WikiEN-l June 2005

wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org

137 participants
234 discussions

apology to the list
by michaelturley＠myway.com 23 Jun '05

23 Jun '05

It was recently pointed out to me how poorly formated my messages are when they appear in the digest and archive versions of this list. I was unaware of this problem. I am considering changing email providers for the address I use to subscribe to this list. Until I change my email address, I will manually break my lines so they don't scroll rightward toward infinity. I hope this helps. I apologize for any inconvenience you may have had while reading my prior messages. Michael Turley User:Unfocused _______________________________________________ No banners. No pop-ups. No kidding. Make My Way your home on the Web - http://www.myway.com

1 0

Re: WikiEN-l Digest, Vol 23, Issue 93
by AssCoAssc＠aol.com 23 Jun '05

23 Jun '05

In a message dated 6/23/05 9:03:37 AM, wikien-l-request(a)Wikipedia.org writes: > It's not like I'd attempt to use USian rather than the ambiguous, but > near-universally used, "American" in a Wikipedia article (although if > I needed unambiguousness, I would use "U.S." and a suitable sentence > wording). > I'm glad you intend to use abbreviations, grammar and syntax when you need "unambiguousness". . . .

1 0

Re: WikiEN-l Digest, Vol 23, Issue 92
by AssCoAssc＠aol.com 23 Jun '05

23 Jun '05

In a message dated 6/23/05 3:39:20 AM, wikien-l-request(a)Wikipedia.org writes: > Just wanted to note how ironic it is to see an argument against BCE/CE, > based on the universal use of BC/AD, while simultaneously using the term > non-USian in place of the similarly universal term non-American. > These arguments stem from an "un-secularianish" agenda.

1 0

Re: WikiEN-l Digest, Vol 23, Issue 90
by AssCoAssc＠aol.com 23 Jun '05

23 Jun '05

In a message dated 6/22/05 4:35:06 PM, wikien-l-request(a)Wikipedia.org writes: > But yes, I agree, language changes - the point is, the use of > CE/BCE notation is a POV term like all the others whose time of being > considered better than any others has not yet come, and may indeed never do > so. > Sounds like original research "whose time of being has not yet come." Let's brush up on the sentence structure.

1 0

A new tool being used to encourage wikipedia participation
by Tom Steinberg 23 Jun '05

23 Jun '05

Hello Everyone, I am the director of the charitable organisation mySociety, part of the UK's 'civic hacking' scene. I am writing because last week we launched a new site which some of our users have already turned towards helping both Wikipedia and Project Gutenberg: http://www.pledgebank.com/gutenberg (and more modestly) http://www.pledgebank.com/wikipediapage As you can see PledgeBank works by helping to reassure people that if they choose to do something of altruistic value, they won't be left doing it all on their own, effectively wasting their effort. PledgeBank could be a handy tool for building critical mass around new WikiUniverse projects, especially potentially niche ones. i.e, you can say you'll only start when enough people have signed up, like this guy is doing here: http://www.pledgebank.com/parking Anyway, that's all from me. If you've any thoughts, questions or comments, please get in touch. all the best, Tom Steinberg -- Director, mySociety 07811 082158 www.pledgebank.com

1 0

Re: Content, reason and the ArbCom
by Michael Snow 23 Jun '05

23 Jun '05

Zoney wrote: >Most importantly, the whole BCE/CE thing is a POV lobby. It's nonsense >to suggest that changing a very common phrase in the English language, >hitherto used near-universally, is "neutral". > >Now Wikipedia with NPOV policy certainly has to avoid siding with >different POVs - but surely to use BCE/CE notation at all is indeed >siding with a POV. Does every POV have to be accommodated on *some* >articles in order to have NPOV? > >Surely sticking to BC/AD, as has been used for centuries and centuries >in the English language (almost certainly the vast majority using it >without religious or political intent), is the most sensible option? > >Wikipedia's ridiculous pandering to all the extremist POVs is not a >good way to ensure NPOV in my opinion, and seriously dints its >credability. > >I suspect many have no idea how absurd it appears to a non-USian to >see BCE/CE spreading across Wikipedia > Just wanted to note how ironic it is to see an argument against BCE/CE, based on the universal use of BC/AD, while simultaneously using the term non-USian in place of the similarly universal term non-American. --Michael Snow

2 1

RickK deleted his talk page
by Rhobite 23 Jun '05

23 Jun '05

RickK has deleted his own talk page. I think it should be undeleted, and RickK should be de-sysop'ed. Rhobite

8 13

Newpages and rc patrollers needed
by fun＠thingy.apana.org.au 23 Jun '05

23 Jun '05

Position vacant: WIKI ANGEL OF DEATH. Low pay, fantastic opportunities, lots of cookies *. Requires: immaculate judgement, sharp scythe, efficient attitude. Automatically pissing off querulous idiots advantageous. Apply at Special:Recentchanges or Special:Newpages. With RickK taking (what is hopefully just) a rest, we need admins manning the pumps.People think of me as an ardent inclusionist, but I don't think anyone can call themselves an "ardent inclusionist" after doing Newpages patrol. About 20-40%, depending on time of day, will be immediately speedyable. Really, about 20-40%. You'll gain a deep and personal insight into what makes someone into an axewielding deletionist. ("HITLER? IF HE'S SO DAMN NOTABLE HE CAN WRITE HIS OWN ARTICLE! DELETE!") Anyway, we need patrollers. Please get on Special:Newpages and Special:Recentchanges and do your bit to hold the tide back. (r3m0t is beta-testing some very nice tools for making RC patrol a lot easier, and Newpages would easily be handled in the same sort of way. If you have Firefox with Greasemonkey, have a word with him on IRC. CoolCat also has some nice tools working with IRC, as does CryptoDerk. Have a look.) - d.

10 16

Anon IP blocking without account
by Fastfission 23 Jun '05

23 Jun '05

Is there a given anon IP address be blocked from editing unless it signs up with an account? I think this would be quite useful in situations of persistent vandalism from high schools or libraries, etc. It would just say something like, "This IP is blocked from editing anonymously because of past problems with vandalism, but you are free to start an account and then you can edit all you want" or something like that. Is this possible? FF

6 7

RE: [WikiEN-l] I will be leaving the project
by Poor, Edmund W 22 Jun '05

22 Jun '05

Really? Good riddance. You've caused far more trouble than you've been worth. Even the way you're leaving is an example. You could have appealed to soft-hearted old Uncle Ed. But, no, you've got to run off in a snit. But if you change your mind, let me know. "For there is more rejoicing", etc. for the lost sheep. Ed Poor

21 36

← Newer
1
...
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
...
24
Older →

Jump to page:

2026

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 2005