body:
Delirium wrote:

> Ah, but it has happened: a group of people have decided to add literally
> hundreds of pages on victims of the Sept. 11 attacks.  My worry is that
> if we allow this, there is nothing to stop literally millions of other
> pages from being eventually added.  There are, for example, quite a few
> groups interested in preserving the memories of those who died in the
> Holocaust; I don't consider it unlikely that at some point some of them
> will discover Wikipedia and begin a concerted effort to add at least
> thousands of biographies of people who have nothing particularly
> notable

You worry about that? How totally sweet wouldn't it be to have a
COMPLETE list of every single person that was killed in the Holocaust?
Their birth place, age, relatives.. maybe even what jobs they had
had. Then we write articles about their relatives and why they werent
killed in the Holocaust too.

Just think about it... 6 million people, confirmable detailed
biographical information. If that happens WP can move mountains. The
Holocaust deniers would look quite stupid (as if they don't already!)
when everyone can copy 6 million biographies from WP!

Maybe none of you would read it. Maybe you all would think it was
rubbish. But *I* would read it, and *I* would wholehearted enjoy it.

BL


list: wikien-l

source: pipermail-mbox

from_name: Bjorn Lindqvist

subject:
[WikiEN-l] Proposed: stop all deletions from 6 months,
	then reconsider

body:
> > [...] The ''deletionists'' against ''inclusionists'' argument is
> > utterly bogus. It is a case of those who take the idea that wikipedia
> > as an encyclopedia seriously and basic standards below which an
> > article is deleted and those who see wikipedia as some sort of
> > scribblebox where any sort of rubbish, not matter how bad, has a
> > 'right' to be left undisturbed.
>
> ...nor that we want to mischaracterize legitimate positions in the most
> extreme terms possible, or insult our opponents. Is there anybody else
> here foolhardy enough to claim that I don't take the idea of Wikipedia
> as an encyclopedia seriously?

I have a new not-rule:

Wikipedia is not an encyclopedia

Meaning that atleast my wish for the project is for it not to become
just another Britannica. Encyclopedias was for yesterdays folks. We've
fooled JTDRL for long enough.

BL


list: wikipedia-l

from_name: Antoine

subject: [Wikipedia-l] series of articles and navigation table

body:
Hello,

I was reading the History of Germany articles and found the navigation
table on the right quite useful:
http://en2.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Germany

I think this will improve wikipedia just as much as the automatic table of
content did.

A way to implement this feature would be to point a parent article to all
it's childs and vice versa. That might be done using [[parent:articlename]]
and / or [[child:articlename]].

Let's look at an example:

History of Germany
-> Franks
-> Holy Roman Empire
-> German Confederation
-> German Empire
-> Weimar Republic
-> Nazi Germany
-> Germany since 1945

Franks article is interesting (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franks) as it
is part of two series (History of France AND of Germany).

So the History of Germany will have:
[[child:Franks]]

And Franks will have:
[[parent:History of France]]
[[parent:History of Germany]]

Maybe we just need the parent tag ? Setting up a parent tag in an article
will automaticly update the parent article without using any child.

cheers,

--
Antoine
http://fr.wikipedia.org/
L'encyclop?die gratuite et libre.


from_name: The Cunctator

subject: [WikiEN-l] Partial solution to rampant deletionism

body:
On 11/9/03 1:36 PM, "Adam Bishop" <grenfell_ at hotmail.com> wrote:

> Why not have entries about everyone who has ever died?  An encyclopedia with
> billions of pages would be fine because it's not paper, right?
>
As to your first question, it's a bit difficult to find confirmable
information about everyone who has ever died. And there are obvious
deficiencies in the current organization/search/naming technologies and
conventions in the current Wikipedia which would make such an idea unwise.

But as to your second question, yes. Though it's a very good idea for the
number of pages to be in some kind of proportion to the
audience/contributorship, so until there are, say 10 million editors on
Wikipedia, it would probably be a bad idea to take steps to explode the
number of pages on the site.


from_name: Yann Forget

subject:
[Wikipedia-l] Read only mirror in Paris & French law non profit
	organisation

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

Hi all,

Following my demand, the Ouvaton cooperative has offered to host a read only
mirror of the French Wikipedia with a budget of 1000 euros for a year in
hardware and bandwidth. For that it is necessary that a non profit
organisation to be set up in France. I drafted a project of status for this
according to French law. It is available at
http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip?dia:Statuts_pour_une_association_en_France

Please, could you opinion on this ? And specially on
* special links between this French law organisation should have with the
Wikimedia foundation;
* technical setup you would recommend.

Regards,
Yann

- --
http://www.non-violence.org/ | Site collaboratif sur la non-violence
http://www.forget-me.net/ | Alternatives sur le Net
http://fr.wikipedia.org/ | Encyclop?die libre
http://www.forget-me.net/pro/ | Formations et services Linux
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/rmg7m4KYjQo0y9oRAtPCAJ4zY/WzyLd7bnnU6ao+Mu2pNC2BAACfZYfV
/4iybSSDpQxlDFTpjo9h9dE=
=DX4I
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


from_name: PROJATA

subject: [Wikipedia-l] please help me

body:
Hi,

I use program : webstripper. This program can download site from internet.
I'm student and I want download sites with mathematic.

I tray download http://pl.wikipedia.org with program Webstripper.

After not good download I can't see pl.wikipedia.org because server write in my screen this text :

" Forbidden
You don't have permission to access / on this server.

Apache/1.3.28 Server at pl.wikipedia.org Port 80 "

I have contact with designer of webstripper and he say : " I can't help you. You must contact with webmaster at wikipedia.org ."

PLEASE HELP ME BACUSE I  DON'T HAVE E-MAIL TO WIKIPEDIA AND I'M NOT
ROBBER OR PIRAT , I'M STUDENT.

SORRY MY ENGLISH BUT I LERNING 2 WEEKS.

I want see pl.wikipedia.org . If not possible : download wikipedia in extension program how webstripper, then I want see in Internet Explorer.

P> Best regards,
P> Andrew

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/attachments/20031109/3d62ae4b/attachment.htm


from_name: Chuck Smith

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Groningen: Wikipedia lecture

body:
> > I just started on a direct translation of the
> > Esperanto brochure, but I'd like to point out that
> the
> > existing one is very out of date.
>
> I updated it a bit in July for the IJK, but the
> numbers are a little
> behind, and of course it's aimed specifically at the
> Esperanto-speaking
> audience. A literal translation would sound rather
> weird. :)
>
> Feel free to use it as a basis, of course.

Brion,

I'll be lecturing on Wikipedia in Groningen
(Netherlands) on December 13, so it would be nice if
it could be updated by then!  :)  This is the sixth
lecture I've given about Wikipedia in Esperanto... it
is getting a bit tiresome.  ;-)  Also, I have a list
of grammar corrections I need to send you.  Hmmm...
I'll get around to that soon.

Thanks,
Chuck

=====
The Meatrix
http://www.themeatrix.com/

__________________________________________________________________

Gesendet von Yahoo! Mail - http://mail.yahoo.de
Logos und Klingelt?ne f?rs Handy bei http://sms.yahoo.de


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: [WikiFR-l] Hébergement_chezOuvaton

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

Hi,

First my idea was that French speaking people make a common proposition before
talking to the whole of Wikipedia.

Le Sunday 09 November 2003 19:03, Anthere a ?crit :
>
> Yann said "But I didnot say there was urgency. It is
> you who interpretated things that way"
>
> Sure Yann
>
> In this mail,
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikifr-l/2003-November/000992.html
>
> you write "c'est nouveau pour nous, faut que je vois.
> on va faire ?a vite."
>
> ->it is new to us, I have to consider this. We will
> have to do this very quickly

No, I didn't say that. Alexis from Ouvaton said that because they decided to
help Wikipedia already some time ago but informed me of their decision only
Saturday 8th (yesterday) after I asked him again. You should read more
carefully before making accusation, please.

> And in this mail, you suggest the first assembly to
> take place on the 22 nd of november, and that
> meanwhile, we should agree on status, board and other
> minor problems
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikifr-l/2003-November/000996.html
>
> But undoubtely, it was just interpretation

It's a proposition. Again I never said that there is any urgency.
Why don't you simply propose another schedule ?

> Yann said that the only goal of Ouvaton was to help
> Wikipedia, and that I was paranoid in saying we did
> not  have to be hasty just because Ouvaton had agreed
> to host us (and could perhaps change their mind if we
> took too much time)
>
> I know very few commercial firms that would do things
> for free. There is always an interest. In that case,
> the adress being ouvaton.wikipedia.fr for example.

Ouvaton is not a commercial firm. It's a cooperative of webmasters.

> I said to Yann we had some material on the french
> wikipedia that could be problematic with french law,
> and that it could be eventually a problem.
>
> He asked me to be more precise.
>
> -> Fair use is not a doctrine recognised in France

There is an equivalent. We have to see how it is applicable.

[cut]

> I said that wikipedia was one project in several
> languages, not several encyclopedia, and that what he
> was suggesting was a french-french project (the server
> will only host french wikipedia).
>
> He answered that no, it was only a mirror of the
> french wikipedia.
>
> In this mail
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikifr-l/2003-November/001004.html
>
> you specifically say that this is a temporary solution
> before we set a read and write server
>
> I said I understood that I understood there would be
> more pb raised than pb solved by the proposition (I
> personnnaly do not know)
>
> He says, not if the server is read only.
>
> But here In this mail
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikifr-l/2003-November/001004.html
>
> he says read is only temporary
>
> what are the technical issues in both cases then ?

I mean that this read only mirror of the French wp would be an experiment.
If it works well, then we can think about making a read-write mirror (and
maybe for other languages too) which is much more complicated, and even not
possible.
Technical questions have to be decided.
I only made proposition which can be changed.

> > > Je pense que ce que tu proposes est un RightToFork
> >
> > Non.
>
> This should not need translation.
> What is the argument ?

For me, it is clear that the whole of Wikipedia has to agree before doing
anything.

> > Anthere, peux-tu ?tre POSITIVE de temps en temps ?
>
> He says I should be positive sometimes :-)
>
> He is right of course :-)))
>
> He says he is doing propositions; he waits counter
> propositions, not blocking just for pleasure
>
> I apology Yann, but I do not do this for pleasure, but
> out of interest and concern for the project. I think
> any proposition should be dissected before being
> accepted, and who would dissect your proposition but
> me ? :-)
>
> What I do is discussion, to reach consensus. That is
> the way we do on Wikipedia. I see not where your
> problem is with it.

I made propositions. You didn't.
You just refuted my propositions.
Please make counter-propositions including schedule, technical questions and
management.

