too high, but
not by much.) or at least to the maximum size default for thumbnails
that can be set on My preferences, which is 300px.
Needless to say, usage in the article plays a big part in inclusion, as
well.
-MuZemike
On 7/3/2012 6:21 PM, Ken Arromdee wrote:
I just stumbled on http
Taken straight from the novel Lord of the Flies, I am sure :)
-MuZemike
On 11/27/2011 8:32 AM, Ken Arromdee wrote:
On Sun, 27 Nov 2011, Ken Arromdee wrote:
Without knowledge, myths are born. With myths, fear is born. With fear,
intolerance is born. With intolerance, ignorance is born
to get neglected also.
-MuZemike
On 11/3/2011 12:58 PM, Carcharoth wrote:
That's a good idea as well, though some might see it as trampling on
the stuff swept under the rug (making it less visible). But you are
right that some backlogs don't really need to be visible to readers.
Carcharoth
, there are always going to be opportunities to expand existing
articles - many of them that are still stubs. I don't know of any good
way in which to guide newcomers towards that direction, though,
especially in a come-and-go-type environment such as this.
-MuZemike
On 10/10/2011 7:08 PM, Tony
wiki) is ultimately a communal effort with individualist aspects; proper
balance between the two key aspects need to be maintained in order for
the wiki to remain open to those to edit.
-MuZemike
On 10/10/2011 9:23 AM, petr skupa wrote:
Boldness
In some way I am starting to believe
=298662379oldid=298662328.
http://kevin.spacey.mediafetcher.com/news/top_stories/actor_st_tropez.php
http://justin.bieber.mediafetcher.com/news/top_stories/actor_st_tropez.php
http://david.guetta.mediafetcher.com/news/top_stories/actor_st_tropez.php
-MuZemike
On 10/6/2011 1:07 AM, Erik Moeller wrote:
One
be close to 50-50, because you then
alienate too much of the community that way.
-MuZemike
On 9/17/2011 3:54 PM, Alan Liefting wrote:
Is it just me or do others find it difficult to instigate any sort of
changes to policies, guidelines, layout, Manual of Style and related
matters regardless of how
relatively minor
features on without community consensus, as seen at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_%28technical%29/Archive_90#Watchlist_emails
. That is, people complain up and down about it. It is impossible to
have everyone happy about everything.
-MuZemike
On 9/13/2011 11
More powerful than Oversight, as well.
-MuZemike
On 9/8/2011 12:07 PM, Fred Bauder wrote:
On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 9:45 PM, Andrew Grayandrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk
wrote:
I don't think we've discussed the outline of X articles much on this
list, which surprises me, but people might nonetheless
Hence the one comment on the Wikimedia blog article
(http://blog.wikimedia.org/2011/07/15/%E2%80%9Crate-this-page%E2%80%9D-is-coming-to-the-english-wikipedia/)
about the survey poll: http://www.vizu.com//poll-results.html?n=138785
50.5%
It will be griefed like YouTube comments.
-MuZemike
others, are not
perfect and comes with systemic flaws.
-MuZemike
On 7/14/2011 7:56 AM, WereSpielChequers wrote:
Do we have stats yet that measure whether this is encouraging editing,
or diverting even more people from improving the pedia to critiquing
it?
Remember there is a risk
with solely for the
sake of process. This article parallels such conflict between
process and development:
http://radar.oreilly.com/2011/05/process-kills-developer-passion.html
-MuZemike
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe
*
accomplish something genuine and good.
-MuZemike
On 6/24/2011 7:59 PM, Howie Fung wrote:
Hi all,
We’re testing a new tool for expressing appreciation to other users and are
hoping that you’ll help test it and give us feedback. You can find a more
detailed rationale for this tool, as well
.
-MuZemike
On 4/10/2011 9:21 PM, Ancient Apparition wrote:
Conservapedia seeks to rewrite history, it makes Convservative Christians
look like uninformed idiots, most Christians ALREADY KNOW that man did
land on the moon, the earth isn't flat, dinosaurs did exist, the earth
CAN'T possibly
That wouldn't solve anything, except further draw a hard line and create
an even larger rift between editors. If we strive to be an open
community where we bring people together, then we would collectively be
making it more closed by doing this.
