Dear Gregory,
Congratulations on WikiQueer - this is a valuable project, and the very
best wishes for it. I'd like to bring your attention to a discussion
held at the recently concluded WikiConference India:
From the MLA (Modern Languages Association) via the Atlantic:
Begin the entry in the works-cited list with the author's real name
and, in parentheses, user name, if both are known and they differ. If
only the user name is known, give it alone.
Next provide the entire text of the tweet in
On Thursday 23 February 2012 12:58 AM, Sarah wrote:
On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 3:53 PM, Achal Prabhalaaprabh...@gmail.com wrote:
Thank you Tom, and Sarah, for your very helpful explanations - they are
extremely useful.
There's a discussion on at the reliable sources notice board, for instance,
On Thursday 23 February 2012 01:10 AM, Thomas Morton wrote:
Splitting this off, Achal, I hope that's OK :)
There's a discussion on at the reliable sources notice board, for instance,
which highlights some of the interpretive problems you raise:
Andrew Lih and Steven Walling and Timothy Messer-Kruse on NPR,
discussing exactly this today:
http://www.npr.org/player/v2/mediaPlayer.html?action=1t=1islist=falseid=147261659m=147261652
On Thursday 23 February 2012 08:11 AM, Robin McCain wrote:
Well, I'm not an active academic, but I have
On Wednesday 22 February 2012 01:36 PM, Peter Gervai wrote:
On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 03:35, George Herbertgeorge.herb...@gmail.com wrote:
By far the majority of people who come up and buck the system or
challenge established knowledge in this manner are, in fact, kooks or
people with an
On Wednesday 22 February 2012 03:45 PM, Thomas Morton wrote:
Jokes aside :) the problem here is exemplary of what Wikipedia *doesn't*
do well, which is to find ways to assess the legitimacy of
not-yet-legitimised knowledge
I'm not seeing a good argument that we *should* assess the
On Wednesday 22 February 2012 06:59 PM, Thomas Morton wrote:
On 22 February 2012 13:11, Achal Prabhalaaprabh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday 22 February 2012 03:45 PM, Thomas Morton wrote:
Jokes aside :) the problem here is exemplary of what Wikipedia *doesn't*
do well, which is to
On Wednesday 22 February 2012 08:08 PM, Fred Bauder wrote:
Journals pose a particular problem as they are often, as in the case of
the three journal articles in this case, behind pay walls. Those are peer
reviewed, while his book by a commercial publisher has not received
academic reviews.
Thank you Tom, and Sarah, for your very helpful explanations - they are
extremely useful.
There's a discussion on at the reliable sources notice board, for
instance, which highlights some of the interpretive problems you raise:
A useful update on this situation, for anyone interested:
http://blogs.outlookindia.com/default.aspx?ddm=10pid=2665*
*
On Wednesday 07 December 2011 04:09 AM, Marc A. Pelletier wrote:
On 06/12/2011 4:21 PM, WereSpielChequers wrote:
Unless he casts his net wider I'm personally more concerned
On Tuesday 06 December 2011 08:27 PM, Kim Bruning wrote:
(Also: seeing reporting on facebook and twitter activity, and
having viewed pages from eg. Hindi Wikipedia, I do not
believe that the Indian internet community shares Kapil
Sibal's position. Though they'll have to speak for
, 2011 at 9:07 PM, Kim Bruningk...@bruning.xs4all.nl wrote:
On Tue, Dec 06, 2011 at 09:25:03PM +0530, Achal Prabhala wrote:
On Tuesday 06 December 2011 08:27 PM, Kim Bruning wrote:
I do not believe that the Indian internet community shares Kapil
Sibal's position. Though they'll have to speak
Can we not pick on a person whose POV is that he wishes to participate
in the Wikimedia movement in the fullest way possible?
Pick on me instead. Oh wait...
Best wishes,
Achal
On Tuesday 15 November 2011 07:40 PM, Béria Lima wrote:
OMG Gomà, can´t you leave any thread in peace without push
Hi Beria,
I'm sorry - I wrote this in a hurry and don't necessarily want to
further crowd foundation-l.
The point about Goma is that he (and other Catalan Wikipedians) don't
need to feel any more excluded than they already do
(http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_CAT/en)
The point
Hallo Anirudh, Lodewijk,
While I think that this discussion is very useful, it has been happening
for some time - I know that Anirudh has raised these questions before,
for instance. In that sense, I'm not sure how the registration of a
trust changes the situation at all; I think that for
to confuse terms that sound and look similar.
Theo
Best wishes,
Achal
On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 9:41 PM, Achal Prabhala aprabh...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hallo Anirudh, Lodewijk,
While I think that this discussion is very useful, it has been happening
for some time - I know that Anirudh has
however, I would be happy to go into much more detail for your
elucidation.
On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 3:26 AM, Achal Prabhala aprabh...@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi Theo
On 11 November 2011 14:10, Theo10011 de10...@gmail.com wrote:
Ohai Achal
As usual, I disagree.
??
I didn't realise
A friend of mine in South Africa, Isabel Hofmeyr, passed on this image
of the first page of the first edition of the English translation of
Gandhi's Hind Swaraj - or Indian Home Rule in translation. (Hind
Swaraj was the blueprint for India's freedom movement).
The book was published in South
On Friday 30 September 2011 10:54 PM, Theo10011 wrote:
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 10:21 PM, Bishakha
Dattabishakhada...@gmail.comwrote:
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 9:45 PM, Milos Rancicmill...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 16:24, Riskerrisker...@gmail.com wrote:
Milos, I believe
On Friday 30 September 2011 11:19 PM, Theo10011 wrote:
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 11:14 PM, Achal Prabhalaaprabh...@gmail.comwrote:
On Friday 30 September 2011 10:54 PM, Theo10011 wrote:
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 10:21 PM, Bishakha Dattabishakhada...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at
On Friday 30 September 2011 11:47 PM, Theo10011 wrote:
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 11:31 PM, Achal Prabhalaaprabh...@gmail.comwrote:
On Friday 30 September 2011 11:19 PM, Theo10011 wrote:
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 11:14 PM, Achal Prabhalaaprabh...@gmail.com
wrote:
How about an encyclopedia?
