[Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] The Signpost -- Volume 11, Issue 6 -- 11 February 2015

2015-02-12 Thread Wikipedia Signpost 
From the editors: We want to know what you think!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-02-11/From_the_editors

News and notes: One editor faces likely ban for work on Wikipedia; another 
awarded $1 million
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-02-11/News_and_notes

In the media: Is Wikipedia eating itself?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-02-11/In_the_media

Traffic report: Bowled over
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-02-11/Traffic_report

WikiProject report: Brand new WikiProjects profiled
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-02-11/WikiProject_report

Featured content: A grizzly bear, Operation Mascot, ''Freedom Planet'' & 
Liberty Island, cosmic dust clouds, a cricket five-wicket list, more fine art, 
& a terrible, terrible opera...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-02-11/Featured_content

Gallery: Feel the love
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-02-11/Gallery


Single page view
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Signpost/Single/2015-02-11

PDF version
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-02-11


https://www.facebook.com/wikisignpost / https://twitter.com/wikisignpost
--
Wikipedia Signpost Staff
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost

___
Please note: all replies sent to this mailing list will be immediately directed 
to Wikimedia-l, the public mailing list of the Wikimedia community. For more 
information about Wikimedia-l:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
___
WikimediaAnnounce-l mailing list
wikimediaannounc...@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaannounce-l
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Cc-by-sa 4.0, Wikimedia logos

2015-02-12 Thread Kat Walsh 
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 12:30 PM, Michael Peel  wrote:
> According to the footer at:
> http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
> CC-BY-SA 4.0 is currently available in 34 languages/language variants: [...]

This is just the deeds, not the license text itself.

-Kat


> Thanks,
> Mike
>
>> On 12 Feb 2015, at 20:26, Luis Villa  wrote:
>>
>> CC 4 is still only in two (three?) languages (Kat may want to weigh in?) so
>> it is premature for us to move, I think. But I'm optimistic we'll see
>> traction in that area soon, and then we can have a movement discussion.
>> Sorry that we can't force that to happen faster :)
>>
>> [To be clear, as I've said on Commons, CC 4.0 is clearly already
>> *acceptable* for imported images - obviously free, etc. We just shouldn't
>> be encouraging it as the *default* anywhere until there are more languages
>> and a movement-wide discussion.]
>>
>> Luis
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 1:13 AM, Pine W > > wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Can we get an update on the transition plan to 4.0? I am seeing increasing
>>> amounts of content with 4.0 licensing across the the web, and would like us
>>> to move sooner rather than later to 4.0 in order to maintain continuity
>>> with new content where possible.
>>>
>>> I am not a licensing expert and I sometimes get headaches trying to
>>> deconflict licenses.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Pine
>>> On Oct 28, 2014 3:00 PM, "Luis Villa"  wrote:
>>>
 Hi, Rupert-

 I think the movement as a whole should try to move consistently to 4.0 at
 roughly the same time. It is confusing to re-users to have to juggle
 different terms for different pieces of Wikimedia content.[1] So
 Foundation
 content will generally remain 3.0 until we make 4.0 the default license
 across the projects. (I'm aware that some projects have taken this jump on
 the own, but where I've seen this, I've made similar points - for example
 <
 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Declaration_of_consent_for_all_enquiries&diff=prev&oldid=622093759
>
 .)

 WMF Legal plans to launch a movement-wide 4.0 discussion when CC has
 issued
 a solid number of translations, ideally in our largest languages. I
 understand the first few translations will be published in the next few
 weeks, and there is a schedule of upcoming translations on CC's wiki
 [2].

 Realistically,
 given the holidays, and the lag for large projects, this likely means that
 discussion will happen early in 2015.

 Hope that helps-
 Luis

 [1] I'm well aware we already have a huge problem with this, but I don't
 want it to get worse. :)
 [2] These are updated by the translation teams, not CC itself, so they may
 not be up-to-date/accurate.

 On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 2:00 PM, rupert THURNER 
 wrote:

> Hi yana, would you be so kind to explain why wmf did not opt for the
 newest
> commons license, cc-by-sa 4.0?
>
> Rupert
> On Oct 28, 2014 9:06 PM, "Yana Welinder" 
 wrote:
>
> Good point.  That line can now be deleted from the trademark template.
>
> On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 7:40 AM, Romaine Wiki 
> wrote:
>
>> Practical question:
>> The template:
>> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Wikimedia_trademark
>> contains a line: (Consider using {{Copyright by Wikimedia
>>  }}
>> instead)
>>
>> Should that line be removed from the Wikimedia trademark template?
>> (including all translations)
>>
>> Romaine
>>
>> 2014-10-28 10:36 GMT+01:00 Ting Chen :
>>
>>> Really cool, great work. Thank you very much.
>>>
>>> Greetings
>>> Ting
>>>
>>> Am 10/27/2014 um 06:51 PM schrieb Yana Welinder:
>>>
>>> Hi folks,

