from_name: Chip Berlet

body:
Hi,

Many people have no clear understanding about the issues of cites and plagiarism, so I stronly support the idea of a  Wikipedia:Plagiarism policy. We can'tr expect people to do the right thing if we don't help educate them about what that means.

-Chip Berlet [User:Cberlet]

________________________________

From: wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org on behalf of Matt Brown
Sent: Sun 7/24/2005 3:45 AM
To: Geoff Burling; English Wikipedia
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Re: Plagiarism Policy, was A Missing Policy

Geoff, it's not that we're attacking you or thinking you're whinging;
it's simply that, although there is no EXPLICIT Wikipedia plagiarism
policy, there are Wikipedia policies that effectively prohibit it;
these being copyright policy and citing sources.

If plagiarism takes the form of copyright infringement, then it has to
be deleted.  There is no room for argument about this.  We cannot
place work under the GFDL without the permission of its author, and
that's that.

If plagiarism does NOT qualify as copyright infringement, then it
falls foul of WP:CITE.  Citing one's sources is not an option on
Wikipedia; it is policy.

All that said, it would not hurt to have a Wikipedia:Plagiarism policy
that puts all that in one place.

-Matt
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l


list: wikitech-l

source: pipermail-mbox

from_name: Rob Lanphier

subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: Case-insensitive login ids via AuthPlugin.php

body:
Hi Tim,

Thanks for the feedback.  Since Brion incorporated my patch (thanks
Brion!), I've got a lot of flexibility in how to approach this,
including the approach that you suggest.

I'm to the point where we should take the conversation to the
MediaWiki/WordPress integration list, since they are the customers of
this feature:
http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wiki-tech

Please direct follow-ups to that list instead of wikitech-l.

For those just joining us, here's the thread so far:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2005-July/thread.html#30861

Comments inline:

On Sun, 2005-07-24 at 11:32 +0100, Timwi wrote:
> Rob Lanphier wrote:
> > I'm in the process of writing a AuthPlugin for bbPress, so that the
> > WordPress folks can do single sign-on between their user forums and
> > their MediaWiki install.  First release is here:
> > http://codex.wordpress.org/User:RobLa/bbPress_Auth_for_MediaWiki
> >
> > One thing I'm having trouble with is the case sensitivity issue.
> > bbPress isn't case sensitive.  MediaWiki is.  This makes logging in
> > relatively simple.  As it turns out, I accidentally leveraged SQLs
> > default case-insensitivity in my first crack at this.
>
> I've thought about this issue before (when a friend asked me if one
> could make article titles entirely case-insensitive).
>
> Personally, I believe the best approach would be the following. Have all
> the names (article titles in the 'page' table in his case, usernames in
> the 'user' table in your case) be entirely lower-case and define that as
> the "canonical form". Then when someone tries to log in as "RobLA" it
> will search for "robla" and find it.
>
> Then add another column to that table, 'displayname' or something, which
> contains the username with the capitalisation the user prefers. In
> Recent Changes, Watchlists, Histories, everything where a username is
> shown, you use that, but in URLs you use the lower-case form.

Here's how I'm solving it for now.  I'm letting the user use whatever
case they want for their first login.  So, if "robla" signs in as
"RobLa" on the first time, a new MediaWiki user table entry with "RobLa"
in the user_name field is created.

On the second and subsequent tries, the login portion isn't case
sensitive.  So, I can still log in as "robla" or "RoBlA", and it'll
blissfully accept it (passwords are another story, always case sensitive
as they should be).  However, when AuthPlugin::getCanonicalName is
called, it'll return the first (and presumably only) instance of "robla"
in the /MediaWiki/ database, by making this call:
$res = $dbr->selectRow('user',
                       array("user_name"),
                       "lower(user_name)=lower(".
                       $dbr->addQuotes($username).")",
                       "AuthBBPress::getCanonicalName" );

Thus, if "RobLa" was what I used the first time, it'll show that I'm
logged in as "RobLa" now, regardless of what case I filled in subsequent
login attempts.

This works particularly well for folks that are migrating to single
sign-on, since this works for whatever case was chosen in the legacy
accounts, while still making it possible to only have one representation
of that combination of letters.

It's not a perfect scheme.  People probably won't realize just how
important it is that the first login attempt use the case combo that
they want to live with.  In fact, just to avoid MediaWiki problems, I'm
leaving the automatic first letter transition of "robla" to "Robla"
intact.  However, there doesn't seem to be any sense in making a
preference or a new database entry, since the case of login names in
MediaWiki isn't easily mutable once created.

The very nice part about this is that there are now no further patches
to MediaWiki required.  A stock MediaWiki 1.5 install will work out of
the box

Rob


from_name: Timwi

subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: Ultimate Wiktionary and design decisions

body:
Brion Vibber wrote:
>
> The gap between my thinking and Gerard's thinking appears to be that
> Gerard considers redirects to be canonincal content; thus having a
> "wrong spelling" in a URL somehow implies that this is a "correct"
> spelling, which is therefore wrong and should be removed.

On the other hand, your thinking is based on the assumption that without
redirects, the URLs that people currently link to will stop working.
This in turn is assuming that the Ultimate Wiktionary will replace the
existing Wiktionaries at their current URLs, which according to my
understanding of the plan isn't going to happen. Gerard said that UW
will at first exist alongisde the existing Wiktionaries, and he also
said that if the community will be in favour of keeping the existing
Wiktionaries in operation indefinitely, then so be it.

Therefore, Ultimate Wiktionary is not going to be at en.wiktionary.org.
Once we decide to scrap the old Wiktionaries, we can therefore easily
have a RewriteRule to forward from capitalised [langcode].wiktionary.org
to ultimate.wiktionary.org or whatever it will be (I would prefer just
wiktionary.org).

However, this is not saying that I disagree with you, Brion; in fact, I
quite agree that redirects should continue to exist, though for other
reasons than yours. I don't see any point in having separate entries for
"goes" and "went", or for "color" and "colour". This would be a
tremendous undertaking for languages that are heavily inflected
(http://verbix.com/webverbix/cache/31.etmek.html), and its usefulness to
the reader is highly doubtful. At the same time, however, there is a
need for disambiguation pages: If I browse to a word which exists in two
languages, and in both languages it is an inflected form of another
word, I need to be asked which of those words I meant.

Timwi


list: wikien-l

from_name: Haukur Þorgeirsson

subject: [WikiEN-l] GFDL for images

body:
> And, shamelessly, i'll direct you to this entry in my blog:
> http://ouvaton.coop/redirect.php?url=mU7F1AUH, where I addressed the
> subject of the GFDL being used for images. Case study.

Thanks, Delphine!

That's exactly as I feared then - GFDL isn't a very
suitable license to make free images with. And someone
who wanted to make a postcard series out of the
featured pictures would indeed have problems since
many of them are only licensed under the GFDL.

This is a problem and we need to address it. At the
very least we should add the CC-BY-SA option to the
image upload page. It currently reads:

"Specify the licence of the file by adding the
appropriate tag(s), e.g. {{GFDL}}, {{PD}}, etc."

It seems that {{GFDL}} isn't really that appropriate
a tag. Look at this user's license here:

"The work is first licensed under the GFDL to make it fully compatible
with all Wikimedia projects. Since the GFDL is inappropriate for photos,
audio, video and short text, this work is also licensed under superior
Creative Commons licences. Note that the CC licences chosen prohibit
commercial use. In other words, if you want to legally make money out of
my work, you'll either have to pay me or include the full text of the GFDL
with your product."
(http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Chamaeleon/Licence)

The assumption seems to be that including the
full text of the GFDL isn't a viable option in
many (most?) cases.

Regards,
Haukur

P.S. How about a license like this:

"This picture can be used by anyone for any purpose
as long as a copy of the American Declaration of
Independence is included in any publications derived
from it."

Would that be a free license? :)


body:
Gerard Meijssen wrote:
>
> As the wiktionaries have turned off first character capitalisation, it
> is impossible to have case insensitive articles. It would have a
> disastrous effect if case insensitivity was imposed.

Where did I ever mention Wiktionary in this thread?


from_name: Stan Shebs

subject: [WikiEN-l] Example vs. Original research

body:
disclist at dapyx-soft.com wrote:

>What is the border between an example and an original theory?
>
>There's an user that argues that examples are original research, because
>they don't have a source, although they support a sourced theory. (this is
>specifically about languages, grammar, etc)
>
>I think we should have something on original research policy related to this.
>
There seems to be a perennial confusion between "original research"
and "original content" - we want people to string words together
in new and different ways, just not to introduce new facts in the
process. An example is just a particular form of content, and
doesn't need to be sourced, just as one doesn't add citations(1) to(2)
the(3) dictionary(4) after(5) every(6) word(7),(8) as well as
citations to the rules of grammar after every phrase (45, 92, 132 but
see 89, p. 1045).

:-)

Stan


subject: [WikiEN-l] Worrying trends

body:
Cool, I wonder why Google doesn't return this page in its results...

Stan

Fred Bauder wrote:

> See Los Lunas Decalogue Stone on Wikipedia.
>
> Fred
>
> On Jul 22, 2005, at 6:00 PM, Stan Shebs wrote:
>
>> Incidentally, google for "Los Lunas inscription" to find out more
>> about one particularly intriguing piece of physical evidence.
>> Definitely worth its own article...
>>
>> Stan
>> Fred Bauder wrote:
>>
>>
>>> The discovery of any evidence which tended to prove the reality  of
>>> any person, city, nation or event which is in the Book of  Mormon
>>> would be a revolutionary event. A coin from the nation of  Nephi,
>>> even  the tiniest scrap of ancient Semitic script, found in  the New
>>> World,  would be priceless.
>>>
>>> Fred
>>>
>>> On Jul 22, 2005, at 4:59 PM, Ray Saintonge wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Fred Bauder wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Well, we will find out. I have just edited this article, noting
>>>>> that  no historical evidence exists other than the Book of
>>>>> Mormon.  My  cousins can revert me, if they dare... Or come up
>>>>> with some  evidence.  Maybe a few gold coins with Nephi's visage...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Where could you spend them? :-)
>>>>
>>>> Ec
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> WikiEN-l mailing list
>>>> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
>>>> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> WikiEN-l mailing list
>>> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
>>> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> WikiEN-l mailing list
>> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
>> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: Texvc not compiling! :/

body:
Tomasz Wegrzanowski wrote:
>
> * Are you using GNU make ? Some stupid Unices contain
>   broken utilities called "make" and the true make
>   is under "gmake" (or not installed at all)

Whoo! Thanks! That fixed it. :-)

Next we're getting the message that latex and dvips aren't installed, so
we've e-mailed his provider to ask them to install it. Just in case they
say no: Is there a way of installing them in user-space, just like
ocamlc and texvc?

