After all the countries are de-subpaged, I plan to go through and move over all the images. I have proxomitron, which kills offsite images, and it's killing a lot of those too (I guess they've been uploaded to meta?)
kq
>I'm absolutely in favor of eliminating inline-rendered external
>images. Totally apart from goatse.cx, it's also a minor security
>issue, since such images can carry cookies and track usage.
I can only guess it was that damned goatse site. I'm confused as to why linking to it isn't yet punishable by death.
I wish I could forget it too. :-/
kq
You Wrote:
>Some moron thought that it would be 'funny' to link a really revolting
>pornographic photograph into a random article, and unfortunately before
>I could remove it I had to LOOK at it.
Some moron thought that it would be 'funny' to link a really revolting
pornographic photograph into a random article, and unfortunately before
I could remove it I had to LOOK at it.
Anyway, if the image had had to be uploaded it would have been caught in
the net, but the jerkwad could just put http://etc and the picture
showed up on the page all by itself.
I know that 24.70.159.4 is probably a random passerby with a perverted
sense of humour, but it was gross and disgusting and made me physically
ill. Oh... looking at recent changes the same person has been hitting a
myriad of articles in the last fifteen minutes. I just blocked him, and
I see I was the third person to do it.
--
Karen AKA Kajikit
And on the seventh day, God said 'What my world needs is a creature that
will truly appreciate it in all its facets' -
and so He made the kitten.
Come and visit my part of the web:
Kajikit's Corner: http://Kajikit.netfirms.com/
Aussie Support Mailing List: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AussieSupport
Allergyfree Eating Recipe Swap:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Allergyfree_Eating
Ample Aussies Mailing List: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ampleaussies/
Love and huggles to all!
> Now that we have the upload function, I'd agree that we don't
> need to render external images.
I'm absolutely in favor of eliminating inline-rendered external
images. Totally apart from goatse.cx, it's also a minor security
issue, since such images can carry cookies and track usage.
I just redeleted it. really, that's /not/ an article. I'm not suggesting that we keep gibberish, and I don't think anyone else is either (except, I guess, whoever requested it be restored. And I would like to hear why it was requested restored; I must have missed something).
kq
You Wrote:
>'Kate Hudson' has no content. The previous version of it says 'hubba
>hubba hubba', and the history says it was deleted and restored by
>request. That is NOT an article. That is not even a pretense at an
>article. That is a piece of stupidity that deserves oblivion. Why on
>EARTH did someone request that that should be put back?
>
>Gibberish is not an article. Blank pages are not an article. And
>nonsense phrases posted by a casual passerby are not an article. They
>just take up space that a real article could use. If it was a real
>article it would say something like 'Kate Hudson is (blah blah blah)'.
>Leaving this doesn't encourage the writer to make real contributions -
>if anything it encourages them to leave more nonsense to clutter up the
>space!
>
>--
>
>Karen AKA Kajikit
>
>And on the seventh day, God said 'What my world needs is a creature that
>will truly appreciate it in all its facets' -
>and so He made the kitten.
>
>Come and visit my part of the web:
>Kajikit's Corner: http://Kajikit.netfirms.com/
>Aussie Support Mailing List: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AussieSupport
>Allergyfree Eating Recipe Swap:
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Allergyfree_Eating
>Ample Aussies Mailing List: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ampleaussies/
>
>Love and huggles to all!
>[Wikipedia-l]
>To manage your subscription to this list, please go here:
>http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
I think it comes down to one thing - how much information does it
provide? Not necessarily 'what information am I personally interested
in' because my tastes don't agree with everyone else's... but how much
information is there that someone else will find potentially useful? I
don't think there's any more essential merit in an article about the
'Outer Mongolian horned lizard' or the planet Venus than there is in one
on 'custard' or 'love-letters'. They could all be potentially useful to
somebody, if they are written properly.
Going back to highschool, in English we were taught that writing was
supposed to consider the five 'W's - Who, What, When, Where, and Why? If
a wikipedia article follows that policy then I don't see how it can go
wrong. I'd think we can also add another one - how? I would see 'how to
keep budgerigars as a pet without killing them' as being a logical
extension of the article on budgies.
