Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: [Wikitech-l] Video codecs and mobile
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 08:41, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: Every article on a street should have video of the street, for example. I can't say I find that a particularly exciting prospect. Especially not, as perhaps I wrongly conjure from context given by this discussion, video shot on mobile phones. I'm picturing wonky-cam, shakey footage that someone has taken walking down a less than visually impressive sidewalk. I think I would find Google Street view a lot more useful and engaging as it gives me a means to explore and decide where I'm 'looking'. Bodnotbod ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Editor retention (was Announcement: New editor engagement experiments team!)
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 22:01, En Pine deyntest...@hotmail.com wrote: think that we should move in the opposite direction, permitting and possibly even encouraging people to be social (within reasonable limits) while working collaboratively on our collective project of Wikipedia. I agree. When I was a new editor I got into a friendly chat with an established Wikipedian. We exchanged a few light-hearted pleasantries and it did a lot to make me feel welcome in my new environment. I don't think we should be asking that people keep their talk pages on topic as it were. Indeed I had no idea that we do. Bodnotbod ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: [Wikitech-l] Video codecs and mobile
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 15:41, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: True. But I do think it'd be an improvement on nothing, and will get better with time. Just after posting, my inbox pointed me towards this in a moment of pleasing synchronicity: http://www.guardian.co.uk/mobile/video/kings-cross-streetstories-app-video Bod ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] User talk templates
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 10:02, Fae fae...@gmail.com wrote: It's been discussed on-wiki before and firmly rejected (too lazy to dig it out). In the spirit of co-operation, I shall dig for you: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Perennial_proposals#Use_a_bot_to_welcome_new_users Bod ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] English Wikipedia considering declaring open-season on works from countries lacking US copyright relations
Just thought I'd add this as an addendum to discussion of copyright in foreign parts. In Belgium a rights lobby [1] wants to charge libraries when they read books to children [2]. I guess they see it as akin to playing music in a public place, which here in the UK is charged by the Performing Rights Society [3]. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SABAM [2] http://thenextweb.com/media/2012/03/13/belgian-rightsholders-group-wants-to-charge-libraries-for-reading-books-to-kids/ [3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Performing_Right_Society Bodnotbod ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Announcing Howie Fung as Director of Product Development
On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 04:19, Howie Fung hf...@wikimedia.org wrote: Great question :). I think the best way to answer is by example. Thank you, Howie. Bod. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Announcing Howie Fung as Director of Product Development
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 20:03, Howie Fung hf...@wikimedia.org wrote: If anyone has any questions about the product group (e.g., what to expect, how it's organized, how we work with the community and other groups), please drop me a line. I'm going to do the unforgivable... OK, what can we expect? :O) Bodnotbod ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] English Wikipedia to go dark January 18 in opposition to SOPA/PIPA
On Twitter: Wikipedia #WikipediaBlackout and Imagine A World Without Free Knowledge ...have all been trending for the late morning, early afternoon. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] English Wikipedia to go dark January 18 in opposition to SOPA/PIPA
Oh, damn: regarding the below... I meant to say in the UK. On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 12:58, Bod Notbod bodnot...@gmail.com wrote: On Twitter: Wikipedia #WikipediaBlackout and Imagine A World Without Free Knowledge ...have all been trending for the late morning, early afternoon. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] English Wikipedia to go dark January 18 in opposition to SOPA/PIPA
AND, I also meant to say #FactsWithoutWikipedia is trending in the UK. This user is cataloguing Wikipedia-related tweets of people that seem to lack basic skills in reading/comprehension (not realising it's just for 24 hours for example)... many tweeting RIP Wikipedia!: https://twitter.com/#!/herpderpedia Anyway, sorry, I've made rather a pig's ear of what was meant to be some light coverage of UK Twitter responses to the blackout. I shall post no more on the subject. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Announcement: Fabrice Florin joins Wikimedia
On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 00:29, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote: I’m really happy to announce that Fabrice Florin is joining the Wikimedia Foundation as Product Manager for New Editor Engagement. [...] Please join me in giving him a big welcome to the Wikimedia movement. :-) holds up big WELCOME sign If I say that this sounds like a hugely important role the rest of the office will fold their arms and rightly harumph at me for the implied negation of their value, so I won't say that. But you can't keep up with Wikipedia news without being made constantly aware that gaining new editors is a serious business. I will be fascinated to see what you make of the ideas for volunteer recruitment we've had so far and any innovations you can come up with. Congratulations and welcome to the other recent new hires as well. It would be lovely if each of the new hires could guest post on the Foundation blog and/or write a page for Signpost once they've settled in and let us know what their average day is like and some insight into what they're working on. The staff is now getting to a size where even close followers of Wikimedia are liable to lose track. Some effort to keep the community feeling that they know all the staff would be much appreciated. en.User:Bodnotbod ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Announcement: Fabrice Florin joins Wikimedia
On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 21:26, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemow...@gmail.com wrote: Personal perspectives are perhaps not very suitable for the official blog (but may be), Ah. OK. I confess I'm more of a Signpost reader than of the blog, so I hadn't thought of it having a particular style or code. anyway engineering reports are being published regularly since a while and they're a very good way to know what's going on at least in the technology department, without having to read MiB of text. Yes. To clarify, it's not that I feel a sense of I don't know what they get up to in that office... I'm sure most things I'd be interested to know I could find out with judicious searching. I'm thinking more along the lines of not just putting names to faces but also a greater insight into what their current working day is like and projects of note. Maybe forget the blog and Signpost. If we go here: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Staff_and_contractors We see that some staff don't yet have pictures. I would respect the choice of anyone who didn't want a pic up but they do go a long way in helping someone retain a name in their mind. Also some of the names are wikified but clicking through doesn't take you to anything substantive in some cases. Other names are not wikified at all. Some of the job titles are wikified and clicking takes you through to the job spec, which is great... but not all have that. So any work that could be done to standardise the page somewhat would be most welcome. And I would definitely welcome it if staff were to project a bit of their personality in some kind of statement of their own. It all adds to that sense of the Foundation being approachable folk working to help us volunteers. What I'm calling for, basically, is efforts to retain that feeling that you knew the staff which was easy to achieve when numbers were so small and will naturally lessen as the organisation grows, but a lessening which can be mitigated to some degree. Bodnotbod ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fundraising and misunderstanding?
On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 7:05 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote: Not really. The Foundation has plenty of reserves. I believe the figure is that they have 6 months of operating costs in reserve. Whether you regard that as plenty depends on one's personality I would say. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Is a research banner advertising of the evil sort?
On Fri, Dec 9, 2011 at 2:44 PM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote: I don't see the problem, myself. There's no product, service or commercial interest being advertised. It's for users who are logged in, not all readers. People who choose to participate actually receive money, which can then be donated to the IRC or Wikimedia. Yet other objections are based on privacy concerns (over being redirected to a third party website)... Such concerns are so overblown, I haven't seen the banner and am not taking a position on it but some of your objections to the objections seem rather odd. 1. You say it's for users who are logged in, not all readers. I am not going to take this to mean that you feel advertising McDonalds would be fine if it were a) only to logged in users and/or b) only displayed to some users. But it is possible to read it that way. 2. You say users actually get money out of it and, again, I will not take this as you saying that McDonalds could place ads on Wikipedia if they a) allowed users to click through activating a donation to Wikipedia and/or b) were given a small sum of money if they clicked on it... but, again, you rather leave yourself open to these interpretations. So, if you'd like to fight for the right for the banner to appear, fine. But the way you're positioning yourself on the issue seems rather flakey. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Is a research banner advertising of the evil sort?
On Fri, Dec 9, 2011 at 2:58 PM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote: those who object to this banner have not rationally presented any possible harm that could result. From the opening email on this that you yourself presented you reported the following objections: 1. It looks like spam (harming our reputation) 2. It raises questions due to Jimmy Wales connections to the group (harming our reputation) 3. It looks symptomatic of malware (harming the user experience) 4. The community wasn't consulted (harming community relations with the Foundation) I take no position on any of those (especially as I have not seen the banner) save to say they do not seem irrational arguments as you suggest. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Vital Articles underperforming?
