from_name: Jeff Raymond

body:
> Any comments?

1) Use the Good Article Review page.  Seriously.  If you want to see
long-term traction on what you want to do, you're best off demonstrating it
rather than having someone accuse you of being disruptive.

2) I was the one who brought up the problem with [[Captain Falcon]] at FAC.
That sort of thing, lately, has been the exception, not the rule - generally
speaking, articles that lack references the way that one did don't get
passed.

3) Keep in mind, if you decide to sweep through, that the GA criteria has
tightened considerably.  Articles without references are routinely delisted
from the candidacy page almost immediately.  Considering that we're still
finding unsourced FAs from a few years ago, I think it's in good shape for a
relatively new process.

Just don't be rash.  I doubt the GA regulars want poor articles listed any
more than you do.

-Jeff


list: wikitech-l

source: pipermail-mbox

from_name: Claudi Meneghin

subject: [Wikitech-l] exporting images

body:
Hi all,
is there any way to export multiple images from a wikipedia, please (in this case Catalan wikipedia)?  Seemingly the special:export page does not match this goal.
Many thamks.
Cheers,
Claudi

---------------------------------
 D?couvrez une nouvelle fa?on d'obtenir des r?ponses ? toutes vos questions ! Profitez des connaissances, des opinions et des exp?riences des internautes sur Yahoo! Questions/R?ponses.


list: wikien-l

from_name: Christopher Thieme

subject: [WikiEN-l] Good Articles is a mess...time for a clean sweep

body:
Come to think of it, Good Articles as a separate distinctin is rather
irrelevant in the entire scheme of things.  Sure, you identify an article as
being "Good".  But after that, the article really doesn't go anywhere.  At
least featured articles are actually "featured."

Perhaps the solution, given its shortcomings, is to abolish "Good Articles".

Christopher D. Thieme
User:ExplorerCDT
cdthieme at gmail.com


from_name: para

subject: [WikiEN-l] African maps

body:
geni <geniice at ...> wrote:

>> "A collection of rare maps of Africa, dating from 1530 to 1915, has been
>> made available for free on the internet by Northwestern University in the
>> US. " Is this something we should be storing too? I think we should at least
>> make an effort to contact them about it...

> The format with which they appear on the net makes them hard/very hard
> to copy. Contacting may be only option

Actually, they are not hidden at all and copying couldn't be much easier. Links
to high resolution TIFF files of the maps are readily available on the
information page of each map, after clicking on "More information". There are
113 maps, some of them on multiple sheets (files). I tried to download one and
got a 8000x7000 TIFF of 100MB with a decent speed. I can't imagine why such
archive files would be given if not for reuse.

-- para


from_name: Gurch

subject: [WikiEN-l] ONE! HUNDRED! MILLION! EDITS!

body:
dmehkeri at swi.com wrote:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jackyl&diff=100000000
>
> Cheers,
> Dan

Only 100 million edits according to the edit IDs, which actually misses
out a lot of early history. According to Special:Statistics, we passed
100 million edits some time ago and we now have over 103 million, and
even that is only since July 2002. There's another year and a half
(which admittedly wasn't that active) of editing on top of that.

-Gurch


from_name: Rob Church

subject: [Wikitech-l] exporting images

body:
On 11/01/07, Claudi Meneghin <clamengh at yahoo.fr> wrote:
> Hi all,
> is there any way to export multiple images from a wikipedia, please (in this case Catalan wikipedia)?  Seemingly the special:export page does not match this goal.

No, not at present; there was some discussion on this list about
utilising the image information we provide in the exported XML streams
to allow Special:Import to pull in images from other wikis, but so
far, nothing has come of this.

Rob Church


subject:
[Wikitech-l] Spam-blacklist for URLs (on Wikimedia sites or
	otherwise)

body:
On 11/01/07, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
> wikitech-l: Does this sound workable in our present setup, per
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/SpamBlacklist_Documentation ?

Additional blacklists can be added in the site configuration; this
should be no problem - the French Wikipedia want a local blacklist,
too.

Rob Church


from_name: David Gerard

body:
On 11/01/07, dmehkeri at swi.com <dmehkeri at swi.com> wrote:

> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jackyl&diff=100000000

(Reverted edits by dmehkeri (talk) to last version by dgerard)

- d.


from_name: Ilmari Karonen

subject:
[Wikitech-l] Category Intersections: "Proof of Concept Page"
 feedback, please?

body:
Samuel Wantman wrote:
>
> [[:Intersection:Actors::Americans::Living people|Living American actors]]

:Parser:error::too:many:::colons.::Please::choose:a:::better::delimiter.

--
Ilmari Karonen


subject:
[Wikitech-l] [MediaWiki-CVS] SVN: [19114]
	trunk/extensions/Editcount

body:
On 11/01/07, ivanlanin at svn.wikimedia.org <ivanlanin at svn.wikimedia.org> wrote:
> Revision: 19114
> Author:   ivanlanin
> Date:     2007-01-10 22:28:30 -0800 (Wed, 10 Jan 2007)
>
> Log Message:
> -----------
> Give descriptions to Duplicator, Editcount, GiveRollback, and NewestPages extensions. Fix some Indonesian (id) translations for Duplicator.

(sigh)

That's all well and good, but for things like NewestPages, which are
supposed to be backwards-compatible...not ideal, since the
descriptions look ridiculous in older Special:Version pages.

Rob Church


from_name: Markus Krötzsch

subject:
[Wikitech-l] Category Intersections: "Proof of Concept Page"
	feedback, please?

body:
On Wednesday 10 January 2007 01:31, Matthew Flaschen wrote:
> Steve Bennett wrote:
> > On 1/6/07, Matthew Flaschen <matthew.flaschen at gatech.edu> wrote:
> >>> Of course, some difficult to anticipate factors are that if category
> >>> intersections are adopted and become popular, we will likely see a
> >>> movement towards more implied categories ("Americans" and "Actors"
> >>> instead of "American Actors")
> >>
> >> This is why people want the intersections, so the system should be able
> >> to scale efficiently enough for it.
> >
> > Indeed, what we probably want is a way to formalise these "implied
> > categories". Like creating a category "American actors" which simply
> > contains the text "Category:Americans Category:Actors", and having the
> > whole thing work just as you'd expect.

I did not follow this discussion, but it seems appropriate to point to the
Semantic MediaWiki extension, which computes "implied categories"
like "American actors" on request (it can combine unions, intersections,
namespace membership, and further "semantic properties").

We will assist in any effort towards developing an efficient way of doing
this, since our current implementation is probably not fast enough for large
wikis. Anyway, APIs and basic user interfaces exist. The homepage of this
extension is [1]. See [2] for an example of automatically combining
information into new listings, and [3] for a dynamic category intersection of
two categories (I fear that ontoworld does not have many examples of things
with more than one category). The query syntax used is described at [4].

-- Markus

[1] http://ontoworld.org/wiki/SMW
[2] http://ontoworld.org/wiki/Africa
[3]
http://ontoworld.org/wiki/Special:Ask?query=%5B%5BCategory%3ASemantic+browser%5D%5D%0D%0A%5B%5BCategory%3ARDF+store%5D%5D&sort=&order=ASC
[4] http://ontoworld.org/wiki/Help:Semantic_search

>
> That shouldn't even be necessary.  That just creates the semantic
> problems we have.  It could be as simple as
>
> [[:Intersect:American|Actors|Link text]]
>
> That reminds me.  What about category unions?
>
> Matthew Flaschen

--
Markus Kr?tzsch
Institute AIFB, University of Karlsruhe, D-76128 Karlsruhe
mak at aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de        phone +49 (0)721 608 7362
www.aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de/WBS/     fax +49 (0)721 693  717
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20070111/06d3dc00/attachment.pgp>


list: commons-l

from_name: Gregory Maxwell

subject: [Commons-l] We'd like a better template message transclusion.

body:
On 1/11/07, Robin Schwab <contact at robinschwab.ch> wrote:
> Cool Cat schrieb:
> > I have actually been working on just that for some time now. All I
> > currently have is javascript hacks which would not even work if the
> > person does not have javascript enabled. Javascript is also slow,
> > another reason to avoid it. But I share your reason. See [[ User
> > talk:Cool Cat/Sandbox
>
> I saw the example, nice tool but it has a principal hook:
> Each user downloads all languages which will generate huge traffic on a
> template like Template:GFDL
>
> So I think we need another technology. Daniel Arnold has a proposal that
> works, see
>
> http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8287
>
> and vote for this feature request here:
>
> http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/votes.cgi?action=show_user&bug_id=8287

Please don't just go 'vote' for this.. There are unsolved technical
problems with the proposal as standing (it totally breaks caching),
voting won't fix that.. coding will.


body:
dmehkeri at swi.com wrote:
>> dmehkeri at swi.com wrote:
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jackyl&diff=100000000
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Dan
>> Only 100 million edits according to the edit IDs, which actually misses
>> out a lot of early history. According to Special:Statistics, we passed
>> 100 million edits some time ago and we now have over 103 million, and
>> even that is only since July 2002. There's another year and a half
>> (which admittedly wasn't that active) of editing on top of that.
>>
>
> I'm Canadian and I was talking in metric, i.e 104857600 American edits.
>
> Dan

How many British edits is that?

-Gurch


list: foundation-l

from_name: Zuir DJ

subject: [Foundation-l] Board meeting in Rotterdam later this week

body:
On 1/11/07, senpai <wikisenpai en gmail.com> wrote:
>
> This is the situation, we don't want to remove all the images that are into
> the databases becous often a picture is essenctial to understand or to
> describe a particular concept.

iustum enim est bellum quibus necessarium, et pia arma ubi nulla in
armis spes est?

Not my vision of Wikimedia projects

--
Juan David Ruiz


list: wikimedia-l

body:
On 1/11/07, senpai <wikisenpai at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> This is the situation, we don't want to remove all the images that are into
> the databases becous often a picture is essenctial to understand or to
> describe a particular concept.

iustum enim est bellum quibus necessarium, et pia arma ubi nulla in
armis spes est?

Not my vision of Wikimedia projects

--
Juan David Ruiz


from_name: Thomas Dalton

body:
> How many British edits is that?

