Re: [Foundation-l] Black market science
On 07/12/11 11:16 AM, Samuel Klein wrote: It's not something we've developed expertise in doing. While it may be a valuable service, that would almost be another top-level Project or two. On the other hand, PLoS (plos.org - the public library of science) is a great journal publisher that reviews and publishes scientific work under a free license. [They impose even fewer restrictions on reuse than Wikimedia, using CC-BY, which is a more appropriate license in my opinion for novel and scientific work.] So at one level, we should simply support PLoS and amplify their visibility and effectiveness. At another, we could serve as a public repository of works submitted to them. I don't really object to hosting the kinds of papers under discussion, but at what point does the pursuit of such content become a monopolistic practice. Others should be hosting these too, even if it results in duplication and redundancy. We should even be encouraging researchers to publish elsewhere.first. To have that happen there needs to be more clarity in the reliable financing of open access sites in general. There are consequences to being the big kid on the block. Rather than merely reflecting trends and attitudes we begin to lead them. With something as simple as alternative spellings, when we adopt the most common spelling based on our own quantitative analysis of Google usages we affect the future analysis by others because their analyses will include usages by Wikimedia and by those influenced by Wikimedia. Other natural processes which may have favoured the alternative are thwarted in their evolution. Ray ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Black market science
On 07/09/11 2:06 PM, Andrea Zanni wrote: My point (working in an academic digital library and just seeing the amount of thesis, dissertation, articles passing by) is that if for people is a difficult, overcomplicated burden to upload a PDF in an institutional repository (5 minutes of their time, even less), how can we wikilibrarians think that they will come to us and upload and curate their text? I clearly remeber the Screw it feeling I had the day after I graduated, meaning that I would not even touch my thesis again for the next months (and so it was). If 5 more minutes of an author's time is too much for uploading a thesis that he has worked in for months or years that's his problem. He could even pay someone to upload for him. It suggests he doesn't have much faith in his own work. It's not our job to hold his hand. Ray ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Black market science
On 07/07/11 12:00 AM, Ting Chen wrote: On de.wikisource.org they scan every page of the original text, upload the scan on Commons and show the scan on the right part of every page as an image. It is even obligatory to have the original scan of the text. The following page is an example: http://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Seite:Oberamt_Tettnang_231.jpg (I just hit the random page) This is, of course, excessive. On the one hand it is a continuing virtue to have reliable proofread texts, but it should be sufficient to be able to link to such a text somewhere without necessarily including a copy. Whether one, two or three people have verified a text can indeed be shown in the metadata, and that becomes a basis for a user to judge reliability. Imposing stringent requirements will also discourage having other editions of the same work. The one place where we can provide the greatest value-added is in linking the material in ways that it will become useful. Ray ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Black market science
2011/7/18 Ray Saintonge sainto...@telus.net On 07/09/11 2:06 PM, Andrea Zanni wrote: My point (working in an academic digital library and just seeing the amount of thesis, dissertation, articles passing by) is that if for people is a difficult, overcomplicated burden to upload a PDF in an institutional repository (5 minutes of their time, even less), how can we wikilibrarians think that they will come to us and upload and curate their text? I clearly remeber the Screw it feeling I had the day after I graduated, meaning that I would not even touch my thesis again for the next months (and so it was). If 5 more minutes of an author's time is too much for uploading a thesis that he has worked in for months or years that's his problem. He could even pay someone to upload for him. It suggests he doesn't have much faith in his own work. It's not our job to hold his hand. I agree that 5 minutes are an acceptable time: what I wanted to say (probably my English is worse than what I think :-) is that curation of a thesis on Wikisource doesn't take 5 minutes, but even 5 hours. 5 hours and a lot of knowledge in Wikisource policies, mediawiki, templates and so on. I perfectly know that having your own thesis in wikitext on Wikisource is a good thing, but I don't honestly know if it is worth the labor. Aubrey ___ 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] Going to far
