from_name: Mark Williamson

body:
You're lucky the RU-RU-SIB soap opera played out mostly on Meta. That
was even more dramatic than the RO-MO conflict, if that is at all
possible.

On 31/01/07, Berto 'd Sera <albertoserra at ukr.net> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > What I am sure I need is a
> > hebrew/english ambassador who's nuetral in this conflict,
>
> Yes, I'd look for that, too. It may be wise not to make too detailed descriptions of the related events in the public lists (as this one). This seems to be pretty much of an ego war, so the less people will be exposed as individuals, the higher your chanches to find a decent compromise. It may help you if you for people who are active on both versions and locate a person who as good relational capabilities. BTW... wouldn't it be nice to have a public list of people having such multiple presences?
>
> Pls, just do not start a HE-HE conflict :)))))))) I mean, I'll miss the MO-RO soap opera, but that doesn't mean I'm ready for "release next" :)))))
>
> B?rto 'd S?ra
> Personagi dl'ann 2006 p?r l'arvista american-a Time (tanme tuti voj?otri)
> http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1569514,00.html
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>

--
Refije dirije lanm? yo paske nou posede pw?p bato.


list: wikipedia-l

source: pipermail-mbox

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Conspicuous only in its absence (was Moldavian)

body:
Well, Berto lives in Ukraine, you live in Toulouse, France.

Mark

On 01/02/07, Liviu Andronic <landronimirc at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 2/1/07, Berto 'd Sera <albertoserra at ukr.net > wrote:
> >
> > Hi!
> >
> > Once this thing will be aver I kind of think that we all miss the MO/RO
> > flame wars... We will tell children about it in cold winter evenings, when
> > they will ask us "Hey grandad, what was a wiki like?" jumping out of their
> >
> > favourite porn hologram player to make silly questions to us "the elder".
> > :)))))))))))))))
> >
> > Then our eyes will look somewhere in the distance and we will say "I've
> > seen
> > things you guys cannot even imagine. I've seen rumenian legions storming
> > the
> > mailing lists, I've seen the moldovian clone resisting behind its
> > glagolitic
> > barricades, fluctuating on the verge of alphabetic extinction...". It all
> > will be SOOO romantic :))))))))))))))))
> >
> > ============================
> > Bogdan (but names mean nothing here, as MO-RO players are wondefully
> > interchangeable) wrote:
> > >The main issue is not that it was imposed by the Communists, but
> > >that nobody wants to use it anymore.
> > So what? Do you know many people wishing to speak latin? The question was
> > about it "being EXACTLY a cyrillic transcritp for rumenian or not". Try
> > and
> > answer that, instead of serving us the n-th number of your "Pravda". Say
> > YES/NO/A % VALUE and pleeeeease DO explain why you say so.
> >
> > > the people who support Cyrillic Moldovan are almost
> > > exclusively Russians and Ukrainians, with some Serbians
> > > and other panslavists.
> > Yeap! And those who oppose it are mainly pan-rumenians :)))) Never heard
> > of
> > an pan-eskimo giving a damn about this subject LOLOLOL. BTW, FMI shouldn't
> > people who don't care about you be called pan-NO-nians? :))))))))
> > ===========================
> >
> > Yeah... I will miss you guys. I used to hate you all, from both sides, but
> >
> > now that you are going to be terminated for good... I'd say this place
> > will
> > loose some of its individuality once you're gone. Like Paris with the
> > River
> > Seine turned into an awful although much needed parking lot...
> >
> > A question to the pan-NO-nian community: what about adopting an interwiki
> > MO-RO day, during which all wikipedians from all editions will be
> > requested
> > to hold ceremonial mock flamewars on this subject? :))))))) Think about
> > it.
> > Having common roots means a lot to community building :) A MO-RO carnival
> > day? :)))))))))))))))
> >
> > Hmm... Bogdan and others, is there any way in which people belonging to
> > the
> > RO tribe should dress up? MO people will have Stalin's moustache, a Red
> > Army
> > cap on their heads, eat pork fat as native ukrainians and will speak a
> > funny
> > fake-rumenian ending all words in -SKI (Bogdanuski, Romaniaski,
> > Moldovoski,
> > Steauaska, Bucurestska, etc), this is 100% clear. But what about YOUR
> > political tribe? Please do enlight us, 'cause I'd hate to look unproper in
> > my RO costume :)))))
> >
> > Really, I know it's ridicolous
>
> It is; your message I mean. Ridiculously stupid.
> Something similar to another fine piece of art, written by Ronald Chmara on
> the "[Wikipedia-l] Harassment on wikipedia" thread.
>
>
> , but I'll miss this political crap :)))) The
> > funny thing about eastern europe is that nobody gives a damn about this
> > rubbish. People care about money, sex and big cars, that's it.
>
> Who are you to judge on this matter?
>
>
> Nationalism
> > is something that drunk young lads with no women may mention, but no more
> > than that. Yet those 5 perverted anomalies who do care about nationalism
> > will ALWAYS make it to our medias. As if the country was nothing but crazy
> >
> > extremists, ethnic trouble, criminals and/or exported prostitutes.
> >
> > Pls, read about Eastern Europe in Wikipedia. Even better, come and see it
> > with your own eyes. It's wonderful people, with a wonderful history,
> > culture
> > and fantastic places, and as soon as you'll see the real thing you'll find
> > out that the actual number of MO-ROs is so small that it's not even worth
> > mentioning them. This much I owe to the normal people of all involved
> > countries.
> >
> > And nevertheless... DO adopt the MO-RO interwiki carnaval day. :)))))))
> > Otherwise I'll organize a campaign to bury under millions of protest
> > emails
> > the Board, the whole set of romanians and moldavians wikipedians, and YOU
> > and your girl/boyfriend as individuals :)))))))))))
> >
> > Your sincerely,
> > Berto 'd Sera
> > Personagi dl'ann 2006 per l'arvista american-a Time (tanme tuti vojaotri)
> > http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1569514,00.html
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > Wikipedia-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Liviu
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>

--
Refije dirije lanm? yo paske nou posede pw?p bato.


list: wikien-l

from_name: Guy Chapman aka JzG

subject: [WikiEN-l] I go away for a few days and all this happens?

body:
On Thu, 1 Feb 2007 13:31:23 +0100, "Michael Bimmler"
<mbimmler at gmail.com> wrote:

>This means, even if the user is moderated, the list moderators are
>(probably) likely to approve his mails, if they are not flaming /
>inappropriate.

All his messages are flaming inappropriate! I have him killfiled,
mind, but it's obvious that his "leaving" was (as so often) a
statement that in his mind Wikipedia can't possibly do without him.

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


from_name: Jeff Raymond

subject: [WikiEN-l] Survey about paid editing

body:
David Gerard wrote:
> On 01/02/07, Gregory Kohs <thekohser at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I'm wondering what the opinions of "influential Wikipedians" are
>> regarding
>> this MSNBC poll that shows 40% of over a thousand people think like I
>> do?
>> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16795533/
>
>
> My opinion is that self-selected samples are statistically bogus and
> inherently meaningless. In the press, they are mostly for amusement
> value. See [[self-selection]].
>
Pretty much.  I would say this privately, but it's worth saying publically
- Gregory, you know that I don't disagree with your position as a whole,
but you're not going to win over your critics with this sort of thing.

-Jeff


from_name: MacGyverMagic/Mgm

subject: [WikiEN-l] WikiProjects overriding policy

body:
On 2/1/07, Stephen Bain <stephen.bain at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 2/1/07, Timwi <timwi at gmx.net> wrote:
> >
> > These people feel they're completely in the right because they have a
> > discussion to link to -- a discussion that took place on the WikiProject
> > page. Since such a discussion cannot override a general rule such as the
> > Naming Convention, how do I properly respond to this without causing an
> > edit war (or move war)?
>
> Tell them that you're pleased some Wikipedians actually managed to get
> together and agree on something.
>
> Tell them that you've thought again about what they're doing, and have
> decided that since they're not agreeing to include original research,
> nor are they agreeing that it's ok for their articles to be
> unverifiable, nor are they agreeing that it's ok if they don't worry
> about NPOV, that it's really no big deal that they are agreeing about
> some absolutely trivial matter (even though it might be, in some
> people's opinions, not within the strict letter of a mere naming
> convention).
>
> --
> Stephen Bain
> stephen.bain at gmail.com

I don't agree with you Stephen. The naming convention was created to avoid
overly convoluted names. The places articles are located should be easy to
link to.

We don't append "(US president)" to every president either. Because it's a
pointless exercise. It doesn't achieve anything other than a lot of
unneccesary work.

To overwrite a basic policy like that, you need much wider discussion
anyway.

Mgm


from_name: Michael Bimmler

body:
On 2/1/07, Guy Chapman aka JzG <guy.chapman at spamcop.net> wrote:
> On Thu, 1 Feb 2007 09:36:16 +0000, "Earle Martin"
> <wikipedia at downlode.org> wrote:
>
> >> I'm amazed at everything that happens when I just go away for a few days.
>
> >Nobody else is. Despite what you may think, the project does not
> >revolve around you.
>
> I thought "Parker" was supposed to be going away for ever?  He was on
> moderation for a while, why has the new address not been added to mod
> I wonder?
>
Definition of "Moderation" (in Mailman context):
The posts of the user are held for moderation by a list moderator who
decides whether he approved, rejects or discards them. It does *not*
mean, that the user cannot anymore submit any posts to the list.
This means, even if the user is moderated, the list moderators are
(probably) likely to approve his mails, if they are not flaming /
inappropriate.

Michael

> Guy (JzG)
> --
> http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JzG
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


body:
We never disambiguate pre-emptively (or rather: we shouldn't)
See [[Wikipedia:Disambiguation]].

