Wikipedia-l September 2003

wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org

72 participants
162 discussions

Gaps in 1.0
by Magnus Manske 02 Sep '03

02 Sep '03

As we are slowly wading through the usual swamp that is consensus ;-) towards Mordor, eh, wikipedia release 1.0, I was wondering: Is there any (more or less) organized effort * to find the gape wikipedia has, compared to *other* encyclopediae, and * to fill them Is there a (machine-readable?) list of all entries in Britannica, Encarta, or any other major encyclopedia? I remember putting lots of possible encyclopedia topics on the 'pedia, but wer'de probably past that stage anyway (had a little more than 100.000 entries, IIRC). Magnus

6 5

Writing articles
by Merritt L. Perkins 02 Sep '03

02 Sep '03

I have been thinking of trying to write some Encyclopedia articles but I would like to discuss them with several other people while I am preparing them for publication. . Suppose I choose to write about Rose of Sharon. I could look in the Wikipedia and not find it under that heading. Perhaps it is described somewhere and I didn't find it. I could take close-up pictures of the flowers with my digital camera and describe it from what I know and what I can see. Should I include pictures of the whole plant, the seeds, or the roots? I could look in encyclopedias and books for more information. I could prepare a rough draft. After reading the instructions for submitting articles I would like to discuss it with other people and get their comments and suggestions. Someone told me that Rose of Sharon was mentioned in the Bible. Somebody may know where. Should I include that and quote the Bible passage? An historian may be able to tell what part it played in history like the thistle in Scotland and the War of the Roses in England. A botanist may be able to correct and add to my description. People in other parts of the world may tell me that it is common there. Is it the national flower of some country or does it appear on a flag? Should we include the name in some other languages? If someone else is writing an article on the same subject I might choose to let him take my article and use parts of it in his article. After I get tired of editing it I could submit it to be included in the Encyclopedia. Then the readers would have their opportunity to make changes. I didn't find articles about Jesse Ramsden who made precision navigation instruments or Count Rumsford who left Massachusetts and went to England and founded the Royal Institution. There are several other subjects that I might write about but I would like to have other people participate. How can I do this? This matter may have been discussed in e-mail but I have more than 450 e-mail on my computer so it is hard to figure out what conclusions have been reached. Merritt L. Perkins

5 4

Logo pb
by Anthere 02 Sep '03

02 Sep '03

Hi, 134 to 137 were put on the voting sheet after the deadline, too, I believe. This not being a problem seemed like a good example of WikiLove, in my eyes. See [http://meta.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=International_logos_(126-150)&…] for example of voting in place without them. Bye, Till we *) -------------- Sorry, but I did not understand what you meant above. Do you mean it was not an act of wikilove to point out to the problem ? I just know one thing When I looked the other day, I just saw a user had replaced with *his* logo (submitted after the deadline), the logo of *another* user (logo number 67). I had no time to check if I had really understood the problem, so I just mentionned it for others to check Clearly, that was a mistake. But in any case, I think it was *not* a good idea to let someone replace the official logos of another by his own. Perhaps my saying was not wikilove toward the author of 138, but it was toward author of 67 :-) __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com

1 0

Re:logo pb
by Anthere 02 Sep '03

02 Sep '03

Till Westermayer till at tillwe.de Tue Sep 2 08:55:13 UTC 2003 * Previous message: [Wikipedia-l] Gaps in 1.0 * Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . till we *) . . . Hi Anthere, there is no logo 138?! Till Hi Tillwe How observant of you :-) (<- this is meant to be a very friendly and cheerful irony) Logo 138 (or rather logoS 138) were added after the deadline, hence were removed by our foreman (err...the organizer in case this word hold meanings I am not aware of). One of the logo 138 had the same name than another, hence it replaced it. The previous saved state was restored. Logos 138 were kat-related logo. Very nice artwork, but I fear they would not have been fit as logos anyway, so it is sad for the author, but won't impact the final choice. Cheers Tillwe I take the opportunity to report - as an ambassador - the displeasure of some author, who feel there is applied pressure to direct their creativity to another direction than is their wish, and officially ask me to help him as my english ability is better than his. (<- this is a neutral report) In my opinion, any logo proposition and any logo versioning is a "free-of-choice" work, and "free-to-display" work (except for sex-race-color-political-religion related works perhaps, though this might be controversial), and any pressure on authors is out of bounds. Please. Thanks. (<- This is a personal opinion. Please and thanks mean please and thanks, and this part of my message is not for you Tillwe dear :-)) __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com

3 2

Pb with logos.
by Anthere 02 Sep '03

02 Sep '03

I have no time to clean it up right now. Sorry. But someone is messing with logos, replacing some old logos with some cat related logo. Logo 138 was not the initial logo. It was replaced Ant __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com

