body:
--- Sj <2.718281828 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 00:55:47 +0200, Anthere <anthere9 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > One comment :
> >
> > 1.1) RK is banned from editing Wikipedia for four months. In the time he
> > is banned, he will be required to do 'community service' work on
> > Wikibooks on topics exclusively related to biology.
> >
> > Fortunately, this did not pass.
>
> Yes, this was a bizarre suggestion.  Perhaps the next suggested remedy
> will require financial donations in reparation, before restoring a
> long-time user's editing privileges.

Community service is a very valid remedy in the real world. Why not here? A
better proposed remedy would have added community service as an option RK could
choose instead of a total hard ban.

*That* is just the type of thing that would have been appropriate for (using
your own words) somebody who obviously cares a great deal about the project.

If the only tool you have is a hammer, then all your problems start to look
like nails. The ArbCom needs more tools.

-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)

_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today!
http://vote.yahoo.com


list: foundation-l

source: pipermail-mbox

from_name: Delirium

subject: [Foundation-l] Wikisource as a repository for thesis

body:
Jimmy (Jimbo) Wales wrote:

>Ray Saintonge wrote:
>
>
>>In this case I would tend to interpret the submission of the thesis to
>>the appropriate university authorities as a form of prior publication.
>>
>>
>
>Agreed.  This is a nice "bright line" rule that won't get us into
>endless debates with physics cranks.  We can still omit, for example,
>self-published books.
>
>
Hopefully it won't come up much, but it's actually very hard these days
to determine what a "real" publisher is.  There's a *lot* of even
widely-distributed books that are put out by fairly small publishers and
then distributed through a larger network, almost in the same way that
self-published books are.  To use this example, most university
publishers are essentially vanity presses---apart from the big ones like
MIT Press and Oxford University Press, the rest are simply imprints
that, if they're published at all, are done on a pay-to-publish basis.

If you google a bit this comes up a lot because book reviewers who have
a "no self-published books" policy to cut down on the cruft they have to
sift through are finding it increasingly hard to actually define what
they mean by that policy...

-Mark


list: wikimedia-l


subject: [Foundation-l] wikinews and other stuff

body:
Erik Moeller wrote:

>>secondly, What the hell is the difference between wikicommons and
>>wikisource? They both seem to me to be depositories for pd/gfdl
>>primary sources.
>>
>>
>
>Yes, which is why I initially proposed Wikimedia Commons to include
>what is currently on Wikisource. I still think the two should be merged.
>
>
I see Wikimedia Commons as being more of a repository, while Wikisource
is more of a general text-document-oriented site that isn't merely a
dumping ground for documents, but also organizes them, translates them,
annotates them, and so on.  It's not clear how the proposed translation
project would fit in at the Commons, for example.

(I could be misinterpreting what the Commons is supposed to be.)

-Mark


subject: [Foundation-l] wikinews and other stuff


from_name: Robin Shannon

subject: [Foundation-l] wikinews and other stuff

body:
Okay i have just gone through all the last bajllion emails from this
list in the last couple of days when i should have been editing
[[victor chang]], but never mind.

firstly, re: wikinews, it will be released under GFDL yes? which means
that if CNN or BBC or ABC or NZBC or the guardian or even slashdot or
a blog wanted to reproduce our wikinews article, then they would have
to also reproduce the entire GFDL license (or did i read the GDFL
incorrectly), which may well be twice as long as the news article. Has
anyone else thought of this problem and come up with any solutions.
Other than this my position on wikinews is not active support, but
certainly close interest.

secondly, What the hell is the difference between wikicommons and
wikisource? They both seem to me to be depositories for pd/gfdl
primary sources.

thirdly, who's bright idea was it to make a user in wikipedia not a
user in wiktionary, metawiki, etc. (and vice versa), is it too late to
make every user a cross-wiki user, or are there already cross-overs
(for example a [[user:jondoe]] in wiktionary and a different user but
with the name [[user:jondoe]] in wikibooks?

fourthly, yes parenthisis are wonderful things. (perhaps this is in
reply to en.wikpedia list, i cant remember)

fifthly, what would wikiverstiy offer that wikibooks doesnt? i fail to
see how a wiki is capable of producing anything that a university
offers other than text books (and class notes ect.). How is it going
to be able to do dems and pracs, and class discussions?
I really want to like the idea of wikiversity, but I'm gonna need some
clarifying before ill do that.

sixthly, there is no sixthly.

paz e amor,

the bellman.


subject: [Foundation-l] wikinews and other stuff


subject: [Foundation-l] whoops i forgot

body:
whoops i forgot to include seventhly

seventhly point one, re: the latin traslation,  could this be included
as class work in wikiversity?

seventhly point two, i think that mediawiki should have some built in
thingo to make translation and peer-review of translation easier for
things such as trasnlatin between different language wikipedias ect.
There are lots of people who might be able to roughly translate
something (ie, fluent in one language, and half decent in another),
but not up to the standard required for addition into wikipedia,
however if collaborative traslation was allowed then this might be
overcome. i dont know exactly how this would work, just an idea

seventhly point three, re: the idea of footnotes raised for latin
translation, i think this could apply to lots of other things (and i
know that footnotes have been debated before) but i would like to add
to this debate by saying that these footnotes should act as another
meta-page, like discussion, page history etc. if people are interested
in this idea, ill post a more detailed RFC.

paz e amor,

the bellman


subject: [Foundation-l] whoops i forgot


from_name: Andrew Lih

subject: [Foundation-l] wikinews and other stuff

body:
We've recenly found GFDL to be a headache, and most wished that CC
existed at the start of WP so we could use it. Now that we're starting
Wikinews from scratch, is there any reason to stick with GFDL, other
than familiarity? I like the CC or special Wikimedia route. Perhaps we
could get Lessig to help craft one appropriate to our needs.

-Andrew (User:Fuzheado)

On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 17:20:15 +1000, Robin Shannon
<robin.shannon at gmail.com> wrote:
> Okay i have just gone through all the last bajllion emails from this
> list in the last couple of days when i should have been editing
> [[victor chang]], but never mind.
>
> firstly, re: wikinews, it will be released under GFDL yes? which means
> that if CNN or BBC or ABC or NZBC or the guardian or even slashdot or
> a blog wanted to reproduce our wikinews article, then they would have
> to also reproduce the entire GFDL license (or did i read the GDFL
> incorrectly), which may well be twice as long as the news article. Has
> anyone else thought of this problem and come up with any solutions.
> Other than this my position on wikinews is not active support, but
> certainly close interest.
>
> secondly, What the hell is the difference between wikicommons and
> wikisource? They both seem to me to be depositories for pd/gfdl
> primary sources.
>
> thirdly, who's bright idea was it to make a user in wikipedia not a
> user in wiktionary, metawiki, etc. (and vice versa), is it too late to
> make every user a cross-wiki user, or are there already cross-overs
> (for example a [[user:jondoe]] in wiktionary and a different user but
> with the name [[user:jondoe]] in wikibooks?
>
> fourthly, yes parenthisis are wonderful things. (perhaps this is in
> reply to en.wikpedia list, i cant remember)
>
> fifthly, what would wikiverstiy offer that wikibooks doesnt? i fail to
> see how a wiki is capable of producing anything that a university
> offers other than text books (and class notes ect.). How is it going
> to be able to do dems and pracs, and class discussions?
> I really want to like the idea of wikiversity, but I'm gonna need some
> clarifying before ill do that.
>
> sixthly, there is no sixthly.
>
> paz e amor,
>
> the bellman.
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

--
Andrew Lih
andrew.lih at gmail.com


subject: [Foundation-l] wikinews and other stuff


from_name: Tim Starling

subject: [Foundation-l] wikinews and other stuff

body:
Robin Shannon wrote:

>Okay i have just gone through all the last bajllion emails from this
>list in the last couple of days when i should have been editing
>[[victor chang]], but never mind.
>
>firstly, re: wikinews, it will be released under GFDL yes? which means
>that if CNN or BBC or ABC or NZBC or the guardian or even slashdot or
>a blog wanted to reproduce our wikinews article, then they would have
>to also reproduce the entire GFDL license (or did i read the GDFL
>incorrectly), which may well be twice as long as the news article. Has
>anyone else thought of this problem and come up with any solutions.
>Other than this my position on wikinews is not active support, but
>certainly close interest.
>
>
>
It's not necessary to quote the GFDL inline with the text, you just have
to have a short license note and a link. You don't see the full text of
the GFDL in each of our articles on Wikipedia do you?

A printed version would presumably have to have the full license attached.

>secondly, What the hell is the difference between wikicommons and
>wikisource? They both seem to me to be depositories for pd/gfdl
>primary sources.
>
>
>
The major difference is that Wikicommons is for images and Wikisource is
for text.

>thirdly, who's bright idea was it to make a user in wikipedia not a
>user in wiktionary, metawiki, etc. (and vice versa), is it too late to
>make every user a cross-wiki user, or are there already cross-overs
>(for example a [[user:jondoe]] in wiktionary and a different user but
>with the name [[user:jondoe]] in wikibooks?
>
>
>
Whose bright idea was it? Rephrase your question please. MediaWiki was
written by volunteers in their spare time for the benefit of people like
you. Be thankful there is a wiki at all.

>fourthly, yes parenthisis are wonderful things. (perhaps this is in
>reply to en.wikpedia list, i cant remember)
>
>
>
It's spelt "parentheses".

>fifthly, what would wikiverstiy offer that wikibooks doesnt? i fail to
>see how a wiki is capable of producing anything that a university
>offers other than text books (and class notes ect.). How is it going
>to be able to do dems and pracs, and class discussions?
>I really want to like the idea of wikiversity, but I'm gonna need some
>clarifying before ill do that.
>
>
>
It can't offer pracs and class discussions, the proponents were very
clear on this. There's no need to be so negative about it.

>sixthly, there is no sixthly.
>
>seventhly point one, re: the latin traslation,  could this be included
>as class work in wikiversity?
>
>seventhly point two, i think that mediawiki should have some built in
>thingo to make translation and peer-review of translation easier for
>things such as trasnlatin between different language wikipedias ect.
>There are lots of people who might be able to roughly translate
>something (ie, fluent in one language, and half decent in another),
>but not up to the standard required for addition into wikipedia,
>however if collaborative traslation was allowed then this might be
>overcome. i dont know exactly how this would work, just an idea
>
>
>
A method for easy translation has already been implemented in EmacsWiki, see
http://www.emacswiki.org/cgi-bin/community/MultilingualExperiment

The author of that feature (Mattis Manzel) has promoted potential
applications for Wikimedia, especially on meta.

