subject: [WikiEN-l] Process wonkery

references:
<s7lah2pihqs0vqiecpaifbaphj43urt5a5@4ax.com>
	<fbad4e140609230946g1506a024g26e2447a3c584abb@mail.gmail.com>
	<47683e960609241202h58eebc8fua913fdc8802ae10c@mail.gmail.com>
	<ef754g$jmb$1@sea.gmane.org>
	<fbad4e140609252350s7644b094hff6edc5ab124865f@mail.gmail.com>
	<451B9BCC.5020400@wikia.com>
	<fb7fdd9c0609280359p34dbcbc8s23dca1adb00e814@mail.gmail.com>
	<451BC6B8.8040201@wikia.com> <efh9sc$c7h$1@sea.gmane.org>

body:
On 28/09/06, David Alexander Russell <webmaster at davidarussell.co.uk> wrote:
> Jimmy Wales wrote:

> > Yeah, but when I do something, unless I am very very very careful, it
> > ends up getting used as a stick to beat innocents to death with. :)

> Couldn't you do what Danny does for WP:OFFICE actions, i.e. have a 'this
> is me just editing' account and a 'this is me as a policy-creating
> godking' account? And then anyone who tries to use your ordinary edits
> to beat innocents with can just be laughed at.

You haven't experienced the amazing feats of Jimbomancy some
wikilawyers and obsessives will stretch to. "This edit is ABSOLUTELY
IMPERATIVE because Jimbo suggested on a mailing list in 1989 that
something like it would be a good idea."

- d.


list: wikien-l

source: pipermail-mbox

from_name: geni

subject: [WikiEN-l] Process wonkery

references:
<s7lah2pihqs0vqiecpaifbaphj43urt5a5@4ax.com>
	<fbad4e140609230946g1506a024g26e2447a3c584abb@mail.gmail.com>
	<47683e960609241202h58eebc8fua913fdc8802ae10c@mail.gmail.com>
	<ef754g$jmb$1@sea.gmane.org>
	<fbad4e140609252350s7644b094hff6edc5ab124865f@mail.gmail.com>
	<451B9BCC.5020400@wikia.com>
	<fb7fdd9c0609280359p34dbcbc8s23dca1adb00e814@mail.gmail.com>
	<451BC6B8.8040201@wikia.com> <efh9sc$c7h$1@sea.gmane.org>
	<fbad4e140609281317u1ec7257en6117a1ceff2c64bc@mail.gmail.com>

body:
On 9/28/06, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
> You haven't experienced the amazing feats of Jimbomancy some
> wikilawyers and obsessives will stretch to. "This edit is ABSOLUTELY
> IMPERATIVE because Jimbo suggested on a mailing list in 1989 that
> something like it would be a good idea."

That would be the anti process lot (yes I can provide examples).

--
geni


list: wikitech-l

from_name: Mike O

subject: [Wikitech-l] Parsing database dumps

body:
> The namespace prefix appears at the beginning of the page title, which appears
> as the text contents of the /mediawiki/page/title element,
> separated by a colon
> from the remaining title part.

That's what I gathered from reading the Wiki docs before I started trying to parse the XML. But look at this snippet of XML from enwiki-latest-pages-articles.xml.bz2 taken from late August. I don't see any namespace in the <title> elements, any ideas why, or am I looking in the wrong spot?

<mediawiki xmlns="http://www.mediawiki.org/xml/export-0.3/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.mediawiki.org/xml/export-0.3/ http://www.mediawiki.org/xml/export-0.3.xsd" version="0.3" xml:lang="en">
  <siteinfo>
    <sitename>Wikipedia</sitename>
    <base>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page</base>
    <generator>MediaWiki 1.8alpha</generator>
    <case>first-letter</case>
      <namespaces>
      <namespace key="-2">Media</namespace>
      <namespace key="-1">Special</namespace>
      <namespace key="0" />
      <namespace key="1">Talk</namespace>
      <namespace key="2">User</namespace>
      <namespace key="3">User talk</namespace>
      <namespace key="4">Wikipedia</namespace>
      <namespace key="5">Wikipedia talk</namespace>
      <namespace key="6">Image</namespace>
      <namespace key="7">Image talk</namespace>
      <namespace key="8">MediaWiki</namespace>
      <namespace key="9">MediaWiki talk</namespace>
      <namespace key="10">Template</namespace>
      <namespace key="11">Template talk</namespace>
      <namespace key="12">Help</namespace>
      <namespace key="13">Help talk</namespace>
      <namespace key="14">Category</namespace>
      <namespace key="15">Category talk</namespace>
      <namespace key="100">Portal</namespace>
      <namespace key="101">Portal talk</namespace>
    </namespaces>
  </siteinfo>
  <page>
    <title>AaA</title>
    <id>1</id>
    <revision>
      <id>46448774</id>
      <timestamp>2006-04-01T12:07:25Z</timestamp>
      <contributor>
        <username>Gurch</username>
        <id>241822</id>
      </contributor>
      <minor />
      <comment>{{R from CamelCase}}</comment>
      <text xml:space="preserve">#REDIRECT [[AAA]] {{R from CamelCase}} {{R from other capitalisation}}</text>
    </revision>
  </page>
  <page>
    <title>AlgeriA</title>
    <id>5</id>
    <revision>
      <id>18063769</id>
      <timestamp>2005-07-03T11:13:13Z</timestamp>
      <contributor>
        <username>Docu</username>
        <id>8029</id>
      </contributor>
      <minor />
      <comment>adding cur_id=5: {{R from CamelCase}}</comment>
      <text xml:space="preserve">#REDIRECT [[Algeria]]{{R from CamelCase}}</text>
    </revision>
  </page>

[...]

Mike O

--
_______________________________________________
Surf the Web in a faster, safer and easier way:
Download Opera 9 at http://www.opera.com

Powered by Outblaze


list: foundation-l

from_name: Erik Moeller

subject: [Foundation-l] A Wikimedia sidebar box for wikipedia.org

body:
On 9/28/06, Brion Vibber <brion at pobox.com> wrote:
> What doesn't work about it?

Let's start with the most obvious bit: WMF is an international
organization, and we want volunteers to contribute as many
translations as possible of key pages on the WMF wiki, no matter how
few there are of them. When you have 100 languages, 5 pages
effectively equates to 500 pages that need to be updated and kept in
sync. Besides requiring better translation tools, it requires enough
volunteers to have access in a preferably permission-free or
permission-weak model to do the work.

Now, there are of course issues with volunteer translations: Can you
trust a random guy not to say in Arabic that Wikimedia is deeply
inspired by the Quran in its mission and scope? Possibly not, but
hopefully you can at least trust someone from a chapter to validate
that information, and have a disclaimer on it when it hasn't been
checked.

Beyond key, relatively static pages, I do believe we need a single
place for official news from the Foundation, and I'm not just talking
about press releases, but also general updates on what we are doing.
It's fine if those news are prepared on Meta or wherever, but there is
a distinction between news that come from a random wiki somewhere, and
news that have been officially validated to be accurate. With regard
to translations, the current events page on WMF wiki lists exactly 3
other languages besides English. 2 of them are out of date.

The notion of using a CMS instead of a wiki has been brought up. I
don't believe that is the way to go, since it seems to me that we are
building the tools we need to build a better WMF website anyway in the
process of improving our other sites.

--
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.


list: wikimedia-l


from_name: David Gerard

subject: [WikiEN-l] Process wonkery

references:
<s7lah2pihqs0vqiecpaifbaphj43urt5a5@4ax.com>
	<47683e960609241202h58eebc8fua913fdc8802ae10c@mail.gmail.com>
	<ef754g$jmb$1@sea.gmane.org>
	<fbad4e140609252350s7644b094hff6edc5ab124865f@mail.gmail.com>
	<451B9BCC.5020400@wikia.com>
	<fb7fdd9c0609280359p34dbcbc8s23dca1adb00e814@mail.gmail.com>
	<451BC6B8.8040201@wikia.com> <efh9sc$c7h$1@sea.gmane.org>
	<fbad4e140609281317u1ec7257en6117a1ceff2c64bc@mail.gmail.com>
	<6ac0ff0e0609281323w5688280x3ef7360782f0e7eb@mail.gmail.com>

body:
On 28/09/06, Carl Peterson <carlopeterson at gmail.com> wrote:

> That's when Jimbomancy is invoked in directly stating that "edits made by
> this account are to be regarded no differently than those made by any other
> editor." Also, if the account remained anonymous with regards to its
> owner...

Those two contradict somewhere ...

There are a few admins who have multiple accounts, purely so they can
edit articles without upset people stalking their every step. There
are users who have had real-life stalkers and so quietly fade out one
account while using a second. This is fine as long as it's for good
reason and one is very careful not to cross the streams. Per
[[WP:SOCK]], "... some have suggested that Jimbo should get, and edit
from, a sock puppet account. Perhaps he does."

- d.


from_name: charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com

subject: [WikiEN-l] How to deal with direct requests for articles?

body:
"David Mestel" wrote

> My only concern with the book idea is that it really has to go one of
> two ways - either a guide to doing shiny stuff in WML, or a guide to
> Wikipedia policy and process.

Hah. It should of course be _what you really need to know_, not a wonkathon. And on page 1 it would have to say 'Wikipedia is dynamic', book already out of date, that sort of thing. But actually the old-lag Wikipedians can confirm that some essential things don't change that much. Certainly the hardest bit is social interaction, and that is a constant.

Charles

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


subject: [Wikitech-l] Parsing database dumps

body:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Brion Vibber" <brion at pobox.com>
> To: "Wikimedia developers" <wikitech-l at wikimedia.org>
> Subject: Re: [Wikitech-l] Parsing database dumps
> Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2006 13:50:07 -0700
>
>
> Those particular page titles are in the main (article) namespace, which has no
> prefix:
>
> >       <namespace key="0" />
> [snip]
> >     <title>AaA</title>
> [snip]
> >     <title>AlgeriA</title>

OK, thanks, that makes sense. I nearly made a leap to that assumption but then thought I'd better not without really understanding. So are you saying that if there's no colon in the title it's safe the assume that they go in namespace 0. And if there is a colon then I need to parse to see if text before a colon matches a namespace, and if it doesn't then the colon is just part of the article title ?

