from_name: Brion Vibber

body:
George Herbert wrote:
> This is the wikipedia equivalent of allowing the en.wikipedia front page to
> be world-anon-editable.
>
> We all know how long *that* would last as an experiment...
>
> That large parts of it should be editable doesn't mean that all of it should
> be all the time to just anyone...

Most wikis are editable; that's how they work. This is normal and not something
to be surprised about.

The Creole site is not targeted at the general public and has none of the sorts
of concerns that Wikipedia has about "omfg little old ladies might see a penis
on the main page for 30 seconds".

If you want to debate WhyWikiWorks anyway, that's fine, but I would ask you to
do it somewhere other than on our developer mailing list.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 249 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20060908/fa965a38/attachment.pgp>


list: wikien-l

source: pipermail-mbox

from_name: Bill Clark

subject: [WikiEN-l] Fwd: [Wikitech-l] BC vs BCE era names

body:
On 9/8/06, ScottL <scott at mu.org> wrote:
>    While I do not like the idea of someone using AWB to go through and
> change one to the other.  If the feature works well enough in the
> preferences they could go through and rewikify the dates to make the
> feature detect them (leaving the displayed version alone).  I think that
> is what is currently done when someone wikifies [[June 22, 2005]] a bot
> of some sort comes and changes it.

The problem is that AD/CE are only supposed to be displayed (according
to the manual of style) if you're dealing with a span of time that
crosses the BC-AD (or BCE-CE) boundary.  In other words, this is
proper:

[[July 4]], [[1776 BC]]–[[July 4]], [[1776|AD 1776]]

...and this is proper:

[[March 21]], [[1974]]–[[October 16]],[[1975]]

...but this is not:

[[March 21]], [[1974|AD 1974]]–[[October 16]],[[1975|AD 1975]]

...and this is not:

[[July 4]], [[1776 BC]]–[[July 4]], [[1776]]

Now, it would certainly be possible to include this level of
context-awareness into the parser, but it's probably not a good idea.
So we're left with trusting the editors to provide the correct display
text in wikilinks, in the manner appropriate to the situation.

If we're going to keep using display text in wikilinks to provide the
AD/CE (as opposed to BC/BCE, which is mandatory and thus easily
parsed) then whatever date display mechanism we use, whether it's the
current one or my patched one or some other one, will have to deal
with this situation.

I'm leaning toward having the parser just rewrite the display text as
well as the link itself, since the other "reasonable" alternative is
to leave the display text alone, and (assuming we put in place my
BC/BCE rewriting patch) this could result in aesthetically unappealing
situations where BCE and AD are mixed in a date range, if the user has
BCE set as their preference (or BC and CE mixed for users who prefer
BC).

The display text is already provided automatically for users who set a
preference and for wikilinked dates that don't already include display
text, so there's already an expectation that dates won't necessarily
display according to the regular rules of interpreting wikicode.
Rewriting display text would make it impossible for editors to specify
something other than what users prefer to see, but I can't think of
any situations where that would be truly disasterous.

-Bill Clark


list: foundation-l

from_name: Jakob Voss

subject: [Foundation-l] WikiSym 2006 - short report

body:
Hi,

Two weeks ago I attended WikiSym 2006, the Second Symposium on Wikis, in
Odense, Denmark. Finally here is a short report on what was relevant to
me and maybe relevant for Wikimedia, Wikimedians, and Wikipedia research
(that's the reason for crossposting).

With me there were some (but little) Wikimedians, so Sj and
Brion Vibber. Participants (around 70) were scientist and community
leaders or very active community members from different wikis, for
instance Sunir (Meatball), Evan (Wikitravel), and Angela (Wikia).
Compared to Wikimania WikiSym is both more academic and more broad in
terms of wiki communities, while Wikimania is very centered to Wikipedia
(and other Wikimedia communities) and free content. To my impression
many people forget about the rich world of wikis beside Wikipedia or
even think Wiki=Wikipedia. Some argued at WikiSym that Wikipedia may
kill other Wikis because of that - there is no other Wiki of its size
anymore.

Anyway - there is a large overlap between Wikimedia world and Wiki world
in general. Sj and me agreed upon that the place for academic,
peer-reviewed Wikipedia research is better WikiSym and not Wikimania, so
both should collaborate, for instance asking academic Wikimedia
submission to better submit at WikiSym instead.

Max V?lkel has also written a short report about WikiSym at the swikg
mailing list[1] for the Semantic Wiki community - he compared WikiSym
and and the first workshop on Semantic Wikis at the European Semantic
Web Conference - the latter is even more academic to his impression. But
WikiSym was a real place where science and practise meet.

There were a lot of "open space sessions" with many discussions, for
instance about the future of wikis in general, and interoperability
between wikis. Have a look at the proceedings at

http://www.wikisym.org/ws2006/proceedings

Some more reports are at

http://ws2006.wikisym.org/space/Symposium+Reports

in the symposium wiki[2] - many particpants took notes there to document
the sessions (yes, it's a wiki although it does not look like MediaWiki ;-)

The workshop on Wikipedia Research was very fruitful and I only got
positive feedback. If your interested in Wikipedia research you should
definitely have a look at the slides:

http://eprints.rclis.org/archive/00007102/

I'm looking forward to WikiSym 2007 which will probably be in Montreal
(as far as I remember, no guarantee)!

Greetings,
Jakob

[1] http://www.aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de/mailman/listinfo/swikig
[2] http://ws2006.wikisym.org


list: wikimedia-l


list: wikitech-l

subject: [Wikitech-l] Fwd: [WikiEN-l] Fwd:  BC vs BCE era names


list: wikipedia-l

from_name: ilooy

subject:
[Wikipedia-l] New language proposals and vandalism from Node ue
	in incubator

body:
2006/9/8, Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com>:
> Also, I have been accused of sockpuppetry many times before. [...]
> On yi.wp I was banned because danny doesn't like me.
> I don't recall being banned on any other wiki [...]
> he banned me for speaking out.
> Toki Pona was a long time ago,
> 4 or 5 on yi: (most to try to circumvent Danny's ban),
> and 3 on one other Wiki which is quite inactive right now.
> I never "vandalised" it. I simply didn't agree with your orthography,
> and as the case turns out to be, nobody else does either. Changing
> orthography to something a bit more kosher is not "vandalism".

But Mark look at the pattern above.
Is that anyway to behave at Wikipedia?

And the Andalusian Test wiki didn't have my
preference for a phonetic spelling, it used the
'''NOA''' convention which is a bit standard in
music lyrics etc. for flamenco songs, poems
etc. So the one that was more NPOV got
deleted. The Wikia Andalu site has received
a lot of attacks from vandals. But If someone
posts in another spelling convention it isn't
reason to ban anyone, the problem is deletion
of work. Since you mention 'kosher' I'll remind
you of the deletions you made in the Ladino
wiki, reverting the spelling to hebrew characters
several times and deleting the romance spelling
with Latin characters which is in fact preferred
by several discussion lists in Ladino and newspapers
and magazines in the Middle East and in other
places around the world.

Do you not see that your pattern of behavior
causes problems within the Wp community?
This is what I meant by m.o. (modus operandi).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modus_operandi

Sincerely,
Jay Bowks
--

?lv!

ilooy.gaon at gmail.com


from_name: Oskar Sigvardsson

subject: [WikiEN-l] current categories and subcategories

body:
On 9/7/06, karen marcelo <karen at radarnetworks.com> wrote:
> hi all
>
> i just joined this list so i'm not sure if this is the correct forum to
> ask this, but how do i get a master list of
> all wikipedia categories and sub-categories?    i looked a the database
> download page and took a peek at
> pages_articles.xml and see that one can parse out Categories from the
> mediawiki tags embedded in the
> text.  but is there some other dump with all the categories (even ones
> that may not have articles) as well as their
> subcategories available somewhere?
>
> apologies in advance if this was the wrong list to post this question
> to, but if someone could direct me to the right one
> it would be most appreciated.
>
> thanks much!

If you look at http://download.wikimedia.org/enwiki/latest/ you can
see that there is a dump that's called categorylinks (
http://download.wikimedia.org/enwiki/latest/enwiki-latest-categorylinks.sql.gz
). It's just under 100 mb. That should be it. The schema for it can be
found at http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Categorylinks_table

It only identifies articles that contains a certain category by the
id-number of the article, which means that if you want to know what
categories are sub/super-categories you need to download another dump
that contains the names of the categories, as well as their id. cur
certainly contains this, but it's 1.5 GB large, and that may be a bit
large. You should try enwiki-latest-all-titles-in-ns0.gz, that might
contain the ids. It's just 14 mb big, so it's not hard to just
download them and try.

Note: I'm not a (very good) mediawiki developer ;)

Good luck!

--Oskar


from_name: Akash Mehta

subject:
[WikiEN-l] Example of a user who should have been banned a long
	time ago

body:
[snip]
> some of them.~~~~

Someone should rewrite the code behind squirrelmail or another email
client so that, when emailing wikipedia.org emails, four tildes is
automagically converted to your Wikipedia username and the appropriate
timestamp :) *starts hacking away at a
str_replace("~~~~",$CONF['wpusr'].date("Y-m-d"),$_POST['message']) -
sorry, just had to add a line of pointless and irrelevant php in here*


from_name: Timwi

subject: [Wikitech-l] Long delay after submitting an edit

body:
C.J.Fryer at lse.ac.uk wrote:
>
> I've been experiencing major delays on our MediaWiki 1.6.7 and 1.7.1
> installation when submitting edits.  After clicking "Save Page", there's
> a delay of around 16 seconds before the user is redirected to the edited
> page.

Have you tried several different browsers? Are you using a proxy to
access the MediaWiki?


from_name: Ivan Krstić

subject: [Wikitech-l] draft of WikiCreole 0.1 available for comment

body:
Tim Starling wrote:
> We're committed? I must have missed that bulletin.

For some value of committed, that I assume actually means "Brion said
we'll do it". I wasn't at the workshop.

