from_name: Justin Cormack

subject: [WikiEN-l] Deletion again

body:
On 25 Oct 2005, at 00:36, Snowspinner wrote:

> We can backport, sure. And they'll be deleted. Really - have a look
> at the deletion debates Eric is talking about there. They're
> appalling. In particular, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
> Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Able_and_Baker_%282nd_nomination%29
> is galling.

I dont know anything at all about webcomics, but I recognise the
notability standards problem from elsewhere; people argue that
breweries should produce so much beer a year to be notable and other
such arbitrary decisions. But I dont see anything in the article that
establishes notability (this may be because it has been fighting
deletion of course), but something that shows how it forms part of
the history or culture or influenced or was influenced by other
things would help; lists of characters and so on are just not
interesting. Its not linked from any other articles. No notable
cultural item stands in isolation; the links from it are just words -
potato, vending machine etc.

(Actually it should be linked from Dayfree Press - just fixing that).

This could all be due to its fought over state, but show me another
article that is what it should look like.

Justinc


list: wikien-l

source: pipermail-mbox

from_name: Paul Rynne

subject: [WikiEN-l] Blocked - In violation of the Wikipedia blocking policy

body:
Hi,

When attempting to edit a page in Wikipedia, I encountered the following
message:

Your user name or IP address has been blocked
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Blocking_policy> by Jtdirl
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jtdirl>.

The reason given is:
/on the evidence almost certainly Skyring
/

*Your IP address is 213.202.191.123. Please include this address, along
with your username, in any queries you make.
*

(First up, I have no idea who or what "Skyring" is, much less why I
should be blocked as a result)

This block is a violation of the Wikipedia blocking policy which stated
that it should take place in the case of  "vandalism, bots, personal
attacks". I engaged in no such activity.

In addition, I discovered that the pages I had edited (a grand total of
5 edits EVER), had all been reverted. These edits were all minor and
were intended to either edit, correct mistakes or badly worded entries.
For example, in the "Demographics" section of the "Republic of Ireland"
section, the last paragraph contains some dubious comments about
immigrants into the Republic of Ireland. I edited this because the
comments as they: a) ignore the largest EU immigrant community in the
Republic (the British), and instead mentions the smaller numbers of
Poles and Latvians (It also speculates inappropriately on the reasons
that have chosen to immigrate), and; b) mentions various African
nationalities under "Other nationalities" while ignoring larger less
visible (non-EU) groupings such as Americans and Canadians!

The "blocking" policy as used by user Jtdirl might more accurately be
labelled a censorship policy as it is clearly intended to prevent
editing of inaccurate entries. I would strongly suggest you come up with
a better policy to police who can block people and review when and why
they do so.

Paul


list: foundation-l

from_name: Ray Saintonge

subject:
Our exponentially increasing costs (was Re: [Foundation-l] Re:
	Answers.com and Wikimedia Foundation to Form New Partnership)

body:
Daniel Mayer wrote:

>--- Anthony DiPierro <wikilegal at inbox.org> wrote:
>
>
>>You know, those figures would make a lot more sense if they were done on an
>>accrual basis rather than a cash basis. As is the figures completely ignore
>>the fact that the expected life of the servers is more than a single
>>quarter.
>>
>>
>The figures I gave assume that all the hardware we have already bought is still
>in operation (which surprisingly is more or less the case).
>
>
>>If you're using those cash-basis figures that's another problem with the
>>model as well :).
>>
>>
>Yet the model has closely predicted increased costs for the last year (yeah, to
>an extent this is self-fulfilling, but only so much so)...
>
>
Anthony makes a good point.  Hardware does break down over time, and has
to be replaced.  Even more likely is that it will become obsolete before
it breaks down.

The projections of increased costs that you talk about are fine as far
as they go, but this has all been in a period of rapid growth.  Sound
accounting practice requires that we be prepared for the evebtual plateay.

Ec


list: wikimedia-l


subject: [WikiEN-l] Deletion again

body:
On 25 Oct 2005, at 01:07, Anthony DiPierro wrote:
> It looks perfectly notable to me, and Snowspinner would have had my
> vote had
> he not fought so hard to get me banned from voting.

Well explain to me why you think it is notable then. I am open
minded, it
just isnt clear as an outsider that it is.

You have until I rewrite [[Lentil]], which is notable, but you cant
really
tell that from reading it either (although less likely to be deleted).

Justinc


from_name: SPUI

subject: [WikiEN-l] The listing of redirects on [[WP:SFD]]

body:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Bike-stub
It's been protected blank again.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Stub_types_for_deletion/Log/Deleted/October_2005#.7B.7Bbike-stub.7D.7D
The original discussion WASN'T EVEN ABOUT A REDIRECT! Fuck you, Mairi.
Fuck you, Grutness. Fuck you, Phroziac.


body:
SPUI wrote:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Bike-stub
> It's been protected blank again.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Stub_types_for_deletion/Log/Deleted/October_2005#.7B.7Bbike-stub.7D.7D
>
> The original discussion WASN'T EVEN ABOUT A REDIRECT! Fuck you, Mairi.
> Fuck you, Grutness. Fuck you, Phroziac.
>
Not only that but I've been blocked for "Delete warring". Asshole.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Deletion again

body:
On 25 Oct 2005, at 01:35, Anthony DiPierro wrote:
>
> Well, I think all web comics are notable, so I doubt my reasoning
> is going
> to change your mind.

I dont have an opinion either way. All I said was that it wasnt
immediately
apparent from the article to an outsider.

Ok if you cant do that why are all webcomics notable?

If you cant convince me (a broadish inclusionist really, and very
open minded)
then no wonder you cant convince the people on afd.

Justinc


from_name: Tim Starling

subject:
[Foundation-l] Re: Answers.com and Wikimedia Foundation to Form New
	Partnership

body:
Chris Jenkinson wrote:
> Jimmy Wales wrote:
>
>> I'm sorry but it is quite strange for me to imagine that someone would
>> remove such a link, _other than_ if they were in the grip of some of the
>> false and inflammatory rhetoric which has been thrown around here.
>
>
> Possibly there is false rhetoric involved in the discussion, but this is
> probably due to a lack of information and clarity from the Board on this
> issue. To quote from the press release:
>
> "Wikipedia will create a Tools page on its English-language site to
> promote useful tools that access Wikipedia, and 1-Click Answers,
> Wikipedia Edition, will receive charter placement on that page."

The press release, and the text posted by Angela in various locations,
was certainly not clear on the nature of the agreement, especially
regarding the rules relating to placement. Accordingly, I've updated the
page on Wikipedia on the subject, with some help from Jimbo:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ATools%2F1-Click_Answers&diff=26359451&oldid=26323607
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Tools/1-Click_Answers&diff=26361212&oldid=26359451

And I've retracted my opposition:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Tools/1-Click_Answers#Apparently_the_community_will_be_involved

Redirect URLs in case of errant line breaks:
http://tinyurl.com/ck9l3    http://tinyurl.com/76jxy
http://tinyurl.com/cv7no#Apparently_the_community_will_be_involved

-- Tim Starling


from_name: Anthony DiPierro

subject:
[Foundation-l] Answers.com and Wikimedia Foundation to Form
	NewPartnership

body:
> >You're not claiming that having advertising is going to cause *all*
> editors
> >to leave, are you?
> >
> >
> No, we are not claiming that having advertising is going to cause all
> editors to leave, but it will be the creative ones who stick their necks
> out, are bold, and make things happen. In any project, company, or
> community for that matter, the creative ones are only about 1%, and it
> is often very difficult to tell just who those very creative ones are.
> They are the ones that make a group grow and propser instead of die and
> fall apart. An effort to do advertising like this is going to drive
> away that precious 1%, and you won't even notice that they are gone
> because for a short time edits will actually go up and it will appear as
> though everything is just fine. But the creative ones will be gone and
> Wikipedia will be a dying project afterward.

So you think all the creative ones are going to be gone? I still doubt it.
It doesn't make any sense to me. Why would someone leave a project because
it tries to make enough money to sustain itself? Should I have quit the
volunteer fire department when we ran comedy night and charged admission, or
when we *gasp* handed out newsletters which local businesses paid money to
be listed in?

Non-profit organizations need to make money to survive, and sponsorship is a
good way to do so, especially when the sponsorships can be done in a way
that is tasteful. No one is talking about pop-unders or BFAs or anything
like that. The way I picture it it'd be targetted text ads on the bottom of
the articles, which could be turned off by simply clicking on a link saying
"turn off ads". They probably wouldn't even have to run all the time, just
during the times when we'd run ads anyway, ads which say "click here to
donate". If it'd please people more we could even make it even more clear
that it's a sponsorship and just put a link at the bottom of the page which
says "this page request brought to you by [whoever]".

I really have a hard time understanding where people opposing this are
coming from. Cynically I'd say maybe you want something for nothing, but I'd
rather give you the benefit of the doubt and think that you'd rather donate
money every three months than view a few text ads. I don't know, I don't
have money to spend on servers, especially when there are corporations who
will gladly pay for those servers for me in return for an acknowledgement of
their support.

You don't even have to believe me on this point, but it is a warning to
> not take the general opinions of the community for granted. It is a
> hard task to try and balance the wants and needs of a community of
> volunteers in particular, and aristiocratic governace of such
> communities just lead to their eventual demise.

You don't have to warn me of anything. I have no power in Wikipedia. I'm
just wondering how many people actually would leave, and trying to figure
out why in the world they'd do so.

>By going the route of advertising, the few bucks will instead come from
>corporate sponsors rather than from readers/editors directly

Actually, if we wanted, we could sell the ads only to readers/editors of the
site.

Anthony


list: wikitech-l

from_name: Brion Vibber

subject:
[Wikitech-l] Re: [WikiEN-l] Ratings again (was: Oour quality
	could	rival Encyclopedia Britannica)

body:
David Gerard wrote:
> Brion, what would it take to get article rating switched on? Is there
> any such feature you would allow in, or is it basically off the agenda
> and I should stop asking?

Well, it needs to be shown to work correctly on pages with thousands of
revisions without bogging the server or otherwise exploding in
interesting ways.

-- 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/20051025/70f6667b/attachment.pgp>


from_name: Mark Williamson

subject: [Wikitech-l] About the cancelling

body:
Such technical problems can easily be solved.

Every single problem you listed is an easily solvable problem.

