On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 4:35 AM, wjhon...@aol.com wrote:
In a message dated 1/6/2009 7:26:34 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,
cbeckh...@fastmail.fm writes:
That's exactly my point. There is no lack of academic analysis of
politicians, of artists, etc. But we do not seem to use any of it.
For
Other than just nay-saying my opinions, with your own opinions, do you have
a *positive* opinion on the topic?
Which is whether our BLP's in general suffer from low citation quality ?
There's a certain glamour in just nullifying someone else's position, but I
don't think that's going to
On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 10:13 AM, wjhon...@aol.com wrote:
Other than just nay-saying my opinions, with your own opinions, do you have
a *positive* opinion on the topic?
Which is whether our BLP's in general suffer from low citation quality ?
There's a certain glamour in just nullifying
wjhon...@aol.com wrote:
In a message dated sainto...@telus.net writes:
Many new ideas are tangential to a general education about a
subject, but are no less important to the advancement of knowledge.
Textbooks are instruments for parroting the party line of received
wisdom. They do
wjhon...@aol.com wrote:
In a message dated 1/6/2009 5:40:09 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,
cbeckh...@fastmail.fm writes:
If by community you mean WP policy then no such decision has been
made. It is perfectly acceptable to write certain articles entirely from
primary sources. Indeed,
On Jan 7, 2009, at 3:53 AM, Ray Saintonge wrote:
wjhon...@aol.com wrote:
It isn't necessary to go so far back. A large part of the important
mathematics of the 1980s and 1990s does not appear in textbooks, or
does so only implicitly, because there is little incentive for
anyone to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123129220146959621.html
John Soong, 18, says that after he had failed to get jobs at several
chains that use the test, he began to poke around for an answer key,
driven by altruistic, and maybe vengeful, motives. In
In a message dated 1/7/2009 1:25:30 AM Pacific Standard Time,
mbimm...@gmail.com writes:
Mind
you, this doesn't mean that we should try to write asacademically and
unintelligibly (to the general public) as possible, but I'm referring to the
sources we use etc. - I think we should not lower
In a message dated 1/7/2009 4:21:27 AM Pacific Standard Time,
wilydoppelgan...@gmail.com writes:
Of course, there are some. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alar_Toomre
cites a few peer reviewed papers, although one is by the subject. But
that's still only ~10% of the total references, and
In a message dated 1/7/2009 12:08:33 PM Pacific Standard Time,
dgoodma...@gmail.com writes:
unless the fame is very recent, there almost
invariably will be peer-reviewed articles discussing both his life and
his specific career, and of course they should be included.
-
I
In a message dated 1/7/2009 2:46:30 PM Pacific Standard Time,
dgoodma...@gmail.com writes:
though most historical journals publish what amount to
articles with major biographical content on individuals, some of t hem
explicitly biographies. Similarly, journals in other fields often
On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 1:24 AM, Michael Bimmler mbimm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 10:13 AM, wjhon...@aol.com wrote:
Other than just nay-saying my opinions, with your own opinions, do you
have
a *positive* opinion on the topic?
Which is whether our BLP's in general suffer
On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 10:45 PM, David Goodman dgoodma...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 5:04 PM, wjhon...@aol.com wrote:
In a message dated 1/7/2009 12:08:33 PM Pacific Standard Time,
dgoodma...@gmail.com writes:
unless the fame is very recent, there almost
invariably will be
The real question however is, are these peer reviewed in the proper and
strict sense.
There are also Who's Who's out there, some of them just accept and print
whatever the subject sends in. So the discovery of exactly what steps the
publication goes through is pertinent.
Just being the
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 12:08 AM, wjhon...@aol.com wrote:
The real question however is, are these peer reviewed in the proper and
strict sense.
There are also Who's Who's out there, some of them just accept and print
whatever the subject sends in. So the discovery of exactly what steps the
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 12:30 AM, Carl Beckhorn cbeckh...@fastmail.fm wrote:
On Wed, Jan 07, 2009 at 04:58:01PM -0500, wjhon...@aol.com wrote:
Remembering that the thrust of this argument was specifically the use of
Encyclopedia Brittanica, news magazines and newspapers. That doesn't
I understand that there are history journals, which may or may not be doing
the same type of peer review as the hard science journals do. But I was
trying to address just the smaller point of BLPs.
My thesis being that there is no such thing as a peer reviewed biography
in the same
In a message dated 1/7/2009 4:30:53 PM Pacific Standard Time,
cbeckh...@fastmail.fm writes:
* Building the majority of an article from newspaper sources is not
a reliability problem at the level of the individually-sourced
pieces of information. However, it's exactly the type of synthesis
Who ever the admin is violated our copyright policies at the very
least as I am sure he did not give the original contributor credit
(that is assuming that the original contributor even has the right to
post that).
For an admin to do that is probably a good reason to lose the bit.
