subject: [Wikitech-l] MediaWiki API (SoC)

body:
Plyd wrote:
> I was wondering how it could be possible to make a real AJAX user interface
> without having a strong API.

It's not clear to me that we want a "real AJAX user interface". Things
like the editing preview and recent changes are somewhat obvious
candidates for a sprinkling of AJAX; which other parts of the user
interaction with MW do you think would benefit significantly from it?

Let's not fix things that aren't broken.

--
Ivan Krstic <krstic at fas.harvard.edu> | GPG: 0x147C722D


list: wikien-l

source: pipermail-mbox

from_name: maru dubshinki

subject: [WikiEN-l] the verifiability of articles we already HAVE

body:
On 4/27/06, Molu <loom91 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> He he, that's even better :D How do you think of these things? Put this in the wikipedia namespace.

For a few years, I was reasonably active in various CCGs, is how. The
analogy is rather easy. But I think I will copy it into my namespace
and work on it a little. Perhaps even come up with a starter deck.
It'd be kinda amusing if at the next Wikimeetup, we could play
Wikipedia: the CCG.

~maru


from_name: Peter Jacobi

subject: [WikiEN-l] 18 months

body:
On en: vs de:

>From my experience, two (rather unrelated) differences
are most striking:

(A) On de: the argument "no real (convential) encyclopedia
would write this" is by and large honored (or at least considered).
On en: this argument is ignored, or even considered trollish.

(B) On de: all articles are expected to be accessable to a general
audience (the horrible and horribly named "Oma-Test" -- "grandmother
test"). On en: there are a lot of articles in mathematics and physics
addressed to users definitively having some education in the area.
I assume most experts are flocking to en: anyway, as it seems
pointless to have advanced articles in other languages than English.

Regars,
Peter
[[User:Pjacobi]]

--
GMX Produkte empfehlen und ganz einfach Geld verdienen!
Satte Provisionen f?r GMX Partner: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/partner


list: wikitech-l

from_name: Elliott F. Cable

subject: [Wikitech-l] Define and Formalize wiki markup

body:
To pitch in, many many many mediawiki run sites are DEFIANTLY
something that regex would be bad to make impossible to type.

Also, first thing that came to mind for ME, was URLS - most URLs
have /something/like/this.ext in them - that would be tons of extra
code to make it not apply within URLs...

On a sidetopic, I'm having trouble submitting things to this list
unless I'm replying to something like this - I've tried to send at
least 15 notes to this list, and they won't go that I can tell,
unless people have completely ignored all of them so far...

On Apr 27, 2006, at 12:18 PM, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:

> On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 02:30:09PM -0400, Pedro de Medeiros wrote:
>> On 4/27/06, Timwi <timwi at gmx.net> wrote:
>>>> This thread has gotten so dense that I can no longer discern
>>>> what the
>>>> topic is, much less who's on which side.  If anyone sees fit to
>>>> continue it, I suggest they start by enumerating those two things.
>>>
>>> Not sure what you mean by 'dense'. My "side" of the thread is
>>> just that
>>> I get agitated at illogical/fallacious arguments like "let's not use
>>> slashes for italics -- they look like regular expressions."
>>> That's all.
>>
>> According to the principle of least astonishment, if someone types
>> something between /slashes/ in a wiki document, he doesn't expect it
>> to turn into regular expressions to do some unobvious pattern
>> matching
>> when "commit" is pressed. So I agree with you.
>
> See my other message: the actual issue is when people *type an example
> of a regular expression into a wikipage*.  While that may not happen
> much on Wikipedia, remember that Not All Mediawikiae Are Wikipedia, a
> rule that's pertinent when discussing this category of topic.
>
> Cheers,
> -- jra
> --
> Jay R. Ashworth
> jra at baylink.com
> Designer
> Baylink                             RFC 2100
> Ashworth & Associates        The Things I
> Think                        '87 e24
> St Petersburg FL USA      http://baylink.pitas.com             +1
> 727 647 1274
>
>      A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally
> read text.
>      Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
>
>      A: Top-posting.
>      Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet and in e-mail?
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


from_name: Anthony DiPierro

subject: [WikiEN-l] Verifiability equating to notability

body:
On 4/26/06, Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote:
> Pete Bartlett wrote:
>
> >----- Original Message ----
> >From: Philip Welch
> >
> >
> >>>I had a bash at creating a proposal which would define notability on
> >>>wikipedia as meaning that an article or topic is mentioned in a third
> >>>party reliable source.
> >>>
> >>>
> >I can provide multiple third party reliable sources as evidence that
> >there is a four way stop on the intersection between Merman Drive and
> >Terre View Drive in Pullman, Washington. Does that mean that
> >aforementioned four way stop is worthy of mention in Wikipedia?
> >
> >
> >Recalling Jimbo's "Ten Things That Should Be Free"
> >(http://many.corante.com/archives/2005/08/05/jimbos_problems_a_free_culture_manifesto.php)
> >
> >in particular number 7: Free the Maps!
> >
> >I would say absolute yes that information should be in a Wikimedia project that
> >seamlessly integrates into Wikipedia.
> >
> Perhaps when we are faced with information about such an obscure
> intersection the question should be, "Where does it belong?" and not
> "Wat's the quickest way to get rid of it?"
>
> Ec
>
Having a wiki incubator or other catch-all project where such things
can be "dumped" until a home can be located would go a long way toward
that.

Anthony


from_name: Jay R. Ashworth

subject: [Wikitech-l] crear plantilla

body:
On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 01:51:00PM +0100, Timwi wrote:
> Rotem Liss wrote:
> > If you use the English language, more of us will understand you and will
> > be able to help you.
>
> Please stop saying that everytime someone posts in a language other than
> your holy sacred one. He probably knows that himself. It is still up to
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> him to use his own preference.

Please stop using strawman arguments, especially to attack people who
are trying to be helpful.

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

     A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
     Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?

     A: Top-posting.
     Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet and in e-mail?


from_name: Uwe Brauer

subject: [Wikitech-l] how to find out: "double" users and administrators

body:
>>>>> "Lars" == Lars Aronsson
>>>>> <lars at aronsson.se> writes:

   Lars> Uwe Brauer wrote:
   >> -  How can I find out, whether the same user has various accounts
   >> and give the false impression that many users contribute. I
   >> presume it must be via the IP (also in case of multi user
   >> machines that might be misleading).

   Lars> You cannot find this out with technical means.  There is a
   Lars> tool called CheckUser that tries to do this, see
   Lars> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/CheckUser

   Lars> But access to CheckUser is only available to highly trusted
   Lars> people, and it never gives 100% accuracy anyway.  Many people
   Lars> can use the same IP address, and one person can use many IP
   Lars> addresses, especially through anonymous proxies.

I see, that means that I wouldn't necessarily be qualified to use
it. Well almost for sure I wouldn't since I have no idea how to become
a highly trusted person.

The reason why I am asking is: on some specific wikipedia discussion
pages a certain "group" of people seem to come up with almost the
identical (and alas not very constructive) arguments. It has been
speculated that these users are in fact one user. For me this is not a
real problem, tough it is annoying, but it might be real issue when it
comes to a possible vote on some decision to be taken.  Having the
same guy with 5 votes isn't exactly what democracy is about. Anyhow it
seems that there is no easy answer.

But it seems that one could ask those trusted users if a certain
suspicion exists about misuse of multiple personalities.

Thanks

Uwe Brauer


subject: [Wikitech-l] Having trouble submitting to this list

body:
On Apr 27, 2006, at 1:28 PM, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:

> On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 12:46:53PM -0800, Elliott F. Cable wrote:
>> Also, first thing that came to mind for ME, was URLS - most URLs
>> have /something/like/this.ext in them - that would be tons of extra
>> code to make it not apply within URLs...
>
> Excellent point -- or, an excellent addendum to my point; however one
> wants to look at these things.  :-)
>
>> On a sidetopic, I'm having trouble submitting things to this list
>> unless I'm replying to something like this - I've tried to send at
>> least 15 notes to this list, and they won't go that I can tell,
>> unless people have completely ignored all of them so far...
>
> I do not recall having seen any threads from you; are you getting
> bounce messages?
Ok, I changed the subject of this, lets see if that works - no bounce
messages; and I always CC everything I send to myself, so I have 4
copies of every e-mail I send - draft, sent mail, on my server, and
sent back to me - and i got he 4th back, so I know it was sent to the
mailing list server. No bounce messages, nothing - just doesn't
work... And they never show up in the mailing list folder that all my
mediawiki-l and wikitech-l messages are moved to automagically...


from_name: Sean Barrett

subject: [WikiEN-l] Indefinite block and desysopping by User:Danny

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

The Cunctator stated for the record:

> Silly, you didn't read the Ultraviolet memo that states that sometimes Danny
> makes WP:OFFICE actions under double-super-secret background, which are
> tagged only by the Ultraviolet WP:OFFICE tag. If you do not have Ultraviolet
> clearance, any reversions or contestations of Ultraviolet
> Double-Super-Secret Background actions will be grounds for immediate
> termination. Of course, if you do not have Ultraviolet clearance, you cannot
> see the Ultraviolet WP:OFFICE tag.
>
> Finally, only those with Ultraviolet clearance are allowed knowledge of the
> Ultraviolet authorization level. So far as you are concerned Ultraviolet
> clearance does not exist, the above statements notwithstanding.
>
> --The Management

/me reports for duty as reactor shielding.

- --
 Sean Barrett     | You'll never find a more wretched hive
 sean at epoptic.org | of scum and villainy. --Obi-Wan Kenobi
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFEUSxnMAt1wyd9d+URAr0lAJ9SD5nSXwp4DuRUwbt70W7iqEeVtgCfTpg6
QaHWtrOvhT906oITIQYXlJs=
=CA6T
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


body:
If I may, I'd like to add something older than either one - emphasis.
I, personally associate *this* with emphasis, and I associate bold
text with emphasis... but that doesn't mean I want *this* and
'''this''' to be combined. I also happen to associate ALL CAPS TEXT
WITH EMPHASIS - BUT I DON'T WANT MEDIAWIKI TO AUTOMATICALLY CONVERT
ALL CAPS TO BOLD, DO I? No, I don't. I think *this* sort of emphasis
is a fundamentally different sort of subconscious emphasis than
'''this''' (where I expect that to mean bold to you) unrelated to any
sort of conflicts. Also, '''this''' is something I never encountered
before MediaWiki software, yet it somehow made sense that ''this'' is
emphasized, '''this''' is more so, and finally '''''this''''' is most
so. Whereas /this/ doesn't really make sense...

