subject: AW: [Wikipedia-l] License question

body:
 Hi Larry and others,

> # Shouldn't we set up some protocol on Wikipedia whereby this constantly
> recurring issue can be systematically resolved?
Yes.

There should be a publicly available procedure (in text or linked form)
which describes the copyright evalutaion process.
So that everyone can at least to some degree evaluate it.

I would propose some kind of programmed scheme:
Like:

(1) Is it a work that you wrote yourself ENTIRELY?
Yes -> (*)   No -> (*)
(2) Do you have used any other material in preparing this contribution?
Yes -> (*)   No -> (*)
(3) Do you have cited one or more items from a source not your own?
Yes -> (*)   No -> (*)
(4) Do you have translated material from another language?
...
(*) You are a great author. Please submit.
...
(*) You have copied all from sources not your own
    -> this CANNOT be used in wikipedia. police is underway.

//

Known problems:
(as far as i know)

(*) Citations
not too much, please. Should not exceed 10 (?) percent.
Copyright allows citations from others, but it should not be a substantial
part of a work.

(*) Translations
You need permission of the original author.
Public domain sources _can_ interfer with later translated work. (If you
retranslate something already translated, but (later) translator still has
rights thereon. I dont know if somebody is allowed to retranslate if some
proper translations exists. But how to determine originality/the difference
between two translations??

(*) Public domain resources
There is a slightly different definition in some or all countries although
effort has been made to make this equal in all countries by the
organisations for intellectual property.
One thing public domain in one state is not necessarily public domain in
another. The same   problems is seen in some (later) statements in Project
Gutenberg.
This in fact says that one is going to assume public domain and in legal is
not, instead it is a copyright infringement.
BTW What about asking Project Gutenberg staff members. They must have some
evaluation procedure already?

(*) Trademarks
You cannot use trademarks for your own. Except in an encyclopedian work.
AFAIK.
wikipedia should have an 'trademarks are the property of their respective
owners and are  not assumed to be used freely' statement for pages that
aren't encyclopedic.
(Or a page which lists all known trademarks. Uugh.)
BTW 'wikipedia' should be trademarked. If another person does it there is no
way to solve it, even so if wikipedia has used it long before such a
trademarkiation(?). Could even stop using of domains. ..
(c't (German computer paper, www.heise.de/ct has a huge amount of articles
on that problem. Crazy world.))

(*) Betriebsgeheimnisse (?)Proprietary Knowledge
You cannot publish proprietary knowledge even if you wrote all this on your
own.
There is a case about publishing D V D secu rity codes by a professor.

(*) Publisher rights
Reading some books on that matter there is an equal amount of legal stuff on
publisher and publishing rights as is the case with copyright items.
People -especially authors- have to make sure that they haven't sold items
under some exclusive license to anybody else. Come to GNU!

(*) Misunderstanding of the 'legal availability of some private copies'
That is the N music case. Short: Anybode can make a very very small number
of private copies. True. BUT must have got a legally copy of the work as
long as holding a copy of it(!). Somebody else cannot provide such a service
for you because THEY perform a massive duplication of works then. This seems
even the case if private persons owning original records want to have a copy
of it somewhere in cyberspace. No service is allowed to provide that. Every
private person has to process it on their own. N has to pay for it.

(*) Patent claims
One (great) publisher writes in all his books, similarly: "For educational
services only - not evaluated according to patent issues !" This might has
something to do with commercial applications of some items. Until now I dont
understand what is the problem here. Maybe somebody prosecutes (?anklagen)
you the publisher that you have let him believe something is free to be used
and it isnt. Like LZW compression scheme. Think of somebody reading on it,
develope a huge software product and finally finds out that it is patented,
or even after he has made some money from it.

//

This is arbitrarily (?) complex.
Anybody who can show up evidence in such an infringement of some rights can
stop you publishing it/all rigorously.

-> advice -> make it modular as much as possible. (ever true)
-> let lawyers evaluate big sources (like PG encyclopedia)
-> reuse project gutenberg evaluations
-> lawyers please help us!

Good luck.


list: wikipedia-l

source: pipermail-mbox

from_name: Jimmy Wales

subject: [Wikipedia-l] image hotlinks

in_reply_to: <004301c0f8e9$ed51bfc0$dfc20ed9@laptop>; from lsanger@nupedia.com on Tue, Jun 19, 2001 at 11:01:07PM +0500

body:
That's pretty non-trivial, I think.

Larry Sanger wrote:

> Well, y'know, we could simply change the code so that images can't be
> grabbed from another server...
>
> Larry
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Timothy Shell" <tshell at bomis.com>
> To: <wikipedia-l at nupedia.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 11:35 PM
> Subject: [Wikipedia-l] image hotlinks
>
>
> >
> > A search on \.jpg reveals 12 instances of hot linking to images.
> >
> > A search on \.gif shows 25 instances.
> >
> >
> > Tim
> >
> > [Wikipedia-l]
> > To manage your subscription to this list, please go here:
> > http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>
> [Wikipedia-l]
> To manage your subscription to this list, please go here:
> http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l

--
*************************************************
*            http://www.nupedia.com/            *
*      The Ever Expanding Free Encyclopedia     *
*************************************************


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Copyright violation warning

body:
We intend to support everything.  Unfortunately, we may not always know how.

Xudong Guan wrote:

> > Here are the languages we need this in:
> > http://zh.wikipedia.com/ Chinese (Hanyu)
> As far as I know, Chinese words are not supported by
> wikipedia. Range 0x80 - 0xFF in a byte was used by
> Chinese operation system to represent Chinese words.
> However, wikipedia will not render those codes "as is". )
> Any plan to support it?
>
>  --
> Xudong Guan [??????], PhD candidate
> Email: guan-xd at cs.sjtu.edu.cn / xdguan at 263.net
> Distributed Computing Technology Center
> Shanghai Jiao Tong Univ.
> Shanghai, P.R.China
>
> [Wikipedia-l]
> To manage your subscription to this list, please go here:
> http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l

--
*************************************************
*            http://www.nupedia.com/            *
*      The Ever Expanding Free Encyclopedia     *
*************************************************


from_name: lcrocker at nupedia.com

body:
If someone with a Chinese browser can tell you exactly what character
encoding is commonly used for their text fields, then you just need
to modify bomis's server configs to change the "Character-Encoding"
line to that.  Same for Japanese.  If Chinese and/or Japanese
browsers can be configured to use UTF-8, that would probably be best
since that would enable simulataneous display of all languages, but I
think most older browsers use ISO-2022 or something.

> We intend to support everything.  Unfortunately, we may not always
> know how.

>> As far as I know, Chinese words are not supported by
>> wikipedia. Range 0x80 - 0xFF in a byte was used by
>> Chinese operation system to represent Chinese words.
>> However, wikipedia will not render those codes "as is". )
>> Any plan to support it?


from_name: Xudong Guan

body:
> Here are the languages we need this in:
> http://zh.wikipedia.com/ Chinese (Hanyu)
As far as I know, Chinese words are not supported by
wikipedia. Range 0x80 - 0xFF in a byte was used by
Chinese operation system to represent Chinese words.
However, wikipedia will not render those codes "as is". )
Any plan to support it?

 --
Xudong Guan [??????], PhD candidate
Email: guan-xd at cs.sjtu.edu.cn / xdguan at 263.net
Distributed Computing Technology Center
Shanghai Jiao Tong Univ.
Shanghai, P.R.China


from_name: Larry Sanger

subject: [Wikipedia-l] image hotlinks

body:
Well, y'know, we could simply change the code so that images can't be
grabbed from another server...

Larry

----- Original Message -----
From: "Timothy Shell" <tshell at bomis.com>
To: <wikipedia-l at nupedia.com>
Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 11:35 PM
Subject: [Wikipedia-l] image hotlinks

>
> A search on \.jpg reveals 12 instances of hot linking to images.
>
> A search on \.gif shows 25 instances.
>
>
> Tim
>
> [Wikipedia-l]
> To manage your subscription to this list, please go here:
> http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l


from_name: Rybo

subject: AW: [Wikipedia-l] Server Bug?

body:
> The weird thing is that this works fine for me.
It is working fine for me either this tuesday.
But it was as described last night (local time).

> -----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: wikipedia-l-admin at nupedia.com
> [mailto:wikipedia-l-admin at nupedia.com]Im Auftrag von Jimmy Wales
> Gesendet am: Dienstag, 19. Juni 2001 18:28
> An: wikipedia-l at nupedia.com
> Betreff: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Server Bug?
>
> The weird thing is that this works fine for me.
>
..


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Copyright question

body:
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Url: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/attachments/20010620/b14247c8/attachment.diff


subject: [Wikipedia-l] image hotlinks

body:
Why nontrivial?  It should just be a matter of commenting out the code that
permits the image to be displayed, no?

In any case, it *would* solve the problem handily.

Larry

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jimmy Wales" <jwales at bomis.com>
To: <wikipedia-l at nupedia.com>
Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2001 5:45 AM
Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] image hotlinks

> That's pretty non-trivial, I think.
>
> Larry Sanger wrote:
>
> > Well, y'know, we could simply change the code so that images can't be
> > grabbed from another server...
> >
> > Larry
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Timothy Shell" <tshell at bomis.com>
> > To: <wikipedia-l at nupedia.com>
> > Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 11:35 PM
> > Subject: [Wikipedia-l] image hotlinks
> >
> >
> > >
> > > A search on \.jpg reveals 12 instances of hot linking to images.
> > >
> > > A search on \.gif shows 25 instances.
> > >
> > >
> > > Tim
> > >
> > > [Wikipedia-l]
> > > To manage your subscription to this list, please go here:
> > > http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> >
> > [Wikipedia-l]
> > To manage your subscription to this list, please go here:
> > http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>
> --
> *************************************************
> *            http://www.nupedia.com/            *
> *      The Ever Expanding Free Encyclopedia     *
> *************************************************
> [Wikipedia-l]
> To manage your subscription to this list, please go here:
> http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Copyright question

in_reply_to: <r5iae33z4in.fsf@orr.maths.keele.ac.uk>; from wiki@gwowen.freeserve.co.uk on Wed, Jun 20, 2001 at 02:04:32PM +0100

body:
Simple facts in a list are not protected by copyright, generally speaking.
Special arrangements of the facts may be copyrightable.

See my list of winners of NASCAR championships... I just copied that from
some source or another.

I don't think there will be a problem with this.

Gareth Owen wrote:

> I've a list of all the winners of major sporting events in an encyclopedia.
> Obviously, the accompanying text is copyright, but how about the lists
> themselves?  Can I just copy them verbatime?  What if I scan them?
>
> Anyone?
> --
> Gareth Owen
> [Wikipedia-l]
> To manage your subscription to this list, please go here:
> http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l

--
*************************************************
*            http://www.nupedia.com/            *
*      The Ever Expanding Free Encyclopedia     *
*************************************************


subject: [Wikipedia-l] image hotlinks

in_reply_to: <008801c0f948$a4f5af20$c3c20ed9@laptop>; from lsanger@nupedia.com on Wed, Jun 20, 2001 at 10:19:31AM +0500

body:
We can ask Clifford, but I'm under the impression that there isn't
specific code to "permit the image to be displayed".  Rather, there
is an abscence of code to prevent it.  We do permit limited html markup;
we could turn that option off, but that would have other bad consequences.