>seventhly point three, re: the idea of footnotes raised for latin
>translation, i think this could apply to lots of other things (and i
>know that footnotes have been debated before) but i would like to add
>to this debate by saying that these footnotes should act as another
>meta-page, like discussion, page history etc. if people are interested
>in this idea, ill post a more detailed RFC.
>
>
>
Don't bother with the RFC, just post PHP.

-- Tim Starling


subject: [Foundation-l] wikinews and other stuff


from_name: Erik Moeller

subject: [Foundation-l] wikinews and other stuff

body:
Robin-
> firstly, re: wikinews, it will be released under GFDL yes?

Currently I'm leaning towards it for reasons of compatibility. But I'd
really like to ask Jimmy to give us a quick update on where the talks with
the FSF and the Creative Commons folk stand on making the FDL 2.0 CC-SA-
compatible.

> secondly, What the hell is the difference between wikicommons and
> wikisource? They both seem to me to be depositories for pd/gfdl
> primary sources.

Yes, which is why I initially proposed Wikimedia Commons to include
what is currently on Wikisource. I still think the two should be merged.

> thirdly, who's bright idea was it to make a user in wikipedia not a
> user in wiktionary, metawiki, etc. (and vice versa), is it too late to
> make every user a cross-wiki user

A migration to single sign-on is being worked on.

Regards,

Erik


subject: [Foundation-l] wikinews and other stuff


list: wikipedia-l

from_name: Magnus Manske

subject: [Wikipedia-l] de:Wikipedia edges out Britannica (among others)

body:
Sj wrote:

>All the same, "the 165,000 well-sorted Web links
>alone are worth the price".
>
>
Web links are not copyrightable, now are they? ;-)

Not like we don't have any of these, but a cross-check might not hurt...

Magnus


list: wikitech-l

from_name: Francisco Ramos

subject: [Wikitech-l] Users tracking

body:
Hello everybody!

I'm doing a project with Wikipedia, that consists in using SCORM.

If you don't know what it is, you can check the link: www.adlnet.org

If anyone thought in use SCORM with Wikipedia, say something.

For that project I need, for each user know the pages he had visited.

When the user logins, and he visit some page from Wikipedia, I want to save that information.

Anybody can help me on how to save that information?

I use Wikimedia 1.3.6 on Windows.

Thanks,
Francisco


list: wikien-l

from_name: Michael Snow

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Red Herring article on wiki wars

body:
Sj wrote:

>http://www.redherring.com/Article.aspx?a=10909&hed=Wiki+wars
>
>Makes it sound as though we will have professional editors next year, hmmm.
>When will someone write an article on Gdanzig?  Aside from a few minor
>errors - the # of times arts were protected and the "Wikipedia
>Foundation" - it's pretty positive.
>
>
Well, there's also an error of sorts in their graphic of "Wikipedia's
Most Contentious Entries", which includes the frequently edited [[Recent
deaths]]. Unless of course they're referring to the edit wars over
whether Derrida is really dead, based on a deconstruction of the concept
of death.

--Michael Snow


subject: [Foundation-l] Wikinews

body:
Anthere-
> "A Wikinews project in a language will be started under two conditions: a)
> that the language is accepted as one of the Wikimedia project languages, b)
> that there is at least one person who expresses an interest in working on
> that language edition."

> I wish that this requirement is modified.
> One person interested is not enough if only for one single reason : if only
> one person is editor, he will also have to be the one person making all
> policies, and the one doing the validation and publication. There will be no
> feedback and no control. No discussion either. This is not a wiki, but a
> blog. This mean that any pov pusher can ask for a wikinews, announced
> himself big chief, and go wild.

That's a legitimate concern. However, I seem to recall that the "one
person, get started" policy is what we used for Wikipedia in the past?
Often it will just be one person who does the work of promoting the
project initially.

One person without sysop access can't do anything that other people cannot
undo. Anything he "publishes" can be edited by anyone else. It's quite
possible that he won't be able to satisfy the four Wikinews requirements
without sysop access.

My suggestion would therefore be as follows:
1) That there will be no sysops until there are at least 10 genuine
registered users.
2) That the project will not be considered an official Wikinews language
until it satisfies the requirements defined in the proposal. The
consequence of this is that it will be listed separately on the Wikinews
language list, as "work in progress".

I believe this allows individuals or small groups to use their
wikinews.org domain to promote the project effectively and develop some of
the required pages, while minimizing the potential for harm to the
Wikimedia Foundation. Of course any clear abuse would be punished in any
case.

What do you think about this approach?

> The second point has to do with liability. If an article contains an error,
> but may not be corrected after a week, we will be liable. And this time, we
> wont be able to say "there is a incorrect statement ? Please, do correct
> it".

I have added the text

"Corrections and updates can still be linked to, but the article text
itself may not be changed."

to the "archival" stage. Does this address your concerns?

Regards,

Erik


subject: [Foundation-l] Wikinews


from_name: Thomas R. Koll

body:
On Fri, Oct 15, 2004 at 06:10:39PM +0200, Magnus Manske wrote:
> Sj wrote:
>
> >All the same, "the 165,000 well-sorted Web links
> >alone are worth the price".
> >
> >
> Web links are not copyrightable, now are they? ;-)
>
> Not like we don't have any of these, but a cross-check might not hurt...

A collection of weblinks is. especially if it's commented

ciao, tom
--
== Weblinks ==
* http://shop.wikipedia.org - WikiReader Internet zu kaufen
* http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benutzer:TomK32
* http://www.hammererlehen.de - Urlaub in Berchtesgaden


from_name: Polytarp!

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Administrator Abuse

body:
Seeing as people have derided to trivialize my complaints instead of
acting upon them, I have remanifestestinied my account under the
CLEVER name "U Tworonto."  It's pronounced the same way, but it's
spelled such as to include the fact that it's the SECOND in a series!

Isn't that just absolutely clever?!

On Wed, 13 Oct 2004 20:38:01 -0700, Polytarp! <polytarp at gmail.com> wrote:
> To whom it may concern (and it should concern everyone!):
>
> I have reason(s) to believe that one or more of the administrator(s)
> of the Wikipaedia Online Encyclopaedia, owned and/or operated by (the)
> Wikemaedia Foundation, Inc./Org./Co., has violated one (1) or more
> (>1) of Wikipaedia's or/and (the) Wikimaedia Foundation,
> Inc./Co./Org.'s rules &/| regulations.  I was prompted to believe this
> by the following message, which appeared when I attempted to make a
> delightful, beneficial, truthful, and good (though not necessarily in
> that order) addition to an article about that most lovable and eminent
> among preemnient German philosophers, Friedrick Nietzsche the First
> (1st):
>
> ...
>
> Your user name or IP address has been blocked by RickK.
>
> The reason given is this:
> all of user\'s edits are vandalism -- was blocked, came back, and
> immediately began vandalizing again
>
> ...
>
> Everyone who reads this message is someone who cares about Wikipedia.
> We all enjoy contributing to it, and do so in the best of faith, and
> are determined to make it grow and succeed.  Imagine the shock-horror
> any one (1) of us would feel upon being excluded from doing so by an
> apparently malicious stranger.
>
> I knew that none of my\ edits were vandalism.  All were made in good
> faith and with the foremost intention of improving the Wikipaedia.  I
> therefore figured that it was a mistake; perhaps, as another part of
> the message suggested, "...[a user] with a [dynamic IP had been]
> blocked accidentally, due to that fact that [his] present IP [had
> been] previously used by a blocked user."  To verify whether or not
> this was the case, I went to the block list to check.  It was then I
> learned the ban wasn't an accident.  Someone going by the name of Erl,
> RickK had banned me indefinitely and purposely:
>
> 22:06, 9 Oct 2004, RickK blocked Ute Oronto (expires indefinite)
> (contribs) (all of user\'s edits are vandalism -- was blocked, came
> back, and immediately began vandalizing again)
>
> Who was this RickK?  Who would ban a user who had made countless
> useful good faith edits, and call these malicious acts of vandalism?
> Who could be so kerlish?
>
> It was then I remembered:  The day or so previous, I had reverted some
> vandalism inflicted upon the Neva article.  Someone had removed the
> Geo-stub template.  I replaced it, and checked to see who the errant
> user could be.  Noting that it was a long time user, who should know
> better, I added him to the vandalism and progress list and went on
> with my day.
>
> Could this have been the same person as the one who banned me?  I
> checked.  It was him, apparently seeking to quiet me and to enact
> vengence upon me.
>
> However, I (capital i, not number one) refuse to be quiet about this
> issue.  I'm E-mailing all of you this so that we'll no longer have
> administrators who feel free to vandalize Wikipaedia and then silence
> users who object by banning them indefinitely for supposedly commiting
> the very same Wikicraeme.
>
> Lovingly yours,
>
> Ute Oronto.
>


subject: [Foundation-l] Re: wikinews and other stuff

body:
Jean-Christophe Chazalette wrote:

>I strongly support the Wikimedia License idea. GDFL is not that appropriate
>to Wikis for plenty of reasons. I'll tell them when there'll be a real issue
>here :) Suffice it to say that considering what wiki actually is,
>technically, and what kind of ambition Wfoundation actually has, a
>tailor-made license would be just *better*. Of course, I would join any
>thinktank about this topic and even would accept to draft the main lines -
>with the help of a decent French-English translator ... of course.
>villy
>
>
While I support efforts to improve the GFDL and make it more compatible
with other free licenses like some of those Creative Commons offers, I'm
not that enthusiastic about the idea of developing a new
Wikimedia-specific license. Both for our benefit in using material from
other sources, and to maintain good relations with the rest of the
free-content community, I think we should resist creating a new license
unless we can clearly articulate the justification and benefits  of
creating yet another license.

Due to the nature of copyleft licenses, proliferating more of them only
makes it harder to interchange content between them, even though they're
supposed to be free. Ideally, I would like to have a system where you
can just identify something generically as copyleft and people will
understand what that means in the same way that they understand the
basic principle of copyright today. But approaching that by reconciling
different licensing systems is difficult, and this stage may be better
achieved with the help of legislation.

--Michael Snow


from_name: Jimmy (Jimbo) Wales

subject: [WikiEN-l] [crromero@telmex.com: Wikipedia]

body:
Our article is apparently a stub.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlos_Slim_Helu

I'm not sure how much the attached hagiography helps, but still,
perhaps the article could be improved?