Hello, I regret the fact that I need to e-mail to this list, but I tried and tried but can't work it out with the people involved. I talked about letting it go but that doesn't seem the right thing to do also, so maybe a discussion on this list can make something happen. First a starter, I'm not going to spin around it... I'm currently blocked on Commons, nl.wiki en Meta for privacy violation and using multible accounts. But now here it comes, when I want to talk about the privacy about the people around me no body is responding. If I messed up, and that still a big maybe I'm happy to go down and get a bad reputation into Google and all the other search engines but people around me should be safe. Currently there are lots of pointers to my girlfriend on NL.Wiki, Meta and Commons. While the article and the picture was hers she had nothing to do with the complete case some people made here. As you will understand I will not call her by her name since otherwise we have yet another place where her name is listed and indexed into Google. It all started on the Dutch Wikipedia after somebody created a article about the Dutch writer and somebody did a CheckUser and came to the conclusion that Delay and me had a common source. After that a Dutch Administrator Freaky Fries came with the news that I had a relationship with this person and that we would live on the same adres (here: http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verzoekpagina_voor_moderatoren/Sokpoppen/2011#Delay) While the CheckUser confirmed that the IP from the home adres is no link to the Delay account and there is no proof or relavancy what so ever it still stating on Wikipedia that we are living together. After that a OTRS agent with the name RonaldB posted a ticketnumber that can confirm that I and her have a relationship. On the Request for Deletion page on Nl.wikipedia is again a link posted to my private twitter to state that I have a relationship with her. ( http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Te_verwijderen_pagina%27s/Toegevoegd_20110601) After that this whole discussion is moved by a dutch administrator to Commons where even Yesterday and today there is a whole discussion again with her name involved on multible pages ( http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Administrators%27_noticeboard#Request_by_Abigor; http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Administrators%27_noticeboard#Request_by_Abigor) Where most recenty a dutch administrator Trijnstel is saying that I and the girl have split up (without any source and without any relevance). On my talkpage on Commons is again brought to the attention. Between this we also have a big Meta discussion http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Requests_for_comment/Abigor where on the page and talkpage the relevance to a possible girlfriend is being made. Now I'm sure that this did break my complete reputation on Wikimedia, while I tried to defend myself and asking for information that the foundation can and have to give I still didn't recieve anything. Also a request for removal of all the names have been made by the ArbCom and nothing was heard But tell me do we want to foundation the damage a reputation of people who doesn't even edit Wikipedia but are taking on to Wikipedia to break a user? I don't care what is happening to me, but somebody please step in and start removing all those privacy violations on all those wiki's. This is going to damage her, and than the Foundation will need to take the heat? Is that what we want? Best, Huib ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Going to far
Huib Laurens wrote: I regret the fact that I need to e-mail to this list, but I tried and tried but can't work it out with the people involved. I talked about letting it go but that doesn't seem the right thing to do also, so maybe a discussion on this list can make something happen. I can't imagine you regret sending this e-mail as much as I regret trying to parse it. From what I can tell, this list isn't the appropriate forum. Whatever your issue is, it's buried beneath a wall of text and what appears to be years of antics on your part. If you have reason to believe that the Wikimedia privacy policy has been violated, you should contact the Ombudsman commission: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Ombudsman_commission. If you would like to have certain information removed from a particular Wikimedia wiki, you can try contacting the wiki's oversighters or Arbitration Committee. If you've ruined or soured those relationships to the point that those individuals are unwilling to respond, then that's a bed of your own making and you'll simply have to live with the consequences of your actions. You're also free to contact individual members of Wikimedia Foundation staff or OTRS, but there doesn't appear to be much (if anything) that needs to be discussed that relates to the purpose or mission of this mailing list. MZMcBride ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
[Foundation-l] Apotmail spambots on mailing lists
[this is to those of you who run mailing lists] You may have noticed a deluge of mailing list subscriptions from sensible.na...@apotmail.com -- these are definitely not real people; in all likelihood, the operator's goal is e-mail address harvesting, or worse. Perhaps it would save some of you time to be aware of this and reject these subscribers (on our subscription-by-approval lists, that is) point blank. Cheers, Asaf -- Asaf Bartov Wikimedia Foundation ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
