Re: [Wikimedia-l] On relationship gossip and appropriate conversation
Austin and all, I'm just coming back to this, and see that I have indeed been widely interpreted as having spoken from personal animosity. My one comment on this, which I hope will be allowed through, is that I carry absolutely no personal animosity toward anybody I mentioned, and if any of them do feel that I have made a personal attack on them, I hope they will contact me directly. Pete On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 3:14 PM, Austin Hair adh...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 11:33 PM, Pete Forsyth petefors...@gmail.com wrote: My point was straightforward: I would certainly not be bringing this topic up in a public forum if it had not been widely and extensively discussed in public forums beforehand. It was brought up by Wil, not by me. His reasons for doing so -- that's another matter entirely, and one I'm not personally inclined to get into. Okay, Pete. Despite giving you ample opportunity to clarify your intentions, all I'm taking away from this is Let's all talk about Wil some more. The consensus seems to be with me in my bewilderment. The horse is dead. I've temporarily set your moderation bit while the appropriate funeral arrangements can be made. Austin ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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] Please be considerate of everyone's time.
Hi all, As I scanned through the weekend emails on this list I noticed that many of you are ready to get back to discussing the goals we are all working on. I am really glad to see that. We have plenty of interesting projects to discuss without the gossip. Let's respect the time that many following this list are donating to the project by sticking to constructive, on topic matters. And for starters: the Wikipedia Android Beta app is in store and is awaiting your comments. Thanks, Lila ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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] Please rename this list to shitfight-l, and give us a list where civil discussion about wikimedia can take place
I must agree with the frustration over the quality of discussion on this mailing list lately, but I did want to make clear my appreciation to the list admins, who have decided to avoid playing semantic word games over what is and is not appropriate, and started moderating people who want to use this list for personal abuse, trolling, and other inappropriate discussions. This list has an unfortunate but not undeserved reputation as a bit of a sewer, but that doesn't mean we should lower our expectations on user conduct. From this subscriber at least, your attempts to clean up this place are very much appreciated, and I hope they continue. Cheers, Craig On 16 June 2014 15:43, Dennis Pierri dennis6...@gmail.com wrote: Buddy I would support more common sense, some people on the list just don't think twice before hitting send, that's the way you start a wildfire. This has become an unmoderated forum full of people who seemingly doesn't remember that there are better ways or places to say to another I hate you. Really everyone should ask themselves before hitting send some of this questions: Does this serves a good purpose? Is it going to do any good? Will it cause unnecessary conflict? It is written in a proper and polite way? Being emotional and eager to say something is not so good here, it's a mail list, you can take your time, be as polite as possible, and use your common sense, or else this will get worse. Dennis Pierri On 16/06/2014, at 00:01, Jasper Deng jas...@jasperswebsite.com wrote: I would support increased moderation too, except that sockpuppetry on email lists is trivial (do we really want to go into the mess of implementing CheckUser for email headers?). On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 9:24 PM, Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton rodrigo.argen...@gmail.com wrote: But this behaviour that you are saying is so Wikimedia Movement, the name is totally correct. And expect a block, because they are free, but they need to act in the name of the community, to stop 'trolls'. ;) On 16 June 2014 00:51, Dennis Pierri dennis6...@gmail.com wrote: Agreed, this list has seen too much personal confrontation, fights and general shit and nothing really productive lately, by the way, be ready for the shit storm from those who feel alluded. On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 10:33 PM, billinghurst billinghu...@gmail.com wrote: I am looking for a productive mailing list that discusses matters of importance to the Wikimedia community. That the people on such a list can have these discussions politely, respectfully, and with concern for others in that the words that say, and attitudes taken. I want to see announcements, I want to see a higher quality of conversation on what should be a flaglist in the mailing list space of Wikimedia. We don't have it. One gets to the point of utter frustration with this list, and it is time that the backstabbers, frontstabbers, bitchfighters, venal, conceited, etc. need a place to kill each other with as much venom as possible, but not under the more impressive and specific name of wikimedia-l. So please rename this list, and take all its people to something befitting the behaviour seen. Then please produce a clean list for those who don't have to have the antics of these unbearable, egotistical, and apparently intolerant and chauvinistic people, and please don't let them join that list. They can have their shithole and revel in it. They know who they are and they would feel ashamed if they had a modicum of interest outside of themselves. If that is not possible, then those of who us who want a higher quality discussion will unsubscribe, and be unrepresented and unheard. Another win for the trolls, and a sad reflection on the direction. Regards, Billinghurst ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l , mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe -- Dennis Pierri ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton rodrigo.argen...@gmail.com +55 11 979 718 884 ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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] Please rename this list to shitfight-l, and give us a list where civil discussion about wikimedia can take place
On 16/06/14 13:03, billinghurst wrote: I am looking for a productive mailing list that discusses matters of importance to the Wikimedia community. That the people on such a list can have these discussions politely, respectfully, and with concern for others in that the words that say, and attitudes taken. I want to see announcements, I want to see a higher quality of conversation on what should be a flaglist in the mailing list space of Wikimedia. That's a tautology. You can't postmoderate a mailing list. There's not even any meaningful access control (luckily the trolls haven't figured that out yet). You can't even premoderate in any meaningful way, because people use reply all to send messages directly to the thread participants. So there's not really any way to do better than what we're doing already. People get angry when there are 10 posts in a row on a topic that they don't care about, because they use unthreaded clients and so have no way to organise messages into groups. And people that do use threaded clients are constantly annoyed when people send to the list in a way that breaks threading. The way to have a better mailing list is to not use a mailing list. NNTP with a web frontend would be better in pretty much every way. -- Tim Starling ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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] Please rename this list to shitfight-l, and give us a list where civil discussion about wikimedia can take place
On 16 June 2014 10:41, Tim Starling tstarl...@wikimedia.org wrote: The way to have a better mailing list is to not use a mailing list. NNTP with a web frontend would be better in pretty much every way. There are no good web frontends for NNTP. (GMane and Google Groups both manage worst of both worlds.) My hypothesis is that this is because the fundamental unit of NNTP/email is the message, but of web forums it's the thread. Idle rambling, with comments from people who also used to love NNTP but can't be bothered any more: http://reddragdiva.dreamwidth.org/566555.html - d. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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] Please rename this list to shitfight-l, and give us a list where civil discussion about wikimedia can take place
On 16 June 2014 10:43, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: On 16 June 2014 10:41, Tim Starling tstarl...@wikimedia.org wrote: The way to have a better mailing list is to not use a mailing list. NNTP with a web frontend would be better in pretty much every way. There are no good web frontends for NNTP. (GMane and Google Groups both manage worst of both worlds.) My hypothesis is that this is because the fundamental unit of NNTP/email is the message, but of web forums it's the thread. Idle rambling, with comments from people who also used to love NNTP but can't be bothered any more: http://reddragdiva.dreamwidth.org/566555.html Of course, there's the what NNTP died of problem. Here's a recent LessWrong thread in which I posit it died of not being on the Web and Gwern suggests it was actually good killfiling: http://lesswrong.com/lw/kbk/meta_policy_for_dealing_with_users/az6f - d. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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] Please be considerate of everyone's time.
