from_name: Anthere

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: userbox : insanity ?

body:
Technical idea : limit the number of templates on a page ?

ant

SCZenz wrote:
> So how do we make things like this go away?  The trouble here is that
> a shocking number, maybe an outright majority, of users seem to think
> "free speech" on Wikipedia is a higher value than actually writing the
> encyclopedia.  I don't think ignoring their views--misguided though
> they may be--will improve the encyclopedia, I think it'll make things
> worse.
>
> SCZenz
>
> On 1/5/06, Anthere <Anthere9 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>My position in short
>>
>>We are here to write an encyclopedia. First before all.
>>
>>Userbox are interesting if they are related to Wikipedia activity and
>>growth.
>>
>>Wikipedians mood IS actually important to the community building and
>>interacting.
>>Which browsers are used is also an interesting information to know how
>>Wikipedia appears to readers, detect bugs...
>>Which language the user manage or which project he participates to is
>>also interesting for project management and editors daily interactions.
>>
>>All this is well and good.
>>
>>Which hand is used to masturbate self is of no interest within wikipedia
>>activity, except if one is actually masturbating himself while writing a
>>message on another user talk page. Is that related to Wikipedia ? Is
>>that helping the community ? No. So, it should go away.
>>
>>Having a template stating something against our goals, such as {{User
>>allow fairuse}} has a name : it is trolling. Trolling has benefits...
>>sometimes. But if it disrupts the community too much (and generate
>>thousands of mails on a mailing list, huge loss of time), then, it
>>should just go away.
>>
>>ant
>>
>>
>>SCZenz wrote:
>>
>>>How about {{User allow fairuse}}?  That seems to be against pretty
>>>much everything Wikipedia stands for.  If we have so many users who
>>>think they can *vote* in an unreasonable copyright policy, maybe we
>>>need unilateral admin action after all.
>>>
>>>On 1/5/06, Anthere <Anthere9 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>I have not followed ANY of the discussion on userbox. Have no idea what
>>>>is going on, no idea who supports what, no idea what is going on.
>>>>
>>>>However, I just speedy deleted {{User masturbation-left}}.
>>>>
>>>>It contained this image :
>>>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Masturbationsm.jpg
>>>>
>>>>Sorry if that appears like an admin abuse or whatever, but imho, this is
>>>>just ***ridiculous***.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>ant


list: wikien-l

source: pipermail-mbox

from_name: jayjg

subject: [WikiEN-l] The userbox fad

body:
On 1/6/06, Sam Spade <samspade.thomasjefferson at googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> When they argue about policy with longtime editors who actually know
> something about policy, they *are* doing harm.  They are wasting the time
> and trying the patience of someone who is actually contributing to the
> goal
> of the project.
>
> Jay.
>
> This is one of the worst things I have heard said in the context of
> the wikipedia.

Jack, you've been on Wikipedia for how many years now?  I'm going to have to
assume this is hyperbole.

Jay.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: userbox : insanity ?

body:
Sam Spade wrote:
> Taking away peoples user boxes is pointless and disruptive. Admins who
> think they should defy consensus to delete peoples self labels are out
> of line. I understand that discussing mastrabation is in bad taste. So
> are ALOT of user pages. I have been very disturbed by users whose
> pages tell me they are into Satanism, are a "perverted trannfag", or
> have a giant che image or soviet star. The single most disruptive user
> page I know is this one:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Deeceevoice
>
> and it has no user boxes.
>
> If there are real objections, craft real policy to deal w them. Do not
> persecute a popular trend in a disruptive manner. That just reinforces
> rebellion and resentment against haughty admins.
>
> Sam Spade

?????????

yes, I think it is high time for a policy if common sense does not
prevail...

ant


from_name: Kirill Lokshin

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: userbox : insanity ?

body:
On 1/6/06, Chris Jenkinson <chris at starglade.org> wrote:
> Kirill Lokshin wrote:
> > On 1/6/06, Sam Korn <smoddy at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >>On 1/6/06, Kirill Lokshin <kirill.lokshin at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>>Good idea.  Is there some way this can be done on a per-namespace
> >>>basis, though?  A lot of Wikipedia: pages (e.g. [[Wikipedia:Template
> >>>messages]]) transclude a lot of templates; the use of {{tl}} has also
> >>>become quite pervasive, both in Wikipedia: and in Talk:
> >>
> >>{{tl}} should be substituted.
> >
> >
> > Does it work when substituted now?  I know there were some issues with
> > that before.
> >
> > In any case, if we were to do this, we would need a bot to go through
> > and substitute the massively-used shorthand templates: {{tl}},
> > {{user}}, {{vandal}}, {{admin}}, etc.
>
> The point of these templates is that they are short and simple to use.
> If they are subst:'d in, they become more complicated. Why do we need to
> do this?

Because otherwise they won't work, given that they tend to be used
many times on a single page.

This entire discussion, of course, assumes that limiting the number of
templates expanded per page is actually something that may take place.

Kirill Lokshin


list: wikitech-l

from_name: sivagowri_hai gowri

subject: [Wikitech-l] to do project in calculator

body:
i am gowri from india.i want help to do digital calculator regarding the basics. please guide me

Send instant messages to your online friends http://in.messenger.yahoo.com


from_name: Conrad Dunkerson

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: userbox : insanity ?

references:
<dpk9n6$v9f$1@sea.gmane.org>
	<ce4d55b80601051548i155e2b7dw2651ca5a5de4958d@mail.gmail.com>
	<dpkc7c$7vl$1@sea.gmane.org>
	<ce4d55b80601051644v16303234l14fd54f21dcf4efa@mail.gmail.com>
	<dplhrl$cv3$1@sea.gmane.org>

body:
Anthere wrote:
> Technical idea : limit the number of templates on a page ?

I don't think it would help. The first 'solution' would be a pyramid
scheme... if you can only call five templates then the userpage would
call five template pages... which would each call five template pages...
et cetera.

So then we start cracking down on that (it's meta-templating)... and
some clever person eventually realizes that there is no reason
whatsoever that each userbox has to be a separate template. You could
include every userbox on wikipedia into a single template call. That
might limit the order in which they appear, but I think that could be
worked out as well.


from_name: Peter Mackay

subject: [WikiEN-l] The userbox fad

body:
> From: wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org
> [mailto:wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org] On Behalf Of jayjg
> Sent: Friday, 6 January 2006 10:26
> To: English Wikipedia
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] The userbox fad
>
> On 1/5/06, Peter Mackay <peter.mackay at bigpond.com> wrote:
> >
> > > From: wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org
> > > [mailto:wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org] On Behalf Of jayjg
> > > Sent: Friday, 6 January 2006 09:24
> > > To: English Wikipedia
> > > Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] The userbox fad
> > >
> > > On 1/5/06, Peter Mackay <peter.mackay at bigpond.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > From: wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org
> > > > > [mailto:wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org] On Behalf Of jayjg
> > > >
> > > > > > There are better social clubs available on the net. If
> > > > > socialising is
> > > > > > truly their main interest, then they'll go elsewhere
> > > soon enough.
> > > > >
> > > > > There are no social clubs available on the net with the
> > > prestige of
> > > > > Wikipedia.  It is a top 20 website.
> > > >
> > > > Surely, using your own definition, that would mean that
> > > there are 19
> > > > more attractive ones?
> > >
> > > Not really, since the others don't allow people to do
> this kind of
> > > thing.
> >
> > Ah. So you see Wikipedia as a social club. A prestigious
> social club.

> Actually, I've been arguing the exact opposite.  Are you sure
> you're reading my e-mails?

You said: "There are no social clubs available on the net with the prestige
of Wikipedia." That looks like a statement that Wikipedia is the most
prestigious social club available on the net. If you meant the exact
opposite, perhaps you should have been less ambiguous in your wording!

I mean, you specifically ruled out the other 19 more prestigious sites.

Presumably you agreed with the rest of my post, including the part where I
said, "I suspect that we are playing with words now."

Pete, never averse to a spot of wordplay


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: userbox : insanity ?

body:
> From: wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org
> [mailto:wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org] On Behalf Of Anthere

> Which hand is used to masturbate self is of no interest
> within wikipedia activity, except if one is actually
> masturbating himself while writing a message on another user
> talk page. Is that related to Wikipedia ? Is that helping the
> community ? No. So, it should go away.
>
> Having a template stating something against our goals, such
> as {{User allow fairuse}} has a name : it is trolling.
> Trolling has benefits...
> sometimes. But if it disrupts the community too much (and
> generate thousands of mails on a mailing list, huge loss of
> time), then, it should just go away.

What's that they say about feeding trolls?


subject:
[WikiEN-l] Userbox compromise proposal (Was:
	Proposalonuserboxdisagreement)

body:
> From: wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org
> [mailto:wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org] On Behalf Of jayjg
> Sent: Friday, 6 January 2006 09:37
> To: English Wikipedia
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Userbox compromise proposal (Was:
> Proposalonuserboxdisagreement)
>
> On 1/5/06, Peter Mackay <peter.mackay at bigpond.com> wrote:
> >
> > > From: wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org
> > > [mailto:wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org] On Behalf Of jayjg
> > > Sent: Friday, 6 January 2006 09:21
> > > To: English Wikipedia
> > > Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Userbox compromise proposal (Was:
> > > Proposal onuserboxdisagreement)
> > >
> > > On 1/5/06, Peter Mackay <peter.mackay at bigpond.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > Being demonised instead of guided, it would seem. If
> > > long-established
> > > > editors greet newcomers with hostility, they should hardly be
> > > > surprised when this behaviour is taken as the established norm.
> > >
> > >
> > > They haven't been demonised, nor greeted with hostility; I'm not
> > > sure where you got that from.
> >
> > Right here, brother. Step back and read your comments with
> the eyes of
> > those whom you are dunking in [[vitriol]].
>
> Sigh. They're not here, I'm not interacting with them, and
> the vitriol seems
> to be something you have invented.

Perhaps we are misunderstanding each other. After all, only you and I know
what is in our hearts, and words are an imperfect medium, especially when
all we see is the bland ASCII characters.

I withdraw the "dunking in vitriol" comment. It was uneccessary and
unjustified.

Perhaps the question is how do we deal with the proliferation of userboxes?

My feeling is that reacting with hostility and brutality is only going to
escalate matters. I'm more inclined to ridicule and humiliation, especially
with those self-identifying as self-pleasurers, but again, this is perhaps
not the optimum approach.

I'd like to say that making use of the Golden Rule and setting an example by
encouraging good behaviour and warning against bad behaviour is my preferred
approach, but again, that's easy for me to say, because I'm not the person
doing it.

