I don't recall who orignially designed the Wikipedia logo, but I got a
request for a higher resolution logo from a magazine editor who is
going to be printing a story about wikipedia. If anybody knows who I
should contact, please let me know.
He wants the logo to be about 1 or 2 inches at 300 dpi. So, we'll
need it to be about 540x532 pixels. If we get one that is HUGE, then
I shouldn't ever have to ask for another one...
Jason Richey
----- Forwarded message from mjansen(a)fnl.nl -----
From: mjansen(a)fnl.nl
Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 11:01:36 +0200
To: jasonr(a)bomis.com
Subject: RE: Wikipedia logo
Op dinsdag 21 mei 2002 20:26, heeft Jason Richey [SMTP:jasonr@bomis.com]
geschreven:
> I'll see what I can come up with... What dimensions are you looking
> for? Our current logo is 135x133 pixels at 72 pixels/inch, or
> 0.450x0.443 inches at 300 dpi. I'm sure we can generate the logo as
> you would like it, but it would be helpful to know how large you need
> it.
It would be perfect if the logo could be blown up to a width and height of
about 1 to 2 inches at 300 dpi.
Thanks in advance
Michael Janszen
Redacteur / Editor
c't Magazine
Postbus 31 331
6503 CH Nijmegen
Tel.: 024-3723659
----- End forwarded message -----
--
"Jason C. Richey" <jasonr(a)bomis.com>
> I tried to go to the new codebase at
> http://www.piclab.com/newwiki/wiki.phtml .
> It returned the following:
> ...
Thanks for testing. I'm pretty constantly working on the
code now, so if you ever get an error like that, try again
in 15 minutes. If it /still/ happens, then mail me. I
wouldn't bother the list at large yet, either; this is still
very much a work in progress.
0
On Tue, 21 May 2002, Krzysztof P. Jasiutowicz wrote:
> On 21-05-2002, Brion L. VIBBER wrote thusly :
> > On mar, 2002-05-21 at 10:40, Krzysztof P. Jasiutowicz wrote:
> > > Have you looked up recently the Wikipedia page
> > > http://www.wikipedia.com/wiki/Karl_Landsteiner as I did yesterday ?
> > Well, I did just now, and I replaced the garbage with a brief stub after
> > a 10-second google search turned up several informationful web pages
> > about the guy. You could have done that yourself!
> OK. Next time when I spot such ugly article I certainly will.
> I just thought that some discussion would be helpful. It was an example
> of the problem.
Nic nie szkodzi. No harm done, but you could still have fixed it and then
brought it to our attention. :)
> > The system we have is based on two ideas:
> >
> > a) Changes to articles will be seen and reviewed by other wikipedians
> > and
> Do we have enough people to look after 100000+ articles ? (+int'l)
If we have enough people to *write* 100000+ articles, then hopefully! If
contributions drop off in the future to lower levels, then there will be
fewer changes to sift through in the list, and new vandalism will be even
easier to find.
The worrying thing is not new vandalism -- it's *old* vandalism. Once
something drops out of RecentChanges, it may as well have fallen off
the face of the Earth until somebody stumbles into it. An article that
nobody fixed a month or a year ago might still be sitting around, and
making it the Stable version ain't gonna help that now. Unless you propose
that 30,000+ articles be individually checked before creating the
"stable" namespace?
> and the reformed Karl Landsteiner article can be (though rather unlikely)
> be vandalized again any minute now.
It can be, of course. And it can be fixed again...
The idea of a stable namespace/review process has been discussed from time
to time, but there's not really been consensus.
If we were to introduce such a system, I think basically this would mean
that for each article, some particular revision of it would be designated
the known good/stable version, and only that version would be shown to
random visitors / distributed in static CD versions. Logged-in users
and those who elected to see the latest unstable version could see and
edit the current revision... New edits would be (somehow) reviewed and,
if ok, designated the new stable version.
There are at least two big questions about how this ought to work:
1) How do we get new folks to dive in and contribute? Having your
improvements show up *immediately* is a big draw to the wikipedia
experience.
2) How does the review process work? If very few people are interested in
a topic, a new article or change might get completely ignored, and very
good articles may never be seen; so limiting reviewing to certain trusted
users would likely not be sufficient. On the other hand, it's child's
play for organized vandals to set up secondary accounts to mod up their
own work, as many discussion-oriented sites have discovered on
establishing user-run comment moderation systems.
