Knowino:Village Inn/archive 1

From Knowino

Jump to: navigation, search

You are viewing an archive of Knowino:Village Inn. Please do not edit this page.

[edit] LiquidThreads extension to MediaWiki enabled

If you go to any discussion page, you'll see that you can start a thread like you would on a conventional forum, thanks to the LiquidThreads extension. You don't need to worry about manually indenting your replies, and it's easy to "watch" individual threads.—Thomas Larsen 01:10, 16 November 2010 (CST)

It's a useful extension, but it looks absolutely terrible—I'll probably try to experiment with the background colours in the CSS file lqt.css.—Thomas Larsen 04:44, 23 November 2010 (CST)

We experimented with this on RW, response to it was almost universally negative. The largest supporters were in the "cool, but not ready for prime time" camp, while some people blocked themselves for 3 months and said they wouldn't come back till we promised to not implement it. I would avoid it on any wiki that is looking to pull in a demographic beyond techies. Tmtoulouse 14:28, 23 November 2010 (CST)

Thanks for your thoughts. One of the reasons I'm keen to try LiquidThreads now is to see if people grow used to it and even find it useful. If you enable a controversial feature later in the life of a wiki, you need to deal with two problems:

users don't want huge interface changes to take place
you need to convert from the old system to the new.

That said, if the whole thing turns out to be a disaster, I'd be quite willing to get rid of LiquidThreads and go back to plain, traditional wikitext.—Thomas Larsen 18:08, 23 November 2010 (CST)

God, yes. Is that what it is/was? Yuck. I finally had to simply top-post to get away from the damn liquid threads. MY feet are still tarry. Steve Harris (Sbharris on Wikipedia) 22:02, 24 November 2010 (CST)

Yes, I think I'll remove it for the time being. If it gets to the stage where it's usable (and useful), we could put it back in, but for the time being it isn't really working.—Thomas Larsen (talk) 22:20, 24 November 2010 (CST)

Okay, LiquidThreads is disabled! I've done my best to move previous discussions to the standard talk-pages, or at least (messily) to the history.—Thomas Larsen (talk) 22:53, 24 November 2010 (CST)

[edit] ApprovedRevs extension to MediaWiki enabled

I've enabled the ApprovedRevs extension. I made a few changes to the default configuration, so now an administrator can give any user access to the new Reviewers user-group. A reviewer can click "View history" and then the "(approve)" link beside the revision they wish to show by default to the public.—Thomas Larsen 22:14, 22 November 2010 (CST)

I am in doubt about the meaning of our approval. Does it mean "patrolled", that is, superficially browsed and found seemingly OK? Or rather, approval in the sense of CZ, that is, verified very carefully and responsibly? Boris Tsirelson 16:17, 2 December 2010 (CST)

While I'm still open to ideas about how we could use "approval", I anticipate it being used most in conjunction with the proposed featured content process. In other words, the featured version of an article would be "approved", and thereafter all changes to that article would be subject to review before they appeared publicly. Does that vaguely make sense?—Thomas Larsen (talk) 01:42, 3 December 2010 (CST)

OK, then I withdraw my premature approvals; they were rather of "patrolled" type. Boris Tsirelson 03:44, 3 December 2010 (CST)

No worries.—Thomas Larsen (talk) 04:21, 3 December 2010 (CST)

[edit] So What's Up?

What is this all about? Need a contest for a logo... Fred Bauder 08:41, 23 November 2010 (CST)

Tendrl is a wiki (only a few simple rules, simple registration, fast editing) encyclopedia (real names, encyclopedic writing, and the like). Or that's the theory, anyway.

And we do rather need a logo. If someone wants to design a temporary one, that'd be awesome, since my own image design skills are shocking! ;-) When we have a few more contributors, we'll have a logo contest. I'll be very interested to see what people come up with.—Thomas Larsen 18:05, 23 November 2010 (CST)

And if you don't mind the suggestion, perhaps another name..."Tendrl" just sounds kind of odd. Perhaps we could all it Libera Encyclopaedia ("Free encyclopedia" in Latin...or at least, thats how the Latin Wikipedia translates it)Steven Clark Bennett 10:16, 24 November 2010 (CST)

No, I don't mind the suggestion in the least! I'll be the first to admit that my naming capabilities are, well, close to nil. ;-) Good names are hard to come by, though. A few possibilities: Librepedia (free-pedia), Ourpedia, and, as you suggested, Libera Encyclopaedia...

