Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikidata] Solve legal uncertainty of Wikidata

2018-07-07 Thread mathieu lovato stumpf guntz

Hi Andra,


Le 04/07/2018 à 13:00, Andra Waagmeester a écrit :



No, Wikidata is not going to change the CC0. You seem to be the
only person wanting that and trying to discredit Wikidata will not
help you in your crusade. I suggest the people who are still
interested in this to go to
https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T193728
 and make useful
comments over there.

It seems all this assertions are following some erroneous assumptions. 
This ticket is not about changing Wikidata license. It aims at making 
sure what can and what can not be legally imported into a database using 
CC0, and in which juridiction it can be legally used safely or not in 
downstream projects.


It would certainly be interesting that Wikimedia infrastructure would 
allow to host projects using Wikibase with other topic/license scopes 
that are queriables within other Wikimedia projects. Surelly it would 
make a good match with the "become the essential infrastructure of the 
ecosystem of free knowledge" goal. But that's an other story, and I 
didn't found time to work on that topic so far.


It would also be great if we could avoid to imput the title of "crusader 
dedicated to discredit Wikidata" to someone that not later than this 
afternoon helped a new contributor to make its first edit on this project.


Cheers.



Maarten


___
Wikidata mailing list
wikid...@lists.wikimedia.org 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata





___
Wikidata mailing list
wikid...@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata


___
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] Response to recent developments of United States travel ban

2018-07-07 Thread James Salsman
P.S. The choice* is between

On Sat, Jul 7, 2018 at 12:53 PM, James Salsman  wrote:
> Mario,
>
> The is between arbitrary border security theater and allowing the
> Foundation to recruit and hire the best candidates. If the Foundation
> was silent on the matter, there would be less of a chance of retaining
> the right.
>
> Thank you for your reply on the other thread about the Executive
> Director's Letter to Donors. I think you raise a few good points,
> which I hope to respond to soon. But your argument isn't compelling
> enough to make it a priority over my work at present. I look forward
> to reading a reply from you responding to more than just the first
> reference on free college. The answers to most if not almost all of
> your questions are in the other three references on free college,
> although they are dense and difficult to read, and require the
> understanding of amortization.
>
> [from that other thread:]
>
>>> I've spoken with perhaps fifty wikimedians over the past couple years,
>>> and I simply do not believe that more than 20% could wish such ill
>>> will on their peers.
>>
>> Let me be bold and suggest that around 99% of the people on this list
>> disagree with the percentages you keep making up.
>
> Why the Foundation wouldn't have already called this question with a
> survey is beyond me.
>
> Best regards,
> Jim
>
>
> On Sat, Jul 7, 2018 at 5:10 AM, Mario Gómez  wrote:
>> I find these activities by the WMF really disturbing for the community.
>> Looking at previous discussions, I am not the first one to voice these
>> issues, but here is my summary:
>>
>> == It is cherry-picking ==
>>
>> The WMF has no long-term commitment to immigration issues. This leads to
>> the appearance that the WMF is cherry-picking an issue against a specific
>> US administration while ignoring both previous administrations and
>> established bipartisan trends in US foreign policy. When I read these
>> communiqués, there are immediate questions that arise about its consistency:
>>
>> * Why does the WMF remain silent about US immigration policies towards
>> Mexicans, which have been going on for more time?
>>
>> * Why does the WMF position itself against religious discrimination on
>> immigration policies, but ignores ideological discrimination?
>>
>>
>> == It is not necessary ==
>>
>> A lot of us in the community support organizations that engage in advocacy
>> on immigration issues. We chose to support organizations that match our
>> political positions and I encourage other members of the community to get
>> involved in organizations matching theirs. But it does not make sense that,
>> when I support the Wikimedia Foundation, I get to support an organization
>> sustaining political positions that enter in conflict with mine.
>>
>>
>> == It does not respect ideological diversity in the community ==
>>
>> As an extension of previous point: the WMF position does not respect the
>> ideological diversity in the community. We signed up for free knowledge,
>> not to promote a very narrow and particular political position. Some
>> example of issues that raise political conflicts for some members of the
>> community:
>>
>> * When the WMF says "the U.S., where we have unique freedoms that are
>> essential to supporting the Wikimedia projects", what unique freedom are
>> they referring to? Some of us find that plainly offensive from a country
>> that we consider to have severe problems for freedom, and that we consider
>> that play an international role that is damaging to freedom worldwide.
>>
>> * When the WMF specifically refers to Libya: why doesn't it condemn NATO
>> invasion of Libya, which destroyed the country and caused a major
>> immigration crisis in Europe? Some of us find this kind of position
>> offensive too.
>>
>>
>> == It alienates the community ==
>>
>> If the WMF wants to get involved in advocacy activities beyond its core
>> mission, at least, it should perform a global consultation process with the
>> community to approve it. Otherwise, a lot of us are alienated by the fact
>> that we are supporting a project that performs advocacy activities that we
>> might not share, and we didn't even had the chance to get out voices heard.
>>
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> MarioGom
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 3, 2018 at 12:42 AM, Katherine Maher 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> *This letter is also available on Meta-Wiki here:
>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/?curid=10631068
>>> *
>>> *Please consider supporting with translations. *
>>>
>>> Dear friends,
>>>
>>> On Tuesday, the highest court in the United States, the Supreme Court,
>>> ruled in favor of the current U.S. administration’s restrictions[1] on
>>> travel and immigration from seven countries.[2] In a 5-4 ruling, the Court
>>> found that the restrictions were lawfully created, despite their breach of
>>> the longstanding ideals of the U.S. immigration system and disturbing
>>> comments [3] made by the current administration about the 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Response to recent developments of United States travel ban