1

We're so much better than the rest of the world that we can write an
entire encyclopedia in one go. ;)


from_name: Anthony

subject: [Foundation-l] Fundraising and site notice

body:
On 1/11/07, Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote:
> It was good to see that official financial statements were finally
> produced.  That certainly satisfies my own previous complaints, and I
> prefer not to make my satisfaction an excuse for further complaints.  I
> can read financial statements, and see no cause for alarm.  Regular
> quarterly statements would be nice, and there would be no need to have
> these interim statements audited, but that's more a suggestion than a
> complaint.
>
"Following the certification and publication of our audited financial
statements, we
will resume publication of our financials, on what I anticipate will be
a monthly basis." - Brad, August 28, 2006

Anthony


from_name: Daniel Mayer

body:
--- Samuel Klein <meta.sj at gmail.com> wrote:
> More regular fundraisers will help; the community has been hoping for a
> fundraiser since the late spring. And more targeted messaging could make
> the fundraiser more successful, as a source of funds and as an event
> around which the community can rally and grow.

Yep; more regular drives and have each shorter in duration. 2 weeks max each but up to 4 per year,
IMO. Having different themes in each drive should also help; the general and vague 'knowledge is
power' theme is getting a bit old.

Focus of any one drive could be on a mix of one or two of the following in this very incomplete
list; community, helping endangered/minor languages, expanding access to knowledge into parts of
the world w/o Internet, improving one of our projects (such as Wikiversity) or even a particular
area of a project, strengthening the foundation generally or any of many different areas,
international aspects, {input your idea here}, etc.

> It would help as the fundraiser ends to have some explicit idea that
> we are pushing towards a goal, and a request to help meet that goal.

I agree - it should also be based on projected revenue needs forecasted from on an actual budget
that can be adjusted based on actual amount raised. A reserve also needs to be set-aside.

> It would help to have a sitewide notice that acknowledges and supports our
> strong open community, saying something like
>   "The Wikimedia projects are written and sustained by you, our readers and
>    editors. [[How you can help|Help us grow in 2007]]."

I would like to put that in the anon notice once the drive is over. We could even have a different
message every day of the week via ((CURRENTDAYNAME}} magic.

-- mav

____________________________________________________________________________________
Any questions? Get answers on any topic at www.Answers.yahoo.com.  Try it now.


from_name: Marc Riddell

subject: [WikiEN-l] psychosis and wikipedia.

body:
> From: "the wub" <thewub.wiki at googlemail.com>
> Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
> Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 23:08:21 +0000
> To: "English Wikipedia" <wikien-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] psychosis and wikipedia.
>
> On 10/01/07, Christopher Thieme <cdthieme at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I'd love to see some psychology-oriented individual do a case study on
>> what
>> kind of people are attracted to editing on Wikipedia.  What psychological
>> defects lurk behind the computer screens and the keyboards.  Why do I ask?
>> Because in the last month (including right now), I've gotten in spats,
>> edit
>> wars, content disputes, with people who would be poster children for
>> narcissitic personality disorder and one of several temporal lobe
>> disorders,
>> respectively.
>>
>> Something like that would probably explain a lot about the bitterness,
>> control issues, the incessant desire to be "right", etc. that some people
>> have when approaching the subject of editing.
>>
>
> There's an interesting article on the BBC website about "psychopathic
> traits" in the workplace, that seems to have jumped up their most e-mailed
> list today despite being from 2004
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/3579402.stm
>
> --
> the wub

Yes! These types of studies, and this type of clinical work has been going
on for some years now.

Helping companies and other organizations recognize and manage pathologies
in their organizational culture has been the bulk of my own work for several
years now.

And the problems aren?t confined just to the workplace. All of it goes home.
The last hour of work is the first hour of home; and the last hour of home
is the first hour of work.

Marc Riddell

> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l


from_name: mwookie

subject: [WikiEN-l] Using paragraphs from wikipedia on other websites

body:
Rory Stolzenberg wrote:
>
>
>
> If he's clearly showing that he's quoting text from another source, I
> don't
> think that would be considered part of the document, rather it would be an
> aggregate work. If he made the GFDL text very much a part of the text he
> writes, then I agree that it would probably require the entire thing to be
> GFDL. However, I get the impression that he doesn't intend to do that.
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
>
>

You are right, I don't really intend to "add or change" it but merely
include it and have other information around (not really article or essay,
but weblinks and statistics). Thanks for all the ideas on the subject, at
least I am starting to understand.

--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Using-paragraphs-from-wikipedia-on-other-websites-tf2943552.html#a8292455
Sent from the English Wikipedia mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


from_name: Ryan Wetherell

body:
On 1/11/07, Chris Picone <ccool2ax at gmail.com> wrote:
> God, why is everyone trying to delete everything for no reason? I can
> understand Esperanza, but then Concordia, Birthday Commitee, and now
> Good Articles have all been attempted to be ridden. Do we just want to
> get rid of things slightly broken to prove a point?

Maybe people just want to clean up the Wikipedia namespace?  It
doesn't have much in the way of content guidelines or anything.

--Ryan

--
[[en:User:Merovingian]]


from_name: Jimmy Wales

body:
Marco Chiesa wrote:
> Brianna Laugher wrote:
>
>> No projects allow NC, do they? English Wikipedia hasn't allowed them
>> for some time.
>>
>>
>>
> The Italian language wikipedia allows a plethora of  licenses for
> images, included NC, copyrighted with permission (we ask the copyright
> owner to mail OTRS for this) and some cases of fairuse as allowed by the
> Italian law. We do also allow PD images with are not allowed on commons.

I am sorry to hear this, because this is a violation of Wikimedia
Foundation policy.  From day one, we have been the *free* encyclopedia.

The Italian community needs to work out a transitional policy to correct
this problem... it will take time and a lot of work, and you will have
to be gentle with people, but it is just not acceptable to have those
images in wikipedia in the long run.

--Jimbo


from_name: Chris Picone

body:
God, why is everyone trying to delete everything for no reason? I can
understand Esperanza, but then Concordia, Birthday Commitee, and now
Good Articles have all been attempted to be ridden. Do we just want to
get rid of things slightly broken to prove a point?

On 1/11/07, NSLE (Wikipedia) <nsle.wikipedia at gmail.com> wrote:
> I don't see how it'd be useful to abolish GAs. GAs, imo, point out some of
> our better work, which still need polishing to become our BEST (FAs).
> Personally, whenever I write an article, my aim is usually an article that
> is well-written enough to be presentable as a GA. And quite on the contrary
> to "after that, the article really doesn't go anywhere", because I can say
> that, at least from the perspective of the tropical cyclones wikiproject
> (WPTC), we try to further our GAs up to A-class and FAs. Maybe not so for
> other projects, but GA definitely plays a role within WPTC.
>
> --Chacor
>
> On 12/01/07, Christopher Thieme <cdthieme at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Come to think of it, Good Articles as a separate distinctin is rather
> > irrelevant in the entire scheme of things.  Sure, you identify an article
> > as
> > being "Good".  But after that, the article really doesn't go anywhere.  At
> >
> > least featured articles are actually "featured."
> >
> > Perhaps the solution, given its shortcomings, is to abolish "Good
> > Articles".
> >
> > Christopher D. Thieme
> > User:ExplorerCDT
> > cdthieme at gmail.com
> > _______________________________________________
> > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: senpai

body:
It's the only way to have some images in the italian articles. We have a lot
of restrictive legislations and we can't use the fair use. For example, we
can go in a museum and take some pictures of a painting but, we can't
publish into wikipedia without the permission of the "sovraintendenza ai
beni culturali"; some days ago the "sovraintendenza ai beni culturali" of
florance have threated us for the photos of some painting and ohter kind of
arts taked into the florence's museums; perhaps will be a problem also for
commons.
This is the situation, we don't want to remove all the images that are into
the databases becous often a picture is essenctial to understand or to
describe a particular concept.

Senpai
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jimmy Wales" <jwales a wikia.com>
To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" <foundation-l a lists.wikimedia.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 8:58 PM
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Board meeting in Rotterdam later this week

> Marco Chiesa wrote:
>> Brianna Laugher wrote:
>>
>>> No projects allow NC, do they? English Wikipedia hasn't allowed them
>>> for some time.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> The Italian language wikipedia allows a plethora of  licenses for
>> images, included NC, copyrighted with permission (we ask the copyright
>> owner to mail OTRS for this) and some cases of fairuse as allowed by the
>> Italian law. We do also allow PD images with are not allowed on commons.
>
> I am sorry to hear this, because this is a violation of Wikimedia
> Foundation policy.  From day one, we have been the *free* encyclopedia.
>
> The Italian community needs to work out a transitional policy to correct
> this problem... it will take time and a lot of work, and you will have
> to be gentle with people, but it is just not acceptable to have those
> images in wikipedia in the long run.
>
> --Jimbo
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l a lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


body:
It's the only way to have some images in the italian articles. We have a lot
of restrictive legislations and we can't use the fair use. For example, we
can go in a museum and take some pictures of a painting but, we can't
publish into wikipedia without the permission of the "sovraintendenza ai
beni culturali"; some days ago the "sovraintendenza ai beni culturali" of
florance have threated us for the photos of some painting and ohter kind of
arts taked into the florence's museums; perhaps will be a problem also for
commons.
This is the situation, we don't want to remove all the images that are into
the databases becous often a picture is essenctial to understand or to
describe a particular concept.

Senpai
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jimmy Wales" <jwales at wikia.com>
To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" <foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 8:58 PM
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Board meeting in Rotterdam later this week

> Marco Chiesa wrote:
>> Brianna Laugher wrote:
>>
>>> No projects allow NC, do they? English Wikipedia hasn't allowed them
>>> for some time.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> The Italian language wikipedia allows a plethora of  licenses for
>> images, included NC, copyrighted with permission (we ask the copyright
>> owner to mail OTRS for this) and some cases of fairuse as allowed by the
>> Italian law. We do also allow PD images with are not allowed on commons.
>
> I am sorry to hear this, because this is a violation of Wikimedia
> Foundation policy.  From day one, we have been the *free* encyclopedia.
>
> The Italian community needs to work out a transitional policy to correct
> this problem... it will take time and a lot of work, and you will have
> to be gentle with people, but it is just not acceptable to have those
> images in wikipedia in the long run.
>
> --Jimbo
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


from_name: Aude

subject: [WikiEN-l] Fwd:  Wikipedia Club of New York - DC?

body:
How long are you in DC?  Though, our numbers are smaller in DC, I'm open to
an informal meetup here most anytime if you or anyone is interested.