Mgm

On 2/1/07, Kirill Lokshin <kirill.lokshin at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 2/1/07, Timwi <timwi at gmx.net> wrote:
> >
> > Here is another case of something I mentioned to this mailing list some
> > time ago:
> >
> >
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Timwi&diff=104821425&oldid=104820754
> >
> > In a nutshell, the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject UK Parliament
> > constituencies]] wants to add the parenthesis "(UK Parliament
> > constituency)" to all constituency articles, even those that don't have
> > ambiguous names and would therefore -- under the general naming
> > convention rules -- not have the parenthesis.
> >
> > These people feel they're completely in the right because they have a
> > discussion to link to -- a discussion that took place on the WikiProject
> > page. Since such a discussion cannot override a general rule such as the
> > Naming Convention, how do I properly respond to this without causing an
> > edit war (or move war)?
> >
> > Timwi
>
> The best thing to do -- if you want to make an issue of it -- would be
> to bring the question up on the main NC page and invite the
> WikiProject to make their case their.  Having said that, a few points:
>
> - There is nothing inherently less meaningful about a discussion on a
> WikiProject page versus a discussion on some other page; both function
> as a consensus of participating editors, which isn't really affected
> by the page name.
> - It's perfectly normal for guidelines -- particularly
> one-size-fits-all guidelines -- to have exceptions (even broad ones);
> and quite reasonable for WikiProjects to come up with such exceptions.
> The deciding factor is whether what's being proposed makes sense, not
> who came up with it.
> - Looking over the linked discussion on the WikiProject page, I'm not
> convinced that they're actually incorrect in suggesting pre-emptive
> disambiguation here.  It's pretty much a decided issue that all
> geographic locations will eventually have articles; and if
> constituencies are, indeed, named after locations, then delaying
> disambiguation until those articles get started -- even though we
> *know* that we'll need to disambiguate -- seems rather unnecessarily
> bureaucratic.  (If nothing else, the project could easily fit within
> the letter of the law here by creating one-liner stubs for the
> locations; but I don't think that's something we ought to push.)
>
> Kirill
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com

body:
I have to say that the WikiProject Go would dearly like to override the policy on Japanese names, because the name order used in 40 years or more of go literature in English has used Japanese name order.

Charles

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


list: wikitech-l

from_name: Daniel Arnold

subject:
[Wikitech-l] embedded links in UI messages (splitted from
	"Major flaws...")

body:
On Wednesday 31 January 2007 21:03:49 Daniel Arnold wrote:
> These pages (not existing by default) get referenced hardcoded inside
> message strings from the MessagesEn.php file (I am not talking about the
> url pages like those called from mediawiki:sidebar):
> [[{{ns:project}}:Metadata]]
> [[{{ns:project}}:Administrators|administrator]]
> [[{{ns:help}}:Contents|help page]]
> [[{{ns:project}}:Searching|Searching {{SITENAME}}]]
> [[{{ns:project}}:Policy]]

I have now written a small patch that fixes this problem for MessagesEn.php. I
used the {{MediaWiki:PAGE}} (thanks Platonides for the idea) syntax as it
always points to the page in the default language which is desired in this
case here.

If the patch gets applied this change should be applied to all 151
MessageXX.php files as this problem causes currently quite some trouble in
multilingual wikis and as the fix can be done in a search and replace manner
which doesn't change any real text (and thus you don't need to know the
language of the language file you are fixing).

Furthermore I added to the after-installation-mainpage a list of pages not
existing in vanilla MediaWiki which interface definition files (in any
language) expect to exist though. So after installation of MediaWiki people
have a quick overview in one place which pages they need to customize in
order to avoid broken links in the interface.

See: http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8846 for the patchfile
against recent SVN version.

Have fun, Arnomane


list: foundation-l

from_name: teun spaans

subject: [Foundation-l] Fair Use (again)

body:
Mark,

neither of the three examples shows that cnn uses fair use. The credits seem
to refer to the story. For example:
"By Deb Krajnak
CNN.com Arts & Style Editor"

probably just means that Deb is an CNN Arts & style editor.

It doesnt say that the image is there under fair use, it doesnt say it isnt.
It is perfectly possible that CNN purchased the photo from a photographer,
and that the photographer paid the copyrights to the Picasso heirs. Or
perhaps he didnt, but then he might get into trouble.

It is no proof that CNN uses "fair use".

kind regards.
teun spaans

PS
The best course of action is to keep to our goals: create free intellectual
properties. Fair usage does not qualify as such.

On 2/1/07, Delirium <delirium at hackish.org> wrote:
>
> Robert Scott Horning wrote:
> > I am curious if anybody who is a regular participant on this mailing
> > list has ever come across an equivalent peer to Wikipedia (aka
> > Britannica or a major website like cnn.com) that would use modern art
> > works (I'm defining modern as created by anybody who has died since
> > 1924) and publish reproductions of them using fair-use as the only
> > justification for their inclusion?
> >
>
> Sure, here's some:
> A 1932 Pablo Picasso painting:
> http://archives.cnn.com/2000/STYLE/arts/05/10/picasso.auction.ap/
> (credited as "AP Photo", though it's doubtful the AP owns the copyright)
> A 1939 Pablo Picasso painting:
> http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2000/year.in.review/story/arts/ (credited as
> "CNN", again doubtful)
>
> Sometimes it's unclear:
> A 1953 Mark Rothko painting:
> http://archives.cnn.com/2000/STYLE/arts/11/15/sothebys.auction.reut/
> (credited as "Courtesy Sotheby's", but it's unclear whether the
> "courtesy" means they were given a copyright license, or, more likely,
> are using it under an {{en:promotional}} type fair-use claim)
>
> My general impression is that fair-use images are quite common in
> journalism.  I don't know about encyclopedias.  They are fairly common
> in educational books---film-studies books frequently make fair use of
> low-resolution still shots from films.
>
> -Mark
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>


list: wikimedia-l

subject: [Foundation-l] Fair Use (again)


from_name: GerardM

body:
Hoi,
I want to say that this is one of the most helpful threads I have seen in a
long time ..
Thank you so much,
   Thanks,
       GerardM

On 2/1/07, Daniel Arnold <arnomane at gmx.de> wrote:
>
> On Wednesday 31 January 2007 21:03:49 Daniel Arnold wrote:
> > These pages (not existing by default) get referenced hardcoded inside
> > message strings from the MessagesEn.php file (I am not talking about the
> > url pages like those called from mediawiki:sidebar):
> > [[{{ns:project}}:Metadata]]
> > [[{{ns:project}}:Administrators|administrator]]
> > [[{{ns:help}}:Contents|help page]]
> > [[{{ns:project}}:Searching|Searching {{SITENAME}}]]
> > [[{{ns:project}}:Policy]]
>
> I have now written a small patch that fixes this problem for
> MessagesEn.php. I
> used the {{MediaWiki:PAGE}} (thanks Platonides for the idea) syntax as it
> always points to the page in the default language which is desired in this
> case here.
>
> If the patch gets applied this change should be applied to all 151
> MessageXX.php files as this problem causes currently quite some trouble in
> multilingual wikis and as the fix can be done in a search and replace
> manner
> which doesn't change any real text (and thus you don't need to know the
> language of the language file you are fixing).
>
> Furthermore I added to the after-installation-mainpage a list of pages not
> existing in vanilla MediaWiki which interface definition files (in any
> language) expect to exist though. So after installation of MediaWiki
> people
> have a quick overview in one place which pages they need to customize in
> order to avoid broken links in the interface.
>
> See: http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8846 for the patchfile
> against recent SVN version.
>
> Have fun, Arnomane
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>


from_name: Parker Peters

references:
<338e85500701311012g5f62e9f1nc13b7b8e4e26eae@mail.gmail.com>
	<7de99f2d0702010136l1f63290eu3557854cc8d063f2@mail.gmail.com>
	<8sm3s2limiav7vkmo7druqo4gomrb2g0et@4ax.com>
	<353e9f360702010431h63aedb95ma2789dc5a74bf72a@mail.gmail.com>
	<dcq3s2dqfo2dqfa4krlukg3p3vhrvumjum@4ax.com>
	<45C1EE47.5040507@gmail.com>

body:
On 2/1/07, Rich Holton <richholton at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Guy Chapman aka JzG wrote:
> > On Thu, 1 Feb 2007 13:31:23 +0100, "Michael Bimmler"
> > <mbimmler at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> This means, even if the user is moderated, the list moderators are
> >> (probably) likely to approve his mails, if they are not flaming /
> >> inappropriate.
> >
> > All his messages are flaming inappropriate! I have him killfiled,
> > mind, but it's obvious that his "leaving" was (as so often) a
> > statement that in his mind Wikipedia can't possibly do without him.
> >
> > Guy (JzG)
>
> Just my opinion, but the repeated posts about his posts are starting to
> become quite tiresome.
>
> -Rich

I find it annoying to have him constantly trying to troll me and flame me,
too.

Parker


subject: [WikiEN-l] First Amendment? - a Problem Mediation to consider

body:
On 2/1/07, Keitei <nihthraefn at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Feb 1, 2007, at 10:31, Guettarda wrote:
>
> > On 2/1/07, Dan Collins <en.wp.st47 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 2/1/07, MacGyverMagic/Mgm <macgyvermagic at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Looks like this needs to be reviewed. A conclusion should be made
> >>> based
> >>> upon
> >>> WP policy rather than the US constitution.
> >>>
> >>> Mgm
> >
> >
> > It's actually par for the course in MedCab cases.  The MedCab
> > provides for
> > informal mediation and a forum for discussion.  That's a useful
> > role, but
> > one that seems to be routinely ignored.  The role of a mediator
> > isn't to
> > judge the situation, but rather, to get people to talk and listen to
> > one-another.  So any "conclusion" beyond that made by the
> > participants in
> > inappropriate, regardless of whether it was based on the US
> > constitution or
> > Wikipedia policy.  The role of mediation is not to draw
> > conclusions.  That
> > an informal body, with no selection process, no official standing,
> > and no
> > oversight, should make "rulings" is mind-boggling.  Especially a
> > body that
> > seems, half the time, to be staffed by rank newbies who know little
> > about
> > policy.
>
> If mediators are acting as judges where they should not, we ask that
> you bring it up with the coordinators ([[Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/
> Coordinators desk]]). From there, we try to convince said problem
> mediators that they have to mediate and not arbitrate, and if that
> doesn't work, they will be asked to resign from the case. Repeat
> problem mediators are asked not to take cases any longer.
>
> Of course this doesn't ensure that cases won't be total disasters,
> but the point is informal, fast, and not heavily regulated. Parties
> are encouraged to speak up if they don't think the mediator is
> helping though.
>
> --keitei (MedCab coordinator (along with Cowman109))
>

The mediator seems to think he is to act as a judge, keitei.

My analysis of the mediation goes back a bit further now that I've had some
time to look at it, and indicates some other serious problems with the case:

- the mediator did little to actually contact those relevant to the dispute.

- the mediator stated a time period at which he would "make [the] decision",
but did not discuss things with any other members, on the mediation page,
mediation talk page, article talk page, user talk pages, or anywhere else.

- comments questioning the mediator's impartiality because of his line of
work are in the history of the mediation, but they appear to have been
reverted rather than discussed openly. Any question of the mediator's
impartiality calls into question the mediation process.

Between this and a mediation "decision" that has nothing to do with
wikipedia policy or with the case at hand, and my little robot's making
"Danger, Will Robinson" noises...

