Planet Wikimedia

From Meta

Jump to: navigation, search

العربية - Česky - Deutsch - English - Français - Polski - Português - Русский - Српски / Srpski - 中文

DISCLAIMER: The Wikimedia Foundation assumes no responsibility or liability for any posts aggregated on Planet Wikimedia. Blog aggregation is a computer-controlled process.

Request a new language

Planet Wikimedia is a weblog aggregator operated by the Wikimedia Foundation, to bring together on-topic posts about wikis from Wikimedia community members. If you run a blog, and you want to be included, you need to explicitly opt-in (see below).

Contents

[edit] What does it do?

Planet Wikimedia fetches RSS feeds every hour from selected Wikimedians who blog and aggregates the content of on-topic posts at <http://en.planet.wikimedia.org/> (and other language subdomains).

[edit] Who and what can be included?

  • Any blogger who is also an active participant in any Wikimedia project, or in the development of MediaWiki, is qualified to be included in the aggregator.
  • Any post about wikis, Wikimedia projects, or MediaWiki is considered to be on-topic, unless there is consensus among readers to the contrary.

Please complain on the discussion page if you feel that a particular blogger's posts are causing the signal-to-noise ratio to decrease.

[edit] How do I get in?

In order to be included, your RSS feed must either be filtered to on-topic posts (e.g. by tagging all relevant posts with "wiki" and providing a feed to this tag), or your blog must be almost exclusively focused on this topic. The very occasional off-topic post is permitted, but given that Planet Wikimedia is intended to scale to hundreds of blogs, please exercise appropriate self-restraint.

Common blogging engines like Wordpress and Blogger support label-specific feeds. In both cases, these are not obvious. For Wordpress, the feed URL is something like <http://yourwebsite.com/blog/?cat=9&feed=rss2> or <http://yourblog.com/blog/category/wiki/feed>. For Blogger, see this help entry. If you specify the URL of your blog, and make sure to add the category/tag/label "wiki" to your posts, we will help you to try to figure out whether a category-specific feed exists for your blog.

Blogs can be listed under your real name, your user name (which will be prefixed with "User:" in the list of authors), or both, e.g. Alan Smithee (Dogmaster3000). Please indicate your preference; if you indicate none, only the real name (if available) will be used. For group blogs the blog title will be used.

In the spirit of Wikimedia's commitment to free content, we encourage you to consider putting your blog content under a free license. In the spirit of Wikimedia's commitment to an unnecessary inflation of userboxes, you can also add a Planet Userbox to your userpage. ;-)

[edit] Requests for inclusion

To be included in the planet, simply list your blog below, together with a feed URL (preferably to a filtered feed), and your signature. Any developer with access to the Subversion server can add your feed.

Add your feed URL here:

  1. http://wikimetro.wordpress.com/ Please add my blog for Wikimetro, which discusses Wikimetro, a local wiki that is similar to wikipedia but only focuses on collecting local info. Jjb9e 02:44, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
    Does not seem to exist yet. Also, PWM has evolved to be more focused on the Wikimedia family of projects - so I'm not sure that we'd want to include a blog like Wikimetro at this time. (Any other opinions?) --Eloquence 00:29, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
    Seems that http://wikimetroblog.wordpress.com/ was intended. It does seem to be very specifically about the one project. Perhaps they could use tags and make a filtered feed for posts of relevance to wiki folk more generally? --Chriswaterguy 17:02, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  2. http://mywikibiz-com.blogspot.com/ is my blog that focuses on wiki developments in the commercial world, with a smattering of dialogue about recent events on Wikimedia project spaces. -- Thekohser 13:45, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
    1. This seems to be more about promoting Kohs' business, Mywikibiz, than to be actually about Wikimedia projects. This is especially clear when one looks at the about section. JoshuaZ 19:00, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
  3. Please add this feed of my personal blog to the German edition of Planet Wikimedia: http://flominator.ramselehof.de/rss.php?serendipity[tag]=wikipedia Thanks, --Flominator 18:37, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
  4. The Appropedia blog (filtered feed - mainly stuff on general wiki issues, wiki tech and free content). At the moment many of the posts are copied from my own blog, but I've finished the copying, so there won't be any duplication. Thanks! --Chriswaterguy 17:02, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  5. Started as Wikimania blog, we would like to continue with this one (no filter, only one topic ;-)). Authors are Raymond + elya. Could you please add to de.planet, thanks! --Elya 16:00, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
  6. chaps.blog.lemonde.fr. It was a personal blog but I want to limit it around only wikipedia. If you put it on the french version of planet wikipedia. Thanks.--Chaps the idol 21:39, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
  7. I would like my blog to be added chetblong.blogspot.com. It is solely about Wikipedia so therefore it doesn't need to have a separate feed. Thanks in advance! Chet B Long (Now Coffee on en.wiki) (talk) 06:11, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Requests for Removal

