Re: [WikiEN-l] Mailing list policy
The group itself should be able to have a voice in what is and what is not policy for the group. As well the group should be able to know what *policy-based* actions are being taken and why. Shining light on moderator actions, ensures that moderators take action that is fair, impartial, and applied evenly across the entire group. 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] Moderation (was: Stick this in your music theory and smoke it.)
Steve confirm the *reason* you put me on moderation. I'm sure that it will be quite interesting. -Original Message- From: Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Tue, Sep 22, 2009 1:30 am Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Moderation (was: Stick this in your music theory and smoke it.) On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 2:48 PM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote: I think that if the person you moderate objects to it, and wants it announced on the list, you should do so. Of course. On that note, whjon...@aol.com has requested that I publicly confirm that he is on moderation. Steve ___ 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] Not everyone wants to be a janitor policeman.
In a message dated 9/20/2009 10:02:40 AM Pacific Daylight Time, werespielchequ...@googlemail.com writes: As for Every system should be open to audit review by anyone who wishes to do so. This may at first glance sound like an attractive slogan. But if my GP or my bank adopted such a policy I would immediately shift my business elsewhere. - You are presuming that a opening a bank's books to inspection means that every piece of data is open, and that's not so. Every bank's books are already open to inspection at certain levels. However there are still systems that operate in-universe which are absolutely closed to any sort of normal inspection. Will ___ 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] Newbie and not-so-newbie biting
In a message dated 9/19/2009 12:05:37 PM Pacific Daylight Time, dgoodma...@gmail.com writes: The best practical way to audit admin actions is to become an admin oneself. Admins have just as many conflicts among them as any other active people here. There are people I watch, and people who watch me. Not everyone wants to be a janitor policeman. Every system should be open to audit review by anyone who wishes to do so. Systems which are closed except to insiders are not part of my vision of a free society. 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] Secondary sources
Jay you are confusing source-based research with original research. If you research something to *confirm* it by researching in sources, you are not doing original research.? If you research it by repeating experiments then you would be. I doubt that any textbook author confirms their sources by repeating the experiments. Will -Original Message- From: Jay Litwyn brewh...@freenet.edmonton.ab.ca To: wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Thu, Sep 17, 2009 8:14 pm Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Secondary sources I agree with Gerard on this. Textbooks are typically loaded with primary sources, and the textbook is a secondary source, even if the author of the textbook did some orijinal research to confirm what the primary source said -- does not mean that research was reviewed. As far as private definitions are concerned, if there is a key difference between yours and my definition, it can be either inconsequential in a context or a key point of difference in a conversation. Every debate leads to confusion. If you are lucky, it does not lead to polarization. ___ http://ecn.ab.ca/~brewhaha/Sound/Tiggerz.mp3 Tune http://www.pooh-corner.org/tigger_lyrics.shtml Lyrics wjhon...@aol.com wrote in message news:8cbff4f848d9479-2ee4-14...@webmail-m017.sysops.aol.com... I dispute that this is my private meaning. And I propose that this is the standard meaning. As well as the inworld meaning. -Original Message- From: David Gerard dger...@gmail.com To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Wed, Sep 9, 2009 1:48 am Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Secondary sources 2009/9/9 wjhon...@aol.com: What I said, and what I've been saying is that any source which is our first incident of a particular fact is a primary source, no matter what their source was. You must appreciate, though, that your private definition of this term is not the established meaning for this term, which has been in use since well before Wikipedia started. And that using private definitions of terms without acknowledging doing so only leads to confusion. - 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 ___ 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 ___ 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: the Journal
I have to modify my comments, because after toying around at wiki.answers.com the voting system doesn't work. It's the same issue at Knol in general. I get over a thousand views a day of my knols and very very rarely does anyone vote my articles either up or down. There has been suspicion among knolians that those articles with a high vote count are some form of fraud (for example by creating a hundred accounts and voting with all of them). So in order to use the whole idea of the best articles get voted to the top we'd need both a way to combat vote-fraud, and a way to intice readers to vote 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] Wikipedia: the Journal
But your response sounds like There's no problem.? And I just pointed out the problem.? Just go to wiki.answers.com for example, answer a few questions, then check back in a month. Even though people read articles, they aren't voting. That's not the same as a poll, where you deliberately create a situation where the only content is the poll itself. You could for example just create a simple vote where If the person stays on this page for more than one minute that's a positive vote and there are no negative votes.? If they stay put, they must be reading the article and at least that much interested.? It is possible, in some contexts (not all), to determine how long a person stays put. Would that work as an up-vote ?? Remember these are not polls.? It's a determination of how popular the content is. Will ___ 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: the Journal
In a message dated 9/14/2009 1:30:54 AM Pacific Daylight Time, ft2.w...@gmail.com writes: If someone writes a paper and knowledge later advances, let the paper be updated; provided the update is also peer reviewed it'll mean the topic's paper is always latest knowledge. Not how it traditionally works, but in a number of ways, better. If you allow the paper to be updated, than all the old peer-review, votes, and other attachments have to be blanked out. Do you see that? Let's say the old paper has a trust level of 8.4 out of 10, with three reviewers and 124 votes of great or however its going to work. Plus a dozen inbound links citing and worse *quoting* it. Now all of that gets chucked in the trash. All the inbound links no longer reflect anything. It's a mess. And all that review work is also lost. Will ___ 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: the Journal
Simple fixes to this proposal. Use WikiJournal. Add peer-review to it. Why not? Allow some WikiJournal articles to become more trusted than others. 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] Wikipedia: the Journal
In a message dated 9/13/2009 9:46:21 AM Pacific Daylight Time, dgoodma...@gmail.com writes: This is somewhat similar to Citizendium, except their peer-review is open, as is currently also considered a good practice. they haven't gotten very far with it, and they seem to have almost all of our problems in maintaining NPOV. I suggest we let them develop their model, and we continue ours'. David I think the proposal is for a *new* sister project to Wikipedia, not an adjustment of Wikipedia. Wikinews for example encourages original research if you are an eye-witness to something you can write about it. Citizendium has no traction in the real world (just in their own minds). So the benefit of a new sister project might be to try to create actual traction with the idea of online peer-review. I see problems with the idea of commissioning works. When Knol first started, they limited it to just invited guests. Now after some time, those invited guests have mostly moved on, and their articles aren't doing great (in general). I would must prefer a method like WikiAnswers where all readers can *vote* on who they trust, and *vote* on good questions and good answers, etc, and the highest trusted authorities gradually percolate to the top of the heap. Then those *trust* levels get translated into the articles they've written *AND* the articles they've peer-reviewed. Does that make sense? Sort of a push-yourself-up-from-your-own-bootstraps method of community consensus. It surely favors the early adapters, but then all IT does that already. And even the early adapters (see early Knolians) can get swamped by the more industrious and clever and persistent authors. That however isn't a bad thing. At level 0.5 we'd need to install a panel of judges to settle conflict. 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] Wikipedia: the Journal
If wiki means quick then it would be quick in that the time between writing and full publication should be much shorter than traditional in print journals. If wiki means anyone can edit it, then it wouldn't be a wiki. If wiki only means that *you* and your *peers* can quickly edit it online in a collaborative mode, than it would be a wiki. I would think the hardest part would be the start-up. Who are my peers? Who judges that? What if I complain that Bozo the Clown isn't my peer at all? Who decides that my article has had enough reviews and can now be published? Those sort of things need to be worked out more betterer. Will ___ 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: the Journal
In a message dated 9/13/2009 2:48:48 PM Pacific Daylight Time, brian.min...@colorado.edu writes: Clearly, this information will not be ported back to Wikipedia. Why is this clear? It isn't clear to me. Will ___ 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: the Journal
Brian, scholarpedia doesn't work as a replacement for wikijournal (or whatever we decide to call it) because they require each editor to have a PhD or MD. Some fields of endeavor, for which a person could indeed be a qualified expert, and perhaps the leading expert in the world, don't even have a method by which you could get a PhD in the first place. Scholarpedia is just more ivory-tower silliness, by ivory tower silly monkeys who think that we're going to keep kow-towing to university stiffs. One thing that Wikipedia has taught us, if nothing else, is that those days are over. Down with the man! Information wants to be free. Free of not only imprisonment, but free of dictated authority. If I'm the world's leading expert on free-style skateboarding, than I should be able to write a peer-reviewed article about it, and have it judged by my peers and voted up or down by my readers. That is how I envision this WikiJournal prospective. Not as another university-driven nowheresville which gets no traction because the vast majority of the world doesn't really care to read highly scientific and technical articles. Another example might be, let's say that you write a piece on intricate details of the Watergate scandal, as an investigative journalist. It's not news but I would think WikiJournal (or whatever) might be a perfect venue to have such an article peer-reviewed. WikiNews is not peer-reviewed. Will ___ 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: the Journal
In a message dated 9/13/2009 3:19:21 PM Pacific Daylight Time, ft2.w...@gmail.com writes: Papers are reviewed annually, or upon major new information, so they become a living document -- the paper on the higgs boson as it is now, and the same paper as it was a year, 2 years ago, showing the advance of knowledge and correcting itself as time passes and knowledge develops. I would say that by this we'd have to mean that a paper cannot change. In that way it has to behave like a print version. Once it's set, than it can't change, otherwise the voting and review process would no longer match the current state of the paper. Rather, like print, if a new paper is submitted, even by the same author on the same topic, it has to be a new entry in this month's journal, not a modification of a now-historical version. Will ___ 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: the Journal
