There is no link to the main page on the navigation bar O.o at least (I can't find it, rc is first). Best regards, Elisabeth Anderl (aka spacebirdy)

effe iets anders a écrit :

Let me add to it that I do not think that this layout is an improvement... (at least on Ubuntu and Firefox)

BR, Lodewijk

2008/1/3, Brion Vibber brion@wikimedia.org:

...

Sergey "putnik" Leschina wrote:

...

Administrator of Russian Wikibooks hid banners of WMF and MediaWiki in default skin (Monobook). May he did it or banners should be visible?

I'd say that's a pretty rude thing to do and should be undone.

The change was made March 2006: http://ru.wikibooks.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki:Monobook.css&diff=80...

-- brion vibber (brion @ wikimedia.org)

---

Hello,

On Jan 4, 2008 12:45 AM, Casey Brown cbrown1023.ml@gmail.com wrote:

Seems like something for a personal monobook and not the main site css... I agree with what's been said pretty much, this should be reverted if not done already.

Knowing that this user is the only sysop there [1] and has a long history of managing Russian-language wikibooks as if it were his [2], I doubt simply asking him will be enough.

[1] http://ru.wikibooks.org/wiki/%D0%A1%D0%BB%D1%83%D0%B6%D0%B5%D0%B1%D0%BD%D0%B... [2] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:VasilievVV/Ramir@ruwikibooks_abuses

ru.wikibook Main page also NO wikimedia sister project links and logos. ru.wikibook leave the wikimedia?

2008/1/4, Elisabeth Anderl n9502784@students.meduniwien.ac.at:

Let's see it, I just tried:

http://tinyurl.com/ytq78s

kind regards

*Guillaume Paumier a écrit :

...

Knowing that this user is the only sysop there [1] and has a long history of managing Russian-language wikibooks as if it were his [2], I doubt simply asking him will be enough.

[1] http://ru.wikibooks.org/wiki/%D0%A1%D0%BB%D1%83%D0%B6%D0%B5%D0%B1%D0%BD%D0%B... [2] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:VasilievVV/Ramir@ruwikibooks_abuses

---

foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Sergey "putnik" Leschina wrote:

This is translation of discussion about banners with Ramir at the Forum: http://ru.wikibooks.org/w/index.php?oldid=25807#.D0.9A.D0.BD.D0.BE.D0.BF.D0....

I'd already started this discussion before, but it was archived. Let me repeat that every Foundation project should by default have banners for the Foundation's and engine's websites. Removing #f-poweredbyico, #f-copyrightico{display:none} from MediaWiki:Monobook.css would be enough to restore them. --putnik

You don't need to repeat. You need to provide [us/me] with a link to Foundation's official requirements. Or I'll archive such advisors again. --Ramir

Isn't simple respect to those who host the project enough? --putnik

The hosters have lost the respect of Wikibooks' users and benefactors long ago. And they put advertisement for their [derogatory synonym for 'profit'] in big Latin letters at the top of every page; one banner is enough for them. --Ramir

Sounds like a pretty clear-cut case of abuse of sysop powers.

-- brion vibber (brion @ wikimedia.org)

Agreed, and putnik's translation is accurate. For the record, the're also considering replacing the wikibooks logo with a derivative using cyrillics, but they can't agree on the proper version.

I don't think the interface was intended to be messed with in this way by the individual projects. Something needs to be done.

-Dan On Jan 4, 2008, at 12:22 PM, Brion Vibber wrote:

Sergey "putnik" Leschina wrote:

...

This is translation of discussion about banners with Ramir at the Forum: http://ru.wikibooks.org/w/index.php?oldid=25807#.D0.9A.D0.BD.D0.BE.D0.BF.D0....

I'd already started this discussion before, but it was archived. Let me repeat that every Foundation project should by default have banners for the Foundation's and engine's websites. Removing #f-poweredbyico, #f-copyrightico{display:none} from MediaWiki:Monobook.css would be enough to restore them. --putnik

You don't need to repeat. You need to provide [us/me] with a link to Foundation's official requirements. Or I'll archive such advisors again. --Ramir

Isn't simple respect to those who host the project enough? --putnik

The hosters have lost the respect of Wikibooks' users and benefactors long ago. And they put advertisement for their [derogatory synonym for 'profit'] in big Latin letters at the top of every page; one banner is enough for them. --Ramir

Sounds like a pretty clear-cut case of abuse of sysop powers.

-- brion vibber (brion @ wikimedia.org)

---

foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

On Jan 4, 2008, at 12:44 PM, Andrew Whitworth wrote:

On Jan 4, 2008 12:35 PM, Dan Rosenthal swatjester@gmail.com wrote:

...

