[Wikimedia-l] Hollywood planning to roll out SOPA-type laws again

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/studios-antipiracy-bill-legislation-1235871278/ we get a mention - d. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at:

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Launch of Justapedia

what do you expect from an encyclopedia founded by world-famous communist Jimmy Wales -d. On Tue, 12 Sept 2023 at 08:52, Vi to wrote: > > Indeed Venn diagrams are a left-wing-woke-cancel-culture propaganda. > > Vito > > Il giorno mar 12 set 2023 alle ore 08:15 Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga > ha

[Wikimedia-l] Re: The last paper encyclopedia: World Book is still in print

f Azerbaijan (Azərbaycan Milli > Ensiklopediyası) is not only published in print but still in the middle of > being written, so the article's claim that this is the last paper > encyclopedia might not be entirely accurate. > > //Johan Jönsson > -- > > Den mån 3 j

[Wikimedia-l] The last paper encyclopedia: World Book is still in print

It's sort of nice to know we didn't take out the entire sector: https://arstechnica.com/culture/2023/06/rejoice-its-2023-and-you-can-still-buy-a-22-volume-paper-encyclopedia/ World Book still does a physical edition, selling a few thousand of each edition of their paper encyclopedia set for

[Wikimedia-l] Re: ChatGPT as a reliable source

Note that quite often it just *makes up* a plausible-looking source. Because AI text generators just make up plausible text, not accurate text. On Wed, 17 May 2023 at 09:40, Lane Chance wrote: > > Keep in mind how fast these tools change. ChatGPT, Bard and > competitors understand well the

[Wikimedia-l] Re: ChatGPT as a reliable source

I've mentioned AI text generators on English Wikipedia's Reliable Sources Noticeboard a couple of times, and the consensus each time has been that it's obvious that this rubbish absolutely doesn't belong in en:wp in any manner. The discussions are how to deal with publishers who indulge in this

[Wikimedia-l] EU designates Wikipedia a Very Large Online Platform

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_23_2413 In the same category as Facebook, Twitter, Amazon, TikTok ... On the face of it, this seems a miscategorisation. However, the recommendations aren't *bad*, and they're stuff we basically do anyway - though through volunteer

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Mozilla's social media pledge

I concur that the WMF should at the very least set up an account mirroring what's sent to the Twitter account. Or perhaps some well-known volunteer could set one up. (That's not me volunteering!) Dip a toe in. - d. On Sat, 31 Dec 2022 at 01:15, Erik Moeller wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 30, 2022 at

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Mozilla's social media pledge

Legoktm runs https://wikis.world which a small number of Wikimedians and WIkimedia groups are already on. But yes - recommended best practice for organisations is to run their own instance. Putting an instance up on a domain you own is also a clear stamp of authenticity. Twitter has stayed up so

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Obnoxious fundraisers again: Undismissable notice

You put the dismissal button *two screens away* from where the user is. You're choosing to make the banner hard to dismiss. Look, we're trying to assume good faith here, but you're not making it easy with the track record of observed behaviour. On Sat, 17 Dec 2022 at 19:14, Samuel Patton

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Obnoxious fundraisers again: Undismissable notice

We ought to have an RfC proposing to limit the size of such disruptive >> banners. >> >> >> >> > On Dec 17, 2022, at 6:16 AM, David Gerard wrote: >> > >> > If you aren't logged in and you're on mobile, the fundraising notice >> > now ta

[Wikimedia-l] Obnoxious fundraisers again: Undismissable notice

If you aren't logged in and you're on mobile, the fundraising notice now takes up 1.5 screens, and can't be dismissed - there's only "Maybe later", and that demands an email address and can't be dismissed. The fundraising department are making the site actually unusable again. - d.

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Is GoogleTV violating Wikipedia's license?

yep. Asking nicely is always the best first option, and WMF is good at that. Reusing our stuff is excellent, but correct licensing is important, and a link back would be very nice. On Tue, 30 Aug 2022 at 13:50, Gnangarra wrote: > Agree with Andy here, the WMF cant sue as the copyright holder,

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Luis Bitencourt-Emilio Joins Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees

On Thu, 13 Jan 2022 at 13:41, Dariusz Jemielniak wrote: > even though I appreciate blockchain as a technology, This is a common buzzword phrase. What *in particular* do you appreciate about them, that someone who knows what they are and how they work but isn't a fan would find a credible claim?

