WikiEN-l June 2003

wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org

77 participants
271 discussions

Apology accepted kils
by uwe kils 03 Jun '03

03 Jun '03

Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] please appologize from kils Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2003 17:57:32 -0700 From: Jimmy Wales <jwales(a)bomis.com> Reply-To: wikien-l(a)wikipedia.org To: wikien-l(a)wikipedia.org References: 1 Apology accepted. I encourage you to join us in a discussion of how to deal with sensitive topics. It's not an easy question. ------------------- Dear Jimmy, dear wikipedians, thank you very much for accepting. Please allow me to suggest that you please delete our user viking and vikings from the English, German and Danish and Norwegian and Swedish sites. We meant it only good and work for education, we took your inivtations to edit and try the possibilities out serious. We never thaught seriously that the edit with the "viking fist" from an anonymous user would survive more than a few seconds. Your system works and it works very democratic, which I admire, and which I counted on. I offer also that you please delete also the user kils from the same sites. After a while I maybe log in again and offer content under a new username for your editing. sincerely yours and best wishes Uwe Kils

1 0

naming convention for birds
by daniwo59＠aol.com 03 Jun '03

03 Jun '03

Where was the discussion for the naming convention for animals. A new user is reverting the Canada goose, and I really don't want to get into that whole fight again. Danny

4 4

Conflict (band) discography
by Graham Burnett 03 Jun '03

03 Jun '03

> > We revert Michael's edits, but we don't delete a page > just because he edited it and his name'll be in the history. > Quercusrobur should have erased Michael's discography > when (or better, before, to keep things separated out) > he put in his own text, You are right, I should have done. In the event I decided to redo the discography from scratch rather than check for Michael's accuracy or otherwise and didn't even refer to it, so subtle are some of his 'mistakes' and 'mis-information' (I must admit that at first I gave the Michael version Conflict discography a quick scan through and thought, 'hmmm that looks about right' and left it without applying the rigour I would have applied to any alterations to the Crass discography (where I would KNOW of any errors straight away)). Lesson learned. Graham Burnett (Quercus robur) PS. I've been thinking about applying for sysop editing access purely in order to be able to delete junk entries without having to put them on 'votes for deletion' and saving some work and hassle for someone else. But I'm keen to avoid the 'politics' of sysop-hood, I have enough of those sort of hassles in real life!

1 0

/ban pages (was re: Viking ban)
by martin＠myreddice.freeserve.co.uk 03 Jun '03

03 Jun '03

Jimbo said: "I, too, object strongly to this practice of creating '/ban' pages as a place to complain about people. It seems likely to escalate a conflict rather than to resolve it." response copied to [[meta:talk:bans and blocks]], for those who miss the "edit this page" button. I know I do. :-) Can we, between ourselves, find a better solution than /ban pages? Prior to my (groundbreaking ;-) creation of the first ever /ban page, best practice seemed to edit [[wikipedia:annoying users]], [[wikipedia:vandalism in progress]], [[user talk:USER NAME]], [[wikipedia:village pump]], any and all talk pages for articles that the user in question had edited, various talk pages of interested sysops ("I think it's Fred", "I agree - it's Fred", "It's definitely Fred!", etc), and also to make long posts to the mailing list in which one is either "shocked", "appalled", or (ideally) "shocked and appalled". My desires were: * Single place for discussion - if I want to know "Why was Fred banned?", I should be able to go to *one* Wikipedia page, read it, and be enlightened. * Avoid/discourage redundant discussions * Ability to refactor away redundancy * Ability to delete page when a banned user is reinstated, or when calls for banning subside and the sweet voice of reason prevails Alternatives I can think of immediately: * Do it on the user talk page * Have a different name for the page (eg /complaints, /problems, ...) * Do it on a subpage of [[wikipedia:annoying users]] (eg [[wikipedia:annoying users/Fred]]) -Martin "Never met a vandal he didn't like" Harper (aka MyRedDice)

5 4

JTDirl sysop issue
by Dante Alighieri 02 Jun '03

02 Jun '03

For what it's worth, I support JTDirl as a sysop. I don't think that JTD was being rude to FB on his page, I think that perhaps FB isn't looking at it in the same light that it was intended. On a side note, even if it WAS rude, if ever being rude was a valid reason to deny someone sysop status, then a WHOLE bunch of sysops are in SERIOUS trouble. lol (laughing out loud, remember? You DID go read [[leet]], didn't you?) ----- 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

5 7

Lir has something to say about Jtdirl
by Adam von 02 Jun '03

02 Jun '03

Jtdirl stated: Most academics on reading what [Fred Bauder] was writing would have binned it or given it an 'f' grade. Jtdirl then stated: It would be nice for once Fred showed even the slightest willingness to work with me, rather than stooping to personal abuse, slander and defamation. This is the sort of hypocrisy that us "troll vandals from hell" are referring to when we speak of the cabal and its disinformation and blatant lying. It is absurd beyond belief that this sort of behavior continues. What next? Will Fred be the next vandal troll from hell? Almost certainly he is next on their hit list. Let me say: It would be nice for once if Jtdirl showed even the slightest willingness to work with me (or anyone else outside of his tight clique of Tannin, mav, zoe, 172, & co), rather than stooping to personal abuse, slander and defamation - something which he manages to do in nearly everything he writes. --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).

