Help me!

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
31 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Help me!

Guy Chapman aka JzG
I'd say this one is going to close as no consensus:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_...For_Dummies_books

So, friends, can you help me to find merit in this article?  To be
reconciled to the existence of what up to now I am unable to see as
anything other than an absurdity?  Or is Tony right, and AfD is
fatally borken?
Guy (JzG)
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JzG

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Help me!

geni
On 3/16/06, Guy Chapman aka JzG <[hidden email]> wrote:
> I'd say this one is going to close as no consensus:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_...For_Dummies_books
>
> So, friends, can you help me to find merit in this article?  To be
> reconciled to the existence of what up to now I am unable to see as
> anything other than an absurdity?  Or is Tony right, and AfD is
> fatally borken?
> Guy (JzG)

Non issue. We leave Afd to have their fun that kill it like to copyvio
it is. Takeing on the inclusionists head on will probably result in a
dummies watch or something.

--
geni
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Help me!

Kirill Lokshin
On 3/16/06, geni <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 3/16/06, Guy Chapman aka JzG <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > I'd say this one is going to close as no consensus:
> >
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_...For_Dummies_books
> >
> > So, friends, can you help me to find merit in this article?  To be
> > reconciled to the existence of what up to now I am unable to see as
> > anything other than an absurdity?  Or is Tony right, and AfD is
> > fatally borken?
> > Guy (JzG)
>
> Non issue. We leave Afd to have their fun that kill it like to copyvio
> it is. Takeing on the inclusionists head on will probably result in a
> dummies watch or something.

It may be utterly useless garbage, but how is it a copyvio?  I was
under the impression that non-creative lists of facts (of which I
think this is an example) weren't eligible for copyright.

Kirill Lokshin
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Help me!

gamaliel8
Agreed, this is taking copyright paranoia too far.  There is no creative
content in this list, it's just a list of books put out by this publisher.

On 3/16/06, Kirill Lokshin <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>
> It may be utterly useless garbage, but how is it a copyvio?  I was
> under the impression that non-creative lists of facts (of which I
> think this is an example) weren't eligible for copyright.
>
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Help me!

Sean Barrett-2
In reply to this post by geni
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

geni stated for the record:

> Non issue. We leave Afd to have their fun that kill it like to copyvio
> it is. Takeing on the inclusionists head on will probably result in a
> dummies watch or something.
>
> --
> geni

A simple list cannot be copyrighted, so cannot be a copyright violation.
[[Feist Publications v. Rural Telephone Service]].  Your contempt of
correctly-followed process and desire to circumvent consensus has
transformed what may once have been merely an assumption into a
conclusion supported by hard evidence.

- --
 Sean Barrett     | UN-altered REPRODUCTION and DISSEMINATION of
 [hidden email] | this IMPORTANT Information is ENCOURAGED,
                  | especially to COMPUTER BULLETIN BOARDS.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFEGgsVMAt1wyd9d+URArhVAJ4q1YeqHliETNeNKJ5fMVInwmVHXgCfcTVP
VvlUMalfY5f+qlpZ4Y8PzjU=
=yqus
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Help me!

geni
In reply to this post by Kirill Lokshin
On 3/17/06, Kirill Lokshin <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 3/16/06, geni <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > On 3/16/06, Guy Chapman aka JzG <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > I'd say this one is going to close as no consensus:
> > >
> > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_...For_Dummies_books
> > >
> > > So, friends, can you help me to find merit in this article?  To be
> > > reconciled to the existence of what up to now I am unable to see as
> > > anything other than an absurdity?  Or is Tony right, and AfD is
> > > fatally borken?
> > > Guy (JzG)
> >
> > Non issue. We leave Afd to have their fun that kill it like to copyvio
> > it is. Takeing on the inclusionists head on will probably result in a
> > dummies watch or something.
>
> It may be utterly useless garbage, but how is it a copyvio?  I was
> under the impression that non-creative lists of facts (of which I
> think this is an example) weren't eligible for copyright.
>
> Kirill Lokshin

It is sorted. For example sorting the books into a "Handheld
computing" section is argubly creative.


--
geni
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Help me!