  1. I don't think my feed link is set correctly to filter the "Wiki" category. <http://datascreamer.com/?feed=rss2> Thanks, NonvocalScream 23:13, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
    Removed in rev:38202. --Roosa (Talk) 19:54, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
  2. Wikinews Reports http://wikinewsreports.blogspot.com/ - please remove that blog from the planet, since it (mostly) does not contain related to Wikimedia projects but rather just content reproduced from Wikinews. -- 89.13.186.155 18:16, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
    • Planet Wikimedia does feature content from the projects.--Eloquence 18:47, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
      • ...but mostly off topic. Can it be filtered? --Chriswaterguy 01:13, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
  3. Hi, could you remove my main blog feed (Wikipedia blog, http://wikip.blogspot.com ) and add these subfeeds instead: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5]. Cheers, Tlogmer 18:02, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
    • May I ask why? If the entire blog is about WP, there should be no need to break it down further.--Eloquence 18:43, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
  4. Please remove Wise Woman; I've seen only non-WP related posts from there.--Reagle 13:01, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
  5. Please remove general posts from [6], and instead add [7]. It's currently grabbing every post, and the latest one is off-topic. Thanks, Majorly (talk) 22:15, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
  6. Please remove this blog by Durova that attacks with personal malice the reputation and the parenting skills of another Wikimedian. - Thekohser 13:47, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
    Not done, no personal attacks there — VasilievV 2 20:04, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
Something very interesting just happened right here. Cometstyles removed an "attack", but all it was was a QUOTE of text from Durova's attack blog, merely replacing my name with Vasiliev's name. So, individuals are forging a de facto policy that Durova's attack blog shall be promoted here, while my mere comment with nearly the exact same content gets reverted? How is that logically sound, people? -- Thekohser 13:27, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
You should probably read the BIG disclaimer notice on top ;) ..--Cometstyles 13:36, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
Okay, that is duly noted. I look forward to my blog being aggregated similarly to the Durova attack blog, and all will be happy. - Thekohser 13:53, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
Note that Durova kindly removed that particular blog post that was offensive to me, and I have likewise removed a post of mine that was offensive to her. Wow. Cooperation and consideration. Imagine that! -- Thekohser 19:08, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
  • Please remove Wikizine from the german-language Planet Wikimedia because it's only in english. For english text we don't need it in german... Marcus Cyron 21:40, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
  • I think the community should reconsider the appropriateness of blog.shankbone.org. He's now written three posts in the past month that fixate on me, and the most recent one contains links and references to an Encylopedia Dramatica page that is intended to humiliate not only me, but also my wife, and my 4-year-old daughter. Shankbone (in an earlier post) proudly states that he is a financial supporter of the ED site. What is going on in our community, that this sort of attack platform is not only condoned, but re-published on charitibly-funded servers? -- Thekohser 19:07, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
  • I have had a chance to read the post referenced here. I do not believe this type of posting is appropriate for the readership and does not seem to have any actual bearing on our local projects. I'm not interested in seeing on the aggregation feed. I certainly don't think the we should include a blog here for syndication that includes extortion such as this quote taken from the comments by Shankbone...

"...I will wait for you to clarify your inaccurate post and charges about my writing, or I will release the whole discussion. "

I will at this time second the removal request. NonvocalScream 03:22, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Shankblog removal discussion break one

Please note that the only reason the ED article in question is mentioned on the blog is because Greg, the nominator here, brought it up and falsely accused David, the blog owner, of having written it. Is David not entitled to defend himself, on his own blog, against a baseless accusation? This particular blog post represents an unseemly argument between you two; it is by no means representative of the blog's content, which is almost entirely about Wikimedia-related work. Disclosure: I've worked with David on his blog. -Peteforsyth 23:24, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
They are entitled to defend on blogspace. However, the example post I reviewed was horrible and not something I want to read on the feed. If I see Greg's blog spew the same I'll be here again, requesting removal as well. I don't like to see infighting on the WMF related blogs. NonvocalScream 00:30, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
Some of the IP comments are from my stalker, who has issued death threats. Please pay attention to established editors - the Wikimedia Foundation is involved, as well as the FBI. So, take the IP unsigned posts with a grain of salt - there are mitigating circumstances, and that User is banned on Wikipedia (they will now deny it is them)
Most telling is that not one person has given an example of anything false or wrong. It all boils down to w:WP:IDONTLIKEIT. Keep in mind, Greg Kohs never once disputes anything I wrote. The entire diatribe he wrote is is sadly missing the integral component that any intelligent Wikipedia editor (most of us are) would spot: "Burn Shankbone because he wrote about what I factually did, and corrected my baseless accusation against him." Unlike Greg's post which are simply innuendo that is completely false, I actually blogged about the facts of Greg's behavior, with diffs. Steve Walling thanked me for sorting out a muddled subject. If Greg is humiliated by his behavior, the problem is certainly not examining it. Perhaps Greg should, instead of fighting with no argument, stop acting in a way that hurts his reputation and makes him newsworthy. There are man sources, and a Wikipedia article about him. Not notability is fair game for examination - afterall, he ran for the Board of Trustees. I'm open to non-Wikipedia Review editors sharing their insights. Over at Meta, he is arguing against my blog - but raises no argument that says anything I wrote is untrue. Isn't that...WP:CENSOR?
Lastly, we need content on the Planet. It is too heavy with programming and musings (both good), but my blog shows what any of us can achieve if we set our mind to it. I'm a paralegal with no journalism credentials. If you look at the totality of my blog, it inspires the rest of us to try it ourselves. Could you imagine a David Shankbone in L.A., Chicago, Paris, London and Tokyo?!?! We'll get those - my blog is a step to show what we can all achieve, to inspire replication. Why take that away just because Greg Kohs is humiliated by his own behavior, and wants nobody to report on it factually, from public record? If he is humiliated, maybe he should stop pulling the stunts I factually reported on. I was the first citizen journalist to interview a major sitting head of state. I know my ethics. David Shankbone 03:52, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
Ok. I'll withdraw my request at this time for removal. I do ask that in the future, please be more careful about the content in the way that it remains interesting to the readership. WMF - or local project related. NonvocalScream 04:11, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
I will heed your advice, NonVocal, and Pete Forsyth is my level-headed webmaster, so both of us are open to criticism. It's just that here, I think some of my links were problematic (but only provided b/c Kohs lodged a baseless accusation against me), but I also think the higher road is the way - just as you advised. I will still write about anything notably that happens on Wikipedia, including Greg Kohs, but it will continue to be factual but I will avoid links that might raise the ire of some editors (i.e. Encyclopedia Dramatica, unless the post is about them specifically.

