body:
Please. Someone. ANYONE.

We're supposed to be bold when editing but then we get indefinitely blocked?
Why are you doing this to me? Why are you refusing to respond? Why am I
getting nothing but nasty emails accusing me of being someone else?

Kurita77

>From: "Kurita Ryohan" <kurita77lineman at hotmail.com>
>Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
>To: wikien-l at Wikipedia.org
>Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] New user, blocked indefinitely?
>Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 11:54:57 -0500
>
>Will someone PLEASE explain to me what is going on? I can't understand why
>you people are acting this way.
>
>Kurita77
>
>>From: fun at thingy.apana.org.au (David Gerard)
>>Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
>>To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
>>Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] New user, blocked indefinitely?
>>Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 02:51:54 +1000
>>
>>Fred Bauder (fredbaud at ctelco.net) [050630 02:49]:
>>
>> > Seems to be a sockpuppet of Enviroknot, see
>> > http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?
>> > title=Talk:Jihad&diff=17828932&oldid=17827080
>>
>>
>>CheckUser doesn't appear to be switched on for me in 1.5 as yet, or I'd go
>>look. I'll ask for it to be switched back on once the devs have the bugs
>>from the 1.5 beta under control, and I'm back on IRC ;-)
>>
>>
>>- d.
>>
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>WikiEN-l mailing list
>>WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
>>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE!
>http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
>
>_______________________________________________
>WikiEN-l mailing list
>WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

_________________________________________________________________
FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar ? get it now!
http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/


list: wikien-l

source: pipermail-mbox

from_name: Ray Saintonge

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Pseudoscience category - GSPOV

body:
Haukur ?orgeirsson wrote:

>>One can graduate from a
>>mainstream, accredited medical school, receive a medical degree, &
>>even be board-certified -- & yet still be a quack.
>>
>>
>I fully agree.
>
>Some doctors with education in scientific
>medicine are quacks. The discipline itself,
>however, isn't quackery. Homeopathy, on the
>other hand, is pseudo-medicine. Everyone who
>practices homeopathy is a quack while she's
>doing it, in the sense that she is providing
>medicine that doesn't work.
>
I have not had occasion to use them, but If I look at the prices of
homeopathic medicines I find them rather modest.  Compare that with the
prices of heavily patented medicines sold by major pharmaceutical
companies.  The improved efficacy of some of these is often only
incremental over that of the drug whose patent has expired.  Some of
these producers are quite happy to withhold medicines from those who
can't pay.  It isn't the homeopaths who are failing to send AIDS drugs
to Africa,  or are using their patent powers to restrict domestic
African production of these drugs.

If indeed homeopathic medicine doesn't work as you allege, there is at
least no recent claims of it doing direct harm.  (Direct harm involves
far more than any allegation of negligence for failing to send the
victims to a "real" doctor.)  The recent problems over Vioxx/Celebrex
did not come from the homeopathic community

>I keep coming back to homeopathy because it
>is probably the pseudo-medicine discipline
>with the greatest mainstream popularity. It
>even has some degree of official recognition
>in some countries. And yet it has been shown
>beyond any reasonable doubt not to work.
>
I suspect that chiropractic is more popular, but that could vary from
one place to the next.  Your use of "beyond reasonable doubt" is too
categorical.  The popularity of homeopathy alone is not be enough to
establish that the medicines work, but it is a clear expression of
reasonable doubt.

Healing involves more than medicines that produce the desired chemical
results.  It can involve more than the syllogistic thinking that has
become so commonplace in the Western World ever since Aristotle.

Attitude and hope are also factors in healing.  I do not believe in God,
but can still recognize the value of prayer to healing.  Shamans had a
vital role in their own societies, even if their medicine bags contained
nothing but innocuous trinkets.

When you show a man the wonders of modern medicine you are showing him
that hope exists.  When you demonstrate that those wonders are beyond
his means, you have turned modern medicine into the offerings of a
latter-day Pandora.  Maybe he was better off with his vials of sterile
water.

>>But if it really doesn't hurt anything if we call it "Alternative
>>medicine", & creates a bit of WikiLove to do so, then shouldn't we
>>accept the term & move on to other things?
>>
>>
>I am arguing that the term is misleading
>for the articles that category currently
>holds (I won't repeat my argument here,
>see my earlier posts). I suggest we replace
>it with "Pseudo-medicine" and will do so
>myself if objections are not raised.
>
>
Such a move would be objectionable POV pushing.

Ec


from_name: JAY JG

subject: [WikiEN-l] Proposal: Requests for rollback

body:
>From: Michael Turley <michael.turley at gmail.com>
>Back to the subject: exactly why are you so strongly opposed to
>separating the tools, especially along these lines?  It seems to me
>that this tool exerts exactly NO control over other users, while all
>the other admin tools that I am aware of do exert a degree of
>dominance over other users.  Why shouldn't this be available
>individually to those who aren't interested in the powers that include
>domination?

Interesting that you would use the highly emotive word "domination"; if
others share your understanding of what adminship involved, then Rebecca
would be entirely warranted in her view that there is an "anti-admin" group
out there for that reason alone.  Regarding the rollback feature, it makes
edit wars considerably easier, which is not a good thing.

Jay.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Protoscience category

body:
Haukur ?orgeirsson wrote:

> Currently the Protoscience category includes such
>
>topics as String theory and Quantum gravity as well
>as Phrenology (old debunked non-sense) and Biorythm
>(recent debunked non-sense). To me it does not seem
>that these things have enough in common to be usefully
>included in the same category.
>
>
Using the example of phrenology, you will find that when the believers
no longer feel the need to defend the topic gradually fades away.

Trolls and troll-feeders are bound in each other's destiny.

Ec


from_name: Kurita Ryohan

body:
Please, anyone?

The reason given is this:
Autoblocked because your IP address has been recently used by "Kurita77".
The reason given for Kurita77's block is: "Sockpuppet of User:Enviroknot
(who is blocked for violating an ArbCom injunction)".

Wouldn't I have been automatically blocked anyways if I was this guy?

Can someone PLEASE give me back my account? People keep leaving me messages
and I can't respond. I want to keep editing the page I came here to edit in
the first place on Eyeshield 21.

Also to the ones who sent me vulgar emails please stop it. Deleting them is
no fun because I have to see that language first to know to delete it.

Kurita77

>From: Andrew Gray <shimgray at gmail.com>
>Reply-To: andrew.gray at dunelm.org.uk
>To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at wikipedia.org>, kurita77lineman at hotmail.com
>Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] New user, blocked indefinitely?
>Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 18:05:21 +0100
>
>On 29/06/05, Kurita Ryohan <kurita77lineman at hotmail.com> wrote:
> > Will someone PLEASE explain to me what is going on? I can't understand
>why
> > you people are acting this way.
>
>A sockpuppet is another user account operated by the same user, under
>the pretence it's a second person.
>
>(For example, consider I'm arguing with you, and a new person appears
>on my side. On the internet, it's quite difficult to tell, with no
>"history", if that person is actually someone who agrees with me, or
>just myself pretending to be someone else. It's surprisingly common)
>
>There are special technical process (I don't understand them either, I
>confess...) to attempt to figure out if two usernames are being used
>by the same person; David's comment about "checkuser" means that he's
>looking into that.
>
>Note Habj's comment: these things do take a bit of time, people are
>volunteers and will do things when they have a spare moment.
>
>My apologies if you've been blocked accidentally; if so, it'll
>probably be resolved, but not immediately - again, these things take
>time.
>
>--
>- Andrew Gray
>   andrew.gray at dunelm.org.uk

_________________________________________________________________
On the road to retirement? Check out MSN Life Events for advice on how to
get there! http://lifeevents.msn.com/category.aspx?cid=Retirement


list: wikitech-l

from_name: Nicolay A. Vasiliev

subject: [Wikitech-l] Records number in main table

body:
Hi!

Is anyone able to answer for me?

Nicolay A. Vasiliev ?????:

> Hello there!
>
> Could you be so kindly to say: how many records contains the cur table
> in the last dump?
>
> Thanks in advance


subject: [WikiEN-l] New user, blocked indefinitely?

body:
Why do you keep attacking me?

>1st edit: His first edit was made within minutes of
>Enviroknot being blocked for violating the ArbCom
>injunction.

Is it against policy to edit at certain times of day? People edit all the
time from what I understand. I got up this morning, signed in, and created
my account after reading all the stuff on how to edit.

>2nd edit: Quoted Enviroknot and struck-out many of
>BrandonYusufToropov's comments. Kurita77 used also
>editing features such as section headings and bold
>text.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Introduction_2

Hello? Policies and Guidelines, Rules, and all the editing tools are spelled
out right here. You obviously wanted people to read them so I did. I didn't
want to make my edits look bad. This is supposed to be a
professional-quality encyclopedia right?

>6th edit: Began lecturing Brandon on "No Personal
>Attacks". Again struck-out several of Brandon's
>comments.
That's because Policy says No Personal Attacsk and we are supposed to Remove
Personal Attacks.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_personal_attacks
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Remove_personal_attacks

>10th edit: Again lectured about "No Personal Attacks".
Why is this a bad thing?

>16th-18th edits: Uploaded an image of "Eyeshield 21".
>Added a disambiguation link to the Eyeshield article.
>In an email he sent to me, Kurita77 claimed that this
>article brought him here.
It did. I was trying things out first. I also reverted a vandal who tagged
his name into the SNES article.

>20th edits: Posted a message on Brandon's talk page
>referencing several Wikipedia policies and instructing
>Brandon to "calm down".
I was assuming good faith and giving Brandon a friendly message. It was not
an instruction, it was a friendly suggestion.

>22nd edit: Posted a question on AN/3RR.
Because I remembered that there's policy like that but I couldn't tell if
I'd violated it, the 3RR policy has a bunch of exceptions. I asked before I
got in trouble.

>All of the above happened in less than 3 hours. It's
>crystal clear that Kurita == Environknot.
>
I'm not this guy Enviroknot whoever he is, I'm just me. I came in here
because I was referenced to it.

PLEASE, just give me back my account. This is completely unfair of you. I
don't understand what makes you act this way.

