Re: [Foundation-l] GLAM-WIKI report
1. What about our mirrors and forks and reusers; do they get the same rights? How about users who want to download media dumps? This is at least two different problems, one is reuse when the content is free and the other is reuse when the content is free due to an agreement. For the moment there is a lot of material we can't use because images are handled as separate from the articles. 2. What about when they decide to change around their naming schemes/take works offline/otherwise restructure their websites, and us with millions of links? Any change of theirs would cause serious disruption. I would say mirror images and link to the original. That way the work is on the external website to keep the links. In addition make a lot better APIs for sharing metadata. The metadata should include identifiers used at the external site. Also consider if the external site should be able to make additional hotlinked information available about the image. Think mashups of metadata, don't think my metadata (or WMFs mtadata). We have become at least as protective as the GLAM institutions in some respects. John ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] GLAM-WIKI report
I stumbled upon this too during discussions with institutions in Norway, it seems like the number of times some material is accessed is a very interesting selling point. It is although not necessary to store the image any specific place for this, it is the actual statistics that is interesting. John Gerard Meijssen wrote: Hoi, Not necessarily. One acronym I learned was KPI, when a GLAM has as a key performance indicator the number of times a picture is actually accessed, it may affect the amount of subsidy they get. There is no reason why an image cannot be made available to the people who want that image on their hard drive. So I mean really there may be more to it. Thanks, GerardM 2009/8/12 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com 2009/8/12 Kat Walsh k...@mindspillage.org: I'm not sure what the technical challenges you had in mind are, but I can think of plenty of reasons to argue against hotlinking and I don't want to let the point slip by. A few: The ones who want hotlinking want it as a way of making the images not free. l mean, really. - d. ___ 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 ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
[Foundation-l] New projects opened
Yesterday, new projects were opened: * Sorani Wikipedia (http://ckb.wikipedia.org/) * Western Panjabi Wikipedia (http://pnb.wikipedia.org/) * Mirandese Wikipedia (http://mwl.wikipedia.org/) * Acehnese Wikipedia (http://ace.wikipedia.org/) * Turkish Wikinews (http://tr.wikinews.org/) ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] New projects opened
Thanks for the information. I'll spread the word to Acehnese community. --Original Message-- From: Milos Rancic Sender: foundation-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List ReplyTo: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List Subject: [Foundation-l] New projects opened Sent: Aug 13, 2009 15:30 Yesterday, new projects were opened: * Sorani Wikipedia (http://ckb.wikipedia.org/) * Western Panjabi Wikipedia (http://pnb.wikipedia.org/) * Mirandese Wikipedia (http://mwl.wikipedia.org/) * Acehnese Wikipedia (http://ace.wikipedia.org/) * Turkish Wikinews (http://tr.wikinews.org/) ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l -- Ivan Lanin. http://www.wikimedia.or.id Dikirim dari BeriHitam® 25704A0F ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
[Foundation-l] Why hasn't the LocalisationUpdate extension been enabled?
When the Vector skin became available, I tried it on my home wiki, pt.wikipedia, and noticed that a great deal of its interface was still in English. So I went to translatewiki.net and translated the remaining strings to Portuguese. Then I waited, and waited.. and I am waiting until today, and the skin still has the English strings on it. It's been almost a month. This is bad for several reasons. On this specific context, it means that non-English users of the Vector skin, which is supposed to increase usability, will actually have potentially more trouble using it simply because it is using a foreign language. On a more general stance, this is also bad for translators, since we don't have as much motivation to contribute when our translations lay unused for so much time. It's exactly one of the arguments that was used a lot to oppose the FlaggedRevisions extension: the immediacy of the edits going live is what makes wikis so compelling. (disclaimer: I'm actualy in favor of flagged revs; I would trade some immediacy for more stability. But not if the delay means a month!) It's also bad for MediaWiki in general, since the expansion of its language support grows in a much slower pace. I understand why it was chosen not to always run bleeding edge versions of the software on the live Wikimedia wikis. But the LocalisationUpdate was created precisely as a workaround to this, i.e, to allow updating the localisation without needing to update the software. So my question is: why is it not enabled yet on most Wikimedia wikis? ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] GLAM-WIKI report
Aggregated statistics for a complete GLAM is interesting, but it seems like they ask about usage stats and metadata about individual items. For example it is _very_ interesting that a otherwise rather anonymous photo from 1890 from the GallriNOR-collection is used in an article about Oat that has 1100 page views each day at English Wikipedia. (From memory, hopefully the correct article) This is probably several orders more than their own traffic on that photo. John Gerard Meijssen wrote: Hoi, Combine this with aggregated statistics for a particular GLAM and do this for any GLAM we have material for. This is not to show the most important GLAM but it is to help them realise and recognise for themselves and for their sponsors that we contribute to their social relevance. It helps us argue why improved annotations will increase traffic to their website. It is absolutely important not to make a competition out of these statistics because GLAMS cannot be compared. What is important is that we contribute to the visibility of a GLAM and its collection. It is obvious why these statistics have to be double checked, because it will be a vital argument in releasing material to us and in building a relationship. Thanks, Gerard 2009/8/13 John at Darkstar vac...@jeb.no I stumbled upon this too during discussions with institutions in Norway, it seems like the number of times some material is accessed is a very interesting selling point. It is although not necessary to store the image any specific place for this, it is the actual statistics that is interesting. John Gerard Meijssen wrote: Hoi, Not necessarily. One acronym I learned was KPI, when a GLAM has as a key performance indicator the number of times a picture is actually accessed, it may affect the amount of subsidy they get. There is no reason why an image cannot be made available to the people who want that image on their hard drive. So I mean really there may be more to it. Thanks, GerardM 2009/8/12 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com 2009/8/12 Kat Walsh k...@mindspillage.org: I'm not sure what the technical challenges you had in mind are, but I can think of plenty of reasons to argue against hotlinking and I don't want to let the point slip by. A few: The ones who want hotlinking want it as a way of making the images not free. l mean, really. - d. ___ 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 ___ 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 ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] GLAM-WIKI report