Your concerns were valid, but please assist me in addressing your concerns by at least writing to me on my talk page. Thanks - btw, I'm a fan of some of your work. --David Shankbone 04:33, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
Yes, in the future I will post to your talk or email you directly. I can do that. And thank you - I'm actually honored that you've read some of mine. I hope that in the future my writings will get to the caliber and detail of yours :). Best, NonvocalScream 04:40, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
My dear, you are already there! Your challenge is cohesive content. That was my biggest challenge. But your prose and mechanics are done. It's only deciding on focused content-what do you care about enough to write about every day--that will make your blog a success. At two months, I already have 14,000 article hits a week. You're on the cusp, my friend. Do you know what helped me to focus? Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, Wikinews reports news, and Commons has images - if you simply refract all of your observations though a Wiki-prism, you can write about anything! Anything! --David Shankbone 05:13, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
Nonvocal, I couldn't agree with you more -- I'd rather not be having this discussion.
Not sure how that particular quote is so offensive. You can pick one item out of a string of accusations, threats, and other childish behavior, but I'm not sure that really proves anything. Plus, what you quote is from the comment thread...thus, not republished in the feed.
For what it's worth, the link mentioned in the nomination has been removed from the original post. -Peteforsyth 00:45, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Shankblog violations of licenses, personality rights, and common decency

This conversation makes me sick. On August 1st, Shankbone wrote in his blog that he just made a donation of $50 to the Encyclopedia Dramatica. One of the keywords in this post is "Paul Wehage", and the name "Greg Kohs" is also mentioned in the body. Shortly after that, Shankbone wrote specifically about me on his blog on August 19th. He appropriated a GFDL-licensed photo of me, without giving proper accreditation required by the terms of the license, nor did he contact me for permission to use the photo. I also have personality rights, and I completely object to his use of my photo and my name in any of his disparaging writings (where I have been called "obsessed", and "angry", and "silly"). This is a reporter? Then, the very next day (August 20th), a highly offensive article about me appears on Encyclopedia Dramatica. I'm supposed to assume that this is a strange coincidence! Later that same day, another Shankbone blog post appears, completely devoted to the subject of... you guessed it, ME! Then on September 3rd, Shankbone writes another blog post that focuses on me, but then goes on and on about Paul Wehage -- someone whose interaction with Encyclopedia Dramatica Shankbone has complained about extensively.
Seriously, how much of this am I supposed to swallow? I can only digest so much baloney, you know.
As for Shankbone thinking that my not refuting any of the "facts" in his horrendous and offensive blog is somehow leeway for him to break licenses, violate my personality rights, and simply defame me as much as he wants... pure lunacy. If you want some refutations, here you go:
  1. I wasn't banned from Wikipedia for paid editing, I was very briefly blocked for that;
  2. I never phrased any implication that Scarian wrote the ED piece; and Shankbone speculating that Paul Wehage (my kind acquaintance) actually wrote the ED article is just shameful on top of wrong;
  3. It is not true for Shankbone to say "you and I have not been involved in any altercations", being that I was vocally displeased with his portrayal of my relationship with Durova as "serial harassment" (which Durova also objected to), and Shankbone was displeased with some things I said of him on Wikipedia Review (which I have redacted);
  4. I have never "challenged the Wikimedia Foundation's status as a charity";
  5. It is untrue to say that I "continually profess to want to return to Wikipedia", in fact, the most recent community discussion about whether I should be unbanned (which Shankbone so carefully and impartially documented) came from out of the blue, without any prompting from my corner. In fact, since about February 2007 or so, I have NEVER professed to want to return to Wikipedia.
Let's face it, folks. Shankbone is way, way, WAY out of line with his repeated, vengeful, attack-oriented blog posts about me, which he damn well knows are upsetting to me. EVEN IF HE DIDN'T AUTHOR the ED piece about me (which mocks my 4-year-old daughter's genesis), Shankbone has financially sponsored the hate site and has called attention to and linked to the page in his blog. You figure out if it's a pure coincidence that Shankbone wrote in detail about me the day before and the day of the creation of the ED piece. I'll also add that Pete Forsyth told me he has (or had?) a vendor/customer relationship with Shankbone, so let's get real about the nature of his support of Shankbone, who wouldn't know a "fact" if it slapped him on the ass on Fire Island. -- Thekohser 06:48, 7 September 2008 (UTC)


