Re: [WikiEN-l] Brand Republic: BBC Radio 4 launches Wikipedia parod y

On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 4:29 PM, David Gerard wrote: > 2009/7/23 kgnp...@gmail.com : > > > Parodies are compliments in my book. Sarcasm to flattery and all that. > Look forward to a US available link. > > >>The thing to remember is how ridiculously mainstream Wikipedia is > these days. When I f

Re: [WikiEN-l] Brand Republic: BBC Radio 4 launches Wikipedia parod y

2009/7/23 Jeremy Atherton : > > On Jul 23, 2009, at 4:29 PM, David Gerard wrote: > >> It'll be on the iPlayer, so UK people can listen again later and >> theoretically record it to put up somewhere. > > iPlayer radio programmes are available outside the UK too. For those wanting a direct link: ht

[WikiEN-l] BBC Radio 4 - Bigipedia

> > Thanks for the tipoff, hopefully if we ever do take advertising it won't be > quite that mind numbingly bad. They certainly got the idea of dab pages, > admins, inane edit wars (must check out [[Crystallography]] to see whether > it currently says that if Topaz crystals make you drowzy or alert

Re: [WikiEN-l] Brand Republic: BBC Radio 4 launches Wikipedia parody

On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 11:19 PM, David Gerard wrote: > 2009/7/23 Charles Matthews : >> David Gerard wrote: > >>> http://www.brandrepublic.com/News/922216/BBC-Radio-4-launches-Wikipedia-parody/ >>> "LONDON - BBC Radio 4 is launching a "broadwebcasting" show parodying >>> the internet by mocking pop

Re: [WikiEN-l] Brand Republic: BBC Radio 4 launches Wikipedia parody

2009/7/23 Charles Matthews : > David Gerard wrote: >> http://www.brandrepublic.com/News/922216/BBC-Radio-4-launches-Wikipedia-parody/ >> "LONDON - BBC Radio 4 is launching a "broadwebcasting" show parodying >> the internet by mocking pop-ups, search boxes and other aspects of >> online activity.

Re: [WikiEN-l] Brand Republic: BBC Radio 4 launches Wikipedia parody

2009/7/23 Charles Matthews : > David Gerard wrote: >> http://www.brandrepublic.com/News/922216/BBC-Radio-4-launches-Wikipedia-parody/ >> >> "LONDON - BBC Radio 4 is launching a "broadwebcasting" show parodying >> the internet by mocking pop-ups, search boxes and other aspects of >> online activity.

Re: [WikiEN-l] Brand Republic: BBC Radio 4 launches Wikipedia parod y

On Jul 23, 2009, at 4:29 PM, David Gerard wrote: > It'll be on the iPlayer, so UK people can listen again later and > theoretically record it to put up somewhere. iPlayer radio programmes are available outside the UK too. Jeremy ___ WikiEN-l mailing

Re: [WikiEN-l] Brand Republic: BBC Radio 4 launches Wikipedia parody

David Gerard wrote: > http://www.brandrepublic.com/News/922216/BBC-Radio-4-launches-Wikipedia-parody/ > > "LONDON - BBC Radio 4 is launching a "broadwebcasting" show parodying > the internet by mocking pop-ups, search boxes and other aspects of > online activity. Listening now - utterly realistic

Re: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedia:Paradoxes

<> An electron is uncrushable.? Can an electron decay? -Original Message- From: stevertigo To: English Wikipedia Sent: Thu, Jul 23, 2009 10:53 am Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedia:Paradoxes On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 5:40 AM, Daniel R. Tobias wrote: > There is also

Re: [WikiEN-l] [Wikitech-l] Watchlistr.com, an outside site that asks for Wikimedia passwords

That's interesting.? Someone signs up with service X to pull details from your service Y that perhaps you don't want the world to know.? Like that you've watchlisted Oral Sex. How do I, as service X make sure that you as Service Y actually have the user's approval for this pulling of my data

Re: [WikiEN-l] The Nature of "Facts"

On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 10:49 PM, wrote: > The other day I ran across what is perhaps for me, one of the most bizarre > situations with references I've yet to encounter. > > Webster's has produced a book.? I found it in some random Google books > searches I was doing on a subject.? It states cer

Re: [WikiEN-l] BBC: Bill Thompson: Wikipedia is flawed and that's OK

One thing which I'll no longer stand as a Wikipedia, is the pre-wiki citation mode that the like of that hack job Encyclopedia Brittanica uses.? All the citations lumped at the end, with no ability to cite *a* fact to *its* evidence.? So to follow up an article, each person must be an expert.

