WikiEN-l October 2006

wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org

135 participants
206 discussions

Re: [WikiEN-l] Larry Craig
by dmehkeri＠swi.com 20 Oct '06

20 Oct '06

> > Also HE VOTED AGAINST CUDDLY ANIMALS. > > > > Oh, well that does it then. I'll order a Level 14 Cabalstrike. > It's obvious that nobody in this case is THINKING OF THE CHILDREN. And that's why I'm leaving Wikipedia. Cheers, Dan

1 0

good example of overuse of {{fact}}
by Jimmy Wales 20 Oct '06

20 Oct '06

First, and example, and then a question/suggestion. If you get bored with my example, please continue anyway to my question/suggestion. :) http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2006/10/15/how_many_times_m… >Some are easy, of course, like the Wikipedia entry claiming that the >word blackboard ‘‘is now perceived by some as being ’politically >incorrect’ in the United Kingdom.’’ ‘‘Citation needed,’’ a parenthesis >cautioned. Indeed: a Nexis search of UK publications found some 30 >blackboards in a week, against just three chalkboards. This is a quote from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_change Our full text reads: >Political correctness is a real or perceived attempt to refine or >restrict language and terms used in public discussion to those deemed >acceptable or appropriate. For example "blackboard" is now perceived by >some as being "politically incorrect" in the United Kingdom, [citation >needed] and so teachers are instructed to call it a "chalkboard" >instead. The tag was added here: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Semantic_change&diff=43364581&old… So from March 12 until now, we have a request that this dubious tidbit be sourced, with no movement. I think that clearly this bit should have been sourced or removed a long time ago. ----- Is there any way we could have a date-stamped fact tag? Which would put such things into a category or other similar page? The purpose would be to provide a mechanism for people to find *older* examples of fact tags, in order to go ahead and remove them. I would recommend that anything like this for which no citation appears within 7 days be removed or edited in some fashion to remove the need. --Jimbo

20 62

[Fwd: photo by gus freedman -- may I use in book]
by Jimmy Wales 20 Oct '06

20 Oct '06

She is a journalist and friend of Wikipedia, so please help her if you can. :) I don't know the photo she is talking about... -------- Original Message -------- Subject: photo by gus freedman -- may I use in book Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 14:56:30 -0700 (PDT) From: Melissa Rossi <melissarossi199(a)yahoo.com> To: jwales(a)wikia.com Hey Jimmy, Do I have your permission to use the photo by Gus Freedman from Wikipedia in my book What Every American Should Know about Who's Really Running America? As far, as I can tell this is OK to use as long as Gus Freedman is credited? Im totally under the gun -- it's brutal what is happening at moment -- so please let me know ASAP. Love the one by Chrys but couldnt afford it! Thanks! Melissa Rossi PS I will probably have to send some more legal signoff, but this will suffice for moment. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great rates starting at 1¢/min. <http://us.rd.yahoo.com/mail_us/taglines/postman7/*http://us.rd.yahoo.com/ev…>

3 2

Question about sources
by Luis Alberto Riveros 20 Oct '06

20 Oct '06

In this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Brahma_Kumaris_World_Spiritual_University It seems that VERIFIABILITY : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Walnut.png> This policy<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:List_of_policies>in a nutshell: *Information on Wikipedia must be reliable and verifiable. Facts, viewpoints, theories, and arguments may only be included in articles if they have already been published by reliable sources<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources>. Articles should cite these sources <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:CITE>whenever possible. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. Is in a way in contradiction with the policy below in the same page: * *Material from self-published sources, and other published sources of dubious reliability, may be used as sources of information so long as:* - *It is relevant to the organization's notability;* - *It is not contentious;* - *It is not unduly self-serving;* - *It does not involve claims about third parties, or about events not directly related to the subject;* - *There is no reasonable doubt about who wrote it.* Please clarify this. Do you want reliable sources or not? If an antagonistic group starts an article and uses a self-published source to hurt an organization's image, is this considered "non contentious"? or "relevant to the organization notability?" or "unduly self-serving"?Thank you for your attention to this. -- Have a blissful day! Luis Alberto Riveros

10 16

Re: [WikiEN-l] We go! We go!
by Daniel P. B. Smith 20 Oct '06

20 Oct '06

> From: "Daniel R. Tobias" <dan(a)tobias.name> > > I remember reading somebody's online description of trolls, where one > of the signs is that they keep saying that they're quitting an online > community / list / newsgroup / forum / site / etc., but rarely > actually do. GENERAL: Away, away! POLICE: (without moving) Yes, yes, we go. GENERAL: These pirates slay. POLICE: Tarantara! GENERAL: Then do not stay. POLICE: Tarantara! GENERAL: Then why this delay? POLICE: All right, we go. ALL: Yes, forward on the foe! Yes, forward on the foe! GENERAL: Yes, but you _don't_ go! POLICE: We go, we go ALL: Yes, forward on the foe! Yes, forward on the foe! GENERAL: Damme, you _don't_ go! POLICE: We go, we go ALL: At last they go! At last they really go!

