Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Massive Online Open Course about Wikipedia

[Ziko van Dijk]

Hello,

Congratulations for this project! I have looked at some figures, and
some videos, and it looks very impressive. I'm gonna have a closer
look in the nearby future.
It would be great to have something like that in other languages.
Kind regards
Ziko




2016-04-05 19:25 GMT+02:00 Brill Lyle :
> Ah. Interesting. Apologies, I didn't know the two Education programs were
> different. Thanks for explaining this.
>
> It's all very interesting. Thank you so much for sharing!
>
> - Erika
>
>
> *Erika Herzog*
> Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle* 
>
> On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 12:16 PM, Shani  wrote:
>
>> Hi, Erika.
>>
>> I was referring to the Wikipedia Education Program (the global one), and
>> specifically the Collab, a group of WikiEDU leaders from around the world,
>> *not* the Wiki Education Foundation (which is basically the US education
>> program). It's very confusing, I know! :)
>>
>> In any case, our efforts focus exactly on what you've described -- we've
>> noticed that different parties seem to work on the same thing and are doing
>> what we can to create global awareness and open up a dialogue about it, so
>> we can learn from each other's efforts, as well as come up with a
>>  successful "recipe" for those who want to start one.
>>
>> Best,
>> Shani.
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 6:48 PM, Brill Lyle  wrote:
>>
>> > I am curious about the overlap -- if any -- between the WikiMOOC
>> > initiatives and WikiEdu. It seems like these are inter-related
>> initiatives
>> > that duplicate efforts to some degree? I understand WikiEdu is focused on
>> > North America, so maybe that answers the question, but it sounds very
>> > frustrating that these efforts are not more connected somehow. The
>> WikiEdu
>> > Dashboard is very cool!
>> >
>> > I am also wondering about user metrics, and how they were measured.
>> > Apologies, I clicked through many of the original links but didn't see
>> that
>> > information quickly / easily.
>> >
>> > Best,
>> >
>> > Erika
>> >
>> > *Erika Herzog*
>> > Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle* > >
>> > Secretary, Wikimedia NYC
>> > 
>> >
>>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> 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
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: Fwd: Hello Mr. ccc, Now you can have your own Wikipedia page

[Keegan Peterzell]

On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 3:15 PM, Cristian Consonni 
wrote:

> 2016-04-06 22:06 GMT+02:00 Florence Devouard :
> > A relationship of mine received the email below and forwarded it to me.
> > http://yourprmanager.com/
>
> This is appalling.


​Heh.  and the testimonials page.

Browsing around, the entire site looks like corporate catfishing [0].

0. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catfishing​
​


-- 
~Keegan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Keegan

This is my personal email address. Everything sent from this email address
is in a personal capacity.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: Fwd: Hello Mr. ccc, Now you can have your own Wikipedia page

[Cristian Consonni]

2016-04-06 22:06 GMT+02:00 Florence Devouard :
> A relationship of mine received the email below and forwarded it to me.
> http://yourprmanager.com/

This is appalling.

C

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: Fwd: Hello Mr. ccc, Now you can have your own Wikipedia page

[Jane Darnell]

Oh dear, those pesky spam laws...

On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 10:06 PM, Florence Devouard 
wrote:

> A relationship of mine received the email below and forwarded it to me.
> http://yourprmanager.com/
>
> This company is known ?
>
> Flo
>
>
> =
>
> Début du message réexpédié :
>
> De: Britney Davis 
> Objet: Hello Mr. ccc, Now you can have your own Wikipedia page
> Date: 6 avril 2016 14:34:27 UTC+2
> À:
>
> Hello Mr. ccc,
>
> Wikipedia is the most trusted and preferred source of original content
> online. Therefore, it is not surprising why institutions, organizations and
> individuals opt for creating their Wikipedia page.
>
>
> To increase your popularity online, it is recommended to create a
> Wikipedia page about yourself or your company and for a new Wikipedia page
> to go up, there are certain eligibility criteria. That means not everyone
> is immediately a good candidate to feature on Wikipedia.
>
> Here are some benefits of having a Company or Personal Wikipedia Page:
>
> 1. Great exposure. Wikipedia is a heavily used web site, and having an
> article about your company means more exposure, more eyeballs, and so forth.
>
> 2. Reputation management. As I mentioned above, your Wikipedia article
> will probably rank on page one for your company name, and that helps with
> your online reputation management.
>
> 3. Increased trust. There’s no underestimating the need to earn trust,
> both from customers and search engines. A Wikipedia article can help with
> both, I believe.
>
>
>
> Get in touch with us to find out if you're eligible to feature on
> Wikipedia with our Complimentary Wikipedia Eligibility Assessment Service.
>
>
>
>
> Warm Regards
>
> Britney
> YourPRManager Team
> Email - brit...@yourprmanager.com
>
>
>
>
> Opt-out: If you have received this message in error, please notify us
> immediately and delete this message without reading, copying,or forwarding
> it to anyone. This email abides to the SPAM laws and is not intended to
> spam.The email has a business proposition intended to you. If you do not
> wish to receive further email from me, please let me know by typing "Not
> Interested" in the subject.
>
>
> Unsubscribe / Change Profile
> Powered by YMLP
>
>
> --
>
>
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> 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
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

[Wikimedia-l] Fwd: Fwd: Hello Mr. ccc, Now you can have your own Wikipedia page

[Florence Devouard]

A relationship of mine received the email below and forwarded it to me.
http://yourprmanager.com/

This company is known ?

Flo


=

Début du message réexpédié :

De: Britney Davis 
Objet: Hello Mr. ccc, Now you can have your own Wikipedia page
Date: 6 avril 2016 14:34:27 UTC+2
À:

Hello Mr. ccc,

Wikipedia is the most trusted and preferred source of original content 
online. Therefore, it is not surprising why institutions, organizations 
and individuals opt for creating their Wikipedia page.



To increase your popularity online, it is recommended to create a 
Wikipedia page about yourself or your company and for a new Wikipedia 
page to go up, there are certain eligibility criteria. That means not 
everyone is immediately a good candidate to feature on Wikipedia.


Here are some benefits of having a Company or Personal Wikipedia Page:

1. Great exposure. Wikipedia is a heavily used web site, and having an 
article about your company means more exposure, more eyeballs, and so forth.


2. Reputation management. As I mentioned above, your Wikipedia article 
will probably rank on page one for your company name, and that helps 
with your online reputation management.


3. Increased trust. There’s no underestimating the need to earn trust, 
both from customers and search engines. A Wikipedia article can help 
with both, I believe.




Get in touch with us to find out if you're eligible to feature on 
Wikipedia with our Complimentary Wikipedia Eligibility Assessment Service.





Warm Regards

Britney
YourPRManager Team
Email - brit...@yourprmanager.com




Opt-out: If you have received this message in error, please notify us 
immediately and delete this message without reading, copying,or 
forwarding it to anyone. This email abides to the SPAM laws and is not 
intended to spam.The email has a business proposition intended to you. 
If you do not wish to receive further email from me, please let me know 
by typing "Not Interested" in the subject.



Unsubscribe / Change Profile
Powered by YMLP


--




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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Sweden loses copyright suit

[Johan Jönsson]

2016-04-06 18:05 GMT+02:00 Castelo Branco :
>> The decision specifically and repeatedly states that the commercial
>> aspect is irrelevant, as such a database "typically has a not
>> insignificant commercial value" – whether the images in this
>> particular case are or can be used commercially or not. See paragraphs
>> 21 and 23.
>>
>> //Johan Jönsson
>> --
>>
>
> Note that "not insignificant" = significant. The decision points exactly
> that the commercial aspect is relevant, and the artists should have
> participation on it.
> "The court finds that the artists are entitled to that value"[1], this is
> what the decision says, at least according to The Guardian. I couldn't
> understand the original decision, even if i have had access to it.
> What is found in these paragraphs you've mentioned?

