Re: [WikiEN-l] So, what is the deal with flagged revisions?

[Daniel R. Tobias]

On Thu, 27 Aug 2009 14:52:48 +0100 (BST), Andrew Turvey wrote:

> See [[Wikipedia:Reviewers]] for more information.

Not to be confused with Wikipedia Review, of course.


-- 
== Dan ==
Dan's Mail Format Site: http://mailformat.dan.info/
Dan's Web Tips: http://webtips.dan.info/
Dan's Domain Site: http://domains.dan.info/



___
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] Well-sourced nonsense vs. unsourced competence

[David Goodman]

>From the excellent little book "Keywords in Evolutionary Biology" by
Evelyn Fox Keller & Elisabeth Lloyd,
 "Adaptation, Current uses" by Mary Jane West-Eberhard,

"An 'adaptation' is a characteristic of an organism whose form is the
result of selection in a particular functional context  Accordingly.
the process of 'adaptation' is the evolutionary modification of a
character under selection for efficient or advantageous
(fitness-enhancing) functioning in a particular context  p.13



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



On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 1:53 AM, stevertigo wrote:
> Well-sourced junk that reads like it belongs on Simple En.wiki:
>
> '''Adaptation''' is one of the basic phenomena of
> biology.Williams, George C. 1966. ''Adaptation and natural
> selection: a critique of some current evolutionary thought''.
> Princeton. "Evolutionary adaptation is a phenomenon of pervasive
> importance in biology." p5 It is the process whereby an organism
> becomes better suited to its [[habitat]].The ''Oxford Dictionary
> of Science'' defines ''adaptation'' as "Any change in the structure or
> functioning of an organism that makes it better suited to its
> environment". Also, the term ''adaptation'' may refer to a
> characteristic which is especially important for an organism's
> survival.Both uses of the term 'adaptation' are recognized by
> King R.C. Stansfield W.D. and Mulligan P. 2006. ''A dictionary of
> genetics''. Oxford, 7th ed. For example, the adaptation of
> horses' teeth to the grinding of grass, or their ability to run fast
> and escape predators. Such adaptations are produced in a variable
> population by the better suited forms reproducing more successfully,
> that is, by [[natural selection]].
>
> The above will be changed, obviously. Note also the large inline
>  make editing difficult, which in turn lets nonsense writing
> persist. If we can't come up with some better technical means of
> separation - all ref tags under their own invisible section maybe -
> then at least carriage-returns - putting the  on the next line -
> would work well enough. Still showing up the same in view mode, but
> the text can actually be readable in edit mode).
>
> Anyway, working on something unsourced like:
>
> In [[biology]], '''adaptation''' is an observed ''effect'' of the
> process of [[evolution]]  —wherein canonical [[organism]]s
> (species) appear to [[change]] over time to survive more efficiently
> within their [[habitat]]. The concept of adaptation was developed
> before the theory of evolution —Lamarck had made some
> groundbreaking observations which inspired Darwin. "Adaptation" in
> reality does not refer to changes within individual organisms, but to
> the canonical form of the species — changes brought about by a
> process of [[natural selection]]. "Adaptation" in the context of
> biology, thus is a largely a colloquialism for natural selection.
>
> -Stevertigo
> Sources available upon request.
>
> ___
> 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] Look This Up on Wikipedia: How Big Is Too Big?

[Keith Old]

Folks,
The "New York Times" Bits blog has a small section on Wikimania.

Considering that
Wikipedia
has
reached Top Five world status among Web sites – with more than 330 million
users – its annual Wikimania conference, which ended Friday night in Buenos
Aires, featured a lot of hand-wringing about all the problems the project
faces.

After emerging on the scene less than a decade ago, growth is slowing down.
Why? Are new contributors being scared away? Are there too many rules? Why
are the biggest players in the community overwhelmingly men? And white? And
will Wikipedia ever become a true global phenomenon, as relevant to the
lives of people in the third world as it is in the developed world?

