Wikipedia:Village pump (news): Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
RickK (talk | contribs)
36,836 edits
→‎In The Guardian today: "one of the administrators over seeing the political coverage"?
Wikimedia Commons support enabled
Line 239: Line 239:


:Every now and then someone (different people every time) adds "Mostly harmless" to the introduction of [[Earth]]. I've reverted it at least three times, that I can remember. :-) — [[User:Chmod007|David Remahl]] 23:33, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)
:Every now and then someone (different people every time) adds "Mostly harmless" to the introduction of [[Earth]]. I've reverted it at least three times, that I can remember. :-) — [[User:Chmod007|David Remahl]] 23:33, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)

== Wikimedia Commons support enabled ==

[[Image:Rosa sp.46.jpg|thumb|Picture from the Commons]]

I have just finished implementing and enabling basic support for the [[commons:Main Page|Wikimedia Commons]] on all wikis. The Wikimedia Commons is a central repository of images, sounds, and other media files. Any file uploaded to it is now available on all wikis using Image: and Media: links. The picture to the right is an example of a file not uploaded to this wiki, but uploaded to the Commons.

To use a file from the Commons, just use it like would any other by specifying its name. The wiki first checks if the file exists locally, and if not, searches for it on the Commons. You can use all the options like thumbnailing, framing etc. Image pages from the Commons can be edited, but should only be to add information about the content, not the licensing. A backlink to the Commons is inserted automatically, using the [[MediaWiki:Sharedupload]] message.--[[User:Eloquence|Eloquence]][[User:Eloquence/CP|*]]

Revision as of 13:15, 30 October 2004

The news section of the village pump is used to make announcements of new templates, wikiprojects, and details of any other news that does not fit into Wikipedia:Announcements or Wikipedia:Goings-on.

Please sign and date your post (by typing ~~~~ or clicking the signature icon in the edit toolbar).

Start a new discussion in the news section

 Policy Technical Proposals Idea lab WMF Miscellaneous 
« Archives, no archives yet (create)

Summary of older announcements


Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th Edition, on Project Gutenberg

Project Gutenberg has recently released its first slice of the 11th Edition of Encyclopaedia Britannica - published 1910-1911 - as EBook #13600. It is available at http://www.gutenberg.net/dirs/1/3/6/0/13600/13600-h/13600-h.htm and is in the public domain. It contains Volume 2, Part 1, Slice 1, which translates as articles from Andros to Anise. There should be plenty of pickings for Wikipedia, should anyone feel like mining it Oops, sorry - it's shorter than I thought :(. Remember to put a This article incorporates text from the public domain 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica. {{1911}} tag into articles created. --Tagishsimon

Well I hope Project Gutenberg will create more of these real soon. [[User:Poccil|Peter O. (Talk)]] 00:04, Oct 13, 2004 (UTC)

Newspaper reporter wants to speak to Wikipedia people

Hi everyone, I'm Curtis Krueger, a reporter with the St. Petersburg Times in Florida. I am writing an article about Wikipedia and would like to talk to some of the people who write and edit articles frequently. I would like hear from people who can tell me what motivates them to contribute to Wikipedia with their writing, editing, research and so on.

I will probably speak to 3-4 people on Thursday or Friday (Oct. 14 & 15 2004). If you are at all interested, please send an email to me at krueger@sptimes.com. Please put in your phone number, city and state and best time to reach you by phone in the next couple of days. If you have the time, you might also tell me a little about what kind of work you do on Wikipedia and why, plus anything about your background such as your profession, education, age, etc.

By the way you can find our newspaper at sptimes.com.

Thank You!!!
Curtis Krueger
St. Petersburg Times
krueger@sptimes.com

Can people who have responded leave a note here? I'm willing to chat with the reporter if there's any fear he won't have enough people to interview (I think an article based on why we all write here sounds fabulous), but I don't feel I have contributed as many articles (or very many truly great articles) as others here, so if they're replying, I'd rather have Curtis talk to them. If you don't feel like revealing yourself, that's fine, but it would help me out. :-) Jwrosenzweig 21:53, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)
By the way, a helpful fact for your article: "Wikipedia people" are called "Wikipedians." :) [[User:Neutrality|Neutrality (hopefully!)]] 22:34, Oct 13, 2004 (UTC)
Jimmy and I have spoken to Curtis, but he is still very keen to get more responses. Please let him know as soon as possible if you are interested. Angela. 17:52, Oct 14, 2004 (UTC)
I dropped him an email. -- Jmabel|Talk 19:04, Oct 14, 2004 (UTC)
I ended up talking to Curtis. I believe User:Jredmond did also. Very nice fellow, very interested in Wikipedia. I'm looking forward to seeing how we all came across. :-) Jwrosenzweig 21:08, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • Mr. Krueger, make sure you find out about the real nature of The Wikipedia, the bis and abusing of people that don't support the views and aren't in with the clique that "run" it. Some suggested starting points below.