Kurita77

_________________________________________________________________
Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee?
Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963


from_name: john kaczmarowski

subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: WikiMedia Error

body:
john kaczmarowski wrote:
> Tomer Chachamu wrote:
>
>> On 28/06/05, john kaczmarowski <jkacz at completeis.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Today, I modified (for about the 10th time) the DefaultSettings.php file
>>> in the Includes directory so that I could upload a .exe file (yes,
>>> trouble, but this is in a relatively secure environment).  Anyway, the
>>> exe was a flash demo that I was attaching to a wiki page.
>>
>>
>>
>> You should not edit DefaultSettings.php. When you need to change a
>> setting, copy the setting line to LocalSettings.php (the main one) (or
>> whatever it's called) and edit it there.
>>
>> I'm not sure what you can do now.
>
>
> Thanks for the note, here's the deal:
>
> 1. The specific changes were as follows:
>
> $wgFileExtensions = array( 'doc', 'pdf', 'xls', 'mpp', 'vsd', 'pdm',
> 'png', 'gif', 'jpg', 'jpeg' );
>
> (note I added doc, pdf, xls, mpp, vsd and pdm)  I also added exe, but
> since have taken it out.
>
> 2. These settings do not exist in LocalSettings, and in fact, this sort
> of edit has workd well in the past.
>
> 3. I can replace the DefaultSettings file with the originally delivered
> default settings file, and I acheive slightly better results.  To wit:
>
> a. Main_Page returns (prior returning DefaultSettings, this page would
> yield only a  page just like all the rest.
>
> b. Many pages have returned to pre-crash state while others return only
> a  opage.
>
> c. Special Pages, login pages, etc. all return

last thing:

I re-installed the wiki (clean on a new machine physically closer to me
by a factor of about 1000)

I copied the wikidb from the old wiki server to the new wiki server

I copied the /images directory from old to new

I created a new main_page (some reason that one didn't come along with
the database)

All is now good.

Simply replacing the defaultsettings.php with a fresh one from the wiki
install tarball didn't work, nor did various attempts to work around the
problems.  Very strange, but fixed nonetheless...

kacz


body:
Someone just sent me this.

If this is really how you people want to be I will leave.

Kurita77

>From: Blank <blank at blank.com>
>To: Kurita77Lineman at hotmail.com
>Subject: Re: Die in shit fatass
>Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 16:42:54
>
>Fuck off loser.
>We don't give two shits who you are.
>We just don't like new users.
>This is OUR encyclopedia.
>You can go to hell. Keep that jap crap off Wikipedia we don't need it.
>Go the fuck away Jew-lover.

_________________________________________________________________
Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee?
Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963


from_name: Matt Brown

body:
Doesn't this sound familiar?  It seems we are having a procession of
users claiming that somehow they got Enviroknot's IP.

-Matt

On 6/29/05, Kurita Ryohan <kurita77lineman at hotmail.com> wrote:
> I'm nothing of the sort. I already told you, I may have gotten someone
> else's IP. Our cable service is up and down thanks to my stupid neighbors
> who couldn't be bothered to check the utility maps before trying to dig in
> for their new pool.


body:
I told you via email that I didn't have cable modem service until this
morning. My stupid neighbors are putting in a pool and they cut my lines. It
was in and out several times.

I have no control over what IP I get.

I'm now getting very sure that you were the one who sent the email I just
forwarded to this list.

Kurita

>From: Pat Carr <carrp_x at yahoo.com>
>Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
>To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
>Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] New user, blocked indefinitely?
>Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 10:54:45 -0700 (PDT)
>
>According to the email headers, Kurita77's IP is
>66.69.141.11. Sound familiar? That IP is listed on the
>ArbCom case page as one of Enviroknot's IPs. See
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/KaintheScion_et_al./Proposed_decision#Sockpuppets_2
>
>Carbonite
>
>--- Kurita Ryohan <kurita77lineman at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Why do you keep attacking me?
> >
> > >1st edit: His first edit was made within minutes of
> > >Enviroknot being blocked for violating the ArbCom
> > >injunction.
> >
> > Is it against policy to edit at certain times of
> > day? People edit all the
> > time from what I understand. I got up this morning,
> > signed in, and created
> > my account after reading all the stuff on how to
> > edit.
> >
> >
> > >2nd edit: Quoted Enviroknot and struck-out many of
> > >BrandonYusufToropov's comments. Kurita77 used also
> > >editing features such as section headings and bold
> > >text.
> >
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Introduction_2
> >
> > Hello? Policies and Guidelines, Rules, and all the
> > editing tools are spelled
> > out right here. You obviously wanted people to read
> > them so I did. I didn't
> > want to make my edits look bad. This is supposed to
> > be a
> > professional-quality encyclopedia right?
> >
> >
> > >6th edit: Began lecturing Brandon on "No Personal
> > >Attacks". Again struck-out several of Brandon's
> > >comments.
> > That's because Policy says No Personal Attacsk and
> > we are supposed to Remove
> > Personal Attacks.
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_personal_attacks
> >
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Remove_personal_attacks
> >
> > >10th edit: Again lectured about "No Personal
> > Attacks".
> > Why is this a bad thing?
> >
> > >16th-18th edits: Uploaded an image of "Eyeshield
> > 21".
> > >Added a disambiguation link to the Eyeshield
> > article.
> > >In an email he sent to me, Kurita77 claimed that
> > this
> > >article brought him here.
> > It did. I was trying things out first. I also
> > reverted a vandal who tagged
> > his name into the SNES article.
> >
> > >20th edits: Posted a message on Brandon's talk page
> > >referencing several Wikipedia policies and
> > instructing
> > >Brandon to "calm down".
> > I was assuming good faith and giving Brandon a
> > friendly message. It was not
> > an instruction, it was a friendly suggestion.
> >
> > >22nd edit: Posted a question on AN/3RR.
> > Because I remembered that there's policy like that
> > but I couldn't tell if
> > I'd violated it, the 3RR policy has a bunch of
> > exceptions. I asked before I
> > got in trouble.
> >
> > >All of the above happened in less than 3 hours.
> > It's
> > >crystal clear that Kurita == Environknot.
> > >
> > I'm not this guy Enviroknot whoever he is, I'm just
> > me. I came in here
> > because I was referenced to it.
> >
> > PLEASE, just give me back my account. This is
> > completely unfair of you. I
> > don't understand what makes you act this way.
> >
> > Kurita77
> >
> >
>_________________________________________________________________
> > Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer
> > virus scan from McAfee?
> > Security.
> >
>http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >
>
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
>http://mail.yahoo.com
>_______________________________________________
>WikiEN-l mailing list
>WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

_________________________________________________________________
Don?t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!
http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/


list: wikipedia-l

from_name: Mark Williamson

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Logos ready to switch

body:
Hi all,

I made a bunch of logos recently...

They're all located at http://xx.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Wiki.png

Wikipedias: am:, ba:, bo:, cv:, gv:, kk:, kl:, kw:, ky:, ps:, tg:,
ug:... I think that's all.

Mark


from_name: Erik Moeller

subject:
[Wikipedia-l] Re: Re: The elections are on,	but I cast a blank
	ballot!

body:
Hello Craig,

> But I do have an opinion.  The positions of all the candidates seem to be
> essentially identical, "we love Wikipedia and NPOV".

I don't think that's accurate at all, but even if you do think that, you
should look at the track record of our current trustees to get an idea
what their future actions are likely to be. To wit:

 > topics of copyright

A new, semi-private mailing list, juriwiki-l, was created to discuss and
resolve these issues as they occur, in collaboration with legal
specialists. Angela and Anthere also use the Wikimedia e-mail ticketing
system, OTRS, to respond to copyright inquiries. Indeed, from what I
know, I would say that the Board is spending a great amount of time to
deal even with the silliest complaints and threats.

There have been discussions with the FSF and Creative Commons to improve
the GFDL, but moving this forward is not just up to the Board.

Copyright, in my opinion, is such a large issue that the community needs
to be highly involved in forming policy. The Board has allowed this to
happen on the Commons, on Wikinews, with the ESA licensing effort, in
the different language communities, etc., while generally keeping a
watchful eye on what is going on, even in languages they do not speak,
relying on trusted individuals to relay information.

 > promotion

The Board has tried to energize promotion efforts by establishing a logo
and trademark policy. Local promotion efforts are up to individual
chapters where they do exist. The Board has helped with official press
releases, a newsletter (the Wikimedia Quarto), and the Foundation
website. It has also appointed a press officer (Elian).

Given our limited budget and our natural growth, I think it would be
unwise to allocate a significant amount of resources to promotion at
this point. Instead, the Board should continue to do what it has done in
the past: encourage the community to design and distribute promotional
materials.

 > hardware

A hardware officer advises the Board on what machines to purchase. This
has so far worked very well. The successful cooperations with Kennisnet
and Yahoo! and the negotiations with Google were coordinated by the
Board, and I think it has played exactly the role it should:
Establishing partnerships while leaving the implementation details to
qualified individuals. Wikimedia is probably also the only major
non-profit whose President (Jimbo) not only looks over every hardware
order, but who also installs the machines and makes sure they are working.

There are at any given time secret, confidential discussions underway,
some of which fail because of unacceptable demands from would-be sponsors.

 > or managing growth.

The fundraising efforts, hiring of Brion and Chad, appointment of a CTO,
CRO and Hardware Officer, partnerships, attempts to build spare
capacity, efforts to eliminate points of failure, and so forth, have all
served this goal. I would indeed say that the Board has made this one of
its key activities, and that this has been possible at all on the budget
we're operating on (while similarly large websites employ a staff of
hundreds) is a testament to Wikimedia's efficiency.

 >  The candidates all propose to increase community input to the
 > board, but don't say exactly how they will do this.

Both Angela and Anthere have generally tried to listen and to fully
document what the Board is doing. The various surveys such as
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Board_agenda/Open_questions
and
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/CheckUser
are good examples of this. As Chief Research Officer, I also see it as
my role to communicate technical needs from the community to the Board.

You have had a lot of time to ask the candidates questions already, and
you can continue to do so. I think engaging in dialogue is a much more
constructive use of your time than a blank "protest vote." I find it
somewhat saddening that we have so few candidates this year, but it is
also an expression of respect for the work Angela, Anthere and Jimbo
have done -- for no pay, and indeed, often investing their own money in
phone calls and travel. The Board is not above criticism, but given the
exceptional job it has done so far, such criticism should be well-founded.

