subject: [Wikitech-l] Grammar for mediawiki markup?

body:
Jeremy Dunck wrote:
> I'm planning to parse the page text from wikipedia downloads.
>
> Is there a document of all the supported markups (past and present),
> or is the PHP code all there is to go off of?

Unfortunately there is no formal, official grammar for the wiki markup.
I'm afraid you'll have to work off the code (which isn't always 'right')
and various help pages (which aren't always right either ;)

There is a set of parser test cases in maintenance/parserTests.txt (not
all of which are passed by the current code).

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 253 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20050902/c801519f/attachment.pgp>


list: wikien-l

source: pipermail-mbox

from_name: Delirium

subject: [WikiEN-l] Looking at the real world

body:
James D. Forrester wrote:

>geni wrote:
>
>
>>On 9/2/05, Skyring <skyring at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>In the past day, [[user:jtdirl]] has published my name and address, and
>>>[[user:mackensen]] has accused me of criminal acts.
>>>
>>>
>>People who play with fire get burned.
>>
>>
>
>And further, accessing a computer system without authorisation is
>illegal in the US, the UK, and Australia, to name but a few countries;
>given that you are banned from Wikipedia, any edits that you were to
>make would constitute such an illegal act. Several sysops, and not just
>Mackensen, have suggested that you may well be doing this, violating
>your ban order. Perhaps you might want to think about finding another
>place to play, Skyring?
>
>
I would have a hard time using this to justify the publication of
someone's personal information on Wikipedia.  If it were some serious
alleged crime, such as death threats, perhaps that would be warranted,
but evading a ban doesn't rise to the level where I would be comfortable
"outing" people.  At least during the period when I was on the ArbCom,
when we used evidence of people's real identies or even IPs to ban
sockpuppets and reincarnations, we didn't publish that evidence publicly
on the wiki.

-Mark


list: commons-l

from_name: Tim 'avatar' Bartel

subject: [Commons-l] Birthday

body:
Hi,

I just noticed that our beloved Wikimedia Commons will have its first
birtday next Tuesday. I think it's pretty impressing how fast our baby
has grown up - even if it sometimes has children's deseases, I think we
(as 'parents') can be proud of this.

Keep up your good work!

Bye, Tim 'avatar' Bartel.

--
"I worry about my child and the Internet all the time, even though
 she's too young to have logged on yet. Here's what I worry about. I
 worry that 10 or 15 years from now, she will come to me and say
 'Daddy, where were you when they took freedom of the press away from
 the Internet?'"    --Mike Godwin, Electronic Frontier Foundation

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 548 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/commons-l/attachments/20050903/8b89c007/attachment.pgp


list: wikitech-l

from_name: Jeremy Dunck

body:
I'm planning to parse the page text from wikipedia downloads.

Is there a document of all the supported markups (past and present),
or is the PHP code all there is to go off of?


subject: [Wikitech-l] Download for nostalgia edition?

body:
I'm trying to get started with a stats project, and the data size for
en.wp.org is a bit daunting for initial testing.

Unfortunately, I am only fluent in English.  Is there a download for
the nostalgia edition of wp.org?  I see that simple.wikipedia.org is
available, but this one's a bit too small for my purposes.


list: foundation-l

from_name: Jean-Baptiste Soufron

subject: [Foundation-l] We made it !!!!!!

body:
Vive la f?te !

Anthere a ?crit :
> We are in first page of Le Monde, with several pages included inside.
> Le Monde is the *first* newspaper in France. This is an amazing day.
>
> http://www.lemonde.fr/
>
> Anthere
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>


list: wikimedia-l

subject: [Foundation-l] We made it !!!!!!


from_name: Brion Vibber

subject:
[Wikitech-l] Re: [MediaWiki-CVS] phase3/includes Image.php, 1.116,
	1.117

body:
?var Arnfj?r? Bjarmason wrote:
> Modified Files:
> 	Image.php
> Log Message:
> * Reverting back to 1.115, not inserting {{ and }} automatically means that the
>   license selector can be used to insert arbitary text, not just templates,
>   this doesn't break it either since you just have to change the entries in
>   MediaWiki:Licenses from e.g:
>     * GFDL|GNU Free Documentation License
>   to:
>     * {{GFDL}}|GNU Free Documentation License
>   to get the same functionality as before

No you can't, because brace replacement happens at wfMsg() time, which
is before the text is picked apart and added to a list.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 253 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20050903/a85f9c0f/attachment.pgp>


from_name: Delphine Ménard

subject: [Foundation-l] Re: We made it !!!!!!

body:
On 9/2/05, Ashar Voultoiz <hashar at altern.org> wrote:
> > We are in first page of Le Monde, with several pages included inside.
> > Le Monde is the *first* newspaper in France. This is an amazing day.

> Is that only on the website or also on "la une" of the paper version ?

Also the paper version... today's (3rd September) edition.

Which is...even more than great :D

Just to make things clear, Le Monde is not the *biggest* newspaper in
France, as it prints only around 350000 ex a day, far from the first
daily newspaper in France "Ouest France" (more than a million) but in
terms of recognition, it is definitely one of the greatest. Making it
to the first page of Le Monde is *big*.

Delphine
--
~notafish


subject: [Foundation-l] Re: We made it !!!!!!


from_name: Walter van Kalken

subject: [Foundation-l] We made it !!!!!!

body:
Congrats :)

Walter/Waerth

> We are in first page of Le Monde, with several pages included inside.
> Le Monde is the *first* newspaper in France. This is an amazing day.
>
> http://www.lemonde.fr/
>
> Anthere
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>


subject: [Foundation-l] We made it !!!!!!


from_name: geni

subject: [WikiEN-l] Looking at the real world

body:
On 9/2/05, Skyring <skyring at gmail.com> wrote:
> In the past day, [[user:jtdirl]] has published my name and address, and
> [[user:mackensen]] has accused me of criminal acts. Other admins apparently
> support both actions.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=prev&oldid=22362309
>  What is wrong with you people? Take a step back from your world of user
> accounts and internal rules and get your priorities right. Please.
>
> --
> Peter in Canberra

People who play with fire get burned.
--
geni


from_name: James D. Forrester

subject: [WikiEN-l] Looking at the real world

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

geni wrote:

> On 9/2/05, Skyring <skyring at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > In the past day, [[user:jtdirl]] has published my name and address, and
> > [[user:mackensen]] has accused me of criminal acts.
>
> People who play with fire get burned.

And further, accessing a computer system without authorisation is
illegal in the US, the UK, and Australia, to name but a few countries;
given that you are banned from Wikipedia, any edits that you were to
make would constitute such an illegal act. Several sysops, and not just
Mackensen, have suggested that you may well be doing this, violating
your ban order. Perhaps you might want to think about finding another
place to play, Skyring?

Yours sincerely,
- --
James D. Forrester
Wikimedia : [[W:en:User:Jdforrester|James F.]]
E-Mail    : james at jdforrester.org
IM (MSN)  : jamesdforrester at hotmail.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFDGQVukn3kUxZyJx0RAhnxAJ9HKCGQo3m4zYWaqs62xk8crumxNQCfXQP3
Lc8AToWGDemLTturQBh0KBg=
=RYpI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


subject: [Foundation-l] Re: We made it !!!!!! DVD

references:
<dfa7jb$mga$1@sea.gmane.org>	<4314D6CF000174D2@mssbzhb-int.msg.bluewin.ch>
	<dfa9ol$svp$1@sea.gmane.org>

body:
>
> The implications might be various. Possibly an impact on the
> publication of a DVD (which might be interesting for more than just
> french people).

On a DVD my father and a bussinessparter for his have been experimenting
with a DVD edition for the nl.wikipedia. They are interested in a recent
dump. Once they figure out all technicalities, we want to talk with the
board about it.

Waerth/Walter


subject: [Foundation-l] We made it !!!!!!

body:
Lars Aronsson wrote:
> Congratulations to the media attention!  However, that article
> refers to http://wikipedia.fr/ and the website at this URL opens a
> frameset which includes fr.wikipedia.org.  This has the
> unfortunate effect that the web browser's address field says
> http://wikipedia.fr/ even when I go to other articles, making it
> harder to find a bookmarkable URL for pages.  It would be easy
> enough for fr.wikipedia.org to contain some JavaScript that
> escapes the enclosing frameset,

We do have such JavaScript, and it seems to work fine there in breaking
out so fr.wikipedia.org reaches the top-level. (Tested Safari 2.0.1)

> but it would be better to change
> wikipedia.fr into a redirect instead of this evil frameset.

Do we own or control it?

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 253 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/attachments/20050903/84b27be8/attachment.pgp


subject: [Foundation-l] We made it !!!!!!

body:
Lars Aronsson wrote:
> Congratulations to the media attention!  However, that article
> refers to http://wikipedia.fr/ and the website at this URL opens a
> frameset which includes fr.wikipedia.org.  This has the
> unfortunate effect that the web browser's address field says
> http://wikipedia.fr/ even when I go to other articles, making it
> harder to find a bookmarkable URL for pages.  It would be easy
> enough for fr.wikipedia.org to contain some JavaScript that
> escapes the enclosing frameset,

We do have such JavaScript, and it seems to work fine there in breaking
out so fr.wikipedia.org reaches the top-level. (Tested Safari 2.0.1)

> but it would be better to change
> wikipedia.fr into a redirect instead of this evil frameset.

Do we own or control it?

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 253 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/attachments/20050903/84b27be8/attachment-0001.pgp


subject: [Foundation-l] We made it !!!!!!

body:
Lars Aronsson wrote:
> Congratulations to the media attention!  However, that article
> refers to http://wikipedia.fr/ and the website at this URL opens a
> frameset which includes fr.wikipedia.org.  This has the
> unfortunate effect that the web browser's address field says
> http://wikipedia.fr/ even when I go to other articles, making it
> harder to find a bookmarkable URL for pages.  It would be easy
> enough for fr.wikipedia.org to contain some JavaScript that
> escapes the enclosing frameset,

We do have such JavaScript, and it seems to work fine there in breaking
out so fr.wikipedia.org reaches the top-level. (Tested Safari 2.0.1)

> but it would be better to change
> wikipedia.fr into a redirect instead of this evil frameset.

Do we own or control it?

