On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 5:22 AM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote:
I think we should have flagged revs for as many articles as we can
keep up-to-date with. If it takes more than 5 minutes (preferably 1
minute) to review an edit (except for occasional times when somehow a
backlog
On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 7:56 AM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
Put 'em on Wikipedia!
Is it still super complicated and like a lot of hard work?
Steve
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing
On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 8:13 PM, Carcharoth carcharot...@googlemail.com wrote:
It would help to have a list of things this list is *not* for. I
suspect this thread is one of them, but am not certain.
One of its roles is as a further avenue for review/appeal when things
get heated on WP itself.
On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 4:28 PM, Ray Saintonge sainto...@telus.net wrote:
The better alternative is to scale up the shorter article. This is an
extension of 'Wiki is not paper'.
Yeah but that's like saying the better alternative to any problem is
to solve it. With our volunteer army, we're
On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 6:06 PM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
cimonav...@gmail.com wrote:
If however the actual result is a shift in editing cultural
attitudes (measured for instance in the rate of non-BLP
articles being semied or protected after the introduction
of FR) towards a stricter and more
Would anyone care to define the boundaries or goals of this
discussion? Is it really going to be Let's all analyse everything
Stevertigo has ever said or done, or had said about him? That could
take a very long time.
Steve
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 9:00 PM, Andrew Gray andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk wrote:
It might be interesting to examine the trend on de.wp - here, the net
drop in IP edits seems to have been part of an overall long-term
trend.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Hut_8.5/German_editing_stats
Thanks
On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 4:50 AM, Carcharoth carcharot...@googlemail.com wrote:
Never underestimate the effects of recentism ;-)
Indeed.
Although, peering into my crystal ball, into the future, far as human
eye can see...
10,000 years in the future, and Barack Obama is a small paragraph in
On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 3:27 PM, Liam Wyatt liamwy...@gmail.com wrote:
This is absolutely standard, at least in Australia. For example, see the
snip
Thanks for that informative reply, that was really helpful. I wish I'd
gone to GLAM-WIKI, I probably could have gotten work to pay for it
too...
On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 3:30 AM, Durova nadezhda.dur...@gmail.com wrote:
4. Persuade the staff to change policy.
This is the approach I've been working on, one institution at a time. A
group of volunteers have been pooling information and resources toward that
end. We've had some successes
On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 10:55 PM, Carcharoth
carcharot...@googlemail.com wrote:
The Google translation is hilarious, but the gist comes through:
Hmm, Assume good intentions seems so much clearer than assume good faith.
Steve
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 11:31 PM, Surreptitiousness
surreptitious.wikiped...@googlemail.com wrote:
[[Wikipedia:Footnote3]] explains it all. I can't work out the
difference, except maybe it took Dragons flight a lot of work to give us
what we already had?
Interesting. I'm not sure why we
Just having a quick look at where these templates are still used, and
I see some novel uses:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tigard,_Oregon#Government
Here they're not being used for referencing, but to create specific
footnotes for a specific section.
Steve
On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 6:18 PM, Charles Matthews
charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com wrote:
I don't ski. You are partly arguing that there should not be a
notability guideline for skiing sites. And partly that a specialist
skiing encyclopedia should be a directory of just about all skiing
sites.
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
Apparently the new cool thing to do is {{r|foo}} rather than ref
name=foo /. Works for me.
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Sure. I enabled your moderation flag because you keep posting large
numbers of low-quality posts, despite my requests to the contrary. The
specific event that triggered it was your posting of 4 very similar
messages to the Deletion of unreferenced living person biographies
thread, all quibbling
On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 7:17 AM, stevertigo stv...@gmail.com wrote:
Don't imagine they will want to let just anyone start moving files -
not just for the server load reason, nor RAM or disk space issues (?),
but because its just not necessary. We learned long ago to treat
filenames as
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 8:05 AM, Durova nadezhda.dur...@gmail.com wrote:
Going through their online store revealed a dozen more of my restorations
for sale, all without credit. Other featured picture contributors may want
to review the vendor's collection to see whether their work is also
On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 8:34 PM, Surreptitiousness
I think perhaps I'd ponder if we needed to be told on-list that someone
was going on moderation.
