subject: [WikiEN-l] Navigation popups

body:
As per your message on my user talk, it works now, on Mozilla. I
removed firefox to make room for a new copy.

That's pretty cool, I really like it. :)

On 8/3/05, Phroziac <phroziac at gmail.com> wrote:
> It doesn't seem to be working for me with Mozilla 1.7.8, or Firefox
> 1.0.2 (I know its old -- I don't use it anymore...im gonna try to
> upgrade and use a source copy though, apparently its stable that
> way..). I'm on debian linux.
>
> On 8/3/05, Lupin wp <lupin.wp at gmail.com> wrote:
> > This is an advert for a new javascript tool which you may find
> > helpful. When you hover the mouse over wikilinks, a list of links pops
> > up. These link directly to pages relevant to the link, such as edit,
> > editTalk, contribs, count (a link to Kate's tool), image thumbnails
> > for image links and so on. I think it's quite nifty! There's a
> > description here:
> >
> >   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Tools#Navigation_popups
> >
> > Installation is a matter of adding a few lines to your monobook.js (or
> > standard.js - this is skin-agnostic).
> >
> > Let me know what you think! It's still in development so I'd welcome
> > suggestions for improvements.
> >
> > Lupin
> >
> > PS I don't know if it works in IE - it's been developed in firefox.
> > _______________________________________________
> > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >
>
>
> --
> signature
>

--
signature


list: wikitech-l

source: pipermail-mbox

from_name: Brion Vibber

subject: [Wikitech-l] Fwd: Problem with WikiEN-l archive

body:
David Gerard wrote:
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>
> Something seems to have gone wrong with the archive at
> <http://mail.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2005-August/
> date.html#67>.  It's as if all the messages have lost the first few
> lines.  I don't know if it's affecting the mailing list, as I only read
> via the archive.

The list archive was recently rebuilt; this seems to affect some old
messages only, which have been listed for some reason on the current
month with various bits missing.

I'm not really sure what's wrong with it; they look ok in the backend file.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 253 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20050803/f66704e0/attachment.pgp>


list: wikien-l

from_name: Delirium

subject: [WikiEN-l] I better shut up (was vfd RFC)

body:
Jack Lynch wrote:

>Actually, ed has pissed me off about as often and thoroughly as he was
>able, and I ''still'' say he did the right thing here, and has nothing
>to apologise for. VfD deserves deletion, and I seem to remember Jimbo
>considering deleting it himself about a year ago. The '''worst'''
>aspect of the wiki is its "wiki-democracy", and all its ugly
>manifestations. The majority has no claim to the truth, esp. when its
>a majority of those who happen to know about some obscure vote,
>failing to announce it to anyone other than their partisan cronies.
>
>
The problem with the proposals to do away with it is that none so far
has proposed anything better (or at least people haven't been convinced
the alternative proposals are better).  There is plenty of stuff that
goes through VfD that ought to be deleted; only a small percentage of
the stuff on VfD is contentious in any way.

If VfD is done away with and no alternative deletion process is
provided, then those types of pages will simply be speedy-deleted.  In
itself that would be fine, since the majority are obvious, but having a
VfD process helps sometimes IMO, because occasionally an admin will
mis-identify something as an obvious deletion candidate when it really
shouldn't be, and others will point out his error before the page is
actually deleted.

-Mark


from_name: neil klopfenstein

body:
On 8/3/05, David Gerard <fun at thingy.apana.org.au> wrote:
> Delirium (delirium at hackish.org) [050804 06:01]:
>
> > The problem with the proposals to do away with it is that none so far
> > has proposed anything better (or at least people haven't been convinced
> > the alternative proposals are better).  There is plenty of stuff that
> > goes through VfD that ought to be deleted; only a small percentage of
> > the stuff on VfD is contentious in any way.
>
>
> I sincerely believe the current VFD process and culture is so poisonous to
> Wikipedia that, at least for the moment, we would be better just letting
> the disks fill with band vanity, original research and poo jokes.

I tend to agree. We have all the time in the world to remove crap from
Wikipedia. I think that paying too much attention to deleting things
at this early stage is a mistake.

> > If VfD is done away with and no alternative deletion process is
> > provided, then those types of pages will simply be speedy-deleted.  In
> > itself that would be fine, since the majority are obvious, but having a
> > VfD process helps sometimes IMO, because occasionally an admin will
> > mis-identify something as an obvious deletion candidate when it really
> > shouldn't be, and others will point out his error before the page is
> > actually deleted.
>
> I strongly agree we need a deletion mechanism - no-one's who's done
> Special:Newpages patrol could possibly disagree IMO. And over 95% of what
> hits VFD needs a sudden and painful death.
>
> But VFD as it exists is sick and diseased and a powerful net negative.

The worst thing about VfD, in my opinion, is that once an article is
listed, it "can't" be merged/redirected/whatever else. It seems like
the majority of the articles on VfD are either no-brainer speedies or
no-brainer merges.

My idea for a comprehensive VfD reform: create a 'problem article' tag
which replaces {{vfd}} and {{d}}. Admins can delete these articles if
they're problematic, editors can remove the tag if they substantially
rewrite the article or redirect it. Anything that keeps the problem
article tag for a week gets deleted.

I also think that vanity pages should be redirected to [[WP:VAIN]] and
band pages, maybe, to [[WP:MUSIC]]. We could easily set up a way for
these redirects to be batch-deleted once a month.

Comments? Recommendations of which talk page to put this on? (I've
never made a policy proposal before...)

e.
[[User:Rebrane]]


from_name: JAY JG

body:
>From: fun at thingy.apana.org.au (David Gerard)
>
>I strongly agree we need a deletion mechanism - no-one's who's done
>Special:Newpages patrol could possibly disagree IMO. And over 95% of what
>hits VFD needs a sudden and painful death.
>
>But VFD as it exists is sick and diseased and a powerful net negative.

Maybe I haven't been there enough recently, but what exactly is making it so
"sick and diseased" that, even though 95% of the stuff it deletes is
garbage, it still needs to be done away with?

Jay.


list: foundation-l

from_name: SJ

subject: [Foundation-l] Legal implications of hosting wikis outside of

body:
On Thu, 4 Aug 2005, David Gerard wrote:

> What's our reader:editor ratio, 50:1? (Are there stats available per wiki?)

More like 1000:1 .

SJ


list: wikimedia-l


list: wiktionary-l

from_name: Sabine Cretella

subject:
[Wiktionary-l] languages that do not have "correct spelling"
	standards

body:
I did not talk about our (e-mail) conversation - I talked about a
discussion page on wiktionary where from one to the other day I found
the note that for definitions Sass ortography has to be used and that
without common consensus knowing that there were at least two people who
defend all possibilities of writing.
http://nds.wiktionary.org/wiki/Wiktionary:Sprache_der_Beitr%C3%A4ge
Here Sass is called "Norm" a norm is a "standard", but Sass is no
standard, but one way of more possible writings.

The discussion we had privately has nothing to do with that and I'd
never take any private discussion to public.

Sorry, I now have to care about wikimania and translations :-)

Ciao, Sabine

Heiko Evermann wrote:

>Hi Sabine, hi everyone,
>
>
>>But let's talk about minor languages. We have some difficulties on the
>>nds wiktionary - people think that the only way to write correct is
>>following the Sass ortography. Some days ago I had a longer telephone
>>conversation with one of the directors of the Institut f?r
>>niederdeutsche Sprache (institute for nds) - he explained that there are
>>at least six different acknowledged ways of writing nds and if we go to
>>details 200 to 400 ways of writing (including also dictionaries from
>>around 1920 etc.) can be defined - so accepting only one way of writing
>>is a discrimination to my opinion. They all need to be accepted - the
>>important thing is that there is a distinction from one to the other.
>>How we could achieve this - in the actual wiktionary signing all non
>>classified words just with nds. Words that can be classified receive
>>nds-ABC, nds-DEF, nds-SASS, nds-xyz. So not only the single term is to
>>be classified, but also the definition (if possible) - if it is not
>>classified there's simply no reference to a certain class.
>>
>>
>This is not a correct representation of the discussion that we had.
>
>

___________________________________
Yahoo! Mail: gratis 1GB per i messaggi e allegati da 10MB
http://mail.yahoo.it


from_name: Sam Korn

subject: [WikiEN-l] Fwd: Wikipedia e-mail -- fair use

body:
Thank you for that wording.  I might have spelt it out better had I
not been in a rush...  I'm British as well, so I know/care very little
about US law.  BTW, I agree that the templates are incorrectly worded,
and I have started a drive to cut down on the numbers of spurious fair
use claims (it's at [[User:Smoddy/Fair use assessment]].  Your point
about content/use is a very valid one, and I actually debated that at
some length on the aforementioned page.

