from_name: Neil Harris

subject: [Wikitech-l] Fwd:  AOL vandalbot

body:
Brian wrote:

> I came across what most likely was a vandal bot using IPs on the range
> 152.163.100.*, and some other IPs I don't remember, creating a couple
> dozen articles with random titles and the same block of nonsense in
> the body. They would appear 3 or 4 at a time, each on a different IP.
> I've been told this is an AOL range, and that if it's a bot, that's
> bad. So, just letting you all know....
>
> --brian0918
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject:     Wikipedia e-mail: AOL vandalbot
> Date:     Fri, 28 Oct 2005 09:26:18 GMT
> From:     David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com>
> To:     Brian0918 <brian0918 at gmail.com>
>
>
>
> (I also put this on your talk page.)
>
> Please hop on IRC and let the devs on #wikimedia-tech know straight
> away - vandalbots coming from AOL is a doomsday scenario, owing to
> their stupidly broad proxy network, and Tim Starling really wants to
> know about this stuff if it springs up. Try to keep it to as small
> ranges of AOL as possible, though Tim says he'd happily block the
> whole ISP if the alternative is making the wiki read-only. Drop a line
> to Wikitech-L as well (you have to subscribe first), detailing what
> makes you think it's a vandalbot and so on, best detail possible. (If
> it turns out not to have been a bot, blame me ;-) I'd rather you
> raised an unnecessary alarm than fail to raise a necessary one.)
>
>
> - d.
>
>
>

There really is no excuse for AOL not to tag their user proxy accesses
with some kind of token that can be used for abuse complants.

The simplest way round this problem would be to "greylist" AOL, by
preventing anon editors from editing from AOL proxy address space.

AOL currently has roughly 22% of the U.S. ISP market [source:
http://www.isp-planet.com/research/rankings/usa.html]. Applying this
restriction would thus have no effect on 78% of potential anon Wikipedia
editors, and might even _increase_ the overall quality level of
Wikipedia anon contributions.

Any legitimate AOL contributor need only create an account to be able to
edit, an this could be made easy for them by diverting the "edit this
page" link for anons to a login page which said:

"Because of problems with vandalism by some AOL users, you will need to
register a username before editing. Creating a Wikipedia username is
free, and has many benefits... &c. &c."

Of course, this would not stop AOL-hosted vandalbots from repeatedly
registering accounts in order to edit, but it would be possible to limit
this by throttling the rate of new account registrations from AOL IPs in
the usual way, as well as other possible anti-vandalbot measures such as
requiring the use of CAPTCHAs (with an E-mail automation alternative for
the disabled) for AOL account registrations.

-- Neil


list: wikien-l

source: pipermail-mbox

from_name: geni

subject: [WikiEN-l] I've said it before, I'll say it again...

body:
On 10/28/05, Anthony DiPierro <wikispam at inbox.org> wrote:
> And yet you wouldn't call any delete war low grade vandalism?

No I would call it a revert war

> I believe
> Jimbo has gone so far as to call any revert war vandalism.

Perhaps but revert wars are far harder to deal with. Wrong version may
be a joke but it is a real problem as well

> Unless you
> propose that we only allow admins to create pages, blank pages, or change
> pages into redirects, I don't see how allowing non-admins to delete and
> undelete is going to change the ability of vandals to vandalize.

I'm not worried about vandals. I worried about good uses both of whom
belive they are right. I have 4 options to use to deal with revert
wars:

:RFC-slow and not hudgely effective
:Arcom very slow is likely to view revert wars over single page as
worth its time worrying about.
:blocking. But only if they revert more than 3 times. Two sides of 4
all of whom revert twice. I can't block but that is one heck of revert
war.

So we come at last to protection. Why not just shove the thing through
AFD in the first place?

> Even then,
> you'd probably have to turn off the ability of non-admins to edit at all to
> have much of an effect on vandalism.

There are differnces between revert wars and vandalism.

> Deletion was given only to admins when adminship was supposed to be no big
> deal. Maybe if adminship were no big deal again you could restrict deletion
> only to admins.

And if people would stop trying to turn us into referees perhaps it
can go back to being no big deal.

--
geni


list: wikitech-l

from_name: monk at zoomcon.com

subject: [Wikitech-l] Deactivating upload on nds.wikipedia

body:
Hello Marcus,

Thursday, October 27, 2005, 8:05:56 PM, you wrote:

> I made a request for this on the wiki since July [1]. There were little response
> to this (but this is not astonishing, because there a few regular contributors
> at all) and no real concerns against it. Reasons for the deactivating are, that
> we have no expertise on legal issues regarding images so we couldn't sort out
> violations of licences effectively if such would occur. Additionally we have
> only generated around 100 images in two and a halv years of existence of which
> I already deleted 50, because they were duplicates of images which are now on
> Commons. So it seems better, when users of nds.wikipedia esteem the Commons as
> their main image repository.
I think it is wrong to disable image uploads on any Wikipedia. Users
should have place to upload any images that are either 1) interesting
only to this local wikipedia, not any other; 2) not totally free, just
fair use or smth.

While you are admin, you should enforce right copyright policy and
delete unappropriate images; but you shouldn't request blocking the
ability of uploading at all.

IMHO.

--
Best regards,
 monk                            mailto:monk at zoomcon.com


from_name: billy mills

subject: [WikiEN-l] Arbitration Committee elections, 2005

body:
Ray Saintonge wrote:

>Arbcom appointments don't need to be all at the same time.  >Whether
Jimbo should be doing this alone is a dubious proposition >because of
the time demands that it would put on him.  A >nominating committee of
trusted people could be a more practical >idea.

Trusted by whom? As the basis for favouring appointment over election
seems to be that the community isn't to be trusted to make the "right"
decisions, I'd love to know how we could arrive at such a committee.

Filio


from_name: Felipe Ortega

subject: [Wikitech-l] Squid config and DB user statistics

body:
Hi again.

For anyone who didn?t look my previous post I'm Telco
Engineer, Assistan Professor at the UAX University in
Madrid (Spain) and I'm working for my Ph.D (at URJC
University) in topics related with Internet multimedia
content distribution (currently focusing on
Wikipedia).

You can visit:

http://libresoft.urjc.es/ for more info about our
work, and

http://gsyc.escet.urjc.es/ for more info about our
technical group.

After processing all the info I've could found at
meta.wikimedia.org, I still have several questions on
the air. I don?t know if someone could help me:

1.- Which is the main bottleneck of Wikimedia whole
system nowadays? Apaches? My-SQL database? Both??

2.- I've found no precise info in My-SQL Wikimedia
tables about the size of the modifications that a
certain user made to an article. It could be very
interesting to build some nice statistics about the
shape of register users contributions (obviously,
respecting the anonimity of users).

Our group has build several studies about these
factors  with many kind of libre software projects.

3.- Finally, in addition to SQUID configs (I still ask
for someone who could help me on this), I wonder if it
could be possible to get some of the Apache logs to
process them and get info about:

a) The top rated pages (by number of hits).
b) The average served page size.

This way, I could begin to think a method to
discriminate the top requested pages, to start with a
distribution content simulation framework at our grid
computing develop architecture.

Regards,

Felipe Ortega.

______________________________________________
Renovamos el Correo Yahoo!
Nuevos servicios, m?s seguridad
http://correo.yahoo.es


from_name: ea

subject: [Wikitech-l] Automatic capitalisation on the faroese Wiktionary

body:
Hello,
I just asked today in the wikimedia-tech channel to have the automatic
capitalisation turned off on the faroese Wiktionary.
This is necesary because in the faroese language (like Icelandic)  most
words are decapitalised.
So please could you turn the capitalisation off, there are only 18
entries right now, and it will be no problem to change them. (I myself
will do this, (I will also ask for sysop rights there because I'd like
to improve this wiktionary and protect it from vandalism, which seems to
become a new problem there)).
If you have questions about my reputation please take a look at my user
pages on de and is wiktionary where I am very active. (
http://de.wiktionary.org/wiki/Benutzer:Spacebirdy
http://is.wiktionary.org/wiki/Notandi:Spacebirdy).

Thanks a lot in advance, best regards,
Elisabeth Anderl (aka Spacebirdy (
http://fo.wiktionary.org/wiki/Br%C3%BAkari:Spacebirdy ))


from_name: MAURICE FRANK

subject:
[WikiEN-l]	Infinite
	BlockbyAbusiveAdmin/Extortion/Harassment/Fraudulent use

body:
>Wikipedia is NOT a "public forum". It is a website
run >by a private
>organisation. You agreed that you would abide by
certain >terms and
>conditions; if you have broken those terms and
>conditions, you have no
>legal comeback.
>
>- --
>Alphax

Aha!
Yes he does have his comeback, if Wiki itself has
broken either its own self-described terms or another
law, towards him. Good luck to him: you've been asking
for it with your gloating claims to be above every law
in the world.

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


list: foundation-l

from_name: Daniel Mayer

subject: [Foundation-l] Trademark violation of our 'MediaWiki' mark

body:
Webhosting Provider, Aplus.Net, Launches Media Wiki
http://www.cheaphostingdirectory.com/news-webhosting-provider-aplus-net-launches-media-wiki-1538.html

-- mav

__________________________________
Yahoo! FareChase: Search multiple travel sites in one click.
http://farechase.yahoo.com


list: wikimedia-l


from_name: David Gerard

subject: [WikiEN-l] Maurice Frank now moderated

body:
>Yes he does have his comeback, if Wiki itself has
>broken either its own self-described terms or another
>law, towards him. Good luck to him: you've been asking
>for it with your gloating claims to be above every law
>in the world.

Moderated. Please contribute something useful to the list or don't bother.

- d.


from_name: Alphax

subject: [WikiEN-l] Page freezing on "good" articles

body:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Bryan Derksen wrote:
> Geoff Burling wrote:
>
>> The continuing arguments around VfD/AfD suggests that some of the
>> community does not understand -- or believe -- that there is a goal
>> to this project, a place where our Wiki will eventually end. I suspect
>> that FF has found another end point to our Wiki.
>>
>>
> Britannica has been editing and rewriting and adding to their
> encyclopedia for two hundred and thirty-seven years now, with no sign
> that they're planning to stop changing stuff and publish the "Final
> Encyclopedia" any time soon. Why do you think Wikipedia is likely to
> start reaching an "endpoint" any time in the forseeable future? I think
> a version-rating method is probably vital in the near future to prevent
> our best articles from backsliding, we've become good enough in many
> areas that IMO this is a real concern. But we're nowhere near "done,"
> and since the corpus of human knowledge is itself constantly changing I
> doubt we ever will be.
>

If you compare Britannica's articles on some "old dead dude" from the
1911 version and the 2005 version I think you would find that they
really haven't changed.

- --
Alphax                      |   /"\
Encrypted Email Preferred   |   \ /     ASCII Ribbon Campaign
OpenPGP key ID: 0xF874C613  |    X   Against HTML email & vCards
http://tinyurl.com/cc9up    |   / \
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQEVAwUBQ2GqILMAAH8MeUlWAQheCQgAlSXBmnF7RcTJs54us4mnTX7SsKOhnR4D
q5yBTzDD5qw5HNIjyTzjsuQNrivSGzYnfxkkMKAfFf7DkXcKB0OAqVYXSJVfADXy
U03o9uItZX6vO3eNO8IXsFRanZNfCGpsl9Hcf8FAP/+xyiNPfsTD1sQYq8djDaND
WekRFI6fnw9LWA22Dze3q5HiPr+11E9YBo/FBzjBvUui4/4hwvERn8xqCebZb+iC
pbjsGHJTpoTKko4x9fekxylYc7dxwbTpWeRWNnHdUz7qzRWuAkzYdzv1JnSHsAd7
w2YVmC7mNWTo4Jz6850MORsTg1y8M6Hp1NnIhehSBb26r0e/YhDWig==
=E5z0
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


from_name: Christian Siefkes

subject: [Wikitech-l] Fwd:  AOL vandalbot

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

Hi,

Neil Harris wrote:
> The simplest way round this problem would be to "greylist" AOL, by
> preventing anon editors from editing from AOL proxy address space.