Yep, it's a good question, and I did ponder it. FYI, at around the
same time, I placed another user on moderation, and didn't announce
the fact.
On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 7:17 AM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
An objectivist in a liberal blog? It happens.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jimmy-wales/what-the-msm-gets-wrong-a_b_292809.html
(It's a piece about our remarkably accuracy-deficient coverage in the
media in the last month
On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 1:46 PM, Durova nadezhda.dur...@gmail.com wrote:
That question has already been answered several times, in several ways. I
am at a loss for how to restate it, and the insinuation posed alongside the
question discourages further attempt.
Ok, I've read through all your
On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 1:39 PM, Carcharoth carcharot...@googlemail.com wrote:
You can add to the advantages that it can also produce a why did you
moderate *him*? response from list members. I got an e-mail from the
other user you placed on moderation, and I was puzzled as to why he
had been
On Sat, Sep 19, 2009 at 1:19 AM, Charles Matthews
charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com wrote:
The hill has five rope tows and seven ski runs. Is this an
encyclopedic topic? Not really.
Hmm. I've written about quite a few ski resorts (Broken River,
Craigieburn Valley, Fox Peak, Invincible Snowfields,
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 12:49 AM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
The eBay reseller named at the top of this thread may (or may not)
have done something morally questionable, but I think it's a major
I'm not seeing it. They're printing public domain images sourced from
an open source
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 10:01 AM, Soxred93 soxre...@gmail.com wrote:
Maybe have something like this:
{{reflist|begin}} becomes references
{{reflist|end}} becomes /references
{{reflist}} says as references /
That's a bit ugly but doable. You might as well just make it
{{reflist-begin}}
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 10:36 AM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 10:01 AM, Soxred93 soxre...@gmail.com wrote:
Maybe have something like this:
{{reflist|begin}} becomes references
{{reflist|end}} becomes /references
{{reflist}} says as references /
That's
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 10:37 AM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
Oic, it's actually {{refbegin}} and {{refend}}.
Or alternatively:
{{reflist|refs=
ref ../ref
}}
Learnt about this the standard way knowledge about wiki syntax
proliferates: diffs.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 5:34 AM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:
As a general suggestion, you may find you have more success in having your
posts accepted if you present your larger point rather than making a pithy
comment that is out of context.
Yes...but if a post is neither accepted nor
Ok, that post was totally off topic. You're on moderation now.
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 12:10 PM, Jay Litwyn
brewh...@freenet.edmonton.ab.ca wrote:
http://ecn.ab.ca/~brewhaha/Sound/MSixths.mp3
DATA 35,27,2,24,40,6,45,27,2,30,50,4
DATA 55,33,2,36,60,4,65,39,4,42,70,4,0,0,4
' How is it that the
Question for the copyright experts. See this image:
http://images.slsa.sa.gov.au/mpcimg/01000/B838.htm
It's over 100 years old, and there is no clear copyright statement
(ie, the photographer isn't listed). Yet they say Any other use
requires permission from the State Library of South Australia.
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 7:51 AM, stevertigo stv...@gmail.com wrote:
Also, let's not forget, the point of BLP was to give the OFFICE a
reason to continue existing.
Wtf? This sounds like a bold, nasty claim, but perhaps I'm not
understanding what you're implying. What are you trying to say,
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 12:53 PM, Durova nadezhda.dur...@gmail.com wrote:
and no share of authorship. If *Time* were to plagiarize a text editor the
matter certainly would be taken seriously.
Do you think? Based on past experience, the reaction is usually to
laugh at the offending party for a)
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 8:05 AM, Durova nadezhda.dur...@gmail.com wrote:
Restored:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Stroop_Report_-_Warsaw_Ghetto_Uprising_06b.jpg
Also, I'm confused. There is absolutely nothing at that page which
would indicate to me that I wasn't entitled to do what that
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 2:03 PM, Rich Holton richhol...@gmail.com wrote:
I'd say that Time magazine and the eBay culprit(s) *should* have given
Durova credit for the restoration. But the should I'm using has to do with
common decency--something that is becoming rather uncommon.