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 253 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/attachments/20050903/84b27be8/attachment.pgp>


subject: [Foundation-l] We made it !!!!!!

body:
Lars Aronsson wrote:
> Congratulations to the media attention!  However, that article
> refers to http://wikipedia.fr/ and the website at this URL opens a
> frameset which includes fr.wikipedia.org.  This has the
> unfortunate effect that the web browser's address field says
> http://wikipedia.fr/ even when I go to other articles, making it
> harder to find a bookmarkable URL for pages.  It would be easy
> enough for fr.wikipedia.org to contain some JavaScript that
> escapes the enclosing frameset,

We do have such JavaScript, and it seems to work fine there in breaking
out so fr.wikipedia.org reaches the top-level. (Tested Safari 2.0.1)

> but it would be better to change
> wikipedia.fr into a redirect instead of this evil frameset.

Do we own or control it?

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 253 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/attachments/20050903/84b27be8/attachment-0001.pgp>


subject: [Wikitech-l] Dump progress

body:
I wrote a couple days ago:
> * Progress and error reporting: The old backup script was a hacky shell
> script with no error detection or recovery, requireing manually stopping
> replication on a database server and reconfiguring the wiki cluster for
> the duration. If something went awry, maybe nobody noticed... the
> hackiness of this is a large part of why we've never just let it run
> automatically on a cronjob.
>
> I want to rework this for better automation and to provide useful
> indications of what it's doing, where it's up to, and if something went
> wrong.
>
> STATUS: Not yet started. Hope to have done tomorrow or Friday.

A semi-experimental backup run is in progress now.

Try for instance:
http://download.wikimedia.org/special/sources/

For your amusement there's a log for each wiki:
http://download.wikimedia.org/special/sources/backup.log

There's also now a page dump which excludes user pages and talk pages in
addition to the full and all-current sets:
http://download.wikimedia.org/special/sources/pages_public.xml.gz

And uploaded files should be included again:
http://download.wikimedia.org/special/sources/upload.tar

It's entirely possible that there are still horrible problems and we'll
have to run it over, of course. :)

> * Clean up download.wikimedia.org further, make use of status files left
> by the updated backup runner script.
>
> STATUS: Not yet started. (Doesn't have to be up before the backup starts.)

Haven't gotten to this yet, will try by the end of the weekend if no one
else tries their hand.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 253 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20050903/4ba02385/attachment.pgp>


from_name: Kovács Endre János

body:
Because on many occasions Google does find the page in question in a certain
other language.

According to Google, the Hungarian Wikipedia has 3870 articles written "in
English":
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=lang_en&as_q=h%C3%A1bor%C3%BA&as_sitesearch=hu.wikipedia.org

Over 52,000 articles "in Czech":
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=lang_cs&as_q=h%C3%A1bor%C3%BA&as_sitesearch=hu.wikipedia.org

Two articles which Google thinks are in Chinese (simplified):
http://www.google.com/search?lr=lang_zh-CN&as_sitesearch=hu.wikipedia.org

The Hungarian article about the National anthem of Russia is supposedly in
traditional Chinese:
http://www.google.com/search?lr=lang_zh-CN&as_sitesearch=hu.wikipedia.org

And so on.

Regards,
Endre (KovacsUr at huwiki)

----- Original Message -----
From: "Angela" <beesley at gmail.com>
To: "Wikimedia developers" <wikitech-l at wikimedia.org>
Sent: Friday, September 02, 2005 10:22 PM
Subject: Re: [Wikitech-l] Assisting Google's language recognition?

> Google miscategorizes the language of some of the Hungarian Wikipedia
> pages. E.g. it thinks that our Adolf Hitler article is in czech.

How do you know they are miscategorising the language?

<http://www.google.com/search?q=inurl%3A%22Adolf+Hitler%22+site%3Ahu.wikiped
ia.org>

This makes it seem like they haven't indexed the page at all, not that
they've marked it as the wrong language.

Angela.
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l at wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


body:
[Sorry, I posted the wrong links for the first two searches in my previous
message.]

Because on many occasions Google does find the page in question in a certain
other language.

According to Google, the Hungarian Wikipedia has 3870 articles written "in
English":
http://www.google.com/search?lr=lang_en&as_sitesearch=hu.wikipedia.org

Over 52,000 articles "in Czech":
http://www.google.com/search?lr=lang_cs&as_sitesearch=hu.wikipedia.org

Two articles which Google thinks are in Chinese (simplified):
http://www.google.com/search?lr=lang_zh-CN&as_sitesearch=hu.wikipedia.org

The Hungarian article about the National anthem of Russia is supposedly in
traditional Chinese:
http://www.google.com/search?lr=lang_zh-CN&as_sitesearch=hu.wikipedia.org

And so on.

Regards,
Endre (KovacsUr at huwiki)

----- Original Message -----
From: "Angela" <beesley at gmail.com>
To: "Wikimedia developers" <wikitech-l at wikimedia.org>
Sent: Friday, September 02, 2005 10:22 PM
Subject: Re: [Wikitech-l] Assisting Google's language recognition?

> > Google miscategorizes the language of some of the Hungarian Wikipedia
> > pages. E.g. it thinks that our Adolf Hitler article is in czech.
>
> How do you know they are miscategorising the language?
>
>
<http://www.google.com/search?q=inurl%3A%22Adolf+Hitler%22+site%3Ahu.wikiped
> ia.org>
>
> This makes it seem like they haven't indexed the page at all, not that
> they've marked it as the wrong language.
>
> Angela.


from_name: Sean Barrett

subject: [Wikien-l] Looking at the real world

body:
MAURICE FRANK stated for the record:

> ... then the continued existence of
> Wikipedia has been proved entirely illegal.

If you become aware of a crime, and you do not do alert the authorities,
especially when the crime is continuous and growing, you are guilty of
being an accessory.  Since you have not filed criminal charges (I
recommend the FBI -- Wikipedia is certainly engaged in interstate
commerce), you are patently proved to be in conspiracy to cover up the
crime and obstruct justice.

--
  Sean Barrett     | You can believe anything you want.
  sean at epoptic.com | The Arbitration Committee is not
                   | obliged to keep a straight face.


from_name: Tomasz Wegrzanowski

body:
On Sat, Sep 03, 2005 at 01:25:05AM -0500, Jeremy Dunck wrote:
> I'm trying to get started with a stats project, and the data size for
> en.wp.org is a bit daunting for initial testing.
>
> Unfortunately, I am only fluent in English.  Is there a download for
> the nostalgia edition of wp.org?  I see that simple.wikipedia.org is
> available, but this one's a bit too small for my purposes.

Do you really to be fluent in a language to run a few test scripts ?
Just fetch the French, German or Dutch wikipedia, they're sufficiently
similar to English for you to be able to understand what's going on.


body:
On 9/3/05, Brion Vibber <brion at pobox.com> wrote:
> There is a set of parser test cases in maintenance/parserTests.txt (not
> all of which are passed by the current code).

Good info, thanks.  I should have asked: is there already a page text
parser in Python?  A grep of the source for pywikipediabot didn't turn
up anything.


from_name: Przykuta

subject: Re: [Foundation-l] We made it !!!!!!

body:
> We are in first page of Le Monde, with several pages included inside.
> Le Monde is the *first* newspaper in France. This is an amazing day.
>
> http://www.lemonde.fr/
>
> Anthere
>
It's nice :)


subject: Re: [Foundation-l] We made it !!!!!!


from_name: steve v

subject: [WikiEN-l] Looking at the real world

body:
--- "James D. Forrester" <james at jdforrester.org>
wrote:

> BTW, I'm troubled by your suggestion that we are
> harsh. This suggests,
> amongst other points, two things: firstly, that
> we're here to meet out
> justice, and secondly that we're here to do so
> fairly. Neither of these
> are true. The Committee is charged with maintaining
> the project and
> protecting it from disruption with the means at its
> disposal. We are
> not, have never been, and will never be here to
> punish people for things
>  they do on the wiki. Instead, we look at things
> from the perspective of
> what is best for the project.

Well, this is all nice and good, but the "whatever's
best for the project" angle doesnt preclude the basic
notion that Arbcom is a service which implies a due
process, and that both the review and process models
are best served if they have at least some resemblance
to concepts of justice or fairness (at least
remotely).

The Arbcom was formed not to simply be an extension of
rule-by-decree, but as an institution of review by
peers for peers. The monarchial model is a double
edged sword: fast executive power are offset by an
excessive burden of duty-and-blame, which in the end
winds up equating to sluggish non-responsiveness to
bottom-up community needs. BTW, I find it troubling
that you would take a criticism suggesting harshness
as "troubling." Can't take a criticism?

I appreciate the care put into your response (not a
screed at all) but IMHO, saying a judgement cant
possibly be "harsh" because the process 'isnt based on
fairness at all to begin with,' is a bit
counterintelligent. Even war criminals claim they were
'just doing their job.' Not that this is the same
thing at all, but that seems to be the basic logic
involved.

SV
"He thinks the carpet-pissers did it?"

__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail for Mobile
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Check email on your mobile phone.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/learn/mail


from_name: MAURICE FRANK

subject: [Wikien-l] Looking at the real world

body:
Ah, but there is one circumstance in which such
accessing of Wikipedia is not an illegal act. That is
when its purpose is to stop Wikipedia committing an
illegal act upon you. Wikipedia is committing an
illegal act upon me by trying to ignore my citation,
made by email to Jimmy Wales as well as on this list,
for it to the remove every word I have ever
contributed to Wikipedia, on grounds of copyright
violation and ides theft, and ensure they stay removed
despite the public editability of pages. Unless you
can demonstrate that the second requirement is
technically possible, then the continued existence of
Wikipedia has been proved entirely illegal.

Anything Skyring is doing that his block blocks him
from doing, to raise awareness of the way he has been
treated and seek due process concerning it, is
automatically legal. Anything I do to raise awareness
in the other editors of every page I've contributed
to, of the violatuion they are dealing with, is
automatically legal.

Message: 8
Date: Sat, 03 Sep 2005 03:07:42 +0100
From: "James D. Forrester" <james at jdforrester.org>
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Looking at the real world
To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
Message-ID: <4319056E.20100 at jdforrester.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

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

geni wrote:

> On 9/2/05, Skyring <skyring at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > In the past day, [[user:jtdirl]] has published my
name and address,
and
> > [[user:mackensen]] has accused me of criminal
acts.
>
> People who play with fire get burned.

And further, accessing a computer system without
authorisation is
illegal in the US, the UK, and Australia, to name but
a few countries;
given that you are banned from Wikipedia, any edits
that you were to
make would constitute such an illegal act. Several
sysops, and not just
Mackensen, have suggested that you may well be doing
this, violating
your ban order. Perhaps you might want to think about
finding another
place to play, Skyring?

