I've noticed the growth of the WikBack, and decided this is a good time for
new projects. The Help Wiki is a MediaWiki site which aims to produce some
neat little help guides for newbies on Wikipedia. At the present, we're just
writing them and improving them: we're taking it slow, and our little
community is still unsure whether our guides will eventually be implemented
onto Wikipedia, or kept on-site.
Anyway, we're located at <
http://www.pj.tsone.info/helpwiki/index.php/Main_Page> (the domain name
isn't sorted yet), and all contributors are welcome. We use the FlaggedRevs
extension to provide some basic peer review and constructive criticism, as
well as a basic level of quality for our readers, but otherwise everybody is
welcome to contribute!
The project was founded by User:Qst@enwiki, and has a basic community of ~8
users; we're around a month old. I'm just the developer for it, by the way
;) so, all welcome, even if you just create an account, and perhaps add a
guide or two!
Best regards to all,
Anthony
User:AGK
en.wikipedia.org
Well, it looks like Hell is going to Heaven in a handbasket.
Has the clique of demons attempted to impose a GOODSITES policy yet,
banning links to insufficiently sinful sites?
--
== 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/
As it's the weekend, I thought I might lighten things (if only there was a
roolback button ;-) ).
There was an article in the press about a new book this week which says
that [[Da Vinci]] hid all his gnostic secrets with mirrors. The discovery
channel covered the story here
http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2008/01/08/davinci-mirror-code.html?dcitc=w19…
.
I couldn't really careless what Da Vinci was upto but the image gallery that
shows the examples of his esoterica is much more interesting (the link is
here
http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2008/01/08/davinci-mirror-code.html?dcitc=w19…
).
Discovery in its tabloid historian fashion titles one of the pics "Darth
Vader". It certainly does, but I wonder how long it will take for some
bright spark to include the "fact" on Wikipedia? The guy who designed the
original Darth Vader custome was John Mollo (interestingly enougn he only
has a bio on german wikipedia), will someone suggest that he had knowledge
of this previously undiscovered da vinci code?
mike
Unfortunately, the evidence by Theresa knott
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Jim62sch/Ev…
and my own experience with Jim62sch and OrangeMarlin does not lead me
to believe it was a polite warning. Rather than simply stating that
they have to do it, and following through, they repeated the threat
(one example: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_notic…
).
I read this as an attempt to drive off an opponent in a content
dispute, pure and simple.
Sxeptomaniac
> On Thu, 3 Jan 2008 17:43:19 -0500, Nathan <nawrich(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> There are many, many different professions with affirmative reporting
> requirements. I've been using the word 'warning' instead of 'threat'
> because threat implies a particular tone that is entirely different. A
> warning might be "You've mentioned you work in the Air Force, but
> please be aware that if you provide more completely identifying
> information about yourself I or others may have to report you." Now,
> thats polite, isn't a threat and is issued in a situation where "just
> go ahead and do it" doesn't apply.
>
> The reason the "whole conversation has been about the former" in this
> case is because that is most closely what happened (between OM and VO)
> *and* it is the situation with policy implications. (On-wiki
> incivility is dealt with by policy, off-wiki non-harassing incivility
> is irrelevant). I'm satisfied with what Mike Godwin wrote, which is
> that if politely issued it is wrongheaded to construe policy as
> prohibiting warnings of a legal obligation.
>
> For examples of some professions who must report information in
> various situations: Physicians, lawyers, judges, psychologists, school
> administrators, teachers, social workers, guidance counselors,
> essentially all law enforcement, military personnel. This class
> obviously includes many millions of people, so it makes sense to
> adjust the policy to account for the affirmative reporting requirement
> issue.
> Nathan
>
> On Jan 3, 2008 5:15 PM, Josh Gordon <user.jpgordon(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Jan 3, 2008 2:00 PM, Chris Howie <cdhowie(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > (Unless you were told to make the threat in exchange for your family's
> > > life? ... Yes, I'm being facetious. :) )
> > >
> >
> > It still wouldn't be ethical. It might be necessary, but it wouldn't be
> > ethical.
