subject: [WikiEN-l] Ed's Flustration

body:
Ed must be getting flustrated. Mr. Natural Health may soon agree to
mediation and if he does not, a request for arbitration will be made which
can probably be dealt with very promptly if he does not participate. I don't
see any emergency.

Fred

From: "Poor, Edmund W" <Edmund.W.Poor at abc.com>
Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2004 09:32:05 -0500
To: "English Wikipedia" <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
Subject: [WikiEN-l] Please ban Mr. Natural Health (was: Kill the puppy (was:
Quacks Like a Duck))

RickK wrote:

> At last count, Mr-Natural-Health had made personal attacks
> on 13 people.  Is this violation of Wikiquette to be allowed to
> continue forever?

If I had bothered to keep my ssh account current when I changed computers
last year, I would just ban him myself, announce it to the mailing list, and
take my chances on being deluged with complaints for being autocratic and
unilateral.

But I'll leave that to Erik (Eloquence). He's a sufficient judge of
consensus, and he's got his finger on the ban button.

How about it, my eloquent friend? Do we have to put up with MHN, or will you
eliminate this nuisance for us?

Ed Poor, aka Unsolved Equation

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

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20040122/ca82fc57/attachment.htm


list: wikitech-l

source: pipermail-mbox

from_name: Christopher Mahan

subject: [Wikitech-l] More on toolbar

body:
just came across a toolbar for mozilla at
http://chrispederick.myacen.com/work/firebird/webdeveloper/

installed it, loving it.

Maybe we can ask the dev to make one for wiki edit effects.

=====
Christopher Mahan
chris_mahan at yahoo.com
818.943.1850 cell
http://www.christophermahan.com/

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it!
http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ps/sb/


list: wikipedia-l

from_name: Anthere

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: foundation of a German registered association

body:
An idea among those who were suggested for the french wikipedia.

If there is in France an special event, in which it is really
interesting for someone to go to represent Wikipedia, there may be some
costs associated. For example, for many events, there is an entrance
fee. We might also consider paying for the train ticket of the attender,
or his hotel night. We might also want him to get there by car, with the
trunk filled up with Wikipedia tee-shirts for sale (the representant
would have had to buy them to the shop beforehand).

I understood that there are parallels with Jimbo, who pays the trip and
hotel night of Jason when a trip to visit the servers is necessary.

It would be really non efficient to change these euros into dollars, to
switch them back into euros afterwards. And it would really be losing
time to have an american understand what to do, to hire a hotel room in
a specific european city.

I also think that domain prices would likely be in euros, not dollars.

For entirely similar reasons, I kept a bank account in the USA, as it is
  wiser to pay an american firm directly in dollars from an american
bank, than in euros from my local bank.

Sascha Noyes a ?crit:
> On Wednesday 21 January 2004 09:04 pm, Kurt Jansson wrote:
>
>>The German Wikipedia community is working on setting up an
>>"eingetragener Verein" (I found these translations on dict.leo.org:
>>"incorporated society", "membership corporation", "registered
>>association", don't know which one fits best). Presumably the foundation
>>meeting will take place in february, we will apply for tax exempt status
>>soon afterwards.
>>
>>Our goals are
>>1. to be able to collect donations (tax-free)
>>2. to communicate with organisations from outside the project in a more
>>professional, official way (e.g. with universities or foundations)
>>
>>There has also been a bit of talk about using the association as an
>>democratic institution for decision making, but nothing has been decided
>>yet. I'd say we should only use the association for this in case of
>>emergency or when all other attempts fail.
>>
>>For more information you can feed Babelfish with these URLs:
>>http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verein
>>http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verein/Satzung
>
>
> I shall volunteer to translate the pertinent parts from
> http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verein if there is interest among the
> current decision makers (ie. Jimbo)
>
>
>>Jimbo, is this okay for you? Do you have any wishes or worries?
>>The association will support all Wikimedia projects, not just Wikipedia.
>>We will support the whole international project, and transfer part of
>>the donations to the foundation if this is legaly possible, but focus on
>>the German-speaking projects. Of course we're not planning a fork, and
>>of course there is no cabal, at least not a German one.
>
>
> If donations for wikipedias (no matter what language) do not go exclusively
> towards paying for 'central' things like hardware, bandwidth (in the future),
> wikipedia 1.0, getting some DB expert to optimise mediawiki, etc., then what
> does the money get spent on? Publicity? (I still maintain that word-of-mouth
> is superior to every other form of publicity). Conventions (synonym:
> "Meetings" - as "conventions" is ambiguous)? Juristiction-specific legal
> representation and advice?
>
> In other words: What is the motivation for not giving all the money to
> wikimedia? (obviously minus upkeep expenses). I'm not trying to be
> antagonistic, just inquisitive.
>
> I've read de:Wikipedia:Verein but have not found a reason (under "Gr?nde") why
> not de-facto all of the money should go to wikimedia. The main reasons (given
> on de:Wikipedia:Verein) for the establishment of the Verein is effective
> communication with the German-speaking populace, the ability to solicit
> tax-deductable donations, and officially representing the interests of
> wikimedia in Germany. (about the last point, it is written on
> de:Wikipedia:Verein that a direct intervention by the wikimedia foundation is
> not possible because of the language barriers and the unsettled ("unsettled"
> in the sense that no proper conclusion has been reached) legal situation /
> legal position. (Please do inform me if the translation is not 100% accurate)
>
> Best,
> Sascha Noyes


list: wikien-l

from_name: Charles Matthews

subject: [WikiEN-l] English names

body:
>  I think we should just say something like "German philosopher
> from Danzig (present-day Gdansk, Poland)", possibly with alternate
> wording.
>
> -Mark

I agree with that.  Trivia question: what do Woody Allen and Kaliningrad
have in common?

Charles


from_name: Gareth Owen

subject: [WikiEN-l] English names

body:
"Charles Matthews" <charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com> writes:

> Trivia question: what do Woody Allen and Kaliningrad have in common?

Formerly called K?nigsberg.  What do I win?
--
Gareth Owen
"The best lack all conviction and the worst are full of passionate intensity"
                  --  W. B. Yeats forsees the standard of debate on wikipedia-l


from_name: Poor, Edmund W

subject: [WikiEN-l] List admin (was: Trolls, how to feed them: not)

body:
Anthere sweetly wrote,

> Nathan,
>
> Would you be ever so kind please,
> as to register to the mailing list if
> you are going to post to it
>
> Thank you :-)
>
> Anthere
> The current list admin
>
> (Ed, by the way, ain't you back ?)

I'm back, but since you are doing such a good job of list
administration, I would like to take this opportunity to
sit this one out. May I have the rest of the year off,
please?

Ed Poor
Last year's list admin


subject:
[WikiEN-l] Please ban Mr. Natural Health (was: Kill the puppy (was:
	Quacks Like a Duck))

body:
RickK wrote:

> At last count, Mr-Natural-Health had made personal attacks
> on 13 people.  Is this violation of Wikiquette to be allowed to
> continue forever?

If I had bothered to keep my ssh account current when I changed
computers last year, I would just ban him myself, announce it to the
mailing list, and take my chances on being deluged with complaints for
being autocratic and unilateral.

But I'll leave that to Erik (Eloquence). He's a sufficient judge of
consensus, and he's got his finger on the ban button.

How about it, my eloquent friend? Do we have to put up with MHN, or will
you eliminate this nuisance for us?

Ed Poor, aka Unsolved Equation
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20040122/986f0739/attachment.htm


from_name: Mills, Billy

subject: [WikiEN-l] English names

body:
A full reading of the Yeats poem cited by Gareth Owen would be salutary for
all Wikipedians: it speaks to many current live debates on this list and
elsewhere.

Billy Mills

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gareth Owen [mailto:wiki at gwowen.freeserve.co.uk]
> Sent: 22 January 2004 09:17
> To: wikien-l at Wikipedia.org
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] English names
>
>
> "Charles Matthews" <charles.r.matthews at ntlworld.com> writes:
>
> > Trivia question: what do Woody Allen and Kaliningrad have in common?
>
> Formerly called K?nigsberg.  What do I win?
> --
> Gareth Owen
> "The best lack all conviction and the worst are full of
> passionate intensity"
>                   --  W. B. Yeats forsees the standard of
> debate on wikipedia-l
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

DISCLAIMER: This message has been scanned by Norton Antivirus (using the
latest definitions) for all known Viruses.
The information in this message is confidential and is intended solely for
the use of the named addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, you
must not copy, distribute or use this email or the information contained in
it for any purpose other than to notify us. If you have received this
message in error, please notify the sender immediately, and delete this
email from your system. Thank you.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20040122/7aa56303/attachment.htm


subject: [WikiEN-l] English names

body:
Charles agreed with Mark's suggestion:

> >  I think we should just say something like "German philosopher from
> > Danzig (present-day Gdansk, Poland)", possibly with alternate wording.
> >
> > -Mark

But I deplore the constant mention of alternate names. Why can't whoever writes the sentence include a link? Then we only have to ensure that the reader will see the alternate name immediately upon clicking the link?

* German philosopher from [[Danzig]]

Upon clicking the /Danzig/ link, the user should see:

Gdansk

  (redirected from Danzig)

* '''Gda?sk''' (formerly '''Danzig''') is a city on the southern coast of ...

For places whose English names are controversial, the first Heading can be something like Origins of its Name

Ed Poor, aka Unsolved Equation


subject: [WikiEN-l] Ed's Flustration

body:
Fred Bauder wrote:

> Ed must be getting frustrated. Mr. Natural Health may soon agree to
> mediation and if he does not, a request for arbitration will be made
which
> can probably be dealt with very promptly if he does not participate.
> I don't see any emergency.

Okay, I'll cool down. And, by the way, remind me not to "volunteer" to
be the Mediator in case he really does agree to mediation. I might be
biased... ;-)

Ed Poor, aka Unsolved Equation

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20040122/c235d89c/attachment.htm


from_name: Sean Barrett

subject: [WikiEN-l] maverick

body:
> Ah, I think Ft. Hood is an Army base, actually (which is why it's called
> "Ft." Hood, and not Hood "AFB").
>
> Agree with you about someone in the military looking to *us* for weapons
> data, though... :-)
>
> 	Noel

Fort Hood is an Army base, and the "army.mil" address gives us another
clue -- both of which are overridden by Dawn's rank of A1C; ie, Airman
First Class.  (Or is that Airperson First Class?)


from_name: J. Noel Chiappa

subject: [WikiEN-l] maverick

body:
     > From: Sean Barrett <sean at epoptic.org>

     >> This is A1C Chavez from Ft. Hood

     > I find it very scary that the Air Force is looking for that kind of
     > information in a freely-editable encyclopedia....