Re: [WikiEN-l] The Nature of "Facts"

The other day I ran across what is perhaps for me, one of the most bizarre situations with references I've yet to encounter. Webster's has produced a book.? I found it in some random Google books searches I was doing on a subject.? It states certain facts and a few of them I knew to be without

Re: [WikiEN-l] Brand Republic: BBC Radio 4 launches Wikipedia parod y

2009/7/23 David Gerard : > 2009/7/23 kgnp...@gmail.com : > >> Parodies are compliments in my book.  Sarcasm to flattery and all that.   >> Look forward to a US available link. > > > It'll be on the iPlayer, so UK people can listen again later and > theoretically record it to put up somewhere. Yeah

Re: [WikiEN-l] Brand Republic: BBC Radio 4 launches Wikipedia parod y

2009/7/23 kgnp...@gmail.com : > Parodies are compliments in my book.  Sarcasm to flattery and all that.  Look > forward to a US available link. It'll be on the iPlayer, so UK people can listen again later and theoretically record it to put up somewhere. The thing to remember is how ridiculousl

Re: [WikiEN-l] When an article is in full protection.

The function of an admin in an edit-war situation should be solely to revert to a previously accepted version, and await talk page consensus, then unprotect.? Admins should not change an article to what they believe is the talk page consensus, as oftentimes this involves a great amount of know

Re: [WikiEN-l] Brand Republic: BBC Radio 4 launches Wikipedia parod y

Parodies are compliments in my book.  Sarcasm to flattery and all that.  Look forward to a US available link. -- Sent from my Palm Pre David Gerard wrote: http://www.brandrepublic.com/News/922216/BBC-Radio-4-launches-Wikipedia-parody/ "LONDON - BBC Radio 4 is launching a "broadwebcasting" show

Re: [WikiEN-l] [Wikitech-l] Watchlistr.com, an outside site that asks for Wikimedia passwords

Update: The developer of watchlistr is now discussing on wikitech-l how to do this on the toolserver, and how to authenticate without passwords being saved on the toolserver (which is not allowed). Further detail no doubt to come :-) - d. 2009/7/22 David Gerard : > fyi > From: Sage Ross > D

[WikiEN-l] Brand Republic: BBC Radio 4 launches Wikipedia parody

http://www.brandrepublic.com/News/922216/BBC-Radio-4-launches-Wikipedia-parody/ "LONDON - BBC Radio 4 is launching a "broadwebcasting" show parodying the internet by mocking pop-ups, search boxes and other aspects of online activity. Produced and directed by Pozzitive, the four-part series is call

Re: [WikiEN-l] BBC: Bill Thompson: Wikipedia is flawed and that's OK

on 7/23/09 1:14 PM, David Gerard at dger...@gmail.com wrote: > http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/digitalrevolution/2009/07/wikipedia.shtml > > "But Wikipedia is flawed in the way Ely Cathedral is flawed, imperfect > in the way a person you love is imperfect, and filled with conflict > and disagreement i

Re: [WikiEN-l] Wikipedia:Paradoxes

On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 5:40 AM, Daniel R. Tobias wrote: > There is also the possibility that *neither* of these things [God & > uncrushable stones] exist, and that is the possibility that seems > most logical to me. The God paradoxes don't involve so much the issue of God's existence, but the ab

Re: [WikiEN-l] BBC: Bill Thompson: Wikipedia is flawed and that's OK

On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 6:22 PM, Carcharoth wrote: > On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 6:14 PM, David Gerard wrote: >> http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/digitalrevolution/2009/07/wikipedia.shtml >> >> "But Wikipedia is flawed in the way Ely Cathedral is flawed, imperfect >> in the way a person you love is imperfect

Re: [WikiEN-l] BBC: Bill Thompson: Wikipedia is flawed and that's OK

On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 6:14 PM, David Gerard wrote: > http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/digitalrevolution/2009/07/wikipedia.shtml > > "But Wikipedia is flawed in the way Ely Cathedral is flawed, imperfect > in the way a person you love is imperfect, and filled with conflict > and disagreement in the way

[WikiEN-l] BBC: Bill Thompson: Wikipedia is flawed and that's OK

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/digitalrevolution/2009/07/wikipedia.shtml "But Wikipedia is flawed in the way Ely Cathedral is flawed, imperfect in the way a person you love is imperfect, and filled with conflict and disagreement in the way a good conference or an effective parliament is filled with ar

Re: [WikiEN-l] ANI curiosity

Mainly I'm on wikibreak and trying to do other things. Though you wouldn't think it. It wouldn't be hard to do as you suggest (analyze 2 - 3 archive pages?) but the views of users are in themselves interesting and valuable. It's user feedback, not just internal measurements, that count, when a

Re: [WikiEN-l] When an article is in full protection.