You need to go to:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Neutrality

and check out "oppose" and also look at:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Rex071404


You might also try user Rex071404. I don't know if he's interested but I'll put a note on his Wikipedia talk page.WikiUser 20:45, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)WikiUser 20:55, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Researcher is doing a Wikipedia study

I found this from User:TheCustomOfLife's talk page :


Would you be interested in being interviewed about your work on the Wikipedia?
As part of a research project conducted by the Electronic Learning Communities group at the Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta, we are conducting a study of the Wikipedia. The purpose of this study is to explore the online community of the Wikipedia by investigating who contributes to the Wikipedia and why.
To that end, we would like to interview people who write, edit, and comment on the articles that make up the Wikipedia. Study participants agree to be interviewed about their experiences with the Wikipedia. The interview can be face-to-face (if you are in the Atlanta area), on the telephone, or via email, whichever is most comfortable and convenient for you. Participation is voluntary and can be discontinued at any time with no reason given.
If you think you might be interested, more information about the study, including how to volunteer, is available at:
http://www.cc.gatech.edu/~susanb/wikistudy.html
If you are not interested, there is no need to reply to this message, and we thank you for your time. Ikenindy 23:20, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Discuss. [[User:Poccil|Peter O. (Talk)]] 23:45, Oct 14, 2004 (UTC)

Slightly weirdly, it is only possible to respond to their consent form if one has an email program integrated with one's browser. That is, if you've disabled mailto: links (which I have: I handle my email via telnet and pine, much safer from viruses) there is no way to sign up. -- Jmabel|Talk 00:56, Oct 15, 2004 (UTC)

I've volunteered to take part and to tell them about The Wikipedia. Funny how this section was deleted isn't it? Suppose some people want to impress a reporter but don't care to help a group of uni researchers? When I signed up to take part I got a pop-up for the pre-selected mail for this computer. I'll let you know-although this section willl probably be deleded before I can- if my form got through to the researchers.WikiUser 20:39, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Isn't there anyone else who took part in this study? [[User:Poccil|Peter O. (Talk)]] 20:49, Oct 15, 2004 (UTC)

I've just recieved this e-mail from the researchers telling people how to sign-up if they have problems using the link above:

"Date: Sunday, October 17, 2004 10:39 pm Subject: Re: Re request for participants in your Study of Wikipedia Users.

Hi, Thank you so much for your response. Anyone who wants to participate but can't use the web-based consent can email me at this address (susanb@cc.gatech.edu). Just indicate that you read the web-based consent form and that you agree to participate. I'll contact you and we can make arrangements for the interview.

(I'll add a note to that effect on the web page as well.)

If you ... would like to participate, please let me know which method you would prefer. If you'd be willing to be interviewed on the phone, just let me know if there's a day and time when it would be convenient for you.

Thanks again for the heads-up on the consent form, and thanks for passing this information along to any other Wikipedians who might want to participate in the study.

Susan Bryant"WikiUser 20:28, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Announcing the creation of the U.S. Northern wikipedians' notice board

An invitation is hereby extended to all U.S. Northern Wikipedians and all Wikipedians interested in the U.S. North to the U.S. Northern wikipedians' notice board board, also known as WP:ANSWER (A Northern States Wikipedia Effort and Resource). Bowl of chowdah for everybody! [[User:Neutrality|Neutrality (hopefully!)]] 00:23, Oct 17, 2004 (UTC)

Announce of Wikimonography - Fryderyk Franciszek Chopin

I am looking for people interested in Classical Music to make a Monography about the Opera Omnia. It should be under GFDL and consist of the scores of all Chopin's works (Mutopia Project), letters (Project Gutenberg) and a comprehensive encyclopedia. The details are on my user page. Comments will be well accepted. Chopinhauer 08:45, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Question.