Larry Sanger wrote:

> Why nontrivial?  It should just be a matter of commenting out the code that
> permits the image to be displayed, no?
>
> In any case, it *would* solve the problem handily.
>
> Larry
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jimmy Wales" <jwales at bomis.com>
> To: <wikipedia-l at nupedia.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2001 5:45 AM
> Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] image hotlinks
>
>
> > That's pretty non-trivial, I think.
> >
> > Larry Sanger wrote:
> >
> > > Well, y'know, we could simply change the code so that images can't be
> > > grabbed from another server...
> > >
> > > Larry
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Timothy Shell" <tshell at bomis.com>
> > > To: <wikipedia-l at nupedia.com>
> > > Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 11:35 PM
> > > Subject: [Wikipedia-l] image hotlinks
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > A search on \.jpg reveals 12 instances of hot linking to images.
> > > >
> > > > A search on \.gif shows 25 instances.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Tim
> > > >
> > > > [Wikipedia-l]
> > > > To manage your subscription to this list, please go here:
> > > > http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> > >
> > > [Wikipedia-l]
> > > To manage your subscription to this list, please go here:
> > > http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> >
> > --
> > *************************************************
> > *            http://www.nupedia.com/            *
> > *      The Ever Expanding Free Encyclopedia     *
> > *************************************************
> > [Wikipedia-l]
> > To manage your subscription to this list, please go here:
> > http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>
> [Wikipedia-l]
> To manage your subscription to this list, please go here:
> http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l

--
*************************************************
*            http://www.nupedia.com/            *
*      The Ever Expanding Free Encyclopedia     *
*************************************************


subject: [Wikipedia-l] image hotlinks

body:
It's perfectly fine as far as *I'm* concerned (and it sounds great!)--maybe
Jimbo will have something to say though.

Larry

----- Original Message -----
From: "Larry Olin Horn" <hornlo at lohnet.org>
To: <wikipedia-l at nupedia.com>
Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 11:26 PM
Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] image hotlinks

> This is related to images....
>
> I have an ancient copy of the Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam (book doesn't even
> have a date or copyright page).
>
> The text itself is available from Project Gutenberg.  The illustrations
(75
> b/w images, about 1MB total, for the "First Edition" of the RoOK) I've
> scanned in for my own use. I'd be glad to transfer both the text and the
> images to WP if you don't see any copyright problems with the images.  You
> can see what I'm talking about here:
>
>    http://www.lohnet.org/~hornlo/misc/rubaiyat/
>
> (still a draft; I've not proofed all the text markup yet).  I'm working on
> the assumption that since the book (text) copyright is out, so too for the
> images.  Please let me know if this is suitable for WP.
>
> loh
>
> [Wikipedia-l]
> To manage your subscription to this list, please go here:
> http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l


from_name: Gareth Owen

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Copyright question

body:
I've a list of all the winners of major sporting events in an encyclopedia.
Obviously, the accompanying text is copyright, but how about the lists
themselves?  Can I just copy them verbatime?  What if I scan them?

Anyone?
--
Gareth Owen


in_reply_to: <200106200522.WAA27488@ross.bomis.com>; from lcrocker@nupedia.com on Tue, Jun 19, 2001 at 10:22:39PM -0700

body:
Lee knows what he is talking about.  I can and will change the character encoding
to whatever is desired, but I know very little about this and won't make a change
until approved by consensus here.  I don't want to make anything worse.  :-)

lcrocker at nupedia.com wrote:

> If someone with a Chinese browser can tell you exactly what character
> encoding is commonly used for their text fields, then you just need
> to modify bomis's server configs to change the "Character-Encoding"
> line to that.  Same for Japanese.  If Chinese and/or Japanese
> browsers can be configured to use UTF-8, that would probably be best
> since that would enable simulataneous display of all languages, but I
> think most older browsers use ISO-2022 or something.
>
> > We intend to support everything.  Unfortunately, we may not always
> > know how.
>
> >> As far as I know, Chinese words are not supported by
> >> wikipedia. Range 0x80 - 0xFF in a byte was used by
> >> Chinese operation system to represent Chinese words.
> >> However, wikipedia will not render those codes "as is". )
> >> Any plan to support it?
>
>
>
>
>
> [Wikipedia-l]
> To manage your subscription to this list, please go here:
> http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l

--
*************************************************
*            http://www.nupedia.com/            *
*      The Ever Expanding Free Encyclopedia     *
*************************************************


from_name: Larry Olin Horn

subject: [Wikipedia-l] gif2png - was: image hotlinks

body:
> I would recommend that you convert them to PNG for better compression.
> Since they are black-and-white line drawings, converting them en masse
> from the existing GIF will be lossless and not sacrifice any quality.

Ok, I'll look into it, but it won't be for several days... and I still
haven't got around to proofing the text.

thanks,
loh


from_name: Krzysztof P. Jasiutowicz

subject: [Wikipedia-l] E-mail interface to Wikipedia

body:
Hello all,

I was just thinking about e-mail interface to Wikipedia.
What for, you might ask.
Sometimes it is for some people hard to get onto the Wikipedia server.
I also think it would booster authors' productivity.

Off the top of my head I can think of three commands that can be placed in
subject line of an e-mail :
* POST
* GET     - raw text of the page
* RECEIVE - formatted text of the page
of course there should also be 'an article a day' service.
POSTing should be reserved to active memebers of this mailing list.
There should be some way to safeguarde against accidental overwriting
of existing pages.

When POSTing raw text in body before '-- ', and author's id from e-mail
before '@'.

Best regards,
kpj.
--
Krzysztof P. Jasiutowicz, M.D | Piek?o jest wybrukowane dobrymi ch?ciami.
Czestochowa, Poland ...       | Samuel Johnson
Wi?cej cytat?w : http://www.cytaty.phg.pl


subject: [Wikipedia-l] [kpjas@promail.pl: Periodic table add-ons]

body:
----- Forwarded message from "Krzysztof P. Jasiutowicz" <kpjas at ceti.pl> -----

Does Wikipedia need these addons to the periodic table ?
If other layout is needed please let me know I have the data
in xml file it can be parsed as one pleases.

For the past two days I hasn't  been able to post anything to Wikipedia
besides the file is rather large so probably won't get through anyway.

See the attached file (ZIP).

Best regards,
kpj.
--
Krzysztof P. Jasiutowicz, M.D | Trzeba by stu oczu, by m?c je na wszystko
Czestochowa, Poland ...       | przymyka?. Stanis?aw Jerzy Lec
Wi?cej cytat?w : http://www.cytaty.phg.pl
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: pt.zip
Type: application/x-zip-compressed
Size: 9176 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/attachments/20010625/c0733af2/attachment.bin


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Estimating article numbers

body:
(I have posted this on [[Larry Sanger/Estimating article numbers]].)

So Wikipedia has almost 10,000 pages.  This represents a heck of a lot of
work and a heck of a lot of content, and we can all be proud, but...I think
there's a bit of a problem.  I have a puzzle for you: how many of these
pages are *articles*?

''We'' all know "10,000 pages" does not mean "10,000 encyclopedia articles."
There are a lot of redirection pages, Talk pages, member pages and subpages,
commentary pages, Wikipedia project pages, and other non-articles.  But the
new reader doesn't know this, and if some news media source comes along (as
they inevitably will--it's only a matter of time now), I think we might be
blasted for misrepresenting the extent of our achievement.  Not only would
that be shameful, it lose us the participation of potential new contributors
who ''care'' about how accurately we represent our achievement, though they
don't care if we say we have 10,000 or, instead, a mere 6,000 articles.  :-)

I wouldn't envy anyone the task of counting the ''actual'' number of
articles.  But we could estimate the number.

Anyone care to give it a shot, and report the results?

For purposes of this exercise, I don't think we need to draw a distinction
between one-sentence articles to the effect that so-and-so was a famous
novelist, and treatise-length pages.  Both of those can, for our purposes,
be called articles, or perhaps "entries."  What ''can't'' be called articles
are:
* redirection pages
* Talk pages
* member pages and subpages thereof
* pages describing the Wikipedia project (e.g., the FAQ, news,
announcements, etc.)
* pages that consist *only* of links to other articles, with virtually no
content of their own
* any other categories?

What I'd like to do with your estimate is to make the assumption that the
''ratio'' of present pages to present articles will remain roughly the same
for the next 5,000 or so ''pages.''  (Or perhaps you can tell me how long
the ratio can probably be relied upon.)

Then, we can (honestly) boast "over 5,000 articles" (notice, articles, not
pages) or "over 5,000 entries" on the front page.  This will make our work
seem more substantial, more real, and that's important if we're going to
make this a reasonably serious project.

I'll bet the present number is right around 5,000, but I really don't know!

Larry


from_name: Timothy Shell

subject: [Wikipedia-l] State Department background notes

body:
"Unless a copyright is indicated, information on the Department of State
Web Site is in the public domain and may be copied and distributed without
permission."

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/bgn/

These background notes have a great deal of information, more than the CIA
factbook.

Tim


from_name: koyaanisqatsi at nupedia.com

body:
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Url: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/attachments/20010701/47890161/attachment.diff


body:
The copyright notice is here:
http://www.state.gov/r/pa/rls/index.cfm?docid=3797

Tim

On Sun, 1 Jul 2001 koyaanisqatsi at nupedia.com wrote:

> Tim, where did you find that copyright notice?  It's not on that page
> and I haven't been able to find it.  And the site does have much more
> info than the CIA book; I'd like to begin adding it.  :-)
>
>
> >"Unless a copyright is indicated, information on the Department of State
> >Web Site is in the public domain and may be copied and distributed
> without
> >permission."
> >
> >http://www.state.gov/r/pa/bgn/
> >
> >These background notes have a great deal of information, more than
> the CIA
> >factbook.
> >
> >Tim0


body:
This is wonderful!

In general, nothing published by the U.S. government can be copyrighted.
This is as it should be, of course.  We paid for them to write it, after
all.

This may be true for other governments as well, which might help the
non-English wikipedias.  But please let's research it carefully.

You also have to watch out... the White House website has (or did
have, during the Clinton administration, I don't know if Dubya's
staff has revamped) a biography of every President.  But they used
those biographies with permission from a copyrighted source.

Therefore, you can't automatically assume that anything on a U.S.
government website is fair game.  Most of it is, though.

