[Wikimedia-l] Books & Bytes – Issue 27, February – March 2018

[UY Scuti]

*Books & Bytes – Issue 27, February – March 2018*
Highlights:

   - #1Lib1Ref
 - New collections
- Alexander Street (expansion)
- Cambridge University Press (expansion)
 - User Group
 - Global branches update
- Wiki Indaba Wikipedia + Library Discussions
 - Spotlight: Using librarianship to create a more equitable
 internet: LGBTQ+ advocacy as a wiki-librarian
 - Bytes in brief

*Arabic, Chinese** and *French* versions of Books & Bytes are now available
in meta!*
Read the full newsletter at
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/The_Wikipedia_Library/Newsletter/February-March_2018

For more updates, follow us on Twitter ,
Facebook  and join the Facebook
group 

The Wikipedia Library Team
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/The_Wikipedia_Library

Books & Bytes is a bi-monthly newsletter of The Wikipedia Library, focusing
on recent, ongoing and upcoming activities and events in TWL and relevant
topic areas. Read our previous newsletters here
 and
subscribe
!
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The fact-checked encyclopedia

[Gerard Meijssen]

Hoi,
The notion that unsourced articles need to be eradicated is fundamentally
so wrong. The notion should be; we are going to source the unsourced
articles and ensure that we provide the best information possible.

Hostility only ensures that the point of view of the person who is hostile
will dominate not that Wikipedia has a neutral point of view.
Thanks,
  GerardM

On 15 April 2018 at 16:50, Paulo Santos Perneta 
wrote:

> Indeed. It's a very noticeable problem at the Wikipedia in Portuguese.
> During a workshop with librarians from the National Library last month, I
> was kind of shocked by the huge amount of semi-automated warnings they were
> receiving, some of them completely useless, as they were directed to
> code-editing rather than the Visual Editor they were using. The librarians
> were also puzzled by the apparently pointless aggressivity and hostility
> coming from the environment they were trying to join.
>
> On the other hand, content is now much more reliable than it used to be -
> there is even a movement at our local wikipedia which is working to
> completely eradicate unsourced articles from there. Even more, we kind of
> justify that hostility against newbies with the notion that the project is
> being actively protected and surveilled against vandalism and fake claims.
>
> So yes, I concur that "fact-checked encyclopedia" is more appropriated
> today than "the encyclopedia anyone can edit" - at pt.wiki as well.
>
> Paulo
>
>
> 2018-04-15 15:21 GMT+01:00 Leigh Thelmadatter :
>
> > Not just English Wikipedia. All of the projects are hostile to
> "outsiders"
> > Those not in English might even be worse for several reasons
> >
> > Enviado desde mi LG de Telcel
> >
> > -- Original message--
> > From: Robert Fernandez
> > Date: Sun, Apr 15, 2018 9:17 AM
> > To: Wikimedia Mailing List;
> > Cc:
> > Subject:Re: [Wikimedia-l] The fact-checked encyclopedia
> >
> > Considering the barriers to entry, growing thicket of policies,
> > organized group harassment, and open hostility on the English
> > Wikipedia, I'm not sure we can even call it "the encyclopedia anyone
> > can edit" anymore.  So I'd say fact-checked is a more accurate and
> > relevant claim these days.
> >
> > On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 8:53 AM, Anthony Cole 
> wrote:
> > > I just googled “wikipedia” and the first result was a Google ad linking
> > to
> > > wikipedia.org.[1] It calls Wikipedia the fact-checked encyclopedia. We
> > used
> > > to call it the encyclopedia anyone can edit. The latter seems more
> honest
> > > than this new formulation which to me implies a degree of reliability
> and
> > > oversight I'm not sure we can ethically assert. I missed the discussion
> > > about this new self-description. Did it happen on meta? Is anyone else
> > > uncomfortabe with this?
> > > --
> > > Anthony Cole
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The fact-checked encyclopedia

[Isaac Olatunde]

Leigh, I disagree that all projects are hostile to outsiders. When someone
edit in a language they do not speak and use machine to translate contents
for example  and refused to stop after multiple warnings, a block in such
case may not be considered an "hostile" response. That being said, I
completely agree with Rob that fact-checked encyclopedia is more
appropriate considering the hostility in some language Wikipedia, notably
the English Wikipedia. How do you describe a Wikipedia where someone create
their first article and got deleted and when the  page creator approached
the deleting admin on why their article got deleted and the response they
received is "Kindly have the decency to create a decent article ", "count
yourself lucky, I don't talk to IP address "?

Regards,

Isaac.


On Apr 15, 2018 3:21 PM, "Leigh Thelmadatter"  wrote:

> Not just English Wikipedia. All of the projects are hostile to "outsiders"
> Those not in English might even be worse for several reasons
>
> Enviado desde mi LG de Telcel
>
> -- Original message--
> From: Robert Fernandez
> Date: Sun, Apr 15, 2018 9:17 AM
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List;
> Cc:
> Subject:Re: [Wikimedia-l] The fact-checked encyclopedia
>
> Considering the barriers to entry, growing thicket of policies,
> organized group harassment, and open hostility on the English
> Wikipedia, I'm not sure we can even call it "the encyclopedia anyone
> can edit" anymore.  So I'd say fact-checked is a more accurate and
> relevant claim these days.
>
> On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 8:53 AM, Anthony Cole  wrote:
> > I just googled “wikipedia” and the first result was a Google ad linking
> to
> > wikipedia.org.[1] It calls Wikipedia the fact-checked encyclopedia. We
> used
> > to call it the encyclopedia anyone can edit. The latter seems more honest
> > than this new formulation which to me implies a degree of reliability and
> > oversight I'm not sure we can ethically assert. I missed the discussion
> > about this new self-description. Did it happen on meta? Is anyone else
> > uncomfortabe with this?
> > --
> > Anthony Cole
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Craig Franklin passed away

[Nurunnaby Hasive]

Sad to know.