I don't really like any of those ideas much, actually. We need a really unique name that will stand out from the hundreds of *pedias out there, but it also needs to be easy to spell and remember. All suggestions are welcome.—Thomas Larsen (talk) 17:52, 24 November 2010 (CST)

http://jdrand.virtue.nu/tendrl1.png This was a design that I made (copy and paste URL in browser's address bar). How is it? Jonas Rand 04:33, 25 November 2010 (CST)

I can't see it, sorry—an error message, "We have detected a hotlinking error. Hotlinking is when you link to images or NON html files on virtue.nu from another host. Hotlinking is not allowed for our FREE Accounts. Hotlinking is allowed for our paid accounts. Your account can be upgraded in the user section when you have logged in," is reported. Do you want to e-mail it to me (see my user-page for my e-mail address)?—Thomas Larsen (talk) 05:33, 25 November 2010 (CST)

You must highlight and copy the URL, then paste it in your browser's address bar. You can't just click the link. If that still does not work, I have uploaded it at ImageShack. Can provide SVG file if necessary. Jonas Rand 11:55, 25 November 2010 (CST)

I like the name Tendrl, as it suggests the revolutionary power of knowledge, although I doubt it is available as a convenient web address. The suggested image is plain vanilla... User:Fred Bauder Talk 15:35, 25 November 2010 (CST)

I feel too naive, but anyway, could someone explain me what is "Tendrl" (I mean, what is was before creating this wiki). I ask Google but is says "Did you mean: Tendril?" Boris Tsirelson 16:28, 25 November 2010 (CST)

Tendril, but transmogrified in the sense that tiger is tigr. User:Fred Bauder Talk 16:32, 25 November 2010 (CST)

Thanks. Something like "Picasa", or Wolfram's "Mathematica", if I understood... Boris Tsirelson 16:40, 25 November 2010 (CST)

How about a photoshopped version of this image: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Pleiospilos_nelii2.jpg Pleiospilos nelii, the Split Rock Plant? User:Fred Bauder Talk 16:30, 25 November 2010 (CST)

That plant is pretty amazing!—Thomas Larsen (talk) 16:36, 25 November 2010 (CST)

A little while ago I was considering the possibility of experimenting with a new type of social networking site, and Tendrl was the only decent name I could think of that didn't have a taken Web address. The name does come from the word "tendril", as in a plant tendril, with intended connotations of links between plants (and people, and maybe knowledge, I don't know). So this site just inherited the name. :-) Before we get a logo, though, we should probably consider whether we want to continue calling the project that or something else.—Thomas Larsen (talk) 16:36, 25 November 2010 (CST)

[edit] Formulas

A mathematician has nothing to do here in the absence of LaTeX formulas. Is there a hope that they will work? Boris Tsirelson 11:30, 23 November 2010 (CST)

Thanks for pointing it out, Boris! I'll try to get the Math extension enabled... I can see we might otherwise be a bit short on mileage when it comes to mathematical articles.—Thomas Larsen 16:15, 23 November 2010 (CST)

Because I don't have full shell access to the server—this is a temporary solution, after all—I couldn't install LaTeX. However, I managed to set up an arrangement that lets math formulae be rendered by a public third-party CGI script as suggested on MediaWiki.org. I hope that will suffice for the time being; it's better than nothing, at any rate. :-) —Thomas Larsen 17:53, 23 November 2010 (CST)

OK, so <math>\frac{d}{dx}(x^2)=2x.</math> does this: $\frac{d}{dx}(x^2)=2x.$ Fred Bauder 19:47, 23 November 2010 (CST)

Is that the output you intended?—Thomas Larsen 20:32, 23 November 2010 (CST)

Yes, of course. Fred Bauder 20:43, 23 November 2010 (CST)

