On Wednesday 28 January 2009 03:26, Jay Litwyn wrote:
Not in the case of an adult banned user and a SEEMINGLY unresponsive ISP.
If anything, since one guy seems to hav openned a channel to Verizon's
abuse department, the problem might go away. I do not see any other way to
do it, because
Gwern Branwen wrote:
In a message dated 1/21/2009 larsen.thoma...@gmail.com writes:
What evidence do you have that an encyclopedia must be free?
Society has existed for a few thousand years without a free encyclopedia.
A statement trivially true. Society has also existed for a few
I do think it's worth pointing out that literally every time I've mentioned
dislike of infoboxes to non-WPians, the reply has been along the lines of
Why not? They're AWESOME! I try to explain the objections, but usually the
person is so set on the accessibility front that they can't see why
New technology, new ways to make errors, and hilarious edit summary:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitrationdiff=267165064
Sorry my error in that reversion (actually killing a bug on my HP
touchscreen).
I wonder if that's bad karma? Killing the bug, not the
G'day Luna,
I do think it's worth pointing out that literally every time I've
mentioned
dislike of infoboxes to non-WPians, the reply has been along the
lines of
Why not? They're AWESOME! I try to explain the objections, but
usually the
person is so set on the accessibility front that
G'day Luna,
I do think it's worth pointing out that literally every time I've
mentioned
dislike of infoboxes to non-WPians, the reply has been along the
lines of
Why not? They're AWESOME! I try to explain the objections, but
usually the
person is so set on the accessibility front that
Your Help or Community Portal page should describe your project.
Your Welcome page isn't very informative about exactly how you are
different from Wikipedia, or any other wiki for that matter.
Almost all (or many) Wikis are free and global. Maybe you could
describe somewhere on your site why
On 29 Jan 2009 at 10:45:32 +, Carcharoth wrote:
New technology, new ways to make errors, and hilarious edit summary:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitrationdiff=267165064
Sorry my error in that reversion (actually killing a bug on my HP
On Jan 29, 2009, at 2:48 AM, Mark Gallagher wrote:
I tend to find the infoboxes alternately annoying and silly or
practical and awesome, depending on my frame of mind and purpose.
One solution to the love/hate problem with infoboxes would be to add a
hide/show preference... similar to
Jussi-Ville Heiskanen wrote:
For instance that simian society has always had ways
of restricting access to intellectual property, not
limited to intentional obfuscation, initiatory methods
of knowledge access, and going all the way to the level
of intentionally making the information
David Goodman wrote:
The combination of user generated content, user-based editorial
control, and free content is our characteristic. That doesn't mean
it's the best way for all purposes, or even that it will always be us
that implements it best.
It is perfectly possible that if there were
In a message dated 1/29/2009 10:31:33 A.M. Pacific Standard Time,
sainto...@telus.net writes:
I had sent him a scathing email denigrating him for not allowing direct
user
edits.
For some time, they allowed you to *email* them additions and corrections,
and I pointed out how
the wub wrote:
Also fom the article:
He said the encyclopedia had set a benchmark of a 20-minute
turnaround to update the site with user-submitted edits to existing
articles
That'll probably be faster than us once flagged revisions is switched
on (compare with the German expeiment, where
On 29/01/2009, Ray Saintonge sainto...@telus.net wrote:
So what if it takes 3 weeks? So what if there are backlogs? Even
accepting the premise that EB can maintain such a breakneck speed,
whoever defined this as a race to do things more quickly?
Well, they have less users than us. They have
Divulging his IP to his provider seems standard, advisable, and perfectly
ethical. We aren't just talking about minor vandalism, he has inspired
numerous copycats and has harassed (or his copycats have) many editors.
I've not looked, but if our privacy policy disallows this even in such
2009/1/29 Ray Saintonge sainto...@telus.net:
So what if it takes 3 weeks? So what if there are backlogs? Even
accepting the premise that EB can maintain such a breakneck speed,
whoever defined this as a race to do things more quickly?