> > b) Wikipedians will improve articles they find to be lacking
> >
> > A is dependent on the number of wikipedians interested in any particular
> > topic (or with a mind to check out new articles), and B is dependent on
> > YOU.
> OK. I admit I am amazed by overall quality and how little impact vandals
> have had so far. But is this just an exception or are there more articles
> that need mending ? How do we know ?
I would say that it's an exception (the vast majority of articles are
indeed not vandalized) *and* that there are more that need mending. Keep
looking -- watch the skies!
-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
I tried to go to the new codebase at http://www.piclab.com/newwiki/wiki.phtml . It returned the following:
Parse error: parse error in /var/www/html/newwiki/Language.php on line 42
Parse error: parse error in /var/www/html/newwiki/Skin.php on line 2
Fatal error: Cannot instantiate non-existent class: language in /var/www/html/newwiki/wiki.phtml on line 21
>I have both codebases set upon my server (the old one is at
>http://www.piclab.com/wiki/wiki.phtml , and the new one is at
>http://www.piclab.com/newwiki/wiki.phtml ), and both have the
>newest 5/20 dump of the database (though the new one doesn't
>have all the article histories).
0
Earlier I announced the availability of a new codebase and a testing
server to the wikitech list, but I see no reason not to involve the
larger list as well.
See http://wikipedia.sourceforge.net for information on the wiki
software.
I have both codebases set upon my server (the old one is at
http://www.piclab.com/wiki/wiki.phtml , and the new one is at
http://www.piclab.com/newwiki/wiki.phtml ), and both have the
newest 5/20 dump of the database (though the new one doesn't
have all the article histories).
Anyone who wants to work on the code can use my server for
testing. In particular, I'd like to solicit translators to
create new languages for the new codebase, which has a much
better facility for handling them (and doesn't require any
coding skill).
Finally, someone a while back posted a wikipedia design that
didn't use HTML tables for layout and that looked very clean.
I could probably find that in the archives, but if someone
could point me to that I'd appreciate it. The new skin system
should make it easier to implement that cleanly.
0
Any attempt to open any page is getting me
Fatal error: Cannot instantiate non-existent class: skinstandard in
/home/wiki-newest/work-http/wikiPage.php on line 1142
I'd post this to "Bug reports" on the 'pedia, except I get the same error
there.
--
Vicki Rosenzweig
vr(a)redbird.org
http://www.redbird.org
> We could also use the name-piping feature to add alt
> text (short
> descriptions of the image for text-mode and speech
> browsers):
>
> [[image:de-flag.jpg|German flag]]
Oooh! This would definitely help our search engine
rankings too! Go Brion!
Chuck
=====
Come to my homepage! Venu al mia hejmpagxo!
http://amuzulo.babil.komputilo.org/
====
Venu al la senpaga, libera enciklopedio
esperanta reta! http://eo.wikipedia.com/
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Información de Estados Unidos y América Latina, en Yahoo! Noticias.
Visítanos en http://noticias.espanol.yahoo.com
On mar, 2002-05-21 at 11:19, Tomasz Wegrzanowski wrote:
> One thing - I hereby officially propose ;) that option "only minor
> changes" should be available only for registered users.
That's been the case for a couple of months on the new software. (And
furthermore, show ALL edits is the default setting. You have to go out
of your way to hide minor edits, and I don't know why anyone would want
to anyway.)
If the other wikis get converted sometime, problem solved!
By the way, MOST OF THE INTERNATIONAL WIKIS ARE LOSING THEIR EDITING
HISTORIES BECAUSE THE OLD WIKI SOFTWARE DELETES OLD PAGE VERSIONS AFTER
A COUPLE OF WEEKS!!!!!!!!! I *hate* destructive default settings.
> All cases of vandalism on Polish wikipedia that weren't immediately
> fixed were in case where nobody have seen it because it wasn't being
> shown on 'Ostatnie Zmiany' (recent changes) page.
>
> Of course a vandal could bother to register, but most of them don't.
> So maybe this feature should be turned off completely.
> It's very dangerous.
Agreed, that's why we did it. :)
-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
Hello all,
It might seem a little off-topic on the international mailing list
but it seems rather urgent and is of general interest (also non-English
Wikipedias).
Have you looked up recently the Wikipedia page
http://www.wikipedia.com/wiki/Karl_Landsteiner as I did yesterday ?
With growing number of pages we either need some review and approval
mechanism or a stable namespace or even a stable version of Wikipedia
(that would be so open for editing for everyone).
What do you think ?
regards,
kpj.