On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 10:16 AM, Delirium delir...@hackish.org wrote: In my experience, experts in a field usually *hate* these general encyclopedia articles, and rarely agree with them. I know that when I look up artificial intelligence (my area) in an encyclopedia, even a specialist one, I'm always prepared to groan. The same holds true for me when watching/reading the news. If I'm being freshly informed I just take it in. But when it's a report/article on something I know intimately I'm often left open-mouthed by the angle they've taken or the vital things they've neglected to mention. The extension of that is to watch/read news and think - for *every* *single* *thing* you see and hear - that someone somewhere is more knowledgeable than the journalist and doing a massive facepalm. However, it is far too cognitively uncomfortable and difficult to process media in that way and it is vital that one reverts to just giving everything they say 98% credence in order to preserve one's sanity. Bodnotbod ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
[Foundation-l] WP being edited by lobbying firm
Hello, Hardly surprising or new, but something we need to be aware of: Wikipedia is being edited by a large lobbying company, Bell Pottinger. It removes negative coverage of its clients: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/caught-on-camera-top-lobbyists-boasting-how-they-influence-the-pm-6272760.html Bodnotbod ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] The News Hole
On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 5:56 PM, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote: There has been some discussion in journalism circles that newspapers, who after all, provide the raw material for many of our topical articles might copy our system of organizing material under a subject heading The Guardian already does this in a way, try clicking on one of the headings here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/list/allnewskeywords The BBC News site also used to put together something akin to our portals for some subjects but perhaps they disappeared in the last redesign since I can't find them now. Bodnotbod ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Ideas for newbie recruitment
On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 12:05 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemow...@gmail.com wrote: I don't remember if we ever asked, in our general surveys, how and when contributors discovered that they /could/ edit. But perhaps after they've edited it's too late becauser they've already fallen in the category I don't remember, I've always known it. I remember how it happened for me. I was just browsing and I clicked on a red link expecting to be taken to a page on the subject. I was presented with the editing interface and was utterly confused. I thought I'd broken the site, that the site had catastrophically failed somehow. I remember one of my early contributions was to somewhere like the Village Pump saying what I'd experienced and what my initial reaction was and positing that maybe other newbies would assume they'd broken the site too. But I think the response was no, I don't think people will believe they broke the site. It didn't really generate much discussion as far as I recall. Bodnotbod ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Ideas for newbie recruitment
On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 11:55 PM, Mateus Nobre mateus.no...@live.co.uk wrote: This hostility is being reflected in the drop at the number of the editors.I agree with the ''automatic-message theory''. None likes automatic messages. In my view, it should be reserved for vandals. Newbies needs a special priority. Something like: ''Hi, thanks for your edition! We hope you become part of our team. If you need anything, just talk to us''. It's not hard to do, is it? It's not hard as in difficult but it would be hard as in laborious and time consuming. I went through a phase of attending to my watchlist and whenever I saw a user-page red-linked and the associated edit was a positive contribution I went ahead and Twinkled them a user page welcome notice. I'd welcome tens of people a day this way. I'm afraid there is little chance of me welcoming tens of users with even a personalised message I had written myself and could simply copy and paste. The task would simply be too dull and repetitive for me. Even with Twinkle it's still boring. If I wanted to bore myself in my free time I'd take up a job that paid. If we wish to welcome the huge amounts of newbie editors with a form of personalisation, I suggest we invest in artificial intelligence. If nothing else the results would probably be hilarious and bring unintentional joy wherever it attempted to help, like those sites devoted to Engrish. I read a quote recently which ran something like enjoyment of one's tools is essential to great work. For the most part I find MediaWiki very pleasant to use and things have definitely moved in the right direction since I joined in 2004. But I was familiar with the concept of mark-up having dabbled with HTML when I began, so I can't really empathise with the average web user who is immediately baffled by what they see when they click 'edit' for that first time. Bodnotbod ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Office Hours
On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 7:15 PM, Oliver Keyes oke...@wikimedia.org wrote: Hey guys Brandon, Howie, Fabrice and I will be holding a second Office Hours session on the new Article Feedback Tool on Thursday 3 November. This will be at 24:00 UTC, which works out at 4pm PST and 11pm GMT. This timing is designed to allow east coast editors, who would be at work during the normal time periods, to attend. I hope to see you all there :). Can you remind us of the channel and the link to the sitey thing? I've forgotten where we go as I haven't done one of these for a while. Freenode something or other, isn't it? Bodnotbod ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fundraising Community Appeal
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 4:10 PM, Ivay Martínez gala...@gmail.com wrote: It's a great idea, I will ask to WM-MX guys to participate. And I support the idea of MZM, we need to do most in social media. I don't know if we have a strategy for content in FB, Twitter, Identi.ca, etc. I know that Twitter was used in the last fundraiser but can't remember any detail other than that a few users (that had identified themselves to the Foundation) all had access to it and were able to send tweets. Bodnotbod ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Stanton Foundation Awards Wikimedia $3.6 Million for Technology Improvements
On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 12:17 AM, Jay Walsh jwa...@wikimedia.org wrote: The purpose of the grant is to fund major investments in the technology infrastructure that supports Wikipedia and its sister projects, Excellent. Does this mean we can now finally have categorised watchlists? It's an idea that people have generally been supportive of when I have mentioned it on wiki but never gets any actual action. I'd program it myself if I could. Put simply, imagine you are interested in both football and politics: you can put articles in your football list or your politics list and when you want to check your watchlist you can choose just to check either the football or the politics one or both. I see people complain that their watchlists are unmanageable every now and again and this would help. Bodnotbod ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Given that we have won, can we turn Italian Wikipedia back on now?
On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 8:43 AM, Jalo jal...@gmail.com wrote: Maybe your countries are more slender If there is one thing that cannot be said of the denizens of the nation where Wikipedia is hosted, it is that they are slender. And we Brits will be similarly rotund by the end of the decade. Bodnotbod ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Three short films about Wikipedia
Hi Lennart, On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 8:09 PM, Lennart Guldbrandsson wikihanni...@gmail.com wrote: Thank you for your input. They are not late at all. I have worked with writing and films for about ten years now, so I do not take your comments personally. The only comment that is new is that I should leave the director's chair to someone else. If you could be more specific about that, I would be grateful. It's a very fair question and I think you've exposed that my comment where I sort of blame it on the director wasn't thought through or was just a bit woolly. You listed a number of things wondering whether I would criticise those and I am pleased to say, no, I didn't think those things were wrong. I suppose I felt it would have been the director who would have made the decision to have in the videos speaking parts that would be rendered in silence. But I guess that may have been a decision a *writer* would have made. So, sorry, I should not have made the director comment. What we were after were not only that people would stand and watch the entire films - it was to make the stand more lively than with only text, or worse, with computer code. Human movement on screens at the back of the stand were very effective at getting people to stop, OK. Yes, I can see how that would work. I'm sure they worked well for that. So please feel free only to take my comments as far as you find them useful and discard anything you feel missed the point. To reiterate, I thought the videos looked very polished and professional. Bodnotbod ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Three short films about Wikipedia
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 11:38 PM, Lennart Guldbrandsson wikihanni...@gmail.com wrote: This year, we have prepared three short films about why the visitors should contribute to Wikipedia (roughly a minute each) that we will show continuously over the four days of the fair. But before we show them for the public, I'd like to show them to you. I'm a bit late replying and, even worse, I'm going to commit a cardinal sin. But here goes. Positives: I thought the videos looked very professional. And I can see that you went to some effort to make the videos make sense without sound, as you have people pointing at things in a very direct manner. Unfortunately, though (and I know it's frowned upon to be critical of others hard work) I still don't think they quite work as non-sound videos. I put myself in the position of the intended audience: someone at a busy fair. I will see on the videos lips moving without sound. I will assume there *should be* sound. Lips are moving = where is the sound? for me. With us on this mailing list you have told us not to expect it, but you surely aren't telling everyone at the fair that there isn't any to be heard. I would merely glance at the screen, see people talking and think oh, no sound and walk away or look elsewhere. Nevertheless, the first two would work on me if I had someone telling me just watch. The third one (with the grandchildren) failed for me. With the first two I could understand what they were trying to convey to a large degree. The third one I found totally obscure. Again, I know what was intended because you told us and the sign at the end seals the deal, but with the third one I didn't think the images really added anything to the end message. Again, sorry to be largely negative about them. They look professional in image quality and there's no hammy performances or stuff to make you go ugh! and I would certainly be glad to see you make more films... although I might suggest someone else had directorial control... With best intentions, Bodnotbod ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] PG rating
