body:
David Gerard wrote:
> "Don't Install Mediawiki - PBwiki.com - We can host your wiki
> securely, backed up and guarded 24/7."
>

And in CamelCase, too! Sorry, I like my [[free links]] too much.

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

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 569 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/attachments/20061003/5167cb89/attachment.pgp>


list: wikimedia-l

source: pipermail-mbox

from_name: Alphax (Wikipedia email)

subject: [Foundation-l] MediaWiki as Google Ads keyword

body:
David Gerard wrote:
> "Don't Install Mediawiki - PBwiki.com - We can host your wiki
> securely, backed up and guarded 24/7."
>

And in CamelCase, too! Sorry, I like my [[free links]] too much.

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

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 569 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/attachments/20061003/5167cb89/attachment-0001.pgp>


list: foundation-l

from_name: Mathias Schindler

subject:
[Foundation-l] Reports of AFP using Wikipedia content without
	attribution

body:
On 10/3/06, James Hare <messedrocker at gmail.com> wrote:
> And now on another blog:
>
> http://blog.outer-court.com/archive/2006-10-03-n18.html
>
> Congratulations!

http://mathias-schindler.de/index.php/2006/10/03/afp-amish-wikipedia-linkliste/
is a list of blog and other news pages about this incident. If you
find something about it, please let me know.

Mathias


from_name: Angela

body:
On 10/3/06, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
> Since I suspect most wikispambots are meant to target mediawiki using
> software that has a special "not mediawiki" function is not completely
> insane.

That's not the case. Most of the wikis I've seen that were completely
killed by spam were not MediaWiki.

Taking one random link from Wikia's blacklist and searching Google for
"sharella.com" +wiki
shows all the top hits are non-MediaWiki wikis hit with this spam.

Angela.


from_name: SJ Klein

subject: [Foundation-l] Club Membership

body:
Dear ROSC Club Director,

Thanks for your kind wishes towards wikinews.  (Are you a regular
reader?  When did you discover it?  What do you like best about it?)

It's nice that you are planning to donate some of your club dues
to Wikinews.  This isn't the right forum for that kind of announcement.
Please be careful about how you discuss your own organizations on
Wikipedia (even on your own userpage) and on this list.

To the list: learning to write in an NPOV fashion is hard.
Finding the line between announcing something you are proud of
and self-promotion can be tricky.  Please assume good faith and
be of good cheer, especially with list newbies.

SJ

+++ ROSC Club Director [03/10/06 14:32 -0700]:
>A Letter and Check will be mailed to Wiki and it will say to doante the money to Wikinews.
>
>  If thats not going to work, I will be on the phone.
>
>effe iets anders <effeietsanders at gmail.com> wrote:
>  Then still, how do you plan to make sure the money goes to wiki*news*
>? Listening to Anthere's intonation, for the record, she is
>boardmember of that same foundtaion, I guess that is not very
>obvious...
>
>Effe
>
>2006/10/3, ROSC Club Director :
>> I plan to make a check out to the Wikimedia Foundation and and send it to the address. This is an advertisment nonetheless.
>> And several editors have already asked that you be blocked from the
>> list. So, just do not do it.
>>
>> Incidently, may I ask you how you intend to make sure that these 2
>> dollars actually get to wikinews ?
>>
>> ant
>>
>> ROSC Club Director wrote:
>> > Look,
>> >
>> > For every new member ROSC gets, we donate $2 to www.wikinews.org.
>> >
>> > Last I know, no other club did that for wiki.
>> >
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> foundation-l mailing list
>> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
>> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------
>> Get your email and more, right on the new Yahoo.com
>> _______________________________________________
>> foundation-l mailing list
>> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
>> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>
>_______________________________________________
>foundation-l mailing list
>foundation-l at wikimedia.org
>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
>
>
>---------------------------------
>How low will we go? Check out Yahoo! Messenger?s low  PC-to-Phone call rates.
>_______________________________________________
>foundation-l mailing list
>foundation-l at wikimedia.org
>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l


subject: [Foundation-l] Club Membership


from_name: effe iets anders

subject: [Foundation-l] Club Membership

body:
Then still, how do you plan to make sure the money goes to wiki*news*
? Listening to Anthere's intonation, for the record, she is
boardmember of that same foundtaion, I guess that is not very
obvious...

Effe

2006/10/3, ROSC Club Director <resourcesofsheboygan at yahoo.com>:
> I plan to make a check out to the Wikimedia Foundation and and send it to the address.  This is an advertisment nonetheless.
> And several editors have already asked that you be blocked from the
> list. So, just do not do it.
>
> Incidently, may I ask you how you intend to make sure that these 2
> dollars actually get to wikinews ?
>
> ant
>
> ROSC Club Director wrote:
> > Look,
> >
> > For every new member ROSC gets, we donate $2 to www.wikinews.org.
> >
> > Last I know, no other club did that for wiki.
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Get your email and more, right on the  new Yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>


subject: [Foundation-l] Club Membership


list: wikien-l

from_name: ScottL

subject: [WikiEN-l] List of war criminals

body:
Bogdan Giusca wrote:
> Speaking of dubious lists, we also have:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_war_criminals
>
> The list currently contains people belonging to these categories:
>
> 1) people who were convicted for war crimes
> 2) people who were charged but not convicted
> 3) people who were never charged due to political reasons, but
> the consensus is that they were involved in war crimes
> 4) people whose involvement in war crimes is unclear or a matter
> of debate.
>
> On the top of the list, it writes that:
>
> "This is a list of formally charged and/or convicted war criminals"
>
> which means 1) and 2). What about people who were formally charged,
> but later found not guilty? They would be included by the current
> criteria.
>
> What about people who were convicted for "war crimes" by an unfair
> mock trial in a country under a dictatorship?
> Should we list them, too?

   Seems to me that NPOV would dictate that all articles here be placed
in less ambiguous subcategories.

[[People convicted of War crimes by XXX]]
[[People charged with war crimes by YYY but not convicted]]
[[People absolved of having commited war crimes by ZZZ]]
[[People acused of warcrimes by GROUP/GOVERNMENT]]

SKL


list: wikitech-l

from_name: Simetrical

subject: [Wikitech-l] Wikipedia mirror

body:
On 10/3/06, Krishna Pagadala <krishnaact at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Nick,
>
>    I am using MediaWiki version 1.7 for the Wikipedia mirror. However, when I copied the "essential" extensions Cite.php and
> ParserExtensions.php and enabled them both in LocalSettings.php, I am seeing a lot of errors. However, when I disable Cite.php, then the errors disappear, but <ref.../ref> no longer work.
>
> On googling this problem, I find that I am not the only one. How can this issue be resolved?

IIRC, this is because the latest versions from trunk are incompatible
with 1.7.  If you install older versions instead, they should work.
Could be wrong, but it's probably worth a try at least.


from_name: Platonides

subject: [Wikitech-l] building a search API

body:
Nick Jenkins
> My suspicion is that it's just wanting a User-Agent header.
Well, it's not only a suspicion. if you do a query without user-agent the
squids give you "403 Forbidden" header with content: "Please provide a
User-Agent header" :-)


from_name: Gordon Joly

subject:
[Foundation-l] [Wikimediauk-l] Royal Society archives online
 until December

body:
At 06:37 -0700 26/9/06, Birgitte SB wrote:
>Someone left a note on Wikisource about these going
>offline in December.  I know at least one editor has
>begun downloading these.  If anyone would like to
>help, I am sure we could use it.  Of course don't get
>yourself in trouble if you fall under UK legal
>jurisitiction.

I have downloaded one paper and started to read it.

"A memoir of the Theory of Mathemtical Form" by A. B. Kempe, M. A., F. R. S.

Received May 18, Read June 18 1885.

It runs to 70 pages, and has diagrams and formulae, and italics.

This was done for personal research, and hence is 100% legal.

Gordon Joly
London
UK


list: commons-l

subject:
[Commons-l] Ogg Theora is too hard to
	play.WeneedYouTube-styleFlash streaming video.

body:
"Gregory Maxwell" wrote:
>> Seems i misunderstood.
>> I find references to "continually improved", "if it doesn't work try in a
>> few days" a
>> bit frustrating. But hell, this may be me ;-)
>
> Why would it tell you how to call it?
To have the vi folks know? So i can know they are calling it badly? ;-)

> The calling conventions are
> embodied in the enwiki templates that use it (at the moment).
Well, as i don't go too much by en: i didn't know.

BTW: Do you know that if you follow (on the template which link to
your free and gnu-compilable sound tool) the [[beta]] link referring
to it you get a Vista screenshot?

> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Listen  for an example.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bassoon#Audio_examples
Thanks. This sounds? much better. :-)

Bugging you again:
If i stop a music while it is being played, the sound which was hearing
keeps vibrating... i needed to kill java (i.e. the browser).
Seems like sending "Start note" and -as stopping it- missing "Stop note"

Platonides

? On both senses :D


from_name: Peter Danenberg

subject: [Wikitech-l] WikiTeX Design

body:
Salvete,

     I wanted to document a design-conversation Tim Starling
and I had the other day  over  IRC;  WikiTeX  for  MediaWiki
should  have  the  following  necessary (but not necessarily
sufficient) properties:

Segregation:
     WikiTeX should be deployable on a segregated  (virtual)
     machine  which  will  communicate with MediaWiki by RPC
     (via e.g. SOAP).

Throttling:
     Processor-time per request will have Draconian absolute
     limits;  and per-IP-throttling may also protect against
     abuse.

     Tim mentioned that we might  start  with  a  subset  of
WikiTeX services; say: graph, music, amsmath.


from_name: Mike O

subject: [Wikitech-l] Featured Articles - How does it work?

body:
I am trying to figure out how Featured Articles works but haven't quite got it yet. I see that if I go to this URL there is monthly list

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Today%27s_featured_article/October_2006

If I edit that page I see the code below (among lots of other code)

----
;'''October 1'''
{{Wikipedia:Today's featured article/October 1, 2006}} <br clear="all">
[[Wikipedia:Today%27s_featured_article/October_1,_2006|view]] -
[[Wikipedia talk:Today%27s_featured_article/October_1,_2006|talk]] -
[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Wikipedia:Today%27s_featured_article/October_1,_2006&action=history history]
----

But I can't figure out where this Featured Article system, where the above code from, etc. Can someone explain this or point me to an article that does?

