subject: [WikiEN-l] It is a sign.

body:
When putting things into geographic catorgaries, the geography dictates
not what looks best. I'm an expert, amongst other things, in looking at maps
of of an area I live in.

I haven't seen anything saying "we the mail list admins are blocking you
break policy 4.13"

Date sent:      	Wed, 27 Apr 2005 21:32:44 +0930
From:           	Alphax <alphasigmax at gmail.com>
Subject:        	Re: [WikiEN-l] It is a sign.
To:             	English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
Send reply to:  	English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
	<mailto:wikien-l-request at Wikipedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
	<mailto:wikien-l-request at Wikipedia.org?subject=subscribe>

> John Bradley wrote:
>
> >Seems the list is run by " ultrablue at gmail.com, dgerard at gmail.com,
> >andrew.lih at gmail.com, fennec at gmail.com, ed.poor at att.net" WHo have
> >no problem manipulating the user base.
> >
> >
> It is *very* rare that users are removed from the mailing list, as it
> (together with IRC and standard email) are the only options of
> communication for blocked users.
>
> >Interestingly I haven't seen any sign of there explanation of for hat matter
> >anything else. Seems a but antisoial to me.
> >
> >
> Actually, I believe that they *have* tried to explain there actions -
> that they were acting in accordance with policy.
>
> >
> >Check Violet Rigas mod to the "Grand National", for her own reasons she
> >has decide it is in Liverpool. WHen actually due to little things like
> >boroughs etc it is actualy in Sefton.
> >
> >
> Sorry, I'm not an expert on British geography. You could probably raise
> the issue on the
> [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:UK_Wikipedians%27_notice_board].
> Anyway, for cosmetic reasons saying it is near Liverpool is a lot
> clearer than just saying it is in Sefton (or wherever it really is)
> because *Liverpool is the more notable location*. A city will always
> outdo a borough - if it's such a problem, just add "in the
> [[metropolitan_borough|borough]] of [[Sefton]]" and everyone will be happy.
>
> >You can check
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incid
> >entArchive1#3RR_at_the_troubled_Clitoris_article
> >
> >
> >
> >
> I did. To be as polite as possible, I think you should read
> [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Civility] and
> [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_personal_attacks] again. If
> you would like a prompt reply from a user, leave a comment on their Talk
> page - that's what they're there for! Next time they login, they will
> see "You have new messages" and investigate.
>
> The 3RR is a highly contentious issue - I don't know why - but if you
> feel hard done by, *politely* explain what you were doing, and take 24
> hours (or however long the block is) off to think about it. Ultimately,
> edit warring just makes people angry and does nothing to improve
> Wikipedia. It harms its reputation because people will refer to it as
> "that thing on the internet where everyone yells at each other about
> what the facts are".
>
> >"
> >
> >Her is a typical rant fro
> >John Bradley (john at ontobus.co.uk) [050423 00:50]:
> >
> >
> >
> >>I think it is everyone who cares about Wikipedia as an encyclopedia
> >>rather than a social club stepped forward and be counted.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >Personal attacks toward other editors are not tolerated because they drive
> >other volunteers away from editing. This is bad for Wikipedia.
> >
> >Really. I pretty much don't care how much of an expert a given editor is -
> >if they're acting like an arsehole and making editing an unpleasant
> >experience for others, we don't need them. There are PLENTY of really
> >quite high-grade experts editing Wikipedia who don't in fact act like
> >arseholes.
> >
> >(This does, however, require a more than usual tolerance for and patience
> >with stupid fellow volunteers amongst the experts in question, and
> >occasional annoying having to prove things from first principles on talk
> >pages when the well-meaning idjit doesn't get it. This is quite a bit less
> >than ideal, and we need ways to deal with it, but it still isn't an excuse
> >for personal attacks.)
> >
> >Note that Irate, the user in question, has not shown even this level of
> >justification for his streams of personal attacks.
> >
> >
> >- d.
> >"
> >.
> >
> >
> I don't think this was an attack - "if they are acting *like* an a-h" is
> quite different to saying "you f-ing f-t, w-t-f are you f-ing the
> article for? Stupid moron". It's like the distinction between [[newbie]]
> and [[n00b]] - fine but discernable.
>
> BTW, what *are* you an expert in? If you don't like what someone has
> said, talk to them about it. Both of you might learn something, and then
> we get a better article out of it. Name-calling won't get anyone
> anywhere - it will get you less than nowhere, because people will
> continue to associate you with your actions long after you have taken
> them. It takes time to earn trust.
>
> >As for my address. I thnk you should stop worrying less.
> >
> >
> OK then.
>
> >As for one of the others.
> >
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:82.35.37.118&action=history
> >
> >
> Did you list them at [[WP:VIP]]?
>
> Anyway, take a break and when you come back, don't do *anything* that
> could be seen as abusive, controversial, policy breaking etc. Many users
> have a "blacklist" of articles they won't touch because they _know_ that
> they will only get into heated, non-productive edit wars.
>
> --
> Alphax
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax
> There are two kinds of people: those who say to God, 'Thy will be done,' and those to whom God says, 'All right, then, have it your way.' - C. S. Lewis
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

		Yours

		John Bradley

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


list: wikitech-l

source: pipermail-mbox

from_name: Greg Bildson

subject: [Wikitech-l] E-R db schema

body:
Entity RelationsShip Diagram:
http://databases.about.com/cs/specificproducts/g/er.htm

Thanks
-greg

> -----Original Message-----
> From: wikitech-l-bounces at wikimedia.org
> [mailto:wikitech-l-bounces at wikimedia.org]On Behalf Of Brion Vibber
> Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2005 1:49 PM
> To: Wikimedia developers
> Subject: Re: [Wikitech-l] E-R db schema
>
>
> ettore di cesare wrote:
> > Where can I find the ER schema used to mysql db in mediawiki?
>
> What's an ER schema?
>
> -- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
>


list: wikien-l

from_name: Anthere

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: BAn

body:
For a banned from the mailing list... you appear quite present...

Anthere

John Bradley a ?crit:
> Why have you banned me from the mailing list again.
>
> Of course with no explanation. Just a continuation of the high kacking of
> wikipedia by fools and idiots. Who are quety happy to pervert the system to
> there won ends.
>
> There in general cowardly actions are hidden behind a human sheild of
> wikipedia users.
>
> Interms of social skills what does it say about someone who annony
> mously		Yours
>
> 		John Bradley
>
> Loc: 	Flat 15/22 Gambier Terrace, Liverpool, L1 7BL, UK.
> Phone:	+44 (0)151 708 7238
> Email:  john at ontobus.co.uk
> WWW:	www.ontobus.co.uk


from_name: John Bradley

subject: [WikiEN-l] BAn

body:
I posted a msg in this thread about having a page deleted while I am
banned. It has deterirated from there as people insisting the subject is the
edit ban on Wikipedia, see the mail from MacGyverMagic/Mgm. Tackling
some of these post is the issue.

The anthropomorphizing of the list is also a problem.

From:           	Phil Sandifer <sandifer at sbcglobal.net>
Subject:        	Re: [WikiEN-l] BAn
Date sent:      	Wed, 27 Apr 2005 07:41:16 -0500
To:             	English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
Send reply to:  	English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
	<mailto:wikien-l-request at Wikipedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
	<mailto:wikien-l-request at Wikipedia.org?subject=subscribe>

> The more interesting question, to me, is why you've come back again to
> a list that has made it clear that you're not wanted. I'd respond to
> the rest of your e-mail, but it was sufficiently incoherent.
>
> Well, except for the part of there being no explanation. Perhaps you
> haven't noticed the general explanation for your sanction. See, you
> write abusive messages both via e-mail and on Wikipedia. You delete or
> yell at any attempts to discuss your behavior with you. You were given
> a chance to reflect and reform by Jimbo. You proceeded to launch more
> personal attacks, and the arbcom, to their credit, only gave you a
> three month ban anyway.
>
> Instead of backing off and recognizing that you've been pissing people
> off, and that you're the only one who sees what's happened to you as a
> grave injustice, you went to the mailing list and began sending
> incoherent screeds. When you got banned, again, you failed to recognize
> that there was a point that you could get, and you returned.
>
> And I'm sure, if you respond to this, it'll be with a flame. But, hell,
> why not try again. The simple fact of what's been going wrong for you
> is that your inability to take any clue, whether mildly or bluntly
> phrased, and recognize that your behavior is inappropriate. The fact
> that your reactions to these clues is to behave inappropriately
> aggravates the situation.
>
> But if you want to, you know, get and stay unbanned, not repeating the
> behavior that got you banned would be a wise start.
>
> -Snowspinner
>
> On Apr 27, 2005, at 6:13 AM, John Bradley wrote:
>
> > Why have you banned me from the mailing list again.
> >
> > Of course with no explanation. Just a continuation of the high kacking
> > of
> > wikipedia by fools and idiots. Who are quety happy to pervert the
> > system to
> > there won ends.
> >
> > There in general cowardly actions are hidden behind a human sheild of
> > wikipedia users.
> >
> > Interms of social skills what does it say about someone who annony
> > mously		Yours
> >
> > 		John Bradley
> >
> > Loc: 	Flat 15/22 Gambier Terrace, Liverpool, L1 7BL, UK.
> > Phone:	+44 (0)151 708 7238
> > Email:  john at ontobus.co.uk
> > WWW:	www.ontobus.co.uk
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

		Yours

		John Bradley

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


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Sister project templates for non-sister projects

body:
Angela a ?crit:

> For promoting Wikimedia's own projects, the template is more
> justifiable, but even there, I would prefer if this was regarded more
> as meta data than as article content. Generating sister project links
> automatically, or having them as part of the interface rather than the
> article would be far preferable. Anthere made a request in bugzilla
> related to this last year
> (<http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=708>).
>
> Angela

Nod. I still support this proposition very much and hope one day a
developer will find interest in it :-)

Ant


from_name: Angela

subject: [WikiEN-l] Sister project templates for non-sister projects

body:
> I agree completely agree and reverted the Wikitravel template back to the
> non-box version. The template now creates a standardized external link again.
> IIRC, that change is what saved this template from deletion before. I just
> tried to do this with the Wikicities template, but failed. Could somebody else
> hack that?