Best,

Erik


from_name: Michael Turley

body:
On 6/29/05, JAY JG <jayjg at hotmail.com> wrote:
> >From: Michael Turley <michael.turley at gmail.com>
> >Back to the subject: exactly why are you so strongly opposed to
> >separating the tools, especially along these lines?  It seems to me
> >that this tool exerts exactly NO control over other users, while all
> >the other admin tools that I am aware of do exert a degree of
> >dominance over other users.  Why shouldn't this be available
> >individually to those who aren't interested in the powers that include
> >domination?
>
> Interesting that you would use the highly emotive word "domination"; if
> others share your understanding of what adminship involved, then Rebecca
> would be entirely warranted in her view that there is an "anti-admin" group
> out there for that reason alone.  Regarding the rollback feature, it makes
> edit wars considerably easier, which is not a good thing.
>
> Jay.

The blocking feature makes newbie biting much easier, which is not a
good thing.

Page locking makes enforcing a single POV easier, which is not a good thing.

*All tools have a proper use, and all tools can be used abusively.*

Ignoring the proper use of a tool in favor of it's potential abusive
use is a specious argument, in my opinion.  It still doesn't address
the reason why ambi thinks (and perhaps you agree) that they belong in
an unseparable package.  If that's the case, why not give admins all
the powers of bureaucrats?  And stewards?  And arbitrators?  And all
the powers of Jimbo Wales, while we're at it?  It would certainly more
convenient to have all the powers in one single package.

Regarding "domination".  I chose the word to best express why *I* am
uninterested in a particular subset of admin tools.  I prefer
persuasion to force.  I have no current interest in tools of force
here at Wikipedia; I intend to test the boundaries of wikilove, good
reason, and persuasion.

I believe my understanding of what adminship involves is very similar
to your own.  However, my preferences regarding implementation are
obviously different.  I prefer that you and others have those
domination tools.  However, I think you're being disingenuous if you
don't admit that that is what they are.  I support the existence of
"overwhelming force" being available to those who are interested,
capable, and willing to use it judiciously.

Finally, the rollback feature, as far as I can tell, is unique, in
that it is a very valuable editing enhancement, but is the only one
that doesn't have any powers of enforcement behind it.  That's why I
think it should be available separately to those who are interested.

--
Michael Turley
User:Unfocused


from_name: Brion Vibber

subject: [Wikitech-l] Parse error on Village pump (policy)/archive

body:
Steve Block wrote:
> I hope this is the right place to post this:  When trying to access the village
> pump (policy) archive on the English wikipedia,
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_%28policy%29/Archive I'm
> getting a parse error:
>
> Parse error: parse error, unexpected '=', expecting ')' in
> /usr/local/apache/common-local/php-1.5/InitialiseSettings.php on line 54

There was an error in the config file for a few seconds.

-- 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/20050629/87782246/attachment.pgp>


from_name: Chris Jenkinson

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

Rebecca wrote:
> I strongly oppose it. Rollback is one of three four technical features
> made accessible to administrators as people that are generally
> trusted. The anti-admin lobby has tried to build adminship up into
> something it wasn't meant to be, isn't, never was and never will be,
> but that doesn't mean we need to accomodate them in this way. If you
> want the tools, then there's a page and a very simple process for you
> to go through to get them - else don't whinge when you don't have
> them.

I am quite offended you would label me in this way, as part of an
"anti-admin lobby". I made this proposal in good faith as a way to
*improve* Wikipedia as it would increase the number of vandal fighters!
You are accusing me of whinging? Whatever happened to assume good faith?
I find this incredibly bad form of you, and even more shocking that you
are one of the people who forms the Arbitration Committee who regularly
rules that "no personal attacks" is one of Wikipedia's key policies.

Let me remind you that I have never voted on requests for adminship
before, and that I have never insulted or in any way had a confrontation
with any Wikipedia admin. Do you have any proof of these accusations?

The only person to make such ridiculous claims as an 'anti-admin lobby'
and 'me whinging' is you. Maybe you have strong feelings about that -
but that is certainly no reason to attack or insult others in this way.

Chris

- --
Chris Jenkinson
chris at starglade.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFCwpKrEq6+ijeBrJ8RAnr9AKCLF032zAhexfBde7wHiN1bMPjn4ACgzzdR
U+wfQEXmfq+p0jfkVDVzIiY=
=Vnsm
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


from_name: Haukur Þorgeirsson

subject: [WikiEN-l] Protoscience category

body:
>I raise an objection: that's not what it's called in English (my overriding
>objection), and "pseudo-medicine" is an invented term hence original
>research.

Very well, you're probably right.

I think I've said my piece on this topic and I've
got a better idea of the various opinions of other
community members. It seems we have reached the typical
Wikipedian conclusion of calling a truce on a status
quo which is unacceptable to everyone :)

At any rate I will proceed with caution in any
changes I make to these articles and categories.

>The current article on [[Alternative medicine]] has suffered a bad case of
>Gohde and could do with a lot of cleaning up, but the Category links to
>Pseudoscience and Protoscience get the point across IMO (having as it does
>both).

Currently the Protoscience category includes such
topics as String theory and Quantum gravity as well
as Phrenology (old debunked non-sense) and Biorythm
(recent debunked non-sense). To me it does not seem
that these things have enough in common to be usefully
included in the same category.

Regards,
Haukur


body:
Now not only are you ignoring my emails, you are pasting only your own
emails into Wikipedia and NOT posting my responses.

To top it off, you blanked my user page after denying me the ability to edit
it myself.

You are acting in horribly bad faith and I want to know why you are doing
this.

Someone, please. Give me back my account. I have done nothing wrong.

Kurita77

>From: "Kurita Ryohan" <kurita77lineman at hotmail.com>
>Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
>To: wikien-l at Wikipedia.org
>Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] New user, blocked indefinitely?
>Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 12:59:11 -0500
>
>I told you via email that I didn't have cable modem service until this
>morning. My stupid neighbors are putting in a pool and they cut my lines.
>It was in and out several times.
>
>I have no control over what IP I get.
>
>I'm now getting very sure that you were the one who sent the email I just
>forwarded to this list.
>
>Kurita
>
>>From: Pat Carr <carrp_x at yahoo.com>
>>Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
>>To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
>>Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] New user, blocked indefinitely?
>>Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 10:54:45 -0700 (PDT)
>>
>>According to the email headers, Kurita77's IP is
>>66.69.141.11. Sound familiar? That IP is listed on the
>>ArbCom case page as one of Enviroknot's IPs. See
>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/KaintheScion_et_al./Proposed_decision#Sockpuppets_2
>>
>>Carbonite
>>
>>--- Kurita Ryohan <kurita77lineman at hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Why do you keep attacking me?
>> >
>> > >1st edit: His first edit was made within minutes of
>> > >Enviroknot being blocked for violating the ArbCom
>> > >injunction.
>> >
>> > Is it against policy to edit at certain times of
>> > day? People edit all the
>> > time from what I understand. I got up this morning,
>> > signed in, and created
>> > my account after reading all the stuff on how to
>> > edit.
>> >
>> >
>> > >2nd edit: Quoted Enviroknot and struck-out many of
>> > >BrandonYusufToropov's comments. Kurita77 used also
>> > >editing features such as section headings and bold
>> > >text.
>> >
>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Introduction_2
>> >
>> > Hello? Policies and Guidelines, Rules, and all the
>> > editing tools are spelled
>> > out right here. You obviously wanted people to read
>> > them so I did. I didn't
>> > want to make my edits look bad. This is supposed to
>> > be a
>> > professional-quality encyclopedia right?
>> >
>> >
>> > >6th edit: Began lecturing Brandon on "No Personal
>> > >Attacks". Again struck-out several of Brandon's
>> > >comments.
>> > That's because Policy says No Personal Attacsk and
>> > we are supposed to Remove
>> > Personal Attacks.
>> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_personal_attacks
>> >
>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Remove_personal_attacks
>> >
>> > >10th edit: Again lectured about "No Personal
>> > Attacks".
>> > Why is this a bad thing?
>> >
>> > >16th-18th edits: Uploaded an image of "Eyeshield
>> > 21".
>> > >Added a disambiguation link to the Eyeshield
>> > article.
>> > >In an email he sent to me, Kurita77 claimed that
>> > this
>> > >article brought him here.
>> > It did. I was trying things out first. I also
>> > reverted a vandal who tagged
>> > his name into the SNES article.
>> >
>> > >20th edits: Posted a message on Brandon's talk page
>> > >referencing several Wikipedia policies and
>> > instructing
>> > >Brandon to "calm down".
>> > I was assuming good faith and giving Brandon a
>> > friendly message. It was not
>> > an instruction, it was a friendly suggestion.
>> >
>> > >22nd edit: Posted a question on AN/3RR.
>> > Because I remembered that there's policy like that
>> > but I couldn't tell if
>> > I'd violated it, the 3RR policy has a bunch of
>> > exceptions. I asked before I
>> > got in trouble.
>> >
>> > >All of the above happened in less than 3 hours.
>> > It's
>> > >crystal clear that Kurita == Environknot.
>> > >
>> > I'm not this guy Enviroknot whoever he is, I'm just
>> > me. I came in here
>> > because I was referenced to it.
>> >
>> > PLEASE, just give me back my account. This is
>> > completely unfair of you. I
>> > don't understand what makes you act this way.
>> >
>> > Kurita77
>> >
>> >
>>_________________________________________________________________
>> > Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer
>> > virus scan from McAfee?
>> > Security.
>> >
>>http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > WikiEN-l mailing list
>> > WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
>> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>> >
>>
>>
>>__________________________________________________
>>Do You Yahoo!?
>>Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
>>http://mail.yahoo.com
>>_______________________________________________
>>WikiEN-l mailing list
>>WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
>>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Don?t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!
>http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/
>
>_______________________________________________
>WikiEN-l mailing list
>WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

_________________________________________________________________
On the road to retirement? Check out MSN Life Events for advice on how to
get there! http://lifeevents.msn.com/category.aspx?cid=Retirement


from_name: Gabriel

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Greek wikipedia to 1.5 ?

body: when the greek wikipedia would be convert to 1.5 ?


body:
>I know I'm risking feeding the trolls, (since it's
>already been determined by IP evidence that this is
>Enviroknot / ElKabong / KaintheScion) so I'll keep it
>short.

