Hello.
I have finally been able to look at this stormfront website.
The latest seems to be that some of these guys, incited by someone
called whitebamboo, do seem to be getting ready to do a 'blitzkreig'
on wikipedia, with Jewish Ethnocentrism named as a specific target.
See http://www.stormfront.org/forum/showthread.php?t=173563&page=4&pp=10
WhiteBamboo seems to be an interesting fellow. His 'public profile' is not
visible, but he lists www.army.com as his home page.
--
_______________________________________________
Find what you are looking for with the Lycos Yellow Pages
http://r.lycos.com/r/yp_emailfooter/http://yellowpages.lycos.com/default.as…
OK, so it's not nearly as compelling as Neo-Nazis breathing hard outside
the door, but I ran across this today on the "Excessive Sweating and Facial
Blushing" site (it was linked from the talk page of another WP user):
A group with an agenda (opposition to a drastic type of surgery to treat
sweating disorders) discovered Wikipedia, said, "hey, we can support our
agenda there"...."but wait, they have an NPOV policy"...."that's ok, we can
do that"..."in fact, let's invite the doctors who support the treatment to
come work on it"....
http://www.esfbchannel.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.pl?board=ETS_General&action=di…
And now, two months later, we have a fairly balanced little article on
[[Endoscopic thoracic sympathectomy]], which the group is now telling other
ETS/anti-ETS sites they can use and copy (WITH proper GFDL linking and
credit, no less!):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endoscopic_thoracic_sympathectomy
Obviously these are rational people, and not ideologues of any stripe --
still, I thought it would be a nice bit of evidence that the system /does/
usually work. :)
Catherine
Since there was no opposition, and several strong supports for
Jwrosenzweig as the new chair of the mediation committee, I boldly made
it so.
Kate set up a mediation mailing list, which access should be restricted
to mediators only.
Next steps are to get mediators registered to this list, and that a
moderator is named for handling registrations. Also, some candidates are
still waiting to be named mediators.
Our new mediator, Improv, is willing to make things move, and planning a
meeting with a whole lot of things to discuss. Planning a meeting on irc
is tough; so possibly, some of these things can be discussed on the new
mailing list ?
Thanks to him anyway :-)
Ant
Dear all,
We have actually a mediawiki installed and used. Its version is 1.2.2
This has been installed under Linux RH Fedora.
We would like to make an upgrade to version 1.3.10 on a new machine
under Linux or Windows.
This is what we did:
- Install a fresh system (linux and Windows (on different machine))
- Install what needed for mediaWiki (Apache/Php/MySQL under Linux;
EasyPHP under Windows).
- Downloaded tar files of mediawiki1.3.10.
- Copy folder mediawiki 1.3.10 to defined place(/var/www/wiki under
Linux; C:\Easyphp\www\wiki under Windows).
- Setup of the mediawiki (name and MySQL base with the Browser).
- Access the new mediawiki. This works fine.
Now, we want to restore our old datas.
- We made a mysqldump of the old data on the old machine.
- We tryied to restore them on the new mediawiki installations (linux
and Windows).
- The tables under MySQL are differents from 1.2.2 to 1.3 and we receive
error messages, like "SELECT
user_name,user_password,user_newpassword,user_email,user_real_name,user_
options,user_rights,user_touched FROM user WHERE user_id=12
function "User::loadFromDatabase". MySQL error "1054: field
'user_real_name' unknown in field list"...
When we want to login with the new mediawiki...
- We tryied several options to make the upgrade, like importing old data
before installing the new wikimedia, but we have errors when the
database is set...
- We tryied to use some php scripts given within the wiki/maintenance
folder. No success and error messages...
- We looked everywhere how to make the upgrade and found no solution...
Please!!! Could anyone give us some light how to make this upgrade??
HELP!!!
Many thanks in advance for any information.
Have a nice day,
Philippe Roth - Switzerland
Hi members,
I very rarely post to lists, but this thread is bothering me a lot. I have read the posting on Stormfront, as well, as at least 75% of the postings on Neo-nazi to attack.
Despite this, I see only editors reacting as if what they have read on this site is going to happen, and exactly as described, i.e. all members of the Stormfront site are to login as users of Wikipedia and try to influence all the articles related to their position to make them POV.
I have little doubt that the members of this site hope to disrupt Wikipedia in a big way. But, frankly, they already _have_. Editors, who usually would be working on articles, are now developing tactics to combat this neo-nazi POV attack. This is their first success.
Score one for Stromfront!!!
Second, do you all really believe that if they intended to do exactly as they say, they would post their tactics openly on their site? I wonder! I think that they _do_ intend to do damage to Wikipedia, but the details are probably in private mailings among members of their community. Meanwhile, they could be using their postings as a _diversion_, and while everyone is concentrating on monitoring certain articles, they could do something entirely different to damage our site. I leave it to those more technically inclined to try to figure out what that might be .
Just my thinking .
As Ever,
Ruth Ifcher
Jimmy (Jimbo) Wales wrote:
>Did anyone notice I was in Jerusalem *on the very day* of the
>Palestinian elections?
>
Coming up in next week's issue of The Wikipedia Signpost:
WIKIPEDIA FOUNDER JIMMY WALES BRINGS PEACE TO MIDDLE EAST
Hey, he needs to make some noise about this pretty quickly, otherwise
based on some of the exuberance in the media recently, somebody else
might hog all the glory. (Just ask yourself, who would you rather see
get the credit, Jimbo or George W. Bush?)
Remember us in your Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech, Jimbo!
--Michael Snow
Hello everyone
I'm still on extended wikivacation in general but am undertaking a
project to add music clips. I plan to record my own playing of certain
well-known classical keyboard works and add them to the encyclopedia.
While I am not a great performer, I hope to provide some material of
reasonable quality, and hope to inspire others to contribute in like
fashion.
The GFDL poses problems. I would prefer not to use it and to use
CC-by-SA only.
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/legalcode)
The main problem with the GFDL is that, for a recording of a musical
work, the "transparent copy" -- the "preferred form for modification"
is unclear. It could be construed to be the WAV file or a lossless
(FLAC etc) encoding of it. These files are prohibitively large. It
could also be construed to be the musical score, or the case could be
made that there is no "transparent copy" and that the license is
meaningless. There are also some audio-specific and music-specific
matters addressed by CC-by-SA, but not by the GFDL.
There are very few audio clips uploaded thus far. I am only aware of
one that is not public domain (though there may be others). Therefore,
this is still a solvable problem.
The Uninvited Co., Inc.
(a Delaware Corporation)
Nicholas Knight wrote:
>> if we tried to make a public issue out of it, the publicity would do
>> more damage to Wikipedia than to the ISP.
>
> How?
Because the publicity would focus on our inability to effectively
control our content or guarantee even a minimum level of reliability.
The ISP's reluctance to help us enforce a ban on some obnoxious user
would be ignored.
--Michael Snow
As has been pointed out here, it is likely that many
of the "keep" votes on a certain VfD page were made at
the prompting of the lowlife Nazi scum at Stormfront.
This is highly regretable, and personally upsetting
to people like me who voted "keep" for reasons which
I believe to be legitimate.
I'd just like to point out that before Stormfront
started lobbying for votes many people were alerted
to the page via the large mailing list which a
certain Wikipedian maintains for just this purpose,
and it is reasonable to assume that many of the
"delete" votes came from recipients of that mailing.
All of which shows that the concept of "consensus"
in VfD is all but meaningless.
Zero.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free!
http://my.yahoo.com