I've just done this for the Wikicities template - assuming my edit
ever goes through. The site seems to be half-dead again. :(

Angela.


from_name: MacGyverMagic/Mgm

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: BAn

body:
It might have something to with the tone of your posts. Calling people
"fools and idiots" is a personal attack. If you find your ban so
unfair, why don't you simply appeal to Jimbo. If you're right, he'll
overturn the decision. Complaining on the mailing lists only causes
people to be annoyed.

--Mgm

On 4/27/05, Anthere <anthere9 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> For a banned from the mailing list... you appear quite present...
>
> Anthere
>
> John Bradley a ?crit:
> > Why have you banned me from the mailing list again.
> >
> > Of course with no explanation. Just a continuation of the high kacking of
> > wikipedia by fools and idiots. Who are quety happy to pervert the system to
> > there won ends.
> >
> > There in general cowardly actions are hidden behind a human sheild of
> > wikipedia users.
> >
> > Interms of social skills what does it say about someone who annony
> > mously                Yours
> >
> >               John Bradley
> >
> > Loc:  Flat 15/22 Gambier Terrace, Liverpool, L1 7BL, UK.
> > Phone:        +44 (0)151 708 7238
> > Email:  john at ontobus.co.uk
> > WWW:  www.ontobus.co.uk
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


subject: [Wikitech-l] privacy policy

body:
Hi

Could we envision putting a little link at the bottom of all pages to go
to our privacy policy ?

If not, where do you suggest we should put the link to this page ?

Thanks

Ant


list: wikipedia-l

from_name: James R. Johnson

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Wiki status / upgrade schedule

body:
I was making some edits on ang: and was wondering.when is the upgrade to
MediaWiki 1.5?  And what's up with the wikis right now?

Thanks,

James


from_name: David 'DJ' Hedley

subject: [WikiEN-l] BAn

body:
You were banned from the mailing list yet continue to post. If sockpuppeting
was treated the same of the mailing list, i'd expect you'd be banned again.
"Troll" springs to mind.
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Bradley" <john at ontobus.co.uk>
To: "English Wikipedia" <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2005 2:10 PM
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] BAn

> I posted a msg in this thread about having a page deleted while I am
> banned. It has deterirated from there as people insisting the subject is
the
> edit ban on Wikipedia, see the mail from MacGyverMagic/Mgm. Tackling
> some of these post is the issue.
>
> The anthropomorphizing of the list is also a problem.
>
>
> From:           Phil Sandifer <sandifer at sbcglobal.net>
> Subject:        Re: [WikiEN-l] BAn
> Date sent:      Wed, 27 Apr 2005 07:41:16 -0500
> To:             English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Send reply to:  English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> <mailto:wikien-l-request at Wikipedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> <mailto:wikien-l-request at Wikipedia.org?subject=subscribe>
>
> > The more interesting question, to me, is why you've come back again to
> > a list that has made it clear that you're not wanted. I'd respond to
> > the rest of your e-mail, but it was sufficiently incoherent.
> >
> > Well, except for the part of there being no explanation. Perhaps you
> > haven't noticed the general explanation for your sanction. See, you
> > write abusive messages both via e-mail and on Wikipedia. You delete or
> > yell at any attempts to discuss your behavior with you. You were given
> > a chance to reflect and reform by Jimbo. You proceeded to launch more
> > personal attacks, and the arbcom, to their credit, only gave you a
> > three month ban anyway.
> >
> > Instead of backing off and recognizing that you've been pissing people
> > off, and that you're the only one who sees what's happened to you as a
> > grave injustice, you went to the mailing list and began sending
> > incoherent screeds. When you got banned, again, you failed to recognize
> > that there was a point that you could get, and you returned.
> >
> > And I'm sure, if you respond to this, it'll be with a flame. But, hell,
> > why not try again. The simple fact of what's been going wrong for you
> > is that your inability to take any clue, whether mildly or bluntly
> > phrased, and recognize that your behavior is inappropriate. The fact
> > that your reactions to these clues is to behave inappropriately
> > aggravates the situation.
> >
> > But if you want to, you know, get and stay unbanned, not repeating the
> > behavior that got you banned would be a wise start.
> >
> > -Snowspinner
> >
> > On Apr 27, 2005, at 6:13 AM, John Bradley wrote:
> >
> > > Why have you banned me from the mailing list again.
> > >
> > > Of course with no explanation. Just a continuation of the high kacking
> > > of
> > > wikipedia by fools and idiots. Who are quety happy to pervert the
> > > system to
> > > there won ends.
> > >
> > > There in general cowardly actions are hidden behind a human sheild of
> > > wikipedia users.
> > >
> > > Interms of social skills what does it say about someone who annony
> > > mously Yours
> > >
> > > John Bradley
> > >
> > > Loc: Flat 15/22 Gambier Terrace, Liverpool, L1 7BL, UK.
> > > Phone: +44 (0)151 708 7238
> > > Email:  john at ontobus.co.uk
> > > WWW: www.ontobus.co.uk
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > > WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> > > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >
>
> Yours
>
> John Bradley
>
> Loc: Flat 15/22 Gambier Terrace, Liverpool, L1 7BL, UK.
> Phone: +44 (0)151 708 7238
> Email:  john at ontobus.co.uk
> WWW: www.ontobus.co.uk
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


body:
I agree bar the major con of name pronunciation. Even taking your own
surname - Rabagliati; how many computers could pronounce that correctly?
Also, implementing automatic audio conversion would presumably slow down
Wikipedia considerably.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Andy Rabagliati" <andyr at wizzy.com>
To: <wikipedia-l at wikipedia.org>
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2005 11:26 AM
Subject: [Wikipedia-l] Text to speech (Was: Conference report from
SouthAfrica)

> On Tue, 26 Apr 2005, Timwi wrote:
>
> > I guess I shouldn't have said this, because now everyone thinks that
> > arguing that accents can be mutually unintelligible, is an argument
> > against natural recordings and for text-to-speech synthesis.
>
> I am glad you brought it up, as I believe it needs to be addressed.
>
> When Atlanta Airport (Georgia) opened, with automated trains taking you
> out to the terminals, there was a requirement for public announcements
> telling you which terminal, stand clear, departing now, etc.
>
> They started out with a pleasant local (Georgian) accent.
>
> Complaints - sounded too provincial, International passengers, etc.
>
> They changed it to a female announcer.
>
> Complaints - people didn't pay enough attention, what was wrong with the
> previous one, etc.
>
> They have ended up with an assertive, metallic, computer voice.
>
> No complaints.
>
> Things pro text to speech :-
>
> * Immediately works with all Wikipedia content.
> * No problems with editing.
> * Uniformity, even if it is uniformly poor ..
>
> I will leave the pro natural speech argument to others - after preparing
> my flame-proof underwear :-) I would also welcome input from people for
> whom English is not a first language.
>
> Cheers,    Andy!
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>


from_name: Gerard Meijssen

subject: [Wikitech-l] privacy policy

body:
Anthere wrote:

> Hi
>
> Could we envision putting a little link at the bottom of all pages to
> go to our privacy policy ?
>
> If not, where do you suggest we should put the link to this page ?
>
> Thanks
>
> Ant

Hoi,
What would the purpose be of this link to our privacy policy be?? How
would it enhance the "user experience" ?? In my opinion a link to this
policy on the login/logoff page would be a good place to have this link.

Thanks,
   GerardM


from_name: Fred Bauder

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Copyright violations

body:
I am no expert on how to handle this. One thing you can do if you suspect a
copyright violation is to take a short phrase and google that phrase. If you
find a match it is best to ask the editor who put it on Wikipedia about it.
They may be the author or have permission to use it.

In the case of someone who is copying from a book or article, you have to
know the literature, but you might catch it anyway on Amazon which permits
search of the text of many books.

One giveaway is a lot of well written language which is not wikified and is
not NPOVed.

This reply hardly exhausts this difficult area however.

Fred

> From: NSK <nsk2 at wikinerds.org>
> Organization: Wikinerds
> Reply-To: wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 00:46:10 +0300
> To: wikipedia-l at wikimedia.org
> Subject: [Wikipedia-l] Copyright violations
>
> Hey,
>
> I know many irresponsible users try to upload copyrighted material in
> Wikipedia. What do you do to find which material is copyrighted and how do
> you handle the situation?
>
> --
> NSK
> http://portal.wikinerds.org
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l


from_name: David Gerard

body:
Angela (beesley at gmail.com) [050427 15:03]:

> I feel Wikipedia has way too many of these boxes already, and we need
> to make sure these don't proliferate by allowing any free content site
> to add their link in this proposed box if that link is not useful to
> readers of that article.

Jamesday has occasionally threatened to switch templates off altogether
when the database is having a particularly hard time of it. While drastic,
after one too many boxes this solution does have a certain appeal.

> For promoting Wikimedia's own projects, the template is more
> justifiable, but even there, I would prefer if this was regarded more
> as meta data than as article content. Generating sister project links
> automatically, or having them as part of the interface rather than the
> article would be far preferable. Anthere made a request in bugzilla
> related to this last year
> (<http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=708>).

They are metadata, really. A place for this sort of related *internal*
metadata (which Wikicities and Wikitravel content most certainly isn't)
would be a very useful thing. Same for spoken versions of articles (there's
some dispute on en: where and how to link these). It's the sort of stuff
that *almost* belongs in the interwiki language links, but *not quite*.

- d.


from_name: Daniel Mayer

subject: [Wikitech-l] privacy policy

body:
--- Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
> I agree that the privacy policy is there for all users, anonymous or
> not. WE do not log what people read. We leave that to our respective
> governments.if they care to. My question is what the added value is to
> adding more cruft to each and every article people read? What is the
> added value? I do not think that adding all kinds of everything to every
> page is a good idea. I prefer a clean crisp look. I prefer that all
> relevant information is readily available from apropriate pages like a
> help page, a user portal..

The point is that many sites *do* track where specific IPs do on their sites.
We need to tell readers that we don't do that - that we respect their privacy.

-- mav

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


from_name: ettore di cesare

subject: [Wikitech-l] E-R db schema

body:
Where can I find the ER schema used to mysql db in mediawiki?

thanx,
-- mata;


from_name: Michael Keppler

subject: [Wikitech-l] MediaWiki 1.5 release schedule

body:
Andre Engels schrieb:
> Where will the first beta-testing be? I would like to take a look to
> see whether/where the bot needs to be adapted (and fill in the odd bug
> report too, if I happen to come across something).

