Agree.
And perhaps other organizations working with copy left licenses could be
informed?
On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 4:20 PM, Teofilo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The European Commission published in July a Green Paper - Copyright
in the Knowledge Economy (1) .
In §3.4. They talk about the
2008/11/14 teun spaans [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Agree.
And perhaps other organizations working with copy left licenses could be
informed?
There is nothing in there of any real significance to free licenses.
--
geni
___
foundation-l mailing list
Hoi,
All projects are started with consent of the board. I take it that the board
has the final say on blocking / removing projects. I can imagine that the
WMF office / organisation takes this decision on there own accord. These are
the two who have the power to establish facts.
Thanks,
On 14 Nov 2008, at 15:47, geni wrote:
2008/11/14 teun spaans [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Agree.
And perhaps other organizations working with copy left licenses
could be
informed?
There is nothing in there of any real significance to free licenses.
Isn't that something that should be fed back
Hello,
Now, the Wikipedia Academy in Lund has ended. A big success, as the number
of participants was double the number we had anticipated. The entire
conference was covered by three bloggers, collected here:
http://wikipediaacademy.blogspot.com/ (Swedish, but translatable for example
via
Hoi,
When the EU develops a law that deals with copyright and licensing, it will
implicitly include Free licenses. It is exactly for this reason that
communities like ours who have at least an idea of what we consider to be
the right way forward are asked to step on the plate. When we, as a
nonsense. There are (small list):
* Creative Commons, dozens of chapters
* Wikimedia, several chapters
* Free Knowledge institute
* Open Office
* Several Linux organisations
* Actually *any* organisation that makes on a large scale freely licensed
manuals etc
* Open Streetmap
* Several libraries
who!
2008/11/16 phoebe ayers [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi ya'll,
You may remember way that back in mid-2006 user:Improv started up the
List Syndication Service:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/LSS
This was an ongoing weekly summary of the mailing lists, particularly
Foundation-L. It was
It doesn't really matter what was on their mind, even though I also disagree
on what is on their mind. It matters that the discussion has been broken
open, and that it will be on the agenda of the commission and after that the
parliament. If it is on the agenda, it is time for a little lobby and
Apparently the German portal on wikipedia.de has been shut down after
a legal case. Is there any more information on this?
http://www.wikipedia.de/
Bryan
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 3:05 PM, Gerard Meijssen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
Hoi,
I think it makes sense to have functionality like FlaggedRevs be localised
prior to it being enabled. Given that it is important for the editors to
understand what is intended with Flagged Revisions. I would argue
BTW, I am not the only person who is working on the site, but it is a
very small group of people and editing is not open to the world.
In that case, you can just get explicit permission from each of them
to do whatever it is you need to do, so there shouldn't be a problem.
2008/11/16 David Gerard [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Donations to WMDE are apparently coming in very fast because of this:
http://wiwowo.blogspot.com/2008/11/internet-cannot-be-censured.html
I'm reluctant to advocate upset politicians as a fundraising tool, but ...
Here's the list. Dig the comments:
Milos Rancic wrote:
On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 5:26 PM, Thomas Dalton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Since you could delete the GFDL-only version and remake it as a dual
licensed version after the switchover (assuming we do switchover), I
can't see how there could a problem. (Assuming you are the only
Gerard wrote: Given that it is important for the editors to understand what is
intended with Flagged Revisions. I would argue that localisation prior to
implementation is essential.
I would like to remind Gerard that the requests for FlaggedRevs are based on the
consensus of live wiki
On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 9:02 AM, David Gerard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2008/11/16 Ian A. Holton [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
This isn't the first time the German chapter has had an interim injunction
issued against them[2], but everytime the matter has been resolved in a
professional manner and the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I haven't seen this yet posted to the Textbook-l list or foundation-l
so I wanted to make it known that Wikibooks is winding down its logo
vote over the next couple weeks. While we're asking people not to
specify color, text, and there may be some
On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 6:44 AM, Michael Bimmler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
forwarded message. As always, I'm grateful if this is *not* quoted as
Michael Bimmler wrote, irrespective of whether I agree with the
email.
-- Forwarded message --
From: RJ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date:
Yes, I totally agree with Ziko.
The article about Heilmann do had contents that are very questionable.
There were content that are not proved and that are now removed, that
must be removed according to our rule of living people biographies.
