Talk:Etenne/subpage1
Wikibooks
Hi Etenne, I wonder if there's any reason not to migrate BoyWiki's content over to Wikibooks? Perhaps a "Boylove" book could be created, with the content arranged hierarchically in subpages. I recently created a bunch of suicide-related subpages under wikibooks:Suicide#Methods, and the objections to the content were overruled, in contrast to how the situation was handled over at Wikiversity (see wikiversity:Talk:Suicide). I'm going to ask around and see what the reception would likely be. Thanks, Leucosticte (talk) 01:38, 25 October 2014 (CEST)
- I don't have any problems whith the content being added to wikibooks however I would not want you to do all that work for something that just gets deleted.--Etenne (talk) 13:55, 25 October 2014 (CEST)
- I think what I'll do instead is narrow my focus to child pornography. I'll work on the book in userspace here, and then copy and paste it over to Wikibooks when it's in decent shape. Leucosticte (talk) 23:41, 28 October 2014 (CET)
Wikis
It seems like NewgonWiki's becoming an archive created kind of a hole in wiki coverage, in that there's nothing in the wikisphere covering intergenerational relationships with adolescent girls, which is ironic since that may be the group of minors to which the largest number of adults feel a romantic or sexual attraction.. I suppose that in retrospect, I should've called ChildWiki "YouthWiki" or something, so that it would cover adolescents as well as children. "Boy" is a term that covers pretty much any male from 0-17 (and even beyond, sometimes; people speak of "college boys" and, although I'm 34, my ex called me a "white boy"). "Child" usually refers to prepubescents; adolescents would probably dislike being called "children" and people who have relationships with them would probably not regard it as "adult-child sex". There could be "adult-youth" sex, I guess. Leucosticte (talk) 21:24, 7 November 2014 (CET)
- I suppose you could always add other Wikis to Childwiki in the same way you would add a different language wiki and sort of have a Childlove hub:) Or are you thinking about renaming it to something more encompassing? BTW, your server runs kind of slow. Also can it be accessed using https?--Etenne (talk) 21:46, 7 November 2014 (CET)
- Yeah, I use DreamHost, and even though I have a VPS, object caching isn't available. I don't have https; I guess I'd need to buy an IP address for that. I could probably get a better hosting solution from some other company; I just use DreamHost to avoid censorship.
- I could name it something more encompassing but the problem with "YouthWiki" is that people might assume that excludes prepubescents, since the youth rights movement typically has only focused on adolescents. Leucosticte (talk) 22:39, 7 November 2014 (CET)
- I don't have any ideas for names off the top of my head right now but perhaps you could make a post to GirlChat and they could come up with something. (as well as perhaps attract some users:) --Etenne (talk) 14:15, 8 November 2014 (CET)
- I notice that efforts to create and sustain a reasonably large, active GirlWiki failed miserably. The BLs are putting the GLs to shame, as usual. :) 1,000+ articles is pretty good for a non-WMF wiki. Leucosticte (talk) 19:48, 8 November 2014 (CET)
- Thanks for the compliments but I feel we can do better:) Plus many of those pages are related to the calender template and chronology. However, I am not dissatisfied with the progress we have been making. I would guess that the difference comes from Boylove having a longer history than girllove in that up until quite recently, girllove was perhaps considered a normal variant of heterosexuality whereas pederasty has almost always been considered as exotic.--Etenne (talk) 21:05, 8 November 2014 (CET)
- I notice that efforts to create and sustain a reasonably large, active GirlWiki failed miserably. The BLs are putting the GLs to shame, as usual. :) 1,000+ articles is pretty good for a non-WMF wiki. Leucosticte (talk) 19:48, 8 November 2014 (CET)
- I don't have any ideas for names off the top of my head right now but perhaps you could make a post to GirlChat and they could come up with something. (as well as perhaps attract some users:) --Etenne (talk) 14:15, 8 November 2014 (CET)
Server
Hey Etenne, I gotta find a new server, I think. I currently have a DreamHost VPS, and not only is it slow, but it doesn't even load sometimes because it runs out of memory. (Memory costs 5 cents/month per megabyte; right now I'm paying $15/month for 300MB.) Problem is, I got kicked off of HostMonster because someone filed a report of "adult content" (because of text, not pictures). Know any good free speech webhosts? I tried NearlyFreeSpeech.NET, but there a number of technical problems associated with that host (including the fact that PHP has to be run in safe mode). Thanks, Leucosticte (talk) 01:28, 12 November 2014 (CET)
- I will look into it. Email me @ etenne@boywiki.org
- I increased the amount of memory a bit, so it's working somewhat better now. Still crashes pretty much daily, but then restarts. Leucosticte (talk) 21:20, 21 November 2014 (CET)
WikiIndex
WikiIndex deleted the articles on BoyWiki, ChildWiki, Newgon Wiki, and ChildPorn.info, among other wikis. See http://wikiindex.org/WikiIndex_talk:Community_portal#We_need_to_have_a_community_discussion_about_Nathania.2FNathan_Larson.2FUser:Leucosticte . It seems to me that most wikis that don't have a strong, benevolent dictator end up going down the path WikiIndex is going. They start out being tolerant and inclusive, and then a new cadre of sysops comes into power, after the old guard has left, and sweeps away the users and content that are considered undesirable. One of the sysops there, Hoof Hearted, who had for a long time been the most active user on the wiki, had defended me and my content in the past, but I think his health has been suffering or he's otherwise been less active than before. He hasn't edited in months.