Hoi, We do have those kinds of statistics already.. aggregating is important because such an overall numbers can be considered a KPI while an individual statistic is interesting. I learned that KPI is key performance indicator ... :) I still have to think what the acronym is there for Thanks, GerardM 2009/8/13 John at Darkstar vac...@jeb.no Aggregated statistics for a complete GLAM is interesting, but it seems like they ask about usage stats and metadata about individual items. For example it is _very_ interesting that a otherwise rather anonymous photo from 1890 from the GallriNOR-collection is used in an article about Oat that has 1100 page views each day at English Wikipedia. (From memory, hopefully the correct article) This is probably several orders more than their own traffic on that photo. John Gerard Meijssen wrote: Hoi, Combine this with aggregated statistics for a particular GLAM and do this for any GLAM we have material for. This is not to show the most important GLAM but it is to help them realise and recognise for themselves and for their sponsors that we contribute to their social relevance. It helps us argue why improved annotations will increase traffic to their website. It is absolutely important not to make a competition out of these statistics because GLAMS cannot be compared. What is important is that we contribute to the visibility of a GLAM and its collection. It is obvious why these statistics have to be double checked, because it will be a vital argument in releasing material to us and in building a relationship. Thanks, Gerard 2009/8/13 John at Darkstar vac...@jeb.no I stumbled upon this too during discussions with institutions in Norway, it seems like the number of times some material is accessed is a very interesting selling point. It is although not necessary to store the image any specific place for this, it is the actual statistics that is interesting. John Gerard Meijssen wrote: Hoi, Not necessarily. One acronym I learned was KPI, when a GLAM has as a key performance indicator the number of times a picture is actually accessed, it may affect the amount of subsidy they get. There is no reason why an image cannot be made available to the people who want that image on their hard drive. So I mean really there may be more to it. Thanks, GerardM 2009/8/12 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com 2009/8/12 Kat Walsh k...@mindspillage.org: I'm not sure what the technical challenges you had in mind are, but I can think of plenty of reasons to argue against hotlinking and I don't want to let the point slip by. A few: The ones who want hotlinking want it as a way of making the images not free. l mean, really. - d. ___ 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 ___ 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 ___ 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] Why hasn't the LocalisationUpdate extension been enabled?
Waldir Pimenta wrote: I understand why it was chosen not to always run bleeding edge versions of the software on the live Wikimedia wikis. But the LocalisationUpdate was created precisely as a workaround to this, i.e, to allow updating the localisation without needing to update the software. So my question is: why is it not enabled yet on most Wikimedia wikis? The LocalisationUpdate extension is slow, with a significant performance loss per page view due to DB queries, and it's unnecessary, because the same effect can be had with a script that runs svn up periodically. -- Tim Starling ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Why hasn't the LocalisationUpdate extension been enabled?
Hoi, Why then is svn up not run every day on the Wikimedia Foundation's servers ?? Thanks, GerardM 2009/8/13 Tim Starling tstarl...@wikimedia.org Waldir Pimenta wrote: I understand why it was chosen not to always run bleeding edge versions of the software on the live Wikimedia wikis. But the LocalisationUpdate was created precisely as a workaround to this, i.e, to allow updating the localisation without needing to update the software. So my question is: why is it not enabled yet on most Wikimedia wikis? The LocalisationUpdate extension is slow, with a significant performance loss per page view due to DB queries, and it's unnecessary, because the same effect can be had with a script that runs svn up periodically. -- Tim Starling ___ 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] Why hasn't the LocalisationUpdate extension been enabled?
Hoi, The problem with svn up is that it does not take into account that the software run in production is not the same version that exists in SVN. Consequently you could update messages that are no longer the same. What LocalisationUpdate does is verify if the message in English in SVN is the same as the one that is currently running. When the messages are exactly the same, it follows that the localised messages are also the same. Because the LocalisationUpdate updates from SVN, it will update the messages that were seen by the translatewiki.net developers. When you say the LocalisationUpdate is slow, the current update process from SVN is slow. This however only needs to run once a day really. When this is done when there is not much traffic anyway, it does not matter. What does matter is that the results of a message found as a result of LocalisationUpdate end up in the l10ncache. Thanks, GerardM 2009/8/13 Tim Starling tstarl...@wikimedia.org Waldir Pimenta wrote: I understand why it was chosen not to always run bleeding edge versions of the software on the live Wikimedia wikis. But the LocalisationUpdate was created precisely as a workaround to this, i.e, to allow updating the localisation without needing to update the software. So my question is: why is it not enabled yet on most Wikimedia wikis? The LocalisationUpdate extension is slow, with a significant performance loss per page view due to DB queries, and it's unnecessary, because the same effect can be had with a script that runs svn up periodically. -- Tim Starling ___ 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] Why hasn't the LocalisationUpdate exte nsion been enabled?
Tim Starling tstarl...@... writes: The LocalisationUpdate extension is slow, with a significant performance loss per page view due to DB queries, I can't reproduce that locally. After installing LocalisationUpdate and visiting a few pages, I get: LocalisationCache::isExpired(en): cache for en expired due to GlobalDependency LocalisationCache::recache: got localisation for en from source SQL: BEGIN DatabaseBase::query: Writes done: DELETE FROM `l10n_cache` WHERE lc_lang = 'en' SQL: DELETE /* LCStore_DB::startWrite Catrope */ FROM `l10n_cache` WHERE lc_lang = 'en' SQL: INSERT /* LCStore_DB::set Catrope */ INTO `l10n_cache` ... Presumably this is LU invalidating the l10ncache. This does not happen on a second or subsequent page view, though. Instead, I get MessageCache::load: Loading en... got from global cache and I see messages being pulled from the l10n_cache table. If you can reproduce these extra queries locally, please tell me how. It's true that there's a known issue with the update script being slow, but that shouldn't be too bad since it's only supposed to be run once every 6, 12 or 24 hours or something. and it's unnecessary, because the same effect can be had with a script that runs svn up periodically. Gerard already explained that that has undesirable side effects. Roan Kattouw (Catrope) ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Why hasn't the LocalisationUpdate extension been enabled?
Hi, when I've read Tim's mail, I got really angry. Why would we translate anything on the translatewiki, when it's ignored for a month (or longer)?? When one has to correct some translation, then it's double work. I have to correct it on my local wiki, and on translatewiki. We copied the almost immediately translated strings of Vector skin to huwiki, because it was really embarrassing that after a month the skin is still english, but we already started push out the beta. And after update, we should delete the messages that we had copied to our local wiki. It's nonsense... Gerard wrote on wikitech-l that the translate extension is not far away. Then that... We just want a solution instead of unnecessary double/triple work. Ákos Szabó (Glanthor Reviol) ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Why hasn't the LocalisationUpdate extension been enabled?
