Windows Mobile/PocketPC/Windows CE/whatever thing
> working, or knows of good resources for testing other mobile
> OSs/browsers, that would be welcome news!
>
> Volunteers for testing on actual devices and donations of devices are
> also welcome.
>
> - -- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com / brion @ wikimedia.org)
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (Darwin)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
> iD8DBQFFojGzwRnhpk1wk44RAjBlAJ9qIPAXXWzEW/q8+usTqiyjY214AgCfV1TW
> xHQ4KK1VMjgfJsc+prpHMBM=
> =VVIT
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>


from_name: David Gerard

subject:
[Wikitech-l] [Oversight-l] Also, once you begin the process,
	You will not make payments on your Account s06x15 c8w

body:
Oh, bother. That's two bits of spam today on oversight-l. I expect
we're on the lists now.

Devs - what's the spam filter like on the mailing list box?

- d.

On 08/01/07, Joy <Momentum_Traders_torridness at gmail.com> wrote:

> Eliminate all of your CreditCard Debt.
[canned lunchmeat snipped]


from_name: Matthew Brown

body:
I personally think it is overstated that most of our content comes
from short-term contributors.  What I do find is that short-term
contributors begin a lot of our articles, yes, but they generally
produce content that is not up to a high standard.  My experience is
that in most fields of interest, large numbers of articles are
substantially written by the same small subset of users.

On the other hand, these people have to start somewhere.  I think that
people get into Wikipedia in one of two ways.  The first is that they
hear about Wikipedia as a project and go there because it sounds
interesting.  The second is when they find an article that's not very
good, and improve or replace it.

In the first case, people are likely to read featured articles and
other stuff pointed-to off the main page first.  In the second case,
they are less likely to - although they are likely to poke around
similar content till they find a 'good example' to work from.  In the
first case, the FA process is very valuable - we're showing people
examples of what to do to create a good Wikipedia article.  In the
second case, applicable WikiProjects are good, because they improve
the chances of someone finding a similar article to a bad one that's
done properly.

Articles don't develop linearly - I agree.  However, what generally
happens is that drive-by users add snippets over time until someone
wanders by, thinks "What a mess!" and decides to yank it out by the
roots and start over.  However, that 'start over' will generally
contain most of what's worthwhile about the previous version - people
are averse to dropping content (even when it should be dropped).  As
the article gets longer, these rewrites tend to be of sections rather
than the whole article.

-Matt


from_name: Marco Schuster

subject: [Wikitech-l] Mobile device testing

body:
Brion Vibber schrieb:
> Simetrical's been doing some work on the handheld stylesheet lately,
> which brings me to the subject of testing MediaWiki in actual
> mobile/handheld browsers.
>
> I stuck a few notes up the other day on the subject of testing with
> emulators:
>
> http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Mobile_browser_testing
>
>
> To summarize real quick:
>
> * Opera Mini can be tested in any desktop web browser via a Java applet
> that Opera provides
>
> * IE Mobile / Pocket IE can in theory be tested in an emulator that
> Microsoft provides (for Windows PCs), but I haven't gotten networking to
> work so haven't been able to reach a wiki with it
>
>
> If someone can get the Windows Mobile/PocketPC/Windows CE/whatever thing
> working, or knows of good resources for testing other mobile
> OSs/browsers, that would be welcome news!
>
> Volunteers for testing on actual devices and donations of devices are
> also welcome.
>
>
I tested on a HP620LX (yeah, it's outdated - CE 2.0 and some ancient
version of IE); Wikipedia can be used there even with normal stylesheet.

Marco


subject: [WikiEN-l] New bot up for RFA

body:
On 1/8/07, Jeff Raymond <jeff.raymond at internationalhouseofbacon.com> wrote:
>
> geni wrote:
> > On 1/8/07, Andrew Gray <shimgray at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> We know the programmer intends it to do
> >> something simple and routine. We don't know if he has a secret plan
> >> (he doesn't, I am sure, but someone who doesn't know of him might not
> >> accept this),
> >
> > The problem with that line of paranoia is that it doesn't trust
> > someone enough to run code you can't see but at the same time trust
> > them to give you the real code.
>
> Of course, if the code that's been released doesn't match the code that's
> running, we can obviously note the problem.

If the bot starts doing things out of spec I don't think we will need
the code to know that. No the paranoid arugment fails.

--
geni


from_name: Robth

body:
On 1/6/07, Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote:

> Sure.  We also know how thoroughly people read software manuals.  We do
> have all sorts of articles that are bloody awful, but we have to give
> our serious contributors a little credit for recognizing trash.  Each
> new contributor will follow his own writing style.  He may look at the
> bad articles to understand how wiki markup is used, but that doesn't
> mean that he will adopt someone else's writing style.  If he makes
> atrocious gaffes in his writing I would hope that someone who notices
> this will become a mentor who understandingly encourages him to improve,
> rather than criticises him on his stupid style.