I guess you could apply for a bot account on http://test.leuksman.com/

Ciao, Michael.


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Wiki status / upgrade schedule (to Brion)

body:
Every message I get off you arrives empty with an attachment which appears
to be a virus. Whether or not this is the case for everyone, I do not know.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brion Vibber" <brion at pobox.com>
To: <wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org>
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2005 6:50 PM
Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Wiki status / upgrade schedule

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


from_name: John Fader

subject: [Wikitech-l] E-R db schema

body:
On 4/27/05, Brion Vibber <brion at pobox.com> wrote:
> ettore di cesare wrote:
> > Where can I find the ER schema used to mysql db in mediawiki?
>
> What's an ER schema?

Brion: it stands for "Entity Relationship schema" - it's the way you'd
represent a database using the [[Entity-relationship model]].

Ettore, all we have is a pure relational schema:
http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/*checkout*/wikipedia/phpwiki/newcodebase/docs/schema.doc?rev=HEAD&content-type=text/plain

It should be possible to reverse-engineer an ER schema from that.
--
John Fader


from_name: Violet/Riga

subject: [WikiEN-l] It is a sign.

body:
> Perceived continuing personal attacks, but I don't agree with the ban
> when dispute resolution is taking place. You're not being blatantly
> abusive, so I think this was probably a little over the top.

There is no ongoing dispute resolution - the ArbCom has reached a
decision and he has been banned from editing!  His continued spamming
of this mailing list with accusations of childishness and bias against
him has pushed the wikien-l (and IRC channel) admins too far.

~~~~ Violet/Riga


subject: [WikiEN-l] BAn

body:
On 4/27/05, John Bradley <john at ontobus.co.uk> wrote:
> The anthropomorphizing of the list is also a problem.

Sorry, but I can't help but laugh at that one!

~~~~ Violet/Riga


from_name: pinco

subject: [Wikipedia-l] La7 - Italian television

body:
Hi,

yesterday on the Italian television La7 during the 8pm News there was an interview to an Italian women about Wikipedia.

She very favourable presented it. She even said that Wikipedia allows to anyone copy some articles publishing them as own book.

Ciao,
Nino

--
http://www.vessella.it (italiano, esperanto, kiswahili, english)
http://www.changamano.org (Iniziative di solidariet? per la Tanzania)
http://www.lernado.it (Articoli di quotidiani della Tanzania, Corso di lingua swahili, Corso di lingua esperanto, Vocabolario esperanto-italiano, Jifunze lugha ya Kiesperanto, Kamusi ya Kiesperanto)


from_name: Andre Engels

body:
On 4/27/05, David 'DJ' Hedley <spyders at btinternet.com> wrote:
> Every message I get off you arrives empty with an attachment which appears
> to be a virus. Whether or not this is the case for everyone, I do not know.

The only attachment I see with Brion's message is a PGP signature,
which is a far cry from being a virus.

Andre Engels


from_name: Edward O'Connor

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Sanger's memoirs

body:
> As much as I love US microbrews, this is not quite a valid comparison.
> They've produced lots of good pale ales and stouts. However, Chimay,
> Duvel and other Trappist-style beers have a taste and appeal all their
> own that have no equivalent in the States.

If I may include our neighbors to the north, I'd say Unibroue gives
Chimay a run for its money.

Ted

--
Edward O'Connor
hober0 at gmail.com

Ense petit placidam sub libertate quietem.


from_name: Frieda Brioschi

subject: [Wikipedia-l] La7 - Italian television

body:
The Italian women thanks you :-)

Frieda

On 4/27/05, pinco <pinco at kiesperanto.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> yesterday on the Italian television La7 during the 8pm News there was an interview to an Italian women about Wikipedia.
>
> She very favourable presented it. She even said that Wikipedia allows to anyone copy some articles publishing them as own book.
>
> Ciao,
> Nino
>
> --
> http://www.vessella.it (italiano, esperanto, kiswahili, english)
> http://www.changamano.org (Iniziative di solidariet? per la Tanzania)
> http://www.lernado.it (Articoli di quotidiani della Tanzania, Corso di lingua swahili, Corso di lingua esperanto, Vocabolario esperanto-italiano, Jifunze lugha ya Kiesperanto, Kamusi ya Kiesperanto)
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>


from_name: Alphax

subject: [WikiEN-l] It is a sign.

body:
John Bradley wrote:

>Seems the list is run by " ultrablue at gmail.com, dgerard at gmail.com,
>andrew.lih at gmail.com, fennec at gmail.com, ed.poor at att.net" WHo have
>no problem manipulating the user base.
>
>
It is *very* rare that users are removed from the mailing list, as it
(together with IRC and standard email) are the only options of
communication for blocked users.

>Interestingly I haven't seen any sign of there explanation of for hat matter
>anything else. Seems a but antisoial to me.
>
>
Actually, I believe that they *have* tried to explain there actions -
that they were acting in accordance with policy.

>
>Check Violet Rigas mod to the "Grand National", for her own reasons she
>has decide it is in Liverpool. WHen actually due to little things like
>boroughs etc it is actualy in Sefton.
>
>
Sorry, I'm not an expert on British geography. You could probably raise
the issue on the
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:UK_Wikipedians%27_notice_board].
Anyway, for cosmetic reasons saying it is near Liverpool is a lot
clearer than just saying it is in Sefton (or wherever it really is)
because *Liverpool is the more notable location*. A city will always
outdo a borough - if it's such a problem, just add "in the
[[metropolitan_borough|borough]] of [[Sefton]]" and everyone will be happy.

>You can check
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incid
>entArchive1#3RR_at_the_troubled_Clitoris_article
>
>
>
>
I did. To be as polite as possible, I think you should read
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Civility] and
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_personal_attacks] again. If
you would like a prompt reply from a user, leave a comment on their Talk
page - that's what they're there for! Next time they login, they will
see "You have new messages" and investigate.

The 3RR is a highly contentious issue - I don't know why - but if you
feel hard done by, *politely* explain what you were doing, and take 24
hours (or however long the block is) off to think about it. Ultimately,
edit warring just makes people angry and does nothing to improve
Wikipedia. It harms its reputation because people will refer to it as
"that thing on the internet where everyone yells at each other about
what the facts are".

>"
>
>Her is a typical rant fro
>John Bradley (john at ontobus.co.uk) [050423 00:50]:
>
>
>
>>I think it is everyone who cares about Wikipedia as an encyclopedia
>>rather than a social club stepped forward and be counted.
>>
>>
>
>
>Personal attacks toward other editors are not tolerated because they drive
>other volunteers away from editing. This is bad for Wikipedia.
>
>Really. I pretty much don't care how much of an expert a given editor is -
>if they're acting like an arsehole and making editing an unpleasant
>experience for others, we don't need them. There are PLENTY of really
>quite high-grade experts editing Wikipedia who don't in fact act like
>arseholes.
>
>(This does, however, require a more than usual tolerance for and patience
>with stupid fellow volunteers amongst the experts in question, and
>occasional annoying having to prove things from first principles on talk
>pages when the well-meaning idjit doesn't get it. This is quite a bit less
>than ideal, and we need ways to deal with it, but it still isn't an excuse
>for personal attacks.)
>
>Note that Irate, the user in question, has not shown even this level of
>justification for his streams of personal attacks.
>
>
>- d.
>"
>.
>
>
I don't think this was an attack - "if they are acting *like* an a-h" is
quite different to saying "you f-ing f-t, w-t-f are you f-ing the
article for? Stupid moron". It's like the distinction between [[newbie]]
and [[n00b]] - fine but discernable.

BTW, what *are* you an expert in? If you don't like what someone has
said, talk to them about it. Both of you might learn something, and then
we get a better article out of it. Name-calling won't get anyone
anywhere - it will get you less than nowhere, because people will
continue to associate you with your actions long after you have taken
them. It takes time to earn trust.

>As for my address. I thnk you should stop worrying less.
>
>
OK then.

>As for one of the others.
>
>http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:82.35.37.118&action=history
>
>
Did you list them at [[WP:VIP]]?

Anyway, take a break and when you come back, don't do *anything* that
could be seen as abusive, controversial, policy breaking etc. Many users
have a "blacklist" of articles they won't touch because they _know_ that
they will only get into heated, non-productive edit wars.

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


from_name: Thomas Gries

subject:
[Wikitech-l] ENotif can be used as means against vandalism (Oven
	Fresh and Co.)

body:
On testwiki, I have several pages in my watchlist.
Of course, I _immediately_ receive (only) one e-mail notification on the
first change of this bastard.

Perhaps some of the developers will give ENotif the chance to prove its
value also against vandalism, because IP addresses can be detected
immediately ?

Just another idea of
Wikinaut Tom
(busy with last patches for REL1_5 )


subject: [Wikitech-l] privacy policy

body:
Daniel Mayer wrote:

>--- Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>What would the purpose be of this link to our privacy policy be?? How
>>would it enhance the "user experience" ?? In my opinion a link to this
>>policy on the login/logoff page would be a good place to have this link.
>>
>>
>
>Readers need a privacy policy as well. We could log what pages they visit and
>potentially give that info to whoever - something I?m sure most readers would
>not want us to do.
>
>-- mav
>
Hoi,
I agree that the privacy policy is there for all users, anonymous or
not. WE do not log what people read. We leave that to our respective
governments.if they care to. My question is what the added value is to
adding more cruft to each and every article people read? What is the
added value? I do not think that adding all kinds of everything to every
page is a good idea. I prefer a clean crisp look. I prefer that all
relevant information is readily available from apropriate pages like a
help page, a user portal..

Thanks,
Gerard


subject:
[Wikitech-l] Announcement: ENotif/EConfirm v3.15 for current REL1_5
	published

body:
Just in case, that you do not watch this bugzilla:
http://bugzilla.wikipedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=454

The new version adds optional notification on _new_ pages; "(last seen)"
links for watched pages; E-mail address confirmation sends a link with a
token to unconfirmed address; "you have new messages on your user and/or
user_talk page" (new) including "(last seen)" links; new option for
recent changes "show only current revision of pages in Recent view" and
perhaps more I forgot here .... but what is in .....