Roan Kattouw wrote: Tim Starling tstarl...@... writes: The LocalisationUpdate extension is slow, with a significant performance loss per page view due to DB queries, I can't reproduce that locally. After installing LocalisationUpdate and visiting a few pages, I get: LocalisationCache::isExpired(en): cache for en expired due to GlobalDependency LocalisationCache::recache: got localisation for en from source SQL: BEGIN DatabaseBase::query: Writes done: DELETE FROM `l10n_cache` WHERE lc_lang = 'en' SQL: DELETE /* LCStore_DB::startWrite Catrope */ FROM `l10n_cache` WHERE lc_lang = 'en' SQL: INSERT /* LCStore_DB::set Catrope */ INTO `l10n_cache` ... Presumably this is LU invalidating the l10ncache. This does not happen on a second or subsequent page view, though. Instead, I get MessageCache::load: Loading en... got from global cache and I see messages being pulled from the l10n_cache table. I don't think those queries have anything to do with LocalisationUpdate. If you can reproduce these extra queries locally, please tell me how. I removed the hook LocalisationUpdate used in r52503, so it doesn't do anything at all. You can reproduce it by reverting to MediaWiki 1.15. I've now committed the rewrite of LocalisationUpdate I promised in the commit message of r52503. I held off on it because I wasn't convinced that it's a useful solution for anything. It's true that there's a known issue with the update script being slow, but that shouldn't be too bad since it's only supposed to be run once every 6, 12 or 24 hours or something. and it's unnecessary, because the same effect can be had with a script that runs svn up periodically. I'm not talking about the update script speed, I'm talking about the MessageNotInMwNs, which was (before r52503) called from a common case of wfMsg() and typically did a DB query. -- Tim Starling ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] New projects opened
On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 10:30 AM, Milos Rancicmill...@gmail.com wrote: Yesterday, new projects were opened: * Sorani Wikipedia (http://ckb.wikipedia.org/) * Western Panjabi Wikipedia (http://pnb.wikipedia.org/) * Mirandese Wikipedia (http://mwl.wikipedia.org/) * Acehnese Wikipedia (http://ace.wikipedia.org/) * Turkish Wikinews (http://tr.wikinews.org/) I find that interwiki links to these projects (at least the Wikipedias, I haven't checked on Wikinews) are not working yet. Could someone from the technical team mend this asap? Thanks in advance! -- André Engels, andreeng...@gmail.com ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Why hasn't the LocalisationUpdate exte nsion been enabled?
Tim Starling tstarl...@... writes: Presumably this is LU invalidating the l10ncache. This does not happen on a second or subsequent page view, though. Instead, I get MessageCache::load: Loading en... got from global cache and I see messages being pulled from the l10n_cache table. I don't think those queries have anything to do with LocalisationUpdate. Ah, I now see that the invalidation was caused by adding LocalisationUpdate's localisations. I already knew the selects on l10n_cache were not LU-related. If you can reproduce these extra queries locally, please tell me how. I removed the hook LocalisationUpdate used in r52503, so it doesn't do anything at all. You can reproduce it by reverting to MediaWiki 1.15. I've now committed the rewrite of LocalisationUpdate I promised in the commit message of r52503. I held off on it because I wasn't convinced that it's a useful solution for anything. Thanks. Roan Kattouw (Catrope) ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Why hasn't the LocalisationUpdate extension been enabled?
Gerard Meijssen wrote: Hoi, The problem with svn up is that it does not take into account that the software run in production is not the same version that exists in SVN. Consequently you could update messages that are no longer the same. What LocalisationUpdate does is verify if the message in English in SVN is the same as the one that is currently running. When the messages are exactly the same, it follows that the localised messages are also the same. Apparently that's not a problem for the release branches, which often receive backported message updates from translatewiki.net. Why can't the same backporting be done for the wmf-deployment branch? -- Tim Starling ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Why hasn't the LocalisationUpdate extension been enabled?
Hoi, When a back port is created, There is *a lot of manual work* involved in preparing the messages that are relevant to a specific release. As it is, translatewiki.net localises the latest development versions of software and this is not what runs in production. The key functionality of LocalisationUpdate is that it ensures that the messages it imports are compatible with the version of MediaWiki that runs in that instance of the software, including extensions. Probably LocalisationUpdate could work with the 1.15 stable version of MediaWiki. This would be really valuable for all the MediaWiki installations out there that have another language as default. It would even be an incentive to them to localise MediaWiki at translatewiki.net because they do not have to wait for the next release. Thanks, GerardM 2009/8/13 Tim Starling tstarl...@wikimedia.org Gerard Meijssen wrote: Hoi, The problem with svn up is that it does not take into account that the software run in production is not the same version that exists in SVN. Consequently you could update messages that are no longer the same. What LocalisationUpdate does is verify if the message in English in SVN is the same as the one that is currently running. When the messages are exactly the same, it follows that the localised messages are also the same. Apparently that's not a problem for the release branches, which often receive backported message updates from translatewiki.net. Why can't the same backporting be done for the wmf-deployment branch? -- Tim Starling ___ 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] Why hasn't the LocalisationUpdate extension been enabled?
Gerard Meijssen wrote: Hoi, When a back port is created, There is *a lot of manual work* involved in preparing the messages that are relevant to a specific release. As it is, translatewiki.net localises the latest development versions of software and this is not what runs in production. The key functionality of LocalisationUpdate is that it ensures that the messages it imports are compatible with the version of MediaWiki that runs in that instance of the software, including extensions. Wouldn't the release branches be improved if you ported that functionality from LocalisationUpdate to the backport automation scripts run on translatewiki.net? And then we'd be able to get translation updates with a simple svn up instead of adding a complex, tightly-integrated extension to the main MediaWiki instance on Wikimedia. -- Tim Starling ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Why hasn't the LocalisationUpdate extension been enabled?