Thanks,
Timwi


from_name: Sergey Samoylov

subject: [Wikitech-l] differences between tables creation from wiki language

body:
Hi there...
I've just installed mediawiki 1.4.7

And now I have a question. I've created the next table:

{| style="margin:0 auto" align=center class="toccolours" style="clear:both;"
|-
{| class="toccolours"  style="margin: 0 2em 0 2em;"
! style="background:#ccccff" align="center" width="100%"| California
|-
|align=center colspan=2| A
|-
|align=center colspan=2| B
|}

and checked the result html code on my wiki and on wikipedia site. And
the was different view.
On my wiki site it was like:

 California

 A

 B

On wikipedia site just only one table was created:

California

A

B

Why it is so different?
I think the second peace  of code is much better. How can I set up it?

Thank you and sory for my english.
          Sergey


from_name: Gerard Meijssen

body:
Timwi wrote:

> Rob Lanphier wrote:
>
>>
>> I'm in the process of writing a AuthPlugin for bbPress, so that the
>> WordPress folks can do single sign-on between their user forums and
>> their MediaWiki install.  First release is here:
>> http://codex.wordpress.org/User:RobLa/bbPress_Auth_for_MediaWiki
>>
>> One thing I'm having trouble with is the case sensitivity issue.
>> bbPress isn't case sensitive.  MediaWiki is.  This makes logging in
>> relatively simple.  As it turns out, I accidentally leveraged SQLs
>> default case-insensitivity in my first crack at this.
>
>
> I've thought about this issue before (when a friend asked me if one
> could make article titles entirely case-insensitive).
>
> Personally, I believe the best approach would be the following. Have
> all the names (article titles in the 'page' table in his case,
> usernames in the 'user' table in your case) be entirely lower-case and
> define that as the "canonical form". Then when someone tries to log in
> as "RobLA" it will search for "robla" and find it.
>
> Then add another column to that table, 'displayname' or something,
> which contains the username with the capitalisation the user prefers.
> In Recent Changes, Watchlists, Histories, everything where a username
> is shown, you use that, but in URLs you use the lower-case form.
>
> Personally, I would prefer if usernames on Wikipedia were entirely
> case-insensitive. Then again, I think article titles should be
> case-insensitive too, but that would be quite a radical change.
>
> Timwi

Hoi,
As the wiktionaries have turned off first character capitalisation, it
is impossible to have case insensitive articles. It would have a
disastrous effect if case insensitivity was imposed.

 From a securtiy point of view passwords are not great at the best of
times. When you decrease their usefullness by half by imposing on
capitalised versions of passwords than you have implemented a detoration
of the implemented security. When you have case insensitive passwords
for bbPress and case sensitive passwords for Mediawiki, it is more or
less Ok, I trust you allow for the changing of passwords..

Thanks,
    GerardM


from_name: steve v

subject: [WikiEN-l] Worrying trends

body:
Ah but it returns Answers.com 's version instead. Say,
ka-chinng!

SV

--- Stan Shebs <shebs at apple.com> wrote:

> Cool, I wonder why Google doesn't return this page
> in its results...
>
> Stan
>
> Fred Bauder wrote:
>
> > See Los Lunas Decalogue Stone on Wikipedia.
> >
> > Fred
> >
> > On Jul 22, 2005, at 6:00 PM, Stan Shebs wrote:
> >
> >> Incidentally, google for "Los Lunas inscription"
> to find out more
> >> about one particularly intriguing piece of
> physical evidence.
> >> Definitely worth its own article...
> >>
> >> Stan
> >> Fred Bauder wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> The discovery of any evidence which tended to
> prove the reality  of
> >>> any person, city, nation or event which is in
> the Book of  Mormon
> >>> would be a revolutionary event. A coin from the
> nation of  Nephi,
> >>> even  the tiniest scrap of ancient Semitic
> script, found in  the New
> >>> World,  would be priceless.
> >>>
> >>> Fred
> >>>
> >>> On Jul 22, 2005, at 4:59 PM, Ray Saintonge
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> Fred Bauder wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> Well, we will find out. I have just edited
> this article, noting
> >>>>> that  no historical evidence exists other than
> the Book of
> >>>>> Mormon.  My  cousins can revert me, if they
> dare... Or come up
> >>>>> with some  evidence.  Maybe a few gold coins
> with Nephi's visage...
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Where could you spend them? :-)
> >>>>
> >>>> Ec
> >>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> WikiEN-l mailing list
> >>>> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> >>>>
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> WikiEN-l mailing list
> >>> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> >>>
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> WikiEN-l mailing list
> >> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> >>
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> >
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

____________________________________________________
Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs


from_name: David Benbennick

subject: [WikiEN-l] Fwd: Password reminder from Wikipedia

body:
On 7/5/05, Skyring <skyring at gmail.com> wrote:
> And again, what precisely is at risk here? WP is a project where just
> about everything is revertable (and frequently is).

Images can't be undeleted.  Sometimes deleted images can be found on
mirrors, but I'm sure that isn't the case for recently-uploaded
images.  So if you compromise an administrator account, yes, you can
potentially do permanent damage.


list: wikipedia-l

from_name: Servien Ilaino

subject: [Wikipedia-l] 2 Nds-Test-wp's?: Some stoopid loser...

body:
Hi there,

There is a weird freak who most probably doesn't understand Low Saxon
or is just really stoopid (yes, stoopid with dubble-o) because, he has
created 2 articles on the Nds-nl Test Wiki (one of which already
existed, and with the wrong title aswell), I later told him to use the
spelling that was suggested to prevent problems with Wiki-titles in
the future if the test-wp would be created. He didn't respons on the
discussion I put on the pages, so I put a table with content asking
him to change his self-constructed, based on Scandinavian, German and
French orthography to the prefered one, instead he deleted the
comments and put it back to the old orthography and started to create
an article on Test-wp/nds, I told him it already existed, and that he
just had to change his freaky orthography (normal in that way exactly)
to the normal one. Instead he ignored it, shouldn't pages with no use
and absolutely no real content like that be deleted?

Servien


from_name: sannse

subject: [WikiEN-l] GFDL for images

body:
Jimmy Wales wrote:
> Haukur ?orgeirsson wrote:
>
>>That's exactly as I feared then - GFDL isn't a very
>>suitable license to make free images with. And someone
>>who wanted to make a postcard series out of the
>>featured pictures would indeed have problems since
>>many of them are only licensed under the GFDL.
>>
>>This is a problem and we need to address it.
>
>
> It is being addressed at the level of the license itself in a
> forthcoming update to the license.

The question then becomes: when?

I've stuck to GFDL for my images, on the basis that this change has been
promised, but how long do we need to wait for a /practical/ licence?

-- (a very impatient) sannse


from_name: Brion Vibber

subject: [Wikitech-l] Ultimate Wiktionary and design decisions

body:
Nikola Smolenski wrote:
> A simple way to solve this could be to make redirects function differently
> than they usually do on MediaWiki: instead of silently displaying content of
> another page under the same URL, they could simply display "Contents of this
> page has moved to [[that page]]."

It's not "silent"; there's a big fat "redirected from XYZ" message.

> Thatway, URLs would still exist and be
> useful, while there would be absolutely no danger of mistaking redirects for
> canonical content.

There is already no danger of mistaking redirects for canonical content.

-- 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/20050724/42184d22/attachment.pgp>


references:
<42E266A2.205@gmail.com> <42E2AD44.507@pobox.com>
	<dbvss5$oe2$1@sea.gmane.org>

body:
Timwi wrote:
> Brion Vibber wrote:
>> The gap between my thinking and Gerard's thinking appears to be that
>> Gerard considers redirects to be canonincal content; thus having a
>> "wrong spelling" in a URL somehow implies that this is a "correct"
>> spelling, which is therefore wrong and should be removed.
>
> On the other hand, your thinking is based on the assumption that without
> redirects, the URLs that people currently link to will stop working.
> This in turn is assuming that the Ultimate Wiktionary will replace the
> existing Wiktionaries at their current URLs, which according to my
> understanding of the plan isn't going to happen.

Gerard's been talking about existing Wiktionaries and his practice of
removing redirects from them.

UW doesn't even enter into this.

-- 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/20050724/f3c06b31/attachment.pgp>


body:
Brion Vibber wrote:

> Nikola Smolenski wrote:
>
>> A simple way to solve this could be to make redirects function
>> differently
>> than they usually do on MediaWiki: instead of silently displaying
>> content of
>> another page under the same URL, they could simply display "Contents
>> of this
>> page has moved to [[that page]]."
>
>
> It's not "silent"; there's a big fat "redirected from XYZ" message.
>
>> Thatway, URLs would still exist and be
>> useful, while there would be absolutely no danger of mistaking
>> redirects for
>> canonical content.
>
>
> There is already no danger of mistaking redirects for canonical content.
>
> -- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)

Hoi,
In an e-mail by Heiko Evermann the practice of using redirects to
indicate alternate spellings is explicitly raised as the way to go. I do
think that that is an unfortunate choise as well as it does not indicate
where the alternate spelling is comming from. It does however prove that
the assertion that the URL is not giving a meaning as to the correctness
of the spelling is manifestly wrong.
Thanks,
    GerardM


from_name: Dori

subject:
[Wikitech-l] Re: differences between tables creation from wiki
	language

body:
On 7/24/05, Sergey Samoylov <ssamoylov at gmail.com> wrote:
> I've installed mediawiki 1.5 from cvs, 1.5 b3 and 1.4.7
> and there was the same result.
> For code:
> {|
> {|
> | California
> |}

I believe tidy is also run on the HTML output.


from_name: SJ

subject: [WikiEN-l] Worrying trends

body:
On Yahoo!, the Wikipedia article is #15.

On Google, Answers.com is #21, a WP clone is #31, a Dansk Wikipedia
article is #38... and the English article isn't in their index.
  http://www.google.com/search?q=los+lunas+inscription+wikipedia

Similar results for "Los Lunas" alone (linking to the article about the city).

