Hi,
I'm a bit concerned because two wikien-l emails contained in the online archives at pipermail have my full name and I believe these pages have been "googled" in the past by individuals angry at the content of articles. I've been harassed as a result by two individuals in the past few months.
I really would like to avoid this problem in the future and either have these pipermail entries edited so as to remove my full name or have them hidden from search engines by having a "NOINDEX" command placed in the html codes for those pages.
The pages in question are
http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2004-April/012194.htmlhttp://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2004-April/012194.html (previous entry title)
If this can be attended to I would be very grateful.
Thanks,
AL
On 25/07/05, andyl2004(a)sympatico.ca <andyl2004(a)sympatico.ca> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm a bit concerned because two wikien-l emails contained in the online archives at pipermail have my full name and I believe these pages have been "googled" in the past by individuals angry at the content of articles. I've been harassed as a result by two individuals in the past few months.
One problem here is that there are multiple places where these lists
are archived: as well as directly in the listserv's pipermail
directory, they are pushed through GMane, which archives them as well
as turning them into newsgroups:
http://dir.gmane.org/gmane.science.linguistics.wikipedia.english.
Who knows where else public copies might exist, and of course search
engine databases might already have spidered it and not be in any
hurry to remove it again....
--
Rowan Collins BSc
[IMSoP]
There are many grey areas when dealing with plagiarism. Personally,
when I write a biographical article I end up sifting through 4-5
online obituaries and merging the contents without much paraphrasing.
Much of the information in those sources is second-hand and often
equally unreferenced.
Where does one draw the line? When there is only one good-going
source of material and this is paraphrased extensively, it should be
referenced. There are many instances, however, where using the term
"reference" would be a bit of an overstatement.
JFW
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.9.0/50 - Release Date: 16/07/2005
What is the border between an example and an original theory?
There's an user that argues that examples are original research, because
they don't have a source, although they support a sourced theory. (this is
specifically about languages, grammar, etc)
I think we should have something on original research policy related to this.
Steve ranted:
> Wikipedia's Achilles heel was inevitably going to be
> its size, and the unwieldiness of managing or guiding
> large group trends. If you think about any society in
> general, its continuity is dependent on the
> establishement of ritual behaviours. Wikipedia's core
> principles are for the most part exactly what should be, but
> Ive been concerned that we lack rituals for indoctrinating
> people into a sense of our community goals and nature.
[snip]
> The general idea, back in the day, was that as
> problems grow, the community must restructure to
> answer them. Disputes gotten too big for JW and the
> mailing lists?--empower a committee to deal with this,
> and another to deal with that. The point is that these
> committees are more than just bantha fodder--they represent
> community structure, which is just as important as software
> structure, or NPO structure. If were not responsive in terms
> of community structure... <i>aw, look at me, I'm ramblin'
> again. Wal, uh hope you folks enjoyed yourselves. Catch ya
> further on down the trail.</i>
Not rambling, Steve, that was a darn good rant!
Our community of volunteer writers still have not developed sufficient
dedication to avoiding bias and incivility. This might be due (in part)
to a lingering sense of anarchistic idealism. Anyway, there is a
well-founded fear that "structure" and "government" will lead to
tyranny.
I've been experimenting with [[Wikipedia:Policy enforcement log]]. I've
made a lot of templates and (proposed) policy pages. Tim Starling wrote
a cool little hack to allow blocked users to edit their own talk page.
Steve and I have revived the Mediation Committee (Mgm asked me to
co-chair). I'm trying to wrap up two VERY DIFFICULT article mediations
before my vacation tomorrow.
A lot of problems Wikipedia has comes down to:
* "I want the web site to reflect my own ideas, feelings and desires."
This comes into endless conflict with our stated mission of creating an
unbiased yet comprehensive free encyclopedia. Nonetheless, we've done an
outstanding job. We've got the world's attention, but we need to figure
out how to take it to the next level.
Uncle Ed
P.S. I will be on vacation July 22-31. (Try not to tear down the place
while I'm gone. ;-)
I just received a password reminder, shouldn't such a thing be
verified before it's given? BTW, I could still login with my usual
password this morning. While the message was sent 11 hours ago. Also
the IP resolves to Munich Germany, nowhere near my location. Has this
been looked into already?
Someone (probably you, from IP address 84.154.85.157)
requested that we send you a new Wikipedia login password.
The password for user "MacGyverMagic" is now "**********".
You should log in and change your password now.
Greetings,
Do I really have to include a full copy of the
GFDL wherever I want to publish a GFDL image?
Would that give me a hard time if I wanted to make
a postcard series out of our featured pictures?
Regards,
Haukur
Haukur Þorgeirsson wrote:
>P.S. How about a license like this:
>
>"This picture can be used by anyone for any purpose
>as long as a copy of the American Declaration of
>Independence is included in any publications derived
>from it."
>
>Would that be a free license? :)
>
>
In order for it to be a truly free license, you would need to have an
additional requirement that they also include a copy of the Thirteenth
Amendment.
--Michael Snow
Hi,
Many people have no clear understanding about the issues of cites and plagiarism, so I stronly support the idea of a Wikipedia:Plagiarism policy. We can'tr expect people to do the right thing if we don't help educate them about what that means.
-Chip Berlet [User:Cberlet]
________________________________
From: wikien-l-bounces(a)Wikipedia.org on behalf of Matt Brown
Sent: Sun 7/24/2005 3:45 AM
To: Geoff Burling; English Wikipedia
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Re: Plagiarism Policy, was A Missing Policy
Geoff, it's not that we're attacking you or thinking you're whinging;
it's simply that, although there is no EXPLICIT Wikipedia plagiarism
policy, there are Wikipedia policies that effectively prohibit it;
these being copyright policy and citing sources.
If plagiarism takes the form of copyright infringement, then it has to
be deleted. There is no room for argument about this. We cannot
place work under the GFDL without the permission of its author, and
that's that.
If plagiarism does NOT qualify as copyright infringement, then it
falls foul of WP:CITE. Citing one's sources is not an option on
Wikipedia; it is policy.
All that said, it would not hurt to have a Wikipedia:Plagiarism policy
that puts all that in one place.
-Matt
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
There is a consensus (claimed by [[User:Theathenae]] in [[Talk:Macedonian
denar]]) that every article where the name of the [[Republic of
Macedonia]] is used, should include this disclaimer in a "note" section:
<<
==Note==
* The use of the terms Republic of Macedonia and Macedonian(s) throughout
this article is not meant to imply an official position on the naming
dispute between Athens and Skopje. See Foreign relations of the Republic
of Macedonia#Naming_dispute_with_Greece,
Republic_of_Macedonia#Naming_Dispute and United Nations Resolution 817
(1993)
>>
(see it at [[Macedonian denar]])
I think this is a bad precedent. I wonder how long it would be until other
disputed names would get the same kind of disclaimer.