My question Brian was to your remark that this would not pass into Wikipedia. Your response didn't address why you think that. By pass into I mean cited in, quoted in, not *COPIED* obviously. We don't allow copy-paste right now. So all I can think is that you meant, that we should not cite any scholarpedia articles from within Wikipedia, and so I asked why. If you did not mean that, than what did you mean? ___ 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: the Journal
In a message dated 9/13/2009 3:21:51 PM Pacific Daylight Time, brian.min...@colorado.edu writes: There is no such requirement. It is a correlation only. There is. Right on the main sign-up page An editor of Scholarpedia should satisfy the following requirements: Have a PhD or MD. I take the usage of the word should here to mean must. In addition, by the way, another should requirement is to be recommended by 2 other curators ! How exclusive. Makes me sick to my stomach. When the revolution comes, the first thing I'm going to do is execute all the university scholars. Well that's been done Will ___ 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: the Journal
In a message dated 9/13/2009 2:48:48 PM Pacific Daylight Time, brian.min...@colorado.edu writes: Clearly, this information will not be ported back to Wikipedia. This is a reminder of what you said. I don't see why it's clear. You don't say should or cannot or dont want but rather Will not be which is rather more restrictive. I don't think it's clear that it will not be. That's my point. Will ___ 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: the Journal
Here is their sign-up page http://www.scholarpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=Special:Userlogin; create=yes Notice the requirement to be affiliated with some institution. So again the entire concept of Scholarpedia is limited to universities and possibly a few research laboratories. I believe the concept of WikiJournal would be universal, just like Wikipedia. Anyone can be an expert on any topic. The validity of your expertise is not measured by your affiliation, but rather by your articles. Will ___ 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] Deletion of unreferenced living person biographies
But I'm not equating speedy with out-of-process, you are. I'm saying they are two different things. I never stated that we have a process for speedy, since that wasn't the point I was making. -Original Message- From: Tony Sidaway tonysida...@gmail.com To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Fri, Sep 11, 2009 10:25 pm Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Deletion of unreferenced living person biographies On 9/11/09, wjhon...@aol.com wjhon...@aol.com wrote: My understanding and usage in-world has always been that out-of-process means not that we have a policy that requires no process on this, but rather that it means we have a process for this, which you did not follow properly. That would apply to an admin who simply deleted a page without discussion. There is no process for speedy deletion. That's the whole point. ___ 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] Deletion of unreferenced living person biographies
The original point was that if a deletion was out of process (which is not the same thing as speedy), than that is a valid reason to restore it. Out of process not meaning there is no process for this but rather meaning we have a process, which you did not follow.? Two different things. ___ 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] Imagine if Wikipedia was printed
In a message dated 9/12/2009 9:35:24 PM Pacific Daylight Time, szv...@gmail.com writes: According to the* Telegraph* one of Matthews (who is a 22 year-old graphic design) goals is to sell it. In theory, he could sell all of Wikipedia article space content... 3,031,886 would give him an astonishing 34,688,684 pages-long book!!! Is this just counting the length of the text ? Or does it also include pictures ? Will ___ 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] Deletion of unreferenced living person biographies
In a message dated 9/11/2009 8:39:51 AM Pacific Daylight Time, tonysida...@gmail.com writes: Possibly you don't. But the speedy deletion has no process, the only recourse is review. My understanding and usage in-world has always been that out-of-process means not that we have a policy that requires no process on this, but rather that it means we have a process for this, which you did not follow properly. So an out-of-process afd for example might be one that closed prematurely, say in eight hours or whatever. 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] Another Media and Wikipedia blackout on NYT reporter in Afghan...
In a message dated 9/10/2009 3:36:58 AM Pacific Daylight Time, surreptitious.wikiped...@googlemail.com writes: Didn't they link to the situation and its resolution? How would that not be a consensus? I have no idea how linking creates a consensus. So I can't really address this. Will ___ 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] Another Media and Wikipedia blackout on NYT reporter in Afghan...
In a message dated 9/10/2009 3:42:07 AM Pacific Daylight Time, surreptitious.wikiped...@googlemail.com writes: I nominate Will as the person making press statements when someone does write the how to make a H-Bomb article. I would like to thank all the little people I stepped on, on my climb to the top. Will ___ 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] Another Media and Wikipedia blackout on NYT reporter in Afghan...
In a message dated 9/10/2009 5:48:09 AM Pacific Daylight Time, fredb...@fairpoint.net writes: We should not publish up-to-date and accurate information on how to create great harm whether it is about A-bombs or reporters held captive by the Taliban, and we don't, Just to repeat by way of propaganda, there is no credible evidence that publishing details about reporters held captive by the Taliban would cause any harm at all, let alone great. Will ___ 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] Another Media and Wikipedia blackout on NYT reporter in Afghan...
In a message dated 9/10/2009 6:26:07 AM Pacific Daylight Time, fredb...@fairpoint.net writes: That is what the Foundation does in such cases, they pass information on from outside sources that are knowledgeable about the situation. Or, at we've seen, outside souces which create false information when it suits them, and are hypocritical when it doesn't. Will ___ 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] Another Media and Wikipedia blackout on NYT reporter in Afghan...
In a message dated 9/10/2009 6:34:59 AM Pacific Daylight Time, fredb...@fairpoint.net writes: To a certain extent this conversation has been about, Common sense, what's common sense?, I don't want no stinking commons sense, I'll work to rule and, if harm results, tough!, Harm to Wikipedia?, Public relations? Piss on that! Sorry but no. It's been about your common sense, isn't my common sense. Miscasting it as fire bad isn't going to win any new converts. ___ 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] Deletion of unreferenced living person biographies
In a message dated 9/10/2009 7:35:43 AM Pacific Daylight Time, tonysida...@gmail.com writes: Out of process deletion isn't a valid reason to restore. Good for the encyclopedia is. That's right your honor. We beat the various innocent family members of the criminal senseless in order to get the evidence, but we finally caught the bad guy! Thank you your honor. The ends justify the means, we agree. Thank you for allowing us to ride roughshod over the community. W.J. ___ 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] Another Media and Wikipedia blackout on NYT reporter in Afghan...
In a message dated 9/10/2009 8:56:59 AM Pacific Daylight Time, stv...@gmail.com writes: Let's suppose you have in your possession exact detailed plans for a small H-bomb. Would you think you could simply put it into Wikipedia? Only if we have reliable, well-researched, and peer-reviewed sources. Scratch peer-review. We don't require that on this sort of article. I'm not even sure we have a policy on how-to manuals, do we? Will ___ 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] Is Wikipedia the first draft of history - New York Times take on Joe Wilson article
That's funny your link got it's final character cut off in my email box so it didn't work. Testing whether this link will work... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Wilson_%28U.S._politician%29 -Original Message- From: Keith Old To: English Wikipedia Sent: Thu, Sep 10, 2009 1:38 pm Subject: [WikiEN-l] Is Wikipedia the first draft of history - New York Times take on Joe Wilson article Folks, The New York Times reports: http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/09/10/the-wikipedia-battle-over-joe-wilsons-obama-heckling/ If journalism is the first draft of history, what is a Wikipedia entry when it is updated within minutes of an event to reflect changes in a person’s biography? This is the very live issue that cropped up in a heated argument on the discussion page that accompanies Wikipedia’s entry on Representative Joe Wilson Wednesday night, just 30 minutes after the Republican from South Carolina interrupted President Barack Obama’s speech by shouting “You lie!” As my colleague Carl Hulse reported in a blog post published about 10 minutes after the fight got going on Wikipedia, Mr. Wilson’s outburst came in response to the president’s statement that his proposed changes to health insurance laws would not give coverage to illegal immigrants. Since Mr. Wilson’s shout was made during a live television broadcast — nowarchived on YouTube by The Associated Press — in front of all of his colleagues, the fact that it happened is not in dispute. Afte r Wikipedia’s editors initially removed the first reference to the event from the entry on Mr. Wilson, citing concerns about sourcing and potential “vandalism,” the page was locked to prevent new or unregistered users from editing it. That is when the argument among Wikipedians — which can be read in full on the discussion page starting here — really took off. (More in article) The Joe Wilson article is here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Wilson_(U.S._politician) Regards *Keith Old* ___ 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] Deletion of unreferenced living person biographies
Are you equating the phrase out of process to the word speedy ? I don't see those two as being the same thing. -Original Message- From: Tony Sidaway tonysida...@gmail.com To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Thu, Sep 10, 2009 8:59 pm Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Deletion of unreferenced living person biographies On 9/10/09, wjhon...@aol.com wjhon...@aol.com wrote: In a message dated 9/10/2009 7:35:43 AM Pacific Daylight Time, tonysida...@gmail.com writes: Out of process deletion isn't a valid reason to restore. Good for the encyclopedia is. That's right your honor. We beat the various innocent family members of the criminal senseless in order to get the evidence, but we finally caught the bad guy! Thank you your honor. The ends justify the means, we agree. Thank you for allowing us to ride roughshod over the community. Come along now, we've had a specific policy for out-of-process or speedy deletions at the discretion of a single administrator for years now, and you're probably the first person to compare out-of-process deletion to beating up innocent people. ___ 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] Secondary sources
I dispute that this is my private meaning. And I propose that this is the standard meaning. As well as the inworld meaning. -Original Message- From: David Gerard dger...@gmail.com To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Wed, Sep 9, 2009 1:48 am Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Secondary sources 2009/9/9 wjhon...@aol.com: What I said, and what I've been saying is that any source which is our first incident of a particular fact is a primary source, no matter what their source was. You must appreciate, though, that your private definition of this term is not the established meaning for this term, which has been in use since well before Wikipedia started. And that using private definitions of terms without acknowledging doing so only leads to confusion. - 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 ___ 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] Another Media and Wikipedia blackout on NYT reporter in Afghanistan
