Based on my own experience on en.wn, I believe copyright/plagiary detection
cannot be fully automated without introducing horrific errors, for the same
reason translation can't be: doing the task properly requires knowing what
the text means.
On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 10:47 AM, James Heilman
tting before publication proved a failure. It is why we have Wikipedia
> and not Nupedia.
> On 10 April 2017 at 14:44, pi zero <wn.pi.z...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > English Wikinews took serious measures for reliability back in 2009. For
English Wikinews took serious measures for reliability back in 2009. For
our pains, we've received mostly grief from the Foundation, and from a
vocal segment of the Wikipedian community. If they consulted, before this
expertise-lending, with the sister project that specializes in
Just a general observation: Making things "global" can be good or bad for
non-wikipedia projects depending on how it's done; spreading uniformity
across projects could also damage non-wikipedia projects by imposing
inappropriate infrastructure. I'm not totally cynical about the idea, just
sure we — as a movement — will have a strategy that we
> can all embrace and push forward together.
I do hope that everyone together can find a positive way forward (says the
optimist in me, even while the pessimist in me lists all the things li
On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 10:51 AM, Neil Harris wrote:
> That's fantastic, represents a huge vote of confidence for the Wiki Way,
> and is a big move towards improving the relationship between the WMF and
> the community.
Just to keep things in perspective: the removal of
I agree with a bunch of what you're saying here. That's probably worth
saying up front, because I'm going to disagree with a bunch of it, too.
to assume good faith.
Assume good faith, and nearby concepts such as be civil, have in the
long term severely damaged the social infrastructure of
It would scarcely be possible to overstate how un-seriously Wikinews takes
Signpost's coverage of Wikinews. We typically don't even bother to try to
debunk falsehoods about Wikinews when they appear on Signpost, figuring
they're too numerous and the forum is too biased for meaningful dialog.
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 7:53 PM, Matthew Flaschen mflasc...@wikimedia.org
Finally, I consider the unreadable parser functions problem essentially
solved. Lua is not perfect, but it's a usable language (and not a
Mediawiki-specific one) that is far more readable and writable than
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 5:40 AM, Martijn Hoekstra martijnhoeks...@gmail.com
tl;dr: We've been collectively whining about templates for long enough. Who
wants to help with fixing them?
Improving on templates is broadly what I've been doing with my dialog tools
To be clear, ordinary user of the dialog tools most certainly does *not*
that an ordinary wiki users can do wonderful things using *only wiki markup*.
(The hypothetical example of a url there is, btw, entirely wrong; but one
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 12:00 PM, Brad Jorsch (Anomie) bjor...@wikimedia.org
That would take a more detailed look at what is actually trying to be
accomplished with these dialogs. For example, enwiki's Teahouse has a
dialog for newbies to more easily post questions, but it's
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 12:41 PM, Brad Jorsch (Anomie) bjor...@wikimedia.org
This reply still isn't anything official, but does represent my own views
as a developer (both volunteer and staff)
Is there an actual problem with Scribunto that drove you to writing this
Pardon my long reply; I actually meant to just comment on a couple of
things, and got carried away. But I really do find this topic very
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 2:03 PM, Brad Jorsch (Anomie) bjor...@wikimedia.org
When it comes to your extremely complicated templates with
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 2:25 PM, Marc A. Pelletier m...@uberbox.org wrote:
On 09/02/2014 01:35 PM, pi zero wrote:
(1) It's very easy to use.
(2) it naturally promotes incremental learning.
I'm sorry, but both of those assertions are not only wrong, but
At first I
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
I am looking for a productive mailing list that discusses matters of
importance to the Wikimedia community. That the people on such a list can
have these discussions politely, respectfully, and with concern for others
in that the words that say, and attitudes taken. I want to see
Mail list logo