2009/3/16 Michael Snow wikipe...@verizon.net:
Anthony wrote:
For offline copies, that would likewise be no attribution at all.
Can we please drop the nonsense that a URL is no attribution at all in
an offline context? I've made this point before, but URLs do not
suddenly become devoid of
2009/3/16 Andre Engels andreeng...@gmail.com:
On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 1:59 AM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
Indeed. The claim is meaningless and querulous noise. Printed objects
commonly have a URL on them these days. Listing a source or history
short URL would do the job it's
2009/3/14 Jussi-Ville Heiskanen cimonav...@gmail.com:
The only thing *on* wikimedia websites that does
satisfy that currently is the history of articles; a direct
link into the history is sadly the only option available. I
think it is way cool that people are thinking of innovative
ways of
2009/3/14 geni geni...@gmail.com:
2009/3/14 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com:
Here's an idea: nice URLs for the history. So we don't end up with
stupid things peppered with ? and and = printed on mugs, travel
guides, etc.
If the people producing the mugs want that they are free to produce
2009/3/14 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com:
2009/3/14 geni geni...@gmail.com:
2009/3/14 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com:
Here's an idea: nice URLs for the history. So we don't end up with
stupid things peppered with ? and and = printed on mugs, travel
guides, etc.
If the people producing
[I've changed the subject line.]
2009/3/11 Lars Aronsson l...@aronsson.se:
If the content is free, people don't need to drink from our
watertap. It's the water that's important, not the tap. We could
have a minimal webserver to receive new edits. Serving replication
feeds to a handful of
2009/3/9 Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com:
On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 9:28 PM, geni geni...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/3/9 Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com:
Should we treat such persons systematically or it is better to add
some exceptional rules? Something like to give a mandate to WMF to
solve problems
2009/3/8 Aphaia aph...@gmail.com:
I would like to encourage Simple English Wikipedia fans to blog about
it ... particularly if you are non-English native speakers. The wiki
is just not known. They might know their mother tongue Wikipedia and
English one but not Simplewiki.
I find it
2009/3/6 Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com:
2009/3/6 Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com:
When the English Wikipedia is the only Wikipedia with BLP issues, I
completely agree.
It's the only Wikipedia where BLP issues significantly affect UK
politicians, which are the subject of
2009/3/5 Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com:
It is not that I am not able to look up words in a dictionary.. When an
excess of dificult word is used, the message is lost.
None of these were excessively difficult, and now you know more English words.
- d.
2009/3/5 Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com:
My English is considered to be quite good. I have not learned any new words
and I do not mind to have an occassional word. For me this was excessive and
it stopped my reading and my interest.
You didn't notice your original response was to
2009/3/4 Andrew Gray andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk:
2009/3/2 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com:
(My usual answer: Email info at wikimedia dot org, that's wikimedia
with an M. It'll get funneled to the right place. All other ways of
contacting us end up there anyway. This seems to work a bit.)
Ha
2009/3/4 Andrew Gray andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk:
I did a headcount the other week of all the OTRS simple vandalism and
uncomplicated BLP tickets I handled - ie, all the ones not needing
digging and arguing with people and so on. 80-90% of them would have
been avoided by flagged revisions.
2009/3/4 quiddity pandiculat...@gmail.com:
http://www.onelook.com/?w=encomium a formal expression of praise
http://www.onelook.com/?w=hagiography a biography that idealizes or
idolizes the person (especially a person who is a saint)
http://www.onelook.com/?w=saccharine overly sweet
*cough*
2009/3/4 KillerChihuahua pu...@killerchihuahua.com:
I cannot stress enough how strongly I agree with this assessment. If
NPOV, V, and RS were followed - as they should be by normally
intelligent adults wishing to write good articles - BLP isn't even
needed at all. I support BLP existing,
2009/3/4 Jim Redmond j...@scrubnugget.com:
I'm working on that now. I've half a mind to increase the point size on the
phrase Wikipedia has no editorial board and put it in blink tags; if
people could actually grok that, then much of the rest of that text could
become unnecessary.
