from_name: Redvers @ the Wikipedia

body:
From: "Sam Korn" <smoddy at gmail.com>

> This along with unreasoned "speedy" votes.  "Speedy"
> does not mean
> "because I really really think so".  There are
> circumstances where it
> is appropriate, but they are rigidly defined.
> People with half a
> degree of sense should know not to vote like this.

Sam's right, but as Mark has pointed out, complaining
here is pointless.

The changes that can be produced by policing AfD
against this sort of thing are startling. I've found
that spending a few minutes a day on AfD saying "this
isn't a vote, please state a reason for your opinion"
and "this isn't a speedy criterion, please argue for a
slow keep or find a reason what fits the current
speedy criteria" and even "AfD isn't a vote. Your
"vote" will be discounted by the closing admin. Plase
give your opinion instead" causes a great change in
those who are contributing.

Well, at the very least it causes them to watch their
language and actually provide reasoning rather than
just votes.

Also, it causes those with a POV or an ulterior motive
to reveal themselves. Both kneejerk inclusionists and
kneejerk deletionists will invariably contact the AfD
patroller and reveal a specious reason why a vote was
appropriate in a particular case. And thus you know
for future reference that they can be discounted. Or
they will contact you and explain in tortured detail
how their vote without reasoning was something other
than a vote without reasoning... and you know to
discount them in future.

What we need is an "AfD Patrol" to join RC and CV.
Members can be deletionists or inclusionists (and will
be accused by both sides of being the other). Their
personal views are worthless, as their job will be to
simply patrol AfD and refute "voters" whenever they
appear. Given three months, these patrollers will have
restored AfD to a faulty-but-mostly-working status,
rather than the current
faulty-but-often-glaringly-broken status it now has.

There is nothing else available to replace AfD.
Therefore we must make AfD work.

Anyone want to be [[WP:BOLD]] and sent up
[[Wikipedia:AfD_Patrol]]? Or do we prefer to sit here
and bitch?

And I know that the ultimate result is
[[Wikipedia:RfA_Patrol]] but one disaster at a time,
hey?

-> REDVERS

___________________________________________________________
Try the all-new Yahoo! Mail. "The New Version is radically easier to use" ? The Wall Street Journal
http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html


list: wikien-l

source: pipermail-mbox

from_name: Steve Bennett

subject: [WikiEN-l] Top-posting (was Re: Offline submissions?)

body:
On 7/5/06, Daniel R. Tobias <dan at tobias.name> wrote:
> Personally, I think top-posters should be executed by lethal
> injection (or perhaps an alternate means such as a firing squad), but
> unfortunately the laws of some countries block this sensible
> proposal.

It never ceases to amaze me how the most logic, rational people (to
wit, computer geeks) can be the most illogical and narrow-minded about
the most bizarre of subjects.

But that's enough. We're way off topic!

Steve


from_name: Fred Bauder

subject: [WikiEN-l] Ken Lay's death prompts confusion on Reuters

body:
On Jul 5, 2006, at 8:48 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:

> On 7/5/06, Fred Bauder <fredbaud at ctelco.net> wrote:
>
>> Alexa shows CNN dropping like a lead balloon, No. 38 today (they are
>> ranked 27). Perhaps they welcome a dig at the competition. BTW we are
>> even with Amazon these days.
>>
>
> Alexa's numbers are inconsistent. Don't count on them for anything.

There certainly are some strange phenomena but there is a pattern.
There is a generational change with canned goods going down and
participatory sites going up.

Fred


from_name: geni

subject: [WikiEN-l] Viral swarming teenage vanity spam

body:
On 7/5/06, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 7/5/06, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Almost any form of edit count or tenure weighing would leave this a
> > > clear consensus for delete.
> >
> > Evidences?
>
> What criteria would you consider acceptable?
>

I've seen people make up tables in the past with both sides listed by
number of edits. Quite interesting

> Um, I was editing frequently in November 2004 at the latest, if my
> contribs don't reflect that then there has been dataloss, but I don't
> see how thats material.   I'm not proposing that we treat people like
> you with over 9k edits, and me with over 20k edits across accounts and
> projects, or me who was active since the end of 2004 and you since the
> beginning of 2004 differently.

I was woundering about that. You sure you didn't change accounts or
something? I don't think there has been much dataloss of undeleted
edits since the switchover to 1.3 and that was fixed.

> I'm suggesting we treat users with zero edits, with 50 edits, with 100
> edits, with different consideration from users with months of
> experience.  Is that so hard to accept?

Traff for arbcom elections was 150 edits and 3 months. Getting that
into place was not fun (and some people still want to get rid of it
see [[Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration_Committee/Elections/December_2006#Eligibility_for_candidacy]])

> Can you honestly say that
> there is reason to automatically assume someone with 50 article edits
> has any real experience unless they tell us so?  Or are you you too a
> proponent of the "Wikipedia is not an encyclopedia... it's an
> experiment in extreme democracy" school of thought?
>

No I'm a process is important indidivdual.

> Sure, all of us were new at some point... and quite a few of the
> things I said early on were a waste of other people's time, if not
> just overtly stupid.  Had I been named supreme ruler of Wikipedia in
> my first week I would have no doubt screwed up it far worse than if I
> were named supreme ruler today.  If you don't believe the same is true
> of you, you need to take a look in the mirror and go find a good dose
> of humble.

I would argue that these days my greater knowlage would allow me more
varried and spectatular ways of screwing up.However that is beside the
point.

>
> > Outdated.
>
> Cite? There is also a single Dutch newspaper.  I too have been a part
> of fluff stories in the press, do I get an article now?
>

Well there are now 4 hits on google news (5 if you count Joystiq twice
as google appears to be doing). As for the question of your gettting
an article I seem to recall that some of the inclusionists I ran into
over the schools issue would probably have said yes.

> Wikipedia
> The Free Pop culture centre of the internet that anyone can edit
>
> Doesn't quite have the same ring to it. :) :)

Maybe but goatse is probably one of our most popular articles.

--
geni


from_name: Jesse W

body:
On Jul 5, 2006, at 9:30 PM, Fred Bauder wrote:
> On Jul 5, 2006, at 10:20 PM, Jesse W wrote:
>> If you say that we should be aim to be a better first step in research
>> than CNN, I might agree with you - I think we can get to that;
>
> CNN does news, not reference.
As does Wikinews; and if you wanted to research a current event, CNN
might be a good first step in such research, making it a reference to
that event.

I fail to see your point. ;-)

Jesse Weinstein


list: wikitech-l

from_name: xaosflux

body:
Many common antivirus products have port blocking of port 25 built in to
them as well.  Check your AV logs/disable the service for testing.
xaosflux

----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Bennett" <stevage at gmail.com>
To: "Wikimedia developers" <wikitech-l at wikimedia.org>
Sent: Tuesday, July 04, 2006 5:53 AM
Subject: Re: [Wikitech-l] Microsoft Exchange Server and Mediawiki

> On 7/4/06, Mei Wu <mwu.mailbox at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Right now, the internal Microsoft smtp server, which is included in
>> the IIS 5, is running. Because the Wiki is running on the same
>> computer as the smtp server does, I am little bit confused what the
>> problem might be. I configured the smtp server to allow relay with no
>> authentication, but it didn't work.
>> Are there any specific configurations I have to make to get the smtp
>> server to send out emails in a LAN ?
>
> If you can't telnet to the server on port 25, then that's your biggest
> problem. Relaying doesn't even come into it. It's possibly listening
> on a different port? I suspect that either:
> * the server is not actually running
> * it's not actually a genuine SMTP server that receives SMTP requests on
> port 25
> * something else like a firewall is blocking you.
>
> Steve
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


from_name: Ilmari Karonen

subject: [Wikitech-l] Pageview counters

body:
????????? ??????? wrote:
>>An approximate and inaccurate pageview counter is better than none.
>
> We have something like this in Russian Wikipedia.
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Ruwiki_pgcounter

That's clever.  I can think of a couple of minor improvements, but the
obvious one, if this was implemented on the English Wikipedia, would be
to only insert the link randomly on, say, one page in 100.

Of course, the sample will be biased since the trick only works with
Javascript, but for many statistical purposes that is acceptable.

--
Ilmari Karonen


subject: [Wikitech-l] Pageview counters

body:
On 7/5/06, Rob Church <robchur at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 05/07/06, Neil Harris <neil at tonal.clara.co.uk> wrote:
> > If this would not be practical, please let me know why.
>
> The fact that we don't retain the logs is perhaps a wee bit prohibitive.

Since so many people seem to find the idea of log analysis attractive,
would it be possible to have a bit more information about:
* which logs *could* be kept with a simple flick switch
* why those are not kept
* whether they could be turned on for brief periods (like 24 hours) to
allow periodic data collection
* what alternative solutions might exist

It seems like there are at least three different places where log data
could be collected:
* on the mysql database - probably very "expensive"
* on mediawiki (ie, in php code) - probably much more attractive,
could add tuning to only record every 10th or 100th hit or whatever
* on the "squids" (presumably, proxy servers) - no idea
* some other web mechanism, like tomcat? or whatever web server is
running (or is that squid??)

Is there absolutely no way that data could be collected at any of
these points, even for short periods, and even filtered?

Steve


body:
On Jul 5, 2006, at 10:06 PM, Jesse W wrote:

> On Jul 5, 2006, at 8:39 PM, Fred Bauder wrote:
>
>> On Jul 5, 2006, at 8:48 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
>>
>>> On 7/5/06, Fred Bauder <fredbaud at ctelco.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Alexa shows CNN dropping like a lead balloon, No. 38 today (they
>>>> are
>>>> ranked 27). Perhaps they welcome a dig at the competition. BTW
>>>> we are
>>>> even with Amazon these days.
>>>>
>>> Alexa's numbers are inconsistent. Don't count on them for anything.
>>>
>> There certainly are some strange phenomena but there is a pattern.
>> There is a generational change with canned goods going down and
>> participatory sites going up.
>>
> CNN *is not* our competition!  Not even of Wikinews!  We are
> *tertiary*
> sources, i.e. we summarize and coordinate what secondary sources make
> of actual facts on the ground (i.e. primary sources).  We'd be
> impoverished and in trouble without CNN, the Stanford Encyclopedia of
> Philosophy and all the rest of the "mainstream media" - We Don't Have
> The Money To Pay Reporters - and even if we did, that's not our
> purpose.
>
> Jesse Weinstein

We are, in a sense, parasitic on them and other original content
providers. But they provide no significant opportunity for
participatory input. Besides, they don't cover Pokeman nearly as well
as we do.