.... the documentation http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enotif

Euer/your Wikinaut
I kindly asked for code review and to commit everything (which is
admittedly a lot) into CVS HEAD.


body:
I've been trying to work on ang: and en:, and it's been quite often
unavailable, such as when I've tried to write the Louver and Jalousie
articles on en:, and on ang: as well.  Just wondering if there have been
some downed servers or something.

James

-----Original Message-----
From: wikipedia-l-bounces at Wikimedia.org
[mailto:wikipedia-l-bounces at Wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Brion Vibber
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2005 7:50 PM
To: wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Wiki status / upgrade schedule

James R. Johnson wrote:
> I was making some edits on ang: and was wondering.when is the upgrade to
> MediaWiki 1.5?

At various points in May.

>  And what's up with the wikis right now?

In what way?

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)


from_name: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason

subject:
[Wikitech-l] Re: cvs head version - change of user preference:
	fully re-arranging the sub-options

body: Fixed in cvs


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Copyright violations

body:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Copyvio
----- Original Message -----
From: "NSK" <nsk2 at wikinerds.org>
To: <wikipedia-l at wikimedia.org>
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2005 10:46 PM
Subject: [Wikipedia-l] Copyright violations

> Hey,
>
> I know many irresponsible users try to upload copyrighted material in
> Wikipedia. What do you do to find which material is copyrighted and how do
> you handle the situation?
>
> --
> NSK
> http://portal.wikinerds.org
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>


from_name: Minty

subject: [Wikitech-l] article count

body:
whilst playing around with the db I got myself a bit confused.

when we say "100,000 articles on x.wikipedia.org" are we simply
counting the number of entries in the cur table, or just those where
is_cur_redirect=0 ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:What_is_an_article

suggests that the figure on

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Statistics

does not include redirects, but that didn't seem to match with what I
saw from (an admitadly 2 month old) db dump.  Hence confusion.

While I'm hear, is any kind soul tracking things like # of stub
articles, # of featured articles, etc?  I realise this can be
extrapolated from a DB dump, I'm more wondering if anyone is already
doing so and publishing the stats somewhere?


from_name: Dori

subject: [Wikitech-l] privacy policy

body:
On 4/27/05, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Daniel Mayer wrote:
>
> >--- Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>What would the purpose be of this link to our privacy policy be?? How
> >>would it enhance the "user experience" ?? In my opinion a link to this
> >>policy on the login/logoff page would be a good place to have this link.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Readers need a privacy policy as well. We could log what pages they visit
> and
> >potentially give that info to whoever - something I'm sure most readers
> would
> >not want us to do.
> >
> >-- mav
> >
> Hoi,
> I agree that the privacy policy is there for all users, anonymous or
> not. WE do not log what people read. We leave that to our respective
> governments.if they care to.
>

I don't believe that's accurate. The access logs would notice what a reader
is looking at. It's not that we're logging what they're reading, but some
could see it that way.


subject: [WikiEN-l] It is a sign.

body:
John Bradley wrote:

>When putting things into geographic catorgaries, the geography dictates
>not what looks best. I'm an expert, amongst other things, in looking at maps
>of of an area I live in.
>
>
>
I could say "Adelaide International Raceway is in the City of Playford",
which is correct, but "Adelaide International Raceway is *near
Virginia*" is more helpful. You have to go with what is most recognised;
after that you can explain detail.

>I haven't seen anything saying "we the mail list admins are blocking you
>break policy 4.13"
>
>
>
Perceived continuing personal attacks, but I don't agree with the ban
when dispute resolution is taking place. You're not being blatantly
abusive, so I think this was probably a little over the top.

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


from_name: Rowan Collins

body:
On 27/04/05, Brion Vibber <brion at pobox.com> wrote:
>
>                 Your real name? [ Brion Vibber     ]
>                     Your email? [ brion at pobox.com  ]
> Your nickname (for signatures) [                  ]
>              Interface language [ en - English    V]

This is unrelated to the topic in hand, but also rather trivial to
file a bug report for, but I noticed that in the form (above) there
are superscript 1 and 2, but below, it says:

>  Fields marked with stars (*, **) are optional.

Just thought I'd mention it in case someone feels like checking in
fixed messages.

--
Rowan Collins BSc
[IMSoP]


list: textbook-l

from_name: Karl Wick

subject:
[Textbook-l] slow administration stuff, and everything else,
	on WikiBooks

body:
Its true, things are slow on WikiBooks, and I take responsability for
it. Every since I have been down in Mexico (10 months or so) my access
to the Internet has been limited and I have not been keeping an eye on
things like I used to (someone had called me the glue that held WB
together). Well now I have Internet in my house again and can be
online more regularly and hope to be able to help things run more
smoothly.

BTW I was made a steward a while back and supposedly able to make
admins and some other stuff, but how in the world do I do it? Is there
a tutorial somewhere? Right now on the Spanish page I'm not even
allowed to edit protected pages. I thought I was supposed to have some
sort of power that transcends all of the wiki sites. Thank you to
anyone who can help set me straight on that.

Adios amigos,
Karl


from_name: Angela

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Copyright violations

body:
On 4/27/05, NSK <nsk2 at wikinerds.org> wrote:

> I know many irresponsible users try to upload copyrighted material in
> Wikipedia. What do you do to find which material is copyrighted

See <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Spotting_possible_copyright_violations>
for some advice on finding which material is copyrighted.

>  and how do
> you handle the situation?

It depends what it is and how it was found. If it was found via the
Foundation receiving a valid take down notice, we'd just take it down.
If not, it would be discussed at
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Copyright_problems> for a week
before being deleted (assuming no one found out that it wasn't a
violation within this time, or sought permission from the copyright
owner to release it under the GFDL). If the violation was not a new
page, it might just be reverted rather than being deleted (see
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Copyright_violations_on_history_pages>).

Angela.


from_name: Andy Rabagliati

subject:
[Wikipedia-l] Text to speech (Was: Conference report
	from	SouthAfrica)

body:
On Wed, 27 Apr 2005, Ray Saintonge wrote:

> David 'DJ' Hedley wrote:
>
> >I agree bar the major con of name pronunciation. Even taking your own
> >surname - Rabagliati; how many computers could pronounce that correctly?
> >Also, implementing automatic audio conversion would presumably slow down
> >Wikipedia considerably.
> >
> When it comes to that surname the Olympic gold medalist with that name
> made us aware that it is pronounced as though the "ag" were not in the name.

Whew - people that know more than me ..

After moving to Scotland (hastily) over 100 years ago we have put the a
back in, but the g is still gone.

Which indeed proves your point regarding voice recordings.

Wonderful extra info, but voice deployment needs orders of magnitude
more work than text to speech, which surely will improve.

So pragmatism would choose text to speech as well.

Cheers,  Andy!    [few people in meatspace know my last name]


subject: [Wikitech-l] privacy policy

body:
> Would be real nice to have a contact us link at the bottom of each page as
> well. Might be easiest to just have a [[MediaWiki:Footermessage]] page and have
> each wiki decide what to put in there (more than one link could be put in, such
> as [[Privacy policy]] ? [[Contact us]] ? [[Terms of use]]).

I agree with this. I've filed it as a feature request at
http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1999

Angela.


from_name: NSK

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Copyright violations

body:
Hey,

I know many irresponsible users try to upload copyrighted material in
Wikipedia. What do you do to find which material is copyrighted and how do
you handle the situation?

--
NSK
http://portal.wikinerds.org


subject:
[Wikitech-l] Re: testwiki cvs head: logged-in user name not shown
	any longer in the upper right corner, "My page" is shown instead

body:
On 26/04/05, Brion Vibber <brion at pobox.com> wrote:

> We might also want to implement the suggestion of a 'you're editing
> anonymously' warning line on the edit page.

And a quick-login box, like LiveJournal has.

I know I'm comitting the ultimate open-source sin here, and not
knowing or caring about how easy that would be, or who would code it,
but I do like that quick-login thingy they have there... :p

--
Rowan Collins BSc
[IMSoP]


subject:
[Textbook-l] Re: slow administration stuff, and everything else,
	on WikiBooks

body:
I'm trying to give someone sysop permission on the en.wikibooks.org
site and it tells me that I don't have permission to do it ...

I went to http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Makesysop and then to
http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Special:Makesysop and it tells me "The
action you have requested can only be performed by users with "sysop"
status." I'm supposedly at that status and well beyond.

BTW the instructions on http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards seem
kind of ambiguous. To make BillPeet an admin on the English WikiBooks
I would type in "BillPeet at enwikibookssysop" ? Maybe it is to my
disadvantage that I didn't study much programming ...

Thanks for the help,
Karl

On 4/28/05, Anthere <anthere9 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
> Angela a ?crit:
>
> >>the most important page is :
> >>http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages
> >
> >
> > You mean http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_permissions :-)
> >
> > Angela
>
> Might it be a freudian slip ??? :-)
>
> Ant
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Textbook-l mailing list
> Textbook-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/textbook-l
>


from_name: Kate Turner

subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: article count

body:
Minty wrote in news.gmane.science.linguistics.wikipedia.technical:
> when we say "100,000 articles on x.wikipedia.org" are we simply
> counting the number of entries in the cur table, or just those where
> is_cur_redirect=0 ?

my understanding is that this is the number of _articles_ in the cur table,
where "article" is defined as a non-redirect page in namespace 0 with either
1 comma or 1 link (depending on how $wgUseCommaCount is configured).

does this make sense?  i don't have the numbers at hand to check...

kate.


subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: article count

body:
Actually, it's:

* A page in the main namespace
* That is not a redirect
* Contains one comma if $wgUseCommaCount evaluates to TRUE or
alternatively contains "[[" (without the quotes).


subject:
[Wikitech-l] Implementing client-side sorting of table fields with
	JavaScript

body:
I submitted a feature request to bugzilla
(http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2001) for client-side
sorting of table fields with JavaScript, there are some bugs in it
currently which I don't know how to fix.

You can see a testcase I uploaded here:
http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/attachment.cgi?id=471&action=view


from_name: Daniel Mayer

subject: [Wikitech-l] Rollback failed <- What is this?

body:
Rollback failed
>From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

There seems to be a problem with your login session; this action has been
canceled as a precaution against session hijacking. Please hit "back" and
reload the page you came from, then try again.