-MuZemike
On 4/8/2011 1:26 PM, David Goodman
Perhaps I'm missing the point, but isn't that what we have been doing so
far (i.e. with all the other sister Wikimedia projects)?
-MuZemike
On 4/7/2011 1:37 PM, Fajro wrote:
On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 3:26 PM, David Gerarddger...@gmail.com wrote:
in the encyclopedia game? I sure hope so. How
Why does Conservapedia come to mind :)
-MuZemike
On 4/7/2011 7:03 PM, Ian Woollard wrote:
You should be careful what you wish for. It's not hard to make a
'viable competitor' encyclopedia that would be so corrupt and
inaccurate it would make the Fox News network... look like a news
network
://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Editing).
-MuZemike
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
not just talking about Wikipedia but most any
wiki in general.)
-MuZemike
On 2/9/2011 1:30 PM, WereSpielChequers wrote:
Re Ian Woolard's query:
As the Wikipedia moves towards some arbitrary definition of notional
'completion', can anyone point to a board or mechanism in the
Wikipedia which
I'm sorry, but if I see somebody starting to source information from
such tabloids you mentioned, especially information on biographies of
living people regarding stuff that is not confirmed, there are going to
be problems with me.
-MuZemike
On 2/3/2011 10:59 AM, Andreas Kolbe wrote
and socialize with other people who are not necessarily your
family.
-MuZemike
On 1/18/2011 1:27 PM, Fred Bauder wrote:
on 1/18/11 2:10 PM, Fred Bauder at fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote:
The importance to the individual of collaborating within a group. And
the
importance to the group in recognizing
founded Wikipedia with Larry
Sanger); at least that was the vibes I received late Friday evening.
-MuZemike
On 1/14/2011 10:56 PM, Carcharoth wrote:
Wikipedia is celebrating its tenth anniversary! To mark the occasion,
Wikipedia is showcasing content not normally featured on the main
page.
I
consider
this an early bug report of sorts :)
-MuZemike
On 12/29/2010 7:16 AM, Magnus Manske wrote:
I see three parts that will be required for a fully functional demo:
1. Conversion of wikitext into HTMLized code as input for a HTML editor
2. A (patched) HTML WYSIWYG editor that takes
ultimately, as a
collection of wiki communities, need to always keep in mind.
-MuZemike
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
I thought I read somewhere that Rupert Murdoch seeks to shut down
Wikipedia because of its free information threat to his and other
similar media empires.
-MuZemike
On 12/21/2010 1:58 PM, Tony Sidaway wrote:
Since Wikipedia grew and became more ambitious in its scope, there
have been
[citation needed]
-MuZemike
On 12/9/2010 10:55 PM, Steve Bennett wrote:
On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 7:50 AM, Andrew Grayandrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk
wrote:
On 29 November 2010 20:42, Charles Matthews
charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com wrote:
So does clicking Random Article and (gasp) judging
the threats start flying.
-MuZemike
On 12/7/2010 10:31 AM, Fred Bauder wrote:
http://www.inc.com/managing/articles/201001/wikipedia.html
'“Wikipedia is a complex culture, and sometimes it can feel like the free
encyclopedia everyone can edit -- except me,” acknowledges Jay Walsh
much
more verifiable information than, say, Venezuela at the 2010 Pan
American Games.
-MuZemike
On 11/29/2010 11:33 AM, Charles Matthews wrote:
Stubs and how to handle them seem to be controversial still (or again),
which is rather surprising given that we have been going nearly a decade
now
no longer stubs. We need to keep that in mind when assigning a
number or percentage of stubs on en.wiki, as the numbers will most
certainly be off.
-MuZemike
On 11/29/2010 1:15 PM, Andrew Gray wrote:
On 29 November 2010 17:33, Charles Matthews
charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com wrote:
Stubs and how
way to go.
-MuZemike
On 11/29/2010 2:50 PM, Andrew Gray wrote:
On 29 November 2010 20:42, Charles Matthews
charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com wrote:
So does clicking Random Article and (gasp) judging for one's own self
what is a stub produce a figure very different from 50%?
I hit random
!