Fred


list: foundation-l

subject: [Foundation-l] The Perl Wiki, or Perl-Wikipedia

body:
On 7/5/06, Eric R. Meyers <ermeyers at adelphia.net> wrote:
> If I came to "The Wrong Place" to discuss ideas with the Wikimedia experts,
> then please direct me to "The Right People" to talk to at Wikimedia.  I just
> see a very good parallel for the needs of "The Perl Wiki," as what Wikipedia
> has been doing for all of the topics under the sun.  Perl topics are just a
> subset of All topics.  There is no sense in doing something different and
> separate for the many varied topics in Perl, when Wikimedia has been coming
> up with fantastic solutions for encyclopedic information and all topics in
> general.  I don't know what can and can't be done yet, but I do know that
> Wikimedia is doing "The Right Stuff," so that is why I'm here willing to
> learn and discuss these integration problems, while personally risking
> looking like an idiot in public. :)
>
> Eric

Closest would be the wikibooks thing. Other than that you would be
looking to start a completely new project which is unlikely to work
too well.

--
geni


list: wikimedia-l


body:
On Jul 5, 2006, at 10:20 PM, Jesse W wrote:

> If you say that we should be aim to be a better first step in research
> than CNN, I might agree with you - I think we can get to that;

CNN does news, not reference.

Fred


from_name: Gregory Maxwell

body:
On 7/5/06, Fred Bauder <fredbaud at ctelco.net> wrote:
> Alexa shows CNN dropping like a lead balloon, No. 38 today (they are
> ranked 27). Perhaps they welcome a dig at the competition. BTW we are
> even with Amazon these days.

Alexa's numbers are inconsistent. Don't count on them for anything.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Keep and Relist

body:
On 7/5/06, Erik Moeller <eloquence at gmail.com> wrote:
> I'd like to push the notion of "keeping and relisting" pages on AfD as
> - an appropriate means of closing controversial AfDs with a high level
> of outside participation
> - a good alternative "vote" to express on such AfDs (e.g. "'''Keep and
> relist''' on AfD in 4 weeks").
[snip]

This would further shift control of the AfD process towards extremists
who are heavily involved pushing their particular agenda and whom are
often the source of the AfD hostility that keeps more moderate users
away from the process.

It's a minority of deletions that are at all controversial, even after
prod. These controversial AfDs are poisonous to the community and
while they are few in relative number they can be large in impact.
They divide us into factions and voting blocks and they encourage
combat rather than cooperation. As such the real problem with
controversial AfD's isn't the outcome of the AfD but the impact on our
users.

As such, I think it is most important that we settle such AfDs as
quickly and efficiently as possible regardless of the outcome. At
times it would seem clearly better to consistently make the wrong
decision then to prolong the arguments... as such I can't see
supporting something thats just going to twist the knife in the wound.

If you were instead suggest something like "relist in one year", I'd
answer that it doesn't take wikien-l discussion or policy changes to
achieve that. ... For the past three months I've been making a list of
every article kept due to what appears to me to be pop-culture mania.
Once each entry is a year old I'll begin proding the ones that
everyone has forgotten about.


body:
On 7/5/06, Eric R. Meyers <ermeyers at adelphia.net> wrote:
> I didn't actually expect negativity towards what I believe will be a good
> thing.

Apoligies you arived in the middle of a seperate discussion that has
had some side effects.

> The immediate first impressions have brought reactions about
> copyright and trademark violations, but I'm not here to steal.  I'm here to
> use and emulate a very good thing.

Most of the stuff is free content so stealing outside some very narrow
areas would be somewhat tricky.

>I absolutely agree with you that part of
> the solution will be a multitude of references to Wikibooks, but another part
> of it will likely be Wikipedia-like encyclopedic topical references, and the
> other Wikimedia components, which I will be investigating tonight.
>
> Why would a completely new project be "unlikely to work too well?"
>

Problems with finding an editorbase. The foundation doesn't have much
in the way of a history of doing single issue projects. there appears
to be a general bias against them amoung the various wikimedia editor
bases since they tend to duplicat the work of either wikipedia or
wikibooks.

> What is it that you are seeing that will limit me to just using Wikibooks?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Eric
>

Setting up a new type of project within the foundation is a slow
process. You best bet is probably either to stick with the articles on
wikipedia and wikibooks or to start your own project on one of the
various free wiki hosts or your own server.

--
geni


from_name: Brion Vibber

subject:
[Wikitech-l] Warning: Missing argument 2
	for	wfParserFunctionsLanguageGetMagic()

body:
Please stop double-posting to two mailing lists. It makes it very difficult to
follow the discussion thread.

Ulisse Savi wrote:
> Warning: Missing argument 2 for wfParserFunctionsLanguageGetMagic() in /home/httpd/vhosts/encyclopedia.meta99.com/httpdocs/extensions/ParserFunctions/ParserFunctions.php on line 144

Current ParserFunctions almost certainly requires MediaWiki 1.7. Get it from SVN
or wait for the release tomorrow.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 249 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20060705/ea6d8c34/attachment.pgp>


from_name: Simetrical

subject: [Wikitech-l] Pageview counters

body:
On 7/5/06, Rob Church <robchur at gmail.com> wrote:
> Just to ask...where was this stated? I'd have thought that there'd be
> some archive evidence of our CTO agreeing to this.

Alexander provided a link:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Anthere&diff=363353&oldid=358186.
 Apparently he asked Anthere, who asked Brion.


from_name: George Herbert

body:
On 7/5/06, George Herbert <george.herbert at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 7/5/06, Redvers @ the Wikipedia <wikiredvers at yahoo.ie> wrote:
> > Anyone want to be [[WP:BOLD]] and sent up
> > [[Wikipedia:AfD_Patrol]]? Or do we prefer to sit here
> > and bitch?
>
> If nobody else gets to it, I may have some bandwidth later tonight.

Done.  [[Wikipedia:AfD Patrol]].  Userbox coming later.  My wife's
working on the icon for it.

--
-george william herbert
george.herbert at gmail.com


from_name: Erik Moeller

body:
On 7/5/06, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell at gmail.com> wrote:
> Going down the VFD page it would appear that a large number, if not a
> majority, of the 'keep' voters have less than 50 article edits. Some
> have no article edits at all.

First of all, I strongly advocate quickly semi-protecting AfDs in
cases like this to avoid too much newbie noise. Newbies can still
comment on the talk page.

The high level of newbie participation is exactly the problem with
articles like this. When an AfD has a very large number of newbies
defending the article (and a large amount of OR and speculative edits
before then), admins tend to interpret all "Keep" arguments as part of
the same newbie reaction. This leads to the interesting phenomenon
that an article may be more likely to be deleted if there's
substantial outside interest in it.

Note that I argued "Weak keep". It's not a very popular or interesting
website -- hardly worth crying over -- but it did receive coverage in
a newspaper with over half a million readers, and on several popular
websites, including Slashdot, which has a paid editorial staff and
more traffic than Wired. Ironically, Wikipedia has a very strong
emotional bias against blogs and other new types of Internet
publications.

As a freelance journalist, I find that somewhat concerning. I have
written for newspapers with large circulations, and I know that
fact-checking before deadlines is often minimal. Several of the
articles I wrote for print publications have been made considerably
worse by the editorial staff (i.e. obvious factual and grammatical
errors introduced).

It is not wise to believe that something magically becomes notable the
moment some print journalist for the NYT cares about, and it magically
becomes irrelevant the moment the "blogosphere" reports about it. We
need fair and reasonable standards of notability which take into
account the fact that our media landscape is radically transforming.

Under a regular AfD, this "Eon8" site would probably have closely
passed WP:WEB (which is a guideline anyway),  as many web comics,
borderline notable websites, memes, and so on do. We should not have
kept it because many confused teenagers thought they were witness to
an important event. But we should also not have deleted for that same
reason. Notability should be independent of outside interest.

Erik


from_name: Walter Vermeir

subject: [Wikitech-l] Pageview counters

body:
????????? ??????? schreef:
>>An approximate and inaccurate pageview counter is better than none.
>
>
> We have something like this in Russian Wikipedia.
>
> See
>
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Ruwiki_pgcounter
>
> http://tools.wikimedia.de/~edwardspec/cgi-bin/top100_ng.cgi
>
> --
> Alexander Sigachov

I am sure that many other wikis would like to have this also. But other
page count systems have been removed in that past by Brion because of
privacy reasons. If this systems gets the blessing of Brion then can
this service been expanded to other wikis?

--
Contact: walter AT wikizine DOT org
Wikizine.org - news for and about the Wikimedia community


from_name: brion at pobox.com

subject: [Wikitech-l] MediaWiki automated test run failure 2006-07-06

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

Running test Table security: embedded pipes (http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2006-April/034637.html)... FAILED!
Running test Link containing double-single-quotes '' (bug 4598)... FAILED!
Running test Template with thumb image (wiht link in description)... FAILED!
Running test message transform: <noinclude> in transcluded template (bug 4926)... FAILED!
Running test message transform: <onlyinclude> in transcluded template (bug 4926)... FAILED!
Running test BUG 1887, part 2: A <math> with a thumbnail- math enabled... FAILED!
Running test Language converter: output gets cut off unexpectedly (bug 5757)... FAILED!
Running test HTML bullet list, unclosed tags (bug 5497)... FAILED!
Running test HTML ordered list, unclosed tags (bug 5497)... FAILED!
Running test HTML nested bullet list, open tags (bug 5497)... FAILED!
Running test HTML nested ordered list, open tags (bug 5497)... FAILED!
Running test Parsing optional HTML elements (Bug 6171)... FAILED!
Running test Inline HTML vs wiki block nesting... FAILED!
Running test Mixing markup for italics and bold... FAILED!

Passed 393 of 407 tests (96.56%) FAILED!


from_name: Mathias Schindler

body:
While Reuters initially meant to report on [[Kenneth Lay]]'s article
on enwp and the pace of the edits on that page, it gave a nice insight
into the mechanisms of information delivery:

Version 1:

http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=internetNews&storyID=2006-07-05T195309Z_01_N05296006_RTRIDST_0_OUKIN-UK-ENRON-LAY-WIKIPEDIA.XML
Ken Lay's death prompts confusion on Wikipedia
Wed Jul 5, 2006 8:53 PM BST167

Lay, 64, died of a heart attack early on Wednesday, a family
spokeswoman said, just six weeks after a jury found him guilty of
fraud in one of the biggest corporate scandals in U.S. history.

Version 2:
http://in.today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=technologyNews&storyID=2006-07-06T031803Z_01_NOOTR_RTRJONC_0_India-258341-2.xml
CORRECTED - Ken Lay's death prompts confusion on Wikipedia
Thu Jul 6, 2006 3:25 AM IST166

Lay, 64, died of an apparent heart attack, according to a pastor at
the Lay family's church in Houston. It was six weeks after a jury
found him guilty of fraud in one of the biggest corporate scandals in
U.S. history. A family spokeswoman said that Lay passed away early on
Wednesday morning in Aspen.

