My question:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Purodhadiff=prevoldid=261483386
His answer:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Purodhadiff=nextoldid=261483386
Przykuta escribió:
Hi
look at ksh wiki
2009/3/23 emijrp emi...@gmail.com:
My question:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Purodhadiff=prevoldid=261483386
His answer:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Purodhadiff=nextoldid=261483386
Seems sensible. The only real disadvantage is that it messes up
2009/3/23 Mark Williamson node...@gmail.com:
I think we should find a way to exclude redirs from depth stats.
Just define non-articles to mean pages outside the main namespace.
Lots of redirects, disambig pages and stubs does not indicate greater
collaboration, so I'm not sure why there were
2009/3/22 Jussi-Ville Heiskanen cimonav...@gmail.com:
Sue Gardner wrote:
I've been meaning to reply in this thread to what Jussi said. (Sorry to
not reply inline; I'm on my Blackberry.)
First of all, can I ask as a favor that you never again refer to me as
Jussi. Jussi is my grandpa.
I
Mark Williamson hett schreven:
I think we should find a way to exclude redirs from depth stats.
Redirects _are_ a sign of depth. Well, _meaningful_ redirects of course.
But there's no automatic way to distinguish meaningful and less
meaningful redirects.
And that's the main problem of the
To me, this indicates a problem with the metrics used to calculate depth.
skype: node.ue
2009/3/23 Marcus Buck m...@marcusbuck.org:
Mark Williamson hett schreven:
I think we should find a way to exclude redirs from depth stats.
Redirects _are_ a sign of depth. Well, _meaningful_ redirects
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 12:36 PM, Mark Williamson node...@gmail.com wrote:
To me, this indicates a problem with the metrics used to calculate depth.
I'd say it indicates not that the depth calculations need to be tweaked, but
that they are intrinsically inaccurate and not meaningful and
There are many situations in which it could be useful to have a way to
quantify the quality, rather than just number of articles, of a
Wikipedia edition. If the whole formula is flawed, we should find a
better one.
Mark
2009/3/23 Nathan nawr...@gmail.com:
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 12:36 PM, Mark
2009/3/23 Mark Williamson node...@gmail.com:
There are many situations in which it could be useful to have a way to
quantify the quality, rather than just number of articles, of a
Wikipedia edition. If the whole formula is flawed, we should find a
better one.
Step one: Define quality.
If you
Introducing the terms of service, or anything other than the license itself,
confuses it for me too. The questions it brings to my mind are:
1) Which controls attribution, the license or the TOS?
2) For importation, which determines compatibility - the license or the TOS
of the original site (if
Дана Monday 23 March 2009 20:00:06 Thomas Dalton написа:
2009/3/23 Mark Williamson node...@gmail.com:
There are many situations in which it could be useful to have a way to
quantify the quality, rather than just number of articles, of a
Wikipedia edition. If the whole formula is flawed, we
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2009/03/23/protect_our_access_to_medical_research/
Can the Foundation officially put in any words towards openness?
- d.
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Perhaps a better thing to quantify is the usefulness, rather than the
quality? That is, ask the people reading and using articles how
useful the article has been to them?
Or, more generally, ask them to rate articles on a scale of 1 to N,
where N is e.g. 5.
By doing that, you can learn
Hi.
For GerardM, Pathoschild or another langcom member.
Can someone of you make a unofficial analysis page of this proposal?
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Wikinews_Greek
Thanks a lot.
C.m.l.
___
foundation-l
Crazy Lover always_yours.fore...@yahoo.com wrote:
For GerardM, Pathoschild or another langcom member.
Can someone of you make a unofficial analysis page of this proposal?
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages/Wikinews_Greek
Done.
--
Yours cordially,
Jesse
--- On Mon, 3/23/09, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Nathan nawr...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Licensing transition: opposing points of view
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Date: Monday, March 23, 2009, 2:47 PM
Introducing the terms
2009/3/23 Brion Vibber br...@wikimedia.org:
He'll be helping us out with operations, monitoring, and documentation
of our servers, making sure everything's running smoothly and improving
our responses to and anticipation of problems.
Fantastic! Just what we've been needing. Welcome aboard!
what be is IRC nick so we know who to poke when servers crash :)
On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 7:30 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.comwrote:
2009/3/23 Brion Vibber br...@wikimedia.org:
He'll be helping us out with operations, monitoring, and documentation
of our servers, making sure
As Sue has mentioned, the board earlier agreed on a statement regarding
the license transition, which is as follows:
The Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation invites the Wikimedia
community to vote on this proposal to license Wikimedia material so it
is available under the Creative
19 matches
Mail list logo
