from_name: Ray Saintonge

references:
<cb7je6$5jm$1@sea.gmane.org>	<cbcea4$aac$1@sea.gmane.org>	<40DA7F1B.70002@softhome.net>	<cbfd60$8p6$1@sea.gmane.org>
	<40DD8A32.9080506@softhome.net>

body:
cookfire wrote:

> Timwi wrote:
>
>> cookfire wrote:
>>
>>> The voting page has been moved over to the English Wiktionary by
>>> Eclecticology.
>>
>> It seems that he *copied* it over. That's a bad idea. :-P I've
>> replaced the page on meta with a "this has been moved" page now.
>>
>>> Now we have a lot of no votes from people I don't see contributing
>>> all that much on Wiktionary.
>>
>> Yeah. I'm stupid. I should have started the vote on Wiktionary itself.
>>
>> Timwi
>
> I wouldn't call it that. In fact I'm glad you would want to help us
> with this issue. It's something we have been asking for since the
> beginning of the English Wiktionary. It wasn't possible back then
> because of other priorities for the developers. It's a pity there is
> such vocal opposition to it now and I feel bad because I started by
> objecting. It is true that there might be even better ways of dealing
> with the issues, but I'm sure that flipping a switch is going to be a
> lot easier to accomplish than having to add functionality to the
> software to do it in those better ways.
>
> Polyglot

Beginning the vote at the wrong place is not a blameworthy act, just a
strategically unsound one. I considered moving it instead of copying the
page, and finally decided that moving was more socially acceptable.  I
was concerned about what complaints I might hear; I was glad to see that
the page was replaced with the message.

How a vote is phrased can make a difference to its success.  Putting
three questions into one can be a recipe for failure; it gives opponents
three separate issues that can be used to oppose the whole thing.  The
opposition was as much to the proposed script as to de-capitalizing the
first letter.

I first proposed freeing up the first letter on Dec. 18, 2002, and I'm
still convinced that it's the best way to go.  Unfortunately the
principal opponent doesn't seem to understand dictionaries.

Ec.


list: wikipedia-l

source: pipermail-mbox

from_name: Adon Metcalfe

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: meta vandalism

body:
ok, then we gotta find out who would do this, and contact them asking
why their doing it, (if it's not just out of spite), this will
probably cause them to stop what their doing. We could follow
madpenguin .org's example, here is what they placed on their main page
after being dos attacked...., it appears they took it down, but it was
along the lines of: Could whoever is attacking us please come forward,
if you don't we will be forced to retaliate, but if you do and explain
your reasons we will wipe the slate clean and resolve the problem.
Thankyou for not being a coward.

It was really effective, the attacks ceased, and I presume they
contacted the attacker and resolved the issue.

--
Adon Metcalfe
mailto:flonejek at gmail.com
HTML Mail
Perth
Australia
Additional Information:
Last Name: Metcalfe
First Name: Adon
Blog: adonmetcalfe.blogspot.com


list: wiktionary-l

from_name: Muke Tever

subject: [Wiktionary-l] Categories on la: broken?

body:
On Sat, 26 Jun 2004 15:54:34 -0700, Brion Vibber <brion at pobox.com> wrote:
> Muke Tever wrote:
>> Categories don't appear to work on la.wiktionary.
>
> The Category and Help namespaces are not defined for Latin. Someone
> needs to provide translations, please.

Ah.
The names would be "Categoria" and "Adiutus"... (Talk would be,
"Disputatio Categoriae", "Disputatio Adiutus".)

(Since this appears to be the same issue... the Project namespace for la:
wiktionary is still "Wikipedia", which could probably stand to be
"Wiktionary" or perhaps "Victionarium".)

	*Muke!
--
http://frath.net/  (my website)
http://kohath.livejournal.com/
http://kohath.deviantart.com/

http://wiki.frath.net/ (conlangs and concultures)


list: wikien-l

from_name: moink

subject: [WikiEN-l] unwished corrections and unwished articles

body:
On Sat, 26 Jun 2004 20:52:28 +0000 (UTC), vesa.sihvonen at bolina.hsb.se
<vesa.sihvonen at bolina.hsb.se> wrote:
>
> I have been graced with the following action:
>
> > Your user name or IP address has been blocked by 14002.
>
> > The reason given is this:
> > repeated vandalization by adding nonesistant world revolution link to a dozen articles.
>
> > You can email 14002 or one of the other administrators to
> > discuss the block. If you believe that our blocking policy
> > was violated, you may discuss the block publicly on the
> > WikiEN-L mailing list
> > (http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l).
> > Note that you may not use the "email this user" feature
> > unless you have a Wikipedia account and a valid email
> > address registered in your user preferences. Your IP address
> > is 212.181.86.76. Please include this address in any queries
> > you make. If you need to see the wiki text of an article,
> > you may wish to use the Export pages feature.
>
> I am convinced it's below the dignity of anyone put in this position, to argue over the understanding of "vandalism" and over Wikipedia's need (or
> alleged lack of need) of articles on World Revolution and Fall of Communism; and I do not think it is up to me to discuss the interpretation of your
> blocking policy -- but maybe it would be in your interest to discuss it? Maybe someone who take, or at least took, his or her engagement in Wikipedia
> somewhat seriously is receiving this mailinglist.
>
> I do however question if actions and a policy that are blatantly contrary to how Wikipedia presents itself to the World Wide Web can be in the
> interest of a serious project. Like after the non-accepted corrections I tried to make April 10th this year, I can't help a resulting impression of
> this Wikipedia being or becoming more of a playground for ignorant but maybe power-intoxicated systops than a field for serious additions to an open-
> source encyclopedia.

Hi there.   It's not standard Wikipedia practice to add links to a
non-existant article to a large number of articles.  However, I don't
see much of an attempt to discuss the disagreement with you before you
were blocked.  I've unblocked you.  Try to make an attempt to get
along better with other users and discuss controversial edits on the
talk page of the article.

moink


body:
moink wrote:

>On Sat, 26 Jun 2004 20:52:28 +0000 (UTC), vesa.sihvonen at bolina.hsb.se
><vesa.sihvonen at bolina.hsb.se> wrote:
>
>
>>I have been graced with the following action:
>>
>>
>>>Your user name or IP address has been blocked by 14002.
>>>
>>>
>>>The reason given is this:
>>>repeated vandalization by adding nonesistant world revolution link to a dozen articles.
>>>
>>>
>>>You can email 14002 or one of the other administrators to
>>>discuss the block. If you believe that our blocking policy
>>>was violated, you may discuss the block publicly on the
>>>WikiEN-L mailing list
>>>(http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l).
>>>Note that you may not use the "email this user" feature
>>>unless you have a Wikipedia account and a valid email
>>>address registered in your user preferences. Your IP address
>>>is 212.181.86.76. Please include this address in any queries
>>>you make. If you need to see the wiki text of an article,
>>>you may wish to use the Export pages feature.
>>>
>>>
>>I am convinced it's below the dignity of anyone put in this position, to argue over the understanding of "vandalism" and over Wikipedia's need (or
>>alleged lack of need) of articles on World Revolution and Fall of Communism; and I do not think it is up to me to discuss the interpretation of your
>>blocking policy -- but maybe it would be in your interest to discuss it? Maybe someone who take, or at least took, his or her engagement in Wikipedia
>>somewhat seriously is receiving this mailinglist.
>>
>>I do however question if actions and a policy that are blatantly contrary to how Wikipedia presents itself to the World Wide Web can be in the
>>interest of a serious project. Like after the non-accepted corrections I tried to make April 10th this year, I can't help a resulting impression of
>>this Wikipedia being or becoming more of a playground for ignorant but maybe power-intoxicated systops than a field for serious additions to an open-
>>source encyclopedia.
>>
>>
>
>Hi there.   It's not standard Wikipedia practice to add links to a
>non-existant article to a large number of articles.  However, I don't
>see much of an attempt to discuss the disagreement with you before you
>were blocked.  I've unblocked you.  Try to make an attempt to get
>along better with other users and discuss controversial edits on the
>talk page of the article.
>
>
This is just another example of the loose cannon behaviour that we're
getting from some over-zealous sysops.  This user did not add the term
"world revolution", he only wikified it where it already appeared.  That
is perfectly within standard Wikipedia practice.  If a non-existent
article is linked enough times, that is exactly what will make it appear
on the list of most wanted pages.  At one time that page was a great
resource for newbies who didn't know what to write about.  Please don't
blame this user for not attempting to get along when that failure is on
the part of his accusers.

Ec


body:
moink wrote:

>>This is just another example of the loose cannon behaviour that we're
>>getting from some over-zealous sysops.  This user did not add the term
>>"world revolution", he only wikified it where it already appeared.  That
>>is perfectly within standard Wikipedia practice.  If a non-existent
>>article is linked enough times, that is exactly what will make it appear
>>on the list of most wanted pages.  At one time that page was a great
>>resource for newbies who didn't know what to write about.  Please don't
>>blame this user for not attempting to get along when that failure is on
>>the part of his accusers.
>>
>>Ec
>>
>>
>
>You're right; I'm sorry.  I wasn't trying to blame the blocked user; I
>was instead trying to point out ways in which these kinds of conflicts
>might be avoided in future.  But I put it wrong.  My apologies.
>
>moink
>
No problem; it's really the sysop that did the blocking that should be
giving the apology the new user.  It's the second such incident on the
mailing list in the last couple days.  Sysops should know and behave better.

Ec


from_name: vesa.sihvonen at bolina.hsb.se

body:
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Url: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20040626/4123d76a/attachment.diff


subject: [WikiEN-l] Copyright Problems: Challenge to administrators

body:
Angela has pointed out that there are many very old discussions on
[[Wikipedia:Copyright problems]] and she has offered a gmail account
(which I don't need, as I have one) to anyone who can remove 10 of
those old discussions from the page.  I looked at the page, and that's
just an overwhelming prospect.  The discussions still there are there
because they are the most complex or controversial copyright disputes,
and no administrator has felt comfortable making a final decision and
resolving it.  Attacking any number of them at once is way too much
work.

