from_name: effe iets anders

body:
Just another thought that came up with me today:

What about an auction. I dont know whether there is interesting stuff enough
to collect, and I dont expect thousends of dollars out of it, but wouldn't
it be fun for the community to have something like an auction? People can
give stuff that could be "cool to have" for the auction, to the foundation,
and the person that bids the highest amount of money, can get the thing. For
instance, I would be thinking of a postcard witht he signatures of all
boardmembers, a used cigarette of oscar (no, not really, please come up with
something more fun! :P ) or maybe even approach famous people to donate
something that belongs to them for this cause. The stuff can varie to
everything, but should be intensively prepared probably.

Would this be fun for the community? Would it be creating some money to the
foundation, would it be worth while? Are there maybe more ideas in this
trend, that together get a meaningfull amount of money together?

I understand of course it wont be possible anymore for this very
fundraising, but I think it would be an idea for the next one. I'm not sure
whether the foundation should "lower" itself to this level, or maybe it
explicitely *should*. Please shoot! :)

Lodewijk

2007/1/6, Peter van Londen <londenp op gmail.com>:
>
> Waerth I would appreciate if you could stay with the subject, which is
> alternative funding of Wikimedia projects by a add-driven fanpedia. The
> fanpedia was brought up some days ago (and not reoccurring every two
> weeks).
> There are definitely more people than you mention; might not be the most,
> as
> I have written, because most people on nl-wp don't care about how the
> projects are being funded. I wished that you had commented on the subject,
> in stead of flaming.
>
> I would like some comments about the feasibility of doing such a project.
> We
> give up "add-freeness" for one project so that the other projects can be
> funded add-free. Is that compatible with the Mission/Vision? Are there
> other
> points: like for instance legal liabilities as of the probable nature of
> the
> content on a Fanpedia?
>
> Robert Scott Horning: I don't know Wikia, so I don't have any idea of a
> fanpedia under the wings of the Wikimedia Foundation would conflict with
> Wikia's interests or vice versa. Anyhow by transporting content to Wikia
> does not help much with funding of the Wikimedia Foundation, if I
> understand
> that correctly.
>
> SJKlein: any comments why you don't think it is a good idea?
>
> A lot of people involved in Wikipedia don't like adds or even sponsoring
> if
> a sitenotice mentions the name of logo of the sponsor. We could keep
> advertising away of the "more-serious" project if we had an add-driven
> sisterproject. (It doesn't have to be a fanpedia, it can be a different
> project, but fancruft is popular!). It would be a compromise.
>
> Kind regards
> Londenp
>
>
> 2007/1/6, Walter van Kalken <walter op vankalken.net>:
> >
> >
> > >
> > >The thing is that a lot of people work on the fancruft, imho
> > >non-encyclopedian, part of Wikipedia and that is OK. Prison Break is
> one
> > of
> > >the most visited articles on dutch Wikipedia. Most nl-Wikipedians are
> > uneasy with this kind of articles, which evoluate to a encyclopedia
> inside
> > the wikipedia in itself, and would be happy to move them to a different
> > project.
> > >
> > Most ?????? That is a very bold statement. I would say a minority.
> > Currently in the Dutch wikipedia it is only 4 or 5 people who bring this
> > up every 2 weeks or so. Including you. That is definately not most
> > wikipedians!!!
> >
> > Waerth
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > foundation-l op lists.wikimedia.org
> > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l op lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>


list: wikimedia-l

source: pipermail-mbox

subject: [Foundation-l] Auction (Was: alternatives)

body:
Just another thought that came up with me today:

What about an auction. I dont know whether there is interesting stuff enough
to collect, and I dont expect thousends of dollars out of it, but wouldn't
it be fun for the community to have something like an auction? People can
give stuff that could be "cool to have" for the auction, to the foundation,
and the person that bids the highest amount of money, can get the thing. For
instance, I would be thinking of a postcard witht he signatures of all
boardmembers, a used cigarette of oscar (no, not really, please come up with
something more fun! :P ) or maybe even approach famous people to donate
something that belongs to them for this cause. The stuff can varie to
everything, but should be intensively prepared probably.

Would this be fun for the community? Would it be creating some money to the
foundation, would it be worth while? Are there maybe more ideas in this
trend, that together get a meaningfull amount of money together?

I understand of course it wont be possible anymore for this very
fundraising, but I think it would be an idea for the next one. I'm not sure
whether the foundation should "lower" itself to this level, or maybe it
explicitely *should*. Please shoot! :)

Lodewijk

2007/1/6, Peter van Londen <londenp at gmail.com>:
>
> Waerth I would appreciate if you could stay with the subject, which is
> alternative funding of Wikimedia projects by a add-driven fanpedia. The
> fanpedia was brought up some days ago (and not reoccurring every two
> weeks).
> There are definitely more people than you mention; might not be the most,
> as
> I have written, because most people on nl-wp don't care about how the
> projects are being funded. I wished that you had commented on the subject,
> in stead of flaming.
>
> I would like some comments about the feasibility of doing such a project.
> We
> give up "add-freeness" for one project so that the other projects can be
> funded add-free. Is that compatible with the Mission/Vision? Are there
> other
> points: like for instance legal liabilities as of the probable nature of
> the
> content on a Fanpedia?
>
> Robert Scott Horning: I don't know Wikia, so I don't have any idea of a
> fanpedia under the wings of the Wikimedia Foundation would conflict with
> Wikia's interests or vice versa. Anyhow by transporting content to Wikia
> does not help much with funding of the Wikimedia Foundation, if I
> understand
> that correctly.
>
> SJKlein: any comments why you don't think it is a good idea?
>
> A lot of people involved in Wikipedia don't like adds or even sponsoring
> if
> a sitenotice mentions the name of logo of the sponsor. We could keep
> advertising away of the "more-serious" project if we had an add-driven
> sisterproject. (It doesn't have to be a fanpedia, it can be a different
> project, but fancruft is popular!). It would be a compromise.
>
> Kind regards
> Londenp
>
>
> 2007/1/6, Walter van Kalken <walter at vankalken.net>:
> >
> >
> > >
> > >The thing is that a lot of people work on the fancruft, imho
> > >non-encyclopedian, part of Wikipedia and that is OK. Prison Break is
> one
> > of
> > >the most visited articles on dutch Wikipedia. Most nl-Wikipedians are
> > uneasy with this kind of articles, which evoluate to a encyclopedia
> inside
> > the wikipedia in itself, and would be happy to move them to a different
> > project.
> > >
> > Most ?????? That is a very bold statement. I would say a minority.
> > Currently in the Dutch wikipedia it is only 4 or 5 people who bring this
> > up every 2 weeks or so. Including you. That is definately not most
> > wikipedians!!!
> >
> > Waerth
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>


list: wikien-l

from_name: Oskar Sigvardsson

subject: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedia jumps _into_ the top 10

body:
On 1/7/07, Neil Harris <neil at tonal.clara.co.uk> wrote:
> Daniel P. B. Smith wrote:
> > I guess I don't understand why Wikipedians would care about this,
> > apart from preening.
> >
> > Am I missing something?
> >
> > Will being in the top ten help us to write a better encyclopedia in
> > some way that being in the top 100 doesn't?
> >
> >
> >
> More readers => more writers to share the work, better coverage of niche
> subjects.
>
> More readers => more influence to get bigger things done.
>
> More readers => more mindshare for the free culture movement => more
> similar projects.
>
> -- Neil

Yeah, that, but there is also nothing wrong about being proud of your
work. We're in the top 10! We rule! Isn't that a great feeling?


from_name: Thomas Dalton

subject: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedia jumps _into_ the top 10.

body:
> A similar question might be why do so many people use Microsoft?

That's easy - because everyone else does. It's a catch-22.

>  ... or
> (shudder) even AOL?

You've got me there. I honestly have no idea. Masochism, perhaps?


list: wikitech-l

from_name: Matthew Flaschen

subject: [Wikitech-l] Default signature

body:
xaosflux wrote:

> (The {{mirror}} template cited does not appear to
> be designed to have a signature in it anywhere).

It's designed to be signed in the Actions section.

Matthew Flaschen

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 252 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20070107/e07d3fe7/attachment.pgp>


from_name: geni

body:
On 1/7/07, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton at gmail.com> wrote:
> >  ... or
> > (shudder) even AOL?
>
> You've got me there. I honestly have no idea. Masochism, perhaps?

Cost, ease of installation and avialibilty. And AOL does provide a
high degree of hand holding for those who want it.
--
geni


list: foundation-l

from_name: Neil Harris

body:
effe iets anders wrote:
> Just another thought that came up with me today:
>
> What about an auction. I dont know whether there is interesting stuff enough
> to collect, and I dont expect thousends of dollars out of it, but wouldn't
> it be fun for the community to have something like an auction? People can
> give stuff that could be "cool to have" for the auction, to the foundation,
> and the person that bids the highest amount of money, can get the thing. For
> instance, I would be thinking of a postcard witht he signatures of all
> boardmembers, a used cigarette of oscar (no, not really, please come up with
> something more fun! :P ) or maybe even approach famous people to donate
> something that belongs to them for this cause. The stuff can varie to
> everything, but should be intensively prepared probably.
>
> Would this be fun for the community? Would it be creating some money to the
> foundation, would it be worth while? Are there maybe more ideas in this
> trend, that together get a meaningfull amount of money together?
>
> I understand of course it wont be possible anymore for this very
> fundraising, but I think it would be an idea for the next one. I'm not sure
> whether the foundation should "lower" itself to this level, or maybe it
> explicitely *should*. Please shoot! :)
>
> Lodewijk
>
>

Why not auction off some of the older servers? They must now be too
clapped-out for any real production use, and they're each a piece of
Wikipedia history some wealthy or obsessive Wikimaniac might want on
their shelf (or in their rack). The money from selling the old servers
can go to buy new ones: possibly with the original names recycled, like
battleships.

Not the very oldest, of course -- they should be carefully kept for
posterity and donated to a museum at some time in the future -- they're
the free culture equivalent of the original printing press, or first
steam engine.

-- Neil


subject: [Wikitech-l] Default signature

body:
Alphax (Wikipedia email) wrote:
>> Perhaps also recommend it in WP:SIG for others with the same problem.
>>
>
> ... or the slightly saner and smaller | ...

Good call, though it isn't specifically about mine (I've changed it to
"-" by now).  It would be cool if Mediawiki automatically changed pipe
to | outside of templates, tables, links, etc. in the sig, but...