Hasive

On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 3:38 AM, Shlomi Fish  wrote:

> On Mon, 16 Apr 2018 10:56:43 -0700
> Lodewijk  wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Through various other channels I learned the unfortunate news that Craig
> > Franklin (Lankiveil) has recently passed away. He was a board member
> > (2011-2015) and president (2013) at Wikimedia Australia, longtime English
> > Wikipedian and admin, and until this month he was member of the Ombudsman
> > Commission.
> >
> > Craig was a lively participant in many of our meetings/conferences, and
> it
> > was always a joy to see him enter a discussion.
> >
> > Condoleances are being collected on his user talk page:
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Lankiveil
> >
>
> sorry to hear that,
>
> -- Shlomi
>
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Lodewijk
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to:
> > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe:
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>



-- 
*Nurunnaby Chowdhury (Hasive) **:: **নুরুন্নবী চৌধুরী (হাছিব)*
User: Hasive  |
GSM/WhatsApp/Viber: +8801712754752
​
Administrator | Bengali Wikipedia 
Board Member | Wikimedia Bangladesh 
fb.com/Hasive  | @nhasive
 | www.nhasive.com
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Amazon Echo' use of Wikipedia; CC license compliance?

[Anthony Cole]

This is off-topic (I presume) but the idea of the WMF increasing its
dependence on large corporate donors is beginning to trouble me. I want the
WMF to answer to our readers and volunteers not Bezos, Brin and Zuckerberg.

I say I presume this is off-topic because I presume the WMF isn’t, even
subconsciously, soft-peddling our share-alike right and right to effective
attribution from these re-users in exchange for dollars from these re-users.

On Wed, 18 Apr 2018 at 5:58 pm, James Heilman  wrote:

> Agree with Gerard. We WANT Youtube, Facebook, and others to use our
> content. That is one reason why we have released it under an open license
> and I believe one reason why we have been so successful. We of course also
> want them to provide appropriate attribution. I think this would be better
> achieved by reaching out and discussing it with these groups directly
> rather than initially by legal means. In my experience most reputable
> organizations are happy to attribute when asked.
>
> With respect to intermediation and them providing financial or direct
> technical support Google, Apple, and Microsoft are listed here as major
> beneficiaries as is the Brin Wojcicki Foundation
> https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Benefactors Would the WMF be happy
> with greater support? Yes I imagine so.
>
> James
>
> Please note that this is written in a personal capacity and does not
> represent an official position of anyone but myself.
>
> On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 7:41 AM, Gerard Meijssen <
> gerard.meijs...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hoi,
> > Maybe you know, but Katherine Mayer gave a talk at the CC conference The
> > subject was big companies using our content (it is not just writing) and
> > making a profit giving nothing / not much in return. The issue she raised
> > is that it may interfere with our collaboration model. People will
> > associate our content with the company that profits in this way and not
> > contribute their knowledge their expertise with us.
> >
> > So no word from the WMF, far from it. When you want the WMF to sue..
> There
> > is wonder if the effect it will have is really what we want. For me it is
> > first and foremost that people are properly informed and I prefer a
> YouTube
> > a Facebook to use our data over them not to do so over license issues.
> > Remember the days when Wikipedia was young; it was a wide held belief.
> > Thanks,
> >GerardM
> >
> > On 16 April 2018 at 01:53, Anthony Cole  wrote:
> >
> > > Is someone from WMF monitoring wikimedia-l and notifying relevant
> > employees
> > > when an issue arises under their remit? This issue - big companies
> using
> > > our writing without attribution and like-licensing - has been hanging
> > with
> > > no word from the WMF for six months.
> > >
> > > Anthony Cole
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 6:22 PM, Anthony Cole 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I see this from Brian Heater at Tech Crunch on 25 March:
> > > >
> > > > "In a conversation earlier this week, Wikimedia’s Chief Revenue
> Office,
> > > > Lisa Gruwell told TechCrunch that this sort of usage doesn’t
> constitute
> > > any
> > > > sort of formal relationship. Most companies more or less hook into an
> > API
> > > > to utilize that breadth of knowledge. It’s handy for sure, and *it’s
> > all
> > > > well within Wikimedia’s fair use rules*, but as with Maher’s letter,
> > the
> > > > CRO expressed some concerns about seemingly one-sided relationships
> ...
> > > *Smart
> > > > assistants are certainly playing by the applicable rules when it
> comes
> > to
> > > > leveraging that information base.*"[1]
> > > >
> > > > That article I link to has both Katherine (WMF ED) and Lisa (Chief
> > > Revenue
> > > > Officer) asking the companies who use our work for free to "give
> > back." I
> > > > want them to give back too, but I don't absolve them of their
> > obligation
> > > to
> > > > meaningfully attribute my work and share it with the same rights
> > > attached.
> > > > If it is the opinion of the WMF that these smart assistants are not
> > > > breaching my rights, I'd like to see the legal advice that opinion is
> > > based
> > > > on.
> > > >
> > > > 1.https://techcrunch.com/2018/03/24/are-corporations-that-
> > > > use-wikipedia-giving-back/
> > > >
> > > > Anthony Cole
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 5:47 PM, WereSpielChequers <
> > > > werespielchequ...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Yes of course the WMF can contact those who are detected reusing our
> > > >> content without fully complying with licenses and encourage them to
> > > >> comply.
> > > >>
> > > >> If a case were to go to court it would need to have one or more
> > > >> contributors who were willing to cooperate with WMF legal in the
> case.
> > > But
> > > >> I doubt there would be a shortage of contributors who were keen to
> do
> > > so.
> > > >>
> > > >> As for why the WMF should do so, here are three reasons:
> > > 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikitech-l] Was macht dich diese Woche glücklich? / What's making you happy this week? (Week of 15 April 2018)

