Jussi-Ville Heiskanen cimonav...@gmail.com
wrote in message news:4ac226e2.7010...@gmail.com...
Indeed I fully agree that ensuring that using the extension
on massively edited pages is something that works fine, is
entirely prudent; whereas ensuring perfect functionality
for the full force of
IANAL, but I don't think I need to be to say the The Foundation is not in
legal jeopardy here unless it chooses to be. It's protected by a
four-thousand-mile moat, a war of independence, several layers of legal code
and a US Supreme Court decision. It doesn't have any assets in the UK as
far
We need to think a little bit outside the box, here; this domain should
really be available, and make sense to use, for *all* WMF sites.
http://www.wm.org is only occupied by a websquatter at the moment, AFAICT; I
think a schema like http://wm.org/wiki_code/article_title or
Something tells me that this was put back and forth through a machine
translator...
:-D
--HM
Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com
wrote in message
news:41a006820906150349r26bb0335ve99c0dd42130...@mail.gmail.com...
Hoi,
It would be nice if you rephrase this. I do not have a clue what
Yes, that's definitely true. But our ultimate guiding principle is the
greater good of the project. Anyone can edit should apply to, as you say,
anyone who is prepared to work constructively with the project, regardless
of any disability (we take great pains, for instance, to make pages
bug18898 (https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18898) is relevant,
both in the technical response proposed, which is more appropriate for the
parallel wikitech-l thread, and in that the wiki in question is frwiki. The
external URL linked (http://pacli.appspot.com/posterstats/tick)
The Wikimedia wikis are, ultimately, private websites, owned and operated by
the Foundation. That the software they run happens to allow millions of
users the ability to make changes to said site is ultimately just fortunate
coincidence: the ability to edit Wikimedia wikis is a privilege, not
