subject: [Foundation-l] Re: how you can help

body:
Erik Moeller a ?crit:
 > I see no reason for the pages not to coexist -- just as we have multiple
 > pages on the English Wikipedia pointing out articles in need of help,
 > hopefully there will be multiple pages on Meta coordinating work on
 > worthwhile projects.

Naturally. I totally agree.

 > The main difference with the Collaboration of the Week (COTW) idea is
 > that it should be featured on the individual Wikimedia projects to truly
 > bring out a large number of volunteers working on a single task in
 > multiple languages. That high level of exposure makes it necessary to
 > have a selection process, and the voting rules as used on Wikimedia COTW
 > have proven very successful for the English Wikipedia COTW.

Exactly. The two process can meet, but they are different.

 > The first WM-COTW will start on Monday; I'll send out a separate
 > announcement then and Angela and I will try to get the template into use
 > on some more Community Portals or similar pages. Any help is welcome.
 >
 > Hopefully, if the WM-COTW is successful, this will get more people
 > interested in Meta and, hence, in the [[We need your help]] page and
 > similar tasklists.
 >
 > All best,
 >
 > Erik

I hope this just as much as you.


list: wikimedia-l

source: pipermail-mbox

from_name: Anthere

subject: [Foundation-l] Re: how you can help


list: wikitech-l

subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: Wikistats for all Wikimedia projects

references:
<NMENLBGDKAFGBDHEPOBNAEMICMAA.e.p.zachte@chello.nl>	<424E30D3.8050601@yahoo.com>	<200504021304.49386@bloodgate.com>	<424ED88A.8040404@yahoo.com>
	<d2n1m7$tib$2@sea.gmane.org>

body:
Arr?te de couper les cheveux en 4 Hashar :-)

Ashar Voultoiz a ?crit:

NOW ! >)
>


subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: Problems with Special:Makesysop

body:
Pedro Fayolle a ?crit:
> D'oh. Sorry about the confusion and thanks.
>
> Pedro
>
> On Apr 2, 2005 9:15 PM, Brion Vibber <brion at pobox.com> wrote:
>
>>Pedro Fayolle wrote:
>>
>>>recently we had a new sysop election at the Spanish Wikipedia and it
>>>was a huge success. We planned to make the candidate sysop today, but
>>>there's a problem with Special:Makesysop stopping us from doing so.
>>>
>>>All we get is error this message:
>>>
>>>User "Renacimiento" could not be made into a sysop. (Did you enter the
>>>name correctly?)

It often happens with the steward interface. Sometimes, it is an issue
of first letter being capital or not. Other times, a space is left
somewhere. And sometimes, there is just no reason. I rewrite it, and
after a while, it works. Inch Allah !


list: wikien-l

from_name: Robert

subject: [WikiEN-l] Articles on *Alleged* homophobia?

body:
Suppose a new contributor comes here and decides that most
or all cases of homophobia really do not exist, and it is
just those over-sensitive gay people that caused the
article to be titled [[Homophobia]]. Would it be Ok for
them to retitle this article to [[Alleged homophobia]]?  I
would think mot.

Similarly. would it be Ok for people to start renaming our
articles such as:

[[Alleged anti-Arabism]]?

[[Alleged Islamophobia]]?

[[Allegend Persecution of Christians]]?

I would think not. Unfortunately, Firebug is trying to do
this for [[Nation of Islam and anti-Semitism]].  It seems
to me that this renaming shows bias, and violates NPOV
policy by using the title of the article to dismiss any
possibility that facts actually exist within it. It also is
totally out of line with how we name all of our other
articles.

Thus, unless we rename all of our other articles in a
similar way, this one article should not be an exception.

RK

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Personals - Better first dates. More second dates.
http://personals.yahoo.com


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Foolish policy proposal

body:
I am registered to several mailing lists which every day offer a sort of
full panel main page of what their web site proposes. Usually, the mail
proposes short paragraphs for each topic, with a link to the full size
topic on the website. For example this one : http://www.journaldunet.com/

This year, what they did and which I found great is simply that the
entire content of their main page was faked. From the big paragraph
introducing a supposingly serious article, to the little ads in the left
side corner. However, each link in the faked main page lead only to a
unique real main page where all the articles where good.

I suppose all journalists worked together to set up the absolutely
amazing collection of faked stuff, I hope they had great fun, and I
promise that it was really delightful to read.

I think that having 2 main pages during a day, one being entirely faked
and the other entirely real gives much opportunity to have a lot of fun.
Add *one* unique fake article to the real page (such as the britannica)
is another funny step, as most readers would think there is no joke
aside from the fake main page.

PS :

I will go further. I just checked on their website if they still had a
copy of the fake main page... and I discovered a sort of feedback
page... and guys, the comment I sent them by mail is mentionned on this
page !!

http://www.journaldunet.com/0504/050404poisson-avril.shtml

I wrote them "Mes pr?f?r?s du JDN et de L'Internaute : le lundi de
pentec?te en alternance en fonction du num?ro de s?curit? sociale, le
site du P?re-No?l comme exemple de site ultra rentable et les tickets
d'avion en A3. Bravo pour toutes les id?es dans tous les cas !"

I think the day *we* can both have fun AND receive feedback from our
readers telling us how much they had fun themselves, the april fool day
will be a success.

Anthere

Erik Moeller a ?crit:
> As per my earlier post - maybe for next year:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Rules_for_Fools
>
> All best,
>
> Erik


subject: [WikiEN-l] Category:Wikipedia official policy

body:
We have an article on [[Category:Wikipedia official
policy]].  There are only a few key policies that might be
regarded as "official" - that is, considered by the
founders and the vast majority of contributors as being
particularly important to the running of Wikipedia. The
articles in this category explain and give guidance on some
of these more important policies. They have either
withstood the test of time or have been adopted by
consensus or acclaimation.

I propose that it is well past time to add
[[Wikipedia:Verifiability]] to this category.  The goal of
Wikipedia is to become a complete and accurate
encyclopedia.

This policy meets all of the criteria listed on this main
article page. As I recall, it has been discussed in-depth
here, and pretty much everyone agrees that this already is
Wikipedia policy. (The only disagreement seems to be how
best to deal with people who violate it.)

As a corollary, we should add Wikipedia:Cite sources.

For discussion pro or con, let's discuss this on the
appropriate discussion page, so as to not clutter up the
Wiki-En list.

[[Category talk:Wikipedia official policy]]

Robert (RK)

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Sports - Sign up for Fantasy Baseball.
http://baseball.fantasysports.yahoo.com/


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Foolish policy proposal

body:
For those who understand french, the link to the fake main page I
mentionned earlier :
http://www.journaldunet.com/index_1er-avril.shtml


from_name: Faraaz Damji

body:
I agree.  You could say that most things are 'alleged' by some
people...alleged racism, alleged holocaust, alleged slavery, etc.

If we named all our other articles like that, then it might make sense,
but as things are right now, I'm pretty sure we just simplify all titles
to make them definitive, and indicate any uncertainties in the article.

If the contributor is suggesting that homophobia doesn't exist, then
they can put it in as a section of the article; that is, of course, if
they have enough evidence to back it up.  Similarly, if they think that
the Nation of Islam isn't anti-semitic, they should add that as a
section in the article.  IMHO, prefixing all titles with 'alleged' adds
confusion and is completely unnecessary.

-Faraaz Damji

Robert wrote:
> Suppose a new contributor comes here and decides that most
> or all cases of homophobia really do not exist, and it is
> just those over-sensitive gay people that caused the
> article to be titled [[Homophobia]]. Would it be Ok for
> them to retitle this article to [[Alleged homophobia]]?  I
> would think mot.
>
> Similarly. would it be Ok for people to start renaming our
> articles such as:
>
> [[Alleged anti-Arabism]]?
>
> [[Alleged Islamophobia]]?
>
> [[Allegend Persecution of Christians]]?
>
> I would think not. Unfortunately, Firebug is trying to do
> this for [[Nation of Islam and anti-Semitism]].  It seems
> to me that this renaming shows bias, and violates NPOV
> policy by using the title of the article to dismiss any
> possibility that facts actually exist within it. It also is
> totally out of line with how we name all of our other
> articles.
>
> Thus, unless we rename all of our other articles in a
> similar way, this one article should not be an exception.
>
>
> RK
>
>
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Personals - Better first dates. More second dates.
> http://personals.yahoo.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: Magnus Manske

subject: [WikiEN-l] Final April Fools wrap up

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

David 'DJ' Hedley schrieb:
>>In a message dated 4/2/2005 10:10:34 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
>>erik_moeller at gmx.de writes:
>>
>>As such,  I propose two simple rules for next year:
>>
>>1) There will be one  well-coordinated joke for the *outside* world,
>>Whether it's a featured  article, a press release, or anything else can
>>be decided by the cabal on  the to-be-created fools-l at wikimedia.org
>>mailing list ;-).
>>
>>2) Jokes  *within* the community are limited to the Wikipedia:, User:
>>and *Talk:  namespaces. MediaWiki:, Template:, Image: and articles are
>>off limits.  Jokes should not be overly disruptive.
>>
>>I second this.

<aol>Me too</aol>
We can use the existing mailing lists, though... :-)

> I'm not sure about this. Setting hard rules for April Fool's Day isn't good.

The very concept of an April Fool's joke already sets some rules. By
limiting its "form" on wikipedia, we can preserve order without
restraining the nature of the joke itself.

Also, we would work on *one* joke together, instead of half a dozen or
so competing ones. We're not writing multiple parallel versions of a
single article, either. Wikipedia spirit, hooray! :-)

I found the toilet paper holder joke pretty good, and showed it to some
colleagues at the lab, who also enjoyed it.
I didn't watch closely what came after that, but from what I head, we
could have done without that.

Magnus
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFCT62XCZKBJbEFcz0RAgR3AJ9ABdNoury7dxZc/vGWaAKJxTxodACfc1U5
vRojiS2IBzcJ3Rr6RI/YNPk=
=GzN5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


from_name: MacGyverMagic/Mgm

subject: [WikiEN-l] Final April Fools wrap up

body:
> >>1) There will be one  well-coordinated joke for the *outside* world,
> >>Whether it's a featured  article, a press release, or anything else can
> >>be decided by the cabal on  the to-be-created fools-l at wikimedia.org
> >>mailing list ;-).
> >>
> >>2) Jokes  *within* the community are limited to the Wikipedia:, User:
> >>and *Talk:  namespaces. MediaWiki:, Template:, Image: and articles are
> >>off limits.  Jokes should not be overly disruptive.

I third this. It's 2 simple rules that prevent things from getting
disruptive and don't block creativity.

P.S. Why are we even talking about April Fools 2 days after the event?
Do we really want Michael Snow to get overworked from writing an
article about this discussion for the Signpost?

