I would probably have begun with creating an article in Danish. We have one red link to [[Bjarne O. Henriksen]], and could probably have two more, and I guess he may border on notability on dawiki for his writing. I never heard of his music, but I won't blame him for that :)
Regards, Ole On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 12:52 PM, Shlomi Fish <shlo...@shlomifish.org> wrote: > Hi all, > > yesterday I had that discussion on #wikimedia-en-help where I (= rindolf) > tried > to help someone (I think he was a guy, but it doesn't matter) with getting > his > article for review accepted: > > <<<< > > <Helpmebot> Hi Referenced99, welcome to the help channel for the > English > Wikipedia! Move the cursor to the input area at the bottom of the window, > type > your question and press Enter, and a helper should be around shortly to > answer > your questions. If your question is about a particular page please make > sure > your question includes the URL or name of the page in question. > <Referenced99> I need very detailed instructions about why this page > keeps getting rejected because of 'unreliable sources' > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Bjarnmar/sandbox. Even the wiki page for > sterling silver says at the top that some of its sources need to be > verified - > but it was still allowed to be a page, so? > <Hersfold> just because some pages have issues doesn't mean we should > allow them to spread > <Referenced99> And i have used sources such as Variety, and when they > said it was not proven his music really existed i put the acutal link to > where > it is in different parts of the world and that's still not enough? > <Referenced99> But that's just it Hersfold - what are the issues with > this page? i have even used some references that were accepted on other > pages > related to his work but they were rejected in this case? > <Hersfold> I'm a bit occupied and don't really have time to look > myself, > but someone else may be around > <Hersfold> !helper > <MJ94> ues? > <MJ94> yes? > <Referenced99> How is Danmarks Radio, the largest TV station in Denmark, > an unreliable source when I link to his work and credits on their site? > <MJ94> Referenced99: one sec > <MJ94> Referenced99: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Rs > <Referenced99> Sorry to bother you Herford...have a nice Saturday > <MJ94> Referenced99: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Imdb#IMDb > IMDB is generally not a "reliable" source. > <Referenced99> Yes, MJ94 I have seen that page and I still don't > understand - and I only use IMDB as an Additional Link but every one of the > links above it are genuine lnks to professional pages that have or > reference > his work? > <Referenced99> Politiken is one of the largest newspapers in the > country, and I referenced them, Variety is known and used as a reference - > I > really don't understand the problem? > <Referenced99> The British Film Institute site is also used as as > reference - so what is wrong? I am really trying to understand > <Referenced99> But could someone please look at the page and tell me > what is wrong with the references I have now? Then I could better > understand, > it would be more specific, please? > <rindolf> Referenced99: where is the page again? > <Referenced99> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Bjarnmar/sandbox > <rindolf> Referenced99: ah, well, it should be more a biography. > <Referenced99> Thank you, rindolf, I would appreciate your help. I have > looked at the general guide but I still don't understand what is wrong > with my > references > <rindolf> Referenced99: like other biography of living people. > <Referenced99> Just a moment, reading you... > <rindolf> Referenced99: reading what? > <Referenced99> So what do I do differently i thought that was what I had > done (I meant reading your reply) > <Referenced99> I never did this before... > <Referenced99> I thought this was a biography page... > <rindolf> Referenced99: see for example > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Wall > <rindolf> Well, that may not be a good one. > <rindolf> Let's see. > <rindolf> Referenced99: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anne_Hathaway > <Referenced99> Ok, i see that page, my page also starts with his name > and where he was born and goes on to his accomplishments - what am I > missing? > <Referenced99> Looking at the hathaway page now... > <rindolf> Referenced99: OK. > <rindolf> Referenced99: your page reads too much like a resume. > <Referenced99> Yes, and except for the absence of a pic can you please > tell me spefically what I need to do that I haven't already done? > <rindolf> I mean a C.V. > <rindolf> Referenced99: structure it more like a biography. > <rindolf> Referenced99: > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons > <Referenced99> well, in the earlier version it was more like the > hathaway but it was criticized, so like they said i went to pages of some > other > composers and they had it more simply prominent