As that page
On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 6:15 PM, Charles Matthews
charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com wrote:
Clearly, though, this is a cultural matter. Readability in this sort
of sense is conditioned by the expectation that the written language is
very close to the spoken language, for example, which is
237mb downloadable in Ogg format - is there not a streaming version somewhere?
On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 3:57 AM, Newyorkbrad (Wikipedia)
newyorkb...@gmail.com wrote:
Privacy.The video of that talk has now been posted and is available at:
On Sun, Sep 13, 2009 at 2:06 PM, Ray Saintonge sainto...@telus.net wrote:
One can hardly call a respect for good grammar pedantry.
If by respect, you mean, congratulating those that use good
grammar, then I don't disagree. If, otoh, you mean, fixing minor
errors or criticising mistakes...then
On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 11:25 PM, Gwern Branwen gwe...@gmail.com wrote:
As with most such things, it's surely the latter. But do we want to
encourage mass uploads? I thought people were already rather unhappy
with so much fair use and copyvios and poor quality uploads (these
were the cited
This is really a Commons question, but...why is so little effort made
to promote bulk upload tools like Commonist? I've wasted countless
hours struggling with the crappy web forms, when it's so easy to do
using the right tool. None of the upload pages make the slightest
mention of these tools. Is
On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 8:19 PM, Carcharoth carcharot...@googlemail.com wrote:
I guess you knew that all already, actually, but I wasn't sure if you
were joking when you made the 'doctor' comment above. Medical
analogies, eh? :-)
Just a comment on the amusing juxtaposition. Like last week when
On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 4:36 AM, wjhon...@aol.com wrote:
Dude, you just posted 7 consecutive posts to the same thread. That's
at least 5 too many. Worse, none of them were longer than 3 lines.
Please refrain - why not collect your thoughts into one more
substantial post?
Thanks,
Steve
On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 2:33 PM, Keith Oldkeith...@gmail.com wrote:
...Youngborg recommends that
people use a “jaundiced eye” when surfing the Web. *
*“I think people are going to have to get a little more calloused at the
Internet,” Youngborg said.*
Jandiced eyes and callouses? Sounds like he
On Mon, Sep 7, 2009 at 3:54 AM, Fred Bauderfredb...@fairpoint.net wrote:
I suppose, as in matters of internet deportment, civility, we must also
accept the burden of maintaining the standard for English usage, global
English usage. It is a grim and dreary business, but I must admit it is
our
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.
On Sun, Sep 6, 2009 at 12:33 PM, Riskerrisker...@gmail.com wrote:
Amazing how few people realise that we're also perfectly capable of
blacklisting their websites, and will do so without hesitation should a
spambot show up. Heck, we give people a hard time for putting in half a
dozen of the
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
On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 8:36 PM, FT2ft2.w...@gmail.com wrote:
It's a lot less glamorous, sounds alot less dramatic, doesn't get
the dollars - but it's got zero capability of misleading.
To be honest, what exactly is the point of this thing? I've seen this
kind of thing a couple of times when
On Sun, Aug 30, 2009 at 8:47 PM, genigeni...@gmail.com wrote:
Most people are not going to want to read a book before editing
wikipedia. Your problems are:
-1) Getting people to realise that it's possible to edit
0) Getting people to want to edit
1)getting people to click the edit link in
On Sun, Aug 30, 2009 at 11:55 PM, wjhon...@aol.com wrote:
Here's one
http://www.travelfurther.net/dictionaries/ba-tz.htm
It's so interesting, as an australian, seeing which of each of those
pairs looks normal to me. Eg, Garden (not yard), Gas or Natural Gas
both seem ok to me, Pickle (US) not
Just curious, how often do the subjects of articles you work on come
up in daily life? I work on a lot of pretty obscure and random stuff,
but even still, I'm surprised how often I can claim to have written
the article about some Australian town, a state park, a ski resort...