Mark

On 25/10/05, muhammad zaid zainuddin <zaidpjd at umich.edu> wrote:
> Dear wikitech,
>
> It's not that I give up or something, I just wonder if my PC cannot display
> the code properly in the edit box , how about others PC? (I only got boxes
> in the edit box.) Likewise, after I told them that buginese has just
> created, suddenly, there were like a hundred of request of having this wiki
> in roman. The main reason is that it'll be easier for them to edit the
> article. Moreover, this is just struck me, most of the readers are using
> public PC and thus they usually aren't allowed to change the settings for
> the PCs (If I'm not mistaken, the control panel for public PCs are locked).
> And lontara font is not a microsoft software or project or whatever, which
> means that it didn't come along with the microsoft OS pack. Therefore, this
> script is not available for almost all public PCs. And this is totally my
> mistake. Thousand apologies.
>
> Maybe you guys're kind of confused, when I said unicode, I referred to the
> traditional lontara. But plese don't delete the lontara font family. We'll
> be needing in the future, like quoting the old text etc.
>
> Again, I'm terribly-terribly sorry for this messed up. Another thousand
> apologies. And I hope you guys can change the system to roman as soon as
> possible. So that I can continue the set up.
>
> Zaid Zainuddin
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>

--
If you would like a gmail invite, please send me an e-mail.
Si ud. quiere que le env?e una invitaci?n para juntar gmail, env?eme un mensaje.
Si vous voulez que je vous envoie une invitation ? joindre gmail,
envoyez-moi s.v.p un message.
Se vce. gostaria que lhe envie um convite para juntar gmail, favor de
envie-me uma mensagem.
Se vuleti chi vi manu 'n invitu a uniri gmail, mandatimi n messaggiu.


subject: [Wikitech-l] About the cancelling

body:
Perhaps I should elaborate.

For font problems on individual people's computers, they may download new fonts.

If they are not able to change the settings on a computer, they should
request the proprietor of the Internet caf?, library, etc. to update
it. If this proves to be a problem, there are dozens of other
possibilities to acommodate for people who cannot change settings.

What you said about "removing the Lontara fonts" is absolute nonsense.
Fonts are stored on each user's computer.

Mark

On 25/10/05, Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com> wrote:
> Such technical problems can easily be solved.
>
> Every single problem you listed is an easily solvable problem.
>
> Mark
>
> On 25/10/05, muhammad zaid zainuddin <zaidpjd at umich.edu> wrote:
> > Dear wikitech,
> >
> > It's not that I give up or something, I just wonder if my PC cannot display
> > the code properly in the edit box , how about others PC? (I only got boxes
> > in the edit box.) Likewise, after I told them that buginese has just
> > created, suddenly, there were like a hundred of request of having this wiki
> > in roman. The main reason is that it'll be easier for them to edit the
> > article. Moreover, this is just struck me, most of the readers are using
> > public PC and thus they usually aren't allowed to change the settings for
> > the PCs (If I'm not mistaken, the control panel for public PCs are locked).
> > And lontara font is not a microsoft software or project or whatever, which
> > means that it didn't come along with the microsoft OS pack. Therefore, this
> > script is not available for almost all public PCs. And this is totally my
> > mistake. Thousand apologies.
> >
> > Maybe you guys're kind of confused, when I said unicode, I referred to the
> > traditional lontara. But plese don't delete the lontara font family. We'll
> > be needing in the future, like quoting the old text etc.
> >
> > Again, I'm terribly-terribly sorry for this messed up. Another thousand
> > apologies. And I hope you guys can change the system to roman as soon as
> > possible. So that I can continue the set up.
> >
> > Zaid Zainuddin
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikitech-l mailing list
> > Wikitech-l at wikimedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
> >
>
>
> --
> If you would like a gmail invite, please send me an e-mail.
> Si ud. quiere que le env?e una invitaci?n para juntar gmail, env?eme un mensaje.
> Si vous voulez que je vous envoie une invitation ? joindre gmail,
> envoyez-moi s.v.p un message.
> Se vce. gostaria que lhe envie um convite para juntar gmail, favor de
> envie-me uma mensagem.
> Se vuleti chi vi manu 'n invitu a uniri gmail, mandatimi n messaggiu.
>

--
If you would like a gmail invite, please send me an e-mail.
Si ud. quiere que le env?e una invitaci?n para juntar gmail, env?eme un mensaje.
Si vous voulez que je vous envoie une invitation ? joindre gmail,
envoyez-moi s.v.p un message.
Se vce. gostaria que lhe envie um convite para juntar gmail, favor de
envie-me uma mensagem.
Se vuleti chi vi manu 'n invitu a uniri gmail, mandatimi n messaggiu.


list: wikipedia-l

from_name: V. Ivanov

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Newly created udm and its two technical problems

body:
2005/10/24, Sulev Iva <juvasul at ut.ee>:
> And especial congratulations to Udmurts! There is so little Finno-Ugric
> languages that have their own Wikipedias. I hope the Udmurt Wiki will help
> much to the Udmurt people and their language!

It's a sad fact, but the [[:udm:]] has the old problem about
{{NUMBEROFARTICLES}} variable. Anyone can see that it malfunctions.

If anybody knows how the problem is usually solved, do help!

The other problem about the Udmurt wikipedia is that it's been created
based on English language file, while it'd be better to use the
Russian file (and this consideration hass been in the request). Most
of Udmurts do understand Russian better than English, and they could
feel themselves easiere at [[:udm:]], while its interface is not yet
translated into the Udmurt.

V. Ivanov (Amikeco),
os-admin.

--
Esperu cxiam!


from_name: Tony Sidaway

subject: [WikiEN-l] Guardian article about Wikipedia

body:
On 10/25/05, Stephen Bain <stephen.bain at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> The guy looking at the entry on TS Eliot was critical because it
> didn't list his book in the bibliography. I think that's certainly an
> unfair criticism.

His words were " It doesn't list my book in the bibliography, but
there are plenty of other useful links."

This didn't sound like criticism to me.  It was a simple remark
followed by a qualification: "there are plenty of other useful links."
 He might just as likely have two other motives for making those
remarks: either to promote his book to the reader, or to persuade the
reader to place a link to his book in the article.


from_name: muhammad zaid zainuddin

subject: [Wikitech-l] About the cancelling

body:
Dear wikitech,

It's not that I give up or something, I just wonder if my PC cannot display
the code properly in the edit box , how about others PC? (I only got boxes
in the edit box.) Likewise, after I told them that buginese has just
created, suddenly, there were like a hundred of request of having this wiki
in roman. The main reason is that it'll be easier for them to edit the
article. Moreover, this is just struck me, most of the readers are using
public PC and thus they usually aren't allowed to change the settings for
the PCs (If I'm not mistaken, the control panel for public PCs are locked).
And lontara font is not a microsoft software or project or whatever, which
means that it didn't come along with the microsoft OS pack. Therefore, this
script is not available for almost all public PCs. And this is totally my
mistake. Thousand apologies.

Maybe you guys're kind of confused, when I said unicode, I referred to the
traditional lontara. But plese don't delete the lontara font family. We'll
be needing in the future, like quoting the old text etc.

Again, I'm terribly-terribly sorry for this messed up. Another thousand
apologies. And I hope you guys can change the system to roman as soon as
possible. So that I can continue the set up.

Zaid Zainuddin


from_name: charles matthews

body:
Stephen Bain wrote

>The guy looking at the entry on TS Eliot was critical because it
didn't list his book in the bibliography. I think that's certainly an
unfair criticism.

No.  He (Anthony Julius) mentioned that his book wasn't included as a
reference.  He didn't make this a criticism.  (If the article went deeply
into the Eliot-anti-Semitism row, it should mention the book, which is a
thorough survey of what the row is about).

Some of these comments about the Guardian seem far too defensive.

Charles


from_name: Sean Barrett

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Quality

in_reply_to:
<71cd4dd90510241319o201dd0f8s54f56cf5ec3f5e0b@mail.gmail.com>
	(message from Anthony DiPierro on Mon, 24 Oct 2005 16:19:30 -0400)

body:
> > 3)It's called Reductio ad absurdum. The logical endpoint of the
> > inclusionist position is to include everything.
>
>  Huh? Is the logical endpoint of the deletionist position to delete
> everything?

Considering the high quality of some of the articles that are deleted,
and the repeated, lunatic refusal of AfU to consider correcting those
blatant errors....

--
 Sean Barrett     | It was a one-eyed, one-horned,
 sean at epoptic.com | flying purple people eater.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Unnecessary nudity on [[Hogtie bondage]]

body:
> I looked the image used to illustrate [[Miniskirt]] is not Featured
> Picture quality: it fails to capture the edginess or the sexiness that
> this garment evokes in the popular imagination. However, it does the job
> by illustrating what a miniskirt looks like -- & it is a free image.

Sexiness is considered by many to be utterly intolerable.  See the
"discussion" about the (professional, high-quality) picture that Bomis
licensed GFDL for our use in the [[Bikini]] article.  It was lynched
explicitly /because/ it was a good picture.  The attractiveness of the
model was the stated reason for deleting it.

--
 Sean Barrett     | It was a one-eyed, one-horned,
 sean at epoptic.com | flying purple people eater.


from_name: Zordsdavini iz Litvy

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Created bug, pih, vec, lmo and udm wiki

body:
Hello,
About Samogitian code. It's good that the code looks like "bat-***".
We, Samogitians, say "smg" or "zm" (from "?emaitiu", which means the
same - "Samogitian"). After all, we discused about codes with
Chamdarae if there is nead for local code it could be "qsm".
Arns Udovi??