Kirill Lokshin
On 3/16/06, geni <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 3/17/06, Kirill Lokshin <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > On 3/16/06, geni <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > On 3/16/06, Guy Chapman aka JzG <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > I'd say this one is going to close as no consensus:
> > > >
> > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_...For_Dummies_books
> > > >
> > > > So, friends, can you help me to find merit in this article?  To be
> > > > reconciled to the existence of what up to now I am unable to see as
> > > > anything other than an absurdity?  Or is Tony right, and AfD is
> > > > fatally borken?
> > > > Guy (JzG)
> > >
> > > Non issue. We leave Afd to have their fun that kill it like to copyvio
> > > it is. Takeing on the inclusionists head on will probably result in a
> > > dummies watch or something.
> >
> > It may be utterly useless garbage, but how is it a copyvio?  I was
> > under the impression that non-creative lists of facts (of which I
> > think this is an example) weren't eligible for copyright.
> >
> > Kirill Lokshin
>
> It is sorted. For example sorting the books into a "Handheld
> computing" section is argubly creative.

Well, it is prefaced with "Note that this list contains some
duplicates; some books are part of multiple ...For Dummies series."
I'm not terribly familiar with these books; do they have something,
like a spine label, giving the series?  If that's the case, listing it
by these isn't particularly creative on our part.

Kirill Lokshin
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Help me!

geni
In reply to this post by Sean Barrett-2
On 3/17/06, Sean Barrett <[hidden email]> wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> geni stated for the record:
>
> > Non issue. We leave Afd to have their fun that kill it like to copyvio
> > it is. Takeing on the inclusionists head on will probably result in a
> > dummies watch or something.
> >
> > --
> > geni
>
> A simple list cannot be copyrighted, so cannot be a copyright violation.
> [[Feist Publications v. Rural Telephone Service]].

I think the claim of "simple list" is somewhat doubtful. Remove the
subheadings and shove it into alphbetical order and you have a case.

> Your contempt of
> correctly-followed process and desire to circumvent consensus has
> transformed what may once have been merely an assumption into a
> conclusion supported by hard evidence.
>

This is going to be good. It adds to my collection of internaly
contradictory things I have been accused of.
--
geni
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Help me!

geni
In reply to this post by Kirill Lokshin
On 3/17/06, Kirill Lokshin <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 3/16/06, geni <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > On 3/17/06, Kirill Lokshin <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > On 3/16/06, geni <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > On 3/16/06, Guy Chapman aka JzG <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > > > I'd say this one is going to close as no consensus:
> > > > >
> > > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_...For_Dummies_books
> > > > >
> > > > > So, friends, can you help me to find merit in this article?  To be
> > > > > reconciled to the existence of what up to now I am unable to see as
> > > > > anything other than an absurdity?  Or is Tony right, and AfD is
> > > > > fatally borken?
> > > > > Guy (JzG)
> > > >
> > > > Non issue. We leave Afd to have their fun that kill it like to copyvio
> > > > it is. Takeing on the inclusionists head on will probably result in a
> > > > dummies watch or something.
> > >
> > > It may be utterly useless garbage, but how is it a copyvio?  I was
> > > under the impression that non-creative lists of facts (of which I
> > > think this is an example) weren't eligible for copyright.
> > >
> > > Kirill Lokshin
> >
> > It is sorted. For example sorting the books into a "Handheld
> > computing" section is argubly creative.
>
> Well, it is prefaced with "Note that this list contains some
> duplicates; some books are part of multiple ...For Dummies series."
> I'm not terribly familiar with these books; do they have something,
> like a spine label, giving the series?  If that's the case, listing it
> by these isn't particularly creative on our part.
>
> Kirill Lokshin

It is however creative on the companies part.
--
geni
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Help me!

MacGyverMagic/Mgm
In reply to this post by geni
On 3/17/06, geni <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 3/17/06, Sean Barrett <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > geni stated for the record:
> >
> > > Non issue. We leave Afd to have their fun that kill it like to copyvio
> > > it is. Takeing on the inclusionists head on will probably result in a
> > > dummies watch or something.
> > >
> > > --
> > > geni
> >
> > A simple list cannot be copyrighted, so cannot be a copyright violation.
> > [[Feist Publications v. Rural Telephone Service]].
>
> I think the claim of "simple list" is somewhat doubtful. Remove the
> subheadings and shove it into alphbetical order and you have a case.

Even if it contains some creative work; someone else needs to have
made the same list before we did for it to be considered a copyvio. Us
Wikipedians are allowed to be creative ourselves. What list are we
violating?