Like a freelancer suddenly overwhelmed with assignments, Wikipedians often
found themselves looking back at the sleepy days when they were largely left
alone. Scratch that. Maybe the better comparison is to the successful
journalists who look back to the time when they were so busy they never had
time to reflect.

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/08/29/look-this-up-on-wikipedia-how-big-is-too-big/

(More in story)


Regards



Keith
___
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] WikiEN-l Digest, Vol 73, Issue 110

[stevertigo]

PS: Daniel, we know you read the digests, but would you please change
the subject header in your replies to match the actual header of the
thread? Thanks.

-Stevertigo

___
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] WikiEN-l Digest, Vol 73, Issue 110

[Thomas Dalton]

2009/8/29 stevertigo :
> Daniel R. Tobias wrote:
>> On Mon, 24 Aug 2009 21:31:24 -0700, stevertigo wrote:
>
>> {{fact}}... WHOIS shows that interpedia.org was regisgtered 16-Jan-
>> 2005, and webpedia.org on 20-Jul-2004, which are both after Wikipedia
>> was founded in 2001.
>
> So I was wrong about those domain names being taken, unless there were
> previous lessors not shown on the history. But note that I used the
> dots (...) to indicate these as variables just so noone would get any
> ideas about specific particular domains.

"Wiki" was a very important part of the name, I doubt anything like
interpedia or webpedia were considered since they would fit Nupedia
better. Wikipedia was never intended to be an online encyclopaedia in
its own right, it was intended as a feeder project for Nupedia. It was
well after the name was chosen that it was realised Wikipedia was a
great idea on its own in isolation of Nupedia.

___
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] WikiEN-l Digest, Vol 73, Issue 110

[stevertigo]

Daniel R. Tobias wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Aug 2009 21:31:24 -0700, stevertigo wrote:

> {{fact}}... WHOIS shows that interpedia.org was regisgtered 16-Jan-
> 2005, and webpedia.org on 20-Jul-2004, which are both after Wikipedia
> was founded in 2001.

So I was wrong about those domain names being taken, unless there were
previous lessors not shown on the history. But note that I used the
dots (...) to indicate these as variables just so noone would get any
ideas about specific particular domains.

Still the point about the words semantics remains valid, though I
understand if we renamed the site - choosing to view ourselves under a
different concept than "quick[ness]" - then the only major popular
usage of a Hawaiian word in a formalistic educational context might
vanish from the Earfh: The philosopher/semanticist in me still wants a
change, even if the etymologist in me likes the idea that we use
something other than Greek or Latin.

- Stevertigo

___
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] WikiEN-l Digest, Vol 73, Issue 110

[Daniel R. Tobias]

On Mon, 24 Aug 2009 21:31:24 -0700, stevertigo wrote:

> ( 3b) (It's the infrastructure/databases/operatingsystems/browsers
> themselves that facilitate this ease - not just "wiki." Still, we
> don't call ourselves the "inter...pedia" or the "web..pedia" for a
> reason: Those domain names were already taken. ;-) )

{{fact}}... WHOIS shows that interpedia.org was regisgtered 16-Jan-
2005, and webpedia.org on 20-Jul-2004, which are both after Wikipedia 
was founded in 2001.


-- 
== Dan ==
Dan's Mail Format Site: http://mailformat.dan.info/
Dan's Web Tips: http://webtips.dan.info/
Dan's Domain Site: http://domains.dan.info/



___
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] Well-sourced nonsense vs. unsourced competence

[David Gerard]

2009/8/29  :

> How do we know who twit? or tweet?
> When a celebrity has an official web page, we can be fairly certain that
> what is posted there as the core content is by their own authority.
> How do you do that with tweets?


Some celeb accounts are verified. Also, if the twitter feed is linked
from their official web page, you can be reasonably confident it's
theirs, if not them personally!


