Strike against the collection of personal data through edit links
I have started a strike to protest against the collection of personal
information through edit links. I won't edit articles with
articleFeedbackv5_ct_token= ids in their URLs, as has become the case
with the English Wikipedia
The Mediawiki 1.18 image rotation bug on Commons and on all Wikimedia projects
1 - Bug or feature ? It is a bug.
2 - The human bug
3 - The technical bug
4 - Unexhaustive list of related talks
1 - Bug or feature ? It is a bug.
Look at
The unrepentant attitude expressed above by K. Peachey increases the
need for clear excuses from the Wikimedia Foundation, expressing
clearly that something has gone wrong in the decision process, and
that the people who think the relationship between users-community and
developers the way K.
Le 11 décembre 2011 19:02, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com a écrit :
Hi.
The Terms of use rewrite is starting to wind down. The current draft is
here: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Terms_of_use.
From the point of view of Continental Europe, where creators enjoy
advanced copyright laws which
For some unexplained reasons, the whole contents of my message is not
showing at
http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2011-December/070807.html
. Here is another copy again:
Le 12 décembre 2011 17:14, Teofilo teofilow...@gmail.com a écrit :
Le 11 décembre 2011 19:02, MZMcBride z
I am unable to find precise answers to your questions. But the scope
of the phenomenon can be somehow understood with the following data
which hint that today, the demand for rotation service has increased
about 56-fold compared to June 2011. But I am unable to say how long
the present high demand
The WMF has been recently backing softwares that are a breach of
Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (1). Recently a totally stupid pink
heart was added to user talk pages, making people believe it is
Valentine Day everyday, with the result that Wikipedia is now being
used as a social network or a
I have learnt this morning that the Timedmedia extension is not yet
installed on wikimedia sites, but its meant to replace the existing
player (1).
As I was uploading videos, and needed some specific tools, I happened
the other day to use the mwEmbed gadget on Wikimedia Commons which
seems to be
I want to say very clearly that without the provisions included under
Creative Commons 3.0 article 5, it will be very difficult for
volunteer contributors to consider working for a project that makes
them liable to all kinds of complaints. For that reason, the proposed
Indemnity clause of the
I replied at
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Terms_of_use#Terms_of_use.2316._Indemnity:_You_don.27t_mean_to_nullify_the_Creative_Commons_terms.2C_do_you_.3F
I think if the Italian Wikipedians fought against an Italian bill of
law trying to make them liable for a large series of complaints,
Of late I've often round reasons to be critical of the choices the WMF has
made, but in this case you've made the best choice possible - supporting the
community on it.wikipedia in a decision that they've come to as a group,
even though that decision is controversial in some places. Bravo
Le 5 octobre 2011 17:23, emijrp emi...@gmail.com a écrit :
When people reuse content in other websites/blogs/etc, they have to copy the
article text and link to Italian Wikipedia where you can check the entire
history and authors. That is how attribution is given. It is explained here
Wikimedia chapters are not only an example of what should not be seen
in Wikimedia projects (an institution[...], of any kind, [...]
claiming to represent [...] individuals [1]) they also absorb funds
and hire people, pushing with more weight the goal to make money (a
salaried person expects
My attention being caught by the sitenotice to the image hiding
referendum, I came to read the 29 May 2011 board Controversial
content resolution [1]. And I was astonished. I have two main
criticisms.
A) The principle of least astonishment was one compound in a set of
balanced principles, limited
2011/3/4 Birgitte SB birgitte...@yahoo.com:
- Original Message
From: Teofilo teofilow...@gmail.com
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Sent: Fri, March 4, 2011 5:05:11 AM
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Moral rights
2011/2/27 Birgitte SB birgitte
Just a few remarks about the 2015 strategic plan pdf (1)
*http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/legalcode 4(a) You
must include a copy of, or the Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) for,
this License with every copy of the Work You Distribute or Publicly
Perform is infringed
*The sunflower
http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Template:BLPLang is not currently
used at
http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Movement_Strategic_Plan_Summary
This can be construed as the WMF wanting to reach the people of the
world to provide educational contents AND English-dominate them.
The
Mexico switched from PD to CC-BY-NC-ND in 2006 (1)
Argentina from CC-BY-SA to CC-BY-NC some time in 2009-2011 (2)
Brazil removed CC-BY-SA altogether from the culture ministry website
in early 2011, in a context where the ministry is planning to reform
the copyright law (3)
Are our definition and
It would seem that the right to license one's own work as one chooses is
one of those rights. How does French law resolve that conflict?