Peter (Skyring)


from_name: Rob Smith

subject: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedia block dispute

body:
One year ban is a godsend: now I can actually get some work done unmolested
and unharrassed by the "experts" and thier sockpuppets who answer to no one.

nobs

On 1/6/06, Fred Bauder <fredbaud at ctelco.net> wrote:
>
> After your one year ban for personal attacks perhaps you can help.
>
>


from_name: Brock Batsell

subject: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedia block dispute

body:
Wow.  The block was too long in my opinion, but based on your
attitudes here (and the fact that you did start this problem, but
don't feel like admitting your wrongdoing), if it were up to me, I'd
leave it in place.  WP would do just fine without yet another troll
and editor with a chip on his shoulder.

Regards,
[[en:User:Bbatsell]]


from_name: MacGyverMagic/Mgm

subject:
[WikiEN-l] Want to publish English version of Wikipedia on DVD
	and need help/advice

body:
Also don't forget, that to comply with the GFDL, you need to provide a list
of contributors for each article. Or at the very least link to the online
history of the article in question.

Mgm

On 1/6/06, Richard Seltzer <seltzer at samizdat.com> wrote:
>
> Thanks for  your response.
>
> Sounds like this could be very difficult. It's hard to imagine "filtering"
> the entire Wikipedia.
> I was hoping that the "articles only" version (without comments) would be
> clean and reliable and free of potential copyright problems.
> And I would not want to include search software. The basic search
> capabilities within Windows could be used. And, of course, a customer
> could
> install any other search program as well.  But, ideally, it should be
> possible to simply navigate with links (as one does with the CIA World
> Factbook).
>
> Do you have an email address for Tim Starling?
>
> I was  hoping that there would be a way to convert regularly updated
> Wikipedia files to a format appropriate for DVD, so it would be possible
> for
> me to offer regular frequent updates.
>
> And is there an email address to officially contact the Foundation?
>
> Thanks again.
>
> Richard
>
> Richard Seltzer, seltzer at samizdat.com, 617-469-2269,
> http://www.samizdat.com
> A library for the price of a book http://store.yahoo.com/samizdat
> A summary of our book publishing projects
> http://www.samizdat.com/orientation.html
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Andrew Gray" <shimgray at gmail.com>
> To: "English Wikipedia" <wikien-l at wikipedia.org>; <seltzer at samizdat.com>
> Sent: Friday, January 06, 2006 6:55 AM
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Want to publish English version of Wikipedia on
> DVD
> and need help/advice
>
>
> On 05/01/06, Richard Seltzer <seltzer at samizdat.com> wrote:
>
> > I understand (thanks to Lars Aronsson) that Directmedia Publishing
> > in Berlin (www.directmedia.de) put the German Wikipedia on DVD
> > (ISBN 3-86640-001-2).  It sells for $10 on www.amazon.de, and
> > $1 of that goes to the German branch of the Wikimedia Foundation.
>
> Euro not dollars, but yeah. Handily, ten euro is almost exactly the
> $12 you mention below.
>
> You might be interested to read
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Wikipedia, where Axel Boldt has
> given a short explanation of the various .de publishing projects.
>
> It may be worth noting that the German publication wasn't a straight
> copy of the "live dump", but rather was a slightly-filtered version -
> a largish team had vetted the whole set of articles and then put it on
> DVD. I'm not sure what level of quality you're looking at for this
> DVD, but without a step like this you'd be leaving a lot of dross (and
> a lot of potential copyright problems) in place. They also had some
> home-brewed searching software, rather than just a webbrowser, IIRC.
>
> As to producing static HTML versions, I believe Tim Starling was
> working on tools to do just this, but I can't offhand find anything.
> Searching the archives of this list might be worthwhile.
>
> One final point - you mention donations to Wikimedia. I assume (since
> it makes good business sense) you'd want to publicise this, and thus
> use the Wikipedia/Wikimedia name - this may well be preaching to the
> choir, but please contact the Foundation, to avoid running into
> trademark issues and any associated unpleasantness. (I certainly don't
> know what the status of using the name was in Germany...)
>
> But all that aside, the donations are of course appreciated :-)
>
> Best of luck,
> --
> - Andrew Gray
> andrew.gray at dunelm.org.uk
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: Nyenyec N

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: userbox : insanity ?

body:
If you disallow templates, people who like them will just copy&paste
the code on their user page. It doesn't take longer at all, one just
needs to mark slightly more text with their mouse.

I think if you want to limit the kind of content that can be posted on
a user page, you'll need to come up with a new policy, not a new piece
of code.

Although removing fair use images from user pages by a bot can work.

-- nyenyec

On 1/6/06, Sam Korn <smoddy at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 1/6/06, Matt Brown <morven at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Is there template syntax to force a template to always subst: in?  If
> > not, it might be a good idea.
>
> No, but I believe some bots do it.
>
> --
> Sam
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: Mason Patrick E SSgt 28 MUNS/MXWKB

subject: [WikiEN-l] Abuse of Power

body:
User Talrias is abusing his power as an administrator and I would like
to formally request that he be reprimanded for this and also request
that my editing privileges be reinstated. Thank you.


from_name: Fred Bauder

subject: [WikiEN-l] userbox : insanity ?

body:
How about an arbitrary rule, maximum of 5 userboxes on any user page?

Fred

On Jan 6, 2006, at 1:09 PM, Jimmy Wales wrote:

> Jimmy Wales wrote:
>
>> SCZenz wrote:
>>
>>
>>> How about {{User allow fairuse}}?  That seems to be against pretty
>>> much everything Wikipedia stands for.  If we have so many users who
>>> think they can *vote* in an unreasonable copyright policy, maybe we
>>> need unilateral admin action after all.
>>>
>>
>>
>> I deleted that one myself.
>>
>
> And then, upon a request on my talk page, undeleted it.  I'll let the
> TfD run its course.
>
> I'm in favor of deleting a ton of userboxes, especially those with
> non-free images, but frankly, I think we should get rid of most of
> them
> anyway.  (This is not a decree and I'm trying to stay out of the
> userbox
> wars myself.  Mostly.)
>
>
>
> --Jimbo
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: Kevin Mulligan

subject: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedia block dispute

body:
Essjay -Wikipedia- wrote:
> First, it would have been nice for Kevin to either email me, as the
> blocking policy suggests, or leave a note on his talk page; however,
> as we all know, it is much more satisfying to burn an admin at the
> stake via the mailing list rather than try to resolve the situation
> directly. I  feel it such a waste to have a dozen different ways to
> contact me listed on my talk page and have none of them be of any use
> to him.
It was never my intention to burn anyone at the stake.  I posted this to
the mailing list per the instructions I see when I try to edit a page
now: "If you believe that our blocking policy was violated, you may
discuss the block publicly on the WikiEN-l mailing list."  I didn't want
to contact you directly since I would have preferred if someone from a
more neutral standpoint could have handled the situation since I feel
that the block you have placed on me suggests a personal bias.
>
> I issued the indefinnate block after Kevin trolled Cool Cat and
> several other users, including Anthere, over a completely
> inappropriate userbox. I settled on an indef block because he admitted
> that his intention in the entire situation was to troll, and we all
> know that trolling is the last thing Wikipedia needs, although it
> certainly receives more than its share. I announced the block in
> #wikimeda, and no other admin saw fit to adjust it, although there
> were several (including two Board members, and, if I remember
> correctly, Jimbo himself) in the channel and actively discussing the
> matter. Further, the block was recorded in the block log, as all
> blocks are, and no other user saw fit to raise the issue on my talk
> page, AN/I, or elsewhere.
I absolutely deny that I trolled anyone other than Cool Cat.  I left
this comment
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Anthere#My_user_box) on
Anthere's userpage but there is absolutely no way it can be construed as
trolling or anything similar.  I'm very surprised that no other admins
commented on my shockingly severe ban, I can only assume this is because
they trusted your judgement in the matter.
>
> Given that several other users have been affected by the resulting
> autoblocks, I'm willing to reduce the block to 24 hours (from whatever
> time I set it) and be done with the matter, provided that, as Kevin
> asserts that he has been a upstanding contributor for a long time, he
> gives up trolling and goes back to making useful edits. If he intends
> to continue trolling, however, I'm not inclined to reduce the block,
> as why would I unblock someone so they can return to trolling.
According to the block log only one other user has been affected by my
block, that is not several.  I have no idea how any other users could in
fact be affected since I have a static IP address.
>
>
> I don't normally get the mailing list emails, so if another admin sees
> a response from Kevin indicating that he has given up trolling and
> would like to be unblocked, please feel free to unblock, and leave me
> a note on my talk saying that it has been done. If one of you
> disagrees with the block (and I'm sure there will be at least one), I
> invoke what I have written on my userpage:
> <quote>
> I strongly encourage other administrators who feel I have made an
> action inappropriately to take the appropriate action to rectify it
> and follow up with a note to me.
> </quote>
>
> If, by some odd chance, Kevin would like to email me directly, instead
> of involving the entire mailing list, he is welcome to do so. I'm also
> available by the other twelve methods listed on my userpage.

    As always, peace be with you all.

    Essjay

I don't appreciate your sarcasm here Essjay.  Since you have posted this
to the mailing list rather than emailing me directly I can only assume
you are happy for it to be handled in public now.

I still very strongly feel that Essjay's overreacted with his block.
I'm not going to allow myself to be portrayed as a merciless troll by
him for this when in fact all I did was leave a practical joke on a
user's talk page.  I appreciate that I did wrong but I do NOT deserve an
indefinite ban from Wikipedia and I question whether I deserve a ban at
all, but that's not for me to decide.

I would very much appreciate it if this situation could be arbitrated as
I am extremely unhappy about being treated this way considering the time
and effort I have put into Wikipedia in the past.

Regards,
Kevin Mulligan

--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.14.14/222 - Release Date: 1/5/2006


from_name: SCZenz

subject: [WikiEN-l] userbox : insanity ?

body:
On 1/6/06, Jimmy Wales <jwales at wikia.com> wrote:
> Jimmy Wales wrote:
> > SCZenz wrote:
> >
> >>How about {{User allow fairuse}}?  That seems to be against pretty
> >>much everything Wikipedia stands for.  If we have so many users who
> >>think they can *vote* in an unreasonable copyright policy, maybe we
> >>need unilateral admin action after all.
> >
> >
> > I deleted that one myself.
>
> And then, upon a request on my talk page, undeleted it.  I'll let the
> TfD run its course.
>
> I'm in favor of deleting a ton of userboxes, especially those with
> non-free images, but frankly, I think we should get rid of most of them
> anyway.  (This is not a decree and I'm trying to stay out of the userbox
> wars myself.  Mostly.)