We have an updated Wikipedia Beta app? Aha, so we do. :) With a little edit pencil next to sections... And an elegant check to see if you want to save an anon edit or log in, after editing. Very nice indeed. Looks like a solid improvement. I'll try editing with it for a week. Hmm, still no way to reach a Talk page. And the History menu option does not bring up the History page. (instead: breadcrumbs) since this is a Beta, it would be nice to have a prominent in-app way to send feedback from any page. SJ On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 4:12 AM, Lila Tretikov l...@wikimedia.org wrote: Hi all, As I scanned through the weekend emails on this list I noticed that many of you are ready to get back to discussing the goals we are all working on. I am really glad to see that. We have plenty of interesting projects to discuss without the gossip. Let's respect the time that many following this list are donating to the project by sticking to constructive, on topic matters. And for starters: the Wikipedia Android Beta app is in store and is awaiting your comments. Thanks, Lila ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe -- Samuel Klein @metasj w:user:sj +1 617 529 4266 ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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] Please rename this list to shitfight-l, and give us a list where civil discussion about wikimedia can take place
Thinking twice is nice and that's what mailman moderation is about. Just for this month we could half the soft quota (https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l ) and calculate it over two months. According to http://www.infodisiac.com/Wikipedia/ScanMail/Wikimedia-l.html this would mean moderating me as soon as I hit send now. :) Nemo ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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] Lsjbot now starting with plant species
After having changed job and residence Sverker is now on it again. This time Lsjbot will generate some 300 000 articles on plant species. The initiative is now receiving full support and even enthusiasm from the fellow wikipedians on svwp It is now close to one year since the 1M article on insects, animal etc was generated and we now have had some feedback whereof I here give some examples *The students on a university veterinary course was given the assignment to write article on parasitic worms and put them up om Wikipedia. These became excellent: complete and voluminous. This was in many way helped/made possible by that there already existed Lsjbot stubs with complete Taxobox, iw-links, categories and basic sources. The students are expert on subjects not the wikispecialities *the experts on animal etc among our Wikipedians has now shifted focus. There are species where the authorities disagree on the taxonomy and here Lsjbot did not generate any article. among birds there are some 500 disputed species. These articles our experts now work with, highlighting the disputes, why, what and by whom. And when we compare these manually created articles we find that on most other language versions, these only take data from one authority and are not correctly describing the dispute. Perhaps svwp will after this not only be most complete but also most correct version on species? As a side effect (not a goal in itself) we expect svwp to be the second biggest version, when it comes to number of articles, by August/September And when it comes to botgeneration in general, we are continuing our researcheffort into generate some 0,3-0,5 M articles on geographic entities from all over the world by end 2015/2016 using Wikidata as a source. Anders ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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] Lsjbot now starting with plant species
Hoi, I blogged about Lsjbot.. [1]. I really hope that a lot of attention is given in finding the links to existing items in Wikidata. Thanks, GerardM [1] http://ultimategerardm.blogspot.nl/2014/06/wikipedia-to-bot-or-not-to-bot.html On 16 June 2014 12:25, Anders Wennersten m...@anderswennersten.se wrote: After having changed job and residence Sverker is now on it again. This time Lsjbot will generate some 300 000 articles on plant species. The initiative is now receiving full support and even enthusiasm from the fellow wikipedians on svwp It is now close to one year since the 1M article on insects, animal etc was generated and we now have had some feedback whereof I here give some examples *The students on a university veterinary course was given the assignment to write article on parasitic worms and put them up om Wikipedia. These became excellent: complete and voluminous. This was in many way helped/made possible by that there already existed Lsjbot stubs with complete Taxobox, iw-links, categories and basic sources. The students are expert on subjects not the wikispecialities *the experts on animal etc among our Wikipedians has now shifted focus. There are species where the authorities disagree on the taxonomy and here Lsjbot did not generate any article. among birds there are some 500 disputed species. These articles our experts now work with, highlighting the disputes, why, what and by whom. And when we compare these manually created articles we find that on most other language versions, these only take data from one authority and are not correctly describing the dispute. Perhaps svwp will after this not only be most complete but also most correct version on species? As a side effect (not a goal in itself) we expect svwp to be the second biggest version, when it comes to number of articles, by August/September And when it comes to botgeneration in general, we are continuing our researcheffort into generate some 0,3-0,5 M articles on geographic entities from all over the world by end 2015/2016 using Wikidata as a source. Anders ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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] Please rename this list to shitfight-l, and give us a list where civil discussion about wikimedia can take place
I am looking for a productive mailing list that discusses matters of importance to the Wikimedia community. That the people on such a list can have these discussions politely, respectfully, and with concern for others in that the words that say, and attitudes taken. I want to see announcements, I want to see a higher quality of conversation on what should be a flaglist in the mailing list space of Wikimedia. Producing civil discourse isn't easy. I was very impressed by AGF when I first arrived at Wikipedia, and it's taken me some years to realize it goes badly wrong in the long term; protects refined trolls, who learn to use it as a shield against accusations of bad faith and a weapon against those of good faith whom they manage to provoke. The opposite extreme may only work under special circumstances --- Never assume https://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Wikinews:Never_assume works tolerably well for en.wn, but Wikinews has the advantage that most discussions can't meaningfully drag out anyway because most issues of contention would be unpublished articles, which rapidly go stale and become irrelevant (so that partial moderation of discussions is afforded indirectly by en.wn's article-review workflow, which is more nearly objective than a direct discussion-moderation). Arguably, AGF shows that fully distributed moderation doesn't work, while Never assume only shows that weak direct moderation can work if there's an external factor imposing order. The internet is a dangerous place http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/climate_desk/2014/02/internet_troll_personality_study_machiavellianism_narcissism_psychopathy.html and one wants a set of rules for moderating internet discussions that is radically inclusive of those of good faith but wildly different views, exclusive of troublemakers, and objective enough to be enforced consistently and successfully by many different moderators of good faith. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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] Lsjbot now starting with plant species
we have now spent one year trying to use Wikidata operationally, in our botprojects, but found it is impossible in the state it is now, from many perspectives. It has been a big disappointment but we hope it will look better a year from now Anders Gerard Meijssen skrev 2014-06-16 12:44: Hoi, I blogged about Lsjbot.. [1]. I really hope that a lot of attention is given in finding the links to existing items in Wikidata. Thanks, GerardM [1] http://ultimategerardm.blogspot.nl/2014/06/wikipedia-to-bot-or-not-to-bot.html On 16 June 2014 12:25, Anders Wennersten m...@anderswennersten.se wrote: After having changed job and residence Sverker is now on it again. This time Lsjbot will generate some 300 000 articles on plant species. The initiative is now receiving full support and even enthusiasm from the fellow wikipedians on svwp It is now close to one year since the 1M article on insects, animal etc was generated and we now have had some feedback whereof I here give some examples *The students on a university veterinary course was given the assignment to write article on parasitic worms and put them up om Wikipedia. These became excellent: complete and voluminous. This was in many way helped/made possible by that there already existed Lsjbot stubs with complete Taxobox, iw-links, categories and basic sources. The students are expert on subjects not the wikispecialities *the experts on animal etc among our Wikipedians has now shifted focus. There are species where the authorities disagree on the taxonomy and here Lsjbot did not generate any article. among birds there are some 500 disputed species. These articles our experts now work with, highlighting the disputes, why, what and by whom. And when we compare these manually created articles we find that on most other language versions, these only take data from one authority and are not correctly describing the dispute. Perhaps svwp will after this not only be most complete but also most correct version on species? As a side effect (not a goal in itself) we expect svwp to be the second biggest version, when it comes to number of articles, by August/September And when it comes to botgeneration in general, we are continuing our researcheffort into generate some 0,3-0,5 M articles on geographic entities from all over the world by end 2015/2016 using Wikidata as a source. Anders ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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] Please rename this list to shitfight-l, and give us a list where civil discussion about wikimedia can take place
Nemo, thanks for that - it really made me laugh. Jane On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 12:23 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemow...@gmail.com wrote: Thinking twice is nice and that's what mailman moderation is about. Just for this month we could half the soft quota (https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Wikimedia-l ) and calculate it over two months. According to http://www.infodisiac.com/Wikipedia/ScanMail/Wikimedia-l.html this would mean moderating me as soon as I hit send now. :) Nemo ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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] Lsjbot now starting with plant species
Hoi, Lets talk Thanks, Gerard On 16 June 2014 13:29, Anders Wennersten m...@anderswennersten.se wrote: we have now spent one year trying to use Wikidata operationally, in our botprojects, but found it is impossible in the state it is now, from many perspectives. It has been a big disappointment but we hope it will look better a year from now Anders Gerard Meijssen skrev 2014-06-16 12:44: Hoi, I blogged about Lsjbot.. [1]. I really hope that a lot of attention is given in finding the links to existing items in Wikidata. Thanks, GerardM [1] http://ultimategerardm.blogspot.nl/2014/06/wikipedia- to-bot-or-not-to-bot.html On 16 June 2014 12:25, Anders Wennersten m...@anderswennersten.se wrote: After having changed job and residence Sverker is now on it again. This time Lsjbot will generate some 300 000 articles on plant species. The initiative is now receiving full support and even enthusiasm from the fellow wikipedians on svwp It is now close to one year since the 1M article on insects, animal etc was generated and we now have had some feedback whereof I here give some examples *The students on a university veterinary course was given the assignment to write article on parasitic worms and put them up om Wikipedia. These became excellent: complete and voluminous. This was in many way helped/made possible by that there already existed Lsjbot stubs with complete Taxobox, iw-links, categories and basic sources. The students are expert on subjects not the wikispecialities *the experts on animal etc among our Wikipedians has now shifted focus. There are species where the authorities disagree on the taxonomy and here Lsjbot did not generate any article. among birds there are some 500 disputed species. These articles our experts now work with, highlighting the disputes, why, what and by whom. And when we compare these manually created articles we find that on most other language versions, these only take data from one authority and are not correctly describing the dispute. Perhaps svwp will after this not only be most complete but also most correct version on species? As a side effect (not a goal in itself) we expect svwp to be the second biggest version, when it comes to number of articles, by August/September And when it comes to botgeneration in general, we are continuing our researcheffort into generate some 0,3-0,5 M articles on geographic entities from all over the world by end 2015/2016 using Wikidata as a source. Anders ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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] Please rename this list to shitfight-l, and give us a list where civil discussion about wikimedia can take place
Everyone move to wikien-l! It's pretty much disused now. Go on, give me work to do. On 16 June 2014 11:23, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemow...@gmail.com wrote: Thinking twice is nice and that's what mailman moderation is about. Just for this month we could half the soft quota (https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l ) and calculate it over two months. According to http://www.infodisiac.com/Wikipedia/ScanMail/Wikimedia-l.html this would mean moderating me as soon as I hit send now. :) Nemo ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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] Please rename this list to shitfight-l, and give us a list where civil discussion about wikimedia can take place
Hoi, Sorry but en,wp is not for me and many others.. No reasons except that it is not what I/we am/are involved in. We need something that is more inclusive. Thanks, GerardM On 16 June 2014 13:44, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: Everyone move to wikien-l! It's pretty much disused now. Go on, give me work to do. On 16 June 2014 11:23, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemow...@gmail.com wrote: Thinking twice is nice and that's what mailman moderation is about. Just for this month we could half the soft quota (https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l ) and calculate it over two months. According to http://www.infodisiac.com/Wikipedia/ScanMail/Wikimedia-l.html this would mean moderating me as soon as I hit send now. :) Nemo ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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] Please be considerate of everyone's time.
