-Original Message-
From: wikien-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:wikien-l-
boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Morton
Sent: 04 October 2011 10:45
To: English Wikipedia
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Facepalm?
If somebody is being a
jerk isn't it better to bluntly
-Original Message-
From: wikien-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:wikien-l-
boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Risker
Sent: 04 October 2011 18:25
To: English Wikipedia
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Facepalm?
So perhaps a better focus of discussion would be how to deal
, 2011 at 11:04, Scott MacDonald
doc.wikipe...@ntlworld.com wrote:
Unfortunately, I think this is what happens when kewl teenagers who
like
memes started (apparently) by star-trek, meet adults who value actual
communication in the language of Shakespeare.
Oh, please. I'd call you a flap
According to our article [[Facepalm]], this is a startrek internet meme
indicating an expression of embarrassment, frustration, disbelief, disgust,
shame or general woe. It often expresses mockery or disbelief of perceived
idiocy.
Well, that must be right.
Given that, I am wondering why we
: 03 October 2011 11:05
To: English Wikipedia
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Facepalm?
On 3 October 2011 11:02, Scott MacDonald doc.wikipe...@ntlworld.com
wrote:
Granted, removing uncivil templates won't magically increase patient
and
constructive discussion, but I do suspect we'd still
-Original Message-
From: wikien-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:wikien-l-
boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Rob Schnautz
Sent: 03 October 2011 19:25
To: English Wikipedia
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Facepalm?
Usually when I facepalm it's because I have a moment, not
-Original Message-
From: wikien-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:wikien-l-
boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of WereSpielChequers
Sent: 30 September 2011 10:56
To: Michael Katz; English Wikipedia
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] finding the most recognizable page names
I'd
-Original Message-
From: wikien-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:wikien-l-
boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Andrew Gray
Sent: 12 August 2011 18:09
To: English Wikipedia
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] WP:RSs
Citing a print source is fine, but some (particularly querulous)
-Original Message-
From: wikien-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org
[mailto:wikien-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Andreas Kolbe
Sent: 13 May 2011 06:58
To: English Wikipedia
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Otto Middleton (a morality tale)
Scott's argument is that many press reports
Case in point.
The Daily Telegraph would generally be regarded as one of the UK better
newspapers in terms of accuracy.
[[James William Middleton]] is one of those terrible articles written by as
pastiche of passing media stories.
To that article was added the seemingly interesting fact that
Meh, if I start a thread saying black, Geni will say white. Some things
in Wikipedia need to be consistent.
Scott
-Original Message-
From: wikien-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org
[mailto:wikien-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Andreas Kolbe
Sent: 13 May 2011 21:28
To: English
-Original Message-
From: wikien-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org
[mailto:wikien-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Ian Woollard
Sent: 12 May 2011 23:56
To: English Wikipedia
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Otto Middleton (a morality tale)
You see I would argue precisely the opposite; I
01:30
To: English Wikipedia
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Otto Middleton (a morality tale)
On 13/05/2011, Scott MacDonald doc.wikipe...@ntlworld.com wrote:
The point is that the story of Otto the true earring-eating Dog of Kate
Middleton was also verifiable from multiple reliable sources, despite
I've written a little essay which I think serves to illustrate the dangers
of Wikipedia's tendency to create articles (and particularly BLPs) from a
pastiche of newspaper articles.
See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Otto_Middleton_%28or_why_newspapers_a
re_dubious_sources%29
It may amuse
It fails our reliable source requirement.-- geni
Wow. Geni that's truly the remark that encapsulates exactly what's wrong
with BLPs, and the irresponsible attitude of Wikipedia.
Nevermind our many biased articles, factual errors, and stuff written from
reliable sources (aka tabloid
Geni,
It might help if you checked you own facts before making false claims:
I quote:
It is fundamental for ICorrect to confirm the true identity of each
Corrector. Therefore ICorrect requires a reliable reference for all new
Correctors. A reference can be either:
1. An existing Corrector -
Geni, you are now being obtuse.
Sometimes we publish false crap on people, sometimes we do it all on our
own, and sometimes it's because we're following a source that is publishing
falsehood.
When a victim tries to get a correction, the whole deck is stacked against
them. Edit Wikipedia and get
The main issue with OTRS is the mismatch between the subject's reasonable
expectation that he's dealing with the editorial authority and the fact
that the volunteer is just an editor. If the complaint is about vandalism or
unsourced content it works fine, but if the complaint is complex, not so
Good grief, Carcharoth, there it is! Brilliant!
I've been stumbling about for years looking for a way to differentiate
between legitimate encyclopaedic biography, which Wikipedia should do, and
the problematic, armature-journalistic, selectively biased, originally
researched, WP:NOTNEWS
Fred,
I'm failing to see the connection between a chap born in 1870 and our BLP
policy. You perhaps can't find an obituary, but I'm pretty sure he's dead.
Scott
-Original Message-
From: wikien-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org
[mailto:wikien-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Fred
After the confrontation between Derrick Coetzee and the National Portrait
Gallery, I thought people would enjoy this irony.
I wandered on to this page of theirs on John Michael Wright:
http://www.npg.org.uk/collections/search/person.php?search=saLinkID=mp07767
role=artwPage=0
Hm, that
: [WikiEN-l] NPG copyright irony
On 20 March 2011 16:43, Scott MacDonald doc.wikipe...@ntlworld.com wrote:
Can I sue them?
Sure . However under UK law which means you can only sue for actual
damages. Which in this case is likely to be limited. In reality if you
made enough threats you might get
I guess I was mainly enjoying the irony that people so prickly about their
own asserted copyrights can be so slapdash with material that is someone
else's copyright. They threw bricks at Derrick, now it appears they are
inhabiting a glass-house.
I doubt I'm much motivated to do anything about it
[mailto:wikien-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Scott MacDonald
Sent: 20 March 2011 20:54
To: 'English Wikipedia'
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] NPG copyright irony
I guess I was mainly enjoying the irony that people so prickly about their
own asserted copyrights can be so slapdash with material
An apology would be nice.
Scott
-Original Message-
From: wikien-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org
[mailto:wikien-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Newyorkbrad
Sent: 21 March 2011 01:28
To: English Wikipedia
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] NPG copyright irony
Compliance, and a desire for
Done - thanks
-Original Message-
From: wikien-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org
[mailto:wikien-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Bob the
Wikipedian
Sent: 06 February 2011 18:48
To: English Wikipedia
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Deletionist wanted for hire
It would appear to me your
26 matches
Mail list logo