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 2:44 AM, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote: I remember once at the local college library, Adams State, in Alamosa, that they had Girl on a Swing in the children's collection. At my secondary school library (er, I think that's 'high school' for the US equivalent) we were given a tour of the library in the first year. We were given some time to look around and a fellow pupil told me that the teacher had a book that showed photos of violent deaths. I went mad as that fellow pupil later described it: I immediately dashed over to see this book the teacher was holding. I had a very morbid curiosity about such things. I learned that this book was kept in a special locked room and only brought out on request (not that the request was always granted). I'm surprised now that I didn't take more interest in the locked room and make it a mission to see all the books kept in there. Which brings me to the thought that I'm sure that if we tag images deemed to be offensive there'll be a constituency of kids that immediately gravitate towards seeing as many of those images as possible, either because we've made it easier to do so or because someone outside of Wikipedia writes a list hosted off-site for all to see. I'm not saying that's a reason to not have a filter. Just that I see it having the above effect. Bod ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] [Wikinews-l] The systematic and codified bias against non-Western articles on Wikinews
On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 10:54 AM, Thomas Morton Agreed - this is not a good WP is unsuited to news. See item #3 in this Signpost re. death of Osama bin Laden. We nailed it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2011-05-09/News_and_notes Wikipedia seems to get a lot of hits when it keeps up with the news. I think it reflects well on the project and has a bit of a wow! factor. It also gets us press coverage. So I'm all for news in Wikipedia. en.User:Bodnotbod ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] [Wikinews-l] The systematic and codified bias against non-Western articles on Wikinews
On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 1:22 PM, Thomas Morton Wikipedia seems to get a lot of hits when it keeps up with the news. I think it reflects well on the project and has a bit of a wow! factor. It also gets us press coverage. So I'm all for news in Wikipedia. It's not *news* though - it's supposed to be a historical record. There is a lot more content that a news article could/should cover (with a different tense style for starters). We consolidate news into historical record; and people find that useful. The old canard, but quite a lovely one I feel, is that journalism is the first draft of history. Wikipedia is sometimes that. Does anyone want to argue for a policy that says Wikipedia does not record events until they are x days/months old? I'm sure there are hundreds of examples of edits made about current events that are regrettable and I'm sure BLPs are often plastered with something that happened yesterday out of all proportion to that person's life taken in toto. But I think we're capable of dealing with that. If the lifecycle of an article that involves current news is: Stable article - [news event happens] - article chaos - heavily edited/recentist - calms down but still recentist - stable and due weight accorded to event. I think that's fine. In fact I think the chaos is what gets people fired up and drives them to make something really good. Bodnotbod ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] The systematic and codified bias against non-Western articles on Wikinews
On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 1:28 PM, Nikola Smolenski smole...@eunet.rs wrote: I'm proud of Wikinews. We're so damn good at teaching how to write, a university journalism professor is assigning us to his students as homework. This is being done on Wikipedia regularly without any extra bureaucratic overhead. I don't know enough about Wikinews to start drawing comparisons between Wikipedia and Wikinews as projects. But if comparisons are going to be drawn, can they be in the spirit of here's lessons that can be learned, one from the other rather than saying we're better than you? So, for example, with the above comment, perhaps it would be helpful to say how Wikipedia has achieved student/teacher participation without bureaucracy. As I understand it the WMF and Wikipedia volunteers have spent time and resources in grooming teachers and institutions that are amenable to introducing Wikipedia as part of assignments. Wikinews has less (fewer?) resources for that sort of outreach. Also Wikipedia has a far broader potential reach to classrooms since it covers all topics, whereas Wikinews will appeal specifically to journalism classes (perhaps others, but the point will still stand). Bodnotbod ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] [Wikinews-l] The systematic and codified bias against non-Western articles on Wikinews
On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 1:41 PM, Thomas Morton Does anyone want to argue for a policy that says Wikipedia does not record events until they are x days/months old? Yes, this would solve a large number of problems (not least resolving the historical significance issue). I think we'd lose something valuable. As I say, we often get positive news coverage for our articles on recent events. Osama was one, the death of Michael Jackson was one, I think we got good reviews for the New Orleans hurricane too. Even then; during this period they are not good news, they are a quickly changing record - often inaccurate and usually poorly written. WN is better set up to cope with this process. Well, I haven't done any type of survey of our articles that fall into the area we're discussing, so I'll defer to you on your points. It wouldn't surprise me if it were the case that the articles are poor, that seems quite likely to me. Nevertheless I think it's like Samuel Johnson's comment, to misquote: Sir, an encyclopedia reporting on news events is like a dog’s walking on his hind legs. It is not done well; but you are surprised to find it done at all. I find news events covered in Wikipedia exciting. And it marks us out from the competition. Just out of interest, and I assure you I don't ask this as a way of trying to trip you up - I genuinely ask out of curiosity: let's say a celebrity dies of old age (and that there's not a great deal of interesting things to say about the death), would you apply the no news for x days/months rule to an edit to their dates? I'm presuming not. The question raises a thought for me, though. I think if we decide that we are not going to capture things because they are not far enough in the past, we may not capture them at all. People are invigorated by things that have just happened. If we say no, you must wait three months I'm sure that person isn't going to place a red cross on their calendar and come back to record it. It will simply not get written, I would suggest. Perhaps it will take a decade before the ultimate article on the Iraq War is written. But I'm glad we have *something* there now. Bodnotbod ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Personal Image Filter results announced
On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 2:46 PM, Thomas Morton morton.tho...@googlemail.com wrote: But another example; clowns. Some people are terrified of clowns, even their images. You wouldn't describe images of clowns as potentially objectionable but it would be great for Coulrophobes to go oh hey Wikipedia, I don't like clowns so can you hide pics of them for me please? Thanks. I have a phobia. I would like to overcome it. All my reading suggests that what I need to do is expose myself to the thing I fear, more and more, in incremental steps. So, if Wikipedia is to be a good citizen in the online world what we should actually do for someone afeared of clowns is to make sure that they see a picture of a clown once every, say, ten articles or so *no matter what the article is about*. This should be ratcheted up gradually so that at some point all the user sees is a big picture of Ronald Macdonald whenever they visit Wikipedia. Once the user reports that they are cured we can return their service back to normal and they can then educate themselves, do their homework whatever, without trepidation. Bodnotbod ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Personal Image Filter results announced
On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 4:03 PM, Thomas Morton morton.tho...@googlemail.com wrote: As I said; you can't cover every situation. But you can engineer around the basic hierarchy - and leave the rest to a button saying add this image to my filter. I'm in favour of the filter (my argument being I'm not super-excited about having it, but I'm even less keen on parents telling their children they can't use Wikipedia) but I do worry about the implementation. I'm not looking forward to the possibility that every picture is going to be surrounded by filter-cruft. I don't really want pictures of planets, plants, fonts, colours and anything else that's universally inoffensive being accompanied with buttons. I hope there's a more elegant solution but if we're giving the user control of their filter then I wonder how this can be avoided. Boednotbod ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] January 15 retro?
On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 12:14 AM, Lodewijk lodew...@effeietsanders.org wrote: wouldn't it be nice to change the logo of Wikipedia on January 15th back for one day to those old logo's? I think I'd rather a more pedestrian solution of something with a big fat TEN YEARS or 10TH ANNIVERSARY on it. And make it clickable through to a celebration page if clicked on when already on the home page, maybe? Basically, few will know what the old logo represents. I don't even remember what the old ones looked like and I've been around a while. en.User:Bodnotbod ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Report from Day 1 of technical testing
On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 12:27 AM, Andrew Garrett agarr...@wikimedia.org wrote: My congratulations to Philippe, the rest of the community team at the Foundation, and all of the volunteers who have helped get the fundraiser to this stage. Yep, well done to the team, it's a fab start. Looking at the stats, it took over 40 days, in 2007, to raise as much as we have so far this year. I expect there's quite a few Wikipedians who have stuff planned who haven't even begun to do their solo efforts yet; I plan to send individual messages to friends and family and won't start on that til tomorrow. Bodnotbod ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] wikimedia fundraiser
On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 3:17 PM, luke lenny lennybodom...@gmail.com wrote: why can't wikimedia publish advertisements and generate revenue and become self-reliant,self-sustainable , instead of asking for funds from user every year again and again... There's a number of issues. But painting it in broad terms; although advertising might make the projects *financially* stable, it may not make their *content* stable. That's to say, a lot of contributors / volunteers / editors might leave. I'd argue with your terminology, though. You say that advertising would make the Foundation self-reliant and self-sustainable. It wouldn't be though, would it? It would be reliant on advertisers and sustained by advertisers. Bodnotbod ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Announcement: Mike Godwin leaves the Wikimedia Foundation
Very sad to hear of Mike leaving; he's a charismatic lawyer. I used to get a kick out of telling people that we have *the* Godwin on board. I am going to take it for granted that do you have an internet meme and law named after you? will be one of the key questions when recruiting the next legal counsel. - bnb ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] New Wikipedia videos being released this week
On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 4:45 PM, Jay Walsh jwa...@wikimedia.org wrote: This week the Foundation is excited to be releasing four separate videos shot at the recent Wikimania Conference in Gdansk, Poland. The first video 'Username' is now posted on the WM Commons: They're good! Very clean-looking and bright. I think it's a great shame that the Wikipedia logo doesn't appear throughout, though. And I would argue the Wikipedia global URL ought to be onscreen at all times too. I assume there would be no argument if someone wanted to do a remix with those elements added? If someone agrees with my points, has the video editing skills and software I sadly lack and would like to do those versions then I would donate £30 (GBP) to Wikimedia. I'm assuming that I would be able to provide proof of keeping my commitment by linking to the donation log: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Special:ContributionHistory/en User:Bodnotbod ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Has Wikipedia changed since 2005?