David Gerard wrote: > 2009/7/23 Ken Arromdee : > >> On Thu, 23 Jul 2009, David Gerard wrote: >> >>> A good example is the death of Michael Jackson, where the page was >>> locked and the discussion was fast and furious. Being a sensitive BLP >>> (at the time), that was IMO just the right way

Re: [WikiEN-l] When an article is in full protection.

Andrew Gray wrote: > 2009/7/23 Al Tally: > >> If there is talk page consensus, does the page really still need to be fully >> protected? >> > There's quite often a bitter disagreement over one thing, which sadly > results in protection to stop the editwarring, despite general > agreement on

Re: [WikiEN-l] ANI curiosity

FT2, why not do a proper analysis of a week or two weeks of requests at the admin and other noticeboards, to get some concrete figures, and not just a general feeling? Carcharoth On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 2:26 PM, FT2 wrote: > I wouldn't be so quick to call it nuisance. We have thousands of active

Re: [WikiEN-l] When an article is in full protection.

2009/7/23 Ken Arromdee : > On Thu, 23 Jul 2009, David Gerard wrote: >> A good example is the death of Michael Jackson, where the page was >> locked and the discussion was fast and furious. Being a sensitive BLP >> (at the time), that was IMO just the right way to do it. Admins >> stepping in and s

Re: [WikiEN-l] When an article is in full protection.

On Thu, 23 Jul 2009, David Gerard wrote: > A good example is the death of Michael Jackson, where the page was > locked and the discussion was fast and furious. Being a sensitive BLP > (at the time), that was IMO just the right way to do it. Admins > stepping in and saying "no, this is a severe BLP

Re: [WikiEN-l] When an article is in full protection.

2009/7/23 David Gerard : > This usually works okay in practice, but then, that too is an > administrative role, rather than an admin making a content decision as > such, and needs to be confirmed sensibly. > e.g. "I've added , does that work for everyone?" > A good example is the death of Mich

Re: [WikiEN-l] When an article is in full protection.

2009/7/23 WereSpielChequers : > Does anyone really object to the idea of admins responding to a request for > admin help by editing a fully protected page in accordance with talkpage > consensus? This usually works okay in practice, but then, that too is an administrative role, rather than an ad

Re: [WikiEN-l] When an article is in full protection.

2009/7/23 Al Tally : > > If there is talk page consensus, does the page really still need to be fully > protected? There's quite often a bitter disagreement over one thing, which sadly results in protection to stop the editwarring, despite general agreement on more broad issues. "[twelfth-century

Re: [WikiEN-l] When an article is in full protection.

On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 13:15, Al Tally wrote: > On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 12:21 PM, WereSpielChequers < > werespielchequ...@googlemail.com> wrote: > >> Actually there are circumstances when admins can and should edit fully >> protected articles per: WP:FULL.< >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedi

Re: [WikiEN-l] ANI curiosity

I wouldn't be so quick to call it nuisance. We have thousands of active users, hundreds of thousands of occasional users, and a wide range of warriors, promoters, and people who don't get the plot (or would rather not do so). There's a very wide range of reasons someone might want an administrator

Re: [WikiEN-l] ANI curiosity

People need a single main point of contact for problems; If we removed AN/I, then the confused complaints would come to AN. If we could keep all the miscellaneous nuisance contained within AN/I, that would be helpful, large as it might get. The various specific boards for reporting problems, SPI

Re: [WikiEN-l] ANI curiosity

On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 1:43 PM, FT2 wrote: > Rename to "Wikipedia:Administrator help requests" or "Requests for > Administrator assistance"? > > Sometimes a name can have an effect. > > FT2 > I have never really liked the structure of the admin noticeboard pages - in that they are subpages with

Re: [WikiEN-l] ANI curiosity

Rename to "Wikipedia:Administrator help requests" or "Requests for Administrator assistance"? Sometimes a name can have an effect. FT2 On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 1:32 PM, Alex Sawczynec wrote: > Probably due in no small part to the fact that AN is the official > "administrator's board," while ANI

Re: [WikiEN-l] ANI curiosity

Probably due in no small part to the fact that AN is the official "administrator's board," while ANI is the incidents board, the "i'm telling on you" board where any user can report any perceived threats. Just tends to lead to more outrageous, drama-inducing posts, I'd wager. - GlassCobra On Thu,

Re: [WikiEN-l] When an article is in full protection.