Timothy Shell wrote:

>
> The copyright notice is here:
> http://www.state.gov/r/pa/rls/index.cfm?docid=3797
>
> Tim
>
> On Sun, 1 Jul 2001 koyaanisqatsi at nupedia.com wrote:
>
> > Tim, where did you find that copyright notice?  It's not on that page
> > and I haven't been able to find it.  And the site does have much more
> > info than the CIA book; I'd like to begin adding it.  :-)
> >
> >
> > >"Unless a copyright is indicated, information on the Department of State
> > >Web Site is in the public domain and may be copied and distributed
> > without
> > >permission."
> > >
> > >http://www.state.gov/r/pa/bgn/
> > >
> > >These background notes have a great deal of information, more than
> > the CIA
> > >factbook.
> > >
> > >Tim0
>
> [Wikipedia-l]
> To manage your subscription to this list, please go here:
> http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l

--
*************************************************
*            http://www.nupedia.com/            *
*      The Ever Expanding Free Encyclopedia     *
*************************************************


subject: AW: [Wikipedia-l] State Department background notes

body:
Can you tell if this applies to foreigners as well?

mit freundlichen Gruessen
Stefan

StefanRybo in Wikipedia
apologies for any language errors (please correct)

> -----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: wikipedia-l-admin at nupedia.com
> [mailto:wikipedia-l-admin at nupedia.com]Im Auftrag von Jimmy Wales
> Gesendet am: Montag, 2. Juli 2001 20:25
> An: wikipedia-l at nupedia.com
> Betreff: Re: [Wikipedia-l] State Department background notes
>
> This is wonderful!
>
> In general, nothing published by the U.S. government can be copyrighted.
> This is as it should be, of course.  We paid for them to write it, after
> all.
..


subject: [Wikipedia-l] My impending down time and return

body:
Hi all,

My itinerary for July 31-August 11:

July 31-August 1: Izhevsk-Moscow
August 1: Moscow-Paris-Dublin
August 2: Dublin-Donegal
August 10: Donegal-Dublin
August 11: Dublin-Shannon-New Jersey-Las Vegas

As you can see, I will be returning to the U.S. on August 11, and I'll be
taking a vacation in Ireland (fiddling :-) ) before I return.

Internet contact will be virtually impossible while travelling from Izhevsk
to Donegal, from July 31 to August 2, and while travelling from Donegal to
Las Vegas, from August 10 to 11.  Once in Donegal, I will have intermittent
access--I *think* I'll be able to download my e-mail, but I'm not too sure
about that.  If not, the best I might be able to do is to write very short
replies to the most crucial messages.  It's very possible that I won't be
working on Wikipedia at all, so you'll all just have to behave yourselves
:-) .  Anyway, the week that I'm in Donegal, I will probably not be online
for more than several hours, all together.  Once back in Las Vegas, I'll be
able to work harder than ever.

Larry


in_reply_to: <000001c103d6$ca8ce300$4a5afea9@millenium>; from rybox@wtal.de on Tue, Jul 03, 2001 at 05:42:39PM +0200

body:
My understanding is that, by either law or custom, the United States
government doesn't copyright anything that it publishes.  I *know*
this means that there is no U.S. copyright.  I *think* this means that
there is no copyright *period*.

On the one hand, all of the wikipedia sites are physically located
here in the U.S. on servers owned by me and operated by me in the U.S.
So U.S. law is what applies.  If any other country gets mad at me for
some reason, I don't suppose I care very much.

But on the other hand, the intention of the free licensing is that anyone
who is somehow unhappy with the way a wikipedia is being run can take the
content and reuse it in their own way -- and to make sure that they can do
so easily, we should try to be sure that everything in the wikipedia system
is as unencumbered as possible.

Rybo wrote:

> Can you tell if this applies to foreigners as well?
>
>
> mit freundlichen Gruessen
> Stefan
>
> StefanRybo in Wikipedia
> apologies for any language errors (please correct)
>
> > -----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht-----
> > Von: wikipedia-l-admin at nupedia.com
> > [mailto:wikipedia-l-admin at nupedia.com]Im Auftrag von Jimmy Wales
> > Gesendet am: Montag, 2. Juli 2001 20:25
> > An: wikipedia-l at nupedia.com
> > Betreff: Re: [Wikipedia-l] State Department background notes
> >
> > This is wonderful!
> >
> > In general, nothing published by the U.S. government can be copyrighted.
> > This is as it should be, of course.  We paid for them to write it, after
> > all.
> ..
>
> [Wikipedia-l]
> To manage your subscription to this list, please go here:
> http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l

--
*************************************************
*            http://www.nupedia.com/            *
*      The Ever Expanding Free Encyclopedia     *
*************************************************


body:
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Url: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/attachments/20010705/c567ff22/attachment.diff


in_reply_to: <200107051911.MAA20556@ross.bomis.com>; from lcrocker@nupedia.com on Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 12:11:08PM -0700

body:
Would there be any interest among wikipedians in different areas around the
country in getting together with each other to hang out and have beers?

We could organize this on the wikipedia itself, or through email.

I live in San Diego.  Larry lives... well, you all know... he lives all over the
world, as the mood suits him, ha ha.  :-)

I'll be in Charleston, South Carolina around the time of Thanksgiving holidays, visiting
my parents.

--
*************************************************
*            http://www.nupedia.com/            *
*      The Ever Expanding Free Encyclopedia     *
*************************************************


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Removing redirect pages from search results

body:
Has this been suggested yet?  I don't think it would be too hard to
implement.

Tim


subject: [Wikipedia-l] CNet now metasearches Wikipedia


in_reply_to: <001b01c10768$417eb260$cdc20ed9@laptop>; from lsanger@nupedia.com on Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 09:41:24AM +0500

body:
Wow!  We should probably do some hard work to speed up the search engine.

Larry Sanger wrote:

> http://www.search.com/search?channel=19&cat=63&tag=st.se.fd.out.19-63
>
> [Wikipedia-l]
> To manage your subscription to this list, please go here:
> http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l

--
*************************************************
*            http://www.nupedia.com/            *
*      The Ever Expanding Free Encyclopedia     *
*************************************************


body:
I think that's a good idea, but it should either be a preference one
can turn on and off (default on, I think), or an option not taken when
clicking on the name for a search. Otherwise we might have pages we
can't change until we discover them through chance. (e.g. suppose
"CountriesOfTheWorld" redirected to "Countries Of The World," which
redirected to "Countries of the world.")

You Wrote:
>Has this been suggested yet? I don't think it would be too hard to
>implement.
>
>Tim
>
>
>
>[Wikipedia-l]
>To manage your subscription to this list, please go here:
>http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l


subject: [Wikipedia-l] (No Subject)

body:
do we want to add meta tags to our pages?  or is there some other
reason our pages don't return descriptions at c|net?  see for instance
http://www.search.com/search?q=louis+pasteur&channel=19&lq=ingmar%2Bbergman&k=93868125&cat=63&int.874=on&int.211=on&int.488=on&int.212=on&int.1230=on&int.1231=on&int.235=on&int.427=on&int.1228=on


from_name: sjc at easynet.co.uk

subject: [Wikipedia-l] (No Subject)

body:
I think the /talk pages are a major plus: it indicates that if you don't
agree with, or need further clarification on, what's there that it's
discussable.

sjc

Quoting Larry Sanger <lsanger at nupedia.com>:

> Yes, could we automatically make the first 25-40 words of the page
> contents
> the description?  That would be groovy.
>
> By the way, this makes getting rid of /Talk pages from ordinary
> search
> results a little more pressing.  It looks pretty bad to have a
> /Talk page in
> a search result.  On the other hand, it might intrigue more
> people--"Wow,
> here's an *interactive* encyclopedia!"
>
> Larry
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <koyaanisqatsi at nupedia.com>
> To: <wikipedia-l at nupedia.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2001 6:47 AM
> Subject: [Wikipedia-l] (No Subject)
>
>
> > do we want to add meta tags to our pages?  or is there some
> other
> > reason our pages don't return descriptions at c|net?  see for
> instance
> >
> http://www.search.com/search?q=louis+pasteur&channel=19&lq=ingmar%
2Bbergman&
>
k=93868125&cat=63&int.874=on&int.211=on&int.488=on&int.212=on&int.1230=on&
in
> t.1231=on&int.235=on&int.427=on&int.1228=on
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [Wikipedia-l]
> > To manage your subscription to this list, please go here:
> > http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>
> [Wikipedia-l]
> To manage your subscription to this list, please go here:
> http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>

This message was sent by Easymail - http://www.easynet.co.uk/


body:
Apparently, they search their own cached copy of Wikipedia.  There's no way
they could return their results so fast if they sent a request to our
server.  :-)

Larry

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jimmy Wales" <jwales at bomis.com>
To: <wikipedia-l at nupedia.com>
Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2001 12:01 AM
Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] CNet now metasearches Wikipedia

> Wow!  We should probably do some hard work to speed up the search engine.
>
> Larry Sanger wrote:
>
> > http://www.search.com/search?channel=19&cat=63&tag=st.se.fd.out.19-63
> >
> > [Wikipedia-l]
> > To manage your subscription to this list, please go here:
> > http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>
> --
> *************************************************
> *            http://www.nupedia.com/            *
> *      The Ever Expanding Free Encyclopedia     *
> *************************************************
> [Wikipedia-l]
> To manage your subscription to this list, please go here:
> http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l


subject: [Wikipedia-l] (No Subject)

body:
Yes, could we automatically make the first 25-40 words of the page contents
the description?  That would be groovy.

By the way, this makes getting rid of /Talk pages from ordinary search
results a little more pressing.  It looks pretty bad to have a /Talk page in
a search result.  On the other hand, it might intrigue more people--"Wow,
here's an *interactive* encyclopedia!"

Larry

----- Original Message -----
From: <koyaanisqatsi at nupedia.com>
To: <wikipedia-l at nupedia.com>
Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2001 6:47 AM
Subject: [Wikipedia-l] (No Subject)

> do we want to add meta tags to our pages?  or is there some other
> reason our pages don't return descriptions at c|net?  see for instance
>
http://www.search.com/search?q=louis+pasteur&channel=19&lq=ingmar%2Bbergman&
k=93868125&cat=63&int.874=on&int.211=on&int.488=on&int.212=on&int.1230=on&in
t.1231=on&int.235=on&int.427=on&int.1228=on
>
>
>
>
> [Wikipedia-l]
> To manage your subscription to this list, please go here:
> http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l


from_name: Cindy Lynn Seeley

subject: [Wikipedia-l] WikiWeb.com

body:
<snip>
| -----Original Message-----
| From: wikipedia-l-admin at nupedia.com
| [mailto:wikipedia-l-admin at nupedia.com]On Behalf Of Larry Sanger
| Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2001 1:27 AM
| To: Wikipedia-l at nupedia.com
| Subject: [Wikipedia-l] WikiWeb.com
|
|
| How about this... http://www.wikiweb.com/  A company that is trying to
| *sell* wikis to business.
</snip>

Are you sure this is the link you intended to post here?  It looks like
Clifford's to me.


subject: [Wikipedia-l] WikiWeb.com

body:
| -----Original Message-----
| From: wikipedia-l-admin at nupedia.com
| [mailto:wikipedia-l-admin at nupedia.com]On Behalf Of Larry Sanger
| Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2001 2:58 AM
| To: wikipedia-l at nupedia.com
| Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] WikiWeb.com
|
|
| Clifford's UseModWiki site is http://www.usemod.com/ .  Are you
| saying he's
| behind http://www.wikiweb.com/ ?  (Actually, I couldn't find any names at
| all on wikiweb.com.)