On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 8:02 PM, Peter Damian peter.dam...@btinternet.com wrote: Some excellent comments in the last few posts. I agree, it's been an interesting conversation. Now... do we have a call to action? One of the things I note with this mailing list is that we are good at pointing out problems and there's a lot of insight to be gained from reading the threads. I'm a better and more committed Wikipedian for being subscribed. I wonder, though, whether we ought to push ourselves to try and come to resolutions towards the end of threads like these and my favoured way of doing that would be that we try to finish up with I am going to do x, y and z. For the most part I think that the response will be er, I don't intend to do *anything*! And that's entirely reasonable. I imagine many of us have our own goals in place for years to come*. The majority of people have priorities that are different to those expressed in any one thread. It would be strange if every thread that began suddenly caused everyone to shift their focus. So I guess the only reasonable way to institute this is for the person who started the thread to always come back at the end (say when nothing has been added for a week) with a post expressing a course of action. Not only would this give us more of a sense that our conversations are having a meaningful impact on the projects but, in expressing a next step, the original poster might get one or two others on board saying I'll help with that. And that conversation-closing post might just be I've summarised this discussion on [wiki page] with a link. The great thing about conversations on wikis is that they can be discovered and revived in the future. That isn't going to happen on this mailing list, where conversations are ephemeral. Conversations may be *repeated* but that's not the same thing. And an upside, if we place this sort of burden on anyone who starts a thread, might be that starting a thread becomes more of a thought out process; you start one knowing that you will experience some peer pressure to meaningfully conclude it. It would hopefully mean fewer threads and more concrete results. * My preference is for proof-reading / copy editing and for every article I read I identify a further article to be read, and it is not uncommon for one article to show me tens more (via the templates at the bottom) candidates for a read. So, for some time, my work load (or play load, since I enjoy it) has been growing exponentially rather than decreasing. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Has Wikipedia changed since 2005?
On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 10:58 AM, Yann Forget yan...@gmail.com wrote: I agree that the core content of Wikipedia should be educational, not trivia. Well, here's our core content (5 thousand or so out of 3.x million): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Vital_articles/Expanded As it happens I've been proofreading articles of late; under nobody's say-so I've decided to work my through The Time 100: http://205.188.238.181/time/time100/leaders/ I'm only through the first 12. I have to say, I've been delighted by what I've seen. 12 out of 3.x million isn't a much better sample than the two or three this thread has so far been offered. So all we can say at this point is that one user thinks that nothing is better since 2005 whilst another user thinks that what we have in 2010 is delightful. Which brings us back the question: what is the quality of our content? Well this list of the 1,000 most important articles as judged by [waves hand, but I think we'll grant that they think [[Biology]] more important than [[Mr Hankey the Christmas Poo]] ] doesn't give any figures but does show the quality rating for each article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Core_topics_-_1,000 Scanning with my eyes I see a lot of green, where green = B. So there is your answer, probably. Wikipedia's grade is B. What does B mean? Here we are: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:B-criteria Hey, that sounds pretty good! So: In 2010 we can say Wikipedia is pretty good. Unfortunately this still leaves the question: was Wikipedia pretty good in 2005? I find I feel absolutely no compulsion to attempt to answer this. But since it is a question of importance to Peter Damian he will of course present data of comparable complexity to mine after the weekend. Deciding whether to give money to an educational charity that has made 1,000 educational topics available for free which are pretty good is a matter for one's own heart. Of course, the quality of most articles has improved, but I would like to see some serious study about this unbalance [between triv and educational content], and what WMF intends to do to correct this. Correction implies wrongness. There will always be more television programmes, long playing records, popular beat combos and innovative sex toys than there will be Einsteins, paradigm shifting scientific discoveries and philosophical enquiries. These are the degraded times in which we live. I suspect the popularity of Chaucer's Canterbury Tales in his day was rightly castigated for being nothing more than a tawdry narrative of Miller's arses. Society really started to go downhill in the 14th century and absolutely nothing has improved since then. But since we must live with the triv/education imbalance that Chaucer burdened us with, we can at least pray that the twelve year old who religiously edits [[Numb3rs]] (sic) now might be editing [[mathematical modelling]] in a decade's time; after all the second is wikilinked in the first. It's surely not too much to ask that someone clicks his mouse once each either side of puberty? But I agree with Yann... we should remove our article on [[Crazy Frog]]. Isn't it horrifying to think how broad our coverage is? I can't tell you how angry I feel when someone tells me they know of Wikipedia. I'm glad at first, of course, but when they tell me they were searching Google for [[Hanson (band)]] and we were one of the top ten hits, I am repulsed. I am forced to think Bleurgh! We don't want *that* *sort* *of* *person* here! And, no, I am not mollified when they say I found out that one member had a [[pulmonary embolism]], I didn't know what that was, so I clicked. And there someone had spelt 'heart' as 'haert' so I changed it and from that point I got excited about Wikipedia. This sort of story I find eminently vomit-inducing and I generally stalk their contributions waiting for them to do something else objectionable so that I can get the mods to ban them. Unfortunately he hasn't done anything that falls outside the guidelines yet, these last five years, but he will one day and I'll be there. I estimate that about 70% of our content should be jettisoned. That 70% of material does absolutely nothing but pique people's prurient interest in Wikipedia, it brings undesirable people on board that then have the temerity to add sourced contributions to core articles, and I suspect these people then go off and tell other people about Wikipedia. I mean, who needs it? User:Bodnotbod ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Wikimedia mirrors
On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 11:14 AM, Aude aude.w...@gmail.com wrote: Surely there are third parties with such experience and interested in this. [...] Surely google has or should have copy? It would be interesting to know what Google has. I recently began a new article and was stunned to see that Google had indexed, given a high ranking to, and (IIRC) had a cache of the article within the day. I'm not technical, so I speak from ignorance, but I imagine they wouldn't have article histories. The notion that Wikipedia was currently vulnerable to data loss had honestly never occurred to me; I thought that the reference sites that use our content meant that back-ups are ubiquitous. You've all given me the fear. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Cyn Skyberg joins Wikimedia as CTCO!
On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 12:06 PM, Liam Wyatt liamwy...@gmail.com wrote: I've always thought that if for some reason all of the Wikimedia projects suddenly disappeared (and no one had any backups) we would be upset about it for a couple of days but then we would just start again O RLY!? There is no way I am proof-reading that article about an obscure Canadian politician - whose name I have long since forgotten - for FAC again, no matter what you say. It was tedious enough the first time around. As it happens I appear unable to access Wikipedia at the time of writing. We do have back-ups right? ;o) User:Bodnotbod ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Call for a moratorium on all new software developments
On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 1:03 PM, Teofilo teofilow...@gmail.com wrote: (1) [His] theory seeks to show that social agents develop strategies which are adapted to the needs of the social worlds that they inhabit. Strikes me that having a strategy that is adapted to your world is probably quite useful. For example, Wikimedia's strategy strives to increase the number of hits it receives; this seems rather a good idea strategy for the Wikimedia world. It would be, to perhaps understate the position, a less successful strategy in the world of boxing. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Call for a moratorium on all new software developments
On Mon, Sep 6, 2010 at 11:33 AM, Teofilo teofilow...@gmail.com wrote: Conclusion : Because more software means more harm... Your premises don't seem to support quite such a sweeping conclusion. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Why do you contribute to Wikipedia?
