A more proactive approach would be very welcome where it comes to featured
pictures. WMF photographers have occasionally discovered their work reused
without credit in commercial advertising.
-Durova
On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 3:24 PM, Andrew Turvey andrewrtur...@googlemail.com
wrote:
Amory Meltzer wrote:
These users are for more likely to be involved in perhaps the more
Wikipedia-esque aspects (AfD, NFC, all the other Three-Letter
Acronyms) and are probably yes, inherently more likely to be more
comfortable online. Compare that to 70 students who spend their
comparable
Hi all,
I am writing up an academic paper on Wikipedia and need to include some
statistics in the background section about the encyclopedia. What I am
looking for includes, *but is not limited to*:
1. The number of articles in English and the following hugest 3 or 4
language versions,
2009/6/29 Muhammad Abdul-Mageed {محمد عبدالمجيد} mumag...@gmail.com:
Hi all,
I am writing up an academic paper on Wikipedia and need to include some
statistics in the background section about the encyclopedia. What I am
looking for includes, *but is not limited to*:
1. The number of
2009/6/28 Andrew Turvey andrewrtur...@googlemail.com:
Open question: do you think the Foundation and/or local chapters should
complain more when their local media fail to respect Wikimedia copyrights?
I think actively asking nicely would be a good idea. Particularly when
several people ask
You might want to ask in the technical forum. Hopefully someone can
point you that way, or answer your question here.
Carcharoth
On Sat, Jun 27, 2009 at 10:24 PM, akhil1988akhilan...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi All!
Here's a newbie to this forum.
I am looking for some references to help me use
2009/6/29 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com:
2009/6/28 Andrew Turvey andrewrtur...@googlemail.com:
Open question: do you think the Foundation and/or local chapters should
complain more when their local media fail to respect Wikimedia copyrights?
I think actively asking nicely would be a good
2009/6/29 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com:
2009/6/29 geni geni...@gmail.com:
2009/6/29 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com:
I think actively asking nicely would be a good idea. Particularly when
several people ask them. Eventually they will get the idea: FREE STOCK
PHOTOS just give credit and
'Keeping News of Kidnapping Off Wikipedia'
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/29/technology/internet/29wiki.html
A dozen times, user-editors posted word of the kidnapping on
Wikipedia’s page on Mr. Rohde, only to have it erased. Several times
the page was frozen, preventing further editing — a
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 4:55 PM, geni geni...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/6/29 Gwern Branwen gwe...@gmail.com:
“We were really helped by the fact that it hadn’t appeared in a place
we would regard as a reliable source,” he said. “I would have had a
really hard time with it if it had.”
...
2009/6/29 Sam Blacketer sam.blacke...@googlemail.com:
This case is more about basic common sense.
I'm not interested in the collection of prejudices you acquired by the
age of 18. They are a poor substitute for logic, evidence and reason.
If someone's life may be
endangered by what is on
Thank you, Thomas!
--muhamamad
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 2:40 AM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.comwrote:
2009/6/29 Muhammad Abdul-Mageed {محمد عبدالمجيد} mumag...@gmail.com:
Hi all,
I am writing up an academic paper on Wikipedia and need to include some
statistics in the background
2009/6/29 geni geni...@gmail.com:
Lightly labeling a source unreliable is problematical.
There is no evidence this has ever stopped anyone on Wikipedia from doing so.
- d.
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from
Sam Blacketer wrote:
This case is more about basic common sense...
Well, no. This case is about whether an editor at (in this case)
The New York Times can successfully collude with editors of other
major media outlets, for the best of reasons, to keep a certain
fact out of the media for N
geni wrote:
2009/6/29 Gwern Branwen gwe...@gmail.com:
“We were really helped by the fact that it hadn’t appeared in a place
we would regard as a reliable source,” he said. “I would have had a
really hard time with it if it had.”
...
The question is though is is
What Wikimedia events or activities would you like to see take place
in the UK?
We're currently trying to pull together ideas for initiatives that
Wikimedia UK can support, at
http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Initiatives/Proposals
There have been lots of ideas posted at:
Sam Blacketer wrote:
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 4:55 PM, geni geni...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/6/29 Gwern Branwen gwe...@gmail.com:
“We were really helped by the fact that it hadn’t appeared in a place
we would regard as a reliable source,” he said. “I would have had a
really hard time
2009/6/29 geni geni...@gmail.com:
Lightly labeling a source unreliable is problematical.
There is no evidence this has ever stopped anyone on Wikipedia from doing
so.
- d.
Yes, but now we should definitely take another look. Most likely it's a
reasonably good source, just not in the
2009/6/29 Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net:
When someone's life is at stake, Ignore all rules actually kicks in.
The government of Iran has made it fairly clear that further protests
carry the risks of further deaths. It's also fairly clear that the
protests in part at least are aimed at
Message: 6
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 17:03:33 +0100
From: Sam Blacketer sam.blacke...@googlemail.com
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] News agencies are not RSs
To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Message-ID:
e75b49f70906290903m485a5e6bo285d4216cc2dc...@mail.gmail.com
Can someone explain how reporting that he was kidnapped would endanger his
life? At least how would it endanger it any further than the kidnapping in
the first place?
