[[Image:Windowslonghorn.jpg|right]]
{{Villagepumppages|Proposals|The '''proposals''' section of the village pump is used to discuss new ideas and proposal that are not policy related (see [[Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)]] for that).
'''Longhorn''' is [[Microsoft]]'s [[codename]] (for a full list see ''[[Microsoft codenames]]'') for the next version of its [[Microsoft Windows|Windows]] [[operating system]], to follow on from [[Windows XP#Service Pack 3 (pending)|Windows XP SP3]] [http://news.com.com/Reversal+Next+IE+update+divorced+from+Windows/2100-1032_3-5577263.html?tag=nl] and [[Windows Server 2003]]. It was originally expected to ship sometime early in [[2006]] as a minor step between [[Windows XP|Whistler]] and [[Windows Blackcomb]] (Longhorn is a name of a [[sports bar]] at the [[Whistler-Blackcomb]] [[ski resort]]).
Gradually, Longhorn assimilated many important new features and technologies of Blackcomb. On [[August 27]], [[2004]], Microsoft announced that they are delaying release of [[WinFS]] so that Longhorn could be released in "a reasonable timeframe" (officially marked as [[December]] of [[2006]]). Two [[beta version]]s have been planned, the first expected to debut in Q2 2005 and the second in Q4 2005, with [[release candidate]]s to be released throughout 2006.
Recurring policy proposals are discussed at [[Wikipedia:Village pump (perennial proposals)]]. If you have a proposal for something that sounds overwhelmingly obvious and are amazed that Wikipedia doesn't have it, please check there first before posting it, as someone else might have found it obvious, too.
Longhorn is currently available as a preview release available to [[MSDN|Microsoft Developer Network]] (MSDN) subscribers, and at select Microsoft developer conferences. The preview release is classified as an [[Alpha version|alpha]] version at the moment, and as such its performance and feature sets are not necessarily representative of the release product. As with many products (including all Windows releases since 98) it has since been leaked onto popular [[file sharing]] networks.
Please sign and date your post (by typing <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> or clicking the signature icon in the edit toolbar).}}
[[Category:Wikipedia community forums|{{PAGENAME}}]]
==Technologies==
== [[Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)/Archive|Proposals archive]] ==
Microsoft labels the key new technologies as "The Pillars of Longhorn", which are:
Discussions older than 7 days (date of last made comment) are moved [[Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)/Archive|here]]. These discussions will be kept archived for 7 more days. During this period the discussion can be moved to a relevant talk page if appropriate. After 7 days the discussion will be permanently removed.
* '''Fundamentals''': new developments to the basic structure of the operating system including the [[Microsoft .NET|.NET]] framework, further support for [[digital rights management]] (DRM), an application deployment engine ("[[ClickOnce]]"), improvements to the installation of applications (Windows Installer/MSI 4.0), and the Trustworthy Computing initiative, previously known as Pallidium, see also ([[trusted computing]]).
* '''[[Avalon (API) | Avalon]]''': a new [[user interface]] subsystem and [[Application programming interface|API]] based on [[XML]], .NET, and [[vector graphics]], which will make use of [[3D computer graphics]] hardware and [[Direct3D]] technologies. See [[Windows Graphics Foundation]].
* '''[[Indigo (messaging system) | Indigo]]''': a service-oriented messaging system to allow programs to interoperate as part of the .NET framework.
* '''[[WinFX]]''': a new API to allow access to these new features, replacing the current "Win32" API (see [[Windows API]]).
It is worth noting that Avalon, Indigo, and WinFX are technologies that will be made available to [[Windows XP]] and [[Windows Server 2003]] as well, and are therefore not technologies to be exclusive to Longhorn, but rather developed in time for the Longhorn release, to be incorporated in that operating system. This doesn't imply coming visual changes to these operating systems though, as Aero will still be exclusive to Longhorn. The reason for [[backporting]] these technologies is to allow an easier introduction to these technologies to developers and end users.
March 26th Microsoft released a Community Preview featuring both Avalon and Indigo to enable developers to experiment with the new technologies without running the Alpha version of Longhorn. Due to many requests it was released to the general public and is available at Microsoft's website [http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=85ab132b-f1aa-4422-b053-272d79863013&DisplayLang=en].
== Wikihow & Wikipedia ==
==Features==
[[Wired Magazine]] has an article, "[http://www.wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,67765,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_3 Wiki Targets How-To Buffs]" on [[WikiHow]], a website dedicated to "how-to" information. Wikipedia does not have a clear policy on whether [[how-to]] information belongs in Wikipedia:
Additionally, Longhorn will include many other new features.
*[[Wikipedia talk:How-to articles]]
*[[Wikipedia talk:How-to]]
Furthmore there is a separate [http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/How-tos_bookshelf How-tos bookshelf] at [[Wikibook]]s. As a matter of practicality, there should only be a single global wiki on a given area to maximize the community size needed to ensure the success of the community. IMHO how-to info belongs in Wikipedia and we should subsume Wikihow content. If Wikipedia does not want that information, we should VfD all our "how-to"s to move that information to WikiHow to aid in their success (and maybe encourage them to move into WikiCities, but that's a separate discussion.) What do others think? [[User:Samw|Samw]] 03:07, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
===Aero===
:We can't just take content from WikiHow since it isn't copyleft (although they were considering that at one point - see their [http://wiki.ehow.com/Copyrights copyrights page]). I don't think the existence of that wiki should affect whether or not How-tos are kept on Wikipedia. [[User:Angela|Angela]][[user talk:Angela|.]]
Longhorn will include a completely re-designed user interface, code-named ''Aero''. The new interface is intended to be cleaner and more aesthetically pleasing than previous Windows interfaces. The most visible addition to the interface is the ''sidebar'', an area at the side of the screen consisting of ''tiles'' which display dynamic information about whatever window is currently in the foreground, which is essentially an extension of the "system tray" on the Windows [[task bar]]. Note that the sidebar had been removed as part of the WinHEC 2005 release (Build 5048).
===Search===
== editors indexing section and member only editing==
Longhorn will feature a new search engine which will allow for instant display of results for a given search. This is in contrast to the search engine of Windows XP, which can take several minutes to display results. The Longhorn search will allow you to add multiple filters to continually refine your search (Such as "File contains the word 'example'"). There will also be saved searches which will act as [[Virtual Folders]], where opening a folder will execute a specific search automatically and display the results as a normal folder. The search will also feature other usability improvements. The Longhorn search is actually built on an expanded and improved version of the indexing service for the search in Windows XP.
===Metro===
NO MEMBER ONLY EDITING!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Metro is the codename for Microsoft's next generation document format, which is based on XML. It is similar in many ways to [[Adobe Systems]]' [[PDF]]. Metro is intended to allow users to view, print, and archive files without the original program that created it. The name Metro also refers to the print path in Longhorn. With Metro, documents can remain in the same format from the time they are created to the time they are printed. Microsoft states that Metro will provide better fidelity to the original document by using a consistent format for both screen and print output.
While many analysts suspect Metro is intended to be a "PDF-killer," Microsoft insists that they are not attempting to duplicate all the functionality of the PDF. For example, at the time of this writing, Metro is not planned to have the capabilities for dynamic documents.