--------

This is very annoying. Why did it happen? There isn't a throttle on edits, is
there?

-- mav

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


from_name: Gerard Meijssen

subject: [Wikitech-l] privacy policy

body:
Daniel Mayer wrote:

>--- Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>I agree that the privacy policy is there for all users, anonymous or
>>not. WE do not log what people read. We leave that to our respective
>>governments.if they care to. My question is what the added value is to
>>adding more cruft to each and every article people read? What is the
>>added value? I do not think that adding all kinds of everything to every
>>page is a good idea. I prefer a clean crisp look. I prefer that all
>>relevant information is readily available from apropriate pages like a
>>help page, a user portal..
>>
>>
>
>The point is that many sites *do* track where specific IPs do on their sites.
>We need to tell readers that we don't do that - that we respect their privacy.
>
>-- mav
>
Hoi,
If that is your point, you do not adress mine. My point is that we do
not need to say this on every page viewed. It is cruft that we can do
without. I agree that we need to tell our readers. Doing this on every
page is excessive.
Thanks,
    GerardM


from_name: Anthere

subject: [Wikitech-l] open and free

body:
Hello

On wikipedia [[free content]], there is the following paragraph :

Free content licenses differ from open content licenses in that they
require a "source" copy of the content to be provided. For example, a
free content publisher should make the source document (f.ex. InDesign
or word-processor file) available along with a PDF, which in this case
would be considered the "object" copy of the creative work. Some free
content licenses have stronger requirements. For example, the GNU Free
Documentation License not only requires that a "source" copy of the
content is provided, but that the source copy should be in an
"transparent" format, i.e., in an open format whose specification is
freely available to everybody.

It is my feeling that the following point stating that free content
licenses differ from open content licenses for the reason free content
licenses require a "source" copy of the content, while open content
license do not require such a "source" copy

... is making me feel very unconfortable.

Actually, I thought that open content meant that precisely the "source"
of the content had to be provided, made available for public scrutiny
and to ensure somehow a sort of transparency. In other words, I thought
that an open source stuff, for example code, was basically mostly about
saying "hey, this is how I wrote the software, this is the code used to
make that stuff work, just check it !)

While I thought free content was related to using the content, reusing
it, redistributing it and if desired, modifying it (which requires the
source to be available).

I removed the sentence of the text as I found it not only very
confusing, but strictly speaking wrong in terms of making a difference
between what is free and what is open.

To be fair, reading the whole articles on the matter is a real mess,
because of such confusing sentences. Perhaps you developers can make
sense of it and accept that several definitions are given to the same
terms and that conflicting definitions just results in giving
contradicting differences between 2 terms, but to be fair, these
articles are so confused that they are not far from being useless.

I have been wondering if the problem was not in the definition of the
term "source". Can anyone explain to me what is "source" ????

I tried to discuss it in the article page and I was basically shut down
(sort of "I am right, you are wrong, this article is perfect and you are
the only one with this crazy idea so get out of here - I exaggerate...
but the content is back in, and I still do not get it).

Now, I could obviously just put my hat on all this and consider that
"WHO CARES ABOUT OPEN AND FREE AFTER ALL !"

The problem is that I am spending all my free time on a "free and open"
stuff, and am now wondering if I am working for what I think I am. And
when I present wikipedia, maybe I just say crap entirely on the topic.

Consequently, if some of you could look at the free content article, I
would be delighted.

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


body:
Karl Wick a ?crit:
> Its true, things are slow on WikiBooks, and I take responsability for
> it. Every since I have been down in Mexico (10 months or so) my access
> to the Internet has been limited and I have not been keeping an eye on
> things like I used to (someone had called me the glue that held WB
> together). Well now I have Internet in my house again and can be
> online more regularly and hope to be able to help things run more
> smoothly.
>
> BTW I was made a steward a while back and supposedly able to make
> admins and some other stuff, but how in the world do I do it? Is there
> a tutorial somewhere? Right now on the Spanish page I'm not even
> allowed to edit protected pages. I thought I was supposed to have some
> sort of power that transcends all of the wiki sites. Thank you to
> anyone who can help set me straight on that.
>
> Adios amigos,
> Karl

Note that you do it all from meta itself.

the most important page is :
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages

ant


body:
> Karl Wick a ?crit:
> I thought I was supposed to have some
> sort of power that transcends all of the wiki sites. Thank you to
> anyone who can help set me straight on that.

No, you have the ability to make other users into admins, assuming
there is consensus on their wiki to do that/or there is no community
there to vote on this, _and_ they have no local bureaucrat.

Anthere a ?crit:
> the most important page is :
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages

You mean http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_permissions :-)

Angela


from_name: Erik Moeller

subject: [Wikitech-l] open and free

body:
Very interesting question, Anthere.

Is there even a generally accepted definition of '''free content'''? A
search within the website of the Free Software Foundation yields no
results. No sources are cited in the article either.

Perhaps it is time for the Wikimedia Foundation (in collaboration with
Creative Commons and the FSF?) to create a free content definition, and
to make a list of free content licenses. In the meantime, it is hard to
see this article as being anything but shaky original research.

Erik


from_name: aerik at thesylvans.com

subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: open and free

body:
> Wikipedia can note propose original research itself... but in such a
> undefined field... only one more reference would be worth it...

If I may be so bold:

I think the description on "Open Content" is pretty good - I also think that just because it is difficult to find descriptions already written of "free content", it does not mean wikipedia should not attempt to describe it.  Put another way, just because we can't point to a common description does not mean that we don't all know (and generally agree on) what we're talking about.

A Google query for "free content" yields 2.5 millions hits - many of these are actually describing "free as in beer" content, not "free as in freedom", and my 2 cents is that "free content" can mean both, just as it can in "free software".

Wikipedia of course, fits both definitions.

Aerik


from_name: David Gerard

subject: [WikiEN-l] It is a sign.

body:
On 4/28/05, ultrablue at gmail.com <ultrablue at gmail.com> wrote:

> In an effort to pre-empt situations like this, I inserted the followin
> text on the Mailing List information page
> (http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l):
> "There are no formal rules for the mailing list. However, users are
> generally expected to follow good practice similar to Wikiquette. That
> is, users should assume good faith and be polite and constructive.
> Users who are extremely disruptive or uncivil may be banned from the
> mailing list by the administrators."
> For more about Wikiquette, see
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikiquette.

Sounds sensible to me.

> I know it's probably a bad thing making up policy like this, but as
> I'm sure you'll agree, John, it's better to have some policy rather
> than none at all, as you had been complaining. Since I unilaterally
> made up this guideline, I welcome input from the mailing list and
> other administrators to help shape it into a practical policy that is
> acceptable to everyone.

Actively controlling the list membership is something to be avoided
except in egregious cases (e.g. when someone abusive keeps rejoining
to continue being abusive), because it resembles work and work is bad,
as is [[m:Instruction creep]]. But this sounds obviously sensible.

- d.


body:
Angela a ?crit:

>>the most important page is :
>>http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages
>
>
> You mean http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_permissions :-)
>
> Angela

Might it be a freudian slip ??? :-)

Ant


subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: open and free

body:
Erik Moeller a ?crit:
> Very interesting question, Anthere.
>
> Is there even a generally accepted definition of '''free content'''? A
> search within the website of the Free Software Foundation yields no
> results. No sources are cited in the article either.
>
> Perhaps it is time for the Wikimedia Foundation (in collaboration with
> Creative Commons and the FSF?) to create a free content definition, and
> to make a list of free content licenses. In the meantime, it is hard to
> see this article as being anything but shaky original research.
>
> Erik

Interesting suggestion...

Wikipedia can note propose original research itself... but in such a
undefined field... only one more reference would be worth it...

Incidently, I noticed that the link toward [[free content]] on the main
page was removed... I am sure there was a link to the article before...

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Main_Page&diff=11269837&oldid=11262680

At some point, this link went to [[open content]]

This is a sure sign of confusion...

Ant


list: foundation-l

subject: [Foundation-l] Board elections

body:
Short update

For those who joined us less than a year ago, the next board elections will occur quite soon.
Last year, we had one technical organiser, Tim Starling; and two general organisers, Imran and Danny.

We currently have 5 candidates for organisation.
I am checking their profile and we will keep you informed as soon as possible of the outcome.
But basically, please consider applications closed :-)

Besides, Tim accepted to take care of technical duties regarding elections again (thanks !).

As Erik suggested, a second developer would be needed to serve as security adviser.
Please, we are looking for volunteers on technical side !

Ant

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


list: wikimedia-l

subject: [Foundation-l] Board elections


subject: [Wikitech-l] Board elections


from_name: ultrablue at gmail.com

subject: [WikiEN-l] It is a sign.

body:
On 4/27/05, John Bradley <john at ontobus.co.uk> wrote:
> I haven't seen anything saying "we the mail list admins are blocking you
> break policy 4.13"

Hello, John. I must say I am not surprised you have been banned from
Wikipedia. Your extremely antagonistic attitude in my dealings with
you were a good indication.

You are right in that there is no specific policy relating to banning
users from the mailing list. I, for one, have never done it before and
needed help even finding the feature in the software. In lieu of
actually having clear policy, it is up to the mailing list
administrators to use their discretion. They (we?) weren't made
administrators of the mailing list for nothing, you know.

In an effort to pre-empt situations like this, I inserted the followin
text on the Mailing List information page
(http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l):

"There are no formal rules for the mailing list. However, users are
generally expected to follow good practice similar to Wikiquette. That
is, users should assume good faith and be polite and constructive.
Users who are extremely disruptive or uncivil may be banned from the
mailing list by the administrators."

For more about Wikiquette, see
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikiquette.

I know it's probably a bad thing making up policy like this, but as
I'm sure you'll agree, John, it's better to have some policy rather
than none at all, as you had been complaining. Since I unilaterally
made up this guideline, I welcome input from the mailing list and
other administrators to help shape it into a practical policy that is
acceptable to everyone.

~Mark Ryan


from_name: Sebino

subject: [Foundation-l] Board elections

body:
I'll be very happy to give my help too!!