Investigative Journalism should go to WikiNews. BTW does Wikinews have any traction yet? I mean does it hit the first googly page ? -Original Message- From: David Gerard dger...@gmail.com To: fredb...@fairpoint.net; English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Wed, Sep 9, 2009 12:24 pm Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Another Media and Wikipedia blackout on NYT reporter in Afghanistan 2009/9/9 Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net: Actually, no, that is a throw-away. But we do need to get a little smarter. We might have something come up that is a bit more serious. I think there's actually not much we need to do. The most recent case was entirely covered by BLP: be extremely conservative about potentially extremely harmful information. We're an encyclopedia, not investigative journalism - we have wikinews for that. If we wait a few days until we're absolutely sure and there are really good and reliable sources, that's fine. Once it's all over the media, it's not our problem; when it isn't, it shouldn't be in the article. People shouting censorship! have mistaken the encyclopedia for a venue for investigative journalism. - 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 ___ 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] Another Media and Wikipedia blackout on NYT reporter in Afghanistan
I really don't see this as IAR. It seems the argument is that it's firmly BLP policy. That for some reason (inexplicable apparently), keeping the name of a kipnap victim secret, helps them to not be killed. Personally the argument seems flat to me. But at any rate, if we were to have a discussion on finding consensus, I would expect it to revolve around BLP. -Original Message- From: Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com To: fredb...@fairpoint.net; English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Wed, Sep 9, 2009 12:22 pm Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Another Media and Wikipedia blackout on NYT reporter in Afghanistan 2009/9/9 Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net: Actually, no, that is a throw-away. But we do need to get a little smarter. We might have something come up that is a bit more serious. More serious than life and death? ___ 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] Another Media and Wikipedia blackout on NYT reporter in Afghanistan
Do no harm isn't a consensus however. That language is so incredibly vague it could be taken to mean almost anything. Fred we've been over this many times on this list :) You really want to do it again? We have articles on murder victims which appear on the top of Google, keeping that fresh in the minds and at the fingertips of anyone with an interest prurient or not. You don't think that harms the remaining living family? Do no harm is an unworkable phrase. Calling Lee Majors last movie trite even with a source is harmful to his career I'm sure. -Original Message- From: Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Wed, Sep 9, 2009 2:24 pm Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Another Media and Wikipedia blackout on NYT reporter in Afghanistan We are supposed to be community-driven. Where is the community consensus on media blackouts? Link please. Will Johnson Interesting, as there is a consensus. It just isn't written down. Do no harm; any problem with that? Fred ___ 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] Another Media and Wikipedia blackout on NYT reporter in Afghanistan
Well what were the sources? Someone mentioned that there were sources, but didn't mention what. ___ 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] Another Media and Wikipedia blackout on NYT reporter in Afghanistan
Interesting here is what they say about themselves Press TV takes revolutionary steps as the first Iranian international news network, broadcasting in English on a round-the-clock basis. Our global Tehran-based headquarters is staffed with outstanding Iranian and foreign media professionals. Press TV is extensively networked with bureaus located in the world's most strategic cities. ENDQUOTE We're put in the unenviable position of determining whether this is a reliable source. They certainly seem internet-savvy from mousing around their site. Will -Original Message- From: Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Wed, Sep 9, 2009 2:50 pm Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Another Media and Wikipedia blackout on NYT reporter in Afghanistan 2009/9/9 wjhon...@aol.com: Well what were the sources? Someone mentioned that there were sources, but didn't mention what. They are all in the article history. This news article, for instance, seems reliable: http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=105379sectionid=351020403 ___ 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] Another Media and Wikipedia blackout on NYT reporter in Afghanistan
I don't think the point is needing to reach but rather it's slapping the hand that reaches. Which is a little more pro-active, and less passive sounding. Is our position to be that, with a reliable source, we need multiple sources in these cases as Fred puts it. And I really don't know what that implies. Perhaps the NYT can stop being double-faced and come clean on their exact argument for blackouts. Was this even a blackout? Or was it merely the case that there were not enough sources reporting it yet? -Original Message- From: Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net To: wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Wed, Sep 9, 2009 2:53 pm Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Another Media and Wikipedia blackout on NYT reporter in Afghanistan Once it's all over the media, it's not our problem; when it isn't, it shouldn't be in the article. - d. Yes, we simply need not reach. At least not in such instances. Fred ___ 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] Another Media and Wikipedia blackout on NYT reporter in Afghanistan
It's a bit of a mistaken idea that the issue with H bombs is their plans. The method of making an H bomb is widely known. The problem is not the blueprints. It's creating the necessary equipment in order to enrich the uranium in the first place. Not a cheap thing to do. Everyone however knows *how* to do it. The how isn't the problem. The entire argument about keeping the names of kidnap victims secret to me is flat. I do not see the logic behind the belief that it will preserve their lives in any way, for example. So even if the community were to agree to do no harm (whatever that means), the further necessary step is to show, in a concrete way, how revealing the name of a victim does harm. I'm sure you can see that. Just as I'm sure that you can see, that people other than yourself, might find the entire argument meaningless, or without adequate justification. Will Johnson -Original Message- From: Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Wed, Sep 9, 2009 3:13 pm Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Another Media and Wikipedia blackout on NYT reporter in Afghanistan Interesting here is what they say about themselves Press TV takes revolutionary steps as the first Iranian international news network, broadcasting in English on a round-the-clock basis. Our global Tehran-based headquarters is staffed with outstanding Iranian and foreign media professionals. Press TV is extensively networked with bureaus located in the world's most strategic cities. ENDQUOTE We're put in the unenviable position of determining whether this is a reliable source. They certainly seem internet-savvy from mousing around their site. Will Well, you see, with respect to news of the Taliban's doings, they probably are much more reliable then other media. They did talk to a Taliban regional commander and got the story. I'm sure the CIA took their information seriously. It is a fiction that they are not reliable as it is a fiction that a Taliban commander is a not lot more trustworthy than, say, the President of Afghanistan. However, we need not be so clever as all that. We can play dumb, and should. And users who come upon this information can chose to play along, or not. At some point, a reasonably perceptive person will realize that the information is hot, and inappropriate for inclusion in Wikipedia. Let's suppose you have in your possession exact detailed plans for a small H-bomb. Would you think you could simply put it into Wikipedia? Fred ___ 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] Another Media and Wikipedia blackout on NYT reporter in Afghanistan
-Original Message- From: geni geni...@gmail.com To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Wed, Sep 9, 2009 3:32 pm Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Another Media and Wikipedia blackout on NYT reporter in Afghanistan 2009/9/9 wjhon...@aol.com: The entire argument about keeping the names of kidnap victims secret to me is flat. I do not see the logic behind the belief that it will preserve their lives in any way, for example. Well this time around 3 civilians died. Not sure if that counts as successful. geni Those who support the idea of keeping this information secret would probably argue that more would have died if it weren't. And those who oppose it would say, See it didn't work. Something for everybody! 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] Another Media and Wikipedia blackout on NYT reporter in Afghanistan
Emily wrote: How does this discussion relate to Wikipedia? Your new nickname is Kitten with a Whip ___ 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] Google Books class action lawsuit
And I'd like to add contract violation *may* be illegal, there are loopholes large enough to swim an elephant through, which is why lawyers like contracts. No such thing as an unbreakable contract. You may have heard about these lawyers that are suing mortgage companies because they didn't explain the mortgage clearly enough ? An interesting point, most websites, don't actually make you read the license before you start using the site. I'm not even sure where on Google Books I would look to see what my allowed uses are. -Original Message- From: Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Tue, Sep 8, 2009 7:33 pm Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Google Books class action lawsuit On Sun, Sep 6, 2009 at 6:17 AM, Thomas Daltonthomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote: Contract violation *is* illegal. Actionable != illegal. The big difference is that you could walk into a police station and tell them that you broke a contract or terms of service, and they'd tell you to have a nice day. Likewise, copyright infringement is a civil matter, not a criminal one. The police do not pursue the matter, the allegedly infringed party does. Steve ___ 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] Secondary sources
What I said, and what I've been saying is that any source which is our first incident of a particular fact is a primary source, no matter what their source was. -Original Message- From: Ray Saintonge sainto...@telus.net To: wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Tue, Sep 8, 2009 8:44 pm Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Secondary sources From: wjhon...@aol.com Sure a manuscript is an unpublished primary source, or an ancient book only held in 12 libraries. However if that item is published that does not create a secondary source. And if that item includes interviews with other people, that does not make it a secondary source. How does becoming old, and being held in only 12 libraries suddenly cause a book to revert to primary source status? It seems that a lot of people are prone to gaming source levels to suit their own objectives. 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 ___ 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] Yeah, let's botspam Wikipedia. I'm sure that'll work out just...