2018-07-07 Thread James Salsman
Mario,

The is between arbitrary border security theater and allowing the
Foundation to recruit and hire the best candidates. If the Foundation
was silent on the matter, there would be less of a chance of retaining
the right.

Thank you for your reply on the other thread about the Executive
Director's Letter to Donors. I think you raise a few good points,
which I hope to respond to soon. But your argument isn't compelling
enough to make it a priority over my work at present. I look forward
to reading a reply from you responding to more than just the first
reference on free college. The answers to most if not almost all of
your questions are in the other three references on free college,
although they are dense and difficult to read, and require the
understanding of amortization.

[from that other thread:]

>> I've spoken with perhaps fifty wikimedians over the past couple years,
>> and I simply do not believe that more than 20% could wish such ill
>> will on their peers.
>
> Let me be bold and suggest that around 99% of the people on this list
> disagree with the percentages you keep making up.

Why the Foundation wouldn't have already called this question with a
survey is beyond me.

Best regards,
Jim


On Sat, Jul 7, 2018 at 5:10 AM, Mario Gómez  wrote:
> I find these activities by the WMF really disturbing for the community.
> Looking at previous discussions, I am not the first one to voice these
> issues, but here is my summary:
>
> == It is cherry-picking ==
>
> The WMF has no long-term commitment to immigration issues. This leads to
> the appearance that the WMF is cherry-picking an issue against a specific
> US administration while ignoring both previous administrations and
> established bipartisan trends in US foreign policy. When I read these
> communiqués, there are immediate questions that arise about its consistency:
>
> * Why does the WMF remain silent about US immigration policies towards
> Mexicans, which have been going on for more time?
>
> * Why does the WMF position itself against religious discrimination on
> immigration policies, but ignores ideological discrimination?
>
>
> == It is not necessary ==
>
> A lot of us in the community support organizations that engage in advocacy
> on immigration issues. We chose to support organizations that match our
> political positions and I encourage other members of the community to get
> involved in organizations matching theirs. But it does not make sense that,
> when I support the Wikimedia Foundation, I get to support an organization
> sustaining political positions that enter in conflict with mine.
>
>
> == It does not respect ideological diversity in the community ==
>
> As an extension of previous point: the WMF position does not respect the
> ideological diversity in the community. We signed up for free knowledge,
> not to promote a very narrow and particular political position. Some
> example of issues that raise political conflicts for some members of the
> community:
>
> * When the WMF says "the U.S., where we have unique freedoms that are
> essential to supporting the Wikimedia projects", what unique freedom are
> they referring to? Some of us find that plainly offensive from a country
> that we consider to have severe problems for freedom, and that we consider
> that play an international role that is damaging to freedom worldwide.
>
> * When the WMF specifically refers to Libya: why doesn't it condemn NATO
> invasion of Libya, which destroyed the country and caused a major
> immigration crisis in Europe? Some of us find this kind of position
> offensive too.
>
>
> == It alienates the community ==
>
> If the WMF wants to get involved in advocacy activities beyond its core
> mission, at least, it should perform a global consultation process with the
> community to approve it. Otherwise, a lot of us are alienated by the fact
> that we are supporting a project that performs advocacy activities that we
> might not share, and we didn't even had the chance to get out voices heard.
>
>
> Best,
>
> MarioGom
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 3, 2018 at 12:42 AM, Katherine Maher 
> wrote:
>
>> *This letter is also available on Meta-Wiki here:
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/?curid=10631068
>> *
>> *Please consider supporting with translations. *
>>
>> Dear friends,
>>
>> On Tuesday, the highest court in the United States, the Supreme Court,
>> ruled in favor of the current U.S. administration’s restrictions[1] on
>> travel and immigration from seven countries.[2] In a 5-4 ruling, the Court
>> found that the restrictions were lawfully created, despite their breach of
>> the longstanding ideals of the U.S. immigration system and disturbing
>> comments [3] made by the current administration about the religious basis
>> for some of these restrictions.
>>
>> Of the seven countries named, at least three have active Wikimedia
>> communities. The Wikimedia chapter in Venezuela, Iranian Wikimedians user
>> group, and proposed 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Response to recent developments of United States travel ban

