Subject: Getting Geeklog back into Wikipedia?

Posted on: 23/09/08 04:17am
By: Dirk

So I see that there once was a Geeklog article in Wikipedia (as announced here initially) that has since been deleted.

Anyone else think it would be worth trying to get Geeklog back into Wikipedia?

But before you rush out and start a new article, let's collect our thoughts for a moment.

Looking at the criteria for deletion, we failed the notability requirement, among other things. So a starting point would be to collect books, articles, and other sources referencing to Geeklog. The only remaining mention of Geeklog in Wikipedia is the article about Groklaw, which could also be used as a reference.

Archive.org has an old copy of the article. I have to admit it does read a bit like typical marketing material, so I can understand why it could even be considered to be spamish. A new article should probably try a more neutral tone.

Anyone familiar with the workings of the Wikipedia deletion process who may be able to share some insights?

bye, Dirk

Re: Getting Geeklog back into Wikipedia?

Posted on: 23/09/08 05:55am
By: LWC

Anyone familiar with the workings of the Wikipedia deletion process who may be able to share some insights?

You said it yourself and there's no way around it: don't even make one single line without adding a reference in the end. Any line without a reference is not a good line and anyone has the right to delete it. The English Wikipedia is by definition a summary of reliable sources. Original research is forbidden (it's true that lots of articles ignore this rule, but that's why each of their unreferenced lines - or the articles themselves - can be deleted at any given moment. And there was never a more living proof than Geeklog!).

Note you're totally free to use the same references multiple times, as long as you don't push the envelope by basing the entire article on the same 2-3 references.

I suggest you make an article in your own wiki and only move it to Wikipedia after you have a reference for every line. They won't delete it then. I said "move" and not "copy", because otherwise you'd end up with two different copies, which would be confusing.

For example:

[infobox goes here]

This is the intro line. [1] This is the second line [2]. The third line again uses the first reference. [1]

History
This is the first line of Geeklog's history. [3] This is the second line of Geeklog's history. [2] This is the third line of Geeklog's history. [4]

Re: Getting Geeklog back into Wikipedia?

Posted on: 23/09/08 02:08pm
By: ::Ben

Geeklog is still in the fr.wikipedia.org and I will update informations if we need it.

::Ben

Re: Getting Geeklog back into Wikipedia?

Posted on: 24/09/08 03:09am
By: 1000ideen

First thing GL should be added here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_content_management_systems

And if you compare with Drupal
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drupal or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joomla!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XOOPS

then you see the necessary and probably useful structure of such an article and what not to do.

Re: Getting Geeklog back into Wikipedia?

Posted on: 24/09/08 08:56am
By: LWC

I suggest to read my post instead. Those 3 articles are full of notifications and warnings. XOOPS especially is in the same state Geeklog was (i.e. not even a single reference). All it takes is one editor to ask for deletion. They just happened not to have such an editor.

Re: Getting Geeklog back into Wikipedia?

Posted on: 11/01/10 10:58pm
By: Dan Stoner

I'd like to see Geeklog back in Wikipedia!


Let's start with the logo... it seems that it should be uploaded to the WikiMedia Commons site so it can be used anywhere. Do we know the author / copyright info? As artwork WikiMedia prefers to have copyright info (rather than licensing info such as GPL). If the logo is released under a Creative Commons license it makes things much easier.


I've started looking at the other content management system articles listed here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_content_management_systems


I'd like to try and get Geeklog back in this list and I think we can find enough external references to do it.

Thoughts?

Re: Getting Geeklog back into Wikipedia?

Posted on: 12/01/10 03:51am
By: Dirk

Quote by: Dan+Stoner

Let's start with the logo... it seems that it should be uploaded to the WikiMedia Commons site so it can be used anywhere. Do we know the author / copyright info?


The logo was created by SImon Lord and he handed over the copyright to the Geeklog Team.

I'll look into getting the logo up there with an appropriate license. Thanks for the pointer.


Quote by: Dan+Stoner

I'd like to try and get Geeklog back in this list and I think we can find enough external references to do it.


Don't forget to mention the Geeklog book, written by the geeklog.jp community 8)

bye, Dirk

Re: Getting Geeklog back into Wikipedia?

Posted on: 12/01/10 09:45am
By: Dan Stoner

Quote by: Dirk Don't forget to mention the Geeklog book, written by the geeklog.jp community 8)


It never hurts to be Big in Japan!