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Moderation notice

If we didn't want serious discussions to come to this mailing list, or have discussions on it taken seriously, this thread would so far be a great example for not doing so. Thankfully, it won't actually succeed in derailing the discussions. - d. ___

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Paid API?

All cloud providers are approximately level in evil. The way we break it down at my day job is: * AWS: when you want it to work and want customer service * Microsoft: when you hate yourself, you're running Windows or both * Google: when you want zero customer service ever under any circumstances

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Citizendium shutting down

2020 at 22:20, Joseph Seddon wrote: > > Is there any merit in us helping them continue to exist? > > Seddon > > On Sat, Jul 4, 2020 at 10:13 PM David Gerard wrote: > > > here's the discussion: > > > > https://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Forum_Talk:Technical_Issues

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Citizendium shutting down

here's the discussion: https://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Forum_Talk:Technical_Issues#Any_further_thoughts.3F On Sat, 4 Jul 2020 at 22:11, David Gerard wrote: > > Front page: > > > This wiki was unsuccessful in achieving its original goals (see > > https://www.quora.com/W

[Wikimedia-l] Citizendium shutting down

Front page: > This wiki was unsuccessful in achieving its original goals (see > https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-difference-between-Wikipedia-and-Citizendium). > A dedicated few writers have continued working in the wiki, improving > articles that they believe are useful, and which for

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Summary of the Brand Project presentation

I'd like to stress - I can see a case for renaming it all as "Wikipedia". I could even make that case! I'm not inclined to advocate such a change myself - and I'm not convinced that branding is a problem we have - but it's not an unreasonable *position*. But pre-deciding the outcome, then

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Brand Project: Who are we as a movement?

d can be fixed. > > Regards, in a personal capacity > > 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 Sun, 12 Apr 2020 at 23:22, David Gerard wrote: > > > I think at

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Brand Project: Who are we as a movement?

ps://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_movement_brand_project > > > > [4] > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_movement_brand_project/FAQ > > > > [5] > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Communication

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Brand Project: Who are we as a movement?

On Sat, 11 Apr 2020 at 09:49, Samir Elsharbaty wrote: > While having Wikipedia as a central concept > is a project requirement, ... and here we have the source of all the problems here: the answer has been predetermined. - d. ___ Wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Brand Project: Who are we as a movement?

> > > Thank you! > > > > > > Samir and the brand project team > > > > > > [1] > > > > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_movement_brand_project/Timeline > > > > > > [2] http

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Brand Project: Who are we as a movement?

; > strategy shouldnt we already know who we are, as it is that should have > > been the key starting point for a strategy process. Its comprehensible not > > to have known or explored that before deciding where, how, why we will be > > doing anything for the next 10 years. > &

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Brand Project: Who are we as a movement?

Particularly as they've demonstrated by their actions an unwillingness to work with Wikipedia properly: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Archive318#Review_of_User:Sn%C3%B8hettaAS_block_please - d. On Sat, 14 Mar 2020 at 04:34, Peter Southwood wrote: > > I

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia is going to be available in turkey again

here's the AP writeup https://apnews.com/3dc4b3da93ba67f728b27608badb7d93 - d. On Thu, 26 Dec 2019 at 13:16, Rajeeb Dutta wrote: > > A wonderful news to end 2019, thanks for the update. > > Best Regards, > Rajeeb Dutta. > (U: Marajozkee) > (Sent from my iPhone pardon the brevity) > > > On

[Wikimedia-l] How does Wikimedia handle non-US requests for user information?

https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_user_information_procedures_%26_guidelines What do you tell non-US authorities who ask if their local courts can submit orders allowing Wikimedia to release information? Are there relevant international treaties in place that would mean that a

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community feedback and next steps on movement brand proposal

similar way as the > announcements about board or steward elections. > > Best, > Kiril > > On Sat, Sep 7, 2019 at 9:46 PM David Gerard wrote: > > > On all wikis? > > > > On Sat, 7 Sep 2019 at 19:19, Yaroslav Blanter wrote: > > > > > > Right. &

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community feedback and next steps on movement brand proposal

