Re: [WikiEN-l] Well-sourced nonsense vs. unsourced competence
On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 10:19 AM, FT2ft2.w...@gmail.com wrote: Actually is there a reason why refs couldn't have a separate section? People with a view on this may like to contribute to: http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposal:Move_references_out_of_the_code ___ 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
Bod Notbodbodnot...@gmail.com wrote: People with a view on this may like to contribute to: http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposal:Move_references_out_of_the_code Good link! Note I've proposed a move on the talk page. -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
Re: [WikiEN-l] Well-sourced nonsense vs. unsourced competence
David Goodmandgoodma...@gmail.com wrote: From the excellent little book Keywords in Evolutionary Biology by Evelyn Fox Keller Elisabeth Lloyd, Adaptation, Current uses by Mary Jane West-Eberhard, An 'adaptation' is a characteristic of an organism whose form is the result of selection in a particular functional context Accordingly. the process of 'adaptation' is the evolutionary modification of a character under selection for efficient or advantageous (fitness-enhancing) functioning in a particular context p.13 By characteristic do they not mean observed [quantity [result or process]]? By organism do they not mean species? The point here is that no organisms themselves adapt - organisms are instances of a species, and its the species itself that adapts. But even that is not technically accurate - adaptation is a perception of overall change - based in a *quantitative estimation of things being different from what they were before. Then the interesting point of adaptation is that the concept means something more than just *quantifiable change(s) - that time and biochemistry bring about some *qualitative improvements out of those changes. Hence it's undeveloped meaning (organism's change) is imprecise, and its developed meaning makes it still just a colloquialism for evolution or natural selection - even when breaking it down as I just did. The authors get it only mostly right. -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
Re: [WikiEN-l] Well-sourced nonsense vs. unsourced competence
On Sun, Aug 30, 2009 at 1:13 PM, stevertigostv...@gmail.com wrote: But even that is not technically accurate - adaptation is a perception of overall change - based in a *quantitative estimation of things being different from what they were before. Correction - should be: 'adaptation is a *quantitative estimation of overall change - based in a perception of things as being different from what they were before.' -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
Re: [WikiEN-l] Well-sourced nonsense vs. unsourced competence
Actually is there a reason why refs couldn't have a separate section? The main disadvantage would be technical - revision data held in an extra field. What you'd have is a list of named references, and the main text only including ref name=WHATEVER / and references / tags. As the cursor moves to a ref tag in the article, the references list (separate text box below) scrolls to that citation, which can be edited. Some minor details to be worked out but... any mileage? FT2 On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 6:53 AM, stevertigo stv...@gmail.com wrote: Well-sourced junk that reads like it belongs on Simple En.wiki: '''Adaptation''' is one of the basic phenomena of biology.refWilliams, George C. 1966. ''Adaptation and natural selection: a critique of some current evolutionary thought''. Princeton. Evolutionary adaptation is a phenomenon of pervasive importance in biology. p5/ref It is the process whereby an organism becomes better suited to its [[habitat]].refThe ''Oxford Dictionary of Science'' defines ''adaptation'' as Any change in the structure or functioning of an organism that makes it better suited to its environment./ref Also, the term ''adaptation'' may refer to a characteristic which is especially important for an organism's survival.refBoth uses of the term 'adaptation' are recognized by King R.C. Stansfield W.D. and Mulligan P. 2006. ''A dictionary of genetics''. Oxford, 7th ed./ref For example, the adaptation of horses' teeth to the grinding of grass, or their ability to run fast and escape predators. Such adaptations are produced in a variable population by the better suited forms reproducing more successfully, that is, by [[natural selection]]. The above will be changed, obviously. Note also the large inline refs make editing difficult, which in turn lets nonsense writing persist. If we can't come up with some better technical means of separation - all ref tags under their own invisible section maybe - then at least carriage-returns - putting the ref on the next line - would work well enough. Still showing up the same in view mode, but the text can actually be readable in edit mode). Anyway, working on something unsourced like: In [[biology]], '''adaptation''' is an observed ''effect'' of the process of [[evolution]] mdash;wherein canonical [[organism]]s (species) appear to [[change]] over time to survive more efficiently within their [[habitat]]. The concept of adaptation was developed before the theory of evolution mdash;Lamarck had made some groundbreaking observations which inspired Darwin. Adaptation in reality does not refer to changes within individual organisms, but to the canonical form of the species mdash; changes brought about by a process of [[natural selection]]. Adaptation in the context of biology, thus is a largely a colloquialism for natural selection. -Stevertigo Sources available upon request. ___ 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] Well-sourced nonsense vs. unsourced competence