Ahh, but some of us are on iOS which doesn’t seem to have been updated on the App Store in a while! The latest status update (at https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Apps/status#2014-05-monthly) seems to suggest it’s in Alpha state. Please can someone from the Apps Team give me some insight into the ETA for a new app, and if some of the new features of iOS 8 could be integrated into it? -- Thehelpfulone https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Thehelpfulone On 16 Jun 2014, at 11:23, Samuel Klein meta...@gmail.com wrote: We have an updated Wikipedia Beta app? Aha, so we do. :) With a little edit pencil next to sections... And an elegant check to see if you want to save an anon edit or log in, after editing. Very nice indeed. Looks like a solid improvement. I'll try editing with it for a week. Hmm, still no way to reach a Talk page. And the History menu option does not bring up the History page. (instead: breadcrumbs) since this is a Beta, it would be nice to have a prominent in-app way to send feedback from any page. SJ On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 4:12 AM, Lila Tretikov l...@wikimedia.org wrote: Hi all, As I scanned through the weekend emails on this list I noticed that many of you are ready to get back to discussing the goals we are all working on. I am really glad to see that. We have plenty of interesting projects to discuss without the gossip. Let's respect the time that many following this list are donating to the project by sticking to constructive, on topic matters. And for starters: the Wikipedia Android Beta app is in store and is awaiting your comments. Thanks, Lila ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe -- Samuel Klein @metasj w:user:sj +1 617 529 4266 ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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] FDC nominations - please ask your questions to the candidates
Hello all, it is with great pleasure that I see the long and diverse list of people having nominated themselves to participate in the FDC in the years to come. [1] The deadline for nominations has passed, and it is now time for the community to ask questions to the candidates. While the next round FDC members will be appointed and not elected, it is crucial that everyone chips in and asks questions to the candidates, so as to allow the Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation to have as much insight as possible as to the skills, competence and motivation of the candidates. You can ask questions to all candidates or to specific candidates on this page: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/Funds_Dissemination_Committee/Nominations/Q%26A Note that your questions are also a way for existing FDC members to know what is important to you all as interested members of the community regarding FDC activities and work, so please, do participate! Best, Delphine (current FDC member) [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/Funds_Dissemination_Committee/Nominations -- @notafish NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get lost. Intercultural musings: Ceci n'est pas une endive - http://blog.notanendive.org Photos with simple eyes: notaphoto - http://photo.notafish.org ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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] Please be considerate of everyone's time.
On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 4:12 AM, Lila Tretikov l...@wikimedia.org wrote: Hi all, As I scanned through the weekend emails on this list I noticed that many of you are ready to get back to discussing the goals we are all working on. I am really glad to see that. We have plenty of interesting projects to discuss without the gossip. Let's respect the time that many following this list are donating to the project by sticking to constructive, on topic matters. And for starters: the Wikipedia Android Beta app is in store and is awaiting your comments. I don't know what an Android Beta app is. Could I ask if there are any plans by WMF to address some of the content problems in Wikipedia? Pretty much any article in my specialist area (which is actually not all that specialist) has serious problems - gross factual errors, omissions, bias and so on. I know from other specialists that this is not just restricted to my area: economics, sociology, many areas of the arts and humanities have similar problems. This is not just a Wikimedia issue, it's a public interest issue. Wikipedia is now the go-to place for knowledge for pretty much everyone in the world. I don't see how WMF is fulfilling its mission (empowering people to collect and develop and disseminate educational content under a free license) when the content isn't actually educational. Regards Ed ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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] Lsjbot now starting with plant species
It would be interesting to know what needs to be improved, so... what prevented you of using the data? And from which different perspectives? Cheers, Micru On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 1:29 PM, Anders Wennersten m...@anderswennersten.se wrote: we have now spent one year trying to use Wikidata operationally, in our botprojects, but found it is impossible in the state it is now, from many perspectives. It has been a big disappointment but we hope it will look better a year from now Anders Gerard Meijssen skrev 2014-06-16 12:44: Hoi, I blogged about Lsjbot.. [1]. I really hope that a lot of attention is given in finding the links to existing items in Wikidata. Thanks, GerardM [1] http://ultimategerardm.blogspot.nl/2014/06/wikipedia- to-bot-or-not-to-bot.html On 16 June 2014 12:25, Anders Wennersten m...@anderswennersten.se wrote: After having changed job and residence Sverker is now on it again. This time Lsjbot will generate some 300 000 articles on plant species. The initiative is now receiving full support and even enthusiasm from the fellow wikipedians on svwp It is now close to one year since the 1M article on insects, animal etc was generated and we now have had some feedback whereof I here give some examples *The students on a university veterinary course was given the assignment to write article on parasitic worms and put them up om Wikipedia. These became excellent: complete and voluminous. This was in many way helped/made possible by that there already existed Lsjbot stubs with complete Taxobox, iw-links, categories and basic sources. The students are expert on subjects not the wikispecialities *the experts on animal etc among our Wikipedians has now shifted focus. There are species where the authorities disagree on the taxonomy and here Lsjbot did not generate any article. among birds there are some 500 disputed species. These articles our experts now work with, highlighting the disputes, why, what and by whom. And when we compare these manually created articles we find that on most other language versions, these only take data from one authority and are not correctly describing the dispute. Perhaps svwp will after this not only be most complete but also most correct version on species? As a side effect (not a goal in itself) we expect svwp to be the second biggest version, when it comes to number of articles, by August/September And when it comes to botgeneration in general, we are continuing our researcheffort into generate some 0,3-0,5 M articles on geographic entities from all over the world by end 2015/2016 using Wikidata as a source. Anders ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe -- Etiamsi omnes, ego non ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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] Wikipedia mobile apps (was: Please be considerate of everyone's time.)