On all wikis? On Sat, 7 Sep 2019 at 19:19, Yaroslav Blanter wrote: > > Right. > > I guess a central notice about an RfC would be appropriate. > > Cheers > Yaroslav > > On Sat, Sep 7, 2019 at 8:16 PM Kiril Simeonovski < > kiril.simeonov...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > It seems like

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block

indeed sanction him for what > they told him they sanctioned him for. > > Todd > > On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 4:37 AM David Gerard wrote: > > > and you're *seriously* positing that the WMF would ban an admin for > > doing only what you describe? > > > > On F

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block

and you're *seriously* positing that the WMF would ban an admin for doing only what you describe? On Fri, 14 Jun 2019 at 11:32, Todd Allen wrote: > > The only case of "harassment" apparently cited here was "I kept writing > garbage articles, and someone kept flagging them as garbage! Harassment!

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block

I think the problem is that the pathological people, having been called out on being pathological, decided to double down on the original complainant. See also: Gamergate, a clearly apt and apposite comparison. On Thu, 13 Jun 2019 at 19:48, Pine W wrote: > > I'm sad to hear that. I would not

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block

On Thu, 13 Jun 2019 at 00:19, Nathan wrote: > The > T team made a very token effort to intervene, and then imposed a high > profile ban with the flimsy excuse of a diff that says "fuck arbcom". They > then used that diff to excuse not including ArbCom, as if ArbCom had never > been subjected to

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fram en.wp office yearlock block

Seconded. These pages appear to have a substantial population of raving obsessives I have no intention of bothering to deal with. - d. On Wed, 12 Jun 2019 at 22:10, Rebecca O'Neill wrote: > > Just you reply to your point on how many people are speaking out against > this decision, I'm a

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

Yann, you SERIOUSLY need to back up this claim of "dishonesty" on the part of a Wikmedian of long experience. Your assumption of bad faith here is stupendous. You can't simultaneously complain of the workload, then work this hard to drive people away. - d. On Mon, 13 May 2019 at 05:10, Yann

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Supporting Wikinews [was: Reviewing our brand system for our 2030 goals]

I seem to recall seeing a thread on this list every few years about how to revive Wikinews and make it do something useful and interesting. In practice, it had a burst of enthusiasm for about six months after it started and then went pretty much dormant, and has been there ever since. - d. On

Re: [Wikimedia-l] America may go bizarro, but Wikipedia has a choice to make

So ... when did someone last test putting up a copy of the sites from the backups? (just a complete copy with history, not even at publicly-accessible scale) On Tue, 8 Jan 2019 at 19:31, Steven Walling wrote: > > Great question to think about for our long term sustainability. I think we >

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Is the death of Wikipedia imminent?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Lead_section says pretty much the same: > The lead should stand on its own as a concise overview of the article's > topic. It should identify the topic, establish context, explain why the topic > is notable, and summarize the most

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Mobile fundraising ads

I've had people complaining to me personally about the multiple-page fundraising banners on mobile, like I can do anything about them ... this is really deeply pissing people off. On Tue, 11 Dec 2018 at 15:03, Joseph Seddon wrote: > > Hi James, > > As I mentioned in my original reply to Molly,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Croatian Wikipedia: persisting far-right bias?

Forgive me, but this is coming across as hopping from excuse to excuse. On Tue, 27 Nov 2018 at 18:03, Dennis During wrote: > > It is important that any wiki process be applied fairly. In this case I > think the Croatian wiki cannot be the first to have a new process applied. > I hope that the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] convert from BitCoin to FoldingCoin and other proofs of useful work

, > Jim > > > On Fri, Nov 2, 2018 at 1:49 AM David Gerard wrote: > > > > worth noting again that in my (I am paid to have these opinions now) > > professional opinion, nothing about cryptocurrencies is good or > > useful, and WMF's involvement should proceed

Re: [Wikimedia-l] convert from BitCoin to FoldingCoin and other proofs of useful work

worth noting again that in my (I am paid to have these opinions now) professional opinion, nothing about cryptocurrencies is good or useful, and WMF's involvement should proceed precisely as far as taking donations at arm's length (never touching an actual cryptocurrency). And documenting the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Category: French Jews on en.wp / GPDR

I'm not 100% comfortable with the approach of doing it because we legally can - we do a lot of stuff because it's the right thing, not just because we're legally obliged to. The concern is a real one and worth giving serious consideration. (As I noted in my email about the GDPR, we do a lot of

[Wikimedia-l] GDPR and Wikimedia content?