- d.

___
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] Well-sourced nonsense vs. unsourced competence

[WJhonson]

How do we know who twit? or tweet?
When a celebrity has an official web page, we can be fairly certain that  
what is posted there as the core content is by their own authority.
How do you do that with tweets?
 
 
 
In a message dated 8/29/2009 12:04:01 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,  
carcharot...@googlemail.com writes:

What I'm  wondering is whether that
counts as a source, and if so what sort and how  and whether it should
be used (I'd say Wikipedia should hold itself aloof  from gutter
journalism and celebrity  wranglings).

___
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] Well-sourced nonsense vs. unsourced competence

[Carcharoth]

On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 6:48 PM, stevertigo wrote:



> Still, we see cases all the time where the fundamental components have
> been around for years and even decades - it took vision, not work, to
> figure out how to put them together in a better way. For example,
> 160-character messaging, technically speaking, is a limitation - not
> an innovation. ;)

Talking of Twitter, I read recently of some celebrity using it to
really say rather strong things about the bloggers and journalists
saying things about her. I won't name the celebrity, but some people
might be able to guess which one. What I'm wondering is whether that
counts as a source, and if so what sort and how and whether it should
be used (I'd say Wikipedia should hold itself aloof from gutter
journalism and celebrity wranglings).

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] Well-sourced nonsense vs. unsourced competence

[stevertigo]

FT2 wrote:
> Indeed. It was a milestone compared to what went before, and enabled citing
> to become a norm or expectation (rather than an option) in practice not just
> theory.
>
> But its some years on and we're in the #5 and useability... methynks we can
> do better still :)

Well, people who actually work on things tend to be conservative, and
like their work to be appreciated. Coincidentally, conservatism in
general is largely about just appreciating what's been done and what
actually *is. Liberals and forward thinkers tend to get too interested
in what could be, forgetting that what *is took work - work that we
futurists may not actually be capable of doing ourselves.

Still, we see cases all the time where the fundamental components have
been around for years and even decades - it took vision, not work, to
figure out how to put them together in a better way. For example,
160-character messaging, technically speaking, is a limitation - not
an innovation. ;)

-Stevertigo

___
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] How to Not Bite was Positives to publicity

[Emily Monroe]

> Is there an easy way to identify new editors?

Good question. I'm interested in hearing the answer.

Emily
On Aug 29, 2009, at 12:40 PM, FT2 wrote:

> Is there an easy way to identify new editors? As in, new accounts  
> are easy,
> but many users start as IPs.
>
> FT2
>
>
>
> On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 6:32 PM, Emily Monroe   
> wrote:
>
>>> The Welcome Wagon sought to bring them into the community
>>
>> If it was bought back, would it survive?
>>
>> Emily
>> On Aug 28, 2009, at 11:06 PM, Keegan Paul wrote:
>>
>>> The Welcoming "committee" is a central repository for welcoming new
>>> users.
>>> The Welcome Wagon sought to bring them into the community, much like
>>> the
>>> neighbor that knocks on your door with brownies and tells you all  
>>> the
>>> sekrets about the neighbors.
>>>
>>> On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 4:50 PM, Emily Monroe 
>>> wrote:
>>>
> The Welcome Wagon, like Esperanza, got taken out back and shot a  
> few
> years ago when we decided to remove traces of perceived social
> networking in late '06 early '07.

 What was the Welcome Wagon, and how is it different from the
 Welcoming
 Committee?