2018-07-07 Thread Mario Gómez
I find these activities by the WMF really disturbing for the community.
Looking at previous discussions, I am not the first one to voice these
issues, but here is my summary:

== It is cherry-picking ==

The WMF has no long-term commitment to immigration issues. This leads to
the appearance that the WMF is cherry-picking an issue against a specific
US administration while ignoring both previous administrations and
established bipartisan trends in US foreign policy. When I read these
communiqués, there are immediate questions that arise about its consistency:

* Why does the WMF remain silent about US immigration policies towards
Mexicans, which have been going on for more time?

* Why does the WMF position itself against religious discrimination on
immigration policies, but ignores ideological discrimination?


== It is not necessary ==

A lot of us in the community support organizations that engage in advocacy
on immigration issues. We chose to support organizations that match our
political positions and I encourage other members of the community to get
involved in organizations matching theirs. But it does not make sense that,
when I support the Wikimedia Foundation, I get to support an organization
sustaining political positions that enter in conflict with mine.


== It does not respect ideological diversity in the community ==

As an extension of previous point: the WMF position does not respect the
ideological diversity in the community. We signed up for free knowledge,
not to promote a very narrow and particular political position. Some
example of issues that raise political conflicts for some members of the
community:

* When the WMF says "the U.S., where we have unique freedoms that are
essential to supporting the Wikimedia projects", what unique freedom are
they referring to? Some of us find that plainly offensive from a country
that we consider to have severe problems for freedom, and that we consider
that play an international role that is damaging to freedom worldwide.

* When the WMF specifically refers to Libya: why doesn't it condemn NATO
invasion of Libya, which destroyed the country and caused a major
immigration crisis in Europe? Some of us find this kind of position
offensive too.


== It alienates the community ==

If the WMF wants to get involved in advocacy activities beyond its core
mission, at least, it should perform a global consultation process with the
community to approve it. Otherwise, a lot of us are alienated by the fact
that we are supporting a project that performs advocacy activities that we
might not share, and we didn't even had the chance to get out voices heard.


Best,

MarioGom


On Tue, Jul 3, 2018 at 12:42 AM, Katherine Maher 
wrote:

> *This letter is also available on Meta-Wiki here:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/?curid=10631068
> *
> *Please consider supporting with translations. *
>
> Dear friends,
>
> On Tuesday, the highest court in the United States, the Supreme Court,
> ruled in favor of the current U.S. administration’s restrictions[1] on
> travel and immigration from seven countries.[2] In a 5-4 ruling, the Court
> found that the restrictions were lawfully created, despite their breach of
> the longstanding ideals of the U.S. immigration system and disturbing
> comments [3] made by the current administration about the religious basis
> for some of these restrictions.
>
> Of the seven countries named, at least three have active Wikimedia
> communities. The Wikimedia chapter in Venezuela, Iranian Wikimedians user
> group, and proposed Libyan user group represent the reality that our
> movement has no borders. Our mission does not discriminate, it unites: in
> these and other countries, we have friends, allies, and fellow Wikimedians.
>
> To our fellow Wikimedians, particularly those from or with family in
> affected countries: we stand with you and reject the premise of this
> outcome. Our movement is possible because of the belief that everyone,
> everywhere, should be able to contribute to shared human understanding. We
> believe in a world where every country, language, and culture can freely
> collaborate without restriction in our shared effort of making free
> knowledge accessible to every person. Wikipedia is proof of what can happen
> when these freedoms are unrestricted. When our ability to come together is
> limited, the world is a poorer place.
>
> The Wikimedia Foundation has opposed the restrictions since earlier
> versions were first introduced. We responded to an executive order in early
> 2017[4] by joining many other organizations and companies in signing a
> series of amicus briefs before the courts hearing these cases.[5] We have
> posted an update on the Wikimedia blog detailing our position on the most
> recent outcome of this case. [6]
>
> We are mindful that these restrictions may have real impacts on individual
> staff and community members, as well as our families and communities. The
> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] adding visual search for Wikipedia