As Sage notes, the functionality of the new apps is about the same on both Android and iOS, with some differences in the UI. Like the beta Android version, we're using a sidebar ToC instead of collapsing sections (though it's a bit fancier looking on iOS right now!) and we've added basic login and editing ability. Note that in both OSs we do not yet have any talk page or notification support -- this should be coming a couple months down the line as we continue to tune up the editor-facing features. We hope to iterate fairly quickly once we've got the first new version out! Unfortunately due to Apple's store policies we can't have an open public beta version of the app easily installable like we do on Android. We're currently doing in-house betas with Apple's Enterprise Distribution program combined with the TestFlight beta distribution service; when they release upcoming improvements to TestFlight we'll be able to distribute betas much more publicly but this may not arrive until iOS 8 as well. Regarding iOS 8 features -- they are very much on our minds, but we can't actually use them yet so we're working on polishing up the iOS 6/7-compatible release. :) Aside from various nice internals updates in the OS, one of the main user-facing improvements is better app-to-app integration based on extension points. This would allow us to make Commons available as a share destination for photos directly from other apps as we do on Android, and other potential things. -- brion On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 6:43 AM, Sage Ross ragesoss+wikipe...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 8:30 AM, Thehelpfulone thehelpfulonew...@gmail.com wrote: Ahh, but some of us are on iOS which doesn’t seem to have been updated on the App Store in a while! The latest status update (at https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Apps/status#2014-05-monthly) seems to suggest it’s in Alpha state. Please can someone from the Apps Team give me some insight into the ETA for a new app, and if some of the new features of iOS 8 could be integrated into it? I believe the provisional release date is July 7.[1] In broad strokes, the functionality of the new iOS app is pretty similar to the new Android app, although I must say the iOS version has a really cool way of handling the in-article navigation with both a ToC and a scrollable miniature view of the article. Someone who knows better can correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think much attention has been given yet to potential iOS 8-specific features. -Sage [1] = http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/mobile-l/2014-June/007331.html ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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] Lsjbot now starting with plant species
Hi Anders, for my understanding, could you give a few examples of what kind of datatypes are still missing that you would need (ideally datatypes I can actually understand). Thanks! Lodewijk 2014-06-16 16:20 GMT+02:00 Anders Wennersten m...@anderswennersten.se: Just a few examples. *It takes up to 6 months and a lot of argumentations to get a new datatype defined. If you are commited you succeed but if it just need it but do not have the time, you fail *The discussions among the Wikidatapeople are most trying *The data and datatypes are not stable. Suddenly someone can suggest that a bunch of existing datatypes are redifined/deleted even if it makes invested code using these obsolete (it has become better this year) *A lot of critical functionality is missing, and even when said it is released there are still restrictions (that soon will be fixed) *The small number of people understanding the intricicies of Wikidata. On svwp there are just 4-7 who really worked with wikidata and at least one has now left because of the longdrawn discussions on Wikdata We can use some dataelements from Wikidata in some articles, but not a commit a set of articles to Wikidata which our botefforts requires (where you need to be 100% sure of the quality and be able to correct these automatically if problems) Anders David Cuenca skrev 2014-06-16 15:40: It would be interesting to know what needs to be improved, so... what prevented you of using the data? And from which different perspectives? Cheers, Micru On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 1:29 PM, Anders Wennersten m...@anderswennersten.se wrote: we have now spent one year trying to use Wikidata operationally, in our botprojects, but found it is impossible in the state it is now, from many perspectives. It has been a big disappointment but we hope it will look better a year from now Anders Gerard Meijssen skrev 2014-06-16 12:44: Hoi, I blogged about Lsjbot.. [1]. I really hope that a lot of attention is given in finding the links to existing items in Wikidata. Thanks, GerardM [1] http://ultimategerardm.blogspot.nl/2014/06/wikipedia- to-bot-or-not-to-bot.html On 16 June 2014 12:25, Anders Wennersten m...@anderswennersten.se wrote: After having changed job and residence Sverker is now on it again. This time Lsjbot will generate some 300 000 articles on plant species. The initiative is now receiving full support and even enthusiasm from the fellow wikipedians on svwp It is now close to one year since the 1M article on insects, animal etc was generated and we now have had some feedback whereof I here give some examples *The students on a university veterinary course was given the assignment to write article on parasitic worms and put them up om Wikipedia. These became excellent: complete and voluminous. This was in many way helped/made possible by that there already existed Lsjbot stubs with complete Taxobox, iw-links, categories and basic sources. The students are expert on subjects not the wikispecialities *the experts on animal etc among our Wikipedians has now shifted focus. There are species where the authorities disagree on the taxonomy and here Lsjbot did not generate any article. among birds there are some 500 disputed species. These articles our experts now work with, highlighting the disputes, why, what and by whom. And when we compare these manually created articles we find that on most other language versions, these only take data from one authority and are not correctly describing the dispute. Perhaps svwp will after this not only be most complete but also most correct version on species? As a side effect (not a goal in itself) we expect svwp to be the second biggest version, when it comes to number of articles, by August/September And when it comes to botgeneration in general, we are continuing our researcheffort into generate some 0,3-0,5 M articles on geographic entities from all over the world by end 2015/2016 using Wikidata as a source. Anders ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Lsjbot now starting with plant species
That is quite unfortunate. I understand that when you say datatype you mean property? From my experience those are best suggested in the frame of a task force or wikiproject, then you have some context and a broader view on how data can be represented. Sometimes new users come with the question where is this datatype/property? when a better question to ask is how do I represent this data?. When I started I was under the false impression that the data in wikipedias could be copied structured without much trouble into wikidata, and that is not always like that. Since wikipedia has no constraints, the data in infoboxes is not always readily importable into the data item, and frequently needs to be re-structured. That needs more effort, but in the end it is rewarding. And yes, I agree that at the beginning some properties were created that had to be changed to make the data consistent, I would say that now everything is more stable, but being a brand-new project is something that was expected. As Lodewijk asks, what are the properties/datatypes/functionality that you need? Cheers, Micru On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 4:20 PM, Anders Wennersten m...@anderswennersten.se wrote: Just a few examples. *It takes up to 6 months and a lot of argumentations to get a new datatype defined. If you are commited you succeed but if it just need it but do not have the time, you fail *The discussions among the Wikidatapeople are most trying *The data and datatypes are not stable. Suddenly someone can suggest that a bunch of existing datatypes are redifined/deleted even if it makes invested code using these obsolete (it has become better this year) *A lot of critical functionality is missing, and even when said it is released there are still restrictions (that soon will be fixed) *The small number of people understanding the intricicies of Wikidata. On svwp there are just 4-7 who really worked with wikidata and at least one has now left because of the longdrawn discussions on Wikdata We can use some dataelements from Wikidata in some articles, but not a commit a set of articles to Wikidata which our botefforts requires (where you need to be 100% sure of the quality and be able to correct these automatically if problems) Anders David Cuenca skrev 2014-06-16 15:40: It would be interesting to know what needs to be improved, so... what prevented you of using the data? And from which different perspectives? Cheers, Micru On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 1:29 PM, Anders Wennersten m...@anderswennersten.se wrote: we have now spent one year trying to use Wikidata operationally, in our botprojects, but found it is impossible in the state it is now, from many perspectives. It has been a big disappointment but we hope it will look better a year from now Anders Gerard Meijssen skrev 2014-06-16 12:44: Hoi, I blogged about Lsjbot.. [1]. I really hope that a lot of attention is given in finding the links to existing items in Wikidata. Thanks, GerardM [1] http://ultimategerardm.blogspot.nl/2014/06/wikipedia- to-bot-or-not-to-bot.html On 16 June 2014 12:25, Anders Wennersten m...@anderswennersten.se wrote: After having changed job and residence Sverker is now on it again. This time Lsjbot will generate some 300 000 articles on plant species. The initiative is now receiving full support and even enthusiasm from the fellow wikipedians on svwp It is now close to one year since the 1M article on insects, animal etc was generated and we now have had some feedback whereof I here give some examples *The students on a university veterinary course was given the assignment to write article on parasitic worms and put them up om Wikipedia. These became excellent: complete and voluminous. This was in many way helped/made possible by that there already existed Lsjbot stubs with complete Taxobox, iw-links, categories and basic sources. The students are expert on subjects not the wikispecialities *the experts on animal etc among our Wikipedians has now shifted focus. There are species where the authorities disagree on the taxonomy and here Lsjbot did not generate any article. among birds there are some 500 disputed species. These articles our experts now work with, highlighting the disputes, why, what and by whom. And when we compare these manually created articles we find that on most other language versions, these only take data from one authority and are not correctly describing the dispute. Perhaps svwp will after this not only be most complete but also most correct version on species? As a side effect (not a goal in itself) we expect svwp to be the second biggest version, when it comes to number of articles, by August/September And when it comes to botgeneration in general, we are continuing our researcheffort into generate some 0,3-0,5 M articles on geographic entities from all over the world by end 2015/2016 using Wikidata as a source.