I just
2009/3/3 Ting Chen wing.phil...@gmx.de:
yes I think the english and the german wikipedias are two models and
examples that are often used for the other language versions. I remember
the talk from Harel in Taipei about the Hebrew Wikipedia and had the
impression that they orient themselves
2009/3/3 Michael Snow wikipe...@verizon.net:
I've made this observation before, but I think it bears repeating. At
least on the English Wikipedia, a frequent practice is to start a
section called Criticism and controversy or some variation thereof.
This indicates to me an utter failure to
2009/3/3 Sue Gardner sgard...@wikimedia.org:
Can I ask: does anyone reading this thread 1) think raising the notability
threshold is a bad idea, 2) believe defaulting to deletion upon request is a
bad idea, or 3) disagree with the notion that other Wikipedias should shift
closer to the German
2009/3/3 Sue Gardner sgard...@wikimedia.org:
Can I ask: does anyone reading this thread 1) think raising the notability
threshold is a bad idea, 2) believe defaulting to deletion upon request is a
bad idea, or 3) disagree with the notion that other Wikipedias should shift
closer to the German
2009/3/2 Mike Godwin mnemo...@gmail.com:
I'm unclear as to how it seems inconsistent to you. Can you explain what you
think is unreconciled? I assume you recognize that NPOV has been adopted by
the Wikipedia community and is enforced by it (and not by the Foundation).
That statement is
2009/3/3 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com:
2009/3/3 Birgitte SB birgitte...@yahoo.com:
I there is simpler way to solicit these reports this without all the false
positives that might come from a report a problem link. I imagine that
all these people who have issues must click on the Help
2009/3/3 Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com:
A sub-cabal within the board? Now, what colour would *their* helicopters be?
We're a charity. They flap their arms really hard.
- d.
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
2009/3/3 Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net:
With respect to biographies of living persons, unless there is sufficient
reliable published information about a person to flesh out a well
balanced article we shouldn't have one.
The question them becomes reliable. Reliable sources usually print
2009/3/3 Jussi-Ville Heiskanen cimonav...@gmail.com:
Sure, the persons themselves can not be harmed, but our
deep understanding of the forces of history, and what force
personality, heredity, cultural context and up-bringing play
within it, is immeasurably impoverished by getting a view that
2009/3/3 Jussi-Ville Heiskanen cimonav...@gmail.com:
Bear with me. I started with that, because that is something
at the periphery, easily overlooked. I will focus on the meat
of the issue in due time.
Then I ask you to get to the point and stay on it, because this needs
to be a thread
2009/3/3 Matthew Brown mor...@gmail.com:
I see no reason why having an article on someone need include
information not published in reliable sources. If they're well-known
for something in the public eye but details of their life elsewhere
are not prevalent, then that's how our article
2009/3/4 Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net:
How about something a little more helpful?
Uh, I think pointing out obvious problems counts, particularly when
the solution offered is to do the same things that are already
problematic twice as hard.
The hard part is to lead the community to a
2009/3/2 Tomasz Ganicz polime...@gmail.com:
Two recent examples from Polish Wikipedia:
*A sportsmen had anitdoping case around 5 years ago, when he was 18.
There is good source of this information (his own interwiev in sport's
magazine in which he appologises for taking an illegal drug). Now
2009/3/2 Lars Aronsson l...@aronsson.se:
What you could do is to ask Polish journalists how they operate
newspaper websites under this law, and how they (as guardians of
the freedom of the press) would react if the Polish Wikipedia was
censored in this way. Perhaps they should write a
2009/3/2 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com:
I don't say that lightly, but I can't see any other way things could
be. I have a pile of special superpowers on en:wp, but if I were being
legally required to exercise them for reasons other than the good of
the encyclopedia, I'd be fervently hoping
2009/3/2 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org:
What is the current OTRS process? When I contacted them a couple years
ago I was referred to arb com, and didn't hear from them again. I certainly
wasn't satisfied.
Pray tell, what was the actual substance of your dispute?
