Yet another hugely surprising decision from the Board, I’m sorry to say.
Considering the results of the 2015 May Board elections, I think it fair to say
that María’s appointment to the Board lacks any community legitimacy
whatsoever. As a then-active member of the Board of Trustees, Maria stood
Stephen LaPorte writes:
We would like to announce that the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees
has approved an amendment to Section 4 of the Terms of Use to require
disclosure of paid editing.
There is a proposal on Wikimedia Commons that aims to opt-out that project
from the amendment,
Amir E. Aharoni wrote:
In the past I would spend many minutes explaining
about [[]], , '', ref name=
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ; and other monstrosities.
You should never, ever use URL as a name for a reference. :-)
But I want to join you in thanking the people behind
Pete Forsyth wrote:
I also published a response to the WMF report:
http://wikistrategies.net/belfer1/
This is an absolutely fantastic blog post, and a must-read for anyone
interested in making sure this... controversy never happens again.
Thanks so much for taking the time to post that,
This week's issue of the English Wikipedia Signpost delivers mildly
shocking news about the opinion of a prominent female Wikimedian (...)
about the meaning of the movement and the role of the chapters as
expressed during the Boards training workshop that took place between
March 1-2 in
Ziko van Dijk wrote
I think that a single quote by a unnamed female Wikimedian, said in
public or in private, is a very small basis for any substantiate
criticism...
Thanks to Chris e-mail's, we now know that the comment was made during a
public session (though I can't find the relevant
David Gerard wrote:
That translates to OK, I have nothing; however, I'll assert I do anyway.
Which of the words from the sentence I wrote require translation for
you? The idea that there are divisions between chapters and communities
is not a new one; I personally have seen people mention
Chris Keating wrote:
This was exactly because we wanted people to speak freely and not worry
about a witch-hunt on an email list if a couple of trolls got hold of some
out-of-context quotes.
I wish you answered the question instead of smearing me on a public
mailing list, Chris. I have no
Carlos M. Colina wrote:
I don't find it deeply disturbing. What, now everybody must love
absolutely all wiki[mp]edians?
Yes, what's wrong with fucking the community? Let's go do it, we don't
need that useless bunch of moaning robots!
Tomasz
Marc A. Pelletier wrote:
Whether or not you have a point about that position having been badly
considered or having a been a waste of money -- and I'd be inclined to
think that it was at least a little of both -- you've squarely crossed
the line between asking legitimate questions and pointless
Erik Moeller wrote:
You tend to add a drama factor of 10x to any discussion I've ever seen
you participate in, and it gets tiresome after a while. Give it a
rest.
Why are you making this issue unnecessarily personal, Erik? This isn't
about Fae, you, or even Timothy Sandole -- so give it a
Richard Symonds wrote:
No, but it's the first paid one at a US educational institution I believe...
and possibly the first paid one worldwide at a traditional university.
Neither of these is true: Wikimedia Foundation hired a paid
Wikipedian-in-Residence at the Belfer Center for Science and
Yana Welinder wrote:
We've started changing the copyright status for the Wikibooks logo on
Commons to CC BY-SA 3.0:
How do we know that the Foundation is the copyright holder for the
Wikibooks logo?
Tomasz
___
Wikimedia-l mailing
I wonder what next will we be offered to buy.
Tomasz
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
The BBC reports that at least 22 people have died today in Kiev,
Ukraine, as result of the violent clashes between the opposition and the
government forces.
I have briefly visited Maidan Nezalezhnosti in March 2012 on my way to a
Wiki Loves Monuments workshop; the city of Kiev and the square
Dear all,
we would like to use this opportunity to express our sincere thanks to
the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees and the Foundation’s Legal
and Community Advocacy department for reaching their decision to abandon
the trademark registration for the Wikimedia community logo.
We are
Yann Forget wrote:
Are you suggesting that we can keep URAA affected data until we get a
takedown notice?
