Re: [WikiEN-l] An open letter to Jimmy Wales
-Original Message- From: Brian brian.min...@colorado.edu To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Fri, 10 Apr 2009 10:54 pm Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] An open letter to Jimmy Wales In my opinion what Wikipedia says about this matter is entirely irrelevant. Wikipedia is not a source of authority on the matter - the Wikimedia Foundation is. - Foundations like companies are mostly the worst possible historians. They have a vested interest in rewriting history to match their current goals. Will Johnson ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Citizendium
Actually, I was just talking about verification of identity. - Chris On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 12:25 PM, wjhon...@aol.com wrote: I guess you're referring to the part where they ask for a CV. But that is only for editors not for authors. I really don't understand how Citizendium expects to get a following if they are going to set the bar so high just to sign up for heaven's sake. Any expert that wants to work on an experts-only project can just join the new Britannica can't they. Knol already has ten times the number of articles, and it's much younger. What I see on Citizendium is pretty sparse. I understand that Citizendium is attempting to only allow qualified experts to create articles but the sign up page only states write a 50-word biography. It makes no reference to prove to us that you're an expert or whatever. It's not a friendly page at all. The first thing they need to get is better marketing and customer relations ;) -Original Message- From: Chris Down neuro.wikipe...@googlemail.com To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Fri, 10 Apr 2009 3:33 am Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Citizendium The thing with Citizendium is that I'm not particularly comfortable giving out personal information to people that I don't even know enough to trust it with. If one of these 'constables' decides it, they could have an outing extravaganza -- and don't think it is an impossibility, either - they're not all robots. - Chris On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 6:53 AM, wjhon...@aol.com wrote: There is a set of check boxes to identify the area in which you are going to be writing. There is no check box for biography which made me hesitate, so I checked the box for history. I don't need 50 words to state that my areas of expertise are in history, biography and genealogy. I can say that in ten at the most. The response I was given back was not welcoming. So apparently Citizendium has no room for critics inside the system? Criticism-from-the-inside, to my mind, is one of the most useful strengths that Wikipedia has embraced. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] AFD has gone to a 7 day cycle
On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 2:10 AM, Al Tally majorly.w...@googlemail.com wrote: On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 2:05 AM, Ron Ritzman ritz...@gmail.com wrote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_deletion#Proposal_to_change_the_length_of_deletion_discussions_to_7_days I wonder when the plan to inform the community was? It might seem like a minor change, but it's a significant one. AFD/VFD has been 5 days since, what, when it was created? It's a fairly entrenched system. Pointless in my view to extend by 2 days. People will simply not remember what they've been practising for years. I noticed it on the CENT template on someone else's talk page. Which reminds me, I should put the CENT template on my user page. Carcharoth ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] AFD has gone to a 7 day cycle
On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 3:03 AM, doc doc.wikipe...@ntlworld.com wrote: Risker wrote: Oh, and discussion closed by someone who participated. Just as an aside. Risker It is really about time that Wikipedia regulated the means by which policy changes are made. Personally, I've long been in favour of a policy making body. However, I understand many people prefer the consensus model. But even if we stick to the consensus model, we perhaps should have a regularised means for closing the discussion and ruling where consensus lies. When we have an afd, an uninvolved admin closes. When the community considers adminship, a crat calls consensus. Is there a need for the selection of a group of trusted users who can be called upon to to declare (after discussion) when a policy change has consensus has been made? Perhaps we should have [[Wikipedia:Requests for policy change]], where an uninvolved crat or arb, or new class of user, closes the debate. Agreed that someone uninvolved should close. Have suggested bureaucrats before. No comment (for obvious reasons) on whether arbs should close such discussions. I think the person or group closing the discussion should be selected ahead of time, as otherwise you can get a group of people jostling to close the discussion who deliberately stayed out in order to close it. Either that, or a semi-regular group start closing such discussions. At a minimum, a new post at some noticeboard saying discussion has ended, we need someone uninvolved to close it would work. Carcharoth ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Citizendium
Well still the verification of identity really doesn't have anything to do with type a 50-word biography When I signed up for Knol, one thing they did was allow verification. So one way to verify you was that you gave them a phone number and your name as it was listed in the phone book. They check that it's really there, they CALL you and give you a code. You have to type that code back in. So what that verifies is that whoever answered the phone at that number was the same person who asked them to call that name and number (listed in the phone book) in the first place. I'd call that *fairly good* verification. Not perfect, but at least it pins the typist down to a particular phone number and phone book listing. At any rate, I don't see how a 50-word biography which could be anything I choose to make up, would satisfy any kind of identify verification. To be an *Editor* that ask that you submit a CV which I suppose if you were so inclined you could check against some college database or whatever. BUT to be an Author they do not ask you to submit a CV. Just apparently this mini-biography. So the point is still the same. If they are using this to verify something, that's not any sort of verification at all. Will Johnson ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Citizendium