[Stephan Gambke via Wikimedia-l]

> What's making you happy this week? You are welcome to comment in any
> language

I have not always been happy in the past with the handling of deprecations, but 
I really appreciate on how it is done for the PHPUnit upgrade (incl. provision 
of compat layer and clear instructions on what to do).
So here's a big thanks to legoktm and everybody involved.

Stephan

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Amazon Echo' use of Wikipedia; CC license compliance?

[geni]

On 16 April 2018 at 06:23, Rob Speer  wrote:
> Right, this worries me too.
>
> I know that Wikimedia doesn't enforce the copyright on the content
> themselves, because they don't hold the relevant copyrights, the authors
> do. But there seems to be no guidance for what _anyone_ can do to address
> and correct large-scale violations.


Because is you know enough about copyright law to be able to do
anything you can already answer that question.

So here goes:

*1 be reasonably wealthy or otherwise have access to significant
amounts of money for legal costs

*2 Be American. While you can sue for copyright infringement from
overseas it greatly complicates matter

*3 Be prepared to use your real name.

*4 Make sure you have registered your work with the U.S. Copyright
Office. Not strictly required but it makes things more straightforward
and allows you to go for statutory damages

*5 Chose a case where you are pretty much the sole author of the
article or image in question.

Got all those ducks in a row? The good news is that most smaller
companies will settle at the first threatening letter although you may
suffer a certain amount of reputational damage from suing small
businesses. If a small company decides to fight and its a fairly
straightforward case you are looking at costs of over $100K. More
complicated case against a big company? Millions.

-- 
geni

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Amazon Echo' use of Wikipedia; CC license compliance?

[James Salsman]

Anthony, it is not off topic at all, and some of the related Annual
Plan effects are very troubling in their present manifestation.

Please see: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Topic:Ubi1v8gwsq09bzjp


On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 6:23 AM, Anthony Cole  wrote:
> This is off-topic (I presume) but the idea of the WMF increasing its
> dependence on large corporate donors is beginning to trouble me. I want the
> WMF to answer to our readers and volunteers not Bezos, Brin and Zuckerberg.
>
> I say I presume this is off-topic because I presume the WMF isn’t, even
> subconsciously, soft-peddling our share-alike right and right to effective
> attribution from these re-users in exchange for dollars from these re-users.
>
> On Wed, 18 Apr 2018 at 5:58 pm, James Heilman  wrote:
>
>> Agree with Gerard. We WANT Youtube, Facebook, and others to use our
>> content. That is one reason why we have released it under an open license
>> and I believe one reason why we have been so successful. We of course also
>> want them to provide appropriate attribution. I think this would be better
>> achieved by reaching out and discussing it with these groups directly
>> rather than initially by legal means. In my experience most reputable
>> organizations are happy to attribute when asked.
>>
>> With respect to intermediation and them providing financial or direct
>> technical support Google, Apple, and Microsoft are listed here as major
>> beneficiaries as is the Brin Wojcicki Foundation
>> https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Benefactors Would the WMF be happy
>> with greater support? Yes I imagine so.
>>
>> James
>>
>> Please note that this is written in a personal capacity and does not
>> represent an official position of anyone but myself.
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 7:41 AM, Gerard Meijssen <
>> gerard.meijs...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Hoi,
>> > Maybe you know, but Katherine Mayer gave a talk at the CC conference The
>> > subject was big companies using our content (it is not just writing) and
>> > making a profit giving nothing / not much in return. The issue she raised
>> > is that it may interfere with our collaboration model. People will
>> > associate our content with the company that profits in this way and not
>> > contribute their knowledge their expertise with us.
>> >
>> > So no word from the WMF, far from it. When you want the WMF to sue..
>> There
>> > is wonder if the effect it will have is really what we want. For me it is
>> > first and foremost that people are properly informed and I prefer a
>> YouTube
>> > a Facebook to use our data over them not to do so over license issues.
>> > Remember the days when Wikipedia was young; it was a wide held belief.
>> > Thanks,
>> >GerardM
>> >
>> > On 16 April 2018 at 01:53, Anthony Cole  wrote:
>> >
>> > > Is someone from WMF monitoring wikimedia-l and notifying relevant
>> > employees
>> > > when an issue arises under their remit? This issue - big companies
>> using
>> > > our writing without attribution and like-licensing - has been hanging
>> > with
>> > > no word from the WMF for six months.
>> > >
>> > > Anthony Cole
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 6:22 PM, Anthony Cole 
>> > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > I see this from Brian Heater at Tech Crunch on 25 March:
>> > > >
>> > > > "In a conversation earlier this week, Wikimedia’s Chief Revenue
>> Office,
>> > > > Lisa Gruwell told TechCrunch that this sort of usage doesn’t
>> constitute
>> > > any
>> > > > sort of formal relationship. Most companies more or less hook into an
>> > API
>> > > > to utilize that breadth of knowledge. It’s handy for sure, and *it’s
>> > all
>> > > > well within Wikimedia’s fair use rules*, but as with Maher’s letter,
>> > the
>> > > > CRO expressed some concerns about seemingly one-sided relationships
>> ...
>> > > *Smart
>> > > > assistants are certainly playing by the applicable rules when it
>> comes
>> > to
>> > > > leveraging that information base.*"[1]
>> > > >
>> > > > That article I link to has both Katherine (WMF ED) and Lisa (Chief
>> > > Revenue
>> > > > Officer) asking the companies who use our work for free to "give
>> > back." I
>> > > > want them to give back too, but I don't absolve them of their
>> > obligation
>> > > to
>> > > > meaningfully attribute my work and share it with the same rights
>> > > attached.
>> > > > If it is the opinion of the WMF that these smart assistants are not
>> > > > breaching my rights, I'd like to see the legal advice that opinion is
>> > > based
>> > > > on.
>> > > >
>> > > > 1.https://techcrunch.com/2018/03/24/are-corporations-that-
>> > > > use-wikipedia-giving-back/
>> > > >
>> > > > Anthony Cole
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 5:47 PM, WereSpielChequers <
>> > > > werespielchequ...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > >> Yes of course the WMF can contact those who are detected reusing our
>> > > >> content without fully complying 