Matthew Flaschen

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 252 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20070107/3700256c/attachment.pgp>


subject: [Wikitech-l] MediaWiki as a Wikimedia project

body:
Brion Vibber wrote:
> More people
> have SSH access for committing (though with a restricted shell)

Why can't they use svn commit?

Matthew Flaschen

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 252 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20070107/d7af06a1/attachment.pgp>


from_name: Florence Devouard

subject: [Foundation-l] Fundraising and site notice

body:
Hello everyone.

Just for a head up (or down)

First, I wanted to announce to all that there will be no more matching
donors in that fundraiser.
This is due to a variety of reasons, including, but not limited to, the
reaction of some members in the community.

Second, the fundraiser is not over. It will be over on Wikipedia day. It
may be that at some point in the coming week, we change the site notice
to put links to thank donators etc...

Third, this fundraiser has been the most successful of our history by
far, until now. When we really think about it, it is fabulous. We can do
even better in the last week.

Fourth, we'll go on with limited funds. Limited means we'll go delaying
certain issues. That's life !

Anthere


body:
> > >  ... or
> > > (shudder) even AOL?
> >
> > You've got me there. I honestly have no idea. Masochism, perhaps?
>
> Cost, ease of installation and avialibilty. And AOL does provide a
> high degree of hand holding for those who want it.

It's no cheaper than other similar ISPs. There is nothing to install
for internet access, it's all built into Windows (I don't believe AOL
supports other OS's) - you just have to run the "internet connection
wizard" - the CD's are purely to get the ISPs name in the title bar of
internet explorer, they don't do anything else. And it's definately no
more available than other ISPs - availability is dependant on your
phone line, not your ISP. I can't judge for handholding, as I've never
needed to phone an ISP for help, so it's possible you've got a point
there.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Forgive and forget

body:
> Forgiveness does not require any admission of wrong.  If  you insist
> that the other person admit wrong you aren't really forgiving, because
> you ignore the possibility that you may be the one who is wrong.
> Forgiveness does not even require that the dispute be first resolved.

I disagree. Especially with the 2nd sentence. Forgiveness requires you
to blame the other person, you can't forgive someone if you don't
think they're in the wrong. Accepting the possibility that you might
be wrong has nothing to do with forgiveness.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Forgive and forget

body:
> Saying "Move on" can be a convenient tactical strategem for winning an
> argument, especially if the article is in your preferred state when you
> say it.  Sometimes finding a third path is preferable to putting the
> issue into a win/lose paradigm.

Saying "move on" rarely has any effect at all. If you want to move on,
you have to be the one to move on, you can't tell the other party to
move on.


from_name: Brion Vibber

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

Rob Church wrote:
> On 07/01/07, Matthew Flaschen wrote:
>> Brion Vibber wrote:
>>> More people
>>> have SSH access for committing (though with a restricted shell)
>> Why can't they use svn commit?
>
> We do; we use svn+ssh as our protocol. However, to stop us running
> riot and storing p0rn on brion's server, we're a little bit locked
> down. :)

To flesh this out a little:

Subversion can run over a couple of different transport protocol layers.
The most common for read-only anonymous access is HTTP, using the WebDAV
extensions.

HTTP isn't necessarily as attractive for read-write scenarios, though.
Unencrypted HTTP is not a great idea, and even if you use encrypted
HTTPS you still have to worry about how to set up good account and
password management.

Tunneling Subversion over the SSH secure shell protocol allows accounts
to be managed on the operating system in a relatively standard way, and
the issue of password management can be pleasantly left on the client side.

That is, as server manager I never ever have to touch your password. I
don't have to see one, set one, e-mail you a default, nothing. You send
me a public key, and the private key on your computer is the only way
that the account can be logged in to. Any password you put on it is
managed by you on your computer; you can change the password, use a
password keychain tool for convenience, whatever.

This means for instance that no one can get your SVN password by getting
10 seconds at your G-mail account and searching for "password" when your
back is turned. ;)

If we provided shell service for developers on the same host, this would
be even more convenient -- you'd login with the same key -- but we don't
for now and so the accounts except for me and Tim use a restricted shell
which allows only Subversion to be accessed.

This combination of http:// for anonymous access and svn+ssh:// for
developer access is pretty common, though I've occasionally seen
projects using https:// with password authentication. (yech!)

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

iD8DBQFFoMb9wRnhpk1wk44RAurjAKCws+ZDIYmtaI7BfE0lUXvDauYF3QCdE0Kb
dup4maczYGylXtrdStwj8tA=
=eevy
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


from_name: Anthere

subject: [Foundation-l] 4 wishes for Year 2007

body:
~Pyb wrote:
>>I've translated it in french so more people can read, it wouldn't be
>>bad to translate this email in the more language we can and spred it
>>on village pump.
>>
>>
>>--
>>schiste
>
>
> Why not making a new issue of Quarto with this letter, the financial
> report, the draft of the provisional budget for 2007
> (http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/What_we_need_the_money_for)... ?
>
> ~Pyb

I diggued for you the draft annual report. It is here:
http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/WMF_Annual_Report
Only the text is here, but I also uploaded the draft pdf, which contains
the images. Some of the images had errors, which need fixing. Some do
not, but their interest was questionned. Danny (dwool AT wikimedia.org)
should have all these images on his computer hopefully.

We could add the financial statement, the audit letter, the "what we
need the money for", my mail probably rewritten, chapter reports when
they are done. Probably add some links as well. Hmmm, perhaps oscar text
on board retreat with all the links related to the retreat. Hmmm; quite
a lot of things.

Let's start with the beginning. Please, help.

Ant


subject: [Foundation-l] 4 wishes for Year 2007


body:
On 1/7/07, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton at gmail.com> wrote:
> It's no cheaper than other similar ISPs.

I'm trying to work of if describeing an ISP as simular to AOL would
constitute lible.

> There is nothing to install
> for internet access, it's all built into Windows (I don't believe AOL
> supports other OS's) - you just have to run the "internet connection
> wizard" - the CD's are purely to get the ISPs name in the title bar of
> internet explorer, they don't do anything else.

If only that were so. They instill a complete browser shell over IE.

> And it's definately no
> more available than other ISPs - availability is dependant on your
> phone line, not your ISP.

Not exaclty not all ISPs offer all their services in all areas.

>I can't judge for handholding, as I've never
> needed to phone an ISP for help, so it's possible you've got a point
> there.

While their customer service is probably better than NTL (not hard)
that isn't quite what a meant. AOL gives people who want it a sort of
cordened off area of the internet with nothing more dangerious than
AOL regulars and certainly nothings as freaky as say 4chan.

--
geni


from_name: Luna

subject: [WikiEN-l] Jeez (ANI)

body:
On 1/7/07, Bryan Derksen <bryan.derksen at shaw.ca> wrote:
>
>
> I'm not involved in anything on "ANI", whatever that is...

[[WP:AN/I]] -- Part of the admin noticeboard.

...and haven't noticed any particular increase in bad behavior associated
> with any of the articles I've been editing in that time period. Why should
> editing be locked down for me? Just lock down ANI if there's a problem
> there.
>

Sounds like a plan, to me; when the endless flamewars at AN/I get old, it's
nice to remember that they all just *go away* when you stop paying attention
to them. Which, more often than not, is a perfectly adequate solution. If
people would just let petty things slide, a little more often, the wiki
would probably run a lot more smoothly.

But that's just my thought, as somebody who isn't terribly fond of heated
arguments.

-Luna


body:
Florence Devouard wrote:
> Hello everyone.
>
> Just for a head up (or down)
>
> First, I wanted to announce to all that there will be no more matching
> donors in that fundraiser.

I was just told some people were jumping to the wrong conclusions. So,
let me emphasize that I used the word "that" on purpose. There will no
more matching donations in THAT fundraiser.

It is very probably we'll have again matching donations in the next
fundraisers.

ant

> This is due to a variety of reasons, including, but not limited to, the
> reaction of some members in the community.
>
> Second, the fundraiser is not over. It will be over on Wikipedia day. It
> may be that at some point in the coming week, we change the site notice
> to put links to thank donators etc...
>
> Third, this fundraiser has been the most successful of our history by
> far, until now. When we really think about it, it is fabulous. We can do
> even better in the last week.
>
> Fourth, we'll go on with limited funds. Limited means we'll go delaying
> certain issues. That's life !
>
> Anthere


from_name: Walter van Kalken

subject: [Foundation-l] alternatives

body:
>
>The thing is that a lot of people work on the fancruft, imho
>non-encyclopedian, part of Wikipedia and that is OK. Prison Break is one of
>the most visited articles on dutch Wikipedia. Most nl-Wikipedians are uneasy with this kind of articles, which evoluate to a encyclopedia inside the wikipedia in itself, and would be happy to move them to a different project.
>
Most ?????? That is a very bold statement. I would say a minority.
Currently in the Dutch wikipedia it is only 4 or 5 people who bring this
up every 2 weeks or so. Including you. That is definately not most
wikipedians!!!

Waerth


subject: [Foundation-l] alternatives


from_name: Bryan Derksen

subject: [WikiEN-l] Jeez (ANI)

body:
----- Original Message -----
From: George Herbert <george.herbert at gmail.com>
Date: Saturday, January 6, 2007 1:17 pm
Subject: [WikiEN-l] Jeez (ANI)

> I hadn't had time to read ANI for the last 3 days, and just went and
> started catching up.
>
> It's not just me; everyone's pissed off and behaving badly right now.
>
> We should put en.wikipedia on a one-week cooldown edit freeze....

I'm not involved in anything on "ANI", whatever that is, and haven't noticed any particular increase in bad behavior associated with any of the articles I've been editing in that time period. Why should editing be locked down for me? Just lock down ANI if there's a problem there.


from_name: Erik Moeller

subject: [Foundation-l] Mission/Vision Statement

body:
On 1/7/07, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell at gmail.com> wrote:
> Same argument applies. I don't see how the internet is important to
> our mission. It's the best tool for the job today, sure, but it's not
> our mission. Sure we can revise it.. but why bother mentioning it. Our
> mission is providing effective support for the creation and
> propagation of this free content. That we use the Internet is true
> today, but it's not at all fundimental ... it simply adds length
> without adding clarity.

I do believe it's fundamental, as it reflects a very important minimum
commitment: Whether we will be able to freely give away information in
other contexts, we will always give it away through the Internet (or
whatever its successor technology may be). I had "global communication
networks" in an earlier version, but I think "Internet" should be safe
for the next few years.

> The words "Free Content" are effectively a domain specific jargon, and
> I think our mission statement should be free of such jargon. I think
> the best way to avoid the jargon is to just say what we mean.

