David Gerard, 30/03/2009 23:37:
The problem, of course, is that every new link or word of text on that
page lowers its utility. That help! page should be as sparse as
possible for user interface reasons.
What do you all think?
http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aiuto:Aiuto is much lighter.
Nemo
2009/3/2 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com:
I just went to get some actual data. Here's the stats.grok.se hit
count for [[:en:Wikipedia:Contact us]] and its subpages:
232227 Wikipedia:Contact us
- ranked #366 page on Wikipedia for Feb 2009
2230 Wikipedia:Contact us/account questions
7773
Hoi,
It is not that I am not able to look up words in a dictionary.. When an
excess of dificult word is used, the message is lost.
Thanks,
GerardM
2009/3/4 quiddity pandiculat...@gmail.com
http://www.onelook.com/?w=encomium a formal expression of praise
2009/3/5 Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com:
It is not that I am not able to look up words in a dictionary.. When an
excess of dificult word is used, the message is lost.
None of these were excessively difficult, and now you know more English words.
- d.
2009/3/5 Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com:
My English is considered to be quite good. I have not learned any new words
and I do not mind to have an occassional word. For me this was excessive and
it stopped my reading and my interest.
You didn't notice your original response was to
Please stop this.
John
Gerard Meijssen skrev:
Hoi,
My English is considered to be quite good. I have not learned any new words
and I do not mind to have an occassional word. For me this was excessive and
it stopped my reading and my interest.
Thanks,
Gerard
PS David, what was you
I think we need to ban anyone with Gerard in their (first or last) name.
I certainly wish it were possible to filter out such emails without deleting
them completely.
On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 9:36 AM, John at Darkstar vac...@jeb.no wrote:
Please stop this.
John
Gerard Meijssen skrev:
Hoi,
-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Sent: Thursday, March 5, 2009 7:48:42 AM
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Request for your input: biographies of living people
I think we need to ban anyone with Gerard in their (first or last) name.
I certainly wish it were possible to filter out such emails without deleting
them
Gerard Meijssen wrote:
Hoi,
My English is considered to be quite good. I have not learned any new words
and I do not mind to have an occassional word. For me this was excessive and
it stopped my reading and my interest.
Thanks,
Gerard
PS David, what was you first language again ?
Jussi-Ville Heiskanen wrote:
Ray Saintonge wrote:
I'm making a point of replying to this before I read any of the other
responses to avoid being tainted by them.
Since I think you make several insightful observations
well worth focusing on, I hope you will in return not
mind me
Jussi-Ville Heiskanen wrote:
Sue Gardner wrote:
* Wikimedians have developed lots of tools for preventing/fixing vandalism
and errors of fact. Where less progress has been made, I think, is on the
question of disproportionate criticism. It seems to me that the solution may
include the
Fred Bauder wrote:
This would exclude a great deal of pornographic actresses and actors.
Which I don't think is a bad thing, in fact. I'm far from a prude,
but someone who is solely notable for appearing in a few pornographic
films seems to contradict what our policy is regarding other
Sue Gardner wrote:
I am just clarifying - default to delete unless consensus to keep would be
a change from current state, right?
In terms of policy, default to delete is the current state for BLPs.
To be more exact, the important bit is: If there is no rough consensus
and the page is not a
In Norway its covered in Lov om behandling av personopplysninger
(personopplysningsloven) §7; Forholdet til ytringsfriheten (Relation to
freedom of speech) [http://www.lovdata.no/all/tl-2414-031-001.html#7]
It is an exception for kunstneriske, litterære eller journalistiske,
herunder
In Norway it seems that neglecting to do something will not lead to any
real danger of legal actions, its phrased uforstand, but gross
neglectence, or grov uforstand could be punishable by law. An example
given is that if an admin is notified on email about specific child porn
in an article (that
If I'm not mistaken it should be possible to detect the presence of a
text which describe a person, and then include a link to a contact form
about BLP.
John
Nathan skrev:
Personally, I'd like to see a prominent Report a problem with this article
link or box only on BLPs for starters. We don't
Sue Gardner wrote:
2009/3/3 Michael Snow wikipe...@verizon.net
But someone making a request is a sign that the article really needs a
hard look, and quite possibly should be removed for not meeting our
standards. So the reversed presumption of default to delete, unless
consensus to keep
2009/3/2 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com:
(My usual answer: Email info at wikimedia dot org, that's wikimedia
with an M. It'll get funneled to the right place. All other ways of
contacting us end up there anyway. This seems to work a bit.)