Version 2 contains a "sorry, we failed to make factchecking before
sending it to the wires" header:

"(Corrects and recasts paragraph two to show that a spokeswoman for
the Lay family did not give the cause of Lay's death. It was given by
another source.)"


body:
Hello Eric,

as geni has explained, the Wikimedia Foundation tends to launch broad
projects over narrow ones: Wikipedia over "an encyclopedia of birds",
Wikinews over "a news site about health issues", Wikisource over
"public domain novels", and so on.

Much of the content of an "encyclopedia of Perl" would likely have a
place in our existing Wikipedia and Wikibooks projects. For source
code, there's also an interesting wiki at:
http://en.literateprograms.org/

What would be the justification for starting a new separate Wikimedia
site just for Perl? Mind you, nothing will stop you from setting up
your own site using the MediaWiki software (except maybe an aversion
to PHP ;-). You can also use a wiki hosting service, like the ones
listed at:
http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Wiki_Science:How_to_start_a_Wiki

Erik


from_name: Oskar Sigvardsson

body:
Now that's just plain funny (well, not the dying part). They report on
the inaccuracies of some versions ?f a wikipedia article (which we
warned about, btw) and then make a mistake themselves, a mistake that
could have easily been fixed had it been in wikinews.

People tend to complain when people misuse the word "irony". Honestly,
I'm not sure about the exact definition (last time I checked the
wikipedia article, it wasn't entirely clear), but this is it, right?

--Oskar

On 7/6/06, Mathias Schindler <mathias.schindler at gmail.com> wrote:
> While Reuters initially meant to report on [[Kenneth Lay]]'s article
> on enwp and the pace of the edits on that page, it gave a nice insight
> into the mechanisms of information delivery:
>
> Version 1:
>
> http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=internetNews&storyID=2006-07-05T195309Z_01_N05296006_RTRIDST_0_OUKIN-UK-ENRON-LAY-WIKIPEDIA.XML
> Ken Lay's death prompts confusion on Wikipedia
> Wed Jul 5, 2006 8:53 PM BST167
>
> Lay, 64, died of a heart attack early on Wednesday, a family
> spokeswoman said, just six weeks after a jury found him guilty of
> fraud in one of the biggest corporate scandals in U.S. history.
>
> Version 2:
> http://in.today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=technologyNews&storyID=2006-07-06T031803Z_01_NOOTR_RTRJONC_0_India-258341-2.xml
> CORRECTED - Ken Lay's death prompts confusion on Wikipedia
> Thu Jul 6, 2006 3:25 AM IST166
>
> Lay, 64, died of an apparent heart attack, according to a pastor at
> the Lay family's church in Houston. It was six weeks after a jury
> found him guilty of fraud in one of the biggest corporate scandals in
> U.S. history. A family spokeswoman said that Lay passed away early on
> Wednesday morning in Aspen.
>
>
>
> Version 2 contains a "sorry, we failed to make factchecking before
> sending it to the wires" header:
>
> "(Corrects and recasts paragraph two to show that a spokeswoman for
> the Lay family did not give the cause of Lay's death. It was given by
> another source.)"
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: Michael R. Irwin

subject: [Foundation-l] Wikiversity - feedback

body:
Cormac Lawler wrote:

>Believe me, I'm as
>anxious to get Wikiversity set up as you are, and as frustrated it's
>taken this long, but that doesn't change where we are or what we are
>doing - which is to develop and realise as clear and realistic a
>project as possible.
>
>
An interesting perspective.

Sometimes when pursuing parallel development of massive projects it
helps to have additional effort applied.   It seems pretty clear that
the cast of thousands has declined to nominate themselves for your
committee's assessment and approval.   Perhaps we should consider
getting the permanent wiki domain operational so those who wish to can
begin contributing in ways other than committee chit chat or other
leadership responsibilities.

We might even entice the occasional participant to participate in a
policy discussion by mistake once in a great while.

As I recall your committee's charter it said something about energizing
or activating Wikiversity effectively, nothing about designing it in
detail before the participants show up and figure out what works to
attract further effective participation.

lazyquasar


subject: [Foundation-l] Wikiversity - feedback


list: commons-l

subject: [Commons-l] Policy update on overwriting and deleting files

body:
Welcome to all the new subscribers to this mailing list. :-)

A few recent policy updates:

The practice of overwriting images with red crosses when a "superior"
version is available is to be considered deprecated. In other words:
please don't do it anymore.

Please only delete redundant files if they are no longer in use
anywhere in Wikimedia. Use the "check usage" tab on the file
description page to do so. For the PNG=>SVG transition, tagging
obsolete PNGs with [[Template:SupersededSVG]] is preferable to
deleting or overwriting old images.

Overwriting files by someone else should be done with extreme caution,
especially if the file is in use in Wikimedia. In most cases, it will
be preferable to upload an alternative version, and point people to
it. Many photographers understandably do not appreciate it if their
work is substantially altered -- even more so, if that alteration is
made on Commons and silently propagates to a project that uses the
photo.

That is not to say that the "wiki principle" of editing does not apply
to images and other media files. Consensus and caution are just much
more advisable here due to the crossing of project and language
barriers.

There has been a lot of recent tension between users from other
projects, and Commons admins, and I hope that these changes will
improve cross-project cooperation.

Arnomane and Duesentrieb have been working on updating the Deletion Guidelines:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_guidelines&action=history

There is also ongoing discussion about these issues on the Village Pump:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Village_pump

Best,

Erik


from_name: Abigail Brady

subject: [Wikitech-l] Pageview counters

body:
On 7/6/06, Nick Jenkins <nickpj at gmail.com> wrote:
> > But other
> > page count systems have been removed in that past by Brion because of
> > privacy reasons.
>
> Well, it *is* a pretty good reason. If you store any logs and are a
> high-profile source of public information and those logs can in any
> way be linked back to a specific user, then you must assume that
> sooner or later someone may take you to court to get access to those
> logs.

And then the way to stop this is to abstract the logs for the traffic
we want, and throw the raw logs away as quickly as possible.
Something of the the level of data that google trends can provide to
the public is basically the type of thing we'd want to have (broad
numbers on the only most popular search terms/pages).

--
Abi


subject: [WikiEN-l] Keep and Relist

body:
I'd like to push the notion of "keeping and relisting" pages on AfD as
- an appropriate means of closing controversial AfDs with a high level
of outside participation
- a good alternative "vote" to express on such AfDs (e.g. "'''Keep and
relist''' on AfD in 4 weeks").

I think the discussion about pages like Eon8 has been hampered by the
perception that a page, once kept, will reside in Wikipedia forever.

To me, this is an example of old-fashioned encyclopedic thinking. But
we are not living in an old-fashioned culture, and Wikipedia is not a
traditional, "patient" medium. We update existing articles with
information about events the moment they happen, whether it's someone
dying or a football score. We often remove or summarize information
that has been added during a particular event once it has phased into
our cultural memory.

However, in the area of judging the existence of articles, I think we
are currently dominated by a "Keep vs. Delete" attitude, the idea that
an article is either "utter rubbish" or "eternal wisdom." We are split
ideologically into factions of "deletionists" or "inclusionists".  I
think this is wrong.

We need novel thinking, because we are dealing with novel problems.
Internet subcultures would like their every fart to be documented for
eternity. Are we going to do that? Of course not. But I don't see
anything wrong in principle with including ephemeral information in an
ephemeral manner.

Of course, there can be no compromise on verifiability or WP:NOR --
Wikipedia is not a soap box or a place to explore novel theories. Nor
am I proposing that spammers should be given room to promote their
products for a "limited time only" (pardon the pun). What I am saying
is that there are ephemeral phenomena that generate a lot of noise in
ephemeral media like blogs, and in many cases there's nothing wrong
with documenting them -- ephemerally.

Erik


body:
On 7/6/06, Eric R. Meyers <ermeyers at adelphia.net> wrote:
> No problem.  I understand Wikimedia's interest of breadth of topics in
> Wikipedia, over depth of topics

Wikipedia has breadth and depth. The key criteria are
- verifiability
- neutral description
- encyclopedic (rather than howtos, source documents, etc.)

See also:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Five_pillars

Projects are generally split along the lines of fundamental _types_ of
content, rather than _topics_. The one, somewhat regrettable exception
to this rule is Wikispecies, which may eventually be integrated in a
larger project dedicated to structured scientific data.

> but how do we correctly tie a
> special-interest encyclopedia, "The Free Encyclopedia of Perl," into the main
> general-purpose encyclopedia, "The Free Encyclopedia,"

Within Wikipedia, there are so-called "WikiProjects". These are
community members who organize themselves to focus on a particular
topic. See the WikiProject programming languages as an example:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Programming_languages

There is a descendant WikiProject for C++, and I see no reason why
there shouldn't be one for Perl. Wikipedians also create content
portals for particular topics:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal%3ABrowse

If there's enough content in the area of Perl alone, there could be a
Perl portal. There is already a category with everything related to
Perl in Wikipedia here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Perl

Finally, if you want to work in multiple projects, we have special
boxes (so-called templates) which we can add to articles in order to
cross-reference resources in other Wikimedia projects:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia%3ASister_projects

Using these boxes, you could reference a related Wikibook. The
Literate Programs wiki is not currently a Wikimedia project (though I
think it would be an excellent candidate to become one), but there
would be no problem with referencing http://en.literateprograms.org/
in the right places.

Please disseminate this information to the other people you've
corresponded with about this idea. ;-)

Best,

Erik


from_name: Rob Church

subject:
[Wikitech-l] Strange words that don't exists in Wikipediaand
	MonoBook.tpl the output continue to be identical ?

body:
On 06/07/06, Ulisse Savi <ulisavi at tin.it> wrote:
> has strange words in the page :
>
> {{#if:|  [[{{{diversity_link}}}|Diversity]]}}
> {{#if:|  Binomial name
> {{{binomial}}}}}
[snip]

These are uses of the ParserFunctions extension which is installed on
all Wikimedia web sites and allows simple expression matching, etc.
within wiki text. See http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/ParserFunctions
for information on how to obtain, install and use them.

> 2) I do not understand where is the system to change the output template/skin. I have changed some file in the directory /skins/ . For example the MonoBook.tpl but the output continue to be the same. If i change the directly the MonoBook.tpl file in the directory

Monobook.tpl is part of the callback template processor, which isn't
in use at the moment. Edit skins/Monobook.php instead.

Rob Church


subject: [Wikitech-l] Pageview counters

body:
On 06/07/06, ????????? ??????? <alexander.sigachov at gmail.com> wrote:
> Brion said it was probably okay to use this for the moment, but
> eventually, developers will want to replace it.