Yann
- --
http://www.non-violence.org/ | Site collaboratif sur la non-violence
http://www.forget-me.net/ | Alternatives sur le Net
http://fr.wikipedia.org/ | Encyclop?die libre
http://www.forget-me.net/pro/ | Formations et services Linux
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/rplGm4KYjQo0y9oRAje1AJ4tLtCr3eXkrrvhVelaMJKqTa03TgCeP+tz
8qMNyhumI4XglJ4BkEskmUo=
=b3sl
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


from_name: Nikola Smolenski

subject: [WikiEN-l] More efficient process suggestions

body:
On Saturday 08 November 2003 15:04, user_Jamesday wrote:
> >> I can appreciate what you are trying to do, but I doubt that it's
> >> practical. If software could do this it would be great ... but then
> >> someone would need to write the software, or is it safe to assume that
> >> you would be doing that?
>
> Ec<<
>
> By the time of 1.0 English Wikipedia will be over 200,000 articles. Getting

What, it will be published so fast? :))

> When we have that we can use it to let people choose their encyclopedai
> size, from one volume to 500 volumes. At that point, inclusionism or
> delitionism just doesn't matter, because everyone gets their own personal
> ecyclopedia size.

While you are mentioning one volume: I was thinking about
http://small.wikipedia.org for a small encyclopedia - all articles as small
as possible, for the one volume edition.

> Looking beyond that are editions (and corresponding flags) for censorship
> levels for child or religious or school curriculum suitability, so we can

I don't see why would any article be religiously or school unsuitable.


from_name: Daniel Mayer

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Setting a new server in France for french wikipedia

body:
Anthere wrote:
>Still, proposition : what about waiting till that new
>server is there and working ? All the tech people
>discussing mirrors on the tech list for a good couple
>of months instead of 10 days ? And taking the next 6
>months to set a proper proposition for association ?

I agree - there is no hurry here.  I just visited fr.wikipedia and it was very
fast. A new database server is also going to be set-up really soon and Brion
is already figuring out how to do webserver load balancing between different
machines. But when the time comes I'm sure we will be able to add a read-only
websever in France to the load balancing mix for fr.wikipedia. Either way all
edits should go to the database server in San Diego (which could then update
the cache of every webserver in near real-time).

Why would this need a French affiliate Wikimedia Foundation? Could the
Wikimedia Foundation just register in France as a non-profit? There are also
copyright concerns. I would like to see an affiliate EU Wikipedia Foundation
set-up, but I would not like to see us have to set-up affiliates in every
nation.  That does not seem to be a practical solution.

Either way I just don't see a need to set-up affiliates right now. Shouldn't
we first put our energies into fully setting up the Wikipedia Foundation
before starting to set-up affiliates?

What's the hurry?

-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)


body:
Adam Bishop wrote:
>Why not have entries about everyone who has ever died?
>An encyclopedia with  billions of pages would be fine
>because it's not paper, right?

Wikipedia is not a phone book either. A person has to have had done something
noteworthy to merit inclusion. Otherwise naming conflicts would be
unmanageable and information on each non-famous person would be very
difficult to confirm - we could not even pretend to try to be 'accurate' if
we allowed information in Wikipedia that really can't be confirmed by
independent sources.

An encyclopedia is a comprehensive /summary/ of knowledge, or of a branch of
knowledge. Sure Wikipedia is an encyclopedia of encyclopedias (meaning it is
a concise, general, and many different specialized encyclopedias all
rolled-up into one) with supporting almanac-like and gazetteer-like
information, but it still does offer a summary of human knowedge, not an
all-inclusive exhaustive regurgitation of even nearly impossible to confirm
human knowledge.

My cats' names are Beybey, Mougie and Merlin - that's part of human knowledge,
but damn near impossible for anybody outside my circle of friends and family
to confirm.  It also isn't interesting outside that sphere either.

-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)


from_name: Hunter Peress

subject: [Wikipedia-l] wikimedia funds should be public

body:
wikimedia funds should be public.

eg an account balance with details like the actual balance, and what has been purchased...

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree


body:
[repost as 1st didnt reach newsserver it seem]

Hello,

I was reading the History of Germany articles and found the navigation
table on the right quite useful:
http://en2.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Germany

I think this will improve wikipedia just as much as the automatic table of
content did.

A way to implement this feature would be to point a parent article to all
it's childs and vice versa. That might be done using [[parent:articlename]]
and / or [[child:articlename]].

Let's look at an example:

History of Germany
-> Franks
-> Holy Roman Empire
-> German Confederation
-> German Empire
-> Weimar Republic
-> Nazi Germany
-> Germany since 1945

Franks article is interesting (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franks) as it
is part of two series (History of France AND of Germany).

So the History of Germany will have:
[[child:Franks]]

And Franks will have:
[[parent:History of France]]
[[parent:History of Germany]]

Maybe we just need the parent tag ? Setting up a parent tag in an article
will automaticly update the parent article without using any child.

cheers,

--
Antoine
http://fr.wikipedia.org/
L'encyclop?die gratuite et libre.


from_name: libertarian

subject:
[WikiEN-l] Communist paper apologises but Wikipedia endorses the
	malicious claim!

body:
 --- On Sun 11/09, Fred Bauder < fredbaud at ctelco.net > wrote:

> Ok on 2 and 3, but 1 is just not factually established.
> Additionally I think the article needs to mention the ambient
> political athmosphere that produced 2 and 3 (regardless of the
> cause of 1). Adequately describing that athmosphere involves
> discussion of the Hindu Nationalist government of
> Gujurat and the climate of polarization which exists.

Notice your biases here.

a) (1) has been factually established. but you deny it.
b) "Hindu nationalist" is a loaded and factually incorrect term.
It smacks of hatred because those who are branded Hindu nationalists
by the West (this term is absent in India!) ask for EQUALITY and
removal of UNEQUAL LAWS.
c) (b) leading to points (2) and (3) in my earlier post can never
be factually established as they are not events but inferences
made after analysis. Yet, you show your double standard by claiming
that the firebombing did not lead to the riots and is not a factual
statement.

I hope Wikipedia does not endorse your racist statements.

One other point. How come you use the racist phrase "Hindu
nationalist" (this is similar to branding Republican Party as
White Nationalist) but refuse to allow me to use the word
Communist which is an exiting fact?

-libertarian

_______________________________________________
No banners. No pop-ups. No kidding.
Introducing My Way - http://www.myway.com


from_name: Fred Bauder

subject:
[WikiEN-l] Communist paper apologises but Wikipedia endorses
	the 	malicious claim!

body:
> --- On Sun 11/09, Fred Bauder < fredbaud at ctelco.net > wrote:
>
>> Ok on 2 and 3, but 1 is just not factually established.
>> Additionally I think the article needs to mention the ambient
>> political athmosphere that produced 2 and 3 (regardless of the
>> cause of 1). Adequately describing that athmosphere involves
>> discussion of the Hindu Nationalist government of
>> Gujurat and the climate of polarization which exists.
>
>Notice your biases here.
>
>a) (1) has been factually established. but you deny it.

It is a fact that it was widely reported and is believed by many people
that a Muslim mob firebombed the train. Not that a Muslim mob firebombed
the train.

>b) "Hindu nationalist" is a loaded and factually incorrect term.
>It smacks of hatred because those who are branded Hindu nationalists
>by the West (this term is absent in India!) ask for EQUALITY and
>removal of UNEQUAL LAWS.

This is rather similar to the discussion we had here as to whether
communist movements and states could fairly be characterized as
totalitarian. Our apologists for communism thought it was very unfair.
Here's what it comes down to: There is a pattern of behavior; we use words
which define and describe the activity; The words we use to define
nationalism fit the pattern of activity and adequately describe the recent
rise in Hindu Nationalism in India.  When you attack this characterization
you attack language, the very notion that well defined words can be used to
describe a pattern of activity. As to hate, you do adequately describe my
emotional reaction both to Hindu nationalism and certain political
tendencies in America which are oppressive. Now we get down to the gist of
the problem. Hindus are the dominant majority in India. They are in the
same position as White Christians are in the United States and rather than
oppressing the rest of society (in a fascist way), if they are wise, will
accommodate and protect the rights and security of others. For two basic
reasons, first, it is right to respect others, second, it is necessary for
the progress and stability of the State. The alternative is to attempt to
rule over an oppressed people.

>c) (b) leading to points (2) and (3) in my earlier post can never
>be factually established as they are not events but inferences
>made after analysis. Yet, you show your double standard by claiming
>that the firebombing did not lead to the riots and is not a factual
>statement.

There is no question that the train incident triggered the riots, as a
match might trigger a fire, but the inflammatory situation is generated by
Nationalist agitation.
>
>I hope Wikipedia does not endorse your racist statements.

It doesn't work that way, Wikipedia strives for a Neutral Point of View;
that means that articles on the issues we are discussing will need to
accommodate both the Hindu Nationalist perspective and the Muslim
perspective and well as an objective perspective.
>
>One other point. How come you use the racist phrase "Hindu
>nationalist" (this is similar to branding Republican Party as
>White Nationalist) but refuse to allow me to use the word
>Communist which is an existing fact?
>
>-libertarian

I use the term "Hindu nationism" because it is in use in the English
language, Google returns 10,100 hits on those words including these:

http://www.mbeaw.org/resources/violence/hindunationalism.html

http://www.hindubooks.org/HinduPhe/hindu_nationalism/page1.htm

http://pup.princeton.edu/titles/6652.html

http://www.alternatives.ca/article231.html

http://www.questia.com/popularSearches/hindu_nationalism.jsp

http://216.239.39.104/search?q=cache:je0SVDBD_4UJ:www.nottingham.ac.uk/iaps/Inve
stigatingHinduNationalism.pdf++%22hindu+nationalism%22&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

http://www.vedamsbooks.com/no14883.htm

This last site is for a book published in India: BJP and the Evolution of
Hindu Nationalism : From Periphery to Centre/Partha S. Ghosh. 1999, 460 p.,
ISBN 81-7304-253-5. So your claim that the usage of the term Hindu
nationalism is somehow something others are making up and is not used in
India is demonstrably false.

As to your allusions to communism, of course the communist movement in
India is eagerly trying to use these issues and you might appropriately say
so in the proper context in a Wikipedia article. But your attack is on an
objective or democratic point of view, not on a communist point of view.

Fred


from_name: Anthere

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Blocage

body:
From: Andre Engels <engels at uni-koblenz.de>

>> The problem with the current rollback is that it
just
>> revert to the previous edit. We would rather to
revert
>> to the previous edit before the user.

>As far as I know, that is what rollback does -
>reverting to the
>last edit of another user than the current one.