One immediate if minor advantage: old references don't get lost from the text, when their first mention is removed. FT2 On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 10:19 AM, FT2 ft2.w...@gmail.com wrote: Actually is there a reason why refs couldn't have a separate section? The main disadvantage would be technical - revision data held in an extra field. What you'd have is a list of named references, and the main text only including ref name=WHATEVER / and references / tags. As the cursor moves to a ref tag in the article, the references list (separate text box below) scrolls to that citation, which can be edited. Some minor details to be worked out but... any mileage? FT2 On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 6:53 AM, stevertigo stv...@gmail.com wrote: Well-sourced junk that reads like it belongs on Simple En.wiki: '''Adaptation''' is one of the basic phenomena of biology.refWilliams, George C. 1966. ''Adaptation and natural selection: a critique of some current evolutionary thought''. Princeton. Evolutionary adaptation is a phenomenon of pervasive importance in biology. p5/ref It is the process whereby an organism becomes better suited to its [[habitat]].refThe ''Oxford Dictionary of Science'' defines ''adaptation'' as Any change in the structure or functioning of an organism that makes it better suited to its environment./ref Also, the term ''adaptation'' may refer to a characteristic which is especially important for an organism's survival.refBoth uses of the term 'adaptation' are recognized by King R.C. Stansfield W.D. and Mulligan P. 2006. ''A dictionary of genetics''. Oxford, 7th ed./ref For example, the adaptation of horses' teeth to the grinding of grass, or their ability to run fast and escape predators. Such adaptations are produced in a variable population by the better suited forms reproducing more successfully, that is, by [[natural selection]]. The above will be changed, obviously. Note also the large inline refs make editing difficult, which in turn lets nonsense writing persist. If we can't come up with some better technical means of separation - all ref tags under their own invisible section maybe - then at least carriage-returns - putting the ref on the next line - would work well enough. Still showing up the same in view mode, but the text can actually be readable in edit mode). Anyway, working on something unsourced like: In [[biology]], '''adaptation''' is an observed ''effect'' of the process of [[evolution]] mdash;wherein canonical [[organism]]s (species) appear to [[change]] over time to survive more efficiently within their [[habitat]]. The concept of adaptation was developed before the theory of evolution mdash;Lamarck had made some groundbreaking observations which inspired Darwin. Adaptation in reality does not refer to changes within individual organisms, but to the canonical form of the species mdash; changes brought about by a process of [[natural selection]]. Adaptation in the context of biology, thus is a largely a colloquialism for natural selection. -Stevertigo Sources available upon request. ___ 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] Well-sourced nonsense vs. unsourced competence
2009/8/29 FT2 ft2.w...@gmail.com: One immediate if minor advantage: old references don't get lost from the text, when their first mention is removed. There's a bot running - or, at least, was recently - that looks for unmatched ref name=whatever/ comments and digs through the article history to find a matching ref. It's pretty neat. -- - 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
Re: [WikiEN-l] Well-sourced nonsense vs. unsourced competence
FT2ft2.w...@gmail.com wrote: Actually is there a reason why refs couldn't have a separate section? The main disadvantage would be technical - revision data held in an extra field. IIRC Greg Maxwell mentioned something about this a couple years ago. He acknowledged the issue of diminished edit-mode readability was valid, but there was a technical and practical issue with putting refs in a separate section. At the time, as his refs setup was new and quite an improvement over the previous, so there wasn't much interest in improving its inferface issues. -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
Re: [WikiEN-l] Well-sourced nonsense vs. unsourced competence
Indeed. It was a milestone compared to what went before, and enabled citing to become a norm or expectation (rather than an option) in practice not just theory. But its some years on and we're in the #5 and useability... methynks we can do better still :) FT2 On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 6:31 PM, stevertigo stv...@gmail.com wrote: FT2ft2.w...@gmail.com wrote: Actually is there a reason why refs couldn't have a separate section? The main disadvantage would be technical - revision data held in an extra field. IIRC Greg Maxwell mentioned something about this a couple years ago. He acknowledged the issue of diminished edit-mode readability was valid, but there was a technical and practical issue with putting refs in a separate section. At the time, as his refs setup was new and quite an improvement over the previous, so there wasn't much interest in improving its inferface issues. -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] Well-sourced nonsense vs. unsourced competence
FT2ft2.w...@gmail.com wrote: Indeed. It was a milestone compared to what went before, and enabled citing to become a norm or expectation (rather than an option) in practice not just theory. But its some years on and we're in the #5 and useability... methynks we can do better still :) Well, people who actually work on things tend to be conservative, and like their work to be appreciated. Coincidentally, conservatism in general is largely about just appreciating what's been done and what actually *is. Liberals and forward thinkers tend to get too interested in what could be, forgetting that what *is took work - work that we futurists may not actually be capable of doing ourselves. Still, we see cases all the time where the fundamental components have been around for years and even decades - it took vision, not work, to figure out how to put them together in a better way. For example, 160-character messaging, technically speaking, is a limitation - not an innovation. ;) -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