Anyway, it's sad to see them abandoning neutrality on these controversial topics, especially due to pressure from RationalWiki. Leucosticte (talk) 19:18, 21 November 2014 (CET)
- Not surprising. Even if they wanted to be more open, it's easy to give in to the pressure since they really don't have a horse in this race. It is easy to turn your head and not see what is right before your eyes.... at least until General Patton comes along and makes you take a walk through the death camps and bury the bodies :) --Etenne (talk) 23:40, 22 November 2014 (CET)
- So, those who don't have a horse in the race don't care, and therefore give in to whatever side makes the most fuss or threatens to make them look bad; and those who do have a horse in the race are considered disqualified from voicing their opinion because they're a bunch of dirty pedophiles with a conflict of interest in the matter. On the other hand, if those who make their living prosecuting child porn offenses, providing government- and defendant-funded treatment to the "victims", and so on, voice their opinions, it's assumed that their motives are pure. Nice. Leucosticte (talk) 01:00, 23 November 2014 (CET)
- Someone recently wrote, "Sites that discuss the normalization of child porn and pedophilia are fine in a neutral context, but they tilt heavily in the interest of illegal acts when they start arguing for it, and since I don't believe it is ethically or legally sensible to provide links to sites that argue for the incitement of criminal acts minus any caveats about exercising legal restraint, and having seen BoyWiki and Newgon Wiki, they are only concerned with help pedophiles hide themselves from the law, which is why I would oppose them without question." Leucosticte (talk) 18:51, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
- Someone should inform this guy that simply existing and being a pedophile is not against any law. Of course, I would like to challenge this person as to exactly which entry/entries it is talking about since I do not see anything on BoyWiki beyond basic internet security which is a good idea for everyone. I suppose that as long as no one fact-checks his lies that he is good. --Etenne (talk) 12:01, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
- Someone recently wrote, "Sites that discuss the normalization of child porn and pedophilia are fine in a neutral context, but they tilt heavily in the interest of illegal acts when they start arguing for it, and since I don't believe it is ethically or legally sensible to provide links to sites that argue for the incitement of criminal acts minus any caveats about exercising legal restraint, and having seen BoyWiki and Newgon Wiki, they are only concerned with help pedophiles hide themselves from the law, which is why I would oppose them without question." Leucosticte (talk) 18:51, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
Quora
I got this message on Quora today:
| “ | Hello
You are being blocked for one month because your questions, in aggregate, are creating a hostile pattern of content that many users are reporting as harassing and hostile to certain groups of people. These are the type of questions which are considered problematic: Quora is very committed to ensuring it is a safe and welcoming place for all good contributors and we require that users are judicious when asking questions that could be perceived as sexist, racist or harmful to minors. Quora Admin |
” |
I was a bit disappointed, since Quora seemed like one of the few mainstream online communities in which it was still safe to ask edgy questions. It seems like feminists don't really want a debate; they want to shut down the opposing side of the debate. We have places like BoyWiki we can go to, but then people de-list those sites from indexes like WikiIndex to make it harder to find.