Hello, Waldir. Waldir Pimenta wrote: When the Vector skin became available, I tried it on my home wiki, pt.wikipedia, and noticed that a great deal of its interface was still in English. So I went to translatewiki.net and translated the remaining strings to Portuguese. Then I waited, and waited.. and I am waiting until today, and the skin still has the English strings on it. It's been almost a month. Thank you for the translation work. As a usability team leader, I appreciate your attention on Vector and the new toolbar especially. We, the usability team, get really excited when the text in UI are translated into new languages. We pushed lots of text especially for the beta landing page and survey. I see the Portuguese pages are fully translated for the survey. Thank you. Since the first release of usability features (Acai) on July 1st, there has been minimum of weekly software update to Acai. And we updated the deployment software with up-to-date translation on August 6th for all languages. In the case for Portuguese, the text for the toolbar, the beta landing page, and the survey was updated. However the translation for tabs didn't get the update. We will look into why the update didn't occur. As for LocalisationUpdate, there has been a discussion in this thread already, so I won't get into too much details. But we are planning to start testing it in the usability prototype sites for the next round of release. http://usability.wikimedia.org/wiki/Prototype It would be great if we can work with translators to test LocalisationUpdate so that the translators can actually confirm their translation appear promptly after the translation in traslatewiki.net. When you see a portion of translation does not appear in UI, please drop me a note. We often think that the translation behind, and if that is not the case we will look into why the update did not occur. Hopefully this kind of gap will be gone, once the automation via LocalisationUpdate is available. But until then, feel free to write to me directly. My email address is nkom...@wikimedia.org. Cheers, - Naoko -- 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
Re: [Foundation-l] Why hasn't the LocalisationUpdate extension been enabled?
Hoi, Three things: - Perfection is the enemy of the good; this works now - This works for all extensions and MediaWiki supported in the WMF SVN and localised in translatewiki.net - This is tightly integrated with what has been localised in translatewiki.net There are two benefits to this approach - it motivates the people that localise - it provides timely support for our localisation effort - It works inside the WMF and outside, it is self contained Again, the scripts for the back port ONLY work for MediaWiki itself This is not good enough because we need localisations for our extensions as well. The LocalisationUpdate functionality has been discussed before we started its development with Brion and Siebrand. This works and it does not require extra work from Siebrand.. A really important KPI in my opinion. As you may perceive from the reactions in this list we are wasting a lot of effort from our volunteers. Implementing LocalisationUpdate is important because it demonstrates that we value the effort and the importance of the localisation work that is done at translatewiki.net. Thanks, GerardM 2009/8/13 Tim Starling tstarl...@wikimedia.org Gerard Meijssen wrote: Hoi, When a back port is created, There is *a lot of manual work* involved in preparing the messages that are relevant to a specific release. As it is, translatewiki.net localises the latest development versions of software and this is not what runs in production. The key functionality of LocalisationUpdate is that it ensures that the messages it imports are compatible with the version of MediaWiki that runs in that instance of the software, including extensions. Wouldn't the release branches be improved if you ported that functionality from LocalisationUpdate to the backport automation scripts run on translatewiki.net? And then we'd be able to get translation updates with a simple svn up instead of adding a complex, tightly-integrated extension to the main MediaWiki instance on Wikimedia. -- Tim Starling ___ 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] New projects opened
Nice! Quick sp correction: Punjabi Milos Rancic wrote: Yesterday, new projects were opened: * Sorani Wikipedia (http://ckb.wikipedia.org/) * Western Panjabi Wikipedia (http://pnb.wikipedia.org/) * Mirandese Wikipedia (http://mwl.wikipedia.org/) * Acehnese Wikipedia (http://ace.wikipedia.org/) * Turkish Wikinews (http://tr.wikinews.org/) ___ 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] New projects opened
On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 6:23 PM, Andre Engelsandreeng...@gmail.com wrote: I find that interwiki links to these projects (at least the Wikipedias, I haven't checked on Wikinews) are not working yet. Could someone from the technical team mend this asap? Thanks in advance! -- André Engels, andreeng...@gmail.com https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=20214 -- Ivan Lanin. http://www.wikimedia.or.id ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] New projects opened
Hoi, Actually according to the standard Panjabi is the correct spelling. Thanks, GerardM http://www.sil.org/iso639-3/documentation.asp?id=pnb 2009/8/13 Kul Takanao Wadhwa kwad...@wikimedia.org Nice! Quick sp correction: Punjabi Milos Rancic wrote: Yesterday, new projects were opened: * Sorani Wikipedia (http://ckb.wikipedia.org/) * Western Panjabi Wikipedia (http://pnb.wikipedia.org/) * Mirandese Wikipedia (http://mwl.wikipedia.org/) * Acehnese Wikipedia (http://ace.wikipedia.org/) * Turkish Wikinews (http://tr.wikinews.org/) ___ 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 ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] New projects opened
Gerard Meijssen wrote: Hoi, Actually according to the standard Panjabi is the correct spelling. Thanks, GerardM Hmmm...really? And I'm half Punjabi. You'd think I should know that. --Kul ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] New projects opened
On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 6:59 PM, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.comwrote: Hoi, Actually according to the standard Panjabi is the correct spelling. It is the same moronic standard which says that the Egyptian dialect is a language. Congrats to the new projects, I just hope that they are really needed and not dupes. user:alnokta ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] New projects opened
2009/8/13 Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com: Yesterday, new projects were opened: * Sorani Wikipedia (http://ckb.wikipedia.org/) * Western Panjabi Wikipedia (http://pnb.wikipedia.org/) * Mirandese Wikipedia (http://mwl.wikipedia.org/) * Acehnese Wikipedia (http://ace.wikipedia.org/) * Turkish Wikinews (http://tr.wikinews.org/) Is there any chance of a wikipedia in any of the Berber languages appearing soon? -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] New projects opened
Hoi, When the most often used Mediawiki messages have been localised for any of the Berber languages, we will be looking at the status at the Incubator. When there are sufficient articles of a sufficient size written by a smalll community we will see if the language is recognised as the language it is said to be. So yes. You may prod me or an other memver of the langcom when you think it is appropriate. Thanks, GerardM 2009/8/13 geni geni...@gmail.com 2009/8/13 Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com: Yesterday, new projects were opened: * Sorani Wikipedia (http://ckb.wikipedia.org/) * Western Panjabi Wikipedia (http://pnb.wikipedia.org/) * Mirandese Wikipedia (http://mwl.wikipedia.org/) * Acehnese Wikipedia (http://ace.wikipedia.org/) * Turkish Wikinews (http://tr.wikinews.org/) Is there any chance of a wikipedia in any of the Berber languages appearing soon? -- geni ___ 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] Why hasn't the LocalisationUpdate extension been enabled?