Mike O

--
_______________________________________________
Surf the Web in a faster, safer and easier way:
Download Opera 9 at http://www.opera.com

Powered by Outblaze


subject: [Wikitech-l] Parsing database dumps

body:
>
> Mike wrote:
> > ...look at this snippet of XML from enwiki-latest-pages-articles.xml.bz2
> > taken from late August. I don't see any namespace in the <title> elements,
> > ...
> >     <title>AaA</title>
> > ...
> >     <title>AlgeriA</title>
>
> Those are main namespace (namespace 0) articles, so they don't
> have a prefix.  But all the non-main-namespace pages do.
> The first is <id>724</id><title>Wikipedia:Adding Wikipedia
> articles to Nupedia</title>.)

Thanks! That explains a lot.

Mike O

--
_______________________________________________
Surf the Web in a faster, safer and easier way:
Download Opera 9 at http://www.opera.com

Powered by Outblaze


from_name: River Tarnell

subject: [Wikitech-l] maintenance notice

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

hello,

at about 13:00 UTC on Sunday the 30th we will be performing some
maintenance on our network during which the site will be offline.

hopefully this won't last longer than a few minutes, although it will
involve a switch reload.

	- river.
(see, not all our maintenance is scheduled 5 minutes in advance...)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFFHDu1rCkrk04PPEoRAi84AJ0abN/od2YXInuGLPcaic6r6b/yeQCeNRxn
cyAQmv4ffTFvM4InKQ/arKU=
=oaFr
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


subject: [Wikitech-l] maintenance notice

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

> 13:00 UTC on Sunday the 30th

of course i meant Sunday the 1st.

	- river.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFFHD3urCkrk04PPEoRAjqAAJ9mrMtDio/6MRaf1XSBO7NjRQ9sOwCfXt9R
pDJqnWuTZC+X9FkUGGTM+L4=
=NkJ0
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


list: commons-l

from_name: Jason Spiro

subject:
[Commons-l] Ogg Theora is too hard to play. We need YouTube-style
	Flash streaming video.

body:
Hi all,

Click this link: http://www.openwetware.org/wiki/SynBERC:MIT/Lab_video_tours

It's far different from most video on Commons: it's Flash streaming
video and it works in 99% of web browsers. (The VLC web browser plugin
is supoosed to support Flash video too, though I've never tried it.
Also I don't know if Flash video is based on patented codecs or not.
But assuming that no such problems come up...) Perhaps we should put
in a MediaWiki feature request:

MediaWiki should convert all our videos to low-rez Flash Video format
for streaming previewing as soon as the .ogg original is uploaded.
This way, more people will be able to view our videos, so we'll get
more uploads.

Agree or disagree?

Cheers,
Jason

--
Jason Spiro: computer consulting with a smile.
I also provide training and spyware removal services for homes and businesses.
Call or email for a FREE 5-minute consultation. Satisfaction guaranteed.
416-781-5938 / Email: info at jspiro.com / MSN: jasonspiro at hotmail.com


list: wikipedia-l

subject: Please someone change arm�neashti to arm�neashce in the interwiki links

body:
Please somenone change the interwiki links for http://roa-rup.wikipedia.org from "arm?neashti" to "arm?neashce". Will somebody please? I've been waiting for some time and no reply. Also it will be good to change the adress of this Wikipedia from roa-rup.wikipedia.org to the correct ISO 639-2 (and ISO 639-3 code) rup.wikipedia.org .

  Thank you!

 __________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Poco spazio e tanto spam? Yahoo! Mail ti protegge dallo spam e ti da tanto spazio gratuito per i tuoi file e i messaggi
http://mail.yahoo.it


subject: [Foundation-l] Call for volunteers: clean up sep11.wikipedia.org

body:
On 9/28/06, Erik Moeller <erik at wikimedia.org> wrote:
> http://sep11.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Community_Portal

As part of the Wikipedia name purging, this is now at:
http://sep11.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11:Community_Portal

--
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.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Call for volunteers: clean up sep11.wikipedia.org


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Call for volunteers: clean up sep11.wikipedia.org


subject: [Wikipedia-l]Please someone change armâneashti to armãneashce in the interwiki links

body:
On 9/28/06, ro.wiki <wikipediaromana at yahoo.it> wrote:
> Please somenone change the interwiki links for http://roa-rup.wikipedia.org from "arm?neashti" to "arm?neashce". Will somebody please? I've been waiting for some time and no reply. Also it will be good to change the adress of this Wikipedia from roa-rup.wikipedia.org to the correct ISO 639-2 (and ISO 639-3 code) rup.wikipedia.org .

If it doesn't get done otherwise, please file a request at:
http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/
--
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.


from_name: Alphax (Wikipedia email)

subject: [WikiEN-l] Process wonkery

body:
Jimmy Wales wrote:
> MacGyverMagic/Mgm wrote:
>> On 9/28/06, Jimmy Wales <jwales at wikia.com> wrote:
>>> I would go in and simply delete it myself and insist that it not be
>>> added back until someone finds a source better than the school's own
>>> homemade website, but I don't want to be seen as creating *actual
>>> policy* in this area by my edits.
>>>
>>> I'm just saying.
>>>
>>> --Jimbo
>>
>> You'd be enforcing verifiability policy, not creating anything new.
>
> Yeah, but when I do something, unless I am very very very careful, it
> ends up getting used as a stick to beat innocents to death with. :)
>

Unfortunately they don't even require a "Jimbo action" to create more
sticks to beat innocents with. They do it on a whim and call it "process".

--
Alphax - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax
Contributor to Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
"We make the internet not suck" - Jimbo Wales
Public key: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax/OpenPGP

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 569 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20060928/0d6371fa/attachment.pgp


body:
David Gerard wrote:
> My phone number and email are publicly available for media contact
> purposes. This means, of course, I get emails and calls about
> *everything*.
>
> A common call is "How do I get an article about me/my book/my achievement?"
>
> Now. What's a helpful answer to this? Better than "You don't, someone
> else has to write one," because you *know* they'll just write a really
> bad one themselves and it'll all end in a tearful AFD entry and
> someone hating or fearing Wikipedia henceforth.
>
> Assume that referring them to a web page or policy page is less good
> than being able to answer on the phone right there.
>
> Ideas please?
>

Tell them to chuck it on [[WP:AFC]].

(Gosh darnit, someone has got to write a wikilink parser for
Thunderbird... does the next version of mIRC support
subst: templates with variables yet?)

--
Alphax - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax
Contributor to Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
"We make the internet not suck" - Jimbo Wales
Public key: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax/OpenPGP

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 569 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20060928/ac8388ea/attachment.pgp


from_name: Stephen Bain

subject: [Foundation-l] Taipei chosen to host Wikimania 2007

body:
On 9/28/06, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> The procedure as it is evidently needs work, since other bidders (e.g.
> London) are disappointed at their hard work being pretty much wasted.
>
> The current system seems to ensure a lot of volunteer time and effort
> being futile. This is damaging to the project.

The problem this year was that there were so many high quality bids
which made it to final consideration, each of which had substantial
amounts of effort invested in them. In one way it's excellent that the
jury is spoiled for choice, but it's indeed a shame to "waste" that
effort. [1]

One issue is the time the process takes. At the moment the whole
process, from initial bids to selection, takes only two weeks. To have
a practical chance of success, a team really has to prepare all
aspects of their bid before the first round officially ends, so it's
not just the shortlisted bids who put in great amounts of effort.

Perhaps there could be another round of pruning between the original
acceptance of bids and the final shortlist? There were only four bids
in the shortlist this year but that number will likely rise as
chapters take hold and local communities grow.

---
[1] Many cities who don't succeed may well bid in later years, and
much of the work will carry over, but securing sponsorship, venues etc
will often be time specific.

--
Stephen Bain
stephen.bain at gmail.com


from_name: Lars Aronsson

subject: [Foundation-l] Proposal re: sep11.wikipedia.org

body:
Tim 'avatar' Bartel wrote:

> We had supporters in germany - mainly two big universities - who
> stated that they are very unhappy in helping us [...] because
> they disagree that sep11 suits into the WM project portfolio and
> the "scope & mission" and that they are unable to support us
> further.

Without interfering with the issue here, I'd like to point out
that there are always people who produce various excuses for not
contributing to volunteer projects.  There is nothing that proves
that they would indeed contribute if the reason for that excuse
was removed.  Instead, they could find another excuse for not
contributing.

People who really want to contribute will instead find excuses for
doing so despite the various obstacles that might come in their
way.

--
  Lars Aronsson (lars at aronsson.se)
  Aronsson Datateknik - http://aronsson.se


from_name: Ray Saintonge

body:
Andrew Gray wrote:

>On 28/09/06, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>The procedure as it is evidently needs work, since other bidders (e.g.
>>London) are disappointed at their hard work being pretty much wasted.
>>
>>The current system seems to ensure a lot of volunteer time and effort
>>being futile. This is damaging to the project.
>>
>>
>The problem is that either we make a choice based on three or four
>groups who've invested a lot of effort - which guarantees wasting a
>fair lump of effort - or we make a choice before the detailed work has
>been done, which would mean we save the legwork of the other teams
>*but* we make a decision based on very little evidence. And if it then
>turns out that the really really really optomistic bid for Gothab
>isn't going to work once we start scaring up sponsorship etc, it's a
>bit late to select an alternative...
>
>It strikes me that any competitive bidding process, where the actual
>work is devolved to a largely unknown local community, is going to
>require a degree of wasted effort as all communities bidding try to
>demonstrate they can achieve the required level. It's not ideal, but
>neither is it simple ineptitude... it's necessary.
>
I don't have any problem with the bidding process either.  In business
when a construction project is up for bids, anyone who wants to have a
reasonable chance of winning will have to show that he can do his
homework.  Bidders for the Olympics put a tremendous amount of money and
energy into preparing their bids without any guarantee of return.  If
they suggested to their potential sponsors that winniing the bid was a
sure thing that would be deceptive.

The shortlisted bids seemed to have been very strong, and three of them
had to lose.

I don't think that it helps the transparency of the process when someone
like Jimbo begins by supporting a bid before the bidding has seriously
started.  It's the kind of prejudicial comment that tells everyone else
to give up before they even try.  It casts doubt on whether he believes
that the community has enough maturity to make good choices.

An effective self-governing community requires a high level of trust,
especially when it errs in its decisions.  As time goes on the Gods need
to remember that there are more and more people with a long term
investment of time and commitment, and that extended commitment is not
consistent with acting stupidly.  Intervention from on high should be
limited to situations where the community has gone seriously off track
from its fundamental principles.

