WikiEN-l November 2006

wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org

121 participants
233 discussions

Re: [WikiEN-l] Fiction and Wikia
by charles.r.matthews＠ntlworld.com 29 Nov '06

29 Nov '06

"Steve Bennett" wrote > To play devil's advocate, aren't we trying to be informative? Should > we be keeping genuine sources of information away from our readers? If > the topic is "Juggling in Copenhagen", then wouldn't a forum for > jugglers in Copenhagen be a really appropriate link? The mission is not the plain vanilla 'be informative'. Interesting comment from one of my non-Wikipedian friends. His colleagues at work tend to access official health statistics through WP external links; because it's quicker generally to do that, than to access the official site, in terms of getting to the relevant page out of many. That's quite a plaudit. Charles ----------------------------------------- Email sent from www.ntlworld.com Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information

2 1

Re: [WikiEN-l] "Reliable sources" guideline being treated as absolute policy
by charles.r.matthews＠ntlworld.com 28 Nov '06

28 Nov '06

"MacGyverMagic/Mgm" wrote > I see no reason why we should be flexible about sources. I do. Inviting inflexibility on sources is to ignore 'good taste'. >If it hasn't got > sources it can be deleted, regardless whether this is a policy or a > guideline. But it need not be deleted. Especially if it is a good article, otherwise. If people hold back a needed article because they are afraid of deletion, we lose, not gain. >It may be kept if someone bothers to find the sources the author > should have included, but that might not happen. Certainly won't, if it's already gone. > The only way to make people use sources is hammering it in, because no > matter how many times it is said, people will ignore it. Perhaps deletion > will get some backsides into gear. Stick, carrot, what's the difference? Mainly stick is an easier, more clear-cut policy. Which will drive away people who feel they have to master 'reliable sources policy' (bad joke) before posting anything. Look at it this way: good Wikipedians are those that post material that survives into later versions of pages. Aggressive deletion of unsourced material cuts down the pool of 'good Wikipedians'. It has always been a bad idea to imply, for example, that you need an academic library handy, to work on scholarly topics. Charles ----------------------------------------- Email sent from www.ntlworld.com Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information

2 1

Fwd: "Reliable sources" guideline being treated as absolute policy
by Rob Smith 28 Nov '06

28 Nov '06

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Rob Smith <nobs03(a)gmail.com> Date: Nov 28, 2006 2:45 PM Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] "Reliable sources" guideline being treated as absolute policy To: nobs03(a)gmail.com On 11/28/06, Fred Bauder <fredbaud(a)waterwiki.info> wrote: > For a subtle guy like you.... > > Fred > On 11/28/06, Andrew Gray <shimgray(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On 28/11/06, Rob Smith <nobs03(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > when you look at the *other* edits made at the same time... > ...you find that the material to which the source referred was taken > out, and the editor simply took six edits to do it all. Leaving the > source in, if the information to which it refers is gone, would be, > er, somewhat pointless and misleading. > Ohhh, um here's a few http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Samuel_Dickstein_%28congressman%2… http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=William_Dodd_%28Congressional_can… http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Edward_Fitzgerald_%28adviser%29&d… http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Lud_Ullman&diff=next&oldid=402457… http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=George_Perazich&diff=next&oldid=4… http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ricardo_Setaro&diff=prev&oldid=78… http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Richard_Lauterbach&action=history http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jenny_Levy_Miller&diff=prev&oldid… http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jack_Fahy&diff=next&oldid=40345233 http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=William_Plourde&diff=prev&oldid=7… http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sonia_Steinman_Gold&diff=next&old…

2 1

Re: [WikiEN-l] GNAA Deleted!
by David Jordan 28 Nov '06

28 Nov '06

Really? I find it disgusting that it's been deleted. What this shows is that if you try hard enough, you can indeed ignore consensus.