 Emily
 On Aug 28, 2009, at 3:35 PM, Keegan Paul wrote:

> The Welcome Wagon, like Esperanza, got taken out back and shot a  
> few
> years
> ago when we decided to remove traces of perceived social  
> networking
> in late
> '06 early '07.  The Birthday crew is really all that remains.
>
> On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 3:31 PM,  wrote:
>
>> Welcome Wagon, we used to have one didn't we?  I don't know what
>> happened
>> to it, it seems like stale news.
>>
>>
>> Free Tutor Program - new users can choose to sign up for tutoring
>> for $10
>> an hour... ok or free whatever.  Have you been bitten?  Are you
>> frustrated?
>> Do you get laid often enough? (ok scratch that)  Sign Up Now, Not
>> Available
>> in Stores, Supplies are Running Out - for Wiki Tutoring!
>>
>> ___
>> WikiEN-l mailing list
>> WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>>
>
>
>
> --
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Keegan
> ___
> 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

>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Keegan
>>> ___
>>> 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] How to Not Bite was Positives to publicity

[FT2]

Is there an easy way to identify new editors? As in, new accounts are easy,
but many users start as IPs.

FT2



On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 6:32 PM, Emily Monroe  wrote:

> > The Welcome Wagon sought to bring them into the community
>
> If it was bought back, would it survive?
>
> Emily
> On Aug 28, 2009, at 11:06 PM, Keegan Paul wrote:
>
> > The Welcoming "committee" is a central repository for welcoming new
> > users.
> > The Welcome Wagon sought to bring them into the community, much like
> > the
> > neighbor that knocks on your door with brownies and tells you all the
> > sekrets about the neighbors.
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 4:50 PM, Emily Monroe 
> > wrote:
> >
> >>> The Welcome Wagon, like Esperanza, got taken out back and shot a few
> >>> years ago when we decided to remove traces of perceived social
> >>> networking in late '06 early '07.
> >>
> >> What was the Welcome Wagon, and how is it different from the
> >> Welcoming
> >> Committee?
> >>
> >> Emily
> >> On Aug 28, 2009, at 3:35 PM, Keegan Paul wrote:
> >>
> >>> The Welcome Wagon, like Esperanza, got taken out back and shot a few
> >>> years
> >>> ago when we decided to remove traces of perceived social networking
> >>> in late
> >>> '06 early '07.  The Birthday crew is really all that remains.
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 3:31 PM,  wrote:
> >>>
>  Welcome Wagon, we used to have one didn't we?  I don't know what
>  happened
>  to it, it seems like stale news.
> 
> 
>  Free Tutor Program - new users can choose to sign up for tutoring
>  for $10
>  an hour... ok or free whatever.  Have you been bitten?  Are you
>  frustrated?
>  Do you get laid often enough? (ok scratch that)  Sign Up Now, Not
>  Available
>  in Stores, Supplies are Running Out - for Wiki Tutoring!
> 
>  ___
>  WikiEN-l mailing list
>  WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>  To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
>  https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
> 
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Keegan
> >>> ___
> >>> 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
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Keegan
> > ___
> > 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] Well-sourced nonsense vs. unsourced competence

[stevertigo]

FT2 :
>> One immediate if minor advantage: old references don't get lost from the
>> text, when their first mention is removed.

Yeah, that's the practical reason for keeping refs with text. Its a
valid argument against separating them.

Andrew Gray wrote:
> There's a bot running - or, at least, was recently - that looks for
> unmatched  comments and digs through the article
> history to find a matching ref. It's pretty neat.

Ah. So, AIUI a bot might be able to do the same thing - but be
modified to remove the bulk of the ref tag to a separate hidden ref
tags section at bottom. All [sic] that would have to be done then is
to separate the 'first' ref tag (the big one) from the tag itself,
leaving the tag inplace.

The only issue then [sic] is that the 'hidden refs section' (where all
the ref text goes) would still show ref numbers [] in view mode. Maybe
just keeping a visible section full of visible ref numbers and hidden
ref text would work - even if people won't like it. Isn't there's a
tag function that can  from showing?

-Stevertigo

___
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] Well-sourced nonsense vs. unsourced competence

[FT2]

Indeed. It was a milestone compared to what went before, and enabled citing
to become a norm or expectation (rather than an option) in practice not just
theory.

