Cross-posting.
-- Forwarded message --
From: Steven Walling swall...@wikimedia.org
Date: Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 6:57 PM
Subject: What to do with ten.wikipedia.org in the future
To: wiki...@lists.wikimedia.org
Hi everyone,
So quite some time has passed since Wikipedia’s 10th
Following on from my previous posts about trying to classify the scope and
coverage of humanities subjects in Wikipedia, I have a practical question:
is it possible to query the Wikipedia database in such a way as to get a
list of all articles (current version)? Even better, with a second,
On 20.09.2010 21:19, Peter Damian wrote:
Following on from my previous posts about trying to classify the scope and
coverage of humanities subjects in Wikipedia, I have a practical question:
is it possible to query the Wikipedia database in such a way as to get a
list of all articles
, September 20, 2010 8:26 PM
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Classifying what is on Wikipedia
On 20.09.2010 21:19, Peter Damian wrote:
Following on from my previous posts about trying to classify the scope
and
coverage of humanities subjects in Wikipedia, I have a practical
question
Message -
From: Henning Schlottmann h.schlottm...@gmx.net
To: foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Sent: Monday, September 20, 2010 8:26 PM
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Classifying what is on Wikipedia
On 20.09.2010 21:19, Peter Damian wrote:
Following on from my previous posts about trying
David Gerard wrote:
It
would be novel indeed to have a Holocaust denier who wasn't a crank as
an editor, but I don't expect it to happen any time soon.
You'd be surprised, then. If you're talking about Holocaust-denial
*activists*, trying to edit articles to encompass that point of view,
There may be some of that, but it is also true that a lot of experts
are actually unhelpful (perhaps we could do something to improve that,
though - a system for experts to review articles, rather than edit
them, might be good). When experts get involved in editing there are
often ownership
Thomas Dalton wrote:
It's a democratically elected government making the laws
and those laws don't prevent free and fair elections, so it isn't
undemocratic. (Of course, an semi-official and unaccountable agency
like the IWF enforcing the laws is not a great way to go about it.)
Your addendum
Judson Dunn wrote:
Make no mistake, the free dissemination of all human knowledge to
every person on the planet is a fight. The forces that would spread
ignorance as a means of control, and separation are always fighting
back. The idea that we should acquiesce in that fight, and censor our
Todd Allen wrote:
Yes, all states have laws. It is the content of those laws which
determines whether or not the state is a free and open society. One
may have a free and open society that is not an anarchy.
Prior-restraint censorship, or blocking people from seeing,
discussing, and thinking
Thomas Dalton wrote:
Yes, all states have laws. It is the content of those laws which
determines whether or not the state is a free and open society. One
may have a free and open society that is not an anarchy.
If the country has free and fair elections for its leaders then it is
a
2008/12/15 Ray Saintonge sainto...@telus.net:
Thomas Dalton wrote:
Yes, all states have laws. It is the content of those laws which
determines whether or not the state is a free and open society. One
may have a free and open society that is not an anarchy.
If the country has free and fair
Jussi-Ville Heiskanen wrote:
Florence Devouard wrote:
Birgitte SB wrote:
I am strongly against collaborating with Westernish governments to help
make their censorship more effective. I personally don't think we should
help anyone make their censorship more effective. But if we are to
Any society considering a Great Firewall of any sort is neither
democratic nor open, whether or not they periodically hold votes on
exactly who should implement bad ideas. We should not in any way
acknowledge or respect such, though we should help those who live
there and encourage and assist
I would recommend that Russian Wikipedia adopt a policy similar to
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:USERBOXES#Content_restrictions
# Userboxes must not be inflammatory or divisive.
# Wikipedia is not an appropriate place for propaganda, advocacy, or
recruitment of any kind, commercial,
2008/12/13 Jimmy Wales jwa...@wikia-inc.com:
I would recommend that Russian Wikipedia adopt a policy similar to
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:USERBOXES#Content_restrictions
# Userboxes must not be inflammatory or divisive.
# Wikipedia is not an appropriate place for propaganda,
Hoi,
Do people add these user boxes to their own user page ?
Thanks,
GerardM
Yes, that's right. Actually, we just have one fictitious user,
[[ru:User/Box]], who is permablocked, and almost all userboxes (including
the Holocost denial one) are moved to the subspace of this user.
Cheers
On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 6:54 AM, geni geni...@gmail.com wrote:
2008/12/13 Jimmy Wales jwa...@wikia-inc.com:
I would recommend that Russian Wikipedia adopt a policy similar to
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:USERBOXES#Content_restrictions
# Userboxes must not be inflammatory or
On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 8:22 AM, Anthony wikim...@inbox.org wrote:
On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 6:54 AM, geni geni...@gmail.com wrote:
2008/12/13 Jimmy Wales jwa...@wikia-inc.com:
I would recommend that Russian Wikipedia adopt a policy similar to
Anthony wrote:
On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 6:54 AM, geni geni...@gmail.com wrote:
2008/12/13 Jimmy Wales jwa...@wikia-inc.com:
I would recommend that Russian Wikipedia adopt a policy similar to
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:USERBOXES#Content_restrictions
# Userboxes must
Jimbo didn't say anyone who denies the Holocaust should be blocked, as
though Wikipedia should engage in thought-crime. He said the sorts of
people who deny the Holocaust are generally the sorts of people who ought to
be blocked on sight from editing Wikipedia. High correlation, not
Florence Devouard wrote:
I can not help reflect further on the whole Virgin Killer story.
Why is that?
A lack of self control, or because you actually have a
deeply thought out viewpoint?