Another sort of related topic to bring up - the whole idea behind CSS
applies here, also. <em> and <i> do the same thing, right? Wrong. <i>
is a formatting control, which I believe technically shouldn't even
be in HTML - <em> is a content control, saying 'this text is
important'. This is also important for alternative browsing -
audible, or any sort of non-visual or non-textual browsing, where <i>
means absolutely nothing, but <em> means emphasized. In the same way,
I understand fundamentally that ''this'' or '''this''' or
'''''this'''''' are different levels of in-line emphasized text, not
headings like ==this==, but DIFFERENT from the text around them. In
other words, emphasized. However, /this/ and *this* are mere
formatting controls - exactly what the entire web standards movement
is fighting against. Yes, /this/ sort of logically slants text - but
that is all. It merely slants text. Unless you directly associate
slanted text with emphasis, /this/ IN AND OF ITSELF doesn't emphasize
the text, as doesn't *this*! Just another thought to consider before
considering the leap to that sort of formatting...

On Apr 27, 2006, at 1:30 PM, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:

> On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 05:08:30PM -0400, Pedro de Medeiros wrote:
>>> See my other message: the actual issue is when people *type an
>>> example
>>> of a regular expression into a wikipage*.  While that may not happen
>>> much on Wikipedia, remember that Not All Mediawikiae Are
>>> Wikipedia, a
>>> rule that's pertinent when discussing this category of topic.
>>
>> It is then an exception, not a rule. Suppose you have a programming
>> language X that uses some of the same markup wiki uses and you
>> want to
>> list some example source code in that language, should you change the
>> wiki markup not to create conflict or just quote the source code? I
>> guess the latter, so why things should be different for regular
>> expressions?
>
> Well, as the other poster notes: *URL's*.  The issue is twofold: which
> item is more newly defined, and which one is more common.
>
>> There might be good reasons for not using /slashes/, I just think
>> this
>> was not one of them. :)
>
> URLs are definitely a better example, but as Mr Cable notes, there are
> *lots* of programming wikis; overloading /RE/ is about as bad as
> overloading /U/R/L.
>
> And since we *can* avoid it, we pretty much *must* avoid it.
>
> Cheers,
> -- jra
> --
> Jay R. Ashworth
> jra at baylink.com
> Designer
> Baylink                             RFC 2100
> Ashworth & Associates        The Things I
> Think                        '87 e24
> St Petersburg FL USA      http://baylink.pitas.com             +1
> 727 647 1274
>
>      A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally
> read text.
>      Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
>
>      A: Top-posting.
>      Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet and in e-mail?
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


subject: [Wikitech-l] MediaWiki API (SoC)

body:
On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 09:38:12AM -0400, Ivan Krstic wrote:
> The API will be used by programs, not people.

Just a thought here, but one which is often overlooked...

One of the sets of programs which -- in the long run -- ought to
migrate to using the API is... Mediawiki iteself.  This thought should
shape the design decisions that are made with respect to the API.

Assuming someone can't come up with a compelling reason why this line
of reasoning is evidence that I'm full of {myself,crap}.  :-)

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

     A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
     Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?

     A: Top-posting.
     Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet and in e-mail?


from_name: Timwi

body:
Chad Perrin wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 26, 2006 at 05:55:17PM +0100, Timwi wrote:
>
>>Chad Perrin wrote:
>>
>>>My impression is that it's aimed at "everybody" -- which includes me.
>>
>>It is definitely not aimed at _pleasing_ everybody, especially not
>>minorities like programmers.
>
> Hopefully it's not aimed at disenfranchising "minorities", either --
> especially since minorities like programmers aren't as much of a
> minority at Wikipedia as they are at, say, the Coopersmith's bar
> downtown.

Yeah, so let's design MediaWiki so it's useful only to the programmers,
since no-one else would be helpful in writing the encyclopedia anyway.
Especially since programmers know everything.

Timwi


subject: [Wikitech-l] crear plantilla

body:
Rotem Liss wrote:
> If you use the English language, more of us will understand you and will
> be able to help you.

Please stop saying that everytime someone posts in a language other than
your holy sacred one. He probably knows that himself. It is still up to
him to use his own preference.


subject: [Wikitech-l] MediaWiki API (SoC)

body:
Rich Morin wrote:
> At 3:16 PM -0400 4/26/06, Ivan Krstic wrote:
>
>>FWIW, I'd discourage this being taken on as a SoC project
>>this summer, since it's a complicated problem that needs
>>significant up-front discussion with a variety of people
>>before any code should be written.
>
> I would love to see a first-cut API get developed, to take
> the place of Pywikipedia.  I think that waiting until the
> "correct" API has been determined is inappropriate.  Get
> something usable, robust, and reasonably speedy in place;
> then look for ways to refine and/or replace it over time.

I agree with this. You can start off with some basic functions (retrieve
an article, edit an article, retrieve article history) and later move on
to more complex ones. Each of these functions is largely independent of
each other, and inconsistencies between them do not make the whole API fail.


subject: [Wikitech-l] crear plantilla

body:
On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 07:00:25PM +0100, Timwi wrote:
> > Please stop using strawman arguments, especially to attack people who
> > are trying to be helpful.
>
> "Speak English or get lost" is not trying to be helpful.

It is also not even *remotely* what he said; hence my characterization
of your argument as a strawman.

But perhaps you just want an argument.  :-)  Down the hall, door 6.

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

     A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
     Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?

     A: Top-posting.
     Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet and in e-mail?


body:
On Apr 27, 2006, at 2:06 PM, Chad Perrin wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 04:16:13PM -0400, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 06:53:13PM +0100, Timwi wrote:
>>>> This thread has gotten so dense that I can no longer discern
>>>> what the
>>>> topic is, much less who's on which side.  If anyone sees fit to
>>>> continue it, I suggest they start by enumerating those two things.
>>>
>>> Not sure what you mean by 'dense'. My "side" of the thread is
>>> just that
>>> I get agitated at illogical/fallacious arguments like "let's not use
>>> slashes for italics -- they look like regular expressions."
>>> That's all.
>>
>> I don't believe it's a fallacious arguemnt.  Let me cast it for you
>> slightly differently:
>>
>>  Choices for inline text markup coding should be made so as to
>> collide
>>  with the least possible number of already extant uses of that set of
>>  punctuation.
>>
>> That's why [[ ]], '' '', and ''' ''' are pretty good choices,
>> while the
>> leading space for indention, slightly less so.
>>
>> While *bold* would be contextual, since <BOL>* is already in use for
>> list items, _italics_ would not, and doesn't collide with anything.
>>
>> /italics/, though, would, probably unexpectedly, collide with the
>> writing of Regexes, and there's no good way to disambiguate from
>> context (as there is with *bold face marking*).
>
> Thanks.  That (and some of your other commentary) clarifies where I
> was
> heading, and I wasn't coming up with a useful way to phrase it.  I'm
> glad someone else did.
>
> Additionally, my statements weren't "fallacious" because they didn't
> purport to be some kind of valid argument that they were not.  One
> might
> claim that my premises were wrong or inapplicable, but I don't think
> "invalid" or "fallacious" in any way applied to my statements.
>
> Besides, I only started this by saying something like "I'd rather we
> didn't do it that way."  I wasn't trying to mandate policy or call
> anyone names, so the implicit vitriol with which my perspective
> seems to
> have been met is a mite bewildering to me.
Don't read something into this which isn't here (-:
I see a lot of argument in this list... almost more than there is
useful discussion (-:
I didn't see any 'vitrol'... if there was, I'm sure it was fully un-
intended!
Let's keep it civil. I happen to agree with Chad; for reasons stated
in my other message (this has seemed to fork into two discussions on
the same topic, lets merge them shall we?) I think that /this/ and
*this* just wouldn't be appropriate for MediaWiki - and although
there is no current underline syntax, and I think _this_ would work
wonderfully for that in MediaWiki, again, the discussion of
underlining in WikiPedia has already been had, and I don't think
there is enough demand outside of wikipedia for an underline syntax
to be added.
(However, if underlining syntax WERE Added, I'd cast my vote for
_this_ - but again, see my other post about content and meaning vs.
display)


from_name: Pedro de Medeiros

body:
On 4/27/06, Timwi <timwi at gmx.net> wrote:
>
> > This thread has gotten so dense that I can no longer discern what the
> > topic is, much less who's on which side.  If anyone sees fit to
> > continue it, I suggest they start by enumerating those two things.
>
> Not sure what you mean by 'dense'. My "side" of the thread is just that
> I get agitated at illogical/fallacious arguments like "let's not use
> slashes for italics -- they look like regular expressions." That's all.

According to the principle of least astonishment, if someone types
something between /slashes/ in a wiki document, he doesn't expect it
to turn into regular expressions to do some unobvious pattern matching
when "commit" is pressed. So I agree with you.