But its some years on and we're in the #5 and useability... methynks we can
do better still :)

FT2


On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 6:31 PM, stevertigo  wrote:

> FT2 wrote:
> > Actually is there a reason why refs couldn't have a separate section?
> > The main disadvantage would be technical - revision data held in an extra
> > field.
>
> IIRC Greg Maxwell mentioned something about this a couple years ago.
> He acknowledged the issue of diminished edit-mode readability was
> valid, but there was a technical and practical issue with putting refs
> in a separate section. At the time, as his  setup was new and
> quite an improvement over the previous, so there wasn't much interest
> in improving its inferface issues.
>
> -Stevertigo
>
> ___
> 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] How to Not Bite was Positives to publicity

[Emily Monroe]

> The Welcome Wagon sought to bring them into the community

If it was bought back, would it survive?

Emily
On Aug 28, 2009, at 11:06 PM, Keegan Paul wrote:

> The Welcoming "committee" is a central repository for welcoming new  
> users.
> The Welcome Wagon sought to bring them into the community, much like  
> the
> neighbor that knocks on your door with brownies and tells you all the
> sekrets about the neighbors.
>
> On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 4:50 PM, Emily Monroe   
> wrote:
>
>>> The Welcome Wagon, like Esperanza, got taken out back and shot a few
>>> years ago when we decided to remove traces of perceived social
>>> networking in late '06 early '07.
>>
>> What was the Welcome Wagon, and how is it different from the  
>> Welcoming
>> Committee?
>>
>> Emily
>> On Aug 28, 2009, at 3:35 PM, Keegan Paul wrote:
>>
>>> The Welcome Wagon, like Esperanza, got taken out back and shot a few
>>> years
>>> ago when we decided to remove traces of perceived social networking
>>> in late
>>> '06 early '07.  The Birthday crew is really all that remains.
>>>
>>> On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 3:31 PM,  wrote:
>>>
 Welcome Wagon, we used to have one didn't we?  I don't know what
 happened
 to it, it seems like stale news.


 Free Tutor Program - new users can choose to sign up for tutoring
 for $10
 an hour... ok or free whatever.  Have you been bitten?  Are you
 frustrated?
 Do you get laid often enough? (ok scratch that)  Sign Up Now, Not
 Available
 in Stores, Supplies are Running Out - for Wiki Tutoring!

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

>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Keegan
>>> ___
>>> 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
>>
>
>
>
> -- 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Keegan
> ___
> 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] How to Not Bite was Positives to publicity

[Emily Monroe]

> Nice signature... I found this in my spam box. :)

Yeah, anytime I see something in my junk email "drawer", I assume it's  
Will Johnson. Not that there's anything wrong with that...

Emily
On Aug 28, 2009, at 10:19 PM, Soxred93 wrote:

> Nice signature... I found this in my spam box. :)
>
> -X!
>
> On Aug 28, 2009, at 4:31 PM, wjhon...@aol.com wrote:
>
>> Welcome Wagon, we used to have one didn't we?  I don't know what
>> happened
>> to it, it seems like stale news.
>>
>>
>> Free Tutor Program - new users can choose to sign up for tutoring
>> for $10
>> an hour... ok or free whatever.  Have you been bitten?  Are you
>> frustrated?
>> Do you get laid often enough? (ok scratch that)  Sign Up Now, Not
>> Available
>> in Stores, Supplies are Running Out - for Wiki Tutoring!
>>
>> ___
>> 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] Well-sourced nonsense vs. unsourced competence

[stevertigo]

FT2 wrote:
> Actually is there a reason why refs couldn't have a separate section?
> The main disadvantage would be technical - revision data held in an extra
> field.

IIRC Greg Maxwell mentioned something about this a couple years ago.
He acknowledged the issue of diminished edit-mode readability was
valid, but there was a technical and practical issue with putting refs
in a separate section. At the time, as his  setup was new and
quite an improvement over the previous, so there wasn't much interest
in improving its inferface issues.

