Main Page | Recent changes | View source | Page history

Printable version | Disclaimers | Privacy policy

Not logged in
Log in | Help

Candidates For Deletion/Archive02

From dKosopedia

<< Candidates for Deletion


Current Commentary

Articles in other languages

Without objection, as a dKosopedia rule, dKosopedia is an English-language wikipedia; all articles shall be in English, but words in other languages are allowed, provided a translation is provided.
AlamakeeDemo, Where did this English Only rule come from? BartFraden. June 23, 2006.
(I was kind of wondering that myself) --Ray Radlein 09:38, 23 June 2006 (PDT)
I made the rule up. Since there are objections, we will debate it. Non-English articles require admins fluent in that language. --Allamakee Democrat 12:12, 23 June 2006 (PDT)
Which brings up the need to promote dkosopedia in the blog, and get people from the Hispanic Caucus involved. We know they're out there. Chadlupkes 12:55, 23 June 2006 (PDT)
Good idea. There is a crying need to drum up editors on dKos
If other-than-English articles are to be welcomed, then some serious policies need to be in place. As I said, we would have to have admins fluent in the other language(s), and until we do, I am loath to let non-English articles through the gate (how is one to determine if this is not a Republican trolling, a copyvio, or outright libel?). We would also have to determine which languages are allowed; if we let in Spanish, do we let in Portuguese or Polish, Hawaiian or Navajo? --Allamakee Democrat 13:14, 23 June 2006 (PDT)
For the time being, while we try to figure out what to do, we could perhaps whip up a template tag a là {{stub}} or {{cleanup}} to indicate that there is an open issue at work regarding the language (something like "This is a foreign-language article. As such, we don't actually know for sure what it says, so we'd appreciate it if you'd let us know," except not all stupid like that is).
Frankly, as an idea, I think that Spanish (and other foreign) language versions of serious dKP political articles are a fantastic idea. That said, there's obviously a gigantic gap between the Platonic ideal of a foreign-language political information resource and what we have the resources to actually achieve here, as you rightly point out. Hell, the English-language dKP is already threadbare enough in places. --Ray Radlein 14:52, 23 June 2006 (PDT)
Brothers and Sisters, there are five good reasons NOT to adopt Alamakee Democrats English Only rule.
First, the rule "solves" a non-problem. We have no evidence of any actual harm from any of the handful of non-English language articles. One salient characteristic of bad public and private management is a focus on solving non-existent problems.
Second, the rule is motivated by ignorance. Another salient characteristic of bad public and private management is decision-making is that it is driven by the ignorance and lack of creativity of managers fearful of the knowledge and creativity of those they supervise.
Third, adopting an English Only rule of any kind sends the wrong message in this period of fuck-witted nativism in American politics. Talk about tone-deaf!
Fourth, the rule originated in political sin. Alamakee Democrat just made it up as part of what appears his or her intention to narrow the scope of what can happen here in DKos. That's not smart. This isn't a campaign organization. This is an information source. Moreover announcing the rule as a fait accompli smells like power trip. That sort of thing becomes pathological in an organization.
Fifth, we depend on volunteer efforts. We can't afford to drive away potential volunteers, unless they are obvious cretins or agents provocateur.
BartFraden June 24, 2006.

June, 2006

Delete - This seems to be part of the original dkosopedia, with the only like on Prohibition, another article that we don't really need except as an example of how local initiatives can reach the level of passing a Constitutional Amendment. I wish people would start pushing a ban on corporate personhood like that. Chadlupkes 12:57, 23 June 2006 (PDT)
Move quotes to articles about the people - There is no need to have these be separate articles. Chadlupkes 12:58, 23 June 2006 (PDT)
I can see where having a handy collection of relevant quotations all in one place would be very useful, but it would only really work, I think, if it could somehow be auto-generated (like the way category listings are, perhaps) from quotes embedded in the parent articles (which is, as you say, where they belong). I strongly suspect that there is some fiendishly clever way to do this built in to the Wiki software somewhere, but my Wiki-fu is to weak to say for sure. --Ray Radlein 14:57, 23 June 2006 (PDT)
In all seriousness, the idea of not having an article on the DLC is mind-bogglingly absurd. Slap a {{stub}} notice, or a {{cleanup}} tag on it [aside: dKP doesn't have one of those yet? Day-umn], by all means; but to even think about deleting it is silly. --Ray Radlein 09:38, 23 June 2006 (PDT)
So slap on the tag. And yes, we probably don't have one of those.
I'll try to create (or steal) a vaguely competent {{cleanup}} tag later tonight, then. I suspect that it'll come in very handy. :-) --Ray Radlein 14:59, 23 June 2006 (PDT)
Merge - Can someone from Michigan do some work to merge this with the other articles and make them look decent? Chadlupkes 18:03, 23 June 2006 (PDT)
I moved this to a more suitable name space, Michigan State Senate, Republican majority.
Delete - Agreed. I think it would depend on what links to them. We are not intending to duplicate Wikipedia. Speaking of, is this version of MediaWiki set to use InterWiki links? That would be a good solution, since they would go directly to WP. Chadlupkes 17:59, 23 June 2006 (PDT)
BartFraden is restoring these, without any discussion. --Allamakee Democrat 09:29, 24 June 2006 (PDT)
Alamakee Democrat, why are you so busy deleting articles that may hold some future value when developed? Why not devote more of your time to writing? BartFraden. June 24, 2006.

24 June 2006

26 June 2006

This is the diary on which Kos made a comment that he didn't care what happened to mercenaries (as opposed to ordinary soldiers). The comment was roundly criticized, especially once it was taken out of proportion. AlanF
Ok, but is this really useful in the wiki? Is it infamous in any context outside of DailyKos? Chadlupkes

June 27, 2006

June 28, 2006 is gone

June 29, 2006

June 30, 2006

Retrieved from "http://localhost../../../c/a/n/Candidates_For_Deletion_Archive02_8a27.html"

This page was last modified 13:57, 18 September 2006 by Chad Lupkes. Based on work by AlanF and Ray Radlein and dKosopedia user(s) Allamakee Democrat and BartFraden. Content is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License.

[Main Page]
Daily Kos
DailyKos FAQ

View source
Discuss this page
Page history
What links here
Related changes

Special pages
Bug reports