Translating the Five pillars (Was: Important Issue to Hebrew Wikipedia and AdminAbuse)

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

Translating the Five pillars (Was: Important Issue to Hebrew Wikipedia and AdminAbuse)

Habj
2007/2/2, Berto 'd Sera <[hidden email]>:

> BTW, how many editions did even bother translating those damn pillars??
> How
> many non-english wikipedians EVEN JUST KNOW that they exist?



Should all Wikipedias translate the pillars? Why? Would it necessarily work,
if they did?

Most of the projects probably have lots to learn from enwiki, since it is
the oldest project and with all its flaws still somehow works despite its
size. Most projects have at one stage or another imported policy pages and
similar from enwiki, or from another wiki that took it from enwiki. Today
however, whatever rules that should be imposed on all projects should come
from the WMF, not English Wikipedia.

The five pillars [1] is, to my knowledge, a compilation of basic policy
created on English Wikipedia. There are other enwiki policy compilations as
well, but it seems the pillars is the one most commonly referred to. I once
a board member ,what policy a Wikipedia has to follow, and got the answer
that probably these are only three: that the content should be free (GFDL),
encyclopaedic and neutral. You can compare the pillars with for instance the
foundation issues page at meta [2] which, interestingly, mentions the "wiki
process" - a badly defined concept that may or may not be identical to the
basic consensus based process of a wiki [3] and that is not mentioned in the
Pillars.

The project that I have been most active at has a compilation of "basic
principles" [4] very similar to the pillars with one exception. This wiki
never imported or reinvented "Ignore all rules", which is the fifth of the
enwiki pillars. I don't think there is anything that tries to make them, or
tells them they should, import that concept from English Wikipedia. I
personally believe they might gain from doing so, but that is another issue
- and a process of much larger scope, and much more painful, than simply
translating a page. Personally I believe the concensus process a.k.a. wiki
process is equally important as Ignore all rules, and deserves a central
place in whatever policy compilation you have. Others might disagree, of
course.

/habj


[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Five_pillars
[2] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Foundation_issues
[3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Consensus
[4] http://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Grundprinciperna
_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Translating the Five pillars (Was: Important Issue toHebrew Wikipedia and AdminAbuse)

Berto 'd Sera-2
Hi!

>Should all Wikipedias translate the pillars? Why? Would it
>necessarily work, if they did?

Now this is an interesting subject. AFAIK, pillars ARE mandatory for all
editions. If not just let me know, pms.wiki will be extremely happy in
getting rid of the "no original research" limit. I'm sure most soviet wikies
will be very happy to get rid of the NPOV principle, as well.

Not sure the board will be happy in being flooded by a tide of weird cases
originated by wikies who decided that creationism is pillar, etc etc...

Berto 'd Sera
Personagi dl'ann 2006 per l'arvista american-a Time (tanme tuti vojaotri)
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1569514,00.html


_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Translating the Five pillars (Was: Important Issue toHebrew Wikipedia and AdminAbuse)

Erik Moeller-4
On 2/26/07, Berto 'd Sera <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Now this is an interesting subject. AFAIK, pillars ARE mandatory for all
> editions. If not just let me know, pms.wiki will be extremely happy in
> getting rid of the "no original research" limit. I'm sure most soviet wikies
> will be very happy to get rid of the NPOV principle, as well.

This has never been fully articulated on the Foundation level. It
should be, in collaboration with the community, for a "Wikipedia
mission statement" (something we should, I believe, have for all our
projects).
--
Peace & Love,
Erik

DISCLAIMER: This message does not represent an official position of
the Wikimedia Foundation or its Board of Trustees.

"An old, rigid civilization is reluctantly dying. Something new, open,
free and exciting is waking up." -- Ming the Mechanic

_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Translating the Five pillars

Berto 'd Sera-2
Hi Erik :)

>This has never been fully articulated on the Foundation level. It
>should be, in collaboration with the community, for a "Wikipedia
>mission statement" (something we should, I believe, have for all our
>projects).

I'm shocked :) Anyway, I can only welcome reality and reality says it's
Independence Day. I quit monitoring eastern wikis as there can't be any
violation where there's no rule.

I will inform my community that we have no mandatory framework that can stop
anyone from proposing whatever they will, thus including
*original research;
*possible paid ads published by template inclusion
*a Wikimedia Chapter to manage what we cash from them

Pls DO publish a draft for the mission statement asap, so that I can try and
propose it as an official PMS.wiki policy and start to spread its adoption.