SJ

On 7/24/05, Stan Shebs <shebs at apple.com> wrote:
> Cool, I wonder why Google doesn't return this page in its results...
>
> Stan
>
> Fred Bauder wrote:
>
> > See Los Lunas Decalogue Stone on Wikipedia.
> >
> > Fred
> >
> > On Jul 22, 2005, at 6:00 PM, Stan Shebs wrote:
> >
> >> Incidentally, google for "Los Lunas inscription" to find out more
> >> about one particularly intriguing piece of physical evidence.
> >> Definitely worth its own article...
> >>
> >> Stan
> >> Fred Bauder wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> The discovery of any evidence which tended to prove the reality  of
> >>> any person, city, nation or event which is in the Book of  Mormon
> >>> would be a revolutionary event. A coin from the nation of  Nephi,
> >>> even  the tiniest scrap of ancient Semitic script, found in  the New
> >>> World,  would be priceless.
> >>>
> >>> Fred
> >>>
> >>> On Jul 22, 2005, at 4:59 PM, Ray Saintonge wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> Fred Bauder wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> Well, we will find out. I have just edited this article, noting
> >>>>> that  no historical evidence exists other than the Book of
> >>>>> Mormon.  My  cousins can revert me, if they dare... Or come up
> >>>>> with some  evidence.  Maybe a few gold coins with Nephi's visage...
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Where could you spend them? :-)
> >>>>
> >>>> Ec
> >>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> WikiEN-l mailing list
> >>>> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> >>>> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> WikiEN-l mailing list
> >>> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> >>> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> WikiEN-l mailing list
> >> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> >> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

--
++SJ


from_name: Tomasz Wegrzanowski

references:
<dbrp1d$e8d$1@sea.gmane.org> <20050722222339.GB5498@taw.pl.eu.org>
	<dbvud0$rka$1@sea.gmane.org>

body:
On Sun, Jul 24, 2005 at 12:34:36PM +0100, Timwi wrote:
> Tomasz Wegrzanowski wrote:
> >
> >* Are you using GNU make ? Some stupid Unices contain
> >  broken utilities called "make" and the true make
> >  is under "gmake" (or not installed at all)
>
> Whoo! Thanks! That fixed it. :-)
>
> Next we're getting the message that latex and dvips aren't installed, so
> we've e-mailed his provider to ask them to install it. Just in case they
> say no: Is there a way of installing them in user-space, just like
> ocamlc and texvc?

Yes, iirc we even had them installed in user-space on old wikimedia servers.
However I suspect it's a rather painful experience.

What kind of Unix is it anyway ?


list: wiktionary-l

subject: [Wiktionary-l] nds is now lowercase ..

body:
Hoi,
Thanks to Brion the nds wiktionary is now lowercase enabled. This means
that all article names will indicate the proper spelling when a word is
added.

I have a 2775 long list of nds words with German translations that I am
given permission to use thanks to Germaniennet. I am happy to upload it
to the nds wiktionary. It would be great if you adopt the template
system that is used by many of the other wiktionaries. So have a look at
it and let me know what you think of it..

In your mail to the wikitech-l you said that you want to use redirects
to indicate alternate spellings. It would be a better idea to treat them
like we do with translations that is, have a proper description of the
word and its origin (what orthography or origin) and refer for all the
rest to a selected word.

Thanks,
    GerardM


from_name: Sabine Cretella

subject: [Wiktionary-l] nds is now lowercase ..

body:
Gerard Meijssen wrote:

> Hoi,
> Thanks to Brion the nds wiktionary is now lowercase enabled. This
> means that all article names will indicate the proper spelling when a
> word is added.
>
> I have a 2775 long list of nds words with German translations that I
> am given permission to use thanks to Germaniennet. I am happy to
> upload it to the nds wiktionary. It would be great if you adopt the
> template system that is used by many of the other wiktionaries. So
> have a look at it and let me know what you think of it..
>
> In your mail to the wikitech-l you said that you want to use redirects
> to indicate alternate spellings. It would be a better idea to treat
> them like we do with translations that is, have a proper description
> of the word and its origin (what orthography or origin) and refer for
> all the rest to a selected word.
>
> Thanks,
>    GerardM
> _______________________________________________
> Wiktionary-l mailing list
> Wiktionary-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiktionary-l
>

___________________________________
Yahoo! Mail: gratis 1GB per i messaggi e allegati da 10MB
http://mail.yahoo.it


subject: [Wiktionary-l] nds is now lowercase ..

body:
I was answering on that one and the message immediately was sent, sorry.

This is great news :-)

Of course, being already used to the templates and how they facilitate
to share contents I fully agree to that. Also for alternate spellings
etc.: I don't like them to be just redirects - sometimes it happens that
they could have a slight difference of meaning in a certain context not
everybody is aware of or that a word of a foreign language with that
spelling exists - so it would mix up things, since some would have a
redirect and others not. It would never be linear. That's why I myself
adopt the "one word/spelling one page". (btw. the same is valid for
verbforms etc.)

So now it is time to prepare the list for upload :-)

Ciao, Sabine

Gerard Meijssen wrote:

> Hoi,
> Thanks to Brion the nds wiktionary is now lowercase enabled. This
> means that all article names will indicate the proper spelling when a
> word is added.
>
> I have a 2775 long list of nds words with German translations that I
> am given permission to use thanks to Germaniennet. I am happy to
> upload it to the nds wiktionary. It would be great if you adopt the
> template system that is used by many of the other wiktionaries. So
> have a look at it and let me know what you think of it..
>
> In your mail to the wikitech-l you said that you want to use redirects
> to indicate alternate spellings. It would be a better idea to treat
> them like we do with translations that is, have a proper description
> of the word and its origin (what orthography or origin) and refer for
> all the rest to a selected word.
>
> Thanks,
>    GerardM
> _______________________________________________
> Wiktionary-l mailing list
> Wiktionary-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiktionary-l
>

___________________________________
Yahoo! Mail: gratis 1GB per i messaggi e allegati da 10MB
http://mail.yahoo.it


from_name: Mark Williamson

body:
I think Servien's behaviour here raises a huge red flag in his request
for a new Wikipedia.

"some stoopid loser", "there is a weird freak", "his freaky orthography".

If you click on the "what links here", the anonymous user who Servien
thinks is so stupid and freaky is using those as example pages to
request Wikipedias for Gronings and Stellingwarfs. Apparently, the
anonymous user feels that the varieties are significantly different.

HE is free to use whatever orthography he wants, no matter what
Servien can say, because it's a test-Wikipedia.

Servien, I think it's apalling that you're expecting a Wikipedia that
you requested to be created, when you're acting like this-- even
complaining to the mailing-list for something that isn't against the
rules, and calling an anonymous user a "stoopid loser" and a "weird
freak".

I think you have suddenly lost the credibility you had here.

Mark

> Hi there,
>
> There is a weird freak who most probably doesn't understand Low Saxon
> or is just really stoopid (yes, stoopid with dubble-o) because, he has
> created 2 articles on the Nds-nl Test Wiki (one of which already
> existed, and with the wrong title aswell), I later told him to use the
> spelling that was suggested to prevent problems with Wiki-titles in
> the future if the test-wp would be created. He didn't respons on the
> discussion I put on the pages, so I put a table with content asking
> him to change his self-constructed, based on Scandinavian, German and
> French orthography to the prefered one, instead he deleted the
> comments and put it back to the old orthography and started to create
> an article on Test-wp/nds, I told him it already existed, and that he
> just had to change his freaky orthography (normal in that way exactly)
> to the normal one. Instead he ignored it, shouldn't pages with no use
> and absolutely no real content like that be deleted?
>
> Servien
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>

--
SI HOC LEGERE SCIS NIMIVM ERVDITIONIS HABES
QVANTVM MATERIAE MATERIETVR MARMOTA MONAX SI MARMOTA MONAX MATERIAM
POSSIT MATERIARI
ESTNE VOLVMEN IN TOGA AN SOLVM TIBI LIBET ME VIDERE


from_name: JAY JG

body:
>From: fun at thingy.apana.org.au (David Gerard)
>
>Seconded. I'm a big fan of leaving comments in the article text for other
>editors where relevant. And also, when deleting something contentious, it
>can help to comment it out rather than just remove it.

It's worth trying, at least; in my experience that can work sometimes, but
other times it's still viewed as a deletion.

Jay.


subject:
[Wikipedia-l] Explicit copyright assignment to wikimedia
	foundation

body:
Is that a warning? ;)

Mark

On 21/07/05, Angela <beesley at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I was wondering  what is the current status  of the explicit copyright
> > assignment  to the  wikimedia  foundation.  Is it  possible  to do  so
> > instead  of the  non-explicit  copyright assignment  for any  original
> > wikipedia contribution ?  Is there any official procedure  and form to
> > assign copyright to the foundation ?
>
> There isn't any standard form yet. I'm not convinced the Foundation
> should want people to assign copyright to it though. Isn't it a lot
> safer if we don't have ownership of any of the content? If we only own
> the trademarks and domain name, there's a lot less to lose should the
> Board go crazy and sell out to Microsoft or if someone successfully
> sues us.
>
> Angela.
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>

--
SI HOC LEGERE SCIS NIMIVM ERVDITIONIS HABES
QVANTVM MATERIAE MATERIETVR MARMOTA MONAX SI MARMOTA MONAX MATERIAM
POSSIT MATERIARI
ESTNE VOLVMEN IN TOGA AN SOLVM TIBI LIBET ME VIDERE


from_name: Alexandre Dulaunoy

subject:
[Wikipedia-l] Re: Explicit copyright assignment to wikimedia
	foundation

body:
On 22/Jul/05 12:21 +0200, Jean-Baptiste Soufron wrote:

> It's definitely safer and much more clear !

What  is "definitely safer  and much  more clear"  ?  with  or without
copyright assignment to the wikimedia foundation ?

The solution for the  GNU Project is quite nice as there  is a kind of
"protective clause" in the case of "going crazy".