-Aude

On 1/11/07, Jimmy Wales <jwales at wikia.com> wrote:
>
> They moved my 26 January trip... instead of NYC, I am going to
> Washington, DC.
>
> On the evening of 31 January, the free culture group at NYU will be
> hosting a party, probably this would be good for a joint meeting?
>
>
>


from_name: effe iets anders

body:
It is better to have no picture at all then a non-free picture, as that
non-free picture is shaking the fundaments on which Wikipedia and of course
the other wikimedia-projects is built. What would wikipedia be without a
free license?

Some time ago there was no free text available either in the context of
wikipedia. That has changed. With pictures it will change as well.

I would like to say as well that a lot of times institutions claim rights on
the area of copyright they do *not* have. That is of course understandable,
they want to stay in control. I would advice the italian community to seek
advice from experts (maybe that could be done by the foundation or wikimedia
italia?) to find our whether these claims are justifyable and whether they
will stand in court as well. You prooved today that it is indeed important
to have that found out. And maybe it would be better to loose a case in test
tryal in court on this as to be incertain forever. I dont know, i leave that
up to the legal department. but maybe we should just consider.

Lodewijk

2007/1/11, senpai <wikisenpai op gmail.com>:
>
> It's the only way to have some images in the italian articles. We have a
> lot
> of restrictive legislations and we can't use the fair use. For example, we
> can go in a museum and take some pictures of a painting but, we can't
> publish into wikipedia without the permission of the "sovraintendenza ai
> beni culturali"; some days ago the "sovraintendenza ai beni culturali" of
> florance have threated us for the photos of some painting and ohter kind
> of
> arts taked into the florence's museums; perhaps will be a problem also for
> commons.
> This is the situation, we don't want to remove all the images that are
> into
> the databases becous often a picture is essenctial to understand or to
> describe a particular concept.
>
> Senpai
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jimmy Wales" <jwales op wikia.com>
> To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" <foundation-l op lists.wikimedia.org>
> Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 8:58 PM
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Board meeting in Rotterdam later this week
>
> > Marco Chiesa wrote:
> >> Brianna Laugher wrote:
> >>
> >>> No projects allow NC, do they? English Wikipedia hasn't allowed them
> >>> for some time.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >> The Italian language wikipedia allows a plethora of  licenses for
> >> images, included NC, copyrighted with permission (we ask the copyright
> >> owner to mail OTRS for this) and some cases of fairuse as allowed by
> the
> >> Italian law. We do also allow PD images with are not allowed on
> commons.
> >
> > I am sorry to hear this, because this is a violation of Wikimedia
> > Foundation policy.  From day one, we have been the *free* encyclopedia.
> >
> > The Italian community needs to work out a transitional policy to correct
> > this problem... it will take time and a lot of work, and you will have
> > to be gentle with people, but it is just not acceptable to have those
> > images in wikipedia in the long run.
> >
> > --Jimbo
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > foundation-l op lists.wikimedia.org
> > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l op lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>


body:
It is better to have no picture at all then a non-free picture, as that
non-free picture is shaking the fundaments on which Wikipedia and of course
the other wikimedia-projects is built. What would wikipedia be without a
free license?

Some time ago there was no free text available either in the context of
wikipedia. That has changed. With pictures it will change as well.

I would like to say as well that a lot of times institutions claim rights on
the area of copyright they do *not* have. That is of course understandable,
they want to stay in control. I would advice the italian community to seek
advice from experts (maybe that could be done by the foundation or wikimedia
italia?) to find our whether these claims are justifyable and whether they
will stand in court as well. You prooved today that it is indeed important
to have that found out. And maybe it would be better to loose a case in test
tryal in court on this as to be incertain forever. I dont know, i leave that
up to the legal department. but maybe we should just consider.

Lodewijk

2007/1/11, senpai <wikisenpai at gmail.com>:
>
> It's the only way to have some images in the italian articles. We have a
> lot
> of restrictive legislations and we can't use the fair use. For example, we
> can go in a museum and take some pictures of a painting but, we can't
> publish into wikipedia without the permission of the "sovraintendenza ai
> beni culturali"; some days ago the "sovraintendenza ai beni culturali" of
> florance have threated us for the photos of some painting and ohter kind
> of
> arts taked into the florence's museums; perhaps will be a problem also for
> commons.
> This is the situation, we don't want to remove all the images that are
> into
> the databases becous often a picture is essenctial to understand or to
> describe a particular concept.
>
> Senpai
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jimmy Wales" <jwales at wikia.com>
> To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" <foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
> Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 8:58 PM
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Board meeting in Rotterdam later this week
>
> > Marco Chiesa wrote:
> >> Brianna Laugher wrote:
> >>
> >>> No projects allow NC, do they? English Wikipedia hasn't allowed them
> >>> for some time.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >> The Italian language wikipedia allows a plethora of  licenses for
> >> images, included NC, copyrighted with permission (we ask the copyright
> >> owner to mail OTRS for this) and some cases of fairuse as allowed by
> the
> >> Italian law. We do also allow PD images with are not allowed on
> commons.
> >
> > I am sorry to hear this, because this is a violation of Wikimedia
> > Foundation policy.  From day one, we have been the *free* encyclopedia.
> >
> > The Italian community needs to work out a transitional policy to correct
> > this problem... it will take time and a lot of work, and you will have
> > to be gentle with people, but it is just not acceptable to have those
> > images in wikipedia in the long run.
> >
> > --Jimbo
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>


body:
I studied deep and deep the italian legislation about copyright (i work in a
legal office) and our law it's really hard to pass. The civil law have a
completely different "modus operandi" by the common law. Other thing... in
en.wiki u use fair use... but fair use it's not "free" and it's not usable
in every country.

Senpai

----- Original Message -----
From: "effe iets anders" <effeietsanders a gmail.com>
To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" <foundation-l a lists.wikimedia.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 9:35 PM
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Board meeting in Rotterdam later this week

> It is better to have no picture at all then a non-free picture, as that
> non-free picture is shaking the fundaments on which Wikipedia and of
> course
> the other wikimedia-projects is built. What would wikipedia be without a
> free license?
>
> Some time ago there was no free text available either in the context of
> wikipedia. That has changed. With pictures it will change as well.
>
> I would like to say as well that a lot of times institutions claim rights
> on
> the area of copyright they do *not* have. That is of course
> understandable,
> they want to stay in control. I would advice the italian community to seek
> advice from experts (maybe that could be done by the foundation or
> wikimedia
> italia?) to find our whether these claims are justifyable and whether they
> will stand in court as well. You prooved today that it is indeed important
> to have that found out. And maybe it would be better to loose a case in
> test
> tryal in court on this as to be incertain forever. I dont know, i leave
> that
> up to the legal department. but maybe we should just consider.
>
> Lodewijk
>
> 2007/1/11, senpai <wikisenpai a gmail.com>:
>>
>> It's the only way to have some images in the italian articles. We have a
>> lot
>> of restrictive legislations and we can't use the fair use. For example,
>> we
>> can go in a museum and take some pictures of a painting but, we can't
>> publish into wikipedia without the permission of the "sovraintendenza ai
>> beni culturali"; some days ago the "sovraintendenza ai beni culturali" of
>> florance have threated us for the photos of some painting and ohter kind
>> of
>> arts taked into the florence's museums; perhaps will be a problem also
>> for
>> commons.
>> This is the situation, we don't want to remove all the images that are
>> into
>> the databases becous often a picture is essenctial to understand or to
>> describe a particular concept.
>>
>> Senpai
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Jimmy Wales" <jwales a wikia.com>
>> To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List"
>> <foundation-l a lists.wikimedia.org>
>> Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 8:58 PM
>> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Board meeting in Rotterdam later this week
>>
>> > Marco Chiesa wrote:
>> >> Brianna Laugher wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> No projects allow NC, do they? English Wikipedia hasn't allowed them
>> >>> for some time.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >> The Italian language wikipedia allows a plethora of  licenses for
>> >> images, included NC, copyrighted with permission (we ask the copyright
>> >> owner to mail OTRS for this) and some cases of fairuse as allowed by
>> the
>> >> Italian law. We do also allow PD images with are not allowed on
>> commons.
>> >
>> > I am sorry to hear this, because this is a violation of Wikimedia
>> > Foundation policy.  From day one, we have been the *free* encyclopedia.
>> >
>> > The Italian community needs to work out a transitional policy to
>> > correct
>> > this problem... it will take time and a lot of work, and you will have
>> > to be gentle with people, but it is just not acceptable to have those
>> > images in wikipedia in the long run.
>> >
>> > --Jimbo
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > foundation-l mailing list
>> > foundation-l a lists.wikimedia.org
>> > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> foundation-l mailing list
>> foundation-l a lists.wikimedia.org
>> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l a lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


body:
I studied deep and deep the italian legislation about copyright (i work in a
legal office) and our law it's really hard to pass. The civil law have a
completely different "modus operandi" by the common law. Other thing... in
en.wiki u use fair use... but fair use it's not "free" and it's not usable
in every country.

