I'm confused; john, could you point to the element of the collected data
that isn't collected already by default in any Nginx or Apache setup? I
agree that there might be a lack of user expectation, but 'silently
capturing behavioral data' seems somewhat hyperbolic to describe what's
actually
Thank you all for the feedback. I will have taken away quite a few good
ideas for further investigation, to summarize:
Gerard - look at the ratios of those bios of a language, which exist only
in that language.
Han Teng - male gaze hypothesis, create a by-profession crosstabular
analysis.
Jane -
Hoi,
These same people may have added content to Wikidata ... Obviously it has
not been considered. However, you can query for these people there. You can
also query how many external references were added by bot. It may provide
the groundwork going to Wikipedias and find who did it .. references
Forwarding.
Pine
-- Forwarded message --
From: James Hare jamesmh...@gmail.com
Date: Jan 13, 2015 2:27 PM
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Introducing WikiProject X
To: l...@lists.wikimedia.org, gender...@lists.wikimedia.org,
wikimedi...@lists.wikimedia.org,
On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 9:22 AM, Andrew Gray andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk wrote:
Fair enough - I don't use it, and I think I'd got entirely the wrong
end of the stick on what it's for! If it's intended to stop tracking
by third-party sites then it certainly seems to be of little relevance
here.
Hi Dario, Reid,
This seems sensible enough and proposal #3 is clearly the better
approach. An explicit opt-in opt-out mechanism would not be worth the
effort to build and would become yet another ignored preferences
setting after a few weeks...
A couple of thoughts:
* I understand the reasoning
Hi all,
There are 2000 editors who have received access to 20 different online
databases. We know the usernames of these editors and the url prefixes of
the websites they were given access to.
We need to know:
- from July 18th 2014 to January 11th 2014
- on English Wikipedia
- for the cohort of
Andrew,
I think it is reasonable to assume that the Do not track header isn't
referring to this.
From http://donottrack.us/ with emphasis added.
Do Not Track is a technology and policy proposal that enables users to opt
out of *tracking by websites they do not visit*, [...]
Do not track is
Re politicians, a trivial observation that is nonetheless better explicit
than implicit:
While the World Forum stats are presumably snapshot stats of some
current(ish) point in time, Wikipedias cover politicians past and present.
This would, of course, skew results as heavily as the patriarchal
I have a question about the P21.
Has any of the GND author sex information leaked into P21? because
that's known-bad data.
It's bad because the GND in all it's wisdom decided to assign sex to
authors based on a apparent gender of the name published under, even
for periods when many women were
Interesting, Magnus, thanks! After working on lots of the female names in
various databases, I can also say that it is pretty difficult to scrape
enough information together to produce a Wikipedia-worthy stub on many of
the women mentioned in those databases. As you point out, we don't have
Fair enough - I don't use it, and I think I'd got entirely the wrong
end of the stick on what it's for! If it's intended to stop tracking
by third-party sites then it certainly seems to be of little relevance
here.
(It might be worth clarifying this in the proposal, in case a future
12 matches
Mail list logo