Re: Getting Geeklog back into Wikipedia?

Posted on: 12/01/10 03:25pm
By: Dan Stoner

And actually, super cool would be if there are any Japanese speaking folks here (or even some who own the book?) who could give some quotes and citations, that's like real stuff that has been published and is in-print.

Re: Getting Geeklog back into Wikipedia?

Posted on: 12/01/10 04:30pm
By: Dirk

Quote by: Dan+Stoner

And actually, super cool would be if there are any Japanese speaking folks here (or even some who own the book?) who could give some quotes and citations, that's like real stuff that has been published and is in-print.


Try contacting Ivy. She's one of the driving forces behind the book and geeklog.jp

I mean, I have a copy of the book but I can't read a thing Mr. Green But joking aside, it really looks impressive.

bye, Dirk

Re: Getting Geeklog back into Wikipedia?

Posted on: 13/01/10 11:18am
By: Dan Stoner

Quote by: Dirk
Try contacting Ivy. She's one of the driving forces behind the book and geeklog.jp


Great tip! Message sent.

Re: Getting Geeklog back into Wikipedia?

Posted on: 19/01/10 11:34am
By: Laugh

So how goes the quest?

Re: Getting Geeklog back into Wikipedia?

Posted on: 25/01/10 09:16pm
By: Dan Stoner

I received no reply from Ivy (I contacted her by email).

The Geeklog logo does not yet seem to be in the Wikimedia Commons.

Re: Getting Geeklog back into Wikipedia?

Posted on: 29/01/10 03:02pm
By: Dirk

Quote by: Dan+Stoner

The Geeklog logo does not yet seem to be in the Wikimedia Commons.


Mea culpa. It's there now:

https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/wiki/File:Geeklog-logo.png

I just hope I did everything correctly - there's a lot of scary language on the upload form :shock:

bye, Dirk

Re: Getting Geeklog back into Wikipedia?

Posted on: 03/02/10 12:30pm
By: Dan Stoner

Thanks Dirk, it looks great!

Re: Getting Geeklog back into Wikipedia?

Posted on: 22/02/10 11:27pm
By: ivy

Quote by: Dirk
Try contacting Ivy. She's one of the driving forces behind the book and geeklog.jp


Great tip! Message sent.


Dan Stoner,
I’m sorry. I can't found the mail.

logo and character download:
http://www.geeklog.jp/filemgmt/index.php/105

Re: Getting Geeklog back into Wikipedia?

Posted on: 23/02/10 03:10am
By: kobab

http://www.geeklog.jp/article.php/GeeklogGuideBook
This is an article on the Geeklog book published in Japan.

Outline translation fellows.

-----------------------------------------------
"A Guide for Geeklog, free CMS" was published. You will have detailed introduction on Geeklog 1.4.1.

Gijutsu Hyoronsha, a publisher's introductions on web
http://www.gihyo.co.jp/books/978-4-7741-3049-1
http://gihyo.jp/book/pickup/2007/0025
http://gihyo.jp/magazine/SD/serial/2007/2007oss/0012

You can buy at http://www.amazon.co.jp/%EF%BD%A1CMS-Geeklog%EF%BD%B0%EF%BD%A5%EF%BD%AC%EF%BD%A4-Geeklog-Japanese/dp/4774130494/sr=8-1/qid=1171353690/ref=sr_1_1/503-2691033-7888733?ie=UTF8&amp;s=books<br /> and several more web shop.

author/translator: Geeklog Japanese
publisher: Gijutsu Hyoron Sha (ISBN?978-4-7741-3049-1)
published on: March 1set, 2007.
price: JPY2,919 tax included

Used a lot of charts & images for your better understanding.

==sample page images==

total: 320 pages

index
Chapter1:What is Geeklog?
Chapter2:installation guides for several servers
Chapter3:how to manage- customizations you can try soon after installation
Chapter4:how to operate: daily operation and how users attend Geeklog sites
Chapter5:Geeklog customize as the first attempt
Chapter6:developer's documents
Appendix FAQ/words

Geeklog Japanese
A team manages Geeklog Japan official web. Corresponding with Geeklog.net, providing support, download services, seminar, make documetns on Geeklog in order to spread Geeklog Japanese version.