Senpai

----- Original Message -----
From: "effe iets anders" <effeietsanders at gmail.com>
To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" <foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 9:35 PM
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Board meeting in Rotterdam later this week

> It is better to have no picture at all then a non-free picture, as that
> non-free picture is shaking the fundaments on which Wikipedia and of
> course
> the other wikimedia-projects is built. What would wikipedia be without a
> free license?
>
> Some time ago there was no free text available either in the context of
> wikipedia. That has changed. With pictures it will change as well.
>
> I would like to say as well that a lot of times institutions claim rights
> on
> the area of copyright they do *not* have. That is of course
> understandable,
> they want to stay in control. I would advice the italian community to seek
> advice from experts (maybe that could be done by the foundation or
> wikimedia
> italia?) to find our whether these claims are justifyable and whether they
> will stand in court as well. You prooved today that it is indeed important
> to have that found out. And maybe it would be better to loose a case in
> test
> tryal in court on this as to be incertain forever. I dont know, i leave
> that
> up to the legal department. but maybe we should just consider.
>
> Lodewijk
>
> 2007/1/11, senpai <wikisenpai at gmail.com>:
>>
>> It's the only way to have some images in the italian articles. We have a
>> lot
>> of restrictive legislations and we can't use the fair use. For example,
>> we
>> can go in a museum and take some pictures of a painting but, we can't
>> publish into wikipedia without the permission of the "sovraintendenza ai
>> beni culturali"; some days ago the "sovraintendenza ai beni culturali" of
>> florance have threated us for the photos of some painting and ohter kind
>> of
>> arts taked into the florence's museums; perhaps will be a problem also
>> for
>> commons.
>> This is the situation, we don't want to remove all the images that are
>> into
>> the databases becous often a picture is essenctial to understand or to
>> describe a particular concept.
>>
>> Senpai
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Jimmy Wales" <jwales at wikia.com>
>> To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List"
>> <foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
>> Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 8:58 PM
>> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Board meeting in Rotterdam later this week
>>
>> > Marco Chiesa wrote:
>> >> Brianna Laugher wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> No projects allow NC, do they? English Wikipedia hasn't allowed them
>> >>> for some time.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >> The Italian language wikipedia allows a plethora of  licenses for
>> >> images, included NC, copyrighted with permission (we ask the copyright
>> >> owner to mail OTRS for this) and some cases of fairuse as allowed by
>> the
>> >> Italian law. We do also allow PD images with are not allowed on
>> commons.
>> >
>> > I am sorry to hear this, because this is a violation of Wikimedia
>> > Foundation policy.  From day one, we have been the *free* encyclopedia.
>> >
>> > The Italian community needs to work out a transitional policy to
>> > correct
>> > this problem... it will take time and a lot of work, and you will have
>> > to be gentle with people, but it is just not acceptable to have those
>> > images in wikipedia in the long run.
>> >
>> > --Jimbo
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > foundation-l mailing list
>> > foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>> > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> foundation-l mailing list
>> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


from_name: Łukasz Garczewski

body:
On 1/11/07, senpai <wikisenpai at gmail.com> wrote:
> I studied deep and deep the italian legislation about copyright (i work in a
> legal office) and our law it's really hard to pass. The civil law have a
> completely different "modus operandi" by the common law. Other thing... in
> en.wiki u use fair use... but fair use it's not "free" and it's not usable
> in every country.

The English Wikipedia is actually a bad example, when it comes to
copyright, exactly because of the fair use. If you want an example,
see how the Polish or German Wikipedias deal with copyright. No fair
use, no non-commercial images, strictly free content.

It is doable. And worth the effort. But nobody's asking that you do it
*now*. Gradual phasing out of un-free images is fine. But be sure to
work toward that goal.

See Danny's "back to the basics" mail for more on "fair use".

--
?ukasz 'TOR' Garczewski


body:
Ok, but... if en.wiki will remove the fair use images, for us will not be a
problem remove the not free images. Other thing, some of the images on
commons are not free in all part of the world, that's a problem, than, also
de.wiki and other project, are not a good example ^_-.

Senpai

----- Original Message -----
From: "?ukasz Garczewski" <lgarczewski a gmail.com>
To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" <foundation-l a lists.wikimedia.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 9:58 PM
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Board meeting in Rotterdam later this week

On 1/11/07, senpai <wikisenpai a gmail.com> wrote:
> I studied deep and deep the italian legislation about copyright (i work in
> a
> legal office) and our law it's really hard to pass. The civil law have a
> completely different "modus operandi" by the common law. Other thing... in
> en.wiki u use fair use... but fair use it's not "free" and it's not usable
> in every country.

The English Wikipedia is actually a bad example, when it comes to
copyright, exactly because of the fair use. If you want an example,
see how the Polish or German Wikipedias deal with copyright. No fair
use, no non-commercial images, strictly free content.

It is doable. And worth the effort. But nobody's asking that you do it
*now*. Gradual phasing out of un-free images is fine. But be sure to
work toward that goal.

See Danny's "back to the basics" mail for more on "fair use".

--
?ukasz 'TOR' Garczewski
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l a lists.wikimedia.org
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


body:
Ok, but... if en.wiki will remove the fair use images, for us will not be a
problem remove the not free images. Other thing, some of the images on
commons are not free in all part of the world, that's a problem, than, also
de.wiki and other project, are not a good example ^_-.

Senpai

----- Original Message -----
From: "?ukasz Garczewski" <lgarczewski at gmail.com>
To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" <foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 9:58 PM
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Board meeting in Rotterdam later this week

On 1/11/07, senpai <wikisenpai at gmail.com> wrote:
> I studied deep and deep the italian legislation about copyright (i work in
> a
> legal office) and our law it's really hard to pass. The civil law have a
> completely different "modus operandi" by the common law. Other thing... in
> en.wiki u use fair use... but fair use it's not "free" and it's not usable
> in every country.

The English Wikipedia is actually a bad example, when it comes to
copyright, exactly because of the fair use. If you want an example,
see how the Polish or German Wikipedias deal with copyright. No fair
use, no non-commercial images, strictly free content.

It is doable. And worth the effort. But nobody's asking that you do it
*now*. Gradual phasing out of un-free images is fine. But be sure to
work toward that goal.

See Danny's "back to the basics" mail for more on "fair use".

--
?ukasz 'TOR' Garczewski
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


from_name: David Gerard

subject: [Foundation-l] Back to basics

body:
On 11/01/07, Delirium <delirium at hackish.org> wrote:
> David Gerard wrote:

> >I'm using this message and quoting "It does not say 'share freely
> >unless the unfree content is better.'" when removing "fair use" pics
> >we have a free replacement for ;-D

> I'd say it depends on just how good the replacement it is.  Fair use is
> an integral portion of describing the "sum of human knowledge"---surely
> you wouldn't want to write an encyclopedia in which you could never
> include a single quote from any book ever published?  We could in theory
> paraphrase them all to avoid relying on fair use, but that's often a
> pretty poor replacement.  Fair-use for images is not fundamentally
> different, though the degree and judgment calls are often different.

I agree completely. But if you've never had an article someone removed
a free image from because they thought a copyright violation looked
better, then you've had a sheltered wiki life.

- d.


subject: [Foundation-l] Back to basics


from_name: Matthew Brown

body:
On 1/11/07, Ryan Wetherell <renardius at gmail.com> wrote:
> Maybe people just want to clean up the Wikipedia namespace?  It
> doesn't have much in the way of content guidelines or anything.

Policy decisions via deletion seem to be the favored mode, sometimes.

-Matt


from_name: Platonides

subject: [Wikitech-l] InnoDB & other DB related issues

body:
howard chen escribi?:
> 2. Why the datasebase dump (/download.wikimedia.org) do not use a
> unqiue format? eg. some files are XML and some files are SQL
Time ago it used SQL. Mediawiki tables were exposed, like the cur table.
With MediaWiki 1.5, there was a change on the db format, so some tables
went out, and others appeared. This broke some usages.
Instead of giving new sql files, which may get outdated, export changed
to the current XML format, so download format will remain stable, no
matter how is it really saved (e.g. article contents are not on the db,
but on 'external storage').

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Data_dumps#What_happened_to_the_SQL_dumps.3F

Some files have kept SQL format, and there's probably no need to change
it for now.

> 3. Why not output as CSV format so we can use mysqlimport, which is a
> LOT faster for all of us.
>
> thanks.

I hope you're comparing against mwdumper, and not against importDump.php ;)
You can always translate them into any format (SQL, CSV...) you want.
The reasoning above applies here as well.

Platonides


body:
Matthew Flaschen escribi?:
> Simetrical wrote:
>> Not as important as intersections, no.  But while I've been bitten for
>> spouting off about stuff I'm ignorant of before, surely calculating a
>> union would be cheaper than calculating an intersection anyway?
>
> I don't think so.  Basically, the way you do a union is make a list
> including all the articles in both categories (including duplicates).
> Then, you remove...the intersection.
>
> Matthew Flaschen

You don't probably need the intersection. If you're giving out the
results sorted (as categories are doing), the merge algorithm would
remove duplicates 'on the way'.
If you have 2 categories of 1000 articles, it's much _easier_ to 'throw'
elements of any of them to fill 200 articles, than searching for the
(little) ones which may be on both.


from_name: Robin Schwab

body:
Cool Cat schrieb:
> I have actually been working on just that for some time now. All I
> currently have is javascript hacks which would not even work if the
> person does not have javascript enabled. Javascript is also slow,
> another reason to avoid it. But I share your reason. See [[ User
> talk:Cool Cat/Sandbox

I saw the example, nice tool but it has a principal hook:
Each user downloads all languages which will generate huge traffic on a
template like Template:GFDL

So I think we need another technology. Daniel Arnold has a proposal that
works, see

http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8287

and vote for this feature request here:

http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/votes.cgi?action=show_user&bug_id=8287

Regards

Robin


from_name: the wub

subject: [WikiEN-l] psychosis and wikipedia.

body:
On 10/01/07, Christopher Thieme <cdthieme at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I'd love to see some psychology-oriented individual do a case study on
> what
> kind of people are attracted to editing on Wikipedia.  What psychological
> defects lurk behind the computer screens and the keyboards.  Why do I ask?
> Because in the last month (including right now), I've gotten in spats,
> edit
> wars, content disputes, with people who would be poster children for
> narcissitic personality disorder and one of several temporal lobe
> disorders,
> respectively.
>
> Something like that would probably explain a lot about the bitterness,
> control issues, the incessant desire to be "right", etc. that some people
> have when approaching the subject of editing.
>

There's an interesting article on the BBC website about "psychopathic
traits" in the workplace, that seems to have jumped up their most e-mailed
list today despite being from 2004

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/3579402.stm

--
the wub


from_name: xaosflux

body:
It should be noted that this RFA ended with a withdrawal
(http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ARequests_for_adminship%2FProtectionBot&diff=99897588&oldid=99889065)
by the operator, and the bot request is no longer active.

en:xaosflux
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ligulem" <ligulem at pobox.com>
To: <wikitech-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 8:34 AM
Subject: [Wikitech-l] User rights for ProtectionBot on en.wikipedia

> On en.wikipedia we have a discussion about giving a user account sysop
> group membership at
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/ProtectionBot
>
> We are currently discussing giving this user account only the
> permissions from the group "registered" (or "bots") *plus* the protect
> permission alone (instead of the whole sysop group set of permissions).
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_adminship/ProtectionBot#Access_rights_for_protection_bot
>
> Do we need a new user group for this on en.wikipedia? Maybe a new group
> "protect", containing the protect permission alone?
>
> If we can show consensus for this, would a site admin/developer do this
> for us?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


from_name: Aphaia

body:
On 1/11/07, Bryan Tong Minh <bryan.tongminh at gmail.com> wrote:
> We have far too few active Dutch translators on Commons. Actually
> none, considering the fact that I do not much translation stuff.