Greg, you call David's speculation "shameful" and "wrong," but unless I missed something, you have yet to state that your own accusation -- which started this whole mess -- was "shameful" or "wrong." What gives? -Peteforsyth 16:27, 7 September 2008 (UTC) per above point 2
You just don't get it, Pete. You're familiar with the notion of a "timeline", aren't you? This "whole mess" started when Shankbone mischaracterized my interaction with Durova as "serial harassment" on a published piece in the Brooklyn Rail, which both Durova and I complained to him about. Then, he extended the mess by writing a blog piece about me (which included a misappropriated image of myself, violating the licensing terms) the day before an article about me appeared in Encyclopedia Dramatica (a few weeks after Shankbone announced how much he admires -- and financially supports -- ED.com). Are you really this gullible, to say that I started the "whole mess" with David Shankbone, who happens to be your client? You're looking rather silly, if so. -- Thekohser 17:15, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
No, Greg, I'm definitely not saying that you started everything between the two of you. But the present issue has to do with "who wrote" and "who is driving traffic to" the ED article about you -- correct? That issue originated with you drawing attention to the article, and falsely accusing David of writing it. That accusation was reckless and unkind, something you have yet to acknowledge.
By the way, there were over 1200 hits to the blog on August 20. Is it beyond your imagination that one of David's readers wrote the ED piece? -Peteforsyth 17:48, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
There's imagination, and then there's reasonable doubt. Just seems highly coincidental that someone who seems to have access to ED checkuser data, is a donor to ED, mentioned his support of ED, and wrote a blog piece about me a day before (and the day of) the ED piece appeared, and then gleefully linked to the piece, is a bit harder to swallow than this mysterious "David's readers" theory. But, you're welcome to it. Look, when Durova claimed that I had written an entry about her on UrbanDictionary.com (which I hadn't), I actually went to bat for her and tried to determine the identity of the person who did, and contacted UD to see if they would take it down. That's what a decent human being does, Pete. Shankbone used it as (yet another) opportunity to draw more attention to himself and to disparage a victim. -- Thekohser 22:56, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
He has promised to be more careful. I'm inclined to believe him. NonvocalScream 16:25, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
Looks like he'll be more careful with his RSS feeds, but anticipates the creation of a NEW blog that will be more hate-strewn, since it won't be tied directly to the WMF's blogroll. I'm inclined to think you've been manipulated, NVS. -- Thekohser 22:56, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
For what is is worth, it is not that easy to manipulate me. I understand that a new blog may very well be created, David has assured me that the issue for which caused me to request removal from this aggregation will not recur. I find no reason to disbelieve. As for blogs outside the aggregator, I've no more control over that than I have at attempting to control Martin's blog (or any other non syndicated blog for that matter) My only concern here is WMF and its contributers. I can't affect what I can't control. I won't use this forum to exert pressure on blogs not syndicated here. NonvocalScream 00:18, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

[edit] An inquiry about general principles

Without endorsing in particular any of what Thekohser wrote about (I agree with some of it, disagree with some of it, but in any event the details aren't relevant to my point), I will say that I think there is a problem here, but it should be addressed more broadly than just this one dispute.

I feel pretty strongly that Planet Wikimedia should be a positive and uplifting outreach tool, showing in a good light the work of good people. It should be something that we can be proud to show to people who don't know much about Wikimedia, giving them a glimpse into some of the blog conversations about our good work. It should not be a place for "wikidrama". And this whole thing is classic old-school top notch high quality wikidrama. As such, I think - links to ED or not - the post in question is really not appropriate for this venue. We have a strong "no personal attacks" policy on all wikis, and Planet Wikimedia should not only not be a way around that, it should also strive for a higher standard than an AN/I page where difficult things really need to be discussed.