In a message dated 9/6/2009 12:09:41 AM Pacific Daylight Time, stevag...@gmail.com writes: Just to hijack the thread...Once a site is blacklisted, is there any way to link to it? I had the situation recently that I wanted to reference a site (squidoo.com from memory) but it was blacklisted. Create a page on your own site that is merely a redirect. Will ___ 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] Google Books class action lawsuit
Charles a few things. You do not need to be in the US to read a Google Book. There is a thing called proxy or super proxy or something of that sort, which will mask where you are, and thus allow anyone to read a book as if they were in the US. Secondly I like the idea of asking Google Books to specify what sort of citation THEY would like a person to use. In lieu of that, there is a standard form of citation to include the repository in which you found the item, as well as the item itself. I think though, 99.34% of our writers probably will continue to use the simplest form possible. In fact we have a robot just to help fill out bad citations. When I find them, I tend to make these citations fuller myself, but it's a never-ending task. Will ___ 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] Google Books class action lawsuit
No people *should* break and ignore stupid rules :) Just like the pigs do. What you didn't live during the '60s ? I mean it's not like you're going to be sued by WMG for 2.4 million . W.J. fight the man ___ 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] Google Books class action lawsuit
In a message dated 9/5/2009 1:22:45 PM Pacific Daylight Time, charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com writes: Yup, there is a reason the wjhon...@aol.com mails still have a killfile chez moi. Managing to miss the point that if a link appears broken to anyone in the world it might simply get removed seems a fundamental error. It wasn't about whether I'm deprived of the info, but what form of citation is good to have on Wikipedia for this patchy service. And you seem to be missing the point, my pointy friend, that you should always cite to *your* source, not their source. If you read it on Google books, then you should credit google books. That's standard citation practice. Will the point buster 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] Google Books class action lawsuit
In a message dated 9/5/2009 2:10:48 PM Pacific Daylight Time, wikim...@inbox.org writes: But the link should go to a generic page which potentially works with more sites than just Google Books, like [[Special:BookSources]]. I like that. Make Google Books just one of the options. I can see a potential problem if we're trying to cite a convenience link directly to a page number and the book has multiple editions. We'd need to know the ISBN. If the repository is Google Books, does it actually state the ISBN or give some way to find it easily? It wouldn't be a good thing if we make it much more complex, nobody would do it, and we'd have a maintenance nightmare. ___ 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] Google Books class action lawsuit
In a message dated 9/5/2009 2:37:08 PM Pacific Daylight Time, thomas.dal...@gmail.com writes: Either Google or the publisher/author of the book you viewed. People get sued for bypassing DRM, why couldn't they be sued for bypassing restrictions on Google books? Google suffers no damage from people in Namibia viewing a book through a proxy. ___ 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] Putting some perspective on the end of Wikipedia
Tony gets the Gary Cooper award for this week. Or in particular the Meet John Doe award http://knol.google.com/k/chair-potato/gary-cooper-movies-on-youtube/hyujx7mco9jp/32 -Original Message- From: Tony Sidaway tonysida...@gmail.com To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Fri, Sep 4, 2009 4:55 pm Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Putting some perspective on the end of Wikipedia I'm undertaking to have all article and talk page semiprotections on Wikipedia reviewed. The process I'm using is to enter a brief proposal on the article talk page and contact the protecting sysop. The idea is that we discuss whether to unprotect the article or talk page and watch it vigilantly. This has already met considerable success, with more 30% of the proposals I've made this evening being enacted upon. There appear to be a lot of semiprotections that have simply been forgotten by the original sysop. I'll keep this up until I either run out of articles to review or get bored. Since there are several thousand semiprotected article the latter is more likely to happen first. Gwern Branwen wonders whether semiprotections have taken over from protections. Well one cannot really compare the current Wikipedia with the Wikipedia of 2005. Then we had no real way of dealing with biographies of living persons, and little awareness of the problem, and as for the protected articles, they numbered dozens at the most, and certainly not thousands. It's important to strike a balance. While many of the semiprotected pages may actually be redirects that we wouldn't normally want to see edited by unregistered users, I suspect many are not. It's always a good idea to review the situation regularly. ___ 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] Googley comments
In a message dated 9/3/2009 7:21:35 AM Pacific Daylight Time, bluecalioc...@me.com writes: Yeah, but see, the thing is, you don't own the blog. The person writing it does (well, technically, the blog hosting service does). They have the right to not have a comment show up. We could use the same argument on Wikipedia. --- What? That Wikipedia puts a comment on this article and someone says I love this person and we or at least someone decides that fan mail is not something we want ? I suppose there would need to be a guideline started to decide what sorts of things are OK for comments. Will ___ 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] Googley comments
In a message dated 9/3/2009 7:24:33 AM Pacific Daylight Time, majorly.w...@googlemail.com writes: Or worse, THIS PERSON IS A DIRTY PEDO1!! (or something as bad). Could be problematic for BLPs. -- We already get that. So this wouldn't change that issue. ___ 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] Googley comments
No that was someone's idea, but not mine. I like having the Make a Comment button at the bottom of each article, as this would mimic what readers are used to seeing at other sites. I don't that this would create a seperate section on the Talk page however, as I think this would clutter the Talk page with a lot of casual comments. When you read the comments on say a YouTube video, you get a lot of one-liners and people talking back and forth and so on. I don't see this as a way to improve the article, only a way to allow casual readers to make comments. It seems like just that possibly more-friendly approach might bring people into the project as editors as well. I'm not sure it would, it's a trial balloon. Will -Original Message- From: Emily Monroe bluecalioc...@me.com To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Thu, Sep 3, 2009 11:20 am Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Googley comments I suppose there would need to be a guideline started to decide what sorts of things are OK for comments. I thought we were talking about how to make the talk page more accessible... Emily On Sep 3, 2009, at 1:19 PM, wjhon...@aol.com wrote: In a message dated 9/3/2009 7:21:35 AM Pacific Daylight Time, bluecalioc...@me.com writes: Yeah, but see, the thing is, you don't own the blog. The person writing it does (well, technically, the blog hosting service does). They have the right to not have a comment show up. We could use the same argument on Wikipedia. --- What? That Wikipedia puts a comment on this article and someone says I love this person and we or at least someone decides that fan mail is not something we want ? I suppose there would need to be a guideline started to decide what sorts of things are OK for comments. Will ___ 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 ___ 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] Googley comments
I just today noticed a new interesting thing while doing a Google search. Under each result there is a cloud looking thing and if you hover it it says Comment. So I tried it. Would someone else try this Google search arsenic and old lace youtube Just like that with the quotes and all. On the first few hits you should see a result _YouTube - Arsenic And Old Lace 1/15 (1944)_ (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O6YzAfyIeAA) Would you see if you can see a comment I left there? I'm curious how this works. To make this thread on-topic, I wonder if there would be any advantage is allowing comments, separate from Talk Page comments, on our articles? I notice that many casual readers will leave comments which you can generally spot as they are not-tagged-with-a-sig and generally left at the top of the Talk page without regard for headers and so on. I just wonder if a more free-form comment section would encourage more casual readers to become casual writers. Will Johnson P.S. The only reason I picked this particular movie was because I was casually looking for more movies to add to my _Click here to see the entire list of Peter Lorre Movies on YouTube_ (http://knol.google.com/k/will-johnson/peter-lorre-movies-on-youtube/4hmquk6fx4gu/ 299) and _Click here to see the entire list of Cary Grant Movies on YouTube_ (http://knol.google.com/k/will-johnson/cary-grant-movies-on-youtube/4hmquk6fx4gu/18 8) Although obviously people are *watching* my nightly selections, they don't seem to be adding any comments ;) Maybe I'm perfect after all! ___ 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] Googley comments
I think I like Comment on this page at the bottom, but I'm hesitant to endorse that creating a section on the discussion (Talk) page. I have a reason for my hesitation. Sometimes readers comments on say Patty Hearst might be something like Oh I remember when this occurred, I was in the seventh grade and had to do a report on her... Now something like that is an interesting way for casual readers to spout off, but on a patrolled-article, comments of that sort get routinely purged as they don't really help us to improve the article. As a casual reader on OPB (other people's blogs) I get annoyed if my comment gets wiped or never appears. I wouldn't be adverse to moderated comments so we don't get lick my ass! and things like that. At any rate, anyone want to bring this to the general wiki community somewhere and gauge the reaction? Will -Original Message- From: Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Wed, Sep 2, 2009 6:58 pm Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Googley comments On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 6:07 AM, David Gerarddger...@gmail.com wrote: Yes. Wikinews does this - they have a collaboration page for editors working on the article, but a comment page specifically for readers to spout forth. Would be good. Yes, there's no good reason we should subject casual commenters to the horrors of wikitext. If they can even figure out that in order to comment they have to click a tiny little link marked Discussion (at the top of the page, not the bottom where every other site does it), then another tiny little link marked Edit this page or New section. Simple suggestion: A big green button at the bottom of every page marked Comment on this page which creates a new section on the discussion page. ___ 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] [Wikitech-l] Fwd: Wired: Wikipedia to Color Code Untrustworthy...
In a message dated 8/31/2009 11:47:04 AM Pacific Daylight Time, ft2.w...@gmail.com writes: - WikiTrust might be described as a way to see how long an edit endured and how much trust it seems to have; in most users' hands it'll be its colored red/blue so its right/wrong. - People won't think, they'll assume and rely. --- Interesting to see this by virtue of repetition in our mirrors. And our pseudo-mirrors who *don't* event state that they mirrored us. Then after a phrase has been cut from our version due to lack of source, it's put back in citing a past mirror who hasn't removed it Circular. Unsourced statement one has high trust because it's been there for two years, without a source. When a source is found contradicting it, will there be a big fight because 100 editors has passed on this and haven't reverted it! Shades of past warfare. 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] I should know this, I worked on the Wikipedia article...
Just last week I was out at a local flea market (is this the same phrase in British English?), and I asked a junk-book seller if he's ever seen the book Foster Family by Buddy Foster. I explained that Buddy was Jody Foster's older brother who had actually had a TV career several years before hers. The lady next to me wanted to argue about whether Buddy Foster had been Andy Griffith's son, she said it was Ronny Howard. That confused me because Ron Howard *was* Andy Griffith's son. The part I couldn't remember at the time was... as WELL. Because Andy had two different shows. See that's what I get for not yet having my brain implant. Will Johnson P.S. A Flea Market (at least in American English) is where people bring all their junk they want to get rid of, and spread it out for other people to buy it for very low prices. ___ 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] I should know this, I worked on the Wikipedia article...