Ec


from_name: Mark Williamson

subject:
[Wikitech-l] Fwd: [Wikipedia-l] whom I have to ask for approval
	of Gileki wikipedia?how find a developer?

body:
Wikipedia-l.

But really, it doesn't seem to matter anymore. People have sent
e-mails in every direction about various Wikis that have even gone
beyond Gileki as far as meeting requirements goes, and their Wikis are
still uncreated.

Mark

On 28/09/06, SJ <2.718281828 at gmail.com> wrote:
> 48 supports, no opposition, 5 actively interested editors including a
> native speaker.  It certainly has the requisite # of interested
> parties.  Wikitech-l is perhaps more likely to grab the attention of a
> developer who can set up the new wiki... where did you send previous
> emails about this?
>
> SJ
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: M R <rastgaar at yahoo.com>
> Date: Sep 27, 2006 10:53 PM
> Subject: [Wikipedia-l] whom I have to ask for approval of Gileki
> wikipedia?how find a developer?
> To: "wikipedia-l wikimedia.org" <wikipedia-l at wikimedia.org>
>
>
> hi
>
>   Gileki wikipedia have many supporters that want topromote it. We
> need a provider  to develop it.  Also does any committe or something
> like that have to approve it first?
>
>   http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages#Gileki
>
>   I appreciate your help.It is over a month that I am sending these
> kind of emails around.
>
>   Rastgaar
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Do you Yahoo!?
>  Everyone is raving about the  all-new Yahoo! Mail.
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>
>
> --
> ++SJ
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>

--
Refije dirije lanm? yo paske nou posede pw?p bato.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Process wonkery

body:
David Gerard wrote:

>On 28/09/06, David Alexander Russell <webmaster at davidarussell.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
>>Jimmy Wales wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Yeah, but when I do something, unless I am very very very careful, it
>>>ends up getting used as a stick to beat innocents to death with. :)
>>>
>>>
>>Couldn't you do what Danny does for WP:OFFICE actions, i.e. have a 'this
>>is me just editing' account and a 'this is me as a policy-creating
>>godking' account? And then anyone who tries to use your ordinary edits
>>to beat innocents with can just be laughed at.
>>
>>
>You haven't experienced the amazing feats of Jimbomancy some
>wikilawyers and obsessives will stretch to. "This edit is ABSOLUTELY
>IMPERATIVE because Jimbo suggested on a mailing list in 1989 that
>something like it would be a good idea."
>
Nothing wins arguments like going into a war saying that God and the
Bible are on your side.

Ec


from_name: Guy Chapman aka JzG

subject: [WikiEN-l] Process wonkery

references:
<s7lah2pihqs0vqiecpaifbaphj43urt5a5@4ax.com>
	<fbad4e140609230946g1506a024g26e2447a3c584abb@mail.gmail.com>
	<38a7bf7c0609231036g378bf749yc132fbfbb05dc1b2@mail.gmail.com>
	<451B9A01.1020904@wikia.com>
	<fbad4e140609280254t3b9ea640pb51397958e6eaeca@mail.gmail.com>
	<rjanh25gtkgg1huc9l1arocubhkmtbqc93@4ax.com>
	<fbad4e140609280359v49e80a53sdc2aeed3ef9430c8@mail.gmail.com>
	<uhrnh29kjhku737rne69oh2u3f7vk299fn@4ax.com>
	<fbad4e140609280848h456cb22esc5f5954ade4f9a68@mail.gmail.com>

body:
On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 16:48:34 +0100, "David Gerard" <dgerard at gmail.com>
wrote:

>> In a rare outbreak of Clue (rare for this issue, not the closer of the
>> DRV), the article was (last time I saw it) redirected to the
>> community, which has a short sentence on it.  We shall see.

>w00t!

Quite.  But what are the chances of this
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Alder_Coppice_Primary_School
going the same way?  Because "strong keep, notable as all schools are"
is sure as hell a religious not a policy argument.

Guy (JzG)
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JzG


from_name: SJ

subject:
[Commons-l] Ogg Theora is too hard to play. We need
	YouTube-style Flash streaming video.

body:
I'm an outspoken fan of fixing and improving Theora, and I think this
sounds like a fantastic idea.  We should do similar low-res versions
of audio into something other than .ogg -- but make sure that the
high-res version we archive and strongly encourage is, in both cases,
the free-format Ogg version.

There is *no* widely-used completely free audio or video format.  We
should not allow our strong support for Ogg to prevent our media from
being used by the overwhelming proportion of our audience that cannot
(or don't know how to) play those formats.

At the same time, we should use our extra free-format-friendly
energies to promote those formats, educate our audience about how to
play them, develop and host instruction manuals and documents to help
with that last point, and regularly survey users to find out how many
of them can and do play free format media... to know, for instance,
when we can start deprecating in-browser flash in favor of in-browser
theora plugins.

Oh, yes -- and we can push the Mozilla Foundation to integrate ogg
players into the default firefox distribution.  <pokes MozFound about
writing in libtheora support>

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

-- SJ

On 9/28/06, Jason Spiro <jasonspiro2 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Click this link: http://www.openwetware.org/wiki/SynBERC:MIT/Lab_video_tours
>
> It's far different from most video on Commons: it's Flash streaming
> video and it works in 99% of web browsers. (The VLC web browser plugin
> is supoosed to support Flash video too, though I've never tried it.
> Also I don't know if Flash video is based on patented codecs or not.
> But assuming that no such problems come up...) Perhaps we should put
> in a MediaWiki feature request:
>
> MediaWiki should convert all our videos to low-rez Flash Video format
> for streaming previewing as soon as the .ogg original is uploaded.
> This way, more people will be able to view our videos, so we'll get
> more uploads.
>
> Agree or disagree?
>
> Cheers,
> Jason
>
> --
> Jason Spiro: computer consulting with a smile.
> I also provide training and spyware removal services for homes and businesses.
> Call or email for a FREE 5-minute consultation. Satisfaction guaranteed.
> 416-781-5938 / Email: info at jspiro.com / MSN: jasonspiro at hotmail.com
> _______________________________________________
> Commons-l mailing list
> Commons-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
>

--
++SJ


from_name: brion at pobox.com

subject: [Wikitech-l] MediaWiki automated test run failure 2006-09-29

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

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 Template infinite loop... 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: HTML Hex character encoding.... FAILED!
Running test TODO: dt/dd/dl test... FAILED!

Passed 412 of 429 tests (96.04%) FAILED!


from_name: Mark Clements

subject: [Wikitech-l] Parsing database dumps

body:
"Mike O" <mikeo at operamail.com> wrote in message
news:20060928210104.E1668CA145 at ws5-11.us4.outblaze.com...
> >
> > Mike wrote:
> > > ...look at this snippet of XML from
enwiki-latest-pages-articles.xml.bz2
> > > taken from late August. I don't see any namespace in the <title>
elements,
> > > ...
> > >     <title>AaA</title>
> > > ...
> > >     <title>AlgeriA</title>
> >
> > Those are main namespace (namespace 0) articles, so they don't
> > have a prefix.  But all the non-main-namespace pages do.
> > The first is <id>724</id><title>Wikipedia:Adding Wikipedia
> > articles to Nupedia</title>.)
>
> Thanks! That explains a lot.
>

As a separate, but related question, why is the namespace not given as part
of the page information?

e.g.
    <title>Help:Contents</title>
    <namespace>12</namespace>
    <pagetitle>Contents</pagetitle>

Surely this would be more useful when it comes to wider application?

- Mark Clements (HappyDog)


from_name: Ilya Haykinson

body:
If I understand the popular sentiment correctly, it is that:

 a) the foundation is committed to preserving knowledge it gathers in open
formats, and
 b) knowledge should be presented by foundation projects using exclusively
open formats

Some people assume that a) and b) are inseparable. I would beg to differ.
Let's:

 - allow uploads only of ogg files, or other open formats, and
 - allow downloads of these ogg files AS WELL as transcode into
flash-presentable formats

We say we want to encourage adoption of open formats.  That's fine and dandy
-- let's only allow open formats in uploads.  But a large part of our
mission is delivering content and I feel that we've been burying our head in
the sand by pretending that there's no problem with access.  I would venture
to say that the vast majority of our users cannot watch or hear any
multimedia files off of our websites.  I would also suggest that they are
not likely to, in the next several years at best.

I suggest that if we change our attitude and allow alternative,
actually-workable presentation of our media, we will be more correctly
fulfilling our mission.  Let's allow Flash for audio and video.

-ilya haykinson

On 9/28/06, SJ <2.718281828 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I'm an outspoken fan of fixing and improving Theora, and I think this
> sounds like a fantastic idea.  We should do similar low-res versions
> of audio into something other than .ogg -- but make sure that the
> high-res version we archive and strongly encourage is, in both cases,
> the free-format Ogg version.
>
> There is *no* widely-used completely free audio or video format.  We
> should not allow our strong support for Ogg to prevent our media from
> being used by the overwhelming proportion of our audience that cannot
> (or don't know how to) play those formats.
>
> At the same time, we should use our extra free-format-friendly
> energies to promote those formats, educate our audience about how to
> play them, develop and host instruction manuals and documents to help
> with that last point, and regularly survey users to find out how many
> of them can and do play free format media... to know, for instance,
> when we can start deprecating in-browser flash in favor of in-browser
> theora plugins.
>
> Oh, yes -- and we can push the Mozilla Foundation to integrate ogg
> players into the default firefox distribution.  <pokes MozFound about
> writing in libtheora support>
>
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Firefox_Ogg_Support
>
> -- SJ
>
> On 9/28/06, Jason Spiro <jasonspiro2 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Click this link:
> http://www.openwetware.org/wiki/SynBERC:MIT/Lab_video_tours
> >
> > It's far different from most video on Commons: it's Flash streaming
> > video and it works in 99% of web browsers. (The VLC web browser plugin
> > is supoosed to support Flash video too, though I've never tried it.
> > Also I don't know if Flash video is based on patented codecs or not.
> > But assuming that no such problems come up...) Perhaps we should put
> > in a MediaWiki feature request:
> >
> > MediaWiki should convert all our videos to low-rez Flash Video format
> > for streaming previewing as soon as the .ogg original is uploaded.
> > This way, more people will be able to view our videos, so we'll get
> > more uploads.
> >
> > Agree or disagree?
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Jason
> >
> > --
> > Jason Spiro: computer consulting with a smile.
> > I also provide training and spyware removal services for homes and
> businesses.
> > Call or email for a FREE 5-minute consultation. Satisfaction guaranteed.
> > 416-781-5938 / Email: info at jspiro.com / MSN: jasonspiro at hotmail.com
> > _______________________________________________
> > Commons-l mailing list
> > Commons-l at wikimedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
> >
>
>
> --
> ++SJ
> _______________________________________________
> Commons-l mailing list
> Commons-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/commons-l/attachments/20060929/be18e282/attachment.htm


body:
oscar wrote:

>On 9/29/06, Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote:
>
>
>>I don't think that it helps the transparency of the process when someone
>>like Jimbo begins by supporting a bid before the bidding has seriously
>>started.
>>
>>
>this is not the point, jimbo imho raises 3 questions which we need to
>address.
>
>(quoting my email:)
>*how can we make such fortunate results not disappear down the drain?
>*would the torino-sponsors be willing to do the same for 2008?
>*how long can we afford to wait with this without spoiling the opportunity?
>
I have no problem with these questions.  It is nevertheless important,
assuming that Torino is still interested for 2008, that other cities
have the opportunity to make bids that will be considered seriously.
Cities interested for 2008 that were either undinterested or
unenthusiastic about 2007 could still present something for 2008.  To be
sure the existing Torino bid will establish a tough standard to beat,
but that should not stop others from trying.