There is an ongoing discussion on en: about this very feature and a
corresponding policy change, resulting in a rough consensus that this kind of
weak block/greylist would be nice to have, for AOL and other dubious shared
address ranges. See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Blocking_policy_proposal.

I volunteered to help writing such a feature, but I'm completely new to the
MediaWiki code, so I suppose most people here would be able to implement it
much faster than I. And of course it would need support from some core
developer to get it into the codebase. Anybody here willing to help?

Best regards
	Christian

- --
|------------ Christian Siefkes ------------- christian at siefkes.net -----|
|    Web: http://www.siefkes.net/     |     Jabber: hc at jabber.ccc.de     |
|  Graduate School in Distributed IS:   http://www.wiwi.hu-berlin.de/gkvi/
|------------ OpenPGP Key: http://www.siefkes.net/key.txt (ID: 0x346452D8)
As long as the world shall last there will be wrongs, and if no man objected
and no man rebelled, these wrongs would last forever.
	-- Clarence Barrow
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFDYhOs301HxjRkUtgRAvkkAKCXVU+fXLKJ0EIuQtx1UV9XMsCJlgCeOeke
ZYKaWtpKG1qad/9qU3Py9z4=
=rprX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


subject:
[WikiEN-l] Infinite
	BlockbyLovelyAdmin/Generosity/Helpfulness/Appropriate use
	ofWikipediaUse Emails

body:
Mr Merkey's future contributions will be screened for unduly uncivil
subject lines as well as uncivil contents. He can of course continue
to contribute as relevant.

Fred's right, though - legal matters go straight to the Foundation;
wikien-L is just a bunch of users.

- d.


list: wikipedia-l

from_name: Stanley W

subject: [Wikipedia-l] id.wikisource.org

body:
Hi, I hereby make a proposal for new wikisource language subdomain
(id.wikisource.org) to be created.

Please verify that this proposal have meet the requirements needed.

Thanks

Stanley


body:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

JAY JG wrote:
>> From: Kelly Martin <kelly.lynn.martin at gmail.com>
>>
>> On 10/25/05, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Prove it. I haven't seen any of these voteing blocks.
>>
>> Then you're not watching.  The existence of voting blocks is quite
>> evident in RfA.
>
>
> In the past you've alleged voting blocks in RfA based on their
> "deletionist" tendencies, and this was discussed on this mailing
> list. Are you still making this claim?
>

I would claim that they do; put yourself forward as an inclusionist and
the inclusionists will vote for you, and the deletionists will stay
quiet and pretend they don't exist, and vice versa. Put yourself forward
as someone who will ignore the typical "d nn" and "keep we need all
articles" votes, and wow! They all get mad and shoot you down in flames.

As a member of one of these inclusionist/deletionist groups plainly
stated [1]:

> In general, inclusionists tend to vote "keep" on articles they think
> should be kept, and abstain entirely from articles they think should
> be deleted. Deletionists tend to vote "delete" on articles they think
> should be deleted, and abstain from those they think should be kept.

[1] http://tinyurl.com/8hsuu

- --
Alphax                      |   /"\
Encrypted Email Preferred   |   \ /     ASCII Ribbon Campaign
OpenPGP key ID: 0xF874C613  |    X   Against HTML email & vCards
http://tinyurl.com/cc9up    |   / \
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQEVAwUBQ2GtjrMAAH8MeUlWAQgaZggArH5w5tTyP/3v3lQvAgerLJuqINcQ19/T
aLcrfKpH3mvTYxXqui00ZsrNNNxwT9Ufun9pNti2YvCpCmgpq0VDfsgNvGXfDamx
KeRrucbDcZexKhZnm399KqjMZiEy3sglU2mlH/KTL1YFsJQhglH8yP21K//8FLjZ
pzIoz5loiP7duYW7mhh/k17UQFAWCH2d7dlkE/QaXkqh+yR+lhzi9VglQ7s81yIG
NMFa97t7lcQcA4YpGn2KhxklymHVu4ANrbsijMJBIhRMEFhXs+jsy5ugpOcxPQ5P
ZYVXANAcnLUKfAH2RNdS+z85/84UIvsGbY9fwQLxrN6x3G2zn7bzyg==
=wl0k
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


subject:
[WikiEN-l] Unilateral action contrary to a vote from a rouge
	admnin, David Gerard

body:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Kelly Martin wrote:
> On 10/27/05, Bryan Derksen <bryan.derksen at shaw.ca> wrote:
>
>>The twoversions template didn't say anything about what
>>the _nature_ of the dispute between the two versions was, and it doesn't
>>give any indication that the two-version situation is good or permanent
>>(perhaps more emphasis can be added when it's restored that it's only a
>>temporary measure), so I don't think it'll be a tool for POV-splitting
>>articles in the long run. Perhaps if someone thinks it might be they
>>should check the articles that use it to see how long the template's
>>been in use on each.
>
>
> The problem with {{twoversions}} is when it becomes a way of life for
> the article.
>
> Too bad we can't rig it so the template explodes after seven days.
>

I look forward to the day when Mediawiki becomes Turing-complete :)

- --
Alphax                      |   /"\
Encrypted Email Preferred   |   \ /     ASCII Ribbon Campaign
OpenPGP key ID: 0xF874C613  |    X   Against HTML email & vCards
http://tinyurl.com/cc9up    |   / \
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQEVAwUBQ2GuVLMAAH8MeUlWAQg/nwgAkyhAVEm0/PmKfzKw3HhxHN+tkfSC+Ffp
NUFvJxSx7F5j77wFt2KRHT9CSjxPo6+0wYK5ryTJFVG+37/HY5WMiyqL21rowbhl
H7FjRJVg5nvnFXgIlhi6If0dAyg3We6fVVSVJSVF7+Hls4QGOHB1SK1J8bLQVnjf
4gOrINfKJXlO62ks4QCBhBO7vOVDTUlU31hpal69vnjkt+pif5hU1SyB84mdB8n0
OISG2obLGKxmuIDFxKPEJlF5HmVn3OArirMZ+mMCbeUWU5tjlwFx2ajYDD4qpDDa
25jLNcj5L2/oNgV7QmL52ogyfCaMHNZwjsG41OXitEDyE2fYGhEYQQ==
=ZsO7
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


subject: [WikiEN-l] The answer for AfD

body:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Snowspinner wrote:
>
> On Oct 28, 2005, at 12:49 AM, MacGyverMagic/Mgm wrote:
>
>> On 10/28/05, Anthony DiPierro <wikispam at inbox.org> wrote:
>>
>>>> Right, but it has little to do with the fact that only admins can
>>>> delete
>>>> articles. You can get rid of AfD, give anyone the ability to  delete an
>>>> article, and still have a clear policy on deletion and undeletion.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> By the way, we *don't* have a very clear policy on deletion and
>>> undeletion.
>>>
>>
>> We do. People just choose to ignore it.
>>
>
>
> Now if only we could all agree on which people.
>

Agreeing that the policy exists would be a good start.

- --
Alphax                      |   /"\
Encrypted Email Preferred   |   \ /     ASCII Ribbon Campaign
OpenPGP key ID: 0xF874C613  |    X   Against HTML email & vCards
http://tinyurl.com/cc9up    |   / \
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQEVAwUBQ2GyH7MAAH8MeUlWAQhMzgf8Dx1u+QVfdvkUOSLoQxKCF38Ni5g2gYoJ
lioMF/fUxahkcidNJfmtJtOfCJ7ik+DjcD08HtbwFq8lcee3BfxPu2DRbP0tD4jL
ws5ANMKJCeBBxpwQ8919ds+YKNToM8acEkO3kRiRLpSP3vLYndmvqbOO7w2YL9HM
9WrJf1jfYRUtjNm4Hj++LT9tSfQ+Rj4O0024QTy9UU1guMrdLhKQMOdZKv2RGeHA
AvYW+aQL1gB/RE3tMcb+uHEC6FqRoDeRrWt94HwrVU29Izubsn1Xbzg75s7JS2QL
44vW8cNEuK+ojDLsKvffl7KRdZpAn2xoGEpSy3Do0H7SFPx1OcDvNQ==
=XAx0
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


subject: [Wikipedia-l] id.wikisource.org

body:
There is significant difference between Indonesian and Malay language I think.

Also there is no Malay wikisource subdomain right now.

-----Original Message-----
From: wikipedia-l-bounces at Wikimedia.org [mailto:wikipedia-l-bounces at Wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Mark Williamson
Sent: Friday, October 28, 2005 14:28
To: wikipedia-l at wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] id.wikisource.org

Here I find a second issue:

I think that Indonesian and Malay meet an equal threshhold to
Serbocroatian, except that they don't have the same level of emotions
attached.

So, I think there should be a single Malay and Indonesian WS.

On 28/10/05, Stanley W <stanley at e-intidata.com> wrote:
> Hi, I hereby make a proposal for new wikisource language subdomain
> (id.wikisource.org) to be created.
>
>
>
> Please verify that this proposal have meet the requirements needed.
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
> Stanley
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>

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


body:
Alphax wrote:

>"Hey Calvin, what are the rules again?"

[[Formosa's Law]]. Could all lucid persons connected to reality please
leave this thread alone. Thanks.

- d.


from_name: Andriy K

subject: [WikiEN-l] Blocking policy violeted

body:
Dear Colleagues,

My username is AndriyK.
IP address is 141.2.247.88

I was blocked by David Gerard at 13:13, 28 October
2005.
The reason was formulated as

"The reason given for AndriyK's block is: "massive
disruption (read the MoS, talk before creating huge
amounts of work for others)"

In my opinion, the blocking policy was violated.
According to the official Wikipedia blocking policy
blocking is used  to deal with vandalism, bots,
personal attacks, and inappropriate usernames.

Nothing of this is unapplicable in my case. I did not
violate 3RR.

I indeed have done a lot of changes, but I did not
vandalize the articles. I corrected the names of
Ukrainian city according to their proper English
spelling (e.g. those used by Encyclopaedia Britannica,
see, for instance,
http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9023842?query=Chernihiv&ct=)

What I did completely conforms the Wikipedia policy
concerning using of modern English in the articles.
Doing these changes I corrected several subtles
mistakes (because of wrong spelling, some lings were
wrong and led to articles that actually were not ment
in the text).

David Gerard was likely misinformed by a one group of
users. These users try to force wikipedia community to
use a sort of "Russian English", i.e. transliteration
from Russian prononciation of the names of Ukrainian
cities instead of the spellings used by modern
creadible English sources (like Encyclopedia
Britannika and many others). I tried to explain my
edits on the talk pages, but this group of users do
not accept any reasons. They push their POV  so to say
"by force".

The same group makes also often propaganda insertions
to the article, which is also an obvious abuse of
Wikipedia.

Thank you in advance for solving the issue.

Best regards,

AndriyK

___________________________________________________________
Gesendet von Yahoo! Mail - Jetzt mit 1GB Speicher kostenlos - Hier anmelden: http://mail.yahoo.de


from_name: Jesse the man

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Can you trust Wikipedia?

body:
But as for the lady who gave the zero, we need to find her e-mail address so
we can ask her what should be added to the Haute Coutre article.

