The BBC has an article on the Flagged Revisions controversy:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/7851400.stm
William King (Willking1979)
2009/1/26 William King williamcarlking@gmail.com:
The BBC has an article on the Flagged Revisions controversy: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/7851400.stm
Apparently they called Michael Peel of WMUK but didn't use the comment ...
- d.
On Jan 26, 2009, at 10:16 AM, William King wrote:
The BBC has an article on the Flagged Revisions controversy:
I'm sure there's context for the photo, but I still have to wonder why, of all the photos of Jimbo that exist in the world, they picked the one of him in a dress.
-Phil
On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 11:53 PM, Philip Sandifer snowspinner@gmail.com wrote:
On Jan 26, 2009, at 10:16 AM, William King wrote:
The BBC has an article on the Flagged Revisions controversy:
I'm sure there's context for the photo, but I still have to wonder why, of all the photos of Jimbo that exist in the world, they picked the one of him in a dress.
I think it is a Chinese top.
Carcharoth
On Jan 26, 2009, at 7:11 PM, Carcharoth wrote:
On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 11:53 PM, Philip Sandifer <snowspinner@gmail.com
wrote:
On Jan 26, 2009, at 10:16 AM, William King wrote:
The BBC has an article on the Flagged Revisions controversy:
I'm sure there's context for the photo, but I still have to wonder why, of all the photos of Jimbo that exist in the world, they picked the one of him in a dress.
I think it is a Chinese top.
As I said, I'm sure there is context - I would assume it was from the Taipei Wikimania, etc. And that it is cropped so that it looks more feminine than it probably actually did.
Still, the BBC picked a photo where he appears to be wearing a dress. And this was not for lack of other options.
-Phil
2009/1/27 Philip Sandifer snowspinner@gmail.com:
As I said, I'm sure there is context - I would assume it was from the Taipei Wikimania, etc. And that it is cropped so that it looks more feminine than it probably actually did. Still, the BBC picked a photo where he appears to be wearing a dress. And this was not for lack of other options.
BBC journalists are actually very nice people, and (because they're not working for advertisers) do try very hard to do a good job. However, they've had so many ridiculous cutbacks that stuff is done very fast and semicompetently. This is why the writing on news.bbc.co.uk verges on the semiliterate these days. Thankfully they're willing to take corrections.
But I would suggest assuming good faith, i.e. it really was the first picture they found in the pile.
- d.
2009/1/27 David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com:
2009/1/27 Philip Sandifer snowspinner@gmail.com:
As I said, I'm sure there is context - I would assume it was from the Taipei Wikimania, etc. And that it is cropped so that it looks more feminine than it probably actually did. Still, the BBC picked a photo where he appears to be wearing a dress. And this was not for lack of other options.
BBC journalists are actually very nice people, and (because they're not working for advertisers) do try very hard to do a good job. However, they've had so many ridiculous cutbacks that stuff is done very fast and semicompetently. This is why the writing on news.bbc.co.uk verges on the semiliterate these days. Thankfully they're willing to take corrections.
But I would suggest assuming good faith, i.e. it really was the first picture they found in the pile.
I think it's a good photo - having our founder wearing non-Western clothing shows how international we are.
On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 12:45 AM, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
2009/1/27 Philip Sandifer snowspinner@gmail.com:
As I said, I'm sure there is context - I would assume it was from the Taipei Wikimania, etc. And that it is cropped so that it looks more feminine than it probably actually did. Still, the BBC picked a photo where he appears to be wearing a dress. And this was not for lack of other options.
BBC journalists are actually very nice people, and (because they're not working for advertisers) do try very hard to do a good job. However, they've had so many ridiculous cutbacks that stuff is done very fast and semicompetently. This is why the writing on news.bbc.co.uk verges on the semiliterate these days. Thankfully they're willing to take corrections.
But I would suggest assuming good faith, i.e. it really was the first picture they found in the pile.
Yeah, but it was a GETTY image! Why not a freely licensed image? :-)
A cropped version was used here:
http://www.smh.com.au/news/technology/biztech/battle-to-outgun-wikipedia-and...