Ha. Tie this into Thomas's suggestion...
...print up
2009/3/4 Andrew Gray andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk:
2009/3/2 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com:
(My usual answer: Email info at wikimedia dot org, that's wikimedia
with an M. It'll get funneled to the right place. All other ways of
contacting us end up there anyway. This seems to work a bit.)
Ha.
On Mar 4, 2009, at 7:17 AM, Andrew Gray wrote:
Ha. Tie this into Thomas's suggestion...
...print up a sheaf of business cards, with Got a problem? info @
wikimedia.org in nice clear bold lettering, the puzzle-globe at one
edge; the other side just WIKIPEDIA writ large. Distribute them to
2009/3/2 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com:
As far as I can make out, the present situation on en:wp is: a
proposal was put which got 59% support. That's not a sufficiently
convincing support level. So Jimbo is currently putting together a
better proposal, with the aim of at least 2/3 support
2009/3/4 Andrew Gray andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk:
I did a headcount the other week of all the OTRS simple vandalism and
uncomplicated BLP tickets I handled - ie, all the ones not needing
digging and arguing with people and so on. 80-90% of them would have
been avoided by flagged revisions.
2009/3/4 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com:
2009/3/4 Andrew Gray andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk:
I did a headcount the other week of all the OTRS simple vandalism and
uncomplicated BLP tickets I handled - ie, all the ones not needing
digging and arguing with people and so on. 80-90% of them would
Sue,
As far as default to delete goes... There was a high profile proposal
about it awhile back, written by Doc_glasgow (now en:User:Scott_MacDonald),
which got significant support but appeared to fall short of a consensus.
Nonetheless the deletion of articles on marginally notable living people
http://www.onelook.com/?w=encomium a formal expression of praise
http://www.onelook.com/?w=hagiography a biography that idealizes or
idolizes the person (especially a person who is a saint)
http://www.onelook.com/?w=saccharine overly sweet
On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 4:19 AM, Gerard Meijssen
2009/3/4 quiddity pandiculat...@gmail.com:
http://www.onelook.com/?w=encomium a formal expression of praise
http://www.onelook.com/?w=hagiography a biography that idealizes or
idolizes the person (especially a person who is a saint)
http://www.onelook.com/?w=saccharine overly sweet
*cough*
2009/3/4 Sue Gardner sgard...@wikimedia.org:
2009/3/3 Michael Snow wikipe...@verizon.net
But someone making a request is a sign that the article really needs a
hard look, and quite possibly should be removed for not meeting our
standards. So the reversed presumption of default to delete,
On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 12:27 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/3/4 quiddity pandiculat...@gmail.com:
http://www.onelook.com/?w=encomium a formal expression of praise
http://www.onelook.com/?w=hagiography a biography that idealizes or
idolizes the person (especially a person who
On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 5:34 PM, Sue Gardner sgard...@wikimedia.org wrote:
I'm confused. Doesn't the current (English) policy say if there's no
consensus ... the page is kept. So, default to _keep_, rather than
default
to delete...?
It's only the English policy, so I realize it's not
On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 5:41 PM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:
According to Dominic's quote, it says default to delete if the article is
*not* a marginally notable BLP. Not a very elegant way of changing the
policy, but perhaps it was intended to slip past wide notice. While deleting
2009/3/4 Dominic dmcde...@cox.net
Sue Gardner wrote:
I am just clarifying - default to delete unless consensus to keep
would
be
a change from current state, right?
In terms of policy, default to delete is the current state for BLPs.