(Note that this is speaking
2009/3/2 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org:
No. In fact, a member of ArbCom had referred me to OTRS. However, I don't
want to get into the specifics of this on a public mailing list.
As a general rule: if you've been formally penalised on a wiki for
your behaviour thereon, and want that concealed,
2009/3/2 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org:
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 2:16 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
As a general rule: if you've been formally penalised on a wiki for
your behaviour thereon, and want that concealed, then that's really
not in the same class as *anything* this thread
2009/3/2 Chris Down neuro.wikipe...@googlemail.com:
Ipatrol has just came on IRC claiming that he has been told that the WMF is
hiring people to validate articles, and that the foundation is doing it in
secret by using thousands of IPs and academics. He claims that the WMF has
contracted
2009/3/2 Nathan nawr...@gmail.com:
If we're being technical, the helicopters are no longer black. They're
invisible. And they have Illuminati logos written invisibly. If you
translate Wikimedia into Aramaic, write it backwards, translate that into
Latin, remove every other letter and
2009/3/2 Joe Szilagyi szila...@gmail.com:
As an easy start for BLPs to contact us for help, why not have the
global footer of all WMF sites include a prominent and very visible
link to a simple mail form they can use to mail OTRS or the Foundation
for help?
Because no-one reads the footer
2009/3/2 Joe Szilagyi szila...@gmail.com:
Since BLP is so important--and Sue is wrong, not because of the
coverage of Wikimedia over it, which is distantly secondary to the
negative effects of a bad BLP situation on a Wikimedia site--then
let's put a big prominent Report A Problem link on the
2009/3/2 Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com:
I may be missing it due to not speaking Dutch, but it doesn't seem to
be linked to from anywhere... Does it include the details of the
article and revision in the default text? That's a key feature for
what I'm suggesting.
The code:
2009/3/2 Wily D wilydoppelgan...@gmail.com:
I am happy to take over control of articles for $1000/month. I can
suggest a list of ~500 or so. Who should I send the list to? Should
I also forward them my P.O. Box?
Send your money to me: David Gerard c/o Ayn Landers, Wikiality,
Florida. Make
2009/3/2 P. Birken pbir...@gmail.com:
One of my reasons to develop Flagged Revs was an incident with blatant
vandalism in an article about a well known german politician that
persisted for several months until we got an email from his office.
That is plain unacceptable. Flagged revisions work
2009/3/3 Birgitte SB birgitte...@yahoo.com:
I there is simpler way to solicit these reports this without all the false
positives that might come from a report a problem link. I imagine that
all these people who have issues must click on the Help link in the sidebar
while looking contact
http://xkcd.com/547/
- d.
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
2009/2/23 Newyorkbrad (Wikipedia) newyorkb...@gmail.com:
However, one question that I have is whether the dump includes, or should
conclude, all namespaces, or only articles. In the past, there have
allegedly been instances in which database dumps have been utilized for
purposes such as
2009/2/19 Michael Snow wikipe...@verizon.net:
I'm likely going to put the general issue of biographies on the board's
next agenda, for what that's worth. Though as I say, there's no simple
blanket solution, and I don't know if we can promise anything beyond
more discussion and more awareness
2009/2/19 Jimmy Wales jwa...@wikia-inc.com:
I think a deeper point is that there are a lot of very problematic BLP's
on Wikipedia, and this is an ongoing problem that we all have to be very
serious about.
In my anecdotal experience (as a UK phone contact), BLPs are our
biggest public
Why one small project changed from CC-by-nc-sa to CC-by-sa:
http://zak.greant.com/free-culture-vs-fear-culture-vs-fee-culture
- d.
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
2009/2/7 Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com:
2009/2/7 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com:
There is no legal question over the very relicensing itself. You
trying to spread FUD here doesn't count.
There's no question in the US. I'm not convinced by We believe that
licensing updates that do
2009/2/4 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org:
Add in the legal questions over the very relicensing itself, and a reuser
really isn't in any better of a position than they were when things were
GFDL.
