from_name: Tim Starling

subject:
[Wikitech-l]
	Re: broken e-mail notification on testwiki - who knows, why ?

body:
Thomas Gries wrote:
> Hi,
> does anyone know about the (non-working) e-mail notification and the
> missing "updated" markers (for watched pages which have new contents
> since your last visit).
> The functionality is totally broken on http://test.leuksman.com which is
> a pity.

It's disabled, not broken. That doesn't mean it will be disabled on
Wikipedia, when it goes live.

> If you want me to assist in fixing this problem, please let me know.
> For those who want to use a working MediaWiki with e-mail notification
> for changed and new pages, it can be downloaded from
> http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enotif .

Since it works much better in HEAD than it did in any of your patches, I
wouldn't recommend anyone downloading them. There's still plenty of work
to do though, as I discovered looking at it just now.

> It could be easily extended to send notification to Sysops, when new
> users register. Pls. contact me, if you need this.

Why don't you find something else to do for a change? It's not like
you're an email expert, I don't know why you're so keen on writing email
features. Why not fix some bugs listed in bugzilla? There's hundreds to
choose from.

-- Tim Starling


list: wikien-l

source: pipermail-mbox

from_name: David Gerard

subject: [WikiEN-l] Completely unwarranted block by Slimvirgin

body:
David 'DJ' Hedley (spyders at btinternet.com) [050529 00:51]:

> I don't actually think he should allow this abusive tirade to continue.
> Snord is boring me now.

At least he's out of Kain abusive mode. Getting called a "lying son of a
fascist whore" was actually a new one on me. (Someone on IRC said
"presumably they make the trains come on time.")

- d.


from_name: Gregory Maxwell

subject: [WikiEN-l] Sam Spade/Report rogue admin

body:
On 5/29/05, Rick <giantsrick13 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > What?
> > This is insane.
> > I suggest you withdraw the VFD right away, signature
> > removal or not.
>
> Thanks for the reasoned discussion.  Care to explain
> ''why'' you think I should remove it, or do you just
> go around making demands all the time?

Because there is nothing wrong with a user complain about admins...
First we frustrate the heck out of him, then try to cast his
frustration as a crime?  That is utterly unacceptable.

My suggestion wasn't a demand of any sort... It was, as stated, a
suggestion. One made in the name of discouraging escalated ill
feelings, and discouraging allegations of abusive behaviours by admins
by showing that you support an environment that treats users fairly
and that you welcome criticism...

I thought my thoughts on this matter were made clear in my earlier
posts, I apologise for not taking the time to provide you with a more
complete reply initially.


list: wikipedia-l

from_name: V. Ivanov

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Paid-for-articles WPs in smaller languages

body:
2005/5/28, Timwi <timwi at gmx.net>:
> Maybe we should make this concept better known globally.  Maybe we
> should organise a list of Wikipedians who are prepared to give money to
> poor people in return for an article in a language that has an inactive
> Wikipedia.  The Wikipedians would be able to specify any conditions,

Say, offer a preferable topic or even a certain article (or article set).

> Of course, for that to work, there needs to be a way of getting the
> message (and later, the money) to the people.  Maybe someone has a few
> ideas?

The very large problem here is the validation.
Someone must check:
- if the article is really in the language in question. :)
- if the article is about what its title is.
- if the style is sufficiently encyclopedical.
- if the money go to the author (and not fully or partly to the "mediator").
The easiest way here is maybe launching such projects only when an
active Wikipedian(or a few of them) in the WP already exists (e. g. as
in the [[:os:]] and [[:cv:]] now).

------------------
I can't imagine the situation about the languages you've listed, but
for many languages of Russia there exist a very interesting literacy
tradition of the years 1920-1940, when the local languages flowered.
That means that a written style exists, though it's mostly forgotten,
and that even useful texts (manuals etc.) exist, some of which can be
reused in the WP.
We are now trying to find the school textbooks: we already have one, a
book on Astronomy of 1949. It's in Moscow now and probably soon
someone will scan it and put pieces into WP.

Mind that for such sources the copyright is no longer in effect (books
published in the USSR before 1971 are no longer copyright-defended if
the server is in the US). That means that for the languages of Russia
we could start another project along with the "Paid-for-Articles" -- a
project of scanning older sources and creative reusing them in WP
articles, thus preserving the once very active written traditions.

Sl./Amikeco
--
Esperu cxiam!


from_name: MacGyverMagic/Mgm

subject: [WikiEN-l] Sam Spade/Report rogue admin

body:
>  I've listed the page for VfD, but I'll
> withdraw that if he'll remove the signature, which he
> has no inclination to do.
>
Shouldn't we give him time to actually respond to the request. I just
saw someone else requesting him remove the sig 5 seconds ago.

--Mgm


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Web bugs on bg.wikipedia.org

body:
The sysops on bg.wikipedia.org (especially Borislav) have taken it upon
themselves to correct for the lack of publically available referrer and
IP information, by including a web bug in one of the MediaWiki messages
that is displayed in every page. They say they are only logging page
view statistics and search engine referrers and not editor IP addresses,
but there's no way to be sure of this.

I've made my position on this perfectly clear on
http://tinyurl.com/dr844 -- I consider this to be an unacceptable risk
to user privacy and I'll do whatever is necessary on a technical level
to prevent it.

-- Tim Starling


list: commons-l

from_name: Tim 'avatar' Bartel

subject: [Commons-l] Wikipedia Check-Usage for Commons media

body:
Hi wikipedians,

at the moment there is no (easy) possibility to check if media on
commons is used throughout the wikipedia projects included into
mediawiki.

Wikipedia Check-Usage [1] is a web based tool which can be used to
check where commons media is used throughout the wikimedia universe.
Also it is able to find "local" duplicates to commons media.

Check-Usage is strongly inspired by Arnomane's check-usage.sh [2] - a
unix shell script doing mostly the same job. Because this script has
several preconditions to run, like shell access to a unix/linux system
and several programs installed on this machine, I though of writing a
small web based interface. After short consideration I decided not to
write only an interface calling Arnomane's script, but to re-code it
completly. Check-Usage is written in PHP using libcurl.

So if you are interested where 'your' pictures are used - give it a try.

And commons sysops can use it before deleting files which are more than
a few days old. In the past it was often problematic deleting/moving a
file on commons, because doing this the included pictures in other
wikimedia-projects were broken.

Bye, Tim.

PS: Regarding the traffic load: only the text of the chosen image-page
gets transfered.

[1] http://www.juelich.de/avatar/check-usage/
[2] http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Arnomane/Image_usage

--
"I worry about my child and the Internet all the time, even though she's
too young to have logged on yet. Here's what I worry about. I worry that
10 or 15 years from now, she will come to me and say 'Daddy, where were
you when they took freedom of the press away from the Internet?'"
--Mike Godwin, Electronic Frontier Foundation


from_name: Jack Lynch

subject: [WikiEN-l] Sam Spade/Report rogue admin

body:
I changed the signature after polite requests from some polite admins.
Unlike certain obvious others, they are good representitives of the
project, easy to comply with, and rare to offend. There are a number
I'd like to compliment, but the hit squad against me is well known,
and I've seen good editors driven off the project, or simply scorned
after sticking up for me. The clique driven aspect of the wiki needs
to change, the articles, as well as the editors are suffering.

Jack / Sam Spade

On 5/29/05, MacGyverMagic/Mgm <macgyvermagic at gmail.com> wrote:
> >  I've listed the page for VfD, but I'll
> > withdraw that if he'll remove the signature, which he
> > has no inclination to do.
> >
> Shouldn't we give him time to actually respond to the request. I just
> saw someone else requesting him remove the sig 5 seconds ago.
>
> --Mgm
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


subject:
[Wikipedia-l] Re: Paid-for-articles WPs in smaller languages
	(was: bambara)

body:
Dear Anthere,

> As for the articles coming from the South Ossetian teachers, I get
> them by e-mail and put them to WP (after wikifying; they come as a
> simple text file or a Word file).

<<Just a side comment. Perhaps you should mention in the comment box the
name of the original author.
I would see two benefits
First it is more honest toward the author, who is credite is work.
Second, it is good image to show several people are contributing.>>

Sure, you are right!
Thank you for the idea: I've been thinking about creating a Category
or a Template for the purpose, but finally considered mixing content
with authorship a not so good idea. But putting a name into the
comment line is both easy and really useful.
Or should I register a special account to post all the articles
created in the project? That will make searching them very easy, etc.
What do you think?

> The journalist informed the locals about the "first encyclopedia in
> Ossetian"; some of them got interested. Neither computers, nor
> Internet are widely available in S.Ossetia -- so the interest could
> rest just the interest, but then the bright idea appeared... :)

<<Nod. Both arguments are fair. I would like to know whether these
teachers have themselves good internet access ? Presumably quite limited ?>>

As for the only teacher, who is working already on her 3rd article
now, she has some limited but free access to a Win98-computer at her
school. There she types her text in MS Word format and brings it on a
diskette to the South Ossetian journalist, who sends the text to me
via e-mail.
The same journalist also shows her the result of her work at the
Wikipedia. Her first article (about the writer Nafi Jusoity) is now
the elected one, its part is on the first page, and as far as I know
the teacher is very proud about the fact.

I don't think it's a good idea to involve manuscripts: if a person
can't use a computer at all, this person probably can't imagine
electronic text (moreover hypertext) and its specialities. That's why
we are most of all interested in younger teachers and students of
Ossetian-related specialities (future journalists and teachers).
Besides the texts for WP we achieve another purpose: raise the
prestege of the language, showing that quality texts in it are needed
and can be paid.

> Among our further plans is looking for such people in the villages of
> North Ossetia, where exists at least one highly literate group: the
> teachers of the Ossetian language. But most of them are not at all
> good computer users... So we have many interesting challenges.

<<Perhaps a collaboration with computer offer ?>>

Can you tell more about your idea? I didn't get it.

> We are also planning to meet authorities of the North Ossetian State
> University in order to organize presentations of Wikipedia at several
> faculties. The future Ossetian philologists and journalists might get
> much experience from writing texts in WP. Still such a presentation
> does not seem possible in the nearest future, for it's not easy for me
> to go to Vladikavkaz now. Born there, I live in St.Petersburg at the
> Baltic Sea at the moment.

<< Can you tell me more about the reasons why this does not seem possible
in the nearest future ? I think your experience sounds very.. >>

Well, at least because the study year is over by the end of May. The
best time for such presentations at the local universities is
October-November or February-March, when the students are not
frightened by the nearing exams and have time to participate in
projects like WP.