Just to ask...where was this stated? I'd have thought that there'd be
some archive evidence of our CTO agreeing to this.

It might be ok to use as far as Brion is concerned, but I'm rather
interested in the sort of load it's placing on Zedler...

Rob Church


from_name: Jeffrey V. Merkey

subject:
[Foundation-l] Cherokee MediaWiki Parser Extension for Syllabary
	Editing

body:
Cherokee MediaWiki parser extension for chr.wikipedia.org and
www.wikigadugi.org completed and posted.  Programs can be downloaded
and tested.  Enjoy.

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Chr2syl

has all the info.

Jeff


from_name: Ulisse Savi

body:
I have installed a mirror of Wikipedia in my site here :
http://encyclopedia.meta99.com/
But i have some problems. I never used MediaWiki in past and i'm a newbie.
Can you help me ?

1) Some pages has strange words that don't exists in Wikipedia-
For example the "Cats" page and the "Dogs page" :

http://encyclopedia.meta99.com/wiki/Dogs
http://encyclopedia.meta99.com/wiki/Cats

has strange words in the page :

{{#if:|  [[{{{diversity_link}}}|Diversity]]}}
{{#if:|  Binomial name
{{{binomial}}}}}
{{#if:Felis silvestris catus|  Trinomial name
Felis silvestris catus(Linnaeus, 1758)}}
{{#if:|  Type Genus
{{{type_genus}}}}}
{{#if:|  Type Species
{{{type_species}}}}}
{{#if:|  [[image:{{{range_map}}}|200px|]]}}
{{#if:|  {{{binomial2}}}}}
{{#if:|  {{{trinomial2}}}}}
{{#if:|  [[image:{{{range_map2}}}|200px|]]}}
{{#if:|  {{{binomial3}}}}}
{{#if:|  {{{trinomial3}}}}}
{{#if:|  [[image:{{{range_map3}}}|200px|]]}}
{{#if:|  {{{binomial4}}}}}
{{#if:|  {{{trinomial4}}}}}
{{#if:|  [[image:{{{range_map4}}}|200px|]]}}
{{#if:|  {{{subdivision_ranks}}}}}
{{#if:|

Why these terrible words ?
Exist a setting to disable the words in the output ?

2) I do not understand where is the system to change the output template/skin. I have changed some file in the directory /skins/ . For example the MonoBook.tpl but the output continue to be the same. If i change the directly the MonoBook.tpl file in the directory   /skins/  why the output is identical ? A problem of cache ? I need ro change the html output to make it similar to my other pages different from MediaWiki. But i have failed to change the template. Why if i change directly  MonoBook.tpl  the output continue to be identical ?


from_name: Fred Bauder

body:
On Jul 5, 2006, at 10:41 PM, Jesse W wrote:

> On Jul 5, 2006, at 9:30 PM, Fred Bauder wrote:
>
>> On Jul 5, 2006, at 10:20 PM, Jesse W wrote:
>>
>>> If you say that we should be aim to be a better first step in
>>> research
>>> than CNN, I might agree with you - I think we can get to that;
>>>
>>
>> CNN does news, not reference.
>>
> As does Wikinews; and if you wanted to research a current event, CNN
> might be a good first step in such research, making it a reference to
> that event.
>
> I fail to see your point. ;-)
>
> Jesse Weinstein

The point is that if you wish to research psychoanalysis,
[[Psychoanalysis]] is always there (A article which needs work) while
only if psychoanalysis is in the news, would you bother with CNN.

Fred


subject: [WikiEN-l] Keep and Relist

body:
On Jul 5, 2006, at 6:24 PM, Erik Moeller wrote:

> including ephemeral information in an
> ephemeral manner

The wisdom of Solomon, to everything there is  a season.

Fred


subject: [WikiEN-l] WikiEN-l] Keep and Relist

body:
On Jul 6, 2006, at 4:34 AM, Daniel P. B. Smith wrote:

> but the idea that a Wikipedia page is
> forever is very deeply ingrained.

So was my idea that you should never throw a book away. That idea has
diminished in power as unsalable books have vastly increased in
number. We don't need to keep stuff around that no one is interested
in anymore.

Fred


from_name: Александр Сигачёв

subject: [Wikitech-l] Pageview counters

body:
> I am sure that many other wikis would like to have this also. But other
> page count systems have been removed in that past by Brion because of
> privacy reasons. If this systems gets the blessing of Brion then can
> this service been expanded to other wikis?

That's completely anonymous referrers and hits counter. The statistics
is not list of hits, but number of hits for each page

Brion said it was probably okay to use this for the moment, but
eventually, developers will want to replace it.

http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Anthere&diff=363353&oldid=358186

--
Alexander Sigachov


from_name: Daniel P. B. Smith

subject: [WikiEN-l] WikiEN-l] Keep and Relist

body:
> From: "Erik Moeller" <eloquence at gmail.com>
>
> I think the discussion about pages like Eon8 has been hampered by the
> perception that a page, once kept, will reside in Wikipedia forever.
<snip>
> We need novel thinking, because we are dealing with novel problems.
> Internet subcultures would like their every fart to be documented for
> eternity. Are we going to do that? Of course not. But I don't see
> anything wrong in principle with including ephemeral information in an
> ephemeral manner.

Interesting but quixotic. No, I _really_ mean it _is_ interesting,
and I'm trying to let the idea soak in to figure out what it means or
ought to mean or implies... but the idea that a Wikipedia page is
forever is very deeply ingrained.

In the first AfD on Eon8, one user commented:

"Wait until the countdown reaches zero, then either Keep if it is not
a hoax, or Delete if it is. Will (message me!) 09:47, 30 June 2006
(UTC)"

But how did this user vote after the countdown reached zero and the
site was revealed to be a hoax?

*Keep Will (message me!) 09:34, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
    **Any specific reason?--Andeh 09:57, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

P. S. Am I the only one bemused by the number of people who seemed to
think a teaser campaign was something novel?

One user commented "This website was a signifgant event of the
internet. It was the first of its kind: a website that absolutely no
one but the creator knew what it was."

No, I am NOT old enough to remember the ad campaign that began with
billboards saying "The camels are coming..." and eventually disclosed
that "Camel Cigarettes Are Here!"

And I am certainly not old enough to remember the business venture
floated in the early 1700s with the prospectus "A company for
carrying on an undertaking of great advantage, but nobody to know
what it is."


subject:
[Wikitech-l] Warning: Missing argument 2 for
	wfParserFunctionsLanguageGetMagic()

body:
I have a problem with ParserFunctions extension. I need to install ParserFunctions extension because in a wikipedia mirror i continue to have strange words in the output (here for example : http://encyclopedia.meta99.com/wiki/Dogs   and here http://encyclopedia.meta99.com/wiki/Cats ).
A supported told me that "ParserFunctions extension is installed on
ALL Wikimedia web sites and allows simple expression matching". The problem is that i have NOT found it in the script i have download here : http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki_1.6

I have installed the ParserFunctions following the instructions i have found here :
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/ParserFunctions
Installation
Download both of these files and put them in a new directory called ParserFunctions in your extensions directory.
Expr.php
ParserFunctions.php
Then put the following at the end of your LocalSettings.php:

require_once( "$IP/extensions/ParserFunctions/ParserFunctions.php" );

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

BUT I HAVE THE ERROR :
http://encyclopedia.meta99.com/wiki/Cats

Warning: Missing argument 2 for wfParserFunctionsLanguageGetMagic() in /home/httpd/vhosts/encyclopedia.meta99.com/httpdocs/extensions/ParserFunctions/ParserFunctions.php on line 144

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

HERE :
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:ParserFunctions#Unable_to_install_2

Many other user has the same identical problem. Without solution at the moment. Can somebody help me. I can post the solution here :
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:ParserFunctions#Unable_to_install_2
For future reference.
I'm also a newbie....


from_name: Mark Gallagher

body:
G'day Gregory,

> Is every random spammer who hits 'edit' automatically a member of the
> 'community'?

No, you have to put a userbox saying "This user masturbates with his/her
left hand only" on your userpage before you can consider yourself a
member of the "community".

> Why would we give automatic suffrage to folks who have not yet
> demonstrated a significant degree of support or even understanding of
> the goals of the project?

Greg, Greg, Greg!  Tut, tut.  You of all people ...

The concept of "suffrage" is not relevant to AfD, because *xfD is not a
vote*.  Newbies flooding an AfD discussion and needing to be ignored is
a Big Problem ... if you're one of those few silly billy closers who
count votes and make poor decisions and let the side down badly.

We let people edit articles with no community standing at all.  Why
wouldn't we let them add evidence to an AfD discussion?  Newbies, it's
true, don't usually contribute anything worthwhile to an AfD --- and if
they don't, I'll ignore them on that particular discussion on that basis
alone.  If a new user *does* have something of value to say, then I'll
take their views into account, whether they have 50 article edits or 5000.

<snip/>

> Almost any form of edit count or tenure weighing would leave this a
> clear consensus for delete. Even more importantly, the arguments on
> the delete side are far more compelling in my view: for example,
> Thatcher131's observation that "eon8 gets one hit on Google News and
> one hit on Lexis/Nexis; both are blog-related hits based solely on the
> claims of the website itself". With that in mind, how can you claim
> that the article isn't an attempt to spread an idea as opposed to
> merely documenting already popular idea?

"Even more importantly"?  I'd say the argument of the alleged strength
of the "delete" case (I haven't read the subpage myself) far outweighs
any "they don't have suffrage!"-type comments.

<snip/>

--
Mark Gallagher
"What?  I can't hear you, I've got a banana on my head!"
- Danger Mouse


from_name: Steve Bennett

subject: [Wikitech-l] Pageview counters

body:
On 7/6/06, Abigail Brady <morwen at evilmagic.org> wrote:
> And then the way to stop this is to abstract the logs for the traffic
> we want, and throw the raw logs away as quickly as possible.
> Something of the the level of data that google trends can provide to
> the public is basically the type of thing we'd want to have (broad
> numbers on the only most popular search terms/pages).

Yep. If the biggest concerns are disk space and privacy, then the
answer is obviously to collect logs for short periods of time that
look vaguely like:

[[George W Bush]] 130.158.1.4 1/4/2006 12:00
[[Bill Clinton] 130.158.1.4  1/4/2006:12:01
[[George W Bush]] 200.0.0.4 1/4/2006:12:01

then every few hours or even minutes reprocess them into this sort of format:
[[George W Bush]] 2 1/4/2006
[[Bill Clinton]] 1 1/4/2006

and discard the original log files. Less disk space (entries that
receive less than N hits could even be discarded altogether from the
aggregate log) and no privacy concerns.

I understand if there's no one to actually implement this at the moment though.