There is no legal question over the very relicensing itself. You
trying to spread FUD here doesn't
2009/2/5 Marc Riddell michaeldavi...@comcast.net:
I have been trying for over two years to bring this issue to the serious
attention of the powers that be in the English Wikipedia. My messages are
met either with a there he goes again attitude, or are not acknowledged at
all. Where does one
2009/2/5 George Herbert george.herb...@gmail.com:
Civility, or more properly abusive editors, is not a petty problem. If I
had Jimbo's God-Emperor powers several existing WP users would be walked out
the door and invited to not come back, on the grounds that they are
persistently abusive and
2009/1/31 Peter Jacobi pjacobi...@googlemail.com:
David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
I didn't add (or are supposed to be). Now I'm wondering if I was
thinking of the personality rights tag.
Can you please give an example link to the tag you are talking about?
This is the personality
2009/1/30 Sam Johnston s...@samj.net:
I'm sure it's not the first time this subject has been raised, but now the
French chapter has dragged us into the world of commercial publishing it's
probably worth [re]considering. Perhaps it is enough initially to tag images
lacking releases
2009/1/30 Peter Jacobi pjacobi...@googlemail.com:
David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
At the moment pictures with people in are tagged with a warning that a
reuser may have to consider model release and personality rights, and
Commons guarantees nothing. It's not clear from your message why
2009/1/24 geni geni...@gmail.com:
2009/1/24 Sue Gardner sgard...@wikimedia.org:
I would also say that I am happy we're talking about this, and I hope
the people asking questions are finding the answers reasonably
reassuring :-)
Depends. The wikia is a large user therefor we should work with
2009/1/24 Gregory Kohs thekoh...@gmail.com:
Please, in your rush to judgment about the character of my attacks
here, take some time to actually explore and learn about United States
law. The Foundation could be in serious trouble here, and you're
spending an awful lot of energy railing
2009/1/24 The Cunctator cuncta...@gmail.com:
I'm not sure why we're so stressed out about getting things exactly legally
right, since once edit histories for anything created before 2002 / late
2001 were wiped out, any of those articles don't have an accurate author
list.
If you take out
2009/1/25 Dan Rosenthal swatjes...@gmail.com:
Yeah, agreed. While on-topic for the list, it's off-topic for this
thread. U.S. intelligence agency involvement in the development of
open source products, especially media wiki, however *IS* a topic I am
very much interested in seeing further
2009/1/25 geni geni...@gmail.com:
2009/1/25 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com:
Has anyone actually asked the CIA for MediaWiki extensions and
enhancements? It'd be worth asking.
We don't know much about what they have done but most of their
developments are more likely to be of interest
2009/1/22 Andrew Whitworth wknight8...@gmail.com:
On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 9:58 AM, Anthony wikim...@inbox.org wrote:
As Thomas said, it requires Internet access, which might not be available.
I think it's a bit more than that, though. The credit should be part of the
work itself, not
2009/1/22 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org:
On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 6:20 PM, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote:
The attribution issue is so divisive, however, that I increasingly
wonder whether it wouldn't be sensible to add at least a set of
preferences to the licensing vote to better
2009/1/11 Brian brian.min...@colorado.edu:
Keep in mind regarding my Semantic drum beating that I am not a developer of
Semantic Mediawiki or Semantic Forms. I am just a user, and as Erik put it,
an advocate.
Semantic MediaWiki's syntax is disastrously horrible and intended for
ontology
2009/1/10 Marc Riddell michaeldavi...@comcast.net:
on 1/10/09 6:59 AM, David Gerard at dger...@gmail.com wrote:
I note that I have asked you before if you've actually attempted to
work directly with the community on-wiki, and you demurred:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2009
2009/1/10 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org:
I care to prevent the relicensing *of my content* to CC-BY-SA. Remove my
content, and you won't hear from me on the license issue again (unless you
choose to read my blog or the blog of the non-profit Internet Review
Corporation).
If you licensed it
2009/1/10 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org:
On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 1:47 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/1/10 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org:
I care to prevent the relicensing *of my content* to CC-BY-SA. Remove my
content, and you won't hear from me on the license issue again (unless
2009/1/9 Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com:
But they aren't violating GFDL 1.3, since they aren't using it, so
what was you complaint about?
