Re: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedia, the overly standarised Encyclopedia you wouldn't dare edit

[Ian Woollard]

On 08/02/2009, White Cat  wrote:
> I know all that. But thats really a minor software issue. We could for
> example allow IP's to set such preferences. Or display a default dating
> format based on the IP. If the IP is from the US, display the US dating
> format, else display international standard.

I think there would tend to be problems with caching. Some ISPs/caches
probably straddle national boundaries, and that would tend to mean
that where two users either side of the boundary viewing the same
pages one would tend to get the wrong format, because the URL would be
the same. The normal way that is dealt with on the web is with the ?
symbol in the URL which bypasses the cache (together with a cookie),
but that's probably a bad idea for the wikipedia, it would increase
the traffic quite a bit. Another way would be to encode the standards
to be used in the URL in some way, but there's disadvantages for that
as well.

The javascript idea where the page dynamically calculates it in the
browser may have more legs though, at least for dates, and possibly
other viewing preferences also.
-- 
-Ian Woollard

We live in an imperfectly imperfect world. Life in a perfectly
imperfect world would be much better.

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedia, the overly standarised Encyclopedia you wouldn't dare edit

[K. Peachey]

On Sun, Feb 8, 2009 at 12:17 PM, White Cat
 wrote:
> I know all that. But thats really a minor software issue. We could for
> example allow IP's to set such preferences. Or display a default dating
> format based on the IP. If the IP is from the US, display the US dating
> format, else display international standard.
I thought we already supported browser detection so its decides off
the data that the web browser (eg: region) holds.

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedia, the overly standarised Encyclopedia you wouldn't dare edit

[White Cat]

I know all that. But thats really a minor software issue. We could for
example allow IP's to set such preferences. Or display a default dating
format based on the IP. If the IP is from the US, display the US dating
format, else display international standard. It could be as simple as
putting a link on every page (for IPs) asking the user to click if he or she
wants to see the data in imperial or metric style.
The point is we should promote the ability to customize how people can see
data in a way they are comfortable with. There is absolutely no reason to
force me to learn an archaic and useless format such as inches, fahrenheits,
ounces and etc. For similar reasons no reason to force a fahrenheit person
to learn celsius. The conversion rate of celsius to fahrenheit is well
known. Software can compute this effortlessly. Even if the reader has an
account he or she cannot set a fixed metric for stuff like date,
temperature, length, weight and etc.

The complaint against standardization mentioned here is against the forced
non-customizable formats. This complaint wants to see all dates (and other
metrcis) to be inputed in a machine readable way.


On Sun, Feb 8, 2009 at 3:58 AM, Carcharoth wrote:

> Trouble with that is that the vast majority of readers do not have
> accounts with user preferences to set. They are "unregistered" readers
> (some people create accounts purely to be able to set these
> preferences). What unregistered readers see is a mish-mash of
> different date formats, sometimes in the same article. Log out
> occasionally and see what the majority of our readers see. It can be
> quite a shock to have all the customised skins and user preferences
> taken away. Ditto for DVD and print versions of articles.
>
> Carcharoth
>
> On Sun, Feb 8, 2009 at 1:47 AM, White Cat
>  wrote:
> > Hard coded in the context of my message is when dates are typed out. Like
> > January, 20 1956 rather than soft coded [[1956-01-20]].
> > Ideally all dates should always be soft coded and be modified by users
> > preferences. In reality the exact opposite of this is done.
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 1:37 PM, Andrew Gray  >wrote:
> >
> >> 2009/2/6 White Cat :
> >>
> >> > We are now forced to use US style dates... Thus it is the American
> >> > Encyclopedia internationals (non USians) should feel uncomfortable in
> >> > visiting let alone editing.
> >>
> >> (...)
> >>
> >> > In the past we had multiple correct ways. For example the use of ISO
> >> dates
> >> > (aka [[-mm-dd]] dates) were encouraged. Users could alter their
> >> settings
> >> > to display the dates in any way they please. The ISO dates were
> drafted
> >> as a
> >> > compromise to the international versus US date war. Now US dates are
> hard
> >> > coded. You do not get to alter it.
> >>
> >> "hard coded"?  This is news to me and news to the Manual of Style.
> >>
> >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOSNUM#Full_date_formatting
> >>
> >> Perhaps you could provide some evidence to back up this assertion?
> >>
> >> --
> >> - Andrew Gray
> >>  andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk
> >>
> >> ___
> >> WikiEN-l mailing list
> >> WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> >> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >>
> > ___
> > WikiEN-l mailing list
> > WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> >
>
> ___
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedia, the overly standarised Encyclopedia you wouldn't dare edit