--
Ivan Krsti? <krstic at solarsail.hcs.harvard.edu> | GPG: 0x147C722D


list: commons-l

from_name: Henning Schlottmann

subject: [Commons-l] proposed policy - Commons:Trademarks

body:
Alison Wheeler wrote:
> On Wed, September 6, 2006 16:07, Platonides wrote:

> > If it's PD on the trademark registration country, it should be ok, but
> > *who decides the ineligibility?*
>
> The way this thread is starting to read I'm almost wondering if we're
> heading towards the conclusion that 'one size will never fit all' as each
> country / jurisdiction will operate different restrictions for the same
> material and for us to define something as 'commons' usuable worldwide
> will be close to impossible.

I suggested elsewhere the following idea of a golden rule for commons:
If an image is free in the US (physical place of the servers) and the
coutry of origin, it should be accepted.  We should not care for the
laws in saudi arabia or japan if the image is in no connection to those
countries.

Ciao Henning [H-stt]


list: textbook-l

from_name: Erik Moeller

subject: [Textbook-l] Global Text Project

body:
On 9/8/06, Robert Scott Horning <robert_horning at netzero.net> wrote:

> For myself, I strongly suspect anything that starts with "students in
> the developing world" and doesn't acknowledge disadvantaged individuals
> even in supposedly "first world" countries to be more or less a scam and
> something to stay away from.  If their overall goal is to bring benefits
> to people in specific countries but also benefit other people in the
> process, I'm much more likly to support such a general project.
>
> Of course, that is why I also consider the OLPC project to be something
> of a scam as well, on the same grounds.

I think that's an unhelpful position. When you start by calling a
project "more or less a scam", you will be less likely to change
hearts and minds than by simply stating your position clearly (if
forcefully). The OLPC folks I know are good people who are likely to
listen to constructive suggestions. Also, we're not above making
similar mistakes. IMHO, the language in Jimmy's personal appeal for
donations, for example, (literally: "I'm doing this for the child in
Africa") could have used considerable polish.
--
Peace & Love,
Erik


from_name: Bradypus

subject: [Foundation-l] COPPA

body:
From: "Ray Saintonge" <saintonge at telus.net>
>>
> Did I miss something?  What personal information are we collecting from
> children?

The IP ?


subject: [Foundation-l] COPPA


subject: [Foundation-l] How not to manage opensource project

body:
From: "Ray Saintonge" <saintonge at telus.net>

Bradypus wrote:

>You say Anthere is eccentric? :-o
>I think I agree with you, but Anthere had raised an interesting issue that
>was interesting.
>
Je n'ai pas dit qu'Anthere est excentrique, mais m?me si je ne l'aurais
pens? ?a ne serait que pour exprimer une forme conique parmi les plus
gentilles.

L'excentricit? dont je parlait s'appliquait ? une id?e et pas ? une
personne.  La personne qui se servait d'une interpretation excentrique
n'?tait pas Anthere.
------
I was just teasing you Ray, and I am pretty sure Anthere perfectly
understood this.
For the rest of you message: no comment.

Bradipus


from_name: brion at pobox.com

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

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

Running test TODO: Table security: embedded pipes (http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2006-April/034637.html)... FAILED!
Running test TODO: Link containing double-single-quotes '' (bug 4598)... FAILED!
Running test TODO: Template with thumb image (with link in description)... FAILED!
Running test Template infinite loop... FAILED!
Running test TODO: message transform: <noinclude> in transcluded template (bug 4926)... FAILED!
Running test TODO: message transform: <onlyinclude> in transcluded template (bug 4926)... FAILED!
Running test BUG 1887, part 2: A <math> with a thumbnail- math enabled... FAILED!
Running test TODO: HTML bullet list, unclosed tags (bug 5497)... FAILED!
Running test TODO: HTML ordered list, unclosed tags (bug 5497)... FAILED!
Running test TODO: HTML nested bullet list, open tags (bug 5497)... FAILED!
Running test TODO: HTML nested ordered list, open tags (bug 5497)... FAILED!
Running test TODO: Parsing optional HTML elements (Bug 6171)... FAILED!
Running test TODO: Inline HTML vs wiki block nesting... FAILED!
Running test TODO: Mixing markup for italics and bold... FAILED!
Running test TODO: 5 quotes, code coverage +1 line... FAILED!
Running test TODO: HTML Hex character encoding.... FAILED!
Running test TODO: dt/dd/dl test... FAILED!

Passed 412 of 429 tests (96.04%) FAILED!


from_name: Sabine Cretella

subject: [Foundation-l] Machine translation, Wikipedia and WiktionaryZ

body:
Well this is on one hand to inform you about what we are going to do/try
to do and on the other to tell people: if you want to do the same, just
do it.

Jeff has this wordlist he uses for the machine translation of the
Cherokee wikipedia. Well, since I want to try to do the same for
Neapolitan he told me to download it and substitute the Cherokee words
with Neapolitan words. Said and done :-) I downloaded the list. Talking
with GerardM about uploading it I sent him the list and he put it on
WiktionaryZ (thank you!):

http://www.wiktionaryz.org/index.php?title=MachineTranslation_preparation_1
http://www.wiktionaryz.org/index.php?title=MachineTranslation_preparation_2
http://www.wiktionaryz.org/index.php?title=MachineTranslation_preparation_3
http://www.wiktionaryz.org/index.php?title=MachineTranslation_preparation_4

Jeff: could you please confirm that we may use the list in this way
under GFDL and CC-BY?

Well, what will happen now: I will start to create the needed entries in
English and add the Neapolitan translations to it. Probably also Italian
and as soon as we have Cherokee online I'll copy and paste these words
there as well (always if I get the OK for it).

Once that is done we can go on with teaching the translation engine the
grammar rules :-)

Now people will say and if it does not work ... well something tells me
it will work ... and besides creating a basis for Machine Translation in
this way also a dictionary is created. So one effort with double result.

Therefore I invite all that are interested in doing similar things to
follow us in our adventure ... well yes, that's how I consider it: a
huge adventure in the world of languages. Probably some that will start
after me to work on this list will be faster ... it would be great to
see that - there is always that time problem (at least for me).

Well this is the first time when we will see one of the WiktionaryZ
features in action: reusability for other projects - in this case for
our wikipedias.

Thank you Jeff for taking the time to work on our languages.

Ciao, Sabine
Chiacchiera con i tuoi amici in tempo reale!
 http://it.yahoo.com/mail_it/foot/*http://it.messenger.yahoo.com


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Machine translation, Wikipedia and WiktionaryZ


list: wiktionary-l

subject: [Wiktionary-l] Machine translation, Wikipedia and WiktionaryZ


from_name: Berto

subject:
[Wikipedia-l] New language proposals and vandalism from Node
	uein incubator

body:
Hi!

>The Wikia Andalu site has received
>a lot of attacks from vandals.
I remember a LOT of flames about the very existence of an andalusian
language (I was and am one of those supporting it, no matter the script
they'll want to choose). Many of the more aggressive opponents on Meta
really sounded much closer to a native castillan speaker than Mark will ever
do. So possibly the vandals might have more than just one warrior in their
tribe... if you will pardon my humour, it would also be quite funny to have
vandals banned from their home country, that is, Vandalusia :)

Me and Mark are more often than not on different sides of the barricade,
when dealing with small sized languages, but I'd be prudent in saying that
he is responsible for all the problems on earth, from Eve's apple to
yesterday's rain. If there are suspects about him playing socketpuppetry the
correct way is to check whether such suspects have real foundations or not,
and to make this BEFORE pointing one's finger and asking for anyone to be
banned, jailed or executed. It's called Habeas Corpus. The other way bears
Mr. Lynch's name.

Hmmm FMI, is "Jay B" even remotely related to a ro user called "Jacky B"?
Just a curiosity of mine.

B?rto


from_name: Jimmy Wales

subject: [Textbook-l] Problem with NPOV

body:
Piotr "Derbeth" Kubowicz wrote:
> What do you think of
> http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Christianity/Living_as_a_Christian and
> http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Imamat_or_Successorship_After_the_Last_Prophet_of_God#Successorship?
>
>
> I noticed there are more and more users who contribute to books that
> are made with strongly islamic point of view (we already have some
> texts about islam: http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Category:Islam), with
> nicks like "Truebeliever", "Believer" etc. I'm afraid that we might
> attract some zealots who see us as a good place to develop
> propaganda. Generally, I think that we should think how we should
> treat books about religious topics.

1. NPOV is crucial.  Textbooks are not advocacy.  They are to instruct
and inform, not brainwash and convert (in either direction!).

2. Wikibooks is for _textbooks_, not any random sort of nonfiction book.
  One of the tests we should use is: "Does this book serve the specific
textbok needs of any actual class offered at any actual accredited
institution?"  That will be a good way to cut out a lot of nonsense at
the start.

--Jimbo


subject: [WikiEN-l] Question about "External links"

body:
100? Thousands for articles which meet good article criteria, are
broad or common in use and receive a lot of hits from
computer-literate users.

On 9/9/06, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 9/8/06, Gregory Kohs <thekohser at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I am curious if there is any factual data about how many clicks per day, on
> > average, that a run-of-the-mill outbound link receives in the "External
> > links" section of a typical Wikipedia article?  My guess is that it's
> > somewhere around 3 or 4, but that's just me looking at it as a [[Fermi
> > problem]].
> >
>
> Depends on the article they are on but I've seen over 100 claimed on SEO forums.
> --
> geni
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


body:
I'm sure it wouldn't be very expensive. All that needs to be done is
that the external (non-interwiki) link code passes URLs through a
script on a server that counts the number of clicks to that particular
link and then passes the user on to the appropriate site, which would
probably be specified through GET. I'll code it if I have time today,
its very simple in php, and using a database means that statistics can
be generated VERY easily.

[snip]
> > As for funding Wikimedia to get a legitimate answer to the question... since
> > I've already been a multi-time donor to Wikimedia fund drives, I would
> > certainly entertain that.  How much do you think it would cost to conduct
> > such a study?  Or, were you being facetious?
>
> I'm not sure, but I was indeed being serious. It would be useful data
> that we don't currently have.
[snip]


body:
Thats certainly a very useful list. Should we get a sysop to run
through them? I'm sure Phatcat68 has some explaining to do. A few
unsourced images can be accidents, as new users may not be familiar
with policy, but i'm sure there's a reasonable limit we can use above
which we begin to give out blocks. Copyvio images are a serious issue
from a legal point of view for the foundation.

