Steve Bennett wrote:
> I mean, all else aside, Jimbo contributed a huge amount
> to Wikipedia basically out of a desire to help the human race. Sanger
> made Citizendium out of a desire to piss off Jimbo.
>
Debatable. But I think the way Sanger systematically misunderstands the
virtues of WP, a
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 4:23 PM, Jay
Litwyn wrote:
> "stevertigo" wrote in message
> news:7c402e010907301615q7f86e8a1v5edb56ced5a80...@mail.gmail.com...
>> Sorry, thought this was going to foundation-l.
>>
>> -S
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 3:14 PM, stevertigo wrote:
>>> It occurs to me that when
I've wondered about this for a long time, but wasn't ever confident about
the maintenance issue: it seems like it would be next to impossible to make
sure that problems get consistent responses, to effectively manage the
potential volume of responses, or even to deal with the inevitable bad
reports
Jay Litwyn wrote:
> "Durova" quoted Samuel Clemens in message
> news:a01006d90904151712x2e95f41r9c2dcf17a4dcb...@mail.gmail.com...
>
>> "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics". -
>> Mark
>> Twain
>>
>
> In book called "They never said it!", that is identified
Jay Litwyn wrote:
> "Durova" quoted Samuel Clemens in message
> news:a01006d90904151712x2e95f41r9c2dcf17a4dcb...@mail.gmail.com...
>
>> "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics". -
>> Mark
>> Twain
>>
>
> In book called "They never said it!", that is identified
Ok, here's a thing.
Should that really be in the wikipedia? It's just all about a quote.
Shouldn't that be in wikiquote?
I must admit, whenever I ask questions like this, I get 'it's dunn
enuff' to be in the wikipedia. Could somebody point me to
[[WP:DUNNENUFF]] policy because it seems to be a re
On Mon, 10 Aug 2009 14:08:52 -0500, Philippe Beaudette wrote:
> Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in
> the sum of all knowledge.
...but *married* human beings can't. (Whether they're in an opposite-
sex or same-sex marriage.)
--
== Dan ==
Dan's Mail Format Site
The shortcut isn't [[WP:DUNNENUFF]], it's [[WP:IAR]]. You may also find
[[WP:IDONTLIKEIT]] useful. :-P Unless I need to pack my bags and leave
for fear my every turn be questioned. What's that Beatles song? "Let
It Be"?
Ian Woollard wrote:
> Ok, here's a thing.
>
> Should that really be in
On Tue, 11 Aug 2009 15:40:53 +1000, Steve Bennett wrote:
> 1) Wales' role in the genesis of Wikipedia is much more significant
> than Sanger's. "Co-founder" is giving too much credit. The guy that
> has the idea, the inspiration and the drive to make it happen deserves
> more credit than the guy w
On Wednesday 01 July 2009, Steve Bennett wrote:
> ::Archived at:
> http://marc.info/?i=b8ceeef70907012048r74142a7av7b8db293e005b...@mail.gmail.com
>
> There must be a page for predicting the three millionth article. I
> can't find it. Where is it?
Sadly, there is none, but seeing that we're at 2
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 2:46 PM, Joseph Reagle wrote:
> On Wednesday 01 July 2009, Steve Bennett wrote:
>> ::Archived at:
>> http://marc.info/?i=b8ceeef70907012048r74142a7av7b8db293e005b...@mail.gmail.com
>>
>> There must be a page for predicting the three millionth article. I
>> can't find it. Wh
http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2009/08/08/Fixing-XML
(Tim Bray invented XML.)
His approach was to recruit a pile of other XML experts, who he didn't
necessarily agree with.
- d.
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubs
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 1:36 PM, Casey Brown wrote:
> Which you can ignore. It's beta-testing, the whole point is to gather
> feedback and make things better, so I don't have a problem with it.
If you mean "ignore" in the sense of "click away from the
questionnaire form without submitting", the u
d. wrote:
> His approach was to recruit a pile of other XML experts, who he didn't
> necessarily agree with.
Another important aspect of his approach was that he recognized
(and even agreed with!) the concerns over someone like him doing
any editing.
__
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 8:40 PM, Steve Bennett wrote:
> Meanwhile, for the autodidacts among us, the 200 core biographies list
> is a pretty interesting place to start reading.
