[Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] The Signpost -- Volume 10, Issue 9 -- 05 March 2014
News and notes: Wikipedia Library finding success in matching contributors with sources http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2014-03-05/News_and_notes Traffic report: Brinksmen on the brink http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2014-03-05/Traffic_report Discussion report: Four paragraph lead, indefinitely blocked IPs, editor reviews broken? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2014-03-05/Discussion_report WikiProject report: Article Rescue Squadron http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2014-03-05/WikiProject_report Featured content: Full speed ahead for the WikiCup http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2014-03-05/Featured_content Single page view http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Signpost/Single PDF version http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book:Wikipedia_Signpost/2014-03-05 https://www.facebook.com/wikisignpost / https://twitter.com/wikisignpost -- Wikipedia Signpost Staff http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost ___ Please note: all replies sent to this mailing list will be immediately directed to Wikimedia-l, the public mailing list of the Wikimedia community. For more information about Wikimedia-l: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l ___ WikimediaAnnounce-l mailing list wikimediaannounc...@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaannounce-l ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
[Wikimedia-l] Announcing Wikimedia UK's new five year strategy
Dear community
I am very pleased to be able to announce that the board of Wikimedia UK has
formally adopted a five year strategy for the charity:
https://wikimedia.org.uk/wiki/Overview_of_strategy
The strategy sets out not only our mission ('to help people and organisations
create and preserve Open Knowledge, and to help provide easy access for all’)
but also the way in which we aim to achieve that in practice.
To ensure that our day-to-day activities are closely focussed on attainment of
our mission, we have committed to record and publish a wide range of measured
outcomes which will indicate, on an ongoing basis, how we are performing
against a range of strategic goals. These measured outcomes will build up
over time into a comprehensive picture of the practical impact the charity has
been able to make.
In preparing the strategy we consulted widely with own Wikimedia UK community,
the Wikimedia community at large, other chapters, the Wikimedia Foundation, and
interested individuals. The draft strategy documents were open for public
consultation during the month of February, and feedback received was taken into
account along with staff and board contributions. We have replied to the
community feedback on-wiki: https://wikimedia.org.uk/wiki/Strategy_consultation
We are confident that as the end result of this process we have a robust
strategy that will serve us well in the years to come. It will enable us to
maintain and track challenging but achievable targets while retaining
operational flexibility to focus our day-to-day efforts on whichever individual
activities and initiatives will best help us achieve practical impact.
We would like to thank everyone who has contributed to the process, and we look
forward to continuing to work with the community with renewed focus and vigour.
Best regards
Michael
Michael Maggs
Chair, Wikimedia UK
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's accept Bitcoin as a donation method
Hi everyone, I thought it may be worth pointing out that this conversation has be re-opened by Jimmy on reddit: http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/201fa6/hello_from_jimmy_wales_of_wikipedia/http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/201fa6/hello_from_jimmy_wales_of_wikipedia/ On it he states I'm planning to re-open the conversation with the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Directors at our next meeting (and before, by email) about whether Wikimedia should accept bitcoin. More info at the thread itself. Regards, Charles / User:Chuq On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 10:44 AM, Katie Horn kh...@wikimedia.org wrote: That very rough number that Matt threw out there has far less to do with the cost of applying human brainpower than it does with the cost of taking the available brainpower away from things we know are going to significantly increase our efficacy. We have several of those things looming on the horizon, and we choose to concentrate new development on what we know will be the biggest earners out of those. My understanding (I am no analyst) is that we continue to have a difficult time finding hard evidence that bitcoin is currently anywhere near the other top candidates, so it remains off the roadmap in favor of concentrating on solid numbers. If anybody would like to supply us with hard figures, we'd certainly be interested in seeing them. The main reason the expected earnings one dude's salary calculation of worthiness doesn't work here, is that there are four people in fundraising engineering. The four of us support and maintain all existing payments functionality, ensure integrity of the donation pipeline, and do all new code development and review. For the sake of the foundation and the movement, each one of us has to do significantly better than individually break even. As the fundraising tech lead, I definitely appreciate any