I'm not sure I fully agree with this. It would depend on the question.
The internet allows people to check and re-check what they've been told.
In that sense, our article on digitalis should strive to represent the
average knowledge of the medical community, not just be a source of entertainment
for example.
If our article on breast cancer could be improved in some way, that is a
good thing.
In a message dated 9/5/2008 2:51:44 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
thomas.dalton(a)gmail.com writes:
a question about your wife's breast cancer would be directed
at a doctor,
**************Psssst...Have you heard the news? There's a new fashion blog,
plus the latest fall trends and hair styles at StyleList.com.
(http://www.stylelist.com/trends?ncid=aolsty00050000000014)
It has came to my attention that closed wikis can be the source of problems
particularly for IW links.
When a wiki is locked down (generally for inactivity) edits to the site are
completely blocked.
This is a problem because IW links can no longer be fixed meaning there is a
permanent invalid IW linkage which may mislead bots and humans (visitors
reading articles) alike.
In addition it creates a backlog as the wikis in question will be unlocked
eventualy. Admittedly the locked wikis are small so backlog isnt exactly too
big of a deal.
In adition locked wikis also need to be edited for SUL unifications,
username renames (can relate to SUL), leftover spam deletions and etc.
I really think certain usergroups and/or global usergroups should be allowed
to edit such wikis.
- White Cat
How to frame a question so that it improves the article.
Step 1 -- Always include a phrase like "this article" or "I don't see where"
Step 2 -- Always include a phrase like "I'd like to see" or "it would
improve this article if"
Step 3 -- Slip your question in, sideways between these catchphrases.
Example
Anna Nicole Smith
"I don't see where in this article they discuss how many men have been
knocked unconscious when she suddenly turned sideways. I think it would improve
this article to have those details. Also this article does not appear to
address what exactly her bust size was prior to her implants. I'd like to see
that added to this article. Thanks. -- Booboo kitty the Fourth"
Will Johnson
**************Psssst...Have you heard the news? There's a new fashion blog,
plus the latest fall trends and hair styles at StyleList.com.
(http://www.stylelist.com/trends?ncid=aolsty00050000000014)
Hello,
Not directly about Wikipedia, sorry :-)
I have a vocabulary question... and Wikipedia was not able to help me !!!
In French, we have a term "mécénat" which refers to the act for a person
or a company to financially support a creator.
http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mécénat
This word exist in other languages, but there is apparently no english
article. In our definition, Foundation (such as the Ford or the Gates
Foundation) are mécènes, but a commercial company can also be directly a
mécène.
We also use the term "sponsor" (or parrainage), which is a direct
translation of the english term sponsor.
The definition of a "mécène" is not so different from the definition of
a sponsor, though the French article hints that the "mecène" does that
for philanthropic reasons, whilst the sponsor does that for commercial
reasons. Except that within the articles, in both cases, it notices that
both mécène and sponsors get financial benefits (deductibility etc...)
and that both mécène and sponsors get benefits in terms of image.
So, I guess it is sometimes a bit tricky to know when a gift is a
"mécenat" and when it is "sponsoring". But still, we try to make the
differenciation. For WMF, the recent big donations would be "mécénat",
whilst those giving money for Wikimania (with public recognition, thank
yous, logo display etc...) are "sponsors".
My question (yes, there is a question): do you really have no term to
describe "mécénat" as the lack of Wikipedia article seem to suggest ?
If there is no term, would "philanthropic activity" fit both the concept
for an organisation OR a unique person ?
Wikipedia Scanner... indeed, that's the one! Many thanks, Chris.
- H
Chris Howie [cdhowie(a)gmail.com] wrote:
> Is it this one?
>
> http://wikiscanner.virgil.gr/
I've always believed that "mécénat" is patronage. But if you want to use it
in a modern and financial context then sponsorship is the most appropriate
term.
Yes, "philanthropic activity" fit both the concept for an organization AND a
unique person. You got individual (i.e. Florence Kelley) and the most
common corporate or private philanthropic activities.
P.S. both Florence Kelly, philanthropy and patronage are mentioned in the
same page here<http://books.google.com/books?id=JG3ceLmdnbgC&pg=PA98&lpg=PA98&dq=Kelley,+F…>:)
Fayssal F.