Heilmann complained through his lawyer at first by
On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 8:03 PM, Ting Chen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Heilmann complained through his lawyer at first by WikiMedia
Deutschland. The chapter answered him that it is not responsible for the
content on Wikipedia and they would do nothing. I agree with the first
part of the
Marco Chiesa wrote:
The point is that the chapter is NOT responsible for the content of
Wikipedia. If as a chapter we receive a suggestion/complain about something
in Wikipedia, we forward the email to OTRS, because that's the address
that's dedicated to these things. If there is a lawsuit, as
David Gerard wrote:
2008/11/19 Nathan [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
The chapter refused to look at the complaint or take any action at all?
Unless there is some legal reason why they can't take responsibility (even
as individuals responding to an e-mail complaint), I find that difficult to
believe.
Right, I wasn't clear. I was thinking it would be strange if the chapter
members took no action, as members (even forwarding a complaint to OTRS),
and the only explanation I had for that was the legal danger in appearing to
take responsibility on behalf of the chapter. As long as they forward the
phoebe ayers wrote:
Because I'm sure the Board will be *thrilled* to get involved in a
dispute that involves nationalism, factionalism, complicated
linguistics, hurt feelings, confusion about what's true, and heated
debate and assumptions of poor faith on all sides. Come on. How is the
Board
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Dovi, you're already in the queue which is being worked through; should
be done within the next few days.
- -- brion
Dovi Jacobs wrote:
Gerard, thank you for your kind comments. I think the system you have
set up at Betawiki is extraordinary, and
Thank you very much. It looks like the foundation's finances are in
excellent order. A few things that jump out at me - despite the size
of the foundation in pretty much every respect increasing dramatically
over the last year, the money spent on travel (which is something I
remember some people
On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 5:28 PM, Gerard Meijssen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hoi,
The proposal is for ASL to be written in SignWriting. This has the added
benefit that whatever is actually written can also be edited in our wiki
style. The problem with video is that you cannot change it and
On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 2:14 AM, Gerard Meijssen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[snip]
Many people who are deaf have not learned to read and write in their own
language.
[snip]
It is true that many deaf people do not know how to write their own
language.
I think the shifting definition of 'own
Here we must be using some other
meaning since the overwhelming majority of deaf children are born to
hearing parents who do not speak sign language.
Really? Do you have some statistics to back that up? Deafness is very
often inherited. It may be a majority, but I doubt it is overwhelming.
Greg, this has nothing to do with cochlear implants.
The deaf activist community is not a monolith, and the SignWriting
folks are not advocates of isolationism at all.
They simply believe in bilingualism, and that attaining literacy in
one's everyday language is valuable in itself, and should
On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 12:50 PM, Pharos [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Greg, this has nothing to do with cochlear implants.
The deaf activist community is not a monolith, and the SignWriting
folks are not advocates of isolationism at all.
Gah, I would not presume to insult them so. For clarity:
Gregory Maxwell hett schreven:
Only that due care is required if we don't want to end up being a tool
for isolationism and this is true for all cases where we create
distinct Wikipedia communities and is not at all limited to speakers
of sign language.
If people like to be isolated, why
On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 6:25 PM, Gerard Meijssen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
When people claim that deaf people are able to read and write in the
dominant language, they forget that this has never been a reason to deny
people their Wikipedia in their language. We do allow people who speak a
On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 12:33 AM, Ral315 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Also, while extensions are granted fairly liberally, is it normal practice
to receive extensions on an annual basis?
A three-month extension is requested approximately 37% of the time. An
additional three-month extension is
On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 11:04 AM, Thomas Dalton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2008/11/24 Michael Bimmler [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Yeah and, what Nathan probably meant: If a chapter ignores a
termination message and keeps using the trademark, we would need to
obtain an injunction in *their* country. Now,
On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 5:17 PM, Florence Devouard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think it is not appropriate that Wikimedia Brasil is listed (and
described) as a non-profit organization if it is not yet incorporated:
http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Local_chapters.
I disagree, it's a list of
2008/11/24 Casey Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 5:17 PM, Florence Devouard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think it is not appropriate that Wikimedia Brasil is listed (and
described) as a non-profit organization if it is not yet incorporated:
That's a very useful tool (if rather cryptic in its output), thank
you! If I'm reading it right, it looks like Wikipedia is registered
far more widely.
Actually, on a second glance, it seems to be registered in
Switzerland, despite Michael's claims otherwise. Michael, what was
your source for
2008/11/24 Florence Devouard [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Luiz Augusto wrote:
First, is that wrong that a chapter is made in majority or entirety by
non-editors ? I would tend to think it is unfortunate, but not wrong. A
person may be part of the wikimedia mouvement without editing a lot. The
person
2008/11/12 Rand Montoya [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
To review, our current donations can be found here:
http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Special:ContributionStatistics
For those who haven't seen it yet:
http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Special:FundraiserStatistics
This is a side-by-side
On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 12:13 AM, Thomas Dalton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's a very useful tool (if rather cryptic in its output), thank
you! If I'm reading it right, it looks like Wikipedia is registered
far more widely.