[Carcharoth]

Trouble with that is that the vast majority of readers do not have
accounts with user preferences to set. They are "unregistered" readers
(some people create accounts purely to be able to set these
preferences). What unregistered readers see is a mish-mash of
different date formats, sometimes in the same article. Log out
occasionally and see what the majority of our readers see. It can be
quite a shock to have all the customised skins and user preferences
taken away. Ditto for DVD and print versions of articles.

Carcharoth

On Sun, Feb 8, 2009 at 1:47 AM, White Cat
 wrote:
> Hard coded in the context of my message is when dates are typed out. Like
> January, 20 1956 rather than soft coded [[1956-01-20]].
> Ideally all dates should always be soft coded and be modified by users
> preferences. In reality the exact opposite of this is done.
>
> On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 1:37 PM, Andrew Gray wrote:
>
>> 2009/2/6 White Cat :
>>
>> > We are now forced to use US style dates... Thus it is the American
>> > Encyclopedia internationals (non USians) should feel uncomfortable in
>> > visiting let alone editing.
>>
>> (...)
>>
>> > In the past we had multiple correct ways. For example the use of ISO
>> dates
>> > (aka [[-mm-dd]] dates) were encouraged. Users could alter their
>> settings
>> > to display the dates in any way they please. The ISO dates were drafted
>> as a
>> > compromise to the international versus US date war. Now US dates are hard
>> > coded. You do not get to alter it.
>>
>> "hard coded"?  This is news to me and news to the Manual of Style.
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOSNUM#Full_date_formatting
>>
>> Perhaps you could provide some evidence to back up this assertion?
>>
>> --
>> - Andrew Gray
>>  andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk
>>
>> ___
>> WikiEN-l mailing list
>> WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>>
> ___
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedia, the overly standarised Encyclopedia you wouldn't dare edit

[White Cat]

We could start a wikiproject to enforce how people need to get kicked out of
the project space. 

On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 8:12 AM, Brian  wrote:

> For whatever it's worth, Wikipedia has become a complex and byzantine
> bureaucracy...it's a maze of process and rules and editors that never get
> tired of enforcing either. It'll never happen but we should start kicking
> people out of project space.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wikien-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org
> [mailto:wikien-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of White Cat
> Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2009 11:16 PM
> To: English Wikipedia
> Subject: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedia, the overly standarised Encyclopedia you
> wouldn't dare edit
>
> I am a bit weary about the over standardization of the site. There seems to
> be a "one correct version" philosophy. I was hoping it to self-destruct but
> it seems like that aint gonna happen.
>
> We are now forced to use US style dates... Thus it is the American
> Encyclopedia internationals (non USians) should feel uncomfortable in
> visiting let alone editing.
> We are now forced to use a certain specific template when an alternate is
> available... Self righteous people will deprecate the other one without
> even
> bothering to discuss...
> We are now forced to not link to dates on list articles...
> There are tens of other similar changes.
>
> Even more trivial issues are dictated by either a guideline or a
> wikiproject. Are we a bureaucracy now?
>
> In the past we had multiple correct ways. For example the use of ISO dates
> (aka [[-mm-dd]] dates) were encouraged. Users could alter their
> settings
> to display the dates in any way they please. The ISO dates were drafted as
> a
> compromise to the international versus US date war. Now US dates are hard
> coded. You do not get to alter it.
>
> The site is becoming increasingly hostile.
>
> Oh and yes I know this mailinglist post will most certainly not fix
> anything. There isn't a better median though.
> ___
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
>
> ___
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedia, the overly standarised Encyclopedia you wouldn't dare edit

[White Cat]

Hard coded in the context of my message is when dates are typed out. Like
January, 20 1956 rather than soft coded [[1956-01-20]].
Ideally all dates should always be soft coded and be modified by users
preferences. In reality the exact opposite of this is done.