2005/10/25, Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com>:
> Actually, that's bat-smg or bat-smo.
>
> Mark
>
> On 24/10/05, Sulev Iva <juvasul at ut.ee> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > congratulation to Buginese, Norfuk, Veneto and Lumbaart users!
> > And especial congratulations to Udmurts! There is so little Finno-Ugric
> > languages that have their own Wikipedias. I hope the Udmurt Wiki will help
> > much to the Udmurt people and their language!
> >
> > I think Ronline is right about Samogitian Wikipedia. It could be started with
> > a xxx-xxx code like fiu-vro and roa-rup. Could it be for Samogitian something
> > like blt-sam or blt-smo?
> >
> > V?rok
> >
> >
> > 24.10.05 15:41:05, "Wikipedia Romania (Ronline)" <rowikipedia at yahoo.com>
> > kirot':
> >
> > >Hi,
> > >
> > >Yes - I've been looking forward most to the Samogitian
> > >one, since I'm interested in the language and culture
> > >of the Baltic states and Samogitian is an important
> > >part of that heritage. Isn't the standard form just to
> > >use the ISO code for the language family and then the
> > >SIL code? For the Aromanian Wikipedia we used that, in
> > >the form: roa-rup, where "roa" = ISO Romance languages
> > >other and "rup" - SIL code for Aromanian. The same was
> > >done for Voro - fiu-vro. But I think Samogitian
> > >doesn't have a SIL code either...
> > >
> > >On another note, a big congratulations to the four
> > >Wikipedias set up. A special one for Venetian and
> > >Lombard - it's great to have Wikipedias in as many
> > >Romance languages as possible, especially the
> > >less-well-known ones. I'd really like to contribute to
> > >these two, since the language is similar to Romanian.
> > >
> > >Ronline
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >__________________________________
> > >Yahoo! FareChase: Search multiple travel sites in one click.
> > >http://farechase.yahoo.com
> > >_______________________________________________
> > >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
> >
>
>
> --
> If you would like a gmail invite, please send me an e-mail.
> Si ud. quiere que le env?e una invitaci?n para juntar gmail, env?eme un mensaje.
> Si vous voulez que je vous envoie une invitation ? joindre gmail,
> envoyez-moi s.v.p un message.
> Se vce. gostaria que lhe envie um convite para juntar gmail, favor de
> envie-me uma mensagem.
> Se vuleti chi vi manu 'n invitu a uniri gmail, mandatimi n messaggiu.
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>

--
Ok^ ek^ besla ikv Olmok Vzauep^evk
:)


subject: [Wikitech-l] the third apologies

body:
Dear wikitech,

Another thousand apologies. I think I just find out how this whole system
works. Darn!! I was so..... stupid. You guys can ignore my previous message

Thank you,

Muhammad Zaid Zainuddin


from_name: Delirium

subject:
[Foundation-l] Answers.com and Wikimedia Foundation to
	Form	NewPartnership

body:
Anthony DiPierro wrote:

>I can't for the life of me understand why people "a bunch of editors and
>readers" would leave over something like this. I also don't think it'd be a
>bad thing to get rid of the people who think this way.
>
Well, if the Foundation really wanted to find out, they could issue an
ultimatum---we're starting GoogleAds tomorrow, and anyone opposed to
advertising on Wikipedia can get out (and good riddance!).

Of course, they are unlikely to do so. =]

-Mark


from_name: Daniel Mayer

body:
--- Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote:
> Anthony makes a good point.  Hardware does break down over time, and has
> to be replaced.  Even more likely is that it will become obsolete before
> it breaks down.

When that becomes a significant issue, then the model will need to be updated.
I've been told that, so far, pretty much all the hardware we've ever bought is
still in use.

-- mav

__________________________________
Start your day with Yahoo! - Make it your home page!
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs


from_name: Dan Grey

body:
On 24/10/05, Dori <slowpoke at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 10/24/05, Dan Grey <dangrey at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Surely there's only a handful of logical conclusions here:
> >
> > 1. We stay with just donations (small private and few large coporate
> > ones) and the site slowly bogs down as traffic demand outstrips server
> > supply
> > 2. We try more small stuff like the Amazon and the forthcoming 1-Click
> > experiments, but let's be honest unless WP is plastered in them
> > they'll never make much of a difference
> > 3. We eventually accept a small amount of Adsense (or Adsense-syle)
> > advertising on the site, which will most likely pay for what we need.
>
> Obviously you're highlighting 3 there, and the obvious corollary to
> all three is that a bunch of editors and readers will pack their bags
> and leave. If the stacks of money is better than editors and readers,
> then the foundations should go for it. And don't for a second think
> that it will be one or two, many people are opposed to this, and a
> tidy sum have already left just because of the *possibility*.

There are hundreds - probably thousands - of editors active every day.
If a few choose to flounce off - as is so fashionable on WP - then sod
them! Most of them will slowly crawl back anyway.

If the choice is between a site with (Adsense) adverts, and no site at
all (which is the choice it *WILL* come down to), then I'd rather have
a site!

Plus with a few mill coming in a year, we'd actually be able to get a
lot closer to the goal of distributing knowledge to everyone, not
least as Wikimedia would be able to afford to PAY people to make these
dreams happen .

Dan


from_name: Stefan Sittler

subject:
[WikiEN-l] Ratings again (was: Oour quality could rival
	Encyclopedia Britannica)

references:
<E506B3FF6BC1254C9AC1B948C380BC280217F858@sm-nyny-xm05.nena.wdpr.disney.com>
	<00bf01c5d8b5$70bf1ba0$7cac0656@NorthParade>
	<435D3F1E.1060008@tonal.clara.co.uk>

body:
(...)
> Remember categories? They were really controversial when they were first
> introduced, but now they are invaluable, and it's hard to remember what
> MediaWiki was like without them.
>
> -- Neil

I have been wondering about this, actually. (I'm newish to WP). Could
somebody show me how exactly categories are helpful? A link would be
fine. It's hard for me to see the usefulness. A link or three would be
fine, maybe an old pertinent discussion. Thanks.

-smws
(user:Kiaparowits)


from_name: David Gerard

body:
[cc'ed from thread on wikien-l to wikitech-l]

On wikien-l, Neil Harris wrote:
>charles matthews wrote:

>> But I think we know all this.  To return to Toynbee, it is more a
>> question of how to get Wikipedians to 'feel challenged', on the
>> specifics.  Right now, with the site running slow, the main practical
>> challenge seems to be hardward/developers/cash.  _I_ mostly feel
>> challenged by the sheer breadth of approach needed.

>At the risk of being tedious,
>article rating
>article rating
>article rating
>article rating
>article rating

Brion, what would it take to get article rating switched on? Is there
any such feature you would allow in, or is it basically off the agenda
and I should stop asking?

- d.


subject:
[Wikitech-l] Re: [WikiEN-l] Ratings again (was: Oour quality could
	rival Encyclopedia Britannica)


from_name: dpbsmith at verizon.net

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Overcoming UI limitations

body:
>From: David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com>

>Yeah, well I DON'T EVEN USE A COMPUTER, I JUST REMOVE THE DSL
>MICROFILTER, PICK UP THE PHONE AND BANG ROCKS TOGETHER *REALLY FAST*
>AND *REALLY PRECISELY* AND LISTEN *REALLY CLOSELY*. So there.  ;-p
>pppphhhblblblblt

YOU HAVE A PHONE? I have to wave a refrigerator magnet
near the telephone line, then hold a compass against
the line and watch the needle.


subject:
[WikiEN-l] So,
	you think you're a good writer? The "Fix Crappy Prose" Challenge

body:
Wikiacc wrote:
>On 10/24/05, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:

>> ===The "Fix Crappy Prose" Challenge===
>> I'd like everyone reading this who thinks they're a pretty good writer
>> to middle-click

>Not everyone has a three-button mouse.

At this point I confess that my laptop doesn't either and I actually
control-clicked ;-) Command-click if you're on a Mac.

- d.


from_name: Andy Rabagliati

subject:
[Wikipedia-l] Fwd: [Wikizh-l] Re: Wikipedia banned in China,
	news from Taiwan (translated)

body:
On Fri, 21 Oct 2005, ZH Wikipedia wrote:

> > Internet users originally thought that this was only a partial
> > suspension, however after investigations by various users, it was
> > found that most provinces in China could no longer access to Wikipedia
> > since the 19th.

Can we have an update on this situation, please ?

Cheers,   Andy!


body:
Alphax wrote:

>RIPE WHOIS reveals that this IP is used by "Ireland On-Line Broadband
>Customers". Unless Skyring has been travelling I don't see how such a
>connection was made.

Skyring travels lots and lots and edits from around the world.

- d.


from_name: Justin Cormack

subject: [WikiEN-l] no speedy criterion for blatent non fair use media

body:
On 25 Oct 2005, at 09:21, MacGyverMagic/Mgm wrote:

> We already have a speedy criterion for blatant copyvio articles and
> images that are clearly unsourced are already removed on a regular
> basis. If you are absolutely sure they're not free, I see no reason
> not to delete them. When uploading, you are clearly reminded of the
> fact it should either be free or your own. The uploading user was
> warned in time.

For images we dont have any speedy delete basis that doesnt involve
the images being tagged for a week with something. Someone is
working on getting a bot to tag them, but it takes a week to get
permission to run a bot. And I am not going to tag them by hand
when I clearly should be deleting them. Over 500 files is clearly
an attempt to bring wikipedia into disrepute.

Justinc


from_name: Robert Scott Horning

subject:
[Foundation-l] Answers.com and Wikimedia Foundation
	to	Form	NewPartnership

body:
Delirium wrote:

> Anthony DiPierro wrote:
>
>> I can't for the life of me understand why people "a bunch of editors and
>> readers" would leave over something like this. I also don't think
>> it'd be a
>> bad thing to get rid of the people who think this way.
>>
> Well, if the Foundation really wanted to find out, they could issue an
> ultimatum---we're starting GoogleAds tomorrow, and anyone opposed to
> advertising on Wikipedia can get out (and good riddance!).
>
> Of course, they are unlikely to do so. =]
>
> -Mark

Attitudes like this are going to destroy the project entirely.  I guess
you don't care about the fact that your actions are encouraging large
scale emmigration from Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects, and
forking of contents.  It doesn't matter if this action with Answer.com
was good or bad, an attitude like this where you can good riddance to
people who don't agree with you is contrary to what this community has
been about.

This whole episode and debate is unfortunately going to leave a lot of
embittered people on all sides of the issue, primarily due to the way it
was presented in the first place.  At this point, that doesn't matter,
and all we got now is controversy that perhaps will never go away.
 Rubbing salt in the wounds and telling people to go away is not going
to help.

While the initial presentation may have been flawed, and the "community"
feeling like it was ignored (with the huge numbers of e-mails on this
list, plus a slashdot story and the rest of the public airing of this
issue) this can either be a divisive issue or we can try to come
together with compromise solutions to get this to work.

The underlying issue for this whole exchange is that the Foundation
needs money in order to operate.  In addtion, being one of the top 50
websites on the internet makes advertising revenue something very
attractive, particularly given the current commercial climate with most
internet websites.  What needs to happen is some creative thoughts about
how some sort of revenue can help pay for the basic needs of this
project, particularly for bandwidth and server costs.