I hope that this post will be removed completely, but even moreso, I hope that we can have a discussion about the purpose and standards of this aggregator.--Jimbo Wales 11:59, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Well, ain't this just wonderful! What about my name, my business name, the names of people close to me which have been splashed all over Wikipedia by this individual, not mention this attack blog which this person "just happened" to link to on his FR:WP page? He's got my real name and lots of other information on his blog and that's still there. I want it gone. Paul Wehage 19:45, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
That sounds like something you may have to take up with that local project. NonvocalScream 20:24, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
Paul Wehage, who spread around rumors that a top Wikimedian is linked to pedophilia, who told Daniel Brandt to reveal the true identity and employer of Newyorkbrad (Somey gave Daniel Brandt Newyorkbrad's I.P.); Paul Wehage, a person who has evaded an ArbCom ban on editing topics via a sockpuppet, w:User:Gretab, that he created right from the get-go. You also wrote a lot about w:User:JzG, and the name you chose, "User:Batshitinsanedufusfromhell" was checkusered over at ED and confirmed to be you. In the article ("the fieryangel") you wrote as "Batshitinsane" you trounced the entire ArbCom that topic-banned you. You have sent out countless e-mails and posted or written conservative blogs on a weekly base linking Jimmy Wales to Boy Scout Spanking art, simply because it was on Wikia's servers. Now you come here making demands? You live in France, and you have self-promoted all over that project (including calling you and Jean-Thierry celebrities of their local 20,000 person hamlet -- you're such an hero!) I'm sure the French Wikipedia knows nothing of your Wikipedia Review boast, "Wikipedia will never, ever get EU funding because of me!" I mean...really! All of this is true, and now here you are asking for these same people to help you. --David Shankbone 20:57, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
Shankbone, could you tell us how you know PW "told Daniel Brandt to reveal the true identity and employer of Newyorkbrad"? If there's some board post or something proving that, it would be nice to provide a link. But, more importantly, how do you have such intimate knowledge of checkuser data from EncyclopediaDramatica.com, and how this was "confirmed" to be PW? So, I am supposed to believe that you had NOTHING to do with the construction of the ED article about me, but you have special access to ED checkuser data? Well, well. Anyway, as I said, even if you didn't have anything to do with the construction of the ED article about me, instead of scorning it, you helped pay for the servers that host it, and you linked to it. I think anyone reading this can begin to see just which side of right and wrong you are standing. Give a guy enough rope, you know? -- Thekohser 22:28, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
Greg, Paul Wehage arguing for the revelation of Newyorkbrad's identity is all over Wikipedia Review from that time period. Then, before I had the honor of being banned, in the discussion that PW is the fieryangel, Jorge recapped prior posts PW made about Newyorkbrad, including 'Give Brand his name and location' and 'He made his bed, he can jolly well lie in it' Greg, you know how to use WR's search engine - if you want links, you will have to do the work yourself.
Has it ever dawned on you that the things you write here are embarrassing for the Wikipedia Review? For instance, you claiming I had "special access to ED checkuser data" - ED doesn't work like Wikipedia - there is no problem with posting the data. (www.encyclopediadramatica.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Drunkenlazybastard&diff=1997563936&oldid=1997563749). Now, you could try to argue that there are multiple Wikipedia-hating ex-pat musicologist spammers who write articles about Musik Fabrik's ArbCom, and whose IP is based in Lagny and assigned to Musik Fabrik's address, and thus say it's not Paul Wehage. But then you'd look kind of dumb, right? So, it will be interesting to watch you dispute that info.
Greg, I don't work on Wikipedia review, although I wrote a few non-Wikipedia related articles about New York, gays and the Republican right (Surprise!) I donated to ED because I think they do a good job at focusing on Absurdism in American culture and right wing politics, not because they taunt Wikipedia editors. Believe it or not, some people vote Republican even though they are for gay rights. Smart people recognize how multi-faceted is life and don't try to raise an w:Appeal to emotion fallacious argument as you consistently do. Wikipedia editors are smart - do you really think they don't see right through your hysterics and theatrics? ED documents more than Wikipedia. I will only take credit for edits made as User:Shankbone on there; however I know some editors on there who are very Wikipedia-focused, and I sometimes tell them about something factual on Wikipedia--like your ridiculous "I will return to do 100 precise edits, more if everyone here apologizes to me" line on w:User talk:Thekohser. What these acquaintances at ED do is run with the absurdism that every post you make is rife with. I'm sorry that it bothers you that your inappropriate behavior gets discussed, but have you ever considered that the root of the problem is you, and not those who factually report on your antics? NPA does not mean, "You don't get to talk about anything I do" it is geared toward unsubstantiated, baseless claims - such as the one you made that I created your ED article.