Steve


from_name: Александр Сигачёв

subject: [Wikitech-l] Pageview counters

body:
> Alexander provided a link:
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Anthere&diff=363353&oldid=358186.
>  Apparently he asked Anthere, who asked Brion.

Yes, but he was not me. I actually voted against the counter (but
majority of Russian Wikipedia community was for)

Developer of the counter is Edward Chernenko.
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Edward_Chernenko

--
Alexander Sigachov
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:ajvol


from_name: Matt Brown

body:
On 7/6/06, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:
> An  argument that fails when you consider you only need an absolute
> majority to keep something deleted on DRV. If it is to be more than a
> process review area then that is illogical.

I've seen DRV overturn deletion in cases where new evidence came to
light; and a couple of times, even, cases when no new evidence came up
but more users got involved and the deletion was overturned.

It's perhaps not the /best/ system, but it does on occasion at least
do more than simply check if process was properly applied.

-Matt


from_name: Patrick-Emil Zörner

subject: [Commons-l] COA copyright policies and other legal stuff,..

body:
Since Eric was posting a hint on all common admins talk pages I use
this opportunity to talk about a subject I strongly feel about.

BTW I am subscribing to this ML and have been since the beginning. The
reason I have not been reading the ML or making posts here is a
completly differnt one.

When I was trying to go through the deletion tags to dispose images
that are against the commons policy I found the following:

http://commons.wikimedia.org//wiki/Template%3ASlovakCityCOA

Concerning COAs my believe always was that we have to care about:

1) Copyright(, Urheberrecht,...) whatever it may be in your country
2) It must be commercial.
3) People must be able to modify it.

To 1) in most cases we do not need to care about that dealing with
COAs since they are ooooooooooold.
However the points 2) and 3) make me feel uneasy and I know there was
a long discussion on de WP.

Concerning point 2) some of you might know that the german newspaper
"Die Zeit" was using the COA of the federal state and city Hamburg and
needed to change the COA on the front cover because of a senat
decision in Hamburg. Personally I think that such a behaviour is
silly. I mean it is not like they have been printing toilet paper with
the COA of Hamburg and selling the stuff. Even printing the COA of a
town on t-shirts and selling them could cause legal trouble IMHO.

To 3) the Brockhaus Multimedial (a germen encyclopedia on DVD) uses
stylised COAs. I totally do not get why they did that. What I am
saying is that this could be interpreted as a modification plus
commercial use. Modifing a COA and selling the stuff on some
merchandising items could cause legal problems too IMHO.

Summary: I do not think that COA go 100% with wikimedia project
policies concerning points 2 and 3. Personally I even think that COAs
as a picture in an encyclopedia are nice to have but not necessary.
But since they seem accepted in the Wikimedia projects commons should
keep them all and without exception since they are PD with some legal
framework attached to them. Therfore I suggest that in cases like the
slovak COA we ignore the terms of use and leave it up to the one that
uses these images to read the terms of use. The slovak terms of use do
not even seem very strikt as far as I can understand the language.

Last but not least I think that the wikimedia projects had the wrong
approach dealing with COAs. They should IMHO have waived using them.
Only COAs that had 100% leagal permissions from the city/country
should have been used. While the WM-projects were growing there could
have been an open window to leagaly enforce WM-projects to use the
COAs because the cities would have wanted us to use them because
without saying the WM-projects make even the smallest town known in
the internet.

What do you think?

greetings

Paddy

___________________________________________________________
Telefonate ohne weitere Kosten vom PC zum PC: http://messenger.yahoo.de


from_name: Zachary Harden

body:
Dear Paddy,

I just think it depends on the nations that the coat of arms are registered
in. Some might have Public Domain status granted to them since Day One of
use, while others have to sit through the test of time. While I am not
familiar with Slovak law, I would wait and see what it says before we take
any action.

Rgds, Zach

>From: Patrick-Emil Z?rner <paddyez at yahoo.de>
>Reply-To: Wikimedia Commons Discussion List <commons-l at wikimedia.org>
>To: Wikimedia Commons Discussion List <commons-l at wikimedia.org>
>Subject: [Commons-l] COA copyright policies and other legal stuff,..
>Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2006 09:01:00 +0200 (CEST)
>
>Since Eric was posting a hint on all common admins talk pages I use
>this opportunity to talk about a subject I strongly feel about.
>
>BTW I am subscribing to this ML and have been since the beginning. The
>reason I have not been reading the ML or making posts here is a
>completly differnt one.
>
>When I was trying to go through the deletion tags to dispose images
>that are against the commons policy I found the following:
>
>http://commons.wikimedia.org//wiki/Template%3ASlovakCityCOA
>
>Concerning COAs my believe always was that we have to care about:
>
>1) Copyright(, Urheberrecht,...) whatever it may be in your country
>2) It must be commercial.
>3) People must be able to modify it.
>
>To 1) in most cases we do not need to care about that dealing with
>COAs since they are ooooooooooold.
>However the points 2) and 3) make me feel uneasy and I know there was
>a long discussion on de WP.
>
>Concerning point 2) some of you might know that the german newspaper
>"Die Zeit" was using the COA of the federal state and city Hamburg and
>needed to change the COA on the front cover because of a senat
>decision in Hamburg. Personally I think that such a behaviour is
>silly. I mean it is not like they have been printing toilet paper with
>the COA of Hamburg and selling the stuff. Even printing the COA of a
>town on t-shirts and selling them could cause legal trouble IMHO.
>
>To 3) the Brockhaus Multimedial (a germen encyclopedia on DVD) uses
>stylised COAs. I totally do not get why they did that. What I am
>saying is that this could be interpreted as a modification plus
>commercial use. Modifing a COA and selling the stuff on some
>merchandising items could cause legal problems too IMHO.
>
>Summary: I do not think that COA go 100% with wikimedia project
>policies concerning points 2 and 3. Personally I even think that COAs
>as a picture in an encyclopedia are nice to have but not necessary.
>But since they seem accepted in the Wikimedia projects commons should
>keep them all and without exception since they are PD with some legal
>framework attached to them. Therfore I suggest that in cases like the
>slovak COA we ignore the terms of use and leave it up to the one that
>uses these images to read the terms of use. The slovak terms of use do
>not even seem very strikt as far as I can understand the language.
>
>Last but not least I think that the wikimedia projects had the wrong
>approach dealing with COAs. They should IMHO have waived using them.
>Only COAs that had 100% leagal permissions from the city/country
>should have been used. While the WM-projects were growing there could
>have been an open window to leagaly enforce WM-projects to use the
>COAs because the cities would have wanted us to use them because
>without saying the WM-projects make even the smallest town known in
>the internet.
>
>What do you think?
>
>greetings
>
>Paddy


from_name: Neil Harris

subject: [Wikitech-l] Pageview counters

body:
Rob Church wrote:
> On 05/07/06, Neil Harris <neil at tonal.clara.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> If this would not be practical, please let me know why.
>>
>
> The fact that we don't retain the logs is perhaps a wee bit prohibitive.
>
>
> Rob Church
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>
>
>
>
Aha. Then how about adding a patch to squid that goes something like:

if (do_throttled_logging && ((throttled_logging_count++ %
throttled_logging_ratio) == 0))
     generate_normal_squid_logfile_line(...);

that then generates a logfile output every throttled_logging_ratio hits?
If this ratio is 1000, then logs one-thousandth of the normal size will
be generated at one-thousandth of the normal load that might be expected
from full-on logging.

Assuming N=1000, and 100 hits/second/squid, that would be one log entry
per ten seconds on each machine, or a total of 10,000 log entries per
day per machine, which would take up perhaps 1 Mbyte: rather different
from the Gbyte of logfile which would be generated daily if full logging
was turned on.

The logs can then be aggregated and analyzed in the usual ways.

-- Neil


from_name: Andrew Lih

body:
Mathias,

Using the same Reuters story, CNN downgraded Wikipedia from
'confusion' to 'reeling'. Oh CNN, how far you have strayed from your
original standards...

Lay's death sends Wikipedia reeling
Wednesday, July 5, 2006 Posted: 2246 GMT (0646 HKT)
http://edition.cnn.com/2006/US/07/05/lay.wikipedia.reut/

On 7/6/06, Mathias Schindler <mathias.schindler at gmail.com> wrote:
> While Reuters initially meant to report on [[Kenneth Lay]]'s article
> on enwp and the pace of the edits on that page, it gave a nice insight
> into the mechanisms of information delivery:
>
> Version 1:
>
> http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=internetNews&storyID=2006-07-05T195309Z_01_N05296006_RTRIDST_0_OUKIN-UK-ENRON-LAY-WIKIPEDIA.XML
> Ken Lay's death prompts confusion on Wikipedia
> Wed Jul 5, 2006 8:53 PM BST167
>
> Lay, 64, died of a heart attack early on Wednesday, a family
> spokeswoman said, just six weeks after a jury found him guilty of
> fraud in one of the biggest corporate scandals in U.S. history.
>
> Version 2:
> http://in.today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=technologyNews&storyID=2006-07-06T031803Z_01_NOOTR_RTRJONC_0_India-258341-2.xml
> CORRECTED - Ken Lay's death prompts confusion on Wikipedia
> Thu Jul 6, 2006 3:25 AM IST166
>
> Lay, 64, died of an apparent heart attack, according to a pastor at
> the Lay family's church in Houston. It was six weeks after a jury
> found him guilty of fraud in one of the biggest corporate scandals in
> U.S. history. A family spokeswoman said that Lay passed away early on
> Wednesday morning in Aspen.
>
>
>
> Version 2 contains a "sorry, we failed to make factchecking before
> sending it to the wires" header:
>
> "(Corrects and recasts paragraph two to show that a spokeswoman for
> the Lay family did not give the cause of Lay's death. It was given by
> another source.)"
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: Gordon Joly

subject:
[Wikitech-l] Where is WikiMedia 1.7 ? Have you a link for the
 download ????

body:
At 10:26 +0200 6/7/06, Ulisse Savi wrote:
>I need to install WikiMwedia 1.7 because Brion Vibber told me that
>ParserFunctions almost certainly requires MediaWiki 1.7. and i need
>ParserFunctions support because yesterday i have installled a
>wikipedia mirror here : http://encyclopedia.meta99.com/  and without
>ParserFunctions wikipedia dump not work good ( i have strange
>character errors in any page without ParserFunctions ). I have not
>found any WikiMedia 1.7 download. Have you the download ?
>Here :
>http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=MediaWiki+1.7+DOWNLOAD&btnG=Google+Search
>i have not any file.
>
>Pardon me... But. ... It is not possible that ALL Wikimedia sites
>use MediaWiki 1.7 and all Dumps are for  MediaWiki 1.7 And in
>MediaWiki sites it is possible only to find MediaWiki 1.6.7. ...
>...
>...
>...
>Have you a link for the download ????
>_______________________________________________

All public versions can be found here

http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/MediaWiki

I assume 1.7 is in the development tree and is available by CVS?

