from_name: Habj

body:
Let's say that:

There is an article about a relatively controversial subject that, for
some reason, has not yet been through any massive edit wars. Maybe the
subject is fairly new, the word in itself is pretty new so no one has
actually written much about it- until now.

There are two people editing this article. You get involved a bit, and
try to create what you feel is a neutral version. This makes one side
immediatelly assume you belong to the Enemy. This person creates a
version that says "some people say this, some people say that" but it
is badly written, the reasoning is strange, it is hard to understand
what he really means. Both sides are getting loud and argumentative,
more concerned with being right than with what is logical and not. The
subject is probably emotional to them. Maybe one side is louder than
the other; maybe not.

You feel that hey - this isn't going to lead anywhere.

What do you do? Do you just leave the article and let them fight? But
then, what happens if all the "good forces" just leave whenever
problem arises? Should you ask someone to try and talk to these
people? Is there a standard way of handling things like this, or is
the only thing to do to stay away and wait until things are so bad
that the article gets locked?

/Habj


list: wikien-l

source: pipermail-mbox

from_name: thomas-edison at ziplip.com

subject: [WikiEN-l] Silly mailing lists

body:
Mailing lists are just so inefficient.... why not just have a forum? At least this mailing list has a virtual forum.

http://mail.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/

Also, I don't seem to get very good feedback here.... I guess I'll just have to post some more on the talk pages, even though people with no knowledge of copyright law will complain. Tough!

? 2005, Pioneer-12

p.s. I have been banned unfairly and no one has even bothered to ADDRESS that in a MONTH. <sarcasm> Way to go, Wikipedia! Good job treating volunteer editors who are simply standing up for their rights like criminals. </sarcasm>


from_name: David Gerard

subject: [WikiEN-l] Content, reason and the ArbCom

body:
James D. Forrester (james at jdforrester.org) [050623 04:48]:
> On Wednesday, June 22, 2005, at 19:42, Jay JG <jayjg at hotmail.com> wrote:

> > Until 40 years ago or so the word "Colored" for "African-American"
> > was used near-universally in the United States, and was seen
> > as "neutral" as well.

> Actually, using "African-American" instead of "black" is widely ridiculed in
> the UK, FWIW.

Yeah, it tends toward "Afro-Caribbean", or just "Afro" on the Afro hair
product shops in Walthamstow ;-)

- d.


from_name: Dan Grey

subject: [WikiEN-l] Newpages and rc patrollers needed

body:
On 23/06/05, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell at gmail.com> wrote:
> Eh, I solve this by marking who patrolled it and the client will have
> complete visability into that..
>
> So, you could make items not appear on your list if they've been
> patrolled by two people or one person you really trust. Or anything
> else you'd like. I can also store flags set by RCers so they can mark
> suspicious edits for later evaluation.

Which is *exactly* what I was thinking of (so :p Alphax and Geni!  :-) )

The only problem I see is authentication - how can you be sure that
the person patrolled the edit is really who they say they are?

Dan


from_name: Kelly Martin

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Per-article blocking

body:
On 6/23/05, MacGyverMagic/Mgm <macgyvermagic at gmail.com> wrote:
> And then there's people who simply don't discuss if the page is
> protected on their preferred version. Quite problematic if you've got
> two of those. WHat do you protect it on then?

Protect a blanked page with only a message stating that there is a
dispute (similar to {{twoversions}}).  I think nl does that.

Kelly


list: wikitech-l

from_name: Philippe Roth

subject: [Wikitech-l] Mediawiki search configuration, please Heeeelp...

body:
Dear All,

We just made a fresh install of our wiki base 1.2.4 to mediawiki 1.4.5
Everything seems to be OK except that we have problems with search...
We have several articles about "plotters".
But if we make a search for "plotter", there is no article found. Same
with "plot*", nothing.
The articles are found only when we make a search for "plotters".

How can we configure our installation to make search like
"plot*","plotter" and so on successful?

Many thanks in advance for light.

Best regards,
Philippe Roth


from_name: Phil Boswell

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Content, reason and the ArbCom

body:
"David Gerard" <fun at thingy.apana.org.au> wrote
in message news:20050622232739.GE7309 at thingy.apana.org.au...
[snip]
> I understand that Before Cheese and After Cheese are henceforth standard
> on
> Uncyclopedia.

Shurely shome mishtake.

"Before C_l_eese" and "After C_l_eese" would be much more suitable.

We are still ostensibly a Pythonist society after all :-)
--
Phil
[[en:User:Phil Boswell]]


from_name: Kat Walsh

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Per-article blocking

body:
On 6/23/05, MacGyverMagic/Mgm <macgyvermagic at gmail.com> wrote:
> And then there's people who simply don't discuss if the page is
> protected on their preferred version. Quite problematic if you've got
> two of those. WHat do you protect it on then?
>
> --Mgm

Well, here's one proposal:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Protection_policy#Blanking_before_protection.3F

(I do like the idea of per-article blocking, as well.)

-Kat
[[User:Mindspillage]]

--
"There was a point to this story, but it has temporarily
escaped the chronicler's mind."  --Douglas Adams


list: wikipedia-l

from_name: Filzstift

subject:
[Wikipedia-l] Announcement - Wikipedia SQL Query Tool
	www.wikisign.org

body:
It's from now on possible to do SQL queries for several (mostly
central european) Wikipedias at

http://www.wikisign.org

I've done it because Special:Asksql was switched off and so i've done
a replacement for it.

(it would be also super if the interface could be translated into your
language: http://www.wikisign.org/helptranslate.php)

Filzstift
----
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benutzer:Filzstift


body:
JAY JG (jayjg at hotmail.com) [050623 08:49]:
>From: Geoff Burling <llywrch at agora.rdrop.com>

> >If you want the conversation taken off-list, then take it off-list
> >yourself.
> >Don't use it as an attempt to get the final word.

> And furthermore, BC/AD is completely POV. So there. :-P

I understand that Before Cheese and After Cheese are henceforth standard on
Uncyclopedia.

- d.


from_name: AssCoAssc at aol.com

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: WikiEN-l Digest, Vol 23, Issue 90

body:
In a message dated 6/22/05 4:35:06 PM, wikien-l-request at Wikipedia.org writes:

> But yes, I agree, language changes - the point is, the use of
> CE/BCE notation is a POV term like all the others whose time of being
> considered better than any others has not yet come, and may indeed never do
> so.
>
Sounds like original research "whose time of being has not yet come."

Let's brush up on the sentence structure.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: WikiEN-l Digest, Vol 23, Issue 92

body:
In a message dated 6/23/05 3:39:20 AM, wikien-l-request at Wikipedia.org writes:

> Just wanted to note how ironic it is to see an argument against BCE/CE,
> based on the universal use of BC/AD, while simultaneously using the term
> non-USian in place of the similarly universal term non-American.
>
These arguments stem from an "un-secularianish" agenda.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: WikiEN-l Digest, Vol 23, Issue 93

body:
In a message dated 6/23/05 9:03:37 AM, wikien-l-request at Wikipedia.org writes:

> It's not like I'd attempt to use USian rather than the ambiguous, but
> near-universally used, "American" in a Wikipedia article (although if
> I needed unambiguousness, I would use "U.S." and a suitable sentence
> wording).
>
I'm glad you intend to use abbreviations, grammar and syntax when you
need "unambiguousness". . . .


from_name: Matt Brown

subject:
[WikiEN-l] Re: RickK leaving: adminship has become much more than
	"no big deal" and that's poisonous

body:
On 6/22/05, thomas-edison @ ziplip. com <thomas-edison at ziplip.com> wrote:
> Hey, I'm being punished without good reason! Most people would just leave. But... you're not gonna get rid of me that easily. :-)
>
> Let's just say, I'm not done rocking the boat. :-)

You are not being punished; you are being barred from contributing
since you refuse to accept the site's terms and conditions.

-Matt


from_name: MacGyverMagic/Mgm

subject: [WikiEN-l] RickK deleted his talk page

body:
No, userpages don't usually contain information by other users, but
I'd strongly recommend users intent on leaving to leave them up (for
example, I'd hate for CryptoDerk to pull his userpage - and all the
links to his vandal fighter in the process - if he ever decided on
leaving). Since leaving users can't delete earlier votes or comments
from other people's talk pages, it stands to reason discussion on
their own talk page should remain as a historic record too.

--Mgm

On 6/22/05, JAY JG <jayjg at hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>From: MacGyverMagic/Mgm <macgyvermagic at gmail.com>
> >
> >If there's more people who deleted talk pages with significant
> >content, then I think that should be adressed. We should ask the
> >community at large if they need to be undeleted.
>
> O.K.  You can start with User talk:Xed - 371 deleted edits there.
>
> Would you extend this to User pages with extensive edits?
>
> Jay.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


subject: [WikiEN-l] Conflict arising - what to do?

body:
If all attempts at discussion fail, you can always try dispute resolution.

--Mgm

On 6/23/05, Fred Bauder <fredbaud at ctelco.net> wrote:
> For a start, on the talk page you might try to identify who the some
> people are and where they say these things. If the sources for both
> views can be identified, they can then be attributed. If the real
> source is one of the Wikipedia editors that is more troublesome.
>
> Fred
>
> On Jun 22, 2005, at 8:07 PM, Habj wrote:
>
> > Let's say that:
> >
> > There is an article about a relatively controversial subject that, for
> > some reason, has not yet been through any massive edit wars. Maybe the
> > subject is fairly new, the word in itself is pretty new so no one has
> > actually written much about it- until now.
> >
> > There are two people editing this article. You get involved a bit, and
> > try to create what you feel is a neutral version. This makes one side
> > immediatelly assume you belong to the Enemy. This person creates a
> > version that says "some people say this, some people say that" but it
> > is badly written, the reasoning is strange, it is hard to understand
> > what he really means. Both sides are getting loud and argumentative,
> > more concerned with being right than with what is logical and not. The
> > subject is probably emotional to them. Maybe one side is louder than
> > the other; maybe not.
> >
> > You feel that hey - this isn't going to lead anywhere.
> >
> > What do you do? Do you just leave the article and let them fight? But
> > then, what happens if all the "good forces" just leave whenever
> > problem arises? Should you ask someone to try and talk to these
> > people? Is there a standard way of handling things like this, or is
> > the only thing to do to stay away and wait until things are so bad
> > that the article gets locked?
> >
> > /Habj
> > _______________________________________________
> > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: Brion Vibber

subject:
[Wikitech-l] categorylinks_table mysql ERROR 1071 at line 12:
	Specified key was too long

body:
mm wrote:
> While trying to load data in categorylinks_table I get the mysql error
> 1071 or 1064 as you can see belove.
> MySQL version on my Linux Fedora Core 3 is
> Ver 11.18 Distrib 3.23.58, for redhat-linux-gnu (i386)
> Can somebody help me?