Cheers.
--
Pedro de Medeiros - Computer Science - University of Bras?lia
Email: pedro.medeiros at gmail.com - Home Page: http://www.nonseq.net
Linux User No.: 234250 - ICQ: 2878740 - Jabber: medeiros at jabber.org


subject: [Wikitech-l] crear plantilla

body:
On Apr 27, 2006, at 2:32 PM, Chad Perrin wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 02:03:09PM -0400, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 07:00:25PM +0100, Timwi wrote:
>>>> Please stop using strawman arguments, especially to attack
>>>> people who
>>>> are trying to be helpful.
>>>
>>> "Speak English or get lost" is not trying to be helpful.
>>
>> It is also not even *remotely* what he said; hence my
>> characterization
>> of your argument as a strawman.
>>
>> But perhaps you just want an argument.  :-)  Down the hall, door 6.
>
> Ditto.
>
> strawman/ad hominem: I wonder if Timwi got up on the wrong side of the
> bed today.
>
> helpful statement: I really think discussion would be more
> productive if
> you didn't assume the worst from everyone, Timwi.  I think we
> Wikipedians tend to call my proposed approach an assumption of good
> faith -- or is that Wikimedians?
I don't think Timwi got up on the wrong side of the bed - at least,
not him specifically. I think this entire mailing list needs some de-
toxification - Just don't worry about personal stuff. Original
poster, you should PROBABLY have thought out your comment a bit
before posting it, although I understand it totally - what you meant
to say is that this is a majorly english list and that it will be
EASIER for us to help the user in the most comprehensive way possible
if he could try to phrase his request in said language. Timwi, what
he said was not completely the nicest way to greet a non-english
MediaWiki user, but scolding him in a public list was not the
solution. Jay - don't label him as an arguer; he isn't. He was
angered by the (appearantly) unfriendly treatment of a new poster to
the list - as you could be in another circumstance; let him be! And
Chad, think for a moment about what was going through Timwi's mind
when he replied - we don't always have the chance to fully think
things through before we speak, and a mailing list is no different.

I hope I might have improved this list in some fashion with this
post; and I surely apologize if I annoyed anybody in the process.
What say we let this conversation die here; the OP's question was
answered, and there has already been enough of a start toward a multi-
faceted mud-slinging contest that I don't want to see here. Ok? So,
if your hitting the reply button to reply to this... just, in the
interest of peace, don't! (-:

I truly hope you will have a nice day!


body:
On Apr 27, 2006, at 2:46 PM, Pedro de Medeiros wrote:

> On 4/27/06, Jay R. Ashworth <jra at baylink.com> wrote:
>
>> URLs are definitely a better example, but as Mr Cable notes, there
>> are
>> *lots* of programming wikis;
>
>
> Any wiki that display code should properly quote it. Have a look at
> any source code example in wikipedia. It is a good practice.
>
>
>> overloading /RE/ is about as bad as
>> overloading /U/R/L.
>
>
> Not really. /U/R/L has a meaning in wiki markup, /RE/ doesn't. It is
> just plain text. So you can't say they compare that much.
>
> Besides, "overloading /RE/" is not correct, because /RE/ is not
> processed by wiki markup (as stated, /RE/ is just plain text). On the
> other hand, "Overloading /U/R/L" is more correct.
In any case, as he said, this won't be changing any time soon, so
lets leave it at this, shall we? There are arguments both for and
against this type of /italic/ *bold* and _underlined_ syntax, we've
heard them all now, and they won't affect anything at all until a
decision is made to totally re-define the syntax anyway; so lets let
this go and move on.


from_name: Brion Vibber

subject:
[Wikitech-l] Italics and bold syntax is not changing,
 please take fights about it offlist.

body:
Thanks.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 249 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20060427/1b2abaf0/attachment.pgp>


body:
Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
> You know, it was *precisely this message* that I was trying to
> preclude, when I first said "I know it won't be changing".

If you feel the need to prepend a statement with "I know this is going to start
a fight, but..." sometimes it's better to just stop there. :)

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 249 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20060427/5123e490/attachment.pgp>


from_name: Plyd

subject: [Wikitech-l] MediaWiki API (SoC)

body:
I was wondering how it could be possible to make a real AJAX user interface
without having a strong API.
I've seen another SoC proposition about AJAX. Including 2 or 3 ajax tools
seems to be just a step, that would be thrown away after having built a
fully ajax-made interface. Is it too early for that too ?

Plyd

On 4/27/06, Ivan Krstic <krstic at fas.harvard.edu> wrote:
>
> Timwi wrote:
> > You can start off with some basic functions (retrieve
> > an article, edit an article, retrieve article history) and later move on
> > to more complex ones.
>
> I thought about this some more yesterday, and I've changed my mind. A
> first pass at a *very* simple API, if done with care, might actually
> help frame later API discussions, such as the one at Hacking Days.
>
> Too much of MediaWiki has traditionally been plagued by the "just sit
> down and spit out some code" approach to development, which led to an
> unseemly growth by agglomeration, and a codebase that's only recently
> been getting less horrid. Given the context -- volunteer coders,
> non-profit organization, etc -- some code is better than no code, so I'm
> not passing judgment here. But given a tangible opportunity to get a
> serious component like the API right (for some value of 'right' that's
> more than what one would obtain just by sitting down and hacking),
> waiting another couple of months to get everyone in a room and hash this
> out seems to be by far the best approach.
>
> The API will be used by programs, not people. People can quickly adapt
> to changes in the UI, but every mistake that ends up in the API will
> probably become an incredible PITA that will need to be supported for
> some time going forward. So I'd still discourage the API being a SoC
> project. Of course, I'm not affiliated with the Foundation, so Ben is
> more than welcome to still submit his application for it.
>
> --
> Ivan Krstic <krstic at fas.harvard.edu> | GPG: 0x147C722D
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>


from_name: Chad Perrin

body:
On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 04:16:13PM -0400, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 06:53:13PM +0100, Timwi wrote:
> > > This thread has gotten so dense that I can no longer discern what the
> > > topic is, much less who's on which side.  If anyone sees fit to
> > > continue it, I suggest they start by enumerating those two things.
> >
> > Not sure what you mean by 'dense'. My "side" of the thread is just that
> > I get agitated at illogical/fallacious arguments like "let's not use
> > slashes for italics -- they look like regular expressions." That's all.
>
> I don't believe it's a fallacious arguemnt.  Let me cast it for you
> slightly differently:
>
>  Choices for inline text markup coding should be made so as to collide
>  with the least possible number of already extant uses of that set of
>  punctuation.
>
> That's why [[ ]], '' '', and ''' ''' are pretty good choices, while the
> leading space for indention, slightly less so.
>
> While *bold* would be contextual, since <BOL>* is already in use for
> list items, _italics_ would not, and doesn't collide with anything.
>
> /italics/, though, would, probably unexpectedly, collide with the
> writing of Regexes, and there's no good way to disambiguate from
> context (as there is with *bold face marking*).

Thanks.  That (and some of your other commentary) clarifies where I was
heading, and I wasn't coming up with a useful way to phrase it.  I'm
glad someone else did.

Additionally, my statements weren't "fallacious" because they didn't
purport to be some kind of valid argument that they were not.  One might
claim that my premises were wrong or inapplicable, but I don't think
"invalid" or "fallacious" in any way applied to my statements.

Besides, I only started this by saying something like "I'd rather we
didn't do it that way."  I wasn't trying to mandate policy or call
anyone names, so the implicit vitriol with which my perspective seems to
have been met is a mite bewildering to me.

--
Chad Perrin [ CCD CopyWrite | http://ccd.apotheon.org ]
"There comes a time in the history of any project when it becomes necessary
to shoot the engineers and begin production." - MacUser, November 1990


from_name: The Cunctator

subject: [WikiEN-l] CNN: Campaign manager resigns amid Wikipedia flap

body:
On 4/27/06, Michael Lindeen <wikikitty at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Yes. And as we get larger and more prominent, this will become more
> common, not less. Mike
>
> On 4/27/06, Pete Bartlett <pcb21 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > The campaign manager of a candidate in the Georgia (*)
> > gubernatorial election has resigned after someone in his
> > office changed the bio of her opponent.
> >
> > Full story at:
> > http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/04/26/cox.wikipedia/
> >
> > Another reminder to us and our fellow editors of the huge
> > responsibilty we all bear these days to edit well.
> >

I'm assuming that the reporter got this wrong: "The resignation came after
Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales confirmed that the addition to the biography
came from an IP address affiliated with the Cox campaign."

Because if that's true, it's kind of a lame move.


body:
On 4/27/06, The Cunctator <cunctator at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 4/27/06, Michael Lindeen <wikikitty at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Yes. And as we get larger and more prominent, this will become more
> > common, not less. Mike
> >
> > On 4/27/06, Pete Bartlett <pcb21 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > The campaign manager of a candidate in the Georgia (*)
> > > gubernatorial election has resigned after someone in his
> > > office changed the bio of her opponent.
> > >
> > > Full story at:
> > > http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/04/26/cox.wikipedia/
> > >
> > > Another reminder to us and our fellow editors of the huge
> > > responsibilty we all bear these days to edit well.
> > >
>
>
> I'm assuming that the reporter got this wrong: "The resignation came after
> Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales confirmed that the addition to the biography
> came from an IP address affiliated with the Cox campaign."
>
> Because if that's true, it's kind of a lame move.
>

p.s. Funny that someone is forced to resign for adding true information....


body:
On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 06:53:13PM +0100, Timwi wrote:
> > This thread has gotten so dense that I can no longer discern what the
> > topic is, much less who's on which side.  If anyone sees fit to
> > continue it, I suggest they start by enumerating those two things.
>
> Not sure what you mean by 'dense'. My "side" of the thread is just that
> I get agitated at illogical/fallacious arguments like "let's not use
> slashes for italics -- they look like regular expressions." That's all.

I don't believe it's a fallacious arguemnt.  Let me cast it for you
slightly differently:

 Choices for inline text markup coding should be made so as to collide
 with the least possible number of already extant uses of that set of
 punctuation.

That's why [[ ]], '' '', and ''' ''' are pretty good choices, while the
leading space for indention, slightly less so.

While *bold* would be contextual, since <BOL>* is already in use for
list items, _italics_ would not, and doesn't collide with anything.

/italics/, though, would, probably unexpectedly, collide with the
writing of Regexes, and there's no good way to disambiguate from
context (as there is with *bold face marking*).

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

     A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
     Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?