I'm nothing of the sort. I already told you, I may have gotten someone
else's IP. Our cable service is up and down thanks to my stupid neighbors
who couldn't be bothered to check the utility maps before trying to dig in
for their new pool.

I'm hoping one of them hits a power line next. It'd serve them right.

>What exactly is your problem with me posting *my own*
>words into Wikipedia?

That you REFUSED TO POST MY RESPONSES. I gave you my responses to your
accusations and you didn't include them, knowing that I would be unable to
edit on Wikipedia thanks to your block.

You denied me my right to respond to your accusations.

>I didn't feel like retyping my
>own words, so I pasted them. Many people don't read
>the mailing list. When your Enviroknot account is
>unblocked in a few hours, you can respond all you
>want.

I do not HAVE an Enviroknot account. I only have one account, and you
blocked it.

>As for your accusation that I sent the offensive
>email, please provide some proof immediately or
>apologize. I'm not holding my breath for either.

If you DIDN'T send it, I apologize, but I think you did. You're obviously
technologically capable enough to have done so, your behavior towards me
lends credibility to that assumption, and it was obviously someone on this
mailing list who did it.

Your refusal to deal with me in good faith is giving me a better idea of
what Wikipedia is really like and it's not the rosy place depicted in your
frontpage and your call for new users to "be bold" and make edits.

Kurita77

_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE!
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/


body:
Carbonite,

Are you REALLY that stupid? I don't think so. I don't think this one was
from you.

If the other one wasn't you then you get my apologies. Either way Wikipedia
needs to start policing their admins.

Kurita77

>From: Blank <blank at blank.com>
>To: Kurita77Lineman at hotmail.com
>Subject: Re: You don't GET to respond you fat shit
>Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 18:51:08
>
>Fuck off loser.
>I'm goint to delete your response in a second.
>I told you last time, this is OUR encyclopedia.
>Go edit somewhere else. Or go sit on the couch and eat and pretend you're
>not a fat slobby Jew-lover.
>Carb, but you'll never prove it.

_________________________________________________________________
Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee?
Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963


body:
I am still blocked.

Why are you people doing this? What is wrong with you?

Kurita77

_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE!
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/


body:
I'm now on 66.69.133.72. You can check it if you like.

I told you, my idiot neighbors are putting in a pool and didn't check the
utility maps before they started digging. They cut the cable lines and
everything has been getting patched and re-patched for the past few days.

What the hell is wrong with you people?

Kurita77

>From: Matt Brown <morven at gmail.com>
>Reply-To: Matt Brown <morven at gmail.com>,English Wikipedia
><wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
>To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at wikipedia.org>
>Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] New user, blocked indefinitely?
>Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 12:57:39 -0700
>
>Doesn't this sound familiar?  It seems we are having a procession of
>users claiming that somehow they got Enviroknot's IP.
>
>-Matt
>
>On 6/29/05, Kurita Ryohan <kurita77lineman at hotmail.com> wrote:
> > I'm nothing of the sort. I already told you, I may have gotten someone
> > else's IP. Our cable service is up and down thanks to my stupid
>neighbors
> > who couldn't be bothered to check the utility maps before trying to dig
>in
> > for their new pool.
>_______________________________________________
>WikiEN-l mailing list
>WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

_________________________________________________________________
Don?t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!
http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/


from_name: Andrew Dunbar

subject: [Wikitech-l] _Show changes_ button destroys edit summary

body:
I reported this bug yesterday or the day before. It only happens when
editing a section which could be why it slipped through.
http://bugzilla.wikipedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2548

Hippietrail.

On 6/28/05, Phil Boswell <phil.boswell at gmail.com> wrote:
> I like the new "Save changes" feature, but the current installation on
> enwiki seems to destroy the edit summary, which AFAICT is a bad thing.
>
> How come this didn't show up before?
>
> HTH HAND
> --
> Phil
> [[en:User:Phil Boswell]]
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>

--
http://linguaphile.sf.net


body:
Ok fine.

Now I'm apparently 66.69.137.7.

I told you, it's been changing every time the cable company has to splice
another part of the connection.

Will you kindly give me back my account?

Kurita77

>From: "Kurita Ryohan" <kurita77lineman at hotmail.com>
>Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
>To: wikien-l at wikipedia.org
>Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] New user, blocked indefinitely?
>Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 15:01:43 -0500
>
>I'm now on 66.69.133.72. You can check it if you like.
>
>I told you, my idiot neighbors are putting in a pool and didn't check the
>utility maps before they started digging. They cut the cable lines and
>everything has been getting patched and re-patched for the past few days.
>
>What the hell is wrong with you people?
>
>Kurita77
>
>
>>From: Matt Brown <morven at gmail.com>
>>Reply-To: Matt Brown <morven at gmail.com>,English Wikipedia
>><wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
>>To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at wikipedia.org>
>>Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] New user, blocked indefinitely?
>>Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 12:57:39 -0700
>>
>>Doesn't this sound familiar?  It seems we are having a procession of
>>users claiming that somehow they got Enviroknot's IP.
>>
>>-Matt
>>
>>On 6/29/05, Kurita Ryohan <kurita77lineman at hotmail.com> wrote:
>> > I'm nothing of the sort. I already told you, I may have gotten someone
>> > else's IP. Our cable service is up and down thanks to my stupid
>>neighbors
>> > who couldn't be bothered to check the utility maps before trying to dig
>>in
>> > for their new pool.
>>_______________________________________________
>>WikiEN-l mailing list
>>WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
>>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Don?t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!
>http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/
>
>_______________________________________________
>WikiEN-l mailing list
>WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE!
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/


from_name: Rebecca

body:
On 6/29/05, Michael Turley <michael.turley at gmail.com> wrote:
> I think this is an excellent idea.
>
> I am not an admin, and do not want to be an admin at this time.
>
> I would be interested in having the rollback feature available to me,
> and I think it would lead to me doing at least a little more
> counter-vandalism work.

I strongly oppose it. Rollback is one of three four technical features
made accessible to administrators as people that are generally
trusted. The anti-admin lobby has tried to build adminship up into
something it wasn't meant to be, isn't, never was and never will be,
but that doesn't mean we need to accomodate them in this way. If you
want the tools, then there's a page and a very simple process for you
to go through to get them - else don't whinge when you don't have
them.

-- ambi


from_name: Lars Aronsson

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Request for creation of Dutch-Low Saxon (nds-nl)

body:
Wouter Steenbeek wrote:
> No, I am not! Please read my messages more closely. I stated that those
> dialects are not to be mutually understood /when written down/. The spellings
> used are incompatible.

Can't you see that discussing qualities is leading nowhere?  Next
thing you will be doing original research on the qualitative
differences between dialects.

Instead I suggest that you discuss quantity.  How much literature
has been published in each dialect?  Has any encyclopedia, or even
dictionary, ever been printed in these dialects?  Are people using
it for everyday writing such as e-mails, newspapers, blogs, and
corporate memos?  Is there any useful basis (spelling reference,
reading population, community of editors) at all for writing an
encyclopedia?  Would readers of the local newspaper use it as a
fact reference, when they meet unknown concepts?  Or would they
just ignore it and go to the Dutch, English, or German Wikipedia?

--
  Lars Aronsson (lars at aronsson.se)
  Aronsson Datateknik - http://aronsson.se


body:
Why do you people not respond? What the hell is wrong with you?

What a bunch of complete assholes you are.

Kurita77

>From: "Kurita Ryohan" <kurita77lineman at hotmail.com>
>Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
>To: wikien-l at Wikipedia.org
>Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] New user, blocked indefinitely?
>Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 15:11:42 -0500
>
>Ok fine.
>
>Now I'm apparently 66.69.137.7.
>
>I told you, it's been changing every time the cable company has to splice
>another part of the connection.
>
>Will you kindly give me back my account?
>
>Kurita77
>
>>From: "Kurita Ryohan" <kurita77lineman at hotmail.com>
>>Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
>>To: wikien-l at wikipedia.org
>>Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] New user, blocked indefinitely?
>>Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 15:01:43 -0500
>>
>>I'm now on 66.69.133.72. You can check it if you like.
>>
>>I told you, my idiot neighbors are putting in a pool and didn't check the
>>utility maps before they started digging. They cut the cable lines and
>>everything has been getting patched and re-patched for the past few days.
>>
>>What the hell is wrong with you people?
>>
>>Kurita77
>>
>>
>>>From: Matt Brown <morven at gmail.com>
>>>Reply-To: Matt Brown <morven at gmail.com>,English Wikipedia
>>><wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
>>>To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at wikipedia.org>
>>>Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] New user, blocked indefinitely?
>>>Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 12:57:39 -0700
>>>
>>>Doesn't this sound familiar?  It seems we are having a procession of
>>>users claiming that somehow they got Enviroknot's IP.
>>>
>>>-Matt
>>>
>>>On 6/29/05, Kurita Ryohan <kurita77lineman at hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> > I'm nothing of the sort. I already told you, I may have gotten someone
>>> > else's IP. Our cable service is up and down thanks to my stupid
>>>neighbors
>>> > who couldn't be bothered to check the utility maps before trying to
>>>dig in
>>> > for their new pool.
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>WikiEN-l mailing list
>>>WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
>>>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>>
>>_________________________________________________________________
>>Don?t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!
>>http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>WikiEN-l mailing list
>>WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
>>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE!
>http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
>
>_______________________________________________
>WikiEN-l mailing list
>WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE!
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/


from_name: Jeremy Dunck

subject: [Wikitech-l] Error while searching en.wikipedia.org

body:
Not sure if this is related to the 1.5 upgrade, but I just got this
while searching (GO button) on en.wikipedia.org.

ERROR
The requested URL could not be retrieved

While trying to retrieve the URL:
NONE://207.142.131.224:80http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Search?search=corporate+governance&go=Go

The following error was encountered:

    * Read Error

The system returned:

    (104) Connection reset by peer

An error condition occurred while reading data from the network.
Please retry your request.