----- Forwarded message from Rivera Romero Concepci?n <crromero at telmex.com> -----

From: Rivera Romero Concepci?n <crromero at telmex.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 17:40:27 -0500
To: jwales at wikia.com
Subject: Wikipedia

Mr. Wales:

Unfortunately the text that is published in your web page about Mr. Carlos Slim Hel?  is way out of reality, please be so kind to take into consideration the information that we are attaching so you can clear and put in order the veridic biography of our Group President.

Concepci?n Rivera

TELMEX

CARLOS SLIM HEL?

Carlos Slim Hel? astonishes people because of his administrative and visionary capacity, which translates, into his extraordinary talent to develop companies, generate jobs and contribute to Mexico's economic promotion.  Carlos Slim Hel? is a master in business, has a mathematical mind, is world renown not only because of his extensive and successful entrepreneurial career, but also because of his profound social vocation.

Carlos Slim Hel? was born on January 28, 1940 in Mexico City, is an engineer by profession, graduated from the Universidad Nacional Aut?noma de M?xico (UNAM) (National Autonomous University of M?xico) in 1961, where before graduating he taught Algebra and Linear Programming.  He has given lectures in public and private institutions, and also in international bodies such as the Economic Commission for Latin America (ECLA).

He has been vice-president of the Mexican Stock Exchange and President of the Mexican Association of Brokerage Houses.  He was the first President of the Latin-American Committee of the New York Stock Exchange Administration Council, and was in office from 1996 through 1998.  He is a director at the Board of Directors of Philip Morris Companies and Alcatel, as well as for SBC Communications, Inc., position from which he retired in July 2004 to devote more time to the Latin American Development Fund, focusing on infrastructure, health and education, amongst the most relevant work.

Financial analysts agree in rating Carlos Slim Hel? as a man that is distinguished for defining and knowing the fundamental issues of each company; its problems and its potential

In 1965, he started to set the basis for Grupo Carso when he was only 25 years old. He incorporated Inmobiliaria Carso in January 1966, only three months before marrying Soumaya Domit Gemayel. The Carso name is the combination of the first three letters in Carlos and the two first letters in Soumaya. A year earlier, in 1965, ha had founded Inversora Burs?til, and headed the Board of Administration from that year onward.

Carlos Slim Hel? started to dazzle people for his administrative capacity and his ingeniousness in business, and above all because he participated in many different sectors.  Little by little, he built one of the most important financial-industrial empires in Mexico: Grupo Carso.

His management style is very practical.  For example there is no corporate "staff" at Grupo Carso.  Each company has its own structure because the idea is that their organization becomes more efficient, and only meets with the directors or executives to discuss the most transcendental issues.

Carlos Slim Hel? has received very important acknowledgements:  He has been awarded the Entrepreneurial Merit Medal of Honor from Mexico's Chamber of Commerce; he received the "Golden Plate Award", granted by the American Academy of Achievement and the Government of Belgium awarded him the Leopold II Commander Medal.

Currently, several companies form Grupo Carso, and all of them represent a "gigantic holding" that is divided in five major standalone companies:

?         Carso Global Telecom owns the majority of the TELMEX's control stock, which operates in Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Chile and Per?, asides from M?xico,.

?         Am?rica Telecom has the majority of America M?vil control stock, and is the leading supplier of wireless services in Latin America, with operations in Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, El Salvador, United States, Guatemala, Nicaragua and M?xico.  In the latter it works under the Telcel brand.

?         Grupo Carso controls Carso Industrial (Condumex, Porcelanite, Nacobre and Cigatam, amongst other) and Carso Comercial (Sears, Sanborns, Promotora Musical and El Globo).

?         Grupo Financiero Inbursa, is formed by Banco Inbursa, Seguros Inbursa, Casa de Bolsa Inversora Burs?til, Arrendadora Inbursa, Fianzas La Guardiana and Afore Inbursa, amongst other companies.

?         US Commercial Corp., holding company of CompUSA.

It has taken Carlos Slim Hel? 38 years of his live to create Grupo Carso, of which he is now the Honorary Lifetime Chairman. He also holds this position in TELMEX, Am?rica M?vil and Grupo Financiero Inbursa. At 64 years old he is still on top of his companies, although his three sons Carlos, Marco Antonio and Patrick Slim Domit head them.

Carlos Slim Hel? has also become a symbol of altruist and humanistic labor, and is outstanding because of his permanent support to social charity work through the TELMEX Foundation, incorporated in December, 1995, that reinforced and expanded the programs and activities that had been carried out by Asociaci?n Carso A.C., incorporated in 1984.  Due to its achievements and the amount of population benefited, TELMEX Foundation is the largest organization of its kind in Latin America.

In the year 2000, Carlos Slim Hel? organized the Fundaci?n del Centro Hist?rico de la Ciudad de M?xico A.C. (Mexico City Historic Downtown Foundation), which objective is to revitalize and rescue Mexico?s City historic downtown, for more people to live, work and find entertainment in this area. He is Chairman of the Executive Committee for the Restoration of the Historic Center since the year 2001.

Additionally, as part of his philathropic work, he heads the Latin America Development Fund project.

People who know him, know that for Carlos Slim Hel? "Success does not lie in doing things well or very well and be acknowledge by others.  It is not an external opinion; it is an internal state;  it is the harmony of soul and his emotions that need love, family, friendship, authenticity, and integrity.  Work well done is not only a responsibility he has with himself and with society, it is also an emotional need".

Besides being a nationalist and visionary businessman, Carlos Slim Hel? is a lover of history, culture, and an Art Connoisseur and collector, a baseball fan, but above all, he is a simple and human man, for whom family is the irreplaceable essence of love, teaching of values and success.

----- End forwarded message -----

--
"La n??fle est un fruit." - first words of 50,000th article on fr.wikipedia.org


body:
In order to maintain good relations with the press, I'll comment only
delicately on this one.

In my opinion, the situation with the Bush and Kerry articles is
routine at wikipedia.  Yes, they are heavily edited.  But there has
been no real internal controversy about them.  It's just that they are
popular topics, and Bush is a controversial president (as was Clinton
before him, except wikipedia did not exist then).  I say: *yawn*

The reporters wanted to write an article about some astounding and
unprecedented wikipedia controversy about the election.  I was quoted
selectively to make that case.

The article does not reflect badly on us or anything, but I can say
that the reporters wrote the article that they wanted to write, my
comments completely notwithstanding.

--Jimbo


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Administrator Abuse

body:
Polytarp! wrote:
> Seeing as people have derided to trivialize my complaints instead of
> acting upon them, I have remanifestestinied my account under the
> CLEVER name "U Tworonto."  It's pronounced the same way, but it's
> spelled such as to include the fact that it's the SECOND in a series!
>
> Isn't that just absolutely clever?!

Brilliant.  Blocked.  Lucky you!  You annoyed Jimbo himself.  I
haven't personally blocked anyone in a long time.  I don't even know
what the rules are about it!  And I don't care!  :-)

Now, if you want to relax and talk about something sensible, feel free.

--Jimbo

p.s. Yes, due process, blah blah blah.  He's feel to appeal his ban
to, uh, anyone actually.


from_name: modean52 at comcast.net

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Anglo-Saxon wiki

body:
The Anglo-Saxon wiki is up (thanks Tim, Angela!).  I was wondering, how do I go about getting it on the statistics pages, and on the other languages' links?

We already have 7 users so far!

Thanks,

James


from_name: Rebecca

subject: [Foundation-l] Wikinews

body:
> The second point has to do with liability. If an article contains an error, but may not be corrected after a week, we will be liable.
> And this time, we wont be able to say "there is a incorrect statement ? Please, do correct it".
> Putting a correction in an attached page wont do it either. Because other sites will use our content, and they are not likely to bother go check error corrections mentionned in another page. This type of "correction" work well in paper journal. It just is not okay online.

Wouldn't the answer with these things be to have it protected, but
editable by one level of user (be they sysops, bureaucrats, whatever),
who could then correct any urgent errors?

-- ambi


subject: [Foundation-l] Wikinews


body:
Thomas R. Koll wrote:

>On Fri, Oct 15, 2004 at 06:10:39PM +0200, Magnus Manske wrote:
>
>
>>Sj wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>All the same, "the 165,000 well-sorted Web links
>>>alone are worth the price".
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>Web links are not copyrightable, now are they? ;-)
>>
>>Not like we don't have any of these, but a cross-check might not hurt...
>>
>>
>
>A collection of weblinks is. especially if it's commented
>
>
I didn't say "just copy the whole thing", did I?

Magnus


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Administrator Abuse

body:
:(

This is the second time in as many or so months I've been called a girl.

Oh well.

On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 05:00:34 +0200, Jens Ropers <ropers at ropersonline.com> wrote:
> Based on the name and conduct, I dare say Ute is probably female and
> (possibly quite) young.
> Maybe that could be asked about and/or taken into account?
> Just a thought.
>
> -- ropers [[en:User:Ropers]]
>     www.ropersonline.com
>
>
>
> On 16 Oct 2004, at 04:17, Jimmy (Jimbo) Wales wrote:
>
> > Polytarp! wrote:
> >> Seeing as people have derided to trivialize my complaints instead of
> >> acting upon them, I have remanifestestinied my account under the
> >> CLEVER name "U Tworonto."  It's pronounced the same way, but it's
> >> spelled such as to include the fact that it's the SECOND in a series!
> >>
> >> Isn't that just absolutely clever?!
> >
> > Brilliant.  Blocked.  Lucky you!  You annoyed Jimbo himself.  I
> > haven't personally blocked anyone in a long time.  I don't even know
> > what the rules are about it!  And I don't care!  :-)
> >
> > Now, if you want to relax and talk about something sensible, feel free.
> >
> > --Jimbo
> >
> > p.s. Yes, due process, blah blah blah.  He's feel to appeal his ban
> > to, uh, anyone actually.
> > _______________________________________________
> > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


subject: [Foundation-l] wikinews and other stuff

body:
Wikibooks is a collection of textbooks. People aim to write textbooks.

They don't aim to directly teach people, nor do they aim to directly
learn things. They don't undertake courses.  This is where Wikiversity
comes in.

I would also disagree with whoever suggested that you couldn't have
class discussions as part of a Wikiversity model. I think that could
definitely work, though pracs and the like would be near impossible.