Could other organizational aspects be done?  What about P2P distributed
models for dealing with content?  Other software models for organizing
the content?  More effecient software algorithms for MediaWiki?

As for financial resources available to the Wikimedia Foundaion, what
else could be done.  More direct fundraising?  A "telethon" or similar
media campaign?  Foundation grants or other philenthropic charities that
could donate for specific projects (like Wikijunior and the Beck
Foundation)?  A "bookstore" that would sell CD-ROMs and printed books
based on contents of Wikimedia projects?  All of these and more can be done.

In this case there are many individuals who feel that they have labored
hard to create an interesting public resource, only to see a few
individuals seemingly make some money off of their volunteer labors,
particularly with the cooperation of the "leaders" of this community.
 That is what is sticking in the craw of those who don't like what is
going on here.  And a darker side is that if somebody else is making
money, why can't I?  If Answers.com is going to get that benefit from
Wikipedia readers and make a little bit of money, what is going to stop
each and every other editor/contributor to Wikipedia to do the same
thing with a link on the tools page that would copy what Answers.com is
doing?  Would that need Foundation approval (getting into cronyism) or
can any editor simply put a link in the same place at any time?  Do you
need to be an admin to make changes there? (more resentment of the
"heirarchy" of community leaders by ordinary users.)  What about other
products/services?  What is the "end result" of all this commercial
activity with Wikipedia?

I don't have any answers this these questions for the most part, but I
have seen them all raised on this mailing list in many different forums.
 Rather than telling people to "get lost and never come back, we don't
need you", it is far better the make the people having complaints to
become part of the solution.  The decision to have ads on Wikipedia  or
not is just a small part of much larger issues here, and it never does
any good to drive people away... especially people who are genuinely
trying to make this a bettter place in the first place.  We are not
talking about driving away vandals and trolls here, but rather people
who have made some significant contributions to this community.

--
Robert Scott Horning


body:
Alphax wrote:
> David Gerard wrote:

>> At this point I confess that my laptop doesn't either and I actually
>> control-clicked ;-) Command-click if you're on a Mac.

>I often use Mozilla on a Linux machine via X11 when sitting at a Mac and
>control-click ;)

Yeah, well I DON'T EVEN USE A COMPUTER, I JUST REMOVE THE DSL
MICROFILTER, PICK UP THE PHONE AND BANG ROCKS TOGETHER *REALLY FAST*
AND *REALLY PRECISELY* AND LISTEN *REALLY CLOSELY*. So there.  ;-p
pppphhhblblblblt

- d.


from_name: Michael Turley

body:
On 10/25/05, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
> Alphax wrote:
> > David Gerard wrote:
>
> >> At this point I confess that my laptop doesn't either and I actually
> >> control-clicked ;-) Command-click if you're on a Mac.
>
> >I often use Mozilla on a Linux machine via X11 when sitting at a Mac and
> >control-click ;)
>
>
> Yeah, well I DON'T EVEN USE A COMPUTER, I JUST REMOVE THE DSL
> MICROFILTER, PICK UP THE PHONE AND BANG ROCKS TOGETHER *REALLY FAST*
> AND *REALLY PRECISELY* AND LISTEN *REALLY CLOSELY*. So there.  ;-p
> pppphhhblblblblt

Bang rocks???  At least you didn't have to take twenty-four years of
throat singing lessons in Outer Mongolia to get online.

--
Michael Turley
User:Unfocused


from_name: MacGyverMagic/Mgm

body:
We already have a speedy criterion for blatant copyvio articles and
images that are clearly unsourced are already removed on a regular
basis. If you are absolutely sure they're not free, I see no reason
not to delete them. When uploading, you are clearly reminded of the
fact it should either be free or your own. The uploading user was
warned in time.

--Mgm

On 10/25/05, Alphax <alphasigmax at gmail.com> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA256
>
> Justin Cormack wrote:
> <snip>
> > The speedy delete criteria are too bureaucratic now, things have to
> > be tagged for a week, which is pointless in this case.
> >
>
> I thought "speedy" meant "admins, provided tagging passes a sanity
> check, delete this on sight"...
>
> - --
> Alphax                      |   /"\
> Encrypted Email Preferred   |   \ /     ASCII Ribbon Campaign
> OpenPGP key ID: 0xF874C613  |    X   Against HTML email & vCards
> http://tinyurl.com/cc9up    |   / \
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
> iQEVAwUBQ13on7MAAH8MeUlWAQj0cAf9EDS/vOJEHHknbFiDnTuF5y4ONxOCpQSV
> LxfGHPpRF5pFibGu0TjS2fPDjow/UEqzWw6iwum43a0TmE05DhIOeA4aMo2EBTzV
> pxtFErMIUOkZbb3xjtFtrcGN8RnLn3z45ulikvJoSFuLHMASUPgvhWvh90C2+fcJ
> HErwOKkb/313fgOi6jRkmBKwiP5wB0vNa9OSMWrkm9HAc+A9mBmLk0T3g8JjlmvM
> Hv0lbCjlJQH6WlfSPin2kiBM2H/aaN46qMN02c6Q+HXrmJfNHG13QmuKrGtQtb5K
> 24psAo8Tk7w9e959Ab16LQyBe0yNwKd8aHMb4zP9ZFr2KUEbheJ51g==
> =mY9z
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: Anthony DiPierro

subject:
Our exponentially increasing costs (was Re: [Foundation-l] Re:
	Answers.com and Wikimedia Foundation to Form New Partnership)

body:
On 10/25/05, GerardM <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hoi,
> Given that it is only a few wikipedias that can be considered to somehow
> cover subjects adequately, the plateau that may arise is still in the
> future. To suggest that we have to take the emergence of a pleateau into
> consideration, you have to identify why it is likely to arise. Personally
> I
> find it easier to find arguments why we are NOT going to reach this
> plateau
> in the near future..
>
> So the best we can do with your "sound accounting practices" is to have
> multiple scenarios available to us. Not because of accounting practices
> but
> because they impact what we do and how we do it. Given however the many
> projects that need funding and the wishes we have to have an impact in the
> languages where we are still weak, it does not seem reasonable to expect
> an
> end to the growth that we have experienced over our first few years.
>
> Thanks,
> GerardM

 I've been speaking with various people off list and the data we have isn't
nearly as bad as I first suspected. It's actually more a problem with
communication of the data to the public that's lacking.
 I have my doubts that the hardware model can hold over the long run,
whether there is a growth plateau or merely less exponential growth. I
believe there are multiple mistakes being made which are to some extent
cancelling each other out (on one end there is the fact that old hardware is
being reused and on the other end there is the fact that the system is not
scaling perfectly linearly). But as far as predicting the actual hardware
requirements on a quarter-to-quarter basis I don't think there's a problem.
 Also while looking at the data I've been quite impressed at how well the
system does seem to be scaling up. Maybe I was just plain wrong when I
looked at the system a year or two ago, or maybe the situation has improved
more than I was aware of. Probably a little of both, but either way, I think
a lot of people are doing a good job.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Deletion again

body:
As long as everyone is allowed to share their views or just blatantly
vote without properly explaining their vote. We're going to make
mistakes. We can't fix that without doing something very unwiki. We
should ignore votes that don't make a case on why a comic of a
professional author shouldn't be included or make a wrong one based on
the policy we've got.

--Mgm

On 10/25/05, Alphax <alphasigmax at gmail.com> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA256
>
> Snowspinner wrote:
> <snip>
> > Here's a first stab - people with documentable credentials in an area
> > that would, in the eyes of a reasonable layman, qualify them to make  a
> > decision on the importance of a topic will be allowed to speedy  keep
> > articles in the area of their credentials.
> >
>
> Before anyone says "not Nupedia again", I think content inclusion
> guidlines are actually an area that needs a bit of credentialism.
>
> Of course, we would still need to guard against POV pushing and original
> research, but it is certainly a better idea than many of the current ones.
>
> - --
> Alphax                      |   /"\
> Encrypted Email Preferred   |   \ /     ASCII Ribbon Campaign
> OpenPGP key ID: 0xF874C613  |    X   Against HTML email & vCards
> http://tinyurl.com/cc9up    |   / \
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
> iQEVAwUBQ13pfbMAAH8MeUlWAQjYmAf/bcTYoiiA2542LmR45oaM+HuY+FYDNMSS
> MDLC99OMxKCeSoFnixJvjE6ysG/xV/0wcKtbuC+wj8i6jLxNIOD934jj0AYtPS+n
> uLCT/tVOwB6x1MuzxMw0dIVAF7Ucc57sjs91etxUl85+j1Ng6JRDACmkhSV76HPO
> m99h+vfE3UxcvHuOWBuQhwN4VkeS8u2N56nRjOEDqSPgyTsFKCs2VUWHJUSPMkZJ
> dVAPRscDMyCluBvQTiYQC+kavy5hKgJT62xeGd2QqMPpch0X5SGpgRKin1bObW3o
> KkaE7oGwbZj9ZEHU732XF4zKeeUlyvjFdaiJr/bX6oIzP1qm/CrUBQ==
> =gX+/
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


subject: [WikiEN-l] Webcomics

body:
Ok, so no one managed to give an idea of why one webcomic might be
notable or not before
I could make [[Lentil]] not suck and be full of factual errors (still
has a dodgy pic
but I ate all the lentils at home).

So here is the answer, having randomly clicked around the category.

Basically all the articles on individual webcomics are really bad
articles. There
isnt really enough to say, just lists of characters, plots etc.
Occasionally
there is a snippet of interesting information. They have no useful
links to or
from them.

However the articles on the creators are generally really good, and
this is what
should be concentrated on. Other stuff should be included unless it
outgrows
the author.

In the same way that you can write a half decent short article about
a minor
author (compare [[Beverley Nichols]] say), but you would never write an
article about any of his books (I keep trying to un redlink them). He
probably fails on any current notability criterion that you could
measure,
as most of the books are out of print, but no one would suggest deletion
as there are links to other people and events at the time that add to
WP.

Similarly I have spent ages trying to stop people writing articles about
individual beers, merging them into the brewery. There are very few
beers
that an article can be written about. See [[Samuel Adams Utopias]]
for what
happens when people try (usually when they get back from the pub).

But [[Able and Baker]], Snowspinners example doesnt even have an
article on
the author. Its like I picked a single book by Beverly Nichols and wrote
that first, listing all the characters. I would expect it to be deleted
as non notable. But if I need to spin one out as the article has got too
long that would be fine.