-- MacGyverMagic


from_name: Phil Sandifer

subject: [WikiEN-l] Vile Triga and Matt Crypto.

body:
You know, I'd be a lot more inclined to give a flying fuck what you say
if you didn't make childish and personally attacking puns out of other
user's names while calling a simple pointing out of the fact that
there's an outstanding request for arbitration against you a personal
attack against you.

But since you do that, let me be the first to express regret for your
ban. It undoubtedly should have been longer.

-Snowspinner

On Apr 3, 2005, at 11:39 AM, John Bradley wrote:

> More manipulation from Matt Crypto. Strange he doesn't mention Vile
> Triga
> behaviour before now, just cuts it down to the bits that suit him.
> More typical
> dishonesty.
>
> Your msg constitues a personal attack. You've refused to accept my
> critismism, why should anyone believe you'll taken on anyone elses.
>
>> For background, you can review the problems with this user's
>> behaviour here:
>>
>> * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Irate
>> *
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#User:
>> Irate
>> * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Smoddy/Irate
>>
>> I am quite open to criticism if others judge that I've handled this
>> situation
>> badly.
>>
>> Matt
>>
>> P.S. Note that even now, this user cannot resist personal attacks in
>> the
>> subject line.
>>
>> Send instant messages to your online friends
>> http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
>> _______________________________________________
>> WikiEN-l mailing list
>> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
>> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>>
>
> 		Yours
>
> 		John Bradley
>
> Loc: 	Flat 15/22 Gambier Terrace, Liverpool, L1 7BL, UK.
> Phone:	+44 (0)151 708 7238
> Email:  john at ontobus.co.uk
> WWW:	www.ontobus.co.uk
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


subject: [WikiEN-l] Vile Triga and Matt Crypto.

body:
I don't really see a trap. I see a querrelous problem user on the brink
of getting slapped down by the arbcom... but no trap.

-Snowspinner

On Apr 3, 2005, at 11:54 AM, John Bradley wrote:

> Perhaps if you where as grown up as you think you are. You'd realise
> you
> just jumped nto the same trap, and of couse bosting about it on IRC
> doesn't
> help.
>
> From:           	Phil Sandifer <sandifer at sbcglobal.net>
> Subject:        	Re: [WikiEN-l] Vile Triga and Matt Crypto.
> Date sent:      	Sun, 3 Apr 2005 11:49:58 -0500
> To:             	English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Send reply to:  	English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> 	<mailto:wikien-l-request at Wikipedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> 	<mailto:wikien-l-request at Wikipedia.org?subject=subscribe>
>
>> You know, I'd be a lot more inclined to give a flying fuck what you
>> say
>> if you didn't make childish and personally attacking puns out of other
>> user's names while calling a simple pointing out of the fact that
>> there's an outstanding request for arbitration against you a personal
>> attack against you.
>>
>> But since you do that, let me be the first to express regret for your
>> ban. It undoubtedly should have been longer.
>>
>> -Snowspinner
>>
>> On Apr 3, 2005, at 11:39 AM, John Bradley wrote:
>>
>>> More manipulation from Matt Crypto. Strange he doesn't mention Vile
>>> Triga
>>> behaviour before now, just cuts it down to the bits that suit him.
>>> More typical
>>> dishonesty.
>>>
>>> Your msg constitues a personal attack. You've refused to accept my
>>> critismism, why should anyone believe you'll taken on anyone elses.
>>>
>>>> For background, you can review the problems with this user's
>>>> behaviour here:
>>>>
>>>> * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Irate
>>>> *
>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:
>>>> Requests_for_arbitration#User:
>>>> Irate
>>>> * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Smoddy/Irate
>>>>
>>>> I am quite open to criticism if others judge that I've handled this
>>>> situation
>>>> badly.
>>>>
>>>> Matt
>>>>
>>>> P.S. Note that even now, this user cannot resist personal attacks in
>>>> the
>>>> subject line.
>>>>
>>>> Send instant messages to your online friends
>>>> http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> WikiEN-l mailing list
>>>> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
>>>> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>>>>
>>>
>>> 		Yours
>>>
>>> 		John Bradley
>>>
>>> Loc: 	Flat 15/22 Gambier Terrace, Liverpool, L1 7BL, UK.
>>> Phone:	+44 (0)151 708 7238
>>> Email:  john at ontobus.co.uk
>>> WWW:	www.ontobus.co.uk
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> WikiEN-l mailing list
>>> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
>>> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> WikiEN-l mailing list
>> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
>> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>>
>
> 		Yours
>
> 		John Bradley
>
> Loc: 	Flat 15/22 Gambier Terrace, Liverpool, L1 7BL, UK.
> Phone:	+44 (0)151 708 7238
> Email:  john at ontobus.co.uk
> WWW:	www.ontobus.co.uk
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: Michael Snow

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Vile Triga and Matt Crypto.

body:
Phil Sandifer wrote:

> I don't really see a trap. I see a querrelous problem user on the
> brink  of getting slapped down by the arbcom... but no trap.

The reference to a trap might be seen as a troll's way of saying he just
got fed.

--Michael Snow


from_name: Rick

subject: [WikiEN-l] Final April Fools wrap up

body:
--- Mark Pellegrini <mapellegrini at comcast.net> wrote:
> To all those people who said we should let our hair
> down, that April
> Fools wouldn't really be
> so bad (it was), that it wouldn't encourage
> vandalism wasn't too much
> (it did), that people
> would do be restrained about it (they weren't), that
> it would be over by
> mid-day (it wasn't),
> and that people wouldn't revert war over something
> so lame (they did), I
> just thought I'd mention
> that the arbcom recieved a request today from
> someone blocked for
> excessively reverting
> [[2005 Britannica takeover of Wikimedia]] (yes, the
> hoax article)
>
> So thank you very much, to all those of you who
> pushed this idiotic
> idea, from those of us
> who actually have to pick up the pieces.
>
> -- Disgruntled

Hear, hear.

RickK

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


from_name: Tomer Chachamu

subject: [Wikitech-l] revision table change in HEAD

body:
On Apr 2, 2005 10:11 PM, Brion Vibber <brion at pobox.com> wrote:
> That would make it very hard to track the current revision in general,
> since we wouldn't know for sure which revision ID was the current one
> (the revision -> text mapping is now one-to-many to allow storing
> revision records for metadata changes without wastefully duplicating
> text storage).

But is this used? For reverts done by admins? For "manual" reverts
done by users? (Edited an old version, made no changes to it)

If not, are there plans to use it?


from_name: JAY JG

body:
Completely agreed as well.

>I agree.  You could say that most things are 'alleged' by some
>people...alleged racism, alleged holocaust, alleged slavery, etc.
>
>If we named all our other articles like that, then it might make sense,
>but as things are right now, I'm pretty sure we just simplify all titles
>to make them definitive, and indicate any uncertainties in the article.
>
>If the contributor is suggesting that homophobia doesn't exist, then
>they can put it in as a section of the article; that is, of course, if
>they have enough evidence to back it up.  Similarly, if they think that
>the Nation of Islam isn't anti-semitic, they should add that as a
>section in the article.  IMHO, prefixing all titles with 'alleged' adds
>confusion and is completely unnecessary.
>
>-Faraaz Damji
>
>
>Robert wrote:
> > Suppose a new contributor comes here and decides that most
> > or all cases of homophobia really do not exist, and it is
> > just those over-sensitive gay people that caused the
> > article to be titled [[Homophobia]]. Would it be Ok for
> > them to retitle this article to [[Alleged homophobia]]?  I
> > would think mot.
> >
> > Similarly. would it be Ok for people to start renaming our
> > articles such as:
> >
> > [[Alleged anti-Arabism]]?
> >
> > [[Alleged Islamophobia]]?
> >
> > [[Allegend Persecution of Christians]]?
> >
> > I would think not. Unfortunately, Firebug is trying to do
> > this for [[Nation of Islam and anti-Semitism]].  It seems
> > to me that this renaming shows bias, and violates NPOV
> > policy by using the title of the article to dismiss any
> > possibility that facts actually exist within it. It also is
> > totally out of line with how we name all of our other
> > articles.
> >
> > Thus, unless we rename all of our other articles in a
> > similar way, this one article should not be an exception.
> >
> >
> > RK
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > __________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! Personals - Better first dates. More second dates.
> > http://personals.yahoo.com
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >
>_______________________________________________
>WikiEN-l mailing list
>WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l


from_name: Angela

subject: [WikiEN-l] Trouble logging into English Wikipedia

body:
On Apr 3, 2005 1:48 PM, Richard Gallagher <richie.gallagher at gmail.com> wrote:
> Do accounts or passwords time out if not used for a certain period of time?

No. The only accounts that disappeared were the very early ones before
MediaWiki was used.

> If at all possible I would like to keep my existing account but there
> doesn't seem to be anyway I can get into it.  Do I have any recourse
> other then creating a new account and starting over?

If you can prove you really are Popsracer to the satisfaction of a
developer, you could ask for them to replace your email address in
your account so you can reset your password, at
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Non-development_tasks_for_developers

Angela.


from_name: Brion Vibber

body:
Tomer Chachamu wrote:
> On Apr 2, 2005 10:11 PM, Brion Vibber <brion at pobox.com> wrote:
>>That would make it very hard to track the current revision in general,
>>since we wouldn't know for sure which revision ID was the current one
>>(the revision -> text mapping is now one-to-many to allow storing
>>revision records for metadata changes without wastefully duplicating
>>text storage).
>
> But is this used?

At present it's used for page moves.

> For reverts done by admins? For "manual" reverts
> done by users? (Edited an old version, made no changes to it)

Todo.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 253 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20050403/49b12268/attachment.pgp>


from_name: John Bradley

subject: [WikiEN-l] Vile Triga and Matt Crypto.

body:
It looks like I have been blocked mainly at the behest of Vilet/Riga and
MattCrypto, this pair have been engaged in several weeks of attacks on
me.

Vile Riga has already had me blocked for breaking a rule I had not broken
has refused to appolgize and has in fact stated she is happy with her
activities. and countinues to state it.

My talk page now has rubbish on it, I wish to delete but cannot as I have
been blocked. Allowing wikipedia to become host to these manipulative
people who's interest on wikipedia are connected with boulstering there
own ego's rather than producing an encylopedia.

They have vandlised my VfD's and various other things. They have broken
rules left right and centre.

I believe the Wikipedia is seriously in breach of the requirments of
charities, in that it is allowing a group of people to use Wikipedia for their
own benefit and not for the objective of creating and encyclopedia.
		Yours

		John Bradley

Loc: 	Flat 15/22 Gambier Terrace, Liverpool, L1 7BL, UK.
Phone:	+44 (0)151 708 7238
Email:  john at ontobus.co.uk
WWW:	www.ontobus.co.uk


from_name: Matt R

subject: [WikiEN-l] Vile Triga and Matt Crypto.

body:
For background, you can review the problems with this user's behaviour here:

* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Irate
* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#User:Irate
* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Smoddy/Irate

I am quite open to criticism if others judge that I've handled this situation
badly.