Jimbo, I have a question.  You think most userboxes should be deleted,
and so do a bunch of other people, including me at this point.  But
it's clearly not a supermajority, so almost all userboxes are going to
be kept if people stay within process (the one above may be an
exception).  In fact, as we've seen, there are a lot of people who
want to change policy about fairuse images in user space for the sake
of the boxes; maybe they could even change *that* we followed the
usual consensus-based procedure for adopting policy.

I've become more and more convinced that the inmates are indeed
running the asylum on these issues, so my question to you is: what do
you think we (as ordinary users who agree with your non-decree) should
do?

SCZenz


from_name: Carbonite

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: userbox : insanity ?

body:
On 1/6/06, Sam Korn <smoddy at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 1/6/06, Nyenyec N <nyenyec at gmail.com> wrote:
> > If you disallow templates, people who like them will just copy&paste
> > the code on their user page. It doesn't take longer at all, one just
> > needs to mark slightly more text with their mouse.
>
> That cuts out my main complaint against userboxes.

Exactly. I'd like to have a repository of code for creating whatever
userboxes people come up with. No fair use images or categories would
be allowed. Userboxes that actually had an encyclopedic use (Babel
boxes, for example) could remain as templates. This would seem to
allow everyone to keep their userboxes and would remove the vast
majority of complaints about them.

Carbonite


from_name: Jimmy Wales

subject: [WikiEN-l] userbox : insanity ?

body:
SCZenz wrote:
> How about {{User allow fairuse}}?  That seems to be against pretty
> much everything Wikipedia stands for.  If we have so many users who
> think they can *vote* in an unreasonable copyright policy, maybe we
> need unilateral admin action after all.

I deleted that one myself.


list: wikipedia-l

from_name: Tomer Chachamu

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Allow multiple entries for one topic

body:
On 05/01/06, ?var Arnfj?r? Bjarmason <avarab at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 1/5/06, Alphax (Wikipedia email) <alphasigmax at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Fred Bauder wrote:
> > > This is an excellent idea. Rather than try to cram all points of view
> > > into one article, how about loosening up and allowing several  articles
> > > with differing points of view or level of detail?
> > >
> > > This idea has been discussed before, but is worth another look.
> > >
> >
> > Fred, you can keep SPOV on Wikinfo; Wikipedia is and always will be
> > NPOV. The "multiple levels of detail" is already covered by subarticles
> > (eg. Geography of Australia).
>
> Having multiple articles on one topic from different points of view is
> certainly a bad idea, but having multiple articles (if people can
> bother to maintain them) need not be. The objective of an article is
> to explain a given topic, and a single monolithic explanation might
> not suit everybody, for instance if you're familiar with the field
> you'd like a more technical explanation and if you aren't something
> that eases you into the topic is more appropriate.

To give some examples,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M-theory
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NP-complete


subject: [WikiEN-l] userbox : insanity ?

body:
Jimmy Wales wrote:
> SCZenz wrote:
>
>>How about {{User allow fairuse}}?  That seems to be against pretty
>>much everything Wikipedia stands for.  If we have so many users who
>>think they can *vote* in an unreasonable copyright policy, maybe we
>>need unilateral admin action after all.
>
>
> I deleted that one myself.

And then, upon a request on my talk page, undeleted it.  I'll let the
TfD run its course.

I'm in favor of deleting a ton of userboxes, especially those with
non-free images, but frankly, I think we should get rid of most of them
anyway.  (This is not a decree and I'm trying to stay out of the userbox
wars myself.  Mostly.)

--Jimbo


from_name: Sam Spade

subject: [WikiEN-l] The userbox fad

body:
When they argue about policy with longtime editors who actually know
something about policy, they *are* doing harm.  They are wasting the time
and trying the patience of someone who is actually contributing to the goal
of the project.

Jay.

This is one of the worst things I have heard said in the context of
the wikipedia. I politely ask you to rethink and restate this, as I
assume you did not mean this.

Sam Spade


subject: [WikiEN-l] userbox : insanity ?

body:
On 1/6/06, Jimmy Wales <jwales at wikia.com> wrote:
> Jimmy Wales wrote:
> > SCZenz wrote:
> >
> >>How about {{User allow fairuse}}?  That seems to be against pretty
> >>much everything Wikipedia stands for.  If we have so many users who
> >>think they can *vote* in an unreasonable copyright policy, maybe we
> >>need unilateral admin action after all.
> >
> >
> > I deleted that one myself.
>
> And then, upon a request on my talk page, undeleted it.  I'll let the
> TfD run its course.
>
> I'm in favor of deleting a ton of userboxes, especially those with
> non-free images, but frankly, I think we should get rid of most of them
> anyway.  (This is not a decree and I'm trying to stay out of the userbox
> wars myself.  Mostly.)

Jimbo,

What's your opinion on the inclusion of user categories (Pro-life,
Democrat, etc...) in userboxes? Even if these userboxes are kept, I
don't see why these templates should categorize users unless it
somehow relates to the encyclopedia (we should keep Babel boxes, for
example). I realize you'd like to remain neutral on the general issue
of userboxes, but would you support the removal of categories from
most userboxes?

Carbonite


subject: [WikiEN-l] Userbox fads

body:
Tony Sidaway wrote:
> Oh I completely agree. The babel boxes, etc, indeed most userboxes,
> are fine. Some may be used for attacks and must be deleted.  Some
> promote factionalism by providing a handy directory for the pushers of
> various points of view (I have identified three such cases in the past
> three weeks) and they must also go.  I don't thinkk we need be overly
> concerned about "powered by alcohol" and other joky stuff.

Hestitations, caveats, and all, I would say that Tony and I are mostly
in agreement here.

The language boxes are actually incredibly useful and wonderful.  Boxes
that help me to know my fellow Wikipedians are useful.  Boxes which
attack people are bad.

Boxes which promote factionalism are bad, but this is in tension with
the idea that these same boxes help me to know my fellow Wikipedians.
It someone with a "Supporter of the Republican Party" userbox just being
friendly and giving me information about themselves, or are they
signalling a desire to engage in POV-pushing conflict?  It all depends
on the user.

As I have said elsewhere in a comment that played a role in setting off
the Great Userbox War of 2006, I think we should try not to use
userboxes that would suggest that we are ideological in our editing.
Here we are wikipedians, out there we may be advocates, but here we just
want to share knowledge and help each other get it right.  (And those
who want to use Wikipedia to advance a particular political or
ideological agenda are invited to leave us alone, please.)

Fun little jokey stuff?  Ehh... I agree with Tony: "I don't think we
need be overly concerned..."

As with everything in Wikipedia, I'm sure the wisdom of the community in
the final analysis will be somewhere in the middle ground (with a very
long and tedious policy and procedure ha ha).

--Jimbo


from_name: Jay Converse

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: The userbox fad

body:
On 1/6/06, Peter Mackay <peter.mackay at bigpond.com> wrote:
>
> > From: wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org
> > [mailto:wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org] On Behalf Of Michael Snow
>
> > I'm not suggesting the word-twisting should continue, but
> > this entire discussion seems to have been carried on in
> > ignorance of the fact that there is, in fact, a better
> > alternative for people who choose their online communities
> > based purely on the amount of traffic they get.
> > MySpace currently ranks 13th according to Alexa, still quite
> > a few spots ahead of Wikipedia. I'm not sure that prestigious
> > is the word you're looking for (your average pundit would
> > probably resort to the tried and true "hip"), but whatever it
> > is they've got, it was worth $580 million to Rupert Murdoch.
>
> Aha! Here we have the solution to Wikipedia's funding problems.
>
> Thanks for that, Michael - I'm not "au lait" with the hip sites. In terms
> of
> culture, I'm still struggling with the Eighties. Where did it all go
> wrong?
>
> Peter (Skyring)
>
>
Somewhere between dayglo clothing and Van Halen.

--
I'm not stupid, just selectively ignorant.


subject: [WikiEN-l] The userbox fad

body:
> From: wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org
> [mailto:wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org] On Behalf Of jayjg

> On 1/5/06, Peter Mackay <peter.mackay at bigpond.com> wrote:
> >
> > > From: wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org
> > > [mailto:wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org] On Behalf Of jayjg
> > > Sent: Friday, 6 January 2006 10:26
> > > To: English Wikipedia
> > > Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] The userbox fad
> > >
> > > On 1/5/06, Peter Mackay <peter.mackay at bigpond.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > From: wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org
> > > > > [mailto:wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org] On Behalf Of jayjg
> > > > > Sent: Friday, 6 January 2006 09:24
> > > > > To: English Wikipedia
> > > > > Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] The userbox fad
> > > > >
> > > > > On 1/5/06, Peter Mackay < peter.mackay at bigpond.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > From: wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org
> > > > > > > [mailto: wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org] On
> Behalf Of jayjg
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > There are better social clubs available on the net. If
> > > > > > > socialising is
> > > > > > > > truly their main interest, then they'll go elsewhere
> > > > > soon enough.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > There are no social clubs available on the net with the
> > > > > prestige of
> > > > > > > Wikipedia.  It is a top 20 website.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Surely, using your own definition, that would mean that
> > > > > there are 19
> > > > > > more attractive ones?
> > > > >
> > > > > Not really, since the others don't allow people to do
> > > this kind of
> > > > > thing.
> > > >
> > > > Ah. So you see Wikipedia as a social club. A prestigious
> > > social club.
> >
> > > Actually, I've been arguing the exact opposite.  Are you
> sure you're
> > > reading my e-mails?
> >
> > You said: "There are no social clubs available on the net with the
> > prestige of Wikipedia." That looks like a statement that
> Wikipedia is
> > the most prestigious social club available on the net.
>
> I was responding to *your* e-mail, in which you first
> introduced the concept of Wikipedia as a social club, and
> suggested there were better ones around.

Actually, that was Carbonite's phrase, not mine. I merely suggested that if
people came here for socialising, there were better places to go. You
responded, by appearing to disagree.

> Are you all done playing games?

Several posts ago, if you care to read back and check what I said. But I'm
not trying to get your goat, I'm trying to get your opinion, and it's hard
for me to pick it out.

There seems to be a problem with Wikipedia's community facilities, such as
user pages, Village Pump, this mailing list and so on. They all help editors
to co-operate, and a great many valuable editors take pleasure in dressing
up their user pages, letting other editors know something about themselves,
and personalising their own little space in a way that they can't do in
article space.

If all this stuff is provided and is widely used, then why start to attack
people for coming here and using it? Surely the problem is not that some
people are actually using the facilities provided, but rather that they are
not doing a real lot of work in article space, and to my mind we are not
going to have a great deal of success in forcing volunteers to work harder.
They will either leave entirely, depriving us of potential workers, or they
will respond in kind to the behaviour shown them by experienced editors who
should know better.

Is this plain common sense, or am I missing something here?

Peter (Skyring)


from_name: MAURICE FRANK

subject: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedia block dispute

body:
In sympathy.