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Lsjbot now starting with plant species
Thanks, you are right they are called Properties Our effort consist of 3-5 rather independent botgerantionseffort, each talking with wikidata by themselves and I am the one understand the technique least. So I can just repeat some of the things I have been told *Inconsistent licensing (and data protection) for data for French communes in comparison to Swiss communes. general if CC0 orCC-BY should be used. *how to handle datatype Coat of arms (in communes cities) *entitycode for special countryentities (communes and subcommunes and variants of communes) *to ensure correct citycode in wikidata, when it is initiated with data from (erronous) enwp data (is now by manual update) *geocode and polygones for areas, mapdata *population data over time *election data for local communes/cities and over time Anders David Cuenca skrev 2014-06-16 17:45: That is quite unfortunate. I understand that when you say datatype you mean property? From my experience those are best suggested in the frame of a task force or wikiproject, then you have some context and a broader view on how data can be represented. Sometimes new users come with the question where is this datatype/property? when a better question to ask is how do I represent this data?. When I started I was under the false impression that the data in wikipedias could be copied structured without much trouble into wikidata, and that is not always like that. Since wikipedia has no constraints, the data in infoboxes is not always readily importable into the data item, and frequently needs to be re-structured. That needs more effort, but in the end it is rewarding. And yes, I agree that at the beginning some properties were created that had to be changed to make the data consistent, I would say that now everything is more stable, but being a brand-new project is something that was expected. As Lodewijk asks, what are the properties/datatypes/functionality that you need? Cheers, Micru On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 4:20 PM, Anders Wennersten m...@anderswennersten.se wrote: Just a few examples. *It takes up to 6 months and a lot of argumentations to get a new datatype defined. If you are commited you succeed but if it just need it but do not have the time, you fail *The discussions among the Wikidatapeople are most trying *The data and datatypes are not stable. Suddenly someone can suggest that a bunch of existing datatypes are redifined/deleted even if it makes invested code using these obsolete (it has become better this year) *A lot of critical functionality is missing, and even when said it is released there are still restrictions (that soon will be fixed) *The small number of people understanding the intricicies of Wikidata. On svwp there are just 4-7 who really worked with wikidata and at least one has now left because of the longdrawn discussions on Wikdata We can use some dataelements from Wikidata in some articles, but not a commit a set of articles to Wikidata which our botefforts requires (where you need to be 100% sure of the quality and be able to correct these automatically if problems) Anders David Cuenca skrev 2014-06-16 15:40: It would be interesting to know what needs to be improved, so... what prevented you of using the data? And from which different perspectives? Cheers, Micru On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 1:29 PM, Anders Wennersten m...@anderswennersten.se wrote: we have now spent one year trying to use Wikidata operationally, in our botprojects, but found it is impossible in the state it is now, from many perspectives. It has been a big disappointment but we hope it will look better a year from now Anders Gerard Meijssen skrev 2014-06-16 12:44: Hoi, I blogged about Lsjbot.. [1]. I really hope that a lot of attention is given in finding the links to existing items in Wikidata. Thanks, GerardM [1] http://ultimategerardm.blogspot.nl/2014/06/wikipedia- to-bot-or-not-to-bot.html On 16 June 2014 12:25, Anders Wennersten m...@anderswennersten.se wrote: After having changed job and residence Sverker is now on it again. This time Lsjbot will generate some 300 000 articles on plant species. The initiative is now receiving full support and even enthusiasm from the fellow wikipedians on svwp It is now close to one year since the 1M article on insects, animal etc was generated and we now have had some feedback whereof I here give some examples *The students on a university veterinary course was given the assignment to write article on parasitic worms and put them up om Wikipedia. These became excellent: complete and voluminous. This was in many way helped/made possible by that there already existed Lsjbot stubs with complete Taxobox, iw-links, categories and basic sources. The students are expert on subjects not the wikispecialities *the experts on animal etc among our Wikipedians has now shifted focus. There are species where the authorities disagree on the taxonomy and here Lsjbot did not generate any
[Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Disclosure amendment to the Terms of Use
Hi all, We would like to announce that the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees has approved an amendment to Section 4 of the Terms of Use to require disclosure of paid editing. This follows the extensive discussion of the amendment https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Terms_of_use/Paid_contributions_amendment on meta in February and March, which resulted in 320,000 words of discussion in various languages. At the Board's meeting in April, they reviewed issues raised in this discussion, and approved the proposed amendment. This amendment is added to the Terms of Use effective immediately. The new section can be found here: https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Terms_of_Use#4._Refraining_from_Certain_Activities For more information, please see the following links: * A letter from the Board: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Board_letter_on_paid_contributions_without_disclosure * A blog post summarizing the change and explaining the process: https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/06/16/change-terms-of-use-requirements-for-disclosure/ * An FAQ explaining the amendment: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Terms_of_use/FAQ_on_paid_contributions_without_disclosure * You can leave comments on the Terms of Use on Meta: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Terms_of_use -- Stephen LaPorte Legal Counsel Wikimedia Foundation *NOTICE: As an attorney for the Wikimedia Foundation, for legal and ethical reasons, I cannot give legal advice to, or serve as a lawyer for, community members, volunteers, or staff members in their personal capacity. For more on what this means, please see our legal disclaimer https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Legal_Disclaimer.* ___ 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, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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] [Wikimedia Announcements] Disclosure amendment to the Terms of Use
Stephen LaPorte writes: We would like to announce that the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees has approved an amendment to Section 4 of the Terms of Use to require disclosure of paid editing. There is a proposal on Wikimedia Commons that aims to opt-out that project from the amendment, given the huge differences between Commons and the English Wikipedia, at which the amendment was targeted. Feedback and comments are welcome at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Requests_for_comment/Alternative_ paid_contribution_disclosure_policy Tomasz ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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] [Wikimedia Announcements] Disclosure amendment to the Terms of Use
Hoi, WOW, CAN SOMEONE WHO HAS THE AUTHORITY TO DO SO CLARIFY IF THIS WILL GET A HEARING? Either it is something that should apply to all projects and consequently it is a board issue or it is en.wp only. When it is en.wp only, the policy is either not carefully thought through or it should not be a board issue in the first place.\ The time to reconsider the application from a project level did come and has gone REALLY Thanks, GerardM On 16 June 2014 19:32, Tomasz W. Kozlowski twkozlow...@gmail.com wrote: Stephen LaPorte writes: We would like to announce that the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees has approved an amendment to Section 4 of the Terms of Use to require disclosure of paid editing. There is a proposal on Wikimedia Commons that aims to opt-out that project from the amendment, given the huge differences between Commons and the English Wikipedia, at which the amendment was targeted. Feedback and comments are welcome at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Requests_for_comment/Alternative_ paid_contribution_disclosure_policy Tomasz ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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] [Wikimedia Announcements] Disclosure amendment to the Terms of Use
Hi GerardM, have you read Stephen's email? On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 10:58 AM, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com wrote: Hoi, WOW, CAN SOMEONE WHO HAS THE AUTHORITY TO DO SO CLARIFY IF THIS WILL GET A HEARING? Either it is something that should apply to all projects and consequently it is a board issue or it is en.wp only. When it is en.wp only, the policy is either not carefully thought through or it should not be a board issue in the first place.\ The time to reconsider the application from a project level did come and has gone REALLY Thanks, GerardM On 16 June 2014 19:32, Tomasz W. Kozlowski twkozlow...@gmail.com wrote: Stephen LaPorte writes: We would like to announce that the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees has approved an amendment to Section 4 of the Terms of Use to require disclosure of paid editing. There is a proposal on Wikimedia Commons that aims to opt-out that project from the amendment, given the huge differences between Commons and the English Wikipedia, at which the amendment was targeted. Feedback and comments are welcome at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Requests_for_comment/Alternative_ paid_contribution_disclosure_policy Tomasz ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe -- Tilman Bayer Senior Operations Analyst (Movement Communications) Wikimedia Foundation IRC (Freenode): HaeB ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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] [Wikimedia Announcements] Disclosure amendment to the Terms of Use
