Re: [Foundation-l] Jimmy Wales donation appeal
Up to now, I kinda liked the fundraiser. Although they are very shouty for what I'm used to (I dislike the red button for instance and the somewhat agressive tone), I think this last change in message could use a *little* step back. Please use a slightly smaller font, an slightly less shouty text. To me it really reads like wow, now we're really desperate, PLEASE COME READ THIS ** APPEAL. I would really appreciate it if this last banner would be done a little less in a way that comes to me (justified or not) as typical American... As said, a slightly smaller font, and a grey color could do miracles here. Lodewijk 2008/12/23 Gregory Maxwell gmaxw...@gmail.com On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 9:40 PM, Casey Brown cbrown1023...@gmail.com wrote: Some pretty nice comments mixed in there. ;-) They also do a good job explaining why we need money. [Jay: interesting to look at, might be nice to use some like their comments in the future] Some of it is just hopeless. Why can't they be self sufficient? is the sort of question that reflects a simple lack of consideration on the part of the asker. Had they considered that question more carefully they would likely have answered it themselves. I.e. that asking for money *is* a form of self-sufficiency no less than any other method other than spending no money at all (which has obvious problems). So then the question is why ask rather than run ads or let company X pay for the ability to control the content, etc... and many counter arguments to these sorts of alternatives are obvious even to people who know nothing of our internals. Although my own experience is that many Americans are a bit baffled that we don't run ads. They've often not even heard the multitude of arguments against pervasive/invasive advertising. I don't believe it's Wikimedia's place to argue against advertising, but there might be an opportunity for some of our community members to work with anti-consumerist groups like Adbusters to make a public argument as to why our current lack of advertisements is laudable from their perspective. On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 9:42 PM, Dan Collins en.wp.s...@gmail.com wrote: Wait. Is donating supposed to make the banner go away? Because it didn't... Why would it? You can collapse it even without donating. (Or log in and make it vanish entirely with the gadget— the reason for it to not vanish entirely on collapse is that a lot of people will collapse then decide they want to donate later…) Though I suppose that might not be a bad feature, but on the other hand… we're not trying to hold people for ransom. You shouldn't have to pay to dispel the notice, requiring that wouldn't reflect Wikimedia's or our communities values well. ___ 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] Jimmy Wales donation appeal
2008/12/23 effe iets anders effeietsand...@gmail.com: As said, a slightly smaller font, and a grey color could do miracles here. Also, note that on IE7 in 1024x768, the banner (on Commons, at least) looks terrible -- the last line (Wikipedia Founder Jimmy Wales) goes under the banner border, so that it is stricken through with that red line (while there is a huge empty margin above the Please Read:). Tried Ctrl+F5, no change. -- [[cs:User:Mormegil | Petr Kadlec]] ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Jimmy Wales donation appeal
2008/12/23 Petr Kadlec petr.kad...@gmail.com 2008/12/23 effe iets anders effeietsand...@gmail.com: As said, a slightly smaller font, and a grey color could do miracles here. Also, note that on IE7 in 1024x768, the banner (on Commons, at least) looks terrible -- the last line (Wikipedia Founder Jimmy Wales) goes under the banner border, so that it is stricken through with that red line (while there is a huge empty margin above the Please Read:). Tried Ctrl+F5, no change. -- [[cs:User:Mormegil | Petr Kadlec]] The same problem happens in a proper browser (FF 3.1b2) on 1280x960. It does not look good. -- Jon Harald Søby http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Jon_Harald_S%C3%B8by ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Jimmy Wales donation appeal
Aside from concerns about loudness and size in the banner, the message itself has been very successful: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Special:FundraiserStatistics -Robert Rohde PS. At screen widths that are not all that small, it appears the collapse button is forcing the Please Read: unit down a line so the last line is hanging outside the box. On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 6:07 PM, Robert Rohde raro...@gmail.com wrote: Looks like the new appeal is working well. We seem to be on pace to have the best single day of this fund drive. -Robert Rohde On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 4:58 PM, Delirium delir...@hackish.org wrote: I assume most of you at least occasionally read one of the Wikimedia websites so probably saw this in a sitenotice, but I thought it was a very well done appeal, concisely highlighting exactly what we do, why it's different than what most people do, and why we're worth donating to, so worth pointing out: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate/Letter/en Worriers about the perennial suggestions to put advertising somewhere on the site(s) might also like what appears to be the closest to a no-ads pledge I've seen so far: Like a national park or a school, we don't believe advertising should have a place in Wikipedia. -Mark ___ 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] Jimmy Wales donation appeal
On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 4:48 AM, Robert Rohde raro...@gmail.com wrote: PS. At screen widths that are not all that small, it appears the collapse button is forcing the Please Read: unit down a line so the last line is hanging outside the box. I should say, that's on IE. Firefox doesn't seem to have that particular problem. -Robert Rohde ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Britannica became free
David Gerard wrote:
2008/12/22 Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com:
On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 4:14 AM, Tim Starling tstarl...@wikimedia.org
wrote:
The following Firefox bookmarklet may be useful:
javascript:(function(){Darwin.Upsell.deactivate();})()
Thanks! It works well :)
They called the function upsell? *facepalm* Wikipedia doesn't need
to do anything to compete with Britannica, just leave them to collapse
under the weight of their own ineptitude.