Mike O

--
_______________________________________________
Surf the Web in a faster, safer and easier way:
Download Opera 9 at http://www.opera.com

Powered by Outblaze


from_name: David Gerard

body:
On 03/10/06, Mike O <mikeo at operamail.com> wrote:

> I am trying to figure out how Featured Articles works but haven't quite got it yet. I see that if I go to this URL there is monthly list
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Today%27s_featured_article/October_2006
> If I edit that page I see the code below (among lots of other code)
> {{Wikipedia:Today's featured article/October 1, 2006}} <br clear="all">

The {{ }} includes the article inside the double braces. [[ ]] makes a
link, {{ }} does an inclusion.

- d.


subject: [WikiEN-l] List of banned books

body:
On 03/10/06, Mark Wagner <carnildo at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 10/2/06, Kim van der Linde <kim at kimvdlinde.com> wrote:
> > MacGyverMagic/Mgm wrote:

> > > Wikipedia:Cleanup Taskforce?
> > > Have them remove any uncited crap.
> > > If ALA 2000 is a specific list with set entries, remove anything that
> > > shouldn't be there.
> > > Be bold!

> > That would amount to deleting around 90% of the article as unsourced........

> That's what I did to get [[List of unusual personal names]] under
> control.  Since then, I've been reverting any addition that doesn't
> cite sources showing that (1) there exists a person with this name,
> and (2) the name is considered unusual.

It's the sort of thing they have to do to keep [[Films considered the
worst ever]] under control. It's clearly a useful article subject, but
you need some real hardarses on hand to keep it usably referenced.
[[List of longest novels]] was started with a referencing requirement.

- d.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Corporate vanity policy enforcement

body:
On 03/10/06, Guy Chapman aka JzG <guy.chapman at spamcop.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 1 Oct 2006 11:23:39 +0100, <charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com>
> wrote:

> >discretion in Arbish is read as saying that pro-active admins are the
> >first, second and probably third lines of defence of the project. It
> >is much better to have them out there doing their best, and taking
> >away the mop-and-bucket from a very few, than doing up the constraints
> >ever tighter, because it is felt that this pre-empts misuse of admin
> >powers.

> Judging by Tony Sidaway's Talk page, the wonks are winning.

[[WP:PRO]]. Quote from it since the worst process wonks are curiously
unable to read. Go through policies rewriting them for humans.

I come out against excessive process quite a lot. Process is actually
important, though - else people haven't a *goddamn clue* which way is
up, and our bureaucracy is confusing enough to newbies. So it is
vitally important that process be shaped so that it is fit for mere
humans.

- d.

- d.


from_name: brion at pobox.com

subject: [Wikitech-l] MediaWiki automated test run failure 2006-10-04

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

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

Passed 412 of 429 tests (96.04%) FAILED!


from_name: Ian Woollard

subject: [WikiEN-l] No references in the "end product?"

body:
I would strongly argue that we need far, far *less* references than
the Encyclopedia Britannica due to the hypertext linking in the
wikipedia.

What hypertexting means is that the references tend to get pushed down
to daughter nodes on particular topics, and you end up with summary
articles with few references that internally refer to other articles.
In Brittanica I bet that the references are duplicated throughout the
Encyclopedia giving an artificially high reference count.

We need to get away from encyclopedia envy and do the right things for
the wikipedia.

--
-Ian Woollard

"Victory can be perceived but not created."
For your own security, the Department of Homeland Security is watching you.


body:
On 04/10/06, Ian Woollard <ian.woollard at gmail.com> wrote:

> I would strongly argue that we need far, far *less* references than
> the Encyclopedia Britannica due to the hypertext linking in the
> wikipedia.
> What hypertexting means is that the references tend to get pushed down
> to daughter nodes on particular topics, and you end up with summary
> articles with few references that internally refer to other articles.
> In Brittanica I bet that the references are duplicated throughout the
> Encyclopedia giving an artificially high reference count.
> We need to get away from encyclopedia envy and do the right things for
> the wikipedia.

Hmmmm. Articles get refactored a *lot* around here, though. I've put
the same reference in several articles as needed on the principle that
more good references are better than not enough, and we can't presume
an article will be viewed as part of Wikipedia. I've turned [[Xenu]]
into a handbill, for instance, and been very glad the references were
*right there*. Mind you, that article needs to be referenced to the
hilt for the sheer "wtf" factor, but anyway.

Semi-tangentially, I'm wondering how to properly reference [[Fork
(software)]]. It's at about a 2003 or 2004 level of quality -
"everyone in the field knows this stuff" - but needs more for 2006.

- d.


from_name: Lorenzarius

subject:
[Foundation-l] Ensuring veracity of articles based on print
	sources

body:
Even if that print source exists, it doesn't mean that that print
source really supports my "sourced" statement... If I really need to
source my fake article to prevent it from being speedy deleted, I
could just source any random real book... So this doesn't solve the
whole problem.

--Lorenzarius

On 10/4/06, James Hare <messedrocker at gmail.com> wrote:
> As Erik pointed out, it is very easy to make a hoax seem legitimate if you
> cite a phony print source. What's not needed is new rules involving the use
> of print sources, but to utilise something we had all along: Google.
> Something we could do is Google the title of the book being referenced, and
> then see if it exists (beyond being mentioned in wiki mirrors). If it
> doesn't exist, then we take further action. One thing we could do is for
> every print source approved in an article, we can note that said print
> sources have been verified to be true on the talk page (via some sort of
> yellow talk page box). Comments?
>
> --James
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

--
http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lorenzarius
Tel: +852 95825791


subject: [Wikitech-l] MediaWiki as Google Ads keyword

body:
On 10/3/06, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
> "Don't Install Mediawiki - PBwiki.com - We can host your wiki
> securely, backed up and guarded 24/7."
>
> yay!

Cute.  I'm pretty sure that's against Google policy, though: "If your
ad text contains competitive language regarding other companies,
support for this claim must be displayed on the landing page for your
AdWords ad." <https://adwords.google.com/select/guidelines.html#C11>
"Use specific keywords that accurately reflect your site."
<https://adwords.google.com/select/guidelines.html#R3>  (As to the
latter, that only applies if you're sure it was "MediaWiki" and not
just "wiki" that it was triggering off.)

Not that I think anyone cares.  :)


from_name: oscar

subject: [Foundation-l] A little problem

body:
dunno but np, will do

On 10/3/06, Anthere <Anthere9 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>  incidently, that means I can not moderate the spc lists.... and
> since Villy left, i think no one else is registered but I. Did not you
> volunteer once ? If so, can you ask Brion to help you on that ?
>
> oscar wrote:
> > dear anthere,
> >
> > thank you for letting us know. may your computer get well soon after the
> > "operations" that are necessary now...
> >
> > all the best,
> > oscar
> >
> > On 10/2/06, Anthere <Anthere9 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >>Fyi
> >>
> >>Whilst I was away, my computer chose to again get sick. Apparently, fix
> >>up in july did not fix the right thing...
> >>
> >>Things are worse this time, since the computer does not restart at all
> >>any more.
> >>
> >>And of course, my last back up was 3 weeks ago :-)
> >>Which means that I have no back up of all the emails I got between
> >>roughly 3 weeks ago, and 5 days ago (these are still on the server).
> >>Actually, right now, I have no access to any mails but the last recent
> >>ones, since I first need to install my back-up on my husband laptop.
> >>
> >>Which basically means
> >>
> >>* Limited internet access planned for the next week to 10 days at least.
> >>If I do not answer to your emails, well, ask yourself if someone else
> >>could help you
> >>
> >>* No access to a whole bunch of documents or emails, eg, approval of the
> >>new languages subcom. Or documents to prepare the board retreat. Or
> >>datafeed contractual agreement.
> >>
> >>So, thank you in advance for your patience :-)
> >>
> >>ant
> >>
> >>_______________________________________________
> >>foundation-l mailing list
> >>foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> >>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>


subject: [Foundation-l] A little problem


body:
On 04/10/06, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hmmmm. Articles get refactored a *lot* around here, though.

Right. So consider a paragraph including a reference that gets cut out
and turned into its own article. And you put a very brief summary
sentence where the paragraph used to go, and you link to the new
article.

Problem: the number of references in the original article just went
down by 1. Are you seriously saying that we really need to come up
with another reference for the sentence? The actual reference is still
there in the new article and it is surrounded by text that it
justifies.

If you keep doing that repeatedly, you end up with a completely
unreferenced orginal article. But the amount of references in the
wikipedia has not gone down.

That's why I consider that a summary page in many cases needs few if
any references.

Yes, I know the policy. The policy is wrong in this kind of case. A
very well-linked article needs very few external references. I think
the FA process needs to count credit for internal references as if
they were external references; not at 1:1, but some number:1; 10:1
internal to external or something.

At the moment it's too all or nothing: ALL ARTICLES NEED REFERENCES.
INTERNAL LINKS DO NOT COUNT! Um. So refactoring is a bad thing then? I
DON'T CARE. EXTERMINATE- EXTERMINATE!

:-)

> - d.

--
-Ian Woollard

"Victory can be perceived but not created."
For your own security, the Department of Homeland Security is watching you.


body:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "David Gerard" <dgerard at gmail.com>

> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Today%27s_featured_article/October_2006
> > If I edit that page I see the code below (among lots of other code)
> > {{Wikipedia:Today's featured article/October 1, 2006}} <br clear="all">
>
>
> The {{ }} includes the article inside the double braces. [[ ]] makes a
> link, {{ }} does an inclusion.

I familiar enough with MediaWiki to readlize that :-)

Where do the inclusions come from, how does one schedule featured articles to appear? Etc... I tried tracing templates but couldn't find the right ones.

Mike O

--
_______________________________________________
Surf the Web in a faster, safer and easier way:
Download Opera 9 at http://www.opera.com

Powered by Outblaze


from_name: Phil Boswell

subject: [WikiEN-l] Mywikipediaspace

body:
Mark Wagner-2 wrote:
>
> On 10/2/06, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell at gmail.com> wrote:
> [snip]
>> It would be really nice that on the third time some foolish
>> advertising company calls us up threatening to sue because we deleted
>> their drivel that we can turn around and say "No, we're going to sue
>> you..." :)
> Do you know a lawyer who'd be willing to take this on contingency?
> Because that's the only way the Foundation would be able to afford a
> lawsuit.
>
Erm...?

Don't we employ a lawyer? I thought that was what Brad was here for...