Really, no LaTeX now? I am surprised to see my quite hard LaTeX formulas in Entanglement (physics) to render even better than on CZ (or WP). Such formulas as these: "in every case y_A must be either ${\scriptstyle(} \begin{smallmatrix} 0 & 0 \end{smallmatrix} \scriptstyle{)}$ or ${\scriptstyle(} \begin{smallmatrix} 1 & 1 \end{smallmatrix} {\scriptstyle)}$ ", and "in which case y_B must be $( \begin{smallmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \end{smallmatrix} )$ or $( \begin{smallmatrix} 1 \\ 1 \end{smallmatrix} )$ ". If so, then the CGI script is wonderful! Boris Tsirelson 01:47, 24 November 2010 (CST)

Ah, I see, the CGI script in fact calls the LaTeX. Boris Tsirelson 01:56, 24 November 2010 (CST)

[edit] Citation

And what about Template:Citation? I tried to copy it from CZ, but it does not work. Something is wrong with #if, I guess.

Also Template:cite web fails.

But Template:Reflist works (apparently). Boris Tsirelson 13:05, 23 November 2010 (CST)

The ParserFunctions extension wasn't installed. I've fixed that now. :-) —Thomas Larsen 18:23, 23 November 2010 (CST)

Thank you! It works, see for instance Entanglement (physics)/Bibliography. Boris Tsirelson 01:50, 24 November 2010 (CST)

Now Template:Harvnb works; see for example Theory (mathematics)#Notes. Boris Tsirelson 02:48, 24 November 2010 (CST)

Thanks for importing those templates!—Thomas Larsen (talk) 05:46, 24 November 2010 (CST)

[edit] Real Names

So how strict is the real names thing going to be? You guys should start working out a way to get rid of vandalism/spam. Hope this works out. --George Bush 12:51, 23 November 2010 (CST)

Pleased to meet you, Mr. Bush. I assume that some kind of verification will be in order, and I assume that there may be differences in privileges for those who confirm identity and those who don't. --Abd ul-Rahman Lomax 17:42, 24 November 2010 (CST)

[edit] Upgrade

I just upgraded MediaWiki, and I apologise for the messiness you would have seen if you visited the site while I was doing so.—Thomas Larsen (talk) 21:29, 23 November 2010 (CST)

[edit] Images

An amazing plant

And what about images? Boris Tsirelson 03:54, 24 November 2010 (CST)

At this stage, server space is fairly limited, so file uploads are disabled. That said, I could probably enable them, but the size limit would probably have to be fairly restrictive until Tendrl gets to the point where dedicated server hosting is worthwhile (we need it) and practical (I can afford it). It would be good to have some pictures and diagrams.—Thomas Larsen (talk) 05:48, 24 November 2010 (CST)

Right off, "until I can afford it" is wrong-headed. Ask others to pitch in from the beginning. Fred Bauder 18:44, 24 November 2010 (CST)

You make a good point. I might run a "donation drive" next month or at the start of next year, actually. I'm terrible at asking for money, though!—Thomas Larsen (talk) 18:52, 24 November 2010 (CST)

But I also wonder, why images must be inside the wiki. Is it possible and reasonable, technically and legally, to link images situated on other servers (say, Citizendium) and get them appearing inside our articles? Html itself supports it natively, doesn't it? Boris Tsirelson 00:54, 26 November 2010 (CST)

It is possible. For example, I doubt it would be too difficult to set up commons.wikimedia.org as an image repository. I should look into it!—Thomas Larsen (talk) 05:44, 26 November 2010 (CST)

I see: we could join this list. Quite nice for a while. Without images our pages are too boring. Boris Tsirelson 05:59, 26 November 2010 (CST)

I just set this up for Wikinfo. Works great. It loads images from Mediawiki Commons and caches them if a page is requested by a reader. It takes a few minutes for it to settle down after you install it. Simple directions here. User:Fred Bauder Talk 09:05, 26 November 2010 (CST)

Now you can use any image from Wikimedia Commons!—Thomas Larsen (talk) 17:38, 26 November 2010 (CST)

Nice, I do! Less boring... But we did not join their list (above); intentionally? Boris Tsirelson

File uploads have been enabled for people in the "reviewer" user-group. This is a temporary solution until we get dedicated server space sorted out, at which stage the permission will be handed out to everyone. See "Images again" for more information.—Thomas Larsen (talk) 03:48, 3 December 2010 (CST)

By the way, please do still use images off Commons wherever possible. Thanks!—Thomas Larsen (talk) 03:49, 3 December 2010 (CST)

[edit] Subpage tabs

I'm working on a way to get navigation tabs above articles linking to the subpages <Article>/Bibliography and <Article>/External Links. We need to think about how we'll go about implementing subpages, actually, and consider whether there are any better options.—Thomas Larsen (talk) 05:51, 24 November 2010 (CST)

[edit] CC-BY → CC-BY-SA—any objections?