Gordo

--
"Think Feynman"/////////
http://pobox.com/~gordo/
gordon.joly at pobox.com///


from_name: Jean-Denis Vauguet

subject: [Foundation-l] Wikimedia visual identity guidelines

body:
Delphine M?nard wrote:
> On 7/5/06, Aphaia <aphaia at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> If we have translation(s) a certain policy, however, it will be useful
>> to determine whether the translation is as official as the original
>> one(s). Which case is that? Or can we simply say "as for all policies
>> of the Wikimedia Foundation, basically you should consider the
>> original one(s) as official"?
>
> That would be my take, yes. For all official policies, there should be
> a disclaimer that says that only the English version is the official
> one.
>
> And yes to the translation in several languages. Thank you if you're
> willing to coordinate it.
>
> Delphine
>
>

I created a subsection on the (right?) WMF translation page on Meta:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Translation_requests/WMF#Miscellaneous

'Need to go, so it's work in progress for fr. I hope it's the way to go,
hit me if I've been bold *too much* and made a mistake.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 191 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/attachments/20060706/c35ec688/attachment.pgp


body:
Delphine M?nard wrote:
> On 7/5/06, Aphaia <aphaia at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> If we have translation(s) a certain policy, however, it will be useful
>> to determine whether the translation is as official as the original
>> one(s). Which case is that? Or can we simply say "as for all policies
>> of the Wikimedia Foundation, basically you should consider the
>> original one(s) as official"?
>
> That would be my take, yes. For all official policies, there should be
> a disclaimer that says that only the English version is the official
> one.
>
> And yes to the translation in several languages. Thank you if you're
> willing to coordinate it.
>
> Delphine
>
>

I created a subsection on the (right?) WMF translation page on Meta:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Translation_requests/WMF#Miscellaneous

'Need to go, so it's work in progress for fr. I hope it's the way to go,
hit me if I've been bold *too much* and made a mistake.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 191 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/attachments/20060706/c35ec688/attachment-0001.pgp


body:
Delphine M?nard wrote:
> On 7/5/06, Aphaia <aphaia at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> If we have translation(s) a certain policy, however, it will be useful
>> to determine whether the translation is as official as the original
>> one(s). Which case is that? Or can we simply say "as for all policies
>> of the Wikimedia Foundation, basically you should consider the
>> original one(s) as official"?
>
> That would be my take, yes. For all official policies, there should be
> a disclaimer that says that only the English version is the official
> one.
>
> And yes to the translation in several languages. Thank you if you're
> willing to coordinate it.
>
> Delphine
>
>

I created a subsection on the (right?) WMF translation page on Meta:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Translation_requests/WMF#Miscellaneous

'Need to go, so it's work in progress for fr. I hope it's the way to go,
hit me if I've been bold *too much* and made a mistake.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 191 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/attachments/20060706/c35ec688/attachment.pgp>


body:
Delphine M?nard wrote:
> On 7/5/06, Aphaia <aphaia at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> If we have translation(s) a certain policy, however, it will be useful
>> to determine whether the translation is as official as the original
>> one(s). Which case is that? Or can we simply say "as for all policies
>> of the Wikimedia Foundation, basically you should consider the
>> original one(s) as official"?
>
> That would be my take, yes. For all official policies, there should be
> a disclaimer that says that only the English version is the official
> one.
>
> And yes to the translation in several languages. Thank you if you're
> willing to coordinate it.
>
> Delphine
>
>

I created a subsection on the (right?) WMF translation page on Meta:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Translation_requests/WMF#Miscellaneous

'Need to go, so it's work in progress for fr. I hope it's the way to go,
hit me if I've been bold *too much* and made a mistake.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 191 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/attachments/20060706/c35ec688/attachment-0001.pgp>


subject:
[Wikitech-l] Where is WikiMedia 1.7 ? Have you a link for the
	download ????

body:
I need to install WikiMwedia 1.7 because Brion Vibber told me that  ParserFunctions almost certainly requires MediaWiki 1.7. and i need ParserFunctions support because yesterday i have installled a wikipedia mirror here : http://encyclopedia.meta99.com/  and without ParserFunctions wikipedia dump not work good ( i have strange character errors in any page without ParserFunctions ). I have not found any WikiMedia 1.7 download. Have you the download ?
Here : http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=MediaWiki+1.7+DOWNLOAD&btnG=Google+Search i have not any file.

Pardon me... But. ... It is not possible that ALL Wikimedia sites use MediaWiki 1.7 and all Dumps are for  MediaWiki 1.7 And in MediaWiki sites it is possible only to find MediaWiki 1.6.7. ...
...
...
...
Have you a link for the download ????


body:
Yes. But in this link i have found only MediaWiki 1.4/1.5/1.6 and following
the links of the site, at the moment, i have not found the 1.7. Version.
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/MediaWiki

----- Original Message -----
From: "Gordon Joly" <gordon.joly at pobox.com>
To: "Wikimedia developers" <wikitech-l at wikimedia.org>
Cc: "Ulisse Savi" <ulisavi at tin.it>
Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2006 10:33 AM
Subject: Re: [Wikitech-l] Where is WikiMedia 1.7 ? Have you a link for the
download ????

> At 10:26 +0200 6/7/06, Ulisse Savi wrote:
>>I need to install WikiMwedia 1.7 because Brion Vibber told me that
>>ParserFunctions almost certainly requires MediaWiki 1.7. and i need
>>ParserFunctions support because yesterday i have installled a wikipedia
>>mirror here : http://encyclopedia.meta99.com/  and without ParserFunctions
>>wikipedia dump not work good ( i have strange character errors in any page
>>without ParserFunctions ). I have not found any WikiMedia 1.7 download.
>>Have you the download ?
>>Here :
>>http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=MediaWiki+1.7+DOWNLOAD&btnG=Google+Search i
>>have not any file.
>>
>>Pardon me... But. ... It is not possible that ALL Wikimedia sites use
>>MediaWiki 1.7 and all Dumps are for  MediaWiki 1.7 And in MediaWiki sites
>>it is possible only to find MediaWiki 1.6.7. ...
>>...
>>...
>>...
>>Have you a link for the download ????
>>_______________________________________________
>
>
> All public versions can be found here
>
>
> http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/MediaWiki
>
> I assume 1.7 is in the development tree and is available by CVS?
>
> Gordo
>
> --
> "Think Feynman"/////////
> http://pobox.com/~gordo/
> gordon.joly at pobox.com///


from_name: Brion Vibber

subject: [Foundation-l] Question about Mediawiki versions on Wikipedia

body:
Jeff V. Merkey wrote:
> I noticed that Mediawiki 1.6.7. has some issues with current content
> with Infoboxes and Cite.php references when citing books and websites.
> I also read that 1.7 is what's running on Wikipedia.  Is there a good
> reason why XML dumps are kept broken and Wikipedia is always using
> unreleased versions as opposed to the other way around.  Most folks run
> production websites on a stable release and leave the experimental
> releases for developers -- here this is reversed.

MediaWiki is our in-house software for running Wikipedia.

We also periodically make snapshot releases for the convenience of third-party
users.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 249 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/attachments/20060706/f1400659/attachment.pgp


body:
Jeff V. Merkey wrote:
> I noticed that Mediawiki 1.6.7. has some issues with current content
> with Infoboxes and Cite.php references when citing books and websites.
> I also read that 1.7 is what's running on Wikipedia.  Is there a good
> reason why XML dumps are kept broken and Wikipedia is always using
> unreleased versions as opposed to the other way around.  Most folks run
> production websites on a stable release and leave the experimental
> releases for developers -- here this is reversed.

MediaWiki is our in-house software for running Wikipedia.

We also periodically make snapshot releases for the convenience of third-party
users.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 249 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/attachments/20060706/f1400659/attachment-0001.pgp


body:
Jeff V. Merkey wrote:
> I noticed that Mediawiki 1.6.7. has some issues with current content
> with Infoboxes and Cite.php references when citing books and websites.
> I also read that 1.7 is what's running on Wikipedia.  Is there a good
> reason why XML dumps are kept broken and Wikipedia is always using
> unreleased versions as opposed to the other way around.  Most folks run
> production websites on a stable release and leave the experimental
> releases for developers -- here this is reversed.

MediaWiki is our in-house software for running Wikipedia.

We also periodically make snapshot releases for the convenience of third-party
users.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 249 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/attachments/20060706/f1400659/attachment.pgp>


body:
Jeff V. Merkey wrote:
> I noticed that Mediawiki 1.6.7. has some issues with current content
> with Infoboxes and Cite.php references when citing books and websites.
> I also read that 1.7 is what's running on Wikipedia.  Is there a good
> reason why XML dumps are kept broken and Wikipedia is always using
> unreleased versions as opposed to the other way around.  Most folks run
> production websites on a stable release and leave the experimental
> releases for developers -- here this is reversed.

MediaWiki is our in-house software for running Wikipedia.

We also periodically make snapshot releases for the convenience of third-party
users.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 249 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/attachments/20060706/f1400659/attachment-0001.pgp>


from_name: Nick Jenkins

subject: [Wikitech-l] Pageview counters

body:
> But other
> page count systems have been removed in that past by Brion because of
> privacy reasons.

Well, it *is* a pretty good reason. If you store any logs and are a
high-profile source of public information and those logs can in any
way be linked back to a specific user, then you must assume that
sooner or later someone may take you to court to get access to those
logs. Suppose a "person of interest" has been reading Wikipedia
information on the chemistry of explosives, or reading up on
biological pathogens, or military installations, etc etc etc. That is
exactly the kind of thing that certain areas of law enforcement would
like to know, and be able to use against people in court. Before you
say "conspiracy theory!", remember that Google has this problem (for
searches that people have conducted, which it does record), and
libraries have this problem (for books that people have borrowed,
which libraries also record). I'm actually surprised that the
Wikipedia has not had this problem yet, and I can only presume that
it's because there are no logs. The single easiest way to avoid the
problem is to not keep any logs (besides those which are already
public, such as the edit histories). There's a counterargument that
some of these people may really be evil, but the reality is that the
databases are located in the US, and the current US government has
repeatedly demonstrated a thorough contempt for civil liberties
(fingerprinting foreign nationals entering the US as though they were
criminals, arresting people wearing T-shirts with protest slogans,
illegal wire taps, indefinite imprisonment without due process at
Guantanamo, the practise of "rendition", arresting people
photographing bridges, and the list of abuses goes on and on and on).
For my 2 cents, concern over legal problems & potential abuse of the
data far outweighs my desire to know how many people have viewed say
the "Mickey Mouse" page.