HTH HAND
--
Phil
--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Mywikipediaspace-tf2367155.html#a6638139
Sent from the English Wikipedia mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


from_name: Nacon Kantari

subject: [WikiEN-l] Is this really permissible behavior by an admin?

body:
It's not my fault that the person can't figure out that when you come on IRC
THREE TIMES in TWO WEEKS with the SAME IP, you're a sockpuppet.  The
original block was an IP block for violating NPA in edit summaries.  The
second block was on NoLongerScieno for being an obvious sockpuppet of the IP
addresses to violate 3RR.  The third block was on ScienoSitter, an obvious
sock, when he came on IRC and I matched the IP address to NoLongerScieno.
The fourth block was a repeat of the third one with Xvidme.  Anything else?

naconkantari

On 10/2/06, Gay Muslim <queeran at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:ScienoSitter
>
> Step 1: Naconkantari blocks the user indefinitely, claiming it is a
> "vandalism only" account.
> A quick look through the user's contributions shows that this is
> absolutely
> not the case.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/ScienoSitter
>
> Step 2: The user requests an unblock. Naconkantari responds by HIMSELF
> removing the unblock template.
> Step 3: The user requests an unblock. A user who the user was involved in
> a
> content dispute with (by the username of OmicronPersei8) REMOVES THE
> UNBLOCK
> REQUEST.
>
> Step 4: The users requests an unblock. Naconkantari AGAIN removes the
> unblock template himself.
>
> Step 5: An admin by the name of "Mr. Lefty" locks the user's talk page for
> "template abuse". Note that up to this point, all the user has done is put
> back a template wrongfully removed by (a) the blocking admin who was also
> involved in the dispute and (b) a non-admin user who not only was ALSO
> involved in the dispute, but has no right to remove the template.
>
> Result? Naconkantari's abuse of power successfully hidden, user completely
> deprived of their right to a fair and impartial look at the circumstances
> of
> Naconkantari's abusive indefinite block.
>
> This isn't the first time Naconkantari's acted like this, either. User
> Xvidme is blocked as a "sockpuppet of NoLongerScieno" even though
> NoLongerScieno's block is "indefinite" because Naconkantari thinks it
> violates the username standards.
>
> Isn't it great how admins get away with this all the time? You wonder why
> people think there's a cabal? THIS KIND OF SHIT IS WHY.
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: ROSC Club Director

subject: [Foundation-l] Club Membership

body:
The Resources of Sheboygan Club will do anything we can do to help Wiki. That even means donating money.

Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote:  Some people fail to grasp the level of passion that many of our
participants feel about advertising. They need to be reminded that a
few years ago a significant group broke away at the mere suggestion that
the site might carry advertising. The ads never happened, but the group
still broke away.

Ec

ROSC Club Director wrote:

>I plan to make a check out to the Wikimedia Foundation and and send it to the address. This is an advertisment nonetheless.
>And several editors have already asked that you be blocked from the
>list. So, just do not do it.
>
>Incidently, may I ask you how you intend to make sure that these 2
>dollars actually get to wikinews ?
>
>ant
>
>ROSC Club Director wrote:
>
>
>>Look,
>>
>>For every new member ROSC gets, we donate $2 to www.wikinews.org.
>>
>>Last I know, no other club did that for wiki.
>>

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l at wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
 Get on board. You're invited to try the new Yahoo! Mail.


subject: [Foundation-l] Club Membership


from_name: Cheney Shill

subject: [WikiEN-l] Living bios - "negative" or "controversial"?

body:
--- David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:

> See [[WT:BLP]]. I've been changing "negative" to
> "controversial",
> since controversy is the problem as I see it, and using
> the word
> "negative" is blatantly throwing NPOV out the window.

Controversial is definitely better than negative.  Not sure
there is an ideal 1 word summary, but it definitely
shouldn't be dependent on whether or not it's positive or
negative.  Maybe doubtful, risky, dubious, unsettled, or
unreliable.  Today's living bio example of choice:  Mark Foley.

~~Pro-Lick
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/User:Halliburton_Shill
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Pro-Lick
http://www.wikiality.com/User:Pro-Lick (now a Wikia supported site)

--spam may follow--

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com


from_name: Richard Holton

references:
<20061001102339.GEME11710.aamtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@smtp.ntlworld.com>
	<2785i2lg91mmjmcqutc9an8l7vug6sr8m5@4ax.com>
	<fbad4e140610031545i7ed1c999g3cb403b8dfccb49a@mail.gmail.com>
	<4a37983b0610031613l279b49c5x4018e139d7550a05@mail.gmail.com>
	<a3u6i25e762e3nfooibjuo3vsia5uve0gp@4ax.com>

body:
On 10/4/06, Guy Chapman aka JzG <guy.chapman at spamcop.net> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 3 Oct 2006 18:13:04 -0500, "Richard Holton"
> <richholton at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Process, like so many things, is not inherently bad. It's the abuse of
> >process that causes problems.
>
> Actually the real evil is slavish adherence to process in the absence
> of the ever-elusive Clue.  Wiki-process exists to guide and inform,
> not to instruct, and far too many people fail to understand this.

I agree with you, Guy. I wasn't very clear, but I was primarily thinking of
slavish adherence to process when I wrote "abuse of process". That and
attempting to dictate process when not absolutely necessary.

There are places where following a strict process is important. Think about
a paper-based filing system, with filing cabinets. A strict process for
filing is essential.

Since we're computer based, and computers are excellent at strictly
following processes, we automate most of those situations. But sometimes
that isn't practical, or just hasn't been accomplished yet.

One part of having a clue is being able to distinguish between situations
where process is absolutely necessary, versus situations where process is to
guide and inform. Most Wikipedia processes are of the latter type.

The controversies on Wikipedia seem to involve processes where judgment is
required, and you can't automate judgment.

-Rich

[[W:en:User:Rholton]]


from_name: Nick Jenkins

subject: [Wikitech-l] Wikipedia mirror

body:
> >   I am using MediaWiki version 1.7 for the Wikipedia mirror. However, when I copied the "essential" extensions Cite.php and
> >ParserExtensions.php and enabled them both in LocalSettings.php, I am seeing a lot of errors. However, when I disable
> Cite.php, then the errors disappear, but <ref.../ref> no longer work.
>
> Download this version and you will find it works and is included and
> integrated.
>
> ftp://ftp.wikigadugi.org/wiki/MediaWiki/

And if that doesn't work, probably best to give us full details of the errors you're seeing (exact error message, when it happens,
changes you've made to LocalSettings, link to a one or two other problems of same type from google, a URL to your wiki if it's
public, etc). Someone on the list is likely to have seen it before, or have a hunch what the problem is, but the details will
probably be what triggers that memory.

All the best,
Nick.


from_name: Sabine Cretella

subject: [Foundation-l] OLPC: A dictionary for all children in the world

body:
Good morning!

At the beginning I was really hesitant to propose this project on these
lists - for the simple fact that it could be seen negatively by some,
but: it is for a good cause, it is Open Content and it is about a
Wiktionary, even if a very particular one.

WiktionaryZ is building the contents for a multilingual dictionary for
all children in the world - all languages are welcome and that's why
this message does not only go to the wiktionary list, but also to
others. Not all projects have wiktionaries and maybe this could be also
their first start into lexicology for their very specific language.

I would like to remind you that the data you provide can be re-used by
your local wiktionary, also uploading it whith the bot, once we have the
dump to be provided to OLPC.

Please find below the original text re. the co-operation. To
participate, please create yourself a profile on http://wiktionaryz.org,
add your babel template and read about the DefinedMeaning
(http://www.wiktionaryz.org/DefinedMeaning). Then tell us or on the wiki
or in the chat ( irc://irc.freenode.net/wiktionaryz or
irc://irc.freenode.net/wiktionary ) we are present in both of them.

If you happen to be in a university or in another adeguate place and
have the possibility to put a print-out of the project description on
the notice board, please send me a short-mail I will happily send you
the pdf. Doing this results in better co-operation with all projects,
since people, who maybe did not consider wikis before do their first
edits. The reason why we ask people to send us an e-mail if they are
interested in contributing is simple: we want to take them by the hand
and show them how to do things. Working on a wiki is not so obvious and
simple as it might seem to us who do it every day.

I will also try to go around the village pumps of the projects to post
the message - of course: you may help me with that - it would be great
:-) I am going to update the project page in English during the day:
http://www.wiktionaryz.org/OLPC_Children%27s_Dictionary - if you have
put the message on your wiki, could you pleas leave a short note on the
discussion page for the project?

Thank you so much for your time and attention and have a wonderful
wiki-day :-)

Sabine

*****
*A Multilingual Dictionary
for the Children
of Our World

*

*One Laptop per Child* (http://laptop.org) is a non-profit association
with a mission to develop a low-cost laptop?the "$100 Laptop"?a
technology that could revolutionize how we educate the world's children.
Our goal is to provide children around the world with new opportunities
to explore, experiment, and express themselves. The laptops are a unique
learning tool, created expressly for children living in the world's most
remote environments.

*The WiktionaryZ Project *(http://wiktionaryz.org) is developing an
open-content dictionary in every language of the world. We are working
with the University of Bamberg to identify relevant word lists and
develop needed applications for managing them
(http://www.uni-bamberg.de/). We are working on a dictionary for
children, to be included on the OLPC laptops.

*You can help!*

Please donate a few minutes of your time to improve the translations and
definitions of *10 words*. Your contribution will reach millions of
children in the world.

To participate, visit http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Translations , or send
an e-mail to:

*kids at WiktionaryZ.org*

(Please list the target languages into which you can translate English ?
*all* languages are welcome. You will receive a return e-mail with
instructions about which words to work on and how else you might be able
to help us.)

*Thank you so much for your help!*

/Sabine Cretella/

/for the co-operating team/

p.s. Would you like to know my personal dream? Having that dictionary,
or at least a huge part of it, ready in many languages by Christmas ...
it is just three months ahead of us ... can you make it as well your dream?

Image by: http://laptop.org <http://laptop.org/>, licensed under
Creative Commons Attributions 2.5 license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/).

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


list: wikipedia-l

subject: [Wikipedia-l] OLPC: A dictionary for all children in the world


list: wiktionary-l

subject: [Wiktionary-l] OLPC: A dictionary for all children in the world


from_name: Guy Chapman aka JzG

body:
On Tue, 3 Oct 2006 18:13:04 -0500, "Richard Holton"
<richholton at gmail.com> wrote:

>Process, like so many things, is not inherently bad. It's the abuse of
>process that causes problems.

Actually the real evil is slavish adherence to process in the absence
of the ever-elusive Clue.  Wiki-process exists to guide and inform,
not to instruct, and far too many people fail to understand this.

