subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: Bounties, tenders, and the GNOME experience

body:
Timwi wrote:

> Erik Moeller wrote:
>
>> Because "bounty" carries strong connotations of competition rather
>> than  cooperation, I would like us to stop using that word, at least
>> when  referring to the proposal described above. Instead, it should
>> be described  as a tender process.
>
> I never liked the term "bounty" either because it reminds me of a
> chocolate bar. ;-)

I get images of cowboys chasing down bad guys. :-)

Ec


list: wikipedia-l

source: pipermail-mbox

from_name: Yann Forget

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Minority/majority question

body:
Hi,

Le Saturday 31 July 2004 11:52, Gutza a ?crit :
> Hello,
>
> I hope I'm posting this on the right list, don't know where else to
> turn. We have a minor dispute on the Romanian Wikipedia and I'd like to
> ask for your advice. The dispute refers to the naming of an article
> (would prefer not to specify which article, but it's a sensitive topic
> with people). Now, there are two spellings proposed for the article
> name: the one widely accepted in Romania and another one which is
> preferred by a Romanian minority.
>
> Some people say that the article should be named the way the Romanian
> majority spells it, others say it should be named as the minority spells
> it, as to respect the rights of the minority, and most importantly
> Wikiquette. The article topic itself is not per se relevant to neither
> the minority nor the majority in particular. Of course that in both
> cases a redirect will be made from the "other" spelling to the main
> article, regardless of which will remain as the main article and which
> remains as a redirect.
>
> Is there an official standing on this issue? Have other people been
> confronted similar disputes? How did you resolve them? Which of the
> options above would you personally prefer if you were to decide?
>
> --Gutza

We had one such issue on fr: recently about [[Action directe (...)]].

Some wanted to say "(terrorist group)", some "(left-extremist group)", and
some other "(armed group)" and the last "(revolutionary group)".
And any other combinations of the above.

The issue is not settled yet.

Yann
--
http://www.non-violence.org/ | Site collaboratif sur la non-violence
http://www.forget-me.net/ | Alternatives sur le Net
http://fr.wikipedia.org/ | Encyclop?die libre
http://www.forget-me.net/pro/ | Formations et services Linux


list: foundation-l

from_name: Anthere

subject: [Foundation-l] Re: Personal research grant collaboration request

body:
Anthere wrote:
>
>
> Chitu Okoli wrote:
>
>> By this rule, I would think that "wikipedia" (small letters) should
>> refer to
>> any of various language wikipedias (e.g. de.wikipedia.org and
>> zh.wikipedia.org), whereas "Wikipedia" (capitalized) should refer to
>> the big
>> mama that comprises all the daughter wikipedias (the Wikipedia should be
>> www.wikipedia.org, though that link automatically points to the
>> wikipedia at
>> en.wikipedia.org, I guess because that one was the first, and is the
>> largest
>> and the most visited).

Oh and... www.wikipedia.org pointing at en.wikipedia.org is a historical
artifact. An oddity :-)
Certainly because it was the first one. The correct adress was initially
www.wikipedia.com.
There have been many discussions to change that... have a portal page,
or an automatic redirection...but...

Other newer projects are not necessarily so, and the www. adress may
point to a portal page bringing to all languages


list: wikimedia-l


from_name: Andrew Lih

body:
Good observation. I've been using Wikipedia and Wikipedias.  The
reasoning for this is because Wikipedia is a brand, rather than a
concept (that is, the name is more similar to "Yahoo" than it is to
"weblog").

One problem with using lower case "wikipedia" is that people tend to
think of it as a generic concept, such that we have seen folks
erroneously use the term "wikipedia" or "Wikipedia."  For an example,
see:

http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2004-May/000213.html

-Andrew (User:Fuzheado)

On Fri, 30 Jul 2004 23:58:21 -0400, Chitu Okoli
<cokoli at jmsb.concordia.ca> wrote:
> By the way, off topic grammatical note on "Wikipedia" (capitalized) vs.
> "wikipedia" (small letters): I understand that the standard English rule for
> capitalizing things like this (I don't know how this works in other
> languages) is that when you are referring to something of which there are
> many instances, you should use small letters. However, if there is only one
> such sample in the whole world/universe, you should capitalize it. For
> instance, website uses small letters because there are millions of them, but
> the Web is capitalized because there's only one World Wide Web. The Sun
> should be capitalized (though it often is not, in practice) when referring
> to [[Sol]], the star of the Solar System, but sun should be left in small
> letters when referring to any generic star in any generic solar system.
>
> By this rule, I would think that "wikipedia" (small letters) should refer to
> any of various language wikipedias (e.g. de.wikipedia.org and
> zh.wikipedia.org), whereas "Wikipedia" (capitalized) should refer to the big
> mama that comprises all the daughter wikipedias (the Wikipedia should be
> www.wikipedia.org, though that link automatically points to the wikipedia at
> en.wikipedia.org, I guess because that one was the first, and is the largest
> and the most visited).
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

--
Andrew Lih
andrew.lih at gmail.com


from_name: Magnus Manske

body:
Gutza wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I hope I'm posting this on the right list, don't know where else to
> turn. We have a minor dispute on the Romanian Wikipedia and I'd like
> to ask for your advice. The dispute refers to the naming of an article
> (would prefer not to specify which article, but it's a sensitive topic
> with people). Now, there are two spellings proposed for the article
> name: the one widely accepted in Romania and another one which is
> preferred by a Romanian minority.
>
> Some people say that the article should be named the way the Romanian
> majority spells it, others say it should be named as the minority
> spells it, as to respect the rights of the minority, and most
> importantly Wikiquette. The article topic itself is not per se
> relevant to neither the minority nor the majority in particular. Of
> course that in both cases a redirect will be made from the "other"
> spelling to the main article, regardless of which will remain as the
> main article and which remains as a redirect.
>
> Is there an official standing on this issue? Have other people been
> confronted similar disputes? How did you resolve them? Which of the
> options above would you personally prefer if you were to decide?

Whatever spelling gets the most Google hits wins...

Magnus


list: wikien-l

subject: [WikiEN-l] Blocked IP list is inaccurate

body:
I'm not sure what is meant by "incorrect," can you elaborate?

Multiple blocks can be made for a given IP, and the time can be
changed to whatever period desired. But all blocks for that IP will be
cleared upon the earliest expiration of the block. At least that was
the latest behaviour described by Tim Starling on IRC.

-Andrew (User:Fuzheado)

On Fri, 30 Jul 2004 10:47:13 -0700 (PDT), Harry Smith
<lance6wins at yahoo.com> wrote:
> The blocked IP list in wikipedia is inaccurate.
> The dates listed for blocks to expire are incorrect.
> Meaning that they are not tied to the block mechanism.
>
> An admin can block an IP address for a period of time
> beyond the expiry date listed on the blocked IP page.
>
> I am not familiar with the mechanism.  Does the block
> page allow one to enter periods of time beyond a
> single day (seems to be the default)?
>
> Can one block for a period of time different then the
> comment indicates?
>
> Can one extend blocks without updating the comment.
>
> Lance6Wins
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard.
> http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

--
Andrew Lih
andrew.lih at gmail.com


from_name: Ralesk Ne'vennoyx

body:
Gutza wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I hope I'm posting this on the right list, don't know where else to
> turn. We have a minor dispute on the Romanian Wikipedia and I'd like to
> ask for your advice. The dispute refers to the naming of an article
> (would prefer not to specify which article, but it's a sensitive topic
> with people). Now, there are two spellings proposed for the article
> name: the one widely accepted in Romania and another one which is
> preferred by a Romanian minority.
>

Well, if it?s an issue with a city name or anything like that, it may be
just as appropriate to call Temesv?r Timi?oara as it is to call Wien
B?cs or Krak?w Krakk? on the Hungarian wikipedia or Wien Vienna on the
English one simply because the host language calls it that way.

It?s a matter of language, I think, not a matter of what country the
language is spoken.  If they want a Hungarian article (I guess this is
just another Sz?kely vs. Romanian ?trouble?), they could always come to
the Hungarian Wikipedia and write the article there with a Hungarian
title and Hungarian contents.

> Some people say that the article should be named the way the Romanian
> majority spells it, others say it should be named as the minority spells
> it, as to respect the rights of the minority, and most importantly
> Wikiquette. The article topic itself is not per se relevant to neither
> the minority nor the majority in particular. Of course that in both
> cases a redirect will be made from the "other" spelling to the main
> article, regardless of which will remain as the main article and which
> remains as a redirect.
>

Otherwise, I?d be really interested to know what article this is about.


from_name: Gutza

body:
Hello,

I hope I'm posting this on the right list, don't know where else to
turn. We have a minor dispute on the Romanian Wikipedia and I'd like to
ask for your advice. The dispute refers to the naming of an article
(would prefer not to specify which article, but it's a sensitive topic
with people). Now, there are two spellings proposed for the article
name: the one widely accepted in Romania and another one which is
preferred by a Romanian minority.

Some people say that the article should be named the way the Romanian
majority spells it, others say it should be named as the minority spells
it, as to respect the rights of the minority, and most importantly
Wikiquette. The article topic itself is not per se relevant to neither
the minority nor the majority in particular. Of course that in both
cases a redirect will be made from the "other" spelling to the main
article, regardless of which will remain as the main article and which
remains as a redirect.

Is there an official standing on this issue? Have other people been
confronted similar disputes? How did you resolve them? Which of the
options above would you personally prefer if you were to decide?

--Gutza


list: wikitech-l

from_name: Tim Starling

subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: Tasks for newbie?

body:
Jeff Warnica wrote:
> Greets all. Id like to begin contributing, in a technical fashion to
> wikipedia, and this seems like the place to start.
>
> At heart, Im a sysadmin, but to start out (especially in isolation), the
> best way seems programming work on mediawiki. Be it squashing bugs, or
> implementing new features, Id like to help. Unfortunately, while Ive
> contributed some content, Im not overtly involved in wikipedia: thus I
> dont know if on Sourceforge bugs are really bugs, and RFE are wanted by
> more then one person - I don't want to waste anyones time by working on
> things that wouldnt be accepted. Thus, I ask: what would be some tasks
> that I could cut my teeth on?