I think that there should be a place that stubs and arcticles that need serious editing are temporally moved to. What do you think?
===Other Features===
I strongly disagree with members only editing. what if someone browzing the Wiki notices something wrong or something he could add. He probably wouldn't take the time to become a member to make just a few changes. (Left by anon 141.156.241.63)
* Full support for the "[[NX bit|NX]]" (No-Execute) feature of processors. This feature, present in [[AMD]]'s [[AMD64]] architecture, as well as [[Intel]]'s [[EM64T]] Architecture, can flag certain parts of memory as containing data instead of executable code, which prevents overflow errors from resulting in arbitrary code execution. This should not be confused with [[trusted computing]] facilities provided by a so-called ''[[Fritz-chip]]''.
* Built-in [[DVD]] recording capabilities, including [[Mount Rainier (packet writing)|Mt. Rainier]] support.
* A new installation program that will install Longhorn in about 15 minutes (which is present in alpha build 4074 of Windows Longhorn).
* Native Raw Image support (As used by most digital cameras).
* Native, embedded RSS support, with developer API.
* Some level of file encryption support, which will prevent unauthorized viewing of files on stolen laptops/hard drives.
* The "My" prefixes will be dropped, so "My Documents" will just be "Documents", "My Computer" will just be "Computer", etc.
==Technologies/Features Delayed until future release==
:#The vast majority of us strongly disagree with members only editing as well
* '''[[WinFS]]''' (short for either ''Windows Future Storage'' or ''Windows File System''): a combined [[relational database]] and [[filesystem]], based on the next version of [[Microsoft SQL Server|SQL Server]] (codenamed ''Yukon''). Working on top of [[NTFS]], it will provide abilities to represent objects and their relationships, rather than just a hierarchy of files and folders. The removal of WinFS from Windows Longhorn was announced in August 2004, and is expected to be released as an update to Longhorn, entering beta stages at about the same time as Longhorn is released, but also will be ported to Windows XP to help end users along with the transition phase to Longhorn. Microsoft's promotion of this technology has spurred the recent trend towards [[desktop search]] tools.
:#There are multiple ways for articles that need editing to gain attention. There are various templates, categories, and the article improvement drive. —[[User:Sean Kelly|Sean κ.]] <span style="cursor:help;">[[User_talk:Sean Kelly|+]]</span> 18:48, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
* '''[[MSH (shell)|Monad]]''' A new [[command-line interface]] called ''[[MSH (shell)|MSH]]'', and codenamed ''Monad'' will not be fully implemented in Longhorn, but will exist in it to some extent. It plans to combine the Unix [[pipes and filters]] philosophy with that of [[object-oriented programming]].
:I agree. Some of the most important contributions (sometimes the most annoying for people who have worked hard on a page!) come from experts (e.g University researchers) who come across factual inaccuracies or misunderstandings and put in their own corrections. These people are rarely Wiki members, and rarely follow wiki style guidelines, but are essential for keeping Wikipedia '''factually accurate''' (and it is up to the rest of us to wikify what they contribute). [[User:Rnt20|Rnt20]] 19:25, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
==Graphics hardware requirements==
I would like to see a preferences option for members that would display some statistics about who edited the currently viewed page. I.e. whether the page was created by a member; edited by a non-member; number of edits; last edit, &c. That way a random page viewer might get some quick clues without going to the history page. — [[User:RJHall|RJH]] 02:15, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Longhorn's graphics requirements are defined in relation to the different desktop experiences.
===Aero Glass===
== Wiki content from the internet ==
This graphics mode adds support for 3D graphics, animation and visual special effects in addition to the features offered by Aero Express.
*Intended for mainstream and high-end graphics cards.
*At least 64 MB of graphics memory, 128 MB recommended, or 256 MB for 1600x1200+.
*At least 32 [[bits per pixel]].
*3D hardware acceleration with capabilities equal to [[DirectX]] 9.
*A memory bandwidth of 2 GB / second.
*Capable of drawing ~1.5M triangles / second, one window being ~150 triangles.
*A graphics card that uses AGP 4X or PCI Express 8-lane bus.
Although this may appear expensive by today's standards, it is likely that such a configuration will be entry-level or lower by Longhorn's release.
===Aero Diamond===
Hi,
A graphics mode customized for the Longhorn Media Center Edition, and will not be made available in the other editions.
===Aero Express===
There are lots of owners of (e.g. University-based) websites who would be happy for the research content (projects/articles) of their websites to be copied onto Wikipedia pages. Could Wikipedia come up with a logo which website owners could put at the bottom of their websites which says something like "feel free to copy the contents of this article which I have written and use it (word-for-word or otherwise) as the basis of a Wikipedia article without copyright restrictions"? A wiki page with external links to all of these websites would also be required (or an easy way of searching for the logo in Google).
The lesser Aero visual experience offering only the basic visual improvements introduced by Longhorn, such as composition based DPI scaling.
It's a lot less effort for a busy postdoc researcher to stick a logo on all his/her articles than it is to wikify all the articles and put them onto wikipedia. If the material was worth copying, then I'm sure there will be plenty of Wikipedians to do it!
*Intended for mainstream or lower-end graphics cards.
*Uses the Avalon Desktop Composition window manager.
*A Longhorn Driver Display Model (LDDM) driver is a requirement.
===To Go===
[[User:Rnt20|Rnt20]] 18:51, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
The new Longhorn look & feel without any visual special effects, similar to the visual style Luna of Windows XP in that it resembles merely an application [[skin (computing)|skin]]. As with Luna, no additional hardware requirements compared to the classic Windows interface.
*A simple option for consumer upgrades, and mobile / low-cost devices.
*No additional requirements compared to the lesser Classic mode.
*Fallback mode in case the hardware requirements for Aero aren't met.
===Classic===
:That is very simple. They have two options. One is to say "I release this under the [[GFDL]]", the licence on which Wikipedia is based. Then everyone who uses it, including Wikipedia, can use and modify their text, as long as the original authors are credited. The other option is to place it into the [[public ___domain]], which gives up those crediting rights. They cannot give Wikipedia-specific permission. Well they can, but we can't use it. [[User:smoddy|smoddy]] 18:57, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
The most basic user interface offered by Longhorn, which is also seen in [[Windows 2000]], or [[Windows XP]] with its visual style Luna deactivated.
* An option for corporate deployments and upgrades.
* Requires Windows XP Display Driver Model (XPDM) or LDDM drivers.
* No graphics card hardware requirements exceeding those of Windows XP.
==References==
:: It would be nice to have an eye-catching logo, which other scientists could spot on websites, and copy onto their own websites. Most scientists have a duty (both morally and sometimes in funding contracts) to support the public understanding of science. I, for one, would be happy to email such a logo to people in several Universities. It needs to look professional (and I'm not much of a graphic designer, I'm afraid). Preferably it would mention GDFL and Wikipedia (with a link) as Wikipedia has goals which most scientists would agree with (wheras GDFL is a little obscure). (PS obviously this would be equally useful for humanities researchers -- please excuse my personal biases!). [[User:Rnt20|Rnt20]] 19:29, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
*[http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/device/display/graphics-reqs.mspx Graphics Hardware and Drivers for "Longhorn"] – Version as of April, 2004; retrieved June 10, 2004
*Microsoft (August 27, 2004). [http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2004/Aug04/08-27Target2006PR.asp Microsoft Announces 2006 Target Date for Availability Of "Longhorn"]. Press Release. Retrieved November 30, 2004.