To be more exact, the important bit is: If there is
2009/3/4 KillerChihuahua pu...@killerchihuahua.com:
I cannot stress enough how strongly I agree with this assessment. If
NPOV, V, and RS were followed - as they should be by normally
intelligent adults wishing to write good articles - BLP isn't even
needed at all. I support BLP existing,
2009/3/4 Nathan nawr...@gmail.com
On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 5:41 PM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:
As far as granting significant weight to the wishes of a subject? Subject
request has consistently been rejected as a basis for deleting an
article,
and many comments in the deletion
2009/3/4 Sue Gardner sgard...@wikimedia.org:
Erik had proposed that articles which meet these three criteria be deleted
upon request: 1) they are not balanced and complete, 2) the subject is only
marginally notable, and 3) the subject wants the article deleted. This would
shift the bar
There are a couple of reasons I can think of why shifting to
delete-on-request for marginally notable BLPs would be problematic.
(1) As Tomasz notes, the idea of marginal notability is one that doesn't
play well to non-Wikipedians and isn't well defined in any case.
(2) We'd still have to have a
Chad wrote:
While working with OTRS, I actually sent several articles through AfD. And I
typically didn't announce that it was an OTRS thing, so as to let the
community
judge the article on its own merits. This would actually be a decent policy to
follow: encourage OTRS respondents to send
On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 10:18 PM, Alex mrzmanw...@gmail.com wrote:
Chad wrote:
While working with OTRS, I actually sent several articles through AfD. And I
typically didn't announce that it was an OTRS thing, so as to let the
community
judge the article on its own merits. This would actually
2009/3/2 philippe philippe.w...@gmail.com
On Mar 2, 2009, at 5:48 PM, private musings wrote:
basically there's a sensible three stage plan to follow to help drive
quality and minimise 'BLP' harm;
1) Semi-protext all 'BLP' material
2) Allow an 'opt-out' for some subjects (eg. non
On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 3:17 AM, Sue Gardner sgard...@wikimedia.org wrote:
It seems obvious to me from the conversation on this thread that part of
the
reason the German Wikipedia seems better able to manage its BLPs (assuming
that is true - but it seems true) is because there is a smaller
On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 2:25 AM, Ting Chen wing.phil...@gmx.de wrote:
Back to BLP. Personally I think that the policies we have related to
BLPs are enough, but maybe we should be put more resource in the
inforcement of these policies. The meetings Philipp mentioned in Germany
are a very
2009/3/3 Ting Chen wing.phil...@gmx.de:
yes I think the english and the german wikipedias are two models and
examples that are often used for the other language versions. I remember
the talk from Harel in Taipei about the Hebrew Wikipedia and had the
impression that they orient themselves
2009/3/3 Michael Snow wikipe...@verizon.net:
I've made this observation before, but I think it bears repeating. At
least on the English Wikipedia, a frequent practice is to start a
section called Criticism and controversy or some variation thereof.
This indicates to me an utter failure to
2009/3/3 Sue Gardner sgard...@wikimedia.org:
Can I ask: does anyone reading this thread 1) think raising the notability
threshold is a bad idea, 2) believe defaulting to deletion upon request is a
bad idea, or 3) disagree with the notion that other Wikipedias should shift
closer to the German
2009/3/3 Sue Gardner sgard...@wikimedia.org:
Can I ask: does anyone reading this thread 1) think raising the notability
threshold is a bad idea, 2) believe defaulting to deletion upon request is a
bad idea, or 3) disagree with the notion that other Wikipedias should shift
closer to the German
2009/3/2 Mike Godwin mnemo...@gmail.com:
I'm unclear as to how it seems inconsistent to you. Can you explain what you
think is unreconciled? I assume you recognize that NPOV has been adopted by
the Wikipedia community and is enforced by it (and not by the Foundation).
That statement is
On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 4:35 AM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/3/3 Aude audeviv...@gmail.com:
Inclusion criteria, such as the one news event is helpful. If we could
make the inclusion criteria for BLP more stringent in other such ways to
weed out some of the garbage or
Aude schrieb:
On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 2:25 AM, Ting Chen wing.phil...@gmx.de wrote:
Back to BLP. Personally I think that the policies we have related to
BLPs are enough, but maybe we should be put more resource in the
inforcement of these policies. The meetings Philipp mentioned in
I probably should have used the word implement rather than enforce.