Matt

P.S. Note that even now, this user cannot resist personal attacks in the
subject line.

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


subject: [Wikitech-l] CVS UPDATE problem

body:
Thomas Gries wrote:
> Dear ALL, I got this ugly message while updating from CVS:
>
>    "waiting for midom's lock in
> /cvsroot/wikipedia/phase3/extensions/SpamBlacklist"

Normally locks should be transient and it should go right through after
a few seconds. It's possible that the anonymous CVS mirroring copied a
lock file from the developer CVS to the anonymous CVS through a stroke
of bad timing, leaving the stale lock file on the anonymous CVS where it
didn't belong.

> Any idea, who or what is "midom" ?

midom is Domas, one of our developers.

 > and how to solve this problem immediately ?

If you see this in the future, submit a support request on Sourceforge
like this:
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1176066&group_id=1&atid=200001

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 253 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20050403/679a77ae/attachment.pgp>


subject: [WikiEN-l] Vile Triga and Matt Crypto.

body:
More manipulation from Matt Crypto. Strange he doesn't mention Vile Triga
behaviour before now, just cuts it down to the bits that suit him. More typical
dishonesty.

Your msg constitues a personal attack. You've refused to accept my
critismism, why should anyone believe you'll taken on anyone elses.

> For background, you can review the problems with this user's behaviour here:
>
> * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Irate
> * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#User:Irate
> * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Smoddy/Irate
>
> I am quite open to criticism if others judge that I've handled this situation
> badly.
>
> Matt
>
> P.S. Note that even now, this user cannot resist personal attacks in the
> subject line.
>
> Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

		Yours

		John Bradley

Loc: 	Flat 15/22 Gambier Terrace, Liverpool, L1 7BL, UK.
Phone:	+44 (0)151 708 7238
Email:  john at ontobus.co.uk
WWW:	www.ontobus.co.uk


from_name: Thomas Gries

subject: [Wikitech-l] Setup.php and $wgContLang - loadfromsession too early ?

body:
I think (but I am not fully sure) to have found a problem in setup.php which
could lead to an undefined $wgContLang object under certain circumstances; pls.
correct me if I'm wrong.

The problem can be solved by executing loadfromsession() some lines later, i.e. after the language settings. Would be nice, if anyone can have a look to it.

[1] http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1805 (for version 1.4)


subject: [WikiEN-l] Vile Triga and Matt Crypto.

body:
Perhaps if you where as grown up as you think you are. You'd realise you
just jumped nto the same trap, and of couse bosting about it on IRC doesn't
help.

From:           	Phil Sandifer <sandifer at sbcglobal.net>
Subject:        	Re: [WikiEN-l] Vile Triga and Matt Crypto.
Date sent:      	Sun, 3 Apr 2005 11:49:58 -0500
To:             	English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
Send reply to:  	English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
	<mailto:wikien-l-request at Wikipedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
	<mailto:wikien-l-request at Wikipedia.org?subject=subscribe>

> You know, I'd be a lot more inclined to give a flying fuck what you say
> if you didn't make childish and personally attacking puns out of other
> user's names while calling a simple pointing out of the fact that
> there's an outstanding request for arbitration against you a personal
> attack against you.
>
> But since you do that, let me be the first to express regret for your
> ban. It undoubtedly should have been longer.
>
> -Snowspinner
>
> On Apr 3, 2005, at 11:39 AM, John Bradley wrote:
>
> > More manipulation from Matt Crypto. Strange he doesn't mention Vile
> > Triga
> > behaviour before now, just cuts it down to the bits that suit him.
> > More typical
> > dishonesty.
> >
> > Your msg constitues a personal attack. You've refused to accept my
> > critismism, why should anyone believe you'll taken on anyone elses.
> >
> >> For background, you can review the problems with this user's
> >> behaviour here:
> >>
> >> * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Irate
> >> *
> >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#User:
> >> Irate
> >> * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Smoddy/Irate
> >>
> >> I am quite open to criticism if others judge that I've handled this
> >> situation
> >> badly.
> >>
> >> Matt
> >>
> >> P.S. Note that even now, this user cannot resist personal attacks in
> >> the
> >> subject line.
> >>
> >> Send instant messages to your online friends
> >> http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> WikiEN-l mailing list
> >> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> >> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >>
> >
> > 		Yours
> >
> > 		John Bradley
> >
> > Loc: 	Flat 15/22 Gambier Terrace, Liverpool, L1 7BL, UK.
> > Phone:	+44 (0)151 708 7238
> > Email:  john at ontobus.co.uk
> > WWW:	www.ontobus.co.uk
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

		Yours

		John Bradley

Loc: 	Flat 15/22 Gambier Terrace, Liverpool, L1 7BL, UK.
Phone:	+44 (0)151 708 7238
Email:  john at ontobus.co.uk
WWW:	www.ontobus.co.uk


from_name: Alphax

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Please let it be over...

body:
Tony Sidaway wrote:

>I have to admit, though, that I seldom enter Wikipedia by the main page,
>and when I do so I'm at work and I have images turned off.  If Mr
>Autofellatio showed his estimable pecker there, I would not have noticed.
>
>
I usually enter WP via my user page or the Reference Desk.

--
Alphax
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax
There are two kinds of people: those who say to God, 'Thy will be done,' and those to whom God says, 'All right, then, have it your way.' - C. S. Lewis


subject: [WikiEN-l] Vile Triga and Matt Crypto.

body:
John/Irate,

Don't you think it's the slightest bit odd that everyone who's weighed in on
this dispute (including the 15 or so people on the RfC, and the people on user
talk pages, the mailing list, IRC, and the admin board) has been critical of
your actions and think that you're the one out of line here? Sure, perhaps it
is plausible that me and VioletRiga are evil, power-obsessed primary-school
teachers in cahoots, but that can't be the case for *everyone* associated with
Wikipedia, right? Surely by now someone would have given their support in your
defense?

I suggest you do this: find a mate whose opinion you trust, and show them this
dispute, and ask for their honest opinion on whether you're being persecuted by
maverick ego-centric admins, or, er, not.

Matt
-- [[User:Matt Crypto]]

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


from_name: Tony Sidaway

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Final April Fools wrap up

body:
Michael Snow said:
> Erik Moeller wrote:
>
>> As such, I propose two simple rules for next year:
>>
>> 1) There will be one well-coordinated joke for the *outside* world,
>> Whether it's a featured article, a press release, or anything else can
>>  be decided by the cabal on the to-be-created fools-l at wikimedia.org
>> mailing list ;-).
>
> With the understanding that one joke may well consist of putting
> multiple joke pieces together, just as the Main Page is put together
> out  of several different pieces.

Do I have to be the one that it will be impossible to enforce this on a Wiki?


from_name: Gerard Meijssen

subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: Database backup

body:
Ashar Voultoiz wrote:

>Alfio Puglisi wrote:
>
>
>>The last database dump on download.wikimedia.org is from March 9th, almost
>>one month ago.
>>
>>Is it correct therefore that we have no backup for data written after that
>>day? Or is there some other backup strategy at the colo?
>>
>>Alfio
>>
>>
>
>We have several (three?) databases receiving content replication. So
>even if 2 servers totally crash at the same time, and 1 can not be used
>for whatever reason, we will still have 1 working copy.
>
>ASCII schema is something like:
>
>                            --> Slave #1
>                          /
>Users -> Master Database -----> Slave #2
>                          \
>                            --> Slave #3
>
>
>As for regular dumps (aka twice per week), stats generation ... I think
>we wait for a monster server (read more disk space).
>
>cheers,
>
>
Hoi,
Yes we have slaves and it is NOT a back-up strategy. The last big
database outage proved that point, we were saved by the fact that one
slave was out of action. This allowed us to restore functionality. It is
good to have slaves but when the database is corrupted you end up with
nothing. Having slaves is not an alternative for a backup.
Thanks,
  GerardM


list: wikipedia-l

from_name: modean52 at comcast.net

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Invisible Categories

body:
How about a new [ICategory:stuff with a] tag, for "I(nvisible )Category"?

James

-------------- Original message --------------

> Hi,
>
> I am wondering if it is possible to make a Category "invisible" in Wikipedia
> (and mediawiki in general). Basically, what I want to do, is create some
> pages, and link them together with a Category. These pages will have very
> little in common with each other, and the categories will be mainly "Pages
> starting with 'A' " and the like, where the useful part is having a list of
> the articles tagged like that. It'll save me (and other users) from having
> to manually maintain seperate "List" articles, yet still allow for quick
> navigation between similar articles.
>
> So, what I want, is the current Category functionality, but without the
> "[Category: Whatever]" at the bottom of the page. Possible?
>
> Regards,
> - Craig Franklin
>
>
> -------------------
> Craig Franklin
> PO Box 764
> Ashgrove, Q, 4060
> Australia
> http://www.halo-17.net - Australia's Favourite Source of Indie Music, Art,
> and Culture.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l


from_name: Christopher Larberg

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Minutemen (vigilantes) article

body:
On Apr 3, 2005 7:52 PM, Robert Brockway <rbrockway at opentrend.net> wrote:
> I think the term "Minutemen (vigilantes)" is POV as the term vigilantes
> has negative overtones in English.  I think it would be better to list the
> article under the title "The MinuteMan Project".
>
> Thoughts, comments, flames?
>
> Rob
>

I agree completely. I wasn't aware of this before, but I'll "be bold"
and make some changes. Since they claim to be engaging in nothing
other than observing and making reports to the Border Patrol,
characterizing them as "vigilantes" is biased.

--Slowking Man


list: foundation-l

from_name: Anthere

subject: [Foundation-l] Re: (fwd) Re: [WikiEN-l] Vile Triga and Matt Crypto.

body:
Sorry, but... why would Wikimedia UK receive this sort of things ????
Receive what ?

Ant

David Gerard a ?crit:
> Needless to say, I can hardly wait for UK Wikimedia to start receiving this
> sort of thing.
>
>
> - d.
>
>
>
> ----- Forwarded message from John Bradley <john at ontobus.co.uk> -----
>
> From: John Bradley <john at ontobus.co.uk>
> To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Vile Triga and Matt Crypto.
> Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2005 17:39:07 +0100
>
> More manipulation from Matt Crypto. Strange he doesn't mention Vile Triga
> behaviour before now, just cuts it down to the bits that suit him. More typical
> dishonesty.
>
> Your msg constitues a personal attack. You've refused to accept my
> critismism, why should anyone believe you'll taken on anyone elses.
>
>
>>For background, you can review the problems with this user's behaviour here:
>>
>>* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Irate
>>* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#User:Irate
>>* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Smoddy/Irate
>>
>>I am quite open to criticism if others judge that I've handled this situation
>>badly.
>>
>>Matt
>>
>>P.S. Note that even now, this user cannot resist personal attacks in the
>>subject line.
>>
>>Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
>>_______________________________________________
>>WikiEN-l mailing list
>>WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
>>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>>
>
>
> 		Yours
>
> 		John Bradley
>
> Loc: 	Flat 15/22 Gambier Terrace, Liverpool, L1 7BL, UK.
> Phone:	+44 (0)151 708 7238
> Email:  john at ontobus.co.uk
> WWW:	www.ontobus.co.uk
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
> ----- End forwarded message -----


from_name: Ray Saintonge

subject: [WikiEN-l] Classified information in Wikipedia

body:
Skyring wrote:

>On Apr 2, 2005 4:54 AM, Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote:
>
>
>>How do you get from the issue of state secrets to invasion of privacy?
>>The activities of Matt's hypothetical daughter are not on-topic to
>>anything.  How can she possibly be involved with the cloak of national
>>security?
>>
>>
>If her place of birth (Krypton) were published, certain governments
>might put two and two together.
>
And since they know that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts
they would arrive at five.