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > --jpgordon ????
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2008 17:47:37 -0500
> From: Anthony <wikimail(a)inbox.org>
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Notability etymology and history (was Re:
> WP:EPISODE)
> To: "English Wikipedia" <wikien-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID:
> <71cd4dd90801031447x656bce6ck4fa66b148456e728(a)mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> On 1/3/08, Chris Howie <cdhowie(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Jan 3, 2008 9:19 AM, Anthony <wikimail(a)inbox.org> wrote:
> >
> > > I also thought of something while waiting for your response. If
> > > maintenance is the problem, wouldn't protection be better than
> > > deletion? Instead of deleting 80% of articles on "universities" to
> > > reduce the maintenance load, why not protect them on a rotating
> > > schedule where 20% are unprotected each day during a five day period?
> > >
> >
> > WP:CREEP aside, sounds like a maintenance nightmare, unless it could be done
> > by bots. IMHO it would be better to coordinate maintenance in a useful way
> > rather than skipping a coordination attempt and going right to protection.
> >
> It'd definitely have to be done by bots, if not coded into the
> software. And yeah, doing a better job of maintenance would be a much
> better solution. I only presented protection as a better solution
> than deletion for dealing with problems of vandalism.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2008 18:06:24 -0500
> From: gwern0(a)gmail.com
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Interesting fact
> To: kmw(a)armory.com, English Wikipedia <wikien-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID: <20080103230624.GC10702@localhost>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> On 2007.12.30 11:03:14 -0600, Kurt Maxwell Weber <kmw(a)armory.com> scribbled 0.7K characters:
> > On Sunday 30 December 2007 07:33, Daniel R. Tobias wrote:
> > > On Sun, 30 Dec 2007 11:58:39 +0000, "Thomas Dalton"
> > >
> > > <thomas.dalton(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > On 26/12/2007, Nachman <nachman.chayal(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > The quote was "Hello, we found your name on Wikipedia. You're the new
> > > > > CIA job fair representative."
> > > >
> > > > That would be an extremely stupid policy... so it's probably true.
> > >
> > > After all, the "intelligence" in their name doesn't refer to the sort
> > > that is measured by IQ tests.
> >
> > Has it ever occurred to you all that perhaps people whose life work is
> > intelligence gathering might actually know more about it than a bunch of
> > random jokers on the Internet?
> > --
> > Kurt Weber
> > <kmw(a)armory.com>
>
> [[Open Source Intelligence]].
>
> No. No, not really. I suspect I dropped that idea somewhere along the line - although I couldn't tell you whether it was the cyborg cats, the remote viewing, the MKULTRA and more covert programs, the sponsorship of heroin and cocaine criminal syndicates (to say nothing of the right-wing dictatorships), the poisoned cigar and wetsuits, or what which specifically disabused me of that idea.
>
> --
> gwern
> OIR man transfer Meade ADIU Team VGPL DST plutonium MD5
>
I posted this on Jimbo's talk page and will post to WikBack, but I wanted to
post here as well. I know that everyone is sick to death of hearing about
this rollback business, but I'm a little confused as to why it's being
allowed to continue. For such a contentious feature that has so bitterly
divided the community, until it's finally been decided whether or not this
even has consensus to go through, it seems to me that we should heed the
advice of users, including myself, calling for a moratorium. Considering
that we were never able to get a full-fledged discussion, and that the
ArbCom case seems unlikely to be accepted (despite Jimbo's wishes that it be
heard by them), our best bet is to wait until the end of the quarter, and
have a new poll, as has been decided. In the meantime, though, we don't know
what ramifications of giving all these users this tool will be; and until
we've discussed everything fully, it doesn't make sense to let this
continue. Thanks for your consideration.