 I'm happy to announce that we are re-licensing the Wikimedia logos
 on
 Commons to CC BY-SA 3.0:

> https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/10/24/wikimedia-logos-have-been-freed/

 I would really appreciate your help with replacing the {{Copyright
 by
 Wikimedia}}
 <
 https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Copyright_by_Wikimedia
>> [1]
 templates on the logos with the {{Wikimedia trademark}}
  [2]
>> and
 {{cc-by-sa-3.0}} [3]
 templates. But we don't want to replace templates on the MediaWiki
 [4] and the
 Community
 <
 https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikimedia_Community_Logo.svg
>>> [5]
 logos, which were originally releas

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Cc-by-sa 4.0, Wikimedia logos

2015-02-12 Thread Kat Walsh 
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 12:26 PM, Luis Villa  wrote:
> CC 4 is still only in two (three?) languages (Kat may want to weigh in?) so
> it is premature for us to move, I think. But I'm optimistic we'll see
> traction in that area soon, and then we can have a movement discussion.
> Sorry that we can't force that to happen faster :)

There are only two official translations of the 4.0 suite currently
(Norwegian and Finnish), with another ready to publish fairly soon,
maybe 10 or so others in progress. (I note that I'm not there anymore,
though, and can't speak to how things will go forward.)

-Kat

> [To be clear, as I've said on Commons, CC 4.0 is clearly already
> *acceptable* for imported images - obviously free, etc. We just shouldn't
> be encouraging it as the *default* anywhere until there are more languages
> and a movement-wide discussion.]
>
> Luis
>
> On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 1:13 AM, Pine W  wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Can we get an update on the transition plan to 4.0? I am seeing increasing
>> amounts of content with 4.0 licensing across the the web, and would like us
>> to move sooner rather than later to 4.0 in order to maintain continuity
>> with new content where possible.
>>
>> I am not a licensing expert and I sometimes get headaches trying to
>> deconflict licenses.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Pine
>> On Oct 28, 2014 3:00 PM, "Luis Villa"  wrote:
>>
>>> Hi, Rupert-
>>>
>>> I think the movement as a whole should try to move consistently to 4.0 at
>>> roughly the same time. It is confusing to re-users to have to juggle
>>> different terms for different pieces of Wikimedia content.[1] So
>>> Foundation
>>> content will generally remain 3.0 until we make 4.0 the default license
>>> across the projects. (I'm aware that some projects have taken this jump on
>>> the own, but where I've seen this, I've made similar points - for example
>>> <
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Declaration_of_consent_for_all_enquiries&diff=prev&oldid=622093759
>>> >
>>> .)
>>>
>>> WMF Legal plans to launch a movement-wide 4.0 discussion when CC has
>>> issued
>>> a solid number of translations, ideally in our largest languages. I
>>> understand the first few translations will be published in the next few
>>> weeks, and there is a schedule of upcoming translations on CC's wiki
>>> [2].
>>>
>>> Realistically,
>>> given the holidays, and the lag for large projects, this likely means that
>>> discussion will happen early in 2015.
>>>
>>> Hope that helps-
>>> Luis
>>>
>>> [1] I'm well aware we already have a huge problem with this, but I don't
>>> want it to get worse. :)
>>> [2] These are updated by the translation teams, not CC itself, so they may
>>> not be up-to-date/accurate.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 2:00 PM, rupert THURNER >> >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> > Hi yana, would you be so kind to explain why wmf did not opt for the
>>> newest
>>> > commons license, cc-by-sa 4.0?
>>> >
>>> > Rupert
>>> > On Oct 28, 2014 9:06 PM, "Yana Welinder" 
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Good point.  That line can now be deleted from the trademark template.
>>> >
>>> > On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 7:40 AM, Romaine Wiki 
>>> > wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > Practical question:
>>> > > The template:
>>> > > https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Wikimedia_trademark
>>> > > contains a line: (Consider using {{Copyright by Wikimedia
>>> > > >> >}}
>>> > > instead)
>>> > >
>>> > > Should that line be removed from the Wikimedia trademark template?
>>> > > (including all translations)
>>> > >
>>> > > Romaine
>>> > >
>>> > > 2014-10-28 10:36 GMT+01:00 Ting Chen :
>>> > >
>>> > > > Really cool, great work. Thank you very much.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Greetings
>>> > > > Ting
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Am 10/27/2014 um 06:51 PM schrieb Yana Welinder:
>>> > > >
>>> > > >  Hi folks,
>>> > > >>
>>> > > >> I'm happy to announce that we are re-licensing the Wikimedia logos
>>> on
>>> > > >> Commons to CC BY-SA 3.0:
>>> > > >>
>>> > https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/10/24/wikimedia-logos-have-been-freed/
>>> > > >>
>>> > > >> I would really appreciate your help with replacing the {{Copyright
>>> by
>>> > > >> Wikimedia}}
>>> > > >> <
>>> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Copyright_by_Wikimedia
>>> > >[1]
>>> > > >> templates on the logos with the {{Wikimedia trademark}}
>>> > > >> >> >[2]
>>> > > and
>>> > > >> {{cc-by-sa-3.0}} >> > > >> org/wiki/Template:Cc-by-sa-3.0>[3]
>>> > > >> templates. But we don't want to replace templates on the MediaWiki
>>> > > >> [4] and the
>>> > > >> Community
>>> > > >> <
>>> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikimedia_Community_Logo.svg
>>> > > >[5]
>>> > > >> logos, which were originally released under free licenses.
>>> > > >>
>>> > > >> There are al