Not quite sure what you're shouting about, Gerard. The amendment clearly gives individual projects the right to have an alternative to this particular section of the terms of use, and that alternative can be either more strict or less strict. Seems Commons is considering an alternative that is very much less strict. If your point is that terms of use that are specifically intended for one or a small number of projects, and that are extremely unlikely to be enforced on most projects, should be addressed on a project-by-project basis, I tend to agree with you; however, it seems that since the primary target project couldn't come to consensus on a policy, everyone else gets stuck with one designed for enwiki. Risker On 16 June 2014 13:58, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com wrote: Hoi, WOW, CAN SOMEONE WHO HAS THE AUTHORITY TO DO SO CLARIFY IF THIS WILL GET A HEARING? Either it is something that should apply to all projects and consequently it is a board issue or it is en.wp only. When it is en.wp only, the policy is either not carefully thought through or it should not be a board issue in the first place.\ The time to reconsider the application from a project level did come and has gone REALLY Thanks, GerardM On 16 June 2014 19:32, Tomasz W. Kozlowski twkozlow...@gmail.com wrote: Stephen LaPorte writes: We would like to announce that the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees has approved an amendment to Section 4 of the Terms of Use to require disclosure of paid editing. There is a proposal on Wikimedia Commons that aims to opt-out that project from the amendment, given the huge differences between Commons and the English Wikipedia, at which the amendment was targeted. Feedback and comments are welcome at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Requests_for_comment/Alternative_ paid_contribution_disclosure_policy Tomasz ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/guidelineswikimedi...@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, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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] Wikimedia Mexico. Report of Activities of May 2014
Dear community: Below you will find the report of activities of the month of May 2014 done by the volunteers of Wikimedia Mexico. Please don't hesitate to get in touch with us if you require extra information about this activities or only to make some suggestions. The report is also available on Spanish and English in our wiki: https://mx.wikimedia.org/wiki/Informes/Mayo_2014/ (Spanish) https://mx.wikimedia.org/wiki/Informes/Mayo_2014/en (English) Kindly regards. On behalf our chapter. Carmen Alcázar (User:Wotancito) WMMX Secretary. ==Highlights== ===First meeting of volunteers for Wikimania 2015=== https://mx.wikimedia.org/wiki/Archivo:Primera_reuni%C3%B3n_de_voluntarios_y_voluntarias_para_Wikimania_2015_09.jpg The Mexican chapter had its first meeting of volunteers for Wikimania 2015, the Wikimedia movement international conference which is to be held next year at Vasconcelos Library in Mexico City. The meeting was held at the same place where the conference will take place. 32 persons attended. A general presentation was offered, then the general coordinations and their specific tasks were described. ===Wikimania 2015 announcement on the Internet Day=== Past May 16 Iván Martínez , president of Wikimedia Mexico, was invited by the Laboratory for the City of Mexico to preside over the Internet Day in Mexico City. The ceremony took place after an inauguration of a Telmex Digital Classroom at the Centro de Transferencia a Menores of Procuraduría General de la República (Center for Minor Transfer of the Attorney General's Office of Mexico City). By request of the city authorities, Iván Martínez made a speech focused on social participation and collaborative phenomenon behind Wikipedia. This message was written by Salvador Alcantar . The mayor of Mexico City, Miguel Ángel Mancera, formally announced the realization of Wikimania 2015 in Mexico City and expressed his approval. Watch the video : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ULTgf_hfjM == Journal == May 2 Talks by Gustavo Sandoval about Wikipedia at two self-managed public high schools in Chicoloapan, State of Mexico: high school number 55 and high school Próceres de la Educación. See, http://linuxchicoloapan.org/flisol-2014-en-chicoloapan-resena/ here, a brief review by Adrián Vergara, a local chronicler who assisted us; some images and opinions of some of the students are also included. These talks are some of the activities included in the Latin-American Festival for the Installation of Free Software (FLISOL). https://mx.wikimedia.org/wiki/Archivo:Pl%C3%A1tica_sobre_Wikipedia_en_secundarias_autogestivas_de_Chicoloapan_de_Ju%C3%A1rez,_Estado_de_M%C3%A9xico._(9).jpg May 6 Interview for Wikinoticias and presentation of Wikimania before the head of the Government of the Federal District, Miguel Ángel Mancera. Iván Martínez and Carmen Alcázar attended the Government's office. May 13 * Iván Martínez meets the authorities of the Institute of High School Education of the Government of Mexico City in Iztacalco to talk about their interest in joining Wikimedia México's Wikipedia Education Program. *Wikimania 2015 staff work meeting at Jardín de Innovación, Mexico City. May 14 * Wikimedia Mexico meets the authorities of the Laboratorio para la Ciudad (Lab for the City) of the Government of the Federal District to talk about Wikimania 2015. May 15 *Wikimania 2015 staff meets Biblioteca Vasconcelos' staff. May 16 * Iván Martínez participates in the ceremony to celebrate the Internet Day in Mexico City, invited by Laboratorio para la Ciudad of the Government of the Federal District. May 17 Iván Martínez talks during the Latin-American Festival for the Installation of Free Software (FLISOL) at National Polytechnic Institute's Escuela Superior de Cómputo (ESCOM, School of Computer Science). May 18 *Wikimedia México's board's monthly meeting *Wikimania 2015 staff work meeting *First meeting of volunteers for Wikimania 2015. Vasconcelos Library, Mexico City. May 22 *Presentation of the Report of Semester 2013-2 of the Wikipedia Education Program at the National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM)'s Faculty of Higher Studies Aragón (FES Aragón). May 23 *Talk by Iván Martínez at the Second Meeting of Digital Humanities, organized by Red de Humanidades Digitales (Digital Humanities Network), UNAM's Faculty of Philosophy and Literature (FFyL) and Biblioteca Vasconcelos. May 27 *Participation of Alan Lazalde at Cumbre del Buen Conocer (Well Knowing Summit) in Quito, Ecuador, organized by FLOK Society. May 31 *Wikipedia Monthly Workshop at Telmex Hub. During May *Meetings and activities related to Wikimania 2015. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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] [Wikimedia Announcements] Wikimedia engineering report, May 2014
Hi, The report covering Wikimedia engineering activities in May 2014 is now available. Wiki version: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_engineering_report/2014/May Blog version: https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/06/15/engineering-report-may-2014/ We're also proposing a shorter, simpler and translatable version of this report that does not assume specialized technical knowledge: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_engineering_report/2014/May/summary Below is the HTML text of the report. As always, feedback is appreciated on the usefulness of the report and its summary, and on how to improve them. -- Major news in May include: - changes to the mobile site to better show the editors behind the curtain https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/05/02/the-wikipedia-editors-behind-the-curtain/ ; - the announcement of CyrusOne in Dallas https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/05/05/wikimedia-foundation-selects-cyrusone-in-dallas-as-new-data-center/ as the location of the new Wikimedia data center; - the Zürich hackathon https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/05/10/tech-wizards-behind-wikipedia-meet-in-zurich-for-hackathon/ and Lila Tretikov’s perspective https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/05/15/hacker-osmosis-ideas-european-hackathon-zurich/ on it; - experiments by the Growth team to encourage more contributors to register https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/05/16/anonymous-editor-acquisition/; - the one-year anniversary https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/05/20/celebrating-one-year-of-tech-news/ of the launch of Tech News; - the launch of Wikipedia Zero in Nepal https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/05/22/wikipedia-zero-shall-accelerate-wikipedia-in-nepal/ in partnership with NCELL; - the launch of a second request for proposals https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/05/27/request-for-proposals-mediawiki-release-management-round-2/ for the release management of MediaWiki for third-party users. *Note: We’re also providing a shorter, simpler and translatable version of this report https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_engineering_report/2014/May/summary that does not assume specialized technical knowledge.* Engineering metrics in May: - 154 unique committers contributed patchsets of code to MediaWiki. - The total number of unresolved commits https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#q,status:open+project:%255Emediawiki.