http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:220.233.86.223#We_now_have_to_block_…
Amusing, but I thought I'd let people know. An anon has claimed, "I am in
charge of 25K plus internet users in Australia and have decided to block the
Wikipedia site through our routers." His reasons include a legal need to
protect his customers from the net (yes, folks, WP is that sinister...).
(The background to this is that this user was blocked a couple of weeks back
for posting a user's personal information and insinuating threats (legal and
otherwise) in a dispute about the [[Potter's House Christian Fellowship]]
article. Presumably sour grapes -- and bluff, in all likelihood.)
Matt
-- [[User:Matt Crypto]]
Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
--- Mathias Schindler <neubau(a)presroi.de> wrote:
> March 23, 2005 07:00 AM US Eastern Timezone
>
> New Britannica Keeps Pace with Change; Revised Encyclopedia Boosts
> Coverage of People, Science & Changing World
>
> CHICAGO--(BUSINESS WIRE)--March 23, 2005--New and revised articles
> spanning science and technology, literature and the Middle East are at
> the center of the just-published Encyclopaedia Britannica for 2005.
>
> Among the new articles included in the 32-volume work are a substantial
> number in science and medicine, such as SARS, monkeypox, nanotechnology
> and computer crime.
>
> There is even an article on earth-impact hazard, the science of
> predicting the probability of astronomical bodies hitting the planet.
LOL - I wrote the first Wikipedia version more than two years ago. It is now a
pretty darn good article.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impact_event
> Several notable people receive their own entries for the first time,
> including U.S. Senator John Kerry, novelist and Nobel laureate J.M.
> Coetzee, cellist Yo-Yo Ma and philosopher John Rawls. Socrates is the
> subject of a lengthy new treatment that reflects the latest scholarship
> on the Greek philosopher.
John Kerry! Wow - these people are really with it, aren't they. And Yo-Yo Ma
has been a very important person much longer than before the last EB update.
> According to editor Dale Hoiberg, the revisions are part of an effort to
> keep the Britannica on the cutting edge of knowledge and world
> developments at a time when the demand for reliable information is
> greater than ever.
And they will be up to date for how long? Two weeks, maybe.
I did take pity on them by buying Britannica Concise for my Palm Pilot. They
really meant it when they called it concise though - all entries are as large
or smaller than our lead sections.
-- mav
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
Just a brief call for help on maintaining [[WP:Press]]. It's very easy.
Here's the procedure:
1. Go to http://news.google.com
2. Search for Wikipedia
3. Setup an alert for new articles on Wikipedia via email
4. When an Google alerts you, put it onto the [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia as a
press source]] page (next year, can someone change the redirection to
[[Wikipedia:Wikipedia as a press source 2006]]?) - please link to the
article in question! If it is an article that references information in
a Wikipedia article, or to [[Wikipedia:Press coverage]] if it is an
article ABOUT Wikipedia. There are some other categories, but I'm sure
everyone gets the jist.
5. If the article is due to us being a press source, go to the article
talk page and:
a. if an author is provided, use [[Template:authoronlinesource2005]]. An
example is:
{{{{authoronlinesource2005|section=March 21-31
| author=Dan Ackman
| date=March 21, 2005
| title=John DeLorean, Car Man Of The Future
| org=Forbes
|
url=http://www.forbes.com/business/manufacturing/2005/03/21/cx_da_0321topne…
(this is on [[John DeLorean]]).
b. if no author is provided, use [[Template:onlinesource2005]]. An
example is:
{{onlinesource2005|section=February 1-10
|title=Veritas Lux Mea.
|org=The Feature
|date=February 9, 2005
|url=http://www.thefeature.com/user/fadereu/journalentry?id=1335&ref=-1}}
(this is on [[Mass media]]).
Simple!
Oh, the reason I ask is 'cause I just noticed that noone has updated it
for a while (the anon is me - I couldn't help myself), and I figured
this would be as good a place as any to ask for someone to take this
over from myself.