Slavik/Amikeco
--
Esperu cxiam!


from_name: JAY JG

subject: [WikiEN-l] Sam Spade/Report rogue admin

body:
>From: Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell at gmail.com>
>
>What?
>This is insane.
>I suggest you withdraw the VFD right away, signature removal or not.

"Insane" is also pretty emotionally charged intense language.

Jay.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Sam Spade/Report rogue admin

body:
On 5/29/05, JAY JG <jayjg at hotmail.com> wrote:
> >From: Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell at gmail.com>
> >What?
> >This is insane.
> >I suggest you withdraw the VFD right away, signature removal or not.
> "Insane" is also pretty emotionally charged intense language.
> Jay.

Nah. Not really. Or more clearly, it wasn't intended to be.
If you honestly read it that way, then I suspect you and I speak
differing versions of English.

In any case, if anyone was offended I do apologise.


subject:
[Wikipedia-l] One last word about user genders (was:sco/fiu-vro
	in danger..)

body:
2005/5/28, Delphine M?nard <notafishz at gmail.com>:
> > relevant to use of Wikipedia.  I've managed perfectly well for about a
> > decade usually roleplaying female online, and nobody ever knows if I don't
> > want them to know.  Even those who do know tend to forget, such is the
> > power of illusion.
>
> An illusion much harder to maintain in a language like French for
> exemple, where many times I will have to use a female form of a past
> participle or an adjective and give myself away ;-). It is quite an

One may write the whole life in Ossetic never giving oneself away. :)
Even the "he/she" pronoun is the same "uy" in the Ossetic, coming from
a demonstrative pronoun ("that"). Reading Ossetian newspapers I often
had problems understanding a person's sex until the author puts it
explicitly.

I belive not many other Hindo-European languages are similar to the
Ossetian in this respect, but most of the Turk languages are such;
with much less (if any) grammar markers of sex.

Slavik /Amikeco
--
Esperu cxiam!


list: wikitech-l

from_name: Kate Turner

subject: [Wikitech-l] image dumps now available

body:
at least, they will be when the dump is complete, which will take a few more
hours yet.  once done, image dumps will be found at:

  http://dumps.wikimedia.org/images/

please read the readme files.  (note: don't download dumps without an
"upload.tar" symlink, because that means the dump is still in progress and
the file will be incomplete!)

please let me know about any problems with these files, particularly if they
don't extract correctly.

kate.


subject: [Wikitech-l] Special page inclusion

body:
Many wiki engines have the ability to put the last few changes from RC
on the main page, or in the sidebar. MediaWiki will have this in 1.5,
with special page inclusion. There will be a whitelist of supported
special pages, currently Recentchanges, Allpages and (thanks to Erik)
Newpages. The syntax is e.g. {{Special:Recentchanges/10}} for the last
10 changes.

It's not currently known how many special pages will be supported by the
time 1.5 is released, or what their subpage-like parameters will be.

My main motivation for doing this was to allow the creation of a better
alphabetical index, similar to [[Wikipedia:Quick index]], for use in a
static HTML dump.

It would be nice to address the problem of internationalisation of
special page names and subpage parameters at some stage.

-- Tim Starling


from_name: Chad Perrin

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Jimbo interview on NPR Friday?

body:
On Fri, May 27, 2005 at 11:21:10PM +0100, Timwi wrote:

> We have more than enough English-speaking contributors already. I think
> we - the interlingual community - have absolutely *every* right to voice
> our resentment over English-language media being nauseatingly anglo-centric.

Of course you have a right.  Having a right and being right are not the
same thing, however.

I, for one, will pay more attention to stuff in and about a language I
understand than in and about a language I don't.  To expect otherwise of
me is unrealistic, sadistic, and absurd.  Likewise, I don't expect
otherwise from others.  I don't expect French news media, Arabic news
media, or Serbian news media to spend more than a cursory bit on
English, and I likewise don't expect English news media to spend more
than a cursory bit on French, Arabic, or Serbian.

Here's a hint: the exhortation to assume good faith is a good idea not
because it's "nice", but because every person is an individual, and
judging that person by the behavior of other people with the same
nationality, native language, or geographical location is the opposite
of an assumption of good faith.

If you have a problem with a given journalist, contact the journalist
and let him or her know.  If you have a gripe with a particular
interview or story, get in touch with whoever conducted the exercise.
Don't generalize a few anecdotal examples as representative of the
entire language-sharing demographic.

By directing unjustified ire at an entire linguistic population is
counterproductive in the extreme.

--
Chad Perrin
[ CCD CopyWrite | http://ccd.apotheon.org ]


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: An idea

body:
On Sat, May 28, 2005 at 07:28:01PM -0700, Mark Williamson wrote:
> As I said before, even dirty perscriptivists (viz Perrin, C.) always
> come to accept language change _eventually_.
>
> Otherwise, the text of your message would have read like something
> more along the lines of "Spec ??? fore ?in sylf!" (Stephen Forrest may
> correct me here in the case that ic may've spake me here in a
> wrong-like manner yar)

In point of fact, the examples of archaic speech you provide owe their
obsolescence more to an imposition of standards than to a modification
of language by accepting corruptions.  The fact that there is only one
"correct" spelling for "self" is, in fact, more a
prescriptivist-friendly alteration of language than descriptivist.
Semantic, syntactic, and even vocal standards have been adopted as
"correct" over the years in addition to descriptive drift over the
years.  In any case, barring the development of an immortality
treatment, I doubt I'll outlive a time when "reknowned" is considered
technically incorrect by a substantial demographic.

--
Chad Perrin
[ CCD CopyWrite | http://ccd.apotheon.org ]


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: An idea

body:
On Sat, May 28, 2005 at 05:08:34PM -0700, Mark Williamson wrote:
> The rest of the message, ie that I pronounce the "inform" in
> "information"  as if it were "infirm", or that I don't pronounce the
> "know" in "acknowledged" the same way I pronounce the "know" in "know"
> (more like "gnaw"  - "acgnawledged"), or for that matter the "know"
> in "knowledge"  the same as "know" when it's by itself...

Funny, I pronounce it like "inform".  So do most of the people I know.
Maybe I'm just lucky.

--
Chad Perrin
[ CCD CopyWrite | http://ccd.apotheon.org ]


from_name: Erik Moeller

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: GFDL Clarification

body:
Hello Robert,

thanks a lot for your efforts in trying to get free content for
Wikipedia. Work such as yours is absolutely essential for us, and much
underrated (it's easier to count edits than e-mails). I agree that this
is a wikipedia-l issue.

I completely understand your frustration that the image you contributed
is now considered non-free. However, Timwi is correct. There has to be
an informed consent before we can claim that an image is under a
particular license. Otherwise we could be sued for damages if someone
else, in the belief that the image is free content, uses it in a way
that the person giving it does not approve us (e.g. by selling it).

Instead of using the GFDL, which is a complicated mess even for a
license geek, I suggest pointing people to the CC-BY-SA 2.0, which is
acceptable on Wikipedia for images. You could use a wording like this:

   Wikipedia is the world's largest encyclopedia, built by thousands of
   individuals in every language and written from a neutral point of
   view. All our content is available to anyone for any purpose, free of
   charge and free of advertising.

   Would you be willing to donate an image to the general public for
   royalty-free use, so it can be used on Wikipedia? The photo would
   always have to be attributed to you, and modifications could only
   be made if they are made available under the same conditions --
   see http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/ for details.

   I would much appreciate it if you could contribute to this effort.

This, I think, is about the minimal level of complexity we can safely use.

Best,

Erik


body:
Gregory Maxwell (gmaxwell at gmail.com) [050529 03:02]:
> On 5/28/05, David Gerard <fun at thingy.apana.org.au> wrote:

> > That's because you are, you lying fuck. ElKabong = KaintheScion and
> > KaintheScion = Enviroknot.

> David, I can appreciate your frustration... as well as your level of
> certainty on this matter. :)
> However, I feel you make our community look bad by using such intense
> language in this case... it comes off as very emotionally charged and
> it might cause an outsider to question the basis for you judgement. It
> will almost certainly encourage a highly emotional reply.

You are, of course, correct. My apologies to the list.

- d.


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: An idea

body:
Timwi (timwi at gmx.net) [050529 02:23]:
> David Gerard wrote:

> >I dunno about icons in article history, but encouraging people more to list
> >that sort of thing on user pages would be really good. There's a template
> >for languages spoken and to what degree; that system could be extended.
> >Put the templates in appropriate Wikipedia subcategories and you have
> >instant handy directories of expertise in particular matters.

> Right, so I'll put a template on my user page saying that I have studied
> computer science.  Then someone comes along and changes something in an
> article about a politician.  Am I then disallowed from fixing their
> mistake because I am not an "expert" in the relevant field?

Not at all. I was thinking more in terms of "hi, you know something about
this, could you please sanity-check?" on their talk page.

- d.


list: foundation-l

subject: [Foundation-l] Wikimedia Research Team:   Getting started

body:
Anthere (anthere9 at yahoo.com) [050529 04:02]:

> I do not consider someone participating to our projects, and not
> belonging to the Research Team, should ever feel or made him felt he is
> a renegade. You are free and welcome to help, within or outside the
> Research Team.
> This is very essential point.

Ah, yep. Building a cathedral in this bazaar is not likely to work too
well.

- d.


list: wikimedia-l


subject:
[Wikitech-l] Re: [Foundation-l] Wikimedia Research Team: Getting
	started


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Wikipedia and detail

body:
Timwi (timwi at gmx.net) [050529 07:23]:

> Incidentally, noone has yet suggested to delete [[Time Hierarchy
> Theorem]], or indeed any other article, for making Wikipedia "too detailed".

The more ardent deleters have indeed put articles up for deletion for being
"too detailed".

> >we run the risk of making the basic information inaccessible to the
> >vast majority of the users who are only interested in the basics.

> People who are only interested in the basics can still look up only the
> basics.  It's a question of organisation, not a question of inclusion.

Yep. There's nothing wrong with subarticles of subarticles.

> >There is a place in the world for large amounts of detailed material,
> >but this shouldn't be the goal of an encyclopedia.

> Funny, and somehow I thought that the goal of Wikipedia is to "collect
> the sum of human knowledge".

Haven't you heard? Our new slogan is "Wikipedia is full. Go away." Now only
*deserving* articles are kept (whatever that means); all others apparently
have to make their case or be deleted in a consensus vote of three versus
one.