Generally, a Wikimedia project community might invite translator on
other Wikimedia projects via
- their general discussion page (like Village Pump on English Wikipedia)
- [[m:TR#requests from local projects]] (also inclusion at [[m:Babylon]])
- translators-l at lists dot wikimedia dot org
-- this works well specially you would like some mailing list posts to
be translated
- local or Wikimedia Embassies (you may access them via  [[m:Wikimedia Embassy]]

If you know other possibilities, please let me know ;)

--
KIZU Naoko
  Wikiquote: http://wikiquote.org
  * habent enim emolumentum in labore suo *


subject: [Wikitech-l] Adequate place for new wikistats

body:
Felipe Ortega escribi?:

> As these graphics complement current wikimetrics info about the project, generated by Erik
  Zatche's scripts, we wonder about the better place to release them, in
case Wikimedia is
interested (under a GPL license).

Wouldn't a GFDL license be more adequate? GPL is intended to software...

Saludos
Platonides


body:
I had been thinking about this for a time. My idea was setting a <div
around the template (easy) and then make the {{/lang}} links 'special'
(need to be done with JS), so they show the target on its parent div
(not the first div, but the template div). However, as templates have
parameters, the would need to be isolated on the parsed html to be
reused by the js. And doing the template rendering with AJAX, wouldn't
hit the caches, so server admins wouldn't be exactly happy with that
extra load.

As you mention it, extra-hacking would be needed to make it work with
transclusions (js not available, different domain: ajax not working...).

Platonides


body:
Robin Schwab worte:
> I saw the example, nice tool but it has a principal hook:
> Each user downloads all languages which will generate huge traffic on a
> template like Template:GFDL

Not really: All users get the same page, so it can be effectively cached.


from_name: brion at pobox.com

subject: [Wikitech-l] MediaWiki automated test run failure 2007-01-12

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

This is MediaWiki version 1.10alpha (r19155).
Reading tests from "maintenance/parserTests.txt"...

Reading tests from "extensions/Cite/citeParserTests.txt"...

Reading tests from "extensions/Poem/poemParserTests.txt"...

  19 still FAILING test(s) :(
      * TODO: Table security: embedded pipes (http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2006-April/034637.html)
      * TODO: Link containing double-single-quotes '' (bug 4598)
      * TODO: message transform: <noinclude> in transcluded template (bug 4926)
      * TODO: message transform: <onlyinclude> in transcluded template (bug 4926)
      * BUG 1887, part 2: A <math> with a thumbnail- math enabled
      * TODO: HTML bullet list, unclosed tags (bug 5497)
      * TODO: HTML ordered list, unclosed tags (bug 5497)
      * TODO: HTML nested bullet list, open tags (bug 5497)
      * TODO: HTML nested ordered list, open tags (bug 5497)
      * TODO: Parsing optional HTML elements (Bug 6171)
      * TODO: Inline HTML vs wiki block nesting
      * TODO: Mixing markup for italics and bold
      * TODO: 5 quotes, code coverage +1 line
      * TODO: dt/dd/dl test
      * TODO: Images with the "|" character in the comment
      * TODO: Parents of subpages, two levels up, without trailing slash or name.
      * TODO: Parents of subpages, two levels up, with lots of extra trailing slashes.
      * TODO: Don't fall for the self-closing div
      * TODO: Always escape literal '>' in output, not just after '<'
Passed 484 of 503 tests (96.22%)... FAILED!


from_name: howard chen

body:
some questions:

1. I see quite a lot fo mediawiki's tables use auto-increment as
primary key but we know that this is no good for innodb, do you guy
aware of this problem?

2. Why the datasebase dump (/download.wikimedia.org) do not use a
unqiue format? eg. some files are XML and some files are SQL

3. Why not output as CSV format so we can use mysqlimport, which is a
LOT faster for all of us.

thanks.


list: wikipedia-l

from_name: Ray Saintonge

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Entries for deletion.... Notability

body:
Ian Tresman wrote:

>>How well do you know what the reliable sources are when you are outside
>>of your fields of interest?
>>
>>
>Technically all Wikipedia editors are outside their field since they
>are all generally anonymous. That leaves common sense which is
>generally described in WP:NOTABLE.
>
That is a remarkably illogical non-sequitur.  Being anonymous does not
imply that one loses all connection with his fields of interest.

Any rule that purports to describe common sense is well worth ignoring.

Ec


subject: [WikiEN-l] African maps

body:
para wrote:

>geni <geniice at ...> wrote:
>
>
>>>"A collection of rare maps of Africa, dating from 1530 to 1915, has been
>>>made available for free on the internet by Northwestern University in the
>>>US. " Is this something we should be storing too? I think we should at least
>>>make an effort to contact them about it...
>>>
>>>
>>The format with which they appear on the net makes them hard/very hard
>>to copy. Contacting may be only option
>>
>>
>Actually, they are not hidden at all and copying couldn't be much easier. Links
>to high resolution TIFF files of the maps are readily available on the
>information page of each map, after clicking on "More information". There are
>113 maps, some of them on multiple sheets (files). I tried to download one and
>got a 8000x7000 TIFF of 100MB with a decent speed. I can't imagine why such
>archive files would be given if not for reuse.
>
I would not be inclined to have concern about the copyright of material
on such a database.  I'm sure too that we have enough collective techy
smarts to do a decent job of getting good copies.

What I do wonder about is the ethical question around wholesale copying
of another site filled with free material.  They have a role too in
whatever niche they find.  They are already in compliance with our
mission to keep such information free. They have a role in the open
access market.   There can be valid reasons for the wholesale copying.of
these databases; preservation redundancy could be one.  Still, just
because an act is legal does not mean that that same act is ethical.

Ec


from_name: Rob Church

body:
On 11/01/07, Ivan Lanin <ivanlanin at gmail.com> wrote:
> Ups, I have to watch out for the MW version requirement for every
> extensions then. Thanks for reminding.

Don't worry too much this time, it's not going to seriously break
anything, and you're only following precedent.

Rob Church


from_name: Bogdan Giusca

subject: [WikiEN-l] African maps

body:
Thursday, January 11, 2007, 8:29:47 PM, SPUI wrote:

>> The format with which they appear on the net makes them hard/very hard
>> to copy. Contacting may be only option

> I've had some success with hacking the URL, but it likes to break randomly:
> It may also be possible to get at the stored jpeg2.

Or you could try downloading the full-resolution TIFFs they are kindly
providing on each image page, by simply clicking on "More information".

:-)


from_name: Christopher Thieme

subject: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedia Club of New York - 31 January 2007 event

body:
On 1/11/07, Jimmy Wales <jwales at wikia.com> wrote:
>
> They moved my 26 January trip... instead of NYC, I am going to
> Washington, DC.
>
> On the evening of 31 January, the free culture group at NYU will be
> hosting a party, probably this would be good for a joint meeting?
>
>

Dear Mr. Wales:

I think we should probably team up with the Free Culture Group at NYU for
the Wednesday, 31 January 2007 event.  Is there a contact person at NYU I
can get in touch with in order to facilitate some cooperation between us and
them...possibly assist them in getting the event going?  If so, please pass
along my e-mail address to them.

Regards,

Christopher D. Thieme
User:ExplorerCDT
cdthieme at gmail.com


from_name: Phil Boswell

subject: [Wikitech-l] MediaWiki as a Wikimedia project

body:
Rob Church wrote:
>
> On 07/01/07, GerardM <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
> [snip]
>> If this move is intended to bring more volunteer developers to MediaWiki
>> I
>> am afraid that it is just window dressing. It will not make much of a
>> difference because people come and stay as they like. If you TRULY want
>> more
>> developers, having someone dedicated to coaching the people who are new
>> to
>> the MediaWiki code would make much more of a difference. Having someone
>> coach people who are doing projects and stuff in Universities would
>> really
>> help.
> Absolutely! New developers come in all very excited about the thing -
> they've submitted a few patches, we've generally used those to help
> mould them into shape, and we've got a feel for them - but they're
> still very "green" - I certainly was. It would make excellent sense if
> a more experienced developer was assigned to "mentor" newbies, and I
> don't mean that in the sense of being up their noses - I mean that in
> a sense of giving their changes a quick eyeball, and being available
> to answer the odd email about how something should be done.
>
Interestingly, given the stink being raised in certain on-wiki circles about
IRC and off-wiki communication, it is evident from lurking on the
appropriate channels that this is already being done spectacularly well by
Brion and Rob, not to mention the other devs who are there from time to
time.

I just wanted to make it absolutely clear that the "mentoring" process is
already ongoing, if not necessarily officially or under that precise name,
and seems to be working very well indeed.

HTH HAND
--
Phil
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/-Wikitech-l--MediaWiki-as-a-Wikimedia-project-tf2931683.html#a8298238
Sent from the Wikipedia Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


from_name: Nina Stratton

references:
<mailman.4692.1168534937.11809.wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
	<1168536299.45a672eb2bdce@webmail.swi.com>
	<45A674FC.5090905@btinternet.com>
	<a4359dff0701110941wbb7b7b4hf794d0a3ad7df8da@mail.gmail.com>

body:
Eh, that's lovely. Now back to work.