I'm a big fan of the GDPR and why it had to be created. (I'm doing a lot of the bureaucratic work on the tech side at the day job and am getting very used to thinking of ways something could constitute Personally Identifying Information.) But I'm wondering how we'll approach it for the Wikimedia

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Does anyone know what wikimedia france are up to with the Request Network ?

Logo still at the bottom of https://request.network - d. On 28 April 2018 at 16:12, Nadine Le Lirzin wrote: > Hi all, > > First of all, thanks for reporting the issue. Impressive reactivity :) > > Then, sorry for the intempestive and unwelcome communication about this

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Does anyone know what wikimedia france are up to with the Request Network ?

Wrote up the story so far: https://davidgerard.co.uk/blockchain/2018/04/27/no-wikipedia-is-not-partnering-with-the-request-network-dont-believe-the-hype/ Any new stuff, corrections, clarifications etc most welcomed! - d. On 27 April 2018 at 21:04, David Gerard <dger...@gmail.com>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Does anyone know what wikimedia france are up to with the Request Network ?

out is their own problem. What will happen to the WMF bitcoin option? https://medium.com/@coinbasecommerce/upgrading-the-merchant-experience-d97679274c71 (I'm just writing up this terrible story for my blockchain blog.) - d. On 27 April 2018 at 19:05, David Gerard <dger...@gmail.com>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Does anyone know what wikimedia france are up to with the Request Network ?

On 27 April 2018 at 17:21, geni wrote: > Not really. At best you end up with a less efficient version of a > downloadable database. People claiming that "blockchain technology" is > useful for things are either cyptocurrency advocates (with the usual > conflicts of interest)

Re: [Wikimedia-l] convert from BitCoin to FoldingCoin and other proofs of useful work

On 11 April 2018 at 22:56, geni wrote: > But the foundation wants actual money (US$ mostly). Why convert > bitcoin into anything other than cash (which is what it does at the > moment)? in fact, I believe the WMF never touches a bitcoin - BitPay takes in the bitcoins,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What's making you happy this week? (Week of 4 March 2018)

On 4 March 2018 at 02:41, Pine W wrote: > What's making you happy this week? Trimmed my en:wp watchlist to pages I was actually interested in and cared about. Made a few more meaningful edits I was more interested in this way :-) really, if you edit with "add page to my

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Anyone else want the job of wikimediaau-l list admin?

gt; > Frederick > > > -- > > _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/ > _/ > _/ FN * फ्रेड्रिक नोरोन्या * فريدريك نورونيا‎ +91-9822122436 > _/ RADIO GOANA: https://archive.org/details/@fredericknoronha > _/ > _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/ >

[Wikimedia-l] Anyone else want the job of wikimediaau-l list admin?

At present it's literally only me as wikimediaau-l list admin. This is less than ideal, i.e. I can't guarantee any sort of consistent service. It fell to me when everyone actually in Australia quit after some spurious legal threats. So that's the threat model ... Anyone want to volunteer as

[Wikimedia-l] looks like SOPA is still dead because of our work five years ago

It's scared them off SOPA-like activities. https://torrentfreak.com/sopa-ghosts-hinder-u-s-pirate-site-blocking-efforts-171008/ The main reason why pirate site blocking requests have not yet been made in the United States is down to SOPA. When the proposed SOPA legislation made headlines five

Re: [Wikimedia-l] How can we fix the two-stage page loading problem?

On 2 September 2017 at 02:09, Michael Peel wrote: > This is possibly the most annoying feature of the Wikimedia projects at the > moment. You access a page. Then you start reading or editing it. And then > suddenly the page jumps when a fundraising banner / central notice /

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Sharing sad news about Bassel

On 2 August 2017 at 00:00, Katherine Maher wrote: > at his article [2], and at https://freebassel.org. This is giving an SSL error ... - d. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Copyfraud by the British Museum

On 28 July 2017 at 21:59, Fæ wrote: > Rogol, it's worth repeating that the only one here talking about > fraudulent conduct is yourself. If you write a post containing the word "fraud" over and over, people are going to assume you are accusing someone of fraud. Particularly

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's set up a Tor onion service for Wikipedia

Apposite, but defective in a number of respects; also, explicitly advocacy for Tor editing without really addressing the objections to it (that it's 99+% a firehose of garbage). Rather than me reading through several pages to pick out what you might mean, could you please quote the bits you

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's set up a Tor onion service for Wikipedia

Editing may be a tricky one, particularly on en:wp, which has found Tor exit points to overwhelmingly be fountains of garbage, and automatically blocks them. - d. On 5 June 2017 at 18:30, David Cuenca Tudela wrote: > I think that's an excellent idea and very much aligned

[Wikimedia-l] EU mandatory filter/safe harbour proposals - what's the status?

