<snip> The current mediation process doesn't work very well, for exactly those reasons, and should not be used an an example of what to do w the ArbCom. They are making changes and improvements, but it is despite, rather than because of their selection process, that it is occuring.
Jack (Sam Spade) </snip>
Can you clarify what you mean, Sam Spade? Thanks.
Flcelloguy
From Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia.
From: wikien-l-request@Wikipedia.org Reply-To: wikien-l@Wikipedia.org To: wikien-l@Wikipedia.org Subject: WikiEN-l Digest, Vol 27, Issue 55 Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 16:39:20 +0000 (UTC)
Send WikiEN-l mailing list submissions to wikien-l@Wikipedia.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to wikien-l-request@Wikipedia.org
You can reach the person managing the list at wikien-l-owner@Wikipedia.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of WikiEN-l digest..."
Today's Topics:
- Re: How many Arbitrators should we have? (Michael Turley)
- Re: Trademarked images and image use policies in non-English Wikipedias (Andrew Gray)
- Re: How many Arbitrators should we have? (Kat Walsh)
- Re: Autoblocking, reverts, and verifiability (Sean Barrett)
- Re: How many Arbitrators should we have? (Jack Lynch)
- Re: Autoblocking, reverts, and verifiability (Andrew Gray)
- Re: Autoblocking, reverts, and verifiability (Tony Sidaway)
- Re: Trademarked images and image use policies in non-English Wikipedias (Justin Cormack)
- Re: How many Arbitrators should we have? (Kelly Martin)
Message: 1 Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 12:11:32 -0400 From: Michael Turley michael.turley@gmail.com Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] How many Arbitrators should we have? To: Ryan Delaney ryan.delaney@gmail.com Cc: English Wikipedia wikien-l@wikipedia.org Message-ID: d148b6870510060911h6afdb564n35144b918e003186@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
On 10/6/05, Ryan Delaney ryan.delaney@gmail.com wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Michael Turley wrote:
There are a lot of current administrators that I've either voted to support, or simply refused to vote oppose in their RfA that I would never consider supporting in the position of an arbitrator. If I'd thought that one future day they'd get handed the authority to arbitrate in any way stronger than they now can (by blocking, page locking, etc) it would certainly have been less "no big deal" and a lot more "let's screen these people very carefully".
All right, then. How would you suggest we choose them?
By the same process we do now, just create more vacancies to fill.
-- Michael Turley User:Unfocused
Message: 2 Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 17:16:28 +0100 From: Andrew Gray shimgray@gmail.com Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Trademarked images and image use policies in non-English Wikipedias To: Nyenyec N nyenyec@gmail.com, English Wikipedia wikien-l@wikipedia.org Message-ID: f3fedb0d0510060916u2c157cd2i@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
On 06/10/05, Nyenyec N nyenyec@gmail.com wrote:
I'd be really interested in reading about what decisions the other language versions of Wikipedia made and why.
Can someone point me to a place where I can discuss this (preferably in English)?
Wikipedia-l may be a good idea, or if you ask on meta there might be someone knowledgeable. The en.wiki articles on foreign-language editions may or may not have brief summaries of such policies, but not really the reasoning behind them.
--
- Andrew Gray andrew.gray@dunelm.org.uk
Message: 3 Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 12:18:24 -0400 From: Kat Walsh mindspillage@gmail.com Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] How many Arbitrators should we have? To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@wikipedia.org Message-ID: 8e253f560510060918i3abd1bf3k56e0ee0667637a87@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
On 10/6/05, Ryan Delaney ryan.delaney@gmail.com wrote:
Michael Turley wrote:
There are a lot of current administrators that I've either voted to support, or simply refused to vote oppose in their RfA that I would never consider supporting in the position of an arbitrator. If I'd thought that one future day they'd get handed the authority to arbitrate in any way stronger than they now can (by blocking, page locking, etc) it would certainly have been less "no big deal" and a lot more "let's screen these people very carefully".
All right, then. How would you suggest we choose them?
- Ryan
I can see something like the current Mediation Committee request process working: a sort of unstructured request, with general agreement from the community and no veto by the arbcom, to form a pool of people to draw from.