On 10/28/05, charles matthews <charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
> Puddl Duk wrote
>
> >We've been the media's little
> darling for a long time, not because we are great, but because
> Wikipedia works _at all_. The media honeymoon won't last forever.
>
> Yes, they could build us up just to knock us down, in classic style. But
> at
> least everyone would know about WP.
>
> >Lest I sound too harsh, remember that the OED, also written with the
> help of volunteers, took over fifty years to fully publish.
>
> Yes, but the bulk of the slips (submissions) came in during five years.
> About where we are now?
>
> Charles
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


subject: [Wikipedia-l] id.wikisource.org

body:
I think you shall ask for other language expert for some judgement about this issue.

My english is bad so I may not have the skill to give you what I have in mind. But I think some Indonesian words is not recognized in Malay and vice versa, some recognized in both language but have different meaning. It is so difficult for making article but satisfying users from both language.

As far as I know. There is no Malay (ms) subdomain language wikisource ever requested. So there is no point why id subdomain can not be created.

-----Original Message-----
From: wikipedia-l-bounces at Wikimedia.org [mailto:wikipedia-l-bounces at Wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Mark Williamson
Sent: Friday, October 28, 2005 15:53
To: wikipedia-l at wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] id.wikisource.org

You think, perhaps, but linguists would beg to differ.

The differences between Indonesian and Malay are mostly on the level
of US vs UK differences -- minor differences of spelling, a few dozen
different words...

But even most reasonable Indonesians do not believe that they truly
speak a different language than Malaysians.

Are there any _true_ differences between the languages?

I think a particularly telling proof is that if I copy the text of an
article from the Malay WP and run it through an Indonesian
spellchecker, there are 0 mistakes. Hmm.

Mark

On 28/10/05, Stanley W <stanley at e-intidata.com> wrote:
> There is significant difference between Indonesian and Malay language I think.
>
> Also there is no Malay wikisource subdomain right now.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: wikipedia-l-bounces at Wikimedia.org [mailto:wikipedia-l-bounces at Wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Mark Williamson
> Sent: Friday, October 28, 2005 14:28
> To: wikipedia-l at wikimedia.org
> Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] id.wikisource.org
>
> Here I find a second issue:
>
> I think that Indonesian and Malay meet an equal threshhold to
> Serbocroatian, except that they don't have the same level of emotions
> attached.
>
> So, I think there should be a single Malay and Indonesian WS.
>
> On 28/10/05, Stanley W <stanley at e-intidata.com> wrote:
> > Hi, I hereby make a proposal for new wikisource language subdomain
> > (id.wikisource.org) to be created.
> >
> >
> >
> > Please verify that this proposal have meet the requirements needed.
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> >
> >
> > Stanley
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> >
>
>
> --
> If you would like a gmail invite, please send me an e-mail.
> Si ud. quiere que le env?e una invitaci?n para juntar gmail, env?eme un mensaje.
> Si vous voulez que je vous envoie une invitation ? joindre gmail,
> envoyez-moi s.v.p un message.
> Se vce. gostaria que lhe envie um convite para juntar gmail, favor de
> envie-me uma mensagem.
> Se vuleti chi vi manu 'n invitu a uniri gmail, mandatimi n messaggiu.
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>

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


subject: [WikiEN-l] AndriyK block (was Blocking policy violeted)

body:
AndriyK wrote:

>My username is AndriyK.
>IP address is 141.2.247.88
>I was blocked by David Gerard at 13:13, 28 October
>2005.
>The reason was formulated as
>"The reason given for AndriyK's block is: "massive
>disruption (read the MoS, talk before creating huge
>amounts of work for others)"

Admins wishing to check up on this should check [[WP:ANI]], AndriyK's
contributions and his interactions with others. Anyone feeling the
above is unfair, feel free to unblock, but do please put a note on
WP:ANI.

- d.


subject: [WikiEN-l] User Ghirlandajo messed up the WP Admin noticeboad

body:
AndriyK wrote:

>User Ghirlandajo violated WP rules several times.
>Yesterday, I described it on Wikipedia:Administrators'
>noticeboard:
>http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AAdministrators%27_noticeboard&diff=26605632&oldid=26583877
>then he messed up the page by removing the title of
>the section
>== [[User:Ghirlandajo]] ==
>and by moving my text into another part of the page so
>that it became unclear who exactly has violated the
>policies.

It made it clearer to me, not less so, as did your contribution list.

- d.


from_name: Angela

body:
On 10/28/05, Fastfission <fastfission at gmail.com> wrote:

> Anyway, I was thinking of it after reading something that Jimbo
> himself had written (http://www.ladlass.com/ice/archives/009846.html)
> so I don't think saying it's not in the spirit of wiki (as if wiki had
> a single spirit, anyway) is really quite going to cut it by itself.

That link reflects something which was widely misquoted in the press.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Announcements_August_2005#August_5
:

  "Numerous news outlets are quoting a Reuters report that Jimmy Wales
has stated that there will be a "freeze" on editing. Jimbo says that
statements about methods for achieving the widely-discussed stable
"Wikipedia 1.0" were misinterpreted as implying a project-wide
lockdown. Wikipedia's open editing will continue for the forseeable
future, and any potential stabilized version would exist alongside the
current system. Jimbo was last seen looking for the 'edit this page'
link on the Reuters article."

Angela.


from_name: Matt Brown

subject: [WikiEN-l] More at the Register

body:
On 10/27/05, Jtkiefer <jtkiefer at wordzen.net> wrote:
>
> It is and has been for some time
> obviously clear that the register is anti-wikipedia.

Rather, it is and has been for some time obviously clear that the Register
will do anything for notoriety and hits.

-Matt


body:
User Ghirlandajo violated WP rules several times.
Yesterday, I described it on Wikipedia:Administrators'
noticeboard:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AAdministrators%27_noticeboard&diff=26605632&oldid=26583877
then he messed up the page by removing the title of
the section
== [[User:Ghirlandajo]] ==
and by moving my text into another part of the page so
that it became unclear who exactly has violated the
policies.

Today user Ghirlandajo violated WP rules again. I
repoted this on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AAdministrators%27_noticeboard&diff=26695621&oldid=26647657
and tried to put my yesterda's text to the proper
place.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AAdministrators%27_noticeboard&diff=26695621&oldid=26647657
and to add the title
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AAdministrators%27_noticeboard&diff=26696095&oldid=26696078

User Ghirlandajo removed everything
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AAdministrators%27_noticeboard&diff=26696951&oldid=26696095
pretending that he moves this onto the page
Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents

In fact, he did not move it to Administrators'
noticeboard/Incidents. (In fact, he moved another text
that blames and slander myself)

When I inserted my text to  Administrators'
noticeboard/Incidents
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AAdministrators%27_noticeboard%2FIncidents&diff=26696630&oldid=2669645
He removed the title
	==[[User:Ghirlandajo]]==
so that it became unclear who exactly violated the
policies:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AAdministrators%27_noticeboard%2FIncidents&diff=26697539&oldid=26696908
in the same time he was slanderring that me - not he
vandalize the page.

I tried to revert his changes at 11:36 but he reverted
back at 11:39. Please look at the history.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&action=history

User Ghirlandajo also slandered me and misinformed
David Gerard. Now I am blocked.

User Ghirlandajo also uses extremely dirty language in
his comments. Please have a look at his contributions
at 11:47, 11:46, and 11:45 on 27 October 2005.

Thank you in advance for your just resolving the
issue.

Best regards,

AndriyK

___________________________________________________________
Gesendet von Yahoo! Mail - Jetzt mit 1GB Speicher kostenlos - Hier anmelden: http://mail.yahoo.de


from_name: Kelly Martin

body:
On 10/28/05, Arne Klempert <klempert at gmail.com> wrote:
> The text is a little bit confusing ("the new product" might sound like
> it's their product), but I see no reason for your "trying to induce"
> thing. And I really don't see any trademark violation here. Of course
> we have to defend our trademarks but we also should avoid trademark
> paranoia.

Don't take this advice; it's absolutely bad.

You absolutely must defend the mark by requiring them to insert
"MediaWiki is a trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation" or other such
content in that advert.  Failure to do so will dilute the mark.  This
is a trademark violation in the sense that they used a trademark not
belonging to them to advertise a commercial service without
acknowledging that it's not their mark.

There's no such thing as "trademark paranoia".  Failure to defend the
mark against dilution will quite simply cause the loss of the mark.

Kelly


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

body:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Ray Saintonge wrote:
> Alphax wrote:
>
>> Justin Cormack wrote:
>>
>>
>>> The speedy delete criteria are too bureaucratic now, things have to
>>> be tagged for a week, which is pointless in this case.
>>>
>>
>> I thought "speedy" meant "admins, provided tagging passes a sanity
>> check, delete this on sight"...
>>
> It only works for admins who have passed a sanity check.
>

I thought that was what RFA was for?

- --
Alphax                      |   /"\
Encrypted Email Preferred   |   \ /     ASCII Ribbon Campaign
OpenPGP key ID: 0xF874C613  |    X   Against HTML email & vCards
http://tinyurl.com/cc9up    |   / \
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQEVAwUBQ2HY+LMAAH8MeUlWAQgqegf+K7DaOXP6ZGzZLUTxO3ksUQ4Ce0d9eTfk
M6ZVv06Jour6XTiR3VhUUC9VK7p/l8NKqBvhlSnxXKBJDSiOtV/um5sil8nnG5Oa
zjYNE7DxEpfgApZH9k8M+EWqxMt9I8LgXm/pZgrQCValVn+K1trJ1p05H57vA7H2
+bH3r2lJ8sShvPOFQvcoA1reYWlJEOE2SykV3ijviVIq366o1PU0phHLPqkPLJOE
IJVpjVifw4F1HppFF3DAkyBx95sUuwFbbRvBIkKWVCNA12tqsEPik0pEWuWdAjRV
RL3oKLxe0rYyfTBTjKo0n2Y8p1usBXUVmLGTIR1CYNxtdwRydWYJtw==
=8OCM
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


subject: [Wikipedia-l] id.wikisource.org

body:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Mark Williamson wrote:
> Here I find a second issue:
>
> I think that Indonesian and Malay meet an equal threshhold to
> Serbocroatian, except that they don't have the same level of emotions
> attached.
>
> So, I think there should be a single Malay and Indonesian WS.
>

As I understand it, "Indonesian" was created as an attempt by the
Indonesian Government to assert their rule over the former Dutch East
Indies, and is basically Malay with a fancy name.

I am willing to step back from this position should a native speaker of
Malay say otherwise.

- --
Alphax                      |   /"\
Encrypted Email Preferred   |   \ /     ASCII Ribbon Campaign
OpenPGP key ID: 0xF874C613  |    X   Against HTML email & vCards
http://tinyurl.com/cc9up    |   / \
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQEVAwUBQ2HZvrMAAH8MeUlWAQi6xwf+OXTQ832Tcjy3DNh1PVvk4dwTiKxc6ky+
iIaqu49YMakOLuCTjsE13i2xkvmwe74p9oIjK5kUxBDQkL9oH90Yg01s2NmRjLD5
gIKdG9xbx2EDJ7zbrLLieNhGfCytlDlEjyP7WdFwA9OgrxRFelOVFfVSd4CLpkk2
Gg4OCpxD1y2Hn92aqjiTyDfsUATkjLrahv7E3mxTBdJwBYR+HmfDORKEan4wGPKW
jSV1HA5ntt2h3jT/+qRRmL4hacqKFpcAklh4cxeS9k2rpFqB3tGYxsuGE4C6ev6+
2IdMk/k/aqxbNr1Y1Z0ags7dYMFRU0DfkGiu189abO2+gGULWXikAQ==
=/eBF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


from_name: Robert Scott Horning

body:
Kelly Martin wrote:

>On 10/28/05, Arne Klempert <klempert at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>The text is a little bit confusing ("the new product" might sound like
>>it's their product), but I see no reason for your "trying to induce"
>>thing. And I really don't see any trademark violation here. Of course
>>we have to defend our trademarks but we also should avoid trademark
>>paranoia.
>>
>>
>
>Don't take this advice; it's absolutely bad.
>
>You absolutely must defend the mark by requiring them to insert
>"MediaWiki is a trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation" or other such
>content in that advert.  Failure to do so will dilute the mark.  This
>is a trademark violation in the sense that they used a trademark not
>belonging to them to advertise a commercial service without
>acknowledging that it's not their mark.
>
>There's no such thing as "trademark paranoia".  Failure to defend the
>mark against dilution will quite simply cause the loss of the mark.
>
>Kelly
>
>
While I would agree that the Wikimedia Foundation needs to enforce the
trademark here, this isn't that big of a deal.  Other than not
mentioning as a disclaimer that MediaWiki is a trademark of the
foundation can this even be considered a problem and that can be cleaned
up with just adding an asterix to the name and a short statement at the
bottom of the web page.