Yes. I just tested. This is true. I had always thought
it reverted just to the last edit. That is good news.

>> However, one disagreement with loggued in people is
>> that they can move pages. While anyone can revert
>> edits made by a vandal, only sysops can fix a move
>> back. That would be the only superior reason to
block
>> a user than I can see.

>No, when a page is moved, the original title will
>become a
>redirect without history, so any registered user can
>move it
>back. Problems only arise when a page has been moved
>more than
>once (in that case one will have to undo all moves in
>reverse
>order rather than doing it at once), or when the
>redirecting
>page has been edited (in that case one does indeed
>need sysop
>powers to first delete the redirecting page).

I am astonished. I just tried this, and yes, you are
right. I just did not know it was possible ! I thought
as soon as a page A had been moved to B, it was
necessary to delete A to move back to B !

That changes a lot of things. I am not sure french
people know this.

Ok thanks Andr?

PS : for my first attempt, I had a software error I
must say. The page A was indicated moved to B, it had
the redirect, it had no more history but the
redirect...but there was no page at B ...hum

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree


from_name: Jimmy Wales

body:
Yann Forget wrote:
> Following my demand, the Ouvaton cooperative has offered to host a
> read only mirror of the French Wikipedia with a budget of 1000 euros
> for a year in hardware and bandwidth. For that it is necessary that
> a non profit organisation to be set up in France.

Can you explain why a nonprofit organization set up in France is
necessary for this?  Can we not just accept the offer as we are right
now, without the overhead, expense, and risk of a separate
organization?

--Jimbo


body:
Daniel Mayer wrote:
> Why would this need a French affiliate Wikimedia Foundation? Could the
> Wikimedia Foundation just register in France as a non-profit?

Perhaps some French people could research this for us?  What would be
necessary for the Wikimedia Foundation to register in France as a
non-profit?  What would the advantages be?

--Jimbo


body:
Hunter Peress wrote:
> wikimedia funds should be public.
>
> eg an account balance with details like the actual balance, and what
>has been purchased...

I have been following a practice of maintaining all non-USD donations
separately, continuing to hold them in the original currency, with the
idea that _perhaps_ we will try to spend those dollars in such a way
as to primarily benefit donors in that part of the world.

SunTrust Bank Account Balance: $1,862.23
PayPal Balances:
 USD 94.98
 CAD 257.80
 EUR 648.54
 GBP 168.84

(Converted to USD this would be: $1,290.85)

The only money that has been spent so far:
$50 - wikipedia.de domain name renewal (but, we don't have this yet)
$9,126.42 - the big new db server

And there have been some small bank fees, as well.

If there is a move for me to do so, I can post these numbers on a more
regular basis, rather than whenever someone happens to ask me.  It is
possible with PayPal to write programs to interact with their system
to get balances, but I have not done so yet because I don't think we
are going to stick with Paypal as our only money service providers,
and it seems that when we have several, automation would be a lot of
work for little benefit.

--Jimbo


from_name: Karl Eichwalder

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Blocking

in_reply_to:
<3FAEEF39.6040009@hotmail.com> (Tim Starling's message of "Mon,
	10 Nov 2003 12:51:53 +1100")

body:
Tim Starling <ts4294967296 at hotmail.com> writes:

> This is an encyclopedia project, not a playground. We have a
> responsibility to our readers to keep the content maximally accurate,
> at all times.

We are still allowed to take a break for sleep or vacation - during such
a period a replacing expert may or may not be available.  The reader is
always responsible fot the data he judges as "the truth"; we should
encourage him to make more use of the version link if in doubt.

Fighting "vandals" will not work and mass rollbacks are always a little
bit risky.

--
                                                         |      ,__o
                                                         |    _-\_<,
http://www.gnu.franken.de/ke/                            |   (*)/'(*)


subject:
[WikiEN-l] Proposed: stop all deletes for 6 months,
	then reconsider

body:
The Cunctator wrote:
>> - The job of the current Wikipedia is not to be a perfect encyclopedia,
>> but to be a source for the great "1.0" version. That version will weed
>> out everything that doesn't belong in an encyclopedia.

> I find this argument disturbing and wrong. I certainly hope this is
> not the consensus understanding of the role of Wikipedia. Have I
> missed some official position statements?

I would have said it a little bit differently, and in a way that I
think would quell your concerns completely.

I think that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, that the kinds of things
that we've been discussing are all things that belong in an
encyclopedia, and that our view of what belongs in an encyclopedia
should be much more expansive (in terms of how 'important' something
has to be before 'deserving' an entry) than Britannica, etc.  We're
creating something astounding and innovative and new.  (How else will
I win the Nobel Prize in Literature? ;-) )

I also think that it's legitimate that "1.0" is going to be space
constrained in some important ways, most significantly in that 1.0
will be designed to be on paper, to be distributed at low cost to
hundreds of millions of people who don't have access to computers.
(How else will I win the Nobel Peace Prize? ;-) )

But I think we should think of those space constraints as unfortunate
realities of the paper medium.

It isn't that somehow the paper-friendly 1.0 is the "real" project,
while Wikipedia is merely a crufty way to generate content for it.
Both are important goals, and they should not be set against each
other.

--Jimbo


list: wikitech-l

subject: [Wikitech-l] pornsites to be blocked

body:
E23 wrote:
> This thing clearly is a robot used for the single purpose of getting
> just such links as on our stats page, to increase their google ranking.

That might be, but it's hard to say for sure.

Let me see if I understand your theory...

Someone writes a robot to go around clicking on lots of websites with
a referrer variable set to a site they are trying to promote.  The
purpose of this is specifically to get listed as a referrer on lots of
stats pages, in the hopes that google thinks those stat pages are
legitimate references, and so rates that original site higher.

That had not occurred to me, but seems entirely possible.  I should
note that a few of the links I saw on that stats page are all happen
to know, owned by the same company.

Another possibility is that some corporate firewall(s) somewhere
redirect people to wikipedia when they try to look at naughty content.


body:
I think it is clear that the 'stop all deletes for 6 months' concept
has zero traction, so we can safely dismiss it now.

James Duffy wrote:
> The ''deletionists'' against ''inclusionists'' argument is utterly
> bogus. It is a case of those who take the idea that wikipedia as an
> encyclopedia seriously and basic standards below which an article is
> deleted and those who see wikipedia as some sort of scribblebox
> where any sort of rubbish, not matter how bad, has a 'right' to be
> left undisturbed.

People have been upset about the phrase "straw man", but really I
think that phrase has to be said when you try to characterize the
debate in this way.

I take the idea that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia seriously, and I
think that there are basic standards below which an article should be
deleted, and I do not see wikipedia as a scribblebox where any sort of
rubbish has a 'right' to be left undisturbed.

I don't think anyone participating in this debate currently holds a
position even remotely resembling your characterization.

Perhaps you should revisit my position, because it's possible that
we're actually in complete agreement.

--Jimbo


from_name: Nick Reinking

subject: [Wikitech-l] pornsites to be blocked

body:
On Mon, Nov 10, 2003 at 03:43:47PM +0100, Walter Vermeir wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have noticed in the stats of Wikipedia NL;
> http://nl.wikipedia.org/stats/
>
> ... for several months traffic from strange websites, porn websites.
>
> http://nl.wikipedia.org/stats/usage_200311.html#TOPREFS
>
> The send traffic to Wikipedia but i can not find a hyperlink to wikipedia
> on there website. I suppose the do this to get a higher google ranking?
>
> This are the websites i c

AFAIK, you only get a higher google ranking when others link to you, not
when you link to others.  So, go figure, unless it is causing a serious
amount of resource wastage.

--
Nick Reinking -- eschewing obfuscation since 1981 -- Minneapolis, MN


from_name: Andre Engels

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Blocage

body:
On Fri, 7 Nov 2003, Anthere wrote:

> The problem with the current rollback is that it just
> revert to the previous edit. We would rather to revert
> to the previous edit before the user.

As far as I know, that is what rollback does - reverting to the
last edit of another user than the current one.

> However, one disagreement with loggued in people is
> that they can move pages. While anyone can revert
> edits made by a vandal, only sysops can fix a move
> back. That would be the only superior reason to block
> a user than I can see.

No, when a page is moved, the original title will become a
redirect without history, so any registered user can move it
back. Problems only arise when a page has been moved more than
once (in that case one will have to undo all moves in reverse
order rather than doing it at once), or when the redirecting
page has been edited (in that case one does indeed need sysop
powers to first delete the redirecting page).

Andre Engels


from_name: Poor, Edmund W

subject: [WikiEN-l] Libertarian rhetoric and India

body:
As the administrator of this mailing list, I would like to ask
"Libertarian" to cool down his rhetoric.

Comments like these have no place here:
* You are clearly lying by pretending that you do not know...
* You are probably a White skinned American who is brainwashed into
believing ...

Instead of making personal remarks abourt list members, why not focus on
writing some incisive, hard-hitting articles about India's political
situation?

I would love to hear more about the following points:
* destruction of Hindu temples (by Muslims)
* descruction of Muslim mosques (by Hindus)
* political affiliations of newspaper editors (especially Marxists)
* India's economic system (socialism, free market, whatever)
* status of women

Just from skimming your letters from 3 days ago, I can tell that
Libertarian has a lot of information -- and possibly a lot of passion!
-- about these topics.

Libertarian, I hope you will channel your energy into helping us build a
set of highly informative articles on India.

Welcome to the project.

Ed Poor


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Machine update

body:
I just got off the phone with Penguin.  The machine build is on hold
as they are waiting for one part -- a 3 bay drive enclosure of all
things.  They are now giving an estimated ship date of next Monday,
but they seemed to be trying to be conservative with that -- it really
depends on when the part comes in.

Yeah, I'm not happy about this, either.

Anyhow, I was invited to call back again later in the week for a more
definitive ETA.  I will of course do so and report back to you at that
time.

--Jimbo


subject: [Wikitech-l] Machine update


subject: [WikiEN-l] Jake and political correctness

body:
Jake,

Your comments about what gets drummed into the ears of white
schoolchildren merit praise and encouragemnt, rather than the "nasty
comments" you predicted.

Please take it off this mailing list, however, and write it up for
[[political correctness]] or [[education in the United States]] or
[[multiculturism]] -- or whichever article is the best place.

Ed Poor


subject: [WikiEN-l] What posts are allowed

body:
Libertarian asked:

<<Why is it that Marxists are allowed to post their
  allegations as a legitimate POV but if there are
  allegations to the contrary, they are either not
  allowed or they have to be worded such that they
  are weak?>>

The Wikipedia websites are not for posting one's opinions. They are for
creating and displaying encyclopedia articles.