- d.


from_name: Gerard Meijssen

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Wikipedia and detail

body:
Timwi wrote:

> Funny, and somehow I thought that the goal of Wikipedia is to "collect
> the sum of human knowledge".
>
> Timwi

Hoi,
To collect the sum of human knowledge is the goal of the Wikimedia
Foundation. It is not necessarily the goal of Wikipedia, its goal is to
create a free-content encyclopedia.
Thanks,
    GerardM


from_name: Anthere

subject: [Foundation-l] Wikimedia Research Team: Getting   started

body:
David Gerard a ?crit:
> Anthere (anthere9 at yahoo.com) [050529 04:02]:
>
>
>>I do not consider someone participating to our projects, and not
>>belonging to the Research Team, should ever feel or made him felt he is
>>a renegade. You are free and welcome to help, within or outside the
>>Research Team.
>>This is very essential point.
>
>
>
> Ah, yep. Building a cathedral in this bazaar is not likely to work too
> well.
>
>
> - d.

It would be a serious mistep to suddently become fully organised, on
schedule and entirely reliable ;-)

Ant


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re:Problème de copyright dans l'usage de vos sources Wikipedia

body:
Timwi a ?crit:
> Anthere wrote:
>
>>
>> Toutefois, nous aimerions signaler que lorsque vous
>> utilisez du mat?riel provenant de Wikipedia, il est
>> n?cessaire de citer d'une part la source et d'autre
>> part la licence.
>
>
> Il n'est pas n?cessaire de citer la source. Il est pourtant n?cessaire
> de citer l'histoire de chaque article inclus les auteurs, et normalement
> nous recommandons aux utilisateurs de notre contenu de faire cela en
> liant ? l'article original sur Wikip?dia.
>
> Au moins, c'?tait toujours mon impression. :-)
>
> Timw
> i

Normallement, ce n'est pas la source qui devrait ?tre cit?e, mais les
auteurs. En pratique, on observe que souvent, ce ne sont pas les auteurs
qui sont cit?s, mais Wikipedia directement. Sur le net, les sites web
pourraient faire l'effort de mettre un lien vers les auteurs... mais si
l'article est r?utilis? dans un livre par exemple... cela sera un peu
compliqu? :-)

D'o? une certaine tol?rance vis ? vis de ceux qui ne font que citer
Wikipedia.

Cela ?tant, je n'ai re?u aucune r?ponse de Izynews. Ni de
modifications... JB, si d'ici une semaine aucune modification n'a ?t?
faite, penses tu que je doive leur ?crire une seconde fois directement,
ou devons nous commencer ? donner une teinte plus juridique ? l'affaire ?

Anthere


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: bambara

body:
Timwi a ?crit:
> Anthere wrote:
>
>>
>> The association Geekcorps recently (it started possibly 2 months ago)
>> made a lot of efforts to try to stimulate a minor wikipedia in an
>> african language. Along with work in translation of the interface,
>> addition of major rules and principles of Wikipedia, Geekcorps also
>> decided to motivate editors speaking bambara in Mali to participate
>> to the bambara wikipedia (http://bm.wikipedia.org) in a *financial*
>> way.
>
>
> How come that the Main Page is still largely in French?  I am
> particularly surprised that it seems to switch between Bamanankan and
> French in the middle of sentences.

It may come from 2 reasons

1) they possibly did not have time to entirely translate it

2) this country is french speaking. In countries were several languages
co-exist, it is quite frequent to mix 2 languages, even in the same
sentence.
For example, in Marocco, you may hear a conversation switching from
french to arab or from arab to french from one word to the next. It is
due to the fact many are just as confortable with both languages. The
first language to come when they look for a word... is the "winner".
Typically, most discussions involving technical terminology is made in
french. Daily discussion about food is more in arab.

Guaka might give other explanations or reflect on these ones ?

Ant


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: bambara

body:
Agreed.

The only important thing is that potential editors understand what it is
all about. Ant

Mark Williamson a ?crit:
> Because Guaka (head of the Wikipedia-Mali effort AFAIK) doesn't know
> Bambara; he's been replacing words and phrases as they become
> available to him.
>
> I'm still not sure it's the best approach: I think he should leave
> something in French until he can find a translation of the whole
> sentence, rather than replacing words.
>
> Mark
>
> On 28/05/05, Timwi <timwi at gmx.net> wrote:
>
>>Anthere wrote:
>>
>>>The association Geekcorps recently (it started possibly 2 months ago)
>>>made a lot of efforts to try to stimulate a minor wikipedia in an
>>>african language. Along with work in translation of the interface,
>>>addition of major rules and principles of Wikipedia, Geekcorps also
>>>decided to motivate editors speaking bambara in Mali to participate
>>>to the bambara wikipedia (http://bm.wikipedia.org) in a *financial*
>>>way.
>>
>>How come that the Main Page is still largely in French?  I am
>>particularly surprised that it seems to switch between Bamanankan and
>>French in the middle of sentences.
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Wikipedia-l mailing list
>>Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
>>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>>
>
>
>


from_name: Timwi

subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: Search

body:
Brion Vibber wrote:
> Timwi wrote:
>
>> The last time you announced this, I asked a question which I think has
>> not received a reply.  How regularly is this search engine updated with
>> newest edits?
>
> Read the second paragraph of my previous message and you will find the
> answer.

Oops.

Thanks :)


subject:
[Wikipedia-l] Re: Paid-for-articles WPs in smaller languages (was:
	bambara)

body:
V. Ivanov a ?crit:
> Dear Anthere,
>
>
>>As for the articles coming from the South Ossetian teachers, I get
>>them by e-mail and put them to WP (after wikifying; they come as a
>>simple text file or a Word file).
>
>
> <<Just a side comment. Perhaps you should mention in the comment box the
> name of the original author.
> I would see two benefits
> First it is more honest toward the author, who is credite is work.
> Second, it is good image to show several people are contributing.>>
>
> Sure, you are right!
> Thank you for the idea: I've been thinking about creating a Category
> or a Template for the purpose, but finally considered mixing content
> with authorship a not so good idea. But putting a name into the
> comment line is both easy and really useful.
> Or should I register a special account to post all the articles
> created in the project? That will make searching them very easy, etc.
> What do you think?

NOD
This is a very good idea.
Use a special account for all those texte. And mention the name of all
authors (or minimal references if they do not want to be public, or a
pseudonyme) on the user page, to indicate it is somehow a collaborative
account, with one technical editor (you).

This way, we can both acknowledge their work (they might later list the
collection of articles each of them wrote); and track the articles
written through the project.

>>The journalist informed the locals about the "first encyclopedia in
>>Ossetian"; some of them got interested. Neither computers, nor
>>Internet are widely available in S.Ossetia -- so the interest could
>>rest just the interest, but then the bright idea appeared... :)
>
>
> <<Nod. Both arguments are fair. I would like to know whether these
> teachers have themselves good internet access ? Presumably quite limited ?>>
>
> As for the only teacher, who is working already on her 3rd article
> now, she has some limited but free access to a Win98-computer at her
> school. There she types her text in MS Word format and brings it on a
> diskette to the South Ossetian journalist, who sends the text to me
> via e-mail.
> The same journalist also shows her the result of her work at the
> Wikipedia. Her first article (about the writer Nafi Jusoity) is now
> the elected one, its part is on the first page, and as far as I know
> the teacher is very proud about the fact.

Nod. Important point. Writters on small wikis not only will gain a bit
financially, but feel proud of their article being in the light.

When I started on the french pedia (basically in os state then), I
mostly wrote along two lines : I made several of the portal pages, but
not with only empty links, but with a comprehensive text covering the
portal issue.  And second, I picked up quite specialized topics not too
widely covered in google... so I knew google would like them.

Between the portal pages and the specialized pages, readers could see
the variety of what could be written, as well as think "waou, there is
some stuff here".

> I don't think it's a good idea to involve manuscripts: if a person
> can't use a computer at all, this person probably can't imagine
> electronic text (moreover hypertext) and its specialities. That's why
> we are most of all interested in younger teachers and students of
> Ossetian-related specialities (future journalists and teachers).
> Besides the texts for WP we achieve another purpose: raise the
> prestege of the language, showing that quality texts in it are needed
> and can be paid.

Agreed

>>Among our further plans is looking for such people in the villages of
>>North Ossetia, where exists at least one highly literate group: the
>>teachers of the Ossetian language. But most of them are not at all
>>good computer users... So we have many interesting challenges.
>
>
> <<Perhaps a collaboration with computer offer ?>>
>
> Can you tell more about your idea? I didn't get it.

If you look for editors in area where there is little computer
equipment, perhaps a collaboration with an organisation doing computer
collection, reinstall and shipping in places where computers are missing
could help.

Hmmmm, when in a university, there is only one computer for 50 students,
it is not surprising students are not very good computer users.
Sometimes, there is not even one computer per teacher either.

>>We are also planning to meet authorities of the North Ossetian State
>>University in order to organize presentations of Wikipedia at several
>>faculties. The future Ossetian philologists and journalists might get
>>much experience from writing texts in WP. Still such a presentation
>>does not seem possible in the nearest future, for it's not easy for me
>>to go to Vladikavkaz now. Born there, I live in St.Petersburg at the
>>Baltic Sea at the moment.
>
>
> << Can you tell me more about the reasons why this does not seem possible
> in the nearest future ? I think your experience sounds very.. >>
>
> Well, at least because the study year is over by the end of May. The
> best time for such presentations at the local universities is
> October-November or February-March, when the students are not
> frightened by the nearing exams and have time to participate in
> projects like WP.
>
> Slavik/Amikeco

Definitly a good argument :-)

/me currently preparing the school fair...


body:
You are correct Mark

But the difference might be that what you talk about is hypothetical,
while the os gets articles this way. What you suggest is great, but we
should focus to what is practical for now.