[Wikimedia-l] Craig Franklin (User:Lankiveil) passed away

[Isaac Olatunde]

Dear all,

It's with deep sadness to announce the death of our friend and a dedicated
member of the Wikimedia community, Craig Franklin. I got this news on the
wall of his wife, Leanne Maree Franklin.

Franklin served as treasurer of Wikimedia Australia and as member of the
ombudsman commission.

We will forever missed him.

Regards,

Isaac.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lankiveil
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Craig Franklin passed away

[phoebe ayers]

On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 1:56 PM, Lodewijk 
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Through various other channels I learned the unfortunate news that Craig
> Franklin (Lankiveil) has recently passed away.
>

What! that is terrible. I fondly remember talking (& sometimes having
friendly arguments) with Craig at various Wikimedia conferences and events
over the years, and seeing him around the English Wikipedia as an editor &
admin since way back (2004). A loss for his family and friends, and for our
movement.

Thanks for passing on the news, & my condolences to all of his friends.
- Phoebe
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

[Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy Update #3: WMCON and Core Team news

[Katherine Maher]

Dear all,

Greetings from Berlin! This is another update on the movement strategy
process, this week coming from Wikimedia Conference. I’ve already had the
chance to see so many old friends, and am looking forward to meeting with
many more of you in person. The movement strategy track of the conference
is an important milestone in the strategy process overall -- it provides an
excellent opportunity to engage diverse voices from affiliates representing
many of our communities from around the world.

During the strategy track we will look at the possibilities for envisioning
our future against the strategic direction, and challenges we may face in
making progress. We will discuss our ways forward, with the goal of forming
a more concrete 3-5 year perspective, getting us further toward 2030.
During these discussions we will map out thematic areas that need our
attention, and where we need to take action and make changes, if we are to
fully address our challenges and seize our opportunities.

At the same time, we know that only a fraction of our diverse global
movement will be present at the Wikimedia Conference. Therefore, the
conference is only a starting point. The process following the conference
will be designed to include different perspectives and voices, and we hope
that you feel encouraged to participate in ongoing discussions on wiki, at
Wikimania, and at regional or thematic events.

As I mentioned in my last email, all these discussions will be supported by
the Core Strategy Team. As I also mentioned, we’ve made some progress in
building that team! I am happy to announce that we have filled some of the
important roles:

*Strategy Process Architect *- Responsible for framing, designing and
maintaining the process in consultation with the international Wikimedia
community. *I’m thrilled to announce that Kaarel Vaidla, former Executive
Director of Wikimedia Eesti, has agreed to fill this role.* Kaarel has been
involved with our movement in various ways over the years, and has proven
his strategic abilities through his contributions to Phase 1 in various
volunteer roles.

*Strategy Process Support Lead* - An external partner to the Process Lead
and Process Architect. This person will participate in process design and
will help us find experience from outside Wikimedia when needed. *I’m
delighted to announce that Bhavesh Patel has agreed to fill this role. *Bhav
is a “conversational architect” who works with many different movement
organizations around the globe. You may know Bhav his outstanding
facilitation at WMCON 2017 and Wikimania Montreal. We’re fortunate to have
him back with us.