2018-07-07 Thread Jeremy Lee-Jenkins
Tom O'Hara,

I foresee several problems with your proposal.

a) The Wikimedia Foundation itself spent a very large amount of money
building something essentially the same which was rejected by the community
and abandoned.
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledge_Engine_(Wikimedia_Foundation)


b) Your proposal is for a proprietary software to be added to the core
Mediawiki software of Wikipedia. The Wikimedia Foundation is notorious for
never using third-party proprietary software.

c) The design is still in the stone age when compared to Bing/Google, so
would not necessarily compete well to attract the target demographic.

d) The search bar at https://www.wikipedia.org/ already has images in a
kind of drop-down search suggestions function, this is nice, but has not
become very popular.

I would actually suggest you go down the route of offering it as an
extension on https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Category:Extensions

Warm Regards

Jeremy Lee-Jenkins

On Fri, Jul 6, 2018 at 3:07 PM, Tomás O'Hara  wrote:

> Hi, here's a link to a proposal I have for adding visual search to
> Wikipedia:
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Use_visual_search_frontend_for_Wikipedia
>  Proposed_by>
>
> (This was created with user ID: tomasohara
> .) I can move it into a
> better location if desired as it as not a "sister project" proper. The
> Proposals
> for new projects
>  page doesn't
> offer suggestions for alternative postings, so I left it there for now.
>
> Below is a copy of the project overview. See the link above for details on
> how this can be applied to foreign language wikipedias. Note that most can
> be supported right "out of the box" except for the text categorization used
> to select images for documents without images. A Wikipedia-specific way to
> do this might be possible (e.g., based on the hierarchy of pages).
>
> Best,
> Tom
>
> -
>
> It would be good for Wikipedia to use a general-purpose visual search front
> end. Note that a big incentive for this is that users will be drawn to
> Wikipedia to use this type of search rather than Google Search or Bing.
> This would be beneficial because these search engines often show Wikipedia
> content for popular entities like sports stars or tourist attractions,
> which cuts down on Wikipedia traffic.
>
> You will be able to use the visual search frontend I developed without
> charge for the duration of my patent in the works (a la license free). Here
> is a link to an example with Wikipedia search on left and my Scrappy Search
> on right:
>
> http://www.scrappycito.com/wikipedia-vs-scrappy-search-small
> -dog-breeds-en-wiki-site.png
>
>
> Two other examples illustrate some added benefits of this visual search
> with respect to Wikipedia. First, disambiguation becomes based on images
> and keywords rather than just snippets of text. See the following:
>
> http://www.scrappycito.com/wikipedia-vs-scrappy-search-bob-j
> ones-en-wiki-site.png
>
> In addition, links to other pages for the same entity become much more
> engaging:
>
> http://www.scrappycito.com/wikipedia-vs-scrappy-search-taylo
> r-swift-en-wiki-site.png
>
>
> See http://www.scrappycito.com for the stable version of the system and
> http://www.tomasohara.trade:9330 for the work-in-progress version. The
> latter has support for handheld devices and also better aesthetics (n.b.,
> version used in examples).
>
> I think this will be extremely popular with the Instagram crowd and younger
> users in general (e.g., younger than 30). To do similar Wikipedia-specific
> searches with the visual search front end, just add *site:en.wikipedia.org
> * to the query*,* as in following example:
>
> Lionel Messi  site:en.wikipedia.org
>
> Scrappy Search uses the Google search API, so all of the search operators
>  are supported.
>
> The patent for this visual search will be owned by my company ScrappyCito,
> LLC. If the company gets acquired, I will require that they honor the
> license-free usage of the visual search system by Wikimedia for Wikipedia.
> (They will likewise be required to pass along this license-free usage
> requirement if they in turn are acquired). You will have access to the
> current source code for use in Wikipedia and other approved projects.
>
> I am doing this both for exposure and because I want to help keep Wikipedia
> viable (e.g., by enabling higher traffic). This is a great way for users to
> browse the encyclopedia, so it can keep users on the Wikipedia domain
> longer.
>
> If this sounds interesting, I can develop a prototype for the Simple
> English Wikipedia for use on one of my servers. After review, I help with
> the deployment for the regular 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Response to recent developments of United States travel ban