Parker


from_name: Mark Wagner

subject: [WikiEN-l] Autoconfirmed threshold

body:
On 2/1/07, Fred Bauder <fredbaud at waterwiki.info> wrote:
> This is a top post. Some people think there is something
> wrong with top posts. Some even get real excited. They

Oddly enough, nobody seems to get too excited about mid-posting.

> maintain that there is a long-standing convention requiring
> posting after the message you are replying to.
>
> Fred
>
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: ? Firefoxman [mailto:enwpmail at gmail.com]
> >Sent: Thursday, February 1, 2007 01:28 PM
> >To: 'English Wikipedia'
> >Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Autoconfirmed threshold
> >
> >What is a top post?
>
> This is not a top post. This post is in the "proper" position.
>
> Fred

--
Mark
[[User:Carnildo]]


from_name: Delirium

subject: [Foundation-l] Fair Use (again)

body:
teun spaans wrote:
> On 2/1/07, Delirium <delirium at hackish.org> wrote:
>
>> Robert Scott Horning wrote:
>>
>>> I am curious if anybody who is a regular participant on this mailing
>>> list has ever come across an equivalent peer to Wikipedia (aka
>>> Britannica or a major website like cnn.com) that would use modern art
>>> works (I'm defining modern as created by anybody who has died since
>>> 1924) and publish reproductions of them using fair-use as the only
>>> justification for their inclusion?
>>>
>>>
>> Sure, here's some:
>> A 1932 Pablo Picasso painting:
>> http://archives.cnn.com/2000/STYLE/arts/05/10/picasso.auction.ap/
>> (credited as "AP Photo", though it's doubtful the AP owns the copyright)
>> A 1939 Pablo Picasso painting:
>> http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2000/year.in.review/story/arts/ (credited as
>> "CNN", again doubtful)
>>
>> Sometimes it's unclear:
>> A 1953 Mark Rothko painting:
>> http://archives.cnn.com/2000/STYLE/arts/11/15/sothebys.auction.reut/
>> (credited as "Courtesy Sotheby's", but it's unclear whether the
>> "courtesy" means they were given a copyright license, or, more likely,
>> are using it under an {{en:promotional}} type fair-use claim)
>>
>> My general impression is that fair-use images are quite common in
>> journalism.  I don't know about encyclopedias.  They are fairly common
>> in educational books---film-studies books frequently make fair use of
>> low-resolution still shots from films.
>>
> neither of the three examples shows that cnn uses fair use. The credits seem
> to refer to the story. For example:
> "By Deb Krajnak
> CNN.com Arts & Style Editor"
>
> probably just means that Deb is an CNN Arts & style editor.
>

I'm talking about the image credits, written vertically along the
right-hand side of the image.  Of course they don't explicitly say they
use fair use, because nobody would waste space saying that---fair use is
an affirmative defense if you're sued, not something you have to declare
ahead of time.  Nevertheless it's quite clear from context that many
journalistic photo uses are {{en:promotional}} fair use.

-Mark


subject: [Foundation-l] Fair Use (again)


from_name: Brion Vibber

subject: [Wikitech-l] New SVN committers

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

Roman Nosov (roman) - blame map extension

Raimond Spekking (raymond) - localization

Aaron Schultz (aaron) (VoiceOfAll) - CheckUser updates and other general
patches

- -- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com / brion @ wikimedia.org)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFFwnbSwRnhpk1wk44RAiI+AJ0e1xgZ8cT/CyrVWBOUkBm530arBACggRb+
NMj6mtdRyCGfQ0B9ZGulCps=
=l8ey
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


from_name: · Firefoxman

subject: [WikiEN-l] Survey about paid editing

body:
The Current stats are No way. The beauty of the site is that it's policed by
volunteers who keep it PR-free.
*57*% Sure. Everyone, paid or volunteer, has trouble staying neutral.
*39*% What's Wikipedia?
*4.1*%

On 2/1/07, Gregory Kohs <thekohser at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I'm wondering what the opinions of "influential Wikipedians" are regarding
> this MSNBC poll that shows 40% of over a thousand people think like I do?
>
> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16795533/
>
> Clearly, I'm in the minority, but it's certainly not a small minority.  I
> would also love to learn (if it were only possible) what the demographics
> are of those who responded "No way" versus those who responded "Sure".  I
> would venture a guess that the average age and household income of those
> saying "Sure" is higher than those who say "No way".
>
> Also, I'd like to mention here to Guy Chapman that he's either
> deleting/ignoring the three civilly-worded e-mails I have sent him, or
> he's
> not getting them whatsoever.  Geni did me a favor and e-mailed Guy, too --
> but I've not heard back from either of them.  Guy, care to comment about
> whether you're "taking" correspondence at your spamcop address?
>
> --
> Gregory Kohs
> Cell: 302.463.1354
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

--
-Firefoxman


subject: [WikiEN-l] Autoconfirmed threshold

body:
What is a top post?

On 1/31/07, Royalguard11 <royalguard11 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 1/30/07, xaosflux <xaosflux at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I like 4 days, AND 25 edits is a good threshold for en:
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Mets501" <mets501wiki at gmail.com>
> > To: "'English Wikipedia'" <wikien-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
> > Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 12:56 PM
> > Subject: [WikiEN-l] Autoconfirmed threshold
> >
> >
> > > According to Simetrical:
> > > "It is now possible for wikis to require a certain number of edits, as
> > > well
> > > as a certain registration time period, for users to become
> autoconfirmed.
> > > Thus, for instance, accounts that have existed for several weeks but
> have
> > > made fewer than five edits might be prevented from moving pages or so
> on.
> > > If
> > > a particular wiki would like this enabled for them, it can file a bug
> > > report
> > > after community agreement."
> > >
> > > I think we should enable this with a threshold of 10 edits.  10 edits
> is
> > > reasonable for a vandal to go through the whole warning system and get
> > > blocked, while at the same time not too much so as to discourage new
> > > contributors.
> > > --Mets501
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > > WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> > > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >
>
> Ugly top post! I agree with 4 days and 25 edits.
>
> --
> -Royalguard11
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

--
-Firefoxman


from_name: David Gerard

subject: [WikiEN-l] What is the fundamental goal of the project?

body:
On 01/02/07, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 2/1/07, Omegatron <omegatron+wikienl at gmail.com> wrote:

> > Are you in favor of removing all non-free quotations from Wikipedia?

> Quotations should for the most part be in wikiquote

Assume the context is the text being discussed in the article.

- d.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Freedom of Speech in WP

body:
On 01/02/07, Luna <lunasantin at gmail.com> wrote:

> If we want the level of discourse to be more civil, we must first ourselves
> behave in a civil manner. Nine times out of ten, that precludes linking
> [[m:DICK]] in my opinion.

I think it's been instruction-crept lately, but at least one previous
version noted that calling someone out as a dick was a dickish move
itself and somewhat missing the point.

- d.


from_name: Dave Grogan

subject: [Wikitech-l] Extension:Spellcheck

body:
I've been working on a spellcheck extension based on scijax.  It is in a
fairly usable state and I am posting a link to it here so that others
who need a spellchecker can more easily find it.

http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Spellcheck mostly points to
http://code.google.com/p/wikimediaspellchecker/


body:
On 01/02/07, Timwi <timwi at gmx.net> wrote:

> Here is another case of something I mentioned to this mailing list some
> time ago:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Timwi&diff=104821425&oldid=104820754
> In a nutshell, the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject UK Parliament
> constituencies]] wants to add the parenthesis "(UK Parliament
> constituency)" to all constituency articles, even those that don't have
> ambiguous names and would therefore -- under the general naming
> convention rules -- not have the parenthesis.

This isn't "policy" in the sense of NPOV or verifiability. Or even in
the sense of deletion procedures. Naming conventions are essentially
arbitrary.

> These people feel they're completely in the right because they have a
> discussion to link to -- a discussion that took place on the WikiProject
> page. Since such a discussion cannot override a general rule such as the
> Naming Convention, how do I properly respond to this without causing an
> edit war (or move war)?

Decide what the "who cares?" value is.

If you can think of important counterexamples, raise those and see if
they can be fitted into the proposed convention in a reasonably
streamlined and obvious manner. They actually care about it, so good
on them for being prepared to work on our content.

When I say "important counterexamples", I mean ones that would be
clearly *wrong* with the bracketed bit after the name and a redirect
from the old name. Not ones where it makes no difference.

I'm a big fan of "who cares?" on naming conventions and a forest of
redirects to help searchers. I think the last one I bothered voicing
an opinion on in a LONG time was [[Ecma Office Open XML]], and only
because I was in the middle of the media coverage. (Microsoft's big
issue was the name - it was at [[Microsoft Office Open XML]] - and I
think they were arguably correct, given the analogous examples of
[[ECMAScript]] vs [[JavaScript]] vs [[JScript]]. So far it's been at
the current title for a week and fingers crossed it stays there.)

- d.


from_name: Marc Riddell

subject: [WikiEN-l] Freedom of Speech in WP

body:
on 2/1/07 2:25 PM, Ray Saintonge at saintonge at telus.net wrote:

> The smiley face is often ignored by those determined to be offended.
> The obvious hyperbole of statements like, "You ought to be shot for
> saying that," tends to be ignored in favour of an impossible litersal
> interpretation.
>
> There is also on the net a frequent tendency toward one-dimensionality.
> Thus "LOL" is most frequently taken to mean "Lots of Laughs", and in
> some circumstances readers will read it as some kind of insult by
> laughing at their work.  For others it can mean, "Lots of Luck," in the
> same way that one would say, "Break a leg," to someone about to go on
> stage.  No-one would seriously take that expression literally.  "Lots of
> Luck," can also be used ironically meaning, "I don't believe you can
> accomplish that without luck."  When I first encountered the
> abbreviation it meant, "Little Old Lady."  Cf [[The Little Old Lady from
> Pasadena]].
>
> It's also important to recognize that the same event can have quite a
> different cultural impact in different societies.  The now infamous
> super-bowl "wardrobe malfunction" outraged some people, but for others
> of us it was hilarious that such a trivial event should get such an
> overblown reaction.  Here along the border it frequently happens that
> the same movie shown with full dialogue on Canadian television will have
> offensive words bleeped on US television.  As more countries mix more
> different vegetables into the soup the flavours become more nuanced.
> Those of us who don't like olives on pizza need to find an accomodation
> with those that do, and bulldozing all the olive trees in the world is
> not an option.  Things do mean exactly what the user intends.  Alice
> understood this, both in Wonderland and in Her Restaurant.  Great works
> of art, literature and music will say entirely different things to each
> person who experiences them.  We need to guard against obligatory
> equation of meanings between the artist and his audience.
>
> Yes, we have lost good editors who got upset with our form of social
> darwinism.  I can imagine that this has been especially difficult from
> some of our American Wikipedians who have now found a raven or coyote
> sitting on the pulpit of their values.  I say this with the utmost
> sympathy, for I know that some have adapted well.  In the present world
> climate it can't be easy to be an American.
>
> I think we have barely touched the surface of the paradigm shift
> implicit in the developments of communications technology.  I've been
> reading the book, "Wikinomics: How Mass Collaboration Changes
> Everything," by Don Tapscott and Anthony D. Williams.  The authors
> mention Wikipedia extensively, along with many of the other well-known
> on-line initiatives.  In a paradign shift the shakedown of the old ways
> can be brutal.  Intellectual property and economics are only the first
> areas to feel the heat.  In the United States Lou Dobbs of CNN is
> constantly carrying-on about incompetent politicians, many of whom leave
> the impression that the primary duty of an elected politician is to get
> re-elected.  Even if you remove the understandably nationalistic tone of
> his statements, they remain applicable.  It's only a matter of time
> until the denizens of the blogosphere discover that maybe they should
> suggest alternatives that are more people friendly than the
> constitutional brick that was proposed for the European Union.  Maybe we
> don't need countries at all.