Ant

Mark Williamson a ?crit:
> Hi...
>
> Regarding manuscripts,
>
> it's often a possibility that the person has seen a webpage but that
> writing the manuscript out in longhand is more convenient for them.
>
> For example, a middle-aged Toareg man who lived in the city for a few
> years and used e-mail, but now doesn't have easy access to a computer
> because he has moved back with his village to take care of his ailing
> mother.
>
> This man could probably find the time to make the long trek to a city
> and use an internet cafe to dash off an e-mail to me with the text of
> an article for the Toareg (or perhaps Berber) Wikipedia, but it would
> be very inconvenient and it would be much easier for him to use
> traditional Toareg writing implements to make the articles out in
> manuscript form while in the village (perhaps even with input from
> other villagers!), and then use the postal system to mail it
> ("snail-mail") to a computer science professor in Algiers, who would
> then e-mail it to me and I would post it.
>
> This would obviously be much easier for the Touareg man than to
> actually make the long trek from Southeastern Algeria to the capital,
> Algiers, just to visit the journalist and make use of a computer.
>
> Just because you don't have access to a computer doesn't mean you
> never HAVE had access. And you might have access to a computer, but it
> might be inconvenient compared to writing on paper and using
> conventional post.
>
> Mark
>
> On 28/05/05, V. Ivanov <amikeco at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Dear Anthere,
>>
>>
>>>As for the articles coming from the South Ossetian teachers, I get
>>>them by e-mail and put them to WP (after wikifying; they come as a
>>>simple text file or a Word file).
>>
>><<Just a side comment. Perhaps you should mention in the comment box the
>>name of the original author.
>>I would see two benefits
>>First it is more honest toward the author, who is credite is work.
>>Second, it is good image to show several people are contributing.>>
>>
>>Sure, you are right!
>>Thank you for the idea: I've been thinking about creating a Category
>>or a Template for the purpose, but finally considered mixing content
>>with authorship a not so good idea. But putting a name into the
>>comment line is both easy and really useful.
>>Or should I register a special account to post all the articles
>>created in the project? That will make searching them very easy, etc.
>>What do you think?
>>
>>
>>>The journalist informed the locals about the "first encyclopedia in
>>>Ossetian"; some of them got interested. Neither computers, nor
>>>Internet are widely available in S.Ossetia -- so the interest could
>>>rest just the interest, but then the bright idea appeared... :)
>>
>><<Nod. Both arguments are fair. I would like to know whether these
>>teachers have themselves good internet access ? Presumably quite limited ?>>
>>
>>As for the only teacher, who is working already on her 3rd article
>>now, she has some limited but free access to a Win98-computer at her
>>school. There she types her text in MS Word format and brings it on a
>>diskette to the South Ossetian journalist, who sends the text to me
>>via e-mail.
>>The same journalist also shows her the result of her work at the
>>Wikipedia. Her first article (about the writer Nafi Jusoity) is now
>>the elected one, its part is on the first page, and as far as I know
>>the teacher is very proud about the fact.
>>
>>I don't think it's a good idea to involve manuscripts: if a person
>>can't use a computer at all, this person probably can't imagine
>>electronic text (moreover hypertext) and its specialities. That's why
>>we are most of all interested in younger teachers and students of
>>Ossetian-related specialities (future journalists and teachers).
>>Besides the texts for WP we achieve another purpose: raise the
>>prestege of the language, showing that quality texts in it are needed
>>and can be paid.
>>
>>
>>>Among our further plans is looking for such people in the villages of
>>>North Ossetia, where exists at least one highly literate group: the
>>>teachers of the Ossetian language. But most of them are not at all
>>>good computer users... So we have many interesting challenges.
>>
>><<Perhaps a collaboration with computer offer ?>>
>>
>>Can you tell more about your idea? I didn't get it.
>>
>>
>>>We are also planning to meet authorities of the North Ossetian State
>>>University in order to organize presentations of Wikipedia at several
>>>faculties. The future Ossetian philologists and journalists might get
>>>much experience from writing texts in WP. Still such a presentation
>>>does not seem possible in the nearest future, for it's not easy for me
>>>to go to Vladikavkaz now. Born there, I live in St.Petersburg at the
>>>Baltic Sea at the moment.
>>
>><< Can you tell me more about the reasons why this does not seem possible
>>in the nearest future ? I think your experience sounds very.. >>
>>
>>Well, at least because the study year is over by the end of May. The
>>best time for such presentations at the local universities is
>>October-November or February-March, when the students are not
>>frightened by the nearing exams and have time to participate in
>>projects like WP.
>>
>>Slavik/Amikeco
>>--
>>Esperu cxiam!
>>_______________________________________________
>>Wikipedia-l mailing list
>>Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
>>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>>
>
>
>


body:
Tim Starling wrote:
>
> Why don't you find something else to do for a change?

If I remember correctly, you are the one who has the nerve to refuse to
move even a single finger for any project that you deem inappropriate
(such as the Klingon Wikipedia), and if I also remember correctly, you
were the one who most vocally told *me* not to tell other people what to
do when I was new.

I *very strongly* suggest you not tell other people what to do.

Comments like the one above can very easily shatter all motivation
someone may have to work on something voluntarily in their free time. I
would hate to see that happen to Thomas, with all his great and hard
work on Enotif going to waste. A lot of people are looking forward to
this feature.

You may have your own opinions about things; you may think that everyone
here is a really crap programmer and you could do it all much better if
you had the time. You might think Enotif is a piece of shit just like
you do with my Recent Changes Patrol feature and flexbisonparse. But,
man, you gotta learn to keep it to yourself.

Timwi


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Notice to an Admin

body:
MacGyverMagic/Mgm wrote:
> Actually, I was asking enviroknot to back up his statements.

Then maybe you should have replied to Enviroknot and not to David Gerard.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Completely unwarranted block by Slimvirgin

body:
Cranston Snord wrote:
>
> I have adequately explained what is going on, and I have referenced all
> the Wikipedia policy that Gerard and his cohorts are violating.

Hey, guys. Since we're all a conspiracy anyway, why don't we just change
the policies so that we are no longer violating them? We could just make
a policy that "we don't like Cranston Snord", and then anything we'll do
has legitimacy and he can't complain.

Timwi


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: WikiEN-l Digest, Vol 22, Issue 95

body:
Rick wrote:
>
>>You are lying, David, and you are violating
>>Wikipedia policy in doing so.
>
> Somebody block this guy from the mailing list, please.

Aw, no! Not at the best part!

Want some popcorn?


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: WikiEN-l Digest, Vol 22, Issue 96

body:
Cranston Snord wrote:
>
> There's this technology called "DHCP" that came along a few years ago.

New Wikipedia policy proposal:

	"Users using DHCP are immune against admin action. They are by
	 definition right and have not done anything wrong."

Timwi


from_name: geni

body:
On 5/29/05, Timwi <timwi at gmx.net> wrote:
> Cranston Snord wrote:
> >
> > There's this technology called "DHCP" that came along a few years ago.
>
> New Wikipedia policy proposal:
>
>         "Users using DHCP are immune against admin action. They are by
>          definition right and have not done anything wrong."
>
> Timwi
>

What about admins using DHCP?

--
geni


from_name: Ray Saintonge

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: An idea

body:
Chad Perrin wrote:

>On Sat, May 28, 2005 at 05:08:34PM -0700, Mark Williamson wrote:
>
>
>>The rest of the message, ie that I pronounce the "inform" in
>>"information"  as if it were "infirm", or that I don't pronounce the
>>"know" in "acknowledged" the same way I pronounce the "know" in "know"
>>(more like "gnaw"  - "acgnawledged"), or for that matter the "know"
>>in "knowledge"  the same as "know" when it's by itself...
>>
>>
>Funny, I pronounce it like "inform".  So do most of the people I know.
>Maybe I'm just lucky.
>
>
The purpose of language is to communicate.  This holds notwithstanding
Mark's efforts to prescribe all manner of fanciful and illiterate
constructions and pronunciations.  There is no shortage of local
dialects and idioms, and it is good to know that they exist as well as
where and how they are used.  But that does not allow us to pretend that
the usage will be accepted everywhere or to extrapolate a local meaning
to the wider community.  When you do that the reader is just as likely
to interpret a term on the basis of its use in his own community, and
that usage can be very different.  It is notable that even though CNN is
based in Atlanta it does not insist that all of its announcers speak in
a Georgia drawl.

I am prepared to accept Mark's testimony that in his Arizona dialect
"acgnawledge" is a commonly used variant, and that the people of Arizona
are properly "infirmed" in their retirement.  I am not prepared to
accept that such aberations have fallen into general usage.

One aspect of the English language's dominance in the world is its
ability to create new words whenever circumstances require.  English has
no Acad?mie rushing in to say, "You can't use that word, because it's
not in the dictionary."   This is a huge problem for lexicographers.
New words are regularly being invented, but many are invented for a
particular ephemeral occasion.  When that occasion passes the word
passes with it; it has no need for an obituary.  If I inject a new word
or usage into a text or conversation, as I frequently do, it is in
anticipation that my readers or listeners will understand it's meaning
from the context.  If I suggest that Mark quayles the English language
readers will have some understanding of what I mean, but I would have no
illusion about making that verb a normal part of English usage.

L33t may very well describe the speech patterns of a certain sub-culture
for the private purposes of that sub-culture, but are we benefitted by
those of its advocates who would want that recognised as a part of
general English usage?  The rest of society is not a part of the inside
jokes that accompany much of that geek speak.

Those of us with a more conservative view of language accept a
lexicographer's duty as one of description and documentation.  Mark and
his prescriptivist friends are too quick to tell us what belongs in the
language without the least shred of verifiability.  They seem to forget
the basic point that I put at the begining of this message: "The purpose
of language is to communicate."

Ec


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: An idea

body:
Timwi wrote:

> Mark Williamson wrote:
>
>> if you break it down - "re - known - ed" - it makes perfect sense
>
> Well, you see, it doesn't make sense to me because it's not pronounced
> like "known".
>
> I'm not as much of a prescriptivist as my previous message might make
> it seem.  I do accept language evolution and I do accept changes in
> grammar and spelling.  My previous message was not meant to belittle
> those who do not know the contents of dictionaries by heart.  I
> certainly don't.
>
> It's just that I think I have acquired somewhat of a language
> intuition and even so, I find it difficult to understand the thought
> process that would lead one to think that there should be a k in that
> word.  Once someone came up with it, I can understand that other
> people might follow it, thinking it might be the correct spelling.
> But the thoughts of that first person are beyond me.

For an example of a sentence where the "k" would be correct:  "After an
absence of many years she was happy to be reknown by her lover." :-)

Ec


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Wikipedia and detail

body:
Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> On 5/28/05, Timwi <timwi at gmx.net> wrote:
>
>>Funny, and somehow I thought that the goal of Wikipedia is to "collect
>>the sum of human knowledge".
>
> So how do wikibooks, wiktionary, and wikiquotes fit into this?

I didn't invent any of those. Nor, incidentally, did I invent Wikipedia
or any guidelines on what should or should not go into Wikipedia. Nor
did I invent the "sum of human knowledge" phrasing, which is found in
numerous places on Wikipedia. When I first came here, I interpreted it
to mean that pretty much anything can go into Wikipedia, including those
kinds of things that are now collected on Wiktionary (which didn't exist
at the time). But with the size of the community, my opinion pretty much
doesn't count, and so I have over time acquired a certain indifference
towards it and just go with what most other people think.