Thank you for your support

Sam

On 8/3/05, Fastfission <fastfission at gmail.com> wrote:
> His response is spot-on as far as I can tell, but it is important to
> see what he is saying. In a charitable interpretation, he is
> responding correctly to Smoddy's argument that promotional materials
> and logos are de facto "fair use" under U.S. copyright law. This is
> not true and our blanket statement template should be modified (as
> should all of them) to explicitly justify under which conditions it
> can be asserted as "fair use" -- not every use would necessarily be
> "fair". "Fair use" does not apply in a blanket way and should be
> spoken of in such a way -- Smoddy's language was imprecise and did not
> reflect a thorough understanding of the law (probably not his fault --
> most of the "fair use" templates are VERY misleading!).
>
> A proper response would be, "We think our use of this falls under the
> 'fair use' clause because 1. the ownership of the logo is clearly
> attributed and the resolution of the file provided is low, 2. we are
> using it for an educational purpose on a non-profit encyclopedia, and
> it enhances this effort significantly, 3. no uncopyrighted alternative
> exists. We believe that a judge would agree with us that such usage is
> 'fair' were it to be litigated."
>
> Our Nationalist friend has not given us any reasons for why he would
> think the above claims would *not* qualify as fair, so it is hard to
> know why he thinks that.
>
> The templates are misleading and should be changed -- they make "fair
> use" look like a free ticket, and they are from the standpoint of what
> the *content* itself is rather than its *use* (i.e., they say things
> like "posters are considered fair use" -- completely the wrong way to
> think about it). I've been working on some proposals along these lines
> which I'll link to on here at some point.
>
> FF
>
>
> On 8/3/05, Haukur ?orgeirsson <haukurth at hi.is> wrote:
> > Well, Jimbo, if you want to stand up for fair use
> > it appears that now's your chance. :)
> >
> > There seem to be around 6000 images that link to
> > the {{logo}} template.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Haukur
> >
> >
> > > I (smoddy -- this is my second email address) sent an email to
> > > User:Crosstar about fair use on a logo at [[Nationalist Movement]] and
> > > [[Crosstar]].  I received this email back in response (my original
> > > email is at the bottom).
> > >
> > > I am forwarding the email here as I am not subscribed to the legal mailing
> > > list.
> > >
> > > Are there any suggestions as to the course to take?
> > >
> > > Sam/smoddy
> > >
> > > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> > > From: crosstar <nationalist at nationalist.org>
> > > Date: Aug 3, 2005 4:06 AM
> > > Subject: Re: Wikipedia e-mail -- fair use
> > > To: Smoddy <sam.korn at gmail.com>
> > >
> > > Dear Mr. Smoddy:
> > >
> > > Your assessment is incorrect and far from "clear."
> > >
> > > "Fair Use" is considered on a case-by-case basis and, even
> > > after expensive and protracted litigation, outcomes may vary.
> > > Suffice it to say, we cannot render legal-advice to you, which must
> > > come from your own, independent legal-counsel.  I can tell you
> > > that in approximately thirty-seven cases involving infringement
> > > of our trademarks and violation of our copyrights, however, we
> > > have won every one.
> > >
> > > The US Copyright Office advises that:
> > >
> > > "The safest course is always to get permission from the
> > > copyright owner before using copyrighted material."
> > > http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html
> > >
> > > The courts tend to lean toward protecting intellectual-property
> > > rights, as well they should, insofar such rights are protected
> > > by the United States Constitution.
> > >
> > > Anyone who wishes his own intellectual-property rights to be
> > > respected (and that should include all of us) should respect such
> > > rights of others.  Penalties for violation are severe and increased if
> > > repeated.  In the Hale case, the fine was $200,000.00, plus
> > > $450,000.00 attorney fees, alone.  Punitive damages may also
> > > be assessed, where conduct is wilfull, reckless or wanton, if, for
> > > instance, the offender persists, after having been placed on notice.
> > >
> > > In this instance, the copyright/trademark owner has not given
> > > permission for its images to be used and will vigorously defend its
> > > rights in court, if need be.
> > >
> > > The Copyright Office further explains that:
> > >
> > > "When it is impracticable to obtain permission, use of copyrighted
> > > material should be avoided...."
> > > http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html
> > >
> > > It is the choice of the copyright/trademark owner whether or not
> > > to license use of its intellectual-property and, insofar as the
> > > owner does not approve of your project and wishes to avoid any
> > > misrepresentation of itself or any implied endorsement of your
> > > project, as well as to prevent any confusion in the mind of the
> > > public, permission is denied.
> > >
> > > There are numerous other objections, but the foregoing should
> > > suffice for purposes of your question.  Thank you for your kind
> > > consideration and cooperation.
> > >
> > > Richard Barrett
> > > Attorney
> > > The Nationalist Movement
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > At 12:11 PM 8/2/2005, you wrote:
> > >
> > >>May I ask that you explain why we are not allowed to display this
> > >>image?  Under US law, it is allowed for reference materials (and other
> > >>such documents) to be shown for informational reasons about the
> > >>topic.  This is clearly true in this case.
> > >>
> > >>I am sending you an email in the hope that you will reply.
> > >>
> > >>Cheers, and best wishes
> > >>
> > >>Sam/smoddy
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Try http://en.wikipedia.org - Wikipedia - the free encyclopaedia!
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > > WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> > > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> > >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


list: wikipedia-l

from_name: Mark Williamson

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Wikibreak

body:
Wikili-ion, I believe.

Mark

On 03/08/05, Phroziac <phroziac at gmail.com> wrote:
> The wikibatteries are wikinimh, wikigel, wikili-ion, wikilipo, or wikinicad?
>
> On 8/3/05, Walter van Kalken <walter at vankalken.net> wrote:
> > After thinking it over for a couple of days (as opposed to my previous
> > overheated runouts) I have decided to go on a wikibreak. I somehow
> > evaluated it and found that with everything added my pleasure in working
> > on the wikimedia projects has diminished to zero. There are some
> > developments to the projects that I do not really like. As people might
> > have noticed in previous mails.
> >
> > I will most surely be back ..... it might be tomorrow, it might be next
> > week it might be in a couple of months. Just need to recharge the
> > wikibatteries and find the fun in participating in the projects again.
> > That fun is kinda gone with me for now.
> >
> > Walter/Waerth
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> >
>
>
> --
> signature
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>

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


from_name: Stephen Bain

subject: [WikiEN-l] Is this right?

body:
On 8/3/05, Chris L?er <chris at zandria.net> wrote:
> It's technically correct. The House of Windsor was originally called
> Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, and Saxe-Coburg-Gotha is a branch of the House of
> Wettin. If a dynasty includes rulers of different countries at the
> same time, as was the case with the Wettins, people often identify
> sub-dynasties, and so Windsor/Saxe-Coburg-Gotha is a sub-dynasty of Wettin.
>

And if anyone really cares enough to want to know that much detail,
they'll click on the wikilink to [[House of Windsor]] and read all
about it. Short is sweet, after all.

--
Stephen Bain
stephen.bain at gmail.com


body:
Brion Vibber wrote:
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>
>> Something seems to have gone wrong with the archive at
>> <http://mail.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2005-August/
>> date.html#67>.  It's as if all the messages have lost the first few
>> lines.  I don't know if it's affecting the mailing list, as I only read
>> via the archive.
>
>
> The list archive was recently rebuilt; this seems to affect some old
> messages only, which have been listed for some reason on the current
> month with various bits missing.
>
> I'm not really sure what's wrong with it; they look ok in the backend file.

Poking more I figured it out: a bug in GNU Mailman a couple years ago
failed to properly store lines beginning with "From ". When the archive
pages got rebuilt, the messages containing such lines would get cut off
and the leftover bits, missing a date header, got inserted into the
current month.

I've fixed up those old entries now so they should be complete. In order
to avoid breaking the archive numbering however I've had to insert empty
placeholder messages; they'll show up in place of the broken half-entries.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 253 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20050803/1977f81c/attachment.pgp>


body:
>spelling. Another thing is that the original author of this list is not
>available (as you said).
>

Where ever did I say this? (please send me my mail where I said "the
author of this glossary is not available for discussion - maybe I said
something like it could be difficult to contact him") The availability
of this author is on the internet itself (you can find it where you
found the list (and copied lists) of words), but I find it rather weird
to include him into a never ending discussion now (as much as I
understood from other people there are similar problems with wikipedia -
and it is a never ending discussion) for which I don't have any time at
this stage. Since he did not only donate nds-de to us I really don't
want to start criticising him as he did a lot, also for other languages.

I for myself wait first for facts from the Insitut for Niederdeutsche
Sprache (institute for nds) and I wrote that in my last (private) e-mail
(I mean that I am waiting for their answer). Further to that I will also
wait for some answers of university professors that deal with nds in
their courses. (and this might take some time) I am not going to throw
any opinions into public without having a basis as at this stage it is
not the case doing it. It just leads to impossible situations.

As I already said I don't have time now to answer - I did not take our
conversations public and I am not going to follow up any more private
discussions in public - I am goin to give the contents of the answers I
receive on nds wiktionary where only people interested in nds can read
them (or they can ask for having a copy).