First off, I believe this to be the greatest site of the internet. Secondly, my question, in the news section why don't you offer articles specifically about the topic, instead of random links to people involved or instances revolving around the subject?

This site is mainly an encyclopedia, so the links offered are intended to better understand a news, not to talk bout it; we leave this work to the newspapers or news agencies. There also independent, free style agencies, like Indymedia that try to give a NPOV vision of an evenment. Chopinhauer 10:15, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Actually, I would not call Indymedia anything like NPOV, they are mostly advocacy journalism. Nothing wrong with that, but it's a different mission. -- Jmabel | Talk 17:27, Oct 19, 2004 (UTC)
Yes, you are right, I don't know Indymedia too much so I shouldn't give opinions about the NPOV. Anyway I had just seen on meta a proposal for Wikinews. Maybe the person who asked the question could be interested by the project. Chopinhauer 23:12, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Announcing the creation of Japanese Wikipedian's Notice Board

Today Wikipedia:Japanese Wikipedians' notice board has launched. Not only Japanese in birth or nationality, but anyone who is interested in Japan and Japanese culture is welcome. Your consideration to participant to our notice board will be appliciated. --Aphaea 12:01, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Good luck with it. Filiocht 13:34, Oct 22, 2004 (UTC)

US Wikipedian's notice board started

After some debate over the name and subdivision of the countryside, the U.S. Wikipedian's notice board has come into existence. Please contribute suggestions of U.S. topics which bear covering, or need particular attention, and propose topics for the coming fortnight's collaboration. +sj+ 23:17, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Yeah I always thought Wikipedia needs to be more U.S. centric! ;-). — David Remahl 08:31, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)

180mb Tomeraider file for pocket pc?

Hi everyone, did the wikipedia tomeraider files for the pocket pc get moved to another address? I can't download them from this site. I was able to about 2 weeks ago but unfortunately my computer needed to be completely formatted so I lost the 180mb file. Does anyone know of a place to get it? All they have now for download are sql files. Thanks everyone. Robert M.

In The Guardian today

File:The Guardian 26-10-04 Wikipedia front page.jpg
The front page
File:The Guardian 26-10-04 Wikipedia pages 2-3.jpg
Pages 2 and 3

(sorry, posted previously in the wrong bit). We made The Guardian today, online article here: [1]. Graham 02:21, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)

An excellent article Apwoolrich 07:43, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)
I added it to Wikipedia:Press coverage. I particularly liked the description of Rambot: "30,000 articles were created by a bot [an automated program that goes round causing havoc] ... hyperlinks, bulletpoints and cut-and-paste press releases do not an encyclopedia entry make." — David Remahl 08:29, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I've uploaded some photos (see right) for those who missed it. ed g2s • talk 16:50, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)

The editors of Encyclopedia Britannica were quoted as saying: People write on things they're interested in, and so many subjects don't get covered; and news events get covered in great detail. The entry on Hurricane Frances is five times the length of that on Chinese art, and the entry on Coronation Street is twice as long as the article on Tony Blair. To address this [the specific] criticism, and show the Encyclopedia Britannica exactly what Wikipedia is made of, Chinese art has been suggested as a Collaboration of the week. -- ALoan (Talk) 12:55, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Yeah, editing Chinese art will address all of those criticisms. That'll show 'em. Xed 13:08, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Thanks for your fulsome praise and wholehearted support. While we deal with the specific criticism [see edit above], you can sort out the general, dare I say systemic, problem (I'd be fascinated to know how you are going to persuade people to write on subjects that they are not interested in). Rome was not built in a day; the longest journey begins with a single step; etc. I'm not going to let the best get in the way of the good. -- ALoan (Talk) 13:23, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)

FYI: a follow-up letter in today's issue Filiocht 14:11, Oct 27, 2004 (UTC)

Hahah! That's mighty funny. — David Remahl 14:17, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)
<g> I wonder if Mr Young is a Wikipedian... -- ALoan (Talk) 14:56, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)
My own thoughts exactly. Filiocht 15:01, Oct 27, 2004 (UTC)

What the heck are the Britannica people talking about? Tony Blair is 36 KB and Coronation Street is 40 KB. The real question is;

  • How long are those articles in EB?