Nina

On 1/11/07, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > How many British edits is that?
>
> 1
>
> We're so much better than the rest of the world that we can write an
> entire encyclopedia in one go. ;)
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: Ivan Lanin

body:
Ups, I have to watch out for the MW version requirement for every
extensions then. Thanks for reminding.

Rgrds, Ivan Lanin

On 1/12/07, Rob Church <robchur at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 11/01/07, ivanlanin at svn.wikimedia.org <ivanlanin at svn.wikimedia.org> wrote:
> > Revision: 19114
> > Author:   ivanlanin
> > Date:     2007-01-10 22:28:30 -0800 (Wed, 10 Jan 2007)
> >
> > Log Message:
> > -----------
> > Give descriptions to Duplicator, Editcount, GiveRollback, and NewestPages extensions. Fix some Indonesian (id) translations for Duplicator.
>
> (sigh)
>
> That's all well and good, but for things like NewestPages, which are
> supposed to be backwards-compatible...not ideal, since the
> descriptions look ridiculous in older Special:Version pages.
>
>
> Rob Church
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>


from_name: Christophe Henner

subject: [Foundation-l] Results of a Universitary Research about Wikipedia

body:
Hi,

I forward this mail from the french mailing list.

To thos intersted by it, it's a research from the ? Department of
Psychology II, Industrial
> and Organizational Psychology ? Wuerzburg University

On 12/01/07, Patrice L?tourneau <patrice_letourneau at hotmail.com> wrote:
> Bonjour,
>
> Pour les personnes que ?a int?resse, je fais suivre ce courriel ? propos de
> la premi?re partie de l'?tude du ? Department of Psychology II, Industrial
> and Organizational Psychology ? de l'Universit? de Wuerzburg.
>
> Cordialement,
> Patrice L?tourneau
>
> http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utilisateur:Patrice_L?tourneau
> http://carnets.opossum.ca/patriceletourneau/
> ------
>
> >From: schroer at psychologie.uni-wuerzburg.de
> >To: patrice_letourneau at hotmail.com
> >Subject: Results of Wikipedia survey
> >Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 13:25:56 +0100 (CET)
> >
> >Hello,
> >
> >some time ago you asked to be notified as soon as results of our survey
> >among Wikipedia contributors are available. There is now a "working paper"
> >on the results of the first part of the study, i.e. our survey among
> >contributors to the German Wikipedia.
> >
> >The paper is available from the following URLs:
> >
> >http://www.abo.psychologie.uni-wuerzburg.de/virtualcollaboration/publications.php?action=view&id=44
> >
> >or
> >
> >http://tinyurl.com/u58oh
> >
> >The paper is now under review for publication, and your comments are very
> >welcome.
> >
> >Best wishes,
> >
> >Joachim Schroer
> >
> >
> >
> >--
> >Joachim Schroer, Dipl.-Psych.
> >University of Wuerzburg
> >Department of Psychology II, Industrial and Organizational Psychology
> >Roentgenring 10
> >97070 Wuerzburg
> >Germany
> >
> >Phone: +49 931 31 6062
> >Fax:   +49 931 31 6063
> >http://www.psychologie.uni-wuerzburg.de/ao/staff/schroer.php
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> http://www.initiesyouthography.com/R.aspx?a=117
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Liste de diffusion WikiFR-L (WikiFR-l at lists.wikimedia.org)
> Gestion de votre abonnement sur http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikifr-l
> Accessible en destinataire principal uniquement
>

--
schiste


from_name: luke brandt

body:
Zuir DJ wrote:
> On 1/11/07, senpai <wikisenpai at gmail.com> wrote:
>> This is the situation, we don't want to remove all the images that are into
>> the databases becous often a picture is essenctial to understand or to
>> describe a particular concept.
>
> iustum enim est bellum quibus necessarium, et pia arma ubi nulla in
> armis spes est?
>
> Not my vision of Wikimedia projects
>

I've never quite understood the idea that re-users should be 'free' to
levy a charge for something when the author wishes to make it 'freely'
available. Surely making something 'free' to everyone is the greater
freedom than the freedom to allow a charge to be made? And don't those
who may make such a charge unfairly benefit if they make a profit? Or is
it only freedom to cover costs that we mean - luke


from_name: David Gerard

body:
On 12/01/07, Daniel Mayer <maveric149 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> --- Samuel Klein <meta.sj at gmail.com> wrote:

> > It would help to have a sitewide notice that acknowledges and supports our
> > strong open community, saying something like
> >   "The Wikimedia projects are written and sustained by you, our readers and
> >    editors. [[How you can help|Help us grow in 2007]]."

> I would like to put that in the anon notice once the drive is over. We could even have a different
> message every day of the week via ((CURRENTDAYNAME}} magic.

Come up with interesting new ones on a daily basis and people will log
in anon just to see what today's is ;-)

- d.


from_name: NSLE (Wikipedia)

subject: [WikiEN-l] Good Articles is a mess...time for a clean sweep

body:
I don't see how it'd be useful to abolish GAs. GAs, imo, point out some of
our better work, which still need polishing to become our BEST (FAs).
Personally, whenever I write an article, my aim is usually an article that
is well-written enough to be presentable as a GA. And quite on the contrary
to "after that, the article really doesn't go anywhere", because I can say
that, at least from the perspective of the tropical cyclones wikiproject
(WPTC), we try to further our GAs up to A-class and FAs. Maybe not so for
other projects, but GA definitely plays a role within WPTC.

--Chacor

On 12/01/07, Christopher Thieme <cdthieme at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Come to think of it, Good Articles as a separate distinctin is rather
> irrelevant in the entire scheme of things.  Sure, you identify an article
> as
> being "Good".  But after that, the article really doesn't go anywhere.  At
>
> least featured articles are actually "featured."
>
> Perhaps the solution, given its shortcomings, is to abolish "Good
> Articles".
>
> Christopher D. Thieme
> User:ExplorerCDT
> cdthieme at gmail.com
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


subject: [WikiEN-l] (no subject)

body:
+!

Nina

On 1/12/07, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen <cimonavaro at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I personally fear systemic bias on wikipedia is being squeezed from
> two directions concurrently at the moment.
>
> The way AFD currently works means that pages which are not on many
> users watchlists is uniquely vulnerable to AFD-wonks predation. So
> that means that the bias stemming from our communitys composition not
> only affects what gets created but also what gets deleted. This
> two-way squeeze worries me.
>
> Although I commend in general terms the drive to emphasize quality
> over quantity, to me at least that does not extend so far as to
> emphasizing removal of content over creation of it. And this is a
> question that should at least be addressed. I think it would be useful
> if the board and or Jimbo uttered something on the matter to let us
> know how they view the question in general on this mailing list.
>
> I do not wish to make this a discussion of specific examples but
> rather a more general definition of guiding principles. But if
> necessary for illustrating the reality of the issue, I will find some
> examples to ground it in reality. I really don't think such is
> necessary, and would much prefer to discuss the matter under a "veil
> of ignorance" about which particular areas are most vulnerable, and in
> the abstract.
>
> So how about it? Even if we accept that quantity is *less* important
> than the quality, is creation still preferred over removal?
>
> --
> --
> Jussi-Ville Heiskanen, ~ [[User:Cimon Avaro]]
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: Dan Jacobson

subject: [Wikitech-l] can also read wikitech-l via gmane.org NNTP

body:
HM> P.S.: I had to unsubscribe and re-subscribe with an other mail
HM> account because I had underestimated the volume of the list and it
HM> made overflow my mailbox on the Wikivoyage server.

I read this list on gmane.science.linguistics.wikipedia.technical via
the gmane.org NNTP server. No need for message bodies one doesn't read.
Posting though is via email.


from_name: Gerard Meijssen

subject: [Foundation-l] NEH grant

body:
Brianna Laugher schreef:
> I went through the application information and I think we could
> definitely be a strong contender, if we had a good partner and a sound
> project.
>
> Please contribute ideas here:
>
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/NEH_Advancing_Knowledge_grant
>
> Basically, we can't use it to purchase existing collections, and we
> need to have a specific project with a partner such as a library,
> museum or archive. So we need to brainstorm on either what good
> projects would be (and then, who would be good to approach as a
> partner?) or on who good partners would be (and then, what would make
> sense as a collaborative project?).
>
> After mulling over this a bit, it just screams LIBRARY + WIKISOURCE to
> me. We need a partner who is sympathetic to open content and not
> putting restrictions on public domain material.
>
> If you have ideas for good partners and/or projects, please put them
> on the meta page!
>
> thanks,
> Brianna
> user:pfctdayelise
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
>


subject: [Foundation-l] NEH grant


body:
Ray Saintonge schreef:
> Ian Tresman wrote:
>
>
>>> How well do you know what the reliable sources are when you are outside
>>> of your fields of interest?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> Technically all Wikipedia editors are outside their field since they
>> are all generally anonymous. That leaves common sense which is
>> generally described in WP:NOTABLE.
>>
>>
> That is a remarkably illogical non-sequitur.  Being anonymous does not
> imply that one loses all connection with his fields of interest.
>
> Any rule that purports to describe common sense is well worth ignoring.
>
> Ec
Ray,
One of my favourite proverbs: "There ain't no such thing as common sense
as common sense ain't common".
Thanks,
    GerardM


subject: [WikiEN-l] African maps

body:
On 12/01/07, Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote:

> What I do wonder about is the ethical question around wholesale copying
> of another site filled with free material.  They have a role too in
> whatever niche they find.  They are already in compliance with our
> mission to keep such information free. They have a role in the open
> access market.   There can be valid reasons for the wholesale copying.of
> these databases; preservation redundancy could be one.  Still, just
> because an act is legal does not mean that that same act is ethical.

Has anyone, uh, called them up, said "hi" and asked for anything
important we would need to know to mirror the maps on Commons? I would
be very surprised if we didn't have a pile of contributors and
supporters at any university of decent size ...

Of course, attribution as reasonably desired would be polite to detail
on the image page - "thank you" costs very little and goes a long way.