On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 2:43 PM, wjhon...@aol.com wrote: In a message dated 4/10/2009 6:03:29 AM Pacific Daylight Time, wikim...@inbox.org writes: So don't join. That's exactly my point isn't it? If you say it is, then I guess it is. But not everyone is unwilling to write 50 words about themselves in order to join Citizendium. I did it (http://tinyurl.com/cjo5hc), though I no longer contribute due to other concerns (the main concern being one that Wikipedia will soon be no better with regard to - lack of respect for copyright). By the way, to answer your question what's the point of that, the point is to create a project where people contribute under their real names and identities. How many in-bound links are there to Citizendium? How many in-bound links are there to IMDb? IMDb now allows *any* member of the public to create synopsis. Brittanica now allows any member of the public to edit (under moderation), just like we're proposing for the project. If you're a good writer, people will read your material, and your edits will be approved. Some people have goals other than to have their material read by as many people as possible. Some, for instance, would prefer that their works not be edited mercilessly by any anonymous moron who comes along. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] An open letter to Jimmy Wales
On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 6:13 PM, Larry Sanger sanger-li...@citizendium.orgwrote: Moreover, I assert that it is my right to raise hell not only on this list, but also on Jimmy Wales' user talk page--if this is really an open, transparent, democratic project devoted to free speech. It isn't, and you don't. I find this part of your argument the strangest. You require approval and a 50 word-biography in order for someone to post on your talk page at Citizendium. The ability to use a user talk page is clearly a privilege which can be granted or can be taken away. If you don't like my message, that's fine, but do not try to deny my right to get it out there. Your right to get your message out there stops at the point where you try to use someone else's website to do so. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] An open letter to Jimmy Wales
On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 10:44 PM, Anthony wikim...@inbox.org wrote: On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 8:49 PM, Larry Sanger sanger-li...@citizendium.org wrote: First, whether or not it really is, Wikipedia (like Citizendium and other similar projects) ought to be democratic, open, and devoted to free speech in a certain sense. The sense is that, as long as a person is generally abiding by the rules of the community, he has a right to speak out in public forums, even if others find it annoying. If a mob of others are outraged at what he says, they have the right to try to refute him (under the same reasonable rules); but they do not have the right to demand that he be silenced. As soon as they gain such authority, the mob is de facto making the rules, which is fine for people who love mobs, but absolutely terrible for most of humanity and for anybody who cares about justice and other things that cannot be made into silly acronyms. Pot meet kettle. http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Talk%3AHomeopathy%2FDraftdiff=100448194oldid=100448185 And don't forget http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Talk:Homeopathy/Draftdiff=prevoldid=100448877 ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] An open letter to Jimmy Wales
Lets just be clear that this is an IMHO that has nothing to do with my point - the source of authority on the subject. All primary sources are biased in that respect. On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 12:24 AM, wjhon...@aol.com wrote: -Original Message- From: Brian brian.min...@colorado.edu To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Fri, 10 Apr 2009 10:54 pm Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] An open letter to Jimmy Wales In my opinion what Wikipedia says about this matter is entirely irrelevant. Wikipedia is not a source of authority on the matter - the Wikimedia Foundation is. - Foundations like companies are mostly the worst possible historians. They have a vested interest in rewriting history to match their current goals. Will Johnson ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] An open letter to Jimmy Wales
-Original Message- From: Anthony wikim...@inbox.org To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Fri, 10 Apr 2009 7:51 pm Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] An open letter to Jimmy Wales And don't forget http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Talk:Homeopathy/Draftdiff=prevoldid=100448877 ___ So apparently Citizendium allows free speech but only if you are very polite, which includes not pointing out other people's breach of the rules. (I had written a much more pointy response but then deleted it.) Will is this horse dead yet Johnson ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] An open letter to Jimmy Wales
Brian, the foundation is not the source of authority on what did or didn't happen years before they existed. The sources of authority would be those people who were actually present and involved in the situation. I'm sure that the entire company wasn't solely Jimmy and Larry. There are probably others who were employees or whatever who could also be interviewed on the matter. As well there are archives of what Jimmy and Larry did or didn't say, and when and to whom. The foundation really is irrelevant in writing the History of Wikipedia: The First Two Years. They aren't even a primary source. Will Johnson ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] An open letter to Jimmy Wales