--
--                   Alexandre Dulaunoy (adulau) -- http://www.foo.be/
--                          http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html
--         "Knowledge can create problems, it is not through ignorance
--                                that we can solve them" Isaac Asimov


from_name: Ray Saintonge

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Plagiarism Policy, was A Missing Policy

body:
Haukur ?orgeirsson wrote:

>>If plagiarism does NOT qualify as copyright infringement, then it
>>falls foul of WP:CITE.  Citing one's sources is not an option on
>>Wikipedia; it is policy.
>>
>>
>Last time I clicked on "random article" ten times
>in a row I did not get a single one which cited
>references. Citing one's sources may be policy but
>it is not strictly enforced policy.
>
>
It's a relatively recent policy. Since it wasn't always so it just means
that many articles written before that don't have references.

Ec


from_name: Rob Lanphier

subject:
[Wikitech-l] Cool URIs don't change (Ultimate Wiktionary and design
	decisions)

body:
On Sat, 2005-07-23 at 22:49 +0200, Brion Vibber wrote:
> More generally, it's completely irresponsible for a web-based resource
> to rearrange content pages without providing a redirect from the old
> URL. This is a basic principle which applies just as much to Wiktionary
> as to Wikipedia, just as much to Hewlett Packard's driver web pages as
> to Slashdot postings, just as much to a database of autogenerated
> earthquake reports or a collection of press releases as to an online
> academic journal.

100% agreed on this point, and one that many people don't seem to
understand.  So it bears repeating:

> More generally, it's completely irresponsible for a web-based resource
> to rearrange content pages [well, just re-read the paragraph above :) ]

Actually, it bears restating.  Here's an old Tim Berners-Lee rant on the
subject, called "Cool URIs Don't Change", that I often trot out whenever
the topic rears its ugly head, which it does way too frequently:
http://www.w3.org/Provider/Style/URI

In my mind, making an exception for Wiktionary projects would be an
extremely disappointing reversal of very good policy maintained by the
rest of the Wikimedia projects.

Rob


body:
I've installed mediawiki 1.5 from cvs, 1.5 b3 and 1.4.7
and there was the same result.
For code:
{|
{|
| California
|}
was rendering two tables:

 California

from wikipedia just one table, and second {| was replaced  with:

So result rendering table on wikipedia was:

California

Thanks
Sergey

On 7/24/05, Nidonocu <nidonocu at gmail.com> wrote:
> Sergey Samoylov wrote:
>
> >Hi there...
> >I've just installed mediawiki 1.4.7
> >
> >And now I have a question. I've created the next table:
> >
> >*snip*
> >
> >Why it is so different?
> >I think the second peace  of code is much better. How can I set up it?
> >
> >Thank you and sory for my english.
> >          Sergey
> >
> >
> Wikipedia is running on the new 1.5 beta MediaWiki engine, therefor it
> includes the improved parser which has for example, fixed your unquoted
> align to center in the table properties and made the tidier formating of
> tr's.
> Upgrade your site to the latest release of 1.5 beta version for the
> improvements but as always remember its a beta so you may have to
> upgrade more often until the final release and you might have some
> problems so make a test wiki before upgrading your current site and
> always backup. I'm personally waiting for final release before I upgrade
> since I currently don't 'need' any of the new features as my site as
> only just recently opened.
>
> Hope that's clear enough. :)
> Nidonocu C:\>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>


from_name: Salvatore Ingala

subject: [Wikitech-l] New feature proposal: Verify

body:
Hi, I'm a newcomer to the developers group. I uploaded in the branch
SHOW_VERIFIED a modified version of MediaWiki where I added a new feature.
This wants to be an alternative to the page protection. I added a
verify/unverify button: 'verify' sets the current revision (or the one
indexed by oldid) as the verified one for that page. This means that any
user can edit the page, but the new revisions are not shown (though they can
be accessed through the hystory, where the currently 'verified' revision is
shown in bold characters) until a sysop 'verifies' it again. 'unverify', of
course, removes this protection.

If anyone wants to test it, after setting the wiki up, it's sufficient to
add "$wgEnableVerify = true;" to LocalSettings.php.
Any suggestion is welcome.

Regards,
Salvatore Ingala


list: foundation-l

from_name: Walter van Kalken

subject: [Foundation-l] Wikimania

body:
In the name of openness I am really interested in seeing a complete list
of the people receiving complete or partial sponsorships to go to wikimania.

Waerth/Walter van Kalken


list: wikimedia-l

subject: [Foundation-l] Wikimania


from_name: Jtkiefer

subject: [WikiEN-l] userpage and user subpage protection

body:
I know that there have been discussions about this in the past and that
this subject has been controversial, however for the life of me I have
not been able to find a full discussion on this so I thought I'd ask
here what the whole issue is with subpage and userpage protection and
why is it so controversial and disputed?

-Jtkiefer


from_name: David Gerard

body:
steve v (vertigosteve at yahoo.com) [050724 05:48]:

> (Tip: I often <!-- comment // hide material --> in the
> article itself when Im not sure, when there's likely
> to be some debate, or when the section needs to be
> rewritten in a way Im not sure how to do.)

Seconded. I'm a big fan of leaving comments in the article text for other
editors where relevant. And also, when deleting something contentious, it
can help to comment it out rather than just remove it.

- d.


from_name: Habj

subject: [WikiEN-l] Worrying trends

body:
On 7/20/05, JAY JG <jayjg at hotmail.com> wrote:
> >From: Chris Jenkinson <chris at starglade.org>
> >
> >I must say that I think that everyone who does not respond to a (good
> >faith) questioning comment asking them why should have their
> >vote/opinion on the matter disregarded. If they are not willing to say
> >why they believe what they do then they should not be considered
> >contributing to the discussion. Wikipedia is rightfully not a democracy
> >where you can vote for whatever reason you like. Any position someone
> >takes must be able to be challenged.
>
> Well, speaking personally, I've probably voted in support of 3 dozen RFAs,
> and only voted against 3 applications, each time listing my reasons.  In
> each case I was challenged, sometimes in a most rude way, for more detail.
> When I provided it, giving links to examples of policy violations etc.,  I
> was attacked again.  Those who did not give reasons  for rejecting the
> applications were not subject to these violations of [[Wikipedia:Civility]]
> policy.  It would be most tempting, in the future, to simply vote "No" and
> refuse to give a reason, in order to avoid this kind of unpleasant
> treatment.

I am the only one who feels that votes for adminship is a slightly
different matters than other polls? You are discussing a particular
individual, and it gets a lot more personal than discussing other
matters. Saying that voting yes is to agree with the nomination and
voting no is the only version that needs to be explained is really to
ask for rough behaviour against those who oppose the nomination, like
Jay describes. If I know that if I vote no I have to give a
motivation, someone will think I am cruel and the consequence is I get
into a hailstorm - then maybe I choose not to vote.

 Maybe you need either a culture where the votes are always motivated,
really _always_ and votes that are not motivated are removed -
including votes agreeing with the nomination - or an exception
regarding votes for adminship. The election for the Wikimedia board,
that recently was finished, was done not only without motivation but
closed, so you did not display who you voted for. In Wikipedia
context, with the ideals of concensus etc. it would be interesting to
hear why this method was chosen.

/ Habj


from_name: Phroziac

body:
Woah, I didn't even read his whole message before I responded, didn't
notice any of the "stupid loser", etc. *oops*.

On 7/24/05, Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com> wrote:
> I think Servien's behaviour here raises a huge red flag in his request
> for a new Wikipedia.
>
> "some stoopid loser", "there is a weird freak", "his freaky orthography".
>
> If you click on the "what links here", the anonymous user who Servien
> thinks is so stupid and freaky is using those as example pages to
> request Wikipedias for Gronings and Stellingwarfs. Apparently, the
> anonymous user feels that the varieties are significantly different.
>
> HE is free to use whatever orthography he wants, no matter what
> Servien can say, because it's a test-Wikipedia.
>
> Servien, I think it's apalling that you're expecting a Wikipedia that
> you requested to be created, when you're acting like this-- even
> complaining to the mailing-list for something that isn't against the
> rules, and calling an anonymous user a "stoopid loser" and a "weird
> freak".
>
> I think you have suddenly lost the credibility you had here.
>
> Mark
>
> > Hi there,
> >
> > There is a weird freak who most probably doesn't understand Low Saxon
> > or is just really stoopid (yes, stoopid with dubble-o) because, he has
> > created 2 articles on the Nds-nl Test Wiki (one of which already
> > existed, and with the wrong title aswell), I later told him to use the
> > spelling that was suggested to prevent problems with Wiki-titles in
> > the future if the test-wp would be created. He didn't respons on the
> > discussion I put on the pages, so I put a table with content asking
> > him to change his self-constructed, based on Scandinavian, German and
> > French orthography to the prefered one, instead he deleted the
> > comments and put it back to the old orthography and started to create
> > an article on Test-wp/nds, I told him it already existed, and that he
> > just had to change his freaky orthography (normal in that way exactly)
> > to the normal one. Instead he ignored it, shouldn't pages with no use
> > and absolutely no real content like that be deleted?
> >
> > Servien
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> >
>
>
> --
> SI HOC LEGERE SCIS NIMIVM ERVDITIONIS HABES
> QVANTVM MATERIAE MATERIETVR MARMOTA MONAX SI MARMOTA MONAX MATERIAM
> POSSIT MATERIARI
> ESTNE VOLVMEN IN TOGA AN SOLVM TIBI LIBET ME VIDERE
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>

--
signature


body:
Well, isn't it kind of unwiki? The big thing I see is that, non admins
can't do it to there pages, so it is really unfair.

On 7/25/05, Jtkiefer <jtkiefer at wordzen.net> wrote:
> I know that there have been discussions about this in the past and that
> this subject has been controversial, however for the life of me I have
> not been able to find a full discussion on this so I thought I'd ask
> here what the whole issue is with subpage and userpage protection and
> why is it so controversial and disputed?
>
> -Jtkiefer
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

--
signature


from_name: Nikola Smolenski

subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: Case sensitivity on Afrikaans Wiktionary

body:
On Saturday 23 July 2005 10:13, Gerard Meijssen wrote:
> Nikola Smolenski wrote:
> >On Friday 22 July 2005 13:25, Gerard Meijssen wrote:
> >>Nikola Smolenski wrote:
> >>>Why is there column "gender" in table "word"? If a word can exist in
> >>>multiple genders, shouldn't that rather be represented in "inflection"
> >>>table? If a word has a gender on its own, wouldn't that rather be
> >>>represented in WordType table? If not, there are other properties of
> >>>words (for example, number) which can also be represented in "word"
> >>>table, why is gender singled out?
> >>
> >>When a word is inflected to a particular form, that word is a word in
> >>its own right and consequently will be found in the UW. The inflection
> >>is there because it does provide information and this information is
> >
> >Now I'm not so sure that I understand which table is for what. Could you
> > give an example? For example, the word "white" is a base word and the
> > word "whiter" is its inflection. How would these two words fit into the
> > database?
>
> Both words will exist as a Spelling, as a Word and they may share a
> Meaning. When the inflections are added, in the Inflection-Word, all the
> missing words will be created and they will all be related to each other
> through this table. Contrary to a paper dictionary we want them all.

