body:
Hi!
I might have been a bit off with the English example.

I'm no expert so I can't tell how big a difference there is between the
English variations, and is  any difficulty in understanding of an article is
caused by that.

Also I can't tell, would the peoples of the Balkan region really understand
each other if they all chose to speak their own language consistently
choosing "dialect" words over commons ones.

Anyway, its for the Serbs and Montenegrins to know if a similar system would
be okay for them. Also I can't tell if the two people can work together in
the same wiki. (From some of the messages posted here it seems the Serbian
isn't that open a community, but I can't tell how widespread the
anti-Montenegrin sentiment is in the community)

Also I don't think it would be fair to allow 3 dialects but deny a 4 , if a
mistake was made, why should the 4th "suffer" from it...

Of course there might be a dilemma, that whats a wiki worth if it will start
by importing all articles from the Croatian or Serbian  wiki (thats what I
would do...), this makes creating a fork not a so good idea.

The solution could be purely technical, make it possible with advanced regex
dictionaries and user input to have all the dialect versions of an article.
Also improve the switching from Cyrillic script to Latin as there are many
places (especially talk pages), where parts of the text don't get
translated...

Bence Damokos
On 12/3/06, Birgitte SB <birgitte_sb at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
> --- Bence Damokos <bdamokos at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi!
> > I am an outsider in this dispute, but I would like
> > to give my opinion on the
> > state of these four languages as I see them, after
> > learning for some time
> > Croatian, and having spoken with a friend who is
> > more knowledgable than me.
> >
> > What I see is that Montenegrin uses the ijekavica
> > dialect of the so-called
> > Serbo-Croatian language (which I think is THE
> > artificial one from the 5
> > mentioned), while the Serbians use the ekavica
> > dialect. This makes every
> > second word different. Even though either is
> > acceptable, you wouldn't wanna
> > mix them in an article (as mixing British or
> > American spelling: no one would
> > really notice), it would stop your "train of
> > thought" to decode each woord
> > and decide which dialect it was written in.
> > Requiring the use of either one
> > would be unfair, and would violate the free speech
> > rights of either of them,
> > also it would lead to some more unnecessary tension.
> >
> > Croatian uses latin script, and ijekavica (at least
> > the official dialect),
> > so Montenegrins could integrate there? Wrong.
> > Montenegrin has many words
> > borrowed from Turkish that Croatians might not
> > understand, or would
> > constantly replace with their Croatian counterparts,
> > or just remove from
> > articles.
> >
> > The difference of words and dialect is a main
> > difference between Serbian in
> > Croatian. Apart from the dialet problem mentioned
> > with the Montenegrins,
> > Serbian language tends to use Western words by
> > transliterating it
> > phonetically into Serbian language, while Croatian
> > tends to invent their own
> > words. Compromise on this ground would either ignite
> > tension, or be a factor
> > in "deteriorating" Croatian language by introducing
> > foreign words, for which
> > there is already a Croatian version in use.
> >
> > Bosnian: I'm no expert here, why this is a separate
> > language :), if not for
> > political reasons. I guess they have many Turkish
> > words too. Anyway, if
> > there is a Bosnian wiki, a Montenegrin one could
> > also be.
> >
> > Also, if I'm correct Montenegro had its state
> > television in the Serbia and
> > Montenegro era, that was broadcast it Montenegrin
> > (language/dialect).
> >
> > In conclusion, Serbo-Croatian was an invented
> > language, without machine
> > translation between the ijekavica/ekavica/ikavica
> > dialects choosing either
> > that is not the official in any a part of the region
> > would lead to tensions,
> > and the difference in words might also lead to
> > misunderstandings, or at
> > least heart national feelings if a "dialect version
> > of a word" is changed to
> > an other "for better understanding".
> >
> > Anyway, I hope I didn't upset any one, and that I
> > wasn't factually wrong, or
> > misleading.
> >
> > Regards, Bence Damokos
> >
> > ps. OFF. why are there so many wikis in Italy?
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> >
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
>
> I believe there is misunderstang over how the
> variations of English are handled on en.WP.  There is
> no mixing of the variations (which are more than just
> spelling), and people would definately notice if there
> was.  The way it works is that in an article on
> England, British conventions are used.  In an article
> on America, the American conventions are used.  In an
> article on Canada, Canadian conventions are used.
> Whenever there is a general article common to all
> areas (such as Dog) the original editor who started
> the article chooses which conventions to  use.  No one
> is allowed to go around changing the grammer and
> spelling to their prefered standards on general
> articles.  In article where the title would be
> different (i.e. Petrol/Gasoline) a redirect is made to
> the original title.  Of course people have not always
> liked this method and have tried to go around changing
> standards, but they are stopped and everyone moves on.
> I don't know these languages myself and I could be
> wrong here, but I do not see any significant
> differences from the situation in English.
>
> BirgitteSB
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.
> http://new.mail.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>


list: wikimedia-l

source: pipermail-mbox

from_name: Bence Damokos

subject: [Foundation-l] Montenegrin request for new language wikipedia


list: wikipedia-l

from_name: Tim Starling

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Static HTML dumps

body:
New static HTML dumps of Wikipedia have been made, they are linked from:

http://static.wikipedia.org/

There are compressed archives of the HTML available for download for all
languages *except* English. Apparently p7zip leaks memory and eventually
crashes when it tries to compress it, but hopefully I'll have something
sorted out in the next few days.

There is no image snapshot this time around due to disk space constraints.
Most of the images on the English Wikipedia main page are now broken because
they were deleted shortly after they were featured.

-- Tim Starling


list: wikitech-l

from_name: Alfio Puglisi

subject: [Wikitech-l] tiff files?

body:
On 12/2/06, Lars Aronsson <lars at aronsson.se> wrote:

> For example, the image http://runeberg.org/img/nfad/0670.4.png is
> 240 kbytes in 150 dpi 16-level grayscale PNG but only 200 kbytes
> in 600 dpi bitonal TIFF G4.  The difference between 150 dpi
> grayscale and 600 dpi bitonal becomes very clear when you try to
> print the page on a 600 or 1200 dpi laser printer.

Well, you should compare apples to apples. The image you specified
becames only 58 kbytes wen saved as 1-bit (bitonal) PNG. And bitmapped
formats like PNG and TIFF have no concept of "dpi"- that's an external
manipulation made by the printing program. You need to compare images
with the same pixel sizes.

Ciao,
Alfio


from_name: Steve Summit

subject: [Wikitech-l] Wikipedia has a problem

body:
> Sorry! This site is experiencing technical difficulties.
> Try waiting a few minutes and reloading.
> (Can't contact the database server: All servers busy)

AFAIK, it means exactly what it says.  I've been seeing it more
and more lately, particularly at around 15:00 UTC weekdays, and
for some reason a whole lot tonight.  It may be some strange
database problem, or it may just be evergrowing load outstripping
server capacity again..


list: wikien-l

from_name: Matthew Brown

subject: [WikiEN-l] overzealous image deletion?

body:
On 12/3/06, Justin Cormack <justin at specialbusservice.com> wrote:
> No, it has been accepted but not enforced. It has always been agreed that
> we dont accept fair use images when we can have free ones. We are a free
> encyclopaedia - thats the whole idea.

That's always been accepted in the most part, yes.  However, the
meaning of 'can have free ones' has changed.  Previously, it required
more than a theoretical possibility of a free alternative.

I am concerned that the definition of 'can have free ones' will be
stretched further so that we start removing pictures of things that no
longer exist under the theory that someone else may have a similar
photo that they might be willing to free license.

-Matt


from_name: Rob

subject: [WikiEN-l] Nazi userboxes

body:
On 12/3/06, Rob Smith <nobs03 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 12/3/06, Rob <gamaliel8 at
> gmail.com<http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l>>
> wrote:
> >
> >I know that had I been aware of that
> >information I certainly would have added it to the article when I
> >wrote it, so you can't claim you would have faced resistance inserting
> >this.
>
> And the fact that the Office of Historian of the House of Representatives
> sat vacant for 10 years speaks volumes about the status of this debate.  I
> would hope that Wikipedia is designed to work past this impasse.  Thank you.

You mentioned missing information, the information was added
immediately.  What's the impasse?


from_name: Ray Saintonge

subject: [WikiEN-l] SOS -- Save Our Sources

body:
Steve Bennett wrote:

>On 12/4/06, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Fair use generally only applies if you are using the copyrighted
>>material in an article about the material itself.
>>
>>
>That's a very specific example of fair use which Wikipedia generally
>dictates as the only one it's willing to accept. I believe that lots
>of other uses can be "fair use". For example, it's generally
>acceptable for an academic to photocopy bits out of a journal so that
>they can study it at home, if the journal can't be borrowed - no
>violation of copyright takes place. I believe this would be in the
>same category. We would not be copying the material to avoid someone
>having to buy the book, we'd be copying it to enable readers to simply
>check that it says what someone is claiming it does. Perfectly fair,
>IMHO.
>
I think that the theory that fair use is applicable in this is a dubious
one.  In any event the place for this kind of medium would be in
Commons, and they don't allow fair use at all.  The academic who
photocopies an article for his own research does not normally make that
article available to a broad range of people.  Even limiting access to
logged-on users is still making the article available to a very large
number of people.

How much of an article would we keep?  In some cases snippets may be
enough, but in the really contentious material fact-checking may require
a context for the material.

>>Most dead-tree sources can be found a good library, which should be
>>
>>
>enough to verify it if we need to.
>
>Know anyone who has ever gone to a library to verify a Wikipedia
>citation? Ever had a suspicion about a dead-tree citation? Could you
>be bothered going to a library to check it out? Could you be bothered
>to click on a link?
>
Honest and thorough fact checkers are not about to cut corners by
avoiding a trip to the library if they feel it is important enough.  I
have frequently had suspicions about citations.  Nothing stops us from
asking another Wikipedian to check it out when we don't have access to
convenient material.  For some going to a well-stocked library may be a
100 mile drive.  Clicking on a link is obviously convenient, but it
could also promote tunnel vision and diminish the possibility of editors
looking for alternative sources that may view the issue differently.

Ec


subject: [WikiEN-l] overzealous image deletion?

body:
Sherool wrote:
> First we got... Then came... a special tagging process was
> later introduced for these cases with a 7 day "timer" rater
> than a 48 hour one, and that's more or less where we are today.