If Marxists, socialists, free market capitalists, Buddhists or Harry
Potter fans have an opinion on something; and if ANYONE thinks this
opinion is relevant to an article, then:

* they may incorporate that opinion into the article
* with attribution (like "Marxists equate profit with theft")

In cases of hot controversy, it may be a good idea to discuss proposed
changes in the article's talk page first, like:

* I think we should mention Singh's critique of the Muslim firebombers,
and not focus so much on Bablanghadi's account of the incident.
Bablanghadi is a Marxist who writes for Bombay Red Digest. (names
invented for this example)

In other words, don't just add your own opinion to an article. Try to
write about what really happened. If that's hard, because there are
different versions of what happened, then LABEL each version as coming
from a particular reporter or advocate:

* Hindus called the train incident "a typical and frighenting example of
Muslim terror"
* Muslims said they were "just defending themselves against Hindu
aggression"
* Marxist journalists called the incidents "a fine example of the
dialectic in play"
* Western observers like Greg Stone expressed the wish "that they would
all grow up and start acting like civilized people" -- a comment which
Agrani Nehru denounced as typical of "that white we-will-save-you
attitude which annoys us all so much"

Try for balance and neutrality. I can help, if you want.

Ed Poor, aka Uncle Ed


subject: [WikiEN-l] Official warning to Khranus

body:
I'd like to ask Jimbo to take a look at what [[user:Khranus]] has been
writing. In my opinion, he has one foot firmly over the line of "troll"
-- his discourtesy and profanity toward others on his talk page, if
nothing else.

His comments to Cyan are unprovoked and even the soft-spoken Kosebamse
has objected.

He's been asked to tone it down, but his replies amount to either
dancing around the issue or telling people to bugger off.

Uncle Ed


subject: [Wikitech-l] Direct access to Wiki-en database

body:
Brion,

It's been so long since I've directly accessed the server that I've
forgotten the root password and misplaced my copy of the communications
software used to "ssh" my way in.

Which is better, to regain this access -- or just submit the following
request?

Christopher Mahan wants his Wikipedia username changed from 'Chris
Mahan' to 'Christopher Mahan' -- in such a way that his edit history
(i.e., user contributions) remains easily accessible.

By the way, I had told him that "working the system" to get his
name-change accomplished would be a sign that he was a good sysop
candidate. So I'd like to take care of this for him promptly.

Ed Poor

P.S. "Do not send any passwords
     via non-secure means
     like this mailing list!"


from_name: Brion Vibber

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: [Wikitech-l] Machine update

body:
On Mon, 10 Nov 2003, Jimmy Wales wrote:
> I just got off the phone with Penguin.  The machine build is on hold
> as they are waiting for one part -- a 3 bay drive enclosure of all
> things.  They are now giving an estimated ship date of next Monday,
> but they seemed to be trying to be conservative with that -- it really
> depends on when the part comes in.
>
> Yeah, I'm not happy about this, either.
>
> Anyhow, I was invited to call back again later in the week for a more
> definitive ETA.  I will of course do so and report back to you at that
> time.

Thanks for the update, Jim.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)


subject: [Wikitech-l] Machine update


body:
--- On Mon 11/10, Poor, Edmund W < Edmund.W.Poor at abc.com > wrote:

> As the administrator of this mailing list, I would like to
> ask "Libertarian" to cool down his rhetoric.

Ed, I appreciate your concern and in fact agree with you.
However, what about asking those who use slurs like "Hindu
Nationalist" and "fascist" to describe Hindus and Indians to
desist from doing so? India is a democracy and it is so only
because India is Hindu majority. That portion which was made
Muslim majority during partition has become an Islamic theocracy
and ethnically cleansed its minorities. Let us not pretend that
India is a similar country.

This is a cruel joke. Someone sitting in an Indian Government
run University has the full freedom to post all over the net
that India is not a democracy but a state run like Benito
Mussolini and if his posts were true, shouldn't the Govt have
come down on him?

To give you a perspective, "Hindu Nationalist" is similar to the
slur "White Supremacist" or "White Nationalist" used in the
context of Republican Party.
Recently, Washington Post had an article on India contributing
troops to Iraq and unusually, not once did it use the slur
"Hindu Nationalist" when it wanted cannon fodder from India to
save the fair skinned Caucasians. It used the term "right of
center" which is acceptable. Indians all over noticed and this point
was made on several bulletin boards and mailing lists.

Why don't you ask those who have gone about posting nonsense using
the word "fascist" to desist from doing so?

I also suggest that you unlock the 2002_Gujarat_violence page or
lock it temporarily in the neutral state, without any information
from MArxist sources. Of all the reports, why should the Marxist
viewpoint be favored? It beats me.

> Comments like these have no place here:
>* You are clearly lying  by pretending that you do not know...
>* You are probably a White skinned American who is brainwashed into
> believing ...

Agreed, but who do you think started it? I was accused of being
a "Hindu nationalist" and that is why I hit back. Why don't you
ban that slur? Since "Hindu nationalist" is similar to "White
Supremacist" applied in the context of Republicans, either both
are legitimate or both are illegitimate.

>Instead of making personal remarks abourt list members, why not
> focus on writing some incisive, hard-hitting articles about India's
> political situation?

I did that. The gang of Marxists keeps deleting the stuff I post.
In one post, one of them even questioned a post I made on Mount
Everest. I added the fact about the person who discovered it. I
was immediately questioned because in their perverted worldview,
no indian should deserve credit.

They've hunted down EVERY ONE of my posts as a gang and indulged in
propaganda of the Marxists.
They even deleted a couple of points which went against them.

1) A Muslim, Abdul Kalam was the nominee of the "Hindu Nationalist"
and "fascist" party. I added this point and it was promptly deleted
and replaced with a line "However the BJP is considered by many to be a Hindu-fundamentalist or even a Hindu-fascist party."

Amazing how you put up with this! If its candidate was a Muslim
(he won the election and is now the President of India), it tells
you something, doesn't it? Doesn't it tell you something when India's
Defence Minister is a Christian? Doesn't it tell you something about
India when the ruling coalition's two other possible contenders were
a Jew and a Kashmiri Muslim?

2) The second example is when I pointed out that a judge who headed
the self-appointed commission of inquiry was a Marxist. It was
deleted repeatedly even though he had served as a Minister in a
Communist Government and was their Presidential candidate.

3) Everything positive about India/Hindus is obfuscated using words
like "alleged". Anything possibly negative even when there is no
proof is made as an assertion.

Why do you think I came here? I thought I'd see some fairness, but
obviously I have a tough time because of the prevailing mindset of
Americans who have internal logic regarding Communists but when it
comes to other countries, they just support the loudest person who
usually happen to be Communist.

>I would love to hear more about the following points:
>* destruction of Hindu temples (by Muslims)

Sure, but I was sure that the gang comprising of Wik, Jiang, Arvindn,
Boud and VerilyVerily (also posts as VV) will continue harassing
me. That is why I came here first. For example, if you look at the
posts of Boud, you will see that he has gone about posting anti-India
stuff all over the place.
In one place, one of them has described some organizations as "been
seen by some people as an informal police force."
This is PURE FANTASY and made up by the member who made the
contribution. Not even the Marxists had the ingenuity to come up
with that description. Notice the part which says "been seen by
some people." In other words, he knows it is fiction but used the
old tactic used by dishonest journalists.

>* descruction of Muslim mosques (by Hindus)

Er, apart from destroying a disused structure built after destroying
a temple, this is not the norm. Maybe, political correct people would
like to equate the two, but Hindus are peaceful people and their
religious ideas preach peace and accept all Gods and it is a religion
which says, "All paths lead to the same goal."
It doesn't say, "Kill the unbelievers and idolators" or "I am the
only God..."

Therein lies the difference. A "fundamentalist Hindu" becomes
withdrawn from the world and becomes more peaceful and unattached
to material things unlike fundamentalists of certain religions
who become more violent.

In short, all religions are NOT EQUAL. Some are more peaceful
in nature. India had a multitude of religions but had peace until
Islam came in (of course, Marxists hunted down two episodes in
history where Hindus destroyed Buddhist centres but what they don't
tell you is that these two Hindus were under the pay of a Muslim
King.). Why deny a fact? Isn't an encyclopedia supposed to
highlight facts and even where interpretations are involved, aren't
they supposed to be based in facts?

>* political affiliations of newspaper editors (especially Marxists)

I shall do all that, but right now I feel harassed with this gang
going after me systematically.

>* India's economic system (socialism, free market, whatever)

Definitely. It is my field.

>* status of women
> Just from skimming your letters from 3 days ago, I can tell that
Libertarian has a lot of information -- and possibly a lot of passion!
>-- about these topics.
>Libertarian, I hope you will channel your energy into helping us build a
>set of highly informative articles on India.

Welcome to the project.
>Ed Poor

Ed, Why do you think I brought all this to the attention of the list?
I was hoping for some fairness. Can we have some totally neutral
people look into the behavior of the Marxists who are misusing a
tool provided for spreading information?
I am not even saying I want my view forced upon others. I am so
confident that my points are the correct ones that I am asking
for an independent investigation to determine who is correct. I am
willing to supply information and let the Marxists do so too.

-libertarian

_______________________________________________
No banners. No pop-ups. No kidding.
Introducing My Way - http://www.myway.com


from_name: Tim Starling

subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: RFC Magic

body:
Chris Seaton wrote:
> I notice that the RFC magic function is not implemented. I think I can
> do that, looking at the ISBN one. Should I set up a special page similar
> to book sources, called RFC sources, or just link to one site that has
> the RFCs?

If I were you I'd just pick a source that looks nice and is
uncommercial. Have the links going straight there. Keep it simple, then
move on to something else.

-- Tim Starling.


body:
--- On Mon 11/10, Fred Bauder < fredbaud at ctelco.net > wrote:

First things first - Are you the Boud who has been posting anti-Hindu
anti-India inflammatory stuff?

> It is a fact that it was widely reported and is believed by many
> people that a Muslim mob firebombed the train. Not that a Muslim
> mob firebombed the train.

A Muslim mob forebombed the train and all those arrested are
Muslims.
Anyway, I have a followup question. A few paragraphs down, there is
an ASSERTION that the train carried Hindus and these Hindus allegedly
created trouble implying they asked for it.
The fiction in the chain mail from internet gets mentioned as a
possible fact despite the fact that the witness named in it has
denied it (His phone number is given. You can call him up if you
want.)

> This is rather similar to the discussion we had here as to whether
> communist movements and states could fairly be characterized as
> totalitarian. Our apologists for communism thought it was very
> unfair.

Very Interesting. You prove my point about supporting Marxists
when it comes to non-Western countries. See my point on having
internal logic in my response to Ed Poor.