But here you are, someone who has worked diligently to harm Wikipedia over the last few years as much as you can. You hold grudges, and it hurts you. Did you know there are prominent editors who want to try a pay-for-editing trial program who know they will never get it passed simply because of what an albatross you and your shenanigans are to any attempt? You've taken a situation where you were probably right, and allowed your egotistical hysterics to diminish any valid argument you have. You always focus on the wrong target; in other words, everyone else is the problem but you. Most people see that as a hallmark of a self-indulgent promotion-oriented businessman who think his thoughts should be the standard. Do you not realize you come across that way, with every post? Really?
The best was the scurrilous Paul Wehage joining you in playing court jesters, making bufoonish requests in light of their highly unethical manners of seeking "revenge" against Wikipedia. Greg, you and Jon Awbrey disrupt the project in this misguidedly fruitless drive to make a point of how unreliable is Wikipedia. Then when you come crawling with your "100 precise edits" you act like you're doing us all a favor. You actually turn to your sworn enemies (like Jimmy Wales, who you constantly malign) to help you. When they actually do, it leaves no impression upon you that your rants might be based upon one fleeting moment and its extenuating circumstances. What you, Paul Wehage, Daniel Brandt, Somey, etc. never get is that despite your unethical acts, which there are many, that when you ask for assistance from people you revile, like Jimmy Wales, they try to help you out fairly. You will never sing the praises of Wales, but when you need him, you'll use him and give him no credit. That's Wikipedia Review. It's a site of demonstrably hypocritical haters. Yours and Paul's actions only proof that. I'm now waiting for Amorrow, Daniel Brandt and Somey to show up here to make as nutty and galling demands as you two have made. Just goes to show--you Wikipedia Review haters need us far moar than we need you. On some level, you all really hate that. --David Shankbone 05:45, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
  • Ok, I've created this and comments/discussion you suggest is welcome on the talk page. Anyone can edit the draft also. I'll be adding to the draft later. Once it is done - It can be transcluded. NonvocalScream 16:32, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
  • I agree with Jimbo (and Nonvocal) and I have removed the three "Kohs" posts. 95% of my blog is dedicated to Wikimedia and my work on it. Greg Kohs wants to do and say anything, without having anyone talk about it because his own behavior embarrasses him. I disagree with that silly argument, but I also agree that for posts on the Planet Wikimedia we should be showing the strides all Wikipedians make, and the interesting work they undertake. Showcasing our more embarrassing "hangers on" and their disruption and hysterics is not the right place for the Planet Wikimedia aggregator. I agree. But I plan to start a new blog where I can publish my thoughts on such matters outside the Wikimedia aggregators, and stick to my Wiki contributions on Shankblog; that is a reasonable request. Greg, I'm a writer and I don't like being told what and who I can write about; everything you "dispute" boils down to ignorance (Your credited on the photo by having text embedded in the photo - a common way to give attribution; trust me, if anyone should know, it's me); the non-policy BADSITES (he likes ED! He donated to ED! Get rid of his blog!"; untruths like "I've never asked to come back to Wikipedia (anyone who reads w:User:Thekohser can quickly see that's not true); and an absolute hysterical tone. It's funny that people you continually disparage and make fun of both on and off wiki (Jimmy Wales; Durova, et al.) and from whom you demand apologies, are the same people you crawl to for help when your ego has been bruised by your own theatrics, the same you continue with here. It's another indication of how much Wikipedia Review needs Wikipedians to have any sort of success. So why do you continually disparage these people? Perhaps it will be something to ponder on a new, non-Planet WIkimedia blog. Even Wikipedians have freedom of speech and thought, and communal decisions are only within the context of Wiki-related matters. Greg, if you think censorship is the way to win the hearts and minds of Wikipedians ("HE GAVE MONEY TO ED!") you're deluded. You never seem to go about things smart, as if you never were taught that one attracts more flies with honey than vinegar. --David Shankbone 18:09, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
Let us know when you've attracted anything with whatever it is you're doing. Disgraceful. Watch yourself on this "new" blog you're promising us. I have never blogged about you, and I have redacted comments I've made about you on message boards. If I see you violating my personality rights, you will be duly warned of my displeasure. -- Thekohser 22:32, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
It would be impolite for me not to say "thank you" for removing the three blog posts. Show me some sincerity and not blog about me again, and then you'll have not only my thanks, but my admiration. It's not "censorship", David; it's just good business sense. I'm really not that interesting from a marketing angle. -- Thekohser 22:59, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Recently added