Please join the #mediawiki channel on irc.freenode.net. If you're
prepared to keep an IRC window open in the background and check it
occasionally while you do other work, you can use your sysadmin skills
immediately by offering advice. This also allows you to start building
trust with the other developers, which is very important if you want to
obtain shell access at some later date. On IRC we can also give you
programming advice.

Fixing bugs is great too, but it's really better if you do both. Many
bug reports we get are not really repeatable in a test installation, and
can only be fixed by mucking around in the live database.

Sourceforge is a good place to look for bugs, and Brion does a lot of
work categorising them and clearing them. There are also numerous
locations scattered across the wiki where bugs are reported. These fall
into two categories: community pages like the village pump, where users
complain about problems to each other, and bug reports pages, which are
often created by users without making them known to all the developers.
And then of course if you're a well known developer, you'll get bug
reports directly via email and IRC.

-- Tim Starling


body:
Tomasz Wegrzanowski wrote:

> On Sat, Jul 31, 2004 at 12:42:34PM +0200, Magnus Manske wrote:
>
>>Whatever spelling gets the most Google hits wins...
>
> It's completely different matter depending on whether it's just a
> spelling issue, or some ideological issue.

And in neither case is Google going to be the one who tells the truth,
really.


from_name: S. Vertigo

subject: [WikiEN-l] Viajero/Zero and Lance6 - POV terms

body:
> On Fri, 30 Jul 2004, Christopher Larberg wrote:
>
> > You apparently misunderstood me. My comments were
> directed towards
> > S. Vertigo and his tongue-in-cheek statements such
> as "Bush is a true
> > patriot and a national treasure" and his
> implication that people who
> > support Bush are attempting to inject such POV
> statements into the
> > Wikipedia. My comments were in no way directed
> towards you.

FYI, I wasnt referring to the injection of "such POV
statements." I was referring (using an extremely
exaggerated example) to a particular style of
[[sanitization]] by which "POV statements" such as
"Shrub is alleged" are turned into "NPOV statements,"
which (in such exaggerated examples) are easy to see
as POV...

This kind of bias is not just a one-way street of
course. :) OK, enough of that nonsense.

S

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


from_name: Tomasz Wegrzanowski

body:
On Sat, Jul 31, 2004 at 12:42:34PM +0200, Magnus Manske wrote:
> Whatever spelling gets the most Google hits wins...

It's completely different matter depending on whether it's just a
spelling issue, or some ideological issue.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Multiple Accounts

body:
Most people do not use their extra accounts to be
disruptive, and therefore a justifiable value
judgement is made among arbitrators, as to the
disruptiveness of a user's editing patterns. "Sock
puppetry" as Andrew said, is limited in definition to
the use of extra accounts to engage in
misrepresentation and disruption.

S

--- Harry Smith <lance6wins at yahoo.com> wrote:

> >From the arbitration policy page:
> Arbitrators with multiple accounts on Wikipedia will
> disclose the usernames of those accounts to the rest
> of the committee, and to Jimbo Wales, but are not
> required to disclose them publicly.
>
> I am surprised....I have been told that folks are
> not
> supposed to have more than one account on Wikipedia.
>
> Yet this seems to indicate that having more than one
> account is not unexpected.
>
> Help.
>
> Lance6Wins
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
> http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


body:
On Sat, Jul 31, 2004 at 12:58:59PM +0200, Ralesk Ne'vennoyx wrote:
> >On Sat, Jul 31, 2004 at 12:42:34PM +0200, Magnus Manske wrote:
> >>Whatever spelling gets the most Google hits wins...
> >
> >It's completely different matter depending on whether it's just a
> >spelling issue, or some ideological issue.
>
> And in neither case is Google going to be the one who tells the truth,
> really.

Rarely one of the options is "more true" than the other in any meaningful way.


body:
Gutza wrote:

> Ok, I hoped I could avoid saying what this is about, but I should have
> seen the RO/HU assumptions coming -- and it's only natural.

Worry not, and please don?t higher your defences, I really didn?t mean
to offend in any way.  As you said, yes it?s natural to suspect it mught
be such a difference ? which is the exact reason why I tried to
elaborate on such issues.

> The article
> in question is the one about Jesus. The Romanian (Eastern) Orthodox
> Church says that the name should be spelled "Iisus Hristos". Other
> religions in Romania (mainly Catholic branches) say that the Romanian
> name is Isus Cristos.
>

On that one, I can sadly not offer many suggestions, maybe that you
could go with the more common one then.  Take a look at demographics and
default to the bigger group, and don?t forget to detail the differences
in naming in the article.  If there are more differences between the
eastern and western ?interpretations?, it might as well be a good idea
to make a separate entry with links to each other.

> So now you know. It's not about Timisoara, and on a personal note I
> mildly resent the way you presented the analogy, as if Timisoara is
> natively spelled Temesv?r in the same way as Vienna is spelled "Wien"; I
> honestly don't understand why you had to bring that into the discussion
> out of nowhere. But let's not get into this now, it would be a waste of
> our time.
>

It was the only city whose Romanian name I was 100% sure how to write
and went out of my way to get the squiggly thing work under the s :P
Nothing more, just wanted to give examples otherwise.  If it had been
such an issue of spelling, I still believe it is a good idea to favour
the name in the host language, instead of favouring a ?foreign? name in
order to please some minority.  Redirects, of course, are welcome.

Then again, had you said what this was about, I hadn?t jumped into this
whole thing at all :)

> Anyhow, the dispute is basically not about the language itself, because
> all religions who dispute the name do it in Romanian. On a side note, to
> put your mind at ease before you assume it as being the case, no Magyars
> are involved in the dispute itself.
>

Wasn?t worried about that factor at all; again, no need to higher your
defences.  I just hope I can be of help.


from_name: Claudio V

subject: [Wikitech-l] Favourite MySQL GUIs

body:
It seems that phpMyAdmin is a preferred MySQL GUI but
the reason why I did not want to use it is because I
am not sure if it is easy to export and import data to
other files (i.e.: txt, excel).  With Navicat you can
perform that task very easily but I was hoping to see
if there was another GUI better than that one.

I will give phpMyAdmin a try during the weekend and
see what it has to offer.

Thanks for the responds.

Claudio

 --- Bill Clark <wclarkxoom at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Jul 2004 14:38:04 -0500, Vinny
> <compwiz24 at comcast.net> wrote:
> > > For me, phpmyadmin always did the job...
> >
> > I'll second that. phpmyadmin is a terrific tool,
> and easy to use.
>
> I'll..  umm.. third that?  phpmyadmin is
> ridiculously simple to
> install... just untar the directory and move it into
> your document
> root somewhere.  You'll need to edit the
> config.inc.php file to
> reflect your login information, but other than that
> there's nothing to
> it!
>
> It even generates PHP code for you to stick into
> your scripts, if
> you're too lazy / don't know mysql+PHP.
>
> -Bill Clark

______________________________________________________________________
Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca


from_name: Emmanuel Engelhart

subject:
[Wikitech-l] [PATCH] [ 965725 ] Pipe-character (|) in instantiated
	Templates

body:
Hi

Small patch.
Maybe not the best solution, but simple and not very dirty.
Makes a merge of correct template args to recover entire wikilinks [[(...)]]

Cordialy

Emmanuel Engelhart

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Le bon sens consiste beaucoup ? connaitre la nuance des choses.
                                   Montesquieu, "de l'esprit des lois"
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emmanuel Engelhart      ICQ UIN : 53388731   TEL (+49)(0)6.22.15.88.03.31
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Parser.patch
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 1333 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20040731/5a04634d/attachment.obj>


from_name: Bill Clark

subject: [Wikitech-l] Favourite MySQL GUIs

body:
On Sat, 31 Jul 2004 13:33:08 -0400 (EDT), Claudio V
<claudio216 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> It seems that phpMyAdmin is a preferred MySQL GUI but
> the reason why I did not want to use it is because I
> am not sure if it is easy to export and import data to
> other files (i.e.: txt, excel).

Phpmyadmin exports to the following formats from the GUI:

SQL
LaTeX
CSV for Ms Excel data
CSV data
XML

I've never seen any functionality present in another GUI MySQL
interface that wasn't also available in phpmyadmin.  IMHO it really is
the best.

Cheers,

-Bill Clark


from_name: Timwi

body:
Erik Moeller wrote:

> Caveat lector: The system which I think should be used by the Wikimedia
> Foundation is different. With GNOME's bounty system, you have potentially
> the situation where two developers hack away on the same stuff, but only
> one of them (who submits the code earlier) gets paid.

I already addressed this problem by saying that we should simply
introduce a policy that whoever wants to work on a bug should set
themselves as the assignee of the relevant bug entry in BugZilla.

> I think there should be an open call for tenders process, where a
> technical-minded steering committee appointed or elected by the foundation
> outlines certain key tasks, and the developers can name the conditions
> under which they are willing to complete them

This is quite an involved process; all this evaluation and negotiation
takes time and energy, and may not be worth it for small and simple
bugs/features. Personally, I think the system would be most pleasant if
people could just assign a bug to them and start working on it straight
away.

As far as I'm aware, you've never replied to my suggested system -- do
you have any opinion on it? If you think it is unsuitable, could you
deliver some constructive criticism?

> Because "bounty" carries strong connotations of competition rather than
> cooperation, I would like us to stop using that word, at least when
> referring to the proposal described above. Instead, it should be described
> as a tender process.

I never liked the term "bounty" either because it reminds me of a
chocolate bar. ;-)

The system I described would probably most sensibly be called a
"Bazaar", since it is modelled after the LiveJournal Bazaar.

Timwi


subject:
[Wikitech-l] Re: [PATCH] [ 965725 ] Pipe-character (|) in
	instantiated Templates

body:
Emmanuel Engelhart wrote:

> Small patch.
> Maybe not the best solution, but simple and not very dirty.
> Makes a merge of correct template args to recover entire wikilinks [[(...)]]

It has a little bug:

Suppose you have something like

{{template|var1=Here is a [[link]] and here is [[link|another]].}}

Your patch would not work properly in this case. Please could you change
this:

+ if((strpos($args[$i], "[[") !== false) && (strpos($args[$i], "]]") ===
false) ) {

in such a way that it essentially says "if number of '[['s in $args[$i]
greater than number of ']]'s"?

Additionally, please use tabs at the beginning of lines, and please use
'diff -u' to create your patches.