I agree that in some sense the death penalty qualifies as enforcement, but
it doesn't actually make any particular article adhere to NPOV. It's the
community, not the Foundation, that is trusted with ensuring that individual
2009/3/2 Sue Gardner sgard...@wikimedia.org:
So, two questions strike me:
2) When it comes to the German Wikipedia and other language versions which
put an unusually high priority on quality . I am curious to know what
quality-supportive measures (be they technical, social/cultural, or
Can I ask: does anyone reading this thread 1) think raising the
notability
threshold is a bad idea, 2) believe defaulting to deletion upon request
is a
bad idea, or 3) disagree with the notion that other Wikipedias should
shift
closer to the German Wikipedia's generally-less-permissive
2009/3/3 Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net:
With respect to biographies of living persons, unless there is sufficient
reliable published information about a person to flesh out a well
balanced article we shouldn't have one.
The question them becomes reliable. Reliable sources usually print
2009/3/3 Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net:
With respect to biographies of living persons, unless there is
sufficient
reliable published information about a person to flesh out a well
balanced article we shouldn't have one.
The question them becomes reliable. Reliable sources usually
Andrew Gray wrote:
2009/3/3 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com:
2009/3/3 Sue Gardner sgard...@wikimedia.org:
Can I ask: does anyone reading this thread 1) think raising the notability
threshold is a bad idea, 2) believe defaulting to deletion upon request is a
bad idea, or 3) disagree
--- On Tue, 3/3/09, Sue Gardner sgard...@wikimedia.org wrote:
From: Sue Gardner sgard...@wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Request for your input: biographies of living
people
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Date: Tuesday, March 3, 2009, 2
--- On Tue, 3/3/09, Aude audeviv...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Aude audeviv...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Request for your input: biographies of living
people
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Date: Tuesday, March 3, 2009, 2:52 AM
On Tue
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Ray Saintonge wrote:
The English Wikipedia is probably the worst offender. Until that
is sorted out a Wikipedia wide policy is premature. The
qualities at the beginning of you paragraph are important, but a
level of common sense also needs to
2009/3/3 Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net:
With respect to biographies of living persons, unless there is sufficient
reliable published information about a person to flesh out a well
balanced article we shouldn't have one.
This is an important principle, I think. Not necessarily in this form
2009/3/3 Jussi-Ville Heiskanen cimonav...@gmail.com:
Sure, the persons themselves can not be harmed, but our
deep understanding of the forces of history, and what force
personality, heredity, cultural context and up-bringing play
within it, is immeasurably impoverished by getting a view that
David Gerard wrote:
2009/3/3 Jussi-Ville Heiskanen cimonav...@gmail.com:
Sure, the persons themselves can not be harmed, but our
deep understanding of the forces of history, and what force
personality, heredity, cultural context and up-bringing play
within it, is immeasurably
2009/3/3 Jussi-Ville Heiskanen cimonav...@gmail.com:
Bear with me. I started with that, because that is something
at the periphery, easily overlooked. I will focus on the meat
of the issue in due time.
Then I ask you to get to the point and stay on it, because this needs
to be a thread
Michael Snow wrote:
Jimmy Wales wrote:
Let me repeat that in a different way, for emphasis: I think that a
great number of our biographies, and bad in a particular way. Minor
controversies are exploded into central stories of people's lives in a
way that is abusive and unfair, and
On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 2:39 PM, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote:
That would not preclude an article about the movie, if notable, although
only a few films spring to mind. And the name of the actor can be
mentioned but ought not be a redlink, unless the person's private life is
notable
2009/3/3 Matthew Brown mor...@gmail.com:
I see no reason why having an article on someone need include
information not published in reliable sources. If they're well-known
for something in the public eye but details of their life elsewhere
are not prevalent, then that's how our article
Ray Saintonge wrote:
I'm making a point of replying to this before I read any of the other
responses to avoid being tainted by them.
Sue Gardner wrote:
* The editors I've spoken with about BLPs are pretty serious about them –
they are generally conservative, restrained,
David Gerard wrote:
2009/3/3 Jussi-Ville Heiskanen cimonav...@gmail.com:
Sure, the persons themselves can not be harmed, but our
deep understanding of the forces of history, and what force
personality, heredity, cultural context and up-bringing play
within it, is immeasurably
2009/3/3 Matthew Brown mor...@gmail.com:
I see no reason why having an article on someone need include
information not published in reliable sources. Â If they're well-known
for something in the public eye but details of their life elsewhere
are not prevalent, then that's how our article
2009/3/4 Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net:
How about something a little more helpful?