==External links==
:::You can't really seperate the GFDL and Wikipedia, as our content is licensed under the GFDL and anyone wanting to contribute their work to Wikipedia would have to do the same. GFDL might be obscure but anyone wanting to contribute their hard work to Wikipedia needs to understand what it entails. If you create a useful website and allow Wikipedia to use its content, you're also allowing anyone who wants to to mirror the site for profit by stuffing it full of popup pr0n ads to do so as well. It would be a little misleading to suggest to people that they are giving Wikipedia permission to reproduce their work without making them aware that anyone else can do the same. — [[User:Trilobite|Trilobite]] ([[User_talk:Trilobite|Talk]]) 20:41, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
*[http://msdn.microsoft.com/longhorn Microsoft Longhorn Developer Center] -- Developer information on Longhorn at [[MSDN]].
**[http://msdn.microsoft.com/Longhorn/understanding/pillars/default.aspx The Pillars of Longhorn]
**[http://longhorn.msdn.microsoft.com Microsoft Longhorn SDK] -- Documentation of the Longhorn APIs made public so far at [[MSDN]].
*[http://www.winsupersite.com/longhorn/ Paul Thurrott's SuperSite for Windows] -- Detailed information regarding Longhorn, including screenshots.
**[http://www.winsupersite.com/reviews/pdc2003.asp PDC 2003 Section] -- Information regarding Longhorn build 4051, released at PDC 2003.
*[http://www.aci.com.pl/mwichary/guidebook/interfaces/windows/longhorn GUIdebook: Windows Longhorn Gallery] - A website dedicated to preserving and showcasing Graphical User Interfaces
*[http://www.longhornblogs.com/ Longhorn Blogs] -- Non-corporate, community-based initiative of Microsoft's next version of Windows
*[http://www.longhornbuzz.com/ Longhorn Buzz] -- Non-corporate, community-based forums dedicated to Microsoft's next version of Windows
*[http://www.windowslonghorn.net/ Longhorn News] -- Non-corporate, community-based news site, dedicated to Longhorn news.
**[http://www.windowslonghorn.net/modules.php?set_albumName=WindowsBetas&op=modload&name=gallery&file=index&include=view_album.php Gallery Section] -- Screenshots from development versions of Longhorn.
{{History of Windows}}
I decided to act myself, and have created a Wiki page which is designed to help website owners at the following ___location:
[[Category:Microsoft Windows|Longhorn]]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Adding_a_GFDL_license_to_your_webpage
[[de:Microsoft Windows Longhorn]]
[[es:Windows Longhorn]]
I have also added the following footer (or something similar) to some of my webpages:
[[it:Windows Longhorn]]
[[ja:Longhorn]]
<nowiki>
[[nl:Windows Longhorn]]
<TABLE><TR><TD VALIGN=CENTER><IMG SRC="http://www.strw.leidenuniv.nl/~nevec/outreach/gfdl.png"></TD><TD VALIGN=CENTER><B>GFDLcontent</B>. The work on this page, and in the project subsections linked to by this page are covered by a <A HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Free_Documentation_License">GFDL</A> license, and the author states that the text and images can be copied within the restrictions of this license (e.g. the material can be copied into free encyclopedias such as <A HREF="www.wikipedia.org">Wikipedia</A>). Please <A HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Adding_a_GFDL_license_to_your_webpage">add a footer</a> like this to your own webpages to promote free access to knowledge.</TD></TR></TABLE><!--Please also list your webpage at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:List_of_GFDL_content_on_the_internet-->
[[pl:Longhorn]]
</nowiki>
[[pt:Windows Longhorn]]
[[ru:Windows Longhorn]]
See e.g. http://www.geocities.com/robert_tubbs/page1.html
[[sv:Windows Longhorn]]
[[zh:Windows Longhorn]]
The non-word ''GFDLcontent'' is included so that Google searches can find this footer.
Please tell me (urgently!) whether there are any problems with this. Otherwise I will try to get the same footer added to lots of University webpages at several different Universities. [[User:Rnt20|Rnt20]] 10:19, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
:Wouldn't it make more sense to use [http://www.wikicities.com/skins/common/images/gnu-fdl.png this image] since it's more of a standard representation of the GFDL, and one which is included by default in MediaWiki installations? [[User:Angela|Angela]][[user talk:Angela|.]] 02:17, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
== Splitting article RfCs by topic ==
On the [[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/RFC|RfAr/RFC]] page, Maurreen suggested splitting the article RfCs into the main Wikipedia catergories, Culture, Geography, History, Life, Mathematics, Science, Society, and Technology. Could be a way of getting more responses, by breaking down the list into more digestable sized chunks, and allowing people with specific interests to pick up on items which may be of interest. Thoughts [[Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment#Splitting article RfCs by topic|here]] please! [[User:Dan100|Dan100]] 07:43, Jun 12, 2005 (UTC)
:This might also have the benefit of encouraging people to write RFCs about topics rather than people. I'm begininng to suspect that few of us are big enough to react well to being the named target of an RFC. [[User:Bovlb|Bovlb]] 04:35, 2005 Jun 13 (UTC)
== hierarchies ==
i often thought of a certain thing but didn't know what it is called.
like what the various parts of a barrel are called, what parts usually constitute a castle and stuff like that.
these things are often tedious to find out and it would be nice if this
would be addressed in a more systematical way in wikipedia.
like a standard box of links kinda like:
harddrives usually consist of
platter
read write head
...
harddrives are a common part of
computers
mp3 players
whatever
harddrives are commonly associated with:
(dunno ... think castles - knights, siege, ...)
somehow like that.
most of this information is of course already there but like i said ...
it would benefit from a more systematical approach.
anyway ... just felt the need to post this.
not much of a wikipedia expert ... dunno if something like this was already discussed/dismissed or something. not even sure if this is the correct place to post this. Sorry if it isnt.
please comment
:Not encyclopedic; this would have to be part of a different Wiki project. —[[User:Sean Kelly|Sean κ.]] <span style="cursor:help;">[[User_talk:Sean Kelly|+]]</span> 18:59, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
::hmm ... i don't really intend to start a discussion about it ... just wanted to suggest it ... nonetheless: i'm not sure what you mean with "not encyclopedic" here. given that the information is often already included in the articles (only harder to access) and the whole thing not being all that different from categories - really don't see it as much of a step. --[[User:Qnnq|Qnnq]] 00:24, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
:::I think that it would be great to have projects such as this, but Wikipedia adheres to the belief that an encyclopedia is a collection of essays, not facts. It sounds like what you are suggesting can't be put into essay form, so it can't go on Wikipedia.