How about characterizing Republican Party as "White Nationalist"?
You can't have it both ways - one standard for the Whites and one
for the Browns. "Hindu Nationalist" is only as similar as
characterizing Republicans as "White nationalist."
I have listed down the reasons for the friction in India.

> Here's what it comes down to: There is a pattern of behavior; we
> use words which define and describe the activity; The words we use
> to define nationalism fit the pattern of activity and adequately
> describe the recent rise in Hindu Nationalism in India.

This phrase is not common in India. It is used only by the West.
Even these racists know it is not true and used the phrase "right
of center Govt" when they wanted Brown human shields so that the
Whites could get back from Iraq.

> Hindus are the dominant majority in India. They are in the
> same position as White Christians are in the United States and
> rather than oppressing the rest of society (in a fascist way), if
> they are wise, will accommodate and protect the rights and security
> of others.

This is complete rubbish because India is a DEMOCRACY. Clearly you are
ignorant if you do not know this and have no business contributing to
an encyclopedia.
India is a democracy because it is Hindu majority. India was split
into two countries in 1947 - India and Pakistan. One became a tolerant
democracy with complete freedoms for everyone while the other
extinguished the lives of its minorities and is now a tinpot
dictatorship.

You're denying the FACT that India is a democracy. India's President
is a Muslim as is the richest person. India's Defence Minister is
a Christian.
Stop spewing hatred and spreading canards. You imply that only Whites
are tolerant by making such remarks. Of all nations on Earth, India
has been the most peaceful and unique in the sense that it has not
attacked anyone. It has also been unique in the sense that it has been
raped by all sorts of lunatics - Islamic fundamentalists, Christian
evangelists who brought in their armies. Colonialism and Marxists.

> For two basic reasons, first, it is right to respect others,
> second, it is necessary for the progress and stability of the
> State. The alternative is to attempt to rule over an oppressed
> people.

You don't teach indians about respect and tolerance. You could learn
a lot from India. You never had any minority President so far, did
you?
And all your brutality is well documented. Feelling guilty, are you?
Maybe that is why you have an urge to broadbrush others as evil.

> There is no question that the train incident triggered the riots,
> as a match might trigger a fire, but the inflammatory situation is
> generated by Nationalist agitation.

What is it they say? Better to remain silent and be...

> It doesn't work that way, Wikipedia strives for a Neutral Point of
> View;

Mine is the Neutral Point of View.

> that means that articles on the issues we are discussing will need
> to accommodate both the Hindu Nationalist perspective and the Muslim
> perspective and well as an objective perspective.

It doesn't mean you come up with fictitious events as facts which
is what you are doing.

> I use the term "Hindu nationism" because it is in use in the English
> language, Google returns 10,100 hits on those words including these:

Now that I've explained the offensive nature of the term invented
by the Western press, I hope you have learnt something from it.
It is not an Indian term. If you cannot use Indian perspectives while
writing about India, there is something wrong with you.

> This last site is for a book published in India: BJP and the
> Evolution of Hindu Nationalism : From Periphery to Centre/Partha S.
> Ghosh. 1999, 460 p., ISBN 81-7304-253-5. So your claim that the
> usage of the term Hindu nationalism is somehow something others are
> making up and is not used in India is demonstrably false.

Obscure book. In a country of billion people, you are sure to
find someone or the other who has latched on to the term.
Secondly, I didn't accuse others here of making it up. It is a lie
and I suggest you apologize to me. I said tha the Western media
invented it and it is a FACT. If you didn't know that, you ought not
to be contributing to an encyclopedia.

> As to your allusions to communism,

Allusions? Surely, this proves that you are clueless about India.
You do not even know the existence of Communists in India. What a
joke!

> of course the communist movement in India is eagerly trying to use
> these issues and you might appropriately say so in the proper
> context in a Wikipedia article.

The Wikipedia article has *only* the false Communist claims.

> But your attack is on an objective or democratic point of view, not
> on a communist point of view.

Mine is the objective and democratic point of view. You sir, on the
other hand have just started learning about India by doing Google
searching while keeping a conversation going with me and picking up
facts from me.

I am not surprised that a Westerner supports Communists when it comes
to Brown countries. Jealousy perhaps? Or maybe a feeling of guilt
for the mass murder your race carried out and a need to portray
others as evil? Who knows?

-libertarian

_______________________________________________
No banners. No pop-ups. No kidding.
Introducing My Way - http://www.myway.com


subject: [WikiEN-l] RE: What posts are allowed

body:
--- On Mon 11/10, Poor, Edmund W < Edmund.W.Poor at abc.com > wrote:

> The Wikipedia websites are not for posting one's opinions. They are
> for creating and displaying encyclopedia articles.

Exactly! This is my point! Either no one should be allowed to post
their opinion or everyone should be allowed to post their opinion.
You can't selectively have Communists post their opinions as facts.

> If Marxists, socialists, free market capitalists, Buddhists or Harry
> Potter fans have an opinion on something; and if ANYONE thinks this
> opinion is relevant to an article, then:

That is not what has been done. I have no objections to that. What
has happened is that Marxist allegations have been presented as FACT.

> In cases of hot controversy, it may be a good idea to discuss
> proposed changes in the article's talk page first, like:

I ended up talking to myself. The arrogant gang bullied me and refused
to enter into a conversation with me. For the sake of decency they
should have done so. OTOH, they misused their sysop privileges
to lock the article. I suggest it be unlocked.

> In other words, don't just add your own opinion to an article. Try
> to write about what really happened.

This is what I've been doing and asking for.

> If that's hard, because there are different versions of what
> happened, then LABEL each version as coming from a particular
> reporter or advocate:

Some points were proven to be false but they make the article, some
have been proven to be true.
There are different versions for some other portions. However, the
strategy of these people is clear - if there is anything positive
about Hindus/India, they claim to have multiple versions. If there
is even some faint hint of something negative, it is an ASSERTION.

> * Hindus called the train incident "a typical and frighenting example of
Muslim terror"
> * Muslims said they were "just defending themselves against Hindu
aggression"

This is nonsense. They will have to provide proof of aggression.
Hindus are not aggressive people. When India was split into two,
guess which part ended up a theocracy? India is a democracy only
because Hindus are accomodative people.

> Try for balance and neutrality. I can help, if you want.

Sure, I'd love to get help. That is why I brought the issue to the
list. How do you plan on addressing my legitimate complaint that
anything positive about India is obfuscated while anything negative
is made as an ASSERTION?

-libertarian

_______________________________________________
No banners. No pop-ups. No kidding.
Introducing My Way - http://www.myway.com


from_name: Richard Gallagher

subject: [Wikitech-l] RFC Magic

body:
On 8 Nov 2003 at 16:58, Chris Seaton wrote:

> I notice that the RFC magic function is not implemented. I think I can
> do that, looking at the ISBN one. Should I set up a special page similar
> to book sources, called RFC sources, or just link to one site that has
> the RFCs?

One thing to consider is that as well as text some RFCs are also
provided as Postscript and/or PDF files.  The majority are soley text,
but it would be good if there some way point to the other avaliable
formats.

Richard Gallagher


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Blocking

body:
Karl Eichwalder wrote:
> Tim Starling <ts4294967296 at hotmail.com> writes:
>
>
>>I was discussing possible measures against this guy on the IRC
>>channel. I came to the conclusion that the best feature to implement
>>would be a method for quickly rolling back page creation. Possibly,
>>sysops could have a column of checkboxes on RC.
>
>
> Those power features will do more harm than good.  Using such a feature
> would mean that the wiki concept failed.

Rubbish. The ability to revert is an important part of the wiki model.

>
>>Perhaps this could be submitted to Sourceforge feature requests.
>
>
> It's much easier.  Just do nothing for some days and the offender will
> quickly loose interest in his destructive doings.  The real vandals are
> those who add (commercial) stuff for optimizing their search engine
> results.

This is an encyclopedia project, not a playground. We have a
responsibility to our readers to keep the content maximally accurate, at
all times.

-- Tim Starling.


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Blocking

body:
Daniel Mayer wrote:
> Tim Starling <ts4294967296 at hotmail.com> writes:
>
>>I was discussing possible measures against this guy on the IRC
>>channel. I came to the conclusion that the best feature to implement
>>would be a method for quickly rolling back page creation. Possibly,
>>sysops could have a column of checkboxes on RC.
>
>
> I like this idea. IMO, a better implementation idea would be to add rollback
> checkboxes to every top edit displayed on their contributions page (maybe
> with non-top edits automatically grayed out). At the top there simply would
> be a "select all" option. However I still can do 2-3 rollbacks a second when
> the server is running fast (gotta love scroll wheels on Linux - press them on
> a link and it opens in a new window). So I wouldn't benefit much from such a
> feature, but from a few frustrating experiences using rollback on a massive
> scale at work (on MS Windows), I know it isn't as easy for many people
> (whoever thought it would be a good idea to have 'auto-scroll' enabled when
> pressing down on the scroll wheel should be shot!).

You should be using Avant. Set it so that the middle mouse button opens
the windows behind the current one. One click per rollback. You can get
2 done per second.

Or you could just use shift-click, but that requires two clicks plus
keyboard action.

> What I would love to see is the addition of diffs to user contrib pages. That
> would make checking of anon edits go much faster (you can't just assume that
> every edit ever made by a vandal's IP is also a vandalism).

Yes, that would be very useful generally, although it might not help too
much with Papotages, who changes IP addresses rapidly.

> Anything that gives us the upper hand against vandals is a good thing; if it
> is easier for us to repair damage than it is for vandals to create it, then
> that removes much of the incentive for vandals to make a mess of the place
> and gives us tools to make cleaning up any mess when it does happen much
> easier. It also allows us to keep our doors wide open. All good things.

Hear hear.

-- Tim Starling.


subject: [Wikipedia-l] please help me

body:
On Sun, 9 Nov 2003, PROJATA wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I use program : webstripper. This program can download site from internet.
> I'm student and I want download sites with mathematic.
>
> I tray download http://pl.wikipedia.org with program Webstripper.

Please do *not* use programs such as Webstripper. Especially on dynamic
sites like Wikipedia, they create a huge amount of load on the servers by
downloading thousands upon thousands of pages extremely rapidly. One
person with one of these programs takes up the equivalent resources of
hundreds or even thousands of other users.

Can you imagine if everyone did this? The whole web would collapse,
because no server could stand up to the load of everybody in the world
requesting thousands and thousands of pages at once.

It's like automatically telephoning everyone in the city because you
wanted to call your friend and your sister, and the fact that those two
people will pick up the phone (along with everybody else!) saves you the
trouble of dialing twice.