The txt-file btw is utf-8 coded, so there are no broken special chars in
it - it is just like is (it will not change if I send it zipped) - if
you have problems and want an ansi coded file open the wordfiles and
save them as txt that's all.

And now I really must think about some organisation work.

Ciao, Sabine

___________________________________
Yahoo! Mail: gratis 1GB per i messaggi e allegati da 10MB
http://mail.yahoo.it


from_name: Kate

subject: [Wikitech-l] bugzilla errors

body:
the bugzilla error "undef error - can't use string as a HASH ref" when
submitting a new bug has been fixed.  sorry for the inconvenience this
caused.  (all bugs were actually submitted, desite this error being
shown.)

kate.


from_name: Lars Sanders

subject: [Wikitech-l] *.caribbean-forum.com

body:
Hi

more possible bandwith mis-use? (I'm not actively searching for these, but
I am reserching some particular subjects on search engines and for
some keywords lots of Wiki clones are comming up and some make me suspicious).

This one seems to be dynamically proxying (?) direct from the
Wikipedia servers. You can see the "Recent Changes" live:

http://anguilla.caribbean-forum.com/encyclopedia.php?title=Special:Recentchanges
http://dominica.caribbean-forum.com/encyclopedia.php?title=Special:Recentchanges

Images are coming direct from Wikipedia servers too.

Also, I see pages like this:
http://dominica.caribbean-forum.com/w/index.php?title=Saddleback_High_School&action=edit&section=2
with no GNU / Copyright information.

 - Lars -


from_name: Tim Starling

subject:
[Wikipedia-l] Re: Explicit copyright assignment to wikimedia
	foundation

body:
Jean-Baptiste Soufron wrote:
> I was answering Tim Starling who said :
>
> "I'm not convinced the Foundation should want people to assign
> copyright to it though. Isn't it a lot
> safer if we don't have ownership of any of the content?"

It was Angela who said that.

-- Tim Starling


subject: [Wikitech-l] *.caribbean-forum.com

body:
Lars Sanders wrote:
> This one seems to be dynamically proxying (?) direct from the
> Wikipedia servers. You can see the "Recent Changes" live:
>
> http://anguilla.caribbean-forum.com/encyclopedia.php?title=Special:Recentchanges
> http://dominica.caribbean-forum.com/encyclopedia.php?title=Special:Recentchanges

Got em.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 253 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20050803/b043dfaa/attachment.pgp>


from_name: Robin Shannon

subject: [Foundation-l] Re: Wikicooks

body:
On 8/3/05, Cormac Lawler <cormaggio at gmail.com> wrote:
> Is there a combination of ingredients that, when mixed, become
> poisonous? I appreciate your point, though I'm a little sceptical..
>
> Cormac

If you ate enough apple seeds, the synide but add up enough to make
you feel a bit off. But you'd have to eat A LOT.

paz y amor,
-rjs.

--
hit me: <robin.shannon.id.au>
jab me: <robin.shannon at jabber.org.au>

upgrade to ubuntu linux: <http://www.spreadubuntu.org/>


subject: [Foundation-l] Re: Wikicooks


body:
>The other 5% is making it a truly poisonous source of acrimony in the
>Wikipedia-writing community. IMO. See further up the thread.

Deleting the page seems like throwing the baby out with the bathwater to me.

Jay.


subject: [Wikitech-l] new LaTeX => MathML converter for mediawiki

body:
David Harvey wrote:
> Dear MediaWiki developers,
>
> I have written a LaTeX to MathML converter designed specifically for
> Wikipedia.
>
> More information is available at http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Blahtex.

Neat!

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 253 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20050803/7d2b5ed4/attachment.pgp>


from_name: Phroziac

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Wikibreak

body:
The wikibatteries are wikinimh, wikigel, wikili-ion, wikilipo, or wikinicad?

On 8/3/05, Walter van Kalken <walter at vankalken.net> wrote:
> After thinking it over for a couple of days (as opposed to my previous
> overheated runouts) I have decided to go on a wikibreak. I somehow
> evaluated it and found that with everything added my pleasure in working
> on the wikimedia projects has diminished to zero. There are some
> developments to the projects that I do not really like. As people might
> have noticed in previous mails.
>
> I will most surely be back ..... it might be tomorrow, it might be next
> week it might be in a couple of months. Just need to recharge the
> wikibatteries and find the fun in participating in the projects again.
> That fun is kinda gone with me for now.
>
> Walter/Waerth
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>

--
signature


from_name: Charles Matthews

body:
Ryan Delaney wrote

> But what you're saying here makes me think that once you are unblocked, it
> very well might happen again. That prospect scares me, and makes me think
> you ought to be blocked a lot longer. Your crack about "liberal
> stereotypes" is just a bitter, bigoted jab that is icing on the cake.
>
> We're trying to make an encyclopedia here. You disrupted it --
> _enormously_ -- just to make a point.

Ed manages to be a prat, without really making (many) enemies.  Which means
he 'gets away with it'.  Things would be improved by his not acting the fool
periodically.

Charles


from_name: Angela

body:
On 8/3/05, Sam Korn <sam.korn at gmail.com> wrote:
> I (smoddy -- this is my second email address) sent an email to
> User:Crosstar about fair use on a logo at [[Nationalist Movement]] and
> [[Crosstar]].  I received this email back in response (my original
> email is at the bottom).
> I am forwarding the email here as I am not subscribed to the legal mailing list.

I forwarded it to the legal mailing list. Alex has responded on that
list, and also publicly at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Copyright_problems where he
writes:

"I doubt that this symbol, also called an arrow cross, can be
copyrighted or trademarked and is therefore in the public domain. It
is basically a copy of a popular fascist symbol used in Hungary before
World War II and if anyone "owns" it this entity is defunct and could
not now assert any rights against such claims [456] [457] [458]. It is
a variation of a common symbol that is used for many purposes[459]. It
is stated that this symbol has its origins with the Magyar tribes of
circa 1000 A.D. [460] Just because someone is using a common symbol
does not mean that they can then claim copyright ownership or
trademark status of that symbol that has a well-documented prior
history. ? (c) Alex756 17:09, 3 August 2005 (UTC)"

By the way, anyone can post to that list even if not subscribed. See
<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Juriwiki> for details.

Angela.


body:
David Gerard wrote:

>I'm not sure the current operation of VFD could fairly have been predicted
>early enough to strangle it at birth. We need a deletion mechanism, but not
>this one.
>
>
It seemed to work well enough for the 8-10 months I was actively
involved in voting/discussing/closing entries there.  There were still
complaints, but mostly from "inclusionists" who disliked it simply
because it was a venue for deleting articles.

Is it significantly worse now, or just scales badly, or have the
inclusionists simply gotten louder voices?  I must confess I haven't
messed with it in 6 months or so just because I lost interest in most
meta-pages and went back to writing articles. =]

-Mark


from_name: Matt Brown

body:
On 8/3/05, Delirium <delirium at hackish.org> wrote:
> Is it significantly worse now, or just scales badly, or have the
> inclusionists simply gotten louder voices?  I must confess I haven't
> messed with it in 6 months or so just because I lost interest in most
> meta-pages and went back to writing articles. =]

It has scaled badly enough that it no longer gets a good cross-section
of Wikipedia opinion, IMO.  Most editors find it just too much work to
keep up on it.

-Matt


from_name: Jtkiefer

subject: [WikiEN-l] Pattern of blocking AOL/IP addresses.

body:
Even though as a general rule administrators try not to block AOL IP's
for the exact reason you mentioned which is the fact that a lot of
people use them, sometimes it has to be done to stem the tide of
vandalism temporarily.  You can also stop wasting your effort with AOL,
people have been trying for eons trying to get AOL to listen and as far
as I know they haven't done a single thing about it.

-Jtkiefer


from_name: Jack Lynch

body:
> Ed manages to be a prat, without really making (many) enemies.  Which means
> he 'gets away with it'.  Things would be improved by his not acting the fool
> periodically.
>
> Charles

Actually, ed has pissed me off about as often and thoroughly as he was
able, and I ''still'' say he did the right thing here, and has nothing
to apologise for. VfD deserves deletion, and I seem to remember Jimbo
considering deleting it himself about a year ago. The '''worst'''
aspect of the wiki is its "wiki-democracy", and all its ugly
manifestations. The majority has no claim to the truth, esp. when its
a majority of those who happen to know about some obscure vote,
failing to announce it to anyone other than their partisan cronies.

Jack (Sam Spade)


from_name: Boris Lohnzweiger

subject:
[Wikipedia-l] Bizarre vandalism at Cherokee Wikipedia by
	217.44.22.219

body:
I think this type of hassle could be avoided to a great extent if people would concentrate on contributing to Wikipedias in languages they master. Nobody without a sufficient command of Cherokee would ever dare to think of writing a book in that language. Yet, the wiki system fools some (or many?) people into thinking they can provide a sensible contribution in foreign languages where they wouldn't be able to make the most basic conversation.