*,n,zwent from around 1305 to about 1440. - About 15 shell requests https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Shell_requests were processed. Contents - Personnel https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/06/15/engineering-report-may-2014/#Personnel - Work with us https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/06/15/engineering-report-may-2014/#Work_with_us - Announcements https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/06/15/engineering-report-may-2014/#Announcements - Technical Operations https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/06/15/engineering-report-may-2014/#Technical_Operations - Features Engineering https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/06/15/engineering-report-may-2014/#Features_Engineering - Editor retention: Editing tools https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/06/15/engineering-report-may-2014/#Editor_retention:_Editing_tools - Core Features https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/06/15/engineering-report-may-2014/#Core_Features - Growth https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/06/15/engineering-report-may-2014/#Growth - Support https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/06/15/engineering-report-may-2014/#Support - Mobile https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/06/15/engineering-report-may-2014/#Mobile - Language Engineering https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/06/15/engineering-report-may-2014/#Language_Engineering - Platform Engineering https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/06/15/engineering-report-may-2014/#Platform_Engineering - MediaWiki Core https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/06/15/engineering-report-may-2014/#MediaWiki_Core - Quality assurance https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/06/15/engineering-report-may-2014/#Quality_assurance - Multimedia https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/06/15/engineering-report-may-2014/#Multimedia - Engineering Community Team https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/06/15/engineering-report-may-2014/#Engineering_Community_Team - Analytics https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/06/15/engineering-report-may-2014/#Analytics - Kiwix https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/06/15/engineering-report-may-2014/#Kiwix - Wikidata https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/06/15/engineering-report-may-2014/#Wikidata - Future https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/06/15/engineering-report-may-2014/#Future Personnel Work with us https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Work_with_us Are you looking to work for Wikimedia? We have a lot of hiring coming up, and we really love talking to active community members about these roles. -
[Wikimedia-l] Court decision in Jones v. Dirty World Recording Entertainment LLC
(Cross-posted from my En-wiki talkpage) The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Sixth_Circuit has issued its decision today in *Jones v. Dirty World Entertainment Recordings LLC*. This is a well-known dispute involving application of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_230_of_the_Communications_Decency_Act in the context of a website (www.TheDirty.com) whose goals and contents are deplorable. The court's decision can be found here http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/14a0125p-06.pdf. A blog post (Eugene Volokh) summarizing the decision can be found here http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/06/16/thedirty-com-not-liable-for-defamatory-posts-on-the-site . In its decision, the Sixth Circuit takes a broad view of Section 230 and holds that Section 230 protection is not lost even where the website operator solicited contributors to post unsourced and uncorroborated dirt about anyone they pleased, and even where the website operator selected which contributions would be published. The protection of Section 230 enables websites such as Wikipedia to operate without fear that the Foundation will be subject to suit anytime someone, such as a BLP subject, disagrees with the content of an article. It is a truism that Freedom of Speech under the First Amendment and statues like Section 230 protects speech we do not care for as well as speech whose value we appreciate. That being said, the decision is a reminder that those of us who care about how Wikipedia treats the subject of BLP articles must remain vigilant in keeping such articles free of defamatory, unsourced negative, unduly weighted, and privacy-invading content, as well as in using good judgment regarding which living persons should be the subject of articles at all. At least in the United States, for better or worse, the law will do little to protect the people we write about in our encyclopedia. Treating them fairly and responsible is therefore, all the more clearly, our collective, non-delegable editorial responsibility. Newyorkbrad ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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] Court decision in Jones v. Dirty World Recording Entertainment LLC
On 16/06/2014 21:07, Newyorkbrad wrote: In its decision, the Sixth Circuit takes a broad view of Section 230 and holds that Section 230 protection is not lost even where the website operator solicited contributors to post unsourced and uncorroborated dirt about anyone they pleased, and even where the website operator selected which contributions would be published. Isn't that rather a bad thing? What was the rationale behind its view? ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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] Court decision in Jones v. Dirty World Recording Entertainment LLC
It's certainly a very troubling outcome given the facts of the case, which I was reporting rather than endorsing. The appeals court relied partly on the breadth of the statute enacted by Congress, and partly on the difficulty of drawing lines reflecting which types of conduct by a site-owner would or would not be protected if the statute were construed more narrowly. The court's decision, and particularly the key portions of it quoted on the Volokh blog, are reasonably accessible to non-lawyers, so everyone interested can certainly review them rather than rely on my summary. Incidentally, another appeals court decision issued today may also be of interest. Here is Judge Posner writing for the Seventh Circuit on the copyright status of Sherlock Holmes pastiches: http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=DisplayPath=Y2014/D06-16/C:14-1128:J:Posner:aut:T:fnOp:N:1363624:S:0 Newyorkbrad On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 4:17 PM, edward edw...@logicmuseum.com wrote: On 16/06/2014 21:07, Newyorkbrad wrote: In its decision, the Sixth Circuit takes a broad view of Section 230 and holds that Section 230 protection is not lost even where the website operator solicited contributors to post unsourced and uncorroborated dirt about anyone they pleased, and even where the website operator selected which contributions would be published. Isn't that rather a bad thing? What was the rationale behind its view? ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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] Please be considerate of everyone's time.
On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 6:22 AM, edward edw...@logicmuseum.com wrote: Could I ask if there are any plans by WMF to address some of the content problems in Wikipedia? Pretty much any article in my specialist area (which is actually not all that specialist) has serious problems - gross factual errors, omissions, bias and so on. I know from other specialists that this is not just restricted to my area: economics, sociology, many areas of the arts and humanities have similar problems. This is not just a Wikimedia issue, it's a public interest issue. Wikipedia is now the go-to place for knowledge for pretty much everyone in the world. I don't see how WMF is fulfilling its mission (empowering people to collect and develop and disseminate educational content under a free license) when the content isn't actually educational. Hi Ed, The Wikimedia Foundation does not write nor edit content on Wikipedia, nor does it dictate editorial policy. All of the content is written, edited, and controlled by whomever would like to volunteer their time to improve it. As such, this is often why the response to a statement like Pretty much any article in my specialist area (which is actually not all that specialist) has serious problems is to invite you to edit it.[1] :-) If you need help, there are forums like the Teahouse,[2] where you can get answers from friendly, experienced Wikipedia editors. If you simply don't have the time to volunteer on improving any content, you can of course always leave suggestions on the Talk page associated with any article. Steven 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Be_bold_in_updating_pages 2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Teahouse ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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] Please be considerate of everyone's time.
Hi Ed - Though I'm not sure what your area of specialty is offhand, I'd point you towards the Wiki Education Foundation and the US Education Program. Although the program has a bit of a checkered history, I feel like it's starting to come together quite well, and it does have the direct aim of improving the quality of our content in areas that are currently lacking. Best, Kevin Gorman On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 6:22 AM, edward edw...@logicmuseum.com wrote: On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 4:12 AM, Lila Tretikov l...@wikimedia.org wrote: Hi all, As I scanned through the weekend emails on this list I noticed that many of you are ready to get back to discussing the goals we are all working on. I am really glad to see that. We have plenty of interesting projects to discuss without the gossip. Let's respect the time that many following this list are donating to the project by sticking to constructive, on topic matters. And for starters: the Wikipedia Android Beta app is in store and is awaiting your comments. I don't know what an Android Beta app is. Could I ask if there are any plans by WMF to address some of the content problems in Wikipedia? Pretty much any article in my specialist area (which is actually not all that specialist) has serious problems - gross factual errors, omissions, bias and so on. I know from other specialists that this is not just restricted to my area: economics, sociology, many areas of the arts and humanities have similar problems. This is not just a Wikimedia issue, it's a public interest issue. Wikipedia is now the go-to place for knowledge for pretty much everyone in the world. I don't see how WMF is fulfilling its mission (empowering people to collect and develop and disseminate educational content under a free license) when the content isn't actually educational. Regards Ed ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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] Please be considerate of everyone's time.