     A: Top-posting.
     Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet and in e-mail?


body:
On 4/20/06, Kelly Martin <kelly.lynn.martin at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 4/20/06, Erik Moeller <eloquence at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 4/20/06, Kelly Martin <kelly.lynn.martin at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On 4/20/06, Erik Moeller <eloquence at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > 3) When another user added an Office Protection label, Danny
> reverted
> > > > him. This is only visible in the list of deleted revisions of
> > > > [[NewsMax.com]].
> >
> > > Actually, no, he didn't.  I did.
> >
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Undelete/NewsMax.com
> > #  00:46, April 19, 2006 . . Danny (Reverted edits by ContiE (talk) to
> > last version by Danny)
> > # 22:31, April 18, 2006 . . ContiE (using the office template.
> > (
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Splash&diff=prev&oldid=49018307)
> )
> >
> > Erik
>
> Ah, yes.  Danny did revert, and THEN I deleted both the edit and the
> reversion.  My mistake.
>
> Kelly

Why did you get involved?


body:
On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 02:30:09PM -0400, Pedro de Medeiros wrote:
> On 4/27/06, Timwi <timwi at gmx.net> wrote:
> > > This thread has gotten so dense that I can no longer discern what the
> > > topic is, much less who's on which side.  If anyone sees fit to
> > > continue it, I suggest they start by enumerating those two things.
> >
> > Not sure what you mean by 'dense'. My "side" of the thread is just that
> > I get agitated at illogical/fallacious arguments like "let's not use
> > slashes for italics -- they look like regular expressions." That's all.
>
> According to the principle of least astonishment, if someone types
> something between /slashes/ in a wiki document, he doesn't expect it
> to turn into regular expressions to do some unobvious pattern matching
> when "commit" is pressed. So I agree with you.

See my other message: the actual issue is when people *type an example
of a regular expression into a wikipage*.  While that may not happen
much on Wikipedia, remember that Not All Mediawikiae Are Wikipedia, a
rule that's pertinent when discussing this category of topic.

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

     A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
     Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?

     A: Top-posting.
     Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet and in e-mail?


from_name: jayjg

subject: [WikiEN-l] Autoblock problem: not working, not right

body:
That's an interesting story, brian, but it doesn't explain why you
first edited with an IP address, then had to create three separate
userids to edit that page, Neztielz, PLAK, and Mystork, before finally
using your real account Colle.

Jay.

On 4/27/06, brian <bs_politic at yahoo.ca> wrote:
> Hi, I was recently blocked by a great admin who seems to of gotten a little jaded.  The block was related to my alledged motives, which in reality were quite good!  Anyways, my block was supposed to end about 8 or 9 hours ago, so if someone with the know how would like to look into it, please give me a hand!
>
> If you want to know why I was unjustly blocked (which I know you really do) please read on! PLEASE!
>
> Well I had given up on wikipedia a few months ago, and had left my user:colle account to gather some dust.  But then you know what happens, I ended up coming crawling back---but I was only going to edit one article (Cuba).  I read the article before I went to Cuba, so it has a bit of sentimental value to me, but I digress.  So I made a new account rather than dig up the old password. Over a day or two I did some edits, worked on a sandbox, and signed a RFC. Unfortunatly I was labled a sockpuppet by an avatar and another user because I had unfortunatly appeared minutes after a high-profile editor was banned indefinatly.  So... I went and found my old accounts password (very lucky), and then used that account to prove I wasn't a sockpuppet by removing the "suspected sockpuppet of.." template from my new userpage, and replacing it with one stating "this user is the legitimate sock puppet of Colle."  The next day Sarah indef banned my legitimate sockpuppet, and gave me a 12
>  hour break from editing.  I've tried to explain the situation, but I haven't had much progress getting back from her lately.  I really don't want people thinking I intentionally mess around with the system --it is just how it happened.  Also, I really didn't break any rules that I know of.  Thanks a bunch!
>
> Brian
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Have a question? Yahoo! Canada Answers. Go to Yahoo! Canada Answers
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


body:
On 4/20/06, Delirium <delirium at hackish.org> wrote:
>
> Stephen Bain wrote:
> > On 4/20/06, Katefan0 <katefan0wiki at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Everybody who's an administrator knows -- or ought to know -- that any
> of
> >> Danny's actions could be undertaken on behalf of the foundation. To me,
> this
> >> suggests -- in fact, demands -- a lot more caution with undoing his
> admin
> >> actions than otherwise, and at the very least warrants a discreet
> "what's
> >> this about?" before taking action.
> >>
> >
> > I agree, and I think this is really the point to take out of this. We
> > should all operate on the presumption that when Danny does something,
> > he's doing it for a Good Reason, and that one shouldn't undo it unless
> > one has checked the reason behind it with Danny first (that's if it
> > should even be undone at all). A little communication solves alot of
> > problems.
> >
>
> But Danny has explicitly said (on this list) that he is also a normal
> editor, and only his actions that are accompanied with a statement that
> they are WP:OFFICE actions should be treated as such.  So if he does
> something and does not tag it WP:OFFICE, we should all operate on the
> presumption that he is doing it in his capacity as a normal Wikipedian.

Silly, you didn't read the Ultraviolet memo that states that sometimes Danny
makes WP:OFFICE actions under double-super-secret background, which are
tagged only by the Ultraviolet WP:OFFICE tag. If you do not have Ultraviolet
clearance, any reversions or contestations of Ultraviolet
Double-Super-Secret Background actions will be grounds for immediate
termination. Of course, if you do not have Ultraviolet clearance, you cannot
see the Ultraviolet WP:OFFICE tag.

Finally, only those with Ultraviolet clearance are allowed knowledge of the
Ultraviolet authorization level. So far as you are concerned Ultraviolet
clearance does not exist, the above statements notwithstanding.

--The Management


subject: [Wikitech-l] crear plantilla

body:
On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 02:03:09PM -0400, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 07:00:25PM +0100, Timwi wrote:
> > > Please stop using strawman arguments, especially to attack people who
> > > are trying to be helpful.
> >
> > "Speak English or get lost" is not trying to be helpful.
>
> It is also not even *remotely* what he said; hence my characterization
> of your argument as a strawman.
>
> But perhaps you just want an argument.  :-)  Down the hall, door 6.

Ditto.

strawman/ad hominem: I wonder if Timwi got up on the wrong side of the
bed today.

helpful statement: I really think discussion would be more productive if
you didn't assume the worst from everyone, Timwi.  I think we
Wikipedians tend to call my proposed approach an assumption of good
faith -- or is that Wikimedians?

--
Chad Perrin [ CCD CopyWrite | http://ccd.apotheon.org ]
"The first rule of magic is simple. Don't waste your time waving your
hands and hopping when a rock or a club will do." - McCloctnick the Lucid


body:
On 4/27/06, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 4/27/06, The Cunctator <cunctator at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 4/27/06, Michael Lindeen <wikikitty at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Yes. And as we get larger and more prominent, this will become more
> > > common, not less. Mike
> > >
> > > On 4/27/06, Pete Bartlett <pcb21 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > The campaign manager of a candidate in the Georgia (*)
> > > > gubernatorial election has resigned after someone in his
> > > > office changed the bio of her opponent.
> > > >
> > > > Full story at:
> > > > http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/04/26/cox.wikipedia/
> > > >
> > > > Another reminder to us and our fellow editors of the huge
> > > > responsibilty we all bear these days to edit well.
> > > >
> >
> >
> > I'm assuming that the reporter got this wrong: "The resignation came
> after
> > Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales confirmed that the addition to the
> biography
> > came from an IP address affiliated with the Cox campaign."
> >
> > Because if that's true, it's kind of a lame move.
>
> The person makeing the edit wasn't logged in so anyone could run a whois.

That's what I figured. If only that CNN article were editable....


body:
On 4/27/06, The Cunctator <cunctator at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 4/27/06, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On 4/27/06, The Cunctator <cunctator at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On 4/27/06, Michael Lindeen <wikikitty at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Yes. And as we get larger and more prominent, this will become more
> > > > common, not less. Mike
> > > >
> > > > On 4/27/06, Pete Bartlett <pcb21 at yahoo.com > wrote:
> > > > > The campaign manager of a candidate in the Georgia (*)
> > > > > gubernatorial election has resigned after someone in his
> > > > > office changed the bio of her opponent.
> > > > >
> > > > > Full story at:
> > > > > http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/04/26/cox.wikipedia/
> > > > >
> > > > > Another reminder to us and our fellow editors of the huge
> > > > > responsibilty we all bear these days to edit well.
> > > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I'm assuming that the reporter got this wrong: "The resignation came
> > after
> > > Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales confirmed that the addition to the
> > biography
> > > came from an IP address affiliated with the Cox campaign."
> > >
> > > Because if that's true, it's kind of a lame move.
> >
> > The person makeing the edit wasn't logged in so anyone could run a
> > whois.
>
>
> That's what I figured. If only that CNN article were editable....
>

It would still be lame if Jimbo ran the whois.


body:
On 4/27/06, Sean Barrett <sean at epoptic.org> wrote:
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> The Cunctator stated for the record:
>
> > Silly, you didn't read the Ultraviolet memo that states that sometimes
> Danny
> > makes WP:OFFICE actions under double-super-secret background, which are
> > tagged only by the Ultraviolet WP:OFFICE tag. If you do not have
> Ultraviolet
> > clearance, any reversions or contestations of Ultraviolet
> > Double-Super-Secret Background actions will be grounds for immediate
> > termination. Of course, if you do not have Ultraviolet clearance, you
> cannot
> > see the Ultraviolet WP:OFFICE tag.
> >
> > Finally, only those with Ultraviolet clearance are allowed knowledge of
> the
> > Ultraviolet authorization level. So far as you are concerned Ultraviolet
> > clearance does not exist, the above statements notwithstanding.
> >
> > --The Management
>
> /me reports for duty as reactor shielding.
>
> That's one reference! For full points, do you note the other two?
>


subject: [Wikitech-l] MediaWiki API (SoC)

body:
there are several tools that could be interesting to have in AJAX, the
editing preview, but I have several other examples that could be faster for
the user :
- following or not a page without having to reload a new page
- the [edit] button that opens a box directly inside the page without
reloading another one
- renaming/deleting etc. in the same way (box added at the top of the page)
These tools are far from necessary but they improve the use of MediaWiki and
they could reduce the number of requests for the servers.

I have also in mind a new SpecialRC.php page, in ajax too.
It would be updated automatically and would offer instant tools, like
viewing beginning of the diff passing just the mouse on the link, sending
messages to an IP or a new user directly from the RC page, ... and helping
stuff to fight vandalism. (A tool that would finally turn the RC page into a
Vandal Fighter tool, with all the advantages of being included in the
browser.)