Your cache administrator is wikidown at bomis.com.
Generated Wed, 29 Jun 2005 20:42:29 GMT by srv9.wikimedia.org
(squid/2.5.STABLE9.wp20050410.S9plus[icpfix,nortt,htcpclr])


from_name: Habj

body:
On 6/28/05, David Gerard <fun at thingy.apana.org.au> wrote:
> Note that the alternative medicine area in particular was badly fouled up
> by [[User:John Gohde]], aka [[User:Mr-Natural-Health]], whose idiosyncratic
> and confrontative behaviour currently has him banned for a year. So the
> area is generally in really bad need of a cleanup and one should take care
> before using it as an example in the present discussion ;-)

Sorry, I didn't know that...

/Habj


from_name: Scorpunit

subject: [Wikitech-l] get text of old database dump

body:
Hello,

I have a problem to get the real text out of the old_text column.
In the cur table for example the real text is saved in the database.
But in the old table the text is hashed.

for example:
O:15:"historyblobstub":2:
{s:6:"mOldId";s:5:"48086";s:5:"mHash";s:32:"1ea4d983a8fd0a10c46022035552d597";}

How can I get the real text out of such a hash?

Thanks..


from_name: Phil Sandifer

body:
As a general note, one will usually get considerably faster results
in what one wants if one does not

A) Continually nag and insist that the unpaid volunteers are working
too slowly because it takes more than 25 minutes

B) Begin crying abuse over nothing

C) Ask things like "what the hell is wrong with you people."

-Snowspinner

On Jun 29, 2005, at 4:11 PM, Kurita Ryohan wrote:

> Ok fine.
>
> Now I'm apparently 66.69.137.7.
>
> I told you, it's been changing every time the cable company has to
> splice another part of the connection.
>
> Will you kindly give me back my account?
>
> Kurita77
>
>
>> From: "Kurita Ryohan" <kurita77lineman at hotmail.com>
>> Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
>> To: wikien-l at wikipedia.org
>> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] New user, blocked indefinitely?
>> Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 15:01:43 -0500
>>
>> I'm now on 66.69.133.72. You can check it if you like.
>>
>> I told you, my idiot neighbors are putting in a pool and didn't
>> check the utility maps before they started digging. They cut the
>> cable lines and everything has been getting patched and re-patched
>> for the past few days.
>>
>> What the hell is wrong with you people?
>>
>> Kurita77
>>
>>
>>
>>> From: Matt Brown <morven at gmail.com>
>>> Reply-To: Matt Brown <morven at gmail.com>,English Wikipedia <wikien-
>>> l at Wikipedia.org>
>>> To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at wikipedia.org>
>>> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] New user, blocked indefinitely?
>>> Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 12:57:39 -0700
>>>
>>> Doesn't this sound familiar?  It seems we are having a procession of
>>> users claiming that somehow they got Enviroknot's IP.
>>>
>>> -Matt
>>>
>>> On 6/29/05, Kurita Ryohan <kurita77lineman at hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> > I'm nothing of the sort. I already told you, I may have gotten
>>> someone
>>> > else's IP. Our cable service is up and down thanks to my stupid
>>> neighbors
>>> > who couldn't be bothered to check the utility maps before
>>> trying to dig in
>>> > for their new pool.
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> WikiEN-l mailing list
>>> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
>>> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>>>
>>
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> Don?t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://
>> search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> WikiEN-l mailing list
>> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
>> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today -
> it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/
> direct/01/
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


list: foundation-l

from_name: Delirium

subject:
[Foundation-l] Re: meta-discussion for new project proposals
	(was	Proposal for new project: Faith Wiki)

body:
Dovi Jacobs wrote:

>But it does seem that the vast majority of needs are covered by the existing projects.
>So I agree with the general sentiment that most of the effort should be going into bettering
>the existing projects, though this does not mean there cannot be new projects. We should indeed guide people as to how they can build their ideas within the existing projects.
>
I agree with this, and think a lot of what people want in new projects
could be taken care of by new views on the same data, which is more a
matter of coding, software architecture, and user-interface design than
a new project per se.  For example, Wikispecies has a strong overlap
with Wikipedia---it's generally accepted (at least in en:) that any
recognized species about which any data is available is an appropriate
candidate for an article, and many people agree that it would be nice if
we had some sort of structured data in Wikipedia that would allow
querying/etc. (essentially the sort of standard information that ends up
in various info boxes, like elevation for a mountain peak).

Given that, it should be possible for a database of species and
Wikipedia to share the same information, just present and query it in
different ways.  So in both this case and others, I'd lean more towards
a long-term solution along these lines, rather than starting more
projects with duplicate information that needs to be kept in sync.  An
issue with user-interface or software can be fixed, but if we end up
with multiple projects duplicating information, merging them at a later
date is much harder.

-Mark


list: wikimedia-l


subject: [Wikitech-l] en.wiktionary.org temporarily broken

body:
Someone has changed the $wgCapitalLinks setting on en.wiktionary.org,
causing many thousands of links to break without warning -- far too many
for humans to fix up in a reasonable amount of time.

I'm really, really, really annoyed about this, and I'd appreciate it if
whoever made this premature change would at least confess to the deed.

Right now I'm working on an automated script to fix up the links. This
change should *not* have been made before this script was reaady.

-- 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/20050629/dd92190f/attachment.pgp>


list: wiktionary-l

subject: [Wiktionary-l] en.wiktionary.org temporarily broken

body:
Someone has changed the $wgCapitalLinks setting on en.wiktionary.org,
causing many thousands of links to break without warning -- far too many
for humans to fix up in a reasonable amount of time.

I'm really, really, really annoyed about this, and I'd appreciate it if
whoever made this premature change would at least confess to the deed.

Right now I'm working on an automated script to fix up the links. This
change should *not* have been made before this script was reaady.

-- 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/wiktionary-l/attachments/20050629/dd92190f/attachment.pgp


from_name: Gregory Maxwell

body:
On 6/29/05, Kurita Ryohan <kurita77lineman at hotmail.com> wrote:
> I'm now on 66.69.133.72. You can check it if you like.
> I told you, my idiot neighbors are putting in a pool and didn't check the
> utility maps before they started digging. They cut the cable lines and
> everything has been getting patched and re-patched for the past few days.
> What the hell is wrong with you people?

Well Kurita, enviroknott obviously lives near you. Because he's been
such a pest we have decided to block everyone in your area who makes
edits remotely resembling enviroknott.  I'm afraid that if you want to
edit you're just going to have to track him down and ask him to move
to a new community. Sorry.


subject: [Wikipedia-l] The elections are on, but I cast a blank ballot!

body:
Gerard Meijssen wrote:

> So for me it is simple who to vote for. As to the other candidates,
> they are known. You may know them personally and this should influence
> you. I am certain that people around you in your communities know the
> candidates, just ask. You can even ask someone you trust who to vote
> for. I did that at the last elections and Andre Engels told me that we
> need someone non-English and he knew Anthere.. so I voted for Anthere
> who I did not know at the time .. I know _sj_ and I know Francis
> Schonken. personally and I know people who know the others. So  yes it
> is a bit obligatory to write a small voter manifesto but that is not
> what should lead you. We know these people.

I don't think this is particularly true; I only know people who are
active on the mailing lists and on en:, which doesn't emcompass
everyone.  I've also never encountered Francis Schonken, because the en:
Wikipedia is a pretty big place these days (there are over a 1000
regularly active editors, and many more occasionally-active editors).  I
have encountered sj, but only because we've both been on the arbitration
committee.

I'd also like to be able to vote for people outside my local circle of
acquaintances.  For example, I think there must be some good editors on
the ja: Wikipedia, as it's one of the biggest, and they would be a
useful voice to have as input (alas, none are running).  To be able to
bring together disparate communities, some sort of statement and
description of how they would act if on the committee is necessary.
Otherwise people just vote for who they personally know, or who people
they know know, which seems to be what you suggest but which I think is
a very poor practice.

-Mark


from_name: JAY JG

body:
>From: Michael Turley <michael.turley at gmail.com>
>
>The blocking feature makes newbie biting much easier, which is not a
>good thing.

The only newbies who get bitten by this are ones who are abusing policy (and
other editors).

>Page locking makes enforcing a single POV easier, which is not a good
>thing.
>
>*All tools have a proper use, and all tools can be used abusively.*

Yeah, in theory. But rollback is ideally suited for edit warring, and
newbies would take full advantage.

Jay.


body:
On 6/29/05, JAY JG <jayjg at hotmail.com> wrote:
> >From: Michael Turley <michael.turley at gmail.com>
> >
> >The blocking feature makes newbie biting much easier, which is not a
> >good thing.
>
> The only newbies who get bitten by this are ones who are abusing policy (and
> other editors).
>
> >Page locking makes enforcing a single POV easier, which is not a good
> >thing.
> >
> >*All tools have a proper use, and all tools can be used abusively.*
>
> Yeah, in theory. But rollback is ideally suited for edit warring, and
> newbies would take full advantage.
>
> Jay.

Rollback is *ideally suited* for reverting vandalism.  Perhaps it is
equally suited for edit warring, but if it were *more* suited for edit
warring than its intended purpose, I'm pretty sure it would have been
written out of the software by now.

The proposal floated does not include offering rollback ''carte
blanche'' for newbies.

It proposes a system similar to WP:RFA where the feature would have to
be requested and approved by consensus.

--
Michael Turley
User:Unfocused


from_name: Mark Williamson

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Logos ready to switch

body:
Ahh, yes, I'm missing a couple.

One on sc:, one on ff:, one on ht:, and on bm: (bm:'s still needs
fixing though).

Mark

On 29/06/05, Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I made a bunch of logos recently...
>
> They're all located at http://xx.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Wiki.png
>
> Wikipedias: am:, ba:, bo:, cv:, gv:, kk:, kl:, kw:, ky:, ps:, tg:,
> ug:... I think that's all.
>
> Mark
>

--
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: Phil Boswell

subject: [Wikitech-l] Search mechanism

body:
I am having trouble understanding how the search mechanism prioritises
results.

