Wikipedia-l August 2003

wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org

78 participants
166 discussions

Re: encyclopedia
by sgilbert＠nbnet.nb.ca 17 Aug '03

17 Aug '03

Merritt L. Perkins wrote: > > What is an encyclopedia? Larry Sanger, Wikipedia's former project leader, spend some time pondering this question. Specifically, he wrote "The elements of an encyclopedia project", which you can find at http://meta.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_elements_of_an_encyclopedia_pr oject . There are other essays at http://meta.wikipedia.org/ that you might enjoy as well. Feel free to post your own thought on the subject! Stephen G.

1 0

On Interlanguage links and seeding articles on other langas.
by Steve Vertigo 17 Aug '03

17 Aug '03

Conversation from Talk pages: ANGELA:I've just seen your post to the intlwiki mailing list. I can't reply there as I'm not currently subscribing to it and I've forgotten my password to re-subscribe, so I'll reply here instead. Feel free to copy this to the list if you want to. I disagree with creating articles which consist only of interlanguage links and I tend to delete such pages from the English Wikipedia. It wastes someone's time if they follow a link thinking they will get some useful information, only to find a blank page. It may be useful for those who want to write articles in other languages, but frustrating and confusing for those trying to read Wikipedia. Linking should occur after the article is written, not before. Angela 21:59, 16 Aug 2003 (UTC) STEVERTIGO:Paraphrasing what you said,(apologies :) in a different context: {I disagree with creating stub articles which consist only of a couple paragraphs and I tend to delete such pages from the English Wikipedia. It wastes someone's time if they follow a link thinking they will get some useful information, only to find a unprofessional and incomplete article. It may be useful for those who want to add or contribute to these articles, but frustrating and confusing for those trying to read Wikipedia. Professional quality should be attained before not after the article is written.} ??sv 22:20, Aug 16, 2003 (UTC) P.S -- I wrote back to Tarq on http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/intlwiki-l/2003-August/001999.html ANGELA:But a stub can contain useful information. IL links do not. They only tell you that there may or may not be some info in some other language somewhere. A blank page is confusing. A page with only a little bit of info is not. Angela STEVERTIGO:Bu shi ! A stub can also contain useless information -- the point is not to generalize what stubs are and what they are good for. Some stubs are better than others. -- "IL links do not"-- Bu shi ! If you look at an page with just a title and an IL link--and you cant read that language--just hover over the ILlink! Bingo. You can do it right now on the ar:wikipedia. Thats one situation (as unusual as it is) where what you said is not true. There are many more. Where in the rules does it say you cant put x in front of X? In fact in some ways its better that making a whole system and then trying to link them up in some way -- each should give the other ideas about how to structure stuff organization. Do you mind if I load this talk up to the mail? -S- P.s -- mail Walter to reset your password intlwiki-l-owner AT Wikipedia DOT org ANGELA: Hovering over links is only useful if you are in the encyclopedia of a language you don't read. Why you be there in the first place? If you are in en: then a link which tells you the page title in Arabic won't help. I agree with linking the WPs together, but linking up a load of blank pages is not useful. The red links are there to tell you a page does not exist. If you put a link in, it makes it look like the page does exist. re: load this talk up to the mail... I don't mind. re: mail Walter. I already clicked the "send me a new password button" but it hasn't done anything. I shall do as you suggest. STEVERTIGO:IL links/usefulness - I respectfully disagree. TBC- __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com

1 0

Possible database corruption
by Matthew Woodcraft 17 Aug '03

17 Aug '03

The history of the page http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_mathematics shows two edits by user Chinju at 16:47, 6 Aug 2003. The next edit was today (17 Aug). The revision resulting from the second Chinju edit, as currently displayed in the history, contains garbage. I believe I looked at the page between the 6th and 17th of August, and it did not contain garbage. I expect someone else would have noticed in 11 days, too. I'm worried that this might be database corruption. -M-

1 0

Re: maybe time for a document project,
by Daniel Mayer 17 Aug '03

17 Aug '03

sometime in the near future? Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 01:54:14 -0700 User-Agent: KMail/1.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200308170154.14868.maveric149(a)yahoo.com> Status: RO X-Status: Q X-KMail-EncryptionState: X-KMail-SignatureState: Karl Eichwalder wrote: >I still believe contents is more important; >all these links, esp. these navigation links >are superfluous. A good search engine is >all you need -- frankly, navigations links are >a waste of resources (time and bandwidth). >I admit, it nice to click around but going this >way you usually will not find the info you are >looking for. Ah - a true believer in search engines. As with all true believers, there isn't any point arguing with you. --mav