All they are doing is offering MediaWiki hosting for their clients just
as many ISP and web hosting services will also support MySQL hosting on
their servers.  In many ways, this shows the popularity and the progress
of this piece of software and the foundation should take this as a
compliment.  It also shows that there is commercial demand for people
who want to use the MediaWiki software to host Wiki services and not be
trying to sneak onto Wikipedia or other Wikimedia project for free
hosting.  That would be a good thing all around, and indeed something we
should be encouraging or even getting into a partnership with somebody
over.  Some sort of partnership where experienced admins and developers
from the various projects offering technical assistance in setting up
MediaWiki servers for a minor donation to the Wikimedia Foundation
sounds like something that would benefit just about everybody here.  Or
heck, even get paid for the technical assistance where experience as an
editor on Wikipedia would be worth something other than just a line of
volunteer work on your resume.

Don't get mad at people like this... encourage them but try to help them
with mistakes like failure to put a disclaimer on their use of term
MediaWiki.  This could be a real opportunity instead.

--
Robert Scott Horning


from_name: Brion Vibber

subject: [Wikitech-l] article effacé

body:
Obaldia at aol.com wrote:
> j'avais ?crit (il y a peut-?tre un mois) un article sous votre site, sur la
> Communaut? fran?aise (structure cr??e par la constitution de 1958). Celui ci a
>  ?t?, apparemment, an?anti, pour des raisons qui m'?chappent,et remplac? par
> un  "stab". Avez-vous quelques ?clairages ? ce sujet?

Impossible ? dire sans des informations... Quel article?
http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communaut?_de_la_Constitution_de_1958 ?

Ce liste s'agit des affaires de logiciel et des serveurs. Pour les
affaires encyclop?diques, il serait plus bon demander sur le page
'discussion' de l'article, ou au 'bistro' de la communaut?:
http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip?dia:Le_Bistro

-- 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/20051028/2e3867fc/attachment.pgp>


from_name: charles matthews

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Can you trust Wikipedia?

body:
Puddl Duk wrote

>We've been the media's little
darling for a long time, not because we are great, but because
Wikipedia works _at all_. The media honeymoon won't last forever.

Yes, they could build us up just to knock us down, in classic style.  But at
least everyone would know about WP.

>Lest I sound too harsh, remember that the OED, also written with the
help of volunteers, took over fifty years to fully publish.

Yes, but the bulk of the slips (submissions) came in during five years.
About where we are now?

Charles


from_name: Michael Snow

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Can you trust Wikipedia?

body:
Alphax wrote:

>Daniel P. B. Smith wrote:
>
>
>>On a trustworthiness scale of 0 to 10, I'd pesonally score the  Register
>>as 3, the Guardian as 9.5.
>>
>>And Slashdot as 2, Drudge as 4, and Wikipedia as, um, about a 7?
>>
>>
>I'd actually give Wikipedia an 8-8.5 on trustworthiness. Writing quality
>is another thing entirely.
>
>
It would be foolish in the extreme to try and rate Wikipedia as a whole,
since unlike these other places it lacks anything like a uniform
editorial hand. Rating individual articles makes sense, and I suppose
you could generate various averages as approximations, but this only
goes so far.

(as we await the debut of an article rating feature)

--Michael Snow


body:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

geni wrote:
> On 10/28/05, Alphax <alphasigmax at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Put yourself forward
>>as someone who will ignore the typical "d nn" and "keep we need all
>>articles" votes, and wow! They all get mad and shoot you down in flames.
>
>
> Sure anyone who states that they are going to go against common
> practice (and probably policy) to such a degree should be opposed.
> Adminship does not exist to further political causes.
>

But it's perfectly OK to support someone who says "I will delete any
article where there is a majority of delete votes, no matter what the
reasons are for the keep votes"?

- --
Alphax                      |   /"\
Encrypted Email Preferred   |   \ /     ASCII Ribbon Campaign
OpenPGP key ID: 0xF874C613  |    X   Against HTML email & vCards
http://tinyurl.com/cc9up    |   / \
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQEVAwUBQ2HyVbMAAH8MeUlWAQgsgAgAkCAxPzk56WPrarZi/gDOBKM89WGQmufd
mJf9Zc6+NOmFwvGZ+xGr6jEmYClKwUns/V6BQVyfbddz/ne6UFICa395cpflCrKP
4cZzlreflKRzk9jf51T0DyhjITvJ2Tb27JArdXDjw6xjWhVJEQhDS9trGZO2h1Pz
yxcyK8chhy7CuQ7VVmyYGxhcJQ66h1m+o75TKRI1MQzLnOtzU7mHwJ84fKf2Io22
3wSOFOfo6jK5Jl5embWFj/2R2Guy6ipMmTrgYwrr2A1OvyQvHnTF4/0+T+LBFRds
zXMAhgTFbeCx9O6/hRUa8GtwTBjImTfnwrpZIpIcu2WLvbcF3wXFGQ==
=EBIn
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


subject:
[WikiEN-l]
	Infinite	BlockbyAbusiveAdmin/Extortion/Harassment/Fraudulent
	use ofWikipediaAbuse Emails

body:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Jeff V. Merkey wrote:
>
> Fred,
>
> Here's the settlement.  Roll the page back to the agreed content and
> lock it and unblock my accounts so I can edit
> in the cultural areas.  Leaving me blocked is grounds for action.  Why
> should I be blocked when it was your admins
> who violated the laws?    Blocking me to avoid claims when you allow
> others to edit is unlawful.  Was I blocked due to
> my race?  Or perhaps due to my religious or culturual beliefs.  See
> where this could go?   From my perspective, I was
> a victim of stalking on this site, and I was blocked for political
> reasons, not because I did anything wrong.  Making
> claims you can block people for legal threats in the case of this person
> may become a self fulfilling prophecy.
> There's right and wrong, and you are an attorney.  You cannot block a
> public forum for any reason or no reason.  It violates
> the CDA and anti-trust legislation.  Think about it.
>

Wikipedia is NOT a "public forum". It is a website run by a private
organisation. You agreed that you would abide by certain terms and
conditions; if you have broken those terms and conditions, you have no
legal comeback.

- --
Alphax                      |   /"\
Encrypted Email Preferred   |   \ /     ASCII Ribbon Campaign
OpenPGP key ID: 0xF874C613  |    X   Against HTML email & vCards
http://tinyurl.com/cc9up    |   / \
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQEVAwUBQ2Hy6bMAAH8MeUlWAQgD0wf/RE0ySS0Y1C+DJFDdGw5b4M43yZoH/6+g
tUDIww2ro91DzvWMeO5xd0uSjqcPQ+nDFq/fwiixJU3qqjR1rAyoKVpJrNP32gAf
Amh6/Mgkz4x1Cv0UcOO7qNBiGhizSd+PdoD0g4dSRz9gMpAV+R1RtZn39GWuO1b1
asvz5Moz1yxNRuwcvT6RIl/vGp7Gq0L4rHCtndv1IdLJmitJSPmvr9yQA8ae/Wi4
npB50pKcmmNx5U+iVqkz4Ev85nk2xJqOK9k/g+h8VmWsCKGitiWG0Ra0CPkpjF4v
7653lkQvdrEcMHHtwT8wRhAqT+GrsbtuSwkWz6o8TTx/RWqcAHh5fw==
=6PqE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


from_name: Daniel P. B. Smith

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Can you trust Wikipedia?

body:
> From: Puddl Duk <puddlduk at gmail.com>

> Lets not delude ourselves. We have a long way to go.  I was just
> looking at some old EB articles the other day; Guerrilla [warfare],
> written by   ..........  T. E. Lawrence.  And Space-time, written by
> ..........  Albert Einstein.

I was thinking the other day that mature Wikipedia articles are
usually at about the level of a _really good_ college term paper,
written by a very competent, bright, student who has spent some time
in the library.

Guess what? I'm not the first person who's had that idea:

http://www.termpapertopic.org/ja/japanese-toilet.html

http://www.termpapertopic.org/ex/exploding-whale.html

--
Daniel P. B. Smith, dpbsmith at verizon.net
"Elinor Goulding Smith's Great Big Messy Book" is now back in print!
Sample chapter at http://world.std.com/~dpbsmith/messy.html
Buy it at http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1403314063/


from_name: Obaldia at aol.com

subject: [Wikitech-l] article effacé

body:
bonsoir,

j'avais ?crit (il y a peut-?tre un mois) un article sous votre site, sur la
Communaut? fran?aise (structure cr??e par la constitution de 1958). Celui ci a
 ?t?, apparemment, an?anti, pour des raisons qui m'?chappent,et remplac? par
un  "stab". Avez-vous quelques ?clairages ? ce sujet?

Merci
Patrick Comoy


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Can you trust Wikipedia?

body:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Daniel P. B. Smith wrote:
>> From: Jtkiefer <jtkiefer at wordzen.net>
>>
>>>> The Guardian has a story entitled "Can you trust Wikipedia?" in  which
>>>> various specialists rate Wikipedia articles in their field of
>>>> knowledge: http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,,1599116,00.html
>>
>>
>> As I also posted in another thread roughly on this topic, although we
>> should be concerned whether or not Wikipedia is trustworthy we  shouldn't
>> get ourselves too concerned about the register's "articles" about
>> Wikipedia since every single article is clearly biased against  wikipedia
>> beyond factuality so the register slamming us with criticism is just
>> business as usual.
>
>
> No, but we _should_ be concerned about the _Guardian's_ articles  about
> Wikipedia.
>
> Because the Register isn't trustworthy, but the Guardian is.
>
> On a trustworthiness scale of 0 to 10, I'd pesonally score the  Register
> as 3, the Guardian as 9.5.
>
> And Slashdot as 2, Drudge as 4, and Wikipedia as, um, about a 7?
>
>

I'd actually give Wikipedia an 8-8.5 on trustworthiness. Writing quality
is another thing entirely.

- --
Alphax                      |   /"\
Encrypted Email Preferred   |   \ /     ASCII Ribbon Campaign
OpenPGP key ID: 0xF874C613  |    X   Against HTML email & vCards
http://tinyurl.com/cc9up    |   / \
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQEVAwUBQ2H8wLMAAH8MeUlWAQiKOQf/X6AiNZHkbY+5NRTDwPvApI1ep7R4WevS
RLJqP05fL68wyz7CInZCgd7r1oL6T0dN3yZSbmUVQ5bs335wR/KpU2mkYNj6Jpl0
Qp2ce62D3gR0rZSPJGR1/5+xxDdVOUbQjnSjaL/3wRpDzWNn+b24NxBpL7yoKlPi
1P47W2qBA1rUFL5Fr1Qp9Xors1T1b2MfaMkexzdnpzrdOMA/CBBRfnVGFs3zs6sI
v+Toa0Uko1LihTmk8eSNF+V3nCGdyU8u33I2RHL3ff4T7pGBoOX4+mFUrtF/7WXt
ipYW0UbUXpu0svn5vl8DRW6qeziWQQGaUlv3cFC2KFW45mbnEyY4TQ==
=tUxR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


body:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

geni wrote:
> On 10/28/05, Alphax <alphasigmax at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>But it's perfectly OK to support someone who says "I will delete any
>>article where there is a majority of delete votes, no matter what the
>>reasons are for the keep votes"?
>
>
> Maybe.
>
>

I went looking through last week's AFD pages (eg. October 17-21). I saw
a few articles where the "majority" of votes were to delete, but the
last few votes included statements such as "keep, I have verified and
rewritten the article..." and "keep after excellent rewrite".

