Re: [Foundation-l] The 'Undue Weight' of Truth on Wikipedia (from the Chronicle) + some citation discussions

2012-02-21 Thread David Gerard
On 22 February 2012 03:04, Mike Godwin wrote: > On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 6:35 PM, George Herbert > wrote: >> The post-facto probability of 1.0 that the researcher was in fact >> professional, credible, and by all accounts right does not mean that a >> priori he should automatically have been trea

Re: [Foundation-l] The 'Undue Weight' of Truth on Wikipedia (from the Chronicle) + some citation discussions

2012-02-21 Thread George Herbert
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 7:04 PM, Mike Godwin wrote: > I should add a response on this point: > > On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 6:35 PM, George Herbert > wrote: > >> The post-facto probability of 1.0 that the researcher was in fact >> professional, credible, and by all accounts right does not mean that

Re: [Foundation-l] Communicating effectively: Wikimedia needs clear language now

2012-02-21 Thread Erik Moeller
On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 3:16 AM, Tom Morris wrote: > Mostly though, thanks to the Internet and multinational corporations, > godawful business jargon crosses all national borders. Words and > phrases like 'onboarding', 'stakeholders', 'mission statements', > 'platforms', 'proactive', 'sectors' an

Re: [Foundation-l] The 'Undue Weight' of Truth on Wikipedia (from the Chronicle) + some citation discussions

2012-02-21 Thread Fred Bauder
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 9:48 PM, Mike Godwin wrote: > >> Apart from the question of whether this particular article -- on the >> Haymarket bombing -- has been hurt by editors' ill-considered >> application of UNDUE, there's the larger question of what it means for >> our credibility when a very

Re: [Foundation-l] The 'Undue Weight' of Truth on Wikipedia (from the Chronicle) + some citation discussions

2012-02-21 Thread Mike Godwin
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 7:06 PM, George Herbert wrote: > Any policy - or policy change - we can think of will have unforseen > consequences. I agree with you. But we can't let this paralyze us in responding to a problem that is no longer "unforeseen," but that in fact has occurred. At minimum, t

Re: [Foundation-l] The 'Undue Weight' of Truth on Wikipedia (from the Chronicle) + some citation discussions

2012-02-21 Thread Mike Christie
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 9:48 PM, Mike Godwin wrote: > Apart from the question of whether this particular article -- on the > Haymarket bombing -- has been hurt by editors' ill-considered > application of UNDUE, there's the larger question of what it means for > our credibility when a very respect

Re: [Foundation-l] The 'Undue Weight' of Truth on Wikipedia (from the Chronicle) + some citation discussions

2012-02-21 Thread George Herbert
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 6:48 PM, Mike Godwin wrote: > On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 6:35 PM, George Herbert > wrote: > >> If the answer to one is "yes", then "These things happen" is an >> explanation but not an excuse, and should be a prompt to help us all >> get better at detecting that.  These thing

Re: [Foundation-l] The 'Undue Weight' of Truth on Wikipedia (from the Chronicle) + some citation discussions

2012-02-21 Thread Mike Godwin
I should add a response on this point: On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 6:35 PM, George Herbert wrote: > The post-facto probability of 1.0 that the researcher was in fact > professional, credible, and by all accounts right does not mean that a > priori he should automatically have been treated that way b

Re: [Foundation-l] The 'Undue Weight' of Truth on Wikipedia (from the Chronicle) + some citation discussions

2012-02-21 Thread Mike Godwin
On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 6:35 PM, George Herbert wrote: > If the answer to one is "yes", then "These things happen" is an > explanation but not an excuse, and should be a prompt to help us all > get better at detecting that.  These things do happen, but should not. >  These things do happen, but w

Re: [Foundation-l] The 'Undue Weight' of Truth on Wikipedia (from the Chronicle) + some citation discussions

2012-02-21 Thread George Herbert
On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 5:48 PM, Mike Godwin wrote: > Fred Bauder writes: > >> I think it probably seems to climate change deniers that excluding >> political opinions from science-based articles on global warming is a >> violation of neutral point of view, and of basic fairness. That is just >> o

[Foundation-l] The 'Undue Weight' of Truth on Wikipedia (from the Chronicle) + some citation discussions

2012-02-21 Thread Andrew Lih
Mike Godwin wrote: > I read the article in the Chronicle pretty carefully. The author's > experience struck me as an example of a pattern that may account for > the flattening of the growth curve in new editors as well as for some > other phenomena. As you may remember, Andrew Lih conducted a > pre

Re: [Foundation-l] [Langcom-l] EFE: Indigenous languages entering Wikipedia

2012-02-21 Thread Osmar Valdebenito
2012/2/21 Michael Everson > On 20 Feb 2012, at 18:23, Osmar Valdebenito wrote: > > > But there are several problems, especially with Mapudungun Wikipedia. > Currently, ISO code for Mapudungun is arn from Araucanian, an offensive > word used by the Spanish and Chilean conquerors till the past cent

Re: [Foundation-l] Reminder: IRC office hours with the localization team tomorrow

2012-02-21 Thread Steven Walling
On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 2:17 PM, Steven Walling wrote: > Hi all! Just a quick reminder that you're invited to join the WMF > localization team at 1800 UTC tomorrow. > This is happening now. :) Steven ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wik

Re: [Foundation-l] EFE: Indigenous languages entering Wikipedia

2012-02-21 Thread Gerard Meijssen
Hoi, The problem that can be solved is to have the arn code associated with Auracanian in the CLDR. Changing the ISO-639 code itself is not possible. This code is not the only one that is considered to be problematic by the people who speak that language. In essence it is just a code. At that, th