[WikiEN-l] WikiEN-l Digest, Vol 32, Issue 110

Thu Mar 16 15:20:08 UTC 2006

Concerning the WP:Office actions, I think we need to be very careful about
focusing so much on biographies.  Slander of Bill Gate is still slander
whether the offending text is contained at [[Bill Gates]] or [[Mircorsoft]]
or [[anti-IE]] or at [[bondage]].  The article may at first glance have
nothing to do with the target of the slander at all.

-Johntex

On 3/15/06, wikien-l-request at wikipedia.org <wikien-l-request at wikipedia.org>
wrote:
>
> Send WikiEN-l mailing list submissions to
>         wikien-l at Wikipedia.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>         http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>         wikien-l-request at Wikipedia.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>         wikien-l-owner at Wikipedia.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of WikiEN-l digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Re: more WP:OFFICE shenanigans (Kirill Lokshin)
>    2. Re: more WP:OFFICE shenanigans (Delirium)
>    3. Re: Too much agglomeration (Stan Shebs)
>    4. Re: more WP:OFFICE shenanigans (Kirill Lokshin)
>    5. Re: Too much agglomeration (The Cunctator)
>    6. Split tool? was Too much agglomeration (The Cunctator)
>    7. Re: Too much agglomeration (The Cunctator)
>    8. Cute mention in the NYT (The Cunctator)
>    9. Re: Retrieving article deleted for NN (Tony Sidaway)
>   10. Re: Retrieving article deleted for NN (Tony Sidaway)
>   11. Re: Retrieving article deleted for NN (The Cunctator)
>   12. Re: Retrieving article deleted for NN (Kat Walsh)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 19:57:55 -0500
> From: "Kirill Lokshin" <kirill.lokshin at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] more WP:OFFICE shenanigans
> To: "English Wikipedia" <wikien-l at wikipedia.org>
> Message-ID:
>         <3f797b9a0603151657h47a1da36ta4cf23eacd139009 at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> On 3/15/06, Kirill Lokshin <kirill.lokshin at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 3/15/06, Delirium <delirium at hackish.org> wrote:
> > > Why is it not a good comparison?  There are many people who would
> argue
> > > that Satanists are no better than Stormfront members (possibly worse,
> if
> > > you believe the network-TV exposes on "satanic cults").
> > >
> > > If indeed an individual keeps making superficially neutral edits that
> > > turn out not to be, then I would favor banning them---but *because of
> > > that*, not because they happen to be a neo-Nazi, or a pedophile, or a
> > > Satanist, or whatever the moral-panic-du-jour is.
> >
> > My point wasn't so much about the type of person editing (although an
> > argument can be made that our level of care here should be directly
> > proportional to the size and intensity of the pitchfork-wielding mob
> > after Jimbo if we screw up), but about the type of article.
> > Biographies, being highly susceptible to defamation and the like, are
> > of significantly less risk than articles on general topics.
> >
> > Are there some particular biographies where we should be wary of
> > Satanist manipulation?  ;-)
> >
> > Kirill Lokshin
>
> And that should be *more* risk, of course!
>
> Kirill Lokshin
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 20:03:53 -0500
> From: Delirium <delirium at hackish.org>
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] more WP:OFFICE shenanigans
> To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Message-ID: <4418B979.2090905 at hackish.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Kirill Lokshin wrote:
>
> >(although an
> >argument can be made that our level of care here should be directly
> >proportional to the size and intensity of the pitchfork-wielding mob
> >after Jimbo if we screw up)
> >
> That's actually what I'm afraid may be happening, at least in some cases.
>
> -Mark
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 17:10:02 -0800
> From: Stan Shebs <shebs at apple.com>
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Too much agglomeration
> To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l at Wikipedia.org>
> Message-ID: <4418BAEA.3080002 at apple.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
>
> The Cunctator wrote:
>
> >Someone please tell me how this article
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guantanamo_Bay_Naval_Base
> >
> >is better off not being broken up into separate entries.
> >
> Wow, it's sure grown since I looked at it last. I think it's ready
> to be its own project now - gitmo.wikimedia.org, complete with
> full bios of all the prisoners and all the guards, and entries
> like [[15 March 2006 at Gitmo]] to record the events of each day
> (only the *notable* events of course).