MySQL 3.x is old and buggy, try 4.0. (Sadly, Fedora has been shipping
3.x versions for ages, for reasons unclear.)

Alternatively, manually edit the table definition to make the index shorter.

-- 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/20050623/7f3903f8/attachment.pgp>


from_name: michaelturley at myway.com

subject: [WikiEN-l] apology to the list

body:
It was recently pointed out to me how poorly
formated my messages are when they appear in
the digest and archive versions of this list.

I was unaware of this problem.

I am considering changing email providers for
the address I use to subscribe to this list.
Until I change my email address, I will
manually break my lines so they don't scroll
rightward toward infinity.  I hope this helps.

I apologize for any inconvenience you may have
had while reading my prior messages.

Michael Turley
User:Unfocused

_______________________________________________
No banners. No pop-ups. No kidding.
Make My Way  your home on the Web - http://www.myway.com


from_name: Karl A. Krueger

subject: [WikiEN-l] Silly mailing lists

body:
On Thu, Jun 23, 2005 at 04:43:37AM -0700, thomas-edison at ziplip.com wrote:
> Mailing lists are just so inefficient.... why not just have a forum?

Mailing lists (and newsgroups) have some real advantages over Web
forums.

First off, everyone gets to choose what software they want to use to
read mail in, whereas a Web forum means that everyone has to use the
same software (namely, the forum software itself) even if it doesn't fit
their needs.  If you want to read a mailing list in a Web browser, you
can use the Web archives (as you linked) or use a Webmail system such as
Gmail.  But those of us who want to read the list in a dedicated mail
client like mutt or Thunderbird can do that too.  We can apply
spam-filters to the list traffic to block out an unwanted thread if we
like.  We can get digest mode.  We can use a real text editor to compose
messages, not a browser TEXTAREA widget.  So a mailing list offers more
choices.

Second, most Web forum software has *remarkably poor* support for a lot
of really basic discussion features, such as threading, quoting, and
catching-up.  Considering that the idea of threaded online discussions
has been around for a couple of decades now (Usenet is 25 this year),
you'd think that someone who was going to implement it anew would learn
from (say) mail clients and Usenet newsreader software?  But no, not
particularly.  Most forum software groups messages into "topics", not
threads -- distinguished by the fact that a "topic" has a single root
message and doesn't fork.  Real discussions, of course, *do* fork, so
Web forums poorly model the behavior of their users.  Moreover, "topics"
get unwieldy after 50 or so messages, leading forum administrators to
pound on their users to "start a new topic" because the old one is
"full".  Huh?  A thread doesn't get full.

Also, how is it that Web forum software such as phpBB and DCForum can
get so popular without having something as basic as a feature to
reliably catch up on unread messages, or to view messages sorted by
different criteria?  Sure, there's usually a feature to see which topics
*have* unread messages, but when there's a dozen topics each of 100+
posts, catching up across the whole forum is slow and irritating.  In
contrast, every mail client in the world can tell you which messages
you've read and which you haven't -- and many can distinguish "message
that has been presented to you in the message list, but you never
actually looked at" from "message that you have never seen at all
before".

--
Karl A. Krueger <kkrueger at whoi.edu>


from_name: Tim Starling

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: 4 new Wikipedias have just been created

body:
Cross-posted to wikitech-l, please reply to one list only.

Wouter Steenbeek wrote:
>
> But there seems to be a technical defect on sco:. A few articles were
> created, among which some by Mark fyi, but the statistics ignore them...
> I was aiming to add the Scottish Wikipedia to the List of Wikipedias but
> I can't, for that reason.

For some reason (probably some theory of Jamesday's about great ways to
optimise selects on single-row tables), the query for the
{{NUMBEROFARTICLES}} tag looks like this:

  $s = $dbr->selectRow( 'site_stats',
    array( 'ss_total_views', 'ss_total_edits', 'ss_good_articles' ),
    array( 'ss_row_id' => 1 ), $fname

i.e. using the new primary key in a way that's always meant to match.
For this latest batch of wikis, I created the site_stats row using:

  INSERT INTO site_stats() VALUES ()

which creates a row with default values in every column. The default for
ss_row_id is 0. I'll fix this on these wikis shortly, I just thought it
was a nice example of the problems you can get when you optimise things
that don't really need optimising.

-- Tim Starling


subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: 4 new Wikipedias have just been created


from_name: Zoney

body:
On 6/23/05, Michael Snow <wikipedia at earthlink.net> wrote:
> Zoney wrote:
>
> >Most importantly, the whole BCE/CE thing is a POV lobby. It's nonsense
> >to suggest that changing a very common phrase in the English language,
> >hitherto used near-universally, is "neutral".
> >
> >Now Wikipedia with NPOV policy certainly has to avoid siding with
> >different POVs - but surely to use BCE/CE notation at all is indeed
> >siding with a POV. Does every POV have to be accommodated on *some*
> >articles in order to have NPOV?
> >
> >Surely sticking to BC/AD, as has been used for centuries and centuries
> >in the English language (almost certainly the vast majority using it
> >without religious or political intent), is the most sensible option?
> >
> >Wikipedia's ridiculous pandering to all the extremist POVs is not a
> >good way to ensure NPOV in my opinion, and seriously dints its
> >credability.
> >
> >I suspect many have no idea how absurd it appears to a non-USian to
> >see BCE/CE spreading across Wikipedia
> >
> Just wanted to note how ironic it is to see an argument against BCE/CE,
> based on the universal use of BC/AD, while simultaneously using the term
> non-USian in place of the similarly universal term non-American.
>
> --Michael Snow

Yeah, except I was using "USian" to be specific - and I'm not
pretending it's not POV-pushing (i.e. recognise that US != America).
It's not like I'd attempt to use USian rather than the ambiguous, but
near-universally used, "American" in a Wikipedia article (although if
I needed unambiguousness, I would use "U.S." and a suitable sentence
wording).

Zoney
--
~()____) This message will self-destruct in 5 seconds...


from_name: Fastfission

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Per-article blocking

body:
Yeah, I don't know. But that seems to fall into the more general
category of "people who won't discuss", of which there is no quick and
simple solution that I know of.

Yes yes, I could take a lot of time filling out an RfC. And then what?
Move it to another stage of mediation? I don't have time for that --
it's not how I want to spend my Wikipedia experience. It's probably
not how anybody wants to. And honestly, it's really not Wikipedia's
best use of ME -- I'm not a mediator by heart, I'm someone who wants
to add content by the truckloads and keep POV pushers out. But at the
same time I believe strongly in due process. So I don't know.

FF

On 6/23/05, MacGyverMagic/Mgm <macgyvermagic at gmail.com> wrote:
> And then there's people who simply don't discuss if the page is
> protected on their preferred version. Quite problematic if you've got
> two of those. WHat do you protect it on then?
>
> --Mgm
>
> On 6/22/05, Fastfission <fastfission at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I think this sounds like a wonderful idea. I think a lot of edit wars
> > and revert wars could be stopped if pages were more quickly protected
> > and people were actually forced to try and work it out on talk
> > beforehand.
> >
> > The negative aspect -- that the page was being prevented from other,
> > legitimate edits -- is indeed quite negative, but no less so than if
> > it is in the middle of edit wars, which make preserving newly added
> > content near impossible.
> >
> > Is there a page for requesting protection? If there was some easy way
> > to do it, I'd do it all the time. I'd much rather discuss
> > disagreements on talk pages than change the articles, but most anons
> > and POV pushers seem unwilling to do that unless forced.
> >
> > FF
> >
> > On 6/22/05, Michael Snow <wikipedia at earthlink.net> wrote:
> > > JAY JG wrote:
> > >
> > > >> > For how long would these individual article blocks remain?
> > > >>
> > > >> Just like current user blocks, the duration can be set by the
> > > >> blocker/admin. I would assume that a 24 hour block for a 3RR violation
> > > >> could for just the article in question, not for the entire Wikipedia.
> > > >
> > > > I fail to see the advantage then; they would likely just move on to
> > > > revert-warring on some other article, and then return to the original
> > > > after 24 hours.
> > >
> > > The advantage is that it gives the antisocial more rope to hang
> > > themselves with, while simultaneously taking a lot of the sting out of
> > > being blocked, for those who aren't simply on Wikipedia to push an
> > > agenda. Yes, the battlefields may shift occasionally, but the process of
> > > building a case for arbitration against serious offenders can move much
> > > more rapidly. Then you won't have to wait as impatiently to get a
> > > sanction that lasts longer than 24 hours, in situations where this
> > > proves necessary.
> > >
> > > Back in the day when the three-revert rule was only a guideline, I
> > > brought an arbitration case against three of the most prolific revert
> > > warriors of the time. I think the arbitrators found the evidence
> > > persuasive in part because I could point to a long list of pages that
> > > had to be protected due to their revert wars. This is straightforward
> > > and a lot easier to deal with than wading through diffs to figure out
> > > who said what personal attack to whom. The same principle would apply to
> > > somebody who gets blocked from 10 different articles on closely related
> > > topics in short succession. With this kind of track record established,
> > > I'm confident that arbitration would quickly consider hearing such a case.
> > >
> > > --Michael Snow
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > > WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> > > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >
>


subject: [WikiEN-l] Silly mailing lists

references:
<HTIPPWOPFRAOJYKIPXL4LZLUAIOIBXAOKMKJKEAK@ziplip.com>
	<20050623143406.GB3380@whoi.edu>
	<4418c60e05062307453b10e04@mail.gmail.com>

body:
I second this. Gmail does a great job of putting messages in similar
threads together as well, which makes it almost like an online forum.
I have a little flag which goes up anytime there is a thread I've
written on, so I can see if there are replies, etc.

I don't know if it is still "invite only" but if so, if anybody
doesn't have one (or wants another) feel free to write to me
personally (off list) and I'll send you an "invite" -- I've got 50 or
so of them (as probably everybody with a gmail account).