On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 4:51 AM, Seth Finkelstein se...@sethf.com wrote: What's so interesting in specific here, is that only now has Larry Sanger's evidence reached some of the relatively tiny number of core editors who are highly influential in shaping the relevant Wikipedia articles. The article where this is covered, [[History of Wikipedia]] had a neutral balanced and stable assessment of the Sanger/Wales dispute and founder/co-founder issue, for years now.It had nothing to do with Larry Sanger's evidence reaching a tiny number of core editors, and everything to do with mass participation. It was well described as far back as 2007 and (unless vandalized) is so today. FT2 ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] AFD has gone to a 7 day cycle
2009/4/11 Al Tally majorly.w...@googlemail.com: On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 2:05 AM, Ron Ritzman ritz...@gmail.com wrote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_deletion#Proposal_to_change_the_length_of_deletion_discussions_to_7_days I wonder when the plan to inform the community was? It might seem like a minor change, but it's a significant one. AFD/VFD has been 5 days since, what, when it was created? No, it was seven days for ages. Then it got taken back to five as a way to deal with the huge load. This proposal restores the old time. - d. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] AFD has gone to a 7 day cycle
On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 11:19 AM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/4/11 Al Tally majorly.w...@googlemail.com:
On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 2:05 AM, Ron Ritzman ritz...@gmail.com wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_deletion#Proposal_to_change_the_length_of_deletion_discussions_to_7_days
I wonder when the plan to inform the community was? It might seem like a
minor change, but it's a significant one. AFD/VFD has been 5 days since,
what, when it was created?
No, it was seven days for ages. Then it got taken back to five as a
way to deal with the huge load. This proposal restores the old time.
{{citation needed}} :-)
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
[WikiEN-l] Wikipedia:Advertising discussions
Please see [[Wikipedia:Advertising discussions]], a proposal I've made to formalise guidelines on where and how the largest discussions should be advertised around Wikipedia to ensure sufficient input to major discussions. Improvements to the page and input on the talk page would be appreciated. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Advertising_discussions Carcharoth ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedia:Advertising discussions
On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 11:36 AM, Carcharoth carcharot...@googlemail.com wrote: Please see [[Wikipedia:Advertising discussions]], a proposal I've made to formalise guidelines on where and how the largest discussions should be advertised around Wikipedia to ensure sufficient input to major discussions. Improvements to the page and input on the talk page would be appreciated. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Advertising_discussions Hmm. I'm going through that list there, and it is actually rather difficult to decide what level of exposure to pitch a small proposal like this at. So far, I've done: *Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals) *Wikipedia:Village pump (policies) *Wikipedia talk:Canvassing *Wikipedia talk:Consensus *Wiki-en-l mailing list The last one was a bit unnecessary really. The Community bulletin board, CENT template, and Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Policies feel a bit like overkill. I suppose it is the difference between wanting some input and wanting some formal approval (that should really come later by some ill-defined common practice assessment - if this is common practice, it should be a guideline immediately, if not, more discussion is needed). Other options are even higher and less appropriate. So I am going to stop there and see what input results. Carcharoth ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] AFD has gone to a 7 day cycle
2009/4/11 Andrew Gray andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk: 2009/4/11 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com: No, it was seven days for ages. Then it got taken back to five as a way to deal with the huge load. This proposal restores the old time. Are you sure? I checked back to 2004ish, back when we were still using a single discussion page, and I'm sure it seemed to be about five then. Possibly my history file has been corrupted. - d. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] AFD has gone to a 7 day cycle
On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 2:12 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: 2009/4/11 Andrew Gray andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk: 2009/4/11 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com: No, it was seven days for ages. Then it got taken back to five as a way to deal with the huge load. This proposal restores the old time. Are you sure? I checked back to 2004ish, back when we were still using a single discussion page, and I'm sure it seemed to be about five then. Did that include VfD? Possibly my history file has been corrupted. Or you are thinking of a different process? MfD? RfA? Carcharoth ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] AFD has gone to a 7 day cycle
On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 8:24 PM, Carcharoth carcharot...@googlemail.com wrote:
{{citation needed}} :-)
When votes for deletion was first introduced, there was no fixed time
for discussion. Things got listed, and if an admin agreed, it would
get deleted. There were no criteria for speedy deletion as we know
them today, though they were forming.