Definitely. I can relate. I mean if I said everything I've ever
remembered for more than a month I learned on my own time
2009/8/11 Steve Summit :
> d. wrote:
>> His approach was to recruit a pile of other XML experts, who he didn't
>> necessarily agree with.
> Another important aspect of his approach was that he recognized
> (and even agreed with!) the concerns over someone like him doing
> any editing.
Yep. He g
On 11 Aug 2009, at 14:56, Carcharoth wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 2:46 PM, Joseph Reagle wrote:
>> On Wednesday 01 July 2009, Steve Bennett wrote:
>>> ::Archived at: http://marc.info/?
>>> i=b8ceeef70907012048r74142a7av7b8db293e005b...@mail.gmail.com
>>>
>>> There must be a page for predicti
SilkTork has started closing down and summarizing the poll results.
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Wikipedia:Civility/Poll
I am still reviewing the statistics and sum total comments, but some
takeaways I already have -
0. It's a problem.
1. We're not enforcing consistently at all
on 8/11/09 4:13 PM, George Herbert at george.herb...@gmail.com wrote:
> SilkTork has started closing down and summarizing the poll results.
>
> https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Wikipedia:Civility/Poll
>
> I am still reviewing the statistics and sum total comments, but some
> takeaw
2009/8/11 Marc Riddell :
> on 8/11/09 4:13 PM, George Herbert at george.herb...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> SilkTork has started closing down and summarizing the poll results.
>>
>> https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Wikipedia:Civility/Poll
>>
>> I am still reviewing the statistics and sum to
Thomas Dalton wrote:
> 2009/8/11 Marc Riddell :
> > on 8/11/09 4:13 PM, George Herbert at george.herb...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> 0. It's a problem.
>>> 1. We're not enforcing consistently at all, and that's hurting us.
>>> 2. We're BITEing new users.
>>>
>> Is anyone really surprised at this? On this
> 2009/8/11 Marc Riddell :
>> on 8/11/09 4:13 PM, George Herbert at george.herb...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>> SilkTork has started closing down and summarizing the poll results.
>>>
>>> https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Wikipedia:Civility/Poll
>>>
>>> I am still reviewing the statist
2009/8/11 Marc Riddell :
> Is anyone really surprised at this? On this very List people are constantly
> bragging about how wonderful Wikipedia is; focusing exclusively on how big
> it is. Yet completely ignoring how screwed up the culture is. It's like a
I'm really not seeing the same level of u
2009/8/11 Marc Riddell :
> Thank you, Thomas, you just made my point. This is exactly the type of focus
> and denial I was speaking of.
I'm not denying we have a problem with civility. I got desysopped for
a civility block the community and ArbCom objected to. What I'm
denying is that this problem
> 2009/8/11 Marc Riddell :
>
>> Is anyone really surprised at this? On this very List people are constantly
>> bragging about how wonderful Wikipedia is; focusing exclusively on how big
>> it is. Yet completely ignoring how screwed up the culture is. It's like a
>
on 8/11/09 6:50 PM, Andrew Gray
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 3:51 PM, Thomas Dalton wrote:
> 2009/8/11 Marc Riddell :
>> Thank you, Thomas, you just made my point. This is exactly the type of focus
>> and denial I was speaking of.
>
> I'm not denying we have a problem with civility. I got desysopped for
> a civility block the communit
George Herbert wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 3:51 PM, Thomas
>> Dalton wrote:
>>> 2009/8/11 Marc Riddell :
Thank you, Thomas, you just made my point. This is exactly the
type of focus and denial I was speaking of.
>>>
>>> I'm not denying we have a problem with civility. I got desysopp
2009/8/12 George Herbert :
> On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 3:51 PM, Thomas Dalton wrote:
>> 2009/8/11 Marc Riddell :
>>> Thank you, Thomas, you just made my point. This is exactly the type of focus
>>> and denial I was speaking of.
>>
>> I'm not denying we have a problem with civility. I got desysopped f
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 4:36 PM, Thomas Dalton wrote:
> 2009/8/12 George Herbert :
>> On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 3:51 PM, Thomas Dalton
>> wrote:
>>> 2009/8/11 Marc Riddell :
Thank you, Thomas, you just made my point. This is exactly the type of
focus
and denial I was speaking of.