On Sat, Aug 28, 2010 at 3:06 PM, Lennart Guldbrandsson wikihanni...@gmail.com wrote: Right now we in the Bookshelf Project are preparing a number of booklets and brochures and you are welcome to participate in the work. We look forward to any comments you may have to any of our deliverables: http://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/Bookshelf_Project#Deliverables [Also cross-posting from Foundation to English Wikipedia list] I'll just add my voice to this. At the moment participation on this project is low. The materials that are developed in Bookshelf will likely be the first time students and professionals see something from us in print form. Now, there is a wonderful person taking a lead role in this project. I am certainly not going to question their wonderfulness. Their wonderfulness is not in doubt, as evidenced by their patient treatment of some of my more snotty moments. However, bless them, I draw the conclusion that their first language is not English. I hope I need hardly press the point that this presents something of a problem when generating readable, professional literature for an English audience (albeit that the intention is to translate the materials later). I will try to mitigate issues arising from this. But there's more material than I can handle. And, in any case, some of the literature is aimed at audiences I know little about (such as marketing professionals). So please do come and investigate the Bookshelf project. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Organization on Wikipedia that deals with content issues.
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 5:30 AM, James Heilman jmh...@gmail.com wrote: Currently I am involved in a dispute regarding the interpretation of the literature regarding Transcendental Meditation (TM) which has been going on for years. There are about 5 editors who admit to being practitioner of TM and only or mainly edit the subject area of TM. They have been using Wikipedia to promote this organization / religion... I've read all the responses to this and it is clear that solutions will be hard to find. This is not a *solution* but merely an expression of what I might do when faced with your situation: 1. Given that what you face is partly a question of uneven numbers (ie more pro TM than against) you might wish to draw in other editors that may not see a RfC. I was going to suggest Wikiproject Pseudoscience, but this might foul [[WP:CANVAS]], so perhaps you could scout Wikiprojects that relate to general healthcare. 2. Given that part of the problem is that your edits are being removed/reverted or otherwise stymied I would content myself, in the interim, by making my case powerfully on the relevant talk pages. They may be able to remove your edits from an article but removing your points from a talk page would be extremely frowned upon and - though you might have to confirm this - actionable; ie if they removed your case from Talk they might receive censure. Actually, I would do '2' before '1' and then link directly to the discussion section at the aforementioned venues once a few views have been expressed. Ideally you will question article claims with great specificity rather than an article as a whole. For example, this conversation... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Transcendental_Meditation#Edit_warring_against_consensus ...isn't going to achieve much. My approach would be: a) Copy the sentence I disapprove of into talk. b) Refute it with as many reliable sources as I can find. c) State my intentions as to what I will do in the light of the sources. d) Leave it entirely alone in talk for a week and see what has happened. 3. Transcendental Meditation, as far as I'm aware, is not a great threat to the global or a national community. Don't let the issue aggravate you and don't lose sight of the super-abundance of stuff in this world aside from TM. Sometimes people can get incredibly *furious* that an article is biased. What may anger you is that people are spending money on what you have reason to believe are false claims. Personally I dislike TM because there are plenty of beneficial meditation resources that are free and I see little attraction in cultish leaders and financial outlay when it comes to sitting quietly with my eyes shut trying and failing to STOP THE NEVER ENDING STREAM OF HORRIBLE THOUGHTS... and breathe... 4. You may take quiet satisfaction that one of the few categories the TM article resides in is 'self-religions' which doesn't have many members but one of which is scientology. I imagine that any of our readers that see that will pause for thought before wiring $$$ to TM bodies. And, actually, reading through the first few paragraphs, the article does already make some pretty stern criticisms of TM. Don't lose sight of that. There will always be people in this world that have a whiff of snake-oil about them. It's unsurprising that some of that comes to Wikipedia. By all means keep fighting the good fight. But don't ever let it spoil even one hour of your day. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
[Foundation-l] How many books are there in the world?
Google has attempted to answer the question of how many books exist in a very interesting blog post. http://booksearch.blogspot.com/2010/08/books-of-world-stand-up-and-be-counted.html Why am I posting this to Foundation-l? Well, one of the things it reveals is the difficulty of answering this question and I hope that it has some relation to Wikimedia projects; in particular, I didn't know that multiple books (entirely unrelated books) have shared ISBNs. So, if nothing else, it might impact... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:ISBN And I also thought that Google's attempt to catologue all books was parallel to our goal of... well, I'm not sure that we ever say we're attempting to catalogue ALL knowledge... but we seem to be making a decent fist of it so far. Nevertheless, I confess that I'm still not sure I should be posting this to Foundation-l... and it strikes me that perhaps the only guidance I can find on what should be posted could perhaps be fleshed out a little more: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l Apologies if this email strikes you as cruft. Still, damn interesting blog post, eh? ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Banner ads in sitenotice
On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 10:43 PM, geni geni...@gmail.com wrote: Job adverts? Really?. Site notice is for critical stuff (fund raising, servers about to explode) even if you play with the notice to only appear ~%10 of the time. Personally I was quite pleased to see it. It can only add to the number of applicants, which I think is a good thing. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
[Foundation-l] I didn't know we're on the BBC!
I've just discovered that the BBC's music site [1] is using our content for their biographies of musicians/bands [2]. This makes me happy. [1] http://www.bbc.co.uk/music/ [2] http://www.bbc.co.uk/music/faqs#why_is_the_bbc_using_wikipedia ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
[Foundation-l] Will Wikipedia be forced to block hot facts?
Interesting blog post here which is really about the future of journalism but has implications for Wikipedia too. The Federal Trade Commission suggests that copyright law could be expanded to limit the right of aggregators to republish reported facts within a specific time period, a change known as a hot news exemption. http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/pda/2010/jul/22/google-ftc-proposals-hurt-journalism ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Boycott in a...@wiki
What definition of neutral are people using when they say the boycott template violates NPOV? I'm struggling with this. Where the WP servers are located, clearly it is acceptable to show pictures of Mohammed both legally and culturally. Amongst (some of, most of?) the speakers of the language wiki it is not. I'm not sure questions of neutrality are the best way to frame this argument. The two viewpoints are in direct contradiction to each other, so can it not be argued that we are not neutral because we are pushing our Western POV which says sure, go ahead and show images of Mohammed? Don't misunderstand; I am hostile to pretty much all religions and would find it mildly amusing that anyone could consider murderous activity because someone published a picture if it were not that people do actually get killed over this nonsense. My argument would be that the language wiki is supported by the WMF and that it would be absurd of the WMF to support a boycott of itself; communicate that to them as a starting point for dialogue. I need convincing that an argument from a neutrality standpoint can work. en.User:Bodnotbod ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Boycott in a...@wiki
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 6:53 PM, Pavlo Shevelo pavlo.shev...@gmail.com wrote: No, that's completely incorrect. Wikipedias are per language, not per country, and no country owns the wiki in its language. I'm completely agree on that and would add (to make it closer to context of Excirial wording): ... nor per country neither per culture, and no culture own no Wikipedia in no language. Er, en:wp, and other languages, are outstandingly owned by the Western democratic cultures of the US and Europe. It's what makes us able to show pictures that those of another culture might be willing to kill someone for. I think that's fine. More than fine, I would go on a march for those rights. Had I been born into a muslim family I would probably think completely differently. I don't see how the fact of my birth in one or the other can make me any more or less neutral. en.User:Bodnotbod ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Boycott in a...@wiki
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 7:21 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: Er, en:wp, and other languages, are outstandingly owned by the Western democratic cultures of the US and Europe. It's what makes us able to show pictures that those of another culture might be willing to kill someone for. They do, however, have extensive usage from people who use them only because English is the current international auxiliary language. This has already done *wonders* to alleviate possible NPOV problems on en:wp. Explain to me how one of these statements is neutral while the other isn't: 1. This is forbidden. 2. This is not forbidden. It seems to me that either both are neutral or both are not neutral. en.User:Bodnotbod ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Boycott in a...@wiki
