In a message dated 4/9/2009 1:28:41 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
billdeancarter(a)yahoo.com writes:
Wikipedia Review will make me feel right at home? You mean they'll address
this issue which none of you Wikipedia administrators intend to,
particularly David Gerard? What's the fucking point of you guys being administrators
when you won't address important issues? Since when is it okay to speedy
delete a new article re-created with the intentions of addressing all of
Wikipedia's notability demands? You guys are running a reckless website and
actually receive a deserved amount of negative press.
"Wikipedia Review will make me feel right at home?"
Sort-of. Maybe after a bit of flaming, just like everywhere.
"You mean they'll address this issue which none of you Wikipedia
administrators intend to, particularly David Gerard?"
They will let you say your piece, and then respond to it. It helps to
vent to a third-party, and it's possible there might be someone who can help
you fix up the article so that it does pass muster who knows. It's worth a
shot isn't it?
"What's the fucking point of you guys being administrators when you won't
address important issues?"
The more you say *fucking* the more people feel sympathy for you. Or is
that the other way round? At any rates, we're not all administrators. And
I suppose it's possible that Alan Cabal is more important than say "are
there any burritos left?", but I've never heard of him before today.
"Since when is it okay to speedy delete a new article re-created with the
intentions of addressing all of Wikipedia's notability demands?"
We are willing here I'm sure to hear what changes you've instituted that
make it pass. So far I haven't heard anything specific and I'm too lazy to
compare the articles in detail. But you see to have a lot of energy and
maybe you could be more forthcoming.
"You guys are running a reckless website and actually receive a deserved
amount of negative press."
Wikipedia is reckless. Makes me feel sort-of excited or something. But
really Bill, you know there are listeners who are sympathetic to
inclusionism, so I'm not sure what advantage you're getting by trying to paint us all
with a broad brush here. You catch more flies with honey you know.
Will Johnson
**************Feeling the pinch at the grocery store? Make dinner for $10
or less. (http://food.aol.com/frugal-feasts?ncid=emlcntusfood00000001)
In a message dated 4/9/2009 1:04:11 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
billdeancarter(a)yahoo.com writes:
Can you get Wikipedia Review to take up issue>>
---------------
*You* can Bill. Sign up, post a new message, see if it gets attention.
Will Johnson
**************Feeling the pinch at the grocery store? Make dinner for $10
or less. (http://food.aol.com/frugal-feasts?ncid=emlcntusfood00000001)
In a message dated 4/9/2009 12:30:25 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
billdeancarter(a)yahoo.com writes:
Please ignore this Green Ink Day nonsense, and address the Alan Cabal
article that has been expunged from Wikipedia's mainspace to its userspace for
unjust reasons:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:MichaelQSchmidt/sandbox_The_unloved_artic…>>
--------------------
I read through the comments at the AfD. I also seperately looked for
something about Alan Cabal. The comments at AfD were interesting. I'd never
really thought about the issue of whether a trivial google search for
someone who is an actual journalist/writer would be top-heavy on their own
writings.
If a person is solely known through their own writings, or if other
mentions of them are trivial, I'd have to side with the deletors. When I look
for Barbara Walters, I find lots of references to her, not writen by her. It
does make sense that journalists/writers would have many incidential
mentions, and lots of detailed mentions by them. The problem is finding
detailed mentions about them... but not by them.
That's the issue with Alan Cabel isn't it?
Has that issue been adequately addressed?
Keeping in mind that most websites cannot be used as [[WP:RS]] because
either they are personal sites masquerading as corporate sites, or they have
little to no editorial oversight.
Will Johnson
**************Feeling the pinch at the grocery store? Make dinner for $10
or less. (http://food.aol.com/frugal-feasts?ncid=emlcntusfood00000001)
I may agree with that but I am still waiting for mainstream media talking
about it and Larry's claims in the open before thinking about editing that
page.
Fayssal F.
> Date: Thu, 9 Apr 2009 18:15:16 +0100
> From: geni <geniice(a)gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] An open letter to Jimmy Wales
> To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID:
> <f80608430904091015t42c71370j9ccf28885624c53f(a)mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> 2009/4/9 Sam Korn <smoddy(a)gmail.com>:
> > Perhaps you can explain what the world at large, the Wikipedia
> > community and I personally gain from publicly pursuing it.
>
> It has in the past caused problems with our [[Wikipedia]] article and
> Jimbo's past attempts to distort the record did cause unnecessary
> conflict within wikipedia.