Plyd

On 4/27/06, Ivan Krstic <krstic at fas.harvard.edu> wrote:
>
> Plyd wrote:
> > I was wondering how it could be possible to make a real AJAX user
> interface
> > without having a strong API.
>
> It's not clear to me that we want a "real AJAX user interface". Things
> like the editing preview and recent changes are somewhat obvious
> candidates for a sprinkling of AJAX; which other parts of the user
> interaction with MW do you think would benefit significantly from it?
>
> Let's not fix things that aren't broken.
>
> --
> Ivan Krstic <krstic at fas.harvard.edu> | GPG: 0x147C722D
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>


body:
On 4/27/06, Jay R. Ashworth <jra at baylink.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 02:30:09PM -0400, Pedro de Medeiros wrote:
> > On 4/27/06, Timwi <timwi at gmx.net> wrote:
> > > > This thread has gotten so dense that I can no longer discern what the
> > > > topic is, much less who's on which side.  If anyone sees fit to
> > > > continue it, I suggest they start by enumerating those two things.
> > >
> > > Not sure what you mean by 'dense'. My "side" of the thread is just that
> > > I get agitated at illogical/fallacious arguments like "let's not use
> > > slashes for italics -- they look like regular expressions." That's all.
> >
> > According to the principle of least astonishment, if someone types
> > something between /slashes/ in a wiki document, he doesn't expect it
> > to turn into regular expressions to do some unobvious pattern matching
> > when "commit" is pressed. So I agree with you.
>
> See my other message: the actual issue is when people *type an example
> of a regular expression into a wikipage*.  While that may not happen
> much on Wikipedia, remember that Not All Mediawikiae Are Wikipedia, a
> rule that's pertinent when discussing this category of topic.

It is then an exception, not a rule. Suppose you have a programming
language X that uses some of the same markup wiki uses and you want to
list some example source code in that language, should you change the
wiki markup not to create conflict or just quote the source code? I
guess the latter, so why things should be different for regular
expressions?

There might be good reasons for not using /slashes/, I just think this
was not one of them. :)

Cheers.
--
Pedro de Medeiros - Computer Science - University of Bras?lia
Email: pedro.medeiros at gmail.com - Home Page: http://www.nonseq.net
Linux User No.: 234250 - ICQ: 2878740 - Jabber: medeiros at jabber.org


from_name: Petr Kadlec

body:
> But it seems that one could ask those trusted users if a certain
> suspicion exists about misuse of multiple personalities.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_CheckUser

-- [[cs:User:Mormegil | Petr Kadlec]]


body:
On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 12:46:53PM -0800, Elliott F. Cable wrote:
> Also, first thing that came to mind for ME, was URLS - most URLs
> have /something/like/this.ext in them - that would be tons of extra
> code to make it not apply within URLs...

Excellent point -- or, an excellent addendum to my point; however one
wants to look at these things.  :-)

> On a sidetopic, I'm having trouble submitting things to this list
> unless I'm replying to something like this - I've tried to send at
> least 15 notes to this list, and they won't go that I can tell,
> unless people have completely ignored all of them so far...

I do not recall having seen any threads from you; are you getting
bounce messages?

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

     A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
     Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?

     A: Top-posting.
     Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet and in e-mail?


subject: [Wikitech-l] crear plantilla

body:
On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 02:51:24PM -0800, Elliott F. Cable wrote:
> I don't think Timwi got up on the wrong side of the bed - at least,
> not him specifically. I think this entire mailing list needs some de-
> toxification - Just don't worry about personal stuff. Original
> poster, you should PROBABLY have thought out your comment a bit
> before posting it, although I understand it totally - what you meant
> to say is that this is a majorly english list and that it will be
> EASIER for us to help the user in the most comprehensive way possible
> if he could try to phrase his request in said language. Timwi, what
> he said was not completely the nicest way to greet a non-english
> MediaWiki user, but scolding him in a public list was not the
> solution. Jay - don't label him as an arguer; he isn't. He was
> angered by the (appearantly) unfriendly treatment of a new poster to
> the list - as you could be in another circumstance; let him be! And
> Chad, think for a moment about what was going through Timwi's mind
> when he replied - we don't always have the chance to fully think
> things through before we speak, and a mailing list is no different.

That notion that he got up on the wrong side of the bed today arose
because this is not the only thread in which he has apparently assumed
bad faith from the beginning in response to others' commentary.  This
isn't meant to provoke further discussion, only to indicate my thinking
on the matter.  Since misunderstanding is probably the biggest
contributor to excess heat, I figure additional understanding of my
perspective might come in handy.

No insult or other negative connotation is intended.  It's more a case
of wanting to prompt others to assume good faith when possible.  A
single incidence would not have prompted me to comment thusly: multiple
incidents, however, make me think a comment might help to cause people
to think more before posting to the list.  I don't want an attempt to
halt potential arguing in this thread to prevent that from getting
across, when the intent is to reduce unnecessary arguing in more threads
than just this one.

--
Chad Perrin [ CCD CopyWrite | http://ccd.apotheon.org ]
print substr("Just another Perl hacker", 0, -2);


body:
On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 05:08:30PM -0400, Pedro de Medeiros wrote:
> > See my other message: the actual issue is when people *type an example
> > of a regular expression into a wikipage*.  While that may not happen
> > much on Wikipedia, remember that Not All Mediawikiae Are Wikipedia, a
> > rule that's pertinent when discussing this category of topic.
>
> It is then an exception, not a rule. Suppose you have a programming
> language X that uses some of the same markup wiki uses and you want to
> list some example source code in that language, should you change the
> wiki markup not to create conflict or just quote the source code? I
> guess the latter, so why things should be different for regular
> expressions?

Well, as the other poster notes: *URL's*.  The issue is twofold: which
item is more newly defined, and which one is more common.

> There might be good reasons for not using /slashes/, I just think this
> was not one of them. :)

URLs are definitely a better example, but as Mr Cable notes, there are
*lots* of programming wikis; overloading /RE/ is about as bad as
overloading /U/R/L.

And since we *can* avoid it, we pretty much *must* avoid it.

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

     A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
     Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?

     A: Top-posting.
     Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet and in e-mail?


from_name: Ray Saintonge

body:
Michael Lindeen wrote:

>Yes. And as we get larger and more prominent, this will become more
>common, not less. Mike
>
>On 4/27/06, Pete Bartlett <pcb21 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>>The campaign manager of a candidate in the Georgia (*)
>>gubernatorial election has resigned after someone in his
>>office changed the bio of her opponent.
>>
>>Full story at:
>>http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/04/26/cox.wikipedia/
>>
>>Another reminder to us and our fellow editors of the huge
>>responsibilty we all bear these days to edit well.
>>
>>Pcb21
>>
>>*that's the American one, in case you were wondering
>>
>>
We really need to look at the positive side of these incidents.  When a
traditional newspaper would include hurtful comments of this sort it
could bury a retraction at the bottom of an even-numbered page a few
days later.  Someone who would spread defamatory rumours in a Wikipedia
biography would be just as likely to do it elsewhere.  If these people
are4 more easily exposed it good be a good effect on the practice of
politics..

Ec


from_name: brian

body:
Yes, of course, I shouldn't of left that out.  I was invited to get an account by atleast 3 people, namely one individual who has "low patience" for anon editors.  Fair enough, so I started up an accout, Neztielz.  Unfortunatly, it was very late, and had some beer, so did not realise that Neztielz was an inappropriate name violating naming policy.  PLAK, on the otherhand, I created with the hope of bringing peoples attention to the parts of the article that were full of misinformation and serious pov problems.  The Cuba article is suffering through an extended fight between two groups of editors, and nothing is getting accomplished.  I felt if i could just focus attention on some of the serious problems, perhaps some progress could be made.  For example the infrastructure section literally only adresses positives prior to the revolution, and negatives following it.  In reality, Cubas infrastrucure has grown, and continues to do so.  While Cuba is behind in areas such as
 telecommunications,  in other areas it is doing quite well.  While the actual edits made by PLAK were a little unscroupulous, I never used a secondary account to back up my work, or make others look bad.

Brian

That's an interesting story, brian, but it doesn't explain why you
first edited with an IP address, then had to create three separate
userids to edit that page, Neztielz, PLAK, and Mystork, before finally
using your real account Colle.

Jay.

On 4/27/06, brian <bs_politic at yahoo.ca> wrote:
> Hi, I was recently blocked by a great admin who seems to of gotten a
little jaded.  The block was related to my alledged motives, which in
reality were quite good!  Anyways, my block was supposed to end about 8
or 9 hours ago, so if someone with the know how would like to look into
it, please give me a hand!
>
> If you want to know why I was unjustly blocked (which I know you
really do) please read on! PLEASE!
>
> Well I had given up on wikipedia a few months ago, and had left my
user:colle account to gather some dust.  But then you know what happens,
I ended up coming crawling back---but I was only going to edit one
article (Cuba).  I read the article before I went to Cuba, so it has a bit
of sentimental value to me, but I digress.  So I made a new account
rather than dig up the old password. Over a day or two I did some edits,
worked on a sandbox, and signed a RFC. Unfortunatly I was labled a
sockpuppet by an avatar and another user because I had unfortunatly appeared
minutes after a high-profile editor was banned indefinatly.  So... I
went and found my old accounts password (very lucky), and then used that
account to prove I wasn't a sockpuppet by removing the "suspected
sockpuppet of.." template from my new userpage, and replacing it with one
stating "this user is the legitimate sock puppet of Colle."  The next day
Sarah indef banned my legitimate sockpuppet, and gave me a 12
>  hour break from editing.  I've tried to explain the situation, but I
haven't had much progress getting back from her lately.  I really don't
want people thinking I intentionally mess around with the system --it
is just how it happened.  Also, I really didn't break any rules that I
know of.  Thanks a bunch!
>
> Brian

---------------------------------
Share your photos with the people who matter at Yahoo! Canada Photos


from_name: Jochen Magnus

subject: [Wikitech-l] Dumps

body:
> So, I go to your site, and I see a problem with a page, and I click on
> the Edit link, and I make the change, and I go back to...
>
> 1) not your site and the change is there.
>
> 2) your site, and the change is *not* there.
>
> Neither of those seems perfect.