works etc like i do now ... > <rindolf> Referenced99: ah, this reminds me of > http://www.bartleby.com/17/1/62.html > <Referenced99> kind of like this one > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Per_N%C3%B8rg%C3%A5rd where his work is > listed... > <Referenced99> Anyway, you see the way his works are listed, that is > what I was doing but should i go back to the hathaway type? > <Referenced99> i have done it so many ways now i am almost dizzy, ha... > <rindolf> Referenced99: I think you should. > <Referenced99> Ok, I will use the hathaway model...do i have to label it > as a biography in any way or just change the way it's set up on the page? > do i > need a pic from the start? > <Referenced99> I really appreciate your help, Rindolf! > <Referenced99> Have a great Saturday! > <rindolf> Referenced99: thanks. > <rindolf> Referenced99: Shabbath is over here in Israel. > <rindolf> Referenced99: according to the Hebrew Midrash. > <Referenced99> Shabbath, then ;D > <Referenced99> I am going to get to work on this now - and yes, it feels > a lot like the man the boy and the donkey...depending on which one gets the > page to review they all say something different. but I won't pull my hair > out > just yet, ha > <rindolf> Referenced99: :-) > <rindolf> Aesop++ > <Referenced99> Oh, I see...better, anyway, ha > <rindolf> Referenced99: also see > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parkinson%27s_law_of_triviality > <Referenced99> One said to model it on other composers, another said > something else... > <rindolf> Referenced99: heh, heh. > <rindolf> Yes, it's always a problem with collaborative projects. > <Referenced99> yes, it seems like the trivial has the upper hand > here...when i mentioned earlier above that not even the wiki page for > sterling > silver had reliable sources but it was still allowed to be a page - someone > said 'that's no reason to let such pages flourish' - !1 > <rindolf> Referenced99: I think the Hebrew > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oral_Torah contains many instances of people > improving what other people said in the past, with something like a > history. > <rindolf> Like, this Rabbi said X ; another said X1 ; another said > X2 ; > another said X[1,2] > <Referenced99> But that's just it: they often are not improving, one > said there weren't enough music sources, but the one before him said > nothing > about that...reading... > <rindolf> Referenced99: well, feel free to bring Aesop or the colour > of > the bike shed argument as a way to tell people to make up their minds or > shut > up. > <Referenced99> Well, Ok, the Torah is one thing, of course that should > give rise to interpretations etc...but this is just some facts about one of > Denmark's successful artists and it's like he's banned or something ha > <rindolf> Referenced99: this is also useful - > http://programming-motherfucker.com/ > <Referenced99> LOL > <rindolf> JFDI - Just fucking do it. > <Referenced99> somehow i think that would seal this poor artist's fate... > <rindolf> Yes, it's a great page. > <rindolf> Referenced99: what will? > <Referenced99> if i cursed at them, then they will never allow this page > through and quite honestly i have read many of the other danish artists > wiki > pages - some he has worked with also - and they have some imdb sources > and not > much else - he has a ton in comparison > <Referenced99> but i can only keep trying, ha... > <rindolf> Referenced99: someone I know who studies in openu.ac.uktold > me they told him not to use wikipedia because everyone can edit it and > it's not > a reliable source, and now he concluded that he shouldn't read any > wikipedia > page I link to him. > <rindolf> Like a page that someone puts elsewhere on a Web 1.0 > web-site > is necessarily any better. > <Demiurge1000> http://enwp.org/WP:42 is useful > <rindolf> Demiurge1000: OK. > <Referenced99> well, it would be different if they would just let the > page go up, and if someone edits it wrongly i will fix it, or someone else > will, but i've been rying to get this page up since May 2012... > <Referenced99> Thanks for that link...geneally trusted would be the > newspapers and british film institute and tv sites i list as > sources...hmmm...but i will try try try again (sigh) > <Referenced99> Bye now!! ;D > > <Demiurge1000> newspapers are indeed most useful > <rindolf> Referenced99: bye. > <-- Referenced99 has quit (Quit: Page closed) > > > >>>> > > Well, here are some more of my thoughts: > > Wikimedia projects now have many rules, and different projects have > slightly different rules. In wikis rules kinda dictate how we should > strive for > quality instead of just senselessly adding more and more quantity. However, > quantity is also important, because we want to avoid the fate of > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nupedia which only had very few articles. > People > come to Wikipedia (and often stay) in order to learn about their favourite > music star or actor, or about one book or another, or a common