He is suggesting that, but apparently without realizing that his
proposal stands in direct contradiction to our precautionary principle
(COM:PRP) and to the way Commons cares about its
Gerard Meijssen wrote:
You have a really strong opinion. When you read this thread, you will
notice that it is not appreciated by many and seen as disruptive. Can you
appreciate it in this way?
No, as the only part where I expressed my opinion was the assumption
that Klaus suggested we only
geni wrote:
Not really. If Wikimedia India doesn't get funded then a few outreach and
editor recruitment programs get delayed. If WMF doesn't get funded the
servers go bye bye and mediawiki stops getting patched. I suppose the FDC
is baised in favor of the continued existence of wikipedia but
While I appreciate the lengthy discussion about the scope of the
resolution and about the ways it can be implemented in on-wiki
processes, I would like to raise a different question.
I note with some interest that Jimmy's vote is not recorded at
Andrew Bogott wrote:
So, we have a problem, and then we have an already-implemented
solution... what is left for anyone to do but dust off their hands and
go to lunch? If Bitpay has already solved the exact problem that we're
discussion, why would the foundation spend a nickel duplicating
Fæ wrote:
I hope this is a coincidence.
How naive of you, Fæ:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=6705202#Personal_and_Moral_Rights.3F
Tomasz
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
Lodewijk wrote:
thanks for sharing. To appreciate the resolution in its proper context, I
was wondering if you could share if there was a specific trigger to this
amendment?
How about
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?diff=111671264oldid=102286853
(as rumour has it)?
Hi!
I'm sure that the WMF fundraising people are all aware of this, but this
isn't exactly a well-known issue, so please excuse this short introduction.
For a few months now, there has been quite a strong push from the
Bitcoin community to accept that currency as a donation method; the
issue
Garfield Byrd wrote:
Please contact me with any questions.
Since the WMF wiki is private now, can a Foundation employee copy the
contents of the new financial statements and the FAQ to an on-wiki
version, please?
Tomasz
___
Keegan Peterzell wrote:
The discussion, as I was clarifying, was about requiring agents that had
not Identified to do so. There was no re-identifying require, which is
th point that I was making.
Oh yes, that's right. Thanks for the clarification, Keegan; I'm sorry
about the confusion.
Hi,
I would like to bring your attention to yet another discussion that's
currently taking place, namely the one about the new privacy policy, and
the related access to non-public information policy.
The privacy policy consultation is obviously important to all of us. but
I'm personally more
Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:
Just checking: considering that this is a rather limited set of users, I
assume they've all been notified by the WMF via email or talk page about
the discussion?
You must be new here.
Tomasz
___
Wikimedia-l
Hello community,
this is to inform you that in response to the trademarking of the
Wikimedia community logo[1], created in 2006 by Artur “WarX”
Fijałkowski, which was discussed on this mailing list[2] as well as on
Meta[3] back in March, a small group of community members—Artur, myself,
Hello community,
this is to inform you that in response to the trademarking of the
Wikimedia community logo[1], created in 2006 by Artur “WarX”
Fijałkowski, which was discussed on this mailing list[2] as well as on
Meta[3] back in March, a small group of community members—Artur, myself,
Hi community,
the latest issue of the Tech News summary has been published and is now
being delivered to its subscribers across the wikis:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Tech/News/2013/31
The newsletter aims to help Wikimedians stay informed about recent and
future
Hi,
there is a famous quote on courage by Winston Churchill, a British Prime
Minister, who once wisely said: Courage is what it takes to stand up
and speak. Courage is also what it takes to sit down and listen.
Over the weekend, more than 440 editors of the German Wikipedia took
part in an
[For those of you non-native speakers of Polish who wonder what just
happened, apparently Michał Aegis Maelstrom Buczyński sent his e-mail
to the wrong mailing list.
In his message, Michał asks people to redouble efforts to promote the
Polish version of Wiki Loves Monuments (which uses the
Geoff Brigham wrote:
WMF is getting professional translations in German, French, Spanish, and
Japanese, and will post by Tuesday.