2018-07-07 Thread Mario Gómez
Hello,

I would suggest to update Wikimedia sites to reflect the fact that
Wikimedia Foundation is active in lobbying in the area of immigration
public policies:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Public_policy
https://policy.wikimedia.org/

Best,

MarioGom

On Tue, Jul 3, 2018 at 12:42 AM, Katherine Maher 
wrote:

> *This letter is also available on Meta-Wiki here:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/?curid=10631068
> *
> *Please consider supporting with translations. *
>
> Dear friends,
>
> On Tuesday, the highest court in the United States, the Supreme Court,
> ruled in favor of the current U.S. administration’s restrictions[1] on
> travel and immigration from seven countries.[2] In a 5-4 ruling, the Court
> found that the restrictions were lawfully created, despite their breach of
> the longstanding ideals of the U.S. immigration system and disturbing
> comments [3] made by the current administration about the religious basis
> for some of these restrictions.
>
> Of the seven countries named, at least three have active Wikimedia
> communities. The Wikimedia chapter in Venezuela, Iranian Wikimedians user
> group, and proposed Libyan user group represent the reality that our
> movement has no borders. Our mission does not discriminate, it unites: in
> these and other countries, we have friends, allies, and fellow Wikimedians.
>
> To our fellow Wikimedians, particularly those from or with family in
> affected countries: we stand with you and reject the premise of this
> outcome. Our movement is possible because of the belief that everyone,
> everywhere, should be able to contribute to shared human understanding. We
> believe in a world where every country, language, and culture can freely
> collaborate without restriction in our shared effort of making free
> knowledge accessible to every person. Wikipedia is proof of what can happen
> when these freedoms are unrestricted. When our ability to come together is
> limited, the world is a poorer place.
>
> The Wikimedia Foundation has opposed the restrictions since earlier
> versions were first introduced. We responded to an executive order in early
> 2017[4] by joining many other organizations and companies in signing a
> series of amicus briefs before the courts hearing these cases.[5] We have
> posted an update on the Wikimedia blog detailing our position on the most
> recent outcome of this case. [6]
>
> We are mindful that these restrictions may have real impacts on individual
> staff and community members, as well as our families and communities. The
> Wikimedia Foundation rejects the spirit of this ban and similar
> restrictions in place around the world that treat some more equally than
> others. Our commitment to our global ethos and shared vision will continue
> to guide our policy efforts into the future, as we strive to uphold the
> values that make our movement possible.
>
> Katherine
>
> [1]  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_13780
> [2]
> https://www.apnews.com/3a20abe305bd4c989116f82bf53539
> 3b/High-court-OKs-Trump's-travel-ban,-rejects-Muslim-bias-claim
> [3]
> https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/12/donald-trump-
> calls-halt-muslims-entering-151207220200817.html
> [4] https://blog.wikimedia.org/2017/01/30/knowledge-knows-no-boundaries/
> [5] See
> https://blog.wikimedia.org/2017/02/06/amicus-brief-immigration-travel-
> restrictions/,
> https://blog.wikimedia.org/2017/03/15/amicus-brief-us-travel-restrictions/
> ,
> and
> https://blog.wikimedia.org/2017/09/18/amicus-brief-us-travel-immigration/
> [6]
> https://blog.wikimedia.org/2018/07/02/supreme-court-
> immigration-wikimedia-values/
>
>
> --
> 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,
> 
___
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] Executive Director's Letter to Donors

2018-07-07 Thread Mario Gómez
Please, don't:

On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 10:11 PM, James Salsman  wrote:

> I propose that the Executive Director ask donors to
> support other organizations which are working for free college,[1-4]
> single payer universal health care,[5] shorter work weeks,[6-7]
> payroll subsidies,[8] and two-bracket taxation.[9]
>
> I believe all of these goals are favored by wikimedians, for
> wikimedians,


There may be wide support for these goals (or not). But there is not
necessarily wide support for some specific approaches.

--- Here's an example. My point is that what you conceive as a
quasi-universal political posiition among wikimedians... it's not.

Taking your proposal for free college, a lot of us support a fully public
education system accessible to everyone. And a lot of us strongly oppose
private sector meddling with the education system.

What would mean your proposal to donate for "free college"? Reading your
links, I assume it might be donating to the Foundation for California
Community College, and I think that would be definitely a no for a part of
the community for different reasons:

1. Why should Wikimedia promote lobbying specific to California? I would
rather support governments in Latin America to improve public education.
And that's just one of the possible possitions.
2. Those of us who oppose private sector in the public education system, do
NOT want to support an organization that promotes those kind of practices:
advertising education materials of their private donors, promoting private
sector involvement in the education system.