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Cc-by-sa 4.0, Wikimedia logos

2015-02-12 Thread Michael Peel 
According to the footer at:
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
CC-BY-SA 4.0 is currently available in 34 languages/language variants: 
Castellano  Castellano 
(España)  Català 
 Dansk 
 Deutsch 
 English 
 Esperanto 
 français 
Galego 
 hrvatski 
 Indonesia 
 Italiano 
 Latviski 
 Lietuvių 
 Magyar 
 Melayu 
 Nederlands 
 Norsk 
 polski 
 Português 
 Português (BR) 
 Suomeksi 
 svenska 
 Türkçe 
 íslenska 
česky 
 Ελληνικά 
 русский 
 українська 
 العربية 
 پارسی 
 日本語 
 華語 (台灣) 
 한국어 
 .

Thanks,
Mike

> On 12 Feb 2015, at 20:26, Luis Villa  wrote:
> 
> CC 4 is still only in two (three?) languages (Kat may want to weigh in?) so
> it is premature for us to move, I think. But I'm optimistic we'll see
> traction in that area soon, and then we can have a movement discussion.
> Sorry that we can't force that to happen faster :)
> 
> [To be clear, as I've said on Commons, CC 4.0 is clearly already
> *acceptable* for imported images - obviously free, etc. We just shouldn't
> be encouraging it as the *default* anywhere until there are more languages
> and a movement-wide discussion.]
> 
> Luis
> 
> On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 1:13 AM, Pine W  > wrote:
> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> Can we get an update on the transition plan to 4.0? I am seeing increasing
>> amounts of content with 4.0 licensing across the the web, and would like us
>> to move sooner rather than later to 4.0 in order to maintain continuity
>> with new content where possible.
>> 
>> I am not a licensing expert and I sometimes get headaches trying to
>> deconflict licenses.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Pine
>> On Oct 28, 2014 3:00 PM, "Luis Villa"  wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi, Rupert-
>>> 
>>> I think the movement as a whole should try to move consistently to 4.0 at
>>> roughly the same time. It is confusing to re-users to have to juggle
>>> different terms for different pieces of Wikimedia content.[1] So
>>> Foundation
>>> content will generally remain 3.0 until we make 4.0 the default license
>>> across the projects. (I'm aware that some projects have taken this jump on
>>> the own, but where I've seen this, I've made similar points - for example
>>> <
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Declaration_of_consent_for_all_enquiries&diff=prev&oldid=622093759
 
>>> .)
>>> 
>>> WMF Legal plans to launch a movement-wide 4.0 discussion when CC has
>>> issued
>>> a solid number of translations, ideally in our largest languages. I
>>> understand the first few translations will be published in the next few
>>> weeks, and there is a schedule of upcoming translations on CC's wiki
>>> [2].
>>> 
>>> Realistically,
>>> given the holidays, and the lag for large projects, this likely means that
>>> discussion will happen early in 2015.
>>> 
>>> Hope that helps-
>>> Luis
>>> 
>>> [1] I'm well aware we already have a huge problem with this, but I don't
>>> want it to get worse. :)
>>> [2] These are updated by the translation teams, not CC itself, so they may
>>> not be up-to-date/accurate.
>>> 
>>> On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 2:00 PM, ru

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Cc-by-sa 4.0, Wikimedia logos

2015-02-12 Thread Luis Villa 
CC 4 is still only in two (three?) languages (Kat may want to weigh in?) so
it is premature for us to move, I think. But I'm optimistic we'll see
traction in that area soon, and then we can have a movement discussion.
Sorry that we can't force that to happen faster :)

[To be clear, as I've said on Commons, CC 4.0 is clearly already
*acceptable* for imported images - obviously free, etc. We just shouldn't
be encouraging it as the *default* anywhere until there are more languages
and a movement-wide discussion.]

