Wikipedia-l January 2003

wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org

61 participants
102 discussions

Some confusion about 'meta'
by Jimmy Wales 31 Jan '03

31 Jan '03

There appears to be some confusion about the history and purpose of meta. This is easy to understand, because meta evolved over time. In the early days, there was a lot of talk *about wikipedia* *on wikipedia*. We didn't have user pages in the early software, all pages were the same kind of page. So it happened that we were having lots of discussion and debate on the wikipedia about the wikipedia, and it was clogging up recentchanges and generally getting in the way of work. So we decided to move all the 'meta-discussion' (i.e. discussion about wikipedia) to meta.wikipedia.com. This meant, of course, that meta allowed for non-NPOV essays, etc. Later, user pages were invented, and so that became a more sensible place for SOME non-NPOV essays on meta-topics. But meta is still useful, as a place for non-user-specific meta-discussion. Except, as a practical matter, the major meta discussion is now here, on the mailing lists. Whatever meta is, it is *not* necessarily the same thing as an experimental wiki for the running of the latest code. It is a fine place for discussing the future of the software, I suppose, although wikitech-l is more important for that right now. --Jimbo

1 0

hacker.wikipedia.org
by Takuya Murata 31 Jan '03

31 Jan '03

Hello, everyone I am not interested in the policy of wikipedia at all. While it can be better still, I think the current policy (NPOV, for instance) and the syntax (wiki-markup language) are adequate and have no intention to discuss them. My concern is about the administration of wikipedia, or the server, database stuff and the development of wikipedia. It seems there is a lot of problems and they are goind to be even worse. In theory, yes, CVS of wikipedia code is open for anyone who is willing to contribute and should be work just like wiki. Alas! the reality is different, if not totally. As we know, quite a few of people are actually coding, compared with the number and diversity of wikipedians. Unlike the article in wikipedia, I posted this for responding to the advice by Jimbo. However, if here is not appreciate place to submit this kind of mail, please let me know and I will seek another place to conduct the discussion. Therefore, I would like to proposal: 1. Disclose more information While none of details are hidden, surely strangers have almost no information to hack. ("How to become a wikipedia hacker" in meta-wikipedia has a lack of critical information and is heavliy underused.) 2. Organize the development system See UseMod. It has a far better developer community then wikipedia software. We should stop immediately relying on the individual efforts. For example, many people simply post a bug to Brion, knowing he is responsible for the wikipedia software. Even he encourages people to report a bug to *him*. I don't blame him as well as others like him but really appreciate them. But such a case is not ought to be in wikipedia. 3. Make wikipedia software more visible and independent Maybe we need a nice name for wikipedia software to make it more recognizable. -- Therefore, -- the practical solution (I think but should not be limited to) is probably: set up hacker.wikipedia.org or sister project dedicated to development software tools for wikipedia. In additon to the server software hosting wikipedia, the software programs may include another useful tools for wikipedians (maybe chat tools, if someone would like to persuite ) The site can embrace services for the sites hosting wikipedia software other than wikipedia.org (actually I am planning to switch the wiki program of my wiki to wikipedia software). If you know UseMod and meatball, my proposal is akin to the relationship among UseMod and meatball. Yes, there is a meat-wikipedia. But as we know, meta- wikipedia doesn't work well. There are plenty of dead stuff, which look weird and make strangers difficult to participate. There are even non-English stuff. Meta-wiki may be good place to put a draft, submit a proposal but it is not suitable for developers. What do you think? Best wishes, Takuya Murata takusi(a)manjiro.net

2 1

Re: [Wikipedia-l] hacker.wikipedia.org
by Takuya Murata 30 Jan '03

30 Jan '03

>Meta should be about > >- meta-project: discussing and formulating project-wide (i.e. not >language-specific) policies; organizing events, contests etc. >- meta-content: organizing and preparing content, e.g. templates; language >files >- meta-code: coordinating the development process - bugs, features etc. If the meta-wikipedia got rid of mess, I don't have any reason to hesitate to use meta for development of wiki software. Takuya Murata