=introduction of Japanese authors/translators=
=introduction of Geeklog.net authors=
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Maybe translation for http://www.gihyo.co.jp/books/978-4-7741-3049-1 would be proper as an summery of the book contents for en.wikipedia. Pls wait for my next post.

Meanwhile, ja.wikipedia has a page for Geeklog. This is a great work by Ivy and others.
http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geeklog

Re: Getting Geeklog back into Wikipedia?

Posted on: 23/02/10 04:15am
By: kobab

translation of http://www.gihyo.co.jp/books/978-4-7741-3049-1
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Introduction

Introduction of how to install, manage and operate Geeklog, an open source CMS enables your web one step better easily. Geeklog is a CMS with blog features. Once you install our standard package, you will have a site with Web2.0, SEO, trackback and ready for multi-language. Mobile site is established automatically as well.

Full of features but its operation is intuitive and small load on servers. Enjoyable for programmers because of its expandability. Many designers & webmasters are interested in as well.



RECOMMENDED to;
-web designer, director & producer
-enterprize, governmental organization, non-profitable organization
-bloggers wishing to make the site better with own domain
-those who plan CMS site with UTF-8
-those who plan mobile site
-those who wish to OPERATE web by themselves
-those who consider multi-language site
-those who operate community site
-web designers & planners with headaches for user support
-security minded people


from author:
Once you install Geeklog and make PC site, mobile site is established and updateboth site simulataniously. Using UTF-8, multi-language site can be made very easy. Because of its blog engine inside, very good for SEO.
This book offers characteristics, install, management, operation, customization & developper's decuments of Geeklog 1.4.1, the latest version. Geeklog was developped for security geeks. Get one of this book and try.
Please help us of open source activities as well.
------------------------------------------------------------


Re: Getting Geeklog back into Wikipedia?

Posted on: 12/03/10 11:10pm
By: Dan Stoner

I have not had a chance to look at this for a while... sorry for the delay.

I put my head into it again but started to get bummed about the prospects as I read more of the wikipedia posting guidelines:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:RS
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:N
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:SPEEDY

BUT THEN.... I found Google book search!

http://books.google.com/books?as_q=geeklog&amp;num=10&amp;btnG=Google+Search&amp;as_epq=&amp;as_oq=&amp;as_eq=&amp;as_brr=0&amp;as_pt=ALLTYPES&amp;lr=&amp;as_vt=&amp;as_auth=&amp;as_pub=&amp;as_sub=&amp;as_drrb_is=q&amp;as_minm_is=0&amp;as_miny_is=&amp;as_maxm_is=0&amp;as_maxy_is=&amp;as_isbn=&amp;as_issn=

Geeklog was mentioned (rightly so!) in a number of published books especially on web content development, blogging, etc.

I'm starting to put an article together. Not sure when I'll have it ready and in wiki format, but I feel much better about "notability" when Geeklog is mentioned side-by-side with Drupal and Wordpress in print books and magazines.

Re: Getting Geeklog back into Wikipedia?

Posted on: 13/03/10 04:52am
By: Dirk

Thanks a lot for your efforts, Dan.

If you think it would help, you could also put your draft on the Geeklog Wiki, e.g. for collaboration or public review.

bye, Dirk

Re: Getting Geeklog back into Wikipedia?

Posted on: 23/03/10 11:40pm
By: Dan Stoner

Quote by: Dirk

Thanks a lot for your efforts, Dan.

If you think it would help, you could also put your draft on the Geeklog Wiki, e.g. for collaboration or public review.

bye, Dirk



Thanks for the offer... I decided not to do that since the internal wiki links would not be valid, etc.

I played with the article in a sandbox for the last few weeks, I think it will pass the previous concerns that caused the article to be deleted.


Re: Getting Geeklog back into Wikipedia?

Posted on: 23/03/10 11:42pm
By: Dan Stoner

Article is live as of the time of this post...


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geeklog

Re: Getting Geeklog back into Wikipedia?

Posted on: 24/03/10 08:58am
By: Anonymous

No need to repeat the link. Anyway, please avoid deletion by respecting the cite web template. This means using the publisher parameter (usually domain.com without www, e.g. publisher=domian.com) and using consensual en wiki dates (yyyy-mm-dd). I also think not even one reference has a date (as opposed to accessdate). Are they really all unknown? Thanks for all the work.