1 0

Re: [WikiEN-l] "Reliable sources" guideline being treated as absolute policy
by SonOfYoungwood＠aol.com 28 Nov '06

28 Nov '06

All I'll say is that 60 percent of deletions involve laziness in some way or another. RS shouldn't be hammered in like this, especially since it's relative to the type of article. | Tyler | Zorin Deckiller | | Wikipedia Administrator | Former SWU member | | _http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Deckiller_ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Deckiller) | | _http://www.myspace.com/redsectora_ (http://www.myspace.com/redsectora) |

1 0

Google Earth screenshots
by Bogdan Giusca 28 Nov '06

28 Nov '06

What should we do with the screenshots taken from Google Earth? I see that more and more of them are uploaded on en.wiki, for example to illustrate things such as high-schools or cities. But, does the fair-use claim hold up? Note that some of the images claim "PD". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Irvine_Sat_View.jpg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:RanchoSatView.jpg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Migrationdinka.png http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Hhi-troads.jpg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:St_cath_wifi.png etc

13 36

Re: [WikiEN-l] The new non-stupid wiki-en thread
by charles.r.matthews＠ntlworld.com 28 Nov '06

28 Nov '06

"Steve Bennett" wrote > So, anyone greatly improved an article lately? [[Gilbert Murray]]. Charles ----------------------------------------- Email sent from www.ntlworld.com Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information

2 1

Re: [WikiEN-l] The new non-stupid wiki-en thread
by Daniel P. B. Smith 28 Nov '06

28 Nov '06

> From: "David Ashby" <humble.fool(a)gmail.com> > > On 11/27/06, Steve Bennett <stevagewp(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> So, anyone greatly improved an article lately? >> >> Steve > > I've deleted about 50 or so articles, does that count? > > -humblefool Arlo Guthrie tells a story about how his wife told him she had cleaned up a stack of magazines in the garage. The next day, he says "I was in the garage, and those magazines weren't 'cleaned,' they're _gone._" His wife replies, "Well, you can't get much cleaner than 'gone.'" Like the apocryphal story of Michelangelo saying "I just cut away everything that didn't look like David," the negative space of deleted articles shapes the positive space that looks like an encyclopedia.

1 0

Re: [WikiEN-l] Systemic bias wrt gender
by charles.r.matthews＠ntlworld.com 28 Nov '06

28 Nov '06

Ray Saintonge wrote > Perception is everything. Repeatedly denying that we are run by a cabal > does nothing to convince those who believe it. But then nothing else would, either. That is the nature of conspiracy cranks. Charles ----------------------------------------- Email sent from www.ntlworld.com Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information

1 0

Systemic bias wrt gender
by niht-hræfn 28 Nov '06

28 Nov '06

The recent thread on the low numbers of women applying for ArbCom and subsequent discussion about systemic bias and under-representation of women has led me to wonder about the nature of gender-related systemic bias on the English Wikipedia. As far as "gender is irrelevant" goes, this is simply not true. Gender of editors really does matter as far as coverage and quality thereof goes. Most of the women I know spend one or two hours in the morning with a straightening iron and a blow dryer. Wikipedia has http:// en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blowdryer and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Hair_iron . These two articles are considerably out of date and do not begin to encompass the complexities of these appliances (and there is not even separate articles for straightening irons and curling irons!). Compare to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Television , the two appliances I have known men to use most. Or even to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Microwave_oven and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refrigerator . Or to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Razor . The bias is there. My question is not "Does systemic bias exist?" but rather "Where is systemic bias hurting us most?" From a coverage standpoint, we have vast comprehensive articles on sports of all kinds, but our ballet articles make me weep inside (I've just started a Ballet WikiProject to address this, but had been too intimidated to do so since first reading/editing until I met another female ballet dancer on wiki). However, how does this compare to the way policy is formed and implemented? Is an unequal ratio of men to women affecting the way we run things? Is it negatively impacting the structure of the encyclopedia? Is it proceeding in this way such that men find it easier to join and women do not? What is suffering the most from this bias, and are there ways to better receive the input of those who would otherwise not be heard? As far as women reading the mailing list, I know that there are plenty who do (like myself), but do not discuss much. I know that I also read more than I edit, perhaps this is the case with more females than just myself? Food for thought. :] --Keitei http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Keitei

13 29

← Newer
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
...
24
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 November 2006