As to how long we can wake, I believe that the decision should be made
relatively soon.  At the very minimum the winners for 2008 should have
time to prepare a presentation to the delegates in Taipei inviting them
to their city the following year, and generating enthusiasm.

For 2009 and later we need to solidify our processes and timetable for
selecting the city.  Perhaps the candidates for 2009 can be known in
time for Taipei so that people there can start informally expressing
their opinion.  The final decison must remain with a limited group that
is capable of evaluating bids objectively.

Ec


body:
From: SJ <2.718281828 at gmail.com>:
>
> I'm an outspoken fan of fixing and improving Theora, and I think this
> sounds like a fantastic idea.  We should do similar low-res versions
> of audio into something other than .ogg -- but make sure that the
> high-res version we archive and strongly encourage is, in both cases,
> the free-format Ogg version.

Cool. I like your idea about audio. Bug filed:
http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7433

To all: If you want the request to be fulfilled, it may help if you
visit the above URL, sign up for a Bugzilla account, and vote for the
request.

> There is *no* widely-used completely free audio or video format.  We
> should not allow our strong support for Ogg to prevent our media from
> being used by the overwhelming proportion of our audience that cannot
> (or don't know how to) play those formats.

Maybe the Foundation / local chapters could get the EU to force M$FT
to include Ogg codecs with Windows :-)

> At the same time, we should use our extra free-format-friendly
> energies to promote those formats
> ...

We need to point directly to the .exe file of the latest codec
installer at Illiminable (and we should suggest they create an
ogg-codecs-latest.exe symlink that always points to the latest one.)
We need to far simplify the Free formats help page. It should be so
easy even my mom could grab the Illiminable codecs.

> Oh, yes -- and we can push the Mozilla Foundation to integrate ogg
> players into the default firefox distribution.  <pokes MozFound about
> writing in libtheora support>
>
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Firefox_Ogg_Support

Is there a bug report? What's the bug URL? There's none listed at the
above URL. But I wanted to vote for it; every vote counts.

Cheers,
Jason

--
Jason Spiro: computer consulting with a smile.
I also provide training and spyware removal services for homes and businesses.
Call or email for a FREE 5-minute consultation. Satisfaction guaranteed.
416-781-5938 / Email: info at jspiro.com / MSN: jasonspiro at hotmail.com


body:
On 29/09/06, Erik Moeller <erik at wikimedia.org> wrote:

>   Wikimania cannot, should not and will not be the only Wikimedia
> event happening in a single year.
> Organizing events is very much within the domain of chapters, and we
> have a UK chapter. Is there a reason some of the lessons from
> preparing the bid could not be used to prepare a more focused wiki
> event in the UK? (*draws wiki youth camp idea  from hat*)

Yes, seeing what can be done to produce a local event would actually
be a really good use of the energy.

- d.


body:
On 9/29/06, Brad Patrick <bradp.wmf at gmail.com> wrote:
> We can do a better job with this procedurally, but honestly, there is
> only one winner in such a situation.  It is ultimately a
> winner-take-all competition.  To the extent this runs counter to the
> community culture of wikilove, I don't there is an alternative.

I don't think it runs counter to wikilove, but perhaps we need to make
it clearer to people that, yes, they may spend weeks on preparing a
bid that will not be accepted. And as has been pointed out time and
again, Wikimania cannot, should not and will not be the only Wikimedia
event happening in a single year.

Organizing events is very much within the domain of chapters, and we
have a UK chapter. Is there a reason some of the lessons from
preparing the bid could not be used to prepare a more focused wiki
event in the UK? (*draws wiki youth camp idea  from hat*)
--
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.


subject:
[Wikipedia-l] Fwd: whom I have to ask for approval of Gileki
	wikipedia?how find a developer?

body:
48 supports, no opposition, 5 actively interested editors including a
native speaker.  It certainly has the requisite # of interested
parties.  Wikitech-l is perhaps more likely to grab the attention of a
developer who can set up the new wiki... where did you send previous
emails about this?

SJ

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: M R <rastgaar at yahoo.com>
Date: Sep 27, 2006 10:53 PM
Subject: [Wikipedia-l] whom I have to ask for approval of Gileki
wikipedia?how find a developer?
To: "wikipedia-l wikimedia.org" <wikipedia-l at wikimedia.org>

hi

  Gileki wikipedia have many supporters that want topromote it. We
need a provider  to develop it.  Also does any committe or something
like that have to approve it first?

  http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages#Gileki

  I appreciate your help.It is over a month that I am sending these
kind of emails around.

  Rastgaar

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
 Everyone is raving about the  all-new Yahoo! Mail.
_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l

--
++SJ


subject:
[Wikitech-l] Fwd: [Wikipedia-l] whom I have to ask for approval of
	Gileki wikipedia?how find a developer?


subject: [Foundation-l] Enforcing collaborative copyright: an essay

body:
Lovenworth and Dyas, two members of corporate law firm Dewey
Ballantine, tackle unresolved issues in an essay on enforcing
collaborative copyright (and suggest the need for a new class of
copyright.  (Are they waiting for a GNU-blessed Wiki license to
emerge?)  Someone should ask for a freely licensed version of the
essay...

"As ownership of collaborative works becomes increasingly diluted, a
common point of enforcement becomes more necessary.  One solution is
to treat collaborative works in a similar manner as a joint work so
that certain contributors to the collaborative work can enforce its
copyright.  Such a solution would do nothing, however, to ensure that
those contributors act with the interests of the collaboration in
mind.  Consequently, until copyright law catches up with the
developments of the modern world, the ability to enforce copyright in
collaborative works will remain limited at best."

http://news.tmcnet.com/news/2006/09/27/1937133.htm
http://www.deweyballantine.com/home1024.cfm

--SJ


subject:
[Foundation-l] [Wikipedia-l] Enforcing collaborative copyright: an
	essay

body:
Lovenworth and Dyas, two members of corporate law firm Dewey
Ballantine, tackle unresolved issues in an essay on enforcing
collaborative copyright (and suggest the need for a new class of
copyright.  (Are they waiting for a GNU-blessed Wiki license to
emerge?)  Someone should ask for a freely licensed version of the
essay...

"As ownership of collaborative works becomes increasingly diluted, a
common point of enforcement becomes more necessary.  One solution is
to treat collaborative works in a similar manner as a joint work so
that certain contributors to the collaborative work can enforce its
copyright.  Such a solution would do nothing, however, to ensure that
those contributors act with the interests of the collaboration in
mind.  Consequently, until copyright law catches up with the
developments of the modern world, the ability to enforce copyright in
collaborative works will remain limited at best."

http://news.tmcnet.com/news/2006/09/27/1937133.htm
http://www.deweyballantine.com/home1024.cfm

--SJ
_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Enforcing collaborative copyright: an essay


references:
<20060928025320.22740.qmail@web30807.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<742dfd060609282340qdeef18ag6a2acb70bf4992f9@mail.gmail.com>
	<efitqc$qgt$1@sea.gmane.org>

body:
Yes, including:

-Wu (code wuu, native name ??)
-Mazandarani (code mzn, native name ????????)
-Newari (code new, native name ????? ????)
-Lak (code lbe, native name ?????)
-Sammarinese/Emilian-Romagnol (code eml, native name Emili?)
-Buryat (code bxr, native name ??????)
-Upper Sorbian (code hsb, native name Hornjoserbsce)
-Novial (code nov, native name Novial)
-Pangasinan (code pag, native name Pangasinan)
-Austrobavarian (code bar, native name Boarisch)
-Bishnupriya Manipuri (code bpy, native name ???? ???/????????????? ???????)
-Dimli-Zazaki (code diq, native name Zazaki)
-Zeelandic (code zea, native name Ze?uws)
-Tarantino (code roa-tara, native name Tarand?ne)
-Zamboageno (code cbk-zam, native name Chavacano de Zamboanga)
-Classical Chinese/Literary Chinese (code zh-classical, native name ???)
-North Russian (code ru-sib, native name ????????? / ???????????????)
-Min Dong (code cdo, native name M?ng-d??ng-ng??)

It may seem like a lot, but in fact each of them has many contributors
and native speakers (in the case of Novial and Literary Chinese,
fluent writers) waiting to begin building them, and they have been
approved by a majority of voters. Most of them have quickly-growing
test wikipedias already.

For more information, you can see if you like
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Approved_requests_for_new_languages
although that page is rather long and cumbersome now.

Mark

On 29/09/06, Tim Starling <tstarling at wikimedia.org> wrote:
> SJ wrote:
> > 48 supports, no opposition, 5 actively interested editors including a
> > native speaker.  It certainly has the requisite # of interested
> > parties.  Wikitech-l is perhaps more likely to grab the attention of a
> > developer who can set up the new wiki... where did you send previous
> > emails about this?
> >
>
> I think it's probably about time that we created a batch of new wikis. Are
> there any other suitable candidates that we can do at the same time?
>
> -- Tim Starling
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>

--
Refije dirije lanm? yo paske nou posede pw?p bato.


body:
And of course there is Gileki, ISO code glk and native name ?????

