[Foundation-l] new list summary posted

2009-03-21 Thread phoebe ayers
Here's the summary for foundation-l for Mar 1-15: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/LSS/foundation-l-archives/2009_March_1-15 and here's the one for Feb. 16-29: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/LSS/foundation-l-archives/2009_February_16-28 My apologies for the delay on both of these! And again, if an

Re: [Foundation-l] depth

2009-03-21 Thread Thomas Dalton
Woa! You managed to force my email client into right-to-left mode there and I could get it back without deleting all the quoted text... Could you please set your email client to left-to-right when writing in English, please? Redirects are counted in depth because they aren't articles. It is an ext

Re: [Foundation-l] Licensing transition: opposing points of view

2009-03-21 Thread ‫‬‭‮‪‫‬‭‮Mark Williamson
So, the authors directly relate to give completely true form of contributed to switch to assume your minimally acceptable is because of share-alike, but you are contribution? skype: node.ue 2009/3/21 Anthony : > On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 8:42 AM, geni wrote: > >> 2009/3/21 Erik Moeller : >> > Th

Re: [Foundation-l] Licensing transition: opposing points of view

2009-03-21 Thread Sue Gardner
I've been meaning to reply in this thread to what Jussi said. (Sorry to not reply inline; I'm on my Blackberry.) Jussi said he's only seen comments on the licensing issue from the staff, and not from the board. That may be true on this list, and it may be true for the specific piece of the conv

Re: [Foundation-l] Licensing transition: opposing points of view

2009-03-21 Thread Anthony
On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 8:42 AM, geni wrote: > 2009/3/21 Erik Moeller : > > There's no reason to assume that they are. > > Actually there is see. Remember every wikipedian who has edited a page > has released a modified version of a GFDL document. I hope you are not > accusing them of violating c

Re: [Foundation-l] depth

2009-03-21 Thread ‫‬‭‮‪‫‬‭‮Mark Williamson
17,000 for a single page!? Wow. I don't think redirects should impact depth, though. If they do, we're calculating wrong I think. 2009/3/21 Marcus Buck : > Przykuta hett schreven: >> Hi >> >> look at ksh wiki >> >> http://s23.org/wikistats/wikipedias_html.php?sort=good_desc >> >> good: 10032 >>

Re: [Foundation-l] depth

2009-03-21 Thread Marcus Buck
Przykuta hett schreven: > Hi > > look at ksh wiki > > http://s23.org/wikistats/wikipedias_html.php?sort=good_desc > > good: 10032 > total: 508246 > edits: 1135239 > > depth: 5509 :) Recipes: - don't delete bad stuff, instead tag it as being bad (in the category for deletion req

Re: [Foundation-l] depth

2009-03-21 Thread Thomas Dalton
2009/3/21 Przykuta : > Hi > > look at ksh wiki > > http://s23.org/wikistats/wikipedias_html.php?sort=good_desc > > good: 10032 > total: 508246 > edits: 1135239 > > depth: 5509 :) > > best regards > > przykuta zh-classical also has an unusually high depth (for a Wikipedia with a significant number

[Foundation-l] depth

2009-03-21 Thread Przykuta
Hi look at ksh wiki http://s23.org/wikistats/wikipedias_html.php?sort=good_desc good: 10032 total: 508246 edits: 1135239 depth: 5509 :) best regards przykuta ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: http

Re: [Foundation-l] Licensing transition: opposing points of view

2009-03-21 Thread geni
2009/3/21 Erik Moeller : > 2009/3/20 geni : >> Now that argument is flawed on a number of grounds but I think I'll >> take the easy option. Where is the link of the following pages: > > Try the edit pages. Doesn't help you. Even those that do mention their equiv of wikipedia:copyrights don't menti