 --- On Tue 04/26,  < daniwo59 at aol.com > wrote:
From:  [mailto: daniwo59 at aol.com]
To: foundation-l at wikimedia.org
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 13:28:08 -0400
Subject: [Foundation-l] Board elections

I would be happy to help out with the Board Elections again.

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

_______________________________________________
Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
The most personalized portal on the Web!


subject: [Foundation-l] Board elections


from_name: Richard Holton

subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: [patch] Anonymous edit warning

references:
<b8b9a51105042523545b5eb96e@mail.gmail.com>
	<d4ljb7$hoc$2@sea.gmane.org>
	<51dd1af80504280508ace730e@mail.gmail.com>

body:
On 4/28/05, ?var Arnfj?r? Bjarmason <avarab at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I notice when I'm not logged in because the "minor" and "watch this
> > article" options are missing. Isn't that warning enough?
>
> An insightful observation, the few times that I do loose my cookie the
> absence of those two checkboxes always reminds me that I'm logged out,
> I think no further warning is needed.

I'm not sure that the argument "I don't need such a warning, therefore
we don't need such a warning" is convincing.

We need to weigh the cost of adding such a warning (cluttering the
user interface, potentially offending/irritating those who don't want
such a warning, etc.) against the benefits of adding such a warning
(reduced accidental anonymous edits, reduced irritation resulting from
the same, etc.).

It's worth noting that having such a warning has no impact on those
who are logged in.

--Rich Holton

[[W:en:User:Rholton]]


body:
On 4/28/05, Karl Wick <karlwick at gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm trying to give someone sysop permission on the en.wikibooks.org
> site and it tells me that I don't have permission to do it ...

The English Wikibooks has its own bureaucrats, so this is not
something a steward should normally be dealing with. Is there a reason
those people can't do it? If so, it may be better to find some more
bureaucrat candidates for that wiki instead.

> I went to http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Makesysop and then to
> http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Special:Makesysop and it tells me "The
> action you have requested can only be performed by users with "sysop"
> status." I'm supposedly at that status and well beyond.

You can't use Special:Makesysop at Wikibooks because you are not a
bureaucrat on that wiki. You can only use the version at Meta.

> BTW the instructions on http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards seem
> kind of ambiguous. To make BillPeet an admin on the English WikiBooks
> I would type in "BillPeet at enwikibookssysop"

No, you should type BillPeet at enwikibooks in the first field and sysop
in the second field.

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

Angela.


from_name: James D. Forrester

subject: [WikiEN-l] It is a sign.

body:
On Thursday, April 28, 2005 9:36 AM, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:

> Actively controlling the list membership is something to be avoided
> except in egregious cases (e.g. when someone abusive keeps rejoining
> to continue being abusive), because it resembles work and work is bad,
> as is [[m:Instruction creep]]. But this sounds obviously sensible.

Fully agreed, as you'd expect.

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

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


from_name: Magnus Manske

subject:
[Wikipedia-l] Text to speech (Was: Conference report from South
	Africa)

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

At
 http://magnusmanske.de/wikipedia/speak.html
you can hit a button to have "This is a wiki test" read to you as a WAV.
It is using the service at
 http://www.festvox.org/voicedemos.html
based on the open source Festival speech generation engine.

The HTML is dead simple. The text of a wikipedia page could be generated
on-the-fly within the parser, or from the <body> part of the output.

Or we could have a <speech>special extension</speech> for important
parts. Then again, probably not.

We should, however, ask the people from CMU first before we
wikipedia-flood their demo system :-)

Magnus

Andy Rabagliati schrieb:
> On Tue, 26 Apr 2005, Timwi wrote:
>
>
>>I guess I shouldn't have said this, because now everyone thinks that
>>arguing that accents can be mutually unintelligible, is an argument
>>against natural recordings and for text-to-speech synthesis.
>
>
> I am glad you brought it up, as I believe it needs to be addressed.
>
> When Atlanta Airport (Georgia) opened, with automated trains taking you
> out to the terminals, there was a requirement for public announcements
> telling you which terminal, stand clear, departing now, etc.
>
> They started out with a pleasant local (Georgian) accent.
>
> Complaints - sounded too provincial, International passengers, etc.
>
> They changed it to a female announcer.
>
> Complaints - people didn't pay enough attention, what was wrong with the
> previous one, etc.
>
> They have ended up with an assertive, metallic, computer voice.
>
> No complaints.
>
> Things pro text to speech :-
>
> * Immediately works with all Wikipedia content.
> * No problems with editing.
> * Uniformity, even if it is uniformly poor ..
>
> I will leave the pro natural speech argument to others - after preparing
> my flame-proof underwear :-) I would also welcome input from people for
> whom English is not a first language.
>
> Cheers,    Andy!
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFCcK6FCZKBJbEFcz0RAjiAAJ42ifnHEfBYxIgkWxF1E7FS6+q02QCeO22t
pVmNjwSHavG8wJepQRtxxTU=
=WeJh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


from_name: Mark Williamson

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Expanding CheckUser permissions

body:
I think that, for the sort of cases outlined below, CheckUser could be
used perhaps if the user themselves specifically said it would be OK.

Mark

On 28/04/05, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
> Tony Sidaway wrote:
>
> >Tony Sidaway said:
> >
> >
> >>Angela said:
> >>
> >>
> >>>If anyone else would like to add to these comments, please do so at
> >>><http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/CheckUser> so that decisions can be
> >>>made about how this feature should be used, and who should be able to
> >>>use it.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>Thanks.  I've outlined my thoughts in a section titled (appropriately)
> >>"At discretion of arbcom, subject to veto".
> >>
> >>
> >
> >..or would if I could!
> >
> >I get a maintenance lock right now.
> >
> >Here's the text:
> >
> >
> >At discretion of arbcom, subject to veto
> >
> >
> >All the gubbins seems to me to be a symptom of our understandable
> >suspicion about abuse of this feature. The best solution to me seems to be
> >to place this feature at the discretion of the arbitration apparatus of
> >each individual Wiki, subject to veto, separately, by the board and Jimbo.
> >Power to flip the appropriate bits to grant or revoke the ability to use
> >this feature should continue to reside with whoever has it now, who as de
> >facto custodian of user privacy would have an absolute veto. Arbcom should
> >also be responsible for ensuring that the feature is used only according
> >to its instructions. The log of all accesses of this feature (when used
> >and by whom) should be public if possible. Further information should not
> >be made available but should be available by a report run by the
> >developers on request of arbcom. User:Tony Sidaway 15:30, 28 Apr 2005
> >(UTC)
> >
> Hoi,
> Some big projects have an arbitration committee some do not. On the
> Dutch wikipedia a user who vehemently denied he used a particular sock
> puppet, but who had a history of using sock puppets was banned because
> he was not believed and, because the nl:wikipedia was denied to have the
> CheckUser tool used in a timely fashion. The user is banned and will
> propably not be back for some time because of it.
>
> Blanket policies that expect that an arbitration committee exists are
> stupid when there is no such thing. Denying the use of the tool results
> result in a situation does hurt a project. When a user is openly accused
> of using specific sock puppets, and when this user openly denies this
> accusation, NOT using the tool denies this user a proper investigation
> and as a result may be convicted because of an honest belief that he is
> guilty as charged. It would have been much better if the tool had proven
> either that the user is propably guilty or that it is inconclusive.
>
> Without some "public" people who can be asked to perform this
> investigation, you discriminate against the smaller projects. This does
> result in situations that are worse than the perceived invasion of
> privacy. People can be and are judged to use sock puppets with or
> without the aditional proof that CheckUser supplies. If this is what we
> want than by all means restrict it to  arbitration commissions.
>
> Thanks,
>     GerardM
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>

--
SI HOC LEGERE SCIS NIMIVM ERVDITIONIS HABES
QVANTVM MATERIAE MATERIETVR MARMOTA MONAX SI MARMOTA MONAX MATERIAM
POSSIT MATERIARI
ESTNE VOLVMEN IN TOGA AN SOLVM TIBI LIBET ME VIDERE


from_name: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason

subject: [Wikitech-l] privacy policy

body:
> The point is that many sites *do* track where specific IPs do on their sites.
> We need to tell readers that we don't do that - that we respect their privacy.

As far as I know we *do* do that, it's recored in the webserver and/or
cache logs along with other per-hit data.


subject: [Wikitech-l] open and free

body:
> Is there even a generally accepted definition of '''free content'''? A
> search within the website of the Free Software Foundation yields no
> results. No sources are cited in the article either.

I think it's generally thought to be defined as free software except
for general content rather than software in particular.


body:
> I notice when I'm not logged in because the "minor" and "watch this
> article" options are missing. Isn't that warning enough?

An insightful observation, the few times that I do loose my cookie the
absence of those two checkboxes always reminds me that I'm logged out,
I think no further warning is needed.


from_name: Lee Daniel Crocker

subject: [Wikitech-l] open and free

body:
On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 08:10 +0200, Anthere wrote:

> I have been wondering if the problem was not in the definition of the
> term "source". Can anyone explain to me what is "source" ????

That's one definition that's pretty easy: the "source data" of any
piece of information is _the most preferred form_ of that data for
making changes.  So for program code that would imply fully-commented
source code as the original developer used; for wiki articles it
would be the wikitext.  For images it might be some graphic editor's
native format that contains info on layers and objects and such.
For other forms of text, it might be native files from Word, pre-
transformed XML with XSLT stylesheets, etc.

On a larger issue, I don't think Wikipedia should fall into the trap
of accepting definitions of terms from activists.  NPOV and the needs
of an encyclopedia demand that we not allow hijacking of the language
by folks like FSF, OSI, and others, good though their intentions may
be.  For example, any definition of "free software" that includes the
GPL but not Sun's Java or MySQL is a horrible abuse of plain English.
Of course, we should report that large groups of people use these
terms in specialized ways, so long as we refrain from endorsing such
use.

Your particular case is another good example of language abuse: for
software, the "generally accepted" (meaning as forced upon geeks like
us by FSF and OSI) notions of "free software" and "open source software"
mean "comes with source code and licensed to require disclosure of
source in derivative products" and just "comes with source code"
respectively; whereas in the textual content world, the terms "free
content" and "open content" are generally used interchangeably to mean
"licensed to allow redistribution"; but some activists (those with whom
you are arguing) would have "free" mean "comes with source and licensed
to require distribution of source in derivatives".