On 9/9/06, Mark Wagner <carnildo at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 9/8/06, Akash Mehta <draicone at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Do we have a way where we can scan talk pages for such warnings and
> > come up with a record of those with 20+?
>
> OrphanBot's top-50 list.  The "tagbot.log" warnings are about new
> uploads; the "orphanbot.log" warnings are about existing uploads.
>
>      54 orphanbot.log:Warning user Phatcat68
>      42 orphanbot.log:Warning user Giantcn
[snip]
>      19 orphanbot.log:Warning user Bcsurvivor
>      18 tagbot.log:Warning user Kulasman
>      18 tagbot.log:Warning user Fluence
[snip]


subject:
[WikiEN-l] Example of a user who should have been banned a long
 time ago

body:
Death Phoenix wrote:
> On 9/7/06, Jossi Fresco <jossifresco at mac.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Sep 7, 2006, at 7:58 PM, Jimmy Wales wrote:
>>
>>> Why was this user not banned months ago?
>> It is blocked for 1 month now, and copyvio images being deleted.
>>
>
> I'm assuming Jimbo knows about the one month block, since he made that block
> himself. Can we construe his post as being a formal request to have him
> permabanned?

No, I was actually just trying to raise the more general issue.  It
looks like what is happening is that bots are warning people repeatedly
but it is not being called to the attention of humans.  I would say,
gee, if a person gets that many warnings, and doesn't respond, and keeps
up the bad behavior, then an indef ban is certainly justified.

The only reason I did not indef ban this user myself is that when I do
that, people end up on the "list of people banned by Jimbo" which is a
sort of special status that I don't like to invoke for the most part.

--Jimbo


body:
geni wrote:
> The problem is that normaly they do a load of uploads then go away so
> there is little point in blocking them.

And, equally, little point in *not* blocking them.

--Jimbo


subject:
[Wikipedia-l] Please check [[MediaWiki:Sitenotice]] on your
	project

body:
I believe its a special system they've developed for the purpose. Try
asking Jimmy or Angela.

On 9/9/06, [LiM] Manop <manop at 6tub1.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm an admin of Thai WP. I'm wondering if anyone can tell me how to
> translate the announcment. I could not find where I can edit.
>
> Thank you,
> Manop
>
> On 9/8/06, Aphaia <aphaia at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hello all,
> > now all active members of Wikimedia projects are invited to vote in
> > the 2006 Election to the Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia
> > Foundation. After one week from the beginning, we have over 1,000
> > votes. Thank you for your interest!
> >
> > On most projects of the Wikimedia Foundation, it is advertised at the
> > top of website. On some projects, it hasn't yet. According my
> > presumption 8-10% projects hasn't recognized now they are invited to
> > give voices (see below).
> >
> > Hence, local sysops are highly expected to ensure their wiki to be
> > informed this Election, and if not yet, please modify
> > [[MediaWiki:Sitenotice]] and put a brief notice about it. If you are
> > not a sysop but visit such a project frequently, please let the local
> > sysops know about that.
> >
> > You may want to render meta version or other projects'.
> > Here are some examples you can reuse:
> >
> > En:
> > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Sitenotice
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Sitenotice
> > Fr:
> > http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Sitenotice
> > Es:
> > http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Sitenotice
> > Ru:
> > http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Sitenotice
> > Id:
> > http://id.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Sitenotice
> > Zh:
> > http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Sitenotice
> >
> > I found by chance  some projects not informed yet, and checked some
> > projects including
> > - 25 largest Wikipedias +1 I visited by chance; 3 Wikipedias lacked
> > information
> > -  5 large Wiktionaries; all had sitenotice
> > - 3 relatively large Wikinews; all had sitenotice
> >
> > 3/31 = 10% projects had no news about Election; I feel unease with
> > this result.  One of the reasons would be that they optimized the
> > sitenotice for other purposes. In some projects, it was just only the
> > former news (like Wikimania scholarship) remained. Anyway, there would
> > be terra incognita from several reasons, which all of us are invited
> > to develop to assure the integrity of our global community.
> >
> > --
> > Kizu Naoko
> > Wikimedia Election Committee, 2006
> > * vox pubuli, vox dei *
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> >
>
>
>
> --
> (LiM) Manop Kaewmoracharoen
> 427 Town Engineering Bldg.
> Iowa State University
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>


from_name: Angela

body:
On 9/9/06, [LiM] Manop <manop at 6tub1.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm an admin of Thai WP. I'm wondering if anyone can tell me how to
> translate the announcment. I could not find where I can edit.

Hi Manop,

You can translate it by editing this page on your wiki:
http://th.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki:Sitenotice&action=edit

The English version to translate from is shown on Meta at
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki%3ASitenotice

Angela

--
Angela Beesley
http://wikia.com | http://a.nge.la


from_name: Anthony

body:
On 9/8/06, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell at gmail.com> wrote:
> Today a US user could legally upload modern works published only in
> Iran, and they would be legal in most of the world.... but they would
> be illegal in Iran. If we fill the Persian language Wikipedia with
> these images, would we be succeeding at producing a free content
> encyclopedia in that language?

Excellent point.  Leaving aside the black/white free/nonfree issue, I
don't think it'd be a smart idea to *unnecessarily* fill the
encyclopedia with a lot of images that a lot of the potential users
can't reuse.

I'm less sure about whether or not it's OK to put these images in the
French encyclopedia (for example), though.  I imagine there are very
few people in Iran who would be interested in a French encyclopedia.
And if it's OK to put the images in most encyclopedias, but not in a
few of them, then should the image be in commons?

> What happens next week if Iran signs
> the Berne Convention?
>
I'd be interested in the answer to that question.  If the copyright
automatically becomes valid in most countries, even for pre-existing
works, then obviously these images are unusable in any language
Wikipedia.  Is that what happens?

> Instead we should conform strictly to the laws of the uploaders
> location and to the laws of where the servers are hosted...

I'd say the uploaders are responsible for conforming strictly to the
laws of their location, not "us".  It would be far too complicated to
try to figure out where people are uploading from and then what laws
apply there.

> and then
> attempt to conform to the laws of all places someone may wish to
> publish or work to the extent that doing so is both reasonable and not
> in strong conflict with or projects overall goals.

For some value of "reasonable" I think the vast majority of people
agree with this.  I do think that value of "reasonable" varies quite a
bit from person to person, though.

Anthony


body:
On 9/8/06, Kelly Martin <kelly.lynn.martin at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 9/8/06, Anthony <wikilegal at inbox.org> wrote:
> > On 9/7/06, Ben McIlwain <cydeweys at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > It sounds like OrphanBot may need a slight tweak to keep
> > > track of how many unsources images a user is uploading, and then start
> > > raising red flags if it exceeds a certain number.
> >
> > I just wish the bot would stop telling me that the images Ive uploaded
> > that dont have a known source (and were released under Sharealike 1.0
> > which doesnt require a source) are candidates for deletion.
>
> We don't allow unsourced images of any sort on Wikipedia.  That's as
> much a moral issue as a legal one.
>
It's not a legal issue at all.  It's a moral issue in that it forces
people to identify themselves in order to contribute images to the
encyclopedia.

I don't know about your morality, but my morality dictates that I
*not* reveal the identity of someone who creates an image and asks not
to be identified.

Anthony


body:
On 9/9/06, Jimmy Wales <jwales at wikia.com> wrote:
> geni wrote:
> > The problem is that normaly they do a load of uploads then go away so
> > there is little point in blocking them.
>
> And, equally, little point in *not* blocking them.
>
Wasting server resources and clogging up the block list is a pretty big point.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Grandmother copyrighted anonymous works

body:
On 9/8/06, Mark Wagner <carnildo at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 9/8/06, Anthony <wikilegal at inbox.org> wrote:
> > On 9/7/06, Ben McIlwain <cydeweys at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > It sounds like OrphanBot may need a slight tweak to keep
> > > track of how many unsources images a user is uploading, and then start
> > > raising red flags if it exceeds a certain number.
> >
> > I just wish the bot would stop telling me that the images Ive uploaded
> > that dont have a known source (and were released under Sharealike 1.0
> > which doesnt require a source) are candidates for deletion.
>
> The Creative Commons Sharealike license might not require attribution
> of the author, but Wikipedia requires that the source of the images be
> provided so that we can verify the license.

How do you verify the license?  If I put my grandmother's name as
author are you going to look up her phone number and call her or
something?  Part of the whole point is that the people who made these
images don't want to be bothered by this crap.

> I can add you to
> OrphanBot's do-not-notify list, but that will just mean that the
> images are deleted without you ever knowing about it.
>
Not now.  I'll have to think about this further.

Part of me thinks the best solution is to just create a sockpuppet for
each person and upload the images under that, claiming authorship on
them.  Another part of me thinks I should make some trivial, yet
copyrightable, modification to the work, claim authorship of the
derivative, and upload them with myself as author.  Yet another part
of me thinks I should just turn off the notification and let y'all
delete the damn images, because it's not worth bothering with.

So far I've just been removing the tags, mentioning that the source is
anonymous, and I think most of the images have survived.

Anthony


body:
You know, looking at the situation from a neutral perspective, I'd be
suggesting a 1 month block for node ue for policy violations and
personal attacks, but thats just my opinion.

Seriously though, guys, can you just learn to solve your differences
on your own? Its bad enough having just about every topic raised on
wikien-l. Sure, CC your communications to the mailing list as you go,
but really you should be contacting each other and working out your
dispute like human beings. Of course, thats just my opinion too.

And Mark, you clearly aren't helping, with personal attacks all over
the place. If you could just calm down, it would solve a lot of
problems.

