Mark,
Are you saying that rather than (A) banning jerks, we should rather (B) simply revert their "work" and drive on without them?
If so, this sort of combines what Jimbo had said before about just letting them have their way for a day -- with the anarchists ideal of "not exercising power".
But do you think edit wars won't mushroom out of control? Should I go back, say, 15 edits ago (to yesterday's "clean" version) and edit that? I can't figure out whether that's bending over to accommodate anti-social behavior -- or that's anti-social in itself.
Ed Poor
[Note: The message that I'm replying to didn't appear on <wikipedia-l>.]
Brion Vibber wrote:
>It strikes me as violating the principle of least astonishment that
>"Delete this page" and the little "(del)" link next to the current image
>revision do different things on an image description page, namely:
>* "Delete this page" deletes only the image description page, leaving
>the image file and its revisions intact, and the image remains in the
>images list
>* "(del)" deletes the image file, any old revisions, the entry from the
>images list, *and* the description page.
>User expectation seems to be that "delete this page" should perform the
>second function.
I agree with Brion.
But I think that the change should appear on the main list too,
since presumably some people have acclimated themselves to the old way.
Hence I am crossposting this reply.
-- Toby
LMS wrote:
>This is a bit off the topic, but it came up and I can't let it pass. KQ
>said recently that Cunctator is the project's *conscience*. Perhaps KQ
>was just trying to be nice, but I think that is actually unfair to the
>rest of us, who like to think we have a principled approach to the
project
>as well. It also accords Cunc respect as somehow *the* representative of
>a *particularly* moral point of view, to whom the rest of us ought to pay
>special heed--I disagree with that and I enjoin you not to accord *any*
>one person such special respect. (I'm not sure KQ meant to imply all
this
>by "conscience of the project," and I also doubt, in his reasonableness
>and modesty, that Cunc would reject the description when cashed out as I
>have done, but I just want this to be clear.)
eh, well, no I didn't mean all that, though I guess it was all implied
by my sloppy writing. :-) All I meant was that Cunc, of all of us,
seems most concerned with abuses of authority. I wouldn't like to
appoint anyone an 'authority' on anything, and certainly I like to
think of people as generally principled.
kq
I merged my little script with the fine layout from the other page.
Please try again
http://mitglied.lycos.de/manske/wiki/test.php (Sorry for the
banner, I can't help it)
I included the English and German intro, as well as the localized search
function. The word "Search" and the intro will appear in English for all
other browser settings, as English is the default for languages that
don't have an intro text of their own.
Known problems:
* Neutral or localized logo is needed
* Maybe an unobstrusive link in or close to the intro to the English
wikipedia, as an anchor for anyone who is stuck on a foreign PC ("This
page in English")
* Works only for Phase III wikipedias (.org)
Magnus
With the understanding that this is a survey and not
an official vote...
> www.wikipedia.org should:
>
> [] not be changed at all.
>
> [x] redirect depending on the browser's language
> setting to the wikipedia
> in the prefered language. (but see below)
>
> [] be a multilingual portal (1)
>
> [] other ______
With the redirection page, I think the contributors
should rework their front pages to make the existance
of the other language project more prominant. Also,
there should be an option in your Wikipedia
preferences to set your default language.
Stephen G.
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Y! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your web site
http://webhosting.yahoo.com/
194.117.133.196 (cache-haw.cableinet.co.uk) which has been blocked in the
last hour or so is a transparent proxy cache for users of the Blueyonder
cable modem service in Bristol, England. The IP block is affecting me even
though I'm logged in.
Any ideas?
Rob Brewer
[[User:Rbrwr]]
Just a note - the [[Wikipedia talk:Bots]] page has a nice summary of the
discussion of pros and cons of the bots, and seems to be developing a
consensus solution.
Cheers - Chas [[User:Chas_zzz_brown]]
On Saturday 26 October 2002 08:57 am, Elian wrote:
> Erik Moeller <erik_moeller(a)gmx.de> writes:
> > Besides, in both cases, I really don't see what the big deal is.
>
> The big deal is: Do you see Wikipedia as a bunch of separate language
> projects which don't need a common frontpage or do you see it as a
> multilingual united project?
We are a multilingual project, but we aren't at the "multilingual _unified_
project" stage yet. However, we are moving in that direction. When we do
become such a project by combining the separate encyclopedia databases and
wikis into one encyclopedia database and one wiki that is just organized by
language, then it would make perfect sense to have one page for the whole
project. A static front page for a wiki also sends the wrong message in
general (this is different and IMO much more harmful than having a protected
wiki front page).
So as we continue to work on the eventual layout of a unified multilingual
front page for the whole project and work towards a multilingual Phase IV, we
should implement the browser language "sniffer and redirect" idea.
The next thing we could do is enhance the language sniffer idea with the
previous suggestion for a HTML heading frame that allows for enhanced
interlanguage navigation for anybody entering through www.wikipedia.org.
Then by the time Phase IV rolls out we should have a pretty neat and very
useful multilingual front page, a combined Recent Changes, search, random
page function and login all at www.wikipedia.org. We could even write-up a
multilingual press release stating "Wikipedia goes fully multilingual".
www.wikipedia.org is very important and valuable real estate. We should work
towards the best use for it and not do anything too hastily.
Patience grasshopper.
-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)
> >www.wikipedia.org should:
> >
> >[] not be changed at all.
> >
> >[] redirect depending on the browser's language
> setting to the wikipedia
> >in the prefered language.
> >
> >[x] be a multilingual portal (1)
> >
> >[] other ______
Hi,
Of course, everybody is aware that the little codicil
(1) is meaning that one is not *only* voting for the
"multilingual portal" proposition, but roughly for the
proposition detailed in (1). That should cut any
further discussion short.
That reminds me of the referendum we had to vote for
quite many years ago when we had lots of problems with
our colony New Caledonia.
The vote proposition was basically "do you want to do
something for New Caledonia"
* yes
* no
"wellllllll....yessssss of course"
There was an unwritten codicil.
-----
So of course, I vote "other"
Well being aware that in *this* voting system, "other"
means "white" and that "white" is never counted in the
final results.
Undefined "other" can not be anything else than
"white".
"Other" could have been a proposition, as was
announced by tc *yesterday*.
Anthere
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Y! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your web site
http://webhosting.yahoo.com/