On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 1:37 PM, Andrew Gray wrote:

> 2009/2/6 White Cat :
>
> > We are now forced to use US style dates... Thus it is the American
> > Encyclopedia internationals (non USians) should feel uncomfortable in
> > visiting let alone editing.
>
> (...)
>
> > In the past we had multiple correct ways. For example the use of ISO
> dates
> > (aka [[-mm-dd]] dates) were encouraged. Users could alter their
> settings
> > to display the dates in any way they please. The ISO dates were drafted
> as a
> > compromise to the international versus US date war. Now US dates are hard
> > coded. You do not get to alter it.
>
> "hard coded"?  This is news to me and news to the Manual of Style.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOSNUM#Full_date_formatting
>
> Perhaps you could provide some evidence to back up this assertion?
>
> --
> - Andrew Gray
>  andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk
>
> ___
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Flagged revisions in The Sunday Times

[Alvaro García]

Oh, I see.

On Sat, Feb 7, 2009 at 21:31, Phil Nash  wrote:

> Alvaro García wrote:
> >> Well maybe it said so here:
> >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roy_Hattersley
>
> Well no, he says "my entry", and a quick look at "Roy Hattersley" (which
> has
> fewer than 500 edits), shows nothing in the edit summaries for "son",
> "Giles", "mistake" or "error". While this may not cover all, the impression
> I get is that this is little more than wishful thinking on his part.
>
>
>
> ___
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>



-- 
Alvaro
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Flagged revisions in The Sunday Times

[Phil Nash]

Alvaro García wrote:
>> Well maybe it said so here:
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roy_Hattersley

Well no, he says "my entry", and a quick look at "Roy Hattersley" (which has 
fewer than 500 edits), shows nothing in the edit summaries for "son", 
"Giles", "mistake" or "error". While this may not cover all, the impression 
I get is that this is little more than wishful thinking on his part. 



___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Flagged revisions in The Sunday Times

[Alvaro García]

Well maybe it said so here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roy_Hattersley

On Sat, Feb 7, 2009 at 20:27, Sam Blacketer wrote:

>
> http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/the_web/article5682896.ece
>
> Slightly confused article headed "The wiki-snobs are taking over" by Giles
> Hattersley. Misnames 'administrators' as 'arbitrators'. Towards the end the
> author claims "My entry features at least two errors, one libellous (unless
> my mother has been keeping a dark secret, I am not Roy Hattersley's son)"
> which has me befuddled since there is no entry on Giles Hattersley nor was
> there ever one (unless it's been oversighted).
>
> --
> Sam Blacketer
> ___
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>



-- 
Alvaro
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

[WikiEN-l] Flagged revisions in The Sunday Times

[Sam Blacketer]

http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/the_web/article5682896.ece

Slightly confused article headed "The wiki-snobs are taking over" by Giles
Hattersley. Misnames 'administrators' as 'arbitrators'. Towards the end the
author claims "My entry features at least two errors, one libellous (unless
my mother has been keeping a dark secret, I am not Roy Hattersley's son)"
which has me befuddled since there is no entry on Giles Hattersley nor was
there ever one (unless it's been oversighted).

-- 
Sam Blacketer
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Spoiler-driven plots on movies articles

[Alvaro García]

Thank you.

On Sat, Feb 7, 2009 at 19:03, Steve Summit  wrote:

> Nathan wrote:
> >On Sat, Feb 7, 2009 at 10:46 AM, Alvaro Garcia  wrote:
> >> Man, I'd never think everyone would be against me and insult me for a
> >> simple question!
> >
> > The argument over spoilers on Wikipedia is commonly referred to as
> > "the spoiler wars" - drawn out, contentious, with a bunch of radicalized
> > people on both sides. Since its settled, people are understandably not
> > interested in seeing it come up again.
>
> Not interested, sure.  But we probably shouldn't jump vigorously
> down the throats of people who come along and just ask, lest we
> give the impression that the radicalized people who got the
> quasiconsensus rammed through are afraid of having anything
> requestioned.
>
> ___
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>