BTW, how can we activate a mailing list for small wikies only? Given all
this freedom maybe it's time we forget about major sisters and start to
speak to each other more frequently than we did thus far.

Cereja
Berto 'd Sera
Personagi dl'ann 2006 per l'arvista american-a Time (tanme tuti vojaotri)
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1569514,00.html


_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Translating the Five pillars

Erik Moeller-4
On 2/26/07, Berto 'd Sera <[hidden email]> wrote:
> I'm shocked :) Anyway, I can only welcome reality and reality says it's
> Independence Day. I quit monitoring eastern wikis as there can't be any
> violation where there's no rule.

It's not that simple. The Board can, and has, encouraged intervention
when key principles have been violated. Just because a rule is not yet
written does not mean that it is not a rule. We can, and in my opinion
will, be explicit about these principles. In the meantime, another
unwritten global rule to follow is "Don't disrupt Wikimedia to make a
point." :-)
--
Peace & Love,
Erik

DISCLAIMER: This message does not represent an official position of
the Wikimedia Foundation or its Board of Trustees.

"An old, rigid civilization is reluctantly dying. Something new, open,
free and exciting is waking up." -- Ming the Mechanic

_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Translating the Five pillars

Gerard Meijssen-3
Hoi,
So how do you make a point. Would you say that the Wikimedia Foundation
cares enough that a point can be made without disruption, without
ruffled feathers by some, without many people being against ??

Do you argue that the WMF can make a point without creating some
disruption??

Thanks,
    GerardM


Erik Moeller schreef:

> On 2/26/07, Berto 'd Sera <[hidden email]> wrote:
>  
>> I'm shocked :) Anyway, I can only welcome reality and reality says it's
>> Independence Day. I quit monitoring eastern wikis as there can't be any
>> violation where there's no rule.
>>    
>
> It's not that simple. The Board can, and has, encouraged intervention
> when key principles have been violated. Just because a rule is not yet
> written does not mean that it is not a rule. We can, and in my opinion
> will, be explicit about these principles. In the meantime, another
> unwritten global rule to follow is "Don't disrupt Wikimedia to make a
> point." :-)
>  


_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Translating the Five pillars

Berto 'd Sera-2
In reply to this post by Erik Moeller-4
Hi!

> Just because a rule is not yet written does not mean that it is not
> a rule.
No, sorry. A rule is a rule when it's clearly expressed and people are aware
of it. A rule that is not written is... a desire, a convention if you wish.
Whatever you'll call it, but not a rule. Otherwise there cannot be any
warranty for anyone. Applying unwritten rules depending on judges' mood is
the ABC of dictatorial states. I acknowledge that it's done for a good
cause, yet it cannot be accepted anyway.

>Don't disrupt Wikimedia to make a point.
It's the last thing I want to do. Pls DO publish the draft and I'll do my
best to spread it. But I will not impose any rule by asserting that there IS
a rule where in fact there is none.

Berto 'd Sera
Personagi dl'ann 2006 per l'arvista american-a Time (tanme tuti vojaotri)
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1569514,00.html
 


_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Translating the Five pillars

Erik Moeller-4
On 2/26/07, Berto 'd Sera <[hidden email]> wrote:
> No, sorry. A rule is a rule when it's clearly expressed and people are aware
> of it. A rule that is not written is... a desire, a convention if you wish.
> Whatever you'll call it, but not a rule. Otherwise there cannot be any
> warranty for anyone. Applying unwritten rules depending on judges' mood is
> the ABC of dictatorial states.

We're not a nation state but an online community of people freely
associating around a clearly identified cause (to build an
encyclopedia, to write a dictionary, and so on). We need not spell out
every single possible behavior that would be detrimental to that
identified cause, though we should be clearer about the broad
principles that help us to achieve it.

--
Peace & Love,
Erik

DISCLAIMER: This message does not represent an official position of
the Wikimedia Foundation or its Board of Trustees.

"An old, rigid civilization is reluctantly dying. Something new, open,
free and exciting is waking up." -- Ming the Mechanic

_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Translating the Five pillars

Andrew Gray
In reply to this post by Berto 'd Sera-2
On 26/02/07, Berto 'd Sera <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi!
>
> > Just because a rule is not yet written does not mean that it is not
> > a rule.
> No, sorry. A rule is a rule when it's clearly expressed and people are aware
> of it. A rule that is not written is... a desire, a convention if you wish.
> Whatever you'll call it, but not a rule. Otherwise there cannot be any
> warranty for anyone. Applying unwritten rules depending on judges' mood is
> the ABC of dictatorial states. I acknowledge that it's done for a good
> cause, yet it cannot be accepted anyway.