We should probably run a large public Save Britannica! campaign -
how to save a great historical encyclopedia, second only to the OED as
one of the great works of Anglophone non-fiction, from its own
business stupidity. I'm halfway serious. What could we do with a Save
Britannica campaign?
(There are many ways in which it sucks, but it still manages
*consistent* quality better than en:wp. Better writing, too. A lot of
us wouldn't be doing this Wikipedia thing if we weren't encyclopedia
fans in the first place, and that includes Britannica.)
- d.
I don't think you can be more clear than:
http://onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/webbin/bparchive?year=2006post=2006-03-24,3
Yours,
Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Jimmy Wales donation appeal
This is really impressive - such a rise in donations just because of a clear and personal approach! Can't we make more like this, personal testimonials and calls by Wikimedians but also non-Wikimedians sympathizing with us? Ziko 2008/12/23 Robert Rohde raro...@gmail.com Aside from concerns about loudness and size in the banner, the message itself has been very successful: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Special:FundraiserStatistics -Robert Rohde PS. At screen widths that are not all that small, it appears the collapse button is forcing the Please Read: unit down a line so the last line is hanging outside the box. On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 6:07 PM, Robert Rohde raro...@gmail.com wrote: Looks like the new appeal is working well. We seem to be on pace to have the best single day of this fund drive. -Robert Rohde On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 4:58 PM, Delirium delir...@hackish.org wrote: I assume most of you at least occasionally read one of the Wikimedia websites so probably saw this in a sitenotice, but I thought it was a very well done appeal, concisely highlighting exactly what we do, why it's different than what most people do, and why we're worth donating to, so worth pointing out: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate/Letter/en Worriers about the perennial suggestions to put advertising somewhere on the site(s) might also like what appears to be the closest to a no-ads pledge I've seen so far: Like a national park or a school, we don't believe advertising should have a place in Wikipedia. -Mark ___ 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 -- Ziko van Dijk NL-Silvolde ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Wikipedia video tutorials: the making-of
Hello Frank, Thank you very much for these explanations for us curious Wikipedians. I will ask Michael Dale for more information. For the moment you'll find a nicer implementation at http://metavid.org/wiki/Stream:House_proceeding_06-09-08_01/0:01:38/0:10:00 Oh, you just want to show how the place will look like? I cannot find something Wikipedia-related on that US Congress site. My experience so far: you can't imagine how many people don't know that everyone can edit Wikipedia. You give a lecture, everybody knows Wikipedia, and suddenly someone asks: but what happens when I click on the edit button? Every Wikipedian knows that uploading pictures on Yes, but it is not only a technical questions, but also about the whole concept of wiki authorship: Am I entitled to edit? I remember having watched the Wikimania lecture of Jimmy Wales in Alexandria, ten minutes about freedom of speech in the Internet era. But the questions by the people in the audience were very, very basic. When I showed Wikipedia to elderly people, it was not only Wikipedia and Internet related stuff they did not know of. Basic computer skills are missing, like drag and drop, copying text, open several windows. Will your future how-to video provide also that, Frank? Theresa is Canadian. Wikipedia is an international project and our The German she speaks at the end sound to me as if she were German. Kind regards, Ziko -- Ziko van Dijk NL-Silvolde ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Britannica became free
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* of Wikipedia, but they have more class than to trash a perceived competitor the way Britannica try to). What other important language encyclopedias of comparable renown are there? Well. The BIFAB AG (Bibliographic Institute F. A. Brockhaus inc.) has announced last week (happy x-mas) to sell the usage rights and brand name of Brockhaus to Bertelsmann (section Arvato, subsection inmedia one, business unit wissen media Group). The remaining staff of 60 editors of Brockhaus at Leipzig was not bought and will receive pink slips. Brockhaus might be transformed into an imprint of various content for door-2-door sales people. Eek! What's happening to the content? - d. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Britannica became free
