Andrew Gray wrote:
>Clearly you didn't get the memo.
>[[Wikipedia:Off-Wiki policy discussion considered harmful]]
>(Next up: someone to argue speeding laws don't count because they were
>passed by people who were stationary at the time.)
http://www.meyerweb.com/eric/comment/chech.html
"Because "considered harmful" essays are, by their nature, so
incendiary, they are counter-productive both in terms of encouraging
open and intelligent debate, and in gathering support for the view
they promote. In other words, "considered harmful" essays cause more
harm than they do good."
"Typically, "considered harmful" essays gets written because someone
has an axe to grind, and they feel like making that grinding process
both public and dogmatic. This is a form of grandstanding, of course,
but it is done with a purpose beyond simple publicity seeking. Usually
such "considered harmful" essays are intended to draw attention to a
little-known subject about which the author is passionate, or to
highlight what the author feels to be a poor decision by someone else.
In addition, there are those "considered harmful" essays that are
written as part of a long-running argument that has gradually
escalated."
(and yes, I put that on the wiki too)
- d.
Whenever I try to deal with unusual copyright
questions myself, I seem to get variously ignored,
harassed, challenged with nonsense legal theories, and
ad hominem'ed to death. So, I have decided that I am
just not going to do it any more. The whole
experience is simply way too unpleasant for the
limited amount of good I am able to accomplish.
Hence someone else is going to have to do it.
I have created a list of evil lists:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Dragons_flight/Evil_looking_lists
These ~35 lists appear to be creative works copied
from the likes of VH1, Rolling Stone, and Time
Magazine. Under US case law a list whose membership
is determined by editorial opinion (rather than facts,
statisics or polling) is subject to copyright
protection, and simply copying such a list into
Wikipedia will generally constitute a copyright
infringment. Most of the lists I have highlighted are
of the "Best of" variety, and appear to consist solely
of the editor's judgment about who the best are. (I
have tried to exclude lists which were based on votes
or polling, as such are not subject to copyright
protection, but it is possible that some lists based
on polling slipped through without my noticing.)
Such lists should be deleted or abbreviated to a
length and purpose consistent with fair use.
As per my initial comments, I don't intend to pursue
this matter further. I'm hoping that my list of evil
will be looking quite red some time in the future, but
I am not optimistic that it will happen.
-DF
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
This is the podcast interview I did last Thursday. I haven't listened
yet myself ... hope I suitably calmed the slightly annoyed AFD subject
and his fans!
- d.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Mark Fonseca Rendeiro
Date: 01-Feb-2006 20:40
Subject: Re: [Ticket#2006010210002589] interview about the evolution
of wikipedia
To: David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com>
Hey David.. the show has been up for a few days and its getting good
feedback and of course, lots of downloads. Thanks again for taking
the time... best of luck to you and Im sure we'll see each other
around the internet.
http://bicyclemark.org/blog/2006/01/bm99-behind-wikipedia/
On 1/24/06, David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> ok!
>
> On 23/01/06, Mark Fonseca Rendeiro <bicyclemark(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > UK time is what I meant. Speak to you thursday!
> >
> >
> > On 1/23/06, David Gerard < dgerard(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On 23/01/06, Mark Fonseca Rendeiro <bicyclemark(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > My best time to talk is five oclock on thursday afternoon.. or late
> > around
> > > > ten thirty in the evening. either day.
> > >
> > >
> > > 10:30pm Thursday evening (is that UK or NL time?) is fine by me! Call
> > > me on the home number, 020 8523 2302.
> > >
> > >
> > > - d.
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > -Mark
>
--
-Mark
The Shiloh Shepherd Dog article has attracted a lot of attention from
breeders and other parties highly involved with the breed. One would
think that this would be a good thing, however, it turns out that
there's a long running dispute between the breed founder and her
original dog club and registry and the newer club and registries. Its
gotten incredibly nasty and they're doing their best to bring it to
Wikipedia.
I've been attempting to help them along for more than 2 months now and
its degenerating into attacking everything in sight just so they can
keep the arguments going. If anyone would be interested in wading into
the mess and lending a helping hand, I would greatly appreciate it.
Personally, I'd like to see them all banned from editing the article or
its talk page :P
Jareth (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jareth)
The date to announce a decision today about the preliminary injunction
against Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. was cancelled today after the
lawyer for the parents of the dead hacker Tron started questioning the
procuration of the lawyer for Wikimedia Deutschland. This is
considered quite an unusual step since the judge had already announced
that he does not agree with the argument that the postmortal rights of
Boris Floricic is violated by mentioning the full name.
The new date for the decision will be the 9th of February 2006.