Are you telling me that you would have deleted such articles? Why don't
we actually go back to "votes for deletion" and implement voting
software for the page? If the process is so mechanical and requires no
brainpower whatsoever, why not just automate it?

(Oh yes, I forget to mention: I have a fully-functional auto-voter which
merely requires you to edit the AFD subpage in question. Contact me
off-list for details.)

- --
Alphax                      |   /"\
Encrypted Email Preferred   |   \ /     ASCII Ribbon Campaign
OpenPGP key ID: 0xF874C613  |    X   Against HTML email & vCards
http://tinyurl.com/cc9up    |   / \
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQEVAwUBQ2H92rMAAH8MeUlWAQhvVwf+MpsDkMnk1UF1V4N8fH8ZuKZIpidc2Qxz
bJ9bxYPBi2ENuctHOCfgOWBvklz9o29OmtZAjMHETSOAzHHC7pm6nRpW3z5hlpMx
1zBBsqTxfQ+S2eOxueMTibCIPbOCNTIOobU2L/5xJ+Q7aqooCQ5GLhj2E7Hw9zir
FX6OWxFfPkNdDjJoRHWOCK9iFNAIcRyEf8gx7xQ2DBl+Rig7Qy2vc3III1xzb3mk
tP+Ia6Xf4JHjGElzdTkXUEV7/YEr/eFSz390sD4AatY3oTxK4c1BlmBwIP/h+JzC
mwCGQAHDvrGAl3VsQ0mzix9RrfZQT2R+OjiQDg3qemYA4YY7uRK2gg==
=7sYw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


from_name: Geoff Burling

body:
On Thu, 27 Oct 2005, Michael Turley wrote:

> On 10/27/05, Geoff Burling <llywrch at agora.rdrop.com> wrote:
> --snip--
> > The continuing arguments around VfD/AfD suggests that some of the
> > community does not understand -- or believe -- that there is a goal
> > to this project, a place where our Wiki will eventually end. I suspect
> > that FF has found another end point to our Wiki.
>
> Hogwash.  Unless you intend to stop the flow of time and the recording
> of history, there will be no "end" to the work needed at Wikipedia.
>
> Oh, but eventually the sciences will be covered!  Or will they?  Our
> pace of scientific discovery hasn't been slowing, it's been
> accelerating.
>
I was talking about the act of writing. While rewriting is a vital
part of writing, the author eventually reaches a final draft. Unless
you enjoy struggling through an endless cycle of rough drafts covered
with interlinear insertions & corrections -- which Wikipedia often
resembles -- you will eventually come to an end point in your writing.

I have *no* idea how you came up with your interpretation of what I
said; I never claimed to say what you are ranting against. I can only
assume you have confused my email for someone else's.

Geoff


subject: [WikiEN-l] More at the Register

body:
On 10/28/05, Alphax <alphasigmax at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Isn't the Register like the Onion, only it takes itself seriously?
>

Pretty much - except more truth is printed in the Onion.

-Matt


body:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

geni wrote:
> On 10/28/05, Alphax <alphasigmax at gmail.com> wrote:
>
<snip>
>>(Oh yes, I forget to mention: I have a fully-functional auto-voter which
>>merely requires you to edit the AFD subpage in question. Contact me
>>off-list for details.)
>
>
> Ctrl-v yes?
>

No, all you have to do is edit the page and it automatically votes for you.

- --
Alphax                      |   /"\
Encrypted Email Preferred   |   \ /     ASCII Ribbon Campaign
OpenPGP key ID: 0xF874C613  |    X   Against HTML email & vCards
http://tinyurl.com/cc9up    |   / \
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQEVAwUBQ2IQYLMAAH8MeUlWAQh4kwf/VrOFtuKVxYlU/pY/tP7e82wHM9dH9ugB
QhD7UCUwgYZxag5w3aFE6GGgpsRM8xvhcfQk+XhE8YG+Wqwn6PRSHDdGBkwlGjnv
C25sT/LOKppHFXEKLW51dSAJ97sJyTY0xZbYKyu2wh+9FxHDF3xgv+AguRf34sXe
Zzgrv0Hm1uN0mtajpM/eNKhL5+O7NdnB1/qdxNu1DCd0C7tut7/oDIkOIymjGVtE
sN0YmwIn6HQBQVEFsn9dVFeM8RrVlbBmx57BDqoNKGLj8NoPHauWQSGUpnRigsKU
h1EnGfBz2XyqRm12WbRBx3U0uZWbHaYg3vGTZb3BVTuZQ4kbQzeQlA==
=TUHF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


from_name: Ray Saintonge

body:
geni wrote:

>On 10/26/05, Fred Bauder <fredbaud at ctelco.net> wrote:
>
>
>>But that will be the next question... No thanks!
>>
>>
>No becuase I know it will not be answered. I think I can show either
>position to be flawed but there is no point in useing the arguments
>against one when I dealing with an someone who holds the other
>position
>
>
If you know there will be no answer what's the point of trolling for one?

Ec


from_name: Nathan Reed

subject: [Foundation-l] Hebrew Wikinews set into development

body:
Congratulations Avichai and crew!

-N.

On 10/28/05, Nicholas Moreau <nicholasmoreau at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Avichai and six other Hebrew Wikipedians and Wikiquoters have signed up to
> create a Hebrew Wikinews.
>
> I've checked out their contributions, approved the request to start
> development on Meta-Wikipedia.
>
> So you know,
> Nick Moreau/Zanimum
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

--
Nathan Reed
nathanreed at gmail.com


from_name: Lars Aronsson

subject: [Foundation-l] Re: Privacy concerns

body:
W. Guy Finley wrote:

> An IP address cannot in any way, shape, or form be considered to
> be private information and I'm amazed there can be rants back
> and forth about this.

In Europe this is not about "private" but "personal" information,
meaning anything that can be connected with your person, such as
names, addresses, phone numbers, and -perhaps- IP addresses.
Storing and processing such information is not illegal, but has to
follow some rules.  Apparently we still use the Internet all over
this continent, so these rules are possible to comply with.

In a case last week a Swedish court ruled that IP addresses were
not personal information.  But this outcome was far from obvious,
and later rulings could go the other way.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/10/21/hunt_for_swedish_filesharers/

> It's as simple as this -- you elect to visit Wikipedia, in turn
> your IP and your activity is stored.

If Wikipedia were a Swedish website (it is not), it would be
required by law to provide information about how it uses cookies
and for what purposes.  No problem, a short notice is enough.
The Foundation's privacy policy document already complies with
this, http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Privacy_policy#Cookies
as does the Swedish Wikipedia's cookie information page,
http://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Cookies

> Make admins sign NDA's about log info?  Unbelievable.  There is
> NOTHING personally identifying there

If it were really harmless, we should ask for all logs to be
published openly, and IP addresses could be listed in articles'
revision history.

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


subject: [Foundation-l] Re: Privacy concerns


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Can you trust Wikipedia?

body:
>But as for the lady who gave the zero, we need to find her e-mail address
>so
we can ask her what should be added to the Haute Couture article.

Darling, emails are so, you know, 1998.

Charles


body:
David Gerard wrote:

>And those who think this is a bad thing, an avoidable thing or
>something we should pretend doesn't happen are blinding themselves and
>heading for trouble. A hierarchy will happen whether you like it or
>not, because humans are involved; politics starts with two or more
>people in a room, anywhere. Pretending it's not there makes it
>poisonous, not nonexistent.
>
>If you don't have a structure then one will form out of your sight and
>bite you in the arse. "If the movement is to move beyond these
>elementary stages of development, it will have to disabuse itself of
>some of its prejudices about organisation and structure. There is
>nothing inherently bad about either of these. They can be and often
>are misused, but to reject them out of hand because they are misused
>is to deny ourselves the necessary tools to further development. We
>need to understand why 'structurelessness' does not work."
>
It happens repeatedly in many circumstances.  People don't participate
because they see an organization as "political" in whatever the worst
sense of that word may be.  By failng to participate they allow the
politics to happen, and they become part of the problem.

Ec


from_name: Jean-Baptiste Soufron

body:
After looking at it, they are clearly trying to induce confusion between
their wiki offer, the gnu gpl software mediawiki, wikipedia, wiktionnary
and wikiquote.

It is necessary to ask them to change this !

Daniel Mayer wrote:
> Webhosting Provider, Aplus.Net, Launches Media Wiki
> http://www.cheaphostingdirectory.com/news-webhosting-provider-aplus-net-launches-media-wiki-1538.html
>
> -- mav
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Yahoo! FareChase: Search multiple travel sites in one click.
> http://farechase.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>


body:
geni wrote:

>On 10/26/05, Kelly Martin <kelly.lynn.martin at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Again, I have said that I will not publicly discuss the merits of the
>>candidates.
>>
>>Kelly
>>
>>
>I'm not asking you to do that. I'm just asking if you honest think
>there are currently people on the nominations list who could get
>elected but are unsutible. Yes or no. I'm not asking for statements
>about individual candidates.
>
I read Kelly's refusal to be drawn in as a sign of integrity.

Ec


from_name: Arne Klempert

body:
On 10/28/05, Jean-Baptiste Soufron <jbsoufron at gmail.com> wrote:
> After looking at it, they are clearly trying to induce confusion between
> their wiki offer, the gnu gpl software mediawiki, wikipedia, wiktionnary
> and wikiquote.

The text is a little bit confusing ("the new product" might sound like
it's their product), but I see no reason for your "trying to induce"
thing. And I really don't see any trademark violation here. Of course
we have to defend our trademarks but we also should avoid trademark
paranoia.

Just my 2 cents (IANAL)

-- Arne (akl)


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

body:
Alphax wrote:

>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Hash: SHA256
>
>Fastfission wrote:
>
>
>>"Respected scholar John Doe has said that the impact of Pepys on
>>future literature is incalcuable, and at least 20 books per decade are
>>published on him."
>>
>>..and so forth would be perfectly in line with NPOV and NOR. What
>>would not be appropriate are unattributed, "universalized" statements
>>of value, but there's nothing in NPOV or NOR which says that all value
>>statements whatsoever should be stripped out of articles.
>>
>>
>Can the Foundation create another project whose job it is to create
>viewpoints that we can then cite?
>
>Or is this the job of Wikisource and Wikibooks?
>
>Or aren't we allowed to cite them, per the "no self-references" rule?
>
I don't know about Wikibooks but Wikisource is certainly mostly
useable.  It's not original research, but mostly a lot of old material
that is already in the public domain.

Ec


from_name: Tony Sidaway

body:
On 10/28/05, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Tony Sidaway got RFCed for following policy in deletion debate
> closings, remember.
>

Shhhhhh! :)


from_name: Ryan Delaney

subject:
[WikiEN-l] Why article creation/deletion is different from text
	creation/deletion

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

dpbsmith at verizon.net wrote:

>
> The effect of editing within an article affects the structure of a
> single argle. The effect of creating or deleting an article affects
> the structure of the encyclopedia as a whole and is therefore a
> more significant event than edits within an article.