Please, just give this a go. I'm going to have a lot of time this
summer, and it'd be nice to use it to help get this project started.


subject: [Foundation-l] wikinews and other stuff


subject:
[WikiEN-l] Re: Objecting to hatespeech is grounds for being
	banned? Huh?!

body:
While I have no problem with his ban, it is inclined to look
ridiculous when compared against the treatment of some of those RK has
clashed with, who have been far worse, and that now gives him
something to complain about. Consistency should be king.

-- ambi

On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 01:21:47 +0200, Anthere <anthere9 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> I would like that no flame war starts on this list.
> Robert is currently very shocked. Just let him voice his opinion once
> for all, and let us be done with it. Please refrain from blowing on the
> flame. It is not pleasant for anyone.
>
> -------
>
> Also, I just looked at Robert user page and talk page, and there is no
> notification of the ban. I am quite surprised of that.  Why not ?
>
> Incidently, Robert, since you will not be able to edit your user page
> and your user talk page, you may wish that they are left in a certain
> state. I am not entirely sure you were given the time to fix your space.
> If you wish to change them in any way, I just wanted to tell you I would
> be willing to do it for you.
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


subject: [Foundation-l] Re: Re: wikinews and other stuff (Tim Starling)

body:
Okay, first off sorry if i sounded negative, i wasn't trying to be, i
like the idea of the idea of both wikinews and wikiversity,  i just
don't know if i like the idea itself yet (if that makes any sense to
anyone).

> It's not necessary to quote the GFDL inline with the text, you just have
> to have a short license note and a link. You don't see the full text of
> the GFDL in each of our articles on Wikipedia do you?
>
> A printed version would presumably have to have the full license attached.

Thanks for clearing that up for me. i think it will be a real
impediment to recognition by the mainstream press, since most of that
has a printed version, and it is unreasonable to expect that any press
group will waste expensive space with the gfdl.

How  does the gfdl apply to photos and video? how could you include a
video clip from wiki news on TV? does anyone know? i don't think the
gfdl was really written with this purpose in mind.

as for creating a wikimedia license as has been suggested, wouldn't it
be impossible to move all the old gfdl articles to wfdl (or what ever
the name is) IANAL so i dunno, thats just what i would seem like to
me.

> The major difference is that Wikicommons is for images and Wikisource is
> for text.

again thank you for the reply, but correct me if I'm wrong a) people
have been talking on this list (or maybe en.wikipedia, the two lists
get all mixed up in my mind) putting text in commons. b) the two
different projects seem like useless repetition c) I'm doing the
typical thing of not knowing all the history, and presuming i have the
right to go throwing my weight around

> Whose bright idea was it? Rephrase your question please. MediaWiki was
> written by volunteers in their spare time for the benefit of people like
> you. Be thankful there is a wiki at all.
>

Yes perhaps my question was a little blunt, but the point stands, and
so does my question, was it a limitation in the software, a decision
by the board, or did no one think about it and its just too late now?

> It's spelt "parentheses".
>

to some ppl perhaps, to others like myself, spelling is as dynamic as a wiki

> It can't offer pracs and class discussions, the proponents were very
> clear on this. There's no need to be so negative about it.
>

again sorry if i sounded negative, but i dont see the difference
between the two projects and i would like clarification. i think that
it would be interesting to try and create a real sense of community,
and have proper classes that go thru a year together just like in real
uni, but i don't know if a wiki would be the appropriate forum

> >sixthly, there is no sixthly.

there remains no sixthly for obvious reasons

> A method for easy translation has already been implemented in EmacsWiki, see
> http://www.emacswiki.org/cgi-bin/community/MultilingualExperiment
>
> The author of that feature (Mattis Manzel) has promoted potential
> applications for Wikimedia, especially on meta.
>

sounds good, i hope it will get in there

> Don't bother with the RFC, just post PHP.

the gauntlet has been thrown down, so i will now try to pick it up.

>
> -- Tim Starling

paz e amor,

the bellman

--
robin.shannon.id.au

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons
Recombo Plus License. To view a copy of this license, visit
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/sampling+/1.0/


from_name: Jean-Christophe Chazalette

subject: [Foundation-l] wikinews and other stuff

body:
I strongly support the Wikimedia License idea. GDFL is not that appropriate
to Wikis for plenty of reasons. I'll tell them when there'll be a real issue
here :) Suffice it to say that considering what wiki actually is,
technically, and what kind of ambition Wfoundation actually has, a
tailor-made license would be just *better*. Of course, I would join any
thinktank about this topic and even would accept to draft the main lines -
with the help of a decent French-English translator ... of course.
villy

----- Original Message -----
From: "Andre Engels" <andreengels at gmail.com>
To: "Robin Shannon" <robin.shannon at gmail.com>; "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing
List" <foundation-l at wikimedia.org>
Sent: Friday, October 15, 2004 11:25 AM
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] wikinews and other stuff

> > firstly, re: wikinews, it will be released under GFDL yes? which means
> > that if CNN or BBC or ABC or NZBC or the guardian or even slashdot or
> > a blog wanted to reproduce our wikinews article, then they would have
> > to also reproduce the entire GFDL license (or did i read the GDFL
> > incorrectly), which may well be twice as long as the news article. Has
> > anyone else thought of this problem and come up with any solutions.
> > Other than this my position on wikinews is not active support, but
> > certainly close interest.
>
> One solution would be what Tim Starling proposed on WikiCommons: We
> get our own Wikimedia license, which specifies that material under the
> Wikimedia license may also be distributed under the GNU/FDL license
> (as well as CC-BY-SA and perhaps others). The Wikimedia license then
> could specify that mentioning "This material may be published in
> changed or unchanged state under the Wikimedia license" would be
> enough.
>
> Andre Engels
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>


subject: [Foundation-l] wikinews and other stuff


from_name: Mark Williamson

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Anglo-Saxon wiki

body:
http://ang.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hrodulf_readnosa_hrandeor

Need I say more? ;p

Does this mean a Gothic Wikipedia is a possibility, or no...?

--node

On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 19:17:51 +0000, modean52 at comcast.net
<modean52 at comcast.net> wrote:
> The Anglo-Saxon wiki is up (thanks Tim, Angela!).  I was wondering, how do I go about getting it on the statistics pages, and on the other languages' links?
>
> We already have 7 users so far!
>
> Thanks,
>
> James
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>


from_name: John Lee

subject:
[WikiEN-l] Re: Objecting to hatespeech is grounds for
	being	banned? Huh?!

body:
I am in complete agreement with the sentiments expressed in both emails
below.

John Lee
([[User:Johnleemk]])

Sj wrote:

>On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 20:20:09 +1000, Rebecca <misfitgirl at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>While I have no problem with his ban, it is inclined to look
>>ridiculous when compared against the treatment of some of those RK has
>>clashed with, who have been far worse, and that now gives him
>>something to complain about. Consistency should be king.
>>
>>
>
>Agreed on both counts.  It is frustrating when the outcome of a series of
>decisions is that people who obviously care about the project, and have
>contributed greatly to it -- but have a hard time expressing it civilly or
>manipulating rules -- are treated the same way, or worse, than people
>who obviously don't care about the project, have only recently arrived or
>contributed little of note, but are skilful at manipulating rules to their
>advantage.
>
>
>


from_name: VideoMontageForum

subject: [Wikitech-l] problem resizing photo's

body:
Hi,
As a newbie in Wiki I have this question:
Installing wikepedia 1.3.5 everything works fine.
Only resizing images does'nt work.
Uploaded images shows up in the original size.
When I for example use this line   [[image:picture.jpg|100px]] I get an
error that something is wrong in image.php

Do I have to install something extra like ImageMagick or something else.

Hope someone will help me,
Regards,
Forkink
wmf at xs4all.nl


from_name: Andre Engels

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Image tarball

body:
On Wed, 13 Oct 2004 23:15:59 +0200, andyr at wizzy.com <andyr at wizzy.com> wrote:

> On Wed, 13 Oct 2004, Tim Starling wrote:
>
> > I've added the image tarball generation to the backup script, so new
> > tarballs will be generated every week from now on.
>
> 14Gig - Owww.
>
> In a few short months it has grown from 3Gig.

I assume the cause of that is the new image syntax: It used to be that
if you had a large image, you'd make it smaller (which also decreased
its file size). Now it is put on the site in large version, and then
made smaller to the user with the '000px' markup. Which means that
there are much more large (sometimes huge) image files.
Andre Engels


from_name: Jens Ropers

subject: [Foundation-l] wikinews and other stuff

body:
IMHO the overlap between Commons and Source mainly concerns text
documents. And IIRC Source started out as a text repository while
Commons started out as an image repository. Then Commons somehow grew
into an "all kinds of shared files"-thing, hence the present overlap.

</my2cents>

-- ropers [[en:User:Ropers]]
     www.ropersonline.com

On 15 Oct 2004, at 22:54, Delirium wrote:

> Erik Moeller wrote:
>
>>> secondly, What the hell is the difference between wikicommons and
>>> wikisource? They both seem to me to be depositories for pd/gfdl
>>> primary sources.
>>>
>>
>> Yes, which is why I initially proposed Wikimedia Commons to include
>> what is currently on Wikisource. I still think the two should be
>> merged.
>>
> I see Wikimedia Commons as being more of a repository, while
> Wikisource is more of a general text-document-oriented site that isn't
> merely a dumping ground for documents, but also organizes them,
> translates them, annotates them, and so on.  It's not clear how the
> proposed translation project would fit in at the Commons, for example.
>
> (I could be misinterpreting what the Commons is supposed to be.)
>
> -Mark
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>


subject: [Foundation-l] wikinews and other stuff


from_name: Emmanuel Engelhart

subject: [Wikitech-l] New feature to win the win the vandalism battle

body:
On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 17:00:54 +0200
Emmanuel Engelhart <emmanuel at engelhart.org> wrote:

> Hi
>
> I propose to add a new feature, to improve our fight again vandalism.
> I mean a diff, for watchlist articles, between the current version and the last
> read one.
>
> I need opinion about the feature ?
> and about an elegant technical solution too ?
>

Nobody again... ?

Follows my technical proposition:
- add a field "wl_validate" (containing an article version id)
- add a tab to validate an article (shown only if the article belongs to the user watchlist)
- add a link for each modified article in the watchlist to compare the current version with the last validated one.

Kelson

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
L'informatique, en tant que discipline, ne traite pas plus des
ordinateurs que l'astronomie le fait les t?l?scopes.
	-- E. W. Dijkstra
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emmanuel Engelhart      ICQ UIN : 53388731   TEL (+49)(0)6.22.15.88.03.31


from_name: Rick

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Administrator Abuse

body:
So what?  Does that mean we need to allow a person to repeatedly vandalize Wikipedia?  Have you even checked out this person's edits at http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Special:Contributions&target=Ute_Oronto?  Are we just supposed to let them go ahead and troll for as long as they want to?