Actually, on a second glance, it seems to be registered in
Mike Godwin wrote:
Phil Nash writes:
I don't want to seem naive but it is unclear to me how this applies
to an
essentially non-profit organisation; if you can help me out with a
link, I'd
be grateful. Thanks.
I'm not sure I understand the question. Are you under the impression
that
2008/11/25 Mike Godwin [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Without criticizing Mozilla at all, I'll note that we're not that much
like Mozilla in the scale on which license trademarks commercially.
It's probably difficult for anyone outside the Foundation to imagine
the sheer number of licensing opportunities
On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 11:38 AM, Florence Devouard [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
Nathan wrote:
On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 8:49 AM, Anthony [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What are you saying here? Do you think free speech is promoted by
telling
people no when they ask if they can use your trademark,
On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 12:10 PM, Thomas Dalton [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
Well, like I said, my purpose wasn't to make a point, but to ask
questions.
I've learned better than to try to make points in this particular e-mail
forum.
Your second question was something of a leading question. It
2008/11/25 Anthony [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 12:10 PM, Thomas Dalton [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
Well, like I said, my purpose wasn't to make a point, but to ask
questions.
I've learned better than to try to make points in this particular e-mail
forum.
Your second question
Anthony writes:
What are you saying here? Do you think free speech is promoted by
telling
people no when they ask if they can use your trademark, but then
not doing
anything when someone uses it without asking?
I'm trying to say that striking a humane balance between the
On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 1:27 PM, Mike Godwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm trying to say that striking a humane balance between the
requirements of trademark maintenance and the interests of freedom of
speech is something I try to do, pretty much on a daily basis.
How are the two in conflict?
2008/11/25 Mike Godwin [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Your reasoning suggests (by analogy) that prosecutors who don't
prosecute every single offense, or policemen who don't arrest everyone
who might have committed offense, are somehow contradictory to
upholding the law. But that's not how the legal
On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 1:42 PM, Erik Moeller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Personally, I'm not a huge friend of IP law,
Specifically, you state on your meta user page that you are strongly
opposed to all types of 'intellectual property'.
but I've always felt that
the fundamental intentions of
2008/11/25 Anthony [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I can't imagine you have that feeling about [[trademark dilution]] law,
though. I don't think people are going to cry fraud when they find out
their coffee mug isn't really the coffee mug that anyone can edit.
What I said is that its fundamental
Anthony writes:
The fundamental intention of [[trademark dilution]] law is to create a
property right.
This isn't an accurate statement about trademark law. It's true that
trademark law creates certain rights, but to understand trademark law
as an attempt to create a *property* right is
On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 3:01 PM, Mike Godwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Anthony writes:
The fundamental intention of [[trademark dilution]] law is to create a
property right.
This isn't an accurate statement about trademark law. It's true that
trademark law creates certain rights, but to
Luiz Augusto wrote:
This is what we need: to stop the current attempt and start it again
Why?
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 2:35 PM, Chad [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Great theory for 2008, except for the whole economy is screwed,
high employment, mortgage foreclosure and general nobody has
any money to spare thing.
-Chad
I'm completely speculating here, but maybe the reason we're doing so
Porantim wrote:
The point here is: Thomas is one of the people who deny the debate. This is
the fact.
Of course I want Thomas close to us, fighting with us, but I cant't believe
in dictatorship.
If you really want to help us, you can speak with your friend Thomas about
those problemas.
If you are convinced that this is not personal, and that there is an issue,
then please provide evidence. Otherwise, this looks like bunch of people who
are unhappy because their proposal wasn't passed.
Geoffrey Plourde
From: Porantim [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To:
Jimbo will be talking with Thomas, so let's table this discussion until he and
ChapCom are finished looking around, ok?
From: Porantim [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2008
I agree, why the hell should we blow off a couple thousand hours of work and
toast a chapter? While there may be some issues in the bylaws and they still
need to legally organize, there is more support for this chapter than some of
the European ones.
My friend, this is starting to appear
Porantim wrote:
Jimmy, again, the problem isn't personal. Please, dont't try to take this
way.
No, I don't think the problem is personal. I think it's a
misunderstanding, and you requested that I talk to Thomas about it. I will.
--Jimbo
___
Geoffrey...
The guy whit you are talking is one of the best sysops on pt.wikipedia.
Don't be maniqueist please.