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] Well-sourced nonsense vs. unsourced competence
2009/8/29 wjhon...@aol.com: 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? Some celeb accounts are verified. Also, if the twitter feed is linked from their official web page, you can be reasonably confident it's theirs, if not them personally! - d. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Well-sourced nonsense vs. unsourced competence
From the excellent little book Keywords in Evolutionary Biology by Evelyn Fox Keller Elisabeth Lloyd, Adaptation, Current uses by Mary Jane West-Eberhard, An 'adaptation' is a characteristic of an organism whose form is the result of selection in a particular functional context Accordingly. the process of 'adaptation' is the evolutionary modification of a character under selection for efficient or advantageous (fitness-enhancing) functioning in a particular context p.13 David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 1:53 AM, stevertigostv...@gmail.com wrote: Well-sourced junk that reads like it belongs on Simple En.wiki: '''Adaptation''' is one of the basic phenomena of biology.refWilliams, George C. 1966. ''Adaptation and natural selection: a critique of some current evolutionary thought''. Princeton. Evolutionary adaptation is a phenomenon of pervasive importance in biology. p5/ref It is the process whereby an organism becomes better suited to its [[habitat]].refThe ''Oxford Dictionary of Science'' defines ''adaptation'' as Any change in the structure or functioning of an organism that makes it better suited to its environment./ref Also, the term ''adaptation'' may refer to a characteristic which is especially important for an organism's survival.refBoth uses of the term 'adaptation' are recognized by King R.C. Stansfield W.D. and Mulligan P. 2006. ''A dictionary of genetics''. Oxford, 7th ed./ref For example, the adaptation of horses' teeth to the grinding of grass, or their ability to run fast and escape predators. Such adaptations are produced in a variable population by the better suited forms reproducing more successfully, that is, by [[natural selection]]. The above will be changed, obviously. Note also the large inline refs make editing difficult, which in turn lets nonsense writing persist. If we can't come up with some better technical means of separation - all ref tags under their own invisible section maybe - then at least carriage-returns - putting the ref on the next line - would work well enough. Still showing up the same in view mode, but the text can actually be readable in edit mode). Anyway, working on something unsourced like: In [[biology]], '''adaptation''' is an observed ''effect'' of the process of [[evolution]] mdash;wherein canonical [[organism]]s (species) appear to [[change]] over time to survive more efficiently within their [[habitat]]. The concept of adaptation was developed before the theory of evolution mdash;Lamarck had made some groundbreaking observations which inspired Darwin. Adaptation in reality does not refer to changes within individual organisms, but to the canonical form of the species mdash; changes brought about by a process of [[natural selection]]. Adaptation in the context of biology, thus is a largely a colloquialism for natural selection. -Stevertigo Sources available upon request. ___ 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] Well-sourced nonsense vs. unsourced competence
Well-sourced junk that reads like it belongs on Simple En.wiki: '''Adaptation''' is one of the basic phenomena of biology.refWilliams, George C. 1966. ''Adaptation and natural selection: a critique of some current evolutionary thought''. Princeton. Evolutionary adaptation is a phenomenon of pervasive importance in biology. p5/ref It is the process whereby an organism becomes better suited to its [[habitat]].refThe ''Oxford Dictionary of Science'' defines ''adaptation'' as Any change in the structure or functioning of an organism that makes it better suited to its environment./ref Also, the term ''adaptation'' may refer to a characteristic which is especially important for an organism's survival.refBoth uses of the term 'adaptation' are recognized by King R.C. Stansfield W.D. and Mulligan P. 2006. ''A dictionary of genetics''. Oxford, 7th ed./ref For example, the adaptation of horses' teeth to the grinding of grass, or their ability to run fast and escape predators. Such adaptations are produced in a variable population by the better suited forms reproducing more successfully, that is, by [[natural selection]]. The above will be changed, obviously. Note also the large inline refs make editing difficult, which in turn lets nonsense writing persist. If we can't come up with some better technical means of separation - all ref tags under their own invisible section maybe - then at least carriage-returns - putting the ref on the next line - would work well enough. Still showing up the same in view mode, but the text can actually be readable in edit mode). Anyway, working on something unsourced like: In [[biology]], '''adaptation''' is an observed ''effect'' of the process of [[evolution]] mdash;wherein canonical [[organism]]s (species) appear to [[change]] over time to survive more efficiently within their [[habitat]]. The concept of adaptation was developed before the theory of evolution mdash;Lamarck had made some groundbreaking observations which inspired Darwin. Adaptation in reality does not refer to changes within individual organisms, but to the canonical form of the species mdash; changes brought about by a process of [[natural selection]]. Adaptation in the context of biology, thus is a largely a colloquialism for natural selection. -Stevertigo Sources available upon request. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