--
Lee Daniel Crocker <lee at piclab.com>  <http://www.piclab.com/lee/>
<http://creativecommons.org/licenses/publicdomain/>


from_name: Timwi

subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: AW: Upload-Problems in Version 1.4.0 (German)

body:
Karl-Otto Kirst wrote:
>>>---
>>>Interner Fehler
>>>...
>>>Konnte Datei "/var/tmp/phpt7qzxs" nicht nach
>>>"/htdocs/data/zum/wiki/images/0/0d/Sui.jpg" kopieren.

What happens if either images/0 or images/0/0d doesn't exist? Will it be
automatically created, and if so, with what permissions?


subject: [Wikitech-l] Board elections

body:
On Thu, 2005-04-28 at 08:53 -0700, Anthere wrote:

> We currently have 5 candidates for organisation.
> I am checking their profile and we will keep you informed as soon as possible of the outcome.
> But basically, please consider applications closed :-)

Seems a bit quick; the first mention of elections on foundation-l (which
I read via the archives occasionally) was on the 26th; there is no
mention at all on the foundation website, so this is the first I'd
heard.  I'd love to take a more active role in the future direction of
the project.

--
Lee Daniel Crocker <lee at piclab.com>  <http://www.piclab.com/lee/>
<http://creativecommons.org/licenses/publicdomain/>


from_name: Ray Saintonge

body:
Mark Williamson wrote:

>I think that, for the sort of cases outlined below, CheckUser could be
>used perhaps if the user themselves specifically said it would be OK.
>
>
ROTFL!  It means that we should ask every sockpuppet for permission to
check to see if he is a sockpuppet. :-D

Ec


from_name: Sean Barrett

body:
> >I think that, for the sort of cases outlined below, CheckUser could be
> >used perhaps if the user themselves specifically said it would be OK.
> >
> >
> ROTFL!  It means that we should ask every sockpuppet for permission to
> check to see if he is a sockpuppet. :-D

If the sockpuppet is denying that it is a sockpuppet,
it should be willing to give permission, ne?

--
 Sean Barrett     | Q: What is purple and, when thrown against the
 sean at epoptic.com |    wall, causes the neighbor's phone to ring?
                  | A: Coincidence.


from_name: Pavol Cupka

subject: [Wikitech-l] mailing list for users with robots

body:
Hello,

I would like to suggest making a mailing list for users running
robots. Would this be possible?
Something like wikibots-l or similar.

Thank you in advance.

--
Palica
http://sk.wikipedia.org/User:Palica
Nezabudni si vzia? svoje Wikam?ny. / Don't forget to take your
Wikamins today. - Palica
http://sk.wikipedia.org - slobodn? encyklop?dia, ktor? m??e ka?d?
upravova? - AJ TY


from_name: The Cunctator

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Make summaries mandatory

body:
Looking at a scroll of Recent Changes, I noticed that usage of the summary
field has plummeted. I strongly recommend a simple change: making summaries
mandatory for edits not checked as "minor". This is non-obtrusive and
helpful. An example of a wiki that uses this feature is at
http://www.technomanifestos.net.


from_name: Brion Vibber

body:
Pavol Cupka wrote:
> I would like to suggest making a mailing list for users running
> robots. Would this be possible?
> Something like wikibots-l or similar.

Pywikipediabot has a mailing list. If you're hacking up yet another
wikipedia bot framework, you probably should avoid duplicating effort...

http://pywikipediabot.sourceforge.net/

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 253 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20050428/8406922c/attachment.pgp>


from_name: Chad Perrin

subject: [Wikitech-l] open and free

body:
On Thu, Apr 28, 2005 at 08:30:18AM +0200, Erik Moeller wrote:
> Very interesting question, Anthere.
>
> Is there even a generally accepted definition of '''free content'''? A
> search within the website of the Free Software Foundation yields no
> results. No sources are cited in the article either.
>
> Perhaps it is time for the Wikimedia Foundation (in collaboration with
> Creative Commons and the FSF?) to create a free content definition, and
> to make a list of free content licenses. In the meantime, it is hard to
> see this article as being anything but shaky original research.
>

Agreed, for the most part.

Part of the problem is that "free" and "open", as applied to
distribution licenses, are issues of quite a lot of contention, with a
whole lot of overlap in their application and meaning.  Neither one has
a perfectly nailed-down definition, as far as I can tell, and there will
probably continue to be arguments over the use of both terms for years
to come.

As hinted in another post in this thread, "open content" and "free
content" are terms adapted from "open source software" and "free
software".  Insofar as we can agree on what those terms mean, there
should be a certain amount of etymological basis for definitions of
terms like "open content" and "free content", but ultimately it doesn't
translate perfectly well because of the fact that often the analogy
between software and documents is fundamentally flawed.

In skimming the article and reading some of the brief quotes from it
here and on the talk page, I noticed that some of the contended-over
descriptions of the differences between "free" and "open" actually
sounded like the differences between "copyleft" and other
free/libre/open licenses, while other descriptions of those differences
seemed to ignore that distinction (where "copyleft" licenses are those
that are "viral" in nature, enforcing free/libre/open standards not only
on the original licensed work, but also on derivative works).

Probably the best way to handle this, in my mind, is to find cites for
all points of view on the matter, write up treatments of them, and
present them in all their contentious glory for the reader to sort out.
That's sorta at the heart of NPOV policy, anyway.  We certainly don't
need to have Wikipedia (or Wiktionary) trying to create "official"
definitions.  Whether or not WMF gets involved in development of
"official" definitions of terms is another matter entirely (and,
frankly, I think the Foundation site might be a good place for such a
thing, but I haven't really thought it through very much so don't take
my word for it).

--
Chad Perrin
[ CCD CopyWrite | http://ccd.apotheon.org ]


from_name: MacGyverMagic/Mgm

subject: [WikiEN-l] It is a sign.

body:
Of course, I agree, but only in repeat cases, not one-offs.

--Mgm

On 4/28/05, James D. Forrester <james at jdforrester.org> wrote:
> On Thursday, April 28, 2005 9:36 AM, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Actively controlling the list membership is something to be avoided
> > except in egregious cases (e.g. when someone abusive keeps rejoining
> > to continue being abusive), because it resembles work and work is bad,
> > as is [[m:Instruction creep]]. But this sounds obviously sensible.
>
> Fully agreed, as you'd expect.
>
> Yours,
> --
> James D. Forrester -- Wikimedia: [[W:en:User:Jdforrester|James F.]]
>
> Mail: james at jdforrester.org | jon at eh.org | csvla at dcs.warwick.ac.uk
> IM  : (MSN) jamesdforrester at hotmail.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: BAn

body:
Violet/Riga wrote:
> On 4/27/05, John Bradley <john at ontobus.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>The anthropomorphizing of the list is also a problem.
>
> Sorry, but I can't help but laugh at that one!

Yeah, that cracked me up too!

Maybe we should all be a little bit more animal-like? :))


body:
Andre Engels wrote:
> There is a so-called edit token that gets sent with every edit you
> make. If your sending has no edit token, or the wrong one, you will
> get a preview page instead. Normally your edit token is connected to
> your login. As I have been told, it is used to make it harder to make
> changes claiming to be someone else.

As an example: As a malicious person, I could make a web page filled
with code like this:
<img
src="http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=SomePage&action=rollback&from=SomeVandalName">
and try to get sysops to visit it (for instance by placing the link as
an external link in an article and waiting for someone to look at it to
verify if it's a good reference or spam).

A few minutes later, the victim sysop would be reading a rash of
complaints on their talk page with great confusion.

 > Apparently on rare occasions,
> your edit token changes, and so you will get a preview page instead of
> a change. However, on rollbacks you can't get a preview page, so this
> error message is provided instead.

Also, I'm not sure that the login session is being properly initialized
when you visit with a saved-password token cookie. I'll have to look at
it a bit more.

If you find this happening to you, try a) going to an edit page if you
haven't during this session, or b) log out and log back in.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 253 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20050428/60ce4f2b/attachment.pgp>


from_name: Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon

subject: [Wikitech-l] templates and category

body:
ettore di cesare <conversazioni at yahoo.it> wrote:
> hi,
> can I call a template to all articles of a category?
> I afraid that I have to call the template in every single articles of
> the category.

I don't think so, but you *can* include a category tag in the
template, so that including the template will add the page to the
category.

--
Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon <brent at brentdax.com>
Perl and Parrot hacker

"I used to have a life, but I liked mail-reading so much better."


from_name: Tim Starling

body:
Karl Wick wrote:
> BTW I was made a steward a while back and supposedly able to make
> admins and some other stuff, but how in the world do I do it? Is there
> a tutorial somewhere? Right now on the Spanish page I'm not even
> allowed to edit protected pages. I thought I was supposed to have some
> sort of power that transcends all of the wiki sites. Thank you to
> anyone who can help set me straight on that.

There are instructions at http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stewards

-- Tim Starling


from_name: Karl-Otto Kirst

subject: AW: [Wikitech-l] Re: AW: Upload-Problems in Version 1.4.0 (German)

body:
> What happens if either images/0 or images/0/0d doesn't exist? Will it be
> automatically created, and if so, with what permissions?

I don't know it. My collegue will check it. Then I'll tell the result.

Regards

Karl Kirst


subject:
[Wikitech-l] MediaWiki 1.5 release schedule with ENotif/EConfirm
	..  and the "zoo"

body:
Thomas Gries wrote:
> You certainly saw me uploading to
> http://bugzilla.wikipedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=454 (ENotif and the other
> "zoo").
> As the whole "zoo" now works, I now can offer breaking it down into
> smaller subject-oriented patches which might suit you. However, such a
> step requires additional time.
>
> Perhaps you can make a concession and accept my offer.

Sure Tom, I freely "accept your offer" for you to do the thing I've been
asking you to do: provide individual, manageable patches for specific
issues.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 253 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20050428/68e39caa/attachment.pgp>


subject: [Wikitech-l] What about the bug "article which can't be removed" ?

body:
Victor STINNER wrote:
> I would like to know if someone is working on the bug "Article non
> effa?able ? cause d'un bug" (article which can't be removed because of a
> mediawiki bug). I heared that it should come from compression
> trouble ...