On the downside,
On Sun, Aug 30, 2009 at 11:33 PM, wjhon...@aol.com wrote:
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
On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 9:24 PM, Carcharothcarcharot...@googlemail.com wrote:
If the regulars editing have some auto-flagging to approve their own
edits, surely they risk approving someone else's changes that were
made in between the time they loaded and read the page, and clicked
edit this
On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 12:37 AM, David Gerarddger...@gmail.com wrote:
I think it'll remove a lot of the reward for aggressive stupidity not
having the stupidity show up on the live site in real time.
Oh, interesting point. Imagine a page gets flag-checked every sunday.
On monday, what would be
On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 9:07 AM, Ian Woollardian.wooll...@gmail.com wrote:
That perennial media narrative is a meme you're fighting.
I think part of it is that it's much simpler than the rather subtle
truth. Meme: Wikipedia had the goal of complete openness and anarchy,
but it failed and they
Tony Sidawaytonysida...@gmail.com wrote:
Shortly after I thought we'd finally killed off the habit of excessive
polling, an apologetic, humorous and evidently quite common meme
appeared on Wikipedia: the !vote.
Unlike the vote, the !vote seems to afford the author the latitude
to falsely
On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 11:12 AM, Emily Monroebluecalioc...@me.com wrote:
I agree. Maybe have a Signpost-like note to everyone subscribed to
Signpost? Maybe have that actually in the Signpost? Something like
Editors note: There's an influx of newbies, so please be patient.
How will that work?
So apparently all the press reporting is wrong. What's the real story?
For some reason, I've never actually come across these flagged
revisions, partly because they always seemed to be happening in the
future some time. What's the policy going to be?
So, quick questions:
1) Is this going to apply
Ok, Erik's post answered some of these:
So, quick questions:
1) Is this going to apply to every page?
No, BLP's and some others.
9) Can non-logged in editors see non-flagged versions?
Yes.
Steve
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 11:13 AM, wjhon...@aol.com wrote:
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.
On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 11:15 PM, David Gerarddger...@gmail.com wrote:
I believe they have machines to turn pages, and something to figure
out the distorted photo of the book and render it how it would look as
a flat page.
Yeah, there are videos of these machines. The book sits open, the
On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 2:35 PM, Ray Saintongesainto...@telus.net wrote:
I'm afraid *he*'ll come too early
Yes, that's what I said. Apparently my fingers typed something
completely different though.
Steve
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
Is this new? I searched for lom metadata (without quotes) and got:
Learning object metadata - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
14 Jul 2009 ... ANZ-LOM is a metadata profile developed for the
education sector in Australia and New Zealand. The profile provides
interpretations of ...
[[IEEE
On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 12:15 PM, wjhon...@aol.com wrote:
The way it was discussed in-project a teritiary source summarizes
several secondary sources into one cohesive article.
Is a work that summarises/draws on multiple news articles secondary or
tertiary? I wonder, because I've considered
On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 1:17 AM, Bod Notbodbodnot...@gmail.com wrote:
I'd really hate to go to [[curry]] and see recipes. The sorts of
spices that are often included yes. But not cooking times.
If I look up [[engine]] I want to know how it functions. But I don't
want to see a tutorial on how
On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 11:31 AM, Carcharothcarcharot...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 2:02 AM, Carcharothcarcharot...@googlemail.com
wrote:
Not sure whether to include all the of Vienne or de Vienne or not.
Perhaps on a separate page? Or altogether is probably fine.
Hmm.
I updated the three millionth topic pool:
Answer: Beate Eriksen, an obscure Norwegian actress.
Winner:
Cryptic C62, Sarah Badel, an obscure actress.
Honorable mention:
Michael of Lucan, Norwegian post offices 1943-1985
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Three-millionth_topic_pool
On Tue,
On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 6:17 AM, Keith Oldkeith...@gmail.com wrote:
Both see the other ruining Wikipedia, either by defeating the point of an
open encyclopedia, or by expanding its “pages” until the site dies from
irrelevance.
Wow. That's the worst characterisation of the
Kind of cool, really. Dunno about you, but when I write articles on
Wikipedia, I do it so that lots of people can read them and the
knowledge can be spread. I really don't care if someone is making a
quick buck.