Guy (JzG)
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JzG


from_name: Ray Saintonge

subject: [WikiEN-l] [Wikipedia-l] the process that isn't written

body:
David Gerard wrote:

>Can anyone think how to rephrase this better? Would it actually get
>through to anyone who needs to hear it?
>
>(I eagerly await all the people saying I should read what I wrote.)
>
>====
>Cultural expectations
>
>These are the things we do that aren't actually codified. The feel of
>the project. The social structure. This stuff is process too, but if
>you contradict it you'll really upset people. Breaking a rule is just
>breaking a rule; but breaking a cultural expectation is breaking
>people's basic assumptions about the fabric of this small world of
>ours. And upset volunteers fade away.
>
>If you think you're keeping to the fundamental rules and the sensible
>processes but repeatedly upset people in the same way, your approach
>is ineffective. If you are in fact right, and cultural expectations
>are getting in the way of writing the encyclopedia, you've got a hard
>job ahead of you changing them. But that's the trouble with vision.
>
Regretably, those who most desparately need to understand this, are the
ones least capable of it.  For them it needs to be put in the form of a
rule, often one with punitive consequences for failure to adhere to it.
Perhaps being blocked for upsetting some number of people in the same
way despite being technically correct according to the literal rules.

Vision is great, but it requires being able to see beyond the rules.  It
requires being able to see where the rules are likely to interfere with
the mission.

Ec


subject: [Wikipedia-l] [WikiEN-l]  the process that isn't written


from_name: Jimmy Wales

body:
Sorry for top posting, but I just wanted to say that I agree with Daniel
completely here.  Sources are critical.

We have implicitly taken a stance with the world: we don't care about
the _credentials_ of the authors, we care about the _quality of the
work_.  This means: we don't just say "trust me, I am a Nobel Prize
winner"... we can't, because we mostly are not.  Instead we say "Trust
us, we cite our sources, we use rational arguments, we write clearly and
neutrally, and we show our working."

(In American English, this is "show our work" but I got the phrase from
David Gerard, who always says "show our working".)

--Jimbo

Daniel P. B. Smith wrote:
>> Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2006 23:07:53 -0500
>>
>> That's true, but is also misleading.
>> You don't see those references in the *end product*.
>
> Oh? Take a look at the article on "Radioactivity" in the Encyclopedia
> Britannica, 11th edition.
>
> It contains fifty-four inline references. It also mentions five
> "general treatises."
>
> And the stuff in between is credited to a known individual, "E. Ru."
> with the Encyclopedia Britannica editors implicitly vouching both for
> his identity and his competence. However, if I want to check his
> competence for yourself, I flip to the front of volume 22, p. vii and
> look up E. Ru. who happens to be some guy named "Ernest Rutherford,
> F. R. S., D. Sc. LL. D., Ph. D., Langworthy Professor of Physics,
> University of Manchester, Nobel Prize for Chemistry, 1908, Author of
> Radio-Activity; Radio-Activity Transformations; etc."
>
> So, depending on what you think of his character or his credentials,
> I can judge whether or not to rely on the stuff that's in between
> those citations.
>
> A point that people seem to continually miss in comparing Wikipedia
> to other scholarly activities is that, to the extent that our
> contributors are less identifiable and less authoritative than those
> of the Encyclopedia Britannica Eleventh Edition or scholarly works,
> we _need_ to  have _denser_ citations than these endeavors. For
> example, our article on "Radioactivity" ought to have _more_ than
> fifty-four inline citations.
>
> It presently has...
>
> ... _zero_ references. No inline references, nothing like the five
> "general treatises" E. Ru. provides (i.e. no "references" or
> "bibliography" section). Seven "see alsos" and seven "external links."
>
> Most recent edits are by Bovineone, KaiserbBot, FocalPoint, Peyre,
> and 165.107.9.47. Not obvious who their real-world identities are,
> but even assuming you take their user pages at face value, which I
> do, their credentials and achievements are:
> "I currently live in Austin, Texas, but I am originally from
> Pasadena, California" (and has a barnstar); a bot with an emergency
> shutoff button; "One more user who believes that Wikipedia is a
> really really good idea;" "Wikipedia does not have a user page with
> this exact name;" and no account.
>
>   For all I know, 165.107.9.47, _may_ be a Nobel Laureate, but...
> should I trust the unreferenced material in this article as much as I
> trust the unreferenced material in the Britannica article credited to
> E. Ru.?
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: Mark Wagner

subject: [WikiEN-l] templates for country-centric POV?

body:
On 10/4/06, Mark Gallagher <m.g.gallagher at student.canberra.edu.au> wrote:

> What is it about Americans, seriously?  I mean, Australians are arrogant
> (well, we are): tell us we do something differently from the rest of the
> world, we'll say, "Gosh, we must be weird.  Still, it's probably because
> we're so much cooler."
>
> Tell an American that he does something differently from the rest of the
> world, and it's a case of, "Gosh, the rest of the world is so weird."
> (Of course, that Americans are cooler than the rest of the world goes
> without saying; in fact, to point it out would imply the possibility
> that this state of affairs could change, so it's best not to.)

It's very simple: most Americans don't really believe that the rest of
the world exists.  There's a place down south of Texas where farm
labor comes from, and the fifty-first state up north of the Great
Lakes is a good place to shop, but that's it, really.

--
Mark
[[User:Carnildo]]


from_name: Kirill Lokshin

body:
On 10/4/06, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_privacy
>
> It's all US POV. It's not immediately clear how to remedy this. I know
> de: has templates for country-centric POV, does en:?

{{Globalize/USA}}

--
Kirill Lokshin


body:
On 10/3/06, Ian Woollard <ian.woollard at gmail.com> wrote:
> Right. So consider a paragraph including a reference that gets cut out
> and turned into its own article. And you put a very brief summary
> sentence where the paragraph used to go, and you link to the new
> article.
>
> Problem: the number of references in the original article just went
> down by 1. Are you seriously saying that we really need to come up
> with another reference for the sentence? The actual reference is still
> there in the new article and it is surrounded by text that it
> justifies.

Well, is the statement (if not necessarily the original text) that was
referenced still present in the summary article or not?  If it is,
just leave the reference in place (in addition to copying it to the
new article, of course); there's nothing wrong, per se, with
duplicated references.

You can, of course, do a number of other things:

1. Add a footnote that says something like "For sources corroborating
this point, see [[New article]]."  It's not necessarily the cleanest
form of citation, but at least it gives readers and future editors an
explicit trail to the references.
2. Condense the citations.  For example, if you replace a paragraph
with five citations with a one-sentence summary, cite all five sources
for it.

--
Kirill Lokshin


from_name: Walter van Kalken

subject:
[Foundation-l] Ensuring veracity of articles based on
	print	sources

body:
James Hare wrote:

>For those books not mentioned in Google, we would of course do our best to
>compile a list. Then once the list is made, knowing Google, it would only be
>a matter of time that the list of old books would be listed on Google,
>therefore making my testing mechanism work.
>
>If we were to compile a list of these books, we'd probably have to protect
>these pages from editing to prevent misuse/fraud.
>
Apart from the english languaged world there is a whole world of books
printed in 100's of other languages and 10's of different scripts. As
soon as you look at things outside of the Western world google becomes
extremely flawed.

Waerth


from_name: Hsiang-Tai Chien

subject: [Foundation-l] Wikimania 2007

body:
Hi Anthere, sorry for the late reply since I have some daily job need to be
done. Please see my reply as HT> below.

-----Original Message-----
From: foundation-l-bounces at wikimedia.org
[mailto:foundation-l-bounces at wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Anthere
Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2006 8:03 AM
To: foundation-l at wikimedia.org
Subject: [Foundation-l] Wikimania 2007

----------

I'd like to say thank you to Hsiang-Tai Chien for his civility and that I
hope we'll do a fabulous Wikimania 2007 in Taipei.
One of the specific request I will have (which is basically the same that
the one of the past two years) is that we try to find funds to help
wikipedians to come from all over the world. We need to start looking for
such funds as soon as possible. And make this event a bridge between
continents.

HT> Thanks, and personally I will join the discussion and the organization
for Wikimania 2007 in the mail lists and also in the Taipei team more
actively. For the fund issue we are discussing with the sponsors now. And we
will need to co-work with the Foundation on this issue.

----------

I'd like to ask HT if all the chinese wikimania core team could join the
wikimania mailing list, even though it may be that some of you discuss
issues in chinese only. It is important (imho) that at least some non
chinese be involved in the organisation, as it will greatly enrich the
process.

HT> Some of members in the Taipei team already joined the Wikimania-l and
Wikimedia-l mailing lists. For example, you can see Theodoranian (as THD),
ROC and myself in this mailing list, and we also joined Wikimania-l since
the bidding result is out. And we will ask more members to join the
Wikimania-l for discussion. We welcome any non Chinese people to join us and
we would be very open for opinions and ideas because Wikimania 2007 is not
just a event for Taipei, it's a event for all Wikipedians over the world. We
understand that the bidding result might let some people down but we still
welcome them to provide ideas to us for this event sincerely.

HT> Also we are now trying to create a wiki server in Taipei so people from
other regions can know the status for the organization process immediately.
The domain address for the server is now been registered and the server
should be online soon. Once it's online I will send the notice to
Wikimania-l.

Also, I would like that all core organisers provide a little bit more
information about them, and that the role of each be defined as much as
possible. This will help identify areas where help is missing. And this
will help us identify who the Foundation should be in touch with for
various issues (for example, the Foundation (Michael) MUST be in contact
with the budget person).

Ant

HT> Yes, I will provide a rough member list now:

Project manager: Theodoranian (wp:zh:User:Theodoranian)
PR and Sponsorship: KJ (wp:zh:User:KaurJmeb) and Francis Huang (member from
Sinica Taiwan)
Contact people: Hsiang-Tai (wp:en:User:Htchien) and ROC (wp:zh:User:Roc)
Website: Alex S. H. (wp:zh:User:Alexsh), Little BTC (wp:zh:User:Littlebtc)
and GLWu
China affairs: Mingwangx (wp:zh:User:Mingwangx) and Chiao-Ching (member from
the sponsor)
Agenda: Theodoranian, Tsu-Chiang Liou (member from Sinica Taiwan) and KJ

For financial and administrative person, we are still looking for some ideal
people.

And we need the contact people in the Foundation so we can discuss and
co-work with WMF. Please advise whom we can contact with.

Thanks and best regards,
H.T.