Mark

On 29/09/06, Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com> wrote:
> Yes, including:
>
> -Wu (code wuu, native name ??)
> -Mazandarani (code mzn, native name ????????)
> -Newari (code new, native name ????? ????)
> -Lak (code lbe, native name ?????)
> -Sammarinese/Emilian-Romagnol (code eml, native name Emili?)
> -Buryat (code bxr, native name ??????)
> -Upper Sorbian (code hsb, native name Hornjoserbsce)
> -Novial (code nov, native name Novial)
> -Pangasinan (code pag, native name Pangasinan)
> -Austrobavarian (code bar, native name Boarisch)
> -Bishnupriya Manipuri (code bpy, native name ???? ???/????????????? ???????)
> -Dimli-Zazaki (code diq, native name Zazaki)
> -Zeelandic (code zea, native name Ze?uws)
> -Tarantino (code roa-tara, native name Tarand?ne)
> -Zamboageno (code cbk-zam, native name Chavacano de Zamboanga)
> -Classical Chinese/Literary Chinese (code zh-classical, native name ???)
> -North Russian (code ru-sib, native name ????????? / ???????????????)
> -Min Dong (code cdo, native name M?ng-d??ng-ng??)
>
> It may seem like a lot, but in fact each of them has many contributors
> and native speakers (in the case of Novial and Literary Chinese,
> fluent writers) waiting to begin building them, and they have been
> approved by a majority of voters. Most of them have quickly-growing
> test wikipedias already.
>
> For more information, you can see if you like
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Approved_requests_for_new_languages
> although that page is rather long and cumbersome now.
>
> Mark
>
> On 29/09/06, Tim Starling <tstarling at wikimedia.org> wrote:
> > SJ wrote:
> > > 48 supports, no opposition, 5 actively interested editors including a
> > > native speaker.  It certainly has the requisite # of interested
> > > parties.  Wikitech-l is perhaps more likely to grab the attention of a
> > > developer who can set up the new wiki... where did you send previous
> > > emails about this?
> > >
> >
> > I think it's probably about time that we created a batch of new wikis. Are
> > there any other suitable candidates that we can do at the same time?
> >
> > -- Tim Starling
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> >
>
>
> --
> Refije dirije lanm? yo paske nou posede pw?p bato.
>

--
Refije dirije lanm? yo paske nou posede pw?p bato.


body:
Ah, and directionality is left-to-right AFAIK for all of them except
Mazandarani and Gileki.

M

On 29/09/06, Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com> wrote:
> And of course there is Gileki, ISO code glk and native name ?????
>
> Mark
>
> On 29/09/06, Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Yes, including:
> >
> > -Wu (code wuu, native name ??)
> > -Mazandarani (code mzn, native name ????????)
> > -Newari (code new, native name ????? ????)
> > -Lak (code lbe, native name ?????)
> > -Sammarinese/Emilian-Romagnol (code eml, native name Emili?)
> > -Buryat (code bxr, native name ??????)
> > -Upper Sorbian (code hsb, native name Hornjoserbsce)
> > -Novial (code nov, native name Novial)
> > -Pangasinan (code pag, native name Pangasinan)
> > -Austrobavarian (code bar, native name Boarisch)
> > -Bishnupriya Manipuri (code bpy, native name ???? ???/????????????? ???????)
> > -Dimli-Zazaki (code diq, native name Zazaki)
> > -Zeelandic (code zea, native name Ze?uws)
> > -Tarantino (code roa-tara, native name Tarand?ne)
> > -Zamboageno (code cbk-zam, native name Chavacano de Zamboanga)
> > -Classical Chinese/Literary Chinese (code zh-classical, native name ???)
> > -North Russian (code ru-sib, native name ????????? / ???????????????)
> > -Min Dong (code cdo, native name M?ng-d??ng-ng??)
> >
> > It may seem like a lot, but in fact each of them has many contributors
> > and native speakers (in the case of Novial and Literary Chinese,
> > fluent writers) waiting to begin building them, and they have been
> > approved by a majority of voters. Most of them have quickly-growing
> > test wikipedias already.
> >
> > For more information, you can see if you like
> > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Approved_requests_for_new_languages
> > although that page is rather long and cumbersome now.
> >
> > Mark
> >
> > On 29/09/06, Tim Starling <tstarling at wikimedia.org> wrote:
> > > SJ wrote:
> > > > 48 supports, no opposition, 5 actively interested editors including a
> > > > native speaker.  It certainly has the requisite # of interested
> > > > parties.  Wikitech-l is perhaps more likely to grab the attention of a
> > > > developer who can set up the new wiki... where did you send previous
> > > > emails about this?
> > > >
> > >
> > > I think it's probably about time that we created a batch of new wikis. Are
> > > there any other suitable candidates that we can do at the same time?
> > >
> > > -- Tim Starling
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > > Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Refije dirije lanm? yo paske nou posede pw?p bato.
> >
>
>
> --
> Refije dirije lanm? yo paske nou posede pw?p bato.
>

--
Refije dirije lanm? yo paske nou posede pw?p bato.


from_name: Birgitte SB

body:
--- oscar <oscar.wiki at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 9/29/06, Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net>
> wrote:
>
> > I don't think that it helps the transparency of
> the process when someone
> > like Jimbo begins by supporting a bid before the
> bidding has seriously
> > started.
>
>
> this is not the point, jimbo imho raises 3 questions
> which we need to
> address.
>
> (quoting my email:)
> *how can we make such fortunate results not
> disappear down the drain?

This is a good question and others have suggested
trying to convert the Turin bid a European conference
if not an Italian one.

> *would the torino-sponsors be willing to do the same
> for 2008?

That is a bad question.  How can we give any opinion
on 2008 when we have not seen any of the final
submissions.  2008 should be a wide open race except
for a preference *against* Asia.  But if an Asian bid
is three times as better as anything else that
preference could be overcome.  I think these sort of
comments are what led to all the hard feelings in the
first place.  Wikimanina 2008 could be anywhere.  If
you want it compete hard, but don't raise false hopes
and think of a backup plan of a more local use for the
work from the beginning.  I really would like to see
everyone stop making preferential comments about
future Wikimania's, especially people involved enough
in WMF that they could possibly end up on some future
jury.

> *how long can we afford to wait with this without
> spoiling the opportunity?

This is a good question in refference to a European or
I talian meetup and out of line regarding WM2008,  The
rules for submissions for 2008 bids are already
public.  The only goal of the jury is should be
choosing the best bid. Period.

Birgitte SB

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com


body:
--- Gatto Nero <gattonero at gmail.com> wrote:

> 2006/9/29, GerardM <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com>:
>
> > In Taipei we will have a completely different
> event from the event in
> > Frankfurt and Boston. Each time we learned new
> things and the resulting
> > offers for hosting were different as a
> consequence. Not allowing for this by
> > saying in advance that Turin does not have to do
> "the work" again is imho
> > stupid. In order for Turin to be a competitor next
> year, they have to
> > analyse what went wrong; was it their offer, their
> presentation sheer bad
> > luck?
>
> Turin is not in Asia.
> (Oh, and we didn't talk about "secret sponsorship",
> right: how came
> that a bid as been even shortlisted with this sort
> of "Yes, you have
> to trust us: we have a huuuuuge sponsor but we
> cannot tell you who,
> secret secret!"?
> Not talking about strange flight cost, strange
> "surplus sponsorship"
> and other funny reason...)
>
> [Beware: this is Gatto Nero's opinion, not
> "Wikimania2007Torino
> Bidding Team"'s opinion]

I don't see a problem with not being able to publicly
name a sponser.  I am sure they were aware that
winning the bid was based on this and if it had not
been posted publically afterwards the win should have
beeen revoked.  Strange flight costs do sound like a
problem, but I don't know what mean by this.  Have
they changed their numbers after they won?

Birgitte SB

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com


body:
Better yet, let's allow uploads of material in any format -- and offer
a conversion service, storing the result in a free format.  Then allow
downloads in that base free format and (at least temporarily) in other
formats as well.

The current system, under which almost no video is uploaded or
downloaded, is surely not the best one... for wikipedia readers or for
xiph.org.

--SJ

On 9/29/06, Ilya Haykinson <haykinson at gmail.com> wrote:
> If I understand the popular sentiment correctly, it is that:
>
>  a) the foundation is committed to preserving knowledge it gathers in open
> formats, and
>  b) knowledge should be presented by foundation projects using exclusively
> open formats
>
> Some people assume that a) and b) are inseparable. I would beg to differ.
> Let's:
>
>  - allow uploads only of ogg files, or other open formats, and
>  - allow downloads of these ogg files AS WELL as transcode into
> flash-presentable formats
>
> We say we want to encourage adoption of open formats.  That's fine and dandy
> -- let's only allow open formats in uploads.  But a large part of our
> mission is delivering content and I feel that we've been burying our head in
> the sand by pretending that there's no problem with access.  I would venture
> to say that the vast majority of our users cannot watch or hear any
> multimedia files off of our websites.  I would also suggest that they are
> not likely to, in the next several years at best.
>
> I suggest that if we change our attitude and allow alternative,
> actually-workable presentation of our media, we will be more correctly
> fulfilling our mission.  Let's allow Flash for audio and video.
>
> -ilya haykinson
>
>
> On 9/28/06, SJ <2.718281828 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I'm an outspoken fan of fixing and improving Theora, and I think this
> > sounds like a fantastic idea.  We should do similar low-res versions
> > of audio into something other than .ogg -- but make sure that the
> > high-res version we archive and strongly encourage is, in both cases,
> > the free-format Ogg version.
> >
> > There is *no* widely-used completely free audio or video format.  We
> > should not allow our strong support for Ogg to prevent our media from
> > being used by the overwhelming proportion of our audience that cannot
> > (or don't know how to) play those formats.
> >
> > At the same time, we should use our extra free-format-friendly
> > energies to promote those formats, educate our audience about how to
> > play them, develop and host instruction manuals and documents to help
> > with that last point, and regularly survey users to find out how many
> > of them can and do play free format media... to know, for instance,
> > when we can start deprecating in-browser flash in favor of in-browser
> > theora plugins.
> >
> > Oh, yes -- and we can push the Mozilla Foundation to integrate ogg
> > players into the default firefox distribution.  <pokes MozFound about
> > writing in libtheora support>
> >
> > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Firefox_Ogg_Support
> >
> > -- SJ
> >
> > On 9/28/06, Jason Spiro <jasonspiro2 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > Click this link:
> http://www.openwetware.org/wiki/SynBERC:MIT/Lab_video_tours
> > >
> > > It's far different from most video on Commons: it's Flash streaming
> > > video and it works in 99% of web browsers. (The VLC web browser plugin
> > > is supoosed to support Flash video too, though I've never tried it.
> > > Also I don't know if Flash video is based on patented codecs or not.
> > > But assuming that no such problems come up...) Perhaps we should put
> > > in a MediaWiki feature request:
> > >
> > > MediaWiki should convert all our videos to low-rez Flash Video format
> > > for streaming previewing as soon as the .ogg original is uploaded.
> > > This way, more people will be able to view our videos, so we'll get
> > > more uploads.
> > >
> > > Agree or disagree?
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Jason
> > >
> > > --
> > > Jason Spiro: computer consulting with a smile.
> > > I also provide training and spyware removal services for homes and
> businesses.
> > > Call or email for a FREE 5-minute consultation. Satisfaction guaranteed.
> > > 416-781-5938 / Email: info at jspiro.com / MSN: jasonspiro at hotmail.com
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Commons-l mailing list
> > > Commons-l at wikimedia.org
> > > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > ++SJ
> > _______________________________________________
> > Commons-l mailing list
> > Commons-l at wikimedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Commons-l mailing list
> Commons-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
>
>
>

--
++SJ


from_name: David Russell

subject: [WikiEN-l] How to deal with direct requests for articles?

