|
|
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| − | Ive noticed a lot of disambiguation pages, epsecially ones about abbreviations, that dont actually have any articles to direct to. What is the point of this?--[[User:151.199.25.180|151.199.25.180]] 21:49, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
| + | <center>[[image:Hello.jpg]] |
| − | Ive noticed that too, and ive sterted deleting them [[User:Carlostmpl|Carlostmpl]]
| + | |
| | | | |
| − | GFDL is not appropriate to a wiki. Should be replaced by GNU GPL or a Creative Common Licence
| |
| − | (discussion on meta community portal)
| |
| | | | |
| − | :I think we should make this a lot more organised. Wikipedia's articles are duplicatable; I believe we should copy those articles first, then modify them to our own standards. As of now, this looks like a sub-standard wiki; just a mess. We can add the anarchist perspective and rearrange the (already well-organised) articles as we wish. [[User:lockeownzj00|lockeownzj00]] 20:46, 12 May 2005 (UTC)
| + | <big>'''Anarchy Rules!!!'''</big> |
| | | | |
| − | You are right. Anarchopedia in English doesn't have a lot of contributors and my English is not so well. Some time ago, I started to copy Wikipedia's articles about anarchism, and I'll join you :) next week. --[[User:millosh|millosh]] 21:13, 12 May 2005 (UTC)
| + | --[[User:Willy on Wheels|Willy on Wheels]] 02:39, 13 March 2007 (UTC))</center> |
| − | | + | |
| − | What's the point of this? If you do a search on Google of a passage from a Wikipedia article for Louis XIV - [http://www.google.com/search?q=%22bankruptcy+when+Louis+XIV+assumed%22 &amp;quot;bankruptcy when Louis XIV assumed&amp;quot;], you get 109 hits, with Wikipedia being #1. Why be hit #110? What's the point of just cloning Wikipedia?
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | I have copied articles from Wikipedia, usually original articles by a good author. I think copying wholesale Wikipedia articles is pointless. If you want to copy and modify articles from Wikipedia, then copy them to your hard drive, modify it and then upload it. What's the point of being just another Wikipedia clone? [[User:Lance Murdoch|Lance Murdoch]] 01:32, 13 May 2005 (UTC)
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | :I'm going to add articles from Wikipedia I created or contributed toward, largely articles on U.S. leftist groups. [[User:DJ Silverfish|DJ Silverfish]] 18:56, 20 May 2005 (UTC)
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | :Why is copying all of Wikipedia pointless? No, that's a bad question... let me try again:
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | :What is the purpose of this site other than to be "not [[Wikipedia]]"? If the purpose is to be an encyclopedia, doesn't it make sense to start with an encyclopedia that you think needs work and then ''do that work''? Any other position would seem to be based merely on territorialism. -[[User:Harmil|Harmil]] 21:26, 30 Jun 2005 (UTC)
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | Sorry to sound negative, but was this site started by non-anarchists to make anarchists look hopelessly disorganised? I thought that Wikipedia was a mess, but this... [[User:81.202.195.21|81.202.195.21]] 14:40, 8 Jul 2005 (UTC)
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | :Hehehe... I started it and I ''am'' an anarchist. People from [[:deu:|German]] and [[:fra:|French]] Anarchopedia are better organized because they were working on site organization. So, if you want to make some better organization here, you are welcome. The point is ''self-organization'', not leadership. And we have a lot of time to try to do that. To say again here (and this is the answer to Harmil's question, too): Anarchopedia should be "an anarchist encyclopedia" and "an encyclopedia for anarchists", but also the virtual place where we can try to build anarchy. May we organize us without leaders and power; at least in the virtual world? ... as well as with people who are not explicit anarchists? Even [http://www.infoshop.org/wiki/ Infoshop OpenWiki] doesn't intend to be "an encyclopedia for anarchists" (just "an anarchist encyclopedia") Anarchopedia would not have a lot of sense without the goal to build a virtual anarchy. --[[User:millosh|millosh]] 00:09, 11 Jul 2005 (UTC)
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | :So, this is the main reason why I am writing here only at the talk pages. People who want to write here should write here without the idea that Anarchopedia is "project which belongs to someone" and without the idea that one person can make decisions about relations between contributors or about the site content. --[[User:millosh|millosh]] 00:09, 11 Jul 2005 (UTC)
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | :It is not easy to make even virtual society without hierarchy and we want to do that in reality. The good thing is that we have a lot of time to try to do that here (or anywhere else). --[[User:millosh|millosh]] 00:09, 11 Jul 2005 (UTC)
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | ::Consider the [[open politics in force]] [[ruleset]]: [http://openpolitics.ca/open+politics+in+force it seems to set very ambitious goals for having mutually self-reinforcing rules that people enforce on each other with minimal input from advisors].