I do think as some others have that not every suitable admin would be a suitable arbitrator/magistrate/clerk -- though quite a few would. It's a few additional skills and a more specific sort of personality required.
-Kat [[User:Mindspillage]]
-- "There was a point to this story, but it has temporarily escaped the chronicler's mind." --Douglas Adams
Message: 4 Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2005 09:24:03 -0700 From: Sean Barrett sean@epoptic.org Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Autoblocking, reverts, and verifiability To: David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com, English Wikipedia wikien-l@Wikipedia.org Message-ID: 43454FA3.3050205@epoptic.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
David Gerard stated for the record:
On 10/6/05, Ryan Delaney ryan.delaney@gmail.com wrote:
David Gerard wrote:
- is too stupid (possibly wilfully stupid) to understand without
falling afoul of it. As we've seen from this thread, even then they frequently can't or won't learn.
Well, after warning someone about the 3RR because I saw that he had reverted twice in a couple hours (with some snippy edit summaries), he made the following elaborate argument that he had done nothing wrong. You can see my painful, and ultimately fruitless, attempt to explain the situation to him at [[User talk:Freemarkets]]. "According to baseball rules, if one has "more than 2 strikes" called against him while at bat, that player will be called "out." In other words, each batter is "entitled" to 2 strikes before being called "out." According to Wikipedia rules, if one edits a page "more than three times" in a 24 hour period, he is subject to being blocked. How is it, then, that that rule does NOT "entitle" an editor to "three reverts" without being called out? If one must break a rule to be blocked, and one cannot break the rule without reverting more than 3 times in 24 hours, then how have I violated the rule, and how would I be subject to being banned? Further, of what use is your warning?--Freemarkets 11:40, 29 September 2005 (UTC)"
What a pity being that wilfully clueless isn't a blocking offence. At least not the first time.
Something to add to [[WP:NOT]]: Wikipedia is not a game of baseball.
Sean Barrett | It is dark, and you are likely to sean@epoptic.com | log off the wrong account. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFDRU+jMAt1wyd9d+URAtYOAJ4k5auqmO1VeuFVNj9jMvC1Wq9PHQCfdYTE F/J4nxsoB4YM1Ir0SDSAmNE= =fgTQ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Message: 5 Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 18:27:05 +0200 From: Jack Lynch jack.i.lynch@gmail.com Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] How many Arbitrators should we have? To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@wikipedia.org Message-ID: 49bdc7430510060927h2b597b4cnee3477890eeaf3d3@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
The current mediation process doesn't work very well, for exactly those reasons, and should not be used an an example of what to do w the ArbCom. They are making changes and improvements, but it is despite, rather than because of their selection process, that it is occuring.
Jack (Sam Spade)
On 10/6/05, Kat Walsh mindspillage@gmail.com wrote:
On 10/6/05, Ryan Delaney ryan.delaney@gmail.com wrote:
Michael Turley wrote:
There are a lot of current administrators that I've either voted to support, or simply refused to vote oppose in their RfA that I would never consider supporting in the position of an arbitrator. If I'd thought that one future day they'd get handed the authority to arbitrate in any way stronger than they now can (by blocking, page locking, etc) it would certainly have been less "no big deal" and a lot more "let's screen these people very carefully".
All right, then. How would you suggest we choose them?
- Ryan
I can see something like the current Mediation Committee request process working: a sort of unstructured request, with general agreement from the community and no veto by the arbcom, to form a pool of people to draw from.
I do think as some others have that not every suitable admin would be a suitable arbitrator/magistrate/clerk -- though quite a few would. It's a few additional skills and a more specific sort of personality required.
-Kat [[User:Mindspillage]]
-- "There was a point to this story, but it has temporarily escaped the chronicler's mind." --Douglas Adams _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Message: 6 Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 17:33:17 +0100 From: Andrew Gray shimgray@gmail.com Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Autoblocking, reverts, and verifiability To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@wikipedia.org Message-ID: f3fedb0d0510060933x31f3ffb7l@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
On 06/10/05, Sean Barrett sean@epoptic.org wrote:
What a pity being that wilfully clueless isn't a blocking offence. At least not the first time.