I am aware that in most cases this is done well-meaningly. Many small wikipedias are in a pitiful state and often show virtually no development. This tempts many editors (especially those with a weakness for languages) to provide "development aid". However, the result is often simply embarrassing. Moreover, such benevolent activities might even cause the exact opposite as Wikipedias written in a mishmash of deficient and foreign language will keep any native speakers (potential future contributors !) from using them.

Boris

______________________________________________________________
Verschicken Sie romantische, coole und witzige Bilder per SMS!
Jetzt bei WEB.DE FreeMail: http://f.web.de/?mc=021193


from_name: Robert Scott Horning

subject: [Foundation-l] Wikiversity

body:
Angela wrote:

>Despite claims to the contrary,
>http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Wikiversity was certainly _not_ protected
>at the advice of the Wikimedia Foundation.
>
>
>
Calm down a moment.  Instead of posting here on Foundation-l, perhaps a
more modest commentary on [[b:Staff Lounge]] would be better?  Certainly
on the talk page of Aya?  I know you think Aya is going overboard a
little bit on Wikibooks, but I think it is more a part of education than
trying to kill this new admin.  I do see that you put some commentary on
the talk page for Wikiversity, but there could be a little bit more
within the Wikibooks community.

Aya has been getting a considerable amount of advise via IRC on
#wikimedia, and I think some of that advise may not be as good as it
should be.  Before you blow you stack, lets try to solve this problem a
little more calmly.  I also don't see much on Wikiversity that is
pressing to be changed at the moment besides the commentary that you are
complaining about.

Aya has been trying to reorganize some of the Wikibooks policy pages and
cleaning out some cruft that has been laying about Wikibooks for some
time.  I think that going after Wikiversity may be too far, but again
Wikiversity has not exactly been progressing that far either.  I'm going
to try and get Aya's viewpoint on this issue.

--
Robert Scott Horning


subject: [Foundation-l] Wikiversity


from_name: Alphax

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

Sam Korn wrote:
> I (smoddy -- this is my second email address) sent an email to
> User:Crosstar about fair use on a logo at [[Nationalist Movement]] and
> [[Crosstar]].  I received this email back in response (my original
> email is at the bottom).
>
> I am forwarding the email here as I am not subscribed to the legal mailing list.
>
> Are there any suggestions as to the course to take?
>

Yes, ignore them. If they feel like suing us, they will be awarded a
percentage of our profits from use of the material.

Any mirrors using "fair use" material do so at their own risk, and stand
to lose a whole lot more (financially) than Wikipedia does.

- --
Alphax                      |   /"\
Encrypted Email Preferred   |   \ /     ASCII Ribbon Campaign
OpenPGP key ID: 0xF874C613  |    X   Against HTML email & vCards
http://tinyurl.com/cc9up    |   / \
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFC8MDs/RxM5Ph0xhMRA2TIAJwN+CwG82QnJRYXmeNk+GNuFeHTSwCgnXL3
BIdlq9iVrXqhYm+28puPoII=
=KvxN
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


subject: [WikiEN-l] Navigation popups

body:
I really like this tool.  I won't use it myself, but I have thought of
another, more generically useful way of using it.  Currently,
Wikipedia uses an ugly kludgey system of footnoting.  Having a pop-up,
with a short delay, could well be the answer to these issues, as long
as it works in IE...

I don't know what other users think of this idea...

Sam

On 8/3/05, Lupin wp <lupin.wp at gmail.com> wrote:
> This is an advert for a new javascript tool which you may find
> helpful. When you hover the mouse over wikilinks, a list of links pops
> up. These link directly to pages relevant to the link, such as edit,
> editTalk, contribs, count (a link to Kate's tool), image thumbnails
> for image links and so on. I think it's quite nifty! There's a
> description here:
>
>   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Tools#Navigation_popups
>
> Installation is a matter of adding a few lines to your monobook.js (or
> standard.js - this is skin-agnostic).
>
> Let me know what you think! It's still in development so I'd welcome
> suggestions for improvements.
>
> Lupin
>
> PS I don't know if it works in IE - it's been developed in firefox.
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: Dan Grey

body:
On 03/08/05, David Gerard <fun at thingy.apana.org.au> wrote:
> I sincerely believe the current VFD process and culture is so poisonous to
> Wikipedia that, at least for the moment, we would be better just letting
> the disks fill with band vanity, original research and poo jokes.

I agree (but the disks would never fill - see m:Wiki is not paper).

Ed deleted VfD then someone else undeleted it. Hardly a big deal. In
the process he hit everyone right between the eyes with the fact that
VfD isn't great.

Moving forwards though, there only appears to be only two schools of thought:

1. Those who wish VfD to stay as-is with all discussions about
listings held in one place.

2. Those who think everything to do with an article should be
discussed on that article's talk page (and a list of pages under
discussion could be maintained with ease using a m:DynamicPageList,
which we all kinds of places on Wikinews).

The former allows very much the same people to contribute to each VfD
vote, with some 'interesting' concepts (eg. "notability", seemingly
never defined). This could, I feel, be the root of the problems David
and Ed are highlighting presently, the same ones that many have done
so before.

The second would make it harder for the same groups of people to
contribute to each VfD vote. It could quite possibly reduce it to only
the contributors to the article and those who have in interest in the
topic (picking up the discussion via the DPL).

VfD itself could easily be deleted again and no. 2 put in its place
within minutes of the devs turning the DPL extension on on Wikipedia.

Should we though?

Dan


from_name: Haukur Þorgeirsson

body:
> I don't want this mailing list to degenerate into a flame war here, but
> I really think you have no cause to be acting indignant. A simple "I'm
> sorry about the trouble I caused, it won't happen again" would have made
> me, and a lot of other people, forget about this entirely. But what
> you're saying here makes me think that once you are unblocked, it very
> well might happen again. That prospect scares me, and makes me think you
> ought to be blocked a lot longer. Your crack about "liberal stereotypes"
> is just a bitter, bigoted jab that is icing on the cake.
>
> We're trying to make an encyclopedia here. You disrupted it --
> _enormously_ -- just to make a point.

Oh, come off it, at least it was a good point :) Many people
seem to think that it's VfD rather than EP that's "enormously"
disruptive to Wikipedia.

He's been blocked and I'm sure that experience is
humiliating enough. Let's try to f&f this and move on.

Regards,
Haukur


body:
> Deleting the page seems like throwing the baby out with the bathwater to me.
>
> Jay.

Sure, its a ''bad'' baby ;)

Jack (Sam Spade)


from_name: Jimmy Wales

body:
Poor, Edmund W wrote:
> I guess this is a bigger deal than I thought.

Well, the VfD deletion thing was... wow.  You had a lot of support about
that.  I think it is safe to say that among supporters and detractors of
the move there was at least universal admiration for the nerve it took
to do it, and acceptance of the goodwill behind it.

Deleting the RfC, though, and unblocking yourself.  That's a little
different.

--Jimbo


list: textbook-l

from_name: kelvSYC

subject: [Textbook-l] Re: Wikiversity

body:
> A week ago, he asked for the creation of the english version of
> wikiversity, which I opposed, as wikiversity is not a recognised
> wikimedia foundation project and still under discussion (in spite
> of the existence of german wikiversity). Aya other option was to
> move all wikiversity content to meta. I only said
> 1) content should be protected (ie, deleting it would be vandalism)
> 2) the community should be asked its opinion before changing
> deletion rules
> 3) wikiversity is still under discussion.
>
> There is NO way this will (should) change overnight, and any new
> project (if started) will be done slowly and carefully. Threats of
> deleting content are not correct.
>

Seems like a unilateral decision by [[User:Aya]] when I checked at
[[Wikiversity]].  It doesn't have my backing at the very least, and
it appears to have not been the backing of the majority.
Nevertheless, Wikiversity has been target to many a vandal attack
lately...

> That goes for ANY changes to do on Wikibooks. They should be done
> slowly, only after reaching community consensus, and certainly not
> imposed. There is no hierarchy and no one has more rights than others.
> I'll add that many editors are currently very busy at Wikimania and
> not able to answer requests for speedy decisions.

I have to admit that I was shocked to hear Wikiversity was protected,
since it made no sense to me.  Still, WV still suffers from scoping
issues that are still not fully resolved at this time.  One thing
that I still do not understand is why Wikiversity is effectively a
book in Wikibooks while the remainder of Wikibooks is effectively a
section of Wikiversity...

As for sweeping changes, Aya is admittedly more radical than most (he
had proposed to delete [[WB:VFD]] at one point), although this is
pretty standard in a community where "community consensus" usually
means "after a few months, the only person saying anything on the
subject is yourself".  Thus much of Wikibooks' own policy is
typically done by "consensus of one" (merging [[Wikibooks:What
Wikibooks is not]] into [[Wikibooks:Deletion policy]]), or in which
policies are made but are virtually nonenforceable
([[Wikibooks:Naming conventions]]) without the use of a potentially
dangerous bot.