And people are quoting Jimbo as having said that it's better to
have no image than a nonfree one.  And if that's true and if it
applies in every case, then we shouldn't be using things like
promotional photos, and the fair-use deletion effort that's
underway is appropriate.


list: foundation-l

from_name: Gianluigi Gamba

subject: [Foundation-l] Why so many Italian language wikis

body:
> Bence Damokos schreef:
>> ps. OFF. why are there so many wikis in Italy?
> ...
> NB the "correct" way to ask your question would have been "Why are there
> so many wikis for language spoken in Italy?" (All the Wikimedia
> Foundation wikis are in Florida :) )

In spite of the common Latin root, Neapolitan, Sicilian, Ligurian, Venetian,
etc... diverged enough from each other to make the speakers of those
languages poorly understandable to each other, when not understandable at
all.
Then the Florentian language was chosen as model to create a national
language (well before the creation of Italy as a unified nation). Today most
of the Italian citizens speak both Italian - recognized as common and
official language for the whole state - and their old local language,
according to the context and the situation; local languages like Sardinian
and Furlan got local official acknowledgment in order to preserve them as
cultural heritage.

The wikis in local languages of Italy are driven by the same purpose:
preservation of the wealth of that cultural past.
Some of their most active users, besides, never happened to learn Italian,
as because of the emigration Italy underwent they were born in the US or in
South America or in Australia or in Germany and they currently speak
Neapolitan/Sicilian/Venetian/etc and English or Spanish or German.

As far as I've seen up to now (probably with the exception of the Lombard
wiki) those communities are big, committed and open enough to keep their
wikipedias alive and growing, and not battlefields for nationalistic issues.

Because that's the point IMHO: Wikimedia resources should not be hostage of
nationalistic issues or (worse) become unaware megaphones of political
movements. That's not what we're here for.

Bye,
G. (aka Paginazero)


subject: [WikiEN-l] Nazi userboxes

body:
On 12/3/06, Rob Smith <nobs03 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 12/3/06, Rob <gamaliel8 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > What's the impasse?
 >
> The partisan impasse represented in the highest levels of an elected
> democracy, i.e. that through baseless defamatory smears and wreckless
> journalism one side can achieve a result.

As wicked cool as Wikipedia is, I don't think we can solve that
problem.  We should probably be using this list to work on problems we
can solve, or failing that, argue about AfD and userboxes.


from_name: Александр Сигачёв

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Russian Wikipedia award?

body:
2006/12/3, Oldak Quill <oldakquill at gmail.com>:
> On 03/12/06, ????????? ??????? <alexander.sigachov at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > I've added an (extremely crappy, which
> > > needs tons of work) [[Runet]] article. It seems that Runet is some
> > > sort of major ISP for Russia, like AOL in its prime, so this award has
> > > probably driven tons of traffic to ru. Good job!
> >
> > It is not a provider :)
> >
> > Runet is slang for "Russian Internet" (".ru" domain).
>
> Then the article needs fixing. What is the site RUNET.ru for? I can't
> really see what's going except advertising and news. I assume it is a
> general portal.

It is a small little-known portal with a loud name. It has only about
700 visitors per day (counter is below of the portal page).

--
Kunlabore,
Alexander Sigachov
http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/user:ajvol


subject: [WikiEN-l] SOS -- Save Our Sources

body:
On 12/3/06, Steve Bennett <stevagewp at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I believe we should also have a way of making dead-tree sources
> available (through scans etc) for verification.

This makes me very nervous, as I envision people challenging all sorts
of what are now unchallenged, acceptable sources because they can't be
bothered to go to the library and check out a widely available book.
No way am I going to start scanning things in.  This sort of thing
should only be reserved for unavailable sources in controversial
articles (things that probably shouldn't be used in controversial
articles anyway, but that's another issue) and if we set up a system
for it, it will encourage people to use and demand this sort of
verification. AGF and a library card should suffice.


from_name: Justin Cormack

subject: [WikiEN-l] overzealous image deletion?

body:
On 3 Dec 2006, at 20:25, Matthew Brown wrote:

> On 12/3/06, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 12/3/06, Steve Summit <scs at eskimo.com> wrote:
>>> Also, if someone could let me know where this new policy has been
>>> discussed, I'd appreciate it, so that I can register my (belated)
>>> opinion on it.
>>
>> Isn't new exactly people have just finaly decided to inforce the
>> policies we have had for a long time.
>
> Hmm, not exactly.  People have decided to interpret the policies we've
> had for a long time in a way that was not previously accepted.

No, it has been accepted but not enforced. It has always been agreed
that
we dont accept fair use images when we can have free ones. We are a free
encyclopaedia - thats the whole idea.

Justinc


from_name: George Herbert

subject: [WikiEN-l] SOS -- Save Our Sources

body:
On 12/3/06, Steve Bennett <stevagewp at gmail.com> wrote:
> > If there's significant concern on these points, then the Wikimedia
> > Foundation could form an exchange agreement with the IA, trading
> > copies of the respective databases, for redundancy.
>
> Hmm, you're suggesting taking a copy of a database consisting of
> several terabytes of data is preferable to copying a few webpages?
> Think of all that hardware...

Several petabytes, not terabytes.  Several terabytes will fit in one
2U server already.

These are not large quantities of hardware, in terms of enterprise systems.

--
-george william herbert
george.herbert at gmail.com


list: commons-l

from_name: Magnus Manske

subject: [Commons-l] New tool - User dupes

body:
Fulfilling a request, I added "User dupes" to my set of toys. For a
user and a wiki (wikipedia or commons), it can find uploaded files
identical in size (pixels and bytes) but different names.

Magnus

[1] http://tools.wikimedia.de/~magnus/userdupes.php


from_name: MacGyverMagic/Mgm

subject: [WikiEN-l] overzealous image deletion?

body:
On 12/3/06, Matthew Brown <morven at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 12/3/06, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 12/3/06, Steve Summit <scs at eskimo.com> wrote:
> > > Also, if someone could let me know where this new policy has been
> > > discussed, I'd appreciate it, so that I can register my (belated)
> > > opinion on it.
> >
> > Isn't new exactly people have just finaly decided to inforce the
> > policies we have had for a long time.
>
> Hmm, not exactly.  People have decided to interpret the policies we've
> had for a long time in a way that was not previously accepted.
>
> -Matt

That's it. I don't remember this being discussed at large at all before
deletions started.

Mgm


from_name: brion at pobox.com

subject: [Wikitech-l] MediaWiki automated test run failure 2006-12-04

body:
An automated run of parserTests.php showed the following failures:

Reading tests from "/home/brion/src/wiki/phase3/maintenance/parserTests.txt"...
Running test TODO: Table security: embedded pipes (http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2006-April/034637.html)... FAILED!
Running test TODO: Link containing double-single-quotes '' (bug 4598)... FAILED!
Running test TODO: Template with thumb image (with link in description)... FAILED!
Running test TODO: message transform: <noinclude> in transcluded template (bug 4926)... FAILED!
Running test TODO: message transform: <onlyinclude> in transcluded template (bug 4926)... FAILED!
Running test BUG 1887, part 2: A <math> with a thumbnail- math enabled... FAILED!
Running test TODO: HTML bullet list, unclosed tags (bug 5497)... FAILED!
Running test TODO: HTML ordered list, unclosed tags (bug 5497)... FAILED!
Running test TODO: HTML nested bullet list, open tags (bug 5497)... FAILED!
Running test TODO: HTML nested ordered list, open tags (bug 5497)... FAILED!
Running test TODO: Parsing optional HTML elements (Bug 6171)... FAILED!
Running test TODO: Inline HTML vs wiki block nesting... FAILED!
Running test TODO: Mixing markup for italics and bold... FAILED!
Running test TODO: 5 quotes, code coverage +1 line... FAILED!
Running test TODO: dt/dd/dl test... FAILED!
Running test TODO: Images with the "|" character in the comment... FAILED!
Running test TODO: Parents of subpages, two levels up, without trailing slash or name.... FAILED!
Running test TODO: Parents of subpages, two levels up, with lots of extra trailing slashes.... FAILED!
Running test TODO: Don't fall for the self-closing div... FAILED!
Running test TODO: Always escape literal '>' in output, not just after '<'... FAILED!

Reading tests from "/home/brion/src/wiki/phase3/extensions/Cite/citeParserTests.txt"...

Passed 451 of 471 tests (95.75%)... FAILED!


from_name: Brad Patrick

subject: [Wikitech-l] Wikipedia has a problem

body:
An order has been placed for an additional six database servers.  The
servers should be delivered Tuesday or Wednesday this week.

On 12/3/06, Steve Summit <scs at eskimo.com> wrote:
>
> > Sorry! This site is experiencing technical difficulties.
> > Try waiting a few minutes and reloading.
> > (Can't contact the database server: All servers busy)
>
> AFAIK, it means exactly what it says.  I've been seeing it more
> and more lately, particularly at around 15:00 UTC weekdays, and
> for some reason a whole lot tonight.  It may be some strange
> database problem, or it may just be evergrowing load outstripping
> server capacity again..
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>

--
Brad Patrick
General Counsel & Interim Executive Director
Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.
bradp.wmf at gmail.com
727-231-0101


from_name: SJ

subject: [Wikipedia-l] News to me

body:
Somewhere, in Henna's apartment, there is the best video ever from
Wikimania's 'Web 1.0 Elevator Pitch-Off' -- with Ross Mayfield
reprising what may be the world's most awesome elevator pitch,
defining in detail the tubes and the network and the tube2tube
dynamics of the Future of Everything.  I love the part where you stop
needing the people on the end of the tubes, and the tubes start
growing themselves.  Even our panel of VC's liked it.

I hear the tubular Future is under wraps but coming out RSN.