If they had even bothered to make ONE useful edit, they might have had an argument for not being blocked.  His/he very first edit was to the Vandalism in progress page,  in which he/she tried to support their vandalism as an anon.  Things went downhill from there.

RickK

Jens Ropers <ropers at ropersonline.com> wrote:
Based on the name and conduct, I dare say Ute is probably female and
(possibly quite) young.
Maybe that could be asked about and/or taken into account?
Just a thought.

-- ropers [[en:User:Ropers]]
www.ropersonline.com

On 16 Oct 2004, at 04:17, Jimmy (Jimbo) Wales wrote:

> Polytarp! wrote:
>> Seeing as people have derided to trivialize my complaints instead of
>> acting upon them, I have remanifestestinied my account under the
>> CLEVER name "U Tworonto." It's pronounced the same way, but it's
>> spelled such as to include the fact that it's the SECOND in a series!
>>
>> Isn't that just absolutely clever?!
>
> Brilliant. Blocked. Lucky you! You annoyed Jimbo himself. I
> haven't personally blocked anyone in a long time. I don't even know
> what the rules are about it! And I don't care! :-)
>
> Now, if you want to relax and talk about something sensible, feel free.
>
> --Jimbo
>
> p.s. Yes, due process, blah blah blah. He's feel to appeal his ban
> to, uh, anyone actually.
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

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

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
vote.yahoo.com - Register online to vote today!


from_name: Robin Shannon

subject: [Foundation-l] Re: wikiversity

body:
After a futher look around wikiversity (something i probably should
have done before opening my big mouth), i think that the crucial
difference between wikiversity and wikibooks is that wikiversity has
feedback. I think that the idea behind the example module
http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Wikiversity:Translation_practice_course
is a great one. (simplified, the idea is that you translate a page
from the spanish wikipedia into the english wikipedia, and then people
provide peer review of you traslation, i guess you just archive the
old translations and comments...).

paz e amor,

the bellman

--
robin.shannon.id.au

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons
Recombo Plus License. To view a copy of this license, visit
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/sampling+/1.0/


subject: [Foundation-l] Re: wikiversity


from_name: Ray Saintonge

body:
Delirium wrote:

> Jimmy (Jimbo) Wales wrote:
>
>> Ray Saintonge wrote:
>>
>>> In this case I would tend to interpret the submission of the thesis
>>> to the appropriate university authorities as a form of prior
>>> publication.
>>
>> Agreed.  This is a nice "bright line" rule that won't get us into
>> endless debates with physics cranks.  We can still omit, for example,
>> self-published books.
>
> Hopefully it won't come up much, but it's actually very hard these
> days to determine what a "real" publisher is.  There's a *lot* of even
> widely-distributed books that are put out by fairly small publishers
> and then distributed through a larger network, almost in the same way
> that self-published books are.  To use this example, most university
> publishers are essentially vanity presses---apart from the big ones
> like MIT Press and Oxford University Press, the rest are simply
> imprints that, if they're published at all, are done on a
> pay-to-publish basis.

I'm counting upon this being an infrequent occurence.  The bulk of
things being put into Wikisource are Public Domain documents.  With more
recent things we often need more discussion on copyright issues.  Of
course the cranks are only too willing to license their material because
they want all the exposure they can get, and in the context of such
questions there is an opportunity to squeeze out the self-published.  If
a few get through because a university press has acted as a vanity
publisher, I don't think it will ever be enough to worry much about.

Ec


subject: [Foundation-l] wikinews and other stuff

body:
Delirium wrote:

> Erik Moeller wrote:
>
>>> secondly, What the hell is the difference between wikicommons and
>>> wikisource? They both seem to me to be depositories for pd/gfdl
>>> primary sources.
>>
>> Yes, which is why I initially proposed Wikimedia Commons to include
>> what is currently on Wikisource. I still think the two should be merged.
>
> I see Wikimedia Commons as being more of a repository, while
> Wikisource is more of a general text-document-oriented site that isn't
> merely a dumping ground for documents, but also organizes them,
> translates them, annotates them, and so on.  It's not clear how the
> proposed translation project would fit in at the Commons, for example.
>
> -Mark

My vision coincides more with Mark's on this.  Texts are handled
diferently from the multimedia material that I would expect to find in
the Commons.  Illustrations are relatively uneditable.

Ec


subject: [Foundation-l] wikinews and other stuff


from_name: Sj

subject:
[WikiEN-l] Re: Hateful ban shows that Wikipedia is flawed almost
	beyond hope

body:
On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 15:54:50 -0700 (PDT), Daniel Mayer
<maveric149 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> --- Sj <2.718281828 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 00:55:47 +0200, Anthere <anthere9 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > One comment :
> > >
> > > 1.1) RK is banned from editing Wikipedia for four months. In the time he
> > > is banned, he will be required to do 'community service' work on
> > > Wikibooks on topics exclusively related to biology.
> Community service is a very valid remedy in the real world. Why not here? A
> better proposed remedy would have added community service as an option RK could
> choose instead of a total hard ban.
>
> *That* is just the type of thing that would have been appropriate for (using
> your own words) somebody who obviously cares a great deal about the project.

I agree with this, and with extending an olive branch to users who are
interested in regaining the community's goodwill.  It was the tone of
'requiring' such a remedy, not the 'community service' bit, that got
my goat.

> If the only tool you have is a hammer, then all your problems start to look
> like nails. The ArbCom needs more tools.

Like the ability to queue edits made by a given user/ip for review
(only to non-Talk pages), rather than having them immediately made
live, for a period of time...

--
+sj+


from_name: Benedikt Mandl

subject: [Wikitech-l] (no subject)

body:
--
GMX ProMail mit bestem Virenschutz http://www.gmx.net/de/go/mail
+++ Empfehlung der Redaktion +++ Internet Professionell 10/04 +++


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: the block on RK

body:
Thank you, James, for this beautiful explanation.  It is easy to
forget, when certain things happen so quickly, that the case was
only just now finalized.

On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 14:51:25 -0700 (PDT), James Rosenzweig
<jwrosenzweig at yahoo.com> wrote:
> The following is essentially (with minor adjustments
> and additions) what I just posted to the talk page on
> the proposed decision in RK's arbitration case:

--
+sj+


subject: [Wikipedia-l] List of encyclopedia topics

body:
On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 20:02:28 +0200, Magnus Manske <magnus.manske at web.de> wrote:
> >A collection of weblinks is. especially if it's commented
> >
> I didn't say "just copy the whole thing", did I?

Speaking of neatly-aggregated lists of hundreds of thousands of things, the
list of encyclopedia topics now has almost 25% coverage...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia%3AList_of_encyclopedia_topics

(and yes node, our new Pokemon fighting technique is unstoppable)
(((flashback to mystery hunts of years past)))
--
+sj+


from_name: Brion Vibber

subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: problem resizing photo's

references:
<ckpahu$2nd$1@sea.gmane.org>
	<18DA8EF0-1EF5-11D9-88AD-000A95DAA284@pobox.com>
	<ckql3e$u4b$1@sea.gmane.org>

body:
On Oct 16, 2004, at 1:11 AM, VideoMontageForum wrote:
> It is very hard to make a copy of the error message because it is
> partly
> hiding behind the menu.

Use view source to get at such messages more conveniently.

> But please click this link
> http://www.videomontageforum.nl/bio/index.php/Afbeelding and you will
> see
> what I mean.

Warning:  imagecreatetruecolor(): requires GD 2.0 or later in
/usr/local/psa/home/vhosts/videomontageforum.nl/httpdocs/bio/
includes/Image.php on line 212

Well, that's a pretty clear error message: upgrade your libgd to 2.0 or
later; if that's not convenient, install ImageMagick and set
$wgUseImageMagick = true; in LocalSettings.php.

> Strange thing is that I find out that I can enlarge photo's
> For example: I upload a small picture  50x70 and  I can show it at
> 400x 600.

Images are not actually resized on the server when enlarging as this
would simply waste server time, disk space, and bandwidth -- the file
would get bigger without looking any better.

> By the way, how can I become a member of this group?

Sign up at: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

This address is listed at the bottom of every message that goes through
the list, and should have also been whereever you found the address of
this list.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20041016/f99047d3/attachment.pgp>


subject: [Wikitech-l] Inserting wikicommons medias in wikipedia

body:
On Oct 16, 2004, at 2:19 AM, Emmanuel Engelhart wrote:
> Is it possible to insert medias from wikicommons in a wikipedia
> article.

No, except insofar as you can use direct URLs.

> If yes, how ?
> If no, where is the problem ?

It hasn't been coded yet. Erik, are you still interested in commons?

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20041016/b068b4be/attachment.pgp>


body:
On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 23:40:52 +0200, Emmanuel Engelhart
<emmanuel at engelhart.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 17:00:54 +0200
> Emmanuel Engelhart <emmanuel at engelhart.org> wrote:
>
> > Hi
> >
> > I propose to add a new feature, to improve our fight again vandalism.
> > I mean a diff, for watchlist articles, between the current version and the last
> > read one.
> >
> > I need opinion about the feature ?
> > and about an elegant technical solution too ?
> >
>
> Nobody again... ?
>
> Follows my technical proposition:
> - add a field "wl_validate" (containing an article version id)
> - add a tab to validate an article (shown only if the article belongs to the user watchlist)
> - add a link for each modified article in the watchlist to compare the current version with the last validated one.
>
> Kelson

Kelson,  this sounds like a fine idea; the lack of response may be
because a different review system is already being tested out, and
trying to implement more than one at a time would be a pain.  Of
course there are details to work out :

* once one person validates a version, do others still have the option
to validate it as well?  what if a vandal comes, changes a page on her
watchlist, and immediately validates it?

* what do you do with versions that have been validated by N users?
show them differently in RC or watchlists?

* Can users 'unvalidate' a version, or do they have to revert the last changes?

> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> L'informatique, en tant que discipline, ne traite pas plus des
> ordinateurs que l'astronomie le fait les t?l?scopes.
>        -- E. W. Dijkstra

--
+sj+


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Chinese simplified-traditional conversion

body:
I recall that ages ago there was a long (and almost acrimonious)
discussion regarding the possibilities (or lack thereof) of conversion
between traditional and simplified Chinese.

