Wikipedia-l October 2002

wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org

81 participants
419 discussions

Ideas for the portal page (was Re: [Intlwiki-l] Re: "We started in January 2001..." )
by Daniel Mayer 12 Oct '02

12 Oct '02

On Saturday 12 October 2002 12:33 pm, Anthere wrote: > The www.wikipedia.org is a very important address. > Must be used accordingly. I agree - the PR value of that address should be shared. >What is important in > wikipedia (for users) is first of all *content*. Hence > it is maybe not best that this address is used for the > foundation, which should come far after contents. I don't think any suggestions thus far would have www.wikipedia.org /only/ be about the Foundation. The portal page should also be a portal to the Foundation. Besides I don't see much difference between the Wikipedia Project and the Wikipedia Foundation; one is the body, the other is the head. They are therefore part of a whole. > The actual page as proposed is not containing any > content, just info about the concept of Wikipedia > (very important I agree nevertheless) and redirection > to other places. This is true. > What makes Wikipedia different from other > encyclopedias ? > *reactivity*. Because we do not rely on paper (bought > once in a lifetime) or peer review (hence delays in > publications), the power of wikipedia is that we can > come up with an actual subject very quickly. Again, very true. > So why wouldnot this "portal" page be, in particular, > a place where actualities are on the front ? > > People would maybe put www.wikipedia.org as a place > (link) where to drop by very frequently to keep > updated with info probably less biaised than their > newspaper, and with much more background ! The news > wouldnot be as quickly there as in www.lemonde.fr but > within a couple of days is much much better than much > encyclos can do. But Wikipedia is not CNN and each Main Page of most of the active language projects already have "current events" listed. > Then, why would not these links toward actual subjects > or background subject of actual issues, be in several > languages when available > > Something like > > Current events > * Israeli-Palestinian conflict (English) -- "title in > spanish" (spanish) > * John Walker Lindh (english) -- "title in japanese" > (japanese) > * Claus von Amsberg (English) -- Claus von Amsberg > (néerlandais) > * Bertrand Delanoë (français) -- Bertrand Delanoe > (English) > * Nobel Prize (English) -- Prix Nobels (français) > * Eldred v. Ashcroft (English) > * Jimmy Carter (English) > > my excuses, I don't necessarily the translations for > each langages. This seems like duplication of part of each language's Main Page and therefore would be difficult to maintain if done manually. There will also be translations of the project overview on the portal page in several different languages, no? The current events section of each would have to be updated. > The idea is just to > * provide content > * put current events coverage or background in the > front, something other encyc can't offer > * made obvious several langages are available > * put each of these langages at the same level > * generate a little bit more of competition and > collaboration between each langage if they want to > have at least one page in their langage here >...... Don't get me wrong I like the basic concept but I'm just not sure it would be practical. Maybe some php magic can be done that automatically takes the current events section of each Main Page of each language project and then displays the results in a box on each language version of the portal pages... That way a person at a glance will be able to see the current events listing for the whole project. That would be most cool. -- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)

1 0

RE: moving the English Wikipedia to en.wikipedia.org
by Daniel Mayer 12 Oct '02

12 Oct '02

On Saturday 12 October 2002 12:33 pm, elian wrote: > Just one more argument for the multilingual portal: for the German > wikipedia we thought of making posters (for promoting wikipedia a little > bit in universities). That means we have to put an URL on the poster > people are able to remember well. The normal non-expert internet user is > accustomed to URLs beginning with www (in fact most people simply don't > know that this is not a necessary part of an internet address) So he will > not remember de.wikipedia.org or is likely to get it wrong. On the other > hand, www signifies to everybody: "hey, this is an internet address", so > we don't even have to add a "http://" > > greetings, > elian Thanks for mentioning this point - it is a very important one. The PR power of www.wikipedia.org should be shared by all language projects. It would be unfair for the English Wikipedia to monopolize the direct benefits from this PR tool. -- Daniel Mayer (aka mav) PS to The Cunctator; When I say "language projects" what I mean is "subprojects of the larger Wikipedia Project that are based in different languages".