But whenever I go back to thinking about it, I keep coming to the
conclusion that this is wrong. The majority of the community is not
always right. Please don't interpret this to mean that I think *I*'m
right. It's just that there is no real way to change the ways of
Wikipedia for as long as it is run by a community which has a certain
majority opinion, even if that opinion is wrong or sub-optimal.

The ways of the community aren't always consistent. I would have thought
that [[Reich]] looks more like a dictionary entry (having pronunciation,
translations, etymology and cognates, etc.), but it clearly survived my
VfD nomination; yet similar articles on other words would probably be
transwikied. On the other hand, my (not-really-an-)article on
[[Piperade]] (containing the sentence "'''Piperade''' is a
[[recipe|dish]]."), was speedy-deleted without VfD process, even though
I would have thought that the single piece of information I entered was
encyclopedic.

I am not a rampant inclusionist; I agree to the concepts of notability
and verifiability.  But I guess within the constraints of notability and
verifiability, I am an inclusionist.  I feel that, since the information
on Wiktionary is just as verifiable as the information on Wikipedia, and
given the fact that there are numerous dictionaries and etymological
reference works establishing their notability, the distinction between a
"dictionary entry" and an "encyclopaedia entry" seems artificial.

I have not really thought about Wikibooks yet.  Whenever I try to, the
first question I ask myself is, "Isn't an encyclopaedia a book?"

Timwi


subject: [WikiEN-l] Sam Spade/Report rogue admin

body:
JAY JG wrote:

>> From: Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell at gmail.com>
>>
>> What?
>> This is insane.
>> I suggest you withdraw the VFD right away, signature removal or not.
>
> "Insane" is also pretty emotionally charged intense language.

It's perfectly acceptable to say that an idea is insane, but not that
the person putting forth the idea is insane.

Ec


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Notice to an Admin

body:
I was under the impression I was replying to the entire list.
Never mind. I'll keep it in mind for next time.

--Mgm

On 5/29/05, Timwi <timwi at gmx.net> wrote:
> MacGyverMagic/Mgm wrote:
> > Actually, I was asking enviroknot to back up his statements.
>
> Then maybe you should have replied to Enviroknot and not to David Gerard.
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: Daniel Mayer

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Wikipedia and detail

body:
--- David Gerard <fun at thingy.apana.org.au> wrote:
> Yep. There's nothing wrong with subarticles of subarticles.

Exactly. Assuming all readers need to know everything about about a topic and
thus having all that detail in one article is a great disservice. The mass
majority of readers want some level of summary and the option to explore sub
topics in more detail in other articles. Thus the use of summary style.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Summary_style

-- mav

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


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Wikipedia and detail

body:
Gregory Maxwell wrote:
>
>>The more ardent deleters have indeed put articles up for deletion for being
>>"too detailed".
>
> Hm. I haven't seen that one yet, ... That's grounds for pruning text
> or splitting an article and not grounds for deletion.

My point exactly.  Detail does belong in Wikipedia.

> Eh, there are some subarticles that are out of date because people
> find the main one and edit it while the sub article doesn't get any
> love and attention.

Then I guess that means the organisation has failed.  In fact, I can
think of an example.  At some point (I was new to Wikipedia at the time)
I decided to write something about UTF-8, because this is something I
find interesting and something I think I know about.  However, for
reasons I don't know, I went to [[Unicode]] rather than [[UTF-8]].  The
article had a section on UTF-8, but that section was not very detailed,
so I decided to add all the detail I know about UTF-8 to that article,
not knowing that the same detail already existed on [[UTF-8]].  If the
section had had a link in the form of "for more detail, see [[UTF-8]]",
this would not have happened.  So, the problem is not that there is too
much detail about UTF-8, but rather that the detail is not organised in
such a way that people will find it.

> Also, when you start splitting articles you end up
> with a lot of duplicated material that can make reading all of them
> (when you are really interested) tedious.

Again, this is a question of organisation.  I would contend that it is
always possible, albeit sometimes extremely hard, to organise the
material in such a way that very little material (if not even no
material at all) is duplicated, to the point that reading all of it is
no longer tedious.

> For example, consider
> articles about characters in works of fiction vs the text on the
> characters all gathered up under the work in question, or  an article
> 'Characters used in soandsos writings' + redirects.

I don't think this question should be asked this generally.  Some
characters are so major that they deserve an article of their own, while
others are minor and should be covered in a more general article (such
as the one on the work of fiction itself, or something like [[Minor
characters from The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy]]).

In fact, this is one example of a very noticeable difference between the
English and German Wikipedias.  In English, we have an article on
[[Vulcan (Star Trek)]], while the German Wikipedia apparently has a
policy against such articles and requires the topic to be covered on an
article about all Star Trek fictional races.  As a result, the German
Wikipedia will never acquire the amount of detail that we have on the
Vulcans.  Of course, the prevailing opinion in the German Wikipedian
community is that this level of detail is unwanted, so people don't see
a problem with it.  I am very glad that the same is not true of the
English Wikipedia, allowing volunteers to write about what they find
interesting rather than what some admins deem "wanted".

Timwi

>>>>There is a place in the world for large amounts of detailed material,
>>>>but this shouldn't be the goal of an encyclopedia.
>>>
>>>Funny, and somehow I thought that the goal of Wikipedia is to "collect
>>>the sum of human knowledge".
>>
>>Haven't you heard? Our new slogan is "Wikipedia is full. Go away." Now only
>>*deserving* articles are kept (whatever that means); all others apparently
>>have to make their case or be deleted in a consensus vote of three versus
>>one.
>
>
> Wikipedia isn't the only place in the world to store knowledge. It's
> clear that we already are aware of that, which is why we have
> wikibooks, wikiquotes, and wiktionary.
>
> If I gave you an algorithm that generated an infinite amount of text
> without ever repeating itself I could rightly tell you that the answer
> to any question you might ask is in the output. But you find this very
> useful.
>
> There is value in being concise, there is value to partitioning, and
> there is value to excluding.
>
> *Wikipedia is not paper*. I see this often cited, but I think it is
> often cited by people who fail to grasp all of the implications, for
> example: We have a search engine, redirects, and hyperlinks, so every
> subject doesn't need an article of its own; people can be expected to
> find material inside other articles.  We can provide instanious links
> to detailed information in millions of places all over the Internet as
> well as information contained in other wikimedia projects, so it is
> not optimum to provide all possible details in every article.
>
> Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. This implies a relationship between the
> reader and the material (he is searching a lot and looking for more
> basic information on average), and it implies things  about the
> creation of material (citations, avoiding original research, NPOV,
> trying to include a more general audience).  Some content is best
> created and presented under a different set of criteria.  By excluding
> this content, and perhaps giving it a home of its own, we improve
> useablity for everyone.


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Wikipedia and detail

body:
Gregory Maxwell wrote:
>
> Wikipedia isn't the only place in the world to store knowledge. It's
> clear that we already are aware of that, which is why we have
> wikibooks, wikiquotes, and wiktionary.

No, not really.  The reason we have Wikibooks, Wikiquote and Wiktionary
is because the community wanted them.  Again, it comes down to the
community majority opinion.  It is no surprise that, with there being a
distinction between an "encyclopaedia" and a "dictionary" in the real
world, a majority of contributors will want to mirror that distinction
out of tradition.  The statement that "Wikipedia isn't the only place in
the world to store knowledge" is invented later to justify this.  It is
relatively obvious that it would be hypothetically possible to store all
knowledge in Wikipedia; people do not deny this, but they only question
that it is desirable.  And again, it comes down to the community
majority opinion.

Timwi


list: wiktionary-l

subject: [Wiktionary-l] GNU-FDL and Ultimate Wiktionary

body:
Jimmy Wales wrote:

>I think that GNU FDL is perfectly fine for Ultimate Wiktionary and there
>is no need to change the license.  The license is perfectly compatible
>with the .DICT format, so there should be no problems at all.
>
I'm glad to hear that.

>Thinking about how to import data from wiktionary in the ultimate
>wiktionary may pose a few puzzles with respect to FDL compliance, but I
>don't see any significant problems.  The import script should keep track
>of who contributed to a chunk of data and take note of that fact.  The
>history may be a little more problematic, and I think we will want to
>get advice on exactly how to do it.
>
Importing histories into Gerard's project will not remove them from the
existing Wiktionaries.  Simply putting a dated link to the source
Wiktionary should do it.  That would only become a problem if the
existing Wiktionary deletes the article or otherwise makes it
unworkable.  In the existing transwiki technique article histories are
moved with the term in question.  This gives a nice list of who edited
and when, but records of what changes these people made are
unavailable.  In some cases, particularly as regards very stubby
articles, it has proved more practical to discard the transwikied
material and its history completely, and start a whole new article.

>But changing the license to something else would require throwing away
>all existing work in wiktionary, which seems quite unwise to me.
>
>
Not really, since the existing wiktionaries would continue as they have
all along.

Ec


from_name: Jimmy Wales

subject: [Foundation-l] GNU-FDL and Ultimate Wiktionary

body:
I think that GNU FDL is perfectly fine for Ultimate Wiktionary and there
is no need to change the license.  The license is perfectly compatible
with the .DICT format, so there should be no problems at all.

Thinking about how to import data from wiktionary in the ultimate
wiktionary may pose a few puzzles with respect to FDL compliance, but I
don't see any significant problems.  The import script should keep track
of who contributed to a chunk of data and take note of that fact.  The
history may be a little more problematic, and I think we will want to
get advice on exactly how to do it.

But changing the license to something else would require throwing away
all existing work in wiktionary, which seems quite unwise to me.

--Jimbo


from_name: Anders Wegge Jakobsen

subject: [Wikitech-l]

body:
"Timwi" == Timwi  <timwi at gmx.net> writes:

> You may have your own opinions about things; you may think that
> everyone here is a really crap programmer and you could do it all
> much better if you had the time. You might think Enotif is a piece
> of shit just like you do with my Recent Changes Patrol feature and
> flexbisonparse. But, man, you gotta learn to keep it to yourself.

 Have you actually seen the Enotif code? If not, then I suggest that
you take a look at the latter half of UserMailer.php

--
/Wegge
Min holdning til Usenet - <http://wiki.wegge.dk/Usenet>
Min weblog - <http://blog.wegge.dk/>


from_name: Till Westermayer

body:
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . till we *) . . .

