Corporate Representatives for Ethical Wikipedia Engagement.Here's the
Facebook page:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/crewe.group/
I see a pile of Wikimedians engaging with them, which is promising.
I visited WMUK on Tuesday and chatted with Stevie Benton (the new
media person), Richard Symonds
One of those would be me :)
A suggestion I picked up on was to have a joint session with Wikipedians
individuals from CREWE where we could have an actual dialogue (I sent an
email to Daria about getting assistance for this last night).
If your interested in helping out with the dialogue that
On 29 March 2012 09:57, Thomas Morton morton.tho...@googlemail.com wrote:
One of those would be me :)
A suggestion I picked up on was to have a joint session with Wikipedians
individuals from CREWE where we could have an actual dialogue (I sent an
email to Daria about getting assistance for
I do disagree with the idea though, FWIW. It feels much akin to a threat :)
We also (reading that blog post) disagree on a few other aspects as well.
Which is why I am eager to see input from a broad swathe of Wikipedians on
these issues.
Tom
On 29 March 2012 10:17, David Gerard
On 29 March 2012 10:20, Thomas Morton morton.tho...@googlemail.com wrote:
I do disagree with the idea though, FWIW. It feels much akin to a threat :)
It's not a threat from us, it's saying you don't want what happened
to Bell Pottinger to happen to you.
I'm surprised to see (repeatedly) that
I've written an essay incorporating some of the ideas expressed here by
David, Carcharoth, Charles and myself.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:ADAM
I've also posted a link to the essay on WT:BLP, and suggested that it might
be helpful to get the no eventualism principle anchored more
Corporate Representatives for Ethical Wikipedia Engagement.Here's the
Facebook page:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/crewe.group/
I see a pile of Wikimedians engaging with them, which is promising.
I visited WMUK on Tuesday and chatted with Stevie Benton (the new
media person), Richard
On 29 March 2012 09:52, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
I visited WMUK on Tuesday and chatted with Stevie Benton (the new
media person), Richard Symonds and Daria Cybulska about this topic.
The approach we could think of that could *work* is pointing out if
you're caught with *what
I've been skimming the arguments on this matter and I'm trying to get
a handle on it. One thing I don't understand is why Mr. Hawkins feels
so aggrieved. Everyone is talking in abstract principles but I
haven't seen where someone details what specific wrongs have been done
to Mr. Hawkins. Not
On 29 March 2012 15:38, Charles Matthews
charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com wrote:
I noticed that in the Bell Pottinger meltdown Lord Bell switched from
saying that the PR operatives had not actually broken the law (i.e.
minimalist on professional ethics), to a line that WP was really just too
On 29 March 2012 15:38, Charles Matthews
charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com wrote:
It would certainly be useful to have an agreed approach from our side.
What even might work? Our natural sort of starting point would be FAQ-like,
but that probably doesn't fit the bill. Neither would a simple set
11 matches
Mail list logo