Has anyone made a definitive list of them? It looks like I'm probably
published here:
On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 7:46 AM, Carcharothcarcharot...@googlemail.com wrote:
Why not scan them and store them at wikisource?
Lol. Indeed. Why not scan 200 volumes of an encyclopaedia? For fun, OCR it too..
Steve
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
Agreed. Jay, the last time I went through the moderation queue, there
were 15 messages from you. Could you please send less messages, and
make them more relevant?
Thanks,
Steve (mod)
On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 2:40 AM, Thomas Daltonthomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote:
If you have a point that is within
On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 10:02 AM, Bod Notbodbodnot...@gmail.com wrote:
I wouldn't be against Wikipedia having its own range of print works
provided they were profitable and all funds were ploughed back into
the Foundation. But I certainly don't think it would be a good idea if
it were purely
On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 12:46 PM, K. Peacheyp858sn...@yahoo.com.au wrote:
Well with the lack of information i'm going to stab in the dark and
guess were talking about community blocks/ban and other sanctions
which are generally disucssed at WP:ANI.
With the lack of information I'm more
On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 1:55 AM, Cathy Edwardscathy.edwa...@bbc.co.uk wrote:
I think I have a good idea why BLP are a hot topic of debate in this
area, but why do you think fiction is contentious - because it's in
danger of unbalancing the encyclopedia?
I'll offer two reasons:
1) Because
On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 3:04 AM, David Gerarddger...@gmail.com wrote:
It can be problematic. I frequently edit as an IP when I'm at another
machine and can't be bothered logging in. The unexplained reversion
rate is *much* higher than when I edit logged-in, even though the
edits are exactly
On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 2:10 AM, Emily Monroebluecalioc...@me.com wrote:
I don't get why there is any need for a dedicated Wikipedia browser.
I agree. For one thing, there's the issue of making it accessible to
Mac, Windows, and Linux.
But yeah, it's good for inspiration.
Yeah, so it's
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 8:09 AM, David Gerarddger...@gmail.com wrote:
It shows the first coupla paragraphs of an article, with pictures.
Why only the first coupla?
I do like:
- the separation of links out on the right hand side (our don't
repeat links policy is pretty annoying at times)
- the
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 4:36 AM, Casey Brownli...@caseybrown.org wrote:
Which you can ignore. It's beta-testing, the whole point is to gather
feedback and make things better, so I don't have a problem with it.
:-)
On the subject, when you click beta feedback, one of the questions is:
On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 10:06 AM, Carcharothcarcharot...@googlemail.com wrote:
Either more accurate assessments, or the article standards are slipping. :-(
Or the definitions of the standards are being raised. It's hard to
tell which is the case though, as there's no obvious way to find out
which
On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 10:59 AM, Erik Moellere...@wikimedia.org wrote:
It clearly requires a lot of maintenance of said error reports page to
pull something like this off, but perhaps it would be worth trying out
for a while?
Definitely. Now, perhaps I'm too old and cynical, but with all these
On Sat, Apr 18, 2009 at 1:29 AM, Anthonywikim...@inbox.org wrote:
Is Wales sole founder? I don't think you can come up with a reasonable
definition of founder by which that is true.
I would make the following observations based on my reading:
1) Wales' role in the genesis of Wikipedia is much
Sorry, what? I see that the photo at the top of that URL is the same
as this one:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Houses.of.parliament.overall.arp.jpg
That one is listed as public domain - so they don't even have to
credit it. It says an Adrian Pingstone took the photo in 2005 and
On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 3:51 AM, wjhon...@aol.com wrote:
Skepticism rears it's ugly head.
I just don't think that motivations are ever that straight forward.
Everyone loves to tell a simple tale like The idea came to me one day
when X, so that night I decided to Y. Usually, though, we all have
I'm trying it. It looks a lot like Vector, which I was already using.
Haven't really made up my mind about Vector/Acai. Seems like a step in
the right direction, but it's not really earth shatteringly better.
But then, usability is not really about helping experienced
power-users...
