Jimbo will be appearing at a cyberlaw talk at Harvard Law School today at
4:30pm ET.
My hope, with the help of several other students, is to stream his
discussion. Shortly before 4:30, we will post a link to the stream and Q&A
related to his talk at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Jimbo_Wales_discussion_at_Harvard_Law
_School%2C_April_25%2C_2005
My apologies if this announcement wasn't posted to the proper mailing list.
I'm just trying to get the word out.
Best,
Scott
I have been amazed at the passions that were stirred up when I proposed that we distribute free fonts.
There have been two types of reaction: Point to a source that has a partial solution, sometimes for money and bickering about the level of handholding that a user may need.
As there is not one golden solution, it is not simple to say spend $$ and you are ready.
It can also become part of the installation of software that goes with a DVD for of-line use. When having enough fonts is needed for the best wikipedia experience, why wouldn't we give a helping hand to our current users and help them in this way ??
Thanks,
Gerard
I'd like to announce a new mediawiki-based project called Wikicompany:
http://www.wikicompany.org (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikicompany)
The goal is to create a community built, worldwide, business directory,
licensed under the GNU FDL license (with some exceptions for images).
More can be read in the Wikicompany introduction page:
http://wikicompany.org/wiki/Wikicompany:Wikicompany
Currently I'm working to get all the Wikipedia company articles into
Wikicompany. Most of the European articles are now inserted.
There are already some articles on Wikicompany which aren't in WP, and
over time this will increase, as most companies in the world are not
really encyclopedia worthy. I hope there can be a healthy symbiosis between
the company articles on WP and those on Wikicompany.
Comments and remarks are welcome on the Wikicompany mailing list
(https://lists.wikicompany.org/listinfo/wikicompany-list) or on
on the Wiki (eg. at: http://wikicompany.org/wiki/Wikicompany:Ideas)
File downloads (including DB dumps) will be made available on:
http://debianlinux.net/wikicompany/
regards,
Jama Poulsen
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
You can mow add to Encarta articles online. After a review by the M$
staff, your edit may be added to the Encarta.
That's so great about Microsoft - they alway invent new things! :-)
http://developers.slashdot.org/developers/05/04/08/1658247.shtml?tid=109&ti…
Magnus
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFCVs0eCZKBJbEFcz0RApfKAJ9mKxwBxmmTl30y1kfeKOXyhhELWACdFhTw
tWg+rfeTHa7aCEWHfuifrwY=
=5pHl
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Hi - I need your help (whoever you are)
I am trying to write a html email which will be used as the release
message for Quarto. Work in progress, ie the html code can be seen at:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:WQ#Publicising_Quarto_by_html_email
The text I'm using at the moment is a straight copy from the meta
release message page:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Translation_requests/WQ/2/Release_message
My problem is that, working with Dreamweaver on a Mac (OSX), I can't
get non-English or non-Roman - specifically Japanese - characters to
work in my version. I have copied the source code from the page as
well as the display text (and edit-mode text). I have tried copying
the text with text encoding changed on my browser (Safari) - Ascander
even copied the Japanese text with different coding (?) into the page
but none of these work. I can copy Japanese etc. text into Word and
Text Edit, but for some reason, I cannot then get these to save and
display the file as a normal html file that opens and functions
properly in a browser. Simple text is the only program that does this
for me but it doesn't seem to support non-English/Roman script :(
Can anyone help me with this predicament? If you can, can you spell it
out in nice and easy steps? Also, if you have a comment to make on the
mail itself, you could go to the quarto-l mailing list - I have only
posted here as I haven't found any absolute solutions there.
Thanks
Cormac
I thought I was seeing things, but sure enough:
lynx http://en.wikipedia.org
'Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1'
Is there a plan to migrate all wikis to utf-8? at the very least it
makes writing interwiki links a major pain. For now I seem to be able
to just force my browser (Safari) to utf-8 long enough to type the
interwiki links.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Special_characters#Unicode
If this is documented/discussed/argued somewhere else, let me know.