Well, I just ran across this app:

>> http://www.ideographer.com/chineserewriter/index_en.shtml
It's Shareware, but it may not be open source. Nevertheless, taking the
thing for a spin and maybe bugging the author with one or two questions
surely can't hurt. The app is for Mac OS X however, so for those poor
souls^W^W of us who don't have access to a Mac, you could either try
pearPC (but if you're only doing it to run this app, then that's using
heavy artillery to aim for sparrows) or see if you can email the author
anyway. I do have a Mac, but sadly I don't understand Chinese.

Anyway, I just meant to sent this to the list *just in case* it's of
use.

-- ropers [[en:User:Ropers]]
     www.ropersonline.com


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Administrator Abuse

body:
Based on the name and conduct, I dare say Ute is probably female and
(possibly quite) young.
Maybe that could be asked about and/or taken into account?
Just a thought.

-- ropers [[en:User:Ropers]]
     www.ropersonline.com

On 16 Oct 2004, at 04:17, Jimmy (Jimbo) Wales wrote:

> Polytarp! wrote:
>> Seeing as people have derided to trivialize my complaints instead of
>> acting upon them, I have remanifestestinied my account under the
>> CLEVER name "U Tworonto."  It's pronounced the same way, but it's
>> spelled such as to include the fact that it's the SECOND in a series!
>>
>> Isn't that just absolutely clever?!
>
> Brilliant.  Blocked.  Lucky you!  You annoyed Jimbo himself.  I
> haven't personally blocked anyone in a long time.  I don't even know
> what the rules are about it!  And I don't care!  :-)
>
> Now, if you want to relax and talk about something sensible, feel free.
>
> --Jimbo
>
> p.s. Yes, due process, blah blah blah.  He's feel to appeal his ban
> to, uh, anyone actually.
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: Fred Bauder

subject: [Wikitech-l] Coding request

body:
Could you please do this?

Fred

> From: Sj <2.718281828 at gmail.com>
> Reply-To: Sj <2.718281828 at gmail.com>, English Wikipedia
> <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 00:32:40 -0400
> To: Daniel Mayer <maveric149 at yahoo.com>, English Wikipedia
> <wikien-l at wikipedia.org>
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Re: Hateful ban shows that Wikipedia is flawed almost
> beyond hope
>
>> If the only tool you have is a hammer, then all your problems start to look
>> like nails. The ArbCom needs more tools.
>
> Like the ability to queue edits made by a given user/ip for review
> (only to non-Talk pages), rather than having them immediately made
> live, for a period of time...
>
> --
> +sj+


from_name: Erik Moeller

subject:
[Foundation-l] Fact-markup (was: Wiki translations of Greek and
	Roman texts)

body:
Delirium-
> we have the technology to do so.  In print, a footnote follows the
> section it's footnoting, and what exactly preceding portion to refers to
> is not actually specified.  This makes it difficult for
> densely-footnoted texts to figure out what is going on.  Since this is
> the intarweb, we can annotate *regions* of text, even overlapping
> regions.  This would be useful in Wikipedia proper as well, as you could
> annotate a particular section as "this is phrased this way because of
> the following issue" and be exactly clear what you're referring to.

> I *seem* to recall someone already proposed something like this, and
> even had a page at meta about it, but I can't find it (I suppose I could
> be imagining things).

Nope, I have been suggesting this on the mailing lists a few times, and
there's a WikiProject on en: which collects some ideas on the matter:
http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Fact_and_Reference_Check

My current plan is to specify a peer review markup language (PRML), which
will of course be a subset of our wiki syntax, but which should be
flexible enough to be used in other contexts as well. The primary function
of the PRML would be to tag individual factual claims, and to highlight
them if they presently lack a citation.

My current favored syntax for the basic fact mark-up / citation is

   1) Claim without citation
   __The Mona Lisa was painted by Leonardo Da Vinci. ??

   2) Claim with citation
   __The Mona Lisa was painted by Leonardo Da Vinci.
     [[Source:The Mona Lisa, 1984, p. 84]]

   __
     starts a factual claim

   ??
     marks a factual claim as dubious

   [[Source: Xyz]] or [http://www.xyz.com]
     generates an auto-numbered footnote or margin note (rendering could
     depend on user preferences or CSS)

Similar to red links, unsourced claims could be (faintly) highlighted in
the rendered page, as an encouragement to add citations.

The reason I am not moving this forward more quickly is that I would like
it to be properly integrated into the MediaWiki 2.0 framework. In
particular, the [[Source:Xyz]] should really refer to a Wikidata
structure, so we can start managing our collection of references properly,
for the benefit of easy and consistent citation throughout Wikimedia. The
PRML will also allow more complex statements, as not everything can be
atomized like the above examples.

Regards,

Erik


subject: [Foundation-l] wikinews and other stuff

body:
Delirium-
> I see Wikimedia Commons as being more of a repository, while Wikisource
> is more of a general text-document-oriented site that isn't merely a
> dumping ground for documents, but also organizes them, translates them,
> annotates them, and so on.  It's not clear how the proposed translation
> project would fit in at the Commons, for example.

This is a very logical distinction at the present time, because we haven't
really put much effort into "wikifying" anything beyond text. There are a
few things which can open up this horizon though:

* SVG support, which is currently in CVS, makes it relatively easy to
create translations of vector graphics like maps and diagrames.

* The various extensions like timelines and Wikitex (not to be confused
with the current math support) can also be openly edited.

* It is possible, with a helper application, to add support for arbitrary
external applications to edit all media types and upload them back to the
server. Zope has this already:
http://www.zope.org/Members/Caseman/ExternalEditor

* It is desirable to have an easy way to overlay bitmap images with
textual explanations. Perhaps SVG can help here. Similarly, we will want
to make it easy to create image maps.

Thus, the distinction between Wikisource and WikiCommons will erode
further, as we will do many of the same things with images, sound and
video that the Wikisource community is doing with text.

The other side is that we will also want to make it possible to transclude
textual content in the Wikimedia projects, e.g., "show me the first
paragraph of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in the English
version". This means that Wikisource will be used in a manner that is very
similar to the Wikimedia Commons, i.e. to enrich other Wikimedia content.
Given this overlap, I will launch a merge initiative when the time is
right (unless someone else does).

That being said, we should absolutely, 100% launch a systematic effort to
translate Wikisource materials. Free content translations are very hard to
come by. Perhaps, through this, we can also entice people to put their
content under a free license (provided the content is valuable to us).

Regards,

Erik


subject: [Foundation-l] wikinews and other stuff


from_name: Paul Fierro

subject: [Wikitech-l] User-less wiki?

body:
We want to use the Wikipedia database in a public project, wrapping it in
our own skin using MediaWiki as (more or less) middleware. In order to keep
our MediaWiki customizations to a minimum, we've been focusing on modifying
index.php to do the dirty work.

What we're looking for is a simple way to have a user-less, read-only wiki.
Since our content comes from the Wikipedia database, and we don't want to be
involved in accepting submissions or moderation, we will be directing all
edits and contributions to wikipedia.org. Because of this, we have no need
for users and such.

We expect to direct a fairly high amount of traffic to wikipedia.org as our
project will be deployed on a network of very high traffic sites.

I've stripped out the login box from the template and prevented such pages
as [[Special::Userlogin]] from displaying, even if one knows enough about
MediaWiki to munge our URLs. Furthermore, no pages that are not in the Main
NS will display. I have this functioning with MediaWiki 1.3.6, but I've been
working on it since 1.2.5. Unfortunately (for me), as MediaWiki matures, I
find myself coding around its changes - for example when
$wgValidSpecialPagesEn disappeared from Language.php in 1.3.0, I could no
longer rely on this array.

What I'm proposing is one or more settings in LocalSettings.php (or
something equally straightforward) that will enable MediaWiki to operate in
a read-only, no-user mode. Naturally, I will offer any help to achieve this.

Is this something that can be accomplished?

Paul


from_name: Charles Matthews

subject:
[WikiEN-l] Re: Objecting to hatespeech is grounds for
	beingbanned? Huh?!

body:
Rebecca wrote

 >Yet, once they get to the ArbCom stage, it'll take a couple
> of months for them to be even put on probation.

'The law's delay' - W. Shakespeare.  The current system is hardly
precipitate, so the argument that B, C, D ... are just as bad as A, who has
had due process, is not a strong one.

Charles


from_name: Rebecca

subject: [Foundation-l] Re: wikiversity

body:
Precisely. There's a little bit more to it than this - there's
certainly the potential for things like class discussions (though IRC,
perhaps), as well, and actually taking some form of organised course,
rather than *just* teaching yourself out of a textbook. Though, as
I've been saying all along, it would also benefit those people too -
by actually creating the textbooks they could then work from.

--ambi

On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 23:51:47 +1000, Robin Shannon
<robin.shannon at gmail.com> wrote:
> After a futher look around wikiversity (something i probably should
> have done before opening my big mouth), i think that the crucial
> difference between wikiversity and wikibooks is that wikiversity has
> feedback. I think that the idea behind the example module
> http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Wikiversity:Translation_practice_course
> is a great one. (simplified, the idea is that you translate a page
> from the spanish wikipedia into the english wikipedia, and then people
> provide peer review of you traslation, i guess you just archive the
> old translations and comments...).
>
> paz e amor,
>
> the bellman
>
> --
> robin.shannon.id.au
>
> This work is licensed under the Creative Commons
> Recombo Plus License. To view a copy of this license, visit
> http://creativecommons.org/licenses/sampling+/1.0/
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>


subject: [Foundation-l] Re: wikiversity


from_name: Jimmy (Jimbo) Wales

body:
Charles Matthews wrote:
> My point is that consistency cannot under current conditions be
> instantly demanded, in the form that if Y is just as bad as X etc.
> It can be demanded in the longer term in the form of precedents;
> which indeed is something to ask about.

Very well put, yes.

--Jimbo


from_name: Kiss All

subject: [Wikitech-l] How to change license and language after installation?

body:
Hi,all
Originally, I just chosed the license of our internal medawiki as
GFDL. But our group memebers don't think it is proper for the actual
content.
Could anybody tell me how to change it?

I also installed mediawiki 1.3.5 on my personal machine with chinese
language option. But the help link is linking to english wikipedia
site's bad title page. I don't want to hack the sidebar and only want
to switch to english. How can I do this?
--
Be good..


body:
As I said, I'm not disputing that RK deserved to be banned. Indeed, I
think this has been one of the most important ArbCom decisions yet.