outside interest in potentially helping us out by modifying fundraising code in order to support more payment methods, and I would be happy to outline the general process of integrating with a new gateway in a way that is consistent with our current code. Before I get in to the nitty-gritty, though, I want to be completely clear on this one point: Even if I had the authority to do so (I do not), there is no universe in which I am willing to enable new functionality simply because the switch exists. Matt has already done a pretty good job outlining the scope of the collective distraction that bitcoin represents, and that scope extends well beyond tech. In fact, it seems to me that producing the actual integration code is the most trivial issue regarding bitcoin integration that has been brought up thus far, and I would not be pleased to see well-intentioned volunteer time go to waste over hastily dismissed blocking issues which exist well outside the purview of the fundraising tech team. That said, here is a very general 30,000 foot view of a typical new gateway integration from a purely technical standpoint: * Donation Interface[1]: This is the mediawiki extension that initiates payments. A new gateway adapter child class will need to be created, which will run in parallel to the existing enabled gateway adapters, and not short-circuit any of the class constraints that have been deliberately built in to the gateway adapter parent class. Then, an appropriate form (or redirect) should be created to handle the user experience, which uses the RapidHTML templating system. At the end of it all, after a successful donation has been made, an internal donation message should be queued. Happily, examples of all the things I just mentioned already exist in other gateway adapter objects; New gateways are rarely so unusual that we haven't nearly done it before. * Payments Listener[2]: Most payment gateways worth even brief consideration, have an optional near-realtime notification system. This system tells us when we receive new payments, and existing payments change status (cancels, refunds, chargebacks). We would need to create a listener to receive realtime payment updates, process them securely, and queue donation messages when appropriate. Though a realtime message listener is usually not strictly required in order to get paid through a new gateway integration, I have recently decided to require them wherever possible. * Nightly reconciliation / auditing[3]: Every payment gateway we integrate with provides a daily downloadable list of all the transactions we should have on record. So, a job needs to be created that will download the daily file and chew through our records to make sure we have all the relevant data, and rebuild anything we may have missed. This job needs to be set up to run daily. * Queue consumer module for civicrm integration[4]: The donations queue consumer will need to be modified, to accept and correctly process donation messages from the new gateway, in a way that is consistent with our
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's accept Bitcoin as a donation method
Jimmy's already noted this is WRONG, but the erroneous Telegraph story reads: Wikipedia charity begins accepting Bitcoin donations after co-founder Jimmy Wales set up a personal account to play around with digital currency and was swamped with cash http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/wikipedia/10687380/Wales-inundated-with-Wikipedia-donations-after-publishing-personal-Bitcoin-address.html *Jimmy Wales* @jimmy_wales https://twitter.com/jimmy_wales 7mhttps://twitter.com/jimmy_wales/status/443031310207311872 Yo, @Telegraph https://twitter.com/Telegraph, this story is wrong: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/wik ipedia/10687380/Wales-inundated-with-Wikipedia-donations-after-publishing-personal-Bitcoin-address.html ... http://t.co/fM3CTBzRsE No decision has been made for Wikipedia to accept BTC! On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 9:26 AM, Charles Gregory wmau.li...@chuq.netwrote: Hi everyone, I thought it may be worth pointing out that this conversation has be re-opened by Jimmy on reddit: http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/201fa6/hello_from_jimmy_wales_of_wikipedia/ http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/201fa6/hello_from_jimmy_wales_of_wikipedia/ On it he states I'm planning to re-open the conversation with the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Directors at our next meeting (and before, by email) about whether Wikimedia should accept bitcoin. More info at the thread itself. Regards, Charles / User:Chuq On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 10:44 AM, Katie Horn kh...