I think this is a little cost for the mirror. Our users are informed
that their editings are loaded back to us at next mirror time. I find
this more useful than no links to original Wikipedia and better than no
mirror. For us is no need off an daily (or hourly) up-to-date
encyclopaedia. We find two to four updates per month adequate.

Look, we are presenting the Wipedia data in our own design. They are
also integrated in our "E-Paper" which is an additional offer to our
paper readers (see http://epaper.rhein-zeitung.de/06/04/23/ , load an
article and doubleclick any noun)

> Those people completely off the grid shouldn't have Wikipedia at all?

Surely not. For this purpose offline copies works perfect. But they are
not XORed to online dumps.

jo


subject:
[Wikitech-l] Italics and bold syntax is not changing,
	please take fights about it offlist.

body:
On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 03:45:22PM -0700, Brion Vibber wrote:
> Subject: [Wikitech-l] Italics and bold syntax is not changing,
>  please take fights about it offlist.

You know, it was *precisely this message* that I was trying to
preclude, when I first said "I know it won't be changing".

I don't believe that the light amongst the heat in this thread was a
waste, however, given that markup parser formal definition is on the
table this month...

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

     A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
     Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?

     A: Top-posting.
     Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet and in e-mail?


body:
> This thread has gotten so dense that I can no longer discern what the
> topic is, much less who's on which side.  If anyone sees fit to
> continue it, I suggest they start by enumerating those two things.

Not sure what you mean by 'dense'. My "side" of the thread is just that
I get agitated at illogical/fallacious arguments like "let's not use
slashes for italics -- they look like regular expressions." That's all.

Timwi


subject: [Wikitech-l] crear plantilla

body:
> Please stop using strawman arguments, especially to attack people who
> are trying to be helpful.

"Speak English or get lost" is not trying to be helpful.


from_name: Ben Francis

subject: [Wikitech-l] MediaWiki API (SoC)

body:
Ivan Krstic wrote:
>Timwi wrote:
>>You can start off with some basic functions (retrieve
>>an article, edit an article, retrieve article history) and later move on
>>to more complex ones.

I like the sound of this, but I'm probably biased because I'm really
keen on writing it!

> The API will be used by programs, not people. People can quickly adapt
> to changes in the UI, but every mistake that ends up in the API will
> probably become an incredible PITA that will need to be supported for
> some time going forward.

I have to admit that this is a very good point, I think an API is
something that can be difficult to change once it's written because by
definition once it's out there other programs will rely on it staying
the same. Getting it right the first time is better than trying to
retain backwards compatibility with a badly designed sytem. Writing an
API is a big responsibility, especially if it ever gets used with
something as hugely significant as Wikipedia.

However...

> I thought about this some more yesterday, and I've changed my mind. A
> first pass at a *very* simple API, if done with care, might actually
> help frame later API discussions, such as the one at Hacking Days.

Yes, I would argue that going ahead and writing a first cut API before
the lengthy process of creating a final and stable specification does
have an enormous amount of value. Firstly, it gets the ball rolling and
gives people something to play with rather than just talk about. But
more than that, by actually trying to write it we could learn an awful
lot about what needs to go in that final, stable spec. People might try
out the prototype API and come back with some useful feedback about how
the API could be improved, before the final spec is set in stone. More
than merely possible, in my opinion this may actually be a wise thing to
do, especially as the final API is likely to stick around for a long time!

I propose brief community discussion and consultation with the people
involved in the current clients with a view to writing a quick interim
specification. Based on this specification an initial attempt could be
started so there is at least some code in repositories somewhere by the
time the hacking sessions at Wikimania come around. This initial API
could be released as a "beta" system, with no guarantee of supporting it
in the future and a disclaimer making it clear that it is an
experimental system only.

This beta system should be carefully designed as if it were going to be
the final system, the ideal situation would be that it would not need
many changes to meet the final specification. Worst case scenario it
would have to be largely re-written or even thrown away. That doesn't
mean that writing it wasn't enormously worth while.

I suppose this is modern Agile Programming or rapid prototype type
thinking, get coding quickly and develop the design in parallel to the
development. It sounds counter-intuitive but there's a large amount of
evidence to suggest it works better for programming than more
traditional engineering methods for tangible systems. It's also
something I've tried out this year with a 2 1/2 month University project
and it went well.

In my opinion and conveniently for my application ;), I think stating
from the start that this code may not ever be officially supported
actually makes the Client API a brilliant project for Google Summer of code!

I wouldn't want to work on any project if there was any community
resistance to the work, that would be completely counter-productive in
an Open Source type environment.

What do people think?

Best Wishes

Ben

--
Ben "tola" Francis
http://hippygeek.co.uk


from_name: wiwo wowi

subject: [Wikitech-l] crear plantilla

body: don?t worry, no problem


body:
On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 04:02:44PM -0700, Brion Vibber wrote:
> Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
> > You know, it was *precisely this message* that I was trying to
> > preclude, when I first said "I know it won't be changing".
>
> If you feel the need to prepend a statement with "I know this is going to start
> a fight, but..." sometimes it's better to just stop there. :)

Hee.

To clarify, though, I wasn't trying to start a fight, then or now.

But I've been mistaking people for adults all year...

Cheers,
-- jr 'no, brion, not you...' a
--
Jay R. Ashworth                                                jra at baylink.com
Designer                          Baylink                             RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates        The Things I Think                        '87 e24
St Petersburg FL USA      http://baylink.pitas.com             +1 727 647 1274

     A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
     Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?

     A: Top-posting.
     Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet and in e-mail?


body:
On 4/27/06, Jay R. Ashworth <jra at baylink.com> wrote:

> URLs are definitely a better example, but as Mr Cable notes, there are
> *lots* of programming wikis;

Any wiki that display code should properly quote it. Have a look at
any source code example in wikipedia. It is a good practice.

> overloading /RE/ is about as bad as
> overloading /U/R/L.

Not really. /U/R/L has a meaning in wiki markup, /RE/ doesn't. It is
just plain text. So you can't say they compare that much.

Besides, "overloading /RE/" is not correct, because /RE/ is not
processed by wiki markup (as stated, /RE/ is just plain text). On the
other hand, "Overloading /U/R/L" is more correct.

Cheers,
--
Pedro de Medeiros - Computer Science - University of Bras?lia
Email: pedro.medeiros at gmail.com - Home Page: http://www.nonseq.net
Linux User No.: 234250 - ICQ: 2878740 - Jabber: medeiros at jabber.org


from_name: Alphax (Wikipedia email)

body:
Magnus Manske wrote:
> Erik Moeller wrote:
>> That shouldn't come as a surprise. MMORPGs are known for their
>> addiction potential. Players spend hundreds of hours in these games.
>> They form emotional attachments with the game and the players.
> Sounds vaguely familiar. Let's see...
>
> * Avatars (user names) ... check
> * Thousands of players online at any time ... check
> * Highly addictive ... check
> * Players can engage in alliances (user page templates) ... check
> * Extreme players can become super-players (admins) ... check
> * Trolls ... check
> * (Edit) wars ... check
>
> Wikipedia - largest MMORPG *ever*!
>

See also: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_is_an_MMORPG

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

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 551 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20060427/0dd5bb83/attachment.pgp


body:
Guy Chapman aka JzG wrote:

>On Wed, 26 Apr 2006 07:05:03 -0700 (PDT), you wrote:
>
>
>>I don't know much about the publishing history of that work (or indeed the work itself til about five minutes ago)
>>but you could be sitting on a small fortune there: http://www.antiqbook.com/boox/cum/212364.shtml .
>>
>>
>My father is very keen on Hooke, and the five volumes I have (which
>were bought for him as a birthday present by my mum.  They were
>previously owned by Margaret 'Espinasse, who wrote an authoritative
>biography of Hooke also cited as a source in the article.
>
>We paid, I think, ?300 around 1985, but we don't have the other 11
>volumes, and they are not a matched set.
>
Some individual volumes are available through abebooks.com

Ec


from_name: Mathias Schindler

subject: [WikiEN-l] Say hello to Baidupedia.

body:
Since Wikipedia.org seems to be inaccessible in mainland China by
standard internet means,  one might assume that one of the
"legitimate" companies in the PRC might jump in. Guess what happened
earlier on...

http://baike.baidu.com/ describes itself as a encyclopedia that is
collaboratively written by its users or however you translate
"??????????????????".

http://www.virtual-china.org/2006/04/baidus_alternat.html has a first
review about it.

"Baidu's Baike [an alternate Chinese wikipedia] has finally formally
launched.  but it's nothing to get excited about...I looked around a
bit and most of the articles are naked plagiarism.  They've
hypocritically put links to reference material at the
bottom...Basically there's little of value here. When I looked
carefully, this is the copyright contract: "Baidu owns all of the
copyrights to material found on this website."  How shameless. "

This system seams to feature some kind of karma/credit point system
where different kind of actions might lead to an increasing score of
your account.

Mathias,
Die Klugheit von Wiki besser verstehen


subject:
[WikiEN-l] Dr. h.c. : done, EFF Pioneers Award: done,
	next station: Nobel prize :)

body:
EFF Honors Craigslist, Gigi Sohn, and Jimmy Wales with Pioneer Awards

Electronic Frontier Foundation 4/27/2006 2:59:09 PM
15th Annual Ceremony Highlights Innovations in Information Technology

http://webwire.com/ViewPressRel.asp?SESSIONID=&aId=13281

"Jimmy Wales is the founder and president of the Wikimedia Foundation,
a non-profit corporation that operates Wikipedia ? a free, online,
collaborative encyclopedia. Wikipedia started in January of 2001, and
now it's one of the most-used reference sites on the Internet, with
editions in over 200 languages. "

Congratulations for Jimmy :)

Mathias


from_name: geni

body:
On 4/27/06, The Cunctator <cunctator at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 4/27/06, Michael Lindeen <wikikitty at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Yes. And as we get larger and more prominent, this will become more
> > common, not less. Mike
> >
> > On 4/27/06, Pete Bartlett <pcb21 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > The campaign manager of a candidate in the Georgia (*)
> > > gubernatorial election has resigned after someone in his
> > > office changed the bio of her opponent.
> > >
> > > Full story at:
> > > http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/04/26/cox.wikipedia/
> > >
> > > Another reminder to us and our fellow editors of the huge
> > > responsibilty we all bear these days to edit well.
> > >
>
>
> I'm assuming that the reporter got this wrong: "The resignation came after
> Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales confirmed that the addition to the biography
> came from an IP address affiliated with the Cox campaign."
>
> Because if that's true, it's kind of a lame move.

