Re: [Wikimedia-l] the big red notice on the top of http://strategy.wikimedia.org - done
Closed isn't the best word, but do most people know what 'read only' means? From: peter.southw...@telkomsa.net To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2014 12:32:56 +0200 Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] the big red notice on the top of http://strategy.wikimedia.org - done Makes sense to me too. Peter - Original Message - From: James Alexander jameso...@gmail.com To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Sunday, March 09, 2014 12:12 PM Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] the big red notice on the top of http://strategy.wikimedia.org - done On Sun, Mar 9, 2014 at 1:49 AM, Bohdan Melnychuk bas...@yandex.ru wrote: But we close wiki. We not set wiki read only. Why should we use another therm than the procedure is called? Because what we DO (no matter what we call it) is set it as Read Only, it is still 100% accessible you just can't edit it. I think it does make sense that 'read-only' is more understandable then 'close' which sounds like we completely shut it off and you can't read it either. James ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
[Wikimedia-l] Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2013 is open!
Dear Wikimedians, Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the second round of the 2013 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the eighth edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2013) to produce a single Picture of the Year. Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year were entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more. There are two total rounds of voting. In the first round, you voted for as many images as you liked. The top 30 overall and the most popular image in each category have continued to the final. In the final round, you may vote for just one image to become the Picture of the Year. Round 2 will end on 7 March 2014. Visit https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Picture_of_the_Year/2013/Introduction to learn more and vote for your favorite image. Thanks,User:MonoPicture of the Year Committee ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
[Wikimedia-l] Round 1 of Picture of the Year 2013 is open!
Dear Wikimedians, Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the 2013 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the eighth edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2013) to produce a single Picture of the Year. Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year are all entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more. For your convenience, we have sorted the images into topical categories. Two rounds of voting will be held: In the first round, you may vote for as many images as you like. The top 30 overall and the most popular image in each category will continue to the final. In the final round, you may vote for just one image to become the Picture of the Year Round 1 will end on 7 February 2014. To vote, visit https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Picture_of_the_Year/2013/Introduction Thanks,User:Mono Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising banner obscuring site interface
Related: There are some issues with the design of these banners, especially the floaty thing.Why are you using a table element? It's really wrong for this kind of thing. Also, please commit to just one color for the floater - the highlighting thing doesn't make sense in that space. (See a possible solution, if the icon was black with a yellow i, at http://awesomescreenshot.com/0d622k4fb2). Furthermore, that shadow is hideous - it should be blurred out some more or just eliminated - it adds little (without shadow: http://awesomescreenshot.com/0e622k4k3c, blurred shadow: http://awesomescreenshot.com/06d22k4s6f). This a) looks better and b) would probably increase conversions since it's all around brighter (but in a better-looking way). At the top, it's best looking to eliminate the shadow on the right side which looks unbalanced and increase the blur (like box-shadow: 0px 5px 10px #aaa;). See http://awesomescreenshot.com/01022k566a. I highly suggest you adopt these changes. Thanks,User:Mono Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2013 11:09:59 -0800 From: pcoo...@wikimedia.org To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising banner obscuring site interface Love it! Looks like there's more than one banner too: http://imgs.xkcd.com/store_news/store_gd_g1_QG5Z.png -- Peter Coombe Fundraising Production Coordinator Wikimedia Foundation On 8 December 2013 19:52, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote: Largely unrelated: it looks like xkcd (http://xkcd.com) has spoofed the DEAR WIKIPEDIA READERS donation banner as part of its store campaign: http://imgs.xkcd.com/store_news/store_gd_d5_FyaR.png. :-) MZMcBride ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising banner obscuring site interface