>>>
The same community that is getting more and more uncivil is the same
community that banned WP:ESP in an uncivil manner!
Fayssal F.
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 00:36:57 +0100
> From: Thomas Dalton
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Civility poll results
> To: English Wikipedia
> Message-ID:
>
> Conte
2009/8/12 George Herbert :
> The poll can tell us that a lot of people, enough that it's probably
> statistically significant as a sample (albeit self selected), are
> concerned about the component issues.
Lots of people are concerned about the health effects of telephone
masts, the connection bet
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 12:36 PM, David Gerard wrote:
> 2009/8/11 Steve Summit :
>> d. wrote:
>
>>> His approach was to recruit a pile of other XML experts, who he didn't
>>> necessarily agree with.
>
>> Another important aspect of his approach was that he recognized
>> (and even agreed with!) the
I'm openly in support of a strong civility ethos - but it can't be a gamed
one where some can and others can't. A community like this can't have some
who can do stuff with impunity and others who'll get blocked for the same
stuff. A good ethos matters; a policy is just words in comparison.
The aim
on 8/11/09 7:15 PM, George Herbert at george.herb...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> I think there is a significant structural risk in the community
> steadily getting less welcome to new blood.
>
> A. People burn out, we need new recruits on an average roughly 18
> month cycle just to maintain a participa
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 1:19 AM, Marc Riddell wrote:
> on 8/11/09 7:15 PM, George Herbert at george.herb...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>>
>> I think there is a significant structural risk in the community
>> steadily getting less welcome to new blood.
>>
>> A. People burn out, we need new recruits on an av
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 1:18 AM, FT2 wrote:
> I'm openly in support of a strong civility ethos - but it can't be a gamed
> one where some can and others can't. A community like this can't have some
> who can do stuff with impunity and others who'll get blocked for the same
> stuff. A good ethos mat
> It is also human nature that everyone, at one time or another, feels
> the need to speak frankly and forcefully. If that is met by hurt
> cries of "you are being incivil", that is a detriment to open
> discourse.
Well, then there's the issue of differing cultures and
neuroatypicalities (
> Wikipedia is a project and a community but, above all, it is an
> encyclopaedia. It is an encyclopaedia that a lot of people find very
> useful. Our system is working. There is certainly room for
> improvement, but I don't see this disaster you speak of.
It's not a disaster, unless we negl
> It is also human nature that everyone, at one time or another, feels
> the need to speak frankly and forcefully. If that is met by hurt
> cries of "you are being incivil", that is a detriment to open
> discourse.
Well, then there's the issue of differing cultures and
neuroatypicalities (
on 8/11/09 8:47 PM, Emily Monroe at bluecalioc...@me.com wrote:
>> It is also human nature that everyone, at one time or another, feels
>> the need to speak frankly and forcefully. If that is met by hurt
>> cries of "you are being incivil", that is a detriment to open
>> discourse.
>
> Well, then
How about...
"The Wikipedia community is too large and diverse for any single
standard of civility to be effective. Careful application of broad
standards of civility need to be adapted to individual situations,
while not compromising core values."
Is that accurate or not?
Carcharoth
__
> "The Wikipedia community is too large and diverse for any single
> standard of civility to be effective. Careful application of broad
> standards of civility need to be adapted to individual situations,
> while not compromising core values."
How about specifying just what those core values
on 8/11/09 9:03 PM, Carcharoth at carcharot...@googlemail.com wrote:
> How about...
>
> "The Wikipedia community is too large and diverse for any single
> standard of civility to be effective. Careful application of broad
> standards of civility need to be adapted to individual situations,
> whil
> Try evasive.
Why is it evasive?
Emily
On Aug 11, 2009, at 8:09 PM, Marc Riddell wrote:
> on 8/11/09 9:03 PM, Carcharoth at carcharot...@googlemail.com wrote:
>
>> How about...
>>
>> "The Wikipedia community is too large and diverse for any single
>> standard of civility to be effective. Careful
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 6:07 PM, Emily Monroe wrote:
>> "The Wikipedia community is too large and diverse for any single
>> standard of civility to be effective. Careful application of broad
>> standards of civility need to be adapted to individual situations,
>> while not compromising core values.