The person makeing the edit wasn't logged in so anyone could run a whois.

--
geni


from_name: Earthhope Action Network

subject: [WikiEN-l] blocked past block time

body:
Can someone please look into this?
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User:Thewolfstar.

I was blocked by Drini and then unblocked by Drini.
My block is supposed to be up, but for some reason I am still blocked.

Thanks,

Maggie thewolfstar

--
in peace and justice for the wildthings,
Margie Laupheimer

http://earthhopenetwork.net/


from_name: David Boothroyd

body:
"Michael Lindeen" <wikikitty at gmail.com> writes:
>On 4/27/06, Pete Bartlett <pcb21 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>  The campaign manager of a candidate in the Georgia (*)
>>  gubernatorial election has resigned after someone in his
>>  office changed the bio of her opponent.
>>
>>  Full story at:
>  > http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/04/26/cox.wikipedia/
>>
>>  Another reminder to us and our fellow editors of the huge
>  > responsibilty we all bear these days to edit well.
>
>Yes. And as we get larger and more prominent, this will become more
>common, not less.

I'm suffering from the opposite problem right now, as an elected
local councillor (up for re-election in a week's time incidentally).
Because I have a biographical article, editors that dislike my edits
have been known to draw attention to it and assume that my editing
must be biased. Worse, some have recently taken to directly
threatening to make a political issue of it.

I don't expect this actually to happen soon, but it seems to me that
it's a form of harassment and a personal attack.

[[en:User:Dbiv]]
--
David Boothroyd - http://www.election.demon.co.uk
david at election.demon.co.uk (home)
dboothroyd at westminster.gov.uk (council)


from_name: Andrew Gray

body:
On 27/04/06, David Boothroyd <david at election.demon.co.uk> wrote:

> I'm suffering from the opposite problem right now, as an elected
> local councillor (up for re-election in a week's time incidentally).
> Because I have a biographical article, editors that dislike my edits
> have been known to draw attention to it and assume that my editing
> must be biased. Worse, some have recently taken to directly
> threatening to make a political issue of it.
>
> I don't expect this actually to happen soon, but it seems to me that
> it's a form of harassment and a personal attack.

Huh. The last edits to that page were someone tagging it {{delete}}...
and that someone being a Conservative councillor in Wycombe who was
tagging the articles of all other local councillors!

Oh, the amusement.

--
- Andrew Gray
  andrew.gray at dunelm.org.uk


from_name: Platonides

subject: [Wikitech-l] MediaWiki API (SoC)

body:
Well, make then as first step in the non-official API a query version call.
The program myust ask first. Hey! I use mediawiki-beta-7.5 wiki api protocol
plus ugly-stuff addition v.1.0.8
The server answers either:
-Sorry, API is disabled here.
-Sorry, I can only handle mediawiki-beta-7.5.0.0.0.1 Please upgrade. Then
the progam must abort and show an alert to the user, forcing the upgrade.
-Yes, i understand this, and also japanese and esperanto. Feel free to use
ither of them. You can also expect me to continue understanding it (you can
cache this response) for the next 3 days.

>> The API will be used by programs, not people. People can quickly adapt
>> to changes in the UI, but every mistake that ends up in the API will
>> probably become an incredible PITA that will need to be supported for
>> some time going forward.
>
> I have to admit that this is a very good point, I think an API is
> something that can be difficult to change once it's written because by
> definition once it's out there other programs will rely on it staying
> the same. Getting it right the first time is better than trying to
> retain backwards compatibility with a badly designed sytem. Writing an
> API is a big responsibility, especially if it ever gets used with
> something as hugely significant as Wikipedia.
>
> However...
>
>> I thought about this some more yesterday, and I've changed my mind. A
>> first pass at a *very* simple API, if done with care, might actually
>> help frame later API discussions, such as the one at Hacking Days.
>
> Yes, I would argue that going ahead and writing a first cut API before
> the lengthy process of creating a final and stable specification does
> have an enormous amount of value. Firstly, it gets the ball rolling and
> gives people something to play with rather than just talk about. But
> more than that, by actually trying to write it we could learn an awful
> lot about what needs to go in that final, stable spec. People might try
> out the prototype API and come back with some useful feedback about how
> the API could be improved, before the final spec is set in stone. More
> than merely possible, in my opinion this may actually be a wise thing to
> do, especially as the final API is likely to stick around for a long time!
>
> I propose brief community discussion and consultation with the people
> involved in the current clients with a view to writing a quick interim
> specification. Based on this specification an initial attempt could be
> started so there is at least some code in repositories somewhere by the
> time the hacking sessions at Wikimania come around. This initial API
> could be released as a "beta" system, with no guarantee of supporting it
> in the future and a disclaimer making it clear that it is an
> experimental system only.
>
> This beta system should be carefully designed as if it were going to be
> the final system, the ideal situation would be that it would not need
> many changes to meet the final specification. Worst case scenario it
> would have to be largely re-written or even thrown away. That doesn't
> mean that writing it wasn't enormously worth while.
>
> I suppose this is modern Agile Programming or rapid prototype type
> thinking, get coding quickly and develop the design in parallel to the
> development. It sounds counter-intuitive but there's a large amount of
> evidence to suggest it works better for programming than more
> traditional engineering methods for tangible systems. It's also
> something I've tried out this year with a 2 1/2 month University project
> and it went well.
>
> In my opinion and conveniently for my application ;), I think stating
> from the start that this code may not ever be officially supported
> actually makes the Client API a brilliant project for Google Summer of
> code!


from_name: Michael Lindeen

subject: [WikiEN-l] Fwd:  blocked past block time

body:
Looks like she is still blocked. I don't see any autoblocks, so I am
not sure what is up. Could one of the tech guys take a look? Mike

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Earthhope Action Network <contact at earthhopenetwork.net>
Date: Apr 27, 2006 10:31 PM
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] blocked past block time
To: Michael Lindeen <wikikitty at gmail.com>

Hi Mike,
 Yes, I am still blocked.  I just checked to make sure. Can you get
someone with technical knowledge that can fix this thing?

 I would really appreciate it.
 thanks,
 Maggie

On 4/27/06, Michael Lindeen <wikikitty at gmail.com> wrote:
> Are you still blocked? I see that Drini tried unblocking you 2 more
> times. Let me know. Mike
>
> On 4/27/06, Earthhope Action Network <contact at earthhopenetwork.net > wrote:
> > Can someone please look into this?
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User:Thewolfstar .
> >
> > I was blocked by Drini and then unblocked by Drini.
> > My block is supposed to be up, but for some reason I am still blocked.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Maggie thewolfstar
> >
> > --
> > in peace and justice for the wildthings,
> > Margie Laupheimer
> >
> > http://earthhopenetwork.net/
> > _______________________________________________
> > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >
>
>

--

in peace and justice for the wildthings,
Margie Laupheimer

 http://earthhopenetwork.net/


subject: [WikiEN-l] Image deletion

body:
On 4/27/06, Sherool <jamydlan at online.no> wrote:
> Currently I'm under
> the impression that most of the "bad" uploads are made by "disposable"
> acounts where someone just register an acount purely for the ability to
> upload images, do a few uploads and then never log in again.

That is one major group. The other is individals who stay around but
upload insane numbers of problem images.

--
geni


from_name: Sherool

subject: [WikiEN-l] Image deletion

body:
On Wed, 26 Apr 2006 01:53:32 +0200, Neil Harris <usenet at tonal.clara.co.uk>
wrote:

> Stan Shebs wrote:
<snip>
>> It's been said before, but further study of upload patterns bears
>> it out - a large percentage of bad uploads could be prevented by
>> disallowing image upload until a new user has been around for at
>> least a week, and by blocking persistent copyviolaters.
>>
>> Many of the uploaders are so new they haven't even figured out
>> how to get images displayed in an article. The contributions list
>> shows edits to topic X, then upload of X-copyvio.jpg, then maybe
>> another couple of edits, and then that's it - the image, good or
>> bad, is an orphan. The especially sad cases are when they upload
>> pictures of themselves, but never edit their user page.
>>
>> Stan
>>
>>
> I agree. We already restrict uploading to logged-in users only, since
> allowing IP-only uploads was a disaster; increasing that restriction to
> allow only logged-in users whose accounts are not recently created,
> using the same criteria used in the semi-protection mechanism, seems
> eminently reasonable to me.

Yeah I do think that would be a very good idea. Users who are too fresh to
move pages or edit semi protected pages rely should not be uploading
images. Granted there are people who have been editing for years who
probably should not be uploading images either, but all in all brand new
acounts acount for the bulk of the problem images.

If we required users to "age" for a bit before they are allowed to upload
images it would have seleval benefits. First of all they might just end up
reading a policy page or two before they upload stuff, and secondly they
are somewhat more likely to remain active, so that they can actualy go
back and fix problems that are pointed out to them. Currently I'm under
the impression that most of the "bad" uploads are made by "disposable"
acounts where someone just register an acount purely for the ability to
upload images, do a few uploads and then never log in again. This is bad
in so many ways, firstly the images never get fixed, secondly it means
image taggers start getting used to uploaders beeing non-responsive so
they stop notifying them and then they upset the few active uploaders who
suddenly find theyr images deleted without a word of warning (forgetting
for a moment the dire warnings on the upload page itself) and so on. I
guess there is a danger of simply moving the problem to commons if users
find themselves uneable to upload to Wikipedia imedeately after
registering, but I think it would at the very least would be worth trying
out for a month or two and see what happens.