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | ==Restored data==
| + | |
| − | I restored eng: from database dump from September 8th. Between 5 ti 10 changes (from 8, 9, and 10 September) are lost. --[[User:millosh|millosh]] 17:49, 11 Sep 2005 (UTC)
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | :No big deal, it should take just a few minutes to resubmit the changes (and apparently i was the only person active during the period :). [[User:e★f|e★f]] 20:26, 11 Sep 2005 (UTC)
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | ==Eng is on new server==
| + | |
| − | [[User:millosh|millosh]] 14:50, 13 Sep 2005 (UTC)
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | ==User unfriendly==
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | Want to grow the articles here? Improve the ease of submitting a new article. First, what the hell is this about having to log in to create an article? How anarchic is that? Second, typing an entry in to the search box should bring up a "create new article" dialog if the database query finds nothing, not the apocryphal MySQL space language it does now. [[User:Denni|Denni]] 01:38, 14 Dec 2005 (UTC)
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | : We have a very small community here so far, and i think this ([[Special:Userlogin|logging]] in first) was done to prevent bots from editing and creating crap articles... personally seeing how there was an influx of regestering bots around, i say this rule has to be deprecated, since it doesn't help anyhow. {{User:beta_m/sig}}
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | :: First of all, YOU DONT HAVE TO BE LOGGED IN TO CREATE AN ARTICLE! Second, making a new article is not terribly complicated. All you have to do is search for it, and if it doesnt come up a link will show up in red at the top of the page. Anyone that cant figure out how to do that probably shouldn't be contributing to Anarchopedia anyway. Im sick of people complaining about how you have to be logged in and how it is un-anarchistic. I have a user name, but I dont always log in with it (usually due to laziness) and it never hinders my ability to edit articles. Furthermore, if you look at the records, only one user was ever banned from this website, and that was because he added "an eggcup" onto the end of every article he could find.
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | :::Right on.
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | == can't write on eng: ? ==
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | i tryied to [[User talk:Libre/dads|make a translation]] for "diego abad de santillan" from the [[:fr:Diego Abad de Santillán|french article]], and put it on eng:, but it [[Special:Recentchanges|seems created]], but it show nothing : see [[Diego Abad de Santillan]].
| + | |
| − | What happen ?
| + | |
| − | [[User:Libre|Libre]] 08:51, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | : something strange !? it passed now ???!! finally good :) [[User:Libre|Libre]] 08:52, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | : It happens sometimes that you have to submit the same thing twice before it actually works. I suspect it has something to do with the timeout threshhold being too low. ~ [[User:Beta_M|Beta_M]] (VolodyA! V Anarhist) <sup>[{{SERVER}}{{localurl:User_talk:Beta_M|action=edit§ion=new}} Talk]</sup> {{{1|09:37}}}
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | == licensing ==
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | I also have thougth a bit about licenses. I think the bad thing about licenses like GFDL and CC are that they gibe somebody the right to go to the courts in order to enforce the rights. I think for anarchists that should be a no-go. So I suggest to develop an anarchistic anti-licenses. This should be very short, maybe one paragraph - and could also be used on other projects. The idea is to give the people the "rights" they need but make clear that these "rights" can not be enforced by any jurisdiction. I would call such a license AAL [[Anarchist Anti License]]. The "Anti" should make clear that this is not a real license. Please take a look at http://www.cypherspace.org/CPL/ for an idea - but I think this could be made much shorter. --[[User:Vinci|Vinci]] 08:50, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | : I do like the idea, but think it's more silly then anything. {{ll|Public domain}} is the way to go if we want to be anarchic. And i don't see what is wrong with GNU GPL anyhow. Taking away somebody's right to restict freedoms of others isn't a bad thing, nor is it anti-anarchist. ~ [[User:Beta_M|Beta_M]] (VolodyA! V Anarhist) <sup>[{{SERVER}}{{localurl:User_talk:Beta_M|action=edit§ion=new}} Talk]</sup> [[2006]] [[July 02]] 16:47 <sub>([[Coordinated Universal Time|UTC]])</sub>
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | ::The problem with [[public domain]] is that someone takes your stuff and changes it and then claims they own the changes, even if they are just corrections, then sues you. The only way around this is a [[share alike]] license, and yes the [[GFDL]] does qualify. It gives you a lot of powers actually if you use the [[GFDL Secondary Section]]s properly - especially the [[GFDL Invariant Section]] - to make sure no one can abuse the materials. For instance you could add an Invariant Section promoting anarchy and giving all the most useful URLs to anyone who reads any derived article. So an article on [[gardening]] would only be distributed with a secondary section on how to [[anarchize gardening]], e.g. by planting [[illegal plant]]s in everyone else's garden all around.
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | ::You could write a more complex [[terms of use]] like [[let.sysops.be]] or [[openpolitics.ca]] or [[lp.greenparty.ca]] to sort out all the various possibilities. One nice idea that came from the (now defunct) [[livingplatform.ca]] was to let tense of articles and PoV of articles actually determine their copyright. So instructions were [[CC-by-sa]] but political opinions were [[CC-by]], and compilations of many opinions were [[CC-by-nc-sa]] etc.
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | == anarchy or not ==
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | anarchy or not, how is someone supposed to find what they
| + | |
| − | want. what is the meaning of anarchy? chaos and time wasting?
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | :They can use the search engine, or they can just learn the lingo. The languaged used to describe community here, like [[faction]] stuff, is way more sensible than Wikipedia where they try to deny there are factions and everyone Jiminy Wales hates is a "troll".
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | == So, what is the rationale behind bans? ==
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | Yes, vandals are obviously bad, but isn't banning them un-anarchic? Could someone explain what the reasoning is?
| + | |
| − | | + | |
| − | :{{ll|Anarchism}} is about empowering people for social change, not making slaves of everyone. Every community has the right to demand that it will not be oppressed, and vandals do exactly that. Think about it, landlord can come and instill [[gender neutral pronoun|ans]] rule in your house, and vandals come in and destroy our project.
| + | |
| − | :Anarchism is '''[[what anarchism is not|not]]''' [[anomie]] or [[nihilism]]. There is nothing wrong with protecting your home and your life from others. We welcome everybody to come in and contribute to the project, but not to destroy it. ~ [[User:Beta_M|Beta_M]] (VolodyA! V Anarhist) <sup>[{{SERVER}}{{localurl:User_talk:Beta_M|action=edit§ion=new}} Talk]</sup> [[2006]] [[October 28]] 07:35 <sub>([[Coordinated Universal Time|UTC]])</sub>
| + | |