So I'm issuing a challenge to every administrator on this list.
Choose one of the discussions that is older than 7 days.  Do all the
research necessary to make an informed decision about whether or not
the page is a copyvio, and perform the necessary action.  Many of them
will be quite a bit of work as they require figuring out which parts
are copyvio, etc.  But I figure if we tackle one each it won't be too
much work for any one person.

moink


from_name: phil hunt

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Mr-Natural-Health banned until 2 Oct

body:
On Sat, 26 Jun 2004 03:21:44 -0700, Matthew Brown <morven at byz.org> wrote:
>David Gerard writes:
>> One question (and I don't mean to sound churlish): if MNH comes back
>on
>> 2nd October and starts doing the same stuff again, will it take
>another
>> few months for this to be acted upon?
>
>I think this is an important issue.  While I would like the arbitration
>committee to be somewhat faster, taking our time over 'first-time
>offenders' at least makes sure that a considered decision is reached.
>However, I do think that subsequent violations after one banning should
>be rather more fast-track than that.  If a user is 'violating their
>probation' by doing the exact same thing they did last time -- I don't
>see the complexity.  I do see an appearance of toothlessness.

I second that.

--
"It's easier to find people online who openly support the KKK than
people who openly support the RIAA" -- comment on Wikipedia
(Email: zen19725 at zen dot co dot uk)


from_name: Tim Starling

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: meta vandalism

body:
Adon Metcalfe wrote:
> ok, then we gotta find out who would do this, and contact them asking
> why their doing it, (if it's not just out of spite), this will
> probably cause them to stop what their doing. We could follow
> madpenguin .org's example, here is what they placed on their main page
> after being dos attacked...., it appears they took it down, but it was
> along the lines of: Could whoever is attacking us please come forward,
> if you don't we will be forced to retaliate, but if you do and explain
> your reasons we will wipe the slate clean and resolve the problem.
> Thankyou for not being a coward.
>
> It was really effective, the attacks ceased, and I presume they
> contacted the attacker and resolved the issue.

We already know who is doing it. It's a Telekom user from Mannheim.
Judging by his repeated declarations of responsibility and the absence
of a denial, it's very likely it is the Telekom user from Mannheim we
know as "Wik". Wik has 22,000 edits and has been active with the project
for about a year. Considering the state of discussions before he made
the transition from contributor to vandal, I think it would be better if
we focused our efforts on liason with his ISP and legal action, rather
than discussion.

-- Tim Starling


from_name: jneden at bellsouth.net

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Custom Logo

body:
Hi guys

Haven't had much wiki'ing time lately. I started a new job, have been college testing like crazy (entrance/placement exams, CLEP [similar to AP], etc.), plus personal life stuff, so I have been busy!

I would like to thank Srtxg and whoever else it was (an IP ^_^) for helping to create the ᏂᎰᏂ (Nihoni - Japan) page on the Cherokee Wikipedia. I had authored that map some time ago and was having trouble with the uploading (the server was doing something rather odd, which seems to be under control now). ᏍᎩ!]

I particularly like that you threw in the following code:

[[af:Japan]]
[[ar:يابان]]
[[ca:Jap?]]
[[cs:Japonsko]]
[[cy:Siapan]]
[[da:Japan]]
[[de:Japan]]
[[el:Ιαπωνία]]
[[en:Japan]]
[[eo:Japanio]]
[[es:Jap?n]]
[[fi:Japani]]
[[fr:Japon]]
[[ga:An tSeap?in]]
[[he:יפן]]
[[hu:Jap?n]]
[[it:Giappone]]
[[ja:日本]]
[[ko:일본]]
[[ms:Jepun]]
[[nl:Japan]]
[[no:Japan]]
[[pl:Japonia]]
[[pt:Jap?o]]
[[ro:Japonia]]
[[ru:Япония]]
[[simple:Japan]]
[[sl:Japonska]]
[[sv:Japan]]
[[tl:Hapon]]
[[ur:نیہون]]
[[zh-cn:日本/简]]
[[zh-tw:日本/繁]]

Where can I get that? :) That's awesome! That gives me some motivation to do the ᏂᎰᏂ page. I'll be patterning it, at least in format, after:

http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%AF%D0%BF%D0%BE%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%8F

That looks great! Thank you!

Now, I have a favor to ask of you guys. Would somebody please create a custom Wikipedia for me, and, if you feel particularly industrious, please upload it and place it on http://chr.wikipedia.org for me? I would be highly appreciative!

Wikipedia: ᏫᎩᏇᏗᎥ (Wikiquedia)
The Free Encylopedia: ᎠᏎᏊᎢ ᎠᏓᏃᎮᏎᏗ ᎪᏪᎵ (Asequui Adanohesedi Goweli)

(Cherokee uses a block-format syllabary; capitalization almost never used.)

You may need a font for this. I would recommend that you try the Aboriginal Serif and Aboriginal Sans fonts, available here:

http://www.languagegeek.com/font/fontdownload.html

Just use whichever you thinks looks the nicest. Traditionally, the Cherokee syllabary is always printed serif, but the handwritten forms are almost always sans. (The presence of serifs distinguishes certain letters, such as Ꮤ and Ꮃ, but it doesn't really matter at all, as long as a few particular glyphs are distinguished from one another within a font or handwritten style.)

Again, I would be very appreciative if you could do this for me. Thank you!

 -- Jeremy
-------------- next part --------------
Today's Topics:

   1. Re: Re: Theora and video policy... (Adon Metcalfe)
   2. Re: Re: Theora and video policy... (Fennec Foxen)
   3. Re: Re: Theora and video policy... (Adon Metcalfe)
   4. Re: Re: Theora and video policy... (Ralesk Ne'vennoyx)
   5. Re: Theora and video policy... (Rowan Collins [IMSoP])
   6. Re: Re: Theora and video policy... (Brion Vibber)
   7. meta vandalism (Anthere)
   8. Re: meta vandalism (Adon Metcalfe)
   9. Re: meta vandalism (Anthere)
  10. Re: Re: meta vandalism (Adon Metcalfe)

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: reply
Type: multipart/digest
Size: 18822 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/attachments/20040626/59160262/attachment.bin
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l


body:
> This is just another example of the loose cannon behaviour that we're
> getting from some over-zealous sysops.  This user did not add the term
> "world revolution", he only wikified it where it already appeared.  That
> is perfectly within standard Wikipedia practice.  If a non-existent
> article is linked enough times, that is exactly what will make it appear
> on the list of most wanted pages.  At one time that page was a great
> resource for newbies who didn't know what to write about.  Please don't
> blame this user for not attempting to get along when that failure is on
> the part of his accusers.
>
> Ec

You're right; I'm sorry.  I wasn't trying to blame the blocked user; I
was instead trying to point out ways in which these kinds of conflicts
might be avoided in future.  But I put it wrong.  My apologies.

moink


subject: [Wikipedia-l] New Wikipedias

body:
Hi there

Do me a favor, somebody, and create the following Wikipedias for me as soon as you get a chance:

http://mus.wikipedia.org/ -- Muscogee (Creek)
http://cho.wikipedia.org/ -- Choctaw
http://nv.wikipedia.org/ -- Navajo

I would also like to create a Wikipedia for the Mikasuki language, sort of a sister language to Muscogee, one of my ancestral languages. (My grandmother is Cherokee and my grandfather is Muscogee, although, due to my upbringing, I have a much stronger Cherokee background.) Mikasuki is used alongside Muscogee on many of the Seminole areas of Florida, and, although small by numbers, has an extremely vibrant population of speakers, young and old, actively promoting the language. I can easily be in touch with the Seminole reservations to inform them of the creation of a Mikasuki Wikipedia, which, I'm sure (knowing them) will excite them quite a bit.

Mikasuki does not have an ISO code. What is preferred to use in this case?

I am also readily in touch with Muscogee and Choctaw speakers. Choctaw is a particularly good candidate for Wiki'ing, for a SE First Nations language, as it has a good number of young, native speakers who could highly benefit from a Choctaw Wikipedia. Muskogee is also a good candidate for wiki'ing--it still has a good number of fluent speakers, but it is suffering from significant language shift, which is rather worrisome. Muskogee (unlike Cherokee) is easily learnable, for the most part, and has a robust but simple grammatical structure (much like Esperanto). I am in the process of learning it from native speakers.

Cherokee, on the other hand, with which I am gaining increased fluency, is a much harder language to quickly pick up, not because of irregularities, but because of its sheer grammatical complexity. Still, it is a very good candidate for Wiki'ing, and I am also adding Cherokee material to the Wikisource archives. Muskogee texts, with a little research and permission, may also be easily added.

You can find a large Muskogee archive here, if you are curious:

http://www.wm.edu/linguistics/creek/

Cherokee has a large amount of written text out there, but only a small amount of it is online. There is, however, a large amount of conversational Cherokee (little of it actually being ORIGINAL!) available -- fire up Google with "o-si-yo" (a dumbly hyphenated version of the syllables that make up "hello") and you'll see what I mean!

Creek has the exact opposite situation. I am in the process of improving both of these situations and will have the first of many high quality IPA-friendly, Cherokee dialogues [with sound files of native-level speakers, including myself] and exercises up on my website, FNN:SE (http://www.nativesouth.org) by tomorrow afternoon. (My accent in Cherokee is at the native level--I just need to increase my fluency in Cherokee! My grandmother and great-grandmother speak English with Cherokee accents, even though they don't realize it!) I will also be adding a large amount of Cherokee source material to my website, within time, as well as to the Wikisource archives. All of my work is copyright-friendly, and ALL of it may be freely and mercilessly reproduced for the betterment of the Cherokee language.

Navajo needs a spot in Wikipedia. It has a HUGE number of native speakers, young and old, who grow up speaking the language more often than they speak English.

For all of these languages, I will set to work on creating their place in Wikipedia, and in advertising their presence to native speakers.

Thanks!
 -- Jeremy
-------------- next part --------------
Today's Topics:

   1. help me answer this question (egbunu david)
   2. Re: meta vandalism (Tim Starling)
   3. Custom Logo (jneden at bellsouth.net)

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: reply
Type: multipart/digest
Size: 35171 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/attachments/20040627/c1c8da53/attachment.bin
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l


from_name: Fennec Foxen

subject: [Wikipedia-l] help me answer this question

body:
This is not the place to solicit assistance in completing homework.
Consider instead using
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reference_desk if you have
queries of a factual nature; note in the future that this is not a
forum for discussing these theoretical matters.