On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 12:21 PM, WereSpielChequers < werespielchequ...@googlemail.com> wrote: > Actually there are circumstances when admins can and should edit fully > protected articles per: WP:FULL.< > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:FULL> > > > Does anyone really object to the idea of

Re: [WikiEN-l] ANI curiosity

On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 11:34 AM, FT2 wrote: > Some off-wiki response-seeking... > > A couple of comments at the administrator's noticeboard (AN) about the > quality of ANI discussion have led to a short post on-wiki asking for > perceptions: > > A user's suggested in passing in an AN discussion,

[WikiEN-l] When an article is in full protection.

Actually there are circumstances when admins can and should edit fully protected articles per: WP:FULL. Does anyone really object to the idea of admins responding to a request for admin help by editing a fully protected page in accordance with talkpage

Re: [WikiEN-l] Bad pictures? Better than missing ones!

On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 11:52 AM, Magnus Manske wrote: > On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 11:28 AM, Carcharoth > wrote: >> On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 11:28 AM, Carcharoth >> wrote: >>> On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 11:23 AM, Magnus >>> Manske wrote: [[Ian O'Brien]], Australian swimmer [[Austin Nichols]],

Re: [WikiEN-l] Bad pictures? Better than missing ones!

On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 11:28 AM, Carcharoth wrote: > On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 11:28 AM, Carcharoth > wrote: >> On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 11:23 AM, Magnus >> Manske wrote: >>> [[Ian O'Brien]], Australian swimmer >>> [[Austin Nichols]], US actor >>> [[Cynna Kydd]], Australian netball player >>> [[Kevi

[WikiEN-l] ANI curiosity

Some off-wiki response-seeking... A couple of comments at the administrator's noticeboard (AN) about the quality of ANI discussion have led to a short post on-wiki asking for perceptions: A user's suggested in passing in an AN discussion, that they feel there can be issues at ANI: - *"For wh

Re: [WikiEN-l] Bad pictures? Better than missing ones!

On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 11:28 AM, Carcharoth wrote: > On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 11:23 AM, Magnus > Manske wrote: >> [[Ian O'Brien]], Australian swimmer >> [[Austin Nichols]], US actor >> [[Cynna Kydd]], Australian netball player >> [[Kevin O'Halloran]], Australian swimmer >> [[Sandra Morgan]], Austra

Re: [WikiEN-l] Bad pictures? Better than missing ones!

On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 11:23 AM, Magnus Manske wrote: > [[Ian O'Brien]], Australian swimmer > [[Austin Nichols]], US actor > [[Cynna Kydd]], Australian netball player > [[Kevin O'Halloran]], Australian swimmer > [[Sandra Morgan]], Australian swimmer > > All features articles, all lacking an image,

[WikiEN-l] Bad pictures? Better than missing ones!

[[Ian O'Brien]], Australian swimmer [[Austin Nichols]], US actor [[Cynna Kydd]], Australian netball player [[Kevin O'Halloran]], Australian swimmer [[Sandra Morgan]], Australian swimmer All features articles, all lacking an image, even though they all have appeared at big public events. _

Re: [WikiEN-l] How wikipedia could link into File Protection.

When full protection is used, then it should stay until it is changed to semi-protection. We should not have a type of protection that allows admins to make *content* changes willy-nilly. When an article is in full protection, admins should not be making content changes, except perhaps to reve

Re: [WikiEN-l] How wikipedia could link into File Protection.

On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 10:33, wrote: > >  No Jonathan, the alternative to admin-only-editing is not full protection. Jay's original email refers to using this when there has been an edit war - in other words when full protection *is* used currently. > Semi-protection allows established users to e

Re: [WikiEN-l] admins blocking but refusing to justify which policy orguideline applies

Not all of use would address this issue as aggressively as Mr Herbert. There are many times when admin actions are unjustified and game-players can easily create an appearance of consensus when there is none. I've already commented on the justice or lack of this action earlier.? What might be

Re: [WikiEN-l] How wikipedia could link into File Protection.

No Jonathan, the alternative to admin-only-editing is not full protection. Semi-protection allows established users to edit an article. Established users are not the same as sysops, therefore the rest of the universe isn't non-sysops. I'm not sure what makes one an "established user" exactly, bu

Re: [WikiEN-l] How wikipedia could link into File Protection.

On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 19:57, wrote: > In a message dated 7/22/2009 7:01:10 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > sinew...@silentflame.com writes: > > OK - so  I think a fair summary of this proposal (correct me if I'm wrong) > is: > We  should create a group of experienced BLP editors (or similar) to >