 Following common sense you cite Wiki's rules. But as a long line of us have found here, Wiki doesn't have any rules, that are for taking literally. Iit only has "spirits of rules" for interpreting in its overall interests not in yours. They will tell you here "You're not entitled to anything".

 You were entitled to be told that before you ever joined, though. You would have preferred that. Most of the world would prefer that too. That's why most of the world is starting to write critical newspaper reviews of Wiki and accord it lightweight status as a source. Keep that bright in your heart + watch it happen.

wikien-l-request at Wikipedia.org wrote:

Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2006 01:29:39 +0000
From: Kevin Mulligan
Subject: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedia block dispute
To: wikien-l at wikipedia.org
Message-ID: <43BDC803.6060606 at kebeol.net>

---------------------------------
To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! Security Centre.


from_name: Sam Korn

subject: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedia block dispute

body:
On 1/6/06, MAURICE FRANK <megaknee at btopenworld.com> wrote:
>  You were entitled to be told that before you ever joined, though. You would have preferred that. Most of the world would prefer that too. That's why most of the world is starting to write critical newspaper reviews of Wiki and accord it lightweight status as a source. Keep that bright in your heart + watch it happen.

Um, no. There are critical newspaper reviews because we get things
wrong.  Entirely different.

--
Sam


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: userbox : insanity ?

body:
On 1/6/06, Kirill Lokshin <kirill.lokshin at gmail.com> wrote:
> Good idea.  Is there some way this can be done on a per-namespace
> basis, though?  A lot of Wikipedia: pages (e.g. [[Wikipedia:Template
> messages]]) transclude a lot of templates; the use of {{tl}} has also
> become quite pervasive, both in Wikipedia: and in Talk:

{{tl}} should be substituted.

--
Sam


from_name: Nathan Russell

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: userbox : insanity ?

body:
On 1/6/06, Kirill Lokshin <kirill.lokshin at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 1/6/06, Sam Korn <smoddy at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 1/6/06, Kirill Lokshin <kirill.lokshin at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Good idea.  Is there some way this can be done on a per-namespace
> > > basis, though?  A lot of Wikipedia: pages (e.g. [[Wikipedia:Template
> > > messages]]) transclude a lot of templates; the use of {{tl}} has also
> > > become quite pervasive, both in Wikipedia: and in Talk:
> >
> > {{tl}} should be substituted.
>
> Does it work when substituted now?  I know there were some issues with
> that before.
>
> In any case, if we were to do this, we would need a bot to go through
> and substitute the massively-used shorthand templates: {{tl}},
> {{user}}, {{vandal}}, {{admin}}, etc.

Some of those are convenient.  For example, on [[WP:LA]], if the
admin2 template were substituted, and later changed, someone would
have to go through and change every listing by hand.


from_name: Chris Jenkinson

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: userbox : insanity ?

body:
Kirill Lokshin wrote:
> On 1/6/06, Sam Korn <smoddy at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On 1/6/06, Kirill Lokshin <kirill.lokshin at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Good idea.  Is there some way this can be done on a per-namespace
>>>basis, though?  A lot of Wikipedia: pages (e.g. [[Wikipedia:Template
>>>messages]]) transclude a lot of templates; the use of {{tl}} has also
>>>become quite pervasive, both in Wikipedia: and in Talk:
>>
>>{{tl}} should be substituted.
>
>
> Does it work when substituted now?  I know there were some issues with
> that before.
>
> In any case, if we were to do this, we would need a bot to go through
> and substitute the massively-used shorthand templates: {{tl}},
> {{user}}, {{vandal}}, {{admin}}, etc.

The point of these templates is that they are short and simple to use.
If they are subst:'d in, they become more complicated. Why do we need to
do this?

Chris

--
Chris Jenkinson
chris at starglade.org

"Mistrust all in whom the impulse to punish is powerful."
  -- Friedrich Nietzsche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra


from_name: Boris Herbinière-Sève

subject: [Wikitech-l] Invalidate an article

body:
Hello,

I'm trying to invalidate an article due to changes applied to a revision
from outside Mediawiki. As per the tables.sql comments, I try to change
the page.page_touched timestamp with something like date("%Y%m%d%H%i%s")
but the page is still rendered as-is. Am I missing something ?

Thanks in advance,

--
Boris Herbini?re-S?ve


from_name: M. Creidieki Crouch

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Wikipedia Day 2006 : 5 years wikifying knowledge

body:
> Switch back to software phase I during the full day ... would be my
> favorite. or have a version of these times set up and fully working just
> to see how it was :-)

We're very likely to be heavily linked on that day from Slashdot and
potentially other news services.  That means we need the Main Page to
be as newbie-friendly as possible.  I think that "look at the pathetic
old configuration" would be a major mistake.  Having Wikipedia as the
Featured article might be a good way to draw people in.

-- Creidieki


from_name: Paweł Dembowski

body:
Fred Bauder napisa?u:

>> To give some examples,
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M-theory
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NP-complete

> Excellent examples. Here's another:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticisms_of_communism
> Fred

Of the three articles, only one is an article variant. The other two
are actually subarticles. Article about criticisms of communism is one
thing, a critical article about communism is another.

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


from_name: Rob

subject: [WikiEN-l] userbox : insanity ?

body:
The problem with that is that, well, it's arbitrary.  Either the boxes are a
problem or they aren't, but if the concern is the networking of POV pushers,
limiting the number won't prevent people from doing that, it will just cause
them to list their 5 favorite POVs.  If the concern is technical or
aesthetic, then I'm sure we could deal with a slightly higher number, like
10 or 20.

If we do set a limit, I feel strongly that the Babel boxes should be exempt
because I don't think people should be penalized for being multilingual.

On 1/6/06, Fred Bauder <fredbaud at ctelco.net> wrote:
>
> How about an arbitrary rule, maximum of 5 userboxes on any user page?
>


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: userbox : insanity ?

body:
On 1/6/06, Chris Jenkinson <chris at starglade.org> wrote:
> >>{{tl}} should be substituted.
> >
> >
> > Does it work when substituted now?  I know there were some issues with
> > that before.
> >
> > In any case, if we were to do this, we would need a bot to go through
> > and substitute the massively-used shorthand templates: {{tl}},
> > {{user}}, {{vandal}}, {{admin}}, etc.
>
> The point of these templates is that they are short and simple to use.
> If they are subst:'d in, they become more complicated. Why do we need to
> do this?

Benefit to the servers.  Avoidable use of templates should be avoided,
and substitution is an easy way of doing that.  Creating slightly ugly
code is unfortunate but inevitable.

--
Sam


from_name: homey2005 at sympatico.ca

subject: [Wikitech-l] User IP check request

body:
Hi,

I'm trying to determine whether a user named "Robert I" an anon posting from a dynamic IP account whose IP always starts with 81.131 and an anon whose dynamic IP always starts with 213.122 are the same person. I know that Robert I has has used 81.131 IPs. I'm wondering if a developer can check if Robert I has ever logged in from an IP beginnign with 213.122

Thanks,

Homeontherange
Wikipedia-en administrator


from_name: Kelly Martin

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Requests for rollback privileges

body:
On 1/6/06, SPUI <drspui at gmail.com> wrote:
> It puts more strain on the server than rollback by an admin.

And breaks more often.

Kelly


from_name: SPUI

body:
Redvers @ the Wikipedia wrote:
> From: Chris Jenkinson <chris at starglade.org>
>
>>Given the recent discussion about admins, and some
>>thoughts about
>>raising the bar, I thought I might bring up an old
>>proposal of mine,
>>which is to give rollback privileges to deserving
>>users who request it.
>
>
> Is the current system (of a rollback add-on for those
> "in the know") broken?
>
> If not, does it need to be fixed? I ask only for
> information.

It puts more strain on the server than rollback by an admin.


from_name: edward hage

subject:
[Wikitech-l] create new pages by accessing the database directly
	FAILS

body:
I try to directly access the wiki-database to create new pages. I can
create new pages, but the content is missing.

I use mediawiki 1.5.4.

The reason I directly want to use the database is to automate the
following process:
I wrote an extension for a special page in which a form can be filled in
by a user. The form is posted to a php-page in which I want to create a
new page with a nicely formatted table with all the info the user gave
me. Also the script must add a link to that newly created page in the
main page (otherwise it will be an orphan).

The following php-script describes the sql-statements. I performed them
manually in mysql to see what is happening. This is just to give an idea
of what I did manually.

$newtitle = "dive-entry-12";
$text = "this is the text on the new page, but is NOT displayed!";

$sql1 = "insert into text (old_text, old_flags) values ($text, \"utf-8\")";

$sql2 = "select max(old_id) from text"; // returns $page_latest (it is
old_id to be used as page_latest entry in page table)

$page_len = count($text);
$randomnr = rand(1000000)/1000000;
$currenttime= "20060103232541";

$sql3 = "insert into page (page_title, page_latest, page_len,
page_random, page_touched) values ($newtitle, $page_latest, $page_len,
$randomnr, $currenttime) ";

PROBLEM
=======
I can create the new entries in the page and the text tables. Now the
entry in column page_latetest is the same as the entry old_id in text.
So the page should get the correct contents. But I do not. The page is
accessible via mediawiki but it is empty !!

Later I edited the page (using the wiki) and then the wiki adds the
entry old_id=1408 with the new text. The page_latest is NOT altered
(still 1407), but the new text with old_id=1408 is shown.

So the entry in table text I made (with old_id=1407) is not used at all.
It is simply skipped and the content at old_id=1408 is shown although
page_latest=1407!

Editing the page again changes page_latest to 1408 and old_id 1409 !!

QUESTION
========
What mechanism determines which text to show for a given requested page?

or (actually the main question)

How can I make good queries in the dbase to manually make (and alter)
new pages?


body:
On 1/6/06, Kelly Martin <kelly.lynn.martin at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 1/6/06, SPUI <drspui at gmail.com> wrote:
> > It puts more strain on the server than rollback by an admin.
>
> And breaks more often.

It also doesn't work for everyone.  It might be the specialized Java
involved, but I tried installing that thing once before I got my admin
powers and it never did work.  Personally I think it partially marginalizes
the role of an administrator, not to mention confuses people as to who is
and isn't one.

--
I'm not stupid, just selectively ignorant.


from_name: Kevin Mulligan

subject: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedia block dispute

body:
On 6 Jan 2006, at 19:00, Brock Batsell wrote:

> Wow.  The block was too long in my opinion, but based on your
> attitudes here (and the fact that you did start this problem, but
> don't feel like admitting your wrongdoing),

"I appreciate that I did wrong but I do NOT deserve an indefinite ban
from Wikipedia"
"I accept that I did wrong by trolling on Cool Cat's page"

> if it were up to me, I'd leave it in place.  WP would do just fine
> without yet another troll and editor with a chip on his shoulder.