----- Original Message -----
From: egbunu david <inventorfuture at yahoo.co.uk>
I would want you to help me answer this question
   "A man who has reflected upon the principle of reasoning is much
less likely to be decieved than one who is guided unconsciously by
assumption which he has never examined. Discuss these assertion in
detail"


subject: [Wikipedia-l] New Wikipedias

body:
jneden at bellsouth.net wrote:

>I would also like to create a Wikipedia for the Mikasuki language, sort of a sister language to Muscogee, one of my ancestral languages. (My grandmother is Cherokee and my grandfather is Muscogee, although, due to my upbringing, I have a much stronger Cherokee background.) Mikasuki is used alongside Muscogee on many of the Seminole areas of Florida, and, although small by numbers, has an extremely vibrant population of speakers, young and old, actively promoting the language. I can easily be in touch with the Seminole reservations to inform them of the creation of a Mikasuki Wikipedia, which, I'm sure (knowing them) will excite them quite a bit.
>
>Mikasuki does not have an ISO code. What is preferred to use in this case?
>
It is lumped in as one of 139 languages in "nai".  SIL uses "MIK". see
http://www.ethnologue.com/show_language.asp?code=MIK

>For all of these languages, I will set to work on creating their place in Wikipedia, and in advertising their presence to native speakers.
>
>
This is an endangered language.  I hope that there are enough speakers
interested in making it work.

Ec


subject: [Wiktionary-l] Re: De-capitalisation-isation

body:
Andrew Dunbar wrote:

>--- Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote: >
>cookfire wrote:
>
>
>>>Timwi wrote:
>>>I wouldn't call it that. In fact I'm glad you
>>>would want to help us with this issue. It's
>>>something we have been asking for since the
>>>beginning of the English Wiktionary. It wasn't
>>>possible back then  because of other priorities
>>>for the developers.
>>>It's a pity there is such vocal opposition to it
>>>now and I feel bad because I started by
>>>objecting. It is true that there might be even
>>>better ways of dealing with the issues, but I'm
>>>sure that flipping a switch is going to be a
>>>lot easier to accomplish than having to add
>>>functionality to the software to do it in those
>>>better ways.
>>>
>>>
>
>There's no need to be short-sighted and settle for
>quick fixes just because they are "a lot easier". I'm
>sure that's not the kind of thinking employed by the
>founders of the OED or Websters.
>
>If Wiktionary is a good project, and I'm sure we all
>believe it is, then it will survive long enough for
>the
>real fixes to come along. Cleaning up after the side-
>effects of the quick fix and cleaning up again in the
>future when a solid fix comes along will be a
>pointless
>drain on the time and patience of the contributors.
>
>Also, going with the quick fix now will reduce our
>chances of getting the developers to implement a solid
>fix later on, because they will believe they had
>already fixed the problem.
>
>
>
>>>Polyglot
>>>
>>>
>>How a vote is phrased can make a difference to its
>>success.  Putting three questions into one can be a
>>recipe for failure;
>>it gives opponents three separate issues that can be
>>used to oppose the whole thing.
>>
>>
>
>Or, those you label "opponents" might have actually
>agreed on the main point, and taken issue with what
>else was going to happen because of the change.
>Since this is what they have said I don't know why you
>feel the need to put it the way you have.
>
It's a fact that the vote lumped three issues together.  The fact
becomes that they voted no on all three points.

>>The opposition was as much to the proposed script as
>>to de-capitalizing the first letter.
>>
>>
>
>Or, the "opposition" was not opposed to
>de-capitalizing
>the first letter in a better way, and were much more
>opposed to the script, depending on which member of
>"the opposition", since each was an individual with a
>different perspective.
>
My support is for the first letter de-capitalization.  I have no
attachment to the script.  It looks as though it would do the job, but
another method could work just as well.

>>I first proposed freeing up the first letter on Dec.
>>18, 2002, and I'm still convinced that it's the best
>>way to go.
>>Unfortunately the principal opponent doesn't seem to
>>understand dictionaries.
>>
>>
>
>It may be even more unfortunate that some feel the
>need
>to put down others rather than improve their arguments
>or consider that other opinions might be valid and not
>just the "contrary ignoramuses" who have been depicted
>in the email I'm replying to now.
>
>
"Ignoramus" is your word.


from_name: Matthew Brown

body:
I've been going through them steadily and have resolved quite a few.
Many of them are simply stuck at the point where external inquiries have
to take place.  I've emailed a number of people asking for
clarifications.

-Matt (User:Morven)


list: wikitech-l

from_name: Karl Eichwalder

subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: Broken links table in HE Wikipedia

body:
"Meir Mendelovich" <meir_m at mail.com> writes:

> Ideas? Is this related to the problem with Greek Wikipedia?

On 'de' we encountered the same behavior.  We were told the software
does not make use of the transaction feature of the database system (for
performance reasons)...

--
                                                         |      ,__o
                                                         |    _-\_<,
http://www.gnu.franken.de/ke/                            |   (*)/'(*)


from_name: Andrew Dunbar

body:
--- Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net> wrote: >
cookfire wrote:
>
> > Timwi wrote:
> >
> >> cookfire wrote:
> >>
> >>> The voting page has been moved over to the
> >>> English Wiktionary by Eclecticology.
> >>
> >> It seems that he *copied* it over. That's a bad
> >> idea. :-P I've replaced the page on meta with
> >> a "this has been moved" page now.
> >>
> >>> Now we have a lot of no votes from people I
> >>> don't see contributing all that much on
> >>> Wiktionary.
> >>
> >> Yeah. I'm stupid. I should have started the vote
> >> on Wiktionary itself.
> >>
> >> Timwi
> >
> > I wouldn't call it that. In fact I'm glad you
> > would want to help us with this issue. It's
> > something we have been asking for since the
> > beginning of the English Wiktionary. It wasn't
> > possible back then  because of other priorities
> > for the developers.
> > It's a pity there is such vocal opposition to it
> > now and I feel bad because I started by
> > objecting. It is true that there might be even
> > better ways of dealing with the issues, but I'm
> > sure that flipping a switch is going to be a
> > lot easier to accomplish than having to add
> > functionality to the software to do it in those
> > better ways.

There's no need to be short-sighted and settle for
quick fixes just because they are "a lot easier". I'm
sure that's not the kind of thinking employed by the
founders of the OED or Websters.

If Wiktionary is a good project, and I'm sure we all
believe it is, then it will survive long enough for
the
real fixes to come along. Cleaning up after the side-
effects of the quick fix and cleaning up again in the
future when a solid fix comes along will be a
pointless
drain on the time and patience of the contributors.

Also, going with the quick fix now will reduce our
chances of getting the developers to implement a solid
fix later on, because they will believe they had
already fixed the problem.

> > Polyglot
>
> Beginning the vote at the wrong place is not a
> blameworthy act, just a strategically unsound one. I
> considered moving it instead of copying the page,
> and finally decided that moving was more socially
> acceptable.  I was concerned about what complaints I
> might hear; I was glad to see that the page was
> replaced with the message.
>
> How a vote is phrased can make a difference to its
> success.  Putting three questions into one can be a
> recipe for failure;
> it gives opponents three separate issues that can be
> used to oppose the whole thing.

Or, those you label "opponents" might have actually
agreed on the main point, and taken issue with what
else was going to happen because of the change.
Since this is what they have said I don't know why you
feel the need to put it the way you have.

> The opposition was as much to the proposed script as
> to de-capitalizing the first letter.

Or, the "opposition" was not opposed to
de-capitalizing
the first letter in a better way, and were much more
opposed to the script, depending on which member of
"the opposition", since each was an individual with a
different perspective.

> I first proposed freeing up the first letter on Dec.
> 18, 2002, and I'm still convinced that it's the best
> way to go.
> Unfortunately the principal opponent doesn't seem to
> understand dictionaries.

It may be even more unfortunate that some feel the
need
to put down others rather than improve their arguments
or consider that other opinions might be valid and not
just the "contrary ignoramuses" who have been depicted
in the email I'm replying to now.

Hippietrail.

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

___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - sooooo many all-new ways to express yourself http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com


from_name: Anthere

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: unwished corrections and unwished articles

body:
Ray Saintonge wrote:
> moink wrote:
>
>>> This is just another example of the loose cannon behaviour that we're
>>> getting from some over-zealous sysops.  This user did not add the term
>>> "world revolution", he only wikified it where it already appeared.  That
>>> is perfectly within standard Wikipedia practice.  If a non-existent
>>> article is linked enough times, that is exactly what will make it appear
>>> on the list of most wanted pages.  At one time that page was a great
>>> resource for newbies who didn't know what to write about.  Please don't
>>> blame this user for not attempting to get along when that failure is on
>>> the part of his accusers.
>>>
>>> Ec
>>>
>>
>>
>> You're right; I'm sorry.  I wasn't trying to blame the blocked user; I
>> was instead trying to point out ways in which these kinds of conflicts
>> might be avoided in future.  But I put it wrong.  My apologies.
>>
>> moink
>>
> No problem; it's really the sysop that did the blocking that should be
> giving the apology the new user.  It's the second such incident on the
> mailing list in the last couple days.  Sysops should know and behave better.
>
> Ec

A sysop **blocked** a user for wikifying a term, which will perhaps be
an article later ?

Wikifying is "vandalism" ??

Was the sysop trying to "limit" the project growth ???

Les Dieux sont tomb?s sur la t?te :-)


subject:
[Wikipedia-l] Since "standard" isn't "standard",
	perhaps it shouldn't be "standard"

body:
David Gerard wrote:

> On 06/27/04 11:26, Rowan Collins wrote:
>
>>>> So here's my challenge to you all (developers and users alike, I hope
>>>> I don't annoy too many people by cross-posting this): come up with a
>>>> name, in retrospect, for the skin which didn't need a name until
>>>> MediaWiki 1.3, because it was just "standard".
>>>
>>> How about "Simple".
>>> Arvind
>>
>> Ah, but isn't "nostalgia" even simpler? Perhaps something more
>> descriptive; I was going to suggest "ochre", but there's no more or
>> less off-yellow in it than some of the other skins, really, now I
>> look....
>
> No, I think "Plain" or "Simple" is a good name, because I use it
> precisely because it is plain and simple.

