subject: [WikiEN-l] The Censorship Lie

body:
On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 14:14:49 -0500, JAY JG <jayjg at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> Are you proposing an article listing the specific lunch details of
> 50,000,000 individuals?

Can we get some feedback on this, please?

--
Peter in Canberra


list: wikien-l

source: pipermail-mbox

from_name: Anthere

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Offensive content

body:
Actually, I would rather say that the default version should include
everything. Editors would have to log and specifically ask for a certain
censorship for it to happen. This would be a delibarate choice, and
people could know that by default, everything is there.

The identification of various level of offensiveness or classes of
offensiveness could be managed thanks to categories.

Ant

Sj a ?crit:
> See for instance:
>
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Offensive_content/sj-proposal
>
> I think getting people to agree on npov information about pages and
> media, and giving them options re: what to see, is an obvious win.
> The default settings for anonymous users should be less in-your-face
> about violence and sex than the settings for users who want everything
> included in article pages.
>
> SJ
>
> On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 19:24:59 +0100, Anthere <anthere9 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>Though I have seen similar discussions on the topic for more than three
>>years now, and expect no consensus anytime soon, I propose those
>>interested to read http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Offensive_content
>>
>>And possibly comment
>>
>>Or come with new ideas.
>>
>>Thanks
>>
>>Anthere
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>WikiEN-l mailing list
>>WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
>>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>>
>
>
>


list: wikipedia-l

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Advertisement on mainpage

body:
Mark Williamson a ?crit:
> Hi, I have a question to put forth.

Hi

> I do not wish to have a disagreement with the members of a just
> recently active Wikipedia for fear of scaring them away, so it's
> better to discuss it here.

Thanks for doing this. I am just as embarrassed than you.

> Recently, I removed the spam/advertisement-ish text from the mainpage
> of the Wolof Wikipedia.
>
> It was reverted, twice, by the currently active Wolof-speaking user,
> Yannick Duchesne.
>
> I feel however that it violates policy.
>
> A rough translation: ?ANAFA (National Association for Literacy and
> Adult Education), an organisation in Dakar, Senegal is now working on
> the translation of open-source software like SPIP
> (http://www.spip.net) (a speedy Internet publisher to manage
> magazine-sites).
>
> Cooperating with the Canadian organization "Alternatives
> (http://www.alternatives.ca)", we plan very soon to edit the Wolof
> (http://wo.wikipedia.com), Pulaar (http://ff.wikipedia.com) and
> Mandinke  Wikipedias and work with every NGO in Africa to promote
> African languages on the net.
>
> This is within the category of a rebellion against linguistic
> discrimination and inequality (particularly bad online) and for the
> equality, solidarity, and diversity of cultures.
>
> ANAFA and Alternatives ask academians - especially Africans - to
> upload here their original copyleft documentation in Wolof and any
> other African language.
>
> More equality and freedom will come from it!?
>
> I have emphasised that the mainpage is supposed to be an introduction
> to Wikipedia. I even tried removing the POV parts and moving it to a
> separate article at [[ANAFA]], but apparently this was not enough.
>
> I'm not sure exactly what's going on here, or what is appropriate - is
> it OK to have such text on the mainpage at all?

> Also, Yannick claims to have read Wikipedia documentation extensively
> and so there is supposedly no issue with his understanding of NPOV.
>
> Mark

Yannick intends to have some people work in wolof in the next few days,
and requested adminship on meta, as most editors of new small wiki
projects do.

I first went to the wo to check, and had the feeling Yannick was not
entirely updated on our principles, so I talked to him by mail and
thought we could give him a chance.

Yesterday, I went back to wo, and saw the comments left by Mark, and
appreciated them. I thought it would probably be enough, and I further
suggested that he comes over to the french wikipedia to "get the feeling".

I made him sysop for 3 weeks, in order to allow translation of
interface. I limited it to 3 weeks, as I was a bit worried by his lack
of understanding of our policies.

I may have made a mistake here...:-(

I reverted to your changes node, and unprotected the main page. I also
let a message asking again that no ads for ANAFA is on the main page,
and that the main page remains unprotected.

Mark, I trust you to maintain the NPOV principle. Could I rely on you to
see what is going on over there in the coming days ? As well as to try
to explain whatever is needed to explain to them ? They are all new and
really are visibly not really aware of a couple of things.

Please, if you see that this really turns sour, leave a message on the
steward page and ask that someone removes Yannick sysophood. I wish that
this does not happen though until he had time to fix a couple of things.
And PLEASE, no one make him bureaucrat. The last thing we want to do is
to unsysop dozen of guys who just do not get it.

Anthere


from_name: Fred Bauder

subject:
[Wikipedia-l] Polite Thoughtful Neo-Nazis, was NSM88,
	deletion of user page image, personal attacks

body:
True and in our human attempt to adequately describe such folks we use the
words "totalitarian" and "terrorist", in reference to such organizations and
governments as the People's Republic of China and individuals such as Osama
bin Ladin. Such folks do not hesitate to "mess up other things for the
cause". There is every reason, based on their history, to presume that they
will conduct themselves in that way on Wikipedia and in fact they routinely
do so, some crudely, some with a measure of sophistication.

Fred

> From: David Gerard <fun at thingy.apana.org.au>
> Reply-To: wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2005 01:11:26 +1100
> To: wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Polite Thoughtful Neo-Nazis, was NSM88, deletion of
> user page image, personal attacks
>
> only a minority are sufficiently obsessed with their cause to
> blithely mess up other things for the cause. So there's no reason to
> presume they're not comporting themselves properly here unless and until
> they actually do just that.


from_name: Skyring

subject: [WikiEN-l] The Censorship Lie

body:
On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 12:17:30 -0800, Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote:
> Christopher Mahan wrote:
>
> >--- geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>>If some information is missing, then people will wonder what else is
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>missing. And that will lead to mistrust. And to be a mistrusted
> >>>encyclopedia is worse than reformatting the hard drives.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>What information is lost if we don't include the image?
> >>
> >>
> >What information is lost in a surgery manual if the images are
> >removed?
> >
> The subject picture seemed to have body parts in the wrong place.  It is
> conceivable in this instance that the possibility of autofellatio may
> have been possible as the product of surgical alteration.  The
> information missing from the picture is the evidence of the surgery.

But not the manual.

--
Peter in Canberra


from_name: Charles Matthews

subject: [WikiEN-l] An encyclopedia without a miniskirt?

body:
Daniel P.B.Smith wrote

> An encyclopedia without a miniskirt would be like a symphony without a >
banjo.

Do we have anything on bicycling fish?

Charles


list: wikitech-l

from_name: Ralf.Bodamer at t-systems.com

subject: [Wikitech-l] Configuring wikipedia Error

body:
Hi,

if i set up the wiki i receive the following error. Can one tell me how to
solve the Problem?

OS is solaris 8

MediaWiki 1.3.10 installation
Please include all of the lines below when reporting installation problems.

Checking environment...
PHP 4.3.10: ok
PHP server API is apache2handler; ok, using pretty URLs (index.php/Page_Title)
Have XML / Latin1-UTF-8 conversion support.
PHP is configured with no memory_limit.
No zlib support.
Couldn't find GD library or ImageMagick; image thumbnailing disabled.
Installation directory: /wwwapp/wiki/wiki
Script URI path: /wiki
Notice: Constant NS_MEDIA already defined in /wwwapp/wiki/wiki/includes/Namespace.php on line 8

Notice: Constant NS_SPECIAL already defined in /wwwapp/wiki/wiki/includes/Namespace.php on line 9

Notice: Constant NS_MAIN already defined in /wwwapp/wiki/wiki/includes/Namespace.php on line 12

Notice: Constant NS_TALK already defined in /wwwapp/wiki/wiki/includes/Namespace.php on line 13

Notice: Constant NS_USER already defined in /wwwapp/wiki/wiki/includes/Namespace.php on line 14

Notice: Constant NS_USER_TALK already defined in /wwwapp/wiki/wiki/includes/Namespace.php on line 15

Notice: Constant NS_WP already defined in /wwwapp/wiki/wiki/includes/Namespace.php on line 16

Notice: Constant NS_WIKIPEDIA already defined in /wwwapp/wiki/wiki/includes/Namespace.php on line 17

Notice: Constant NS_WP_TALK already defined in /wwwapp/wiki/wiki/includes/Namespace.php on line 18

Notice: Constant NS_WIKIPEDIA_TALK already defined in /wwwapp/wiki/wiki/includes/Namespace.php on line 19

Notice: Constant NS_IMAGE already defined in /wwwapp/wiki/wiki/includes/Namespace.php on line 20

Notice: Constant NS_IMAGE_TALK already defined in /wwwapp/wiki/wiki/includes/Namespace.php on line 21

Notice: Constant NS_MEDIAWIKI already defined in /wwwapp/wiki/wiki/includes/Namespace.php on line 22

Notice: Constant NS_MEDIAWIKI_TALK already defined in /wwwapp/wiki/wiki/includes/Namespace.php on line 23

Notice: Constant NS_TEMPLATE already defined in /wwwapp/wiki/wiki/includes/Namespace.php on line 24

Notice: Constant NS_TEMPLATE_TALK already defined in /wwwapp/wiki/wiki/includes/Namespace.php on line 25

Notice: Constant NS_HELP already defined in /wwwapp/wiki/wiki/includes/Namespace.php on line 26

Notice: Constant NS_HELP_TALK already defined in /wwwapp/wiki/wiki/includes/Namespace.php on line 27

Notice: Constant NS_CATEGORY already defined in /wwwapp/wiki/wiki/includes/Namespace.php on line 28

Notice: Constant NS_CATEGORY_TALK already defined in /wwwapp/wiki/wiki/includes/Namespace.php on line 29

Fatal error: Cannot redeclare class namespace in /wwwapp/wiki/wiki/includes/Namespace.php on line 57

Thanks,
Best Regards
Ralf Bodamer


from_name: Bill Konrad

subject: [WikiEN-l] Reply to Tony, David, and Christiaan

body:
Tony Sidaway wrote:
> Bill Konrad said:
>>
>> Nonsense. For more than 99% of the articles there would be absolutely
>> no  question regarding whether or not the content is suitable.
>>
> I think we're talking to cross purposes. Your statement does not
> contradict mine.

Yes, I think there is some misuderstanding. I do not understand how you can
maintain that all editors would have to bowlderize all of their edits when
for more than 99% of the articles there is no consideration whatsoever of
bowlderization being an issue.

Bkonrad


list: foundation-l

from_name: Erik Moeller

subject: [Foundation-l] Wikinews Design Contest Open for Submissions

body:
Help us create a unique visual identity for the Wikinews project!

    http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikinews_design_contest

The Wikinews design contest, which will run until April 17, 2005,
consists of two components:

* www.wikinews.org multilingual portal
* site stylesheets

You can also offer prizes for the best designs! If you can't contribute
a design, please offer a prize, to increase the incentive to contribute.