Excellent post. Thank you.

Marc Riddell


from_name: Bogdan Giusca

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Moldavian

body:
Thursday, February 1, 2007, 1:45:20 PM, David wrote:

> In fact, there seems to be an organized campaign, with a form letter.

As long as there is no one protesting in front of the Wikimedia
Foundation's headquarters, it's ok. :-)


from_name: Mark Ryan

subject: [WikiEN-l] lists.wikimedia.org mailing list memberships reminder

body:
I don't know about other subscribers to this mailing list, but I just
received a password reminder email for Wikimedia mailing lists,
despite never having received one before, ever. This is probably an
unintentional change brought about by the changes to the mailing lists
in January.

To turn this back off, visit the WikiEN-l list information page at the
following URL:

http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Type your email address in the box under "Changing options and
unsubscribing" and click "Unsubscribe or edit options". Type in your
password on the next screen and hit "Log in". Scroll down to "Get
password reminder email for this list?", click "no", and click "Set
globally" if you want to turn it off for all Wikimedia mailing lists
you are subscribed to with that email address.

Then click "Submit my changes" at the bottom of the screen.

Voila! No more getting your passwords emailed to you in plain text
(which I, for one, think is the stupidest feature of MailMan ever).

~Mark Ryan


from_name: Liviu Andronic

body:
On 2/1/07, Berto 'd Sera <albertoserra at ukr.net > wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> Once this thing will be aver I kind of think that we all miss the MO/RO
> flame wars... We will tell children about it in cold winter evenings, when
> they will ask us "Hey grandad, what was a wiki like?" jumping out of their
>
> favourite porn hologram player to make silly questions to us "the elder".
> :)))))))))))))))
>
> Then our eyes will look somewhere in the distance and we will say "I've
> seen
> things you guys cannot even imagine. I've seen rumenian legions storming
> the
> mailing lists, I've seen the moldovian clone resisting behind its
> glagolitic
> barricades, fluctuating on the verge of alphabetic extinction...". It all
> will be SOOO romantic :))))))))))))))))
>
> ============================
> Bogdan (but names mean nothing here, as MO-RO players are wondefully
> interchangeable) wrote:
> >The main issue is not that it was imposed by the Communists, but
> >that nobody wants to use it anymore.
> So what? Do you know many people wishing to speak latin? The question was
> about it "being EXACTLY a cyrillic transcritp for rumenian or not". Try
> and
> answer that, instead of serving us the n-th number of your "Pravda". Say
> YES/NO/A % VALUE and pleeeeease DO explain why you say so.
>
> > the people who support Cyrillic Moldovan are almost
> > exclusively Russians and Ukrainians, with some Serbians
> > and other panslavists.
> Yeap! And those who oppose it are mainly pan-rumenians :)))) Never heard
> of
> an pan-eskimo giving a damn about this subject LOLOLOL. BTW, FMI shouldn't
> people who don't care about you be called pan-NO-nians? :))))))))
> ===========================
>
> Yeah... I will miss you guys. I used to hate you all, from both sides, but
>
> now that you are going to be terminated for good... I'd say this place
> will
> loose some of its individuality once you're gone. Like Paris with the
> River
> Seine turned into an awful although much needed parking lot...
>
> A question to the pan-NO-nian community: what about adopting an interwiki
> MO-RO day, during which all wikipedians from all editions will be
> requested
> to hold ceremonial mock flamewars on this subject? :))))))) Think about
> it.
> Having common roots means a lot to community building :) A MO-RO carnival
> day? :)))))))))))))))
>
> Hmm... Bogdan and others, is there any way in which people belonging to
> the
> RO tribe should dress up? MO people will have Stalin's moustache, a Red
> Army
> cap on their heads, eat pork fat as native ukrainians and will speak a
> funny
> fake-rumenian ending all words in -SKI (Bogdanuski, Romaniaski,
> Moldovoski,
> Steauaska, Bucurestska, etc), this is 100% clear. But what about YOUR
> political tribe? Please do enlight us, 'cause I'd hate to look unproper in
> my RO costume :)))))
>
> Really, I know it's ridicolous

It is; your message I mean. Ridiculously stupid.
Something similar to another fine piece of art, written by Ronald Chmara on
the "[Wikipedia-l] Harassment on wikipedia" thread.

, but I'll miss this political crap :)))) The
> funny thing about eastern europe is that nobody gives a damn about this
> rubbish. People care about money, sex and big cars, that's it.

Who are you to judge on this matter?

Nationalism
> is something that drunk young lads with no women may mention, but no more
> than that. Yet those 5 perverted anomalies who do care about nationalism
> will ALWAYS make it to our medias. As if the country was nothing but crazy
>
> extremists, ethnic trouble, criminals and/or exported prostitutes.
>
> Pls, read about Eastern Europe in Wikipedia. Even better, come and see it
> with your own eyes. It's wonderful people, with a wonderful history,
> culture
> and fantastic places, and as soon as you'll see the real thing you'll find
> out that the actual number of MO-ROs is so small that it's not even worth
> mentioning them. This much I owe to the normal people of all involved
> countries.
>
> And nevertheless... DO adopt the MO-RO interwiki carnaval day. :)))))))
> Otherwise I'll organize a campaign to bury under millions of protest
> emails
> the Board, the whole set of romanians and moldavians wikipedians, and YOU
> and your girl/boyfriend as individuals :)))))))))))
>
> Your sincerely,
> Berto 'd Sera
> Personagi dl'ann 2006 per l'arvista american-a Time (tanme tuti vojaotri)
> http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1569514,00.html
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>

--
Liviu


from_name: Ron Ritzman

subject: [WikiEN-l] False AfD Nominations

body:
On 2/1/07, Andrew Gray <shimgray at gmail.com> wrote:

> You do realise *we make it impossible* for non-account users to list
> an article for deletion, right?

Did you ever consider that there might be a good reason for that and
that same reason might also apply to creating an account for the sole
purpose of making an AFD nom? We already give less weight to AFD
"votes" from anons and newly created single purpose accounts,
shouldn't the nominations be held to the same or a higher standard?

> And that the only way to jump through
> all our hoops to, in all honesty and good faith, list an article for
> deletion that you have problems with is to go off, create an account,
> then do it?

No, there is another way. You can ask someone else to make the nom for
you. This looks a lot more kosher then creating a trash account to
make the nom. That makes you look like someone's sock puppet.


subject: [Wikipedia-l] [Foundation-l] Moldavian

body:
On 2/1/07, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> David Monniaux schreef:
> > OTRS has received a request for this wiki to be taken down, stating that
> > Moldovian is just Romanian written in cyrillic, in a way imposed by the
> > Communists. (I'm not saying this is true, I have no opinion on the
> > issue, I'm just reporting.)
> >
> Hoi,
> This argument is totally irrelevant. There is no place for politics in
> answering the question if a language is used and if so in which way.

There is one relevant point in this
argument. Writing Moldovan with Cyrillic was and is imposed.
By politics, but imposed. And as such, there are no (apart for
minoritary and exceptional cases)
persons freely willing to write Romanian in Cyrillic script.

Thus, I do
not really understand what does Wikipedia - and the language committee,
in particular - hope for the future of the Moldovan Wikipedia when
there are _no_ native _writers_
willing to contribute. This "no" is evident, taking into
account the two recent votes
(on mo.wiki and on meta), where no Moldovan supported the existance of the
Moldovan Wikipedia. This Wikipedia cannot advance much if it is to be
driven by -
in most of the cases - approximate transliterations made by Mark Williamson
of Romanian Wikipedia articles.

What is relevant is that there are people still writing in Cyrillic.
> This has been expressed before. On previous occasions we have expressed
> quite strongly that political arguments have no place in deciding if a
> language in one of its manifestations is used or not. This is the point
> of view of the language committee.
>
> Thanks,
>     GerardM
>     for the language committee
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>

--
Liviu


subject:
[Foundation-l] We really need to avoid the next
	Microsoft-Wikipedia bad publicity storm

body:
On 01/02/07, Mohamed Magdy <mohamed.m.k at gmail.com> wrote:

> Could the answer be in adding another line just above the save button?
> explaining the idea to the editor and telling him/her that there is a
> conflict of interests and if you wish to add content to the article, add
> it to the talk page instead? and if you have more to say, add a link too.

There's so much visual noise on the edit page already that it's likely
to be ignored, I fear.

(Mind you, the MediaWiki user interface needs all sorts of attention.)

[I'm going to have to learn to code, aren't I.]

- d.


from_name: Evan Jones

subject: [WikiEN-l] RFC on essay

body:
Hello,

I've just written a brief essay on the relationship between reliable
sources and verifiability (and, ultimately, the worth of the article.)
This is my first essay, and comments and constructive criticisms are
more than welcome on the essay's talk page.

The essay is entitled "No reliable sources, no verifiability, no
article" and it can be found at [[WP:NRSNVNA]].