Carcharoth
Probably too lazy to deal with all the GFDL stuff we keep hounding them about. :)
bibliomaniac15
--- On Mon, 1/26/09, Carcharoth carcharothwp@googlemail.com wrote: From: Carcharoth carcharothwp@googlemail.com Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] BBC article on Flagged Revisions To: "English Wikipedia" wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Monday, January 26, 2009, 4:55 PM
On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 12:45 AM, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
2009/1/27 Philip Sandifer snowspinner@gmail.com:
As I said, I'm sure there is context - I would assume it was from
the
Taipei Wikimania, etc. And that it is cropped so that it looks more feminine than it probably actually did. Still, the BBC picked a photo where he appears to be wearing a dress. And this was not for lack of other options.
BBC journalists are actually very nice people, and (because they're not working for advertisers) do try very hard to do a good job. However, they've had so many ridiculous cutbacks that stuff is done very fast and semicompetently. This is why the writing on news.bbc.co.uk verges on the semiliterate these days. Thankfully they're willing to take corrections.
But I would suggest assuming good faith, i.e. it really was the first picture they found in the pile.
Yeah, but it was a GETTY image! Why not a freely licensed image? :-)
A cropped version was used here:
http://www.smh.com.au/news/technology/biztech/battle-to-outgun-wikipedia-and...
Carcharoth
_______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
WHY ON EARTH is Jimbo wearing a Japanese dress?
-- Alvaro
On 26-01-2009, at 20:53, Philip Sandifer snowspinner@gmail.com wrote:
On Jan 26, 2009, at 10:16 AM, William King wrote:
The BBC has an article on the Flagged Revisions controversy:
I'm sure there's context for the photo, but I still have to wonder why, of all the photos of Jimbo that exist in the world, they picked the one of him in a dress.
-Phil
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512
On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 8:58 PM, Alvaro García wrote:
WHY ON EARTH is Jimbo wearing a Japanese dress?
Excuse me. Jimbo wearing a 'Japanese dress' would look more like this: https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/wiki/File:JimmyWales_wearing_...
In the BBC article, Jimbo is not wearing anything Japanese, but rather wearing a traditional - almost stereotypical - Chinese garment called a qipao (see https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Cheongsam ).
- -- gwern
On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 2:08 AM, Gwern Branwen gwern0@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 8:58 PM, Alvaro García wrote:
WHY ON EARTH is Jimbo wearing a Japanese dress?
Excuse me. Jimbo wearing a 'Japanese dress' would look more like this: https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/wiki/File:JimmyWales_wearing_...
In the BBC article, Jimbo is not wearing anything Japanese, but rather wearing a traditional - almost stereotypical - Chinese garment called a qipao (see https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Cheongsam).
Or maybe the male equivalent?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Changshan
Carcharoth
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512
On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 5:28 AM, Carcharoth wrote:
On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 2:08 AM, Gwern Branwen wrote:
On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 8:58 PM, Alvaro García wrote:
WHY ON EARTH is Jimbo wearing a Japanese dress?
Excuse me. Jimbo wearing a 'Japanese dress' would look more like this:
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/wiki/File:JimmyWales_wearing_...
In the BBC article, Jimbo is not wearing anything Japanese, but rather wearing a traditional - almost stereotypical - Chinese garment called a qipao (see https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Cheongsam).
Or maybe the male equivalent?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Changshan
Carcharoth
An easy mistake indeed. But didn't you know Jimbo always cross-dresses for major occasions to underline the subversiveness of Wikipedia and as a shout-out to its many LBGT editors?
(But seriously, the Cheongsam article didn't make clear that it referred only to female garments. Time to go edit it...)
- -- gwern
Of the two articles that I've read, neither get all the facts right - but the BBC one is pretty terrible. It doesn't mention the poll, refers to Jimmy's statement as coming "from a blog" (misattributing a source, unless it was crossposted from his talkpage), using a strange and distracting image, failing to describe the scope of the problem, incorrectly stating that the proposal comes from Jimmy, etc.
Can't imagine why the article doesn't have a byline...
Nathan
On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 2:45 PM, Nathan nawrich@gmail.com wrote:
It doesn't mention the poll, refers to Jimmy's statement as coming "from a blog" (misattributing a source, unless it was crossposted from his talkpage),
FWIW, there is a link in the right-hand column direct to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jimbo_Wales#Why_I_am_asking_Flagged_R... describing it as a blog entry.