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 7:24 PM, Andre Engels andreeng...@gmail.com wrote: As to the best of my understanding Each and every single rule on Wikipedia is completely determined by WP:5P (and NPOV is one of them) in sense that no rule may contradict to 5P. May not contradict. That's something far different from being completely determined by it. I disagree, although it depends on your definition of may. My reading of no rule may contradict is that contradiction is unacceptable in which case you are indeed completely determined by it. Apparently accordingly to you and others in this thread, not just a rule to not include Mohammed depiction but any rule in Wikipedia whatsoever that is based on morality would go But this I agree with. Whether something is forbidden or not is a product of time and place. In the UK (where I live) it was once acceptable to burn people alive. In modern Britain that would get you into trouble. If I were to travel back in time I'm not sure I could argue that my position on witches was neutral and therefore they should put down that flaming torch. I think I would have to seek a different form of reasoning. en:User:Bodnotbod coutner NPOV. I disagree with that. -- André Engels, andreeng...@gmail.com ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Boycott in a...@wiki
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 8:11 PM, Andre Engels andreeng...@gmail.com wrote: So, to get back to the original question: Is it or is it not acceptable to you that the community of one Wikipedia decides that certain pictures will not be shown on their wiki? And is it or is it not acceptable that they use the morality of the nationality or other group that most of them belong to in doing so? I think I would accept that some language wikis decide, by consensus, that they will not show illustrations of Mohammed under any circumstances. They should not ask for a boycott of another language, though. They could have a protest page with a list of users who want to sign up to it. Sticking a banner on the main page - and worse; as the only content - I disagree with. Paedophilia is unlawful all around the world; but let's say it were legal in one culture and an associated language wiki hosted pictures of sex acts with minors; I think en:wp would correctly be in uproar. I don't think we would respond by having the issue on our front page in any form and especially not as the single item of content. en.User:Bodnotbod ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Boycott in a...@wiki
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 9:18 PM, Oliver Keyes scire.fac...@gmail.com wrote: Except the problem is that at no point do they mention law; it's entirely personal opinions. The prohibition against illustrating Mohammed in (some?) muslim culture is no more a personal opinion than a decision we would make not to show, for example, certain sexual imagery or images of violence; there's certainly imagery in those realms that wouldn't be illegal to show but the community would agree that we shouldn't. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Boycott in a...@wiki
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 11:02 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: The prohibition against illustrating Mohammed in (some?) muslim culture is no more a personal opinion than a decision we would make not to show, for example, certain sexual imagery or images of violence; there's certainly imagery in those realms that wouldn't be illegal to show but the community would agree that we shouldn't. It turns out this is actually quite historically inaccurate. You're asserting that the prohibition against showing an image of Mohammed can be adequately described as a personal opinion? understand there is a popular online encyclopedia It's very well to get cute. I'll put it down to Friday night festivities. But I'd accept it with more grace if you're able, since you're here, to answer my question earlier. If we are taking this argument on as an NPOV issue; which of these is neutral and which is not: 1. This is forbidden. 2. This is not forbidden. As I say, I think if one is regarded as neutral then so must the other. And if one is regarded as a POV then so must the other. I don't say this to brow beat you. I think it's an interesting and relevant question and I'd be interested to know what people think. . We're all aware that Wikimedia is now a global organisation and we all hope that it continues to expand. I would assume that issues like this one are going to crop up more often in various forms. So, since we are confronted with the Mohammed issue today I think it's well worth thinking how we are to approach these things. My personal view is that a language community should decide on its content provided, of course, that the law is not broken. Others will say that the 5 Pillars must be adhered to in all languages. And I might agree with that, but haven't yet given it much thought. If we, primarily as en:wp people as we are on this list, tell other language cultures what they can and can't do could we not be charged with cultural imperialism? And, if we go that route, are we not going to be expending way too much energy on that? Note; I'm not suggesting that anyone would act in Bad Faith... I'm suggesting that it is the logical result of dictating to language wikis what they should do. It is not a WMF goal, as far as I'm aware, to spread Western - often secular - cultural values. I think we will by accident, and that's great, because I like Western values and have a distaste for much of what happens within the Islamic world. But I don't think it should be an explicit goal. Yet. So, I repeat; treating this as a neutrality issue is fundamentally flawed and anyone who approaches that language wiki with that as their weapon should get pwned. I suggest we figure out a better approach. en.User:Bodnotbod ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Communication
On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 8:04 PM, Mike Godwin mnemo...@gmail.com wrote: I think if you look at what we did with regard to the Gallimard takedowns... Going back to the original issue regarding communication, the appearance of Mike on this thread shows me that this mailing list is one good way to get the Board's attention. If Mike hadn't been able to deal with an issue and he felt it was important he would just walk across to or email someone who is better placed to respond. On that basis I would say there isn't a communication issue. It might be hard for a newbie to know where to go, but in a way that protects the staff from being overwhelmed by the many millions who visit the site and have a query. I actually think it's a good thing to have barriers to communicating with WMF staff. In that way, we the community become sort of receptionists for them; we can either deal with a complaint or question ourselves or, if it so warrants, bump it up here or directly email the WMF. User:Bodnotbod ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Office action
On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 1:08 AM, wjhon...@aol.com wrote: The Right Honourable Mr Godwin: In the world outside this mailing list, the fact that I'm responding to this extent to these criticisms would itself be taken as proof of transparency, not disproof. Well yes, but after the fact. If I'm reading the criticism correctly the point being made is that within the process there might be some room for *including* the community in these actions... Personally I'm in favour of a strong legal lead to protect the community. If there's a debate to be had, I'd rather see action taken and then the discussion had afterwards as to whether we have a strong community feeling for those things to then be replaced. To do it the other way, by community consensus *first*... well, the overwhelming majority are not lawyers and even fewer will be cognisant of the laws pertaining to copyright or other issues that hit Wikipedia. So I trust Mike Godwin to protect us all and *then* be challenged on his actions whilst, in the interim, we lose the content under discussion. User:Bodnotbod ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Communication
On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 12:23 AM, Noein prono...@gmail.com wrote: I've been watching the dialogues between the WMF and this mailing list for a while now and most of the conflicts are the same: bad communication. This is apparently not due to individuals but institutional. I think you're wrong. Try to get any sense out of the upper echelons of your phone company, your gas providers, whoever gives you your electricity. The Wikimedia community is huge. The staff relatively small. It's unthinkable you'd write to ATT and get a response from the CEO. Looked at in that light, the WMF is very transparent. The WMF office would be incapable of turning over every query the wider public has. We're a community and we should be supporting the office folk in their roles. They do not have a call centre and nor should they. However, should you have a question that needs to be looked at by someone high up, my best recommendation is to be a good community member. If you have a rep for doing lots of good work on the projects you will come to the attention of WMF staff and they will communicate with you because they have to come to know and respect you. To illustrate; I worked on the Wikimedia Strategy website for two or three months. During that time I had a few exchanges with Philippe who is now full-time (he was a contractor, I believe, when I was interacting with him)... and I just know that if I have any deep-seated problem, something I think is important *that the community can't answer for* I can go to him. And I can say to him Hey, here's this thing. Who would you recommend I contact on this issue? However, that's on the trust that I won't pester him on any old thing that crosses my mind. It would have to be something big. And for the most part I would go to the community first, and if I felt there were a groundswell of opinion behind me I'd write to someone in the WMF and say hey, look, there's a couple hundred people here taking one side on this issue and I think someone at WMF should take a look. We cannot expect such a tiny staff to be open to all of us. You have to build out from your own opinion/idea, nurture and grow it and if it gains ground then go to the WMF. User:Bodnotbod ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
[Foundation-l] Fora.tv and Britannica to join hands...