3 2

Kils sysop status temporarily revoked
by erik_moeller＠gmx.de 02 Jun '03

02 Jun '03

I have temporarily revoked Kils' sysop status on en:, someone with developer status on de: may want to do the same. Explanation: In the last few days, a user named "Viking" has vandalized/downsized a couple of articles he considered "indecent" (especially the [[fisting]] article), threatened people not to question what he is doing if they didn't have "administrator status" and then left (there was a brief discussion of a possible ban). Kils subsequently deleted Viking's user and talk pages and explained it was an "experiment of his children". I asked him for details, he responded and then *deleted his talk page* before I could read his response. I restored the talk page and there was the following response. ----------------------- Eloquence: I confirm this - I do not think any had the quality of vandlism, otherwise I would have stepped in. We were concerned that a "handbook type" with direct instructions to certain practises on certain pages was endangering the reputation of wikipeia and of us as visible contributers and cooperators. A first thing many teachers and professors for example do, before they endorse or use a web based project in class or with students/parents, is to search for ugly content within. And there was some, and as we were supported by responses of colleagues with the right background it was beyond the rules of wikipedia - young vikings are often of very spontaneous mannors, I advised them to do things different, but then we are also very democratic. they plan to do it different now - we could have done everything anonymous, but we did not - from that you can deduct that we all are interested in communication and construction - we are all astonished how much time you spent in the wikipedia project (Anerkennung!) you seem to need only very little sleep - best greetings across the ocean (from the USA) from uwe kils - user Kils 18:50 31 May 2003 (UTC) ----------------------- It seems quite clear that Uwe Kils shares Viking's standard of "decency" regarding Wikipedia articles and feels that material e.g. about specific sexual practices is inappropriate. In light of his actions, I do not trust him to be a sysop anymore. In spite of my objections, this should normally go through discussion first before the status is revoked, but I am worried that Kils might delete more pages, and it seemed like an appropriate safety measure. I also wanted to allow others to take a look at his user talk page to have a track record, and this was not possible with him being a sysop, because then I could not protect the page or stop him from deleting it. If anyone feels that Kils must be a sysop again, please post. Regards, Erik

8 18

Tuf-Kat's nice gift
by Julie Kemp 02 Jun '03

02 Jun '03

Dear Tuf-Kat - Thanks so much for the lovely gift. I hope you have fun on your travels and are able to keep in touch. Sadly, however, I must allow that, although I often feel like I look like Charlize Theron, the truth is somewhat more strong-featured and European-looking. Oh, and I must say that Kemp is not my maiden name. Still, you totally made my day, dude! Take care, and I hope the others liked their presents, too! Julie

1 0

Jtdirl is now a sysop
by erik_moeller＠gmx.de 02 Jun '03

02 Jun '03

With Jimbo's approval, Jtdirl (James Duffy) is now a sysop. <bias>I'm sure he'll be a great addition to the team.</bias> Regards, Erik

1 0

Regarding Advertising on Wikipedia
by Tony Wilson 02 Jun '03

02 Jun '03

LittleDan wrote: >Why does everyone oppose advertizing? I it's descrete enough, it's not intrusive and doesn't lower our credibility. I'll give you 10 reasons. 1: Because there is absolutely NOTHING you can do to stop a link between advertising and influence/control over content establishing itself. 2: Because in the post hi-tech stock market crash environment, on-line advertising rates often don't even pay for the bandwidth the ads consume. 3: Because the small number of advertisers remaining take advantage of the buyers' market to demand (and get) unacceptable types of advertising, involving one or more usually all of the folowing obnoxious things: pop-ups, data-mining cookies, Shockwave, and Flash 4: Because users have to pay per MB bandwidth charges to look at ads they don't want to see. 5: Because many of our best contributors will walk out in disgust 6: Because a lot of contrbutors are doing a lot of hard work to create a non-commercial resource of real value. If someone comes along and says, "oh no, all those countless hours you donated to a free comunity project, well, one day I'm going to turn around and use your sweat to make a dollar" then my contribution stops right here and right now. Ditto for a lot of other people. And if Jimbo pulls the pin one day and we need money to keep going, then I'll put my hand in my pocket and help out. Better yet, I'll just provide the hardware, and let some other people pitch in to provide the bandwidth. (I own a computer shop: I have any amount of hardware.) 7: Because a site that carries advertising, even if i is still run on a non-profit basis, would find it much more difficult to persuade people to release material to it, in particular images. 8: Because the relentless urge some people have to commercialise every last damn thing on the planet is personally offensive: to me, and to a great many other people - especially the sort of people who love Wikipedia 9: Because this is an encyclopedia, not a second-rate imitation of Encarta 10: Just because Tannin

3 2

Jump to page:

2025

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 June 2003