While the contest is running, please also feel free to edit the existing
portal at:

    http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Www.wikinews.org_portal

All best, and good luck to all participants,

Erik M?ller


list: wikimedia-l


from_name: pinco

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Alex Y. Kwan

body:
Hi Alex,
thank you for your attention!

I'm changing the page. You'll find a Chinese enter (?ina, in Esperanto)
where you can add your sentences under "mandarena" (Mandarin) or
"kantona" (Cantonese). I know nothing abour Chinese! What's the
difference between: Mandarin, Cantonese, Ming-Nan, Simplified Chinese,
Traditional Chinese? Should I add all of them?

Thanks a lot,
Nino

> I'd love to, but I don't know exactly where I should add it. Under
> Chinese, probably, but that means the "wo ai ni" should be under
> Chinese->Mandarin so that I can add a Chinese->Cantonese category.
> Don't know what's either of those in Esperanto, though. :)
>
> little Alex

--
http://www.vessella.it (italiano, esperanto, kiswahili, english)
http://www.changamano.org (Iniziative di solidariet? per la Tanzania)
http://www.lernado.it (Articoli di quotidiani della Tanzania, Corso di lingua swahili, Corso di lingua esperanto, Vocabolario esperanto-italiano, Jifunze lugha ya Kiesperanto, Kamusi ya Kiesperanto)


from_name: Phil Sandifer

subject: [Wikipedia-l] NSM88, deletion of user page image, personal attacks

body:
On Feb 17, 2005, at 6:33 AM, David Gerard wrote:
>

> The blocks were seen as unfair and promptly undone by other admins,
> which
> demonstrates to the original blockers that their reason was seen as
> inadequate. Though my block (for being a trolling account with no good
> edits - I am entirely unconvinced that User:NSM88 has anything to do
> with
> the personit purports to be operated by) stuck, until being unblocked
> yesterday by Snowspinner as it was clogging an AOL proxy. (The way to
> get
> around that one, as I understand it, is to undo the IP number block but
> leave the username blocked.)
>
No, no, it was a different block I undid. NSM is still blocked.

-Snowspinner


body:
Though I was not one of the blocking admins, I support blocking NSM88,
and would reblock. My grounds are not "he is a Nazi" nor "he is
disruptive." I was willing to block upon seeing his userpage and name.

The fact of the matter is, "National Socialist Movement Heil Hitler" is
an offensive username. Putting Nazi images on your userpage has the
same effect as an offensive username. No matter how good his
contributions might have turned out to be, they could not be made
effectively from that account. So I consider it to be, if anything, a
special case of offensive usernames.

-Snowspinner


subject: [WikiEN-l] The Censorship Lie

body:
On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 21:22:51 -0000 (GMT), Tony Sidaway
<minorityreport at bluebottle.com> wrote:
> Skyring said:
> >
> > And guess what? If you look at what the general public regards as good
> > encyclopaedias in this day and age, you'll see no Autofellatio, no
> > Goatse, no terrorist beheadings. I suggest that the people who think
> > that such material belongs in a good encyclopaedia are a tiny
> > minority.
>
> Evidently not, else they would be so massively outnumbered on Wikipedia
> that such articles would be a cinch for VfD.

Hmmm. Wikipedia as the real world. Even in microcosm it doesn't come
close to being a true reflection. Most people in RL don't spend their
days fooling around writing an encyclopaedia.

--
Peter in Canberra


from_name: S.M.Sabri S.M.Ismail

subject: [WikiEN-l] new user

body:
From: "NSK" <nsk2 at wikinerds.org>
> On Wednesday 16 February 2005 18:29, Karl A. Krueger wrote:
>> It's a sign of recognition to other neo-Nazis.
>> For other numerical examples, compare 420, 93, 42, 23, or 17.
> I suggest that all users using neo-Nazi numbers be monitored by the sysops,
> and in case we find they are inserting Nazi POV, or displaying Nazi symbols,
> or generally promoting Nazism in Wikipedia, then they should be banned
> forever (and notify authorities etc if possible).

Ooh, 23 and 42. Just the numbers I like to use online.
regards, sabre23t =^.^=
... btw, 23 there is a play on "2/3rd" that is a play on "toothed" ... ;-)

--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.8.8 - Release Date: 14.02.05


from_name: Tony Sidaway

body:
Bill Konrad said:
>
> Nonsense. For more than 99% of the articles there would be absolutely
> no  question regarding whether or not the content is suitable.
>
I think we're talking to cross purposes. Your statement does not
contradict mine.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Naughty/violent pictures

body:
Arno M said:
> --- Arno M <redgum46 at lycos.com> wrote:
> ....
>> It is not an encycopedia's task to do PR for terrorists,
>> especially
>> ones who are as ruthless as these.
> Chris Mahan replied:
> Then Auschwitz pics are out of the question, right?
> -----
>
> Wrong. There are plenty of pictures of that atrocity that are not
> excessively violent.

Smiling people posing for a snap on their way to the gas chamber, that
kind of thing?


subject:
Child porn and wikipedia (was [WikiEN-l] Re: Autofellatio - NO to
	that image)

body:
Arno M said:
>
> One point though: Florida is not the world so I'm nt sure why its laws
> are getting so much attention here....

Liability.  The servers are in Florida.


from_name: David Gerard

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: WikiEN-l Digest, Vol 19, Issue 87

body:
geni (geniice at gmail.com) [050217 06:35]:

> > Agreed.

> Which is why it is od that no one has anaged to give a direct answer
> to my question about what information the picture adds to the article.

I did precisely that:

    http://mail.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2005-February/019703.html

"That it's actually possible. A line drawing really is not a substitute."

- d.


subject:
Child porn and wikipedia (was [WikiEN-l] Re: Autofellatio - NO
	tothat image)

body:
Daniel Mayer said:
> --- Jack Lutz <jack-lutz at comcast.net> wrote:
>> >One point though: Florida is not the world so I'm nt sure why its
>> >laws are
>> getting so much attention here....
>>
>> Wikimedia is located in Florida.
>
> The image in question is a cartoon of a little girl with her bare
> bottom exposed. That's all, just her bare bottom. I don't know about
> Florida, but commercials for baby products in California *very* often
> show the bare bottoms of very young children (real ones, not cartoons).

She appears to be holding a teddy bear with a large dildo attached to its
crotch.


subject: [Foundation-l] Apology to David Gerard and explanation

body:
Walter van Kalken (walter at vankalken.net) [050217 08:48]:

> For now I want to apologize to David Gerard. I am under a lot of stress.
> And since I felt that I had given the reason for me not to contact my
> provider nor to change it. Plus external reasons nothing to do with
> wikipedia I just blew up. I had no right to address him with the words I
> did. I am sorry for making an ass out of myself.

No prob. Sorry for being so terse.

- d.


from_name: Michael Keppler

subject: [Wikitech-l] embedding flash movies

body:
Stan Wiechers schrieb:
> The codebase attribute gets translated.
>
> Is there a way to turn that off?

Surrounding that all with <nowiki>...</nowiki> doesn't help?

Ciao, Michael.


body:
Tony Sidaway wrote:
> Bill Konrad said:
>> I do not understand how you
>> can  maintain that all editors would have to bowlderize all of their
>> edits when  for more than 99% of the articles there is no consideration
>> whatsoever of  bowlderization being an issue.
>
> Well there you go.  Who said that it wouldn't be an issue in all edits,
> for all editors?

I do for one. Off the top of my head I can't think of a single article that
I've contributed to in a significant way that would likely ever need any
sort of bowlderization to meet any reasonable sort of acceptability (not
some hypothetical extreme form of censorship).

> Suppose we had a rule saying "no use of the word 'sparrow'".

Now you're just being even more exagerratedly silly.

Bkonrad


from_name: Christiaan Briggs

subject: [WikiEN-l] The Censorship Lie

body:
I'm intrigued by the efforts to label this an issue of editorial
control. That presumes an extremely narrow definition of the word
censorship and seems wholly disingenuous to me.

Still no one has attempted a rational response to my question to
Jimbo...
What is it about a picture of a man performing autofellatio in an
article about autofellatio that makes it "pornographic"?

At the end of the day this is about censoring images for the sake of
the prudish and the squeamish, whether it be that of an individual,
organisation or on behalf of a sub-culture.

We can debate until the cows come home but we're never going to reach
agreement on the points as they're being argued because this isn't so
much a debate about whether an image is appropriate or not but a debate
about which world view will prevail on Wikipedia: one that attempts to
self-censor on the grounds of prudery and squeamishness, or one that
doesn't.

The beauty is we don't have to come to an agreement; many of us have
been able to agree to a technical solution that skirts around the whole
issue and leaves censorship up to the enduser. So why we're still
debating instead of implementing the idea I'm not entirely sure.

Christiaan


from_name: Puddl Duk

subject: [WikiEN-l] The Censorship Lie

body:
--- Christiaan Briggs <christiaan at last-straw.net>
wrote:

> I'm intrigued by the efforts to label this an issue
> of editorial
> control. That presumes an extremely narrow
> definition of the word
> censorship and seems wholly disingenuous to me.
>
> Still no one has attempted a rational response to my
> question to
> Jimbo...
> What is it about a picture of a man performing
> autofellatio in an
> article about autofellatio that makes it
> "pornographic"?
>
> At the end of the day this is about censoring images
> for the sake of
> the prudish and the squeamish, whether it be that of
> an individual,
> organisation or on behalf of a sub-culture.
>
> We can debate until the cows come home but we're
> never going to reach
> agreement on the points as they're being argued
> because this isn't so
> much a debate about whether an image is appropriate
> or not but a debate
> about which world view will prevail on Wikipedia:
> one that attempts to
> self-censor on the grounds of prudery and
> squeamishness, or one that
> doesn't.
>
> The beauty is we don't have to come to an agreement;
> many of us have
> been able to agree to a technical solution that
> skirts around the whole
> issue and leaves censorship up to the enduser. So
> why we're still
> debating instead of implementing the idea I'm not
> entirely sure.
>
> Christiaan
>

If you really want to look at it that way then every
time you've reverted someone, or deleted a single
letter in an edit, you have censored.

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo


body:
geni (geniice at gmail.com) [050217 09:27]:

> >     http://mail.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2005-February/019703.html

> > "That it's actually possible. A line drawing really is not a substitute."

> But failed to say why a line drawing is not a subsitute (argument by
> assertion logical fallacy in other words).

Because I assumed it obvious that a photo was a photo and a line drawing
was an artist's creation.

- d.


from_name: Aphaia

subject: [Foundation-l] Blocking on Japan

body:
On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 17:51:44 +0900, Tietew <tietew-wikipedia at tietew.net> wrote:
> I stopped proxyblockbot temporarily.
> At least, until proper blocking policy of open proxies is
> settled, I do not restart it.