FF

On 6/23/05, Zoney <zoney.ie at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 6/23/05, Karl A. Krueger <kkrueger at whoi.edu> wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 23, 2005 at 04:43:37AM -0700, thomas-edison at ziplip.com wrote:
> > > Mailing lists are just so inefficient.... why not just have a forum?
> >
> > Mailing lists (and newsgroups) have some real advantages over Web
> > forums.
> >
> > First off, everyone gets to choose what software they want to use to
> > read mail in, whereas a Web forum means that everyone has to use the
> > same software (namely, the forum software itself) even if it doesn't fit
> > their needs.  If you want to read a mailing list in a Web browser, you
> > can use the Web archives (as you linked) or use a Webmail system such as
> > Gmail.  But those of us who want to read the list in a dedicated mail
> > client like mutt or Thunderbird can do that too.  We can apply
> > spam-filters to the list traffic to block out an unwanted thread if we
> > like.  We can get digest mode.  We can use a real text editor to compose
> > messages, not a browser TEXTAREA widget.  So a mailing list offers more
> > choices.
> >
> > Second, most Web forum software has *remarkably poor* support for a lot
> > of really basic discussion features, such as threading, quoting, and
> > catching-up.  Considering that the idea of threaded online discussions
> > has been around for a couple of decades now (Usenet is 25 this year),
> > you'd think that someone who was going to implement it anew would learn
> > from (say) mail clients and Usenet newsreader software?  But no, not
> > particularly.  Most forum software groups messages into "topics", not
> > threads -- distinguished by the fact that a "topic" has a single root
> > message and doesn't fork.  Real discussions, of course, *do* fork, so
> > Web forums poorly model the behavior of their users.  Moreover, "topics"
> > get unwieldy after 50 or so messages, leading forum administrators to
> > pound on their users to "start a new topic" because the old one is
> > "full".  Huh?  A thread doesn't get full.
> >
> > Also, how is it that Web forum software such as phpBB and DCForum can
> > get so popular without having something as basic as a feature to
> > reliably catch up on unread messages, or to view messages sorted by
> > different criteria?  Sure, there's usually a feature to see which topics
> > *have* unread messages, but when there's a dozen topics each of 100+
> > posts, catching up across the whole forum is slow and irritating.  In
> > contrast, every mail client in the world can tell you which messages
> > you've read and which you haven't -- and many can distinguish "message
> > that has been presented to you in the message list, but you never
> > actually looked at" from "message that you have never seen at all
> > before".
> >
> > --
> > Karl A. Krueger <kkrueger at whoi.edu>
> >
>
> For once, this is on-topic. I would recommend Gmail for mailing lists.
> Personally, I like keeping WikiEN and other reasonably high-volume
> mailing lists away from my primary email account.
>
> Also, the threading, while not perfect, is great for a web based
> system, and the automatic/user-controlled collapsing/expansion of
> quoted text is fantastic. Ditto for read messages in the thread - all
> available while reading the most recent messages.
>
> One never has to worry about deleting messages or unwanted threads
> either (it's no harm to just leave it - as you'll never run out of
> space!) Also the search facility is very prompt compared to in-client
> searching of downloaded mail.
>
> I found it to be a good way of experiencing Gmail whilst not wanting
> to use Gmail for my personal mail.
>
> Zoney
> --
> ~()____) This message will self-destruct in 5 seconds...
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: Tom Steinberg

subject:
[WikiEN-l] A new tool being used to encourage wikipedia
	participation

body:
Hello Everyone,

I am the director of the charitable organisation mySociety, part of
the UK's 'civic hacking' scene. I am writing because last week we
launched a new site which some of our users have already turned
towards helping both Wikipedia and Project Gutenberg:

http://www.pledgebank.com/gutenberg

(and more modestly)

http://www.pledgebank.com/wikipediapage

As you can see PledgeBank works by helping to reassure people that if
they choose to do something of altruistic value, they won't be left
doing it all on their own, effectively wasting their effort.

PledgeBank could be a handy tool for building critical mass around new
WikiUniverse projects, especially potentially niche ones. i.e, you can
say you'll only start when enough people have signed up, like this guy
is doing here:

http://www.pledgebank.com/parking

Anyway, that's all from me. If you've any thoughts, questions or
comments, please get in touch.

all the best,

Tom Steinberg

--
Director, mySociety
07811 082158
www.pledgebank.com


from_name: Vincent "Bentong" S. Isles

subject:
[Wikipedia-l] Filipino/Tagalog Wikipedia and the language situation
	in the Philippines

body:
WARNING: Some parts of the ff. msg might be outdated
because of the creation of the Cebuano Wikipedia
<http://ceb.wikipedia.org/> on June 22. Thank you.

Guys,

I was not active yet with the Wikipedia when you
started voting whether to separate/merge the Tagalog
and Filipino Wikipedias.

As a Filipino though (a national of the Philippines,
not to be confused with 'one who speaks the Filipino
language'), I could tell you that the Filipino
language is ONE BIG, FAT LIE. There is, there has
never been, and (hopefully) there will never be a
Filipino language. What our national government is
calling "the Filipino 'language'" is actually the same
language the Tagalogs of Luzon are speaking. There was
never and there is no difference between "Tagalog" and
"Filipino".

The term Filipino is used by the Tagalogs, who is the
second most numerous ethnic group in the Philippines
(Cebuanos are first by about a million) and who is in
control of our government to make it easier for other
ethnic groups (not only us the Cebuanos, but also the
Warays, Pampangos, Pangasinense, etc.) to accept their
imposition of their language in us. In other words,
"Filipino" was invented to deceive us and to force
their language down our throats.

And in fact, the current Tagalog Wikipedia is NOT
following the latest orthographic rules laid down by
the Komisyon ng Wikang Filipino (Commission on the
Filipino Language, the governmental agency tasked with
regulating the Tagalog language). Last Dec. 2003 (if I
remember correctly), the KWF released a new version of
their ever-changing orthographic conventions, which
(of course) was never followed by textbook publishers,
media companies, and other entities involved with
publication -- even those Tagalog-owned. (In short:
their imposition of the language is one big mess. They
can't even force their rules on their own
'kababayans'.)

You can see that granting the Cebuano speakers a
Wikipedia in their own language is not only a matter
of extending the Wikipedia project to those who are
willing to extend it in their own languages but a
moral, ethical act on your part which could not only
save a language which is suffering from unjust
treatment from a misguided government but also give
its young speakers some semblance of hope and
something to be proud of of their own language.

So what do I suggest?
1. You give us our request -- which is to have a
Wikipedia in Cebuano.
2. You NEVER, NEVER allow a request for a Filipino
Wikipedia -- and instead tell the requesters to work
in the Tagalog Wikipedia.
3. You give the requests of the speakers of other
"minority" languages in the Philippines. (So far, only
Edwin -- for the Kapampangan language -- has
requested. We are hoping that the creation of Cebuano
and Kapampangan Wikipedias would inspire others.)

Matinahoron (Respectfully yours),

Vincent "Bentong" S. Isles
http://bentong.topcities.com/

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


subject: [Wikipedia-l] chapters of the Wikimedia Foundation

body:
Guys,

How are chapters of the Wikimedia Foundation created?
I hope we Cebuanos could organize one after we have
made our Wikipedia active.

bentong

P.S. Thanks in advance. I might not be able to reply
promptly to the answers re this message.

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


from_name: Rowan Collins

subject: [Wikitech-l] CLARIFICATION ON SHARATHA THIDIS

body:
On 23/06/05, gutty prakasam <guttychennai at yahoo.com> wrote:
> DEAR SIR,
>
> THERE IS A CONFUSION ON SHARATHA THIDHI,
[...]

Gutty,
1) TYPING IN ALL CAPITAL LETTERS is considered shouting, and thus somewhat rude.
2) This is not the right place to ask this question; this is a
technical mailing list for those working on a particular piece of
software.

Presumably, you hoped to tap the knowledge of contributors to
Wikipedia, the online encyclopedia? If so, perhaps you could try the
English Wikipedia's Reference Desk at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reference_desk

Or if, as I suspect, English is not your first language, perhaps you
could look on http://wikipedia.org/ to see if there is an active
Wikipedia in your own language.

HTH
--
Rowan Collins BSc
[IMSoP]


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Thank you for the support (re Cebuano Wikipedia)

body:
Thank you for everyone who showed support in our
proposal to set up a Cebuano Wikipedia. We promise you
that to the best of our ability we will make the
Cebuano Wikipedia one of the most active Wikipedias.

Daghang salamat mga kahigalaan!
(Thank you so much friends!)

Respectfully,

Vincent "Bentong" S. Isles
http://bentong.topcities.com/

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


subject: [WikiEN-l] Content, reason and the ArbCom

body:
On 6/22/05, Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote:
> Despite the current fad for the term "African-American" neither the
> United Negro College Fund nor the National Association for the
> Advancement of Colored People have seen fit to change the names of their
> organizations.  I avoid the term "African-American" because a person's
> citizenship is not apparent in his racial features, and I certainly
> would not want to offend a non-citizen by calling him "American".  To me
> there is something offensive about a herd instinct that requires me to
> change my terminology to suit the whims and fashions of the day.

These particular examples are not about "whims and fashions of the
day" but a people who have historically labeled in a derogatory manner
and who have no simple identification term attempting to find
something they can live with.

The two groups you named have names from the time they were created
and get a lot out of the fact that they are historic. On its own
printed matter the UCNF refers to its mission as supporting
"historically black" college and uses the term "African American" (no
hyphen). The NAACP also uses the term "African Americans." Just
because they keep historic names does not mean that they have not seen
it fit to change their overall terminology.

This is not about "herd instinct" in the slightest, and this is a
lousy example. One should in these cases, especially with issues which
have LONG histories of abuse, try to be a bit respectful. If using
your judgment to pick out the best term ("Black" and "African
American" and "people of Africa descent" are all known to be
acceptable as polite terms if used in good faith) based on the
definition of "polite" of the day (or, in this case, the last 20 years
or so) is too much for your brain to handle, I can't imagine how you
possibly get through the day. There is nothing that irritates me more
than people using the ridiculous excuse that they "can't keep up" or
"can't be expected to remember" or things like that with this
particular case when honestly there have been a total of only five or
six "changes" and the last one was twenty years ago. Hopefully you are
capable.

> Language change is more complex than that.  We learn our terminology at
> different times and different places.  Paramount is its need to continue
> as an effective means of communication.  These formerly neutral terms
> may still be neutral in another place, or with another segment of the
> same society, or in different circumstances.  "Assuming good faith"
> includes assuming that the person using a particular term does so
> without intent to offend.  Only the context of his words will show the
> difference.

We learn, and we continue to learn. Our language is not static, and
neither are we. This is not rocket science, don't act as if it is
truly difficult. If you want to insist on your own labelings and
terminology -- fine. But don't pretend it is difficult to keep track
of, unless you travel from country to country every different day of
the week.

FF


subject: [Wikitech-l] Enabling table-grouping tags

body:
Would it be possible to consider enabling the <colgroup> and <col> HTML
tags, which according to the design guide I favour
(http://www.ncdesign.org/html/060table.htm) work fine for all versions of IE
since IE3, and for Netscape since v6.

The <thead>, <tbody> and <tfoot> tags would probably also be helpful.