-MuZemike
On 11/6/2010 6:28 AM, Fred Bauder wrote:
On 05/11/2010 22:52, Carcharoth wrote:
On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 10:24 PM, Fred Bauderfredb...@fairpoint.net
wrote:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/07/magazine/07FOB-medium-t.html
That has to be the first time I've seen WP:OWN analysed
What? No Toilet paper orientation?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toilet_paper_orientation
Proof positive that Wikipedia is still going strong when we have weird
articles like these.
-MuZemike
On 10/21/2010 2:36 PM, Fred Bauder wrote:
A list has been prepared by Alastair Plumb of Asylum
or not we are here to build
an online community or an online encyclopedia. Should we focus outwards
toward the reading/viewing audience, or should we focus inwards towards
the editors?
-MuZemike
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
So we got Conservapedia and some other conservative website accusing
Wikipedia of having a liberal bias. What else is new, or what else are
we to expect?
-MuZemike
On 10/13/2010 8:45 AM, Fred Bauder wrote:
Is there anything on this list:
http://www.conservapedia.com
tend to do better in a wiki environment (not just
Wikipedia) than most others who do not.
But this is coming from a person who specializes in building up
already-existing articles over trying to create brand new articles from
scratch.
-MuZemike
On 10/11/2010 1:51 PM, Gwern Branwen wrote
Is it me, or when I saw the word focus group, I started to develop
some bad feelings about this?
-MuZemike
On 10/5/2010 8:49 PM, Philippe Beaudette wrote:
Hi everyone,
I wanted to take a moment to bring you up to date on the planning of
the 2010-2011 fundraiser, and ask once again for your
, failing on many levels.
That is why I am very wary and cautious about focus groups, as they tend
to blindly serve their clientele instead of giving actual feedback on
whatever their assessing.
-MuZemike
On 10/6/2010 3:24 PM, James Alexander wrote:
On 10/6/2010 4:03 PM, MuZemike wrote
As the title indicates, when working on articles, do you prefer making a
bunch of small edits or one or a couple of big edits?
Personally, I started out making lots of small edits, but lately I've
been the opposite of that.
-MuZemike
___
WikiEN-l
.)
-MuZemike
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
I think those clueless people out there (or those who are just plain
ignorant) are beginning to know how exactly the wheel was invented.
-MuZemike
On 7/23/2010 7:49 PM, George Herbert wrote:
David -
Please don't toss napalm on the fire.
Thanks.
-george
On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 5:04 PM
From NetworkWorld.com, which I'm not sure they're painting a more
positive or more negative picutre of pending changes:
http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/62518
-MuZemike
On 6/14/2010 8:46 PM, Ian Woollard wrote:
On 15/06/2010, MuZemikemuzem...@gmail.com wrote:
Have there been
Have there been any other media outlets, blogs, etc. who see Pending
Changes as a loosening of controls? I haven't; perhaps I've been
hanging around with the community too much who say it will be more
restrictive than before :)
-MuZemike
On 6/14/2010 6:39 PM, Risker wrote:
On 14 June 2010 19
despite the numerous on- and off-wiki
discussions, watchlist notices, and anything short of having a bot send
messages to all 12 million + registered users.
-MuZemike
On 6/8/2010 6:15 PM, K. Peachey wrote:
If you really want to know i the community is ready... why are posting
on the email list
that disallowing such editing may
indeed help in smart article creation by reducing the number of crap
articles (I mean complete crap) that gets created. There is probably
some tradeoff there in new page creation as far as anon creation is
concerned.
-MuZemike
On 5/28/2010 11:29 AM, Alan Liefting
), increased questioning of literally every decision made,
increased criticism (general and specific) of adminship and
administrators, higher RfA standards, etc. The list goes on.
-MuZemike
On 5/26/2010 6:34 PM, David Goodman wrote:
Are you saying that a _declining_ number of administrators means
, both which came within the past 36
hours IIRC, I like vector as a whole. Looks more modern and crisp than
monobook.
-MuZemike
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https
of flexibility that I believe has sunk Citizendium (and
other online encyclopedias like Brittanica and Google Knol) long ago.
-MuZemike
On 4/17/2010 7:26 AM, David Gerard wrote:
On 17 April 2010 12:44, Eugene van der Pijlleug...@vanderpijll.nl wrote:
Using
the CZ mailing list
/2721/2482
-MuZemike
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
48 matches
Mail list logo