I'm asking here from a policy point of view. Is there a better
solution?
Thanks,
[[w:mt:User:Srl]]
And a big thank you to all who work on this project. It's amazing how
well the tools work from a community point of view. I think
mt.wikipedia.org is set to have a major and positive impact on the
Maltese language online, possibly offline as well.
Grazzi Ħafna lilkom minn qalbi.
Hey folks -
I'm pitching an idea for a postmodern wikipedia. What I mean by that is
that there are multiple concurrent versions of an article. Instead of a
zero-sum game where only one text can inhabit a title at any time, a
user can choose from different branches. The user basis this decision on
who the authors are, and how many people agree with the text.
A PGP sign-off system will keep track of who wrote what, and who agrees
with it. Authors who have had a lot of people sign off on their word
will get bonus scores on their texts, and articles that well-reputed
authors sign off on will get also get bonus scores.
A 'troll pit' of low-rated articles by low-rated authors will be
automatically filtered from casual browsers.
The immediate wikipedia problems that this solves are:
- Edit wars. This is common with articles covering controversial
topics, such as abortion. Proponents of different truths will build and
maintain their side of the story, including counter arguments, instead
of trying to destroy the other side. There is no negative sign-off, so
the only thing the article measures is how many people agree with it,
not how many disagree.
- Graffiti. Small, hard-to-detect changes to articles will not be
signed off on by many people, so they will not survive a reputation
filter. Those branches will go into the troll pit.
- Trolling. See graffiti. Giving a definition of trolling that makes it
distinguishable from grafitti is left as an exercise for the reader.
- Lack of attribution.With a PGP sign-off system, articles can be
attributed to authors, even if they are anonymous.
- Public perception. The steady maintenance of well-respected articles
by reputable authors will make wikipedia a trusted source of information.
Message: 10
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 12:16:46 -0400
From:
Subject: RE: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Sanger's memoirs
To:
Message-ID: <000001c545c4$5fc48b70$830ffea9@ls>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Jimmy wrote:
> I'll just restate my point, which is that the first person to
> propose that we move to a wiki system to resolve the problems
> of Nupedia was Jeremy Rosenfeld.
What does "propose" mean, then? I suppose you mean he mentioned such an
idea to you. Well, so what? That didn't lead to the creation of Wikipedia,
did it? You're implying that it did. But it didn't.
I mention *all sorts* of ideas to other people, and other people have
mentioned zillions of ideas to me. This doesn't make any such person,
somehow, "the first person to propose" the idea, in the sense of being
creditable with formulating the project that actually came into being.
And why, again, Jimmy, did you take four years to mention this, if it's
worth mentioning at all? Why did you never tell me, or Wikipedians, before?
Why is it worth mentioning just now?
> I just think this is an
> interesting bit of historical trivia which in no way detracts
> from your _causal_ role in the founding of Wikipedia.
But to say that Jeremy Rosenfeld was "the first person to propose" a wiki
encyclopedia is precisely to imply, isn't it, that he played the seminal
causal role in founding Wikipedia--which is just false. It isn't just
"another perspective."
> (And of course you never opposed _neutrality_, my point was
> that you never were happy with NPOV _as a technical term to
> describe a social concept of co-operation_. You said so
> yourself the other day, and I think that's great.)
The social concept of co-operation was always my idea of the purpose of the
neutrality policy, as well. That was quite explicit in Nupedia's policy
statement, drafted by me, as well as the longer statement of Wikipedia's
policy on the NPOV page, which I drafted.
I disagree with the exact formulation of the words, "the neutral point of
view." I personally advocated everything else about the policy, more
strenuously than anyone else did; and if I had not done so, Wikipedia might
not now be committed to its neutrality policy.
> I apologize most sincerely if my saying so has upset you; it
> was not my intention.
