Yes, the signal tends to be lost in the noise.
Cheers,
Peter
- Original Message -
From: Kevin Wayne Williams kwwilli...@kwwilliams.com
To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Sent: Tuesday, August 06, 2013 11:10 PM
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Visual Editor temporary
Love it!
2013/8/7, Denny Vrandečić denny.vrande...@wikimedia.de:
I have been thinking about this for a while, and now finally managed to
write it down as a proposal. Details are on meta on the following link,
below is the intro to the proposal:
Actually, an offline version of WIkipedia, though useful in remote
locations and for secure-internet areas like schools (or prisons), is
probably not as desirable as copies of specific content, such as a
Wikipedia dump of the Paleontology portal or something like that. For
people who wish to
This may work very fine for little stubs about repetitive stuff, like the
introductions of cities (location, population, foundation date, country,
etc). But, how will that work for the rest of sections of Berlin (history,
geography, politics...)? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berlin
2013/8/7
I thought so myself, but then I did a bit of research to figure out the
state of natural language generation. I could not find easily a current
state of the art, but I found this list of examples on the KPML website
that is linked from the proposal, they are from 1998:
Thanks for sharing your very interesting ideas. While I am not fully
support your idea of implementation, I share your basic view of the need
and think some of the concepts you introduce has a very high potential
to better utilize the power of us having many versions.
I have put in my
Most times the best approach is a compilation of several approaches.
Perhaps we can use the Denny system for the little introduction of articles
(for example: geography, biographies) and optional automatic translation
for the rest of the article.
I mean, if you follow a red link in a little
On 06.08.2013 20:03, Nathan wrote:
I'll take on faith that anti-Americanism doesn't explain why you jump
to this conclusion when there are many that make more sense, but how
do you explain then the fact that the English Wikipedia (which,
presumably, has a similar North American bias) is having
On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 1:27 PM, Yaroslav M. Blanter pute...@mccme.ruwrote:
Not commenting on the topic of the thread, is there any data around to
show that the English Wikipedia is mainly written by North Americans (aka
residents of the US and Canada)? Seems to me that it is likely to be the
Thank you, Anders. Yes, I published the idea in order to garner feedback
and further evolve it. It is by no means ready-perfect-finished, it is
rather really just a first draft. So suggestions, constructive critique,
and improvements are obviously extremely welcome. --
2013/8/7 Anders
Obviously, this system should be only used as far as it carries. I don't
know how far it might carry us - it might fail miserably, and not get
beyond the Rome is a city. Rome is in Italy. Rome is known for The
Colosseum, coffee and Vatican City (state). stage. It might lead to a
glorious future,
Forwarding this from wikimania-l, sorry for crossposting.
Cheers,
Nicole
-- Forwarded message --
From: Nicole Ebber nicole.eb...@wikimedia.de
Date: 7 August 2013 21:15
Subject: Thursday, 10-14:00 – Chapters Dialogue Session
To: Wikimania general list (open subscription)
Yaroslav M. Blanter, 07/08/2013 13:27:
Not commenting on the topic of the thread, is there any data around to
show that the English Wikipedia is mainly written by North Americans
(aka residents of the US and Canada)? Seems to me that it is likely to
be the case but not 100% obvious.
Nathan
Ah, I believe these are editor's edit-measurements based on IP
address, which is something quite different from base of operation.
I tend to edit pages geo-located in the US when I visit those places,
and I imagine many others not based in the US do the same. The same
holds for all other countries
On 8/7/13 4:22 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:
Yaroslav M. Blanter, 07/08/2013 13:27:
Not commenting on the topic of the thread, is there any data around to
show that the English Wikipedia is mainly written by North Americans
(aka residents of the US and Canada)? Seems to me that it is likely
Yes, it should be made clear that opt out will always be an acceptable user
preference.
On Aug 6, 2013 7:26 AM, Todd Allen toddmal...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 8:35 PM, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote:
Todd Allen wrote:
[comments about VisualEditor]
Hi Todd.
Thank
This perspective is not a productive one for building and maintaining a
community. You need to have a better way of granting legitimacy to people's
concerns while being able to discern histrionics.
Generally the optimal easy is to have there be a pathway by which the
complainants have to fix the
Histrionics is generally not a productive policy either.
It gets tedious after a while.
Cheers
Peter
- Original Message -
From: The Cunctator cuncta...@gmail.com
To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Sent: Wednesday, August 07, 2013 6:54 PM
Subject: Re:
*This Month in GLAM* is a monthly newsletter documenting recent happenings
within the GLAM project, such as content donations, residencies, events and
more. GLAM is an acronym of *G*alleries, *L*ibraries, *A*rchives and *M*useums.
You can find more information on the project at glamwiki.org.
As for the FDC/annual plan grants, that would require for them to be
recognised Wikimedia partner orgs in the new affiliation model, right?
Nemo
Unless I am mistaken, it would, yeah. I'm assuming that Anasuya is hoping
that they would be able to achieve affcom recognition in their
20 matches
Mail list logo