I'm afraid I haven't been keeping up with posts to the list so I hope this hasn't already been broadcast. It's plausible to regard Britannica as a competitor to Wikipedia, although I doubt whether many of us actually wish them harm. They've come to an agreement with Fora.tv. I've viewed quite a lot of material on Fora. It's a great site, well worth a search or five. http://www.prweb.com/releases/2010/04/prweb3932324.htm User:Bodnotbod ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Building up the reserves
On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 6:00 PM, Anthony wikim...@inbox.org wrote: Yeah, IIRC it was one of the suggestions of the auditors a few years ago. How much would you say needs to be saved up before WMF is no longer living hand-to-mouth? Very interesting question. Presumably it can be expressed as a percentage of yearly running costs? I would be curious to know of an answer to this. Anybody familiar with other non-profits in this regard? ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] I'm here to request a new Wikimedia project
On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 5:42 PM, Pharos pharosofalexand...@gmail.com wrote: I was just wondering, how would you like to start an almanac, guys? That would be neat, a wiki Our friends at the allied project OpenStreetMap (The Free Wiki World Map) have gone a long way in this direction, and you probably want to check their project out. You've baffled me there. What's the overlap between a map and an almanac? ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Strategy n WMF Staff
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 8:49 AM, Tomasz Ganicz polime...@gmail.com wrote: For my experience - even Cary has sometimes problems to figure our whom to contact in the Office for a specific inquiry - and this is not his fault but just because it is simply not well resolved inside Office, so I guess producing a single how to document could be a good exercise for WMF officers, as it would force them to take a look how contacting with the looks from outsider POV :-) Thanks to everyone for their very useful replies, I'll file the thread away in a handy place for future reference :o) In relation to the above; yes, I'm very conscious that the WMF is still a young organisation and, furthermore, there's a number of new recruits who are no doubt still finding their feet. It would be unfair and undesirable in a number of ways to contact them with proposals at this point. I'm also conscious that the volunteer community is pretty vast and that the staff is very small in comparison, so I appreciate that they don't want to be *too* accessible given that most issues are best addressed by other volunteers. User:Bodnotbod (en:wp) ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Office Hour for Thursday, February 25
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 12:34 AM, Cary Bass c...@wikimedia.org wrote: Hey everyone! On Thursday, February 25, the Office Hour will once again be hosted by Mike Godwin, Legal counsel for the Wikimedia Foundation, who you can read about at http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/User:Mikegodwin Mike Godwin's excellent and should have his own TV show. And I really value the Office Hours idea, it's a great way for the community to interact with the WMF. I'd just like to make the point though, hoping not to come across as too critical, that Mike will have done office hours duty three times recently after today. It would be great if someone else can be persuaded to have a go for next time. I certainly have a few things I would like to ask which Mike would not be best placed to answer. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Office Hour for Thursday, February 25
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 4:22 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote: I was there when Cary asked for someone to do it and Mike was the only volunteer. I suspect the rest of the staff think they are too boring and nobody would want to talk to them. If you suggest a specific person that you would be interested in asking questions of then Cary might stand a chance of getting them to agree to it. Oh, it's a shame if the staff don't feel there's much interest. The ones I've attended don't get many folk in terms of numbers but there always seems to be enough questions to keep an interesting discussion going for an hour. I'd like Tim Starling to do one; I have some questions about the impact of the Strategy process on Mediawiki. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Strategic Planning Office hours
On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 7:38 PM, Philippe Beaudette pbeaude...@wikimedia.org wrote: We're now beginning the process of synthesizing the work that's been done so far. Well... there's some discussion about that... ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
[Foundation-l] Wikipedic OCD
Does anyone else suffer from this problem, whereby you listen to or watch any kind of programme and think I could add that to Wikipedia! For me, there's so many facts I encounter every day that having that thought becomes overwhelming. I just wonder if I'm alone. User:Bodnotbod ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Great news! Google gives Wikimedia USD 2 million
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 2:45 PM, Gregory Kohs thekoh...@gmail.com wrote: Wow, this is big news! Now with Google cooperating with the National Security Agency, everything seems to be lining up for Wikimedia. Can you expand on that please. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Great news! Google gives Wikimedia USD 2 million
Excellent news. I'm a big fan of Google (not saying they won't ever turn evil!) and switching between Google and Wikimedia products/projects accounts for 90% of my time online. It's great to see them both in harmony with each other. The question is, how do we thank the company that has everything? I vote we remove everything from our Google articles regarding privacy concerns for one day and put a banner on the articles saying: Wikimedia Thanks Google with This Slightly More Positive Article Than Usual! And then tomorrow we just revert our own edits. Does anyone have a better idea? ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Great news! Google gives Wikimedia USD 2 million
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 2:51 PM, Anthony wikim...@inbox.org wrote: The prior question is, where did the money come from? I can't seem to figure out what the Google Fund at the Tides Foundation is... It does seem slightly opaque. A small amount of digging suggests that Google gives money to here: http://www.tides.org/index.php ...which then releases it again on Google's say so. Maybe. My only evidence for this is really: http://bit.ly/d5I3PD ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] At school
On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 9:53 PM, Tyler programmer...@comcast.net wrote: Kids at my school are criticizing the heck out of your Foundation and will not trust Wikipedia because anyone can edit it. If anyone can edit, then why do you exist? There could be a billion vandals. When the old ones get banned, there could be new ones. You've had some replies now, Tyler. I'm interested to know whether they have persuaded you or not? The majority of us on this list are pretty devoted to the project but most of us realise there's a vast population we need to convince regarding the value of Wikipedia. Have you tried looking at Wikipedia pages on subjects you're interested in and/or are knowledgeable about? What did you think of the articles? Did you at least value the list of references and external links you found? ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] A poem about wikis
On Sat, Feb 13, 2010 at 3:33 AM, Tyler programmer...@comcast.net wrote: Tiddly, Pop, pop, pop! Tiddly, pop, pop, pop. Wikipedia will never stop! It cranks out new articles, fixes the old. You can make text in Vetalics or bold. With three hundred million or more edits on the whole site, It will turn a guy's face blue, red or white. Now no one on the mailing list has seen Uncyc, Because I am the only one who thinks it's funny, Mike! Nurse, time for Tyler's medication. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] [Announcement] Danese Cooper joins Wikimedia as CTO
She has an important job and lots to do: I ask you all to join me in welcoming and supporting her. Welcome Danese. Impressive CV! ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] 2008/2009 Wikimedia Foundation Annual Report
On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 4:55 PM, Veronique Kessler vkess...@wikimedia.org wrote: Thanks for the comment. The mm signifies millions which is the amount the timeline is representing, $6 million from 125,000 donors globally. If we were to replace it with one m, that would signify only $6 thousand. See also: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_abbreviation_of_million I'm not sure whether to take you seriously given the reference at that link but anyway... How about the fifth bullet point here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:MoS#Large_numbers ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] 2008/2009 Wikimedia Foundation Annual Report
Very impressed with the report, I found it rather inspiring. Is it too late for a proof-reading note? On page 12 headed Gathering Support, attached to the timeline at the bottom, there is a caption saying Annual Giving Campaign surpasses $6mm goal from over 125k donors globally. I guess there should be just one 'm' following the '6'? ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] video presentation on explicit images on WMF projects
On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 3:19 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: As for the link, showing these in greatly enlarged versions, without the context of the articles in which they are used, is setting up a strong bias. We've never engaged in that use of the material, nor would we. If people want to take our material out of our encyclopedic content and turn it into sexually-focused presentations, that is their look-out. Indeed. The video basically comes across as a threat to try to drum up a moral panic against Wikimedia. I don't see it that way at all. The narration was calm and unsensational and a gentle pan across an image can hardly said to be grossly misrepresentative either. As for taking the images out of context of articles; well as they may be viewed on Commons with no context I don't see that as a valid point. Don't misunderstand me, I think our articles on sexual organs should have a photo and Commons is our repository for such. But I was somewhat taken aback by a few of the pics in that video... are we ever going to have an article called gay facial? ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] video presentation on explicit images on WMF projects
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 4:25 PM, Nikola Smolenski smole...@eunet.rs wrote: somewhat taken aback by a few of the pics in that video... are we ever going to have an article called gay facial? Are you saying that you will be surprised if you find out that we have one? Heh, after I pressed 'send' I thought, I'll have a link in my inbox in under 5 minutes. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Sex-related content improvement
Or go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sex_positions , one of the most viewed pages of English Wikipedia. Do you think the images there are of excellent quality? I don't. I think they have a certain innocent charm. They look like pictures drawn by an illiterate who needed a hobby whilst on remand. And why not? People *should* have a hobby. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Boing Boing applauds stats.grok.se!
On Fri, Jan 8, 2010 at 5:57 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: But then, who isn't a contributor since 2004 these days? Is there something special about 2004? That's when I became a volunteer. Is that recognised as the year things reached critical mass? ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Fundraising banners
Congrats to the WMF on raising all the necessary funds. I'm sure plenty was learned for next year's effort. I've always been curious that the fundraiser runs over Christmas. I thought that would be a time when people are watching their pennies. What's the reason for that? Just curious, as obviously it has been a success. Yay! ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] advertising craigslist
On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 6:12 AM, Mark Williamson node...@gmail.com wrote: If we put a quote from Nelson Mandela there, for example, it isn't very likely that he will get any money or website traffic or any quantifiable benefit from our banner. I'm not against the Craig banner but you do raise an interesting point, in that I think we could do better. Who would people's ideal banner person be? I think our aims are noble enough to attract someone truly great. Nelson Mandela would be amazing, wouldn't he? I think we could genuinely aim that high, especially if we can access him via the One Laptop Per Child initiative. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] advertising craigslist
With regard to whether Craigslist is too parochial, I can give some insight into the UK view. Amongst my online friends (young, 20-40 year old, IT literate, affluent consumers) Craigslist is certainly well known. But entirely unused. I haven't heard of a single person using the site from this country. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Whither, video tutorials?