I don't see admins of sites like Quora being "very committed to ensuring it is a safe and welcoming place" for dissidents. I wonder why people don't see it as dangerous in any way to suppress minority viewpoints. They focus on the dangers of allowing those views to be heard. Leucosticte (talk) 23:19, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
- Do you think that continuing to have a page about them on BoyWiki is desirable given the circumstances? --Etenne (talk) 13:30, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
- As criticism, maybe. Kinda like how Evil-Unveiled had pages about BoyWiki and its users, for purposes of criticism. Leucosticte (talk) 21:01, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
Book
Someone writes, "I just finished a book about a young teen growing up in South Africa. He goes to a boarding school where he gets in a relationship with one of the teachers. A key is found that the teacher gave the boy. At first the boy lies to protect the teacher but when the story falls apart the boy ends up telling the truth -- not everything, but enough. The boy continues to defend the teacher, even saying it was his fault the relationship got started. The interrogator then switches and even gets angry that the boy does not see himself as the victim. In the end the boy gives in and repeats that he was abused. It struck me that once the boy relented and became the 'victim' he gave his empowerment away not to the teacher but the interrogator. The teacher actually empowered the boy by letting him choose how the relationship progressed but the interrogator took that empowerment away and used the empowerment for himself to take control of the boy and the teacher."
It kinda reminds me of the new ad campaign that's been on TV asking for donations to teach young people that they should tell on any adult who engages in sexual touching with them. This training is said to produce strong, empowered youth. Leucosticte (talk) 00:30, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
Leucosticte's e-mail
If you have it, I'd like to get in touch with him. Please don't put it here - I don't think it should be made public without his permission - you could e-mail it to me, if you have it, OK? Thanks. user4
Where to put links to other sites that have good information?
Do we have a general "links" page, to put links to good sites? If so, where?
For example, this is a good page: http://web.archive.org/web/20131006162550/http://agetaboo.org/ and this, too: http://web.archive.org/web/20131006162550/http://agetaboo.org/info/attraction.htm
User4 (talk) 06:43, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
- Boylinks maybe ? I don't know. Links mainly correspond to an entry however maybe if you take a look at Wikipedia and see if they have something comparable, we could figure out a format for doing that. --Etenne (talk) 08:55, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
Newly added articles
When people come to the site, we can use the (very frustrating) technique that supermarkets often use - they move things around, or introduce new items, which then forces the customers to search the whole place to find things. This makes the customers buy more products, even though it makes the customers very unhappy sometimes.
Or, we could make it easy for returning visitors -- those who have already seen much of the material on the site. We could have a category of "newly added articles". Then visitors would not have to dig through everything on the site in order to find the new articles - something which may frustrate them, and even cause them to stop visiting the site.
Sure - we have the "recent changes" category, but that is confusing, and difficult to peruse.
How about a page which lists only new articles, perhaps by date of creation (most-recent first)? I'll bet our visitors would really appreciate that!
What do you think? Should we make it very difficult for returning visitors to read our new articles, or make should we make it easy for them?
User4 (talk) 19:31, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
- You mean something like Special:NewPages? Leucosticte (talk) 08:37, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
A "Newly Added Pages" link on the main page
would be useful for visitors, especially returning ones, wouldn't it? User4 (talk) 12:54, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
- Already there See: From BoyWiki's new and recently improved articles:
- Template:Did you know Leucosticte (talk) 20:54, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
- Hmm... perhaps the text "From BoyWiki's new and recently improved articles:" should be amended to "From BoyWiki's new and recently improved articles :(click link to see more) as I sure missed it, and I'm pretty sure others have, too. User4 (talk) 05:18, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
- Template:Did you know Leucosticte (talk) 20:54, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
A "Newly Added or Improved Pages" link...
... would be nice in the "navigation panel," as the current Recent changes link is more appropriate for editors than for casual readers, don't you think? User4 (talk) 05:10, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
(diff | hist) (diff | hist | edit)
(diff | hist | edit) in Recent Changeswould be nice. It would then not require that the page be loaded first, and "edit" chosen. It would save bandwidth for BW, too. Maybe make this appear only for logged-on users? Is it possible? User4 (talk) 06:23, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
- Some changes are going to be added to that page during the next upgrade but what you are asking would require a rewrite of the wiki software itself and I doubt any of our tech. people would be willing to do that.--Etenne (talk) 09:37, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
- Feel free to add it as a task over at Phabricator. Leucosticte (talk) 10:40, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
Do we have a template that gives the option of searching further when a category exists for a certain term?