Cheers,
Evan Jones
User:Chardish


from_name: Gerard Meijssen

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Moldavian

body:
Bogdan Giusca schreef:
> Thursday, February 1, 2007, 1:45:20 PM, David wrote:
>
>
>> In fact, there seems to be an organized campaign, with a form letter.
>>
>
> As long as there is no one protesting in front of the Wikimedia
> Foundation's headquarters, it's ok. :-)
>
Hoi,
Is it ?
Thanks,
    GerardM


from_name: Ray Saintonge

subject: [Foundation-l] Fair Use (again)

body:
Robert Scott Horning wrote:

>Ray Saintonge wrote:
>
>
>>Robert Scott Horning wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I am being told that the one and only way that these images are going to
>>>possibly be removed from Wikipedia is through a WP:OFFICE action.  I
>>>think that is one of the most ridiculous sentiments ever made.  For
>>>example, see the "disclaimer" that was thrown onto this image:
>>>
>>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image%3AHand_with_Reflecting_Sphere.jpg
>>>
>>>
>>I looked at that "disclaimer", and found it excessively
>>confrontational.  I was tempted to at least edit off the rough edges,
>>but though it better not to meddle with what you are trying to do..  I
>>saw no mention of WP:OFFICE.
>>
>>
>The point I was trying to make here is that the only option that our
>"desgnated agent" could do here (aka Brad, if he were contacted by the
>Escher Foundation to remove this content) is to invoke WP:OFFICE and
>have the content removed.
>
I see WP:OFFICE as something that can be used when the problem is
inherently fixable.  It is not the best place for permanent deletions.
Being willing to take the material down on request is only a first step,
and only a temporary one at that.  It doesn't stop another person at
some time in the future when Brad no longer has that role from starting
the whole process all over again.  A temporary take down and WP:OFFICE
(or similar) action should show good faith, but if something is to be
more permanent it should be followed by a formal OCILA takedown order.
To facilitate this we can send them blank forms that are even filled in
to whatever extent we can do that.  When they are completed and returned
they are made public, and can serve as a basis for shooting the
resurrection of such material on sight.  The only options that anyone
who wants the images back up would have would be to start a formal
put-back process at his own expense, or wait until the copyright expires.

If this problem is ever going to resolve itself we need to inject a
little formality into the process.  Neither deleting all potentially
infringing material out of paranoia, nor the unbridled addition of
material as a dare to come and get us can be very helpful.  We should
prefer receiving takedown orders; without implying that any such act
would be broadly seen as somehow hostile.

>I see no reason that such a disclaimer needs
>to be here in this first place, and am arguing that this is strongly
>suggesting that perhaps even having this image on Wikipedia is illegal.
>
Properly worded it should not suggest that we know the material is
illegal.  With apparently orphaned material it may just be a technique
for trying to determine if there is anyone out there who does own the
copyright.  If it stays up like that for three years with no reply at
all it may very well establish that the copyright has been abandoned.
At the same time we will be able to produce the historical record of how
the image was treated by us.

>I'm sure that somebody thought to add the disclaimer as a form of CYA
>(cover your assetts), but if you are in doubt in the first place
>wouldn't it simply be better to remove the image completely?
>
Not necessarily, maybe the image really is an orphan.

Ec


subject: [Foundation-l] Fair Use (again)


from_name: Gurch

subject: [WikiEN-l] Survey about paid editing

body:
Gregory Kohs wrote:
> I'm wondering what the opinions of "influential Wikipedians" are regarding
> this MSNBC poll that shows 40% of over a thousand people think like I do?
>
> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16795533/
>
> Clearly, I'm in the minority, but it's certainly not a small minority.  I
> would also love to learn (if it were only possible) what the demographics
> are of those who responded "No way" versus those who responded "Sure".  I
> would venture a guess that the average age and household income of those
> saying "Sure" is higher than those who say "No way".
>
> Also, I'd like to mention here to Guy Chapman that he's either
> deleting/ignoring the three civilly-worded e-mails I have sent him, or he's
> not getting them whatsoever.  Geni did me a favor and e-mailed Guy, too --
> but I've not heard back from either of them.  Guy, care to comment about
> whether you're "taking" correspondence at your spamcop address?

I voted "What's Wikipedia"?

In unrelated news, 87.3% of statistics are misleading.

-Gurch


subject: [Foundation-l] Fair Use (again)

body:
The Cunctator wrote:

>On 1/31/07, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>On 1/31/07, The Cunctator <cunctator at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>My issue is that I don't think people should be using bots to remove images
>>>
>>>
>>>with questionable status.
>>>
>>>
>>All deletion is done manualy.
>>
>>
>Deletion of the actual image is done manually -- removal of the image from
>articles is done by a bot.
>
Perhaps the point here is which comes first?  If there really is an
agreement to delete an actual image first, it can't hurt to have the bot
come along later to clean up the links.  It wouln't be very friendly to
proced in the other order.

Ec


subject: [Foundation-l] Fair Use (again)


from_name: David Ashby

subject: [WikiEN-l] Most cunningly disguised spam yet?

body:
On 2/1/07, Angela <beesley at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 2/1/07, Earle Martin <wikipedia at downlode.org> wrote:
> > I just came across this user page:
> >
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:%24_London_Apartments
> >
> > (That %24 is a dollar sign.) Intrigued by the weird user name, I had a
> > look - at first glance it's a regular user page. But as you read it
> > more carefully, you discover the preponderance of certain words, like
> > "London", "apartment", "rent", "renting", "house", and "first floor".
> > As you get further down, you see a bunch of "useful" links to other
> > sites, one of which is coincidentally called "London Apartments".
> >
> > A glance at the user contributions shows almost nothing but
> > modifications to their own page, despite what the text on the page
> > claims. There are a couple of trivial edits to other pages.
> >
> > Spam? Or real person? I seek the wisdom of the collective....
>
> It could be either, but the links don't need to be there. I've removed
> them and left a note for the user.
>
> On 2/1/07, Dan Collins <en.wp.st47 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Look at his contribs. He is doing nothing but editing his userpage. I'd MfD
> > it under [[WP:NOT]] a free web host, but that's just me.
>
> He has made edits to a few articles now. I don't see a need for an MfD
> listing when the rest of the page is fine.
>
> Angla
>

Paging through the edit history on that page, this user's name and sex
have both changed within a few hours. Very odd.

-david


from_name: Parker Peters

body:
Doesn't look too bad to me. There are legitimate edits made by the account,
and while most of the edits are to the user page, a heck of a lot are
spelling or small edits anyways.

The links themselves aren't all that bad either; none look particularly out
of line, especially not to a map of London, nor the London city government
page, or the city's transport authority. I'd say it was more like someone
was proud of where they lived.

I'd prefer that this one be given the benefit of the doubt absent any major
issue that you could elsewise come up with... which since you asked for
outside opinions, you likely don't really have.

Parker

On 2/1/07, Earle Martin <wikipedia at downlode.org> wrote:
>
> I just came across this user page:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:%24_London_Apartments
>
> (That %24 is a dollar sign.) Intrigued by the weird user name, I had a
> look - at first glance it's a regular user page. But as you read it
> more carefully, you discover the preponderance of certain words, like
> "London", "apartment", "rent", "renting", "house", and "first floor".
> As you get further down, you see a bunch of "useful" links to other
> sites, one of which is coincidentally called "London Apartments".
>
> A glance at the user contributions shows almost nothing but
> modifications to their own page, despite what the text on the page
> claims. There are a couple of trivial edits to other pages.
>
> Spam? Or real person? I seek the wisdom of the collective....
>
>
> --
> Earle Martin
>             http://downlode.org/
> http://purl.org/net/earlemartin/
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: Anthony

body:
On 2/1/07, Mohamed Magdy <mohamed.m.k at gmail.com> wrote:
> Could the answer be in adding another line just above the save button?

Sure, but what's the question?


from_name: Rob Church

subject: [Wikitech-l] update.php should fix more permissions

body:
On 01/02/07, Dan Jacobson <jidanni at jidanni.org> wrote:
> By the way on
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:How_to_move_a_wiki_to_another_server
> "SELECT, INSERT, UPDATE and DELETE permissions should suffice."

That's because when I wrote the documentation page, I was writing for
the most common case, and for the general purpose user account;
maintenance would normally be done using a different account.

Rob Church


subject: [Wikitech-l] Special:Categories starting from D: how to link?

body:
On 01/02/07, Dan Jacobson <jidanni at jidanni.org> wrote:
> Does SpecialCategories.php need to take some lessons from
> SpecialAllpages.php about allowing fancier arguments?

I'll tell you what; Special:Categories can start taking lessons from
Special:Allpages when the bug report is filed in the right place.

Rob Church


from_name: Luna

subject: [WikiEN-l] Survey about paid editing

body:
On 2/1/07, Cheney Shill <halliburton_shill at yahoo.com> wrote:

> There wasn't a vote for, "Can you phrase the question to be
> more misleading?"
>
> "Is it ok to pay people to post or edit Wikipedia content?"
> - I'd say it's easy to have wrongly interpreted that to be
> a question about whether it's OK for Wikipedia to hire
> editors/posters.  If you phrase it as, is it OK for
> companies to insert undisclosed ads and PR into articles,
> you'll get very different survey results.

Too true. More often than not, it's all in how we phrase a question. Their
choice was rather ambiguous on the count of who was doing the paying.

Personally, I heard a story of a company that had paid somebody to check up
on their article, now and then -- just to make sure it wasn't vandalized and
nobody was saying *blatantly* crappy and false stuff about them. The guy
wasn't supposed to make any substantive edits, only to make sure nothing too
untoward happened to the article. *That* doesn't bother me, provided they
stay with really clear-cut cases like that.

Paid editors can be neutral (take journalists and news reporters, for
example), but being paid (or even employed in the long term) by the very
subject of your writing poses an obvious and inherent conflict of interest.
It may be possible to write neutrally in such circumstances, but it would
have to be the exception to the rule, for one to be able to do so.

-Luna


from_name: oscar van dillen

subject: [Foundation-l] [Announcement] Welcome to the advisory group

body:
On 1/29/07, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> To be blunt, to me is seems like a "blast from the past" while we need to
> see into a future and reach out.

couldn't help thinking of the following anecdote:

some years ago the parliament in the netherlands did tests at (dutch) high
school graduation level.
the results in dutch language were not good if i recall correctly, but
especially in the history test they were exceedingly bad. when asked about
the importance of awareness and knowledge of history in his profession, one
politician stated: "we are here for the future, not for the past"

best ;-)
oscar

--
DISCLAIMER: This message does not represent an official position of the
Wikimedia Foundation nor of its Board of Trustees.


from_name: NSLE (Wikipedia)

subject:
[WikiEN-l] Wikipedia case study (GFDL!) from Harvard Business
	School

body:
HighInBC will be interested to know that his successful 76/1/0 RFA was
covered:
http://courseware.hbs.edu/public/cases/wikipedia/screens/images/Wikipedia-Requests.gif

-NSLE/Chacor

On 01/02/07, Samuel Klein <meta.sj at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> http://courseware.hbs.edu/public/cases/wikipedia/
>
> The Harvard Business School is famous for its case studies.  Two of its
> professors put out a case study on Wikipedia, and the history of the
> Enterprise 2.0 article (a new term championed by one of the case study
> authors; the article was written by others who use the term).
>
> I have a cameo as the admin who recommends starting a new AfD discussion.
>
> The whole study is released under the GFDL, though it will be available
> for sale via CD as per usual with new case studies.
>
> Don't forget the check out the exhibits, which are fascinating.
>
> --SJ
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: geni

body:
On 2/1/07, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 01/02/07, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 2/1/07, Omegatron <omegatron+wikienl at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Are you in favor of removing all non-free quotations from Wikipedia?
>
> > Quotations should for the most part be in wikiquote
>
>
> Assume the context is the text being discussed in the article.

