Habj (sweetadelaide at gmail.com) wrote:
>How do you do it on the other wikipedias? Do people just think to themselves
>"this is a good page, we need it, people should have this in mind" and then
>label it "guideline" to see if someone reverts? Are there formal procedures?
>Input from as many 'pedias as possible would be appreciated.
At some stage I will be going through as many as possible of the
guidelines on en: and rewriting them for clarity - and I encourage
others to do so (taking due care with talk page discussion,
ascertaining consensus, not getting radical, etc).
The basic notion I'm using is: guidelines require editorial judgement,
which is something you can't legislate. So you should aim guidelines
at clueful editors of good will, because editors of bad will won't
care, and editors who are clueless wouldn't understand them anyway.
As far as I can tell, one of the greatest sources of [[m:instruction
creep]] in guidelines on en: is when people put in sentences to try to
hit bad editors over the head with. This makes the guidelines so
bloated the good editors don't even look at them, and the bad ones
keep ignoring them anyway.
(A notable example is the Manual of Style on en: - it's so long and
detailed that the only use it gets is (a) editors who can't tolerate
any ambiguity or inconsistency writing to it; (b) editors quoting it
to try to battle other editors they disagree with. No-one actually
uses it as a reference because it's not possible.)
So. Guidelines: helpful guides for sensible editors of good will,
because no-one else cares.
Policy: things that have to be a certain way for things to work at
all. That's a VERY small set. NPOV, No Original Research, No Personal
Attacks ... 3RR on en: ....
How does that sound to you?
- d.
Hi!
Wikimedia Germany has been offered to participate in the Google Grants
International-Programm. We can kidnly use Google AdWords to promote
Wikimedia sites. Suggestions are needed to reasonably benefit:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Google_Grants
Final dealine for suggestions is February 14th.
Greetings,
Jakob
How many of the 'pedias out there have some formal labelling of guidelines,
saying "this is a guideline of the prtovleskian wikipedia" etc.?
Swedish Wikipedia didn't until this summer. There were some pages with
"rules" of various kinds floating around in the Wikipedia namespace. Some
people liked to say "this and that is a policy of Swedish wikipedia" but
there was no way to define which these policies were. Now we are trying to
define guidelines and policy all at once, so to speak. It seems obvious that
policies should go through some kind of more formal procedure - but what
about guidelines?
How do you do it on the other wikipedias? Do people just think to themselves
"this is a good page, we need it, people should have this in mind" and then
label it "guideline" to see if someone reverts? Are there formal procedures?
Input from as many 'pedias as possible would be appreciated.
/Habj
A recent image use change was discussed and accepted on Simple English
Wikipedia (http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Image_use_policy).
We're going to move towards using the free images available from
Wikimedia Commons exclusively. There are several benefits to this
move, particularly in helping Simple become a highly-portable source
to aid inter-language article translation. By using only free images
on Commons, which can be immediately used on any project just by
creating an image link, we eliminate potential legal problems and
speed the overall process.
A side-benefit is that this move will help discourage proliferation of
"pop culture" topics on Simple - such as Pokemon, albums, and movies -
which are arguably better done on the home-language Wikipedias. Simple
tries to concentrate on "core" encyclopedia topics and related.
If anyone is interested in helping create an easy-to-read,
easy-to-translate encyclopedia, please visit
http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Welcome.
-- Netoholic
David Gerard wrote:
>Michael Snow wrote:
>
>
>>David Gerard - [[Pete Postlethwaite]]
>>Lest any of
>>the subjects be offended by my choices, I'm not necessarily saying you
>>look like these people. My focus was on picking capable actors who could
>>be made to look more or less like you. This is for entertainment value only.
>>
>>
>Hmph! [[Jason Isaacs]] if you please. Including the overwhelming hubris.
>
>
Of course, Jason Isaacs is absolutely perfect! Please forgive the
oversight, I've already fired the casting director.
Now you can look forward to a fantastic scene in the sequel, Wikipedia:
Return of the Cabal, where the members of the Arbitration Committee
suddenly appear, hooded and masked, when Jimbo presses a secret
combination of keys on his laptop. Then we have a tremendous wheel war
between Jimbo and Lir (using one of his stealth sysop accounts) in which
Jimbo tries to delete [[Wikipedia:Neutral point of view]] and replace it
with Totalitarian Unificationist Left-wing Objectivist Jewish
Micronation Terrorist point of view. (By the way, if anybody knows what
that point of view would look like, please contact me, our scriptwriters
for the third movie are kind of stuck.)
--Michael Snow
Hello,
we have an ongoing discussion at [[:en:Wikipedia talk:3D Illustrations]] on
the use of anaglyphic 3D images in en. At this time the consensus seems to be
tending towards not using these pictures inlined in articles (to avoid
confusing the lots of readers without 3D glasses and maintaining printable
illustrations), but giving the pictures some exposure by using a new template
analogous to {{commons}} called {{3d_commons}}. (see [[:en:Gorilla]] for a
first example).
I now created a derivative work of the original commons logo, to use in this
template:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Commons-logo-Anaglyph.svg
I realize that this already constitutes a violation of the original
commons-logo license, but I'd like to transfer copyright of my logo the the
Wikimedia foundation as well to make it official. Is that possible? Who'd be
the appropriate person to contact and sort out the mess?
Cheers,
Daniel
Michael Snow wrote:
>David Gerard - [[Pete Postlethwaite]]
> Lest any of
>the subjects be offended by my choices, I'm not necessarily saying you
>look like these people. My focus was on picking capable actors who could
>be made to look more or less like you. This is for entertainment value only.
Hmph! [[Jason Isaacs]] if you please. Including the overwhelming hubris.
>But keep in mind that the only way to
>ensure you will be played by the actor of your choice is to foot the
>bill for that actor's salary.
Oh, well in that case your choice is JUST FINE.
- d.
Did anyone notice that Mitch Kapor co-founded Wikipedia?
I sent a letter to the editor, they haven't responded to it yet.
http://www.nowtoronto.com/issues/current/goods_next.php
Nick
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Cars NEW - sell your car and browse thousands of new and used cars online search now
---------------------------------
Dear all,
As of 4th February 2006, the board has approved the initial members of
the Chapters Committee. All details can be found here:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Chapters committee.
The chapters committee's primary function is to assist in the creation
of Wikimedia Chapters throughout the world (see
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_chapters) as well as assist
the existing Chapters in their day to day relationship with the
Wikimedia Foundation. Those goals and duties will be refined with
time.
Please feel free to ask any questions or give advice on the meta talk
page and add to our todo list.
Delphine
PS. to the translators mailing list. If you could translate this and
send it to your respective language mailing lists, this would be
grand. Thank you.
--
~notafish