Mgm
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Help me!

Steve Bennett-4
In reply to this post by Guy Chapman aka JzG
On 3/17/06, Guy Chapman aka JzG <[hidden email]> wrote:
> I'd say this one is going to close as no consensus:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_...For_Dummies_books
>
> So, friends, can you help me to find merit in this article?  To be
> reconciled to the existence of what up to now I am unable to see as
> anything other than an absurdity?  Or is Tony right, and AfD is
> fatally borken?

Merit, you say? Imagine this: There's an article about the Dummies
series itself. Imagine this article makes a claim like "Most books are
now about lifestyle rather than technical subjects". By linking to the
actual list you could form your own impression.

I don't totally accept the "It's on the publisher's website, we don't
need to duplicate it" argument. Is the publisher's website going to be
published on the Wikipedia 1.0 website? Is it going to be printed? etc
etc.

No, I don't see a *lot* of merit in this article. But I don't see that
Wikipedia would be much better off without it either. (Assuming it's
not a copyvio).

Steve
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Help me!

Guy Chapman aka JzG
In reply to this post by geni
On Fri, 17 Mar 2006 01:09:44 +0000, you wrote:

>It is sorted. For example sorting the books into a "Handheld
>computing" section is argubly creative.

That's just the sections from the dummies.com website - each subheader
contains a straight copy & paste of the identically headed section on
dummies.com.
Guy (JzG)
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JzG

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Help me!

Alphax (Wikipedia email)
In reply to this post by geni
geni wrote:

> On 3/17/06, Kirill Lokshin <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>>On 3/16/06, geni <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>>On 3/17/06, Kirill Lokshin <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On 3/16/06, geni <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On 3/16/06, Guy Chapman aka JzG <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>I'd say this one is going to close as no consensus:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_...For_Dummies_books
>>>>>>
>>>>>>So, friends, can you help me to find merit in this article?  To be
>>>>>>reconciled to the existence of what up to now I am unable to see as
>>>>>>anything other than an absurdity?  Or is Tony right, and AfD is
>>>>>>fatally borken?
>>>>>>Guy (JzG)
>>>>>
>>>>>Non issue. We leave Afd to have their fun that kill it like to copyvio
>>>>>it is. Takeing on the inclusionists head on will probably result in a
>>>>>dummies watch or something.
>>>>
>>>>It may be utterly useless garbage, but how is it a copyvio?  I was
>>>>under the impression that non-creative lists of facts (of which I
>>>>think this is an example) weren't eligible for copyright.
>>>>
>>>>Kirill Lokshin
>>>
>>>It is sorted. For example sorting the books into a "Handheld
>>>computing" section is argubly creative.
>>
>>Well, it is prefaced with "Note that this list contains some
>>duplicates; some books are part of multiple ...For Dummies series."
>>I'm not terribly familiar with these books; do they have something,
>>like a spine label, giving the series?  If that's the case, listing it
>>by these isn't particularly creative on our part.
>>
>>Kirill Lokshin
>
>
> It is however creative on the companies part.
>
So we reorder it.

--
Alphax - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax
Contributor to Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
"We make the internet not suck" - Jimbo Wales
Public key: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax/OpenPGP

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

signature.asc (570 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Help me!

geni
On 3/17/06, Alphax (Wikipedia email) <[hidden email]> wrote:

> So we reorder it.

I'm not stoping you.


--
geni
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Help me!

Alphax (Wikipedia email)
geni wrote:
> On 3/17/06, Alphax (Wikipedia email) <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>
>>So we reorder it.
>
>
> I'm not stoping you.
>

I'm not stopping *you* either. If you think it's a copyvio which can be
easily fixed, why not fix it instead of jumping up and down screaming
"copyvio! copyvio!"?

--
Alphax - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax
Contributor to Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
"We make the internet not suck" - Jimbo Wales
Public key: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax/OpenPGP

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

signature.asc (570 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Help me!

Steve Summit
In reply to this post by geni
>> It may be utterly useless garbage, but how is it a copyvio?  I was
>> under the impression that non-creative lists of facts (of which I
>> think this is an example) weren't eligible for copyright.
>
> It is sorted. For example sorting the books into a "Handheld
> computing" section is argubly creative.

Guy Chapman already made this point, but it's worth repeating:
that "arguably creative" work was evidently done by the
publisher, not us.