All the best,
Nick.


body:
Brion told that MediaWiki will released tomorrow
I think to wait tomorrow. ... ...
It is too much complicated for a newbie to find and to use a DEV release.
....
...
But please- ...
...
...
If not tomorrow, please release it in a month/6 weeks/2 month max.
...
---
I need it.
ALL DUMPS ARE FOR WIKI 1.7. and  the release is 1.6.7.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Stephen Bain" <stephen.bain at gmail.com>
To: "Wikimedia developers" <wikitech-l at wikimedia.org>
Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2006 10:48 AM
Subject: Re: [Wikitech-l] Where is WikiMedia 1.7 ? Have you a link for
thedownload ????

> On 7/6/06, Ulisse Savi <ulisavi at tin.it> wrote:
>> Yes. But in this link i have found only MediaWiki 1.4/1.5/1.6 and
>> following
>> the links of the site, at the moment, i have not found the 1.7. Version.
>> http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/MediaWiki
>
> The latest snapshot release is 1.6.7. However you can get the latest
> version directly from Subversion (Mediawiki doesn't use CVS anymore).
>
> See this page for instructions:
> http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Download_from_SVN
>
> --
> Stephen Bain
> stephen.bain at gmail.com
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


from_name: Przykuta

subject: [Foundation-l] Wikiatlas(es) - modification of old proposal

body:
In wikipedias users make articles, which are not articles but galleries or there are (galleries) sections of articles. It is often the same what we have on commons. Look here:

http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalisz#Galeria_Zdj.C4.99.C4.87_Kalisza

and

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Kalisz

or

http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krak%C3%B3w_-_album

and

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Krak%C3%B3w

So, I think, that not only users want albums of their cities. Many people want to look for Zoological atlas, Historical atlas... We have many files now, but on commons there are described in English or native language for described city, village or person. If I want read something about Madrid I must know English or Spanish. If you want read about Polish villages on commons you must know that language. Of course we hawe Wikipedia, but people wants gallery of photos, maps and other graphics described in their languages. Description in all languages is not good, if it on one page.

But, if we will have a new project: "Wikiatlas" or "Wikialbums"... So I've written about it on meta. I only supplemented old proposal for project Wikiatlas:

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikiatlas#Not_only_geographical_atlas

What do you think about it?

Przykuta


from_name: Claudi Meneghin

subject: [Wikitech-l] String function #sub

body:
Hi,
  are you able, please, to forecast when the string function #sub is activated? I would need it to standardise the calendar pages at Lombard wikipedia: in other words the introduction of all day-pages would have exactly the same code, and the number of days from the beginning of the year would be automatically calculated, and the appropriate month-template would be correctly placed. The number of days lacking to the end of the year would be calculated as well, of course.
  If it is at short term, I will go on anyway, warning users that 'a funcionality of the page is yet to be activated'... or something like.
  Many thanks.
  Sincerely yours,
  Claudi

---------------------------------
 Yahoo! Mail r?invente le mail ! D?couvrez le nouveau Yahoo! Mail et son interface r?volutionnaire.


from_name: Gregory Maxwell

body:
On 7/6/06, BJ?rn Lindqvist <bjourne at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Why would we give automatic suffrage to folks who have not yet
> > demonstrated a significant degree of support or even understanding of
> > the goals of the project?
>
> Because they are giving up their free time trying to help the project.
> That demonstrates their support.

Assume good faith does not demand we ignore the obvious.

A person with zero article edits is not giving their time to support
the project, unless of course they explain otherwise.

We frequently have people come by to simply argue that their position
must be supported by the project... they do this fully with good faith
because, of course, their ideas are without flaw... but with either
bad judgment or without allegiance to our goals.  So we say "Thank you
for your contribution" and we place it in the appropriate bit bucket.

This is the same reason we dont give protection, blocking, and
deletion to every anonymous user at their first moment of access.


from_name: geni

body:
On 7/6/06, Mark Gallagher <m.g.gallagher at student.canberra.edu.au> wrote:
> No.  Well, yes.  But no.
>
> DRV has been legitimately accused of endorsing bad decisions on that
> grounds that "process was followed".  The people arguing that DRV should
> do such a thing are either:
>
> a) Process wonks, who can therefore be ignored (or, preferably, locked
>     in a padded cell for their own comfort and safety)
> b) People who have confused Wikipedia with Real Life.
>
> DRV is *not* an appeals court.  The rules that apply to appeals courts
> in the USA, Canada, Australia, and I assume practically everywhere else,
> do *not* apply to DRV.  We need to remember that.  DRV is not, it's
> true, in the business of providing a venue for AfD Take Two, but neither
> is it totally uninterested in the outcome provided process is followed.
>
> DRV is a safeguard to ensure that AfD gets the right *result*.  That's
> all it's for --- *not*, I repeat *not*, simply to ensure AfD gets the
> right *process*.  Process being followed is a good indication that the
> AfD result was good; but it shouldn't blind us to potential errors.
>

An  argument that fails when you consider you only need an absolute
majority to keep something deleted on DRV. If it is to be more than a
process review area then that is illogical.

--
geni


from_name: Jeff V. Merkey

body:
I noticed that Mediawiki 1.6.7. has some issues with current content
with Infoboxes and Cite.php references when citing books and websites.
I also read that 1.7 is what's running on Wikipedia.  Is there a good
reason why XML dumps are kept broken and Wikipedia is always using
unreleased versions as opposed to the other way around.  Most folks run
production websites on a stable release and leave the experimental
releases for developers -- here this is reversed.

It's a little frustrating to run down continual problems with the dumps.

Any enlightenment would be appreciated.

Jeff


from_name: Erik Moeller

subject: [WikiEN-l] Keep and Relist

body:
On 7/6/06, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell at gmail.com> wrote:
> This would further shift control of the AfD process towards extremists
> who are heavily involved pushing their particular agenda and whom are
> often the source of the AfD hostility that keeps more moderate users
> away from the process.

How so? After all, the idea is to delay the process so that these
extremists (which exist on either side of the spectrum) become
recognizable as the lone voices which they are. Besides, I'm not
proposing anything what these people could not have done already -- no
change of policy is needed.

> As such, I think it is most important that we settle such AfDs as
> quickly and efficiently as possible

In cases like Eon8, semi-protecting the page and/or relisting it later
(weeks, months, a year -- whatever is appropriate for the situation)
seems like a good way to achieve that. The more we are talking about
bold actions by individual admins, the more you will have tension,
escalation and accusations. Another option to reduce fighting about
controversial decisions would be to allow a quorum of closing admins
to make a decision quickly, rather than waiting for the full 5 days.

So, you could have:

Calling an admin quorum of 5 admins to keep and relist a year from now.~~~~
* Support.--~~~~
* Support--~~~~
=> Passed

As for how long to wait with the relisting, I think it depends on the
case. I suspect that much of the interest in Eon8 will have dissipated
by August.

Erik


subject: [WikiEN-l] WikiEN-l] Keep and Relist

body:
On 7/6/06, Daniel P. B. Smith <wikipedia2006 at dpbsmith.com> wrote:
> Interesting but quixotic. No, I _really_ mean it _is_ interesting,
> and I'm trying to let the idea soak in to figure out what it means or
> ought to mean or implies... but the idea that a Wikipedia page is
> forever is very deeply ingrained.

Let me be absolutely clear: I think the website was frankly idiotic,
and it's mostly the SomethingAwful crowd of easily befuddled teens
that cared about it. Nevertheless, it created a stir among thousands
of people within a very short amount of time.  Given how the Internet
works, these brief mass phenomena are likely going to become more
common, and will often lead to an influx of newbies on Wikipedia as
well.

I have yet to see a convincing argument why it would be a bad idea to
let the befuddled teens have their article (carefully vetted for
verifiability and OR) for a few weeks, and to delete it when it's
clear that the phenomenon has not transcended their subcultural
sphere.

Erik


from_name: Delirium

body:
Jesse W wrote:

>On Jul 5, 2006, at 8:39 PM, Fred Bauder wrote:
>
>
>>On Jul 5, 2006, at 8:48 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On 7/5/06, Fred Bauder <fredbaud at ctelco.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Alexa shows CNN dropping like a lead balloon, No. 38 today (they are
>>>>ranked 27). Perhaps they welcome a dig at the competition. BTW we are
>>>>even with Amazon these days.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>Alexa's numbers are inconsistent. Don't count on them for anything.
>>>
>>>
>>There certainly are some strange phenomena but there is a pattern.
>>There is a generational change with canned goods going down and
>>participatory sites going up.
>>
>>
>CNN *is not* our competition!  Not even of Wikinews!  We are *tertiary*
>sources, i.e. we summarize and coordinate what secondary sources make
>of actual facts on the ground (i.e. primary sources).  We'd be
>impoverished and in trouble without CNN, the Stanford Encyclopedia of
>Philosophy and all the rest of the "mainstream media" - We Don't Have
>The Money To Pay Reporters - and even if we did, that's not our
>purpose.
>
Wikinews explicitly *does* permit, encourage, and conduct first-hand
reporting, and doing that *is* part of its purpose.  It's true that it
doesn't *always* do this.  Many of the articles are written by
summarizing/distilling existing reports, but that's actually true of
most organizations---a huge percentage of news articles even by
traditional news organizations are either outright syndicated from, or
at least based on reports from, major wire servies like the Associated
Press and Reuters.

See: http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Wikinews:Original_reporting

-Mark


body:
Brad Patrick wrote:

>Jeff, Foundation-L isn't the best place to discuss this.  I think you are
>going to get more help if you work on
>http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Project:Forum or mediawiki-l.
>
>

Thanks Brad. I'll move this topic over there.

Jeff

>On 7/6/06, Jeff V. Merkey <jmerkey at wolfmountaingroup.com> wrote:
>
>
>>I noticed that Mediawiki 1.6.7. has some issues with current content
>>with Infoboxes and Cite.php references when citing books and websites.
>>I also read that 1.7 is what's running on Wikipedia.  Is there a good
>>reason why XML dumps are kept broken and Wikipedia is always using
>>unreleased versions as opposed to the other way around.  Most folks run
>>production websites on a stable release and leave the experimental
>>releases for developers -- here this is reversed.
>>
>>It's a little frustrating to run down continual problems with the dumps.
>>
>>Any enlightenment would be appreciated.
>>
>>Jeff
>>_______________________________________________
>>foundation-l mailing list
>>foundation-l at wikimedia.org
>>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>


body:
Brion Vibber wrote:

>Jeff V. Merkey wrote:
>
>
>>I noticed that Mediawiki 1.6.7. has some issues with current content
>>with Infoboxes and Cite.php references when citing books and websites.
>>I also read that 1.7 is what's running on Wikipedia.  Is there a good
>>reason why XML dumps are kept broken and Wikipedia is always using
>>unreleased versions as opposed to the other way around.  Most folks run
>>production websites on a stable release and leave the experimental
>>releases for developers -- here this is reversed.
>>
>>
>
>MediaWiki is our in-house software for running Wikipedia.
>
>We also periodically make snapshot releases for the convenience of third-party
>users.
>
>

Brad asked we take this discussion off line, so lets do so.