On Thursday 15 September 2011 12:40 AM, Andrew Lih wrote:
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 11:43 AM, Sarahslimvir...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 12:34, Andrew Lihandrew@gmail.com wrote:
And, in Wikipedia's crowdsourced way, potentially a re-oriented,
mobilized Wikinews could
On Thursday 15 September 2011 01:43 AM, David Gerard wrote:
On 14 September 2011 21:02, Achal Prabhalaaprabh...@gmail.com wrote:
It wouldn't be an exaggeration to say that the world now follows the
Wikinews model.
No, you're describing bare skimming of the unedited social media pool.
On Monday 12 September 2011 02:01 PM, David Gerard wrote:
[subject changed]
On 12 September 2011 08:46, Yaroslav M. Blanterpute...@mccme.ru wrote:
Right, but we do have this systemic bias already in place: in ALL our
projects, the articles on localities in Sweden are longer and better
On Saturday 10 September 2011 05:28 PM, Ilario Valdelli wrote:
Good execpt some errors.
Italian is national language in switzerland.
Ilario
On 10 Sep 2011 00:54, Robin Pepermansrobinp.1...@gmail.com wrote:
An idea that I raised during a discussion between the language
committee and
On Saturday 10 September 2011 06:07 PM, Milos Rancic wrote:
On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 14:17, Achal Prabhalaaprabh...@gmail.com wrote:
This is an excellent idea. However, to cut down on frivolous closure
requests, will you also make more explicit on the page (within the
policy) that requests
On Monday 05 September 2011 03:53 AM, Kim Bruning wrote:
On Sun, Sep 04, 2011 at 11:54:44PM +0100, Thomas Dalton wrote:
Yes, exactly! You're smart! :-)
Now, one definition of censorship is :
* Filtering on the basis of prejudicial labels.
We're not actually allowed to censor, because
An interesting thing happened today. I started receiving frantic calls
this morning from an officer at the National Gallery of Modern Art in
Bangalore, who shall go unnamed. She had got my number from a colleague,
who I met in the course of a GLAM meeting we organised earlier in the
year. This
Dear friends,
A quick update on the oral citations project.
1) We have now posted sample articles in all 3 project languages,
Malayalam, Sepedi and Hindi:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Oral_Citations#Articles.2F_Discussions_.28in_development.29
2) A full English subtitle track for
Dear Tom and David,
On Wednesday 27 July 2011 03:03 PM, Thomas Morton wrote:
This is a really interesting and thoughtfully complete project.
As an editor I am cautious of how well these could be used as citations
without falling afoul of original research.
The first problem I see is that
Hallo (responses inline)
On Wednesday 27 July 2011 06:02 PM, CasteloBranco wrote:
And why does the people who speaks Malayalam, Hindi and Sepedi need to
write in English in order to have those oral citations published?
Yes, we don't. We have Sepedi, Malayalam and Hindi Wikipedias to work
on.
Hallo, (responses inline)
On Wednesday 27 July 2011 11:36 PM, Wjhonson wrote:
You should not create your own videos and then publish them on Wikipedia.
You should create videos or audio tracks of oral interviews, and then publish
them.
We did not create our own videos and then publish them on
Dear Ziko,
On Wednesday 27 July 2011 09:38 PM, Ziko van Dijk wrote:
Hello,
Today I found the time to read the messages about the Oral Citations
project and watch the film People are Knowledge. I hope that we can
go on in this discussion without accusations about racism etc. In
science, it
Hallo, (responses inline)
On Wednesday 27 July 2011 11:57 PM, Wjhonson wrote:
For actual quotations from sources, you should quote the source exactly.
Then you will never be using original research.
I don't actually understand what this means. If you look at the articles
created:
Hallo, (responses inline)
On Thursday 28 July 2011 12:27 AM, Wjhonson wrote:
Achal I was responding to Thomas not to you.
However yes, if you are quoting what an interviewee is saying, you should use
quotation marks to offset their statements.
Or even use the blockquote markup for a lengthy
Dear Castelo,
On Thursday 28 July 2011 12:25 AM, CasteloBranco wrote:
Tom,
The fundamental difference in our views is that you talk about
translation, and i'm talking about another thing. The projects are not
bare translations of another language version (let's say, the English
version).
Dear friends,
At the beginning of 2011, a group of us began working on a project to
explore alternative methods of citation on Wikipedia. We were motivated
by the lack of published resources in much of the non-Anglo-European
world, and the very real difficulty of citing everyday aspects of lived
Sreejith's point is that proving the date of authorship in commonly used
religious iconography is difficult; it's also difficult to work through
the dates of derivatives of the 'original' work in order to establish
which versions have what period - if any - of copyright validity left.
For what
unknown by the community, obviously not.
E. Forrester
On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 12:23 PM, MZMcBridez at mzmcbride.com
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l wrote:
/ Hi.
//
// As Daniel noted in his earlier e-mail to the list, Achal Prabhala is now a
// Wikimedia Fellow.[1
On Friday 21 January 2011 07:26 AM, MZMcBride wrote:
Achal Prabhala wrote:
Greetings,
I'm happy to tell you a little more about myself and the scope of this
short-term research project I'm undertaking, and I'm as happy to assume
that you fully intended for your messages to come across
41 matches
Mail list logo