The case is: Thomas is a good guy... but in the mailing list he stopped all
the process of consensus. The problem is not just a discussion of Porantim
and Thomas... are more of 10
Anthony writes:
I guess what I didn't understand was that you were using the term
freedom
of speech to mean an absolute bar on the restriction of speech.
This is not what I was using the term to mean.
Would you say there is clearly a tension between fraud law (or
perjury law)
and
On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 6:03 PM, Casey Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 5:25 PM, Ral315 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm completely speculating here, but maybe the reason we're doing so well
so
far is that, I'd imagine, a significant portion of our readers are in the
tech
or the Red Cross keeping people from soliciting
money for another charity using their symbols.
Not a great example - the Red Cross symbol is protected by more than
just trademark law, there are international treaties explicitly
governing its use.
___
On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 6:12 PM, Mike Godwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Anthony writes:
I guess what I didn't understand was that you were using the term
freedom
of speech to mean an absolute bar on the restriction of speech.
This is not what I was using the term to mean.
Then you
Hey All--
There has been a lot of good feedback on the first set of site notices and
we've taken those ideas and, I think, done a pretty good job of implementing
fixes across projects and languages. The tech team has done fabulous work.
You can see a brief statistical summary of the Phase I
Anthony writes:
Then you haven't answered how the requirements of trademark
maintenance and
the interests of freedom of speech are in conflict.
I have certainly tried to explain it. Do you need me to try to
explain it again and again until you understand what I'm saying?
Are you just
On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 7:19 PM, Rand Montoya [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
As such, Phase 2 drafts can be found here:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fundraising_2008/design_drafts. We are
attempting to re-define the space in a different manner to encourage those
who have not yet donated. The
On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 7:22 PM, Mike Godwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Anthony writes:
Are you just making this up off the top of your head?
Is that an appropriate response? Surely one of your assume good
faith
memes would be appropriate here, wouldn't it?
I feel certain that this is
For quick background, it's pretty painful to rename a database in our
system, and we currently have a lot of bits in our configuration that
make automatic relationships between the database name and the domain
name, so this has delayed renaming of some language subdomains for a while.
It's not
There have been no edits at mo.wikipedia or mo.wiktionary because both
databases are locked.
Mark
2008/11/25 Brion Vibber [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
For quick background, it's pretty painful to rename a database in our
system, and we currently have a lot of bits in our configuration that
make
I think it's good that this started after the election.
We would lose if we competed with Obama donations...
As it is, I think some of the donors may be looking for new places to give.
Thanks,
Pharos
On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 2:35 PM, Chad [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 3:54
On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 7:47 PM, Nathan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 7:19 PM, Rand Montoya [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
The Quotes site notice will have 6 different quotes (all translated, we
hope) rotated in.
I don't know - I think it would be interesting, at least on the
Anthony writes:
Instead of attacking my idea, you attacked me.
I'm sorry you interpreted me as attacking you, which must seem
incredibly unfair since you're scrupulous about refraining from
getting personal. Did you figure I was attacking you because I
learned in law school to attack
Democracy is still the enemy of autocracy. Also if a chapter gets really bad,
people will vote with their dues and chapter will soon find itself in the red.
From: Thomas Dalton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
Best question...
Maybe the [[ w:Invisible hand ]] (ouch)
-- Porantim
2008/11/25 Marc Riddell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
on 11/25/08 5:35 PM, Jimmy Wales at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
lots of independent
action loosely coordinated... the wiki way).
Jimmy,
In this type of loosely coordinated
I don't know whether this is a reasonable place to put this problem,
but the articles on Ireland on en.wikipedia.org need a serious look by
people with a neutral view. Right now we've got a clique of about 10
editors filibustering and preventing any change to the article naming
Geoffrey,
I have been working with Luis and other guys as translators for years.
Their devotion is much appreciated and I know them thoughtful, patient
and experience Wikimedians who are deeply concerned about their
project and thus its relationship to the real world.
Personally I am afraid Jimmy
Ziko,
Maybe the problem is my very poor english and I can't explain what I really
think.
There is *no* Wikimedia organisation in Brazil. There is no allegation
about nothing. There is facts about *proposed* chapter.
I suggest you to read the messas in beggining of this thread.
Exept Jimb,
This subject line is very strange to me: A chapter without Wikimedians. A
member of a Wikimedia organisation is a Wikimedian by definition, he is
someone who supports with his fee and his invested sparetime the Wikimedia
goals.
If someone calls a fellow member a non Wikimedian, this is at least
-- Forwarded message --
From: Michael Everson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 2:21 PM
Subject: [Foundation-l] Trouble in Ireland
To: foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
I don't know whether this is a reasonable place to put this problem,
but the articles on
As Michael Bimmler suggested, I think too that wikien-l would be more
appropriate. This is an English Wikipedia issue, not a Wikimedia issue.