Webstripper is banned at Wikipedia. Don't use it. If you've been using it,
you've probably also hit the request throttle limit and will be briefly
blocked from using the site at all, but this is temporary. (Though if you
create a particularly unpleasant amount of server load your IP may be
permanently blocked.)

Use a web browser like everybody else, and please stop attacking the web
sites that you enjoy.

If you really want the entire wiki, you can download database backups at
http://download.wikipedia.org/ , however you'll need some knowledge of
using databases to get any use out of them.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)


from_name: Daniel Ehrenberg

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Blocking

body:
> > It's much easier.  Just do nothing for some days
> and the offender will
> > quickly loose interest in his destructive doings.
> The real vandals are
> > those who add (commercial) stuff for optimizing
> their search engine
> > results.
>
> This is an encyclopedia project, not a playground.
> We have a
> responsibility to our readers to keep the content
> maximally accurate, at
> all times.
>
> -- Tim Starling.

In case you forgot, Wikipedia is a wiki. Our sucess is
a direct result of our openness. We can't just say
that, so it's "maximally accurate", that we ban people
that would go away anyway. Wikipedia is a work in
progress.
LDan

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree


body:
> Hello,
>
> I was reading the History of Germany articles and
> found the navigation
> table on the right quite useful:
> http://en2.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Germany
>
> I think this will improve wikipedia just as much as
> the automatic table of
> content did.
>
> A way to implement this feature would be to point a
> parent article to all
> it's childs and vice versa. That might be done using
> [[parent:articlename]]
> and / or [[child:articlename]].
>
> Let's look at an example:
>
> History of Germany
> -> Franks
> -> Holy Roman Empire
> -> German Confederation
> -> German Empire
> -> Weimar Republic
> -> Nazi Germany
> -> Germany since 1945
>
> Franks article is interesting
> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franks) as it
> is part of two series (History of France AND of
> Germany).
>
> So the History of Germany will have:
> [[child:Franks]]
>
> And Franks will have:
> [[parent:History of France]]
> [[parent:History of Germany]]
>
>
> Maybe we just need the parent tag ? Setting up a
> parent tag in an article
> will automaticly update the parent article without
> using any child.
>
> cheers,
>
>
> --
> Antoine

This should have been sent to wikitech-l instead, but
I'll just respond here anyway.

That sounds like a useful feature, but right now, the
developers are working on optimization, not new
features. Even if you learned PHP and programmed this
yourself, they might not accept it if it slows down
the server significantly. A feature to make easier
syntax for HTML tables has been created, but it is not
currently being used in the main Wikipedia. With the
new table syntax, the table of contents could be
written something like this:

{|cellpadding="3" cellspacing="0" style="float:right;
margin:5px; border:3px solid;"
|style="border-bottom:3px solid; background:#efefef;"|
This article is the top of the

'''History of Germany''' series.
|-
|[[Franks]]
|-
|[[Holy Roman Empire]]
|-
|[[German Confederation]]
|-
|[[German Empire]]
|-
|[[Weimar Republic]]
|-
|[[Nazi Germany]]
|-
|[[History of Germany since 1945|Germany since 1945]]
|}

To me, this seems sufficient.

LDan

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree


from_name: Neil Harris

subject: [Wikitech-l] pornsites to be blocked

body:
E23 wrote:

> I've looked in the logs, and there are many entries of this kind:
>
> nnn.nnn.nnn.nnn - - [10/Nov/2003:05:06:31 +0000] "GET / HTTP/1.1" 200
> 18558 "http://one-specific-pornsite.net/..." "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible;
> MSIE 5.01; Windows NT5.0)"
>
> Almost every entry has different IP, and the specific sub page on the
> porn site varies as well. The requested page is always "/" and the
> user agent is always set exactly as above. There are never any
> accompanying requests for such things as images or style sheets.
>
> This thing clearly is a robot used for the single purpose of getting
> just such links as on our stats page, to increase their google ranking.
>
>
If we blocked search engines such as Google from indexing the stats
pages, using robots.txt, that would at least have the effect of making
referrer-link spamming pointless.

-- Neil


from_name: Walter Vermeir

subject: [Wikitech-l] pornsites to be blocked

body:
Hi,

I have noticed in the stats of Wikipedia NL;
http://nl.wikipedia.org/stats/

... for several months traffic from strange websites, porn websites.

http://nl.wikipedia.org/stats/usage_200311.html#TOPREFS

The send traffic to Wikipedia but i can not find a hyperlink to wikipedia
on there website. I suppose the do this to get a higher google ranking?

This are the websites i c


from_name: Ray Saintonge

body:
Lars Aronsson wrote:

>Hunter Peress wrote:
>
>>wikimedia funds should be public.
>>
>Like this: This money is now under GPL.  If you give it to someone,
>you have to tell everybody who you gave it to, and they in turn must
>respect that this money is under GPL.  Etc.  This money must never
>again enter the closed economy.  :-)
>
Does this mean that since you can copy GPL money as much as you want,
there would be no such thing as counterfeiting? :-)

Ec


subject: [Wikitech-l] pornsites to be blocked

body:
I've looked in the logs, and there are many entries of this kind:

nnn.nnn.nnn.nnn - - [10/Nov/2003:05:06:31 +0000] "GET / HTTP/1.1" 200
18558 "http://one-specific-pornsite.net/..." "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible;
MSIE 5.01; Windows NT5.0)"

Almost every entry has different IP, and the specific sub page on the
porn site varies as well. The requested page is always "/" and the user
agent is always set exactly as above. There are never any accompanying
requests for such things as images or style sheets.

This thing clearly is a robot used for the single purpose of getting
just such links as on our stats page, to increase their google ranking.

/E23

Walter Vermeir walter-at-wikipedia.be |wikipedia| wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I have noticed in the stats of Wikipedia NL;
> http://nl.wikipedia.org/stats/
>
> ... for several months traffic from strange websites, porn websites.
>
> http://nl.wikipedia.org/stats/usage_200311.html#TOPREFS
>
> The send traffic to Wikipedia but i can not find a hyperlink to wikipedia
> on there website. I suppose the do this to get a higher google ranking?
>
> This are the websites i c
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


subject:
[WikiEN-l] Communist paper apologises but Wikipedia endorses
	the	malicious claim!

body:
libertarian wrote:

>>Here's what it comes down to: There is a pattern of behavior; we
>>use words which define and describe the activity; The words we use
>>to define nationalism fit the pattern of activity and adequately
>>describe the recent rise in Hindu Nationalism in India.
>>
>
>This phrase is not common in India. It is used only by the West.
>Even these racists know it is not true and used the phrase "right
>of center Govt" when they wanted Brown human shields so that the
>Whites could get back from Iraq.
>
The sentence "They have never had any doubt that the organisation is
wedded to national unity, national integrity, national identity and
national strength through individual character and national character. "
is taken directly from the web page of the BJP
http://bjp.org/history.htm  I could not have described nationalism
better myself.

As for Iraq, I can assure you that the American requests to be rescued
from their new Vietnam have not just gone out to "brown" countries.

>>Hindus are the dominant majority in India. They are in the
>>same position as White Christians are in the United States and
>>rather than oppressing the rest of society (in a fascist way), if
>>they are wise, will accommodate and protect the rights and security
>>of others.
>>
>This is complete rubbish because India is a DEMOCRACY. Clearly you are
>ignorant if you do not know this and have no business contributing to
>an encyclopedia.
>India is a democracy because it is Hindu majority.
>
This is a "non-sequitur".  India is a democracy, but it does not follow
that it is because of its Hindu majority.

>You're denying the FACT that India is a democracy. India's President
>is a Muslim as is the richest person. India's Defence Minister is
>a Christian.
>
I'm glad to see that the residents of the occupied Portuguese
territories are receiving a fair share of representations.  He succeeded
a Sikh.  I guess that the old Hindu kshatriya caste is not as effective
as it used to be.  I suppose that's the down side to being peaceful.

Saddam Hussein did not become more tolerable by naming a Christian,
Tariq Aziz, as foreign minister.

>Stop spewing hatred and spreading canards. You imply that only Whites
>are tolerant by making such remarks. Of all nations on Earth, India
>has been the most peaceful and unique in the sense that it has not
>attacked anyone.
>
It overran Sikkim, and the Portuguese territories

>It has also been unique in the sense that it has been
>raped by all sorts of lunatics - Islamic fundamentalists, Christian
>evangelists who brought in their armies. Colonialism and Marxists.
>
Indian Marxists were all home-grown.

>>For two basic reasons, first, it is right to respect others,
>>second, it is necessary for the progress and stability of the
>>State. The alternative is to attempt to rule over an oppressed
>>people.
>>
>
>You don't teach indians about respect and tolerance. You could learn
>a lot from India. You never had any minority President so far, did
>you?
>
At least here in British Columbia we have had a provincial premier,
Ujjal Dosanjh, who was born in India.

>>But your attack is on an objective or democratic point of view, not
>>on a communist point of view.
>>
>Mine is the objective and democratic point of view.
>
Nothing prevents the views of communists and democrats from coinciding
on given issues.

>I am not surprised that a Westerner supports Communists when it comes
>to Brown countries. Jealousy perhaps? Or maybe a feeling of guilt
>for the mass murder your race carried out and a need to portray
>others as evil?
>
As the saying goes, yours is a case of the pot calling the kettle brown.
:-)

The second example is when I pointed out that a judge who headed
the self-appointed commission of inquiry was a Marxist. It was
deleted repeatedly even though he had served as a Minister in a
Communist Government and was their Presidential candidate.

There are some very selective omissions from this.  Iyer was a minister
in a state government in 1957, not the federal government.  The 1987
presidential vote was a matter of all the parties working together to
oppose the Congress(I) candidate.  It seems that even the BJP voted for
the Communist candidate.

Ec


subject: [Wikitech-l] pornsites to be blocked

body:
Jimmy Wales wrote:

>E23 wrote:
>
>
>>This thing clearly is a robot used for the single purpose of getting
>>just such links as on our stats page, to increase their google ranking.
>>
>>
>
>That might be, but it's hard to say for sure.
>
>Let me see if I understand your theory...
>
>Someone writes a robot to go around clicking on lots of websites with
>a referrer variable set to a site they are trying to promote.  The
>purpose of this is specifically to get listed as a referrer on lots of
>stats pages, in the hopes that google thinks those stat pages are
>legitimate references, and so rates that original site higher.
>
>That had not occurred to me, but seems entirely possible.  I should
>note that a few of the links I saw on that stats page are all happen
>to know, owned by the same company.
>
>
That's right. It's called "referrer log spam". Googling will find lots
of discussion of this phenomenon.

