My answers to Phoebe questions. (I tryed to keep it short to not create a
lot of problems to read, if you need a bigger version you can ask me) :)
> *I've been asked to write a short editorial about this development from a
> Wikipedian's perspective and am curious about (and would love to includ
On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 7:22 PM, phoebe ayers wrote:
>
> I've been asked to write a short editorial about this development from
> a Wikipedian's perspective and am curious about (and would love to
> include) other Wikimedian experiences -- did you use print
> encyclopedias as a kid?
I loved ency
On 13 March 2012 20:22, phoebe ayers wrote:
>
> I've been asked to write a short editorial about this development from
> a Wikipedian's perspective and am curious about (and would love to
> include) other Wikimedian experiences -- did you use print
> encyclopedias as a kid? Was a love of print en
On 14/03/12 11:22, phoebe ayers wrote:
> I've been asked to write a short editorial about this development from
> a Wikipedian's perspective and am curious about (and would love to
> include) other Wikimedian experiences -- did you use print
> encyclopedias as a kid? Was a love of print encyclopedi
On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 6:58 PM, Yaroslav M. Blanter wrote:
>>
> No, I think there were only like three big universal encyclopaedias still
> being printed (Britannica, Brockhaus, and Russian Encyclopaedia?), unless I
> am confusing things.
There's also World Book in English, the biggest seller of
> I've been asked to write a short editorial about this development from
> a Wikipedian's perspective and am curious about (and would love to
> include) other Wikimedian experiences -- did you use print
> encyclopedias as a kid? Was a love of print encyclopedias part of your
> motivation or interes
On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 8:22 PM, phoebe ayers wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Samuel Klein wrote:
> > 2010's 32-volume set will be its last. (Now I want to get one, to
> > replace my old set!) Future versions will be digital only.
> >
> >
> http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/
On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Samuel Klein wrote:
> 2010's 32-volume set will be its last. (Now I want to get one, to
> replace my old set!) Future versions will be digital only.
>
> http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/03/13/after-244-years-encyclopaedia-britannica-stops-the-presses/?s
2012/3/13 Samuel Klein
> "Today our digital database is much larger than what we can fit in the
> print set. And it is up to date because we can revise it within
> minutes anytime we need to, and we do it many times each day."
>
>
Wow, they update the encyclopedia many times each day.
___
Hello,
Thanks MZMcBride for your reply here.
On 10 Mar 2012, at 22:32, MZMcBride wrote:
> Michael Peel wrote:
>> I'd like to see more information here. What activities are MarkMonitor
>> involved in with the 'anti-piracy fight'? Are they involved in filtering all
>> peer-to-peer traffic, or just
2012/3/14 Samuel Klein :
> "Today our digital database is much larger than what we can fit in the
> print set.
And yet the article "Gesenius, Heinrich Friedrich Wilhlem" has 745
words in the 1911 print edition and 175 in the current online edition.
--
Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרו
On Tue, 13 Mar 2012 22:54:48 +, Thomas Dalton
wrote:
> I thought they had already stopped... I'm sure I remember an
> announcement like this a year or two ago... does anyone know what it
> is I'm remembering?
>
No, I think there were only like three big universal encyclopaedias still
being pr
I thought they had already stopped... I'm sure I remember an
announcement like this a year or two ago... does anyone know what it
is I'm remembering?
On 13 March 2012 22:49, Samuel Klein wrote:
> 2010's 32-volume set will be its last. (Now I want to get one, to
> replace my old set!) Future ver
2010's 32-volume set will be its last. (Now I want to get one, to
replace my old set!) Future versions will be digital only.
http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/03/13/after-244-years-encyclopaedia-britannica-stops-the-presses/?smid=tw-nytimes&seid=auto
http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2012
Am 13.03.2012 10:39, schrieb Andreas Kolbe:
On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 9:20 AM, Tobias Oelgarte<
tobias.oelga...@googlemail.com> wrote:
Am 13.03.2012 03:39, schrieb Andreas Kolbe:
No. I'm not accusing you for prudery, but for making wrong cited
statements. Your assumption is that we have to sa
On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 9:20 AM, Tobias Oelgarte <
tobias.oelga...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Am 13.03.2012 03:39, schrieb Andreas Kolbe:
>
>>
>> No. I'm not accusing you for prudery, but for making wrong cited
> statements. Your assumption is that we have to sacrifice neutrality to
> please a audie
Am 13.03.2012 03:39, schrieb Andreas Kolbe:
It's not me who's uploading hundreds of pornographic media onto Wikimedia
sites. There are places for porn online, just like there are places for
online poker, and amateur digital art. I have no problem with any of them.
But listen to yourself – you ar
On 03/09/12 10:00 PM, Thomas Morton wrote:
On 10 March 2012 00:57, Ray Saintonge wrote:
On 03/09/12 6:06 AM, Neil Babbage wrote:
Wikimedia is not supposed to be some kind of exercise in perfection for
perfection's sake. It's supposed to be open, accessible and useful.
"Useful", like "not
On 03/12/12 10:11 AM, Nathan wrote:
On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 1:02 PM, Marc Riddellwrote:
on 3/12/12 11:43 AM, Nathan at nawr...@gmail.com wrote:
The "bible belt" phrase that some people throw around in this discussion is
just a stand-in for anti-Americanism and a sign of profound ignorance. It
On 03/09/12 9:39 PM, Andreas Kolbe wrote:
On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 2:16 AM, Ray Saintonge wrote:
On 03/08/12 2:20 AM, Theo10011 wrote:
The other issue is morality and responsibility. I don't think any
executives or board members should make a statement about that video. It's
a stated policy t
On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 11:38 PM, Ray Saintonge wrote:
> On 03/12/12 12:35 PM, George Herbert wrote:
>>
>> Without delving into the specifics here, or concluding either way as
>> to the current case lacking actual evidence in front of me, it is a
>> real and quite serious problem if we don't hold
21 matches
Mail list logo
