> > BTW, I do not actually hold the position that, even if nobody
> >disagrees with the statement that Wagner was an anti-Semite, it should
> >be attributed. Rather, I asked Jimbo for a policy clarification on
> >this point. And got one, quite promptly. Whereupon I immediately
> >unprotected the page -- as promised.
>
> I'm doubtful that my ramblings really clarified anything. But if you
> saw light, I'm glad to have been mumbling in the vicinity. :-)
>
> --Jimbo
LOL! I nominate Jimbo for "king of the world" rights ;-)
Summing up:
* A sysop should not use his powers as weapons in a debate
* A sysop shouldn't use protection unless things have gotten way out of hand
* Let's all cooperate with good will and avoid factionalism
Ed Poor <-- not frozen, but considerably melted
I agree with Erik's "eloquent" suggestion wholeheartedly, which I have paraphrased as follows:
* A sysop should only use his administrative privileges as a "time out" to direct discussions in case of conflicts to the talk page, but he should not do that if he states a position in the matter. Otherwise he is no longer a sysop or a moderator
but an editor, which is not the function assigned to him.
I intend to follow this suggestion to the letter.
BTW, I do not actually hold the position that, even if nobody disagrees with the statement that Wagner was an anti-Semite, it should be attributed. Rather, I asked Jimbo for a policy clarification on this point. And got one, quite promptly. Whereupon I immediately unprotected the page -- as promised.
Ed Poor
LOL, I actually support Erik's sysop nomination! He and I are on the
same side, even if we had a little dust-up over Wagner. You, Jonathan,
on the other hand <grin> need a bit more seasoning first before we put
the database in your [[user:Clutch]]es.
Ed Poor
An RDF feed listing the last 10 non-minor updates to Wikipedia is
available at http://www.wikipedia.org/tools/feed-en.rdf (replace 'en' as
desired to get a feed for the other languages). Updated every half hour,
so it may miss things at busier times. ;)
Thanks to the magic of RDF, Kuro5hin.org users can now select a
Wikipedia headlines box in their display preferences.
Users of Ximian Evolution for e-mail can also put the feed into their
'Summary' page via Tools/Summary settings/News Feeds/Add news feed.
Suggestions for improvements and other uses are welcome at
http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/RDF_spool
-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
I just noticed that http://www.wikipedia.org has a Google PageRank of 8.
Hard to believe, but apparently so--so we skipped from a 6 to an 8. Wow!
Nupedia is a 7 now, too.
There's also now an open content encyclopedia directory, and Wikipedia is
at the top of it:
http://directory.google.com/Top/Computers/Open_Source/Open_Content/Encyclop…
Sorry if this is not news, but if it is, let's update the announcements
page.
Larry
--
"We have now sunk to a depth at which the re-statement of the obvious is
the first duty of intelligent men." --George Orwell
> From: Daniel Mayer <maveric149(a)yahoo.com>
> PS IMO there already are way too many features available to the
> greenest of newbies. It would be nice if we started off new accounts
> with basic features and automatically added more features based on the
> number of edits that user has made and the age of the user account
> (maybe have three feature-set levels: novice, intermediate and old
> hand). I fear that having too many features is intimidating to many
> non-technical new users. I'm also a wee bit apprehensive that new
> users would abuse features we might otherwise want to give to many
> users (such as the limited rollback feature described above).
>
> However, after the Lir fiasco I'm no longer in favor of automatically granting
> pure meta-level powers to users. Old hands can and should continue to ask and
> be invited to ask about being Admins.
Thanks for this great work, but I think you should have stopped before
"PS".
I think we should eliminate the "rollback" feature, and other features,
*for everyone*, if they turn out to be a problem, long before we start
considering making a hierarchy such as you suggest. This is a wiki,
remember!
Larry
--
"We have now sunk to a depth at which the re-statement of the obvious is
the first duty of intelligent men." --George Orwell
On Wednesday 04 December 2002 03:38 pm, wikitech-l-request(a)wikipedia.org
wrote:
> Despite all the critics, at least for our first vandal bot on the German
> pedia the rollback function came just handy and worked fine. Thanks Brion.