TBSDY
Hi,
From the Welcome page:
Welcome to Wikisource. This site is a repository of source texts in any
language which are either in the public domain, or are released under
the GNU Free Documentation License. The site is part of the Wikimedia
foundation and is a sister project of Wikipedia, which is a
multilingual project to create a complete and accurate, free content
encyclopedia.
It only talks about GNU FDL, not Verbatim.
Is the page not up-to-date?
Merc.
On 29/03/2005, at 2:01 PM, Andrew Lih wrote:
> You might want to take a look at Wikisource, which is a repository for
> verbatim content.
>
> -Andrew
>
>
>
> On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 13:54:38 +0800, Tony Mobily IMAP <merc(a)mobily.com>
> wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> My name is Tony Mobily. I am the Editor In Chief of Free Software
>> Magazine (http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com).
>>
>> Our magazine has articles about free software and free culture in
>> general. All our articles are released under a free license (Cretive
>> Common, GFDL or Verbatim Only) 6 weeks after the magazine is out.
>> I KNOW that a Verbatim Only license is hardly free, but it's our
>> current option for "opinionated" articles about a specific subject.
>>
>> Some of my authors told me that some of the articles would be perfect
>> as follow-up articles to wikipedia entries. The beauty of this is that
>> the follow-up articles themselves would be editable, and would
>> therefore stay "alive".
>>
>> For example he article "Format Wars"
>> (http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/free_issues/issue_01/
>> focus_format_history/) would fit very neatly in Wikipedia's
>> "File_format" entry.
>>
>> The requirement of course would be that these article are released
>> under the GFDL. That will depend on the authors, but I have talked to
>> some of them already and they said that they would be happy with that.
>>
>> The problem is: do you have a spot in Wikipedia (or in "Wikimedia" in
>> general) for general articles such as the ones we publish? If the
>> answer is "no", would it be worthwhile creating such a spot?
>>
>> Thanks a lot,
>>
>> Merc.
>>
>> Tony Mobily
>> Editor-In-Chief
>> Free Software Magazine http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> WikiEN-l mailing list
>> WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org
>> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>>
>>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Tony Mobily
Author of "Hardening Apache" (Apress)
"...this book can save you..." -- Mitchell Pirtle, PHP Magazine 05/2004
Hello,
My name is Tony Mobily. I am the Editor In Chief of Free Software
Magazine (http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com).
Our magazine has articles about free software and free culture in
general. All our articles are released under a free license (Cretive
Common, GFDL or Verbatim Only) 6 weeks after the magazine is out.
I KNOW that a Verbatim Only license is hardly free, but it's our
current option for "opinionated" articles about a specific subject.
Some of my authors told me that some of the articles would be perfect
as follow-up articles to wikipedia entries. The beauty of this is that
the follow-up articles themselves would be editable, and would
therefore stay "alive".
For example he article "Format Wars"
(http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/free_issues/issue_01/
focus_format_history/) would fit very neatly in Wikipedia's
"File_format" entry.
The requirement of course would be that these article are released
under the GFDL. That will depend on the authors, but I have talked to
some of them already and they said that they would be happy with that.
The problem is: do you have a spot in Wikipedia (or in "Wikimedia" in
general) for general articles such as the ones we publish? If the
answer is "no", would it be worthwhile creating such a spot?
Thanks a lot,
Merc.
Tony Mobily
Editor-In-Chief
Free Software Magazine http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com
There is an international writing contest going on on the German,
Dutch, and Polish wikipedias. In the spirit of international harmony,
I started a sister contest on En: as well. Please nominate articles
and other content which was created or expanded this month, and which
you think is particularly well-written:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:International_writing_contest
Cheers,
SJ
JAY JG wrote:
>>From: "Blair P. Houghton" <blair(a)houghton.net>
>>David Gerard wrote:
>>>>JAY JG wrote:
>>
>>>>>>Wikipedia has a number of mechanisms for investigating cases of alleged
>>>>>>admin abuse; WikiEN-l is not one of them.
>>
>>>>
>>>>HEAR HEAR. [[WP:AN/I]] is a good one.
>
>>Unreachable for anyone who's been blocked. Without WikiEN-l people
>>could be "disappeared" by unscrupulous admins.