Then I have misunderstood the database design :( I believed at first that
inflections would be stored in "inflection" table. Now when I understand the
design better, I don't think that it is a good idea to have separate "word"
for each inflection because it brings a lot of unneccesary redudance, and
much room for error. For example, it would be possible to mark "whiter" as an
adverb and "white" as a verb! And then, imagine the horror which would ensue
if someone would use wrong PartOfSpeech for base word and now it has to be
changed for 100 inflections...

Though this would be a crucial change, please think about it. I think that
"word" table should contain only lemmas.

> >>relevant for the inflections and the headword.. A Wordtype indicates a
> >>noun a verb an adjective etc.
> >
> >I still don't understand why is gender singled out of all properties a
> > word could have. For example, a verb could be transitive or intransitive,
> > and this information is important. To give an example:
> >
[...]
>
> At this moment in time I would not have intransitive verbs or transitive
> verbs at all. To me they are verbs. When they are transitive, they have
> a different meaning from when they are intransitive so to me the
> destinction is in the meaning.

OK, for a better example, why not number? Perhaps transitivity doesn't, but
number also affects inflection, much as gender does.

> >OK, but what if you have a longer phrase as a table field? For example, an
> >"inflection" in table "inflection" might be "male genitive superlative" or
> >"3rd person plural female past". I don't think it makes sense to add such
> >phrases to the dictionary as proper entries, only so that the dictionary
> >would have translations of them.
> >
> >Are some table fields inherently translatable? Is this what you had in
> > mind above?
>
> Most if not all text fields will be inherently translatable, this is
> what I have very much in mind. The name of a font will not be translated
> but that is the only one at this point in time. It makes perfect sense
> to have this in the UW as it allows us to have a self learning User
> Interface. The thing is; it has function.

OK, so this solves it :)

> >I was thinking about something else; for example, on
> >http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/account there is this example: "A beggarly
> >account of empty boxes. - Shakespeare, Romeo and Juliet, V-i"; but I
> >understand now it is going to be just a part of "meaningtext". I'm not so
> >certain, but maybe it would be good to create a separate table for
> > examples, because same examples could (and probably will) be used in
> > "meaningtext"s in different languages. It would also make it easier to
> > automatically add new examples (for example, by grepping Project
> > Gutenberg ;)
>
> "A beggarly account of empty boxes" is a quote and why not have it as a
> seperate Word and marked as such ?? It would be a idiom for "account"
> and this is linked through Relation. Many famous quotes have been
> translated and we could have them all. (Een paard , een paard, een
> koninkrijk voor een paard)

Because, ideally each word (in each language) should have an example or two,
and so the number of examples would approach the number of words; and, it
would become impossible to distinguish between notable quotes (Kingdom for a
horse!), which occur frequently, need a description, and need to be
canonically translated, and non-notable quotes, which are in the wiktionary
only to be used as examples of use for other words, need not have a
description, and translators won't encounter them at all.

> I do not think grepping Project Gutenberg makes much sense. If anything
> it helps you find occurances of the word but you have to be selective of
> what to include. That is an editorial process and just the fact that a
> word is used does not make for a good idiom in the UW.

I think it would make sense for rarer words, which might occur once or a few
times in entire Gutenberg's corpus. Of course, at the end a human editor has
to decide whether a quote is really relevant.

Related to grepping Project Gutenberg, have you considered adding information
on word frequency? Only a single new table is needed, "frequency", with
fields "spellingID", "corpus" and "frequency"; eventually "corpus" colud
become "corpusID".

Once the UW is up and running, how hard would it be to make such changes?

> >When I was referring to "dialect", I did not have in mind a dialect that
> > is officially recognised, but simply a set of words which could be
> > identified as belonging to a certain group. So if you want to say that
> > this word was part of London dockworkers' slang in 1800s, you should be
> > able to do so, and not just stamp it with "British English".
>
> When there are words that are specific to London dockworkers in the
> 1800s, I would not call it a dialect because like many professions they
> have there own vocabulary. These I would mark within a collection as the
> bulk of what they say would be London English of the 1800s. Now there is

I agree, it is not a dialect, but if some words are recognisable as belonging
to a distinctive group of words, they should somehow be marked as belonging
to it, and I was suggesting that they are marked in a same way they would be
marked as belonging to a certain dialect. Another solution would be to use
"wordrelation" table instead, even though it isn't meant to be used in that
way :)

> one thing that is relevant, the UW wants all words of all languages but
> its primary purpose it to have the current vocabulary. So yes, these
> words exist and have their place but when they are not used anymore they
> should be marked as such.

Well, just replace 1800s with 2000s and you still have the same problem :)

> >As a simple example, in Serbia, there are several publishing houses that
> > were publishing Asterix, and in some translations "Idefix" is named
> > "Garoviks" and "Panoramix" is named "Aspiriniks" while in others "Idefix"
> > is named "Idefiks" and "Panoramix" is named "Panoramiks"; and this is
> > consistent. If you are going to translate something about Asterix to
> > Serbian, you should pick one of the translations, but you should be
> > consistent in using only the words from the translation which you have
> > picked, and they should somehow be marked as belonging to the same
> > translation. There surely are more important things than Asterix where
> > similar might apply.
>
> Garoviks and Idefiks are for the Serbian language synonyms and as such I
> do not have to choose because they are both correct. As a matter of
> interest you could explain things either in the etymology or in the
> meaning of the word.

They are synonyms, but they are stylistically marked: it would be wrong to
translate Idefix first as Garoviks and later as Idefiks, or to consistently
translate Idefix with Idefiks but Panoramix with Aspiriniks, much as it would
be wrong to write "I recognise you recognized me"; a translator has to choose
and make the choice consistent.

Unrelated to any of the above, could you move "word" table a bit to the right,
because currently it is hard to see what is relation between "word",
"spelling" and "etymology" tables, the lines overlap.


subject:
[Wikipedia-l] Wikimania! Announcements and broadcasting : help
	requested

body:
Dear Wikipedians,

Wikimania will begin in less than two weeks.  (If you're helping
organize this, the calendar is already engraved inside your forehead
:-)  There will be a crazy collection of speakers and wiki developers
(http://wikimania.wikimedia.org/wiki/Programme), media and documentary
coverage, and lots of storytelling and good fun.

For those of you who can't be there in person, there will be audio
streams from the two main halls, and two cameras' worth of vlogging
thanks to Soufron et al.  There are also some important things you can
do to make it an even better event :

== Wiki discussions, gathering sources ==
Wikimania will see some very focused discussions about how to improve
and coordinate the development of MediaWiki, Wikipedia, and the other
Wikimedia projects.  Preparation and organization of ideas over the
next ten days will see great returns on investment.
   (To add a discussion you want to see happen, or link to existing
discussions :
    please update  http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania:Discussions )

The most exciting part of Wikimania, to me, is getting many different
circles of savvy people talking about Wikimedia development at the
same time; and most of that will take place outside of Frankfurt.

== Announcements; Letting others know how to take part ==
I hope that when the audio podcasts and vlogs of the conference
sessions start to come out, that everyone who might care to will know
how to find them...  and I want the many Wikimedians who can't be
there to know how to find the discussions on-wiki surrounding key
sessions and discussions.

== Requests for help ==
So please respond to the following requests, if you can, either on- or
off-list (if off-list, make sure you write to elian :

  1)  We need people to help spread the word about Wikimania; to
websites that want to follow or link to the conference, to people who
want to join in the disucssions online.  Many conferences have IRC
channels that occasionally produce one or two questions.  We should
strive to have as much feedback coming from IRC and wiki discussions
as from the audience.
  2)  We need people to help update the Wikimania website with
information as the conference approaches; and especially DURING the
conference, as new materials become available.  Transcripts, podcasts,
etc will turn up on meta and on individual blogs; and we should have a
good portal to that content.
  3) As I mentioned previously, we also need transcribers for the
broadcast sessions.  We will only have audio and video for the larger
2 of 5 rooms; we could use 4-5 transcribers listening in and typing
out text transcripts for those rooms as well.  (I'm sure someone will
be bored enough to tune in :
http://wikimania.wikimedia.org/wiki/Programme )
  3b) If you're COMING to Wikimania and want to transcribe sessions in
the other three rooms, you will have my undying affection.  Contact me
directly about that...

Maniacally,
     SJ


body:
On Monday 25 July 2005 09:02, Andrew Dunbar wrote:
> On 7/24/05, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
> accent according to the offical orthographical rules, Russian (and some
> other Cyrllic script languages) can optionally indicate where the stress
> is and in some contexts it is the norm. With Hebrew and most

Yes, and one of the places where it is the norm is in a dictionary ;)

Regardless of how is this resolved in the end, it would make sense to built in
at least some ability of determining such things automatically. You don't
want to duplicate entire Russian corpus (with inflections, it could easily
rise to ten million words), so that you could have each one of them with and
without diacritics. It makes sense to have only canonical spellings in the
dictionary, and a bit of code to offer nearest match when someone tries to
retrieve a word spelled in a different way.

> > One crucial decision is that only correct spelling is allowed. This
> > means that all incorrect spelling will be amended or deleted. As
> > Ultimate Wiktionary is a database, it does not cater for things like
> > redirects. I urge you to have a look at both the design criteria and the
> > design itself because this is the time when it is relatively easy to
> > make changes. Once Erik starts coding the UW database, having finished
> > Wikidata and the GEMET implementation, the moment has passed us by.
>
> Please list out of the above points what is and what is not considered
> a correct spelling as Ultimate Wiktionary is concerned. Please then
> indicate whether every correct spelling is also suitable as a headword/
> article title/lemma or whatever you wish to call it.