Yours sincerely,
- --
James D. Forrester
Wikimedia : [[W:en:User:Jdforrester|James F.]]
E-Mail    : james at jdforrester.org
IM (MSN)  : jamesdforrester at hotmail.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird -
http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFDGQVukn3kUxZyJx0RAhnxAJ9HKCGQo3m4zYWaqs62xk8crumxNQCfXQP3
Lc8AToWGDemLTturQBh0KBg=
=RYpI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

___________________________________________________________
To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! Security Centre. http://uk.security.yahoo.com


subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: Grammar for mediawiki markup?

body:
On 9/3/05, Ashar Voultoiz <hashar at altern.org> wrote:
> Jeremy Dunck wrote:
>  > Good info, thanks.  I should have asked: is there already a page text
> > parser in Python?  A grep of the source for pywikipediabot didn't turn
> > up anything.
>
> pywikipediabot works directly with wikitext. I think Kate Turner did a
> simple mediawiki using python, can't find it though.

Thanks for pointing that out.  I'm just finding that the parsing logic
is spread throughout the functionality of the library in the form of
regex's, as opposed to having an actual parser with resulting tree.

I'm sure this was an informed choice -- I'll post to their mailing
list for information on that choice.


subject: [Wikien-l] Looking at the real world

body:
On 9/3/05, MAURICE FRANK <megaknee at btopenworld.com> wrote:
> Ah, but there is one circumstance in which such
> accessing of Wikipedia is not an illegal act. That is
> when its purpose is to stop Wikipedia committing an
> illegal act upon you. Wikipedia is committing an
> illegal act upon me by trying to ignore my citation,
> made by email to Jimmy Wales as well as on this list,
> for it to the remove every word I have ever
> contributed to Wikipedia, on grounds of copyright
> violation and ides theft, and ensure they stay removed
> despite the public editability of pages. Unless you
> can demonstrate that the second requirement is
> technically possible, then the continued existence of
> Wikipedia has been proved entirely illegal.
>
> Anything Skyring is doing that his block blocks him
> from doing, to raise awareness of the way he has been
> treated and seek due process concerning it, is
> automatically legal. Anything I do to raise awareness
> in the other editors of every page I've contributed
> to, of the violatuion they are dealing with, is
> automatically legal.
>

Everying you contributed was relised uner the GFDL. We correctly
credit you. You have no case.

--
geni


from_name: Lars Aronsson

subject: [Foundation-l] We made it !!!!!!

body:
Anthere wrote:
> We are in first page of Le Monde, with several pages included inside.
> Le Monde is the *first* newspaper in France. This is an amazing day.
> http://www.lemonde.fr/

Congratulations to the media attention!  However, that article
refers to http://wikipedia.fr/ and the website at this URL opens a
frameset which includes fr.wikipedia.org.  This has the
unfortunate effect that the web browser's address field says
http://wikipedia.fr/ even when I go to other articles, making it
harder to find a bookmarkable URL for pages.  It would be easy
enough for fr.wikipedia.org to contain some JavaScript that
escapes the enclosing frameset, but it would be better to change
wikipedia.fr into a redirect instead of this evil frameset.

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


subject: [Foundation-l] We made it !!!!!!


subject: [WikiEN-l] Looking at the real world

body:
Matt R stated for the record:

> Are you saying that the ArbComm should be amoral?

Yes.  We are here to ensure that an encyclopedia can be built.  We don't
care if you are a pedophile, a Nazi, or a tax collector.  If you
contribute to the encyclopedia, we leave you alone.  If you hinder the
encyclopedia, you're out.  That is the entirety of our standards.

We're not bound by the American Bill of Rights.  We're not bound by
English common law.  We're not bound to be fair or just.  We're not even
bound by precedent, though we do try to learn from what works and what
doesn't work.  We usually obey the laws of thermodynamics.

> I would hope that fairness
> and a vague sense of justice would figure to some extent in the activities of
> the Arbitration Committee. Historically, that seems to have been the case.

--
  Sean Barrett     | Madness takes its toll.
  sean at epoptic.com | Please have exact change.


from_name: Gerard Meijssen

subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: Spell checking in MediaWiki

body:
Heiko Evermann wrote:

>Hi Mark,
>
>
>>Ahh, but Gerard, the words have the same origins, even if you spell
>>them differently.
>>
>>So Sass will spell it "greutens", and AS will spell it "groytens", but
>>they both have the same origin, and the same translations.
>>
>>
>
>Thanks a lot for this remark.
>
>Kind regards,
>
>Heiko
>
Hoi,
When a word's etymology is considered, its origin is often mistaken by
people because they look for the "ultimate" root for a word. They then
decide that it is for instance derived from a Latin or Greek word and
there is means so and so. When you look at etymology in this way, sure
you are "correct". An alternative way of looking is from what language
did it derive in this language, dialect; this etymology may be quite
different. It may be from French in stead. Historically this connection
is far more relevant. Linguistically I would say it is an enrichment if
you are aware of this flow.

Now I know that you know. And I also know that this discussion has
nothing to do with the subjectmatter discussed on the Wikitech-l. I will
from now on only discuss technical matters that are genuinely technical
on wikitech-l. Discussions on the use of Ultimate Wiktionary I will only
answer to on the Wiktionary-l.

Thanks,
    Gerard


from_name: Theresa Knott

subject: [WikiEN-l] Looking at the real world

body:
On 9/3/05, Delirium <delirium at hackish.org> wrote:
> James D. Forrester wrote:
>
> >geni wrote:
> >
> >
> >>On 9/2/05, Skyring <skyring at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>In the past day, [[user:jtdirl]] has published my name and address, and
> >>>[[user:mackensen]] has accused me of criminal acts.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>People who play with fire get burned.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >And further, accessing a computer system without authorisation is
> >illegal in the US, the UK, and Australia, to name but a few countries;
> >given that you are banned from Wikipedia, any edits that you were to
> >make would constitute such an illegal act. Several sysops, and not just
> >Mackensen, have suggested that you may well be doing this, violating
> >your ban order. Perhaps you might want to think about finding another
> >place to play, Skyring?
> >
> >
> I would have a hard time using this to justify the publication of
> someone's personal information on Wikipedia.

Skyring's name and address were removed pretty sharply. They are no
longer on Wikipedia. James was pointing out that [[user:mackensen]]
was justified in accusing Skyring of criminal acts.

Theresa


from_name: Edward Z. Yang

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

> I'm afraid you'll have to work off the code (which isn't always 'right')

Never underestimate the convolutedness of parser.php. If I were you, I'd
start simple (like grabbing all wikilinks off a page) and experiment.
Handling wikitext is like a black magic at times. I've done some
elementary classes for parsing pages, if you're interested.

- --
 Edward Z. Yang      Personal: edwardzyang at thewritingpot.com
 SN:Ambush Commander Website: http://www.thewritingpot.com/
 GPGKey:0x869C48DA   http://www.thewritingpot.com/gpgpubkey.asc
 3FA8 E9A9 7385 B691 A6FC B3CB A933 BE7D 869C 48DA
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (MingW32)

iD8DBQFDGcbpqTO+fYacSNoRAih4AJ4zA/5S26KB16XsF5PvN6G74meX0gCfa2rI
oWmvA1QM1hRX8qsJAAgvpU4=
=yua+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


from_name: Evan Martin

subject: [Wikitech-l] Assisting Google's language recognition?

body:
On 9/2/05, Angela <beesley at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Google miscategorizes the language of some of the Hungarian Wikipedia
> > pages. E.g. it thinks that our Adolf Hitler article is in czech.
>
> How do you know they are miscategorising the language?
> <http://www.google.com/search?q=inurl%3A%22Adolf+Hitler%22+site%3Ahu.wikipedia.org>
>
> This makes it seem like they haven't indexed the page at all, not that
> they've marked it as the wrong language.

I believe this is correct.  We've had problems in the past with
overloading wikipedia so the crawl has been throttled way back.


list: wikipedia-l

from_name: Rowan Collins

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Character usage

body:
On 01/09/05, Stephen Forrest <stephen.forrest at gmail.com> wrote:
> With Firefox on a vanilla Windows XP installation, the
> aesc-with-macron looks somewhat fainter than other characters.  With
> IE on the same machine, the aesc-with-macron doesn't even render for
> some reason.

I may be wrong, but I have a feeling Firefox can try to fill in
missing characters from other fonts, whereas IE just ignores them; so
the faint character is being pulled from some other Unicode font
somewhere on your system. [Or something like that, I don't know the
mechanics]

--
Rowan Collins BSc
[IMSoP]


from_name: Anthere

subject: [Foundation-l] Re: We made it !!!!!!

body:
Brion Vibber wrote:

> Lars Aronsson wrote:
>
>> Congratulations to the media attention!  However, that article
>> refers to http://wikipedia.fr/ and the website at this URL opens a
>> frameset which includes fr.wikipedia.org.  This has the
>> unfortunate effect that the web browser's address field says
>> http://wikipedia.fr/ even when I go to other articles, making it
>> harder to find a bookmarkable URL for pages.  It would be easy
>> enough for fr.wikipedia.org to contain some JavaScript that
>> escapes the enclosing frameset,
>
>
> We do have such JavaScript, and it seems to work fine there in breaking
> out so fr.wikipedia.org reaches the top-level. (Tested Safari 2.0.1)
>
>> but it would be better to change
>> wikipedia.fr into a redirect instead of this evil frameset.
>
>
> Do we own or control it?
>
> -- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)

Not the Foundation.

A french a**h*** bought it last fall when we first started to be
featured in the press. We know who he is. We had mail exchanges with him
already to try to get it back.

For now, he redirects to us, with a bad title and some frame issues
editors frequently complain about, but AT LEAST he redirects to us
rather than making cash with a mirror or anything else. This could be
worse...(see http://wikipedia.ru/)

We now have valid trademarks. So the Foundation could normally get the
domain back by going legal. I think we'll do if he starts being really a
problem. For now, stand by...

Ant


subject: [Foundation-l] Re: We made it !!!!!!


from_name: Skyring

subject: [WikiEN-l] Looking at the real world

body:
On 9/3/05, James D. Forrester <james at jdforrester.org> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> geni wrote:
>
> > On 9/2/05, Skyring <skyring at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > In the past day, [[user:jtdirl]] has published my name and address, and
> > > [[user:mackensen]] has accused me of criminal acts.
> >
> > People who play with fire get burned.
>
> And further, accessing a computer system without authorisation is
> illegal in the US, the UK, and Australia, to name but a few countries;
> given that you are banned from Wikipedia, any edits that you were to
> make would constitute such an illegal act. Several sysops, and not just
> Mackensen, have suggested that you may well be doing this, violating
> your ban order. Perhaps you might want to think about finding another
> place to play, Skyring?

Thanks, James. Given that Wikipedia doesn't require checking of
real-life identification before allowing access to the system, I can't
see your theory lasting too long in any court.