Justinc


body:
GerardM wrote:

>On 10/25/05, Robert Scott Horning <robert_horning at netzero.net> wrote:
>
>
>>Delirium wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Anthony DiPierro wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>I can't for the life of me understand why people "a bunch of editors
>>>>
>>>>
>>and
>>
>>
>>>>readers" would leave over something like this. I also don't think
>>>>it'd be a
>>>>bad thing to get rid of the people who think this way.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>Well, if the Foundation really wanted to find out, they could issue an
>>>ultimatum---we're starting GoogleAds tomorrow, and anyone opposed to
>>>advertising on Wikipedia can get out (and good riddance!).
>>>
>>>Of course, they are unlikely to do so. =]
>>>
>>>-Mark
>>>
>>>
>>Attitudes like this are going to destroy the project entirely.
>>
>
>I don't have any answers this these questions for the most part, but I
>
>
>>have seen them all raised on this mailing list in many different forums.
>>Rather than telling people to "get lost and never come back, we don't
>>need you", it is far better the make the people having complaints to
>>become part of the solution. The decision to have ads on Wikipedia or
>>not is just a small part of much larger issues here, and it never does
>>any good to drive people away... especially people who are genuinely
>>trying to make this a bettter place in the first place. We are not
>>talking about driving away vandals and trolls here, but rather people
>>who have made some significant contributions to this community.
>>
>>
>
>
>Nobody wants people and particularly editors to go away. Do not even suggest
>that. And do not use it as an argument why having more money is bad. We can
>use money to fulfill our aim: bringing information that is free and NPOV to
>all people in all languages.
>
>Thanks,
>GerardM
>
>
Read what I was replying to.  Telling editors to leave and never come
back was precisely the intent of the message, unless there is something
here I don't understand.  I am suggesting that if this is handled in the
wrong way that people will leave, and it will create wounds that will
take a long time to heal here.  Clearly this whole episode was
mishandled, and I'm trying to find a solution to the problem that can
heal all of the hurt feelings.

Some people will take offense at just about any action, and I understand
that too.  This will be an "excuse" for them to leave although if you
really cornered those editors who will leave as to why they stopped
contributing, this whole ad controversy will only be a very minor part
of other issues they are dealing with.

--
Robert Scott Horning


from_name: Snowspinner

subject: [WikiEN-l] Deletion again

body:
On Oct 25, 2005, at 4:14 AM, Alphax wrote:
>
> Before anyone says "not Nupedia again", I think content inclusion
> guidlines are actually an area that needs a bit of credentialism.
>

Another argument in favor, to my mind, is that even for experts,
citation takes time. Research is a non-trivial task. On an article,
this is fine - it's not a race, and citations and information can be
added whenever. Sooner is nice, eventually is acceptable.

Deletion debates, you have five days, assuming you notice it off the
bat. When you get stretches like we're getting with webcomics,
whereby huge strings of comics are nominated in a row, citation-based
responses become impossible. But even in the case of an individual
article on a topic, it is absurd to demand that subject experts get
their work done in five days. Especially when we are so wedded to
process that a closed AfD is growing more and more impossible to
overturn.

-Snowspinner


subject:
[Wikitech-l] Re: [WikiEN-l] Ratings again (was: Oour quality
	could rival Encyclopedia Britannica)

body:
Brion Vibber wrote:
>David Gerard wrote:

>> Brion, what would it take to get article rating switched on? Is there
>> any such feature you would allow in, or is it basically off the agenda
>> and I should stop asking?

>Well, it needs to be shown to work correctly on pages with thousands of
>revisions without bogging the server or otherwise exploding in
>interesting ways.

Ah, cool. What test results would convince you? (I'm thinking in terms
of setting up a box with MediaWiki 1.5 or CVS HEAD, loading a DB dump
with lotsa revisions and torturing it.)

- d.


body:
On Oct 25, 2005, at 11:11 AM, Sean Barrett wrote:
>
> Sexiness is considered by many to be utterly intolerable.  See the
> "discussion" about the (professional, high-quality) picture that Bomis
> licensed GFDL for our use in the [[Bikini]] article.  It was lynched
> explicitly /because/ it was a good picture.  The attractiveness of the
> model was the stated reason for deleting it.
>

Every day, I start to realize the revert warriors are right, and we
totally suck beyond all reason.

-Snowspinner


from_name: Andrew Gray

subject: [WikiEN-l] In The News - new name needed

body:
On 24/10/05, MacGyverMagic/Mgm <macgyvermagic at gmail.com> wrote:
> I like that idea. But how would we deal with old links? We can't just
> deprecate a link and not replace it. If they call it ITN, it will
> still be called ITN if it points to [[WP:NEWS]].

I pretty much meant what Flcello suggests below: ask people to call it
News (or something) rather than ITN. Not perfect - but most people say
AfD not VfD now.

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


body:
BJ?rn Lindqvist wrote:

>Sorry, that was a bone-headed slip. I think I menat to say western
>viewpoint.
>
In this case, the western world is actually quite a bit more tolerant of
such things, on average, than the non-western world.  I don't think nude
hogtied women would be looked on too favorably in the Muslim countries
of the world, which represent a large portion of the non-western world.

-Mark


from_name: Ray Saintonge

subject:
[Wikipedia-l] Re: The issue of existance of the Moldovan language
	Wikipedia

body:
Wikipedia Romania (Ronline) wrote:

>Hi,
>
>I think Node is making a few misleading points here,
>most of all to do with this logo changing on the
>Romanian Wikipedia.
>
>I have been at the Romanian Wikipedia since 2003, and
>I can say that there have been no conflicts so far
>with other Wikipedias (except this Moldovan one,
>perhaps) and that this logo-changing was not inspired
>by a dislike for Russians. It was rather changed by a
>desire to have a Romanian character on the logo of a
>Romanian-language encyclopedia. There was never any
>discussion of "we will particularly replace this
>symbol just because it's Cyrllic". I don't think it's
>right that Node use this to his advantage just because
>of what is in reality a coincidence.
>
>As to automatic conversion, as Node said - it would
>cause a great deal of controversy, both in Romania and
>Moldova. In Moldova, it is seen as a symbol of Russian
>repression - perhaps Node doesn't see it as much
>because he hasn't lived through those times (neither
>have I - I'm not Moldovan), but a lot of Moldovans
>have said that so far. The controversy becomes
>increasingly significant when we're talking about a
>script that is no longer official (except for in the
>breakaway Transnistria, which is a dictatorship that
>still follows the Soviet ideals) and is in decline (in
>the sense that - all young Moldovans learn Latin
>only).
>
>Overall, though, I'm not against the Wikipedia. It is
>officially biscriptal at the moment, in terms of
>interface, even though Latin content can't go there -
>instead, it is placed on the Romanian Wikipedia.
>
>But it would be good to hear what international users
>think of this Wikipedia. Would it be correct to delete
>it? Or perhaps move the Cyrillic version to a more
>specific subdomain, rather than letting the mo:
>subdomain host only Cyrillic content?
>
>
I don't think that you will hear much from people who are not directly
involved in Romanian/Moldovan issues.  Node has a history of being very
interested in language issues from all around the world, not just this
one.  With the volume of mail that goes through this mailing list it's
understandable that most of us would prefer to avoid commenting on
topics about which we know very little.

I'm not commenting o the logo issue, because I haven't seen the details.

My first impression would be to let the Cyrillicists use the mo:
domain.  Nostalgia for Soviet Stalinist days or the current
Transnistrian dictatorship should have nothing to do with it.
Propaganda only works when people listen to it, and the people whom they
are trying to convince pay less attention to it than the opponents.
Arguing against the Cyrillic mo: project helps to keep it alive more
than anything else.

There really should be no objection to maintaing that use for mo: unless
someone else has a use for that domain.  I realize that some Latin
script writing Moldovans like to consider their language as different
from Romanian, but that the difference is not recognized at all on the
Romanian side.  As long as an all Cyrillic mo: is alive it will make it
more difficult for those who want a Latin mo: distinct from Romanian.
If you leave it alone it will probably die off eventually anyway.

Ec


subject: [WikiEN-l] Deletion again

body:
On 10/25/05, Alphax <alphasigmax at gmail.com> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA256
>
> Anthony DiPierro wrote:
> > On 10/24/05, Justin Cormack <justin at specialbusservice.com> wrote:
> >
> <snip>
> >> Ok if you cant do that why are all webcomics notable?
> >
> >
> > Because Wikipedia has no space requirements. We have plenty of room to
> > include all webcomics. To choose to include some, but not others, would
> > allow us to make a statement about what is worthwhile and what isn't. It
> > would violate NPOV. Further, the only people who are going to come across
> > the article are those who are specifically looking for it. Keeping the
> > article in the encyclopedia provides useful information to those people, and
> > doesn't hurt anyone else. If any webcomics are notable, then all webcomics
> > are notable.
> >
>
> By your logic: If any people are notable, then all people are notable.
>
> Excuse me while I write articles on Anthony DiPierro, Justin Cormack,
> and the rest.

If you can find third party, verifiable information on them, I look
forward to reading your articles.

--
Michael Turley
User:Unfocused


from_name: Jean-Baptiste Soufron

subject: [Foundation-l] Privacy concerns

body:
So my conclusion was that users should be better informed about the fact
that personal data is gathered, what use will be done of it, and what
they can do (explain them where to get information on it, modify it or
delete it).

soufron.free.fr/soufron-spip/article.php3?id_article=103

Just mentioning that somewhere would be enough to comply with the EU
regulations... but it needs to be done.

Chris Jenkinson wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> We had a rather large discussion today on privacy and its application on
> Wikipedia (specifically anonymous editing and the checkuser tool which
> is the subject of much debate at the moment).
>
> I am curious to whether the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy is
> compatible with EU legislation on privacy (which is tightly regulated),
> and whether it is obliged to be, as the Foundation hosts servers in the
> European Union (which are presumably subject to EU law).
>
> I would also like to propose that any person with access to server logs
> (which include IP addresses), including people with access to the
> checkuser tool, should sign a legal agreement of some sort with the
> Wikimedia Foundation concerning non-disclosure of this information.
>
> I am unsure whether or not an IP address qualifies as "personal
> information" under EU law and I have contacted the UK Information
> Commissioner's Office asking them for their opinion.
>
> Thoughts on the legal agreement proposal, and answers to the question of
> legal obligations are much appreciated.
>
> Chris
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: [Foundation-l] Privacy concerns


subject: [Foundation-l] Privacy concerns


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: [Foundation-l] Privacy concerns


from_name: charles matthews

subject: [WikiEN-l] Webcomics

body:
Justin Cormack wrote

> But [[Able and Baker]], Snowspinners example doesnt even have an  article
> on
> the author.