Ah, I think Ft. Hood is an Army base, actually (which is why it's called
"Ft." Hood, and not Hood "AFB").

Agree with you about someone in the military looking to *us* for weapons
data, though... :-)

	Noel


subject: [WikiEN-l] mediation mailing list

body:
There's a Mediator message board set up on the Web.

Here's who signed up so far:

Angela
Wolfram
norse
LittleDan
Fred Bauder
Anthere
llywrch
Cimon Avaro
JamesF
Ed Poor

We're still saying "hi" to each other and figuring out how to use this
new communications mechanism.

Ed Poor, aka Uncle Ed

P.S. I'm dropping the Unsolved Equation handle, at Erik's request


from_name: Evan Prodromou

subject: [Wikipedia-l] foundation of a German registered association

body:
>>>>> "PG" == Peter Gervai <grin at tolna.net> writes:

    PG> Just thinking out loud...

So, I'm just wondering who would give money to an organization that...

  * Doesn't pay for, operate or maintain any of the Wikipedia resources
    (servers, bandwidth, legal expenses)
  * Doesn't have any decision-making power for any of the Wikipedias

If German Wikipedians can and want to raise funds, make decisions,
etc., for the German-language Wikipedia (tough beans for Austrians and
Swiss, btw), they should negotiate with Wikimedia to license the
Wikipedia name, transfer operations to another data center (or pay
Wikimedia for operating costs of de.w.o), and take
responsibility. It's pretty wishy-washy to try to have it both ways.

~ESP

--
Evan Prodromou <evan at wikitravel.org>
Wikitravel - http://www.wikitravel.org/
The free, complete, up-to-date and reliable world-wide travel guide


from_name: Jimmy Wales

subject: [WikiEN-l] Inquiry from a reporter

body:
1.  Is there a graph or chart somewhere showing the number of
wikipedia articles at different points in time?

2. Some time ago, I saw where someone had done a comparison of
Britannica versus Wikipedia articles, some 200 articles compared as I
recall.  Where is that?  How old is it?  Have there been other
comparisons done?

3.  If you're a prominent Wikipedian in the San Francisco area who
would be interested in being interviewed, please email me and let me
know your contact info so I can pass it along.

--Jimbo


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Inquiry from a reporter


body:
Kurt Jansson wrote:
> Jimbo, is this okay for you? Do you have any wishes or worries?
> The association will support all Wikimedia projects, not just Wikipedia.
> We will support the whole international project, and transfer part of
> the donations to the foundation if this is legaly possible, but focus on
> the German-speaking projects. Of course we're not planning a fork, and
> of course there is no cabal, at least not a German one.

My concern is that unless there's some form of legal control by the
Wikimedia Foundation over such international subsidiaries, there could
be some divisiveness and heartbreak in the future.  What can we do now
to prevent such things in the future?

It would seem best to me if it is possible for the U.S. foundation to
legally open an "office" in the legal sense in Europe, either for the
entire EU or on a per-country basis.

--Jimbo


references:
<20040122114038.GV2294@narya.grin.hu>
	<87n08g6k8y.fsf@unicorn.bad-people-of-the-future.san-francisco.ca.us>
	<40100913.4070801@gmx.net>

body:
Kurt Jansson wrote:
> Jimbo, what are the operating costs of de.w.o? And what are the costs
> for the whole project?

I don't know the answer to either of these questions, because I don't
break it out that way.

It does occur to me that a German foundation ought to either be a
simple subsidiary of the international foundation, or else it ought to
not use the name Wikimedia at all.  I am deeply concerned about the
possibility of future conflict between different organizations, and
think that we ought to arrange things so that this is essentially
impossible because the two are united in terms of control.

--Jimbo


subject: [Wikipedia-l] German Wikipedia Inavailability/Hardware Status

body:
Peter Gervai wrote:
> > 2.  In various configurations consistent with the correct placement of
> > memory, Geoffrin gives sporadic errors in test #11.  These are listed
> > as "ECC" errors, which Jason believes may mean that these are o.k.,
> > i.e.  errors that were caught and fixed by the ECC stuff in the RAM.
> > Or, it may mean something else.  He was researching that yesterday
> > afternoon.
>
> I would use these only if they're out of the guarantee period. Any errors
> mean it's not perfect, and you should change them if they're still covered
> by the seller. (Well, at least we do that in good old Europe, but maybe
> industry of the USA is not that advanced ;->.)

They are covered by warranty, and so our current plan is to return the
entire machine to Penguin with the insistence that they get it 100%
right before they return it to us.  But this will have to wait for
another week or so, i.e. until our new datacenter is up and running
so that Geoffrin is not needed.

--Jimbo


subject: ISBN numbers (was, Re: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Wikipedia funds)

body:
The simple answer is that they are incredibly useful, and that they
are convenient.  If there were some other number which uniquely
identified books, rather than particular printings of books, I would
support using those instead.

Delirium wrote:

> To sidestep the issue of partnering with booksellers for a bit, I have a
> more fundamental question: why do we have ISBN links at all?  ISBN
> numbers do not identify books; they identify particular printings of
> books by particular publishers.  Our job, as an encyclopedia, is to
> discuss the books themselves; if the reader wishes to find which
> publishers have the book currently in print in his or her country, I
> don't see that as our role (there are plenty of places to look that up,
> or ask your local bookstore).  Not to mention that with the vast
> majority of books we'd be interested in documenting in an encyclopedia,
> there are dozens (sometimes hundreds!) of ISBN numbers under which the
> book has been published.  Are we going to end every article on books
> with a lengthy list of ISBN numbers?  Or are we going to arbitrarily
> pick one from our favorite publisher?  I'd propose we instead just leave
> them out entirely.
>
> -Mark
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>


from_name: Brion Vibber

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Inquiry from a reporter

body:
On Jan 22, 2004, at 11:22, Jimmy Wales wrote:
> 1.  Is there a graph or chart somewhere showing the number of
> wikipedia articles at different points in time?

Slightly out of date, haven't gotten the update to finish yet:
http://wikipedia.org/wikistats/EN/ChartsWikipediaZZ.htm

Also of interest:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Modelling_Wikipedia's_growth

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/attachments/20040122/817f6880/attachment.pgp


subject: [WikiEN-l] Message boards

body:
As of this morning, it looks like Erik is the administrator of the 2
Wikipedia message boards.

Anyone can sign up, with read/write access to both Mediation and
Arbitration. I suppose it will take us around a week to figure out if
either team wants to configure this differently.

The message board software has "usergroups", which could be used to
separate Mediators from Arbitrators, if closed door sessions are needed.

I'm leaning toward an open forum with what I call "eavesdropping", e.g.,
only Mediators will contribute comments to the Mediation message board,
but registered users can read every comment.

Another alternative is to limit read AND write access for each board to
its members. We should discuss this before doing it.

Ed Poor, aka Uncle Ed
Mediation Committee
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20040122/18836d8e/attachment.htm


from_name: Daniel Ehrenberg

subject: [WikiEN-l] Creative Alternatives to Bans

body:
Fred Bauder wrote:
> Before a "short ban" would be considered the editor
> would have lost an
> arbitration dispute. How about some creative
> alternatives to bans as
> results? For example, an editor may only be having
> trouble in certain areas,
> for example, Fred Bauder, should he lose an
> arbitration might be forbidden
> from editing any philosophy articles....
>
> Fred

Sounds good but how would you enforce that? For most
people that would work, but many trolls would just
ignore it without something like a threat of banning.

LDan

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it!
http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ps/sb/


from_name: Peter Gervai

body:
On Thu, Jan 22, 2004 at 03:04:04AM +0100, Kurt Jansson wrote:

> The German Wikipedia community is working on setting up an
> "eingetragener Verein" (I found these translations on dict.leo.org:
[...]

> Jimbo, is this okay for you? Do you have any wishes or worries?
> The association will support all Wikimedia projects, not just Wikipedia.
> We will support the whole international project, and transfer part of
> the donations to the foundation if this is legaly possible, but focus on
> the German-speaking projects. Of course we're not planning a fork, and
> of course there is no cabal, at least not a German one.

How this association going to be related to wikimedia foundation and its
projects? Is wikimedia going to be sued based on german laws from then on? Is
your association going to be sued based on the content of any wikimedia
project, or the content of the german wikipedia?

Just thinking out loud...

Peter


subject: [WikiEN-l] Inquiry from a reporter

body:
Jimmy Wales wrote:
> 1.  Is there a graph or chart somewhere showing the
> number of
> wikipedia articles at different points in time?

There's the Webalizer
(http://en.wikipedia.org/stats/), but that's only how
many people access the website. There's also
[[Wikipedia:Awareness statistics]], but that's still
not number of articles.

Oh, here it is. There's a graph at [[Wikipedia:Size of
Wikipedia]], but it hasn't been updated since last
November. There's data up to today, though. Here's the
picture itself:
[[Image:English_language_wikipedia_article_count_jan_2001_-_nov_2003.png]]
.
>
> 2. Some time ago, I saw where someone had done a
> comparison of
> Britannica versus Wikipedia articles, some 200
> articles compared as I
> recall.  Where is that?  How old is it?  Have there
> been other
> comparisons done?

I'm not sure what you mean, but there's always the
making fun of Britannica thing at the meta:
[[m:Making_fun_of_Britannica]].
>
> 3.  If you're a prominent Wikipedian in the San
> Francisco area who
> would be interested in being interviewed, please
> email me and let me
> know your contact info so I can pass it along.
>
> --Jimbo

LDan

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it!
http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ps/sb/


from_name: Fred Bauder

body:
Before a "short ban" would be considered the editor would have lost an
arbitration dispute. How about some creative alternatives to bans as
results? For example, an editor may only be having trouble in certain areas,
for example, Fred Bauder, should he lose an arbitration might be forbidden
from editing any philosophy articles....