@wikimedia.org wrote: That very rough number that Matt threw out there has far less to do with the cost of applying human brainpower than it does with the cost of taking the available brainpower away from things we know are going to significantly increase our efficacy. We have several of those things looming on the horizon, and we choose to concentrate new development on what we know will be the biggest earners out of those. My understanding (I am no analyst) is that we continue to have a difficult time finding hard evidence that bitcoin is currently anywhere near the other top candidates, so it remains off the roadmap in favor of concentrating on solid numbers. If anybody would like to supply us with hard figures, we'd certainly be interested in seeing them. The main reason the expected earnings one dude's salary calculation of worthiness doesn't work here, is that there are four people in fundraising engineering. The four of us support and maintain all existing payments functionality, ensure integrity of the donation pipeline, and do all new code development and review. For the sake of the foundation and the movement, each one of us has to do significantly better than individually break even. As the fundraising tech lead, I definitely appreciate any outside interest in potentially helping us out by modifying fundraising code in order to support more payment methods, and I would be happy to outline the general process of integrating with a new gateway in a way that is consistent with our current code. Before I get in to the nitty-gritty, though, I want to be completely clear on this one point: Even if I had the authority to do so (I do not), there is no universe in which I am willing to enable new functionality simply because the switch exists. Matt has already done a pretty good job outlining the scope of the collective distraction that bitcoin represents, and that scope extends well beyond tech. In fact, it seems to me that producing the actual integration code is the most trivial issue regarding bitcoin integration that has been brought up thus far, and I would not be pleased to see well-intentioned volunteer time go to waste over hastily dismissed blocking issues which exist well outside the purview of the fundraising tech team. That said, here is a very general 30,000 foot view of a typical new gateway integration from a purely technical standpoint: * Donation Interface[1]: This is the mediawiki extension that initiates payments. A new gateway adapter child class will need to be created, which will run in parallel to the existing enabled gateway adapters, and not short-circuit any of the class constraints that have been deliberately built in to the gateway adapter parent class. Then, an appropriate form (or redirect) should be created to handle the user experience, which uses the RapidHTML templating system. At the end of it all, after a successful donation has been made, an internal donation message should be queued. Happily, examples of all the things I just mentioned already exist in other gateway adapter objects; New gateways are rarely so unusual that we haven't nearly done it before. * Payments Listener[2]: Most payment gateways worth even brief consideration, have an optional near-realtime notification system. This system tells us when we receive new payments, and existing payments
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's accept Bitcoin as a donation method
sarcasm Wow, we've made an entire 1.6k out of bitcoin? This totally seems like the highest-value way to spend our time! Thanks, Bitcoin! I'm sure that the value of these items won't wildly vary in short spaces of time based on things like, oh, your propensity to have banking neophytes host your exchanges and end up shut down. /sarcasm On 10 March 2014 07:39, Andrew Lih andrew@gmail.com wrote: Jimmy's already noted this is WRONG, but the erroneous Telegraph story reads: Wikipedia charity begins accepting Bitcoin donations after co-founder Jimmy Wales set up a personal account to play around with digital currency and was swamped with cash http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/wikipedia/10687380/Wales-inundated-with-Wikipedia-donations-after-publishing-personal-Bitcoin-address.html *Jimmy Wales* @jimmy_wales https://twitter.com/jimmy_wales 7mhttps://twitter.com/jimmy_wales/status/443031310207311872 Yo, @Telegraph https://twitter.com/Telegraph, this story is wrong: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/wik ipedia/10687380/Wales-inundated-with-Wikipedia-donations-after-publishing-personal-Bitcoin-address.html ... http://t.co/fM3CTBzRsE No decision has been made for Wikipedia to accept BTC! On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 9:26 AM, Charles Gregory wmau.li...@chuq.net wrote: Hi everyone, I thought it may be worth pointing out that this conversation has be re-opened by Jimmy on reddit: http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/201fa6/hello_from_jimmy_wales_of_wikipedia/ http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/201fa6/hello_from_jimmy_wales_of_wikipedia/ On it he states I'm planning to re-open the conversation with the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Directors at our next meeting (and before, by email) about whether Wikimedia should accept bitcoin. More info at the thread itself. Regards, Charles / User:Chuq On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 10:44 AM, Katie Horn kh...@wikimedia.org wrote: That very rough number that Matt threw out there has far less to do with the cost of applying human brainpower than it does with the cost of taking the available brainpower away from things we know are going to significantly increase our efficacy. We have several of those things looming on the horizon, and we choose to concentrate new development on what we know will be the biggest earners out of those. My understanding (I am no analyst) is that we continue to have a difficult time finding hard evidence that bitcoin is currently anywhere near the other top candidates, so it remains off the roadmap in favor of concentrating on solid numbers. If anybody would like to supply us with hard figures, we'd certainly be interested in seeing them. The main reason the expected earnings one dude's salary calculation of worthiness doesn't work here, is that there are four people in fundraising engineering. The