In a message dated 8/30/2009 6:22:24 AM Pacific Daylight Time, carcharot...@googlemail.com writes: We have those. I've heard Americans refer to garage sales. We (Brits) have those sometimes, but more often we take stuff to a local charity shop, or a school's jumble sale, or stick stuff in the boot (luggage compartment) of a car, drive with others to an empty field, and have what called a car boot sale! :-) OK, a garage sale is typically where you sell your stuff from your own garage. People just park on the street, walk to your house and buy your stuff. Sometimes we'll have a neighborhood garage sale, where several people will sell their junk from one person's garage. A flea market must be like your car boot sale, but the flea market's I've been to, aren't in empty fields, they are more organized and regular. Jumble sale that's a new one, I think we'd call that a charity flea market. That is, you donate your stuff and some charity sells it. I was just thinking the other day, Is there a British-American Dictionary ? That would be a dictionary that has all these various words and phrases and their translations into British English. Often I'll come upon an article obviously written by a Brit and it will say something like At the market, her trolley bumped into a right blinker and he copped her one... (I just made that up), and it makes little sense at all to an American, unless they had watched a lot of British tele. W.J. ___ 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] British-American dictionary
Here's one http://www.travelfurther.net/dictionaries/ba-tz.htm he doesn't have Trolley though, I think that's one of the funniest ones he doesnt list To Brits a trolley is the cart you push around a grocery store. To Americans a trolley is a streetcar usually electric and old-fashioned and quaint. Advise to Brits, never say fag or fag end in the states http://www.travelfurther.net/dictionaries/ba-df.htm ___ 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] Wired: Wikipedia to Color Code Untrustworthy Text
Or if everybody knows how to game then the gaming advantage vanishes. Full disclosure can also level the field. ___ 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] Well-sourced nonsense vs. unsourced competence
How do we know who twit? or tweet? When a celebrity has an official web page, we can be fairly certain that what is posted there as the core content is by their own authority. How do you do that with tweets? In a message dated 8/29/2009 12:04:01 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, carcharot...@googlemail.com writes: What I'm wondering is whether that counts as a source, and if so what sort and how and whether it should be used (I'd say Wikipedia should hold itself aloof from gutter journalism and celebrity wranglings). ___ 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] Positives to publicity
In a message dated 8/28/2009 8:10:34 AM Pacific Daylight Time, bluecalioc...@me.com writes: Holy cow. Is Jimbo aware of this? -- Jimbo is irrelevant. We're cooking and eating him next week. W.J. ___ 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] Positives to publicity
In a message dated 8/28/2009 11:20:44 AM Pacific Daylight Time, bluecalioc...@me.com writes: When we are done, we can revert and voila! Wikipedia has food forever! - Just imagine how many Terabytes of data are hiden under the iceberg tip that is what the casual reader sees. I have yet to see any paper about say, The Twisty Turny Biography of Lincoln Evolves Over Six Years That would probably keep someone busy for a long time. There must be 25,000 revisions to Lincoln. 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] Wikien-L Bug Report
Go to https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l Sidebar: Search Posting Archives Type in whatever, click Search Result https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/mmsearch/wikien-l 404 NOT FOUND 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] Knol goes from a Wikipedia rival to a Craigslist imitator
Evidently I am now a media darling http://www.google.com/search?source=ighl=enrlz==q=knol+craigslist The oddest part of this entire experience (other than the fact that it shot me up to over 1,000 views a day), is how much of this news is either simple reposting of titles with link, or bloggers copying each other in a sort of feeding frenzy. I've never personally become involved in the blogging world. I would think that a person would want original content, not merely be blogger number 87 on the list of people blogging about the really important news like me selling a pair of speakers ;) I'm world famous! I get more views than President uh... Harding... or something. Ok maybe Zachary Taylor, at any rate I'm famous! Maybe I'll write a knol about it. Sort of keep the cycle churning. How do you do that exactly? I've never figured out completely how to be a media whore, but I'm willing to learn. Any whores want to teach me tricks? Will Media Whore Wannabe 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] How to Not Bite was Positives to publicity
Welcome Wagon, we used to have one didn't we? I don't know what happened to it, it seems like stale news. Free Tutor Program - new users can choose to sign up for tutoring for $10 an hour... ok or free whatever. Have you been bitten? Are you frustrated? Do you get laid often enough? (ok scratch that) Sign Up Now, Not Available in Stores, Supplies are Running Out - for Wiki Tutoring! ___ 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] Positives to publicity
The last book of Wikipedia was too fluffy. I prefer reality. Gritty, in the trenches, kick sand in your face, thumb wrestle to the death! Tabloid style. -Original Message- From: FT2 ft2.w...@gmail.com To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Fri, Aug 28, 2009 2:13 pm Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Positives to publicity I'm serious. FT2 On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 10:09 PM, wjhon...@aol.com wrote: Only if I get to write the Drama chapter. -Original Message- From: FT2 ft2.w...@gmail.com To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Fri, Aug 28, 2009 1:40 pm Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Positives to publicity I'd be all up for writing a wikibook introduction to Wikipedia. Anyone else interested? :) FT2 On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 9:24 PM, Keegan Paul kgnp...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 1:25 PM, wjhon...@aol.com wrote: Just imagine how many Terabytes of data are hiden under the iceberg tip that is what the casual reader sees. I have yet to see any paper about say, The Twisty Turny Biography of Lincoln Evolves Over Six Years 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 This is what I consider to be the exact point for starting this thread. People truly do have no clue about how to edit or the community and how it functions. Actually, I don't think the functionality of the community can be described. Folks are amazed to be told that they can edit willy nilly, make an account and all that. For all our popularity worldwide the vast majority of the consumers have no idea (I realize I'm preaching to the choir) until these news stories invoke interest. So, what to do about it? How to not bite? This that and the other are great questions to mull over. I have no answers myself, Wikipedia just kind of happens. ~Keegan -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Keegan ___ 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 ___ 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 ___ 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] How to Not Bite was Positives to publicity
Maybe that was the name, I can't remember. I think they tried to welcome me once, and I put my boots up on the table, pulled the cigar out of my mouth and said, Make my day fat boy. Or it's possible that was a movie I saw. -Original Message- From: Emily Monroe bluecalioc...@me.com To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Fri, Aug 28, 2009 2:50 pm Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] How to Not Bite was Positives to publicity The Welcome Wagon, like Esperanza, got taken out back and shot a few years ago when we decided to remove traces of perceived social networking in late '06 early '07. What was the Welcome Wagon, and how is it different from the Welcoming Committee? Emily On Aug 28, 2009, at 3:35 PM, Keegan Paul wrote: The Welcome Wagon, like Esperanza, got taken out back and shot a few years ago when we decided to remove traces of perceived social networking in late '06 early '07. The Birthday crew is really all that remains. On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 3:31 PM, wjhon...@aol.com wrote: Welcome Wagon, we used to have one didn't we? I don't know what happened to it, it seems like stale news. Free Tutor Program - new users can choose to sign up for tutoring for $10 an hour... ok or free whatever. Have you been bitten? Are you frustrated? Do you get laid often enough? (ok scratch that) Sign Up Now, Not Available in Stores, Supplies are Running Out - for Wiki Tutoring! ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Keegan ___ 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 ___ 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] Positives to publicity
I... friggin... love it. And I rarely love anything at all. I mean I don't even love Cheetos, although I like it. But this page you linked is the first time I've ever encountered anyone doing this. It's the wave of the future! I wish I had the technical ability to do it, or the time. I'm like one of those zombies in the Bela Lugosi White Zombie (1932) which I just linked up today (shameless plug shameless plug) Chairpotato's Night at the Movies! http://knol.google.com/k/chair-potato/chairpotatos-night-at-the-movies/hyujx7mco9jp/23 Just look at their faces as they push that grind-stone around and around and around. I'm like that. Only with a whip. W.J. -Original Message- From: Andrew Gray andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Fri, Aug 28, 2009 4:24 pm Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Positives to publicity 2009/8/28 wjhon...@aol.com: Just imagine how many Terabytes of data are hiden under the iceberg tip that is what the casual reader sees. I have yet to see any paper about say, The Twisty Turny Biography of Lincoln Evolves Over Six Years There's something related that's been floating around for a few years - it's a bit more lighthearted, but it's pretty interesting nonetheless. http://jonudell.net/udell/gems/umlaut/umlaut.html -- - Andrew Gray andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk ___ 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] So, what is the deal with flagged revisions?