1 0

Little flags
by Daniel Mayer 12 Oct '02

12 Oct '02

On Saturday 12 October 2002 12:33 pm, Khendon wrote: > On Fri, Oct 11, 2002 at 07:28:14PM +0200, Magnus Manske wrote: > > When writing on Phase II, I was thinking about little flags for the > > different languages. We'd just need a merged GB/US flag for > > en.wikipedia.com... > > And Australian. And, uh, all the other countries that speak english. Yes this would be neat but may get out-of-hand for languages like Spanish in which there are dozens of countries who use Spanish as their main language. These flags would have to be tiny and might need to be combined in one image file per language for the upcoming portal page in order to limit the number of elements that browsers have to download. I'm not sure if the benefit is worth the cost but it should be at least tried. -- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)

1 0

www.wikipedia.org
by Anthere 12 Oct '02

12 Oct '02

I think I forgot to put this prop on the main list Aren't we procrastinating here ? Shouldnot we change the mailing lists to have one for en. matters and one for "meta".matters ??? --- The Cunctator <cunctator(a)kband.com> wrote: > On 10/12/02 1:37 AM, "Daniel Mayer" > <maveric149(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > We are already working on a portal page for the > whole project at Metapedia. > > > http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_to_do_with_www.wikipedia.org > > If approved, this page will be hosted at > www.wikipedia.org and the English > > Wikipedia will be at en.wikipedia.org. > > This is exactly the incredibly bad idea I'm worried > about. I can't really > think of anything more ill-conceived. Ok. So now we are on similar grounds. But what about voicing why you think this ill-conceived ? While I said yesterday why I thought it was not necessary a bad idea from a technical point of view, I had the following thoughts The www.wikipedia.org is a very important address. Must be used accordingly. What is important in wikipedia (for users) is first of all *content*. Hence it is maybe not best that this address is used for the foundation, which should come far after contents. The actual page as proposed is not containing any content, just info about the concept of Wikipedia (very important I agree nevertheless) and redirection to other places. What makes Wikipedia different from other encyclopedias ? *reactivity*. Because we do not rely on paper (bought once in a lifetime) or peer review (hence delays in publications), the power of wikipedia is that we can come up with an actual subject very quickly. So why wouldnot this "portal" page be, in particular, a place where actualities are on the front ? People would maybe put www.wikipedia.org as a place (link) where to drop by very frequently to keep updated with info probably less biaised than their newspaper, and with much more background ! The news wouldnot be as quickly there as in www.lemonde.fr but within a couple of days is much much better than much encyclos can do. Then, why would not these links toward actual subjects or background subject of actual issues, be in several languages when available Something like Current events * Israeli-Palestinian conflict (English) -- "title in spanish" (spanish) * John Walker Lindh (english) -- "title in japanese" (japanese) * Claus von Amsberg (English) -- Claus von Amsberg (n�erlandais) * Bertrand Delano� (fran�ais) -- Bertrand Delanoe (English) * Nobel Prize (English) -- Prix Nobels (fran�ais) * Eldred v. Ashcroft (English) * Jimmy Carter (English) my excuses, I don't necessarily the translations for each langages. The idea is just to * provide content * put current events coverage or background in the front, something other encyc can't offer * made obvious several langages are available * put each of these langages at the same level * generate a little bit more of competition and collaboration between each langage if they want to have at least one page in their langage here (just thinking here, I wrote these articles on Maurice Papon and Bertrand Delano� in english but didnot really bothered to translate them in french :-))) We could have something a bit equivalent with a couple of brillant prose articles in each langage, these changing from time to time... just random thoughts Anthere __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos & More http://faith.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ Intlwiki-l mailing list To unsubscribe and otherwise manage your list subscription, please go to http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/intlwiki-l Intlwiki-l(a)nupedia.com __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos & More http://faith.yahoo.com