Apparently this was my misunderstanding of your post.  I mistook the link
with mention of Clifford to lead to his website, which was the same site as
the first link.

Here's identifying information for wikiweb:

WiKiWeb, Inc. (NETBLK-CBCN-64-37-73-224)
   11625 Tumahawk Creek Pky  C
   Leawood, KS 66211
   US

   Netname: CBCN-64-37-73-224
   Netblock: 64.37.73.224 - 64.37.73.255

   Coordinator:
      Cybercon, Network Operation Center  (NOC15-ARIN)  noc at cybercon.com
      314-621-9991 (FAX) 314-212-9530

   Record last updated on 18-Mar-2000.
   Database last updated on 10-Jul-2001 22:56:04 EDT.

The ARIN Registration Services Host contains ONLY Internet
Network Information: Networks, ASN's, and related POC's.
Please use the whois server at rs.internic.net for DOMAIN related
Information and whois.nic.mil for NIPRNET Information.


subject: [Wikipedia-l] WikiWeb.com

body:
How about this... http://www.wikiweb.com/  A company that is trying to
*sell* wikis to business.

Their free wiki hosting shut down, though:
http://worldcrossing.com/WebX?128 at 109.vOD6blmYphc^0 at .eeb73e8
(there's a link to Wikipedia there)

And why should you choose their wiki software, as opposed to, say,
Clifford's?
http://www.wikiweb.com/intro7.html
*chuckle*

Larry


subject: [Wikipedia-l] WikiWeb.com

body:
Clifford's UseModWiki site is http://www.usemod.com/ .  Are you saying he's
behind http://www.wikiweb.com/ ?  (Actually, I couldn't find any names at
all on wikiweb.com.)

Larry

----- Original Message -----
From: "Cindy Lynn Seeley" <Cindy_Seeley at n-connect.net>
To: <wikipedia-l at nupedia.com>
Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2001 12:47 PM
Subject: RE: [Wikipedia-l] WikiWeb.com

> <snip>
> | -----Original Message-----
> | From: wikipedia-l-admin at nupedia.com
> | [mailto:wikipedia-l-admin at nupedia.com]On Behalf Of Larry Sanger
> | Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2001 1:27 AM
> | To: Wikipedia-l at nupedia.com
> | Subject: [Wikipedia-l] WikiWeb.com
> |
> |
> | How about this... http://www.wikiweb.com/  A company that is trying to
> | *sell* wikis to business.
> </snip>
>
> Are you sure this is the link you intended to post here?  It looks like
> Clifford's to me.
>
> [Wikipedia-l]
> To manage your subscription to this list, please go here:
> http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l


subject: [Wikipedia-l] questions on writing mathematics

body:
> 2. What should be the nature of the mathematics part of
> Wikipedia?  I'm asking this because I see it as more or less
> a replacement (or even better) as things like Eric Weisstein's
> Mathworld or Foldoc.  But there the emphasis is on concise
> write-ups with formal definitions...

"Concise" is not as valuable here: we have no space limitations,
so we should take as much space as is necessary to clearly
explain something, give examples, and some background as you
suggest.  I also think our audience will be more laymen than
that of something like a textbook: after all, the audience of a
textbook is self-selected math students, while we'll be getting
random search hits, so I think it is important for us to explain
and link to context in every article.

> However, I think that in order to be usable as a mathematical
> dictionary (should it be?) the short formal definition should be
> near the beginning (or >maybe even always *at* the beginning) and
> clearly recognizable as such. So I guess my question is actually
> if there should be some kind of rule on this.

I think most articles will end up this way: define, then describe.
How that's done for each subject will be best determined by experts
in that subject, with feedback from the rest of us.

> 3. A related question is how much redundancy do we want?
> Is "reflexive" going to be explained on every page that uses
> its in its definitions, or do we want one small article that
> defines it and let all the others link to that (as in Mathworld).
> If we do write such an article what should be the title? Should
> it simply be "reflexive" or "reflexive binary relation"? I
> would say the latter because the term "reflexive" has a higher
> chance of having other meanings in other contexts.

Redundancy is not bad per se, but linking to separate articles
makes it easier to give more detail when needed.  Titles should be
as clear as necessary--your judgment is as good as anyone's on
that matter.  There is lots of discussion about these topics on
Wikipedia already, and some general consensus about several things,
but it would be a bad idea to set up rules to far ahead of time--
we want to see what works first, then edit things based on our
experiences.  Once we get the content, that's easy to do.

> 4. What is the current opinion on using HTML 4 special characters?
> I'm using 'mozilla' and it handles them fine. Even text-ased 'lynx'
> tries to represent them with normal characters which results often
> in a quite readable result. And it would of course be really nice
> to have things like subset, and, or, forall, element et cetera.

LOTS of discussion exists here.  For a first pass, see "Wiki special
characters".  The symbols on that page should work in most browsers
of recent vintage.  Mozilla is better than most: IE and NN won't
show you "forall", "subset", and some others.  A product like TtH
would be useful, but would shut out Mac owners and possibly others.
Again, use some judgment: if you think you can explain a subject
without needing the special characters, then do so; but if you really
do need them, go ahead--browsers will catch up.  If you can get by
with the few extended characters in ISO, then use those directly
instead of HTML entities (such as "not", "times", and "middot").

There's lots of discussion about these topics already in
Wikipedia, and your contibutions there would be helpful.


from_name: Jan Hidders

in_reply_to: <200107080952.CAA24160@ross.bomis.com>; from wikipedia-l-request@nupedia.com on Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 02:52:19AM -0700

body:
Hello all,

I should probably not ask this here but put it on the appropriate pages in
Wikipedia, but I prefer personally discussions by mailing-list. (Yes, I
know, very unWikiWiki of me.) So my apologies if my behaviour is
inappropriate.

So here goes:

1. What is the status on the search engine? It is really slow and as far as
I can see at this moment not working at all. It has probably been
already said a zillion times before but I think a good search engine is really
really important critical success factor IMHO. Or are we going to let Google
do all the work?

2. What should be the nature of the mathematics part of Wikipedia? I'm
asking this because I see it as more or less a replacement (or even better)
as things like Eric Weisstein's Mathworld or Foldoc

  http://foldoc.doc.ic.ac.uk/foldoc/index.html

But there the emphasis is on concise write-ups with formal definitions. But
the scope of Wikipedia is much broader so I would expect there the same
thing but also
* informal introduction of the term,
* more examples and
* something about the history of the term.
However, I think that in order to be usable as a mathematical dictionary
(should it be?) the short formal definition should be near the beginning (or
maybe even always *at* the beginning) and
clearly recognizable as such. So I guess my question is actually if there
should be some kind of rule on this.

3. A related question is how much redundancy do we want? Is "reflexive"
going to be explained on every page that uses its in its definitions, or do
we want one small article that defines it and let all the others link to
that (as in Mathworld). If we do write such an article what should be the
title? Should it simply be "reflexive" or "reflexive binary relation"? I
would say the latter because the term "reflexive" has a higher chance of
having other meanings in other contexts.

4. What is the current opinion on using HTML 4 special characters? I'm using
'mozilla' and it handles them fine. Even text-based 'lynx' tries to
represent them with normal characters which results often in a quite
readable result. And it would of course be really nice to have things like
subset, and, or, forall, element et cetera.

Kind regards,

-- Jan Hidders


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Britannica is now making people pay for "premium content"

body:
This is relevant for all of us, as it ought to give us extra incentive to
work on Wikipedia (and Nupedia).

You might or might not know that Britannica is at least implying that not
all of its articles, or all the content of all of its articles, are no
longer available for free.  The following message is now appended to
Britannica articles:

"Need more? Full Britannica articles are available to subscribers and Free
Trial participants. To view the complete article, register for 14 days FREE.
To learn more about our premium service, click here. Britannica.com
subscribers, please log-in above."

I believe Jimbo said early on, and I believe I agreed, that Britannica
simply couldn't maintain its business model with banner ads--they would
either have to become open content (and therefore have a moral justification
to ask for volunteers) or become a pay service.  It seems they've chosen the
latter route, which is great news for Wikipedia.

Larry

[Advisory-l] -- a Nupedia.com mailing list
Help build the largest and finest encyclopedia in the world!
To manage your subscription to this list, please go here:
http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/advisory-l


body:
Relevant URL:
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/ap/20010718/tc/britannica_fees_2.html


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re Britannica, let's use the opportunity to get new people on board

body:
This news about Britannica is important.  Britannica is becoming a pay site.
We need therefore to get the word out that Wikipedia is a free alternative.
How can you help?  In the near future, instead of writing Wikipedia
articles, use your Wikipedia time to post on mailing lists and newsgroups
words to the effect that Britannica might be becoming a pay site, but
Wikipedia is free and always will be--and in the space of a few years, it
will be *bigger* than Britannica.  They should be quakin' in their boots.
Anyway, please do help.  Post to a few mailing lists and newsgroups--get the
word out.  It's important we do this *now*, and that we mention (and link
to) the Britannica story.  It will gain us many converts.

Larry


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Indian wikipedia

body:
There are Wikipedias for different languages.  Do you have a specific language
in mind?

I am not very well informed on the subject, but I am under the impression that most
people (or most educated people?) in India speak English.  There is certainly no need
for a separate wikipedia for different nations which share a common language.  There
should not be an Australian Wikipedia, for example.

But perhaps you are asking why there is no wikipedia in some specific local language
of India.

Rybo wrote:

>
>  Hi all,
>
>
>  why is there no indian wikipedia?
>
>
> mit freundlichen Gruessen
> Stefan
>
> StefanRybo in Wikipedia
> apologies for any language errors (please correct)
>
> [Wikipedia-l]
> To manage your subscription to this list, please go here:
> http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l

--
*************************************************
*            http://www.nupedia.com/            *
*      The Ever Expanding Free Encyclopedia     *
*************************************************


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Indian wikipedia

body:
 Hi all,

 why is there no indian wikipedia?

mit freundlichen Gruessen
Stefan

StefanRybo in Wikipedia
apologies for any language errors (please correct)


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Fw: Graphing Wikipedia

body:
Yep, this is groovy.  Maybe somebody wants to get their script and see what
it does with Wikipedia.  I shudder (with delight) to think what the result
will look like.