I am glad on your decision. I appliciate you on that. I know no
discussion arose on this issues and guess it was hard for you to make
a decision solely, specially it is not your personal idea but based on
the community approval in silence and perhaps expectation.
Again, thank you.

????????????????????????????????????????????
???????????????????????????????????????????
??????????????????????????????

I hope this issue will gather more interest on JA WP and the
discussion will go further.

????????????????????????
????????????????

--
Aphaea@*.wikipedia.org
email: Aphaia @ gmail (dot) com


subject: [Foundation-l] Blocking on Japan


list: wiktionary-l

from_name: eG

subject: [Wiktionary-l] The Japanese Wiktionary have been locked temporarily

body:
Dear Wiktionary community,

The Japanese Wiktionary have been locked until we'd establish the basic
policies. In brief, the matter was lack of motivated and dedicated
contributors there. That's shame but true. Here I report the reason and
background in detail.

This project has 2,000 articles and seems to be not so inactive.
However, many of members think the current state is terrible. Many of
articles have been edited by sock-puppets and vandal(s) who seems to be
banned from Wikipedia. Most of basic policies remain untouched. We had
tried to do something several times, those were failed. One of major
reasons of the failure was copyright issues under Japanese law, I
suppose. There are three admins but now they are inactive and two of
them have expressed their will to resign, moreover, no one requested for
adminship. Thus, the Wiktionary became bleak. It also might threaten
novel contributors.

I'm afraid vandals and non-cooperative people waste the project if we
would leave actual status. There are less motivated people than
non-preferables. So I proposed the temporal closure on the Village pump.
The suggestion and discussion were absolutely open. I announced it
clearly on the Main page and head of Recentchanges. All of visited
people must be noticed. After a week, as you know, the result was 8
supports and 1 objection. Now the oppose seems to accept this suggestion
because s/he did not express opposing argument when I ascertained the
request and s/he seems to be cooperative to solve the issues. After the
counting, we got 4 new supports, including 1 sysop. Most of us think we
have to have such policies before editing and stop to edit now. To
establish those policies would be an effortful work and take long time.

This is the reason and background.

I hope my next post would be a report of re-open of the Japanese Wiktionary.

Sincerely,

   eG [[m:User:Electric goat]]
__________________________________
Let's Celebrate Together!
Yahoo! JAPAN
http://pr.mail.yahoo.co.jp/so2005/


subject: [WikiEN-l] new user

body:
From: "NSK" <nsk2 at wikinerds.org>
> On Wednesday 16 February 2005 18:29, Karl A. Krueger wrote:
>> It's a sign of recognition to other neo-Nazis.
>> For other numerical examples, compare 420, 93, 42, 23, or 17.
> I suggest that all users using neo-Nazi numbers be monitored by the sysops,
> and in case we find they are inserting Nazi POV, or displaying Nazi symbols,
> or generally promoting Nazism in Wikipedia, then they should be banned
> forever (and notify authorities etc if possible).

Ooh, 23 and 42. Just the numbers I like to use online.
regards, sabre23t =^.^=

--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.8.8 - Release Date: 14.02.05


subject:
Fwd: For improvement of JA situation (Re: [Foundation-l] And blocked
	again)

body:
Sorry, Andre, you'll see it twice.  I forgot to include the address of
the list ...

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Aphaia <aphaia at gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 09:25:47 +0900
Subject: For improvement of JA situation (Re: [Foundation-l] And blocked again)
To: Andre Engels <andreengels at gmail.com>

On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 15:46:56 +0100, Andre Engels <andreengels at gmail.com> wrote:
> Aphaia:
> > But I have to point out Japanese Wikipedia lack administrative issues
> > in general. ...[omitted by the author herself] A dormant project
> > like Japanese Wikipedia can't react to things if they are so of urgent
> > and importance.
>
> I think you made a bad choice of words there. I would not want to call
> such a succesful project as the Japanese wp (according to the
> statistics having over 100 major contributors and 4000 edits a day)
> 'dormant' in any way.

Thank you for your comment, you let me notice my another wrong wording:
I would have liked to say in the first sentence of your quotation,
"Ja Wikipedia lacks  'an interest in' administrative issues..."

I admit it is very active project, but I doubt its activities have consciousness
enough appropriate to keep such a huge project and community.
I fear if it is an unsustainable growth. The balance of increase of content
and maintenance  there might be kept nowadays. So I don't think I have to change
the word dormant: a sleeping person could move very actively in a
dream but we don't
think him awake.

As for size, according to a daily and monthly survey of a Wikipedian
 (User:Mintlef, http://wikipedia.g.hatena.ne.jp/mintleaf/),
JA WP has 100 major registered contributors and probably a same number
of or larger
number of anonymous contributors;  It is another sign of lack of intentionally
avoiding involvement and engagement in my opinion. And this enormous anonymity
make JA issues harder, probably.  So here the first question is what we can do
motivate those anonyms to register themselves to the project. /##To
make a better and
comfortable project, perhaps - without personal attacks but feeling of
love and approval...
but how? I attempted some of expressions of approval and some people
found them nice,
but right now they are alike of petals in the ocean.)

> Still, I do understand that there is a problem
> here, and I hope you can solve it. It might be a kind of
> self-fulfilling prophecy too

I appreciate your understanding. But not only understanding, if
possible, would I
like you to give us a help and assistance? I expect it wouldn't be
helpful not only JA
but also other projects potentially.

Before diving into the topic, I would like you to remark a fact I am
not there a sysadmin.
I thought JA WP needed more helper and requested sysopship twice. My
requests were
rejected with 65-72% approvals [JA WP holds 75% criteria for
promotion]. In my view
some of JA users are afraid I am a sort of authoritarians, with an
iron rod, and/or suspect
I don't shere with them the view what Wikipedia should be. Perhaps at
the latter point
they might be correct, because I can't assume what kind of view they
have (some of you
remember the ascii art I showed). As for the former point,  I would
like not to comment here; it is more suitable to talk in other places,
not here on foundation-l. But please remind
my opinion belongs only to me as an individual and perhaps it is not a
typical view of JA Wikipedians.

In my view the core issue of JA WP issues are evasive attitude  of
users both registered
and anonymous. It causes lack of interest on administration and
maintenance,  avoidance of involvement and engagement, suppression of
good interaction
on responsibility.

And Japanese project is in fact younger than other projects and less
experienced,
or precisely, experiences what no other project has known.
Its increasing rate can be compared only to a few other projects and a
half of edits have
been done anonymously.  With language barriers the experiences on the
other projects
and wisdom are hardly available there on JA WP. I dare say, JA WP will
be someday
unsustainable, unless we began right now to make appropriate actions.

I assume, one of reasons some of JA people tend to use external forums
instead of Village Pump or talk page: fond of anonymity and avoidance of
responsibility under a stably using registered name. One day I opposed
a sysop say
she would post her question not to VP but to a certain forum there I
was harassed, but
she replied the latter would give her quicker responses. And I admit
the fact might be so,
but such de facto approval could cause a potential fork and make VP
and the community
deserted. In my opinion we have not rely on anonymous talk to make our
decision, though
those people who are for anonymity might have a different opinion. If
such additional forum
should be discussed to improve the situation, we could later be back
to this point.)

In my view now regretfully JA WP lacks appropriate governance in
proportion to its size.
It is one of most active project among us.  But perhaps one of most assistance
needed ones, I presume. I take this lack of interest and engagement
very serious.
It is not only a potential hazard on JA WP, but could be on other where people
are evasive in general. I heard on some small Wikipedias good editors
avoid being
nominated as sysop candidate, since they thought they couldn't - here we notice
not only lack of involvement but lack of self-esteem. In my opinion
the JA WP issues
are potentially shared by such other projects and we should seek their
resolutions.

So , as Andre pointed out, the task of administrators are there visibly harder
than on other projects I have ever involved since 2004  in my view.
And there among
the administrators again the lack of involvement arises. Recently an
user requested
for adminship but he said clearly he has no intent to use his
privileges positively.
I objected his promotion because in my view though he is a good editor
but not an
active contributors and showed clearly not to be an active
administrators. But an admin,
who is active contributors but seldom use his privileges in my view,
supported him
with words "it is not a problem, because we have already admins who don't use
their privileges).

In my view on JA WP such a strange idea has spread for a while - it has become
not merely functions to serve as a janitor but a title for eminent
users. Personally
I don't like this idea. In my view administrator are alike as janitors
or gardeners fighting with
vandals and trolls and keeping the project as clean as possible. It is
not a sort of honors,
though it is natural for us to  feel honored to be supported and
trusted by a number of
trusted people.  So here too, I think, JA needs to be improved to have
more admins;
if users have a wrong image, it could be a hazard for them to be appointed.

And last, the issues of malice and gossips come. I asked once some good editors
to let me recommend them to admins but was denied. They feared to be featured,
particularly on the forum I mentioned on the above. After my own
harassment, I can't
say they were too evasive. It is very a horrible experience, indeed.
And here would you
let me express my applications for those who support me: they made me succeed in
gather my strength in spirit again. But I have been fortunate. I have
friends out of JA WP
and could pour my worries in front of them. But most of Ja users are
active only on Ja
and would have no support out of their "community". People could
rumored it was a pity
but wouldn't cast the consolation to the person embarrassed directly.
Or, it  was my own
case, they came to the embarrassed person and said "I am very sorry. I
hope you are back.
But I can't support you in public. I don't like to be offended as like
as you. But you are
a strong person, I know. You can bear it. and I like you." It is not a
hostility indeed but
I don't think I would like to be a part of such a group. So now it
seems to me very
reasonable many past active users left that project within three months.

So we have here  to have another improvement, I guess, but at the same time,
I feel it is not my own task: the JA community wouldn't be able to notice
what is wrong in this situation, and deny to change the situation, in
the worst case.
If I recall correctly, Erik Moeller suggested the Foundation or the
Board would intervene,
I think it might be a possible reaction from us.
At least now the interested thread use the name of Wikipedia (it is
already a trademark),
though the Foundation legally has no right to close it, but can demand
it not to use
the name of Wikipedia or not to behave there is any sort of relation
between that external community and our project. And for the community
the Foundation has a right to intervene:
for example, not to refer to any other external communication ways as
if it is under the
control of the Foundation nor the project, not accepted as an official
part of the project,
nor recommended as an active part of the projects: As for the forum I
mentioned, in case
they can't improve themselves, it would be helpful at least for the
community the Board demands to the community not to refer nor
recommend it in the project documents, like the guidebook for newbies
(now they did). But on this point I think I am too involved and
will appreciate opinions of the third parties who aren't regulars
there and give a look
on the forum concerned. Both other JA users' feedbacks and ones of
other projects' participants will be appliciated.

