Re: [Foundation-l] Pre-wikis vs. maturing Wikipedia: taking away dedicated editors?

2012-03-07 Thread geni
On 7 March 2012 07:23, Amir E. Aharoni wrote: > I'm taking a hint from Clay Shirky's books here: What most people > would consider high quality published sources - in this case, by > railway companies, governments, standards institutions or engineering > colleges - simply don't have the capacity t

Re: [Foundation-l] Pre-wikis vs. maturing Wikipedia: taking away dedicated editors?

2012-03-07 Thread Yaroslav M. Blanter
On Wed, 7 Mar 2012 09:10:17 +, geni wrote: > On 7 March 2012 07:23, Amir E. Aharoni > wrote: >> I'm taking a hint from Clay Shirky's books here: What most people >> would consider high quality published sources - in this case, by >> railway companies, governments, standards institutions or en

[Foundation-l] Monthly report chapter germany

2012-03-07 Thread Phillip Wilke
Hello everybody, starting from now the german chapter report february is available.You'll find it via meta wiki: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_chapters/Reports/Wikimedia_Deutschland Sorry for bothering you to do another klick to reach the report. It's to extensive to paste it in the m

Re: [Foundation-l] Controversial content software status

2012-03-07 Thread phoebe ayers
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 6:30 PM, Kat Walsh wrote: ... > Sorry to drag this out--there are definitely more interesting things > to talk about. But as someone who basically holds Phoebe's position on > the issue I'd like to say what I am thinking also. > > I think, in fact, that I am almost exactly

Re: [Foundation-l] Controversial content software status

2012-03-07 Thread WereSpielChequers
> Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2012 21:30:27 -0500 > From: Kat Walsh > To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List > > Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Controversial content software status > Message-ID: > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 8:32 PM, phoebe ayers

Re: [Foundation-l] Controversial content software status

2012-03-07 Thread Juliana da Costa José
Andreas, you seem really maniac fixed to this theme. I am since 7 years in Wikipedia and never saw this pictures. For me are pictures from tortured persons, from war and weapons torn bodies and shot heads a much more terrifying that sex-pics (I spare posting "spectacular" links, just for attending

Re: [Foundation-l] Controversial content software status

2012-03-07 Thread phoebe ayers
2012/3/7 Juliana da Costa José : > Andreas, you seem really maniac fixed to this theme. I am since 7 years in > Wikipedia and never saw this pictures. > For me are pictures from tortured persons, from war and weapons torn bodies > and shot heads a much more terrifying that sex-pics (I spare posting

Re: [Foundation-l] Controversial content software status

2012-03-07 Thread Juliana da Costa José
Hi Phoebe, so it would be not longer possible too, to have medical pictures f.e. from surgeries, organs or corpses, because they could frighten people? Best Juliana 2012/3/7 phoebe ayers > 2012/3/7 Juliana da Costa José : > > Andreas, you seem really maniac fixed to this theme. I am since 7

Re: [Foundation-l] Controversial content software status

2012-03-07 Thread David Gerard
2012/3/7 Juliana da Costa José : > so it would be not longer possible too, to have medical pictures f.e. from > surgeries, organs or corpses, because they could frighten people? Knowledge is an inherently frightening thing, as is the prospect of other people feeling they have a right to know thi

Re: [Foundation-l] Wikimedia France position on fundraising

2012-03-07 Thread Chris Keating
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 9:37 PM, Arne Klempert wrote: > On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 6:24 PM, Florence Devouard > wrote: > > Please find on Wikimedia France position regarding chapter fundraising in > > France in the coming years. > > > Wikimedia UK's response to the same set of questions is now on Met

Re: [Foundation-l] Controversial content software status

2012-03-07 Thread Marc Riddell
on 3/7/12 12:52 PM, Juliana da Costa José at julianadacostaj...@googlemail.com wrote: > Hi Phoebe, > > so it would be not longer possible too, to have medical pictures f.e. from > surgeries, organs or corpses, because they could frighten people? > > Best > > Juliana >> 2012/3/7 Juliana da Cost

Re: [Foundation-l] Pre-wikis vs. maturing Wikipedia: taking away dedicated editors?

2012-03-07 Thread teun spaans
* They have to do lots of original research; it is impossible to follow development of the railway infrastructure and operations using only high quality published sources; * They got bitten a bit by the "notability" discussions in their field; they want to document every track, every junction

Re: [Foundation-l] Controversial content software status

2012-03-07 Thread Delirium
On 3/7/12 6:52 PM, Juliana da Costa José wrote: so it would be not longer possible too, to have medical pictures f.e. from surgeries, organs or corpses, because they could frighten people? I don't think anyone's proposing that the information should be removed from articles; just that there sho

Re: [Foundation-l] Controversial content software status

2012-03-07 Thread Andreas Kolbe
Juliana, You simply don't understand where I am coming from. I have nothing against Wikimedia websites hosting adult content, just like I have nothing against the far greater amounts of explicit adult material on Flickr for example. What saddens me though is that Wikimedia is unable to grow up, a

Re: [Foundation-l] Controversial content software status

2012-03-07 Thread David Gerard
On 7 March 2012 22:41, Andreas Kolbe wrote: > WMF is looking to work together with lots of mainstream organisations, from > the British Museum to the Smithsonian. But this kind of curation of adult > content is an embarrassment for the Wikimedia Foundation, and a potential > embarrassment for all