One would assume that a search for _Dark brown_ (ie just the words, no
quotes involved) would result in a list topped by the article [[Dark
brown]]:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Search?search=Dark+brown&fulltext=Search

It's not even in the first 50! And surrounding it with quotes does not help.

Is [[Wikipedia:Searching]] current? I couldn't find anything on there to
help, although I'm having a quick squirrel through the linked document at
MySQL.
--
Phil
[[en:User:Phil Boswell]]


from_name: Andrew Gray

body:
On 29/06/05, Kurita Ryohan <kurita77lineman at hotmail.com> wrote:
> Will someone PLEASE explain to me what is going on? I can't understand why
> you people are acting this way.

A sockpuppet is another user account operated by the same user, under
the pretence it's a second person.

(For example, consider I'm arguing with you, and a new person appears
on my side. On the internet, it's quite difficult to tell, with no
"history", if that person is actually someone who agrees with me, or
just myself pretending to be someone else. It's surprisingly common)

There are special technical process (I don't understand them either, I
confess...) to attempt to figure out if two usernames are being used
by the same person; David's comment about "checkuser" means that he's
looking into that.

Note Habj's comment: these things do take a bit of time, people are
volunteers and will do things when they have a spare moment.

My apologies if you've been blocked accidentally; if so, it'll
probably be resolved, but not immediately - again, these things take
time.

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


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: The elections are on, but I cast a blank ballot!

body:
On 6/29/05, Anthere <anthere9 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> I invite you to ask more questions here as well as on the appropriate
> candidate talk page if you feel it necessarily.

Well, in my reasoning I thought I was fairly clear that a lot of my
motivation was not based on a dislike of any of the candidates, but
more because two years is too long and because the editors, myself
included, are not being given quite enough information about
longer-term issues. I don't think 'questions' are a good solution to
the lack of information in the statements because we can not expect a
large enough audience to read the discussion.

But since I'm being invited to ask questions, I'd like to ask a
question of all of the candidates; please pardon its length. Perhaps
this is more directed at Angela, since she mentioned the GFDL in her
statement, but I'd like to hear comments from all.

What is your long-term position with respect to the GFDL, particularly
with respect to attribution?  Specifically, I've read the new CC-wiki
license and I'm very concerned that it creates a special right for
site operators (as opposed to first editors or publishers).  The
requirements of the CC-wiki are fairly similar to the not quite
GFDL-compatible attribution suggestions we make on our licensing page,
which is a big reason why I would even mention CC-wiki when talking
about Wikipedia licensing.

Obviously Wikipedia could never be licensed as CC-wiki, and I have
great faith that the Free Software Foundation would not make unwise
changes to later versions of the GFDL... but I think that we would all
benefit from finding out exactly what changes the board would request
on our behalf.

I feel confident that the community will not tolerate a change to the
licensing which grants Wikimedia special legal rights which would
inhibit the ability of the community to fork should the board somehow
lose its mind and act against what the community feels is its best
interest. This would require that the license not provide a special
attribution loophole that allows only attributing to the site where
the material was originally created.  I would like a direct assurance
that the board members will make no attempt to achieve such a change
for GFDL-licensed content on Wikipedia, Commons, or Wikibooks.

I'd also like to know how each board member thinks the board to
incorporate community input into licensing-related discussions. I
believe that most people would agree that the use of our content could
be enhanced by some degree of carefully thought out change, but I know
I'd like to have the ability to provide input; for example, my point
on the non-negotiability of the legal ease of forking.

Thanks!


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: New user, blocked indefinitely?

body:
While I know nothing about your case - and not personally will dig
into it - I think it takes more than 25 minutes to check the
background to your story... give it a little time.

/Habj

On 6/29/05, Kurita Ryohan <kurita77lineman at hotmail.com> wrote:
> Will someone give me a response? Please? None of the admins I have emailed
> have responded.
>
> This is frightening. The way you people act is directly contrary to the
> literature Spangineer sent me.
>
> Kurita77
>
> >From: "Kurita Ryohan" <kurita77lineman at hotmail.com>
> >Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> >To: wikien-l at Wikipedia.org
> >Subject: [WikiEN-l] New user, blocked indefinitely?
> >Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 11:19:39 -0500
> >
> >Can someone please tell me what I have done wrong?
> >
> >So far I have edited only a few articles. I cleaned up a vandal at SNES and
>
> >added a small section to NES. I added an article and image for the
> >Eyeshield 21 anime and added a link to the manga's page. I read the primer
>
> >sent to me by Spangineer and the Wikipedia policy pages. I became involved
>
> >in the discussion at Jihad because it seems to show up a lot, and I tried
> >to calm it down by removing some personal attacks.
> >
> >I removed personal attacks from the discussion by striking them through
> >because policy on Remove Personal Attacks says that we're supposed to
> >refactor without removing the context. I thought that would be the best way
>
> >to do it.
> >
> >I got a bunch of nasty messages back claiming that my removal of personal
> >messages was "vandalism" when it's clearly policy to remove them. Now an
> >admin named Carbonite has blocked me indefinitely claiming I am a
> >sockpuppet of someone named Enviroknot. Carbonite isn't responding to my
> >emails. Can someone please explain this?
> >
> >Thanks,
> >Kurita77
> >
> >_________________________________________________________________
> >Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE!
>
> >http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >WikiEN-l mailing list
> >WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> >http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE!
> http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: Brion Vibber

subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: [Wiktionary-l] en.wiktionary.org temporarily broken

body:
Brion Vibber wrote:
> Right now I'm working on an automated script to fix up the links. This
> change should *not* have been made before this script was reaady.

Ok, I've run this: all uppercase pages in the main entry namespace have
been renamed to lowercase.

There's still some cleanup work to do -- obviously not all of that
_should_ be lowercase (though most of it should!). I'll want a list of
prefixes and such for any additional mass corrections that need doing.

Also, I'm running a links refresh in the background to fix up the links
tables. Whatlinkshere and similar may give bogus results temporarily.

-- 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/20050629/abd6c87b/attachment.pgp>


body:
Brion Vibber wrote:
> Right now I'm working on an automated script to fix up the links. This
> change should *not* have been made before this script was reaady.

Ok, I've run this: all uppercase pages in the main entry namespace have
been renamed to lowercase.

There's still some cleanup work to do -- obviously not all of that
_should_ be lowercase (though most of it should!). I'll want a list of
prefixes and such for any additional mass corrections that need doing.

Also, I'm running a links refresh in the background to fix up the links
tables. Whatlinkshere and similar may give bogus results temporarily.

-- 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/wiktionary-l/attachments/20050629/abd6c87b/attachment.pgp


subject: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedia enquiry

body:
Dear Mailing list,

I am searching for permission to use a frame enlargement from FULL METAL JACKET.  Any ideas as to who I would contact about this?  It's for a book on film art.

Cheers,

Marty Fairbairn, PhD
Trustee, Upper Grand District School Board
Member, Guelph Police Services Board
53 Ptarmigan Drive
Guelph, ON
N1C 1B4
Tel: (519) 824-1703
FAX: (519) 824-5421
Email: mfairbc045 at rogers.com


from_name: Steve Block

body:
I hope this is the right place to post this:  When trying to access the village
pump (policy) archive on the English wikipedia,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_%28policy%29/Archive I'm
getting a parse error:

Parse error: parse error, unexpected '=', expecting ')' in
/usr/local/apache/common-local/php-1.5/InitialiseSettings.php on line 54

I'm running Firefox 1.0.4 on W98SE if that matters any.


from_name: David Monniaux

subject:
[Wikitech-l] Paris servers: perhaps small time off network tomorrow
	2300 CEST

body:
There may be a little network outage tomorrow 2300 CEST (2100 UTC) on
the Paris servers while Jexiste moves stuff between bays.


from_name: thomas Armstrong

subject: [Wikitech-l] I modify, but my webpages don't change

body:
Hi.

I'm changing the contents of 'MonoBook.php':

---------

<?php $this->msg('personaltools') ?>

----------
to
---------

<?php $this->msg('personaltools') ?>xxxxx

---------

But I refresh my webpages, and HTML doesn't change.

I've got:
$wgDefaultSkin = 'MonoBook';
at 'LocalSettings.php'.

What am I doing wrong?


from_name: Michael Snow

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Proposal: Requests for rollback

body:
Michael Turley wrote:

>The blocking feature makes newbie biting much easier, which is not a
>good thing.
>...
>Regarding "domination".  I chose the word to best express why *I* am
>uninterested in a particular subset of admin tools.  I prefer
>persuasion to force.  I have no current interest in tools of force
>here at Wikipedia; I intend to test the boundaries of wikilove, good
>reason, and persuasion.
>...
>Finally, the rollback feature, as far as I can tell, is unique, in
>that it is a very valuable editing enhancement, but is the only one
>that doesn't have any powers of enforcement behind it.
>
The rollback feature *is* a power of enforcement, just like blocking is,
in the rhetorical framework you're using (other people prefer the
rhetoric of janitorial tools). Blocking doesn't have any additional
powers of enforcement behind it either, as we regularly find when
dealing with vandals who can edit from multiple IP addresses. Rollback
is just as susceptible to use in biting newbies as blocking, although
people may differ on the degree of seriousness involved.

Reverting is widely considered a "slap in the face" to the person being
reverted. If we are to use your rhetoric, then I don't see how we can
avoid considering it an instrument of force. If you really are such a
wiki-pacifist as you claim, and prefer persuasion to force in all
circumstances, then you shouldn't be interested in having the rollback
function either.

--Michael Snow


from_name: Craig Franklin

subject:
[Wikipedia-l] Re: Re: The elections are on,
	but I cast a blank ballot!

body:
Scr?obh Mark Williamson:

>I would discourage this. Unless you really don't have an opinion, why
>not vote for your preferred candidates? If you don't have a preference
>and you don't like any of them, I can understand.

But I do have an opinion.  The positions of all the candidates seem to be
essentially identical, "we love Wikipedia and NPOV".  I see no dramatic
proposals on the topics of copyright, promotion, hardware or managing
growth.  The candidates all propose to increase community input to the
board, but don't say exactly how they will do this.  They all talk about
guiding the board, but offer no suggestions as to what direction they will
guide it in.  Nobody, in particular, has expressed an opinion on the Chinese
Wikinews issue.