Perhaps -- if you feel a short mini definition of the core freedoms
would be better, feel free to give it a whack.

> We can offset the additional length by removing the free-beer aspects
> of the current draft. I believe the free-beerness of Wikimedia itself
> is a natural side effect of our mission of wide propagation but not in
> and of itself a fundamental goal.

Well, my take is different -- it _is_ a fundamental goal to not just
disseminate widely, but to _guarantee_ that the work done by
volunteers through the project will always be freely available through
at least the channel through which it was created.
--
Peace & Love,
Erik

DISCLAIMER: This message does not represent an official position of
the Wikimedia Foundation or its Board of Trustees.


subject: [Foundation-l] Mission/Vision Statement


subject: [Foundation-l] Mission/Vision Statement

body:
Erik Moeller wrote:
> On 1/7/07, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell at gmail.com> wrote:
>>We can offset the additional length by removing the free-beer aspects
>>of the current draft. I believe the free-beerness of Wikimedia itself
>>is a natural side effect of our mission of wide propagation but not in
>>and of itself a fundamental goal.
>
>
> Well, my take is different -- it _is_ a fundamental goal to not just
> disseminate widely, but to _guarantee_ that the work done by
> volunteers through the project will always be freely available through
> at least the channel through which it was created.

I agree with Erik on this. I do not consider that our goal is limited to
build a resource, but also to make it available to the largest number of
people on Earth.
For this, we can lower three main barriers. The financial barrier (we
lower the cost of access to the maximum), the language barrier (we give
people the opportunity to access language in their mother language), and
the re-use barrier (we allow others to reuse the content).

To my opinion, the multilingualism, the free licence and the free of
charge access are part of the Foundation mission.

Anthere


subject: [Foundation-l] Mission/Vision Statement


from_name: Ashar Voultoiz

subject: [Foundation-l] Why is MediaWiki so low-tech?

body:
Tim Starling wrote:
<snip>
> We have several JS/AJAX features, and I have attempted to encourage the
> development of more. See
>
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2006-August/025991.html
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2006-September/026387.html

I badly need to learn AJAX, so that might be a good start :)

> The answer to your question is that we have far fewer developers (in
> full-time equivalent terms) than Facebook, Flickr or any of the other
> major AJAX-based sites. We will work towards improved client-side
> functionality, but it could take years to reach the level of functionality
> you're talking about.

What about hiring more developers ? Maybe the foundation should looks
for the needed skills. The MediaWiki code is well wrote and can be
learned easily. With Brion and you as mentors, I am sure they will get
effective very fast.

It might be good to get some people to handle the servers too, that will
mean less system administration for you and more development.

cheers,

--
Ashar Voultoiz - WP++++
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Hashar
http://www.livejournal.com/community/wikitech/
IM: hashar at jabber.org  ICQ: 15325080


from_name: Carlos

subject: [Wikitech-l] Default signature

body:
[Matthew Flaschen <matthew.flaschen at gatech.edu>, 2007-01-07 03.29 CET]
> xaosflux wrote:
> > Now that I've sent my last post saying {{mirror}} wasn't a good
> > example, I see where it's being used.  The problem doesn't seem to be
> > in using signatures containing pipes in templates, but in tables,
> > where pipe is a delimiter.
>
> Tables also use pipes, but in Mirror the | breaks each parameter too
> soon.  The problem is the same no matter how the parameters were
> rendered.  See
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Superm401/Sandbox/BrokenMirror .

You can just replace the | in your signature with <nowiki>|</nowiki>.
Perhaps also recommend it in WP:SIG for others with the same problem.

--


subject: [Wikitech-l] MessageCache and MediaWiki namespace redesign

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

Tim Starling wrote:
> So here's what I've done in my working copy, soon to be committed:
> * Removed InitialiseMessages.inc and rebuildMessages.php
> * During upgrade, delete all pages in the MediaWiki namespace which were
> last modified by "MediaWiki default".
> * Reoptimised the message cache for the sparse MediaWiki namespace.

I've gone ahead and taken this live; the batch deletions are running in
the background.

A couple tweaks:

* The deleteDefaultMessages script now ensures that the 'MediaWiki
default' user is set up as a bot, so the flood of deletions is hidden
from recent changes.

* It turns out some messages try to transclude other messages. French
Wikipedia's MediaWiki:Copyrightwarning for instance trancluded
MediaWiki:Copyrightpage to get the default local page name for the
copyright information page; also some of the default messages for the
Special:Export page in various languages fetch the 'Main Page' name this
way for the example text. I've changed the transclusion logic to fetch
from the message cache when pulling a {{MediaWiki:}} page that doesn't
exist in the database; that should better match the 'expected' behavior
from these pages seeming to exist for viewing purposes.

Some wikis also experienced a temporary problem with the '!TOO BIG'
message being showed in place of all UI messages.

I think this could have been due to funny updating behavior; several
machines which were recently reinstalled didn't have the 'sudo'
configuration set up correctly, so parts of the update scripts didn't
run correctly. This may have lead to inconsistent behavior, though I'm
not sure that's the cause; or it may have just been partial updates
where MessageCache had new code but DefaultSettings didn't have the
configuration variable yet, so the maximum message size triggered on
everything.

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

iD8DBQFFoOsZwRnhpk1wk44RAsVhAJ0XexHAPbcljbfWsQdwnN88KxtMPQCfcpEj
CyTDXbImzJ4u9B8dWKmUWj0=
=XAtU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


body:
Brion Vibber wrote:
> Rob Church wrote:
>> On 07/01/07, Matthew Flaschen wrote:
>>> Brion Vibber wrote:
>>>> More people
>>>> have SSH access for committing (though with a restricted shell)
>>> Why can't they use svn commit?
>> We do; we use svn+ssh as our protocol. However, to stop us running
>> riot and storing p0rn on brion's server, we're a little bit locked
>> down. :)
>
> To flesh this out a little:

Thanks.  Your explanation made sense.  I never really thought about what
svn+ssh really meant...

Matthew Flaschen

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 252 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20070107/21d6100c/attachment.pgp>


from_name: Kim Bruning

subject: [Foundation-l] On hard-to-read usernames

in_reply_to:
<41a006820612240747j586af0c5qbb9327645eb2d88b@mail.gmail.com>;
	from gerard.meijssen@gmail.com on Sun, Dec 24, 2006 at 04:47:48PM
	+0100

body:
On Sun, Dec 24, 2006 at 04:47:48PM +0100, Gerard Meijssen wrote:
> How the metrics are to be created is something that has not been discussed
> at all. It is clever that you already know that it will be possible to game
> it.

David Gerard already mentioned gaming of metrics on en.wikipedia, which is a big problem.

However, simply consider:
	Slashdot.
Which has long since succumbed to the eternal september (R.I.P.)

Kuro5hin was deliberately designed with less (gamable) metrics and thus lasted a while longer.
One of our coolest editors -Ta Bu Shi Da Yu- is a sort of Kuro5hin refugee. (Don't tell him I said
that :-P)

--
[Non-pgp mail clients may show pgp-signature as attachment]
gpg (www.gnupg.org) Fingerprint for key  FEF9DD72
5ED6 E215 73EE AD84 E03A  01C5 94AC 7B0E FEF9 DD72


list: wikipedia-l

from_name: Philip Newton

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Why is MediaWiki so low-tech?

body:
On Sat, 6 Jan 2007 11:47:57 -0500, "James Hare"
<messedrocker at gmail.com> wrote:

> Well we have to remember that -not everyone- owns a Dell Dimension with a
> 3gHz processor and 1GB of RAM, or a high-end MacBook from 2006. While I own
> both, not everyone does. Not everyone has the resources to run the latest
> browser with all the greatest implements and support for seventy thousand
> scripts. I wouldn't be surprised if a computer that was old by 1995 in the
> US is considered industry standard in Somalia.

Hence his suggestion to:

> On 1/6/07, Virgil Ierubino <virgil.ierubino at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Can't MediaWiki default to its
> > current state, but offer a per-user preference to turn on advanced
> > options?

Cheers,
Philip


from_name: Rob Church

body:
On 07/01/07, Matthew Flaschen <matthew.flaschen at gatech.edu> wrote:
> Brion Vibber wrote:
> > More people
> > have SSH access for committing (though with a restricted shell)
>
> Why can't they use svn commit?

We do; we use svn+ssh as our protocol. However, to stop us running
riot and storing p0rn on brion's server, we're a little bit locked
down. :)

Rob Church


from_name: Andrew Garrett

subject: [Wikitech-l] Default signature

body:
--Xaosflux wrote:
> Seems like {{delete|I created this page by mistake}} would suffice
> there?

... We're not in the business of providing individual examples and
counter-examples. Suffice to say there is no good reason *not* to support
signatures in templates - and people do use signatures in templates - so we
should support it.

Andrew Garrett
(Werdna)


from_name: Gatto Nero

body:
2007/1/7, Anthere <Anthere9 a yahoo.com>:

> I was just told some people were jumping to the wrong conclusions. So,
> let me emphasize that I used the word "that" on purpose. There will no
> more matching donations in THAT fundraiser.
>
> It is very probably we'll have again matching donations in the next
> fundraisers.
>
> ant

Oh. I was quite happy.
So, let me emphasize that I used the word "that" on purpose.

(But, if we are going to discuss the *form* in which matching donation
are going to be rewarded, maybe...)


body:
2007/1/7, Anthere <Anthere9 at yahoo.com>:

> I was just told some people were jumping to the wrong conclusions. So,
> let me emphasize that I used the word "that" on purpose. There will no
> more matching donations in THAT fundraiser.
>
> It is very probably we'll have again matching donations in the next
> fundraisers.
>
> ant

Oh. I was quite happy.
So, let me emphasize that I used the word "that" on purpose.

(But, if we are going to discuss the *form* in which matching donation
are going to be rewarded, maybe...)


from_name: GerardM

body:
Hoi,
When the Wikimedia Foundation wants to make MediaWiki an official project,
it has the potential to make this change happen. With this change, the WMF
however assumes responsibilities that it currently does not have. It
currently does not take responsibility for the way Brion has too much on his
plate to finish the many things he did not finish. It can at this moment
selfishly urge Brion to do whatever because of WMF priorities.

When the WMF takes responsibility for MediaWiki, it should take much more
notice of all the other organisations that use MediaWiki and have developed
their own changes to accommodate needs that the WMF does not feel for its
projects. Doing this will bring the power of all the people who also
developing MW, and it will bring the need for integration and support that
has not really been addressed up to now.