--
Peter in Canberra


subject: [WikiEN-l] Looking at the real world

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

steve v wrote:

[Re. The Committee's decision on Skyring]

> Is "no wiki-stalking" even a policy? Cause thats what
> people seem to do all around anyway. Skyring seems to
> have a basis for some review of the latest ruling,
> though I suppose people will want him to demonstrate
> patience and heed to the rules. (In spite of WP:IAR,
> no doubt). Was something else going on there, or did
> he just kind of rub people the wrong way by being a
> pov-pushing smart alec?

All appeals of Arbitration Committee rulings are to be directed to
Jimbo. This is made quite clear. :-) In this particular case, as can be
seen from its page, Jimbo was the one who asked us to review the case in
the first place in view of Skyring's highly disruptive and unhelpful
behaviour.

BTW, I'm troubled by your suggestion that we are harsh. This suggests,
amongst other points, two things: firstly, that we're here to meet out
justice, and secondly that we're here to do so fairly. Neither of these
are true. The Committee is charged with maintaining the project and
protecting it from disruption with the means at its disposal. We are
not, have never been, and will never be here to punish people for things
 they do on the wiki. Instead, we look at things from the perspective of
what is best for the project.

In this case we decided that Skyring's continued presence was not only
not conducive to the construction of an encyclop?dia, but actively
harmful, distracting worthwhile editors from actually writing and
maintaining it. As such, we banned him. It is not and should not be
thought of as a judgement on him personally, merely on his behaviour on
the project as shewn in evidence before the Committee.

In case anyone's wondering, we banned Skyring for a year rather than
permanently because we have a (non-binding) informal agreement to only
ban people for a maximum of a year, 12 months being such a very long
time on the Internet. If someone comes back after a year and is /still/
disruptive to the project, it is no great issue for us to re-ban them
for a year (as, indeed, we have now had to do, sadly).

If you think that people do "wikistalking" to the detriment of the
project, please bring them before the Arbitration Committee. It's what
we're here for, but we can't be everywhere and rely on editors concerned
with the project over petty recriminations to point out to us where our
oversight may be required.

Hmm. Sorry that this has turned into such a screed. Hopefully some will
read it and remember what we're all about: building and maintaining the
best encyclop?dia we possibly can.

Yours sincerely,
- --
James D. Forrester
Wikimedia : [[W:en:User:Jdforrester|James F.]]
E-Mail    : james at jdforrester.org
IM (MSN)  : jamesdforrester at hotmail.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFDGYgKkn3kUxZyJx0RAjoKAJ46sPNa8VBdfRb+56eGq1nKl9vtcQCggV87
gwaw4Y/vlnBjt0BI9rRlyoU=
=lHf4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


subject: [Foundation-l] Re: We made it !!!!!!

body:
Lars Aronsson wrote:

> Anthere wrote:
>
>>We are in first page of Le Monde, with several pages included inside.
>>Le Monde is the *first* newspaper in France. This is an amazing day.
>>http://www.lemonde.fr/
>
>
> Congratulations to the media attention!  However, that article
> refers to http://wikipedia.fr/ and the website at this URL opens a
> frameset which includes fr.wikipedia.org.  This has the
> unfortunate effect that the web browser's address field says
> http://wikipedia.fr/ even when I go to other articles, making it
> harder to find a bookmarkable URL for pages.  It would be easy
> enough for fr.wikipedia.org to contain some JavaScript that
> escapes the enclosing frameset, but it would be better to change
> wikipedia.fr into a redirect instead of this evil frameset.

by the way, the frame issue was several times discussed on irc.
It seems most browsers do a total redirect. Only a couple of editors
reported the framing issue.

I do not know if *we* can do something on this.

Ant


subject: [Foundation-l] Re: We made it !!!!!!


subject: [Wikien-l] Looking at the real world

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

geni wrote:

> On 9/3/05, MAURICE FRANK <megaknee at btopenworld.com> wrote:
>
> > Ah, but there is one circumstance in which such
> > accessing of Wikipedia is not an illegal act. That is
> > when its purpose is to stop Wikipedia committing an
> > illegal act upon you.

No, an "eye for an eye" is not legal doctrine. You may disagree, but I
would strongly counsel against following it. You may well end up being
prosecuted at the request of, or sued by, people who are less easy-going
that we are.

> > Wikipedia is committing an
> > illegal act upon me by trying to ignore my citation,
> > made by email to Jimmy Wales as well as on this list,
> > for it to the remove every word I have ever
> > contributed to Wikipedia, on grounds of copyright
> > violation and ides theft, and ensure they stay removed
> > despite the public editability of pages.
>
> Everying you contributed was relised uner the GFDL. We correctly
> credit you. You have no case.
>

Geni is wholly correct. There is no possible way in which you can have
your words withdrawn. That's what the licence contract says. If you
didn't read it, well, that's unfortunate. For you.

Yours sincerely,
- --
James D. Forrester
Wikimedia : [[W:en:User:Jdforrester|James F.]]
E-Mail    : james at jdforrester.org
IM (MSN)  : jamesdforrester at hotmail.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFDGYkfkn3kUxZyJx0RAqSHAJ9u+sPRzBLllscM0jmS0qT244ZP9wCeLWks
ax2hcZRMNU210UA8fvgfrg0=
=FeDo
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


subject: [Foundation-l] Re: We made it !!!!!!

body:
Anthere wrote:

> Brion Vibber wrote:
>
>> Lars Aronsson wrote:
>>
>>> Congratulations to the media attention!  However, that article
>>> refers to http://wikipedia.fr/ and the website at this URL opens a
>>> frameset which includes fr.wikipedia.org.  This has the
>>> unfortunate effect that the web browser's address field says
>>> http://wikipedia.fr/ even when I go to other articles, making it
>>> harder to find a bookmarkable URL for pages.  It would be easy
>>> enough for fr.wikipedia.org to contain some JavaScript that
>>> escapes the enclosing frameset,
>>
>>
>>
>> We do have such JavaScript, and it seems to work fine there in breaking
>> out so fr.wikipedia.org reaches the top-level. (Tested Safari 2.0.1)
>>
>>> but it would be better to change
>>> wikipedia.fr into a redirect instead of this evil frameset.
>>
>>
>>
>> Do we own or control it?
>>
>> -- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
>
>
>
> Not the Foundation.
>
>
> A french a**h*** bought it last fall when we first started to be
> featured in the press. We know who he is. We had mail exchanges with him
> already to try to get it back.
>
>
> For now, he redirects to us, with a bad title and some frame issues
> editors frequently complain about, but AT LEAST he redirects to us
> rather than making cash with a mirror or anything else. This could be
> worse...(see http://wikipedia.ru/)
>
> We now have valid trademarks. So the Foundation could normally get the
> domain back by going legal. I think we'll do if he starts being really a
> problem. For now, stand by...
>
>
> Ant

In case someone feels the need to say "YOU SHOULD HAVE BOUGHT IT
BEFORE"... we agree. But in France, only french legal organisations can
buy domains in .fr

A year ago, Wikimedia France did not existed yet. And the Foundation
could not legally purchase it. We crossed our fingers for no one to
steal it. And it was stolen about 2-3 weeks before the association
founding meeting.

Ant


subject: [Foundation-l] Re: We made it !!!!!!


from_name: Angela

subject: [Foundation-l] We made it !!!!!!

body:
On 9/3/05, Brion Vibber <brion at pobox.com> wrote:

> We do have such JavaScript, and it seems to work fine there in breaking
> out so fr.wikipedia.org reaches the top-level. (Tested Safari 2.0.1)

It stays inside the frame using Firefox 1.0.6, even when I click an
external link and go somewhere else entirely.

Angela.


subject: [Foundation-l] We made it !!!!!!


from_name: Fastfission

subject: [WikiEN-l] Copyright situation

body:
I wasn't referring to a copyright provision, I was referring to their other
well-known restrictive laws. I'm not sure I buy the "ethical validity"
argument, in part because I'm not so sure I, in my heart of hearts, think
that copyright is about ethics much these days (and suspect that Iran's lack
of participation in foreign copyright agreements is done so more for their
own benefit -- not having to pay foreign copyright holders -- than it does
in inducing any loss-of-profit for the Iranian government or Iranian
citizens).

But anyway -- my response was just meant to say, "Well, I don't think we're
legally bound to follow Iranian laws on this or much anything else." Even if
that's *true* (I'm the first to admit I'm not very well versed in
international law), it doesn't *necessarily* imply any particular course of
action. The censorship example was just to illustrate that if we tried to
follow every country's individual content laws about everything, we'd have
no encyclopedia.

FF

On 8/7/05, Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote:
>
> There is some ethical validity to respecting Iranian copyright law
> whether or not an obligation exists. Iran's failure to participate in
> international treaties on the matter should not be a primary concern.
> Infringement of Iranian copyrights are still infringements even if US
> courts would not consider those laws. Copyright terms in Iran (life +
> 30) are still shorter than in most countries, so there would be no need
> to extend them beyond that time. I'm not aware of any Iranian copyright
> provision regarding the depiction of women, and you admit that you don't
> know about that either. That aspect seems like a red herring.
>
> Ec
>
> Fastfission wrote:
>
> >Well the English servers are in the USA, which means they are subject
> >to US law, not Iranian law. If we *were* subject to Iranian law, I'm
> >betting there are a number of other Iranian laws we are already
> >breaking! I don't know the Iranian laws about depictions of women but
> >I'm willing to bet they've got a few that we're well afoul of.
> >
> >FF
> >
> >On 8/8/05, Roozbeh Pournader <roozbeh at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>On 8/6/05, Fastfission <fastfission at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>Why not make a special tag template for this? Something along the lines
> of:
> >>>
> >>>"This image, produced by the current government of Iran, are believed
> >>>to not fall under U.S. copyright laws as Iran is not a member of WIPO.
> >>>Should this change, though, the usage of this image is still believed
> >>>to fall under the "fair use" clause of U.S. copyright law. Use in
> >>>mediums other than on the servers of the English-language Wikipedia,
> >>>hosted in the United States by the non-profit Wikimedia Foundation,
> >>>may not be exempt from either of these requirements."
> >>>
> >>>
> >>There are problems with that:
> >>1) I believe the Wikimedia Foundation would be breaking Iranian law by
> >>distributing those material to Iran, that is, serving its pages to
> >>Iranian readers. If it wishes to use the material, it should block
> >>Iran from its readership.
> >>2) It's not only the government, and other Iranians may wish to sue
> >>the Wikimedia Foundation.
> >>
> >>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: Paweł Dembowski

subject: [Foundation-l] Re: We made it !!!!!!

references:
<dfa7jb$mga$1@sea.gmane.org>
	<Pine.LNX.4.61.0509031136480.25292@sara.aronsson.se>
	<dfbtu0$59r$1@sea.gmane.org>

body:
> by the way, the frame issue was several times discussed on irc.
> It seems most browsers do a total redirect. Only a couple of editors
> reported the framing issue.
> I do not know if *we* can do something on this.
> Ant

I get a frame both in IE and in Firefox.