Because we haven't had a chance to finish final review fixups on it. Should be done in the next few days. (Why are there like 500 replies to this from people we've already talked to directly and know what's up?) -- brion ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
[Foundation-l] Question to post...
Google's new search engine, Caffeine, is supposedly kicking Wikipedia entries further down results page. Thoughts? Comments? http://software.silicon.com/applications/0,39024653,39484015,00.htm Thank, Serita ___NOTICE This electronic mail transmission, including any attachments, contains confidential information of Bain Company, Inc. (Bain) and/or its clients. It is intended only for the person(s) named, and the information in such e-mail shall only be used by the person(s) named for the purpose intended and for no other purpose. Any use, distribution, copying or disclosure by any other persons, or by the person(s) named but for purposes other than the intended purpose, is strictly prohibited. If you received this transmission in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and then destroy this e-mail. Opinions, conclusions and other information in this message that do not relate to the official business of Bain shall be understood to be neither given nor endorsed by Bain. When addressed to Bain clients, any information contained in this e-mail shall be subject to the terms and conditions in the applicable client contract. ___ ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Question to post...
On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 2:56 PM, Cox, Seritaserita@bridgespan.org wrote: Google's new search engine, Caffeine, is supposedly kicking Wikipedia entries further down results page. Thoughts? Comments? http://software.silicon.com/applications/0,39024653,39484015,00.htm [from my comments in #wikimedia-tech the other day] So— I tried 20 random words, and the WP result was lower in four of them, the same in the rest. No pattern really... We still have the problem with article at funny name; redirect from common name; common name search on google gives squat, which I consider to be much more major. When you're at the top there is no place to go but down. A larger comparison would be nice, but I didn't seen any reason to think that it was a major change. I generally expect the SEO people to over-react to, well, just about everything. (I went on, on IRC, to point some examples of the behavioural change that happened towards the end of 2007 (per my cruddy memory) where non-widely-linked redirects basically fell out of the google index... search terms like Jesus bug or many other things like http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:Redirects_to_scientific_names ... if we cared about the traffic flux from google we'd see what we could do to fix that) ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Question to post...
On 8/13/09 12:23 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote: (I went on, on IRC, to point some examples of the behavioural change that happened towards the end of 2007 (per my cruddy memory) where non-widely-linked redirects basically fell out of the google index... search terms like Jesus bug or many other things like http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:Redirects_to_scientific_names ... if we cared about the traffic flux from google we'd see what we could do to fix that) Worth looking into; have we got some collected info and sample queries to poke at? [I would recommend moving further detail discussion on this end of things to wikitech-l.] -- brion ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Question to post...
Perhaps we should try using the titles for things that other people use--not for g-rank, but as signs that we recognize that an encyclopedia is made for the readers. David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 4:56 PM, Brion Vibberbr...@wikimedia.org wrote: On 8/13/09 12:23 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote: (I went on, on IRC, to point some examples of the behavioural change that happened towards the end of 2007 (per my cruddy memory) where non-widely-linked redirects basically fell out of the google index... search terms like Jesus bug or many other things like http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:Redirects_to_scientific_names ... if we cared about the traffic flux from google we'd see what we could do to fix that) Worth looking into; have we got some collected info and sample queries to poke at? [I would recommend moving further detail discussion on this end of things to wikitech-l.] -- brion ___ 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] Question to post...
On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 5:09 PM, David Goodmandgoodma...@gmail.com wrote: Perhaps we should try using the titles for things that other people use--not for g-rank, but as signs that we recognize that an encyclopedia is made for the readers. Eh— It's unsolvable in some cases... People frequently use multiple terms for the same thing. And what happens when one term is really common in Canada and one is really common in the US? Do we always use the US version because the US is more populous than Canada? It would be a fair decision by one reasonable metric, but deeply biased by other reasonable metrics. An alternative argument is that When a 'more correct' name exists, we should use that because we're an encyclopaedia and we're supposed to educate people on these things. Perhaps you don't agree— but hopefully you can see why others can reasonably hold that position. The real answer to this problem is ALL names should work equally, and with redirects they do. Except, it seems, that search engines behaviour may be undermining this to some extent. ... but changing the naming in response to the symptom rather than a response to the real problem. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] New projects opened
2009/8/13 Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com: Yesterday, new projects were opened: * Sorani Wikipedia (http://ckb.wikipedia.org/) * Western Panjabi Wikipedia (http://pnb.wikipedia.org/) * Mirandese Wikipedia (http://mwl.wikipedia.org/) * Acehnese Wikipedia (http://ace.wikipedia.org/) * Turkish Wikinews (http://tr.wikinews.org/) For those curious as to overall statistics, that's about 270 language editions of Wikipedia, now. (The various lists seem to disagree slightly, and it's a little lower if we omit two empty projects). Turkish Wikinews is the 28th Wikinews project - there's now Turkish editions of wikinews, wikiquote, wikisource, and wikitionary, as well as wikipedia. -- - Andrew Gray andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Question to post...