I also forgot to mention those annoyingly ugly 'Credit Card'/PayPal buttons with the double borders. I suggest making the border 1px solid and then reduce the border radius to 5px. User:Mono From: userm...@outlook.com To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2013 19:36:31 -0700 Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising banner obscuring site interface Related: There are some issues with the design of these banners, especially the floaty thing.Why are you using a table element? It's really wrong for this kind of thing. Also, please commit to just one color for the floater - the highlighting thing doesn't make sense in that space. (See a possible solution, if the icon was black with a yellow i, at http://awesomescreenshot.com/0d622k4fb2). Furthermore, that shadow is hideous - it should be blurred out some more or just eliminated - it adds little (without shadow: http://awesomescreenshot.com/0e622k4k3c, blurred shadow: http://awesomescreenshot.com/06d22k4s6f). This a) looks better and b) would probably increase conversions since it's all around brighter (but in a better-looking way). At the top, it's best looking to eliminate the shadow on the right side which looks unbalanced and increase the blur (like box-shadow: 0px 5px 10px #aaa;). See http://awesomescreenshot.com/01022k566a. I highly suggest you adopt these changes. Thanks,User:Mono Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2013 11:09:59 -0800 From: pcoo...@wikimedia.org To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising banner obscuring site interface Love it! Looks like there's more than one banner too: http://imgs.xkcd.com/store_news/store_gd_g1_QG5Z.png -- Peter Coombe Fundraising Production Coordinator Wikimedia Foundation On 8 December 2013 19:52, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote: Largely unrelated: it looks like xkcd (http://xkcd.com) has spoofed the DEAR WIKIPEDIA READERS donation banner as part of its store campaign: http://imgs.xkcd.com/store_news/store_gd_d5_FyaR.png. :-) MZMcBride ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Monobook was optimised for editors, Vector is more balanced between readers and edtors
How are the edit functions in Monobook more prominent than in Vector? Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2013 08:24:52 +0100 From: nemow...@gmail.com To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Monobook was optimised for editors, Vector is more balanced between readers and edtors WereSpielChequers, 22/11/2013 08:03: But it would be interesting to see some stats on the relative retention and upgrading of editors who use monobook and Vector. The idea sounds crazy, but yes, why not, let's test this. I believe you can put your thoughts on a Meta-Wiki Research: page, describing the background, the A/B test and the proposed analysis, and then ask the WMF to run it (preferably with the consensus of the target wikis, but it's not usually considered necessary for so-called experimentations). Nemo ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] The failure of Google, looking for open source alternatives
Do you have a specific article that talks about this? Do remember the new Google Maps is still in beta. It's (still) impossible to use on older computers because it is so slow and laggy - it's possible the WMF could lobby them to keep it around. Mono From: strain...@gmail.com Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2013 01:31:51 +0300 To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] The failure of Google, looking for open source alternatives 2013/8/25 Romaine Wiki romaine_w...@yahoo.com: Google is throwing the Wikipedia layer out of Google Maps under the guise of improvement, while it actually sets several steps back in time. It is like going to the Middle Ages instead of the future. I wouldn't go *that* far. Opportunities come and go, and so are reusers of our content. This is not such a big deal for Wikipedia, I believe. It shows that commercial companies do not make decisions by looking what people like, need and want, but let the end users down. In the past such changes in software always was a moment for me to consider if there are alternatives and if possible to switch over to them. Considering this for finding a Wikipedia layer on maps, I do not know any. But I do know there is an open source alternative, just like Wikipedia, but then for maps, OpenStreetMap. We already work together in some way, we use the maps of OpenStreetMap in our Toolserver maps when we click on the coordinates on articles. Unfortunately I couldn't find any layer for Wikipedia on http://openstreetmap.org Perhaps the WMF should provide that? Kolossos has done a tremendous job with his work on the subject. Moving from the toolserver to the labs could be a good moment to increase the resource allocated to that project. I think OSM would be happy with the idea. One of their layers (the transport map) is already provided by a third party AFAIK. I think it would be good if we as Wikimedia would broaden our use of and connections with OpenStreetMap and let both communities work together more. (It is unlikely to happen I think, but OpenStreetMap would be perfectly under the wing of WMF, just as Wikivoyage.) No it wouldn't. The OSM Foundation has proven in many ways superior to the WMF (consider only the way licence change was approached on their and and on the WMF wikis...). Perhaps some of this image is due to cultural differences between Europe and the US (me being biased towards the European model), but I don't think so. Also, compared to Wikivoyage, OSM has far superior visibility. We should strive on working together with OpenStreetMap, we supplement each other. Have a nice weekend, Strainu ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