___________________________________________________
 ??????? ? ????????????????
 http://messenger.yahoo.com.tw/


subject: [Foundation-l] Wikimania 2007


subject: [WikiEN-l] How to deal with direct requests for articles?

body:
Zephram Stark wrote:

>In this regard, one-time editors at Wikipedia have the same problem as single-use sellers at eBay: they have no established reputation. Yet, building a reputation at Wikipedia can take months once you understand the system, and years to grok the politics of the Wiki world. A person who wants to contribute something noteworthy about themselves, or make a one-time contribution on another subject, does not have the time or resources to learn the procedures or establish their reputation. There is also the problem of maintenance on a good article to make sure that it isn't vandalized or dumbed down. For these needs, increasingly more people are turning to established third-party sellers and editors for their eBay and Wikipedia service requests. For a low one-time fee, companies like ZS Wikiplacement guarantee a top quality Wikipedia article and two years of 99.9% uptime maintenance. Reputation has its rewards. Next time someone calls or writes to you about positioning
> themselves in Wikipedia, simply refer them to ZS WikiPlacement at 1.432.224.6991 (email: info at collectiveresource.com). We will determine if their desired information has a good enough chance of being considered noteworthy and verifiable. Plus, we will format the article in such a way that it is useful to the greatest amount of people (through Wiki formatting, writing the article from a neutral point of view and by placing the most noteworthy data at the top).
>
>  I hope this provides a win-win-win solution for our company, mutual customers and service personnel at Wikipedia (by reducing your workload.)
>
This proposal shows a dilightful level of ignorance.

The Wiki is about people's own contributions.  It is about the
validation of individual efforts which are in many ways more valuable
than the contents themselves.  It is about the synthesis of common
positions through our own version of peer review.

I find it hard to imagine ghost-written POVs, let alone maintaining that
POV.  The most rational part of this is that they would want their
one-time fee up front.

Ec


from_name: Guettarda

body:
On 10/4/06, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> See [[WT:BLP]]. I've been changing "negative" to "controversial",
> since controversy is the problem as I see it, and using the word
> "negative" is blatantly throwing NPOV out the window.
>
> Our pop culture articles are a wasteland of fan-maintained hagiography
> anyway. Do we need to throw NPOV out for those? See e.g.
> http://www.neilgaiman.com/journal/2006/05/what-bears-do-on-lawn.html

While it's obvious that we shouldn't leave out negative information just
because it's negative, we need to be especially careful with negative
information.  Hagiography is an article-quality issue - we aren't going to
get sued and we aren't going to damage someone's career if hagiography
stands in an article for a few days or weeks.  More importantly, hagiography
isn't different for the living or the dead defamation is.  What's unique
about Living people is that they can be harmed by what is said about them in
an article far more than dead people or mountain ranges.  So there's a very
realy reason to focus BLP on negative or potentially damaging information.

I think the best conception of BLP is "make sure that information content
clearly outweighs the harm done", not "make sure than the information is
accurate".  I'm not aware of anyone who ever lost their job because people
said nice things about them.

Ian

There's also a fair bit of Jimbomancy going on, which doesn't help.
>
>
> - d.
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


subject: [WikiEN-l] Porchesia

body:
geni wrote:

>On 10/3/06, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>{{not verified}} if it's under a few days old, {{unreferenced}} if it's over.
>>
>>
>Problem is that people would rather ah read about dancing pigs. Well
>that an the issue that the various cleanup lists are insanely
>backloged.
>
The ones who believe an article about dancing pigs may have problems
that are beyond the scope of this mailing list.

Ec


from_name: David Gerard

subject: [WikiEN-l] Porchesia

body:
On 03/10/06, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 10/3/06, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:

> > {{not verified}} if it's under a few days old, {{unreferenced}} if it's over.

> Problem is that people would rather ah read about dancing pigs. Well
> that an the issue that the various cleanup lists are insanely
> backloged.

It's a clear warning to readers as well; and something for the editors
to fix if they care.

- d.


from_name: charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com

body:
Zephram Stark wrote

> A person who wants to contribute something noteworthy about themselves, or make a one-time contribution on another subject, does not have the time or resources to learn the procedures or establish their reputation.

They can of course ask. I have been dealing offline by email with a professor in his 80s, who falls exactly into the category.

Charles

-----------------------------------------
Email sent from www.ntlworld.com
Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software
Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information


from_name: Sean Barrett

subject: [WikiEN-l] *spork*

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

Jason Potkanski stated for the record:

> Save the holy verses for religious texts and rhetoric for dev/null .
> On Wikipedia, sane consensus-built uniform policy pages please.
>
> -jtp

This message will serve as declaration of my intent to ignore with
extreme prejudice all "sane consensus-built uniform policy pages" the
moment they interfere with building an encyclopedia.

- --
 Sean Barrett     | Madness takes its toll.
 sean at epoptic.com | Please have exact change.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFFJA52MAt1wyd9d+URApbMAJ9C3nv/b6tkmIQIRlQZExvmjsjPkACeIQ0j
JHtUSIHxdoJ77GpQXK5ZmqI=
=gWeH
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


from_name: Jay R. Ashworth

body:
On Wed, Oct 04, 2006 at 02:01:51AM -0400, Simetrical wrote:
> On 10/3/06, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
> > "Don't Install Mediawiki - PBwiki.com - We can host your wiki
> > securely, backed up and guarded 24/7."
> >
> > yay!
>
> Cute.  I'm pretty sure that's against Google policy, though: "If your
> ad text contains competitive language regarding other companies,
> support for this claim must be displayed on the landing page for your
> AdWords ad."

That's not negative to *mediawiki*.... it's negative to *installing*.

No?

[ looks at website ]

Oh; no, I see they're not hosting MediaWiki as I'd inferred they
might be.  Yep; sounds like Simetrical's right, unless their argument
is the one I just got done making.

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

	"That's women for you; you divorce them, and 10 years later,
	  they stop having sex with you."  -- Jennifer Crusie; _Fast_Women_


from_name: Nathaniel

body:
On 10/4/06, Ian Woollard <ian.woollard at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> In my view, sourcing each article like it is a standalone entity is a
> throwback to the dead-tree encyclopedia where cross-referencing is
> very painful indeed. With hypertexting it is quite possible to
> construct an article that doesn't suffer for lack of references at all
> (or very few)- because each paragraph summarises the position of other
> article(s) and links to them. The linked-to articles contain numerous
> references supporting the summary and their own article.

I prefer to think that Wikipedia content is not limited to use on the
internet--if I want to print out an article for personal use or for
distribution, I don't want to have to print out every wikilinked article as
well.  There have also been attempts to turn wikipedia articles into books
(WikiReaders, etc.); these would all be unsourced to some extent unless
every article that was wikified in the summary article (and probably several
more levels, since there are different levels of "summary") is included.

Furthermore, putting refences on the most specific articles puts the burden
on the reader to go and find the sources of the information found in the
summary articles.  Sometimes it might not be clear--for example, if in the
[[Welding]] article I'm talking about welding power supplies used in arc
welding, should the reader go to [[welding power supply]] for the sources or
to [[arc welding]]?  Or both?  Unless there's a consistent system for this
(which I doubt is possible), the reader will not easily find the citation.
And what's the point of a citation if the reader can't find it?

Nathaniel


from_name: Will

body:
Focusing on one topic is rather suspect (in this case, Scientology), and the
comments do tread close to attacks, Still, it wasn't "vandalism" in it's
strictest sense, making this very difficult to place.

On 03/10/06, Gay Muslim <queeran at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:ScienoSitter
>
> Step 1: Naconkantari blocks the user indefinitely, claiming it is a
> "vandalism only" account.
> A quick look through the user's contributions shows that this is
> absolutely
> not the case.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/ScienoSitter
>
> Step 2: The user requests an unblock. Naconkantari responds by HIMSELF
> removing the unblock template.
> Step 3: The user requests an unblock. A user who the user was involved in
> a
> content dispute with (by the username of OmicronPersei8) REMOVES THE
> UNBLOCK
> REQUEST.
>
> Step 4: The users requests an unblock. Naconkantari AGAIN removes the
> unblock template himself.
>
> Step 5: An admin by the name of "Mr. Lefty" locks the user's talk page for
> "template abuse". Note that up to this point, all the user has done is put
> back a template wrongfully removed by (a) the blocking admin who was also
> involved in the dispute and (b) a non-admin user who not only was ALSO
> involved in the dispute, but has no right to remove the template.
>
> Result? Naconkantari's abuse of power successfully hidden, user completely
> deprived of their right to a fair and impartial look at the circumstances
> of
> Naconkantari's abusive indefinite block.
>
> This isn't the first time Naconkantari's acted like this, either. User
> Xvidme is blocked as a "sockpuppet of NoLongerScieno" even though
> NoLongerScieno's block is "indefinite" because Naconkantari thinks it
> violates the username standards.
>
> Isn't it great how admins get away with this all the time? You wonder why
> people think there's a cabal? THIS KIND OF SHIT IS WHY.
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: Jason Potkanski

subject: [WikiEN-l] *spork*

body:
On 10/2/06, Nick Boalch <n.g.boalch at durham.ac.uk> wrote:
> David Gerard wrote:
> > Someone's trying to cure [[WP:IAR]] with instruction creep again.
> > They're already trying to tell people who think the change is
> > ridiculous not to intrude on the process. Pick today's process!
>
> I think this is probably something cyclical:
>
>   1) IAR starts short and simple;
>
>   2) IAR gets expanded by people trying to be helpful;
>
>   3) IAR gets further expanded by people adding exceptions and
>      corollories to the previous additions;
>
>   4) IAR becomes a hideous monstrosity;
>
>   5) someone sane comes along and makes it short and simple again;
>
>   6) we have a big bunfight about what the role of IAR is, generally
>      vastly complicated by people who don't understand what the point
>      of it is and are resistant to having it explained to them;
>
>   7) see (1)
>
> The 'Brainstorming' page appears to be a rather more organised attempt
> at step (2), but I can't see that it has any realistic chance of
> breaking the cycle.
>
> Some Wikipedians always seem to want to artificially restrict IAR with
> examples, procedures and so on, because they are worried that 'IAR will
> be abused'. What I think we need to remind these people of frequently is
> that it really doesn't matter all that much if IAR *does* get 'abused'
> (whatever that is taken to mean), since this is still a Wiki and almost
> any change is trivially undoable.
>

As the creator of the brainstorming page, I must first apologize for
dare thinking about tinkering with the anarchist's prime directive.

The policy is a philosophical policy, not a literal one. I don't
expect the average wikipedia editor to understand philosophy. It is
much harder to explain than NPOV and NPOV goes to great lengths to
explain it.