Lack of visible reward. Yes I think that's is it, or part of it anyway. It's why I've been fixated at Knol for a while. Wanting to see my own name in lights. Too bad Wikipedia couldn't have a sister project for publishing scholarly papers. Or could we? Or do we? Will Johnson -Original Message- From: David Goodman dgoodma...@gmail.com To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Fri, Aug 28, 2009 7:08 pm Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] So, what is the deal with flagged revisions? the lack of visible reward will have the same effect on them as on new contributors. David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 2:15 PM, David Gerarddger...@gmail.com wrote: 2009/8/28 Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com: 2009/8/28 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com: Protection is a failure of the wiki model in the first place. Discussion is a poor substitute for editing. Edit warring is a failure of the wiki model. We use protection to force people into a discussion model which works better in those situations. Yeah, it's all imperfect. What I mean is, that's a bit of process for a particular purpose, and if we need it with flagged revs as we do with full protection, then we can reintroduce it when we do. I think the lack of visible reward will be helpful in dealing with everyday edit warriors. (If people with the reviewer bit edit-war with it, one or both is likely to get a strong word at the very least.) - 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 ___ 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] The best coverage yet of the living bios rule
Dude! Conspirapedia is not taken! What a fantabulous website that would be Get on it. ___ 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] How to Not Bite was Positives to publicity
I don't use a signature. Blame the AOL programming bastards for spamming my email. -Original Message- From: Soxred93 soxre...@gmail.com To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Fri, Aug 28, 2009 8:19 pm Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] How to Not Bite was Positives to publicity Nice signature... I found this in my spam box. :) -X! On Aug 28, 2009, at 4:31 PM, wjhon...@aol.com wrote: Welcome Wagon, we used to have one didn't we? I don't know what happened to it, it seems like stale news. ___ 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] Secondary sources
I don't equate second hand witness to secondary source. A primary source is the first source we have that describes a certain event. Matilda was baptised in the Church of St Mary last Easter is a primary source if the author isn't merely parroting some other known source. The author doesn't need to be an eye-witness and in fact can be parroting some earlier now-lost source and *still* be a primary source. Do you agree with that last statement? The first source we know about, that we still have, is a primary source, no matter how the information came to the writer. -Original Message- From: David Goodman dgoodma...@gmail.com To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Tue, Aug 25, 2009 7:52 pm Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Secondary sources Yes, chronicles are accepted as primary sources, because there is nothing further back from them--they serve essentially the same function as newspapers. Obviously, they have to be used with a good deal of interpretation,just as newspapers. I don't believe everything in a newspaper happened just as they describe it either. However, the ASC, as many other chronicles, also serve as secondary sources, commenting on the events they describe: for example, the famous analysis of K. William I at 1087 is a secondary evaluation, more of less like a modern editorial in a newspaper, which is a secondary source, David Goodman, Ph.D, M .L.S. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 10:24 PM, wjhon...@aol.com wrote: I disagree that editing turns a primary source into a secondary source. And I disagree that we make that distinction in-project. I also disagree that newspaper articles are secondary sources. Some are, some aren't. Is the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle a primary source? Yes. Do you believe that every event there described is being described by an eye-witness? No. In fact it's possibly doubtful whether any of it is eye-witness testimony. Being an eye-witness is not what makes an article primary or secondary. -Original Message- From: David Goodman dgoodma...@gmail.com To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Tue, Aug 25, 2009 3:42 pm Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Secondary sources Wikipedia is not the same as the academic world. From the point of view of an historian analyzing sources, a newspaper is considered a primary source, and you will find them so classified in any manual on doing research in history or any listing of sources at the end of an historical book or article. From the POV of Wikipedia, we've been considering it a secondary source, which is the way most people think of it. what we call primary sources: is the archival material that an historian also calls primary sources, but normally lists separately in a bibliography. if the reporter's notebooks are preserved, that's also a primary source. The analysis of the differences between the primary sources20in attempting to reconstruct what happened is what historians do. The articles monographs other historians publish giving their analysis is what they consider the secondary sources. Similarly, in science, the actual archival primary sources are, in a sense, the lab notebooks--and they are preserved as such, for patents and the like. But a primary scientific paper is the one reporting the work, and a secondary paper is a review. The Wikipedia definition is a term of art at Wikipedia, used because we need some way of differentiating between material which is edited, and that which is not. The primary sources are the unedited reports. As a newspaper is edited, its a secondary source. David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 6:30 PM, wjhon...@aol.com wrote: Sure a manuscript is an unpublished primary source, or an ancient book only held in 12 libraries. However if that item is published that does not create a secondary source. And if that item includes interviews with other people, that does not make it a secondary source. A primary source is merely the first time a given situation is made 0Ato exist. Even if King Yog took notes before his interview with me, and had them typed up and collated by someone else and then read them to me, and I copied them out and published them, I'm not creating a teritary source out of all that. =0 A Everything that comes before primary is merely part of the process of creating a source. Just because there are levels and layers of information doesn't push the source into being secondary or teritiary. The notes are primary, the typed version is primary, the manuscript is primary, and the final published version is all still primary. I think I wrote a monograph on this a while ago when someone asked me if a school transcript is a secondary source (it's not) their reasoning was that it's built from various primary sources which are the grading worksheets
Re: [WikiEN-l] And other observations...
wiki doesn't mean quick to me That derivation I think is pretty obscure. To me when someone says Wiki whatever or wiki whatever for that matter, it means collaborative editing. W.J. -Original Message- From: stevertigo stv...@gmail.com To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Mon, Aug 24, 2009 9:31 pm Subject: [WikiEN-l] And other observations... A success Wikipedia has thus far been, though issues there are still. Observations, on these issues I will make. 1) Wikipedia is a collaborative website that tries to be an encyclopedia. Wikipedia's got a funny name: It was named by the founders after the technology it was based on, rather than the philosophy it was based on - openness, egalitarianism, honest and honorable conduct, etc. 2) Thus the name wiki itself is misapplied to en.w.pedia Wiki is a technological concept. Wikipedia is an egalitarian one. Though people have for years tried to turn wiki into a larger, more philosophical term, it just doesn't want to go there - wiki ultimately doesn't mean anything more than quick. We want Wikipedia to be more than just a quickie resource. 3) Wiki facilitates easy editing, but then not everything we do is editing. In fact the main thing Wikipedia does is just exist - existing in a digital form at a free/open-access online database for ease of reading/viewing. Wiki makes lots of things easy - some of which are conducive to making an encyclopedia. The wiki made vandalism easy too, but we learned that collaboration itself could deal with that. ( 3b) (It's the infrastructure/databases/operatingsystems/browsers themselves that facilitate this ease - not just wiki. Still, we don't call ourselves the inter...pedia or the web..pedia for a reason: Those domain names were already taken. ;-) ) -Stevertigo ___ 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] Secondary sources
In a message dated 8/25/2009 6:50:03 AM Pacific Daylight Time, andrewrtur...@googlemail.com writes: Not quite. The first publication can be a secondary source, for instance if the New York Times publishes an article on a car accident. A primary source is something like a census return or, in this case, a witness statement. That is not correct Andrew. Each source must be published. Typically witness statements are not themselves published. You are confusing first-hand experience with primary source. A primary souce, even a census return is not first-hand, it's merely first publication. If you took you example to extreme, then there would be no primary sources at all. W.J. ___ 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] New York Times: Wikipedia to Limit Changes to Articles on People
In a message dated 8/25/2009 11:12:03 AM Pacific Daylight Time, andrewrtur...@googlemail.com writes: I had an interesting conversation with a senior BBC exec on this the other day. Apparently, their lawyers aren't sufficiently comfortable with the copyright violation checking on Wikimedia Commons to be able to rely on free photographs, so they don't use them. Bizarrely they'd rather pay someone for an image, and hence be able to sue them if they had copyright problems, than get it for free. Which brings to mind an interesting business proposition. --- Fork! Fork! spoon? Here at um wikifreeverified.com we ensure you that all our content has been triple-checked by expert triple-checkers to ensure that it's all free free free! To use that is. For your ease of mind you will pay us $1000 per year plus 25 cents per image. ___ 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] Online encyclopedia of life reaches 150,000 species
So what was so special about this wiki or pseudo-wiki that it became successful ? -Original Message- From: Keith Old keith...@gmail.com To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Tue, Aug 25, 2009 2:00 pm Subject: [WikiEN-l] Online encyclopedia of life reaches 150,000 species G'day folks, Phys Org reports that the Online Encyclopedia of Life has reached 150,000 species. http://www.physorg.com/news170396645.html The Encyclopedia of Life, an online project launched in 2007 with the aim of creating a webpage on every known animal and plant species, has reached 150,000 entries in its second year. * * * In a statement marking the anniversary, the collaborative project said close to two million people from more than 200 countries had contributed to the website (www.eol.org). Users can create a page that describes a plant or animal with text, images or both. The information is then submitted to experts, verified and made available for free. The project's creators hope to accumulate a page for every 1.8 million animal and plant species http://www.physorg.com/tags/plant+species/ known to scientists over 10 years. More in article. This would compare well with Wikipedia's progress over a similar period. Regards Keith * ___ 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] Secondary sources
Sure a manuscript is an unpublished primary source, or an ancient book only held in 12 libraries. However if that item is published that does not create a secondary source. And if that item includes interviews with other people, that does not make it a secondary source. A primary source is merely the first time a given situation is made to exist. Even if King Yog took notes before his interview with me, and had them typed up and collated by someone else and then read them to me, and I copied them out and published them, I'm not creating a teritary source out of all that. Everything that comes before primary is merely part of the process of creating a source. Just because there are levels and layers of information doesn't push the source into being secondary or teritiary. The notes are primary, the typed version is primary, the manuscript is primary, and the final published version is all still primary. I think I wrote a monograph on this a while ago when someone asked me if a school transcript is a secondary source (it's not) their reasoning was that it's built from various primary sources which are the grading worksheets from various teachers. However my reasoning is that all of the preparation is merely the necessary steps to create the source. It's instructive to consider whether making images available online of a primary source creates a secondary source. How about making minor editing corrections? At what level of modification of a primary source, do you create a secondary source? Formatting a film for TV size doesn't suddenly turn the film from primary to secondary. W.J. -Original Message- From: Andrew Turvey andrewrtur...@googlemail.com To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Tue, Aug 25, 2009 11:16 am Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Secondary sources Are we talking at cross purposes here? Primary sources, secondary sources and tertiary sources are phrases that are regularly used by historians and other academics whose use considerable pre-date Wikipedia. Unpublished primary sources are regularly used in academic research. - wjhon...@aol.com wrote: From: wjhon...@aol.com To: wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Tuesday, 25 August, 2009 19:01:49 GMT +00:00 GMT Britain, Ireland, Portugal Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Secondary sources In a message dated 8/25/2009 6:50:03 AM Pacific Daylight Time, andrewrtur...@googlemail.com writes: Not quite. The first publication can be a secondary source, for instance if the New York Times publishes an article on a car accident. A primary source is something like a census return or, in this case, a witness statement. That is not correct Andrew. Each source must be published. Typically witness statements are not themselves published. You are confusing first-hand experience with primary source. A primary souce, even a census return is not first-hand, it's merely first publication. If you took you example to extreme, then there would be no primary sources at all. W.J. ___ 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 ___ 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] Secondary sources
I disagree that editing turns a primary source into a secondary source. And I disagree that we make that distinction in-project. I also disagree that newspaper articles are secondary sources. Some are, some aren't. Is the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle a primary source? Yes. Do you believe that every event there described is being described by an eye-witness? No. In fact it's possibly doubtful whether any of it is eye-witness testimony. Being an eye-witness is not what makes an article primary or secondary. -Original Message- From: David Goodman dgoodma...@gmail.com To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Tue, Aug 25, 2009 3:42 pm Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Secondary sources Wikipedia is not the same as the academic world. From the point of view of an historian analyzing sources, a newspaper is considered a primary source, and you will find them so classified in any manual on doing research in history or any listing of sources at the end of an historical book or article. From the POV of Wikipedia, we've been considering it a secondary source, which is the way most people think of it. what we call primary sources: is the archival material that an historian also calls primary sources, but normally lists separately in a bibliography. if the reporter's notebooks are preserved, that's also a primary source. The analysis of the differences between the primary sources20in attempting to reconstruct what happened is what historians do. The articles monographs other historians publish giving their analysis is what they consider the secondary sources. Similarly, in science, the actual archival primary sources are, in a sense, the lab notebooks--and they are preserved as such, for patents and the like. But a primary scientific paper is the one reporting the work, and a secondary paper is a review. The Wikipedia definition is a term of art at Wikipedia, used because we need some way of differentiating between material which is edited, and that which is not. The primary sources are the unedited reports. As a newspaper is edited, its a secondary source. David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 6:30 PM, wjhon...@aol.com wrote: Sure a manuscript is an unpublished primary source, or an ancient book only held in 12 libraries. However if that item is published that does not create a secondary source. And if that item includes interviews with other people, that does not make it a secondary source. A primary source is merely the first time a given situation is made to exist. Even if King Yog took notes before his interview with me, and had them typed up and collated by someone else and then read them to me, and I copied them out and published them, I'm not creating a teritary source out of all that. =0 A Everything that comes before primary is merely part of the process of creating a source. Just because there are levels and layers of information doesn't push the source into being secondary or teritiary. The notes are primary, the typed version is primary, the manuscript is primary, and the final published version is all still primary. I think I wrote a monograph on this a while ago when someone asked me if a school transcript is a secondary source (it's not) their reasoning was that it's built from various primary sources which are the grading worksheets from various teachers. However my reasoning is that all of the preparation is merely the necessary steps to create the source. It's instructive to consider whether making images available online of a primary source creates a secondary source. How about making minor editing corrections? At what level of modification of a primary source, do you create a secondary source? Formatting a film for TV size doesn't suddenly turn the film from primary to secondary. W.J. -Original Message- From: Andrew Turvey andrewrtur...@googlemail.com To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Tue, Aug 25, 2009 11:16 am Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Secondary sources Are we talking at cross purposes here? Primary sources, secondary sources and tertiary sources are phrases that are regularly used by historians and other academics whose use considerable pre-date Wikipedia. Unpublished primary sources are regularly used in academic research. - wjhon...@aol.com wrote: From: wjhon...@aol.com To: wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Tuesday, 25 August, 2009 19:01:49 GMT +00:00 GMT Britain, Ireland, Portugal Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Secondary sources In a message dated 8/25/2009 6:50:03 AM Pacific Daylight Time, andrewrtur...@googlemail.com writes: Not quite. The first publication can be a secondary source, for instance if the New York Times publishes an article on a car accident. A primary source is something like a census return or, in this case, a witness statement.