2009/8/13 Cox, Serita serita@bridgespan.org: Google's new search engine, Caffeine, is supposedly kicking Wikipedia entries further down results page. Thoughts? Comments? http://software.silicon.com/applications/0,39024653,39484015,00.htm Thank, Serita There is evidence that Google has pushed wikipedia down in the past. I doubt it will have much impact in the long term. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
[Foundation-l] Alphascript Publishing: 1900+ copypasted books from Wikipedia
It was raised before on the Village Pump, but I think this is so disturbing that we ought to do something. Alphascript Publishing has published over 1900 (and counting) books, all available on Amazon. Prices range from $31 to $179. All of these books are simple computer-generated copies from Wikipedia and (at least according to one Amazon reviewer) couple other public domain websites. Trouble is, from book description page there is absolutely no way of knowing that the book is a Wikipedia mirror on paper. At least several Amazon buyers have been fooled. What really gets my blood boiling is that Amazon user VDM Verlag Dr.Müller (I think someone exposed him as 100% shareholder of the publishing co) goes on rating these products as five star The publisher seems to observe the copyright (even includes full edit history) so legal action seems impossible. Someone already contacted Amazon, but they are not responsible for the quality of books sold. In the meantime the number of such books grew from 900 in June to almost 2000 as of today... I think we should do something. At the very least publishing product reviews warning that what this is See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:PrimeHunter/Alphascript_Publishing_sells_free_articles_as_expensive_books http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(miscellaneous)/Archive_20#The_Alphascript-Amazon-Wikipedia_book_hoax http://rufftoon.livejournal.com/59337.html Thanks, Renata P.S. on a happier note: half of Wikipedia editors now can claim to be published authors. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Alphascript Publishing: 1900+ copypasted books from Wikipedia
When I worked for the FSF I helped to run a campaign against the Amazon Kindle (and, DRM in general). We did an action called The Kindle Swindle in which we asked people to tag all DRM ebooks and the kindle itself with the tags kindle swindle and DRM. People went ahead and tagged close to a thousand products with the term Kindle Swindle and the Kindle advice was tagged with that phrase close to 400 times making it become one of the top four tags on the Kindle page. What is kind of neat is that for each tag-term has its own discussion forum. The Kindle Swindle tag has a relatively active set of discussion threads [1], and the original comment I wrote [2] has over 250 replies to it. I imagine some combination of blogging, tagging, and letter writing could help in some way to increase consumer awareness and this kind of work can be done in a distributed fashion by wikimedians worldwide. footnotes :[1] http://www.amazon.com/tag/kindle%20swindle?ref_=tag_dpp_cust_itdp_t :[2] http://www.amazon.com/tag/kindle%20swindle/forum/ref=cm_cd_ef_tft_tp?_encoding=UTF8cdForum=Fx9U9IIOS8R4U3cdThread=TxEMQ1LM199AP8displayType=tagsDetail On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 6:10 PM, Renata Strenataw...@gmail.com wrote: It was raised before on the Village Pump, but I think this is so disturbing that we ought to do something. Alphascript Publishing has published over 1900 (and counting) books, all available on Amazon. Prices range from $31 to $179. All of these books are simple computer-generated copies from Wikipedia and (at least according to one Amazon reviewer) couple other public domain websites. Trouble is, from book description page there is absolutely no way of knowing that the book is a Wikipedia mirror on paper. At least several Amazon buyers have been fooled. What really gets my blood boiling is that Amazon user VDM Verlag Dr.Müller (I think someone exposed him as 100% shareholder of the publishing co) goes on rating these products as five star The publisher seems to observe the copyright (even includes full edit history) so legal action seems impossible. Someone already contacted Amazon, but they are not responsible for the quality of books sold. In the meantime the number of such books grew from 900 in June to almost 2000 as of today... I think we should do something. At the very least publishing product reviews warning that what this is See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:PrimeHunter/Alphascript_Publishing_sells_free_articles_as_expensive_books http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(miscellaneous)/Archive_20#The_Alphascript-Amazon-Wikipedia_book_hoax http://rufftoon.livejournal.com/59337.html Thanks, Renata P.S. on a happier note: half of Wikipedia editors now can claim to be published authors. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l -- I am running the Arizona Rock'n'Roll marathon with Team in Training. Help me reach my fundraising goals: http://pages.teamintraining.org/ma/pfchangs10/joshuagay ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] New projects opened
On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 5:25 PM, Andrew Grayandrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk wrote: For those curious as to overall statistics, that's about 270 language editions of Wikipedia, now. (The various lists seem to disagree slightly, and it's a little lower if we omit two empty projects). Turkish Wikinews is the 28th Wikinews project - there's now Turkish editions of wikinews, wikiquote, wikisource, and wikitionary, as well as wikipedia. Remember there's also the SiteMatrix: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:SiteMatrix, it has totals and also lets you see visually how many projects in each language (ie. how many in Turkish) too. -- Casey Brown Cbrown1023 ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Alphascript Publishing: 1900+ copypasted books from Wikipedia
I would be exceedingly uncomfortable with us organizing a negative campaign against any publisher not actually violating our copyright. . A factual campaign, providing information is another matter. It would be entirely appropriate for individuals, even in a somewhat coordinated way, to add a review, just pointing out that it is entirely a copy of a Wikipedia article, and available free in an updated version from our website--and in updated form. David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 6:47 PM, Joshua Gayjoshua...@gmail.com wrote: When I worked for the FSF I helped to run a campaign against the Amazon Kindle (and, DRM in general). We did an action called The Kindle Swindle in which we asked people to tag all DRM ebooks and the kindle itself with the tags kindle swindle and DRM. People went ahead and tagged close to a thousand products with the term Kindle Swindle and the Kindle advice was tagged with that phrase close to 400 times making it become one of the top four tags on the Kindle page. What is kind of neat is that for each tag-term has its own discussion forum. The Kindle Swindle tag has a relatively active set of discussion threads [1], and the original comment I wrote [2] has over 250 replies to it. I imagine some combination of blogging, tagging, and letter writing could help in some way to increase consumer awareness and this kind of work can be done in a distributed fashion by wikimedians worldwide. footnotes :[1] http://www.amazon.com/tag/kindle%20swindle?ref_=tag_dpp_cust_itdp_t :[2] http://www.amazon.com/tag/kindle%20swindle/forum/ref=cm_cd_ef_tft_tp?_encoding=UTF8cdForum=Fx9U9IIOS8R4U3cdThread=TxEMQ1LM199AP8displayType=tagsDetail On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 6:10 PM, Renata Strenataw...@gmail.com wrote: It was raised before on the Village Pump, but I think this is so disturbing that we ought to do something. Alphascript Publishing has published over 1900 (and counting) books, all available on Amazon. Prices range from $31 to $179. All of these books are simple computer-generated copies from Wikipedia and (at least according to one Amazon reviewer) couple other public domain websites. Trouble is, from book description page there is absolutely no way of knowing that the book is a Wikipedia mirror on paper. At least several Amazon buyers have been fooled. What really gets my blood boiling is that Amazon user VDM Verlag Dr.Müller (I think someone exposed him as 100% shareholder of the publishing co) goes on rating these products as five star The publisher seems to observe the copyright (even includes full edit history) so legal action seems impossible. Someone already contacted Amazon, but they are not responsible for the quality of books sold. In the meantime the number of such books grew from 900 in June to almost 2000 as of today... I think we should do something. At the very least publishing product reviews warning that what this is See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:PrimeHunter/Alphascript_Publishing_sells_free_articles_as_expensive_books http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(miscellaneous)/Archive_20#The_Alphascript-Amazon-Wikipedia_book_hoax http://rufftoon.livejournal.com/59337.html Thanks, Renata P.S. on a happier note: half of Wikipedia editors now can claim to be published authors. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l -- I am running the Arizona Rock'n'Roll marathon with Team in Training. Help me reach my fundraising goals: http://pages.teamintraining.org/ma/pfchangs10/joshuagay ___ 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] Alphascript Publishing: 1900+ copypasted books from Wikipedia