Uh, I think pointing out obvious problems counts, particularly when
the solution offered is to do the same things that are already
problematic twice as hard.
The hard part is to lead the community to a
2009/3/2 Sue Gardner sgard...@wikimedia.org:
So what can we do? Here are the things I am thinking about. I would love
your input:
* Do we think the current complaints resolution systems are working? Is it
easy enough for article subjects to report problems? Are we courteous and
serious in
2009/3/2 Sue Gardner sgard...@wikimedia.org:
Hi folks,
I've been increasingly concerned lately about Wikimedia's coverage of living
people, both within biographies of living people (BLPs) on Wikipedia, and in
coverage of living people in non-BLP text. I've asked the board to put this
issue
2009/3/2 Tomasz Ganicz polime...@gmail.com:
Two recent examples from Polish Wikipedia:
*A sportsmen had anitdoping case around 5 years ago, when he was 18.
There is good source of this information (his own interwiev in sport's
magazine in which he appologises for taking an illegal drug). Now
2009/3/2 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com:
I would guess it's mostly (2), in my experience. People have no idea
who to contact. The Contact Wikipedia link on en:wp's sidebar
doesn't seem to catch their eye - though it gets you to the right
answer in three further clicks. Perhaps it should be on
This is the most prominent problem facing the English Wikipedia today in my
view. BLPs are easy to write and easy to get wrong, and there are always
newly famous people to write about - so this issue is only going to become
more important and more visible with time. Sue's point about the type of
Hoi
For the English Wikipedia there is an awareness and there are procedures in
place to deal with BLP problems.These procedures may get an update with an
implementation of Flagged Revisions. In her question, Sue did not limit BLP
issues to English Wikipedia only.
It seems to me that BLP issues
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 6:38 AM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.comwrote:
2009/3/2 Sue Gardner sgard...@wikimedia.org:
* Are there technical tools we could implement, that would support
greater
quality in BLPs? For example – easy problem reporting systems,
particular configurations of
Nathan writes:
I would like to see Mike's opinion, though, on how deeply the Foundation
can
be involved in establishing Wikimedia-wide policies on content like BLPs.
It
would seem to challenge the notion that the Foundation itself hosts but
does
not control project content.
My strong
Tomasz Ganicz wrote:
least in Poland at some legal risk. In Poland there is a law
that a person can always ask for removing his/her personal data
from any electronic database (except govermental ones).
There is a similar law in Sweden (Personuppgiftslagen, PUL), but
it has an exception for
They have no recourse. We are not subject to Polish law.
From: Tomasz Ganicz polime...@gmail.com
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Sent: Monday, March 2, 2009 6:24:09 AM
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Request for your input
2009/3/2 Lars Aronsson l...@aronsson.se:
What you could do is to ask Polish journalists how they operate
newspaper websites under this law, and how they (as guardians of
the freedom of the press) would react if the Polish Wikipedia was
censored in this way. Perhaps they should write a
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 5:38 PM, Geoffrey Plourde geo.p...@yahoo.com wrote:
They have no recourse. We are not subject to Polish law.
How do you know? And who is we?
Sebastian
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
I normally spend my wikitime on writing articles, and generally avoid
wikidrama. When I run into a BLP problem, if I'm uninvolved enough then I
can deal with it myself. Sometimes, I am sufficiently involved and cannot
be directly involved in resolving BLP problems and take admin actions
myself.
: Monday, March 2, 2009 8:46:53 AM
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Request for your input: biographies of living people
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 5:38 PM, Geoffrey Plourde geo.p...@yahoo.com wrote:
They have no recourse. We are not subject to Polish law.
Individual Polish editors are, however, likely
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Sent: Monday, March 2, 2009 8:57:14 AM
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Request for your input: biographies of living people
I normally spend my wikitime on writing articles, and generally avoid
wikidrama. When I run into a BLP problem, if I'm uninvolved enough then I
can
Hello,
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 6:01 PM, Geoffrey Plourde geo.p...@yahoo.com wrote:
I have some experience with customer service and was willing to serve as OTRS
volunteer, but was rejected. The number of rejections I have witnessed is
really shooting OTRS in the foot.