We have also appointed a *Project Assistant*, *Anne Kierkegaard*, to help
the core team to manage the administrative side of the process. Anne
currently works with WMDE and will be supporting Nicole directly in her
capacity as process lead. We've also recruited our *Thought and Process
Facilitator*, *Anna Lena Schiller*. Anna Lena will support the Process Lead
in shaping a high-performing team and be responsible for designing and
supporting facilitation at meetings and events throughout the strategy
process. Many of you may know Anna Lena as one of the wonderful
facilitators of WMCON between 2011 and 2016. *I am so happy both Anne and
Anna Lena have agreed to join the team!*

I would also like to remind you that there is still an open call for
applications for the positions of the *Information & Knowledge Manager* and
the *Project Manager* in the strategy team. We’re getting great
applications, and I continue to encourage people from across the movement
to apply!

I look forward to seeing many of you at the Wikimedia Conference -- and
many more of you in meetings and events to come. Thank you for your ongoing
engagement in the strategy process!

Tschüssi,
Katherine

-- 
Katherine Maher

Executive Director
Wikimedia Foundation

1 Montgomery Street, Suite 1600
San Francisco, CA 94104

+1 (415) 839-6885 ext. 6635
+1 (415) 712 4873
kma...@wikimedia.org
https://annual.wikimedia.org
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Craig Franklin passed away

[kayode yussuf via Wikimedia-l]

May Craig's soul rest in peace.
Kayode Yussuf 

On Wednesday, April 18, 2018, 4:50:16 PM GMT+1, phoebe ayers 
 wrote:  
 
 On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 1:56 PM, Lodewijk 
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Through various other channels I learned the unfortunate news that Craig
> Franklin (Lankiveil) has recently passed away.
>

What! that is terrible. I fondly remember talking (& sometimes having
friendly arguments) with Craig at various Wikimedia conferences and events
over the years, and seeing him around the English Wikipedia as an editor &
admin since way back (2004). A loss for his family and friends, and for our
movement.

Thanks for passing on the news, & my condolences to all of his friends.
- Phoebe
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
  
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Amazon Echo' use of Wikipedia; CC license compliance?

[Rob Speer]

Right, this worries me too.

I know that Wikimedia doesn't enforce the copyright on the content
themselves, because they don't hold the relevant copyrights, the authors
do. But there seems to be no guidance for what _anyone_ can do to address
and correct large-scale violations. The guides on Wikipedia meta-pages are
about "here's what to do if someone copies content without following the
license", but not "here's what to do if someone copies _all_ the content
without following the license". Asking for takedowns of particular pages
that I was directly involved in, one at a time, would be silly and less
than effective.

Here I'm thinking of things more brazen than the Google Knowledge Graph --
projects that combine multiple CC-By-SA resources together, claim ownership
over the content, and sell it.

I'm not asking Wikimedia to do all the work. But I'd at least like to hear
what has worked and what hasn't worked in enforcing copyright on Wikimedia
projects. If the answer is "nothing works", that doesn't bode well for
Creative Commons data.

On Sun, 15 Apr 2018 at 19:53 Anthony Cole  wrote:

> Is someone from WMF monitoring wikimedia-l and notifying relevant employees
> when an issue arises under their remit? This issue - big companies using
> our writing without attribution and like-licensing - has been hanging with
> no word from the WMF for six months.
>
> Anthony Cole
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 6:22 PM, Anthony Cole  wrote:
>
> > I see this from Brian Heater at Tech Crunch on 25 March:
> >
> > "In a conversation earlier this week, Wikimedia’s Chief Revenue Office,
> > Lisa Gruwell told TechCrunch that this sort of usage doesn’t constitute
> any
> > sort of formal relationship. Most companies more or less hook into an API
> > to utilize that breadth of knowledge. It’s handy for sure, and *it’s all
> > well within Wikimedia’s fair use rules*, but as with Maher’s letter, the
> > CRO expressed some concerns about seemingly one-sided relationships ...
> *Smart
> > assistants are certainly playing by the applicable rules when it comes to
> > leveraging that information base.*"[1]
> >
> > That article I link to has both Katherine (WMF ED) and Lisa (Chief
> Revenue
> > Officer) asking the companies who use our work for free to "give back." I
> > want them to give back too, but I don't absolve them of their obligation
> to
> > meaningfully attribute my work and share it with the same rights
> attached.
> > If it is the opinion of the WMF that these smart assistants are not
> > breaching my rights, I'd like to see the legal advice that opinion is
> based
> > on.
> >
> > 1.https://techcrunch.com/2018/03/24/are-corporations-that-
> > use-wikipedia-giving-back/
> >
> > Anthony Cole
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 5:47 PM, WereSpielChequers <
> > werespielchequ...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Yes of course the WMF can contact those who are detected reusing our
> >> content without fully complying with licenses and encourage them to
> >> comply.
> >>
> >> If a case were to go to court it would need to have one or more
> >> contributors who were willing to cooperate with WMF legal in the case.
> But
> >> I doubt there would be a shortage of contributors who were keen to do
> so.
> >>
> >> As for why the WMF should do so, here are three reasons:
> >>
> >> Each of our wikis is a crowd sourced project. Crowd sourcing requires a
> >> crowd, if a crowd settles down and stabilises it becomes a community.
> The
> >> community is broadly stable, but we need a steady flow of new
> wikimedians,
> >> and our only really effective way of recruiting new Wikimedians is for
> >> them
> >> to see the edit button on our sites. An increasing shift to our content
> >> being used without attribution is an existential threat to the project
> and
> >> hence to the WMF.
> >>
> >> Our communities are made up of volunteers with diverse motivations. For
> >> some of us the BY-SA part of the licensing is important, personally I
> feel
> >> good when i see one of my photos used by someone else but attributed to
> >> me.
> >> If the de facto policy of the WMF was to treat volunteer contributions
> as
> >> effectively CC0 this would be demotivating for some members of our
> >> community. I'm also active on another site where every member regularly
> >> gets stats on their readership, something I very much doubt would happen
> >> if
> >> it wasn't an effective mechanism to encourage continued participation.
> >>
> >> Every organisation needs money, the WMF gets most of its money by asking
> >> for it on wikipedia and other sites. Again, encouraging attribution back
> >> to
> >> Wikipedia etc tackles the existential threat of other sites treating
> >> wikipedia et al as CC0.
> >>
> >>
> >> WSC
> >>
> >> On 5 April 2018 at 08:04, 
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Hi,
> >> >
> >> > On 04/04/2018 08:36 PM, Anthony Cole wrote:
> >> > > I'm curious also. 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Research Showcase April 18, 2018 (11:30 AM PDT| 18:30 UTC)