2 1

Re: Wikipedia-l Digest, Vol 1, Issue 1307
by Bahnev 01 Sep '03

01 Sep '03

> Message: 9 > Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2003 20:49:17 +0100 > From: Kurt Jansson <jansson(a)gmx.net> > Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] IBM analyzing Wikipedia page histories > To: wikipedia-l(a)wikipedia.org > Message-ID: <3F4FAE3D.2050103(a)gmx.net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed > > Fernanda Viegas wrote: > > > 3. Another poster asked about our diff method: I think the main > > difference between ours and yours is that ours is operating at a finer > > granularity (roughly at the sentence level, rather than the paragraph > > level). We'd be happy to talk in more detail, if you want! > > I'd love to see MediaWiki use a smarter diff function, but I have no > programing skills (well, TurboPascal, but that's long ago ...). Maybe > one of our not-so-busy developers (are there any?) could talk with you > about this. > > > > 4. We have been finding some fascinating patterns about the different > > ways in which people collaborate in Wikipedia. We are currently writing > > a paper about this and would be happy to share it with the community > > after we are done. > > Great! > > > Kurt > > Can you tell me what "diff" means?

2 1

Re : secte, HELPPPPPP
by Anthere 01 Sep '03

01 Sep '03

[Wikipedia-l] Re:Culte, cult, secte, sect Brion Vibber brion at pobox.com Sun Aug 31 02:50:32 UTC 2003 Anthere wrote: >It usually refer to groups which practice some of the >following, mental manipulation, power centralization >in the hands of a guru or a small group of people, >with a pyramidal organisation, > [[There is no Cabal]] ... > with money exactions, > [[Wikipedia:Donations]] ? >and a doctrine that can not be disputed. > [[Wikipedia:Neutral point of view]] ! ;) -- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com) LOL, yes !!! You forgot * rather new (he, less than 3 years) * rather small number of members (eh, less than 10 000 certainly qualify) * dangerous for their members (eh, wikipediholism) * power in hands of one : Jimbo, or a small group : eh the sysops HELP !!!!! WITHOUT NOTICING, I BECAME MEMBER OF A "SECTE" !!!!!! __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com

7 8

Gaps in 1.0
by Erik Zachte 01 Sep '03

01 Sep '03

I think one area where Wikipedia is not yet faring too well is in the fine arts section (painting, ballet, architecture, drama, music, etc). Of course exceptions exist. Just a gut feeling, no time to dig into it now. I filled a few gaps myself: articles on Rembrandt, van Gogh, Dutch Golden Age and a few others in that area were non existent or very meagre a few monthes ago. This in itself says enough. If these articles were in a bad shape until recently, it means we are still charting the tip of the iceberg, we are talking mainstream household name fine arts in these cases. If my assumption is well founded, we might discuss how to attract more Wikipedians from art schools, schools of music and the like. ---- A quote from the talk page for http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Most_Referenced_Articles "I don't know what it says about Wikipedia (I tell a lie, I '''do''' know what it says about Wikipedia), but [[God]] gets only 886 links, while [[Science fiction]] is linked 998 times. -- Cimon Avaro on a pogostick Erik Zachte --- P.S. I checked: the article about Rembrandt dates from Oct 2002, not exactly a few monthes ago, still Wikipedia was almost 2 years old then.

1 0

protected pages
by Ilyanep 01 Sep '03

01 Sep '03

I'm a sysop, and I don't want people messing up certain pages under my user page...would it be considered unfair if I protect them or am I allowed to do so? The reason I'm asking this is that I have a few friends who I want to see my 'article' under my user page and they're all anon's on wikipedia, and there's a big chance that they'll mess it up and leave (never wanting to come back so blocking isn't an option!) I could just tell them to stop, but I'd feel much more comfortable with the protection on it :)

5 4

An Approval Process (Proposal)
by David Levinson 01 Sep '03

01 Sep '03

Proposal for a Wikipedia Article "Approval" Process Assuming there is support for a stable version of wikipedia, some mechanism for stability is required. Allow logged in users to approve any version of an article. Logged in users could also disapprove any or every version of an article. Articles would be scored based on number of users who approved (weighted?) - number of users who disapproved (weighted?). The article with the highest approval rating would be the released (approved) article. This would be displayed somewhere distinct from the working wikipedia (e.g. sifter.wikipedia.org, or something similar). New users would be presented with Wikipedia Release edition. They could still edit the article, but it would not be released until the approvals on the new article exceed the approvals on the previously released article. The under-edit version from which users are working may differ from the release version if approvals have not yet been found. The differences would be highlighted on the edit screen. Edits would of course appear in Recent Changes. In addition, there would be Recent Approvals tracking articles which recently were voted on for approval. An edit would of course count as a vote for approval (if preferences so set). Under the article (in view mode) (for logged in users) would be "vote to approve" and "vote to disapprove" buttons. A vote to approve would transfer a users vote to this version for approval and remove it from previous versions. A vote to disapprove would remain even if another version was disapproved. Possible weight = 1 if under 100 edits, 2 if under 200 edits, 3 if under 300 edits, 4 otherwise. Alternative weighting schemes are possible as well, including weight=1 for all logged in users. Comments? -- DavidLevinson

6 7

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 September 2003