Larry

> Check it, yo:
>
>        http://www.emacswiki.org/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?EmacsWikiGraph
>
> This is very cool.
>
>
> Ted
>
> --
> Edward O'Connor
> ted at bomis.com


subject: AW: [Wikipedia-l] Indian wikipedia

body:
 Hello Jimbo,

 You are right. I support this.
 I do not know what languages are spoken in india.
 I was just reading a world population statistics and wondering
 that such a huge amount of people got no individual wikipedia.

 mit freundlichen Gruessen
Stefan

StefanRybo in Wikipedia
apologies for any language errors (please correct)

> -----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: wikipedia-l-admin at nupedia.com
> [mailto:wikipedia-l-admin at nupedia.com]Im Auftrag von Jimmy Wales
> Gesendet am: Mittwoch, 25. Juli 2001 00:47
> An: wikipedia-l at nupedia.com
> Betreff: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Indian wikipedia
>
> There are Wikipedias for different languages.  Do you have a
> specific language
> in mind?
>
> I am not very well informed on the subject, but I am under the
> impression that most
> people (or most educated people?) in India speak English.  There
> is certainly no need
> for a separate wikipedia for different nations which share a
> common language.  There
> should not be an Australian Wikipedia, for example.
>
> But perhaps you are asking why there is no wikipedia in some
> specific local language
> of India.
>
> Rybo wrote:
>
> >
> >  Hi all,
> >
> >
> >  why is there no indian wikipedia?
> >
> >
> > mit freundlichen Gruessen
> > Stefan
> >
> > StefanRybo in Wikipedia
> > apologies for any language errors (please correct)
> >
> > [Wikipedia-l]
> > To manage your subscription to this list, please go here:
> > http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>
> --
> *************************************************
> *            http://www.nupedia.com/            *
> *      The Ever Expanding Free Encyclopedia     *
> *************************************************
> [Wikipedia-l]
> To manage your subscription to this list, please go here:
> http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>
>


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Kuro5hin.org story

body:
Please see http://www.kuro5hin.org for an article, written by me, that you
might find interesting.  It is right now on the front page.  It represents
my current thinking on the future of Wikipedia.  I am still optimistic, as
you'll see.

Larry


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Fw: Article-A-Day for Wikipedia

body:
Hey Toan, I don't know where the articles are stored!  I don't know what's
under the hood.

I'm forwarding this to Wikipedia-L to get their input.  It's definitely
seems to be a problem, knowing exactly what text to grab...you programmers
no doubt have a better idea than I do.  But anyway we want to send out, to
all interested subscribers, a random Wikipedia article (hopefully, not a
/Talk page, but in the beginning that won't matter) via e-mail.

Larry

----- Original Message -----
From: "Toan Vo" <toan at bomis.com>
To: "Larry Sanger" <lsanger at nupedia.com>
Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2001 12:22 AM
Subject: Article-A-Day for Wikipedia

> I'm planning to do the job request from you "Article-A-Day for Wikipedia",
> but I'm not sure what the job required?
> I can grab text from html, but the thing is how do you know which page is
> an article because all the pages are the same?  Do you put all articles
> under some sub directory so we can recognized it as an article?
>
> Toan


body:
Larry, your kuro5hin article is now mentioned on the front page of
slashdot (http://slashdot.org/) as well.  We can expect the flood of
traffic to increase.  :-) (and that may explain the edit-lock error I
encountered earlier?)

KQ


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Slashdotted!!!

body:
We have been Slashdotted:
http://slashdot.org/articles/01/07/26/0312258.shtml
This is going to be Wikipedia's biggest day so far.  Brace yourselves, and
Be Bold In Updating Pages.

Larry


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Fw: Yahoo! Listing

body:
More great news...

----- Original Message -----
From: <bizex35 at yahoo-inc.com>
To: "Larry Sanger" <lsanger at nupedia.com>
Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2001 10:30 PM
Subject: Yahoo! Listing

> Hi,
>
> The URL you suggested
>
>   <url:http://www.wikipedia.com/>
>
> has been added to Yahoo!. It will appear after our next update, probably
> within the next 2-4 days. You can find your site at that time by looking
> through the "What's New"  listings (http://www.yahoo.com/new/)
> or by searching on its title or URL.
>
> It has come to our attention that various organizations have been sending
> unsolicited messages to new sites that appear in our listings. We're sorry
> if you're inconvenienced by messages of this kind; Yahoo! does not condone
> these messages in any way, nor do we divulge to anyone contact information
> for the sites we list.
>
> Thank you for taking the time to suggest your site. We rely on our users
> to make Yahoo! complete and comprehensive. In order to keep Yahoo!
> accurate, please also let us know of any future changes that might affect
> your listing.
>
> If you haven't already done so, and you'd like to return the favor
> and put Yahoo! on your own site, please see
> http://www.yahoo.com/docs/yahootogo/ for detailed instructions.
>
> Thanks again,
>
> The Yahoo! Team
>
> ---------------
> For more information about Yahoo!'s site suggestion process, please
> read the help documents located at http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/url/
>
>
> Message from bizex35:
> I'll definitely look into creating an Open Content category, thanks for
the advise!


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Wikipedia on Yahoo!

body:
Finally, Wikipedia is on Yahoo!

http://dir.yahoo.com/Reference/Encyclopedia/

--Larry


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Request for opinions

body:
To me, the Tony Blair article (http://www.wikipedia.com/wiki.cgi?Tony_Blair)
is horribly biased, but I can't trust my instincts since I'm a moderate
supporter of some of his policies.

Can someone from outside the UK offer an opinion on its NeutralPointOfView.

Cheers
--
Gareth Owen


from_name: creaktop

subject: [Wikipedia-l] IRC channel

body:
Hey there

first off: great work with wikipedia. I am honestly awed at how much content
has evolved in only half a year.

Is there any chance of getting a Wikipedia IRC channel up, or is there
already one that I don't know about?
I think it would be really interesting to see what kind of collaboration
would come out of  it.

BTW. it is at the moment impossible for me to WikiOff at all, anyone else
having problems at this time?

Also i'd like to know how often the RecentUpdates page gets updated

bye,

--
creaktop
creaktop at gmx.net

War is Peace
Freedom is Slavery
Ignorance is Strength
----------------


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Request for opinions

in_reply_to: <r5ik80rq5cc.fsf@orr.maths.keele.ac.uk>; from wiki@gwowen.freeserve.co.uk on Sun, Jul 29, 2001 at 01:37:07PM +0100

body:
It seems that the controversial bits have been moved to /Talk, and I think that's
appropriate.  I know virtually nothing of Tony Blair, but I would agree that a
sentence reading "...may have fooled some of the population..." takes a stand that
isn't appropriate for Wikipedia.

A rewritten version might read "Critics claim that Blair's rebranding strategy was
superficial, and that his fundamental politics actually remain the same" or some
such.

Gareth Owen wrote:

> To me, the Tony Blair article (http://www.wikipedia.com/wiki.cgi?Tony_Blair)
> is horribly biased, but I can't trust my instincts since I'm a moderate
> supporter of some of his policies.
>
> Can someone from outside the UK offer an opinion on its NeutralPointOfView.
>
> Cheers
> --
> Gareth Owen
> [Wikipedia-l]
> To manage your subscription to this list, please go here:
> http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l

--
*************************************************
*            http://www.nupedia.com/            *
*      The Ever Expanding Free Encyclopedia     *
*************************************************


subject: [Wikipedia-l] IRC channel

in_reply_to: <01072914555800.08533@localhost.localdomain>; from creaktop@gmx.net on Sun, Jul 29, 2001 at 02:55:58PM +0200

body:
RecentChanges is updated automatically and constantly whenever a change is made.

creaktop wrote:

> Hey there
>
> first off: great work with wikipedia. I am honestly awed at how much content
> has evolved in only half a year.
>
> Is there any chance of getting a Wikipedia IRC channel up, or is there
> already one that I don't know about?
> I think it would be really interesting to see what kind of collaboration
> would come out of  it.
>
> BTW. it is at the moment impossible for me to WikiOff at all, anyone else
> having problems at this time?
>
> Also i'd like to know how often the RecentUpdates page gets updated
>
> bye,
>
> --
> creaktop
> creaktop at gmx.net
>
> War is Peace
> Freedom is Slavery
> Ignorance is Strength
> ----------------
> [Wikipedia-l]
> To manage your subscription to this list, please go here:
> http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l

--
*************************************************
*            http://www.nupedia.com/            *
*      The Ever Expanding Free Encyclopedia     *
*************************************************


from_name: Patrick Spinler

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Wikipedia down right now ?

body:
My apologies if this is redundant, I don't follow this mailing list.

As of the moment of my typing, addresses of the form:

  http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foo

give a 404 error.  Since every link in ths system is of this form, that
means things are broken. :-(

However, address of the form

  http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki.cgi?Foo

work.

Has there been a recent httpd rules change ?

Thanks,
-- Pat

--
      This message does not represent the policies or positions
	     of the Mayo Foundation or its subsidiaries.
  Patrick Spinler			email:	Spinler.Patrick at Mayo.EDU
  Mayo Foundation			phone:	507/284-9485


in_reply_to: <3B670ADB.13D5E2C0@mayo.edu>; from spinler.patrick@mayo.edu on Tue, Jul 31, 2001 at 02:45:31PM -0500

body:
http://www.wikipedia.com/wiki/Perfect_number
seems to work fine for me.

http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki.cgi?Perfect_number
also seems to work fine for me.

So for pages that already exist, the rewriting seems to be fine.

Your particular example is interesting, because there is not literally a page
called "Foo".  For this, I get different results for the two, and I don't know
off the top of my head why that should be.  But you're write, it is something
anomolous with the mod_rewrite rules.

Patrick Spinler wrote:

>
> My apologies if this is redundant, I don't follow this mailing list.
>
> As of the moment of my typing, addresses of the form:
>
>   http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foo
>
> give a 404 error.  Since every link in ths system is of this form, that
> means things are broken. :-(
>
> However, address of the form
>
>   http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki.cgi?Foo
>
> work.
>
> Has there been a recent httpd rules change ?
>
> Thanks,
> -- Pat
>
> --
>       This message does not represent the policies or positions
> 	     of the Mayo Foundation or its subsidiaries.
>   Patrick Spinler			email:	Spinler.Patrick at Mayo.EDU
>   Mayo Foundation			phone:	507/284-9485
> [Wikipedia-l]
> To manage your subscription to this list, please go here:
> http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l

--
*************************************************
*            http://www.nupedia.com/            *
*      The Ever Expanding Free Encyclopedia     *
*************************************************


body:
This works:
http://www.wikipedia.com/wiki/Foo

I don't know why .org would not work, but then I'm not sure why anyone
would be visiting wikipedia.org anyway.

Tim

On Tue, 31 Jul 2001, Patrick Spinler wrote:

>
> My apologies if this is redundant, I don't follow this mailing list.
>
> As of the moment of my typing, addresses of the form:
>
>   http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foo
>
> give a 404 error.  Since every link in ths system is of this form, that
> means things are broken. :-(
>
> However, address of the form
>
>   http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki.cgi?Foo


body:
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Url: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/attachments/20010801/6bf796a0/attachment.diff


in_reply_to: <200108011710.KAA02028@ross.bomis.com>; from koyaanisqatsi@nupedia.com on Wed, Aug 01, 2001 at 10:10:58AM -0700

body:
Fixed, thanks!  I'm going to look into this today.  I thought we had a cron
job running to test for the edit lock and get rid of it if it was on too long.