In summary, I voted blank.

Sl?inte,
- Craig

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


subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: Parse error on Village pump (policy)/archive

body:
Brion Vibber <brion <at> pobox.com> writes:

> There was an error in the config file for a few seconds.
>

Ah, thanks, apologies.

Steve Block


from_name: James R. Johnson

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Logos ready to switch

body:
Hey,
	Could you perhaps make logos for ang wiktionary, wikiquote, and
wikibooks?

Thanks,

James

-----Original Message-----
From: wikipedia-l-bounces at Wikimedia.org
[mailto:wikipedia-l-bounces at Wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Mark Williamson
Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2005 4:02 PM
To: wikipedia-l at wikimedia.org
Subject: [Wikipedia-l] Logos ready to switch

Hi all,

I made a bunch of logos recently...

They're all located at http://xx.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Wiki.png

Wikipedias: am:, ba:, bo:, cv:, gv:, kk:, kl:, kw:, ky:, ps:, tg:,
ug:... I think that's all.

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


from_name: Angela

subject: [Wikitech-l] Image link to a page

body:
On 6/29/05, Robert Jones <bob at jones-cliffe.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> This page contains an image that links to a normal page rather than the
> "Image:ImageName" page.
> http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Quarto
> How is that done in normal wiki-text? Is it something special to that wiki
> or can the same effect be achieved on en.wikipedia.org ?

This can't be done on Wikimedia sites other than the Foundation wiki.
That wiki has closed access, so is able to allow arbitrary HTML, since
only trusted users can edit there. On an open wiki, this wouldn't be
safe, so there is currently no way of linking an image to an actual
page.

Angela.


from_name: Ray Saintonge

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Pseudoscience category - GSPOV

body:
geni wrote:

>>If indeed homeopathic medicine doesn't work as you allege, there is at
>>least no recent claims of it doing direct harm.  (Direct harm involves
>>far more than any allegation of negligence for failing to send the
>>victims to a "real" doctor.)
>>
>>
>
>Hmmm of course to make that stement you have to accept that
>agrivations are not due to any active effect of homeopathy.
>
>you also have to ignore this
>
>http://www.adrugrecall.com/zicam/zicam.html
>
>(although of course not all homeopaths would accept that as homeoapthy.
>
And even if we accept this product as homeopathic (a determination that
I am in no position to make) it is still only one product. I suppose
that the Homeopathic Pharmacopoeia. could be checked by someone with
ready access to see if the product is included

The 2003 California appelate case of National Council against Health
Fraud v. Botanical Laboratories, Inc. This is from the losers' own
website. http://www.quackpotwatch.org/opinionpieces/filed_7.htm is
instructive . The judges concluded "Appellant believes that no one
should be allowed to market homeopathic remedies. Congress has decided
otherwise, and officially recognizes the Homeopathic Pharmacopoeia.
Appellant?s broad-brush approach of sweeping all homeopathic remedies
into a single bag marked "undesirable" simply does not work in the
courts, where each claimed instance of unfair advertising and unfair
business practice must be closely scrutinized. Appellant failed to
present any admissible evidence in this case that respondents are guilty
of false advertising and unfair business practices with respect to any
of their products.."

Ec


from_name: Thomas Gries

subject:
[Wikitech-l] Question re. MediaWiki w/ Easyphp and mail() under
 Windows: mailing does not work

body:
Dear developers, someone has contacted me with a question regarding (see
subject).
Can you help him and me by giving or pointing out some information page
for this problem of running MediaWiki and mail under Windows ?
Tom

Original mail follows:

hello,

I am trying to configure my system to use the email
notification. Apache, MySql, PHP and MyPHPAdmin have
been installed by EasyPHP...

I set the variables 'smtp' and 'sendmail_from' in
php/php.ini and '$wgSMTP' in
www/mediawiki/localsettings.php.

In the login page of the wiki, when I fill the "user
name " textbox and click on the "mail me a new
password" button I've got the following error:

---------------------------------------------------
Warning: usermailer(Mail.php): failed to open stream:
No such file or directory in
h:\easyphp\www\mediawiki\includes\UserMailer.php on
line 54

Fatal error: usermailer(): Failed opening required
'Mail.php'
(include_path='.;h:\easyphp\www\mediawiki;h:\easyphp\www\mediawiki/includes;h:\easyphp\www\mediawiki/languages')
in h:\easyphp\www\mediawiki\includes\UserMailer.php on
line 54
-----------------------------------------------------

It seems that my system is missing "mail.php" but I
don't know where to get it and how to install it. I've
read in the Enotif documentation that Pear should not
be used. I don't know what is Pear but it has been
installed by easyphp. Shall I remove it, or replace it
by another package to get this "mail.php"?

any help would be greatly appreciated!

thx


body:
On 6/29/05, Angela <beesley at gmail.com> wrote:
> The lack of information in the statements can be explained by the 1000
> character limit on those. I disagree about the questions not being a
> good solution though. Last year, I only wrote my candidate statement
> after the questions were asked because that process highlighted what
> points were actually important to the community.

A fair enough point, and in any case there is no need we need to agree
on everything.

> My position is that the GFDL, as it currently stands, is almost
> impossible to adhere to for modified versions. I did already make some
> comments about this at
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Angela/Election_questions_2005
> Work is underway to make the process of reusing the content much simpler.

A basic feature of mediawiki is to present a list of the editors at
the bottom of each article. For electronic distribution that and a
copy of the GFDL would provide compliance. It is obviously unsuitable
for some medium so there could be some improvement, I agree.

> > Specifically, I've read the new CC-wiki
> > license and I'm very concerned that it creates a special right for
> > site operators (as opposed to first editors or publishers).
>
> I don't feel that the draft license at
> <http://creativecommons.org/drafts/wiki_0.5> which has the requirement
> to attribute the original site gives that site any special rights. It
> isn't actually a new license, but a re-branded version of the cc-by-sa
> with the only major difference being that the wiki is attributed
> rather than the authors.

This is a substantial change, I'm quite aware of the license and what it is...
I disagree very strongly with the nature of the altered attribution.

>In practice, this is how people are already
> interpreting the GFDL. I am aware of very few mirrors who credit the
> authors rather than simply crediting "Wikipedia" and linking to the
> original article.

I made it clear in my email that I was already aware of the wikipedia
copyright page, and it's lack of strict conformance with the GFDL. I
mentioned it clearly and specifically and quite frankly I am somewhat
offended that you paid my message little enough credit or attention
that you failed to notice this.

As a community we have chosen to be lenient on the enforcement of our
license rights in exchange for some increased visibility. I agree that
it is a valuable pragmatic choice today, but I am unsure that it is
the best course in the long run.  But importantly it does not change
the nature of legal status of our work.

> The only request has been the fairly general one of making the license
> easier to understand. Personally, I would not want anything that would
> remove the rights of authors, which seems to be what you are implying
> might happen.

Easier to understand is a fair request.  However, with the text "Work
is underway to make the process of reusing the content much simpler.",
you contradict yourself. Which is it?

> > I feel confident that the community will not tolerate a change to the
> > licensing which grants Wikimedia special legal rights which would
> > inhibit the ability of the community to fork should the board somehow
> > lose its mind and act against what the community feels is its best
> > interest.
>
> I can't imagine any way in which later versions of the GFDL would do
> that beyond what the current version does. Wikimedia doesn't control
> the GFDL, and is far from being the only user of it.

As I said, "and I have great faith that the Free Software Foundation
would not make unwise changes to later versions of the GFDL", but
specifically I was requesting confirmation that the foundation was not
even *requesting* changes in the future versions which would grant
Wikimedia special rights which a fork of Wikipedia would not have
because the community (or just parts of the community) must have the
right to fork the project and not face an artificially unfair
competitive environment against WikiMedia due to special permissions
in some later version of the license.

> Also, if the
> changes made by the FSF were so awful you wanted to fork, you could
> still do so under the terms of the old license. Current content can be
> reused under the current license, even after a new version is
> introduced.

I am well aware of this, however, it would be unacceptable for
Wikimedia to be granted a special right over the material in the fork
simply because Wikimedia hosted the content first.

> Because of this, you can be fairly confident that any
> adoption of a new version of the license would have to be approved by
> the community, and not only by the Board.

Since the license on the site is already granted 'or later versions'
if Wikimedia were to convince the Free Software Foundation to change
the terms Wikimedia could distribute content under a new license
against the will of the community, the community could fork and
Wikimedia would maintain an unfair competitive advantage in the
marketplace because of the special distribution rights. (if you get
your content from Wikipedia then you can just credit wikipedia, if you
get your content from FreeWikipedia then you can.. credit all of the
authors or.. the Wikimedia Wikipedia).

Considering my past correspondence with with FSF and their long term
track record, I would gauge the chance of them approving such a change
to be something near a snowballs chance in hell... Because of this, I
was simply looking for the confirmation that the board wasn't even
trying to request such a thing.  If anything your reply has only
increased my concern.  As what is almost certainly the single largest
user of the GFDL, and probably one of the most important it would be
foolish to assume we have no clout.

> If you have specific requirements for what should or should not be
> part of the next license, it would be useful to make those at a page
> such as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:GFDL_upgrade (or
> the page on meta linked to there by pcb21 that has not yet been
> created) so this can feed into any discussions between Wikimedia and
> the FSF.

A simple requirement is that no change to the license discriminate
against a fork which provides all of the appropriate attribution that
the wikimedia wikipedia provides, and that no change make provide any
additional legal means for wikimedia to prevent forks.  I will submit
that there.

I will also be following up with the Free Software Foundation with the
simple message that, while working with the board is fine, that the
material on Wikipedia is entirely the authorship of the community and
it is the rights and freedoms of the community and the world which are
significant in matters related to our licensing.