Fred

> From: Bjorn Lindqvist <bjrn.lindqvist at telia.com>
> Reply-To: bjrn.lindqvist at telia.com, English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2004 20:03:01 +0100
> To: wikien-l at Wikipedia.org
> Subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Banning for a day, hi to Cunc
>
>> I think no one should be short banned without a clear process and global
>> agreement upon using this sort of action. Currently, we do not know who
>> could decide of such an action, and we do not have any arguments laid
>> down. Plus we confuse "short ban" as a mean to cool down the editor,
>> "short ban" as a mean to give a break to the group, and "short ban" as a
>> way to get around due process.
>
> Or "short ban" as a means to publicly and wikipedia-globally humiliate
> someone and declare that person to be "wrong"?
> Short bans are a bad idea.
>
> BL
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l


subject: [WikiEN-l] Enforcement of mild penalties

body:
The arbitration committee might retain jurisdiction, or at least be able to
reopen the matter in case. They could then impose a hard long ban if really
necessary.

Fred

> From: Daniel Ehrenberg <littledanehren at yahoo.com>
> Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2004 12:26:39 -0800 (PST)
> To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Creative Alternatives to Bans
>
> Fred Bauder wrote:
>> Before a "short ban" would be considered the editor
>> would have lost an
>> arbitration dispute. How about some creative
>> alternatives to bans as
>> results? For example, an editor may only be having
>> trouble in certain areas,
>> for example, Fred Bauder, should he lose an
>> arbitration might be forbidden
>> from editing any philosophy articles....
>>
>> Fred
>
> Sounds good but how would you enforce that? For most
> people that would work, but many trolls would just
> ignore it without something like a threat of banning.
>
> LDan
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it!
> http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ps/sb/
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l


from_name: Arne Klempert (akl)

body:
On Thursday, January 22, 2004 12:40 PM
Peter Gervai <grin at tolna.net> wrote:

>> The German Wikipedia community is working on setting up an
>> "eingetragener Verein" (I found these translations on dict.leo.org:
> [...]
>
>> Jimbo, is this okay for you? Do you have any wishes or worries?
>> The association will support all Wikimedia projects, not just
>> Wikipedia. We will support the whole international project, and
>> transfer part of the donations to the foundation if this is legaly
>> possible, but focus on the German-speaking projects. Of course we're
>> not planning a fork, and of course there is no cabal, at least not a
>> German one.
>
> How this association going to be related to wikimedia foundation and
> its projects? Is wikimedia going to be sued based on german laws from
> then on? Is your association going to be sued based on the content
> of any wikimedia project, or the content of the german wikipedia?

Wikimedia Germany calls itself a "sister organization" of Wikimedia
Foundation. IMHO that doesn't mean a legal relation, so WM Germany is
not responsible for things done by the WM Foundation and vice versa.

It's quite the same wording as in the by-laws of FSF Europe referring to
the Free Software Foundation:
http://www.fsfeurope.org/about/legal/constitution.en.html

According to this there is also no legal relation between WM Germany and
the projects of the Foundation (including the German-speaking
Wikipedia).

Arne
[[de:Benutzer:Akl]]


from_name: KNOTT, T

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Kill the puppy (was: Quacks Like a Duck)

body:
 Anthere [mailto:anthere8 at yahoo.com] wrote:
>Mr-Natural-Health mentionned on Wikipedia:Requests for mediation
>that he agreed to arbitration.
>
>?

I think that this is a misunderstanding on his part. I think he really agreeing to mediation rather than arbitration. Let's not worry about it. The point is he has agreed to cooperate, which is a huge step forward. I thought he'd never agree. I would really like to see mediation work here. A success early on will boost the status of the mediation process.

Theresa


body:
I'm afraid that I don't really understand what you're saying.  You
seem to be saying two exactly opposite things.  On the one hand, you
say that we can't have a Foundation in Europe because if we do, it
would be legally liable (for takedown notices and the like).  On the
other hand, you say that we need to have a Foundation in Europe so
that it can take on that sort of legal liabilities.

I can tell you that I will not support any Foundation using the
Wikimedia name that is formed without the ability to prevent it from
doing bad things -- trust in the individuals involved is not enough,
because over the passage of time, things may change, and I see grave
dangers for us all in that regard.

I think that the solution is quite simple -- for the Wikimedia
Foundation to form and control the German subsidiary.  This subsidiary
will give the ability for Germans to give tax deductible donations,
will serve as a legal point of contact for any Germany-specific
concerns, etc.

There are already talks in progress for us to do exactly that with a
French foundation, and I will gladly pursue that in Germany as well,
if that would be useful.

But I will not support a foundation using the Wikimedia name that
might *or might not* send money to the international organization, and
that might serve as a way for some people (not you, I am speaking 30
years in the future) to split the project or use it to make a
lucrative income for themselves without regard to the overall goals of
the international community.

--Jimbo


from_name: Delirium

body:
Jimmy Wales wrote:

>But I will not support a foundation using the Wikimedia name that
>might *or might not* send money to the international organization, and
>that might serve as a way for some people (not you, I am speaking 30
>years in the future) to split the project or use it to make a
>lucrative income for themselves without regard to the overall goals of
>the international community.
>
>
Trademark diluation might be relevant here as well: if the Wikimedia
Foundation owns the Wikimedia and Wikipedia trademarks in the US and EU
(as I assume it will in the future), then we can't really allow another
organization that is legally unrelated to the Foundation to call itself
by those trademarks.  I think?

-Mark


from_name: Ray Saintonge

body:
Poor, Edmund W wrote:

>Anthere sweetly wrote,
>
>>Anthere
>>The current list admin
>>
>>(Ed, by the way, ain't you back ?)
>>
>
>I'm back, but since you are doing such a good job of list
>administration, I would like to take this opportunity to
>sit this one out. May I have the rest of the year off,
>please?
>
A fine thing to say in January!   :-)

Ec


subject: [WikiEN-l] English names

body:
Ed Poor wrote

>But I deplore the constant mention of alternate names. Why can't whoever
>writes the sentence include a link? Then we only have to ensure that the
>reader will see the alternate name immediately upon clicking the link?

>* German philosopher from [[Danzig]]

Only once per article, anyway.  For me, it depends a bit on prominence.  For
example, I think

'Constantinople (present-day Istanbul)'

is over-the-top,

'Ragusa (present-day Dubrovnik)'

is helpful (especially since it turns out that there is another Ragusa)

and

'New Amsterdam (present-day New York)'

saves me from a guilty feeling that I should have learned this sometime, but
am not quite sure when.

Charles


body:
Peter Gervai wrote:

>Evan Prodromou wrote:
>
>>>>>>>"PG" == Peter Gervai <grin at tolna.net> writes:
>>>>>>>
>>and take
>>responsibility. It's pretty wishy-washy to try to have it both ways.
>>
>
>You didn't get the point. It's not about their willingness. It is about the
>differences of legal anvironment between US and DE. Maybe it's legal to talk
>about nazism in the US and maybe you get to jail for it in germany. Maybe a
>definite percent of Wikipedia articles legal in the US and illegal in DE. Do
>you want to get US WIKIMEDIA sued because they are present in german law
>environment? Do you want de-us.wikipedia.org and de-de.wikipedia.org for
>separating articles which are not legal in germany? Having a censored mirror
>maybe? (Bad words changed to stars? THere are funny ideas in the politics
>field.)
>
I doubt that "talking" about Nazism would be illegal.  It's "promoting"
it that would be illegal.  One also has to consider that there are other
German speaking countries, like Switzerland.  If this is a serious
problem, rather than an imaginary one based on sombody's
misunderstanding, one could create an intermediate boilerplate page
containing something like the following:

        Reading the page [[Nazism]] may be illegal in Germany.  If you
    live outside of Germany or otherwise feel that this does not apply
    to you, please click [[here]] to continue.  Otherwise use the back
    button in your tool bar.

 Ec


from_name: Sascha Noyes

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Inquiry from a reporter

body:
On Thursday 22 January 2004 02:22 pm, Jimmy Wales wrote:
> 1.  Is there a graph or chart somewhere showing the number of
> wikipedia articles at different points in time?
>

http://en2.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Size_of_Wikipedia

> 2. Some time ago, I saw where someone had done a comparison of
> Britannica versus Wikipedia articles, some 200 articles compared as I
> recall.  Where is that?  How old is it?  Have there been other
> comparisons done?

There are two quality comparisons that I am aware of:
 I can only find one at the moment, though:
http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_Wikipedia_Quality_Survey

Also, for comparing wikipedia with britannica and encarta quantitatively, I
have done the following:

http://en2.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Snoyes/compare

Best,
Sascha Noyes
--
Please encrypt all email. Public key available from
www.pantropy.net/snoyes.asc


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Inquiry from a reporter

body:
On Thursday 22 January 2004 04:33 pm, Sascha Noyes wrote:
> There are two quality comparisons that I am aware of:
>  I can only find one at the moment, though:
> http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_Wikipedia_Quality_Survey

I've found the other one:

http://en2.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Kokiri/WQA

Best,
Sascha Noyes
--
Please encrypt all email. Public key available from
www.pantropy.net/snoyes.asc


subject: [WikiEN-l] Not a joking matter

body:
I'm really pissed off. I guess I better take a few days off.

I don't want to deal with trolls.

Anyone who calls themselves a troll or hints (however playfully) that
they might be a troll, is like someone who jokes about hijacking a
plane.

If the passenger next to me on a plane said, "I'm thinking of hijacking
this plane," my first impulse would be . . . (well, usage guidelines for
this mailing list don't let me say any more).

Bottom line: I'll be back when there's an agreement that trolls aren't
allowed here.

I mean it: you can have trolls, or you can have me. The choice is yours,
people.

Ed Poor


body:
>>>>> "PG" == Peter Gervai <grin at tolna.net> writes:

    PG> You didn't get the point.

No, I didn't. That was the upshot of my message.

    PG> It's not about their willingness. It is about the differences
    PG> of legal anvironment between US and DE. Maybe it's legal to
    PG> talk about nazism in the US and maybe you get to jail for it
    PG> in germany. Maybe a definite percent of Wikipedia articles
    PG> legal in the US and illegal in DE. Do you want to get US
    PG> WIKIMEDIA sued because they are present in german law
    PG> environment? Do you want de-us.wikipedia.org and
    PG> de-de.wikipedia.org for separating articles which are not
    PG> legal in germany? Having a censored mirror maybe? (Bad words
    PG> changed to stars? THere are funny ideas in the politics
    PG> field.)