Hello! Sorry to flood this page with topics, but an oversight was just pointed out to me—the license specified here at the moment is the CC-BY (Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License), which is incompatible with the license used by Wikipedia and the Citizendium, namely the CC-BY-SA (Creative Commons Attribution–ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License). Pretty much all of the content posted here so far is original or was posted previously on the Citizendium, so I don't anticipate any problems, but are there any objections to changing the license from the CC-BY to the CC-BY-SA? If not, I'll fix the problem tomorrow morning (Melbourne time). Cheers,—Thomas Larsen (talk) 06:02, 24 November 2010 (CST)

OK with me. --Boris Tsirelson 06:07, 24 November 2010 (CST)

Please dual license with the GNU_Free_Documentation_License as Wikipedia does so that any material from Wikipedia, Citizendium, and Wikia can be used if an editor desires. Fred Bauder 16:01, 24 November 2010 (CST)

Wikipedia, Citizendium, and Wikia are all licensed under the CC-BY-SA, or so it seems to me—am I missing something?—Thomas Larsen (talk) 18:00, 24 November 2010 (CST)

Perhaps not anything under the GNU_Free_Documentation_License on Wikipedia was converted to CC-BY-SA Fred Bauder 18:42, 24 November 2010 (CST)

No, everything was converted (as far as I know).—Thomas Larsen (talk) 22:12, 24 November 2010 (CST)

[edit] Subpages/namespaces

Hello! I've been experimenting a bit with the idea of having separate pages for bibliographies and external links, rather than trying to stuff all those things into articles. I've added two new namespaces: Bibliography: and Links:. If you visit any article, you should see navigation tabs at the top of the screen that point to the bibliography and links for that article. Unfortunately, I haven't managed to provide a way to link back to the main article after editing those pages, so for the time being you'll have to use your browser's "Back" button. I'm working on it, though!

Let me know what you think.—Thomas Larsen (talk) 22:16, 24 November 2010 (CST)

Nice. For now I just insert links back into the bibliography (or links) pages. Boris Tsirelson 23:03, 24 November 2010 (CST)

Well, I stop doing it (waiting for your success). Boris Tsirelson 23:11, 24 November 2010 (CST)

Okay, a Back to article navigation link appears at the top of Bibliography: and Links: pages (and their associated talk-pages, too). It seems to work correctly, but let me know if you find any problems with it!

The extension I've hacked together (with the help of folks on the MediaWiki-L mailing list) to implement the whole system is a complete mess at present, and I plan to re-write it tomorrow.—Thomas Larsen (talk) 06:27, 25 November 2010 (CST)

It works nicely. Boris Tsirelson 14:54, 25 November 2010 (CST)

Ridiculously, now the system suggests also Bibliography to Bibliography, etc. Not a big problem, of course. Boris Tsirelson 23:16, 24 November 2010 (CST)

Hmm, I don't entirely understand what you mean. Are you saying that there's still a "Bibliography" link on "Bibliography:" pages? Because, if so, I don't see one.—Thomas Larsen (talk) 23:21, 24 November 2010 (CST)

Yes, now I do not see it, too. But at 23:16 I did :-) Boris Tsirelson 23:34, 24 November 2010 (CST)

Ah, that explains it then. I was making several changes at that time to the script that handles the tabs.—Thomas Larsen (talk) 23:43, 24 November 2010 (CST)

[edit] Dump

What about an XML dump available to download, like CZ dump? Boris Tsirelson 01:27, 25 November 2010 (CST)

Sounds like a good idea. I'll see what I can do, although I must confess it's not my highest priority right now. :-) —Thomas Larsen (talk) 06:24, 25 November 2010 (CST)