Luis

On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 1:13 AM, Pine W  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Can we get an update on the transition plan to 4.0? I am seeing increasing
> amounts of content with 4.0 licensing across the the web, and would like us
> to move sooner rather than later to 4.0 in order to maintain continuity
> with new content where possible.
>
> I am not a licensing expert and I sometimes get headaches trying to
> deconflict licenses.
>
> Thanks,
> Pine
> On Oct 28, 2014 3:00 PM, "Luis Villa"  wrote:
>
>> Hi, Rupert-
>>
>> I think the movement as a whole should try to move consistently to 4.0 at
>> roughly the same time. It is confusing to re-users to have to juggle
>> different terms for different pieces of Wikimedia content.[1] So
>> Foundation
>> content will generally remain 3.0 until we make 4.0 the default license
>> across the projects. (I'm aware that some projects have taken this jump on
>> the own, but where I've seen this, I've made similar points - for example
>> <
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Declaration_of_consent_for_all_enquiries&diff=prev&oldid=622093759
>> >
>> .)
>>
>> WMF Legal plans to launch a movement-wide 4.0 discussion when CC has
>> issued
>> a solid number of translations, ideally in our largest languages. I
>> understand the first few translations will be published in the next few
>> weeks, and there is a schedule of upcoming translations on CC's wiki
>> [2].
>>
>> Realistically,
>> given the holidays, and the lag for large projects, this likely means that
>> discussion will happen early in 2015.
>>
>> Hope that helps-
>> Luis
>>
>> [1] I'm well aware we already have a huge problem with this, but I don't
>> want it to get worse. :)
>> [2] These are updated by the translation teams, not CC itself, so they may
>> not be up-to-date/accurate.
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 2:00 PM, rupert THURNER > >
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi yana, would you be so kind to explain why wmf did not opt for the
>> newest
>> > commons license, cc-by-sa 4.0?
>> >
>> > Rupert
>> > On Oct 28, 2014 9:06 PM, "Yana Welinder" 
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Good point.  That line can now be deleted from the trademark template.
>> >
>> > On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 7:40 AM, Romaine Wiki 
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > Practical question:
>> > > The template:
>> > > https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Wikimedia_trademark
>> > > contains a line: (Consider using {{Copyright by Wikimedia
>> > > > >}}
>> > > instead)
>> > >
>> > > Should that line be removed from the Wikimedia trademark template?
>> > > (including all translations)
>> > >
>> > > Romaine
>> > >
>> > > 2014-10-28 10:36 GMT+01:00 Ting Chen :
>> > >
>> > > > Really cool, great work. Thank you very much.
>> > > >
>> > > > Greetings
>> > > > Ting
>> > > >
>> > > > Am 10/27/2014 um 06:51 PM schrieb Yana Welinder:
>> > > >
>> > > >  Hi folks,
>> > > >>
>> > > >> I'm happy to announce that we are re-licensing the Wikimedia logos
>> on
>> > > >> Commons to CC BY-SA 3.0:
>> > > >>
>> > https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/10/24/wikimedia-logos-have-been-freed/
>> > > >>
>> > > >> I would really appreciate your help with replacing the {{Copyright
>> by
>> > > >> Wikimedia}}
>> > > >> <
>> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Copyright_by_Wikimedia
>> > >[1]
>> > > >> templates on the logos with the {{Wikimedia trademark}}
>> > > >> > >[2]
>> > > and
>> > > >> {{cc-by-sa-3.0}} > > > >> org/wiki/Template:Cc-by-sa-3.0>[3]
>> > > >> templates. But we don't want to replace templates on the MediaWiki
>> > > >> [4] and the
>> > > >> Community
>> > > >> <
>> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikimedia_Community_Logo.svg
>> > > >[5]
>> > > >> logos, which were originally released under free licenses.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> There are also some pages on Commons, like this one
>> > > >> [6], that
>> may
>> > > need
>> > > >> to
>> > > >> be updated based on the re-licensed logos.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Thanks,
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Yana
>> > > >>
>> > > >> [1]
>> > https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Copyright_by_Wikimedia
>> > > >>
>> > > >> [2]
>> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Wikimedia_trademark
>> > > >>
>> > > >> [3