-- Neil


from_name: Nicolas Weeger

subject: [Wikitech-l] 'links' and 'brokenlinks' tables dump?

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

|> The links can be created by the maintenance/rebuildlinks.php
|> script that's part of the wikipedia software.

I tried running the maintenance script, so far still have issues,
apparently i'm missing some tables...
But if it takes some hours to generate (as the files says), then it'd
be a pain to run regularly...

FYI, i intend to check links, redirects, stuff like that. I could do
requests directly on the (fr) database, but i have a bad history of
sql queries bringing down the server *whistles*

Nicolas 'Ryo'
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQE/r9hHxqZgvN2acvURAm0pAJ47RgyFLUAX/W74Nyq3zckacOdLZACeO3tu
Gl1ZDRJpYhywZ8klov7tNuY=
=RAfA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


body:
Hi Nicolas. E-mail me off-list and I'll see what we can do about it.

/ E23

Nicolas Weeger nweeger-at-noos.fr |wikipedia| wrote:

> |> The links can be created by the maintenance/rebuildlinks.php
> |> script that's part of the wikipedia software.
>
> FYI, i intend to check links, redirects, stuff like that. I could do
> requests directly on the (fr) database, but i have a bad history of
> sql queries bringing down the server *whistles*
>


from_name: Nikola Smolenski

subject: [Wikitech-l] pornsites to be blocked

body:
On Monday 10 November 2003 18:52, Neil Harris wrote:
> Jimmy Wales wrote:
> >Someone writes a robot to go around clicking on lots of websites with
> >a referrer variable set to a site they are trying to promote.  The
> >purpose of this is specifically to get listed as a referrer on lots of
> >stats pages, in the hopes that google thinks those stat pages are
> >legitimate references, and so rates that original site higher.
>
> That's right. It's called "referrer log spam". Googling will find lots
> of discussion of this phenomenon.

It obviously deserves an article :)


from_name: The Cunctator

subject:
[WikiEN-l] Straw man (was: Proposed: stop all deletes for 6
	months, then reconsider)

body:
On 11/10/03 8:50 PM, "Andrew Lih" <alih at hku.hk> wrote:

>> From:  Jimmy Wales
>> James Duffy wrote:
>>> The ''deletionists'' against ''inclusionists'' argument is utterly
>>> bogus. It is a case of those who take the idea that wikipedia as an
>>> encyclopedia seriously and basic standards below which an article is
>
>>> deleted and those who see wikipedia as some sort of scribblebox
> where
>>> any sort of rubbish, not matter how bad, has a 'right' to be left
>>> undisturbed.
>>
>> People have been upset about the phrase "straw man", but
>> really I think that phrase has to be said when you try to
>> characterize the debate in this way.
>
> The problem is, recently folks have been crying "straw man" and it
> hasn't been accurate, and unnecessarily villifies the poster.

At least according to Wikipedia, "the straw man rhetorical technique is the
practice of refuting weaker arguments than your opponents actually offer."

That is what people have been doing.

Your use of the word "crying"--when describing what people are doing in a
textual medium--unnecessarily vilifies the posters.

> In most of these cases, discussion has consisted of reasonable "What
> if..." and "slippery slope" arguments when standards for "articleness"
> are lowered.  This is not automatically a straw man, and in most posts
> here, they have not been straw man arguments at all.

For one, slippery slope arguments are fallacies too.

Secondly, you actually made a straw man argument again: "when standards for
'articleness' are lowered". I am not advocating lowering standards for
'articleness'. Rather, others are advocating changing the standards, and
claiming that the new standards are the "real" standards and that any other
position is for lower standards.

Thirdly, slippery slope arguments are generally connected to a further straw
man argument when the "what if" scenario is deemed to be bad and used to
attack the original position.

Finally, I hope you're not trying to characterize what James Duffy wrote
above as a reasonable "what if" argument.


subject:
[Wikipedia-l] Setting a new server in France for french
	wikipedia

body:
Addressing various points:

1. Does the main Wikipedia/Wikimedia foundation really want to be located on French soil and subject to French law with all international funds subject to judgements by French courts? I don't think that's wise unless it can't be avoided.

2. Technically, isn't a caching proxy server a better idea? That way, those in France can avoid the transatlantic round trip time increases but still edit the main wikipedia/Wikimedia databases. (Mav, that's something your test didn't show, unless you were doing it from a French proxy service)

3. Caching proxies seem like a better way to obtain legal isolation, since proxies and caching are fairly widely accepted as being different from the sites they are caching. I assume that the French foundation can be set up as a non-proft dedicated to increasing the responsiveness of the Wikipedia when accessed from within France.

4. This is also a nice model for local caches around the world.


from_name: Lars Aronsson

body:
Hunter Peress wrote:
> wikimedia funds should be public.

Like this: This money is now under GPL.  If you give it to someone,
you have to tell everybody who you gave it to, and they in turn must
respect that this money is under GPL.  Etc.  This money must never
again enter the closed economy.  :-)

We will soon die from starvation, since there are too few "open
economy" food stores.  Some of us must move into the countryside and
start cooperative "whole earth" farms that produce GPL food.

--
  Lars Aronsson (lars at aronsson.se)
  Aronsson Datateknik - http://aronsson.se/


subject:
[WikiEN-l] Straw man (was: Proposed: stop all deletes for
	6months, then reconsider)

body:
On 11/10/03 11:01 PM, "Andrew Lih" <alih at hku.hk> wrote:

>> On Behalf Of The Cunctator
>> At least according to Wikipedia, "the straw man rhetorical
>> technique is the practice of refuting weaker arguments than
>> your opponents actually offer."
>
> Have you ever heard the saying, "Don't eat where you crap?" :)

Yes. Have you ever heard the saying "Little strokes fell mighty oaks?" I
like that one because it rhymes. So?

>> That is what people have been doing.
>> Your use of the word "crying"--when describing what people
>> are doing in a textual medium--unnecessarily vilifies the posters.
>>
>> For one, slippery slope arguments are fallacies too.
>
> When debating our policies, pointing out resulting troubling scenarios
> and possible degradation to Wikipedia's reputation is a valid exercise
> given Wikipedia's stature and importance. Slippery slope arguments are
> not inherent fallacies.

Yes, they are. By definition it is a fallacy. Slippery slope arguments, by
definition, are missing the connecting tissue.

You seem to have a basic misunderstanding of logical fallacies.


from_name: Daniel Mayer

body:
WikiEN-l is /not/ USENET. Please stop abusing this list by posting arguments
about just who and who is not a 'Hindu nationalist'.

Please show some respect for the readers of this list and reply to each other
OFFLIST.

--mav


from_name: libertarian

body:
--- On Mon 11/10, Ray Saintonge < saintonge at telus.net > wrote:

> http://bjp.org/history.htm I could not have described nationalism
> better myself.

All political parties all over the world try to describe themselves
as patriotic and nationalistic. There is nothing new in this. We are
discussing the phrase "HINDU nationalist" not nationalist.

> As for Iraq, I can assure you that the American requests to be
> rescued from their new Vietnam have not just gone out to "brown"
> countries.

The whole sham was for Indian troops and if BJP had its way, they
would have shamelessly sent the troops in order to curry favor
with the Americans. Fortunately, India has many parties and they
couldn't come to agreement even within the ruling coalition.

> This is a "non-sequitur". India is a democracy, but it does not
> follow that it is because of its Hindu majority.

Empirical evidence is on my side. In 1947, a portion of India was
chopped off and given to Muslims. It ended up an Islamic theocracy
and ethnically cleansed whatever minorities it had.
Certain states in North Eastern India which are Christian majority
have already "warned" people to convert to Christianity or else...
The region is in flames.
It is only because Hindus are a majority that India is democratic.

> I'm glad to see that the residents of the occupied Portuguese
> territories are receiving a fair share of representations. He
> succeeded a Sikh. I guess that the old Hindu kshatriya caste is not
> as effective as it used to be. I suppose that's the down side to
> being peaceful.

What do you mean 'downside'? Is this a Western trait to see it as
a downside unless someone from your tribe is not holding all
important positions?
As far as I know, Indians are proud of GeorgeF's efficiency
despite his socialist past.

> Saddam Hussein did not become more tolerable by naming a Christian,
> Tariq Aziz, as foreign minister.

If you had followed the news in the region, you'd have known that
Saddam Hussein was a secular person and his Govt was not a jihadi
Govt. Is this what Fox TV brainwashed Americans with? I know that
Americans were hoodwinked by massive propaganda into supporting
a war using lies and deception, but I didn't think they were
told that Iraq was an Islamic fundamentalist state.

> It overran Sikkim, and the Portuguese territories

Sikkim joined India and the Sikkim Assembly voted for it since
they knew that they'd be taken over by China otherwise.
Goa was overrun and the Portuguese kicked out liberating the
Goan people. Heard of the Goan Inquisition where barbaric acts
were committed by the Church?

> Indian Marxists were all home-grown.

Communist Party of India split into two when India went to war
with China over the issue of whether the masters were in Peking
or Moscow.

> At least here in British Columbia we have had a provincial premier,
> Ujjal Dosanjh, who was born in India.

You're still a xenophobic country in the sense that your Prime
Minister cannot be foreign born. OTOH, we allow foreign born
people to hold the office of Prime Minister and one such person
could become our Prime Minister anytime. She is the leader of
the opposition now.

> Nothing prevents the views of communists and democrats from
> coinciding on given issues.

If a view was morally correct, I'd support the view too. I wouldn't
oppose it just because the Communists support it.
On this issue, it so happens that they cooked up lots of stuff.
I am willing to discuss the issue point by point. The problem is
that others who contributed to it acted in an arrogant manner and
refused to do so.
I'll give this to you - my style is not correct and I may tend to
use hyperboles and am open to correction. However, the substance
I contribute will be accurate and to the point. If you look at
my contributions, I have taken the effort to explain my position
and give links and at the same time I have removed lines which
were hyperboles and attribution of motives which I should not have
done.
All I am asking is that others not attribute motives without basis
(the only valid basis would be either an oral or written statement
which is documented).

> As the saying goes, yours is a case of the pot calling the kettle
> brown. :-)

There you go again, refusing to distinguish between a riot and a
state sponsored genocide.

> There are some very selective omissions from this. Iyer was a
> minister in a state government in 1957, not the federal government.

Selective ommission? You're attributing motives to me by making that
statement. I didn't mention it because it didn't even strike me. Even
if he was just a village level Marxist, he is a Marxist!
If you knew about Indian politics, you'd have known that Communists
never formed a Govt (except as part of a coalition) at the Centre
and there are only 3 states where they routinely form the Govt.