Do we have an anti-FUD department here? The Guardian should have checked the EB statement for truthfullness before publishing the article. -- mav 20:19, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)

EB's article on Tony Blair [2] appears to be 741 words long. Our article is some 5000 words long.
Doesn't that depend when they compared the size of CS and TB? Maybe they've been radically altered since the statement was originally drafted/conceived... - IMSoP 22:25, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)

BTW, that's the front page of the "G2" tabloid supplement, not the main paper (obviously); the article was also flagged on the front cover of the paper, though (at top left). - IMSoP 22:25, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I've drafted a reply to the EB FUD (comment away before I send)

In your October 26, 2004 article “Who Knows?” your paper quoted the editors of Encyclopedia Britannica as saying (about Wikipedia): “People write on things they're interested in, and so many subjects don't get covered; and news events get covered in great detail. The entry on Hurricane Frances is five times the length of that on Chinese art, and the entry on Coronation Street is twice as long as the article on Tony Blair.”

I would like to note that The Encyclopedia Britannica does not have an article on Coronation Street and their article on Tony Blair is 741 words long while the Wikipedia article on Tony Blair has been longer than that since August 2003. In addition, the current size of the Tony Blair article in Wikipedia is over 3,700 words (not counting lists, quotes, markup or HTML) while the current size of the Wikipedia article about Coronation Street is just over 5000 words (again not counting lists, quotes, markup or HTML). The statement quoted by Britannica is therefore false.

Please make note of this in your paper.

Thank you,

Daniel Mayer, Wikipedia contributor

Links

Guardian article “Who Knows?”

Encyclopedia Britannica article on Tony Blair (note the word count line)

Wikipedia article on Tony Blair

The first version of the above Wikipedia article I could find that was longer than EB’s

A search for “Coronation Street” on Encyclopedia Britannica

Wikipedia article on Coronation Street

I'm sure Ian Mayes will be thrilled... - IMSoP 21:12, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Sent. --mav 17:04, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)

"one of the administrators over seeing the political coverage"? I didn't know anybody oversaw anything on Wikipedia. RickK 08:26, Oct 30, 2004 (UTC)

Wikipedia and HHGG!

On tonight's episode of Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy, (BBC Radio 4) there is mention of a newspaper office where the public could walk in off the street and write the news. The news could not be guaranteed accurate. Sounds familiar? Apwoolrich 17:45, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Someone mentioned to me that Wikipedia vs Britannica sounds remarkably like the HHGG vs Encyclopaedia Galatica :-) (and differences just as Adams describes them even!) zoney ♣ talk 23:08, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Think we should add a big "don't panic" to the main page? -- Jmabel | Talk 00:11, Oct 27, 2004 (UTC)

Yes, or automatically add that to all new users' talk pages! zoney ♣ talk 10:35, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Or maybe an enigmatic 42? Filiocht 10:41, Oct 27, 2004 (UTC)
We'd have to be careful h2g2 didn't feel we were trespassing on their territory - they were founded by Douglas Adams, after all... - IMSoP 22:17, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Comparing the article about Earth in Wikipedia and HHGG ("Mostly harmless"), I think our project beats HHGG's stub (although it looks a very promising stub). --Farside 19:46, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Ah but, their article on Towels beats our on Towel and has many follow-up articles (we have better pictures though). - Solipsist 23:09, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Every now and then someone (different people every time) adds "Mostly harmless" to the introduction of Earth. I've reverted it at least three times, that I can remember. :-) — David Remahl 23:33, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Wikimedia Commons support enabled

Picture from the Commons

I have just finished implementing and enabling basic support for the Wikimedia Commons on all wikis. The Wikimedia Commons is a central repository of images, sounds, and other media files. Any file uploaded to it is now available on all wikis using Image: and Media: links. The picture to the right is an example of a file not uploaded to this wiki, but uploaded to the Commons.

To use a file from the Commons, just use it like would any other by specifying its name. The wiki first checks if the file exists locally, and if not, searches for it on the Commons. You can use all the options like thumbnailing, framing etc. Image pages from the Commons can be edited, but should only be to add information about the content, not the licensing. A backlink to the Commons is inserted automatically, using the MediaWiki:Sharedupload message.--Eloquence*

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Village_pump_(news)&oldid=6980571"