-Stevertigo

___
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] Rorchach foes strike back

[Daniel R. Tobias]

On Mon, 24 Aug 2009 01:06:19 -0400 (EST), gwe...@gmail.com wrote:

> "Complaint Over Doctor Who Posted Inkblot Test"
> http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/24/business/24inkblot.html

How is Doctor Who involved in this?  Were the inkblots retrieved by 
way of the Tardis?  :-)


-- 
== Dan ==
Dan's Mail Format Site: http://mailformat.dan.info/
Dan's Web Tips: http://webtips.dan.info/
Dan's Domain Site: http://domains.dan.info/



___
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] So, what is the deal with flagged revisions?

[Emily Monroe]

> the lack of visible reward will have the same effect on them as on  
> new contributors.

What can we do about that?

Emily
On Aug 28, 2009, at 9:08 PM, David Goodman wrote:

> the lack of visible reward will have the same effect on them as on new
> contributors.
>
> David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG
>
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 2:15 PM, David Gerard  
> wrote:
>> 2009/8/28 Thomas Dalton :
>>> 2009/8/28 David Gerard :
>>
 Protection is a failure of the wiki model in the first place.
 Discussion is a poor substitute for editing.
>>
>>> Edit warring is a failure of the wiki model. We use protection to
>>> force people into a discussion model which works better in those
>>> situations.
>>
>>
>> Yeah, it's all imperfect. What I mean is, that's a bit of process for
>> a particular purpose, and if we need it with flagged revs as we do
>> with full protection, then we can reintroduce it when we do. I think
>> the lack of visible reward will be helpful in dealing with everyday
>> edit warriors. (If people with the reviewer bit edit-war with it, one
>> or both is likely to get a strong word at the very least.)
>>
>>
>> - d.
>>
>> ___
>> 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] Well-sourced nonsense vs. unsourced competence

[Andrew Gray]

2009/8/29 FT2 :
> One immediate if minor advantage: old references don't get lost from the
> text, when their first mention is removed.

There's a bot running - or, at least, was recently - that looks for
unmatched  comments and digs through the article
history to find a matching ref. It's pretty neat.

-- 
- 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] Well-sourced nonsense vs. unsourced competence

[FT2]

One immediate if minor advantage: old references don't get lost from the
text, when their first mention is removed.

FT2


On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 10:19 AM, FT2  wrote:

> Actually is there a reason why refs couldn't have a separate section?
>
> The main disadvantage would be technical - revision data held in an extra
> field.
>
> What you'd have is a list of named references, and the main text only
> including  and  tags. As the cursor
> moves to a ref tag in the article, the references list (separate text box
> below) scrolls to that citation, which can be edited.
>
> Some minor details to be worked out but... any mileage?
>
> FT2
>
>
>
> On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 6:53 AM, stevertigo  wrote:
>
>> Well-sourced junk that reads like it belongs on Simple En.wiki:
>>
>> '''Adaptation''' is one of the basic phenomena of
>> biology.Williams, George C. 1966. ''Adaptation and natural
>> selection: a critique of some current evolutionary thought''.
>> Princeton. "Evolutionary adaptation is a phenomenon of pervasive
>> importance in biology." p5 It is the process whereby an organism
>> becomes better suited to its [[habitat]].The ''Oxford Dictionary
>> of Science'' defines ''adaptation'' as "Any change in the structure or
>> functioning of an organism that makes it better suited to its
>> environment". Also, the term ''adaptation'' may refer to a
>> characteristic which is especially important for an organism's
>> survival.Both uses of the term 'adaptation' are recognized by
>> King R.C. Stansfield W.D. and Mulligan P. 2006. ''A dictionary of
>> genetics''. Oxford, 7th ed. For example, the adaptation of
>> horses' teeth to the grinding of grass, or their ability to run fast
>> and escape predators. Such adaptations are produced in a variable
>> population by the better suited forms reproducing more successfully,
>> that is, by [[natural selection]].
>>
>> The above will be changed, obviously. Note also the large inline
>>  make editing difficult, which in turn lets nonsense writing
>> persist. If we can't come up with some better technical means of
>> separation - all ref tags under their own invisible section maybe -
>> then at least carriage-returns - putting the  on the next line -
>> would work well enough. Still showing up the same in view mode, but
>> the text can actually be readable in edit mode).
>>
>> Anyway, working on something unsourced like:
>>
>> In [[biology]], '''adaptation''' is an observed ''effect'' of the
>> process of [[evolution]]  —wherein canonical [[organism]]s
>> (species) appear to [[change]] over time to survive more efficiently
>> within their [[habitat]]. The concept of adaptation was developed
>> before the theory of evolution —Lamarck had made some
>> groundbreaking observations which inspired Darwin. "Adaptation" in
>> reality does not refer to changes within individual organisms, but to
>> the canonical form of the species — changes brought about by a
>> process of [[natural selection]]. "Adaptation" in the context of
>> biology, thus is a largely a colloquialism for natural selection.
>>
>> -Stevertigo
>> Sources available upon request.
>>
>> ___
>> 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] Well-sourced nonsense vs. unsourced competence