That was kinda my point. They deceive potential buyers into thinking it's an original book/content without disclosing that it's just a copy from Wikipedia. There are disclaimers inside the book -- but that comes only after opening the wallet. Someone should put it up front. On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 6:56 PM, David Goodman dgoodma...@gmail.com wrote: I would be exceedingly uncomfortable with us organizing a negative campaign against any publisher not actually violating our copyright. . A factual campaign, providing information is another matter. It would be entirely appropriate for individuals, even in a somewhat coordinated way, to add a review, just pointing out that it is entirely a copy of a Wikipedia article, and available free in an updated version from our website--and in updated form. David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 6:47 PM, Joshua Gayjoshua...@gmail.com wrote: When I worked for the FSF I helped to run a campaign against the Amazon Kindle (and, DRM in general). We did an action called The Kindle Swindle in which we asked people to tag all DRM ebooks and the kindle itself with the tags kindle swindle and DRM. People went ahead and tagged close to a thousand products with the term Kindle Swindle and the Kindle advice was tagged with that phrase close to 400 times making it become one of the top four tags on the Kindle page. What is kind of neat is that for each tag-term has its own discussion forum. The Kindle Swindle tag has a relatively active set of discussion threads [1], and the original comment I wrote [2] has over 250 replies to it. I imagine some combination of blogging, tagging, and letter writing could help in some way to increase consumer awareness and this kind of work can be done in a distributed fashion by wikimedians worldwide. footnotes :[1] http://www.amazon.com/tag/kindle%20swindle?ref_=tag_dpp_cust_itdp_t :[2] http://www.amazon.com/tag/kindle%20swindle/forum/ref=cm_cd_ef_tft_tp?_encoding=UTF8cdForum=Fx9U9IIOS8R4U3cdThread=TxEMQ1LM199AP8displayType=tagsDetail On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 6:10 PM, Renata Strenataw...@gmail.com wrote: It was raised before on the Village Pump, but I think this is so disturbing that we ought to do something. Alphascript Publishing has published over 1900 (and counting) books, all available on Amazon. Prices range from $31 to $179. All of these books are simple computer-generated copies from Wikipedia and (at least according to one Amazon reviewer) couple other public domain websites. Trouble is, from book description page there is absolutely no way of knowing that the book is a Wikipedia mirror on paper. At least several Amazon buyers have been fooled. What really gets my blood boiling is that Amazon user VDM Verlag Dr.Müller (I think someone exposed him as 100% shareholder of the publishing co) goes on rating these products as five star The publisher seems to observe the copyright (even includes full edit history) so legal action seems impossible. Someone already contacted Amazon, but they are not responsible for the quality of books sold. In the meantime the number of such books grew from 900 in June to almost 2000 as of today... I think we should do something. At the very least publishing product reviews warning that what this is See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:PrimeHunter/Alphascript_Publishing_sells_free_articles_as_expensive_books http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(miscellaneous)/Archive_20#The_Alphascript-Amazon-Wikipedia_book_hoaxhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_%28miscellaneous%29/Archive_20#The_Alphascript-Amazon-Wikipedia_book_hoax http://rufftoon.livejournal.com/59337.html Thanks, Renata P.S. on a happier note: half of Wikipedia editors now can claim to be published authors. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l -- I am running the Arizona Rock'n'Roll marathon with Team in Training. Help me reach my fundraising goals: http://pages.teamintraining.org/ma/pfchangs10/joshuagay ___ 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 ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Question to post...
On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 5:23 AM, Gregory Maxwellgmaxw...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 2:56 PM, Cox, Seritaserita@bridgespan.org wrote: Google's new search engine, Caffeine, is supposedly kicking Wikipedia entries further down results page. Thoughts? Comments? http://software.silicon.com/applications/0,39024653,39484015,00.htm [from my comments in #wikimedia-tech the other day] So— I tried 20 random words, and the WP result was lower in four of them, the same in the rest. No pattern really... We still have the problem with article at funny name; redirect from common name; common name search on google gives squat, which I consider to be much more major. A simple solution to this is using the canonical tags which all major search engines started supporting earlier this year. http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/canonical-link-tag/? Wikia's GPL code to add this to MediaWiki is available here: https://wikia-code.com/wikia/trunk/extensions/wikia/CanonicalHref/CanonicalHref.php? More info on it in Nick's blog post at http://www.techyouruniverse.com/wikia/google-canonical-href-with-mediawiki Angela ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Alphascript Publishing: 1900+ copypasted books from Wikipedia
David Goodman wrote: I would be exceedingly uncomfortable with us organizing a negative campaign against any publisher not actually violating our copyright. . A factual campaign, providing information is another matter. It would be entirely appropriate for individuals, even in a somewhat coordinated way, to add a review, just pointing out that it is entirely a copy of a Wikipedia article, and available free in an updated version from our website--and in updated form. It may still be violating moral rights, which are a part of the copyright law even though no penalties are provided. There could also be a case for fraudulent misrepresentation. Another alternative might be for Wikimedians to put together a company that would sell similar books to the public at cost, perhaps on a print on demand basis so as to get the latest versions. Article selection might be the same, and they could even use identical titles for each book, but there would be no deception about where the material comes from. Ec ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Question to post...
On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 2:56 PM, Cox, Seritaserita@bridgespan.org wrote: Google's new search engine, Caffeine, is supposedly kicking Wikipedia entries further down results page. Thoughts? Comments? http://software.silicon.com/applications/0,39024653,39484015,00.htm Thank, Serita ___NOTICE This electronic mail transmission, including any attachments, contains confidential information of Bain Company, Inc. (Bain) and/or its clients. It is intended only for the person(s) named, and the information in such e-mail shall only be used by the person(s) named for the purpose intended and for no other purpose. Any use, distribution, copying or disclosure by any other persons, or by the person(s) named but for purposes other than the intended purpose, is strictly prohibited. If you received this transmission in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and then destroy this e-mail. Opinions, conclusions and other information in this message that do not relate to the official business of Bain shall be understood to be neither given nor endorsed by Bain. When addressed to Bain clients, any information contained in this e-mail shall be subject to the terms and conditions in the applicable client contract. ___ ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l As long as all sites are getting treated equally, it's fine in my book. I only take issue when results are skewed because Google bumps results up/down arbitrarily. -Chad ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] [Wikitech-l] Question to post...