Apparently not, though.

koyaanisqatsi at nupedia.com wrote:

> I'm getting editing locks on everything right now too.  I'd say that
> wikipedia is, for the moment, down.
>
> 0

--
*************************************************
*            http://www.nupedia.com/            *
*      The Ever Expanding Free Encyclopedia     *
*************************************************


from_name: Clifford A. Adams

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Edit Lock problems

in_reply_to:
<200108011710.KAA02028@ross.bomis.com> from "koyaanisqatsi@nupedia.com"
 at "Aug 1, 2001 10:10:58 am"

body:
> I'm getting editing locks on everything right now too.

Just a quick reminder: *anyone* can clear the editing lock by
visiting this URL:

http://www.wikipedia.com/wiki.cgi?action=unlock

If the lock is stuck, it will take about 1 minute and then
return a message about a "forced" unlock.

Eventually I will probably make the locks self-clearing, or
possibly check the time of the lock and remove ones that
are too old.

        --Cliff


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Edit Lock problems and a question

body:
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Url: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/attachments/20010801/eeb0c26e/attachment.diff


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Edit Lock problems

in_reply_to: <200108011800.f71I0meV041998@frontiernet.net>; from caadams@frontiernet.net on Wed, Aug 01, 2001 at 02:00:48PM -0400

body:
Perhaps we should put a link to that unlock command on the edit lock page.
We can say "Hey, please wait about a minute and try resubmitting, but if that
doesn't work, click on the link below to clear the edit lock, which will take
about a minute."

Does that make some sense as a short-term measure?

Clifford A. Adams wrote:

> > I'm getting editing locks on everything right now too.
>
> Just a quick reminder: *anyone* can clear the editing lock by
> visiting this URL:
>
> http://www.wikipedia.com/wiki.cgi?action=unlock
>
> If the lock is stuck, it will take about 1 minute and then
> return a message about a "forced" unlock.
>
> Eventually I will probably make the locks self-clearing, or
> possibly check the time of the lock and remove ones that
> are too old.
>
>         --Cliff
> [Wikipedia-l]
> To manage your subscription to this list, please go here:
> http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l

--
*************************************************
*            http://www.nupedia.com/            *
*      The Ever Expanding Free Encyclopedia     *
*************************************************


from_name: Andre Engels

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Searching

body:
Could the search option be changed so that it gives the pages linking to
a certain page, rather than the pages containing a certain phrase? As things
are now, a page with "... is an actor who always wears panama hats" (or
even "The panamarican highway" will show up in a search for Panama, but
"... the [[Panama|Panamese]] prime minister..." will not. I think such a
search could also be made faster than the current one.

--
Andre Engels, engels at win.tue.nl
Telephone: +31(0)6-11181398 (GSM)
http://www.win.tue.nl/~engels/index_en.html
PGP Public key: see http://www.win.tue.nl/~engels/pgp.asc

If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise,
we don't believe in it at all			-- Noam Chomsky


in_reply_to: <200108012101.OAA23409@ross.bomis.com>; from koyaanisqatsi@nupedia.com on Wed, Aug 01, 2001 at 02:01:08PM -0700

body:
On Wed, Aug 01, 2001 at 02:01:08PM -0700, koyaanisqatsi at nupedia.com wrote:
>
> A question:  I mentioned in the feature requests that a search for
> "John MacDonald" will not turn up "John A. MacDonald" or "John D
> MacDonald".  So I tried to search for _ , with the purpose of changing
> them back to spaces so that those terms will turn up in searches.  But
> that search returned 6055 pages, which is a problem in itself, but the
> one :-) that I checked did not contain an underscore at all.  Is there
> some way to perform this search accurately?0

Since you can use regulare expressions you might try looking for

  John.*MacDonald

The problem with the '_' is that Gareth also searches the titles of the
articles in the form where the spaces are replaced with underscores. So the
result of the search contains also all the articles with a space in the
title. Perhaps the search should be limited to the body of the articles? I
think it would be nice anyway to have a separate search for bodies and
titles.

Kind regards,

-- Jan Hidders


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Searching

body:
On Thu, Aug 02, 2001 at 10:27:20AM +0200, Andre Engels wrote:
> Could the search option be changed so that it gives the pages linking to
> a certain page, rather than the pages containing a certain phrase? As things
> are now, a page with "... is an actor who always wears panama hats" (or
> even "The panamarican highway" will show up in a search for Panama, but
> "... the [[Panama|Panamese]] prime minister..." will not. I think such a
> search could also be made faster than the current one.

Hallo Andre,

I usually do that by searching for "\[\[[pP]anama". You probably know why
and how this works.

Kind regards,

-- Jan Hidders

PS.   We hebben elkaar al eens in de Mensa ontmoet, geloof ik. :-)


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Searching

body:
Jan Hidders wrote:

> PS.   We hebben elkaar al eens in de Mensa ontmoet, geloof ik. :-)

Dat klinkt behoorlijk waarschijnlijk.

--
Andre Engels, engels at win.tue.nl
Telephone: +31(0)6-11181398 (GSM)
http://www.win.tue.nl/~engels/index_en.html
PGP Public key: see http://www.win.tue.nl/~engels/pgp.asc

If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise,
we don't believe in it at all			-- Noam Chomsky


from_name: Jimmy Wales

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Searching

body:
Jan Hidders wrote:
> Hallo Andre,
>
> I usually do that by searching for "\[\[[pP]anama". You probably know why
> and how this works.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> -- Jan Hidders

Jan's solution is good for technically savvy people, but for normal people, I
do think that the search results could be vastly improved.

--
*************************************************
*            http://www.nupedia.com/            *
*      The Ever Expanding Free Encyclopedia     *
*************************************************


subject: [Wikipedia-l] time / NTP

body:
I notice that Wikipedia always seems to be about 5 minutes ahead of my
time, which I keep set via NTP.  Any thought of running NTP on the server?

loh


from_name: Axel Boldt

subject: [Wikipedia-l] How to make searches faster and more relevant

body:
I think users most of the time want to search on article titles only.
That should be the default behavior of the little search boxes on
every page (maybe changeable on user preferences page?).

Then there should be an advanced search page where you can search on
article body, with regular expression and all the fixings. Authors
will use this.

If you do a regular article title search, the page with returned
results should say: "You can also do a [[full text search]] of all
articles."

Alternatively, search could remain full text as it is now, but return
the pages with the search term in their title above, and separated
from, the ones with the search term in their body.

Cheers,
  Axel


body:
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Url: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/attachments/20010803/00b8b7f4/attachment.diff


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Edit Lock problems

body:
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Url: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/attachments/20010803/5dd44947/attachment.diff


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Suggestioins for improved search

body:
Hello,

I think most users mainly want to search on article titles, not on
full text. Maybe that should be the default behavior of the search box
(changeable in preferences?).

Then there should be an "Advanced
search" page where you can do full text search with regular expressions
and all the fixings. This would be used by authors, but users could
also see a link to this page on their list of returned search results.

I think search results would become more relevant and searching would
become quicker.

Alternatively, one could modify the presentation of search results so
that those articles whose title matches the search string are listed
first, followed by the article body matches.

Also, I don't think it helps to have subpages listed as indented.
Indentation suggests one of two things: the indented entries are not
as important as the others, or they belong together into some group,
neither of which applies to the search results. I think it would be
easier to scan the search results if all results would be indented
except for the first one of every letter, like this:

Axiom
  Arian nation
  Austria
Denmark
Fishing
  Farming
  Finch
Zoloft

Cheers,
  Axel


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Edit Lock problems

in_reply_to: Jimmy Wales's message of "Wed, 1 Aug 2001 14:44:36 -0500"

body:
Jimmy Wales <jwales at bomis.com> writes:

> Perhaps we should put a link to that unlock command on the edit lock page.
> We can say "Hey, please wait about a minute and try resubmitting, but if
> that doesn't work, click on the link below to clear the edit lock, which
> will take about a minute."

The error message is getting served as text/plain, so the "Clicking Here" link
doesn't work (you can copy/paste the URL though).

--
Gareth Owen


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Edit Lock problems

in_reply_to: <r5iwv4kcei3.fsf@orr.maths.keele.ac.uk>; from wiki@gwowen.freeserve.co.uk on Sat, Aug 04, 2001 at 11:21:08AM +0100

body:
Yeah, good point.  I have to think about how to fix this.

Gareth Owen wrote:

> Jimmy Wales <jwales at bomis.com> writes:
>
> > Perhaps we should put a link to that unlock command on the edit lock page.
> > We can say "Hey, please wait about a minute and try resubmitting, but if
> > that doesn't work, click on the link below to clear the edit lock, which
> > will take about a minute."
>
> The error message is getting served as text/plain, so the "Clicking Here" link
> doesn't work (you can copy/paste the URL though).
>
> --
> Gareth Owen
> [Wikipedia-l]
> To manage your subscription to this list, please go here:
> http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l

--
*************************************************
*            http://www.nupedia.com/            *
*      The Ever Expanding Free Encyclopedia     *
*************************************************


from_name: kpjas at tau.ceti.pl

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Wikipedia teamwork

body:
Hello all,

Wikipedia is naturally collaborative. Probably there are very few other software projects that serve collaboration better. However I think we should think about and discuss implementation of teamwork.

Some Wikpedia entries easily gather around themselves several people that in a relatively short time and without much debate produce quite acceptable Wikipedia

articles. But it is always so smooth.

My proposition is to start a new page with a link from the Homepage that would

organize teams for work on some subjects.

I don\'t mean just one article, rather more broad subjects like existentialism,

art nouveau style, or cytology. These issues require some more thought on design and some planning and some cross-sectional discussion.

Some subjects need such collaboration like heart - I might know something about human heart but

vertebrates have differently built hearts. I know that but not the details. So zoologists might help a lot.

Sometimes we need a collaboration across national Wikipedias. Usually national Wikipedias take from the English one but Wikipedians from, for instance, Catalonia can help with entries like

[[Antonio Gaudi]].

regards,

Kpjas


from_name: Tim Chambers

subject: [Wikipedia-l] why not team up with Wikipedia?

body:
To Whom It May Concern:

First I want to say that I've been a fan of Google since your early days. I
originally chose google.com as my search engine because the results were
better and also because I wanted to support a Web site that used Linux. I
continue to use google.com because -- more than any other search engine -- I
simply believe that you have a clue! (In the
http://www.wikipedia.com/wiki/Cluetrain_Manifesto sense of the word. :-)

That URL brings me to the purpose that I'm writing to you. I've watched
google.com evolve over time and am enthused about Google's support for the
http://www.wikipedia.com/wiki/Open_Directory_Project, featured prominently
on your home page. I'm wondering if Google is aware of another ambitious
project: the http://www.wikipedia.com/wiki/Wikipedia. You can visit the Web
page for details, but in a sentence, it is "a collaborative project to
produce a complete encyclopedia from scratch" (http://www.wikipedia.com/).
It's important to note that Wikipedia is also an open source encyclopedia
project. That is, the content is released under the GNU Free Documentation
License.