NOTE: I FOUND A HACK - SEE THE END OF THIS ENTRY. I added Books, and I now see that this forces a search for the term "books" to jump directly to that category, rather than (as before) providing search results for the term among all the articles. User4 (talk) 05:39, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
- I note that a search for the term "literature" has the same problem. No option in given for viewing the category, or searching among all entries. User4 (talk) 05:48, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
- Wikipedia example: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=boozing&title=Special%3ASearch&fulltext=Search states the page exists, but gives the search results in addition.
The answer would seem to be here in the wikicode for the returns of that search. The template must be in there. Maybe it is obvious to you. Not to me!:
<div class="results-info">Results <strong>1 - 20</strong> of <strong>1,977</strong></div>
<div style="clear:both"></div></div><div class="mw-search-profile-tabs"><div class="search-types"><ul><li class="current"><a href="/w/index.php?title=Special:Search&search=boozing&fulltext=Search&profile=default"
title="Search in (Article)">Content pages</a></li><li class="normal"><a href="/w/index.php?title=Special:Search&search=boozing&fulltext=Search&profile=images" title="Search for files">Multimedia</a></li><li class="normal"><a href="/w/index.php?title=Special:Search&search=boozing&fulltext=Search&profile=all" title="Search all of content (including talk pages)">Everything</a></li><li class="normal"><a href="/w/index.php?title=Special:Search&search=boozing&fulltext=Search&profile=advanced" title="Search in custom namespaces">Advanced</a></li></ul></div><div style="clear:both"></div></div></form>
MAYBE IN THE FOLLOWING
<div class='searchresults'><p class="mw-search-exists">
<b>There is a page named "<a href="/wiki/Boozing" title="Boozing" class="mw-redirect">Boozing</a>" on Wikipedia</b></p>
<ul class='mw-search-results'>
<li><div class='mw-search-result-heading'>
<a href="/wiki/Alcoholic_beverage" title="Alcoholic beverage">Alcoholic beverage</a> <span class='searchalttitle'>(redirect from <a href="/wiki/Boozing" title="Boozing"><span class="searchmatch">Boozing</span></a>)</span> </div> <div class='searchresult'>An alcoholic beverage is a drink which contains a substantial amount of the psychoactive drug ethanol (informally called alcohol). As one of the most widely</div>
<div class='mw-search-result-data'>25 KB (3,130 words) - 23:12, 23 February 2015</div></li>
<li><div class='mw-search-result-heading'><a href="/wiki/Booze" title="Booze"><span>
- Wikipedia has this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Redirect
- Maybe the relevant section is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Redirect#Soft_redirects
- A "double soft search redirect" could probably be easily hacked to do what I am suggesting ::https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Double_soft_redirect
- Here is some code on redirects:
<div id="mw-content-text" lang="en" dir="ltr" class="mw-content-ltr"><dl> <dd><i>"Demonized" redirects here. For the album, see <a href="/wiki/Demonized_(album)" title="Demonized (album)">Demonized (album)</a>.</i></dd> </dl>
- This could "do the trick", couldn't it?
User4 (talk) 06:48, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
I found a hack for the problem. It works for other search terms, too.
https://www.boywiki.org/en/index.php?title=Special%3ASearch&search=%3Fbooks&go=Go
Just place a question mark before the search term. User4 (talk) 07:11, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia's category:Pederastic films
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Pederastic_films has a few we don't have. And perhaps their articles are superior to ours for the ones we do have (I don't have time to check them all)? User4 (talk) 05:53, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
Imports
Hi Etenne, I recommend doing an Special:Import of this file, which contains a few dozen revisions from ChildWiki pages User4 wanted to bring over. For more info on this process, see mediawikiwiki:Manual:Importing XML dumps. Thanks. Leucosticte (talk) 05:51, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
Problem with an incorrect "talk page"
... belongs to the Chicken Hawk film page. Or, at least, it should. User4 (talk) 04:20, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
New Russian law against "promoting pedophilia"
I believe that most BoyWiki content is now illegal in Russia, as it promotes pedophilia (or pederasty). Therefore, most of BW content should be removed, in order not to violate Russian law. User4 (talk) 17:29, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
- do you really want to do this? On a side note, it is not an issue because this site is already blocked in Russia by the Russian government. --Etenne (talk) 17:33, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
- Of course not. I'm just making a point. (I don't have time now for a long response.) This kind of "politically correct" (literally) thinking is what has led to so many injustices in the world today, including the pogram against BLs. (Sorry - gotta run - be back later.) User4 (talk) 17:47, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
Special category "All pages" still screwed up
I moved the Homeland Security page to remove the quote at the beginning, but the [Special:AllPages] index is still screwed up (or is there a time lag for it to take effect?) User4 (talk) 23:00, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
- Two reasons that I can think of,
- 1. I think that Special category "All pages" may also include all the redirect pages so what you are seeing maybe the redirect.