Re: Getting Geeklog back into Wikipedia?

Posted on: 24/03/10 11:06am
By: Dan Stoner

Quote by: Guest

No need to repeat the link. Anyway, please avoid deletion by respecting the cite web template. This means using the publisher parameter (usually domain.com without www, e.g. publisher=domian.com) and using consensual en wiki dates (yyyy-mm-dd). I also think not even one reference has a date (as opposed to accessdate). Are they really all unknown? Thanks for all the work.



Trying to learn how to write the citations and the wiki template syntax was the hardest part... I looked at a lot of other articles to see examples and possibly learned some bad habits and poor style from them.

I completely missed the need for "publisher = domain" so that will be an easy addition.

Also thank you for the feedback on the dates... somewhere I learned that the preferred date format was "dd Month yyyy" but if not the article citations can easily be revised.

Re: Getting Geeklog back into Wikipedia?

Posted on: 24/03/10 11:10am
By: Dan Stoner

Ah.. now I know where I learned "dd Month year"... it's the MLA citation style for dates.

Re: Getting Geeklog back into Wikipedia?

Posted on: 24/03/10 03:14pm
By: Anonymous

I beg of you not to quote an entire post, especially if you're the immediate follower. Big Grin

Also note the weird spaces when closing a template - {{template }}.

Re: Getting Geeklog back into Wikipedia?

Posted on: 24/03/10 04:50pm
By: Dan Stoner

Hello anonymous,

Could you please post pointers to the Wikipedia help pages covering the changes you suggested?

The Citation templates page show examples using the MLA style for dates mentioned above:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_templates

Thanks very much.

Re: Getting Geeklog back into Wikipedia?

Posted on: 24/03/10 07:19pm
By: Anonymous

I was talking directly about http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Cite web - I see now it suggets using all three date options. Sorry for thinking otherwise. I guess I'm just used to seeing yyyy-mm-dd in en articles.

Re: Getting Geeklog back into Wikipedia?

Posted on: 25/03/10 08:32am
By: Dirk

All nitpicking aside: A big Thank You to Dan for writing this article and getting it into Wikipedia.

To "Guest": It seems you put that citation style warning into the article? Now that Dan seems to have addressed the concerns, would you consider taking it out again?

bye, Dirk

Re: Getting Geeklog back into Wikipedia?

Posted on: 25/03/10 09:05am
By: Laugh

Thanks Dan,

We appreciate the work you did!

Re: Getting Geeklog back into Wikipedia?

Posted on: 25/03/10 10:19am
By: Anonymous

I promise to personally undo the warning as soon as publisher= is used.

Re: Getting Geeklog back into Wikipedia?

Posted on: 25/03/10 04:29pm
By: Dan Stoner

Quote by: Dirk A big Thank You to Dan for writing this article and getting it into Wikipedia.


Glad to do it.

Re: Getting Geeklog back into Wikipedia?

Posted on: 25/03/10 04:43pm
By: Dan Stoner

Quote by: Guest

I promise to personally undo the warning as soon as publisher= is used.



See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cite_web

There are only two required parameters for cite_web : title and url.

"publisher" is an optional parameter. In fact, using the domain name for "publisher" goes against the recommendations and examples.

If we were citing nytimes.com, publisher would be "New York Times" not nytimes.com.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cite_web#Examples for additional examples that illustrate this.


I am guessing that the general Geeklog community is not interested in the minutia of Wikipedia citation style. I have created a Talk page for the Geeklog article, it seems appropriate to suggest that those interested in the details of the article should continue discussion at wikipedia.org.

Re: Getting Geeklog back into Wikipedia?

Posted on: 25/03/10 06:27pm
By: Anonymous

Only Title and URL are mandatory but things like publisher, date and accessdate are pretty basic (as opposed to dozens of exotic parameters). If the publisher has its own article, of course you're supposed to use it instead of its domain.

Re: Getting Geeklog back into Wikipedia?

Posted on: 20/07/11 06:52pm
By: ::Ben

I Updated latest release date and version on Wikipedia.org, but the References section need some cleaning...
This section's citation style may be unclear. The references used may be made clearer with a different or consistent style of citation, footnoting, or external linking.


Ben

Geeklog - Forum
https://www.geeklog.net/forum/viewtopic.php?showtopic=84558