Thanks for reading.
>
> Regards,
> [[en:User:Bbatsell]]
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: userbox : insanity ?

body:
On 1/6/06, Matt Brown <morven at gmail.com> wrote:
> Is there template syntax to force a template to always subst: in?  If
> not, it might be a good idea.

No, but I believe some bots do it.

--
Sam


from_name: Bryan Derksen

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: userbox : insanity ?

body:
Sam Korn wrote:

>On 1/7/06, Chris Jenkinson <chris at starglade.org> wrote:
>
>
>>What's wrong with having tidy text in the code? I can't see a reason
>>that template:tl needs to be changed. And I really wish you wouldn't
>>create a bot just yet until this has been thoroughly discussed. :)
>>
>>
>
>Don't worry, my bot isn't programmed yet! (Though it is named: Sambot,
>in honour of Rambot.)  Nothing is wrong with having tidy text in the
>code.  However, the balance between the potential losses in terms of
>server strain and the usefullness of tidy code (IMO) falls definitely
>on the side of easing server strain.
>
>
Template:tl is protected anyway, so I don't see the risk as being all
that large. If other templates also become so widely used that changes
to them would cause serious problems, protect them too. Such widespread
templates probably shouldn't be changed very often anyway even if there
weren't server issues, simply on account of how many places such changes
would touch.

On the other hand, if it later turns out that a template like this
_does_ need changing, it'll be a lot harder to fix everything if it's
been substed everywhere.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: userbox : insanity ?

body:
On 1/6/06, Nyenyec N <nyenyec at gmail.com> wrote:
> If you disallow templates, people who like them will just copy&paste
> the code on their user page. It doesn't take longer at all, one just
> needs to mark slightly more text with their mouse.

That cuts out my main complaint against userboxes.

--
Sam


from_name: geni

subject: [WikiEN-l] userbox : insanity ?

body:
On 1/6/06, Jimmy Wales <jwales at wikia.com> wrote:
> Jimmy Wales wrote:
> > SCZenz wrote:
> >
> >>How about {{User allow fairuse}}?  That seems to be against pretty
> >>much everything Wikipedia stands for.  If we have so many users who
> >>think they can *vote* in an unreasonable copyright policy, maybe we
> >>need unilateral admin action after all.
> >
> >
> > I deleted that one myself.
>
> And then, upon a request on my talk page, undeleted it.  I'll let the
> TfD run its course.
>
> I'm in favor of deleting a ton of userboxes, especially those with
> non-free images, but frankly, I think we should get rid of most of them
> anyway.  (This is not a decree and I'm trying to stay out of the userbox
> wars myself.  Mostly.)
>
>
>
> --Jimbo

Fair use issue has mostly been solved. There are few hold outs but
nothing that can't be delt with within normal process

--
geni


from_name: Rob Church

subject: [Wikitech-l] Invalidate an article

body:
I'm afraid I don't understand exactly what it is you are trying to do.
When you say 'changes external to MediaWiki', what were those?

What is the desired *outcome* of this?

Rob Church

On 06/01/06, Boris Herbini?re-S?ve <boris.seve at drillscan.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm trying to invalidate an article due to changes applied to a revision
> from outside Mediawiki. As per the tables.sql comments, I try to change
> the page.page_touched timestamp with something like date("%Y%m%d%H%i%s")
> but the page is still rendered as-is. Am I missing something ?
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> --
> Boris Herbini?re-S?ve
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>


list: foundation-l

from_name: Amgine

subject: [Foundation-l] Norwegian Wikinews

body:
I'm pleased to announce that the Norwegian Wikinews proposal has met the
qualifying requirements for volunteers
(http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikinews/Start_a_new_edition#Norwegian),
has developed the necessary documents and templates (and then some!
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/New_language_pre-launch#Norwegian_.28fellesnorsk.29),
and is now ready for the site to be created.

I will be asking the Developers to create the site at their convenience.

Amgine


list: wikimedia-l

subject: [Foundation-l] Norwegian Wikinews


from_name: Geoff Burling

subject: [WikiEN-l] userbox : insanity ?

body:
On Fri, 6 Jan 2006, Anthere wrote:

> I have not followed ANY of the discussion on userbox. Have no idea what
> is going on, no idea who supports what, no idea what is going on.
>
> However, I just speedy deleted {{User masturbation-left}}.
>
> It contained this image :
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Masturbationsm.jpg
>
> Sorry if that appears like an admin abuse or whatever, but imho, this is
> just ***ridiculous***.
>
To repeat an opinion I expressed about another misuse/use of userboxes,
doesn't this particular userbox fall under [[WP:POINT]]?

We already have the tools to deal with this problem. No need to pass a
PATRIOT act, destroy Carthage & salt the earth, or take other extreme
measures.

Geoff

P.S. Yes, I know I said I wasn't going to contribute to this thread. I'm
off to wikify an article shortly.


from_name: Sam Korn

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: userbox : insanity ?

body:
On 1/6/06, Nathan Russell <windrunner at gmail.com> wrote:
> Some of those are convenient.  For example, on [[WP:LA]], if the
> admin2 template were substituted, and later changed, someone would
> have to go through and change every listing by hand.

Then program a bot to do it.  Convenience is not a good reason to put
unnecessary strain on the servers.

--
Sam


list: wiktionary-l

from_name: Ray Saintonge

subject:
[Wiktionary-l] New huge missing entries list: over 300,
	000 entries

body:
Brian wrote:

> http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/User:Brian0918/Hotlist
>
> I've created an "English Dictionary Hotlist" of over 300,000 entries
> as part of [[Wiktionary:Requested articles]]. Please read the
> guidelines before getting involved in the list. I have a lot of
> experience with this from the Wikipedia equivalent at
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Missing_encyclopedic_articles
> .

Why didn't you jusst merge it with [[Wiktionary:English index]] which
serves the same purpose. I don't see the point of having two or more
such lists.

Ec


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Checkuser qualifications

body:
On 1/6/06, Habj <sweetadelaide at gmail.com> wrote:
> Quite a few wikipedias have by now appointed checkusers. How have
> people reasoned on the various projects while appointing their
> checkusers - do they need to be "tech folks" or not? To what extent
> should a checkuser have some prior knowledge, that can not easily be
> picked up by a trusted but not very tech-knowledgeble person? I have
> heard both opinions, both "it is very important" and "it is not very
> important" but not very much resoning for either side.

On "en" we limited the choice to members of the Arbitration Committee
who indicated either experience in network security or the willingness
to learn.  In my opinion, having some understanding of how the
Internet is organized (e.g. subnets, tier 1 and tier 2 providers,
netblock assignments and reassignments, DHCP subranges, etc.) is
important to interpreting CheckUser results.  However, any reasonably
intelligent individual can learn what is required in a relatively
short time.

I think it is more important to weigh the candidate's ability to
exercise discretion and judgment than their technical skills at
interpreting IP data.  Note also that there is a mailing list for
editors with CheckUser rights; someone who wants help interpreting a
particular set of results can always ask for help there.

Kelly


from_name: daniwo59 at aol.com

subject: [Foundation-l] Wikimedia Visual identity guidelines

body:
In a message dated 1/6/2006 8:44:23 PM Eastern Standard Time,
notafishz at gmail.com writes:

I have  put up the Wikimedia visual identity guidelines on the
Foundation website.  They were agreed upon by the board, officers and
local  chapters.

Where?


from_name: Aerik Sylvan

subject: [Wikitech-l] Analysis of posted urls to develop spam filter?

body:
Forgive me if this has already been discussed, but has anyone done any
analysis of the frequency of posted urls to look into developing a spam
filter?  What I'm getting at is this:  it is fairly common for a spammer to
post an url (or a bunch of urls) to multiple pages, sometime using proxies,
but in rapid succession.  It would be interesting to collect data about how
often legitimate urls are added (via edits) to test the viability of a
filter that only blocks urls after they've been posted several times in the
lasts day (or whatever time period).

Like this:  It is pretty unlikely that you would get 5 edits in a day adding
the same url to different pages, but that is a pretty good indication of
spammy behavior.

So, anyone looked at anything like that?

Best Regards,
Aerik


from_name: Magnus Manske

body:
edward hage wrote:
>
> QUESTION
> ========
> What mechanism determines which text to show for a given requested page?
>
> or (actually the main question)
>
> How can I make good queries in the dbase to manually make (and alter)
> new pages?
Use the MediaWiki functions/methods in includes/Database.php

Magnus


from_name: Matt Brown

subject: [WikiEN-l] Unused userboxes

body:
On 1/6/06, Jay Converse <supermo0 at gmail.com> wrote:
> It's just me, but I don't see why not.  A userbox is a template is a
> template is a template... and so on and so forth.  I don't see why just
> because it's currently a hot button issue that we should prevent what
> already is a valid reason for deletion from being used.

I do suspect in the current climate that will just make a dozen people
start to use it, to protect it.

-Matt


from_name: Chris Jenkinson

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: userbox : insanity ?

body:
Sam Korn wrote:
> Then program a bot to do it.  Convenience is not a good reason to put
> unnecessary strain on the servers.

That's the entire reason we have computers, for convenience. We could be
doing Wikipedia on paper but a computer makes it easier. Convenience is
an *excellent* justification for extra strain on the servers. The
solution is optimisation.

Chris

--
Chris Jenkinson
chris at starglade.org

"Mistrust all in whom the impulse to punish is powerful."
  -- Friedrich Nietzsche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: userbox : insanity ?

body:
On 1/6/06, Chris Jenkinson <chris at starglade.org> wrote:
> Sam Korn wrote:
> > Then program a bot to do it.  Convenience is not a good reason to put
> > unnecessary strain on the servers.
>
> That's the entire reason we have computers, for convenience. We could be
> doing Wikipedia on paper but a computer makes it easier. Convenience is
> an *excellent* justification for extra strain on the servers. The
> solution is optimisation.
>
> Chris

Wikipedia code optimisation is already pretty good. Compare our server
numbers to those of other high traffic sites.

--
geni


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: userbox : insanity ?

body:
On 1/6/06, Chris Jenkinson <chris at starglade.org> wrote:
> Sam Korn wrote:
> > Then program a bot to do it.  Convenience is not a good reason to put
> > unnecessary strain on the servers.
>
> That's the entire reason we have computers, for convenience. We could be
> doing Wikipedia on paper but a computer makes it easier. Convenience is
> an *excellent* justification for extra strain on the servers. The
> solution is optimisation.

There are over two hundred thousand pages linking to template:tl.
Have you any idea of the disruption that would be caused to the
servers by {{tl}} being edited?  It would crash the servers for ages.
If the templates aren't going to be changed, the only reason for
leaving them is that they look prettier in the code.  When you think
of the damage that could be caused by their being changed, even in
good faith, that justification does not hold up.  I intend to create a
bot to mass-substitute all instances of these templates.

