On Sunday 28 July 2002 03:00 am, The Cunctator wrote:
> What are the articles this person has been changing?
For 66.108.155.126:
20:08 Jul 27, 2002 Computer
20:07 Jul 27, 2002 Exploit
20:07 Jul 27, 2002 AOL
20:05 Jul 27, 2002 Hacker
20:05 Jul 27, 2002 Leet
20:03 Jul 27, 2002 Root
20:02 Jul 27, 2002 Hacker
19:59 Jul 27, 2002 Hacker
19:58 Jul 27, 2002 Hacker
19:54 Jul 27, 2002 Principle of least astonishment
19:54 Jul 27, 2002 Hacker
19:52 Jul 27, 2002 Trance music
19:51 Jul 27, 2002 Trance music
For 208.24.115.6:
20:20 Jul 27, 2002 Hacker
For 141.157.232.26:
20:19 Jul 27, 2002 Hacker
Most of these were complete replacements with discoherent statements.
Such as "TAP IS THE ABSOLUTE DEFINITION OF THE NOUN HACKER" for Hacker.
For the specifics follow http://www.wikipedia.com/wiki/Special:Ipblocklist
and look at the contribs.
--mav
Dear all,
Most of you would be aware of some of the discussions that have occurred
around Wikipedia in the Norwegian languages. Since the last round of
discussions on this list, there has been a lot of internal debate, as
well as what seems to be a fairly widely accepted agreement following
voting.
This e-mail intends to, after a brief recap on Norwegian language and
wikipedia issues, take those interested through the latest development
and will stake out the road ahead. It is also intended to inform the
international community about the current agreement on no.wikipedia, so
as to prevent misunderstandings in the future.
Finally, we will mention an unfortunate reaction to the vote by a small
number of users at the Norwegian Bokmål/Riksmål (no:) wikipedia who want
to disregard the result of the voting and are planning to create a
_third_ Norwegian wikipedia with the sole mission of mixing the contents
of the two current Norwegian versions.
== A short language history of Norway ==
Spoken Norwegian ("norsk") (ISO 639-2 alpha-2 code "no") is in a fairly
unique situation compared to most other languages of the world in that
it has two widely accepted written standards, Bokmål (ISO 639-2 alpha-2
code "nb") and Nynorsk (ISO 639-2 alpha-2 code "nn"). By national
legislation they are both regarded as official written forms of
Norwegian. In addition, many people still make a distinction between
Bokmål and its precursor which still is in use, Riksmål.
Briefly speaking, Bokmål and Riksmål are descendants of the Danish
written language. Until the 1800s, Danish was the only widely used
written language in Norway as a result of four centuries of union with
Denmark. With increasing independence came a wish to norwegianise the
Danish standard, with Knud Knudsen at the forefront for changing parts
of the vocabulary and orthographics. Thus, Riksmål, and later Bokmål,
resulted. These forms together are today probably used by about 90% of
Norway's population, or somewhere around 3,500,000 people.
Parallel to this development, a new written standard was created by Ivar
Aasen. He travelled extensively throughout Norway, and based his new
language, landsmål, on the grammar and vocabulary of dialect samples
from around the country. This was later renamed Nynorsk. Modern Nynorsk
differs significantly from modern Bokmål, and may be linguistically
looked upon as as different (or as similar if you like) as Swedish is to
Danish. For English or Dutch/German speakers, the differences may be
likened to those between (Lowland) Scots and English or Low German and
Dutch. Today it is estimated that about 500,000-600,000 people have
Nynorsk as their first written language.
More information about the Norwegian language history can be found in
English, German, French, Spanish or Portuguese on the website of the
Norwegian Language Council:
http://www.sprakrad.no/templates/Page.aspx?id=653
== A short history of Wikipedia in Norwegian ==
The first Norwegian wikipedia started 26 November 2001 on the subdomain
no.wikipedia.org. As most wikipedias, its contributor and article count
started really picking up around the end of 2003. At the time, it
accepted all written standards of Norwegian, although the amount of
Nynorsk was minimal. There were already several debates about the
feasibilty and appropriateness of keeping the two languages united on
one Wikipedia. On 31 July 2004 a Wikipedia for Nynorsk was created.
The creation of nn:, however, split the community at no: wikipedia. Many
felt that given that Nynorsk now had its own wikipedia, no: should
become a Bokmål/Riksmål Wikipedia only. Others disapproved and claimed
that there was no need to change and that it should continue its
language policy of accepting all and keep its interwiki link name of
"Norsk".