"Simple" could entail confusion with the Simple English Wikipedia.  As
one of the old farts around here, I continue to use this skin.  I think
that "Gold Standard" is the suggestion that would have my vote.

Ec


from_name: Rowan Collins

body:
Somebody recently posted on the English Wikipedia's "Help Desk" with
what at first sight appeared to be a technical problem with skins:
they could not see "the most modern 'standard'" while logged in.
[ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Help_desk#Display_irk ]

I think, however, that they are just being confused by a rather
unhelpful choice of name - if you select "Standard" as your skin, you
get not the current default (which is called "MonoBook"), but the
previous one. It's now become a name for something that was previously
essentially nameless.

As I went on to say in my response, it's probably not a very good idea
having something called "standard" that's not standard any more -
perhaps we should try and come up with a "proper" name for it.
"Classic" would be a possibility, but not a very good one, since we
already have a "nostalgia"; "phase3" would be a bit dull (and
meaningless for most users)...

So here's my challenge to you all (developers and users alike, I hope
I don't annoy too many people by cross-posting this): come up with a
name, in retrospect, for the skin which didn't need a name until
MediaWiki 1.3, because it was just "standard".

--
Rowan Collins BSc
[IMSoP]


subject:
[Wikitech-l] Since "standard" isn't "standard",
	perhaps it shouldn't be "standard"


from_name: Michael Diederich

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Interwiki links

body:
Hi all,

in the moment i am refreshing the interwiki-links in de: from the [[1.
Janaur]] to [[31. Dezember]] - and i found a lot of pages without
interwiki-links and also broken interwikilinks (the half of 28. May is
linked to 14. May, between 1. April and the 4. January the same.)

I would like to get in touch with other people from other wikipedias to run
the pybot and solve this problem.

Are there any comments oder people who would like to help?

Best regards,

da didi
de:Benutzer:MichaelDiederich
--
===========================================================================
Gentoo Linux:                   Gentoo Base System version 1.4.16
kernel-2.6.7                    Pentium III (Coppermine)
===========================================================================


body:
> > So here's my challenge to you all (developers and users alike, I hope
> > I don't annoy too many people by cross-posting this): come up with a
> > name, in retrospect, for the skin which didn't need a name until
> > MediaWiki 1.3, because it was just "standard".
> >
>
> How about "Simple".
>
> Arvind

Ah, but isn't "nostalgia" even simpler? Perhaps something more
descriptive; I was going to suggest "ochre", but there's no more or
less off-yellow in it than some of the other skins, really, now I
look....

--
Rowan Collins BSc
[IMSoP]


subject: [Wikitech-l] TeX rendering option labels

body:
Thinking about the "Standard" skin naming issue brought to mind my
least favourite piece of text in the whole MediaWiki interface:

"Recommended for modern browsers".

It's not a note attached to an option somewhere, it is the entire text
of one of the options for "Rendering math" (maybe one day I'll be able
to customize that to "maths"...).

What exactly is a "modern browser"? How "modern" is "modern"? Does
that include modern text-based browsers, such as ELinks? I doubt it!
What happens in a few years time, when "modern" browsers become able
to do far fancier tricks (and what's now "modern" will be "older")?
And who is recommending this, and why? And if you're about to answer
that question, hold on to it for a bit; if we have to give an
explanation beyond the text that appears, we might as well just call
it "use this one".

Looking at the options, some of the others aren't too great either -
and they're a right mish-mash. Currently, we have:
(0) "Always render PNG"
(1) "HTML if very simple or else PNG"
(2) "HTML if possible or else PNG"
(3) "Leave it as TeX (for text browsers)"
(4) "Recommended for modern browsers"
(5) "MathML if possible (experimental)"

This order seems somewhat bizarre, for a start, but that's alright -
we can just redefine the values the constants are defined with in
Language.php (correct me if I'm wrong). For clarity, I'll use the
numbers in brackets (their current position/value) in my proposal
below.

Basically, what we want to communicate here is: a)roughly what
behaviour the option activates; b)what circumstances/browsers/etc that
will be useful for. So why not standardise the descriptions, e.g.:

(3) "Leave it as TeX (useful for text-based browsers, screen reader software)"
(0) "Always produce a PNG image (*)"
(1) "Produce HTML if very simple, otherwise a PNG (*)"
(4) "HTML for many cases, but PNG for the most complex (*)"
(2) "HTML wherever possible, otherwise PNG (may not display well in
existing browsers|*)"
(5) "MathML wherever possible, otherwise PNG [EXPERIMENTAL]"

Now, all we need to do is what to replace those *s with - some
scenarios or example browsers for each case. Now, as I say, I don't
know what "modern browser" means, but maybe "e.g. IE >=5.0, Netscape
>=4.0, Mozilla" for option (4), and the corresponding less-thans for
option (1)? And can anyone think of a specific situation for option
(0) - just "if other options do not display well" perhaps? As for (2)
and (5), we can add example browsers in when/if they come into
existence...

(Of course, all these will then have to be translated too!)

What does anyone think?

--
Rowan Collins BSc
[IMSoP]


from_name: David Gerard

body:
On 06/27/04 10:00, Matthew Brown wrote:
> I've been going through them steadily and have resolved quite a few.
> Many of them are simply stuck at the point where external inquiries have
> to take place.  I've emailed a number of people asking for
> clarifications.

Please mark the ones you have in progress so as to avoid duplication.

- d.


body:
On 06/27/04 11:26, Rowan Collins wrote:

>>>So here's my challenge to you all (developers and users alike, I hope
>>>I don't annoy too many people by cross-posting this): come up with a
>>>name, in retrospect, for the skin which didn't need a name until
>>>MediaWiki 1.3, because it was just "standard".

>>How about "Simple".
>>Arvind

> Ah, but isn't "nostalgia" even simpler? Perhaps something more
> descriptive; I was going to suggest "ochre", but there's no more or
> less off-yellow in it than some of the other skins, really, now I
> look....

No, I think "Plain" or "Simple" is a good name, because I use it
precisely because it is plain and simple.

- d.


body:
> > What exactly is a "modern browser"? How "modern" is "modern"? Does
> > that include modern text-based browsers, such as ELinks? I doubt it!
> > What happens in a few years time, when "modern" browsers become able
> > to do far fancier tricks (and what's now "modern" will be "older")?
> > And who is recommending this, and why? And if you're about to answer
> > that question, hold on to it for a bit; if we have to give an
> > explanation beyond the text that appears, we might as well just call
> > it "use this one".
>
> It's explained in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texvc
>
> Please read it first.

Thanks for the link, however, that simply says:
> 2. "moderate" - should work and look good in reasonably modern browsers

How is "reasonably modern" any more explanatory than "modern"?
Admittedly, I was being slightly over-the-top with the "who and why?",
but I still think the label as it stands is complete non-information.

That's not to say, by the way, that the rendering principles and rules
involved are in any way questionable - their existence is a highly
creditable achievement. It's just the way they are then presented to
the user as preferences that needs 'tightening up', so that full use
can be made of the features.

--
Rowan Collins BSc
[IMSoP]


from_name: Delirium

subject: [Wikitech-l] License problems

body:
Evan Prodromou wrote:

>First, I'm pretty sure you can't release something under the GPL and
>also disclaim copyright to it.
>
>Second, it's not clear that you can contribute to a GPL project like
>Mediawiki and make "parts" of that work public domain. What parts of
>your work are not derivative of previous work, and thus not required to
>be under the GPL? Remember, derivation doesn't just mean "containing
>parts of previous stuff" -- adding a function to an existing module is
>making a derivative work (the new module), even if "your" function
>doesn't contain any code from the other modules.
>
>
This is indeed a tricky situation, but combining the two isn't entirely
impossible.  The following situation is perfectly okay:
* Write a stand-alone, independent piece of code, and disclaim copyright
to it, thereby releasing it into the public domain
* Incorporate this piece of (now public domain) code into a larger GPL'd
project

The piece of code on its own is still public domain, but the complete
project is GPL'd.  It is true that because of the GPL's nature, any
changes that are derived works of the whole must themselves be GPL'd, so
unless the public domain module is developed in a strictly segregated
fashion, with all changes also released into the public domain, over
time the entire body of code will slowly become GPL'd (as derived works
of a public domain original are copyrightable).

Perhaps a clearer wording would be that the code is released under the
GPL, but some portions derive from code by Erik Moeller and Daniel Lee
Crocker that was orginally in the public domain, and remains in the
public domain to the extent that it hasn't been modified since then.

(Of course, maybe that isn't clearer.)

-Mark


body:
> > That's not to say, by the way, that the rendering principles and rules
> > involved are in any way questionable - their existence is a highly
> > creditable achievement. It's just the way they are then presented to
> > the user as preferences that needs 'tightening up', so that full use
> > can be made of the features.
>
> "moderate" is a level which should be a default if we didn't have to support
> very old browsers. Unless you *know* that your browser is very old, it should
> work well with "moderate" level.
>
> "liberal" mode, on the other hand, will often look ugly, no matter what browser
> you use.

Right, so that's what we need to communicate to users on the
Preferences screen, right?

--
Rowan Collins BSc
[IMSoP]


from_name: Brion Vibber

subject: [Wikitech-l] Swap on zwinger

body:
Zwinger crawled to a horrible death again today. Reboot & log check
showed OOM kills in the log, again. Noticed that _somebody_ disabled swap!

The machine's got 1gig of ram. That's a nice chunk, but apparently
sometimes it gets pushed, and we get that OOM condition. That's not good.

I've turned swap back on (2gig).

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 253 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20040627/544910a1/attachment.pgp>


from_name: Evan Prodromou

subject: [Wikitech-l] License problems

body:
This is mostly a question for Erik Moeller and Lee Daniel Crocker. The
new README in CVS says,

        Sections of code written exclusively by Lee Crocker or Erik
        Moeller are also released into the public domain, wich does
        not impair the obligations of users under the GPL for use
        of the whole code or other sections thereof.

First, I'm pretty sure you can't release something under the GPL and
also disclaim copyright to it.