Thanks!
Timwi


from_name: Ray Saintonge

subject: [Wikipedia-l] User:Fire

body:
I am annoyed by the behaviour of user:fire.  He is not a sysop on
Wikisource, yet he was able to come and block a user indefinitely with
no better excuse than a non-working link to wikipedia about name-change
policy.  I immediately reversed the block.

Those who participate in Wikisource are quite capable of deciding who
should be blocked.  We don't need this loose cannon who has not
otherwise participated in Wikisource to sneakily acquire some kind of
superior access for no other reason to block a user that he does not like.

Ec


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Request for new language Wikipedia: Lojban

body:
Pierre Abbat wrote:

> I would like to start a Wikipedia in Lojban.

The domain name should be http://jbo.wikipedia.org/.

(Just mentioning that for completeness.)

Timwi


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Minority/majority question

body:
Yann Forget wrote:

> We had one such issue on fr: recently about [[Action directe (...)]].
>
> Some wanted to say "(terrorist group)", some "(left-extremist group)", and
> some other "(armed group)" and the last "(revolutionary group)".
> And any other combinations of the above.

How about just "group"? :-p


body:
Sorry for replying out of the thread, my subscription suffered some
unknown damage so I have to get the replies from the web archive, I
don't receive them by mail although I am subscribed.

Ok, I hoped I could avoid saying what this is about, but I should have
seen the RO/HU assumptions coming -- and it's only natural. The article
in question is the one about Jesus. The Romanian (Eastern) Orthodox
Church says that the name should be spelled "Iisus Hristos". Other
religions in Romania (mainly Catholic branches) say that the Romanian
name is Isus Cristos.

So now you know. It's not about Timisoara, and on a personal note I
mildly resent the way you presented the analogy, as if Timisoara is
natively spelled Temesv?r in the same way as Vienna is spelled "Wien"; I
honestly don't understand why you had to bring that into the discussion
out of nowhere. But let's not get into this now, it would be a waste of
our time.

Anyhow, the dispute is basically not about the language itself, because
all religions who dispute the name do it in Romanian. On a side note, to
put your mind at ease before you assume it as being the case, no Magyars
are involved in the dispute itself.

Cheers,
Gutza

Gutza wrote:

 >/ Hello,
/>/
/>/ I hope I'm posting this on the right list, don't know where else to
/>/ turn. We have a minor dispute on the Romanian Wikipedia and I'd like to
/>/ ask for your advice. The dispute refers to the naming of an article
/>/ (would prefer not to specify which article, but it's a sensitive topic
/>/ with people). Now, there are two spellings proposed for the article
/>/ name: the one widely accepted in Romania and another one which is
/>/ preferred by a Romanian minority.
/>/
/
Well, if it?s an issue with a city name or anything like that, it may be
just as appropriate to call Temesv?r Timi?oara as it is to call Wien
B?cs or Krak?w Krakk? on the Hungarian wikipedia or Wien Vienna on the
English one simply because the host language calls it that way.

It?s a matter of language, I think, not a matter of what country the
language is spoken. If they want a Hungarian article (I guess this is
just another Sz?kely vs. Romanian ?trouble?), they could always come to
the Hungarian Wikipedia and write the article there with a Hungarian
title and Hungarian contents.

 >/ Some people say that the article should be named the way the Romanian
/>/ majority spells it, others say it should be named as the minority
spells
/>/ it, as to respect the rights of the minority, and most importantly
/>/ Wikiquette. The article topic itself is not per se relevant to neither
/>/ the minority nor the majority in particular. Of course that in both
/>/ cases a redirect will be made from the "other" spelling to the main
/>/ article, regardless of which will remain as the main article and which
/>/ remains as a redirect.
/>/
/
Otherwise, I?d be really interested to know what article this is about.


subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: Outstanding patches?

body:
Alwin Meschede wrote:

> This (once again) fixes the sort ordering in SpecialLonelypages:
>
> +    function sortDescending() {
> +        return false;
> +    }

What exactly is the problem this is supposed to be fixing, and why does
this fix it? I don't currently see a sort ordering problem on
Special:Lonelypages.

Timwi


from_name: Brion Vibber

subject: [Wikitech-l] $1 Billion in Grants available

body:
Other list admins, please don't approve spam. Thanks.

-- 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/20040731/a54bcf27/attachment.pgp>


from_name: Rick

subject: [WikiEN-l] Blocking policy

body:
This is not a policy can change which can be implemented by the arbitration committee, and to attempt to do so is a violation of their charter and their powers.

RickK

Fred Bauder <fredbaud at ctelco.net> wrote:
The arbitration dispute: [[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/User:Guanaco
versus User:Lir]] has the potential to affect all Wikipedia administrators
(sysops). Please see the proposed decision at [[Wikipedia:Requests for
arbitration/User:Guanaco versus User:Lir/Proposed decision]]. It would
require any administrator who blocks a user to set forth at least a
reference to the section of [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy]] on which they rely
in order for the block to be presumed valid and not subject to immediate
reversal. Reasons like "troll", or "disruptive" would not be acceptable.

Please place comments on the talk page of [[Wikipedia:Requests for
arbitration/User:Guanaco versus User:Lir/Proposed decision]]

Fred

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

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20040731/c74bbd2f/attachment.htm


subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: Outstanding patches?

body:
Alwin Meschede wrote:

> I don't see it on the live site (might be due to caching) but on my
> local installation. Look at http://wikidev.net/Special:Lonelypages in
> Gabriel's wiki: The sort order is z-a. My patch makes sure it's a-z.

OK, I've committed your patch.

Thanks!


from_name: Alwin Meschede

subject: [Wikitech-l] Outstanding patches?

body:
Brion Vibber wrote:
> If so, please repost them here so we can get these committed or
> corrected and move on to the next set of fun bugs. :)

This (once again) fixes the sort ordering in SpecialLonelypages:

Index: includes/SpecialLonelypages.php
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/wikipedia/phase3/includes/SpecialLonelypages.php,v
retrieving revision 1.11
diff -u -r1.11 SpecialLonelypages.php
--- includes/SpecialLonelypages.php	18 Jul 2004 08:48:25 -0000	1.11
+++ includes/SpecialLonelypages.php	31 Jul 2004 12:49:35 -0000
@@ -11,7 +11,11 @@
  	function isExpensive() {
  		return true;
  	}
-
+
+	function sortDescending() {
+		return false;
+	}
+
  	function getSQL() {
  		$dbr =& wfGetDB( DB_SLAVE );
  		extract( $dbr->tableNames( 'cur', 'links' ) );

Alwin Meschede
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Lonelypages_sortorder.patch.gz
Type: application/gzip
Size: 365 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20040731/82a1208a/attachment.bin>


body:
Emmanuel Engelhart wrote:

> True, new version correcting this bug.

Again, *please* use tabs to indent lines in the future. I've fixed this
for you now and committed it.

Oh, and I've also changed
		for ( $i = 0; $i < $argc; $i++ ) {
to
		for ( $i = 0; $i < $argc-1; $i++ ) {

because once there's only a single argument left, you don't want to try
to merge it with the non-existant next.

Thanks,
Timwi


subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: Outstanding patches?

body:
Timwi wrote:
> Alwin Meschede wrote:
>> I don't see it on the live site (might be due to caching) but on my
>> local installation. Look at http://wikidev.net/Special:Lonelypages in
>> Gabriel's wiki: The sort order is z-a. My patch makes sure it's a-z.
>
> OK, I've committed your patch.

While that patch changes order to A-Z with $wgMiserMode off, it changes
it *to* Z-A when loading the cached results back up with $wgMiserMode on
(as on the Wikipedia installations).

This still needs some work.

-- 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/20040731/9ae43b0d/attachment.pgp>


from_name: Fennec Foxen

references:
<9DwP7FexpVB@erik_moeller> <ceg571$tk1$1@sea.gmane.org>
	<410BEF8F.2090101@telus.net>

body:
On Sat, 31 Jul 2004 12:14:23 -0700, Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote:
> Timwi wrote:
> > I never liked the term "bounty" either because it reminds me of a
> > chocolate bar. ;-)
> I get images of cowboys chasing down bad guys. :-)

The quilted, quicker picker-upper, Bounty! :)


from_name: Hacksprint

subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: Custom tags

body:
My bad,  I included the extension PHP file before DefaultSettings.php
which was way too early.  It all works now.  Thanks to everyone who
helped!

Hacksprint wrote:

> Tim Starling wrote:
>
>> Brion Vibber wrote:
>>
>>> Hacksprint wrote:
>>>
>>>> Unfortunately setHook isn't used anywhere so I have no example
>>>> to work with and I don't know where the best place to insert the
>>>> hook from.  Anyone have any hints I could use?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> We've got a couple of extensions in CVS:
>>> http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/wikipedia/extensions/
>>>
>>> EasyTimeline and WikiHiero are in use on Wikipedia so should be in a
>>> reasonably working state.
>>
>>
>>
>> Just to add to that, MediaWiki extensions are switched on by
>> including the PHP file from LocalSettings.php. When the file is
>> included, it will register an extension function, and the extension
>> function will be called back from Setup.php once the environment is
>> fully initialised. Inside the extension function, you can do things
>> like adding parser hooks and special pages.
>>
>> -- Tim Starling
>
>
> I added "include_once( "extensions/rblog.php" );" to my LocalSettings.php
>
> Is this adequate for a minimal extension?  I can't get it to do something
> useful with the <rblog> tag.  Thanks
>
> <?php
>
>
> # Remote Blog extension
> # To use, include this file from your LocalSettings.php
> # To configure, set members of $wgRemoteBlogSettings after the inclusion
>
>
> class RemoteBlogSettings {
>        var $settings;
> };
> $wgRemoteBlogSettings = new RemoteBlogSettings;
> $wgRemoteBlogSettings->settings="";
>
>
> $wgExtensionFunctions[] = "wfRemoteBlogExtension";
>
>
> function wfRemoteBlogExtension() {
>        global $wgParser;
>        $wgParser->setHook( "rblog", "ext_rblog_hook" );
> }
>
>
> function ext_rblog_hook( $rblog_src )
> {
>        return "Hello World" . $rblog_src;
> }
>
>
> ?>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>
>


subject: [Wikitech-l] Can custom tags take attributes

body:
Is it true that callbacks set by setHook can only handle tags
of the form:

<tag>content</tag>

And not tags of the form:

<tag attribute="value">content</tag>

Thanks


body:
On Sat, 31 Jul 2004 14:10:06 +0100
Timwi <timwi at gmx.net> wrote:

> Emmanuel Engelhart wrote:
>
> > Small patch.
> > Maybe not the best solution, but simple and not very dirty.
> > Makes a merge of correct template args to recover entire wikilinks [[(...)]]
>
> It has a little bug:
>
> Suppose you have something like
>
> {{template|var1=Here is a [[link]] and here is [[link|another]].}}
>
> Your patch would not work properly in this case. Please could you change
> this:
>
> + if((strpos($args[$i], "[[") !== false) && (strpos($args[$i], "]]") ===
> false) ) {
>
> in such a way that it essentially says "if number of '[['s in $args[$i]
> greater than number of ']]'s"?
>
> Additionally, please use tabs at the beginning of lines, and please use
> 'diff -u' to create your patches.
>

True, new version correcting this bug.