Depending on the context it is my understanding that. individual short
quotations are de facto free with regards to copyright (not trademark)
under  every legal system I seen the issue raised under.

--
geni


subject: [Foundation-l] Chapters Coordinator!

body:
Dear all,

In the Frankfurt retreat of October 2007 (see
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Report_from_Frankfurt_-_October_2006/en
) it was envisioned that someone should be charged with the fostering of
relationships between Chapters and Foundation as well as with the developing
of Chapters and related activities. This is actually a job which has been
developed, and officially been done for quite a while already, by Delphine
M?nard, as you all may know.

On the current path of stabilizing and professionalizing the organization,
the Wikimedia Foundation has decided to now hire Delphine M?nard as Chapters
Coordinator (part-time), starting as of today, February 1st, 2007. It is my
honor, as board member especially responsible for relationships with
chapters, to announce this to you.

Since it is a bit pointless to welcome someone already so involved in
Wikimedia, please allow me to express my warmest congratulations to
Delphine, I am looking forward to a fruitful cooperation :-)

Best regards,
Oscar

Oscar van Dillen
Wikimedia Foundation


subject: [Foundation-l] Chapters Coordinator!


from_name: David Gerard

subject: [WikiEN-l] Survey about paid editing

body:
On 01/02/07, Gregory Kohs <thekohser at gmail.com> wrote:

> I'm wondering what the opinions of "influential Wikipedians" are regarding
> this MSNBC poll that shows 40% of over a thousand people think like I do?
> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16795533/

My opinion is that self-selected samples are statistically bogus and
inherently meaningless. In the press, they are mostly for amusement
value. See [[self-selection]].

- d.


subject: [Foundation-l] Fair Use (again)

body:
geni wrote:

>On 1/31/07, The Cunctator <cunctator at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Which I should note includes removal of caption text which obviously is not
>>covered by any image license. It's certainly true that in most cases the
>>caption is meaningless without the image sometimes the caption text is
>>significant to the article on its own.
>>
>>I believe that removal should be done manually.
>>
>>
>
>
>Really? Cool.
>
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Works_of_the_Philippines_government
>
>Needs sorting out (deleting). Some of the stuff there could probably
>be tagged fair use but the rest needs to be orphaned.
>
>Before you do that would you mind orphaning:
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Indusvalleyexcavation.jpg
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Sistine.chapel.entire.500pix.jpg
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:LowerFortGarry.jpg
>
>Because that would allow us to clean out Category: Non-commercial use
>only images once and for all.
>
I've removed the last item since it is in the public domain, being more
than 50 years old

Ec


subject: [Foundation-l] Fair Use (again)


from_name: Phil Sandifer

subject: [WikiEN-l] RFC on essay

body:
1) The "burninate it all" attitude is actively counter-productive. It
is easier to see an unsourced statement and find a source than to
work blind.

2) Your major argument is that Jimbo supports you. That's nice, but
note that he is talking about a particular kind of information - the
"I heard it somewhere" sort. That is not what most unsourced
information is. Most unsourced information is based on more certainty
than that.

3) Your essay is based on an immediatist bias. You assume that an
unsourced article is a placeholder for the later article - it's not.
It's a starting point. Good articles are the product of time and
edits - to whack an article early on because it's not good enough is
just stupid.

4) There is no evidence that an article lacking reliable sources is a
mess of original research.

5) Your acronym is terrible.

Best,
Phil Sandifer
sandifer at english.ufl.edu

You are standing in an open field west of a white house, with a
boarded front door. There is a small mailbox here.

 >

On Feb 1, 2007, at 5:50 PM, Evan Jones wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I've just written a brief essay on the relationship between reliable
> sources and verifiability (and, ultimately, the worth of the article.)
> This is my first essay, and comments and constructive criticisms are
> more than welcome on the essay's talk page.
>
> The essay is entitled "No reliable sources, no verifiability, no
> article" and it can be found at [[WP:NRSNVNA]].
>
> Cheers,
> Evan Jones
> User:Chardish
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l


from_name: Arwel Parry

subject: [WikiEN-l] Picture copyrights - an interesting article

body:
There's an interesting article on picture copyrights in todays'
"Guardian", "A picture paints a thousand invoices"
http://technology.guardian.co.uk/weekly/story/0,,2002905,00.html

It might be worth linking to this article when people complain about
non-free images being deleted!

--
Arwel Parry


subject: [Foundation-l] Fair Use (again)

body:
teun spaans wrote:

>The best course of action is to keep to our goals: create free intellectual
>properties. Fair usage does not qualify as such.
>
Part of creating free property would be doing what we can to convert the
fair use properties into free ones.

Ec


subject: [Foundation-l] Fair Use (again)


list: commons-l

subject: [Commons-l] Image libraries claiming their money from websites

body:
http://technology.guardian.co.uk/weekly/story/0,,2002905,00.html

No mention of Commons! I'll be emailing such a mention in; I hope you will too.

- d.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Survey about paid editing

body:
On 2/1/07, Gregory Kohs <thekohser at gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm wondering what the opinions of "influential Wikipedians" are regarding
> this MSNBC poll that shows 40% of over a thousand people think like I do?
>
> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16795533/
>
> Clearly, I'm in the minority, but it's certainly not a small minority.

Yes you are. See the people voteing it was ok were thinking about
people like danny not you.

--
geni


from_name: Dan Collins

body:
On 2/1/07, Earle Martin <wikipedia at downlode.org> wrote:
>
> I just came across this user page:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:%24_London_Apartments
>
> (That %24 is a dollar sign.) Intrigued by the weird user name, I had a
> look - at first glance it's a regular user page. But as you read it
> more carefully, you discover the preponderance of certain words, like
> "London", "apartment", "rent", "renting", "house", and "first floor".
> As you get further down, you see a bunch of "useful" links to other
> sites, one of which is coincidentally called "London Apartments".
>
> A glance at the user contributions shows almost nothing but
> modifications to their own page, despite what the text on the page
> claims. There are a couple of trivial edits to other pages.
>
> Spam? Or real person? I seek the wisdom of the collective....
>
>
> --
> Earle Martin
>             http://downlode.org/
> http://purl.org/net/earlemartin/
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

Look at his contribs. He is doing nothing but editing his userpage. I'd MfD
it under [[WP:NOT]] a free web host, but that's just me.

--
ST47
Editor, en.wikipedia


from_name: The Cunctator

body:
On 2/1/07, Earle Martin <wikipedia at downlode.org> wrote:
>
> I just came across this user page:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:%24_London_Apartments
>
> (That %24 is a dollar sign.) Intrigued by the weird user name, I had a
> look - at first glance it's a regular user page. But as you read it
> more carefully, you discover the preponderance of certain words, like
> "London", "apartment", "rent", "renting", "house", and "first floor".
> As you get further down, you see a bunch of "useful" links to other
> sites, one of which is coincidentally called "London Apartments".
>
> A glance at the user contributions shows almost nothing but
> modifications to their own page, despite what the text on the page
> claims. There are a couple of trivial edits to other pages.
>
> Spam? Or real person? I seek the wisdom of the collective....

I'd be surprised if it's spam. Just ignore it.


from_name: SonOfYoungwood at aol.com

subject: [WikiEN-l] RFC on essay

body:
I agree with what Phil says, not to mention that deleting removed edit
history and therefore violates GDFL if any of that information is used (which is
will be, in some form). Also, it could use a bit of a copy-edit :)

| Tyler | Zorin Deckiller |
| Wikipedia Administrator |  Former SWU member |
| _http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Deckiller_
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Deckiller)   |
| _http://www.myspace.com/redsectora_ (http://www.myspace.com/redsectora)   |


from_name: Frieda Brioschi

subject: [Foundation-l] Chapters Coordinator!

body:
2007/2/1, oscar van dillen <oscarvandillen a wikimedia.org>:
> On the current path of stabilizing and professionalizing the organization,
> the Wikimedia Foundation has decided to now hire Delphine M?nard as Chapters
> Coordinator (part-time), starting as of today, February 1st, 2007. It is my
> honor, as board member especially responsible for relationships with
> chapters, to announce this to you.

Wow!
Congrats Delphine :-))

Frieda

___________________________________________
http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utente:Frieda


subject: [Foundation-l] Chapters Coordinator!

body:
2007/2/1, oscar van dillen <oscarvandillen at wikimedia.org>:
> On the current path of stabilizing and professionalizing the organization,
> the Wikimedia Foundation has decided to now hire Delphine M?nard as Chapters
> Coordinator (part-time), starting as of today, February 1st, 2007. It is my
> honor, as board member especially responsible for relationships with
> chapters, to announce this to you.

Wow!
Congrats Delphine :-))

Frieda

___________________________________________
http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utente:Frieda


from_name: Anthere

subject: [Foundation-l] AGENDA

body:
Moderated.

Ant

Volunteer Services wrote:
> January 31st, 2007
>
>   To Whom it May Concern:
>
>   The Committee on Lost Stuff will not meet on Tuesday January 31st, 2007.
>
>   AGENDA
>
>   1. Roll Call
>
>   2. Hearing of John Doe's Lost Toe
>       A. John Doe, Chair
>       B. Jane Doe, Co-Chair
>
>   3. Hearing of Jane Doe's Lost Hand
>       A. Jane Doe, Chair
>       B. John Doe, Co-Chair
>
>   4. Adjourn
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Want to start your own business? Learn how on Yahoo! Small Business.


subject: [Foundation-l] AGENDA


body:
On 2/1/07, Matthew Brown <morven at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 2/1/07, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Depending on the context it is my understanding that. individual short
> > quotations are de facto free with regards to copyright (not trademark)
> > under  every legal system I seen the issue raised under.
>
> Yes, and the mechanism for it is called "fair use" under United States law.
>
> -Matt

You are forgetting de minimis.
--
geni


from_name: Nicolò Zamperini

subject: [Foundation-l] Chapters Coordinator!

body:
Support @ Delphine :)

Nicol?