> On Thu, 4 Sep 2008 20:47:53 +1000 Angela <beesley(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] vocabulary
> To: "English Wikipedia" <wikien-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID:
> <8b722b800809040347u1473a8bdl85b81b53d7bed3a0(a)mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 8:01 PM, Andrew Gray <shimgray(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > 2008/9/4 Florence Devouard <Anthere9(a)yahoo.com>:
> >
> >
> >> The definition of a "m?c?ne" is not so different from the definition of
> >> a sponsor, though the French article hints that the "mec?ne" does that
> >> for philanthropic reasons, whilst the sponsor does that for commercial
> >> reasons.
> >
> > The traditional distinction would be "patron" ...
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patronage has an interlanguage link to
> M?c?nat. Not sure if the lack of a link the other way is deliberate or
> not.
>
> Angela
>
>
Well, blunder of the day: typed a very similar reply, in all its glory,
sent it off and then realised I'd sent it from the wrong account, it got
bounced by Mailman, and I've lost the original. Bugger. Ah well, here goes
for a second try...
The actual results of the rankings analysis don't surprise me, if only from
personal experience. It's logical that due to Wikipedia's wide article base
and high site ranking, that there will be popular articles on the more
popular search terms. However, on popular searches with many relevant site
hits, Wikipedia often doesn't make it into the top 5, lingering around on
the first page of results but not always having a top-3 or even top-5
ranking. I guess not even enwiki gets carte blanche...
On the political bit of the article, to be honest (and again, I'm speaking
from little more than experience), people researching current events and
other currently relevant and rapidly changing information, they tend to
reach for links to trusted online news sources rather than Wikipedia
articles. Also, the Google News search feature knocks Wikipedia out of the
equation altogether when it's used. The political COI edits are a perennial
subject for journalists and technology commentators, but if people use
Wikipedia as their sole source for current events, then they should
probably be expecting a certain deal of information lag or the odd factual
inaccuracy. Caveat lector, as always.
If anyone could find me the link to the site which displays anon
contributions by IPs in US gov't address pools, I'd be eternally grateful -
I appear to have lost it without a trace!
- H
Usamah M. Ali [usamah1228(a)gmail.com] wrote:
> Hello,
>
> SitePoint's lead blogger Josh Catone published a very interesting blog
today about the powerfulness of Wikipedia entries in search result pages.
You can read it here:
>
> http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2008/09/04/just-how-powerful-is-wikipedia
>
> Regards,
> Usamah
I'm working on a proposal to try to add some sanity to our notability
procedures, and to better organize our coverage of areas where we
have, essentially, multiple articles on a single topic. It uses a
template-based system that duplicates much of the functionality of
subpages.
More about it later - I'm still working on some aspects of it. All I
want to know for now is what the logic was on deprecating subpages in
the article space, and what the technical decision to turn off
MediaWiki's subpages means for content issues.
That is, is the decision to turn off subpages just at technical
decision because of the problem it causes for articles like [[OS/2]]?
Is there a consensus on the content issues of subpages? What is this
consensus, and where can I read its forming so that I can make my
proposal adhere to it, or make it so that accepting my proposal
definitely and clearly alters it?
Thanks,
Phil Sandifer
Or maybe both Dowd and Wikipedia simply got it from People, the source Wikipedia lists for the quote.
B.
"Where do your children's names come from?
TODD: Sarah's parents were coaches and the whole family was involved in track
and I was an athlete in high school, so with our first-born, I was,
like, 'Track!' Bristol is named after Bristol Bay. That's
where I grew up, that's where we commercial fish. Willow is a community
there in Alaska. And then Piper, you know, there's just not too many
Pipers out there and it's a cool name. And Trig is a Norse name for
"strength."
----- Original Message ----
From: Steve Summit <scs(a)eskimo.com>
To: wikien-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Sent: Sunday, August 31, 2008 6:54:04 AM
Subject: [WikiEN-l] NYT flattery
[If "imitation is the sincerest form of flattery", I'm thinking
close paraphrase is a pretty good second.]
Liberal commentators are of course having a field day with the
nomination of [[Sarah Palin]] for the U.S. vice-presidency.
The NYT's dishy Maureen Dowd compared the situation to a
deliciously hokey chick flick, including this description
of the heroine's kids:
Track (named after high school track meets), Bristol
(after Bristol Bay where they did commercial fishing),
Willow (after a community in Alaska), Piper
(just a cool name) and Trig (Norse for "strength.")
[http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/31/opinion/31dowd.html]
Now, was this fantastic satire, or based on truth? A quick check
of our article reveals not only that it's truth, but also where
Dowd got her facts from.
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l