It's a good point.

This is going to date me, but 'Sounds' music newspaper used to have letters
on the back - practically form letters - where 15-year-olds would write in
saying "I don't see why [insert dull metal band of early 1970s now
completely forgotten, eg May Blitz] don't get the credit they deserve''.
Assume the staff writers weren't faking these - the problem was you could
never work out from the letters why anyone would ever want to listen to the
band.

Charles


subject: [WikiEN-l] How do I edit a page from inside China?

body:
On 10/25/05, Christopher Maloney <voldrani at gmail.com> wrote:
> As most of you probably know, China has recently blocked (again)
> access to Wikipedia.  I've gotten around their Great Firewall by
> installing tor, but now, I find that my edit access to pages is
> blocked, because I appear to be coming from an open proxy.
>
> I don't understand why my edit access is blocked, even though I'm
> logged in as a valid user (Klortho).  I'm sure there's a good reason,
> but I don't understand it.  Anyway, is there any way around this?  I
> certainly hope so, because it seems ironic to me that Wikipedia, in
> effect, puts up an additional barrier to Chinese people wanting to
> express themselves (in addition to the censorship by the government,
> that is).

This *very issue* is right now being proposed as a policy, here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Blocking_policy_proposal

Ironically, you yourself may not be able to enter into the discussion
(although maybe talk-page editing isn't blocked?), but you can at
least see what's happening. At least some people are hoping that this
exact situation can be remedied.
Good luck.

--smws
(user:Kiaparowits)

> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: Neil Harris

subject:
[Wikitech-l] Re: [WikiEN-l] Ratings again (was: Oour quality
	could	rival Encyclopedia Britannica)

body:
Brion Vibber wrote:

> David Gerard wrote:
>
>> Brion, what would it take to get article rating switched on? Is there
>> any such feature you would allow in, or is it basically off the agenda
>> and I should stop asking?
>
>
> Well, it needs to be shown to work correctly on pages with thousands of
> revisions without bogging the server or otherwise exploding in
> interesting ways.
>
> -- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)

Brion,

Am I being naive here, or would a super-dumb implementation with a
single table with the columns shown below be enough to work in the short
term?

Page_ID
Revision_ID
User_ID
Rating_ID
Rating value
Timestamp

If a user rates five parameters, five entries go into the table. Even if
users were to rate articles at the same rate that they are currently
editing them (about once a second), and each rating had five rating
dimensions, the table would grow at a rate of about half-a-million
entries per day. If each entry took (say) twenty bytes, that would be a
growth of 10 megabytes per day, or about four gigabytes a year. Since
the table would grow by simply appending records to its end, and would
not otherwise change, it would not add much load to the database when
being written, as adding five records at once in a single InnoDB
transaction would result in only a single disk write.

To throttle back the load from rating, it might be reasonable to
restrict rating only to logged-on users, and, if that's not enough,
* to throttle the rate at which they could rate articles?
* to restrict rating only to times when the server load was low?
* to restrict rating only to users with a certain number of edits and/or
time since account was registered?

Now, this could clearly be made much, much more efficient in a number of
obvious way, but it would be simple enough to implement in the short
term to get things going.

Also in the short term, the only output method needed would be the
ability to dump an XML or CSV file showing all the rating records for an
given article in a given time-period, and this could be restricted to
admins for the time being if the random access required would be a
significant load on the database. This would be enough to allow users to
start experimenting with ratings analysis schemes.

To prevent the unlimited growth of the table, it would be quite
reasonable to archive rating records more than (say) a year old into a
compressed XML dump.

Finally, in any case, since ratings would only be an experiment during
this phase, the whole ratings system could be turned off at any time if
it presented a serious problem.

-- Neil


body:
Neil Harris wrote:

>Finally, in any case, since ratings would only be an experiment during
>this phase, the whole ratings system could be turned off at any time if
>it presented a serious problem.

A previous version of the code (not the current version, I think?)
loaded *all* revisions of the article being rated, and switching it on
would have caused an extremely unhappy DB server and a top-50 error
message pretty much instantly ;-)

- d.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Deletion again

body:
On 10/25/05, Alphax <alphasigmax at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA256
>
> Anthony DiPierro wrote:
> > On 10/24/05, Justin Cormack <justin at specialbusservice.com> wrote:
> >
> <snip>
> >> Ok if you cant do that why are all webcomics notable?
> >
> >
> > Because Wikipedia has no space requirements. We have plenty of room to
> > include all webcomics. To choose to include some, but not others, would
> > allow us to make a statement about what is worthwhile and what isn't. It
> > would violate NPOV. Further, the only people who are going to come
> across
> > the article are those who are specifically looking for it. Keeping the
> > article in the encyclopedia provides useful information to those people,
> and
> > doesn't hurt anyone else. If any webcomics are notable, then all
> webcomics
> > are notable.
> >
>
> By your logic: If any people are notable, then all people are notable.

 By my logic all people are notable, yes.

Excuse me while I write articles on Anthony DiPierro, Justin Cormack,
> and the rest.

 Notability is different from verifiability (and no original research), and
in any case non-famous (living) people have a legal right to privacy. So if
you can find public, verifiable information about me or Justin in
respectable secondary sources, I personally think it should be included in
Wikipedia.


from_name: Ben Yates

body:
There's no way to keep anonymous proxy users blocked and let logged-in proxy
users edit?

On 10/25/05, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 10/25/05, Christopher Maloney <voldrani at gmail.com> wrote:
> > As most of you probably know, China has recently blocked (again)
> > access to Wikipedia. I've gotten around their Great Firewall by
> > installing tor, but now, I find that my edit access to pages is
> > blocked, because I appear to be coming from an open proxy.
> >
> > I don't understand why my edit access is blocked, even though I'm
> > logged in as a valid user (Klortho). I'm sure there's a good reason,
> > but I don't understand it. Anyway, is there any way around this? I
> > certainly hope so, because it seems ironic to me that Wikipedia, in
> > effect, puts up an additional barrier to Chinese people wanting to
> > express themselves (in addition to the censorship by the government,
> > that is).
>
>
> Because we get so much vandalism through Tor proxies that it isn't
> worth unblocking them. When we block ips it prevents anyone from
> useing them even if they have an account.
>
>
> --
> geni
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


subject:
[Foundation-l] Answers.com and Wikimedia Foundation to Form
	NewPartnership

body:
On 10/25/05, GerardM <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> As much as you are entitled to an opinion, Anthony and Mark have an equal
> right to their opinion. They do not expect people to leave in the first
> place over having ads or not. To their opinion extremely few people would
> walk away and these are in his opinion extremist that we may be better of
> without. Now by painting the other party as having an anti community
> attitude is over the top.

 The statement I made about being better off without those people was
ill-conceived. It was a gut reaction to some statements by Dori that I think
were over the top. If someone comes to a conclusion after some consideration
and discussion that they'd rather not participate in Wikipedia if it engages
in advertising, that's too bad.
 At the same time, I find it hard to see why someone would rationally come
to this conclusion. And I find it even harder to see why someone would leave
just because the possibility of advertising is raised. I've always been of
the opinion that if we ever have ads they should be easy to turn off, both
by editors and casual readers. I could even see an argument that editors
should have them turned off by default.
 What I probably find the hardest to understand is why we can't just
implement a trial of opt-in ads, which would only displayed to those who
turn them on. If the calculations of some of us are right, only 5% of
Wikipedians would have to turn them on to pay for the entire site. But some
of the extremists would leave over even that, and I find that very hard to
fathom.

> Suggesting that other technical models may be considered is nice. It is
> not
> something that is easily done and, it ignores the amount of work done to
> make it as scalable as it is today. Moving to another architecture is also
> made more problematic because we are growing as much as before and it is
> not
> trivial to move to a different architecture. P2P is nice but how are we
> going to ensure that we have the data in the first place, how do you
> ensure
> that little used data does not disapear ? We will still need our data
> stored
> somewhere. P2P works nice for popular content.. we have a lot of content
> that is not.

 I think P2P is a promising solution for the future. It probably wouldn't be
pure P2P though, it its simplest form you'd use P2P to replace the squids,
and the rest would stay as is. You could pull out more and more of the
infrastructure though, to the point where maybe a dozen database servers
would be all that Wikipedia had to run. One major issue would be that
content would have to be signed, and most (or all) browsers wouldn't support
that without downloading some sort of plugin.
 I think it'd work, but we'd need a backup plan, and donations probably
aren't going to cut it.


from_name: Koltwills at aol.com

subject: [WikiEN-l] Repeated blocks -- collateral damage

body:
I just got this message:

You have attempted to edit a page, either by clicking the "edit this  page"
tab or by following a red link.
Your user name or IP address has been _blocked_
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Blocking_policy)   by _David  Gerard_
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:David_Gerard) .
The reason given is:
Autoblocked because your IP address has  been recently used by
"_Ugabogaimasuuuukpoopit@!_
(http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Ugabogaimasuuuukpoopit@!&action=edit) ".  The reason given for Ugabogaimasuuuukpoopit@!'s
block is: "massive  sockpuppetry (A1sdf sockpuppet)".
You can _email  David Gerard_
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Emailuser/David_Gerard)  or one of the other _administrators_
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:List_of_administrators)   to discuss the block. You may also
edit _your user talk  page_ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Mytalk)  if
you wish. If you believe that our _blocking  policy_
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Blocking_policy)  was violated, you may discuss the block
publicly on the _WikiEN-l  mailing list_
(http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l) . Note that you may not use the "email this user"  feature unless
you have a Wikipedia account and a valid email address  registered in your _user
 preferences_ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Preferences) .

Your IP address is 64.12.117.8. Please  include this address, along with your
username, in any queries you  make.

Okay. But this isn't my IP address.

Here we go again: collateral damage.

This hasn't happened for a couple of weeks, but it happens frequently  enough
-- often three and four times a week:  I get blocked as the  result of
someone else's conduct.  When I try to edit, I get the  "User is blocked" message --
but the I.P. address is never my  own.

If this follows the usual pattern, I'll be blocked several more times  this
week and the next and the next.