The one week timeframe was introduced in August 2002 (by the
Cunctator, though it seems to have stuck):
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion_archive_May_2004diff=177211oldid=177189
The timeframe was a minimum for discussion; in practice it seems that
some nominations could stay listed indefinitely until an admin got
around to making the decision.
The one week timeframe was moved into the deletion policy in July 2003:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Deletion_policydiff=1674649oldid=1674648
As the whole thing was conducted on a single page at the time, things
started to get too crowded with all nominations staying there for a
week. There were some discussions through 2003 about shortening the
time:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Votes_for_deletion/lag_time
From the beginning of October 2003 it was apparently a six-day
timeframe, but by the end of the month it was five days:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Deletion_policydiff=1674735oldid=1674734
Note also the franchise requirements at the time, and the high
thresholds for deletion (at various times either 3/4 or 2/3 majority
required for deletion).
Beginning April 2004, the problem of VFD growing ever larger (the main
reason for going down to 5 days) was partially solved by having each
discussion on its own subpage (the current day-log system came in on
Christmas 2004).
So there you go, a little policy history lesson :)
--
Stephen Bain
stephen.b...@gmail.com
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] AFD has gone to a 7 day cycle
On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 6:09 AM, Carcharoth carcharot...@googlemail.com wrote: Incidentally, one of the downsides of notifications posted at AN and ANI is that they are only there until the bots archive them (that's only a day for ANI) unless someone replies (unlikely) or various tricks are used to ensure archiving doesn't take place until the poll is over (or for a set period like 3 or 4 days). Perhaps the archive bots can be coded to not archive any thread with this HTML comment... !-- sticky -- ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] An open letter to Jimmy Wales
On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 4:51 AM, Anthony wikim...@inbox.org wrote: On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 10:44 PM, Anthony wikim...@inbox.org wrote: Pot meet kettle. http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Talk%3AHomeopathy%2FDraftdiff=100448194oldid=100448185 And don't forget http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Talk:Homeopathy/Draftdiff=prevoldid=100448877 And that right there is why Citizendium will never be as good as wikipedia. --Oskar ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] AFD has gone to a 7 day cycle
On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 3:35 PM, Ron Ritzman ritz...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 6:09 AM, Carcharoth carcharot...@googlemail.com wrote: Incidentally, one of the downsides of notifications posted at AN and ANI is that they are only there until the bots archive them (that's only a day for ANI) unless someone replies (unlikely) or various tricks are used to ensure archiving doesn't take place until the poll is over (or for a set period like 3 or 4 days). Perhaps the archive bots can be coded to not archive any thread with this HTML comment... !-- sticky -- That would require manual archiving. Better, IMO, to have a set notice period for each venue, and to post-date the notice, so the bot archives it at the end of that notice period. It's easy to fool bots like that! :-) You could code the notice period into the bot as well. So both methods would work. Carcharoth ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] An open letter to Jimmy Wales
Ironically, even the conservapedia homeopathy article is probably more accurate than the citizendium one in this case: http://www.conservapedia.com/Homeopathy On 11/04/2009, Oskar Sigvardsson oskarsigvards...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 4:51 AM, Anthony wikim...@inbox.org wrote: On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 10:44 PM, Anthony wikim...@inbox.org wrote: Pot meet kettle. http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Talk%3AHomeopathy%2FDraftdiff=100448194oldid=100448185 And don't forget http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Talk:Homeopathy/Draftdiff=prevoldid=100448877 And that right there is why Citizendium will never be as good as wikipedia. --Oskar ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l -- -Ian Woollard We live in an imperfectly imperfect world. Life in a perfectly imperfect world would be *much* better. Life in an imperfectly perfect world would be pretty ghastly though. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] An open letter to Jimmy Wales