Of course deletion has different effects; it's a different sort of
edit. But it's still an edit. What you have written is true, but it
doesn't speak to the question of why deletion should be handled
differently from other edits. As long as you are trusting the
community of people editing the articles to decide what should be in
the article, you ought to trust them to decide if the article
shouldn't exist at all.

Ryan
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFDYvev6MKb8lYmCtcRAoj1AJ4sC3o+gaZ/PfjvoL9N2r77HyW+cgCfcPU/
w/MbHj/dX5MrsDHHNYeZujQ=
=jrPM
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


from_name: Alphax

subject:
[WikiEN-l]	Infinite	BlockbyAbusiveAdmin/Extortion/Harassment/Fraudulent
	use

body:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

MAURICE FRANK wrote:
>>Wikipedia is NOT a "public forum". It is a website
>
> run >by a private
>
>>organisation. You agreed that you would abide by
>
> certain >terms and
>
>>conditions; if you have broken those terms and
>>conditions, you have no
>>legal comeback.
>>
>>Alphax
>
>
> Aha!
> Yes he does have his comeback, if Wiki itself has
> broken either its own self-described terms or another
> law, towards him. Good luck to him: you've been asking
> for it with your gloating claims to be above every law
> in the world.
>

"Hey Calvin, what are the rules again?"

- --
Alphax                      |   /"\
Encrypted Email Preferred   |   \ /     ASCII Ribbon Campaign
OpenPGP key ID: 0xF874C613  |    X   Against HTML email & vCards
http://tinyurl.com/cc9up    |   / \
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQEVAwUBQ2It+7MAAH8MeUlWAQhvqgf9HehQ5EJ4FLyg08hl4RdeQ5AyewNHil4n
//EMbbjTs+iLtI6Mq51A+2uIHR9X2S6GcDDjJoMi1Q82uxhSUOMaLxVDE9C+tIV1
OXX7W5Mb3ypQ377jhcplJVpVgFQPgYui8oZhp0oSquz2lXO7Wgi2uw1RsorztHl/
0Ju+w9kbSUL3Kxt+unBfZB8KAW21UljQ9NF4x0cLzecMZIjLrqRbdsYes3v0vJdr
Cgd8Ifi8MMKrt+Gkvdwuk8CxE+KhLlEeYpW1cjiN12DaHv5jx90loLx9lKDWhw9r
FxiXRtSH+omEK5EKBnFldvSSCoRqkaVdnzNgROuFTH1h4yVoFANO5g==
=qwUN
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


subject:
[Juriwiki-l] Re: [Foundation-l] Trademark violation of
	our	'MediaWiki' mark

body:
Arne Klempert wrote:
> On 10/28/05, Jean-Baptiste Soufron <jbsoufron at gmail.com> wrote:
>> After looking at it, they are clearly trying to induce confusion between
>> their wiki offer, the gnu gpl software mediawiki, wikipedia, wiktionnary
>> and wikiquote.
>
> The text is a little bit confusing ("the new product" might sound like
> it's their product), but I see no reason for your "trying to induce"
> thing. And I really don't see any trademark violation here. Of course
> we have to defend our trademarks but we also should avoid trademark
> paranoia.

Well, a good first step would be mentioning that mediawiki is a
registered trademark from another company, and clearly explaining that
is a third party software that they did not develop.

When you look here :
http://www.cheaphostingdirectory.com/news-webhosting-provider-aplus-net-launches-media-wiki-1538.html

As you say he actual text is confusing, which is exactly the criteria
for trademark violations. I don't say we should hurry to the courts, but
we should ask them to be more precise.

JBS, in the dark of the night


body:
On 10/28/05, Alphax <alphasigmax at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I look forward to the day when Mediawiki becomes Turing-complete :)
>

I've got a whole array of gmail account stacked up for the eventuality
that one day their filtering system will become Turing-complete.  I'm
patient...


from_name: Delirium

subject:
[Wikipedia-l] Other projects in Bosnian, Serbian, Croatian,
	Montenegrin, ...?

body:
Milos Rancic wrote:

>Bosniaks should have all projects in their own standard language
>because it is better to have three small projects where people would
>want to work then one when people would not want to work. In this
>moment.
>
>
This is debatable.  Having 3 projects separated on
ethnic/nationalist/political lines is just about the worst possible
alternative, IMO, worse even than having no projects, since I cannot see
how such a project could ever possibly be a legitimate Wikipedia project
with a neutral point of view.

-Mark


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Can you trust Wikipedia?

body:
Puddl Duk wrote:

>Lets not delude ourselves. We have a long way to go.  I was just
>looking at some old EB articles the other day; Guerrilla [warfare],
>written by   ..........  T. E. Lawrence.  And Space-time, written by
>..........  Albert Einstein.
>
>EB has literally tens of thousands of superb, first rate articles
>written by the world's leading experts and polished by an editorial
>staff. Yet we enjoy make fun of a handful of embarrassing errors or
>shortcomings that have.
>
>
I'd say even the "good" Britannica articles are, with a very few
exceptions, quite bad when it comes to having a neutral point of view.
1911 EB in particular does not even pretend to be neutral, and makes
quite unsupported judgments with astonishing frequency, claiming e.g.
that a particular philosophical viewpoint is "wrong" (even if it's
widely accepted), or that a particular author's work is "overrated", and
so on.

The current edition is certainly much better than 1911, but it still
leaves much to be desired.

-Mark


from_name: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason

subject:
[Wikitech-l] Re: [MediaWiki-CVS] phase3/includes
	DefaultSettings.php, 1.383, 1.384 Parser.php, 1.515, 1.516

references:
<20051026221305.5F47A1AC193F@mail.wikimedia.org>
	<43601178.6010100@physics.unimelb.edu.au> <djudeo$q0k$1@sea.gmane.org>
	<djue8b$si6$1@sea.gmane.org>

body:
On 10/29/05, Tim Starling <t.starling at physics.unimelb.edu.au> wrote:
> Timwi wrote:
> > Tim Starling wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> This will break static HTML dumps and any other offline usage. Can't we
> >> just change Commons policy instead?
> >
> >
> > Can't we just make those images free instead?
> >
> > What's with Wikimedia being all free, and all the people having say and
> > everything? It just doesn't make any sense. It's like a government
> > trying to tell everyone their goal is peace, and then going to war with
> > Iraq.
>
> Trademark protection is necessary to prevent forks or other encyclopedia
> projects from claiming to be the real Wikipedia.

The issue is not trademark protection, it's copyright protection.
Wikimedia claims copyright over the images and won't license them
under a free license, I don't think anyone would have an issue with
them still protecting it as a trademark if they would do so.


from_name: David Gerard

subject: [WikiEN-l] [[Wikipedia:Good articles]]

body:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Good_articles

Love it. Love it.

- d.


from_name: Timwi

subject:
[Wikitech-l] Re: [MediaWiki-CVS] phase3/includes
 DefaultSettings.php, 1.383, 1.384 Parser.php, 1.515, 1.516

body:
Tim Starling wrote:
>
> This will break static HTML dumps and any other offline usage. Can't we
> just change Commons policy instead?

Can't we just make those images free instead?

What's with Wikimedia being all free, and all the people having say and
everything? It just doesn't make any sense. It's like a government
trying to tell everyone their goal is peace, and then going to war with
Iraq.

Timwi


subject: [WikiEN-l] Blocking policy violeted

body:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Andriy K wrote:
<snip>
> These users try to force wikipedia community to
> use a sort of "Russian English", i.e. transliteration
> from Russian prononciation of the names of Ukrainian
> cities instead of the spellings used by modern
> creadible English sources (like Encyclopedia
> Britannika and many others).
>

Your spelling leaves much to be desired.

- --
Alphax                      |   /"\
Encrypted Email Preferred   |   \ /     ASCII Ribbon Campaign
OpenPGP key ID: 0xF874C613  |    X   Against HTML email & vCards
http://tinyurl.com/cc9up    |   / \
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQEVAwUBQ2JDQLMAAH8MeUlWAQg+MQf/Yz6tx/ACeitzrE4IB/1LYd+ituU4xqjy
/MGNOpBo67MxDHVElgie+dVUYeEnJuY2zlR+YjqiAapk3xXATzUN+Srw0CSa/qDe
B2E045dcHyDt6yDQC3TxH9Ke+PmF3vXo+4XFalN67KjfbhkKygIme6KdFR47952S
lLq+Ouup86qKjoyqQRwcK+wLh0doy3TG2d4iZ50TQIBhif6PIQkNhhtvOfnO5y6t
NLzEMYBUC9Oi6S7mu3RjjMZUOIBhVoxdkNUCkfSw8WlSeIDymGj12KVqNngb61SA
sFYdtQ/4ntZMHsYV4eSsKMJVRSAR7bCw8u5H9lXbzmbbshhl5E7WTA==
=7BDi
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: Automatic capitalisation on the faroese Wiktionary

body:
> I just asked today in the wikimedia-tech channel to have the automatic
> capitalisation turned off on the faroese Wiktionary.

*sigh* When are they finally going to turn off the capitalisation in
*all* Wiktionaries?


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: AfD should be Arguments for Deletion

body:
MacGyverMagic/Mgm wrote:
> I support the idea of forcing people to actually argue their view, but
> I see a lot of problems with the current idea.
> 1) The decision of the closing admin is always going to be questioned.

Since you've used the word "always", clearly you're aware that this is
not a problem specifically of my proposal and therefore not an argument
against my proposal.

> 2) Having only arguments doesn't show how many people actually endorse
> these views.

But that's the whole point. It shouldn't be *necessary* to show "how
many" people "endorse" anything -- "endorse" is just another euphemism
for "vote for", as is apparent in the words "how many". Instead, it
should only be necessary to explain reasoning. If the only reasoning
that makes perfect sense is one that favours deletion or keepage, then
this should be all that's necessary, regardless of any counts or any
"how many people".

Timwi


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Recent 1-Click Answers Deal

body:
> I just wanted to let you know how stunned and disappointed I was to hear
> that the board with very little input made this deal to advertise on
> wikipedia.

Other than "OMG it's advertising!!1" and "OMG I'm so disappointed!!1",
do you have any actual arguments?

Timwi


from_name: Anthere

subject: [Foundation-l] cp.aplus.net

body:
an interesting direct link : https://cp.aplus.net/login.asp

__________________________________
Yahoo! FareChase: Search multiple travel sites in one click.
http://farechase.yahoo.com


subject: [Foundation-l] cp.aplus.net


list: commons-l

from_name: Tim 'avatar' Bartel

subject: [Commons-l] Upload of thumbnails in Commons

body:
Hi wikipedians,

I fixed some thumbnail-uploads again today - this is really too much
unneeded work. Please take a look at
http://bugzilla.wikipedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3822 and vote, if you like.

Thanks, Tim.


subject: [WikiEN-l] New Ideas for AfD

body:
geni wrote:

>On 10/26/05, Anthony DiPierro <wikispam at inbox.org> wrote:
>
>
>> Supports what consensus? I just said, if people can't come to a general
>>agreement, then there *is* no consensus. You seem to be mistaking majority
>>with consensus.
>>
>>
>General aggreement isn't going to happen any more on anything. As such
>in order to get things done we have to shift over to super majority.
>If you don't like this go and join a smaller project.
>
That sounds like a deletionist manifesto.

That seems characteristic of the gang of punks that has been dominating
the deletion process.  These fanatics are  so obsessed with pushing
their POV through deletions that they have completely lost touch with
anything constructive or creative.

I'm also disappointed in those who are in a position to act against this
clique that just whine and do nothing.  Sometimes it takes a little
courage to deal with these disruptive influences.  Even if a large
proportion of these articles deserves be deleted that doesn't justify
the inflexible attitude about all the deletions.

If they can't make some effort to reach compromises with others who do
suggest alternatives for problem articles then maybe they should go
troll somewher else.