- d.


from_name: Felipe Ortega

body:
Well, yes! The GNU For Documents License is the precise one I should have mentioned :-o

Sorry, I usually abuse of the GPL ... Thanks for the adequate appointment, Platonides...

Thank you very much for the positive feedback. I will start to upload material as soon as possible.

Regards,

Felipe Ortega.

Platonides <Platonides at gmail.com> escribi?: Felipe Ortega escribi?:

> As these graphics complement current wikimetrics info about the project, generated by Erik
  Zatche's scripts, we wonder about the better place to release them, in
case Wikimedia is
interested (under a GPL license).

Wouldn't a GFDL license be more adequate? GPL is intended to software...

Saludos
Platonides

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l at lists.wikimedia.org
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

---------------------------------

LLama Gratis a cualquier PC del Mundo.
Llamadas a fijos y m?viles desde 1 c?ntimo por minuto.
http://es.voice.yahoo.com


from_name: Jay R. Ashworth

subject: [Wikitech-l] MediaWiki 1.9.0 released

body:
On Wed, Jan 10, 2007 at 01:10:21PM -0800, Brion Vibber wrote:
> MediaWiki 1.9.0 is the quarterly release snapshot for Winter 2007. While
> the code has been running on Wikipedia for some time, installation and
> upgrade bits may be less well tested. Bug fix releases may follow in the
> coming days or weeks.

So... what's the next quarterly release?

1.10, right?  :-)

Cheers,
-- jra
--
Jay R. Ashworth                                                jra at baylink.com
Designer                          Baylink                             RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates        The Things I Think                        '87 e24
St Petersburg FL USA      http://baylink.pitas.com             +1 727 647 1274


subject: [Wikitech-l] MediaWiki 1.9.0 released

body:
On Wed, Jan 10, 2007 at 01:10:21PM -0800, Brion Vibber wrote:
> There are no changes from 1.9.0rc2 to 1.9.0 final except the version number.

Oh, yeah.   "Thanks, Brion."  :-)

Cheers,
-- jra
--
Jay R. Ashworth                                                jra at baylink.com
Designer                          Baylink                             RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates        The Things I Think                        '87 e24
St Petersburg FL USA      http://baylink.pitas.com             +1 727 647 1274


from_name: Jeff V. Merkey

subject: [Foundation-l] Copyright issue with external links

body:
Expect big changes in the next 24 months on internet copyright and usage
in the United States Congress and Senate. Congress has been getting too
many people complaining. One sad note is that Slashdot is no longer
"news for geeks" but "news for hackers, and software pirates". The
pendulum is starting
to swing back the other way and unfortunately, it may swing too far to
the right. Experimental internet IP litigation is where WE DO NOT
WANT TO BE in the line of fire.

Anything folks can do to limit our exposure here is a good thing. For
the most part, WMF and its policies err on the side of caution, and this
is a very
good thing. The more prudent we can be in this area, the better. There's
just been too much abuse of the current copyright laws by the internet
community as a whole.

:-)

Jeff

John Barberio wrote:

>Hi,
>
>Over on Wikipedia, there's a significant group of editors who've decided
>that current copyright policy doesn't go far enought, and are rewriting
>the external linking guidelines to require 'copyright verification' and
>'due care to verify copyright' on external links. This is because they
>feel we are risking threat of suit due to linking to the likes of YouTube.
>
>No, I'm not suggesting we should allow links to copyvio, it's clear that
>we shouldn't. But it's my understanding that the proposed changes would
>be poor ones to make for various reasons.
>
>Primarily because we don't have the resources to take 'due care' and
>'verify copyright'. True copyright verification needing lawyers time and
>money, it's not something that's in our grasp at all.
>
>At the moment, copyright policy says not to 'knowingly and
>intentionally' link to violations of copyright. And I believe this is
>pretty much the best standard we can claim without introducing
>unattainable burdens.
>
>Additionally, my lay understanding of the legal implications is that
>claiming we can and do verify copyright status of external links may
>well open us up to liability rather than reduce it.
>
>I've tried to explain this in discussion, but the discussion has gotten
>a bit overheated. It appears no one is going to calm down over this
>until there's a clarification of copyright policy by the foundation.
>
>I hope this can be clarified by the foundation.
>
>   - John
>
>_______________________________________________
>foundation-l mailing list
>foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
>
>


subject: [Wikipedia-l] new wikis

body:
On 12/01/07, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:

> Singlish was denied in the past.. I do not know why you would suggest
> Singlish in the first place. It is not recognised as a language, it has
> the status of "invented" language, it does not have the same notability
> as Ido Interlingua Esperanto ..

Invented language?? I understood "Singlish" was the name for the local
Singapore dialect of English. I understand there are problems with
reliable documentation of it as the government officially disapproves
of it.

- d.


from_name: Marco Chiesa

body:
?ukasz Garczewski wrote:

>The English Wikipedia is actually a bad example, when it comes to
>copyright, exactly because of the fair use. If you want an example,
>see how the Polish or German Wikipedias deal with copyright. No fair
>use, no non-commercial images, strictly free content.
>
>
>
So, when is the English wikipedia planning to get rid of  the
noncommercial and wikipedia-only images that are still in use. And what
about fair use, which to me sounds like wikipedia-only but without
asking permission?

Marco


subject: [Wikipedia-l] new wikis

body:
Hoi,
Singlish was denied in the past.. I do not know why you would suggest
Singlish in the first place. It is not recognised as a language, it has
the status of "invented" language, it does not have the same notability
as Ido Interlingua Esperanto ..
Thanks,
    GerardM

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Wikipedia_Chinglish

J.L.W.S. The Special One schreef:
> I'd suggest a Singlish Wikipedia and Singlish Wiktionary.
>
> On 1/10/07, Dan Collins <en.wp.st47 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Zordsdavini iz Litvy wrote:
>>
>>> Hello,
>>> I don't understand why new wikis are nor been creating. The people will go
>>> out of this because some of them are waiting for the year...
>>>
>>> Arns Udov???
>>>
>>>
>> If you wnat to make a new wiki with the WikiMedia foundation, visit
>> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposals_for_new_projects
>>
>> --
>> GnuPG key ID is 0x84189146 on subkeys.pgp.net


from_name: Ian Tresman

body:
> >Technically all Wikipedia editors are outside their field since they
> >are all generally anonymous. That leaves common sense which is
> >generally described in WP:NOTABLE.
> >
>That is a remarkably illogical non-sequitur.  Being anonymous does not
>imply that one loses all connection with his fields of interest.

No, it means that it is not verifiable.

I've invited experts in their field to contribute their expertise to
Wikipedia, only to have it vetoed by an anonymous editor who claim to
be a professor and an expert in his field.

You would think that two verifiable experts in their field would have
sway over an anonymous unverifiable editor.

Regards,
Ian Tresman


from_name: Ligulem

subject: [Wikitech-l] SVN:  [19142] trunk/phase3/includes

body:
On 12.01.2007 05:43, werdna at svn.wikimedia.org wrote:
> Revision: 19142
> Author:   werdna
> Date:     2007-01-11 20:43:33 -0800 (Thu, 11 Jan 2007)
>
> Log Message:
> -----------
> UI stuff for the cascading protection feature - warnings for sysops editing cascading protected pages (including which page the protection has come from), more useful errors for users (including which page the protection has come from), and a note at the top of the protect page when trying to unprotect a page affected by cascading protection to the effect of 'you can't affect the cascading protection here'.
>

Tried that revision in my local playground wiki install.

*Awesome*

Of course, this is all way cooler than a bot. Thanks a lot for
developing all this!

--Ligulem


from_name: geni

body:
On 1/12/07, Marco Chiesa <chiesa.marco at gmail.com> wrote:
> So, when is the English wikipedia planning to get rid of  the
> noncommercial and wikipedia-only images that are still in use.

less than 1000 of each less

>And what
> about fair use, which to me sounds like wikipedia-only but without
> asking permission?
>

That isn't quite the case.

--
geni


from_name: Dan Collins

subject: [WikiEN-l] Yes, it's Esperanza again

body:
NSLE (Wikipedia) wrote:
> Yeah, this time it's a deletion review, as apparently some admins
> unilaterally deleted the history of Esperanza's subpages against consensus
> established at the MFD.
>
> [[WP:DRV/EA]] is already a working shortcut.
>
> --Chacor
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
my god, why won't they just die out.

--
GnuPG key ID is 0x84189146 on subkeys.pgp.net

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 888 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20070112/87503b2f/attachment.pgp


from_name: Alphax (Wikipedia email)

subject: [WikiEN-l] One way inter-languages links

body:
Matthew Brown wrote:
> Rob Church wrote:
>> Actually, we *do* track interlanguage link relationships in the
>> database, as we do for page links, image links, external links,
>> category links, etc.
>
> It's just that each Wikipedia is in a separate database and thus only
> has one part of the puzzle, yes?
>

The CheckUsage tool manages it... actually, that would probably be a
good starting point.

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

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 542 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20070112/831e17d2/attachment.pgp


from_name: James Hare

subject: [WikiEN-l] Yes, it's Esperanza again

body:
And there also has been constant fighting over the replacement essay on
WP:EA itself.

I AM JAMES, BRINGER OF BAD NEWS

On 1/12/07, MacGyverMagic/Mgm <macgyvermagic at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> The AFD was for the organization, not the all the programs contained in
> it.
> Treating the subpages individually is no more than logically.
>
> Mgm
>
>
> On 1/12/07, Dan Collins <en.wp.st47 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > NSLE (Wikipedia) wrote:
> > > Yeah, this time it's a deletion review, as apparently some admins
> > > unilaterally deleted the history of Esperanza's subpages against
> > consensus
> > > established at the MFD.
> > >
> > > [[WP:DRV/EA]] is already a working shortcut.
> > >
> > > --Chacor
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > > WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> > > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> > >
> > my god, why won't they just die out.
> >
> > --
> > GnuPG key ID is 0x84189146 on subkeys.pgp.net
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >
> >
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


subject: [Wikipedia-l] new wikis

body:
Hoi,
People can always start on the Incubator and show that they have what it
takes. The notion of the Incubator is that by working on the Incubator
there will be something that will indicate that it is just a flash in
the pan.. Someone saying: "Would it not be nice" and then doing nothing.
We have asked Brion to include the "BetaWiki" functionality so that
people can start on the localisation of that language and for all
projects to maintain the localisation of MediaWiki on a MediaWiki server.