I'm confused about this example. How would having a German foundation
fix this situation? Would they take on the publisher role that
Wikimedia has now? Would this just be nominal, or would the German
foundation actually operate the de.w.o site?

~ESP

--
Evan Prodromou <evan at wikitravel.org>
Wikitravel - http://www.wikitravel.org/
The free, complete, up-to-date and reliable world-wide travel guide


body:
On Thursday 22 January 2004 04:52 pm, Ulrich Fuchs wrote:
> we are featured by one of the three
> big german news magazines next month

Which one?

Best,
Sascha Noyes
--
Please encrypt all email. Public key available from
www.pantropy.net/snoyes.asc


body:
On Thu, Jan 22, 2004 at 11:06:21AM -0500, Evan Prodromou wrote:
> >>>>> "PG" == Peter Gervai <grin at tolna.net> writes:

> and take
> responsibility. It's pretty wishy-washy to try to have it both ways.

You didn't get the point. It's not about their willingness. It is about the
differences of legal anvironment between US and DE. Maybe it's legal to talk
about nazism in the US and maybe you get to jail for it in germany. Maybe a
definite percent of Wikipedia articles legal in the US and illegal in DE. Do
you want to get US WIKIMEDIA sued because they are present in german law
environment? Do you want de-us.wikipedia.org and de-de.wikipedia.org for
separating articles which are not legal in germany? Having a censored mirror
maybe? (Bad words changed to stars? THere are funny ideas in the politics
field.)

IANAL, but should be taken consideration. I'm not against it. I'm not for
it. Just giving input, that's all I do.

[[user:grin]]


from_name: Rick

subject: [WikiEN-l] maverick

body:
I notice that maveric has yet to respond.  :)

RickK

Sean Barrett <sean at epoptic.org> wrote:
> > And I must add that I find it very scary that the Air Force is looking
> > for that kind of information in a freely-editable encyclopedia....
>
> I get the impression that Dawn Chavez was asking this out of personal
> interest. But it would be prudent not to use a .mil email address for those
> sorts of things. I did get a bit of a laugh out of that one, though. ;-)

I would say that having a personal interest in the shelf life of
Maverick missiles is rather scary, too, except that many of my
interests are similarly scary. Maybe Dawn and I should ... no, we
probably shouldn't; my wife wouldn't understand.

--
Sean Barrett | Ask not what your country can do for you,
sean at epoptic.com | ask what your country can do to you.
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20040122/9a4ce432/attachment.htm


subject: [WikiEN-l] Interested in exchanging links with  wikipedia.org

body:
Rick wrote:
> Um, Dan, I would question the autobiography as being
> "welcome".  Not unless he has something to offer
> other than selling baseball bats.
>
> RickK

I said only if it was non-promotional. It's a company
and we have articles on companies.

LDan

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it!
http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ps/sb/


from_name: Gabriel Wicke

subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: More on toolbar

body:
On Thu, 22 Jan 2004 08:24:01 -0800, Christopher Mahan wrote:

> just came across a toolbar for mozilla at
> http://chrispederick.myacen.com/work/firebird/webdeveloper/
>
> installed it, loving it.
>
> Maybe we can ask the dev to make one for wiki edit effects.

Mozex (http://mozex.mozdev.org/) should be pretty close to what you're
looking for- you can edit textareas in your favourite text editor for
example.
Another nice tool along those lines is the zope external editor, but that
requires a webdav save method (and i'm pretty shure there's no such thing
in mediawiki now).
--
Gabriel Wicke


subject: [WikiEN-l] Please ban Mr. Natural Health (was: Kill the puppy (was:	Quacks Like a Duck))

body:
On Thursday 22 January 2004 05:43 pm, David Gerard wrote:
> On 01/22/04 14:32, Poor, Edmund W wrote:
> > If I had bothered to keep my ssh account current when I changed
> > computers last year, I would just ban him myself, announce it to the
> > mailing list, and take my chances on being deluged with complaints for
> > being autocratic and unilateral.
> > But I'll leave that to Erik (Eloquence). He's a sufficient judge of
> > consensus, and he's got his finger on the ban button.
> > How about it, my eloquent friend? Do we have to put up with MHN, or will
> > you eliminate this nuisance for us?
>
> Speaking as one of those tangling with Mr-Natural-Health ... check
> his contributions list. He's writing articles that are good and useful,
> except for the (IMO) gross and overwhelming POV. (IMO, they're rants
> and/or advocacy, not encyclopaedia articles.) They have good material
> in them for articles, but that requires MNH not getting upset by the
> editing process.
>
> It would be a loss for him to leave if he could play nicer than others.

What you're forgetting in your "usefulness calculation" is that people who
engage in reversion wars and hopelessly POV edits waste a lot of time of
other contributers.

That having been said, I take the approach that his contributions are not of
interest in deciding whether or not he should be banned for repeatedly and
after many warnings violating the "no personal attacks" rule.

Ceterum censeo, Carthaginem esse delendum.

Best,
Sascha Noyes
--
Please encrypt all email. Public key available from
www.pantropy.net/snoyes.asc


from_name: Kurt Jansson

body:
Evan Prodromou wrote:

> If German Wikipedians can and want to raise funds, make decisions,
> etc., for the German-language Wikipedia (tough beans for Austrians and
> Swiss, btw), they should negotiate with Wikimedia to license the
> Wikipedia name, transfer operations to another data center (or pay
> Wikimedia for operating costs of de.w.o), and take
> responsibility. It's pretty wishy-washy to try to have it both ways.

Jimbo, what are the operating costs of de.w.o? And what are the costs
for the whole project? I think it's pretty clear that keeping the
servers running is our top priority. Sorry if this wasn't clear in my
first mail.

(And sorry if other things weren't clear also. I spend about three or
four times more time on an English mail than on a German one, and still
I'm often uncertain if I got everything right.)

Kurt


from_name: Anthere

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: List admin (was: Trolls, how to feed them: not)

body:
Poor, Edmund W a ?crit:
> Anthere sweetly wrote,
>
>
>>Nathan,
>>
>>Would you be ever so kind please,
>>as to register to the mailing list if
>>you are going to post to it
>>
>>Thank you :-)
>>
>>Anthere
>>The current list admin
>>
>>(Ed, by the way, ain't you back ?)
>
>
> I'm back, but since you are doing such a good job of list
> administration, I would like to take this opportunity to
> sit this one out. May I have the rest of the year off,
> please?
>
> Ed Poor
> Last year's list admin

No way dear Ed. Hummm...I'll do it till the end of the month :-)
Then, what about setting turns between good, dedicated and trusted
wikipedians ?

I already had a year duty on the fr: list, and at the end of it, it was
really eating me up.

What did I do ?

Easy.

I '''complained''' each time an editor posted without being registered
for example. To the point, a couple of people just said "poor Anthere,
she is really having a lot to do, she can't do everything...Anthere, do
you need help ?"

YESSSSSS. I did. They got the job :-)

So, here is the deal...

I suggest some nice people offer help, and we will turn them the job,
provided that they agree to block messages with the Nazi word in it, but
agree to let go through messages about baseball stuff, or Maverick
missiles (that was fun, no ?)

Otherwise, I will complain. I am really good at that :-)

-------

but it was a pleasure to help you Ed.


from_name: Ira Stoll

subject: [WikiEN-l] You guys are great!

body:
Gee, maybe I spoke too soon. That anagram thing really threw me. Anyways,
I'm JackLynch. I donno how it ended up giving my actual name, but then I
havn't been on many mailing lists. Maybe my email did it automatically or
some such? Anyways, thats who I am. Jack

_________________________________________________________________
Get a FREE online virus check for your PC here, from McAfee.
http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963


from_name: Bjorn Lindqvist

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Banning for a day, hi to Cunc

body:
> I think no one should be short banned without a clear process and global
> agreement upon using this sort of action. Currently, we do not know who
> could decide of such an action, and we do not have any arguments laid
> down. Plus we confuse "short ban" as a mean to cool down the editor,
> "short ban" as a mean to give a break to the group, and "short ban" as a
> way to get around due process.

Or "short ban" as a mean to publicly and wikipedia-globally humiliate
someone and declare that person to be "wrong"?
Short bans are a bad idea.

BL


subject: [WikiEN-l] Citations of Authority

body:
Fred Bauder wrote:

>Generally there is a near absence of citations made in most of our wars.
>Mainly there is bald assertion of "authoritative" point of view, usually
>accompanied by repeated references to NPOV.
>
>
I'm personally a little wary of using citations overmuch.  Obviously in
many cases they can provide some backing for claims, but especially on
contentious issues a citation can be produced to back up essentially any
arbitrary claim.  This includes "scientific" fields, where for example I
can probably produce at least one study to back up any claim you'd care
to make about anti-depressants (they work, they don't work, they
sometimes work, they're better than nothing, they're worse than nothing,
they're the best current solution, there are better current solutions,
etc., etc.).  "The devil can cite scripture for his purposes" and all that.

-Mark


subject: [WikiEN-l] Policy suggestions

body:
== Policy suggestions ==

Most of the conflict I have had here (IMO) was due to disputes over quality
of information (and citations), or the inclusion or exclusion of POV
(Interpretations of said information, and citations). I'd like to propose a
few things, which might make my job here (assuming I get to keep it) and
yours a bit easier. Don't take this the wrong way, I'm well aware that I am
a dubious source of information, and I don't think I'm giving orders (I'm
pretty low on the totem pole, clearly) but I would like you to hear my
policy suggestions.