Being querulous?
- d.
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
2009/1/9 Brian brian.min...@colorado.edu:
I am skeptical of the current development process. That is because it has
led to the current parser, which is not a proper parser at all, and includes
horrifying syntax.
Er, that would be a direct descendant of UseModWiki. That this has
been a
2009/1/8 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org:
No, the requirement for me to inform you of the violation was just
introduced in GFDL 1.3.
Presumably the legally safe thing to do would be to (b) remove all
edits contributed by Anthony to any Wikimedia project, but firstly (a)
ban him in perpetuity from
From another provider of data, information and even knowledge. Thank
you for ibiblio notes to UNC are in order.
- d.
Subject: Happy 2009 from ibiblio
I'm jumping in between Christmas and New Year's to thank you for your
contributions to ibiblio and for your support in
2008/12/25 Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net:
Can you and Kurt come up with a proposal that doesn't abandon our
fabulously useful and marketable air of neutrality?
Yes, good thought, I think we could. After all, it is a sort of cemetery.
I suspect it would turn into a universal
2008/12/25 Ian A. Holton poe...@gmail.com:
I do however believe that such a project is a good idea and also believe
that it being hosted outside of the WMF might even be benefitial and might
even be worth an organisation itself if the scope is extended to cover more
than just the victims of
2008/12/24 Robert Rohde raro...@gmail.com:
So, if not visibility, then what is really going on. In my opinion,
if you want someone to read something, personalizing it is a very good
idea. I think describing it as a personal message and putting a face
to it, provides engagement and gets
2008/12/24 Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com:
Europeana (http://www.europeana.eu/) is working again. I think that it
has a lot of useful (PD) materials.
Looks like it *could* be an interesting project. Any pointers to good
places to start looking?
- d.
2008/12/25 Erik Zachte erikzac...@infodisiac.com:
Hi Brian, Brion once explained to me that the post processing of the dump is
the main bottleneck.
Compressing articles with tens of thousands of revisions is a major resource
drain.
Right now every dump is even compressed twice, into bzip2
2008/12/25 Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net:
If we stood for something, it might serve to invigorate.
You mean, taking a particular political position? I don't see that in
the mission.
- d.
___
foundation-l mailing list
2008/12/25 Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net:
Each of the millions who were starved, imprisoned, tortured, or killed
has a unique story. Each story is more significant and educational than a
Wikipedia article on Hitler or Stalin.
The same applies to the Sep11 wiki. Why was that moved
2008/12/25 Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net:
Oh, but we are, just by what we do. And the mass murders of the twentieth
century would have made short work of us. In fact, in the last regime
controlled by them Wikipedia is blocked.
Controlled by the Soviets, who I understand were the subject
2008/12/25 geni geni...@gmail.com:
2008/12/25 Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net:
Well where will it stop? If we have a project, we should have a memorial
project for all disasters. I echo Mr. Bimmler in his concerns about the
motives behind this proposal.
I think half a dozen might do, one
2008/12/25 Brian brian.min...@colorado.edu:
But at least this would allow Erik, researchers and archivers to get the
dump faster than they can get the compressed version. The number of people
who want this can't be 100, can it? It would need to be metered by an API
I guess.
Maybe we can
2008/12/23 Mathias Schindler mathias.schind...@gmail.com:
On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 11:06 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
Britannica is notoriously antagonistic toward Wikipedia in its
advertising, but Brockhaus for instance isn't anywhere near as
obnoxious (they're not *fans
FYI, the state of local image uploads on en:wp. How's your wiki doing?