There is another problem: the WMF has insisted that funds it receives from
corporate donors do not influence WMF decisions. If WMF starts promoting
donations to organizations that promote private interests of WMF corporate
donors... that would be a vicious relation that would undermine WMF
credibility.

Best,

MarioGom
___
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] On traceability and reliability of data we publish [was Re: [Wikidata] Solve legal uncertainty of Wikidata]

2018-07-07 Thread mathieu lovato stumpf guntz

Hi Andra,

I agree this is misconception that a copyright license make any direct 
change to data reliability. But attribution requirement does somewhat 
indirectly have an impact on it, as it legally enforce traceability. 
That is I strongly disagree with the following assertion: "a license 
that requires BY sucks so hard for data [because] attribution 
requirements grow very quickly". To my mind it is equivalent to say that 
we will throw away traceability because it is subjectively judged too 
large a burden, without providing any start of evidence that it indeed 
can't be managed, at least with Wikimedia current ressources.


Now, I don't say traceability is the sole factor one should take into 
account in data reliability, but certainly it is one of them. Maybe we 
should first come with clear criteria to put in a equation that enable 
to calculate reliability of information. Since it's in the core goals of 
the Wikimedia strategy, it would certainly worth the effort to establish 
clear metrics about reliability of information the movement is spreading.


Cheers


Le 04/07/2018 à 13:00, Andra Waagmeester a écrit :
I agree with Maarten and to add to that. It is a huge misconception 
that CC0  makes data unreliable. It is only a legal statement about 
copyright, nothing more, nothing less. Statements without proper 
references and qualifiers make data unreliable, but Wikidata has a 
decent mechanism to capture that needed provenance.


On Wed, Jul 4, 2018 at 12:50 PM, Maarten Dammers > wrote:


Hi Mathieu,

On 04-07-18 11:07, mathieu stumpf guntz wrote:

Hi,

Le 19/05/2018 à 03:35, Denny Vrandečić a écrit :


Regarding attribution, commonly it is assumed that you
have to respect it transitively. That is one of the
reasons a license that requires BY sucks so hard for data:
unlike with text, the attribution requirements grow very
quickly. It is the same as with modified images and
collages: it is not sufficient to attribute the last
author, but all contributors have to be attributed.

If we want our data to be trustable, then we need
traceability. That is reporting this chain of sources as
extensively as possible, whatever the license require or not
as attribution. CC-0 allow to break this traceability, which
make an aweful license to whoever is concerned with obtaining
reliable data.

A license is not the way to achieve this. We have references for that.


This is why I think that whoever wants to be part of a
large federation of data on the web, should publish under CC0.

As long as one aim at making a federation of untrustable data
banks, that's perfect. ;)

So I see you started forum shopping (trying to get the Wikimedia-l
people in) and making contentious trying to be funny remarks.
That's usually a good indication a thread is going nowhere.

No, Wikidata is not going to change the CC0. You seem to be the
only person wanting that and trying to discredit Wikidata will not
help you in your crusade. I suggest the people who are still
interested in this to go to
https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T193728
 and make useful
comments over there.

Maarten


___
Wikidata mailing list
wikid...@lists.wikimedia.org 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata





___
Wikidata mailing list
wikid...@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata


___
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] [Wikidata] SPARQL tutorial video (2 hours)

2018-07-07 Thread Nurunnaby Hasive
Great! Thanks, Asaf!

I learn so many issues about Wikidata after watching your 3hr long Wikidata
intro video. Last few days I'm trying to learn SPARQL. Hope your this video
also help me a lot to learn more about SPARQL.

Thanks again!

Hasive

On Fri, Jul 6, 2018 at 5:40 PM Rajeeb Dutta  wrote:

> Thanks Asaf for sharing the video.
> Thanks,
> Regards,
> Rajeeb Dutta.
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On 06-Jul-2018, at 4:18 PM, Tito Dutta  wrote:
>
> Great. Many thanks for sharing.
>
> Thanks
> Tito Dutta
> Note: If I don't reply to your email in 2 days, please feel free to remind
> me over email or phone call.
>
>
> On Fri, 6 Jul 2018 at 16:14, Asaf Bartov  wrote:
>
>> Hullo.
>>
>> I recently recorded a video of my 2-hour SPARQL tutorial.  It is better
>> than the SPARQL section in my 3-hour Intro to Wikidata video from a couple
>> of years ago, and is easier to follow, with the query screen fed directly
>> rather than through the video camera.
>>
>> It is now available here:
>>
>> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Querying_Wikidata_with_SPARQL_for_Absolute_Beginners.webm
>>
>>
>> Enjoy!
>>
>>A.
>> ___
>> Wikidata mailing list
>> wikid...@lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
>>
> ___
> Wikidata mailing list
> wikid...@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
>
> ___
> Wikidata mailing list
> wikid...@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
>