On 9/9/06, ilooy <ilooy.gaon at gmail.com> wrote:
> 2006/9/8, Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com>:
> > Psh, I haven't even been on Meta for a few weeks.
>
> Mark, as you'll note if you re-read my posting
> there are others, and it is very obvious to me you
> have 'other' identities on Wikipedia. So maybe you
> haven't logged in as Node ue but it seems someone
> with your m.o. is at work.
>
> > The fact is, Jay, you are for some reason biased against me. You hate
> > me for no logical reason. In all my previous encounters with you, you
> > have been extremely hostile towards me.
> > Mark
>
> Not at all Mark. Not personal, only I don't agree
> with your methods and your efforts to impose your
> opinions over others.
>
> Why is the Andalusian test wiki deleated from Incubator?
> Why were you banned several times in different guises
> from several language wikis?
>
> Definitely not personal, but maybe against some of your
> personae which to me seem to be very biased and slanted
> towards one opinion.
>
> I ask that the issue of the deletion of the Andalusian Test
> wiki be looked into. My feeling is you had something to
> do with this as you've been warned before for vandalizing
> the efforts to establish a wiki in Andalusian.
>
> Sincerely,
> Jay Bowks
>
>
> --
>
> ?lv!
>
> ilooy.gaon at gmail.com
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>


body:
Thats the only problem. We can't AWB every single link in the
database, then AWB it back just for the purpose of a study, which is
why we would have to somehow do it at software parser level for a day
or so. And we could easily host the file on toolserver and handle
redirects / logging from there. I have spare low traffic mysql db
server we could use. Then again, it would be simpler to build the
functionality into the Wikipedia toolbar, and thats a violation of
privacy, so it would have to be optional, and there'd be a clearly
rigged demographic left of those who allowed the logging to take
place...

On 9/9/06, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 9/8/06, Akash Mehta <draicone at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I'm sure it wouldn't be very expensive. All that needs to be done is
> > that the external (non-interwiki) link code passes URLs through a
> > script on a server that counts the number of clicks to that particular
> > link and then passes the user on to the appropriate site, which would
> > probably be specified through GET. I'll code it if I have time today,
> > its very simple in php, and using a database means that statistics can
> > be generated VERY easily.
>
> Turning every external link follow into a database write on Wikipedia
> is simply not going to be acceptable.
>
> We don't currently log HTTP GETs for a reason...
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


body:
Just for, say, 50 links, it would be very easy to implement, if there
is consensus and approval.

On 9/9/06, Richard Holton <richholton at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 9/8/06, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Turning every external link follow into a database write on Wikipedia
> > is simply not going to be acceptable.
> >
> > We don't currently log HTTP GETs for a reason...
> >
> > Yeah, I can see that may be troublesome. It might be interesting to do it
> for a subset of pages...like the featured articles, for instance. I'm not
> sure how difficult it would be to implement, though...
>
> -Rich
> [[W:en:User:Rholton]]
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


body:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AFratele_lui_Bonaparte%2C_il_cunosti%3F&diff=378367&oldid=370448

and

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Offensive-email.jpg

would be a start. You've been warned on your talk page about a month
ago on the issue of personal attacks
(http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Node_ue#I_see_you_are_circumventing_the_community_again.).

On 9/9/06, Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com> wrote:
> Where exactly are my personal attacks?
>
> On 08/09/06, Akash Mehta <draicone at gmail.com> wrote:
> > You know, looking at the situation from a neutral perspective, I'd be
> > suggesting a 1 month block for node ue for policy violations and
> > personal attacks, but thats just my opinion.
> >
> > Seriously though, guys, can you just learn to solve your differences
> > on your own? Its bad enough having just about every topic raised on
> > wikien-l. Sure, CC your communications to the mailing list as you go,
> > but really you should be contacting each other and working out your
> > dispute like human beings. Of course, thats just my opinion too.
> >
> > And Mark, you clearly aren't helping, with personal attacks all over
> > the place. If you could just calm down, it would solve a lot of
> > problems.
> >
> > On 9/9/06, ilooy <ilooy.gaon at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > 2006/9/8, Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com>:
> > > > Psh, I haven't even been on Meta for a few weeks.
> > >
> > > Mark, as you'll note if you re-read my posting
> > > there are others, and it is very obvious to me you
> > > have 'other' identities on Wikipedia. So maybe you
> > > haven't logged in as Node ue but it seems someone
> > > with your m.o. is at work.
> > >
> > > > The fact is, Jay, you are for some reason biased against me. You hate
> > > > me for no logical reason. In all my previous encounters with you, you
> > > > have been extremely hostile towards me.
> > > > Mark
> > >
> > > Not at all Mark. Not personal, only I don't agree
> > > with your methods and your efforts to impose your
> > > opinions over others.
> > >
> > > Why is the Andalusian test wiki deleated from Incubator?
> > > Why were you banned several times in different guises
> > > from several language wikis?
> > >
> > > Definitely not personal, but maybe against some of your
> > > personae which to me seem to be very biased and slanted
> > > towards one opinion.
> > >
> > > I ask that the issue of the deletion of the Andalusian Test
> > > wiki be looked into. My feeling is you had something to
> > > do with this as you've been warned before for vandalizing
> > > the efforts to establish a wiki in Andalusian.
> > >
> > > Sincerely,
> > > Jay Bowks
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > ?lv!
> > >
> > > ilooy.gaon at gmail.com
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > > Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> >
>
>
> --
> Refije dirije lanm? yo paske nou posede pw?p bato.
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>


body:
I understand, and its fairly obvious that he's prejudiced against
starting a Zazaki wiki, which is why I suggest a 1 month block from
meta, if not 3mths - indef.

On 9/9/06, ilooy <ilooy.gaon at gmail.com> wrote:
> 2006/9/8, Akash Mehta <draicone at gmail.com>:
> > You know, looking at the situation from a neutral perspective, I'd be
> > suggesting a 1 month block for node ue for policy violations and
> > personal attacks, but thats just my opinion.
>
> I appreciate your opinion, Akash,
> and I agree it would be better to
> resolve differences this way.
>
> But... stuff is getting deleted, and
> Marks behavior is unchanging. The
> last run in I had with him concerning
> Ladino was a bad ordeal for me. I don't
> wish to have to fight with Mark, I don't
> enjoy it at all. And I'm asking for community
> support and request that the deletion of
> the Andalusian Test wiki be resolved as
> a matter of good policy and fairness in
> NPOV standards.
>
> With regards,
> Jay Bowks
>
>
> --
>
> ?lv!
>
> ilooy.gaon at gmail.com
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>


from_name: Sam Korn

subject: [WikiEN-l] Template usage?

body:
On 9/9/06, Akash Mehta <draicone at gmail.com> wrote:
> Some day we'll need to come up with a comprehensive list of all those
> working on CVU / RC patrol and together switch all the policies so
> that vandals no longer know the location of AIV :) I remember when
> someone put hundreds of instances of the nazi symbol on an article and
> it took half an hour till somebody figured out how to use the
> index.php?target=...&action=edit format to get rid of it, and after
> various accounts vandalised with the same vandalism, yet another
> sockpuppet applied for the page to be semi protected and succeeded!

Incidentally, the other way of reversing this is for a sysop to use
the "rollback" button from the user's contributions list.

--
Sam


from_name: will at avery.homelinux.org

body:
Quoting Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell at gmail.com>:

> On 9/8/06, Henning Schlottmann <h.schlottmann at gmx.net> wrote:
> > I suggested elsewhere the following idea of a golden rule for commons:
> > If an image is free in the US (physical place of the servers) and the
> > coutry of origin, it should be accepted.  We should not care for the
> > laws in saudi arabia or japan if the image is in no connection to those
> > countries.
>
> This is overly simplistic. Wikimedia's output is intended to be free
> everywhere...  I don't think we should follow unusual and foolish laws
> in places where we are not required to do so, but that is a long way
> from only considering the law in the US and the uploaders location.
>
I didn't understand "country of origin" to mean the uploaders location, which
may not be verifiable.

> An example is Iran. Iran is not *currently* a party to most
> international copyright treaties. As a result their copyrights are not
> considered valid in most of the world. However their copyright law is
> effectively equal to what is mandated by the Berne convention.
>
> Today a US user could legally upload modern works published only in
> Iran, and they would be legal in most of the world.... but they would
> be illegal in Iran. If we fill the Persian language Wikipedia with
> these images, would we be succeeding at producing a free content
> encyclopedia in that language?    What happens next week if Iran signs
> the Berne Convention?
>
But for the purposes of this rule the country of origin of those works would be
Iran, where they were first published, not the US.

It seems that some rule of thumb is needed to overcome the complications of
every single theoretical, or even practical, forum shopping possibility for
copyright holders.

Will

<snip>

----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.


from_name: Tim Starling

body:
Ivan Krsti? wrote:
> Simetrical wrote:
>> Anyway: why would we want to replace our insane and byzantine markup
>> system, which tens of thousands of users have grown used to, with
>> another insane and byzantine markup system that's completely
>> incompatible with the markup used in probably over ten million pages
>> on Wikimedia alone, and unfamiliar to our users to boot?
>
> That's not what WikiCreole is trying to do. Creole is attempting to
> provide a small set of standardized markup that wiki engines can support
> in addition to their native markup; eight wiki engines, including
> MediaWiki, have committed to providing Creole support.

We're committed? I must have missed that bulletin.

-- Tim Starling


from_name: Brion Vibber

body:
Tim Starling wrote:
> Ivan Krsti? wrote:
>> Simetrical wrote:
>>> Anyway: why would we want to replace our insane and byzantine markup
>>> system, which tens of thousands of users have grown used to, with
>>> another insane and byzantine markup system that's completely
>>> incompatible with the markup used in probably over ten million pages
>>> on Wikimedia alone, and unfamiliar to our users to boot?
>> That's not what WikiCreole is trying to do. Creole is attempting to
>> provide a small set of standardized markup that wiki engines can support
>> in addition to their native markup; eight wiki engines, including
>> MediaWiki, have committed to providing Creole support.
>
> We're committed? I must have missed that bulletin.

I said I'd try a test implementation. Haven't had time to work on it yet.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 249 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20060909/6636322b/attachment.pgp>


from_name: Alison Wheeler

subject: [Foundation-l] COPPA

body:
On Fri, September 8, 2006 18:54, George Herbert wrote:
> I think it helps a lot that neither the foundation nor the projects
> actually
> collect personal information about people as part of project activities,
> other than the account's email if the user wants to, and their IP address
> (for anons or checkuser usage).