Wikipedia tracks its relationship to the Google spider and search engine
(see http://www.wikipedia.com/wiki/What_Google_Likes), but I'm writing to
ask if you'd consider something more. Could there be some relationship
similar to what you have to dmoz.org? Could Wikipedia be featured in search
results in a distinctive way?

I, and other members of the Wikipedia discussion list, patiently and
hopefully await your reply.

Respectfully,

Tim Chambers ><>
http://www.wikipedia.com/wiki/Tbc


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: why not team up with Wikipedia?

body:
Aack. I meant to introduce myself to this list BEFORE sending my suggestion
to Google. My apologies. Hope I wasn't out of line sending the message.

Cheers,

Tim Chambers ><>
http://www.wikipedia.com/wiki/Tbc


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Wikipedia teamwork

body:
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Url: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/attachments/20010808/ce778cfc/attachment.diff


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Wikipedia teamwork

in_reply_to: kpjas@tau.ceti.pl's message of "Tue,  7 Aug 2001 13:01:04 +0200 (CEST)"

body:
kpjas at tau.ceti.pl writes:

> Hello all,

Wikipedia is naturally collaborative.

I think you've hit the nail on the head here.  Groups seem to organise
themselves '''naturally''', and really don't need formal structures, or at
least not those that they can't figure out for themselves.  If you feel that
you can and want to organise a "Tiger Team" for some topic or organise
collabaration between the various international wikis, fantastic, go ahead,
you certainly don't need offical blessing.

I for one can prefer the freewheeling edit-what-I-like-when-I-like wikipedia
as it is.  As long as we respect each other opinions, and work toward
NeutralPointOfView, we don't need any more formal layers of bureaucracy beyond
the occasional stern telling off by Larry :)

--
Gareth Owen


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Wikipedia teamwork

in_reply_to: <r5i7kweza5o.fsf@orr.maths.keele.ac.uk>; from wiki@gwowen.freeserve.co.uk on Wed, Aug 08, 2001 at 07:20:03PM +0100

body:
On 08-08-2001, Gareth Owen wrote thusly :
> Wikipedia is naturally collaborative.
Can it be more collaborative ?
> I think you've hit the nail on the head here.  Groups seem to organise
> themselves '''naturally''', and really don't need formal structures, or at
> least not those that they can't figure out for themselves.  If you feel that
> you can and want to organise a "Tiger Team" for some topic or organise
> collabaration between the various international wikis, fantastic, go ahead,
> you certainly don't need offical blessing.
> I for one can prefer the freewheeling edit-what-I-like-when-I-like wikipedia
> as it is.  As long as we respect each other opinions, and work toward
> NeutralPointOfView, we don't need any more formal layers of bureaucracy beyond
> the occasional stern telling off by Larry :)
Are we missing the guarding angel ? ;-)

That's another point. Maybe I am a little paranoid but I feel that
while wikipedia is doing so great I'm anxious what will it be in the future.
How can we be sure that they won't shut down the server or make it payable.
This is a commercial company after all, not the FSF.

The freewheeling edit-what-I-like-when-I-like attitude is only illusory
anarchic kind of freedom because LS comes in and ...

Best regards,
kpj.
--
Krzysztof P. Jasiutowicz, M.D | ?ycie jest snem. Pedro Calderon
Czestochowa, Poland ...       |
Wi?cej cytat?w : http://www.cytatowo.prv.pl


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Wikipedia teamwork

in_reply_to: <200108081834.LAA22158@ross.bomis.com>; from koyaanisqatsi@nupedia.com on Wed, Aug 08, 2001 at 11:34:57AM -0700

body:
On 08-08-2001, koyaanisqatsi at nupedia.com wrote thusly :
> >My proposition is to start a new page with a link from the Homepage
> >that would organize teams for work on some subjects.
 I don\'t mean
> >just one article, rather more broad subjects like existentialism,
> >art nouveau style, or cytology. These issues require some more thought on
> >design and some planning and some cross-sectional discussion.

> Interesting suggestion. I suppose eventually it might seem necessary,
> but I thought the appeal of wikipedia was that it was self-governing.
> The suggestion seems a bit like what Nupedia does already.  Maybe I
> misunderstand you.
Nupedia is a separate project. A distinct group of entries require
knowledge from different fields. I was just thinking how it can be tackled.

> >Sometimes we need a collaboration across national Wikipedias. Usually
> >national Wikipedias take from the English one but Wikipedians from,
> >for instance, Catalonia can help with entries like
> A good suggestion, I think, at least until the other wikipedias become
> self-sufficient.  Many of the other wikipedia don't have much in the
> way of entries.  How would it be implemented, though?  I'm just leery
> of suggestions to impose structure on wikipedia.
To propagate appeals for collaboration in special kinds of pages in
national wikipedias and in 'Recent Changes' pages on all wikipedias
we all read 'Recent Changes' by habit, don't we ?

Regards,
kpj.
--
Krzysztof P. Jasiutowicz, M.D | Co to jest wierno?? kobiety ? Jest to obawa
Czestochowa, Poland ...       | przed utrat? zdobytej pozycji. Fiodor
Wi?cej cytat?w : http://www.cytaty.phg.pl


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Copyright question

body:
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Url: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/attachments/20010810/6084c0db/attachment.diff


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Copyright question

body:
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Url: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/attachments/20010810/7c38f157/attachment.diff


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Copyright question

body:
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Url: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/attachments/20010810/9f40a228/attachment.diff


from_name: Robert Bihlmeyer

subject: [Wikipedia-l] slashdot effect

body:
I don't think wikipedia does suffer from slashdotting still, does it?
In other words, any load we see now will not magically get better when
/.ers forget about us.

I've already changed the message on RecentChanges to something which
should be nearer to the truth. The red alert on the "Editing" pages
should be changed (or deleted), too, but I can't do that.

Unless I'm mistaken of course ...
--
Robbe
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.ng
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 232 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/attachments/20010810/c63c069f/attachment.pgp


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Copyright question

in_reply_to: <r5i66bvu3s0.fsf@orr.maths.keele.ac.uk>; from wiki@gwowen.freeserve.co.uk on Fri, Aug 10, 2001 at 08:13:35PM +0100

body:
Gareth Owen wrote:
> Thanks a lot.  He died in 1925, so if I understand
> http://www.loc.gov/copyright/circs/circ1.html#hlc correctly, the very latest
> it would be in copyright is last year, so they're fair game.  Correct?

It seems hard to say, based on my reading of this thing.

It seems that "Public Law 105-298, enacted on October 27, 1998, further extended the
renewal term of copyrights still subsisting on that date by an additional 20 years,
providing for a renewal term of 67 years and a total term of protection of 95 years."

So if it was published in 1908, then it seems that if the renewals were done timely,
there could be copyright protection until 2003.

Or would that be... 95 years past his *death*?

I dunno.  You should ask the Project Gutenberg people -- they work on this copyright
stuff all the time.

http://promo.net/pg/subs.html
and subscribe to 'gutvol-d'.  There are some good people on there (I used to
subscribe) who seem to know all about this stuff.

--
*************************************************
*            http://www.nupedia.com/            *
*      The Ever Expanding Free Encyclopedia     *
*************************************************


from_name: Gareth Owen

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Copyright question

body:
Can anyone ascertain the copyright status on these biographies
http://www.maths.tcd.ie/pub/HistMath/People/RBallHist.html ?

They're noted as being based on A Short Account of the History of Mathematics
by W. W. Rouse Ball (4th Edition, 1908)
--
Gareth Owen


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Copyright question

in_reply_to: koyaanisqatsi@nupedia.com's message of "Fri, 10 Aug 2001 12:11:13 -0700"

body:
koyaanisqatsi at nupedia.com writes:

> Walter William Rouse Ball :
> http://www-groups.dcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/~history/Mathematicians/Ball.html0

Thanks a lot.  He died in 1925, so if I understand
http://www.loc.gov/copyright/circs/circ1.html#hlc correctly, the very latest
it would be in copyright is last year, so they're fair game.  Correct?

--
Gareth Owen


from_name: sanger1 at nupedia.com

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Copyright question

body:
Speaking of copyright, this is an interesting little article:

http://www.wikipedia.com/wiki/Wikipedia_Copyright

linked to from

http://www.wikipedia.com/wiki/Wikipedia_bugs

--Larry, who is back, but feeling rather ill and jet-lagged


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Wikipedia teamwork

body:
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Url: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/attachments/20010812/22dce7ff/attachment.diff


from_name: lcrocker at nupedia.com

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Copyright question

body:
>I think this is probably a question for LDC.  :-)

Actually, I think you need a real lawyer for this one.  Yes, the
copyright should have expired under the original act, but the Sonny
Bono extension or DMCA may have extended it.  If the book is
published by a company that still exists, it is they who will enforce
the copyright, if any, so look for the publisher.  If you do assume
that the work is out of copyright and use it, all that is likely to
happen is that the present rights owner may ask that we remove it,
and we will have to do so (assuming the copyright is in fact valid).
Last month I would have added "it's not like anyone ever presses
criminal charges for copyright violation...", but that was before
Sklyarov.


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Wikipedia teamwork

in_reply_to: <20010809164845.B1711@apex.mount.net>; from Krzysztof P. Jasiutowicz on Thu, Aug 09, 2001 at 04:48:45PM +0200

body:
On Thu, Aug 09, 2001 at 04:48:45PM +0200, Krzysztof P. Jasiutowicz wrote:
>
> That's another point. Maybe I am a little paranoid but I feel that while
> wikipedia is doing so great I'm anxious what will it be in the future. How
> can we be sure that they won't shut down the server or make it payable.
> This is a commercial company after all, not the FSF.

Because the GFDL allows you to download everything and start your own
server. With some Perl magic you could request all edit-pages and dowload
the pre-formatted text, you could even use the same Wiki software, and I'm
sure we can trust Bomis enough to warn us in advance.

> The freewheeling edit-what-I-like-when-I-like attitude is only illusory
> anarchic kind of freedom because LS comes in and ...

The success of Wikipedia is due to the cloud of enthusiasts and volunteers
that hangs around it. Larry has worked very hard to create that cloud, and
I'm sure he knows that if he would "come in and ..." the cloud might dissapear
or move to an alternative server.

However, Larry is doing an excellent job and I see no sign that this is
going to change. So setting up an alternative server would not only be a
bit silly, but also higly unthankful, considering the wonderful opportunity
they have given us.

Kind regards,

-- Jan Hidders


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Wikipedia teamwork

body:
Jan Hidders <hidders at win.tue.nl> writes:

> Because the GFDL allows you to download everything and start your own
> server.

Well the GFDL also wants transparent copy to be easily available. I
don't consider spidering wikipedia to be an option open to the "man
from the street".

