On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 12:47 PM, basedrop based...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't have a particular need to have the art history portion of the wiki
editable for my users at my domain. I have the specialized users at my
site, I'd like to take advantage of that aggregation of specialized users
to
The local government of Seoul, Korea, is preparing to donate some of
her contents.
For the donation they approached to the bureaucrats of ko.wp, because
we don't have a local chapter in Korea.
Finally they decided to publish them in a major web portal in Korea in
condition of free license. The
2009/2/19 Michael Snow wikipe...@verizon.net:
I'm likely going to put the general issue of biographies on the board's
next agenda, for what that's worth. Though as I say, there's no simple
blanket solution, and I don't know if we can promise anything beyond
more discussion and more awareness
2009/2/19 Jimmy Wales jwa...@wikia-inc.com:
I think a deeper point is that there are a lot of very problematic BLP's
on Wikipedia, and this is an ongoing problem that we all have to be very
serious about.
In my anecdotal experience (as a UK phone contact), BLPs are our
biggest public
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 21:28, Bence Damokos bdamo...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,Thank you for your replies. Are there any notable examples you could
mention, or point me to?You might be interested in the German initiative of
working with a state-funded Institute to write articles in Wikipedia about
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 8:51 AM, Chad innocentkil...@gmail.com wrote:
That aside: the two situations are entirely different. This proposal
is effectively outsourcing a section of Wikipedia to some experts
in the field. That's entirely unlike the Foundation deciding to add
an additional
I totally agree that we should know in advance on how attribution
should take place when people are going to reuse our content. A good
example on how to handle this might be how the Blender Foundation did
that with its 'Elephant's Dream' and 'Big Buck Bunny' projects (even
though the license there
Wikimedia Nederland has:
* Participated in the greenbook about copyright reform in the European Union
* Written a letter to the government which resulted in the release of
portrait photographs of all members of the current cabinet under GFDL
* Talked to members of the parliament about copyright
2009/2/19 Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com:
Hoi,
Thomas OTHER people can see this benefit.. It is not that hard.. even I can.
Then would you care to explain it to me?
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
2009/2/19 Robert Rohde raro...@gmail.com:
In my opinion, it is incumbent upon us to give examples of how we
believe third parties can legally and practically reuse WMF content by
exercising rights under CC-BY-SA. If we can't, in our collective
wisdom, agree on how third parties ought to be
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 11:38 PM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
cimonav...@gmail.com wrote:
Robert Rohde wrote:
If someone comes to us and says: I want to print a copy of [[France]]
in my book. What is a reasonable way to comply with the license?,
then we really ought to be able to answer that
I have never understood why any substantial contributor to Wikipedia
here would feel that attributing the specific text the contributed to
an article to them individually if an article is reprinted is to
their benefit--given that the text will have been almost entirely
replaced, modified, and
The benefit is in getting users who would not be comfortable on
Wikipedia because of the perceived and real behavior problems on that
site--even if this is no worse ultimately than in the academic world,
the mode of interaction is certainly very different. Why do we assume
the present editing
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 11:09 PM, Michael Snow wikipe...@verizon.netwrote:
Sage Ross wrote:
From my experience talking with people (mostly academics) who have
Wikipedia articles, they are often unhappy with their articles but
also either don't want to interfere in a community they aren't
2009/2/19 David Levy lifeisunf...@gmail.com:
David Goodman wrote:
The benefit is in getting users who would not be comfortable on
Wikipedia because of the perceived and real behavior problems on that
site--even if this is no worse ultimately than in the academic world,
the mode of
Gerard Meijssen wrote:
If articles can be shared, surely talk pages can be shared too ?
Yes, but this eliminates the avoidance of interaction that David
Goodman cited as a benefit.
And if that's the case, what *is* the benefit? Why dedicate effort
and resources toward duplicating the normal
Nathan wrote:
This sounds like a very interesting idea to me. None of the potential
problems are obvious dealbreakers to me. It isn't outsourcing, the talkpage
can be shared as easily as anything else, we would really like to take
advantage of concentrated groups of expert users, and the more
Sometime in the past year I stopped posting the top posters list because it
was seen as not useful and perhaps encouraging the type of behavior it was,
in fact, meant to discourage. Even so, I thought I might post this special
edition of top posters. The numbers come from Erik Zachte's list page,
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 1:30 PM, David Levy lifeisunf...@gmail.com wrote:
But what's the point of duplicating the entire structure (including
talk pages) instead of simply referring these experts to Wikipedia?