If this move is intended to bring more volunteer developers to MediaWiki I
am afraid that it is just window dressing. It will not make much of a
difference because people come and stay as they like. If you TRULY want more
developers, having someone dedicated to coaching the people who are new to
the MediaWiki code would make much more of a difference. Having someone
coach people who are doing projects and stuff in Universities would really
help.

Sure, MediaWiki is strategic to the Wikimedia Foundation. It is not only
strategic to the WMF. In order to take the role of "owning" the project, it
is important that the WMF considers how this new role gives responsibilities
and if the WMF wants to take up this burden.

Thanks,
    GerardM

On 1/6/07, Erik Moeller <erik at wikimedia.org> wrote:
>
> I'd like to reopen the discussion about whether we officially consider
> MediaWiki a project of the Wikimedia Foundation. Currently, the
> position of the Foundation on this issue appears somewhat ambiguous.
> While we run the Subversion repository, the website, the mailing
> lists, and pay the two lead developers, MediaWiki is listed, for
> example, on:
> http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Our_projects
>
> not as a Wikimedia project, but as a "related project." It is also not
> part of our usual list of projects. On the other hand, mediawiki.org
> carries the "A Wikimedia Project" button.
>
> My view is that we should make this the consistent, official view and
> consistently promote and list MediaWiki as a Wikimedia Foundation
> project wherever other Wikimedia projects are listed. My hope is that,
> in doing so, we will make MediaWiki more prominent and attract more
> volunteers to work on it, just as on other Wikimedia Foundation
> projects. I also believe that this will help in making MediaWiki
> strategy a key part of the Foundation's general project strategy.
>
> What are other people's thoughts? The only downside I can see is that
> this might be seen as a move to exercise additional control over the
> direction of development. But already, all major code changes to the
> core have to be approved by Brion, who is a Foundation employee. I
> actually think it will be easier to identify our responsibility
> towards outside users if we consider MediaWiki to be a key part of the
> free culture movement that the Wikimedia Foundation must support.
>
> --
> Peace & Love,
> Erik
>
> DISCLAIMER: This message does not represent an official position of
> the Wikimedia Foundation or its Board of Trustees.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>


from_name: Ray Saintonge

subject:
[WikiEN-l] [Wikipedia-l] Entries for deletion.... issues from
 the Third World

body:
geni wrote:

>On 1/7/07, MacGyverMagic/Mgm <macgyvermagic at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Well, yes they can. But Andrew's point still stands. How can one make a
>>well-balanced decision when you're tagging or deleting stuff every 20-30
>>seconds? It usually takes me at least 2 minutes to read the entry, watch the
>>history and do other related stuff and that's just on a short article. Also,
>>the reasons given in the reason field by some administrators is totally not
>>as helpful as it should be.
>>
>>
>the article is new so there is not history and most are maybe two
>lines. Yes it could be done.
>
Observations:

The tag went up on this article less than one-half hour after the
article was begun.  It's also remarkable that no-one involved has seen
fit to comment on the admin's talk page to question his excessive zeal.

Ec


list: wiktionary-l

from_name: Pill

subject: [Wiktionary-l] New email adress for the mailing list

body:
The Wiktionary mailing list has got a new adress,
wiktionary-l at lists.wikimedia.org. Please send mails to this adress and
change email filters etc., if neccessary. During the transitional phase,
mailing to the old adress, wiktionary-I at wikimedia.org, will still work,
but it's good to change that as soon as possible.

-- Pill (wiki.pill at gmail.com)


from_name: Sage Ross

body:
On 1/7/07, Oldak Quill <oldakquill at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 07/01/07, Florence Devouard <anthere at anthere.org> wrote:
> > Hello everyone.
> >
> > Just for a head up (or down)
> >
> > First, I wanted to announce to all that there will be no more matching
> > donors in that fundraiser.
> > This is due to a variety of reasons, including, but not limited to, the
> > reaction of some members in the community.
>
> Regardless of whether I agreed with the Virgin notice or not, this is
> an excellent move on behalf of the Foundation. It demonstrates the
> Foundation's responsiveness to Wikimedians and that there is no
> bureaucratic disconnect (which is always a worry when a project like
> ours begins to organise into formalised institutions and structures).

I have to disagree.  I hope that you're only mentioning the "reactions
of some members of the community" reason in order to shame the
complainers; canceling a matching donor because of such a tiny
minority is not "responsiveness", it's oversensitivity.  When you say
that was one of the reasons, do you mean that loud whining about
Virgin Unite is a reason why no other matching donors decided to
participate, or do you mean that the complaints are why the Foundation
decided not to have another matching partner?  Hopefully, neither; I'd
like to think that the complaints really were as insignificant as they
seem to me.

-Ragesoss


from_name: Daniel P. B. Smith

subject: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedia jumps _into_ the top 10 (Oskar Sigvardsson)

body:
> From: "Oskar Sigvardsson" <oskarsigvardsson at gmail.com>
>> Daniel P. B. Smith wrote:
>>> I guess I don't understand why Wikipedians would care about this,
>>> apart from preening.
>>>
>>> Am I missing something?
>>>
>>> Will being in the top ten help us to write a better encyclopedia in
>>> some way that being in the top 100 doesn't?
>
> Yeah, that, but there is also nothing wrong about being proud of your
> work. We're in the top 10! We rule! Isn't that a great feeling?

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubris


from_name: Erica Flynn

subject:
[WikiEN-l] [Wikipedia-l] Entries for deletion.... issues from
	the Third World

body:
>
> Well, yes they can. But Andrew's point still stands. How can one make a
> well-balanced decision when you're tagging or deleting stuff every 20-30
> seconds? It usually takes me at least 2 minutes to read the entry, watch
> the
> history and do other related stuff and that's just on a short article.
> Also,
> the reasons given in the reason field by some administrators is totally
> not
> as helpful as it should be.
>
> Mgm

20 seconds is actually quite a bit of time if you take into account some
types of speedies (broken redirects, redirects to user pages, talk pages
without articles, some completely NN band articles, total nonsense, etc.) An
average of one delete every 20-30 seconds, over the course of an hour and
working from the usually-backlogged CSD page, doesn't seem unreasonable to
me.

Erica
en:User:Fang Aili


subject: [Wikipedia-l] New ipblock-exempt permission

body:
Hi All,

I've just committed a change that allows users with the permission key
'ipblock-exempt' to be exempted from ALL forms of IP blocks, including those
which come from DNSBLs.

This permission is by default assigned to the Sysop group, although it can
be, as usual, applied to any group using $wgGroupPermissions.

(See bug 3706 and r18904)

Take care,

Andrew Garrett

(Werdna)


subject: [Wikitech-l] New ipblock-exempt permission


body:
> I notice it was marked "using NPWatcher" - has anyone experience of
> using this program? I've noticed it a bit recently, and it seems to be
> very heavily used for fast automation of tagging, deletion, etc. Which
> is fair enough, so long as only one person involved is doing it -
> because the speedy deletion process on enwp has two pairs of eyes
> involved, there'll in theory be a second person along to read it over
> before deletion and decide if the tag is in order or not.

NPWatcher is a newer VP-like program designed by User:Martinp23 to aid
in new page patrolling. It's for .NET again, so it leaves us
non-windows people out again, but from what I've seen it can be used
to tag a new page with a CSD tag (like {{db-nonsense}}) and leave a
warning on the persons talk page not to make silly articles like that.
It can also be used by admins to help clear backlogs, such as CAT:CSD
by deleting pages (believe me, it really helps). As an admin, I know
that I check pages that are marked for speedy deletion before deleting
them, with some being more obvious than others. It's almost always
backlogged though, so it would be appreciated it editors would make
sure they are sure when tagging articles, and don't make it any more
bureaucratic. Sometimes you just need to let us do our jobs.

-User:Royalguard11


from_name: Rob Smith

subject: [WikiEN-l]  Forgive and forget

body:
On 1/6/07, Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote:

>A full blown arbitration could do that.  Especially if the earlier steps
>are bypassed.  Mediation should work to find a common ground for agreement.

>Ec

>>from  Rob Smith <nobs03 at gmail.com>   11/27/06
>>to  Fred Bauder <fredbaud at ctelco.net>
>>date Nov 27, 2006 7:42 PM
>>subject Private message
>>mailed-by gmail.com

>>Let's cut to the quick.  When Berlet proposed circumventing WP:DR ("I
>freely confess I have a vested interest in this...")

>>http://mail.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2005-November/032066.html

>>and you acknowledged the wisdom of circumventing official WP:Dispute
>>Resolution policy, "I agree with this."

>>http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2005-November/032068.html

>>I well understood how WP:DR was being sacrificed to Foundation issues
>>and the threat of defamation suits, etc.  I never pressed this aspect
>>in my defense publicly.  I continued the assume good faith in your
>>judgement, actions and opinions, as I do now.  The record shows I
>>never participated in any of the recusal requests.

>>Clearly there are problems with the Dispute Resolution policy, which
>>my experience could be helpful for others in the future.  But to
>>continue to scapegoat me -- a user with no reputation for personal
>>attacks prior to ArbCom (I don't think anyone ever even accused me of
>>it) -- only darkens some of the shadowy perceptions out there about
>>Wikipedia's internal processes.  I believe in fact, my interactions
>>with other users, prior to ArbCom, was almost a model of civility,
>>focusing on the article and not personal bullshit & biases.  And this
>>can be verified.

>>I send this to you privately because I understand some of the
>>difficult positions you were placed in.  All I ask for now is fairness
>>and reconsideration.

>>Thank you.

>>Nobs01

Mediation was interrupted in this case; and I never ceased AGF with
the Committee.  I discovered Arbitration doesn't exist to right
perceived wrongs, rather to protect the interests of the Foundation.

Nobs01


subject: [WikiEN-l] Forgive and forget

body:
Thomas Dalton wrote:

>>Forgiveness does not require any admission of wrong.  If  you insist
>>that the other person admit wrong you aren't really forgiving, because
>>you ignore the possibility that you may be the one who is wrong.
>>Forgiveness does not even require that the dispute be first resolved.
>>
>>
>I disagree. Especially with the 2nd sentence. Forgiveness requires you
>to blame the other person, you can't forgive someone if you don't
>think they're in the wrong. Accepting the possibility that you might
>be wrong has nothing to do with forgiveness.
>
In a sense yes, but blame is a private feeling.  Blaming another person
is your own feeling that he has been wrong.  If that blame becomes a
public act it only compounds the problem.  Whether he, in fact, has done
wrong is irrelevant, and it follows from that that any admission or
apology on his part is also irrelevant.

