On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 7:26 AM, Carcharothcarcharot...@googlemail.com wrote:
That's a very good idea.
+1
The name strikes me as the biggest drawback of the current system.
Carcharoth
On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 11:36 AM, FT2ft2.w...@gmail.com wrote:
I think there's a terminology issue.
We
On Sun, Aug 30, 2009 at 8:31 PM, Carcharoth carcharot...@googlemail.comwrote:
On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 4:10 AM, Brianbrian.min...@colorado.edu wrote:
On Sun, Aug 30, 2009 at 9:08 PM, Carcharoth carcharot...@googlemail.com
wrote:
snip
Is it not more likely that most long-term editors who
Bod Notbod wrote:
One of the proposals on the strategy wiki has recommended an
adjustment to talk pages. I added that perhaps the tab should be
called discussion/feedback to encourage people who are primarily
readers to let us know what they thought of an article without it
necessarily
Risker wrote:
There are some opportunities to improve practices here, and to really take a
look and decide which articles (and rarely, article talk pages) need this
indefinite protection. At the same time, I really do believe that if an
admin is going to reduce protection on a page with an
I was away and missed the FR discussions, but I have to say this: the
vanishing point is nowhere in sight!
Charles
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 11:15 AM, Charles
Matthewscharles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com wrote:
Carcharoth wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8237271.stm
Interesting story there. Hadn't realised there was even a lawsuit in
progress.
With Google books, any student anywhere in the US will
On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 12:33 AM, Samuel Kleinmeta...@gmail.com wrote:
The name strikes me as the biggest drawback of the current system.
I think de Alfaro put it well himself in his quote from Information Week:
'Despite its name, WikiTrust can't directly measure whether text is
trustworthy.
On 9/5/09, Charles Matthews charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com wrote:
I was away and missed the FR discussions, but I have to say this: the
vanishing point is nowhere in sight!
FR?
(Racks brains).
I assume you mean flagged revisions?
___
WikiEN-l
Tony Sidaway wrote:
On 9/5/09, Charles Matthews charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com wrote:
I was away and missed the FR discussions, but I have to say this: the
vanishing point is nowhere in sight!
FR?
(Racks brains).
I assume you mean flagged revisions?
Got it in one! Oh, and
2009/9/5 Gwern Branwen gwe...@gmail.com:
Would it be possible for you to do a comparison with Wikipedia just
before semiprotection was enabled? I've long wanted to know whether
the argument that semiprotections would replace full protections holds
any water.
Such a comparison should be
Charles a few things.
You do not need to be in the US to read a Google Book. There is a thing
called proxy or super proxy or something of that sort, which will mask where
you are, and thus allow anyone to read a book as if they were in the US.
Secondly I like the idea of asking Google Books
2009/9/5 wjhon...@aol.com:
Charles a few things.
You do not need to be in the US to read a Google Book. There is a thing
called proxy or super proxy or something of that sort, which will mask where
you are, and thus allow anyone to read a book as if they were in the US.
That is probably
On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 3:35 PM, Thomas Daltonthomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/9/5 wjhon...@aol.com:
Charles a few things.
You do not need to be in the US to read a Google Book. There is a thing
called proxy or super proxy or something of that sort, which will mask where
you are, and
No people *should* break and ignore stupid rules :)
Just like the pigs do.
What you didn't live during the '60s ?
I mean it's not like you're going to be sued by WMG for 2.4 million .
W.J. fight the man
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
2009/9/5 Gwern Branwen gwe...@gmail.com:
On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 3:35 PM, Thomas Daltonthomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/9/5 wjhon...@aol.com:
Charles a few things.
You do not need to be in the US to read a Google Book. There is a thing
called proxy or super proxy or something of that
Gwern Branwen wrote:
On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 3:35 PM, Thomas Daltonthomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/9/5 wjhon...@aol.com:
Charles a few things.
You do not need to be in the US to read a Google Book. There is a thing
called proxy or super proxy or something of that sort, which
1. Do we have an approved and sensible citation style for GB?
The point is that some people simply paste in the very long GB URL for a
page. I tend to do the other thing, which is to treat it no differently
from a book I have open in front of me.
You do both.
As I understand it , the standard
In a message dated 9/5/2009 1:22:45 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com writes:
Yup, there is a reason the wjhon...@aol.com mails still have a killfile
chez moi. Managing to miss the point that if a link appears broken to
anyone in the world it might simply get
I forgot to mention that the G Book interface has a list of links on
the left , headed: Get this book. First it lists commercial sources,
and then it almost always lists: Find this book in a library. That
link takes you to the record for the book in WorldCat. You can use the
necessary part
In a message dated 9/5/2009 2:10:48 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
wikim...@inbox.org writes:
But the link should go to a generic page which potentially works with
more sites than just Google Books, like [[Special:BookSources]].
I like that. Make Google Books just one of the options. I can see
2009/9/5 wjhon...@aol.com:
In a message dated 9/5/2009 1:18:07 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
thomas.dal...@gmail.com writes:
Contract violation *is* illegal. (Assuming a website ToS is a binding
contract - has that ever been tested in court?)
Piffle. Who is going to sue? Who has standing to
In a message dated 9/5/2009 2:37:08 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
thomas.dal...@gmail.com writes:
Either Google or the publisher/author of the book you viewed. People
get sued for bypassing DRM, why couldn't they be sued for bypassing
restrictions on Google books?
Google suffers no damage from
2009/9/5 wjhon...@aol.com:
In a message dated 9/5/2009 2:37:08 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
thomas.dal...@gmail.com writes:
Either Google or the publisher/author of the book you viewed. People
get sued for bypassing DRM, why couldn't they be sued for bypassing
restrictions on Google books?
When I cite from Google Books I use something like this:
ref name=Wilson{{cite book|last=Wilson|first=Carol|title=Freedom at
risk: the kidnapping of free Blacks in America,
1780–1865|publisher=University Press of
Kentucky|date=1994|pages=43–44|isbn=0813118581|url=
2009/9/6 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com:
What could possibly go wrong?
http://www.blackhatworld.com/blackhat-seo/black-hat-seo-tools/115582-wikipedia-linking-tool.html
If your life is suffering from inadequate levels of stupid (I know!
Whose doesn't?), that looks like just the forum for you
2009/9/6 Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com:
2009/9/6 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com:
If your life is suffering from inadequate levels of stupid (I know!
Whose doesn't?), that looks like just the forum for you to get a topup
from.
Why do you still read SEO sites? They are all that
2009/9/6 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com
What could possibly go wrong?
http://www.blackhatworld.com/blackhat-seo/black-hat-seo-tools/115582-wikipedia-linking-tool.html
If your life is suffering from inadequate levels of stupid (I know!
Whose doesn't?), that looks like just the forum for you
27 matches
Mail list logo