Second, it's not clear that you can contribute to a GPL project like
Mediawiki and make "parts" of that work public domain. What parts of
your work are not derivative of previous work, and thus not required to
be under the GPL? Remember, derivation doesn't just mean "containing
parts of previous stuff" -- adding a function to an existing module is
making a derivative work (the new module), even if "your" function
doesn't contain any code from the other modules.

Lastly, who benefits from this? Why make this confusion for users? How
am I supposed to figure out what parts of MediaWiki aren't encumbered by
the GPL? If it's pretty much impossible to me to find out, what good
does it do? And how does that outweigh the downside of confusion to the
99% of other users who don't need the PD dedication?

If somebody wants to put parts of MediaWiki under a separate license,
they should be really clear about what's under that separate license,
and they should make real sure that they aren't violating the GPL by
doing so.

~ESP

--
Evan Prodromou <evan at wikitravel.org>
Wikitravel (http://wikitravel.org/)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20040627/27853ee5/attachment.pgp>


from_name: Tomasz Wegrzanowski

body:
On Sun, Jun 27, 2004 at 01:35:06PM +0100, Rowan Collins wrote:
> Thinking about the "Standard" skin naming issue brought to mind my
> least favourite piece of text in the whole MediaWiki interface:
>
> "Recommended for modern browsers".
>
> It's not a note attached to an option somewhere, it is the entire text
> of one of the options for "Rendering math" (maybe one day I'll be able
> to customize that to "maths"...).
>
> What exactly is a "modern browser"? How "modern" is "modern"? Does
> that include modern text-based browsers, such as ELinks? I doubt it!
> What happens in a few years time, when "modern" browsers become able
> to do far fancier tricks (and what's now "modern" will be "older")?
> And who is recommending this, and why? And if you're about to answer
> that question, hold on to it for a bit; if we have to give an
> explanation beyond the text that appears, we might as well just call
> it "use this one".

It's explained in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texvc

Please read it first.


subject: [Wikipedia-l] nl: exceeds 30.000

body:
It is always nice to have something to cheer about!

The nl:wikipedia exceeds 30.000 articles. I hope we will be able to continue like we do with some great articles and some brilliant people contributing to successes like this.

Thanks,
  GerardM


from_name: Till Westermayer

subject:
[Wikipedia-l] Since "standard" isn't "standard", perhaps it
	shouldn't be "st

body:
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . till we *) . . .

>On Sun, Jun 27, 2004 at 11:33:07AM +0100, Rowan Collins wrote:

>> So here's my challenge to you all (developers and users alike, I
>> hope I don't annoy too many people by cross-posting this): come
>> up with a name, in retrospect, for the skin which didn't need a
>> name until MediaWiki 1.3, because it was just "standard".
>>

"Old Standard"?

Or even "Gold Standard"?

 __ .
 / / / /                            ... Till Westermayer - till we *)
. .
  . mailto:till at tillwe.de . www.westermayer.de/till/ . icq 320393072
  . Habsburgerstr. 82 . 79104 Freiburg . 0761 55697152 . 0160 96619179
  . . . . .


body:
On Sun, Jun 27, 2004 at 02:07:28PM +0100, Rowan Collins wrote:
> > It's explained in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texvc
> >
> > Please read it first.
>
> Thanks for the link, however, that simply says:
> > 2. "moderate" - should work and look good in reasonably modern browsers
>
> How is "reasonably modern" any more explanatory than "modern"?
> Admittedly, I was being slightly over-the-top with the "who and why?",
> but I still think the label as it stands is complete non-information.
>
> That's not to say, by the way, that the rendering principles and rules
> involved are in any way questionable - their existence is a highly
> creditable achievement. It's just the way they are then presented to
> the user as preferences that needs 'tightening up', so that full use
> can be made of the features.

"moderate" is a level which should be a default if we didn't have to support
very old browsers. Unless you *know* that your browser is very old, it should
work well with "moderate" level.

"liberal" mode, on the other hand, will often look ugly, no matter what browser
you use.


subject: [Wikitech-l] License problems

body:
Evan Prodromou wrote:
> First, I'm pretty sure you can't release something under the GPL and
> also disclaim copyright to it.

Consider the case of a public domain program which has been heavily
modified by the addition of code that is copyrighted and GPL-licensed.
Or, to use the classic copyright dilettante's example, a modern Disney
cartoon based on a 19th-century book which has fallen into the public
domain. ;)

These cases are equivalent, but they look clearer since you can see the
PD material on its own. [IANAL! IANAL!]

> Second, it's not clear that you can contribute to a GPL project like
> Mediawiki and make "parts" of that work public domain.
[snip]
> Lastly, who benefits from this?
[snip]

No particular "parts" are public domain. Much of MediaWiki's code has
been touched by many hands; even Lee's major rewrite of '02 was heavily
based on Magnus's codebase, and afaik Magnus has not disclaimed copyright.

The practical effect is simply that if we want to relicense the codebase
later on, we won't need to get Lee or Erik's permission, as they've
disclaimed copyright on their contributions.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 253 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20040627/3ebbe81f/attachment.pgp>


from_name: Arvind Narayanan

in_reply_to:
<9f02ca4c0406270333556e0f04@mail.gmail.com>;
	from rowan.collins@gmail.com on Sun, Jun 27, 2004 at 11:33:07AM
	+0100

body:
On Sun, Jun 27, 2004 at 11:33:07AM +0100, Rowan Collins wrote:

> So here's my challenge to you all (developers and users alike, I hope
> I don't annoy too many people by cross-posting this): come up with a
> name, in retrospect, for the skin which didn't need a name until
> MediaWiki 1.3, because it was just "standard".
>

How about "Simple".

Arvind
--
Its all GNU to me


subject:
[Wikitech-l] Re: [Wikipedia-l] Since "standard" isn't "standard",
	perhaps it shouldn't be "standard"


from_name: Daniel Mayer

subject: [WikiEN-l] Mr-Natural-Health banned until 2 Oct

body:
--- David Gerard <fun at thingy.apana.org.au> wrote:
> Very much so, thank you. Particularly as (1) MNH has been trying to
> edit quite a bit since his ban (see [[Special:ipblocklist]]) and
> (2) User:Plato said on IRC #wikipedia last night that MNH intends
> to come back and start where he left off as soon as his ban is up.

MrNH needs to understand that his ban clock will be reset each and every time
he attempts to subvert the ban order. He may end up effectively permanently
banning himself (if this keeps up, then the AC may just rule that way and be
done with it). I'll leave a message on his talk page.

--mav

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


from_name: Stephan Walter

subject: [Wikitech-l] License problems

body:
Hi all,

Disclaimer: IANAL

I agree that using two different licenses leads to confusion and should
be avoided.

But IIRC you can put the same piece of code under different licenses,
because a license is a contract between the author and the
consumer/reader/audience. When you license your code to Alice under
license A, and to Bob under license B, you just have placed two contracts.

But I may be horribly wrong on this.

Cheers,
Stephan


list: foundation-l

from_name: daniwo59 at aol.com

subject: [Foundation-l] 501(c)(3)

body:
For fund-raising purposes, are we a qualified 501(c)(3) organization with a
valid IRS tax ID?

Danny
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/attachments/20040627/6639df5f/attachment.htm


subject: [Foundation-l] 501(c)(3)

body:
For fund-raising purposes, are we a qualified 501(c)(3) organization with a
valid IRS tax ID?

Danny
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/attachments/20040627/6639df5f/attachment-0001.htm


list: wikimedia-l

subject: [Foundation-l] 501(c)(3)

body:
For fund-raising purposes, are we a qualified 501(c)(3) organization with a
valid IRS tax ID?

Danny
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/attachments/20040627/6639df5f/attachment.html>


subject: [Foundation-l] 501(c)(3)

body:
For fund-raising purposes, are we a qualified 501(c)(3) organization with a
valid IRS tax ID?

Danny
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/attachments/20040627/6639df5f/attachment-0001.html>


from_name: Jim Cecropia

body:
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20040627/ef55d30c/attachment.htm


from_name: Timwi

subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: MediaWiki 1.3.0beta4 released

body:
Brion Vibber wrote:

> * "newbies" mode on Special:Contributions

OK, for those who don't know, this feature is accessible at:

     http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/newbies

Apparently it displays the most recent contributions by some of the most
recently created users (but doesn't say who :-p).

Greetings,
Timwi


subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: License problems

body:
Stephan Walter wrote:

> I agree that using two different licenses leads to confusion and should
> be avoided.

"Public domain" is not a license.


subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: License problems

body:
Evan Prodromou wrote:

> This is mostly a question for Erik Moeller and Lee Daniel Crocker. The
> new README in CVS says,
>
>         Sections of code written exclusively by Lee Crocker or Erik
>         Moeller are also released into the public domain, wich does
>         not impair the obligations of users under the GPL for use
>         of the whole code or other sections thereof.
>
> First, I'm pretty sure you can't release something under the GPL and
> also disclaim copyright to it.

You can develop something independently, disclaim copyright to it, and
then incorporate it into a GPL project. (If that was not possible, it
would mean that no GPL project can ever incorporate public-domain code.)

Maybe nobody can use those public-domain pieces because they're pretty
much useless without the rest that is GPL, and is thus pretty much
forced to adhere to the GPL, but that doesn't mean that Erik and Lee
Daniel have to keep their copyright.

Timwi


body:
vesa.sihvonen at bolina.hsb.se wrote:

> I have been graced with the following action:
>
>>Your user name or IP address has been blocked by 14002.
>
>>The reason given is this:
>>repeated vandalization by adding nonesistant world revolution link to a dozen articles.

I have warned the responsible sysop, and re-inserted all the links to
[[world revolution]] you originally inserted.

Thanks for contacting us about it.
Timwi


from_name: Martin Harper

body:
> if MNH comes back on 2nd October and starts doing the same
> stuff again, will it take another few months for this to be acted
> upon?

In Wik's case we had a "parole" ruling authorising sysops to implement 24 hour bans in
certain cases. Such a thing may be done for Mr. N-H (and Irismeister, as it happens) -
the "certain cases" being personal attacks and similar unpleasantness. Would this
resolve your concern?

-Martin


body:
Anthere wrote:

> A sysop **blocked** a user for wikifying a term, which will perhaps be
> an article later ?