Oskar Sigvardsson wrote: On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 4:51 AM, Anthony wikim...@inbox.org wrote: On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 10:44 PM, Anthony wikim...@inbox.org wrote: Pot meet kettle. http://en.citizendium.org/wiki?title=Talk%3AHomeopathy%2FDraftdiff=100448194oldid=100448185 The Constabulary? How precious! Yet another reason why I won't be going there. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] An open letter to Jimmy Wales
Ian Woollard wrote: Ironically, even the conservapedia homeopathy article is probably more accurate than the citizendium one in this case: http://www.conservapedia.com/Homeopathy I /really/ don't think Wikipedia wants a pissing contest here. Do we really want to compare the worst article we can find on Citizendium with Wikipedians worst? I think we'd clearly lose. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] An open letter to Jimmy Wales
2009/4/11 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com: 2009/4/11 Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net: Unreal! And Larry Sanger thought he could come to Wikipedia and lodge complaints... Indeed. It's the bit where he's behaving here in a manner that wouldn't be put up with for a second on Citizendium or any of its associated mailing lists or forums that's most surprising. I don't get the point. In North Korea I assume it's not looked favourably upon when you criticise the Dear Leader. Does that mean that no North Korean should criticise WMF on Wikipedia? Michel ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] An open letter to Jimmy Wales
On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 4:03 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: 2009/4/11 Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net: Unreal! And Larry Sanger thought he could come to Wikipedia and lodge complaints... Indeed. It's the bit where he's behaving here in a manner that wouldn't be put up with for a second on Citizendium or any of its associated mailing lists or forums that's most surprising. Can I request that this thread now end and that we don't engage in a wholly unedifying attack on Larry, Citizendium or anyone else. -- Sam PGP public key: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Sam_Korn/public_key ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Citizendium
On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 5:05 AM, wjhon...@aol.com wrote: When I signed up for Knol, one thing they did was allow verification. So one way to verify you was that you gave them a phone number and your name as it was listed in the phone book. They check that it's really there, they CALL you and give you a code. You have to type that code back in. So what that verifies is that whoever answered the phone at that number was the same person who asked them to call that name and number (listed in the phone book) in the first place. I'd call that *fairly good* verification. Not perfect, but at least it pins the typist down to a particular phone number and phone book listing. At any rate, I don't see how a 50-word biography which could be anything I choose to make up, would satisfy any kind of identify verification. To be an *Editor* that ask that you submit a CV which I suppose if you were so inclined you could check against some college database or whatever. They've had some discussion on the CZ forum about the onerousness of the sign-up process before, and in addition to rejections, they have quite a few where they basically write back, we need more information, because we don't have enough to verify your identity. Most of those people never get back to them, from what I gather. CZ sign-up is slightly problematic for people without institutional email addresses, but they place a high premium on better verification than just 'fairly good'. In part, I think this is because they really, really want to avoid letting any vandals through; the lack of that particular aspect of Wikipedia is a major selling point for many of their users and potential users. A related observation: presumably because of the delayed sign-up process, only about half of new users ever make a first edit on CZ: http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Image:New_users.png -Sage (User:Ragesoss) ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Citizendium
Sage Ross wrote: A related observation: presumably because of the delayed sign-up process, only about half of new users ever make a first edit on CZ: http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Image:New_users.png -Sage (User:Ragesoss) I wonder what percentage of new accounts make a *useful* first edit on wikipedia? ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] An open letter to Jimmy Wales
Folks, shout Larry down all you want - I know I personally would be happy to see the co-founder dispute disappear forever. But threats to block or moderate him are overboard; there is no basis for either action (and a block would result in repercussions for the blocking admin, I'd imagine). Nathan ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] An open letter to Jimmy Wales