Emmanuel

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
La noirceur porte plusieurs masques, aucun n'est aussi dangeureux que
celui de la vertu.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emmanuel Engelhart      ICQ UIN : 53388731   TEL (+49)(0)6.22.15.88.03.31
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Parser.patch
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 1687 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20040731/75025d84/attachment.obj>


subject: [Wikitech-l] Update LanguageRO.php from CVS

body:
Gutza wrote:
> I have updated the categories in LanguageRO.php in CVS. Can someone
> please update it on the server? We'd like to start using categories, and
> we'd prefer the localized keyword instead of the English one -- I expect
> changing the namespace name will result in the desired behaviour, is
> this correct? (i.e. we could write [[Categorie:foo]] instead of
> [[Category:foo]] once the namespace was changed from "Category" to
> "Categorie").

Comitted to REL1_3 and installed on Wikipedia.

Thanks for the update!

-- 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/20040731/1b44caec/attachment.pgp>


subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: Outstanding patches?

body:
Timwi schrieb:
> Alwin Meschede wrote:
>
>> This (once again) fixes the sort ordering in SpecialLonelypages:
>>
>> +    function sortDescending() {
>> +        return false;
>> +    }
>
>
> What exactly is the problem this is supposed to be fixing, and why does
> this fix it? I don't currently see a sort ordering problem on
> Special:Lonelypages.

I don't see it on the live site (might be due to caching) but on my
local installation. Look at http://wikidev.net/Special:Lonelypages in
Gabriel's wiki: The sort order is z-a. My patch makes sure it's a-z.

Alwin Meschede


subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: templates fields delimiters

body:
Gabriel Wicke wrote:

> I'm currently writing a new parser using BisonGen (builds both a C
> python module and a pure python parser) that handles the entire parsing
> in one step.

Oooh. Very good. I was wondering when someone would start doing this and
whether I would have to do it.

I would like to know -- how are you going to describe the syntax? Is it
going to be extensible enough to allow for new syntax elements later (of
if a bug creeps into the grammar, will it be easy to fix without
re-writing the entire parser)?

Thanks!
Timwi


subject: [Wikitech-l] [PATCH] New feature -> add a rollback comment

body:
Emmanuel Engelhart wrote:
> This patch provides the possibility for adding a comment with an admin
> rollback.

Neat! A couple things to work on:

The comment should be retrieved by WebRequest::getText() rather than
WebRequest::getVal(). This will perform input transcoding on the few
languages that have this extra feature (Esperanto only, currently). You
do not need to use urldecode(); this is done by PHP before we ever see
the data.

Text put into HTML output should pretty much always be escaped via
htmlspecialchars() to avoid data corruption problems and HTML/JS
injection attacks. Titles for instance may contain the & character, and
all kinds of trouble ensues if it's not escaped properly.

Title::getText() will return only the non-namespace portion, so this
doesn't work on non-article pages. You'll want to use
Title::getPrefixedText().

Use htmlspecialchars() rather than urlencode() on the user name. The URL
for the form submission will be created by the browser; we just need to
make sure that the browser gets the correct data in the first place.

Also, try to stick with tabs as Timwi's mentioned; it gets really messy
to work with files where indentation styles change constantly.

A minor UI quibble; since the comment field doesn't support line breaks,
it should probably be an <input> rather than a <textarea>. Also it might
be nice to label the comment field and make the form layout a little
more consistent with how similar features look (deletion, blocking).

-- 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/20040731/d7f3097a/attachment.pgp>


body:
On Sat, 31 Jul 2004 15:10:53 +0100
Timwi <timwi at gmx.net> wrote:

> Emmanuel Engelhart wrote:
>
> > True, new version correcting this bug.
>
> Again, *please* use tabs to indent lines in the future. I've fixed this
> for you now and committed it.
>
> Oh, and I've also changed
> 		for ( $i = 0; $i < $argc; $i++ ) {
> to
> 		for ( $i = 0; $i < $argc-1; $i++ ) {
>
> because once there's only a single argument left, you don't want to try
> to merge it with the non-existant next.
>

Ok, sorry for not using tabs... but sometimes, my emacs php-mode seems
to have difficulties...But I will  solve the problem or understand the
mode ;)

Emmanuel

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Il y a deux produits majeurs qui sont sortis de Berkeley: Le LSD et BSD.
Nous ne pensons pas que ce soit une co?ncidence.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emmanuel Engelhart      ICQ UIN : 53388731   TEL (+49)(0)6.22.15.88.03.31


subject: [Wikitech-l] Use wfMsg instead of str_replace

body:
Hi,

it seems that wfMsg has a way of replacing the $1, $2 etc. Apparently
you only need to do something like this:

	$a = wfMsg( 'messagename', $value1, $value2 );

and you'll have $1 and $2 replaced with the value of $value1 and $value2.

It seems that some people have used str_replace to achieve the same
effect, which makes the source code slightly less modular and stuff. I
propose changing all instances of this to wfMsg.

I have attempted to make all these changes; please review the attached
patch. :-)

Thanks!
Timwi
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: patch.txt
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20040731/0b7a8222/attachment.txt>


from_name: Gabriel Wicke

body:
On Thu, 2004-07-29 at 19:59 +0000, ?var Arnfj?r? Bjarmason wrote:
> So in other words the code exists but is not currently enabled?

The code exists in php, but is a few times slower than the current
parser. That tokenizer also handles only a few of [count > 20] passes.

I'm currently writing a new parser using BisonGen (builds both a C
python module and a pure python parser) that handles the entire parsing
in one step. The C version also performs very well (0.014 seconds vs.
0.17 seconds for the pure python version). The output will be a DOM
object tree, includes and the like will be handled by manipulating that
tree before dumping it as [insert your favourite format here]. Where
feasible, this parser also supports the current Moin syntax additional
to the MW one, it's intended to work with Moin of course (which has a
relatively clean design and profits from the python infrastructure).
Some more details at http://moinmoin.wikiwikiweb.de/NewWikiParser.
--
Gabriel Wicke


from_name: Anthere

body:
Evan Prodromou wrote:
> Yann Forget <yann at forget-me.net> said:
>
>  > We had one such issue on fr: recently about [[Action directe (...)]].
>
>  > Some wanted to say "(terrorist group)", some "(left-extremist
> group)", and
>  > some other "(armed group)" and the last "(revolutionary group)".
>  > And any other combinations of the above.
>
>  > The issue is not settled yet.
>
> What about the very neutral "(group)"? Is it pretty much consensus that
> they are
> a group? Is there another group named "Action directe" that needs to be
> disambiguated from?
>
> ~ESP

Group sounds somehow unnatural.

As far as consensus goes, I might say that there should be pretty much a
consensus that they are an armed group. I doubt anyone would dispute
they use weapons to help their voice be heard.

Any other reference (left-extremist or terrorist) is a POV rather than a
factual description so should be left aside


body:
Gutza wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I hope I'm posting this on the right list, don't know where else to
> turn. We have a minor dispute on the Romanian Wikipedia and I'd like to
> ask for your advice. The dispute refers to the naming of an article
> (would prefer not to specify which article, but it's a sensitive topic
> with people). Now, there are two spellings proposed for the article
> name: the one widely accepted in Romania and another one which is
> preferred by a Romanian minority.
>
> Some people say that the article should be named the way the Romanian
> majority spells it, others say it should be named as the minority spells
> it, as to respect the rights of the minority, and most importantly
> Wikiquette. The article topic itself is not per se relevant to neither
> the minority nor the majority in particular. Of course that in both
> cases a redirect will be made from the "other" spelling to the main
> article, regardless of which will remain as the main article and which
> remains as a redirect.

Whatever the choice you finally agree upon, I would recommand that you
do not start naming things based on attempts to follow politically
correct considerations.

We are not here to be politically correct, but to be factual, or adapted
to our readers.

Respecting a minority point of view is not attempting to pretend that
this is the majority point of view, but only acknowledging that this
minority view exist.

If you put a redirect from the minor to the general, and if you mention
clearly in the general spelling that there are also other spellings
used, and possibly also use that alternate spelling in a few carefully
chosen articles (such as those about that minority in particular), I
guess you could come to an agreement with reasonable people.

Anthere


body:
Hello,

I have updated the categories in LanguageRO.php in CVS. Can someone
please update it on the server? We'd like to start using categories, and
we'd prefer the localized keyword instead of the English one -- I expect
changing the namespace name will result in the desired behaviour, is
this correct? (i.e. we could write [[Categorie:foo]] instead of
[[Category:foo]] once the namespace was changed from "Category" to
"Categorie").

If this is the wrong list to address to, I would appreciate it if you
could direct me to the proper forum for this request.

Thank you,
Gutza


body:
Austin Hair wrote:
>>An example from the English Wikipedia were common usage is overruled by
>>offensiveness: 'Eskimo' is a very common name for a people who live in the
>>North American Arctic. In fact it is probably the most common name for them (at
>>least in the U.S.). But they consider it to be highly offensive. Therefore our
>>article about them is at [[Inuit]] (a widely used alternate name - esp in
>>Canada).
>
>
> Unfortunately for this example, not all Eskimo are Inuit, and by and
> large anthropologists still stick with the more accurate definition,
> regardless of social stigma.  (Thankfully, Nelson Mandella hasn't been
> re-styled an "African-American" on en yet.  I'm waiting for the day...)