I don't think the interface was intended to be messed with in this way by the individual projects. Something needs to be done.

If you don't put the rules in writing, you can't expect anybody to follow them. Intentions are basically worthless in this regard. I personally think that more projects should modify their interfaces to fit their own needs and to differentiate themselves from other projects.

Ideally, the new wikibooks logo won't have any text on it, or no text on it by default, so we can avoid language localizations.

--Andrew Whitworth

---

foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

I'd like to think common sense is not so dead, that we'd think it's ok to remove references to the foundation because we dislike them for certain reasons. It's one thing to modify an interface to fit one's own needs. It's another modify it to deliberately remove references to the foundation.

-Dan

Dan Rosenthal wrote:

Agreed, and putnik's translation is accurate. For the record, the're also considering replacing the wikibooks logo with a derivative using cyrillics, but they can't agree on the proper version.

Note that that's ok; we've generally been pretty cool with slightly-customized logos of this sort.

I don't think the interface was intended to be messed with in this way by the individual projects. Something needs to be done.

A formal request would be polite before escalating to something like a desysop.

-- brion

On a similar note, a second sysop, like a second CU, should be a necessity in all projects. If you don't have the community to support at least two sysops, then you probably shouldnt have any. Reduces the risk of unchecked god-kings running around and turning the projects into their own personal playgrounds.

I don't think it's a necessity, but it's something we should aim for whenever possible. Having two checkusers is essential because checkuser logs are private, sysop logs are public, so the community can monitor sysops for abuse, they can't monitor checkusers for abuse. In most cases, I think one admin is probably better than none - most admin work is routine and uncontroversial and it would be a waste of steward time to get them to do everything when there is someone local willing to do it.

He lives in New Zealand, I'm guessing he speaks English. Nice of him to be so accommodating.

On Jan 4, 2008 6:19 PM, Elisabeth Anderl n9502784@students.meduniwien.ac.at wrote:

Here is the response, since Ramir http://ru.wikibooks.org/wiki/%D0%A3%D1%87%D0%B0%D1%81%D1%82%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%BA:Ramir does not speak other languages than Russian to me (I offered English, Spanish, German, French and Icelandic) I can't continue a communication there and let this up to Russian speakers.

Answer: http://tinyurl.com/2ual4x

Translator: http://tinyurl.com/3dto3r

Best regards, Elisabeth Anderl (aka spacebirdy)

---

foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Sorry to say that, but if it is so then http://tinyurl.com/ywcnm9 simply was a lie... imho a conversation on this basis with him seems senseless, sorry. Best regards.

Yaroslav M. Blanter a écrit :

He indeed speaks English, since his weblog contains some English entries. I am not sure Russian speakers will be more successful, since the guy last year has been stripped the admin status on Russian WP for misconduct by the special decision of AK (one of the three cases ever I believe). Looks like this is the case for the future arbitration committee, unless some authority interferes beforehand.

Cheers, Yaroslav

...

He lives in New Zealand, I'm guessing he speaks English. Nice of him to be so accommodating.

On Jan 4, 2008 6:19 PM, Elisabeth Anderl n9502784@students.meduniwien.ac.at wrote:

...

Here is the response, since Ramir http://ru.wikibooks.org/wiki/%D0%A3%D1%87%D0%B0%D1%81%D1%82%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%BA:Ramir does not speak other languages than Russian to me (I offered English, Spanish, German, French and Icelandic) I can't continue a communication there and let this up to Russian speakers.

Answer: http://tinyurl.com/2ual4x

Translator: http://tinyurl.com/3dto3r

Best regards, Elisabeth Anderl (aka spacebirdy)

---

It means:

"Sorry, I don't understand"

best regards.

Nathan a écrit :

What does "Unnskyld, jeg forstår ikke." mean? Its transliterated it looks like, so translators make no heads or tails of it.

On Jan 5, 2008 11:38 AM, Elisabeth Anderl n9502784@students.meduniwien.ac.at wrote:

...

Sorry to say that, but if it is so then http://tinyurl.com/ywcnm9 simply was a lie... imho a conversation on this basis with him seems senseless, sorry. Best regards.

Yaroslav M. Blanter a écrit :

...

He indeed speaks English, since his weblog contains some English entries. I am not sure Russian speakers will be more successful, since the guy last year has been stripped the admin status on Russian WP for misconduct by the special decision of AK (one of the three cases ever I believe). Looks like this is the case for the future arbitration committee, unless some authority interferes beforehand.

Cheers, Yaroslav

...

He lives in New Zealand, I'm guessing he speaks English. Nice of him to be so accommodating.