Well, I've discovered an export special page and got a dump of all "my" pages. Boris Tsirelson 09:46, 27 November 2010 (CST)

Ah, that's convenient!—Thomas Larsen (talk) 21:36, 27 November 2010 (CST)

[edit] Two things

I think we need to consider two main things right now: our name, and how to get people involved.—Thomas Larsen (talk) 17:57, 26 November 2010 (CST)

[edit] Name

Do we want to continue using the name "Tendrl", or choose another name? I don't mind it, personally, but it isn't descriptive and it may have negative connotations. I'm well aware that people here and elsewhere have hinted that we should select another name.—Thomas Larsen (talk) 17:57, 26 November 2010 (CST)

The name "Tendrl" seems perfectly fine for me as well, but some disagree. If most people are not in favor of the name "Tendrl", I propose "Conoces" (second person form of the verb "to know" in Spanish). Jonas Rand 01:46, 27 November 2010 (CST)

I actually like "Conoces"!—Thomas Larsen (talk) 02:58, 27 November 2010 (CST)

(The catch: Conoces.org and Conoces.org are both taken.)—Thomas Larsen (talk) 02:59, 27 November 2010 (CST)

Some suggestions:

ProudWiki ("Be proud of your contribution!")

AmbitionWiki

HarmonicGrowth (an image from artlandia) (but OrganicGrowth is taken by organicgrowth.org)

Boris Tsirelson 09:36, 27 November 2010 (CST)

More suggestions. There are many particles and quasiparticles in physics: neutron, electron, plasmon, magnon, exciton etc. For some of them there are (in reality, or only hypotetically) "-ino" particles: neutrino, plasmino, gluino etc. Some words of this form are taken on the Internet (some as Italian words rather than particles): magnetino, electrino. But others are not (yet). Also, informon (not a particle) is taken, but informino is just a Italian word. Boris Tsirelson 07:02, 28 November 2010 (CST)

Thomas asked me about math words (and small animals), but I found only cofinality and hyperfinite, . Boris Tsirelson 07:09, 28 November 2010 (CST)

We could trasmogrify Buratino "back" to Buraton, but alas, buraton is already a trade mark. Boris Tsirelson 07:33, 28 November 2010 (CST)

Hmm, a name that has connotations of a "particle of knowledge"...?—Thomas Larsen (talk) 00:01, 29 November 2010 (CST)

"Knowino"?? Being not a native English speaker I cannot... Boris Tsirelson 01:10, 29 November 2010 (CST)

Actually, that's a possibility! "Knowino" almost sounds like "Now-I-Know", which is the kind of thing users would ideally say after reading an encyclopedia. :-) I like it—I'd be interested to hear what other people think...—Thomas Larsen (talk) 02:39, 29 November 2010 (CST)

[edit] Getting people involved

Right now we have several dedicated contributors, which is great. Thanks, folks! If we want to make "Tendrl" (substitute another name if you feel inclined) a viable project, we need to think about getting more people involved and establishing a core base of contributors. I'm aware that we have a number of people from the Citizendium, and a few from RationalWiki; we could let folks at Wikipedia know, too, but we need to work on some of the core project pages (like Tendrl:About) beforehand. So do you have any ideas about ways to get people actively involved?—Thomas Larsen (talk) 17:57, 26 November 2010 (CST)

I found out from Rationalwiki through David Gerard, who posts regularly on foundation-l, a Wikipedia list I follow closely. I'm not sure what Tendrl would offer a typical Wikipedian, most of whom, if they are active are administrators there and often have other responsibilities. As you may have noticed from theodicy, I'm quite prone to original research, but that is not a direction you are likely to go in. I'm quite sure a professor from a school of divinity would make short work of any edit I might make, as, indeed, Larry Sanger did with any philosophy edits I made on the then new Wikipedia. I started the article "reality"... I spelled philosophical wrong... User:Fred Bauder Talk 10:00, 27 November 2010 (CST)

The edit comment, "Heh", exposes my naive state of mind that editing an encyclopedia was a transgressive act, a social trespass. User:Fred Bauder Talk 10:06, 27 November 2010 (CST)

Wow, it isn't? ;-) —Thomas Larsen (talk) 21:35, 27 November 2010 (CST)