Re: [WikiEN-l] Annoying exonyms (was: hatnotes)
In a message dated 8/24/2009 10:47:15 AM Pacific Daylight Time, geni...@gmail.com writes: Wikipedia with it's surprisingly structured entries is likely to be used as a significant stepping stone in this direction. What is the name of every celebrity born in Nebraska on May 15th? Is that possible today without human intervention? W.J. ** A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy steps! (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1222846709x1201493018/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072amp;hmpgID=115amp; bcd=JulystepsfooterNO115) ___ 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] Annoying exonyms (was: hatnotes)
In a message dated 8/24/2009 12:23:07 PM Pacific Daylight Time, geni...@gmail.com writes: Birth dates and locations tend to be fairly structured within articles so are fairly easy to get. Dealing with a term as vauge as celebrity make the task impossible even with human intervention. Hmm I'm not sure I can agree with that. Is celebrity really that ambiguous. I make a list of 100 Nebraskans born on May 15th. I would think we could all agree on at least ten of them as celebrities and probably 10 or 20 as not. It's that grey-area where some local newscaster is a celebrity to some and not to others. What about movie stars ? That's not quite as vague. Can we do that today without human intervention? People who have been in a film? Or is that too vague ** A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy steps! (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1222846709x1201493018/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072amp;hmpgID=115amp; bcd=JulystepsfooterNO115) ___ 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] Annoying exonyms (was: hatnotes)
In a message dated 8/22/2009 8:59:52 PM Pacific Daylight Time, kgnp...@gmail.com writes: Right well, I'll start brushing up on my Breton and by the time I get around to learning Vietnamese the sun will have obliterated the earth and Wikipedia as we know it.-- I will wager $100 that Wikipedia will be gone long before the sun turns into a Red Giant. W.J. ___ 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] Annoying exonyms (was: hatnotes)
In a message dated 8/22/2009 11:24:34 PM Pacific Daylight Time, bodnot...@gmail.com writes: I do sometimes get into the mindset of thinking everything I do with Wikipedia might be a waste of time because I envision it collapsing, dying, being fatally attacked or somesuch. The content of Wikipedia, like malaria, is here to stay. It's been copied so many times by now, that nothing can eradicate it. Wikipedia itself however probably won't live more than ten more years at the most :) In twenty years, we will live inside the matrix 24-7 with constant streaming implants so there won't be an Internet per se, and computing power will be distributed all-wetware-all-the-time. After all any million step computation can be done one step at a time by a million neurons, you don't even have to be in a waking state. Hey that's gives me an idea! I'd better get to work right away on building a wetware bot attack plan. W.J. ___ 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] SmartWikiSearch, a similarity search engine for Wikipedia
In a message dated 8/23/2009 4:53:57 AM Pacific Daylight Time, brewh...@freenet.edmonton.ab.ca writes: The search for bees and flowers suggests pollination. I do not see anything mindless about that. That is a human association - You're not understanding me. An article discussing bees and mentioning that they pollinate flowers IS a human association. I didn't say it wasn't. However the meta-network of *all* such associations to the nth degree of relatedness is not something a human can encompass in one bite. That's one thing. What I was stating is that this meta-network itself, is created by a computer algorithm, which ITSELF has no mind. It has no idea what the terms mean, or refer to, or imply. It only knows that they are associated in some way. It creates this meta-network and ranks the associations in a mindless way, i.e. without comprehension. That's what I meant. W.J. ___ 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] Flagged Revisions
In a message dated 8/23/2009 6:07:11 AM Pacific Daylight Time, brewh...@freenet.edmonton.ab.ca writes: http://www.google.ca/search?hl=enq=wikihow+enlargement+penismeta= It was there on link six. It's a bit rough to complain about Wikihow in this regard. It's quite likely that any Ads of this sort come either from vandals or from some kind of affiliate network. Your link does not work for me. What you should do, if you want to produce evidence, is actually copy the URL for the exact link. Google searches change for different people, and over time. Will ___ 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] Policies, notability et al, was Request to Wikipedians for BB...
Steve, news articles *in general* are primary sources. Here is how you can tell: Is what I'm reading the first time someone has published what I'm reading? So and so was hit by a car today -- primary source, first time published. Secondary sources collate multiple primary sources, any multiple primary sources. When a source uses some primary and some secondary sources, I personally would still call that secondary. Marion Davies claimed in tape interviews that she was born in 1905, but a search of relevant public records indicates she was born in 1897. HOWEVER, when we had the discussion years ago about what a tertiary source should be in Wiki-speak, we almost always only referred to encyclopedias and their ilk, which collate multiple secondary sources. It's hard to come up with another example of what a tertiary source would be, and I personally don't like the term, but there you go. 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] Annoying exonyms (was: hatnotes)
In a message dated 8/23/2009 1:59:04 AM Pacific Daylight Time, bodnot...@gmail.com writes: Do you think it would be hopelessly superseded by brain implants that give us access to all knowledge all of the time? Who's to say that that knowledge wouldn't be provided by Wikipedia? -- You silly goose. Don't you realize that when we all have brain implants that retain a quintabyte that the internet won't exist at all. We'll be in constant streaming twitter mode all the time. There won't be articles per se, and you won't get input from a single page, you'll get continuous input from a million sources simultaneously in twitt-bits. W.J. ___ 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] SmartWikiSearch, a similarity search engine for Wikipedia
In a message dated 8/22/2009 10:56:20 AM Pacific Daylight Time, dger...@gmail.com writes: Because there is no need to determine what the meaning of the particular term or keyword is, the pages it returns generally deal with the same concept or concepts that you entered. For instance, if you enter Flower and Bee, it will find pages where these two concepts overlap - those are pages about pollination. --- This seems big to me. It's creating, in a mindless way, semantic relationships between keywords. This has been thought about for a long time it seems, but no one has really solved the annoying issue of how to avoid most false positives. I don't think you can avoid them all because English is so ambiguous but the use of cross-links is a major leap forward. Very few people are going to link-up concepts that are basely minor, but scan all pages for the links highlights the semantic connetions between concepts. You could even take it one step further, use the semantic web to point out semantic connections that are not directly obvious. Such as a leap from beekeeper to honeycomb. Try to do that using Google. You get thousands of bad hits before you get the one good one. Search for Hillbillies and Movie, using a semantic web you get the exact hit you want. W.J. ___ 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] Annoying hatnotes
In a message dated 8/22/2009 12:42:20 PM Pacific Daylight Time, carcharot...@googlemail.com writes: *a département of France *a French river *a French city *the French name for Vienna - The Council of Vienne. Also apparently Vienne is a surname, I'm sure we can find SOME obscure person named Vienne 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] Annoying exonyms (was: hatnotes)
In a message dated 8/22/2009 6:44:23 PM Pacific Daylight Time, stv...@gmail.com writes: How is it claimed that we are bound to English spelling only, and yet permit all the Nordic, Germanic, and French characters* - few of which most *English* speakers know the pronunciation of. (*?) Diacritical marks are evil and must be destroyed. In addition the period after initials is redundant and evil (and must be destroyed). The usage Dr Smith, M.D. is silly and evil and must be destroyed. The insistence by highbrows to spell re-su-me (your job history) with a diacritical mark is excessively evil and not only must be destroyed but all those who espouse this cause must be destroyed as well (and their families, in-laws and pets, especially cats). How much sugar is in this Jamba Juice I'm drinking W.J. ___ 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] Annoying exonyms (was: hatnotes)
In a message dated 8/22/2009 8:04:51 PM Pacific Daylight Time, carcharot...@googlemail.com writes: Will, is this genealogy webpage reliable at all? http://gilles.maillet.free.fr/histoire/famille_bourgogne/famille_vienne.htm Well one thing I always caution people is, don't rely on websites of modern compilations *if* they don't provide sources. So let's check first the usual suspects and we can see right off that a large portion of this seems to be pulled in-tact from E.S. (III:452) If you want to rely on a site that I won't R.O.S. (revert on site) I'd recommend genealogics. We can see that Leo van de Pas (operator of genealogics) has extracted all or most of this line, for example see Hughes de Vienne, Sire de St George here : http://www.genealogics.org/getperson.php?personID=I00164470tree=LEO You can follow this line back or forth and see what E.S. says or doesn't about it. That would be a good starting point. BUT (here you see my big but), always always check what source Leo has stated, at the bottom of each entry. Some sources like Paget are notoriously unreliable. 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] Motion To Disqualify a Candidate if it suppliedmisinformation...