Steve
On
On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 10:16 AM, Carcharothcarcharot...@googlemail.com wrote:
Only three of those 24 articles, in my opinion, have moved much beyond
being a single line article or a few lines at most, even though
impeccably referenced. You might say go and help expand those
articles (and I
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 12:21 PM, Bod Notbodbodnot...@gmail.com wrote:
Well, to a degree. But what if they later say, in an equally
verifiable source, that that was a joke? Or if a verifiable source
says it isn't true? But yes, I wouldn't object to seeing that in an
article provided policy is
On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 12:21 PM, Carcharothcarcharot...@googlemail.com wrote:
But still? A local library? I find it useful to look at things in
context with other similar institutions. So, I try and think of famous
libraries. The British Library, the Bodleian Library, the Library of
Congress,
On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 7:44 AM, Carcharothcarcharot...@googlemail.com wrote:
One of the annoying things is that sometimes you can have a grouping
of possible titles and possble redirects (e.g. A. Other, Any Other, A.
M. Other, Any Middle Other, Any Other (disambiguator), and so on), and
On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 10:12 PM, Charles
Matthewscharles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com wrote:
visible fashion. It's around 30,000 links to do, doesn't matter so much
where people plunge in (check page history to see if someone else is
active(.
Now that I have discovered [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia 1.0]]
On Sun, Aug 2, 2009 at 1:37 AM, David Gerarddger...@gmail.com wrote:
Efforts like the Wikipedia Selection for Schools are important to help
too (and feed into 0.7 and 1.0). Remember, that's a real actual
encyclopedia DVD being used in actual schools and hugely popular with
teachers, based on
On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 1:44 PM, Ben Kovitzbkov...@acm.org wrote:
attention to tags? I know it's 2009, and I know tags will never go
away, but most tags still strike me as both anti-wiki and page
clutter. If a page has a problem, fix it.
That attitude is anti-wiki. I can diagnose far more
On Sun, Jul 26, 2009 at 5:52 PM, Dan
Dascalescuddascalescu+wikipe...@gmail.com wrote:
Aside from that, let's have a bit of common sense: does anyone
sincerely think that if Martin Niemoeller were alive, he'd object to
the image of that monument being on Wikipedia? Does anyone think that
any of
On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 3:10 PM, Ben Kovitzbkov...@acm.org wrote:
Wikipedia-editing is pretty far removed from subject-matter
expertise. It's more about searching and summarizing and
collaborating. It's closer to being a librarian than any other
occupation.
Librarian? Nah. There are lots of
On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 5:22 AM, Ray Saintongesainto...@telus.net wrote:
So what if there have been tens of thousands of papers on the
Rorschachs! The geocentric universe was impervious to criticism for
much longer. If the tests are truly scientific they will be just as
scientific when exposed
moderator
Does this thread have anything to do with this list? Does anyone care anymore?
/moderator
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
But I'm interested to know if the good people of this list are aware
of specific tasks/duties on en:wp that are woefully understaffed at
the moment. Things that really need doing.
My current view is that [[wp:1.0]] is really the only taskforce that
matters, and there is a huge amount of
So, can someone fill me in on why we're laughing at this? From the article:
To psychologists, to render the Rorschach test meaningless would be a
particularly painful development because there has been so much
research conducted — tens of thousands of papers, by Dr. Smith’s
estimate — to try
On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 1:45 AM, Carcharothcarcharot...@googlemail.com wrote:
get the photographer credit, unless the photographer is famous). There
have been cases (I won't name names) of photographers putting their
name in the filenames, but there should be other ways to address the
I do
On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 12:01 PM, Andrew
Turveyandrewrtur...@googlemail.com wrote:
Does that mean we should have the same process for delisting admins - not
really fair that candidates today are held to a higher standard than
candidates who got through three years ago!
Actually it is fair,
On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 8:02 PM, David Gerarddger...@gmail.com wrote:
The point is that discussion of the matter is much more likely to be
effective there rather than here, because there is specifically where
the official discussion is being conducted!
It's an open list, anyone can subscribe
101 - 200 of 243 matches
Mail list logo