-- Forwarded message --
From: Mark Wagner carni...@gmail.com
Date: 2008/12/23
Subject: [WikiEN-l] Image tagging: 33 months later
To: English Wikipedia wikie...@lists.wikimedia.org
Back in March of 2006, I
2008/12/22 Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com:
Then, I wanted to see what is the value of Britannica; without
success. It is a private company (in US sense of that meaning;
public companies in European sense are just companies owned by some
local or state government; and in some specific
2008/12/22 Tomasz Ganicz polime...@gmail.com:
I don't like guys from Wikmedia projects speaking in some sort of
supremacy language. Our goal is to create: a world in which every
single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge. so
if the Britannica or PWN or any other
2008/12/22 Gregory Maxwell gmaxw...@gmail.com:
On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 5:38 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
(A tangential note: I consider NPOV to be our most important
innovation - much more radical than merely letting anyone edit your
encyclopedia. The concept of neutrality has
2008/12/12 Anthony wikim...@inbox.org:
The IWF said that contextual issues are important in the decision of whether
or not they will keep the webpage on their list. They specifically
reiterated that they still consider the image to be potentially illegal.
The head of the IWF is potentially
2008/12/11 Cary Bass c...@wikimedia.org:
And sometimes even pluralized, like I was searching through your
internets
intarwebs, get it right!
- d.
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
2008/12/8 Jay A. Walsh [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Press_releases/Censorship_of_WP_in_the_UK_Dec_2008
http://www.boingboing.net/2008/12/07/how-the-great-firewa.html
How the Great Firewall of Britain works
- d.
___
2008/12/8 Rand Montoya [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
1) A quick update of the community giving stats (gifts less than
$10,000) for the first 35 days of the fundraiser:
How many donations in the name of The Scorpions? ;-D
- d.
___
foundation-l mailing list
2008/12/6 Thomas Dalton [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Discussions please. (Not denial that this problem is a problem, thanks.)
If you want to encourage discussion, don't start by restricting the
discussion to only people that agree with you. You won't get any
useful results that way.
Are you speaking
2008/12/6 Bryan Tong Minh [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I can think of two solutions here. One is to simply have more
multi-project admins. Wikimedia ought to be one big community with a
commons goal. Unfortunately (but not unsurprisingly) Wikimedia has
been separated into many different islands
2008/12/5 George Herbert [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I think these are valid concerns about my idea.
I would respond with But you can always create pages the existing way 8-)
But some new users won't want that much framework either. I don't
know how many different methods/paths we can set up for
2008/12/5 Nathan [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
This [1] is the sort of thing I'm thinking about. David, has this been
proposed, discussed, modeled and rejected in the past? (It seems like it
must have, for something that is pretty common around the web).
[1]:
2008/12/3 Erik Moeller [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
As per Michael's earlier e-mail:
http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Press_releases/Wikipedia_to_become_more_user-friendly_for_new_volunteer_writers
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Lolcat2.jpg
- d.
2008/11/27 Geoffrey Plourde [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
If we could get something that reads the searches and tabulates the most
frequently not found articles, we could better target our account creation
efforts.
Hence my suggestion on wikitech-l :-)
Logging referers as well as the name of the
2008/11/27 Geoffrey Plourde [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Preserve History, Donate Now!
Preserve History, Buy Us A Better Backup Infrastructure!
- d.
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
2008/11/27 Ziko van Dijk [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
So the phrase
Wikipedia is a non-profit
projecthttp://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Edu_Notice_2008_1.pnghad
rather poor results. Maybe because it contains two words that sound negative
to many people, non and profit, and maybe many people do not
2008/11/27 Thomas Dalton [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Wikipedia is a charity ?
People always say non-profit when describing WMF, is it a charity?
The two terms are different. (In the UK, the WMF would probably be
considered charitable, I don't know what the requirements are in the
US.)
The bottom
2008/11/27 Robert Rohde [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 1:40 PM, Thomas Dalton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And, in fact, wikimediafoundation.org says nonprofit charitable
organization. I don't know why people generally say non-profit
instead of charity, then - charity would be more
2008/11/16 David Gerard [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Donations to WMDE are apparently coming in very fast because of this:
http://wiwowo.blogspot.com/2008/11/internet-cannot-be-censured.html
I'm reluctant to advocate upset politicians as a fundraising tool, but ...
Here's the list. Dig the comments
901 - 999 of 999 matches
Mail list logo