1 0

Re: [Intlwiki-l] Re: "We started in January 2001..."
by Anthere 12 Oct '02

12 Oct '02

--- The Cunctator <cunctator(a)kband.com> wrote: > On 10/12/02 1:28 PM, "Anthere" <anthere5(a)yahoo.com> > wrote: > <snip>\> > > The www.wikipedia.org is a very important address. > > Must be used accordingly. What is important in > > wikipedia (for users) is first of all *content*. > Hence > > it is maybe not best that this address is used for > the > > foundation, which should come far after contents. > > > > The actual page as proposed is not containing any > > content, just info about the concept of Wikipedia > > (very important I agree nevertheless) and > redirection > > to other places. > > Exactly. This is the basic problem with the "portal" > concept. > > <snip interesting discussion> > > > > The idea is just to > > * provide content > > * put current events coverage or background in the > > front, something other encyc can't offer > > * made obvious several langages are available > > * put each of these langages at the same level > > * generate a little bit more of competition and > > collaboration between each langage if they want to > > have at least one page in their langage here > > > > (just thinking here, I wrote these articles on > Maurice > > Papon and Bertrand Delano? in english but didnot > > really bothered to translate them in french :-))) > > That is the problem with putting languages on the > same level. (All the other > ideas above are just right.) Having multiple > versions of the same > information, whether in different languages or in > multiple entries in one > language, is detrimental to the progress of the > project. At the same time, > only being in one language is detrimental to the > project. This implies better definition of the word "version" maybe. In french, version means basically translation. We recently changed our welcome text to indicate the french wikipedia was the equivalent of the en.wikipedia (instead of it being the version of the en.wiki) Though npov states that goal, I believe the majority of the articles will never be the same. We ain't machines, and nobody will take care to review over and over articles in each langage to check they are the same. This would be 1)no fun 2)limiting creativity. Picking info is one thing, translating it is another. After the article on Papon was reedited by several people, I copied it on the french wiki, and mostly let other french translate it. I tell you, within 2 weeks, the en. and the fr. article may look similar but *are not* the same. Some interested might check our http://fr.wikipedia.com/wiki.cgi?Jacques-Yves_Cousteau, much more npov than the en. one. > multiple entries in one > language, is detrimental to the progress of the > project. And I don't think it being detrimental to the project. In the long term, I believe each langage could get maybe more specific about some subjects. Just as some fields are more covered in one langage than another for the sake of human knowledge communication. Music by Germans, Romance by Italians, whatever. Say, it is possible that en.wiki has a small article about "Le Festival de Cannes" and we have a very comprehensive one. Does that make sense for english to have a very comprehensive one ? Does that not make sense then to have a long "current event" on www.wikipedia.org in french and a short in english ? > An example of how to attempt to compromise between > those issues for the www > home page, for example, would be to keep the current > event links in English > but: > 1) at the top of the page list all the languages in > their native tongue (I > had added the more complete list, but Mav reverted > it since some of them > were rarely used) Are you proposing just the same page than the current one here, with just all languages instead of a small dozen ? Where is the compromise ? I see very little difference with the current situation. If what worries you is the mis-representation we would have over the english representation with what I propose, I need to reassure you. We have very little "current news" right now, and I don't expect we will have much more until we are bigger. So it is very likely we would only have a couple of links on the page. That should do for a representation proportional to our size I guess... > 2) add a section for highlighting entries in other > languages Can you explain that more ? Where is the section ? How to access it ? How do you plan to take into account further development of say...the german wiki is her links are relegated somewhere and not very visible ? > (Note that 2) would be greatly helped if we figure > out ways to integrate > Recent Changes.) I totally agree __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos & More http://faith.yahoo.com