On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 7:39 PM, Lennart Guldbrandsson wikihanni...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks for the information, Lennart. The films were ready by some time in the spring of 2009, I guess, and Wikimedia Sverige showed them to a mildly impressed audience at our AGM. There was no premiere or big news item about it and the whole thing went almost unnoticed. Perhaps the idea was flawed, or the execution, or the process, but either way, the films was not a success by any measure. Oh dear, it sounds like you're a little downhearted by the affair. But I enjoyed them. I guess it's fair to say that I'm a pretty committed Wikipedian, though, and the videos weren't really aimed at me. But this wasn't the whole truth. All in all, if memory serves, there was talk about a further dozen or so further films. The further films was intended to deal with the various other questions that the audience may have: reverts, NPOV, the principles, copyright, and so on. Perhaps this is a project that the Bookshelf will take care of, or maybe this is something that is better done by amateurs on YouTube? There's been some talk on the Strategy wiki and it's clear that some people are quite keen on further video content: http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Tutorials I hope you don't feel crestfallen by the videos. I liked them! ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Whither, video tutorials?
On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 2:39 PM, Bod Notbod bodnot...@gmail.com wrote: I've just remembered seeing these 'making of' vids for video tutorials: http://blog.wikimedia.org/2008/12/18/wikimedia-to-produce-online-video-tutorials/ The post is a year old. And a comment links to a post in this mailing list, also nearly a year old: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2008-December/048225.html Anyone know where I can find the actual videos? Nobody knows where these are then? They surely haven't vanished into thin air? The very fact of the making of shows that some product was being made, so I'm very confused. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Whither, video tutorials?
On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 1:38 PM, Mike.lifeguard mike.lifegu...@gmail.com wrote: Here are two: *http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikipedia_video_tutorial-1-Editing-en.ogv *http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikipedia_video_tutorial-2-Reliability-en.ogv Aha! Thank you very much, Mike. They're very good. But the sound, for me, is *very* out of synch... by quite a number of minutes. Anyone else find that? But thank you for the links. I'm impressed by them aside from the sound issues. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Whither, video tutorials?
On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 1:53 PM, Bod Notbod bodnot...@gmail.com wrote: They're very good. But the sound, for me, is *very* out of synch... by quite a number of minutes. Anyone else find that? Sorry, I meant *seconds*. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
[Foundation-l] Whither, video tutorials?
I've just remembered seeing these 'making of' vids for video tutorials: http://blog.wikimedia.org/2008/12/18/wikimedia-to-produce-online-video-tutorials/ The post is a year old. And a comment links to a post in this mailing list, also nearly a year old: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2008-December/048225.html Anyone know where I can find the actual videos? ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Pedophilia and the Non discrimination policy
On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 11:29 PM, Jake Wartenberg j...@jakewartenberg.com wrote: That is, pedophiles will always be able to edit unless we radically change the nature of the project. What? Radically change Wikipedia because of paedophiles? Change it how? When someone's about to make an edit we have a pop-up that says Are you a paedophile: YES/NO and they can click through? ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Pedophilia and the Non discrimination policy
On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 11:57 PM, David Levy lifeisunf...@gmail.com wrote: but what sort of project are we left with? Let's just have Paedo-Wiki and be done with it. We have wikis for over 200 languages. It would be wrong not to allow paedos to express themselves. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Pedophilia and the Non discrimination policy
On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 12:06 AM, David Levy lifeisunf...@gmail.com wrote: Let's just have Paedo-Wiki and be done with it. We have wikis for over 200 languages. It would be wrong not to allow paedos to express themselves. I recognize your sarcasm, but not your point. Well, I guess I just don't know where this conversation is going. A paedophile might know a lot about the Spanish Civil War and could usefully add stuff. A murderer might know a lot about Pokemon. A rapist might know a lot about physics. It's not like we're going to know the personality involved, so surely we just have to accept that editors come in all shapes and sizes and let them get on with it. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Pedophilia and the Non discrimination policy
On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 12:25 AM, David Levy lifeisunf...@gmail.com wrote: I agree. When users edit the wikis to reflect pro-pedophilia/pro-murder/pro-rape/pro-anything (or anti-anything) agendas, that's when it's appropriate to act (regardless of whether they've provided advance indication that such an issue might arise). I agree. Ages ago I saw someone editing that believed in child abuse. Their argument was that there was a historical basis for it, going back to the Greeks or somesuch. There wasn't much I could do about it because we're all essentially just people on the internet, and he wasn't actually saying he had committed a sex-crime that one could report. I think this issue is something we don't have to worry about too much. People like that will be few and far between; if people start agitating for criminal beliefs I think the community can handle it. They'll be rightly despised in our community as much as they are in real life. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Pedophilia and the Non discrimination policy
On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 1:28 AM, David Levy lifeisunf...@gmail.com wrote: What about users who make no on-wiki mentions of their pedophilia? I can't believe nobody's told a wikipaedophile joke yet. I went to the Edinburgh Festival a few years ago, watched a stand up comedian, and he asked does anyone know this fact? I said yes, I do. He said how come? I said, I spend a lot of time on Wikipedia and the whole audience laughed and the comedian said I thought you were going down a dangerous path there. I have no idea why we're discussing this. There can't be many paedophile editors and the ones that exist should be dealt with by the police. We're a community. Asking whether we should be concerned about paedophiles within our community is like walking into a pub and wondering who abuses children. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Wikipedia is not bureaucracy, said bureaucrat and deleted article
On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 6:06 PM, Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com wrote: Your question is not constructive because new rules of the list include the rule that 30 messages per month per person should be a limit. http://strategy.wikimedia.org No posting limit. Little bureaucracy. Ideas welcomed with open arms. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Wikipedia is not bureaucracy, said bureaucrat and deleted article
On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 11:29 PM, Felipe Ortega glimmer_phoe...@yahoo.es wrote: This is Andrew Dalby's quote, not mine. I would like to hear from Felipe clarification of the claim that 49,000 contributors left Wikipedia. If it is so, then en.wp has around ten times more fluctuation of contributors. (According to statistics. Those figures show we need help. Here's a place you can help: http://strategy.wikimedia.org My particular articles I'd like to see help with: http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Editor_awards_and_rewards http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Social_features Talk anonymously if you like. Talk on the discussion page rather than edit. Join in. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] strategy office hours today
On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 5:07 PM, Eugene Eric Kim ee...@blueoxen.com wrote: Hi everyone, It's that time again. Strategic Planning office hours are today, November 18, from 20:00-21:00 UTC, which is: 12-1pm PST, 3pm-4pm EST. Um, today's the 17th. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] strategy office hours today
On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 5:40 PM, Isabell Long isabell...@gmail.com wrote: Hi everyone, It's that time again. Strategic Planning office hours are today, November 18, from 20:00-21:00 UTC, which is: 12-1pm PST, 3pm-4pm EST. Um, today's the 17th. Maybe they're going on US time? By my calculations, which admittedly are far from infallible, that would make no difference. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Foundation-l open for business, with changes
On Sat, Nov 14, 2009 at 3:20 AM, Ryan Lomonaco wiki.ral...@gmail.com wrote: Second, we're adding a soft post limit that, for the time being, will kick in at 30 posts per month. At that point, we will, at our discretion, place members on moderation for the remainder of the month, and will approve posts only where we feel they are useful and add significantly to the discussion. Good idea. Is the number of posts from any one contributor easy to keep track of? ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Growth vs. maintenance
On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 2:05 AM, David Goodman dgoodma...@gmail.com wrote: We need, thus, the influence of community opinion--expressed opinion, expressed without fear of rejection for not following the established forms. Surely the established forms are quite limited, the wiki and the internet in general being a text-based way of communicating. Are you suggesting people take part in deletion debates through the medium of interpretive dance? Next time I want to warn a vandal I'll make some pottery that voices my displeasure and upload a JPEG to Commons. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Growth vs. maintenance
On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 9:36 PM, Robert Rohde raro...@gmail.com wrote: At the root, I think that Wikipedia is something of a victim of it's own success. We've written the largest encyclopedia in history, become a household name, and created a top web destination. Great job. What now? Are you already on http://strategy.wikimedia.org ? ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
