Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2007 10:50:38 +0100
From: Geert Lovink <geert(a)xs4all.nl>
Subject: Re: <nettime> shocklogs wikipedia entry
Update: Wikipedia editors are again considering to delete the shocklog
entry. Interesting remark is this context is their suspicion of
'foreign language' blogs being involved as references. But who is
foreign in this case? English for those write Dutch? Or Dutch for those
know only English? Interesting to see how Larry Singer's Citizendium is
putting pressure on Wikipedia to get rid of 'neologisms' and barbarian
non-Anglo knowledge... Best, Geert
An editor has nominated the article Shocklog for deletion, under the
Articles for deletion process. We appreciate your contributions, but
the nominator doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for
inclusion, and has explained why in the nomination (also see What
Wikipedia is not and Deletion policy). Your opinions on why the topic
of the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with
the article are welcome: participate in the discussion by editing
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shocklog. Add four tildes like this
ËœËœËœËœ to sign your comments. You can also edit the article Shocklog
during the discussion, but do not remove the "Articles for Deletion"
template (the box at the top of the article), this will not end the
deletion debate. Jayden54Bot 13:37, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
seemingly a violation of Wikipedia:Avoid neologisms Cornell Rockey
02:00, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
Merge with Blog, as a "Shocklog" is a type of blog. Flakeloaf 04:10, 21
January 2007 (UTC)
Delete Lacks sources demonstration sufficient use to satisfy WP:NEO.
Sources consist of a couple of foreign-language blogs and an on-line
Master's thesis. Need published sources complying with WP:RS
- --Shirahadasha 04:52, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
Delete, basically a neologism, and an imprecise one at that. Is Stile
Project a "shocklog"? Lankiveil 05:16, 21 January 2007 (UTC).
On 17 Jan 2007, at 11:54 AM, Geert Lovink wrote:
> (dear nettimers, together with students of the masters-of-media blog at
> the university of amsterdam i have been working on a wikipedia entry
> about so-called shock logs or shock blogs. it is been an interesting
# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
# more info: majordomo(a)bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body
# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime(a)bbs.thing.net
FN M: 0091 9822122436 P: +91-832-240-9490 (after 1300IST please)
[copied to foundation-l and wikipedia-l; please note this when replying]
I was sure I'd seen this on the mailing lists before, but I couldn't
find it on a quick search (which is odd - I'm sure I heard a week ago)
It appears the Esperanto Wikipedia is on a stamp. Well, Esperanto is
on the stamp; a chunk of the text from [[eo:L. L. Zamenhof]] is used
as a sort of background illustration.
Colour image: http://www.jr.co.il/pictures/stamps/jrst0399.jpg
Detailed description: http://www.jr.co.il/pictures/stamps/jrst0399e.jpg
Brief discussion: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_%28news%29
This is quite a delightful discovery; it isn't clear why our text is
used, but it must be a good motive, and it's certainly a somewhat
unusual bit of recognition :-)
Congratulations to the eo.wp community - from a glance at their
discussion forums last night I didn't see any obvious keywords to
suggest they've noticed yet, so someone more competent than I may like
to make sure they know...
- Andrew Gray
I received a message (below) from a librarian at a US high school who is
considering writing a policy for their students regarding the use of
Wikipedia in research papers. She asked for my input and whether I knew of
any similar policies in schools -- either middle and high schools or
colleges and universities. This:
is the kind of thing she's interested in (this particular policy appears,
by the way, to be completely sensible -- the main flaws I found were they
missed the permanent link and citation features, and they called us "the
I pointed her towards
* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Researching_with_Wikipedia, and
which seem to be en:'s documentation on the subject of academic use. But I'm
wondering if any of you:
* know of such policies at specific institutions (and if so if you can send
me a link)
* know of commentary on, or a list of, such policies (either from our lists
& sites or other places)
* have comments about such policies and what should go into them.
* if any of you are librarians or professors, if you have answers for the
last question about how WP is handled at reference desks and in classes.
here's the message (with specific campus names taken out):
>I am the head librarian at a college prep high school in California. We are
>considering writing a school policy regarding the use of Wikipedia in
>academic research. I am gathering as much information as I can from
>universities because I would like our policy and instruction to reflect
>our students will be met with once they leave us.
> Does the University of California have a policy about the use of
Wikipedia or do professors to
>set guidelines for its use?
> In your opinion, based on your experience at various universities, are
students allowed to cite it in academic research papers?
> Do professors address it at all and how is it handled at the reference
desk at university libraries.
>From: Andre Engels [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
>Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2007 09:31 AM
>Subject: [Wikipedia-l] No consensus
>It's very nice in Wikipedia to work with consensus. But what if no consensus
>is found? How is it decided then?
Look to existing practice. And keep trying.
At 12:16 10/01/2007, you wrote:
>I agree that notability should be judged by those familiar with the field.
The only problem here, is that fields have sub-fields, and sub-fields
I think an article subject is notable if someone has noted it in a
There is a danger of peers in a field assessing a controversial
subject as non-notable for the wrong reasons, ie. confusing
notability with importances.
We have articles on obscure chemical compounds, obscure villages in
obscure countries, and obscure ideas in obscure publications.
Thank goodness that www.google.com doesn't have a "notability"
criteria, or most of its pages would disappear.
Brion's just enabled a feature of mine called "Cascading Protection". Simply
put, this automagically applies temporary full protection to any page
included on a page protected or semi-protected with the "cascading bit".
Brion has so far protected the Main Page of en.wikipedia with this feature,
which should eliminate main-page vandalism, except of images on commons;
which could be uploaded by a bot, protected manually, or protected on
commons. I would also strongly recommend protecting Main Page/Tomorrow, or
equivalent on other projects, but I lack the sysop bit to do it myself. Any
sysop is free to activate or deactivate this on a page that appears to
require it; within whatever decision-making processes exist on the target
Please note that the edit and move tabs will appear as normal to save
performance, however a warning indicating where the cascading protection
comes from will appear when sysops try to edit, and an error will appear
when regular users try to edit these pages.
Hi all, I'm from India, a contributor to the Wikipedia. In recent
times, the 'mortality' of new Wikipedia entries seems to be higher
than usual. While one can understand the need for abundant caution,
it's also important to allow for a diversity of concerns and issues in
Should we presume that because an initiative is not very visible in
cyberspace (okay, we are under-digitised societies!) that it is not
prominent or noteworthy? See as one example:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vikalp This is a campaign against
censorship of documentary film in India, one which has the
participation of about 250 documentary film-makers.
There must be some way out. Your suggestions would be welcome. FN
FN M: 0091 9822122436 P: +91-832-240-9490 (after 1300IST please)