WikiEN-l May 2003

wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org

74 participants
283 discussions

(no subject)
by Dante Alighieri 20 May '03

20 May '03

Hello out there in WikiEN-l land... I've been futzing around the W now for some time and I think it might be time to try my hand at being an administrator if no one else objects. I can't promise to be half as prolific or attentive as Mav149, but then, who can. :) So, this is a formal request for Wikipedia Administrator privileges for my humble self. ----- Dante Alighieri dalighieri(a)digitalgrapefruit.com "The darkest places in hell are reserved for those who maintain their neutrality in times of great moral crisis." -Dante Alighieri, 1265-1321

1 0

Re: photographs and POV
by koyaanis qatsi 20 May '03

20 May '03

John Owens writes: >Did anyone bother to notice that I did NOT say that >photographs were NPOV, or very NPOV? :-\ Well, I noticed that you said "So, umm, just what opinions does a photograph have? As long as they aren't doctored or staged, photographs are about as NPOV as it gets around here. You _can_ make a POV photograph, but you have to try. The inclusion or not is where the POV usually starts to creep in. And it seems to be trying to do so now." It sounds to me--and apparently I've misunderstood this--as if you are saying that photographs are inherently NPOV unless they are doctored or staged. It sounds to me as if you are also saying that it takes effort to make an undoctored photograph which is POV. Failing to disagree with you respectfully the last time, I will disagree with you respectfully now. I would argue that taking a POV photograph is a function of having a camera. But perhaps I've misunderstood what you mean, again, which I seem wont to do. If so, please explain how. best, kq __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo. http://search.yahoo.com

1 0

Re: votes for deletion
by koyaanis qatsi 20 May '03

20 May '03

LittleDan writes: < reminds us of #14, not a place to dump public domain materials > >We shouldn't copy content from public domain sources, >only the information from them. Are you saying we shouldn't copy in information from public domain resources, and if so, why are you saying that? Copying in public information has been very useful in building up the country articles--all of them are based on CIA information, with many of them supplemented with information from the State Department. There is no harm in that. Similarly, some but not all of the biographical entries come from public domain resources. The problem with public domain sources is not that they are public domain, but that copyright has far extended any sort of reasonable limit and has turned into a system for controlling culture in perpetuity. In less ideological terms, what that means is that nearly everything post 1920s is *not* in the public domain, so the information you can glean from public domain resources typically predates that and so is often anachronistic to the point of being useless. This was the case with the information on [[Algeria]] from the 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica, which took me several hours to verify, and even then I got no more than a few paragraphs from it. Similarly, this was the problem with the various instructions someone was uploading about e.g. how to swim, as well as the recipes from the 1800s and early 1900s, referring to ingredients, methods, and measurements that often had not been in use for decades. Often the material in old biographical entries is laden with various cultural assumptions which are incorrect or downright embarassing. Anyway, that is the background behind #14. It's not an absolute--or at least it shouldn't be--it's a warning: know what you're in for, and be prepared to do a lot of work. kq __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo. http://search.yahoo.com

2 1

censorship
by Daniel Ehrenberg 19 May '03

19 May '03

I wrote: > [ ] Censor inapropriate content But I meant > [ ] Censor obscene content or > [ ] Censor content that may be considered obscene. As for the category scheme that Eloquence suggested (but I accidentally deleted the email) I think that would be a great idea, but it would require too much work. I've always wanted a category scheme, even a rough one like in the esperanto wiki, and your suggestion would work out well. I just think that if we set our goals too high, we'll never complete them (though I suppose Wikipedia is in defiance of this). --LittleDan __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo. http://search.yahoo.com

5 9

minimum stub length.
by Daniel Ehrenberg 19 May '03

19 May '03

I think we should institute a minimum length for all new stub pages. There are many pages that are only one sentence, but I don't know enough about the topic to add more information. (the one I came across was [[GDM]]). I think we should make a rule that all stubs should be at least three sentences long. That way, we won't have as many really short stubs around. We could build this into the software that there must be three periods (at least) in every entry. To go further, if we really wanted to, we could say that if an entry has no periods (a vandal probably made it) then instead of giving an error message, it would just show the page (once) as if it would look if it were saved but really not save it. Most vandals (not trolls) just write one simple phrase of babble on a non-existant page once, and it is soon deleted, but we could automate this. --LittleDan __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo. http://search.yahoo.com

5 10

Re: vandalism
by koyaanis qatsi 19 May '03

19 May '03

I wrote: >I didn't realize what a thoroughly stupid idea the >IP/block login idea was until you mentioned all um, that was meant to be a private message to Brion. kq __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo. http://search.yahoo.com

1 0

Re: vandalism
by koyaanis qatsi 19 May '03

19 May '03

Brion wrote: >My apologies if I sounded a little rude. It's not a problem. Most of us have been rude on occasion, and I'm no exception. :-/ kq __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo. http://search.yahoo.com

1 0

Re: WikiEN-l digest, Vol 1 #360 - 17 msgs
by koyaanis qatsi 19 May '03

19 May '03

Brion: > Well, I'm sure that the numerous AOL users > and others using major ISPs will be thrilled > to see the wiki is "broken" after some idiot > wrote "u r al gay" in one page and got the > dynamic IP permanently banned. Hello? That's why I asked if it was something we wanted to consider. Apparently it's not. Thanks for explaining. kq __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo. http://search.yahoo.com

2 1

re: vandalism
by koyaanis qatsi 19 May '03

19 May '03

I didn't realize what a thoroughly stupid idea the IP/block login idea was until you mentioned all the people that would be trying to tell you that the server is broken. Sorry about that. kq __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo. http://search.yahoo.com

1 0

Re: vandalism
by koyaanis qatsi 19 May '03

19 May '03

Erik: > That's what I've been trying to tell you: > WE HAVEN'T BANNED HIS IP ADDRESS. Please > read my earlier mails again. thanks for shouting. it's all perfectly clear now. kq __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo. http://search.yahoo.com

1 0

← Newer
1
...
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
...
29
Older →

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

WikiEN-l May 2003