By declaring that the contract where the contractant chooses to
waive a fundamental right is void.
You find the same line of thought in Jean Jacques
Moral rights is one of the core values which used to be defended at
least in the past, at least by a few community members. Things are
changing so quickly these days that I can be sure of nothing, but it
seems to be still the case today as shown on
2011/2/27 Birgitte SB birgitte...@yahoo.com:
No one wants to attack French moral rights, or the attack the idiosyncrasies
of
any particular legal jurisdiction. What we want to do is curate a large
international collection of free content that will remain free content 300
years
from now
2011/3/4 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com:
On 4 March 2011 11:05, Teofilo teofilow...@gmail.com wrote:
No one ? I would not say so. I would rather say that 75.8% (1) want to
attack moral rights, which are not French only (3), and, as I showed
in my previous mail, are a value taken into account
2011/3/4 Teofilo teofilow...@gmail.com:
2011/3/4 Teofilo teofilow...@gmail.com:
(...)
(3) For example Spanish copyright law article 14 derechos
irrenunciables e inalienables (...) Exigir el reconocimiento de su
condición de autor de la obra
http://civil.udg.es/normacivil/estatal/reals
The Upload wizard distorts competition in favour of Creative Commons,
for the purpose of creating a monopoly (0).
Instead, it would be safer that for every file licensed under a
Creative Commons license, one licenses one other file under GFDL and
another file under Art libre, open
source music
What is a guru license, and what is a non-guru license?
A guru license is a license where a guru can change the terms of the
license according to his whims.
You can recognise the existense of a guru to the presence of the
following lines :
CC-BY-SA 3.0 : either this or a later license version.
Upload wizard: the different attribution mechanisms and spirits of
GFDL and Creative Commons
Two small words make a big difference in the attribution mechanism of
CC-BY-SA : if supplied in
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/legalcode 4(c).
Put together with designate another party or
French authorship rights law:
Article L121-1
An author shall enjoy the right to respect for his name, his
authorship and his work.
This right shall attach to his person.
It shall be perpetual, inalienable and imprescriptible. It may
be transmitted mortis causa to the heirs of
2011/2/20 geni geni...@gmail.com:
(...)
Well no. Because any such requirement would make it difficult to
distribute such a video via conventional TV.
A video has been released by a creator who intends it for
free-software-like distribution: do you think it is good to allow
reusers to display
2011/2/21 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com:
On 21 February 2011 13:14, Teofilo teofilow...@gmail.com wrote:
For the time being, the less bad licenses for videos are the Licence
art libre with specify to the recipient where to access the
originals (either initial or subsequent) (1
2011/2/21 geni geni...@gmail.com:
(...)
What is more complicated is what happens in a movie theatre. In my
opinion, the theatre owner should tell the viewers where the movie is
available for download on the internet.
Look at you. You are stuck in one mode of thinking. Why should a web
based
2011/2/21 geni geni...@gmail.com:
Can't images are again CC-BY-SA and not compatible
What if the Creative Commons guru issues a statement saying that TVL
is Creative Commons 4.0 ?
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
2011/2/20 phoebe ayers phoebe.w...@gmail.com:
Everyone, let us keep the agricultural rhetoric to a minimum please.
regards,
phoebe
Sorry. That must have been a side-effect of the Paris International
Agricultural Show 2011 being held until the end of this week.
2011/2/21 geni geni...@gmail.com:
On 21 February 2011 19:45, Teofilo teofilow...@gmail.com wrote:
2011/2/21 geni geni...@gmail.com:
Can't images are again CC-BY-SA and not compatible
What if the Creative Commons guru issues a statement saying that TVL
is Creative Commons 4.0 ?
Why
2011/2/21 geni geni...@gmail.com:
(...)
I was thinking about a Powerpoint presentation.
Well yes thats rather the problem. There are also slideshows with
actual physical slides. I've got some around somewhere.
--
geni
People who work with actual physical slides are unlikely to
incorporate
2011/2/19 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com:
On 19 February 2011 10:31, Teofilo teofilow...@gmail.com wrote:
A) Internationalisation. The CC 3.0 license is an unported license.
This means English-based, English speaking countries' jurisdictions
bases, English Common Law based. The 3.0 version
2011/2/20 Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com:
Hello,
Please get real. The translation of such licenses is WORK and much of this
WORK is done by volunteers. Even when it is not done by volunteers it costs
time.
There is one suggestion I can give you. Give abundantly of your money to
2011/2/20 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com:
On 20 February 2011 15:52, Teofilo teofilow...@gmail.com wrote:
2011/2/19 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com:
You do not understand the licenses. There are also country versions of
3.0, and each is explicitly interchangeable with each of the others.