:::Exceptions are the infoboxes popular on some pages, and the many list articles. However, the list articles generally are only used in the context of another article, and infoboxes are used to summarize the information in an essay. I don't really think this idea fits either of those categories. —[[User:Sean Kelly|Sean κ.]] <span style="cursor:help;">[[User_talk:Sean Kelly|+]]</span> 00:38, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
:::: essays, not facts ... hmm yeah it's a hard fit then. perhaps i should check with wiktionary. thanks for the comments --[[User:Qnnq|Qnnq]] 05:02, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
:::::Many series of articles have "navigational templates" at the bottom of the page to help readers find logically related articles (look [[Los Angeles, California| here]]). Succession boxes are used for many political offices so that readers can easily see who held the office before and after. Categories ties together articles in a hierarchical fashion. There are many existing methods to allow readers to find the articles on staves and bung holes (or rather, to allow editors to help readers find the articles). Also - "essays" is not the best word, as it implies an expression of an opinion. The word "articles" best captures what we try to create. (Yes, there are ''many'' lists, but if that was all we had Wikipedia would be a very dry reference). Cheers, -[[User:Willmcw|Willmcw]] 06:28, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)
==Good idea...==
You know how in user preferences you can set your date to display a certain way if an article has the date within parenthesis (or something like that)? I hit upon an idea. How about putting unstandard spellings of words within parenthesis and then they would display according to the setting you indicate in your user preferences? If you speak American english then someone who wrote in British english would put nonstandard words in parens and then that word would render in american english. Did I explain myself well?? [[User:Jaberwocky6669|Jaberwocky6669]] 02:58, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)
:That has been proposed in the past, and rejected on grounds I can't remember at the moment. -- [[User:Cyrius|Cyrius]]|[[User talk:Cyrius|✎]] 08:44, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
:Was it maybe a developing problem?[[User:Howabout1|Howabout1]] [[user talk:howabout1|<span style="color:red">Talk to me!</span>]] 14:56, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)
:: Nonstandard? It's probably a POV problem about which spellings should be () and which should not. Also, it would be confusing for new editors, difficult to maintain (what, ''every instance'' of "colour" to be converted?) and it is not really needed. [[User:R3m0t|r3m0t]] <sup>[[User talk:R3m0t|talk]]</sup> 17:33, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)
:::It would make editing much harder if so many words had to be marked up in this way. See my [http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/2004-September/035308.html mailing list post] about this, with an example showing how complicated the markup could get. [[User:Angela|Angela]][[user talk:Angela|.]]
==Images in other wikis==
Hi! I'm from Ukrainian wikipedia. Recently I have translated article about [[Gavrilo Princip]]. I need to put images in my article, and there are some in English article. But images in English article is not images from WikiCommons. How about to create a special tag, like <nowiki>[[Image:en:Example]]</nowiki> or something like that, which would put images in my article from articles from other Wikipedias? It will be easier for me and for servers. 13.06.05 Please [http://uk.wikipedia.org/wiki/Обговорення_користувача contact me]
:I would also like to know how to make Wiki-crosslinks for images too. Also, is there an easy way to move an image from one of the individual Wikis to WikiCommons where all Wikimedias can have access to it? In the long run, I think it is a better idea than uploading redundant images. [[User:H Padleckas|H Padleckas]] 01:34, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
There's no ''simple'' way to link to images in other Wikipedias, but the process of transferring is not so hard.
* To move to another Wikipedia:
**First, of course, check the image's description page to be sure you understand the copyright license. Many pop-culture images in the English Wikipedia (screen shots, album covers, movie posters, etc.) are used under the United States [[fair use]] concept, and may or may not be usable in other jurisdictions.
**If you believe it's usable in your Wikipedia, just right-click the picture and save it to your hard drive -- you might want to change the name to a more descriptive one in your local language.
**Upload the picture to your local Wikipedia.
**On the local image description page, make a link to the English image description page, and copy any licensing or source information from the English page to your local page.
*To move to Wikicommons, it's the same process:
**Check licensing -- it can only be uploaded to Commons if it is [[GFDL]] or [[public ___domain]].
**Right-click and save from local wiki to hard drive.
**Rename file (on your hard drive) to be more specific or internationally understandable if necessary.
**Upload to Commons, following instructions there.
**Tag image on local wiki with {{tl|NowCommons}} and list on [[Wikipedia:Images for deletion|Images for deletion]] (or the equivalent image deletion procedure on non-English Wikipedias).
Image syntax should not need to be changed unless the filename has changed -- <nowiki>[[Image:Foo.jpg]]</nowiki> will look first for a file named "Foo.jpg" on the local wiki; if it finds one, it will use the local one, if not, it will look at Commons and use that one. — [[User:CatherineMunro|Catherine]]\<sup>[[User_talk:CatherineMunro|talk]]</sup> 21:05, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)
You could create the following template in the Hungarian wiki: "Template:CrossWikiImage".
<img src="http://{{{1}}}.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:{{{2}}}">
Then when you wanted to reference the page, you could use the following template:
{{
CrossWikiImage|en|Gavrilloprincip.jpg
}}
It's not a perfect solution, but it might be a reasonable workaround until the software supports cross language images. And because it would be implemented as a template, it would be easy to change if/when the software changes.--[[User:Arcadian|Arcadian]] 22:58, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
==Edit summaries==
I think more needs to be done to encourage users to use this feature, especially on controversial articles. Far too few people make proper and regular use of it. I propose that edit summaries be made compulsory for articles with neutrality/POV disputes (possibly through the mediawiki software?). How might I propose this to become official policy? Its only a guideline at the moment. ([[Wikipedia:Edit summary]]) [[User:Deus Ex|Deus Ex]] 15:31, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
:I think this was proposed earlier and opposed for a reason I forget. [[User:Howabout1|Howabout1]] [[user talk:howabout1|<span style="color:red">Talk to me!</span>]] 16:21, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)
:Edit summaries should be required via software, period. However, as Howabout1 also says, I think this has been brought up before, so you may want to search for old discussions. [[User:Thue|Thue]] | [[User talk:Thue|talk]] 17:09, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
::Software can't recognize pages with POV disputes at the moment (and I don't see any way it can do so, reliably), so this would have to be the rule for all pages. However, sometimes I don't want and need to take the effort to enter a summary; for example, for making very small changes (spelling, links, etc.) I'll check the "minor edit" box. If an edit summary is required for all edits, I'll just type some "asdfafdsfa" nonsense, to satisfy the software. So you're just making it more difficult for me to make small changes, so I won't correct as many spelling errors. And you make it more difficult for new users. I think this easily outweighs the possible small positive effects. [[User:Eugene van der Pijll|Eugene van der Pijll]] 18:36, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
:::Well, the way I imagined it would be that the software would detect all articles in a POV disputes category, or something like that. I wouldn't suggest that an edit summary should be required for minor edits, as you say that would be pointless. But for articles in factual/POV disputes for major edits forcing people to enter summaries would be desirable. If they just entered nonsense in the summary for major edits, it would show that user negatively, and hopefully they wouldn't be taken seriously for the rest of the POV dispute, as they are not evidently not interested in constructive editing. [[User:Deus Ex|Deus Ex]] 22:40, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
::::See: [[Wikipedia:Village_pump_%28perennial_proposals%29#Always_fill_the_summary_field]]. [[User:Bobblewik|Bobblewik]] [[User talk:Bobblewik|(talk)]] 23:14, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
:::I can't see that it should be that big a problem to just write fx "sp" when making a spelling correction. [[User:Thue|Thue]] | [[User talk:Thue|talk]] 17:31, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
== Last update? When? ==
Can we add a function to display a "Last update: 6 months ago" message on an article's header if that article hasn't been edited for a while, say, over 6 months. If I see such a message, I'll be more skeptical with the information.