Leaving IAR as a piece of scripture is unacceptable. When looking at
religious text, most people do not take the bible literally but
figuratively. We can not just say it has "deep and subtle meaning," we
must also offer a context that guides a reader to make their own
conclusions.

This isn't "instruction creep" ... it is basic education.

Save the holy verses for religious texts and rhetoric for dev/null .
On Wikipedia, sane consensus-built uniform policy pages please.

-jtp


from_name: MacGyverMagic/Mgm

body:
That's probably something for WP:ANI.
I haven't looked into the details, but it appears clear to me that unblock
requests should be investigated by an impartial admin. Not the one that did
the block in the first place.

Mgm

On 10/3/06, Gay Muslim <queeran at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:ScienoSitter
>
> Step 1: Naconkantari blocks the user indefinitely, claiming it is a
> "vandalism only" account.
> A quick look through the user's contributions shows that this is
> absolutely
> not the case.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/ScienoSitter
>
> Step 2: The user requests an unblock. Naconkantari responds by HIMSELF
> removing the unblock template.
> Step 3: The user requests an unblock. A user who the user was involved in
> a
> content dispute with (by the username of OmicronPersei8) REMOVES THE
> UNBLOCK
> REQUEST.
>
> Step 4: The users requests an unblock. Naconkantari AGAIN removes the
> unblock template himself.
>
> Step 5: An admin by the name of "Mr. Lefty" locks the user's talk page for
> "template abuse". Note that up to this point, all the user has done is put
> back a template wrongfully removed by (a) the blocking admin who was also
> involved in the dispute and (b) a non-admin user who not only was ALSO
> involved in the dispute, but has no right to remove the template.
>
> Result? Naconkantari's abuse of power successfully hidden, user completely
> deprived of their right to a fair and impartial look at the circumstances
> of
> Naconkantari's abusive indefinite block.
>
> This isn't the first time Naconkantari's acted like this, either. User
> Xvidme is blocked as a "sockpuppet of NoLongerScieno" even though
> NoLongerScieno's block is "indefinite" because Naconkantari thinks it
> violates the username standards.
>
> Isn't it great how admins get away with this all the time? You wonder why
> people think there's a cabal? THIS KIND OF SHIT IS WHY.
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


body:
On 04/10/06, MacGyverMagic/Mgm <macgyvermagic at gmail.com> wrote:

> That's probably something for WP:ANI.
> I haven't looked into the details, but it appears clear to me that unblock
> requests should be investigated by an impartial admin. Not the one that did
> the block in the first place.

That's Enviroknot, on whom consensus is that he can just feck off.

- d.


body:
On 04/10/06, Guy Chapman aka JzG <guy.chapman at spamcop.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Oct 2006 18:13:04 -0500, "Richard Holton"
> <richholton at gmail.com> wrote:

> >Process, like so many things, is not inherently bad. It's the abuse of
> >process that causes problems.

> Actually the real evil is slavish adherence to process in the absence
> of the ever-elusive Clue.  Wiki-process exists to guide and inform,
> not to instruct, and far too many people fail to understand this.

It's an easy error to make - many a considerate editor will come here,
read up on the policies and guidelines and words and words and PAGES
AND PAGES of stuff and try to make sense of it all. Do they know which
way is up without a guide in the face of an incoherent morass of
millions of words of policies and guidelines? Of course they don't.

- d.


from_name: Stephen Streater

subject: [WikiEN-l] List of banned books

body:
On 3 Oct 2006, at 19:01, Mark Wagner wrote:

> On 10/2/06, Kim van der Linde <kim at kimvdlinde.com> wrote:
>> MacGyverMagic/Mgm wrote:
>>> Wikipedia:Cleanup Taskforce?
>>> Have them remove any uncited crap.
>>> If ALA 2000 is a specific list with set entries, remove anything
>>> that
>>> shouldn't be there.
>>> Be bold!
>>
>> That would amount to deleting around 90% of the article as
>> unsourced........
>>
>
> That's what I did to get [[List of unusual personal names]] under
> control.  Since then, I've been reverting any addition that doesn't
> cite sources showing that (1) there exists a person with this name,
> and (2) the name is considered unusual.

My (Japanese) niece has the longest name
in Japanese history. There are various reasons
for this, which I won't go into, but what would
you like to see as a citable source for this?


subject: [WikiEN-l] List of banned books

body:
On 2 Oct 2006, at 20:35, geni wrote:

> On 10/2/06, Kim van der Linde <kim at kimvdlinde.com> wrote:
>> The [[List of banned books]] is a mess, and the way people have added
>> challenged books to the list (ALA_2000 entries) and the clogging
>> up with
>> many doubtful entries (just listed without explanations etc) has
>> made it
>> the target of creationists who try to get a book listed that a
>> book that
>> they claim is banned, but which in fact is far from that (if their
>> rational holds, the bible is banned book).
>>
>
> I would not be suprised to find that the bible has been banned at some
> point in histoty.

Like today in Saudi Arabia, for example.


body:
On 4 Oct 2006, at 10:02, Guy Chapman aka JzG wrote:

> On Tue, 3 Oct 2006 18:13:04 -0500, "Richard Holton"
> <richholton at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Process, like so many things, is not inherently bad. It's the
>> abuse of
>> process that causes problems.
>
> Actually the real evil is slavish adherence to process in the absence
> of the ever-elusive Clue.  Wiki-process exists to guide and inform,
> not to instruct, and far too many people fail to understand this.

The only way to find out is to be around for a bit.

Having a list of gurus would be useful. Even
keeping tabs on a few talk pages (such as
Guy's) is very educational.


body:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_privacy

It's all US POV. It's not immediately clear how to remedy this. I know
de: has templates for country-centric POV, does en:?

- d.


subject: [Foundation-l] Wikimania 2007

body:
Hi Anthere, sorry for the late reply since I have some daily job need to be
done. Also I just have some mail server issue with Yahoo so my last reply to
you is lost. I wish this one can make it to the mailing list. :(

OK, please see my reply as HT> below.

-----Original Message-----
From: foundation-l-bounces at wikimedia.org
[mailto:foundation-l-bounces at wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Anthere
Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2006 8:03 AM
To: foundation-l at wikimedia.org
Subject: [Foundation-l] Wikimania 2007

----------

I'd like to say thank you to Hsiang-Tai Chien for his civility and that I
hope we'll do a fabulous Wikimania 2007 in Taipei.
One of the specific request I will have (which is basically the same that
the one of the past two years) is that we try to find funds to help
wikipedians to come from all over the world. We need to start looking for
such funds as soon as possible. And make this event a bridge between
continents.

HT> Thanks, and personally I will join the discussion and the organization
for Wikimania 2007 in the mail lists; I will also participate in the Taipei
team more actively. Although we have a large amount of local sponsorships,
it would always be better if more funds on travel scholarships are
available. The Taipei team is also discussing sponsorship details with China
Airlines (flag carrier of ROC on Taiwan) for deeply discounted tickets.
China Airlines serves many cities in North America and Europe, including Los
Angeles, New York, San Francisco, Dallas, Houston, Seattle, Vancouver,
Amsterdam, Frankfurt, Rome, Vienna, and others. We will work closely with
the Foundation in the coordination of sponsorships.

----------

I'd like to ask HT if all the chinese wikimania core team could join the
wikimania mailing list, even though it may be that some of you discuss
issues in chinese only. It is important (imho) that at least some non
chinese be involved in the organisation, as it will greatly enrich the
process.

HT> Some of Taipei team members have already joined the Wikimania-l and
Wikimedia-l mailing lists. We did not participate much in the previous
discussions on Wikimania Taipei because there were too many emotional
comments and invalid questions, and the team was already very busy with the
preparation of the conference. We will ask more members to join the
Wikimania-l for serious discussions on the conference. We welcome any
non-Chinese people to join us and we would be very open for opinions and
ideas because Wikimania 2007 is not just an event for Taipei, but an event
for all Wikimedians over the world. We understand that the bidding result
might let some people feel down but we still sincerely welcome them to
provide constructive ideas for this event.

HT> We will start organizing the Wikimania 2007 page on meta soon, and use
it as a platform for relevant discussions. We have also registered domain
name wikimania.tw for use by Wikimania 2007.

Also, I would like that all core organisers provide a little bit more
information about them, and that the role of each be defined as much as
possible. This will help identify areas where help is missing. And this
will help us identify who the Foundation should be in touch with for
various issues (for example, the Foundation (Michael) MUST be in contact
with the budget person).

Ant

HT> Yes, I will provide a rough member list now:

Team leader: Theodoranian (meta:User:Theodoranian / wp:zh:User:Theodoranian)

Media and public relations: KJ (meta:User:KaurJmeb / wp:zh:User:KaurJmeb)
Sponsorship: KJ and Francis Huang (Academia Sinica, the national academy of
ROC on Taiwan)

English communications: Hsiang-Tai (meta:User:Htchien / wp:zh:User:Htchien),
Dodd (meta:User:Dodd / wp:zh:User:Dodd), and roc (meta:User:R.O.C /
wp:zh:User:R.O.C)

Website: Alex S. H. (meta:User:Alexsh / zh:User:Alexsh), LittleBTC
(meta:User:Littlebtc / zh:User:????B), and GLWu

Program: Theodoranian, Tsu-Chiang Liou (Academia Sinica), and KJ

For financial matters, we are still looking for the ideal person.

At the same time, we would like the Board appoint a contact person for us so
we can coordinate lots of matters with the Board.

Thanks and best regards,
H.T.

___________________________________________________
 ??????? ? ????????????????
 http://messenger.yahoo.com.tw/


subject: [Foundation-l] Wikimania 2007


body:
On 04/10/06, Richard Holton <richholton at gmail.com> wrote:

> The controversies on Wikipedia seem to involve processes where judgment is
> required, and you can't automate judgment.

The hard part is how to get across that that last isn't a bug.

- d.


body:
See [[WT:BLP]]. I've been changing "negative" to "controversial",
since controversy is the problem as I see it, and using the word
"negative" is blatantly throwing NPOV out the window.

Our pop culture articles are a wasteland of fan-maintained hagiography
anyway. Do we need to throw NPOV out for those? See e.g.
http://www.neilgaiman.com/journal/2006/05/what-bears-do-on-lawn.html

There's also a fair bit of Jimbomancy going on, which doesn't help.

- d.


body:
On 04/10/06, Oskar Sigvardsson <oskarsigvardsson at gmail.com> wrote:

> Figured it was something like that ;) Can we kick him from the list
> then, please?

In fact, his morphing email addresses were the reason new subscribers
started moderated ...