What do you think about the idea of automatically listing contributors' names on articles? (See, for example, the bottom of Quadratic formula.) From a scholarly perspective, this is completely normal and routine; from a public perspective, this lends credibility to articles, since editors are more obviously accountable; and, from a community perspective, this lets editors get some recognition for their work. On the other hand, there may be disadvantages I haven't yet realised, so I'd love to hear your thoughts.—Thomas Larsen (talk) 21:35, 27 November 2010 (CST)

The main disadvantage manifests itself already: you wrote the article, I did a tiny correction, and now I am the first author and you the second! It should not be made automatically. And there should be "principal authors" and "contributors" (or something like that). And all that is potentially controversial. Anyway, I did it (manually) for CZ articles, see talk pages to Life and others. Boris Tsirelson 00:33, 28 November 2010 (CST)

Wow, now I am the only "contributor" to "Life" (and others)! Quite wrong and unfair. Better no "contributors" at all than this. Boris Tsirelson 00:42, 28 November 2010 (CST)

Yeah, in light of that I've disabled the extension for the time being; I can't see any easy way to get around the problem.—Thomas Larsen (talk) 02:12, 28 November 2010 (CST)

← We should consider the question, "What will Tendrl's niche be?" In other words, what should Tendrl offer (for readers and contributors) that projects like Citizendium and Wikipedia don't? I mean, we could say, "Editors use their real names, unlike Wikipedia, and the place is designed to have very little bureaucracy, unlike Citizendium," but that's vague and debatable—certainly not the kind of statement that would persuade people to "join" the project.—Thomas Larsen (talk) 02:12, 28 November 2010 (CST)

A good question... For me it is (for now) just a fork of CZ. If CZ will die then maybe a number of "citizens" will jump here (which still does not ensure long life of Tendrl), but if CZ will not die, most of them will stay there. A larger reservoir is of course WP. WP does not go to death in the near future, but I do observe some decrease of activity. If 1/100 of Wikipedians will jump hereto it will be a lot. A year or two ago there was a bunch of WP mathematicians on CZ, but then they returned to WP, probably because the math level of WP is quite high, and of CZ — quite low. But all that is not an answer to your question, of course. It can well be that the interest to wikis is decreasing in general. Boris Tsirelson 10:23, 28 November 2010 (CST)

[edit] "Knowino"?

What do you folks think of "Knowino" as a name? Boris suggested it, and I rather like it. "Knowino", for me, has two associations:

it sounds a little like "Now-I-Know!"
it suggests a kind of "particle of knowledge" (on the pattern of "neutrino", for example).

If we want to make a name change, we need to do it relatively soon.—Thomas Larsen (talk) 01:51, 3 December 2010 (CST)

One more association: neutrino is a companion to neutron; and a wiki-encyclopedia is a companion to literature (books, articles). Boris Tsirelson 03:41, 3 December 2010 (CST)

[edit] Content from Wikipedia

Is taking a couple of paragraphs from Wikipedia acceptable both legally and projectwise? I think I remember that to satisfy CC-by-SA one has to link to the original page as well as the license.--George Bush 01:40, 7 December 2010 (CST)

People on Citizendium are very reluctant to copy from Wikipedia, because Google detects such quotes and substantially decreases the rank of the whole Citizendium (not only the article containing the quote). At least they believe it does; and they really know, as far as I understand. Probably the same danger applies to us. --Boris Tsirelson 08:24, 7 December 2010 (CST)

[edit] Wikimedia Commons

I took consciously a few pictures from Wikimedia Commons and Boris' robot did unconsciously the same (robots don't have a conscience). I assume that this is allright? I don't know anything about copyright and such things; I've never understood why Citizendium wouldn't have it.--Paul Wormer 08:47, 7 December 2010 (CST)

I am not quite understanding the question. What do you mean by "consciously" here? The robot did nothing; image names are copied from CZ as they were. In some cases images with such names appear to exist in WC, and then they appear immediately. We have the right to use them. But maybe we should bother that the author is credited under the picture. Especially if it was credited on CZ but is not credited here. Is this the problem? Also it may happen that an image with such name exists on WC but is different from that on CZ. Is this the problem? --Boris Tsirelson 09:29, 7 December 2010 (CST)