--
Aphaea@*.wikipedia.org
email: Aphaia @ gmail (dot) com

--
Aphaea@*.wikipedia.org
email: Aphaia @ gmail (dot) com


subject: [Foundation-l] Proposal: Wikimedia Collaboration of the Week

body:
I have created

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_COTW

as a proposal for weekly cross-project, cross-language collaborations.
This could include things like help documents, promotion materials, or
work on underexposed projects. I'm sure people will come up with lots of
cool ideas for this. Besides getting things done, I hope this will
strengthen the awareness of Wikimedia as an organization and of Meta as
a site.

The idea is that thet Wikimedia Collaboration of the Week (WM-COTW) will
be featured on the Community Portal or a similar page of many (all?)
projects, in many (all?) languages. These should really be big,
worthwhile projects. Of course often they will not be completable in a
week, but it will drive people to Meta to work on them.

Please comment on this proposal or edit it. I would like to take it live
soon -- implementing it will be up to the individual wikis.

If someone wants to create a nice logo for this, that would be very neat!

All best,

Erik


from_name: Ray Saintonge

body:
NSK wrote:

>On Thursday 17 February 2005 11:06, Jack Lutz wrote:
>
>
>>Hello,
>>I understand user NSM88 had at one time an image of himself dressed in some
>>kind of Nazi or neo-Nazi uniform displayed on his user page, and that it
>>was deleted. Two issues stemming from that: deletion justification, and
>>personal attacks by admins.
>>
>>
>The administrators were right to delete it. Neo-Nazis will not be tolerated in
>Wikipedia.
>
A distinction still needs to be made between what is in an article, and
what is in a user page.  Neo-Nazi propaganda obviously has no role in
most articles.  If someone feels that he best describes himself by
appearing in a Neo-Nazi uniform he succeeds in telling a lot about
himself.  There is a fundamental contradiction when you try to suppress
Neo-Nazis by emulating their behaviour.

Ec


from_name: Jim Higson

subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: xml wiki representation

references:
<cuq5bq$5ps$1@sea.gmane.org> <4210C423.3060904@web.de>
	<cuqj47$rag$1@sea.gmane.org>

body:
Jim Higson wrote:

A question regarding lists as XML:

It seems like with the current parser nested lists are always contained
within listitems.

What should be the output from something like:

** foo
** bar

Should there be a 'phantom' listitem to contan the nested list, such as:

<list>
        <listitem>
                <list>
                        <listitem>foo</listitem>
                        <listitem>foo</listitem>
                </list>
        </listitem>
</list>

Or is it valid for a List to directly contain a list, ie:

<list>
        <list>
                <listitem>foo</listitem>
                <listitem>foo</listitem>
        </list>
</list>

Of course, starting two lists like that is bad syntax, but parsable. I can
build a decent parse tree of list wikitext now, but I'm not sure which is
the correct XML output.

--
Jim


body:
Tony Sidaway wrote:

>Sean Barrett said:
>
>
>>>Was the spaniel equipped with a large dildo?
>>>
>>>
>>No, I must confess that I missed that detail in my cursory glance at
>>the [[Lolicon]] image.
>>
>>
>
>Arguably it isn't just the dildo, it's the composition.  It's a child
>posed erotically.  The look on the child's face is one of submission.  The
>viewpoint is that of the abuser.  I'm familiar with the suncream ad and
>none of those elements is present.
>
I have no problem with the illustration.  It is a reasonable balance
between good taste and a fair representation of what the topic is
about.  The simple fact that many would not notice the dildo without
being told about it says a lot about the care that went into choosing
the image.  I'm sure that the contributor could have found far more
objectionable drawings if he had so wanted.

Ec


from_name: Jim Trodel

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: The Censorship Lie

body:
> From: Christiaan Briggs <christiaan at last-straw.net>
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] The Censorship Lie
> To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Message-ID: <0b8dfe7f2fc3ef7aa72e882894ea26b8 at last-straw.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
>
> I'm intrigued by the efforts to label this an issue of editorial
> control. That presumes an extremely narrow definition of the word
> censorship and seems wholly disingenuous to me.
>
> Still no one has attempted a rational response to my question to
> Jimbo...
> What is it about a picture of a man performing autofellatio in an
> article about autofellatio that makes it "pornographic"?
>
> At the end of the day this is about censoring images for the sake of
> the prudish and the squeamish, whether it be that of an individual,
> organisation or on behalf of a sub-culture.
>
Editorial control is what we do everyday in deciding what stays in our
out. Censoring would be to delete all mention of a specific item
including systematically deleting any reference or access to the
subject matter. Censorship is not continuing to provide easy access to
information or images while not forcing it on everyone. Read Farenheit
451 for (albiet extreme) real censorship - or other efforts in the
past to systemically burn books to remove them from the library and
prevent all access. Limiting access is often called censorship but is
not.

As I have recently commented on the image in questions talk page - the
intransigence of some to the completely reasonable proposal to
exercise some discretion by making it a link just makes me want to the
take the battle up a notch and just get rid of the picture from
wikipedia - make it an external link (still not censorship - just what
I would consider better discretion).

Jim


body:
Tony Sidaway wrote:

> Bill Konrad said:
>> Tony Sidaway wrote:
>>
>>> Suppose we had a rule saying "no use of the word 'sparrow'".
>>
>> Now you're just being even more exagerratedly silly.
>
> Absolutely not.  I'm trying to illustrate that it is technically easier
> for a group that has a specific need for bowdlerized content to filter
> existing unbowdlerized content than to require all editors to edit to yet
> another limitation of their expression, and that instruction creep of this
> kind is both undesirable (because it limits appropriate use of certain
> words, concepts and images) and unnecessary (because only the group in
> question knows at any given time what it does and does not find acceptable
> to it).

Well, I do not find your arguments convincing. I am in agreement with
several others who have indicated that if we as a community cannot come to
some agreement about not openly displaying patently offensive images, then I
may need to reconsider how much I want to be associated with such a
community. I mean, I love the openness and freedom of Wikipedia, but there
are limits to most everything within the scale of human experience. I think
we need to aim for the semi-mythical Golden Mean in which the vast majority
of the content is acceptable to the vast majority of people, even if it
means excluding or "bowlderizing" a tiny fraction of content at the extreme
edges.

Bkonrad


from_name: Andre Engels

subject:
Fwd: Article ownership Re: avoiding forks (was Re: [Wikipedia-l]
	public service ads in Wikipedia?)

body:
On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 20:04:05 -0500, Stirling Newberry
<stirling.newberry at xigenics.net> wrote:

> More people not tied to the original dispute does two things. First, it
> takes personality conflicts off the table, which are a regrettable part
> of most edit wars. Second, it reduces the ability of groups to harden
> into place by getting closer to a statistical sampling of opinion. 2
> people self selected to edit an article probably have views which are
> unusual, that's why they chose to edit the article. Ten or more is much
> more likely to reflect the broad range.

Sounds to me like a base for even more conflict. Everyone comes in
with his or her own opinion, and instead of finding a compromise
between 2 opinions, we suddenly have to find a compromise between 10.

> Importantly, this would help to
> reduce the incentive for each side to bring in friends and continue the
> revert war.

I don't see how. If there are more people discussing, it becomes only
more important to have more people speaking for your POV.

> If a larger group of wikipedians can't come to a consensus, then it
> clearly is time for a more formal RFC to be written. But again, the
> more people not party to the original dispute, the more likely that RFC
> is to focus on the actual issues.

And then? What does an RFC do? I don't see how this helps. There will
be yet more people coming in. If you're lucky they all agree with you.
More likely, some will agree with you, some with the other, some with
neither. And then? We still have the same conflict, but we have gone
from 2 to 10 to 20 people involved. I don't see how this resolves
anything.

Andre Engels


subject:
avoiding forks (was Re: [Wikipedia-l] public service ads in
	Wikipedia?)

body:
So in other words, they are different than we are, so they are the
ones that have to change.

Andre Engels

On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 17:42:09 -0700, Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com> wrote:
> Why would John Lott vandalise his own article? Isn't that kind of the
> opposite of what most celebrities do to their own articles?
>
> Anyhow, I think most academics that are somehow repelled by Wikipedia
> other than because of the basic concept (many of them complain about
> how chaotic it is) is because they don't want their work to be mixed
> and mashed with that of others.
>
> The way it works in academia in general is John Smith writes "An
> Introduction To Introductions", with all his expertise and theses and
> opinions and all the basic information organised /his/ way, and then
> year or two later Jack Doe decides he could do it better (at least in
> his POV) and writes "Introductions: An Introductory Reader".
>
> They will both have their ups and downs but what John Smith likes best
> about it is that he has one book that he wrote all by himself that he
> can brag about and Jack Doe has his own book too and can brag about it
> unceasingly.
>
> If an article is edited by all the top experts in the field, unless
> there is some other purpose behind it (ie, a more generalised work
> where each expert contributes from their more specific area of
> interest and/or expertise), they will not get as much pleasure out of
> it, and there is a much smaller chance that they will write it.
>
> This stems from the basic desire of everybody to be famous, at least a
> little bit in some way shape or form.
>
> There is no Wiki solution to this problem.
>
> Rather than us getting over their problems for them, we should stay
> exactly as we are and wait for them to change, which they probably
> will at some point (if we paid a couple of well-known academians in
> every field a little bit to tell everybody how great Wikipedia is and
> to contribute some, it would go a long way)
>
> Mark
>
> On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 21:46:29 -0000 (GMT), Tony Sidaway
> <minorityreport at bluebottle.com> wrote:
> > Sj said:
> > > It would be wonderful and appropriate to list contributors at the
> > > bottom of each page.
> >
> > Might be better if this was a "Special:".  Unless I see Marvin Minsky's
> > name in the list of contributors to an article to AI, or whatever, the
> > names of the contributors aren't going to help a lot, and I really can't
> > see fripperies like that persuading tenured professors, published authors
> > and so on, who aren't already interested in the concept, to contribute
> > their bits.
> > Having said that, the reason I got interested in Wikipedia was that I was
> > looking up the firearms researcher John Lott.  As it happened, a person on
> > an IP number that corresponded to the institute that employs John Lott
> > started to vandalize the John Lott article. An editor subsequently
> > reported on [[WP:ViP]] that the person identified himself as John Lott.
> > Now that was quite a fascinating introduction to the immediacy of
> > Wikipedia and to the organic, self-repairing nature of the system.
> > I was hooked.
> >
> > It was also nice to see that one or two people I knew from Usenet had
> > found their way here.
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>


body:
NSK wrote:

>On Thursday 17 February 2005 19:52, Ray Saintonge wrote:
>
>
>>There is a fundamental contradiction when you try to suppress
>>Neo-Nazis by emulating their behaviour.
>>
>>
>Democracy should not protect those who seek to destroy it.
>
A democracy that uses Nazi tactics is no longer a democracy.