The community in Wikibooks also seems to be very polarized - there
seems to be a separate community that deals with BOTM/COTM and
another group actively discussing policy issues - lately a few in the
BOTM/COTM regulars have accused me of unilaterally changing policy
even though they have been thoroughly discussed (even predating BOTM
and COTM) but were virtually unenforceable.

Still, at least something had to be done - the decision to make Aya a
bureaucrat was a needed one (even if I disagree with someone
requesting bureaucratship - I still believe it should be a nominated
post), if only to bring more admins to the project to deal with huge
admin backlogs.  The decision to overhaul policy was needed over huge
issues in Wikibooks stemming from forking of Wikipedia content and
whether biographies were instructional material.


subject: [Foundation-l] Wikiversity

body:
Despite claims to the contrary,
http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Wikiversity was certainly _not_ protected
at the advice of the Wikimedia Foundation.

Perhaps it was advised by one member of that foundation, but other
Board members were not consulted. I am disgusted this approach would
be taken with no consensus from the community.

Wikiversity has been running for a long time on Wikibooks and I see no
agreement whatsoever for it to be suddenly shut down like this.

Protection is a defense against vandalism, not a way of expressing one
person's point of view on whether or not a sub-project of Wikibooks
should exist. Please remove the misleading statements about protection
and explain why you ever thought the Foundation would propose such an
awful measure on a popular set of pages like Wikiversity.

Angela.


subject: [Textbook-l] Wikiversity


subject: [Foundation-l] Wikiversity


from_name: David Gerard

subject: [WikiEN-l] block open proxies only for non-logged-in users please

body:
Tor Ville (tor_ville at yahoo.com) [050804 05:18]:

> Why block the IP? What if it's from a library or
> school? This sounds like a too harsh response.

We frequently block libraries or schools for short times when used for
vandalism. In some cases we block an entire school and take it up with the
school authorities.

- d.


from_name: Skyring

body:
On 8/4/05, David Gerard <fun at thingy.apana.org.au> wrote:
> Tor Ville (tor_ville at yahoo.com) [050804 05:18]:
>
> > Why block the IP? What if it's from a library or
> > school? This sounds like a too harsh response.
>
>
> We frequently block libraries or schools for short times when used for
> vandalism. In some cases we block an entire school and take it up with the
> school authorities.

All you need do is sit on Recent Changes for a while, and you'll see
patterns of edits which look remarkably like mischevious adolescents
sitting around school computers out of sight of adult supervision and
daring each other to be more and more audacious. We don't really need
our articles containing unsourced information telling us that "Old Mr
Bloggs is a poo-brain."

--
Peter in Canberra


subject: [WikiEN-l] Skyring is now moderated on wikien-l

body:
Per a suggestion from Jimbo, Skyring has been moderated on wikien-l. Posts
concerning or alluding to Jtdirl will be rejected.

I'm sure we won't need to apply this, and that nor will we suddenly see a
flock of new listmembers talking about Jtdirl. In fact, Jtdirl is now
off-topic for wiken-l IMO.

(Jimbo actually suggested he be kicked for this, but I'm in a really warm
and fuzzy mood 'cos I've got a new laptop and it's really really good.)

- d. (bad monk)


body:
Delirium (delirium at hackish.org) [050804 06:01]:

> The problem with the proposals to do away with it is that none so far
> has proposed anything better (or at least people haven't been convinced
> the alternative proposals are better).  There is plenty of stuff that
> goes through VfD that ought to be deleted; only a small percentage of
> the stuff on VfD is contentious in any way.

I sincerely believe the current VFD process and culture is so poisonous to
Wikipedia that, at least for the moment, we would be better just letting
the disks fill with band vanity, original research and poo jokes.

> If VfD is done away with and no alternative deletion process is
> provided, then those types of pages will simply be speedy-deleted.  In
> itself that would be fine, since the majority are obvious, but having a
> VfD process helps sometimes IMO, because occasionally an admin will
> mis-identify something as an obvious deletion candidate when it really
> shouldn't be, and others will point out his error before the page is
> actually deleted.

I strongly agree we need a deletion mechanism - no-one's who's done
Special:Newpages patrol could possibly disagree IMO. And over 95% of what
hits VFD needs a sudden and painful death.

But VFD as it exists is sick and diseased and a powerful net negative.

- d.


subject:
[Foundation-l] Legal implications of hosting wikis outside of
	United States?

body:
Delirium (delirium at hackish.org) [050804 01:55]:
> Brion Vibber wrote:

> >What would be the legal implications of serving some content from
> >outside of the United States, in comparison to merely running them
> >through a local caching proxy?

> It would certainly make things more complex than having them all in one
> country.  Is there really any benefit to introducing the added
> complexity?  London to New York ping times are around 60-80 milliseconds
> roundtrip, so physical location isn't even noticeable compared to the
> other sources of latency.

Indeed. And given UK libel laws, there is NO WAY ON EARTH I'd want to see a
Wikimedia database hosted in the UK.

What's our reader:editor ratio, 50:1? (Are there stats available per wiki?)
Logged-in page views mostly aren't cached, but if we have enough readers it
should still help. How helpful have the French and Dutch squids been to
serving European readers efficiently?

- d.


body:
Skyring (skyring at gmail.com) [050804 06:19]:
> On 8/4/05, David Gerard <fun at thingy.apana.org.au> wrote:

> > We frequently block libraries or schools for short times when used for
> > vandalism. In some cases we block an entire school and take it up with the
> > school authorities.

> All you need do is sit on Recent Changes for a while, and you'll see
> patterns of edits which look remarkably like mischevious adolescents
> sitting around school computers out of sight of adult supervision and
> daring each other to be more and more audacious. We don't really need
> our articles containing unsourced information telling us that "Old Mr
> Bloggs is a poo-brain."

Of course, if we suspend VFD we'll have a lot more to clean up ;-)

We have many remarkably high-quality editors, and even administrators and
developers, on Wikipedia who are of high-school age. But just ask them
about their schoolmates ...

- d.


from_name: Walter van Kalken

subject: [Foundation-l] Wikibreak

body:
After thinking it over for a couple of days (as opposed to my previous
overheated runouts) I have decided to go on a wikibreak. I somehow
evaluated it and found that with everything added my pleasure in working
on the wikimedia projects has diminished to zero. There are some
developments to the projects that I do not really like. As people might
have noticed in previous mails.

I will most surely be back ..... it might be tomorrow, it might be next
week it might be in a couple of months. Just need to recharge the
wikibatteries and find the fun in participating in the projects again.
That fun is kinda gone with me for now.

Walter/Waerth


subject: [Foundation-l] Wikibreak


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Wikibreak


body:
JAY JG (jayjg at hotmail.com) [050804 06:42]:
>From: fun at thingy.apana.org.au (David Gerard)

> >I strongly agree we need a deletion mechanism - no-one's who's done
> >Special:Newpages patrol could possibly disagree IMO. And over 95% of what
> >hits VFD needs a sudden and painful death.
> >But VFD as it exists is sick and diseased and a powerful net negative.

> Maybe I haven't been there enough recently, but what exactly is making it
> so "sick and diseased" that, even though 95% of the stuff it deletes is
> garbage, it still needs to be done away with?

The other 5% is making it a truly poisonous source of acrimony in the
Wikipedia-writing community. IMO. See further up the thread.

- d.


from_name: Anthere

subject: [Textbook-l] Re: Wikiversity

body:
Hi,

First, I never said I was speaking in the name of Wikimedia Foundation
on irc yesterday night. I would never do so without consulting with
Angela and Jimbo, in particular since I know they are both very
interested in Wikiversity issues and may not share my opinion (on the
naming issue at least :-)).

Second, it is my fault, because I did not write clearly what I meant,
and had to interrupt myself in the middle of a discussion to save
cookies from burning. When i say "protect the information", I never
meant "protect the page", but "protect the information"... Yesterday,
Aya indicated on irc he absolutely did not want wikiversity content to
be hosted on wikibooks and announced his intention to delete all related
pages. Which I absolutely do not agree with.

A week ago, he asked for the creation of the english version of
wikiversity, which I opposed, as wikiversity is not a recognised
wikimedia foundation project and still under discussion (in spite of the
existence of german wikiversity). Aya other option was to move all
wikiversity content to meta. I only said
1) content should be protected (ie, deleting it would be vandalism)
2) the community should be asked its opinion before changing deletion rules
3) wikiversity is still under discussion.

There is NO way this will (should) change overnight, and any new project
(if started) will be done slowly and carefully. Threats of deleting
content are not correct.

That goes for ANY changes to do on Wikibooks. They should be done
slowly, only after reaching community consensus, and certainly not
imposed. There is no hierarchy and no one has more rights than others.
I'll add that many editors are currently very busy at Wikimania and not
able to answer requests for speedy decisions.

And though it was my fault I was not clear with my words, please do not
mix a personal opinion with a Foundation decision.