See /Archive for older additions.

  1. Please add this feed of Wikimedia Hong Kong Blog (http://blog.wikimediahk.org/?feed=rss2) -- ※   JéRRy   ┼   雨雨   ※  20:21, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
    Done Added to zh.planet by Shinjiman on July 5th, added to en.planet by me now. Jon Harald Søby 17:42, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
  2. Please change my current blog to http://vmwa.blogspot.com/ and the feed to http://feeds.feedburner.com/remotewiki . Thanks, O (谈 • висчвын) 01:22, 13 July 2008 (GMT)
    Not done, the feed at http://feeds.feedburner.com/remotewiki was empty when I checked it. --Roosa (Talk) 19:37, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
    Because I haven't posted anything yet. --O (谈 • висчвын) 16:00, 28 July 2008 (GMT)
    Now has content. --O (谈 • висчвын) 16:14, 28 July 2008 (GMT)
    Done in rev:38202. --Roosa (Talk) 19:54, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
  3. http://datascreamer.com Wikipedia/Media related posts. Feed url <http://datascreamer.com/?feed=rss2>. I'm not sure how to filter for wordpress, but the filter category is "Wiki" Thanks, NonvocalScream 06:18, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
    Added in rev:38109. --Roosa (Talk) 19:37, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
  4. Please add my personal blog at http://jamesonwiki.blogspot.com/. You can call me by James R. (User:E) and add the feed http://jamesonwiki.blogspot.com/search/label/Wikimedia which is where I will put all Wikimedia-related blog posts. — E talk 09:42, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
    Added in rev:38109. --Roosa (Talk) 19:37, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
  5. http://dendodge.blogspot.com, it's entirely on-topic, I do assure you so, (feed)Dendodge 19:15, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
    Added in rev:38109. --Roosa (Talk) 19:37, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
  6. Please change my current feed (http://giggyisms.blogspot.com/search/label/English%20Wikipedia) to http://giggyisms.blogspot.com/search/label/wiki. Thanks, giggy (:O) 07:31, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
    Done in rev:38109. --Roosa (Talk) 19:37, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
  7. Please add David Shankbone's blog, http://blog.shankbone.org. He uses the "Wikipedia" category (feed), though most of his stuff is relevant to Wikimedia projects. Your call as to whether to include the whole blog or just the filtered feed. Thanks! -Peteforsyth 16:03, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
    Added in rev:38109. --Roosa (Talk) 19:37, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
    I'm told that Giggy requested that this be restricted to the Wikipedia tag. David asked me to sort this out, as I'm a little more familiar with feeds. I believe this is the proper feed to accomplish that: [8] -Peteforsyth 01:59, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  8. http://durova.blogspot.com/ (I hope this is adequate; please ping me if there's any problem). Durova 17:28, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
Request that this blog be removed, at it contains very personal attacks on the reputation and the parenting skills of another Wikimedian. I will also request this above. - Thekohser 13:45, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
  1. http://aartedepilotarumfogao.blogspot.com/ Please remove this from the Portuguese Planet and add it to the English one - I'm switching to writing in English. The whole blog is Wikimedia/Free Culture dedicated. Please list under User:PatríciaR. Thanks,Patrícia msg 21:56, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
  2. http://wikiprojectoregon.wordpress.com This group blog will be the "blog home" of WikiProject Oregon, and will be used to help the wider community understand how Wikipedia works, and how to get involved. Not much content yet, but the first main post is coming shortly, and this will be an active blog! -Peteforsyth 00:54, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
  3. Our New Mind I use the tag "wiki," but most of my content is/will be relevant, so you might not want to include the specific tag. Thanks! -Pete Forsyth 22:12, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
    Added feed for the "wiki" tag.--Eloquence 16:40, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
  4. For my blog (feed) - could you please change the displayed name from Chris Watkins to Chriswaterguy? My real name isn't secret, but I prefer to consistently use my nick. Many thanks. --Chriswaterguy 01:32, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
  5. Please change the links of User:O to blog and feed. Thanks, 哦，是吗？(О кириллицей) 20:44, 20 March 2008 (GMT)
  6. Please add this filtered feed for my blog Pablo Garuda
    Feed:
    http://max.kanat.us/tag-syndicate/?user=chriswaterguy&tag=wikis&tag=wikitech&tag=freecontent
    Thanks! --Chriswaterguy 02:14, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
  7. Please add my recently created blog. I'm not quite exactly sure how to specify a feed URL or filter, I do use labels though... probably 90% of my posts so far have carried either Wikipedia or Wikimedia labels and thus might be of interest.
    Filtered feeds believed to be: http://nonnotablenatterings.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default/-/Wikipedia and http://nonnotablenatterings.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default/-/Wikimedia%20Foundation and http://nonnotablenatterings.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default/-/Commons but I could be wrong!
    You may list this under my real name, Larry Pieniazek or under my username, Lar, or both, as you like, I have no preference. (see my WikiMatrix for real name confirmation. ++Lar: t/c 16:39, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
    Only one feed added - please tag all feeds you want to see in the planet with a single tag, e.g. "Wiki", "Wikimedia". Otherwise the aggregator treats them as separate blogs, which is annoying.--Eloquence 00:30, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
  8. Please add my blog. Feeds;
    http://giggyisms.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default/-/English%20Wikipedia - English Wikipedia
    http://giggyisms.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default/-/Meta-Wiki - Meta
    http://giggyisms.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default/-/Commons - Commons
    Also if you could leave me a note to confirm doing/not doing this, it'd be appreciated. You can put my name as "User:Giggy". Cheers, Giggy\Talk 01:35, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
    Only one feed added - please tag all feeds you want to see in the planet with a single tag, e.g. "Wiki", "Wikimedia". Otherwise the aggregator treats them as separate blogs, which is annoying.--Eloquence 00:30, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
  9. Please add the filtered feed for my new blog and remove the old one[9]
    New: http://blog.ut7.in/feeds/posts/default/-/wikipedia?alt=rss
    Old: http://utcursch.wordpress.com/category/wikipedia/feed/
    Utkarshraj Atmaram 07:02, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
  10. http://anondiss.blogspot.com/ and http://anondiss.blogspot.com/search/label/Wikimedia%20Foundation --Anonymous DissidentTalk 11:26, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
    Alnotka has done this for me. Done --Anonymous DissidentTalk 07:29, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
    Moved to this section from requests section, ready to archive. giggy (:O) 07:53, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Not added