Fred Bauder arranged electrons to indicate (back on 04/11/2009 07:58 AM) that: A comment here was deleted by The Constabulary on grounds of making complaints about fellow Citizens. If you have a complaint about the behavior of another Citizen, e-mail constab...@citizendium.org. It is contrary to Citizendium policy to air your complaints on the wiki. See also CZ:Professionalism. http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Template:Nocomplaints Unreal! And Larry Sanger thought he could come to Wikipedia and lodge complaints... Complaining is Not Allowed, so problems cannot exist. Kewl. I sure won't be participating in any society where people address each other as Citoyen, even if they have renamed the Committee of Public Safety. -- Sean Barrett | Free Tibet* s...@epoptic.com | * with purchase of home: 310-641-9625 | another Tibet of equal cell: 310-739-3785 | or greater value. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] An open letter to Jimmy Wales
Depends... Michel may be comparing Wikipedia (and this list in particular) to NK as well. Fayssal F. Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2009 16:11:07 +0100 From: David Gerard dger...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] An open letter to Jimmy Wales To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Message-ID: fbad4e140904110811me65b77axabfcf2bc14fe7...@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 2009/4/11 Michel Vuijlsteke wikipe...@zog.org: I don't get the point. In North Korea I assume it's not looked favourably upon when you criticise the Dear Leader. Does that mean that no North Korean should criticise WMF on Wikipedia? No, it's that wikien-l has a civility rule too. And saying I'M GOING TO REPEAT MYSELF FOREVER UNTIL YOU AGREE WITH ME falls afoul of it. You appear to be comparing Citizendium to North Korea. - d. -- ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Citizendium
On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 11:10 AM, doc doc.wikipe...@ntlworld.com wrote: Sage Ross wrote: A related observation: presumably because of the delayed sign-up process, only about half of new users ever make a first edit on CZ: http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Image:New_users.png -Sage (User:Ragesoss) I wonder what percentage of new accounts make a *useful* first edit on wikipedia? Smaller, no doubt, than on CZ. But their registration process has already imposed a moderately intense selection process; most people who successfully register are people whose edits are very likely to be useful, so they view the fact many of them never begin editing as serious loss. And, of course, at this stage they are much more concerned with getting new people involved than we are (which is, perhaps, shortsighted on our part, but it's tough to see participation levels as a critical problem when the scale of the user base is so big that we can't get a real sense of it on an interpersonal level) -Sage (User:Rageoss) ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Citizendium
Brian that's all irrelevant. They are not *asking* you to describe yourself, they are *compelling* you to do it. That's not the same thing. And in addition, the page does not even state that they will use this information for any purpose, to verify, to identify, to accept, to ... anything. That's the second point. Address those points. Will ** Feeling the pinch at the grocery store? Make dinner for $10 or less. (http://food.aol.com/frugal-feasts?ncid=emlcntusfood0001) ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] An open letter to Jimmy Wales
Michel Vuijlsteke wrote: 2009/4/11 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com: 2009/4/11 Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net: Unreal! And Larry Sanger thought he could come to Wikipedia and lodge complaints... Indeed. It's the bit where he's behaving here in a manner that wouldn't be put up with for a second on Citizendium or any of its associated mailing lists or forums that's most surprising. I don't get the point. In North Korea I assume it's not looked favourably upon when you criticise the Dear Leader. Does that mean that no North Korean should criticise WMF on Wikipedia? My understanding was that the North Koreans have a very egalitarian policy: Nobody has access to the internet. ;-) Ec ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Green Ink Day (stick to Alan Cabal)
On Thu, 9 Apr 2009 12:30:06 -0700 (PDT), Bill Carter wrote: Please ignore this Green Ink Day nonsense, and address the Alan Cabal article that has been expunged from Wikipedia's mainspace to its userspace for unjust reasons: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:MichaelQSchmidt/sandbox_The_unlov ed_article Wikipedia has too many Cabals already! :-) -- == Dan == Dan's Mail Format Site: http://mailformat.dan.info/ Dan's Web Tips: http://webtips.dan.info/ Dan's Domain Site: http://domains.dan.info/ ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
