WikiEN-l December 2006

wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org

157 participants
289 discussions

Admins who pretend to quit (was Re: MONGO and the ArbComm)
by M Roget 15 Dec '06

15 Dec '06

Can we have a rule that states that any admin who "quits" Wikipedia to protest this or that is automatically desysopped? It's one thing to take a wikibreak or to leave because of real life time commitments but any admin who quits in order to make a point has abdicated their responsibilities. There seems to be a trend of admins announcing their departure only to come back in a few days after dozens of people have posted supportive statements on their talk page. Call me cynical but this looks like manipulative trolling to me and automatic desysopping would create a disincentive. If someone really intends to leave they won't care about being desysopped - they'll even request that it be done but if somone is just pretending to leave an automatic desysopping will make them think twice. Michel

19 38

Re: [WikiEN-l] Off-article linkspamming
by charles.r.matthews＠ntlworld.com 15 Dec '06

15 Dec '06

A wrote > I have noticed an emerging trend for linkspammers to spam their sites on > article talk pages, user pages and user talk pages, especially after failing > to get their spam placed in an article itself. [[WP:SPAM]] does not have a > clearly formulated policy on this from what I can see. It will all fall under [[Wikipedia:Conflict of interest]], though. At the level of generalities, if posted links are serving purposes that do not chime with Wikipedia's, one can deduce a likely COI. That doesn't do more than give some sort of framework, of course. Charles ----------------------------------------- Email sent from www.ntlworld.com Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information

2 1

Fwd: Completely unreasonable block and behavior by admin friends of Itaqallah to win a content dispute
by Parker Peters 14 Dec '06

14 Dec '06

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Parker Peters <onmywayoutster(a)gmail.com> Date: Dec 12, 2006 4:11 PM Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Completely unreasonable block and behavior by admin friends of Itaqallah to win a content dispute To: Michael Bimmler <mbimmler(a)gmail.com> On 12/12/06, Michael Bimmler <mbimmler(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > 1. I'm not the list moderator. I'm merely reporting, so that we don't > have 10 people asking "please moderate him" > 2. He should maybe get a bit more calm... Words as "dick" and > "bullshit" simply don't help your cause. > michael No, they don't. But the utterly dismissive attack rhetoric that's been heaped on him, both here and on wikipedia? The fact that I'm the only person it seems who's even bothered to check the merits of his complaint? I can see where someone would start to get really angry, and throwing oil onto fire doesn't help. Parker

7 24

Off-article linkspamming
by A 14 Dec '06

14 Dec '06

I have noticed an emerging trend for linkspammers to spam their sites on article talk pages, user pages and user talk pages, especially after failing to get their spam placed in an article itself. [[WP:SPAM]] does not have a clearly formulated policy on this from what I can see. For instance, [[User:Hoodia]] was especially egregious today, spamming the [[Hoodia]] article, but also setting up a User talk page that consisted entirely of spam: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Hoodia&oldid=94315565 This case is obvious and common sense, but I have seen more subtle issues recently, such as this editor listing her site www.BreastImplantAwareness.org/ after her signature: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AStephen_Barrett&diff=93819… to bottom) Does this count as linkspam? It struck me and other editors as inappropriate. SEO spammers are going to want a working link from Wikipedia to improve results, so I suppose <nowiki> is an option in many of these cases. As another example, a longtime detractor of mine who was eventually blocked for linkspamming still managed to spam links removed from various articles to her bostonschoolofelectrolysis.com website via another editor's talk page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Alphachimp/Archive_7#PLEASE_REPLY_AN… This is now archived and indexed on Google, effectively achieving the desired result of a direct link from Wikipedia. These phenomena seem like something we should address before it gets much worse. I guess the most contentious one would be links to one's own sites on one's User and User:Talk pages. I'm not sure how that line should be drawn. A blanket ban would probably drive some editors away, and any policy would probably have a lot of gray area regarding what's acceptable. Jokestress

4 3

Re: [WikiEN-l] Westboro_Baptist_Church
by Yann Forget 14 Dec '06

14 Dec '06

Hi, Tragic Romance wrote: > Hi, > > I don't know who to write to about this, but user "Wahkeenah" makes a death threat against the members of "Westboro Baptist Church" at the bottom of this page: > > http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Westboro_Baptist_Church&oldi… > > I'm just an editor; I have no association with that user or that church. Thanks for removing this. I am forwarding to the appropriate list. > Thanks, > Tim Best Regards, Yann -- http://www.non-violence.org/ | Site collaboratif sur la non-violence http://www.forget-me.net/ | Alternatives sur le Net http://fr.wikipedia.org/ | Encyclopédie libre http://fr.wikisource.org/ | Bibliothèque libre http://wikilivres.info | Documents libres

2 1

Re: [WikiEN-l] new Google Earth tie-in (!!)
by Daniel R. Tobias 14 Dec '06

14 Dec '06

On 14 Dec 2006 at 12:10, "Stephen Bain" <stephen.bain(a)gmail.com> wrote: > And more to the point, they could have done this without asking, > except for the use of the logo. Instead they were willing to negotiate > use of the logo, and have made an effort to be compliant like other > mirrors, following our own instructions for mirrors. And as far as I can tell, there is no exclusive license involved in this project, so it's not a "sellout"; nothing in this deal blocks the future use of Wikipedia data as part of other geographical projects of other companies and organizations, including ones of a less proprietary nature, or the negotiation of such groups to get similar rights to use the logo. -- == 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] Admins who pretend to quit (was Re: MONGO and the ArbComm)
by Daniel R. Tobias 14 Dec '06

14 Dec '06

On 12/12/06, Guy Chapman aka JzG <guy.chapman(a)spamcop.net> wrote: > Let each case be judged on its merits, in accordance with the > Clue-based principles on which the whole edifice is after all founded. The principles of Wikipedia are based upon Clue? Well, then, I say it was Colonel Mustard in the ballroom with a candlestick. -- == 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/

3 2

Problem with {{contradicting}}
by Timwi 13 Dec '06

13 Dec '06

I think the {{contradicting}} template is problematic because it doesn't require the user to specify what the supposed contradiction is. Some people seem to add it as if it was an intrinsic property of the subject, rather than a request to fix something. When I removed it with the comment "Please don't add the contradiction tag without giving your reasons on the Talk page, otherwise I won't know what to fix in the article", it was simply added back in with the edit summary "who keeps removing that template?". Timwi

4 3

Nazi userboxes
by Michael Bimmler 13 Dec '06

13 Dec '06

I just came across the following userpage http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Blind14 which shows a "This user is a nazi"-userbox quite prominently, depicting a swastika in a clearly non-enzyclopedic contect (i.e. as a personal non-scientific reference / symbol of adherence). I'm not sure about legislation in US but I wonder whether this could be an offense against law. Feel free to comment on whether it is a violation of Wikipedia policies, I won't comment this, as I didn't take part in the Great Userboxes War. Michael

39 155

Trial of Harry Dexter White
by Rob Smith 13 Dec '06

13 Dec '06

http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:6H382o49RFkJ:etd-db.uno.edu/theses/avai…<http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:6H382o49RFkJ:etd-db.uno.edu/theses/avai…> http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:6H382o49RFkJ:etd-db.uno.edu/theses/avai… 22%2B%22san+fransisco%22&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=2<http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:6H382o49RFkJ:etd-db.uno.edu/theses/avai…>

2 2

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

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 December 2006