To the extent that online communities resemble any judicial system,
they tend to more resemble common law than civil law ones. I don't
feel that Not Writing Every Rule Down From Day One is automatically a
failure of that system, though I agree we could be doing more to
emphasise what is fundamental principles and what is administrative
stuff.

[You can take the common-law analogy a lot further, but I'll refrain.]

--
- Andrew Gray
  [hidden email]

_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Translating the Five pillars

Gerard Meijssen-3
In reply to this post by Erik Moeller-4
Hoi,
When you say that we are an on-line community, you are basically wrong. We
are many communities. We do not share one cause; as you state yourself we
have many causes. Not stating that the NPOV is an essential part of our
efforts is a major failing because there are projects that fail this
criteria. By not stating that this is essential to a Wikipedia, the
Wikimedia Foundation does not have the moral right to intervene where this
is lacking.

When you argue that we have to be clear what our principles are, when you
mean that NPOV is one of these principles. Please say so. At some stage the
WMF will say what the minimum requirements are with respect to licensed
materials in our projects. I think the notion of NPOV is more important than
the notion of freely licensed material. The notion of providing information
without bias is much more relevant than the information being Free.

I will immediately state that the notion of Freely licensed information is
dear to me. However what is its value if it is biased, when you are left
guessing if the data is intended to be the best it can be or that you have
to appreciate what the bias of any of a WMF project is. A bias that can be
different depending on the language...

No, it is absolutely vital to be clear about what the basis is of our
projects. Free and NPOV have to be core values for all of our projects in
all of our languages.

Thanks,
   GerardM



On 2/26/07, Erik Moeller <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> On 2/26/07, Berto 'd Sera <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > No, sorry. A rule is a rule when it's clearly expressed and people are
> aware
> > of it. A rule that is not written is... a desire, a convention if you
> wish.
> > Whatever you'll call it, but not a rule. Otherwise there cannot be any
> > warranty for anyone. Applying unwritten rules depending on judges' mood
> is
> > the ABC of dictatorial states.
>
> We're not a nation state but an online community of people freely
> associating around a clearly identified cause (to build an
> encyclopedia, to write a dictionary, and so on). We need not spell out
> every single possible behavior that would be detrimental to that
> identified cause, though we should be clearer about the broad
> principles that help us to achieve it.
>
> --
> Peace & Love,
> Erik
>
> DISCLAIMER: This message does not represent an official position of
> the Wikimedia Foundation or its Board of Trustees.
>
> "An old, rigid civilization is reluctantly dying. Something new, open,
> free and exciting is waking up." -- Ming the Mechanic
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>
_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Translating the Five pillars

Berto 'd Sera-2
In reply to this post by Erik Moeller-4
Hi!

>We're not a nation state but an online community of people freely
>associating around a clearly identified cause (to build an
>encyclopedia, to write a dictionary, and so on).
Sorry, Erik. I do NOT mean to be polemic, yet I don't see how this can be
understood from anyone not being an average western open source activist. We
ask the planet to be telepathic, and that's more than I can accept.

Writing an encyclopedia is not enough to get rid of POV (cfr soviet
encyclopedia, fascist Treccani, catholic encyclopedias, etc). It's not
enough to get rid of advertising, as many such online publications DO show
ads. And it's not enough to get rid of original research, since it's
perfectly normal for other encyclopedias to publish (sometimes even to
prepare) such material.

>We need not spell out every single possible behavior
My asking for 4-5 clear mandatory pillars is not the same as asking for a
1200 articles constitution. It's not about turning wikimedia into a
bureaucratic nightmare; it's about establishing a clear framework.

People MAY have a different idea of what an encyclopedia is (should be).
Failure to understand this is but western integralism. We either DO explain
the basics of what is "defined as correct" within this private property of
ours or remain exposed to people applying THEIR cultural standards in
absolute good faith.

Once you have two such conflicting visions it's going to be "my idea wins
because I got friends in the Board" or "we win because we can send so many
flame emails that we will tire everyone to death". This is not democracy,
it's e-creeps vs e-bloods.

I will not write a report against a person/edition that possibly was in good
faith but is "not complaining with my Glorious Party's ideology". I have
lots of bad sides in my character, but being a spy because of
racial/ideological reasons is not one of them.

I do believe that if you take a minute to think about it you will see what I
mean. It takes no more than 100 chars to write a clear version of the
pillars and it takes but a mandatory link in the submission page to have all
our users informed (as we do with copvios).