In a message dated 8/21/2009 10:40:47 AM Pacific Daylight Time, gwe...@gmail.com writes: Only if you deny it '*with extreme predjudice*'. And then jump on top of the podium and begin machine-gunning down Congressmen. - While wearing a prom dress. W.J. ___ 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] Motion To Disqualify a Candidate if it suppliedmisinformation...
In a message dated 8/21/2009 11:45:13 AM Pacific Daylight Time, bluecalioc...@me.com writes: Why not a wedding dress? - You may be too young to remember that it was the Homecoming Queen whose Got A Gun I did it... for Johnny! 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] Flagged Revisions
-Original Message-
From: Jay Litwyn brewh...@freenet.edmonton.ab.ca
To: wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Sent: Fri, Aug 21, 2009 4:06 pm
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Flagged Revisions
Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote in message
news:a4359dff0908210918w6ad2a4a5q14a3fc036fa31...@mail.gmail.com...
2009/8/21 Ray Saintonge sainto...@telus.net:
What's so bad about encouraging howto information? I'm sure that a
lot
of people would find such practical information very useful.
Sure, it would be very useful, but it isn't within Wikipedia's scope.
Perhaps a new WikiHowTo project? (Several such projects already exist:
http://www.google.com/search?q=wikihowto Maybe no need for a new
Wikimedia one.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/template:howto {{howto}} DID contain links
to
http://www.wikihow.com and http://howto.wikia.com/ One is a sister
project.
The other is more closely allied with google and penis enlargement
product
comparisons. I also found either a performance or a connectivity
difference.
In specific instances, like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kombucha ,
both
could be in the external links. It seems that we are now recommending
wikiversity and wikibooks for training.
--
Jay you seem to be under the assumption that Wikia is a sister.
It might be more appropriate to call Wikia your father's new wife or
your first cousin from that part of your family that your family
doesn't talk to anymore.
As far as wiki.howto.com being called a penis enlargement site that's
pretty offensive isn't it? What's the point of that sort of rant? The
front page of it, has links to I suppose recommended articles and none
of them are about penis enlargement.
W.J.
___
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] Annoying hatnotes
Here is what I think you mean. In a situation where there are only two items that might be confused with each other, should we have a page for those? Or should we, at the top of each item, merely point at the other item? That's what it sounds like to me. And in that situation, where we have two things both called say White Glove, we should just point at each of them, from the top of the other article, thus not have a disamg page to list two items. Will Johnson -Original Message- From: Carcharoth carcharot...@googlemail.com To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Thu, Aug 20, 2009 2:35 am Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Annoying hatnotes OK. I'll break it down: 1) Do you accept that trivial disambiguations can be unencyclopedic? Carcharoth On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 2:59 AM, wjhon...@aol.com wrote: I have no idea what you just ask. That's a lot of jargon for one question. -Original Message- From: Carcharoth carcharot...@googlemail.com To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Wed, Aug 19, 2009 1:06 pm Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Annoying hatnotes Will, simple question: do you accept that trivial disambiguations can be unencyclopedic and give the wrong impression, and if so, is having a neutral dab hatlink better than a jarring note being sounded at the t op of a page, the first thing the reader will read after the title? OK, that was a long simple question... Carcharoth On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 8:47 PM, wjhon...@aol.com wrote: This is how I do it. If in Plankton we have only one other thing named planton, then we shouldn't have a disamg page just for two items. That seems overkill. So in that case SB_Plankton makes sense. If however in Bob Jones we have 15 people, 3 things, and 2 places named Bob Jones then it makes sense to have a disamg page. I.E. there's a trade-off in having too many clicks, where it is? two items? or three? W.J In a message dated 8/19/2009 7:37:26 AM Pacific Daylight Time, carcharot...@googlemail.com writes: If there really is a chance that people will search for plankton in an attempt to find out about the SB character, then the hatnote should be neutral and direct people to a disambiguation page (for other things named plankton, see here). And I don't care if that disambiguation page only has two entries. That is an acceptable trade-off to having a spongebob squarepants character name jarring people's reading experience by being placed at the top of an unrelated article. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list wikie...@list s.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 ___ 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 ___ 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] Policies, notability et al, was Request to Wikipedians for BBC...
I submit that there is no such language in any of our policies. If there is, then whoever wrote it has no clue what we meant when we were discussing tertiary sources many years ago. Tertiary sources are just summaries of notable secondary sources. So they quite obviously provide notability, in fact perhaps the ultimate form of it, trouncing secondaries quite roundly, since they in-fact pick the most notable topics to report out of those! Will Johnson In a message dated 8/19/2009 2:16:36 AM Pacific Daylight Time, surreptitious.wikiped...@googlemail.com writes: The thrust of the argument against tertiary sources is this: Third party sources don't provide any evidence of notability unless they contain some sort of commentary on their subject matter, othewise they are classed as tertiary sources. ___ 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] Annoying hatnotes
This is how I do it. If in Plankton we have only one other thing named planton, then we shouldn't have a disamg page just for two items. That seems overkill. So in that case SB_Plankton makes sense. If however in Bob Jones we have 15 people, 3 things, and 2 places named Bob Jones then it makes sense to have a disamg page. I.E. there's a trade-off in having too many clicks, where it is? two items? or three? W.J In a message dated 8/19/2009 7:37:26 AM Pacific Daylight Time, carcharot...@googlemail.com writes: If there really is a chance that people will search for plankton in an attempt to find out about the SB character, then the hatnote should be neutral and direct people to a disambiguation page (for other things named plankton, see here). And I don't care if that disambiguation page only has two entries. That is an acceptable trade-off to having a spongebob squarepants character name jarring people's reading experience by being placed at the top of an unrelated article. ___ 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] Annoying hatnotes
So you repeat what I say and then say you're not repeating what I said, and then repeat it There's an issue here that you're arguing against your very own position. I'm not sure you are understanding what I said. W.J. ___ 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] Annoying hatnotes
I have no idea what you just ask. That's a lot of jargon for one question. -Original Message- From: Carcharoth carcharot...@googlemail.com To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Wed, Aug 19, 2009 1:06 pm Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Annoying hatnotes Will, simple question: do you accept that trivial disambiguations can be unencyclopedic and give the wrong impression, and if so, is having a neutral dab hatlink better than a jarring note being sounded at the top of a page, the first thing the reader will read after the title? OK, that was a long simple question... Carcharoth On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 8:47 PM, wjhon...@aol.com wrote: This is how I do it. If in Plankton we have only one other thing named planton, then we shouldn't have a disamg page just for two items. That seems overkill. So in that case SB_Plankton makes sense. If however in Bob Jones we have 15 people, 3 things, and 2 places named Bob Jones then it makes sense to have a disamg page. I.E. there's a trade-off in having too many clicks, where it is? two items? or three? W.J In a message dated 8/19/2009 7:37:26 AM Pacific Daylight Time, carcharot...@googlemail.com writes: If there really is a chance that people will search for plankton in an attempt to find out about the SB character, then the hatnote should be neutral and direct people to a disambiguation page (for other things named plankton, see here). And I don't care if that disambiguation page only has two entries. That is an acceptable trade-off to having a spongebob squarepants character name jarring people's reading experience by being placed at the top of an unrelated article. ___ 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 ___ 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] Policies, notability et al, was Request to Wikipedians for BBC...
The way it was discussed in-project a teritiary source summarizes several secondary sources into one cohesive article. Let us first set-aside those works calling themselves encyclopedias when they are really specialist works that pretend to cover a subject area thoroughly which is a different animal altogether. Examining true encyclopedia articles, we can find an article on say Mary, Queen of Scots which itself may cite seven or ten other secondary works, as it's basis. Each of those works may be a few hundred pages long, but the enclyclopedia article is only perhaps a thousand words. So a true tertiary work, selects and summarizes (presumably the best) multiple-secondary-works per article. This was the in-project jargon. This is not in-general how a tertiary work is necessarily defined outside the project. I'm not familiar with slashdot and digg, but it seems they would, at least, not synthesize. Synthesis is a necessary part, in my mind, to the creation of a true encyclopedia article. All tertiary works are encyclopedias. Not all encyclopedias are tertiary works, since the word is bastardized by some. W.J. -Original Message- From: Jussi-Ville Heiskanen cimonav...@gmail.com To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Wed, Aug 19, 2009 4:53 pm Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Policies, notability et al, was Request to Wikipedians for BBC... wjhon...@aol.com wrote: I submit that there is no such language in any of our policies. If there is, then whoever wrote it has no clue what we meant when we were discussing tertiary sources many years ago. Tertiary sources are just summaries of notable secondary sources. So they quite obviously provide notability, in fact perhaps the ultimate form of it, trouncing secondaries quite roundly, since they in-fact pick the most notable topics to report out of those! Will Johnson Out of curiosity... would you class Slashdot and Digg as tertiary sources ? Yours, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen ___ 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