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

Akash Mehta wrote:
> Hang on, if the PR people start contributing, odds are that sooner or later
> they'll write an article (not on themselves or a client, just in general)
> and then they'll have a confronting AfD and leave Wikipedia permanently.
> What can we do about encouraging people to contribute without creating
> policy violating articles? (snip) Maybe the welcome templates should link to simplified versions of
article creation guidelines?

The problem is that most hired PR people will not have the same attitude
as you - they will take great offence when 'their' article is deleted.
No matter how clear we make the policy, we can't legislate for people
taking offence just because we enforce it.

Cynical
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFFHL6dg8fvtQYQevcRAgS8AJ9yvulfMvikFGwCAmSD3V5dsP/tjQCfR1AN
FKQI4skJBJqYmGxVgXq3zXA=
=39yW
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


from_name: Robert Scott Horning

subject: [Foundation-l] A Wikimedia sidebar box for wikipedia.org

body:
Aphaia wrote:

>On 9/29/06, Erik Moeller <erik at wikimedia.org> wrote:
>
>
>>On 9/28/06, Brion Vibber <brion at pobox.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>What doesn't work about it?
>>>
>>>
>>Let's start with the most obvious bit: WMF is an international
>>organization, and we want volunteers to contribute as many
>>translations as possible of key pages on the WMF wiki, no matter how
>>few there are of them.
>>
>>
>
>It would be wounderful, but not feasable I think. Most of
>international organizations  limit their official language into a
>number we can count by our two hands. Their regional branches issue
>publifications in the regional languages, but those two - official
>publification from the organisation itself and local publification
>from its branch or sister organizations - are different matters.
>
>
One aspect of Wikimedia projects is that we have linguistic resources
and individuals who are willing to translate content between many
different languages, perhaps many more than would typically be available
for most other multi-national organizations outside of perhaps ones
related to the United Nations.

That said, I would say that a reasonable metric in terms of a line to
draw and not require any further translations to more obscure languages
that are difficult to support would be the same as for new project
proposals:

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/New_project_policy#Interest_poll

The United Nations limits their "official languages" to just six:
 English, French, Spanish, Russian, Chinese, and Arabic

If you don't speak one of those languages, UN interpreters won't help
you directly.  This list is very obviously politically motived by UN
politics, but still, these languages alone cover most of the world in
some way or another.

Clearly, in terms of communications between chapters and the base users
of Wikimedia projects, it is important to offer information and
organizational information in multiple languages.

Remember, less than half of all Wikimedia content is written in English,
and that percentage that is in English is increasingly becoming smaller.

--
Robert Scott Horning


from_name: David Gerard

subject: [Wikipedia-l] [[Wikipedia:Practical process]]

body:
On 29/09/06, Michael Billington <michael.billington at gmail.com> wrote:

> My opinion however is that we should not create process wihout removing (or
> somehow downgrading the importance of) some other process. This could be
> done by merging policies/guidelines into eachother. It is (IMO) the best way
> to counter instruction creep.

I might put that as a suggestion. Or you could. Which bit would it fit
naturally into?

- d.


from_name: Stephen Streater

body:
> On 9/28/06, Stephen Streater <sbstreater at mac.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 28 Sep 2006, at 12:36, Oskar Sigvardsson wrote:
>>
>>> On 9/28/06, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> My phone number and email are publicly available for media contact
>>>> purposes. This means, of course, I get emails and calls about
>>>> *everything*.
>>>>
>>>> A common call is "How do I get an article about me/my book/my
>>>> achievement?"
>>>>
>>>> Now. What's a helpful answer to this? Better than "You don't,
>>>> someone
>>>> else has to write one," because you *know* they'll just write a
>>>> really
>>>> bad one themselves and it'll all end in a tearful AFD entry and
>>>> someone hating or fearing Wikipedia henceforth.
>>>>
>>>> Assume that referring them to a web page or policy page is less
>>>> good
>>>> than being able to answer on the phone right there.
>>>>
>>>> Ideas please?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> - d.
>>>
>>> Fist off all, this should really be in our FAQ (I've just skimmed
>>> over
>>> it, man it's big, and I couldn't find it). Someone should put
>>> that in.
>>>
>>> To answer your question, if I were to get those calls I would calmly
>>> explain that we have fairly high standards on what people can be
>>> subjects of articles. Tell them that if they deserve to have an
>>> article in wikipedia, they will. Just not written on request or by
>>> themselves. Point out that if they do write an article on
>>> themselves,
>>> it is very likely it will be deleted and it is not always a nice
>>> discussion to read. You might also want to point out that you
>>> yourself
>>> doesn't have an article, I can imagine that would convince some
>>> people
>>> ;)
>>
>> I would suggest that they start contributing to Wikipedia.
>> After a period, their name will be recognised by other
>> passing editors who will be surprised that they don't have
>> an article yet, and they will write one.

On 29 Sep 2006, at 04:16, Akash Mehta wrote:
> Hang on, if the PR people start contributing, odds are that sooner
> or later
> they'll write an article (not on themselves or a client, just in
> general)
> and then they'll have a confronting AfD and leave Wikipedia
> permanently.
> What can we do about encouraging people to contribute without creating
> policy violating articles? Of course, I know when I started out
> editing, I
> created [[Php MMORPG]] and [[Telstra India Call Centre Clip]]. The
> former I
> speedied and the latter was prodded by another editor, then prod2ed
> it and
> in the end both were deleted. These articles didn't conform to
> policy in
> terms of notability or referencing, and weren't worth keeping, but
> I (as a
> relatively normal policy-unaware contributor at the time) didn't
> know any of
> this. Maybe the welcome templates should link to simplified
> versions of
> article creation guidelines?

Why are you suddenly talking about PR people contributing?
It's more useful to have the achievers themselves helping out.


from_name: charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com

body:
David Russell wrote

> The problem is that most hired PR people will not have the same attitude
> as you - they will take great offence when 'their' article is deleted.
> No matter how clear we make the policy, we can't legislate for people
> taking offence just because we enforce it.

They are surely mostly bright enough to understand the words 'no ownership of articles'. In any case, this is a policy as deeply set in WP's approach as anything else. If they can't live with it, tough.

Charles

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


from_name: oscar

body:
it would certainly be madness to have procedures that would ask people to do
an excellent job twice, let alone many times over.

the questions raised here seem to me:
*how can we make such fortunate results not disappear down the drain?
*would the torino-sponsors be willing to do the same for 2008?
*how long can we afford to wait with this without spoiling the opportunity?

even if the choice of a city hosting wikimania needs to be made sooner and
sooner in years to come (we may want to set a limit in "booking" here, say,
3 years?), the bids themselves should always be judged on their own merits
first of all, the geographical location being important too, yet coming
second in line as a criteria imho.

it may be wise to agree upon this: that a bid which doesn't make it for one
year, may run once more and make it the year after. such a prospect, when
communicated in advance, could prevent serious disappointment for some of
our potential sponsors (they would feel less "turned down" because there is
always a second chance). also it would be good to discuss and know this at
an early stage: if, from a sponsors point of view, a bid is valid for one
calendar-year only, or perhaps also for the next, in case a city isn't
elected.

oscar

On 9/28/06, Jimmy Wales <jwales at wikia.com> wrote:
>
> Not that it is up to me, nor should it be, but I intend to be a strong
> personal supporter of Turin for 2008, and encourage the concept that we
> should settle this fairly soon.
>
> Gianluigi Gamba wrote:
> > I congratulate with Taipei team and I'm sure they'll organize a
> memorable
> > event.
> >
> > As a member of the Turin bidding team, let me voice a choral "too bad".
> > We had a sort of incredible "astral conjunction" of sponsors *really
> eager*
> > to have the Wikimania event, the enthusiasm of the whole community, the
> > honeymoon with the media and the commitment of many people from national
> > (and not only) institutions.
> > I wonder if such combination will return in a future. I hope so.
> >
> > A prayer to the future jury: that's not been this year's case, but
> should
> > geographic and linguistic criteria be essential in choosing the future
> > locations, please say it in advance, before people start making
> contacts,
> > put their faces off and spend words.
> >
> > Good luck Taipei, and good job.
> >
> > G. (aka Paginazero)
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>


body:
On 9/29/06, Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote:

> I don't think that it helps the transparency of the process when someone
> like Jimbo begins by supporting a bid before the bidding has seriously
> started.

this is not the point, jimbo imho raises 3 questions which we need to
address.

(quoting my email:)
*how can we make such fortunate results not disappear down the drain?
*would the torino-sponsors be willing to do the same for 2008?
*how long can we afford to wait with this without spoiling the opportunity?

oscar


from_name: GerardM

body:
Hoi,
When people want Wikimania happening in 2007 in their town and they do their
best to achieve this, they do this on the basis of competition. They
compete. They either win or lose as there is only one place where Wikimania
will happen. This is the way of things, considering things to be different
is madness.

In Taipei we will have a completely different event from the event in
Frankfurt and Boston. Each time we learned new things and the resulting
offers for hosting were different as a consequence. Not allowing for this by
saying in advance that Turin does not have to do "the work" again is imho
stupid. In order for Turin to be a competitor next year, they have to
analyse what went wrong; was it their offer, their presentation sheer bad
luck?