Jeff

>-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
>
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>foundation-l mailing list
>foundation-l at wikimedia.org
>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
>


from_name: Brad Patrick

body:
Jeff, Foundation-L isn't the best place to discuss this.  I think you are
going to get more help if you work on
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Project:Forum or mediawiki-l.

On 7/6/06, Jeff V. Merkey <jmerkey at wolfmountaingroup.com> wrote:
>
>
> I noticed that Mediawiki 1.6.7. has some issues with current content
> with Infoboxes and Cite.php references when citing books and websites.
> I also read that 1.7 is what's running on Wikipedia.  Is there a good
> reason why XML dumps are kept broken and Wikipedia is always using
> unreleased versions as opposed to the other way around.  Most folks run
> production websites on a stable release and leave the experimental
> releases for developers -- here this is reversed.
>
> It's a little frustrating to run down continual problems with the dumps.
>
> Any enlightenment would be appreciated.
>
> Jeff
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

--
Brad Patrick
General Counsel & Interim Executive Director
Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.
bradp.wmf at gmail.com
727-231-0101


body:
On 7/6/06, Jeff V. Merkey <jmerkey at wolfmountaingroup.com> wrote:
> I noticed that Mediawiki 1.6.7. has some issues with current content
> with Infoboxes and Cite.php references when citing books and websites.
> I also read that 1.7 is what's running on Wikipedia.  Is there a good
> reason why XML dumps are kept broken and Wikipedia is always using
> unreleased versions as opposed to the other way around.  Most folks run
> production websites on a stable release and leave the experimental
> releases for developers -- here this is reversed.
>
> It's a little frustrating to run down continual problems with the dumps.
>
> Any enlightenment would be appreciated.

Who says Wikipedia is production? :)
Like the content the software is a work in progress. Hopefully it will
all be more stable in the future, until then translators will also
have to suffer along with our growing pains.

You can check out the version of Mediawiki that we use from SVN
(http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Download_from_SVN), so it's not
unreleased it's just not the version we are recommending to third
parties. (After all, most Mediawiki sites outside of Wikipedia don't
care about tracking wikipedia's features very closely).


from_name: Lord Voldemort

subject:
[Foundation-l] Opinions/suggestions for "outside" members of
	the board?

body:
On 6/19/06, Jimmy Wales <jwales at wikia.com> wrote:
> Comments on these names are welcome... as are further ideas of course!

Forgive my ignorance, does anybody know anything about Thomas Malone
from MIT?  (http://ccs.mit.edu/malone/) He seems to be very into
collective intelligence.  I know nothing of his politics or views of
freedom of information, so I thought I'd ask.  Note: I am not putting
forth his name for the Board (he seems pretty busy), I was just
wondering if people in the know, namely you guys and gals, knew
anything about him.  Please forgive me if he has been discussed
previously.  Thanks.  --LV


from_name: Mei Wu

subject: [Wikitech-l] PDF Export

body:
Hi all,

Does anybody have experiences with installing the PDF Export extension
with htmldoc? I am running a brand new MediaWiki 1.6.7 and installed
htmldoc version 1.8.24 on Windows XP. When I hit the Print to PDF
button in my Wiki, I get the error "ERROR: No HTML files". I have
attached the code snippet from the extension script below. I would
appreciate any help because I am pretty much lost. Thanks.

Mei

 // make a temporary directory with an unique name
                        $mytemp = "C:\TEMP\f".time()."-".rand().".html";
                        $article_f = fopen($mytemp,'w');
                        fwrite($article_f, $html);
                        fclose($article_f);
                        putenv("HTMLDOC_NOCGI=1");

                        # Write the content type to the client...
                        header("Content-Type: application/pdf");
                        flush();

                        # Run HTMLDOC to provide the PDF file to the user...
                        passthru("htmldoc -f pdf --quiet --jpeg
--webpage '$mytemp'");
						#passthru("htmldoc --webpage -f output.pdf '$mytemp'");


from_name: Rob Church

subject: [Wikitech-l] String function #sub

body:
On 06/07/06, Claudi Meneghin <clamengh at yahoo.fr> wrote:
> Hi,
>   are you able, please, to forecast when the string function #sub is activated?

Since it's part of extension code not in our version control repo, the
rough guideline is when someone (Brion or Tim in this case):

1. Looks at the code and agrees it's sane and won't kill our boxen
2. Checks it into Subversion and tweaks as needed
3. Enables it live

This can take up anything from 10 minutes to 10 days, depending upon
their workload.

Rob Church


from_name: Jimmy Wales

subject: [WikiEN-l] OSINT press release

body:
Kirill Lokshin wrote:
> On 7/6/06, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Interesting one:
>>
>>   http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/060705/dcw049.html?.v=57
>>
>> Now, how do we keep the well-intentioned clueless from alienating
>> them? Particularly given the directions in the second-last para are
>> very nice and really just the thing.
>
> The press release seems to be confused on certain points.  At first
> they discuss the creation of an article-space page (which seems to be
> up for deletion at the moment, but never mind that).  They then
> instruct people to:
>
> "First create or update your own Wiki page, with a short description
> of your mission or capability and a short description of where you fit
> into the OSINT world. Then a discreet link to your commercial home
> page. Once your Wiki page exists the title of that page becomes an
> automatic Wiki link whenever it is inserted on any Wiki page with two
> [[brackets]], and should be inserted with a short descriptive line at
> least once in each grouping above."
>
> Are they talking about user pages and linking them in article-space?
> Or separate articles for each participant with links to their
> commercial pages?

They are talking about encouraging self-interested people to come in and
spam us with nonsense, to be honest.  The entire thing is a huge mess.

--Jimbo

--
#######################################################################
#    Office: 1-727-231-0101       |  Free Culture and  Free Knowledge #
#    http://www.wikipedia.org     |     Building a free world         #
#######################################################################


subject:
[Wikitech-l] Where is WikiMedia 1.7 ? Have you a link for
	thedownload ????

body:
On 06/07/06, Ulisse Savi <ulisavi at tin.it> wrote:
> If not tomorrow, please release it in a month/6 weeks/2 month max.

If he said it's going to be released tomorrow, then it's going to be
released tomorrow, for god's sake...just be patient!

> I need it.
> ALL DUMPS ARE FOR WIKI 1.7. and  the release is 1.6.7.

Stop shouting and making hysterical posts to mailing lists.

In the meantime, make sure your server has PHP 5.1.x installed, and is
using MySQL 4.0 or greater.

Rob Church


subject: [Wikitech-l] Pageview counters

body:
On 06/07/06, Simetrical <Simetrical+wikitech at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 7/5/06, Rob Church <robchur at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Just to ask...where was this stated? I'd have thought that there'd be
> > some archive evidence of our CTO agreeing to this.
>
> Alexander provided a link:
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Anthere&diff=363353&oldid=358186.
>  Apparently he asked Anthere, who asked Brion.

I would still consider that there would be a public archive of it.

Rob Church


from_name: Jesse W

subject: [WikiEN-l] OSINT press release

body:
Er, some difficulties with terms here...

On Jul 6, 2006, at 3:43 PM, Cobb wrote:
> Puppy wrote:
>> Same as always. Afd, userfy, welcome messages, and
>> lots of links and explanations of and to WP:V, WP:NPOV,
>> and WP:NOR. -kc-
>
> Weeks of AFDs and sockspuppets/newbies, followed by
> DRVs. full of socks/newbies, followed by idiot admins
> undeleting the articles and putting them on DRV for
> yet more weeks of socks/newbie infested discussions
> and stupid editors who haven't read the policies etc etc
> etc etc.
>
> Yet... of course... vandalism doesn't work on a WIki
> because it's as easy to fix as it was to vandalise in first
> place... isn't it?
Well, since *nothing* you mentioned or implied above was "vandalism",
yes.  Vandalism refers to intentional, bad faith edits - newbies ain't
that.  Ignorant or busy editors ain't that.  Idiot admins ain't even
that.  What all of those are is misguided people.  Misguided people
make trouble everywhere, and have since time began, and will until a
while after the heat death of the universe.  The answer to them is the
same as always - lots and lots of tiresome, irriating, frustrating
discussion.  Sorry.

> Wasn't that the Wikipedia war-cry once?
And, for "vandalism", it still is.  For misguided people - it has
always been discussion until either the misguided people change their
minds or enough other people get fed up, then more or less forceful
requests to leave.

Did you have some mistaken idea it was otherwise?

Jesse Weinstein


subject: [WikiEN-l] OSINT press release

body:
John Lyden wrote:
> On 7/6/06, Jimmy Wales <jwales at wikia.com> wrote:
>> They are talking about encouraging self-interested people to come in and
>> spam us with nonsense, to be honest.  The entire thing is a huge mess.
>>
>> --Jimbo
>
> so other than having us subjected to this spam, what other recourse do we have?

I called and asked nicely.  I think they are going to knock it off.

In the meantime, the page is really in need of a major major cleanup.
It is highly POV in the sense that oss.net (the organization which put
out the press release) is made the centerpiece of an article which is on
a topic which, as far as I know, is a legitimate one.

But, oss.net is legitimate, Robert David Steele is legitimate, and this
is all just a misunderstanding of how to properly get people involved in
Wikipedia.

--
#######################################################################
#    Office: 1-727-231-0101       |  Free Culture and  Free Knowledge #
#    http://www.wikipedia.org     |     Building a free world         #
#######################################################################


subject: [WikiEN-l] OSINT press release

body:
Puppy wrote:
> John Lyden wrote:
>> On 7/6/06, Jimmy Wales <jwales at wikia.com> wrote:
>>> They are talking about encouraging self-interested people to come in and
>>> spam us with nonsense, to be honest.  The entire thing is a huge mess.
>>>
>>> --Jimbo
>> so other than having us subjected to this spam, what other recourse do we have?
>>
> OTOH, it appears he called you, Jimbo? Or is he referring to someone
> else as "your President"?
> Keep, Steele Stands Back I've just talked with your President, we will
> do a press release retracting or modifying my call for inputs, I have
> changed my web site to stiff vendors, and I will wait to learn more in
> Boston. This is my last entry here. Best wishes to all of you.Robert
> Steele 20:56, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
> Retrieved from
> "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Open_source_intelligence"

No, I called him.  He's an ok guy.  Problem solved.

--
#######################################################################
#    Office: 1-727-231-0101       |  Free Culture and  Free Knowledge #
#    http://www.wikipedia.org     |     Building a free world         #
#######################################################################