Yes, I noticed that by copying the CZ file name, Tendrl sometimes finds the correct picture, sometimes the wrong picture, and sometimes no picture on Wikimedia Commons. I thought that at CZ it was explicitly forbidden to use pictures from Wikimedia Common?--Paul Wormer 09:46, 7 December 2010 (CST)

Forbidden? Just not arranged, I guess. A sysadmin must add WC to the right place in order to use it. Larsen did, and we know why. CZ did not, just because it did not need to (I think so). --Boris Tsirelson 10:00, 7 December 2010 (CST)

To clarify: if you specifically upload (i.e., use Special:Upload) a picture here from Wikimedia Commons or anywhere else, you need to make sure it is properly licensed and attributed. But if the picture already exists on Wikimedia Commons, you can just include it in articles as if it were uploaded locally, but you don't need to worry about attribution (because if you click on the image, it will take you to a page that links back to Wikimedia Commons).—Thomas Larsen (talk) 02:21, 12 December 2010 (CST)

I uploaded quite a few of my own drawings (made for CZ) to Wikimedia Commons. I was hardly aware of Wikimedia Commons before, now it seems to me a very convenient facility. Why is CZ against using it?--Paul Wormer 04:54, 12 December 2010 (CST)

I have no idea. Is Citizendium against using Wikimedia Commons? If so, I don't understand why; it's an extremely useful repository of free images, which are used widely by projects like Wikipedia.—Thomas Larsen (talk) 06:22, 12 December 2010 (CST)

I guess that CZ just wants to be independent. After all, an image at WC can be deleted at every time if someone is too bothered about its copyright. And till now CZ people were not at all bothered by the cost, disk space etc. --Boris Tsirelson 06:53, 12 December 2010 (CST)

You are asking some very good questions about CZ's policy concerning photo use. As long as you follow the photo credit requested at Wikimedia Commons, you should be OK. I am not an attorney so this is not legal advice.Mary Ash 12:27, 13 December 2010 (CST)

[edit] Real names?

There are a number of compelling reasons to require potential contributors to register an account using their full real name. Some of those reasons are summed up in Tendrl:Rules:

we want contributors who are proud of their work (and willing to accept responsibility for it)
accountability results in a more polite and enjoyable culture
real names remind us that we're dealing with real people.

But there are also problems with enforcing a real-names policy. First and foremost, it deters helpful people from contributing. We can debate the soundness of their reasoning as much as we want, but ultimately it's up to us (as a community) to make things as easy as possible for individuals who are genuinely interested in contributing. A person who would've been willing to do good work can simply walk away from the project and lose very little, while we lose a great deal. That is the nature of a public wiki.

I've been thinking about a possible compromise solution. I think it's only fair that I discuss it with you folks first. The idea is to allow people to edit articles without registering an account and to permit pseudonyms, like Wikipedia, but then restrict all additional user rights (like "reviewer" and "administrator") to editors using their full real names. I've enabled the ApprovedRevs extension, which allows reviewers to set a default article revision to display to the public, and we could use that feature to protect articles from vandalism. That way we'd have the best of both worlds. Very little vandalism would appear publicly, and it would be easy for people to get involved.

I think Tendrl should be, in a way, Citizendium as it should have been. We should have great encyclopedic content, a role for experts, and a culture that both newbies and veterans find friendly and engaging. But we need to avoid setting up—either on the grounds of aesthetics or on no real grounds at all—unnecessary barriers to participation. What do you think?—Thomas Larsen (talk) 04:55, 12 December 2010 (CST)

I wrote before that IMHO for the time being Tendrl should be very open. When it turns out that vandals become too much of a nuisance, rules can be changed and access can be restricted. And, indeed, I would give real power (banning users, deleting and locking articles, etc.) only to people with real (and verified) names.