I think this would allow a great many contorted and cluttered tables to be
tidied up considerably.
--
Phil
[[en:User:Phil Boswell]]


from_name: Rebecca

subject: [WikiEN-l] Anon IP blocking without account

body:
On 6/23/05, Fastfission <fastfission at gmail.com> wrote:
> That's exactly right. This wouldn't replace anything as is, it would
> just augment. I'm getting real sick of high school IP addresses that
> vandalize and then say, "Oh, must have been someone else." Better to
> just lock that down at a level where you can leave a message and be
> sure it is getting to the right person. But only in situations where
> it has been shown to be a recurrent problem, of course.
>
> FF

They're not always lying, though. I have my own IP when I edit from my
room, but if I use the shared labs downstairs, I have to use one which
could be any one of about four thousand students. I've had to unblock
it a few times before - in cases like this, such a block would be
really useful, though.

-- ambi


from_name: Alphax

subject: [WikiEN-l] Newpages and rc patrollers needed

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

Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> Yea, yea. I'm working on that.
>
> I've got a database running that imports all new changes, and will
> allow a client to retrieve changes and see who has checked them.
>
> I'm still diddling with the schema.
>
> On 6/22/05, Dan Grey <dangrey at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Here's a question for y'all as a newbie to RC patrolling.
>>
>>So I've got CDVF going, and I've imported the admins. So is it now
>>simply a job of sitting here and trying to check diffs as quickly as
>>possible?
>>
>>It strikes me that must waste *a lot* of effort - lots of people must
>>check the same edit.
>>
>>
>>Dan
>

But that's no better than the old "mark this change as patrolled" system
- - you are relying on someone else to check the diff! And what if they
too are a vandal, or don't bother to fix it?? Anyway, with CDVF, admin
reverts are already detected and removed from the table, and diffs can
be manually removed from the table (click in the "X" column), so the
number of diffs that actually need checking is lower than you might think.

- --
Alphax
OpenPGP key: 0xF874C613 - http://tinyurl.com/cc9up
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax
There are two kinds of people: those who say to God, 'Thy will be done,'
and those to whom God says, 'All right, then, have it your way.' - C. S.
Lewis
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFCuh5w/RxM5Ph0xhMRAvrIAKCiQSrxPIdtibSkF2s9bvgFQjiMaACgnRBe
coFJO6azhSxY/Etsw0iy7L8=
=4Jgb
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


subject: [Wikitech-l] images missing

body:
Merlin wrote:
> I just installed the wiki media and the german version of wikipedia on
> my pc. Looks like it works fine, but the images are missing. On the spot
> where the image should be located it says missing imag and the name.
> Does anybody know where to optain the images, or if they are anyhow
> inside the tables and i made a mistake with the inserts.

http://download.wikimedia.org/
http://download.wikimedia.org/images/

-- 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/20050623/2350603c/attachment.pgp>


from_name: Anthere

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: chapters of the Wikimedia Foundation

body:
Hi

There are currently three chapters, in Germany, France and Italy.
Others are currently under work, for Switzerland, England, Poland,
Netherlands...

Most of these chapters take a lot of time and energy. I do not recommand
to make one before you have a serious number of participants in your
country. It is more important to focus FIRST of all on the project.
Chapters are in great part set up to promote the language(s) spoken in
the countries and relevant projects. If there is a project with 100
articles, it makes little sense.

Mostly, take your time :-) Starting a language is huge work. Focus on
that before everything. Most chapters creation took at least a year.

Good luck

Anthere

Vincent \"Bentong\" S. Isles a ?crit:
> Guys,
>
> How are chapters of the Wikimedia Foundation created?
> I hope we Cebuanos could organize one after we have
> made our Wikipedia active.
>
>
> bentong
>
> P.S. Thanks in advance. I might not be able to reply
> promptly to the answers re this message.
>
> Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com


from_name: JAY JG

body:
>From: Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net>
>Language change is more complex than that.  We learn our terminology at
>different times and different places.  Paramount is its need to continue as
>an effective means of communication.  These formerly neutral terms may
>still be neutral in another place, or with another segment of the same
>society, or in different circumstances.  "Assuming good faith" includes
>assuming that the person using a particular term does so without intent to
>offend.  Only the context of his words will show the difference.

Excuse me - I get the last word here.  Use of BC/AD is evil and causes
cancer.

Jay.


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

Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> Eh, I solve this by marking who patrolled it and the client will have
> complete visability into that..
>
> So, you could make items not appear on your list if they've been
> patrolled by two people or one person you really trust. Or anything
> else you'd like. I can also store flags set by RCers so they can mark
> suspicious edits for later evaluation.
>
> Also, this will be totally decoupled from the realtime flow of
> edits... so you can work in realtime or you can look at the edits from
> last night that no one reviewed yet.
>
> I'm only working on the backend infrastructure (well I'm 80% done now
> I think), this will need to be integrated into CDVF before it's
> useful. I suspect the interface will take more time than the :30
> minutes it took me to write an irc->sql gateway. :)
>

Awesome :)

- --
Alphax
OpenPGP key: 0xF874C613 - http://tinyurl.com/cc9up
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax
There are two kinds of people: those who say to God, 'Thy will be done,'
and those to whom God says, 'All right, then, have it your way.' - C. S.
Lewis
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFCujLZ/RxM5Ph0xhMRAnBKAJ0bgwqPJ2YbasBrMPMaFLEPU0DdmwCgsTzw
+PWCuG+oCm1JNWbDVjXgfWc=
=fpi7
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


from_name: Fred Bauder

subject: [WikiEN-l] ArbCom about to declare that the MoS is policy

body:
1) Wikipedia has established a Wikipedia:Manual of Style for the
"purpose of making things easy to read by following a consistent
format," see [1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_%28dates_and_numbers%29#Eras). The
prescriptions of Wikipedia's manual of style are not binding, but it
is suggested that with respect to eras that "Both the BCE/CE era
names and the BC/AD era names are acceptable, but be consistent
within an article."

Fred

On Jun 23, 2005, at 12:56 PM, Jon wrote:

> ArbCom, unfortunately, but at least now with good intentions, is
> making another mistake on the BCE/CE arbitration. It appears to be
> about to declare that the MoS (or at least an extract of it) is
> policy. My understanding is this is not the case, and that the MoS
> is just a non-binding guideline.
>
> This understanding comes from a recent discussion, initiated by
> SlimVirgin, who argued that the MoS had never followed the correct
> procedure to become policy. I argued that it had - as it was
> followed generally by WPians and had been effectively accepted as
> such by the community. However, SlimVirgin, supported by others,
> argued that it would need a consensus vote. I didn't persevere in
> countering this argument for too long, and the designation of the
> MoS as "policy" was removed.
>
> It seems the ArbCom is about to reverse the effects of that
> discussion and declare a basic guideline as policy. As there is
> nothing in the general wording of the MoS to separate out the bits
> on BCE/CE notation from the rest, it leaves open the possibility
> that users not complying with the MoS (and most don't from time to
> time at least in some respects) are leaving themselves open to
> complaints.
>
> Kind regards
>
> Jguk
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Yahoo! Messenger NEW - crystal clear PC to PCcalling worldwide with
> voicemail
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: Sam Korn

subject: [WikiEN-l] Silly mailing lists

body:
If you are prepared to accept the rules of Wikipedia, then I have no doubt
that you will be allowed back to edit. As it is, you were creating a
worrying copyright problem, something that would be bet avoided.

After all, what problem does it give you to put your comments under the
GFDL? They still must be attributed to you.

Sam

On 6/23/05, thomas-edison @ ziplip. com <thomas-edison at ziplip.com> wrote:
>
>
> Mailing lists are just so inefficient.... why not just have a forum? At
> least this mailing list has a virtual forum.
>
> http://mail.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/
>
> Also, I don't seem to get very good feedback here.... I guess I'll just
> have to post some more on the talk pages, even though people with no
> knowledge of copyright law will complain. Tough!
>
> (c) 2005, Pioneer-12
>
> p.s. I have been banned unfairly and no one has even bothered to ADDRESS
> that in a MONTH. <sarcasm> Way to go, Wikipedia! Good job treating volunteer
> editors who are simply standing up for their rights like criminals.
> </sarcasm>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


subject: [Wikitech-l] Meta hacked?

body:
Chad Perrin wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 23, 2005 at 10:22:04PM +0200, Alfio Puglisi wrote:
>>Is meta hacked or what? Take it offline if it isn't possible to remove the
>>banner.
>
>
> What banner?  I'm looking at meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page and see
> no banner.

The Pelican Shit / Ass Pus vandal briefly hit meta. It's already been
cleaned up.

-- 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/20050623/b1e4ed50/attachment.pgp>


from_name: mm

subject:
[Wikitech-l] categorylinks_table mysql ERROR 1071 at line 12:
 Specified key was too long

body:
While trying to load data in categorylinks_table I get the mysql error
1071 or 1064 as you can see belove.
MySQL version on my Linux Fedora Core 3 is
Ver 11.18 Distrib 3.23.58, for redhat-linux-gnu (i386)
Can somebody help me?
Thanks,
Mircea
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
mysql> ro < /mnt/120GB/wikipedia/encic/ro/ro_categorylinks_table.sql
    -> ;
ERROR 1064: You have an error in your SQL syntax near 'ro <
/mnt/120GB/wikipedia/encic/ro/ro_categorylinks_table.sql' at line 1
mysql>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[mircea at h bat]$ mysql -u mircea -psome_pass ro <
/mnt/120GB/wikipedia/encic/ro/ro_categorylinks_table.sql;
ERROR 1071 at line 12: Specified key was too long. Max key length is 500
[mircea at h bat]$
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------


from_name: Mark Williamson

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: addind new language into wikipedia

body:
Hi Henry,

I think the biggest reason that an Amis version was not created the
night before last was that no native speakers had put their names
forward in support of it.

My suggestion is that you add a request to
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages, and
encourage all the Amis speakers you know to add their support on that
page.

Also, there should be a decision about what subdomain to use. ami: is
indeed an ISO 639-3 code, but it is as of yet unclear whether or not
Wikimedia accepts ISO 639-_3_, so alternate proposals (such as amis:,
i-ami:, etc) should probably also be included.

If you get enough support, you might also try setting up an Amis
test-wikipedia or test-wiktionary on Meta.