Getting pissed off with the incessent complaints,
Ec


subject: [WikiEN-l] New Ideas for AfD

body:
geni wrote:

>On 10/27/05, Philip Sandifer <snowspinner at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Your opinion, while interesting, is kind of notable for utterly
>>contradicting what Jimbo has said repeatedly about the community, and
>>the fact that we are not a democracy.
>>
>>-Snowspinner
>>
>>
>I try to be a realist. The current size of the project means that we
>know have people or even groups of people who will never agree on
>anything ever. The time needed to carry out the length of debate
>needed to get anything close to consensus is now so long that if we
>want a result withing a decade we have to use supermajority rather
>than consensus. No amout of jumping up and down saying wikipedia is
>not a democracy is going to change that.
>
>Fortunetly when it comes to individual articles the number of people
>involved is small enough that consensus is still posible in a large
>number of cases.
>
>
By presuming that there can be no easy agreement you don't give it a
chance to happen.  If is takes a little longer that's far more
acceptable than the confrontational approach that has been prevailing
lately.  You would be surprised by the positive resultes you would get
by showing a little good faith.

Ec


from_name: Elisabeth Anderl

subject:
[Wikitech-l] Re: Automatic capitalisation on the faroese
	Wiktionary

body:
Timwi a ?crit :

>
>> I just asked today in the wikimedia-tech channel to have the
>> automatic capitalisation turned off on the faroese Wiktionary.
>
>
> *sigh* When are they finally going to turn off the capitalisation in
> *all* Wiktionaries?
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Thanks a lot ! This was quick :)
Best regards, Elisabeth Anderl


from_name: Milos Rancic

body:
For the moment I thought that it was not you there...

Mark, please, please, please stop to help us. And, please, stop to
talk to other people what is the best for us.

Bosniaks should have all projects in their own standard language
because it is better to have three small projects where people would
want to work then one when people would not want to work. In this
moment.

I am sick of your colonialist behaviour. If you really want to help
us, please find some programmer who would help us to make MW
extensions faster and/or find some mediator who wants to work on
relations between our communities.

On 10/28/05, Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm sending this because I noticed a request for a Bosnian Wikisource:
>
> http://wikisource.org/wiki/Wikisource:Language_domain_requests#bs.wikisource.org_.28Bosanski.29
>
> Now, Jimmy Wales said IIRC that it was due to ignorance and that it
> was a mistake that we had separate Wikipedias for these so-called
> languages.
>
> For this reason, it strikes me as counterproductive to start up a new
> project in Bosnian.
>
> Y?s, there are already Wikisource subdomains for Croatian and Serbian,
> which in itself strikes me as unfortunate and counterproductive, but I
> think that it would be even more counterproductive to promote such a
> farce of forced separation of what could be fantastic combined efforts
> when there is a clear path to stop the nonsense without hurting the
> status quo -- with Wikisource, there is no Bosnian version yet, and
> Croatian and Serbian versions are small, compared to Wikipedias.
>
> Just as Angela said with regards to Simple English projects
> (Wikiquotes and Wikibooks), a source is a source. Since Croatian,
> Bosnian, and Serbian are 99.9999999% mutually intelligible, it seems
> nonsensical to me to separate Wikisources, given that Wikisource isn't
> even supposed to have original content.
>
> Now, for all the people out there who would like to tell me that
> Croatian, Serbian, and Bosnian are really separate languages, that's
> obviously nonsense.
>
> The best explanation seems to be that it's a single language, called
> different names by different people.
>
> After all, how else is it possible that people who a decade ago spoke
> "Serbo-Croatian" now speak a different language? The answer is, it
> isn't. They still speak the same language, they just call it different
> things.
>
> Mark
>
> --
> If you would like a gmail invite, please send me an e-mail.
> Si ud. quiere que le env?e una invitaci?n para juntar gmail, env?eme un mensaje.
> Si vous voulez que je vous envoie une invitation ? joindre gmail,
> envoyez-moi s.v.p un message.
> Se vce. gostaria que lhe envie um convite para juntar gmail, favor de
> envie-me uma mensagem.
> Se vuleti chi vi manu 'n invitu a uniri gmail, mandatimi n messaggiu.
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>


from_name: Stan Shebs

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Can you trust Wikipedia?

body:
Delirium wrote:

> Puddl Duk wrote:
>
>> Lets not delude ourselves. We have a long way to go.  I was just
>> looking at some old EB articles the other day; Guerrilla [warfare],
>> written by   ..........  T. E. Lawrence.  And Space-time, written by
>> ..........  Albert Einstein.
>>
>> EB has literally tens of thousands of superb, first rate articles
>> written by the world's leading experts and polished by an editorial
>> staff. Yet we enjoy make fun of a handful of embarrassing errors or
>> shortcomings that have.
>>
>>
> I'd say even the "good" Britannica articles are, with a very few
> exceptions, quite bad when it comes to having a neutral point of
> view.  1911 EB in particular does not even pretend to be neutral, and
> makes quite unsupported judgments with astonishing frequency, claiming
> e.g. that a particular philosophical viewpoint is "wrong" (even if
> it's widely accepted), or that a particular author's work is
> "overrated", and so on.
>
> The current edition is certainly much better than 1911, but it still
> leaves much to be desired.

NPOV as a policy is nearly unique to WP. 1911EB is unabashedly
about describing the world from the British and Western POV -
they wouldn't have dreamed of representing the then-burning South
African situation as the Boers or Xhosa saw it, or the Opium Wars
as they seemed to the Chinese.

We could probably do some interesting "marketing" of WP along
these lines - highlight some balanced articles on topics for
which the typical net or printed source only presents one of the
sides. Partisans won't like those articles of course, but
thoughtful people will find it mind-expanding to hear about more
viewpoints than they can find in an Encarta or EB (does Encarta
still describe Bill Gates as a "respectable businessman loved by
all right-thinking people"? :-) ).

Stan


subject: [WikiEN-l] [[Wikipedia:Good articles]]

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

Alphax wrote:

> It looks like the area where we have the greatest coverage is in Rail
> Transport. Not entirely surprising when you go through all the
> navigational templates examples and discover that they are mostly on
> trains and such.

- From [[Autism]]: "Autistics sometimes have a persistent, intense
preoccupation. For example, the child might be obsessed with learning
all about vacuum cleaners, train schedules or lighthouses."

- From [[Asperger's syndrome]]: "Asperger syndrome can involve an
intense and obsessive level of focus on things of interest...Particularly
common interests are means of transport (such as trains), computers,
and dinosaurs."

Hmm...

Ryan
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFDY2RD6MKb8lYmCtcRAvqsAJ9raR57f7yAvgRNOnCPKvk0wWWV1gCeLtk+
moggLQE1wDDHT5LeciPxbwU=
=4Aaw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


from_name: Kelly Martin

subject: [WikiEN-l] Proposed overhaul of elections and arbitration process

body:
On 10/26/05, Michael Turley <michael.turley at gmail.com> wrote:
> What I still don't understand is why you propose a very large pool of
> magistrates instead of a very large pool of arbitrators.

Because then you end up with no coherency in final decisions (unless
we punt and let Jimbo make all the real final decisions, which I don't
think anybody wants, least of all Jimbo).  You want your final court
of appeal to consist of the same judges on most cases, or you will get
random, inconsistent justice depending entirely on the composition of
the panel.  Having the same panel hear all final appeals helps to
obtain consistency.

I am opposed to using randomly selected panels to hear final appeals.
Randomly selected panels for initial hearings are fine.

> Choosing any two trusted Wikipedia members, I have yet to see any
> trusted pair of Wikipedia members where one is so much more qualified
> than another at dispute resolution that they should serve in an appeal
> body over the other.

I would say that there are DEFINITELY large degrees of difference in
the qualifications of "trusted" members of Wikipedia, if by "trusted"
you mean those we've seen fit to grant administrative rights to.  I
can think of a half dozen admins off the top of my head who are wholly
unfit to attempt to resolve disputes.  (No, I will not name names.)

Kelly


from_name: Mark Gallagher

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

body:
G'day Timwi,

>> Aw, good on yer. [...]
>
>> Righto.  It's crap [...]
>> it's unnecessary, it adds an extra step for users who're just
>> browsing through article links, and it makes Jakob Nielsen cry
>> [...]
>
> I don't know why I always end up regretting having made any
> suggestions.

I'm sorry.  I quite earnestly disagree with your idea (for, amongst
others, the reasons quoted above), but my language was unduly harsh.

--
Mark Gallagher
"What?  I can't hear you, I've got a banana on my head!"
- Danger Mouse

--
Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.12.4/146 - Release Date: 21/10/2005


from_name: Puddl Duk

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Can you trust Wikipedia?

body:
> >Lest I sound too harsh, remember that the OED, also written with the
> help of volunteers, took over fifty years to fully publish.
>
> Yes, but the bulk of the slips (submissions) came in during five years.
> About where we are now?
>
> Charles
>

Well, I hope it doesn't take another 45 years to sift through and
organise all our submissions :)

But we are going to have to adapt or we'll be relpaced. Early in the
project any information coming in was good  (a poorly written article
being better than no article, usually).  As articles mature there will
be a point where they stop improving, on average, by random edits. I'm
not a fan of page freezing, I'd prefer some kind or released vs
working version, plus a mechanism for rev rolling (only for 'released'
articles). Or any other check-valve that obstructs the random
degeneration while still allowing constant improvement.


from_name: Dori

subject: [Foundation-l] Trademark violation of our 'MediaWiki' mark

body:
On 10/28/05, Daniel Mayer <maveric149 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Webhosting Provider, Aplus.Net, Launches Media Wiki
> http://www.cheaphostingdirectory.com/news-webhosting-provider-aplus-net-launches-media-wiki-1538.html
>

I don't think they're diluting the mark, they even link to
mediawiki.org in their FAQ:
http://www.apluskb.com/scripts/search_kb.pl?catid=1&sid=4448582990&q=wiki&p=&showquestion=3275

They're just using it IMO
--
Dori


from_name: Tim Starling

references:
<20051026221305.5F47A1AC193F@mail.wikimedia.org>	<43601178.6010100@physics.unimelb.edu.au>
	<djudeo$q0k$1@sea.gmane.org>

body:
Timwi wrote:
> Tim Starling wrote:
>
>>
>> This will break static HTML dumps and any other offline usage. Can't we
>> just change Commons policy instead?
>
>
> Can't we just make those images free instead?
>
> What's with Wikimedia being all free, and all the people having say and
> everything? It just doesn't make any sense. It's like a government
> trying to tell everyone their goal is peace, and then going to war with
> Iraq.

Trademark protection is necessary to prevent forks or other encyclopedia
projects from claiming to be the real Wikipedia.

-- Tim Starling


from_name: Dan Grey

subject:
[Juriwiki-l] Re: [Foundation-l] Trademark violation of our
	'MediaWiki' mark

body:
All I see is a company offering to host pre-configured MediaWiki
installations for customers under the terms of the GPL. Where's the
problem?

Dan


from_name: Alexandre Dulaunoy

body:
On Sat, 29 Oct 2005, Jean-Baptiste Soufron wrote:

> Arne Klempert wrote:
> > On 10/28/05, Jean-Baptiste Soufron <jbsoufron at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> After looking at it, they are clearly trying to induce confusion between
> >> their wiki offer, the gnu gpl software mediawiki, wikipedia, wiktionnary
> >> and wikiquote.
> >
> > The text is a little bit confusing ("the new product" might sound like
> > it's their product), but I see no reason for your "trying to induce"
> > thing. And I really don't see any trademark violation here. Of course
> > we have to defend our trademarks but we also should avoid trademark
> > paranoia.
>
> Well, a good first step would be mentioning that mediawiki is a
> registered trademark from another company, and clearly explaining that

I  can't find  any  registered trademark  regarding  Mediawiki on  the
uspto.gov website.  I know that  trademark registration is  not always
mandatory but just wondering.