Our readers and our content writers. Speed of updates is a
On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 2:48 AM, Mark Gallagher m...@formonelane.netwrote:
As a reader, it's cool to quickly find the national motto of Burundi or the
height of Centrepoint Tower without having to read through paragraphs of
text. I love infoboxes! But also as a reader, it's distracting to
On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 7:47 PM, Chris Down
neuro.wikipe...@googlemail.com wrote:
Divulging his IP to his provider seems standard, advisable, and perfectly
ethical. We aren't just talking about minor vandalism, he has inspired
numerous copycats and has harassed (or his copycats have) many
It is the policy of Wikimedia that personally identifiable data collected
in the server logs, or through records in the database via the CheckUser
feature, or through other non-publicly-available methods, may be released by
Wikimedia volunteers or staff, in any of the following situations:
On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 8:35 PM, Chris Down
neuro.wikipe...@googlemail.com wrote:
It is the policy of Wikimedia that personally identifiable data collected
in the server logs, or through records in the database via the CheckUser
feature, or through other non-publicly-available methods, may be
Keith Old wrote:
In a move to take on Wikipedia, the *Encyclopedia Britannica* is inviting
the hoi polloi to edit, enhance and contribute to its online version.
New features enabling the inclusion of this user-generated content will be
rolled out on the encyclopedia's website over the next 24
wjhon...@aol.com wrote:
In a message dated 1/29/2009 sainto...@telus.net writes
I had sent him a scathing email denigrating him for not allowing direct
user edits.
For some time, they allowed you to *email* them additions and corrections,
and I pointed out how ridiculously last
geni wrote:
2009/1/29 Ray Saintonge:
So what if it takes 3 weeks? So what if there are backlogs? Even
accepting the premise that EB can maintain such a breakneck speed,
whoever defined this as a race to do things more quickly?
Our readers and our content writers. Speed of updates is
2009/1/29 Ray Saintonge sainto...@telus.net:
Speed of updates may be a factor for current events, but I see nothing
to convince me that EB wants to enter that field. Nor do I see them as
competitors to upload the latest plot line of Desperate Housewives as
soon as it has aired.
Has there
-Original Message-
From: Ray Saintonge sainto...@telus.net
To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Sent: Thu, 29 Jan 2009 12:45 pm
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Watch out Wikipedia, here comes Britannica 2.0
Keith Old wrote:
New features enabling the inclusion of this
-Original Message-
From: Ray Saintonge sainto...@telus.net
To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Sent: Thu, 29 Jan 2009 12:52 pm
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Watch out Wikipedia, here comes Britannica 2.0
wjhon...@aol.com wrote:
In a message dated 1/29/2009 sainto...@telus.net
If you have *working* ideas feel free to tell us, we have already
programmed bots that do nothing but look for his vandalism. We *have*
done everything we possibly can on wiki that I can think of. The only
on wiki action left to us is to block all of his ISP from editing. If
you have alternative
On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 12:33 AM, Wilhelm Schnotz wilh...@nixeagle.org wrote:
If you have *working* ideas feel free to tell us, we have already
programmed bots that do nothing but look for his vandalism. We *have*
done everything we possibly can on wiki that I can think of. The only
on wiki
Something that would definitely help is to have more CUs around when he
attacks. That way we can dig up more sleepers and block the proxies that
he's been using. According to Luna he was using one proxy for at least a
month before it was blocked.
- Chris
On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 9:45 AM, Sam Korn
On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 12:02, Luna lunasan...@gmail.com wrote:
Any band article with an infobox tends to attract
small-time battles over the specific list of genres to include, too, I've
noticed
I've always thought the proper solution to this is to hardcode the
genre line to read music --
Hehe good one
--
Alvaro
On 29-01-2009, at 22:51, Mark Wagner carni...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 12:02, Luna lunasan...@gmail.com wrote:
Any band article with an infobox tends to attract
small-time battles over the specific list of genres to include,
too, I've
noticed
Being bold here and expounding a little. If any of you have read the
history of encyclopedias *Britannica* put out in its Macropedia from a few
years ago, it's been clear their management has been living in a dream
world. They go on at length about quaint little experiments from the 1980s,
while
You don't need to publish that unless you/we plan to use it as
evidence for a report to his ISP.
What I mean is the socks and IP ranges should be kept track of in some
manner somewhere if it is intended to be reported to his ISP and of
course the normal amount required for admins to act on the
I think Brittanica's model *could* have worked if Wikipedia hadn't
appeared on the scene.
I, revealing that I am an old fart, ( as if you couldn't tell by my
cantankerous moods), bought the complete Brittanica when I was just a
pup (more or less) and paid about $900 for it them.
(To you brits
Kurt Maxwell Weber k...@armory.com wrote in message
news:200901281218.09438@armory.com...
On Wednesday 28 January 2009 03:26, Jay Litwyn wrote:
Not in the case of an adult banned user and a SEEMINGLY unresponsive ISP.
If anything, since one guy seems to hav openned a channel to Verizon's
35 matches
Mail list logo