This is not a good solution. Sometimes people edit a page to fix a typo or adjust layout. A page with outdated information may have been edited multiple times without the needed update (for example: the current U.S. president: ''Richard Nixon''). -- [[User:Toytoy|Toytoy]] 18:03, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)
:At the bottom of the page (at least, in the stylesheet I use) it says "This page was last modified 18:03, 13 Jun 2005". A more prominent notice, for example in a large font just below the article's title, would just put unnecessary emphasis on something that correlates only weakly with quality. [[User:Eugene van der Pijll|Eugene van der Pijll]] 18:39, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
== Wikipedia [[Special:Monitor]] ==
It struck me that to speed the discovery of vandalism, pumping out diffs at a high rate on a specific page, thereby getting rid of the Recentchanges middleman, may be a good idea.
It would be similar in structure to Slashdot's [http://slashdot.org/metamod.pl Meta Moderation] system: a designated page, perhaps [[Special:Monitor]], would pump out X number of recent diffs made within the last Y days, on one single page, for the purpose of fast eyeballing.
This would cut out the "middleman" of Recentchanges for those on janitorial duty; only the refresh button needs to be repeatedly abused in order to view massive amounts of diffs and scan for vandalism at a very fast rate.
The details of the method by which diffs are chosen for display can be left to people with more expertise, but I'll offer up some suggestions:
*The number of diffs and timerange to pull from can be
**user customisable, or
**fixed at say, 10 diffs per page, pulled from diffs made within the last 5 days
*The choosing of whether a diff displays on Monitor can be
**completely random, or
**completely random, but "viewed" diffs are never viewed again, or
**use a probability system.
***a more frequently edited/viewed article, the diffs of the article will appear on Monitor more frequently
***an already viewed diff would have its probability of being chosen for Monitor cut, to say, 1/1000th of the original probability
Only suggestions, I don't know enough about the throughput of changes and the number of janitors on duty at any given time to know which method is more feasible. But I believe a Monitor page would greatly facilitate the speedy discovery of vandalism.
-- [[User:Znode|Znode]] 05:40, 2005 Jun 14 (UTC)
: Now, there's something for me to consider... [[User:R3m0t|r3m0t]] <sup>[[User talk:R3m0t|talk]]</sup> 12:07, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)
: Perhaps you could put this in [http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org Bugzilla] and tell us the bug number here? [[User:R3m0t|r3m0t]] <sup>[[User talk:R3m0t|talk]]</sup> 12:11, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)
: Some further ideas:
:* This could begin with IP removal edits with blank summaries and expand.
:* Buttons on the page can cause the required action to popup in a new window.
:* This could be done on an external site, RC IRC channel bla bla.
: Basically, Znode, a) thanks for your idea and b) I may be way ahead of you. If I will be allowed to make this... muahaha. [[User:R3m0t|r3m0t]] <sup>[[User talk:R3m0t|talk]]</sup> 13:56, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)
:: http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2411
:: -- [[User:Znode|Znode]] 16:52, 2005 Jun 14 (UTC)
:Or you could just summarize the diffs and put them right in the edit summary, so they are visible in recent changes without having to visit each one. See [[Wikipedia:Village_pump_%28perennial_proposals%29#A_better_description]] - [[User:Omegatron|Omegatron]] 17:14, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)
:: Well, that would help. [[User:R3m0t|r3m0t]] <sup>[[User talk:R3m0t|talk]]</sup> 06:00, Jun 15, 2005 (UTC)
:: Perfecting an algorithm to summarise large edits is non-trivial. If it merely chooses the first change, it can also be easily worked around by vandals (make first change valid).
:: It also does not solve the problem that once it is off the rapid-flowing Recentchanges, it is never to be seen again. Thus if a time period has a higher vandal rate than usual, but that time period does not have enough janitors, the vandalism done at that time cannot be "saved for viewing" at a time period when there are more janitors online and less of a vandal rate.
:: -- [[User:Znode|Znode]] 07:34, 2005 Jun 15 (UTC)
:I'm quite a fan of this idea. I think a significant reason that vandalism remains in wikipedia is that someone isn't actively monitoring RC (or not enough people are.) Once an edit has passed from the most recent changes, it's not likely to be picked up again by someone looking for vandalism, so then it sits until someone sees the article, notices the vandalism, and cares enough to fix it. This idea, if well implemented, could serve as a check to that problem. [[User:Kmccoy|kmccoy]] [[User_talk:Kmccoy|(talk)]] 06:36, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
: Oh, another idea would be giving anonymous edits and accounts created in the last X days a higher probability. Don't know if the database load of the latter makes it feasible. -- [[User:Znode|Znode]] 07:35, 2005 Jun 15 (UTC)
==a question==
I already asked this question at the Dutch wiki, but here I'll go: For historians it is pretty important to have good sources about the opinions of people in the past. Wikipedia is a good project, which shows the interests and points of view of a lot people. Is it a idea to make a offline-copy of the whole wikipedia every year or so? I don't know exactly how much spacy on the harddisc wikipedia needs if we would do it that way, but it would be nice. Of cource we would only need the articles, not the editing software. Does anyone know if such a thing exists? I heard of a copy from 2001, but is there also a more recent copy? [[User:Effeietsanders|Effeietsanders]] 08:06, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
: The whole of Wikipedia in English is [http://download.wikimedia.org/#wikipedia 905] [[MiB]] (text and current versions only). This means that on (say) a [[DVD-9]] you could fit it about 9 times (say, for 9 years). This includes articles, talk pages, user pages, templates, wikipedia pages, etc. The whole of en: is 35.15 [[GiB]] (text including all old revisions). This means that it could be fitted onto about 5 [[DVD-9]]s, or about 2 [[DVD-18]]s (rare) or one 50 GiB [[Blu-Ray]] disk. [[User:R3m0t|r3m0t]] <sup>[[User talk:R3m0t|talk]]</sup> 11:53, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)
: I forgot to mention that on a [[HVD]] (3.9 TB) one could probably fit all old revisions and current ones, in all projects, across all languages. You may even be able to fit all the images too. [[User:R3m0t|r3m0t]] <sup>[[User talk:R3m0t|talk]]</sup> 12:02, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)
::thanx a lot! and how could it eventually be downloaded? (I'm not planning to do so right now, but investigating the possibility)[[User:Effeietsanders|Effeietsanders]] 11:58, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
::: Well, I don't think that Wikimedia will be able to afford that - it may eventually be served out with a [[BitTorrent]]-style system, or there may be a grant to mail people discs free (rather like [[Ubuntu]]). Alternatively, there could be a program which downloads articles on demand and then saves them on your hard disc. Ask [[User:Magnus Manske]]. Also, filtering systems may be able to greatly reduce the amount of articles to distribute through quality control, ommission of minor edits, image compression and selection of articles by notability or topic. In any case, I feel it's unlikely that old revisions will be distributed; they are of interest to very few people. Most people just want to know what we know about [[pie]] ''now''. [[User:R3m0t|r3m0t]] <sup>[[User talk:R3m0t|talk]]</sup> 12:07, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)
::: PS If you were a serious historian, you would probably be able to access it in, say, the [[Library of Congress]] or some other [[copyright library]], and probably other large libraries too. [[User:R3m0t|r3m0t]] <sup>[[User talk:R3m0t|talk]]</sup> 12:10, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)
::: It would probably be best to include as many revisions as possible: imagine an event against (say) [[North Korea]] and the [[US]] in one [[June]] and you were interested in seeing how the story unfolded and how the overall POV of the [[North Korea]] article changed as a result. The media would probably be more useful, but a mere yearly snapshot of the [[North Korea]] article would be near-useless. [[User:R3m0t|r3m0t]] <sup>[[User talk:R3m0t|talk]]</sup> 12:13, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)
::::of cource, but the more sources, the more information. We can never know exactly what historians may want to use in the future. Ans of cource I don't want to distribute the wiki, but just place it in the larger libraries like the Royal Dutch Library (for holland large, probably not for you :P). And a lot of information can be taken from the talkpages as well. Well, anyway, we never know... [[User:Effeietsanders|Effeietsanders]] 12:17, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
:Effeietsanders, I just wanted to make sure that you know about http://download.wikimedia.org -- that's the place where you can download the contents of various wikimedia projects. [[User:Kmccoy|kmccoy]] [[User_talk:Kmccoy|(talk)]] 18:41, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
::Yes I found it out. Thanks to ask. I'm trying to get the Dutch Royal Library as far to take care of the "archive" we will produce, I think they will take care of the nl.wikipedia.org, but I don't know if they want to take care of the othe languages. As soon I know, you'll hear from me.[[User:Effeietsanders|Effeietsanders]] 21:31, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
== Flash articles and spoken articles ==
Hello all,
I've been very impressed with the self-made Flash animations posted on various web pages, and I got to wondering whether something like that couldn't be incorporated into Wikipedia. For example, an overview of the Physics article might feature a Flash animation of Newton's three laws, or something like that.