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 1:37 AM, Carcharoth wrote:
> It is also human nature that everyone, at one time or another, feels
> the need to speak frankly and forcefully. If that is met by hurt cries
> of "you are being incivil", that is a detriment to open discourse.
>
> Carcharoth
>
Indeed.
It's a
on 8/11/09 9:10 PM, Emily Monroe at bluecalioc...@me.com wrote:
>> Try evasive.
> Why is it evasive?
Because he is saying that basically what we are suggesting: a common set of
standards governing personal interaction cannot be found. This is simply not
true. And a concerted, serious effort to ac
2009/8/12 Emily Monroe :
>> Wikipedia is a project and a community but, above all, it is an
>> encyclopaedia. It is an encyclopaedia that a lot of people find very
>> useful. Our system is working. There is certainly room for
>> improvement, but I don't see this disaster you speak of.
>
> It's not
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 2:11 AM, George Herbert wrote:
> AGF is a good place to start.
>
> No Personal Attacks is another one, but AGF is more core.
>
I'd settle for a "social contract" - I think "civility" is too loaded a term
in Wikipedia after all the past.
If we were going to design such a
> Because he is saying that basically what we are suggesting: a common
> set of standards governing personal interaction cannot be found.
> This is simply not true. And a concerted, serious effort to
> accomplish this is what is needed; not "it's hopeless, because it's
> too big". Nonsense!
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 2:23 AM, Marc Riddell wrote:
> on 8/11/09 9:10 PM, Emily Monroe at bluecalioc...@me.com wrote:
>
>>> Try evasive.
>> Why is it evasive?
>
> Because he is saying that basically what we are suggesting: a common set of
> standards governing personal interaction cannot be found.
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 2:29 AM, Emily Monroe wrote:
>> Because he is saying that basically what we are suggesting: a common
>> set of standards governing personal interaction cannot be found.
>> This is simply not true. And a concerted, serious effort to
>> accomplish this is what is needed; not "
> I'd settle for a "social contract" - I think "civility" is too
> loaded a term in Wikipedia after all the past.
I agree.
> If we were going to design such a page, I'd start with the communal
> need to work together and (given the diversity of users) the need to
> actively avoid where poss
> Yes. Thanks for explaining what I was trying to say.
You're welcome. :-)
I'd qualify as being neuroatypical. I've been on the receiving end of
what I just did on several occasions throughout my lifetime. The best
thank you would be to pass it on.
Emily
On Aug 11, 2009, at 8:33 PM, Carcharo
on 8/11/09 9:29 PM, Emily Monroe at bluecalioc...@me.com wrote:
>> Because he is saying that basically what we are suggesting: a common
>> set of standards governing personal interaction cannot be found.
>> This is simply not true. And a concerted, serious effort to
>> accomplish this is what is n
> Any solution to this problem should start with the simple question:
> How do you treat another human being?
I agree. This is yet another question that we all need to ask when
having such a discussion.
Emily
On Aug 11, 2009, at 8:45 PM, Marc Riddell wrote:
> on 8/11/09 9:29 PM, Emily Monroe
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 2:45 AM, Marc Riddell wrote:
> Any solution to this problem should start with the simple question: How do
> you treat another human being?
>
The biggest clue isn't some "civility" standard - it's when some user says
"please talk about the issues, actions, and evidence, rat
> ad hominen
What does ad hominen mean?
Emily
On Aug 11, 2009, at 8:59 PM, FT2 wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 2:45 AM, Marc Riddell >wrote:
>
>> Any solution to this problem should start with the simple question:
>> How do
>> you treat another human being?
>>
>
> The biggest clue isn't some
2009/8/12 Emily Monroe :
>> ad hominen
>
> What does ad hominen mean?
It means attacking the person that made an argument rather than the
argument itself.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To
> It means attacking the person that made an argument rather than the
> argument itself.
Aw, thanks.
It's rather difficult to look something up on wikipedia, while
participating in a discussion about wikipedia, and new page patrolling
on wikipedia as well (whew!).
Emily
On Aug 11, 2009, at
It's interesting that Marc assigns the blame for the myriad conduct problems
to leadership (the executive suite, though I'm not sure who this
represents). I might argue the opposite. The lack of leadership makes it
impossible to maintain consistent standards of behavior. The amorphous and
unstable
61 matches
Mail list logo