Ah !
See the interesting debate on fr, about how we should call americans
people from the united states

http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip%C3%A9dia%3APrise_de_d%C3%A9cision_Am%C3%A9ricain%2C_%C3%89tasunien%2C_%C3%89tatsunien%2C_%C3%89tats-Unien%2C_%C3%89tats-Unisien

Current options are

Am?ricain, Am?ricaine

?tats-Unien, ?tats-Unienne

?tatsunien, ?tatsunienne

?tasunien, ?tasunienne

?tats-Unisien, ?tats-Unisienne

?tats-Unis d'Am?ricain, ?tats-Unis d'Am?ricaine

Unistatique, Unistatique

Unistatien, unistatienne

Bushmen

Unista?ais, unista?aises

-------

Admitedly, the last couple ones might be jokes

Perhaps...


from_name: Fred Bauder

subject: [WikiEN-l] Blocking policy

body:
The change of policy is to block for a reason other than those in
[[Wikipedia:Blocking policy]]. Enforceing it is not a change of policy.

Fred

From: Rick <giantsrick13 at yahoo.com>
Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2004 15:02:11 -0700 (PDT)
To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Blocking policy

This is not a policy can change which can be implemented by the arbitration
committee, and to attempt to do so is a violation of their charter and their
powers.

RickK

Fred Bauder <fredbaud at ctelco.net> wrote:
The arbitration dispute: [[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/User:Guanaco
versus User:Lir]] has the potential to affect all Wikipedia administrators
(sysops). Please see the proposed decision at [[Wikipedia:Requests for
arbitration/User:Guanaco versus User:Lir/Proposed decision]]. It would
require any administrator who blocks a user to set forth at least a
reference to the section of [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy]] on which they rely
in order for the block to be presumed valid and not subject to immediate
reversal. Reasons like "troll", or "disruptive" would not be acceptable.

Please place comments on the talk page of [[Wikipedia:Requests for
arbitration/User:Guanaco versus User:Lir/Proposed decision]]

Fred

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

Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail
<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/mail_us/taglines/10/*http://promotions.yahoo.com/new
_mail/static/efficiency.html>  - Send 10MB messages!
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20040731/ec0479a7/attachment.htm


from_name: Leonard Vertighel

body:
Am Samstag, 31. Juli 2004 17:20 schrieb Anthere:
> See the interesting debate on fr, about how we should call americans
> people from the united states
> [...]
> Bushmen

Will they be called Kerrymen after the next election?


body:
Leonard Vertighel wrote:
> Am Samstag, 31. Juli 2004 17:20 schrieb Anthere:
>
>>See the interesting debate on fr, about how we should call americans
>>people from the united states
>>[...]
>>Bushmen
>
>
> Will they be called Kerrymen after the next election?

I doubt Mr Kerry could *ever* reach Mr Bush reputation :-)

(now, I run away before troubles begin...)


from_name: Gutza

body:
Unfortunately I can't read the thread in the MUA, as I said in a
previous post, and your reply doesn't appear in the web archive (See
http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/2004-July/016295.html).
Could you please forward your reply to me via e-mail at this address,
I'd really like to follow this discussion.

Thank you,
Gutza


from_name: Tim Starling

subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: Can custom tags take attributes

body:
Hacksprint wrote:
> Is it true that callbacks set by setHook can only handle tags
> of the form:
>
> <tag>content</tag>
>
> And not tags of the form:
>
> <tag attribute="value">content</tag>
>
> Thanks

That's correct. If you know your way around a regex you could probably
change that, by fixing Parser.php and sending us the patch. I imagine
you could pass an array of attributes to the hook function as a second
parameter. You'd just have to change the regexes used to identify these
tags.

-- Tim Starling


from_name: Yann Forget

body:
Le Saturday 31 July 2004 16:48, Anthere a ?crit :

> >  > We had one such issue on fr: recently about [[Action directe (...)]].
> >  > Some wanted to say "(terrorist group)", some "(left-extremist
> > group)", and
> >  > some other "(armed group)" and the last "(revolutionary group)".
> >  > And any other combinations of the above.
> >  >
> >  > The issue is not settled yet.
> >
> > What about the very neutral "(group)"? Is it pretty much consensus that
> > they are
> > a group? Is there another group named "Action directe" that needs to be
> > disambiguated from?
> >
> > ~ESP
>
> Group sounds somehow unnatural.
>
> As far as consensus goes, I might say that there should be pretty much a
> consensus that they are an armed group. I doubt anyone would dispute
> they use weapons to help their voice be heard.
>
> Any other reference (left-extremist or terrorist) is a POV rather than a
> factual description so should be left aside

Yes, I would agree with that. For the time being, it settled to
http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Action_directe_(groupe_arm?)

Yann
--
http://www.non-violence.org/ | Site collaboratif sur la non-violence
http://www.forget-me.net/ | Alternatives sur le Net
http://fr.wikipedia.org/ | Encyclop?die libre
http://www.forget-me.net/pro/ | Formations et services Linux


from_name: Harry Smith

subject: [WikiEN-l] Arbitration

body:
--- Phil Sandifer <sandifer at sbcglobal.net> wrote:
<snip>
> My point being that naming of the cases should
> probably be left to the
> arbitrators to decide, as they're the ones who get
> to determine the
> scope of a given case.
>
> -Snowspinner

That is good as far as it goes.

But the Arbitrators do not decide.  The complaintant
(complainer?) chooses a name and no one bothers to
rename it.

Lance6Wins

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


subject: [WikiEN-l] Arbitration versus Mediation

body:
--- zero 0000 <nought_0000 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> I notice you just added an example in [[Israeli West
> Bank barrier]]
> where your edit summary "replace image with one
> agreed to in
> talk on 26 Jul 2004" shows your lack of integrity
> since two
> complementary images were agreed to after a long
> negotiation,
> and you know that. Next stunt like that and I will
> block you again.
>
> Zero.
>

QUOTES:
Ok, we have permission to use the third image. I
reduced it to the same width as the wall picture.
These two pictures together give a reasonable overview
of most of the barrier.
The barrier near Jenin, northern West Bank, July 2003

Great work! Thank you! Jayjg 16:17, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Way to go. Stargoat 17:45, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)

        Does anyone know how to get these pictures
into the main body of the article? Jayjg 05:05, 26 Jul
2004 (UTC)

            I can do it, maybe tomorrow. --Zero 09:27,
26 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Zero,

You might have thanked the person for doing what you
said you would try to get to and had not done.

Lance6wINS
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
> http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


from_name: Jimmy (Jimbo) Wales

body:
Daniel Mayer wrote:
> On the English Wikipedia we go with what most people who speak English (our
> readers) would expect to find (with caveats for ambiguity and offensiveness).

And the additional caveat of trying as hard as possible to just relax
about British versus American spelling.  :-) (Resulting in complete
inconsistency on the matter, for the most part, as both are accepted
equally, usually.)

--Jimbo


body:
I will have to think some more before I can offer anything that might
hopefully be constructive, but for now I will just compliment both
Gutza and Danutz for bringing the issue to us with thoughtful
explanations and reasons.  I personally think that this is the most
important thing: to work together with reason and love to find a
solution that is satisfactory to everyone.

It occurs to me just now that in many cases, what we ought to have is
something in the software similar to a "hard link" versus a "soft
link" in Unix.  Let me explain.

Right now, we have the concept of a "redirect".  The redirect is like
a soft link in Unix, i.e. the redirected term is "inferior" in some
sense to the "real" name.  Without making any formal comment on
whether I think the decision is right or not, the redirect of "Eskimo"
to "Inuit" is a reasonable example -- "Eskimo" is not the preferred
term, so it is redirected to "Inuit".

But another way of going about this would be to have a way in the
software to form a special bond between two terms so that the two are
existentially equal from the point of view of end users of the
website.  Rather than being a redirect from a less preferred to a more
preferred term, the two would be totally equal and linked.

This does not solve the problem of what words to use in the body of
the article, so perhaps it would be pointless.  But it would resolve
the issue of people feeling that the redirect itself is a commentary
on the validity of one use.  (Sometimes we _are_ commenting on the
validity of one use, and that's fine in some cases.  For example, we
might redirect the common name of some species into the scientific
name, to promote general consistency of our naming conventions for
species.)

But really, as I started out saying, I don't think I have anything
really brilliant to offer in terms of solving the problem, except my
usual guidance that thoughtfulness, caring, reason, love, and respect
are the way forward.

--Jimbo


subject: [WikiEN-l] Blocking policy

body:
Rick wrote:
> This is not a policy can change which can be implemented by the
>arbitration committee, and to attempt to do so is a violation of their
>charter and their powers.

I'm not sure how it is a policy change at all.

Under "enforcement" it says "When a wikipedia administrator discovers
an instance where a block was made without appropriate reference to
the [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy]], they may reverse the block but
should post a note on the offending Wikipedia administrators talk page
explaining why the block was reversed."

It is already the case that any wikipedia administrator may reverse
blocks in almost all cases.  (The exception that I can think of would
be a reversal of a block in contradiction of a decision of either the
Arbitration Committee or me personally, which has never happened and
seems rather likely to cause quite an ugly scene if it ever did.)

But if, say random sysop A blocks annoying user B, and then random
sysop C unblocks the same person, and gives as reason on A's talk page
that although B was being annoying, it was not sufficient for a
unilateral block, that's nothing new.

It's perfectly fine for the arbitration committee to say so, because
it's already existing 'law'.

It would be different if the ArbCom was claiming that any admin who
doesn't give a proper reason would be blocked or whatever.  *That*
would be an unconstitutional expansion of power which of course I would
use my 'reserve powers' as 'monarch' to overrule.

--Jimbo


body:
Jeff Warnica wrote:

>On Sun, 2004-01-08 at 00:01 +0200, Magnus Manske wrote:
>
>
>>Ray Saintonge wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Timwi wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Erik Moeller wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Because "bounty" carries strong connotations of competition rather
>>>>>than  cooperation, I would like us to stop using that word, at least
>>>>>when  referring to the proposal described above. Instead, it should
>>>>>be described  as a tender process.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>I never liked the term "bounty" either because it reminds me of a
>>>>chocolate bar. ;-)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>I get images of cowboys chasing down bad guys. :-)
>>>
>>>
>>Mutiny, anyone? :-)
>>
>>
>
>I dont think "bounty" implies competition. It implies going to outside
>and/or unusual sources to get something done. ie: bail bondsman (or 1880
>sheriffs in the West) hire bounty hunters to track someone down - but
>only one (group) at a time.
>
I don't think so.  The wanted posters went up "$xxxxx, Dead or Alive".
Whoever got him, got the cash.  This may have changed with modern bounty
hunters.