Again, you miss the whole point. Why should a self appointed
commission run by a Marxist get precedence over many other self
appointed commissions of inquiry? By arguing on where you are a
Minister, you assume that we are in agreement over the Marxist
commission getting precedence over all other commissions of
inquiry.

> The 1987 presidential vote was a matter of all the parties working
> together to oppose the Congress(I) candidate. It seems that even
> the BJP voted for the Communist candidate.

I remember this election vividly. BJP voted against him and held
a grudge it had extending back to 30 years. I am not sure where you
get your news from or whether you start googling after I make a
post here on the list. If that is the case, I am sorry to say you
are on the wrong track. This was given as an example of why not to
make enemies in politics and how it comes back to bite them.

-libertarian

_______________________________________________
No banners. No pop-ups. No kidding.
Introducing My Way - http://www.myway.com


from_name: Delirium

subject: [WikiEN-l] Straw man

body:
Andrew Lih wrote:

>>Yes, they are. By definition it is a fallacy. Slippery slope
>>arguments, by definition, are missing the connecting tissue.
>>
>>
>
>Well I guess it is now that you've changed the Wikipedia entry for it
>and changed "argument" to "fallacy."
>
>The slippery slope argument only becomes a fallacy if you make an
>unreasonable conclusion connecting happening A and happening B.  Folks
>were debating the merits of including ~3,000 victims of 9/11
>individually as articles in Wikipedia. Asking what this means for other
>victims of other disasters and crimes around the world and in history is
>not a far stretch. That is why "rounding up" all arguments of this type
>to fallacy is not fair.
>
>
I'd agree with that, and calling it a fallacy is often a sneaky attempt
by opponents of a particular issue to evade the real questions.  The
basic issue is that it is a fact that moving in a direction makes it
easier to move further in that direction.  When we move 5 arbitrary
units in a direction, things that were 10 in that direction are now 5.
It would be a fallacy to say it is *inevitable* that then we will go the
additional five, but it is entirely logical to say it is now *more
likely* we will do so, and thus a legitimate point of contention for
those who oppose doing anything to make such an outcome more likely.

To pick one example, it is often held that if we begin allowing the
government to intrude on our privacy with anti-terrorism legislation
like the Patriot Act, this will set the stage for more intrusive
legislation to follow--the new more-intrusive legislation is, by
comparison, no longer a huge power grab, only an incremental one.  This
isn't a fallacy, but simple fact, and empirically attested to by
legislative history.

If The Cunctator's argument was correct, "precedent" would be a logical
fallacy, which it is most certainly not: precedent is appealed to all
the time.  The fact that something happens today makes it more likely
that something similar will happen in the future, as today's act will be
appealed to as partial precedent.  See court history for another example.

Back on topic, I believe I did elucidate my argument in quite
mind-numbing detail.  The argument, for those who missed it, is as follows:

* By allowing entries for people whose only interest above any other
random person who has ever existed is "died in September 11 terrorist
attacks", we are forming a principle that dying in a notable event is
sufficient for inclusion in Wikipedia.
* Notably, we are forming the principle that "so-and-so died in a
notable event" constitutes sufficient grounds on which to oppose
deletion of such biographies.
* Thus, we have no legitimate grounds on which to oppose the inclusion
in Wikipedia of those who died in any other notable tragedy.
* Thus, if it occurs in the future that a group of people begin a
sustained effort to add thousands of articles in Wikipedia on people who
have died in a notable event but are not otherwise notable themselves
(World War II soldiers, Holocaust victims, etc.), we have no legitimate
grounds on which to ask them to stop doing so or to remove their
articles.  After all, we let the Sept. 11 biographies be included, so
how could we how ask that they refrain from adding their WW2 soldier
ones, or suggest that they be deleted?

I don't see how this is a logical fallacy.  Those who oppose this point
of view need either to find some reason the argument is wrong (is there
some grounds on which we *can* legitimately object to WW2 soldiers, but
not to Sept 11 victims?), or need to disagree with its premise (that it
is undesirable to allow tons of biographies on otherwise not notable
people to be included in Wikipedia).  I believe The Cuncator has done
the latter, but I also think most people disagree with him there.

As for the particular *harm* such entries cause, it will be ridiculous
if every single Wikipedia entry on a famous person has at the top (or
bottom), "so-and-so was also the name of [somebody not notable in any
way whatsoever], so so-and-so (disambiguation)".  This _will_ eventually
happen, given no policy against the inclusion of non-notable people and
enough time.  That's not a slippery slope argument either, just an
observation that as we continue to add biographies of people who are not
notable, eventually we will add many thousands (if not millions) of such
biographies.

In short, we must either excise the Sept. 11 biographies, or allow
unrestricted biographies of essentially anyone.  The Cunctator seems to
be arguing that there is no slippery slope here: that we can allow the
Sept. 11 biographies and go no further.  But there is no legitimate
grounds on which to do so: there is no way we can say that the Sept. 11
biographies are notable, but 6 million Holocaust victims are not.  Many
people, in fact, would argue the reverse, with that particular example.

-Mark


body:
>--- On Mon 11/10, Fred Bauder < fredbaud at ctelco.net > wrote:

> I'm pretty sure no one will ever let you put such statements
> as "The press in India is communist controlled"

Then why is Boud allowed to go around posting articles saying
India is a fascist and racist state?
Why do you think I raised the issue on the mailing list? It is to
bring to the attention of the listers a blatant case of abusing
Wikipedia to push their agenda.

Come on, I am the one who has tried to enter into a conversation
and attempt to sort out differences. Elsewhere I also removed
my abrasive style. I have stated earlier that I am willing to
change the style as soon as it is pointed out to be hyperbolic
in nature, but the substance I post will always be information
which has been verified.

How about stopping arguing with me and trying to help out by
resolving the situation in an objective manner? That is what I came
here for in the first place. I am willing to trust you to see the
issue in an objective manner and remove all factually inaccurate
stuff. What do you say?

-libertarian

_______________________________________________
No banners. No pop-ups. No kidding.
Introducing My Way - http://www.myway.com


body:
On Nov 10, 2003, at 19:57, user_Jamesday wrote:
> 2. Technically, isn't a caching proxy server a better idea? That way,
> those in France can avoid the transatlantic round trip time increases
> but still edit the main wikipedia/Wikimedia databases. (Mav, that's
> something your test didn't show, unless you were doing it from a
> French proxy service)

A caching proxy that doesn't know the wiki's internal state would just
function as a non-caching proxy, which would make it slower to load
pages and group all its users behind a single IP address.

Each page can be updated at any time, and we need to be able to show
the current version to users, including when they view the page
immediately after editing it. Pages may be altered with user-specific
information such as the login name, extra links, and various output
options for people who are logged in, and talk page update notification
for both logged-in and non-logged-in users.

The simplest way to ensure this is to disable caching altogether, and
require that every page be reloaded every time. That puts unnecessary
strain on the server regenerating and resending unchanged pages as
people click around, so we do allow for some caching, with caveats:

The cache-control header is marked to tell proxies *not* to cache
pages, because a page sent to one person isn't necessarily the page
that would be sent to someone else. The browser can cache, but is told
to re-request the page every time, so that the cached page can be
rechecked as to whether it's current. If it is current we don't have to
regenerate the page or wait for it to download, but there is still a
round trip to the server for every hit.

'Plain' page hits by non-logged-in users are cached on the server and
the cached version is sent out without additional rendering if and only
if the wiki knows it's an okay match. (Page hasn't changed,
non-logged-in user with no talk notification.) These cached pages are
also sent compressed if possible, which saves on bandwidth.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)


subject: [WikiEN-l] Straw man

body:
The Cunctator wrote:

>>But there is no legitimate
>>grounds on which to do so: there is no way we can say that the Sept. 11
>>biographies are notable, but 6 million Holocaust victims are not.  Many
>>people, in fact, would argue the reverse, with that particular example.
>>
>>
>
>And I would not disagree with that, nor have I ever.
>
>Please correct your misunderstandings of what I have said.
>
>
Then I think the simple disagreement boils down to that.  I think that
this is opening the door for a flood of stuff Wikipedia doesn't need and
shouldn't have to deal with, while you disagree that it is undesirable
for us to have such entries.  So I suppose slippery slope doesn't enter
into it at all: I think we should have none of them, and you think we
should have all of them.  Is that accurate?

I'm curious what you meant by "necessary interface changes".  Do you
mean we wouldn't reference the non-notable people at all on the articles
of the famous people?  I'm objecting to an article on, say, Thomas
Jefferson, saying "Thomas Jefferson was also a chemical engineer who
worked for Raytheon in the 1960s and 70s," or "Thomas Jefferson was a
high school student who died in an automobile accident in 1952," or even
a link pointing to a "list of other Thomas Jeffersons" which is
populated with such non-noteworthy people.  If they can somehow be kept
completely isolated in a "people who are not notable" ghetto, such that
[[Thomas Jefferson]] doesn't have to include them or a link to them or a
disambiguating page containing them, I'd have no objections to their
mere presence in the database--it's the pollution of the namespace I'm
objecting to.

I also have a secondary (and lesser) objection that these are the sorts
of articles that never get cleaned up, and are more likely than most to
just stay crap for extended periods of time (as some of the Sept. 11
entries illustrate).

-Mark


from_name: Fred Bauder

body:
>>--- On Mon 11/10, Fred Bauder < fredbaud at ctelco.net > wrote:
>
>> I'm pretty sure no one will ever let you put such statements
>> as "The press in India is communist controlled"
>
>Then why is Boud allowed to go around posting articles saying
>India is a fascist and racist state?
>Why do you think I raised the issue on the mailing list? It is to
>bring to the attention of the listers a blatant case of abusing
>Wikipedia to push their agenda.
>
>Come on, I am the one who has tried to enter into a conversation
>and attempt to sort out differences. Elsewhere I also removed
>my abrasive style. I have stated earlier that I am willing to
>change the style as soon as it is pointed out to be hyperbolic
>in nature, but the substance I post will always be information
>which has been verified.
>
>How about stopping arguing with me and trying to help out by
>resolving the situation in an objective manner? That is what I came
>here for in the first place. I am willing to trust you to see the
>issue in an objective manner and remove all factually inaccurate
>stuff. What do you say?
>
>-libertarian

We seem to be making progress and in truth you are no worse than some of
the other editors in this area, perhaps the focus needs to move over to
them for a while. However you cannot depend on one overworked person to
somehow monitor the situation and set it right. The dialog needs to be
beween the active contributors. Perhaps you could look at the article,
Hindutva, and see if you could craft it as a NPOV article. Now if it is
reverted, DON'T revert it back, just drop us a note so we can look at how
it went.

Fred