How does this happen?

There also have been instances when I've been blocked from editing a  page
(that remains open to edit for other users; it's not locked down),  but can edit
elsewhere.

I've been told that such a thing is impossible, yet it's happened  repeatedly.

How does this happen?  Is there something I or someone else can  do to
prevent it from occurring again?

dcv


from_name: Delirium

subject: [WikiEN-l] Ratings again

body:
Stefan Sittler wrote:

>I have been wondering about this, actually. (I'm newish to WP). Could
>somebody show me how exactly categories are helpful? A link would be
>fine. It's hard for me to see the usefulness. A link or three would be
>fine, maybe an old pertinent discussion. Thanks.
>
>
I've used them to basically find things in the same category.  For
example, [[Category:Islands of Greece]], and its sub-categories for
different island chains.

I see them as fulfilling a lot of the functions that would otherwise
have to be fulfilled with lists, but in a more maintainable way, since
they're maintained incrementally on the article side, not centrally on
the list side (the "list" is then automatically generated).  They don't
completely replace lists, but they automate a lot of the more tedious
sorts of lists that would otherwise have to be constructed and maintained.

-Mark


from_name: Stan Shebs

subject: [WikiEN-l] A microthreshold for article _creation?_

body:
dpbsmith at verizon.net wrote:

>The Wikipedia promise is "edit this page."
>
>But I don't think the promise of zero-threshold _editing_ should
>automatically be a promise of zero-threshold article _creation._
>
>_Most_ people get their feet wet with simple edits, giving a chance to get
>acculturated before taking the leap to creating an article. People whose
>first edit is the creation of an article are, I think, showing _too_ bold a
>temperament.
>
A side-effect of making hoops for creation while leaving addition
wide open is that you incentivize new people to glue their material
into existing articles even if that doesn't make much sense. So
you'll have bios tacked onto the existing town articles (birthplaces),
chemist bios including the full info on the compounds they studied,
and so forth. Even in the cases where merging might make sense, the
new editor won't be able to create the necessary redirs either, so
the uncreated articles continue to be redlinks and offer no hint
that the content already exists in some other article (or maybe even
replicated in several articles).

I've gamed out a few similar schemes of my own, and in general it
works out that there's little advantage to making substantive
distinctions between creation and modification.

Stan


body:
On 10/25/05, Christopher Maloney <voldrani at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> As most of you probably know, China has recently blocked (again)
> access to Wikipedia. I've gotten around their Great Firewall by
> installing tor, but now, I find that my edit access to pages is
> blocked, because I appear to be coming from an open proxy.
>
> I don't understand why my edit access is blocked, even though I'm
> logged in as a valid user (Klortho). I'm sure there's a good reason,
> but I don't understand it. Anyway, is there any way around this? I
> certainly hope so, because it seems ironic to me that Wikipedia, in
> effect, puts up an additional barrier to Chinese people wanting to
> express themselves (in addition to the censorship by the government,
> that is).

 Keep trying. I started using Tor after all the talk of admins being able to
see my IP address, and I've found that only about half the exit nodes are
blocked. You can set up your Tor config file to exclude those exit nodes
that are blocked, as you find them.
 There was some talk at some point about giving admins the power to block
and unblock all Tor exit nodes simultaneously (blocking them for 30 minutes
at a time). I'm not sure if this is in the implementation stages or not, but
it'd be a good solution.
 Anthony


from_name: dpbsmith at verizon.net

body:
The Wikipedia promise is "edit this page."

But I don't think the promise of zero-threshold _editing_ should
automatically be a promise of zero-threshold article _creation._

_Most_ people get their feet wet with simple edits, giving a chance to get
acculturated before taking the leap to creating an article. People whose
first edit is the creation of an article are, I think, showing _too_ bold a
temperament.

Many online communities have a provision whereby new users' messages are
automatically moderated initially and only removed from moderation after
they've posted a small number of acceptable messages.

Suppose we had a level of privilege called, say "contributor." Anons and non-
contributors could edit articles just as they do now, but only contributors
could create an article _and have it appear immediately in the main
namespace._

Articles contributed by non-contributors would go to a "moderated" area.
These article would not appear in the namespace until a contributor made at
least one edit to them. That is, an article is approved by making a single
edit to it. The reason for requiring one edit for approval would be to
strongly encourage contributors not to mindlessly approve marginal articles.

I'm thinking that it should be extremely easy to become a contributor. I'm
thinking that the requirement should be a) contributors must have user names,
and b) users with accounts get contributor status automatically as soon as
their first new article is approved.


from_name: Gerrit Holl

subject: [Foundation-l] Answers.com stuff

body:
daniwo59 at aol.com wrote:
> We are now among the top 30 websites in the world. I believe that we
> are the only one that is a not-for-profit (haven't checked it recently,
> but it is a fairly safe assumption). How can we cover our operating
> costs?

I think the BBC is not-for-profit.

Gerrit.

--
Temperature in Lule?, Norrbotten, Sweden:
| Current temperature   05-10-25 13:39:57   -5.4 degrees Celsius ( 22.3F) |
--
Det finns inte d?ligt v?der, bara d?liga kl?der.


subject: [Foundation-l] Answers.com stuff


subject:
[Foundation-l] Benefits of advertising (was Re: Our exponentially
	increasing costs)

body:
Jimmy Wales wrote:
> Then as a longstanding member of the community with a good reputation, I
> ask for your help in explaining to them how it is *not* advertising.  In
> order to do that, you'll have to stop spinning wild accusations first
> and ask some basic questions about the deal until you understand it.

I assume good faith, but there is at least one thing I still fail to
understand. As I understand it, Wikipedia will receive 50% of the money
made by ad-clicks in the software product by Answers.com. How does this
revenue reduce to 0 if users remove the link from Wikipedia? Surely
answers.com will advertise the software on their own website as well? Or
will it be distinguished how people downloaded it?

Is it like this: "It is in the interest of Wikipedia to prominently
feature the product, because the product generates revenue for
Wikipedia"?

Gerrit.

--
Temperature in Lule?, Norrbotten, Sweden:
| Current temperature   05-10-25 13:49:46   -5.3 degrees Celsius ( 22.5F) |
--
Det finns inte d?ligt v?der, bara d?liga kl?der.


subject:
[Foundation-l] Answers.com and Wikimedia Foundation to Form New
	Partnership

body:
Jimmy Wales wrote:
> It strikes me as absolutely impossible for *anyone* to exert influence
> over our content.

There is an edit link on every page! (-;

Gerrit.

--
Temperature in Lule?, Norrbotten, Sweden:
| Current temperature   05-10-25 13:59:50   -5.1 degrees Celsius ( 22.8F) |
--
Det finns inte d?ligt v?der, bara d?liga kl?der.


from_name: Brion Vibber

body:
Daniel Mayer wrote:
> --- Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote:
>>Anthony makes a good point.  Hardware does break down over time, and has
>>to be replaced.  Even more likely is that it will become obsolete before
>>it breaks down.
>
> When that becomes a significant issue, then the model will need to be updated.
> I've been told that, so far, pretty much all the hardware we've ever bought is
> still in use.

I should point out that it hasn't been that long; we started the Florida
cluster in early 2004 following the Great Double Server Crash of
Christmas 2003.

The oldest machine we have in service is Larousse, an 866-MHz Pentium
III which does some specialized and backup services, and used to be our
secondary web server in the old California location.

Everything else is less than two years old, with the oldest generation
being 2.6GHz Pentium IVs. Not quite obsolete yet!

A number of machines have had to go out for repair or replacement over
time (usually faulty memory, sometimes failed disks), but most are still
chugging away.

-- 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/foundation-l/attachments/20051025/17a4fb68/attachment.pgp


body:
Daniel Mayer wrote:
> --- Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote:
>>Anthony makes a good point.  Hardware does break down over time, and has
>>to be replaced.  Even more likely is that it will become obsolete before
>>it breaks down.
>
> When that becomes a significant issue, then the model will need to be updated.
> I've been told that, so far, pretty much all the hardware we've ever bought is
> still in use.

I should point out that it hasn't been that long; we started the Florida
cluster in early 2004 following the Great Double Server Crash of
Christmas 2003.

The oldest machine we have in service is Larousse, an 866-MHz Pentium
III which does some specialized and backup services, and used to be our
secondary web server in the old California location.

Everything else is less than two years old, with the oldest generation
being 2.6GHz Pentium IVs. Not quite obsolete yet!

A number of machines have had to go out for repair or replacement over
time (usually faulty memory, sometimes failed disks), but most are still
chugging away.

-- 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/foundation-l/attachments/20051025/17a4fb68/attachment-0001.pgp


body:
Daniel Mayer wrote:
> --- Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote:
>>Anthony makes a good point.  Hardware does break down over time, and has
>>to be replaced.  Even more likely is that it will become obsolete before
>>it breaks down.
>
> When that becomes a significant issue, then the model will need to be updated.
> I've been told that, so far, pretty much all the hardware we've ever bought is
> still in use.

I should point out that it hasn't been that long; we started the Florida
cluster in early 2004 following the Great Double Server Crash of
Christmas 2003.

The oldest machine we have in service is Larousse, an 866-MHz Pentium
III which does some specialized and backup services, and used to be our
secondary web server in the old California location.

Everything else is less than two years old, with the oldest generation
being 2.6GHz Pentium IVs. Not quite obsolete yet!

A number of machines have had to go out for repair or replacement over
time (usually faulty memory, sometimes failed disks), but most are still
chugging away.

-- 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/wikimedia-l/attachments/20051025/17a4fb68/attachment.pgp>


body:
Daniel Mayer wrote:
> --- Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote:
>>Anthony makes a good point.  Hardware does break down over time, and has
>>to be replaced.  Even more likely is that it will become obsolete before
>>it breaks down.
>
> When that becomes a significant issue, then the model will need to be updated.
> I've been told that, so far, pretty much all the hardware we've ever bought is
> still in use.

I should point out that it hasn't been that long; we started the Florida
cluster in early 2004 following the Great Double Server Crash of
Christmas 2003.

The oldest machine we have in service is Larousse, an 866-MHz Pentium
III which does some specialized and backup services, and used to be our
secondary web server in the old California location.

Everything else is less than two years old, with the oldest generation
being 2.6GHz Pentium IVs. Not quite obsolete yet!

A number of machines have had to go out for repair or replacement over
time (usually faulty memory, sometimes failed disks), but most are still
chugging away.