  1. Please add my recently created notebook to the portuguese planet:
    http://www.google.com/notebook/public/05959439175835756100/BDQjbSwoQzfqqucci
    Feed:
    http://www.google.com/notebook/feeds/05959439175835756100/notebooks/BDQjbSwoQzfqqucci
    --Spoladore 14:29, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
    • A Portuguese speaker needs to evaluate this.--Eloquence 18:47, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
      • Already added. LeonardoG 03:36, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
  2. Please, add my blog, El Malak Pharmacy blog, to the Arabic language section العربية. I made a post about specifically about wikipedia titled" do you support free knowledge? هل تدعم مجانية المعرفة urging people to share it and donate to it.
    http://elmalakrx.com/blog/?p=96
    Rss feed: http://elmalakrx.com/blog/?p=96&feed=rss2
    Mamdouh Samy, El Malak Pharmacy Blog, Egypt.
    • An Arabic speaker needs to evaluate this.--Eloquence 18:47, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
  3. Interesting feeds: |NYT Wikipedia NYT Jimmy Wales Ars Technica Wikipedia]
    • Feeds are only added on request of the author.--Eloquence 11:20, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
  4. T. Mills Kelly's edwired. "Wikis" category: http://edwired.org/?cat=14 (I'm not sure how to get the filtered feed for this category; if it can't be done, then better not to add it, as most posts are not wiki-related)--Ragesoss 00:48, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
    • I'm currently only adding blogs with the permission of the bloggers, to avoid copyright issues.--Eloquence 05:50, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
  5. My main feed is at http://evan.prodromou.name/rss , and I've filtered it for wiki-specific tags through Yahoo Pipes, with a feed here: http://pipes.yahoo.com/pipes/pipe.run?_id=psLszYsE3BGPFsL71fC6Jw&_render=rss . Can I add myself? --Evan 16:14, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
    • Rather than having two different conversations about this feed (one in private email for wikiblogplanet between Evan and me, and one here for planet wikimedia), since they're very similar conversations, can we maybe have the conversation here? I very much want Evan's feed on both planets, but do I have to point out that the structure of this feed is a little different from most feeds. Let me take the feed output for "20 Floréal CCXV" as an example, which has 4 sections, that are tagged respectively as:
    • tags: wikitravel wiki montreal amitajune toc
    • tags: rocococamp barcamp barcampmontreal recentchangescamp
    • tags: kanren scheme the reasoned schemer logic prolog
    • tags: domains ib joker godaddy phonojournalist phrygian cap
    So what I would be expecting is the first and second items, but not the third and fourth (I'm here assuming the "barcamp" + "wiki" + "recentchangescamp" + "rocococamp" + "sxsw07" + "mediawiki" tags are the ones that yahoo pipes is filtering on, and those tags, or something very like them, would probably be suitable and on-topic for planet wikimedia). However, looking at the source of the feed, the 4 posts for 20 Floréal CCXV are inside one <item> tag (i.e. it's doing it by day, rather than by item or by section). Looking at the source http://evan.prodromou.name/rss feed, it's all one <item> per day too, so it's not anything that yahoo are doing. If I understand correctly, this means that the third and fourth non-wiki items / sections in the above example would not be filtered out. Maybe that's an issue, and maybe it's not. -- All the best, Nickj 00:56, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
    As is I am reluctant to accept this feed, as it would lead to lots of posts that are off-topic on the main planet. Can this be fixed somehow? I'd love to have the wiki posts.--Eloquence 19:56, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
    It won't lead to lots of posts that are off-topic. Just occasionally I have posts that include both wiki and non-wiki items on the same page. I'll see what I can do to filter the non-wiki sections out. --Evan 15:06, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
  6. Flosse Posse blog about Free, Libre and Open Source Software and Content in Education. Feed at: http://feeds.feedburner.com/FlossePosse --Teemul 14:44, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
    • No wiki category - blogs in the Wikimedia planet are filtered down to posts that are relevant to Wikimedia or wikis in general.--Eloquence 19:56, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Other languages

The Planet at en.planet.wikimedia.org is for English language posts and blogs. To request a planet in your language, please see Planet Wikimedia/New language.

[edit] Alternatives

[edit] English

Open Wiki Blog Planet, run by en:User:Nickj, offers a less filtered feed. It can be edited here.

[edit] Polish

http://adamdziura.9g.pl/wikipedia/planetawiki/

[edit] Chinese / Russian incubator planets

There are several incubator planets, which will be redirected to the Planet Wikimedia sites as and when they come online, so please add feeds following the directions on this page:

[edit] Spanish

[edit] Aggregator not updating

Anyone know how to fix it?--David Shankbone 05:17, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Planet_Wikimedia"
Personal tools