On 8/13/09 5:28 PM, Angela wrote: On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 5:23 AM, Gregory Maxwellgmaxw...@gmail.com wrote: So— I tried 20 random words, and the WP result was lower in four of them, the same in the rest. No pattern really... We still have the problem with article at funny name; redirect from common name; common name search on google gives squat, which I consider to be much more major. A simple solution to this is using the canonical tags which all major search engines started supporting earlier this year. That's been deployed for a while, eg: link rel=canonical href=/wiki/Foobar / at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foo -- brion ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Question to post...
On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 2:56 PM, Cox, Seritaserita@bridgespan.org wrote: Google's new search engine, Caffeine, is supposedly kicking Wikipedia entries further down results page. Thoughts? Comments? So what? Wikipedia's goal isn't to get high search rankings. It's to be a useful resource within its domain. If a search for flat screen TV starts ranking online stores higher than [[Flat panel display]], say, that's not something we should be worried about at all. Good for Google for improving its search quality results. (For that particular query it already returns stores, POV reviews, and so on -- which is entirely correct.) If Google is starting to rank us lower than our actual *competitors* -- other sites that aim to provide neutral explanations of factual topics -- then we should be looking at what people might prefer about those sites that would cause Google to rank them higher. It's not like Google is doing anything but matching demand, as far as it can gauge it. If Wikipedia gets moved to fourth place for a certain query, and then everyone skips the first three results to click on the Wikipedia link, I very much doubt we'd stay in fourth place for too long. So, in short: forget about Google. Make a site that people want to read, and you'll get popularity not just from search engines, but also from word of mouth and every other means under the Sun. It's not like we're making ad revenue off people who come to Wikipedia but would really prefer to be someplace else. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
[Foundation-l] EN Wikizine - Year: 2009 Week: 33 Number: 115
** ____ _ __ _ / / /\ \ (_) | _(_)___(_)_ __ ___ \ \/ \/ / | |/ / |_ / | '_ \ / _ \ \ /\ /| | | |/ /| | | | | __/ \/ \/ |_|_|\_\_/___|_|_| |_|\___| .org Year: 2009 Week: 33 Number: 115 ** An independent internal news bulletin for the members of the Wikimedia community // === Technical news === [Tech Update] - the sysadmins posted a tech update of what happened last week and what will be coming up this week and beyond. http://techblog.wikimedia.org/2009/08/weekly-wiki-tech-update/ -- techblog post [clone $brion;] - Brion Vibber, the current Foundation CTO, announced that they want to split his position into two. There will be a new Chief Technical Officer and Brion will become the Senior Software Architect; more information about the responsibilities of each can be found on the blog post. http://techblog.wikimedia.org/2009/08/cto-position-split/ -- techblog post [Try Beta] - Have you noticed the new ?Try Beta? link at the top of Wikimedia project sites? The usability team is proud to introduce the new skin, Vector, and the newly enhanced edit toolbar. Check it out and give them your feedback! http://techblog.wikimedia.org/2009/08/try-the-usability-beta/ -- techblog post [pl.wp: Report a Problem] - The Polish Wikipedia has put together a neat little pop-up tool for reporting errors in articles. (The Zg?o? b??d link in the sidebar.) http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2009-August/102708.html -- post on wikien-l [MW.org: FlaggedRevs] - MediaWiki.org is currently testing out Flagged Revisions in their Manual and Help namespaces. http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2009-July/043806.html -- reason for FlaggedRevs http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2009-August/044582.html -- brion telling about it being enabled [Image Annotations] - a hack for Wikimedia Commons allows for image annotations, just like Flickr has them, be sure to check it out! http://ur1.ca/8tik -- example image http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Gadget-ImageAnnotator -- help page [MediaWiki Wave] - a new project, MediaWiki Wave, has been launched. It attempts to find a way for Google Wave, a communication and collaboration tool in development, to work with and make the best of MediaWiki. http://mediawikiwave.blogspot.com/ -- blog http://code.google.com/p/mediawikiwave/ -- project code === Request for help === [BBC Wikimania] - this is a weird request for help, because it doesn't come from the community. The BBC's Digital Revolution, an open and collaborative documentary on the way the web is changing our lives, wants to come to Wikimania 2009 but can't make it! They're looking for people to film some content for them, are you going to Wikimania and interested? Visit the blog post for more information and contact them ASAP. http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/digitalrevolution/2009/08/wikimania-2009-are-you-going-w.shtml === Proposals === [Global sysop opt-out] - a new proposal about global sysops has been created and feedback is requested! http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_sysops/opt-out_proposal === Foundation === [Report to the Board] - Sue Gardner, the Executive Director, has published her report to the Board of Trustees for April 2009. http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2009-August/053920.html [Board Election Results] - the results of the Board of Trustees elections have been released; the three winners are: Ting Chen (Wing), Kat Walsh (Mindspillage), and Samuel Klein (Sj). The Election Committee started a post-mortem section to collect commentary for future elections. Your comments on what went wrong and what went right will be highly appreciated. http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Board_elections/2009/Results/en -- results http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Board_elections/2009#Post_mortem -- post mortem === Agenda === [IN: WP Takes Chennai] - Are you in India? Love Wikipedia? Got a camera? Then participate in 'Wikipedia Takes Chennai' this Sunday (August 16). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Takes_Chennai === Community === [WMFR: Multimedia Usability] - Wikimédia France has announced a new Multimedia Usability Project. It is intended to support and compliment the Wikimedia Foundation's project funded by the Foundation. http://blog.wikimedia.fr/lancement-du-multimedia-usability-project-822 http://blog.wikimedia.org/2009/07/02/ford-foundation-awards-300k-grant-for-wikimedia-commons/ -- WMF project [MW Translation Rally] - Translatewiki.net, the site that coordinates translations of the MediaWiki software, is running a translation rally. Contribute 500 MediaWiki translations and share in 1,000 Euro! http://translatewiki.net/wiki/Project:Rally-2009-08