SJ

On 12/1/06, David Still <daveydweeb at gmail.com> wrote:
> It's a series of tubes, I hear.
>
> On 12/2/06, James Hare <messedrocker at gmail.com> wrote:
> > You mean the Internets.
> >
> > On 12/1/06, Death Phoenix <originaldeathphoenix at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hey, if we have someone inventing the Internet...
> > >
> > > On 11/30/06, The Cunctator <cunctator at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I didn't realize Danny Mayer was a cofounder of Wikipedia. You learn
> > > > something new every day!
> > > >
> > > > From: "Adriana Iwashko" <IwashkoA at newschool.edu>
> > > > To: < artdesignstudies at newsite.newschool.edu>
> > > > Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2006 16:04:36 -0500
> > > > Subject: Open Source- The Vera List Center for Art and Politics
> > > > Panel Discussion
> > > > "Open Source: On the Line"
> > > > Monday, December 4, 2006 - 6:30 p.m.
> > > > The New School, Theresa Lang Community and Student Center
> > > > 55 West 13th Street, 2nd floor
> > > > New York City
> > > > Admission: $8, free for all students, as well as members of
> > > > Rhizome.org<http://rhizome.org/>
> > > > and New School faculty, staff and alumni with valid ID
> > > >
> > > > Panelists:
> > > > Cory Arcangel, artist
> > > > Joy Garnett, artist
> > > > Patrick May, Director of Technology, Rhizome.org <http://rhizome.org/>
> > > > Daniel Mayer, Co-founder, Wikipedia
> > > > Laura Quilter, Founder, Fair Use Network
> > > >
> > > > Moderator:
> > > > Christiane Paul, Adjunct Curator of New Media Arts, The Whitney Museum
> > > > of American Art
> > > >
> > > > A panel on the aesthetic and political possibilities afforded by open
> > > > source systems, and related debates around copyright and intellectual
> > > > property.
> > > >
> > > > The panelists will examine sites like Wikipedia and
> > > > Digg.com<http://digg.com/>as well as
> > > > p2p networks and social networking sites, and the practices and
> > > > challenges inherent to each. They will also explore artworks, arts
> > > > institutions, and businesses that have sought to adopt open source
> > > > models, and touch on current challenges to the continuation of this
> > > > ethos such as "net neutrality" legislation.
> > > >
> > > > Organized by Rhizome, in association with the Vera List Center for Art
> > > > and Politics.
> > > >
> > > > This event is presented as part of the Vera List Center's program
> > > > cycle on "The Public Domain," and on occasion of Rhizome's tenth
> > > > anniversary.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > UPCOMING EVENTS:
> > > >
> > > > Friday, December 1, 2006 - 6:00 and 8:00 p.m.
> > > > "AIDS and the Politics of Science"
> > > > "Beyond Lament: AIDS and the Arts"
> > > > 2 panels commemorating World AIDS Day, and the 25th anniversary of
> > > > epidemic's beginning, organized by the Wolfson Center for National
> > > > Affairs
> > > >
> > > > Wednesday, December 6, - 7:00 p.m.
> > > > "Image Ownership and Usage in the Digital Age"
> > > > Wednesday, December 6, 2006 - 7:00 p.m.
> > > >
> > > > With Michelle Bogre, Parsons The New School for Design
> > > > Richard Ellis, Senior Vice President, Getty Images
> > > > Barbara Hoffman, Arts and Intellectual Property Lawyer
> > > >
> > > > Presented as part of the Aperture Foundation's series "Confounding
> > > > Expectations: Photography in Context."
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > 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
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>

--
++SJ


subject: [Wikipedia-l] News to me

body:
We were robbed.  Earballs should have won.

On 12/4/06, SJ <2.718281828 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Somewhere, in Henna's apartment, there is the best video ever from
> Wikimania's 'Web 1.0 Elevator Pitch-Off' -- with Ross Mayfield
> reprising what may be the world's most awesome elevator pitch,
> defining in detail the tubes and the network and the tube2tube
> dynamics of the Future of Everything.  I love the part where you stop
> needing the people on the end of the tubes, and the tubes start
> growing themselves.  Even our panel of VC's liked it.
>
> I hear the tubular Future is under wraps but coming out RSN.
>
> SJ
>
> On 12/1/06, David Still <daveydweeb at gmail.com> wrote:
> > It's a series of tubes, I hear.
> >
> > On 12/2/06, James Hare <messedrocker at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > You mean the Internets.
> > >
> > > On 12/1/06, Death Phoenix <originaldeathphoenix at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hey, if we have someone inventing the Internet...
> > > >
> > > > On 11/30/06, The Cunctator <cunctator at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I didn't realize Danny Mayer was a cofounder of Wikipedia. You
> learn
> > > > > something new every day!
> > > > >
> > > > > From: "Adriana Iwashko" <IwashkoA at newschool.edu>
> > > > > To: < artdesignstudies at newsite.newschool.edu>
> > > > > Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2006 16:04:36 -0500
> > > > > Subject: Open Source- The Vera List Center for Art and Politics
> > > > > Panel Discussion
> > > > > "Open Source: On the Line"
> > > > > Monday, December 4, 2006 - 6:30 p.m.
> > > > > The New School, Theresa Lang Community and Student Center
> > > > > 55 West 13th Street, 2nd floor
> > > > > New York City
> > > > > Admission: $8, free for all students, as well as members of
> > > > > Rhizome.org<http://rhizome.org/>
> > > > > and New School faculty, staff and alumni with valid ID
> > > > >
> > > > > Panelists:
> > > > > Cory Arcangel, artist
> > > > > Joy Garnett, artist
> > > > > Patrick May, Director of Technology, Rhizome.org <
> http://rhizome.org/>
> > > > > Daniel Mayer, Co-founder, Wikipedia
> > > > > Laura Quilter, Founder, Fair Use Network
> > > > >
> > > > > Moderator:
> > > > > Christiane Paul, Adjunct Curator of New Media Arts, The Whitney
> Museum
> > > > > of American Art
> > > > >
> > > > > A panel on the aesthetic and political possibilities afforded by
> open
> > > > > source systems, and related debates around copyright and
> intellectual
> > > > > property.
> > > > >
> > > > > The panelists will examine sites like Wikipedia and
> > > > > Digg.com<http://digg.com/>as well as
> > > > > p2p networks and social networking sites, and the practices and
> > > > > challenges inherent to each. They will also explore artworks, arts
> > > > > institutions, and businesses that have sought to adopt open source
> > > > > models, and touch on current challenges to the continuation of
> this
> > > > > ethos such as "net neutrality" legislation.
> > > > >
> > > > > Organized by Rhizome, in association with the Vera List Center for
> Art
> > > > > and Politics.
> > > > >
> > > > > This event is presented as part of the Vera List Center's program
> > > > > cycle on "The Public Domain," and on occasion of Rhizome's tenth
> > > > > anniversary.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > UPCOMING EVENTS:
> > > > >
> > > > > Friday, December 1, 2006 - 6:00 and 8:00 p.m.
> > > > > "AIDS and the Politics of Science"
> > > > > "Beyond Lament: AIDS and the Arts"
> > > > > 2 panels commemorating World AIDS Day, and the 25th anniversary of
> > > > > epidemic's beginning, organized by the Wolfson Center for National
> > > > > Affairs
> > > > >
> > > > > Wednesday, December 6, - 7:00 p.m.
> > > > > "Image Ownership and Usage in the Digital Age"
> > > > > Wednesday, December 6, 2006 - 7:00 p.m.
> > > > >
> > > > > With Michelle Bogre, Parsons The New School for Design
> > > > > Richard Ellis, Senior Vice President, Getty Images
> > > > > Barbara Hoffman, Arts and Intellectual Property Lawyer
> > > > >
> > > > > Presented as part of the Aperture Foundation's series "Confounding
> > > > > Expectations: Photography in Context."
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > 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
> > > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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
> >
>
>
> --
> ++SJ
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>

--
Brad Patrick
General Counsel & Interim Executive Director
Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.
bradp.wmf at gmail.com
727-231-0101


from_name: Thomas Dalton

subject: [WikiEN-l] SOS -- Save Our Sources

body:
> I believe we should also have a way of making dead-tree sources
> available (through scans etc) for verification. Currently, we don't
> seem to have any way of uploading a scan of a page or whatever, simply
> for the purpose of verification. It wouldn't be for inclusion in the
> article itself, and possibly restricted to logged in users, but I
> would have thought this would easily satisfy "fair use".

Fair use generally only applies if you are using the copyrighted
material in an article about the material itself. Using it as a source
isn't "fair". Most dead-tree sources can be found a good library,
which should be enough to verify it if we need to.


subject: [WikiEN-l] SOS -- Save Our Sources

body:
David Gerard wrote:

>On 04/12/06, Steve Bennett <stevagewp at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>The situation that crops up more often for me is taking photos of
>>information plaques at tourist sites - I use the information on them
>>later on to write the article, and would like to make the image
>>available for someone who wants to verify what I've done, or possibly
>>to expand on it. I don't think copyright is an issue. Nor is anyone
>>going to travel hundreds or thousands of kilometres to do it, for what
>>is a pretty trivial article.
>>Now, I *have* the image. Where do I put it?
>>
>>
>On Commons! Make sure it's a nice image.
>
Hmmm!  I've never really thought about the copyrightability of text on
historical or tourist plaques, or epitaphs on tombstones. ;-)

Ec


from_name: florencedevouard

subject: [Foundation-l] [Juriwiki-l] Commons reuse FAQ updated

body:
Wikimedia Foundation Logos
The Wikimedia Foundation logo and logos for particular projects (such as
Wikipedia and Commons) are trademarks of and copyrighted by the
Wikimedia Foundation. They are not generally available for other uses,
though reuse in press or media about Wikimedia projects is explicitly
permitted. Local "fair use" or "fair dealing" laws (e.g. for academic or
critical purposes) may also apply in your jurisdiction.

I'll be careful about that.
In particular, not all logos are trademarked by the Foundation. Maybe a
twist could be made to the text to make a reference to trademarks,
whilst not claiming all are tms ?

---------

I otherwise moved text around in what seemed to me more clear. I hope it
is fine. Please change it back or discuss it if you do not agree.

Ant

PS: ey, good job David. I guess we are very near having a good page, to
be translated, for content reuse.