The way I see it, this decision is a political and not a technical one. Each
word could have several spellings, each of which is related to a spelling
authority. If you want common misspellings in the dictionary, simply have
"Common misspelling" as a spelling authority. Similarly, nothing prevents you
from having several different spellings of a same word attributed to a single
spelling authority, which solves all the problems you mentioned above.


body:
On 25/07/05, Servien Ilaino <servien at gmail.com> wrote:
> Well Mark, if you ask people kindly to read through the spelling and
> other rules, which EVERY Wikipedia has and just ignores it, and you

I wish to remind you of a couple of things.

1) nds-nl is a test Wikipedia still.
2) spelling rules are usually decided by a community. In this case,
the rules have been decided by you with no vote or input from anyone
else.

> leave some messages and the other person doesn't reply then yes I
> think that person is not completely smart no, not that I expected

Perhaps they have another reason? And regardless of whether or not
they're smart, it's certainly not very becoming of you to say he's a
"stoopid loser".

> positive feedback from you anyway, but I'm not looking for your
> approval, since you don't speak LS and you are negative towards the
> creation of every new Wiki. The reason why every Wikipedia uses ONE

In fact, your Wikipedia is the first Wikipedia I have been negative
towards. I have supported the creation of basically all other
requested Wikipedias... ask anyone on the list. Regardless of whether
or not you're looking for my approval, in this case you have certainly
overstepped the bounds of what is OK by calling this person names in
such a way. Even Phroziac, who initially supported you, seems to have
withdrawn his support when he realised how you acted.

> writing system is to prevent errors with the same articles in 16
> different writing systems. Everyone is free to comment or suggest
> changes, but he doesn't reply to messages or anything! IMO that's
> strange yes!

Again, it's a test Wikipedia. Nobody is required to respond to
messages. You might also see what he did at [[Requests for new
languages]].

> Servien!

Mark


from_name: Tomer Chachamu

body:
On 25/07/05, Nikola Smolenski <smolensk at eunet.yu> wrote:
> The way I see it, this decision is a political and not a technical one. Each
> word could have several spellings, each of which is related to a spelling
> authority. If you want common misspellings in the dictionary, simply have
> "Common misspelling" as a spelling authority. Similarly, nothing prevents you
> from having several different spellings of a same word attributed to a single
> spelling authority, which solves all the problems you mentioned above.

Surely it would be better for the search function to try some other
possibilities, such as removing glottal stops from the input and
searching again.

Besides, didn't we forget the Unicode possibility of the same
character entered in two ways?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canonical_equivalence

Actually, ideally every word would have a "search name" which is
worked out based on the language. It would only contain the compulsory
characters, with a certain decision on e.g. German ? ? ? (to transform
them in one direction or the other). It could also decompose all
precomposed characters into sets of characters. This is a little bit
like how some databases store the soundex index.

I think this would handle most cases. I certainly agree that redirects
are a necessary technical feature for the rarer cases.


body:
On 25/07/05, Salvatore Ingala <spider87 at katamail.com> wrote:
> Hi, I'm a newcomer to the developers group. I uploaded in the branch
> SHOW_VERIFIED a modified version of MediaWiki where I added a new feature.
> This wants to be an alternative to the page protection. I added a
> verify/unverify button: 'verify' sets the current revision (or the one
> indexed by oldid) as the verified one for that page. This means that any
> user can edit the page, but the new revisions are not shown (though they can
> be accessed through the hystory, where the currently 'verified' revision is
> shown in bold characters) until a sysop 'verifies' it again. 'unverify', of
> course, removes this protection.

How do you set who is allowed to verify?


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Wikimania competitions : Writing, media, fun.

body:
Ther Wikimania Writing and Media competition, in various categories.
Originally, this was limited to content created in the past year, but
that led to various problems with defining what that meant, and people
misunderstanding the stricture; so now the contest is open to all
wikimedia content.

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania:Competitions

Prizes include O'Reilly books and Wikipedia swag in German and
English, rare pieces of currency, and probably some Xiph.org swag as
well.  Suggestions for special contest categories are welcome.

Currently, we have only one video up for the video prize -- which I
guarantee will be something sweet.  So if you have any good video to
upload, upload it now!  (Or send it to me via mail; it can be in any
format; NullC and I will handle re-encoding it for you.)

Finally, Bdk and I are looking for judges to help judge the submissions.

I.  Nominate people you think would make good contest judges here:
      http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimania:Competitions
II.  A few people suggested the idea of having known writers and
artists, not necessarily Wikimedians, be on a celebrity panel for the
final judging.  Suggest people you'd like to see on such a panel as
well. (also on the above page)

Cheers,
  SJ


from_name: Gerard Meijssen

subject:
[Wikitech-l] Cool URIs don't change (Ultimate Wiktionary and
	design	decisions)

body:
Rob Lanphier wrote:

>On Sat, 2005-07-23 at 22:49 +0200, Brion Vibber wrote:
>
>
>>More generally, it's completely irresponsible for a web-based resource
>>to rearrange content pages without providing a redirect from the old
>>URL. This is a basic principle which applies just as much to Wiktionary
>>as to Wikipedia, just as much to Hewlett Packard's driver web pages as
>>to Slashdot postings, just as much to a database of autogenerated
>>earthquake reports or a collection of press releases as to an online
>>academic journal.
>>
>>
>
>100% agreed on this point, and one that many people don't seem to
>understand.  So it bears repeating:
>
>
>
>>More generally, it's completely irresponsible for a web-based resource
>>to rearrange content pages [well, just re-read the paragraph above :) ]
>>
>>
>
>Actually, it bears restating.  Here's an old Tim Berners-Lee rant on the
>subject, called "Cool URIs Don't Change", that I often trot out whenever
>the topic rears its ugly head, which it does way too frequently:
>http://www.w3.org/Provider/Style/URI
>
>In my mind, making an exception for Wiktionary projects would be an
>extremely disappointing reversal of very good policy maintained by the
>rest of the Wikimedia projects.
>
>Rob
>
Hoi,
Well Tim Berners-Lee has one good line on the Wiktionary situation: "Do
you really feel that the old URIs cannot be kept running? If so, you
chose them very badly." I was not there at the time but what I
understood from some that  the Wiktionary people where told that they
could not have uncapitalised articles. This demand for uncapitalised
articles did not go away and over time the cost of this change improved.
It is certainly true for the Dutch wiktionary that there was a long time
between the first request and the moment it was granted. I do not know
if there ever was a technical reason why we could not have it, the only
argument that I remember was that we needed something to do with case
insensitive search, something we are still waiting for. All this
procastinantion meant that several thousand words had to be changed, by
hand in the Dutch case with a script in the English case.

It is "nice" to have persistence in your links. It is cool if it is just
a technical choise because then it is a no brainer. In the Wiktionary
case people do use redirects for correctly spelled words and as they are
not interested in creating articles for the inflections they use
redirects or they use redirects for the wrong spellings or they use
redirects for different orthografies. So yes, it is disappointing but it
is not a reversal of policy but the correction of a bad situation.

Thanks,
    GerardM


from_name: SJ

subject:
[Foundation-l] Fwd: Wikimania! Announcements and broadcasting :
	help requested

body:
(Forwarding to Foundation-l and the translators list. )

Dear translators, we have even more need of people to propagate
information about the conference in other languages; since the default
broadcasts and transcripts will be in English.  If there are people
interested in updating portals to Wikimania content in other languages
(on meta:), the portals would certainly be used.

Cheers,
  SJ

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: SJ <2.718281828 at gmail.com>
Date: Jul 25, 2005 10:35 AM
Subject: Wikimania! Announcements and broadcasting : help requested
To: Wikipedia general list <wikipedia-l at wikimedia.org>, Elisabeth
Bauer <elian at djini.de>

Dear Wikipedians,

Wikimania will begin in less than two weeks.  (If you're helping
organize this, the calendar is already engraved inside your forehead
:-)  There will be a crazy collection of speakers and wiki developers
(http://wikimania.wikimedia.org/wiki/Programme), media and documentary
coverage, and lots of storytelling and good fun.

For those of you who can't be there in person, there will be audio
streams from the two main halls, and two cameras' worth of vlogging
thanks to Soufron et al.  There are also some important things you can
do to make it an even better event :

== Wiki discussions, gathering sources ==
Wikimania will see some very focused discussions about how to improve
and coordinate the development of MediaWiki, Wikipedia, and the other
Wikimedia projects.  Preparation and organization of ideas over the
next ten days will see great returns on investment.
   (To add a discussion you want to see happen, or link to existing
discussions :
    please update  http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania:Discussions )

The most exciting part of Wikimania, to me, is getting many different
circles of savvy people talking about Wikimedia development at the
same time; and most of that will take place outside of Frankfurt.

== Announcements; Letting others know how to take part ==
I hope that when the audio podcasts and vlogs of the conference
sessions start to come out, that everyone who might care to will know
how to find them...  and I want the many Wikimedians who can't be
there to know how to find the discussions on-wiki surrounding key
sessions and discussions.

== Requests for help ==
So please respond to the following requests, if you can, either on- or
off-list (if off-list, make sure you write to elian :

  1)  We need people to help spread the word about Wikimania; to
websites that want to follow or link to the conference, to people who
want to join in the disucssions online.  Many conferences have IRC
channels that occasionally produce one or two questions.  We should
strive to have as much feedback coming from IRC and wiki discussions
as from the audience.
  2)  We need people to help update the Wikimania website with
information as the conference approaches; and especially DURING the
conference, as new materials become available.  Transcripts, podcasts,
etc will turn up on meta and on individual blogs; and we should have a
good portal to that content.
  3) As I mentioned previously, we also need transcribers for the
broadcast sessions.  We will only have audio and video for the larger
2 of 5 rooms; we could use 4-5 transcribers listening in and typing
out text transcripts for those rooms as well.  (I'm sure someone will
be bored enough to tune in :
http://wikimania.wikimedia.org/wiki/Programme )
  3b) If you're COMING to Wikimania and want to transcribe sessions in
the other three rooms, you will have my undying affection.  Contact me
directly about that...