After that yes, I will defend the pillars as I did so far, because any
violation will have become a voluntary violation. But I will not prosecute a
person because of his/her opinions. After all, as Chomsky once said "I'm not
God, so maybe I always was wrong".

Peace & love 2 U, too :)

Berto 'd Sera
Personagi dl'ann 2006 per l'arvista american-a Time (tanme tuti vojaotri)
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1569514,00.html


_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Translating the Five pillars

Berto 'd Sera-2
In reply to this post by Andrew Gray
Hi!

> I don't
> feel that Not Writing Every Rule Down From Day One is automatically a
> failure of that system, though I agree we could be doing more to
> emphasise what is fundamental principles and what is administrative
> stuff.

It's a matter of deciding whether there is something gluing all projects
into one or not. This common glue cannot come from en.wiki, it must come
from wmf, because wmf is the only thing that really holds us together
(trademark + hosting service). It's definitely NOT about administrative or
local stuff.

BTW, my request for a list dedicated to small wikies is not provocative.
It's just a matter of recognizing that since WMF fails (so far) to give this
glue it will probably be better if at least try and make this glue all
together, since none of us will ever have the numerical force needed to
fight against en.wiki's POV.

Berto 'd Sera
Personagi dl'ann 2006 per l'arvista american-a Time (tanme tuti vojaotri)
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1569514,00.html


_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Translating the Five pillars

Erik Moeller-4
In reply to this post by Berto 'd Sera-2
On 2/26/07, Berto 'd Sera <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Writing an encyclopedia is not enough to get rid of POV (cfr soviet
> encyclopedia, fascist Treccani, catholic encyclopedias, etc).

Well, we're not the Catholic Encyclopedia, we're the free
encyclopedia. There is no POV implicit in our mission. That said, the
most recent version of our mission statement (which is currently in
the resolution stage for voting by the Board) states that our mission
is to create "neutral educational content"; making this part of the
WMF Mission Statement seems to be uncontroversial among the Board and
I expect that this will become official soon.

> It's not enough to get rid of advertising, as many such online publications DO
> show ads.

Wikimedia doesn't and has no intention to. That said, it doesn't seem
appropriate in a mission statement.

> And it's not enough to get rid of original research, since it's
> perfectly normal for other encyclopedias to publish (sometimes even to
> prepare) such material.

Indeed, and the boundaries are very hard to define as well -- this is
why it is important to be careful with blanket statements that apply
to all projects in all languages. Both Wikinews & Wikiversity do
permit original research within limits, and Wikipedia might in some
way feature such original content.  I'm not saying it shouldn't be in
a Wikipedia mission statement -- I'm saying it shouldn't be rushed.

--
Peace & Love,
Erik

DISCLAIMER: This message does not represent an official position of
the Wikimedia Foundation or its Board of Trustees.

"An old, rigid civilization is reluctantly dying. Something new, open,
free and exciting is waking up." -- Ming the Mechanic

_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Translating the Five pillars

Berto 'd Sera-2
Hi!

> "neutral educational content";
Good for me :) LOLOL, why didn't you say so right from the start?

> Wikipedia might in some way feature such original content
Which ones, for example?

Berto 'd Sera
Personagi dl'ann 2006 per l'arvista american-a Time (tanme tuti vojaotri)
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1569514,00.html


_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Translating the Five pillars

Ray Saintonge
Berto 'd Sera wrote:

>>Wikipedia might in some way feature such original content
>>    
>>
>Which ones, for example?
>
Answering that would be a strategic error.  We have too many people who
are willing to give a strict literal reading of such an answer, then
several months later come back wioth, "But you said here ...!"

Ec


_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Translating the Five pillars

David Gerard-2
In reply to this post by Berto 'd Sera-2
On 26/02/07, Berto 'd Sera <[hidden email]> wrote:

> > Wikipedia might in some way feature such original content
> Which ones, for example?


There are languages in which their Wikipedia is the first encyclopedia
*ever* written in the language.  I can hypothetically imagine such a
Wikipedia allowing original research or even signed articles,
Britannica-style.

("No ownership of articles" is a rule on en:wp, but I can imagine it
not being one on other WMF wikis.)


- d.