3.0
2011/2/20 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com:
On 20 February 2011 16:18, Teofilo teofilow...@gmail.com wrote:
I presume that the people who created
http://creativecommons.org/choose/ know what they are doing and that
their view on licensing does make sense, to some extent.
You also presume
2011/2/18 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com:
On 18 February 2011 13:41, Teofilo teofilow...@gmail.com wrote:
Having a choice of possible licenses is a richness. Because specific
licenses might be more suitable to some specific needs than other
licenses. Because they don't offer the same sort
2011/2/18 Huib Laurens sterke...@gmail.com:
I'm starting to think you just don't like changes... every change that is
done will result in a email from you
Everything that affects internationalisation should result into a
e-mail from me.
Everything that affects the balance of power between
2011/2/18 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com:
On 18 February 2011 13:41, Teofilo teofilow...@gmail.com wrote:
Having a choice of possible licenses is a richness. Because specific
licenses might be more suitable to some specific needs than other
licenses. Because they don't offer the same sort
2011/2/19 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com:
On 19 February 2011 10:54, Teofilo teofilow...@gmail.com wrote:
Everything that affects internationalisation should result into a
e-mail from me.
CC licensing does not affect internationalisation in any way whatsoever.
CC 2.0 does not. CC 3.0 does
2011/2/19 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com:
On 19 February 2011 11:58, Teofilo teofilow...@gmail.com wrote:
2011/2/19 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com:
On 19 February 2011 10:54, Teofilo teofilow...@gmail.com wrote:
Everything that affects internationalisation should result into a
e-mail from me
2011/2/19 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com:
On 19 February 2011 10:41, Teofilo teofilow...@gmail.com wrote:
Maximising reusability is not the same as maximising usability.
This is a nice-sounding phrase, but its meaning is entirely unclear.
And maximising usability would mean rationalising
I have tried the prototype upload wizard for the first time this week (1)
I am confident that all bugs can be solved. Bugs don't matter. But I
am much more skeptical on the specifications, as they are presented at
http://usability.wikimedia.org/wiki/Multimedia:Upload_wizard/Questions_%26_Answers
2011/2/4 MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com:
Hi.
This doesn't seem to have hit this list yet, so I'm posting here for general
information and discussion.
Effective February 1, 2011, there are two substantive changes to the
policies and procedures surrounding identifying to the Wikimedia
I have just uploaded the Firefox addon. Although it works perfectly on
http://www.flickr.com/photos/75062596@N00/164893152 , it is not
working perfectly on the corresponding Wikimedia Commons page at
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Om%C3%B8_%26_Agers%C3%B8,_2006-06-04.jpg
: the work is not
2011/2/8 phoebe ayers phoebe.w...@gmail.com:
this is just awesome:
http://openattribute.com/
Born at the Drumbeat festival, just released! See the backstory:
http://mollykleinman.com/2011/02/07/announcing-open-attribute/
A little caveat, though : the question asked by Molly Kleinman : “What
Oops sorry. Even the it attributes the photographer is wrong. The
pluggin is totaly wrong. It identifies only the uploader, and none of
the artists.
2011/2/9 Teofilo teofilow...@gmail.com:
A little caveat,
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l
As I previously said, one major barrier to the reuse of free contents
is not only having an easy way to copy-paste copyright and licensing
information, but the reliability of such copyright information. The
work of Melanie Schlosser, Unless Otherwise Indicated: A Survey of
Copyright Statements on
Sorry if you feel that I am repeating myself with trifles not worth to
bother the foundation list, but...
It seems that people have difficulties understanding the meaning of
distribute unchanged Wikimedia content, including appropriate
attribution at [[:foundation:Trademark Policy#Things You Can
Allrightsreserved is a new website proposed for the purpose of hosting
contents currentlty tagged with commons:Template:Copyright by
Wikimedia, commons:Copyright by Wikimedia Deutschland and
commons:Template:Copyright by Wikimedia Polska and hosted at Wikimedia
Commons.
More at
2011/1/27 Jesse (Pathoschild) pathosch...@gmail.com:
These messages are available to all wikis
(including non-Wikimedia wikis), instead of just one wiki.
