In a message dated 5/2/2003 6:36:26 AM Eastern Standard Time,
jwales(a)bomis.com writes:
> I think we need to revisit having the ability for sysops to ban logged
> in users. Maybe the wiki way of doing this is to put the ability into
> the software, but all sysops must agree to use it *only* to ban
> *certain* variants on a known banned troll.
>
As much as I would like to see Zog banned, this could potentially lead to
horrible flame wars. Maybe a compromise would be to give sysops the ability
to ban a logged in user for a set period of time, say 12 hours, until a
decision can be reached and a developer can put a longer term ban in place.
Just a suggestion.
Danny
In a message dated 5/2/2003 6:00:37 AM Eastern Standard Time,
jowens.wiki(a)ghiapet.homeip.net writes:
> >He's back as Anti-Zog, Baboon Mouth, and JamesERay
>
> Don't forget Niggardly and UncleT, though not much was done as them.
>
>
And I really wish Martin would stop reverting the pages into tributes to
white racism with a Confederate war flag, a picture of HItler, and links to
the lyrics of "Nigger Hating Me". If he was banned, why are we giving him a
forum?
Danny
I made a couple of changes to [[wikipedia:copyright]], explained on the
talk page. The most important one was to take out all references to
"special permission materials". Reading through the page, I found that
we actually had three categories of materials:
* GFDL
* fair use
* "special permission", which means that the copyright holder gives
permission to use the material *only for Wikipedia*.
The third category of materials was added by Lee on Aug 27, 2002. I
don't think it was properly discussed, and I disagree with it. The fair
use situation is already bad enough. Adding "special permission"
materials on top of that makes free reuse of Wikipedia next to
impossible.
If fair use cannot be justified and GFDL permission cannot be obtained,
then the material simply cannot be used in a project that claims to be
freely reusable.
There is also a legal issue: contributors license their article under
GFDL to the public. If somebody else adds material to that article,
then they are technically creating a derivative work, and are
*required* to license all of it under GFDL, i.e. they cannot insist on
a special permission only for Wikipedia.
Axel
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
http://search.yahoo.com
Zog is back as "Anti-Zog". He's not doing an Adam trick and pretending he's
someone else, he's just trying to get the song lyrics back into [[Thats how
a nigger goes]]. Can someone please block him without delay?
-- Tim Starling.
_________________________________________________________________
MSN Instant Messenger now available on Australian mobile phones. Go to
http://ninemsn.com.au/mobilecentral/hotmail_messenger.asp
The Cunctator wrote:
>We actually did have a big discussion about this
>and film ended up being nixed because of the problem
>of digital videa replacing actual film as the medium
>for "films". Thus, "movie".
That's one minor reason (but that convention was
written sometime in the UseMod days - well before
digital movies were widely available in movie
theaters). Another is that the word "film" is often
applied selectively (in at least the United States) to
movies that are considered to be of a higher caliber.
Thus, to many people, all films are movies but not all
movies are films.
However, it basically comes down to this - we had to
choose something to serve as a standard disambiguating
term just as we had to choose one format to have all
the day articles reside at.
Disambiguation is aimed at resolving ambiguities and
having both "film" and "movie" exist side by side is
inconsistent - creating ambiguity.
-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
http://search.yahoo.com
One reason we should scrupulously stick to conventions is that in the
event that we someday have a long discussion and decide that our old
convention is undesirable, our sticking to the convention makes it a
lot easier to change.
That is, it would be pretty simple to write a script to move all pages
from "Blah blah blah (movie)" to "Blah blah blah (film)", but a lot of
work to fix "Blah blah blah (the movie)" and "Blah blah blah, a movie"
and "The movie: Blah blah blah" and so on.
Jim wrote:
>I also blame the Americans for everything,
>but in this case I must plead guilty (and
>guilt by association with Australians)
Funny, I blame the French for everything... Oh wait -
that's politics and is also fairly insulting to a
large group of Wikipedians so that type of thing
shouldn't be stated on the list. Silly me.
It should also be noted that an American, me, was the
main person arguing for the down style and I still
maintain that this is the most grammatically correct
way to express these names in a general context (that
is, outside of the bird articles). Thus redirects are
absolutely necessary.
-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
http://search.yahoo.com
Ray wrote: "Although I am usually responsive to blaming the Americans
for everything, it needs to be remarked that the capitalist charge in
this matter has been led by an Australian" - which made me smile. The
irony is that I also tend to blame the Americans for everything - and
in this context, I blame them for *not* capitalising things when they
ought to! So perhaps we had best categorise this particular Australian
as one of Little Johnny Howard's "American Deputy Sherrifs in
South-east Asia." .... Err - sorry, Jimbo. I know - no politics on the
list. :)
Enough humour. When Ray wrote that "the problem ... operates on two
levels" and that "as long as it is only on a stylistic level ..." he
missed the point. It is *not* only stylistic, nor indeed even primarily
stylistic: it is a matter of clear, unabiguous, and accurate
communication. There are many long-tailed shrikes, but only one
Long-tailed Shrike. It is not a matter of 'preffered styles", but a
matter of a precise and correct name or a vague and incorrect name.
However, Ray's third point raises a significant issue. Creating
lower-case redirects to entries that are (quite properly) capitalised
involves a good deal of attention to detail - something that I can
speal with authority about, as I have spent 20 or 30 hours attending to
this stuff in the four days or so, It is tedius and a small number of
mistakes will undoubtedly have slipped through. A technical solution
would indeed be very welcome. The obvious starting point would be a
search function that works. I understand that that matter is high on
the developers' priority list, and wish them every success in the
quest. Pending that (or more comprehensive technical solutions), it
seems we will just have to rely on the trusty old Mark 1 Eyeball.
Tony Wilson
(Tannin)
> Message: 8
> From: "Graham Burnett" <grahamburnett(a)blueyonder.co.uk>
> To: <wikien-l(a)wikipedia.org>
> Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 18:19:59 +0100
> Subject: [WikiEN-l] Zog
> Reply-To: wikien-l(a)wikipedia.org
>
> I havn't seen any of 'Zogs' edits but picked up some concerns about this
> person from the mailing list- just in case anyone is unaware, 'Zog' is a
> term used by white supremacists and other nazis and is an abreviation of
> 'Zionist Occupational Governmnent', and is i believe a reference to that
> famous nazi publication/forgery 'The protocols of Zion' (ie, that the
world
> is run by a Jewish conspiracy). as such this username is far more
offensive
> than the likes of 'fuckyou' or 'i've got a big cock' or whatever. I
> seriously doubt any such user has any intentions of doing anything other
> than spreading race hate.
>
> Cheers graham (Quercus robur)
>
Appologies- i realised this HAD been discussed on the zog user pages which I
hadn't seen at the time, also my wikien digests arrived in a jumbled up
order yesterday, hence sorry for restating what everybody else already
knew...
Cheers Graham (Quercus robur)