--
Ausir
Wikipedia, wolna encyklopedia
http://pl.wikipedia.org


subject: [Foundation-l] Re: We made it !!!!!!


from_name: David Benbennick

subject: [Commons-l] Birthday

body:
The picture of the day for September 6,
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Potd/2005-09-6, is
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Dandelion_clock.jpg.

Let's change it to a birthday cake!


from_name: Jan Ulrich Hasecke

subject: [Foundation-l] Digital Lifestyle Award

body:
Wikipedia won the Digital Lifestyle Award in Germany.

http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/63546

juh

http://www.wikitution.org


subject: [Foundation-l] Digital Lifestyle Award


from_name: Nicolas Weeger

subject: [Foundation-l] Digital Lifestyle Award

body:
Jan Ulrich Hasecke a ?crit :
> Wikipedia won the Digital Lifestyle Award in Germany.

Great! Congrats :)

> juh

Ryo


subject: [Foundation-l] Digital Lifestyle Award


from_name: Brian

body:
Aren't almost all of the pages Google requests cached? At any rate, our
robots.txt [1] makes no mention of this, so if this is the case we are
either doing user-agent checking and throttling then dynamically or we have
a negotiated agreement with them...Is this the case?

/Alterego

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/robots.txt

On 9/3/05, Evan Martin <evanm at google.com> wrote:
>
> On 9/2/05, Angela <beesley at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Google miscategorizes the language of some of the Hungarian Wikipedia
> > > pages. E.g. it thinks that our Adolf Hitler article is in czech.
> >
> > How do you know they are miscategorising the language?
> > <
> http://www.google.com/search?q=inurl%3A%22Adolf+Hitler%22+site%3Ahu.wikipedia.org
> >
> >
> > This makes it seem like they haven't indexed the page at all, not that
> > they've marked it as the wrong language.
>
> I believe this is correct. We've had problems in the past with
> overloading wikipedia so the crawl has been throttled way back.
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>


from_name: Neil Harris

subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: [Foundation-l] Re: We made it !!!!!!

body:
Pawe? Dembowski wrote:

>>by the way, the frame issue was several times discussed on irc.
>>It seems most browsers do a total redirect. Only a couple of editors
>>reported the framing issue.
>>I do not know if *we* can do something on this.
>>Ant
>>
>>
>
>I get a frame both in IE and in Firefox.
>
>
>
Could this be because the frame-breaking code in
http://fr.wikipedia.org/skins-1.5/common/wikibits.js is executed in a
<head> context, rather than a <body> context?

http://www.thesitewizard.com/archive/framebreak.shtml specifically
states that the frame-breaker code must be executed in the <body>, not
the <head>.

-- Neil


from_name: Tim Starling

subject: [Wikitech-l] Benchmarking of PHP 4.4.0 on gcc 4.0.1

body:
I did some benchmarking of PHP compiled with gcc 4.0.1. Results and
methodology are described at:

http://wp.wikidev.net/GCC_benchmarking

I eventually settled on -O3 with profile-guided optimisation. This gave
a 5-10% improvement over the old PHP 4.3.11 build on all the benchmarks
except preg_replace. The preg_replace problem is probably because the
benchmark was atypical compared to the profiling data, which was
gathered using refreshLinks.php.

-- Tim Starling


from_name: TOR

subject: [Commons-l] Birthday

body:
Tim 'avatar' Bartel wrote:
> I just noticed that our beloved Wikimedia Commons will have its first
> birtday next Tuesday.

Hard to believe it's already been a year...

I feel old. :P

--
Pozdrawiam,
TOR <tor at oak.rpg.pl>


subject: [Foundation-l] Re: Digital Lifestyle Award

body:
Nicolas Weeger wrote:

> Jan Ulrich Hasecke a ?crit :
>
>>Wikipedia won the Digital Lifestyle Award in Germany.
>
>
> Great! Congrats :)
>
>
>>juh
>
>
> Ryo

As a general reminder, you are welcome to list such award here
(http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WQ/Draft#Prizes.2C_Awards) for the
creation of next Quarto.

Ryo, if you could slightly flesh the prize we got (picture ? link ?), it
would be great.

Ant


body:
Neil Harris wrote:

> Pawe? Dembowski wrote:
>
>>> by the way, the frame issue was several times discussed on irc.
>>> It seems most browsers do a total redirect. Only a couple of editors
>>> reported the framing issue.
>>> I do not know if *we* can do something on this.
>>> Ant
>>>
>>
>>
>> I get a frame both in IE and in Firefox.
>>
>>
>>
> Could this be because the frame-breaking code in
> http://fr.wikipedia.org/skins-1.5/common/wikibits.js is executed in a
> <head> context, rather than a <body> context?
>
> http://www.thesitewizard.com/archive/framebreak.shtml specifically
> states that the frame-breaker code must be executed in the <body>, not
> the <head>.
>
> -- Neil
>
Working with some small test pages stripped down from the source code
seems to disprove the above guesswork, as putting the script in <head>
seems to work fine. However, using Firefox's Javascript console, and
visiting wikipedia.fr, I get the following error:

    Error: uncaught exception: Permission denied to call method
Location.toString

However, visiting http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accueil does not.

Writing a genuine exception into the Javascript code certainly does
torpedo the frame-breaking effect, as expected. However, the Javascript
console does not give a source code line for the error, so it is
presumably a low-level internal exception that is being caught, as part
of something else.

Could this possibly be because of the broken HTML syntax of the
wikipedia.fr frame-trapper page, which does not terminate its <head>,
and has no <body> element at all?

-- Neil


from_name: Steve Rapaport

subject: [Foundation-l] Re: foundation-l Digest, Vol 18, Issue 4

body:
F?licitations!

The Wikipedia deserves it!