*only replace text that you know to be wrong (inaccurate), and replace it
with something that has a citation to back it up. If they have a reasonable
difference, based on citation, allow both POV to be presented
*Multiple POV '''should''' be expressed, and differing citations given. wiki
is not paper. There is room for everyone to be heard, history shows us many
examples of minority opinion later being found correct. There is room for
all POV's so long as citations are given.
*There is always room for respectable citations that differ.
*The quality expected of the citations should be based on the number of
editors, and thus number of citations involved. The more citations provided,
the higher the standard (thus in an article with only one editor, a lower
standard of citation would be expected than in an article where numerous
editors are present and there are plentiful citations).
*NPOV can be promoted best by providing citations of differing POV's and
presenting said POV's in as impartial a manner as possible, thereby
providing the highest quality, objective information possible.
*I think some sort of forum for debate over POV should be made available, as
there seems to be no end of desire for it among some.
**editors who have proof of particular expertise should be considered a
citation in and of themselves (on the subjects that they have such proof of
expertise in).

p.s. I previously posted this on [[Wikipedia talk:Arbitrators]], and I also
posted it on village pump and wikipedia:policy and guidelines.
JackLynch

_________________________________________________________________
Check out the new MSN 9 Dial-up ? fast & reliable Internet access with prime
features! http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-us&page=dialup/home&ST=1


from_name: Peter Bartlett

subject: [WikiEN-l] You guys are great!

body:
Hi Jack,

Just wondering who you are on wikipedia - there are several users called
Jack and your email name (an anagram of "is a troll" by the way!)
doesn't give it away.

Pete/User:Pcb21

-----Original Message-----
From: wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org
[mailto:wikien-l-bounces at Wikipedia.org] On Behalf Of Ira Stoll
Sent: 22 January 2004 10:22
To: wikien-l at Wikipedia.org
Subject: [WikiEN-l] You guys are great!

>I resisted subscribing to the mailing list....


subject: [WikiEN-l] Replacing Text

body:
This would be a change from the usual blanket deletions and reversions our
partisian warriors usually engage in.

> From: "Ira Stoll" <irastoll at hotmail.com>
> Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2004 20:45:58 -0600
> To: wikien-l at Wikipedia.org
> Subject: [WikiEN-l] Policy suggestions
>
> *only replace text that you know to be wrong (inaccurate), and replace it
> with something that has a citation to back it up. If they have a reasonable
> difference, based on citation, allow both POV to be presented


subject: [WikiEN-l] Citations of Authority

body:
Generally there is a near absence of citations made in most of our wars.
Mainly there is bald assertion of "authoritative" point of view, usually
accompanied by repeated references to NPOV.

Fred

> From: "Ira Stoll" <irastoll at hotmail.com>
> Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2004 20:45:58 -0600
> To: wikien-l at Wikipedia.org
> Subject: [WikiEN-l] Policy suggestions
>
> == Policy suggestions ==
>
> Most of the conflict I have had here (IMO) was due to disputes over quality
> of information (and citations), or the inclusion or exclusion of POV
> (Interpretations of said information, and citations). I'd like to propose a
> few things, which might make my job here (assuming I get to keep it) and
> yours a bit easier. Don't take this the wrong way, I'm well aware that I am
> a dubious source of information, and I don't think I'm giving orders (I'm
> pretty low on the totem pole, clearly) but I would like you to hear my
> policy suggestions.
>
> *only replace text that you know to be wrong (inaccurate), and replace it
> with something that has a citation to back it up. If they have a reasonable
> difference, based on citation, allow both POV to be presented
> *Multiple POV '''should''' be expressed, and differing citations given. wiki
> is not paper. There is room for everyone to be heard, history shows us many
> examples of minority opinion later being found correct. There is room for
> all POV's so long as citations are given.
> *There is always room for respectable citations that differ.
> *The quality expected of the citations should be based on the number of
> editors, and thus number of citations involved. The more citations provided,
> the higher the standard (thus in an article with only one editor, a lower
> standard of citation would be expected than in an article where numerous
> editors are present and there are plentiful citations).
> *NPOV can be promoted best by providing citations of differing POV's and
> presenting said POV's in as impartial a manner as possible, thereby
> providing the highest quality, objective information possible.
> *I think some sort of forum for debate over POV should be made available, as
> there seems to be no end of desire for it among some.
> **editors who have proof of particular expertise should be considered a
> citation in and of themselves (on the subjects that they have such proof of
> expertise in).
>
> p.s. I previously posted this on [[Wikipedia talk:Arbitrators]], and I also
> posted it on village pump and wikipedia:policy and guidelines.
> JackLynch
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Check out the new MSN 9 Dial-up ? fast & reliable Internet access with prime
> features! http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-us&page=dialup/home&ST=1
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l


subject: [WikiEN-l] English names

body:
>* '''Gda?sk''' (formerly '''Danzig''') is a city on the southern coast
of ...

I was just about to say "eh... Poland doesn't have a southern coast (and
neither does Germany)"... But then realized that seas have coasts too
:-)

The people who've figured out the naming conventions for Gdansk (and
other places that have changed names of the years) might like to add
them to [[Wikipedia:Naming conventions (places)]] - at the moment that
page is basically devoted to the much-discussed policy on English
counties.. But a more general policy statement, as much as it is
possible, would be useful for the future.

Pete/Pcb21


subject: [WikiEN-l] I have a doctorate, by God!

body:
Heh, enough of associate professors of philosophy or political science
citing their "authority" when all they do is regurgitate what some other
professor filled them up with.

Fred

> From: "Ira Stoll" <irastoll at hotmail.com>
> Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2004 20:45:58 -0600
> To: wikien-l at Wikipedia.org
> Subject: [WikiEN-l] Policy suggestions
>
> **editors who have proof of particular expertise should be considered a
> citation in and of themselves (on the subjects that they have such proof of
> expertise in).


from_name: Daniel Mayer

subject: [WikiEN-l] maverick

body:
RickK wrote:
>I notice that maveric has yet to respond.  :)

I noticed it and assumed it had nothing to do with me.

-- mav


body:
Bjorn Lindqvist a ?crit:
>>I think no one should be short banned without a clear process and global
>>agreement upon using this sort of action. Currently, we do not know who
>>could decide of such an action, and we do not have any arguments laid
>>down. Plus we confuse "short ban" as a mean to cool down the editor,
>>"short ban" as a mean to give a break to the group, and "short ban" as a
>>way to get around due process.
>
>
> Or "short ban" as a mean to publicly and wikipedia-globally humiliate
> someone and declare that person to be "wrong"?
> Short bans are a bad idea.
>
> BL

just a more pc term : short block rather than short ban


from_name: Brion Vibber

subject: [Wikitech-l] Database shuffling

body:
Since geoffrin's still exhibiting intermittent MySQL crashes, I've
moved the database to gunther. Thanks to replication, it only took a
few minutes to switch main servers. Rock on!

The downside is that gunther presently has only 1GB of memory so it's
got less in-memory cache available. In view of this I've turned off
searching for the moment to make sure we can run ok. If it seems ok,
we'll try it back on.

The upside is that gunther has a fast SCSI RAID disk array like
geoffrin does, which should make it a lot more palatable than ursula.

Ursula is replicating updates now from gunther.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20040122/6680405b/attachment.pgp>


subject:
[Wikipedia-l] A chapter system is much better (was: foundation of a
	German registered association)

body:
Lars wrote:
>..
>I strongly recommend that you all look at how the German chapter
>of ISOC (which is an "e.V.", see www.isoc.de) has solved this.  I
>assume they have a working model already, that could be copied.
>In fact, the ISOC chapter model could be copied for more countries
>than Germany, if Wikipedians want to form local chapters in their area.

I agree - we should look into that. I also agree that a chapter system would
be the best way to go. Then, if needed, we could have an affiliate in Europe
that would coordinate national or lower level chapters in Europe (or we could
just have chapters).

Their "Primer for Creating a Local ISOC Chapter"
http://www.isoc.org/isoc/chapters/application/primer.shtml also mentions
incorporation as one of the final steps of chapter formation and how the ISOC
needs to sign-off on that (before that it mentions that the ISOC needs to
approve the chapter's bylaws). So a chapter so formed (assuming it was
incorporated as a tax-exempt non-profit) would have tax-deductible status and
would firmly be part of the Wikimedia Foundation.

IMO, creating "sister" organizations is a bad idea for the reasons Jimbo gave.
Plenty of organizations are international in nature so we should put our
efforts into making Wikimedia into an international organization.

Please everybody be patient though - the bylaws were only recently adopted and
for all practical purposes the foundation is still just Jimbo. So until we
have a full board of trustees things will continue to move slowly - Jimbo is
only one person.

I would suggest then for people to start to think about who they want to be on
the board. I assume we will be having elections for that in the next month or
so.

-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)


from_name: David Gerard

subject:
[WikiEN-l] Please ban Mr. Natural Health (was: Kill the puppy
	(was:	Quacks Like a Duck))

body:
On 01/22/04 14:32, Poor, Edmund W wrote:

> If I had bothered to keep my ssh account current when I changed
> computers last year, I would just ban him myself, announce it to the
> mailing list, and take my chances on being deluged with complaints for
> being autocratic and unilateral.
> But I'll leave that to Erik (Eloquence). He's a sufficient judge of
> consensus, and he's got his finger on the ban button.
> How about it, my eloquent friend? Do we have to put up with MHN, or will
> you eliminate this nuisance for us?

Speaking as one of those tangling with Mr-Natural-Health ... check
his contributions list. He's writing articles that are good and useful,
except for the (IMO) gross and overwhelming POV. (IMO, they're rants
and/or advocacy, not encyclopaedia articles.) They have good material
in them for articles, but that requires MNH not getting upset by the
editing process.

It would be a loss for him to leave if he could play nicer than others.

I have been on Wikipedia about 2 seconds, so I may be hopelessly naive
here.

- d.


subject: [WikiEN-l] Please ban Mr. Natural Health

body:
On 01/22/04 22:43, David Gerard wrote:

> It would be a loss for him to leave if he could play nicer than others.

With. Nicer with. Meh!

- d.


from_name: Ulrich Fuchs

body:
> My concern is that unless there's some form of legal control by the
> Wikimedia Foundation over such international subsidiaries, there could
> be some divisiveness and heartbreak in the future.  What can we do now
> to prevent such things in the future?
>
> It would seem best to me if it is possible for the U.S. foundation to
> legally open an "office" in the legal sense in Europe, either for the
> entire EU or on a per-country basis.

If you want to open a foundation subsidiary that's not that easy: If there is
a subsidiary of the Foundation in Europe (let's say in Germany), german law
will apply. In that case some articles on the english WP would have be taken
down, since they are likely to be illlegal by german law. Since taking down
articles for that reason is very unlikely to happen, no one here in Europe
can take responsibility for the Foundation directly without a more direct
control over the content. So having a foundation subsidiary here will - set
aside the technical (formal) difficulties - not work, since no one wants to
do that job.