Ec


from_name: geni

body:
> Do I have to be the one that it will be impossible to enforce this on a Wiki?

Why? It doesn't differ from normal vanderlism in term of inforcement.

--
geni


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: April Fool's Day

body:
csherlock at ljh.com.au wrote:

> Skyring wrote:
>
>> On Apr 1, 2005 9:23 PM, MacGyverMagic/Mgm <macgyvermagic at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Saying Terri died of autofellatio is bad taste and totally not funny.
>>
>> Did you actually write those words with a straight face?
>
> LOL!!!!

If he thought it was in bad taste the activity might have withdrawn his
comments and said them with a smeared face.

Ec


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Minutemen (vigilantes) article

body:
>On Apr 3, 2005 8:28 PM, Richard Holton <richholton at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> I suppose if we allow definition 2 above, then members of a
> Neighborhood Watch group would be vigilantes. However, I've never
> heard the word used that way. Of course, that's just me, and maybe
> others have heard the other usage. Still, I think the name change is
> in order. Make sure we disambiguate Minutemen as appropriate.
>
> -- Rich Holton

There's actually another article titled [[Minuteman Project]]. I'm in
the process of merging the two.

--Slowking Man


body:
geni said:
>> Do I have to be the one that it will be impossible to enforce this on
>> a Wiki?
>
> Why? It doesn't differ from normal vanderlism in term of inforcement.

Going after vandalism is one thing, going after April Fool articles is
quite another.


body:
> Going after vandalism is one thing, going after April Fool articles is
> quite another.

Not really. Revert a few times (pointing out any descission reached on
this issue) then block until midnight UCT if they don't take the hint
(I'm aware that this could cause problems in the meta namespace but
since that is pretty much admins only any descision on that should be
respected) move to BJAODN if you feel like it just like any other
silly vandalism .

--
geni


from_name: Ronald Chmara

body:
On Apr 3, 2005, at 8:02 PM, Robert Brockway wrote:
> On Sun, 3 Apr 2005, Robert Brockway wrote:
>> I think the term "Minutemen (vigilantes)" is POV as the term
>> vigilantes
>> has negative overtones in English.  I think it would be better to
>> list the
>> article under the title "The MinuteMan Project".
>>
> Excuse me following up to myself.
> dictionary.com gives the following definitions for vigilante:
> 1. One who takes or advocates the taking of law enforcement into one's
> own
>    hands.

Such as enforcing who may or may not be allowed to cross a border, with
the use of armed patrols?

Here's part of their slogans (from their website header):
"Americans doing the jobs Congress won't do."
"Operating within the law to support enforcement of the law."

> 2. A member of a vigilance committee.

Vigilance, keeping watch....

> I don't see how the MinuteMan Project members could qualify as
> vigilantes
> since all they are doing, as directed by the group, is to observe and
> advise legitimate authorities.

A watchman (keeping vigil, see "vigilance") sounds the alarm, yes....
and that's part of what makes them (MinuteMan project) vigilantes.

>  In this regard the group is acting in a
> manner similar to a Neighbourhood Watch.

My Neighborhood Watch doesn't actively roam around and set up
"observation camps" in the middle of my local street intersections,
while carrying guns and looking for trouble.

I don't know about yours. :)

Advocating that they are similar to a Neighborhood Watch is *their* POV
(lifted straight from their website, no less), the obviously clear
differences between the two notwithstanding... them (MMP) claiming to
not be vigilantes is not entirely unlike white power groups claiming
that they are not inherently racist... it's totally non-sensical, an
attempt to legitimize their actions.

> This is not to say that individuals in the group could not act as
> vigilantes but I don't see any evidence the group is advocating this.

Check out their website... their whole purpose is about taking into
*their own hands* the patrolling function of law enforcement on the
borders. All that being said, the article itself points out that they
are considered vigilantes, regardless of what the title is.

All of the above is *my* POV, though... I'm in favor of changing the
article name, so their POV and my POV can become NPOV, :)

-Bop


body:
geni said:
>> Going after vandalism is one thing, going after April Fool articles is
>> quite another.
>
> Not really. Revert a few times (pointing out any descission reached on
> this issue) then block until midnight UCT if they don't take the hint
> (I'm aware that this could cause problems in the meta namespace but
> since that is pretty much admins only any descision on that should be
> respected) move to BJAODN if you feel like it just like any other
> silly vandalism .

I can't see us arriving on a consensus to ban all April Fool articles on
April 1 (except for the "approved" one).  The experience of Friday is that
no more vandalism occurs than on a normal day, but one or two unexpected
things happen to the main page, navs and screen furniture.  This really
isn't worth legislating for and certainly is not unexpected activity on
April 1.  There is in my experience a visible trend to over-react to what
was all-in-all a rather enjoyable day.


body:
>On Apr 3, 2005 8:49 PM, Ronald Chmara <ron at opus1.com> wrote:
>
> Such as enforcing who may or may not be allowed to cross a border, with
> the use of armed patrols?

They claim to be armed (and not all of them are armed) merely for self-defense.

> All of the above is *my* POV, though... I'm in favor of changing the
> article name, so their POV and my POV can become NPOV, :)

Which is what I'm doing.

--Slowking Man


from_name: Richard Holton

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Articles on *Alleged* homophobia?

body:
On Apr 3, 2005 8:08 PM, csherlock at ljh.com.au <csherlock at ljh.com.au> wrote:
> I would be opposed to an article called "Persecution of Christians".
> Rewording for a more NPOV title would be best. Just like I opposed
> [[Christian views of women]].
>
> TBSDY

Ok. I'll bite. What is your objection to those two article titles, and
how do you suggest that they be modified? I'm not trying to pick a
fight, I'm just curious.

-- Rich Holton

en.wikipedia:User:Rholton


body:
> I can't see us arriving on a consensus to ban all April Fool articles on
> April 1 (except for the "approved" one).

Since when has the likelyhood of complete and total failer been a
reason to give up?

> The experience of Friday is that
> no more vandalism occurs than on a normal day, but one or two unexpected
> things happen to the main page, navs and screen furniture.  This really
> isn't worth legislating for and certainly is not unexpected activity on
> April 1.  There is in my experience a visible trend to over-react to what
> was all-in-all a rather enjoyable day.

If we get some kind of consensus on what to do we will be in a better
position to act if things do get out of control and if not we will
muddle through somehow~~~~

--
geni


from_name: Charles Matthews

body:
Tony Sidaway wrote

>  There is in my experience a visible trend to over-react to what
> was all-in-all a rather enjoyable day.

Obviously not all agree.  The 'benefits' though are intangibles, and I don't
suppose anyone ever thought otherwise.

Charles


body:
geni said:
>> I can't see us arriving on a consensus to ban all April Fool articles
>> on April 1 (except for the "approved" one).
>
> Since when has the likelyhood of complete and total failer been a
> reason to give up?
>

I haven't suggested giving up, merely commented on the unlikelihood of
such a decision being enforceable.  I'm confident that many, perhaps most,
would regard the decision to regulate April Fool's day as at best a
belated and shoddy April Fool jape, and at worst a massive over-reaction.


body:
Tim Starling wrote:

>The Cunctator wrote:
>
>
>>I think this April Fool's Day was a great success. It was also successful in
>>reminding us which of the admins are the humorless autocratic control
>>freaks.
>>
>>Remember, kiddies: just because someone's enjoying doing something you don't
>>enjoy doing, it doesn't mean that's wrong.
>>
>>
>
>April Fools Day is that one day of the year when everyone can get up and
>*try* to make a joke, even if they don't have a sense of humour. It's a
>wonderful, participatory event. Joke templates are available at help
>desks around the country. If you prefer, you can enhance someone else's
>joke by adding something silly to it. It's a simple method but it always
>works.
>
I'm glad to see that from so far away you have grasped the essence of
the American <s>humour</s> humor industry.  Profit is enhanced by
reducing the unit cost of the product.  To do this in the joke industry
it helps to develop uniform standards for what people will find funny.
In furtherance of this end laugh tracks in TV shows are as old as "I
Love Lucy".  Lest it be seen as a manipulation of the public by a
capitalist humor industry that is desparate for profits, there must be
allowance for some degree of inventiveness.  Jokes that depend on
someone's misfortune are an especially fruitful territory for this.
When members of the public are given the opportunity to substitute the
names of personal acquantances for the generic ones in the joke template
they can marvel at their own originality, and be inspired thereby to
purchase more templates.

Ec


body:
On Apr 3, 2005 10:02 PM, Robert Brockway <rbrockway at opentrend.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 3 Apr 2005, Robert Brockway wrote:
>
> > I think the term "Minutemen (vigilantes)" is POV as the term vigilantes
> > has negative overtones in English.  I think it would be better to list the
> > article under the title "The MinuteMan Project".
> >
> Excuse me following up to myself.
>
> dictionary.com gives the following definitions for vigilante:
>
> 1. One who takes or advocates the taking of law enforcement into one's own
>    hands.
>
> 2. A member of a vigilance committee.
>
> I don't see how the MinuteMan Project members could qualify as vigilantes
> since all they are doing, as directed by the group, is to observe and
> advise legitimate authorities.  In this regard the group is acting in a
> manner similar to a Neighbourhood Watch.
>
> This is not to say that individuals in the group could not act as
> vigilantes but I don't see any evidence the group is advocating this.
>
> Thoughts, comments, flames, rebuttal?
>
> Rob

I suppose if we allow definition 2 above, then members of a
Neighborhood Watch group would be vigilantes. However, I've never
heard the word used that way. Of course, that's just me, and maybe
others have heard the other usage. Still, I think the name change is
in order. Make sure we disambiguate Minutemen as appropriate.

-- Rich Holton

en.wikipedia:User:Rholton


from_name: Craig Franklin

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Invisible Categories

body:
Hi,

I am wondering if it is possible to make a Category "invisible" in Wikipedia
(and mediawiki in general).  Basically, what I want to do, is create some
pages, and link them together with a Category.  These pages will have very
little in common with each other, and the categories will be mainly "Pages
starting with 'A' " and the like, where the useful part is having a list of
the articles tagged like that.  It'll save me (and other users) from having
to manually maintain seperate "List" articles, yet still allow for quick
navigation between similar articles.