four of us support and maintain all existing payments functionality, ensure integrity of the donation pipeline, and do all new code development and review. For the sake of the foundation and the movement, each one of us has to do significantly better than individually break even. As the fundraising tech lead, I definitely appreciate any outside interest in potentially helping us out by modifying fundraising code in order to support more payment methods, and I would be happy to outline the general process of integrating with a new gateway in a way that is consistent with our current code. Before I get in to the nitty-gritty, though, I want to be completely clear on this one point: Even if I had the authority to do so (I do not), there is no universe in which I am willing to enable new functionality simply because the switch exists. Matt has already done a pretty good job outlining the scope of the collective distraction that bitcoin represents, and that scope extends well beyond tech. In fact, it seems to me that producing the actual integration code is the most trivial issue regarding bitcoin integration that has been brought up thus far, and I would not be pleased to see well-intentioned volunteer time go to waste over hastily dismissed blocking issues which exist well outside the purview of the fundraising tech team. That said, here is a very general 30,000 foot view of a typical new gateway integration from a purely technical standpoint: * Donation Interface[1]: This is the mediawiki extension that initiates payments. A new gateway adapter child class will need to be created, which will run in parallel to the existing enabled gateway adapters, and not short-circuit any of the class constraints that have been deliberately built in to the gateway adapter parent class. Then, an appropriate form (or redirect) should be created to handle the user experience, which uses the RapidHTML templating
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's accept Bitcoin as a donation method
Charles Gregory, 10/03/2014 14:26: On it he states I'm planning to re-open the conversation with the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Directors at our next meeting (and before, by email) about whether Wikimedia should accept bitcoin. More info at the thread itself. What's the board of directors? Nemo ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's accept Bitcoin as a donation method
On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 11:02 AM, Oliver Keyes oke...@wikimedia.org wrote: sarcasm Wow, we've made an entire 1.6k out of bitcoin? This totally seems like the highest-value way to spend our time! Thanks, Bitcoin! I'm sure that the value of these items won't wildly vary in short spaces of time based on things like, oh, your propensity to have banking neophytes host your exchanges and end up shut down. /sarcasm Sounds like an interesting headache for Jimmy's tax accountant! Income tax implications of getting donations in bitcoins, cashing them out and donating them to a tax exempt organization... might be complicated. It's hard to credit that people are still pushing for the WMF to accept Bitcoin payments after the worlds major venue for trading them, the Magic: The Gathering Online Exchange, crashed and disappeared $500m. Obviously not a safe and secure payment modality right now, where is the rush to jump into something so risky? ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] [feature suggestion] Be able to include/exclude certain page fragments based on the geographic area
Another point of view is that the knowledge doesn’t (shouldn’t) depend in any way of the local government -- possibly it can be viewed differently from a culture to another but that’s a cultural question not related to censorship. Moreover it would be a censorship practice close to the Ministry of Truth in 1984 where the newspapers are re-printed afterwards to modify the past History. ~ Seb35 Le mercredi 5 mars 2014 05:37:25 (CET), Todd Allen toddmal...@gmail.com a écrit : Exactly this. If the government of any given country wants to redirect certain articles, or all of Wikipedia, to a page saying This content blocked by the Ministry of Knowledge, people will know they're being censored. If instead they reach a sanitized version of the article reflecting the government's preferred spin, we're putting that government's spin in our voice. That's not at all acceptable. Let them censor, let them make it obvious, and let them deal with the fallout. But we should absolutely not help them in any way whatsoever. On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 9:30 PM, Austin Hair adh...@gmail.com wrote: I think that if you stop to think about it another way, you'll find that this would do the opposite of what you intend, to wit: allowing various courts to impose editorial control. Imagine Circletine, once a popular childhood beverage but now the issue of some controversy regarding its tendency to cause tooth loss. Although banned from sale in Europe and the United States, an aggressive marketing campaign has made it the best-selling soft drink in the nation of Elbonia. Equally aggressive lobbying in the Elbonian parliament has resulted it in being a crime to disparage Circletine in any way, or even to mention the controversy in print. And so we have our article: '''Circletine''' is a bannedin country=elboniacontroversial/bannedin milk flavoring product made from malt extract, curds, and whey, bannedin country=elboniaonce/bannedin extremely popular worldwide bannedin country=elboniaAlthough it enjoyed several decades of success as an inexpensive beverage marketed mostly for children, concerns over an increased risk of tooth loss led to its withdrawal from sale in most western countries./bannedin (I think you can see where this is going.) Censorship is awful, but partial censorship is worse than simply saying I'm not allowed to talk about it. Ask your government why. Austin On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 9:50 PM, Yuri y...