Will
**
Make your summer sizzle with fast and easy recipes for the
grill.
2009/6/29 wjhon...@aol.com
Can someone explain how reporting that he was kidnapped would endanger his
life? At least how would it endanger it any further than the kidnapping in
the first place?
Will
It would raise the price of his release. It would encourage deeper digging
into his
In a message dated 6/29/2009 11:42:48 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
ragesoss+wikipe...@gmail.com writes:
It would raise his profile, indicate that Western media had taken
notice of the kidnapping, and therefore raise his value to the
kidnappers (either his value as a negotiating chip or his
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 2:47 PM, wjhon...@aol.com wrote:
So we're now going to set a higher moral position than any other
information outlet does? Because I'm pretty darn sure that they would report
it, if
they had a reliable source from which to do so.
No. In fact, the New York Times
In a message dated 6/29/2009 11:42:48 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
ragesoss+wikipe...@gmail.com writes:
It would raise his profile, indicate that Western media had taken
notice of the kidnapping, and therefore raise his value to the
kidnappers (either his value as a negotiating chip or his
2009/6/29 Sage Ross ragesoss+wikipe...@gmail.com:
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 2:35 PM, wjhon...@aol.com wrote:
Can someone explain how reporting that he was kidnapped would endanger his
life? At least how would it endanger it any further than the kidnapping in
the first place?
It would raise
2009/6/29 Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net:
Easily done; news of the D-Day invasion was suppressed.
Fred
An example that is in now way relevant because we are not in a total
war situation.
--
geni
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
2009/6/29 Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net:
Easily done; news of the D-Day invasion was suppressed.
Fred
An example that is in now way relevant because we are not in a total
war situation.
--
geni
It's not a big war, but we certainly are at war with the kidnappers.
Fred
2009/6/29 Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net:
2009/6/29 Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net:
Easily done; news of the D-Day invasion was suppressed.
Fred
An example that is in now way relevant because we are not in a total
war situation.
--
geni
It's not a big war, but we certainly are
On Mon, 29 Jun 2009, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen wrote:
This case is more about basic common sense. If someone's life may be
endangered by what is on their wikipedia biography but is not widely
reported elsewhere, I would expect that anyone sensible would find some way
of applying policy so as
would the news media have acted equally to protect someone kidnapped
who was not part of the staff of one of their own organizations?
preventing harm is the argument of all censors
David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 3:25 PM, Ken
While I cannot speak for the New York Times, Canadian media have acted in
the same way to protect members of NGOs who have been kidnapped.
Perhaps a more pertinent question is why this particular reporter's
kidnapping was more newsworthy than the majority of kidnappings that occur
in the area.
On Mon, 29 Jun 2009, Matt Jacobs wrote:
It really doesn't matter what policy administrators used to keep it quiet,
or even if they abused the rules. The information had a very real
probability of affecting whether a man lived or died, so that takes obvious
precedence over internal rules on an
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 8:42 PM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:
While I cannot speak for the New York Times, Canadian media have acted in
the same way to protect members of NGOs who have been kidnapped.
There's a two-year-old ongoing kidnapping in Iraq involving five Britons - a
consultant
2009/6/29 Sam Blacketer sam.blacke...@googlemail.com:
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 8:42 PM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:
While I cannot speak for the New York Times, Canadian media have acted in
the same way to protect members of NGOs who have been kidnapped.
There's a two-year-old ongoing
But explain how naming them would have endangered them any further than they
already were.? How is their name a bargaining chip or whatever the logic is.
-Original Message-
From: Sam Blacketer sam.blacke...@googlemail.com
To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Sent:
Explain first how you know that the kidnappers don't already know who they've
captured when they've captured them.? Every person carries identity papers and
as a side-note, I would expect they would have targeted a person *just because*
they were famous for some reason.
Do you understand
2009/6/29 Nathan nawr...@gmail.com:
Wikipedia as an outlet devolves control over information to the
people -
that is, people outside of hierarchical organizations where control and
responsibility for information is assigned by some measure of merit.
In 99.99% of cases this works out quite
I might have an interesting side note here. Sorry if this is a bit out of
context.
I have a source in a certain other government agency, who knows about a
certain unnamed individual in Pakistan whom *we are going to bomb straight
into wherever terrorists go when they get bombed.
Through my
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 11:49 AM, wjhon...@aol.com wrote:
So instead what we did, instead of merely reporting it and moving on, is to
make it into another front-page example of Wikipedia censorship, so it can
go around the world in the opposite direction as well. And for twice as
long.
On 29 Jun 2009, at 22:40, George Herbert wrote:
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 11:49 AM, wjhon...@aol.com wrote:
So instead what we did, instead of merely reporting it and moving
on, is to
make it into another front-page example of Wikipedia censorship,
so it can
go around the world in the
George you would have to show that, the action of suppression had a causative
effect.