>
> Sven (Ben-Zin)
Mega Dittos! I love this feature because it offers an easy way to wear-down
vandals without having to block the vandal's IP. Rolling back each edit a
vandal makes two seconds after they make it should cause most vandals to lose
interest and leave for good instead of instantly getting pissed-off by
getting blocked (therefore evoking the "I'll show you" response whose only
outlet would be circumventing the block or jumping wikis). Thus a string of
rollbacks would tend to reduce the chance that the vandal will come back
later with bigger guns (or trash a sleeping non-English wiki).
For example; as soon as I determine that an IP is a vandal, I leave that IP's
user contribs page open and periodically hit reload. And WAMMO! I click on
the rollback link each time the vandal makes an edit. So far every vandal has
gotten the hint after less than 10 rollbacks.
It would be nice, however, if clicking on rollback takes you back to the user
contribs page and not the reverted article. But I understand that there still
in the problem of possible rollback conflicts where two Admins hit rollback
in succession and Admin 2 reinstates the vandal version that Admin 1 already
reverted. So until that can be fixed I don't mind hitting the back button.
When it does get fixed I would like to propose that a limited rollback feature
be added as a logged-in user default. The limited part would be this; Regular
logged-in users would not be able to rollback edits made by other logged-in
users. But IPs would be fair game.
-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)
Payment for this post:
http://www.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Ruthenium&diff=463516&oldid=461…
PS IMO there already are way too many features available to the greenest of
newbies. It would be nice if we started off new accounts with basic features
and automatically added more features based on the number of edits that user
has made and the age of the user account (maybe have three feature-set
levels: novice, intermediate and old hand). I fear that having too many
features is intimidating to many non-technical new users. I'm also a wee bit
apprehensive that new users would abuse features we might otherwise want to
give to many users (such as the limited rollback feature described above).
However, after the Lir fiasco I'm no longer in favor of automatically granting
pure meta-level powers to users. Old hands can and should continue to ask and
be invited to ask about being Admins.
See:
http://www.reference.com/encyclopedia/
This is a new website, which does not apparently yet actually have a
reference look up (if you search from reference.com, you'll receive
dictionary.com results), but you'll notice that Wikipedia is listed among
the sources.
It seems likely that Reference.com will be using Wikipedia results at some
point soon, just as Dictionary.com uses free dictionaries. This will
have a probably small, but nonetheless important long-term impact on
public perception of Wikipedia. It'll be the first time a major website
actually uses Wikipedia articles.
Larry
--
"We have now sunk to a depth at which the re-statement of the obvious is
the first duty of intelligent men." --George Orwell
Do us all a favor, oh great public servant (sysop Tokerboy), and create a Wikipedia:Feature wishlist page. Then, volunteer to coordinate between the various mailing lists, source forge and that new page. You can hold votes and report results.
SourceForge is impractical for several reasons, and just posting to wikitech-l or to this mailing list just isn't good enough.
We need to keep better track of our open issues.
Ed Poor, aka Uncle Ed
Sounds good to me.
If all the non-English wikipedias want to swim in the same pool with the English wikipedia, why not? Why should there be barriers?
It reminds me of a joke: England and America are two peoples separated by a common language ;-)
I don't get it either!
Ed Poor
-----Original Message-----
From: Brion Vibber [mailto:brion@pobox.com]
Sent: Friday, December 06, 2002 3:39 PM
To: wikipedia-l; intlwiki-l(a)wikipedia.org
Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Wiki consolidation: Please base this on
commonproject goals
On Fri, 2002-12-06 at 10:55, Poor, Edmund W wrote:
> Why do you want all projects to share the same user database?
1) Common user database: single account/login for all languages and
meta, saving a lot of trouble for a lot of people
2) Common file upload area: don't have to copy 200 flag images over to X
wiki because they were put in an English-only section; they'll be
available to all
3) Common link database: *Much* easier to track interlanguage links (and
image files linked to from articles in the various languages), including
detection of nonexistent articles and automatic backlinking to the other
languages, even for articles that don't exist in the current language
but are linked to from others (eg, "no article on this topic is yet
available in Florthapian ([[create one now!]]), but it's available in
[[Upper Wuvian]] and [[Quenya]]")
4) As the number of languages running on the new server as separate
wikis increases, maintenance gets more difficult.
Please comment at:
http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thoughts_on_language_integration
-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
Wikipedia-l(a)wikipedia.org
http://www.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l