Hi Delirium,

>Not true.  The official website of Texas <http://www.state.tx.us/>
>is in both Spanish and English, and this is true of many states
>with large Spanish-speaking populations.  Every ballot I've ever
>used to vote in an election (I'm from Texas) was printed in both
>English and Spanish; in the last election, my absentee ballot came
>with a Vietnamese version as well.  All government buildings have
>their signs in both English and Spanish.  Basically, there is no
>official piece of communication you can get from the Texas state
>government that does not have every word of English translated to
>Spanish, and in the Houston area Vietnamese is often included as
>well.

>(Compare the uproar that would ensue if a European country allowed
>people to vote using Turkish-language ballots.)

While that is uncommon, information about the election is presented in
most immigrant languages commonly, here too.

 __ .
 / / / /                            ... Till Westermayer - till we *)
. .
  . mailto:till at tillwe.de . www.westermayer.de/till/ . icq 320393072
  . Hirschstra?e 5. 79100 Freiburg . 0761 55697152 . 0160 96619179
  . . . . .


body:
Ray Saintonge wrote:
>
> I would be wary of any scheme to pay people for articles.  We have
> prided ourselves on an all volunteer production in all languages.

The first major contributors to Wikipedia were paid (or at least Larry
Sanger was).  I don't see the problem with this.  The main incentive is
not just to have certain articles written for money, but actually to
start the Wikipedia itself, i.e. to hope that a community would form.

> The one thing that is not mentioned in the discussion is who would fund
> this proposal.

Fund what?  My proposal suggests that Wikipedians offer the money.
Anyone can offer as much as they like for as many articles as they like.

Timwi


subject:
[Wikipedia-l] Article validation: allow IP ratings for the raw
	data phase

body:
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . till we *) . . .

Hi,

catching up after holidays, I'm not sure if anybody mentioned it, but at
least theoretically it would be possible to make statistical
comparisions between anonymous ratings and logged-in ratings (if anon/
logged in is stored), so after a while we could show if there a
statictically significant differences between both ratings.

And on a related topic: I think ratings (who rates what how) should be
visible, meaning raters are conscious about their decisions and the
consequences.

Till

>I suggest that we allow ratings by anonymous users (IP numbers),
>at least in 1.5.

>Reasons for this:

>* we've always worked by leaving things as open as possible and
>only   restricting as needed;

>* we're explicitly not using the data for anything important yet,
>so if ten   thousand rating spammers put
>[[Image:Autofellatio.jpg]] top marks for   everything, it won't
>actually affect anything;

>* the raw data will be of great interest to people, and as wide as
>possible   is good. (I can see the academics studying Wikipedia
>slavering for the   ratings data tarball ;-)

>- d.

>_______________________________________________
>Wikipedia-l mailing list
>Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l

 __ .
 / / / /                            ... Till Westermayer - till we *)
. .
  . mailto:till at tillwe.de . www.westermayer.de/till/ . icq 320393072
  . Hirschstra?e 5. 79100 Freiburg . 0761 55697152 . 0160 96619179
  . . . . .


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: GFDL Clarification

body:
Robert Brockway wrote:
> On Sat, 28 May 2005, Timwi wrote:
>
>>Quite to the contrary, you only asked if the image could be used on
>>Wikipedia, not whether they would license it under the GFDL or anything
>>else. Therefore, they only agreed to using it on Wikipedia, and
>>therefore it should not be used on Wikipedia because it isn't free.
>
> If I had asked Mercedes Corby if I could licence the images under the GFDL
> I'm sure she would not have had the slightest clue what I was talking
> about.  I'm certain her focus, then as now, is on her sister who has now
> been convicted of a serious offence and sentenced to 20 years jail, not
> licencing issues.  I was not about to expect her to absorb alot of
> information on licencing when she had more important things to worry
> about.  As far as I'm concerned I asked for images that were copyright
> free and that is what I got.

Just because she has "more important things to worry about", doesn't
really make it okay for us to ignore her copyrights and exploit her work.

Instead, maybe you should just ask a simpler question.  "Do you forgo
your copyright?"  If the answer is yes, the image (or other work) is
public-domain and can be used on Wikipedia.

Timwi


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Problème de copyright dans l'usage de vos sources Wikipedia

body:
Wouter Steenbeek wrote:

>> Wouter Steenbeek wrote:
>>
>>> But I prefer you to hold this discussion in English, indeed to hold
>>> any discussion on this list in English.
>>
>> I am sure many people will "prefer" that, but that doesn't stop us from
>> using other languages whenever we feel like it.
>>
>>> There will be a lot of people who are unable to read French...
>>
>> There are people who are unable to read English.  Picture that.
>
> Yes, but not one this list; at least I am confident that anyone having
> suscribed to this list can read English. The sole reason why I prefer
> English here (note: just *here*, not on Wikisource, Wikiquote, the
> commons etc.) is a practical one. It makes communication easier. I can
> very well read your French (but hardly respond in the same language,
> unfortunately) and - if necessary - German and Spanish as well, but I
> would be lost if people began to write in Chinese, Arabic or Swahili,
> though these are quite viable international languages in certain parts
> of the world. Others however might be willing to use languages like
> these. Anything posted here must be accesible to all of us, imo. I
> must stress I fully support multilinguality.

As a rule I write to this list in English, but if I want to respond to
someone who has written in French I will do so in that language.  I
don't object to people using other languages, as long as they realize
that I may have no clue about what they are saying.  If I think that I
adequately misunderstand, I will respond in English.  I may even grace a
response to Italian comments with "Va bene" before I switch to
English.   In no event will I complain about someone's use of another
language.

Ec


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: How to change namespaces in Friulian Wiki?

body:
Mark Williamson wrote:
> Hm, can't you do that with the MediaWiki: namespace? And if not, is
> that scheduled for a future version? And if not, is there a reason
> (somebody changing namespaces would probably be worse than somebody
> changing other interface text).

We only ever need to change the name of a namespace once for every
language.  I agree that the current process to do this is tedious, but I
don't think it is worth any developer effort to change.


from_name: Mark Williamson

subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Problème de copyright dans l'usage de vos sources Wikipedia

body:
D'accord Ant,

?????????????Z??????????????! (ekri nan lot lang ki nou pale / najuN kutubanu
hwukaga wuti kaccana / cando podemus, iscriemus in sas limbas ??teras)

Ccccccccccependant j' dois dire que dans la phrase japonaise, j'n'suis
pas ?? l'aise 100 % avec sa grammaire (sepedan m dwe di ke nan sa fraz
japon??z, m se pa 100% konf??tab av??k sa gram??)

Wouter pokipa ou ekri pa nan limborg???

Mark

On 29/05/05, Anthere <anthere9 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
> Wouter Steenbeek a ??crit:
> >
> >> Anthere wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Toutefois, nous aimerions signaler que lorsque vous
> >>> utilisez du mat??riel provenant de Wikipedia, il est
> >>> n??cessaire de citer d'une part la source et d'autre
> >>> part la licence.
> >>
> >>
> >> Il n'est pas n??cessaire de citer la source. Il est pourtant n??cessaire
> >> de citer l'histoire de chaque article inclus les auteurs, et
> >> normalement nous recommandons aux utilisateurs de notre contenu de
> >> faire cela en liant ?? l'article original sur Wikip??dia.
> >>
> >> Au moins, c'??tait toujours mon impression. :-)
> >>
> >> Timwi
> >
> >
> > I guess you're right. It is even unusual for encyclopaedias to quote,
> > unless it comes to information which is tied very strongly to one
> > source. That is what sets encyclopaedias apart from scientifical
> > publications. But I prefer you to hold this discussion in English,
> > indeed to hold any discussion on this list in English. There will be a
> > lot of people who are unable to read French...
> >
> > Wouter
>
> I wrote in french for two reasons
>
> 1) there are apparently a good many people here who are currently
> forgetting that we are not in an english-restricted list. I think it is
> good to remind people from time to time that we are multilingual and
> that speaking english requires an effort for some of us.
>
> 2) second, the problem mentionned in terms of copyright only concerns
> the dutch, the french and the german wikipedias. When I write to a
> website publishing in french, dutch and german, I see no valid reason to
> write them in a fourth language.
>
> I will add that being allowed to speak in my language help me cooling
> down, keep faith in a multilingual project, and to avoid just plainly
> unregistering from this list as I have been seriously considering in the
> past few days.
>
> Ant
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>

--
SI HOC LEGERE SCIS NIMIVM ERVDITIONIS HABES
QVANTVM MATERIAE MATERIETVR MARMOTA MONAX SI MARMOTA MONAX MATERIAM
POSSIT MATERIARI
ESTNE VOLVMEN IN TOGA AN SOLVM TIBI LIBET ME VIDERE


subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Problème de copyrig h t dans l'usage de vos sources Wikipedia

body:
Angela l di tr? byen. M ou raple souple ki Wikipedia se yon proj? d
plizy? lang, ankli limborg?-la ki ou-menm pale ak ekri.

Mark

On 29/05/05, Angela <beesley at gmail.com> wrote:
> Wouter Steenbeek wrote:
> >> Anything posted here must be accessible to all of us, imo.
>
> I don't agree with this. If someone wants to post in a language other
> than English, I'd rather they do that than not post at all. We would
> risk missing out on a lot of news and issues from the others
> Wikipedias if we tried to enforce any sort of English-only policy
> here. If the message is on this list, it gives other people the
> opportunity to quickly translate it into English, or any other
> languages that might be useful to people reading the thread. It would
> be very difficult to prevent English-only speakers ever seeing another
> language in a project as multilingual as Wikipedia.
>
> > I can very well read your French (but hardly respond in the same language?)
>
> I don't think anyone is claiming you do need to respond in the same
> language. I've posted English replies to the mailing lists of
> non-English Wikipedias with no complaints that I'm aware of - or maybe
> just no complaints I could read ;)
>
> Angela.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>
>
>

--
SI HOC LEGERE SCIS NIMIVM ERVDITIONIS HABES
QVANTVM MATERIAE MATERIETVR MARMOTA MONAX SI MARMOTA MONAX MATERIAM
POSSIT MATERIARI
ESTNE VOLVMEN IN TOGA AN SOLVM TIBI LIBET ME VIDERE


subject:
[Wikipedia-l] Re: Paid-for-articles WPs in smaller languages
	(was: bambara)

body:
Hi Kasper,

I brought up the issue of NKo before as you will remember.