I've posted articles on food and recipes to the wikipedia... and no
doubt I'll do more of it, because again I don't see the essential
difference between telling you what an ingredient is and where it comes
from, and telling you how to use it. The good thing about the wikipedia
is that you can do both...
--
Karen AKA Kajikit
And on the seventh day, God said 'What my world needs is a creature that
will truly appreciate it in all its facets' -
and so He made the kitten.
Come and visit my part of the web:
Kajikit's Corner: http://Kajikit.netfirms.com/
Aussie Support Mailing List: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AussieSupport
Allergyfree Eating Recipe Swap:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Allergyfree_Eating
Ample Aussies Mailing List: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ampleaussies/
Love and huggles to all!
Hey all -- is there any way of tracking contributions by the first three
IP number sets (triplets or triads or whatever they're called)? One of
the people who makes really interesting, generally very good
contributions seems to be working off a dynamic IP (or maybe just
different terminals on a static network). I'd like to be able to check
the contributions, but the last three numbers change regularly. Any
ideas?
Jules
> Your new software is up and running. I think it looks o.k.,
> but I'm often wrong about such things. :-)
>
> If this goes well, then which language is next? :-)
Astronomer already did most of the Spanish translation, so that
should be easy (especially since my Spanish is almost adequate to
make fixes in it as well). I think the Polish guys are also hot
to get started, but I haven't seen anyone step up as possible
administrative help there.
>
>
>From: lcrocker(a)nupedia.com
>
>I totally fail to see your point here. It's not a dictionary
>entry at all--it's an article that gives the flavor of a group
>of languages. I think it's a great article, and exactly the
>kind of thing that should be in Wikipedia. I think most paper
>encyclopedias have articles like this as well. It's nothing at
>all like a dictionary entry.
>
To me, an article that says: this word/phrase means this in language A,
B, C is pretty much a dictionary.
>Sorry, I don't see any resemblance there either. The guideline
>you mention is "wikipedia is not a usage guide.", and these
>articles have nothing at all to do with language usage.
>
OK, I misunderstood the rule there, it apparently applies only to word
usage.
>Besides which, I think you're taking "what Wikipedia is not"
>far too seriously and literally. Just because we don't want
>Wikipedia to /become/ a dictionary, or a usage guide, or any
>number of other things, that doesn't mean it can't /contain/
>the occasional article that looks like those things, when that's
>appropriate. When it's appropriate is a matter of judgment.
>
I'm kind of puzzeled with that. On the list, we are regularly reminded
that "wikipedia has no rules". However, when I arrived, I was urged
(politely) to follow all kinds of policies, guidelines and conventions.
To become a sysop, it is even required to know about most of these
rules. Many of the sysops spend many times on making these rules.
However, when these are broken, the resulting reaction is not always the
same. Sometimes, we obey the rules and correct whatever went wrong, at
other times it is said "this article can stay this way because
(blabla)". To me, this suggests that something is wrong with these
rules. Maybe we should not have any rules at all, but I think it is
clear it become a big mess then. So if we have any
rules/guidelines/policies/conventions at all, we should obey them
regardless the article, the author or the topic. If we want to make
exceptions the rules should be rewritten so that everybody can see why
some is as it is, otherwise the same issues will be raised over and over
again.
>Again, use some judgment instead of blindly following rules.
>Are they good articles? Are they interesting, well written? Do
>they provide useful information?
>
I know many pieces of text that are all of the above, but wouldn't
qualify for Wikipedia.
Mav:
>I once brought this very question up on the cookbook's talk page and was told
>that these pages are poplar for visitors and that Wikipedia is not paper.
>That was enough for me. And we shouldn't be too concerned with the NPOVness
>of a recipe. :-)
>
Wikipedia is not paper. Great, so we have a lot of space. Then why are
dictionary entries, full-text articles and list of quotations and
external links NOT acceptable while, apparently, recipes are?
>What's more is that I now see /very/ little by the way of current editing of
>these pages or the creation of similar ones so I don't think their presense
>sets any type of bad precedent.
>
I'm not sure I understand what you say here...
Jeronimo