--
[[User:Sherool]]


subject: [WikiEN-l] Blocked by Alkivar without Justification

body:
Can you give me your username on Wikipedia? I'll look into it. All of
the admins are accountable. In fact, several have been desysopped
because of abuse. Give us a chance. :) Mike

On 4/27/06, TGGG85 at aol.com <TGGG85 at aol.com> wrote:
> Mr. "Alkivar" blocked me too without justification recently. As an
> administrator, he had NO E-MAIL address listed at the time where I could contact  him.
> Obscure? Hard to reach? Of course. This individual can exercise power over
> editing and editing privileges at will. Pity you if he disagrees with you. Take
> a look at what he has done on Wikipedia. And, then tell me WHY he is an
> administrator. Can the Wikipedians who contribute constructively put up with
> administrator nonsense and capricious behavior? NOT FOR LONG! The accomplished
> individuals who originate, expand, or edit articles are quickly put off. I am
> one of them. YES, I can PROVE that I am an internationally recognized expert in
>  my field. I need an administrator like "Mr Alkivar" or whomever to tell me
> what  I can write or can't write? No wonder the reputation of Wikipedia is
> deteriorating on the Internet. I can only wish you luck in getting unblocked. I
> suspect he can get away whatever he does and at this point nobody really
> cares,  do they?
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


body:
Calm actions work better than angry actions on Wikipedia. Mike

On 4/27/06, Russell Blackford <russellblackford at bigpond.com> wrote:
> Um, wouldn't a dispassionate explanation of the facts be better if you want
> help from the Powers That Be (of whom I am not one)?
>
> Russell a.k.a. Metamagician3000
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <TGGG85 at aol.com>
> To: <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Sent: Friday, April 28, 2006 2:46 PM
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Blocked by Alkivar without Justification
>
>
> > Someone unblocked me without an explanation. I assume that you are aware
> > of
> > the various complaints about "Mr. Alkivar." Since he was IMPOSSIBLE to
> > contact
> > by E-Mail when I was blocked without an adequate explanation by him, what
> > am
> > I  to think?
> >
> > Is it possible that NONE of the administrators have "sock-puppets?" You
> > can
> > be sure that some of them masquerade as vandals and then "rescue" articles
> > just  to "enhance" their standing in the Wikipedia Community. This is OLD
> > news at
> > this  point. isn't it?
> >
> > All of this nonsense alienates talented and expert writers. Of course, you
> > already realize that, don't you? I am going to continue with my Internet
> > publishing work where it is appreciated.Wikipedia is getting to be a
> > tiresome
> > place for innovation which rubs some administrators the wrong way. ENOUGH
> > ALREADY!
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: brion at pobox.com

subject: [Wikitech-l] MediaWiki automated test run failure 2006-04-28

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

Running test Table security: embedded pipes (http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2006-April/034637.html)... FAILED!
Running test Magic Word: {{NUMBEROFFILES}}... FAILED!
Running test BUG 1887, part 2: A <math> with a thumbnail- math enabled... FAILED!

Passed 300 of 303 tests (99.01%) FAILED!


from_name: TGGG85 at aol.com

body:
Mr. "Alkivar" blocked me too without justification recently. As an
administrator, he had NO E-MAIL address listed at the time where I could contact  him.
Obscure? Hard to reach? Of course. This individual can exercise power over
editing and editing privileges at will. Pity you if he disagrees with you. Take
a look at what he has done on Wikipedia. And, then tell me WHY he is an
administrator. Can the Wikipedians who contribute constructively put up with
administrator nonsense and capricious behavior? NOT FOR LONG! The accomplished
individuals who originate, expand, or edit articles are quickly put off. I am
one of them. YES, I can PROVE that I am an internationally recognized expert in
 my field. I need an administrator like "Mr Alkivar" or whomever to tell me
what  I can write or can't write? No wonder the reputation of Wikipedia is
deteriorating on the Internet. I can only wish you luck in getting unblocked. I
suspect he can get away whatever he does and at this point nobody really
cares,  do they?


from_name: Rob Church

subject: [Wikitech-l] crear plantilla

body:
On 27/04/06, Elliott F. Cable <ecable at avxw.com> wrote:
[snip the message]

Hear, hear!

Rob Church


from_name: Pete Bartlett

body:
----- Original Message ----
From: The Cunctator <cunctator at gmail.com>
>It would still be lame if Jimbo ran the whois.

I'd've thought it would be more like
"Mr. Wales can you confirm for us that IP address XXX edited Wikipedia article YYY to say ZZZ"

Jimbo clicks "history", clicks "diff" ... "Uh, yes."

Standard journalistic practice to get an outside to confirm events.
Normally it would be "a Wikipedia spokesperson confirmed..." but they get extra bonus gravitas
in their article by having the real-life President of the Foundation do it.

p.s. Should we be adding

"* Enables you to make smears against your political opponents without getting caught"

to [[Wikipedia:Why create an account?]]
?


from_name: Ray Saintonge

subject: [WikiEN-l] Wikitruth

body:
geni wrote:

>On 4/23/06, Anthony DiPierro <wikilegal at inbox.org> wrote:
>
>
>>The building owner didn't send anything to anyone, though.
>>
>>Anthony
>>
>>
>It isn't the act of sending that is an issue since putting the
>postcard in an envelope would prevent any such case.
>
So now the case depends on whether the janitor sent an open postcard or
put the postcard in an envelope.

We haven't yet considered the possibility of the janitor (whose normal
duties include disposing of trash) picked the paper out of the trash.

Perhaps the only certainty in this case is that the judge hearing the
case will be ROTFL.

Ec


body:
Someone unblocked me without an explanation. I assume that you are aware of
the various complaints about "Mr. Alkivar." Since he was IMPOSSIBLE to contact
 by E-Mail when I was blocked without an adequate explanation by him, what am
I  to think?

Is it possible that NONE of the administrators have "sock-puppets?" You can
be sure that some of them masquerade as vandals and then "rescue" articles
just  to "enhance" their standing in the Wikipedia Community. This is OLD news at
this  point. isn't it?

All of this nonsense alienates talented and expert writers. Of course, you
already realize that, don't you? I am going to continue with my Internet
publishing work where it is appreciated.Wikipedia is getting to be a tiresome
place for innovation which rubs some administrators the wrong way. ENOUGH  ALREADY!


from_name: maru dubshinki

body:
On 4/28/06, TGGG85 at aol.com <TGGG85 at aol.com> wrote:
...
> Is it possible that NONE of the administrators have "sock-puppets?" You can
> be sure that some of them masquerade as vandals and then "rescue" articles
> just  to "enhance" their standing in the Wikipedia Community. This is OLD news at
> this  point. isn't it?
...

What rot. It takes insane amounts of vandal-fighter to enhance one's
standing, and there is way more than enough vandalism for any such
prestige-seeker to fight already without necessitating manufacturing
some.

~maru


body:
I am not going to waste any further valuable time on discussing "Mr.
Alkivar."  I have better ways to waste my time, if I want to waste  time.


body:
You are probably one of the miscreants that I was referring to. I think you
doth protest too much.


body:
On 4/28/06, TGGG85 at aol.com <TGGG85 at aol.com> wrote:
> You are probably one of the miscreants that I was referring to. I think you
> doth protest too much.

Nice little rhetorical technique there. If we don't protest your
allegations, we confirm them through silence. But on the other hand,
if we disagree and make our disagreement known, we damn ourselves out
of our own mouths when we "doth protest too much". If this is the way
you conduct yourself on list, you deserve to have been blocked.

~maru


subject: [WikiEN-l] Unjustifiably blocked

body:
Why is it so difficult to trust what some administators are doing when  their
ego-tripping and petty tryanny is so transparent to  all?


subject: [WikiEN-l] Unjustifiably blocked

body:
There is no point of progress with pursuing an argument with an
administrator. The arrogance of some of them is astounding to behold, no matter  what the
issue is. Major or minor in fact or opinion.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Unjustifiably blocked

body:
"Probably acted?" In fact, NOBODY apparently knows what he is doing since  he
has precluded himself from contact. Why isn't he explaining what happened?
Ego-tripping is a solitary activity on the part of some of the administrators.
Don't expect them to be accountable when they don't want to  be.


from_name: Brion Vibber

subject: [Wikitech-l] Hyper Estraier extension

body:
Tietew wrote:
[snip]
> Look'n'feel is derived from LuceneSearch.php.

I'd recommend instead using the search plugin system built into 1.5 and later;
see extensions/MWSearch for the Lucene interface for that. It might need a
little more tweaking, but will be smoother to replace things with in future than
the old hacked-up LuceneSearch.php.

Next week I'll be testing out Sphinx (http://sphinxsearch.com/) which is a GPL'd
fulltext search engine, which at least according to its authors is faster than
Lucene -- much faster at indexing! They don't however currently have appropriate
tokenizing for CJK presently. We could see about adding that, but I'd certainly
love to compare it to something else like Estraier if it's available.

> == Request ==
> I want to test and demo real-time index update from live
> Wikipedia. Could you please give me a permittion to access
> OAIRepository?

I'll set this up for you this weekend. Make sure you've got a fast connection
and plenty of space. :)

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 249 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20060428/5764147f/attachment.pgp>


from_name: Judson Dunn

subject: [WikiEN-l] Image deletion

body:
Yeah, but if we can slow one group down, all the better. At least with
the long-time wikipedian uploading a ton of improperly tagged images
you have someone you can open a dialogue with. With the majority of
images not tagged, or tagged incorrectly it seems the people never
come back, or change the image info at all.

Image copyright is one of the hardest areas for some people to get,
especially people who are new to the entire concept of US copyright
law, a little time to read policy and the reasons behind it can't be a
bad thing.

On 4/27/06, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 4/27/06, Sherool <jamydlan at online.no> wrote:
> > Currently I'm under
> > the impression that most of the "bad" uploads are made by "disposable"
> > acounts where someone just register an acount purely for the ability to
> > upload images, do a few uploads and then never log in again.
>
> That is one major group. The other is individals who stay around but
> upload insane numbers of problem images.
>
> --
> geni
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>