--
Sam


subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: User IP check request

body:
On 1/7/06, Ashar Voultoiz <hashar at altern.org> wrote:
> You want to ask someone with the checkuser right:
>
>   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Listusers
>
> Select group name 'checkuser' then 'go' , you will get a list of people
> you can contact.
>
> There is certainly a page somewhere to ask such a thing though (if not,
> the community should probably create one).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:ANI is probably the best place, though
asking a user with CheckUser access is doubtless faster.

--
Sam


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: userbox : insanity ?

body:
Sam Korn wrote:
> There are over two hundred thousand pages linking to template:tl.
> Have you any idea of the disruption that would be caused to the
> servers by {{tl}} being edited?  It would crash the servers for ages.
> If the templates aren't going to be changed, the only reason for
> leaving them is that they look prettier in the code.  When you think
> of the damage that could be caused by their being changed, even in
> good faith, that justification does not hold up.  I intend to create a
> bot to mass-substitute all instances of these templates.

What's wrong with having tidy text in the code? I can't see a reason
that template:tl needs to be changed. And I really wish you wouldn't
create a bot just yet until this has been thoroughly discussed. :)

Chris

--
Chris Jenkinson
chris at starglade.org

"Mistrust all in whom the impulse to punish is powerful."
  -- Friedrich Nietzsche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: userbox : insanity ?

body:
On 1/7/06, Chris Jenkinson <chris at starglade.org> wrote:
> What's wrong with having tidy text in the code? I can't see a reason
> that template:tl needs to be changed. And I really wish you wouldn't
> create a bot just yet until this has been thoroughly discussed. :)

Don't worry, my bot isn't programmed yet! (Though it is named: Sambot,
in honour of Rambot.)  Nothing is wrong with having tidy text in the
code.  However, the balance between the potential losses in terms of
server strain and the usefullness of tidy code (IMO) falls definitely
on the side of easing server strain.

--
Sam


from_name: Ashar Voultoiz

subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: User IP check request

body:
homey2005 at sympatico.ca wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm trying to determine whether a user named "Robert I" an anon posting from a dynamic IP account whose IP always starts with 81.131 and an anon whose dynamic IP always starts with 213.122 are the same person. I know that Robert I has has used 81.131 IPs. I'm wondering if a developer can check if Robert I has ever logged in from an IP beginnign with 213.122
>
> Thanks,
>
> Homeontherange
> Wikipedia-en administrator

You want to ask someone with the checkuser right:

  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Listusers

Select group name 'checkuser' then 'go' , you will get a list of people
you can contact.

There is certainly a page somewhere to ask such a thing though (if not,
the community should probably create one).

cheers,

--
Ashar Voultoiz - WP++++
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Hashar
http://www.livejournal.com/community/wikitech/
IM: hashar at jabber.org  ICQ: 15325080


from_name: Jay Converse

subject: [WikiEN-l] Unused userboxes

body:
On 1/6/06, Zzyzx11 at Wikipedia <zzyzx11 at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> Here's something that crossed my mind:
>
> As the number of userboxes continues to increase, I am starting to see a
> number of them that are currently NOT being used by ANYONE. So in a couple
> weeks from now, if these same userboxes are still not being used on any
> userpage, shouldn't they be put on TFD like any other unused, orphaned
> template? Why or why not?
>
> Zzyzx11 at en.wikipedia.org
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Zzyzx11
> zzyzx11 at hotmail.com
>
>
It's just me, but I don't see why not.  A userbox is a template is a
template is a template... and so on and so forth.  I don't see why just
because it's currently a hot button issue that we should prevent what
already is a valid reason for deletion from being used.

--
I'm not stupid, just selectively ignorant.


from_name: Delphine Ménard

body:
Hello,

I have put up the Wikimedia visual identity guidelines on the
Foundation website. They were agreed upon by the board, officers and
local chapters.

They can be found here:
http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Wikimedia_visual_identity_guidelines

Right now, those are linked only from the press page on Foundation
website. Thank you for linking them where appropriate on the projects.
Thank you for *not* copying them out of Foundation website but *only*
provide a link to the page.

Best,

Delphine
--
~notafish


from_name: SCZenz

subject:
[WikiEN-l] Userbox compromise proposal (Was: Proposal on userbox
	disagreement)

body:
On 1/7/06, Tony Sidaway <f.crdfa at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 1/5/06, Ben Yates <bluephonic at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > To save this from double-posthood, this is a kind of cool development
> > -- the userspace is coming into its own as a separate construct from
> > the encyclopedia.
>
> Why is this cool?

Agree with Tony on this question.  The userspace is not separate from
the encyclopedia; if it is, it is getting misused.

SCZenz


from_name: Habj

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Checkuser qualifications

body:
Quite a few wikipedias have by now appointed checkusers. How have
people reasoned on the various projects while appointing their
checkusers - do they need to be "tech folks" or not? To what extent
should a checkuser have some prior knowledge, that can not easily be
picked up by a trusted but not very tech-knowledgeble person? I have
heard both opinions, both "it is very important" and "it is not very
important" but not very much resoning for either side.

/Habj


from_name: Zzyzx11 at Wikipedia

subject: [WikiEN-l] Unused userboxes

body:
Here's something that crossed my mind:

As the number of userboxes continues to increase, I am starting to see a
number of them that are currently NOT being used by ANYONE. So in a couple
weeks from now, if these same userboxes are still not being used on any
userpage, shouldn't they be put on TFD like any other unused, orphaned
template? Why or why not?

Zzyzx11 at en.wikipedia.org
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Zzyzx11
zzyzx11 at hotmail.com

_________________________________________________________________
Don?t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!
http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/


from_name: endomion at comcast.net

subject: [WikiEN-l] Unused userboxes

body:
> As the number of userboxes continues to increase, I am starting to see a
> number of them that are currently NOT being used by ANYONE. So in a couple
> weeks from now, if these same userboxes are still not being used on any
> userpage, shouldn't they be put on TFD like any other unused, orphaned
> template? Why or why not?

Check the history and see if they were used by the creator on their user page,
but then abandoned.  Those could be candidates for speedy delete.  The ones that
were created for other people but never used on the creator's user page could be
candidates for delete on the slow track.


subject:
[WikiEN-l] Userbox compromise proposal (Was: Proposal on
	userboxdisagreement)

body:
On 1/7/06, Peter Mackay <peter.mackay at bigpond.com> wrote:
> > From: wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org
> > [mailto:wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org] On Behalf Of SCZenz
> >
> > On 1/7/06, Tony Sidaway <f.crdfa at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On 1/5/06, Ben Yates <bluephonic at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > To save this from double-posthood, this is a kind of cool
> > > > development
> > > > -- the userspace is coming into its own as a separate
> > construct from
> > > > the encyclopedia.
> > >
> > > Why is this cool?
> >
> > Agree with Tony on this question.  The userspace is not
> > separate from the encyclopedia; if it is, it is getting misused.
>
> Plainly the userspace *is* a different space. Different rules apply. For
> example, POV is allowed on user pages, and while we don't shrink from
> editing article or talk pages, we don't modify others' user pages. They are
> private, personal, full of OR and opinionated in ways that WP is not and can
> never be.
>
> If there are different rules and different modes of behaviour and discourse,
> then clearly it is a different cyber-region. It would be wise to accept and
> understand this, rather than trying to enforce the same standards and rules
> that apply to WP.
>
> Having said that, there is considerable overlap, and obiously the userspace
> is closer to the articlespace than it is to (say) PhotoBucket or Google.

The userspace is *for* building the encyclopedia, and we can (and do)
edit userpages that are clearly for another purpose.  People are
allowed quite a bit of leeway at current, but it is not a right or a
good thing for that leeway to expand.  Wikipedia is not (primarily) an
experiment in evolving online communities, and it is certainly not a
webhosting service.

SCZenz


from_name: Sam Spade

subject: [WikiEN-l] userbox : insanity ?

body:
Exactly. I'd like to have a repository of code for creating whatever
userboxes people come up with. No fair use images or categories would
be allowed. Userboxes that actually had an encyclopedic use (Babel
boxes, for example) could remain as templates. This would seem to
allow everyone to keep their userboxes and would remove the vast
majority of complaints about them.

Carbonite

> We already have the tools to deal with this problem. No need to pass a
> PATRIOT act, destroy Carthage & salt the earth, or take other extreme
> measures.
>
> Geoff
>
> P.S. Yes, I know I said I wasn't going to contribute to this thread. I'm
> off to wikify an article shortly.

These strike me as steps in the right direction. Arbitrary measures
and unilateral decision making are not. People need to consider
morale, rigour, and the appearance of impropriety. If there is a
problem w process, change the process. Ignoring all rules is the
problem, not the solution.

Have a look at my user page, Its nothing but templates basically. I
even have a category someone put there. Does anyone see what I'm doing
as a problem?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Sam_Spade

Sam Spade


subject: [WikiEN-l] The userbox fad

body:
> When they argue about policy with longtime editors who actually know
> something about policy, they *are* doing harm.  They are wasting the time
> and trying the patience of someone who is actually contributing to the
> goal
> of the project.
>
> Jay.
>
> This is one of the worst things I have heard said in the context of
> the wikipedia.

you've been on Wikipedia for how many years now?  I'm going to have to
assume this is hyperbole.

Jay.

Please re-read what you wrote instead.

Also, I stopped using my name / providing personal details on this
project after a particularly offensive statement was made on this list
regarding my step-son. I have realised there are too many bad people
here, and too few measures taken against them for me to feel
comfortable or safe being less than anonymous. Nothing personal, but
please refer to me by my user name. Thanks,

Sam Spade


from_name: Tony Sidaway

body:
On 1/5/06, Ben Yates <bluephonic at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> To save this from double-posthood, this is a kind of cool development
> -- the userspace is coming into its own as a separate construct from
> the encyclopedia.

Why is this cool?


from_name: Peter Mackay

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: The userbox fad

body:
> From: wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org
> [mailto:wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org] On Behalf Of Michael Snow

> I'm not suggesting the word-twisting should continue, but
> this entire discussion seems to have been carried on in
> ignorance of the fact that there is, in fact, a better
> alternative for people who choose their online communities
> based purely on the amount of traffic they get.
> MySpace currently ranks 13th according to Alexa, still quite
> a few spots ahead of Wikipedia. I'm not sure that prestigious
> is the word you're looking for (your average pundit would
> probably resort to the tried and true "hip"), but whatever it
> is they've got, it was worth $580 million to Rupert Murdoch.

Aha! Here we have the solution to Wikipedia's funding problems.