I know that the RfC on PRISM has already been closed, but I have only
remembered this today: what happened with the professional translations
of
Oliver Keyes wrote:
I would disagree that the scale does not match. I'm not sure how many
people the fundraising banners reach, but I imagine it's a subset of
people who use wikipedia. Almost /all/ of our external links are going
to be linking to somewhere with a non-compliant privacy policy.
Bence Damokos wrote:
https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/1714329?hl=en Note that just
active views will be counted and that it won’t include views from videos
set to autoplay.
The video that was included in the banners was not set to autoplay, so I
can hardly see your point.
Victor Grigas wrote:
This was because much of the material surrounding the video was
written in English, and there was a lot of it, so translation would
have been slow, expensive and prone to error.
That's what community translations are perfect for; they are free (in
terms of licence) and
Hi,
it came to my attention very recently that a link to a YouTube video has
been included in our fundraising banners[1] last year, enabling people
by default to watch a video about Wikipedia loaded through a YouTube
iframe / element.
There's been a small discussion about this on IRC, and
Hi Victor,
thanks for your e-mail, I does indeed provide a lot of valuable
background information!
I'm being told that the technical limitations I mentioned in my opening
e-mail are somehow related to Squid and Varnish (the caching software we
use) and our infrastructure being unable to
John Vandenberg wrote:
I have converted it to wiki text.
I wonder why it requires a volunteer to pick up a task that WMF
employees should have done in the first place...
-- Tomasz
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Hi again,
so I spent some time looking into the problem and wrote a short summary
at http://twkozlowski.net/russian-wikipedia-under-threat-again/
(shameless promotion mode=off /) -- if anyone cares about what's
happening outside of the US, that is.
As described in the summary, there are
… writes Amanda Filipacci, the writer behind the recent Wikipedia
novelists sexism scandal:
http://blogs.wsj.com/speakeasy/2013/07/10/my-strange-addiction-wikipedia/.
I'm not sure if it's still funny or maybe already depressing.
-- Tomasz
James Salsman wrote:
How much of a change to previous compensation scales pegged to the
nonprofit sector does that represent in percentage terms?
If I understand correctly, it's been requested that questions are asked
at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_budget#2013-14, so
Hi there,
two months after the smoking cannabis controversy, the Russian
Wikipedia is in trouble again, this time over an anti-piracy legislation
that will come into force on August 1 and which might result in
Wikipedia as a whole -- not just a few articles -- being blacklisted in
the
On June 19, Garfield Byrd wrote:
As we may be very close to having a Board of Trustee approved budget, I
suggest we wait until we can release the full Annual Plan document on July
1, so that there is context for the Wikimedia Foundation spending plan for
FY 13-14.
It's July 3 (UTC), but don't
Everton Zanella Alvarenga wrote:
http://www.diplomacy.edu/calendar/webinar-wikipedia-diplomats
Is it just me who was surprised to see that Bence will be representing
the Affiliations Committee during that webinar? I know for a fact that
AffCom involves a lot of behind–the–scenes talks et
Bence Damokos wrote:
I hope I am not totally unqualified to speak about the Wikipedia topics.
Quite the contrary, I think you're very knowledgeable about the
subject—but what does AffCom have to do with it? If you're going to talk
about Wikipedia's role in disseminating information about
Adrian Raddatz wrote:
You do realize that every message has an unsubscribe option at the
bottom, right? That's the easiest way to get off of this list.
For future reference: I initiated the un-subscription process for
Mary contacted her off–list, so this will hopefully be resolved soon.
Geoff,
I'm a bit lost here now that I've read that translation notice more
carefully — are you really saying you want to have this post translated
into German, French, Spanish and Japanese by Tuesday, June 18, and then
for the local communities to comment on it by Friday, June 21?
There is
Tobias wrote:
I think Wikimedia should protest openly against such unethical
surveillance. While previous posts have pointed out that indeed
Wikipedia contains less private information than Facebook or Google, it
still has a lot that should remain private. Most notably access logs of
both
Luis Villa wrote:
For your information, we have not been approached to participate in
PRISM, and we have never received or honored an NSA or FISA subpoena
or order.