BR, Lodewijk
2008/11/26 Michael Everson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 26 Nov 2008, at 13:27, Casey Brown wrote:
There's a place on enwp called the
I think perhaps the intent was to get English and Irish editors
involved. This has been on and off of the noticeboards at
en.wikipedia.org multiple times, through Arbcom at least once, etc.
-Dan
On Nov 26, 2008, at 9:25 AM, effe iets anders wrote:
As Michael Bimmler suggested, I think too
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 5:20 PM, Anthony [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 10:35 AM, Nathan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Anthony, Mike - I'm sure you haven't forgotten that this is Foundation-l,
not Trademark 01 (or Intro to rhetoric, for that matter), but maybe we can
draw the
Hi lists,
Does anybody know whether there is a plan of matching donation for this
fundraising season?
--Takashi
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Amusing. I am strongly reminded of the fights over Macedonia and Liancourt
Rocks. Except on those occasions nobody had any illusions that the participants
on all side were any more than puerile time-wasters. Just because this lot have
greater fluency in the English language doesn't mean that
2008/11/26 Porantim [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The problem don't is people with no edits participate of the chapter, the
problem is deny editors to participate.
Sounds pretty much like an allegation to me. Make it hard.
Ziko
___
foundation-l mailing list
Such as:
* Help Brion Vibber keep Wikipedia running (followed by his pic, and later
with an explanation what he is doing)
* Make Dr. Winiger's edits accessible to everyone (followed by a pic of
this Zedler winner of 2007 ...)
* Alice Weigand wants a fast and working Wikipedia when teaching
2008/11/26 Michael Snow [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
George Herbert wrote:
I don't want Wikipedia being used to sell Coffee, or shares in Citibank.
On a lighter note, have no fear about the latter - obviously the only
thing capable of selling shares in Citi right now is a massive
government bailout.
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 8:03 AM, Ziko van Dijk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Quotes should be in the local language, indeed. Germans would find it
strange to see suddenly quotes in a foreign language and believe that a
technical fault has happend.
What about portret photos next to a quote? A
If we focused on a wider range of people, not just special people
(staffers or awar winners), it would be okay. I like the idea as it is now,
though.
Yes, it should be a wide range, maybe 10-20 different people, so that
readers will not always see the same.
The tricky thing is: the persons
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 11:23 AM, Michael Bimmler [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 5:20 PM, Anthony [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 10:35 AM, Nathan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Anthony, Mike - I'm sure you haven't forgotten that this is
Foundation-l,
not
Hello,
Wikimedia Serbia is proud to announce the Regional Conference of Wikimedia
Serbia 2008.
The Regional Conference of Wikimedia Serbia will be held at 19th, 20th and
21st December in Belgrade, in the Belgrade Youth Home. Depending on the number
and locations of participants, we are likely
Outside of those involved, I don't think many harbor those same
illusions here either.
-Dan
On Nov 26, 2008, at 11:50 AM, Christiano Moreschi wrote:
Amusing. I am strongly reminded of the fights over Macedonia and
Liancourt Rocks. Except on those occasions nobody had any illusions
that
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 16:50:38 +
From: Christiano Moreschi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Trouble in Ireland
Amusing. I am strongly reminded of the fights over Macedonia and
Liancourt Rocks. Except on those occasions nobody had any illusions
that the participants on
Again, this is not the place for it. I see you've brought it up with Jimbo
and elsewhere, so please stop canvassing a EN-WP dispute in places it
doesn't belong.
David
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
2008/11/26 David Gerard [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I've been suggesting on wikien-l something like trying to work out,
with actual numbers, what article readers would reasonably be
expecting where. This led to suggesting an idea on wikitech-l on how
to gather internal referer logs (where people go
I wonder whether Proctor and Gamble will ever sue Wikimedia Foundation
because of its brand *Wick MediNite*...
Here my little brainstorming:
Wikipedia on USB-stick, with WP-logo, updates automatically (put it into an
online computer over night).
A lap top beveridge holder (certainly already on
Wikipedia on USB-stick, with WP-logo, updates automatically (put it into an
online computer over night).
I like the sound of that. (It wouldn't need to be overnight, a patch
containing a week's worth, say, of (vetted) edits to a selection of
articles small enough to fit on a USB-stick (with
Porantim wrote:
The problem don't is people with no edits participate of the chapter, the
problem is deny editors to participate.
Porantim, I hear what you are saying and I agree with you. There should
never be a chapter which denies that participation of editors. I'll go
even further:
1 - 100 of 21786 matches
Mail list logo