Ec


from_name: Brion Vibber

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Wikipedia-l Digest, Vol 19, Issue 52

body:
YELYOSHI at aol.com wrote:
> This is yelyoshi at aol.com  Ples do not send any noe emails
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l

I have unsubscribed you from this list.

For future reference, you can unsubscribe yourself from the URL that's
listed at the end of every message send through the list.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 253 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/attachments/20050217/7f0bd812/attachment.pgp


from_name: Aparna

subject: [Wikitech-l] ICFAI University Press- Request for reprint permission


body:
David Monniaux wrote:

> Ray Saintonge wrote:
>
>> .  There is a fundamental contradiction when you try to suppress
>> Neo-Nazis by emulating their behaviour.
>
> Godwin Point (i.e. baselessly accusing people of emulating
> nazi/fascist behavior).
>
> Perhaps we should concentrate on some facts: namely, that person was
> editing articles related to Jews and heavily pushing certain very
> specific points of views (holocaust denial) everywhere (even though
> these points of views were already discussed in relevant pages),
> including in headlines.
>
> In short, the user was very very probably a troll intent on disrupting
> Wikipedia.

If you had chosen to look at my whole post rather than just the point
that amuses you you would have seen that my reference was ONLY to the
picture on his user page.  It would be inappropriate for me to comment
on the POVs that he expressed on other articles because I have no
intention of reviewing them, so I didn't.  Nor did I comment on his
banning, which may very well be justified by his behaviour.  My point
was strictly limited to a user's rights to portray himself on his own
user page in a manner that best describes him.

And who was "baselesly accused"?  Essentially, I was commenting on those
who proclaim, "We will not tolerate ..."  The Nazis did a very effective
job of not tolerating.

Ec


references:
<cuq5bq$5ps$1@sea.gmane.org>
	<4210C423.3060904@web.de>	<cuqj47$rag$1@sea.gmane.org>
	<cv1qq7$5s2$1@sea.gmane.org>

body:
Jim Higson wrote:
> What should be the output from something like:
>
> ** foo
> ** bar
>
> Should there be a 'phantom' listitem to contan the nested list, such as:
[snip]
> Or is it valid for a List to directly contain a list, ie:

In HTML, a list cannot directly contain another list; the child list
must sit inside a list item. If you break the list tree by skipping a
level in this way you will get a phantom bullet point.

(If you just want to indent to second level, you can do this:

:* foo
:* bar

which will make the top-level list a definition list which has no
visible item marker.)

> Of course, starting two lists like that is bad syntax, but parsable. I can
> build a decent parse tree of list wikitext now, but I'm not sure which is
> the correct XML output.

It could be perfectly good and correct if that's how that schema is
defined. However it may be better to stick with how the HTML lists work.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 253 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20050217/7c0ea77a/attachment.pgp>


from_name: Felix Wan

subject:
[Wikipedia-l] Re: Quenya language request,
	and Chinese Wikipedia again

body:
On Thu, February 17, 2005 3:15 am, MilchFlasche?????? said:
> On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 15:45:53 -0800 (PST), Felix Wan
> <felixwiki at earthsphere.org> wrote:
>> Meanwhile, I am trying to recruit new volunteers for the project:
>> http://www.cantonese.org.cn/bbsxp/ShowForum.htm?forumid=6
>>
> We really need contributors. I pray that more people who types
> Cantonese hanzi everyday should join the testing.
>
For your information, I posted a message at another forum and received
much opposition.  The reasons are similar to the opposition here:
http://www.cantonese.sheik.co.uk/phorum/read.php?1,34242

Felix Wan


body:
Jimbo said:
>
> What Florida does not do is *require* us to get rid of this.
>
Yes, I suppose that's what I meant.  So, to the question: is an eroticized
drawing of a child abuse victim suitable for Wikipedia?


from_name: Arno M

subject: [WikiEN-l] Naughty/violent pictures

body:
--- Arno M <redgum46 at lycos.com> wrote:
...
> It is not an encycopedia's task to do PR for terrorists,
> especially
> ones who are as ruthless as these.
Chris Mahan replied:
Then Auschwitz pics are out of the question, right?
-----

Wrong. There are plenty of pictures of that atrocity that are not excessively violent.

Further, many violent pictures and movies (eg people beng strangled with piano
wire) were made by the Nazis themselves for their own gratification. It
was not propaganda for public consumption.

This contrasts strongly with Berg's murder. That was meant to be circulated by
those who made it. y publihing it here, wikipedia untimately played into their
hands.

--
_______________________________________________
Find what you are looking for with the Lycos Yellow Pages
http://r.lycos.com/r/yp_emailfooter/http://yellowpages.lycos.com/default.asp?SRC=lycos10


subject: [WikiEN-l] Shock sites (was Naughty/violent pictures)

body:
"I agree that we shouldn't be displaying links to the beheadings [of Nick erg].
We've done it in around six articles. One of the websites we give the URL
for (though not as a live link) is the ogrish site, which also shows
young women having sex with horses. The fact that we have to crawl
into the gutter to find these videos ought to tell us something. I
wish we'd show more maturity as a community when it comes to stuff
like this.

Sarah"

I agree with slimvirgin - the page referred to,
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_shock_sites), is also a disgrace.

At least its existance is being debated here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:List_of_shock_sites/delete

I am not against the idea of a shock sites article, but providing
samples and links is ridiculous.

--
_______________________________________________
Find what you are looking for with the Lycos Yellow Pages
http://r.lycos.com/r/yp_emailfooter/http://yellowpages.lycos.com/default.asp?SRC=lycos10


body:
Tony Sidaway said:
"geni said:
>> Someone informed me that the law of Florida doesn't allow us to get
>> rid of the bit of child porn at [[Lolicon]].  Perhaps we should get a
>> second opinion from the Foundation's lawyers.  I would be happy to see
>> that trash off the website; at least the autofellatio guy is a
>> grown-up doing it for fun.
>
> US law allows simulated child porn at present (ie drawings, cgi, young
> looking models etc).
>
Well I won't make a big deal of it, but I do think it's absolutely vile."

No it is gross, but at least it's not a photo. I must say I'd never heard
of Lolicon until I saw went to that page and saw this just now.
I learn something new every day...

One point though: Florida is not the world so I'm nt sure why its laws are
getting so much attention here....

--
_______________________________________________
Find what you are looking for with the Lycos Yellow Pages
http://r.lycos.com/r/yp_emailfooter/http://yellowpages.lycos.com/default.asp?SRC=lycos10


from_name: Alex Y. Kwan

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Alex Y. Kwan

body:
Hello,

pinco wrote:
> I would be very grateful to you if you could help me having a look at:
> http://eo.wiktionary.org/wiki/Mi_amas_vin and writing in the original
> scripting the chinese (cantonese) sentences :)

I'd love to, but I don't know exactly where I should add it. Under
Chinese, probably, but that means the "wo ai ni" should be under
Chinese->Mandarin so that I can add a Chinese->Cantonese category. Don't
know what's either of those in Esperanto, though. :)

little Alex


subject:
[Wikipedia-l] Re: Quenya language request, and Chinese Wikipedia
	again

body:
Hello,

MilchFlasche?? wrote:
> So "Alex" could be "Alexandria"? :wink:

Alexandra. :)

My primary school teacher tried to give me "Sandra" as a nickname. Argh.
I actually like the "Lexa" that my friend came up with, except I don't
want to be linked with Lex Luthor, however much I like him in "Smallville".

little Alex


subject: [WikiEN-l] New Users on New Wikipedia?

body:
"Look what the cat dug up:  [[User:NSM88]]"

For someone who was only in Wikipedia for about 2.5 hours ,NSM88 has
certainly created a lot of fuss here.

(see http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=NSM88)

What if two of them had come by....

Incidentally, if this guy did blow in from the Stormfront, then there seems to have
been a change of mind over there. Here's a St Valentines Day note that appeared there:

"The only solution is to setup our own wikipedia, which is called a fork and to set it up with the idea of promoting neutrality, balance and a wide range of point of views. Not to mention keeping a very close eye on Jewish topics and people suspected of being jew biased."

--
_______________________________________________
Find what you are looking for with the Lycos Yellow Pages
http://r.lycos.com/r/yp_emailfooter/http://yellowpages.lycos.com/default.asp?SRC=lycos10


body:
Rich Holton said:
>
>
> I take extreme exception to the statement that "Neo-Nazis will not be
> tolerated in Wikipedia." In my opinion that statement is in direct
> contradiction to the concept of NPOV.
>
Agreed.  Neo-nazis are not incapable of making useful NPOV edits, in my
experience, and their perspective makes them more likely to spot some
forms of POV that might escape the radar of other editors.  They can also
do useful research, as that chap did on the article about the New Zealand
NF rally.  The result of their contribution would be higher quality
encyclopedic content, and their views are hardly likely to predominate and
overbalance articles in the prevailing climate of Wikipedia.
As with all editors with a mission, their edits should be, and almost
certainly will, be watched more closely than others.  Recent experience
has shown us that counter-activism can also be a problem--this isn't new,
I saw a similar problem on Usenet nearly ten years ago, but Wikipedia has
the editorial control structures to alleviate the effect of such
tit-for-tat.


body:
Hello,

Mark Williamson wrote:
> Or Alexis, or Alexandra. Although in recent times it may just be
> "Alex", especially in Hong Kong and Singapore.

"Alex" in HK is definitely a boy's name. I actually hate it when people
use nicknames as their legal names, especially when it's because they
don't know any better. But that's my problem and no one else's.

little Alex


body:
Rich Holton said:
>
> --- Tony Sidaway <minorityreport at bluebottle.com> wrote:
>
>>So, to the question: is an eroticized drawing of a child abuse victim
>>suitable for Wikipedia?
>
> Aside from an article on "eroticized drawings of child abuse victims",
> I can't imagine any place such a drawing would be relevant. And I'm not
> sure that the topic would deserve an article of its own.

Well that's apparently what Lolicon is about--child porn manga and anime.


from_name: Stan Wiechers

subject: [Wikitech-l] embedding flash movies

body:
Excellent, thank you. That will help.

-----Original Message-----
From: wikitech-l-bounces at wikimedia.org
[mailto:wikitech-l-bounces at wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Brion Vibber
Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2005 4:37 AM
To: Wikimedia developers
Subject: Re: [Wikitech-l] embedding flash movies

Stan Wiechers wrote:
> I'm looking for suggestions and best practices on how to embed flash
> movies into the mediawiki.