David Gerard wrote:

>  http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Reusing_content_outside_Wikimedia
>
>I've tweaked this and filled it out a bit. It's hard writing about
>legal issues in very simple grammar; I'd like juriwiki-l in particular
>to look over this and check that I haven't oversimplified,
>particularly in the "how to comply with this licence" sections.
>
>The only section that hasn't been written yet is content under
>GPL/LGPL - anyone think they can write two simple sentences on how to
>comply with this licence?
>
>It should probably also be merged with the similar page on meta.
>
>
>- d.
>_______________________________________________
>Juriwiki-l mailing list
>Juriwiki-l at wikimedia.org
>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/juriwiki-l
>
>This email and its attachments are strictly intended for use and viewing by the sole addressee(s) on the juriwiki-l mailing-list.
>
>
>They cannot be published outside of this list without the prior authorization of their author(s).
>
>They may contain legally privileged and/or confidential or proprietary information.  If you are not the intended recipient of this email, or this email has been sent to you through inadvertence, mistake or negligence, or you have otherwise received this email without the knowledge, authority and consent of the sender, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, forwarding, distribution or copying of this email, and/or any attachments is strictly prohibited.  If you believe you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the juriwiki-l mailing list by writing to juriwiki-l at wikimedia.org and permanently delete the original email and any attachments and discard any copies or printouts of this email and any attachments.
>
>
>


from_name: Sherool

subject: [WikiEN-l] overzealous image deletion?

body:
On Sun, 03 Dec 2006 23:22:24 +0100, MacGyverMagic/Mgm
<macgyvermagic at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 12/3/06, Matthew Brown <morven at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 12/3/06, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On 12/3/06, Steve Summit <scs at eskimo.com> wrote:
>> > > Also, if someone could let me know where this new policy has been
>> > > discussed, I'd appreciate it, so that I can register my (belated)
>> > > opinion on it.
>> >
>> > Isn't new exactly people have just finaly decided to inforce the
>> > policies we have had for a long time.
>>
>> Hmm, not exactly.  People have decided to interpret the policies we've
>> had for a long time in a way that was not previously accepted.
>>
>> -Matt
>
>
> That's it. I don't remember this being discussed at large at all before
> deletions started.

I haven't been following the evolution of this too closely but I believe
it's been happening in stages. By the creation of new or expanding of
existing cpeedy deletion criterea.

First we got the criterea to speedy delete unused fair use images (CSD
I5), wich for the most part have been fairly uncontroversial. Then came
the criterea to speedy delete scertain kinds of fair use images if they
did not have a fair use rationale (CSD I6). Then came the whole "invalid
fair use tag" thing that made stuff like photos tagged with a {{logo}}
template speedyable (CSD I7). Then I7 was expanded[1] to include any fair
use image that fail any of the 10 fair use criterea within 48 hours of
notifying the uploader[2]. Since the most common criterea to "fail" is the
#1 one (wich I think we are all familiar with by now) a special tagging
process was later introduced for these cases with a 7 day "timer" rater
than a 48 hour one, and that's more or less where we are today.

1:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ACriteria_for_speedy_deletion&diff=70360355&oldid=70301118
2:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Fair_use_criteria/Amendment/Consensus

--
[[:en:User:Sherool]]


from_name: James Hare

subject: [WikiEN-l] Introducing a new mailing list

body:
The problem is, I personally believe it's such a condescending name. I
would've gone with something more like wikiwomen-l.

On 12/4/06, Erik Moeller <erik at wikimedia.org> wrote:
>
> This is a positive initiative. I have only one issue with it, which is
> that the mailing list is on Wikimedia's servers, while the wiki is
> not. While we all trust you, of course, to do the right thing, as a
> matter of fair play towards others with similar ideas, it might be
> sensible to either host the list separately, or to move the wiki to
> Wikimedia's servers. Users might also be confused when they subscribe
> to a Wikimedia mailing list but their Wikimedia username doesn't work
> on the wiki (I'm speaking about the hypothetical post-single login
> world ;-).
>
> If I was a woman I would probably start a long thread about being
> referred to as a  member of the genus "chix," but I'm not, so I'll
> leave that to the "chix" to figure out. :-)
> --
> Peace & Love,
> Erik
>
> Member, Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees
>
> DISCLAIMER: Unless otherwise stated, all views or opinions expressed
> in this message are solely my own and do not represent an official
> position of the Wikimedia Foundation or its Board of Trustees.
> _______________________________________________
> 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] Wikiyouth

body:
In the spirit of announcing a mailing list for women, I would like to
announce a wiki and message board for the youth (20 and under) of wiki
communities. Below is our announcement letter / about page, since I feel it
bests describe the mission and I'll be darned if I make a redundant message.

Are you an advocate of youth rights on the Internet?

Have you ever used or edited a wiki, such as the world-famous Wikipedia?

Then we want you to join the Wiki Youth Movement.

http://www.wikiyouth.org/

Wikis like Wikipedia allow young people everywhere to share knowledge, ideas
and experiences. But wherever young people use the Internet, they are faced
with reactionary and condescending views. Fearful adults try to regulate the
content they can see and the communities they can contribute to. The Wiki
Youth Association seeks to give young readers, users and editors a voice.

Beyond demanding equal treatment as wiki contributors, our goal is to build
a shared understanding of wiki ethics. Vandalism and immature behavior are
condemned on most wikis, and sensible learning approaches for new wiki users
are encouraged. We want to have fun, but not at the expense of others. We
want to help you to understand the maze of wiki-rules, so that you too can
have fun.

We would also like to give intelligent young people a shared social space
where they can talk about their experiences in not only wiki communities,
but also their daily lives. eventually, we hope that we can develop the WYA
into a true social movement which organizes events and campaigns. But our
initial goals are modest: we only want to become the single largest
world-wide community of young wiki users.

The WYA is not a formal organization. There is no membership other than
registration for our wiki and forums.

Join today!


subject: [Foundation-l] Wikiyouth


from_name: phoebe ayers

subject: [Foundation-l] [WikiEN-l] Introducing a new mailing list

body:
On 12/4/06, Tim Starling <tstarling at wikimedia.org> wrote:
>
> Oldak Quill wrote:
> > Such a list seems to encourage a sense of difference where there isn't
> > one. It will also discourage some women from contributing to the
> > general discussion ("why post in two places when I can post here?").
>
> This view, and several others like it, are discussed in depth in the
> FLOSSPOLS gender report:
>
>
> http://flosspols.org/deliverables/FLOSSPOLS-D16-Gender_Integrated_Report_of_Findings.pdf
>
> On page 20:
>
> "Some people - both men and women - interpret the mere mention of gender
> as
> somehow 'reiterating' the 'artificial' differences between the sexes [...]
> "
>
> "However, our study also found that the attitude of some of the male
> F/LOSS
> participants towards women creates an atmosphere which can be described at
> least as not women-friendly.
> "Whereas most hackers see themselves as neither sexist nor hostile towards
> women there is a clear distinction on how women and men perceive and
> experience interaction within the F/LOSS community."
>
> They present survey results showing that women perceive a bias in open
> source communities whereas men do not. They go on to discuss why this is.
> Most of their findings are framed in a way specific to open source
> software,
> but they could easily be extended to this forum. The primary issue of
> relevance to mailing lists and communication is flaming. Men are much more
> tolerant of it than women. Says Susan Herring in "Gender and Power in
> Online
> Communication":
>
> http://rkcsi.indiana.edu/archive/CSI/WP/WP01-05B.html
>
> "Politeness is one common means through which gender is cued in
> asynchronous
> CMC. Women are more likely to thank, appreciate and apologize, and to be
> upset by violations of politeness: they more often challenge offenders who
> violate online rules of conduct (Smith et al., 1997), and predominantly
> female groups may have more, and more strictly enforced, posting rules
> designed to ensure the maintenance of a civil environment (Hall, 1996;
> Herring, 1996a). In contrast, men generally appear to be less concerned
> with
> politeness; they issue bald face-threatening acts such as unmitigated
> criticisms and insults, violate online rules of conduct, tolerate or even
> enjoy 'flaming', and tend to be more concerned about threats to freedom of
> expression than with attending to others' social "face" (Herring, 1994,
> 1996a, 1999)."

Thanks for the report links, Tim; very interesting.

Knowing all this, an optimistic man may try to change everyone's mind on the
> importance of good behaviour and civility, and to create a forum where
> both
> men and women can participate comfortably. Wikipedia itself was started
> with
> such ideals in mind (e.g. "WikiLove"). But my experience has led me to be
> more jaded.
>
> I support Wikichix, in the hopes that it may become a platform for women
> to
> discuss the implicit bias against them in male-dominated wikis, in a forum
> where they won't be subjected to instant incredulity and attack, as they
> have been in this thread. I hope that they will be able to formulate and
> promote guidelines for non-discrimination, for application at mixed wikis
> such as Wikipedia. In the meantime, while they're waiting for these
> guidelines to be accepted by the community at large, Wikichix may be able
> to
> expound the problem and discuss coping strategies, so that they can more
> confidently participate in the present-day wiki culture.
>
> -- Tim Starling

Indeed. Though I just heard about the new list with this message, it makes
sense; gender bias is an issue that many of us see as being present in the
projects, and it will be nice to have a place to discuss it without every
substantive message being followed by twenty posts saying "omg there's no
bias what are you talking about!" It doesn't seem much different than other
topical lists, which perhaps we need a few more of in general to sort out
this kind of big-picture discussions. I would hope that any good discussion,
conclusion or recommendation will also get discussed on the appropriate
"big" Foundation lists when needed, and I'm sure as the new list sorts
itself out this kind of communication will develop.

And Gerard's point upthread that we need to show more consideration for
everyone is perhaps well taken. It's not just many women who may find a lot
of discussions around here distasteful; it's also a great number of people
who don't want to deal with incivility and general stupidness. This may
include a number of expert contributors or others who would be a help to the
projects and should be welcomed.

phoebe (a female person, longtime list reader but rare poster)


body:
On 12/4/06, Kat Walsh <mindspillage at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 12/4/06, Matt R <matt_crypto at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > Any idea to make Wikipedia a more comfortable place for people to get
> involved
> > is a worthy one, and I support a forum for editors to discuss issues of
> gender
> > bias in wikis, to promote wikis to potential female editors, and for
> general
> > discussion of wikis in a female-friendly environment.
> >
> > However, I have to confess to being unhappy with the existence of an
> > officially-endorsed *females-only* mailing list and wiki. Discussion
> isn't
> > enabled by segregating the people who should be talking to each other
> about a
> > problem, and I do not think Wikipedia should be in the business of
> excluding
> > people from discussions because of their gender. WikiChix can still be
> made a
> > female-friendly forum by use of moderation.
> >
> > Ubuntu Women say, "Ubuntu-Women is not about segregation of women,
> rather its
> > goal is to integrate women as equals within the mainstream development
> going on
> > in the Ubuntu world. Remember, membership is open to all and not based
> on
> > gender alone. If you want to increase diversity and encourage women in
> Linux
> > please don't hesitate to speak to us."
> >
> > I urge you to follow their example, but otherwise keep up the good work,
>
> I second this completely.
>
> -Kat

Yes, on second thought I'm not happy with the list being female-only either;
though that's perhaps a discussion to have on the new list itself.
Moderation and a commitment to the discussion at hand seems like it would do
the trick.
-- phoebe


from_name: David Gerard

subject: [WikiEN-l] SOS -- Save Our Sources

body:
On 04/12/06, Steve Bennett <stevagewp at gmail.com> wrote:

> The situation that crops up more often for me is taking photos of
> information plaques at tourist sites - I use the information on them
> later on to write the article, and would like to make the image
> available for someone who wants to verify what I've done, or possibly
> to expand on it. I don't think copyright is an issue. Nor is anyone
> going to travel hundreds or thousands of kilometres to do it, for what
> is a pretty trivial article.
> Now, I *have* the image. Where do I put it?