This will be fixed with some changes to the deletion backend in
MediaWiki 1.5. (This isn't fully finished yet, I hope to get it done
this weekend. Search the archives for my previous post on this subject.)

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 253 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20050428/dc64d1bf/attachment.pgp>


from_name: Tony Sidaway

body:
Angela said:
>
> If anyone else would like to add to these comments, please do so at
> <http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/CheckUser> so that decisions can be
> made about how this feature should be used, and who should be able to
> use it.
>

Thanks.  I've outlined my thoughts in a section titled (appropriately) "At
discretion of arbcom, subject to veto".


body:
Tony Sidaway said:
> Angela said:
>>
>> If anyone else would like to add to these comments, please do so at
>> <http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/CheckUser> so that decisions can be
>> made about how this feature should be used, and who should be able to
>> use it.
>>
>
> Thanks.  I've outlined my thoughts in a section titled (appropriately)
> "At discretion of arbcom, subject to veto".

..or would if I could!

I get a maintenance lock right now.

Here's the text:

At discretion of arbcom, subject to veto

All the gubbins seems to me to be a symptom of our understandable
suspicion about abuse of this feature. The best solution to me seems to be
to place this feature at the discretion of the arbitration apparatus of
each individual Wiki, subject to veto, separately, by the board and Jimbo.
Power to flip the appropriate bits to grant or revoke the ability to use
this feature should continue to reside with whoever has it now, who as de
facto custodian of user privacy would have an absolute veto. Arbcom should
also be responsible for ensuring that the feature is used only according
to its instructions. The log of all accesses of this feature (when used
and by whom) should be public if possible. Further information should not
be made available but should be available by a report run by the
developers on request of arbcom. User:Tony Sidaway 15:30, 28 Apr 2005
(UTC)


subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: mailing list for users with robots

body:
Timwi <timwi at gmx.net> wrote:
> Brion Vibber wrote:
> > Pavol Cupka wrote:
> >
> >> I would like to suggest making a mailing list for users running
> >> robots. Would this be possible?
> >> Something like wikibots-l or similar.
> >
> > Pywikipediabot has a mailing list. If you're hacking up yet another
> > wikipedia bot framework, you probably should avoid duplicating effort...
> > http://pywikipediabot.sourceforge.net/
>
> You and other Pywikipediabot fans keep saying that on this list, but it
> never changed the fact that people are more passionate about writing
> their own scripts than they are about learning some obscure
> never-heard-of programming language for the only purpose of reading
> someone else's code which will probably turn out to be unsatisfactory
> anyway.

I'm not a Python programmer (whitespace as syntax? eww) but this seems
a little inflammitory.  Python *is* a reasonably popular language, and
even those who don't know it can usually read it fairly easily.

Having said that, the Pywikipediabot list is probably not an
appropriate place for non-Python programmers to discuss wikibots, just
as wikitech-l isn't an appropriate place to debate programming
languages.  Creating a language-neutral forum might be a good idea.

--
Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon <brent at brentdax.com>
Perl and Parrot hacker

"I used to have a life, but I liked mail-reading so much better."


from_name: Jakob

subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: E-R db schema

body:
John Fader wrote:
>>What's an ER schema?
>
> Brion: it stands for "Entity Relationship schema" - it's the way you'd
> represent a database using the [[Entity-relationship model]].
>
> Ettore, all we have is a pure relational schema:

http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/*checkout*/wikipedia/phpwiki/newcodebase/docs/schema.doc?rev=HEAD&content-type=text/plain

> It should be possible to reverse-engineer an ER schema from that.

Is this the actual file or out of date?

http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/wikipedia/phpwiki/newcodebase/

says "Last modified 2 years, 4 months ago"?

I'm also interested in a schema. Can you please point me to the actual file with
 all the "CREATE TABLE" statements?

Thanks,
Jakob


from_name: Angela

subject: [Foundation-l] Re: Expanding CheckUser permissions

body:
As I mentioned on this list a couple of weeks ago,
[[Special:CheckUser]] allows a user with "checkuser" permissions to
check the IP address of a logged in user in order to investigate abuse
or check for "sockpuppetting".

Thanks to everyone who gave feedback on this at
<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/CheckUser> or on the mailing list. The
majority of people commenting there thought the feature should be made
more widely available. However, there was little agreement on who
should be given access to the feature or to the logs.

Currently, only David Gerard and Tim Starling have access to this
feature. David pointed out that he barely uses it, and that its
availability to the English Arbitration Committee has been
controversial. He felt the issue is less "who should have access" than
"what circumstances justify checking?". See [[meta:CheckUser]] for
details on how David is currently using it. Tim starling suggested two
guidelines on the mailing list; only research bad people and do not
give away IP addresses unless it's necessary.

There was general agreement on making CheckUser more widely available,
but many thought this should only be done with restrictions, limits
and/or penalties. There were mixed views on who should be given access
to it, with suggestions including sysops, bureaucrats, bureaucrats of
the larger wikis, stewards, or something between one and three elected
users per project. Some felt people should use it only on their own
project. There was no general agreement on whether it should be
limited to stewards.

The most contentious question was whether the user being checked
should be notified about the check. Some people felt very strongly
that they should, but there were also many arguments against doing
this. See [[meta:CheckUser]] for full details. Some felt that, not
only should the checked user be told, but that the logs should be
public. Anthere suggested ombudsmen should be appointed to oversee the
use of it.

David Gerard added a question about which circumstances merit
checking. Two people said that there must be reasonable cause for it.
Guidelines such as requiring another user request it so it can't be
used for personal reasons, and using it only as a last resort, were
also suggested. One person felt the user that is checked has to
approve.

If anyone else would like to add to these comments, please do so at
<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/CheckUser> so that decisions can be
made about how this feature should be used, and who should be able to
use it.

Thanks.

Angela.


from_name: Gerard Meijssen

body:
Tony Sidaway wrote:

>Tony Sidaway said:
>
>
>>Angela said:
>>
>>
>>>If anyone else would like to add to these comments, please do so at
>>><http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/CheckUser> so that decisions can be
>>>made about how this feature should be used, and who should be able to
>>>use it.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>Thanks.  I've outlined my thoughts in a section titled (appropriately)
>>"At discretion of arbcom, subject to veto".
>>
>>
>
>..or would if I could!
>
>I get a maintenance lock right now.
>
>Here's the text:
>
>
>At discretion of arbcom, subject to veto
>
>
>All the gubbins seems to me to be a symptom of our understandable
>suspicion about abuse of this feature. The best solution to me seems to be
>to place this feature at the discretion of the arbitration apparatus of
>each individual Wiki, subject to veto, separately, by the board and Jimbo.
>Power to flip the appropriate bits to grant or revoke the ability to use
>this feature should continue to reside with whoever has it now, who as de
>facto custodian of user privacy would have an absolute veto. Arbcom should
>also be responsible for ensuring that the feature is used only according
>to its instructions. The log of all accesses of this feature (when used
>and by whom) should be public if possible. Further information should not
>be made available but should be available by a report run by the
>developers on request of arbcom. User:Tony Sidaway 15:30, 28 Apr 2005
>(UTC)
>
Hoi,
Some big projects have an arbitration committee some do not. On the
Dutch wikipedia a user who vehemently denied he used a particular sock
puppet, but who had a history of using sock puppets was banned because
he was not believed and, because the nl:wikipedia was denied to have the
CheckUser tool used in a timely fashion. The user is banned and will
propably not be back for some time because of it.

Blanket policies that expect that an arbitration committee exists are
stupid when there is no such thing. Denying the use of the tool results
result in a situation does hurt a project. When a user is openly accused
of using specific sock puppets, and when this user openly denies this
accusation, NOT using the tool denies this user a proper investigation
and as a result may be convicted because of an honest belief that he is
guilty as charged. It would have been much better if the tool had proven
either that the user is propably guilty or that it is inconclusive.

Without some "public" people who can be asked to perform this
investigation, you discriminate against the smaller projects. This does
result in situations that are worse than the perceived invasion of
privacy. People can be and are judged to use sock puppets with or
without the aditional proof that CheckUser supplies. If this is what we
want than by all means restrict it to  arbitration commissions.

Thanks,
    GerardM


from_name: eric poscher

subject: [Wikitech-l] uploading picture_s_

body:
Hi all,

I'd like to find out, if/how it is possible to upload several files or
pictures at once.
It seemed to my that it was possible to upload a .zip file of several
pictures, but obviously it's a feature of a different cms??

many thanks for any hints.

eric.

--
.---------------------------------------------------------------------------.
|                 |    "I have a dream that my four little children will    |
|  eric.poscher   |     one day live in a nation where they will not be     |
|     @epe.at     |   judged by the color of their skin but by the content  |
|                 |       of their character." Martin Luther King, 1963     |
`--------------------------------------------------------------------------'


from_name: ettore di cesare

subject: [Wikitech-l] E-R db schema

body:
John Fader wrote:
[cuts]
>
> Ettore, all we have is a pure relational schema:
> http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/*checkout*/wikipedia/phpwiki/newcodebase/docs/schema.doc?rev=HEAD&content-type=text/plain
>
> It should be possible to reverse-engineer an ER schema from that.

thanx john, I try ...


from_name: Erik Moeller

subject: [Foundation-l] Wikinews: New State of the Wiki report

body:
I have written a new "State of the Wiki" report about the Wikinews project:

http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/User:Eloquence/State_of_the_Wiki

In this issue: new editions, growth across languages, translations,
papal veneration, contests, statistics, automation, original reporting,
Wikinews TV, Wikinews Radio, chat, licensing, RSS, content partnerships,
the French, and praise and criticism for Wikinews from blogs and
established media.

If you haven't paid attention to Wikinews in the last two months, if you
want to know what's going on in the different language editions, or if
you'd like to take a peek into our secret laboratories, I hope you'll
give this a read. It's quite long, but also the result of intensive
research, including an e-mail survey across the different editions and
interviews on IRC. It is hopefully structured in a way that will allow
you to skip the parts that don't interest you.

Enjoy,

Erik


subject: AW: [Wikitech-l] Upload-Problems in Version 1.4.0 (German)

body:
Many thanks - also to the other ones, who gave me some advices! We could
solve the problem (in www.zum.de/wiki)! It was because of the rights in one
subdirectory.

Regards

Karl Kirst