>Or to put things in a more geek context:
>Jabba hired only one bounty hunter to track down Han, Greedo. Besides,
>it would not just be wikipedia using the term: Gnome may have came up
>with it, but Horde also uses it. ESR may put it in the Jargon file if he
>ever gets off the speaking tour.
>
Whatever!  The point was, whateever the system that may or may not be
adopted there may be a better word for it.

Ec


subject:
[Wikitech-l] Re: [PATCH] [ 965725 ] Pipe-character (|)
	in	instantiated Templates

body:
Timwi wrote:
> Emmanuel Engelhart wrote:
>> True, new version correcting this bug.
>
> Again, *please* use tabs to indent lines in the future. I've fixed this
> for you now and committed it.

Seems pretty straightforward, I've gone ahead and copied it to the 1.3
branch and installed it.

-- 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/20040731/4b97daf1/attachment.pgp>


body:
Gutza wrote:

> Gutza wrote:
>
> >/ The
> />/ article in question is the one about Jesus. The Romanian (Eastern)
> />/ Orthodox Church says that the name should be spelled "Iisus Hristos".
> />/ Other religions in Romania (mainly Catholic branches) say that the
> />/ Romanian name is Isus Cristos.
> />/
> />/ Anyhow, the dispute is basically not about the language itself,
> />/ because all religions who dispute the name do it in Romanian. On a
> />/ side note, to put your mind at ease before you assume it as being the
> />/ case, no Magyars are involved in the dispute itself.
> /
> I'm glad that you've clearly identified. I thought that your approach
> in your approach in your first letter was needlessly evasive.
> Personally, I was guessing something based on the speech differences
> between Romanian and Moldovan, but now I realize that it has to do with
> the Greeks and that there is no imminent Eskimo uprising in Timisoara.
> :/-) People do bring these issues out of nowhere when they are left to
> /guess about the problem.
>
> Going with the majority (Google or otherwise) is never satisfactory.
> That breeds the tyranny of the majority. In English these problems have
> been numerous in relation to usages by the British and Americans.
> French, Spanish and Portuguese also encounter differences between
> European and New World versions.
>
> I would be asking questions like: How does the secular press deal with
> the issue? How was it dealt with in communist days? (Say what you might
> about them, I can't imagine that an atheist organization would favour
> one religion over the other.)
>
> _Ok, I might be wrong or subjective here (I'm actually fuming), but
> what *do* you imagine such an atheist organization would do? I am
> trying really hard not to be sarcastic here, so please excuse me if
> some sarcasm gets through, but what do you imagine an atheist
> organization would favor? Now now, let's keep things into perspective,
> think about an "atheist organization" which is trying to doctor you
> into believing whatever they say. Talk to me, Saintonge, you seem to
> know how this works, you tell me what such an organization does! If I
> may "say what I might", the way you put it, I will tell you that they
> DIDN'T GIVE A SHIT ABOUT RELIGION! Sorry, was that too tough for your
> cute little theory? Then I will tell you a little more, Mr. Theory
> Man: not only did they give a shit about it, they actually resented
> it. They took down churches. They forced people to work during holy
> days. They changed the names of saints. They condemned you for
> cherishing your saints. Now you tell me, how can such an "atheist
> organization" relate to the discussion at hand?

No need to get so worked up about a topic when it's only religion.  If
they were equal opportunity oppressors they would have treated both
groups in the same way.  In the course of their using the Romanian
language, some reference to the words that you now find difficult would
have been inevitable.

> What does the Romanian Academy have to say about the matter?
>
> _Nothing, they don't regulate these things. If they were somehow
> forced to actually take a stand, they would probably promote the BOR
> naming. (BOR = The Romanian Orthodox Church)

Not that I support the right of any academy to regulate language - there
is no academy for English.  Still the term that they tend to use in
their publications would be some kind of evidence.

> Is there such a thing as an "official" religion in Romania?
>
> _Yes, the Eastern Orthodox religion.
> _
> I can see that the Orthodox version is based on a transliteration from
> the Greek, but how did the other version come to be what it is.
> (Romanian, after all, is still a romance language.)
>
> _The "other" version came to be due to whatever reasons the Catholic
> Church in Romania decided. Can't you see that all this is more or less
> arbitrary? Do you really think that the BOR version is really what one
> would call "orthodox" in the ethimological sense? No, it's just a
> conventional name for the same religious and historical person, that's
> all.

Of course it's arbitrary.  And of course etymological orthodoxy is not
implied by religious Orthodoxy.  The real "conventional" name is the one
that everybody accepts, but the problem is that you have no convention.
I can now see that the Catholic version has Latin in the background, but
Greeks and Romans have been arguing over religious nothings for many
centuries.

> If reviewing all these question does not give *clear* guidance, you
> should accept both.
>
> _Sorry to formulate it this way, but your solution is really cute. Did
> you actually take the time to read the original message?_

Since you mentioned it I made a point of re-reading the original post.
There's nothing to prevent you from accepting both forms as correct.  If
I had wanted to suggest something cute I would have taken note that it
is a two part name, and split the baby down the middle with one part of
the name from each group.

> For each article where the question is relevant, the first form
> introduced in that article should have precedence.
>
> _Sorry, I might be off on this one, but IMHO the sentence above
> doesn't say anything practical. Yes, the first form always has
> precedence because it's the first, but what do you mean? Honestly not
> being sarcastic._

I see it as perfectly practical, and objective.  Whoever started the
primary disputed article has earned the right to name it.  I don't know
which version that person used, and I don't want to know.  (I have no
intention to edit in Romanian, so my own personal preference doesn't
matter.)  As you said the other form would redirect anyway.  If another
person wants to link from another article, he should be free to use
whatever form he wants there.  Internal consistency within an article
should still be encouraged.  It certainly works with the huge number of
spelling variations that there are between British and American, and
that's without getting into Canadian, Australian, Indian, South African,
or Trinidadian variations.

You raised the question, and I think that all those who responded did so
in good faith, perhaps it would be a great exercise of Wikiquette to
recognize that fact.  How you decide your question, will not affect
anything we do where we do it.

Ec


from_name: Jeff Warnica

subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: Bounties, tenders, and the GNOME experience

references:
<9DwP7FexpVB@erik_moeller> <ceg571$tk1$1@sea.gmane.org>
	<410BEF8F.2090101@telus.net>  <410C16BC.6090303@web.de>

body:
On Sun, 2004-01-08 at 00:01 +0200, Magnus Manske wrote:
> Ray Saintonge wrote:
>
> > Timwi wrote:
> >
> >> Erik Moeller wrote:
> >>
> >>> Because "bounty" carries strong connotations of competition rather
> >>> than  cooperation, I would like us to stop using that word, at least
> >>> when  referring to the proposal described above. Instead, it should
> >>> be described  as a tender process.
> >>
> >>
> >> I never liked the term "bounty" either because it reminds me of a
> >> chocolate bar. ;-)
> >
> >
> > I get images of cowboys chasing down bad guys. :-)
>
> Mutiny, anyone? :-)

I dont think "bounty" implies competition. It implies going to outside
and/or unusual sources to get something done. ie: bail bondsman (or 1880
sheriffs in the West) hire bounty hunters to track someone down - but
only one (group) at a time. Or to put things in a more geek context:
Jabba hired only one bounty hunter to track down Han, Greedo. Besides,
it would not just be wikipedia using the term: Gnome may have came up
with it, but Horde also uses it. ESR may put it in the Jargon file if he
ever gets off the speaking tour.

I think the way to handle the "tendering process" is not to open it up
to just anyone, "off the street". Only allow "friends" to apply. Thus,
to "bid" on a bounty you already have to have done some (volunteer[1])
work. From there, first come, first serve. Put a time limit on them,
such that if you don't even get status reports they go back out "to
tender".

[1] Well, volunteer work from wikipedias perspective. Some other 3rd
party could have paid them for whatever they previously contributed.


from_name: David Gerard

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Minority/majority question

body:
Gutza (gutza at moongate.ro) [040731 19:53]:

> Some people say that the article should be named the way the Romanian
> majority spells it, others say it should be named as the minority spells
> it, as to respect the rights of the minority, and most importantly
> Wikiquette. The article topic itself is not per se relevant to neither
> the minority nor the majority in particular. Of course that in both
> cases a redirect will be made from the "other" spelling to the main
> article, regardless of which will remain as the main article and which
> remains as a redirect.
> Is there an official standing on this issue? Have other people been
> confronted similar disputes? How did you resolve them? Which of the
> options above would you personally prefer if you were to decide?

The answer in en is "whatever's the common spelling in English." If it
basically doesn't have one, then it really is strictly case by case, and
impossible to answer without knowing what article you're talking about.

- d.


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: send in the academics

body:
Andrew Lih (andrew.lih at gmail.com) [040731 12:18]:

> Also, what Abe describes would likely be incompatible with the "no
> original research" policy we've had for a while. Rather, Wikipedia
> (and most encyclopedias) are secondary source works, not primary
> battlegrounds for ideas.

Not necessarily [[original research]]. What Abe seems to be describing
(please correct me if I'm wrong) is doing something to create more quality
work, to academic standards, that would then available under GFDL or a
compatible license. That is, something to get the quality work produced.

This need not necessarily be done on Wikipedia. I'm not sure what he
describes would fit with the Wikipedia way of doing things, but that
doesn't mean it isn't a very good idea to have happen somewhere. It's a
project worth thinking about. If credit will get quality academics to
contribute, then how do we get credit to work properly in a Wiki
environment? That sort of thing.

- d.


from_name: Emmanuel Engelhart

body:
Hi

This patch provides the possibility for adding a comment with an admin
rollback.