[Sarah R]

Hi Everyone,

Just a reminder that the Research Showcase will begin in a half hour!

Kindly,

Sarah R.



On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 7:30 PM, Sarah R  wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> A quick correction.* "*The Critical Relationship of Volunteer Created
> Wikipedia Content to Large-Scale Online Communities" will be presented by 
> *Nicholas
> Vincent.*
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Sarah R.
>
> On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 6:47 PM, Sarah R  wrote:
>
>> Hi Everyone,
>>
>> The next Research Showcase will be live-streamed this Wednesday, April
>> 18, 2018 at 11:30 AM (PDT) 18:30 UTC.
>>
>> YouTube stream: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z1pa-pr6xis
>>
>> As usual, you can join the conversation on IRC at #wikimedia-research.
>> And, you can watch our past research showcases here.
>> 
>>
>> The Critical Relationship of Volunteer Created Wikipedia Content to
>> Large-Scale Online CommunitiesBy *Nate TeBlunthuis*The extensive
>> Wikipedia literature has largely considered Wikipedia in isolation, outside
>> of the context of its broader Internet ecosystem. Very recent research has
>> demonstrated the significance of this limitation, identifying critical
>> relationships between Google and Wikipedia that are highly relevant to many
>> areas of Wikipedia-based research and practice. In this talk, I will
>> present a study which extends this recent research beyond search engines to
>> examine Wikipedia’s relationships with large-scale online communities,
>> Stack Overflow and Reddit in particular. I will discuss evidence of
>> consequential, albeit unidirectional relationships. Wikipedia provides
>> substantial value to both communities, with Wikipedia content increasing
>> visitation, engagement, and revenue, but we find little evidence that these
>> websites contribute to Wikipedia in return. Overall, these findings
>> highlight important connections between Wikipedia and its broader ecosystem
>> that should be considered by researchers studying Wikipedia. Overall, this
>> talk will emphasize the key role that volunteer-created Wikipedia content
>> plays in improving other websites, even contributing to revenue generation.
>>
>>
>> The Rise and Decline of an Open Collaboration System, a Closer LookBy *Nate
>> TeBlunthuis*Do patterns of growth and stabilization found in large peer
>> production systems such as Wikipedia occur in other communities? This study
>> assesses the generalizability of Halfaker etal.’s influential 2013 paper on
>> “The Rise and Decline of an Open Collaboration System.” We replicate its
>> tests of several theories related to newcomer retention and norm
>> entrenchment using a dataset of hundreds of active peer production wikis
>> from Wikia. We reproduce the subset of the findings from Halfaker and
>> colleagues that we are able to test, comparing both the estimated signs and
>> magnitudes of our models. Our results support the external validity of
>> Halfaker et al.’s claims that quality control systems may limit the growth
>> of peer production communities by deterring new contributors and that norms
>> tend to become entrenched over time.
>>
>> Kindest regards,
>>
>> Sarah R. Rodlund
>> Senior Project Coordinator-Product & Technology, Wikimedia Foundation |
>> Hic sunt leones
>> srodl...@wikimedia.org
>>
>>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Amazon Echo' use of Wikipedia; CC license compliance?

[James Heilman]

Agree with Gerard. We WANT Youtube, Facebook, and others to use our
content. That is one reason why we have released it under an open license
and I believe one reason why we have been so successful. We of course also
want them to provide appropriate attribution. I think this would be better
achieved by reaching out and discussing it with these groups directly
rather than initially by legal means. In my experience most reputable
organizations are happy to attribute when asked.

With respect to intermediation and them providing financial or direct
technical support Google, Apple, and Microsoft are listed here as major
beneficiaries as is the Brin Wojcicki Foundation
https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Benefactors Would the WMF be happy
with greater support? Yes I imagine so.