Steve

On 9/3/05, foundation-l-request at wikimedia.org <
foundation-l-request at wikimedia.org> wrote:
>
> Send foundation-l mailing list submissions to
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> foundation-l-request at wikimedia.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> foundation-l-owner at wikimedia.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of foundation-l digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. RE: Re: We made it !!!!!! (valdelli at bluemail.ch)
> 2. Re: Re: We made it !!!!!! DVD (Walter van Kalken)
> 3. Re: We made it !!!!!! (Ashar Voultoiz)
> 4. Re: We made it !!!!!! (Dariusz Siedlecki)
> 5. Re: We made it !!!!!! (Jean-Baptiste Soufron)
> 6. Re: Re: We made it !!!!!! (Delphine M?nard)
> 7. Re: We made it !!!!!! (Przykuta)
> 8. Re: We made it !!!!!! (Lars Aronsson)
> 9. Re: We made it !!!!!! (Brion Vibber)
> 10. Re: We made it !!!!!! (Anthere)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Fri, 2 Sep 2005 22:03:45 +0200
> From: valdelli at bluemail.ch
> Subject: RE: [Foundation-l] Re: We made it !!!!!!
> To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" <foundation-l at wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID: <4314D6CF00017832 at mssbzhb-int.msg.bluewin.ch>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
>
> Yes, I know. This is the good moment (also here in Swiss and in Italy),
> but
> the newspapers always are finding news... when the news are not new, this
> the moment to kill the old news :)
>
> Finally, I think that bad moments will follow. This is the moment to
> contact
> the journalists who write these articles and to offer the availability for
> new informations. This is the moment to construct references and links to
> manage the next steps.
>
> Ilario
>
> >-- Messaggio originale --
> >To: foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> >From: Anthere <anthere9 at yahoo.com>
> >Date: Fri, 02 Sep 2005 21:39:01 +0200
> >Subject: [Foundation-l] Re: We made it !!!!!!
> >Reply-To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List <foundation-l at wikimedia.org>
> >
> >
> >valdelli at bluemail.ch wrote:
> >> Yes, for the French people. :)
> >>
> >> Ilario
> >
> >No. Not really. Not only for french people. Each time we have a major
> >media display in a country, the *whole* project directly or indirectly
> >benefit from it.
> >
> >I have been on Wikipedia for now 3 years and a half, and for all this
> >time, I have been dreaming on us having an article in Le Monde. We had
> >once a tiny little report in the cultural section. Very little impact.
> >But here, we are featured on first page.
> >
> >The impact of this is likely to be huge, because it means a sort of
> >recognition. In particular we can expect
> >1) more fear from all those we are currently in competition with, so
> >possibly more attacks
> >2) but mostly more interest from potential partners, be it firms,
> >organisations, associations, academics etc...
> >
> >The implications might be various. Possibly an impact on the publication
> >
> >of a DVD (which might be interesting for more than just french people).
>
> >Possibly a partnership for publication of wikireaders (and similarly,
> >why would we limit that to french language ?). Possibly a lever to
> >negociate with organisations such as ESA, which would benefit all of us.
> >And quite possibly as well, more donations, since we are currently in
> >the middle of a fund drive (more money will benefit all of us).
> >
> >We are together in this Ilario. Not just french, or just italian ;-)
> >
> >ant
> >
> >
> >>>We are in first page of Le Monde, with several pages included inside.
> >>>Le Monde is the *first* newspaper in France. This is an amazing day.
> >>>
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >foundation-l mailing list
> >foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> >http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Sat, 03 Sep 2005 03:07:46 +0700
> From: Walter van Kalken <walter at vankalken.net>
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Re: We made it !!!!!! DVD
> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List <foundation-l at wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID: <4318B112.8010604 at vankalken.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
>
>
> >
> > The implications might be various. Possibly an impact on the
> > publication of a DVD (which might be interesting for more than just
> > french people).
>
> On a DVD my father and a bussinessparter for his have been experimenting
> with a DVD edition for the nl.wikipedia. They are interested in a recent
> dump. Once they figure out all technicalities, we want to talk with the
> board about it.
>
> Waerth/Walter
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Fri, 02 Sep 2005 22:56:21 +0200
> From: Ashar Voultoiz <hashar at altern.org>
> Subject: [Foundation-l] Re: We made it !!!!!!
> To: foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> Message-ID: <dfae9l$9hc$1 at sea.gmane.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Anthere wrote:
> > We are in first page of Le Monde, with several pages included inside.
> > Le Monde is the *first* newspaper in France. This is an amazing day.
> >
> > http://www.lemonde.fr/
> >
> > Anthere
>
> Is that only on the website or also on "la une" of the paper version ?
>
> --
> Ashar Voultoiz - WP++++
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Hashar
> http://www.livejournal.com/community/wikitech/
> IM: hashar at jabber.org ICQ: 15325080
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Fri, 2 Sep 2005 23:14:17 +0200
> From: Dariusz Siedlecki <datrio at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] We made it !!!!!!
> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List <foundation-l at wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID: <283332d2050902141468a71a0d at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> 2005/9/2, Anthere <anthere9(at)yahoo.com>:
> > We are in first page of Le Monde, with several pages included inside.
> > Le Monde is the *first* newspaper in France. This is an amazing day.
>
> Congratulations on behalf of the Polish Wikipedia (which will hit 100k
> articles this month ;).
>
> > Anthere
>
> --
> Pozdrawiam,
> Dariusz "Datrio" Siedlecki
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Sat, 03 Sep 2005 01:43:56 +0200
> From: Jean-Baptiste Soufron <jbsoufron at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] We made it !!!!!!
> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List <foundation-l at wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID: <4318E3BC.4060903 at gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Vive la f?te !
>
> Anthere a ?crit :
> > We are in first page of Le Monde, with several pages included inside.
> > Le Monde is the *first* newspaper in France. This is an amazing day.
> >
> > http://www.lemonde.fr/
> >
> > Anthere
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2005 01:48:41 +0200
> From: Delphine M?nard <notafishz at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Re: We made it !!!!!!
> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List <foundation-l at wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID: <453b6e5050902164841dc8189 at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> On 9/2/05, Ashar Voultoiz <hashar at altern.org> wrote:
> > > We are in first page of Le Monde, with several pages included inside.
> > > Le Monde is the *first* newspaper in France. This is an amazing day.
>
> > Is that only on the website or also on "la une" of the paper version ?
>
> Also the paper version... today's (3rd September) edition.
>
> Which is...even more than great :D
>
> Just to make things clear, Le Monde is not the *biggest* newspaper in
> France, as it prints only around 350000 ex a day, far from the first
> daily newspaper in France "Ouest France" (more than a million) but in
> terms of recognition, it is definitely one of the greatest. Making it
> to the first page of Le Monde is *big*.
>
> Delphine
> --
> ~notafish
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2005 09:07:35 +0200
> From: Przykuta <przykuta at o2.pl>
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] We made it !!!!!!
> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List <foundation-l at wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID: <20050903070735.0A801543CC at rekin17.go2.pl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-2";
>
>
>
> > We are in first page of Le Monde, with several pages included inside.
> > Le Monde is the *first* newspaper in France. This is an amazing day.
> >
> > http://www.lemonde.fr/
> >
> > Anthere
> >
> It's nice :)
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2005 11:40:15 +0200 (CEST)
> From: Lars Aronsson <lars at aronsson.se>
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] We made it !!!!!!
> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List <foundation-l at wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0509031136480.25292 at sara.aronsson.se>
> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
>
> Anthere wrote:
> > We are in first page of Le Monde, with several pages included inside.
> > Le Monde is the *first* newspaper in France. This is an amazing day.
> > http://www.lemonde.fr/
>
> Congratulations to the media attention! However, that article
> refers to http://wikipedia.fr/ and the website at this URL opens a
> frameset which includes fr.wikipedia.org <http://fr.wikipedia.org>. This
> has the
> unfortunate effect that the web browser's address field says
> http://wikipedia.fr/ even when I go to other articles, making it
> harder to find a bookmarkable URL for pages. It would be easy
> enough for fr.wikipedia.org <http://fr.wikipedia.org> to contain some
> JavaScript that
> escapes the enclosing frameset, but it would be better to change
> wikipedia.fr <http://wikipedia.fr> into a redirect instead of this evil
> frameset.
>
>
> --
> Lars Aronsson (lars at aronsson.se)
> Aronsson Datateknik - http://aronsson.se
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Sat, 03 Sep 2005 03:16:49 -0700
> From: Brion Vibber <brion at pobox.com>
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] We made it !!!!!!
> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List <foundation-l at wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID: <43197811.1070005 at pobox.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Lars Aronsson wrote:
> > Congratulations to the media attention! However, that article
> > refers to http://wikipedia.fr/ and the website at this URL opens a
> > frameset which includes fr.wikipedia.org <http://fr.wikipedia.org>. This
> has the
> > unfortunate effect that the web browser's address field says
> > http://wikipedia.fr/ even when I go to other articles, making it
> > harder to find a bookmarkable URL for pages. It would be easy
> > enough for fr.wikipedia.org <http://fr.wikipedia.org> to contain some
> JavaScript that
> > escapes the enclosing frameset,
>
> We do have such JavaScript, and it seems to work fine there in breaking
> out so fr.wikipedia.org <http://fr.wikipedia.org> reaches the top-level.
> (Tested Safari 2.0.1)
>
> > but it would be better to change
> > wikipedia.fr <http://wikipedia.fr> into a redirect instead of this evil
> frameset.
>
> Do we own or control it?
>
> -- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com <http://pobox.com>)
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: signature.asc
> Type: application/pgp-signature
> Size: 253 bytes
> Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
> Url :
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/attachments/20050903/84b27be8/signature-0001.bin
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Sat, 03 Sep 2005 12:23:58 +0200
> From: Anthere <anthere9 at yahoo.com>
> Subject: [Foundation-l] Re: We made it !!!!!!
> To: foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> Message-ID: <dfbtjv$4rk$1 at sea.gmane.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
>
> Brion Vibber wrote:
>
> > Lars Aronsson wrote:
> >
> >> Congratulations to the media attention! However, that article
> >> refers to http://wikipedia.fr/ and the website at this URL opens a
> >> frameset which includes fr.wikipedia.org <http://fr.wikipedia.org>.
> This has the
> >> unfortunate effect that the web browser's address field says
> >> http://wikipedia.fr/ even when I go to other articles, making it
> >> harder to find a bookmarkable URL for pages. It would be easy
> >> enough for fr.wikipedia.org <http://fr.wikipedia.org> to contain some
> JavaScript that
> >> escapes the enclosing frameset,
> >
> >
> > We do have such JavaScript, and it seems to work fine there in breaking
> > out so fr.wikipedia.org <http://fr.wikipedia.org> reaches the top-level.
> (Tested Safari 2.0.1)
> >
> >> but it would be better to change
> >> wikipedia.fr <http://wikipedia.fr> into a redirect instead of this evil
> frameset.
> >
> >
> > Do we own or control it?
> >
> > -- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com <http://pobox.com>)
>
>
> Not the Foundation.
>
>
> A french a**h*** bought it last fall when we first started to be
> featured in the press. We know who he is. We had mail exchanges with him
> already to try to get it back.
>
>
> For now, he redirects to us, with a bad title and some frame issues
> editors frequently complain about, but AT LEAST he redirects to us
> rather than making cash with a mirror or anything else. This could be
> worse...(see http://wikipedia.ru/)
>
> We now have valid trademarks. So the Foundation could normally get the
> domain back by going legal. I think we'll do if he starts being really a
> problem. For now, stand by...
>
>
> Ant
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
>
> End of foundation-l Digest, Vol 18, Issue 4
> *******************************************
>

--
\Steve


body:
Neil Harris wrote:

> Neil Harris wrote:
>
>> Pawe? Dembowski wrote:
>>
>>>> by the way, the frame issue was several times discussed on irc.
>>>> It seems most browsers do a total redirect. Only a couple of editors
>>>> reported the framing issue.
>>>> I do not know if *we* can do something on this.
>>>> Ant
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I get a frame both in IE and in Firefox.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> Could this be because the frame-breaking code in
>> http://fr.wikipedia.org/skins-1.5/common/wikibits.js is executed in a
>> <head> context, rather than a <body> context?
>>
>> http://www.thesitewizard.com/archive/framebreak.shtml specifically
>> states that the frame-breaker code must be executed in the <body>,
>> not the <head>.
>>
>> -- Neil
>>
> Working with some small test pages stripped down from the source code
> seems to disprove the above guesswork, as putting the script in <head>
> seems to work fine. However, using Firefox's Javascript console, and
> visiting wikipedia.fr, I get the following error:
>
>    Error: uncaught exception: Permission denied to call method
> Location.toString
>
> However, visiting http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accueil does not.
>
> Writing a genuine exception into the Javascript code certainly does
> torpedo the frame-breaking effect, as expected. However, the
> Javascript console does not give a source code line for the error, so
> it is presumably a low-level internal exception that is being caught,
> as part of something else.
>
> Could this possibly be because of the broken HTML syntax of the
> wikipedia.fr frame-trapper page, which does not terminate its <head>,
> and has no <body> element at all?
>
> -- Neil
>
The answer to my own question appears to be "no", based on playing with
reduced test cases (see attached file). However, I'm now pretty
convinced that the uncaught Javascript exception is the most likely
cause of the failure to break out of the enclosing frame.

-- Neil

>
>


from_name: epzachte at chello.nl

subject: [Wikitech-l] Dump progress

body:
Thanks Brion, very neat.

One more question: it would be nice if each project also wrote a line to a global log that is publicly accessable.
People could monitor this to detect that a dump has started and how much progress has been made.

E.g. at http://download.wikimedia.org/dumpprogress.txt

2005-Sep-03 12:18:30 special commons / completed normally
2005-Sep-03 12:27:10 special sources / completed normally
2005-Sep-03 12:39:12 wikiquote ab / completed normally
2005-Sep-03 12:39:23 wikiquote ac / completed normally
2005-Sep-03 12:40:23 wikiquote ae

Cheers, Erik Zachte


body:
On 03/09/05, Jeremy Dunck <jdunck at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 9/3/05, Brion Vibber <brion at pobox.com> wrote:
> > There is a set of parser test cases in maintenance/parserTests.txt (not
> > all of which are passed by the current code).
>
> Good info, thanks.  I should have asked: is there already a page text
> parser in Python?  A grep of the source for pywikipediabot didn't turn
> up anything.

You might want to take a look at
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Alternative_parsers - and, of course,
please add any others you come across (or write) to that page...

--
Rowan Collins BSc
[IMSoP]


from_name: Jeff Heikkinen

subject: [Wikien-l] Looking at the real world

body:
 > Direct intervention to remove words is not "an eye for
 > an eye" at all. It's the same as directly taking back
 > stolen property when its ownership is traceable.

No, it's blatant vandalism. (You are referring, of course, to your
activities as 195.188.254.82, which, I hasten to add, were done AFTER
your block in blatant violation of at least two other Wikipedia
policies.) Moreover, the overwhelming majority of the words you "took
back" were not your own, which, by your own arguments, places you in a
much more precarious position than it does anyone at Wikipedia.