Maniacally,
     SJ

--
++SJ


body:
Nikola Smolenski wrote:

>On Saturday 23 July 2005 10:13, Gerard Meijssen wrote:
>
>
>>Nikola Smolenski wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On Friday 22 July 2005 13:25, Gerard Meijssen wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Nikola Smolenski wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Why is there column "gender" in table "word"? If a word can exist in
>>>>>multiple genders, shouldn't that rather be represented in "inflection"
>>>>>table? If a word has a gender on its own, wouldn't that rather be
>>>>>represented in WordType table? If not, there are other properties of
>>>>>words (for example, number) which can also be represented in "word"
>>>>>table, why is gender singled out?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>When a word is inflected to a particular form, that word is a word in
>>>>its own right and consequently will be found in the UW. The inflection
>>>>is there because it does provide information and this information is
>>>>
>>>>
>>>Now I'm not so sure that I understand which table is for what. Could you
>>>give an example? For example, the word "white" is a base word and the
>>>word "whiter" is its inflection. How would these two words fit into the
>>>database?
>>>
>>>
>>Both words will exist as a Spelling, as a Word and they may share a
>>Meaning. When the inflections are added, in the Inflection-Word, all the
>>missing words will be created and they will all be related to each other
>>through this table. Contrary to a paper dictionary we want them all.
>>
>>
>
>Then I have misunderstood the database design :( I believed at first that
>inflections would be stored in "inflection" table. Now when I understand the
>design better, I don't think that it is a good idea to have separate "word"
>for each inflection because it brings a lot of unneccesary redudance, and
>much room for error. For example, it would be possible to mark "whiter" as an
>adverb and "white" as a verb! And then, imagine the horror which would ensue
>if someone would use wrong PartOfSpeech for base word and now it has to be
>changed for 100 inflections...
>
>Though this would be a crucial change, please think about it. I think that
>"word" table should contain only lemmas.
>
>
>
Right, well this is very much a design decision. The inflections will
have to be entered by hand. And if some poor sod does enter all these
inflections and they are wrong, there will be the need for an other poor
sod to remove them.

>>>>relevant for the inflections and the headword.. A Wordtype indicates a
>>>>noun a verb an adjective etc.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>I still don't understand why is gender singled out of all properties a
>>>word could have. For example, a verb could be transitive or intransitive,
>>>and this information is important. To give an example:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>[...]
>
>
>>At this moment in time I would not have intransitive verbs or transitive
>>verbs at all. To me they are verbs. When they are transitive, they have
>>a different meaning from when they are intransitive so to me the
>>destinction is in the meaning.
>>
>>
>
>OK, for a better example, why not number? Perhaps transitivity doesn't, but
>number also affects inflection, much as gender does.
>
>
When it comes to meaning, all the inflections can share the same
meaning. The number (first, second, third person) will be implied by the
Inflection in the table Inflection-Word. (at this moment it still says
Conjugation in this table)

>
>
>>>OK, but what if you have a longer phrase as a table field? For example, an
>>>"inflection" in table "inflection" might be "male genitive superlative" or
>>>"3rd person plural female past". I don't think it makes sense to add such
>>>phrases to the dictionary as proper entries, only so that the dictionary
>>>would have translations of them.
>>>
>>>Are some table fields inherently translatable? Is this what you had in
>>>mind above?
>>>
>>>
>>Most if not all text fields will be inherently translatable, this is
>>what I have very much in mind. The name of a font will not be translated
>>but that is the only one at this point in time. It makes perfect sense
>>to have this in the UW as it allows us to have a self learning User
>>Interface. The thing is; it has function.
>>
>>
>
>OK, so this solves it :)
>
>
>
>>>I was thinking about something else; for example, on
>>>http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/account there is this example: "A beggarly
>>>account of empty boxes. - Shakespeare, Romeo and Juliet, V-i"; but I
>>>understand now it is going to be just a part of "meaningtext". I'm not so
>>>certain, but maybe it would be good to create a separate table for
>>>examples, because same examples could (and probably will) be used in
>>>"meaningtext"s in different languages. It would also make it easier to
>>>automatically add new examples (for example, by grepping Project
>>>Gutenberg ;)
>>>
>>>
>>"A beggarly account of empty boxes" is a quote and why not have it as a
>>seperate Word and marked as such ?? It would be a idiom for "account"
>>and this is linked through Relation. Many famous quotes have been
>>translated and we could have them all. (Een paard , een paard, een
>>koninkrijk voor een paard)
>>
>>
>
>Because, ideally each word (in each language) should have an example or two,
>and so the number of examples would approach the number of words; and, it
>would become impossible to distinguish between notable quotes (Kingdom for a
>horse!), which occur frequently, need a description, and need to be
>canonically translated, and non-notable quotes, which are in the wiktionary
>only to be used as examples of use for other words, need not have a
>description, and translators won't encounter them at all.
>
>
The idioms, proverbs and quotes will be "Word" records in their own
right. So we have to be selective in the idiom that we choose. What is
new ?? That is what the editorial process is for. For instance for the
Dutch French speaking people the phrase "Papa fume un pipe" is famous
and as such it is noteworthy but its significance will bewilder the
French.. :)

>
>
>>I do not think grepping Project Gutenberg makes much sense. If anything
>>it helps you find occurances of the word but you have to be selective of
>>what to include. That is an editorial process and just the fact that a
>>word is used does not make for a good idiom in the UW.
>>
>>
>
>I think it would make sense for rarer words, which might occur once or a few
>times in entire Gutenberg's corpus. Of course, at the end a human editor has
>to decide whether a quote is really relevant.
>
>Related to grepping Project Gutenberg, have you considered adding information
>on word frequency? Only a single new table is needed, "frequency", with
>fields "spellingID", "corpus" and "frequency"; eventually "corpus" colud
>become "corpusID".
>
>
There is more to frequency than that. If anything grep may find it but
you still need to know the meaning of the word in that text. When the
word gets a new meaning, that is what you want to know .. I will speak
to the people of Rotterdam CS (developers of Lucene) about just these
kind of issues.

>Once the UW is up and running, how hard would it be to make such changes?
>
>
This is the time when it is easy to make fundamental changes to the
design of the UW, it is still also the time to come with an alternative
to the design I propose and as you have noticed, I do change things when
there is a good argument to do so. When the UW is life, changing the
software will be more difficult.

>
>
>>>When I was referring to "dialect", I did not have in mind a dialect that
>>>is officially recognised, but simply a set of words which could be
>>>identified as belonging to a certain group. So if you want to say that
>>>this word was part of London dockworkers' slang in 1800s, you should be
>>>able to do so, and not just stamp it with "British English".
>>>
>>>
>>When there are words that are specific to London dockworkers in the
>>1800s, I would not call it a dialect because like many professions they
>>have there own vocabulary. These I would mark within a collection as the
>>bulk of what they say would be London English of the 1800s. Now there is
>>
>>
>
>I agree, it is not a dialect, but if some words are recognisable as belonging
>to a distinctive group of words, they should somehow be marked as belonging
>to it, and I was suggesting that they are marked in a same way they would be
>marked as belonging to a certain dialect. Another solution would be to use
>"wordrelation" table instead, even though it isn't meant to be used in that
>way :)
>
>
>
Collection is the mechanism of choise for this. Relation is to indicate
thesaurus like structures including antonymes..

>>one thing that is relevant, the UW wants all words of all languages but
>>its primary purpose it to have the current vocabulary. So yes, these
>>words exist and have their place but when they are not used anymore they
>>should be marked as such.
>>
>>
>
>Well, just replace 1800s with 2000s and you still have the same problem :)
>
>
These words are still welcome and the Collection is there for it.

>
>
>>>As a simple example, in Serbia, there are several publishing houses that
>>>were publishing Asterix, and in some translations "Idefix" is named
>>>"Garoviks" and "Panoramix" is named "Aspiriniks" while in others "Idefix"
>>>is named "Idefiks" and "Panoramix" is named "Panoramiks"; and this is
>>>consistent. If you are going to translate something about Asterix to
>>>Serbian, you should pick one of the translations, but you should be
>>>consistent in using only the words from the translation which you have
>>>picked, and they should somehow be marked as belonging to the same
>>>translation. There surely are more important things than Asterix where
>>>similar might apply.
>>>
>>>
>>Garoviks and Idefiks are for the Serbian language synonyms and as such I
>>do not have to choose because they are both correct. As a matter of
>>interest you could explain things either in the etymology or in the
>>meaning of the word.
>>
>>
>
>They are synonyms, but they are stylistically marked: it would be wrong to
>translate Idefix first as Garoviks and later as Idefiks, or to consistently
>translate Idefix with Idefiks but Panoramix with Aspiriniks, much as it would
>be wrong to write "I recognise you recognized me"; a translator has to choose
>and make the choice consistent.
>
>
A translator has to make a consistent choise, Collections of translated
names of Asterisk characters can be used for that. We have the
technology. :)

>Unrelated to any of the above, could you move "word" table a bit to the right,
>because currently it is hard to see what is relation between "word",
>"spelling" and "etymology" tables, the lines overlap.
>
I did put the table Word out of whack to show its importance. I put
Collection on the same level as Meaning because that one too is very
important for several applications. Table is technically challeging and
that is why it is also given some prominence

Thanks,
    GerardM


from_name: steve v

body:
It may not be controversial as much as off topic.
"Protection" is an issue for sysops alone, almost
exclusively to provide for stability for pages which
may be too much in flux--from vandalism to POV wars.
Protection is something that is frowned upon as
"unwiki", as if one sought to add secrecy or privacy
to parts of Wikipedia. To distinguish subpages from
other pages would require some software hacks,
("Please DIY") and otherwise would still present a
wikiethical issue.

Further, protection may be associated with page
visiblity, and "blacklists" to keep certain pages
"private" (software currenly allows for system
whitelists). While privacy might be nice on Wikinews
for example, to emulate private "journalistic
conference" for "scoop" discussions between editors
and writers, I doubt that even subpage protection will
happen on Wikipedia, aside from system stuff like
monobook.css, etc. You can make your notes as <!--
hidden comments --> on there, if you want, but they
will still be visible. ;)

In general, its been principle to keep things open,
open, and open, though probably nobody would complain
if you became a sysop and protected your own subpages.