On Commons! Make sure it's a nice image.

- d.


from_name: Gatto Nero

subject: [Foundation-l] Introducing a new mailing list

body:
2006/12/4, Angela <beesley at gmail.com>:
> Following recent discussions on wikien-l where a number of women said
> they were not comfortable contributing to the discussion, a new
> mailing list has been created for female wiki editors to discuss
> issues of gender bias in wikis...

Oh. My. God.
Which will be the next one?
WikiNigger? WikiFaggot? (These names are a provocation)
Are we sure that we need a ML of this kind?
I think it's not good to open a self-discriminating place on wiki: the
strenght of wiki-etc is that everyone has the same right to speak, and
the same importance as any other contributor.
"Close" all the wikifemales in a nice and pretty fence is not the
better way to fight bias... Worst: it's the better way to make
*easier* the formation of stronger gender bias.
The only way to fight gender bias is to discuss about it openly, to
explain, to debate, to confront each other.

More interesting should be to know which are the reasons why these
women were not comfortable contributing to the discussion. Could you
tell us?

Claudio / Gatto Nero

(ok, to clear the field from all the misunderstandings, I'm gay... so
I think I've the same right to speak about "gender bias" than women :D
)


from_name: James Mackay

subject: [WikiEN-l] SOS -- Save Our Sources

body:
Steve Bennett wrote:

>On 12/4/06, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton at gmail.com> wrote:

>

>

>>Fair use generally only applies if you are using the copyrighted

>>material in an article about the material itself.

>>

>>

>That's a very specific example of fair use which Wikipedia generally

>dictates as the only one it's willing to accept. I believe that lots

>of other uses can be "fair use". For example, it's generally

>acceptable for an academic to photocopy bits out of a journal so that

>they can study it at home, if the journal can't be borrowed - no

>violation of copyright takes place. I believe this would be in the

>same category. We would not be copying the material to avoid someone

>having to buy the book, we'd be copying it to enable readers to simply

>check that it says what someone is claiming it does. Perfectly fair,

>IMHO.

>

>From experience as an academic who regularly photocopies bits out of
journals, I can tell you that the practise is certainly NOT "generally
acceptable".  There are tight restrictions on what can and cannot be copied,
and an absolute limit of 10% of the material is imposed.  The British
Library, and many of the other top-quality academic libraries, have staff
specially assigned to ensure that this limit is not breached.

For the purpose being talked of here, the copyright laws simply wouldn't
allow it, particularly as you are talking about reproducing the article
online for more than just personal use.

James


from_name: Josh Gordon

body:
This is all a long-term problem in online communities. Whether we like
it or not, there is a significant subset of women (and, I'm sure, a
subset of men, but much smaller) who are easily put off by the general
male argumentative/competitive (as opposed to supportive/nurturing)
tone of online communication. The result tends to be lose-lose; the
community loses the valuable participation of these people, and the
individuals find themselves unable to participate in areas they might
otherwise thrive in. This isn't meant in any way to condemn anyone --
it's just how things are. You shouldn't have to be tough as nails to
participate in Wikipedia discussions; however, you do -- and the
proposed list will provide a safe place for the issues that men tend
to belittle.

--jpgordon ????


from_name: Bryan Derksen

body:
Angela wrote:
> It's this sort of "get over it" attitude that dissuades people from
> wanting to join this discussion. The sexism, discrimination, and bias
> present in the Wikipedia community isn't something to "get over".

This statement implicitly assumes that there _is_ sexism, discrimination
and bias present in the Wikipedia community. That's begging the
question. I've never seen it, and considering it's a rare thing when I
actually know what the gender of another editor is I have trouble
figuring out how it would even be practical.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 250 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20061204/2486a815/attachment.pgp


from_name: Anthere

subject:
[Wikitech-l] Startup looking for Superstar Wiki Developer (SF
	Bay Area)

body:
Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2006 at 05:20:06PM -0500, The Cunctator wrote:
>
>>Do you get paid by the asterisk?
>
>
> Best.  One-liner.  Ever.
>
> Cheers,
> -- jra

*nod*


body:
phoebe ayers wrote:
> Yes, on second thought I'm not happy with the list being female-only either;
> though that's perhaps a discussion to have on the new list itself.

If it's held on the new list, how will guys like me participate in it?

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 250 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20061204/187c29da/attachment.pgp


from_name: Jeff V. Merkey

subject: [Wikitech-l] Wikipedia has a problem

body:
Brad Patrick wrote:

>An order has been placed for an additional six database servers.  The
>servers should be delivered Tuesday or Wednesday this week.
>
>

You may wish to consider ordering more powerful platforms. I run 6
instances of the entire
Wikipedia on a single Solera Appliance. These servers have throughput of
875 megabyte per second
disk channels. They use standard off the shelf hardware. We could
certainly cut WMF a break on
pricing if you are interested in the future.

Jeff

>On 12/3/06, Steve Summit <scs at eskimo.com> wrote:
>
>
>>>Sorry! This site is experiencing technical difficulties.
>>>Try waiting a few minutes and reloading.
>>>(Can't contact the database server: All servers busy)
>>>
>>>
>>AFAIK, it means exactly what it says.  I've been seeing it more
>>and more lately, particularly at around 15:00 UTC weekdays, and
>>for some reason a whole lot tonight.  It may be some strange
>>database problem, or it may just be evergrowing load outstripping
>>server capacity again..
>>_______________________________________________
>>Wikitech-l mailing list
>>Wikitech-l at wikimedia.org
>>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>


subject: [WikiEN-l] SOS -- Save Our Sources

body:
On 12/4/06, Steve Bennett <stevagewp at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Most dead-tree sources can be found a good library, which should be
> enough to verify it if we need to.
>
> Know anyone who has ever gone to a library to verify a Wikipedia
> citation? Ever had a suspicion about a dead-tree citation? Could you
> be bothered going to a library to check it out? Could you be bothered
> to click on a link?
>
> Steve

Unfortunately too few people do, but it's good academic practice in research
so even if people don't do it, it should be encouraged to check dead tree
sources.

Mgm


body:
That's a shame. We could use a bit of female input in a predominantly male
wiki.
Get over the uncomfortable feeling and speak your mind. I want to hear those
female thoughts on the mailing list.

Mgm

On 12/4/06, Angela <beesley at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Following recent discussions on wikien-l where a number of women said
> they were not comfortable contributing to the discussion, a new
> mailing list has been created for female wiki editors to discuss
> issues of gender bias in wikis and ways to encourage more female
> editors, and just as a place that females can feel more comfortable
> posting to.
>
> It's called WikiChix - named after LinuxChix, the women-oriented
> community for Linux users. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LinuxChix
>
> If you are female and interested in wikis, I would like to encourage
> to join the mailing list at
> http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikichix-l
>
> There's also a wiki at http://wikichix.org/ - let me know your
> username if you'd like an account there. Some of the pages are openly
> editable, so even if you're not female, you are welcome to post your
> comments at http://wikichix.org/wiki/Comments
>
> The FAQs for the related communities at
> http://wikichix.org/wiki/WikiChix#Related_communities answer a lot of
> questions about why this was created, so please read those for more
> information until we have our own FAQ.
>
> Angela
>
> --
> Angela Beesley
> wikiangela.com
> _______________________________________________
> 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: Gregory Maxwell

body:
On 12/4/06, Angela <beesley at gmail.com> wrote:
[snip]
> mailing list has been created for female wiki editors to discuss
> issues of gender bias in wikis and ways to encourage
[snip]
> If you are female and interested in wikis, I would like to
[snip]

So we'll continue the time-honored tradition of fighting gender biases
simply by performing more prejudiced actions.

Two wrong don't make a right, and I'd like to invite all my friends in
Wikimedia to both decline membership in clubs build around overt
gender discrimination and to reject their biases by refusing to give
voice to their members in our overall community. Subtle biases can be
hard to deal with, but creating a club around overt discrimination is
not a solution.


from_name: Kat Walsh

body:
On 12/4/06, Matt R <matt_crypto at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

> Any idea to make Wikipedia a more comfortable place for people to get involved
> is a worthy one, and I support a forum for editors to discuss issues of gender
> bias in wikis, to promote wikis to potential female editors, and for general
> discussion of wikis in a female-friendly environment.
>
> However, I have to confess to being unhappy with the existence of an
> officially-endorsed *females-only* mailing list and wiki. Discussion isn't
> enabled by segregating the people who should be talking to each other about a
> problem, and I do not think Wikipedia should be in the business of excluding
> people from discussions because of their gender. WikiChix can still be made a
> female-friendly forum by use of moderation.
>
> Ubuntu Women say, "Ubuntu-Women is not about segregation of women, rather its
> goal is to integrate women as equals within the mainstream development going on
> in the Ubuntu world. Remember, membership is open to all and not based on
> gender alone. If you want to increase diversity and encourage women in Linux
> please don't hesitate to speak to us."
>
> I urge you to follow their example, but otherwise keep up the good work,

I second this completely.

-Kat

--
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mindspillage  |  G/AIM:LucidWaking
mindspillage or mind|wandering on irc.freenode.net | email for phone
The good traveller has no fixed plans, and is not intent on arriving
-- Lao-Tzu        Wikia: creating communities - http://www.wikia.com


from_name: Brion Vibber

subject: [Wikitech-l] New SVN committer

body:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Added Steve Sanbeg (sanbeg), working on the LabelSectionTransclusion
extension.

- -- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFFdHMNwRnhpk1wk44RAt5zAKDTItqZRx8T95BBd9znUl5dbwvULwCguR6R
dMMM0ADuWEs93XHWSEi6Wd8=
=c5Ti
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


from_name: Ryan Wetherell

subject: [WikiEN-l] Attack blogs in WP:LIVING articles

body:
I agree that the link should be in [[Anne Milton]], but with some kind
of warning of content.  We already do this in a lot of articles,
including, say, scientific theories, where we have supportive and
opposing external links.  Now I know that theories and people are
different things, but I don't see the problem of excluding a notable
outside link, even if it is critical.