Their justification (after I communicated with them) was that it looked
like "oddball vandalism" simply because it was an anonymous IP address
adding the same link to many pages.

I would like to encourage ALL sysops to *stop* thinking of IP addresses
as a "lower caste". Do *not* expect people to open accounts; why should
they, and why should you force them to?

Greetings,
Timwi


body:
On 06/27/04 23:00, Martin Harper wrote:

>>if MNH comes back on 2nd October and starts doing the same
>>stuff again, will it take another few months for this to be acted
>>upon?

> In Wik's case we had a "parole" ruling authorising sysops to implement 24 hour bans in
> certain cases. Such a thing may be done for Mr. N-H (and Irismeister, as it happens) -
> the "certain cases" being personal attacks and similar unpleasantness. Would this
> resolve your concern?

Very much so, thank you. Particularly as (1) MNH has been trying to
edit quite a bit since his ban (see [[Special:ipblocklist]]) and
(2) User:Plato said on IRC #wikipedia last night that MNH intends
to come back and start where he left off as soon as his ban is up.

- d.


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Custom Logo

body:
jneden at bellsouth.net wrote:

> I particularly like that you threw in the following code:
>
> [[af:Japan]] [ ... etc., loads of language links ]
>
> Where can I get that? :)

Well, for example, you could have got it from the page you quoted,
http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%AF%D0%BF%D0%BE%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%8F :)

In general, though, the English ones are more likely to have all
available links (the others tend to be added only by bots), so
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan would have been the place to look.

> Now, I have a favor to ask of you guys. Would somebody please create a
> custom Wikipedia for me, and, if you feel particularly industrious,
> please upload it and place it on http://chr.wikipedia.org for me? I
> would be highly appreciative!

I assume you meant a "custom Wikipedia *logo*", right?... I've added
your request to http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_in_other_languages

Greetings,
Timwi


from_name: C A S [name omitted for privacy reasons]

from_email: a

subject: [Wikipedia-l] I was banned, why?

body:
    I was banned, apparently because I am suspected of "sockpuppetry". I have not been provided with any evidence of this, the issue has not been reviewed by the mediation committee, I am not guilty. Please remedy this matter. -- User:Lir
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/attachments/20040628/e7699f68/attachment.htm


subject:
[Wikipedia-l] Re: Since "standard" isn't "standard",
 perhaps it   shouldn't be "st

body:
Till Westermayer wrote:

>>>So here's my challenge to you all (developers and users alike, I
>>>hope I don't annoy too many people by cross-posting this): come
>>>up with a name, in retrospect, for the skin which didn't need a
>>>name until MediaWiki 1.3, because it was just "standard".
>
> "Old Standard"?
> Or even "Gold Standard"?

I really really don't think it should contain the word "standard" at all.

"Gold" might be nice. A derivative suggestion might be "Golden Age",
heheh...


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: nl: exceeds 30.000

body:
Gerard.Meijssen wrote:

> It is always nice to have something to cheer about!
>
> The nl:wikipedia exceeds 30.000 articles. I hope we will be able to
> continue like we do with some great articles and some brilliant people
> contributing to successes like this.

Whoo! Congratulations! Way to go!

En is about to reach a milestone too (300,000), but I'm not sure if the
media aren't already sick of our frequent press releases. :)

Maybe we (en) should save up our press release for the half-million?


body:
Andrew Dunbar wrote:

> There's no need to be short-sighted and settle for
> quick fixes just because they are "a lot easier". I'm
> sure that's not the kind of thinking employed by the
> founders of the OED or Websters.
>
> If Wiktionary is a good project, and I'm sure we all
> believe it is, then it will survive long enough for the
> real fixes to come along.

This is so typical. This argument is *always* going to brought up for
*everything* that is not a complete miracle cure. Hence nothing will
ever change and hence we will be stuck with the same problem forever
just because people wouldn't accept at least a partial solution!

> Cleaning up after the side-
> effects of the quick fix and cleaning up again in the
> future when a solid fix comes along will be a pointless
> drain on the time and patience of the contributors.

That is ungrounded and probably false. What you call a "quick fix" is a
step in the right direction. Any "cleaning up" needed to do after the
next fix (whether or not it is a miracle cure) will complement, and not
override, replace, or render useless, the cleaning up needed now.

> Also, going with the quick fix now will reduce our
> chances of getting the developers to implement a solid
> fix later on, because they will believe they had
> already fixed the problem.

You are forgetting that you *already* have no chance of getting a
developer to do anything. The only reason why we can do this now is
because *the feature is already there*. I don't know why it was written
(maybe for Toki Pona?), but we have it now, and we can flip a switch to
make it work. I (not really a "developer") have volunteered to write a
script to do the moving in order to spare you from 40,000 page moves,
but even without that script I am sure the Wiktionary userbase can fix
all of that manually over time.

> It may be even more unfortunate that some feel the need
> to put down others rather than improve their arguments
> or consider that other opinions might be valid and not
> just the "contrary ignoramuses" who have been depicted
> in the email I'm replying to now.

I do think I have considered the arguments brought forward. I have
thought about them as much as I could, and almost all of them struck me
as separate issues that were not arguments against this particular change.

Timwi


from_name: Ricky Beam

subject: [Wikitech-l] Swap on zwinger

body:
Linux machines do not function correctly without swap.  This is especially
true with 2.6 kernels... swap can be 1 byte but it has to exist :-)  As
you are seeing, the OOM killer will go on a rampage (pun not intended)
without any swap.  The OOM killer can be disabled, but I don't recommend
it.

Swap should be 2x physical ram.  But one can get away with less.

--Ricky


subject: [Wikitech-l] Swap on zwinger

body:
On Mon, 28 Jun 2004, Ivan Krstic wrote:
>Ricky Beam wrote:
>> Swap should be 2x physical ram.  But one can get away with less.
>
>There was a reasonably long discussion on lkml some time ago regarding
>this. The 2xRAM rule of thumb was useful with older machines, but should
>not be taken too seriously nowadays; I'd recommend between 256 and 512
>MB of swap, no more (except as an emergency solution).

There have been may jehads in the name of swap...  There are numerous
reasons to make swap 2x ram, at minimum, 1x ram.  At the top of the
list is the strong recommendation from those far more knowledgable
of the linux memory management than ALL of us.  Linux doesn't manage
memory the way sane people do... "is this memory free" has a minimum
of three answers. (in 2.6, it's now four answers.)

--Ricky


from_name: Andrew Dunbar

body:
--- Timwi <timwi at gmx.net> wrote: > Andrew Dunbar
wrote:
>
> > There's no need to be short-sighted and settle
> > for quick fixes just because they are "a lot
> > easier". I'm sure that's not the kind of
> > thinking employed by the founders of the OED or
> > Websters.
> >
> > If Wiktionary is a good project, and I'm sure we
> > all believe it is, then it will survive long
enough
> > for the real fixes to come along.
>
> This is so typical. This argument is always going
> to brought up for everything that is not a
> complete miracle cure.
> Hence nothing will ever change and hence we will be
> stuck with the same problem forever just because
>people wouldn't accept at least a partial solution!

So basically you have made a prediction that
nothing short of a miracle is capable of fixing
the problem the proper way. Then you extend
this into the future of all problems for all
eternity. And this is to bolster support for your
compromise solution.

>From what you say in the following paragraph, it
seems that you expect these statements to be taken
as grounded and probably true:

> > Cleaning up after the side-effects of the quick
> > fix and cleaning up again in the future when a
> > solid fix comes along will be a pointless drain on
> > the time and patience of the contributors.
>
> That is ungrounded and probably false. What you call
> a "quick fix" is a step in the right direction.
> Any "cleaning up" needed to do after the next fix
> (whether or not it is a miracle cure) will
> complement, and not override, replace, or render
> useless, the cleaning up needed now.

Since you have brought up "grounds" and
true vs. false regarding the nature of your
proposed change and its side-effects, I would
call on you to please provide some grounds
to support that these claims of yours:

a) that a real fix require a miracle
b) that cleaning up won't be required

> > Also, going with the quick fix now will reduce our
> > chances of getting the developers to implement a
> > solid fix later on, because they will believe they
> > had already fixed the problem.
>
> You are forgetting that you already have no chance
> of getting a developer to do anything.

This is your argument, for which I am hoping
you provide some grounds.

> The only reason why we can do this now is because
> *the feature is already there*.

A feature with side-effects which, thankfully, have
now
Been discussed and commented on by several people.

> I don't know why it was written (maybe for Toki
> Pona?), but we have it now, and we can flip a switch
> to make it work. I (not really a ?developer?) have
> volunteered to write a script to do the moving in
> order to spare you from 40,000 page moves, but even
> without that script I am sure the Wiktionary
> userbase can fix all of that manually over time.

So you do know the switch is there. You don't know why
the switch is there. You do know that a miracle is
needed to make a better switch. You're not really a
developer. You will write a script. Such a script does
not need to be miraculous. My claims that cleanup
after the script are ungrounded. You are sure we can
avoid this non-developer script if we fix it ourselves
over time. You are not prepared to wait time for a
better fix.

> > It may be even more unfortunate that some feel the
> > need to put down others rather than improve their
> > arguments or consider that other opinions might be
> > valid and not just the "contrary ignoramuses" who
> > have been depicted in the email I'm replying to
> > now.

> I do think I have considered the arguments brought
> forward. I have thought about them as much as I
> could, and almost all of them struck me as separate
> issues that were not arguments against this
> particular change.

Well I hope I've clarified what hasn't been thought
about Sufficiently. In the meantime I'm going to start
looking at The Wiki code, and get in touch with some
Wiki developers to see how feasible a good solutions
would be.

Hippietrail.

___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - sooooo many all-new ways to express yourself http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com


from_name: Erik Moeller

subject: [Wikitech-l] License problems

body:
Evan-
>         Sections of code written exclusively by Lee Crocker or Erik
>         Moeller are also released into the public domain, wich does
>         not impair the obligations of users under the GPL for use
>         of the whole code or other sections thereof.

> First, I'm pretty sure you can't release something under the GPL and
> also disclaim copyright to it.