-- 
Alvaro
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Spoiler-driven plots on movies articles

[Steve Summit]

Nathan wrote:
>On Sat, Feb 7, 2009 at 10:46 AM, Alvaro Garcia  wrote:
>> Man, I'd never think everyone would be against me and insult me for a
>> simple question!
>
> The argument over spoilers on Wikipedia is commonly referred to as
> "the spoiler wars" - drawn out, contentious, with a bunch of radicalized
> people on both sides. Since its settled, people are understandably not
> interested in seeing it come up again.

Not interested, sure.  But we probably shouldn't jump vigorously
down the throats of people who come along and just ask, lest we
give the impression that the radicalized people who got the
quasiconsensus rammed through are afraid of having anything
requestioned.

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] What is an orphan?

[Andrew Gray]

2009/2/7 Sage Ross :

> But it seems like there may naturally be a significant number of
> articles that ought to have only one incoming link, just based on the
> nature of topics and their relationships to each other and on the
> notion of "preferential attachment", which seems to describe the
> natural structure of knowledge.

The obvious examples would, I suppose, be daughter articles - "History
of widgets" or "Widgets in popular culture" is probably only ever
going to get a direct link from "Widgets"...

-- 
- Andrew Gray
  andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Spoiler-driven plots on movies articles

[Charlotte Webb]

On Sat, Feb 7, 2009 at 1:09 PM,   wrote:
> That's why *you* do it.  It's not why *I* do it.
> Sometimes years after I've seen a movie, I can't quite recall how it ended,
> and I'd like to know that without needing to watch it again.

Oh there will always be titles you can't find anywhere except maybe
"on ebay during a recession"... plus ones you wouldn't want to pay for
even if blockbuster has 250 copies of it.

—C.W.

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] What is an orphan?

[Sage Ross]

On Sat, Feb 7, 2009 at 1:03 PM, Charlotte Webb
 wrote:

>
> But even though you'll find disagreement about how many links are
> "enough" for a certain article. Five is right out. After a couple
> hundred you'll find people fighting the other way with their
> auto-delinking scripts/bots.
>
> —C.W.
>

What I took from distribution of links (with a whole lot of
highly-linked articles) is that the shape of that curve seems to fit
with other patterns that happen, e.g., in scientific literature, and
that this is in some sense natural.In writing that article, I
tried to emphasize the different numbers for certain classes of
under-linked articles without dwelling on any particular definition of
"orphan".  WikiProject Orphanage's definition seems useful for drawing
attention to the fact that proper linkage is more complex than just
"does anything link here, yes or no?".

But it seems like there may naturally be a significant number of
articles that ought to have only one incoming link, just based on the
nature of topics and their relationships to each other and on the
notion of "preferential attachment", which seems to describe the
natural structure of knowledge.

-Sage

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Spoiler-driven plots on movies articles

[WJhonson]

That's why *you* do it.  It's not why *I* do it.
Sometimes years after I've seen a movie, I can't quite recall how it ended,  
and I'd like to know that without needing to watch it again.
 
 
 
In a message dated 2/7/2009 7:35:00 A.M. Pacific Standard Time,  
alva...@gmail.com writes:

I'm not  saying I'd rather have a one-line plot, I'm just saying that   
spoilers aren't that necessary. You go to the article to see if you  go  
watch the movie, not to read it because you didn't get the chance  to  
watch it.

**Who's never won?  Biggest Grammy Award surprises of all time on 
AOL Music. 
(http://music.aol.com/grammys/pictures/never-won-a-grammy?ncid=emlcntusmusi0003)
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] What is an orphan?

[Charlotte Webb]

On Sat, Feb 7, 2009 at 11:17 AM, Charles Matthews
 wrote:
> I certainly think there should be one than one template addressing this
> issue, and preferably a "one or two links" template that only adds a
> category.