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Write_your_own_MediaWiki_extension

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)

This message is the property of R/GA Media Group Inc. and contains information which may be privileged or confidential. It is meant only for the intended recipients and/or their authorized agents. If you believe you have received this message in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail or by forwarding this message to postmaster at rga.com, and destroy any printed or electronic copies of the message. Any unauthorized use, dissemination, disclosure, or copying of this message or the information contained in it, is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. Thank you.


subject:
[Foundation-l] Re: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Quenya language request,
	and Chinese Wikipedia again

body:
Hello,

Christopher Mahan wrote:
> Obviously not expert enough. Ask the Chinese embassy for an official
> statement.

I wouldn't trust the Chinese embassy for a neutral and fair answer. It's
the last place I would ask.

> Get off your high horse and pony up half a million dollars and 5000
> man hours for wikipedia and then we'll talk about ignorance.

Just because one is willing to volunteer his/her time and money doesn't
mean one isn't ignorant and vice versa. The two have no correlation, afaik.

> Chinese wikipedia will sort itself out. Like they say: "Under the
> Manchus for 500 years, can wait 10 more."

LOL, even the most fatalistic of we Chinese will eventually become
proactive sometimes.

little Alex


from_name: Mark Williamson

subject:
[Wikipedia-l] Polite Thoughtful Neo-Nazis, was NSM88,
	deletion of user page image, personal attacks

body:
I have relatives who died in the holocaust, and I am against
everything Nazis stand for, yet I will defend to the death their right
to free speech and I believe that they should be just as welcome as
anybody else in editing Wikipedia as long as they can maintain NPOV.

An image of a swastika upsets me very much. However it is not for the
reason you might presume. Whenever I see a swastika, I think of a
symbol which has been used for thousands of years in China, India, and
elsewhere which was only recently used by such a hateful group of
people, but which to over 2 billion people still symbolises luck and
happiness. It upsets me that a group can take a symbol which has such
a good reputation and commit such horrors that they take the lives of
millions of people and use such a sacred religious symbol to stand for
their actions.

My grandfather faught in WWII against Nazis. But as I said before, I
don't see why we shouldn't allow these people to put images of
themselves on their own userpage wearing a nazi uniform, except
/maybe/ that it offends many people. We may be upset by their beliefs
but if they play by the rules of Wikipedia, we have no right to kick
them out just because they are filled with hate.

Mark

On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 16:17:05 +0100, Caroline Ewen <caroline at web.lu> wrote:
> Now that I've watched the discussion, I have some things to say about this.
>
> First of all, I *strongly* object to arguments like "nothing more 'graphic'
> than a 'Nazi uniform'."...wearing a Nazi uniform is quite a strong
> statement, at least for Europeans. "If I should upload an image of myself
> wearing a Democratic or Republican pin, for example, would that be
> "disruptive"?" -> How can one even THINK of putting a democrat or republican
> on the same level as a Nazi ?
>
> I completely support NSK when he says that "the administrators were right to
> delete it. Neo-Nazis will not be tolerated in Wikipedia." Maybe people
> outside Europe don't get the point as much as we do, since we had
> grandparents fighting in WWII, lost family members, and obviously have
> already a different attitude towards all Nazi-symbols. Plus, on the lb wiki,
> the guy would have been banned from the start since nazi-symbols are
> considered to be illegal and must not be posted in Luxembourg (even if the
> servers aren't in Lux, the pages are written in luxembourgish and the public
> is luxembourgish).
>
> Ok, maybe the way the administrator proceeded to make the blocks was not in
> the same way that someone else would have done them, but that's the only
> objection I have to make. How can we possibly tolerate a user who already by
> his username does offend a great deal of other contributors and moreover has
> links on his userpage to a site where I can't even find the words to
> describe it.
>
> IMHO,
>
> Caroline aka Bris?is (lb, fr).
>
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : wikipedia-l-bounces at Wikimedia.org
> [mailto:wikipedia-l-bounces at Wikimedia.org] De la part de David Gerard
> Envoy? : jeudi 17 f?vrier 2005 15:29
> ? : wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> Objet : Re: [Wikipedia-l] Polite Thoughtful Neo-Nazis, was NSM88,deletion of
> user page image, personal attacks
>
> Fred Bauder (fredbaud at ctelco.net) [050218 01:23]:
>
> > True and in our human attempt to adequately describe such folks we use
> > the words "totalitarian" and "terrorist", in reference to such
> > organizations and governments as the People's Republic of China and
> > individuals such as Osama bin Ladin. Such folks do not hesitate to
> > "mess up other things for the cause". There is every reason, based on
> > their history, to presume that they will conduct themselves in that
> > way on Wikipedia and in fact they routinely do so, some crudely, some with
> a measure of sophistication.
>
> Astroturfing in general is going to be a problem. See:
>
>   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:204.251.90.242
>
> The edit in question is here:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Yahoo%21&diff=prev&oldid=10339741
>
> That's a crude example. I am certain there are much less crude examples
> ongoing as we speak.
>
> - d.
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>


subject:
[Wikipedia-l] Re: NSM88, deletion of user page image,
	personal attacks

body:
lol. Casino bots for equal representation!

Mark

On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 19:14:30 +0100, Anthere <anthere9 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
> NSK a ?crit:
> > On Thursday 17 February 2005 19:52, Ray Saintonge wrote:
> >
> >>There is a fundamental contradiction when you try to suppress
> >>Neo-Nazis by emulating their behaviour.
> >
> >
> > Democracy should not protect those who seek to destroy it.
>
> I get very similar messages on my blog. Generally, they come from casino
> bots.
>
> Ant
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>


from_name: Jochen Magnus

subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: Update of download.wikimedia.org/archives/de/

body:
Brion Vibber wrote:
> What's wrong with the Feb 9 dump?

I hope, nothing is wrong with it ;-)

Normally we load "cur_table.sql.bz2" from
http://download.wikimedia.org/archives/de/. This file was last updated
Feb 3.

But now I found a file named "20050209_cur_table.sql.bz2" in the
directory, which is newer (Feb 9). So I am bemused, but this may be due
to my humbly english in our conversation.

jo


from_name: Tony Sidaway

subject: [Wikipedia-l] NSM88, deletion of user page image, personal attacks

body:
Fred Bauder said:
> In my
> opinion we should change that policy and permit exclusion of open
> advocates of totalitarian ideologies and terrorism.

Why?  ArbCom can already exclude anybody who misbehaves.  The policy as
you're described it is also subject to interpretation.  The words
"totalitarian" and "terrorism" are both very slippery.


subject:
Child porn and wikipedia (was [WikiEN-l] Re: Autofellatio - NO
	tothat image)

body:
Sean Barrett said:
>
> For those whose childhood didn't include this iconic image: Coppertone
> was a sunscreen product, the advertisements for which showed a drawing
> of a very young (under 10 years old) girl whose swimsuit bottom (as I
> recall, she wore nothing on top) was being pulled down by a cocker
> spaniel to reveal the contrast between her well-tanned back and very
> pale bottom.

Was the spaniel equipped with a large dildo?


from_name: David Gerard

subject: [WikiEN-l] new user

body:
From: "NSK" <nsk2 at wikinerds.org>
>On Wednesday 16 February 2005 18:29, Karl A. Krueger wrote:

>>It's a sign of recognition to other neo-Nazis.
>>For other numerical examples, compare 420, 93, 42, 23, or 17.

>I suggest that all users using neo-Nazi numbers be monitored by the sysops,
>and in case we find they are inserting Nazi POV, or displaying Nazi
>symbols,
>or generally promoting Nazism in Wikipedia, then they should be banned
>forever (and notify authorities etc if possible).

And those radio amateurs. Sending those greetings of "73s and HEIL
HITLER!!!!!" all the time. Ban the lot!

- d.


body:
Sean Barrett said:
>> Was the spaniel equipped with a large dildo?
>
> No, I must confess that I missed that detail in my cursory glance at
> the [[Lolicon]] image.

Arguably it isn't just the dildo, it's the composition.  It's a child
posed erotically.  The look on the child's face is one of submission.  The
viewpoint is that of the abuser.  I'm familiar with the suncream ad and
none of those elements is present.


from_name: NSK

subject:
Stirling Newberry (was Article ownership Re: avoiding forks (was
	Re: [Wikipedia-l] public service ads in Wikipedia?))

body:
On Thursday 17 February 2005 05:26, wiki pedista wrote:
> NSK said:
> > Have you ever wondered why I rarely edit at
>
> Wikipedia?
>
> > it's  because I know that nobody will know that an
>
> article or paragraph
>
> > was written  by me.
>
> That explains a lot. This person that continuously
> makes
> outrageous proposals, or just tries to plug his
> marginal
> project, isn't even a collaborator of Wikipedia.I know
> this is an open list, but this lack of
> self restrain is almost spam. I'm sure many of the
> subscribers to the list are getting at least a bit
> annoyed with him, but are too polite to say it.
>
> Well, I am not polite enough. Stirling, if you don't
> like our project and policies, please feel free not
> to adopt them in yours, but leave us alone, and
> stop making noise on the list.
>
> Sorry to the rest of the list by this completely
> unproductive message.
>
> AstroNomer

I thought personal attacks were prohibited here.

--
NSK
http://portal.wikinerds.org


subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: www.en.wikipedia.org

body:
Ginu George wrote:

> Type http://en.wikipedia.org
>
> remove that www from the browser

I think NSK knew that, but was pointing out it should redirect.


body:
On Thursday 17 February 2005 11:06, Jack Lutz wrote:
> Hello,
> I understand user NSM88 had at one time an image of himself dressed in some
> kind of Nazi or neo-Nazi uniform displayed on his user page, and that it
> was deleted. Two issues stemming from that: deletion justification, and
> personal attacks by admins.

The administrators were right to delete it. Neo-Nazis will not be tolerated in
Wikipedia.

--
NSK
http://portal.wikinerds.org


subject: [Wikitech-l] www.en.wikipedia.org

body:
I cannot access www.en.wikipedia.org, I know this isn't supposed to be the
right domain but I am sure many users make this mistake from time to time,
and it can easily be avoided by enabling some new dns aliases.

--
NSK
http://portal.wikinerds.org


subject:
Child porn and wikipedia (was [WikiEN-l] Re: Autofellatio - NO to
	that image)

body:
Rich Holton said:
>
>
> I plead half-awakeness as my excuse for not seeing your point.
>
No problem.  Sometimes I don't express my point as well as I should.

What's hitting me on the funny bone is that I don't see the same people
who are asking for the Autofellatio picture to be justified making the
same point about the Lolicon picture.  On the face of it, most of the
reasons advanced for getting rid of the autofellatio picture, or at least
making it a link, seem to hold up for Lolicon--if not even stronger.  But
the chap in the autofellatio picture is clearly an adult having a whole
heap of fun.  The girl in the Lolicon picture is submitting to child
abuse, and the presentation is, or is intended to be, erotic.  Perhaps the
fact that the latter picture is an anime drawing is the reason why it
seems to fly under so many radars.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Reply to Tony, David, and Christiaan

body:
Bill Konrad said:
> I do not understand how you
> can  maintain that all editors would have to bowlderize all of their
> edits when  for more than 99% of the articles there is no consideration
> whatsoever of  bowlderization being an issue.