phrase, or a > popular game, or whatever, and I don't want to lose it, just because it > fell > out of the scope of the latest edition of Encyclopaedia Britannica. So we > should encourage more quantity *and* more quality. > > It is very effortless to mark something as "non-notable", > "request-for-deletion", "does-not-cite-any-references-and-sources", but it > is > also something that will make more people more bitter and not as happy. A > lot > of people parrot http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Art_of_War as an ideal > way to > confront your enemies, but I prefer learning from the actions and heritage > of > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saladin . Despite the fact that the Christian > occupation of Palestine at that time after the first two crusades was > discriminatory and suppressive, Saladin consciously decided to act in a > noble > and forgiving way. Some of the stories about him are astonishing: when the > horse of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_I_of_England (Richard the > Lion’s > Heart) died, Saladin gave him two good war horses. When Richard got sick, > Saladin allowed his personal doctor to take care of him (back then Muslim > medicine was considered the best in the world ). I also read a wikipedia > page > about a certain French knight (about whom there was a recent film) who > travelled on the third crusade to fight Saladin, was captured, and Saladin > made him swear he won't fight him again; then the Pope at the time > considered it un-upholdable, because it was an oath given to a > non-believer and > he returned to fight Saladin again. And Saladin was perfectly acceptable > of the > knight's decision to believe the pope (!!) and had the knight fight him > again. > > I think the Art of War aims to make sure your enemies will be devastated > as much > as possible, while Saladin's philosophy was to make sure that in the long > run, > your enemy will be less motivated to fight you, will think extremely > highly of > you, and you will eventually make him look bad, and win. That's true > victory. > > So what about the wikimedia projects? I think we should try more to be > friendly, invest more time in educating (while avoiding quick and > effortless > trigger happy stuff like removing whole sections or gradually "removing > sesame > seeds" - http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2007/09/11.html ), care > taking and > guidance instead of in dismissing something as bad or immediately removing > it > due to some problems. A good “crowd-sourcing” collaborative project is > often > an exercise in doing the same thing again and again, but we have to do that > and have patience, compassion and appreciation. We answer the same > questions > over and over again on such Freenode channels such as #perl or > ##programming , > but we cannot really expect people to read the F. A. Q. at the topic. We > need > to avoid short-term “gains” in time, hostility and psychological “tactics” > with > a much better long term strategy of encouraging people to contribute. Many > times people complain that they don't have enough time, but like I note in > http://www.shlomifish.org/humour/Star-Trek/We-the-Living-Dead/ : > > <<< > Q2: No. Busy > people are unproductive. We are very productive and so we’re never busy. > >>> > > (If you're a Star Trek fan, you can read the rest of the screenplay, to > get more > of my philosophy behind it). Many mathematicians will tell you that they > also consider Mathematics an art, and that some proofs are beautiful, or > that, > like good artists, they want to publish everything they discovered or > found. > Mathematics still requires a lot of creative processes and still cannot > really be automated (reaching a proof is > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NP-hard I > think, and the heuristics do not scale well). And if Mathematics is an > art, we > need to understand that writing (using conceptual thought and written > and/or > spoken languages), including both fiction, scientific/non-fiction, essays > and > everything in between is also an art. And that we should treat the people > who > are trying to help us like human beings, not like machines that emit > streams > of characters, because they are much more than that. > > Sorry that this message was so long. Comments are welcome. > > Sincerely yours, > > Shlomi Fish > > -- > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > Shlomi Fish http://www.shlomifish.org/ > Why I Love Perl - http://shlom.in/joy-of-perl > > If Botticelli were alive today, he’d be working for Vogue. > — http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Peter_Ustinov > > Please reply to list if it's a mailing list post - http://shlom.in/reply . > > _______________________________________________ > Gendergap mailing list > Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap > -- http://palnatoke.org * @palnatoke * +4522934588
_______________________________________________ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