What I am suggesting is that he does also have some reason to be
incensed, for the reasons that Sj mentioned. There are many other
users who have caused as much trouble as RK, but just haven't been
around as long. Many of those users also lack the history of positive
contributions, and some do not appear to give a damn about the
project. Many of these are also, as he says, skilful at manipulating
the rules. Yet, once they get to the ArbCom stage, it'll take a couple
of months for them to be even put on probation.

-- ambi

On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 13:08:32 -0400, Delirium <delirium at hackish.org> wrote:
> Rebecca wrote:
>
> >While I have no problem with his ban, it is inclined to look
> >ridiculous when compared against the treatment of some of those RK has
> >clashed with, who have been far worse, and that now gives him
> >something to complain about. Consistency should be king.
> >
> >
> I didn't participate in this particular Arbitration decision, so this is
> just my personal view, but I don't think it was inconsistent or
> unjustifiable.  Any particular action by RK doesn't warrant banning IMO,
> but this is not one particular action.  There is a *lengthy* series of
> actions, and he's been at the center of numerous disputes over the past
> year or so.  Some are not his fault, and some are.  Generally, he
> appears to go ballistic during most of them, which causes problems.  If
> you look through this mailing list's archives, you'll find quite a few
> tirades from him, including his belief that Wikipedia ought to be called
> "Nazipedia" due to its antisemitism (a statement I don't think he ever
> actually retracted).  On the whole, he's accounted for a
> disproportionate share of problem-resolution time, and I don't think
> it's entirely due to the people he contends with.  It's a tough call
> because he also has been a good faith contributor, but I think if you
> look at other decisions, it's consistent.  IMO this case is clearer than
> Wik's case, for example.
>
> -Mark
>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


subject: [Wikitech-l] Wikispecies

body:
I just submitted a new feature request of "real top bar for mediawiki"
in bugzilla. We may add sibling projects into that top bar including
this one. :-)

On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 14:04:27 +0200 (MEST), Benedikt Mandl
<benedikt.mandl at gmx.at> wrote:
> For those who havn't heard of wikispecies yet: wikispecies is a
> wikimedia project meant to accomodate the needs and demands of scientists
> to a species directory and database. It was set up at http://
> species.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page to test it and discuss details.
>
> As the initial brainstorming on the village pump goes on, one thing
> becomes clear: wikispecies has the potential to attract many people who
> would not contribute to a general encyclopedia, but would to a scientific
> database. As wikispecies will strictly suppress any forking from
> wikipedia, I thought about an approach that would allow us to use the pool
> of species-folks for wikipedia.
>
> The tasks:
> 1.) Wikispecies provides an interface (already at www.wikispecies.org)
> with templates for different categories (such as "synonymes", "habitat",
> "morphology" etc.)
>
> 2.) These categories represent a table that can be accessed by wikipedia
> and wikispecies
>
> 3.) Wikispecies, which have an emphasis on things like "synonymes" or
> "original species description" will display these categories on a high
> order
>
> 4.) Wikipedia will display the information that seems interesting for the
> user of a general encyclopedia in an order that seems appropriate for that
> purpose
>
> As I don't understand the underlying technical questions, I would like to
> know if this is technically feasible and - more important - who would
> volunteer to set up a database that would work as proposed.
>
> Thank you very much in advance,
>
> Benedikt
>
> --
> +++ GMX DSL Premiumtarife 3 Monate gratis* + WLAN-Router 0,- EUR* +++
> Clevere DSL-Nutzer wechseln jetzt zu GMX: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/dsl
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>

--
Be good....


from_name: VideoMontageForum

body:
Thanks very much Brion for youre reply.

I reinstalled and running version 1.3.6
It is very hard to make a copy of the error message because it is partly
hiding behind the menu.
But please click this link
http://www.videomontageforum.nl/bio/index.php/Afbeelding and you will see
what I mean.

Strange thing is that I find out that I can enlarge photo's
For example: I upload a small picture  50x70 and  I can show it at 400x 600.
But as soon as I want to show the picture smaller than the orignal size
problems occure.
( i have copied the page from the dutch wikipedia for the code just to let
you see what is happening)

By the way, how can I become a member of this group?

Thanks in advance for helping me.
Regards,
Forkink

On Oct 15, 2004, at 1:05 PM, VideoMontageForum wrote:
> As a newbie in Wiki I have this question:
> Installing wikepedia 1.3.5 everything works fine.

Please upgrade to 1.3.6 immediately, there are security vulnerabilities
in earlier versions that have been found and fixed.

> Only resizing images does'nt work.
> Uploaded images shows up in the original size.
> When I for example use this line   [[image:picture.jpg|100px]] I get an
> error that something is wrong in image.php

You need to cut and paste the actual error message if you want anyone
to be able to help you.

 schreef in bericht news:18DA8EF0-1EF5-11D9-88AD-000A95DAA284 at pobox.com...
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


from_name: Andre Engels

body:
On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 18:40:47 -0700, Michael Snow
<wikipedia at earthlink.net> wrote:

> While I support efforts to improve the GFDL and make it more compatible
> with other free licenses like some of those Creative Commons offers, I'm
> not that enthusiastic about the idea of developing a new
> Wikimedia-specific license. Both for our benefit in using material from
> other sources, and to maintain good relations with the rest of the
> free-content community, I think we should resist creating a new license
> unless we can clearly articulate the justification and benefits  of
> creating yet another license.

The justification and benefit is:
1. that we want to make dual licensing easier
2. that we see problems with the GNU/FDL, but at the same time are
stuck to it, so we want to be able to have something that can both be
put under the GNU/FDL and under a less restrictive license at the same
time

> Due to the nature of copyleft licenses, proliferating more of them only
> makes it harder to interchange content between them, even though they're
> supposed to be free.

The proposed license would make it easier, not harder, by expressly
specifying that the material can be published under other licenses as
well, and under what conditions.

> Ideally, I would like to have a system where you
> can just identify something generically as copyleft and people will
> understand what that means in the same way that they understand the
> basic principle of copyright today. But approaching that by reconciling
> different licensing systems is difficult, and this stage may be better
> achieved with the help of legislation.

That's going to be hard, see the number of Cc-licenses that are
around. You can't satisfy everyone at once.

Andre Engels


body:
On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 03:41:02 -0400
Sj <2.718281828 at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 23:40:52 +0200, Emmanuel Engelhart
> <emmanuel at engelhart.org> wrote:
> > On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 17:00:54 +0200
> > Emmanuel Engelhart <emmanuel at engelhart.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi
> > >
> > > I propose to add a new feature, to improve our fight again vandalism.
> > > I mean a diff, for watchlist articles, between the current version and the last
> > > read one.
> > >
> > > I need opinion about the feature ?
> > > and about an elegant technical solution too ?
> > >
> >
> > Nobody again... ?
> >
> > Follows my technical proposition:
> > - add a field "wl_validate" (containing an article version id)
> > - add a tab to validate an article (shown only if the article belongs to the user watchlist)
> > - add a link for each modified article in the watchlist to compare the current version with the last validated one.
> >
> > Kelson
>
> Kelson,  this sounds like a fine idea; the lack of response may be
> because a different review system is already being tested out, and
> trying to implement more than one at a time would be a pain.  Of
> course there are details to work out :

Ok, I guess you speak about the Magnus special page, coded last
July. I didn't know anything about this feature, so I take a look at
this feature. Magnus goal was to provide a voting system for each
article. I just want to improve the tracking of modifications.

I think, it would be good for me to work with the same data/framework.

But, this tool takes vote for one article. I need to have a validation
for one version. And that's a weakness of the current tool.

It would be great to store the article revision id in the validate
table.

> * once one person validates a version, do others still have the option
> to validate it as well?  what if a vandal comes, changes a page on her
> watchlist, and immediately validates it?

A user first validates an article for himself, to know which version
was entirely reviewed by him. So in a far future, he can review the
entire article again by showing simply the diff between the current
version and the last validate one.

>
> * what do you do with versions that have been validated by N users?
> show them differently in RC or watchlists?
>
> * Can users 'unvalidate' a version, or do they have to revert the last changes?
>

I guess the last answer avoids this question ?? I hope so ;-)

Best regards

Emmanuel Engelhart

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Il faut ?tre ?conome de son m?pris, en raison du grand nombre de
n?cessiteux.
	-- Chateaubriand
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emmanuel Engelhart      ICQ UIN : 53388731   TEL (+49)(0)6.22.15.88.03.31


body:
Hi

Is it possible to insert medias from wikicommons in a wikipedia article.
If yes, how ?
If no, where is the problem ?

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ne prenez pas la vie trop au serieux :
De toute facon vous n'en sortirez pas vivant.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emmanuel Engelhart      ICQ UIN : 53388731   TEL (+49)(0)6.22.15.88.03.31


from_name: Thomas R. Koll

body:
On Sat, Oct 16, 2004 at 03:41:02AM -0400, Sj wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 23:40:52 +0200, Emmanuel Engelhart
> Kelson,  this sounds like a fine idea; the lack of response may be
> because a different review system is already being tested out, and
> trying to implement more than one at a time would be a pain.  Of
> course there are details to work out :

If both are written as options it should be possible to have both.

> * once one person validates a version, do others still have the option
> to validate it as well?  what if a vandal comes, changes a page on her
> watchlist, and immediately validates it?

don't validate your own edits, simple as that.

> * what do you do with versions that have been validated by N users?
> show them differently in RC or watchlists?

a validate_counter sounds good.

> * Can users 'unvalidate' a version, or do they have to revert the last changes?

If a revert comes (only sysop can do that, no?) then the validate_counter is reset to 0

ciao, tom
--
== Weblinks ==
* http://shop.wikipedia.org - WikiReader Internet zu kaufen
* http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benutzer:TomK32
* http://www.hammererlehen.de - Urlaub in Berchtesgaden


from_name: Michael Snow

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Tracking Wikipedia growth

body:
For those of you that are interested in this subject, here's a report
that has Wikipedia as the 4th-fastest-growing website in the US for the
month of September, in terms of unique visitors.

http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/041015/cgf040_1.html

A lot of the growth is driven by students doing school research;
Britannica ranked as the 9th-fastest-growing for the same time period.
We're growing faster than they are, both in percentage terms and in raw
numbers, but they're still ahead overall.