SV

--- Jtkiefer <jtkiefer at wordzen.net> wrote:

> I know that there have been discussions about this
> in the past and that
> this subject has been controversial, however for the
> life of me I have
> not been able to find a full discussion on this so I
> thought I'd ask
> here what the whole issue is with subpage and
> userpage protection and
> why is it so controversial and disputed?
>
> -Jtkiefer
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

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


body:
Nikola Smolenski wrote:

>On Monday 25 July 2005 09:02, Andrew Dunbar wrote:
>
>
>>On 7/24/05, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
>>accent according to the offical orthographical rules, Russian (and some
>>other Cyrllic script languages) can optionally indicate where the stress
>>is and in some contexts it is the norm. With Hebrew and most
>>
>>
>
>Yes, and one of the places where it is the norm is in a dictionary ;)
>
>Regardless of how is this resolved in the end, it would make sense to built in
>at least some ability of determining such things automatically. You don't
>want to duplicate entire Russian corpus (with inflections, it could easily
>rise to ten million words), so that you could have each one of them with and
>without diacritics. It makes sense to have only canonical spellings in the
>dictionary, and a bit of code to offer nearest match when someone tries to
>retrieve a word spelled in a different way.
>
>
>
As a matter a fact I do want all inflections even if they are ten
million words. Now I do not expect to have all these inflections to
start off with but as far as I am concerned I want them all. I already
have 222.930 Dutch words and they do include many inflections. I asked
Brion about this at one stage and he saw no problem with a big database.
from a discspace pov it does indeed not amount to that much .. :)

As we explicitly want to use the UW as a repository of correct
spellings, a repository that can be used by Open and Free software
projects, we explicitly want the physical records. When we have
technology to generate inflection well and good but we will still want
all the correctly spelled words.

>>>One crucial decision is that only correct spelling is allowed. This
>>>means that all incorrect spelling will be amended or deleted. As
>>>Ultimate Wiktionary is a database, it does not cater for things like
>>>redirects. I urge you to have a look at both the design criteria and the
>>>design itself because this is the time when it is relatively easy to
>>>make changes. Once Erik starts coding the UW database, having finished
>>>Wikidata and the GEMET implementation, the moment has passed us by.
>>>
>>>
>>Please list out of the above points what is and what is not considered
>>a correct spelling as Ultimate Wiktionary is concerned. Please then
>>indicate whether every correct spelling is also suitable as a headword/
>>article title/lemma or whatever you wish to call it.
>>
>>
>
>The way I see it, this decision is a political and not a technical one. Each
>word could have several spellings, each of which is related to a spelling
>authority. If you want common misspellings in the dictionary, simply have
>"Common misspelling" as a spelling authority. Similarly, nothing prevents you
>from having several different spellings of a same word attributed to a single
>spelling authority, which solves all the problems you mentioned above.
>
I have for one compelling reason added a table Misspelling. This is
where the absolutely wrong spellings may go. Its function? to prevent
people to add wrong spellings time and again. So this table is to grow
organically. Now there is this massive file on en.wikipedia and
en.wiktionary, this file contains typos. This table is not really there
for the typos but for the words that are spelled wrong for the "right"
reason. Meaning can relate to several almost identical Words (and by
implication Spelling). This may mean that several orthographies are
implied. These orthographies are to be named and indentified. Common
misspelling is not an orthography is anything it is the antithesis of
orthography.

 From a database point of view a Word has one Spelling. That is given
the ERD very much technical and non negotialbe. It is the Spelling that
is validated by a Spelling Authority.

Thanks,
    GerardM


body:
Tomer Chachamu wrote:

>On 25/07/05, Nikola Smolenski <smolensk at eunet.yu> wrote:
>
>
>>The way I see it, this decision is a political and not a technical one. Each
>>word could have several spellings, each of which is related to a spelling
>>authority. If you want common misspellings in the dictionary, simply have
>>"Common misspelling" as a spelling authority. Similarly, nothing prevents you
>>from having several different spellings of a same word attributed to a single
>>spelling authority, which solves all the problems you mentioned above.
>>
>>
>
>Surely it would be better for the search function to try some other
>possibilities, such as removing glottal stops from the input and
>searching again.
>
>Besides, didn't we forget the Unicode possibility of the same
>character entered in two ways?
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canonical_equivalence
>
>Actually, ideally every word would have a "search name" which is
>worked out based on the language. It would only contain the compulsory
>characters, with a certain decision on e.g. German ? ? ? (to transform
>them in one direction or the other). It could also decompose all
>precomposed characters into sets of characters. This is a little bit
>like how some databases store the soundex index.
>
>I think this would handle most cases. I certainly agree that redirects
>are a necessary technical feature for the rarer cases.
>
Hoi,
Redirects will not exist in the UW. There is no need for them. Either
they are correct spelling or they are not. If we MUST have a situation
where links into UW need to be maintained, the words will go into
Misspelling. Consequently the information will be utterly different from
what it had before and consequently it cannot be maintained that the
exterior party will have the URL point to the same information. Because
in stead of a word with a meanin and all the other stuff it will now
give a "You are wrong". This will be handled either at the Spelling
level or at the Misspelling level.

Then again, a user may want to see only a limited number of languages,
and consequently what is shown will also not be the same for everyone.
The word "dei" and "die" or both common typos, they are but for
different languages. So what are we going to show when someone asks for
dei of die ??

Thanks,
    GerardM


from_name: Jama Poulsen

subject: [Wikitech-l] adding HTML headers from an extension

body:
I'm trying to add an HTML header from a MediaWiki extension using
$wgOut->addScript(), but nothing is included in the output page.

Adding things after the <body> element does work fine, eg. using addHTML(),
so it seems the extensions can't currently modify the HTML header parts.

Is this assumption correct, or am I doing something wrong here?

Thanks,

Jama Poulsen
http://wikicompany.org


body:
And furthermore, if for some reason you don't want people editing your
user page(s), you can put a note on them saying not to, and most
people will listen, other then vandals. I have a note on mine saying
TO edit it, and not many people do, other then vandals and
anti-vandals :(

On 7/25/05, steve v <vertigosteve at yahoo.com> wrote:
> It may not be controversial as much as off topic.
> "Protection" is an issue for sysops alone, almost
> exclusively to provide for stability for pages which
> may be too much in flux--from vandalism to POV wars.
> Protection is something that is frowned upon as
> "unwiki", as if one sought to add secrecy or privacy
> to parts of Wikipedia. To distinguish subpages from
> other pages would require some software hacks,
> ("Please DIY") and otherwise would still present a
> wikiethical issue.
>
> Further, protection may be associated with page
> visiblity, and "blacklists" to keep certain pages
> "private" (software currenly allows for system
> whitelists). While privacy might be nice on Wikinews
> for example, to emulate private "journalistic
> conference" for "scoop" discussions between editors
> and writers, I doubt that even subpage protection will
> happen on Wikipedia, aside from system stuff like
> monobook.css, etc. You can make your notes as <!--
> hidden comments --> on there, if you want, but they
> will still be visible. ;)
>
> In general, its been principle to keep things open,
> open, and open, though probably nobody would complain
> if you became a sysop and protected your own subpages.
>
>
> SV
>
>
> --- Jtkiefer <jtkiefer at wordzen.net> wrote:
>
> > I know that there have been discussions about this
> > in the past and that
> > this subject has been controversial, however for the
> > life of me I have
> > not been able to find a full discussion on this so I
> > thought I'd ask
> > here what the whole issue is with subpage and
> > userpage protection and
> > why is it so controversial and disputed?
> >
> > -Jtkiefer
> > _______________________________________________
> > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

--
signature


from_name: Delirium

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Example vs. Original research

body:
Daniel P. B. Smith wrote:

> Let's take "The world is round." I have just spent ten minutes
> browsing my bookshelves looking for the clearest citation. A popular
> book by Menzel entitled Astronomy... nope. "A Field Guide to the
> Stars and Planets?" Nope. "Norton's Star Atlas?" Nope. All of them
> give the radius of the earth... but fail to say in so many words that
> the world is round, because, well, everybody knows that.
>
> Aha. I have it.
>
> "The earth is approximately an oblate spheroid (a sphere flattened at
> the poles.... For many navigational purposes the earth is assumed to
> be a sphere, without intolerable error."

I mostly agree, but I think we should also avoid turning Wikipedia into
a parody of citations, unless some way of producing "hidden" citations
is developed.  It's been discussed on and off that there should be some
way to tag parts of the article with a citation for facts, and if that
were done they could also be given flags for whether they should appear
as footnotes to the casual reader, or perhaps merely be available for
people doing fact-checking or desiring a more detailed bibliography.

Without such a mechanism, we could end up with more footnotes than there
are sentences in many articles.  Just looking at [[en:Paris]] for the
moment, this is the first paragraph:

"Paris is the capital city of France, as well as the capital of the
Ile-de-France region, whose territory encompasses Paris and its
suburbs.  The city of Paris proper is also a departement, called Paris
departement (French: departement de Paris)."

These are facts that might be worth getting citations for:
[1] Paris is the capital city of France.
[2] Paris is the capital of the Ile-de-France region.
[3] The Ile-de-France region's territory encompasses Paris and its suburbs.
[4] The city of Paris proper is also a departement, called Paris
departement.

Presumably citations for these can be found in French law, and would be
useful to have somewhere---someone might conceivably actually want to
know exactly where it is specified officially that Paris is the capital
city of France.  But I'm not sure we'd want to present readers with a
barrage of footnotes for all these facts that they might take as fairly
obvious---by the time you got the end of the article we might be on
footnote #200.

-Mark


body:
Angela wrote:

>If you want a non-editable page, please don't use a wiki. I see no
>reason user pages need to be protected any more than any other page.
>You don't own these pages just because you created them in the user
>namespace. See <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Ownership> and
><http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Protected_pages_considered_harmful>.
>
>
In practice, though, users are generally considered to "own" their user
pages.  If someone edited my user page, I would probably move their
comments to my talk page, and this seems to be standard practice---a
user's user page is only for them to edit, barring extenuating
circumstances such as the user being banned.

-Mark


from_name: andyl2004 at sympatico.ca

subject: [WikiEN-l] Pipermail Privacy Concern

body:
Hi,

I'm a bit concerned because two wikien-l emails contained in the online archives at pipermail have my full name and I believe these pages have been "googled" in the past by individuals angry at the content of articles. I've been harassed as a result by two individuals in the past few months.

I really would like to avoid this problem in the future and either have these pipermail entries edited so as to remove my full name or have them hidden from search engines by having a "NOINDEX" command placed in the html codes for those pages.

The pages in question are
http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2004-April/012194.html
http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2004-April/012194.html (previous entry title)

If this can be attended to I would be very grateful.

Thanks,

AL