Thanks for that, Michael - I'm not "au lait" with the hip sites. In terms of
culture, I'm still struggling with the Eighties. Where did it all go wrong?

Peter (Skyring)


subject: [WikiEN-l] The userbox fad

body:
> From: wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org
> [mailto:wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org] On Behalf Of jayjg
> Sent: Saturday, 7 January 2006 03:00
> To: English Wikipedia
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] The userbox fad
>
> On 1/5/06, Peter Mackay <peter.mackay at bigpond.com> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > I was responding to *your* e-mail, in which you first
> introduced the
> > > concept of Wikipedia as a social club, and suggested there were
> > > better ones around.
> >
> > Actually, that was Carbonite's phrase, not mine. I merely suggested
> > that if people came here for socialising, there were better
> places to
> > go. You responded, by appearing to disagree.
>
> As was quite obvious, I explained why they might prefer to
> socialize on Wikipedia, rather than on those other places.

Because it's "prestigious". Hmmm. What about MySpace?

> There seems to be a problem with Wikipedia's community
> facilities, such as
> > user pages, Village Pump, this mailing list and so on. They
> all help
> > editors to co-operate, and a great many valuable editors
> take pleasure
> > in dressing up their user pages, letting other editors know
> something
> > about themselves, and personalising their own little space in a way
> > that they can't do in article space.
> >
> > If all this stuff is provided and is widely used, then why start to
> > attack people for coming here and using it? Surely the
> problem is not
> > that some people are actually using the facilities provided, but
> > rather that they are not doing a real lot of work in article space,
> > and to my mind we are not going to have a great deal of success in
> > forcing volunteers to work harder.
> > They will either leave entirely, depriving us of potential
> workers, or
> > they will respond in kind to the behaviour shown them by
> experienced
> > editors who should know better.
> >
> > Is this plain common sense, or am I missing something here?
>
>
> If they are here to build a great encyclopedia, and the
> social aspects of Wikipedia assist in that, then that's
> great.  The issue I'm raising regards the many editors who
> seem to have no interest in actually building the
> encyclopedia itself, and instead focus their efforts almost
> entirely on using the social and "webhosting" facilities that
> are, in reality, here only to assist Wikipedia in its primary purpose.

And the point I'm making is that it is counterproductive and unjust to
chastise them for using the community facilities provided, especially when
it seems that some of them are enjoying themselves in tweaking the noses of
the curmudgeons. Instead we should be encouraging them to be more productive
in our primary purpose.

We aren't going to do that by ridiculing them and driving them away.

Peter (Skyring)


from_name: Robert Scott Horning

subject: [Foundation-l] Request for approval for a wiki for standards

body:
Chris Jenkinson wrote:

> Gerard Meijssen wrote:
>
>> Hoi,
>>
>> On Meta the request for a Wikistandards wiki has been revived.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>  GerardM
>
>
> Are these standards you would put on this new wiki anything to do with
> a manual of style or writing guidelines?
>
> I also have to ask - is a wiki really the best format for documenting
> standards? A standard is supposed to be an immutable document; it
> can't just be edited and changed by anyone because that's going to
> ruin compatibility.
>
> Chris

I believe that a wiki is an excellent method of collaborative writing,
including standards development.  Often when trying to develop a
standard you need to work on several parts of the standard
simultaneously, and having revision control and other feedback methods
found on MediaWiki software is going to be very useful.

As far as making a standard immutable, we already have page protection
once the standard has been put in place.  This is no different than
Wikisource where similar kinds of immutable documents already exist.
 That would have to be a community decision as to if a certain page has
a "final" status and can't be changed any more.

More likely, you would have to have some sort of versioning of documents
anyway, where you would have a "frozen" official version and a draft
version that is still a work in progress.  We already have date
versioning in MediaWiki software anyway, so this is something that
doesn't even need extra development.

As far as a style guide, there are several current ISO related
guidelines that could be adapted for use by anybody trying to write
standards documentation of any sort.  This isn't even new for Wikimedia
projects either.

I want to add that there is a huge need for open and free (as in speech
as well as beer) standards.  Even modestly priced standards from groups
like ANSI or ISO can cost more than $200 a piece, and I've seen some
fairly general standards documents costing more than $100,000 each with
some incredibly draconian non-disclosure agreements.  Even supposedly
public standards like the National Electrical Code that governs how
buildings are wired with electricity can cost a couple thousand
dollars... and that is a matter of law that you have to live by.

This is something that really needs to be established, and I feel it
would be an excellent candidate for the seed wiki (under whatever name
that might be officially called if it get going).  There isn't quite the
same level of support for this as say Wikiversity, but I think we could
get a strong community going for this.

This really can't be accomodated in Wikibooks directly in part because
this isn't really teaching materials or textbook development, and the
standards development process needs some additional community support
that simply can't be directly accomodated by Wikibooks.  New policies
and social structures need to be developed that are specific and unique
to the development of standards documentation.  Most of that can be
developed ad hoc once the project is developed.

--
Robert Scott Horning


subject: [WikiEN-l] userbox : insanity ?

body:
> From: wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org
> [mailto:wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org] On Behalf Of Fred Bauder
> Sent: Saturday, 7 January 2006 08:12
> To: English Wikipedia
> Cc: Fred Bauder
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] userbox : insanity ?
>
> How about an arbitrary rule, maximum of 5 userboxes on any user page?

Sounds good, but may I suggest that before enforcing it, make sure that
every admin is fully compliant, otherwise it will seen arbitrary and
hypocritical.

Actually, when it comes to brightly coloured extraneous gumph on user pages,
admins seem to be worse offenders than most, probably because they tend to
have been around for a while and accumulated flashy little boxes and pix and
templates.

How about making it five *templates* maximum on a user page?

Peter (Skyring)


subject:
[WikiEN-l] Userbox compromise proposal (Was: Proposal
	onuserboxdisagreement)

body:
On 1/7/06, Peter Mackay <peter.mackay at bigpond.com> wrote:
> > From: wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org
> > [mailto:wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org] On Behalf Of SCZenz
> >
> > The userspace is *for* building the encyclopedia, and we can
> > (and do) edit userpages that are clearly for another purpose.
> >  People are allowed quite a bit of leeway at current, but it
> > is not a right or a good thing for that leeway to expand.
> > Wikipedia is not (primarily) an experiment in evolving online
> > communities, and it is certainly not a webhosting service.
>
> I think the community role is important, and surely it is up to the
> community as to how the userspace evolves. Granted, the production of an
> encyclopaedia is the focus, but WP is run by consensus as few other internet
> communities are, and in many ways it is not a matter of dictating how things
> will happen so much as hanging on for the ride and watching what happens!
>
> By and large userland seems to be a relatively tranquil nation, and I make
> no doubt that even the current user template row will find its own happy
> compromise soon enough. My appreciation of the WP community is that it is
> one that values freedom and "leeway" very highly, but co-operation in the
> shared goal is valued higher still.

Um, I am indeed opposed to ticking positive contributors off, and so I
don't like mass deletions of harmless userboxes.  Making people happy
is good, because it helps the project.

But Wikipedia is only run by consensus to a certain point.  Users
cannot decide, by consensus, to devote any page anywhere on Wikipedia
to *anything* that hurts the encyclopedia.

SCZenz


from_name: Puzzlet Chung

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Korean Wikipedia under National Security Law?

body:
On 1/6/06, Anthere <Anthere9 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Puzzlet Chung wrote:
> > I am Puzzlet Chung, one of the administrators in Korean Wikipedia.
>
> Hello Puzzlet,
>
> Several points in your message
>
> > User:WonYong (also in en.wp) in Korean Wikipedia claims that Korean
> > Wikipedia should follow South Korean National Security Law so that the
> > contents potentially able to threat the nation (i.e. South Korea)
> > should be censored. He made National Security violation templates, to
> > tag "anti-State" articles which should be deleted:
> >
> > http://ko.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:National_Security
> > http://ko.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:National_Security2
>
> You mention that WonYong is also an english editor.
> Less than 2 weeks ago, I was informed on my en.wiki talk page of the
> creation of a template, to be used apparently for similar reasons.
>
> The template has been deleted since then :
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Security_Risk&action=edit
>
> See
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Anthere#Dealing_With_Information_That_Presents_A_Security_Risk
>
> it strikes me that the creation of the korean template, which seems very
> similar to the english idea, was created just a few days later.
>
> I presume the english template was deleted after a vote. It may be
> interesting to find the discussion about the deletion...
>
> In any cases, it seems generally a bad idea.

I've found the discussion for deletion here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion&diff=33843551&oldid=33843273

We've put the templates at the Votes for Deletion, and so far WonYong
is the only one who wants to keep it:
http://ko.wikipedia.org/wiki/%EC%9C%84%ED%82%A4%EB%B0%B1%EA%B3%BC:%EC%82%AD%EC%A0%9C_%ED%86%A0%EB%A1%A0#.7B.7BNational_Security.7D.7D

> > WonYong insists that it is South Korea that try to conserve Korean
> > language and protect it from extinction, hence both administration and
> > contents of Korean Wikipedia should follow South Korean laws, and
> > Korean language speakers who is not South Korean citizens don't have
> > anything to do with it. He states that North Korea is not recognized
> > by South Korea as a nation but a "band of mafias," (the statement of
> > which is not true, since North Korea is a member of UN, and relation
> > between two Koreas has changed), and doesn't deserve for Korean
> > Wikipedia to reflect its POV.
>
> The comment you report seems to me very rude.
> But even though South Korea was not recognising North Korea as a nation,
> most of the world do, and people living in North Korea do exist as
> humans and have their own history, culture, opinion... no matter what
> South Korea would claim, North Korea has a right of existence and a
> right of participation to the korean wikipedia.
>
> If WonYong does not agree with this, I think he just should not edit
> Wikipedia. And if he insists on excluding other koreans pov, he should
> be banned.
>
> > The problem is that some users would agree to his point of view. Out
> > of two Korean [[names of Korea]], some South Koreans relate "Chos?n"
> > with North Korea and Communism. They think equal juxtaposition of two
> > names, (juxtapose the names when they have to, of course), as not
> > satisfying Natural Point of View as in South Korea, where the majority
> > of the Korean Wikipedia users live in, and where the server is located
> > as well. Although "Chos?nmal" is the name of Korean language called
> > not only by North Koreans, but majority of Chinese Koreans and some
> > Japanese Koreans, some find "Chos?nmal" aggressive and inappropriate
> > to use it in some articles.
>
> Yes. This is a common dispute on many wikipedia.
> I have seen it many time on the english wikipedia as well, for american
> and british do not always use the same word to qualify a thing.
> I have seen it on the french wikipedia, between canadians and europeans.
> We regularly hear similar issues on the portuguese wikipedia (between
> the south american and the european portuguese speakers)
> Same for some scandinavian languages...
>
> *this* is unfortunately frequent, and difficult to handle, in particular
> if one instance of language can appear "rude" to the speakers of the
> other instance.
>
> In most projects, the two general rules used are
> * if one instance was used in an article, do not change it to the other
> instance. Keep it as originally used. It is more polite to the original
> author... does not make him feel as he wrote something "erroneous".
> * if one instance is rather used in one country, and the article is
> related to that country, keep the instance used in that specific country.
>
> For example, French from France use the word gay to qualify homosexuals.
> Canadians use gai.
> If the article is about Toronto (Canadian city), we'd rather use gai. If
> the article is about a famous french actor, we'd rather use gay.
>
> Indeed, sometimes, some instances may appear aggressive or
> inappropriate, but this is something we have to learn to live with.