With regard to learning from previous experiences: The greatest weakness of Citizendium is its bureaucracy with a Constitution, Laws, Bylaws, Motions, Amendments, Councils, Constabulary, Ombudsman, etc. to rule about a dozen active participants who know each other very well. To avoid such bureaucracy, I'm much in favor of a minimum set of rules. Create a rule only when you see its necessity in practice. This a computer project, nothing is irreversible. In real life you want, of course, preventive rules about fires, attacks by suicide bombers, etc., For a computer project (with regular backups) rules are not necessary to prevent irreversible disasters, because they simply don't exist. Even the arguing about preventive rules gives quarrels and time-consuming discussions, cf. CZ.

The greatest weakness of WP, on the other hand, is not so much its vulnerability to vandalism as its continuous changing (and usually degrading) of articles by self-appointed experts. CZ has tried to solve the latter problem by the "approval" system. This idea is worth remembering, although I think it is unnecessary for a small organization like CZ. Most articles are not even read by other citizens, let alone changed, and non-citizens cannot touch any article. An important drawback of CZ's approval system is that the "draft version" is usually better than the "approved version", which readers may find confusing (at least I do). I would introduce the approval system here only when it becomes clear that articles start to deteriorate, then it is time that participants with real names decide to lock them and perhaps to start thinking about rules under which that can be done.

Finally, I hope that John Stephenson in his message of December 11 will turn out to be wrong.

--Paul Wormer 06:33, 12 December 2010 (CST)

Well, we should have our own dedicated domain name pretty soon, so his link might not work. ;-) However, I suspect that this wiki will be very much alive and well while that article remains on Citizendium.—Thomas Larsen (talk) 07:23, 12 December 2010 (CST)

[edit] CZ-related templates

Our three Citizendium-related templates, CZcredit, CZcreditTalk and CZauthor, are now better than before. "CZcredit" links the specific CZ article rather than the CZ main page; the same holds for "CZcreditTalk". "CZauthor" is simpler to use, see its documentation. --Boris Tsirelson 11:23, 13 December 2010 (CST)

Ah, excellent. What if the article on Citizendium had a different name from the one on Tendrl, though? It might be better to have something like this (although it would be slightly more annoying to use):

That template would then create a link to revision 2334152 of the (fictional, non-existent) "James, Edward" article on Citizendium, and it would still work if our article were named "Edward James". What do you think?—Thomas Larsen (talk) 16:11, 13 December 2010 (CST)

[edit] Hosting

Hello folks! I plan to get new VPS hosting for this site sometime next week. This will mean we'll be able to:

get a dedicated domain name (knowino.org, for example)—and start "advertising" the site actively
install LaTeX on the server, eliminating our dependency on a third-party CGI script to render mathematical equations
allow all registered users to upload files.

I'll be registering a domain name then, so we really need to come up with a project name before next week! Please see Tendrl:Our name.—Thomas Larsen (talk) 18:34, 13 December 2010 (CST)

At this stage I'm planning to go with MyHosting.com on the LAMP VPS plan. Does anyone know of a better deal, or are there issues with MyHosting.com that I'm not aware of? Most of the reviews I've read have been fairly positive.—Thomas Larsen (talk) 20:40, 14 December 2010 (CST)

[edit] Differences

See Tendrl talk:About#Differences for some ideas—these may help to determine our "niche".—Thomas Larsen (talk) 03:49, 14 December 2010 (CST)

[edit] If it helps

Most of my deviantart gallery is restorations of out-of-copyright images. If they're of use to you, feel free to grab anything licenced under a CC licence - which SHOULD be everything except my original art; if it's not, leave me a message on there.

The gallery's at http://adamcuerden.deviantart.com/gallery

Potentially useful items include:

Pittsburgh, PA, USA, in 1871 and 1904
Various star charts (sample provided; there's many more)
WWI recruitment posters - far too many to link.
The Battle of Spottsylvania, American Civil War.
A series on Gilbert and Sullivan

I DO take requests, but could you send them through DeviantArt for now, as I'll be busy over Christmas? 81.159.31.208 04:30, 14 December 2010 (CST)

Thanks! I really appreciate your offer, and I'm sure we'll take you up on it. Cheers!—Thomas Larsen (talk) 04:39, 14 December 2010 (CST)

Actually, I'll make it a little easier - I signed up for an account, and registered an e-mail address to it. If you want to reach me, going to my user page and sending me an e-mail through the site would probably be easiest. Cheers! Adam 05:03, 14 December 2010 (CST)