Wikimedia has put in a submission against this - but the entertainment industry is still lobbying as absolutely hard as possible. (Their goal is to remove safe harbour protection from YouTube so they can demand money that presently doesn't exist, and that they know doesn't exist.) Do we have any

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Update on Wikimedia Foundation v. NSA

For those who missed it in the 10th footnote, this is the link to spread: https://blog.wikimedia.org/2017/05/23/wikimedia-nsa-appeal-standing/ - d. On 23 May 2017 at 23:00, James Buatti wrote: > Hello everybody, > > > > The Foundation is pleased to announce an update

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikitribune!

On 26 April 2017 at 09:23, Andrea Zanni wrote: > Last time I remember we had a discussion¹ was September 2011 (!): > https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2011-September/thread.html Everyone interested in Wikified news should read the Wikinews threads in

[Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia, right, but on the blockchain

Advertising-funded Wikipedia that micropays participants from advertising revenue, on the Ethereum blockchain! The important bit is to give them startup money. "Lunyr: Decentralized Wikipedia on the blockchain"

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikitribune!

On 25 April 2017 at 22:59, Jimmy Wales wrote: > Today I announced a new initiative, outside of my Wikimedia activities, > to combat fake news. It is important to me that I share directly with > all of you information about this new initiative early on. I was one of

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [arbcom-l] Where is WMF with pursuing companies that offer paid editing services

On 14 April 2017 at 17:39, Gabriel Thullen wrote: > The damage has been done. Theverge.com claims to have done such a > modification on Wikipedia, to quote them "as did we, in a test yesterday". > We will probably see more of this. Yes. This is why we need to respond in

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [arbcom-l] Where is WMF with pursuing companies that offer paid editing services

On 14 April 2017 at 11:38, Andy Mabbett wrote: > A far better (and less WP:BITEy) outcome would be to get then to Pretty sure WP:BITE doesn't apply in the case of deliberate abuse for clear purposes of spamming. - d. ___

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Arbital, another Wikipedia competitor/complement

aand it's dead Jim: http://lesswrong.com/r/discussion/lw/otq/whats_up_with_arbital/ The front page is now a "coming soon" for the proposed blogging platform. Oh well. - d. On 11 October 2016 at 22:52, David Gerard <dger...@gmail.com> wrote: > Followup on this: Arbital is

[Wikimedia-l] heads up: latest wacky jape from the music industry to whittle away DMCA safe harbours

A study claiming that YouTube costs them ONE BLION DOLLARS a year, by having DMCA safe harbours! writeup: https://torrentfreak.com/dmca-helps-youtube-avoid-up-to-1bn-in-royalties-per-year-study-claims-170330/ study: http://www.phoenix-center.org/PolicyBulletin/PCPB41Final.pdf The conceit

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Status of the Code of Conduct for technical spaces

You mean, "how to deal with people who complain they weren't consulted then turn around and complain they were excessively consulted"? At this point, the appropriate thing would be to put forward a plausible solution rather than complain they did the thing you claimed they hadn't sufficiently

Re: [Wikimedia-l] a second commons, prevent cease and desist business

This thread is notably long on hypothetical and meta-level discussions and very short on concrete examples of the supposedly problematic uploads under discussion. What are the generally accepted examples of what we're actually talking about here? - d.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] More politics: "WMF Annual Report"

+1 On 4 March 2017 at 10:17, Ido ivri wrote: > A little late into the discussion I just want to note that aside from the > factual reservations, which seem to make sense, the overall tone, context > and setting of the WMF Annual report is something I wholeheartedly agree >

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Is the Code of Conduct in force?