Nynorsk Wikipedia soon proved a success, as it within the next few
months gathered several people who had felt uncomfortable in the
(mainly) Bokmål environment at no:. The name displayed in interwiki
links became "Norsk (nynorsk)" (languages are not spelt with upper case
in Norwegian). To date it continues to be one of the fastest growing
wikipedias, with a steady article increase, now at over 6000 articles
and >50 editors with more than 10 edits since arrival.
== Votes ==
The issue of no:'s language policy has come up time and again, and a
vote was held in March ([[:no:Wikipedia:Målform]]) as to which policy to
adapt. Independent of the method of the tally (whether or not to include
new contributors etc.) there was a majority for switching to a
Bokmål/Riksmål only language policy (50% for Bokmål/Riksmål, 43.2% for
Bokmål/Riksmål/Nynorsk/Høgnorsk, and 6.8% for the official variants
Bokmål/Nynorsk only).
Following this result, there is now going to be a vote on which
interwiki link name will most appropriately reflect the current language
policy of no:. The result of this vote will most likely be either "Norsk
(bokmål)" or "Norsk (bokmål/riksmål)".
Understandably, there has also been a debate as to whether the subdomain
should change from "no" to "nb", as this is the correct representation
of Bokmål according to ISO 639-2. However, there is some resentment
towards such a move and currently a general acceptance in letting the
Bokmål wikipedia stay at "no". The alternative some have suggested is a
server-side redirect from "no" to "nb", in the same way that "nb" today
is a server-side redirect to the equivalent page on "no".
== Summary of the problem ==
Unfortunately, a small group of users (who all write Bokmål/Riksmål) are
ignoring the results from the vote, and are claiming they want to
re-establish a wikipedia for all written standards of Norwegian. They
claim they have been in touch with people centrally in Wikimedia
(developers? stewards?) and that they have so far received positive
comments. With this email, we would like to state the fact that there
have been no official decisions about creating a third Norwegian
wikipedia containing both Bokmål and Nynorsk, it is merely an unofficial
initiative from a small group of users which started a sign-on list at
[[:no:Bruker:Norsk_Wikipedia]]. A spontaneous list with signatures
against this activity was immediately created at
[[:no:Wikipedia-diskusjon:Fellesnorsk]]. The process of creating a third
Norwegian wikipedia has not gone through a voting process in any of the
two existing Norwegian wikipedias (no: and nn:) and can not be
considered as a decision by the Norwegian Wikipedia community.
We believe the creation of a third wikipedia under the Wikimedia
foundation would have a serious and unfortunate impact on the existing
wikipedias in Norwegian, no: and nn:, and would undermine Wikipedia's
reputation in Norway. This being said, we are all for extensive co-
operation between the four Scandinavian language wikipedias (including
Swedish and Danish), as evident by the recent creation of
[[:meta:Skanwiki]], the Scandinavian meta-pages, and the use of featured
articles from neighbour wikipedias.
== Conclusion ==
Hopefully, this letter will help people better understand the
complicated language situation of the Norwegian Wikipedia community, so
as to give a background on which discussion can take place on this list
in the future, such as the inevitable debate following a possible
request for a re-establishment of the common (and third!) Norwegian
Wikipedia.
>From the community of no.wikipedia.org and nn.wikipedia.org,
Bjarte Sørensen [[:meta:User:BjarteSorensen]] (Administrator/bureaucrat on nn:)
Lars Alvik [[:no:User:Profoss]] (Administrator/bureaucrat on no:)
Øyvind A. Holm [[:no:User:Sunny256]] (Administrator on no:)
Onar Vikingstad [[:no:User:Vikingstad]] (Administrator on no:)
Jon Harald Søby [[:no:User:Jhs]] (Administrator on no:)
Chris Nyborg [[:no:User:Cnyborg]] (Administrator on no:)
Guttorm Flatabø [[:no:User:Dittaeva]] (Administrator on nn:)
Gunleiv Hadland [[:meta:User:Gunnernett]] (Administrator on nn:)
Jarle Fagerheim [[:nn:User:Jarle]] (Administrator on nn:)
Øyvind Jo Heimdal Eik [[:en:User:Pladask]] (Administrator on nn: and no:)
Kristian André Gallis [[:nn:User:Kristaga]]
Vegard Wærp [[:no:User:Vegardw]]
Nina Aldin Thune [[:no:User:Nina]]
Thor-Rune Hansen [[:no:User:ThorRune]]
Claes Tande [[:no:User:Ctande]]
Arnt-Erik Krokaa [[:no:User:AEK]]
Rune Sattler [[:no:User:Shauni]]
So, it seems (if I interpret Jimbo's mail on wikitech and the discussion
here correctly) that most of us would like *some kind* of category
scheme in wikipedia. I do, too! But, we seem to differ on the details
(shocked silence!).