On 1/7/09,
If the username of this individual is discovered, I would gladly bring the
individual to RFAR and request desysopping. This is the opposite of what we
entrust administrators to do.
-Durova
On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 7:04 PM, Wilhelm Schnotz wilh...@nixeagle.orgwrote:
Who ever the admin is
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 11:17 PM, Soxred93 wrote:
Unfortunately, we don't have the name of that particular admin.
X!
I didn't exactly intend to start an RfAr on this admin, but I'd point
out that there are not that many current admins on en and
Agreed. This is an absolute travesty.
bibliomaniac15
--- On Wed, 1/7/09, Durova nadezhda.dur...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Durova nadezhda.dur...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Rank hath its privileges
To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Date: Wednesday, January 7, 2009, 8:17 PM
If
And I imagine no way to get it unless views of deleted revisions is
logged somewhere that I don't know of I suspect this is rather
unlikely unless wmf has them privately.
On 1/7/09, Soxred93 soxre...@gmail.com wrote:
Unfortunately, we don't have the name of that particular admin.
X!
On
It's come up on ANI. I await his reply before concluding how to proceed.
-Durova
On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 8:37 PM, Wilhelm Schnotz wilh...@nixeagle.orgwrote:
And I imagine no way to get it unless views of deleted revisions is
logged somewhere that I don't know of I suspect this is rather
If I were not on a cell phone and had time, I would join the angry mob
and start an RFAR :) I don't think he has any excuse for his actions
which knowingly violated our copyright rules.
Feel free to start one or someone else is likely to do it. After all
lynching gets good drama ;).
On 1/7/09,
2009/1/8 Scientia Potentia est bibliomaniac...@yahoo.com:
Agreed. This is an absolute travesty.
Questionable. What deleted content wikipedia admins can hand over has
always been something of a grey area. Deleted stuff that the author
wants is fairly widely accepted to be okey but other areas
The reason why it is not ok in this case is because the admin in
question posted text that he does not own the copyright to. Provided
the text is not a copyright violation on its own, this admin has
violated the GFDL by not giving credit to the original author.
On 1/7/09, geni geni...@gmail.com
2009/1/8 Wilhelm Schnotz wilh...@nixeagle.org:
If I were not on a cell phone and had time, I would join the angry mob
and start an RFAR :) I don't think he has any excuse for his actions
which knowingly violated our copyright rules.
He probably hasn't. The release under the GFDL is unlikely
Hence why I put provided the text is not a copyright violation in my
prior post.
Regardless posting text that he does not have the copyright permission
for, regardless if it is from the GFDL or from a third source... This
admin has crossed a certain ethical line.
On 1/7/09, geni
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Admin_misusing_viewdeleted
The admin account has apparently been identified.
- Joe
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing
In a message dated 1/5/2009 11:21:59 AM Pacific Standard Time,
geni...@gmail.com writes:
When you merge the wording of the GFDL requires that you preserve the
history (a really really bad choice of words). Can be done close
enough through a history merge but most users don't/can't do
In a message dated 1/7/2009 7:57:35 AM Pacific Standard Time,
snowspin...@gmail.com writes:
Encyclopedia and record of only what has been published in reliable
secondary sources are not synonymous terms.
And yet the community needs a method of determining
Any admin can merge page histories through import or delete/undelete.
- White Cat
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 8:34 AM, wjhon...@aol.com wrote:
In a message dated 1/5/2009 11:21:59 AM Pacific Standard Time,
geni...@gmail.com writes:
When you merge the wording of the GFDL requires that you
In a message dated 1/7/2009 11:20:05 PM Pacific Standard Time,
wikipedia.kawaii.n...@gmail.com writes:
Any admin can merge page histories through import or delete/undelete.
- White Cat
Then that's a problem isn't it?
The rest of our editors cannot do this. That's a
It is not a problem at all. A merge is a slow and delicate process. It takes
time an energy. One should not be trying (or claiming) to be merging
hundreds of articles in a matter of a day.
That is of course the kind of merge people normally do. In the case of this
thread a merge can be the
In a message dated 1/7/2009 11:30:53 PM Pacific Standard Time,
wikipedia.kawaii.n...@gmail.com writes:
It is not a problem at all. A merge is a slow and delicate process. It takes
time an energy. One should not be trying (or claiming) to be merging
hundreds of articles in a matter of a day.
Just like deleting a merge requires admin tools. You are welcome to file a
bugzilla on this.
- White Cat
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 9:33 AM, wjhon...@aol.com wrote:
In a message dated 1/7/2009 11:30:53 PM Pacific Standard Time,
wikipedia.kawaii.n...@gmail.com writes:
It is not a problem at
In a message dated 1/7/2009 11:35:47 PM Pacific Standard Time,
wikipedia.kawaii.n...@gmail.com writes:
Just like deleting a merge requires admin tools. You are welcome to file a
bugzilla on this.
It's not at all like it.
In this case, anyone can do a merge. You
38 matches
Mail list logo