I notice also that some articles are being made into "audio articles" by volunteers, but not in any systematic way right now. Is there any way that someone could edit either of these types of media in a similar way that he or she edits articles? (I assume editing a Flash animation would be easier, but the difficulty in both would seem to be matching the voices).
Really I am very impressed by short summaries of topics either in audio or video form, and I think it would add a lot to Wikipedia. What do you all think? [[User:Mjklin|Mjklin]] 03:19, 2005 Jun 15 (UTC)
*The people who are recording spoken versions of wikipedia articles mainly focus featured articles and other pages that interest them. The idea is to make our best articles available to sight disabled people. It's not possibble to upload Flash animations at the moment, but if you find good ones you can always link them. Problem is that most of them are copyrighted and therefore not eligble to being uploaded. Combining the two is a great idea, but would require people making sound files and animators to work together. At the moment we don't seem to have any animators. - [[User:MacGyverMagic|Mgm]]|[[User talk:MacGyverMagic|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 09:20, Jun 15, 2005 (UTC)
::Flash versions would be good in some ways, but anti-wiki because it would require a lot of technical knowledge for people to edit them. If you want to make a flash animation for Wikipedia, then create it, upload it to an external site, then link to it from the relevant article.
::Spoken articles are different. They are just snapshots of the text article at a certain point in time. There is no need to change individual lines in them. One individual should record the entire article, and it should then be redone a few months later if significant changes have been made to the article. Only stable articles (not ones likely to caught up in an edit war at any time) should be recorded.
::I've tried to make the recording of articles more systematic. I've created [[Template:Spoken Wikipedia request]] and I hope to co-ordinate the work a bit more when we have more audio contributors. At the moment we are slowly making our way through the featured articles. — [[User:Chameleon|''Chameleon'']] 09:39, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
::For animation, it would be better to push [[SVG]], which is an open standard (Flash is proprietary). For audio I don't really see a problem, as people browsing the web will have screen readers running; and since Wikipedia keeps its code pretty clean, there should be no problems. ¦ [[User:Reisio|Reisio]] 03:31, 2005 Jun 23 (UTC)
:::But is SVG as complete and easy to use as Flash? We don't need the technology to be all flashy and interactive with clicky things, but there are certain features it really needs. Besides the technical side of things, it would be great to see PNG diagrams animated instead and whatnot. Cool stuff. [[User:Master Thief Garrett|Master Thief Garrett]]<sup>[[User talk:Master Thief Garrett|Talk]]</sup> 05:42, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
::::What certain features? Vector & animation - what else is there? [[MNG]] would be great, but afaik that is even less supported than SVG. Eventually they should both be well supported; until then, there's GIF. ¦ [[User:Reisio|Reisio]] 18:15, 2005 Jun 23 (UTC)
== Automated conversion of an existing article's citations to a footnote system ==
:''This was cross-posted to [[Wikipedia talk:Footnotes]].''
If someone wants to do a lot of people a big wiki-favor, please create a macro for automated conversion of an existing article's citations to a footnote system. For instance, [[Convention on Psychotropic Substances]] needs to be converted to footnotes, but that would be rather time-consuming to do manually. There are probably hundreds or thousands of articles in need of such conversion. Please take a look and see what you think. Thanks! [[User:Remember me|Remember me]] 14:35, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
:That particular article is fixed now. [[User:Remember me|Remember me]] 03:16, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
== Articals ==
I for one am sick to death of seeing "artical" in wikipedia, mostly on discussion pages, but still, these people sound like morons. It's '''article'''.
Is there anything that can be done about this? Perhaps a subst:template for user pages? An awareness campaign? Or would it be easier to just contact the people at Oxford and get them to change the spelling of the word?
--[[User:Robojames|Robojames]] 15:41, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
:Go to [[User:Humanbot]], a bot-assisted spelling project, and add it there. [[User:smoddy|smoddy]] 15:52, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
:: That's already been done; see [[Wikipedia:List of common misspellings]]. Also, comments may not be edited, even for misspellings or typos. [[User:R3m0t|r3m0t]] <sup>[[User talk:R3m0t|talk]]</sup> 16:16, Jun 15, 2005 (UTC)
:::I guess I'm not proposing that we edit comments, merely that we educate people that this is incorrect and if you use the word ''artical'' to describe your edits, you might not be taken seriously. --[[User:Robojames|Robojames]] 18:47, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
==[[Wikipedia:Clueless newbies]] proposal==
I've been watching/editing the [[Wikipedia:Clueless newbies]] page, and I'm just wondering if it would be OK to create an archive page for all the anon IPs. Here's my comment (taken from the talk page):
There's been quite a lot of promoting anon IPs as clueless newbies. Most of these newbies are only here for a day or two; the vast majority listed here have not been active in Wikipedia for over a month. Does anyone oppose making a "Clueless newbie" archive page? In addition, does anyone oppose splitting listing registered users from anon IPs when someone lists them here (i.e. list as two different sections?) Thanks!