I'm wasn't talking here about writing style, which is something that
everyone has independently of Wikipedia, but referencing style.  Very
few people come to the project with established preferences for how to
research and reference encyclopedia articles.  And while it's true
that you can offer suggestions for improvement for people who come to
stay, the same is not true of the short-term contributors who account
for most of our content.  Our one chance to reach many of our
contributors is through the articles they read before contributing,
and if the majority of those articles are unreferenced or poorly
referenced they are going to (as I did and I suspect many others here
did at first) start by writing unreferenced or poorly referenced
articles; if they only work on one article, that may well be all they
write.

> Failing to have the resources is not an argument for extreme action.

> We all have our own image of what is needed for an ideal article.  For
> any article this develops over time, sometimes over a very long time.
> An early stage article may be deficient in many respects.  Only
> blatantly illegal, offensive or vandalous activities require immediate
> attention.  Otherwise, fix what you can or leave deficiency notices and
> move on.  Eventually someone who is interested in the subject will do
> what needs to be done.

This is an example of a view of the Wikipedia system that I find very
unconvincing. First, the notion that articles organically develop and
improve over time, with each stage of the article serving as the
building block for the next, is not supported by examining articles
that expand and improve substantially from their creation; generally,
such expansion is a result of a single editor replacing (as opposed to
slowly expanding upon) the existing content (an interesting essay on a
subject related to this can be found at
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Matt_Britt/Don%27t_just_do_whatever>).
 While there is certainly a value to having something, whatever it is,
at a given location (breadth of coverage is a sort of quality in and
of itself), we shouldn't overstate the role that existing weak
articles play in developing strong articles to replace themselves.

Furthermore, I think the almost dialectical view, evident in your
comment above, that Wikipedia is headed inexorably in the correct
direction is an incorrect and dangerous one. While the project has
already achieved a great deal, it is still quite possible that it
could end up as something much less than it has the potential to be,
that it could become largely a compilation of the collected wisdom of
the internet instead of a true collection of human knowledge. So long
as the volume of content from passer-by contributors continues to
dwarf that from regulars (i.e. for the foreseeable future), the
quality of referencing in contributions from new users is going to be
the greatest factor in determining the direction we move in in this
regard.  Taking a lassez faire approach to article quality (and
specifically, reference quality) will ensure that our average article
remains rather poorly referenced, and strikes me as a sure way to at
best delay the development of a higher quality encyclopedia, and at
worst lastingly sidetrack the project.

--
Robth
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Robth)


list: wiktionary-l

from_name: elisabeth anderl

subject: [Wiktionary-l] Logo

body:
Matthieu Barba a ?crit :
> Hello all,
>
> I already wrote something on the English Beer Parlour, but this list is probably more appropriate.
>
> A new logo of the project Wiktionary has been voted at the end of October. But the old logo has not been replaced in any project I have visited (All the 1000+).
>
> Why isn't it implemented now? Maybe because the logo is still incomplete, some issues are still discussed: which letter should be written? W (from Wiktionary) or A (from the alphabet)? Problems with the Japanese letters, etc.
>
> By the pace is is going, there will never be a final version.
>
> So, what do we do?
>
> We could speed things up by forcing the remaining issues to be discussed (in the English Beer Parlour for example).
> We could also "forget" about this logo and just keep the old one. Of course it has been voted, but it looks like nobody cares now. And some people complained about the vote procedure itself.
>
> I would have supported this logo even though I dislike it (for many reasons), but the way things went and are going now, I would not anymore. Do we still need this logo? It doesn't add anything compared to the old one (maybe more solid, but that's all).
>
> If I could, I would just ignore the vote and either keep the current one, or begin another procedure but this time with a proper preparation (there has been too much problems), with more time to propose versions, etc.
> For example, if I organize a vote on fr: (the project where I work the most) with the question: "Do you want to change the logo with the new one or keep the current one?" I think there would be more votes for keeping the old. In the end, it is still the Wiktionary communities who decide, isn't it?
>
> Here is a link to the new logo page on meta: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wiktionary/logo
>
>  I would like to know your opinion about that ^^
>
> Thanks,
> Darkdadaah, fr.wikt
>  __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> En finir avec le spam? Yahoo! Mail vous offre la meilleure protection possible contre les messages non sollicit?s
> http://mail.yahoo.fr Yahoo! Mail
> _______________________________________________
> Wiktionary-l mailing list
> Wiktionary-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiktionary-l
>
>
>
Hello, yes, imho it is not implemented because it is incomplete.
Furthermore I got the impression, that the logo vote was iniciated by
non wiktionary contributors and that there were much voters from
outside, so that now since the voting is over they are gone and no one
from wiktionary is actually interested or has got the time completing
this logo.
It is funny that all Wiktionarians I have spoken with do not like this
new logo, maybe that is also a reason why there is no progress.
Best regards
Elisabeth Anderl (aka spacebirdy)