James

Please note that this is written in a personal capacity and does not
represent an official position of anyone but myself.

On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 7:41 AM, Gerard Meijssen 
wrote:

> Hoi,
> Maybe you know, but Katherine Mayer gave a talk at the CC conference The
> subject was big companies using our content (it is not just writing) and
> making a profit giving nothing / not much in return. The issue she raised
> is that it may interfere with our collaboration model. People will
> associate our content with the company that profits in this way and not
> contribute their knowledge their expertise with us.
>
> So no word from the WMF, far from it. When you want the WMF to sue.. There
> is wonder if the effect it will have is really what we want. For me it is
> first and foremost that people are properly informed and I prefer a YouTube
> a Facebook to use our data over them not to do so over license issues.
> Remember the days when Wikipedia was young; it was a wide held belief.
> Thanks,
>GerardM
>
> On 16 April 2018 at 01:53, Anthony Cole  wrote:
>
> > Is someone from WMF monitoring wikimedia-l and notifying relevant
> employees
> > when an issue arises under their remit? This issue - big companies using
> > our writing without attribution and like-licensing - has been hanging
> with
> > no word from the WMF for six months.
> >
> > Anthony Cole
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 6:22 PM, Anthony Cole 
> wrote:
> >
> > > I see this from Brian Heater at Tech Crunch on 25 March:
> > >
> > > "In a conversation earlier this week, Wikimedia’s Chief Revenue Office,
> > > Lisa Gruwell told TechCrunch that this sort of usage doesn’t constitute
> > any
> > > sort of formal relationship. Most companies more or less hook into an
> API
> > > to utilize that breadth of knowledge. It’s handy for sure, and *it’s
> all
> > > well within Wikimedia’s fair use rules*, but as with Maher’s letter,
> the
> > > CRO expressed some concerns about seemingly one-sided relationships ...
> > *Smart
> > > assistants are certainly playing by the applicable rules when it comes
> to
> > > leveraging that information base.*"[1]
> > >
> > > That article I link to has both Katherine (WMF ED) and Lisa (Chief
> > Revenue
> > > Officer) asking the companies who use our work for free to "give
> back." I
> > > want them to give back too, but I don't absolve them of their
> obligation
> > to
> > > meaningfully attribute my work and share it with the same rights
> > attached.
> > > If it is the opinion of the WMF that these smart assistants are not
> > > breaching my rights, I'd like to see the legal advice that opinion is
> > based
> > > on.
> > >
> > > 1.https://techcrunch.com/2018/03/24/are-corporations-that-
> > > use-wikipedia-giving-back/
> > >
> > > Anthony Cole
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 5:47 PM, WereSpielChequers <
> > > werespielchequ...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Yes of course the WMF can contact those who are detected reusing our
> > >> content without fully complying with licenses and encourage them to
> > >> comply.
> > >>
> > >> If a case were to go to court it would need to have one or more
> > >> contributors who were willing to cooperate with WMF legal in the case.
> > But
> > >> I doubt there would be a shortage of contributors who were keen to do
> > so.
> > >>
> > >> As for why the WMF should do so, here are three reasons:
> > >>
> > >> Each of our wikis is a crowd sourced project. Crowd sourcing requires
> a
> > >> crowd, if a crowd settles down and stabilises it becomes a community.
> > The
> > >> community is broadly stable, but we need a steady flow of new
> > wikimedians,
> > >> and our only really effective way of recruiting new Wikimedians is for
> > >> them
> > >> to see the edit button on our sites. An increasing shift to our
> content
> > >> being used without attribution is an existential threat to the project
> > and
> > >> hence to the WMF.
> > >>
> > >> Our communities are made up of volunteers with diverse motivations.
> For
> > >> some of us the BY-SA part of the licensing is important, personally I
> > feel
> > >> good when i see one of my 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The fact-checked encyclopedia

[Paulo Santos Perneta]

Indeed. It's a very noticeable problem at the Wikipedia in Portuguese.
During a workshop with librarians from the National Library last month, I
was kind of shocked by the huge amount of semi-automated warnings they were
receiving, some of them completely useless, as they were directed to
code-editing rather than the Visual Editor they were using. The librarians
were also puzzled by the apparently pointless aggressivity and hostility
coming from the environment they were trying to join.

On the other hand, content is now much more reliable than it used to be -
there is even a movement at our local wikipedia which is working to
completely eradicate unsourced articles from there. Even more, we kind of
justify that hostility against newbies with the notion that the project is
being actively protected and surveilled against vandalism and fake claims.

So yes, I concur that "fact-checked encyclopedia" is more appropriated
today than "the encyclopedia anyone can edit" - at pt.wiki as well.