Ec


subject: [WikiEN-l] Jeez (ANI)

body:
Luna wrote:
> On 1/7/07, Bryan Derksen <bryan.derksen at shaw.ca> wrote:
>>
>> I'm not involved in anything on "ANI", whatever that is...
>
>
> [[WP:AN/I]] -- Part of the admin noticeboard.

Ah, didn't recognize that particular acronym offhand. I've posted the
occasional notice there but don't actively monitor it.


from_name: Andrew Gray

subject:
[Wikipedia-l] Entries for deletion.... issues from the Third
	World

body:
On 07/01/07, Frederick Noronha <fred at bytesforall.org> wrote:
> Hi all, I'm from India, a contributor to the Wikipedia. In recent
> times, the 'mortality' of new Wikipedia entries seems to be higher
> than usual. While one can understand the need for abundant caution,
> it's also important to allow for a diversity of concerns and issues in
> this space.
>
> Should we presume that because an initiative is not very visible in
> cyberspace (okay, we are under-digitised societies!) that it is not
> prominent or noteworthy? See as one example:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vikalp This is a campaign against
> censorship of documentary film in India, one which has the
> participation of about 250 documentary film-makers.
>
> There must be some way out. Your suggestions would be welcome. FN
> --
> FN M: 0091 9822122436 P: +91-832-240-9490 (after 1300IST please)
> http://fn.goa-india.org  http://fredericknoronha.wordpress.com
> http://www.goa-india.org http://feeds.goa-india.org/index.php
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>

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


body:
[sorry for earlier blank]

On 07/01/07, Frederick Noronha <fred at bytesforall.org> wrote:
> Hi all, I'm from India, a contributor to the Wikipedia. In recent
> times, the 'mortality' of new Wikipedia entries seems to be higher
> than usual. While one can understand the need for abundant caution,
> it's also important to allow for a diversity of concerns and issues in
> this space.
>
> Should we presume that because an initiative is not very visible in
> cyberspace (okay, we are under-digitised societies!) that it is not
> prominent or noteworthy? See as one example:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vikalp This is a campaign against
> censorship of documentary film in India, one which has the
> participation of about 250 documentary film-makers.

Bah. Untagged - no way an organisation of 250 professionals which runs
a six-day film festival is "db-bio", even if all the internal links
are red.

I notice it was marked "using NPWatcher" - has anyone experience of
using this program? I've noticed it a bit recently, and it seems to be
very heavily used for fast automation of tagging, deletion, etc. Which
is fair enough, so long as only one person involved is doing it -
because the speedy deletion process on enwp has two pairs of eyes
involved, there'll in theory be a second person along to read it over
before deletion and decide if the tag is in order or not.

But when both are using this sort of thing... well, I saw one user who
was running a speedy deletion, on average, *every twenty seconds for
an hour* using it. People can't really be giving what they're looking
at any attention at that speed, and wrongful tagging will just carry
over into wrongful (and wasteful) deletion.

Thoughts on how usefully to solve this? Automation to cope with a task
is well and good, but we can't automate out human review where it's
there for a reason.

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


from_name: Bryan Derksen

body:
Thomas Dalton wrote:
>> The case that drew my attention a little while back did so because it
>> had been tagged as {{db-empty}}, and then deleted despite containing a
>> {{hangon}} note, three external links, and 160 words of actual
>> honest-to-god coherent content. It was a little patchy, clearly
>> written by someone for whom English was not a first language and
>> wiki-syntax was not a second, but obviously a survivable stub on
>> something and certainly not an empty article. And the guy who wrote it
>> complained it had been deleted, so I looked into it.
>>
>> Deletion summary was "(Deleting page - reason was: "Empty page" using
>> NPWatcher)"
>
> a) Which article?
> b) Have you taken it to DRV?

If the case is as it is described, there should be no need for DRV. Just
undelete it. The tag was clearly incorrect.


from_name: Simetrical

references:
<enlnmo$69l$1@sea.gmane.org> <45A0EB19.2030208@pobox.com>
	<enr1to$pvb$1@sea.gmane.org>

body:
On 1/7/07, Ligulem <ligulem at pobox.com> wrote:
> On en.wikipedia I currently (14:56, 7 January 2007 UTC) see
>
> <main page>
>
> in the sidebar (html entities appearing on the rendered page?). I'm
> using monobook.

For future reference, that's the secret code for "the message
'main_page' is supposed to be here, but it doesn't exist".  Seems to
be fixed now, anyway.


from_name: Brianna Laugher

references:
<24dce9db0701060830q1306d829l2737670b11fbb4ef@mail.gmail.com>
	<enop6b$ln9$1@sea.gmane.org> <enpnqs$boa$1@sea.gmane.org>

body:
On 07/01/07, Ashar Voultoiz <hashar at altern.org> wrote:
> What about hiring more developers ? Maybe the foundation should looks
> for the needed skills. The MediaWiki code is well wrote and can be
> learned easily. With Brion and you as mentors, I am sure they will get
> effective very fast.
>
> It might be good to get some people to handle the servers too, that will
> mean less system administration for you and more development.

http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/What_we_need_the_money_for#Goals_for_Hiring_.28June_07_.3D_.24100.2C000.2Fmo.29

They mention a CTO = Chief Technical Officer and "several developers".

Given that the current fundraiser seems unlikely to meet its goal of
$1.5m, hiring might be one of the areas that gets cut back.

regards
Brianna
user:pctdayelise


from_name: Thomas Dalton

subject: [WikiEN-l] Forgive and forget

body:
> >An apology is admitting you were wrong. If one side admits they were
> >wrong, then yes, the dispute is resolved.
> >
> Why does one side have to be wrong?

Depends on the nature of the dispute. It's entirely possible to have a
dispute and neither side be wrong. In that case, however, talk of
apologies and forgiveness is meaningless.


body:
> I'm trying to work of if describeing an ISP as simular to AOL would
> constitute lible.

I'll call my lawyer... ;)

> If only that were so. They instill a complete browser shell over IE.

AOL do, yes. Which makes installing AOL far more complicated than any
other ISP, as you actually have to install something.

> Not exaclty not all ISPs offer all their services in all areas.

It's more different types of internet connection are available in
different places (ADSL, cable, satalite, etc) - if you can get ADSL
from AOL, you can get it from anyone. The speed might be different if
one ISP has LLU at your exchange, but that's all.

> While their customer service is probably better than NTL (not hard)
> that isn't quite what a meant. AOL gives people who want it a sort of
> cordened off area of the internet with nothing more dangerious than
> AOL regulars and certainly nothings as freaky as say 4chan.

There is that. AOL is much more like the pre-internet days of seperate
networks. (Maybe that's why they're so rubbish - they didn't notice
when the internet arrived)


body:
> the speedy deletion process on enwp has two pairs of eyes
> involved

Unless I'm mistaken, if the first pair of eyes is an admin, they can
delete it straight away. The db tags are just for non-admins (or
admins that want a 2nd opinion) to notify admins.


from_name: Andre Engels

body:
2007/1/7, Frederick Noronha <fred at bytesforall.org>:

> Should we presume that because an initiative is not very visible in
> cyberspace (okay, we are under-digitised societies!) that it is not
> prominent or noteworthy?

No, but it does work the other way around: we need some kind of indication
that it is prominent or noteworthy, and cyberspace-presence is one of the
easier ways to get such an indication.

See as one example:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vikalp This is a campaign against
> censorship of documentary film in India, one which has the
> participation of about 250 documentary film-makers.

When I Google for:

Vikalp "films for freedom"

which would be a quite specific search, I still get 500+ hits. If it were
notable,

There must be some way out. Your suggestions would be welcome. FN
>

Well, in the ideal case, the article itself would be enough to judge
notability, and a Google search would only be necessary if there were doubts
about the actual correctness of the notability claims.

--
Andre Engels, andreengels at gmail.com
ICQ: 6260644  --  Skype: a_engels


body:
On 07/01/07, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton at gmail.com> wrote:
> > the speedy deletion process on enwp has two pairs of eyes
> > involved
>
> Unless I'm mistaken, if the first pair of eyes is an admin, they can
> delete it straight away. The db tags are just for non-admins (or
> admins that want a 2nd opinion) to notify admins.

My understanding was that even admins should tag, if there's anything
there that's at all subjective (anything much above
page-blanked-by-author, random text, whatever). It certainly seems
more sensible that way.

(I usually try to, but...)

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


from_name: Ligulem

body:
On 07.01.2007 13:44, Brion Vibber wrote:
> I've gone ahead and taken this live; the batch deletions are running in
> the background.

On en.wikipedia I currently (14:56, 7 January 2007 UTC) see

<main page>

in the sidebar (html entities appearing on the rendered page?). I'm
using monobook.

I've looked through recent changes in MediaWiki namespace on en but
can't find anything that could explain this.

So could that problem have something to do with this change here?

Apologies for possibly asking stupid things in the wrong place.


from_name: Oldak Quill

body:
On 07/01/07, Florence Devouard <anthere at anthere.org> wrote:
> Hello everyone.
>
> Just for a head up (or down)
>
> First, I wanted to announce to all that there will be no more matching
> donors in that fundraiser.
> This is due to a variety of reasons, including, but not limited to, the
> reaction of some members in the community.

Regardless of whether I agreed with the Virgin notice or not, this is
an excellent move on behalf of the Foundation. It demonstrates the
Foundation's responsiveness to Wikimedians and that there is no
bureaucratic disconnect (which is always a worry when a project like
ours begins to organise into formalised institutions and structures).

Thanks Florence and the rest of the team. You're doing an excellent job.

--
Oldak Quill (oldakquill at gmail.com)


body:
> My understanding was that even admins should tag, if there's anything
> there that's at all subjective (anything much above
> page-blanked-by-author, random text, whatever). It certainly seems
> more sensible that way.
>
> (I usually try to, but...)

[[WP:CSD]]:

"The "Speedy deletion" policy governs limited cases where Wikipedia
administrators may delete Wikipedia pages or media "on sight" without
further debate. Non-admins can request deletion of such a page by
adding an appropriate template (see below). The word "speedy" in this
context refers to the simple decision-making process, not the length
of time since the article was created."