_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Translating the Five pillars

Gerard Meijssen-3
Hoi,
Would you accept POV Wikipedias ?
Would you accept Wikipedias that are not Free ?
Would you accept Wikipedias where articles about the same subject state
completely contradictory things .. one being in one language the second in
another language ?
Thanks,
     GerardM

On 2/26/07, David Gerard <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> On 26/02/07, Berto 'd Sera <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > > Wikipedia might in some way feature such original content
> > Which ones, for example?
>
>
> There are languages in which their Wikipedia is the first encyclopedia
> *ever* written in the language.  I can hypothetically imagine such a
> Wikipedia allowing original research or even signed articles,
> Britannica-style.
>
> ("No ownership of articles" is a rule on en:wp, but I can imagine it
> not being one on other WMF wikis.)
>
>
> - d.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>
_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Translating the Five pillars

Subsume
I'm not sure I understand the point of your line of questioning.

Is this just slippery slope, or do you feel that Original Research is
absolutely on par with the things you suggest?

-S

On 2/26/07, GerardM <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hoi,
> Would you accept POV Wikipedias ?
> Would you accept Wikipedias that are not Free ?
> Would you accept Wikipedias where articles about the same subject state
> completely contradictory things .. one being in one language the second in
> another language ?
> Thanks,
>      GerardM
>
> On 2/26/07, David Gerard <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > On 26/02/07, Berto 'd Sera <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > > > Wikipedia might in some way feature such original content
> > > Which ones, for example?
> >
> >
> > There are languages in which their Wikipedia is the first encyclopedia
> > *ever* written in the language.  I can hypothetically imagine such a
> > Wikipedia allowing original research or even signed articles,
> > Britannica-style.
> >
> > ("No ownership of articles" is a rule on en:wp, but I can imagine it
> > not being one on other WMF wikis.)
> >
> >
> > - d.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>

_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Translating the Five pillars

David Goodman
I remind people about the existence of Wikia for things that diverge
from the standards,

The point of calling something a Wikipedia is not just the inter-wiki
links, but the expectation of the type of material and authorship that
WP has been representing.
There will obviously be variation, somewhat dependent on , frankly,
national characteristics. It is not accidental that de is stricter
about V & RS than en--to give a positive illustration.  Some of it is
legal systems--the European WPs can not accept fair use images.

Whether a WP is POV depends on where you view it from. We would expect
some national POV. We would not expect it being taken over by a more
specific group pushing a point.  Whether a WP permits OR is also a
continuum--there are continual discussions about how far "common
sense" can be extended, & I wouldn't expect total agreement on that,
or on BLP, or on anything that depended upon human interpretation of a
general principle.

Some cannot be literal in execution, though they may be in principle.
Even "no ownership"--in en WP there are some topics that are
essentially owned, because the effort of the necessary editors to
overcome this is not present. I might even accept a WP that allowed a
particular state of an article to be signed. Some less-edited ones in
practice are.

Some may be cases where the original WP implementation may have been
too rigid: I would accept a WP that insisted on real names to edit
articles., though I do not advocate it.

But some things are more specific: I do not think the Foundation
should accept the use of the name by a WP that charges for access.

And even some principles have to be conceded: I would like it that no
WP is censored, but I can think of some where this might not be a real
possibility and that community would need to accept a safe degree of
self-censorship.

I simply do not know whether I would accept a WP operated by an
educational foundation of some sort--or conceivably even a  government
educational agency.


David Goodman DGG

On 2/26/07, Steve <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I'm not sure I understand the point of your line of questioning.
>
> Is this just slippery slope, or do you feel that Original Research is
> absolutely on par with the things you suggest?
>
> -S
>
> On 2/26/07, GerardM <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > Hoi,
> > Would you accept POV Wikipedias ?
> > Would you accept Wikipedias that are not Free ?
> > Would you accept Wikipedias where articles about the same subject state
> > completely contradictory things .. one being in one language the second in
> > another language ?
> > Thanks,
> >      GerardM
> >
> > On 2/26/07, David Gerard <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >
> > > On 26/02/07, Berto 'd Sera <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > > Wikipedia might in some way feature such original content
> > > > Which ones, for example?
> > >
> > >
> > > There are languages in which their Wikipedia is the first encyclopedia
> > > *ever* written in the language.  I can hypothetically imagine such a
> > > Wikipedia allowing original research or even signed articles,
> > > Britannica-style.
> > >
> > > ("No ownership of articles" is a rule on en:wp, but I can imagine it
> > > not being one on other WMF wikis.)
> > >
> > >
> > > - d.
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > > [hidden email]
> > > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>


--
David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S.

_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Translating the Five pillars

David Gerard-2
On 27/02/07, David Goodman <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I simply do not know whether I would accept a WP operated by an
> educational foundation of some sort--or conceivably even a  government
> educational agency.


The Wikimedia Foundation is an educational charity, isn't it?
Wikimedia UK certainly aims to be. (one day.)


- d.

_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
12