Paulo


2018-04-15 15:21 GMT+01:00 Leigh Thelmadatter :

> Not just English Wikipedia. All of the projects are hostile to "outsiders"
> Those not in English might even be worse for several reasons
>
> Enviado desde mi LG de Telcel
>
> -- Original message--
> From: Robert Fernandez
> Date: Sun, Apr 15, 2018 9:17 AM
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List;
> Cc:
> Subject:Re: [Wikimedia-l] The fact-checked encyclopedia
>
> Considering the barriers to entry, growing thicket of policies,
> organized group harassment, and open hostility on the English
> Wikipedia, I'm not sure we can even call it "the encyclopedia anyone
> can edit" anymore.  So I'd say fact-checked is a more accurate and
> relevant claim these days.
>
> On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 8:53 AM, Anthony Cole  wrote:
> > I just googled “wikipedia” and the first result was a Google ad linking
> to
> > wikipedia.org.[1] It calls Wikipedia the fact-checked encyclopedia. We
> used
> > to call it the encyclopedia anyone can edit. The latter seems more honest
> > than this new formulation which to me implies a degree of reliability and
> > oversight I'm not sure we can ethically assert. I missed the discussion
> > about this new self-description. Did it happen on meta? Is anyone else
> > uncomfortabe with this?
> > --
> > Anthony Cole
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Amazon Echo' use of Wikipedia; CC license compliance?

[Gerard Meijssen]

Hoi,
Maybe you know, but Katherine Mayer gave a talk at the CC conference The
subject was big companies using our content (it is not just writing) and
making a profit giving nothing / not much in return. The issue she raised
is that it may interfere with our collaboration model. People will
associate our content with the company that profits in this way and not
contribute their knowledge their expertise with us.

So no word from the WMF, far from it. When you want the WMF to sue.. There
is wonder if the effect it will have is really what we want. For me it is
first and foremost that people are properly informed and I prefer a YouTube
a Facebook to use our data over them not to do so over license issues.
Remember the days when Wikipedia was young; it was a wide held belief.
Thanks,
   GerardM

On 16 April 2018 at 01:53, Anthony Cole  wrote:

> Is someone from WMF monitoring wikimedia-l and notifying relevant employees
> when an issue arises under their remit? This issue - big companies using
> our writing without attribution and like-licensing - has been hanging with
> no word from the WMF for six months.
>
> Anthony Cole
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 6:22 PM, Anthony Cole  wrote:
>
> > I see this from Brian Heater at Tech Crunch on 25 March:
> >
> > "In a conversation earlier this week, Wikimedia’s Chief Revenue Office,
> > Lisa Gruwell told TechCrunch that this sort of usage doesn’t constitute
> any
> > sort of formal relationship. Most companies more or less hook into an API
> > to utilize that breadth of knowledge. It’s handy for sure, and *it’s all
> > well within Wikimedia’s fair use rules*, but as with Maher’s letter, the
> > CRO expressed some concerns about seemingly one-sided relationships ...
> *Smart
> > assistants are certainly playing by the applicable rules when it comes to
> > leveraging that information base.*"[1]
> >
> > That article I link to has both Katherine (WMF ED) and Lisa (Chief
> Revenue
> > Officer) asking the companies who use our work for free to "give back." I
> > want them to give back too, but I don't absolve them of their obligation
> to
> > meaningfully attribute my work and share it with the same rights
> attached.
> > If it is the opinion of the WMF that these smart assistants are not
> > breaching my rights, I'd like to see the legal advice that opinion is
> based
> > on.
> >
> > 1.https://techcrunch.com/2018/03/24/are-corporations-that-
> > use-wikipedia-giving-back/
> >
> > Anthony Cole
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 5:47 PM, WereSpielChequers <
> > werespielchequ...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Yes of course the WMF can contact those who are detected reusing our
> >> content without fully complying with licenses and encourage them to
> >> comply.
> >>
> >> If a case were to go to court it would need to have one or more
> >> contributors who were willing to cooperate with WMF legal in the case.
> But
> >> I doubt there would be a shortage of contributors who were keen to do
> so.
> >>
> >> As for why the WMF should do so, here are three reasons:
> >>
> >> Each of our wikis is a crowd sourced project. Crowd sourcing requires a
> >> crowd, if a crowd settles down and stabilises it becomes a community.
> The
> >> community is broadly stable, but we need a steady flow of new
> wikimedians,
> >> and our only really effective way of recruiting new Wikimedians is for
> >> them
> >> to see the edit button on our sites. An increasing shift to our content
> >> being used without attribution is an existential threat to the project
> and
> >> hence to the WMF.
> >>
> >> Our communities are made up of volunteers with diverse motivations. For
> >> some of us the BY-SA part of the licensing is important, personally I
> feel
> >> good when i see one of my photos used by someone else but attributed to
> >> me.
> >> If the de facto policy of the WMF was to treat volunteer contributions
> as
> >> effectively CC0 this would be demotivating for some members of our
> >> community. I'm also active on another site where every member regularly
> >> gets stats on their readership, something I very much doubt would happen
> >> if
> >> it wasn't an effective mechanism to encourage continued participation.
> >>
> >> Every organisation needs money, the WMF gets most of its money by asking
> >> for it on wikipedia and other sites. Again, encouraging attribution back
> >> to
> >> Wikipedia etc tackles the existential threat of other sites treating
> >> wikipedia et al as CC0.
> >>
> >>
> >> WSC
> >>
> >> On 5 April 2018 at 08:04, 
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Hi,
> >> >
> >> > On 04/04/2018 08:36 PM, Anthony Cole wrote:
> >> > > I'm curious also. I release my articles under "attribution, share
> >> alike"
> >> > > and rely on WMF to preserve those rights.
> >> >
> >> > Why are you relying on the WMF? Wikipedia contributors (like yourself)
> >> > are the ones who own copyright to the