--Ryan

On 12/4/06, David Boothroyd <david at election.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> I should like to clarify the issue in this dispute. The question is
> not whether the blog is a 'source'; it is clearly not a source for
> anything other than what is said on the blog. The issue is whether or
> not to mention it in the article; the subsidiary issue is, should that
> question be answered in the affirmative, it should be linked to.
>
> My position is that the answer to both questions is Yes. The following
> reasons justify mentioning the blog:
>
> 1) The blog has been mentioned twice in the (UK) national press. The
> first was in Damian Whitworth, "A strange case of espionage and warfare
> inside the commuter belt", The Times, April 18, 2005, p. 28. The second
> was Rod Liddle, "Battle of the Guildford gals", The Sunday Times, May 1,
> 2005, p. 15. I have undertaken an extensive search and have yet to find
> any other site set up to target an individual candidate being mentioned
> in the press. This is therefore a unique situation.
>
> 2) The blog has also been mentioned by Sandra Howard (wife of the
> then Leader of the Opposition) in her election campaign blog.
> http://www.conservatives.com/tile.do?def=sandra.howard.page&obj_id=122745
>
> 3) The fact that Anne Milton is quoted by Sandra Howard asserting that
> Tim Ireland was "stalking" her through the weblog is particularly
> significant. It is a notably extreme accusation.
>
> 4) It appears to be the only case where a blog about an MP has
> continued to be updated. There have been others, but they have all gone
> under. This one hasn't.
>
> 5) The author of the blog, Tim Ireland, is notable enough to have an
> article about him. His notability is for his work on political blogs.
>
> 6) I do not propose to mention this in the article, but in my submission
> the edit wars engaged in by supporters of Anne Milton (including by IP
> addresses traced to the Parliamentary estate) who attempt to remove all
> mention of it from the article, denote that it is considered notable by
> them. See the article history.
>
> I do not see how WP:BLP is engaged merely by mentioning that a critical
> blog exists. It is potentially engaged by reporting Anne Milton's
> reaction, but that has an unimpeachable source in The Times piece.
>
> Now Guy imputes to me motives other than improving the encyclopaedia
> to explain why I think it should be mentioned. This is really neither
> here nor there to the merits of the case but I would invite anyone
> wishing to examine the issue to look at my contributions on Talk:Anne
> Milton starting in June.
>
> Should the first question be decided in the affirmative, that the
> blog is notable enough to be mentioned, then should it be linked? I
> submit the answer is clearly "Yes". Once the article mentions the blog,
> inquiring readers may wish to look at it for themselves. It simply
> makes no sense to say that the blog is notable but yet not linkable.
> Even the Wikipedia article on Goatse.cx links to a mirror to it.
> I would make a proviso that the link to the blog should make clear
> that the site is not in any sense neutral. It might also be
> reasonable, though I don't think warranted, to have the site
> address in text rather than as a hyperlink.
>
> Perhaps I should say that as I understand Guy's position, he considers
> that a link to the blog is acceptable from [[Tim Ireland]] but not
> from [[Anne Milton]]. I cannot understand the internal logic of such a
> position.
> --
> David Boothroyd - http://www.election.demon.co.uk
> david at election.demon.co.uk (home)
> dboothroyd at westminster.gov.uk (council)
> _______________________________________________
> 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] Categories vs lists vs navboxes (was Re: Deletions,
	lists, etc?)

body:
And red links, of course.

--Ryan

On 12/4/06, MacGyverMagic/Mgm <macgyvermagic at gmail.com> wrote:
> Not to mention that categories require articles to exist.
> You can combine a bunch of stubs into a list.
>
> >From what I've seen the idea has become less common, but a few months ago
> there were plenty of people saying lists were obsolete to categories. As
> long as we all understand they are complementary, I'm happy.
>
> Mgm
> _______________________________________________
> 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: Jay R. Ashworth

subject: [Wikitech-l] Wikipedia has a problem

body:
On Mon, Dec 04, 2006 at 01:15:21PM +1100, Steve Bennett wrote:
> On 12/4/06, Steve Summit <scs at eskimo.com> wrote:
> > AFAIK, it means exactly what it says.  I've been seeing it more
> > and more lately, particularly at around 15:00 UTC weekdays, and
> > for some reason a whole lot tonight.  It may be some strange
> > database problem, or it may just be evergrowing load outstripping
> > server capacity again..
>
> I blame [[List of big-bust models and performers]]. Apparently our
> most popular list.

And rightfully so.  :-)

Cheers,
-- jra
--
Jay R. Ashworth                                                jra at baylink.com
Designer                          Baylink                             RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates        The Things I Think                        '87 e24
St Petersburg FL USA      http://baylink.pitas.com             +1 727 647 1274

	(I've been informed that the 'divorce' quote makes me look
	misogynistic, even though Jennifer Crusie is (pretty obviously)
	a female romance novelist.  So I've removed it. :-)


from_name: The Cunctator

subject: [WikiEN-l] Deletions, lists, etc?

body:
On 12/2/06, Daniel R. Tobias <dan at tobias.name> wrote:
>
> On 29 Nov 2006 at 15:28, The Cunctator wrote:
>
> > On 11/29/06, Guettarda <guettarda at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > It doesn't matter if the article was about [[World War II]] and the
> > > discussion only involved three people would voted delete on the
> grounds of
> > > "never heard of it", DRV is supposed to comment on process, not merits
> of
> > > deletion (you'll be told "that's what *fD is for, and you should have
> > > commented when you had the chance).
> >
> > That's total bullshit.
>
> Only partial bullshit.  There really *are* factions around who behave
> exactly as described.  They aren't always the majority in the
> appropriate areas at any given time, and they don't always win the
> debates, but they're there.

Sorry--I didn't mean that I didn't believe Guettarda. I meant that I think
the process is dysfunctional.


body:
On 12/4/06, phoebe ayers <phoebe.wiki at gmail.com> wrote:
> Yes, on second thought I'm not happy with the list being female-only either;
> though that's perhaps a discussion to have on the new list itself.
> Moderation and a commitment to the discussion at hand seems like it would do
> the trick.

Yes, .. Exclude me because I'm a loud-mouth, not because I'm male.
That would be fair.

I think you'll find, in any case, that small and focused groups are
much more friendly on their own.


body:
This should not be one the Wikmedia servers. Just start a googlegroup.

On 12/4/06, Angela <beesley at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Following recent discussions on wikien-l where a number of women said
> they were not comfortable contributing to the discussion, a new
> mailing list has been created for female wiki editors to discuss
> issues of gender bias in wikis and ways to encourage more female
> editors, and just as a place that females can feel more comfortable
> posting to.
>
> It's called WikiChix - named after LinuxChix, the women-oriented
> community for Linux users. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LinuxChix
>
> If you are female and interested in wikis, I would like to encourage
> to join the mailing list at
> http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikichix-l
>
> There's also a wiki at http://wikichix.org/ - let me know your
> username if you'd like an account there. Some of the pages are openly
> editable, so even if you're not female, you are welcome to post your
> comments at http://wikichix.org/wiki/Comments
>
> The FAQs for the related communities at
> http://wikichix.org/wiki/WikiChix#Related_communities answer a lot of
> questions about why this was created, so please read those for more
> information until we have our own FAQ.
>
> Angela
>
> --
> Angela Beesley
> wikiangela.com
> _______________________________________________
> 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: Ron Hall

subject: [Wikitech-l] Wikipedia has a problem

body:
>
> >
> > I blame [[List of big-bust models and performers]]. Apparently our
> > most popular list.
>
> And rightfully so.  :-)
>
    Thanks for bringing this to my attention. I would never of found all
    of these talented folk......<hem>

    There are educations and then there are educations.......

    r


from_name: Oldak Quill

body:
On 04/12/06, Angela <beesley at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 12/4/06, MacGyverMagic/Mgm <macgyvermagic at gmail.com> wrote:
> > That's a shame. We could use a bit of female input in a predominantly male
> > wiki.
>
> Having a separate list is not preventing women having input into
> Wikipedia. It's about getting input from those who otherwise wouldn't
> participate.

Such a list seems to encourage a sense of difference where there isn't
one. It will also discourage some women from contributing to the
general discussion ("why post in two places when I can post here?").

--
Oldak Quill (oldakquill at gmail.com)


from_name: Steve Summit

body:
Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> I'd like to invite all my friends in Wikimedia to both decline
> membership in clubs build around overt gender discrimination
> and to reject their biases by refusing to give voice to their
> members in our overall community.

Wow.  You're either with us or against us.  Shun the unbelievers.
Way to be inclusive there, Greg.


from_name: dmehkeri at swi.com

subject: [WikiEN-l] SOS -- Save Our Sources

body:
>
> >Most dead-tree sources can be found a good library, which should be
> enough to verify it if we need to.
>
> Know anyone who has ever gone to a library to verify a Wikipedia
> citation? Ever had a suspicion about a dead-tree citation? Could you
> be bothered going to a library to check it out? Could you be bothered
> to click on a link?
>

Yes to all four. But it was to check out a citation in a book I wanted to read
anyway, and also it should be noted that I am a freak.

In a different case, there was an article on an obscure topic that was
plausible, had proper-looking references to both online and offline sources
written by subject-matter experts, and turned out to be total [[WP:BOLLOCKS]].

It was frustrating not to have access to some of the sources, but luckily in
this case the paper copies weren't needed. It was challenged it while the
article authors (or, likely, one author with multiple socks) were still writing
it, so they were there to answer requests to quote the relevant passages; they
also had a talent for self-conviction.

If it had been some time after the fact, it may have been a different story, and
the article might still exist. I don't know that I would have bothered to track
it down myself. It's not even clear I would even have successfully navigated
AfD, which was hard enough as it was. It has been my only AfD listing since I
started on... well, look at that, four years yesterday, virtual happy birthday
to me.