This assumes the relevant Community is here now on this very list, which is an extremely questionable assumption. As has been noted ad nauseam already. At this point this thread appears hard to distinguish from forum shopping. On 2 March 2017 at 17:16, Rogol Domedonfors

Re: [Wikimedia-l] More politics: "WMF Annual Report"

On 2 March 2017 at 12:07, Steinsplitter Wiki wrote: > This WMF Annual Report has imho a obvious political connotation. Wikimedia > should remain politically neutral in any regard. WP:POV; In 2017, literally the concept of factual information is an active matter of

Re: [Wikimedia-l] More politics: "WMF Annual Report"

On 2 March 2017 at 13:30, Peter Southwood wrote: > It is not possible to get away from politics while remaining in contact with > civilisation. Politics follows you around. It is possible to ignore politics > only until they affect you directly. Well, yes. Who

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Draft Code of Conduct for Technical Spaces

On 26 February 2017 at 17:49, Tim Landscheidt wrote: > Eh, they do and that is one of the reasons to oppose the > Code of Conduct. Its draft implicitly alleges that the > technical spaces currently are a cesspit that is in urgent > need of someone with a rake while

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Foundation official response re Daily Mail issue

On 9 February 2017 at 15:13, Stephen Philbrick < stephen.w.philbr...@gmail.com> wrote: > Does anyone have a link to the recent Foundation Statement about the Daily > Mail? We are receiving inquires at OTRS, and it would be nice if I see see > our official position. Here's the current version

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Concerns in general

On 27 January 2017 at 03:33, Romaine Wiki wrote: > But I think it is possible to make sure risks are spread over the world. > Certainly as we are an international movement that intends to cover the > knowledge of the whole humanoid civilisation. > To come to a conclusion,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Where is WMF with pursuing companies that offer paid editing services

`What we actually need is clarity from the en:wp arbcom. They could easily say "yes Legal has advised X but we are stricter", and note that they have already banned users for outing blatant bad faith spammers. GorillaWarfare's commentary on this, both personal and speaking for the arbcom, are

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Where is WMF with pursuing companies that offer paid editing services

On 7 January 2017 at 20:31, Jytdog at Wikipedia wrote: > With those companies freely (and often mockingly) advertising their > services, the spigot is opened wide - they constantly get more customers > and send people here to edit.I would like to know if legal is >

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Where is WMF with pursuing companies that offer paid editing services

I should add: I spent a few months following the various AFD queues on WP lately, and MY GOODNESS THERE ARE SO MANY BLATANT SPAMMERS. What Jytdog raises is an actual problem. The short reason for a lot of the Problems with Wikipedia is actually "spammers mean we can't have nice things". - d.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Music industry threats to safe harbor?

On 21 December 2016 at 02:53, Newyorkbrad wrote: > I think it might be useful to focus on how any of the proposed changes > to the law would affect Wikipedia/Wikimedia specifically, apart from > the broader philosophical discussion. Is there a good link for > exactly what

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Music industry threats to safe harbor?

On 21 December 2016 at 02:53, Newyorkbrad wrote: > I think it might be useful to focus on how any of the proposed changes > to the law would affect Wikipedia/Wikimedia specifically, apart from > the broader philosophical discussion. Is there a good link for > exactly what

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Music industry threats to safe harbor?

Good to know :-) I was mostly just wondering if the music industry initiative was making any headway, from an outside perspective. Because if they chip a bit off, they won't stop there. On 19 December 2016 at 20:22, Charles M. Roslof wrote: > Throughout 2016, the US

[Wikimedia-l] Music industry threats to safe harbor?

For various reasons * I follow music industry news. One drum the record industry has been beating *hard* in the past year is attempts to reduce the DMCA "safe harbor" provisions in order to squeeze more money from YouTube. It's been a running theme through 2016. e.g.

[Wikimedia-l] Infobitt.com (crowdsourced news) has gone offline

Larry Sanger's attempted crowdsourced Wikinews, Infobitt, is dead - the name infobitt.net no longer resolves (though the domain is still registered). It died sometime after June 23, the date of the last screenshot on the Wayback Machine; tweets concerning it suggest it was up until August or

Re: [Wikimedia-l] We appear have been partially blocked in France (probably accidentally)