>
>There's been no evidence of "disappearing" being carried out by "unscupulous
>admins", and in any event controversial blockings can be brought to the
>attention of WikiEN-l, but WikiEN-l is not an investigatory body.
1. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence (except in the case
where the observer is omniscient over the system).
2. WikiEN-l is the starting point for an investigation, and a venue of
recourse for discussing investigations gone wrong. It is, de facto,
whatever it is at the time people write to it.
3. Unless a forum is created elsewhere and publicized, it's the only
place blocked users can go, and they can only go there if they happen
across the directions to it, and can manage to understand the subscription
process (which ain't exactly a slam-dunk).
--Blair
-------------- Original message --------------
> Thomas Haws wrote:
>
> >Silverback, you couldn't have said it better about adminship. If we were more
> effective at removing admins we could be more generous about installing them.
> >
> >
> I have heard this line of argument a few times now from people
> advocating some form of quick and easy de-adminship without resorting to
> arbitration. In general, I think we already readily give adminship to
> those who are nominated, and anyone who has a close call on their first
> try will normally pass overwhelmingly after waiting a month or two. I
> invite anyone who believes the argument above to point me to a case
> where having an easier de-adminship process would have made the
> difference in the success of an adminship nomination.
>
> We could be more generous in seeking out candidates and making
> nominations, of course, but that's a different matter. There are many
> good users out there who are just waiting for a nomination.
>
> --Michael Snow
The process of getting an adminship is currently political, and religious, with confession of past offenses, absolution by votes, self promotion of past accomplishments and back slapping by cronies. It some ways it is a bit unseemly. It should be automatic and an opportunity to serve rather than for status. Many serve just as well or better within editing privileges, although many admins make invaluable contributions to the community and should feel a sense of accomplishment.
-- Silverback
-------------- Original message --------------
> >From: Andy Roberts
> >On Fri, 25 Mar 2005 15:36:05 -0500, JAY JG wrote:
> > > Wikipedia has a number of mechanisms for investigating cases of alleged
> > > admin abuse; WikiEN-l is not one of them.
> > >
> >In that case why does the automatic block message suggest that any
> >objection may be directed to this list?
> >
> >" If you believe that our blocking policy was violated, you may
> >discuss the block publicly on the WikiEN-L mailing list"
> >
> >
> >Violating blocking policy is an abuse of admin status is it not?
>
> As I understand it, that is to provide a means for block editors to get the
> attention of other adminstrators, since they are no longer able to post.
>
> Jay.
I was unaware of any listing of admins or their email addresses or who Jimbo was when I was blocked for the first and only time. I only knew that the block was incorrect, and the email address for this list was the easiest find, because it was referenced in the block process. There should be a general list like this that a user can be referred to, because like myself, his only experience at communicating with the wiki community may have been talk pages, so he may have felt disenfranchised by the block. Individual email addresses are not a good first line alternative because who knows how soon they will be checked.
-- Silverback
--- Anthere <anthere9(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> Quite a good article
>
> But also exactly the article which makes the world
> believe this is an
> english project, run by english editors.
>
> Not exactly the kind of rumors all of us appreciate.
>
>
> Poor, Edmund W a �crit:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: TL(a)pipeline.com [mailto:TL@pipeline.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2005 2:22 PM
> > To: Poor, Edmund W
> > Subject: article of interest
> >
> >
> >
>
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/13.03/wiki_pr.html
> >
> > I'm sure EVERYONE has seen this article but me, by
> now. I feel like I
> > just got a big pat on the back for my 3 1/2 years
> of work! This writer
> > is very friendly and has captured the essence of
> Wikipedia much, MUCH
> > better than anyone else heretofore. I just wish
> his article was GFDL'd
> > so I could incorporate all his descriptions.
> >
> > Uncle Ed
> >
> > P.S. A non-Wikipedian sent me the URL
You mean the parts that talk about the Wikipedias in
75 languages, and how the millionth article was in the
Hebrew Wikipedia?
RickK
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site!
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/