I interpret that as admins being able to delete without tagging. The
whole point of CSD is that it's for uncontroversial deletions. If
there is anything significantly subjective about it, it should go
through PROD or AfD.


from_name: Alphax (Wikipedia email)

subject: [Wikitech-l] Default signature

body:
Carlos wrote:
> [Matthew Flaschen <matthew.flaschen at gatech.edu>, 2007-01-07 03.29 CET]
>> xaosflux wrote:
>>> Now that I've sent my last post saying {{mirror}} wasn't a good
>>> example, I see where it's being used.  The problem doesn't seem to be
>>> in using signatures containing pipes in templates, but in tables,
>>> where pipe is a delimiter.
>> Tables also use pipes, but in Mirror the | breaks each parameter too
>> soon.  The problem is the same no matter how the parameters were
>> rendered.  See
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Superm401/Sandbox/BrokenMirror .
>
> You can just replace the | in your signature with <nowiki>|</nowiki>.
> Perhaps also recommend it in WP:SIG for others with the same problem.
>

... or the slightly saner and smaller | ...

--
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: 542 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20070107/987875a6/attachment.pgp>


from_name: charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com

body:
"Daniel P. B. Smith"

> Will being in the top ten help us to write a better encyclopedia in
> some way that being in the top 100 doesn't?

Being in the top 100 didn't make Wikipedia a household word. That happened in the last six months. Does that help? Yes. In fact since we still need to gain editors, it is better if we are more prominent.

Charles

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


list: commons-l

subject: No subject

body:
There's a first demo impl of InstantCommons up at:
http://141.13.22.239/ic-client/index.php/Main_Page

What this does: Allows any MediaWiki installation to transparently
load (and cache) images from a central repository like Commons,
provided the repository permits it. Ideally, Wikimedia Commons will do
so, and any installation in the world will be able to use files from
Commons as if they were locally uploaded.

The current code is in the instantcommons branch. There are still a
few issues and it's not feature-complete yet before it can go to the
official review.

===============
(note: it's not working on Commons, but a fake Commons)

It doesn't seem to create a log entry for the 'borrowed' images, but
still creates image page s for them (but doesn't link to the source in
any way, which is a bit weird).
probably wiki admins would like to know which images have been 'borrowed'.

No idea why Erik didn't post here as well, as if we're not interested :)

cheers
Brianna
user:pfctdayelise


subject: No subject

body:
what would we like to see in it?

* Category system - or 'categories vs galleries' :) a longstanding and
unresolved debate on Commons. What are the strengths and weaknesses of
categories, from Commons' POV? What functionality is missing? Are they
effective? What does a category signify?

* SVGs, maps and/or diagrams - it seems to me Commons is probably
leading the way in SVG diagrams. What are best practices? How can
someone interested in creating such content get involved? Has SVG
revolutionised cartography? What will it be like in 10 years time?

* Celebrity photography - some case studies of success. What are the
problems in getting free licenses of modern celebrities? Can they be
resolved?

* Commons Picture of the Year - an overview of this event.

* Community, administration and policy - How do our deletion processes
work? Are they effective? (/me looks at debates open from two months
ago...) If not why not? How much community involvement in this is
there? Do the decisions reflect written or seemingly unwritten policy?

*  The open content movement - how can Commons help educate the general pub=
lic?

* Commons and Flickr - how they interact with each other, how they
compare, goals/content - Flickrreview etc.

This is just what came into my head in ten minutes. There is tons of
interesting stuff that could be done. Please do some if intend to come
to Wikimania :]

cheers,
Brianna
user:pfctdayelise

On 08/04/07, Erik Moeller <erik at wikimedia.org> wrote:
> I'm (re)sending this to lots of lists -- people, we need more
> submissions! Please be bold in sending us your papers -- we'd love to
> see you in Taiwan this year. :-)
>
> Please forward to other relevant lists as well! See
> http://wikimania2007.wikimedia.org/wiki/Call_for_Participation/distributi=
on
> for the ones we've already covered.
>
> Erik
>
> - - - -
>
> Wikimania is an annual global event devoted to Wikipedia and the other
> Wikimedia Foundation projects. It is a community event, which is also
> open to the public and to researchers. This year's conference will be
> held from August 3-5, 2007 in Taipei, Taiwan at Chien Tan Overseas
> Youth Activity Center. For more information, please visit the
> Wikimania site:
>
> http://wikimania2007.wikimedia.org/
>
> Send your submissions through:
>
> http://wikimania2007.wikimedia.org/wiki/Submission
>
> We are accepting submissions for posters, presentations, workshops,
> and discussion groups. We are also accepting nominations for speakers
> and speaker panels, and suggestions for other activities. Please note
> the details below and be bold in your submissions!
>
> =3D=3D Important dates =3D=3D
>
>     * 1 March =96 30 April: Submission
>     * 1 May =96 31 May: Feedback and notification of acceptance
>     * 3 =96 5 Aug 2007 : Wikimania
>
> =3D=3D Conference Themes =3D=3D
>
> Submissions should address one or more of the following themes:
>
>     * Wikimedia Communities =96 Interesting projects and particularities
> within the communities (we explicitly invite you to present your local
> Wikimedia project's community!); policy creation within individual
> projects; conflict resolution and community dynamics; reputation and
> identity; multilingualism, languages and cultures; social studies.
>
>     * Free Content =96 Open access to information; ways to gather and
> distribute free knowledge, usage of the Wikimedia projects in
> education, journalism, research; ways to improve content quality and
> usability; copyright laws and other legal areas that interfere with
> Wikimedia projects.
>
>     * Technical infrastructure =96 Issues related to MediaWiki
> development and extensions; Wikimedia hardware layout; new ideas for
> development (including usable case studies from other wikis or similar
> projects).
>
> Your topic must be related to Wikimedia projects and its communities
> or to the creation of free content in general.
>
> =3D=3D Types of Submissions =3D=3D
>
> We are seeking submissions for
>
> * presentations (10=9630 minute talks with optional short or full papers)
> * posters (printed presentations or visual displays that can stand on the=
ir own)
> * workshops (30=96120 minute session with more involvement of the audienc=
e)
> * panels (group of 2-5 speakers to discuss on a specific subject)
> * Birds-of-a-Feather (BoF) (45-60 minute informal meetup of group
> discussion on a particular topic)
> * artistic artifacts (plays, competitions, comedy, visualizations, or
> other representations of some aspect of the projects)
>
> =3D=3D Guidelines =3D=3D
>
> Wikimania is organized by volunteers, so please help us to minimize
> wasted effort by following these guidelines carefully before
> submitting and be sure not to forget anything that is mentioned here.
> All submissions must explicitly include the following:
>
> * an English title
> * a short English abstract of 50 to 100 words. The abstracts should be
> provided as plain text, and not as file attachments. This abstract
> will be used as public description of your submission in the
> conference program
> * a detailed description (or full paper) of at least one page (300
> words or more). This description will not be published unless you want
> it, but used for reviewing your submission. Give an overview of the
> areas to be covered or taught. State clearly the relevance to the
> Wikimedia projects and whether submission concerns a specific wiki
> project. You may use any language, but we strongly suggest English or
> Chinese. Full descriptions may include a link to a full paper or
> slides in HTML or PDF, if available.
> * full name, email address, and a short bio of 1=963 sentences for each
> author. You may also add wiki usernames and nicknames.
> * the type of submission (presentation, poster, workshop, panel, BoF, art=
istic)
> * the language(s) you are going to talk in (or the language of your poste=
r)
>
> Please tell us with your submission whether you will attend to
> Wikimania (a) surely, (b) probably, (c) only if your submission is
> accepted, or (d) only if we provide travel and/or accommodation.
>
> Additionally, please specify:
>
> * the target audience you are going to reach and what previous
> knowledge is needed
> * special requirements (such as equipment for a workshop or panel) if nee=
ded
> * images or sketches of the poster or artistic artifact if available
> * for panel submissions short biographies of each suggested panelist
> * whether the presentation is intended to be a specific length.
> * BoF proposals should describe the significance of and community
> interest in the topic, and name the proposed discussion leader(s).
>
> For poster sessions there are additional guidelines:
> http://wikimania2007.wikimedia.org/wiki/Poster_session
>
> Please note that all submissions must be dual licensed under the GNU
> Free Documentation License version 1.2 or later and the Creative
> Commons Attribution License.
>
> =3D=3D Submissions =3D=3D
>
> Once you are sure you have included all of the required information,
> please send your submission by the respective deadline through our
> submission system:
>
> http://wikimania2007.wikimedia.org/wiki/Submission
>
> Please do not send submissions by email. If you need help for
> translating your work please visit our translation help page.
> Questions, but not submissions, may be directed to cfp at wikimedia.org.
>
> =3D=3D Hacking Days =3D=3D
>
> Before the main conference there will also be informal Hacking days
> for MediaWiki developers who are familiar with the software, If you
> are interested in joining it, please visit:
>
> http://wikimania2007.wikimedia.org/wiki/Planning/Hacking_Days_Extra_2007
>
> =3D=3D See also =3D=3D
>
> * About the venue: http://www.cyh.org.tw/
> * Brainstorming page for program ideas:
> http://wikimania2007.wikimedia.org/wiki/Program_Ideas
> * Editable list of attendees: http://wikimania2007.wikimedia.org/wiki/Att=
endees
> * WikiSym 2007 (October 21-23, 2007, Montreal), an alternative wiki
> conference: http://www.wikisym.org/ws2007/
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikisource-l mailing list
> Wikisource-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l
>


subject: No subject

body:
Definitions of [wikimedia] on the Web:

The Wikimedia Foundation Inc. is the parent organization of Wikipedia,
Wiktionary, Wikiquote, Wikibooks (including Wikijunior and Wikiversity),
Wikisource, In Memoriam 9/11, Wikimedia Commons, Wikispecies, Wikinews,
and Nupedia (defunct). It is a non-profit corporation organized under
the laws of Florida, USA. Its existence was officially announced by
Wikia CEO and Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales on June 20, 2003.=20
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia=20

Definitions of [mediawiki] on the Web:

MediaWiki is a Wiki software package licensed under the GNU General
Public License. It is a feature-rich wiki implementation, and is used to
run Wikipedia and other Wikimedia Foundation projects, as well as many
other wikis.=20
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki=20

Definitions of [wikipedia] on the Web:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page A free content, multilingual
encyclopedia written collaboratively by contributors around the world.
The site is a Wiki - anybody can edit and add to an article. Offers
quick understanding on controversial issues. Strong in current affairs.
http://www.uccb.ca/library/subject/reference/encyclopedias.html

Wikipedia is a Web-based, free-content encyclopedia written
collaboratively by volunteers and sponsored by the non-profit Wikimedia
Foundation. It has editions in roughly 200 different languages (about
100 of which are active) and contains entries both on traditional
encyclopedic topics and on almanac, gazetteer, and current events
topics. Its purpose is to create and distribute a free international
encyclopedia in as many languages as possible. ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia

=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D

... so, what were we talking 'bout, again?


subject: No subject

body:
"...proposals for innovative, collaborative humanities projects using
the latest digital technologies for the benefit of the American
public, humanities scholarship, and the nation's cultural
institutions. These grants will support collaborations among
libraries, museums, archives, universities, and other cultural
organizations that may serve as models for the field. We encourage
projects that explore new ways to share, examine, and interpret
humanities collections in a digital environment and to develop new
uses and audiences for existing digital resources."