Well there you go.  Who said that it wouldn't be an issue in all edits,
for all editors?
Suppose we had a rule saying "no use of the word 'sparrow'".  You could
argue that only a tiny minority of articles would need to be changed to
conform to this rule, but the end result would still be an encyclopedia
missing the word "sparrow", and into which it was not permitted to edit an
article to make it include the word sparrow. Thus all edits, all editors
and all articles would be affected by the anti-sparrow rule.
For people who hated the word "sparrow", it would be a lot easier for them
to produce a filtered snapshot of Wikipedia that did not contain the word
sparrow, and this would also keep instruction creep to a minimum.  People
who don't care about the word "sparrow" can use it in articles in complete
ignorance that it is anathema to a certain target audience, choosing to
use it whenever they think it is appropriate.  Thus references to the
utterances  of Robert Hellenga, Nigel Balchin, Salim Ali, Val Henry
Gielgud, Kent L. Koppelman, Caroline Chesbro, Fred Bodsworth, Terry Lane:
Sparrows Fall,, Mary Kevin O'Rourke, Janet Green, Benjamin Franklin, Dick Cheney,
Alexander Pope, William Shakespeare and of course the bible would not need
to be bowdlerized for the sake of sparrow-haters.  The word could be used
when its use was appropriate and encyclopedic.


body:
Hi Felix,

Many of the responses there anger me because they almost go so far as
to say that Cantonese is worthless as a language.

What about the guy who said something like "You will hardly get 50
characters in without wondering why Cantonese has so much 'junks'"?

Or the people who said "Cantonese should only be used for informal
things." without giving a valid reason?

The people who say Cantonese speakers can already use zh.wikipedia,
this is of course true but the same is true for Basque, Catalan,
Galician, Asturian, or Aragonese speakers using es.wikipedia, or
Sicilian speakers using the Italian Wikipedia, or Frisian or
Limburgish speakers using the Dutch Wikipedia, and so on and so forth.

Nearly every single one of the people who speaks these languages is
bilingual, but there is still seen a need for an encyclopedia in the
less formal local vernacular for almost the same reason bibles are
published in Algerian Arabic (vs fusha) but serious literature is not
- the desire to reach more people overrides in those cases the desire
to be prissy and use languages imposed on us by outsiders.

I wonder a few things about the people at that forum, first of all how
many of the people who answered were native Cantonese speakers? Many
of the things they said sounded exactly like something I would hear
from a monolingual person from Beijing but not a native speaker of
Cantonese from Guangzhou. Second of all how many of the people who
answered were from the mainland vs hongkong/macao/overseas? The
Mainland government has been telling people for years and years that
"Your language is illegitimate, you must use this Mandarin-based
language for all your writing instead because it promotes national
unity! NATIONAL UNITY! NATIONAL UNITY!!!", and only recently are many
people questioning that (some of the posts I see more recently from
native speakers say "I have believed unquestioningly for many years
that Baihuawen really was somehow superior to the local vernacular,
but a year or two ago I asked myself 'why?' and none of the answers I
could give were logical", or "I have used Baihuawen for writing all my
life until my son asked me why we don't write all the time in the
vernacular, like the kids do in SMS, and when I had no good answer I
decided to try it myself"), but in Hong Kong / Macao / Overseas the
attitude towards the local vernacular is much more open and relaxed
although there is even there some of the anti-vernacular attitude.

Mark

On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 11:37:40 -0800 (PST), Felix Wan
<felixwiki at earthsphere.org> wrote:
> On Thu, February 17, 2005 3:15 am, MilchFlasche?'???? said:
> > On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 15:45:53 -0800 (PST), Felix Wan
> > <felixwiki at earthsphere.org> wrote:
> >> Meanwhile, I am trying to recruit new volunteers for the project:
> >> http://www.cantonese.org.cn/bbsxp/ShowForum.htm?forumid=6
> >>
> > We really need contributors. I pray that more people who types
> > Cantonese hanzi everyday should join the testing.
> >
> For your information, I posted a message at another forum and received
> much opposition.  The reasons are similar to the opposition here:
> http://www.cantonese.sheik.co.uk/phorum/read.php?1,34242
>
> Felix Wan
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>


from_name: Sj

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Stirling Newberry

body:
<gives Stirling a cookie>
<give Astronomer a blue pill>
<tags "NSK was here" all over the local high school>

People should learn to spell 'Newberry', too :-)  j's scratchpad seems
to like the idea of a commentable citation index, btw.  If you come to
the next meetup you can  meet her in person...

SJ

On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 22:41:07 -0500, Stirling Newberry
<stirling.newberry at xigenics.net> wrote:
> I know this is an open list, but the least one could ask is that if you
> are going to make attacks, you bother to make sure you are shooting at
> the right person.
>
> On Feb 16, 2005, at 10:26 PM, wiki pedista wrote:
> > NSK said:
> >> Have you ever wondered why I rarely edit at
> > That explains a lot. This person that continuously makes
> > outrageous proposals, or just tries to plug his marginal
< <snip> >
> > Well, I am not polite enough. Stirling, if you don't

--
http://en.wikipedia.org/User:Sj


from_name: Tomer Chachamu

subject:
[Wikitech-l] ICFAI University Press- Request for reprint
	permission

body:
On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 11:24:49 +0530, Aparna <aparna at icfai.org> wrote:
> From
> ICFAI
>
> Dear Sir,
>
>  We find the article titled "Economy of Sri Lanka " quite useful and thus we would like to incorporate it in our forthcoming executive reference book on "Sri Lankan Economy" Hence we request you to permit us to publish the above referred article in our journal book.
>
>  Institute of Chartered Financial Analysts of India (ICFAI) is a non-profitable organization established to impart quality education in management and finance. Our publication wing "ICFAI Books" is publishing various digest journals/magazines and executive reference books for use of student of our institution for the purpose of academic discussion, study and research, besides application in practical functioning. It is basically a wing of our academic institution, meant for publishing to cater to the educative needs of students and staff. However journals/books are priced to recover the cost of editing, printing and distribution and not for making profits. Any money that eventually earned, if any, over and above the costs would be naturally included into the publication/academic pool for the above referred objectives only.
>
>  Besides generating original articles and books, we are deliberately providing enough fields for accommodating plurality of views and multiplicity of ideas for the benefit of learning and free flow of different thought on a variety of topics.
>
>  Hence, we seek your permission for publishing the above-mentioned article in our forthcoming book on "Sri Lankan Economy" and expect continued cooperation for spread of knowledge. We will acknowledge the source with due respect/as per your suggestion.
>
>  We would be glad if you can send us an early reply as we have a fast approaching deadline.
>
> Thanking you,
>
> Aparna Bellur
>
> (Member, Editorial Team)
>
> ICFAI Books
>
> 71, Nagarjuna Hills,
>
> Punjagutta, Hyderabad- 500082
>
> INDIA.
>
> Phone: 91 040 23435387/88
>
> Fax: 91 040 23435386

Please look at the GFDL at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Text_of_the_GNU_Free_Documentation_License

Essentially, all text on Wikipedia is licensed under the GFDL with no
Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts. You
can print any article you wish freely, but you must provide reference
to the original "transparent" copy, i.e. the web address of the
article.


subject:
Fwd: For improvement of JA situation (Re: [Foundation-l] And blocked
	again)

body:
On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 09:25:47 +0900, Aphaia <aphaia at gmail.com> wrote:

> > Still, I do understand that there is a problem
> > here, and I hope you can solve it. It might be a kind of
> > self-fulfilling prophecy too
>
> I appreciate your understanding. But not only understanding, if
> possible, would I
> like you to give us a help and assistance? I expect it wouldn't be
> helpful not only JA
> but also other projects potentially.

I am not sure what kind of assistance I can give, given that I do not
speak Japanese (well, at least not more than 50 words of it).

I did make a check, and found that indeed the Japanese Wikipedia has
a remarkably low number of admins. It has about the same number as the
Dutch one (ja: 31, nl: 34), even though the Dutch one is about half
the size of the Japanese one, and compared to other languages is
relatively low. The Polish and Swedish Wikipedias have considerably
more admins. I think that to compare to the other languages, the
Japanese number could easily be doubled.

> Before diving into the topic, I would like you to remark a fact I am
> not there a sysadmin.
> I thought JA WP needed more helper and requested sysopship twice. My
> requests were
> rejected with 65-72% approvals [JA WP holds 75% criteria for
> promotion]. In my view
> some of JA users are afraid I am a sort of authoritarians, with an
> iron rod, and/or suspect
> I don't shere with them the view what Wikipedia should be.

Interesting... On nl: we have had all requests approved upto now,
usually with no objections.

Andre Engels


from_name: Stan Shebs

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: [Wikipedia-l] "The God-King drives a Hyundai"

body:
Sj wrote:

>
>More :  http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/sj/2005/02/17#a797
>
Whaddayamean, the God-King is fallible!?

As an interesting data point relating to quality vs EB, I've been
going through 1911EB articles thought not to be in WP (about half
just need a redir), and cross-checking with present-day EB at the
same time - it's remarkable how some present-day EB articles are
nearly word-for-word identical with their 1911 versions, except
for being shortened by leaving out detail, references, and
citations, tsk tsk.

My current favorite is Felix Faure, who in 1911EB "died of apoplexy",
in present-day EB "died suddenly", while in WP we also find out just
what he was doing at the moment of death, heh-heh, plus we have an
article on the woman he was doing it with, she having a life story
of her own.

Stan


subject: [Wikipedia-l] "The God-King drives a Hyundai"


body:
The Arbcom cannot and should not exclude _advocates_, but it would
have good grounds to exclude _advocacy_, because that is hardly if
ever NPOV. If someone spends a large part of their Wikipedia time in
an area where after repeated attempts they do not seem to be willing
and able to write NPOV, I think arbitration could step in to forbid
them from editing on that subject.

However, such should be judged from the extent to which their POV
hinders their NPOV editing, not from the nature of the POV they are
editing from. Although it can hardly be avoided that we put the bar
higher for people with a more extreme and uncommon POV, this to me
means that we should encourage those who manage to pass that higher
bar and compliment them. I would be happy to see a neonazi write about
the major groups and leaders in their field.