>
> Stan
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 20:48:50 -0500
> From: "Kirill Lokshin" <kirill.lokshin at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] more WP:OFFICE shenanigans
> To: "English Wikipedia" <wikien-l at wikipedia.org>
> Message-ID:
>         <3f797b9a0603151748x21e91f49r5e37542e5fee3b28 at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> On 3/15/06, Delirium <delirium at hackish.org> wrote:
> > Kirill Lokshin wrote:
> >
> > >(although an
> > >argument can be made that our level of care here should be directly
> > >proportional to the size and intensity of the pitchfork-wielding mob
> > >after Jimbo if we screw up)
> > >
> > That's actually what I'm afraid may be happening, at least in some
> cases.
>
> I don't think that's entirely a bad thing.  Unless we wish to ignore
> Wikipedia's reputation entirely, we should, within reason, avoid doing
> things likely to blow up in our face in a particluarly spectacular
> fashion.  Whether any particular issue _is_ likely to blow up is open
> for debate, of course; but we shouldn't pretend that any decisions we
> make will have no reprecussions in the outside world.
>
> Kirill Lokshin
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 21:10:14 -0500
> From: "The Cunctator" <cunctator at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Too much agglomeration
> To: "English Wikipedia" <wikien-l at wikipedia.org>
> Message-ID:
>         <dfd0b40603151810w4b0a9ff2paa6d522eb1550431 at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> On 3/15/06, Bryan Derksen <bryan.derksen at shaw.ca> wrote:
> > The Cunctator wrote:
> > > Someone please tell me how this article
> > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guantanamo_Bay_Naval_Base
> > >
> > > is better off not being broken up into separate entries.
> > >
> > I count four sections that are already broken off into separate entries:
> >
> > [[Camp Delta]]
> > [[Camp Iguana]]/
> > /[[Combatant Status Review Tribunal]]
> > [[Periodic Report of the United States of America to the United Nations
> > Committee Against Torture]]
> >
> > It looks like it could use more, though. Is anyone trying to stop you
> > from doing it? I don't see anything obvious in the history or talk pages
> > discussing this issue.
>
> No, I'm just whining. If the Naval Base section was broken off from
> the detention camp section i'd have less to complain about.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 21:19:11 -0500
> From: "The Cunctator" <cunctator at gmail.com>
> Subject: [WikiEN-l] Split tool? was Too much agglomeration
> To: "English Wikipedia" <wikien-l at wikipedia.org>,       "Wikimedia
>         developers" <wikitech-l at wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID:
>         <dfd0b40603151819p24e0fb79q219855128e10882a at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> After whining about [[Guantanamo Bay Naval Base]] I was wondering if
> it would be possible to develop a split or clone tool; like the move
> tool but would allow a new page to be generated with the same history
> as the other one.
>
> I hate copying off tons of text from GBNB and losing the history; with
> the clone/split tool I wouldn't have that problem. I'd think it would
> be comparatively easy to implement in some clever fashion ??
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 21:56:15 -0500
> From: "The Cunctator" <cunctator at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Too much agglomeration
> To: "English Wikipedia" <wikien-l at wikipedia.org>
> Message-ID:
>         <dfd0b40603151856y16c5b85dm64f21d2468493003 at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> On 3/15/06, The Cunctator <cunctator at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 3/15/06, Bryan Derksen <bryan.derksen at shaw.ca> wrote:
> > > The Cunctator wrote:
> > > > Someone please tell me how this article
> > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guantanamo_Bay_Naval_Base
> > > >
> > > > is better off not being broken up into separate entries.
> > > >
> > > I count four sections that are already broken off into separate
> entries:
> > >
> > > [[Camp Delta]]
> > > [[Camp Iguana]]/
> > > /[[Combatant Status Review Tribunal]]
> > > [[Periodic Report of the United States of America to the United
> Nations
> > > Committee Against Torture]]
> > >
> > > It looks like it could use more, though. Is anyone trying to stop you
> > > from doing it? I don't see anything obvious in the history or talk
> pages
> > > discussing this issue.
> >
> > No, I'm just whining. If the Naval Base section was broken off from
> > the detention camp section i'd have less to complain about.