Cordialy

Emmanuel Engelhart

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne conna?t pas.
	-- Blaise Pascal
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emmanuel Engelhart      ICQ UIN : 53388731   TEL (+49)(0)6.22.15.88.03.31
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: rollback.patch
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 3197 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20040731/b76ff110/attachment.obj>


from_name: sannse

subject: [WikiEN-l] Arbitration versus Mediation

body:
Zero wrote:

> If there is a dispute between two or more editors, then this
> is called a "Mediation" issue and is listed on
> [[Wikipedia:Requests for Mediation]].  In the case of charges
> against one editor, it goes on [[Wikipedia:Requests for Arbitration]].
> The person or persons making the charges need not have been
> involved in any direct disputation with the person they are
> charging, but they might have been.

That's not how it works, or certainly not how it should.  Almost every case
has two sides, both usually believing that the other is the only party at
fault.  Mediation is as important in a case of "charges against one editor"
as otherwise.  Although it certainly makes it difficult if one side won't
acknowledge that they might just be at fault too (and that goes for /either/
side).

In the (rarer) case that an issue is totally one sided there is still a
place for mediation, negotiation and genuine attempts to reach
understanding.

Equally, arbitration can be necessary in a dispute between two or more
editors if mediation fails.  It's quite possible for the arbitration
committee to look at a case and decide both sides are at fault.

> I notice you just added an example in [[Israeli West Bank barrier]]
> where your edit summary "replace image with one agreed to in
> talk on 26 Jul 2004" shows your lack of integrity since two
> complementary images were agreed to after a long negotiation,
> and you know that. Next stunt like that and I will block you again.

As an administrator you do not have the authority to block a logged in user
except in the cases outlined in the blocking policy - which basically comes
down to instances of simple vandalism.  If you follow through on this threat
I would say the other party is likely to have a good case for taking /you/
to arbitration.

--sannse


from_name: Ray Saintonge

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: User:Fire

body:
Ronny Raschkowan wrote:

> Ray Saintonge wrote:
>
>> I am annoyed by the behaviour of user:fire.  He is not a sysop on
>> Wikisource, yet he was able to come and block a user indefinitely
>> with no better excuse than a non-working link to wikipedia about
>> name-change policy.  I immediately reversed the block.
>> Those who participate in Wikisource are quite capable of deciding who
>> should be blocked.  We don't need this loose cannon who has not
>> otherwise participated in Wikisource to sneakily acquire some kind of
>> superior access for no other reason to block a user that he does not
>> like.
>>
>> Ec
>
>
> Hello Ray,
>
> I was doing username changes  requested on this page:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Changing_username
>
> There was also a user, 'Spik dk', who asked to get his username
> changed. That's what I did. The instructions say also, that I have to
> move the User: and the User Talk: Page from the old to the new nick.
> For security reasons ("This prevents a new user claiming the name,
> which would mean the signatures and author attributions made by third
> party users of our content would all be pointing to the wrong
> person."), there's also an instruction to block the old username.
>
> After changing the username(s) in the database, I asked Angela to get
> temp sys-op on the Wikis were I had changed the usernames of the
> people who requested to block the old nicks.
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_permissions/Archive1
>
> So: I was not blocking the user because I "don't like him" ( I even
> don't know him :) ), but because he asked for a username change and
> (following the instructions) it also included to block the old
> username :)
>
> Yours,
> Fire

Hello Ronny
Thanks for replying.  Perception is often everything, and now that you
have made an explanation it makes sense.  What I saw was a user whose
only contribution was to start a Faroese home page (I have no knowledge
of Faroese obscenities, so I would have no way of knowing if he had done
something like that.)

What I saw was that a user was blocked indefinitely for flimsy reasons.
He failed to follow some bureaucratic procedure about how his name would
be changed, and was receiving a penalty far in excess of what we would
give to ordinary anonymous vandals.  I checked the admin list to see if
your name was there; it wasn't.  By this point I suspected the worse, so
I unblocked him and wrote my message to the mailing list.

In retrospect I can now see that this block was for technical rather
than disciplinary reasons.  No such block had ever taken place in
Wikisource before.  Would it not be more appropriate if you had
explained what you were doing before you took this action?  Any of the
existing active sysops would have been happy to accomodate the
situation.  All we had was a non-working link back to Wikipedia.

Ray


subject: [Wikipedia-l] User:Fire

body:
Jerome Jamnicky wrote:

>On Sun, 1 Aug 2004 07:10, Ray Saintonge wrote:
>
>
>>I am annoyed by the behaviour of user:fire.  He is not a sysop on
>>Wikisource, yet he was able to come and block a user indefinitely with
>>no better excuse than a non-working link to wikipedia about name-change
>>policy.  I immediately reversed the block.
>>
>>Those who participate in Wikisource are quite capable of deciding who
>>should be blocked.  We don't need this loose cannon who has not
>>otherwise participated in Wikisource to sneakily acquire some kind of
>>superior access for no other reason to block a user that he does not like.
>>
>>
>
>You should get your facts straight before you make accusations like that.
>
>
Butting in to prove your ignorance are you?

Ec


from_name: Brion Vibber

subject: [Wikipedia-l] User:Fire

body:
Ray Saintonge wrote:
> Jerome Jamnicky wrote:
>> On Sun, 1 Aug 2004 07:10, Ray Saintonge wrote:
>>> I am annoyed by the behaviour of user:fire.  He is not a sysop on
>>> Wikisource, yet he was able to come and block a user indefinitely with
>>> no better excuse than a non-working link to wikipedia about name-change
>>> policy.  I immediately reversed the block.
>>>
>>> Those who participate in Wikisource are quite capable of deciding who
>>> should be blocked.  We don't need this loose cannon who has not
>>> otherwise participated in Wikisource to sneakily acquire some kind of
>>> superior access for no other reason to block a user that he does not
>>> like.
>>
>> You should get your facts straight before you make accusations like that.
>>
> Butting in to prove your ignorance are you?

Odd that you sent this message three minutes after admitting that you
were wrong. Would you mind retracting that statement and apologizing to
Ronny, to Jerome, and to this list?

-- 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/wikipedia-l/attachments/20040731/d75d9821/attachment.pgp


subject: [Wikipedia-l] User:Fire

body:
I see you're up to your old grudges again. ;-)
Give it up, and you'll feel better.

Angela_ wrote:

>On Sat, 31 Jul 2004 14:10:08 -0700, Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote:
>
>
>>I am annoyed by the behaviour of user:fire.
>>
>>
>Have you thought about discussing this with Fire rather than
>embarrassing him by bringing this to the mailing list?
>
I thought of going to his talk page, but since this was the first time
he showed up it was likely that he wouldn't look at it.  The mailing
list was appropriate since the block was also a public act.

>>We don't need this loose cannon who has not
>>otherwise participated in Wikisource
>>
>>
>Please don't attack users you know nothing about. Fire is not a "loose cannon".
>
He did "fire" out of nowhere

>>to sneakily acquire
>>
>>
>It wasn't sneaky. It was fully logged on Meta, which is where all
>emergency or necessary short term sysoppings occur.
>
There was no emergency or immediate necessity.

>>some kind of superior access
>>
>>
>Firstly, Fire has shell access to all of the Wikimedia servers, so
>adminship on Wikisource is hardly superior to what he already has.
>Secondly, adminship is not supposed to be indicative of any level of
>superiority.
>
superior access = access to do things that those who do not have such
access cannot, access to a broader range of functions

>>for no other reason to block a user that he does not like.
>>
>>
>Whatever makes you think he didn't like the user?
>
He blocked him indefinitely.

>Fire was undertaking an often requested, and largely thankless, task
>of renaming users. This is not a job many of the developers enjoy, yet
>he and Jeronim have been working through a huge backlog of such
>requests over the last couple of days. Attacking people for working on
>this, especially when they are completely following the written
>recommendations for doing it, is hardly going to encourage our
>developers to undertake such tasks is it?
>
He could easily have explained himself.  Under the circumstances where
this was a technical rather than a disciplinary block, any active sysop
on Wikisource would have been happy to accomodate him.  You certainly
should have known better than to perform a temporary sysopping in
preference to seeking co-operation..  If your written recommendations
included getting the co-operation from those in the project in question
(especially the smaller ones), then maybe someone like User:Fire would
not leave us with the impression that they are a bull in a china shop.

Ec


subject: [Wikipedia-l] User:Fire

body:
Brion Vibber wrote:

> Ray Saintonge wrote:
>
>> Jerome Jamnicky wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 1 Aug 2004 07:10, Ray Saintonge wrote:
>>>
>>>> I am annoyed by the behaviour of user:fire.  He is not a sysop on
>>>> Wikisource, yet he was able to come and block a user indefinitely with
>>>> no better excuse than a non-working link to wikipedia about
>>>> name-change
>>>> policy.  I immediately reversed the block.
>>>>
>>>> Those who participate in Wikisource are quite capable of deciding who
>>>> should be blocked.  We don't need this loose cannon who has not
>>>> otherwise participated in Wikisource to sneakily acquire some kind of
>>>> superior access for no other reason to block a user that he does
>>>> not like.
>>>
>>>
>>> You should get your facts straight before you make accusations like
>>> that.
>>>
>>
>> Butting in to prove your ignorance are you?
>
>
> Odd that you sent this message three minutes after admitting that you
> were wrong. Would you mind retracting that statement and apologizing
> to Ronny, to Jerome, and to this list?

Huh?

There was no such admission, I merely said that I now understood what he
did, and suggested how the situation could be better handled in the
future.  My response to Ronny speaks for itself.  Jerome asked for it
when he stuck his nose in.  Thre was no attack against the list.

Ray


from_name: Rick

subject: [WikiEN-l] Blocking policy

body:
Please point to ONE page on Wikipedia in which there is a requirement that a sysop point to a particular policy page when blocking a user.

RickK

sannse <sannse at tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
RickK wrote:

> This is not a policy can change which can be implemented by the
arbitration committee, and to attempt to do so is a violation of their
charter and their powers.
>
> RickK
>

On the contrary, it is a policy that is already in place and is frequently
being ignored. The arbitration committee pointing this out and telling all
of us to stick to the rules is *exactly* what they are there for.

But perhaps this discusison can continue on [[Wikipedia talk:Requests for
arbitration/User:Guanaco versus User:Lir/Proposed decision]] as Fred
requested

--sannse

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

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20040731/526d22c0/attachment.htm


subject: [WikiEN-l] Blocking policy

body:
When has it ever been policy that a sysop must point to a policy page when blocking a user?