Anthere

Angela a ?crit:
> Despite claims to the contrary,
> http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Wikiversity was certainly _not_ protected
> at the advice of the Wikimedia Foundation.
>
> Perhaps it was advised by one member of that foundation, but other
> Board members were not consulted. I am disgusted this approach would
> be taken with no consensus from the community.
>
> Wikiversity has been running for a long time on Wikibooks and I see no
> agreement whatsoever for it to be suddenly shut down like this.
>
> Protection is a defense against vandalism, not a way of expressing one
> person's point of view on whether or not a sub-project of Wikibooks
> should exist. Please remove the misleading statements about protection
> and explain why you ever thought the Foundation would propose such an
> awful measure on a popular set of pages like Wikiversity.
>
> Angela.


from_name: Puddl Duk

subject: [WikiEN-l] Copyright situation

body:
On 8/4/05, Roozbeh Pournader <roozbeh at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I am having a problem with several Iran-related articles and photos.
> Someone ([[User:Zereshk]]), who has posted a lot of text and pictures
> copyrighted in Iran to the Wikipedia is claiming that:
>
> "Iranian websites are not legally protected under International
> copyright laws. Iran is not a member of WTO, nor a signatory to the
> Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works,
> and correspondingly does not adhere to International Copyright laws
> itself. [...] Wikipedia (an American company) is not legally
> responsible for anything even if something was copied from a website
> from Iran." [
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Roozbeh#Copyright_tags_are_unwarranted
> ]

I think this is a good question for the Juriwiki-l mailing list (see
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_list).

This has come up before on the copyright problems page. Even if we are
legally able (at the moment) to violate Iran's copyright laws, I don't think
that we should.


from_name: Fastfission

body:
The entire idea of "voting for deletion" seems problematic to me. It's
like a reverse popularity contest -- the worst of grade-school
elections.

"Discuss for deletion", "Nominate for deletion", "Propose for
deletion", --whatever. But a rough and informal polling system seems
to be the root of the difficulties.

...But I don't have an alternative.

FF

On 8/3/05, David Gerard <fun at thingy.apana.org.au> wrote:
> JAY JG (jayjg at hotmail.com) [050804 09:03]:
>
> > >The other 5% is making it a truly poisonous source of acrimony in the
> > >Wikipedia-writing community. IMO. See further up the thread.
>
> > Deleting the page seems like throwing the baby out with the bathwater to me.
>
>
> I'm not sure the current operation of VFD could fairly have been predicted
> early enough to strangle it at birth. We need a deletion mechanism, but not
> this one.
>
>
> - d.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: Phroziac

subject: [WikiEN-l] Beastliness

body:
19:04 < jwales> 666,666 articles?  Ah, this is where I suddenly lock the
               database and reveal my evil satanic plans.

On 8/4/05, Charles Matthews <charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com> wrote:
> It seems mildly appropriate that while current discussions are going on, the
> wiki-en article total passed 666666.
>
> Perhaps VfD needs exorcism.
>
> Charles
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

--
signature


body:
If VFD were kept, how about un-inlining the closed vfds, and giving
links to them instead? Would make the CSDs clutter it somewhat less.

On 8/4/05, Andrew Gray <shimgray at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 04/08/05, Delirium <delirium at hackish.org> wrote:
>
> > Is it significantly worse now, or just scales badly ...
>
> Some numbers:
>
> 31/07 - 102
> 30/07 - 121
> 29/07 - 137
> 28/07 - 130
> 27/07 - 130
> 26/07 - 132
> 25/07 - 108
>
> ie, 860 over a week at the end of July, versus
>
> 31/01 - 58
> 30/01 - 69
> 29/01 - 76
> 28/01 - 67 (one of which I remember, sigh)
> 27/01 - 65
> 26/01 - 69
> 25/01 - 63
>
> at the end of January, a mere 468. Numbers don't included cases where
> many pages were listed together (there was one last week with over
> 20!), but I suspect they scale to the rest of VfD - so almost doubling
> in six months?
>
> It's trickier to get numbers for a year ago, so I won't try it now,
> but I'd guess at maybe 250/week? In a few months, the day-at-a-glance
> VfD page will get to the length it was a year before,
> week-at-a-glance... when it was already straining.
>
> Leaving aside the inherent problems of the VfD process, there's an
> obvious scaling issue there. The recent WP:CSD expansions will stem
> the tide a bit - a lot of VfDs are "playing safe nominations" of
> speedy candidates anyway, but...
>
> I have absolutely no idea what to do about it, so I'm glad someone
> seems to have enough suggestions to get a debate going :-)
>
> --
> - Andrew Gray
>   andrew.gray at dunelm.org.uk
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

--
signature


from_name: Charles Matthews

subject: [WikiEN-l] Beastliness

body:
It seems mildly appropriate that while current discussions are going on, the
wiki-en article total passed 666666.

Perhaps VfD needs exorcism.

Charles


from_name: Tomasz Wegrzanowski

subject: [Wikitech-l] The image dump seems to be corrupted

body:
On Thu, Aug 04, 2005 at 03:43:25PM +0800, Darwin Sadeli wrote:
> I encountered a problem when trying to download the english wikipedia
> image dumps. First of all, the web page states that the size of the
> dump is 16.7 GB. However, when I tried to download using wget, only
> about 700 MB was downloaded. When I tried to extract the tar file, it
> stops abruptly, giving error message that the end of file is
> corrupted.
>
> So, I wondered if the image dumps are actually corrupted or my method
> of downloading is actually wrong and certain steps are required to
> download the image dump. Please help! Thank you in advance for your
> kind assistance.

Iirc stable wget has a bigfile problems. So it sees 16.7 GB
(4 * 4GB + 700 MB) as 700 MB, because that's what fits in 32 bit value.

Try some other program (or maybe unstable wget).


subject: [Foundation-l] Wikiversity

body:
At first, I agreed with Angela - protection is bad
etc.

Then I read Aya's reasoning, and he has a point,
doesn't he?

Wikiveristy has apparently failed to gain WM support,
and hasn't exactly been flourishing.

Wikibooks is a project to collaboratively write
free-content textbooks. To quote from What Wikibooks
is not, which Angela restored this morning:

"Wikibooks is not a place for users to publish content
unrelated to our main objective. In particular,
Wikibooks may not be used as a personal homepage or
online file storage. Users who want to use the wiki
technology for other collaborative efforts should find
a wiki hosting services such as
[http://www.wikicities.com Wikicities], or install
their own wiki software. For more information on how
to set up the MediaWiki software, please read our book
on [[Wiki Science]]."

So what possible justification is there for
"Wikiversity" to freeload off Wikibooks?

Dan

___________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Messenger - NEW crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com


subject: [Foundation-l] Wikiversity


from_name: Poor, Edmund W

body:
I'm working with Visviva (on WikiProject Deletion sorting) to find a way
to sort all this out.

It's based on an idea developed at another encyclopedia wiki - one which
actually PAYS ME to flounder around and flummox things up!

It uses templates for transclusion. Details forthcoming, as it will take
at least the rest of this week to document and test this.

Note that I put "document it" first! I write software in the following
stages:

1. Document what the software is intended to do.
2. Write the system tests and unit tests for the source code.
3. Oh, yes, when we have time ... Write the source code!

I think this is discussed at greater length at Wikipedia, either at
[[refactoring]] or [[test-first development]]. It's amazing how many
bugs you can KEEP FROM coming to life, merely by writing the tests
first. It also reduces total development time. Oh, why did I ever quit
the Wikipedia Development Team? (Because you didn't want to learn PHP,
remember? Shut up, I'm not going to have a MPD on the mailing list! Why
not? JRM had one on your user talk page. Oh, please!)

Somewhat distractedly,

Uncle Ed
Developer Emeritus
Admin Provisional

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alphax [mailto:alphasigmax at gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2005 9:54 AM
> To: Phroziac; English Wikipedia
> Subject: [WikiEN-l] Shrinking VFD (was I better shut up)
>
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: RIPEMD160
>
> Phroziac wrote:
> > If VFD were kept, how about un-inlining the closed vfds, and giving
> > links to them instead? Would make the CSDs clutter it somewhat less.
> >
>
> Several people use combinations of Javascript and CSS which
> allow this to be done. With one click they can hide all closed VFDs.


body:
Ed, are you sure you are sane?
By the way, what do you think of the pure wiki deletion system? I like
it alot, personally.