Mark

On 23/06/05, Henry Tan-Tenn <share2002nov at lomaji.com> wrote:
> I would love to see an Amis (Pangcah) project.  It's the fourth or fifth
> largest language spoken natively in Taiwan (Japanese, though having many
> speakers, is always non-natively spoken among the elderly).  There
> should be enough educated, Internet-using literate speakers to get one
> going, though slow progress is to be expected, at least till it builds
> up a reputation for being "the on-line Amis project" (Wikimedia sadly
> having received very little press attention in Taiwan).  Like other
> Taiwanese Austronesian languages, there may be major dialect differences
> to negotiate (or perhaps ignore).
>
> ~~~~
>
> Mark Williamson ti 2005/6/10 ChS 08:21 sia-kong:
> > No, there is no objection, and I don't think there ever has been.
> >
> > The same seems to be true with Amis, except that Amis doesn't have a
> > suitable language code.
> >
> > If it would be OK, an agreement was reached among the involved parties
> > that amis.wiktionary.org would be suitable. (they wanted a Wiktionary
> > created, and maybe a Wikipedia at some future date).
> >
> > Otherwise, xxx-amis, i-amis, x-amis, or anything like that might be OK.
> >
> > Amis will actually have a code in the new version of the ISO
> > three-letter codes, but it hasn't been finalised yet (I for one think
> > it's horrible -- it's based almost entirely on the Ethnologue, which
> > means they combine languages which shouldn't be combined and divide
> > languages which shouldn't be divided, and exclude some languages
> > altogether).
> >
> > There haven't been any objections to the Sa--whatsit Wikipedia, but
> > then there are no good code suggestions either.
> >
> > Also, a Scots Wikipedia (among others) has been requested and has a
> > test Wikipedia that seems to be working a bit. I  don't recall any
> > objections to Scots either, and it has an iso code, sco:
> >
> >
> > Mark
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>

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


body:
On 23/06/05, Phil Boswell <phil.boswell at gmail.com> wrote:
> Would it be possible to consider enabling the <colgroup> and <col> HTML
> tags [...]

There is existing discussion of this at
http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=986 inlcuding patches.
--
Rowan Collins BSc
[IMSoP]


from_name: MacGyverMagic/Mgm

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Per-article blocking

body:
And then there's people who simply don't discuss if the page is
protected on their preferred version. Quite problematic if you've got
two of those. WHat do you protect it on then?

--Mgm

On 6/22/05, Fastfission <fastfission at gmail.com> wrote:
> I think this sounds like a wonderful idea. I think a lot of edit wars
> and revert wars could be stopped if pages were more quickly protected
> and people were actually forced to try and work it out on talk
> beforehand.
>
> The negative aspect -- that the page was being prevented from other,
> legitimate edits -- is indeed quite negative, but no less so than if
> it is in the middle of edit wars, which make preserving newly added
> content near impossible.
>
> Is there a page for requesting protection? If there was some easy way
> to do it, I'd do it all the time. I'd much rather discuss
> disagreements on talk pages than change the articles, but most anons
> and POV pushers seem unwilling to do that unless forced.
>
> FF
>
> On 6/22/05, Michael Snow <wikipedia at earthlink.net> wrote:
> > JAY JG wrote:
> >
> > >> > For how long would these individual article blocks remain?
> > >>
> > >> Just like current user blocks, the duration can be set by the
> > >> blocker/admin. I would assume that a 24 hour block for a 3RR violation
> > >> could for just the article in question, not for the entire Wikipedia.
> > >
> > > I fail to see the advantage then; they would likely just move on to
> > > revert-warring on some other article, and then return to the original
> > > after 24 hours.
> >
> > The advantage is that it gives the antisocial more rope to hang
> > themselves with, while simultaneously taking a lot of the sting out of
> > being blocked, for those who aren't simply on Wikipedia to push an
> > agenda. Yes, the battlefields may shift occasionally, but the process of
> > building a case for arbitration against serious offenders can move much
> > more rapidly. Then you won't have to wait as impatiently to get a
> > sanction that lasts longer than 24 hours, in situations where this
> > proves necessary.
> >
> > Back in the day when the three-revert rule was only a guideline, I
> > brought an arbitration case against three of the most prolific revert
> > warriors of the time. I think the arbitrators found the evidence
> > persuasive in part because I could point to a long list of pages that
> > had to be protected due to their revert wars. This is straightforward
> > and a lot easier to deal with than wading through diffs to figure out
> > who said what personal attack to whom. The same principle would apply to
> > somebody who gets blocked from 10 different articles on closely related
> > topics in short succession. With this kind of track record established,
> > I'm confident that arbitration would quickly consider hearing such a case.
> >
> > --Michael Snow
> > _______________________________________________
> > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: James D. Forrester

body:
On Thursday, June 23, 2005, at 12:05, Anthere <anthere9 at yahoo.com> wrote:

> Other [chpaters] are currently under work, for [..] England

Umm. The United Kingdom, please. :-)

It's bad enough when Americans get the name of the country that set them up
wrong, but we'd hope that our European friends and allies with whom we are
in economics and social union would at least get it right. ;-)

Yours,
--
James D. Forrester
Wikimedia : [[W:en:User:Jdforrester|James F.]]
E-Mail    : james at jdforrester.org
IM  (MSN) : jamesdforrester at hotmail.com


subject: [WikiEN-l] Silly mailing lists

body:
On 6/23/05, Karl A. Krueger <kkrueger at whoi.edu> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 23, 2005 at 04:43:37AM -0700, thomas-edison at ziplip.com wrote:
> > Mailing lists are just so inefficient.... why not just have a forum?
>
> Mailing lists (and newsgroups) have some real advantages over Web
> forums.
>
> First off, everyone gets to choose what software they want to use to
> read mail in, whereas a Web forum means that everyone has to use the
> same software (namely, the forum software itself) even if it doesn't fit
> their needs.  If you want to read a mailing list in a Web browser, you
> can use the Web archives (as you linked) or use a Webmail system such as
> Gmail.  But those of us who want to read the list in a dedicated mail
> client like mutt or Thunderbird can do that too.  We can apply
> spam-filters to the list traffic to block out an unwanted thread if we
> like.  We can get digest mode.  We can use a real text editor to compose
> messages, not a browser TEXTAREA widget.  So a mailing list offers more
> choices.
>
> Second, most Web forum software has *remarkably poor* support for a lot
> of really basic discussion features, such as threading, quoting, and
> catching-up.  Considering that the idea of threaded online discussions
> has been around for a couple of decades now (Usenet is 25 this year),
> you'd think that someone who was going to implement it anew would learn
> from (say) mail clients and Usenet newsreader software?  But no, not
> particularly.  Most forum software groups messages into "topics", not
> threads -- distinguished by the fact that a "topic" has a single root
> message and doesn't fork.  Real discussions, of course, *do* fork, so
> Web forums poorly model the behavior of their users.  Moreover, "topics"
> get unwieldy after 50 or so messages, leading forum administrators to
> pound on their users to "start a new topic" because the old one is
> "full".  Huh?  A thread doesn't get full.
>
> Also, how is it that Web forum software such as phpBB and DCForum can
> get so popular without having something as basic as a feature to
> reliably catch up on unread messages, or to view messages sorted by
> different criteria?  Sure, there's usually a feature to see which topics
> *have* unread messages, but when there's a dozen topics each of 100+
> posts, catching up across the whole forum is slow and irritating.  In
> contrast, every mail client in the world can tell you which messages
> you've read and which you haven't -- and many can distinguish "message
> that has been presented to you in the message list, but you never
> actually looked at" from "message that you have never seen at all
> before".
>
> --
> Karl A. Krueger <kkrueger at whoi.edu>
>

For once, this is on-topic. I would recommend Gmail for mailing lists.
Personally, I like keeping WikiEN and other reasonably high-volume
mailing lists away from my primary email account.

Also, the threading, while not perfect, is great for a web based
system, and the automatic/user-controlled collapsing/expansion of
quoted text is fantastic. Ditto for read messages in the thread - all
available while reading the most recent messages.

One never has to worry about deleting messages or unwanted threads
either (it's no harm to just leave it - as you'll never run out of
space!) Also the search facility is very prompt compared to in-client
searching of downloaded mail.

I found it to be a good way of experiencing Gmail whilst not wanting
to use Gmail for my personal mail.

Zoney
--
~()____) This message will self-destruct in 5 seconds...


from_name: Andrew Gray

body:
On 23/06/05, James D. Forrester <james at jdforrester.org> wrote:
> On Thursday, June 23, 2005, at 12:05, Anthere <anthere9 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Other [chpaters] are currently under work, for [..] England
>
> Umm. The United Kingdom, please. :-)
>
> It's bad enough when Americans get the name of the country that set them up
> wrong, but we'd hope that our European friends and allies with whom we are
> in economics and social union would at least get it right. ;-)

I could be wrong, but I vaguely recall reading something that "England
only" (or probably England-and-Wales) was being looked at, as it
potentially simplified matters from a legal standpoint. Scots law, as
we should all remember, exists solely to confuse people at inopportune
moments...

(On the other hand, I've just been poking around looking for this, and
can't find it anywhere - apologies if I've misremembered)

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


body:
On Thursday, June 23, 2005, at 15:55, Andrew Gray <shimgray at gmail.com>
wrote:

> On 23/06/05, James D. Forrester <james at jdforrester.org> wrote:
> > On Thursday, June 23, 2005, at 12:05, Anthere <anthere9 at yahoo.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Other [chpaters] are currently under work, for [..] England
> >
> > Umm. The United Kingdom, please. :-)
> >
> > It's bad enough when Americans get the name of the country that set
> > them up wrong, but we'd hope that our European friends and allies with
> > whom we are in economics and social union would at least get it right.
> > ;-)
>
> I could be wrong, but I vaguely recall reading something that "England
> only" (or probably England-and-Wales) was being looked at, as it
> potentially simplified matters from a legal standpoint.

Yeah, the current Plan is to incorporate under England-and-Wales law, but
we'll be for the whole of the UK.

> Scots law, as we should all remember, exists solely to confuse people
> at inopportune moments...

Fully agree. :-)

> (On the other hand, I've just been poking around looking for this, and
> can't find it anywhere - apologies if I've misremembered)

Yours,
--
James D. Forrester
Wikimedia : [[W:en:User:Jdforrester|James F.]]
E-Mail    : james at jdforrester.org
IM  (MSN) : jamesdforrester at hotmail.com


from_name: AssCoAssc at aol.com

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: WikiEN-l Digest, Vol 23, Issue 95

body:
In a message dated 6/23/05 3:32:40 PM, wikien-l-request at Wikipedia.org writes:

> Excuse me - I get the last word here.? Use of BC/AD is evil and causes
> cancer.
>
That caveman comic strip with the funny ants used "B.C."....
is Johnny Hart a reasonable authority on this matter?


from_name: Chad Perrin

subject: [Wikitech-l] Meta hacked?

body:
On Thu, Jun 23, 2005 at 10:22:04PM +0200, Alfio Puglisi wrote:
>
> Is meta hacked or what? Take it offline if it isn't possible to remove the
> banner.

What banner?  I'm looking at meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page and see
no banner.