--Michael Snow


from_name: Thomas Gries

body:
My email notification patch (see
http://bugzilla.wikipedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=454 ) and  the recently
proposed enhancement (proposed by Chris Phoenix see
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Email_notification_to-do_list#diff_link
) are quite close to the original proposal of Emmanuel Engelhart:

I propose to add a new feature, to improve our fight again vandalism.
I mean a diff, for watchlist articles, between the current version and
the lastread one.
I need opinion about the feature ? and about an elegant technical
solution too ?
Emmanuel Engelhart [Kelson]

Proposed for Enotif is to have (in the email notification) diff link: In
addition to a link to the latest page, include a link to the diff
between the latest page and the last version the user saw.

What you already can have now, when you would use Enotif v1.2
Because Enotif already knows the exact time of a watched page change ( =
when a notification is sent to each watching user), the page version
just before that "Enotif sent" event is the last version which was
actually(!) visited by the watching user. A green marker (introduced
together with the Enotif patch) marks such watched pages having new (=
not yet visited) contents. Just to say it again: the marker and the
notification mails are only for watch listed pages, which page title are
printed in bold, as you know,.

This feature (marker in Watchlist and Recent-Changes view is already
built in Enotif v1.2 -- see the documentation pages
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Enotif .

Enotif v1.2 is already available for Mediawiki 1.3.5 (as a diff file or
as a MediaWiki1.3.5+Enotif v1.2 tgz package). I migrated successfully
and without problems that patch to the current MediaWiki 1.3.6 and will
publish it with some small improvements as MediaWiki1.3.6+Enotif v1.3
this weekend, October 17, 2004.

Tom Gries
Berlin


from_name: Anthere

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: the block on RK

body:
I thank you for your answer James.

Just as a note for the admin who left you a note saying you could impose
the block yourself. Though you obviously could, I'd say that in terms of
procedure, it would probably be best for an arbitrator not to impose the
block himself after he took the decision to ban a person.

Imho.

ant

James Rosenzweig a ?crit:
> The following is essentially (with minor adjustments
> and additions) what I just posted to the talk page on
> the proposed decision in RK's arbitration case:
>
> This situation is entirely my fault, based in large
> part on my inexperience as an arbitrator. I asked on
> the proposed decision page what should be done about
> the ban. An admin (not an arbitrator) left me a note
> saying I could impose the block myself -- I should
> have taken the advice I have often given others, and
> waited for the input of an experienced arbitrator. I
> had been editing a bit too long, and I think I was
> trying to tie up too many loose ends as an arbitrator
> all in one night.
>
> As a result, I did not give RK the notification or the
> time to put affairs in order that now seem like such
> an obvious thing to me. I apologize deeply and
> sincerely to RK for this -- I am more than willing to
> unblock RK and allow him the time to set his user and
> user talk pages in the state he prefers. This was not
> intended by me as a slight to RK in any way: as I
> said, it's purely a combination of my inexperience as
> an arbitrator and my appalling failure to consider the
> matter with more care and prudence. I will copy this
> to the mailing list so that RK sees my response: if he
> wishes, he is more than welcome to let me know he
> would like to be unblocked for a day to set things in
> order.
>
> I apologize once again to him, and to the Wikipedia
> community, for not displaying more fully the kind of
> careful and well-thought-out action that I believe led
> the community to entrust me with this position, and I
> promise to remedy that in the future.
>
> James Rosenzweig
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com


body:
Rebecca wrote

> Sometimes, Charles, I really do wonder if you read people's posts
> before replying to them.

Not a fair comment. My point is that consistency cannot under current
conditions be instantly demanded, in the form that if Y is just as bad as X
etc.  It can be demanded in the longer term in the form of precedents; which
indeed is something to ask about.

Charles


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Administrator Abuse

body:
Jens Ropers a ?crit:
> Based on the name and conduct, I dare say Ute is probably female and
> (possibly quite) young.
> Maybe that could be asked about and/or taken into account?
> Just a thought.
>
> -- ropers [[en:User:Ropers]]

Why being a female should exactly make a difference ?


body:
Daniel Mayer a ?crit:
> --- Sj <2.718281828 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 00:55:47 +0200, Anthere <anthere9 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>>One comment :
>>>
>>>1.1) RK is banned from editing Wikipedia for four months. In the time he
>>>is banned, he will be required to do 'community service' work on
>>>Wikibooks on topics exclusively related to biology.
>>>
>>>Fortunately, this did not pass.
>>
>>Yes, this was a bizarre suggestion.  Perhaps the next suggested remedy
>>will require financial donations in reparation, before restoring a
>>long-time user's editing privileges.
>
>
> Community service is a very valid remedy in the real world. Why not here? A
> better proposed remedy would have added community service as an option RK could
> choose instead of a total hard ban.
>
> *That* is just the type of thing that would have been appropriate for (using
> your own words) somebody who obviously cares a great deal about the project.
>
> If the only tool you have is a hammer, then all your problems start to look
> like nails. The ArbCom needs more tools.
>
> -- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)

I perfectly agree it might be a solution, and a good one for RK to show
his good will. And I definitly support this kind of solution.

But this can only be an option endorsed by RK himself. Not forced on him.

There is a huge difference between real life and Wikipedia.

We chose to participate and be part of Wikipedia community. We can also
choose not to. And that will be okay.

We did not choose to born, and in most places we have no choice but to
be part of the civil society.


subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: Re: problem resizing photo's

body:
Thanks again, well I am working for several hours on it so I think I take a
break now :)
I installed the whole thing on a computer in my network and all works well.

So I think I have to contact my website hoster.
I tried to install ImageMagick on the server but ofcourse I have no acces to
the root.

I have read the manual and found out that there is a way to intall MM with a
prefix but I was unable to do so.
I think I have not enough knowledge to do that.

When I try to install I type './configure' and a lot of difficult text shows
up.
Than the manual says type 'make install' and than the file is not found.

Hmmmmmm, think I need a cup of coffe now........

Thanks anyway for helping me,
Forkink
wmf at xs4all.nl

"Brion Vibber" <brion at pobox.com> schreef in bericht
news:18C9FFA8-1F4E-11D9-BF7A-000A95DAA284 at pobox.com...
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


from_name: Andy Rabagliati

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Image tarball

body:
On Fri, 15 Oct 2004, Andre Engels wrote:

> On Wed, 13 Oct 2004 23:15:59 +0200, andyr at wizzy.com <andyr at wizzy.com> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 13 Oct 2004, Tim Starling wrote:
> >
> > > I've added the image tarball generation to the backup script, so new
> > > tarballs will be generated every week from now on.
> >
> > 14Gig - Owww.
> >
> > In a few short months it has grown from 3Gig.

Sorry - the cron jobs had not run and I was looking at the full db archive.

Now I see the pictures - 8Gig - not quite so bad :-)

> I assume the cause of that is the new image syntax: It used to be that
> if you had a large image, you'd make it smaller (which also decreased
> its file size). Now it is put on the site in large version, and then
> made smaller to the user with the '000px' markup. Which means that
> there are much more large (sometimes huge) image files.

It will take me a week or so to get a good look at these - but -
a question for the developers - am I right to only accept files
matching ./en/[0-9a-f]/../* from the archive ?

Presumably uploads are just hashed into these dirs ?

There are a few pics that come with the mediawiki software that I
would, naturally, leave alone.

In the first (Jun) archive /thumb/* was about 700Meg, and /archive/*
was similar. There were also a lot of encyclopedia pics in the
root dir - I threw them all away without noticing anything untoward.

I might run a script over the archive and convert large images
to ones of the same size but, say, 70% quality. I imagine I
could easily halve the archive size that way.

If there are other regexes that would catch files resized by the
server I would be very grateful for the hint.

Currently I am getting the archive to a US server, unpacking,
throwing away, and then rsyncing down to a friendly server in
South Africa.

Cheers,   Andy!


subject: [Wikitech-l] Wikispecies

body:
For those who havn't heard of wikispecies yet: wikispecies is a
wikimedia project meant to accomodate the needs and demands of scientists
to a species directory and database. It was set up at http://
species.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page to test it and discuss details.

As the initial brainstorming on the village pump goes on, one thing
becomes clear: wikispecies has the potential to attract many people who
would not contribute to a general encyclopedia, but would to a scientific
database. As wikispecies will strictly suppress any forking from
wikipedia, I thought about an approach that would allow us to use the pool
of species-folks for wikipedia.

The tasks:
1.) Wikispecies provides an interface (already at www.wikispecies.org)
with templates for different categories (such as "synonymes", "habitat",
"morphology" etc.)

2.) These categories represent a table that can be accessed by wikipedia
and wikispecies

3.) Wikispecies, which have an emphasis on things like "synonymes" or
"original species description" will display these categories on a high
order

4.) Wikipedia will display the information that seems interesting for the
user of a general encyclopedia in an order that seems appropriate for that
purpose

As I don't understand the underlying technical questions, I would like to
know if this is technically feasible and - more important - who would
volunteer to set up a database that would work as proposed.

Thank you very much in advance,

Benedikt

--
+++ GMX DSL Premiumtarife 3 Monate gratis* + WLAN-Router 0,- EUR* +++
Clevere DSL-Nutzer wechseln jetzt zu GMX: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/dsl


subject:
[Wikitech-l] How to change license and language after
	installation?

body:
On Oct 16, 2004, at 7:18 AM, Kiss All wrote:
> Hi,all
> Originally, I just chosed the license of our internal medawiki as
> GFDL. But our group memebers don't think it is proper for the actual
> content.
> Could anybody tell me how to change it?

Edit LocalSettings.php and change the license settings. (Set them all
to "" to leave it vague and unspecified; you can clarify in MediaWiki:
messages or help pages if you like.)

> I also installed mediawiki 1.3.5 on my personal machine with chinese
> language option. But the help link is linking to english wikipedia
> site's bad title page. I don't want to hack the sidebar and only want
> to switch to english. How can I do this?

Edit LocalSettings.php and change $wgLanguageCode. You'll also need to
rebuild the MediaWiki: pages from the English language file, use the
'rebuildMessages.php' script in maintenance/. This needs to be run from
the command line, and you should make an AdminSettings.php first (see
AdminSettings.sample).

IMPORTANT NOTE: if rebuildMessages.php seems to "hang" with no output,
type the number "2" and hit "enter". On some PHP configurations there
seems to be an output buffering problem, and so the prompt doesn't
appear before it sits there waiting for input. The prompt looks
something like this:

Current namespace size: 1739
1. Update messages to include latest additions to Language.php
2. Delete all messages and reinitialise namespace
3. Quit

Please enter a number:

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20041016/a6deb4dd/attachment.pgp>