I would read "collects" as "requires from the individual in order to open
an account or editing facility whether mandatory or optional", which at
most would be a valid email address.

The information people may or may not choose to place on a userpage is
simmilar to the content on an LJ or MySpace page or in a blog. It isn't
"collected" by the operator as part of their service but freely offered by
the person involved for their own purposes.

Alison Wheeler


subject: [Foundation-l] COPPA


from_name: Dovi Jacobs

subject: [Wikitech-l] Labeled section transclusion

body:
This post is to solicit wider community feedback on the Wikisource discussion of an extension for "Labeled section transclusion." The idea is this: a simple method to mark off multiple sections of a wiki page for individual transclusion. A clear description of the feature, the rationale behind it, and discussion of it may be found here:

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Wikisource:Labeled_section_transclusion

(There is also an old bugzilla feature request, but the description and discussion at the wiki page is light-years beyond it.)

The reason I am posting this now is because it became clear today that the exact same need was encountered simultaneously in three different Wikisource languages (English, French, and Hebrew), and each in language a different way to hack around the problem has not only been suggested, but even implemented! This seems to strongly suggest a genuine need for an overall solution. (The local solutions should also be evaluated by people with technical know-how.)

The wiki-page linked to above also has lengthy discussions of the various local solutions that have been tried, as well as a link to the bug.

It would be great to get wider feedback on whether the proposal is feasible, desirable, and how it might best be implemented.

(I also strongly suspect that a flexible feature such as this might turn out to be useful in numerous contexts outside of Wikisource as well.)

Dovi

---------------------------------
 All-new Yahoo! Mail - Fire up a more powerful email and get things done faster.


body:
On 9/9/06, Stephen Bain <stephen.bain at gmail.com> wrote:
> If the original author doesn't care about attribution, or their rights
> as photographer, or what happens to the image, then get them to assign
> the copyright to someone else in a deed. Then the other person can do
> whatever they want with the image, since they own the copyright.
>
Copyright assignment might work.  But is the listed source supposed to
be the author or the copyright holder?


from_name: geni

body:
On 9/9/06, Jimmy Wales <jwales at wikia.com> wrote:
> Death Phoenix wrote:
> > On 9/7/06, Jossi Fresco <jossifresco at mac.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Sep 7, 2006, at 7:58 PM, Jimmy Wales wrote:
> >>
> >>> Why was this user not banned months ago?
> >> It is blocked for 1 month now, and copyvio images being deleted.
> >>
> >
> > I'm assuming Jimbo knows about the one month block, since he made that block
> > himself. Can we construe his post as being a formal request to have him
> > permabanned?
>
> No, I was actually just trying to raise the more general issue.  It
> looks like what is happening is that bots are warning people repeatedly
> but it is not being called to the attention of humans.  I would say,
> gee, if a person gets that many warnings, and doesn't respond, and keeps
> up the bad behavior, then an indef ban is certainly justified.
>

The problem is that normaly they do a load of uploads then go away so
there is little point in blocking them.

--
geni


from_name: David Gerard

body:
On 09/09/06, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 9/9/06, Jimmy Wales <jwales at wikia.com> wrote:

> > gee, if a person gets that many warnings, and doesn't respond, and keeps
> > up the bad behavior, then an indef ban is certainly justified.

> The problem is that normaly they do a load of uploads then go away so
> there is little point in blocking them.

If we're getting a string of these hit and upload burst people, some
checkusering *may* be in order (I don't *know*, but it might be) to
see if they're repeat offenders. Remembering that the recentchanges
table only goes back a limited time (one to four weeks on dev whim and
system resources). So if you have a string of recent hit-and-run anon
uploaders, please leave a list of usernames on WP:RFCU with a note
that I suggested checking for persistent offenders might be in order -
insisting on dropping us in the copyright poo is not nice or suitable
behaviour.

- d.


subject:
[WikiEN-l] MWT for WP:BLPP (formerly How does living bio patrol
	actually work?)

body:
On 09/09/06, Akash Mehta <draicone at gmail.com> wrote:

> I've made a few minor tweaks and built a prototype using the current MWT
> code. See http://draicone.googlepages.com/mwt-blpp-binsrc.zip<http://draicone.googlepages.com/mwt-blpp-bin+src.zip>
> (including binaries and source, as you may have guessed by now) for the
> win32 version. Should work in Windows98+. If someone wants to port this to
> Java, go ahead. I think Simeon / TehKewl1 got it running under WINE, Linux
> users can try that.

If it works under current Wine, that'll be excellent :-) I'll try it
under 0.9.20 on Ubuntu Dapper and let you (and the list and WP:BLPP)
know how it goes.

- d.


from_name: Richard Holton

subject: [WikiEN-l] Fwd: [Wikitech-l] BC vs BCE era names

body:
On 9/8/06, Bill Clark <wclarkxoom at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> The problem is that AD/CE are only supposed to be displayed (according
> to the manual of style) if you're dealing with a span of time that
> crosses the BC-AD (or BCE-CE) boundary.  In other words, this is
> proper:
>
> [[July 4]], [[1776 BC]]–[[July 4]], [[1776|AD 1776]]
>
> ...and this is proper:
>
> [[March 21]], [[1974]]–[[October 16]],[[1975]]
>
> ...but this is not:
>
> [[March 21]], [[1974|AD 1974]]–[[October 16]],[[1975|AD 1975]]
>
> ...and this is not:
>
> [[July 4]], [[1776 BC]]–[[July 4]], [[1776]]
>
> I'd like to point out that this aspect of the style guide needs to be
applied intelligently, not slavishly. Especially in the lower years, like 5,
just having a stand-alone number may lead to some confusion for a reader.
Note the difference between:

"In 5 BCE, Julius went to Napoli, and in 4, he went to Roma."
and
"In 5 BCE, Julius went to Napoli, and in 4 CE, he went to Roma."

If you _know_ what the rule is, the first is clear; if you don't, you could
draw the wrong conclusion. Of course, it's possible to rewrite to follow the
MOS and avoid confusion, but just removing all AD/CE designations that
aren't explicitly in a range is not the answer.

--Rich
[[W:en:User:Rholton]]


from_name: Alphax (Wikipedia email)

body:
Akash Mehta wrote:
[fixed top posting]
> On 9/9/06, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 9/8/06, Akash Mehta <draicone at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I'm sure it wouldn't be very expensive. All that needs to be done is
>>> that the external (non-interwiki) link code passes URLs through a
>>> script on a server that counts the number of clicks to that particular
>>> link and then passes the user on to the appropriate site, which would
>>> probably be specified through GET. I'll code it if I have time today,
>>> its very simple in php, and using a database means that statistics can
>>> be generated VERY easily.
>> Turning every external link follow into a database write on Wikipedia
>> is simply not going to be acceptable.
>>
>> We don't currently log HTTP GETs for a reason...
>
> Thats the only problem. We can't AWB every single link in the
> database, then AWB it back just for the purpose of a study, which is
> why we would have to somehow do it at software parser level for a day
> or so. And we could easily host the file on toolserver and handle
> redirects / logging from there.

The toolserver is overworked enough as it is, thankyou very much.

> I have spare low traffic mysql db
> server we could use. Then again, it would be simpler to build the
> functionality into the Wikipedia toolbar, and thats a violation of
> privacy, so it would have to be optional, and there'd be a clearly
> rigged demographic left of those who allowed the logging to take
> place...
>

Logging of such things can /always/ be circumvented if you try hard enough.

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

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 569 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20060909/cd36b63e/attachment.pgp


from_name: Matt Brown

subject: [WikiEN-l] Can anything be done about Deletion Review?

body:
Biggest bug here is in all the "Endorse process" votes ...

-Matt


subject:
[Wikipedia-l] New language proposals and vandalism from Node
 ue	in incubator

body:
ilooy wrote:
> Hey fellow wikipedians,
> The situation at the pages fro new language proposals
> is growing very hot and troublesome.
>

<insert request to fork back to intlwiki-l here>

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

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 565 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/attachments/20060909/e27bde27/attachment.pgp


subject:
[WikiEN-l] Example of a user who should have been banned a long
	time ago

body:
On 9/9/06, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 09/09/06, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 9/9/06, Jimmy Wales <jwales at wikia.com> wrote:
>
> > > gee, if a person gets that many warnings, and doesn't respond, and keeps
> > > up the bad behavior, then an indef ban is certainly justified.
>
> > The problem is that normaly they do a load of uploads then go away so
> > there is little point in blocking them.
>
>
> If we're getting a string of these hit and upload burst people, some
> checkusering *may* be in order (I don't *know*, but it might be) to
> see if they're repeat offenders. Remembering that the recentchanges
> table only goes back a limited time (one to four weeks on dev whim and
> system resources). So if you have a string of recent hit-and-run anon
> uploaders, please leave a list of usernames on WP:RFCU with a note
> that I suggested checking for persistent offenders might be in order -
> insisting on dropping us in the copyright poo is not nice or suitable
> behaviour.
>
>
> - d.

No it appears to mostly be companies advertiseing themselves or people
creating a small number of articles with lots of pics.

--
geni


body:
On 09/09/06, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 9/9/06, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:

> > If we're getting a string of these hit and upload burst people, some
> > checkusering *may* be in order (I don't *know*, but it might be) to
> > see if they're repeat offenders. Remembering that the recentchanges

> No it appears to mostly be companies advertiseing themselves or people
> creating a small number of articles with lots of pics.

Ah, good. Less work ;-)

- d.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Template usage?

body:
On 9/9/06, Mark Gallagher <m.g.gallagher at student.canberra.edu.au> wrote:
> I think posts like this one, considering both your suggestion at top
> (however tongue-in-check you intended it) and the story you relate here
> show just why CVU, if it must exist at all, needs a swift kick in the butt.
>
huh?

> [0] Depending on how you define it.  If you don't care about newbies
>      bitten, games of Chinese Whispers enjoyed, Cluey people pissed off,
>      etc., CVU is wonderful.

On the other hand the CVU is one of the more welcomeing communities
for newbies and I suspect at least some of those complaining about
newbie being bitten are mearly anoyed that they didn't get thier
first.

Finaly truely cluey people don't get pissed off.

