On Saturday 08 February 2003 12:35 pm, Erik Moeller wrote:
>.....
> If you want more than just language links on the portal, you have to wait
> for phase IV. It's that simple. What we probably can do immediately,
> though, is highlight (e.g. background color) the existing language link to
> the user's primary language on *every page* (not just www.wikipedia.org)
> that has a translation in that language.
>
> Regards,
>
> Erik
Well if Anthere et al don't want an automatic slice of the huge amount of
traffic going to en.wiki's Main Page then I really don't know what to say.
<analogy>
Just because street thugs (advertisers) use knifes (language redirection based
on browser settings) doesn't mean that you shouldn't trust your surgeon with
a scalpel.
</analogy>
But I really like your highlighting idea Erik. This gives /even/ more
visibility to the multilanguage(sic) aspect of Wikipedia while still
presenting the user with a content laden and useful entry point.
I think we should reexamine Anthere's 'content on the portal' idea for
possible implementation in Phase IV. This might be a good place to have
en.wiki's Selected Articles section (if and when the browser a person is
using is set to English - if not then some selected content from the
appropriate language would be presented).
Heck, we could even set the 'selected content' to include the whole Main Page
that corresponds to the language set in a person's browser (what would be
more useful than that?). Then what we would have is Neil's header proposal.
--Daniel Mayer (aka mav)
WikiKarma:
I added more events to [[February 3]] and (as always) after Zoe finished
adding more births/deaths and even more events I updated all the year pages
and many of the other articles linked from that page.
On Friday 07 February 2003 04:58 pm, Anthere wrote:
> >But we could move it to en.wikipedia.org and rotate the address
> >www.wikipedia.org weekly among all the wikipedias so it points one week to
> >the Main Page of the French, next week to the Spanish, then to the English
> >and so on until PhaseIV is ready.
>
> I actually like this idea!
>
>
> Yeah me too :-)
If you like this idea then why not support, as an interim solution, the
browser language sniffing idea whereby the language set in a person's browser
will redirect them to an active WIkipedia language (and if the language set
in the person's browser doesn't exist in wiki or isn't active with more than
100 articles then it is directed to en.eiki)?
Rotating the Main Page for everybody would confuse the hell out of users while
there is some logic to the sniffing idea - at least as an interim solution.
But I will again state for the record that I think it would be a big mistake
to just put-up a static link page at www.wikipedia.org whose only job is to
direct people to different languages. Wikipedia is alive and our most visible
page should indicate this by having useful project-wide features and logins.
So I for one say we should wait until Phase IV before we change our most
visited page (but IMO we can move en.wiki now so long as we provide browser
language sniffing). We could and IMO should, also have our first project-wide
press release posted at the time of the change in order to announce that we
are, at last, a fully functional multilanguage project.
But if we implement the language-sniffing idea then all the most active wikis
(I think there are 12 now) will be able to use wikipedia.org for promotional
purposes. We may even like the idea and build upon it (as the 'multilanguage
header frame proposal' by Neil in meta suggests).
http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_to_do_with_www.wikipedia.org
--Daniel Mayer (aka mav)
WikiKarma:
I added many events to [[February 2]], updated all the year pages and many of
the articles linked from that page.
Jimbo wrote:
''I wonder what would happen if we unprotected the
home page for a few
days, with the *express plan* of trying to do
something more
international there?''
No, I don't think that would do the trick. That is the
Main Page of the english wikipedia, it doesn't have to
be multilingual (I think it is international enough).
The objection is that the www.wikipedia.org points to
www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main+Page, the main page of
the ''english'' wikipedia, that doesn't necessarily
have to be the Main Page of the ''whole'' project.
(I wasn't going to bring this up for a while, but
Jimbo
asked)
AstroNomer
Wikikarma: Started article [[radiostronomia]] in
es.wikipedia
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com
The vandalism was coming from: 18.56.0.30 and soon after *.31.
That's at MIT, apparently. Drunk college kid, I bet.
I blocked just those two, and things have been quiet for a few
minutes. We might need to extend the ban to 18.56.0.* for a few
days if it becomes necessary.