Nick1915

2007/2/1, Frieda Brioschi <ubifrieda a gmail.com>:
>
> 2007/2/1, oscar van dillen <oscarvandillen a wikimedia.org>:
> > On the current path of stabilizing and professionalizing the
> organization,
> > the Wikimedia Foundation has decided to now hire Delphine M?nard as
> Chapters
> > Coordinator (part-time), starting as of today, February 1st, 2007. It is
> my
> > honor, as board member especially responsible for relationships with
> > chapters, to announce this to you.
>
> Wow!
> Congrats Delphine :-))
>
> Frieda
>
> ___________________________________________
> http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utente:Frieda
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l a lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>


subject: [Foundation-l] Chapters Coordinator!

body:
Support @ Delphine :)

Nicol?

Nick1915

2007/2/1, Frieda Brioschi <ubifrieda at gmail.com>:
>
> 2007/2/1, oscar van dillen <oscarvandillen at wikimedia.org>:
> > On the current path of stabilizing and professionalizing the
> organization,
> > the Wikimedia Foundation has decided to now hire Delphine M?nard as
> Chapters
> > Coordinator (part-time), starting as of today, February 1st, 2007. It is
> my
> > honor, as board member especially responsible for relationships with
> > chapters, to announce this to you.
>
> Wow!
> Congrats Delphine :-))
>
> Frieda
>
> ___________________________________________
> http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utente:Frieda
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>


from_name: charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com

subject: [WikiEN-l] Survey about paid editing

body:
> *57*% Sure. Everyone, paid or volunteer, has trouble staying neutral.

Wonder who supplied this exact wording? It has an odd, familiar ring.

Charles

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


from_name: Fred Bauder

subject: [WikiEN-l] Autoconfirmed threshold

body:
This is a top post. Some people think there is something wrong with top posts. Some even get real excited. They maintain that there is a long-standing convention requiring posting after the message you are replying to.

Fred

>-----Original Message-----
>From: ? Firefoxman [mailto:enwpmail at gmail.com]
>Sent: Thursday, February 1, 2007 01:28 PM
>To: 'English Wikipedia'
>Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Autoconfirmed threshold
>
>What is a top post?

This is not a top post. This post is in the "proper" position.

Fred


from_name: Oskar Sigvardsson

subject: [WikiEN-l] Survey about paid editing

body:
On 2/1/07, Mark Wagner <carnildo at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 2/1/07, Gregory Kohs <thekohser at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I'm wondering what the opinions of "influential Wikipedians" are regarding
> > this MSNBC poll that shows 40% of over a thousand people think like I do?
> >
> > http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16795533/
>
> My opinion is that the poll provides no protection against ballot-stuffing.

Sure it does! It probably sets a cookie! You know, a cookie! Those
delicios delicacies that are the ultimate protection against
everything!


subject: [WikiEN-l] Autoconfirmed threshold

body:
Most people don't care. See [[Posting styles]] for more information.

On 2/1/07, Fred Bauder <fredbaud at waterwiki.info> wrote:
> This is a top post. Some people think there is something wrong with top posts. Some even get real excited. They maintain that there is a long-standing convention requiring posting after the message you are replying to.
>
> Fred
>
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: ? Firefoxman [mailto:enwpmail at gmail.com]
> >Sent: Thursday, February 1, 2007 01:28 PM
> >To: 'English Wikipedia'
> >Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Autoconfirmed threshold
> >
> >What is a top post?
>
> This is not a top post. This post is in the "proper" position.
>
> Fred


from_name: Thomas Dalton

subject: [WikiEN-l] Survey about paid editing

body:
A poll by Microsoft asking if what they've just done is ok... would
you blame me for being just a little sceptical about the validity of
their methods?


from_name: Earle Martin

body:
I just came across this user page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:%24_London_Apartments

(That %24 is a dollar sign.) Intrigued by the weird user name, I had a
look - at first glance it's a regular user page. But as you read it
more carefully, you discover the preponderance of certain words, like
"London", "apartment", "rent", "renting", "house", and "first floor".
As you get further down, you see a bunch of "useful" links to other
sites, one of which is coincidentally called "London Apartments".

A glance at the user contributions shows almost nothing but
modifications to their own page, despite what the text on the page
claims. There are a couple of trivial edits to other pages.

Spam? Or real person? I seek the wisdom of the collective....

--
Earle Martin
            http://downlode.org/
http://purl.org/net/earlemartin/


from_name: Stephen Bain

body:
On 2/1/07, Timwi <timwi at gmx.net> wrote:
>
> These people feel they're completely in the right because they have a
> discussion to link to -- a discussion that took place on the WikiProject
> page. Since such a discussion cannot override a general rule such as the
> Naming Convention, how do I properly respond to this without causing an
> edit war (or move war)?

Tell them that you're pleased some Wikipedians actually managed to get
together and agree on something.

Tell them that you've thought again about what they're doing, and have
decided that since they're not agreeing to include original research,
nor are they agreeing that it's ok for their articles to be
unverifiable, nor are they agreeing that it's ok if they don't worry
about NPOV, that it's really no big deal that they are agreeing about
some absolutely trivial matter (even though it might be, in some
people's opinions, not within the strict letter of a mere naming
convention).

--
Stephen Bain
stephen.bain at gmail.com


from_name: Alphax (Wikipedia email)

subject: [WikiEN-l] False AfD Nominations

body:
Phil Sandifer wrote:
>
<snip>
> Let me be blunter: if this is standard for how the community
> considers deletion (and I've seen precious little evidence of late
> that it's not), the community can no longer be trusted with this
> function.
>

I've known this for two years now. "The People" can NEVER be trusted.
Democracy works well in theory, but not in practice - and people keep
forgetting that Wikipedia is not an experiment in internet democracy
(hence, they keep voting and denying that they're voting).

"You know how stupid the average person is? Well, by definition, half of
'em are stupider than that!!!"

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

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 542 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20070201/2b8565ae/attachment.pgp


from_name: Delirium

subject: [Wikitech-l] Our IP was blocked by mistake

body:
Marco Schuster wrote:

>David Gerard schrieb:
>
>
>>If you're just caching a regular snapshot, what's wrong with the
>>database dumps which are created specifically to make a regular
>>snapshot available?
>>
>>
>the ones for the big wikis (en,de) need REALLY good machines to import
>(good ram, enough disk...) and even with good machines they need ages to
>import :-(
>
>
Would the static HTML dumps work for your purposes?  They are just HTML
files, available in compressed archives per-language:
http://static.wikipedia.org/

Note that if you plan to use them for mirroring (as opposed to, say,
research), you will need to modify them so that they don't present
themselves as being Wikipedia, or otherwise misuse the Wikimedia trademarks.

(Incidentally, the link is to the November 2006 dump, but the log says
that the December 2006 dump finished; could somebody update that?)

-Mark


from_name: Angela

body:
On 2/1/07, Earle Martin <wikipedia at downlode.org> wrote:
> I just came across this user page:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:%24_London_Apartments
>
> (That %24 is a dollar sign.) Intrigued by the weird user name, I had a
> look - at first glance it's a regular user page. But as you read it
> more carefully, you discover the preponderance of certain words, like
> "London", "apartment", "rent", "renting", "house", and "first floor".
> As you get further down, you see a bunch of "useful" links to other
> sites, one of which is coincidentally called "London Apartments".
>
> A glance at the user contributions shows almost nothing but
> modifications to their own page, despite what the text on the page
> claims. There are a couple of trivial edits to other pages.
>
> Spam? Or real person? I seek the wisdom of the collective....

It could be either, but the links don't need to be there. I've removed
them and left a note for the user.

On 2/1/07, Dan Collins <en.wp.st47 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Look at his contribs. He is doing nothing but editing his userpage. I'd MfD
> it under [[WP:NOT]] a free web host, but that's just me.

He has made edits to a few articles now. I don't see a need for an MfD
listing when the rest of the page is fine.

Angla


from_name: Ray Saintonge

subject: [WikiEN-l] [[Incivility]]

body:
charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com wrote:

>The article [[incivility]] is likely the worst I have started.
>
>Please help a needy page.
>
Since it is a negative term wouldn't it be preferable to merge it with
[[civility]]?

Ec


from_name: Walter van Kalken

subject: [Foundation-l] Chapters Coordinator!

body:
I am very happy to see that a helpfull and knowledgable volunteer is now
being hired on a professional level :) Congrats to Delphine. And good luck!

Waerth

>Dear all,
>
>In the Frankfurt retreat of October 2007 (see
>http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Report_from_Frankfurt_-_October_2006/en
>) it was envisioned that someone should be charged with the fostering of
>relationships between Chapters and Foundation as well as with the developing
>of Chapters and related activities. This is actually a job which has been
>developed, and officially been done for quite a while already, by Delphine
>M?nard, as you all may know.
>
>On the current path of stabilizing and professionalizing the organization,
>the Wikimedia Foundation has decided to now hire Delphine M?nard as Chapters
>Coordinator (part-time), starting as of today, February 1st, 2007. It is my
>honor, as board member especially responsible for relationships with
>chapters, to announce this to you.
>
>Since it is a bit pointless to welcome someone already so involved in
>Wikimedia, please allow me to express my warmest congratulations to
>Delphine, I am looking forward to a fruitful cooperation :-)
>
>Best regards,
>Oscar
>
>Oscar van Dillen
>Wikimedia Foundation
>_______________________________________________
>foundation-l mailing list
>foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
>
>


subject: [Foundation-l] Chapters Coordinator!


subject: [WikiEN-l] Freedom of Speech in WP

body:
Marc Riddell wrote:

>on 1/31/07 8:35 PM, Ray Saintonge wrote:
>
>
>>One point which for me makes "Be civil" preferable to "Don't be a dick"
>>is that it advocates something that people should be in preference to
>>what they should not be.  It has a more positive outlook.
>>
>>
>I agree with the positive part, but there's that word "civil" again - I keep
>wanting to put the word "defense" right after it :-).
>
>
At least you're not putting "war" right after it. Few people would
understand if you were referring to a war fought with utmost politeness.
:-)

Ec


from_name: Mark Williamson

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Important Issue to Hebrew Wikipedia and AdminAbuse

body:
Well, I agree with most of this, but I'm not sure if it's intended to
be in response to my previous post.