Andre Engels

On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 06:01:01 -0700, Fred Bauder <fredbaud at ctelco.net> wrote:
> The Arbcom cannot exclude an advocate of totalitarianism or terrorism under
> our current policies, indeed, we cannot even accept a case on that basis
> alone. The user must go beyond advocacy and violate NPOV, make personal
> attacks, delete encyclopedic material, attempt to dominate a block of
> articles with aggressive POV editing, etc. before we can accept a case or
> even issue a mild rebuke. A polite thoughtful neo-nazi is welcome to edit
> under our current policies.
>
> The Arbcom has a few critics who think we do otherwise, but while there is
> prejudice against these folks once they fall into our clutches we do more or
> less follow expressed Wikipedia policy.
>
> Fred
>
> > From: "Tony Sidaway" <minorityreport at bluebottle.com>
> > Reply-To: wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 12:37:50 -0000 (GMT)
> > To: <wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org>
> > Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] NSM88, deletion of user page image, personal
> > attacks
> >
> > Fred Bauder said:
> >> In my
> >> opinion we should change that policy and permit exclusion of open
> >> advocates of totalitarian ideologies and terrorism.
> >
> > Why?  ArbCom can already exclude anybody who misbehaves.  The policy as
> > you're described it is also subject to interpretation.  The words
> > "totalitarian" and "terrorism" are both very slippery.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>


from_name: JAY JG

subject: [WikiEN-l] Naughty/violent pictures

body:
>From: "Tony Sidaway" <minorityreport at bluebottle.com>
>
>
>JAY JG said:
> >
> >
> >>From: "Tony Sidaway" <minorityreport at bluebottle.com>
> >>Are forks such a bad idea?
> >
> > Yes, forks are a bad idea, because the text in the forked articles
> > inevitably diverges.  You would end up with different articles on the
> > same  subject contradicting each other.
>
>Is this necessarily a problem?

Yes. If two articles on the same subject contradict each other, then either
we haven't done a proper NPOV job in writing them, or one is wrong.

Jay.


from_name: jellings

subject:
[Wiktionary-l] Re: [Wikitech-l] Re: Fwd: [Foundation-l] Import
	question

body:
Obviously my question has caused a serious issue.  I am thankful to
those who have offered help.

My goal was NOT to do a bulk loading into en.wiktionary.org or
wikipedia.org via a bot or anything else.  I wanted to do this on my
own installation from a file of my own work.  I tried looking around
on different wiki groups for the answer but was unsuccessful.

Slightly disappointed, but still working on it,

John

On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 20:34:32 +0100, Gerard Meijssen
<gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
> Ray Saintonge wrote:
>
> > Gerard Meijssen wrote:
> >
> >> Ray Saintonge wrote:
> >>
> >>> This might be raised in [[Wiktionary:Beer parlour]], but I suspect
> >>> that it would not receive a warm reception.  While the words which
> >>> are not yet in Wiktionary might be welcomed there would remain the
> >>> question of how do you propose to reconcile your contributions with
> >>> the words that we already have.  To the extent that any upload may
> >>> be possible it should also be done at a rate that is slow enough to
> >>> allow others to ask questions about each of your contributions.
> >>> Perhaps by first entering a small sample of your files you could
> >>> develop the confidence of the Wiktionary community that your
> >>> contributions are acceptable.
> >>>
> >>> Ec (en:Wiktionary sysop)
> >>
> >>
> >> Hoi,
> >> This is a great example where the en:wiktionary assumes that is only
> >> has been adressed when dictionary terms are mentioned. It also
> >> assumes that its practices are the same on all wiktionaries. It is
> >> only one wiktionary and they are not.
> >
> >
> > What a liar!!!
>
> A liar is someone who does not speak the truth. I am sorry that it hurts
> you to hear something that has some truth.
>
> >> There are several wiktionaries that welcome quality content and load
> >> them in bulk with a bot onto their pages. We even apply for temporary
> >> bot status so that it can be uploaded with a personalised bot (good
> >> for the GFDL requirements). This is a great way of beefing up the
> >> content of a project. Certainly when as often happens, the content is
> >> either specialised or with translations to a specific language it can
> >> be an extremely worthwhile addition to the wiktionary.
> >
> >
> > If some other language Wiktionary is more interested in quantity than
> > quality, or wants to use a bot just to beef up its article numbers the
> > members there are welcome to come to such a community decision.
>
> As neither you nor I have seen the data mentioned we are both in no
> position to say something about the quality of the data. I do appreciate
> quality data and, when I get quality data, I am happy to upload it to
> the wiktionaries that appreciate it. We do use a bot for that and, why
> should this be an issue when we know its source and when the quality of
> the data is excellent ?
>
> >
> >> The argument that the upload should be slow enough for the community
> >> to ask questions is based on what, fear ?? There is already plenty of
> >> content on en: that is questionable like words spelled wrong, this is
> >> spelled out, but hey, it is a dictionary and content SHOULD be
> >> correct. So when you argue let us know what the content is about, I
> >> could agree. When you say do it slowly as we want to look into every
> >> addition, I would say that this is not feasible using a bot.
> >
> >
> > If you believe that there are words spelled wrong on the en:wiktionary
> > then fix them, rather than whining here that they should be correct.
> > In the first place the members of a community need to know what a bot
> > will do so that they can decide on whether it is acting
> > appropriately.  Suddenly adding 20,000 entries without any opportunity
> > to adapt them to current formatting practices is just adding 20,000
> > tasks for other people to fix.  I am not prepared to arrogate to
> > myself the authority to decide such a thing, nor can I accept that
> > such a thing will be decided on a mailing list to which only a
> > fraction of the active community subscribes.  The proposal needs to be
> > put to a broader community of the en:Wiktionary before it can be
> > implemented there.
> >
> > Ec
> >
> I do not have time to spend more time on the en:wiktionary. (I run a bot
> on the en:wiktionary as we speak, and I run it on request.) I do agree
> that a community may know in advance what is going to happen. But why
> the community should be against data with words, descriptions and
> translations that currently do not exist is beyond me. Your idea that a
> file cannot be created that does conform to a standard is also something
> that is based on .. what ??
>
> When I get this file, I will look at it. If it is any good I will create
> a big file that may be used as input for the bot. I will leave the
> translation part as is customary to me and the other bits as is
> customary to you. I will write in the beer parlour that I have quality
> data that I can upload to the en:wiktionary and when I get reasonable
> questions I will give reasonable answers.  And after a week, given a
> reasonable outcome, I may start uploading the data. There will be no
> need to adapt them, do not worry :)
>
> Thanks,
>     GerardM
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wiktionary-l mailing list
> Wiktionary-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiktionary-l
>

--
john


from_name: Andre Engels

body:
I don't like "hear, hear" and "me too" comments, but I am doing it to
this mail of Rich Holton's. I find the messages in this thread highly
disturbing. However little I like neonazi's, I very much defend their
right to edit Wikipedia, as long as they keep to NPOV just like any
other contributor.

As I have said in a previous mail, what matters is not what POV an
editor is writing from, but the extent to which that POV interferes
with their willingness and capability to write NPOV on the Wikipedia.

Andre Engels

On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 03:58:09 -0800 (PST), Rich Holton
<rich_holton at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> --- NSK <nsk2 at wikinerds.org> wrote:
>
> > On Thursday 17 February 2005 11:06, Jack Lutz wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > > I understand user NSM88 had at one time an image of himself dressed
> > in some
> > > kind of Nazi or neo-Nazi uniform displayed on his user page, and
> > that it
> > > was deleted. Two issues stemming from that: deletion justification,
> > and
> > > personal attacks by admins.
> >
> > The administrators were right to delete it. Neo-Nazis will not be
> > tolerated in
> > Wikipedia.
> >
>
> Please note that, with rare exceptions, each contributor to this list
> is speaking for themselves, and not officially for Wikipedia or
> Wikimedia. This applies equally to NSK's comments above, and to my
> comments.
>
> I take extreme exception to the statement that "Neo-Nazis will not be
> tolerated in Wikipedia." In my opinion that statement is in direct
> contradiction to the concept of NPOV.
>
> _Everyone_ is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia unless and until they
> demonstrate that they will not participate in good faith, according to
> the established practices and policies of the community. There are
> established mechanisms for determining when someone is not
> participating in good faith, and for restricting their participation as
> a result.
>
> "Everyone" includes Neo-Nazis, no matter how much we may abhor their
> beliefs.
>
> I do not think that the photo should have been removed based solely on
> the presence of Nazi symbols, especially since it was on the user's
> page.
>
> However, many people in the US (like me) have a different attitude
> about Nazi symbols that do many people in Europe. The United States did
> not so directly suffer from Hitler and the Nazi's as Europe did. I
> think it's almost impossible for someone like me to fully appreciate
> their views.
>
> Let me make this plain: I hate Neo-Nazi beliefs. However, I urge that
> we Wikipedians treat Neo-Nazi's no differently than we treat other
> contributors whose beliefs differ from our own. Certainly remove POV
> from articles. Certainly hold them accountable to properly documented
> facts. Make sure that they are participating in good faith. But unless
> and until they prove themselves unable to participate in good faith, we
> should not take any action against them.
>
> -Rich Holton
> en.Wikipedia:User:Rholton


body:
I think that's largely due to the fact that since English speakers as
a group (not nessecarily on an individual level) are generally
unaccommodating of other languages (look at the complaints that were
received after the wikipedia.org domain was made to no longer redirect
to en:) and believe the world revolves around them and them alone,
thus "Wikipedia" to most English speakers means what I would call
"en.wikipedia" or "The English Wikipedia".

On the other hand, I think most French speakers who are aware of the
concept are referring to all versions when they say Wikip?dia, at
least much more often than are English speakers.

Thus, while it includes a few prolific editors of en:, it excludes
entirely the big names on all other Wikipedias.

While the big players on the Icelandic Wikipedia would hardly go well
into such an article, the big players on the German, French, Japanese,
etc. Wikipedias would probably fit in very nicely.

I also notice there isn't much diversity, and by that I mean that all
of those people I would put together in a single group as opposed to
for example ?var or those like him.

Mark

On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 16:07:56 -0500, Sj <2.718281828 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Daniel Pink's WIRED article about Wikipedia, "the self-organizing,
> self-repairing, hyperaddictive library of the future," has hit the
> shelves.
>
> Titled "The Book Stops Here", the six-page piece opens with a picture
> of Jimbo gazing levelly over a large stack of Britannica volumes and
> -- are those the 2001 Florida Statues?   It follows up with a set of
> beautiful sketches of six active wikipedians (Angela, Bryan Derksen,
> Carptrash, Kingturtle, Ram-Man, and Raul654), whose stories are woven
> into the article.
>
> Pink deals quite well with the nuances and motivations of the en:
> community, and the Wikipedia healing factor.  However he all but
> ignores other languages (the article's one real flaw), and makes no
> mention of Wikimedia, New York, or other gatherings.  He also
> demonstrates a Pelligrinesque affection for the term "God-King" (the
> subject is a quote from the article).
>
> More :  http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/sj/2005/02/17#a797
>
> Cheers,
>    SJ
>
> --
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Sj
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>