- d.


body:
On 04/10/06, Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote:
> David Gerard wrote:

> >be (e.g. for indie rock). There's a whole world between 1923 and 1995
> >in that category.

> Don't despair!  If we wait long enough for them to go into the public
> domain they can be added to Wikisource.

In the US? Shirley you jest!

- d.


body:
On 04/10/06, Mike O <mikeo at operamail.com> wrote:
> From: "David Gerard" <dgerard at gmail.com>

> > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Today%27s_featured_article/October_2006
> > > If I edit that page I see the code below (among lots of other code)
> > > {{Wikipedia:Today's featured article/October 1, 2006}} <br clear="all">

> > The {{ }} includes the article inside the double braces. [[ ]] makes a
> > link, {{ }} does an inclusion.

> I familiar enough with MediaWiki to readlize that :-)
> Where do the inclusions come from, how does one schedule featured articles to appear? Etc... I tried tracing templates but couldn't find the right ones.

User:Raul654 picks the front page feature and writes an intro text,
which ideally is the intro section of the article, and a pic and puts
them into that day's template, with about a week's worth created ahead
of time. The template is then included in the front page using a date
variable as part of the name of the template being called, which picks
up the pre-populated template for that day.

- d.


from_name: Ian Woollard

body:
On 04/10/06, Jimmy Wales <jwales at wikia.com> wrote:
> Sorry for top posting, but I just wanted to say that I agree with Daniel
> completely here.  Sources are critical.

Agreed, But should we be sourcing the *wikipedia*, or should we be
sourcing the *article*?

Because that's not the same thing.

In my view, sourcing each article like it is a standalone entity is a
throwback to the dead-tree encyclopedia where cross-referencing is
very painful indeed. With hypertexting it is quite possible to
construct an article that doesn't suffer for lack of references at all
(or very few)- because each paragraph summarises the position of other
article(s) and links to them. The linked-to articles contain numerous
references supporting the summary and their own article.

And this style of article is very useful for people to learn a new
area- the summary article is generally a lot easier to read than one
with the detailed, referenced articles. But right now, a readable
summary article cannot reach FA, because it doesn't have enough
references!!!

Whilst you *can* duplicate information around the wikipedia; that
makes the wikipedia more brittle- for example when something changes,
you would find it hard to track down all the changes that need to be
made.

So the basic unit of a hypertext encyclopedia is not the article, it's
the encyclopedia. In a hypertext entity like the wikipedia, I think we
need to source the *wikipedia*, not the article.

> --Jimbo

--
-Ian Woollard

"Victory can be perceived but not created."
For your own security, the Department of Homeland Security is watching you.


from_name: Matt Brown

body:
On 10/4/06, Mark Gallagher <m.g.gallagher at student.canberra.edu.au> wrote:
> A relevant quotation: "Remember, in Italy they drive on the wrong side
> of the road."

Um, but Italy drives on the same side of the road as the US does.
That statement would have to have been uttered by a resident of a
nation that drives on the left.

-Matt


from_name: Alphax (Wikipedia email)

body:
David Gerard wrote:
> On 04/10/06, Ian Woollard <ian.woollard at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I would strongly argue that we need far, far *less* references than
>> the Encyclopedia Britannica due to the hypertext linking in the
>> wikipedia.
>> What hypertexting means is that the references tend to get pushed down
>> to daughter nodes on particular topics, and you end up with summary
>> articles with few references that internally refer to other articles.
>> In Brittanica I bet that the references are duplicated throughout the
>> Encyclopedia giving an artificially high reference count.
>> We need to get away from encyclopedia envy and do the right things for
>> the wikipedia.
>
>
> Hmmmm. Articles get refactored a *lot* around here, though. I've put
> the same reference in several articles as needed on the principle that
> more good references are better than not enough, and we can't presume
> an article will be viewed as part of Wikipedia. I've turned [[Xenu]]
> into a handbill, for instance, and been very glad the references were
> *right there*. Mind you, that article needs to be referenced to the
> hilt for the sheer "wtf" factor, but anyway.
>
> Semi-tangentially, I'm wondering how to properly reference [[Fork
> (software)]]. It's at about a 2003 or 2004 level of quality -
> "everyone in the field knows this stuff" - but needs more for 2006.
>

Sadly, I think we may be ahead of the dead-tree world on stuff like this
and references are hard to come by. Online references would probably
reference us in return and we end up being self-referential...

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

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 569 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20061004/dda654da/attachment.pgp


from_name: Oskar Sigvardsson

body:
On 10/4/06, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 04/10/06, MacGyverMagic/Mgm <macgyvermagic at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > That's probably something for WP:ANI.
> > I haven't looked into the details, but it appears clear to me that unblock
> > requests should be investigated by an impartial admin. Not the one that did
> > the block in the first place.
>
>
> That's Enviroknot, on whom consensus is that he can just feck off.

Figured it was something like that ;) Can we kick him from the list
then, please?

--Oskar


body:
On 10/4/06, Jimmy Wales <jwales at wikia.com> wrote:
<snip>
> Instead we say "Trust
> us, we cite our sources, we use rational arguments, we write clearly and
> neutrally, and we show our working."

Somebody should put that on a bumber-sticker. Sums up wikipedia perfectly.

--Oskar


body:
On 10/4/06, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 04/10/06, Oskar Sigvardsson <oskarsigvardsson at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Figured it was something like that ;) Can we kick him from the list
> > then, please?
>
>
> In fact, his morphing email addresses were the reason new subscribers
> started moderated ...

I remember those days fondly :)


from_name: Guy Chapman aka JzG

body:
On Mon, 2 Oct 2006 00:50:11 +0100, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:

>If admins are going to operate outside the system it hardly seems
>acceptable to comunicate to those they effect as if they were part of
>such a sytem. No statements about personalised deletions should be
>personalised in term.

That's begging the question. In what way is deleting uncited,
unverifiable, unimportant, often vanity content "working outside the
process"?

Guy (JzG)
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JzG


references:
<20061001102339.GEME11710.aamtaout03-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@smtp.ntlworld.com>
	<2785i2lg91mmjmcqutc9an8l7vug6sr8m5@4ax.com>
	<fbad4e140610031545i7ed1c999g3cb403b8dfccb49a@mail.gmail.com>
	<4a37983b0610031613l279b49c5x4018e139d7550a05@mail.gmail.com>
	<a3u6i25e762e3nfooibjuo3vsia5uve0gp@4ax.com>
	<fbad4e140610040650g8bd7d32icd885ad5e5861674@mail.gmail.com>

body:
On Wed, 4 Oct 2006 14:50:52 +0100, "David Gerard" <dgerard at gmail.com>
wrote:

>It's an easy error to make - many a considerate editor will come here,
>read up on the policies and guidelines and words and words and PAGES
>AND PAGES of stuff and try to make sense of it all. Do they know which
>way is up without a guide in the face of an incoherent morass of
>millions of words of policies and guidelines? Of course they don't.

Not disputed.  The trouble is that most of the stuff tells you what
Wikipedia is *not* about, rather than what it *is* about.

Guy (JzG)
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JzG


subject: [WikiEN-l] List of banned books

body:
On 04/10/06, Stephen Streater <sbstreater at mac.com> wrote:

> My (Japanese) niece has the longest name
> in Japanese history. There are various reasons
> for this, which I won't go into, but what would
> you like to see as a citable source for this?

Third-party verification that this is actually noteworthy to anyone, at least.

- d.


from_name: geni

references:
<20061001095851.QEQL23938.aamtaout02-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@smtp.ntlworld.com>
	<54a44a8b0610010301n2d893236l8e088fabb9dbfeb2@mail.gmail.com>
	<451FF94C.7020908@wikia.com>
	<f80608430610011650q264a83f3vcc7207bb9cb67cd8@mail.gmail.com>
	<qqn7i294cu6k5p6isfcrhgeff8j0il168d@4ax.com>

body:
On 10/4/06, Guy Chapman aka JzG <guy.chapman at spamcop.net> wrote:
> That's begging the question. In what way is deleting uncited,
> unverifiable, unimportant, often vanity content "working outside the
> process"?
>
> Guy (JzG)

Who are you to judge what is unimportant? We have verious processes
for deletion for exactly that reason.

--
geni


from_name: Jimmy Wales

subject: [WikiEN-l] List of banned books

body:
Kim van der Linde wrote:
> The [[List of banned books]] is a mess, and the way people have added
> challenged books to the list (ALA_2000 entries) and the clogging up with
> many doubtful entries (just listed without explanations etc) has made it
> the target of creationists who try to get a book listed that a book that
> they claim is banned, but which in fact is far from that (if their
> rational holds, the bible is banned book).
>
> Could some people deal with this list?

I was just chatting with someone about this page the other day.  Part of
the problem is that the ALA puts out a very melodramatic list each year
for "Banned Books Week".  Upon close inspection, the books are very
seldom "banned" books.  They have sometimes been removed from school
reading lists for stupid reasons, but still perfectly well available in
the school library, etc.


subject: [WikiEN-l] List of banned books

body:
Kim van der Linde wrote:
> That would amount to deleting around 90% of the article as unsourced........

Go for it!

--Jimbo


from_name: Michael Billington

subject:
[Wikipedia-l] Reports of AFP using Wikipedia content without
	attribution

body:
On 10/4/06, Mathias Schindler <mathias.schindler at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I will update or correct anything there. Feel free to translate the
> text or refer to it.
>
Somebody say translate? Here we are, translated from German to English via
Google:

http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fmathias-schindler.de%2Findex.php%2F2006%2F10%2F03%2Feinladung-zum-textvergleich%2F&langpair=de%7Cen&hl=en&ie=UTF8<http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%253A%252F%252Fmathias-schindler.de%252Findex.php%252F2006%252F10%252F03%252Feinladung-zum-textvergleich%252F&langpair=de%257Cen&hl=en&ie=UTF8>

--Michael Billington


from_name: Krishna Pagadala

subject: [Wikitech-l] Wikipedia Mirror

body:
At the following website, where I am trying to create a mirror (most of it works, thanks to the feedback/pointers from this mailing list),

http://freeknowledge.dyndns.org/index.php/Remote_control_frequencies

I see these errors on the right hand side.

Remote Control Frequenices
Background information

Origin	Illinois

Genre(s)	IDM Trip Hop Hip Hop

Years active	2000-Present

Label(s)	The Secret Life Of Sound

Website	Official site

Members

R-Rock under the alias Kaptain Nemo

How can this be fixed?