Wikimedia Deutschland issued a statement to the press today and
explained the situation. Those of you who "Sprechen Sie Deutsh" might
want to read or babelfish this url:
http://www.wikimedia.de/2006/02/entscheidung-uber-einstweilige-verfugung-ve…
Wikimedia Deutschland considers this move by the lawyer of Tron's
parents to be an attempt to delay the process' end. It also "regrets"
that the confidentiality of the out-of-court negotiation attempt
(which was given at the request of Tron's lawyer) was broken several
times.
Heise has some quotes from this lawyer and from Wikimedia's lawyer,
Thorsten Feldmann: http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/69162
hi, how are you?my name is maryam oroojeni,Im a chemist in iran .Im searching about Bisphenol A and methods of synthesis,I'd like to use your information about it ,could you send for me any articles about it?thank u ,good luck. bye
---------------------------------
What are the most popular cars? Find out at Yahoo! Autos
Kirill Lokshin wrote:
>On 2/1/06, Sean Barrett <sean at epoptic.org> wrote:
>> David understates the case, by the way: It is hilarious to watch them
>> arguing over the correct procedure to "get" Tony, when it's obvious that
>> they haven't even begun the process for developing the plan to generate
>> a schedule to outline [[Wikipedia:Requests for Lynching]] ([[WP:RfL]]).
>I suspect there would be three schools of thoughts on this:
Could you please both post these messages on WP:ANI.
- d.
>1890 edits at a very low edit rate. Little evidence of vandle fighting and has
>failed to create any featured articles. The distibution of edits is
pretty good although
>a little low on article space. Would probably get through RFA but
would not be completely clear cut.
In another 30 edits, that could be describing me :)
Seriously though:
Username Jimbo Wales
Total edits 1890
Image uploads 9 (7 cur, 2 old)
Distinct pages edited 727
Edits/page (avg) 2.60
First edit 2001-03-27 20:47:31
Articles 417
Talk 211
User 128
User talk 809
Project 198
Project talk 62
1 in 4 edits actually in the article space, and twice as many on user
pages? Not to mention 128 edits to his own user page? I'm not sure
what measure you use to judge "pretty good" edit distribution - the
guy is clearly not here to create an encyclopaedia :)
Steve (who has 18 times more edits in the template namespace, so must
be 18 times cooler...)
I forward it to the de.wp list, whose readers may be interested by the
issue as well.
heinz
Anthere schrieb:
> Thanks for the update Presroi.
>
> I forward it to the foundation list, whose readers may be interested by
> the issue as well.
>
> Ant
>
> Mathias Schindler wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> today there was a hearing at the Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, Berlin
>> (municipal court) about the preliminary injunction against the German
>> Verein. The injunction was prohibiting Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. to
>> redirect wikipedia.de to the German Wikipedia as long as the full
>> civil name of a dead hacker ([[en:Tron (hacker)]]) is shown at
>> de.wikipedia.org.
>>
>> In the hearing, the judge gave more than just a hint that he does not
>> agree with the argument from Tron's parents that telling a (already
>> publicly known) civil name is violating the post-mortem
>> Persönlichkeitsrecht (right of personality).
>>
>> The decision, whether the preliminary injunction is withdrawn will be
>> announced on thursday at 9 a.m. (CET).
>>
>> Here are two reports from the court hearing:
>>
>> http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/69056 (the author was present
>> at the hearing)
>>
>> http://www.golem.de/0601/43060.html (I am not sure if he was there)
>>
>>
>> There is one question left and I would love to see some research from
>> you. Ivo Floricic, the owner of the trademark "Tron" and father of
>> Boris Floricic (aka. [[en:Tron (hacker)]] claims that he thinks that
>> he is the only one with the name "Floricic" in Germany and these
>> special circumstances would somehow violate his rights if wikipedia is
>> mentioning the full name of Tron.
>>
>> Does anyone know any other person by the name of Floricic?
>>
>> According to Google, there is an artist "Alen Floricic" from Croatia
>> who might be notable (if he is notable, it would be nice to consider
>> taking the CV from certain sites and write an article about him).
>> There is also a professor of linguistics, Franck Floricic from France.
>>
>> Greetings,
>> Mathias
>> _______________________________________________
>> WikiEN-l mailing list
>> WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org
>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
>> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>>
Jimbo wrote:
>I think a few people have gotten quite confused about the role of admins
>due to the excessive rules lawyering. Maybe they are the ones who need
>to rethink it.
See [[WP:ANI]] - a lynchmob of process-obsessives attempting to
discuss the process for a lynching. It's almost amusing.
(Apparently referring to discussion on wikien-l means I'm purporting
to speak for the Foundation. Huh?)
- d.