RickK

"Jimmy (Jimbo) Wales" <jwales at wikia.com> wrote:
Rick wrote:
> This is not a policy can change which can be implemented by the
>arbitration committee, and to attempt to do so is a violation of their
>charter and their powers.

I'm not sure how it is a policy change at all.

Under "enforcement" it says "When a wikipedia administrator discovers
an instance where a block was made without appropriate reference to
the [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy]], they may reverse the block but
should post a note on the offending Wikipedia administrators talk page
explaining why the block was reversed."

It is already the case that any wikipedia administrator may reverse
blocks in almost all cases. (The exception that I can think of would
be a reversal of a block in contradiction of a decision of either the
Arbitration Committee or me personally, which has never happened and
seems rather likely to cause quite an ugly scene if it ever did.)

But if, say random sysop A blocks annoying user B, and then random
sysop C unblocks the same person, and gives as reason on A's talk page
that although B was being annoying, it was not sufficient for a
unilateral block, that's nothing new.

It's perfectly fine for the arbitration committee to say so, because
it's already existing 'law'.

It would be different if the ArbCom was claiming that any admin who
doesn't give a proper reason would be blocked or whatever. *That*
would be an unconstitutional expansion of power which of course I would
use my 'reserve powers' as 'monarch' to overrule.

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

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20040731/b74353a1/attachment.htm


from_name: Wikipedia

body:
ok. let me present you the hole situation, from my side, the one who wrote the article, Danutz from ro.wiki. I had many contributions to Wikipedia since September 2003, some two mounths after it was lauched. Gutza could confirm that I wrote a lot in Wikipedia. Well, i'm a catholic, so in respect to my church, I wrote the article at Isus Cristos.

Look what I found on the portuguese Wikipedia, about the use of Portuguese and Brazilian versions of Portuguese language:

Por exemplo, na p?gina principal aparece em v?rios s?tios a palavra "projecto". Esta palavra est? escrita na norma seguida em Portugal e em ?frica. No Brasil, escreve-se "projeto".

Qual das duas vers?es est? correcta? Ambas.

Simplesmente uma vers?o ? usada no Brasil e outra em Portugal, ?frica e territ?rios asi?ticos... Como acontece nas outras grandes l?nguas internacionais, n?o existem vers?es superiores ou inferiores: s?o apenas diferentes. Por isso, n?o veja algo que n?o est? escrito no seu Portugu?s como incorrecto apenas por isso.

Esta Wikip?dia ? de l?ngua portuguesa. Ou seja, ? de todos os falantes do portugu?s, seja qual for a norma que utilizam. Consequentemente, ? m? educa??o mudar da norma "A" para a norma "B", porque isso implica uma falta de respeito com todos os utilizadores da norma "A" da l?ngua portuguesa.

It tells about the use of the versions of Portuguese language. Now adapted to the situation, it would be like that:

E.g., the the article "Isus Cristos" is written in it's catholic form, a church that compromises some 10% of the romanian speaking population. The ortodox form is "Iisus Hristos.

Wich of those two versions is correct? Both.

It's just that a version is used by the Orthodox Church, and the other one by the Catholic Church... Like in other international languages, there is no version better or worse: there are just diferences. That's why, you should not consider something written in you church's form as not correct just because of this.

This Wikipedia is for the Romanian-speaking countries. In other words, for all the speakers of this language, even though they are orthodox or chatolic. So, it is rood to move from the A to B, because this is a lack of respect for the users using the form A of the romanian language.

So, one of the arguments is that the article was originally written at the chatolic form, and not the orthodox. So it should be bad education being moved, acording the Wikiquette generaly used in all international Wikipedias.

Second. The form Isus Cristos is widely spread in Romania, and it has majority in the region Transilvania, because of the influence of the Catholic Church here, that being for much the official religion of the region (when Transilvania was part of Hungary). In many writings, like press and books the form Cristos is used, and the majority of romanians (at least in Transilvania where I live, the city of Cluj-Napoca) tend to pronounce Cristos. Ronline, a romanian user that lives in Oradea, confirmed that.

Third. Romanian is a romance language, and in all Romance languages the form Cristos is used. Many say that the form Hristos, comes from the greek version of the name, but in fact it comes from the slavonic form of the name.

As I created the article, and as both forms are accepted, and widely spread in regions of Romania I belive that the article should remain at it's current place, Isus Cristos.

BTW, only 35 milion people speak portugues do Portugal, and some 174 milion people speak portugues do Brazil, still the minority has the right to impose herself in the pt.wiki, with the method, presented to you above by me.

Thank you for your time. Danutz.

---------------------------------
Yahoo! Companion - Scarica gratis la toolbar di Ricerca di Yahoo!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/attachments/20040731/8126e025/attachment.htm


subject: [WikiEN-l] Blocking policy

body:
RickK wrote:

> This is not a policy can change which can be implemented by the
arbitration committee, and to attempt to do so is a violation of their
charter and their powers.
>
> RickK
>

On the contrary, it is a policy that is already in place and is frequently
being ignored.  The arbitration committee pointing this out and telling all
of us to stick to the rules is *exactly* what they are there for.

But perhaps this discusison can continue on [[Wikipedia talk:Requests for
arbitration/User:Guanaco versus User:Lir/Proposed decision]] as Fred
requested

--sannse


from_name: Ronny Raschkowan

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: User:Fire

body:
Ray Saintonge wrote:
> I am annoyed by the behaviour of user:fire.  He is not a sysop on
> Wikisource, yet he was able to come and block a user indefinitely with
> no better excuse than a non-working link to wikipedia about name-change
> policy.  I immediately reversed the block.
> Those who participate in Wikisource are quite capable of deciding who
> should be blocked.  We don't need this loose cannon who has not
> otherwise participated in Wikisource to sneakily acquire some kind of
> superior access for no other reason to block a user that he does not like.
>
> Ec

Hello Ray,

I was doing username changes  requested on this page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Changing_username

There was also a user, 'Spik dk', who asked to get his username changed.
That's what I did. The instructions say also, that I have to move the
User: and the User Talk: Page from the old to the new nick.  For
security reasons ("This prevents a new user claiming the name, which
would mean the signatures and author attributions made by third party
users of our content would all be pointing to the wrong person."),
there's also an instruction to block the old username.

After changing the username(s) in the database, I asked Angela to get
temp sys-op on the Wikis were I had changed the usernames of the people
who requested to block the old nicks.
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_permissions/Archive1

So: I was not blocking the user because I "don't like him" ( I even
don't know him :) ), but because he asked for a username change and
(following the instructions) it also included to block the old username :)

Yours,
Fire


from_name: Magnus Manske

body:
Ray Saintonge wrote:

> Timwi wrote:
>
>> Erik Moeller wrote:
>>
>>> Because "bounty" carries strong connotations of competition rather
>>> than  cooperation, I would like us to stop using that word, at least
>>> when  referring to the proposal described above. Instead, it should
>>> be described  as a tender process.
>>
>>
>> I never liked the term "bounty" either because it reminds me of a
>> chocolate bar. ;-)
>
>
> I get images of cowboys chasing down bad guys. :-)

Mutiny, anyone? :-)

Magnus


subject: [Wikipedia-l] User:Fire

body:
On Sat, 31 Jul 2004 14:10:08 -0700, Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote:
> I am annoyed by the behaviour of user:fire.

Have you thought about discussing this with Fire rather than
embarrassing him by bringing this to the mailing list?

> We don't need this loose cannon who has not
> otherwise participated in Wikisource

Please don't attack users you know nothing about. Fire is not a "loose cannon".

> to sneakily acquire

It wasn't sneaky. It was fully logged on Meta, which is where all
emergency or necessary short term sysoppings occur.

> some kind of superior access

Firstly, Fire has shell access to all of the Wikimedia servers, so
adminship on Wikisource is hardly superior to what he already has.
Secondly, adminship is not supposed to be indicative of any level of
superiority.

> for no other reason to block a user that he does not like.

Whatever makes you think he didn't like the user?

Fire was undertaking an often requested, and largely thankless, task
of renaming users. This is not a job many of the developers enjoy, yet
he and Jeronim have been working through a huge backlog of such
requests over the last couple of days. Attacking people for working on
this, especially when they are completely following the written
recommendations for doing it, is hardly going to encourage our
developers to undertake such tasks is it?

Angela.


from_name: zero 0000

subject: [WikiEN-l] Arbitration versus Mediation

body:
From: "sannse", Sat, 31 Jul 2004 21:37:21 +0100
> As an administrator you do not have the authority to block a logged
in
> user except in the cases outlined in the blocking policy - which
basically
> comes down to instances of simple vandalism.

According to [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy]]:
   Sysops may also permanently block user accounts that make lots of
   disruptive edits. However, blocks should not be used against
isolated
   incidents of disruptive behaviour from IP addresses and user
accounts
   that make a mixture of disruptive and useful edits.

Reading that carefully, I am permitted to block accounts that make
many repeated disruptive edits, since those are not "isolated
incidents".
>From the previous paragraph we learn that "disruptive edits" include
"deliberately misleading edits".  Since this particular case fits the
description quite well, I believe my actions are within the policy.

Also, since "Lance6Wins" is a new user account only created after I
blocked his IPs, I am entitled to use the more lenient rules on that
page concerning new user accounts (but I don't need to).  Finally,
I'll say that in my opinion I am doing Wikipedia a service by cracking
down on this fanatic who has been a thorn in the side of all decent
editors of the middle-east portion of Wikipedia for many months.

Zero.

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


body:
Brion Vibber wrote:

> Gutza wrote:
>
>> I have updated the categories in LanguageRO.php in CVS. Can someone
>> please update it on the server? We'd like to start using categories,
>> and we'd prefer the localized keyword instead of the English one -- I
>> expect changing the namespace name will result in the desired
>> behaviour, is this correct? (i.e. we could write [[Categorie:foo]]
>> instead of [[Category:foo]] once the namespace was changed from
>> "Category" to "Categorie").
>
>
> Comitted to REL1_3 and installed on Wikipedia.
>
> Thanks for the update!
>
> -- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)

Thank YOU for applying the patch so quickly, you have no reason to thank me!

Cheers,
Gutza