@rawbw.com wrote: I submitted the proposal to be able to eliminate certain parts of the articles in certain countries, where the local governments find those parts illegal: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=62231 But it got rejected, and I am not sure I am clear why. The problem is that there are countries that lack the freedom of speech (most of the countries), and some of them get very aggressive about banning materials that most reasonable people wouldn't find objectionable. The very recent example, provided in the bug report above, is banning of any references of Adolf Hitler's book Mein Kampf in Russia. While this case may seem not as important, but I don't see why users outside Russia should be affected by such decision, when they may not even support any decisions or values of the said government. Yet, everybody's version of wikipedia page is affected, and materials are hidden. My suggestion, if implemented, would allow to hide certain parts of the articles in the country (or area) of jurisdiction of the corresponding court, while allowing users not living there to still see the original version. If such governments get their way in banning materials globally, this will effectively make wikipedia biased, and reflecting various POVs of various courts, which has never been intended by wikipedia. Yuri ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] [feature suggestion] Be able to include/exclude certain page fragments based on the geographic area
On 03/10/2014 11:30, Seb35 wrote: Another point of view is that the knowledge doesn’t (shouldn’t) depend in any way of the local government -- possibly it can be viewed differently from a culture to another but that’s a cultural question not related to censorship. Moreover it would be a censorship practice close to the Ministry of Truth in 1984 where the newspapers are re-printed afterwards to modify the past History. This is exactly the point: when local governments attempt to twist the truth, they are currently able to do this for all readers, regardless of the location. This feature would allow to explicitly twist the truth in specific areas where this twisting is legally required, while preserving the real version for everyone else. In a way, it will also keep the registry of altered information, while now there is no such way and alterations are just swallowed. Yuri ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] the big red notice on the top of http://strategy.wikimedia.org - done
Closed isn't the best word, but do most people know what 'read only' means? From: peter.southw...@telkomsa.net To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2014 12:32:56 +0200 Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] the big red notice on the top of http://strategy.wikimedia.org - done Makes sense to me too. Peter - Original Message - From: James Alexander jameso...@gmail.com To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Sunday, March 09, 2014 12:12 PM Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] the big red notice on the top of http://strategy.wikimedia.org - done On Sun, Mar 9, 2014 at 1:49 AM, Bohdan Melnychuk bas...@yandex.ru wrote: But we close wiki. We not set wiki read only. Why should we use another therm than the procedure is called? Because what we DO (no matter what we call it) is set it as Read Only, it is still 100% accessible you just can't edit it. I think it does make sense that 'read-only' is more understandable then 'close' which sounds like we completely shut it off and you can't read it either. James ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] the big red notice on the top of http://strategy.wikimedia.org - done
Probably not. How about 'archived'? Thanks, Mike On 10 Mar 2014, at 22:22, User Mono userm...@outlook.com wrote: Closed isn't the best word, but do most people know what 'read only' means? From: peter.southw...@telkomsa.net To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2014 12:32:56 +0200 Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] the big red notice on the top of http://strategy.wikimedia.org - done Makes sense to me too. Peter - Original Message - From: James Alexander jameso...@gmail.com To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Sunday, March 09, 2014 12:12 PM Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] the big red notice on the top of http://strategy.wikimedia.org - done On Sun, Mar 9, 2014 at 1:49 AM, Bohdan Melnychuk bas...@yandex.ru wrote: But we close wiki. We not set wiki read only. Why should we use another therm than the procedure is called? Because what we DO (no matter what we call it) is set it as Read Only, it is still 100% accessible you just can't edit it. I think it does make sense that 'read-only' is more understandable then 'close' which sounds like we completely shut it off and you can't read it either. James ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] the big red notice on the top of http://strategy.wikimedia.org - done