Something to add to [[WP:NOT]]: Wikipedia is not a game of baseball.
Should we add that the 3RR is also not cricket? ;-)
--
- Andrew Gray andrew.gray@dunelm.org.uk
Message: 7 Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 17:36:08 +0100 From: Tony Sidaway f.crdfa@gmail.com Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Autoblocking, reverts, and verifiability To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@wikipedia.org Message-ID: 605709b90510060936p74a9c87aq857a4511018832e8@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Wikipedia is not baseball.
Message: 8 Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2005 17:41:13 +0100 From: Justin Cormack justin@specialbusservice.com Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Trademarked images and image use policies in non-English Wikipedias To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@Wikipedia.org Message-ID: 1128616874.19912.4.camel@scrod.vision Content-Type: text/plain
On Thu, 2005-10-06 at 10:48 -0500, Nyenyec N wrote:
Hi,
In HuWiki there's an ongoing debate over trademarked images, such as company logos. On the one hand, they're usually copyrighted so they shouldn't be uploaded, on the other hand they can be used to illustrate encyclopedia articles about the specific company without the fear of anyone suing us.
Except that they might implicitly be taken to imply endorsement, or we might be asked to remove them.
WHat is the summary of the argument on HU?
I know that they cannot be uploaded to commons (since they're copyrighted) and I think the German Wikipedia also doesn't allow such images, since they don't have a free license.
I'd be really interested in reading about what decisions the other language versions of Wikipedia made and why.
en is overlax and allows upload of pretty much any copyrighted image at the moment. Clearly this is going to have to change. I wouldnt use the policies of en as a basis for anything else. Also it depends on the fair use policy of the country in question (as that is where it will largely be used). Germany has no fair use right in law apparently, hence their decision.
Can someone point me to a place where I can discuss this (preferably in English)?
Here, or wikiproject fair use on en.
Message: 9 Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2005 11:38:51 -0500 From: Kelly Martin kelly.lynn.martin@gmail.com Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] How many Arbitrators should we have? To: Michael Turley michael.turley@gmail.com, English Wikipedia wikien-l@wikipedia.org Message-ID: bd4c411e0510060938k13f93177hcff5643bad070341@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
On 10/6/05, Michael Turley michael.turley@gmail.com wrote:
There are a lot of current administrators that I've either voted to support, or simply refused to vote oppose in their RfA that I would never consider supporting in the position of an arbitrator. If I'd thought that one future day they'd get handed the authority to arbitrate in any way stronger than they now can (by blocking, page locking, etc) it would certainly have been less "no big deal" and a lot more "let's screen these people very carefully".
Keeping adminship "no big deal" has to include keeping the authorities granted to them in the same general class.
I'm also in agreement that the notion of letting any admin volunteer to act as an adjudicator on any dispute is a bad idea.
First, you have the issue that adminship is currently "no big deal". If we give admins the right to make unilateral binding decisions (even if subject to appeal) with the full authority of the ArbCom, then suddenly adminship is no longer "no big deal". We'd really need to reconfirm all our current admins to this new standard, and I bet a lot of them would fail to meet it.
Second, allowing people to pick and choose what issues they will offer justice on is an open invitation to bias. If a candidate jurist has a POV on a particular issue, he will want to judge it in order to impose his POV. I oppose any system in which assignment to cases is on a voluntary basis; all of our jurists should take the cases as they come, with the option (and obligation) to recuse in case of conflict.
As to the problem of getting people to want to serve as magistrates (which is, frankly, a really nasty job, almost as bad as that of arbitrator, and with less prestige and power): the one selling point is that it stands to reason that magistrates will naturally be the most probable candidates to become future arbitrators, and are likely to be called on to serve as temporary arbitrators to fill vacancies and so forth. Combine that with the fact that there are some crazy people who enjoy being jurists, and I think we can scare up enough qualified people to at least blunt the storm somewhat.
And, on top of that, I will personally buy a round of drinks for anyone who serves as a magistrate, at every Wikimania I attend. :)
Kelly
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
End of WikiEN-l Digest, Vol 27, Issue 55
_________________________________________________________________ Dont just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/