2 1

Re: maybe time for a document project, sometime in the near future?
by Daniel Mayer 17 Aug '03

17 Aug '03

Karl Eichwalder wrote: >This is of dubious value. Why don't you trust in >the reader use wikipedia's search feature? Uh? The same argument can be made about links in Wikipedia articles to other Wikipedia articles. Easily accessible links is the whole point of HTML and the web. Use the Wikipedia search feature indeed. -- mav

3 2

Re: maybe time for a document project, sometime in the near future?
by Daniel Mayer 17 Aug '03

17 Aug '03

Karl Eichwalder wrote: >As long as resource problems at wikipedia.org >are not resolved I'd rather vote not to add new >projects. Uh? Wikibooks already exists /and/ part of that project's goal is to annotate and otherwise add value to public domain source texts. No new project needed. -- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)

1 0

Re: maybe time for a document project, sometime in the near future?
by Daniel Mayer 17 Aug '03

17 Aug '03

Cross posted to Textbook-L Brion wrote: >The thing that would make a Project Sourceberg >worthwhile is wiki-style annotation of the texts. Yes! Just so everybody knows, we've been talking about annotation for the Wikibooks project on Textbook-L. See "disappearing/reappearing column-side notes," "public domain works with marginal notes" and "Re: disappearing/reappearing column side-notes" at http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/textbook-l/2003-August/subject.html#sta… Here is a hack of what that may look like: http://www.wikipedia.org/upload/5/56/Sidenote-column.html The current idea is to have <note> annotation </note> act as the actual syntax. >Annotations could include cross-links to Wikipedia >and Wiktionary as well as within the document, and Yep. What would really be neat is an optional java-script feature whereby double clicking on any word in the text will bring-up the corresponding Wiktionary entry. But that has to wait for Wiktionary to define many tens of thousands more words first. I was also thinking of wikifying terms within the public domain source text on Wikibooks to point to their corresponding Wikipedia articles. Aside: A different color for cross-Wikimedia links would be nice so that true external links (outside of Wikimedia) are distinguishable from cross-Wikimedia links (I've suggested green before). >we could have a relatively sane system for linking >from Wikipedia and Wiktionary to *particular spots* >in the texts, for instance to provide context for a quote. We could use anchors for this now that Wikipedia, Wiktionary and Wikibooks all have the latest and greatest MediaWiki installed. >Now, that would require some special coding if we want >to make it a clean system (ie, one where visitors can edit >annotations but not original text); or one could just dump >Gutenberg's ASCII texts straight into giant wiki pages and >do it all by hand. I'm not convinced that locking the public domain source text would be the best option since there is a lot of formatting and Wikifying that can be done with source text. However, I wouldn't mind blocking anons from editing source text if that can be coded easily enough (since logged-in users are more likely to know better about not changing the wording of the source text). But at the very least, annotations should be open to edit by all. Oh, and other Wikibooks modules should also have the ability to use the annotation feature (such as textbooks). So that is something to keep in mind if/when the annotation system is being worked on. -- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)

1 0

Re: maybe time for a document project, sometime in the near future?
by Daniel Mayer 17 Aug '03

17 Aug '03

Karl Eichwalder wrote: >What is wrong with Project Gutenberg? No need to >duplicate all and everything ;) Sorry, but some people don't care to read plain text with page after page of copyright and disclaimer info in front of it. Wikibooks plans to host many public domain texts; basically anything in the public domain you would expect to buy in a college bookstore or find in a university library. But our focus is on adding value to those texts by wikifying terms to point to Wikipedia articles and also adding annotation in the "margin" (a feature that is being worked on for Wikibooks). --- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)

2 1

software on Wiktionary upgraded
by Brion Vibber 17 Aug '03

17 Aug '03

Okay, Wiktionary should now be back in line with the version of the software running on the other wikis. And, hopefully, not too broken. :) -- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)

1 0

Calif recall candidates --
by Steve Vertigo 16 Aug '03

16 Aug '03

I think we ought to list each of the recall candidates, and invite their staffs to add to their articles. Crazy? :) http://www.sfgate.com/gate/special/pages/2003/recall/ http://www.georgyforgov.com/index.htm ! ! go geeks! __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com

11 21

← Newer
1
...
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
...
17
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 August 2003