Google and Facebook both flatly denied having any relationship to
PRISM, and it turned out not to be exactly true—is there any
K. Peachey wrote:
Change it to a blank/transparent square for the logo at the current
time, Then let WV take as long as they want to choose a new logo?
In other words, let's remove their logo, even against their wish, and
then let /them/ come up with a solution?
-- Tomasz
Again, this is going to be a general e–mail, so I'm not going to quote
anyone in particular, and will just refer to some parts of the e–mails
sent before this one.
First of all, I think some of you guys should really stop freaking out
about the alleged level of attacks in this thread (and the
Well, it's Monday SF time (4 PM if Google doesn't lie to me), and we're
still waiting for some explanations on why this situations happened /at
all/.
-- Tomasz
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
This isn't a comment aimed at anyone in particular, so I'm not going to
quote anybody, but can we please stop hijacking this thread, and posting
about how Wikimedia Foundation staff are also humans and how the WMF was
badly organised X years ago — which are valid discussion for a different
Yaroslav M. Blanter wrote:
If I read the e-mails correctly, 1 and 2 were covered. 1 is Gayle, and 2
is that it was on her to do list for a long time, so apparently she
decided to perform this on Friday afternoon since it was not pleasant
and had to be done anyway.
I'm not so sure about
Gregory Varnum wrote:
I am not sure what you mean by none of the members being willing to comment.
Our chair has responded several times on Meta and many others have
responded
to Odder via email about this.
Let me just straighten this, Greg. Nobody has ever contacted me via
e-mail about
Gayle Karen Young wrote:
Hello folks,
[...]
Gayle
So what did you want to say? I haven't been able to find any answers to
any questions that have been asked by so many people in this thread.
-- Tomasz
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Hi all,
for those of you who do not watch the RecentChanges on the Foundation
wiki https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Special:RecentChanges, I
think it might be somehow surprising to see that in a top-level
decision, almost all volunteer administrators of the wiki have been
stripped off
Marc A. Pelletier wrote:
Tomasz, while it seems clear that communications about that move seem to
have been lacking, I think it's unwarranted to ascribe ill-intent to the
WMF staff. Perhaps you should wait for a response from them before you
declare what their wishes may be or what their
I'm not going to respond to all the points raised in your e-mail, Sue
(partially because most of them are just too general), so let me just
mentioned some of them.
The editors are responsible for the projects: the Wikimedia Foundation
knows that, acknowledges it, and is deeply appreciative
Hi all,
I think it should be noted that the Russian Wikipedia is having more and
more problems with the state-maintained Internet blacklist (an idea that
they heavily opposed, and which made them go on strike last July).
Apparently, the infamous cannabis smoking article was put back on the
Amqui wrote:
Any details translated in English about what are the specific
wording on the articles that pushed the Russian State to blacklist
those articles?
The community-maintained list of all blacklisted articles
http://tiny.cc/e7urww has all the necessary information; apparently
the
Hi Sam,
first of all, let me thank you for your involvement in this—it's
appreciated! Other comments follow in-line.
By the time we see a final-draft plan in April/May, there is already
little leeway for significant change.
This probably means that there is something wrong with the process
Steven,
I am actually disappointed to see you bring such an example to back up a
thesis that — that's the impression I'm getting — the community cannot
provide valuable feedback on budget-related matters.
The experience that I have is quite opposite: as far as I am aware,
community members
Hi Sam,
thanks for the message, I appreciate hearing from a Board member at long
last.
I agree that it might be a good idea to collect feedback during the year
(is there actually any page that could be used for this purpose on
Meta?) — but I think that it also needs to be mentioned that it's
David Gerard wrote:
(Someone noted on wikien-l that the Oh Shit moment in the editor
graph coincides pretty well with the decision to lock down article
creation on en:wp. Tiny inconveniences.)
It's been more than seven years since article creation was disabled for
anonymous editors on the
67 matches
Mail list logo