So far, I saw three concepts:
1. Simple categories like "Person", "Event", etc.; about a dozen total.
2. Categories and subcategories, like
"Science/Biology/Biochemistry/Proteomics", which can be "scaled down" to
#1 as well ("Humankind/Person" or something)
3. Complex object structures with machine-readable meta-knowledge
encoded into the articles, which would allow for quite complex
queries/summaries, like "biologists born after 1860".
Pros:
1. Easy to edit (the wiki way!)
2. Still easy to edit, but making wikipedia browseable by category,
fine-tune Recent Changes, etc.
3. Strong improvement in search functions, meta-knowledge available for
data-mining.
Cons:
1. Not much of a help...
2. We'd need to agree on a category scheme, and maintenance might get a
*little* complicated.
3. Quite complex to edit (e.g., "<category type='person'
occupation='biologist' birth_month='5' birth_day='24' birth_year='1874'
birth_place='London' death_month=.....>")
For a wikipedia I'd have to write myself, I'd choose #3, but with
respect to the wiki way, #2 seems more likely to achieve consensus (if
there is such a thing;-)
Magnus
Timwi wrote:
> Your [[IP address]] will be recorded when you click 'Save'. If
> you are not [[Special:Userlogin|logged in]], it will be shown
> publicly. See [[Wikipedia:Privacy policy|privacy policy]].
To make it even less scary, how about:
:Unless you are [[Special:Userlogin|logged in]] your edit will be signed
with your [[IP address]] when you click 'Save'. See our
[[Wikipedia:Privacy policy|privacy policy]].
Having an edit be signed with your IP number is IMO less threatening
than saying we'll show your IP number publically, more of a way of
granting attribution for the contributor's fine work than a warning that
"we're watching you!". This version does unfortunately omit the point
that Wikipedia records the IP address of logged-in users too, but it's
not like we can compress every detail of the privacy policy down into
just two lines and it should be pretty obvious to anyone who's thinking
about this sort of thing so hopefully not a major omission.
>Well, Elephantus apparently hasn't been monitoring the growth of the
>Serbocroatian WP.
>The top contributors recently are:
>OC Ripper,
>Dejvid,
>Myself,
>Pokrajac,
>Belirac,
>anonymous user.
>Now, of all these people, the ONLY ONE who is not a native speaker is ME.
[[sh:User:Dejvid]] is also not a native speaker and his main activity
was also copy/pasting articles from the other three Wikipedias.
So two out of the top three contributors aren't native speakers and
what they're doing is basically making an internal fork.
>From the standpoint of the Croatian Wikipedia, there are two main
problems about Serbo-Croatian Wiki:
1. User confusion. Nontechnical, casual passers-by who stumble
upon Serbo-Croatian Wikipedia and, in many cases, automatically assume
that there is no Croatian (or Serbian, for that matter) Wikipedia.
I tried to make a partial fix for this by adding a banner
to the top of the S-C Main Page pointing people to the other 3
Wikis, but you and Pokrajac removed this.
2. Fragmentation of user base. The people who consider their
language to be Serbo-Croatian form a small minority, with political
views which are usually at the left end of the political spectrum.
By providing these people with their own Wiki you're possibly
depriving the three of small, but potentially valuable
contributions and a diversity of opinion necessary for a successful
Wiki. If we were to create, say, a German-Marxist Wikipedia, would
that be welcomed by the majority of contributors to the German
Wiki?
As for the politics of the issue, I don't really care one
way or the other. I cooperate well with the folks
on the Serbian Wikipedia who don't try to convince me that
I'm wrong and they're right. But I really think that you should
respect the will of a great majority of the three peoples
and not try to force a common identity or language upon us.
Proclaiming the many contributors to the three Wikipedias
and other ordinary folks "nationalists" because they decided
to go their separate ways shows a certain lack of respect or
detailed and nuanced knowledge about things. It's not
a simple copy/paste/merge operation, as shown in the past
90 years or so. Sorry.
Elephantus (from Croatian Wikipedia)
--
Odaberite XXLadsl i iskoristite 60 dana neograničenog surfanja za samo 1 kn!
Uz svaki XXLadsl poklanjamo Iskonov glazbeni CD. http://www.iskon.biz/xxladsl
The Serbo-Croatian Wikipedia was reopened in June
after a request from a single user of the Serbian
Wikipedia - [[sr:User:Покрајац|Pokrajac]]. This was
not announced beforehand in any way on the three Wikipedias that
are most affected by this issue – Serbian,
Croatian and Bosnian, there was no public discussion or
a vote. The idea was supported here by people
who weren't part of the growing communities of the
three Wikipedias.
