This is a reminder. Not a direct comment on any words on this thread.
We are all on the same side here. We want information to be free. We
are arguing about the details, not the big picture. Just keep that in
mind.
--
--
Jussi-Ville Heiskanen, ~ [[User:Cimon Avaro]]
2011/10/5 M. Williamson node...@gmail.com:
Editors aren't the only people who use Wikipedia.
About that point it's worth noting that in Facebook several autonomous
supporting groups have appeared, the most numerous has 215.000
followers and it's now still growing with a 1000 likes/hour rate.
This may have been answered by Kaldari already but...
Wouldn't it have been a better solution to block ALL wikimedia projects in
any language, if the user geolocates to Italy? It's my understanding that
this law does not differentiate (so, the English wikipedia faces the same
risks as Italian
Using a geotargeted CentralNotice would be clever, but I believe it
would be trivial to get around by disabling Javascript. Currently
it.wikipedia is using JS to redirect to their message, but beyond that
all page contents are also being hidden with CSS (yes, you can bypass
that too, but it's
On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 5:20 PM, Peter Coombe thewub.w...@googlemail.comwrote:
Using a geotargeted CentralNotice would be clever, but I believe it
would be trivial to get around by disabling Javascript. Currently
it.wikipedia is using JS to redirect to their message, but beyond that
all page
Hi all;
The events regarding Italian Wikipedia blanking[1][2] of all its content
are
a serious precedent IMHO. They can make a lot of noise using other
procedures, like a big blinking site notice, but giving no choice to read
the content is against the main goal of Wikipedia.[3]
Italian
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 22:32, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote:
No, it is a very good idea. The public needs to know what is at stake. It
would be nice if it were otherwise, but most people only learn by
experience.
Another important point here is that Wikipedia is an international project;
there are speakers of Italian in Switzerland, Brazil, Argentina, Mexico, and
in smaller numbers in lots of other countries who may not care so much what
happens in Italian politics. If the UK proposed a new law to shut
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 22:55, M. Williamson node...@gmail.com wrote:
Another important point here is that Wikipedia is an international project;
No, this is not another important point, this is exactly my point. Is
the Kiribati based community (or a part of it) of Wikipedians allowed
to block
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 22:58, Mathias Schindler
mathias.schind...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 22:55, M. Williamson node...@gmail.com wrote:
Another important point here is that Wikipedia is an international project;
No, this is not another important point, this is exactly my point.
Is the Kiribati based community (or a part of it) of Wikipedians allowed
to block en.wikipedia.org for x hours because a new Kiribatian (sp?)
media law might come?
Mathias
You're right, 2-3% of it.wikip users live outside of Italy, but this new law
will affect every page in which a user
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 23:08, Jalo jal...@gmail.com wrote:
You're right, 2-3% of it.wikip users live outside of Italy, but this new law
will affect every page in which a user that live in Italy save a single page
version (that is 100% of articles).
Then can you specify the threshold for the
Then can you specify the threshold for the community-ratio that is in
your opinion required for some Wikipedians to vandalize a language
edition of Wikipedia in such way?
I've already told that: 100% of articles. Do you need a larger threshold?
___
They should be enough, to convice the rest of the community. And when
Kiribati users are actually able to convince all the others on en, then: Go
Kiribati! Go!
southpark
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 11:10 PM, Mathias Schindler
mathias.schind...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 23:08, Jalo
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 22:55, M. Williamson node...@gmail.com wrote:
Another important point here is that Wikipedia is an international
project;
No, this is not another important point, this is exactly my point. Is
the Kiribati based community (or a part of it) of Wikipedians allowed
to
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 5:10 PM, Mathias Schindler
mathias.schind...@gmail.com wrote:
Then can you specify the threshold for the community-ratio that is in
your opinion required for some Wikipedians to vandalize a language
edition of Wikipedia in such way?
Unless the WMF decides it should
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 23:08, Jalo jal...@gmail.com wrote:
You're right, 2-3% of it.wikip users live outside of Italy, but this
new law
will affect every page in which a user that live in Italy save a single
page
version (that is 100% of articles).
Then can you specify the threshold for
On 4 October 2011 22:15, Benjamin Lees emufarm...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 5:10 PM, Mathias Schindler
mathias.schind...@gmail.com wrote:
Then can you specify the threshold for the community-ratio that is in
your opinion required for some Wikipedians to vandalize a language
FWIW because of the way this has been implemented, it is not (at least
obviously) possible to rollback/reverse via the web interface (it appears
to
be a change in common.js - and even that page redirects to the message).
Tom
You can disable javascripts and css in your browser. For
2011/10/4 emijrp emi...@gmail.com
Hi all;
The events regarding Italian Wikipedia blanking[1][2] of all its content are
a serious precedent IMHO. They can make a lot of noise using other
procedures, like a big blinking site notice, but giving no choice to read
the content is against the main
On 10/4/11 11:20 PM, Jalo wrote:
the de facto threshold is whatever allows them to get consensus and have an
admin make the
necessary changes and not be reverted
You can see the consensus in
http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Bar/Discussioni/Comma_29_e_Wikipedia
I know, it's in italian
On 10/04/2011 10:38 PM, Mathias Schindler wrote:
On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 22:32, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote:
No, it is a very good idea. The public needs to know what is at stake. It
would be nice if it were otherwise, but most people only learn by
experience.
Editors aren't the only people who use Wikipedia.
2011/10/4 Jalo jal...@gmail.com
Is the Kiribati based community (or a part of it) of Wikipedians allowed
to block en.wikipedia.org for x hours because a new Kiribatian (sp?)
media law might come?
Mathias
You're right, 2-3% of
23 matches
Mail list logo