Whilst I am very happy of the final outcome, and thank David Gerard and
WMF for having handled
On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 9:07 AM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen cimonav...@gmail.com
wrote:
Frankly, as a person who thinks nothing of enjoying a sauna
with members of the other gender of any age, I think you are
overstating it considerably to say *all* of us think the image is
even mildly
Anthony wrote:
On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 9:07 AM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen cimonav...@gmail.com
wrote:
Frankly, as a person who thinks nothing of enjoying a sauna
with members of the other gender of any age, I think you are
overstating it considerably to say *all* of us think the
Hoi,
When no real user has this on his user page, then it is no real issue with
deleting this nonsense. When it is people actually having this on their
user
page you have a real problem. Now it seems to me that it is easiest to
stamp
such nonsense out.
Thanks,
GerardM
Well, if it
Hoi,
What good are rules if subterfuge prevents them from being applied?
Thanks,
GerardM
2008/12/13 Yaroslav M. Blanter pute...@mccme.ru
Hoi,
When no real user has this on his user page, then it is no real issue
with
deleting this nonsense. When it is people actually having this on
On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 7:09 AM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote:
Any society considering a Great Firewall of any sort is neither
democratic nor open, whether or not they periodically hold votes on
exactly who should implement bad ideas. We should not in any way
acknowledge or
On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 1:15 PM, Todd Allen toddmal...@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, all states have laws. It is the content of those laws which
determines whether or not the state is a free and open society. One
may have a free and open society that is not an anarchy.
Prior-restraint censorship, or
on 12/13/08 6:52 PM, Florence Devouard at anthe...@yahoo.com wrote:
Professionals could probably help us grow up in certain areas, but they
would have to cope with all the no-life standing on our mailing lists.
Florence,
Professionals, or, as they are also referred to, experts don't get
True, true.
But note that this fear seems to be less pregnant (hmm, maybe not the
right word, pregnent ?) in WMF, which now has hired expert or use some
as consultants.
The WMF uses experts for administrative stuff, that is very different
to using them directly in the creation of content.
Hoi,
The creation of content is not something the WMF organisation deals with. It
has started to employ experts in order to make our environment more usable.
As part of the Stanton project, a user interface designer will be included.
This is likely to improve the usability of MediaWiki a lot. By
Florence Devouard wrote:
Birgitte SB wrote:
I am strongly against collaborating with Westernish governments to help make
their censorship more effective. I personally don't think we should help
anyone make their censorship more effective. But if we are to decide we
would rather have
On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 6:33 AM, Tomasz Ganicz polime...@gmail.com wrote:
Well, the story with IWF have shown that the current system of
blocking vandals by their IP has to be changed ASAP. In fact it is
causing a lot of problems even without action of IWF and other similar
wachdogs. There are
2008/12/12 Florence Devouard anthe...@yahoo.com:
We all perfectly know that if this particular image was borderline,
there are images or texts that are illegal in certain countries. I am
not even speaking of China here, but good old westernish countries.
In some countries, it may be
On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 6:26 AM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote:
The censorship issue isn't really an issue - if an image (or content
or whatever) is genuinely illegal in a given country then of course
that country has every right to block it. If countries block legal
images (as
Not a response to your email, but the reaction in general strikes me
as very inconsistent. With China they have been censored, they try and
use TOR, and we block them, and say for years that there is
regrettably nothing we can do about this situation. UK gets blocked
for a day and we are
On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 9:01 AM, Judson Dunn cohes...@sleepyhead.org wrote:
Not a response to your email, but the reaction in general strikes me
as very inconsistent. With China they have been censored, they try and
use TOR, and we block them, and say for years that there is
regrettably
On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 6:43 AM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote:
Indeed, I don't see any alternative way to block anonymous users. Even
forcing people to register wouldn't help since, without IP addresses,
we can't block account creation by people creating new accounts every
time
Long-time ago, I suggested adding a short-duration cookie whenever a
block was triggered that would allow the software to detect the most
obvious IP jumping vandals (asumming they used the same browser on the
same machine each time). It doesn't get at the bulk of Tomek's
criticism, but it
On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 7:50 AM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote:
Long-time ago, I suggested adding a short-duration cookie whenever a
block was triggered that would allow the software to detect the most
obvious IP jumping vandals (asumming they used the same browser on the
same
On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 10:50 AM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote:
Long-time ago, I suggested adding a short-duration cookie whenever a
block was triggered that would allow the software to detect the most
obvious IP jumping vandals (asumming they used the same browser on the
same
2008/12/12 David Moran fordmadoxfr...@gmail.com:
I absolutely agree with Judson that we should be devoting exactly zero of
our material and mental resources to thinking of ways to assist in the work
of censors. The problems presented in this example are almost entirely
those of a national
On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 6:33 AM, Tomasz Ganicz polime...@gmail.com wrote:
2008/12/12 Florence Devouard anthe...@yahoo.com:
We all perfectly know that if this particular image was borderline,
there are images or texts that are illegal in certain countries. I am
not even speaking of China
2008/12/12 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org:
On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 5:52 AM, Florence Devouard anthe...@yahoo.comwrote:
If tomorrow, a really illegal-in-UK image is reported to the IWF, they
will block it for real. And they will block again editing.
They didn't block editing. You did.
2008/12/12 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org:
The IWF said that contextual issues are important in the decision of whether
or not they will keep the webpage on their list. They specifically
reiterated that they still consider the image to be potentially illegal.
The head of the IWF is potentially
Mike Godwin wrote:
Anthony writes:
I'm sure they're in the process of changing their review system to
take
these issues into account. At the same time, requiring *all* images
to be
found illegal before taking action, would not be a good idea.
In this particular instance, however, it is
The IWF said that contextual issues are important in the decision of whether
or not they will keep the webpage on their list. They specifically
reiterated that they still consider the image to be potentially illegal.
You expected them to actually admit to having made a mistake? Why
would they
47 matches
Mail list logo