-- 
*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, 


[Wikimedia-l] adding visual search for Wikipedia

2018-07-07 Thread Tomás O'Hara
Hi, here's a link to a proposal I have for adding visual search to
Wikipedia:

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Use_visual_search_frontend_for_Wikipedia


(This was created with user ID: tomasohara
.) I can move it into a
better location if desired as it as not a "sister project" proper. The
Proposals
for new projects
 page doesn't
offer suggestions for alternative postings, so I left it there for now.

Below is a copy of the project overview. See the link above for details on
how this can be applied to foreign language wikipedias. Note that most can
be supported right "out of the box" except for the text categorization used
to select images for documents without images. A Wikipedia-specific way to
do this might be possible (e.g., based on the hierarchy of pages).

Best,
Tom

-

It would be good for Wikipedia to use a general-purpose visual search front
end. Note that a big incentive for this is that users will be drawn to
Wikipedia to use this type of search rather than Google Search or Bing.
This would be beneficial because these search engines often show Wikipedia
content for popular entities like sports stars or tourist attractions,
which cuts down on Wikipedia traffic.

You will be able to use the visual search frontend I developed without
charge for the duration of my patent in the works (a la license free). Here
is a link to an example with Wikipedia search on left and my Scrappy Search
on right:

http://www.scrappycito.com/wikipedia-vs-scrappy-search-small
-dog-breeds-en-wiki-site.png


Two other examples illustrate some added benefits of this visual search
with respect to Wikipedia. First, disambiguation becomes based on images
and keywords rather than just snippets of text. See the following:

http://www.scrappycito.com/wikipedia-vs-scrappy-search-bob-j
ones-en-wiki-site.png

In addition, links to other pages for the same entity become much more
engaging:

http://www.scrappycito.com/wikipedia-vs-scrappy-search-taylo
r-swift-en-wiki-site.png


See http://www.scrappycito.com for the stable version of the system and
http://www.tomasohara.trade:9330 for the work-in-progress version. The
latter has support for handheld devices and also better aesthetics (n.b.,
version used in examples).

I think this will be extremely popular with the Instagram crowd and younger
users in general (e.g., younger than 30). To do similar Wikipedia-specific
searches with the visual search front end, just add *site:en.wikipedia.org
* to the query*,* as in following example:

Lionel Messi  site:en.wikipedia.org

Scrappy Search uses the Google search API, so all of the search operators
 are supported.

The patent for this visual search will be owned by my company ScrappyCito,
LLC. If the company gets acquired, I will require that they honor the
license-free usage of the visual search system by Wikimedia for Wikipedia.
(They will likewise be required to pass along this license-free usage
requirement if they in turn are acquired). You will have access to the
current source code for use in Wikipedia and other approved projects.

I am doing this both for exposure and because I want to help keep Wikipedia
viable (e.g., by enabling higher traffic). This is a great way for users to
browse the encyclopedia, so it can keep users on the Wikipedia domain
longer.

If this sounds interesting, I can develop a prototype for the Simple
English Wikipedia for use on one of my servers. After review, I help with
the deployment for the regular English Wikipedia on your servers once
approved.

==
Tom O'Hara, founder ScrappyCito, LLC.  PO Box 6430
tomasoh...@gmail.com Austin, TX 78762-6430
737-203-1577   www.scrappycito.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] Executive Director's Letter to Donors

2018-07-07 Thread Gerard Meijssen
Hell NO!

We are not neutral and it will be a particular sad situation when we forget
what we are there for, what our objectives are only to "avoid compromising
the appearance of
the projects and the movement as neutral providers of information; to avoid
bad publicity; to avoid antagonizing governments or corporate interests; to
avoid compromising the Foundation's tax-exempt status; to avoid fragmenting
the resources and attention of the movement; to avoid creating divisions
within the projects and the movement that would make it more difficult for
volunteers to work together."

We just won a major victory in our battle to keep the internet free, an
internet where we can write our projects. A victory where one of our
opponents said "Wikipedia should be nationalised"; there is no neutral
ground for us. We have antagonised governments. Our Turkish Wikipedia and
other Wikipedias is not available in Turkey. Our established positions are
against corporate interests. And to be honest, when we lose our tax status
in the USA because of all this, we will make us even more money.