- 2. The way the page is cached in your browser may not update even if you are using ctrl R until you close and restart your browser. --Etenne (talk) 23:11, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
Protection
Does the protection of File talk:Warren Cup Scene B 20thCentury london British Museum.jpg need to be indefinite? Someone might come along later and want to bring up some topic related to the image that has nothing to do with the previous discussion. Leucosticte (talk) 17:16, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
- Yes, I think so. That is the only option on the protection drop-down list and doesn't seem to want to let me set a time. I will unprotect it latter :) --Etenne (talk) 17:24, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
- That's odd. MediaWiki:protect-expiry-options should be giving you a bunch of different options. Leucosticte (talk) 18:30, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
- Well, it doesn't matter because we are going to be completely redoing the wiki software soon and adding additional security features ...but don't tell anybody;) --Etenne (talk) 18:44, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
- I wonder if it would be useful to install mediawikiwiki:Extension:Scribunto? Then we could import the latest templates from Wikipedia. Admittedly, I don't have a particular use case in mind. Leucosticte (talk) 20:19, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
- Well, it doesn't matter because we are going to be completely redoing the wiki software soon and adding additional security features ...but don't tell anybody;) --Etenne (talk) 18:44, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
Risk to editors
Is there anyone among the crazies who has the time to research/harass/pursue editors on the basis of their IPs? Am I crazy not to be using a proxy? Or is the damage already done? Or is this paranoia? thanks. Linguist (talk) 11:27, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
- Well we have it set up so the BoyWiki software itself does not record your IP # however taking extra security precautions is always a good idea. I really don't know what the likelihood is that anyone could track you simply based on your IP#.... I so far no one has had any problems with this but that does not mean that it is completely impossible. My experience has been though that the most frequent way people get tracked is by posting too much personal information about themselves. --Etenne (talk) 11:49, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
- In response to your question, "Is there anyone among the crazies who has the time to research/harass/pursue editors on the basis of their IPs?", the answer is: In the past there have been crazy people on BoyLove sites collecting personal information about posters -- BoyChat has always been the "happy hunting ground" for antis collecting information in order to identify and "out" posters. We all should assume the same thing happens at BoyWiki, too.
- Regarding IP addresses: Everyone should always assume that the Free Spirit servers have been compromised (it would be so easy for the FBI to do that). When you read about what the FBI has done in the past with other organizations, it is highly likely that they have done the exact same thing at BoyChat and BoyWiki. That is, they have planted "moles" (spies) as posters, and they have already compromised the computer system.
- As for your question, "Or is the damage already done?", well, that depends on where you live (don't tell me!) and if your identity here has been linked with your identity on other sites where you have given personally identifiable information. If that is the case, then - yes - "the damage has been done". The most important thing is that you do not currently have any pictures of any kind containing children saved to your hard drive, and -- if you have had them in the past, but deleted them (especially if you use Windows) -- you should throw away your hard drive, get a new one, and start over. You should assume that your IP address has already been given to the legal authorities where you live, and that you are now on their "watch list" (they may try to make friends with you, and try to get you to share illegal materials).
- You should use Truecrypt to create a secret volume on your hard drive, and use that partition for any BoyLove-related things. Google "download truecrypt" for more information. It is a little complicated to do everything right, but it is worth the effort. Losing a day or two now is better than losing years later...