This is the more detailed writeup that Le Monde cribbed from: http://www.nextinpact.com/news/101786-google-fr-bloque-pour-apologie-terrorisme-orange-invoque-erreur-humaine.htm and it's hilarious, even in translation. Orange blames "human error". Indeed. - d. On 17 October 2016 at 21:54,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Arbital, another Wikipedia competitor/complement

s articles are notoriously opaque and not good for explaining a concept to people who don't already understand it. And CC-by-sa educational articles on math are a win for everyone. On 14 March 2016 at 01:03, David Gerard <dger...@gmail.com> wrote: > Being put together by Eliezer Yudkowsky of LessWro

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A new Wikipedia fork: InfoGalactic

On 10 October 2016 at 20:50, John Mark Vandenberg wrote: > Ads on the horizon according to > http://infogalactic.com/info/Infogalactic:Roadmap and > https://infogalactic.com/info/Infogalactic:Advertising Well past that: http://infogalactic.com/info/Infogalactic:Corelords -

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A new Wikipedia fork: InfoGalactic

; A. > > On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 9:35 PM geni <geni...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> S >> >> On 10 October 2016 at 19:13, David Gerard <dger...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > "INFOGALACTIC: an online encyclopedia without bias or thought

[Wikimedia-l] A new Wikipedia fork: InfoGalactic

"INFOGALACTIC: an online encyclopedia without bias or thought police" Home page: http://infogalactic.com/info/Main_Page Announcement: http://voxday.blogspot.com/2016/10/project-big-fork-infogalactic.html Roadmap: http://infogalactic.com/info/Infogalactic:Roadmap - d.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Ray Saintonge has died

On 13 September 2016 at 17:19, Lane Rasberry wrote: > https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ray_Saintonge,_Heathrow_Terminal_5,_20110801_P1020446.jpg Yes, that shot was after I went across London to catch him between planes and have a few pints at Heathrow :-D - d.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Status update about editing software, June 2016

On 23 June 2016 at 10:17, James Forrester wrote: > TL;DR: The Editing Department is working to make the content editing > software better. The big work areas are improving the visual editor and > editing wikitext. We will bring in a wikitext mode inside the visual

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The end

On 17 May 2016 at 13:44, Chris Sherlock wrote: > I've just been blocked forever. I've been bullied, and I'm having suicidal > thoughts. Followup: Chris is fine :-) All is well. He's quite touched at how many people rallied around to help him. Mostly he's a bit

Re: [Wikimedia-l] wikinews has a NPOV policy derived from wikipedia, mamamia ...

For comparison: http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Special:Statistics the twitter version: "Wikinews is half as active as Citizendium." - d. On 1 May 2016 at 17:45, rupert THURNER wrote: > On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 10:38 PM, Tilman Bayer wrote: >>

[Wikimedia-l] Arbital, another Wikipedia competitor/complement

Being put together by Eliezer Yudkowsky of LessWrong. Content is cc-by-sa 3.0, don't know about the software. https://arbital.com/p/arbital_ambitions/ Rather than the "encyclopedia" approach, it tries to be more pedagogical, teaching the reader at their level. Analysis from a sometime Yudkowsky

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Anybody alive?

I've just been standing back at a safe distance and watching the current disaster with an "ooh, ouch" expression on my face. Still, editing Wikipedia is less triggering than editing RationalWiki. I was only actually shocked at Oliver's resignation. - d.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Post mortems (second attempt)

On 22 February 2016 at 03:49, Risker wrote: > I can think of Echo/Notifications which, despite some rather minor > grumblings and need for a few tweaks at the beginning, has been fully > embraced by the community. It's not entirely perfect for all use cases, > but it is so

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Profile of Magnus Manske

On 18 January 2016 at 20:33, Magnus Manske wrote: > * New things are not necessarily good just because they are new. What seems > to be an improvement, especially for a technical mind, can be a huge step > backwards for the "general population". On the other hand,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF trustee Arnnon Geshuri and part in anticompetitive agreements in Google

... and the court papers, and the smoking gun documents, and ... This is the sort of thing that needs some serious explaining. Assume good faith, but we're starting from some pretty *startling* circumstances and evidence here. - d. On 9 January 2016 at 09:19, Craig Franklin

Re: [Wikimedia-l] AWB & Ubuntu: Can really someone help?

I got it to work on Ubuntu 14.04 by approximately this method. It's INCREDIBLY long winded, you have to download about a gigabyte of stuff from Microsoft, one file didn't exist at the listed download site any more and I had to get a questionable copy off someone's "saved stuff" web directory, and

  1   2   3   4   5   >