So, what I want, is the current Category functionality, but without the
"[Category: Whatever]" at the bottom of the page.  Possible?

Regards,
- Craig Franklin

-------------------
Craig Franklin
PO Box 764
Ashgrove, Q, 4060
Australia
http://www.halo-17.net - Australia's Favourite Source of Indie Music, Art,
and Culture.


from_name: Robert Brockway

body:
I think the term "Minutemen (vigilantes)" is POV as the term vigilantes
has negative overtones in English.  I think it would be better to list the
article under the title "The MinuteMan Project".

Thoughts, comments, flames?

Rob

--
Robert Brockway B.Sc.
Senior Technical Consultant, OpenTrend Solutions Ltd.
Phone: +1-416-669-3073 Email: rbrockway at opentrend.net http://www.opentrend.net
OpenTrend Solutions: Reliable, secure solutions to real world problems.
Contributing Member of Software in the Public Interest (http://www.spi-inc.org)


body:
On Sun, 3 Apr 2005, Robert Brockway wrote:

> I think the term "Minutemen (vigilantes)" is POV as the term vigilantes
> has negative overtones in English.  I think it would be better to list the
> article under the title "The MinuteMan Project".
>
Excuse me following up to myself.

dictionary.com gives the following definitions for vigilante:

1. One who takes or advocates the taking of law enforcement into one's own
   hands.

2. A member of a vigilance committee.

I don't see how the MinuteMan Project members could qualify as vigilantes
since all they are doing, as directed by the group, is to observe and
advise legitimate authorities.  In this regard the group is acting in a
manner similar to a Neighbourhood Watch.

This is not to say that individuals in the group could not act as
vigilantes but I don't see any evidence the group is advocating this.

Thoughts, comments, flames, rebuttal?

Rob

--
Robert Brockway B.Sc.
Senior Technical Consultant, OpenTrend Solutions Ltd.
Phone: +1-416-669-3073 Email: rbrockway at opentrend.net http://www.opentrend.net
OpenTrend Solutions: Reliable, secure solutions to real world problems.
Contributing Member of Software in the Public Interest (http://www.spi-inc.org)


subject: [Wikitech-l] CVS UPDATE problem

body:
Dear ALL, I got this ugly message while updating from CVS:

    "waiting for midom's lock in
/cvsroot/wikipedia/phase3/extensions/SpamBlacklist"

Any idea, who or what is "midom" ? and how to solve this problem
immediately ?


from_name: The Cunctator

subject: [WikiEN-l] Final April Fools wrap up

body:
On 4/3/05 2:14 PM, "Rick" <giantsrick13 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> --- Mark Pellegrini <mapellegrini at comcast.net> wrote:
>> So thank you very much, to all those of you who
>> pushed this idiotic
>> idea, from those of us
>> who actually have to pick up the pieces.
>>
>> -- Disgruntled
>
> Hear, hear.
>
> RickK

I think this April Fool's Day was a great success. It was also successful in
reminding us which of the admins are the humorless autocratic control
freaks.

Remember, kiddies: just because someone's enjoying doing something you don't
enjoy doing, it doesn't mean that's wrong.


from_name: Angela

subject: [Wikitech-l] CVS UPDATE problem

body:
On Apr 3, 2005 11:20 PM, Thomas Gries <mail at tgries.de> wrote:

> Any idea, who or what is "midom" ?

Midom is Domas Mituzas. See <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Midom>.
He's "dammit" on the #mediawiki IRC channel.

Angela.


from_name: Richard Gallagher

body:
Hello,

I lasted logged in to the English Wikipedia a few months ago, today
when I try to logon it gives an error "The password you entered is
incorrect. Please try again.".  As far as I know the username/password
I'm giving is correct.

When I attempt to use the "Email new password" option it gives the
error "Error sending mail: There is no e-mail address recorded for
user "Popsracer"".

This is surprising because as far as I know my email address should be
on record. And I was able to successfully do a password reset on 8
June 2003.

Do accounts or passwords time out if not used for a certain period of time?
If at all possible I would like to keep my existing account but there
doesn't seem to be anyway I can get into it.  Do I have any recourse
other then creating a new account and starting over?

Richard Gallagher (User:Popsracer)


from_name: MacGyverMagic/Mgm

body:
I agree too. Stuff like that should be addressed within an article.

-- MacGyverMagic

On Apr 3, 2005 8:05 PM, JAY JG <jayjg at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> Completely agreed as well.
>
> >I agree.  You could say that most things are 'alleged' by some
> >people...alleged racism, alleged holocaust, alleged slavery, etc.
> >
> >If we named all our other articles like that, then it might make sense,
> >but as things are right now, I'm pretty sure we just simplify all titles
> >to make them definitive, and indicate any uncertainties in the article.
> >
> >If the contributor is suggesting that homophobia doesn't exist, then
> >they can put it in as a section of the article; that is, of course, if
> >they have enough evidence to back it up.  Similarly, if they think that
> >the Nation of Islam isn't anti-semitic, they should add that as a
> >section in the article.  IMHO, prefixing all titles with 'alleged' adds
> >confusion and is completely unnecessary.
> >
> >-Faraaz Damji
> >
> >
> >Robert wrote:
> > > Suppose a new contributor comes here and decides that most
> > > or all cases of homophobia really do not exist, and it is
> > > just those over-sensitive gay people that caused the
> > > article to be titled [[Homophobia]]. Would it be Ok for
> > > them to retitle this article to [[Alleged homophobia]]?  I
> > > would think mot.
> > >
> > > Similarly. would it be Ok for people to start renaming our
> > > articles such as:
> > >
> > > [[Alleged anti-Arabism]]?
> > >
> > > [[Alleged Islamophobia]]?
> > >
> > > [[Allegend Persecution of Christians]]?
> > >
> > > I would think not. Unfortunately, Firebug is trying to do
> > > this for [[Nation of Islam and anti-Semitism]].  It seems
> > > to me that this renaming shows bias, and violates NPOV
> > > policy by using the title of the article to dismiss any
> > > possibility that facts actually exist within it. It also is
> > > totally out of line with how we name all of our other
> > > articles.
> > >
> > > Thus, unless we rename all of our other articles in a
> > > similar way, this one article should not be an exception.
> > >
> > >
> > > RK
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > __________________________________
> > > Do you Yahoo!?
> > > Yahoo! Personals - Better first dates. More second dates.
> > > http://personals.yahoo.com
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > > WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> > > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> > >
> >_______________________________________________
> >WikiEN-l mailing list
> >WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> >http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: ultrablue at gmail.com

subject: [WikiEN-l] Vile Triga and Matt Crypto.

body:
Hi. I was the admin who blocked Irate for 24 hours for his 3RR
violation. In the interests of transparency, I am sending this email.

Immediately after I blocked Irate, he emailed me, saying "You better
explain yourself no, and list who ever else you have blocked". He came
on to the #Wikipedia IRC channel and private messaged me with a
similarly worded request. I explained that he had been blocked for his
3RR violation, and he did not dispute that he had broken the rule.

He instead questioned my credibility, demanding that I block
Violetriga and MattCrypto for their alleged violations of the rule. I
explained that I had only just finished writing a message to his talk
page, and I hadn't had time to examine any other users. This was only
partially true, since MattCrypto had pointed me to the page, telling
me he'd "used up all his reverts". I had neglected to check whether
MattCrypto was over.

Irate claimed that Violetriga had violated the 3RR on his or her own user page.

Upon examining the entire situation, I felt it would be grossly unfair
to block MattCrypto and Violetriga as a result of their actions.
However, in an effort to remain unbiased, I listed those two users on
the Admins' 3RR Noticeboard, for the other users to decide. Consensus
on that page seems to be that neither of those two users should be
blocked.

I trust my actions were acceptable.

~Mark


from_name: Thomas Gries

subject: [Wikitech-l] delay announcement: ENotif and EAuthent for 1.4

body:
Again and for information only to avoid double-work:
I am busy with back-porting ENotif [1] and EAuthent [2] (email
notification and authentication) from 1.5 to 1.4.

It will be delayed some days. If you have questions or suggestions,
please look to [3] or reply directly to me, please.
New scheduled release date: 09.04.2005
Tom

[1] http://bugzilla.wikipedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=454
[2] http://bugzilla.wikipedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=866
[3] http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enotif


from_name: Delirium

subject: [WikiEN-l] Final April Fools wrap up

body:
The Cunctator wrote:

>I think this April Fool's Day was a great success. It was also successful in
>reminding us which of the admins are the humorless autocratic control
>freaks.
>
>Remember, kiddies: just because someone's enjoying doing something you don't
>enjoy doing, it doesn't mean that's wrong.
>
>
It's possible some of us just didn't find the jokes funny. =]

April Fool's Day seems to be the day of the year when all the really
lame jokes crawl out of the woodwork... just take a look at the
trainwreck that was Slashdot's frontpage for a representative example...

-Mark


from_name: David Gerard

subject: [Foundation-l] (fwd) Re: [WikiEN-l] Vile Triga and Matt Crypto.

body:
Needless to say, I can hardly wait for UK Wikimedia to start receiving this
sort of thing.

- d.

----- Forwarded message from John Bradley <john at ontobus.co.uk> -----

From: John Bradley <john at ontobus.co.uk>
To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Vile Triga and Matt Crypto.
Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2005 17:39:07 +0100

More manipulation from Matt Crypto. Strange he doesn't mention Vile Triga
behaviour before now, just cuts it down to the bits that suit him. More typical
dishonesty.

Your msg constitues a personal attack. You've refused to accept my
critismism, why should anyone believe you'll taken on anyone elses.

> For background, you can review the problems with this user's behaviour here:
>
> * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Irate
> * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#User:Irate
> * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Smoddy/Irate
>
> I am quite open to criticism if others judge that I've handled this situation
> badly.
>
> Matt
>
> P.S. Note that even now, this user cannot resist personal attacks in the
> subject line.
>
> Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

		Yours

		John Bradley

Loc: 	Flat 15/22 Gambier Terrace, Liverpool, L1 7BL, UK.
Phone:	+44 (0)151 708 7238
Email:  john at ontobus.co.uk
WWW:	www.ontobus.co.uk

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

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


from_name: Mark Williamson

body:
I disagree.

If the usage of the words "terrorism" and "terrorist" is NPOV (which
has been decided through polls on en.wiki - since when is something
NPOV if more than 1/3rd of those polled say it isn't? lol), then so is
the usage of "vigilante".

Sure, "vigilante" has negative connotations. But we're operating
entirely within the definition here. They are keeping vigil (they
don't mention going further than just that, but others do), and thus
they are vigilantes.