But no one has shown that.? Rather what's happened is that a big ethics debate
has erupted over learning that the NYTimes actively recruits others media
outlets to suppress stories for some vague claim of
2009/6/29 Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net:
2009/6/29 Nathan nawr...@gmail.com:
Wikipedia as an outlet devolves control over information to the
people -
that is, people outside of hierarchical organizations where control and
responsibility for information is assigned by some measure of
David Goodman wrote:
would the news media have acted equally to protect someone kidnapped
who was not part of the staff of one of their own organizations?
preventing harm is the argument of all censors
That may be the case; but saying that acting to prevent harm makes one a
censor is not
2009/6/29 Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net:
2009/6/29 Nathan nawr...@gmail.com:
Wikipedia as an outlet devolves control over information to the
people -
that is, people outside of hierarchical organizations where control
and
responsibility for information is assigned by some measure of
- Michael Peel em...@mikepeel.net wrote:
I've been feeling a bit uneasy about this whole issue since I first
heard about it (this morning); it was obviously the best real-life
approach to deal with this, but the top-down approach within
Wikipedia (i.e. coming from Jimmy) was worrying.
Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote:
Content decisions are not made by ArbCom, functionaries or Jimbo. The
community aren't going to be keen on orders from on high that we're
not allowed to question or get an explanation for.
Office actions are taken over content all the
Wikipedia as an outlet devolves control over information to the people
-
that is, people outside of hierarchical organizations where control and
responsibility for information is assigned by some measure of merit.
In 99.99% of cases this works out quite well; in the others, as we can
see
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 6:07 PM, wjhon...@aol.com wrote:
George you would have to show that, the action of suppression had a
causative effect.
But no one has shown that.? Rather what's happened is that a big ethics
debate has erupted over learning that the NYTimes actively recruits others
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 3:07 PM, wjhon...@aol.com wrote:
George you would have to show that, the action of suppression had a
causative effect.
I don't believe that our (Jimmy et al's private) actions here caused
anything. The combined effect of all of the media together embargoing
this is
On Mon, 29 Jun 2009, Andrew Turvey wrote:
I think the only way of responding to these kind of dilemmas is through
office actions like this. Although Jimmy Wales was the main driver on this,
it was largely implemented by admins - independent volunteers like the rest
of us who no doubt would
On Mon, 29 Jun 2009, Risker wrote:
While I cannot speak for the New York Times, Canadian media have acted in
the same way to protect members of NGOs who have been kidnapped.
I already posted this, but...
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/22/washington/web22ksmnote.html?_r=1
2009/6/29 Andrew Turvey andrewrtur...@googlemail.com:
Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote:
Content decisions are not made by ArbCom, functionaries or Jimbo. The
community aren't going to be keen on orders from on high that we're
not allowed to question or get an explanation for.
2009/6/30 Ken Arromdee arrom...@rahul.net:
On Mon, 29 Jun 2009, Andrew Turvey wrote:
I think the only way of responding to these kind of dilemmas is through
office actions like this. Although Jimmy Wales was the main driver on this,
it was largely implemented by admins - independent
Mr. Martinez wasn't kidnapped at the time, was he? I mean, there was nobody
actually holding him prisoner, was there?
I don't think many westerners realise how endemic kidnapping for profit is
in this region of the world; it's commonplace and a longstanding pattern of
behaviour that goes back
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 7:26 PM, George Herbertgeorge.herb...@gmail.com wrote:
The balance we're using is working for our public reputation among
readers, the media, media critics and internet critics, policymakers.
In this particular case, the controversy seems limited to our own
internal
Four thoughts:
1) Geni's question about Pajhwok Afghan News is valid. But also Al Jazeera,*
Adnkronos, Little Green Footballs, *The Jawa Report* and *Dan Cleary,
Political Insomniac*, also apparently qualify as unreliable sources. Or
temporarily unreliable sources, if that's the preffered term.
I'd just like to clarify one point. The NYT article does make it seem as if
the entire reason that the actions were done were because Jimmy asked or
requested it. This is not the case and I know this first-hand, of course
being one of those administrators involved. I did what I did because I
Three more points:
1) Rohde's experience in reporting the mass murder of Bosnian Muslims by
Serbian Christians may have drawn sympathy and support from Muslim
officials, including perhaps some who may have sway with the kidnappers.
Publishing details of his kidnapping in a Muslim country would
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 9:07 PM, stevertigostv...@gmail.com wrote:
Three more points:
1) Rohde's experience in reporting the mass murder of Bosnian Muslims by
Serbian Christians may have drawn sympathy and support from Muslim
officials, including perhaps some who may have sway with the
In reply to Wjhonson, here's an example of a captured reporter who
subsequently had the chance to explain how careless coverage endangered his
life.
In late 2001 Canadian journalist Ken Hechtman was in Afghanistan when the
United States invaded, and was arrested as a suspected spy. Here's the
What exactly makes Linuxconf the second most popular Wikipedia article
after Michael Jackson?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Popular_pages
# Michael Jackson (33,092 hits last hour)
# Linuxconf (12,512 hits last hour)
...
--
Dan
http://dandascalescu.com
62 matches
Mail list logo