You don't need to apologize, condescendingly, for upsetting me, Jimmy;
obviously, that's just a further insult, as it puts attention on the fact
that I am upset. Sure I am. Kind of you to observe that. If I were to
say, "Jimmy really had nothing to do with Wikipedia. When I asked him to,
he compliantly set up a wiki, and I proceeded to do virtually everything to
get the project started and set it up to become a success; he was on the
sidelines most of the time; and, of course, he paid me"--you would be upset,
too, I suspect. But I do not say this, out of respect.
I am upset, and also disappointed and severely disillusioned. But if for
anything, you need to apologize for implying something false, which, if
passed around much, would create entirely the wrong impression among your
many admirers in the Wikimedia community: "The original idea for a wiki for
Wikipedia was not proposed by Larry, but by Jeremy Rosenfeld." That's an
apology that I would find valuable.
I see that someone has already made use of your declaration to say something
completely wrong on my Wikipedia user page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Larry_Sanger
I expect that your perfectly innocent comment will now be repeated, with
perfect innocence, to journalists. Then this and other such historical
revisionism on your part will help ensure that I will in the future be
portrayed as (1) not the person who came up with the idea of Wikipedia, (2)
merely and singlehandedly responsible for the "miserable failure" that was
Nupedia, and who was fired because it was a failure, (3) on Wikipedia,
merely an employee taking orders and not really responsible for any of the
policy of the project, (4) opposed to an open project altogether, and (5)
opposed to neutrality. That, at least, is how it seems some of my
detractors want me to be portrayed, even though my memoir shows every part
of it to be outrageously false.
And after this, instead of treating me as a person with a legitimate,
well-founded complaint, I imagine that you will respond by implying that I
am "upset," and that you "apologize that I am upset." That's mighty big of
you, Jimmy.
--Larry
The memoir's location again:
http://features.slashdot.org/features/05/04/18/164213.shtmlhttp://features.slashdot.org/features/05/04/19/1746205.shtml
I was just wondering, coming in cold and knowing bugger all about anything, but wouldn't there exist documentation, like internal memos, minutes, or whatever the company/firm/sweatshop used in its day to day business dealings and communications. Or was this some casual chit chat standing around the water cooler with everyone saying: great idea! Drop everything and get to it. Or did it occur during a 5 minute smoko break - or maybe walking back together with your cups of latte from the local stucko bucko thingo, etc. Or maybe you were all having lunch at Antonio's and you had a mouthful of focaccia and no one heard you...
pippu
---------------------------------
Nuovo Yahoo! Messenger E' molto più divertente: Audibles, Avatar, Webcam, Giochi, Rubrica Scaricalo ora!
Could somebody block this troll from this list? What he just wrote does not
even merit reply.
-- mav
--- Mark Williamson <node.ue(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Oh, come on.
>
> > For the entire history of Bomis from day one until the current day, the
> > percentage of revenue that comes from adult businesses has been under
> > 10%. The bulk of the revenue of Bomis today comes from advertising
> > syndicated from Google; in the past it was at various times Overture and
> > NBCi which provided the bulk of the revenue.
>
> "Under 10%" is code language for "Over 5%". Bomis is easily
> "legitimised" by adding tonnes of search-engine sponsored results,
> directory type stuff, syndicated adds, and the like, just to 'balance
> out' the pornographic content.
>
> Many pornographic websites which are more explicitly pornographic than
> Bomis also have a search engine/syndicated advertising 'front', from
> which they derive the majority of their revenue, but...
>
> > Far from being a "secret", Bomis is a public website that anyone can
> > look at anytime they like. If Bomis is pornography so is much of what
> > happens in R rated movies.
>
> I never said Bomis was a secret. I simply said that the fact that
> Bomis peddles pornography, and that the history of Wikipedia is
> intricately intertwined with Bomis, is kept a secret of sorts. Read
> the Wikipedia articles on the issue, you will not see much mention of
> pornography, but go to #wikipedia on freenode and you will hear a much
> different story.
>
> And I remind you that in many R-rated movies, there are... well, you
> can find that information at Wikipedia.