In my experience, "vigilante" does often mean somebody who takes
justice into their own hands, often violently (ie, a man who murders
people who have been proven to be rapists but got away from jail time
due to a technicality), but it can also mean somebody who keeps watch
well, somebody who is vigilant.

How can this be compared to terrorism? Because of our double-standard.
If terrorism is an act, against civilians, intended to strike fear
into the hearts of the populace, then I would generally say the events
of 11.9 qualify. I would also say the nuclear bombings of Hirosima and
Nagasaki qualify. Was that not the intention? So why don't we mention
prominently in /those/ two articles that they were terrorist acts?
Because we choose to restrict our in-group definition to only those
acts perpetrated by people who are not part of the military of a
nation internationally recognised as sovreign? Do we realise how
sillily fine the line between those two categories is? The only reason
we keep it separate is because we want to believe that Us attacking
Them is not Evil ("terrorist" can often be used as a synonym for evil
in modern American society), while Them attacking Us is. We demonise
the British role in the war for American independence, yet we glorify
the role of the Union in the American civil war which occurred for
strikingly similar reasons. Both were cases of wars seeking to gain
independence for a region, the Colonials and the Confederates were
both the disgruntled, both wanted to break away, yet the Colonials are
good but the Confederates are bad. Some say it's because they had
slaves. Then why do we perpetuate the personality cult of George
Washington who was a slaveowner?

Double-standards obviously exist within society, but we should keep
them out of Wikipedia.

And as a general guideline, if more than 1/4th of the people involved
in a discussion say the text is POV, it probably is POV but you just
can't see that.

Mark

On Apr 3, 2005 8:49 PM, Ronald Chmara <ron at opus1.com> wrote:
> On Apr 3, 2005, at 8:02 PM, Robert Brockway wrote:
> > On Sun, 3 Apr 2005, Robert Brockway wrote:
> >> I think the term "Minutemen (vigilantes)" is POV as the term
> >> vigilantes
> >> has negative overtones in English.  I think it would be better to
> >> list the
> >> article under the title "The MinuteMan Project".
> >>
> > Excuse me following up to myself.
> > dictionary.com gives the following definitions for vigilante:
> > 1. One who takes or advocates the taking of law enforcement into one's
> > own
> >    hands.
>
> Such as enforcing who may or may not be allowed to cross a border, with
> the use of armed patrols?
>
> Here's part of their slogans (from their website header):
> "Americans doing the jobs Congress won't do."
> "Operating within the law to support enforcement of the law."
>
> > 2. A member of a vigilance committee.
>
> Vigilance, keeping watch....
>
> > I don't see how the MinuteMan Project members could qualify as
> > vigilantes
> > since all they are doing, as directed by the group, is to observe and
> > advise legitimate authorities.
>
> A watchman (keeping vigil, see "vigilance") sounds the alarm, yes....
> and that's part of what makes them (MinuteMan project) vigilantes.
>
> >  In this regard the group is acting in a
> > manner similar to a Neighbourhood Watch.
>
> My Neighborhood Watch doesn't actively roam around and set up
> "observation camps" in the middle of my local street intersections,
> while carrying guns and looking for trouble.
>
> I don't know about yours. :)
>
> Advocating that they are similar to a Neighborhood Watch is *their* POV
> (lifted straight from their website, no less), the obviously clear
> differences between the two notwithstanding... them (MMP) claiming to
> not be vigilantes is not entirely unlike white power groups claiming
> that they are not inherently racist... it's totally non-sensical, an
> attempt to legitimize their actions.
>
> > This is not to say that individuals in the group could not act as
> > vigilantes but I don't see any evidence the group is advocating this.
>
> Check out their website... their whole purpose is about taking into
> *their own hands* the patrolling function of law enforcement on the
> borders. All that being said, the article itself points out that they
> are considered vigilantes, regardless of what the title is.
>
> All of the above is *my* POV, though... I'm in favor of changing the
> article name, so their POV and my POV can become NPOV, :)
>
> -Bop
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>


from_name: Sj

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Foolish policy proposal

body:
> http://www.journaldunet.com/index_1er-avril.shtml
ROFLLL

One of my favorites was their poll, I don't even know why...

* ?tes-vous connect?s ? Internet ?
	Oui
	Non
	Je ne sais pas

--
+sj+


from_name: Jimmy (Jimbo) Wales

subject: [WikiEN-l] April Fool's Day next year

body:
Ok, I think next year we should not tolerate what went on this year.
But we should try to do something fun.

Of all the ideas that I saw proposed, I think that the absolute best
compromise between those who love the holiday and those who are not
great fans of it would be to have the main page be 100% real and
accurate in every last respect, but *also* to have it be filled with
stories that people would naturally suspect to be hoaxes.

[[Exploding whale]] is a nice example, as is [[Holy prepuce]] (which
was a real featured article already).

Here's what I like about this compromise: first, it satisfies those of
us who understand that Wikipedia is first and foremost a serious
encyclopedia.  Second, it satisfies those who want to have fun
tricking people on April 1st.

And finally, and most important, it appeals to all of us on both sides
of the debate who are intellectual snobs. :-) Any lame website can
come up with fake stories *yawn* to trick people *yawn*.  Only we
ubergeeks of Wikipedia can come up with *real* stories to trick
people.

--Jimbo

--
"Pianosa is een Italie" - first words of 50,000th article on nl.wikipedia.org


subject: [Wikipedia-l] The value of Pronunciation

body:
David Gerard wrote:
> I was amazed when I moved to Walthamstow (London E17). I heard accents
> from people obviously born here that sounded like NOTHING ON EARTH I'd
> ever heard before. The Australian accent is incredibly homogeneous by
> comparison.

American, too.  I pride myself (more or less) on speaking a very
standard American English with a very standard American accent.  This
has become more important as I speak to people whose first language is
not English, because a very mainstream American accent is easy to
understand (for people who watch American movies, at least, which
means a lot of people).

Germans and Dutch and French have reported to me that I am easier to
understand than Angela, for example.  (She has a beautiful accent in
my opinion, but it sounds Very British.)

Now, even so, I once took a fun little quiz/survey online (which I
can't find now) which was able to identify that I'm from the south --
it utilized vocabulary and pronounciation questions and in some cases
I had no idea that there were regional variations at all.

--Jimbo


subject: [Foundation-l] what is partnership ?

body:
Christopher Mahan wrote:
> I say the opposite is true. We should have a policy that says: "It
> does not matter how much money, content, or goodwill you send our
> way, we are not putting your logo or anything else in the wikipedia."
> Our NPOV policy would prohibit that, now that I think about it.

Nothing about NPOV prohibits us from recognizing people or
organizations who help us in an appropriate place in an appropriate
and tasteful fashion.

--Jimbo


subject: [Foundation-l] what is partnership ?


subject: [WikiEN-l] On preventing anonymous edits

body:
On 4/4/05 3:30 AM, "Theo Clarke" <wiki at tignosis.com> wrote:

> On Sun, 3 Apr 2005 01:06:44 +0100, David 'DJ' Hedley wrote:
>> ?That would be undermining the very point that promotes Wikipedia,?though.
>>
>> ?"Anyone can edit" is false if anons can't edit. Theres a lot of?people who
>> ?would just walk out if that became true.
>
> Analysed at that level, the promotional statement is already untrue. Blocked
> users and users of blocked IP addresses cannot edit. At a more extreme level,
> those with no access to the Internet cannot edit.
>
> In my opinion, preventing anonymous edits makes the project no less open as
> long as registration is unrestricted.
>
To correct the above statement, replace "no less open" with "less open".

By definition placing restrictions and conditions on users makes the project
less open. There can be a reasonable debate about whether and when it is
worth placing restrictions on the project--but it's difficult to have that
reasonable debate when people can't admit what that's doing.


from_name: Skyring

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Classified information in Wikipedia

body:
On Apr 2, 2005 4:34 AM, Matt R <matt_crypto at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

> Nah, my suspicion is that 99% of classified information would not directly
> place people in harm's way if released to the public. What it might do is cause
> the country concerned varying degrees of disadvantage and embarassment
> (economically, politically, diplomatically etc).

If it's not verifiable, then how could it do any damage?

The "go code" for the 18th Strategic Weapons Wing is THX 1138. On
receipt of that code the Wing launches and millions of people will
die.

--
Peter in Canberry


subject: [WikiEN-l] Final April Fools wrap up

body:
On 4/4/05 2:36 AM, "Delirium" <delirium at hackish.org> wrote:

> The Cunctator wrote:
>
>> I think this April Fool's Day was a great success. It was also successful in
>> reminding us which of the admins are the humorless autocratic control
>> freaks.
>>
>> Remember, kiddies: just because someone's enjoying doing something you don't
>> enjoy doing, it doesn't mean that's wrong.
>>
>>
> It's possible some of us just didn't find the jokes funny. =]

That was my point: Just because someone finds a joke funny that you don't
find funny, it doesn't mean that's wrong. Or a "trainwreck".


body:
On Apr 2, 2005 4:54 AM, Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote:
> >
> How do you get from the issue of state secrets to invasion of privacy?
> The activities of Matt's hypothetical daughter are not on-topic to
> anything.  How can she possibly be involved with the cloak of national
> security?

If her place of birth (Krypton) were published, certain governments
might put two and two together.

--
Peter in Canberry


from_name: Theo Clarke

subject:
[WikiEN-l] Re: April 1st 2006, IRC, the mailing list,
	and the Cabal

body:
On Sun, 3 Apr 2005 01:06:44 +0100, David 'DJ' Hedley wrote:
>?That would be undermining the very point that promotes Wikipedia,?though.
>
>?"Anyone can edit" is false if anons can't edit. Theres a lot of?people who
>?would just walk out if that became true.

Analysed at that level, the promotional statement is already untrue. Blocked users and users of blocked IP addresses cannot edit. At a more extreme level, those with no access to the Internet cannot edit.

In my opinion, preventing anonymous edits makes the project no less open as long as registration is unrestricted.

Theo


from_name: Alphax

subject: [WikiEN-l] Vile Triga and Matt Crypto.

body:
John Bradley wrote:

>It looks like I have been blocked mainly at the behest of Vilet/Riga and
>MattCrypto, this pair have been engaged in several weeks of attacks on
>me.
>
>Vile Riga has already had me blocked for breaking a rule I had not broken
>has refused to appolgize and has in fact stated she is happy with her
>activities. and countinues to state it.
>
>My talk page now has rubbish on it, I wish to delete but cannot as I have
>been blocked. Allowing wikipedia to become host to these manipulative
>people who's interest on wikipedia are connected with boulstering there
>own ego's rather than producing an encylopedia.
>
>They have vandlised my VfD's and various other things. They have broken
>rules left right and centre.
>
>
>
And your username is.... (so we can investigate this further)

>I believe the Wikipedia is seriously in breach of the requirments of
>charities, in that it is allowing a group of people to use Wikipedia for their
>own benefit and not for the objective of creating and encyclopedia.
>
>
Provide evidence, and action will be taken.