It almost looks like it was written with Wikipedia in mind.  The grant
range is $50,000 to $350,000 over two years; not enormous, but it
seems worth the time of some Wikimedian grant writers.

With some creativity, there are probably some other NEH and possibly
NSF grants that Wikimedia might have a shot at as well.

-User:Ragesoss


subject: No subject

body:
Wikipedia and her sisters?

Thanks,
Yoni
he:user:Yonidebest


subject: No subject

body:
free one for pretty much everything.

--
geni


subject: No subject

body:
:::So, any change in that respect must be reflected in all languages (I
:::presume the cutoff at 15 or 45 could be negociable depending on
:::communities, but the concept of having a cutoff should be global).

I read that and came away with:

a) the basic way in which we give out permissions, 'a user of type X
can do Y things', should be consistent across all projects; but

b) *but* the details of quite where any project draws the boundaries can vary

So "a normal user should be able to edit all pages", say, should be
the same everywhere. "A normal user should be able to edit
semi-protected pages and move pages, after some threshold, but not
edit protected ones" should be the same everywhere.

But little details like what constitutes a "threshold", or the like,
can vary - age of the account? age since first edit? number of edits?
a combination? what's a viable number for either - five days/twenty
edits? Likewise, the exact requirements for becoming an admin or
deleting an article inevitably vary across projects, but the idea of
"there will be a vague set of standards and consensus among those
discussing it" is constant.

(As an aside, if we're talking uniform behaviour across wikis, now
would be a good time to rediscuss the IP-page-creation policy on
enwp...)

> In that case, I would like to add that the move page functionality should be
> given to both users with a certain time of existance, but also to sysops.
> That is because of the stewards, reverting vandalism on small wiki's then.

Valid point. Any technical issues with this?

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


subject: No subject

body:
anywhere else in the U.S. (and I've been to most of it) that has close to
the tech-centeredness of these three cities. I don't know if St. Pete has
anything comparable, community-wise, but I doubt it. Of course the price one
pays for this is astronomical rent, and as others have pointed out that
might not be the wisest thing to do with our limited money. However,
certainly a lot of good talent, from programmers to publishers to venture
capitalists, gets attracted to San Francisco and similar areas, which is one
possible reason to move -- an in-person volunteer community could be built
around the office as well as an online one.

-- phoebe


subject: No subject

body:
I know some of the answers to this, but a BC analysis asks:

Where is the data duplicated?  Where are the servers duplicated?  What
will the impact be to users of a cutover to the disaster recovery
site(s), in terms of performance and lag and downtime?  Are
administrative and technical staff in the affected zone, and if so,
how do you get them to the DR site, and who handles their houses and
families and so forth?  What are the risks of building flood, wind
damage, and complete collapse?  How long could power be out?  Are
there generator refueling plans?  Do the refuelers have disaster
access permits from the local government?

I could keep going.  There are lots of issues.

I am not aware of there being anywhere that is completely safe from
significant natural disasters.  Some places are more prone than
others, and the ones you get in some areas are more regionally
catastrophic (big earthquakes, big hurricanes, 15 feet of snow across
a whole state, etc) than others (tornados, etc).

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


subject: No subject

body:
indiainteracts.com. Use the keyword wikicamp to search for them."

Truth in Numbers: The Wikipedia Story ('wikidocumentary.wikia.com') also looks
promising.

Hope this helps, George
en_wp: [[User:GChriss]]
irc.freenode.net: GChriss

============
Exclusive interview with Jimmy Wales:
http://indiainteracts.com/video/top_home.php?year=2007&month=02&dat=26&guid=Exclusive-Interview-With-Jimmy-Wales

Event kickstart:
http://indiainteracts.com/videos/2007/02/27/Wiki-Camp-2007--Kickstart/

Jimmy's keynote - Part 1:
http://indiainteracts.com/videos/2007/02/27/Wiki-Camp-2007--Jimmy-Talk-Part--1/

Jimmy's keynote - Part 2:
http://indiainteracts.com/videos/2007/03/02/Wiki-Camp-2007--Jimmy-Talk-Part--2/

Press conference:
http://indiainteracts.com/videos/2007/03/02/Wiki-Camp-2007--Jimmys-Press-Meet/

Blogs vs Wikis:
http://indiainteracts.com/videos/2007/03/01/Wiki-Camp-2007--Blog-Vs-Wikia/

Birds of a Feather session:
http://indiainteracts.com/videos/2007/03/02/Wiki-Camp-2007--Q-and-A/

Jimmy with the audience:
http://indiainteracts.com/videos/2007/03/01/Wiki-Camp-2007--Unconference

Organizer's Chat:
http://indiainteracts.com/videos/2007/02/28/Wiki-Camp-2007--Organisers-Chat/


subject: No subject

body:
-

"Firstly there are guidelines, such as all work has to be sourced and
referenced.
Secondly the MuslimWikipedia has a NPOV policy, i.e this isn't the
place for Peoples points of view.
Thirdly the MuslimWikipedia is to present Islam, its History, its
people, its tenets, its faith, its ideas in a POSITIVE light, and
hence negative views of Islam are against the Muslim Wikipedias
policies."

Good going matching points two and three, guys.

- d.


subject: No subject

body:
with the approval a few select people, while any
volunteer can work on developing an extension.  If a
volunteer who develops the extension is not capable of
implementing it on a Wikimedia wiki, how can
implementation be part of the development?

I won't pretend I understood your message completely
regarding SVN and why it would not need to take three
months to install an extension.  But right now I would
be happy to recieve any feedback on whether an
extension could installed or not in so short of time
as three months. In my experience the wait is not only
longer than that [1], but is without any time frame at
all.

Birgitte SB

[1] http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5881

--- GerardM <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hoi,
> Cool. When an extension is developed, implementation
> is part of the project.
> Not to do so would be daft. When an extension is
> developed elsewhere, we
> have a "not invented here" situation.
>
> I would suggest that one function of the WMF could
> be to perform maintenance
> checks on all the software that is included in SVN.
> This means that having
> software in the MediaWiki SVN will have specific
> benefits. One of these
> maintenance checks would be to indicate and or
> maintain compatibility with
> the main branch of MediaWiki. Another is that the
> software developed will be
> truly open source; it will be this because of the
> general availability that
> the MediaWiki SVN implies.
>
> With such a framework in place, it does not need to
> take three months to
> install an extension. It does however not imply that
> any extension available
> in SVN will be installed. There is more to that.
>
> Thanks,
>     GerardM
>
> On 4/17/07, Birgitte SB <birgitte_sb at yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > To better clarify:
> >
> > Projects should find volunteers, partners, or
> grants
> > to invest in new features.  However once that
> > investment is done the b'crats of a wiki do not
> have
> > the ability to turn it on, activate it, whatever
> the
> > right terminology is.  A developer who is somehow
> > under the oversight of WMF must decide if an
> extention
> > that has been developed is acceptable for a
> Wikimedia
> > wiki.  I don't know how they decide that, but I
> > imagine it has to do with security and stability.
> If
> > they decide it is acceptable, the extention is put
> on
> > the wiki.  If they decide it is not, then they
> tell
> > the requesting parties why it is not acceptable.
> > Presumably the people who worked on it originally
> (not
> > WMF developers) go back to work on it for another
> try
> > or else they give up on it.
> >
> > I am specifing what WMF's responsibilty is AFTER
> the
> > investments you are talking about have already
> been
> > made.  I am not putting any constrainsts on the
> actual
> > development of features.
> >
> > Birgitte SB
> >
> >
> > --- Birgitte SB <birgitte_sb at yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > > I think you misunderstand me.  I am not talking
> > > about
> > > developers writing code for extentions, but
> simply a
> > > developer "turning on" an existing extension or
> else
> > > saying they will not turn on that extension
> unitil
> > > some specified problem is fixed.
> > >
> > > Birgitte SB
> > >
> > >
> > > --- Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hoi,
> > > > Do not put artificial constraints in. When an
> > > > extension is realistic in
> > > > that it provides a service that will benefit a
> > > > particular project or
> > > > even language, it may be that an investment in
> > > > developer time of more
> > > > that three months is worth the effort. When a
> > > > project is expensive,
> > > > there are all kinds of grants possible to gain
> > > > either developer time or
> > > > money to pay for the development of this code.
> > > Often
> > > > it is not only a
> > > > WMF project that does benefit from an
> extension.
> > > > When such parties are
> > > > found and when the development becomes a
> shared
> > > > effort much more becomes
> > > > feasible.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > >     GerardM
> > > >
> > > > Birgitte SB schreef:
> > > > > The WMF provides the essential
> infrastructure
> > > and
> > > > an
> > > > > organizational framework for the support and
> > > > > development of multilingual wiki projects.
> > > > Wikimedia
> > > > > wikis must be able to technically adapt in
> an
> > > > > individual manner to succeed.
> > > > >
> > > > > Needs to be met?
> > > > > Local extension requests must be evaluated
> by a
> > > > > developer with the ability to implement them
> > > > within
> > > > > three months.
> > > > >
> > > > > For whom?
> > > > > Wikimedia communities
> > > > >
> > > > > At what cost?
> > > > > Not sure; at the cost of other bugs I
> suppose.
> > > On
> > > > the
> > > > > waiting side, three months seems like a long
> > > time
> > > > to
> > > > > find out if an extension is acceptable or
> needs
> > > > more
> > > > > work.  But if it is not realistic to people
> on
> > > the
> > > > > developer side, please adjust to any set
> time
> > > > period.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Birgitte SB
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --- Florence Devouard <Anthere9 at yahoo.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >> Dear all,
> > > > >>
> > > > >> In the past few days, I have explored more
> > > > >> systematically the policy
> > > > >> governance model, and how it could be
> > > > implemented.By
> > > > >> the way, I found a
> > > > >> short article about it on the english
> wikipedia
> > > :
> > > >
> > > > >>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Policy_Governance
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> One of the things the board has to design
> is
> > > what
> > > > is
> > > > >> called the ENDS.
> > > > >> In each ends, the board defines which needs
> are
> > > > to
> > > > >> be met, for whom, and
> > > > >> at what cost.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Let me give you two examples of ends.
> > > > >> *******************************
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> The WMF is the host provider of several
> > > websites,
> > > > >> referred to as
> > > > >> Wikimedia project.  Wikimedia websites must
> be
> > > up
> > > > >> and running
> > > > >> efficiently, 24/24 hours, 7 days a week.
> That
> > > is
> > > > the
> > > > >> priority of WMF.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Needs to be met ?
> > > > >> Information must be accessible anytime.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> For whom ?
> > > > >> Any person with internet access
> > > > >>
> > > > >> At what cost ?
> > > > >> Well, within limits reasonable with the
> revenue
> > > > we
> > > > >> have. If we had
> > > > >> figures to mention, we could say max 1
> million
> > > > per
> > > > >> year.
> > > > >> *******************************
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Another example
> > > > >>
> > > > >> The WMF is the organiser of an annual
> > > conference,
> > > > >> Wikimania.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Needs to be met ?
> > > > >> Both a scientific conference and a
> community
> > > > event,
> > > > >> Wikimania brings
> > > > >> together members of various Wikimedia
> projects
> > > in
> > > > >> order to exchange
> > > > >> ideas, build relationships, and report on
> > > > research
> > > > >> and project efforts.
> > > > >> It also provides an opportunity for
> Wikimedians
> > > > and
> > > > >> the general public
> > > > >> alike to meet and share ideas about free
> and
> > > open
> > > > >> source software, free
> > > > >> knowledge initiatives, and wiki projects
> > > > worldwide.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> For whom ?
> > > > >> Primarily for Wikimedians. Secondarily for
> the
> > > > >> general public
> > > > >>
> > > > >> At what cost ?
> > > > >> No cost. WMF should find sponsors to cover
> > > > Wikimania
> > > > >> costs by large.
> > > > >> *******************************
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Now, these are two easy ends to define.
> > > > >> What I would like to ask you help on, is to
> > > > define
> > > > >> more ends, which
> > > > >> describe what you think the WMF is about.
> The
> > > two
> > > > >> ends I mentionned
> > > > >> above a "long term" ends, they would be
> listed
> > > > this
> > > > >> year, and then next
> > > > >> year and probably the year after. Not all
> ends
> > > > are
> > > > >> this way. We could
> > > > >> also have an end valid only one year, or
> only 3
> > > > >> months.
> > > > >> Let us say we want a BIG technical meeting
> > > around
> > > > >> Mediawiki to occur in
> > > > >> the next 6 months, it would be one END.
> > > > >> Or we want to produce a DVD of the english
> high
> > > > >> quality content, it
> > > > >> could be another END.
> > > > >> Actually, hiring an ED could also be an end
> :-)
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Now, before you tell me "eh, we elected you
> > > guys
> > > > to
> > > > >> think of that for
> > > > >> us", my answer will be "no, you elected us
> to
> > > > >> represent your dreams
> > > > >> about WMF, and to make sure your dreams
> > > happen".
> > > > >> So, what I am currently asking you is
> > > > >>
> > > > >> "What do you want Wikimedia Foundation to
> focus
> > > > its
> > > > >> attention on in the
> > > > >> next few months, few years or more".
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Whether you are members on the "paper"
> (bylaws)
> > > > or
> > > > >> not, morally, you are
> > > > >> the owners of the organization. I do not
> think
> > > > the
> > > > >> editors represent the
> > > > >> only owners, but the editors definitly are
> part
> > > > of
> > > > >> the owners. So, I ask
> > > > >> you your opinion as owners.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> What do you think we should achieve ? If
> you
> > > had
> > > > 5
> > > > >> points to list, what
> > > > >> would they be ?
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> ant
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> _______________________________________________
> > > > foundation-l mailing list
> > > > foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> __________________________________________________
> > > Do You Yahoo!?
> > > Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> > > protection around
> > > http://mail.yahoo.com
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > foundation-l mailing list
> > > foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > >
> >
>
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> > >
> >
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> protection around
> > http://mail.yahoo.com
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> >
>
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