However unfortunately I have realised that it is an issue bigger than
simply conversion between scripts.

NKo is used to write a sort of "unified Mande" rather than individual
varieties, so it wouldn't work well for the Bambara Wikipedia.

Although mostly only old people use it in the area you are in, in
surrounding nations it is used by most of the Mande population, and
remember that it is an amazing miracle of indigenous literacy in
Africa (it spread from person to person and generation to generation,
across thousands of kilometres, without the framework of a formal
education system).

Especially in Guinea it is the primary means for writing Mande
languages, and there is already a huge body of existing technical
literature on diverse topics written in it.

Given the nature of NKo literature distribution, I think it's possible
some of the works in the language could be used   directly on
Wikipedia

Mark

On 29/05/05, Guaka <guaka at no-log.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> First, thanks to HaafLimbo (his alias on the Limburgish Wikipedia) who
> pointed me to this mailinglist :)
>
> > > it's often a possibility that the person has seen a webpage but that
> > > writing the manuscript out in longhand is more convenient for them.
>
> That can even be more convenient inside cities where there is internet,
> like Bamako. Many people have never touched a computer. In fact, last
> week I proposed an older Fulaar man, who is also head of a Fulaar
> cultural association, to simply bring me written articles.
>
> > > Just because you don't have access to a computer doesn't mean you
> > > never HAVE had access. And you might have access to a computer, but it
> > > might be inconvenient compared to writing on paper and using
> > > conventional post.
>
> Not to forget the costs of using the computer (let alone the internet).
>
> > >>Or should I register a special account to post all the articles
> > >>created in the project? That will make searching them very easy, etc.
> > >>What do you think?
>
> Yesterday, when I added 5 articles to the Bambara Wikipedia I simply put
> the name of the author in the comment box.
>
> > >>>Among our further plans is looking for such people in the villages of
> > >>>North Ossetia, where exists at least one highly literate group: the
> > >>>teachers of the Ossetian language. But most of them are not at all
> > >>>good computer users... So we have many interesting challenges.
> > >>
> > >><<Perhaps a collaboration with computer offer ?>>
> > >>
> > >>Can you tell more about your idea? I didn't get it.
>
> Reading this thread... An idea that pops up right now... Communities
> could be provided with one or more computers, under the condition they
> regularly write new Wikipedia articles. An internet connection is
> probably too expensive at such places. This way people can be provided
> with lots of valuable information in languages some people can
> understand while at the same time working on information in their native
> language.
>
> Make computer usage free for people who contribute to Wikimedia projects
> (or localization, documentation, development of free software, free
> information projects), and people who don't contribute can choose to pay
> a small sum that pays the electricity, and possibly the internet
> connection...
>
> I've been quite a while in Bamako now. And I've tried to get people
> interested. First with 200 CFA per article (0.3 EUR), but that didn't
> really work. I've tried with university students, but nothing really
> happened. Recently a new Geek arrived however, who has equipped a little
> community school/center with a bunch of computers, in one of the poorer
> areas of Bamako. And they are really interested. The university students
> and the more "well off" people couldn't be bothered with the 500 CFA.
> Poorer people however, don't have the money to use a cybercafe. 500 CFA
> per hour is considered cheap here, for using the internet, but is also
> unaffordable for at least 90% of the population.
>
> Yesterday, at the center, I gave out the first 500 CFA pieces, and
> people are starting to get the idea.
>
> I also installed a DICT version of Wikipedia on the computer, so they
> can access all the text from the French Wikipedia and translate that.
>
> bye,
> Kasper
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>

--
SI HOC LEGERE SCIS NIMIVM ERVDITIONIS HABES
QVANTVM MATERIAE MATERIETVR MARMOTA MONAX SI MARMOTA MONAX MATERIAM
POSSIT MATERIARI
ESTNE VOLVMEN IN TOGA AN SOLVM TIBI LIBET ME VIDERE


from_name: Maru Dubshinki

subject: [Wikipedia-l] US Education system (was NPR interview)

body:
On 5/27/05, Alphax <alphasigmax at gmail.com> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Christopher Mahan wrote:
> > How do you explain to somebody that Toyota != Toyota Motor
> > Corporation when their level of expertise is limited to US High
> > School education level?
> >
>
> Is it true that in the US, students are not taught anything about other
> countries?
>
> - --
> Alphax

Well, I'm a sort of an expert here on the subject of US students (I
graduate high school in a few days) so I can confidently tell you that
yes, we are taught about other countries, and reasonably well- but
that goes only for the students who actually care and pay attention.
The others, well, all bets are off.

~Maru
And there are depressingly many of the latter.


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: An idea

body:
No, not really.

This has little to do with spelling - even in the most recent times
when English spelling was largely up to the individual author, they
would've branded that as "incorrect".

People like you seem to believe that language does _not_ change over time.

In that case I say to you, behold:

"Ne sorga, snotor guma; selre bi? ?ghw?m ??t he his freond wrece,
?onne he fela murne. Ure ?ghwylc sceal ende gebidan worolde lifes;
wyrce se ?e mote domes ?r dea?e; ??t bi? drihtguman unlifgendum ?fter
selest."

That's a quote from what I consider to be one of the most splendid
works of English poetry.

What, you say, English? Isn't that Icelandic or some other crazy
langauge like that? No, it is indeed English, and that is how it was
written. Even if you replaced the spelling of words that have cognates
in modern English with their current standard spelling, it would be
quite literally incomprehensible.

Many of the words have been replaced by French ones, many others have
changed in their pronunciation so drastically as to be quite literally
unrecognisable.

Mark

On 29/05/05, Chad Perrin <perrin at apotheon.com> wrote:
> On Sat, May 28, 2005 at 07:28:01PM -0700, Mark Williamson wrote:
> > As I said before, even dirty perscriptivists (viz Perrin, C.) always
> > come to accept language change _eventually_.
> >
> > Otherwise, the text of your message would have read like something
> > more along the lines of "Spec ??? fore ?in sylf!" (Stephen Forrest may
> > correct me here in the case that ic may've spake me here in a
> > wrong-like manner yar)
>
> In point of fact, the examples of archaic speech you provide owe their
> obsolescence more to an imposition of standards than to a modification
> of language by accepting corruptions.  The fact that there is only one
> "correct" spelling for "self" is, in fact, more a
> prescriptivist-friendly alteration of language than descriptivist.
> Semantic, syntactic, and even vocal standards have been adopted as
> "correct" over the years in addition to descriptive drift over the
> years.  In any case, barring the development of an immortality
> treatment, I doubt I'll outlive a time when "reknowned" is considered
> technically incorrect by a substantial demographic.
>
> --
> Chad Perrin
> [ CCD CopyWrite | http://ccd.apotheon.org ]
>

--
SI HOC LEGERE SCIS NIMIVM ERVDITIONIS HABES
QVANTVM MATERIAE MATERIETVR MARMOTA MONAX SI MARMOTA MONAX MATERIAM
POSSIT MATERIARI
ESTNE VOLVMEN IN TOGA AN SOLVM TIBI LIBET ME VIDERE


from_name: Александр Сигачёв

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Paid-for-articles WPs in smaller languages

body:
> >Mind that for such sources the copyright is no longer in effect (books
> >published in the USSR before 1971 are no longer copyright-defended if
> >the server is in the US).

> Whose law are you getting this from?  Russia has recently adopted the
> life + 70 rule, and though there is some confusion about how the
> transition from life + 50 would function none of that would support your
> speculation about the law.

Yes, but the law is not retrospective. So if work already was in
public domain then it's remain in public domain. (example until 1963
in USSR photo works was protected only 3 year). I think we need
[[Copyright in Soviet Union]] article. At present I can refer to
acts/articles/legal authorities only in Russian language (example
http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_talk:%D0%98%D1%81%D1%82%D0%BE%D1%87%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%BA%D0%B8_%D0%B8%D0%BD%D1%84%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%BC%D0%B0%D1%86%D0%B8%D0%B8/%D0%91%D0%A1%D0%AD)


from_name: Rob Lanphier

subject:
[Wikitech-l] Aggregating MediaWiki access control
	discussions/patches

body:
Hi folks,

I'm starting to take a more active interest in MediaWiki access control
features, primarily in the area of integration with other applications
and authenticaion systems.  My initial interest in this was picqued by
administrating a GForge site (helixcommunity.org) where there have been
frequent requests for some form of wiki integration.  However, my
interest is probably more abstract than that now (i.e. I want to solve
the general problem, rather than writing a one-off MediaWiki/GForge glue
layer).

As I've started my investigation, I've been looking at what
conversations have occurred in the past.  I've tried to document what I
know so far here:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Access_control

I've wanted to get a good idea for what's already been discussed and how
the code currently works before coming in swinging with my own ideas for
improvements that can be made.

A couple of questions:
1.  I've included links to several bugs.  I'd like to file a tracking
bug in BZ which is blocked by those bugs so that I get the benefit of
two-way links to all of the bugs.  However, it doesn't appear that
metabugs are standard practice here.  Is that by policy?  More to the
point, would anyone mind if I filed an "Access control" tracking bug?
2.  Is there anything major I'm missing?

I'll be on #mediawiki IRC semi-regularly (as "robla"), but you may have
to /msg me to get my attention.

Thanks
Rob


from_name: Brion Vibber

subject: [WikiEN-l] Upload service interruption on en.wikipedia.org

body:
We're going to be moving some images around tonight to relieve disk load
on the central image file server.

Uploads may be briefly disabled on en.wikipedia.org during parts of this
process to ensure that files aren't lost. Sorry for any inconvenience
this may cause.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 253 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20050529/1a4b2ff6/attachment.pgp


subject: [Wikitech-l] Upload service interruption on en.wikipedia.org

body:
We're going to be moving some images around tonight to relieve disk load
on the central image file server.

Uploads may be briefly disabled on en.wikipedia.org during parts of this
process to ensure that files aren't lost. Sorry for any inconvenience
this may cause.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 253 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20050529/1a4b2ff6/attachment.pgp>


from_name: Wouter Steenbeek

subject:
[Wikipedia-l] One last word about user genders (was:sco/fiu-vroin
	danger..)

body:
>On 5/26/05, Tony Sidaway <minorityreport at bluebottle.com> wrote:
>
> > On English Wikipedia (dunno about the others) there is a facebook page
> > where you can put your photograph if you want people to know stuff like
> > gender (or you can just say "I am male" or "I am female" on your user
> > page).  In general it doesn't make much difference, though, and is not
> > relevant to use of Wikipedia.  I've managed perfectly well for about a
> > decade usually roleplaying female online, and nobody ever knows if I
>don't
> > want them to know.  Even those who do know tend to forget, such is the
> > power of illusion.
>
>An illusion much harder to maintain in a language like French for
>exemple, where many times I will have to use a female form of a past
>participle or an adjective and give myself away ;-). It is quite an
>interesting thing to note , that English is  language with which it is
>much easier to hide your gender than with many other languages.
>
>Delphine
>
And of course, if you want to be sure your sex is not misinterpreted, you
can use your real name as user name. I don't think I would consider a
Delphine male at any time, no matter how drunk I may be...