On 17 June 2014 00:23, Steven Walling steven.wall...@gmail.com wrote: The Wikimedia Foundation does not write nor edit content on Wikipedia, nor does it dictate editorial policy. All of the content is written, edited, and controlled by whomever would like to volunteer their time to improve it. As such, this is often why the response to a statement like Pretty much any article in my specialist area (which is actually not all that specialist) has serious problems is to invite you to edit it.[1] User:Peter Damian is currently subject to a community ban on the English wikipedia. Original details at http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidentsoldid=305732814#Enough_is_enough -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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] The tragedy of Commons
Hi, Some Commons contributors like to ask impossible requirements, and threaten to delete files if these are not met. We have now a case of famous pictures from the government of Israel and Israel Defense Forces. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Matanya#Files_and_pages_that_were_deleted_by_User:Fastily_that_I_am_aware_of_them https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Beba_Idelson_Ada_Maimon1952.jpg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Abba_Hushi_1956.jpg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Aharon_Meskin_-_Ben_Gurion_-_Israel_Prize1960.jpg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Avraham_Shlonsky_1952.jpg These are famous and valuable pictures, including two featured pictures on the Hebrew Wikipedia. These files have already been deleted and restored 3 times. When the URAA issue was not convincing enough, a new reson for deletion was advanced: that publication details were not given. Anyone with 2 bits of common sense can understand that these famous pictures were published soon after they were taken. There is no reasonable doubt about that. In addition, publication is not a requirement for being in the public domain in Israel. After I restored these images, I was threatem by LGA, who is a delete-only account: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Administrators%27_noticeboard/User_problems#User:Yann There, more contributors argue on this issue. By asking absurb requirements about publication details, these contributors threaten the project as a whole. If insisting, it will lead people to upload pictures like these locally instead of Commons. Then the idea of a central repository for all Wikimedia projects is gone. Instead of looking for a reason to destroy these files, they should try to find a reason to keep them. Regards, Yann ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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] [Wikimedia Announcements] WMF Board of Trustees: Minutes of April 2014 meeting
Hello all, We have published the minutes from the Board's April 2014 meeting in San Francisco, which you may find here: https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Minutes/2014-04-25 -- Stephen LaPorte Legal Counsel Wikimedia Foundation *NOTICE: As an attorney for the Wikimedia Foundation, for legal and ethical reasons, I cannot give legal advice to, or serve as a lawyer for, community members, volunteers, or staff members in their personal capacity. For more on what this means, please see our legal disclaimer https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Legal_Disclaimer.* ___ 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, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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] [Wikimedia Announcements] WMF Board of Trustees: Minutes of April 2014 meeting
I am very happy to see the discussion of user groups and the concern about their lack of formation. Hopefully, the process can be amended to fit better to what was originally envisioned. From: slapo...@wikimedia.org Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 01:49:53 +0200 To: wikimediaannounc...@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] WMF Board of Trustees: Minutes of April2014 meeting Hello all, We have published the minutes from the Board's April 2014 meeting in San Francisco, which you may find here: https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Minutes/2014-04-25 -- Stephen LaPorte Legal Counsel Wikimedia Foundation *NOTICE: As an attorney for the Wikimedia Foundation, for legal and ethical reasons, I cannot give legal advice to, or serve as a lawyer for, community members, volunteers, or staff members in their personal capacity. For more on what this means, please see our legal disclaimer https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Legal_Disclaimer.* ___ 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, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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] [Wikimedia Announcements] Disclosure amendment to the Terms of Use
On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 11:17 AM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote: Not quite sure what you're shouting about, Gerard. The amendment clearly gives individual projects the right to have an alternative to this particular section of the terms of use, and that alternative can be either more strict or less strict. That's correct. Members of various projects asked for this kind of flexibility in the comment period, and the board agreed that we should add the ability for projects to craft alternatives on a per-project basis to this amendment. In the absence of a local policy, however, the ToU amendment applies to every project. While this issue is a concern of many on the English Wikipedia, the amendment was not crafted specifically for en:wp; this has been an issue across many language communities. The terms of use (amendments and all) apply to all of our projects. best, -- phoebe -- * I use this address for lists; send personal messages to phoebe.ayers at gmail.com * ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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] [Wikimedia Announcements] Disclosure amendment to the Terms of Use
On 16 June 2014 20:48, phoebe ayers phoebe.w...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 11:17 AM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote: Not quite sure what you're shouting about, Gerard. The amendment clearly gives individual projects the right to have an alternative to this particular section of the terms of use, and that alternative can be either more strict or less strict. That's correct. Members of various projects asked for this kind of flexibility in the comment period, and the board agreed that we should add the ability for projects to craft alternatives on a per-project basis to this amendment. In the absence of a local policy, however, the ToU amendment applies to every project. While this issue is a concern of many on the English Wikipedia, the amendment was not crafted specifically for en:wp; this has been an issue across many language communities. The terms of use (amendments and all) apply to all of our projects. best, -- phoebe I'm so very disappointed in the Board and the WMF for this TOU amendment, which was obviously written to quell concerns about English Wikipedia, with extremely little consideration of any other project. Now projects *must* formally exempt practices that are perfectly acceptable to them: Commons in particular, where professionals (who link to their personal for-profit websites in their file descriptions) contribute a great deal of the highest quality work; MediaWiki and all its developer-related sites, where a large number of our best non-staff developers are financially supported by other organizations; Wikidata, which is pure data and no benefit can be derived; Wikisource, where no benefit can be derived; and a multitude of Wikipedias that have openly welcomed editors who receive financial support or are paid by various organizations without any issue whatsoever. It is extremely unlikely that it will ever be enforced in the vast majority of WMF projects. And the end result is an amendment that can't effectively be enforced without violating the internal rules of the amendment. [1] It's virtually impossible to make a supportable allegation of undeclared paid editing without violating outing or harassment policies. Of course, we all know there will be plenty of unsupported allegations. It would have been far more beneficial if the WMF and the Board had had the courage to work directly with the English Wikipedia community to develop a policy there instead of imposing it on hundreds of projects that not only don't care, they will now have to create policies to counteract the effects of this TOU amendment. Simply put, Terms of Use should never include clauses whose enforcement is undesirable in a significant portion of the overall site. I'll be off now to help Mediawiki create their RFC to essentially void this decision. Risker/Anne [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Terms_of_use/FAQ_on_paid_contributions_without_disclosure#How_does_community_enforcement_of_this_provision_work_with_existing_rules_about_privacy_and_behavior.3F ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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] Court decision in Jones v. Dirty World Recording Entertainment LLC
On 17 Jun 2014, at 4:17 am, edward edw...@logicmuseum.com wrote: On 16/06/2014 21:07, Newyorkbrad wrote: In its decision, the Sixth Circuit takes a broad view of Section 230 and holds that Section 230 protection is not lost even where the website operator solicited contributors to post unsourced and uncorroborated dirt about anyone they pleased, and even where the website operator selected which contributions would be published. Isn't that rather a bad thing? What was the rationale behind its view? Would this allow the WMF to exercise a degree of editorial control over the projects without jeopardizing their S230 immunity? I'm specifically thinking of BLPs. Kevin ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines 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] [Wikimedia Announcements] Disclosure amendment to the Terms of Use
Risker wrote: I'm so very disappointed in the Board and the WMF for this TOU amendment, which was obviously written to quell concerns about English Wikipedia, with extremely little consideration of any other project. Now projects *must* formally exempt practices that are perfectly acceptable to them: Commons in particular, where professionals (who link to their personal for-profit websites in their file descriptions) contribute a great deal of the highest quality work; MediaWiki and all its developer-related sites, where a large number of our best non-staff developers are financially supported by other organizations; Wikidata, which is pure data and no benefit can be derived; Wikisource, where no benefit can be derived; and a multitude of Wikipedias that have openly welcomed editors who receive financial support or are paid by various organizations without any issue whatsoever. It is extremely unlikely that it will ever be enforced in the vast majority of WMF projects. From what I can tell, a few people thought there was a lack of ammunition against paid advocates. This amendment provides a modicum of firepower. Whether this amendment is a good idea or not, I agree with you that this amendment is unlikely to be heavily enforced, which is why I'm not particularly concerned about it. I imagine most readers and editors have never and will never fully read the terms of use. I certainly haven't gotten through the whole thing. It's long. Plus it's one of many documents that I'm allegedly supposed to read before editing a wiki. I think I'm also supposed to read the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License, the GNU Free Documentation License, and probably the privacy policy, as well as local policies and now policy overrides, of course. So, uh, nobody does. And the world keeps on spinning. The general rule of engagement continues to be don't be a dick, which is really a re-statement of the Golden Rule. And none of this is specific to Wikimedia wikis. Don't be a dick is pretty universal. Terms of use, terms and conditions, site usage agreements, etc. continue to go unread across the wired and unwired worlds. If it helps, there are worse things that the Legal and Community Advocacy group could be spending its time on. :-) Are black hat paid advocates going to disclose their practices on their user page? Of course not. They're also not going to read or follow the terms of use. Perhaps a benefit of this will be that GLAM folks and similarly like-minded individuals will now be more cognizant of the need to disclose their paid editing, which seems like a decent practice in many cases. If that's the upshot here, that doesn't seem so bad. At the end of the day, you don't need to register an account to edit. You don't need to provide an e-mail address. With a very small amount of patience, you can make as many accounts as you want (they're free!). We've already lost the battle and yet we continue to win the war. How about that. MZMcBride ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
