 | This user is in the free and open-source software task force. |
You can almost never use the word "RECENT" in Wikipedia. When was it written? 2012 or 2004? When will it be read? 2012 or 2022?
Note: WP:BOTPOL (check if too-fast bots violate this, and if not, considering trying to get the policy changed) [1]
While barnstars and smiles are nice, the nicest thing I can see someone doing is to get stuck into Wikipedia:WikiProject Free Software. There you will find the basic todo items and a more specific set of TODO lists. You might also find Portal:Free software to be a good starting point, and you can see my own list of needy articles lower down on this page.
Wikipedia policy (Wikipedia:Naming conventions (precision)) implies that the name "GNU/Linux" should be used instead of just "Linux" so as to avoid ambiguity (when refering to operating systems which are based on the combination of the GNU operating system and the Linux kernel).
In 2007, with no consensus or support, one of the most active editors on English Wikipedia, alone, replaced hundreds of links to "GNU/Linux" with "Linux". People complained, but no one had a similar amount of time to undo his flood of edits. (EDIT: I have been banned from naming the user here because of WP:UP#POLEMIC - which I contest.)
So, I encourage others to use the term "GNU/Linux" in Wikipedia and ignore the annoying hobby of that one wikipedian (who otherwise makes many positive contributions to Wikipedia). At the same time, if you find editors abbrasive, please react calmly. Some like to steamroll over the edits of new contributors to an article (violating WP:BITE guideline), provoking a frustrated or hot-headed reaction which can be easily argued against (because it wasn't well thought out) or which allows the topic to be changed to criticism of the victim's lack of civility.
Jimbo Wales has criticised the removal of "GNU/Linux", saying: "The project to excise all references to GNU/Linux is deeply POV and wrong. It should be reverted completely and totally as quickly as possible. Virtually all references to Linux should be references to GNU/Linux."
(EDIT: Removed because an admin invoked WP:UP#POLEMIC - which I contest)
"Licence" is the noun, "license" is the verb. This is true for UK, Ireland, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, and India. The only exception is the USA, and possibly the Philippines, where they use "license" for both the noun and the verb.
Interesting article: American and British English differences
Wikipedia policy: WP:ENGVAR
((fact)) tags are very useful. If you want to help an article, please add these tags to any statements which need a verifiable source. If these tags are added to an article that you contribute to, remember that they are not a criticism. And if you replace these tags with citations, the article will be stronger for it.
Also, see:
Note: I only rarely put effort into my user page, so the content of this page has probably not be reviewed or checked or updated recently.
Wikipedia contributor since February 1st, 2004.
If you see a typo or glitch here, please feel free to fix it, and thanks to those who already have. I like this guy's articles: Ultan Quigley.
Before being "Gronky", I had other usernames, but none lasted all that long. I wish my username was not "Gronky", but I picked that one night when I couldn't find a good username that wasn't already taken, and now I don't want to lose my edit history. So I'm Gronky.
If someone went looking for my identity and the address of where I sleep at night, and posted them on Wikipedia, I would hope that the wikipedia admins would consider banning that user. If that user admitted what they did, and said that it was not acceptable and that it should not happen again, maybe a fixed-term ban would be suitable instead.
No one has posted my home address, but another wikipedian (EDIT:Name not mentioned because an admin invoked WP:UP#POLEMIC - which I contest), during a heated argument, has posted the "personal information" of User:Skyring.
The details are incomplete because the information has been deleted from the Wikipedia database, but there are still edit summaries that confirm that the user did post Skyring's personal information. At one point in my research on this case, I read that this information included the address of where Skyring lives - but I can't find that anymore.
Wikipedia admins are clearly aware of what the user in question has done, but they have done nothing. That user continues to edit Wikipedia even though there has been no acknowledgement by him of his actions, or whether or not he thinks they should be acceptable, or whether or not he has resolved not to do the same again.
That user contributes a lot to Wikipedia, and many people value his contributions. But should Wikipedia have a class that are above common standards of decency? User:Skyring is trying to raise this issue, but his posts are repeatedly reverted and blocked by other Wikipedians (including admins) [3]
I've had disagreements with that user before. Next time I disagree with him, will he try to find of where I live, and post my address on Wikipedia? Should I fear my anonymity being taken away by another wikipedian - and by this fear should I pander to and agree with that user from now on?
Gronky 19:05, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
I've just noticed that when another other admin told that user that he's abusing his admin power, he reverts the admins! (and then he locked his own talk page - making it impossible for that admin, or anyone else, to re-raise the deleted issue.) (EDIT: I have links, but an admin has banned me from posting them due to WP:UP#POLEMIC - which I contest.)
And he seems to be doing a "rollback" on new accounts which he suspects are created by Skyring. A rollback is where all contributions by a user during a certain period are reverted by a click of an admins-only button.
All very disappointing that this is being not only tolerated, but the cover-up is being assisted. Gronky 23:47, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
Please comment here if you know anything of the following:
<ol> list; the simple #-prefixed list style only tolerates nested items beginning with ## or #*, I think. As to your questions, the Reference desk seems to be a good place to track down the arcane and obscure. --Teratornis 23:59, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
I don't keep track anymore of which articles I've contributed a lot to. The best way to see that is to look at my 500 most recent edits. Years ago, when I made this list, I was proud to have created the following pages of decent size:
...and to have done the majority of the work, at the time, on:
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Comparison_of_free_and_open_source_software_licenses#Merge_June_2012. KarlB (talk) 19:21, 20 June 2012 (UTC)