That means contributing as a volunteer to a variety of websites with
different principles. Wikimedia is a non profit and it is dedicated to
2011/1/27 Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com:
One very powerful reason why you should not localise locally is because
there is no way that you will know locally when a message gets changed. The
consequence is that the quality of locally localised messages do not get the
same quality
2011/1/28 Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com:
When the CIA uses MediaWiki and it does, we are
happy because as a result we do and did get feedback on the use of our
project. When the CIA wants to use LocalisationUpdate and its people help
localise at translatewiki.net we could not be
Before Translatewiki existed it was possible for Wikimedia/Wikipedia
users to improve the translation of the Mediawiki software's message
used on their project into their own language.
It is no longer possible now, because Translatewiki exists, and there
is a powerful Translatewiki lobby within
Our previous agreement with the Presidency of Argentina has entered a
grey zone where we don't know exactly what we are allowed to do with
their media.
So this agreement needs a new negociation for renewal or the best
termination terms.
Could anyone help ?
We need someone with a good knowledge
Aren't we going to throw these partnerships (?) away ? If Wikimedia
does not have enough money to develop some services internally, then
just forget them, instead of allowing outsiders to use Wikipedia as a
Trojan horse containing for profit businesses or other purposes non
compatible with the
Le 21 janvier 2011 18:43, Florence Devouard anthe...@yahoo.com a écrit :
Bonjour François
En fait, wikiwix n'est pas un site miroir de Wikipedia (une copie).
C'est un peu plus compliqué.
Si la page vient à disparaitre ou devenir
inaccessible, la version originale est toujours accessible
2011/1/4, Виктория mstisla...@gmail.com:
it had been patrolled = [отпатрулированная версия] anyway.
Thanks!
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
2011/1/5, Tim Starling tstarl...@wikimedia.org:
On 05/01/11 00:33, Teofilo wrote:
We are more or less 24 hours (19 hours, exactly) after I corrected the
mistake, but the toolserver.org/~kolossos/openlayers is still wrong.
This is not what a wiki is supposed to be.
You seem to be getting
2011/1/4, Виктория mstisla...@gmail.com:
it had been patrolled = [отпатрулированная версия] anyway.
What about the message Стабильная версия была проверена 28 сентября
2010. 1 изменение ожидает проверки. which is written now at the top
of the history tab (1), and google-translates into English
The other day, I read the [[:en:Wikileaks]] article on Wikipedia. What
it said was, more or less, that Wilileaks is a leaks website that used
to be a wiki. And I wondered : how long will it take before we read
somewhere : Wikipedia, the Pedia that used to be a Wiki ?
Sooner than you might think.
2010/9/7, Teofilo teofilow...@gmail.com:
2010/9/7, Tim Starling tstarl...@wikimedia.org:
Presumably this conspiracy would have to extend beyond the WMF to
PediaPress and Purodha Blissenbach, the developers of Collection and
mobile.wikipedia.org respectively.
The absence of a history tab
2010/9/7, Tim Starling tstarl...@wikimedia.org:
If you don't like it, you can request that it be switched off, using
Bugzilla. You will need to demonstrate that the community is in favour
of such an action.
This is not proactive. Giving more power to the admins is a
constitutional change.
2010/9/7, Kropotkine_113 kropotkine...@free.fr:
There is absolutely nothing wrong with it on french Wikipedia.
My interpretation : French admins are happy to see their powers
increased, and to mimic oversighters with it. Non-admins, especially
newly-registered ones might be too shy or not aware
2010/9/7, Tim Starling tstarl...@wikimedia.org:
Presumably this conspiracy would have to extend beyond the WMF to
PediaPress and Purodha Blissenbach, the developers of Collection and
mobile.wikipedia.org respectively.
The absence of a history tab in the mobile format is in my view an
exact
During the past few years, the new softwares of the Wikimedia
Foundations have been developped in a too much anarchic way.
* They are sometimes implemented as a whim of a few WMF big wheels,
without consulting the user communities.
* We are never shown specifications defining the goals of the
News from the front.
A very bad and unfair unbalance of power was established in favor of
English on Wikimedia Commons in 2005-2006, requiring people from the
world to work for the benefit of the English language community.
In that ocean of unfairness, there was a small island where you could
What would you think about an automobile repair shop, when you
discover after you try the car again that you can no longer remove the
key and stop the engine ?
This what happened on the Spanish Wikipedia where I logged in and
found out that the logout link (Salir in Spanish) is hidden behind
the
2010/6/15, Brandon Harris bhar...@wikimedia.org:
Could you provide me with the exact operating system and browser
versions you are using?
Thanks. I replied at
2010/6/15, Domas Mituzas midom.li...@gmail.com:
there're some better ways to report problems though, like
http://bugs.wikimedia.org/
Yes. So the topic for a talk on the foundation list would be : should
Wikipedia stop to support older computers or older web browsers like
Internet Explorer 6 ?