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


subject: [Wikitech-l] Meta hacked?

body:
On Thu, Jun 23, 2005 at 01:42:22PM -0700, Brion Vibber wrote:
> Chad Perrin wrote:
> >On Thu, Jun 23, 2005 at 10:22:04PM +0200, Alfio Puglisi wrote:
> >>Is meta hacked or what? Take it offline if it isn't possible to remove the
> >>banner.
> >
> >
> >What banner?  I'm looking at meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page and see
> >no banner.
>
> The Pelican Shit / Ass Pus vandal briefly hit meta. It's already been
> cleaned up.

Oh, good.

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


body:
>From: AssCoAssc at aol.com
>In a message dated 6/23/05 3:32:40 PM, wikien-l-request at Wikipedia.org
>writes:
>
>
> > Excuse me - I get the last word here.  Use of BC/AD is evil and causes
> > cancer.
> >
>That caveman comic strip with the funny ants used "B.C."....
>is Johnny Hart a reasonable authority on this matter?

Well, I suspect he would have a strong opinion on the matter.  He became a
born-again Christian in the 90s, and the B.C. strip contents started
reflecting that, which created some controversy.

Jay.


from_name: Boris Lohnzweiger

subject: [Wikipedia-l] 4 new Wikipedias have just been created

body:
That's real good news. Thanks to Tim Starling and everyone else involved in preparing the new Wikipedias from me, too. And good luck to our new Cebuano, Kapampangan, Scots and V?ro editors!

I believe all of these four Wikipedias will soon prove to be successful (even though they will probably grow at differnent speeds). The reason I'm sure of this that each of them had a number of people interested in contributing even before they were created. And that separates them from a lot of Wikipedias created in the past which are inactive now. Like Mark, I hope a lot more editions will follow. But I think we should always keep in mind that it takes a minimum number of commited people right from the start. Otherwise there is no point in creating a Wikipedia for a certain language, no matter how many people speak it. That's a lesson we had to learn and if we keep it in mind many more successful Wikipedias will follow.

Boris

Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com>, wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org schrieb am 22.06.05 13:18:31:

Hi all,

I would like to announce that 4 new Wikipedias have just been created
by Tim Starling (thanks!)

They are:
http://pam.wikipedia.org/ Kapampangan Wikipedia
http://ceb.wikipedia.org/ Cebuano Wikipedia
http://sco.wikipedia.org/ Scots Wikipedia
http://fiu-vro.wikipedia.org/ V?ro Wikipedia

I also hope that in the near future we may add additional Philippines
languages to our repertoire (many have millions of speakers, for
example Illocano, Bicolano, Hilgaynon, Samaran, Pangasinan...)

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

_________________________________________________________________________
Mit der Gruppen-SMS von WEB.DE FreeMail k?nnen Sie eine SMS an alle
Freunde gleichzeitig schicken: http://freemail.web.de/features/?mc=021179


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

Dan Grey wrote:
> Which is *exactly* what I was thinking of (so :p Alphax and Geni!  :-) )
>
> The only problem I see is authentication - how can you be sure that
> the person patrolled the edit is really who they say they are?
>

(insert plan to integrate OpenGPG with MediaWiki here)

Well, somehow, you would authenticate yourself with the database server,
and then authenticate yourself with Wikipedia... or something... in the
same way that IRC cloaks and username changes are done - make an edit
under your login to confirm it is you.

- --
Alphax
OpenPGP key: 0xF874C613 - http://tinyurl.com/cc9up
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax
There are two kinds of people: those who say to God, 'Thy will be done,'
and those to whom God says, 'All right, then, have it your way.' - C. S.
Lewis
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFCumaZ/RxM5Ph0xhMRAqnbAJwJxFysmlj4xLObw23dS+goqdg+hgCfWOcS
yR2bt+SnQ6+v+uajxk0M+4k=
=4mfW
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Per-article blocking

body:
Blanking doesn't seem very helpful at all when the page needs to be
protected. All you need to do is make up a fuss between enough users
and you can disrupt wikipedia until there's no tomorrow. Besides, no
one can edit a blanked article into something else the parties might
accept.

--Mgm

On 6/23/05, Fastfission <fastfission at gmail.com> wrote:
> Yeah, I don't know. But that seems to fall into the more general
> category of "people who won't discuss", of which there is no quick and
> simple solution that I know of.
>
> Yes yes, I could take a lot of time filling out an RfC. And then what?
> Move it to another stage of mediation? I don't have time for that --
> it's not how I want to spend my Wikipedia experience. It's probably
> not how anybody wants to. And honestly, it's really not Wikipedia's
> best use of ME -- I'm not a mediator by heart, I'm someone who wants
> to add content by the truckloads and keep POV pushers out. But at the
> same time I believe strongly in due process. So I don't know.
>
> FF
>
> On 6/23/05, MacGyverMagic/Mgm <macgyvermagic at gmail.com> wrote:
> > And then there's people who simply don't discuss if the page is
> > protected on their preferred version. Quite problematic if you've got
> > two of those. WHat do you protect it on then?
> >
> > --Mgm
> >
> > On 6/22/05, Fastfission <fastfission at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > I think this sounds like a wonderful idea. I think a lot of edit wars
> > > and revert wars could be stopped if pages were more quickly protected
> > > and people were actually forced to try and work it out on talk
> > > beforehand.
> > >
> > > The negative aspect -- that the page was being prevented from other,
> > > legitimate edits -- is indeed quite negative, but no less so than if
> > > it is in the middle of edit wars, which make preserving newly added
> > > content near impossible.
> > >
> > > Is there a page for requesting protection? If there was some easy way
> > > to do it, I'd do it all the time. I'd much rather discuss
> > > disagreements on talk pages than change the articles, but most anons
> > > and POV pushers seem unwilling to do that unless forced.
> > >
> > > FF
> > >
> > > On 6/22/05, Michael Snow <wikipedia at earthlink.net> wrote:
> > > > JAY JG wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >> > For how long would these individual article blocks remain?
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Just like current user blocks, the duration can be set by the
> > > > >> blocker/admin. I would assume that a 24 hour block for a 3RR violation
> > > > >> could for just the article in question, not for the entire Wikipedia.
> > > > >
> > > > > I fail to see the advantage then; they would likely just move on to
> > > > > revert-warring on some other article, and then return to the original
> > > > > after 24 hours.
> > > >
> > > > The advantage is that it gives the antisocial more rope to hang
> > > > themselves with, while simultaneously taking a lot of the sting out of
> > > > being blocked, for those who aren't simply on Wikipedia to push an
> > > > agenda. Yes, the battlefields may shift occasionally, but the process of
> > > > building a case for arbitration against serious offenders can move much
> > > > more rapidly. Then you won't have to wait as impatiently to get a
> > > > sanction that lasts longer than 24 hours, in situations where this
> > > > proves necessary.
> > > >
> > > > Back in the day when the three-revert rule was only a guideline, I
> > > > brought an arbitration case against three of the most prolific revert
> > > > warriors of the time. I think the arbitrators found the evidence
> > > > persuasive in part because I could point to a long list of pages that
> > > > had to be protected due to their revert wars. This is straightforward
> > > > and a lot easier to deal with than wading through diffs to figure out
> > > > who said what personal attack to whom. The same principle would apply to
> > > > somebody who gets blocked from 10 different articles on closely related
> > > > topics in short succession. With this kind of track record established,
> > > > I'm confident that arbitration would quickly consider hearing such a case.
> > > >
> > > > --Michael Snow
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > > > WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> > > > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> > > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > > WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> > > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> > >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: Angela

body:
> > I could be wrong, but I vaguely recall reading something that "England
> > only" (or probably England-and-Wales) was being looked at, as it
> > potentially simplified matters from a legal standpoint.
>
> Yeah, the current Plan is to incorporate under England-and-Wales law, but
> we'll be for the whole of the UK.

UK is the working name for the chapter at the moment, though this does
unfortunately exclude Ireland, which might not be large enough to get
its own chapter yet, so I think there is still room for changes to be
made to incorporate them.

This was discussed at <http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_UK>.
The suggestion of using "WISE" (Wales, Ireland, Scotland, England) was
made at http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_UK

Angela.


body:
On 23/06/05, James D. Forrester <james at jdforrester.org> wrote:
> It's bad enough when Americans get the name of the country that set them up
> wrong, but we'd hope that our European friends and allies with whom we are
> in economics and social union would at least get it right. ;-)

Go on, admit it, you've used "Holland" to refer to "the Netherlands"
before; and I bet plenty of people still refer to the non-existent
nation of "Czechoslovakia" out of habit - to the annoyance of "our
European friends and allies" from "Slovakia" and "the Czech
Republic"... :p

On 23/06/05, Angela <beesley at gmail.com> wrote:
> This was discussed at <http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_UK>.
> The suggestion of using "WISE" (Wales, Ireland, Scotland, England) was
> made at http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_UK

Hm... "Wikimedia WISE" - I like it! It may not be very obviously
descriptive, but it's certainly snappy and neutral...

--
Rowan Collins BSc
[IMSoP]


from_name: katimawan .

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: 4 new Wikipedias have just been created

body:
On behalf of my fellow Kapampangans, I wish to thank the people from Wikimedia, and others who have lent their support, for making the Kapampangan Wikipedia a reality .  This is an important milestone for our language, in the continuing quest to revitalize it and make it responsive to the needs of the 21st century.  Its fortuitous appearance in the wake of the re-introduction of the language to schools in the Kapampangan capital means that schoolchildren, who are increasingly familiar with the Internet, will have a reliable reference in the native tongue easily accessible to them.
A Wikipedia in our beloved mother tongue is a precious and beautiful thing, and we will do our best to take care of it.

Thank you too, for giving our Cebuano brothers their Wikipedia.  They deserve it richly.  Congratulations to them.  Congratulations, too, to our friends who speak Scots and V?ro, who now also have Wikipedias of their own.  And I appreciate Mark's statement that the other major Philippine languages not yet represented so far should also have their own Wikipedias.  That is something to look forward to.

I do not understand why some people say that language is a source of division.  If you give people their own voice, in their own tongue (as opposed to suppressing it), then you are actually promoting world understanding.  More power to Wikipedia for the great work that it is doing.