I would recommend removing the word "also" from the above paragraph, but I
didn't write it. Maybe Lee had a reason for phrasing it this way.
Derivative copyright is a thorny issue (and underscores the idiocy of the
whole concept of copyright), so I won't get into it too deeply. What it
essentially is supposed to say (IMO) is, "Everything by these contributors
that *can* be legally put in the public domain, is." The more other coders
follow our example, the larger that body of work will be.

> Lastly, who benefits from this? Why make this confusion for users? How
> am I supposed to figure out what parts of MediaWiki aren't encumbered by
> the GPL?

You don't have to if you want to use the GPL, since GPL'd code can legally
include PD source, just as GFDL documents can legally include public
domain texts and images. If you want to be on the safe side, just adhere
to the GPL. But if I added, say, a major new extension to MediaWiki, then
you could use the first version of that extension that is not incorporated
into a GPL work by someone else and do with it whatever you want.

By the way, since >99% of our users never download or install MediaWiki
(they use the wiki through someone else's web server), the difference
between GPL and PD is surprisingly small for all practical purposes. You
could, for example, add lots of proprietary libraries to MediaWiki or port
the whole thing over to .NET, but never give anyone the source - if you
don't distribute it at all, you don't have to.

This is not theoretical. There is at least one person running a quite
expensive wiki hosting service on the basis of a heavily modified UseMod
codebase which has never been made publicly available, for instance. And
the Scoop weblog/diary system has been significantly extended and
localized by the people at nensch.de, but they have explicitly stated that
they don't want to share the code because of the effort they have put into
it. I'm sure there are dozens, if not hundreds, more examples already.

The next major GPL release will supposedly address this, but existing code
is not affected by any such change.

Using the GPL (copyleft) to creepingly subvert copyright is at face value
a good idea, but it puts you in a position where you have to actually
enforce and defend copyright, and I don't want to be in that position. If
copyright was abolished, then you could not force me to open the code of a
proprietary MediaWiki fork, though you could reverse engineer it and copy
it freely. The ultimate goal of the GPL is to replace the copyright regime
on software with a copyleft regime, whereas I'd prefer to get rid of the
regimes altogether.

Though not typically, in this instance I find myself agreeing with the
libertarian view ("Do whatever you want") more than with the socialist one
("Sir, please give us your password so that we can share your code with
the community"). I advise anyone who uses the GPL to think about whether
they are willing to enforce it. If so, then the GPL (especially after the
web service "bugfix") is the best choice of license.

In any case, this is not something we should fight about. In the short
term, the differences are minor.

Regards,

Erik


body:
Hi Jim. Thanks for your reply :)

Jim Cecropia wrote:

> I don't think there is an issue of anons being "lesser-users" and I
> support allowing anons to edit because I believe it encourages new
> editors to try out the Wiki through its openness.

No-where have I implied that I don't want anons to be able to edit. The
problem is that I see an increasing number of sysops rectify unilateral
bans by saying something like, "They should create an account to make
their edits look less like vandalism!" That's just ridiculous.

> HOWEVER . . . if we don't think anons bear watching, why do we have an
> option to show only anons on "Recent Changes"?

Anons are indeed worth watching, because for obvious reasons vandalism
tends to be from anons. This is not the point.

The point is that no matter what an anon does, they should *not* have a
higher chance of being classified as "vandals" or even getting blocked
than a logged-in user. Currently they do because the prevailing... let's
say "convention" among sysops is to regard anons as lesser folk who are
less worthy of tolerance. I don't think I like that sentiment.

Greetings,
Timwi


body:
You know what, forget it. I'm sick of this.

I don't see why I should even attempt to rectify my desire to be of
help. You do your own stuff, I won't try to help you again.

Bye,
Timwi


from_name: Dan Miller

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Wikipedia-l Digest, Vol 11, Issue 42

body:
> En is about to reach a milestone too (300,000), but
> I'm not sure if the
> media aren't already sick of our frequent press
> releases. :)
>
> Maybe we (en) should save up our press release for
> the half-million?

Agreed.  The average over at
[[en:Wikipedia:Half-million pool]] puts it in about
6-8 months, so it's not worth it until then.

Meelar

=====
"The difference between extra-marital sex and extra marital sex is not to be sneezed at."

--George Will, on hyphen use

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail


from_name: Nikola Smolenski

body:
On Monday 28 June 2004 01:55, Tony wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Jun 2004 11:33:07 +0100, Rowan Collins wrote:
> >So here's my challenge to you all .....  come up with a
> >name, in retrospect, for the skin which didn't need a name until
> >MediaWiki 1.3, because it was just "standard".
>
> Name it for the colour: "Straw".
>
> "Classic" is OK (not great but OK),  "Traditional" is not bad either.

I agree with "Classic".


from_name: Anthere

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: I was banned, why?

body:
C A S [name omitted for privacy reasons] wrote:
>     I was banned, apparently because I am suspected of "sockpuppetry". I
> have not been provided with any evidence of this, the issue has not been
> reviewed by the mediation committee, I am not guilty. Please remedy this
> matter. -- User:Lir

This is not an issue for the mediation committee Lir :-)


from_name: Jens Frank

subject: [Wikitech-l] Query two or more categories

body:
On Sat, Jun 26, 2004 at 06:38:11AM +0200, Nikola Smolenski wrote:
> On Friday 25 June 2004 00:37, Forest Gregg wrote:
> > Is there a way to query two or more categories. Something like
> > /Category:Philosophers:Dwarves that would return all dwarvish philosophers.
> > I think I saw a notice that a feature like this was implemented.
>
> I made a patch which does it but it didn't made it to the CVS. I guess because
> I submitted it when everyone was busy with installing new version mediawiki
> to the Wikipedia.

Hi,

can you repost it? I checked all your mails to this list back to June 1 and
can't find the patch.

Regards,

JeLuF


from_name: Fennec Foxen

body:
On Mon, 28 Jun 2004 04:38:12 +0100, Timwi <timwi at gmx.net> wrote:

> The point is that no matter what an anon does, they should *not* have a
> higher chance of being classified as "vandals" or even getting blocked
> than a logged-in user. Currently they do because the prevailing... let's
> say "convention" among sysops is to regard anons as lesser folk who are
> less worthy of tolerance. I don't think I like that sentiment.

I for one will never block an anonymous user until I've dropped three
warnings on his or her talk page. I know some people are reluctant to
use this form of communication (perhaps due to a generalized lack of
feedback from the anons themselves :) but I view it as more of a place
to document problems with the user, rather than purely for
communication.

With the new skin, people get a Bright Orange Notice when they have
new messages. I think this increases the response rate.

But with regards to a "lesser caste", I will note that it is well
within the standard scope of sysop actions to block anonymous
troublemakers; however, blocking logged in troublemakers is far more
of an issue and is much, much more liable to cause controversy
(depending on the type of the trouble made).


from_name: Ivan Krstic

subject: [Wikitech-l] Swap on zwinger

body:
Ricky Beam wrote:
> Swap should be 2x physical ram.  But one can get away with less.

There was a reasonably long discussion on lkml some time ago regarding
this. The 2xRAM rule of thumb was useful with older machines, but should
not be taken too seriously nowadays; I'd recommend between 256 and 512
MB of swap, no more (except as an emergency solution).

Cheers,
Ivan.


from_name: Tony

body:
On Sun, 27 Jun 2004 11:33:07 +0100, Rowan Collins wrote:
>So here's my challenge to you all .....  come up with a
>name, in retrospect, for the skin which didn't need a name until
>MediaWiki 1.3, because it was just "standard".

Name it for the colour: "Straw".

"Classic" is OK (not great but OK),  "Traditional" is not bad either.


from_name: Phil Sandifer

subject: [Wikipedia-l] I was banned, why?

body:
Without having to think about it too much, I can point to the
well-proven sockpuppet "Editing Saddam Hussein," which you attempted to
use to vote in RfA, and which User:Plato has admitted was you.

-Snowspinner

On Jun 28, 2004, at 12:19 AM, C A S [name omitted for privacy reasons] wrote:

> ????I was banned, apparently because I am suspected of "sockpuppetry".
> I have not been provided with any evidence of this, the issue has not
> been reviewed by the mediation committee, I am not guilty. Please
> remedy this matter. -- User:Lir
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/enriched
Size: 787 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/attachments/20040628/1843a17a/attachment.bin


subject: [Wikipedia-l] I was banned, why?

body:
*I was banned, apparently because I am suspected of "sockpuppetry".  I have not been provided with any evidence of this, the issue has not  been reviewed by the mediation committee, I am not guilty. Please  remedy this matter. -- User:Lir
**Without having to think about it too much, I can point to the well-proven sockpuppet "Editing Saddam Hussein," which you attempted to  use to vote in RfA, and which User:Plato has admitted was you.

*Surely, Plato's say-so is not sufficent grounds to ban me; I'm rather confused as to how he can "admit" to my alleged crimes. Regardless, having reviewed the history of User:Editing Saddam Hussein -- I am at a loss as to how that account envokes the negative connotations indicated in the latter half of "A sock puppet is an additional username used by a Wikipedian who posts under more than one name. While they may serve legitimate purposes, sock puppets may be sometimes also used to deceive, for example by voting more than once in a poll or otherwise creating an illusion of broader support for an idea."
*Apparently you feel that the account was used to sockpuppet against your admin request -- do you have any proof of my voting more than once in RfA? I doubt you will find any evidence to support your allegation; since, I am not User:Editing Saddam Hussein nor is that my sockpuppet.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sockpuppet<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sockpuppet>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/attachments/20040628/399617ef/attachment.htm


subject: [WikiEN-l] Treatment of anons vs logged-in users

body:
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20040628/f0beb339/attachment.htm


from_name: Ronald Chmara

subject:
[Wikipedia-l] [PR] Kurzweil Educational Systems Announces Kurzweil
	1000 Version 9 With Expanded Online Search,
	Portability and Information Sharing

body:
On Jun 28, 2004, at 11:00 AM, Mathias Schindler wrote:
> I've nerver heard a company name such as "kurzweil"

Wow, really?

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

The name is instantly recognized by many musicians, AI folks, OCR
folks, (etc.).

He's mostly a pioneer in electronic sound and AI engines, including
musical instruments and vocal synthesis. The 1000 and 3000 series of
software can be explained simply as a blind person checking out a
library book, no braille needed, and having the book read to them by a
computer.