2010/6/15, Domas Mituzas midom.li...@gmail.com:
Well, there're no incentives for keeping old cars, as they emit more
CO2, are noisier, etc. Old computers are similar
What a pity they are not similar to old sewing machines, old vacuum
cleaners, old electric ovens, or old tables or old chairs.
Let's have a look at the mission of Wikimedia :
The mission of the Wikimedia Foundation is to empower and engage
people around the world to collect and develop educational content
under a free license or in the public domain, and to disseminate it
effectively and globally. (1)
Is there any room
When I read and edited the English language wikipedia this morning, I
saw that the logo had changed. I had a strange feeling, at first not
being sure if this was only a feeling of surprise or if there was some
real problem with that new logo. After performing my editing tasks, I
had a closer look
With the Foundation's support
Is there a board resolution on this matter ? I think the question of
how we talk to each other is a question even more important than the
license problems. As there was a referendum on the license change, I
think there should be a referendum on the talk pages'
2009/12/12, Geoffrey Plourde geo.p...@yahoo.com:
With regards to Florida, if the servers are in an office building, one way to
decrease costs might be to reconfigure the environmental systems to use the
energy from the servers to heat/cool the building. Wikimedia would then be
able to
2009/12/13, Andre Engels andreeng...@gmail.com:
I don't think that's a practical solution. It's not because they need
to be cooled that computers cost so much energy - rather the opposite:
they use much energy, and because energy cannot be created or
destroyed, this energy has to go out some
You have probably heard about CO2 and the conference being held these
days in Copenhagen (1).
You have probably heard about the goal of carbon neutrality at the
Wikimania conference in Gdansk in July 2010 (2).
You may want to discuss the basic and perhaps naive wishes I have
written down on the
In the following news article, it is said that Google showed French
journalists in Paris a webpage with search results including Wikipedia
in its presentation of its new Goggles search engine.
I think the WMF lawyers should have a closer look at that and see if
WMF is not entitled to a
Make the following experience:
Go to Gmail and create a new account on Gmail. Does Google tell you
after you have created your new account : We are ready to have a
conflict relationship with YOU ? We have an Abuse Log ready for YOU ?
Now go to meta.wikimedia.org (1), create a new account there
/20050305062057/www.museeguimet.fr/homes/home_id20392_u1l2.htm
2009/9/28, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com:
2009/9/28 wiki-li...@phizz.demon.co.uk:
From the earlier poster Teofilo:
I disagree. I think the priority is to have the full
resolution pictures of Public Domain works.
That seems
That was not the right link. Good link :
http://web.archive.org/web/20050208203749/http://www.museeguimet.fr/pages/page_id18315_u1l2.htm
2009/9/30, Teofilo teofilow...@gmail.com:
(1)
http://web.archive.org/web/20050305062057/www.museeguimet.fr/homes/home_id20392_u1l2.htm
David Monniaux said: only in 2006 it was established for sure that
rights to works
done by civil servants as part of their duties belonged to their employer;
No, it is the opposite. The new French Intellectual Property Code says
that the civil servant author remains the copyright owner of his
Hello GerardM,
I follow you on the multilingual issue. Some of the manyfold copyright
symbols I quoted in my previous message might apply to the annotating
text, and let alive creative text writers have the possibility to sell
their text for money. But that should not allow them to add a
I think our prioritory focus should the Public Domain, not least
because the new (undisclosed yet) digital clause to be used on
French governement GLAM websites will be experimentally tested on the
website of the Claude Monet exhibition at Grand Palais in Paris from
October 2010 to January 2011.
My reaction to this report is tears, because it is terrible : they use
the keyword public domain only once, talking about a set of 4500
American Library of Congress pictures on Flickr (1), only to
contradict it a few lines below when they talk about rights holder
for the works by Ingres (2), a
David Monniaux said : release lower resolution pictures under free
license, keep high resolution pictures (those suitable for art books,
posters and so on) proprietary.
I disagree. I think the priority is to have the full resolution
pictures of Public Domain works. Because this is what the French
However, this
study presents evidence that, far from educating users about copyright
or promoting the public domain, many libraries engaged in digitization
projects are omitting a key tool for copyright education or using it in
ways that undermine users’ needs for accurate copyright
Hello everybody;
This is to say that I have written a piece on this topic at :
http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Main_Page#uk.wikimedia.org_is_Wikimedia_Ukraine,_isn't_it_?
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
90 matches
Mail list logo