On 8/4/05, Poor, Edmund W <Edmund.W.Poor at abc.com> wrote:
> I'm working with Visviva (on WikiProject Deletion sorting) to find a way
> to sort all this out.
>
> It's based on an idea developed at another encyclopedia wiki - one which
> actually PAYS ME to flounder around and flummox things up!
>
> It uses templates for transclusion. Details forthcoming, as it will take
> at least the rest of this week to document and test this.
>
> Note that I put "document it" first! I write software in the following
> stages:
>
> 1. Document what the software is intended to do.
> 2. Write the system tests and unit tests for the source code.
> 3. Oh, yes, when we have time ... Write the source code!
>
> I think this is discussed at greater length at Wikipedia, either at
> [[refactoring]] or [[test-first development]]. It's amazing how many
> bugs you can KEEP FROM coming to life, merely by writing the tests
> first. It also reduces total development time. Oh, why did I ever quit
> the Wikipedia Development Team? (Because you didn't want to learn PHP,
> remember? Shut up, I'm not going to have a MPD on the mailing list! Why
> not? JRM had one on your user talk page. Oh, please!)
>
> Somewhat distractedly,
>
> Uncle Ed
> Developer Emeritus
> Admin Provisional
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Alphax [mailto:alphasigmax at gmail.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2005 9:54 AM
> > To: Phroziac; English Wikipedia
> > Subject: [WikiEN-l] Shrinking VFD (was I better shut up)
> >
> >
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: RIPEMD160
> >
> > Phroziac wrote:
> > > If VFD were kept, how about un-inlining the closed vfds, and giving
> > > links to them instead? Would make the CSDs clutter it somewhat less.
> > >
> >
> > Several people use combinations of Javascript and CSS which
> > allow this to be done. With one click they can hide all closed VFDs.
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

--
signature


subject: [Foundation-l] Wikiversity

body:
Dan Grey wrote:

>At first, I agreed with Angela - protection is bad
>etc.
>
>Then I read Aya's reasoning, and he has a point,
>doesn't he?
>
>Wikiveristy has apparently failed to gain WM support,
>and hasn't exactly been flourishing.
>
>Wikibooks is a project to collaboratively write
>free-content textbooks. To quote from What Wikibooks
>is not, which Angela restored this morning:
>
>"Wikibooks is not a place for users to publish content
>unrelated to our main objective. In particular,
>Wikibooks may not be used as a personal homepage or
>online file storage. Users who want to use the wiki
>technology for other collaborative efforts should find
>a wiki hosting services such as
>[http://www.wikicities.com Wikicities], or install
>their own wiki software. For more information on how
>to set up the MediaWiki software, please read our book
>on [[Wiki Science]]."
>
>So what possible justification is there for
>"Wikiversity" to freeload off Wikibooks?
>
>Dan
>
>
The presence of Wikiversity and Wikijunior on Wikibooks is somewhat
detrimental to Wikibooks in general, in the sense that it seems to
encourage other people to come up with their own "pet projects" that
they want to start and put them on Wikibooks.  This has been a problem
in the past on Meta where regular contributors to the Proposed Projects
page have more often than not suggested that Wikibooks is a place to
throw the project idea.  This doesn't seem to be happening as much now,
however.

The "announcement" by Anthere that Wikiversity was not a Wikimedia
Foundation project just added fuel to the fire.  See:

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk%3ARequests_for_new_languages#Requests_for_new_Wikiversity_languages

Yes, it hasn't been "officially sanctioned" by the Wikimedia Foundation
to be put onto seperate servers yet (the German Wikiversity not
withstanding), but it does seem to offer unique content that really
doesn't fit into any currently existing Wikimedia project, including
Wikibooks.  And it is "official" in the sense that just about any major
project on any server is official that doesn't have its own unique DNS
lookup.

One of the huge problems with Wikiversity right now is that active
discussions are going on in several places, including Textbook-l, Meta,
Wikibooks, Wikipedia, and #wikimedia.  These also seem to be very
disjointed groups, each with their own goals.  A very similar problem
currently exists although to a smaller extent with Wikijunior.  IMHO the
discussion on meta needs to be terminated, particularly with "live"
projects on another server.  Unfortunately I don't have the political
pull on meta to achieve that goal, and it doesn't seem likely to happen
either.  In particular this current issue between Angela and Aya is a
demonstration of the conflict between the Wikibooks community and the
rest of the Wikimedia community having a cultural clash, and that the
discussions about Wikiversity have not been in a consistant community
forum area.  It takes somebody with agressive searching to find all of
the relevant content about the role of Wikiversity on Wikibooks and what
direction it should be taking.  I know for a fact that I have not read
all of it myself.

There are other issues with Wikiversity, and perhaps this whole issue is
going to bring to light what the future of this project should be.
 Certainly Wikibooks is drifting away from the "pure textbook"
philosophy that it started out as, and is becoming more of an original
non-fiction book repository.  This is even more so with some current
actions by Wikipedia users moving content over to Wikibooks.  This
support role by Wikibooks to Wikiversity is all but gone now in the
Wikibooks community.

--
Robert Scott Horning


subject: [Foundation-l] Wikiversity


from_name: Dschwen

subject: [Wikitech-l] SVG locator maps mediawiki extension

body:
Hello all,

I'm currently developing a mediawiki extension to create svg maps using a
simple markup language. (see also:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Map_generator#Dynamap_Mediawiki_Extension )

The key idea is to avoid double efforts by using the geospatial data already
present in many wikipedia articles. Features can be drawn on the map by
simply referencing the appropriate article. I.e.
point: Cairo
plots the location of Cairo, getting the coordinates from a {{coor d|yy|N|xx|
E}} template in the Cairo article. Check my sample installation

http://www.kellnerweg.de/wiki/index.php/Dynamap_Example

I mirrored only 4 articles and added geospatial info where necessary. Have a
look at the bottom of my Suez Canal article
http://www.kellnerweg.de/wiki/index.php?title=Suez_Canal&action=edit
(the geopoly template)

The extension produces SVG output, and everything is clickable and linked to
wikipedia articles. Coastlines are taken from WDB2. Suez Canal coordinates
were created using google maps. If your browser cannot display SVG a PNG
version and a link to the svg are displayed instead (but you'll miss out on
the interactivity).

I'd love to hear some feedback!
Ciao,
Daniel
--
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Dschwen
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Dschwen
http://commons.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Dschwen
http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Dschwen


subject:
[WikiEN-l] Why VFD is vexatious,
	pernicious and a collossal pain in the neck

body:
I never like the creation of a central page to list prospective
deletions. Admins have deletion power, they should simply use it.

If we need a "guidelines" page, fine. Make a guidelines page, so that if
50 articles a day fail to meet the "worthiness criteria" an Admin knows
to delete them. For example:

* Nothing but a URL to a foreign language website.
* Nothing but graffiti about some school chum of yours: Jack is a prat,
or loves Mary (or maybe even Sam ;-)

Oh, yes, we have that already, don't we? It's called speedy delete ...

I propose something radically different:
* If an article is off to a good start, let it remain a stub. Even help
it along by expanding it.
* If a TOPIC is inappropriate for Wikipedia, tag it and bag it (more
about this below)
* If content is hopelessly poor, but it's a good topic (like graffiti
about a notable person, place or thing) - then blank the page. I believe
this makes it fall below the threshold for "red linking"; stubs under a
certain minimum number of characters appear as "non-existent", right?

Tag and bag:

We should be able to label or "move" articles out of the main namespace,
so that they do not appear to the ordinary reading public. Let's find a
way to do this other than ACTUALLY DELETING each version of the page
from a database table and copying those versions into a "deleted page"
table. That is too much server overhead, I guess.

Just make it "hidden" or something. But let it be visible on some page
(like a category page?) which lists "bad articles" in various categories
and sorted in various convenient ways.

One more thing: voting

Don't say that "voting is astonishingly rare" at Wikipedia, and then
turn around and insist that no page can be deleted (or RETAINED) without
first counting and abiding by the Votes For Deletion. This is
breathtakingly stupid, and we deserve all the bad press we get for it -
and for what it does to the deletion process.

Timing

There is tension between the Process of creating an encyclopedia and the
hurry to present the Product.

* Process => development of new articles, along with continuous revision
(i.e., improvement) of old articles
* Product => the display of finished articles

We also insist on displaying "works in progress", which provides the
tension. I think this is what provides the vector which spreads the
poison which David Gerard was talking about (like mosquitoes carrying
malaria).

Uncle Ed


body:
JAY JG (jayjg at hotmail.com) [050804 09:03]:

> >The other 5% is making it a truly poisonous source of acrimony in the
> >Wikipedia-writing community. IMO. See further up the thread.

> Deleting the page seems like throwing the baby out with the bathwater to me.

I'm not sure the current operation of VFD could fairly have been predicted
early enough to strangle it at birth. We need a deletion mechanism, but not
this one.

- d.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Shrinking VFD (was I better shut up)

body:
hmm, sounds cool. but wouldn't cut the load time down..

