Eclecticology opined:
> Larry's definition of fact seems way off base.
> If we strictly follow his definition of fact
> then it is fact to say that Saddam Hussein is
> a popular president.
You seem to be attempeting an argument ad absurdum, but I don't see how you get "Saddam Hussein is a popular president" from anything Larry said.
I say this without prejudice to whatever point you were trying to make. By the way, what point *were* you trying to make?
Ed Poor
I don't know if software can be made smart enough to resolve the conflicts, but if all I want to do is APPEND, that should be easy enough. My favorite idea (though I don't know how to code it) would be to let the user SELECT a place in the text where they want to insert.
But maybe this is overkill. I find that if 2 other users are editing the talk page, I better stop and read what they're saying.
Ed Poor
Brion Wrote:
>On Fri, 2002-11-22 at 12:33, koyaanisqatsi(a)nupedia.com wrote:
>> Speaking of which, why doesn't "preview" preview?
>> All I get is a text-edit box showing what I've typed in. An HTML
>> preview might be handy.
>
>You didn't forget to scroll down below the edit box, right?
Um ... I don't know what the average percentage is on 'human error',
but I'm sure I've driven it up.
Yes, that's exactly what I wanted. What I already had. Let me try
that for Christmas now. ;-)
kq
I was wondering whther you have any answers on some copyright
issue-related questions I have. Such as, in [[The Matrix]] article, can I
legally add a screen capture from my DVD copy?, how about a small scan of
the box cover? I can include a FULL cast list can't I? And what about
computer games, or applications. Can I post screenshots of them? Can I
reproduce copies of pictures of famous actors and post them under fair use
(or maybe show a picture of them starring in a movie). Do we have answers
to any of these questions?
Thanks,
ASB [[User:Smelialichu]]
--
<signature>
There are only 10 types of people in this world;
Those that know binary...and those that don't
</signature>
Thank you, kq, for saying it even better than Larry:
> We are a community of people trying to
> build a free online encyclopedia. To
> this regard, it seems to me that we
> should not hesitate to show people the
> door when they prove not to share our goal.
I agree wholeheartedly with this, as well as your entire post.
Clearly the days of optional rules and options like "ignore all rules" are over. We can only inch toward tyranny or lapse into obliteration, unless we clarify our principles and find a way to live by them together.
I suggest a thorough overhaul of the Wikipedia namespace, with re-codification (and condensation where needed). Please work with me on this.
I'm stretched too thin, which is one reason I kept "quitting" this month. I can't orient newcomers, adjudicate POV battles, research new articles, run my spellchecker and tune the database to relieve the lag problem all at once. Oh, and I also wish I had time just to browse through the 'pedia and actually read some articles!
Ed Poor
genocide involves the destorying of culture. americinization is a form of genocide. stop saying that i should be banned for opposing King Jimbo Wales, whoever that is, he probably would rather see the correct name of things, than the same ol americanized crap.
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now
> I have "adopted" Lir as a mentee, because I believe
> she really wants to contribute. Please join me in
> gently (or firmly) coaching her about Wikipedia
> standards such as naming convention, NPOV, etc.
Lir's current standards are just as valid as the so
called "community standards". Her persistance in
applying these standards could be seen as her attempt
to coach all other Wikipedia users to adapt to her
naming conventions and POV.
Just because a viewset is shared by the majority, no
matter how overwhelming that majority, the majority
has no authority over the dissenting individual.
--TMC
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your site
http://webhosting.yahoo.com
>>I think techniques for automatically slowing down bots would be the
>>most valuable place to concentrate our efforts.
>This sounds promising to me too.
>What's the fastest rate of saving that a legitimate user is likely to
use?
>What's the fastest rate of saving that we can expect to keep up with
>if used by a bot? I'm going make a 0th approximation of 1 minute for
each.
>Too slow? too fast?
I often prepare a set of inter-related articles and upload them using
multiple browser tabs, saving them as fast as I can click the button.
There's no reason I couldn't wait between saves, but I don't want to....
--
Sean Barrett
sean(a)epoptic.com
Jonathan, Toby,
Let's try to keep discussion on topic, shall we?
The issue of whether speaking ill of the US constitutes treason isn't related to improving Wikipedia, is it?
Or are you proposing to right an article on "Modern views of treason"?
Ed Poor
On 11/21/02 5:52 AM, "Erik Moeller" <e.moeller(a)fokus.gmd.de> wrote:
> There's a new preference in CVS now to have edits minor by default, as
> per someone's request on wikipedia-l. This may be helpful for
> copyeditors. I haven't added it to the other Language* files (except for
> German) yet.
>
Please take that out.
Marking edits minor by default is not the right behavior. We want to see
clueless newbie edits by default, and for those of us who hide minor edits
(the only way minor edits are used right now) that would make that not
possible.
What I've seen work is to make summaries mandatory for non-minor edits.
Otherwise we should not change the default settings.