Trying for Wikimania is without guarantees, all competing cities had a
credible offer. Only one could be chosen. Picking out Turin for next year is
bad business, it is an insult to the other cities that made an offer and it
is a message to other cities that they should not bother for 2008 because it
is likely to be Turin.

Turin may compete again, sure, but it has to compete on an equal footing. If
Almere 2008 is to be a credible option, there cannot be a prefered city for
2008. It is morally wrong.

Thanks,
    GerardM

NB Still living in Almere

On 9/29/06, oscar <oscar.wiki at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> it would certainly be madness to have procedures that would ask people to
> do
> an excellent job twice, let alone many times over.
>
> the questions raised here seem to me:
> *how can we make such fortunate results not disappear down the drain?
> *would the torino-sponsors be willing to do the same for 2008?
> *how long can we afford to wait with this without spoiling the
> opportunity?
>
> even if the choice of a city hosting wikimania needs to be made sooner and
> sooner in years to come (we may want to set a limit in "booking" here,
> say,
> 3 years?), the bids themselves should always be judged on their own merits
> first of all, the geographical location being important too, yet coming
> second in line as a criteria imho.
>
> it may be wise to agree upon this: that a bid which doesn't make it for
> one
> year, may run once more and make it the year after. such a prospect, when
> communicated in advance, could prevent serious disappointment for some of
> our potential sponsors (they would feel less "turned down" because there
> is
> always a second chance). also it would be good to discuss and know this at
> an early stage: if, from a sponsors point of view, a bid is valid for one
> calendar-year only, or perhaps also for the next, in case a city isn't
> elected.
>
> oscar
>
> On 9/28/06, Jimmy Wales <jwales at wikia.com> wrote:
> >
> > Not that it is up to me, nor should it be, but I intend to be a strong
> > personal supporter of Turin for 2008, and encourage the concept that we
> > should settle this fairly soon.
> >
> > Gianluigi Gamba wrote:
> > > I congratulate with Taipei team and I'm sure they'll organize a
> > memorable
> > > event.
> > >
> > > As a member of the Turin bidding team, let me voice a choral "too
> bad".
> > > We had a sort of incredible "astral conjunction" of sponsors *really
> > eager*
> > > to have the Wikimania event, the enthusiasm of the whole community,
> the
> > > honeymoon with the media and the commitment of many people from
> national
> > > (and not only) institutions.
> > > I wonder if such combination will return in a future. I hope so.
> > >
> > > A prayer to the future jury: that's not been this year's case, but
> > should
> > > geographic and linguistic criteria be essential in choosing the future
> > > locations, please say it in advance, before people start making
> > contacts,
> > > put their faces off and spend words.
> > >
> > > Good luck Taipei, and good job.
> > >
> > > G. (aka Paginazero)
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > foundation-l mailing list
> > > foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> > > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>


from_name: Gatto Nero

body:
2006/9/29, GerardM <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com>:

> In Taipei we will have a completely different event from the event in
> Frankfurt and Boston. Each time we learned new things and the resulting
> offers for hosting were different as a consequence. Not allowing for this by
> saying in advance that Turin does not have to do "the work" again is imho
> stupid. In order for Turin to be a competitor next year, they have to
> analyse what went wrong; was it their offer, their presentation sheer bad
> luck?

Turin is not in Asia.
(Oh, and we didn't talk about "secret sponsorship", right: how came
that a bid as been even shortlisted with this sort of "Yes, you have
to trust us: we have a huuuuuge sponsor but we cannot tell you who,
secret secret!"?
Not talking about strange flight cost, strange "surplus sponsorship"
and other funny reason...)

[Beware: this is Gatto Nero's opinion, not "Wikimania2007Torino
Bidding Team"'s opinion]


from_name: M Rastgaar

body:
Thank you all for your emails,

  1- I have proposed Gileki . Me and other 4 editors are Native Giek. I just added (N) to their IDs
  2- The phonetic of this language is GilƏki. In English, it is called Gileki and in French Gilaki. Ethnologe calls it Gilaki. This means that Ethnologe is not showing the correct pronanciation of Gileki.
  3- Eventhough I had been asked to help to untangle the discrepancy ralted to the name of this language in WiktionaryZ, eventually I had to change every "Gileki" to "Gilaki", otherwise I have not been able to edit it. I think it is a quick wrap up but not necessarily the best and considering solution.
  4- I am sure that this language is not the only one tha has the problem of difference between Ethnologe scripts and its phonetic. I will comply with whatever is your policy.
  5- The first word in Gileki wiktionaryZ is in Roman scripts, because It was there when I first saw this page. So I assumed it is the WiktionaryZ format.

  Thanks
  Have agreat time

  Rastgaar

GerardM <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
  Hoi,
There are several projects where there are groups fighting each other
because their project was envisioned to be only about one specific
orthography or script. It is in my opinion much better to solve these issues
first and be sure that there will be no such fight in the future.

Thanks,
GerardM

On 9/29/06, Tim Starling wrote:
>
> GerardM wrote:
> > Hoi,
> > Many people are in favour of adding Gilaki to the list of languages..
> There
> > is one issue outstanding as far as I am concerned. At WiktionaryZ the
> Babel
> > templates are in an Arabic script.. The first Gilaki word however is in
> both
> > the Latin and this Arabic script.
> >
> > Another issue is that the language is called Gilaki and only Wikipedia
> calls
> > it Gileki ..
> >
> > It would be nice to have these issues resolved first..
>
> Couldn't we create it first and resolve the issues later? Unless you are
> suggesting that the existence of these issues implies that the proposers
> don't know anything about the language, I don't see any problem with
> changing either the default text direction or the language name after the
> wiki is created.
>
> -- Tim Starling
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

---------------------------------
Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls.  Great rates starting at 1?/min.


body:
Hoi,
Both Turin and Almere are in Europe. Both should be allowed to enter the
2008 competition. Rio de Janeiro or Johannesburg or Adelaide or Dullsville
should be allowed to enter the 2008 competition. There is NO reason why they
should not be allowed to compete on equal footing.

When there are things about the 2007 competition that were problematic, they
should be part of the learning process that may be happening before the
competition for Wikimania 2008 starts.

Wikimania 2007 will be in Taipei.

Thanks,
    GerardM

On 9/29/06, Gatto Nero <gattonero at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> 2006/9/29, GerardM <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com>:
>
> > In Taipei we will have a completely different event from the event in
> > Frankfurt and Boston. Each time we learned new things and the resulting
> > offers for hosting were different as a consequence. Not allowing for
> this by
> > saying in advance that Turin does not have to do "the work" again is
> imho
> > stupid. In order for Turin to be a competitor next year, they have to
> > analyse what went wrong; was it their offer, their presentation sheer
> bad
> > luck?
>
> Turin is not in Asia.
> (Oh, and we didn't talk about "secret sponsorship", right: how came
> that a bid as been even shortlisted with this sort of "Yes, you have
> to trust us: we have a huuuuuge sponsor but we cannot tell you who,
> secret secret!"?
> Not talking about strange flight cost, strange "surplus sponsorship"
> and other funny reason...)
>
> [Beware: this is Gatto Nero's opinion, not "Wikimania2007Torino
> Bidding Team"'s opinion]
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>


body:
2006/9/29, GerardM <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com>:
> Hoi,
> Both Turin and Almere are in Europe. Both should be allowed to enter the
> 2008 competition. Rio de Janeiro or Johannesburg or Adelaide or Dullsville
> should be allowed to enter the 2008 competition. There is NO reason why they
> should not be allowed to compete on equal footing.

I agree that everyone should have the right to compete in an *equal*
competition (that's the stress: *equal*).
There is no reason why Turin should be favoured for 2008, just as
Taipei should have not been favoured for 2007 (even if this has
happened). Bids should be evaluated only for what they are and what
they say, for the work done, for their accuracy, for they originality
(maybe).
Personally (and repeat: personally, as Gatto Nero), I think that this
proposal - favouring Torino for 2008 - is just as offensive for our
work as the choose made for 2007. You know, all this "second choice"
thing remember me of Olympic Games in Sidney and then in Athens.
Or of a mother that gives candy to their children just to keep them quite.
But again: it's my opinion. There are italians really happy for what Jimbo said.

> When there are things about the 2007 competition that were problematic, they
> should be part of the learning process that may be happening before the
> competition for Wikimania 2008 starts.

Just like changing the jury? Or maybe considering more what people
outside uk/en/jury members think and prefer?

Gatto Nero


body:
2006/9/29, GerardM <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com>:

> Wikimania 2007 will be in Taipei.

Oh, I forgot: we all noticed that Wikimania 2007 will be hold in Taipei.
I'm just saying that this was not a fair choose, just 'till someone
will be able to bring me factual and believable reasons for this.

Gatto Nero


from_name: Alphax (Wikipedia email)

body:
James Hare wrote:
[fixed top posting]
> On 9/28/06, Erik Moeller <erik at wikimedia.org> wrote:
>> On 9/29/06, Brad Patrick <bradp.wmf at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> We can do a better job with this procedurally, but honestly, there is
>>> only one winner in such a situation.  It is ultimately a
>>> winner-take-all competition.  To the extent this runs counter to the
>>> community culture of wikilove, I don't there is an alternative.
>> I don't think it runs counter to wikilove, but perhaps we need to make
>> it clearer to people that, yes, they may spend weeks on preparing a
>> bid that will not be accepted. And as has been pointed out time and
>> again, Wikimania cannot, should not and will not be the only Wikimedia
>> event happening in a single year.
>>
>> Organizing events is very much within the domain of chapters, and we
>> have a UK chapter. Is there a reason some of the lessons from
>> preparing the bid could not be used to prepare a more focused wiki
>> event in the UK? (*draws wiki youth camp idea  from hat*)
>>
>
> Yes... we have small local meetups, and the international conference.
> Something in between would be good.
>

Wikimania Europe, Asia, America perhaps?