I'm logging off now, hopefully this information will be sufficient
to allow others to mount an easy defense if it comes back.
wikipedia can suck my big fat wang penis.
---
my site - www.jzcool.net
On Fri, 7 Feb 2003 20:32:34
Tom Parmenter wrote:
>
>It isn't unreasonable to think, that with no institutional effort on
>our part, the FDL and the Creative Commons, and public domain will
>flow together. Individual contributors may pursue it (and perhaps
>reunite with Isis) but for most of us, these discussions are
>academic. We claim no copyright, don't want any, wouldn't accept it,
>and are occasionally bemused by trying to figure out how we ended up
>with one after so much effort not to have one.
>
>I have never been involved in a discussion of the GFDL in Wikipedia
>that didn't feel like a troll to me. See [[Talk:Oregon City, Oregon]]
>and [[Talk:Hitler has only got one ball]].
>
>Tom Parmenter
>Ortolan88
>
>|From: erik_moeller(a)gmx.de (Erik Moeller)
>|Sender: wikipedia-l-admin(a)wikipedia.org
>|Reply-To: wikipedia-l(a)wikipedia.org
>|Date: 08 Feb 2003 01:48:00 +0100
>|
>|> Your GFDL contributions will fall into the public domain 70 years after
>|> your death anyway. Why wait? Why not release them right now? I found
>|> the idea quite liberating, actually.
>|
>|The FDL idea is, of course, more anti-copyright than the public domain
>|idea, because it is intended to convince others to release their content
>|openly. It turns copyright against itself - the only freedom it takes away
>|is the freedom to exert control over content. The FDL has various problems
>|(GNU is primarily about software, and hasn't really spent much work on
>|developing decent general open content licenses), and other licenses
>|aren't established enough.
>|
>|The copyleft concept only works well with a standardized license. Neither
>|GNU nor Creative Commons will give that to us. I do believe that
>|Wikipedia's use of the FDL will give it a big boost, and that we can
>|increasingly use that as an argument that the FDL *is* the standard share-
>|alike license. Isn't that amazing - we're already so big that we can argue
>|that something we do is right because we do it. Almost like Microsoft ;-)
>|
>|Regards,
>|
>|Erik
>|_______________________________________________
>|Wikipedia-l mailing list
>|Wikipedia-l(a)wikipedia.org
>|http://www.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>|
>
>_______________________________________________
>Wikipedia-l mailing list
>Wikipedia-l(a)wikipedia.org
>http://www.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>
_____________________________________________________________
Get 25MB, POP3, Spam Filtering with LYCOS MAIL PLUS for $19.95/year.
http://login.mail.lycos.com/brandPage.shtml?pageId=plus&ref=lmtplus
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
It's me who put this in the "racialisme" article. The word may be used by
quite some people, but I really think that it was invented by racist groups
and people to justify racism. Links in Google don't and can't justify
anything.
And I also redirected the articles about "racisme anti-blanc" and "racisme à
l'envers" to "racisme". Personnally I don't think such articles should be in
Wikipedia. I think that it doesn't improve the quality and reputation of
Wikipedia.
But if a great number of people think I am wrong, then put back these
articles.
However, I do not support the idea to block people who write racist articles.
It's counter-productive. It's better to correct their articles and show them
the limit (as defined by the law in France). And this as long as they are few
and we can correct their articles.
Regards,
Yann
PS: I didn't subscribed to this list. So cc: me if necessary.
> Anthere, do you read my mails ?????
> I don't say racialism don't exist because there are not in the dictionnary.
> I said this word is not french, so we have to think about how to handle this
> kind of case.
> And what is the criteria that make a word that don't exist officially can be
> add in an encyclopedie or not ?
> I'm not the one that put the poor definition of racialism yesterday and I'm
> not the one who have removed [racisme antiblanc] and [racisme inverse].
> Please stop firing in the whole.