The "phenomenal growth" (1,019 articles) of the Serbo-Croatian
is mostly a result of people (some of them with little or no
knowledge of the three languages)
copy-pasting articles from Serbian (converting those to Latin
alphabet), Croatian or Bosnian Wikipedias. The sole
exception has been an anonymous user 213.202.x.x who wrote
several longer articles in almost perfect Croatian and
posted them to the Serbo-Croatian wiki.
My question is this: Why aren't Serbian, Bosnian and Croatian
Wikipedias provided the same treatment as e.g. Danish and
Bokmal (Norwegian) which are also mutually intelligible
in the written form? There is no common Dano-Bokmal
Wikipedia with well-wishing but mostly misguided non-native-
speakers copying articles to it.
Serbo-Croatian has been dead as a political collection of
standard languages for 15 years now (30 years in Croatia),
it is slowly disappearing, except as a historical footnote,
even in international linguistic circles because the name
itself is insulting to most Bosniaks and Croats and not
used by most Serbs (who prefer the term Serbian).
I'd like to propose a relocking of this Wikipedia or at least a
name change (Serbian - Latin, as a temporary bridge to
the Latin conversion system now being tested for the Serbian
Wikipedia).
Elephantus (from Croatian Wikipedia, 10.042 articles
and growing!) :-)
--
Odaberite XXLadsl i iskoristite 60 dana neograničenog surfanja za samo 1 kn!
Uz svaki XXLadsl poklanjamo Iskonov glazbeni CD. http://www.iskon.biz/xxladsl
1. I notice that whenever one uses an accent in a Category, it puts it all out of order. For instance, if I wish to write Àfrica in the Category - it ends up after Z rather than amongst the As - is there a trick to fixing that up?
2. Is there a wikipedia for Tetum, the official language of the newest member of the United Nations, East Timor?
pippu d'angelo
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Mail: gratis 1GB per i messaggi, antispam, antivirus, POP3
Hi all,
1. Why is it that {{{NUMARTICLES}}} in ceb-wp's main
page gives inconsistent results between sessions?
Yesterday our article count was already up to 600+,
but last time I check (just now, before I hit the Send
button) it's down to 400+?
2. Are the date entries (i.e. [[Enero 1]]) acceptable
for the "This wikipedia is with 1,000 articles"? If
yes, then ceb-wp is nearing 1,000 pages (698 on last
count) but 365 of them are day's entries. ;) 4 months
in operation and no bots ;)
3. Finally, who is really in charge of making admins
on new wp's? I submitted my application (for adminship
on ceb-wp) last Sept. 27, 2005, but I was passed over
by Yann who made admins on Oct. 9. I really want to
change the interface into Cebuano, esp. that I have
just finished translating the Google interface into
our language.
Daghang salamat! (That's how we say thank you!)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Vincent "Bentong" S. Isles Chemistry & Physics Teacher
bentong_isles(a)yahoo.com http://bentong.topcities.com
56-C San Miguel St. Cebu City, Philippines
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Unsa ang tinuod nga pagkamakinasodnon? Kini mao ang
pagdapig sa budaya [culture] batok sa mga buot mopasipala
niini, langyaw man kun isigka-Pilipino.
Mabuhi ang pinulongang Sinugboanon!
SCRAP THE PHILIPPINE NATIONAL LANGUAGE POLICY!
STOP THE FORCED LEARNING OF TAGALOG!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Abag sa Sinugboanong Wikipedya | http://ceb.wikipedia.org
Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
2005/10/24, Sulev Iva <juvasul(a)ut.ee>:
> And especial congratulations to Udmurts! There is so little Finno-Ugric
> languages that have their own Wikipedias. I hope the Udmurt Wiki will help
> much to the Udmurt people and their language!
It's a sad fact, but the [[:udm:]] has the old problem about
{{NUMBEROFARTICLES}} variable. Anyone can see that it malfunctions.
If anybody knows how the problem is usually solved, do help!
The other problem about the Udmurt wikipedia is that it's been created
based on English language file, while it'd be better to use the
Russian file (and this consideration hass been in the request). Most
of Udmurts do understand Russian better than English, and they could
feel themselves easiere at [[:udm:]], while its interface is not yet
translated into the Udmurt.
V. Ivanov (Amikeco),
os-admin.
--
Esperu cxiam!