--
Alphax
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax
There are two kinds of people: those who say to God, 'Thy will be done,' and those to whom God says, 'All right, then, have it your way.' - C. S. Lewis


from_name: Daniel Mayer

subject: [WikiEN-l] April Fool's Day next year

body:
--- "Jimmy (Jimbo) Wales" <jwales at wikia.com> wrote:
> Of all the ideas that I saw proposed, I think that the absolute best
> compromise between those who love the holiday and those who are not
> great fans of it would be to have the main page be 100% real and
> accurate in every last respect, but *also* to have it be filled with
> stories that people would naturally suspect to be hoaxes.
>
> [[Exploding whale]] is a nice example, as is [[Holy prepuce]] (which
> was a real featured article already).

Exactly! The trouble this time was that the FAs that a person may have mistaken
for April Fools jokes were already featured on the Main Page by the time April
1 came around. Next time these should be kept in reserve and then the best of
that crop could be the April 1 TFA. 'Did you know...' could also be subverted
for a day from displaying interesting facts that are in new articles to very
unusual facts from some of our more off the wall - but still correct and real -
articles.

-- mav

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


subject: [WikiEN-l] April Fool's Day next year

body:
--- Tony SiSidawaymiminorityreportluebottle.com> wrote:
> Daniel Mayer said:
> >The trouble this time was that the FAFAshat a person may have
> > mistaken for April Fools jokes were already featured on the Main Page
> > by the time April 1 came around. Next time these should be kept in
> > reserve and then the best of that crop could be the April 1 TFTFA'Did
> > you know...' could also be subverted for a day from displaying
> > interesting facts that are in new articles to very unusual facts from
> > some of our more off the wall - but still correct and real - articles.
>
> What you're saying seems to boil down to: "Next year, let's keep the less
> interesting stuff off WiWikipedian the run up to April 1."  How will that
> make WiWikipedia better encyclopedia?

There is more in life that is interesting than what could be considered to be a
prank.

-- mamav

__________________________________
Yahoo! Messenger
Show us what our next emoticon should look like. Join the fun.
http://www.advision.webevents.yahoo.com/emoticontest


body:
David Gerard wrote:
> By the way, I would strongly questoin GerardM's assertion that the person's
> way of pronouncing their name is *correct*, in the sense of people
> pronouncing it differently being *incorrect*.

:-) As a matter of courtesy I try really hard to pronounce GerardM's
name in the way that he does (Dutch way) but it's basically impossible
for me, and feels embarassing.  So I vary between just giving up and
pronouncing it the American way, and mangling it. ;-)

--Jimbo

--
"Pianosa is een Italie" - first words of 50,000th article on nl.wikipedia.org


subject: [WikiEN-l] April Fool's Day next year

body:
--- Tony Sidaway <minorityreport at bluebottle.com> wrote:
> I'm sorry, but you don't seem to be addressing my question.  The kind of
> stuff we're talking about here isn't a prank, it's articles like
> [[Exploding whale]] and [[Holy prepuce]], specifically--the kind of
> article that tends to know the reader out of his passive rut.  Surely it's
> good to have this kind of article all the time, not save them up to take
> the place of real April fools pranks.

Only one April Fools article is needed per year. The others can and should be
eventually on the Main Page - regardless of their FTA date. This time we used
them *all* as TFAs before April 1. As we go forward some articles will seem to
be candidates for next year's April 1 TFA. Most of those will be supplanted by
newer FAs that are even better April 1 candidates. Once that happens the lesser
candidates could be a TFA on any other day. But a ?best of? short list should
be maintained.

-- mav

__________________________________
Yahoo! Messenger
Show us what our next emoticon should look like. Join the fun.
http://www.advision.webevents.yahoo.com/emoticontest


from_name: Nicolay A. Vasiliev

subject: [WikiEN-l] DB upload trouble

body:
Hello there!

Let me come in to your community please :)!

And immediately I need your advice. I am starting to install MediaWiki
on my server. I got DB dump and tried to execute this from shell by
connecting to DB and pointing the source as this dump. This operation
starts to insert records but after some time it fails with an error of
max packet size exceeding. This paameter set as 1 Gb already but this
fires in any case :(. Help me please how could I upload the Wiki database.

Thanks in advance and sorry my por English.

Nicolay Vasiliev.


from_name: csherlock at ljh.com.au

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: April Fool's Day

body:
Skyring wrote:
> On Apr 1, 2005 9:23 PM, MacGyverMagic/Mgm <macgyvermagic at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Saying Terri died of autofellatio is bad taste and totally not funny.
>
>
> Did you actually write those words with a straight face?
>

LOL!!!!

TBSDY


body:
Robert wrote:
> Suppose a new contributor comes here and decides that most
> or all cases of homophobia really do not exist, and it is
> just those over-sensitive gay people that caused the
> article to be titled [[Homophobia]]. Would it be Ok for
> them to retitle this article to [[Alleged homophobia]]?  I
> would think mot.
>
> Similarly. would it be Ok for people to start renaming our
> articles such as:
>
> [[Alleged anti-Arabism]]?
>
> [[Alleged Islamophobia]]?
>
> [[Allegend Persecution of Christians]]?
>
> I would think not. Unfortunately, Firebug is trying to do
> this for [[Nation of Islam and anti-Semitism]].  It seems
> to me that this renaming shows bias, and violates NPOV
> policy by using the title of the article to dismiss any
> possibility that facts actually exist within it. It also is
> totally out of line with how we name all of our other
> articles.
>
> Thus, unless we rename all of our other articles in a
> similar way, this one article should not be an exception.
>
>
> RK

I would be opposed to an article called "Persecution of Christians".
Rewording for a more NPOV title would be best. Just like I opposed
[[Christian views of women]].

TBSDY


from_name: Joel Wiesmann

subject: [Wikitech-l] Caching of includes

body:
Hi there

I'm just hacking around in my mediawiki setup and try to do some kind of "smart"
include. Means I'm having a namespace where the articles ("events") can be saved
in "YYY-MM-DD_title"-format and a {{tag}}-include (coded in Parser.php) that
automatically shows the titles of "today's" events.

Now the problem is, that the browser seems to cache the results. So if I create
an event with today's date in the appropriate namespace, and put a
{{tag}}-include on the sandbox-page it shows the entry (that's ok so far).

Now the problem is, that if I create a second event, the sandbox still shows
only one event and:
- If I do an "edit" on the sandbox page, the 2nd event appears.
- It also appears when I clean the browser-cache and reload the page.
- Doing a "hard-refresh" with shift-reload won't show the 2nd entry.
- All other caching mechanisms are deactivated.

Unfortunately I don't recognize the HTML-tag for this caching-stuff - the
browser I'm using is firefox so maybe this caching has something to do with the
browsers default settings.

Someone knows a solution for my problem which will only deactivate the browser's
caching on the pages using that include? Some kind of additional header
informations?

Regards
Joel


list: wiktionary-l

from_name: Gerard Meijssen

subject: [Wiktionary-l] Ultimate wiktionary - ultimate.wiktionary.org ??

body:
Hoi,

I just reailised that with ultimate wiktionary, there will be a need to
have an URL where the Ultimate Wiktionary will be located. I do not
think it is acceptable to host the Ultimate Wiktionary as wiktionary.org
as this is the current portal page. Therefore I think something like
*ultimate.wiktionary.org* would be as good a choise as any.

When a Wiktionary decides to merge into the Ultimate wiktionary, this
domain will be a redirect to the Ultimate Wiktionary. Technically there
will be a need to redirect references in Wikipedia when a Wiktionary is
migrated. Linking from the Ultimate Wiktionary to Wikipedia or any other
project should remain the same. It should be obvious that the Ultimate
Wiktionary can use all resources of all Wiktionaries. It is as obvious
that any Wiktionary can use the resources of the Ultimate Wiktionary.

Thanks,
   GerardM


from_name: Ray Saintonge

body:
Mark Williamson wrote:

>If the usage of the words "terrorism" and "terrorist" is NPOV (which
>has been decided through polls on en.wiki - since when is something
>NPOV if more than 1/3rd of those polled say it isn't? lol), then so is
>the usage of "vigilante".
>
If such a result exists it would reflect the ravings of a self-appointed
clique of POV pushers.  Such polls are held with such regularity and
frequency that it is impossible to isolate those which have real
meaning.  If a person isn't directly active in the affected areas the
polls will go by unnoticed.  If you are suggesting that the rest of us
who were not previously aware of the vote should now go to cast our
ballot, please give the article name where this is happening so that we
can vote that the term is indeed POV.  In any event I don't see how a
vote can remove the 200 years of connotations that have built up around
the word "terrorism"

>Sure, "vigilante" has negative connotations. But we're operating
>entirely within the definition here. They are keeping vigil (they
>don't mention going further than just that, but others do), and thus
>they are vigilantes.
>
>In my experience, "vigilante" does often mean somebody who takes
>justice into their own hands, often violently (ie, a man who murders
>people who have been proven to be rapists but got away from jail time
>due to a technicality), but it can also mean somebody who keeps watch
>well, somebody who is vigilant.
>
There is more to a word than its dictionary denotation.  "Vigilante"
does not escape so easily from its lynch-mob past.  To say now that we
can go back to literal root meanings is akin to the defence claim of not
knowing the gun was loaded.

>How can this be compared to terrorism? Because of our double-standard.
>If terrorism is an act, against civilians, intended to strike fear
>into the hearts of the populace, then I would generally say the events
>of 11.9 qualify. I would also say the nuclear bombings of Hirosima and
>Nagasaki qualify. Was that not the intention? So why don't we mention
>prominently in /those/ two articles that they were terrorist acts?
>Because we choose to restrict our in-group definition to only those
>acts perpetrated by people who are not part of the military of a
>nation internationally recognised as sovreign? Do we realise how
>sillily fine the line between those two categories is? The only reason
>we keep it separate is because we want to believe that Us attacking
>Them is not Evil ("terrorist" can often be used as a synonym for evil
>in modern American society), while Them attacking Us is. We demonise
>the British role in the war for American independence, yet we glorify
>the role of the Union in the American civil war which occurred for
>strikingly similar reasons. Both were cases of wars seeking to gain
>independence for a region, the Colonials and the Confederates were
>both the disgruntled, both wanted to break away, yet the Colonials are
>good but the Confederates are bad. Some say it's because they had
>slaves. Then why do we perpetuate the personality cult of George
>Washington who was a slaveowner?
>
You've just made the point that "terrorist" is POV, and yet seem to
agree to its use.  This is inconsistent.