>
> > Bomis _is_ a brand which is very different from the Wikipedia brand,
> > which is why I have always insisted on keeping the two very separate.
>
> Yes, but is not Bomis the ultimate origin of Nupedia which is the
> ultimate origin of Wikipedia? You have said many things in this
> discussion confirming that Nupedia and at first Wikipedia were both
> Bomis projects. Sure, there was never a sign posted at Wikipedia that
> said "Come Buy Porn from Bomis!", but the fact that much of the
> funding for Wikipedia comes directly or indirectly (ie, through you
> and other donors who profit from Bomis) from a business which makes
> "less than 10%" of its revenue through pornography.
>
> So while in your mind they may be very seperate, this is not something
> that everybody follows along with, similar to your delusion that you
> aren't a sort of god-king but rather just a sort of "amicus
> vicipaedii" who is respected so much people tend to do what you say. I
> hope that eventually you will catch on to the reality of the issue -
> what real people actually really think, their real motivations rather
> than those you imagine for them, and that what people think and what
> you would like people to think are often very different.
>
> Mark
>
> --
> SI HOC LEGERE SCIS NIMIVM ERVDITIONIS HABES
> QVANTVM MATERIAE MATERIETVR MARMOTA MONAX SI MARMOTA MONAX MATERIAM
> POSSIT MATERIARI
> ESTNE VOLVMEN IN TOGA AN SOLVM TIBI LIBET ME VIDERE
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l(a)Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
I was looking at wikipedia-l to see how the community might react to my
memoir. I haven't been subscribed for three years. But seeing Jimmy's
comment impelled me to rejoin the list, for the sole purpose of confirming
what has been on record for five years.
Jimmy wrote:
> The original idea for a wiki for Wikipedia was not proposed by Larry,
> but by Jeremy Rosenfeld.
Who is Jeremy Rosenfeld? I'm afraid I don't remember, but I don't have a
very good memory for names. Was he one of the people doing link weeding for
Bomis?
I remember very clearly the evening when I got the idea for Wikipedia. It
was January 2 and Ben Kovitz and I were eating at a Mexican restaurant just
around the corner from the old Bomis office. (I could point out the place,
if it still exists, but I forget the name.) Ben no doubt remembers it as
well, because I told him almost immediately after he explained the concept
of a wiki to me that it would be interesting to consider building a more
free-wheeling encyclopedia project using a wiki. I told him that, even as
we were still eating dinner. I remember writing a wiki encyclopedia
proposal soon after I got home, I think that very night; I remember you
saying that you liked the idea and that you'd set up the wiki. That would
have been January 3. I think you (or maybe it was Jason Richey) actually
put the wiki online either that day or the next. I think it was that very
day, because I remember being happy that the thing had been set up so
quickly. Over the next few days I started populating the wiki with the
basic pages, and pitched the idea to Nupedia.
If Jeremy Rosenfeld told you about wikis, or suggested that wiki software
could be used to run a wiki encyclopedia, you certainly never told *me*
that; and in any case, it was not Jeremy Rosenfeld's conversation with you,
but instead mine, that actually caused the precursor of Wikipedia to come
into existence on January 3 or 4. I know how Wikipedia was originated,
since, well, I did the origination. Moreover, I came up with the name for
the project and shepherded it very closely from then through its first year.
Do you deny these claims, Jimmy?
If not, then what you say is simply false, is it not?--That "The original
idea for a wiki for Wikipedia was not proposed by Larry, but by Jeremy
Rosenfeld."
I just don't know what you could possibly thinking. Why don't you clarify
for the list what you meant, precisely, in light of the facts as I have
presented them? Surely you're not accusing *me* of having lied since
practically the beginning of the project? Because, as you know, the above
story has been the official story of the origin of the idea for Wikipedia
since the beginning of the project. Why would you take five years to "set
the record straight" and thereby accuse me of having been a liar all that
time?
--Larry