Don't need multiple templates necessarily. Just something like:
{{#ifexpr:{{{links|0}}} > 0
| {{ambox|...| visible banner part |...}} [[Category:Orphaned articles]]
| [[Category:Articles which aren't really orphaned but need more
incoming links]]
}}

Of course you'd have to run a bot to count whatlinkshere
(&namespace=0) and change the code from {{orphan|date=July 2002}} to
{{orphan|date=July 2002|links=3}} based on the number of the counting.

Some kind of magic word for {{NUMBEROFINBOUNDLINKS|0}} (last bit being
the namespace) would make this immeasurably easier.

But even though you'll find disagreement about how many links are
"enough" for a certain article. Five is right out. After a couple
hundred you'll find people fighting the other way with their
auto-delinking scripts/bots.

—C.W.

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] What is an orphan?

[Charles Matthews]

Charlotte Webb wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 3:24 AM, Charles Matthews
>  wrote:
>   
>> But in my view calling an article with two respectable incoming links an
>> "orphan" is quite misleading.
>> 
>
> I think the word is used subjectively for any article deemed to need
> more incoming links because the article's presence is for whatever
> reason under-represented among the remainder of article-space.
>
> Perhaps a different word should be adopted such as (I don't know)
> "lonely". But alas one term redirects to the other.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Lonelypages
>
>   
This came up because WikiProject Orphanage has (a) adopted "fewer than 
three" good incoming links as the standard for orphans, and (b) 
apparently thinks no one should take down {{orphan}} now unless there 
are those three links.  The Signpost story says half a million articles 
qualify as "orphan" in this new sense.  Therefore, while I'm someone 
concerned about hypertext issues in general and orphans in particular, I 
reckon some serious mission creep has been going on.  I have found 
articles that have the couple of good links you'd expect, and yet they 
are going to be adding to the "backlog" for the foreseeable future. I 
certainly think there should be one than one template addressing this 
issue, and preferably a "one or two links" template that only adds a 
category.

Charles


___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Spoiler-driven plots on movies articles

[Alvaro García]

--
Alvaro

On 07-02-2009, at 12:58, Casey Brown  wrote:

> On Sat, Feb 7, 2009 at 10:46 AM, Alvaro García  w 
> rote:
>> Wow man SORRY. I'm not arrogant, I'm just asking something!
>>
>> Man, I'd never think everyone would be against me and insult me for a
>> simple question!
>>
>
> I suggest you do what I do: only read the first paragraph. ;-)  When a
> movie is confusing though, I can look to Wikipedia when I'm like "what
> just happened?!" thanks to the complete plot.

Yeah, I've done that once.

>
> Don't worry, we don't think you're arrogant!  (However, you can see
> their point, I'm sure... the spoilers debate was a *huge* one that
> they don't want to bring up again.)

Ok, thank you!
>
> -- 
> Casey Brown
> Cbrown1023
>
> ---
> Note:  This e-mail address is used for mailing lists.  Personal  
> emails sent to
> this address will probably get lost.
>
> ___
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Spoiler-driven plots on movies articles

[Nathan]

On Sat, Feb 7, 2009 at 10:46 AM, Alvaro García  wrote:

> Wow man SORRY. I'm not arrogant, I'm just asking something!
>
> Man, I'd never think everyone would be against me and insult me for a
> simple question!
>

The argument over spoilers on Wikipedia is commonly referred to as
"the spoiler wars" - drawn out, contentious, with a bunch of radicalized
people on both sides. Since its settled, people are understandably not
interested in seeing it come up again.

Nathan
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Spoiler-driven plots on movies articles

[Casey Brown]

On Sat, Feb 7, 2009 at 10:46 AM, Alvaro García  wrote:
> Wow man SORRY. I'm not arrogant, I'm just asking something!
>
> Man, I'd never think everyone would be against me and insult me for a
> simple question!
>

I suggest you do what I do: only read the first paragraph. ;-)  When a
movie is confusing though, I can look to Wikipedia when I'm like "what
just happened?!" thanks to the complete plot.

Don't worry, we don't think you're arrogant!  (However, you can see
their point, I'm sure... the spoilers debate was a *huge* one that
they don't want to bring up again.)

-- 
Casey Brown
Cbrown1023

---
Note:  This e-mail address is used for mailing lists.  Personal emails sent to
this address will probably get lost.

