In response to JzG/Guy Chapman, that was indeed the 1,000,000th article, according to official stats.
I must admit that initially I was urging many of the powers at be *to* fudge the millionth, but then the article became pretty darn good.
Cool stuff, gang!
Nick Moreau
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Photos NEW, now offering a quality print service from just 8p a photo.
News items are starting to be published about the Jordanhill Station
article, some more heavily reliant on the official press release than
others. http://tinyurl.com/jvw2s is the link to the Google News list.
The article itself is rather over-egged for one about a suburban railway
station, but it is heart-warming to see that the first photographs in the
dawn light of a new day have been added after a lot of discussion about
copyright usage of images found here and there on the web.
Peter (Skyring)
From:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Village_pump_%28technic…
>For some lovely reason our new mail server has been blacklisted by SpamCop,
>allegedly for sending mail to spamtrap addresses. (They provide no details
>by
>policy, of course, so there's no way to verify it.)
>Since there's a tiny possibility that the user-to-user email feature
>actually could be
>abused, I've gone ahead and enabled the e-mail confirmation requirement for
>using
>email features. This is a bit annoying for the moment since you have to do
>it
>separately on each wiki.
>I've disputed the listing, so hopefully we'll get it removed soonish and
>those who
>aren't getting email will, uh, start getting it again. --Brion 22:42, 1
>March 2006 (UTC)
What this means is that everyone will have to go to
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Confirmemail
If you don't, you will not receive Wikipedia email.
Zzyzx11 at en.wikipedia.orghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Zzyzx11
zzyzx11(a)hotmail.com
_________________________________________________________________
Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee®
Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
How do I cite sources? There is no clear, concise guide that I've been
able to find.
In short, can reference templates and the <ref> tag be used together?
On 2/28/06, Steve Bennett <stevage(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On 2/28/06, The Cunctator <cunctator(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > A little more seriously, I mean that our *goal*, I think, should be to
> > have everyone edit and read, whereas our expectations are that a much
> > smaller percentage are much more active.
>
> Is that even our goal? My point was just that our readership is much
> greater than just the wikipedia community. I can't remember why I was
> making that point, but it was surely very pertinent...
I certainly hope it's our goal. I'm not a huge fan of consumerism or
elitism, which follow from a goal of not including everyone in the
potential editorship pool.
Alphax wrote:
I fear the day when a group of people will say "Hey! Let's all become
admins on Wikipedia! All we have to do is revert vandalism for an hour
for three months, and then we can all become admins and trash the
place!" Actually, I wonder why it hasn't happened already.
-Aieeeeee! don't tell people not to stick beans up their noses! :-)
-Allan
From my Talk page, if anyone can give me an answer:
Hi. I'm working on KLF discography. To aid with formatting, I created
two templates. The image thumbnails I am using get passed as arguments
to the templates. I've noticed that, presumably as a result of the use
of a template, the Image page doesn't know that the image is being
used in an article (see e.g. Image:The KLF- Burn The Bastards.jpg).
I'm worried that some bot will come along and say "right, they're not
being used", and list them for deletion.
If you can suggest a way round this or what might be causing it please
leave a message on my talk page (as I've asked several people).
Guy (JzG)
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.ukhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JzG
[[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Appeal of VeryVerily]]
[[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Appeal of VeryVerily/Proposed
decision]]
I'm coming to the mailing list because I don't know where else to turn.
I am asking for aid from anyone in the community, in any form you can
muster, to save me from another wrong ArbComm ruling which may
drive me off Wikipedia forever.
I hope the mailing list won't just dismiss this as some worthless
disgruntled complaint. The AC can make poor decisions, as I think all
can acknowledge.
After a self-imposed exile of *a year* (because I could not edit under
the stress of constant blocking), I returned and worked very hard to
explain in painstaking detail to the ArbComm what they overlooked before.
They accused me of reverting "without discussion" based on a handful
of edits picked from my many thousands, but I explained (again) that
I was being stalked by an auto-reverter, and also I was dealing with
someone ("Ruy Lopez") who wrecks articles in batches with the same edits
to numerous articles. I point out that I've always been responsible
about explaining edits when needed. I similarly provided another, more
detailed, point-by-point, day-by-day account of what happened in each
of the cases they mentioned in their "Finding of Fact" (which I'd done
the first time in less detail).
None have contested the accuracy of my analysis (indeed, none have even
acknowledged it). But they are not overturning the ruling that's based
on this accusation.
However, recently, all of the sudden, Raul654 tells me on his talk
page that the justification is a conflict I was in in May 2004 (!!),
seven months before the AC case, which was long since resolved and
over with, and which had never been mentioned in either case till now!
(And, as I noted, back then community norms were quite different; that
case went to a quickpoll, which voted to not take action.)
No other arbitrator will even tell me what they think I've done wrong.
I have tried to talk to them individually, and have gotten dismissive
responses, or none at all.
Jdforrester has gone so far as to apparently say that my thousands and
thousands of contributions (~12,000), the product of endless hours of
labor here, are OF NO BENEFIT TO WIKIPEDIA if I'm not willing to stay
under his conditions. What am I to make of such a callous non-sequitur?
Raul says it's "galling" that I would complain when the evidence page
on the last arbitration was a mess - even though five cases were lumped
together and dozens of people were editing it, factors beyond my control.
In fact, I made very effort to respond to the arbitrators' points, but
they never seemed to even acknowledge it. The final ruling still listed
articles which were reverted by a vandal stalking me (I reverted back)
as evidence of my "bad behavior".
This is all explained in detail in my appeal.
I once considered myself a major member of this community. I have not
earned this hate. And after more than a year, even if they're not sure,
they can't just let it be the past? WP:AGF, WikiLove, all that?
So please anyone who has time take a look and comment. I was a huge
contributor before, and I see so much that needs to be done and want
to pitch in. But they'd have me edit as a second-class editor deprived of
legitimacy and vulnerable to arbitrary blocking. With no justification
for making me one.
Thanks if you're still reading,
VV
for some definition of "article", we're approaching 1E6 .
And we seem to have broken 1E6 user accounts today.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: SJ <2.718281828(a)gmail.com>
Date: Feb 28, 2006 4:29 PM
Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] EN:WP: One Meeeeellion Articles
To: wikipedia-l(a)wikimedia.org
We could at least link to an FAQ about the counting method, and what it means.
It's certainly not meaning*less*, but does allow for confusion.
On a tangent, while naming a "millionth" article might not be terribly
meaningful, having some regular WP zeitgeist -- every hundredth edit,
every tenth article created and deleted (by namespace) -- could be
quite useful.
Also, today may be the last day to enter the 2-million article pool.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Pools
SJ
On 2/28/06, The Cunctator <cunctator(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On 2/27/06, SJ <2.718281828(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > Dear all,
> >
> > The English Wikipedia is approaching its millionth article this week.
> > A tidy milestone.
> > We are working on a press release for the event:
> > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/PR/1M-en
> >
> > If you are interested in helping identify the millionth article,
> > please leave a note on the talk page.
>
> Wouldn't it be nice if our press release talks about how meaningless
> this statistic is, and notes, for example, how the patent office
> recently cheated in its identification of the 7 millionth patent?
>
> Or we could just keep on encouraging innumeracy to get the cute little CNN spot.
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l(a)Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
--
++SJ