--
geni


from_name: Mark Williamson

subject:
[Wikipedia-l] New language proposals and vandalism from Node ue
	in incubator

body:
On 08/09/06, ilooy <ilooy.gaon at gmail.com> wrote:
> 2006/9/8, Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com>:
> > Also, I have been accused of sockpuppetry many times before. [...]
> > On yi.wp I was banned because danny doesn't like me.
> > I don't recall being banned on any other wiki [...]
> > he banned me for speaking out.
> > Toki Pona was a long time ago,
> > 4 or 5 on yi: (most to try to circumvent Danny's ban),
> > and 3 on one other Wiki which is quite inactive right now.
> > I never "vandalised" it. I simply didn't agree with your orthography,
> > and as the case turns out to be, nobody else does either. Changing
> > orthography to something a bit more kosher is not "vandalism".
>
> But Mark look at the pattern above.
> Is that anyway to behave at Wikipedia?

Being accused? That's the behaviour of others, not me.

Being banned? Unless you mean permabanned, many well-respected users
have been banned on one occasion or another (usually for something
like violation of the 3RR), and there isn't nearly enough oversight on
administrative action at small Wikis, so for example me being banned
at yi.wp in its infancy was not subject to community approval because
there was no community (but the one there now positively loves me).

Having sockpuppets? Almost everyone does. I admit it, so do I. But I
don't have a whole lot,I never use them really, and I have never
abused them.

> And the Andalusian Test wiki didn't have my
> preference for a phonetic spelling, it used the
> '''NOA''' convention which is a bit standard in
> music lyrics etc. for flamenco songs, poems
> etc. So the one that was more NPOV got
> deleted. The Wikia Andalu site has received
> a lot of attacks from vandals. But If someone
> posts in another spelling convention it isn't
> reason to ban anyone, the problem is deletion
> of work. Since you mention 'kosher' I'll remind

Well, if that's what you're accusing me of, having a history of simply
deleting the Andalusian Test-WP, then you are quite wrong. I have
never once done that. I support the creation of an Andaluz Wikipedia,
just not on YOUR terms -- you were not the original requester; there
are many orthographies for the language, and you should not be allowed
to unfairly dominate.

> you of the deletions you made in the Ladino
> wiki, reverting the spelling to hebrew characters
> several times and deleting the romance spelling
> with Latin characters which is in fact preferred
> by several discussion lists in Ladino and newspapers
> and magazines in the Middle East and in other
> places around the world.

I don't seem to recall doing that -- on the LAdino Test-Wiki, I did,
and you certainly *accused* me of doing it on lad.wiki. And on the
Test-Wiki, it wasn't vandalism. You don't have sole creative control
over anything, and when you think Latin letters should go first, or
that they should even be included, that is subject to community
consensus, and I was simply being bold.

Also, I wonder, what's the point of having a Ladino Wiki in latin
characters? Sure, it's a bit different from Castellano, but it's
basically the same as Nuevomejicano (New Mexican Spanish), with some
Hebrew and Aramaic words here and there, and Nuevomejicano certainly
doesn't deserve its own Wikipedia. Written in the Latin alphabet,
LAdino hardly deserves its own Wikipedia -- it is really mostly
identical to Castillian, as evidenced by the fact that many articles
on lad.wp are simply copied and then converted to the "phonetic"
orthography used by LAdino.

On the other hand, the Hebrew alphabet is the historical and still the
most popular alphabet for writing Ladino, and a version in Hebrew
letters would not be redundant.

> Do you not see that your pattern of behavior
> causes problems within the Wp community?
> This is what I meant by m.o. (modus operandi).
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modus_operandi

I'm not dumb, I know what m.o. means. However, I do not see a pattern
of behaviour, and as far as I can tell, you have caused at least as
many problems as I have, or more.

Mark


from_name: Amgine

subject: [WikiEN-l] [Wmfcc-l] Living bio patrol on en:wp [[WP:BLPP]]

body:
On 8-Sep-06, at 9:34 AM, David Gerard wrote:

> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:BLP_Patrol

I agree, this is a major problem when working with press and also
constitutes a large percentage of large-issue communications with the
Foundation Office and with OTRS.

The [[WP:BLPP]] addresses many of the concerns, and is a great idea.
However, this treats the symptoms of two fundamental issue which
en.wp is not addressing: Who is noteworthy enough for inclusion in an
encyclopedia, and what/how much should be said regarding living
persons. These two issues cannot be resolved by a technical solution.

The Patrol is a reasonable stop-gap measure which will address the
problems we have now, but it is unlikely to scale well, nor is it a
solution for all wikipedias. I would encourage the en.wp community to
create a few objective measures akin to the USA State of Florida
judicial "Public Persons" test. It seems to me that any encyclopedic
living persons biography must be about a person who is, at the very
least, a public person (that is, someone reasonably well-known or in
a position where they are likely to be addressing a general public
audience, such as politicians for public office, newspaper editors,
actors, radio announcers, clergy members, corporate spokespersons, &c.)

It is not reasonable to have large, in-depth biographies about living
persons. Too much information makes is included, often with such
detail that make an en.wp article a considerable risk to the
subject's privacy and security (such as identity theft, among other
things.) Deep articles are prone to bias, either showing the subject
unfavourably or too favourably, and often give undue weight to some
minor element of their life to push a point of view (a classic
example are US Congressional members, whose articles almost
universally contain extensive coverage of the most recent few years
of public service - particularly perceived scandals - and may
completely lack any mention of previous public positions or private
careers.) Subjects can and do dramatically alter their lives and
goals, and en.wp articles are not able to be relevant to these changes.

For these and other reasons, en.wp should develop policy limiting
living persons articles to primary career facts and academic
achievements, current positions held or endeavors, and minimal
personal facts. By presenting a minimal set of biographic facts the
community can circumvent a large number of internal and external
conflicts, whilst avoiding maintenance issues and keeping the
articles relevant until such time as the subjects may be viewed in
historical context.

</rant>

Amgine

-------------- next part --------------


subject: [Wikitech-l] [Wmfcc-l] Living bio patrol on en:wp [[WP:BLPP]]


from_name: Rory Stolzenberg

subject: [WikiEN-l] WikiEN-l Digest, Vol 38, Issue 42

body:
We have to assume good faith in image uploads unless there's a reason to do
otherwise.  If we find the image on the internet saying it's copyrighted
with all rights reserved, then we'd delete it, or if every other of the
user's 200 images were proved to be copyvios, we'd delete it, but if we have
no evidence, we don't delete it.

On 9/9/06, Akash Mehta <draicone at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> [[en:WP:V]] anyone?
>
> On 9/9/06, Rory Stolzenberg <rory096 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > So let me give a hypothetical.  Say my grandmother takes a really
> > > > awesome photograph.  She doesn't want to create a Wikipedia or
> Commons
> > > > account.  In fact, she doesn't even have a computer.  Furthermore,
> she
> > > > doesn't want her name up on the Internet.  But she is willing, after
> > > > some persuasion from me, to license her photo under Sharealike 1.0.
> > > >
> > > > Can I put this image in Wikipedia and/or Commons without lying?
> > > >
> > > I see no problems, just say "Created by my grandmother who agreed to
> > > license it as CC-SA-1.0."
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


body:
On 9/9/06, Anthony <wikilegal at inbox.org> wrote:
>
> On 9/9/06, Stephen Bain <stephen.bain at gmail.com> wrote:
> > If the original author doesn't care about attribution, or their rights
> > as photographer, or what happens to the image, then get them to assign
> > the copyright to someone else in a deed. Then the other person can do
> > whatever they want with the image, since they own the copyright.
> >
> Copyright assignment might work.  But is the listed source supposed to
> be the author or the copyright holder?
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

Usually it's both since they're one and the same, but we actually want the
copyright holder.  It doesn't matter to us who took it, only who owns it,
since that's who would be using the license that we have to know. Same with
fair use images; we want to know the copyright holder, not some random
website with the image (though that is helpful if it says who the copyright
owner is).


from_name: Jason Potkanski

subject: [WikiEN-l]  How does living bio patrol actually work?

body:
>From wikipedia talk @ WP:BLPP
State of BLP Patrol: Week ending Sep 9th

Done:

   - Consensus reached that group will only focus on BLP articles, Group
   Renamed to BLP Patrol.

   - Critical Mass reached. Consensus reached simply that this group
   should exist.

   - Consensus seems to be to leave NPOV:Undue Weight issues up to local
   editor consensus?

To Do:

   - Devs are at work on software assistance and monitoring tools.

   - Alter IRC Bots and/or irc channels for active monitoring.

   - Develop templates in support of BLPP.

   - (Low)Develop userbox/category for BLPP wikipedians.

   - (High)Agree on what specific Libel patrol will target. Current
   proposal is to focus on USA definition of Defamation per se.

   - (High)WP:LIBEL </wiki/WP:LIBEL> is way to short to be an effective
   policy.

   - Agree on methods to minimize resulting edit wars.

   - Agree on methods for dealing with editors who insist on violating
   BLP and Libel policies.

   - (Low)Elect a Project Manager. I, User:Electrawn</wiki/User:Electrawn>,
   offer myself to manage as the original creator. If anyone else feels they
   are better qualified, I will bow to someone more experienced.

I may have missed somethings for the todo or done, add below.
Electrawn</wiki/User:Electrawn>05:13, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
"Managing the project" can be re-termed "herding particularly stroppy
cats" ;-) The main reason Wikipedia is so keen on consensus is that it's
less headaches. If we can agree on obvious things that will help immediately
(simple checking of as many living bio edits as possible), then more
difficult things can wait for consensus to shake them out. - David
Gerard</wiki/User:David_Gerard>12:59, 9 September 2006 (UTC)  Yup,
I'm herding them in from Wiki-en. There are many different directions
various folks are taking from technical to process to policy to active
patrollers. I am a big fan of Divide and Conquer. :)
Electrawn</wiki/User:Electrawn>20:59, 9 September 2006 (UTC)  -Jason
"Electrawn" Potkanski

I get asked this by the press a lot. So I thought I'd come here and
> ask how it actually works.
>
> 1. What is the actual process?
> 2. How are new living bios spotted?
> 3. Who watches edits in them, on what sort of schedule?
>
> And 4. the big one:
>
> Is there anything that can be done to make the living bio patrolling
> volunteers' work easier and more efficient? What magical software
> features would you like? Is there anything that some as-yet-unwritten
> bot software could do to assist?
>
> I'd love to be able to answer "we have a volunteer patrol who look out
> for any rubbish going in living biographies. We're not perfect but I
> think we do pretty well" and be able to give more detail if they ask
> ;-)
>
>
> - d.
>
>


from_name: Gregory Maxwell

subject: [Foundation-l] Clickable images

body:
On 9/9/06, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
[snip]
> By the way if anything your argument
> is an argument against images that can not be freely displayed and copied.