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Spoiler-driven plots on movies articles

[Alvaro García]

Wow man SORRY. I'm not arrogant, I'm just asking something!

Man, I'd never think everyone would be against me and insult me for a  
simple question!


--
Alvaro

On 07-02-2009, at 12:38, Gwern Branwen  wrote:

> On Sat, Feb 7, 2009 at 10:34 AM, Alvaro García  w 
> rote:
>> I'm not saying I'd rather have a one-line plot, I'm just saying that
>> spoilers aren't that necessary. You go to the article to see if you  
>> go
>> watch the movie, not to read it because you didn't get the chance to
>> watch it.
>
> That may be true for you.
>
> I, at least, would not be so arrogant and narrow-minded as to suggest
> that my particular use of Wikipedia articles is *the* use to which
> they should be put. And I certainly wouldn't suggest that articles
> shouldn't contain anything but what serves my particular interest.
>
> -- 
> gwern
>
> ___
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Spoiler-driven plots on movies articles

[David Goodman]

We are not a movie guide, but an encyclopedia. There are a great many
reasons why people might want to read an encyclopedia article about a
movie. Very high among them is to find out about the movies one hasn't
seen and never will.

If you   want a movie guide to read up on whether  you want to go to
or rent a movie, there are more appropriate sources.

On Sat, Feb 7, 2009 at 10:34 AM, Alvaro García  wrote:
> I'm not saying I'd rather have a one-line plot, I'm just saying that
> spoilers aren't that necessary. You go to the article to see if you go
> watch the movie, not to read it because you didn't get the chance to
> watch it.
>
>
> --
> Alvaro
>
> On 07-02-2009, at 12:21, "K. Peachey"  wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Feb 8, 2009 at 12:25 AM, Alvaro García  w
>> rote:
>>> Hey,
>>>
>>> I have a question:
>>> Every time I go to a movie page to know how it is, I read the Plot
>>> section. However, I have realised that 95% of them write about key
>>> twists or scenes and they even tell the ending. I have thought of
>>> editing some of them, but I thought I'd rather ask here first.
>>>
>>> Are movie articles supposed to tell you ALL the movie?
>>>
>>> Thank you,
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Alvaro
>> Yes, otherwise it would be like "Harry Potter is a wizard" you might
>> like to look at [[en:wp:spoiler]]
>> 
>>
>> ___
>> WikiEN-l mailing list
>> WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
> ___
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>



-- 
David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Spoiler-driven plots on movies articles

[Gwern Branwen]

On Sat, Feb 7, 2009 at 10:34 AM, Alvaro García  wrote:
> I'm not saying I'd rather have a one-line plot, I'm just saying that
> spoilers aren't that necessary. You go to the article to see if you go
> watch the movie, not to read it because you didn't get the chance to
> watch it.

That may be true for you.

I, at least, would not be so arrogant and narrow-minded as to suggest
that my particular use of Wikipedia articles is *the* use to which
they should be put. And I certainly wouldn't suggest that articles
shouldn't contain anything but what serves my particular interest.

-- 
gwern

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Spoiler-driven plots on movies articles

[Al Tally]

On Sat, Feb 7, 2009 at 3:34 PM, Alvaro García  wrote:

> I'm not saying I'd rather have a one-line plot, I'm just saying that
> spoilers aren't that necessary. You go to the article to see if you go
> watch the movie, not to read it because you didn't get the chance to
> watch it.
>
>
> --
> Alvaro
>

Without the "spoilers" the article is incomplete. If you want to read the
plot without having the ending spoiled, try IMDB or something.

-- 
Alex
(User:Majorly)
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Spoiler-driven plots on movies articles

[Alvaro García]

I'm not saying I'd rather have a one-line plot, I'm just saying that  
spoilers aren't that necessary. You go to the article to see if you go  
watch the movie, not to read it because you didn't get the chance to  
watch it.