< Aoineko
- --
http://www.forget-me.net
Alternatives sur le Net
http://keys.indymedia.org/showkey.py?key=0A34CBDA
gpg --keyserver keys.indymedia.org --recv-key 0A34CBDA
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE+OnJcm4KYjQo0y9oRAryFAKCQ1xsg8enBe8ozEjE6E6mmcXPyGACfd0l6
k4iLwVzFCwVKb8+VS26HqY8=
=QoDP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Hello,
I did remove philippe's article far before Yann for two reasons :
- first it was not neutral, as a french who is aware of political
science and history letting him write this article was the same as
letting KKK write an article on white power. It does not means he is
racist, it only means he is lacking of objectivity (or "recul"),
- secondly, is considered racist anythings that gets in contradiction
with the first article of the Déclaration universelle des Droits de
l'Homme, saying that any people are born equal in dignity and in regard
to the law, and therefore (article 2) no difference can be made
regarding the the people. And that is illegal in France.
Europe is not america, we do not have the 1st Amendment (liberty of
speech) we have la liberté d'expression (which is bounded to the respect
of the ground of democracy), and since the 2nd WW it is considered as a
delictuous to justify or state theory that are either xenophobic,
racist, or revisionist (like saying shoah never existed). You may say
that wikipedia is in the US. Fine, Yahoo also was but had problems with
french justice for selling nazis items, because regarding internet,
France -as the US- consider their justice is "extra-terriorial". As long
as a speech is seen from France, it can be prosecuted wherever the
server is.
If we accept definition that are an implicit legitimation of racism
(racialism) (wich made nazi legitimate too in killing tzigan) :
- should we also made article saying that it is legitimate to think
shoah never was? If so no matter what my opinions are, I will write it.
- Do you assume the legal responsabilities if we are prosecuted ?
And least, but not last, we may suffer indymedia far right infiltration
: french indymedia is down since they let antisemitic articles being
written. It was not their fault, they just did not see them arrive.
Infiltrated far rightists begun to write articles that were border line
first and their expresses their full expanded ideas afterwards.
Sometimes we may have to think in long term.
Infiltration is classic for french far rightist and leftist movement.
They consider the "noyeautage" as one way to convince people of the
(far) rightness of their ideas. If you are not firm at the very
beginning, fr.wikipedia.org will have the same problem as indymedia =>
shutdown -f now.
Take your responsabilities, but don't close your eyes, please.
Friendly yours,
PS words do not grow in dictionnary, they result from a consensus. Just
ask yourself, knowing that words in "ism" are the same in french and
english : do I know any words like racialism ? Maybe it proves nothing
few knows priapism, or botulism, but still ask yourself.
--
Julien Tayon aka Jul on fr.wikipedia.orghttp://www.tayon.net/http://libroscope.org/
Si la vérité est une femme, essayons de la séduire avant de la saisir.
Giskart wrote:
''It seems clear to my that the English Wikipedia is
not willing to give up
his prominend location at www.wikipedia.org.''
Is that true? I read declarations in the past that
said otherwise, but actions seems to indicate that
he is right. There has been discussion here and on
meta, but the results are always in the future.
Questions:
Is there any technical reason that www.wikipedia.org
can
not have one content, while
www.wikipedia.org/wiki/something and
www.wikipedia.org/wiki/something point to
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/something?
Who has the final word in the "political" decision
(as opposed to technical)? Jimbo? I remember him
telling that he agreed to the change. Did he change
his mind?
I'm sorry to insist in what may appear to be a petty
issue, but I do not think it is.
--AstroNomer
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com
The site of MIT OpenCourseWare (http://ocw.mit.edu )
uses the Creative Commons License. The summary of said
license
shows immediately to be totally incompatible with GNU
FDL,
because it forbids commercial use without
authorization.
AstroNomer
Wikikarma: Created the article ''Star formation'' (but
the server still doesn't accept it).
---------
P.S. Yes, I'm impatient, and don't want to wait for
phase IV for a really international www.wikipedia.org.
Though I
agree that the optimization of the database to improve
performance is more important it is also more difficult.
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com
It occurs to me that one big problem with finding a satisfactory
"international" front page on www is that it is protected, due to
being a big target for vandals. When the page is not protected,
people will naturally edit and re-edit until a satisfactory compromise
is reached.
I wonder what would happen if we unprotected the home page for a few
days, with the *express plan* of trying to do something more
international there?
--Jimbo