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


list: textbook-l

subject: No subject

body:
Academy Awards?
http://movies.msn.com/movies/oscars2007/?icid=ncoscartagline1


subject: No subject

body:
http://www.quartertothree.com/game-talk/showpost.php?p=3D856122&postcount=
=3D3

Fred


subject: No subject

body:
deletion debate, or nominating an article for deletion. No idea how to
enforce it,but it would be a good thing for the encyclopedia. Obviously
notable stuff wouldn't get deleted. Non-notable stuff would get truly
vetted.

Mgm

On 1/14/07, Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote:
>
> MacGyverMagic/Mgm wrote:
>
> >I had blanket votes as much as the next guy, but I don't like visiting
> >project deletion boards for each of the topics I'm interested in. I don't
> >have that much time. When they're centralized, I can see what is being
> >discussed at one single glance. Visiting 15 different pages is going to
> >cause time problems. We should force people to stay away from subjects
> they
> >don't know about unless they want to do the research.
> >
> That would be fine as long as the rule also applies to those making the
> nominations.
>
> Ec
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


subject: No subject

body:
We teach librarians how to evaluate sources, and how to teach
the students they will help how to evaluate.

For many years we've been
teaching how to evaluate web sources, and both students and
librarians have gotten fairly good at it.  It's even easier to
teach how to evaluate & use WP: paid advertising is not prominent
among the results, and a good deal of material present on the
web is filtered out: if you enter a city name you will not get
airline schedules, weather forecasts, and hotel advertisements.
Even the biases are more likely to be out in the open, and you
can check them by looking at related articles. At a more advanced
level, the edit histories make very good teaching examples.

What students (including library school students) are weak
at is evaluating print sources.

The material you linked to is about as good a statement as
I have seen. I would have emphasized even more the
use of WP as a starting point, and the use of external
links. WP is not primarily a web directory, but it is a useful
web directory nevertheless.

On 1/16/07, phoebe ayers <phoebe.wiki at gmail.com> wrote:
> All,
>
> I received a message (below) from a librarian at a US high school who is
> considering writing a policy for their students regarding the use of
> Wikipedia in research papers. She asked for my input and whether I knew of
> any similar policies in schools -- either middle and high schools or
> colleges and universities. This:
> http://www3.iath.virginia.edu/lists_archive/Humanist/v20/0080.html
> is the kind of thing she's interested in  (this particular policy appears,
> by the way, to be completely sensible -- the main flaws I found were they
> missed the permanent link and citation features, and they called us "the
> world's blog").
>
> I pointed her towards
> * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Schools_FAQ
> * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citing_Wikipedia
> * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Researching_with_Wikipedia, and
> * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Academic_use
>
> which seem to be en:'s documentation on the subject of academic use. But I'm
> wondering if any of you:
>
> * know of such policies at specific institutions (and if so if you can send
> me a link)
> * know of commentary on, or a list of, such policies (either from our lists
> & sites or other places)
> * have comments about such policies and what should go into them.
> * if any of you are librarians or professors, if you have answers for the
> last question about how WP is handled at reference desks and in classes.
>
> Thanks!
> phoebe (brassratgirl)
>
> here's the message (with specific campus names taken out):
>
> >I am the head librarian at a college prep high school in California. We are
>
> >considering writing a school policy regarding the use of Wikipedia in
> >academic research. I am gathering as much information as I can from
> >universities because I would like our policy and instruction to reflect
> what
> >our students will be met with once they leave us.
> >
> >  Does the University of California have a policy about the use of
> Wikipedia or do professors to
> >set guidelines for its use?
> >
> >  In your opinion, based on your experience at various universities, are
> students allowed to cite it in academic research papers?
> >
> >  Do professors address it at all and how is it handled at the reference
> desk at university libraries.
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>

--
David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S.


subject: No subject

body:
But when you look
here<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:Article_starter>,
you see this is false.

On 1/23/07, Brian Salter-Duke <b_duke at bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 23, 2007 at 10:51:22AM -0500, Mets501 wrote:
> > Would anyone object to preloading a references section in every new
> article?
> > For example, when a user searches for a topic and clicks the big "Create
> > this article" link, the user will be shown a page like this:
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Testing...testing...testing
> > <
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Testing...testing...testing&actio
> > n=edit&preload=Template:Article+starter>
> > &action=edit&preload=Template:Article+starter.
> >
> >
> >
> > The text of this template is at [[Template:Article starter]].
>
> Why not add <references/> as well. I'm always forgetting to check
> whether it is there before editing a section and adding refs.
>
> >
> >
> > --Mets501
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
>
> --
>          Brian Salter-Duke            b_duke at bigpond.net.au
>               [[User:Bduke]]  mainly on en:Wikipedia.
>           Also on fr: Wikipedia, Meta-Wiki and Wikiversity
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

--
en:User:Firefoxman

This user is.


subject: No subject

body:
"Protected Template:Article starter: included in MediaWiki namespace =
[edit=3Dsysop:move=3Dsysop]"
=20

But when you look here =
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:Article_star=
ter> , you see this is false.
=20

On 1/23/07, Brian Salter-Duke <b_duke at bigpond.net.au> wrote:=20

On Tue, Jan 23, 2007 at 10:51:22AM -0500, Mets501 wrote:
> Would anyone object to preloading a references section in every new =
article?=20
> For example, when a user searches for a topic and clicks the big =
"Create
> this article" link, the user will be shown a page like this:
> =
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=3DTesting...testing...testing
> =
<http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=3DTesting...testing...testing =
<http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=3DTesting...testing...testing&=
actio> &actio=20
> n=3Dedit&preload=3DTemplate:Article+starter>
> &action=3Dedit&preload=3DTemplate:Article+starter.
>
>
>
> The text of this template is at [[Template:Article starter]].

Why not add <references/> as well. I'm always forgetting to check
whether it is there before editing a section and adding refs.

>
>
> --Mets501
>
>
>
>
>=20
> ------------------------------

--
         Brian Salter-Duke            b_duke at bigpond.net.au
              [[User:Bduke]]  mainly on en:Wikipedia.
          Also on fr: Wikipedia, Meta-Wiki and Wikiversity=20

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

--=20
en:User:Firefoxman

This user is.=20


subject: No subject

body:
very accurate and moderately precise.  When I find them in areas for
which I'm familiar with the body of knowledge and reliable sources, I
will spend time to go find the appropriate citations and sources as
time allows, to "back up" the already existing content with
appropriate references.

The current thread is grossly insulting to the accuracy of the average
Wikipedia article and contributor.

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