On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 11:21 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: Eek! What's happening to the content? There are/were several ways to access the content of the actual core Brockhaus encyclopedia: 1. Buy the book. 30 volumes, 2700€ - 3100€, depending on your payment plan: http://www.brockhaus.de/enzyklopaedie/aufeinenblick/bestellen.php 2. Buy the USB stick edition: 1500 €. no longer being sold. 3. Pay per view via munzinger.de http://munzinger.de/search/query?f=queryqid=query-12 4. online subscription to brockhaus-enzyklopaedie.de. There was never an end user license for this web site. end users had to buy 1. or 2. (see above) to get access to this site until 31/12/2010. 5. Get the content (or a very similar kind encyclopedia) from http://lexikon.meyers.de, which is the second encyclopedia brand name at BIFAB AG. BIFAB has announced to shut down all encyclopedia related activities and has said that the content at lexikon.meyers.de is largely taken from Brockhaus substance so that they are unable to continue this service. Hence we have to assume that lexikon.meyers.de is going to be shut down in the next 39 days. From an online perspective, it is unlikely to get any worse. The poorly visible Brockhaus encyclopedia text might re-appear under different brand names in other places. Or other content might appear under a Brockhaus brand. All questions to save or use or release the content from the Brockhaus encyclopedia would have to be directed to Arvato/Wissen media group. Mathias ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] 2008 Annual Fundraiser - Going into Phas e 2
So, Obama has won election in the USA, people are more happy (maybe not only part of people in USA) - they want to pay for that ;) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reciprocal_altruism Just simple behaviors :) http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Special:FundraiserStatistics ~everyone wants to be Santa Claus ;) Jimbo's appeal is a good move. (yes we can? - a god meme to use in acknowledgement, yes, we can + be bold = ?) So, be bold during Christmas and all next days przykuta ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Wikipedia video tutorials: the making-of
2008/12/23 Ziko van Dijk zvand...@googlemail.com: Thank you very much for these explanations for us curious Wikipedians. :-) Oh, you just want to show how the place will look like? I cannot find something Wikipedia-related on that US Congress site. No, it was just to give you an impression you how it _could_ look like. My experience so far: you can't imagine how many people don't know that everyone can edit Wikipedia. You give a lecture, everybody knows Wikipedia, and suddenly someone asks: but what happens when I click on the edit button? Every Wikipedian knows that uploading pictures on Yes, but it is not only a technical questions, but also about the whole concept of wiki authorship: Am I entitled to edit? Yes, that's perfectly true. For some of our target groups this is certainly a bigger obstacle than the wiki markup. But the questions by the people in the audience were very, very basic. Again, I agree. Our first step should be to figure out which of these very basic questions we should answer. I'm sure that will have a high impact. When I showed Wikipedia to elderly people, it was not only Wikipedia and Internet related stuff they did not know of. Basic computer skills are missing, like drag and drop, copying text, open several windows. Will your future how-to video provide also that, Frank? We should at least think about ways to make the how-to screencast tutorials as comprehensible as possible. Would you personally be interested to join the screencast team? Your participation is highly welcome! The German she speaks at the end sound to me as if she were German. She's living in Berlin ;-) Thank you for your helpful comments which I appreciate as always. Frank ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
[Foundation-l] Fwd: [WikiEN-l] Image tagging: 33 months later
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 did a check of image uploading. The results
were, to put it bluntly, appalling.
I've re-done the check with a new batch of 1,945 images. This covers
a little over two days' uploading, where the original set was 1,866
images uploaded in a little over 24 hours.
For 1,945 images uploaded and not later deleted, 1,960 license tags
were applied.
858 images, or 44%, were tagged with a non-free content tag, up from
40% in 2006. with album covers and logos making up slightly more than
half. The vast numbers of promotional photos that were uploaded in
2006 are nowhere to be seen: only 20 images were so tagged.
At least 917 images (47%) were tagged with a free-content license tag,
up from 41% in 2006. The most popular tags are PD-Self (334 images),
GFDL (250 images), and Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike (221
images)
Only 176 images (9%) did not have a license tag, a vast improvement
over 2006, when 26% were untagged.
500 of the images were checked for tag correctness. Things are
looking *much* better than they were in March 2006: of the 494 tags
applied, 35 (7%) were clearly incorrect, and 34 invalid fair-use
claims were made. In 2006, the error rates were 22% incorrect and 16%
invalid fair-use claims.
The most-misused tag by count is the self-creation tag (at least 21
images were not self-created), with the GFDL/CC-BY-SA-3.0 dual-license
tag especially problematic. By proportion, it's CC-BY-3.0 (5 out of
12 incorrect).
On the non-free content side of things, the problematic tags are
{{non-free television screenshot}} (6 out of 10 used to illustrate a
person's biography), {{non-free audio sample}} (3 out of 4 samples
were over-long), and {{non-free promotional}} (2 out of 3 images were
clearly replaceable). As before, album covers and logos tended to be
used correctly (74 out of 84 and 46 out of 57, respectively).