--
Alvaro

On 07-02-2009, at 12:21, "K. Peachey"  wrote:

> On Sun, Feb 8, 2009 at 12:25 AM, Alvaro García  w 
> rote:
>> Hey,
>>
>> I have a question:
>> Every time I go to a movie page to know how it is, I read the Plot
>> section. However, I have realised that 95% of them write about key
>> twists or scenes and they even tell the ending. I have thought of
>> editing some of them, but I thought I'd rather ask here first.
>>
>> Are movie articles supposed to tell you ALL the movie?
>>
>> Thank you,
>>
>>
>> --
>> Alvaro
> Yes, otherwise it would be like "Harry Potter is a wizard" you might
> like to look at [[en:wp:spoiler]]
> 
>
> ___
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Spoiler-driven plots on movies articles

[K. Peachey]

On Sun, Feb 8, 2009 at 12:25 AM, Alvaro García  wrote:
> Hey,
>
> I have a question:
> Every time I go to a movie page to know how it is, I read the Plot
> section. However, I have realised that 95% of them write about key
> twists or scenes and they even tell the ending. I have thought of
> editing some of them, but I thought I'd rather ask here first.
>
> Are movie articles supposed to tell you ALL the movie?
>
> Thank you,
>
>
> --
> Alvaro
Yes, otherwise it would be like "Harry Potter is a wizard" you might
like to look at [[en:wp:spoiler]]


___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Spoiler-driven plots on movies articles

[Carcharoth]

On Sat, Feb 7, 2009 at 2:29 PM, Al Tally  wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 7, 2009 at 2:25 PM, Alvaro García  wrote:
>
>> Hey,
>>
>> I have a question:
>> Every time I go to a movie page to know how it is, I read the Plot
>> section. However, I have realised that 95% of them write about key
>> twists or scenes and they even tell the ending. I have thought of
>> editing some of them, but I thought I'd rather ask here first.
>>
>> Are movie articles supposed to tell you ALL the movie?
>>
>> Thank you, 
>>
>
> Yes, otherwise the article would be incomplete.

There was more to it than that. But please, no rehashing of the
arguments. Could someone point to previous discussion? Unless it's
been long enough since the last discussion.

Carcharoth

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] Spoiler-driven plots on movies articles

[Al Tally]

On Sat, Feb 7, 2009 at 2:25 PM, Alvaro García  wrote:

> Hey,
>
> I have a question:
> Every time I go to a movie page to know how it is, I read the Plot
> section. However, I have realised that 95% of them write about key
> twists or scenes and they even tell the ending. I have thought of
> editing some of them, but I thought I'd rather ask here first.
>
> Are movie articles supposed to tell you ALL the movie?
>
> Thank you, 
>

Yes, otherwise the article would be incomplete.

-- 
Alex
(User:Majorly)
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

[WikiEN-l] Spoiler-driven plots on movies articles

[Alvaro García]

Hey,

I have a question:
Every time I go to a movie page to know how it is, I read the Plot  
section. However, I have realised that 95% of them write about key  
twists or scenes and they even tell the ending. I have thought of  
editing some of them, but I thought I'd rather ask here first.

Are movie articles supposed to tell you ALL the movie?

Thank you,


--
Alvaro

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] What is an orphan?

[Alvaro García]

I'm curious, is that your name?


--
Alvaro

On 07-02-2009, at 10:08, Charlotte Webb   
wrote:

> On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 3:24 AM, Charles Matthews
>  wrote:
>> But in my view calling an article with two respectable incoming  
>> links an
>> "orphan" is quite misleading.
>
> I think the word is used subjectively for any article deemed to need
> more incoming links because the article's presence is for whatever
> reason under-represented among the remainder of article-space.
>
> Perhaps a different word should be adopted such as (I don't know)
> "lonely". But alas one term redirects to the other.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Lonelypages
>
> —C.W.
>
> ___
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

Re: [WikiEN-l] What is an orphan?

[Charlotte Webb]

On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 3:24 AM, Charles Matthews
 wrote:
> But in my view calling an article with two respectable incoming links an
> "orphan" is quite misleading.

I think the word is used subjectively for any article deemed to need
more incoming links because the article's presence is for whatever
reason under-represented among the remainder of article-space.

Perhaps a different word should be adopted such as (I don't know)
"lonely". But alas one term redirects to the other.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Lonelypages

—C.W.

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l