- You should see also the Tor browser bundle, the Proxy_and_VPN, and the THE WAR AGAINST "CHILD MOLESTERS" articles. User4 (talk) 06:35, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
BW's Wish list
Where is BW's "wish list"? I would like to add:
- a request for the ability to choose to see "Recent changes" with only the articles and talk pages that I have not already responded to -- in other words, excluding the stuff I've already dealt with. User4 (talk) 18:07, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
- Well I think that is going to be a moot point because with the new purposed security features, no one but the curators will be able to see who is posting what. It don't exactly know how this is going to work and there is no use debating it with me because they Wiki council has already made up it's mind to do this. --Etenne (talk) 18:19, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
- I wonder what effect that will have on collaboration? That seems like a disturbing loss of transparency. Also, is that compatible with the GFDL? Leucosticte (talk) 18:26, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
- Well I think that is going to be a moot point because with the new purposed security features, no one but the curators will be able to see who is posting what. It don't exactly know how this is going to work and there is no use debating it with me because they Wiki council has already made up it's mind to do this. --Etenne (talk) 18:19, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
- [NEW REQUEST]I also would like to suggest that on "Special:All pages" that the date listings be broken out of the listing and put in a separate list. They are very distracting, and not useful for most people. User4 (talk) 20:27, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
- Uh, sorry -- off topic -- but we need to discuss something off-site. Can you please open a https://www.safe-mail.net e-mail account, and then send me an e-mail from that account to my e-mail address that you already have? Thanks. User4 (talk) 18:43, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
BTW - I have started a Wish list here. User4 (talk) 06:25, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
Wikipedia's article on Pedophilia
I have looked at dozens of earlier (and often quite different) versions of Wikipedia's article on Pedophilia edited over the past 15 years or so, and I also have a complete copy of all the "talk" pages discussing the article and its contents.
A huge edit war went on in the past, which now seems to have subsided. The article is apparently in accords with Wikipedia's neutrality standards, and no longer even carries the disclaimer that "The neutrality of this article is disputed". It seems that certain factions have gained control over the matter of doubts and conflicting opinions, and certain editors (perhaps wrongly?) have now been excluded from voicing their opinions.
It seems to me that the article does not take a neutral POV, and that this should be discussed in an article on BW. Someone could take the Wikipedia article and "annotate" it with concerns regarding the (apparent) nonfactual nature of many claims made in the article, and other concerns regarding the "neutrality" of the article, though our opinions would almost certainly be considered by Wikipedians to "not be neutral". Of course, we don't want to start a big edit war here at BW, either! That would be a big mess! User4 (talk) 06:23, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
- Newgon Wiki has some articles about the goings-on at Wikipedia, including censorship and various users who contributed to the current state of affairs. Admittedly, it's a bit outdated, but certain events had a lasting effect. Leucosticte (talk) 12:11, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
- Great idea! Now, who can do it? I'll be happy to upload the relevant Wikipedia talk pages -- they are GNU licensed (or whatever it is) so it is perfectly legal to host them (to have digital copies of them) on the BW site. (It only violates copyright to host a copyrighted file without permission -- that is, to have the file actually located on your site/server -- but links to files on other sites are perfectly legal. A link is just a link -- it is NOT "hosting the file on your site/server". Right?) User4 (talk) 20:04, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
Newgon Wiki
This subject was brought up earlier, but here it is again. What do you think of importing the mainspace of Newgon Wiki? I would recommend not importing templates, since that would likely mess up our templates. But the mainspace has a lot of useful stuff. Since Newgon Wiki became an archive, the way for it to remain a living document is to import it to someplace like BoyWiki, so that the improvement of articles can continue.
I would also recommend the uploading of Newgon Wiki's files (since there are issues of Uncommon Sense, and pamphlets, etc. in there), but that's another matter. Leucosticte (talk) 20:20, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
Stupid question...
Why does BW have to be part of FS? Couldn't it be hosted elsewhere? Is hosting so difficult to find? This may be a stupid question, but I am asking it seriously.
- ChildWiki proved that it could be hosted elsewhere easily enough. But you saw how that went. Leucosticte (talk) 23:30, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
- "How it went" is that without a specific effort to locate and invite interested, motivated people to participate, then no-one will become new editors. It's a public relations problem. And then there's the fact that the pool of qualified people available to be drawn upon is quite small.