You have nothing vaguely resembling a legal case, nor a case under
Wikipedia's rules. You agreed to the license independantly of any of the
other BS you keep spewing; even if you were right about everything else,
something you have yet to convince anyone of, it wouldn't change that
fact. I suggest you stop making things up off the top of your head about
what the law and/or Wikipedia policies say, and actually READ them.

You have had your defense in front of the community that you keep
demanding. Not a single person thinks you have a case, and some go so
far as to question your sanity. Why you think getting more people
involved is likely to change that is beyond me.


from_name: Ashar Voultoiz

body:
Jeremy Dunck wrote:
 > Good info, thanks.  I should have asked: is there already a page text
> parser in Python?  A grep of the source for pywikipediabot didn't turn
> up anything.

pywikipediabot works directly with wikitext. I think Kate Turner did a
simple mediawiki using python, can't find it though.

--
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: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason

body:
If you're going to install a new build of php on the wikimedia servers
I'd like to remind you of bug 2741, build php with Exif support
(--enable-exif).


from_name: Ray Saintonge

subject: [Wikien-l] Looking at the real world

body:
MAURICE FRANK wrote:

>Ah, but there is one circumstance in which such
>accessing of Wikipedia is not an illegal act. That is
>when its purpose is to stop Wikipedia committing an
>illegal act upon you. Wikipedia is committing an
>illegal act upon me by trying to ignore my citation,
>made by email to Jimmy Wales as well as on this list,
>for it to the remove every word I have ever
>contributed to Wikipedia, on grounds of copyright
>violation and ides theft, and ensure they stay removed
>despite the public editability of pages. Unless you
>can demonstrate that the second requirement is
>technically possible, then the continued existence of
>Wikipedia has been proved entirely illegal.
>
This sounds like the work of someone who got a law degree from reading
comic books.

No-one has any legal obligation to pay attention to you.  Unless you
were infringing someone else's copyrights when you first added the
material, the continued presence of your material that you yourself put
into Wikipedia is not an infringement of copyright.

If you contribute material you agree to the GFDL at the time that you
add the material.  There is no provision to withdraw that material.

As to "idea theft", please remember that ideas themselves are not
copyrightable; copyrights apply only to the way they are presented.

Of course, if someone *else* has added material to which you have the
legal copyright.there exist formal legal procedures whereby you can
demand its removal.

Ec


from_name: Delphine Ménard

subject: [Foundation-l] Wikimania 2006: City applications can start

body:
Hi all.

The page with a frame for cities' applications (I can't find a good
word for that?) is now ready. Please copy/paste the content as
indicated on the page to present your city's application.

Page is here: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2006/Official_requirements_for_potential_host_cities

Applications must be in by the 30th of September. Please note that
this is a wiki, so applications will only be considered "finished" on
the deadline date, you can of course work on meta to make your
application grow. Please leave comments to the talk page so as to
leave the characteristics of the city applying clear. :-)

And as we say in French, "Que le meilleur gagne !"

Best,

Delphine
--
~notafish


from_name: Matt R

subject: [WikiEN-l] Looking at the real world

body:
--- "James D. Forrester" <james at jdforrester.org> wrote:
> BTW, I'm troubled by your suggestion that we are harsh. This suggests,
> amongst other points, two things: firstly, that we're here to meet out
> justice, and secondly that we're here to do so fairly. Neither of these
> are true....we look at things from the perspective of what is best for
> the project

Are you saying that the ArbComm should be amoral? I would hope that fairness
and a vague sense of justice would figure to some extent in the activities of
the Arbitration Committee. Historically, that seems to have been the case.

-- Matt

Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Matt_Crypto
Blog: http://cipher-text.blogspot.com

___________________________________________________________
To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! Security Centre. http://uk.security.yahoo.com


from_name: James D. Forrester

subject: [WikiEN-l] Looking at the real world

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

Matt R wrote:

> Are you saying that the ArbComm should be amoral?

Essentially, yes. If Hitler was able to contribute usefully to the
project, but Mother Theresa wasn't, we'd be forced to ban the latter,
and it would be outside of our remit to ban the former. However, in the
real world, generally the nasty pieces of work who, based on the general
consensus morals that we have but aren't meant to project into the
encyclop?dia, "deserve" to be banned will act in a way that isn't for
the good of the project either, and so they get banned, too.

Hmm. Did you mean "amoral with respect to the participants' nature", or
"amoral with respect to the participants' activities on Wikipedia"? It
rather changes the question, and my answer to it...

Yours sincerely,
- --
James D. Forrester
Wikimedia : [[W:en:User:Jdforrester|James F.]]
E-Mail    : james at jdforrester.org
IM (MSN)  : jamesdforrester at hotmail.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFDGekKkn3kUxZyJx0RAmRxAJwOWWWxyQjo4yzy29VypO12P2/O6ACgkVfr
hjqaMLmNK0SO5oZ+HLQo+M4=
=MTDH
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


subject: [WikiEN-l] Looking at the real world

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

steve v wrote:

> "James D. Forrester" <james at jdforrester.org> wrote:
>
> > BTW, I'm troubled by your suggestion that we are harsh. This suggests,
> > amongst other points, two things: firstly, that we're here to meet out
> > justice, and secondly that we're here to do so fairly. Neither of these
> > are true. The Committee is charged with maintaining the project and
> > protecting it from disruption with the means at its disposal. We are
> > not, have never been, and will never be here to punish people for things
> > they do on the wiki. Instead, we look at things from the perspective of
> > what is best for the project.
>
> Well, this is all nice and good, but the "whatever's
> best for the project" angle doesnt preclude the basic
> notion that Arbcom is a service which implies a due
> process, and that both the review and process models
> are best served if they have at least some resemblance
> to concepts of justice or fairness (at least
> remotely).

I would disagree. If what we do is fair and just, then that is not our
intent, merely a happy by-product. Wikipedia is not a democracy, and not
a bureaucracy, and the Committee serves to upload neither potential
set-up, nor any other community model. There is a massive range of
options to go through in the dispute resolution processes before that of
Arbitration is reached, all of which in their own ways are fair and just
(and, in most cases, disproportionately, but not inappropriately,
unfair, being weighted towards the wronger and against the wronged, as
it were); by the time one is in Arbitration, the application of fairness
and justice has seemed to have been unproductive.

On the other hand, we seek as much information as possible from all
sides when evaluating cases. This is fair and just and a form of due
process, if you will (for example, we have suspended cases temporarily
whilst participants are unable to continue to edit for a short period
due to being ill or away), but it is done not for their own sake but so
that we can reach the most accurate decision possible. The distinction
may only be theoretical, but I feel that it is important (and, as these
principles are only there to act as aides to the process, they can and
are by-passed when we feel that they are being "gamed").

> The Arbcom was formed not to simply be an extension of
> rule-by-decree, but as an institution of review by
> peers for peers.

It was? This is news to me, and, well, given that I helped form it... We
already have "an institution of review by peers for peers", except we
generally just call it the "community". The reason why the entire
dispute resolution process has grown up over the past two or three years
is that the community wishes things, when they get out of hand, to be
handled in a more formal way.

> The monarchial model is a double
> edged sword: fast executive power are offset by an
> excessive burden of duty-and-blame, which in the end
> winds up equating to sluggish non-responsiveness to
> bottom-up community needs.

Indeed. This is why we're forever eager to hear complaints, suggestions,
and cases. We on the Committee are, I think, all aware of the burden of
duty on our shoulders, and would hope that others would guide us onto
the path of the straight and narrow, e'er we err.

> BTW, I find it troubling
> that you would take a criticism suggesting harshness
> as "troubling." Can't take a criticism?

Nonsense, I repeatedly emplore people to criticise us so that we can
learn from our mistakes and serve our function more suitably.

What I found "troubling" was that your comments belied a failure of
communication as to what the Committee's job is, and instead suggested
your ascribing to us a court-like system of "due process" and "justice"
and "fairness" (to quote from your words, above). This just simply isn't
true, and it's not in anyone's interest for people to be mis-informed,
lest they indeed become dis-informed and act in ways that not only isn't
in the project's and the community's interest, but not in theirs.

> I appreciate the care put into your response (not a
> screed at all)

Thank you. :-)

> but IMHO, saying a judgement cant
> possibly be "harsh" because the process 'isnt based on
> fairness at all to begin with,' is a bit
> counterintelligent. Even war criminals claim they were
> 'just doing their job.' Not that this is the same
> thing at all, but that seems to be the basic logic
> involved.

I hope that this follow-up has clearly put across the point that this
illogical step is not one that I have taken here. :-)

Yours sincerely,
- --
James D. Forrester
Wikimedia : [[W:en:User:Jdforrester|James F.]]
E-Mail    : james at jdforrester.org
IM (MSN)  : jamesdforrester at hotmail.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFDGe2Ikn3kUxZyJx0RAhcwAKCYJWTcXTZCNfPnjCGsckE2gQGoxgCeM6v7
fh7rqwIc+do8B+lYWXJ4RbI=
=nR7i
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


subject: [WikiEN-l] Looking at the real world

body:
--- "James D. Forrester" <james at jdforrester.org> wrote:

> > Are you saying that the ArbComm should be amoral?
>
> Hmm. Did you mean "amoral with respect to the participants' nature", or
> "amoral with respect to the participants' activities on Wikipedia"? It
> rather changes the question, and my answer to it...

Oops, yes it was ambiguous. I meant amoral with respect their activities on
Wikipedia. I do agree with your theoretical comments about Hitler and Mother
Theresa. I was more worried about situations that might occur like the
following (completely made-up, honest!):

User A gets into conflict with User B. Both behave *equally* badly, breaking
various policies and just being gits in general. However, User A is also an
outstanding scholar and prolific contributor of high-quality content, whereas
User B only pops in every now and then for some light editing (and mostly
outside of the main article space to boot). User A hints darkly that, if
sanctioned, she would quit the project for good. A pragmatic, amoral ArbComm
might be tempted to place heavier sanctions on User B than User A, even though
that would be (morally speaking) unfair, because User A is evidently more
valuable to the project than User B.

-- Matt

Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Matt_Crypto
Blog: http://cipher-text.blogspot.com

___________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Messenger - NEW crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com


from_name: MAURICE FRANK

subject: [Wikien-l] Looking at the real world

body:
No contract exists between Wikipedia and any user
towards whom it has taken admin decisions without the
user having any defence process before the whole
community, and without dispute resolution being tried.
In trying to prove me wrong you've shown why I'm
right: any rules of license or contract that were
published to users were alongside rules on how users
and the community relate to each other. The admin
decisions without a defence process have been defended
on grounds that "You are not entitled to anything" and
that there aren't any rules any more consistently than
when it suits the community to apply them. All
statements of that nature have broken the terms on
which you received any contributed words, and hence
any license or contract.