Governments can indeed be terrorists.  When the word was first used it
was applied by Edmund Burke to the Reign of Terror in France, not to
some rag-tag cluster of insurgents.  If I were to single out any
historical person from the US Civil War to call a terrorist it would be
General Sherman.  To judge George Washington on the basis of his being a
slaveowner is anachronistic; it applies the standards of another era to
a time when slave ownership was not seriously questioned.  Nevertheless,
it would be interesting to see a list of US presidents who owned slaves
at any time in their lives.  It is also notable that objections to
slavery were already on the rise, particularly in Virginia.  As Thomas
Moore observed in 1804,
    Who can, with patience, for a moment see
    The medley mas of pride and misery
    Of whips and charters, manacles and rights,
    Of slaving blacks and democratic whites,
    And all the piebald polity that reigns
    In free confusion o'er Columbia's plains?

>Double-standards obviously exist within society, but we should keep
>them out of Wikipedia.
>
>And as a general guideline, if more than 1/4th of the people involved
>in a discussion say the text is POV, it probably is POV but you just
>can't see that.
>
>
A POV is far less obvious when it is held by a large majority.  I
recently saw a quote from H. L. Mencken to the effect that Americans
most trust those politicians who tell them lies, and distrust most the
ones who say the truth.

Ec


body:
Tony Sidaway wrote:

>David Gerard said:
>
>
>>My own name would be pronounced in vastly varying ways
>>in various languages of Europe, but even then I couldn't really assert
>>the pronunciations were *incorrect*.
>>
>>
>I agree with Mr Garrot.
>
That's the strangled pronunciation. :-)

Ec


subject: [WikiEN-l] April Fool's Day next year

body:
Daniel Mayer wrote:

>--- "Jimmy (Jimbo) Wales" <jwales at wikia.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Of all the ideas that I saw proposed, I think that the absolute best
>>compromise between those who love the holiday and those who are not
>>great fans of it would be to have the main page be 100% real and
>>accurate in every last respect, but *also* to have it be filled with
>>stories that people would naturally suspect to be hoaxes.
>>
>>[[Exploding whale]] is a nice example, as is [[Holy prepuce]] (which
>>was a real featured article already).
>>
>>
>Exactly! The trouble this time was that the FAs that a person may have mistaken
>for April Fools jokes were already featured on the Main Page by the time April
>1 came around. Next time these should be kept in reserve and then the best of
>that crop could be the April 1 TFA. 'Did you know...' could also be subverted
>for a day from displaying interesting facts that are in new articles to very
>unusual facts from some of our more off the wall - but still correct and real -
>articles.
>
>
With nearly a year to build a list of candidate articles there should be
a lot to choose from.

Ec


subject: [WikiEN-l] DB upload trouble

body:
Is there somebody able to answer for me?

Nicolay A. Vasiliev wrote:

> Hello there!
>
> Let me come in to your community please :)!
>
> And immediately I need your advice. I am starting to install MediaWiki
> on my server. I got DB dump and tried to execute this from shell by
> connecting to DB and pointing the source as this dump. This operation
> starts to insert records but after some time it fails with an error of
> max packet size exceeding. This paameter set as 1 Gb already but this
> fires in any case :(. Help me please how could I upload the Wiki
> database.
>
> Thanks in advance and sorry my por English.
>
> Nicolay Vasiliev.


from_name: Anthere

body:
The Cunctator a ?crit:
> On 4/3/05 2:14 PM, "Rick" <giantsrick13 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>--- Mark Pellegrini <mapellegrini at comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>>So thank you very much, to all those of you who
>>>pushed this idiotic
>>>idea, from those of us
>>>who actually have to pick up the pieces.
>>>
>>>-- Disgruntled
>>
>>Hear, hear.
>>
>>RickK
>
>
> I think this April Fool's Day was a great success. It was also successful in
> reminding us which of the admins are the humorless autocratic control
> freaks.
>
> Remember, kiddies: just because someone's enjoying doing something you don't
> enjoy doing, it doesn't mean that's wrong.

:-)

yeah


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Foolish policy proposal

body:
Sj a ?crit:
>>http://www.journaldunet.com/index_1er-avril.shtml
>
> ROFLLL
>
> One of my favorites was their poll, I don't even know why...
>
> * ?tes-vous connect?s ? Internet ?
> 	Oui
> 	Non
> 	Je ne sais pas
>

:-)
I think I loved all of them really.


from_name: Tom Haws

subject: [WikiEN-l] Stalked by a "new user"

body:
I looked at Usr:Kreen's contribs as you asked and left a nice note at
Kreen's talk page.  Like you, I'm not sure what else to do.

Tom Haws
"And [the angel] said unto me: Knowest thou the condescension of God?
And I said unto him: I know that he loveth his children; nevertheless, I
do not know the meaning of all things."

Violet/Riga wrote:

>I'd appreciate it if somebody could look at the contributions by
>Kreen, a "new user" that immediately went after articles I've worked
>on, eventually starting an RFC, demanding page protection and claiming
>3RR for after just one revert!  I'm not aware of any communications
>with this person previously and they've not discussed anything with me
>so far - just come along and tried to organise my de-sysopping.
>
>Not sure how to progress this, though the user seems to have logged off now.
>
>~~~~ Violet/Riga
>_______________________________________________
>WikiEN-l mailing list
>WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
>
>
>


from_name: Laurent CHASTEL

subject:
[Wikitech-l] How to configure synchronization of 2 instances of
	mediawiki

body:
Hello,

I have implemented mediawiki to manage documentation on development rules
and source code management tools usage from my firm.
All users find it very usefull and simple to use and easy to make
modifications on articles.

We have now a new office in another country. We have a VPN between the 2
locations but the bandwith is to small. The users in the new office find
borring to use wiki (20 secondes to display a page against instant display
in "old" office)

I would like to have 2 instances of mediawiki on 2 servers, to synchronize
them and to allow users to make modification on both instances.
For php scripts and uploaded files, I have the solution, but I don't have
one for database.

We have a server A (located in old office) and a server B (located in new
office), both of them are complete webserver (L.A.M.P.)
Users from the old office are connected to A, Users from the new one to B.
Users make modification on A, they are transfert to B ("simple" master/slave
replication in mysql).
But if users modify something on B ... it's not transfered (mysql don't have
master/master replication).

Is there a way to redirect mysql queries according to their type in
mediawiki : select on B(slave) and insert/update/delete on master(A) ?
(mysql replication is used to push modification for A to B)

Perhaps, the solution implemented to wikipedia is the one I need.
Could you explain it ?

Best regards,
Laurent

PS1 : I tryed a solution with cache Turck MMCache and mediawiki on B that
connect to the database on A. The time to display a page is of 10s.
PS2 : Sorry for the long mail ...
PS3 : Soon ;)


from_name: Richard Holton

subject: [WikiEN-l] April Fool's Day next year

body:
On Apr 4, 2005 1:08 PM, Tony Sidaway <minorityreport at bluebottle.com> wrote:
> Daniel Mayer said:
>
> > Only one April Fools article is needed per year.
>
> How, of all the scores of articles that are created every day on
> Wikipedia, do you legislate for there to be only *one* April Fools article
> on April 1?
>
If I understand things correctly, any "freelance" joke article in the
main namespace would be treated as vandalism (or something) and be
speedily deleted (or maybe moved to the user area, or something).

-- Rich Holton

en.wikipedia:User:Rholton


subject: [WikiEN-l] April Fool's Day next year

body:
--- Tony Sidaway <minorityreport at bluebottle.com> wrote:
> How, of all the scores of articles that are created every day on
> Wikipedia, do you legislate for there to be only *one* April Fools article
> on April 1?

There is only one TFA per day - hence *today's* featured article.

-- mav

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Make Yahoo! your home page
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs


from_name: Charles Matthews

subject: [WikiEN-l] Final April Fools wrap up

body:
The Cunctator wrote

> That was my point: Just because someone finds a joke funny that you don't
> find funny, it doesn't mean that's wrong. Or a "trainwreck".

The point is though about 'fun'; not whether we all have the same sense of
humour.  People mostly work on WP because it's fun.  This despite the fact
that none of us could define how or why WP counts as a fun place.

Charles


body:
I am not advocating the prevention of anonymous edits.  I am saying that such a policy has no relevant connection to the claim that "anyone can edit".

Anonymous edits enable impulse contributions to WP. I share the consensus view that this is desirable. It is not a matter of openness; merely a matter of immediacy.

Theo

On Mon, 4 Apr 2005 12:42:57 +0100, David Gerard wrote:
>?Theo Clarke (wiki at tignosis.com) [050404 20:35]:
>
>>?On Sun, 3 Apr 2005 01:06:44 +0100, David 'DJ' Hedley wrote:
>>
>>>?That would be undermining the very point that promotes
>>>?Wikipedia,?though.
>>>?"Anyone can edit" is false if anons can't edit. Theres a lot of?
>>>?people who
>>>?would just walk out if that became true.
>>>
>>?Analysed at that level, the promotional statement is already
>>?untrue. Blocked users and users of blocked IP addresses cannot
>>?edit. At a more extreme level, those with no access to the
>>?Internet cannot edit.
>>?In my opinion, preventing anonymous edits makes the project no
>>?less open as long as registration is unrestricted.
>>
>
>?This one comes up again and again, and the consensus has always
>?been "nope,
>?anon edits will continue thanks."
>
>
>?- d.
>?_______________________________________________
>?WikiEN-l mailing list
>?WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
>?http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l


from_name: Tim Starling

body:
The Cunctator wrote:
> I think this April Fool's Day was a great success. It was also successful in
> reminding us which of the admins are the humorless autocratic control
> freaks.
>
> Remember, kiddies: just because someone's enjoying doing something you don't
> enjoy doing, it doesn't mean that's wrong.

April Fools Day is that one day of the year when everyone can get up and
*try* to make a joke, even if they don't have a sense of humour. It's a
wonderful, participatory event. Joke templates are available at help
desks around the country. If you prefer, you can enhance someone else's
joke by adding something silly to it. It's a simple method but it always
works.

-- Tim Starling


from_name: James D. Forrester

subject: [Foundation-l] Re: (fwd) Re: [WikiEN-l] Vile Triga and MattCrypto.

body:
On Monday, April 04, 2005 12:29 PM, David Gerard <fun at thingy.apana.org.au>
wrote:

> Anthere (anthere9 at yahoo.com) [050404 04:16]:
>
> > Sorry, but... why would Wikimedia UK receive this sort of things
> > ???? Receive what ?
>
> Sorry, I missed including that bit - an email from an aggrieved en:
> user based in the UK claiming his 3RR bans and cautions for personal
> attacks were evidence Wikimedia is not fulfilling its charitable
> goals.
>
> (VampWillow, JamesF - I wonder how much of a thing we'll need
> pointing out the UK org does not run the servers ...)

I suspect that it might well become one of our stock replies -
#REDIRECT[[Wikimedia Foundation]].

Yours,
--
James D. Forrester -- Wikimedia: [[W:en:User:Jdforrester|James F.]]

Mail: james at jdforrester.org | jon at eh.org | csvla at dcs.warwick.ac.uk
IM  : (MSN) jamesdforrester at hotmail.com