However, we need some sort of organization here in Germany. Otherwise, the
major contributors who stick their head out to much (namlely the admins, even
more namely Kurt) are endangered to be held liable (for copyright violations
or whatever reason) in case someone tries to milk some money out of us
(Remember the SCO/Linux-Case. We are far more endangered to have sleeping,
undiscovered copyright violations than Linux ever was). We need some sort of
organization to draw attraction of that particular sort to the organization
and away from the admins.

Furthermore, we need it - as Kurt already mentioned - for collecting tax
exempt donations and for better "marketing". The german Wikipedia is the
second biggest Wiki in the world now - we are featured by one of the three
big german news magazines next month, we need a more or less official
representation of the german language Wikipedians in general and the german
ones in particular. We need someone who can sign letters and speak officially
for the community, not just a "press contact".

So that "Verein" must and will be founded. It's just the question if we name
it Wikimedia or not. We would like to, because we feel ourselfes connected to
the foundation, even if it should be - for the reason given above - no formal
connection. Yet - as Kurt also already mentioned - one could think about a
global organization putting those local organizations under a common roof
with an international board. But let's take one step after the other. So
let's try us first with "Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur F?rderung
Freien Wissens e.V. ", and do our best to link that association with the
foundation the best way possible.

Uli


subject: [WikiEN-l] Citations of Authority

body:
This is exactly the kind of problem I want to have solved. Everybody thinks
they are right, and maybe they are, but can't they at least cite a reference
and portray the POV in a NPOV manner?
JackLynch

>Generally there is a near absence of citations made in most of our wars.
>Mainly there is bald assertion of "authoritative" point of view, usually
>accompanied by repeated references to NPOV.

_________________________________________________________________
Check out the new MSN 9 Dial-up ? fast & reliable Internet access with prime
features! http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-us&page=dialup/home&ST=1


subject: [WikiEN-l] RE:You guys are great!

body:
I'm not sure if I understand you correctly, but it seems you may have a
misperception of my intent. Unless we difine the word "test" differently, I
do not mean to "test" anybody here, but rather be part of making things
better. Also, as far "Do not test the mailing list administration" I must
insist I'm not aware of what is ment by that, but I would really appreciate
a tutorial on how to use the mailing list, and rules and regulations
regarding it. I've been having problems recieving mail, I have thus far been
reading mail thru the archive, accessed by the "Welcome to the "WikiEN-l"
mailing list" letter I recieved. When I asked for help on IRC, they
described recieving a great deal of mail (perhaps one letter for every post?
I have selected NOT to recieve mail in "digest mode" which some felt to be
my problem (doesn't seem to have made any difference). Thanks so much for
any help,
JackLynch

>Jack

>When you registered to the mailing list yesterday or two days ago, you
>indicated "Jack" as a name reference.

>Jack, I know you are testing us in turns, to check our processes and make
>things move on. It is good, and nice of you to feel so much interested in
>participating to the process, but do remember to let us time to build
>things as well.

>Do not test the mailing list administration please.

_________________________________________________________________
High-speed users?be more efficient online with the new MSN Premium Internet
Software. http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-us&page=byoa/prem&ST=1


from_name: Nils Kehrein

body:
Jimmy Wales wrote:
> I'm afraid that I don't really understand what you're saying.  You
> seem to be saying two exactly opposite things.  On the one hand, you
> say that we can't have a Foundation in Europe because if we do, it
> would be legally liable (for takedown notices and the like).  On the
> other hand, you say that we need to have a Foundation in Europe so
> that it can take on that sort of legal liabilities.

Hm, i think Ulrich tried to say that if someone tries to sue the
(german) Wikipedia because of e.g. copyright infringements, they would
sue individuals at this point. Very likely that they will try to sue
Wikipedia "sysops" like Kurt. So it is /our/ intention to found that
"Verein" to withdraw their attention from individuals and that this
"Verein" will (hopefully) be their first contact. But because there's
no real connection (in law?) between the german "Verein" and the american
Wikimedia Foundation they hopefully will not succeed.

It's just about protecting individual Wikipedians and having a
contact address more reliable than a simple email link.

Sorry for any confusion i should cause with this posting ;-)

Regards,
Nils.

--
Veteran of the Bermuda Triangle Expeditionary Force 1990-1951.


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Toolbar

body:
Erik wrote:
>I would like to apologize for being unnecessarily rude in
>defending my invention. I hope it's understandable that
>after spending several hours working on something, you
>become a bit defensive about it. Especially as I developed
>this not for me, but to help newbies.

Well when I've spent several hours on the mailing list over a certain issue, I
sometimes loose some objectivity and civility. So I accept your apology and
hope that you will accept mine.

It may be that I'm used to it now and know how it works, but I've just played
with your little toy again and it doesn't seem that horrible in its half
disabled state.

Saying something like "Formating example bar" above the toolbar would probably
shut me up on this issue. :)

-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)


from_name: Andrew Smith

body:
Anthere wrote:

> > But how could non english people have any implication in the current
> wikimedia foundation ?
>

Is this a good time for suggesting that Wikimedia uses Esperanto as its
means of communication?!

Anyway, I know basically nothing about law but how about something like 'The
German Friends of Wikimedia' (in German obviously)? There's an organisation
called 'The American Friends of Cambridge University' (or something like
that) which uses the name of Cambridge University but is not a part of it as
such (they donate money for scholarships and things like that). Would/could
this be an acceptable solution?

Andrew (Ams80)


body:
Jimmy Wales a ?crit:
> I'm afraid that I don't really understand what you're saying.  You
> seem to be saying two exactly opposite things.  On the one hand, you
> say that we can't have a Foundation in Europe because if we do, it
> would be legally liable (for takedown notices and the like).  On the
> other hand, you say that we need to have a Foundation in Europe so
> that it can take on that sort of legal liabilities.
>
> I can tell you that I will not support any Foundation using the
> Wikimedia name that is formed without the ability to prevent it from
> doing bad things -- trust in the individuals involved is not enough,
> because over the passage of time, things may change, and I see grave
> dangers for us all in that regard.
>
> I think that the solution is quite simple -- for the Wikimedia
> Foundation to form and control the German subsidiary.  This subsidiary
> will give the ability for Germans to give tax deductible donations,
> will serve as a legal point of contact for any Germany-specific
> concerns, etc.
>
> There are already talks in progress for us to do exactly that with a
> French foundation, and I will gladly pursue that in Germany as well,
> if that would be useful.
>
> But I will not support a foundation using the Wikimedia name that
> might *or might not* send money to the international organization, and
> that might serve as a way for some people (not you, I am speaking 30
> years in the future) to split the project or use it to make a
> lucrative income for themselves without regard to the overall goals of
> the international community.
>
> --Jimbo

But how could non english people have any implication in the current
wikimedia foundation ?


from_name: Jimmy Wales

body:
Anthere wrote:
> But how could non english people have any implication in the current
> wikimedia foundation ?

1.  Non English people have an equal right to vote for member
representatives to the board as English speaking people

2.  I fully support the creation of subsidiary foundations, to
whatever extent is desirable, with additional representation there for
'locals' to that nation's foundation.  I do not support any move of
that type unless we do it carefully so as to completely eliminate any
possibility of a "split" or "break" 20 years in the future.

----

Consider this possibility, 20 years from now.  The international
Wikimedia Foundation is publishing a nice print version of the
Encyclopedia in French, for sale in France.  This is a profitable
venture, so that it is generating funds for whatever copyediting and
production work that may be necessary to supplement the work of
volunteers, as well as generating funds that permits the free
distribution of the same work to schools in poor districts in France
and in poor countries where French is a dominant language.

But, at that time, 20 years from now, the French foundation board
thinks it would be nice to have a fancy job and an office and to have
that revenue for expenditures on whatever, and so they sue the
international foundation over the publication of the French edition
using the Wikipedia name.

That's just one example, I'm sure you can immediately think of many
more.

There is no reason to think that the current group of people involved
in Wikipedia would do any of that, but we must plan for the longterm,
for what might happen 50 or 100 years from now, after we are all gone.
Institutional decisions made today have ramifications many many years
into the future, especially if we are not cautious.

--Jimbo


body:
Andrew Smith wrote:
> Anyway, I know basically nothing about law but how about something like 'The
> German Friends of Wikimedia' (in German obviously)? There's an organisation
> called 'The American Friends of Cambridge University' (or something like
> that) which uses the name of Cambridge University but is not a part of it as
> such (they donate money for scholarships and things like that). Would/could
> this be an acceptable solution?

If there are safeguards in place, yes, that's a reasonable solution.

I think what we need here is a German lawyer who is fluent in English.

--Jimbo


subject: [Wikipedia-l] How about a notice like this?

body:
I would like to place a notice like this, in German, prominently on
the homepage of the German Wikipedia, and perhaps on the Recent
Changes page.

"Are you a German lawyer who is fluent in English?  The Wikimedia
Foundation is exploring what will be necessary to set up a German
nonprofit organization and needs legal assistance.  If you are willing
and able to give pro bono assistance, please contact jwales at bomis.com
in English.  Thanks!"

Could someone do that for me?

I would like to discuss with someone who can explain to me some of the
possibilities and pitfalls, so that we can move forward in our
decision making with solid information rather than speculation by
those of us who are not lawyers.

--Jimbo


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: You guys are great!

body:
Jack

When you registered to the mailing list yesterday or two days ago, you
indicated "Jack" as a name reference.

Jack, I know you are testing us in turns, to check our processes and
make things move on. It is good, and nice of you to feel so much
interested in participating to the process, but do remember to let us
time to build things as well.

Do not test the mailing list administration please.

Ira Stoll a ?crit:
> Gee, maybe I spoke too soon. That anagram thing really threw me.
> Anyways, I'm JackLynch. I donno how it ended up giving my actual name,
> but then I havn't been on many mailing lists. Maybe my email did it
> automatically or some such? Anyways, thats who I am. Jack


from_name: Lars Aronsson

body:
Jimmy Wales wrote:
> I think that the solution is quite simple -- for the Wikimedia
> Foundation to form and control the German subsidiary.  This subsidiary
> will give the ability for Germans to give tax deductible donations,
> will serve as a legal point of contact for any Germany-specific
> concerns, etc.