28 out of 254 free-content tags were incorrect, compared to 7 out of
205 non-free-content tags. Breaking non-free content down by type of
media and getting rid of the generic fair use tags (promotional,
fair use, etc.) seems to have worked wonderfully.
We still need to do something about people uploading images with
incorrect information, but it's far less of a problem than it used to
be.
--
Mark
[[User:Carnildo]]
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
wikie...@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] 2008 Annual Fundraiser - Going into Phas e 2
Hm, btw, where was again that list with all incoming donations? Lodewijk 2008/12/24 Przykuta przyk...@o2.pl So, Obama has won election in the USA, people are more happy (maybe not only part of people in USA) - they want to pay for that ;) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reciprocal_altruism Just simple behaviors :) http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Special:FundraiserStatistics ~everyone wants to be Santa Claus ;) Jimbo's appeal is a good move. (yes we can? - a god meme to use in acknowledgement, yes, we can + be bold = ?) So, be bold during Christmas and all next days przykuta ___ 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] Jimmy Wales donation appeal
On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 8:59 PM, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote: 2008/12/23 effe iets anders effeietsand...@gmail.com: Up to now, I kinda liked the fundraiser. Although they are very shouty for what I'm used to (I dislike the red button for instance and the somewhat agressive tone), I think this last change in message could use a *little* step back. Please use a slightly smaller font, an slightly less shouty text. To me it really reads like wow, now we're really desperate, PLEASE COME READ THIS ** APPEAL. I would really appreciate it if this last banner would be done a little less in a way that comes to me (justified or not) as typical American... Within the last 24 hours, we've raised a total of $283,859. That's more than 10 times as much as we made during a typical weekday in the last few days of the fundraiser, and the single highest day on record for community gifts. We don't know yet how steep the inevitable drop-off will be, but it's obvious that the appeal is working beyond everyone's expectations. I think it's worth noting that this tenfold increase has been possible without the use of additional pixel real estate, without scrolling marquees, interstitials, or other serious interruptions of the Wikipedia reader/editor experience. All it took were less than 60 characters of text on each page in a highly visible font, linking to a personal appeal that makes our case in more detail. We should ask ourselves why it is that based on the previous sitenotices, 9 in 10 people who would be clearly willing to give to us, did not do so. There seem to be at least three principal reasons for that: * The previous messages were below the visibility threshold for most people: They considered them to be an unimportant part of the page that should be ignored. * The previous messages did not, clearly enough, make a case for giving. They appealed to people who instantly get the non-profit donation model, but not to those for whom Wikipedia is essentially the same as any other website. The appeal directly addresses this distinction, to the satisfaction of a great number of people. * Because it's a personal appeal, rather than an impersonal donation message, the letter seems more likely to resonate with people. This is really important. Even the fact there was a picture is helpful. It humanizes the process, and makes it much less anonymous. When this letter has reached its audience and we need a new donation banner, I would strongly suggest another personal appeal of this type, from a new person (maybe an educator). Thanks, Pharos Regardless of how the numbers will hold up, it's clear that these are important lessons to take away: The appeal, compared to some of our other site-notices, was trivial to implement. It's more important to communicate clearly and in a personal manner what we're trying to do than to focus on widgets designs. Yes, more so than before, this appeal communicates a sense of urgency. As it should: We still have a revenue gap of $1.75M to just cover our expenses for the fiscal year (let alone increase our reserve). We're in the middle of the worst financial crisis in our lifetime; companies are failing or laying off staff around us. If people's reaction is I don't want Wikipedia to go away - I better donate, that's not a bad thing. Obviously we should try to work out any remaining display glitches. And I'm sure over time we'll find a happy medium when it comes to aspects like font size, color, etc. But more importantly, we should try to translate this appeal into as many languages as possible, as it's currently just running in the English language wikis. -- Erik Möller Deputy Director, Wikimedia Foundation Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate ___ 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] 2008 Annual Fundraiser - Going into Phas e 2
On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 8:57 PM, effe iets anders effeietsand...@gmail.com wrote: Hm, btw, where was again that list with all incoming donations? Lodewijk There are many statistics pages, see the Contributions/Fundraiser section on http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Special:SpecialPages. -- Casey Brown Cbrown1023 --- Note: This e-mail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails sent to this address will probably get lost. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
[Foundation-l] New project proposal: Soviet Repressions Memorial
I have submitted a new project proposal, at http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Victims_of_Soviet_Repressions_Memorial -- Kurt Weber http://blog.kurtweber.us k...@kurtweber.us ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
[Foundation-l] Europeana
Europeana (http://www.europeana.eu/) is working again. I think that it has a lot of useful (PD) materials. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