Thanks, I just wanted to see what everyone else thinks before making a "Clueless newbie" archive for those not "officially" resolved- i.e. an anon or registered user who doesn't come back. Thanks for the input! [[User:Flcelloguy|Flcelloguy]] 19:19, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
* Go right ahead with that archive. Once the old request are archived, you'll see there's no real reason to split the listing anymore. - [[User:MacGyverMagic|Mgm]]|[[User talk:MacGyverMagic|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 10:16, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
== Combined watchlist ==
It would be nice if we had one single watchlist for all projects. I guess this is tied into [[m:Single_login|single user login]], though. - [[User:Omegatron|Omegatron]] 14:06, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)
== In "Upload file" page, change "licence" to "license" ==
In the special page [[MediaWiki:Uploadtext|'''Upload file''']], which is apparently protected from editing by guys like me, there are two instances where "license" is spelled "licence". Everywhere else on the upload page, the word is spelled "license". I propose that those instances where the word is spelled "licence" be changed to "license" for consistency with the rest of the page. [[User:H Padleckas|H Padleckas]] 01:09, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
:The first addition of the word uses the "licence" spelling" [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki:Uploadtext&diff=next&oldid=2448666]. The original uses American spelling ("dialog") but doesn't use that word [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki:Uploadtext&oldid=2448646] - [[User:Omegatron|Omegatron]] 01:35, Jun 17, 2005 (UTC)
::Or we could just change "license" and all other misspellings to make everything consistent and correct. — [[User:Chameleon|''Chameleon'']] 21:38, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
== An "Articles needing pictures" category in the Community Portal ==
I think this is a good idea. There are many articles in need of pictures, such as [[Ancient Egyptian art]]. [[User:Revolución|Revolución]] 04:41, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
:I think we should have a page describing articles needing pictures and what kind of pictures they need (lead picture? diagram? what should it show?) It should also be mentioned on the article's talk page. I like making pictures for articles and would find this helpful. [[User:Dcoetzee|Deco]] 17:26, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
: We have [[Wikipedia:Requested pictures]]. Note that [[:Category:Articles that need pictures]] was recently [[Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Category:Articles that need pictures|deleted]]. [[User:Bovlb|Bovlb]] 17:06, 2005 Jun 21 (UTC)
== User page block ==
I see alot of vandles (sp?) edit others user page(s). I think that only the user of that page should be able to edit it. Could the wikipedia code be changed to allow such a proposal that I am asking? And if someone has a proposal or suggestion to change the user page, a link on the top of '''all''' user pages should be place to let the user know that another has a proposal or suggestion to make in altering the page (perferably a link to make a new note on the users talk page).
--[[User:Admiral Roo|Admiral Roo]] 14:27, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)
*'''Disagree'''. Edits to user pages are easily visible on Recent changes, and tend to get reverted quickly. They can be the first identification of a vandal; many, many edits to articles could have passed by and have to be reverted (I did anonymous IP this week). So on the whole, apart from preserving the WikIdeal, allowing edits to user pages helps flush vandals out of the system. [[User:Physchim62|Physchim62]] 08:44, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
*Yes, it makes vandals ten times easier to spot. I'd be against it. - [[User:MacGyverMagic|Mgm]]|[[User talk:MacGyverMagic|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 10:02, Jun 22, 2005 (UTC)
==Sockpuppet check via hashing==
:''Cross-posted to [[Wikipedia talk:Sock puppet]]''
How about revising the WikiMedia software so that along with each edit, a [[Hash function|hashed]] version of the editor's IP address would be listed in the edit history? That way, it would be possible to determine if two users have the same IP address, without actually giving away their IP address. [[User:Joo-joo eyeball|Joo-joo eyeball]] 15:23, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
: It's already possible, although only 2 people are able to use the IP checker. [[User:R3m0t|r3m0t]] <sup>[[User talk:R3m0t|talk]]</sup> 15:44, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)
::Sounds like a good idea in principle. However, it might be prone to abuse: someone looking to find a user's IP address could iterate through the space of all IP addresses finding those that match the hash. The IPv4 space isn't so prohibitively large as you might expect. My workstation (a 2GHz Xeon) can compute ten million MD5-Base64 hashes in 43 seconds in Perl, while still doing other things at the same time. At that rate, it would only take about 18500 seconds (5.1 hours) to test the entire 4 billion possible IP addresses. --[[User:Fubar Obfusco|FOo]] 15:58, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
::Sockpuppets aren't illegal. I don't like this idea. An IP checker that only two people can view sounds ideal to me for cases of banned users returning under different names, etc. - [[User:Omegatron|Omegatron]] 16:39, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)
:Another issue is that "two accounts posting from same IP address" and "sock puppet" are not interchangeable, and must not be confused in Wikipedia policy or practice.
:Example one: I and another Wikipedia editor post from the same IP address ... for good reason; we live together and share the same ISP connection! It would be a mistake to interpret this condition as the two of us being the same person. (Our writing styles are completely different, and we work on different sorts of articles, so perhaps it wouldn't be an issue usually -- but if we both happened to vote on the same VfD, it would be erroneous to discount one of our votes because we happened to be on the same IP address.)
:Example two: Many systemic Wikipedia abusers have used open proxies to do their evil deeds. To conflate "same IP address" and "sock puppet" would hand these abusers an argument in their own defense: "Since we're not posting from the same IP address, we are ''therefore'' not sock puppets. Wikipedia practice even says so!"
:Making more information about users' IP addresses, for the purpose of finding out sock puppets, will tend to lead to people conflating "same IP address" with "sock puppet". This is a ''bad mistake'' and should not be contributed to. --[[User:Fubar Obfusco|FOo]] 23:29, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
*See also [[Wikipedia:Sockpuppet/Proposal]] - most people seem to support checking for sockpuppet accounts of ''disruptive and blocked'' users, which is basically where the problem lies. Good faith multiple accounts need no checking. [[User:Radiant!|R]][[User_talk:Radiant!|adiant]][[meta:mergist|_<font color="orange">>|<</font>]] 08:09, Jun 22, 2005 (UTC)
== Proposal regarding era designations in Manual of Style ==
I have created a [[Wikipedia:Eras/Compromise proposal|compromise proposal]] regarding era style (BCE/CE vs BC/AD). Please discuss the proposal on [[Wikipedia talk:Eras/Compromise proposal|its talk page]]. [[User:Kaldari|Kaldari]] 20:28, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
== Merchendise ==
I think that in order to help [[Mediawiki]] with funding, the creator (I forgot his name now) should allow someone to make Mediawiki merchendise. What do you think? Personally, I would like to have a [[necklace]] madallion (sp?) of [[Wikipedia]] around my [[neck]]. [[User:Admiral Roo|Admiral Roo]] <small>([[User talk:Admiral Roo|Talk to me]])([[ Special:Contributions/Admiral Roo|My Contributions]])</small> 19:02, Jun 22, 2005 (UTC)
* See this [http://www.cafepress.com/wikipedia CafePress] link - [[User:Skysmith|Skysmith]] 10:28, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
== New request type: copyright examination ==
[[Wikipedia:Requested copyright examinations]] --[[User:Easyas12c|Easyas12c]] 20:02, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
== Talk pages: permanent Wiki policy header ==
I think it would be useful to create a small (couple of lines) summary of Wikipedia policy, with appropriate links. Things like [[WP:NOR]], etc. This would be a permanent header at the top of every Talk page. In a relatively unobtrusive way (if kept very short) it would (a) remind regular users of these policies and (b) bring them to the attention of [[Wikipedia:Clueless newbies|newbies]] who may well be entering the site via some random content page.[[User:Rd232|Rd232]] 22:59, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
== Wikilinks: Tooltip summary ==
In a nod to the [[semantic web]], there could be a mechanism for pages to contain a very simple definition or tiny summary, for display as a [[tool tip]] over the link.[[User:Rd232|Rd232]] 22:59, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
:Problem is we've [[chocolate|already]] [[Llama|got]] [[LEGO|tooltips]] that tell you where a link [[Link|is]] [[July|actually]] [[Halo|going]] [[WP:VP|to]]. But that's not to say such a system can't replace it. Problem is where to get the summary from?