In these paragraphs (and I think I meant 20 and 23, though 21 is also
relevant – sorry) you find the courts argument that the commercial or
lack of commercial aspect is irrelevant and that the scale is what
matters. The decision is rather explicit on this point (e.g. "Huruvida
förfogandet sker i kommersiellt syfte saknar betydelse"). The quote
you refer to is regarding the fact that we're talking about a
commercial scale: It's not about the specific ability to reuse content
from this database, but the court argues that at a certain size,
there's an inherent potential commercial value that the artists are
entitled to. This argument is not made in the context of free licenses
or others being able to reuse the content, but refers to the scope of
offentligkonst.se.

Now, I'm not a lawyer, so there's always a chance I could be mistaken,
but I have read both the article you refer to and the decision and
while there's nothing wrong with the former, as a newspaper article,
it's still a shorter article about ten pages of legal text regarding a
fairly intricate piece of copyright law. I would strongly advise
against doing legal interpretation without having access to the
decision in question, or a good translation thereof, because there are
definitely aspects the newspaper article doesn't touch.

//Johan Jönsson
--

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

[Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Sweden loses copyright suit

[Castelo Branco]

> The decision specifically and repeatedly states that the commercial
> aspect is irrelevant, as such a database "typically has a not
> insignificant commercial value" – whether the images in this
> particular case are or can be used commercially or not. See paragraphs
> 21 and 23.
>
> //Johan Jönsson
> --
>

Note that "not insignificant" = significant. The decision points exactly
that the commercial aspect is relevant, and the artists should have
participation on it.
"The court finds that the artists are entitled to that value"[1], this is
what the decision says, at least according to The Guardian. I couldn't
understand the original decision, even if i have had access to it.
What is found in these paragraphs you've mentioned?

CasteloBranco

[1]
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/apr/05/wikimedias-free-photo-database-of-artworks-violates-copyright-court-rules
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Sweden loses copyright suit

[WereSpielChequers]

The blog still uses a whited out example of an 1854 statue, yet the discussion 
is supposedly about the sculptor's copyright.

Is the Swedish court trying to imply that artists and their heirs have a near 
indefinite copyright period for sculpture on display in Sweden? Or is this a 
modern statue of a chap who died in 1854? The blurb describes the statue as 
being public domain, so I suspect it is just a misleading picture, it would be 
better to use a picture with a whited out statue that is still in copyright. 

Those journalists and lawyers who support this judgment will try to spin this 
as being about the rights of living artists. So I'd suggest using the example 
of the oldest statue you can find in the database that is still in copyright, 
especially if the initial heirs are also long dead. A sentence in the blog post 
along the lines of "copyright in Sweden lasts for x years after the artist 
dies, so some of the artworks that the court is trying to restrict public 
access to are over y years old".

It might also be worth adding that Wikimedia Commons, wikimedia's main media 
library operates under US law. Though individuals who add or use material also 
need to comply with the law where they are.

Regards

WereSpielChequers

> 

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Sweden loses copyright suit

[Johan Jönsson]

2016-04-06 0:57 GMT+02:00 Lilburne :
> You still haven't got it right. What you can't do is publish a database of
> images for commercial use.
>
> If I were to go to Sweden take photos of every publicly placed work of art
> and put them on a website
> there wouldn't be an issue. If I were to put them on a website and announce
> that they could be used
> by commercial enterprises for any purpose then I would have a problem.
>
> Its the creation of a database of images for commercial reuse that is the
> problem.
>

The decision specifically and repeatedly states that the commercial
aspect is irrelevant, as such a database "typically has a not
insignificant commercial value" – whether the images in this
particular case are or can be used commercially or not. See paragraphs
21 and 23.

//Johan Jönsson
--

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