-Bop


from_name: Andreas Kasenides

subject: [Wikitech-l]  Re: Setting up for the Greek language

body:
Could one of the developers, please, take up this task and load the
modified month names
and abbreviations as it is described below? This will help a lot in
making a calendar of events,
anniversaries etc. in Greek.
Thanks
Andreas

Andreas Kasenides wrote:

>>Delirium wrote:
>>>/ Timwi wrote:
>>/>/
>>/>>/ Delirium wrote:
>>/>>/
>>/>>>/ There may be cases I'm not covering, but for the one I can
>>/>>>/ immediately see in the interface, the issue is that "day month" type
>>/>>>/ dates use the possessive form of the month name, while month names
>>/>>>/ used by themselves use a simple noun form.
>>/>>/
>>/>>/ [... etc. ...  'Maios' vs. '5h Maiou']
>>/>>/
>>/>>/ Ah-ha. I kind of thought so. So why don't you just do this:
>>/>>/
>>/>>/ - Set the month name to "Maio"
>>/>>/ - In a sentence like "{{MONTHNAME}} is nice", write "{{MONTHNAME}}s
>>/>>/ estis bioutiphulos"
>>/>>/ - Set the date format to "{{DAY}} {{MONTHNAME}}u {{YEAR}}"
>>/>>/ http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>>/>/
>>/>/ Well, unfortunately one part I had left out were the accents, which
>>/>/ shift when the word becomes possessive.  To take the example from
>>/>/ Andreas's email, the simple noun form of June is "Io?nios", whereas the
>>/>/ possessive form is "Ioun?ou".  So it would really need a separate
>>/>/ {{MONTHNAMEPOSSESSIVE}} or something of that sort.
>>/
>>OK. Next idea:
>>
>>(1) Set the month names to be the possessive forms, e.g. "Ioun?ou",
>>     so they can be used normally in dates throughout the site.
>>(2) Create thingies in the Template namespace that contain the
>>     nominative forms, e.g. [[Template:Nominative-Ioun?ou]] would
>>     contain "Io?nios".
>>(3) Whenever you need the nominative, instead of {{CURRENTMONTHNAME}}
>>     write {{Nominative-{{CURRENTMONTHNAME}}}}.
>>
>>How's that?
>>Timwi
>>
> Sorry for not responding earlier on this (since I started it). It
> seems that
> something went wrong with my delivery of list messages and I had to
> look into
> the Web archives. Anyway:
>
> Concerning the Greek names for months and the way they work you can
> look in
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inflection for nice explanation and
> reference.
> I believe the above suggestion by Timwi seems to solve the problem. Of
> course
> somebody needs to remember what we are doing here so that in the
> future it
> stays that way.
>
> So the possessive case of Greek months along with their abbreviation,
> after the comma,
> are (please keep the dots in abbreviations, it looks much better in
> Greek):
>
> ??????????, ???.
> ???????????, ????.
> ???????, ????.
> ????????, ???.
> ?????, ?????
> ???????, ????.
> ???????, ????.
> ?????????, ???.
> ???????????, ????.
> ?????????, ???.
> ?????????, ?????.
> ??????????, ???.
>
> I also attach a UTF-8 txt file with the above.
> Now somebody needs to load all these.
> Thanx
> Andreas
> =========================
>
> e-mail: Andreas.Kasenides_at_cs.ucy.ac.cy
> <mailto:Andreas.Kasenides%20at%20cs.ucy.ac.cy>
>
> (replace the _at_ above with @)
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
--

Andreas Kasenides
e-mail: Andreas.Kasenides_at_cs.ucy.ac.cy
<mailto:Andreas.Kasenides%20at%20cs.ucy.ac.cy>
(replace the _at_ above with @)

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20040628/e508c09f/attachment.html>


from_name: moink

body:
> I for one will never block an anonymous user until I've dropped three
> warnings on his or her talk page. I know some people are reluctant to
> use this form of communication (perhaps due to a generalized lack of
> feedback from the anons themselves :) but I view it as more of a place
> to document problems with the user, rather than purely for
> communication.

I won't block a user either, until three warnings that specifically
state what they're doing wrong, and that are 5 minutes apart, so that
I can expect them to have read the warnings (exceptions can be made
for suspected bots).  That's why I made {{test2}}, {{test3}}, and
{{test4}}.  I've been frustrated in the past sometimes, when I'm in
the process of working my way through this sequence, and another admin
decides that no more warnings are necessary and blocks the user, when
I really haven't been minding cleaning up after them. I think we
should standardize the process.  That way the series of warnings can
be fine-tuned, and any admin going to a talk page knows what has been
said to this user and what to do next.

moink


from_name: Josip Rodin

subject: [Wikitech-l] Swap on zwinger

body:
On Mon, Jun 28, 2004 at 03:18:16AM -0400, Ricky Beam wrote:
> >> Swap should be 2x physical ram.  But one can get away with less.
> >
> >There was a reasonably long discussion on lkml some time ago regarding
> >this. The 2xRAM rule of thumb was useful with older machines, but should
> >not be taken too seriously nowadays; I'd recommend between 256 and 512
> >MB of swap, no more (except as an emergency solution).
>
> There have been may jehads in the name of swap...  There are numerous
> reasons to make swap 2x ram, at minimum, 1x ram.  At the top of the
> list is the strong recommendation from those far more knowledgable
> of the linux memory management than ALL of us.  Linux doesn't manage
> memory the way sane people do... "is this memory free" has a minimum
> of three answers. (in 2.6, it's now four answers.)

By the time a machine with 1 GB of RAM actually uses around 1 GB of swap,
it will be about as responsive as the nearest brick wall, so you might as
well not bother, like the previous poster said.

--
     2. That which causes joy or happiness.


from_name: Brion Vibber

body:
>>On Sun, 27 Jun 2004 11:33:07 +0100, Rowan Collins wrote:
>>
>>>So here's my challenge to you all .....  come up with a
>>>name, in retrospect, for the skin which didn't need a name until
>>>MediaWiki 1.3, because it was just "standard".

I had intended to rename it "Classic" back in April, but apparently
forgot to update the English localization. (I did change at least
Esperanto, haven't checked the others.)

Change is now made for en; other languages with custom skin names should
update as necessary.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 253 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20040628/a9d435cd/attachment.pgp>


from_name: jneden at bellsouth.net

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Custom Cherokee Logo

body:
Hi Timwi

Thank you. Yes, I did mean a logo. :-) I really appreciate your adding the logo request for me.

Thanks,
Jeremy


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: [Mikasuki Wikipedia]

body:
Hi there

Thanks for your help. Yes, I am aware of the "nil" situation, as well as the SIL code. Should we use MIK?

http://mik.wikipedia.org

I think that seems appropriate.

Yes, Mikasuki is an endangered language, at least in its number of speakers. However, its speech community, although very vibrant (YOU visit the Seminole reservations and tell me if it's not! ^_^) has never been all that big, compared to other Muskogean Native American languages, such as Creek and Choctaw. Since the language is vibrant but endangered, I don't think it could be MORE appropriate that we get a Mikasuki Wikipedia up. The same goes for all Native American languages, especially when we have a Toki Pono wikipedia up (no offense to Sonja! ^_^ D?sol?!).

Anyway, I look forward to seeing them up. I will get them set up for native speakers to start posting. Please let me know.

Thank you!
 -- Jeremy
-------------- next part --------------
Today's Topics:

   1. Re: New Wikipedias (Ray Saintonge)
   2. Since "standard" isn't "standard",	perhaps it shouldn't be
      "standard" (Rowan Collins)
   3. Re: Since "standard" isn't "standard",	perhaps it shouldn't
      be "standard" (Arvind Narayanan)
   4. Re: Since "standard" isn't "standard",	perhaps it shouldn't
      be "standard" (Rowan Collins)
   5. nl: exceeds 30.000 (Gerard.Meijssen)
   6. Re: Since "standard" isn't "standard", perhaps it	shouldn't
      be "st (Till Westermayer)
   7. Re: Since "standard" isn't "standard",	perhaps it shouldn't
      be "standard" (David Gerard)
   8. Re: Since "standard" isn't "standard",	perhaps it shouldn't
      be "standard" (Ray Saintonge)
   9. Interwiki links (Michael Diederich)
  10. Re: Custom Logo (Timwi)
  11. Re: Since "standard" isn't "standard", perhaps it   shouldn't
      be "st (Timwi)
  12. Re: nl: exceeds 30.000 (Timwi)

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: reply
Type: multipart/digest
Size: 16366 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/attachments/20040628/692638fc/attachment.bin
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l


subject: [Wikipedia-l] I was banned, why?

body:
>*Surely, Plato's say-so is not sufficent grounds to ban me; I'm
rather confused as to how
he can "admit" to my alleged crimes. Regardless, having reviewed the
history of User:Editing Saddam Hussein -- I am at a loss as to how
that account envokes the negative connotations indicated in the latter
half of "A sock puppet is an additional username used by a Wikipedian
who posts under more than one name. While they may serve legitimate
purposes, sock puppets may
be sometimes also used to deceive, for example by voting more than
once in a poll or otherwise creating an illusion of broader support
for an idea." *Apparently you feel that the account was used to
sockpuppet against your admin request -- do you have any proof of my
voting more than once in RfA? I doubt you will find any evidence to
support your allegation; since, I am not User:Editing Saddam Hussein
nor is that my sockpuppet.

I do have to wonder how a user can "admit to" anything on another's behalf.

moink


from_name: Jim Cecropia

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Rules vs. Anarchy

body:
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20040628/8adc6d9e/attachment.htm


body:
Rowan Collins wrote:
>>I had intended to rename it "Classic" back in April, but apparently
>>forgot to update the English localization. (I did change at least
>>Esperanto, haven't checked the others.)
>
> Bah, I still think it would be nicer to give it a 'proper' name -
> suggestions of "Gold", "Straw", "Ochre" all sound more interesting to
> me. And having "Nostalgia" and "Classic" does seem a bit silly...

Well if you guys want to spend a month hashing out a name (which will
invariably involve a vote on meta and a dispute over the voting rules),
feel free. I've just made the original intended change.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 253 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20040628/c5d4a0ad/attachment.pgp>