1 0

Nice article in The Guardian
by Gareth Owen 30 Jan '03

30 Jan '03

Perusing my paper over lunch, I spotted a nice write up of the project in todays Guardian. Highlights : "perhaps one of the greatest testaments to the generosity on the web" "What makes the Wikipedia so compelling - and this article so hard to finish - is the way everything is so massively linked. You read one entry, and before you know it, you're reading up on Anne Boleyn or Italian greyhounds." http://www.guardian.co.uk/online/story/0,3605,884666,00.html or linked from [[Wikipedia:Press_coverage]] (by Rbrwr) -- Gareth Owen "Wikipedia does rock. By the count on the "brilliant prose" page, there are 14 not-bad articles so far" -- Larry Sanger (12 Jan 2001)

4 4

Request for administrator privileges
by J.T. Stanton II 30 Jan '03

30 Jan '03

Hello . . . Writing to request sysop status - my motivation is simple : * -based sex practice <http://www.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Scrotum-based_sex_practice&acti…>, Like This, queef, ulm, Tea bag sex position, teabagging, John Cheese, Erectile Bone, Cabinet of Canada <http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cabinet_of_Canada> . . . ad infinitum. I've no doubt that this kind of nonsense would eventually get caught with or without me, but what's the point in waiting for someone else to come along and clean it up if my fair amount of spare time and T3-and-friendly-boss-equipped day job give me the ample opprotunity to help keep the 'pedia tidy ? After all, *someone* has to finish classifying and deleting all those orphaned talk pages . . . Anyway . . . take a look at the 'votes for deletion' page, and tell me everyone's life wouldn't be easier if I could just dump garbage like ' Arise Oh Compatriots Nigerias Call Obey ' myself. :' ) ~ J.T. ( Tzaquiel )

1 0

[Fwd: Open-Site.org]
by Magnus Manske 30 Jan '03

30 Jan '03

Vlad from the Open-site project (open-site.org), another free encyclopedia just starting, answered to my "merger" proposal. I forward this to the list for discussion.

3 2

Re: The Wikipedia Foundation
by Chuck Smith 30 Jan '03

30 Jan '03

> We're not waiting for anything. This is in the > works now. Hmm... am I not on the list where they're discussing this? I think this new change of mailing lists has really left me out of things. :( Chuck ===== Interesting fact: Google returns more results for "Esperanto" than for "Catalan" ---------------------------------------- Learn Esperanto! - http://www.lernu.net/ Enciklopedio: http://eo.wikipedia.org/ ___________________________________________________ Yahoo! Móviles Personaliza tu móvil con tu logo y melodía favorito en http://moviles.yahoo.es

1 0

The Wikipedia Foundation
by Chuck Smith 30 Jan '03

30 Jan '03

What is the plan for setting up The Wikipedia Foundation? For my volunteer work here at TEJO (www.tejo.org), I've been researching how foundations work and perhaps I could be of assistance in setting one up. Unfortunately all of my experience is dealing with European foundations, but I hope to learn about American ones as well. I bet within a year of setting it up you'd get some rich guy (or gal) who'd want to give us a million dollars or more, which of course would pay the full time salary for several Wikipedians in several different language projects. So, what are we waiting for? Chuck ===== Interesting fact: Google returns more results for "Esperanto" than for "Catalan" ---------------------------------------- Learn Esperanto! - http://www.lernu.net/ Enciklopedio: http://eo.wikipedia.org/ ___________________________________________________ Yahoo! Móviles Personaliza tu móvil con tu logo y melodía favorito en http://moviles.yahoo.es

2 1

Larry wouldn't mind
by Chuck Smith 29 Jan '03

29 Jan '03

> Just don't tell Larry ;-) Why should Larry mind, since he's the one who said, "Subpages would be nice, I suppose, for other namespaces, like the Wikipedia namespace and the User namespace." I'm also firmly against the use of subpages in the Talk namespace and I'm not thrilled about having them in the Wikipedia namespace, but I don't like how many user pages just get so big! Chuck ===== Interesting fact: Google returns more results for "Esperanto" than for "Catalan" ---------------------------------------- Learn Esperanto! - http://www.lernu.net/ Enciklopedio: http://eo.wikipedia.org/ ___________________________________________________ Yahoo! Móviles Personaliza tu móvil con tu logo y melodía favorito en http://moviles.yahoo.es

5 8

Re: Wikipedia-l digest, Vol 1 #989 - 1 msg
by Matt M. 29 Jan '03

29 Jan '03

> Interesting fact: Google returns more > results for "Esperanto" than for "Catalan" What about for Catalan, Catalá, Catalán, and Catalana put together?

1 0

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 January 2003