One of the problems with being an expert in anything (be it Wikipedia, nuclear physics, theology or cricket) is that you notice terrible journalism in your field!
Sam
On Tuesday 27 January 2009 08:55, Sam Korn wrote:
On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 2:45 PM, Nathan nawrich@gmail.com wrote:
It doesn't mention the poll, refers to Jimmy's statement as coming "from a blog" (misattributing a source, unless it was crossposted from his talkpage),
FWIW, there is a link in the right-hand column direct to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jimbo_Wales#Why_I_am_asking_Flagged_ Revisions_to_be_turned_on_now describing it as a blog entry.
And, functionally, that IS a blog entry.
On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 2:17 PM, Gwern Branwen gwern0@gmail.com wrote:
[Chinese clothing]
An easy mistake indeed. But didn't you know Jimbo always cross-dresses for major occasions to underline the subversiveness of Wikipedia and as a shout-out to its many LBGT editors?
(But seriously, the Cheongsam article didn't make clear that it referred only to female garments. Time to go edit it...)
There are political overtones as well. Apparently this sort of clothing is not common in mainland China since the Cultural Revolution. Though places like Hong Kong and Taiwan presumably still use it. But this is getting off-topic. Back to Flagged Revisions.
What is the latest news?
Carcharoth
Oops, my mistake! But let me tell you a Kimono is not a dress. There are Japanese dresses too.
-- Alvaro
On 26-01-2009, at 23:08, Gwern Branwen gwern0@gmail.com wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512
On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 8:58 PM, Alvaro García wrote:
WHY ON EARTH is Jimbo wearing a Japanese dress?
Excuse me. Jimbo wearing a 'Japanese dress' would look more like this: https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/wiki/File:JimmyWales_wearing_...
In the BBC article, Jimbo is not wearing anything Japanese, but rather wearing a traditional - almost stereotypical - Chinese garment called a qipao (see https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Cheongsam ).
gwern -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEAREKAAYFAkl+bLIACgkQvpDo5Pfl1oI/CwCfSrYLYOELTCDEgBjXTX2+2R/a wxIAn218dGiKKFHr2DCZ4rSVinPLDggp =sbW2 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
E-mailing revisions to an author concerned with the article you want to revise would do about the same thing, plus, rather than having a few volunteers for the process and the resulting Jerman experience with a backlog and weeks of delay, that author might hav time to offer feedback, including the potential for a personal block or a polite refusal to be your proxy.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512
On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 8:35 PM, brewhaha%40edmc.net wrote:
E-mailing revisions to an author concerned with the article you want to revise would do about the same thing, plus, rather than having a few volunteers for the process and the resulting Jerman experience with a backlog and weeks of delay, that author might hav time to offer feedback, including the potential for a personal block or a polite refusal to be your proxy.
So you would add yet another layer of bureaucracy? At that point - having to manually email in diffs and change them based on an editor's say-so - it's about as easy to contribute to a Wikipedia article as a Knol article.
In case you don't follow me: with any system that makes contributing as much of an ordeal as that, we can basically kiss goodbye to anonymous edits. At that point, it'd be more efficient to ban anonymous edits altogether.
- -- gwern
It's "have", not "hav".
-- Alvaro
On 26-01-2009, at 22:35, "brewhaha%40edmc.net" brewhaha@edmc.net wrote:
E-mailing revisions to an author concerned with the article you want to revise would do about the same thing, plus, rather than having a few volunteers for the process and the resulting Jerman experience with a backlog and weeks of delay, that author might hav time to offer feedback, including the potential for a personal block or a polite refusal to be your proxy.
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On 1/27/09, Alvaro García alvareo@gmail.com wrote:
It's "have", not "hav".
Unless you are Nigel Molesworth, hem hem.
Hehe, just looked him up on Wikipedia.
-- Alvaro
On 27-01-2009, at 8:48, Sam Blacketer sam.blacketer@googlemail.com wrote:
On 1/27/09, Alvaro García alvareo@gmail.com wrote:
It's "have", not "hav".
Unless you are Nigel Molesworth, hem hem.
-- Sam Blacketer _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l