-Original Message-
To: English Wikipedia
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] A Wikipedian asked to write for a paper
encyclopedia
http://savageminds.org/2012/01/19/wikipedia-encyclopedias/
- d.
Note that citing references is forbidden; proof Wikipedia is not a real
encyclopedia.
articles created are a different matter - it is inevitably
vanity or promotion.
Scott
PS Can anyone tell me how to stop the system attributing my posts to
Wiki? Or how to stop it top-posting? (Technical ignorance.)
-Original Message-
From: wikien-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org
[mailto:wikien
. If
the crowd want to create their collaborative mess, then this is to be
preferred, and the FA with his superior article must necessarily go
elsewhere.
I've always found the problem with Wikipedia is that it has components which
usually work remarkably well together (wiki, open editing
On 4 February 2011 01:32, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote:
One is expected to use sound editorial judgment. Using British tabloids
for a biography of a living person falls outside that remit. One is
expected to have some familiarity with what is an appropriate source
for
the
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ASearchredirs=1search=t
hesun.co.uk+%22Living+people%22fulltext=Searchns0=1title=Special%3ASearch
advanced=1fulltext=Advanced+search
'Nuff said.
Scott
-Original Message-
From: wikien-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org
On Fri, 4 Feb 2011, Fred Bauder wrote:
Clearly there are issues. I'm on Jimbo's side with this though. Some of
my earliest edit wars were over whether The People's Republic of China
could be described in the introduction as a totalitarian dictatorship.
What has currently been hit on is
You've certainly framed the issue, but there are four lights.
http://videosift.com/video/How-many-lights-do-you-see-Captain-Great-Picard-
Moment
Fred
Hm, yes but {{citation needed}}.
Otherwise it just comes down to my reality is better than yours and either
brute force, or attrition posing as
I'm sorry, but if I see somebody starting to source information from
such tabloids you mentioned, especially information on biographies of
living people regarding stuff that is not confirmed, there are going to
be problems with me.-MuZemike
All well in theory, but have you looked? The Daily
at 4:07 PM, wiki doc.wikipe...@ntlworld.com wrote:
A leader(ship) would find it easier
to say thank you, you're right, we should do this, but please could you
tone it down a bit.
I thought that is what (some) arbitrators *did* say to you! Maybe the
message got garbled in the transmission
My own simple solution would be to elect a policy advisory committee
*The PAC would only consider policy areas, and only as a last resort, where the
status-quo did not enjoy evident consensus, but where repeated community
attempts to resolve the problem had proved futile.
*The PAC by majority
in Wikipedia contributors} - repost
On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 5:06 PM, wiki doc.wikipe...@ntlworld.com wrote:
1) the qualities one needs to get anything done in Wikipedia are
generally,
tenacity and bullheadedness. Drawing enough attention to the issue and
breaking through the natural apathy and inertia
I don't think it helps to characterise any simple questioning of the leader
as a deranged vendetta. Are you suggesting all criticism is a mark of
either hatred or insanity - or both? That line of defending leaders against
criticism has a somewhat unsavoury history.
What happened here is that
So Jimmy's claim that the first edit was Hello world! isn't to be taken
literally?
It is simply a totem. If you want to be cruel you call it a sound-bite which
takes liberty with reality, if you want to be kind you call it a
foundation-myth which serves to encapsulate the ethos and meaning of
I see where you're coming from Tony, but ultimately, you can't herd cats. A
campaign against jargon is only going to make minimal headway.
The are some structural things that Wikipedia needs to do:
1) WYSIWYG would be fantastic, but I've no idea what that would meet in
practice.
Sticking to the
on the preservation of the wiki-saints, which
can only serve to prevent us heeding genuine prophets of future dangers.
Beware the true apocalypse. Let Him That Thinketh He Standeth Take Heed
Lest He Fall
It would be far more profitable (or prophet-able) to seek to divine the
undoubted demons ahead
On competition:
In terms of on-line encyclopedias Wikipedia has no effective competition. If
you sit to research, you'll look at Wikipedia. If you want to contribute it
will be Wikipedia.
But. where we are in competition with others is for the time of the
undergraduate/graduate who sits down
.
It is ridiculous that we have the best possible article on the somewhat
obscure baroque painter http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Michael_Wright
(yes, I wrote that single-handedly) or some bit of Italian architecture and,
on the other hand, articles which suck at:
*http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Writing
magnusman...@googlemail.com wrote:
This stuff will apparently show up in Amazon search results soon-ish:
http://www.amazon.com/wiki/James_Joyce
Interesting idea, though I find it slightly disturbing for some reason...
The idea seems to be that you'll search for James Joyce, get the page,
follow
Yeah, but my odds of getting a Kindle gratis from their benevolence are??
It's a bit like applauding the Ritz Hotel for giving away free coffee with a
$150 meal.
-Original Message-
From: wikien-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org
[mailto:wikien-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of
a Kindle.
-Original Message-
From: wikien-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org
[mailto:wikien-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of David Carson
Sent: 03 December 2010 23:04
To: English Wikipedia
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Amazonified Wikipedia
On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 9:56 AM, wiki doc.wikipe
on the project page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:MICROSOFT.
Thank you,
--
User:Dwayne
From Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
w...@dwayneflanders.com
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https
:
I was thinking, after the talk about
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Vandal_fighters which doesn't
terribly look like it's going anywhere, why don't we possibly bundle a
few of the other userrights into one, such as my proposal below:
User right: Superuser
Rights included: rollback
22 matches
Mail list logo