Wouter

_________________________________________________________________
Nieuw: Beeld en geluid met MSN Messenger 7.0 http://messenger.msn.nl/


subject: RE: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Problème de copyright dans l'usage de vos sources Wikipedia

body:
>Anthere wrote:
>>
>>Toutefois, nous aimerions signaler que lorsque vous
>>utilisez du mat?riel provenant de Wikipedia, il est
>>n?cessaire de citer d'une part la source et d'autre
>>part la licence.
>
>Il n'est pas n?cessaire de citer la source. Il est pourtant n?cessaire de
>citer l'histoire de chaque article inclus les auteurs, et normalement nous
>recommandons aux utilisateurs de notre contenu de faire cela en liant ?
>l'article original sur Wikip?dia.
>
>Au moins, c'?tait toujours mon impression. :-)
>
>Timwi

I guess you're right. It is even unusual for encyclopaedias to quote, unless
it comes to information which is tied very strongly to one source. That is
what sets encyclopaedias apart from scientifical publications. But I prefer
you to hold this discussion in English, indeed to hold any discussion on
this list in English. There will be a lot of people who are unable to read
French...

Wouter

_________________________________________________________________
MSN Webmessenger doet het altijd en overal http://webmessenger.msn.com/


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Wikipedia and detail

body:
Speaking of which, why on earth do we mention etymologies of words in
articles such as [[en:Archaeology]] or [[en:Zo?logy]]?

When [[scn:Trisceli]] was the Translation of the Week, I had a laugh
over reading in Chinese "The etymology of the word 'three-legged
figure'' is from the Greek 'triskelion'" or something along those
lines because quite obviously the Chinese translation (a meaning-based
translation meaning iirc "three-legged figure") is not related to the
Greek, but it was amended so as to say that the _English_ name came
from the Greek.

Other Chinese articles including etymologies that are even more
irrelevant than in the English versions are articles on the sciences;
I mostly deleted those sections when /manually/ converting to
Traditional for closed-zh-tw: (at the time, of course, it was zh-tw:).

Mark

On 29/05/05, Timwi <timwi at gmx.net> wrote:
> Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> > On 5/28/05, Timwi <timwi at gmx.net> wrote:
> >
> >>Funny, and somehow I thought that the goal of Wikipedia is to "collect
> >>the sum of human knowledge".
> >
> > So how do wikibooks, wiktionary, and wikiquotes fit into this?
>
> I didn't invent any of those. Nor, incidentally, did I invent Wikipedia
> or any guidelines on what should or should not go into Wikipedia. Nor
> did I invent the "sum of human knowledge" phrasing, which is found in
> numerous places on Wikipedia. When I first came here, I interpreted it
> to mean that pretty much anything can go into Wikipedia, including those
> kinds of things that are now collected on Wiktionary (which didn't exist
> at the time). But with the size of the community, my opinion pretty much
> doesn't count, and so I have over time acquired a certain indifference
> towards it and just go with what most other people think.
>
> But whenever I go back to thinking about it, I keep coming to the
> conclusion that this is wrong. The majority of the community is not
> always right. Please don't interpret this to mean that I think *I*'m
> right. It's just that there is no real way to change the ways of
> Wikipedia for as long as it is run by a community which has a certain
> majority opinion, even if that opinion is wrong or sub-optimal.
>
> The ways of the community aren't always consistent. I would have thought
> that [[Reich]] looks more like a dictionary entry (having pronunciation,
> translations, etymology and cognates, etc.), but it clearly survived my
> VfD nomination; yet similar articles on other words would probably be
> transwikied. On the other hand, my (not-really-an-)article on
> [[Piperade]] (containing the sentence "'''Piperade''' is a
> [[recipe|dish]]."), was speedy-deleted without VfD process, even though
> I would have thought that the single piece of information I entered was
> encyclopedic.
>
> I am not a rampant inclusionist; I agree to the concepts of notability
> and verifiability.  But I guess within the constraints of notability and
> verifiability, I am an inclusionist.  I feel that, since the information
> on Wiktionary is just as verifiable as the information on Wikipedia, and
> given the fact that there are numerous dictionaries and etymological
> reference works establishing their notability, the distinction between a
> "dictionary entry" and an "encyclopaedia entry" seems artificial.
>
> I have not really thought about Wikibooks yet.  Whenever I try to, the
> first question I ask myself is, "Isn't an encyclopaedia a book?"
>
> Timwi
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>

--
SI HOC LEGERE SCIS NIMIVM ERVDITIONIS HABES
QVANTVM MATERIAE MATERIETVR MARMOTA MONAX SI MARMOTA MONAX MATERIAM
POSSIT MATERIARI
ESTNE VOLVMEN IN TOGA AN SOLVM TIBI LIBET ME VIDERE


subject:
[Wikitech-l]
	Re: broken e-mail notification on testwiki - who knows, why ?

references:
<42986491.1030903@tgries.de>
	<d7a0r0$koe$1@sea.gmane.org>	<d7c3f6$l00$1@sea.gmane.org>
	<d7ca27$3ru$1@sea.gmane.org>

body:
Tim Starling wrote:
>
> I see you've taken the opportunity to list all the wrongs I've done
> against you in the past. [...]

In hindsight, maybe I shouldn't have done that. I apologise. If at all,
I probably should have sent the mail privately, so you wouldn't have
needed to defend yourself in front of the public community. But the urge
was strong.

I don't know what it is that makes me over-react whenever you use terms
or phrases that I see as potentially offensive. I tried to find the
e-mail where you commented on the patrol feature, but I can't find it.
There was another e-mail where you described a negative comment of mine
as "whinging". In hindsight, it's a small thing, and I probably *was*
whinging, but I think all of these small things add up to make it a
bigger thing.

> * I honestly thought refusing to contribute to the Klingon Wikipedia was
> a fair compromise.

It is perfectly in your right to do or not do what you like. I
personally don't like this behaviour of yours, but I will not complain
about it because I am not in a position where I am entitled to do so.

However, I guess what actually irritates me is the combination of that
*and* the fact that there are very few other people with the relevant
access => the brickwall effect. I have often moaned that too few people
have access to do the things smaller projects need to have done (this
applies to pretty much all projects, not just tlh), and unfortunately it
has often been misinterpreted to mean that I am insisting on receiving
access myself. I just think that if you are going to refuse to do
something that is in your power to do, then you should at least empower
someone else to do it instead.

Thanks, anyway, for clarifying everything. I feel better now.

Timwi


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: WikiEN-l Digest, Vol 22, Issue 96

body:
geni wrote:
>
>>New Wikipedia policy proposal:
>>
>>        "Users using DHCP are immune against admin action. They are by
>>         definition right and have not done anything wrong."
>
> What about admins using DHCP?

Admins are already immune, by definition always right, and have done
nothing wrong.  Do you doubt it?  Then you are a troll!


from_name: Merlin

subject: [Wikitech-l] Inserting old dump into db. How long will it take?

body:
Hi there,

I am wondering how long it would take to insert the 15GB old dump into a
mysql db on a athlon 2000 system on suse 8.1 if the system does only
this job.
As far as I remember there was something like 200 inserts per minute. So
this could take weeks, right?`

Did somebody already do that and can provide some figures?

Thanx in advance,

Merlin


body:
Wouter Steenbeek wrote:
>
> But I prefer you to hold this discussion in English, indeed to hold
> any discussion on this list in English.

I am sure many people will "prefer" that, but that doesn't stop us from
using other languages whenever we feel like it.

> There will be a lot of people who are unable to read French...

There are people who are unable to read English.  Picture that.


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Copyright violations at download.wikimedia.org

body:
Kate Turner wrote:

>Gregory Maxwell wrote in gmane.science.linguistics.wikipedia.misc:
>
>
>>It would appear that we are breaking the law with respect to copyright
>>at download.wikimedia.org.
>>
>>
>this is not particular to downloads, but applies to any place that old
>revisions are available, including the web interface.
>
An apparent infringement is not always "breaking the law."

>>This is a result of our policy about the insertion of copyrighted
>>material into articles:
>>
>>
>>[[Wikipedia:Copyright problems#Instructions]]
>>"Pages where the most recent edit is a copyright violation, but the
>>previous article was not, should not be deleted. They should be
>>reverted. The violating text will remain in the page history for
>>archival reasons unless the copyright holder asks the Wikimedia
>>Foundation to remove it."
>>
>>
>does this policy apply everywhere or only en.wp?
>
It seems like a reasonable policy.  This is directly concerned with a
core principle so I would suggest that it should be broadly applied.

>>As a result our database contains large quantities of violating
>>material.
>>
>>
>my understand of the relevant US law is that we are not required to
>aggressively remove copyright violations until requested by the copyright
>holder.
>
Yes and no.  Technically one is required to remove material that one
knows to be an infringement when one becomes aware of it by any means.
However, in the absence of a take down order there is the easy defence
of not knowing that the material is an infringement.  "Not knowing" is a
broader concept than simply being to identify a certain passage as
identical to that by someone else.  If we determine that to be the case
we have an infringement as a question of fact, but not necessarily as a
question of law.  If we maintain the offending material in the current
article after it has been fully identified as an infringement the
likelihood that we have also an infringement in law is greater.  For
purposes of this line of reason we can safely assume that a claim of
fair use in the current article is not available, but the standards of
fair use may be considerably relaxed.

Access to the infringing material is considerably more limited, even
though in theory anyone can access it.  Let's be practical!  Who is
going to spend a lot of his time looking through often lengthy article
histories looking for copyvios to plagiarize?  If a copyright holder
properly makes a request to take down the material from the archive we
should be prepared to comply, but until that happens we have no need to
be so worried about this stuff.

I agree that copyvio material should be identified, but NOT in the edit
summary.  That only makes it easier for someone to go through the edit
histories to find it.  A two-step approach may be better.  In the first
edit the article is tagged as a copyvio; in a new edit the offending
material along with the tag are removed from the article.

Ec