>
>
> --
> geni
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
>
> End of WikiEN-l Digest, Vol 69, Issue 22
> ****************************************
>
[apologies for cross-postings]
Hi everyone
Thought some people might be interested to know about my new book 'Cyberchiefs' which analyses leadership and organisation in free software projects, weblogs and wikis - in fact one of the case studies is on the English Wikipedia. See below for publisher blurb.
Cheers,
Mathieu
mathieu.oneil(a)anu.edu.au
*******
Cyberchiefs: Autonomy and Authority in Online Tribes
Mathieu O’Neil
April 2009
PB / £ 17.99 / $ 32.95 / 978-0-7453-2796-9 / 215mm x 135mm / 242 pp
‘Going against all easy celebrations of an Internet culture without authority or power structures, Cyberchiefs offers an important and relevant account of the innovations in forms of authority expressed by the social dynamics of Internet group formations.’
Tiziana Terranova, associate professor of Sociology of Communications and Cultural Studies at the University of Naples ‘L’Orientale’ and author of Network Culture: Politics for the Information Age.
People are inventing new ways of working together on the internet. Decentralised production thrives on weblogs, wikis and free software projects. In Cyberchiefs, Mathieu O’Neil focuses on the regulation of these working relationships. He examines the transformation of leadership and expertise in online networks, and the emergence of innovative forms of participatory politics.
What are the costs and benefits of alternatives to hierarchical organisation? Using case studies of online projects or ‘tribes’ such as the radical Primitivism archive, the Daily Kos political weblog, the Debian free software project, and Wikipedia, O’Neil shows that leaders must support maximum autonomy for participants, and he analyses the tensions generated by this distribution of authority.
Mathieu O’Neil is Adjunct Research Fellow at the Australian National University in the Australian Demographic and Social Research Institute, and Principal Researcher at Australia’s Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy. He has contributed articles to Le Monde diplomatique, Manière de voir and Factsheet 5. He has also worked as a magazine editor and designer, as an editor on the collective New Media Art weblog Under the Sun, and has curated international digital art exhibitions.
Publisher webpage (US): http://us.macmillan.com/cyberchiefs
Obligatory Facebook page: Coming soon!
****
Dr Mathieu O'Neil
Adjunct Research Fellow
Australian Demographic and Social Research Institute
College of Arts and Social Science
The Australian National University
E-mail: mathieu.oneil(a)anu.edu.au
Tel.: (61 02) 61 25 38 00
Web: http://adsri.anu.edu.au/people/visitors/mathieu.php
Mail: Coombs Building, 9
Canberra, ACT 0200 - AUSTRALIA
I have access to the original DNB through a world-subscription to Ancestry.
You could probably get it with just the British subscription which is probably
about a hundred bucks a year.
Will
**************
Feeling the pinch at the grocery store? Make dinner for $10 or
less. (http://food.aol.com/frugal-feasts?ncid=emlcntusfood00000001)
I ought to be used to this by now; but I have just found a 1911
Britannica article we have not imported or covered (see [[William
Stewart of Houston]]). These almost always crop up when the
disambiguation of common names, such as "William Stewart", was not
exhaustive in the checking.
Anyway, this might be a moment to mention ongoing work with another
merge, that of the old Dictionary of National Biography (DNB). I have
just reached the half-way point in doing a complete listing (with
summaries); see on [[User:Charles Matthews]]. The "raw material" for
that is in Magnus Manske's user space; I wouldn't mind help at all, but
the various types of corruption of scanned text make it a bit daunting
even with the "Concise Dictionary of National Biography" (CDNB) to hand.
In effect the 63 pages I'm producing are the content of the CDNB
summaries, restricted to the first edition (1900 and before) of the DNB.
Do ask if this seems of interest as a project.
It will all be moved into project space when it's looking more complete.
There is an ambitious Wikisource project to get the original DNB
articles posted: unlike the 1911EB, and some others we use, this work is
_not_ yet conveniently available online. (And it is a huge resource.)
Charles
I've analyzed Wikipedia's HTML code for representing geographical
coordinates. The current code is verbose and does not support the Geo
microformat correctly. Three alternatives, differing on functionality
and code size, are suggested as replacements:
http://www.princexml.com/howcome/2009/wikipedia/geo/
Alternative 1, which is comptible with Wikipedia's current syntax for
personalized presentation, reduces the number of elements from 14 to
10. Alternative 2, which uses CSS generated content to achieve
personalized presentations, reduces the number of elments from 14 to 5
and the code size from 798 to 248 bytes.
Cheers,
-h&kon
Håkon Wium Lie CTO °þe®ª
howcome(a)opera.com http://people.opera.com/howcome