Edwin

---------------------------------

Correo Yahoo!
Comprueba qu? es nuevo, aqu?
http://correo.yahoo.es


body:
See http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/How_to_win_an_argument

:-)

Sam

On 6/23/05, JAY JG <jayjg at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Wrom:
> XCAXZOWCONEUQZAAFXISHJEXXIMQZUIVOTQNQEMSFDULHPQQWOYIYZUNNYCGPKYLEJGDGVCJVTLBXFGGMEPYOQKEDOTWFAOBUZXUWLSZLKBRNVWWCUFPEGAUTFJMVRESKPNKMBIPBARHDMNNSKVFVWRKJVZCMHVIBGDADRZFSQHYUCDDJBLVLMHAALPTCXLYRWTQTIPWIGYOKSTTZRCLBDXRQBGJSNBOHMKHJYFMYXOEAIJJPHSCRTNHGSWZIDREXCAXZOWCONEUQZAAFXISHJEXXIMQZUIVOTQNQEMSFDULHPQQWOYIYZUNNYCGPKYLEJGDGVCJVTLBXFGGMEPYOQKEDOTWFAOBUZXUWLSZLKBRNVWWCUFPEGAUTFJMVRESKPNKMBIPBARHDMNNSKVFVWRKJVZCMHVIBGDADRZFSQHYUCDDJBLVLMHAALPTCXLYRWTQTIPWIGYOKSTTZRCLBDXRQBGJSNBOHMKHJYFMYXOEAIJJPHSCRTNHGSWZIDREXCAXZOWCONEUQZAAFXISHJEXXIMQZUIVOTQNQEMSFDULHPQQWOYIYZUNNYCGPKYLEJGDGVCJVTLBXFGGMEPYOQKEDOTWFAOBUZXUWLSZLKBRNVWWCUFPEGAUTFJMVRESKPNKMBIPBARHDMNNSKVFVWRKJVZCMHVIBGDADRZFSQHYUCDDJBLVLMHAALPTCXLYRWTQTIPWIGYOKSTTZRCLBDXRQBGJSNBOHMKHJYFMYXOEAIJJPHSCRTNHGSWZIDREXCAXZOWCONEUQZAAFXISHJEXXIMQZUIVOTQNQEMSFDULHPQQWOYIYZUNNYCGPKYLEJGDGVCJVTLBXFGGMEPYOQKEDOTWFAOBUZXUWLSZLKBRNVWWCUFPEGAUTFJMVRESKPNKMBIPBARHDMNNSKVFVWRKJVZCMHVIBGDADRZFSQHYUCDDJ


from_name: Jimmy Wales

subject: [Wikitech-l] Cluster strategy - expansion plans

body:
I wonder if people can update me/us on how the integration with the
Amsterdam cluster is going.  Are there any lessons?  Are we still
committed to our multiple-data-center strategy?  Is there anything new
which we have learned?

I am working with Yahoo to finalize the details of the South Korean
facility... what have we learned which might help with this?

What might we ask of a large potential donor next?

--Jimbo


from_name: Matthew Felgate

subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: Wikitech-l Digest, Vol 23, Issue 45

body:
Hello all,

I have just set up www.TeachMeQuick.co.uk

If you know anybody who is doing GCSEs or A Levels, please tell them about it.

Thanks for your people helping me with this website

:)

On 6/23/05, wikitech-l-request at wikimedia.org
<wikitech-l-request at wikimedia.org> wrote:
> Send Wikitech-l mailing list submissions to
>         wikitech-l at wikimedia.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>         http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>         wikitech-l-request at wikimedia.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>         wikitech-l-owner at wikimedia.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Wikitech-l digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. orphaned pages (iznogood at iznogood-factory.org)
>    2. Re: automatic checking for or flagging of copyright
>       violations (Daniel Mayer)
>    3. Re: we need responsive servers on Tuesday (Kurt Jansson)
>    4. Re: we need responsive servers on Tuesday (Mark Bergsma)
>    5. Re: 4 new Wikipedias have just been created (Tim Starling)
>    6. CLARIFICATION ON SHARATHA THIDIS (gutty prakasam)
>    7. Mediawiki search configuration, please Heeeelp... (Philippe Roth)
>    8. Re: CLARIFICATION ON SHARATHA THIDIS (Rowan Collins)
>    9. Enabling table-grouping tags (Phil Boswell)
>   10. categorylinks_table mysql ERROR 1071 at line 12: Specified
>       key was too long (mm)
>   11. Re: Enabling table-grouping tags (Rowan Collins)
>   12. Cluster strategy - expansion plans (Jimmy Wales)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 14:36:13 +0200
> From: iznogood at iznogood-factory.org
> Subject: [Wikitech-l] orphaned pages
> To: wikitech-l at wikimedia.org
> Message-ID: <20050622143613.4cd65466 at iznogood>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
>
> Hello,
>
> I'm a french wikipedia contributor especially to link orphaned pages.
>
> But I have a problem with frequency list of orphaned pages update.
>
> http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Lonelypages
>
> I wonder if it is possible to make an update on week or 2 weeks bases
> even if it is only on french orphaned list page.
>
> That will ease my linkage job.
>
> Thanks.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 13:32:28 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Daniel Mayer <maveric149 at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: [Wikitech-l] automatic checking for or flagging of
>         copyright       violations
> To: Wikimedia developers <wikitech-l at wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID: <20050622203228.4082.qmail at web51606.mail.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
> --- aerik at thesylvans.com wrote:
> > Wouldn't automatically checking edits against google searches add an awful
> > big load to the servers?  Not only is it several thousand hits, but then also
> > thousands more string comparisons?  Amd then we'd have event handling for any
> > suspect edits...
>
> The load could be distributed offline via possible changes to the rc patrol
> software already in use. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:CryptoDerk/CDVF
>
> That way we could also get around Google's 1000 search per day limit.
>
> -- mav
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 22:50:46 +0200
> From: Kurt Jansson <jansson at gmx.net>
> Subject: Re: [Wikitech-l] we need responsive servers on Tuesday
> To: Wikimedia developers <wikitech-l at wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID: <42B9CF26.4000403 at gmx.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
>
> Domas Mituzas wrote:
>
> > Sure. I'm just giving an advise to relax and not to worry.
> > Things will go as they have to go :) People look live ok
> > only when relaxed :) And we sure, will try not crashing :)
>
> The servers were responsive, I was relaxed, and everything went well. :-)
>
> You're all doing a great job here, thanks!
>
> Kurt
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2005 00:09:43 +0200
> From: Mark Bergsma <mark at nedworks.org>
> Subject: Re: [Wikitech-l] we need responsive servers on Tuesday
> To: Wikimedia developers <wikitech-l at wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID: <42B9E1A7.1040703 at nedworks.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Kurt Jansson wrote:
> > Domas Mituzas wrote:
> >
> >> Sure. I'm just giving an advise to relax and not to worry. Things will
> >> go as they have to go :) People look live ok only when relaxed :) And
> >> we sure, will try not crashing :)
> >
> >
> > The servers were responsive, I was relaxed, and everything went well. :-)
> >
> > You're all doing a great job here, thanks!
>
> Actually, we had severe (network) problems in florida at that time... :)
>
> --
> Mark
>
> mark at nedworks.org
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2005 10:36:28 +1000
> From: Tim Starling <t.starling at physics.unimelb.edu.au>
> Subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: 4 new Wikipedias have just been created
> To: wikipedia-l at wikimedia.org, wikitech-l at wikimedia.org
> Message-ID: <42BA040C.1060603 at physics.unimelb.edu.au>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Cross-posted to wikitech-l, please reply to one list only.
>
> Wouter Steenbeek wrote:
> >
> > But there seems to be a technical defect on sco:. A few articles were
> > created, among which some by Mark fyi, but the statistics ignore them...
> > I was aiming to add the Scottish Wikipedia to the List of Wikipedias but
> > I can't, for that reason.
>
>
> For some reason (probably some theory of Jamesday's about great ways to
> optimise selects on single-row tables), the query for the
> {{NUMBEROFARTICLES}} tag looks like this:
>
>   $s = $dbr->selectRow( 'site_stats',
>     array( 'ss_total_views', 'ss_total_edits', 'ss_good_articles' ),
>     array( 'ss_row_id' => 1 ), $fname
>
> i.e. using the new primary key in a way that's always meant to match.
> For this latest batch of wikis, I created the site_stats row using:
>
>   INSERT INTO site_stats() VALUES ()
>
> which creates a row with default values in every column. The default for
> ss_row_id is 0. I'll fix this on these wikis shortly, I just thought it
> was a nice example of the problems you can get when you optimise things
> that don't really need optimising.
>
> -- Tim Starling
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 22:33:12 -0700 (PDT)
> From: gutty prakasam <guttychennai at yahoo.com>
> Subject: [Wikitech-l] CLARIFICATION ON SHARATHA THIDIS
> To: wikitech-l at wikipedia.org
> Message-ID: <20050623053312.61063.qmail at web31612.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
> DEAR SIR,
>
> THERE IS A CONFUSION ON SHARATHA THIDHI,
>
> LAST YEAR MY FATHER EXPIRED ON 28TH OF JUNE.  THE SAME
> YEAR EXTRA MONTH CAME . THIS YEAR WHEN THE CALCULATION
> FOR THE 1ST YEAR CERIMONY FALLS ON 15TH TO 18TH OF
> JULY I.E. 1ST DAY MASIKAM, 2 DAY VIMOGAM 3 DAY
> SHRATHAM AND THE 4 DAY SUBHAM CONDUCTING HOMA.
>
> NOW THERE IS A CONFUSION SITUATION ARISE.  THE DAY
> 16TH AND 17TH OF JULY IS THE IMPORTANT DAY WHERE THE
> SHRATHA THIDHI IS SUNNYA AS PER THE RULE WE CAN'T
> CONDUCT CEREMONY'S ON THESE DAYS WHERE THE SHRATHA
> THIDHI IS SUNNYA.
>
> IF YOU CAN ABLE TO GET ME THE CLARIFICATION ON THIS.
> HOW TO CONDUCT THE CEREMONY.
>
> AS PER HINDU SASTHARA WE CAN'T AVOID ANY CEREMONYS.
>
> HOPE YOU RECEIVE A LINE IN RESPONSE IN THIS REGARD
>
>
> THANKS  AND REGDS
> GUTTY PRAKASAM
>
> KINDLY ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT.
>
> THANKS AND REGDS
> GUTTY
>
> PROGRESSIVE CONTAINER TERMINAL
> ROOM NO:5, 2ND FLOOR,
> NO: 234,THAMBU CHETTY STREET
> CHENNAI 600 001
> TEL: 25228535, 25214588
> FAX: 25232963
> EMAIL: pct at touchtelindia.net
>             pctchennai at yahoo.com
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________
> Yahoo! Sports
> Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football
> http://football.fantasysports.yahoo.com
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2005 08:12:03 +0200
> From: "Philippe Roth" <philippe.roth at epfl.ch>
> Subject: [Wikitech-l] Mediawiki search configuration, please
>         Heeeelp...
> To: <wikitech-l at wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID:
>         <5D5E3EAD8471514FB9E0607C4B2E10163042FD at rex1.intranet.epfl.ch>
> Content-Type: text/plain;       charset="us-ascii"
>
> Dear All,
>
> We just made a fresh install of our wiki base 1.2.4 to mediawiki 1.4.5
> Everything seems to be OK except that we have problems with search...
> We have several articles about "plotters".
> But if we make a search for "plotter", there is no article found. Same
> with "plot*", nothing.
> The articles are found only when we make a search for "plotters".
>
> How can we configure our installation to make search like
> "plot*","plotter" and so on successful?
>
> Many thanks in advance for light.
>
> Best regards,
> Philippe Roth
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2005 11:21:01 +0100
> From: Rowan Collins <rowan.collins at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Wikitech-l] CLARIFICATION ON SHARATHA THIDIS
> To: guttychennai at yahoo.com,     Wikimedia developers
>         <wikitech-l at wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID: <9f02ca4c050623032159565f14 at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> On 23/06/05, gutty prakasam <guttychennai at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > DEAR SIR,
> >
> > THERE IS A CONFUSION ON SHARATHA THIDHI,
> [...]
>
> Gutty,
> 1) TYPING IN ALL CAPITAL LETTERS is considered shouting, and thus somewhat rude.
> 2) This is not the right place to ask this question; this is a
> technical mailing list for those working on a particular piece of
> software.
>
> Presumably, you hoped to tap the knowledge of contributors to
> Wikipedia, the online encyclopedia? If so, perhaps you could try the
> English Wikipedia's Reference Desk at
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reference_desk
>
> Or if, as I suspect, English is not your first language, perhaps you
> could look on http://wikipedia.org/ to see if there is an active
> Wikipedia in your own language.
>
> HTH
> --
> Rowan Collins BSc
> [IMSoP]
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2005 11:43:59 +0100
> From: "Phil Boswell" <phil.boswell at gmail.com>
> Subject: [Wikitech-l] Enabling table-grouping tags
> To: wikitech-l at wikimedia.org
> Message-ID: <d9e3es$47v$1 at sea.gmane.org>
>
> Would it be possible to consider enabling the <colgroup> and <col> HTML
> tags, which according to the design guide I favour
> (http://www.ncdesign.org/html/060table.htm) work fine for all versions of IE
> since IE3, and for Netscape since v6.
>
> The <thead>, <tbody> and <tfoot> tags would probably also be helpful.
>
> I think this would allow a great many contorted and cluttered tables to be
> tidied up considerably.
> --
> Phil
> [[en:User:Phil Boswell]]
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2005 14:07:35 +0300
> From: mm <mt1900 at rdslink.ro>
> Subject: [Wikitech-l] categorylinks_table mysql ERROR 1071 at line 12:
>         Specified key was too long
> To: wikitech-l at wikimedia.org
> Message-ID: <42BA97F7.6070003 at rdslink.ro>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> While trying to load data in categorylinks_table I get the mysql error
> 1071 or 1064 as you can see belove.
> MySQL version on my Linux Fedora Core 3 is
> Ver 11.18 Distrib 3.23.58, for redhat-linux-gnu (i386)
> Can somebody help me?
> Thanks,
> Mircea
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> mysql> ro < /mnt/120GB/wikipedia/encic/ro/ro_categorylinks_table.sql
>     -> ;
> ERROR 1064: You have an error in your SQL syntax near 'ro <
> /mnt/120GB/wikipedia/encic/ro/ro_categorylinks_table.sql' at line 1
> mysql>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> [mircea at h bat]$ mysql -u mircea -psome_pass ro <
> /mnt/120GB/wikipedia/encic/ro/ro_categorylinks_table.sql;
> ERROR 1071 at line 12: Specified key was too long. Max key length is 500
> [mircea at h bat]$
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 11
> Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2005 14:43:08 +0100
> From: Rowan Collins <rowan.collins at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Wikitech-l] Enabling table-grouping tags
> To: Wikimedia developers <wikitech-l at wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID: <9f02ca4c05062306432f0dc2ea at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> On 23/06/05, Phil Boswell <phil.boswell at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Would it be possible to consider enabling the <colgroup> and <col> HTML
> > tags [...]
>
> There is existing discussion of this at
> http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=986 inlcuding patches.
> --
> Rowan Collins BSc
> [IMSoP]
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 12
> Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2005 18:30:10 +0200
> From: Jimmy Wales <jwales at wikia.com>
> Subject: [Wikitech-l] Cluster strategy - expansion plans
> To: wikitech-l at wikimedia.org
> Message-ID: <42BAE392.4040701 at wikia.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> I wonder if people can update me/us on how the integration with the
> Amsterdam cluster is going.  Are there any lessons?  Are we still
> committed to our multiple-data-center strategy?  Is there anything new
> which we have learned?
>
> I am working with Yahoo to finalize the details of the South Korean
> facility... what have we learned which might help with this?
>
> What might we ask of a large potential donor next?
>
> --Jimbo
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>
>
> End of Wikitech-l Digest, Vol 23, Issue 45
> ******************************************
>