- You can build a better mousetrap, but the world is not going to beat a path to your door until they know about it, and want one of them. Motivation is the key. People act out of self interest, which must be carefully fostered. In other words, you gotta make them hungry for the carrots you dangle in front of them, no matter how truly illusory the carrots really are. Anyway, I just had a big (though late) lunch, and I'm going to take a nap for awhile. C'ya... User4 (talk) 00:10, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
- Oh, well you would've been welcome to help with public relations.. Leucosticte (talk) 02:40, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
- You can build a better mousetrap, but the world is not going to beat a path to your door until they know about it, and want one of them. Motivation is the key. People act out of self interest, which must be carefully fostered. In other words, you gotta make them hungry for the carrots you dangle in front of them, no matter how truly illusory the carrots really are. Anyway, I just had a big (though late) lunch, and I'm going to take a nap for awhile. C'ya... User4 (talk) 00:10, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
- I would have been happy to do so, but I was off the Internet for quite a while, and wasn't aware of what was going on with CW. My bad. User4 (talk) 06:51, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
- We can always bring it back, but I wonder what our constituency would be. ASFAR disbanded and there hasn't been a successor organization, so my guess is that hardly anyone cares enough about child liberation that they would be interested in getting organized or writing much about it. The other hurdle is even if people do care about child liberation, not all of those people are necessarily cool with childlove. See also User:Leucosticte/Potential allies. The question of whom we would reach out to as potential supporters is one I never really figured out an answer to. Leucosticte (talk) 15:49, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
- I would have been happy to do so, but I was off the Internet for quite a while, and wasn't aware of what was going on with CW. My bad. User4 (talk) 06:51, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
- Yes and no, I mean if the BoyWiki council wanted to leave Free Spirits (which they do not), we would certainly be free to do so. However since BoyWiki doesn't generate significant donations, we would not be financially able to do that. I am sure there would also be other considerations as well. I mean we are BL's after all and it seems to be in our nature to debate the pros and cons of any issue ad infinitum:) --Etenne (talk) 11:27, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
- There are German and Dutch pedo sites that are up (BTW, that Brongersma's wiki I just posted an article about has a contact e-mail addy listed - you could e-mail them and ask for rights to share their stuff on BW). I don't know if they own their own servers or not. And - you'll love this(?) -- European copyright law is nowhere near as stringent as U.S. copyright law! "Fair use" in many countries includes the not-for-profit sharing of copyrighted works. See, it's about selling the stuff, not about sharing the stuff for free. User4 (talk) 11:37, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
- Hmm... "putting FS back on the right path"... Well, you've got your work cut out for you. I, personally, think that FS is now corrupted -- (possibly) by The Man, and definitely by the VirPeds. Looking back at older articles, the VirPeds were very active here, too. So, how about The Man? Is he at work here too? (I really wish we could talk off site.) User4 (talk) 12:01, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
- This is as much as I can tell you, the old FSC is dead and had been replaced with the FSCo and only one of the former members of the FSC consults occasionally. The one that I think you worry too much about only takes care of his own little world on our old server which BoyWiki hasn't been on since April. The old server couldn't handle BoyWiki which is a bit CPU intensive. That is why when the chat boards went down for 3 days last month, it did not effect BoyWiki --Etenne (talk) 12:14, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
Also, you have a somewhat distorted idea of who and how things run at Free Spirits. BoyChat is not Free Spirits... like BoyWiki, it is simply one of the sites they host and completely separate (including email) from BoyWiki. Each Free spirits resource is run independently by their own admins. So for example, the BoyWiki staff don't have access to the administration part BoyChat or any or the other FS sites other then the their own resource. As I said, we are not even on the same server. I seriously doubt that many of the members of the FSCo (esp the non-English speaking members) have ever even heard of VirPed. --Etenne (talk) 13:06, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
Case sensitivity in article titles
The wiki software is apparently case-sensitive when it parses article names. I notice that we use two different styles, ie: "TITLENAME (film)" vs "TITLENAME (Book)". This kind of inconsistency makes creating links difficult, and leads to a number of links offering to "create a new article" when the article already exists, but with differing capitalization in the article name. And it seems unreasonable to me to require that editors remember which style of capitalization is used for which kind of article. What do you think? User4 (talk) 07:11, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
Yes, I agree. I think the right way is for them to all be lower case. I will have to go back and reread about naming articles on Wikipedia. Perhaps I will work on that tomorrow --Etenne (talk) 07:34, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
- I agree that they should be lowercase. Redirects are cheap, though. Leucosticte (talk) 15:52, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