A requirement for attribution is not a prohibition against free use
and redistribution.

Attribution, by itself, is a basic activity which any honest and
ethical distributor will be careful to perform with due care even when
not required to by copyright licenses.

So long as the default state of copyright is all rights reserved
mandatory attribution is a fundamental requirement for any license
which attempts to use copyright to prevent content from being removed
from the commons. If the attribution and at least basic licensing
information are not brought along with the work it becomes far too
likely that the information will be lost and the work will fall out of
availability to the public.

The attribution and licensing data provided one click away already
causes us a little resistance from some photographers who would rather
see a distracting by-line attached to every illustration of theirs.
What we do today is uniform on all of our pages (with a few
exceptions, for example the frwiki main page), and is consistent with
our behavior for text. It is likely the minimal acceptable thing we
can do both from both the perspective of license conformance and from
the perspective of behaving honestly. Hiding the attribution behind
multiclick secret handshakes just isn't going to fly.

I think it is important that we keep any discussion centered on the
actual problem: Our image behavior is surprising when we use images as
parts of navigational elements.  This isn't an issue over free
content, and any attempt to turn the discussion into a crusade to
establish a new (and ultimately self defeating) definition of free
content is just going to be a waste of all our time.


subject: [Foundation-l] Clickable images


body:
On 9/9/06, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
[snip]
> It is however the correct answer. DRV only exists because there are
> screwups elsewhere.
[snip]

Evidence?

As far as I can tell DRV exists because there was a group of users who
didn't feel like they were given enough control over Wikipedia... so
another page was required to give a larger audience their power fix.

Wikipedia (tm) The free content encyclopedia where everyone is CEO.


from_name: Phil Sandifer

body:
On Sep 9, 2006, at 4:56 PM, geni wrote:

>
> That isn't a very nice way to talk about inclusionists.

You're confusing DRV with VfU. VfU was the very nice page we used to
have where deletions could be contested. DRV is what happened when
the deletionists got mad that VFU was being used to give articles a
"second chance," and so they overwhelmed all sense and made it so
that you couldn't undelete an article on the grounds that the outcome
was idiotic.

Unfortunately, this didn't actually put an end to AfD coming to
idiotic conclusions, leaving us without a good mechanism in place to
deal with that - a particular problem considering the continued
belief of some AfD regulars that AfDs that close "delete" all mean
"and salt the earth so that this article may never rise again."

Best,
Phil Sandifer
sandifer at english.ufl.edu

You are standing in an open field west of a white house, with a
boarded front door. There is a small mailbox here.
 >


from_name: Akash Mehta

body:
Wait, there's yet another mailing list I should be signed up to? I
already have a backlog of 200+ emails in my Gmail over the past two
days, thanks mainly to wikipedia-l and wikien-l.

On 9/9/06, Alphax (Wikipedia email) <alphasigmax at gmail.com> wrote:
> ilooy wrote:
> > Hey fellow wikipedians,
> > The situation at the pages fro new language proposals
> > is growing very hot and troublesome.
> >
>
> <insert request to fork back to intlwiki-l here>
>
> --
> Alphax - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax
> Contributor to Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
> "We make the internet not suck" - Jimbo Wales
> Public key: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax/OpenPGP
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>
>
>
>


from_name: maru dubshinki

body:
On 9/9/06, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 09/09/06, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 9/9/06, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2006_September_7#Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion.2FEsoteric_programming_languages
>
> > Stop screwing up deletions in the first place?
>
>
> You're on your way to setting a new record for clear helpfulness in
> your responses.
>
>
> - d.

Ah, but you already set it for your original message.

~maru


body:
[[en:WP:V]] anyone?

On 9/9/06, Rory Stolzenberg <rory096 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > So let me give a hypothetical.  Say my grandmother takes a really
> > > awesome photograph.  She doesn't want to create a Wikipedia or Commons
> > > account.  In fact, she doesn't even have a computer.  Furthermore, she
> > > doesn't want her name up on the Internet.  But she is willing, after
> > > some persuasion from me, to license her photo under Sharealike 1.0.
> > >
> > > Can I put this image in Wikipedia and/or Commons without lying?
> > >
> > I see no problems, just say "Created by my grandmother who agreed to
> > license it as CC-SA-1.0."
> >
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


subject: [WikiEN-l] Template usage?

body:
Some day we'll need to come up with a comprehensive list of all those
working on CVU / RC patrol and together switch all the policies so
that vandals no longer know the location of AIV :) I remember when
someone put hundreds of instances of the nazi symbol on an article and
it took half an hour till somebody figured out how to use the
index.php?target=...&action=edit format to get rid of it, and after
various accounts vandalised with the same vandalism, yet another
sockpuppet applied for the page to be semi protected and succeeded!

On 9/9/06, Rory Stolzenberg <rory096 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Right, but it doesn't protect against vandals who registered, didn't edit
> for 4 days and the vandalized.  If they're vandalizing templates, they're
> not just people who come to Wikipedia and say "wow, i can delete this entire
> page lol!" - they're vandals who've been doing it for a while and are
> familiar with Wikipedia, so they probably know how to get around
> semi-protection.
>
> On 9/8/06, Akash Mehta <draicone at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Well, semi protection ensures that good users who aren't yet sysops
> > can edit a template when they need to. We have a whole lot more than
> > 1000 trusted editors who regularly edit templates.
> >
> > On 9/8/06, Andrew Lih <andrew.lih at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On 9/8/06, Akash Mehta <draicone at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > I personally think that any template transcluded 80-100+ times or
> > > > transcluded in 10+ feature articles / wikipedia space pages, or even
> > > > transcluded in two policy pages (disclaimers etc.) should be semi
> > > > protected, and really widely used templates that are vandalised
> > > > despite semi protection should be fully protected.
> > >
> > > I agree, if not fully protected at least semi-protected.
> > >
> > > -Andrew (User:Fuzheado)
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > > WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> > > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> > > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: Elisabeth Bauer

subject:
[WikiEN-l] Example of a user who should have been banned a	long
 time ago

body:
Jossi Fresco wrote:
> On Sep 7, 2006, at 7:58 PM, Jimmy Wales wrote:
>
>> Why was this user not banned months ago?
> It is blocked for 1 month now, and copyvio images being deleted.

Just a recommondation: If I block a user for repeatedly uploading
copyvios, I usually issue an infinite block together with a message to
email an apology and an assurance that this won't happen again. If I get
a believable assurance, I think about lifting the block.

With just a month block and no communication you have no guarantee that
the user won't start uploading copyvios again after the block has run
out automatically.

greetings,
elian


from_name: Piotr "Derbeth" Kubowicz

subject: [Textbook-l] Problem with NPOV

body:
Dnia Sat, 09 Sep 2006 13:51:43 +0200, Jimmy Wales napisa?(a):

> 1. NPOV is crucial.  Textbooks are not advocacy.  They are to instruct
> and inform, not brainwash and convert (in either direction!).
>
> 2. Wikibooks is for _textbooks_, not any random sort of nonfiction book.
>   One of the tests we should use is: "Does this book serve the specific
> textbok needs of any actual class offered at any actual accredited
> institution?"  That will be a good way to cut out a lot of nonsense at
> the start.

I suggest leaving only these religious books which can be useful for studying a religion from a scientific point of view (looking at its features, history, culture etc.).

Currently Christianity is written generally with respect to NPOV. http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/History_of_Islam may be interesting but needs some POV-cleanup (quote from main page: "But in the view of muslims it is the first religion in the world, that is the history of islam starts from 'Adam'"). The same applies to http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/History_of_Islamic_Civilization (with problem with possible copyright violation). But in my opinion http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Imamat_or_Successorship_After_the_Last_Prophet_of_God and http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Islam_Way_of_Life should be deleted.

--
Piotr 'Derbeth' Kubowicz
Jabber id: derbeth at jabber.wp.pl

Pom?? Wikibooks stworzy? najwi?kszy zbi?r otwartych podr?cznik?w! http://pl.wikibooks.org/

Opera - the fastest browser on Earth! http://www.opera.com/


body:
On 9-Sep-06, at 2:56 PM, David Gerard wrote:

> On 09/09/06, Amgine <amgine at saewyc.net> wrote:
>
>> For these and other reasons, en.wp should develop policy limiting
>> living persons articles to primary career facts and academic
>> achievements, current positions held or endeavors, and minimal
>> personal facts. By presenting a minimal set of biographic facts the
>> community can circumvent a large number of internal and external
>> conflicts, whilst avoiding maintenance issues and keeping the
>> articles relevant until such time as the subjects may be viewed in
>> historical context.
>
>
> And, of course, [[WP:LIVING]] has pretty much from its creation said
> what you're asking for here: facts in the article need to be relevant
> to the subject's notability.
>
> (removed developers from the cc:, as I can't see them caring about an
> editorial policy issue)
>
>
> - d.

No, actually.

To give an example of what I mean:

[[Tom DeLay]]

{{infobox}}

'''Thomas Dale "Tom" DeLay''' (born in [[1947]]) is a former member
of the [[United States House of Representatives]] from [[Sugar Land,
Texas|Sugar Land]], [[Texas]], the former [[Majority Leader of the
United States House of Representatives|House Majority Leader]], and a
prominent member of the [[Republican Party (United States)|Republican
Party]].

== Early life and education ==

DeLay was born in Laredo, Texas. He spent part of his childhood in
Venezuela, due to his father's employment. He attended Calallen High
School in Corpus Christi, Texas, and spent two years as a pre-med
student at Baylor University. DeLay received a Bachelor of Science
degree with a major in biology from the University of Houston in 1970.