Brion indicated that it can get on his "to do" list after release 1.9
(done) and SUL (his current priority). When the language files are
ALWAYS generated for new languages, we will not get the sad situation of
the Marathi projects where the localisation is said to be overwritten
with new releases. Localisation will be done at Incubator and, new
messages once translated there can be exported to at least all the
Wikimedia Foundation projects. External projects will benefit with new
releases.. :)

For languages that do not have an ISO-639 code, the notion of granting a
project is problematic. We hope to announce within the month much of the
content that is in the ISO-CD-639-6 AND a procedure in which you will be
able to get recognition under the standard that is being worked on. NB
this standard will have some 25.000 linguistic entities to start off
with and many of them are spoken only or signed languages.

Thanks,
     GerardM

Zordsdavini iz Litvy schreef:
> But what You could suggest for approved languages? Why people have to wait
> so much time. They will run away.
>
> Arns Udov???
>
> 2007/1/12, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com>:
>
>> Hoi,
>> Singlish was denied in the past.. I do not know why you would suggest
>> Singlish in the first place. It is not recognised as a language, it has
>> the status of "invented" language, it does not have the same notability
>> as Ido Interlingua Esperanto ..
>> Thanks,
>>     GerardM
>>
>>
>> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Wikipedia_Chinglish
>>
>> J.L.W.S. The Special One schreef:
>>
>>> I'd suggest a Singlish Wikipedia and Singlish Wiktionary.
>>>
>>> On 1/10/07, Dan Collins <en.wp.st47 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Zordsdavini iz Litvy wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Hello,
>>>>> I don't understand why new wikis are nor been creating. The people
>>>>>
>> will go
>>
>>>>> out of this because some of them are waiting for the year...
>>>>>
>>>>> Arns Udov???
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> If you wnat to make a new wiki with the WikiMedia foundation, visit
>>>> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposals_for_new_projects
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> GnuPG key ID is 0x84189146 on subkeys.pgp.net


subject: [WikiEN-l] (no subject)

body:
I suggested something on another thread that stated that only people with
background in a certain field should be qualified to judge notability.
Chemists determine chemical notability, Finns determine notability of
Finnish folk, the list goes on. Perhaps it's time to give AFD a good ol'
reworking to separate the opinions of people who are qualified to speak
about the subject's notability and outsider's opinions (both are important,
but we can't put the fingers of clueless people on the red button).
Hopefully, through this, closing AFDs will be based less on vote counting
and more on evaluating the opinions of people.

On 1/12/07, Nina Stratton <ninaeliza at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> +!
>
> Nina
>
> On 1/12/07, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen <cimonavaro at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I personally fear systemic bias on wikipedia is being squeezed from
> > two directions concurrently at the moment.
> >
> > The way AFD currently works means that pages which are not on many
> > users watchlists is uniquely vulnerable to AFD-wonks predation. So
> > that means that the bias stemming from our communitys composition not
> > only affects what gets created but also what gets deleted. This
> > two-way squeeze worries me.
> >
> > Although I commend in general terms the drive to emphasize quality
> > over quantity, to me at least that does not extend so far as to
> > emphasizing removal of content over creation of it. And this is a
> > question that should at least be addressed. I think it would be useful
> > if the board and or Jimbo uttered something on the matter to let us
> > know how they view the question in general on this mailing list.
> >
> > I do not wish to make this a discussion of specific examples but
> > rather a more general definition of guiding principles. But if
> > necessary for illustrating the reality of the issue, I will find some
> > examples to ground it in reality. I really don't think such is
> > necessary, and would much prefer to discuss the matter under a "veil
> > of ignorance" about which particular areas are most vulnerable, and in
> > the abstract.
> >
> > So how about it? Even if we accept that quantity is *less* important
> > than the quality, is creation still preferred over removal?
> >
> > --
> > --
> > Jussi-Ville Heiskanen, ~ [[User:Cimon Avaro]]
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: A. Özgür Erdemli

subject:
[Foundation-l] Turkish Wikipedia won Golden Spider- 2006 Best
	Content Prize

body:
Hi everybody,

I wanted to share a great news with all wikimedians. Although it is not
officially announced yet I got an email today from the Golden Spider Web
Awards Organization. Turkish Wikipedia won Golden Spider- 2006 Best Content
Prize. The Golden Spider award is a nation wide, most famous and most
reputable web award organization in Turkey.

Couple pictures from previous years ceremonies:
http://www.ntvmsnbc.com/news/90164.jpg
http://www.telepati.com.tr/agustos05/gorsel/spider.jpg
http://www.telepati.com.tr/temmuz05/gorsel/Turkcell-AltinOrumcek.jpg
http://www.turkline.com/altinorumcek.php

The ceremony will be held on 25 January 2007. We are currently trying to
figure it out, who will go get the prize, since there is no Turkish chapter
yet. Probably some old Wikipedia fellow will go and get it and send to
Wikimedia Foundation and WMF keep the prize safe until "Wikimedia Turkiye"
go live. That what I am thinking.

Thanks.

Dbl2010


body:
Let's send everyone involved in the argument on a trip to Hawaii.

On 1/12/07, John Barberio <barberio at lineone.net> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Over on Wikipedia, there's a significant group of editors who've decided
> that current copyright policy doesn't go far enought, and are rewriting
> the external linking guidelines to require 'copyright verification' and
> 'due care to verify copyright' on external links. This is because they
> feel we are risking threat of suit due to linking to the likes of YouTube.
>
> No, I'm not suggesting we should allow links to copyvio, it's clear that
> we shouldn't. But it's my understanding that the proposed changes would
> be poor ones to make for various reasons.
>
> Primarily because we don't have the resources to take 'due care' and
> 'verify copyright'. True copyright verification needing lawyers time and
> money, it's not something that's in our grasp at all.
>
> At the moment, copyright policy says not to 'knowingly and
> intentionally' link to violations of copyright. And I believe this is
> pretty much the best standard we can claim without introducing
> unattainable burdens.
>
> Additionally, my lay understanding of the legal implications is that
> claiming we can and do verify copyright status of external links may
> well open us up to liability rather than reduce it.
>
> I've tried to explain this in discussion, but the discussion has gotten
> a bit overheated. It appears no one is going to calm down over this
> until there's a clarification of copyright policy by the foundation.
>
> I hope this can be clarified by the foundation.
>
>    - John
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>


from_name: MacGyverMagic/Mgm

subject: [WikiEN-l] African maps

body:
I think Nina Stratton was going to ask, but I could've misunderstood what
she was talking about.
Perhaps it would help to ask someone with more press experience to talk to
them, so they may have heard about the Wikipedian: David?

Mgm

On 1/12/07, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 12/01/07, Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote:
>
> > What I do wonder about is the ethical question around wholesale copying
> > of another site filled with free material.  They have a role too in
> > whatever niche they find.  They are already in compliance with our
> > mission to keep such information free. They have a role in the open
> > access market.   There can be valid reasons for the wholesale copying.of
> > these databases; preservation redundancy could be one.  Still, just
> > because an act is legal does not mean that that same act is ethical.
>
>
> Has anyone, uh, called them up, said "hi" and asked for anything
> important we would need to know to mirror the maps on Commons? I would
> be very surprised if we didn't have a pile of contributors and
> supporters at any university of decent size ...
>
> Of course, attribution as reasonably desired would be polite to detail
> on the image page - "thank you" costs very little and goes a long way.
>
>
> - d.
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


subject: [WikiEN-l] (no subject)

body:
I've been thinking of searching through the deletion logs, taking everything
that's not "JOSH LIKES MEN LOLOLOL" and putting it on a website so if
Wikipedia wants it again or an independent wiki they can look at it then
I'll ship off the good stuff to them.

Even if some things are a bit too... specialist, they could go on a Wikia
wiki.

On 1/12/07, Fred Bauder <fredbaud at waterwiki.info> wrote:
>
>
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Jussi-Ville Heiskanen [mailto:cimonavaro at gmail.com]
> >Sent: Friday, January 12, 2007 09:14 AM
> >To: 'English Wikipedia'
> >Subject: [WikiEN-l] (no subject)
> >
> >I personally fear systemic bias on wikipedia is being squeezed from
> >two directions concurrently at the moment.
> >
> >The way AFD currently works means that pages which are not on many
> >users watchlists is uniquely vulnerable to AFD-wonks predation. So
> >that means that the bias stemming from our communitys composition not
> >only affects what gets created but also what gets deleted. This
> >two-way squeeze worries me.
> >
> >Although I commend in general terms the drive to emphasize quality
> >over quantity, to me at least that does not extend so far as to
> >emphasizing removal of content over creation of it. And this is a
> >question that should at least be addressed. I think it would be useful
> >if the board and or Jimbo uttered something on the matter to let us
> >know how they view the question in general on this mailing list.
> >
> >I do not wish to make this a discussion of specific examples but
> >rather a more general definition of guiding principles. But if
> >necessary for illustrating the reality of the issue, I will find some
> >examples to ground it in reality. I really don't think such is
> >necessary, and would much prefer to discuss the matter under a "veil
> >of ignorance" about which particular areas are most vulnerable, and in
> >the abstract.
> >
> >So how about it? Even if we accept that quantity is *less* important
> >than the quality, is creation still preferred over removal?
> >
> >--
> >--
> >Jussi-Ville Heiskanen, ~ [[User:Cimon Avaro]]
>
> I'm with you on this, although my position is much more liberal than most.
> I think it is a shame that people's good work about significant subjects is
> routinely discarded.
>
> Fred
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: Jeff Raymond

subject: [WikiEN-l] (no subject)

body:
James Hare wrote:

> Hopefully, through this, closing AFDs will be based less on vote counting
> and more on evaluating the opinions of people.

I can see it now - Librarian badlydrawnjeff notes that over 10k books
generally meet our standard in a given year, and a shitstorm ensues.

A good idea that will never, ever happen.

-Jeff