I can understand your
: Guillaume Paumier guillom@gmail.com
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Sent: Monday, March 2, 2009 9:05:58 AM
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Request for your input: biographies of living people
Hello,
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 6:01 PM, Geoffrey Plourde geo.p
2009/3/2 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com:
I don't say that lightly, but I can't see any other way things could
be. I have a pile of special superpowers on en:wp, but if I were being
legally required to exercise them for reasons other than the good of
the encyclopedia, I'd be fervently hoping
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 6:14 PM, Geoffrey Plourde geo.p...@yahoo.com wrote:
I care not about my application being killed. I am pointing out that it
appears that you kill most of the applications, which may be the reason for
a lack of manpower.
Access to OTRS implies a high trust into the user
2009/3/2 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org:
Flagged Revs is an excellent way of dealing with vandalism to BLPs,
technical solutions to more subtle problems are a little trickier.
Flagged Revs could be used with addition levels - a free of
vandalism level and a well balanced, fact-checked and free of
Anthony wrote:
Sounds good, but how good is OTRS at handling these issues? Are there any
statistics available as to what percentage of OTRS complainers are satisfied
with the resolution? Does OTRS provide any escalation for people who aren't
satisfied with their initial results?
In general,
: [Foundation-l] Request for your input: biographies of living people
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 6:14 PM, Geoffrey Plourde geo.p...@yahoo.com wrote:
I care not about my application being killed. I am pointing out that it
appears that you kill most of the applications, which may be the reason for
a lack
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 6:38 PM, Geoffrey Plourde geo.p...@yahoo.com wrote:
Not necessarily. You do them in bulk at a certain time each week or every two
weeks.
And of course all applicants will be available at the same time,
because they all live in the same timezones and have the same
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 12:35 PM, Jimmy Wales jwa...@wikia-inc.com wrote:
Anthony wrote:
Sounds good, but how good is OTRS at handling these issues? Are there
any
statistics available as to what percentage of OTRS complainers are
satisfied
with the resolution? Does OTRS provide any
There is lots I want to reply to here; this mail is just a start...
2009/3/2 Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com
From what I can tell, a lot of subjects of BLPs that have problems
with their articles don't complain at all. The accounts I've heard
(or, at least, my interpretation thereof) of
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 12:29 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.comwrote:
2009/3/2 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org:
Flagged Revs is an excellent way of dealing with vandalism to BLPs,
technical solutions to more subtle problems are a little trickier.
Flagged Revs could be used with addition
2009/3/2 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org:
What is the current OTRS process? When I contacted them a couple years
ago I was referred to arb com, and didn't hear from them again. I certainly
wasn't satisfied.
Pray tell, what was the actual substance of your dispute?
(Note that this is speaking
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 1:50 PM, Michael Bimmler mbimm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 7:33 PM, Anthony wikim...@inbox.org wrote:
My problem wasn't in regard to a biography, but it was a BLP issue
under
Sue's expanded definition (it was in regard to some things written about
me
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 8:02 PM, Anthony wikim...@inbox.org wrote:
Ah, so not only do you not ask for feedback, but you actively discourage it.
I think this is slightly misrepresenting what I said. For reference
purposes here the current footer, as attached to each outgoing
message:
---
2009/3/2 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org:
No. In fact, a member of ArbCom had referred me to OTRS. However, I don't
want to get into the specifics of this on a public mailing list.
As a general rule: if you've been formally penalised on a wiki for
your behaviour thereon, and want that concealed,
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 2:16 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/3/2 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org:
No. In fact, a member of ArbCom had referred me to OTRS. However, I
don't
want to get into the specifics of this on a public mailing list.
As a general rule: if you've been
2009/3/2 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org:
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 2:16 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
As a general rule: if you've been formally penalised on a wiki for
your behaviour thereon, and want that concealed, then that's really
not in the same class as *anything* this thread is
2009/3/2 Joe Szilagyi szila...@gmail.com:
As an easy start for BLPs to contact us for help, why not have the
global footer of all WMF sites include a prominent and very visible
link to a simple mail form they can use to mail OTRS or the Foundation
for help?
Because no-one reads the footer
1 - 100 of 127 matches
Mail list logo