== Public service ==

In 1978, DeLay won the election for an open seat in the Texas House
of Representatives. He was the first Republican to represent Fort
Bend County in the state House. DeLay was elected to the federal
House in 1984, representing the Texas 22nd congressional district,
after his predecessor, Republican Ron Paul, declined to run for re-
election.

DeLay was appointed deputy whip by then-Minority Whip Dick Cheney in
1988. When the Republican Party gained control of the House in 1995
following the 1994 election, DeLay was elected Majority Whip. After
serving as his party's Whip for eight years, DeLay was elected
Majority Leader upon the retirement of Dick Armey in 2003. After
being indicted in Texas on charges related to campaign contributions,
DeLay stepped down as Majority Whip.

On April 3, 2006, DeLay announced that he would not run for re-
election. He also announced his resignation effective June 9, 2006,
and that he planned to form a lobbying firm that would work to
support conservative issues.

</example>

Compare to the extant article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_DeLay

?


from_name: effe iets anders

subject: [Foundation-l] Clickable images

body:
Hello all,

I think we all saw them. Clickable images. Very usefull, especially on
the main page etc, but there are some slight problems. You can not
access the license-information without digging in the sourcecode of
the page. And that might be in a template in a template etc. So that's
why I am wondering:

Should it be allowed at all to make images clickable, as people cannot
check the license-information?

Or should it maybe not be allowed to make images clickable when the
licence requires that attribution should be given to the author? (Like
GFDL, CC-BY, CC-BY-SA etc) So it should be allowed with PD?

This is not because I want to hurry this through, but would like to
share some thoughts on this behalf. Maybe it should be wise to make
this "global" policy when we could come to a clear result. I am no
lawyer myself, but I just have the feeling that we are very much
searching the border of what is allowed with these
clickimage-templates etc. (There is also some function in MediaWiki
that shows one image but links to another, btw, the discussion is the
same there)

Greetings, hoping for fruitfull discussion,

Lodewijk


subject: [Foundation-l] Clickable images


from_name: Sean Barrett

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

Rory Stolzenberg stated for the record:

> We have to assume good faith in image uploads unless there's a reason to do
> otherwise.  If we find the image on the internet saying it's copyrighted
> with all rights reserved, then we'd delete it, or if every other of the
> user's 200 images were proved to be copyvios, we'd delete it, but if we have
> no evidence, we don't delete it.

On the contrary, policy (as well as Jimbo) states an image without
provenance shall be deleted.

- --
 Sean Barrett     | I'm tired of getting the fuzzy
 sean at epoptic.com | end of the lollipop. --Sugar Kane
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD4DBQFFA4ALMAt1wyd9d+URAod0AJijq+hkpwsycTIQSwWwlp4c2vVWAJ4ztF7a
pUG6q5mM3V24dHfHO8x3Yg==
=JZbA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


from_name: Guillaume Paumier

subject: [Foundation-l] Clickable images

body:
Hello

On 9/9/06, effe iets anders <effeietsanders at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hello all,
>
> I think we all saw them. Clickable images. Very usefull, especially on
> the main page etc, but there are some slight problems. You can not
> access the license-information without digging in the sourcecode of
> the page. And that might be in a template in a template etc. So that's
> why I am wondering:
>
> Should it be allowed at all to make images clickable, as people cannot
> check the license-information?
>

AFAIK, these clickable images are mainly used to direct either to other
Wikimedia sister projects, or to really big portals. In the first case, the
logos are the property of the Wikimedia Foundation. Is there any issue with
not giving the license-information?

In the second case, the images are used to direct people to pages which are
symbolized by these images. I suggest the target page includes the image
linking to it (classic image include, that links to the image description
page). Thus, if people want to know the license-information, they have to
click twice, but it's easier than to dig in templates.

g.

--
Guillaume Paumier
Disciplus Simplex
http://fr.wikipedia.org : Resistance is futile ? You will be assimilated.


subject: [Foundation-l] Clickable images


from_name: Carl Peterson

body:
Speaking of process votes, one of the biggest problems I see with DRV is
that it becomes a second AFD. For example, if you look at the DRV for the
CVU you'll notice that most of the comments (including some of my own) had
more to do with the original delete/keep discussion that took place in the
MfD than it did with whether or not policy was followed in the way the MfD
was closed.

Carl

On 9/9/06, Matt Brown <morven at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Biggest bug here is in all the "Endorse process" votes ...
>
> -Matt
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


subject: [Foundation-l] Clickable images

body:
Hi,

thank you for your reaction. I think your idea of putting the image in
the page it points to is a good idea. But I would like to broaden the
discussion a bit. We are now thinking about where it is used, and how
we can talk it right. I think we should actually think about how we
can use it in the broadest sense, so we can afterwards find out when
we can use it. The point is that people will always come up with new
uses of the template, and I think we should somehow state clear what
is allowed and what not. I only know of the use in main pages, but it
is also used broader I guess.
It could be used for flags to link to countries, or for roads, to link
the the article about it. (Like A1, A2 etc in
http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amsterdam ) So what are your thoughts
about it when you forget about the main page, and think in general?

Lodewijk

2006/9/9, Guillaume Paumier <guillom.pom at gmail.com>:
> Hello
>
> On 9/9/06, effe iets anders <effeietsanders at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hello all,
> >
> > I think we all saw them. Clickable images. Very usefull, especially on
> > the main page etc, but there are some slight problems. You can not
> > access the license-information without digging in the sourcecode of
> > the page. And that might be in a template in a template etc. So that's
> > why I am wondering:
> >
> > Should it be allowed at all to make images clickable, as people cannot
> > check the license-information?
> >
>
> AFAIK, these clickable images are mainly used to direct either to other
> Wikimedia sister projects, or to really big portals. In the first case, the
> logos are the property of the Wikimedia Foundation. Is there any issue with
> not giving the license-information?
>
> In the second case, the images are used to direct people to pages which are
> symbolized by these images. I suggest the target page includes the image
> linking to it (classic image include, that links to the image description
> page). Thus, if people want to know the license-information, they have to
> click twice, but it's easier than to dig in templates.
>
> g.
>
> --
> Guillaume Paumier
> Disciplus Simplex
> http://fr.wikipedia.org : Resistance is futile ? You will be assimilated.
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>


subject: [Foundation-l] Clickable images


from_name: David Gerard

subject: [Foundation-l] Clickable images

body:
On 09/09/06, effe iets anders <effeietsanders at gmail.com> wrote:

> So we *have* to think about clickable images, however I agree it would
> be nice if we wouldn't have to because of all PD.

In all those words, it's not clear (1) what you are asking for (in a
sentence) (2) on what basis (in a sentence).

- d.


subject: [Foundation-l] Clickable images


body:
I've made a few minor tweaks and built a prototype using the current MWT
code. See http://draicone.googlepages.com/mwt-blpp-binsrc.zip<http://draicone.googlepages.com/mwt-blpp-bin+src.zip>
(including binaries and source, as you may have guessed by now) for the
win32 version. Should work in Windows98+. If someone wants to port this to
Java, go ahead. I think Simeon / TehKewl1 got it running under WINE, Linux
users can try that.

On 9/7/06, Jossi Fresco <jossifresco at mac.com> wrote:
>
> On Sep 6, 2006, at 11:16 PM, Akash Mehta wrote:
>
> >  I'll see if I can
> > hack away at the code and build a prototype with the latest stable
> > release.
> That will be great. And it would be greater yet, if it could be
> ported to Java so that your app could run on a Mac, Linux or other
> non-Windows OSes... :)
>
> -- Jossi
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: geni

body:
On 9/9/06, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2006_September_7#Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion.2FEsoteric_programming_languages

Stop screwing up deletions in the first place?
--
geni


from_name: Jaroslaw Lipszyc

subject: [Textbook-l] Global Text Project

body:
> From: Robert Scott Horning <robert_horning at netzero.net>

> that is why I also consider the OLPC project to be something
> of a scam as well

Maybe this is just a strategical effort to get the project happen in the
first place? You cannot declare war to all hardware and software vendors
and hope that they will let you work in peace. I think that by declaring
limited scope of the project OLPC bought themselves precious time. What
will happen after plants are set up and 100$ laptops start to roll out
is a different matter, and i'll be not surprised if those laptops start
to appear in Wal-Mart (and Media Markt, hopefully, because Europe also
need it :-)
BTW - i read this list for some time now, hello to all.
greetings
Jaroslaw Lipszyc


subject: [Foundation-l] Clickable images

body:
On 9/9/06, effe iets anders <effeietsanders at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> thank you for your reaction. I think your idea of putting the image in
> the page it points to is a good idea. But I would like to broaden the
> discussion a bit. We are now thinking about where it is used, and how
> we can talk it right. I think we should actually think about how we
> can use it in the broadest sense, so we can afterwards find out when
> we can use it. The point is that people will always come up with new
> uses of the template, and I think we should somehow state clear what
> is allowed and what not. I only know of the use in main pages, but it
> is also used broader I guess.
> It could be used for flags to link to countries, or for roads, to link
> the the article about it. (Like A1, A2 etc in
> http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amsterdam ) So what are your thoughts
> about it when you forget about the main page, and think in general?
>
> Lodewijk
>

Actually, it seems your example about motorways isn't an image but a
formatted text ;)

Anyway, you're right to say we should make things clear. My opinion is:
clickable images should be avoided. The general policy is the
license-information should be available by simply clicking the image.
First-time visitors are a bit surprised by this, but if we start mixing
clickable and non-clickable images (that means respectively images pointing
to an article/portal and images pointing to their description page), the
situation will soon become a huge mess. Otherwise, people don't know where
they're going to land when clicking an image.

In a nutshell: avoid clickable images.

g.

--
Guillaume Paumier
Disciplus Simplex
http://fr.wikipedia.org : Resistance is futile ? You will be assimilated.


subject: [Foundation-l] Clickable images


body:
On 09/09/06, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 9/9/06, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:

> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2006_September_7#Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion.2FEsoteric_programming_languages

> Stop screwing up deletions in the first place?

You're on your way to setting a new record for clear helpfulness in
your responses.

- d.