And on the other hand, German tax laws might require (I don't know)
that the German organization be totally independent under its own
bylaws in order to be registered ("incorporate") and qualify for tax
exemption.  I think I warned against this sort of conflict a year ago.
I strongly recommend that you all look at how the German chapter of
ISOC (which is an "e.V.", see www.isoc.de) has solved this.  I assume
they have a working model already, that could be copied.  In fact, the
ISOC chapter model could be copied for more countries than Germany, if
Wikipedians want to form local chapters in their area.

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


from_name: Fred Bauder

subject: [WikiEN-l] Procedure for requesting mediation

body:
Theresa, I've been following this. Please go to Wikipedia:Requests for
arbitration and briefly set forth your complaint and the relief you request.
(at the bottom of the page).

Others who wish to join in her complaint should also add their comments to
hers under the same heading, ==Theresa v. Mr. Natural Health==

A notice should be placed on Mr. Natural Health's talk page quoting the
complaint and linking to Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration.

We are still working on procedure, but these are the commonsense steps we
will probably come up with.

Fred

> From: "KNOTT, T" <TKNOTT at qcl.org.uk>
> Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 10:54:44 -0000
> To: "English Wikipedia" <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Subject: [WikiEN-l] Mr. Natural Health has refused mediation with the
> community
>
>
> Mr natural health has refused mediation with the community. He appears to feel
> that he has done nothing wrong and wants his "harassers" punished.
>
> I'm just writing this email to keep the pressure on really. How far down the
> line are we on finalizing the arbitration process? When will the arbitration
> committee be able to something about the Mr NH situation?
>
> Theresa
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l


subject: [WikiEN-l] Procedure for requesting arbitration

body:
Theresa, I've been following this. Please go to Wikipedia:Requests for
arbitration and briefly set forth your complaint and the relief you request.
(at the bottom of the page).

Others who wish to join in her complaint should also add their comments to
hers under the same heading, ==Theresa v. Mr. Natural Health==

A notice should be placed on Mr. Natural Health's talk page quoting the
complaint and linking to Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration.

We are still working on procedure, but these are the commonsense steps we
will probably come up with.

Fred

> From: "KNOTT, T" <TKNOTT at qcl.org.uk>
> Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 10:54:44 -0000
> To: "English Wikipedia" <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Subject: [WikiEN-l] Mr. Natural Health has refused mediation with the
> community
>
>
> Mr natural health has refused mediation with the community. He appears to feel
> that he has done nothing wrong and wants his "harassers" punished.
>
> I'm just writing this email to keep the pressure on really. How far down the
> line are we on finalizing the arbitration process? When will the arbitration
> committee be able to something about the Mr NH situation?
>
> Theresa
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

> From: "KNOTT, T" <TKNOTT at qcl.org.uk>
> Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 10:54:44 -0000
> To: "English Wikipedia" <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Subject: [WikiEN-l] Mr. Natural Health has refused mediation with the
> community
>
>
> Mr natural health has refused mediation with the community. He appears to feel
> that he has done nothing wrong and wants his "harassers" punished.
>
> I'm just writing this email to keep the pressure on really. How far down the
> line are we on finalizing the arbitration process? When will the arbitration
> committee be able to something about the Mr NH situation?
>
> Theresa
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: foundation of a German registered association

body:
Ulrich Fuchs wrote:
> Jimmy, you will never be able to fully avoid this - all Wikipedia
> texts are GNU FDL.

But GNU FDL is a good thing, and people taking the texts to do
whatever they want is a good thing.  That's not what I'm talking
about.  I'm talking about a scenario in which there's a break within
the organization, and that is something we can and should try to
prevent with solid international co-operation and planning.

> Worst case scenario: There might be quarrels in the future between
> the contributors from different countries, the majority of
> contributors of one country decides to set up it's own server. If
> they want to do so, this just will happen, and the foundation will
> not be asked. The only thing you are and should be able to avoid in
> such a situation is that such a spit-off-Wikipedia/media uses the
> name Wikipedia/Wikimedia.

But it is important for us to all work together _today_ to ensure that
such splits don't happen in the future.  Quarrels between contributors
from different countries don't need to lead to that kind of
organizational split, if we put into place procedures that push us all
to work together as part of an international team.

I see the likelihood of a real break being much greater if we do not
retain organizational simplicity and unity.

> Again, we are not wanting, planning, or considering such a
> split. That is exactly WHY we want to use the name Wikimedia. If we
> don't use it, THEN the first step towards such a split would be
> done, because then you have two organizations with different names
> doing the same thing (supporting projects like Wikipedia) - that's
> already a symbolic split, even if one is sending money to the other.

I agree completely that it is much more desirable for there to be
legal arrangements made so that we can use the Wikimedia name
universally for the single international project.  I do not support
the idea of creating a separate organization of any kind, with or
without the name Wikimedia.  If a separate legal entity is useful, and
surely it is, then yes I support that fully.

> Actually, this is far more dangerous for the future than what we are
> trying to bring into life right now: An organization named Wikimedia
> also, having "supporting free content in general and the US
> Wikimedia Foundation in particular" as goal in it's bylaws, being
> run by Wikipedians, but legally independent from the foundation for
> a number of good reasons.

I oppose the legal independence and see no reason for it.  But I need
to talk to a German lawyer so that we can iron these issues out more
clearly.

> To further reduce the possibility of that situation, probably a
> paper can be signed by the country organizations stating that they
> are aware that they might use the Wikimedia name only as long as
> "approved" by the Wikimedia foundation. Then, in the worst case of a
> split-off, you have good changes to make the split-off organization
> change it's name. As stated above, there is no way to hinder such a
> split-off in general.

I think that's an excellent suggestion and likely the best way to
proceed.

> I doubt there is any legal way to have a foundation subsidiary here
> in Germany that is under german law (important for tax exemption and
> so on), open for german members but still completely controlled by
> the foundation. The highest board of every german e.V (and also of a
> german foundation) are democratic institutions, so everything is
> controlled by the members. If you want to open the organization for
> other members than the foundation (and you need at least 7 members
> for an e.V), you *must* give up control. I think that will hold true
> for every EU country, not just for Germany.

I have no opinion nor preference as to the exact details.  If the
organization has to be in a certain way, then it has to be in a
certain way.  But even in that case, it is crucial that legal controls
be in place to ensure that such an organization does not someday
become separated from the international movement.

> We want to have an open community which acts bottom-up and not
> top-down. If that's not what you want, please say it, because then
> we know we must go ahead, choose another name and take the first
> step towards that split we all don't want.

I am 100% in favor of an open community w hich acts bottom-up and not
top-down.  But that community is, and must remain, truely
international in character.  The legal choices that we make can
destroy that if we aren't careful.

What I ask you to do is to *not* go ahead, not so quickly, as there is
no particular reason to hurry.  We can spend several months exploring
options and talking to a lawyer.  Possibly my visit to Germany this
summer would be a good target date for the launching of such a
foundation, and I could be there to give my enthusiastic support.

But going out, this week, or this month, to form an organization in
haste, without us all fully discussing and working out the details so
as to achieve our mutual goals, seems unwise to me.

Let's target early June (when I will be in Berlin and Munich) for the
date of a formal launch, and spend time between now and then carefully
working on a plan.

--Jimbo


body:
You did succeed. I'm trying now to access his talk page.

Fred

> From: "KNOTT, T" <TKNOTT at qcl.org.uk>
> Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 11:54:58 -0000
> To: "English Wikipedia" <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Subject: RE: [WikiEN-l] Procedure for requesting arbitration
>
>
>
> OK I've tried to list him but I'm having problems at the moment with time
> outs. I'm not sure if my complaint made it onto the page or not, and not
> attempted to put a notice on Mr NH's page. I'll try again after lunch.
>
> Theresa
>
>> Others who wish to join in her complaint should also add their comments to
> hers under the same heading, ==Theresa v. Mr. Natural Health==
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l


subject: [Wikipedia-l] foundation of a German registered association

body:
Ivo K?thnig wrote:
> The last point should never happen, since it is not allowed to use
> the money in another manner as discribed in the statute of the
> "e.V.". If we change the statute (which is not that easy itself,
> since most members have to vote for the changes), we risk to lose
> the ability to collect money tax-free, in particular if we change it
> to make a lucrative income for ourselves.

> I don't know if there is a way to make a contract, that the "e.V."
> is allowed to use the name "Wikimedia" as long as you allow
> this. (may someone should research this) May that would be a
> solution for you, Jimbo?

Yes, something along those lines is exactly what I have in mind.

I do not wish to stand in the way of progress.  I only want to caution
that we move slowly, carefully, and *together*.

--Jimbo


body:
Ivo K?thnig wrote:
> But what makes you sure that, the situation is not exactly reverse? In that
> case it may would be very good to have an independent french organisation,
> which fight for the original goals?

It is best if we set things up all around, so that corruption of our
goals is practically impossible, and that organizational conflict due
to poor organizational design is practically eliminated.

It is possible for poor choices to lead us into conflict, while good
choices will lead us into harmony.

--Jimbo


body:
Kurt Jansson wrote:
> You are absolutely right. But I find it quite funny that in all your
> future scenarios the American foundation are always the good guys, while
> you fear the international ones might only want to make money out of the
> project.

That is not my intention at all, and I apologize if it seemed that
way.  That isn't what I mean at all.

> I can imagine other scenarios, for example a take-over of the
> American foundation with the help of many faked accounts is much more
> easy than in the German "e.V." where only "real" people are allowed to
> vote.

Only real people are allowed to vote for member representatives here,
too.  That is no difference.

> I can understand your concerns, but please try to imagine that many
> people on the international Wikipedias have exactly the same kind of
> concerns about the American foundation.

Of course, we should all be concerned about such things.  And this is
why I advise that we be very cautious and careful about our
institutional arrangements.  There's no reason why we can't preserve
our ideals, while at the same time preventing inter-organizational
conflict.

--Jimbo


body:
Peter Gervai wrote:
> > There is no reason to think that the current group of people involved
> > in Wikipedia would do any of that, but we must plan for the longterm,
> > for what might happen 50 or 100 years from now, after we are all gone.
> > Institutional decisions made today have ramifications many many years
> > into the future, especially if we are not cautious.
>
>
> Think ICANN.
>
> (The board members have to sue one another to get the balance sheets. Pretty
> stinky. It used to be a useful, honest gang. Way back in the smelly tarpits
> of history.)

Precisely!  We must take care to avoid such a thing.