One of WonYong's points is that most of the people who prefer to call
Korea "Chos?n" must have been not able to access the Internet.
However, according to User:Yonghokim, as many as 20% of netizens of
whom Korean language is the mother tongue prefer "Chos?n" to "Hanguk."
However, another user refutes that if Wikipedia speaks with what most
of the 80% would find aggressive, the site would eventually be
isolated. I'm not sure about how many Korean language speakers would
think so -- maybe we should have straw polls in Korean Wikipedia to
find out.

> You raise another very important point : the servers.
> Yes, the korean wikipedia is served by the Yahoo servers in Korea.
> This should absolutely NOT be an argument for Koreans in Seoul to push
> their POV ! The location of the servers should not matter. This is just
> a technical decision and should NOT imply any domination of one Korea
> over the other ! Just as americans are not supposed to dominate the
> british or the australians.
>
>
> > I am a South Korean citizen myself, but as far as I understand
> > Wikipedian policy of NPOV, WonYong's activity threats NPOV more than
> > the "Evil Wikipedia" would threat the existence of South Korea, not
> > like what he might think, as long as Wikipedia is not a some kind of
> > Communists' propaganda. But I've started to seriously consider about
> > moving DB server back to Florida and "foreigning" the site,
> > contributed by so-called foreigns and South Koreans who's not afraid
> > of South Korean laws.
>
> We should try not to censor ourselves thinking of what our countries
> could censor. This is something most of us have weaknesses in, I the
> first. Best to wait until our government really complain about rather
> than trying to comply to rules they never intended to inforce in the
> first place.
>
>
> Ant
>
>
> > Regards,
> >
> > Puzzlet Chung

Puzzlet Chung


from_name: Brion Vibber

subject:
[Wikitech-l] 2 Questions: "Image-Batch-Upload" and "Refresh wiki
	data"

body:
Jan wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I have two questions concerning my own MediaWiki-installation (1.5):
>
> 1. I need to upload approx. 400 images to my Wiki; all images are in one
> Folder (and have different filenames).
> I have full access to my wiki as WikiSysop, FTP, and phpMyAdmin/ODBC.
> How could i do this?

pywikipediabot

> 2. I imported many articles by MediaWiki-XML-Export/Import feature. But
> my Wiki didnt realized them; the articles have categorys in the
> article-text, but they are not assigned to the categorys. Only when I
> edit&save an article, it got assigned. Same thing with the statistics (0
> articles), "most wanted articles" = none ... and so on. How to refresh
> all articles?

refreshLinks.php

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 249 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20060107/8888af69/attachment.pgp>


from_name: Gerard Meijssen

body:
Hoi,

On Meta the request for a Wikistandards wiki has been revived. The
request was voiced at a conference of language standards in  Berlin (Dec
12-13, 2005). A significant number of people from the language standards
community have indicated on Meta that they are interested to actively
support this effort. See:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposals_for_new_projects#Wikistandards

Just a few of the people who have expressed interest in working on a
Wikistandards project run by Wikimedia:

* Professor Alan K. Melby, Brigham Young University, member of the Board
of Directors and chair of the Translation and Computers committee,
American Translators Association and many other affiliations, see
http://www.ttt.org/akm-cv.html
* Donald A. DePalma, President and CRO: Common Sense Advisory, Inc.;
author: Business Without Borders, member of the Board of Directors of
the Globalization and Localization Association (GALA), chair of the
Language Standards for Global Business Summit, more:
http://www.commonsenseadvisory.com/about_us/management.php?id=1
* Keiran Dunne, Assistant Professor of French, Pennsylvania State
University * Dr. Jennifer DeCamp, principal engineer at MITRE
Corporation, a
federally funded Research and Development Center, where she provides
software testing and advice on foreign language technology. She has
worked with localization issues since the 1970s.
* Peter Reynolds, Lionbridge Technologies, involved with the XLIFF and
Translation Web Services standards.
* Tex Texin, Internationalization Architect, Yahoo, Inc. Tex Texin has
been providing globalization services including training, strategy, and
implementation to the software industry for many years. See
http://www.global-conference.com/iuc27/biosabstracts/b058.html
<http://www.global-conference.com/iuc27/biosabstracts/b058.html> for
details.

The purpose of Wikistandards will be to discuss standards and to
formulate drafts on the wiki. Informative encyclopaedic texts would be
written on Wikipedia. As it is of importance for a standard to be known
and thereby to be a Standard, many people at the conference indicated
their willingness to translate these articles to other languages for
other Wikipedias as well. The terminology involved with standards would
get its place in WiktionaryZ (the name suggested to replace "Ultimate
Wiktionary").

Wikistandards itself will be a new project in its own right. It does not
fit into Wikibooks since the discussions and drafts will be original
works developed by the standards communities. There will be a portal
dedicated to language standards, but hopefully, we will get other
standards communities interested as well. Wikistandards will also make
use of content in our other projects.

One reason why a wiki like this makes sense is because the Wikimedia
Foundation is known for its NPOV, it is not part of academia or the
business world and, as importantly, we have a great track record in
managing large amounts of content. We can hope for great synergies
between the standards community and the Wikimedia community.

On the most basic level, Wikimedians will help the standards experts to
learn the ropes, and to structure the wiki in a way that makes sense.
But we also have a very real need for being involved in or close to
standardization processes, particularly language standards, as we will
make increased use of them in our projects.

On the Unicode website, Wikipedia is already the only website that is
singled out for its use of UTF-8. With the WiktionaryZ project,
supporting standards will become even more important as we will have ALL
languages and people from ALL locales using one database. We have
discussed using standards like CLDR (Common Locale Data Repository) for
localization and TBX (TermBase eXchange) for exporting terminology. In
the future we may even make use of TMX (Translation Memory eXchange) to
integrate WiktionaryZ with industry standard computer-aided translation
(CAT) tools. Other standards will be relevant for relation types and
other meta data.

In the process of standardization, Wikimedia will only set one standard
of its own: a standard of freedom. Any standard we use in our projects
must be fully documented, free to use and free to implement, or we do
not consider it a standard in the first place. What better way to ensure
that than by being involved, as a neutral party, in the standard
process?

Given that we have a lot of enthusiasm for this project and given that
it provides us with a win win situation, I do ask for your permission to
set up this project in the very near future.

Thanks,
  GerardM


from_name: Ray Saintonge

body:
Gerard Meijssen wrote:

> On Meta the request for a Wikistandards wiki has been revived. The
> request was voiced at a conference of language standards in  Berlin (Dec
> 12-13, 2005). A significant number of people from the language standards
> community have indicated on Meta that they are interested to actively
> support this effort. See:
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposals_for_new_projects#Wikistandards

I can't say that I would oppose this as a separate project.  Clearly the
need to have relatively firm and uneditable versions is much stronger
than in any of our existing projects.  Other discussions have already
pointed to the need for versions of Wikipedia articles that are marked
reliable.

> The purpose of Wikistandards will be to discuss standards and to
> formulate drafts on the wiki. Informative encyclopaedic texts would be
> written on Wikipedia. As it is of importance for a standard to be known
> and thereby to be a Standard, many people at the conference indicated
> their willingness to translate these articles to other languages for
> other Wikipedias as well. The terminology involved with standards would
> get its place in WiktionaryZ (the name suggested to replace "Ultimate
> Wiktionary").

The drift of Wiktionary2 into this kind of thing seems somehow less
threatening to the future of the existing Wiktionaries which would
continue to be real wikis.

Involving oursekves in standards cretion has a deliciously subversive
ring to it.  If standards can be established through some kind of broad
global collaboration it's one less thing for governmens to be doing.  As
I've stated before after the negative votes from France and Holland a
wiki would be an excellent vehicle for rewriting the EU Constitution.
... perhaps even a world constitution.

> Wikistandards itself will be a new project in its own right. It does not
> fit into Wikibooks since the discussions and drafts will be original
> works developed by the standards communities. There will be a portal
> dedicated to language standards, but hopefully, we will get other
> standards communities interested as well. Wikistandards will also make
> use of content in our other projects.

Fair enough.

> One reason why a wiki like this makes sense is because the Wikimedia
> Foundation is known for its NPOV, it is not part of academia or the
> business world and, as importantly, we have a great track record in
> managing large amounts of content. We can hope for great synergies
> between the standards community and the Wikimedia community.

I'm sure there are vested interests that will object strongly to having
their gravy trains derailed.

> On the most basic level, Wikimedians will help the standards experts to
> learn the ropes, and to structure the wiki in a way that makes sense.
> But we also have a very real need for being involved in or close to
> standardization processes, particularly language standards, as we will
> make increased use of them in our projects.

Not necessarily.

> On the Unicode website, Wikipedia is already the only website that is
> singled out for its use of UTF-8. With the WiktionaryZ project,
> supporting standards will become even more important as we will have ALL
> languages and people from ALL locales using one database. We have
> discussed using standards like CLDR (Common Locale Data Repository) for
> localization and TBX (TermBase eXchange) for exporting terminology. In
> the future we may even make use of TMX (Translation Memory eXchange) to
> integrate WiktionaryZ with industry standard computer-aided translation
> (CAT) tools. Other standards will be relevant for relation types and
> other meta data.

Although these standards may already be established, putting them into
Wikistandards would open them to discussion, and possibly amendment.
Absolutely nothing should be considered sacred, but that should not
imply that any existing standard should be immediately thrown into
chaos.  When it comes to its own internal policies Wikipedia is a model
of chaos.  It often seems that the process is dominated by a few who
have an interest in promulgating a particular policy then protecting it
once that is accomplished.  The entire decision-making process needs to
be reviewed.

> In the process of standardization, Wikimedia will only set one standard
> of its own: a standard of freedom. Any standard we use in our projects
> must be fully documented, free to use and free to implement, or we do
> not consider it a standard in the first place. What better way to ensure
> that than by being involved, as a neutral party, in the standard
> process?

I suppose that a conceivable extension of Jimbo's Frankfurt speech would
be, "Free the standards."

Ec