Dan


from_name: Birgitte SB

body:
--- Yann Forget <yann at forget-me.net> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> Angela a ?crit :
> > Following recent discussions on wikien-l where a
> number of women said
> > they were not comfortable contributing to the
> discussion, a new
> > mailing list has been created for female wiki
> editors to discuss
> > issues of gender bias in wikis and ways to
> encourage more female
> > editors, and just as a place that females can feel
> more comfortable
> > posting to.
> >
> > It's called WikiChix - named after LinuxChix, the
> women-oriented
> > community for Linux users.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LinuxChix
> >
> > If you are female and interested in wikis, I would
> like to encourage
> > to join the mailing list at
> >
>
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikichix-l
> >
> > There's also a wiki at http://wikichix.org/ - let
> me know your
> > username if you'd like an account there. Some of
> the pages are openly
> > editable, so even if you're not female, you are
> welcome to post your
> > comments at http://wikichix.org/wiki/Comments
> >
> > The FAQs for the related communities at
> >
>
http://wikichix.org/wiki/WikiChix#Related_communities
> answer a lot of
> > questions about why this was created, so please
> read those for more
> > information until we have our own FAQ.
>
> They are always been a gender bias in Wikipedia,
> first by the simple
> fact that there are much less women editors than
> men. This is
> particularly obvious on the French Wikipedia from
> the start, so it is
> not specific to one language. I think the numbers of
> women editors has
> increased lately, but women are still far from being
> about the same
> number as men.
>
> Until recently, I thought that the problem would
> solve itself over time,
> when Wikipedia becoming more mainstream. I read the
> thread on wikien-l
> and I think that the problem is more serious than I
> thought. The first
> problem is when people (men only ?) do not see that
> the problem exists.
> It remembers me of the tale of the fish and water.
> When asked its
> opinion about water, the fish said: "Please show me
> some water. I don't
> see any water."
>
> It is sad that women feel the need for a separate
> list, but denying them
> this tool will not help solve the problem. So I hope
> that the list will
> serve its purpose and helps women feel more
> confident on Wikimedia projects.
>
> > Angela
>
> Regards,
>
> Yann
>

I am completely shocked after reading the archive at
Wikien-l .  My first thought on this list was that it
should be open.  I still would prefer it to be open,
but it will never exist if comments like those that
are showing up on Wikien-l arre to be how it is
started.  There is such a lack of belief that the
problem exists or that it is serious which is shocking
to me.  If anyone who attended the Board Q & A at
Wikimania and can still think it is not a serious
problem after witnessing the entire room laugh at
dismissive comment which nearly brought me to my feet
in outrage; I do not know what to say to them.  And I
do not think the participation of such people who must
have these problems proved to them  will help the
situation.

I have to force myself to write this after closing the
"Compose" window a dozen times.  But I feel it is
important to be honest about this here.  Honestly the
way a woman can contribute in places like this by
overlooking all the subtle sexism.  By ignoring it and
pretending it is not about her.  By not responding to
these threads and not drawing attention to the fact
that she is not a man.  By not writing email like this
one.  I do not know how to participate in a discusion
about this subtle sort of dismissive sexism with the
people who dismiss it. Not if I want to turn around
and work with them on-wiki.  I hope this new list can
be something that is open for anyone to join.  I hope
the men who would join would take the opportunity to
listen in to such a discussion rather than shape it.
But after reading the wikien-l archive I really am
worried many could not stop themselves from arguing
the point.  I don't know the answer.  I do know that I
will *not* discuss this topic with a number of the
people commenting at wikien-l, because they don't get
it.

If anyone thinks I don't get.  Maybe you are right.
Maybe this is just all in my head and it was
irrational of me to react so strongly to the comment
at Wikimania.  Maybe there are legions of women
secretly contributing to the wiki's right now, I mean
who really know which gender someone is.  Maybe there
isn't a problem at all.

BirgitteSB

____________________________________________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.
http://new.mail.yahoo.com


from_name: Ken Arromdee

subject: [WikiEN-l] overzealous image deletion?

body:
On Sun, 3 Dec 2006, Justin Cormack wrote:
> No, it has been accepted but not enforced. It has always been agreed
> that
> we dont accept fair use images when we can have free ones.

But "can have" is, I think, being interpreted in a way which is far from
universally accepted.  Was it really intended all along that we "can have"
a free image when all that that means is that someone, somewhere, could
track down a person and take a photograph under a free license, regardless
of how hard the person is to track down or how much stalking one would have
to do to get the photograph?


from_name: charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com

subject: [WikiEN-l] Phrase, fable, popular culture

body:
Ray Saintonge wrote
>  Perhaps I misread something to think that Charles was
> promoting the idea of a separate wiki for such things and pop culture.

I was promoting the idea of Wikifable, a place where myths could be written in narrative mode. As indeed a place to transwiki such material: so that we have a range of places. Superman on WP should be analytical and sourced, on Wikifable could give the outline of the Superman comix/TV/film stories.

Charles

-----------------------------------------
Email sent from www.ntlworld.com
Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software
Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information


from_name: Steve Bennett

subject: [WikiEN-l] SOS -- Save Our Sources

body:
On 12/3/06, MacGyverMagic/Mgm <macgyvermagic at gmail.com> wrote:
> I've seen it happen and I'm pretty sure it continues to happen. Sometimes
> websites disappear. Not that uncommon on the web, but it can be disastrous
> for Wikipedia articles when those sites happen to be the source for an
> article. I think there should be an organized effort to have pages for
> uncommon sources cached and to replace dead links with their archived
> counterparts. Is there such an effort yet?

I believe we should also have a way of making dead-tree sources
available (through scans etc) for verification. Currently, we don't
seem to have any way of uploading a scan of a page or whatever, simply
for the purpose of verification. It wouldn't be for inclusion in the
article itself, and possibly restricted to logged in users, but I
would have thought this would easily satisfy "fair use".

The same mechanism should apply for web pages, where we can copy the
relevant bits of a webpage and store them somewhere in case the
website is no longer available. Archive.org is only a partial solution
to that - and what if archive.org itself disappears?

Steve


subject: [WikiEN-l] SOS -- Save Our Sources

body:
"Steve Bennett" wrote

> I believe we should also have a way of making dead-tree sources
> available (through scans etc) for verification. Currently, we don't
> seem to have any way of uploading a scan of a page or whatever, simply
> for the purpose of verification. It wouldn't be for inclusion in the
> article itself, and possibly restricted to logged in users, but I
> would have thought this would easily satisfy "fair use".

No, I don't think it would. And I'm against any movement from 'verifiability' as we understand it, to 'anyone online ought to be able to verify'. Entirely different things.

Charles

-----------------------------------------
Email sent from www.ntlworld.com
Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software
Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information


from_name: cohesion

body:
> On 12/4/06, Angela <beesley at gmail.com> wrote:
> [snip]
> > mailing list has been created for female wiki editors to discuss
> > issues of gender bias in wikis and ways to encourage
> [snip]
> > If you are female and interested in wikis, I would like to

This is the most disappointing thing I have seen wikimedia do. I very
rarely post on these lists, and even more rarely on the non-technical
ones. When I first read this proposal I thought, "Oh that would be an
interesting list to listen to". I was then shocked and saddened when I
read that I would be excluded on my gender. Don't think this doesn't
hurt people when you exclude them, and don't think that every man
reading this lacks the same sense of hurt and rejection you would have
if there was a male only list, or a white only list. I can assure you,
it's the same, and some people are hurt by it just as much.

Our gender bias is a fine topic of discussion, but instead of
discriminating based on gender, why not discriminate based on who is
interested?

If this proposal continues I would strongly support it being entirely
hosted by non foundation resources. I don't want to support
discrimination of any kind.

Very saddened,

Judson


body:
"Steve Bennett" wrote

> Let me ask you, what do you see as the basic model for readers finding
> a given article? Are you focussing primarily on a reader coming to
> Wikipedia to find information on a very specific topic? What if he
> just wants to browse? What if he doesn't know what he wants?

There are half-a-dozen major ways.

> Let's take an example, [[Template:Energy Conversion]]. Do you consider
> this intrusive? Do you not think there is value in raising the
> visibility of all these topics? Do you not think there is value in
> showing how many different solar power topics there are compared to
> only three wind power topics? Had you heard of "blue energy"? Does it
> make you wonder what "Anaerobic digestion" is doing in amongst energy
> conversion topics?
>
> I think navigation boxes serve to stimulate interest and lead readers
> to other, related topics. And if we can stimulate the reader's
> interest, we can stimulate him to help us, don't you think?

Another way to put it: they are tendentious and can even be considered a type of advertising. We have debated this recently at the mathematics WikiProject, and apart from calculus, where students may well want to get from one calculus article to another via a menu of suggestions, and a few limited list like exceptional Lie groups, there is no enthusiasm at all.

Charles

-----------------------------------------
Email sent from www.ntlworld.com
Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software
Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information


subject: [WikiEN-l] SOS -- Save Our Sources

body:
"Steve Bennett" wrote

> We already have the situation where some sources (ie, web sites) are
> obviously much more verifiable than others (books). Why would
> converting some of the latter into the former suddenly make the whole
> system implode?

Mmmm. But the books are much more _reliable_ than the websites, aren't they?

Things will change. At present we're hearing a lot about ex-copyright books being put online, but not seeing that. What I notice these days is how many older academic papers are now online, particularly in the humanities, but behind subscription walls. In a sense what WP should do is to harness its people to put selective quotes from those, undoubted fair use in the scholarly convention, online. Oh, that's what we do anyway ... seems we should assume good faith of those doing that. In summary, pro tem we should get round the issue with more verbatim footnotes.

Charles

-----------------------------------------
Email sent from www.ntlworld.com
Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software
Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information


from_name: Thomas Dalton

subject: [WikiEN-l] SOS -- Save Our Sources

body:
> Hmmm!  I've never really thought about the copyrightability of text on
> historical or tourist plaques, or epitaphs on tombstones. ;-)

The text is definitely copyrighted. I guess taking a picture of it
would be a derivative work at best (at worst, it would simply be a
copy), so you wouldn't be able to release it under any license
acceptable on commons without the permission of whoever wrote it
(which they might well grant in exchange for the free publicity).

As far as I know, making something easy for the public to read doesn't
effect the copyright you can claim on it.


from_name: Erik Moeller

body:
This is a positive initiative. I have only one issue with it, which is
that the mailing list is on Wikimedia's servers, while the wiki is
not. While we all trust you, of course, to do the right thing, as a
matter of fair play towards others with similar ideas, it might be
sensible to either host the list separately, or to move the wiki to
Wikimedia's servers. Users might also be confused when they subscribe
to a Wikimedia mailing list but their Wikimedia username doesn't work
on the wiki (I'm speaking about the hypothetical post-single login
world ;-).