On 8/4/05, Alphax <alphasigmax at gmail.com> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: RIPEMD160
>
> Phroziac wrote:
> > If VFD were kept, how about un-inlining the closed vfds, and giving
> > links to them instead? Would make the CSDs clutter it somewhat less.
> >
>
> Several people use combinations of Javascript and CSS which allow this
> to be done. With one click they can hide all closed VFDs.
>
> - --
> Alphax                      |   /"\
> Encrypted Email Preferred   |   \ /     ASCII Ribbon Campaign
> OpenPGP key ID: 0xF874C613  |    X   Against HTML email & vCards
> http://tinyurl.com/cc9up    |   / \
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (MingW32)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
> iD8DBQFC8h33/RxM5Ph0xhMRA0GGAKCuDAQKaxsdGhQZ8epJJjhRTkNQ5gCdGVLW
> 1bnsi26CuWmSzFfuTgi0TQI=
> =8io7
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>

--
signature


from_name: Alfio Puglisi

body:
On Thu, 4 Aug 2005, Tomasz Wegrzanowski wrote:

>On Thu, Aug 04, 2005 at 03:43:25PM +0800, Darwin Sadeli wrote:
>> I encountered a problem when trying to download the english wikipedia
>> image dumps. First of all, the web page states that the size of the
>> dump is 16.7 GB. However, when I tried to download using wget, only
>> about 700 MB was downloaded. When I tried to extract the tar file, it
>> stops abruptly, giving error message that the end of file is
>> corrupted.
>>
>> So, I wondered if the image dumps are actually corrupted or my method
>> of downloading is actually wrong and certain steps are required to
>> download the image dump. Please help! Thank you in advance for your
>> kind assistance.
>
>Iirc stable wget has a bigfile problems. So it sees 16.7 GB
>(4 * 4GB + 700 MB) as 700 MB, because that's what fits in 32 bit value.
>
>Try some other program (or maybe unstable wget).

Recent versions of curl have been tested and are able to download large
files without problems. Note that curl needs an explicit option ("-C -" i
believe) to continue from a partially downloaded file if the transfer was
interrupted (can happen in a several hours download), otherwise it will
start from scratch.

Alfio


from_name: Lars Sanders

subject: [Wikitech-l] live mirror: www.source-of-knowledge.com

body:
Hi

here is a site which a) is mirroring live content (the change I made to my
user page was visible immediately) and b) is not mention the GFDL:

http://www.source-of-knowledge.com/default.asp?t=Special:Recentchanges
http://www.source-of-knowledge.com/default.asp?t=Wikipedia

I've put a note here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Mirrors_and_forks/Stu#source-of-knowledge.com

also visible here: ;-)
http://www.source-of-knowledge.com/default.asp?t=Wikipedia:Mirrors_and_forks/Stu#source-of-knowledge.com

 - Lars -


from_name: David

subject:
[WikiEN-l] Why VFD is vexatious, pernicious and a collossal pain
	in the neck

body:
Poor, Edmund W wrote:

>* If content is hopelessly poor, but it's a good topic (like graffiti
>about a notable person, place or thing) - then blank the page. I believe
>this makes it fall below the threshold for "red linking"; stubs under a
>certain minimum number of characters appear as "non-existent", right?
>
>
Not yet.  Pure Wiki Deletion proposes this, however. ~[[en:User:Humblefool]]


from_name: Nic Coveney

subject: [WikiEN-l] i accidentally removed data

body:
i accidentally removed the data on a subject but i cant remember what one.
my friend knows though and ill ask him tomorow. i didn'tknow that it
affected all computers let allone any computres sorry

your daily user

nic

_________________________________________________________________
Single? Start dating at Lavalife. Try our 7 day FREE trial!
http://lavalife9.ninemsn.com.au/clickthru/clickthru.act?context=an99&locale=en_AU&a=19179


from_name: Brion Vibber

body:
Lars Sanders wrote:
> here is a site which a) is mirroring live content (the change I made to my
> user page was visible immediately) and b) is not mention the GFDL:
>
> http://www.source-of-knowledge.com/default.asp?t=Special:Recentchanges
> http://www.source-of-knowledge.com/default.asp?t=Wikipedia

Blocked.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 253 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20050804/9b3c30a8/attachment.pgp>


subject: [WikiEN-l] soz false alarm i remembered it and fixed it

body:
soz guyz i fixed it i wont do it again

wikipedia rox cyas :)

_________________________________________________________________
SEEK: Over 80,000 jobs across all industries at Australia's #1 job site.
http://ninemsn.seek.com.au?hotmail


from_name: admin Yellowikis

subject: [Wikitech-l] inserting single articles in a website

body:
Could you add a note to the top of the articles on your wiki saying:

 "This article is from Wikipedia. If you want to edit it please go to
cc.wikipedia.org/.../Italy."

Hope this helps

Paul Y

On 8/4/05, Sabine Cretella <sabine_cretella at yahoo.it> wrote:
> Hi, I am copying and pasting pages from Wikipedia about Italy in several
> languages in a wiki of my own (every page has a single source and
> copyright notice) - sometimes I have these articles then translated and
> I copy these translations to the other language projects (I did so with
> Maiori on the EN wikipedia which was translated from DE - and another
> language is going to be RU as soon as I have time after wikimania).
>
> Now of course people can edit on my wiki as well, but I would like to
> avoid this and have them edit Wikipedia directly.
>
> The thing is: this would mean to insert the page with the article from
> Wikipedia in an Iframe within a wiki page - completely with "edit" tabs
> ... otherwise I cannot make sure that edits, added things etc go back to
> wikipedia/wikibooks which to my opinion is the only thing that makes sense.
>
> Do you have an idea on how this could be done?
>
> Ciao, Sabine
>
>
>
>
>
> ___________________________________
> Yahoo! Mail: gratis 1GB per i messaggi e allegati da 10MB
> http://mail.yahoo.it
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>

--
Yellowikis is to Yellow Pages, as Wikipedia is to The Encyclopedia Britannica


from_name: Sabine Cretella

body:
Hi, I am copying and pasting pages from Wikipedia about Italy in several
languages in a wiki of my own (every page has a single source and
copyright notice) - sometimes I have these articles then translated and
I copy these translations to the other language projects (I did so with
Maiori on the EN wikipedia which was translated from DE - and another
language is going to be RU as soon as I have time after wikimania).

Now of course people can edit on my wiki as well, but I would like to
avoid this and have them edit Wikipedia directly.

The thing is: this would mean to insert the page with the article from
Wikipedia in an Iframe within a wiki page - completely with "edit" tabs
... otherwise I cannot make sure that edits, added things etc go back to
wikipedia/wikibooks which to my opinion is the only thing that makes sense.

Do you have an idea on how this could be done?

Ciao, Sabine

___________________________________
Yahoo! Mail: gratis 1GB per i messaggi e allegati da 10MB
http://mail.yahoo.it


from_name: Andrew Gray

subject: [WikiEN-l] I better shut up (was vfd RFC)

body:
On 04/08/05, Matt Brown <morven at gmail.com> wrote:

> It has scaled badly enough that it no longer gets a good cross-section
> of Wikipedia opinion, IMO.  Most editors find it just too much work to
> keep up on it.

I used to read every VfD entry, though I'd only comment on a handful.
That'd be pretty much a full-time job, now, an hour or so a day at
least... it's hard to get the time to do that and anything else.

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


body:
On 04/08/05, Delirium <delirium at hackish.org> wrote:

> Is it significantly worse now, or just scales badly ...

Some numbers:

31/07 - 102
30/07 - 121
29/07 - 137
28/07 - 130
27/07 - 130
26/07 - 132
25/07 - 108

ie, 860 over a week at the end of July, versus

31/01 - 58
30/01 - 69
29/01 - 76
28/01 - 67 (one of which I remember, sigh)
27/01 - 65
26/01 - 69
25/01 - 63

at the end of January, a mere 468. Numbers don't included cases where
many pages were listed together (there was one last week with over
20!), but I suspect they scale to the rest of VfD - so almost doubling
in six months?

It's trickier to get numbers for a year ago, so I won't try it now,
but I'd guess at maybe 250/week? In a few months, the day-at-a-glance
VfD page will get to the length it was a year before,
week-at-a-glance... when it was already straining.

Leaving aside the inherent problems of the VfD process, there's an
obvious scaling issue there. The recent WP:CSD expansions will stem
the tide a bit - a lot of VfDs are "playing safe nominations" of
speedy candidates anyway, but...

I have absolutely no idea what to do about it, so I'm glad someone
seems to have enough suggestions to get a debate going :-)

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


from_name: Karl Butcher

subject: [WikiEN-l] Copyright situation

body:
If Iran joins international copyright treaties, and we haven't respected
their copyrights, major changes would have to be made all at once. It is
simpler to respect their copyrights now, so it can't come up as an issue
later.
 -Measure

 On 8/4/05, Skyring <skyring at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 8/5/05, Puddl Duk <puddlduk at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > This has come up before on the copyright problems page. Even if we are
> > legally able (at the moment) to violate Iran's copyright laws, I don't
> think
> > that we should.
>
> What advantage would there be in doing so? Surely there's nothing in
> any Iran-related article that HAS to be sourced this way.
>
> --
> Peter in Canberra
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

--
For every 12 seconds you've spent reading this email,
Another person has died due to environmental activism.
http://www.junkscience.com/malaria_clock.htm