:*Do you use the first paragraph? Some are too short--just a line like "this is a fictional character in the blabla universe"--and others too long--requiring the system to auto-cut off the description after a certain number of characters have been displa...--so that's a problem.
:*Alternately, do you define a new /Summary subpage of each page? Well that could work but would take many months for the use of this manual summary to be comprehensive.
:*Do you code in an auto-summary tool akin to Microsoft Word's that will make use of everything between the <summary> and </summary> tags?
:**Possible, but how would it generate it?
:***on-the-fly--that's a BIG resource killer
:***sequentially cached cutups--summaries could be wrong for a fair while if it crawls a vandalised version of the page
:**Also, how would it be delivered to the end user?
:***Downloaded with the page--LONG loading times
:***Downloaded when pointed over--long wait to download the IFRAME's contents and the user may not even realise that you *can* see a writeup when pointed over
:Not to say it's a bad idea, it's in fact quite a good idea... just that it's got some issues. [[User:Master Thief Garrett|Master Thief Garrett]]<sup>[[User talk:Master Thief Garrett|Talk]]</sup> 06:05, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for your comments. I appreciate that of the three proposals I made, this is by far the hardest to implement. To answer one of your questions, I had envisaged some kind of a <nowiki>{{summary}}</nowiki> tag on each page (or a separate subpage or whatever), with purpose-written content. Efficiently getting that content onto pages linking to it is another matter. Still, sometimes it's worth floating ideas, you never know where they might lead. [[User:Rd232|Rd232]] 13:55, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
== Page history: Display size of page ==
To help users evaluate page histories, display the size of a page version in the history, or possibly the change in page size (in % and/or kb) caused by each edit. This would make it easier to spot major changes worth looking at in more detail. [[User:Rd232|Rd232]] 22:59, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
== Births and deaths in year articles ==
I'd like to propose that the list of births and deaths in year articles should be restricted to figures of major international repute. If we listed everyone with a Wikipedia article in these categories, the year articles would be dominated by them (e.g. 1944 would contain over 800 births). If people wish to spin off the articles for, say, [[Births in 1944]] article, then fine (although this should have more detail than just the Category of course). [[User:Average Earthman|Average Earthman]] 22:50, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
:How long would 1944 be with all those? If under 32k, I don't have much of a problem with it. Even if over 32k, I dunno, what other content would [[1944]] have? It's supposed to list what happened that year. And I dislike this "international importance" bit. A prime minister of a small African country may not be internationally important, but he should go there. Likewise should a pop star, who has no relevance whatsoever :) --[[User:Golbez|Golbez]] 22:58, Jun 23, 2005 (UTC)
:: Actual news events? The birth of someone who will go on to appear in TV movies is pretty irrelevent, and most people going to the year articles won't be looking for this. Full lists of people who were born in that year are better served either by the category or by a separate article - e.g. we have a separate [[Deaths in 2004]] article rather than include the whole list on the [[2004]] article. I've broadband, and it just took nearly five seconds to load the [[Deaths in 2004]] article. So, for an earlier year, a full births and deaths list is potentially wasting up to ten seconds of time for the majority of people who would go to the year to look at the news events. Personally, I'd like a summary of the most famous/influential people who died, such as Ronald Reagan and Marlon Brando in 2004 (we're able to summarise other news events after all, why not deaths?). [[User:Average Earthman|Average Earthman]] 22:00, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
== Directory ==
I brought this up once already, but I think it still needs to be addressed.
The condition of the english-language wikipedia's directory is horrific compared to that of the German-language wikipedia's (de.wikipedia.org then click on "Artikel nach Themen") I have talked with [[user:Spangineer]] about doing something with a combination of the portals system into the directories, and addition of new portals, etc., but neither of us can offer the immense amount of time needed to work on this sort of project. Please talk to one of us if you are interested in helping in any way.
PS: Is there any way I can keep this from being deleted? Because I think it is <i>very</i> important to the user-friendliness of Wikipedia.
[[User:Clarkefreak|Clarkefreak]] [[User talk:Clarkefreak|∞]] 01:14, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
:A direct link to the page in question: [[:de:Wikipedia nach Themen]]. Since I seem to be the only one "emptying the brackish water" out of the Pump these days, I'll try to remember to to leave this one alone. Besides you'll probably have lots of responses posted here so would no doubt keep it alive all the longer. [[User:Master Thief Garrett|Master Thief Garrett]]<sup>[[User talk:Master Thief Garrett|Talk]]</sup> 02:35, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Another option could be expansion of [[DDC and LOC]]. --[[User:Arcadian|Arcadian]] 22:47, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
:That sort of thing doesn't give the nice-looking portals and such that I think wikipedia needs more of and better quality ones. What I'm looking for is what the German wikipedia has at [[:de:Wikipedia nach Themen]]. Even if you don't understand German, you can tell that this is a good system that organizes information easily, with a featured picture, article, etc. for each cateogory. [[User:Clarkefreak|Clarkefreak]] [[User talk:Clarkefreak|∞]] 18:18, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
== maps ==
It would be fantastic if every place name and every historic place name had a map.
:We think so too! --[[User:Golbez|Golbez]] 03:41, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC)
:It would be a great thing to have, but the problem is how to make such maps. Hopefully one day we'll have a "WikiAtlas" project so you can just cross-link to a fully-explorable world map with the view centered on that ___location, but until then it's up to each article author to arrange one. [[User:Master Thief Garrett|Master Thief Garrett]]<sup>[[User talk:Master Thief Garrett|Talk]]</sup> 03:50, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
== "Books on tape" ==
My wife and I often listen to books on tape. There's a lack of free content out there. If I were to record myself reading a public-___domain book, and release it into the public ___domain, it would be a large file, even in ogg format. Would Wikimedia be willing to host it? Where would be an appropriate place for it? Commons? Wikisource? Thanks, – [[User:Quadell|Quadell]] <sup>([[User_talk:Quadell|talk]]) ([[Wikipedia:Image sleuthing|sleuth]])</sup> 18:36, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC)
:Please also see [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia]]. I was planning to upload some readings of PD poems to Wikimedia, which seems like the appropriate place for such things. Cheers, -[[User:Willmcw|Willmcw]] 18:47, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC)
*I'd say wikisource is the right place to put recordings of PD books and poems. You could put a template with a link to the file right at the start of the page. - [[User:MacGyverMagic|Mgm]]|[[User talk:MacGyverMagic|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 19:27, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC)
|