The claim has been made (and I have no reason to doubt it) that
all 46k of that article was cut-and-pasted from the publisher's
website.

My own opinion is that, as a general rule, any time you
cut-and-paste that much information from someone else's work,
it's probably wrong.  It may not be wrong because it's a
copyright violation per se, but it's probably wrong all the
same.  Just the fact that you're thinking of cutting and pasting
that much information can serve as a simple alarm bell saying
"I probably shouldn't do this."

                                        Steve Summit
                                        [[User:Ummit]]
                                        [hidden email]
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Help me!

geni
In reply to this post by Alphax (Wikipedia email)
On 3/17/06, Alphax (Wikipedia email) <[hidden email]> wrote:

> geni wrote:
> > On 3/17/06, Alphax (Wikipedia email) <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>So we reorder it.
> >
> >
> > I'm not stoping you.
> >
>
> I'm not stopping *you* either. If you think it's a copyvio which can be
> easily fixed, why not fix it instead of jumping up and down screaming
> "copyvio! copyvio!"?
>
> --
> Alphax - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax
> Contributor to Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
> "We make the internet not suck" - Jimbo Wales
> Public key: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax/OpenPGP

The onus is on the uploader to make sure whatever it is is not a
copyvio. If I ripped out the subheading and sorted it into
alphabetical order someone would probably try to revert me pretty
fast. I'd still need to go through WP:CP in order to kill the history
and in anycase wikisource is over there.

--
geni
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Help me!

Steve Bennett-4
Can I just make the comment that this thread shows why email is much
better adapted to serious discussions that Wiki software is. Most of
the comments on AfD are "Delete, per nom" or "Keep <insert brief spiel
here>". Whereas on email people are actually able to develop ideas
like "it's a copyvio" beyond that simple troublesome phrase.

And to think there was a proposed policy to ban offsite discussion
about Wikipedia...:)

Steve

On 3/17/06, geni <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 3/17/06, Alphax (Wikipedia email) <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > geni wrote:
> > > On 3/17/06, Alphax (Wikipedia email) <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >>So we reorder it.
> > >
> > >
> > > I'm not stoping you.
> > >
> >
> > I'm not stopping *you* either. If you think it's a copyvio which can be
> > easily fixed, why not fix it instead of jumping up and down screaming
> > "copyvio! copyvio!"?
> >
> > --
> > Alphax - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax
> > Contributor to Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
> > "We make the internet not suck" - Jimbo Wales
> > Public key: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alphax/OpenPGP
>
> The onus is on the uploader to make sure whatever it is is not a
> copyvio. If I ripped out the subheading and sorted it into
> alphabetical order someone would probably try to revert me pretty
> fast. I'd still need to go through WP:CP in order to kill the history
> and in anycase wikisource is over there.
>
> --
> geni
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Off-wiki vs. on-wiki discussion

Philip Welch
On Mar 17, 2006, at 7:34 AM, Steve Bennett wrote:

> Can I just make the comment that this thread shows why email is much
> better adapted to serious discussions that Wiki software is. Most of
> the comments on AfD are "Delete, per nom" or "Keep <insert brief spiel
> here>". Whereas on email people are actually able to develop ideas
> like "it's a copyvio" beyond that simple troublesome phrase.
>
> And to think there was a proposed policy to ban offsite discussion
> about Wikipedia...:)

I propose a new guideline. I call it, "On-wiki policy discussion  
considered harmful".

--
Philip L. Welch
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Philwelch



_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Off-wiki vs. on-wiki discussion

Kirill Lokshin
On 3/17/06, Philip Welch <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Mar 17, 2006, at 7:34 AM, Steve Bennett wrote:
>
> > Can I just make the comment that this thread shows why email is much
> > better adapted to serious discussions that Wiki software is. Most of
> > the comments on AfD are "Delete, per nom" or "Keep <insert brief spiel
> > here>". Whereas on email people are actually able to develop ideas
> > like "it's a copyvio" beyond that simple troublesome phrase.
> >
> > And to think there was a proposed policy to ban offsite discussion
> > about Wikipedia...:)
>
> I propose a new guideline. I call it, "On-wiki policy discussion
> considered harmful".

We should combine that with the earlier discussion, though -- just
think of how much time a "Policy discussion considered harmful"
guideline would save us ;-)

Kirill Lokshin
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
12