Re: [Foundation-l] Controversial content software status

2012-03-07 Thread Thomas Morton
On 7 Mar 2012, at 23:03, David Gerard wrote: > On 7 March 2012 22:41, Andreas Kolbe wrote: > >> WMF is looking to work together with lots of mainstream organisations, from >> the British Museum to the Smithsonian. But this kind of curation of adult >> content is an embarrassment for the Wikimedi

Re: [Foundation-l] Controversial content software status

2012-03-07 Thread David Gerard
On 7 March 2012 23:08, Thomas Morton wrote: > On 7 Mar 2012, at 23:03, David Gerard wrote: >> I think you have no grasp of just how far beyond merely "mainstream" >> Wikipedia is. > The answer being; Not much at all. We're beyond mainstream and are now infrastructure. We're part of the assume

Re: [Foundation-l] Controversial content software status

2012-03-07 Thread Thomas Morton
On 7 Mar 2012, at 23:16, David Gerard wrote: > On 7 March 2012 23:08, Thomas Morton wrote: >> On 7 Mar 2012, at 23:03, David Gerard wrote: > >>> I think you have no grasp of just how far beyond merely "mainstream" >>> Wikipedia is. > >> The answer being; Not much at all. > > > We're beyond main

Re: [Foundation-l] Controversial content software status

2012-03-07 Thread Tobias Oelgarte
Am 07.03.2012 23:41, schrieb Andreas Kolbe: Juliana, You simply don't understand where I am coming from. I have nothing against Wikimedia websites hosting adult content, just like I have nothing against the far greater amounts of explicit adult material on Flickr for example. What saddens me th

Re: [Foundation-l] Controversial content software status

2012-03-07 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 11:46 PM, Tobias Oelgarte < tobias.oelga...@googlemail.com> wrote: > Am 07.03.2012 23:41, schrieb Andreas Kolbe: > Sorry to interrupt you. But as i can see, you constantly rage against > sexuality in any form. I came to this little conclusion because i saw never > an example

Re: [Foundation-l] Controversial content software status

2012-03-07 Thread Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 4:30 AM, Kat Walsh wrote: > Sorry to drag this out--there are definitely more interesting things > to talk about. But as someone who basically holds Phoebe's position on > the issue I'd like to say what I am thinking also. "definetely more interesting things to talk about"

Re: [Foundation-l] Controversial content software status

2012-03-07 Thread Tobias Oelgarte
Am 08.03.2012 01:53, schrieb Andreas Kolbe: On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 11:46 PM, Tobias Oelgarte< tobias.oelga...@googlemail.com> wrote: Am 07.03.2012 23:41, schrieb Andreas Kolbe: Sorry to interrupt you. But as i can see, you constantly rage against sexuality in any form. I came to this little co

Re: [Foundation-l] Controversial content software status

2012-03-07 Thread Juliana da Costa José
Andreas, I do not know from where you come from, But I tell you, from where I come: My worked for the Vatikan and we had several preachers in our house who had all a special sound in their voice. This special slobbery smart-aleck when they spoke about the depravity of the humanity with special focu

Re: [Foundation-l] Controversial content software status

2012-03-07 Thread Andreas Kolbe
If you search for "devoirs" (= homework) or "vacances" (= holiday) on French Wikipedia, you're presented with a porn video in which a man and a woman engage in sex acts (cunnilingus and fellatio) with a dog. http://fr.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sp%C3%A9cial%3ARecherche&profile=images&search=d

Re: [Foundation-l] Controversial content software status

2012-03-07 Thread MZMcBride
Kat: Thank you for weighing in. I know many people appreciated hearing from you, Phoebe, and some of the other "big" voices who have commented here. And I think some of the replies in this thread have gone a long way to helping ease some tensions and create better dialogue. :-) Andreas: I think h

Re: [Foundation-l] Controversial content software status

2012-03-07 Thread MZMcBride
MZMcBride wrote: > Kat: Thank you for weighing in. I know many people appreciated hearing from > you, Phoebe, and some of the other "big" voices who have commented here. And > I think some of the replies in this thread have gone a long way to helping > ease some tensions and create better dialogue.

Re: [Foundation-l] Controversial content software status

2012-03-07 Thread Thomas Morton
> > If you search for "devoirs" (= homework) or "vacances" (= holiday) on > French Wikipedia, you're presented with a porn video in which a man and a > woman engage in sex acts (cunnilingus and fellatio) with a dog. > > > http://fr.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sp%C3%A9cial%3ARecherche&profile=im

Re: [Foundation-l] Controversial content software status

2012-03-07 Thread Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 3:00 AM, phoebe ayers wrote: > Hi MZ and all -- > > Project development was put on hold over the winter in favor of more > pressing priorities, with the agreement of the Board. There is > currently an open proposal on the table for the Board to vote on > whether to continu

Re: [Foundation-l] Controversial content software status

2012-03-07 Thread Yaroslav M. Blanter
> Andreas: I think > http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2012-March/072463.html is > one of my favorite posts to foundation-l ever. I'll go add these examples > to > now. > > MZMcBride > I just suggested to rename th

Re: [Foundation-l] Controversial content software status

2012-03-07 Thread David Gerard
On 8 March 2012 07:13, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen wrote: > On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 3:00 AM, phoebe ayers wrote: >> So, yeah, things are on hold essentially because there are more urgent >> things to do, and because given the rather extraordinary scale of the >> debate and all of the controversy, serio