-- 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/wikimedia-l/attachments/20051025/17a4fb68/attachment-0001.pgp>


body:
Neil Harris wrote:
> Am I being naive here, or would a super-dumb implementation with a
> single table with the columns shown below be enough to work in the short
> term?

<snip>

Have you looked at the existing implementation?

-- 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/20051025/3bf77ea6/attachment.pgp>


from_name: GerardM

body:
Hoi,
Given that it is only a few wikipedias that can be considered to somehow
cover subjects adequately, the plateau that may arise is still in the
future. To suggest that we have to take the emergence of a pleateau into
consideration, you have to identify why it is likely to arise. Personally I
find it easier to find arguments why we are NOT going to reach this plateau
in the near future..

So the best we can do with your "sound accounting practices" is to have
multiple scenarios available to us. Not because of accounting practices but
because they impact what we do and how we do it. Given however the many
projects that need funding and the wishes we have to have an impact in the
languages where we are still weak, it does not seem reasonable to expect an
end to the growth that we have experienced over our first few years.

Thanks,
GerardM

On 10/25/05, Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote:
>
> Daniel Mayer wrote:
>
> >--- Anthony DiPierro <wikilegal at inbox.org> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>You know, those figures would make a lot more sense if they were done on
> an
> >>accrual basis rather than a cash basis. As is the figures completely
> ignore
> >>the fact that the expected life of the servers is more than a single
> >>quarter.
> >>
> >>
> >The figures I gave assume that all the hardware we have already bought is
> still
> >in operation (which surprisingly is more or less the case).
> >
> >
> >>If you're using those cash-basis figures that's another problem with the
> >>model as well :).
> >>
> >>
> >Yet the model has closely predicted increased costs for the last year
> (yeah, to
> >an extent this is self-fulfilling, but only so much so)...
> >
> >
> Anthony makes a good point. Hardware does break down over time, and has
> to be replaced. Even more likely is that it will become obsolete before
> it breaks down.
>
> The projections of increased costs that you talk about are fine as far
> as they go, but this has all been in a period of rapid growth. Sound
> accounting practice requires that we be prepared for the evebtual plateay.
>
> Ec
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>


from_name: Anthere

subject:
[Foundation-l] Re: Answers.com and Wikimedia Foundation to Form
	NewPartnership

body:
Delirium wrote:

> Anthony DiPierro wrote:
>
>> I can't for the life of me understand why people "a bunch of editors and
>> readers" would leave over something like this. I also don't think it'd
>> be a
>> bad thing to get rid of the people who think this way.
>>
> Well, if the Foundation really wanted to find out, they could issue an
> ultimatum---we're starting GoogleAds tomorrow, and anyone opposed to
> advertising on Wikipedia can get out (and good riddance!).
>
> Of course, they are unlikely to do so. =]
>
> -Mark

That discussion already occured amongst ourselves some months ago, and
the conclusion of the discussion is currently visible (or... rather...
not visible precisely) on the website.

Ant


from_name: Milos Rancic

subject: Ant: Re: [Wikipedia-l] I can't believe!

body:
As I said, if this user template pass, I don't see any reason why
other "regional language" template should not pass.

When someone says that (s)he is speaking Bronxian, Philadelphian,
San-Franciscian or even "The Language of 10th New York Avenue" and
make a template about that, (s)he would be completely right. Of
course, I would be the first who would list all of my native "regional
languages" because I have the same feelings toward my regions as the
person from Zlatibor toward Zlatibor. As well as I know a lot of
people who have the same feelings toward the parts of Belgrade.

And language user templates would become a nonsense.

And I think that this conversation is nonsense, too. If you want to
defend such principle even language user templates would become a
nonsense, go on. But, I see that there are enough of reasonable people
on the poll.

On 10/24/05, Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com> wrote:
> Uhh... is there such a category? And if there were, would it matter if
> that were a part of it? And why couldn't they classify it if it were
> userified?
>
> Mark
>
> On 24/10/05, Milos Rancic <millosh at mutualaid.org> wrote:
> > But, they can't classify category "User zb" in some super-category of
> > South Slavic speaking people.
> >
> > On 10/24/05, Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > People can still add the category [[Category:User zb]] to their page.
> > >
> > > Mark
> > >
> > > On 24/10/05, Milos Rancic <millosh at mutualaid.org> wrote:
> > > > On 10/24/05, Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > I don't think it matters -- even if there is no template, people can
> > > > > make it look like a language template anyhow.
> > > > >
> > > > > So if they can make something that looks like a rabbit and acts like a
> > > > > rabbit, why not just give them a rabbit?
> > > >
> > > > Because of categorization.
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > > > Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > > > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > If you would like a gmail invite, please send me an e-mail.
> > > Si ud. quiere que le env?e una invitaci?n para juntar gmail, env?eme un mensaje.
> > > Si vous voulez que je vous envoie une invitation ? joindre gmail,
> > > envoyez-moi s.v.p un message.
> > > Se vce. gostaria que lhe envie um convite para juntar gmail, favor de
> > > envie-me uma mensagem.
> > > Se vuleti chi vi manu 'n invitu a uniri gmail, mandatimi n messaggiu.
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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
> >
>
>
> --
> If you would like a gmail invite, please send me an e-mail.
> Si ud. quiere que le env?e una invitaci?n para juntar gmail, env?eme un mensaje.
> Si vous voulez que je vous envoie une invitation ? joindre gmail,
> envoyez-moi s.v.p un message.
> Se vce. gostaria que lhe envie um convite para juntar gmail, favor de
> envie-me uma mensagem.
> Se vuleti chi vi manu 'n invitu a uniri gmail, mandatimi n messaggiu.
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>


from_name: Timwi

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Link formatting suggestion

body:
> Aw, good on yer. [...]

> Righto.  It's crap [...]

> it's unnecessary, it adds an extra step for users who're just
> browsing through article links, and it makes Jakob Nielsen cry [...]

I don't know why I always end up regretting having made any suggestions.


from_name: Stephen Bain

subject: [WikiEN-l] Guardian article about Wikipedia

body:
On 10/25/05, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> The Guardian Online really, really loves Wikipedia because the
> managing editor of the online edition really, really loves Wikipedia
> (so I was told at a job interview there a few months ago, when the
> interviewer noticed "Wikipedia" in my interests ;-).
>
> That said, I find it hard to consider the above unfair. It's the
> real-world acid test and mostly rings true to me.
>

The guy looking at the entry on TS Eliot was critical because it
didn't list his book in the bibliography. I think that's certainly an
unfair criticism.

--
Stephen Bain
stephen.bain at gmail.com


body:
In a message dated 10/25/2005 3:16:22 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
geniice at gmail.com writes:

On  10/25/05, Koltwills at aol.com <Koltwills at aol.com>  wrote:

>
> How does this happen?

You are on  AOL your IP changed when you went to a new page

> Is there  something I or someone else can  do to
> prevent it from  occurring again?

Stop useing AOL.

Well, I suppose I have another reason to go to  Mozilla!

AOL just sux.

Thanks.

dcv


from_name: Wikiacc

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Crappy prose isn't the main "quality" problem.

body:
On 10/24/05, Daniel P. B. Smith <dpbsmith at verizon.net> wrote:
> The quality problem in our articles isn't "crappy prose." Sure, a
> sentence like
>
> "Implicit order means a system has hidden information which is not
> apparent based solely on direct observation."
>
> makes me wince.
>
> But improving the quality of an article is more than just rewriting
> crappy prose. Or checking facts. Or adding references. Or fixing
> typos. Or removing inaccuracies.
>
> As the -paedia root implies, a good encyclopedia article should
> teach. That means it should go beyond Gradgrind, facts, facts, facts.
> It should convey not data, not information, but knowledge. It should
> integrate and synthesize; it should be comprehensible to a wide range
> of readers, for example by having a progressive structure that gives
> the basics quickly without sacrificing detail later. It should be
> well balanced, giving suitably proportioned weight to all aspects of
> its subject. It should be analytical.
>
> It takes a _lot_ of work to do that.
>
> If you look at the Guardian criticisms, Mike Barnes complains that
> some of the writing in an article is "unhelpful." He thinks
> encyclopedia articles should be helpful.
>
> Alexandra Shulman complains that an article "inaccurate and unclear"
> and that "every value judgment it makes is wrong." She thinks
> encyclopedia articles should be not only accurate but clear, and that
> they _should present value judgements--sound ones._
>
> Mark Kurlansky complains of some factual details. No comment on the
> prose.
>
> Anthony Julius complains that an article is "purely factual and not
> in any way analytical." He thinks encyclopedia articles should be
> analytical.
>
> Claire Tomalin complains of minor accuracies, complains more about
> major _omissions_, and by the failure of the article to comment on
> the literary merit of Pepy's diary. She thinks an encyclopedia should
> provide balanced coverage of a topic. Like Shulman, she thinks  it
> should present sound value judgements.
>
> Derek Barker indeed complains of prose style.
>
> Robert McHenry complains that an article shows "no understanding of
> the cultural and historical contexts involved. In other words, it is
> a school essay, sketchy and poorly balanced."
>
> Most complain of inaccuracies, but characterize them as minor.
>
> Only one complains of bad prose.
>
> The others complain of articles that fail to be helpful; clear;
> present sound value judgements; be analytical; and provide balanced
> coverage of their subject.
>
>
> --
> Daniel P. B. Smith, dpbsmith at verizon.net
> "Elinor Goulding Smith's Great Big Messy Book" is now back in print!
> Sample chapter at http://world.std.com/~dpbsmith/messy.html
> Buy it at http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1403314063/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
Well said.

--
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Wikiacc


subject: [WikiEN-l] The listing of redirects on [[WP:SFD]]

body:
SFD obviously only has jurisdiction over stub templates. To be
considered a stub template it should meet the following criteria:
1. It is a template.
2. It is used to indicate stub articles.

On 10/25/05, SPUI <drspui at gmail.com> wrote:
> SPUI wrote:
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Bike-stub
> > It's been protected blank again.
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Stub_types_for_deletion/Log/Deleted/October_2005#.7B.7Bbike-stub.7D.7D
> >
> > The original discussion WASN'T EVEN ABOUT A REDIRECT! Fuck you, Mairi.
> > Fuck you, Grutness. Fuck you, Phroziac.

So CSD G4 does not apply.

> >
> Not only that but I've been blocked for "Delete warring". Asshole.
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

--
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Wikiacc