On Jan 4, 2008 6:19 PM, Elisabeth Anderl n9502784@students.meduniwien.ac.at wrote:

...

Here is the response, since Ramir http://ru.wikibooks.org/wiki/%D0%A3%D1%87%D0%B0%D1%81%D1%82%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%BA:Ramir does not speak other languages than Russian to me (I offered English, Spanish, German, French and Icelandic) I can't continue a communication there and let this up to Russian speakers.

Answer: http://tinyurl.com/2ual4x

Translator: http://tinyurl.com/3dto3r

Best regards, Elisabeth Anderl (aka spacebirdy)

---

He speaks Russian, but responds to English with Norwegian? Is that because Elisabeth is Norwegian? (scratching my head here). It seems like if the community there is unable to take steps, then the Foundation should step in. There are limits to the autonomy of projects, it isn't complete.

On Jan 5, 2008 12:11 PM, Yaroslav M. Blanter putevod@mccme.ru wrote:

...

What does "Unnskyld, jeg forst?r ikke." mean? Its transliterated it looks like, so translators make no heads or tails of it.

"Excuse me, I do not understand" (Norvegian)

Cheers, Yaroslav

---

foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

I am not Norwegian :) but I understand that language a bit due to my German and Icelandic knowledge. First I assumed good faith and I asked in IRC for help, that is why there is a Russian text from an IP who explained what I wrote in perfect Russian too. But due to the facts I learned here (that he understood me perfectly well) imho he just tried to respond in a language he /thought /I would not understand. Best regards.

Nathan a écrit :

He speaks Russian, but responds to English with Norwegian? Is that because Elisabeth is Norwegian? (scratching my head here). It seems like if the community there is unable to take steps, then the Foundation should step in. There are limits to the autonomy of projects, it isn't complete.

Hoi, There are limits to the autonomy of projects. These limits have not been defined. In the discussions about a global arbcom it is suggested that it should only be there for the smaller projects. I do disagree, when autonomy is limited limitations imposed should be imposed equally. It would be discriminatory to put limits on others that you would not want to bear yourself. It is also true that the big projects have had the privilege to establish their policies. The English language Wikipedia has had the benefit from a lot of close attention and became what it is as a result. The culture of other countries, languages is different and the way Wikipedias will grow will also be similar but different as a result.

So far the Wikimedia Foundation has kept distance between itself and the projects. There are instances where the board has been seen to keep its prerogative to provide high justice when and where needed. It is for instance the board that gives final approval to new projects. This has worked well.

When a global arbitration committee is to deal with individual complaints, we will find people that will game the system. We will find people pressing hat projects all have to do things in the same way because it appeals to their sense of what is right. To a large extend this will create work, not provide clear benefits and it will not remove the sense that governance is removed from the ordinary editors. Far from it, it will create another layer of arguments decrying the distance between the organisation and the smaller projects.

So far, when an issue arose, there were people arguing for a resolution. This was not efficient, it took time but it often had the benefit that it resolving it self in time. The solutions were not always neat but when projects are independent, they do not have to be neat in our eyes, we can assume trust that it will move towards what is optimal.

I do not negate a need for a global Arbcom. I think that there is a need for such a body. I argue for reluctance in applying it as a tool. I would like to have a body that only deals with issues that require "high justice" on things where the autonomy of the project is preventing resolution. These are instances where blatant copy violations are supported. Where NPOV issues needs to be addressed because they are not acceptable. Obvious abuse of power by admins. Quiet or not so quiet diplomacy combined with the potential of a full fledged arbitration case is what works best. Such a case would lead to a recommendation to the board, and when the board accepts it, it is soon enough.

In my opinion the composition of the people who deal with an arbitration case would be optimal when it reflects the project it is about combined with people who are familiar with the WMF as an organisation. A Wikibooks case should include people familiar with Wikibooks looking at the issue. This in turn means that there is a premium when people of the different language versions of a project are familiar with each others practices, when things are out of hand, when diplomacy does not help, when things need to be addressed on a global level, there are only losers.

Thanks, GerardM

On Jan 5, 2008 6:14 PM, Nathan nawrich@gmail.com wrote:

He speaks Russian, but responds to English with Norwegian? Is that because Elisabeth is Norwegian? (scratching my head here). It seems like if the community there is unable to take steps, then the Foundation should step in. There are limits to the autonomy of projects, it isn't complete.

On Jan 5, 2008 12:11 PM, Yaroslav M. Blanter < putevod@mccme.ru> wrote:

...

...

What does "Unnskyld, jeg forst?r ikke." mean? Its transliterated it looks like, so translators make no heads or tails of it.

"Excuse me, I do not understand" (Norvegian)

Cheers, Yaroslav

---

foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

---

foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l