Thanks
Krishna

=====================================
Misinterpreting Copyright by Richard Stallman
"Die Gedanken Sind Frei": Free Software and the Struggle for Free Thought by Eben Moglen mp3 ogg
Free Knowledge blog

.

---------------------------------
Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls.  Great rates starting at 1?/min.


from_name: charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com

body:
Guettarda wrote

<snip>

>More importantly, hagiography
> isn't different for the living or the dead [-] defamation is.

The dead work more miracles, AFAIK. There is also the odd thing about writers, particularly, whose reputation dies with them, which is illogical if it was based on what they wrote.

Neither of these is really the problem with [[Bananarama]], of course.

Charles

-----------------------------------------
Email sent from www.ntlworld.com
Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software
Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information


from_name: Aphaia

subject: [Foundation-l] Wikimania 2007

body:
On 10/3/06, Anthere <Anthere9 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> I'd like to ask HT if all the chinese wikimania core team could join the
> wikimania mailing list, even though it may be that some of you discuss
> issues in chinese only. It is important (imho) that at least some non
> chinese be involved in the organisation, as it will greatly enrich the
> process.

Even before the winner city was decided, I was contacted by a member
of Chinese team to help inviting speakers from Japan. I understood
this request they would have liked me as non Chinese to be involved
program organization. I believe some other non Chinese editors had a
similar contact.

As Transcom member, I would like also to know who of Chinese team will
be interested in translation coordinations. Personally I think it
would be better one of Chinese team will care for translation in
general and one additional coordinator collaborate with him or her.
Since there are many good translators in Chinese speaking community,
not only zh-en but also zh-de, zh-ru and so on (I don't know zh-fr
translator(s) yet though), it will make a sense some language versions
are generated directly from Chinese versions in case Chinese is the
original. And then native speaker copyediting will be helpful.
Translation and website setting up began on the mid March in past two
conferences, we have enough time find such a coordinator, but if
Chinese team have a clear plan, it will be nice for us all to know
about that.

--
Kizu Naoko
  Wikiquote: http://wikiquote.org
  * vox populi, vox dei *


subject: [Foundation-l] Wikimania 2007


subject: [WikiEN-l] Porchesia

body:
On 10/4/06, Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote:
> The ones who believe an article about dancing pigs may have problems
> that are beyond the scope of this mailing list.
>
> Ec

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

People are equaly likely to ignore any warnings when it comes to text
being verified or not.

--
geni


from_name: Daniel R. Tobias

body:
On 5 Oct 2006 at 01:11, Mark Gallagher
<m.g.gallagher at student.canberra.edu.au> wrote:

> Tell an American that he does something differently from the rest of the
> world, and it's a case of, "Gosh, the rest of the world is so weird."

That's because the rest of the world *is* so weird!

--
== Dan ==
Dan's Mail Format Site: http://mailformat.dan.info/
Dan's Web Tips: http://webtips.dan.info/
Dan's Domain Site: http://domains.dan.info/


from_name: David Gerard

subject: [WikiEN-l] Porchesia

body:
On 04/10/06, Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote:
> geni wrote:

> >Problem is that people would rather ah read about dancing pigs. Well
> >that an the issue that the various cleanup lists are insanely
> >backloged.

> The ones who believe an article about dancing pigs may have problems
> that are beyond the scope of this mailing list.

Hey, [[Dancing pigs]] is a great article!

- d.


from_name: Richard Holton

body:
On 10/4/06, Daniel R. Tobias <dan at tobias.name> wrote:
>
> On 5 Oct 2006 at 01:11, Mark Gallagher
> <m.g.gallagher at student.canberra.edu.au> wrote:
>
> > Tell an American that he does something differently from the rest of the
> > world, and it's a case of, "Gosh, the rest of the world is so weird."
>
> That's because the rest of the world *is* so weird!

Oh, come on. The rest of the world isn't really *weird*. The rest of the
world is just *foreign*!

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


from_name: Hsiang-Tai Chien

subject: [Foundation-l] Wikimania 2007

body:
Hi Anthere, sorry for the late reply since I have some daily job need to be done. Also I just have some mail server issue with Yahoo now so my last 2 posts are lost. I wish this one can make it to the mailing list. :(

OK, please see my reply as HT> below.

-----Original Message-----
From: foundation-l-bounces at wikimedia.org [mailto:foundation-l-bounces at wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Anthere
Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2006 8:03 AM
To: foundation-l at wikimedia.org
Subject: [Foundation-l] Wikimania 2007

----------

I'd like to say thank you to Hsiang-Tai Chien for his civility and that I hope we'll do a fabulous Wikimania 2007 in Taipei.
One of the specific request I will have (which is basically the same that the one of the past two years) is that we try to find funds to help wikipedians to come from all over the world. We need to start looking for such funds as soon as possible. And make this event a bridge between continents.

HT> Thanks, and personally I will join the discussion and the organization for Wikimania 2007 in the mail lists; I will also participate in the Taipei team more actively. Although we have a large amount of local sponsorships, it would always be better if more funds on travel scholarships are available. The Taipei team is also discussing sponsorship details with China Airlines (flag carrier of ROC on Taiwan) for deeply discounted tickets. China Airlines serves many cities in North America and Europe, including Los Angeles, New York, San Francisco, Dallas, Houston, Seattle, Vancouver, Amsterdam, Frankfurt, Rome, Vienna, and others. We will work closely with the Foundation in the coordination of sponsorships.

----------

I'd like to ask HT if all the chinese wikimania core team could join the wikimania mailing list, even though it may be that some of you discuss issues in chinese only. It is important (imho) that at least some non chinese be involved in the organisation, as it will greatly enrich the process.

HT> Some of Taipei team members have already joined the Wikimania-l and Wikimedia-l mailing lists. We did not participate much in the previous discussions on Wikimania Taipei because there were too many emotional comments and invalid questions, and the team was already very busy with the preparation of the conference. We will ask more members to join the Wikimania-l for serious discussions on the conference. We welcome any non-Chinese people to join us and we would be very open for opinions and ideas because Wikimania 2007 is not just an event for Taipei, but an event for all Wikimedians over the world. We understand that the bidding result might let some people feel down but we still sincerely welcome them to provide constructive ideas for this event.

HT> We will start organizing the Wikimania 2007 page on meta soon, and use it as a platform for relevant discussions. We have also registered domain name wikimania.tw for use by Wikimania 2007.

Also, I would like that all core organisers provide a little bit more information about them, and that the role of each be defined as much as possible. This will help identify areas where help is missing. And this will help us identify who the Foundation should be in touch with for various issues (for example, the Foundation (Michael) MUST be in contact with the budget person).

Ant

HT> Yes, I will provide a rough member list now:

Team leader: Theodoranian (meta:User:Theodoranian / wp:zh:User:Theodoranian)

Media and public relations: KJ (meta:User:KaurJmeb / wp:zh:User:KaurJmeb) Sponsorship: KJ and Francis Huang (Academia Sinica, the national academy of ROC on Taiwan)

English communications: Hsiang-Tai (meta:User:Htchien / wp:zh:User:Htchien), Dodd (meta:User:Dodd / wp:zh:User:Dodd), and roc (meta:User:R.O.C / wp:zh:User:R.O.C)

Website: Alex S. H. (meta:User:Alexsh / zh:User:Alexsh), LittleBTC (meta:User:Littlebtc / zh:User:????B), and GLWu

Program: Theodoranian, Tzu-Chiang Liou (Academia Sinica), and KJ

For financial matters, we are still looking for the ideal person.

At the same time, we would like the Board appoint a contact person for us so we can coordinate lots of matters with the Board.

Thanks and best regards,
H.T.
 ___________________________________________________
 ??????? ? ????????????????
 http://messenger.yahoo.com.tw/


subject: [Foundation-l] Wikimania 2007


from_name: Tim Starling

subject: [Wikitech-l] Change in practice: $wgDBname, wfMemcKey()

body:
Previously, memcached keys in MediaWiki were typically constructed like this:

$key = "$wgDBname:user:id:$id";

This does not work when you have more than one wiki in the same database,
which is possible with table prefixes. I have now introduced a memcached key
construction function called wfMemcKey(). It is used like this:

$key = wfMemcKey( 'user', 'id', $id );

The argument count is variable, and the arguments are concatenated with a
":" separator and an appropriate wiki-specific prefix. When there is no
table prefix, the result is the same as the old construction above. When
there is a table prefix, the result will be have a compound prefix, e.g.
"$db-$prefix:user:id$id".

Other similar uses of $wgDBname, such as identifying wikis in log entries,
should be considered deprecated. Instead, use wfWikiID(), which returns the
database name if there is no prefix, and a hyphenated identifier if there is
one.

-- Tim Starling


from_name: Simetrical

subject: [Wikitech-l] [mediawiki][bug] is_redirect not reliable

body:
On 10/4/06, Colin Delacroix <colin+news at zoy.org> wrote:
> Sorry if it is a known bug (is there a public BTS for mediawiki?).

Bug-tracker is at http://bugs.wikimedia.org/.


subject:
[Wikitech-l] mail-eater refusing mail from ctelco.net (was failure
	notice)

body:
See, that'll be yer problem: mail-eater.wikimedia.org (66.230.200.215)
doesn't like rad0.ctelco.net. But the ctelco.net server won't take a
4xx (permanent) error seriously (it's treating it like a 5xx temporary
error - see [[Bounce message]]), so keeps trying for a couple of days
before bouncing the mail.

wikitech - Fred discovered this trying to email arbcom-l. Does
mail-eater really think ctelco.net sucks, or is the breakage at the
ctelco.net end worse than just treating a 4xx as a 5xx?

- d.

On 04/10/06, Fred Bauder <fredbaud at ctelco.net> wrote:

> > Hi. This is the qmail-send program at rad0.ctelco.com.
> > I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following
> > addresses.
> > This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out.
> > <arbcom-l at Wikipedia.org>:
> > 66.230.200.215 does not like recipient.
> > ZRemote host said: 450 <rad0.ctelco.com>: Helo command rejected:
> > Host not found
> > Giving up on 66.230.200.215.
> > I'm not going to try again; this message has been in the queue too
> > long.


subject: [Wikipedia-l] [WikiEN-l] the process that isn't written

body:
On 04/10/06, Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote:

> Regretably, those who most desparately need to understand this, are the
> ones least capable of it.  For them it needs to be put in the form of a
> rule, often one with punitive consequences for failure to adhere to it.
> Perhaps being blocked for upsetting some number of people in the same
> way despite being technically correct according to the literal rules.

It was written for them as well. "Gosh darn it, you must be blocked
because we're just too stupid."

- d.