--Jimbo


subject:
[Wikipedia-l] European meeting of Wikimedia project contributors
	(was: Why 'Wikimedia Germany', 'Wikimedia France', 'Wikimedia ????')

body:
I am very enthusiastic about Kurt's suggestion here, and I propose
that we set this date as well for the founding of a German
organization of some sort, as determined after our inquiry into the
finer points of German law and a consideration of the possibilities
open to us.

I am personally planning to spend some vacation time in Berlin and
Munich, and if I can find suitable arrangements, I would like to stay
in Europe for much longer, possibly as much as a month or two, with
the primary purpose of working with Europeans on Wikimedia stuff.

Kurt Jansson wrote:
> Please make a bit of promotion in the other "European" communities for
> the Wizards of OS 3 in Berlin on June 10-12, 2004:
> http://www.mikro.org/Events/OS/wos2/konzept-e.htm
>
> Jimbo will be there and Erik is organizing a panel called "Wikipedia and
> friends":
> http://wiki.wizards-of-os.org/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?Wikipedia_And_Friends
>
> We're also thinking about a Wikipedia mini conference on the WOS3. It
> would be great if some people from the other "European" communities
> could visit us and talk about their communities.


body:
I put a bit more. Red and Bold

Fred

> From: "KNOTT, T" <TKNOTT at qcl.org.uk>
> Reply-To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 12:48:44 -0000
> To: "English Wikipedia" <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Subject: RE: [WikiEN-l] Procedure for requesting arbitration
>
>
>
>> You did succeed. I'm trying now to access his talk page.
>>
>> Fred
>
> I've just managed to do it.
>
> Theresa
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l


subject: [Wikipedia-l] European meeting of Wikimedia project contributors

body:
Yann Forget wrote:
> I was asked to do a presentation of Wikipedia to the World Free Software
> Meeting in Bordeaux, south-west of France, in July. Could you come?
> cf. http://lsm2004.abul.org/rubrique2.html (the site is not active at this
> time). I was thinking to invite Brion...

I will be in Berlin in early June, and my plans beyond that are
unsettled.  But yes, I would like to attend something like that, esp.
in Bordeaux, which would be a pleasant place to visit in any event!  If
I can find a way to arrange things so that I can work in Europe while
visiting various places for events like this, I would be delighted.

--Jimbo


from_name: Optim

subject: [Wikitech-l] Minor changes by anonymous user

body:
what's the problem?

do you forbid minor changes in nl: ?

--Optim

--- Elly Waterman <elly.waterman at wanadoo.nl>
wrote:
> On NL wikipedia there appears an anonymous
> user, IP 80.79.97.145, who regularly is making
> Minor changes

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it!
http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ps/sb/


references:
<20040122162701.GF2294@narya.grin.hu>
	<87ptdbr67m.fsf@unicorn.bad-people-of-the-future.san-francisco.ca.us>
	<20040123125838.GQ2294@narya.grin.hu>
	<200401231623.57661.koethnig@informatik.hu-berlin.de>

body:
Ivo K?thnig wrote:
> Gathering money is the first step. Since we do not know exacly, how
> much money this will be, we can not exactly plan, what to do with
> this money.

Gathering money is not the first step, then.  It would be
irresponsible for us to gather money without a plan for what to do
with the money.

> Some money is needed for the organisation itself. For example each
> year we have to held a meeting, and every member has to be
> informed. We actually dont know if it is allowed to use e-mail for
> that (what we would prefer), but if not we have to use snail-mail,
> and for that reason we would need at least 1?  per member each year.

I will gladly provide funds for anything of that nature.  I would
prefer that we keep all overhead for the use of donor funds to an
absolute minimum for as long as possible.

> But as you can imagine it makes no sence to think about all that in detail,
> since we do not know, if we collect enough money to finance that.

I think you have it exactly backwards.  Collecting money with no
specific plan for what is to be done with it is not a good idea at
all.

There is nothing to prevent Europeans from being members of the
international Wikimedia Foundation, either.  There is nothing to
prevent the international Wikimedia Foundation from engaging in any or
all of the kinds of activities that you mentioned, either, either in
Europe or in America.

--Jimbo


from_name: Rick

subject: [WikiEN-l] Policy suggestions

body:
Wikipedia is not a list of citations.

RickK

Ira Stoll <irastoll at hotmail.com> wrote:

*only replace text that you know to be wrong (inaccurate), and replace it
with something that has a citation to back it up. If they have a reasonable
difference, based on citation, allow both POV to be presented

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20040123/c8951152/attachment.htm


body:
He will just delete it as soon as it is posted to his Talk page.

RickK

Fred Bauder <fredbaud at ctelco.net> wrote:
A notice should be placed on Mr. Natural Health's talk page quoting the
complaint and linking to Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration.

---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/attachments/20040123/6c959973/attachment.htm


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Amazon experiment ended early

body:
As I expected, the Amazon experiment shows fairly conclusively that
the revenue to be obtained is not sufficient to justify any potential
controversy that this might cause.

>From the other day when I started this, to now, our complete earnings
are $0.34, yes, 34 cents.

These earnings are based on the sales of 5 total items, 4 paperbacks
from Amazon, and 1 hardback from their used Marketplace.  (However, it
looks like the earnings may not have been credited for all the items,
so it is possible that a few more cents will trickle in.)

In any event, it is clear to me that under the most optimistic
scenario, with the links made more prominent or more often or
whatever, the Amazon program could return at most $200 per month.  I
just made that number up out of thin air, and I actually have no
particular idea as to how it could be forced that high.

Therefore, I eagerly conclude that this whole issue is a dead issue,
and that we need not consider it much further, if at all.

--Jimbo


from_name: Poor, Edmund W

subject: [Wikitech-l] Bravo, Brion (was: Database shuffling)

body:
Thanks for all your hard work, Brion. If I were on the Wikimedia board
of trustees, I would vote you a $1,000 stipend to show you the world's
gratitude.

Ed Poor


from_name: Ray Saintonge

subject:
[WikiEN-l] Mr. Natural Health has refused mediation with
	the	community

body:
KNOTT, T wrote:

>Mr natural health has refused mediation with the community. He appears to feel that he has done nothing wrong and wants his "harassers" punished.
>
>I'm just writing this email to keep the pressure on really. How far down the line are we on finalizing the arbitration process? When will the arbitration committee be able to something about the Mr NH situation?
>
Sometimes this process of "keeping the pressure on" is as irritating as
MNH's alleged wrongdoing.  What we see on the mailing list is a stream
of accusations intended to highlight every little fault that he commits.
 We see little or nothing about the other side of the story.

Mediation and arbitration are very good concepts, but I too would be
hesitant about accepting a process in which the apparent mediators don't
have their own system properly in place.  The optics in those
circumstances suggest that a person is offering himself as a mediator in
order to further the POV of the majority opinion in that context.  If by
our actions we only succeed in convincing the accused that the process
is unfair, then we have undermined the mediation system, and his refusal
to co-operate with it begins to seem more logical.

The mediation committee needs to figure out its own procedures before
that option can be offered to anybody.  Those procedures must include
provisions to insure that the rights of the accused are protected so
that he can have the confidence that he is participating in a fair system.

Ec


body:
Jimmy Wales wrote:

>I would like to place a notice like this, in German, prominently on
>the homepage of the German Wikipedia, and perhaps on the Recent
>Changes page.
>
>"Are you a German lawyer who is fluent in English?  The Wikimedia
>Foundation is exploring what will be necessary to set up a German
>nonprofit organization and needs legal assistance.  If you are willing
>and able to give pro bono assistance, please contact jwales at bomis.com
>in English.  Thanks!"
>
If you are looking for a lawyer who is "fluent in English" the notice
could just as easily be in English. :-)

Ec


body:
> And on the other hand, German tax laws might require (I don't know)
> that the German organization be totally independent under its own
> bylaws in order to be registered ("incorporate") and qualify for tax
> exemption.  I think I warned against this sort of conflict a year ago.
> I strongly recommend that you all look at how the German chapter of
> ISOC (which is an "e.V.", see www.isoc.de) has solved this.  I assume
> they have a working model already, that could be copied.  In fact, the

What we actually did, was copying the model of the Free Software Foundation.
They also are a "e.V." ("eingetragener Verein") in Germany, not a Foundation.
As I already said, it's very complicated to found and run a foundation in
Germany, probably far more complicated than you in the US can imagine. Where
you would be founding a foundation normally, we are founding an "e.V." Even
the red cross is an "e.V." in Germany.

Uli


body:
Ivo K?thnig wrote:

>>I doubt that "talking" about Nazism would be illegal.  It's "promoting"
>>it that would be illegal.  One also has to consider that there are other
>>German speaking countries, like Switzerland.  If this is a serious
>>problem, rather than an imaginary one based on sombody's
>>misunderstanding, one could create an intermediate boilerplate page
>>containing something like the following:
>>
>
>Of course it is not illegal to talk about Nazism. Even "promoting" them is not
>illegal in most cases. But for example its illegal to lie about the holocaust
>or use some of (the old) symbols (for example the Hakenkreuz) for "promoting"
>Nazism. That means for example it is illegal to stick these symbols on you
>clothes.
>
>Since Wikipedia has one rule, called NPOV, there never will be a problem with
>that, cause it is allowed to write "who lies about the holocaust" (we ourself
>would never lie about, just talking about these lies). It even is allowed to
>have pictures with the "Hakenkreuz" since it is allowed to show them for
>example in an educational context.
>
Your response is reassuring, but it also seems to negate the need for
two separate German language databases.  It shows that the intent of the
person using this material is very important.  There are people who will
continue to submit bad material, but as long as we make appropriate
edits when we find it we should be safe.

I would expect that this law would also extend to certain neo-Nazis who
use other symbols that are different form though still modelled on the
"Hakenkreuz" (swastika in English).

Ec


from_name: Tim Starling

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Inquiry from a reporter

body:
Jimmy Wales wrote:

> 3.  If you're a prominent Wikipedian in the San Francisco area who
> would be interested in being interviewed, please email me and let me
> know your contact info so I can pass it along.

You might want to contact some of the people at:

http://en2.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedians/California

 From memory, Stevertigo, Tualha, Smack, Jiang, Khym Chanur, Dante
Alighieri, Minesweeper, CYD and Davodd are active. Of those, Stevertigo,
Dante and CYD have been with the project the longest.

-- Tim Starling