> is a third party software that they did not develop.

If they fully  comply with the GNU General  Public License[1], I can't
see the issue. It won't be  the first time that a front-cover web page
is  trying to  induce confusion  regarding  a free  software (did  you
remember the Dansguardian issue ? (look at their download page)).

[1] Can someone make a verification  that they comply with the GNU GPL
?

> When you look here :
> http://www.cheaphostingdirectory.com/news-webhosting-provider-aplus-net-launches-media-wiki-1538.html
>
>
> As you say he actual text is confusing, which is exactly the criteria
> for trademark violations. I don't say we should hurry to the courts, but
> we should ask them to be more precise.

Wouldn't  be better  to  focus only  on  the GNU  GPL compliance  than
"playing" with  trademark stuff (as  this is a different  battle field
;-) ?

just my 0.02 EUR,

adulau

--
** Alexandre Dulaunoy (adulau) **** http://www.foo.be/ **** 0x44E6CBCD
**/ "To  disable the  Internet to  save EMI  and Disney  is  the moral
**/ equivalent of burning down the library of Alexandria to ensure the
**/ livelihood of monastic scribes." Jon Ippolito.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Page freezing on "good" articles

body:
On 10/27/05, Fastfission <fastfission at gmail.com> wrote:
> There was a lot of talk not too long ago about possibilities of
> protecting certain high-profile articles which are reasonably "good",
> in order to prevent various forms of content degredation which happen
> even with well-meaning editors, much less from vandals and the
> problems which come up in problematic reverts, etc.
>
> Is there a designated place to discuss this sort of thing?
>
> In my mind, it would make sense to have some sort of "Vote for
> Freezing" page for articles of this sort.

I'm not a fan of freezing articles. The ability for everyone to edit
is one of the best things about Wikipedia, and even our best articles
can be improved and will need to be updated over time.

However, a revision system is being perpetually discussed. The
classical revision system in engineering is to make a release that
your customer uses (in our case this would be an article identified as
high quality). While the released version is served up to our
customers, new editing takes place on a 'work in progress' page.
Eventually, when the 'work in progress' is better than the 'released
version', the article is updated and the cycle repeats.

This (or any similar) mechanism will theoretically allow continuous
article improvement while blocking vandalism and degeneration. Only
improvements are allowed to pass. I think something like this only
makes sense for very mature articles.

Prerequisite to any 'released' version is the ability to pass judgment
on an article's quality.


from_name: Alphax

subject: [WikiEN-l] [[Wikipedia:Good articles]]

body:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

David Gerard wrote:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Good_articles
>
> Love it. Love it.
>

It looks like the area where we have the greatest coverage is in Rail
Transport. Not entirely surprising when you go through all the
navigational templates examples and discover that they are mostly on
trains and such.

- --
Alphax                      |   /"\
Encrypted Email Preferred   |   \ /     ASCII Ribbon Campaign
OpenPGP key ID: 0xF874C613  |    X   Against HTML email & vCards
http://tinyurl.com/cc9up    |   / \
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQEVAwUBQ2LR17MAAH8MeUlWAQhSVQf8D9w4aSKP7V6FBU1QnpN+TIYMwM/flEib
atcOHIUNip86rX428BL9cGbEHr8vSRwfwvpBYs9lOdXWK8Rl7fVrz7vBIsQTd/fE
xJGF6azOxNaut4xDmuCi1D/bmfNE97+uSjUpBnqG4BrgBzlkpzomt24Yi4XmEgKF
ApTXZauxCAmAvhb9zVCZI7DsLbJpXP9h54A5x2SQoE7iJLvLpLS1TEZtR3JPkwAw
SLTDK+P9blQUYRZ7MZ71V4MJBMBirqGYhubCGuAT/iC40w37nM1gCjYOC6LwlJgQ
Mon7g8mfsn9ZBFMHwlvLW27cHUD1kUtbH4CHTtDedVEANMI3koMhCw==
=GY6Z
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


body:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Timwi wrote:
>
>> I just wanted to let you know how stunned and disappointed I was to
>> hear that the board with very little input made this deal to advertise
>> on wikipedia.
>
>
> Other than "OMG it's advertising!!1" and "OMG I'm so disappointed!!1",
> do you have any actual arguments?
>
>

I will agree to it provided that Wikireaders, the database dumps and
PHP/SQL/server software is given exactly the same amount of coverage.
List them in alphabetical order for all I care. Neutral point of view
and all. There are many ways of accessing Wikipedia; the 1-Click Answers
tool is just ONE of these. Making all of them more visible would
undoubtably be a Good Thing.

And if the Foundation gets a bit of extra money for servers/developers
so that it doesn't take me 2 minutes to get to the edit page, I'm all
for it.

- --
Alphax                      |   /"\
Encrypted Email Preferred   |   \ /     ASCII Ribbon Campaign
OpenPGP key ID: 0xF874C613  |    X   Against HTML email & vCards
http://tinyurl.com/cc9up    |   / \
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQEVAwUBQ2LSWLMAAH8MeUlWAQh29Qf9FC0u+TjzEq8M7uKR+5yC6BwGsFbjlNoH
9VtIeTrFMhZYLQaUjm5qfZS+/mJqRTLjH9sLZpcu0PILn5SQfhQrQrY/nt+r6C5t
Jo28tiAGZIPUS27gHMltZLd4p/SnM3tSDy3Myt2ceUT8wmKHv4XFMJMSCNlYd/al
ZKlZkTdCcjmiBwGSbLi3Aw1xQS1xNkr5HJp/qMmOTp/pwIt/R9MsObf+VzXg05fu
eIjzMiCPBI0DBw54QnUAb4hREds+wCtm7SHMiPXE/D7tBaELHWy/+/cGRX0cq3lO
HVJg6hzpSgR2UH1IPQTjTRHcK/QJqXrgU0g2YFg8yKjTfeOY3se1ZQ==
=8aBF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


from_name: Fred Bauder

subject:
[Wikipedia-l] Wiki China: Problem with the site,
	attention and action from the board requested

body:
Dallas, Texas

Probably English speakers.

Fred

On Oct 29, 2005, at 9:11 AM, Ting Chen wrote:

> Hello,
>
> as you know at the moment Wikipedia is stil blocked from the china
> mainland
> gouvement. But this is probably not their only measure against the
> WikiMedia-projects.
>
> Please take a look at the following site:
> http://www.wikicn.com/wiki/%E9%A6%96%E9%A1%B5
>
> This site is named as Wiki China and is hosted from some chinese
> companies.
> They call themselve the first chinese wiki encyclopedia and had
> (machine)
> copied over tens of thousands of articles from the chinese
> Wikipedia site,
> without mentioning their source, and without any hint of GFDL. Most
> articles
> has stil the interwiki-links in them, natuarally without any other
> language
> provided from this site. Further more they have cencored most of the
> sensitive articles, which could probably be the reason of the
> blocking.
>
> Is there any possibility from the board to take any action? A
> mention of the
> source and GFDL is in my oppinion the fundamental action, which
> they should
> take.
>
> Greetings
> Ting ([[:en:User:Philopp]] [[:de:User:Wing]] [[:zh:User:Wing]]
>
> --
> Highspeed-Freiheit. Bei GMX superg?nstig, z.B. GMX DSL_Cityflat,
> DSL-Flatrate f?r nur 4,99 Euro/Monat*  http://www.gmx.net/de/go/dsl
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>


subject: [WikiEN-l] More at the Register

body:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Matt Brown wrote:
> On 10/27/05, Jtkiefer <jtkiefer at wordzen.net> wrote:
>
>>It is and has been for some time
>>obviously clear that the register is anti-wikipedia.
>
>
>
> Rather, it is and has been for some time obviously clear that the Register
> will do anything for notoriety and hits.
>

Isn't the Register like the Onion, only it takes itself seriously?

- --
Alphax                      |   /"\
Encrypted Email Preferred   |   \ /     ASCII Ribbon Campaign
OpenPGP key ID: 0xF874C613  |    X   Against HTML email & vCards
http://tinyurl.com/cc9up    |   / \
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQEVAwUBQ2LVk7MAAH8MeUlWAQjmtgf9FdekLmm5XvizQP3Uib2Bg4CIU+g9VjLp
jBrpEF5MJUO2jfYgiYaL2oJZSF8RKEvKSPUy8D/1bpTFoMtZl4zYRe7Z7JPNHKlK
qestfNLpVpP9fGeZxxjdilhX6eQA8jvGhs34RCSKrOamTOJXwb81kcgggEyyqMA/
VXF/8AuVIKeVgvZMbMUG20O/Um3eIDVBJ/mq+V6OTTG4DUxexkeTLI0W9EnXGwhq
5ly+nf2Z/PDy3815as4S16dyWRQ7Ro85z/b+03s/15+qMRSA/LpH4F/vSGAOehNX
0eziy+lt2li5bevhpz5iLMwbmTMyOiqB/XT3c2bRNv76qoa3wZxXmg==
=PDog
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


body:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

Tim 'avatar' Bartel wrote:
> Hi wikipedians,
>
> I fixed some thumbnail-uploads again today - this is really too much
> unneeded work. Please take a look at
> http://bugzilla.wikipedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3822 and vote, if you like.
>

I thought the devs didn't care about votes?

- --
Alphax                      |   /"\
Encrypted Email Preferred   |   \ /     ASCII Ribbon Campaign
OpenPGP key ID: 0xF874C613  |    X   Against HTML email & vCards
http://tinyurl.com/cc9up    |   / \
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQEVAwUBQ2LXnLMAAH8MeUlWAQhtZAf/TfyqDxURHhETFaco2KaJsk8Bs7/Pk6yH
wGU+TjEP3QeYl22RWr5i4mqJsxUq2MACE3dkAZKjABxzru0JdVDoOgSMQNQJSffG
qXAiM1XijxxLwUsHamgKS7wSvtF12321cWSyuvMsRLBCSJcpKQsVlI7pb5kippbG
p5QNdTe7YLAvWXKo1bMnefPemZ7mIezos4ul/+S90Pirq4as+q2GRvmVkHBpvd+k
iykvEELcLU4/2QH3s7+OgAxe7uEu6GRAktikOS1kkwFIkErnfmWeljiBuSXGw5TF
Is8jBpxKXR0AKqiyq2ozplwEwxX5YLHfhV1ILDVmJ3QF83W9kcvC6A==
=z/BK
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


list: wiktionary-l

from_name: www

subject: [Wiktionary-l] Wikimania - Spanish - we need someone for

body: Hi


body:
Hi, I just saw your advert about proofreading in Spanish. I'm from Spain and I'll be willing to help with this project or future ones.
If you're interested, you can contact me on rchulia at hotmail.com or 323-401-8313.

Rosana Chulia


from_name: Nick Jenkins

subject:
[Wikitech-l] Re: Change Navigation Sidebar in Non-English Media
	Wiki Installations

body:
> I am trying to change the navigation sidebar in a Media Wiki 1.5
> environment installed with Romanian as default language. I tried editing
> the MediaWiki:Sidebar page, which did come up, but the change does not
> show up in the interface. Do I need to address a Romanian-specific
> namespace (and if yes, what is that?) or do I have to mess up with the
> php files?

(this is just my best guess, apologies if you have already tried this)
In "MediaWiki:Sidebar", do you have something like
"randompage-url|randompage" somewhere in there?
If so, and you change "MediaWiki:randompage" from "Pagin? aleatoare"
to "This is a test", does it show up in the interface? You can also
change "MediaWiki:randompage-url" to point somewhere else.
(I.e. MediaWiki:Sidebar is just a form of indirection, it's not the
literal text that shows up in the interface).

All the best,
Nick.