If I was a woman I would probably start a long thread about being
referred to as a  member of the genus "chix," but I'm not, so I'll
leave that to the "chix" to figure out. :-)
--
Peace & Love,
Erik

Member, Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees

DISCLAIMER: Unless otherwise stated, all views or opinions expressed
in this message are solely my own and do not represent an official
position of the Wikimedia Foundation or its Board of Trustees.


body:
I don't like this idea at all. It's the first case of sexism I've seen
on Wikipedia. Discriminating against men is not a solution to
discrimination against women (which as far as I can tell, doesn't
exist anyway).


body:
"MacGyverMagic/Mgm" wrote

>Can you give any examples of
> sexism or bias on WP or the mailing list?

Haven't we had this thread already?

Charles

-----------------------------------------
Email sent from www.ntlworld.com
Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software
Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information


from_name: Luna

body:
Hm. I never put too much thought into this, before. I've always figured it's
hard to be sexist when all we really get is somebody's username, but that's
got more to do with overt and intentional sexism, and I don't think that's
the sort of issue that people have in mind, here. Well, maybe it is, but the
more interesting issue to me is what I've seen a few people refer to as the
"locker room mentality." I might prefer to use a group of "The Guys" down at
the local sports bar. The topics and methods of conversation, and the social
norms, just aren't as accessible to some people. I have to admit I'm one of
them, sometimes. If that's costing us potentially valuable members of the
community, then it's a damned shame.

Since my username is a bit ambiguous, in terms of gender, it's interesting
to see which people assume I'm male or female. But I rarely see much in
terms of special or adverse treatment as a result, that I can recognize. The
trolls I run into do skip to a different chapter in their little pocket
thesaurus, but that seems to be pretty much it. So I do think the *general
atmosphere* is more what people are getting at. In a community so
numerically dominated by men, it can be difficult to address or even really
recognize that sort of issue.

Personally, I would prefer that WikiChix be open to men who happen to be
interested. But being outside of the community, I'm not in any position to
demand that.

I'm a bit bewildered by all of this, and I'm not sure what will be
accomplished, but all the same, I hope it does well. I enjoy having good
people around.

On a somewhat related note, will WikiChix be needing any help with
templates, help desk and {{helpme}} staff, development of a community
portal, conflict mediation, and possibly counter-vandalism? Or should such
discussion and offers be moved to their respective mailing list?

-Luna


subject: [WikiEN-l] SOS -- Save Our Sources

body:
> Things will change. At present we're hearing a lot about ex-copyright books being put online, but not seeing that. What I notice these days is how many older academic papers are now online, particularly in the humanities, but behind subscription walls. In a sense what WP should do is to harness its people to put selective quotes from those, undoubted fair use in the scholarly convention, online. Oh, that's what we do anyway ... seems we should assume good faith of those doing that. In summary, pro tem we should get round the issue with more verbatim footnotes.

It's not just old papers - almost all papers are available online in
you have the right subscriptions (which basically means logging on
from a university computer, or via a university proxy). Some are even
available before they're published (preprints).

I don't think there's any need to quote the passages we're using, just
cite the paper in the usual way. There are plenty of academic
Wikipedians that can verify the source.


body:
On 12/4/06, charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com
<charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com> wrote:
> And the capacity to irritate people who can navigate without the intrusion, thank you all the same. One per article is quite enough, and often too many.

Let me ask you, what do you see as the basic model for readers finding
a given article? Are you focussing primarily on a reader coming to
Wikipedia to find information on a very specific topic? What if he
just wants to browse? What if he doesn't know what he wants?

Let's take an example, [[Template:Energy Conversion]]. Do you consider
this intrusive? Do you not think there is value in raising the
visibility of all these topics? Do you not think there is value in
showing how many different solar power topics there are compared to
only three wind power topics? Had you heard of "blue energy"? Does it
make you wonder what "Anaerobic digestion" is doing in amongst energy
conversion topics?

I think navigation boxes serve to stimulate interest and lead readers
to other, related topics. And if we can stimulate the reader's
interest, we can stimulate him to help us, don't you think?

Steve


body:
If the blog is worth mentioning, it seems worth linking to. Wouldn't make
too much sense to mention a blog post without linking to it *somewhere*, eh?

But as to whether it's worth a mention at all, I have no idea.

Just my two cents.
-Luna

On 12/4/06, Ryan Wetherell <renardius at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I agree that the link should be in [[Anne Milton]], but with some kind
> of warning of content.  We already do this in a lot of articles,
> including, say, scientific theories, where we have supportive and
> opposing external links.  Now I know that theories and people are
> different things, but I don't see the problem of excluding a notable
> outside link, even if it is critical.
>
> --Ryan
>
> On 12/4/06, David Boothroyd <david at election.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> > I should like to clarify the issue in this dispute. The question is
> > not whether the blog is a 'source'; it is clearly not a source for
> > anything other than what is said on the blog. The issue is whether or
> > not to mention it in the article; the subsidiary issue is, should that
> > question be answered in the affirmative, it should be linked to.
> >
> > My position is that the answer to both questions is Yes. The following
> > reasons justify mentioning the blog:
> >
> > 1) The blog has been mentioned twice in the (UK) national press. The
> > first was in Damian Whitworth, "A strange case of espionage and warfare
> > inside the commuter belt", The Times, April 18, 2005, p. 28. The second
> > was Rod Liddle, "Battle of the Guildford gals", The Sunday Times, May 1,
> > 2005, p. 15. I have undertaken an extensive search and have yet to find
> > any other site set up to target an individual candidate being mentioned
> > in the press. This is therefore a unique situation.
> >
> > 2) The blog has also been mentioned by Sandra Howard (wife of the
> > then Leader of the Opposition) in her election campaign blog.
> >
> http://www.conservatives.com/tile.do?def=sandra.howard.page&obj_id=122745
> >
> > 3) The fact that Anne Milton is quoted by Sandra Howard asserting that
> > Tim Ireland was "stalking" her through the weblog is particularly
> > significant. It is a notably extreme accusation.
> >
> > 4) It appears to be the only case where a blog about an MP has
> > continued to be updated. There have been others, but they have all gone
> > under. This one hasn't.
> >
> > 5) The author of the blog, Tim Ireland, is notable enough to have an
> > article about him. His notability is for his work on political blogs.
> >
> > 6) I do not propose to mention this in the article, but in my submission
> > the edit wars engaged in by supporters of Anne Milton (including by IP
> > addresses traced to the Parliamentary estate) who attempt to remove all
> > mention of it from the article, denote that it is considered notable by
> > them. See the article history.
> >
> > I do not see how WP:BLP is engaged merely by mentioning that a critical
> > blog exists. It is potentially engaged by reporting Anne Milton's
> > reaction, but that has an unimpeachable source in The Times piece.
> >
> > Now Guy imputes to me motives other than improving the encyclopaedia
> > to explain why I think it should be mentioned. This is really neither
> > here nor there to the merits of the case but I would invite anyone
> > wishing to examine the issue to look at my contributions on Talk:Anne
> > Milton starting in June.
> >
> > Should the first question be decided in the affirmative, that the
> > blog is notable enough to be mentioned, then should it be linked? I
> > submit the answer is clearly "Yes". Once the article mentions the blog,
> > inquiring readers may wish to look at it for themselves. It simply
> > makes no sense to say that the blog is notable but yet not linkable.
> > Even the Wikipedia article on Goatse.cx links to a mirror to it.
> > I would make a proviso that the link to the blog should make clear
> > that the site is not in any sense neutral. It might also be
> > reasonable, though I don't think warranted, to have the site
> > address in text rather than as a hyperlink.
> >
> > Perhaps I should say that as I understand Guy's position, he considers
> > that a link to the blog is acceptable from [[Tim Ireland]] but not
> > from [[Anne Milton]]. I cannot understand the internal logic of such a
> > position.
> > --
> > David Boothroyd - http://www.election.demon.co.uk
> > david at election.demon.co.uk (home)
> > dboothroyd at westminster.gov.uk (council)
> > _______________________________________________
> > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >
> _______________________________________________
> 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] SOS -- Save Our Sources

body:
On 12/4/06, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton at gmail.com> wrote:
> Fair use generally only applies if you are using the copyrighted
> material in an article about the material itself.

That's a very specific example of fair use which Wikipedia generally
dictates as the only one it's willing to accept. I believe that lots
of other uses can be "fair use". For example, it's generally
acceptable for an academic to photocopy bits out of a journal so that
they can study it at home, if the journal can't be borrowed - no
violation of copyright takes place. I believe this would be in the
same category. We would not be copying the material to avoid someone
having to buy the book, we'd be copying it to enable readers to simply
check that it says what someone is claiming it does. Perfectly fair,
IMHO.

>Using it as a source isn't "fair".

Don't get you.

>Most dead-tree sources can be found a good library, which should be
enough to verify it if we need to.

Know anyone who has ever gone to a library to verify a Wikipedia
citation? Ever had a suspicion about a dead-tree citation? Could you
be bothered going to a library to check it out? Could you be bothered
to click on a link?

Steve


from_name: rfrangi at libero.it

body:
Brianna wrote
>
> Good grief. Is it the end of the world if women have an ADDITIONAL
> list to share their views on? I don't see anyone advocating that women
> STOP contributing to the existing lists or channels in favour of a
> women-only one instead.
>

Well honestly, it sounded more like an ALTERNATIVE list, not an ADDITIONAL list, but probably it's just my male bias.

Anyway, no, it's not the end of the world. So let's go with WikiBoyz and WikiLGBT (or WikiL, WikiG, WikiB & WikiT)

WikiLeft and WikiRight are ok for the basic kind of political bias you find on Wikipedia.

WikiHeaven and WikiHell will do for the religious bias in the form, believers vs. atheists (Yes, I know WikiHell is so POV)

Roberto (Snowdog)

------------------------------------------------------
Mutuo da 200.000?? Tassi ridotti:euribor +0.69%. Solo per richieste online. www.mutuionline.it
http://click.libero.it/mutuionline04dic0


from_name: Jeff V. Merkey

subject: [Wikitech-l] Wikipedia has a problem

body:
Ivan Krsti? wrote:

>Jeff V. Merkey wrote:
>
>
>>You may wish to consider ordering more powerful platforms. I run 6
>>instances of the entire Wikipedia on a single Solera Appliance.
>>These servers have throughput of 875 megabyte per second
>>
>>
>
>I run a Wikipedia instance on the 366MHz OLPC XO-1
>(http://dev.laptop.org/~krstic/xo); it works because I'm the only user.
>Neither storage nor disk throughput help when your problem is sheer
>load, and you're computationally-bound.
>
>
>
I also have proxy servers setup and I get about 2000 visitors a day and
over 300,000 hits per day.

Jeff