> > This would require that the license not provide a special
> > attribution loophole that allows only attributing to the site where
> > the material was originally created.
> > I would like a direct assurance
> > that the board members will make no attempt to achieve such a change
> > for GFDL-licensed content on Wikipedia, Commons, or Wikibooks.
>
> In practice, this is already being done as I mentioned above. The
> section at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Copyrights#Example_notice
> seems to be widely supported by the community at the English
> Wikipedia, and a similar statement exists on other projects (see

And as I said "The requirements of the CC-wiki are fairly similar to
the not quite GFDL-compatible attribution suggestions we make on our
licensing page,
which is a big reason why I would even mention CC-wiki when talking
about Wikipedia licensing."

I am aware of it, and consider it a kludge to address a practical issue.

><http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Lizenzbestimmungen#Praktische_Anwendung_in_Online-Medien>
> for example). If this is not the case, then the community needs to
> make a decision to change the wording, which all contributors are
> currently agreeing to (since that copyrights page is linked from the
> edit page).

When I last read the page, it was fairly clear that it was a limited
permission grant and not a term of the license.

If you believe that adding additional terms to a page separate from
the licence notice that every contributor sees somehow permits the
wikimedia foundation to redefine the GFDL then you are sorely mistaken
and are potentially putting the foundation in a legally precarious
situation.  Even if you ignore that fact that contributors only agree
to license you their text under the GFDL and have never even seen that
page (for example, I only read it long after I started contributing
because I was already well aware of the GFDL),  you run into the fact
that we have GFDLed text included from other authors who have never
seen the wikipedia.

For example, wikipedia includes some of my text from a GFDLed linux
documentation project document which I wrote ages ago and was
contributed by someone else before I ever contributed to the
wikipedia.

> However, perhaps the fact that the authors are attributed in the page
> history, which is linked from the Wikipedia article that the mirrors
> are being asked to link to, is seen as sufficient attribution. I
> wouldn't agree to anything which allowed the complete removal of that
> attribution, but allowing a situation where readers had to make a few
> clicks to get to it, in order to make re-using the content easier,
> would not necessarily be something I would oppose.

I'd be quite agreeable to alterations in that ilk... In an electronic
medium following hyperlinks for source or attribution is acceptable
within reasonable bounds.

When you start granting rights preferentially is when I find it concerning.

Any part of the wikipedia community, should have an equal right to
make a proper fork (i.e. one that provides all attribution, GFDL,
prefered form, etc) and sever all ties to the Wikimedia Foundation.
Such forks should have an equal right to redistribute the work to
others whom redistribute it again with 'condensed attribution' which
link to their choice of proper forks (as our adhoc enforcement rules
allows improper forks to do towards Wikipedia).

> > I'd also like to know how each board member thinks the board to
> > incorporate community input into licensing-related discussions.
>
> The main issue here seems to be the next version of the GFDL, which
> neither the board nor the Wikimedia community has any control over.

This is inaccurate. As one of the largest users of the GFDL it would
be foolish to deny that we have some degree of influence.

> In
> terms of discussions prior to a new license, I would hope anyone
> interested would contribute their opinions on the page I previously
> linked, or on meta to make it more international, or on any of the
> relevant mailing lists. The more important question might be how the
> discussions are managed after a new version of the GFDL is introduced.

Fair enough.

> I don't know if the FSF release draft versions as the CC do. If they
> do, this would be an ideal opportunity for the Wikimedia communities,
> as well as for anyone else using the license, to have an input into
> this discussion.

New license versions are a rare event for the FSF. I'm sure if we
asked for the ability to see and comment on a draft we'd be granted
it..

> If that is not the case, then there will need to be
> discussion after the release of GFDL 2.0 whereby the community as a
> whole could decide whether it was appropriate to change to that new
> license. Imposing a new version without any sort of community
> discussion and consensus is something I aim to avoid.

That is good.

> Perhaps you and others with opinions on this could form some sort of
> special interest group
> (<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special_interest_group>) where these
> issues can be discussed, agreed upon, and then presented to the FSF in
> a more formal way. Do you think that could be a useful way to ensure
> input on this rather than relaying opinions only through the Board?

Yes, that would be an excellent step which I will follow up with.
Thank you for your time and your thoughts.


from_name: Tomer Chachamu

subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: WikiMedia Error

references:
<d9shtf$31f$1@sea.gmane.org>
	<9a878c4405062903054987968@mail.gmail.com>
	<d9u94j$a5d$1@sea.gmane.org> <d9utqn$dc9$1@sea.gmane.org>

body:
I'm glad to hear it worked.

The reason (I know of) that DefaultSettings.php should not be edited
is that your changes will disappear when upgrading your wiki.

As I said in my original message, COPY the relevant block of settings
from DefaultSettings.php into LocalSettings.php, and edit them there.
:)


subject: [Wikitech-l] Image link to a page

body:
On 29/06/05, Robert Jones <bob at jones-cliffe.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> This page contains an image that links to a normal page rather than the
> "Image:ImageName" page.
>
> http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Quarto
>
> How is that done in normal wiki-text? Is it something special to that wiki
> or can the same effect be achieved on en.wikipedia.org ?
>
> Many thanks.

Have you tried editing the image description page to redirect to the
normal page?

I seem to remember such a trick was used on en.wikibooks.org on the
Main Page a few designs ago.


subject: [Wikitech-l] Search mechanism

body:
On 29/06/05, Phil Boswell <phil.boswell at gmail.com> wrote:
> Is [[Wikipedia:Searching]] current? I couldn't find anything on there to
> help, although I'm having a quick squirrel through the linked document at
> MySQL.

We use Lucene search now, not MySQL's FULLTEXT search. :)


from_name: Haukur Þorgeirsson

subject: [WikiEN-l] Homeopathy and syllogism

body:
> I have not had occasion to use them, but If I look at the prices of
> homeopathic medicines I find them rather modest. Compare that with the
> prices of heavily patented medicines sold by major pharmaceutical
> companies. The improved efficacy of some of these is often only
> incremental over that of the drug whose patent has expired. Some of
> these producers are quite happy to withhold medicines from those who
> can't pay. It isn't the homeopaths who are failing to send AIDS drugs
> to Africa, or are using their patent powers to restrict domestic
> African production of these drugs.

Completely true and completely irrelevant.

> If indeed homeopathic medicine doesn't work as you allege, there is at
> least no recent claims of it doing direct harm. (Direct harm involves
> far more than any allegation of negligence for failing to send the
> victims to a "real" doctor.) The recent problems over Vioxx/Celebrex
> did not come from the homeopathic community.

True enough, I suppose, and also irrelevant.
I don't think there's direct harm done by
homeopathy beyond that which selling any
completely useless product under false
pretenses would entail. That the product's
advertised effects are medical makes the
practice all the more repellant.

> Your use of "beyond reasonable doubt" is too
> categorical. The popularity of homeopathy alone
> is not be enough to establish that the medicines
> work, but it is a clear expression of reasonable doubt.

Here I must disagree with you. To repeat an earlier
example I don't think the popularity of Holocaust
denial is a clear expression of reasonable doubt
that the Holocaust occurred. Nor do I think that
the popularity of Mormonism is a clear expression
of reasonable doubt that America was colonized by
a Hebrew tribe in 600 B.C.

To compare with something at hand I'd say that
there is more doubt that Kurita77 is Enviroknot
than there is about homeopathy being useless.
And I hope you agree that that case is beyond
any *reasonable* doubt.

And yet, unlike homeopathy, the hypothesis that
Kurita77 is a user with no connection to Enviroknot
does not break any *physical* laws. It's *conceivable*
that all the facts linking the two are coincidences.
It is, however, so unlikely that we can dismiss the
possibility for practical purposes.

There is ample information on homeopathy available
on the Internet. Please study it carefully for yourself
and see what conclusion you come to on the efficacy
of the discipline.

> Healing involves more than medicines that produce the desired chemical
> results. It can involve more than the syllogistic thinking that has
> become so commonplace in the Western World ever since Aristotle.

There is no useful alternative to syllogism.

Regards,
Haukur


from_name: David Gerard

subject: [WikiEN-l] Proposal: Requests for rollback

body:
Michael Turley (michael.turley at gmail.com) [050629 16:56]:

> Back to the subject: exactly why are you so strongly opposed to
> separating the tools, especially along these lines?  It seems to me
> that this tool exerts exactly NO control over other users, while all
> the other admin tools that I am aware of do exert a degree of
> dominance over other users.  Why shouldn't this be available
> individually to those who aren't interested in the powers that include
> domination?

If you want the equivalent of a rollback function, there are tools to
simulate it using Javascript. (I don't have details to hand, sorry.)

- d.


from_name: Stan Shebs

subject: [WikiEN-l] The sandbox incubator

body:
Erik Moeller wrote:

>
> Ever since WikiChess became popular and accepted on Wikipedia, the
> sandbox has turned into an incubator for new "wikigames". The problem
> with this is that, as long as a page is a subpage of the sandbox, it
> is very difficult to delete it, because it is regarded as "legitimate
> playground." On the other hand, once a game has found a sufficient
> number of players, these players are all likely to vote "keep" when
> the game eventually and inevitably creeps into the Wikipedia
> namespace, as has happened with chess.

Wow, I had no idea the sandbox was being used this way. Zap it. Automated
daily deletion of subpages, perhaps?

Users can host games on their own subpages if they really want, or (better)
set up a dedicated wiki, call it wikiplay or something.

Stan


subject: [WikiEN-l] New user, blocked indefinitely?

body:
On 6/29/05, Kurita Ryohan <kurita77lineman at hotmail.com> wrote:
> Why do you people not respond? What the hell is wrong with you?
>
> What a bunch of complete assholes you are.

I've put Kurita on moderation so his posts will have to be approved
before being sent to the list. I'll leave it up to the regular list
admins to decide if they want to block him completely.

Angela


body:
Haukur ?orgeirsson (haukurth at hi.is) [050629 21:47]:

> I am arguing that the term is misleading
> for the articles that category currently
> holds (I won't repeat my argument here,
> see my earlier posts). I suggest we replace
> it with "Pseudo-medicine" and will do so
> myself if objections are not raised.

I raise an objection: that's not what it's called in English (my overriding
objection), and "pseudo-medicine" is an invented term hence original
research.

The current article on [[Alternative medicine]] has suffered a bad case of
Gohde and could do with a lot of cleaning up, but the Category links to
Pseudoscience and Protoscience get the point across IMO (having as it does
both).

- d.