> >
> Okay, I did a bit but there's still tons that needs to be broken off
> and better organized.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 22:00:29 -0500
> From: "The Cunctator" <cunctator at gmail.com>
> Subject: [WikiEN-l] Cute mention in the NYT
> To: "English Wikipedia" <wikien-l at wikipedia.org>
> Message-ID:
>         <dfd0b40603151900y555c0564xaac67f1419312844 at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> >From
> http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/12/sports/ncaabasketball/12bracket.html
>
> "Nowhere is the growth of the bracket's prestige more evident than
> with the proliferation of bracketology, a concept defined in
> Wikipedia, not Webster's."
>
> Just think that in a few generations "Wikipedia" will be the generic
> equivalent of "Webster's".
>
> Woot! (Again, defined in Wikipedia and probably not in Webster's.)
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 04:13:16 +0000
> From: "Tony Sidaway" <f.crdfa at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Retrieving article deleted for NN
> To: "English Wikipedia" <wikien-l at wikipedia.org>
> Message-ID:
>         <605709b90603152013p404f36f3i8611bb13450e1340 at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> On 3/15/06, Death Phoenix <originaldeathphoenix at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Me too. Basically, anyone listed in [[:Category: User undeletion]],
> which is
> > linked to {{user recovery}} (note: this is NOT a userbox).
>
> Oh yes it is!  It doesn't actually contain a table and there aren't
> any colors, but the purpose and usage are exactly the same.  Just
> because something doesn't *look* like a userbox, doesn't mean it isn't
> a userbox.  A the creator of that particular template, *I* should
> know.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 04:19:32 +0000
> From: "Tony Sidaway" <f.crdfa at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Retrieving article deleted for NN
> To: "English Wikipedia" <wikien-l at wikipedia.org>
> Message-ID:
>         <605709b90603152019t13b98d20p8488bae6ee07e7cc at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> I'd say that this article should *never* have been listed for
> deletion. As an article about a fairly longlived students' society
> with several established orchestras, bands and whatnot that have given
> public performances, it should have been merged to the parent article
> about the University.
>
> This is what is so frustrating about the deletion process.  Absence of
> thought is endemic.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 11
> Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 23:21:29 -0500
> From: "The Cunctator" <cunctator at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Retrieving article deleted for NN
> To: "English Wikipedia" <wikien-l at wikipedia.org>
> Message-ID:
>         <dfd0b40603152021l70df398fqf72ee3eaf4474216 at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> On 3/15/06, Steve Bennett <stevage at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hello all,
> >   An article dear to my heart (well, more an article about a subject
> > dear to my heart) has apparently recently deleted for non-notability.
> > Although I actually agree with that designation, I suddenly sympathise
> > with anyone who's had an article deleted! Particularly some of the
> > (good faith) remarks made on the AfD page like "Delete. It still
> > amazes me some of the topics that people think are notable." -
> >
> > Just wondering whether it's possible for me to get the content (and if
> > possible, history) of the article back? There are probably more
> > appropriate places to host it. Or maybe even trim it down and merge it
> > into some other article.
> >
> >
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Engineering_Music_Society
> >
> I'd just like to say I think it's pathetic this was deleted.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 12
> Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 23:22:20 -0500
> From: "Kat Walsh" <mindspillage at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Retrieving article deleted for NN
> To: "English Wikipedia" <wikien-l at wikipedia.org>
> Message-ID:
>         <8e253f560603152022m17daf352uc8c6c7d22b6ea76d at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> On 3/15/06, Steve Bennett <stevage at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hmm...now, re-reading the article (thanks very much Ben), I'm
> > wondering if the club *isn't* notable, as a community music group,
> > rather than as a university society. It's true, societies are a dime a
> > dozen. But community music groups that anyone can join (it's open to
> > non-students) are rare, and there can't be many of this size (around
> > 200 members). *thinking music*
>
> Community music groups that anyone can join are rare? I've only been a
> member of one with over 200 members, probably over 300 -- the others
> had about 80 -- but they weren't unusual and I wouldn't call any of
> them notable; they'd probably merit mention in the articles about the
> town or university they were based in, though.
>
> Not that I would nominate an article on one for deletion if it showed
> up, of course -- I'd leave that dirty work to someone else!
>
> -Kat
>
> --
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mindspillage | (G)AIM:LucidWaking
> "Once you have tasted flight you will always walk with your eyes cast
> upward. For there you have been and there you will always be."
> - Leonardo da Vinci
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
>
> End of WikiEN-l Digest, Vol 32, Issue 110
> *****************************************
>