1 0

Re: "We started in January 2001..."
by Daniel Mayer 12 Oct '02

12 Oct '02

On Friday 11 October 2002 09:27 pm, Kpjas wrote: > Hello all, > > "We started in January 2001 and are already working on 52607 articles (in > the English version)..." > > Is there an easy way to change this sentence on the opening (main) > page of www.wikipedia.org to reflect (even estimated) the total > number of pages created by all Wikipedias ? I'm sure this is possible but I'm also pretty sure the code for it hasn't been written yet. This is a great idea BTW. > This will be a small step towards making Wikipedia one unified project. > > Regards, > Kpjas. We are already working on a portal page for the whole project at Metapedia. http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_to_do_with_www.wikipedia.org If approved, this page will be hosted at www.wikipedia.org and the English Wikipedia will be at en.wikipedia.org. This is a lot better than trying to make the English Wikipedia Main Page also be the Portal Page for the whole project. Under a couple of plans, the welcome message on the portal page will also be translated into many different languages in the same way as the Main Page for Metapedia is now translated. This also requires a different character set than the one used by the English Wikipedia - thus the English Wikipedia and the portal page needs to be separate (at least I think this is the case - developers, would it be possible to have a different character set for just one page in a wiki?). {{NUMBEROFARTICLESALLLANGUAGES}}, {{NUMBEROFLANGUAGES}} and {{NUMBEROFARTICLES-XX}} (where XX is a language code) would be very useful things to have on a portal page for the whole project. -- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)

2 1

Wierd bug!
by Karen AKA Kajikit 12 Oct '02

12 Oct '02

When I clicked on a brown link to take me to a stub entry, it seems to take me to a random page instead. And then when I click on my 'back' button to try to get back to where I came from, it takes me to ANOTHER random page! Has anyone else noticed this????? Actually, it suddenly seems to be happening with ALL links! Is somebody playing with the program right now? This is too wierd! -- Karen AKA Kajikit To err is human... to really foul things up add kitten and stir. Come and visit my part of the web: Kajikit's Corner: http://Kajikit.netfirms.com/ Aussie Support Mailing List: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AussieSupport Allergyfree Eating Recipe Swap: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Allergyfree_Eating Ample Aussies Mailing List: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ampleaussies/

4 4

Advertisment
by Anthere 12 Oct '02

12 Oct '02

Humhum, For those of you who can't technically help to solve the en.bug, and are wikialcoolics, sisters wikipedias are working very well, and would be delighted to receive your visit during that interlude. :-) __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos & More http://faith.yahoo.com

1 0

Re: Wierd bug!
by Daniel Mayer 12 Oct '02

12 Oct '02

On Friday 11 October 2002 09:27 pm, wikipedia-l-request(a)nupedia.com wrote: > When I clicked on a brown link to take me to a stub entry, it seems to > take me to a random page instead. And then when I click on my 'back' > button to try to get back to where I came from, it takes me to ANOTHER > random page! > > Has anyone else noticed this????? > > Actually, it suddenly seems to be happening with ALL links! Is somebody > playing with the program right now? This is too wierd! Yep - the Wiki has gone off the deep end. I don't think it is the random page gone wild since the url is correct but the page displayed is completely wrong. Oh well, I need to catch-up on my Star Trek watching anyway. ;-) -- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)

1 0

Re: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Moving the English Wikipedia to en.wikipedia.org
by lcrocker＠nupedia.com 12 Oct '02

12 Oct '02

>> If there's no objection, I'm going to switch the URL redirecting >> around tomorrow, so that www.wikipedia.org/* points to >> en.wikipedia.org/* rather than the other way 'round. A new >> intro page can later be set up at convenience. > I object strenuously. This is not a slam-dunk good idea at all. > Please hold off at least a good while before doing this. I really hate saying this, but, um, I'm with Cunc here. I also think it's a really bad idea to have www.wikipedia.org be anything but the most direct route to the front page of the English Wikipedia. Like it or not, that's where the action is. As long as the front page continues to have links to the foreign wikis, I see no need to waste the time of 90% of our users with a pointless "intro" page.

9 11

← Newer
1
...
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
...
42
Older →

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

Wikipedia-l October 2002