Our objectives, our reliance on a free internet, free software and free
licenses are an integral part of who we are. We will not squander it to
appease any two bit dictator.
Thanks,
   GerardM

On 7 July 2018 at 01:10, Benjamin Lees  wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 6, 2018 at 3:33 PM, James Salsman  wrote:
> > Are there any specific reasons that the Foundation should remain
> > neutral on any topic, economic, political, or otherwise, which clearly
> > impacts the readership or community?
>
> Well, off the top of my head: to avoid compromising the appearance of
> the projects and the movement as neutral providers of information; to
> avoid bad publicity; to avoid antagonizing governments or corporate
> interests; to avoid compromising the Foundation's tax-exempt status;
> to avoid fragmenting the resources and attention of the movement; to
> avoid creating divisions within the projects and the movement that
> would make it more difficult for volunteers to work together.
>
> On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 1:01 AM, James Salsman  wrote:
> > I've spoken with perhaps fifty wikimedians over the past couple years,
> > and I simply do not believe that more than 20% could wish such ill
> > will on their peers.
>
> Let me be bold and suggest that around 99% of the people on this list
> disagree with the percentages you keep making up.
>
> Emufarmers
>
> ___
> 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] [Wikidata] Solve legal uncertainty of Wikidata

2018-07-07 Thread Alphos OGame
Hello,

Mathieu, not only are you forum-shopping here as Maarten pointed out, you
are also consecutively trying one "what if" after the other instead of
providing an actual formal case against the CC0 license currently in effect
on Wikidata.
So far each of your individual arguments has been debunked :
- incompatibly licensed database imports (Nemo_bis [1] and Denny [2][3]
replied to that concern on May 14th on Phabricator ; same applies to
CC-BY-SA on Wikipedia : we get rid of incompatible stuff all the time)
- provenance and traceability of data (Maarten Dammers replied to that
concern on this email thread on July 4th ; licenses have nothing to do with
either of those things : references are there for that, and edit history
can help too)
- conflation of licensing of an entire text and facts stated within it -
which is pretty much one of the main purposes of Wikidata, or am I mistaken
? - (Martijn Hoekstra replied to that concern on this email thread on July
4th ; facts aren't long blobs of complicated text that are works of the
mind, although it could be a tad more complex when it comes to large
compilations of facts - but the definition of "large" is nowhere properly
determined)
On May 25th, you mentionned on Phabricator "discussing face to face with a
professional lawyer specialized on free licenses" [4]. She was supposed to
forward you "more information later". Has she done that ? Barring anything
new from her or any other lawyer, I see no reason whatsoever to keep going
on with that discussion which, so far, seems to only be able to determine
the morals and ethos of sticking to CC0, and not the actual legality of it.

However, I'd like to point out as an aside that in the process of your - so
far it seems purely intellectual - exercice, you have pushed Karima out of
a mailing list, which culminated in you asking from Wikimedia France that
all messages from all their mailing lists be immediately and irrevocably
made public "for total and absolute transparency and openness" as I recall
it, for the measly sake of this very argument. Your request was thankfully
denied on the basis of, if anything, privacy protection of their members.
Her message on May 4th on Phabricator [5] doesn't leave much to the
imagination that her leaving the Wikimedia France Wikidata mailing list and
your actions are directly related.

I suggest you either provide a strong legal argument (which is more than
"this thing and that stuff could happen", I mean something with actual
legal babble, including law and case law, with help from an actual lawyer)
or drop the splintered stick you hit that long-since dead horse with. And
whichever you choose, if you could stop bullying people to get your point
across, that'd be swell.

Thank you.

Roger / Alphos

[1] https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T193728#4204583
[2] https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T193728#4204771
[3] https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T193728#4204779
[4] https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T193728#4231434
[5] https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T193728#4182444



2018-07-05 20:30 GMT+02:00 Yann Forget :

> Hi,
>
> 2018-07-04 12:50 GMT+02:00 Maarten Dammers :
>
> > Hi Mathieu,
> >
>
>
> > So I see you started forum shopping (trying to get the Wikimedia-l people
> > in) and making contentious trying to be funny remarks. That's usually a
> > good indication a thread is going nowhere.
> >
> > No, Wikidata is not going to change the CC0. You seem to be the only
> > person wanting that and trying to discredit Wikidata will not help you in
> > your crusade. I suggest the people who are still interested in this to go
> > to https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T193728 and make useful comments
> > over there.
>
>
> I concur totally with analysis.
>
> Regards,
>
> Yann Forget
> ___
> 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,