2 1

Re: [WikiEN-l] Before reverting blanking, please read the text
by Curly K-Man 20 Oct '06

20 Oct '06

How hard is it to actually check before reverting? Whenever I'm reverting a change, I always check to see who the last editor (before the vandalism) was. Anytimes it's either a a) IP or b) user without a userpage (redlink) or c) the same user that added the current "vandalism" , I'll go back into the history and see what that person added. Sometimes, there are multiple instances of vandalism not picked up by whatever tools we're using (RC,VP, VS, IRC, ect). -Royalguard11 [[User:Royalguard11]] __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

1 0

Re: [WikiEN-l] Before reverting blanking, please read the text
by Sydney aka FloNight 20 Oct '06

20 Oct '06

---- Bryan Derksen <bryan.derksen(a)shaw.ca> wrote: ============= Sydney aka FloNight wrote: > ---- Guy Chapman aka JzG <guy.chapman(a)spamcop.net> wrote: > The whole article? *All* of it? Even the bits which are not crap? No > I don't. > > Guy (JzG) > > ================================ > > The first, second, ..... time they remove the crap. When it keeps getting inserted they blank the whole article. You are making things up out of thin air. Here are the contributions of the article-blanker: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=Aarc… Just two edits, both of those were wholesale removals of the entire article. The edit that added the objectionable material was on October 11: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Judy_Genshaft&diff=80888561&oldid… That material wasn't touched until Aarcelay blanked the article. Nobody at any point tried removing _just_ the objectionable bit. Bryan Derksen, I was speaking generally about the frustration seen on the OTRS complaints I have answered. If this was a single incident none of us would be going on and on about it. Sydney

1 0

Re: [WikiEN-l] Before reverting blanking, please read the text
by Daniel R. Tobias 20 Oct '06

20 Oct '06

On 19 Oct 2006 at 09:08, "Parker Peters" <onmywayoutster(a)gmail.com> wrote: > That's one of the reasons I gave up on editing Wikipedia and am slowly not > bothering even to check my email on here: accounts blocked for "vandalism" > or other reasons with no talkpage, new accounts with no welcome message, and > general evidence of admins being shitty to them and getting away with it. I remember reading somebody's online description of trolls, where one of the signs is that they keep saying that they're quitting an online community / list / newsgroup / forum / site / etc., but rarely actually do. I forget... is Parker Peters the one who picked a peck of pickled peppers, or is he secretly Spider-Man, or what? :-) -- == Dan == Dan's Mail Format Site: http://mailformat.dan.info/ Dan's Web Tips: http://webtips.dan.info/ Dan's Domain Site: http://domains.dan.info/

1 0

Re: [WikiEN-l] Before reverting blanking, please read the text
by Sydney aka FloNight 20 Oct '06

20 Oct '06

---- Guy Chapman aka JzG <guy.chapman(a)spamcop.net> wrote: ============= On Thu, 19 Oct 2006 18:09:42 +0100, "Andrew Gray" <shimgray(a)gmail.com> wrote: >Pause for a second. Imagine you're entirely unfamiliar with Wikipedia. >You see some horrible crap. You figure out you can edit. What do you >do? You delete it. The whole article? *All* of it? Even the bits which are not crap? No I don't. Guy (JzG) ================================ The first, second, ..... time they remove the crap. When it keeps getting inserted they blank the whole article. Sydney

2 1

Reminder
by Matt R 19 Oct '06

19 Oct '06

I saw this on BBC News today: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/6059726.stm Made me think. I suspect I'm not the only one on this list to have encountered some pretty disturbed and angry people on Wikipedia. I know you all know this already, but a reminder: it's a good idea to ensure your physical address (at the very least) is not public if you plan to tangle with nutcases online. -- Matt Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Matt_Crypto Blog: http://cipher-text.blogspot.com Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com

7 10

← Newer
1
...
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
...
21
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 October 2006