In answer to Geni: back a week ago when she wrote "Am
I coreect in thinking you are User:Tern" I answered
her with an email asking to be informed of how to
access dispute resolution and VfC while under a block.
She ignored it. So by her own hand she is in no
position to claim I have no case.

Direct intervention to remove words is not "an eye for
an eye" at all. It's the same as directly taking back
stolen property when its ownership is traceable.

In answer to Sean: it's awareness of an illegality,
rather than necessarily a crime, because I wouldn't be
clear whether it's criminal or civil. For the FBI to
have a claim to prosecute internet users in other
countries would be an interesting one, at least giving
it clearer responsibilities in return over activities
in your country that affect folk elsewhere.

___________________________________________________________
How much free photo storage do you get? Store your holiday
snaps for FREE with Yahoo! Photos http://uk.photos.yahoo.com


from_name: Fastfission

subject: [WikiEN-l] Copyright situation

body:
Funny that you'd invoke "fair use" as an adequate alternative, when in
the eyes of many of the world's legal systems, U.S. standards for
"fair use" would be considered "stealing" if done within their own
borders... Of course, what is "legal" and what is "ethical" have long
been separate notions. (And, of course, when "ethics" are invoked in
most discussions of copyright law, it is usually as hubris rather than
honest philosophical committment, but such is life). ;-)

FF

On 9/3/05, Skyring <skyring at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 9/4/05, Fastfission <fastfission at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I wasn't referring to a copyright provision, I was referring to their other
> > well-known restrictive laws. I'm not sure I buy the "ethical validity"
> > argument, in part because I'm not so sure I, in my heart of hearts, think
> > that copyright is about ethics much these days (and suspect that Iran's lack
> > of participation in foreign copyright agreements is done so more for their
> > own benefit -- not having to pay foreign copyright holders -- than it does
> > in inducing any loss-of-profit for the Iranian government or Iranian
> > citizens).
> >
> > But anyway -- my response was just meant to say, "Well, I don't think we're
> > legally bound to follow Iranian laws on this or much anything else." Even if
> > that's *true* (I'm the first to admit I'm not very well versed in
> > international law), it doesn't *necessarily* imply any particular course of
> > action. The censorship example was just to illustrate that if we tried to
> > follow every country's individual content laws about everything, we'd have
> > no encyclopedia.
>
> This is something that has been thrashed out many times, including
> well before the advent of the Internet. Just because a copy of (say)
> The Washington Post might be sent to Iran doesn't mean that TWP has to
> follow Iranian laws. It's up to Iran to enforce their own laws in
> their own country and nobody is saying otherwise.
>
> But just because we can legally steal images owned by Iranians doesn't
> mean we should. For one thing, they might change their copyright law.
> But to my mind it's just plain wrong, especially when we have so many
> other avenues available, such as fair use, to illustrate our
> encyclopaedia.
>
> --
> Peter in Canberra
>


subject: [WikiEN-l] Looking at the real world

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

Matt R wrote:

> "James D. Forrester" <james at jdforrester.org> wrote:
>
> > > Are you saying that the ArbComm should be amoral?
> >
> > Hmm. Did you mean "amoral with respect to the participants' nature", or
> > "amoral with respect to the participants' activities on Wikipedia"? It
> > rather changes the question, and my answer to it...
>
> Oops, yes it was ambiguous. I meant amoral with respect their activities on
> Wikipedia. I do agree with your theoretical comments about Hitler and Mother
> Theresa. I was more worried about situations that might occur like the
> following (completely made-up, honest!):
>
> User A gets into conflict with User B. Both behave *equally* badly, breaking
> various policies and just being gits in general. However, User A is also an
> outstanding scholar and prolific contributor of high-quality content, whereas
> User B only pops in every now and then for some light editing (and mostly
> outside of the main article space to boot). User A hints darkly that, if
> sanctioned, she would quit the project for good. A pragmatic, amoral ArbComm
> might be tempted to place heavier sanctions on User B than User A, even though
> that would be (morally speaking) unfair, because User A is evidently more
> valuable to the project than User B.

Of course, the term "fairness" can be used in both its Proceduralist and
it can be Distributionalist meanings (pure Communism is arguably the
latter but not the former, and pure Capitalism is the inverse thereof),
as well as the Correctialist meaning followed by the Committee, but I
will stop having fun with critical thinking and word-play (;-)), and
instead answer the question directly:

In said circumstance, yes, I personally would go for the amoral option
over the "just" course of applying exactly the same censures to each.
The project would be better-served by the continued presence of User A
than of User B, though in your example you didn't say that User B had
threatened to leave, in which case the decision is betwixt one user
leaving or none, which tilts the balance of pragmatism still further in
favour of placing "heavier sanctions" on B than A, as you put it.

In reality, we normally find that one of the two (or more) parties
started it, or should have known better, or something else, which allows
us to properly differentiate between them in terms of how to correct the
issue, so this purported situation is unlikely to come up in reality in
a wholly applicable fashion.

Perhaps this way that the Committee works disappoints some people; I can
certainly understand how that might be. Nevertheless, this is how it has
operated for the past 20-odd months.

Yours sincerely,
- --
James D. Forrester
Wikimedia : [[W:en:User:Jdforrester|James F.]]
E-Mail    : james at jdforrester.org
IM (MSN)  : jamesdforrester at hotmail.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFDGhsgkn3kUxZyJx0RAuO5AJ4zDxat26J2qeBbn/0t/82UKA5hKgCgkhiq
NLGc5OnBggCyz4E9JP0xcAg=
=yhA1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


from_name: Ryan W. (Merovingian)

subject: [WikiEN-l] Protecting nonexistent pages

body:
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Url: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20050904/6ee19b04/attachment.diff


from_name: David Mertz, Ph.D.

subject: [WikiEN-l] Block on false (and never even reported) 3RR

body:
== Blocked for [[WP:3RR]] ==

You have been blocked for twenty-four hours in response of a
[[WP:3RR|three-revert rule]] violation on the article
[[Homosexuality]]. If you have any questions, please reply on this talk
page, or [[Special:Emailuser/Bratsche|email me]]. Please refrain from
edit warring when you return. [[User:Bratsche|Bratsche]][[User_talk:Bratsche|talk]] | [[Wikipedia:Esperanza|Esperanza]] 04:23, September 4, 2005 (UTC)

:This block is flatly in error, and I am almost certain it reflects a
prior animosity (about an unrelated issue) by administrator
[[User:Bratsche]].  A look at the edit history of [[Homosexuality]]
will '''plainly''' show that I have not reverted four times on the same
issue (nor on any issue, during ''any'' 24 hour period).  I ''have'',
however, made more than four edits on a variety of different sections
and wordings.  This isn't even close to a 3RR violation!

:In fact, ''I'' reported [[User:66.216.226.34]] for 3RR violation
around a phrase about the APA/DSM in that article.  A number of users
other than me reverted this anon editor on the same issue (I did so a
couple times, but not four).  Moreover, as soon as someone else first
restored the prior version from the anon editors POV change, I
requested on the anon's talk page, in the edit comments, and at
[[Talk:Homosexuality]] that the editor take the suggested change to the
talk page.  S/he refused, until after I reported the 3RR; when the anon
finally brought it to the talk page, the clear consensus of editors was
that the new language was not appropriate.  Several users tried to
address a core element of the anon editors proposed change, and I
''did'' help tweak that... but not by reversion in '''any''' case, only
by moving forward. [[User:Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters|Lulu of the
Lotus-Eaters]] 04:56, 2005 September 4 (UTC)

Moreover... looking around Bratsche's user page, another editor
questioned the block; and looking there, Bratshe's general animosity
towards me is readily apparent.  I really think this matter reaches
admin abuse, but really I just want to get the annoying block removed
(I wouldn't be so petty as to report it to mediation if it is not
repeated).

Yours, David (Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters)...


from_name: ABCD

subject: [WikiEN-l] Protecting nonexistent pages

body:
On 9/4/05, Ryan W. (Merovingian) wrote:
> [[User:Lucky 6.9]] and I have been discussing this possibilty: What if one was able to proect a deleted/nonexistent page?  The same page would not be created over and over if it has no place in Wikipedia.  When the clueless newbie/troll/vandal goes away, it can be unprotected, just like normal.  The best defense for this is the fact that the {{deletedpage}} template would become obsolete.  In addition, it would be a relief on the servers (even if it's minor).  Any thoughts?
>
> --Ryan
>

Submitted to bugzilla as  bug# 3357
<http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3357>.

ABCD


from_name: Tim 'avatar' Bartel

subject: [Foundation-l] Wikinews - Licensure straw poll

body:
Hi,

Kelly Martin schrieb am 09/01/2005 12:30 AM:
> One would think that all Wikipedias would be subject to the same set
> of copyright rules, since they're all operated out of Florida.  I've
> never understood why people think that the language content is written
> in has any impact on the law such content is required to comply
> with....

a) Please note, that there are Servers in Europe and Asia too.
b) Perhaps it's dumb, but it's reality. If you write a text in german
(to a german audience) in Wikipedia, german courts will judge you - even
if it's done at a server in Florida. Perhaps the court is not able to
force the server to put down the text, but it's able to judge you. If
you are not in germany, that should be no big problem - but as german
person or visiting germany, you will get problems. This happened before.
And I strongly expect, that this is the case not only in germany.

Bye, avatar.
--
5 von 4 Leuten haben Probleme mit Mathematik.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 548 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/attachments/20050904/a7617922/attachment.pgp


body:
Hi,

Kelly Martin schrieb am 09/01/2005 12:30 AM:
> One would think that all Wikipedias would be subject to the same set
> of copyright rules, since they're all operated out of Florida.  I've
> never understood why people think that the language content is written
> in has any impact on the law such content is required to comply
> with....

a) Please note, that there are Servers in Europe and Asia too.
b) Perhaps it's dumb, but it's reality. If you write a text in german
(to a german audience) in Wikipedia, german courts will judge you - even
if it's done at a server in Florida. Perhaps the court is not able to
force the server to put down the text, but it's able to judge you. If
you are not in germany, that should be no big problem - but as german
person or visiting germany, you will get problems. This happened before.
And I strongly expect, that this is the case not only in germany.

Bye, avatar.
--
5 von 4 Leuten haben Probleme mit Mathematik.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 548 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/attachments/20050904/a7617922/attachment-0001.pgp