So someone at wikipedia.com should /really/ implement periodic snapshots
of the wiki database. Technicalities can't be a problem, just add
something like

  18 04 * * * tar czf /webspace/wikipedia-`date +%Y%m%d`.tar.gz /wikidir
  16 04 * * * find /webspace -maxdepth 1 -name wikipedia-\* -mtime +7 | xargs rm

(2 lines) to an appropriate crontab. Pretty please?

> With some Perl magic you could request all edit-pages and dowload
> the pre-formatted text, [...]

Sure, and perhaps I'll do that some day. But it puts much more
workload on the server than providing a snapshot, so I'd rather avoid
it. And if more people exercise their rights in this manner, it will
only get worse. A snapshot is much lighter on bandwidth and CPU, can
be mirrored via standard software.

> you could even use the same Wiki software, and I'm
> sure we can trust Bomis enough to warn us in advance.

For me its not so much a question about trusting Bomis than of
convenience and "taking your own license seriously".

> However, Larry is doing an excellent job and I see no sign that this is
> going to change. So setting up an alternative server would not only be a
> bit silly, but also higly unthankful, considering the wonderful opportunity
> they have given us.

Setting up a read-only mirror would certainly be useful, and not in
the least unthankful in my mind. Free licenses are about the *freedom*
to route around the original originators/maintainers/creators of a
piece of work. Witness that in the free software scene, such forks are
quite rare. Maintaining something is work, and nobody takes that
likely on themselves (and if they do, they usually give up pretty
quickly).

--
Robbe
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.ng
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 232 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/attachments/20010814/3cc19a2a/attachment.pgp


subject: [Wikipedia-l] ISBN links

body:
The automatic links to booksellers provided with ISBN numbers are a
good feature overall.

I'd rather have them not point at Amazon, though, since they are
obviously against freedom (keyword: 1-click patent), and didn't
respect my privacy (details on request). I would be more comfortable
with links to other outfits (Barns & Noble, whatever).

Obviously you may differ on this issue, and if the links to Amazon are
kept, I suggest that they use the Amazon Honor System. With this Bomis
would receive payment for every traffic that reaches Amazon through
one of those links (just like with banner ads). AFAIK, the only thing
that must be changed is the base URL used in those links (e.g. putting
/wikipedia/ somewhere in there), and of course registering with
Amazon. If you implement this, please put up some page stating where
the money goes. I'd expect Bomis to earmark the money for the hosting
& maintaining costs of wikipedia, but it's always good to have an
explicit statement.

Perhaps other booksellers offer similar deals, or they could be worked
out individually.

What do others think?

--
Robbe
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.ng
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 232 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/attachments/20010814/25179666/attachment.pgp


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Copyright question

in_reply_to: Jimmy Wales's message of "Fri, 10 Aug 2001 15:55:06 -0500"

body:
Jimmy Wales <jwales at bomis.com> writes:

> Gareth Owen wrote:
> > Thanks a lot.  He died in 1925, so if I understand
> > http://www.loc.gov/copyright/circs/circ1.html#hlc correctly, the very latest
> > it would be in copyright is last year, so they're fair game.  Correct?
>
> It seems hard to say, based on my reading of this thing.
>
> It seems that "Public Law 105-298, enacted on October 27, 1998, further
> extended the renewal term of copyrights still subsisting on that date by an
> additional 20 years, providing for a renewal term of 67 years and a total
> term of protection of 95 years."
>
> So if it was published in 1908, then it seems that if the renewals were done
> timely, there could be copyright protection until 2003.

If 1908 is the start date, 75 years of copyright lapsed in 1983 and Public Law
105-298 is irrelevant.  If 1925 (authors death) is the start PL105-298 does
apply, and we can't use it till 2020.

Of course, Rouse-Ball was a Briton, saw it possible that the distinctions
between US and International copyright law are relevant.

--
Gareth Owen


subject: [Wikipedia-l] ISBN links

body:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: RIPEMD160

Robert Bihlmeyer <robbe at orcus.priv.at> wrote:

>This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
>It has been signed conforming to RFC2015.
>You'll need PGP or GPG to check the signature.

Cute, but is it really necessary to sign messages for this little
list? Besides, my mail client (Microflaccid Outlook Express)
doesn't like the RFC2015 format, so I have to read all your
messages raw. To add insult to injury, I can't even verify your
signature with my plain gpg tool because it's not the canonical
ascii-armored format.

I'm posting this publicly so others can see they're not the only
one. (Or maybe I am, in which case, I will cower and stop
complaining. :-)

>...if the links to Amazon are kept, I suggest that they use the
>Amazon Honor System...I'd expect Bomis to earmark the money for
>the hosting & maintaining costs of wikipedia...

Excellent idea. I agree completely.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (MingW32) - WinPT 0.3.2
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
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=+qE5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
[Just going to silly extremes to prove a point. The e-mail is message is
signed with my key for tbchambers at yahoo.com. My public key is on the
http://wwwkeys.us.pgp.net/ server.]


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Making Wikipedia more Google friendly

body:
When you do a search on Wikipedia or click on a link, the returned
URL looks like http://www.wikipedia.com/wiki.cgi?Poker
If somebody likes this page and links to it, then in principle that
should increase our standing with Google. But Google doesn't like CGI
links. It would be better if the wiki script always returned links of
the form http://www.wikipedia.com/wiki/Poker (actually, I would have
prefered http://www.wikipedia.com/Poker, but that's too late now).

Is the source code of our wiki perl script available somewhere?

Axel


from_name: Krzysztof P. Jasiutowicz

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Wikipedia teamwork

in_reply_to: <8766brcbwg.fsf@orcus.priv.at>; from robbe@orcus.priv.at on Tue, Aug 14, 2001 at 09:56:47AM +0200

body:
On 14-08-2001, Robert Bihlmeyer wrote thusly :
> Jan Hidders <hidders at win.tue.nl> writes:
> > Because the GFDL allows you to download everything and start your own
> > server.
> Well the GFDL also wants transparent copy to be easily available. I
> don't consider spidering wikipedia to be an option open to the "man
> from the street".
> So someone at wikipedia.com should /really/ implement periodic snapshots
> of the wiki database. Technicalities can't be a problem, just add
> something like
>   18 04 * * * tar czf /webspace/wikipedia-`date +%Y%m%d`.tar.gz /wikidir
>   16 04 * * * find /webspace -maxdepth 1 -name wikipedia-\* -mtime +7 | xargs rm
> (2 lines) to an appropriate crontab. Pretty please?
> > With some Perl magic you could request all edit-pages and dowload
> > the pre-formatted text, [...]
> Sure, and perhaps I'll do that some day. But it puts much more
> workload on the server than providing a snapshot, so I'd rather avoid
> it. And if more people exercise their rights in this manner, it will
> only get worse. A snapshot is much lighter on bandwidth and CPU, can
> be mirrored via standard software.
> > you could even use the same Wiki software, and I'm
> > sure we can trust Bomis enough to warn us in advance.
> For me its not so much a question about trusting Bomis than of
> convenience and "taking your own license seriously".
A very good suggestion with a downloadable copy of Wikipedia.
It would certainly add more credibility... and freedom.
> > However, Larry is doing an excellent job and I see no sign that this is
> > going to change. So setting up an alternative server would not only be a
> > bit silly, but also higly unthankful, considering the wonderful opportunity
> > they have given us.
[snip]

Regards,
kpj.
--
Krzysztof P. Jasiutowicz, M.D | Bogowie wiedz?, ?e ?mier? jest nieszcz??ciem.
Czestochowa, Poland ...       | Inaczej ch?tnie umieraliby sami. Safona
Wi?cej cytat?w : http://www.cytaty.phg.pl


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Wikipedia teamwork

in_reply_to: <8766brcbwg.fsf@orcus.priv.at>; from Robert Bihlmeyer on Tue, Aug 14, 2001 at 09:56:47AM +0200

body:
On Tue, Aug 14, 2001 at 09:56:47AM +0200, Robert Bihlmeyer wrote:
> Jan Hidders <hidders at win.tue.nl> writes:
>
> > Because the GFDL allows you to download everything and start your own
> > server.
>
> Well the GFDL also wants transparent copy to be easily available. I
> don't consider spidering wikipedia to be an option open to the "man
> from the street".

FWIW I certainly agree with that, and there should certainly be an easy
way to download the complete Wikipedia. So you can also add my "pretty
please" :-)

-- Jan Hidders


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Wikipedia teamwork

body:
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Url: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/attachments/20010815/3baca0f6/attachment.diff


from_name: Bryce Harrington

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Wikipedia teamwork

body:
I think what people are trying to politely say is that you may be in
violation of your license...

My suggestion to get around this with a minimum of time expended would
be to set up a cron job to tarball the wiki databases once a week.

Login as www-data or nobody or root or whomever
$ crontab -e
0 5 * * 0 /usr/local/bin/tarball_wiki  # Weekly Sunday 5am tarball

#!/bin/sh
## tarball_wiki script
tar cf /tmp/wiki.tar /home/www-data/wiki_db /home/www-data/cgi-bin/wiki.pl
gzip /tmp/wiki.tar
rm -f /home/www-data/html/wiki.tar.gz
mv /home/www-data/html/wiki.tar.gz /home/www-data/html/wiki-prev.tar.gz
mv /tmp/wiki.tar /home/www-data/html/wiki.tar.gz

This will keep the current plus previous week's tarball.
Obviously, you'll have to fiddle the paths to match however your system
is organized.  You might need to add some chmod/chown commands if you do
this as a user other than the web user.

Anyway, IANAL, but I think this little script would get you off the hook
regarding the transparency issue.

Bryce

On Wed, 15 Aug 2001 sanger1 at nupedia.com wrote:
> I agree completely as well.  You all must realize, though, that the
> amount of (expensive) paid programming labor Bomis can devote to
> useful and even essential features like this is less than we would
> all like.  It would be ideal if some programmers would step up to the
> plate and actually help bring some of these proposals into being.  I
> for one would be absolutely delighted.
>
> Larry
>
> You Wrote:
> >On Tue, Aug 14, 2001 at 09:56:47AM +0200, Robert Bihlmeyer wrote:
> >> Jan Hidders <hidders at win.tue.nl> writes:
> >>
> >> > Because the GFDL allows you to download everything and start
> your own
> >> > server.
> >>
> >> Well the GFDL also wants transparent copy to be easily available. I
> >> don't consider spidering wikipedia to be an option open to the "man
> >> from the street".
> >
> >FWIW I certainly agree with that, and there should certainly be an
> easy
> >way to download the complete Wikipedia. So you can also add
> my "pretty
> >please" :-)
> >
> >-- Jan Hidders
> >
> >[Wikipedia-l]
> >To manage your subscription to this list, please go here:
> >http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> >0


from_name: Larry Sanger

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Simple but useful Wikipedia change, perhaps

body:
Hey Jason,

Have a look at what Dan Keshet says, about 2/3 the way down this page:

http://www.wikipedia.com/wiki/Larry_Sanger/An_impending_scalability_problem

It would make lots of people happy if we would copy his code to Wikipedia's
current implementation (without having to upgrade to Cliff's latest
version).  It would help with scaleability.

Larry