2009/1/19 Nathan nawr...@gmail.com:
Instance number 192,453,345,252 that someone complains about something that
makes no sense and turns out to be completely wrong. Next!
No-one said that.
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To
2009/1/19 Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com:
Indeed, but competition is good so I wish them all the best, even if
the challenge before them may turn out to be impossible.
Oh yeah. Enough people complain that Wikipedia and/or its community is
hopelessly broken that there's got to be more
On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 9:35 PM, Skyring skyr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 11:16 AM, Delirium delir...@hackish.org wrote:
Delirium wrote:
... strongly discourage edits that change one to
another, unless the article's strongly associated with a specific
English-speaking country
On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 8:29 AM, James Farrar james.far...@gmail.com wrote:
Which brings up the question What is Wikipedia?. Is meta-content
like User: space and Wikipedia: space actually part of Wikipedia?
A question I thought of after reading
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Angr this]. Is
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 1:20 AM, Wily D wilydoppelgan...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 9:35 PM, Skyring skyr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 11:16 AM, Delirium delir...@hackish.org wrote:
Delirium wrote:
... strongly discourage edits that change one to
another, unless
On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 10:23 AM, Ron Ritzman ritz...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 8:29 AM, James Farrar james.far...@gmail.com wrote:
Which brings up the question What is Wikipedia?. Is meta-content
like User: space and Wikipedia: space actually part of Wikipedia?
A question I
The problem is *this* particular example is on commons. If james meant
to point out our complex image policy.. He should have linked to a
closed discussion on en wiki.
Common's rules are simpler then en wiki... Most of the complexity is
really copyright law.
On 1/19/09, Ron Ritzman
The problem is picking the correct one involves lots of drama and
arbcom cases. Drama that we did not have before the unlinking of
dates. (This I a direct consequence of date unlinking)
To be honest, I wonder if there is a way to reformat dates by .js
script... We could have two scripts... One 1
Right, but it is on wikimedia commons.
If it were hosted on en wikipedia, you could argue fair use, etc. As
far as the image's current status, I explained that in a prior post.
Remember commons hosts only free images.
On 1/19/09, James Farrar james.far...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/1/19 Wilhelm
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 3:33 AM, Wilhelm Schnotz wilh...@nixeagle.org wrote:
The problem is picking the correct one involves lots of drama and
arbcom cases. Drama that we did not have before the unlinking of
dates. (This I a direct consequence of date unlinking)
Picking the correct format for
2009/1/19 James Farrar james.far...@gmail.com:
True, but IMX images hosted on enwiki get moved to commons PDQ.
Not always. There are situations where they cannot be moved and
notices are placed. In this case however the image could not be used
on en since we don't allow non free images outside
Sure, we have one going on now just over the *unlinking*. Check
WP:RFAR under current cases.
We have had problems with types of English being an issue and going to
arbcom, this is the same type of thing... Now that it is harder to set
your settings to hide the wrong format (now it is as difficult
On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 6:36 PM, Christopher Grant chrisgrantm...@gmail.com
wrote:
We have bots that do that, grawp still gets through(part of the reason is
that these proxies need to be blocked globally or else grawp can still
abuse
SUL and TOR to create accounts and make the required 10
You mean something similar to
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:$wgBlockOpenProxies ? -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Bots/Requests_for_approval/ProcseeBotlooks
like the best solution to the proxy part atm. It would be good if we
could get it to run with global blocks.
- Chris
On Tue,
On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 8:27 PM, Christopher Grant chrisgrantm...@gmail.com
wrote:
You mean something similar to
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:$wgBlockOpenProxies ? -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Bots/Requests_for_approval/ProcseeBotlooks
like the best solution to the proxy
Its disabled for very good reason If you enable this, every editor's IP
address will be scanned for open HTTP proxies. Good luck getting someone to
enable it.
- Chris
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 1:36 PM, George Herbert george.herb...@gmail.comwrote:
On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 8:27 PM, Christopher
Ah. I see. It's something else entirely. I was hoping for some input
on the points I raised...
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 1:58 PM, Wilhelm Schnotz wilh...@nixeagle.org wrote:
Sure, we have one going on now just over the *unlinking*. Check
WP:RFAR under current cases.
We have had problems with
17 matches
Mail list logo