[FT2]

Actually is there a reason why refs couldn't have a separate section?

The main disadvantage would be technical - revision data held in an extra
field.

What you'd have is a list of named references, and the main text only
including  and  tags. As the cursor
moves to a ref tag in the article, the references list (separate text box
below) scrolls to that citation, which can be edited.

Some minor details to be worked out but... any mileage?

FT2



On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 6:53 AM, stevertigo  wrote:

> Well-sourced junk that reads like it belongs on Simple En.wiki:
>
> '''Adaptation''' is one of the basic phenomena of
> biology.Williams, George C. 1966. ''Adaptation and natural
> selection: a critique of some current evolutionary thought''.
> Princeton. "Evolutionary adaptation is a phenomenon of pervasive
> importance in biology." p5 It is the process whereby an organism
> becomes better suited to its [[habitat]].The ''Oxford Dictionary
> of Science'' defines ''adaptation'' as "Any change in the structure or
> functioning of an organism that makes it better suited to its
> environment". Also, the term ''adaptation'' may refer to a
> characteristic which is especially important for an organism's
> survival.Both uses of the term 'adaptation' are recognized by
> King R.C. Stansfield W.D. and Mulligan P. 2006. ''A dictionary of
> genetics''. Oxford, 7th ed. For example, the adaptation of
> horses' teeth to the grinding of grass, or their ability to run fast
> and escape predators. Such adaptations are produced in a variable
> population by the better suited forms reproducing more successfully,
> that is, by [[natural selection]].
>
> The above will be changed, obviously. Note also the large inline
>  make editing difficult, which in turn lets nonsense writing
> persist. If we can't come up with some better technical means of
> separation - all ref tags under their own invisible section maybe -
> then at least carriage-returns - putting the  on the next line -
> would work well enough. Still showing up the same in view mode, but
> the text can actually be readable in edit mode).
>
> Anyway, working on something unsourced like:
>
> In [[biology]], '''adaptation''' is an observed ''effect'' of the
> process of [[evolution]]  —wherein canonical [[organism]]s
> (species) appear to [[change]] over time to survive more efficiently
> within their [[habitat]]. The concept of adaptation was developed
> before the theory of evolution —Lamarck had made some
> groundbreaking observations which inspired Darwin. "Adaptation" in
> reality does not refer to changes within individual organisms, but to
> the canonical form of the species — changes brought about by a
> process of [[natural selection]]. "Adaptation" in the context of
> biology, thus is a largely a colloquialism for natural selection.
>
> -Stevertigo
> Sources available upon request.
>
> ___
> 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