Why not? People know what the words 'read' and 'only' mean. Putting them together should be pretty self explanatory: It can only be read. On 10/03/14 22:32, Michael Peel wrote: Probably not. How about 'archived'? Thanks, Mike On 10 Mar 2014, at 22:22, User Mono userm...@outlook.com wrote: Closed isn't the best word, but do most people know what 'read only' means? From: peter.southw...@telkomsa.net To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2014 12:32:56 +0200 Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] the big red notice on the top of http://strategy.wikimedia.org - done Makes sense to me too. Peter - Original Message - From: James Alexander jameso...@gmail.com To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Sunday, March 09, 2014 12:12 PM Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] the big red notice on the top of http://strategy.wikimedia.org - done On Sun, Mar 9, 2014 at 1:49 AM, Bohdan Melnychuk bas...@yandex.ru wrote: But we close wiki. We not set wiki read only. Why should we use another therm than the procedure is called? Because what we DO (no matter what we call it) is set it as Read Only, it is still 100% accessible you just can't edit it. I think it does make sense that 'read-only' is more understandable then 'close' which sounds like we completely shut it off and you can't read it either. James ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] the big red notice on the top of http://strategy.wikimedia.org - done
Maybe. I worry that it is computer jargon - but perhaps what I suggested is historian jargon... Thanks, Mike On 10 Mar 2014, at 22:33, Isarra Yos zhoris...@gmail.com wrote: Why not? People know what the words 'read' and 'only' mean. Putting them together should be pretty self explanatory: It can only be read. On 10/03/14 22:32, Michael Peel wrote: Probably not. How about 'archived'? Thanks, Mike On 10 Mar 2014, at 22:22, User Mono userm...@outlook.com wrote: Closed isn't the best word, but do most people know what 'read only' means? From: peter.southw...@telkomsa.net To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2014 12:32:56 +0200 Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] the big red notice on the top of http://strategy.wikimedia.org - done Makes sense to me too. Peter - Original Message - From: James Alexander jameso...@gmail.com To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Sunday, March 09, 2014 12:12 PM Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] the big red notice on the top of http://strategy.wikimedia.org - done On Sun, Mar 9, 2014 at 1:49 AM, Bohdan Melnychuk bas...@yandex.ru wrote: But we close wiki. We not set wiki read only. Why should we use another therm than the procedure is called? Because what we DO (no matter what we call it) is set it as Read Only, it is still 100% accessible you just can't edit it. I think it does make sense that 'read-only' is more understandable then 'close' which sounds like we completely shut it off and you can't read it either. James ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] the big red notice on the top of http://strategy.wikimedia.org - done
On 3/10/2014 3:36 PM, Michael Peel wrote: Maybe. I worry that it is computer jargon - but perhaps what I suggested is historian jargon... It's not so much jargon that's the problem - it's that nearly all websites are read-only, and to some visitors it will be rather puzzling why we should go out of our way to highlight that aspect for this one. --Michael Snow ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] the big red notice on the top of http://strategy.wikimedia.org - done
On 10 Mar 2014, at 22:42, Michael Snow wikipe...@frontier.com wrote: On 3/10/2014 3:36 PM, Michael Peel wrote: Maybe. I worry that it is computer jargon - but perhaps what I suggested is historian jargon... It's not so much jargon that's the problem - it's that nearly all websites are read-only, and to some visitors it will be rather puzzling why we should go out of our way to highlight that aspect for this one. True. But is that a feature or a bug? Thanks, Mike ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
[Wikimedia-l] Non-free images in collaborations
@ Yana. You write But we hope to make them all freely licensed eventually and have already done so for newer logos (e.g. the new Wikivoyage logo). But commons does not reflect this https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page Please advise? -- James Heilman MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine www.opentextbookofmedicine.com ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Non-free images in collaborations
I'm confused about what you mean? The Wikivoyage logo for example is certainly marked as free https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikivoyage-logo.svg can you clarify? James Alexander Legal and Community Advocacy Wikimedia Foundation (415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 6:08 PM, James Heilman jmh...@gmail.com wrote: @ Yana. You write But we hope to make them all freely licensed eventually and have already done so for newer logos (e.g. the new Wikivoyage logo). But commons does not reflect this https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page Please advise? -- James Heilman MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine www.opentextbookofmedicine.com ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
[Wikimedia-l] Non-free images in collaborations
My apologies. You are indeed correct. -- James Heilman MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine www.opentextbookofmedicine.com ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