--
MatthewFelgate
@Hotmail.com for MSN
@GMail.com for Email


from_name: Cormac Lawler

body:
On 6/23/05, Angela <beesley at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > I could be wrong, but I vaguely recall reading something that "England
> > > only" (or probably England-and-Wales) was being looked at, as it
> > > potentially simplified matters from a legal standpoint.
> >
> > Yeah, the current Plan is to incorporate under England-and-Wales law, but
> > we'll be for the whole of the UK.
>
> UK is the working name for the chapter at the moment, though this does
> unfortunately exclude Ireland, which might not be large enough to get
> its own chapter yet, so I think there is still room for changes to be
> made to incorporate them.
>
> This was discussed at <http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_UK>.
> The suggestion of using "WISE" (Wales, Ireland, Scotland, England) was
> made at http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_UK
>
> Angela.

I think it would be nice to incorporate Ireland into this chapter, but
obviously the name and the legal framework will be the problem. I'd
still like to see the efforts to focus on smaller languages be
extended to Irish Gaelic, which is in big trouble as a spoken
language. It'd be really nice to see pan-British Isles collaboration
on scholarship and general education in smaller languages, learning
lessons from the resounding success in Wales, for example. Even though
there's now a dedicated TV channel in Irish and it's a compulsory
subject throughout school, there's a big need to promote its actual
use and make it a community-based initiative. This, you understand, is
coming from someone who suffers from non-Irish-speaking-Irishperson
guilt, so I'd be happy to help out with this.

Cormac / Cormaggio


from_name: jfdwolff at doctors.org.uk

subject: [WikiEN-l] RFC

body:
I totally agree with Fastfission. There are probably quite a few editors who find themselves peacefully editing when suddenly a nasty POV-pusher comes crashing on the scene overwhelming a perfectly balanced article with biased rubbish.
By the time a POV-pusher has been stopped, a large amount of damage has been done. Often, these edits are not reverted (to keep the peace?) but weaseled down. In other instances, a shouting match develops on the talk page, which then becomes the basis for an RFC. None of this helps the quality of the content.
RFC, however, is completely inadequate. Community response to RFCs is very modest, even (or especially) when controversial articles are being discussed. Only recruiting like-minded editors through their talkpages seems to help. RFC or otherwise, it often leads to no agreement between the litigants, and mediation is sought etc etc. By that time the experienced user is already tired and wants to go back to normal editing.

Jfdwolff

Fastfission wrote:
>Yeah, I don't know. But that seems to fall into the more general
>category of "people who won't discuss", of which there is no quick and
>simple solution that I know of.

>Yes yes, I could take a lot of time filling out an RfC. And then what?
>Move it to another stage of mediation? I don't have time for that --
>it's not how I want to spend my Wikipedia experience. It's probably
>not how anybody wants to. And honestly, it's really not Wikipedia's
>best use of ME -- I'm not a mediator by heart, I'm someone who wants
>to add content by the truckloads and keep POV pushers out. But at the
>same time I believe strongly in due process. So I don't know.

>FF


from_name: Christopher Larberg

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

On 6/23/05, Anthere <anthere9 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> There are currently three chapters, in Germany, France and Italy.
> Others are currently under work, for Switzerland, England, Poland,
> Netherlands...

Has there been any discussion of a United States chapter (or, probably
more realistically, U.S. state chapters)?

- --Slowking Man

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFCu3AqCYNOh7qrRhoRApA6AJ94qMRiwhGoIvobE874zJEPtFHiQwCfV6uN
na+ljuUZ6Q/z6KUPltXbubw=
=KpKb
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


from_name: Jon

body:
ArbCom, unfortunately, but at least now with good intentions, is making another mistake on the BCE/CE arbitration. It appears to be about to declare that the MoS (or at least an extract of it) is policy. My understanding is this is not the case, and that the MoS is just a non-binding guideline.

This understanding comes from a recent discussion, initiated by SlimVirgin, who argued that the MoS had never followed the correct procedure to become policy. I argued that it had - as it was followed generally by WPians and had been effectively accepted as such by the community. However, SlimVirgin, supported by others, argued that it would need a consensus vote. I didn't persevere in countering this argument for too long, and the designation of the MoS as "policy" was removed.

It seems the ArbCom is about to reverse the effects of that discussion and declare a basic guideline as policy. As there is nothing in the general wording of the MoS to separate out the bits on BCE/CE notation from the rest, it leaves open the possibility that users not complying with the MoS (and most don't from time to time at least in some respects) are leaving themselves open to complaints.

Kind regards

Jguk

---------------------------------
Yahoo! Messenger NEW - crystal clear PC to PCcalling worldwide with voicemail


from_name: Rob Brewer

subject: [Wikitech-l] Meta hacked?

body:
On Thu, 23 Jun 2005 22:34:29 +0200 (MEST), Alfio Puglisi wrote

> It's gone, whatever it was. A bright orange banner saying something like
> "This page brought to you by Ass Pus Productions".

It was in [[m:Template:MediaWiki links]].

--
Rob Brewer <rob at rbrwr.org> <http://rbrwr.org>
"This time I want cash, not forged book tokens"


from_name: Anthere

body:
James D. Forrester a ?crit:
> On Thursday, June 23, 2005, at 12:05, Anthere <anthere9 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Other [chpaters] are currently under work, for [..] England
>
>
> Umm. The United Kingdom, please. :-)

Ohoh, apologies ;-)

(I fear we always say Angleterre, not Royaume-Uni... but we talk of the
same place hopefully :-))

> It's bad enough when Americans get the name of the country that set them up
> wrong, but we'd hope that our European friends and allies with whom we are
> in economics and social union would at least get it right. ;-)
>
> Yours,

The country that set them up ??
Economic and social union ????
/me is badly coughing here.

But I am in spirit with you, ? island accross our common channel