And no, I think that the vast majority of Wikipedians, of any
language, are unaware of the pillars.

Mark

On 01/02/07, Berto 'd Sera <albertoserra at ukr.net> wrote:
> Hi Mark,
>
> I will not comment on Ukr/Ru/Ru-sib. I will rather act in silence and take
> my time to make sure that violations are prosecuted as such. It's my close
> geographical neighborhood and I do care for places and people I love :) I'm
> from the Alps, we are slooow but extremely methodical.
>
> More in general, we all have political ideas/illusions/dreams/principles
> etc. It's a human right to have them. But there are fields in which they are
> NOT acceptable as a source for decision making. Anyone being a cop cannot
> serve a guy better than another because they share a religious or political
> belief. Same is for doctors, for language operators, soldiers, encyclopedia
> editors, government officers, etc.
>
> Whenever you deal with something that encompasses a whole society as such,
> politics are OFFLIMITS. Failure to understand this means you deal with a
> dictatorship. It means that nothing changed. People only adapted their
> definition of "enemy of the people" to the current Czar. Now they deport
> communists, Russians and Germans, and that's as far as the "democratic
> novelty" goes. Sorry, I ain't gonna take it.
>
> They are free to do so in reality if they wish, but they are not free to do
> it within the WMF, because there is a thing called "pillars". Pillars are
> the reason why people donate money, those very money that pay for
> everybody's servers and bandwidth. Failure to respect the pillars is FRAUD
> TO DONORS. This must be extremely clear.
>
> BTW, how many editions did even bother translating those damn pillars?? How
> many non-english wikipedians EVEN JUST KNOW that they exist? It's hundreds
> of thousands of articles, each of which may happily say that there never was
> any holocaust, that the earth is flat, that candidate Y never made any fraud
> and candidate G is the sole responsible for everything from Adam and Eve to
> climate warming, or that Marlon Brando is the Roman Pope...
>
> So what? Who will check anyway? Us stupid westerners don't read Cyrillic,
> right? Nope guys, some of us morons actually do... It's not a matter of
> whether one's opinions are right or wrong; it's just that THIS IS NO PLACE
> FOR NOBODY'S POLITICAL DELIRIUM! Full stop.
>
> B?rto 'd S?ra
> Personagi dl'ann 2006 p?r l'arvista american-a Time (tanme tuti voj?otri)
> http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1569514,00.html
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>

--
Refije dirije lanm? yo paske nou posede pw?p bato.


from_name: Dan Jacobson

body:
Dan Jacobson schrieb:
> php rebuildtextindex.php
> ALTER TABLE... 1142: ALTER command denied to user...

< You do not have the right MySQL permissions. Add to your wikiuser
< account the ALTER TABLE privilege and your problems should be fixed.

And indeed they were. Now let's try another script.
$ php updateSearchIndex.php
LOCK TABLES... 1044: Access denied for user...

And indeed, adding more privileges fixes that too.

My question is why doesn't update.php fix or at least warn about
these? E.g., "Bla lacks permissions to do ZZZ. Some maintenance
scripts won't run. Some daily tasks will be hindered."

By the way on
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:How_to_move_a_wiki_to_another_server
"SELECT, INSERT, UPDATE and DELETE permissions should suffice."


body:
Gentlemen, the challenge: how do I make a link to where the D's start
in Special:Categories?

Currently
http://radioscanningtw.jidanni.org/index.php?title=Special:Categories&offset=507
is right, but it changes day to day.

"Sure, just use [[Special:Allpages/Category:D]], and you won't even
need to use {{fullurl}}" you say. However that would only work if each
category page had a body. None do, so they won't be in Allpages.

Does SpecialCategories.php need to take some lessons from
SpecialAllpages.php about allowing fancier arguments?


subject: [Wikitech-l] action=submit blocked at public library?

body:
How could it be that not only for *.wikipedia.org, but also my
taizhongbus.jidanni.org, at our public library
(http://www.ntl.gov.tw/, where you take a number to get a seat before
the doors open), one can login fine, meaning HTTP POST works, but
"show preview" and "save page" cause their MSIE browser to timeout
waiting. Though they like to block things like port 22, etc. I can't
believe they are blocking outbound requests with "wpTextbox" in them
or something. What might be up their sleeve? The lady said she didn't
know, and it's far away so I can't experiment often, nor before, "time
up sir, there are other users waiting."


body:
charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com wrote:
> I have to say that the WikiProject Go would dearly like to override
> the policy on Japanese names, because the name order used in 40 years
> or more of go literature in English has used Japanese name order.
>

So... let them? Will the servers collapse if OH MY GOODNESS NOT
EVERYTHING IS THE SAME?!!!

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

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 542 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20070202/f031f41d/attachment.pgp


from_name: geni

subject: [Foundation-l] Fair Use (again)

body:
On 2/2/07, Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote:
> Perhaps the point here is which comes first?  If there really is an
> agreement to delete an actual image first, it can't hurt to have the bot
> come along later to clean up the links.  It wouln't be very friendly to
> proced in the other order.
>
> Ec

The problem with that is the backlogs. other than saying beyond a
certian date it is not posible to say when an image will be deleted.

--
geni


subject: [Foundation-l] Fair Use (again)


from_name: Aphaia

subject: [Foundation-l] Chapters Coordinator!

body:
On 2/2/07, Nicol? Zamperini <nick1915 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Support @ Delphine :)

Congrats, Delphine!
Now your hiring is annouced not only here on the list but also on the
wikimediafoundation.org website ([[Template:News-en|Latest news
section]] and [[Current staff]] page; other language than English are
waiting for translators. There are some other items on both pages
(they were also announced here on the foundation-l mailinglist).
Translators, we would appreciate for your cooperation. (but wait a
moment for Japanese, now it's 5am for me in Japan .......)

Again, congrats!

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


from_name: Tim Starling

subject: [Wikitech-l] Using spaces in file urls

body:
Michael . wrote:
> For example, if a file is stored in p:\docs\some user documentation.doc, I
> can't link to it in the wiki without setting $wgRawHtml and using the a
> href=... tag directly inside html tags. Not a very secure option, and also
> not very user-friendly. Substituting spaces for %20 doesn't work (IE renders
> the %20 directly for file:// links, it seems), and using [blah] doesn't
> work, becuase the first space gets regarded as the split between the url and
> the title of the link to be displayed. And an a href tag just gets ignored,
> despite my efforts to try and add it to the attribute whitelist.

%20 works for me in IE 7. That would be the standard solution. You need to
use file:/// not file:// for local links for this to work in IE. Three
slashes are required to comply with RFC 1738 anyway.

-- Tim Starling


from_name: Parker Peters

body:
I'm on moderation, but an incivil troll like Earle here who decides to flame
people isn't?

Policy is certainly out of whack here.

I request Earle be put on moderation until such time as he can exist without
flaming people and attacking people who contribute remarks in good faith.

Parker

On 2/2/07, Earle Martin <wikipedia at downlode.org> wrote:
>
> On 01/02/07, Parker Peters <parkerpeters1002 at gmail.com> blathered:
> > I'd prefer
>
> I asked for opinions from the collective, not trolls, so your
> preferences are irrelevant.
>
>
> --
> Earle Martin
>             http://downlode.org/
> http://purl.org/net/earlemartin/
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: Berto 'd Sera

body:
Hi Mark,

I will not comment on Ukr/Ru/Ru-sib. I will rather act in silence and take
my time to make sure that violations are prosecuted as such. It's my close
geographical neighborhood and I do care for places and people I love :) I'm
from the Alps, we are slooow but extremely methodical.

More in general, we all have political ideas/illusions/dreams/principles
etc. It's a human right to have them. But there are fields in which they are
NOT acceptable as a source for decision making. Anyone being a cop cannot
serve a guy better than another because they share a religious or political
belief. Same is for doctors, for language operators, soldiers, encyclopedia
editors, government officers, etc.

Whenever you deal with something that encompasses a whole society as such,
politics are OFFLIMITS. Failure to understand this means you deal with a
dictatorship. It means that nothing changed. People only adapted their
definition of "enemy of the people" to the current Czar. Now they deport
communists, Russians and Germans, and that's as far as the "democratic
novelty" goes. Sorry, I ain't gonna take it.

They are free to do so in reality if they wish, but they are not free to do
it within the WMF, because there is a thing called "pillars". Pillars are
the reason why people donate money, those very money that pay for
everybody's servers and bandwidth. Failure to respect the pillars is FRAUD
TO DONORS. This must be extremely clear.

BTW, how many editions did even bother translating those damn pillars?? How
many non-english wikipedians EVEN JUST KNOW that they exist? It's hundreds
of thousands of articles, each of which may happily say that there never was
any holocaust, that the earth is flat, that candidate Y never made any fraud
and candidate G is the sole responsible for everything from Adam and Eve to
climate warming, or that Marlon Brando is the Roman Pope...

So what? Who will check anyway? Us stupid westerners don't read Cyrillic,
right? Nope guys, some of us morons actually do... It's not a matter of
whether one's opinions are right or wrong; it's just that THIS IS NO PLACE
FOR NOBODY'S POLITICAL DELIRIUM! Full stop.

B?rto ?d S?ra
Personagi dl?ann 2006 p?r l?arvista american-a Time (tanme tuti voj?otri)
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1569514,00.html


from_name: Gregory Kohs

body:
It looks like Guy Chapman is definitely reading this list and is active on
Wikipedia --
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:%24_London_Apartments&diff=next&oldid=105016776.
He still hasn't answered my polite e-mails, though, so I have to conclude
he's just being arrogant and rude.

It also appears that the Stalinist hive-mind has a "flexible" definition of
what constitutes "spam".  A few "nofollow" links to London apartment pages
on a User page = spam.  Nearly 3,000 links to a for-profit Google AdSense
funded operation that gets exemptions from "nofollow" and often points to
wikis that have, at best, two active editors in the past month and/or less
than 5 edits overall in a month = not spam.  Reporting on this "not spam" =
blockable offense from an admin who ignores e-mails.

If you Wikipedians are proud of this type of work, keep it up.  It only
generates MORE of an urge to expose the hypocrisy.

--
Gregory Kohs
Cell: 302.463.1354


from_name: Cool Cat

subject: [WikiEN-l] Inclusion criteria of one category

body:
Hi, I'd like to invite everybody here to get involved with the discussion in
[[:Category talk:Kurdistan]]. There currently is a confusion on what the
inclusion criteria supposed to be.

At the moment unrelated articles such as airline companies, rivers,
mountains, towns, cities, city squares, long dissolved countries, among
other things are categorized under the same category.

        Cool Cat