Even if everything could be made seamless, what would be the
advantage?
It's
2009/2/19 Nathan nawr...@gmail.com:
Sometime in the past year I stopped posting the top posters list because it
was seen as not useful and perhaps encouraging the type of behavior it was,
in fact, meant to discourage. Even so, I thought I might post this special
edition of top posters. The
2009/2/19 Nathan nawr...@gmail.com:
So the question really should be, what of this would be to our disadvantage?
It's very difficult to set up technically, for a start. Live mirroring
of existing content isn't too hard, but sorting out editing would be a
nightmare. We presumably wouldn't want
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 1:55 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.comwrote:
That's the result of having to write a master's thesis!
Actually, I think that list is very positive - we have 25 people all
posting at least an average of 5 posts a day. That's a large, active
community. 753
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 8:24 AM, Anthony wikim...@inbox.org wrote:
The GFDL has problems which need to be fixed. If the relicensing under
CC-BY-SA occurs, that's much less likely to happen.
I spent 3 years trying to get the GFDL fixed. Would you like me to
forward you all of the We'll get back
2009/2/19 Nathan nawr...@gmail.com:
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 1:55 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.comwrote:
That's the result of having to write a master's thesis!
Actually, I think that list is very positive - we have 25 people all
posting at least an average of 5 posts a day.
Hoi,
I am glad that you did not count the number of times that I blogged on one
of my blogs. Have a read and tell me where you think I make most sense ...
http://ulltmategerardm.blogspot.com
http://omegawiki.blogspot.com
http://extensiontesting.blogspot.com/
Thanks,
GerardM
2009/2/19
I hope you realize that doesn't make any sense. If the WMF didn't
exist, how could it host anything at all?
skype: node.ue
2009/2/19 Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com:
Hoi,
The French Wikipedia may pre-date the WMF but the hosting of the French
Wikipedia has always been done by the
Isn't that what outsourcing is...
skype: node.ue
2009/2/19 Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com:
Hoi,
It is not outsourcing at all. Quite the contrary, it would be people from
elsewhere, people who are likely to be trusted from elsewhere editing our
content from somewhere else as
Thomas Dalton 753 GerardM 738 David Gerard 450 Ray Saintonge 405
Anthony 403 Milos Rancic 381 geni 359 Anthere 323 Dan Rosenthal 316
Chad 311 Nathan 283 Mark Williamson 276 Andrew Whitworth 273 Geoffrey
Plourde 253 Erik Moeller 229 Jussi-Ville Heiskanen 224 effe iets anders
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 2:36 PM, Mark Williamson node...@gmail.com wrote:
I still hold the crown on Wikipedia-l. Whatever happened to that list,
anyways?
Pretty much no decisions are made at the Wikipedia level. They're either
made at the foundation level or the individual project one.
2009/2/19 Robert Rohde raro...@gmail.com:
I think you are significantly overestimating the difficulty. We
already have an API [1] and similar tools that allow one to accomplish
many similar tasks. For example, calling ?action=render will give you
a llive HTML version of any current page that
Michael Snow escribió:
I suppose I should bring it with me whether I spend it or not. Anyway, I'm
looking forward to Wikimania, and seeing any of you that are able to
make it.
--Michael Snow
You should bring it and not spend it. I foresee you will be asked about
them there :-)
Robert Rohde wrote:
True, though under the current system a middle man in position of a
user authentication token could do exactly the same things to
Wikimedia as someone with the plaintext password. Which is a short
way of saying our system has never been built with much security in
mind.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Wikipedia-l is still a good place to discuss Wikipedia related issues
regardless of language. I've seen some interesting discussions take
place there over the last couple of months.
It's still quite useful.
Cary
Mark Williamson wrote:
I still hold
33 matches
Mail list logo