--
Alphax - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax
Contributor to Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
"We make the internet not suck" - Jimbo Wales
Public key: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax/OpenPGP

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 569 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/attachments/20060929/bc49bfed/attachment.pgp


body:
James Hare wrote:
[fixed top posting]
> On 9/28/06, Erik Moeller <erik at wikimedia.org> wrote:
>> On 9/29/06, Brad Patrick <bradp.wmf at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> We can do a better job with this procedurally, but honestly, there is
>>> only one winner in such a situation.  It is ultimately a
>>> winner-take-all competition.  To the extent this runs counter to the
>>> community culture of wikilove, I don't there is an alternative.
>> I don't think it runs counter to wikilove, but perhaps we need to make
>> it clearer to people that, yes, they may spend weeks on preparing a
>> bid that will not be accepted. And as has been pointed out time and
>> again, Wikimania cannot, should not and will not be the only Wikimedia
>> event happening in a single year.
>>
>> Organizing events is very much within the domain of chapters, and we
>> have a UK chapter. Is there a reason some of the lessons from
>> preparing the bid could not be used to prepare a more focused wiki
>> event in the UK? (*draws wiki youth camp idea  from hat*)
>>
>
> Yes... we have small local meetups, and the international conference.
> Something in between would be good.
>

Wikimania Europe, Asia, America perhaps?

--
Alphax - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax
Contributor to Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
"We make the internet not suck" - Jimbo Wales
Public key: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax/OpenPGP

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 569 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/attachments/20060929/bc49bfed/attachment-0001.pgp


body:
James Hare wrote:
[fixed top posting]
> On 9/28/06, Erik Moeller <erik at wikimedia.org> wrote:
>> On 9/29/06, Brad Patrick <bradp.wmf at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> We can do a better job with this procedurally, but honestly, there is
>>> only one winner in such a situation.  It is ultimately a
>>> winner-take-all competition.  To the extent this runs counter to the
>>> community culture of wikilove, I don't there is an alternative.
>> I don't think it runs counter to wikilove, but perhaps we need to make
>> it clearer to people that, yes, they may spend weeks on preparing a
>> bid that will not be accepted. And as has been pointed out time and
>> again, Wikimania cannot, should not and will not be the only Wikimedia
>> event happening in a single year.
>>
>> Organizing events is very much within the domain of chapters, and we
>> have a UK chapter. Is there a reason some of the lessons from
>> preparing the bid could not be used to prepare a more focused wiki
>> event in the UK? (*draws wiki youth camp idea  from hat*)
>>
>
> Yes... we have small local meetups, and the international conference.
> Something in between would be good.
>

Wikimania Europe, Asia, America perhaps?

--
Alphax - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax
Contributor to Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
"We make the internet not suck" - Jimbo Wales
Public key: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax/OpenPGP

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 569 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/attachments/20060929/bc49bfed/attachment.pgp>


body:
James Hare wrote:
[fixed top posting]
> On 9/28/06, Erik Moeller <erik at wikimedia.org> wrote:
>> On 9/29/06, Brad Patrick <bradp.wmf at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> We can do a better job with this procedurally, but honestly, there is
>>> only one winner in such a situation.  It is ultimately a
>>> winner-take-all competition.  To the extent this runs counter to the
>>> community culture of wikilove, I don't there is an alternative.
>> I don't think it runs counter to wikilove, but perhaps we need to make
>> it clearer to people that, yes, they may spend weeks on preparing a
>> bid that will not be accepted. And as has been pointed out time and
>> again, Wikimania cannot, should not and will not be the only Wikimedia
>> event happening in a single year.
>>
>> Organizing events is very much within the domain of chapters, and we
>> have a UK chapter. Is there a reason some of the lessons from
>> preparing the bid could not be used to prepare a more focused wiki
>> event in the UK? (*draws wiki youth camp idea  from hat*)
>>
>
> Yes... we have small local meetups, and the international conference.
> Something in between would be good.
>

Wikimania Europe, Asia, America perhaps?

--
Alphax - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax
Contributor to Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
"We make the internet not suck" - Jimbo Wales
Public key: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax/OpenPGP

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 569 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/attachments/20060929/bc49bfed/attachment-0001.pgp>


from_name: Steve Summit

subject: [WikiEN-l] Seth Finkelstein in the Technology Guardian

body:
Charles wrote:
> Didn't see anyone mention this article from yesterday,
> http://technology.guardian.co.uk/weekly/story/0,,1882027,00.html
> title, "I'm on Wikipedia, get me out of here", by [[Seth Finkelstein".

I was struck by Seth's account of how he "strongly argued the
case against myself" at AFD.  I suspect that a biographical
article's subject tends to carry significant but paradoxical
undue weight at AFD, in two contradictory directions.  Subjects
who argue that they are notable and that their articles should be
kept are obviously vain self-promoters, so their articles should
obviously be deleted.  But subjects who argue that their articles
should be deleted are obviously trying to hide something (or, at
least, to unjustly influence the free flow of information), so
their articles should obviously be kept.


from_name: Delirium

body:
Steve Summit wrote:
> Charles wrote:
>
>> Didn't see anyone mention this article from yesterday,
>> http://technology.guardian.co.uk/weekly/story/0,,1882027,00.html
>> title, "I'm on Wikipedia, get me out of here", by [[Seth Finkelstein".
>>
>
> I was struck by Seth's account of how he "strongly argued the
> case against myself" at AFD.  I suspect that a biographical
> article's subject tends to carry significant but paradoxical
> undue weight at AFD, in two contradictory directions.  Subjects
> who argue that they are notable and that their articles should be
> kept are obviously vain self-promoters, so their articles should
> obviously be deleted.  But subjects who argue that their articles
> should be deleted are obviously trying to hide something (or, at
> least, to unjustly influence the free flow of information), so
> their articles should obviously be kept.
>

Strangely, this really is how it usually happens in my experience,
mainly because the other two cases don't require the person in question
to argue.  Genuinely famous people who want an article don't have to
create or argue for it themselves, because they're genuinely famous, so
someone else will do it.  Genuinely unknown people will have their
article summarily deleted without any intervention on their part.  (A
few edge cases do buck this trend.)

-Mark


body:
Charles wrote:
> Didn't see anyone mention this article from yesterday,
> http://technology.guardian.co.uk/weekly/story/0,,1882027,00.html
> title, "I'm on Wikipedia, get me out of here", by [[Seth Finkelstein".

Anyone who's at all interested should definitely read through
[[Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Seth_Finkelstein]] from July.
Note in particular how Seth managed to maintain a civil and
reasonable tone even while repeatedly trading the barb "repeating
a fallacious argument does not make it any the less fallacious"
with a remarkably insensitive, rulemongering wikilawyer.
(Note also how little good it did him in the end.)


subject: [WikiEN-l] NYT obituaries editor answers reader's questions

body:
David Gerard wrote:
>> From Danny:
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/25/business/media/25asktheeditors.html
>
>
> You should all read this (you need to log in, but these things
> happen). It answers a pile of relevant questions for Wikipedia:
> notability, how to write a good bio (our best bio articles would a
> well-written obituary, whether the person is alive or not), research
>  ... fantastic stuff.
>

Here are some good bits which are applicable:

> We will not publish an obituary until we can confirm the death.
> Someone reliable has to tell us so-and-so is dead ? a family member,
> a family spokesperson, a hospital official, a business partner,
> someone.

...

> A Times affiliation is no longer an automatic ticket to the
> Obituaries page. In fact, as a general policy, we now set the bar
> even higher for Times people, precisely because we want to avoid even
>  the appearance of favoritism. The thinking now is: You had better
> have done something special at the paper, or elsewhere, if you want
> to be buried beside kings, captains of industry and Nobel laureates.

...

> When we look to see whether someone had made a newsworthy impact in
> some way ? who "made a wrinkle in the social fabric," as Margo puts
> it ? we don't equate significance with fame. In point of fact, 9 out
> of 10 people we write about are indeed not household names (the 10th
> is ? a movie star, a secretary of state). But that doesn't negate
> their importance. Most made their marks in quiet ways, out of the
> public limelight, but they still made a mark, possibly on your life
> and mine.

...

> How do you measure impact? How do you determine significance? Not
> with a ruler or any other device. We use the only tool we have
> available: our judgment, informed by years of experience in
> journalism, lifetimes of reading, an awareness of the world, a sense
> of history.

...

Probably more in there, but that will do for now.

--
Alphax - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax
Contributor to Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
"We make the internet not suck" - Jimbo Wales
Public key: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax/OpenPGP

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 569 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20060929/958b598f/attachment.pgp


from_name: Travis Derouin

subject: [Wikitech-l] MultipleUpload Extension

body:
Hi,

I've written an extension for uploading multiple files at once, if
anyone is interested, the details can be found here:

http://www.wikihow.com/WikiHow:MultipleUpload-Extension

If anyone wants to add it to SVN, that'd be great.

Thanks,
Travis


from_name: Peter Jacobi

subject: [WikiEN-l] Citationgate: expertise and verifiability

body:
In the unlikely case anyone interested has missed it: There
are some troubles re mandatory in-line citing and science
articles.

It all started with a warning put at large number of "good
articles" that they will be delisted soon for lack of
in-line cites. This immediately got the response, that standard
textbooks facts are not and should not be in-line cited, the
references section will name selected textbooks and one cannot
judge the correctness without having some context anyway.

The main struggle seem to be played out by (a subset of)
WikiProject Physics vs (a subset of) WikiProject Good Articles.

For an example of the amount of in-line cites requested see
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special_relativity&diff=78107405&oldid=77881051

For a list of places where discussion occur see below.

What worries me most about this incident, is the idea that proper
and extensive in-line citing will allow anybody (the proverbial
"layperson") to verify the contents of the article. The proponents
of this position refer to the "any editor" in "Editors adding new
material to an article should cite a reputable source, or it may
be challenged or removed by any editor".

In my not so humble opinion, in many articles of science (and
elsewhere) this is a false and dangerous idea. You need some
basic experise in the field to judge the reliability of sources,
the selection of sources and even to see whether a statement
in the article is the correct summary of a larger chapter in a
source.

I cannot help but see some of the recent actions as an example
of anti-academedic bias by factions withing Wikipedia.

Regards,
[[User:Pjacobi]]

Linklist:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Special_relativity#GA_Re-Review_and_In-line_citations
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Good_article_candidates#Discussion_on_criteria_changes
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Physics#Another_reason.2C_why_Wikipedia_sucks
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Citing_sources#When_not_to_cite_Part_Deux
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Physical_cosmology#Noncompliant

--
GMX DSL-Flatrate 0,- Euro* - ?berall, wo DSL verf?gbar ist!
NEU: Jetzt bis zu 16.000 kBit/s! http://www.gmx.net/de/go/dsl